The news, released simultaneously in Baku and Yerevan, that Armenia and Azerbaijan had successfully concluded negotiations on a peace agreement is very welcome. Negotiations had been going on for a long time, sometimes in person and sometimes by email, sometimes with the participation of third-party mediators, but most of the time bilaterally without third parties. Armenia and Azerbaijan should be congratulated. The EU, US, Russia and France were amongst the first to praise the sides for their success.
When Armenia and Azerbaijan announced the conclusion of the negotiations on Thursday (13 March) they struck different notes: The Armenians were upbeat. Their foreign ministry said that the agreement was now ready to be signed. They said that Armenia has accepted Baku’s proposals on two previously unresolved articles of the draft and is ready to start talks with the Azerbaijani side on the time and place of the signing. The Azerbaijanis were more reticent. In a separate, even if synchronised, statement, the Azerbaijani foreign ministry, also “noted with satisfaction” that the negotiations were over but repeated the demand that Armenia must change its constitution to remove claims to Azerbaijani territory. For good measure the Azerbaijani side called for the formal abolishment “of the obsolete and dysfunctional Minsk Group and related structures of the OSCE”.
Azerbaijan has a habit of not knowing when to stop. Its demand for changes to the Armenian constitution are according to the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry “long-lasting and principled”. But making that a condition for signing a peace agreement is disingenuous, since changes to the Armenian constitution will be a long process which will inevitably be caught in Armenia’s messy domestic political dialogue. The demand related to the Minsk Group is more realistic, since this structure has not worked for years. Here the onus is on the OSCE, and the three co-Chair countries (France, Russia and the US) rather than on Armenia. To put as a condition for signing a peace agreement is at best not helpful, and one can even call it bizarre.
The sides now have to agree on the time and place for signing the peace agreement. The place is not important, but the agreement should be signed as soon as possible and without delay.
The fact that Armenia and Azerbaijan have successfully concluded discussions on the text of a peace agreement is a step in the right direction. But only a step!
There is much work that yet has to be done to ensure tat Armenia-Azerbaijan peace is lasting and sustainable. Any peace agreement to be worth the paper it is written on must have buy- in of key stakeholders and the population at large. Here the work has hardly begun.
The Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders, Nikol Pashinyan and Ilham Aliyev are very different and they preside on very different governance models. But both sit atop vertical structures which give them a lot of self-confidence and a belief in their power. This is what enabled them to negotiate and agree a peace agreement. But now the situation moves to a new phase. This will require a different approach and skills.
**Empower the “party of peace”**
There is in both Armenia and Azerbaijan a strong “party of war” and a fledgling “party of peace”. The “party of peace” needs to be empowered. As someone who has worked on peace and reconciliation issues in the South Caucasus for a very long time, I am very sceptical on a bottom-up approach. The critical mass of those supporting peace has failed to materialise. At best it will take many, many, years to do so. What is needed now is a top-down approach, enabling the “party of peace”, first amongst elites, opinion shapers, media and civil society.
**Time for dialogue and confidence-building**
If ever there was a time for dialogue and confidence-building between Armenians and Azerbaijanis it is now.
Dialogue must now become a norm, and involve all layers of society. This will be challenging as the situation is still fragile, and an error or a provocation, can impact badly on all. But it is a risk that has to be accepted and the dialogue process must be broadened.
Confidence-building measures between Armenians and Azerbaijanis remain rare and far between. Baku and Yerevan must now create conditions for CBMs to be implemented.
**Galvanise International Support**
The EU and US, as well as countries such as the UK, Norway, Netherlands and others, have in the past tried to support peace initiatives between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Their efforts have not always been coherent and often suffered from a lack of understanding of the complexities of the issues they were dealing with. The attitude of the governments in Yerevan and Baku has often been unfriendly, if not outright hostile. Yet foreign donors have the resources, and at least among civil society, the credibility. The governments in Baku and Yerevan must galvanise the energy of the international community in support of their peace agreement. This new cooperation needs to have an innovative and solid basis but can be a win-win situation for all.
It is good that Armenia and Azerbaijan have finalised successfully discussions on a peace agreement. It is now time for further steps.
##### Source: Dr Dennis Sammut is the Director of LINKS Europe and Managing Editor of _commonspace.eu_.
**The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of _commonspace.eu_ or its partners**