At the 4th Shushi Global Media Forum, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev made a statement that reflects Baku’s current understanding of the regional security architecture of the South Caucasus.

Referring to the “3 3” format, Aliyev noted.

“Today, at the current stage, it is important that “3 3″ be a full six-way cooperation. As long as Georgia does not join, at least five-sided, but with a very clear agenda. It is important so that this mechanism does not turn into another Minsk Group, which will deal exclusively with Azerbaijani-Armenian issues. The format should include issues related to the entire region with the participation of Russia, Iran, Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan on the principle of equality.”

According to Aliyev, it is this concept that Azerbaijan considers as a priority today, and if it is acceptable to other capitals, it will be possible to hold a five-way meeting at least at the level of foreign ministers.

This statement once again shows that Azerbaijan considers “3 3” not as a platform for the regulation of Armenian-Azerbaijani relations, but as a regional cooperation mechanism, the agenda of which should include security, economic, transport and political issues without Western mediation.

Aliyev’s emphasis on the fact that the format should not turn into a “new Minsk Group” testifies to Baku’s continuous aspiration to exclude the restoration of such multilateral mediation mechanisms, which may involve actors whom Azerbaijan considers to have a more favorable position towards Armenia.

This approach fully fits into the logic of Azerbaijan’s foreign policy in recent years. After the 2020 war, Baku consistently claims that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is over and the mission of the OSCE Minsk Group is over. For this reason, Azerbaijan prefers either bilateral negotiations or regional formats, where Western actors are not represented and cannot influence the negotiation process.

168.amin a conversation with Russian political analyst Alexander Khramchikhin noted that Russia and Iran continue to be the most interested parties in maintaining and activating the “3 3” format.

According to his assessment, both countries consider the expansion of Western influence in the region as a process contrary to their strategic interests, so “3 3” is an important tool for them to maintain and strengthen their own political influence.

“For Moscow, it is an opportunity to maintain its political presence in the South Caucasus, especially in the conditions when there is tension in Armenian-Russian relations, and the European Union has increased its activity in the region. This format is also important for Iran, as it provides an opportunity to directly participate in regional communication and security processes and limit the influence of extra-regional actors,” Khramchikhin said.

At the same time, according to the expert’s assessment, there are still serious political obstacles on the way to the full launch of “3 3”. Georgia does not participate in the format due to its conflicts with Russia, as a result of which the initiative actually operates in a five-party format.

According to Khramchikhin, this testifies not only to the structural limitations of the format, but also to the fact that there is still no full agreement among the participating countries on its political goals.

It is noteworthy that the next ministerial meeting of the “3 3” format was planned to be held in Yerevan or Baku, but it has been postponed for a long time, and no new date has been announced. This is due not only to regional geopolitical changes, but also to the lack of confidence regarding the format’s effectiveness and future role.

Nevertheless, Russia and Iran are still interested in its reactivation.

In general, Aliyev’s statements can be considered not so much as an impetus for the quick restart of “3 3”, but as another conceptual formulation of Azerbaijan’s regional policy.

Baku continues to insist that the security and cooperation system of the South Caucasus should be formed exclusively with the participation of regional actors, minimizing the involvement of external mediators. However, the viability of this approach will depend not only on the position of Azerbaijan, but also on the political decisions of Armenia and Georgia, as well as on the further developments of the ongoing geopolitical competition between Russia, Iran, Turkey, the European Union and the United States.

—