False start by Yerevan and Trump’s Asian tour Caliber.Az weekly review

The editorial team of Caliber.Az presents the latest episode of Sobitiya (Events) with Murad Abiyev, covering the main news stories of the week.

Azerbaijan – Armenia

This week, President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev once again visited the Karabakh region. During the trip, President Aliyev handed over the keys to apartments to the resettled residents of Horovlu village in the Jabrayil district and the villages of Mammadbayli and Aghali in the Zangilan district. This event marked yet another significant milestone in the Great Return programme.

Meanwhile, the Armenian authorities have invited the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, to take part in the European Political Community summit scheduled for May 2026 in Yerevan. This was reported by Armenia’s Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan, who clarified that “the documentation of the invitation is currently underway.” This development deserves special attention.

In principle, the Armenian authorities are doing everything correctly. The sides have signed the historic Washington Declaration, initialled the draft peace agreement, and it is clear that ordinary diplomatic courtesy required inviting the Azerbaijani leader to an international event in Yerevan—especially to the EPC summit, in which the country is, by default, a participant.

However, everything indicates that President Aliyev will have to politely decline the trip to the Armenian capital. The reason is simple — such a visit would create a false impression of the final establishment not only of peace but also of good-neighbourly relations. But for that to happen, peace must be achieved not only de facto but also de jure.

As Caliber.Az has learned from diplomatic sources, the current level of bilateral relations does not yet allow President Aliyev’s visit to Yerevan to be regarded as a relevant or timely step.

Continuing on this topic, it should be noted that for peace to be established de jure, Armenia, as is well known, must fulfil one important precondition — to remove from its Constitution all territorial claims against Azerbaijan.

Incidentally, Prime Minister Pashinyan also touched upon this issue during his visit to Paris. There, he once again voiced the familiar thesis that Armenia’s Basic Law allegedly contains no territorial claims against Azerbaijan, and that this has supposedly been confirmed by the Constitutional Court.

We have already responded to these theses many times — and we will do so again. Firstly, the convoluted decision of the Constitutional Court cannot be decisive for Azerbaijan. After all, even though it is a constitutional body, its ruling is, in one way or another, a matter of interpretation of the Constitution. Azerbaijan’s condition, however, is to eliminate the very possibility of such interpretation.

Assistant to the President of Azerbaijan, Hikmet Hajiyev, responding to journalists’ questions, confirmed the establishment of a working group between the United States and Azerbaijan. In this regard, Hajiyev recalled the memorandum of understanding signed between the U.S. and Azerbaijan during President Ilham Aliyev’s visit to Washington in August of this year.

This memorandum outlines the strategic partnership between the two countries in such fields as energy, transportation, artificial intelligence, high technologies, defence, security, and others. The creation of a bilateral working group will undoubtedly give new momentum and a more positive atmosphere to Azerbaijani-American relations, which had been notably strained under the Biden administration.

Trump's Asian tour

The central topic on the global agenda this past week was Donald Trump’s major tour of Asia. The leitmotif of this trip was the American president’s effort to secure the most favourable conditions—first and foremost—for trade cooperation with the countries of the Asia-Pacific region.

The agreements signed during the visit with Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Japan, and South Korea effectively demonstrated to Beijing, ahead of Trump’s meeting with Xi Jinping, that the United States is firmly determined to reduce its dependence on Chinese imports. But is it really that simple?

Let us make it clear from the start: the central point of intrigue lies precisely in China’s rare earth metals and related products. It is worth recalling that, in response to Trump’s threat to increase tariffs on Chinese goods by another 100 per cent, Beijing imposed restrictions on the export of rare earths and products made from them. This is a serious argument in the U.S.–China dispute.

At present, China accounts for more than 70 per cent of global rare earth production and 90 percent of their processing. The world’s dependence on Chinese supplies is so high that even under the most optimistic forecasts, no serious competition is expected within the next five years. This is due both to China’s enormous reserves of rare earths and to its relatively low environmental standards for extraction and production. The combination of these factors gives Beijing a tremendous advantage on the global market. And it would be naïve to assume that China would refrain from using this trump card.

So what are Trump’s trump cards? In fact, there is only one — tariffs restricting the access of Chinese goods to the U.S. market. However, experts argue that in this game, America is in a weaker position. Firstly, China has certain tools to stimulate the growth of its domestic market. Secondly, since the beginning of this year, China has significantly increased its exports to alternative markets — mainly to Europe and the countries of Southeast Asia.

Yes, it will be difficult for the Chinese to manage without the American market. But the nuance is that it will be even harder for the Americans to manage without Chinese rare earths. These materials are critically important for the production of most high-tech goods. There is virtually no substitute for Chinese components, no matter how many agreements are signed with other countries.

All this partly explains Xi Jinping’s rather relaxed demeanour during the negotiations in Busan, South Korea. It is noteworthy that Trump showered the Chinese leader with a string of compliments, calling him, in particular, a “great leader.” In response, Xi spoke only about the importance of Sino-American cooperation.

But what was the outcome? Chinese sources reported the results of the talks in extremely concise terms. On the American side, however, the main source of news was Donald Trump himself. He announced that the two sides had agreed to conclude a one-year trade deal in the near future. The essence of the agreement is that China will lift restrictions on rare earth exports and resume purchases of American soybeans. In return, the United States will reduce average import tariffs on Chinese goods by 10 per cent — from 57 to 47 per cent — and, of course, will not raise them by another 100 per cent as had been previously announced.

It can be stated that Washington and Beijing have reached a temporary compromise that does not resolve their fundamental contradictions, such as the enormous trade imbalance as well as military and technological rivalry. There is no doubt that the coming months will be spent by both sides trying to strengthen their negotiating positions ahead of the next round — which now seems inevitable.

As for the geopolitical aspect of the meeting, Trump said nothing about China’s purchases of Russian oil or about Taiwan. However, he made a rather curious statement regarding the Russia–Ukraine war. Its essence was that Washington and Beijing would work together toward resolving the conflict — but sometimes, as he put it, the sides, meaning Russia and Ukraine, need to be allowed to fight.

It seems that the parties failed to reach any compromise on Ukraine. The phrase “sometimes, you have to let them fight” almost mirrors the nature of the confrontation between the U.S. and China themselves — only in reverse. While Washington and Beijing have temporarily agreed on a trade truce, Ukraine remains the arena for testing strength. In other words, it appears that Beijing has now defended Russia’s position more explicitly than ever before.

It would not be surprising if new American arms supplies to Kyiv are announced soon. Incidentally, just yesterday, news emerged that the Pentagon had approved the delivery of Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, explaining that its stockpiles were sufficient and that “we can share.” In short, the next move is now up to Trump.