Armenian constitutional change as key to anti-revanchism, early peace with Baku Dispelling myths, embracing reality

Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan stated in parliament that Armenia and Azerbaijan acknowledge issues with their respective constitutions, but these matters are not up for negotiation in the peace talks.

He further clarified, "This does not mean at all that the issue of constitutional changes in Armenia is a subject of negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan. There is no such notion. Armenia is convinced that both its constitution and the constitution of Azerbaijan as a whole cannot be a problem for the establishment of long-term peace in legal terms."

This statement seems like a sly but unsuccessful attempt to deflect blame. The Constitution of Azerbaijan does not contain any territorial claims to neighbouring states, while the Constitution of Armenia includes claims not only to Azerbaijan but also to Turkey. This has been acknowledged by Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan. The debates and statements in parliament are one thing, but the presence of revanchist sentiments behind the walls of the parliament is quite another. As a Soviet judge said during the trial of Ataman Semenov, “We are judging Semenov not for abstract non-recognition of Soviet power and White Guardism in literature, but for effective, active White Guardism expressed in attempts to undermine the power of workers and peasants.” Semenov received his due punishment without pity. But let's return to Armenia.

During protest rallies in Armenia, there are cries and complaints about "Artsakh," mythical "ethnic cleansing," and "prisoners of conscience languishing in Azerbaijani prisons." So "peace in legal terms" are just words—beautiful words, of course, but tinged with deceit. Even if Armenia were to amend its Constitution to state, "We will never do this again, and the words 'Artsakh' and 'Ararat' (meaning 'mountain') will be subject to administrative arrest and a fine determined by the judicial bodies of the Republic of Armenia," the revanchists would not disappear. They would still have their patrons.

Hence, we will remain vigilant, recognizing that neither the Constitution of Armenia nor any peace treaty can provide genuine assurances; they are merely words on paper. The Azerbaijani army stands as the sole reliable safeguard of Azerbaijan's territorial integrity. Nonetheless, from a legal perspective, we deem it prudent to pursue necessary amendments to the Armenian Constitution.

The purpose of amending the Constitution of Armenia is not solely to counter Armenian revanchism but also to preemptively address potential complications and unjust reproaches in the future. By clearly stipulating commitments to deny territorial claims and affirming the reality that "Karabakh is Azerbaijan," these amendments serve as a precautionary measure. In case of any future disputes or accusations, we will have tangible evidence to present to international organizations and critics. These changes are essential for fostering lasting peace and facilitating unimpeded movement between mainland Azerbaijan and the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic. Ultimately, such amendments promote fairness and correctness in addressing historical grievances. While we are content with our Constitution, our neighbours must dispel myths of exclusivity and embrace the reality of the situation. Only by acknowledging and addressing these realities can we pave the way for genuine progress and stability in the region.