Following the full agreement on the draft peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Baku has adopted a different strategy. Despite Armenia’s calls and readiness to begin discussions on the time and place for signing the treaty, Azerbaijan has responded with disinformation and renewed threats.
Given its awareness of Azerbaijan’s track record, Armenia brought the situation to the attention of the international community during a special session of the OSCE Permanent Council, convened at Armenia’s request.
Yerevan is still waiting for a response from Baku. Multiple proposals from Armenia, including mechanisms for oversight, remain unanswered. Azerbaijan has responded to Armenia’s offer to discuss the signing venue and timing with more threats. Elchin Amirbekov, Special Representative for Assignments by President Aliyev, urged Armenia to “accelerate” the peace treaty signing process, warning that the opportunity may not last forever.
Deputy Foreign Minister of Armenia, Vahan Kostanyan, described Azerbaijan’s stance and such statements as unconstructive:
“I cannot say why they are making such statements, but I can clearly note that they do not contribute positively to the atmosphere. These remarks seem designed to obscure or counter ongoing legal processes in Azerbaijan that hardly qualify as legal at all.”
Armenia considers Azerbaijan’s current behavior—spreading disinformation, border shootings, and imposing new preconditions—as dangerous, especially after reaching consensus on the peace treaty’s text.
Deputy Foreign Minister Robert Abrisoghian warned during the March 26 OSCE session in Vienna that these developments could have serious consequences.
According to Armenia’s Foreign Ministry, representatives from over 20 OSCE participating states took the floor during the meeting. Most welcomed the agreement on the peace treaty’s text and urged its prompt signing and ratification. In his remarks, Kostanyan stated:
“To our surprise, Azerbaijan’s reaction and subsequent actions are both disappointing and alarming. Their accusations are not isolated incidents—they are part of a broader, well-established pattern. Azerbaijan has a tendency to intensify disinformation campaigns about alleged ceasefire violations to justify future escalations. Armenia has repeatedly presented evidence of this strategy to OSCE member states, including in 2020 and 2023. I urge greater attention to this recurring pattern. The recent rise in aggressive rhetoric and threats toward Armenia is also part of this troubling trend and reminds us of past military escalations.”
The day after the meeting, UK Deputy Permanent Representative to the OSCE, Deirdre Brown, congratulated both Armenia and Azerbaijan on concluding peace treaty negotiations, calling it a historic moment. In a statement published on the UK government’s website, she stressed that:
“Finalizing the peace agreement is the best path to lasting peace and security in the South Caucasus. It will open the door to increased trade and prosperity not only for Armenia and Azerbaijan but also for their neighbors.”
The UK also urged both sides to avoid rhetoric that undermines the prospects for peace.
Is the situation serious enough to warrant such a strong international response? Deputy Speaker of Armenia’s National Assembly, Ruben Rubinyan, spoke cautiously about the risk of escalation:
“The danger of war existed yesterday, exists today, and may exist tomorrow. But there’s currently no trigger or justification for war. I wouldn’t say the risk is higher than before, but it’s still present until the peace process reaches its conclusion. What are we doing? We are moving toward peace. That’s why, thanks in part to our efforts, the text of the peace treaty has been agreed upon and is awaiting signature.”
The parliamentary opposition, however, remains skeptical of both the document—which they say they haven’t seen in full—and Azerbaijan’s sincerity. Seyran Ohanyan, former Defense Minister and head of the opposition “Armenia” faction, said that while the path to peace is necessary, the treaty could create new opportunities for Azerbaijan:
“In principle, a peace treaty is the right direction—we also strive for peace. And as a military man, I can say: who wants peace more than those who would suffer first in war? But Azerbaijan is being deceptive. The delay is aimed at establishing legal grounds internationally, so that later, taking advantage of geopolitical developments and shifts in power dynamics, they can increase pressure on Armenia.”
Sargis Khandanyan, Chair of the Armenian Parliament’s Standing Committee on Foreign Relations, recently proposed to his Azerbaijani counterpart Samad Seyidov to meet at the Armenian-Azerbaijani border to discuss the time and place for signing the treaty. Khandanyan remains hopeful for a positive response but called Amirbekov’s latest comments unconstructive:
“I see this as yet another tactic to delay the process. If Azerbaijan truly wants peace, they must propose a time and location for the signing without delay. As for their demand regarding constitutional changes, Armenia has repeatedly stated that it is not a legitimate precondition. In fact, we are urging Azerbaijan to speed up and sign the agreement.”
Despite Azerbaijan’s continued attempts—according to various assessments—to stall or derail the peace process, Armenia remains committed to its peace agenda. During his working visit to Kazakhstan, Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan reaffirmed that the peace treaty would be a turning point in Armenia-Azerbaijan relations. He reiterated Armenia’s position: mutual recognition of territorial integrity and border delimitation must be based on the Almaty Declaration. Mirzoyan also stressed the importance of resolving humanitarian issues, including clarifying the fate of the missing and releasing prisoners of war and detained civilians.