The Russian-language Azerbaijani news outlet haqqin.az has published a report citing the Israeli Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, revealing possible new conditions being placed on Azerbaijan ahead of a scheduled meeting at the White House on August 8. The central topic of discussion is Azerbaijan’s potential accession to the Abraham Accords and the possible link to the signing of a peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia.
According to the report, also referenced by several international media outlets, the administration of former U.S. President Donald Trump is reportedly insisting that Azerbaijan’s participation in the Abraham Accords should only occur after a comprehensive peace treaty is officially concluded with Armenia. This treaty is expected to be signed in the near future.
However, experts at the Begin-Sadat Center question the validity of such linkage. In their view, this approach lacks strategic rationale and could jeopardize both initiatives — the resolution of the South Caucasus conflict and the expansion of the Arab-Israeli normalization framework.
The report emphasizes that the foundation for Azerbaijan’s participation in the Accords should not rest on its stance toward Armenia, but rather on its unique and long-standing relationship with the State of Israel. Azerbaijan is the only Muslim-majority country in the world that has maintained deep, multi-dimensional ties with Israel for decades — including military, energy, technological cooperation and intelligence coordination. This alliance, analysts argue, already makes Azerbaijan a vital U.S. partner in a region bordering both Iran and Russia.
The authors of the report further highlight that the original goal of the Abraham Accords was to normalize relations between Israel and the Muslim world. Armenia, as a non-Muslim state, is not directly relevant to this process — especially given its historical alignment with pro-Iranian and pro-Russian structures.
The Center’s experts also point out that no other country previously joining the Abraham Accords — including the UAE, Bahrain, or Morocco — was required to meet foreign policy preconditions, such as resolving bilateral conflicts with neighbors. Morocco, for example, was not asked to resolve its conflict with Algeria before signing. This comparison is used to argue against selective pressure on Azerbaijan.
Such a move, the analysts warn, may be perceived as a double standard, turning a diplomatic initiative into a tool of coercion rather than dialogue. This could erode trust in the Accords themselves and undermine their intended integrative purpose.
In conclusion, the report underscores that the Republic of Azerbaijan is seen by both Washington and Tel Aviv as a strategic pillar in the emerging security architecture of Eurasia. Baku’s accession to the Abraham Accords is not viewed as a symbolic gesture, but as part of a broader geopolitical design aimed at containing Iran, neutralizing Russian influence, and consolidating U.S. presence across the Middle East–Caucasus–Caspian axis.
Errors in strategic judgment, the analysts caution, could not only derail ongoing diplomatic efforts but also result in long-term strategic losses — opening the door for renewed influence by Iran, Russia, and other rival actors ready to exploit the missteps of their geopolitical competitors.
