MEETING POINT KAZAN

The BRICS summit held in Kazan brought a notable development on the Azerbaijani-Armenian front. For the first time in recent history, direct talks were held between Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. While no specific outcomes were announced, Aliyev and Pashinyan discussed the current situation, instructed their foreign ministers to continue working, and agreed to leverage all available opportunities to reach a peace agreement as soon as possible. However, the terms of such an agreement have yet to be disclosed. Nonetheless, the fact that the meeting occurred at all in the current climate suggests optimism and opens avenues for further consideration.

No Smooth Attempts At Talks

Over recent months, attempts to hold talks between Aliyev and Pashinyan—with or without mediators—have repeatedly stalled. Back in July, a meeting between the two leaders was anticipated at the European Political Community summit in London, which drew 45 heads of state and government. However, the meeting was disrupted due to actions by the Armenian side.

Another "diplomatic attempt" was made at the CIS summit in early October, but the anticipated full-fledged meeting still did not materialise, though journalists noted a brief conversation between the two leaders. Photos captured during this exchange were described by some Armenian media as "insulting" and "humiliating" for Pashinyan. A planned meeting between the speakers of the Azerbaijani and Armenian parliaments, Sahiba Gafarova and Alen Simonyan, also fell through when Simonyan suggested that Azerbaijanis should "seek their homeland in Altai."

In this context, the meeting in Kazan offers a more confident, optimistic outlook. After a lengthy pause, the negotiation process managed a "restart." Aliyev and Pashinyan spoke for about an hour, which in itself is notable. However, this doesn't necessarily mean that work on the peace treaty will now accelerate, given the unresolved issues and many complexities.

The press offices did not disclose the specifics of Aliyev and Pashinyan's discussion. It's worth noting that the peace agreement between Baku and Yerevan is reportedly about 80% complete. Initially, Baku pushed for a swift completion, but now Yerevan seems to be the one eager to finalise the document on the margins of the COP29 summit. Yerevan has proposed signing a version of the text that omits certain contentious points, and it has indicated that it will not amend its Constitution prior to the peace agreement signing—an approach that does not sit well with Baku.

The American Play

The BRICS summit meeting aligns with recent US diplomatic engagement, including a visit to Baku and Yerevan by senior US diplomat Michael Carpenter. US President Joe Biden also sent a message to the Azerbaijani and Armenian leaders, expressing support for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of both countries and urging swift progress on a peace agreement.

However, American mediation has increasingly "lost credibility" in Azerbaijan. A letter from US congress members calling for sanctions against official Baku drew sharp criticism there. Ilham Aliyev even suggested that the State Department itself was involved in orchestrating this letter. Until recently, American officials claimed it was merely an opinion from Capitol Hill, implying that the executive branch was not accountable for it. Such explanations, however, are no longer deemed sufficient.

US diplomacy may have complicated its position by focusing on the "safe and dignified return of the Armenians of Garabagh." Baku argues it has done all that is necessary to facilitate this return, offering security and civil rights and recognising as citizens the Armenians who lived there before 1988 and their descendants. Moreover, there was no forced expulsion or "pushing out" of people, unlike the ethnic cleansing of Azerbaijanis in Armenia. Hence, Baku sees continued emphasis on this issue as an undue concession to Armenian "aspirations."

Perhaps the most sensitive issue at play is the upcoming US presidential election, traditionally held on the first Tuesday in November. Joe Biden will not be participating. Even if Vice President Kamala Harris wins, experts do not discount the possibility of shifts in Washington's foreign policy direction. As a result, American diplomatic proposals urging a swift signing of a peace treaty, with the US acting as a sort of moderator in the region, are being heard. However, there is still a pause as parties wait for a clearer picture to emerge in the White House. The negotiations have already progressed to a stage where they are occurring without intermediaries, which is a source of great optimism. The process of border demarcation and delimitation has commenced and has drawn renewed attention due to the ratification of the procedural rules for the Border Delimitation Commission. In both Azerbaijan and Armenia, this document has received presidential approval. Furthermore, Nikol Pashinyan and his allies managed to break through the stiff resistance of the Armenian opposition, which used revanchist slogans to full effect, and pushed the agreement through parliament with the support of his Civil Pact faction. It's fair to note, however, that the Constitutional Court's verdict is still pending. Even at this juncture, the developments in the Armenian parliament might offer some grounds for optimism.

Does this signify that Armenia's plans for revenge are now off the table? And, crucially, that these plans lack international support?

EUMA's Provocative Role

Regrettably, not everything is unfolding as favourably as one might hope. Armenia is being actively prepared for a forceful resurgence, with France leading the charge in this process. Additionally, Paris is engaging European Union structures in these provocations. An example of this can be seen in the activities of the EU's monitoring mission in Armenia, EUMA (European Union Mission in Armenia).

During the credential ceremony for the newly appointed Belgian Ambassador to Azerbaijan, Julien de Fraipon, President Ilham Aliyev issued a clear statement: the European Union must not become an instrument of Paris's divisive policies or blindly follow the French agenda. The President also clarified Azerbaijan's stance on another contentious issue between Baku and Brussels. Ilham Aliyev spoke firmly about the so-called 'binocular diplomacy' displayed by EUMA. He reminded the audience that the mission was initially deployed under different terms—limited in both duration and personnel, conditions to which Azerbaijan had agreed. Now, however, these terms have been extended and the mission's scope altered, without Azerbaijan's consent.

In Azerbaijan, experts have reiterated that EUMA's activities in the region serve not as mere monitoring but as intelligence gathering, serving France's interests, which openly support Armenia. Just days after the Azerbaijani President's meeting with the Belgian Ambassador, French Defence Minister Sebastien Lecornu addressed the French Senate. He stated, "We have established a defence mission in Yerevan. This is unprecedented." Additionally, the French authorities have "deployed a group of instructors to train Armenian soldiers—a move in a country that remains part of a security organisation alongside Russia." French advisers in Yerevan have a specific mandate: to devise two or three defensive plans for Armenia in the event of 'aggression.' The French minister confirmed that night vision goggles were provided to Armenian border guards. Moreover, France assisted in establishing an air defence system and restoring artillery. Despite the Minister's assurances that France is only supplying 'defensive' equipment, it has been repeatedly noted that howitzers, offensive weapons, have been supplied as well.

The Azerbaijani media has published compelling video evidence showing EUMA's 'binocular enthusiasts' engaging in activities within Armenia that exceed the agreed-upon scope outlined in Prague. A convoy of EUMA observers—two dark-coloured SUVs and one white vehicle—was observed on the section of the border dividing the villages of Baghanis Ayrum and Voskepar (historically known as Yukhari Askipara). Later, the same vehicles were spotted near the Azerbaijani village of Farahli, where Armenian forces were conducting engineering work. EUMA representatives were seen acting as instructors on this site.

Adding to this is yet another provocative resolution from the European Parliament. Although the likelihood of its implementation is slim, documents like this greatly fuel Armenian revanchism. They certainly don't appear spontaneously, but are likely in response to requests from Yerevan, where a double game seems to be in play once again."