Azerbaijan insists on terms for peace as Armenia seeks strategic gains at COP29 Expert insights

Armenian Parliament Speaker Alen Simonyan recently stated that Armenia is open to signing a peace treaty on the sidelines of the COP29 climate summit in Baku, but emphasized that the decision ultimately lies with Azerbaijan. This statement suggests a strategic maneuver from Yerevan, aiming to attend the climate summit while simultaneously attempting to advance an incomplete peace agreement.

Amid rising revanchist sentiments in Armenia, the Pashinyan government appears to be seeking to eliminate contentious issues from the peace treaty, potentially proposing a truncated document. Such an approach raises concerns about the feasibility of achieving lasting peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia.

Caliber.Az reached out to foreign experts for their views on this strategic move.

Russian political scientist and Eurasia expert Alexander Razuvaev believes that Yerevan's tactics are designed to portray Azerbaijan as an unwilling participant in the pursuit of peace.

In a recent discussion on the geopolitics of the South Caucasus, the expert highlighted the complexities of the situation, noting that many individuals may not fully grasp the nuances and often form opinions based solely on headlines.

“Not everyone is familiar with the complexities of geopolitics in the South Caucasus; many people only read headlines and form their opinions based on them. It’s crucial to recognize that, in this context, there can be no bargaining or claims of equality between the parties involved. Azerbaijan won the war, and any potential peace agreement can only be reached on its terms.

If Armenia believes it can seek revenge in the future with Western support, that hope is misguided. Such attempts could jeopardize Armenia's very existence as a state. Moreover, Armenia lacks substantial allies on the global stage; its relationships with figures like Aleksandr Lukashenko and Vladimir Putin have soured,” the pundit emphasized.

He suggested that the upcoming 16th BRICS summit, scheduled for October 22 to 24 in Kazan, would be an ideal venue for signing a peace agreement, but only if it adheres to Baku's conditions.

Yuri Bocharov, Israeli political scientist, Director of the Institute for Information Wars Research, echoed Razuvaev's sentiments. He characterized Armenia's claims of wanting to sign a peace treaty quickly and on any platform as a continuation of its longstanding demagoguery, rather than a genuine commitment to a balanced resolution.

“Because they understand perfectly well there that Azerbaijan seeks to establish a comprehensive agreement that encompasses both peace and regional economic development. However, Armenia is reluctant to offer any additional concessions to Baku. By excluding certain clauses from the agreement, the Armenian side can later claim, ‘We signed this, we agreed! Yet Azerbaijan is not fulfilling its commitments!’,” the political scientist noted.

He emphasized that the most significant risk lies in the preamble of the Armenian constitution.

“Signing the treaty without amending the Armenian constitution could give the current opposition the opportunity to argue that the peace agreement is invalid, as it contradicts the constitution. Moreover, if there is a change in government in Armenia, the new administration might also seek to annul the treaty for the same reason.

The Armenian side appears eager to leverage the upcoming COP29 climate summit, recognizing its significance for Azerbaijan. Even if an agreement to sign a peace treaty at COP29 seems imminent, Armenia could potentially backtrack at the last moment, introducing new, unacceptable conditions. This would create a media frenzy around COP29, benefiting Armenia's narrative.

In my view, Azerbaijan should maintain a firm stance. The peace treaty must be comprehensive and fully developed, and it should only be signed after amendments to the Armenian constitution. Most importantly, there should be no legal or political ambiguities that could allow for the treaty to be annulled in the future,” Bocharov concluded.