Azerbaijan, considering the signing of a peace treaty with Armenia important, is precisely taking steps to shield the peace process from the intrusions of political adventurists and to prevent provocateurs from turning the agreements reached into a fragile substance in the future. Baku wholeheartedly calls on Yerevan to join it on the path of existential responsibility for a predictable future.
However, the behavior of Armenia’s political leadership raises many doubts about the sincerity of its intentions to achieve long-term peace. Official Yerevan shows the traits of a transient opportunist more concerned with the pirouettes of political theater than the results of years-long efforts on a matter of destiny.
When Azerbaijan asserts that the treaty should be signed between states—not political parties of the two countries—it knows exactly what it is saying and where the attention of its counterpart should be. Agreements of this kind pass through many rounds and stages of grueling negotiations, discussions, and deliberations.
Diplomats must overcome themselves and endure enormous hardships. When long-awaited success is achieved, all the costs and efforts are fully justified.
Reconciliation gives the peoples of the agreeing nations hope and confidence in the future. It inspires optimism and faith in guaranteed protection from new waves of hatred and clashes. That’s why Azerbaijan insists on amending Armenia’s constitution and other legal acts to prevent the recurrence of dangerous incidents and to put an end to the resurgence of territorial claims.
But the reasonable attitude of the Azerbaijani side is met with hostility in Armenia for inexplicable reasons. It is also unclear why high-ranking Armenian representatives say one thing to Azerbaijani negotiators during talks and then express completely contradictory messages on international platforms—thereby planting the seeds of subversion into the peace process. Here’s a fresh example.
Armenia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Robert Abazyan, at a special OSCE session convened at Yerevan’s request, surprised the audience with a new absurdity by claiming that his country “observes troubling signs of a possible military escalation from Azerbaijan.” And how should one interpret this? Such a scandalous statement comes from a senior Armenian diplomat precisely when the Prime Minister of his country, Nikol Pashinyan, assures Baku that he is ready to sign a peace treaty.
It would be interesting to know which of the two is being disingenuous. It’s possible that both representatives from Yerevan are executing a preplanned maneuver to confuse their counterpart and create new dilemmas. Other leaders in the country, including Armenian ambassadors abroad, speak in the same destructive and utterly unacceptable tone as the Deputy Foreign Minister. This cannot be a coincidence, given that Armenian envoys at various levels use the same propaganda clichés accusing Azerbaijan of being untrustworthy.
The semantics of these false claims include accusatory tones towards Baku, suggesting it only speaks of peace while in fact preparing for escalation. The contradictory statements by Armenian officials serve dangerous goals incompatible with genuine peace. The unrelenting wave of revanchism in Armenia threatens not only the interests and security of Azerbaijan but also the future of the South Caucasus—a region long exhausted by the conflict born of Armenia’s unfounded territorial ambitions.
Azerbaijan, through years of titanic effort and tangible sacrifice, has put an end to Armenian separatism on its lands. The leaders of the illegal regime in Khankendi held not only the Karabakh Armenians but also citizens of the Republic of Armenia hostage. Baku liberated thousands of people from years of fear and horror, ending the obscurantism of radical extremists.
Despite this, voices of cave-dwelling nationalists still echo in Armenia, demanding the inclusion of the so-called Karabakh issue in the peace agreement. This is unthinkable, as Azerbaijan will never agree to it.
Meanwhile, Nikol Pashinyan urges his supporters and Armenian society to end the “Karabakh movement.” There are supporters of this position in the country, but in Armenia’s parliament revanchist demands still resound—calls tantamount to advocating for a new war against Azerbaijan. So whom should one believe in such a contradictory environment?
If Armenia’s government continues to flirt with slippery elements from opposition factions in the National Assembly and fringe street movements, it will inevitably lose initiative and become hostage to the radical wing. Nikol Pashinyan must ensure that baseless demands for the unconditional cessation of legal proceedings against former separatist leaders from Khankendi are no longer voiced in society.
The Prime Minister’s apparent tolerance of the outrageous demands of fanatics could lead to the failure not only of his current administration but of society as a whole.
The Armenian people have already experienced such a tragedy once, when Karabakh coup plotters overthrew the legitimate government and established a dictatorship that led to a national catastrophe for millions. The republic will not survive a repeat of that history.
It is high time for Pashinyan’s cabinet to move from words to action. The government officially speaks of peace, yet gunfire is heard nearly every day on the Azerbaijani border. It is not difficult to see that those breaking the silence are targeting the long-awaited peace to prevent it from being achieved.
Tensions in the region remain high, and the costs of reaching a comprehensive peace continue to grow. Pashinyan’s so-called calls to sign an agreement may convince many of his sincerity—but not the Azerbaijani side. Peace cannot be achieved through pretense and hypocrisy. Yerevan must stop its descent into the spiral of evil and fully focus on constructive proposals from Baku.
Otherwise, there will be no peace—and this will once again confirm the logic behind Azerbaijan’s demands.
Tofig Abbasov
