A STEP TOWARDS PEACE

Another round of post-conflict talks was held in the capital of the European Union Brussels on May 22. The third meeting between the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinian and President of European Council Charles Michel lasted five hours.

The final statement made by Charles Michel after the event sounded very optimistic: "The first meeting of commissions on border issues will take place in the coming days at the interstate border. Both leaders agreed to continue the work towards the opening of transport links. They also agreed on transit between Western Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan and through Azerbaijani territory between different parts of Armenia, as well as on principles that will regulate international transportation through the communications infrastructure of both countries. The leaders agreed to continue discussions on a future peace treaty regulating inter-state relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Delegations led by the Foreign Ministers will continue this process in the coming weeks". On his own behalf, Michel added: "...I have emphasised to both leaders that in my view it is important to address the rights and security of the ethnic Armenian population of Garabagh... The EU will work with the parties to develop an Economic Advisory Group trying to promote economic development for the benefit of both countries and their peoples. I have also underlined the importance of preparing the population for a long-term sustainable peace. EU is ready to strengthen its support." Michel promised to hold the next meeting in July/August 2022.

But what's behind the scenes?

No doubt that the agreements reached in Brussels are in the interests of all the parties involved, especially the European Union. Brussels understandably wants to succeed in its mission as a mediator and to secure the Azerbaijani pipelines and railways from "unpleasant surprises", as it has drawn conclusions both from the July 2020 skirmish and the following 44-day war, when Armenia targeted the Azerbaijani infrastructure strategically important for Europe. Finally, both theoretically and practically the post-conflict settlement in Garabagh makes it possible to make use of a win-win scenario, when a solution is in the interests of both sides.

Apparently, the negotiation process is running in line with Azerbaijan's position. Baku insists on the demarcation and delimitation of borders, which is closely related to their recognition by Yerevan and its renunciation of territorial claims against Azerbaijan.

Opening of communications is definitely in the interests of both sides. But Michel’s separate reference to transit between Western Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan, i. e. the Zangezur corridor, without mentioning the Lachin corridor is also a successful accomplishment for Baku.

Finally, Armenia, despite its best efforts, failed to push a reference to the OSCE Minsk Group in Brussels, let alone a discussion on autonomous status for Garabagh. Michel's personal statement showed that Europe viewed the issue only in the context of ensuring the rights and security of the Armenian population. President Aliyev has repeatedly stated that Baku considers the Armenians of Garabagh as its own citizens and is prepared to ensure their security, civil rights and cultural and humanitarian development.

Will Armenia miss the chance?

Apparently, the outcome of the Brussels meeting was a good reason for optimism. Especially considering the first meeting between the Azerbaijani and Armenian deputy prime ministers, Shahin Mustafayev and Mher Grigoryan, that took place at the border.

However, Baku reminded that the talks held in Brussels on April 6 ended in the same optimistic way. And the meeting between Mustafayev and Grigoryan was due to take place back in late April. But it was disrupted twice by Armenia, according to President Ilham Aliyev. So, is Yerevan ready to go towards peace?

The reason is clear too. Just days after the summit in Brussels, Ilham Aliyev said: "On May 24, the first meeting of commissions was held on the Azerbaijani-Armenian border. It makes a lot of sense, as we will be able to define our borders; this is very important. Because these borders were also occupied by Armenians. On the other hand, it will automatically and officially put an end to territorial claims against Azerbaijan by revanchist, fascist powers in Armenia. After all, if we define our borders, there is no need to talks about the so-called status of Nagorno-Karabakh!".

Negotiations. But what else?

There is less cause for optimism though. Border delimitation and demarcation under the auspices of the EU is not the first mission of its kind. Russia has taken the leading role in the process right after the 44-day war. Moscow had a significant tool to regulate the process - the maps of the USSR General Staff, which indicated the borders with maximum precision. However, Armenia disrupted the process, because Yerevan did not want to lose territories that had been illegally appropriated during the Soviet years, when the borders of republics were not defined, and later, during the occupation of the Zangilan, Lachin and Kalbajar districts bordering Armenia. During almost two years following the hostilities in Garabagh, there were events at Lake Garagol, where Armenian soldiers were literally kicked out, a ‘one-day war’ in Kalbajar, and many more incidents. As a result, Russian mediation efforts have almost stagnated. Today, Brussels is leading the process. However, it is still unknown whether Armenia has a will to take real steps to demarcate the borders and renounce the illegally appropriated territories. After all, local revanchists continue rallies in Yerevan accusing Nikol Pashinyan of "betraying the Armenian cause" and so on. But they have not crossed the red line yet. Will Pashinian's team risk signing documents that imply a renunciation of claims to Azerbaijani lands?

It is not that simple with the seemingly uncontroversial issue of opening communications either. After the talks in Brussels, Armen Grigoryan, one of Pashinyan's closest allies, made his comments on the issue. According to him, there can be no road or transport route as a corridor on Armenian territory. "As to opening regional communications, the agreements are dealing with border and customs control, tolling, and international transit. These important issues concern the implementation of the Armenian Intersection project. The Armenian government will move consistently in this direction,” Grigoryan said.

Regulated intersection

What is the idea behind the Armenian Intersection that Yerevan is referring to so enthusiastically? It was first introduced by Nikol Pashinian back in February 2022. At that time, he promised to connect both the Arazdeyan (Yeraskh)-Julfa road with access to Iran and the Azerbaijani Zangezur corridor, and further to the Russian railways, including the Armenian North-South motor road project, under a single project. The latter, as Yerevan expects, will create a link from Russia and Europe to the Persian Gulf.

We deliberately skip commenting on the bottle-neck border checkpoint Upper Lars on the Russian-Georgian border and the strategic Yerevan-Kafan road running through the Azerbaijani territory. There are other important things to discuss. The opening of communication lines is a complex issue. Even theoretically, Armenia cannot open a road to Julfa to get access to the Russian railways through Azerbaijan.

Moreover, whereas before the 44-day war Azerbaijan insisted on the real advancement of negotiations and the liberation of the occupied territories, the current situation is fundamentally different. Baku is undoubtedly interested in promoting a post-conflict settlement, but today the situation has changed. Armenia needs the opening of communications much more than Azerbaijan. After all, Azerbaijan has built alternative logistics infrastructure through Georgia during the years of occupation, and has an agreement with Iran. Moreover, if Armenia disrupts the delimitation of borders on the basis of Soviet maps, Baku may raise the question of returning to the maps of the Paris Peace Conference.

The 44-day war has archived the proposals of the OSCE Minsk Group that Armenia is missing today. This means that tomorrow they may well miss what they are rejecting today.