Joshua Kucera

Does all this mean space is being created where it’s possible for the two sides to find some compromise on the constitution, and avert the looming disaster that the referendum could pose? Let’s hope.

The two deputy PMs in charge of a joint border commission, also for the first time, crossed into each other’s territory during a visit along the border last week, the two sides announced. And now Turkey’s envoy to Armenia will come to Armenia in the coming days.

The August White House meeting has already improved the atmosphere and there have been some small but significant steps forward just in the last few days. Pashinyan’s plane crossed Azerbaijani airspace, reportedly a first.

There is hope that the prospect of becoming a hub, or other potential peace dividends, could convince Baku to delink the constitution issue from the peace process. (Which it already did last year with another critical issue, the “Zangezur Corridor.)

The U.S. is promising to help build the “Trump Route,” basically a version of what Azerbaijanis had been calling the Zangezur Corridor, a route through Armenia connecting the two noncontiguous parts of Azerbaijan. That could then open the door to many other regional connections.

Armenia has its own regional hub vision, which is compatible with Azerbaijan’s, called the Crossroads of Peace. There also is interest from abroad in making all this happen – from the EU, Gulf states, and now most notably the U.S.

And that vision is not compatible with an unresolved conflict on its border. Officials in Baku acknowledge that Armenia has to be included if the Caucasus can really become a serious international hub, and that the investors needed to make this happen won’t come without peace.

But there also is another strain of thinking in Baku, one that is focused on turning the country into a transit and energy hub of the Greater Caspian region. It is something you increasingly see in the rhetoric of Aliyev and state-affiliated commentators.

In the broader context, many in Azerbaijan feel that a peace deal will benefit Armenia more than them, and that the status quo of no war, no peace, is acceptable to Baku. So, in this thinking, they can afford to wait, and as the winners of the war, dictate terms on Armenia.

In Baku, they say that’s not the case: they consider it a reasonable demand for the Armenian constitution not to enshrine a formal claim on their territory, and want the Armenian public to confirm that they renounce irredentist demands for the sake of long-term peace.

Many Armenians think that this is deliberate sabotage by Azerbaijan, which knows that Armenian voters will reject the new constitution.. “So, then the conflict will continue”, one Armenian source imagined Aliyev saying. “And then we will crush you.”

Pashinyan has not done much to explain why the constitution needs to be changed, and in the context of Baku’s public demands to remove the language about Karabakh, many Armenian voters see it as the result of Azerbaijani bullying. So the chances of failure are high.

Baku considers that language in the constitution a claim on its territory. PM Pashinyan has been saying he wants to change the constitution for years, but now is finally doing it; a referendum is tentatively planned for 2026 or 2027.

The most significant remaining obstacle, though, is Armenia’s constitution. Azerbaijan says it won’t sign the agreement until Armenia changes its constitution to remove a(n indirect) reference to “reunification” with Nagorno-Karabakh.

But the Washington deal papered over some of the fundamental issues that still divide the two sides. This includes the “Trump Route” – which is a step forward, but still leaves unanswered the most difficult questions about how new transportation routes will be arranged.

The two sides finalized the text of a peace agreement in March. In Washington last month the foreign ministers initialled it, while the leaders of the two countries – along with Trump – signed a separate agreement including some of the same principles that are in the peace deal.

Armenia and Azerbaijan: The Hard Road to a Lasting Peace | International Crisis Group A conflict-ending accord between Armenia and Azerbaijan sits ready for signature. Peace would be a boon for both countries and their common vision of regional economic integration. With help from outs...

Armenia and Azerbaijan are closer than ever to finally resolving their decades-old conflict. But there are still significant obstacles which remain and that risk scuttling the process. Our new @crisisgroup.org briefing lays it out: www.crisisgroup.org/europe-centr...

Armenia and Azerbaijan: The Hard Road to a Lasting Peace | International Crisis Group A conflict-ending accord between Armenia and Azerbaijan sits ready for signature. Peace would be a boon for both countries and their common vision of regional economic integration. With help from outs...

A month ago, Trump hosted Aliyev & Pashinyan in Washington with much pomp. But the deal between Armenia & Azerbaijan, negotiated bilaterally months before, remains unsigned. Our new @crisisgroup.org briefing explores the roadblocks to peace & how to overcome them. @joshuakucera.bsky.social

Some further reflections on yesterday’s White House summit between President Aliyev, PM Pashinyan and President Trump. It was by all accounts an extraordinary day, whose time-honoured optics and symbolism could seduce all but the most hardened observers of the Armenian-Azerbaijani peace process.

From scanning social media in the Caucasus, along with the skepticism I see a lot of genuine happiness about what happened. That also will have its effect, trust between the two sides has been zero, and this will go some way in starting to rebuild it. Let's hope.

All that said, it was a remarkable sight to see them all there smiling, Pashinyan and Aliyev shaking hands. The vibes and symbolism were all very positive and that will have its own sort of effect.

The flattery ... my god. But both Pashinyan and Aliyev knew the assignment, this is what you have to do. And in this case it brought results. Though, doubts remain about the follow-up: this has always been a problem with U.S. involvement in the Caucasus, now 100x so with Trump.

Aliyev reiterated that Armenia has to change its constitution before they will sign the peace agreement. This remains a deeply risky proposition -- asking Armenian voters to ratify their defeat -- and still threatens to scuttle the agreement.

The most significant potential pitfall is the lack of detail on the transportation agreement. Will there be customs checks? Who will provide security? What do the "reciprocal benefits" for Armenia entail? These were always the sticking points it seems like they remain so.

Having watched the ceremony and read the text that they signed, a few additional thoughts. tl;dr: it was a positive event, but a lot of pitfalls lie ahead.

So is this Peace? It’s still too early to say, a lot will depend on the details announced at the meeting (I am told some were still being worked out today) and even more so, on the way they are interpreted and implemented once the action moves away from the White House media spotlight.

Also worth noting that the “Trump Route” idea isn’t very new, either – U.S. and EU officials were proposing the private company compromise in 2022-3. This iteration seems to have come together very quickly, though – until now the Trump administration has had virtually zero policy in the Caucasus.

Meanwhile, a key Armenian official today reiterated that Armenia still insists on reciprocity for any transit deal; all the reported information about the Trump Route is that it only has to do with Azerbaijani transit through Armenia, not the other way around. x.com/HovhanNaz/st...

Alex Raufoglu on X: "The administration will immediately launch working groups to implement the details of the roadmap, with negotiations on the "Trump Route" expected to begin next week. An official said nine different operators have already expressed interest, including three from the U.S." / X The administration will immediately launch working groups to implement the details of the roadmap, with negotiations on the "Trump Route" expected to begin next week. An official said nine different operators have already expressed interest, including three from the U.S.

But nothing about passport/customs checks has been mentioned, and the plan is apparently not yet fully baked. There are a lot of potential obstacles here.

x.com/ralakbar/sta...

Does the Trump Route plan solve this issue? It’s hard to say. The idea is that a private company could operate it and reduce some of the political sensitivities, while also (in theory) committing the U.S. to its success.