"We want peace with the Armenian people, not just the government" Azerbaijani presidential aide to Berliner Zeitung

The German outlet Berliner Zeitung, on the sidelines of the 3rd International Media Forum held in Khankendi, spoke with the Assistant to the President of Azerbaijan and Head of the Foreign Policy Affairs Department of the Presidential Administration, Hikmet Hajiyev. The translation from German was provided by Caliber.Az.

— Why have Armenia and Azerbaijan still not reached a comprehensive peace agreement? And what could be a sustainable formula for settlement between Yerevan and Baku?

— Sometimes, states sign peace agreements on paper, but peace does not exist on the ground. In the case of the South Caucasus, the situation is the opposite. We have real peace on the ground — military clashes and escalation are no longer on the agenda between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Of course, some disputed issues remain, but that is completely normal. This is precisely why diplomacy and dialogue exist.

We are ready to sign peace and to transform the entire region. The text of the peace agreement, developed in Baku and presented to the Armenian side, has already been largely agreed upon. That in itself is a positive outcome.

— But clearly, there are still steps that need to be taken.

— There are certain details that require resolution. First and foremost, the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia contains claims to Azerbaijani territory. A constitution is an internal matter for any state — unless it references another country or a specific region of another country. We want to make peace not only with the Armenian government but also with the Armenian people. And we want to see the Armenian people themselves, through appropriate constitutional changes, renounce any territorial claims against Azerbaijan.

— But it’s not just about Armenia’s Constitution, is it?

— After that, I believe there will be no more obstacles or barriers on the path to peace. In addition, we want the OSCE Minsk Group to be consigned to the dustbin of history. It was a diplomatic failure — a complete fiasco. For thirty years, the Minsk Group carried out this failed mission without offering real prospects for resolving the conflict. Now, we are closer than ever to peace — at least peace on the ground.

— Are possible reparations from Armenia being discussed?

— At present, this issue is not on the agenda of bilateral negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Nevertheless, Azerbaijan has conducted a thorough assessment of all damages incurred. This is a matter of state responsibility, because Armenia grossly violated international law, used force against Azerbaijan for 30 years, occupied Azerbaijani territories, and failed to comply with UN Security Council resolutions.

During the occupation, Armenia completely destroyed Azerbaijani towns and villages. Since the liberation of these territories, we have carried out a comprehensive damage assessment using UN-standard methodology. According to these assessments, the total damage amounts to approximately 150 billion US dollars.

— One of the biggest challenges will likely be convincing Azerbaijanis to return to Karabakh on a permanent basis. How do you intend to achieve that?

— I wouldn't call it a challenge. The Azerbaijani people are, by nature, deeply connected to their land. We have always dreamed of returning to our homes.

Our goal is to ensure their return in conditions of dignity and security. As can be seen, the entire Karabakh region is currently a vast construction site. At present, over 50,000 Azerbaijanis already live, work, and study in Karabakh and the eastern part of Zangezur.

— Armenians who lived in Karabakh for generations also want to return. Wouldn’t the greatest peace project of our time be for the political leadership in Baku to allow Armenians to return to Karabakh?

— First of all, Armenians did not leave Karabakh because we expelled them. They made the decision to leave on their own. Secondly, Azerbaijan developed a very comprehensive reintegration model. However, the Armenians refused to be part of it. What does that mean? It means accepting Azerbaijani citizenship, demonstrating loyalty as citizens of Azerbaijan, and abiding by the Constitution and laws of the Republic of Azerbaijan. This is standard practice in any state. Azerbaijan can no longer allow a "zigzag policy" on its own sovereign territory. That is in the past. For those who wish to live as Azerbaijani citizens, the appropriate procedures are in place.

— Around 120,000 Armenians were forced to leave Karabakh during the events of 2023 — essentially the entire population. In the West, this is being referred to as ethnic cleansing.

— Look, the voluntary departure of the Karabakh Armenians can in no way be considered ethnic cleansing. But if we’re going to talk about the “right of return,” then let’s also talk about the Azerbaijanis who lived in Armenia and were forcibly expelled from there.

The right of return is a matter of intense debate — for example, in Germany after World War II. This right is part of human rights and must also be recognised for the 250,000 Azerbaijanis who were expelled from Armenia. So my question is: do they have the right to return? Absolutely, yes. But Yerevan refuses to even discuss this issue.

— If you speak with older generations of Armenians and Azerbaijanis who grew up in the Soviet Union, they say they dream of peace. But many young people in both countries often do not believe in a sustainable peace. Why is the level of hostility among some of the younger generation so high?

— We have to be realistic. Ethnic reconciliation is one of the most difficult aspects of any post-war period. Look at the Balkans — it’s been more than 30 years since the wars of the 1990s, and full ethnic reconciliation has still not been achieved. It takes time. Some wounds of war are still very fresh for us. Take a look at Aghdam — it was completely wiped off the face of the earth.

— In particular, young people on both sides don’t seem interested in a long-term peace process. How can that be overcome?

— We must be very cautious about a new wave of revanchism in Armenian society. We are already seeing attempts to challenge the new status quo in the region. We are seeing efforts to undermine the new realities, and we are observing how Armenian youth are being ideologically conditioned toward renewed confrontation and war. This is absolutely unacceptable.

That is why the Armenian government must now focus on its own domestic public. I believe constitutional reform will be an important step toward ending such tendencies.

— Let’s talk about the recent talks in Abu Dhabi. In what language did you communicate with your Armenian counterparts?

— Sometimes in English, sometimes in Russian.

— Both sides have described the dialogue as constructive. Can you provide specific examples?

— One constructive element is that the entire peace process is now in our own hands. Only Armenia and Azerbaijan are making decisions — without the involvement of Russia, the European Union, or the United States. There were only Armenians and Azerbaijanis in the room. We had a civilised dialogue. We don’t need anyone to teach us how to live in peace and coexist. The talks were quite productive — despite the fact that we still don’t have diplomatic relations.

— Yet from the outside, it may seem that the peace process has stalled.

— We are awaiting constitutional changes in Armenia. We are also not operating in a diplomatic vacuum. There are precedents.

— What precedent do you have in mind?

— Look at the Belfast Agreement of 1998 between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. Constitutional amendments were also required there, because the Irish Constitution contained claims to Northern Ireland.

— One of the current issues is the so-called Zangezur Corridor. Would you welcome the involvement of private American companies in managing this Armenian-Azerbaijani project?

— As President Ilham Aliyev said, that is a question for the Armenian side. Whatever may be under discussion — we’re not privy to it. If they’re cooperating with American companies, that’s their choice. Meanwhile, we’re doing our “homework”: developing transport infrastructure and maintaining ties with all our neighbours — Georgia, Iran, and Russia. Overall, such routes will benefit the entire region. If Armenia is ready, we would be glad to jointly develop the Trans-Caucasus transport corridor.

— What can Presidents Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Vladimir Putin learn from Armenia and Azerbaijan?

— That’s a very difficult question. I would prefer to remain diplomatically polite here. I can only share Azerbaijan’s experience: our policy has always been to study the experience of other countries. Learning from others’ mistakes is extremely important.

We never accepted the occupation and consistently demanded the implementation of UN Security Council resolutions. I believe Azerbaijan has set a precedent and created a model for conflict resolution. Recently, Prime Minister Pashinyan admitted that he regretted not recognising Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity back in 2022. Had Armenia accepted that reality earlier, the conflict could have been resolved much sooner. But that’s in the past.

— You have good relations with both Kyiv and Moscow. Why, then, are Russia–Ukraine talks taking place in Istanbul and not in Baku?

— If our friends and partners wish to meet in Baku — they are welcome. Baku has already become the diplomatic capital of the entire Caspian region. Negotiations between Türkiye and Israel were held here. There were also contacts between Syria and Israel. At one point, strategic talks between Russia and the United States on missile defence systems took place in Baku, as well as dialogue between NATO and Russia. Many other discreet diplomatic meetings have also taken place in Baku. Everyone is always welcome — but we cannot force anyone. They must choose to come to us.

— Russia has traditionally exerted strong influence in the region. But due to the war in Ukraine, the Kremlin's geopolitical weakness is now evident. Moreover, relations between Azerbaijan and Russia appear tense. Is this a temporary episode or the beginning of fundamental changes?

— I wouldn't call it fundamental changes. It’s more about a misunderstanding and a rise in tensions in bilateral relations. Such episodes can occur between neighbouring countries. It all began with the plane crash, which deeply shocked Azerbaijani society. It happened on Russian territory, in Russian airspace, and we know how it happened — that is no longer a secret. As a neighbour and partner, Azerbaijan expects Russia to take responsibility and ensure justice in this case.

— Azerbaijan maintains good relations with Israel, but is also a neighbour of Iran, which in turn closely cooperates with Armenia. What is Baku’s official position on the conflict between Iran and Israel?

— First of all, Azerbaijan’s current geopolitical position is extremely sensitive. One neighbour — Russia — is involved in the war in Ukraine and is under heavy sanctions. On the other hand, Israel and Iran are engaged in a conflict. Iran — our second largest neighbour — is under sanctions just as severe as those imposed on Russia.

— A complex geostrategic situation.

— Under these conditions, Azerbaijan remains an island of security and stability. We maintain open lines of communication and good relations with both Israel and Iran. This reflects our diplomatic philosophy: openness, transparency, and predictability. At the same time, we take into account the national interests of our neighbours and strive to understand their legitimate security concerns.

— Let’s turn to relations with Germany. Why is Berlin today so inconspicuous as a geopolitical player? Germany does not play a major role in the South Caucasus, in Ukraine, in the Middle East, or in South Asia or Africa.

— I wouldn’t say that Germany is so inconspicuous. Germany enjoys high regard in the region. President Steinmeier recently visited Baku — he is held in great respect in Azerbaijan. But I do agree that Germany could do more — not only in terms of peacebuilding, but especially in driving the economic transformation of the South Caucasus. Germany is an economic powerhouse within the EU and one of the world’s leading economies. We expect German companies to become more active.

— Germany and the EU regularly criticise the human rights situation in Azerbaijan. In the Reporters Without Borders press freedom index, Azerbaijan ranks 168th out of 180. How do you plan to improve that ranking?

— Unfortunately, some major European media outlets — including German ones — have conducted a coordinated propaganda campaign against Azerbaijan. But let’s look at the new realities. The Trump administration in the U.S. exposed many covert operations carried out by USAID, which had close ties to previous American administrations. In our region, USAID was never truly engaged in humanitarian work.

— Can you clarify?

— They funded numerous media outlets in the region and instructed them to publish content pushing a negative agenda against Azerbaijan. Today, we’re seeing significantly fewer negative publications, largely because figures like Samantha Power — the former head of USAID — are no longer active. In our view, she harboured an almost genetic hatred toward Azerbaijan and its people.

— Germany also frequently sees critical publications on human rights in Azerbaijan.

— Unfortunately, certain European — including some German — media outlets demonstrate what I would call a “firewall mentality.” Without ever visiting the country, they broadcast a distorted reality. Some outlets publish only one-sided, biased information. I’ll give you an example: if a German publication runs a sharply critical article about my country, I request a right of reply. Formally, they say “yes,” but in practice, I am never given the floor. This reminds me of the Politburo of the Soviet Union.

— What do you mean?

— I apologise in advance for comparing parts of the German media to the Politburo, but the analogy is hard to avoid. Do I have the right to present a different perspective? Yes. Am I allowed to voice it? No. We are not given a platform to respond. We are denied the opportunity to present our side.