Tripartite meeting between Nikol Pashinyan, Olaf Scholz and Ilham Aliyev in Munich on Feb. 17, 2024 (Office of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia)
YEREVAN—Armen Grigoryan, Secretary of the Security Council of Armenia, confirmed today that Azerbaijan has submitted its version of a peace treaty to Armenia.
“Following our response on January 4, Azerbaijan has submitted its version, and we are currently working on it. I believe that if the foreign ministers meet soon, they will discuss the peace agreement,” Grigoryan said.
Grigoryan clarified that the EU civilian monitoring mission, which is deployed along the Armenian side of the border, does not have access to the Nerkin Hand region, where the recent border incident occurred. Four Armenian soldiers were killed in an Azerbaijani attack on Nerkin Hand, Syunik on February 13, the most intense escalation along the border in months. Grigoryan emphasized that Armenia remains committed to resolving the issue through diplomatic means and reiterated Armenia’s commitment to a mirror withdrawal of troops from the border.
Grigoryan also addressed the issue of armament acquired by Azerbaijan. He proposed the implementation of arms control mechanisms to establish stability and long-term peace in the region. He emphasized that Armenia is actively diversifying its security and foreign policy and is committed to finding a peaceful resolution to the conflict through diplomatic channels.
This news follows a meeting between Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in Munich on February 17 with the mediation of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz within the framework of the Munich Security Conference. The meeting, which was the first between the two leaders since last July, was held to discuss the ongoing conflict between the two countries over Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabakh and the peace deal that continues to linger.
According to Azerbaijan’s APA news agency, Scholz left the room at some point, and the meeting continued in a bilateral format between Pashinyan and Aliyev. Afterwards, the sides expressed satisfaction with the meeting but offered few specifics on a way forward.
One of the main reasons for their failure to meet has been disagreement over who should mediate, particularly since Azerbaijan’s seizure of Artsakh in September and the exodus of the region’s Armenian population. Armenia has favored mediation by the EU and U.S. Azerbaijan first expressed preference for authoritarian regional powers Russia and Turkey and then began rejecting all outside mediation.
Armenia and Azerbaijan have met in bilateral format several times, however, to discuss border delimitation in November and a prisoner exchange in December. Armenia has not explicitly rejected bilateral talks on a comprehensive peace deal, though its preference for Western mediation is evident, as it seeks closer ties with the EU and U.S. and attempts to move away from its traditional strategic partner Russia.
The Aliyev-Pashinyan-Scholz meeting took place just four days following the latest escalation on the border with Azerbaijan on February 13.
In the latest incident, Azerbaijan claimed that its troops had come under fire from an Armenian army position in the southern Syunik region on February 12, resulting in the wounding of one Azerbaijani soldier. The Armenian Defense Ministry promptly announced that it would conduct an investigation. The following day, Azerbaijan launched what it called a “revenge operation,” subjecting the Armenian post to intensive fire for four hours, killing four soldiers and wounding another.
During a government meeting on February 15, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan expressed concerns about Azerbaijan’s intentions along the border. “Our analysis shows that Azerbaijan wants to launch military action in some parts of the border with the prospect of turning military escalation into a full-scale war against Armenia,” Pashinyan stated. “This intention can be read in all statements and actions of Azerbaijan.”
After his meeting with Aliyev, on February 18 Pashinyan said the two countries’ foreign ministers would meet soon for peace talks. It is not clear whether or not any mediators will be present. Aliyev, meanwhile, called his meeting with Pashinyan “constructive and useful.” He declared that there is “de facto peace in the region” and expressed readiness to sign a peace treaty.
At the same time, the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry reiterated Baku’s demand that Armenia revise its constitution and other laws to remove all references to Artsakh.
Following the Munich meeting, Scholz stated that the sides agreed to resolve their differences without violence. No details about any specific agreements were made public.
On the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken also met with Pahinyan and Aliyev separately, expressing support for the peace process. During his meeting with Aliyev, Blinken “raised the importance of Azerbaijan adhering to its international commitments and obligations regarding human rights.”
While the two countries’ leaders maintain that they have agreed on the main principles of the peace treaty, the sides voice disagreement over almost all of the parts of the deal, including the opening of the transport links, border delimitation and demarcation, and Aliyev’s bold declaration that Armenia must amend its constitution if it wishes to achieve peace with Azerbaijan. Aliyev emphasized that Armenia’s current constitution contains provisions that supposedly challenge Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity.
The crux of the issue lies in Armenia’s Declaration of Independence, which calls for the unification of Artsakh with Armenia, as well as international recognition of the Armenian Genocide. These references have been a point of contention in the ongoing peace talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Regarding the principles for a peace treaty, Armenia and Azerbaijan have discussed recognizing each other’s territorial integrity, with the latest USSR and Almaty declaration maps used for the demarcation of the borders, and opening regional infrastructure based on the respective country’s legislation and jurisdiction. Azerbaijan, however, demands a corridor through Armenia connecting mainland Azerbaijan with its exclave Nakhchivan to be controlled by Russian border troops and without Armenian customs or border checks.
Amidst Azerbaijan’s outward display of peace on the international stage, the country’s Defense Ministry has announced the commencement of a training session for reservists, in line with the 2024 training plan approved by Minister of Defense Zakir Hasanov. The reservists, after undergoing registration and medical examination at the assembly point, have been equipped with military uniforms and other essential supplies.
The training session is designed to elevate combat proficiency, military acumen and practical experience of the reservists, according to the Defense Ministry. It also aims to acquaint reservists with the latest weaponry and military equipment in the army’s arsenal.
While Azerbaijan’s rhetoric on the international stage may suggest a commitment to peace, its actions at home raise questions about its true intentions. The timing of the reservist training session, coming on the heels of a recent escalation on the border with Armenia, suggests that Baku may be preparing for a new round of hostilities rather than seeking genuine peace. This dichotomy between words and actions underscores the complexity of the situation and the challenges facing the region in achieving a lasting peace.