"Baku will once again have to force Yerevan to peace" Expert opinions on Caliber.Az

As 2024 draws to a close, the peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia has still not been signed. On the contrary, Armenia, with the help of France, the U.S., and India, is rapidly rearming. Yerevan is also stepping away from the issue of amending the Armenian constitution, which contains territorial claims against neighbouring countries.

Is Armenia truly intending to sign a peace treaty, or are we witnessing the familiar "political Armenian manoeuvring," the end of which leads not to peace but to a new war with Azerbaijan? Caliber.Az's correspondent posed this question to Russian experts.

According to Russian expert on the South Caucasus Konstantin Tasits, Baku and Yerevan have made significant progress in the peace process throughout 2024. This is a reason for optimism.

"Let's recall that, to date, 15 out of 17 articles of the agreement have been agreed upon. This means there is a possibility that the text will be fully finalized in the near future. As for the constitution, Armenia is in the process of drafting a new basic law. Pashinyan has publicly criticized the Declaration of Independence several times, calling it 'a major problem and a tragedy.' Therefore, it can be assumed that the reference to this document will be removed in the new constitution. In that case, the path to a peace agreement will be open," noted the political analyst.

In his opinion, a referendum on constitutional changes will still take place. However, if Armenia starts stalling again, Azerbaijan will pressure it into making progress.

"The Armenians used to say that the referendum was scheduled for 2027. A special commission is working on it, and progress is being made. Judging by the statements, Yerevan has not abandoned this idea. On the contrary, some experts are now saying that it may be held earlier. However, if Yerevan again begins to delay the negotiation process, I believe Azerbaijan will likely continue to exert pressure on Armenia to achieve solutions to all disputed issues that are acceptable to it, and ultimately the peace agreement will be signed," Tasits is sure.

Russian political scientist Vladislav Gerdin trusts Yerevan much less. In his opinion, Armenia's approach to the negotiation process and the signing of the peace agreement raises significant concerns.

"It’s not even about the fact that it’s been four years since the end of the 44-day war, but rather how Armenia has behaved throughout the entire negotiation process that began after November 10, 2020. Armenia has been stalling and resisting, trying to avoid committing to anything that doesn’t align with its ambitions and interests. This is evident in all the signs of these years. If we look at how many times Armenia has deviated from its direct commitments outlined in the November 10, 2020 statement, we will find many instances. For example, the process that seemed to be successful for three years regarding the unblocking of communications in the region, with the involvement of the governments of all three countries, was suddenly undermined by Yerevan, which declared that it no longer wanted Russian security forces to act as a third party guaranteeing the safety of the transport corridor across Armenian territory. According to Yerevan, only Armenian intelligence or border guards should be present there now.

The same pattern is evident in the peace agreement negotiations, which have reached a deadlock due to Yerevan's approach of ‘one step forward, two steps back.’ In this context, Pashinyan's recent statement claiming that there are no territorial claims against Azerbaijan in Armenia's constitution only adds to the confusion, making it hard to understand the true intent. Baku has every reason to be distrustful of Yerevan. The increasing pace of arms acquisitions further complicates matters, suggesting that Armenia is preparing for some form of ‘Plan B.’ Consequently, Yerevan leaves Baku with little choice but to apply significant military-political pressure to establish lasting peace in the South Caucasus. Even if this occurs under the concept of ‘coercion to peace,’ it would still be better than no peace at all," concluded Gerdin.