Budapest Memorandum and the OSCE Minsk Group Parallels in broken promises and geopolitical realities

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine has released a statement marking the 30th anniversary of the signing of the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, which accompanied Ukraine’s accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. This pivotal document, signed on December 5, 1994, is worth revisiting for its historical significance.

“This document was supposed to provide Ukraine with guarantees of security, sovereignty and territorial integrity in exchange for giving up the world's third largest nuclear arsenal. The Memorandum was to become a significant step in strengthening global nuclear disarmament and serve as an example for other states to give up nuclear weapons.”

The statement also highlights that in 2014, the Russian Federation—one of the guarantors of Ukraine's security under the Budapest Memorandum—blatantly disregarded the document and international law as a whole, launching aggression against Ukraine that escalated into a full-scale invasion in 2022.

"These actions are a clear violation of international law, in particular, the UN Charter, which obliges states to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other countries and is based on the principle of non-use or threat of force. The Budapest Memorandum failed to prevent the aggression of the Russian Federation, as a nuclear-weapon state, against Ukraine, as a state that has renounced its nuclear arsenal. Even the consultations envisaged by the document, which Ukraine has repeatedly tried to initiate, were not held," the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry emphasizes.

The statement notably omits that the United States and the United Kingdom were also guarantors of Ukraine's security under the Budapest Memorandum. Nor does it mention that Ukraine received approximately $500 million under the Nunn-Lugar program as compensation for surrendering its nuclear arsenal. This relatively modest sum was the price the Ukrainian leadership of the time placed on relinquishing its nuclear status—a status that, undoubtedly, would have shielded the country from many of its subsequent challenges and significantly enhanced its geopolitical standing.

From the outset, it was evident that the memorandum was, to put it mildly, flawed. It lacked any binding commitments to defend Ukraine in the event of aggression. In the case of a nuclear attack, the guarantors merely promised to appeal to the UN Security Council to provide assistance. In the event of a situation affecting these commitments, they pledged to hold consultations. These promises were a feeble substitute for the ironclad guarantees Ukraine sought.

This serves as a striking example of how major powers can easily disregard the agreements they sign, treating their obligations superficially, and deceiving smaller states to serve their own agendas and interests.

Azerbaijan is all too familiar with this dynamic. When faced with Armenia’s military aggression and the occupation of 20% of its territory, Azerbaijan placed its hopes in the fair, legally-grounded mediation of the so-called international community, including the leading global powers.

In December 1994, during the Budapest summit of heads of state and government of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) (the CSCE transformed into the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 1995 – ed.) member states, the mandate of the Minsk Group was established. To enhance efforts in conflict resolution, the summit also created the High-Level Planning Group (HLPG) with an open-ended mandate. In 1995, the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office appointed a personal representative on the conflict, intended to address issues relevant to the future Minsk Conference. Since July 1996, this position has been held by Ambassador Andrzej Kasprzyk. However, his role largely amounted to shuttle visits between Baku, Yerevan, and Khankendi, with no tangible contribution toward resolving the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict.

As for the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair countries—the United States, Russia, and France—they not only failed to ensure the implementation of international law and the liberation of all Azerbaijani territories occupied by Armenia, as demanded by four well-known UN Security Council resolutions, but actively hindered justice. In the case of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, sanctions were imposed on Russia by the United States and the European Union. In contrast, despite Armenia's years-long occupation of Azerbaijani lands, no sanctions were ever imposed against it.

Moreover, while Ukraine has received military and financial aid from the United States, the EU, and other Western countries exceeding $100 billion, Azerbaijan received nothing. On the contrary, we witnessed the implementation of the immoral and unjust Section 907 of the U.S. Freedom Support Act, passed by Congress. Additionally, the U.S. became a country that annually allocated financial assistance to the Karabakh separatists. In France, several cities entered into sister-city agreements with Azerbaijani settlements under Armenian occupation. Meanwhile, Russia openly referred to Armenia as its "outpost in the Caucasus."

Despite all this, Azerbaijan successfully restored its sovereignty and territorial integrity in full. This achievement was possible because Azerbaijan pursued the right strategy—one rooted in steady yet relentless geopolitical, economic, and military strengthening.

Azerbaijan placed its trust in its own strength. The country has become the economically strongest country in the South Caucasus, with the most capable military in the region. Baku undertook immense diplomatic efforts. As a result, the country achieved a historic victory, reclaiming all territories occupied by Armenia. This was accomplished despite the plans of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair countries. In this way, Azerbaijan demonstrated to the world how to defend national interests even when facing opposition from the leading global powers—powers that Ukraine naively trusted 30 years ago when it signed the Budapest Memorandum and entrusted its security to those who have always and will always, act solely in their own interests.