Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, speaking at the Atlantic Council in Washington, D.C. on Thursday, February 4, 2025, stated that Armenia is prepared to withdraw its legal complaints against Azerbaijan from international courts as part of the ongoing peace negotiations.
John Herbst, Senior Director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center and former U.S. Ambassador to Uzbekistan and Ukraine, asked Pashinyan about the two remaining unresolved points in the peace treaty, noting that Armenia and Azerbaijan had already reached an agreement on 15 out of 17 provisions. He then pressed the Prime Minister on what those unresolved points were and how likely it was that a final agreement could be reached, adding that if Azerbaijan was not genuinely committed to a mutually beneficial peace, negotiations could be prolonged indefinitely.
In response, Pashinyan stated that the two unresolved points in the peace negotiations are Azerbaijan’s proposal to ban the deployment of third-party forces, including the European Civilian Monitoring Mission, along the Armenia-Azerbaijan border, and the withdrawal of legal complaints filed against each other in international institutions.
“One of the points concerns the deployment of third-party forces along the Armenia-Azerbaijan border. Azerbaijan proposes to have a ban on the deployment of third-party forces along the border, meaning the European Civilian Monitoring Mission. We take note of this desire of Azerbaijan and have made our own proposal, which implies applying this point only to demarcated sections of the border. In other words, if we have demarcated a given sector, it means that no third-party force should be present there. So, we have submitted our proposal in a written way and are waiting for Azerbaijan’s response,” he said.
Expanding on the second unresolved issue, Pashinyan explained that Azerbaijan has proposed withdrawing all legal complaints filed by both sides in international institutions, a move Armenia is open to under certain conditions. “The other point concerns the complaints filed against each other in legal institutions. The idea is to call back all these complaints. In general, we are not against this idea either, but our proposal is not only to call back these complaints, but also not to raise these issues in bilateral relations. Otherwise, a strange situation may arise when, for example, an issue is called back from an international institution, but one of the parties tries to put this issue on the table in bilateral relations and one of the parties could use this issue to provoke escalation. In that case, it will no longer be possible to transfer this issue to international institutions. We are not against this idea either. Our proposal is to end further discussions on conflicting issues and open a new era of bilateral relations, starting from a new and clean page,” he stated.
Pashinyan emphasized that apart from these two points, all other major aspects of the peace treaty have already been agreed upon, including the recognition of each other’s territorial integrity. “If you noticed, this means that all important issues of the draft peace treaty have already been agreed upon. There were very deep and sensitive topics in that draft, but there is already agreement on all these issues. For example, Armenia and Azerbaijan agreed to recognize each other’s territorial integrity, based on the borders of Soviet Armenia and Soviet Azerbaijan,” he noted.
He further underscored that the agreement also includes a commitment by both nations to refrain from making territorial claims against each other in the future. “We have agreed to have a provision that Armenia and Azerbaijan have no territorial claims against each other and will not raise such claims in the future. This is actually the cornerstone for the future peace and everything is agreed for it. I am saying this, because it makes it obvious that now peace is more than reachable, and now only political will is needed to finalize the draft peace treaty, sign it and achieve sustainable peace,” Pashinyan concluded.
Reactions from Advocates and Experts
John Eibner ” Christian Solidarity International: “Further aggression against the Armenian state and nation – not peace – will be invited should Yerevan drop all efforts to hold Azerbaijan accountable for its ethnic and religious cleansing of Armenian Christians from Nagorno Karabakh, the imprisonment of political hostages and the military occupation of swathes of Armenian borderland. This is Armenia’s strategy for achieving peace, according to Prime Minister, Nikol Pashinyan. The Armenian Prime Minister appears to be leaving Washington without the solid security guarantees that are required to prevent further aggression.”
Karnig Kerkonian ” International Lawyer who has worked closely on these cases: “Withdrawing these international cases will not bring peace”that much is certain. In fact, withdrawing the cases will only invite patent impunity from Azerbaijan, erasing hard-won legal victories that are publicly holding Azerbaijan to account. The Prime Minister has the whole thing upside down: these cases must not be sacrificed at the bilateral “negotiating” table”they must be the very foundation upon which a genuine and lasting peace is actually built. Then, of course, there is the curious failure to understand the colossal lesson of the last century”that appeasement does not work. As we saw in Hitler’s snatching of the Sudetenland and Azerbaijan’s conquest of Nagorno Karabakh, appeasement simply invites more aggression. In fact, as both examples (and countless others) sadly demonstrate, appeasement invites ethnic cleansing and, ultimately, genocide.”
Vartan Oskanian ” Former Foreign Minister of Armenia: “A just and lasting peace cannot be built on the erasure of legal truths. International law is not a diplomatic concession”it is the bedrock of justice. Any peace agreement must uphold Armenia’s legal claims, not nullify them. Armenia must not only refuse to withdraw its cases but also escalate them. The Armenian government has a duty to initiate additional legal proceedings against Azerbaijan”not only for its past and ongoing violations but specifically for its ethnic cleansing of Nagorno-Karabakh’s Armenian population. The mass displacement of 150,000 Armenians, carried out under the threat of extermination, is a textbook case of ethnic cleansing and must be recognized and prosecuted as such. Pashinyan seems determined to put the final nail in Nagorno-Karabakh’s coffin. Withdrawing these legal cases will do exactly that.”
Aram Hamparian, Executive director of Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA): “There can be no peace absent accountability – a reckoning with Azerbaijan’s crimes, the release of Armenian hostages, the removal of Azerbaijani forces from Armenia, and the return of Armenians to Artsakh. Each unilateral concession by Pashinyan to Azerbaijan invariably leads to renewed Azerbaijani demands for yet more unilateral concessions – a relentless cycle of surrender that cedes ever more Armenian soil, security, and sovereignty.”
