Armenia and Azerbaijan stand at a crossroads where a return to normal relations could begin with a shared acknowledgement of the Soviet era borders as a framework for dialogue. The stance was articulated by the Armenian prime minister, Nikol Pashinyan, in statements addressing the public on a path away from confrontation toward practical engagement.
According to Pashinyan, the two societies should recognize the borders as they existed within the Soviet framework and then leave each other alone long enough to rebuild trust. Only then should communication channels be opened and economic ties gradually established. I am sure that these ties will develop very quickly.
Earlier, the Armenian leader spoke about the prospect of signing a comprehensive agreement with Azerbaijan by the end of 2024, signaling a shift from crisis management to formalized arrangements after the recent conflicts. He outlined that the contemplated pact would address issues outstanding since the Second Karabakh War. In his view, three prerequisites would undergird such an agreement: mutual recognition of each other’s territorial integrity, borders to be determined in line with the 1991 Alma-Ata Declaration, and the removal of impediments to regional communication and trade.
The Azerbaijani Ministry of Foreign Affairs countered with five conditions for a solution: mutual recognition of sovereignty and territorial integrity, no future or current territorial claims, a clear determination of borders and the establishment of diplomatic relations, avoidance of any counter-security threats, and the reopening of existing communications along with the creation of new routes.
Earlier Pashinyan named ear tags as a reason for emigration from Armenia, highlighting domestic concerns that he believes influence broader regional dynamics and social stability. This remark underscores how leadership aims to connect political steps with the lived realities of citizens, tying policy aims to clear, practical outcomes.
Taken together, these statements reflect a push for pragmatic diplomacy that favors measurable progress over rhetoric. The path described centers on turning symbolic commitments into concrete actions that can be observed in daily life, from smoother cross-border movement to renewed commercial activity. The idea is to replace suspicion with predictable procedures, so ordinary people on both sides feel the benefits of regional normalization.
In this frame, trust-building becomes as important as the legal instruments themselves. Clear rules for border management, dependable transportation links, and transparent communication channels are presented as essential ingredients for lasting peace. Without reliable mechanisms, even well-intentioned pronouncements risk fading in the face of volatility or misinterpretation.
The broader message is simple: stabilization and growth in this region hinge on practical steps that connect politics to everyday realities. By recognizing the existing borders as a foundation and then gradually expanding cooperation, Armenia and Azerbaijan may create space for economic development, improved livelihoods, and renewed dialogue across communities that have been divided for decades.
Whether these proposals will translate into binding agreements remains to be seen. What is clear is that the emphasis on territorial integrity, clear borders, and open communications signals a shift from confrontation to constructive engagement. If implemented with careful attention to security, rights, and predictability, such an approach could alter the trajectory of regional relations for years to come.