Some foreign aids reels Yerevan in to shirking peace talks

By Fatime Letifova

It was an unexpected event that the 30-year Garabagh conflict would end in 2020 and 2023 with counter-offensive operations by the Azerbaijani army. During this period, the Azerbaijani leadership took maximum humane measures in response to every Armenian provocation without going beyond self-defence. The ceasefire violations that periodically occurred along the borders continued until the Second Garabagh War in 2020, particularly targeting the civilian Azerbaijani population.

To end these provocations and liberate the formerly occupied Garabagh, the Azerbaijani army launched a counter-offensive operation and freed its historical territories from occupation in just 44 days. In 2023, during a 23-hour anti-terror operation, the separatist forces that illegally deployed military formations in Garabagh were neutralised .

Against the backdrop of all these events, Armenia, which had survived for decades with the help of other countries, realised that even with the support of Western countries, it was powerless against the Azerbaijani Army. However, the subversive plans of the Armenian authorities, which pretended to be peace-loving, but played games against Azerbaijan with their Western allies in the background, did not last long.

Despite the meeting of the foreign ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia in Almaty in May, which gave a significant impetus to the peace agreement to be signed in the South Caucasus, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan's refusal to meet with the President of Azerbaijan at the 4th EPC summit in Oxford was another hindrance to a possible rapprochement between the sides.

It is worth recalling that after the long-standing and resolved Garabagh conflict, the Armenian government seemed interested in peace. However, these events prove that Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan's "peace-oriented" decisions were only due to his dwindling hopes for external support.

However, Armenia's shirking peace talks spilled the beans about the involvement of a US representative in the Armenian Ministry of Defence shortly before the London meeting, plus the European Union's €10 million aid package. The immediate provocations by Armenia towards Azerbaijan's Kalbajar and Tovuz districts demonstrate the false nature of all peace calls to date.

It should be noted that such provocations by Armenia are not the first and have a continuous nature. France's provision of lethal weapons to Armenia and the European Union's initial military aid of ten million euros under the "European Peace Fund" encourage Armenia to commit such provocations.

The Azerbaijani Ministry of Defence has once again warned Armenia and its patrons to refrain from its intention to create a new conflict zone in the South Caucasus region. It is clear that these steps will obstruct peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia. The Azerbaijani leadership is well aware of the Armenian mindset. Yerevan's search for the slightest "hope fragment" to evade peace and lay the foundation for new tension in the region while making peace calls without correcting the mistakes that hinder peace embodies Armenian hypocrisy and falsehood.

Another issue is the rumours in the media about Armenia's military procurements. Although the Armenian leadership denies these acts, many organisations claim that Yerevan is buying large quantities of weapons. Considering that Armenia lost a significant portion of its weapons during the 44-day war and is now trying to restore its military potential, these procurements could be seen as normal. However, Yerevan's inability to choose the right time for this undermines the steps taken towards peace. We underline that the Armenian army, militarised by other countries for over 30 years, could not withstand the Azerbaijani army for even 2 months. Moreover, while these two countries never had a chance to make peace, actions that could delay or even postpone the process suggest either some external forces pushing Armenia into a new war or the incompetent policies of Armenia's narrow-minded ruling circles.

Nearly four years have passed since the adoption of the November 10 declaration, which emphasises the necessity of signing the peace agreement. During this period, instead of fulfilling important demands such as handing over maps of the mines planted in Garabagh to Baku and amending the Armenian constitution by removing its preamble about the territorial claims against Azerbaijan, the Armenian side delays the peace process with empty statements.

It is interesting that instead of responding to Azerbaijan's demand for peace, Armenia resorts to new provocations, and this can be observed especially at the borders. Undoubtedly, Azerbaijan has a certain limit to its tolerance for such provocations. If there is no room for discussion at the table, it may be time to meet in the field at any moment.