According to Hajiyev’s statement, the meeting was planned to take place on the sidelines of the “European Political Community” Summit in London, following the same format as the Aliyev-Pashinyan talks in Munich. Initially, the meeting would involve the British Prime Minister, the Azerbaijani President, and the Armenian Prime Minister, followed by bilateral discussions. However, Pashinyan refused to attend. Hajiyev commented, “We consider Armenia’s refusal as an indication of its intent to withdraw from dialogue and promoting a peace agenda. Although Armenia speaks of peace on various platforms, it is unclear why it refuses a meeting that serves to advance the peace agenda. The international community should understand that Armenia must genuinely value opportunities for dialogue instead of rejecting them.”
Pashinyan’s “diplomatic maneuver” recalls the 2006 Aliyev-Kocharian negotiations in Rambouillet Castle, where Kocharian “hid” from inconvenient discussions at the “end of the corridor.” It also resembles the “Pyunik” team’s 2006 strategy in the “Commonwealth Cup,” where they did not show up for the semi-final game against “Neftchi.”
In all seriousness, the negotiation situation has fundamentally changed, not in Armenia’s favor. Its leadership is not demonstrating sufficient adequacy. Realistically, since coming to power, Nikol Pashinyan has employed a deceptive tactic: making seemingly constructive statements, expressing readiness for dialogue, talking about “concessions” and “compromises,” but not making any significant decisions—essentially, “dragging things out.” Armenia behaved this way while Azerbaijani lands were under occupation, believing this would continue indefinitely and that Baku would eventually agree to recognize the lines of demarcation as the state border. But the situation has now changed. After Armenia provoked a new war, lost it, attempted a revenge, faced anti-terrorist raids in September 2023, and experienced disastrous results from border skirmishes, Azerbaijan has increased diplomatic pressure on Armenia.
In Yerevan, they tried to repeat the old tactic. Initially, Pashinyan regularly sought new mediators, shifting from Russia to the EU, from the EU to the USA, and so on. Simultaneously, Armenia attempted to establish “exclusive” relationships with these mediators, participating in negotiations, signing agreements but not fulfilling their commitments. A notable example is Pashinyan’s signature on documents in Prague recognizing Azerbaijan’s borders, followed by congratulations to the Khankendi junta on the “independence day of Karabakh.”
Now, the diplomatic “noose” has tightened to the limit. While Armenia relied on mediators’ help, whether Russia, the USA, or the EU, Azerbaijan skillfully built its diplomatic strategy and effectively moved the negotiations to a bilateral format. Pashinyan must negotiate with Aliyev, not Charles Michel, not James O’Brien, and certainly not Anne Hidalgo. Aliyev will not compromise on the “red lines” in negotiations. Azerbaijan intends to sign a genuinely peaceful treaty with Armenia, not a “time bomb” with loopholes for future revenge. This puts Pashinyan in a highly ambiguous position: he must sign diplomatic capitulation once again, with no prospects for reducing diplomacy to a “fighting draw.”
An intelligent and responsible politician would try to prepare public opinion, inform citizens about Armenia’s situation, and conduct negotiations. But that describes an intelligent and responsible politician.
Pashinyan decided to flee the meeting—much like the 11,000 Armenian “lions with steel hearts” from the battlefield, hoping that a little more time would bring in French howitzers, Indian sniper rifles, and…
But in reality, “token” arms supplies won’t resolve anything. If Yerevan tries to provoke new regional conflicts, counting on help from “friends and patrons,” it will have catastrophic consequences for Armenia, and Azerbaijan’s negotiation stance will become even tougher. Most importantly, one cannot escape inconvenient political realities—in a bunker, at the “end of the corridor,” or anywhere else.
A. Shakur
Translated from minval.az
