The Armenian prime minister, Nikol Pashinyan, spoke at a press conference about ongoing negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan aimed at a peace agreement. He indicated that both sides are working toward a formal text and expressed a desire to reach an agreement and sign the document soon. Pashinyan suggested that the signing could happen at a meeting in Chisinau on June 1, provided that the draft treaty is sufficiently coordinated by both sides in the near term. He emphasized that the goal is to complete the talks quickly and to have the text ready for signing, noting that Armenia has already offered the draft peace agreement to Azerbaijan for the fourth time.
Pashinyan stated that if Azerbaijan responds to Armenia’s proposals within the current week and the analyses undertaken over a few days to a week confirm acceptable compromise positions, the path toward agreement could advance rapidly. He also noted that Azerbaijan has not yet issued a reply to Armenia’s offers.
Regarding territorial issues, Armenia is prepared to recognize Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan, provided that the safety of the Armenian population is guaranteed. Pashinyan described the ongoing negotiations as intensive, with hopes to finalize and sign the peace and relations framework with Azerbaijan as soon as possible. In parallel, the president of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, affirmed that the signing of a peace agreement is an inevitable development and that constructive efforts are being made to achieve this goal. Aliyev underscored that the agreement should reflect international principles and norms.
Pashinyan explained that delimitation along Armenia’s border with Azerbaijan should reference the maps used by the 1975 USSR General Staff. He argued that these maps could serve as the basis for containment and also referenced the Prague agreement of October 6, 2022, which involved mutual recognition of territorial integrity and delimitation in line with the Alma-Ata Declaration of 1991. He provided figures indicating that Azerbaijan’s lands, including Nagorno-Karabakh, span about 86,600 square kilometers, and that the Armenian side expects recognition of Armenia’s territorial integrity over roughly 29,800 square kilometers. He noted that the withdrawal of troops would help stabilize the region and reduce tensions over time.
On security matters, Pashinyan stated that Armenia has not received any encouragement from Western governments to push Russia out of the Armenian sphere. He asserted that discussions with Russia are conducted openly and without hidden agendas, while criticizing a CSTO mission for not clearly marking Armenia’s territory in its documents. He argued that clearly defining Armenia’s territorial boundaries would resolve the majority of related issues. The Armenian leadership has also begun discussing security arrangements with Western partners, signaling a shift toward broader, legally reliable regional security arrangements.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, offered a general view that the CSTO maintains jurisdiction across its member states and indicated that Moscow would continue dialogue with Armenia. In a separate assessment, Dmitry Novikov, the first deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on International Relations, described Pashinyan’s situation as difficult from multiple angles, including domestic political pressures and the need to balance allied obligations with Russia against Western sanctions. According to Novikov, several centers of power are shaping Armenia’s current policy, with the Armenian leadership trying to chart a path that could ease tensions with Azerbaijan while preserving national interests. He cautioned that withdrawing from the CSTO would not align with Armenia’s interests if followed as a directive, suggesting that a policy grounded in national concerns is essential for stability. These analyses reflect a broader debate about Armenia’s strategic orientation and its relations with both Russia and Western partners.
Related posts:
The goalscorers of Lionel Scaloni’s cycle in the Argentina national team Pashinyan and the CSTO: documents unresolved amid border tensions Armenia’s CSTO Stance Under Scrutiny Amid Regional Security Debates Armenia Balances CSTO Involvement With National Interests Armenia’s CSTO commitments remain intact, Moscow asserts Armenia’s Balancing Act: Pashinyan, CSTO, and Sanctions in the Ukraine Context Is Unity Possible for the CSTO? Twenty Years of Security Cooperation in Eurasia Armenia Chooses Diplomacy Over CSTO Exercises Amid Lachin Corridor Tension Armenia, CSTO, and the Balance of Regional Security: A North American Perspective Armenia, Karabakh, and Territorial Debates: A Party Perspective Rewrite Demonstrating Armenia’s Stance on Karabakh and CSTO Dynamics Armenia and CSTO: Regional Security Debates and Strategic Realignments