The causes of the current tensions in Armenian-Azerbaijani relations are not limited to disagreements over historical and cultural heritage. They may also be influenced by problems within Armenian-Azerbaijani relations themselves, as well as by global developments. Political commentator Boris Navasardyan expressed this view.
“I do not believe they are limited to conflicting views on historical and cultural heritage. I assume there are other causes connected either with Armenian-Azerbaijani relations themselves or with broader global developments which, whether we like it or not, also affect relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan,” Navasardyan said.
According to him, different scenarios for the development of relations are possible. For Armenia’s preferred scenario of rapid and effective normalization to materialize, the process must regularly produce new progress.
Without Progress, Unresolved Issues Come to the Fore
According to Navasardyan, the process must be continuously moved forward. Otherwise, the issues on which the sides still disagree return to the agenda.
“The mechanism of this process must constantly be lubricated and kept functioning; it must be continuously sustained. When that support is absent, problems that may remain unresolved for many years come to the fore,” the political commentator said.
In his opinion, the recent intensification of discussions concerning historical and cultural heritage should be viewed in this context.
“I believe the intensification of discussions about cultural and historical heritage is due to a certain slowdown on the ground or in practical matters, or to obstacles that are difficult to overcome at this stage,” he noted.
At the same time, Navasardyan does not believe that either side in Armenia or Azerbaijan is uninterested in advancing the process. However, he said, this does not in itself mean that the two countries agree on every issue.
The Enclave Issue Could Cause Significant Disagreements
Navasardyan identified the enclave issue as one of these complicated matters. According to him, it is difficult to find a solution that would satisfy both sides simultaneously, although he believes such a solution is possible.
“I do not consider it impossible. Of course, a solution is possible, but that does not mean it will be easy to reach,” he said.
According to him, if the process slows down on this or another issue, interested groups may emerge in both countries and attempt to bring other subjects to the forefront.
Key Questions Concerning TRIPP Remain Unresolved
The political commentator said that questions connected with the implementation of the region’s most important projects also remain unresolved. He particularly highlighted TRIPP and the subsequent developments associated with it in the process of unblocking regional communications.
“I assume that problems related to the implementation of the most important projects remain. This primarily concerns TRIPP and the subsequent developments associated with it in the field of unblocking communications,” he said.
According to Navasardyan, this context raises questions about what will happen after TRIPP and which route regional railway connections will follow.
“We understand very well that another question is also becoming increasingly pressing today: what will happen after TRIPP? For example, will the railway running through Nakhchivan enter Armenia, or will it proceed directly into Turkey while bypassing Armenia?” he noted.
The Interests of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey on Unblocking Do Not Fully Coincide
According to Navasardyan, there are objective contradictions between the approaches of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey to projects aimed at unblocking regional communications.
“Perhaps this is not being debated, but it represents an objective divergence between the approaches of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey,” he said.
According to him, the issue is not limited to which country has the greatest interest in the unblocking process. There is also competition over which country or territory will become the principal route and where investments will be concentrated.
“Besides the interest in becoming the primary territory for this unblocking process, there is also an interest in attracting investment. In other words, the more successfully you advance your project, the more investment you will receive,” Navasardyan noted.
According to him, this problem has not yet received a practical solution, while further delays could reactivate issues that should not currently be priorities.
“I cite this merely as an example showing that this highly important practical problem, which concerns not only Armenia and Azerbaijan, has yet to find a solution. The longer that solution is delayed, the more actively issues that are already untimely today will resurface,” the political commentator concluded.