Funny and serious patronage Armenia in the grasp of well-wishers

If we attempt to characterise recent developments in the context of Armenian-Azerbaijani normalisation, it becomes clear that Armenia has once again found itself under the wing of patrons. Not that they’ve jumped in with great enthusiasm—rather sluggishly, one might say—but still heavily. The result? Zero effect, yet plenty of noise.

The first thing that comes to mind is the well-known incident involving the post by the Office of the President of Germany and the DW film supporting the long-defunct mythical “Nagorno Karabakh Republic.” This coincided with Frank-Walter Steinmeier’s visit to Yerevan and came just before his arrival in Baku. And although Steinmeier’s aide later issued a written apology for the publication, as the saying goes, the aftertaste remains—especially since these events fit perfectly into the broader pattern.

And in that broader pattern, we are witnessing the “outrage of the civilised Western public” over Azerbaijan’s position regarding two prerequisites for the peace treaty: the amendment of Armenia’s Constitution to remove territorial claims against Azerbaijan, and Armenia’s consent to the dissolution of the OSCE Minsk Group. Amid ongoing efforts to finalise the text of the peace agreement, certain Western forces are trying to portray the situation as if Baku is putting forward new demands to Yerevan—thus promoting a narrative that is disruptive to the peace process.

For instance, French Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs Jean-Noël Barrot stated during hearings at the National Assembly: “Azerbaijan is now demanding a revision of the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia. This new precondition is unacceptable and delays the signing [of the peace treaty].”

A question in the same vein was posed to Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev by a German journalist during a joint press conference with the President of Germany.

At the very same time, during the Central Asia–EU Summit, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated that without peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia, the implementation of transport projects within the Trans-Caspian Corridor would be impossible. As if Georgia doesn't exist—through which the Baku–Tbilisi–Kars railway already runs! Azerbaijan has encountered this intention to drag Armenia into regional projects at any cost before. In the early 2000s, Washington attempted to push for oil and gas pipelines from Azerbaijan to Türkiye to pass through Armenian territory. Needless to say, this came without any demand for Armenia to withdraw from the Azerbaijani territories it was occupying at the time.

Nevertheless, Azerbaijan succeeded in implementing the pipeline routes through Georgia—and that’s hardly surprising. After all, the West needs energy imports just as much as Azerbaijan needs to export them. And in matters of such importance, Armenia’s interests—no matter how cherished they may be in world capitals—inevitably take a back seat when Baku shows resolve. The same will apply to the Trans-Caspian project, especially since, as already noted, the necessary route is already in place.

Meanwhile, over in Yerevan, Armenian officials have once again decided to join the European Union—this time with President Vahagn Khachaturyan signing a law initiating the country’s accession process. And this is far from the final step. As Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan himself stated back in January this year, the decision to join the EU can only be made through a nationwide referendum.

But the most important part comes afterward—because for the process to truly begin, it requires the consent of Brussels itself. And does Brussels even want that? One wonders whether Ursula von der Leyen is truly prepared to throw her weight behind Armenia’s accession to the EU. It seems that might be just as difficult as forcing Baku into a rushed peace with Yerevan.

At the same time, while it’s fair to chuckle at the political and diplomatic posturing of certain European circles, it’s also important to recognise the seriousness of their actions on the ground—specifically, their growing military cooperation with Armenia. Over the past few days, there have been two notable developments pointing toward Armenia’s ongoing militarisation.

During a visit to Paris, Armenia’s Minister of High-Tech Industry, Mkhitar Hayrapetyan, met with Emmanuel Chiva, head of France’s Directorate General of Armaments. According to Armenian media, the meeting focused on prospects for expanding military-industrial cooperation between Armenia and France, opportunities to initiate technology exchange programmes, issues related to the development of defence technologies in Armenia, and other related topics.

At the same time, it has emerged that official New Delhi, in addition to supplying arms to Yerevan, has also committed to training Armenian special operations forces. One can reasonably assume that Indian instructors will be teaching Armenian troops combat skills suited to high-altitude environments. This further suggests that, with the backing of its patrons, Armenia is nurturing plans for sabotage operations against the Azerbaijani Armed Forces along the conditional border.

Azerbaijan has experience countering Armenia both diplomatically and militarily. Any escalation on either front threatens to result in a fiasco for Armenia—the severity of which will be directly proportional to the scale of its provocations.