Which is more important, form or content? Expert ponders on Armenia-Azerbaijan normalisation process

Political scientist and head of the South Caucasus Research Centre Farhad Mammadov commented on the negotiation process between Baku and Yerevan in his Telegram channel.

"The negotiation cycle between Azerbaijan and Armenia is gaining momentum again.

Russia announces a meeting of the foreign ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia.

The US State Department is all eyes on the normalisation process: Dereck Hogan (who worked at the US embassy in Azerbaijan for a long time) is on the phone, and Erica Olson and Louis Bono are 'on the ground'.

It can be seen that painstaking work is going on to organise at least a meeting in Washington or somewhere else in an ally country. The State Department is trying to make the meeting substantive.

In the last three weeks, new topics have emerged in the Armenian-Azerbaijani track, alongside the traditional ones, creating tension rather than providing a basis for a rapprochement.

For Azerbaijan, the content of the negotiations is important, and the main achievement of Azerbaijani diplomacy is that the same agenda is discussed in both negotiating platforms:

- a peace treaty in priority;

- the peace treaty is based on the five principles proposed by Azerbaijan;

- the issue of unblocking communications is second on the list;

- the topic of the border does not imply the withdrawal of troops, but rather the definition of the basis for defining the border;

- despite the efforts of the Armenian side, the Karabakh issue is not on the inter-state agenda and this is acknowledged by official Iravan.

That is, the content of the negotiations is the same, but the mediators prioritise their own interests in particular topics. The fact of the peace treaty itself is important for the United States, and for Russia - the unblocking with its participation and a new additional function on the territory of Armenia is important.

However...

The topic of the Armenian-speaking population of Karabakh becomes a certain precondition for Armenia in its relations with Azerbaijan. If this is the only precondition, and it is not accepted by Azerbaijan, then Armenia should be completely deprived of that minimal Armenian subjectivity in the fate of the Armenian-speaking population of Karabakh.

The "international community" is already ready for this. Failure to negotiate in this track and it seems likely that the process will collapse, will create the conditions for Azerbaijan to implement actions in this direction.

The US and Russia, for various reasons, are in solidarity in opposing the establishment of the notorious checkpoint on the notorious border. However, Azerbaijan's adherence to principle and the algorithm of the negotiation process make the establishment of a checkpoint on the conditional border inevitable. It is necessary to change the conditions for the progress of the negotiation process. The Armenian leadership is doing everything in its power to bring the negotiations to a standstill," Farhad Mammadov wrote.