Azerbaijan’s Foreign Minister Ceyhun Bayramov stated that Yerevan has not engaged in direct negotiations with Baku, choosing instead to pursue diplomacy through digital channels and mediated exchanges. He emphasized that the two sides have shifted to what he described as online diplomacy, where each side clearly articulates its terms and red lines, and where discussions occur in a less formal setting than traditional in-person talks. The message underscores a strategic preference for documented, traceable communications that can be reviewed and referenced as negotiations proceed, a pattern analysts in North America have noted as increasingly common in tense regional disputes. For observers in Canada and the United States, this description adds nuance to how neighboring states manage high-stakes talks, especially when trust is fragile and messages must endure the test of time and geography.
On the margins of major international forums, former Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan reportedly accepted an invitation to participate in a trilateral session with U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev. The aim of this gathering was to reassess the trajectory of the draft peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan and to evaluate concrete steps toward turning the agreement into a durable framework. Participants indicated that the three-way encounter focused on the progress of treaty language, confidence-building measures, and the sequencing of steps required to move from general principles to enforceable commitments. In Washington and beyond, observers in Canada and the United States welcomed any sign of renewed momentum, noting that a credible peace process in this region could contribute to broader regional stability and serve as a reference point for similar negotiations elsewhere in conflict-affected zones.
Within the broader effort to resolve bilateral tensions, the sides also addressed practical questions about opening transportation and communication corridors, with an eye toward restoring reliable cross-border routes. They discussed how to implement an agreement reached in Prague on October 7, 2022, particularly concerning the delineation and management of border areas and the restoration of normalistic links that facilitate trade, travel, and humanitarian aid. The emphasis was on producing tangible improvements that communities on both sides can experience quickly, while ensuring that long-term arrangements are solid enough to withstand future pressures. For Canada and the United States, this focus on verifiable steps toward reconnecting communities echoes shared regional priorities where regional connectivity is a cornerstone of economic and security policy.
The Armenian representatives underscored a fundamental condition for peace: any agreement must genuinely guarantee long-term peace and stability in the region. They reiterated concerns about the Lachin corridor and condemned what they described as a blockade that has precipitated humanitarian, environmental, and energy crises in Nagorno-Karabakh. They argued that such measures undermine the prospects for lasting reconciliation and violate commitments that make real peace possible. In response, Azerbaijani officials defended their stance on security and passage, highlighting the ongoing need to balance humanitarian concerns with national sovereignty and regional security interests. The dialogue continues to be delicate, with all parties signaling a willingness to engage, provided that commitments are clear, verifiable, and backed by credible enforcement mechanisms. In North American policy circles, these debates are watched closely for lessons on how to construct peace agreements that are resilient, transparent, and responsive to the lived realities of affected communities.