Recent statements coming from Baku have given new momentum to discussions around the so-called Armenian–Azerbaijani “peace agenda.” While speaking about the work of border delimitation commissions and possible meetings, including those to be held in Armenia, Baku is simultaneously putting forward clear conditions for signing a peace agreement. These include amending Armenia’s Constitution and the “full implementation of TRIPP obligations.”
Commenting on the situation, political analyst Stepan Danielyan stated that Baku’s statements concern not a legal or technical process, but the actual restriction of Armenia’s sovereignty.
“Obligations” to Azerbaijan
According to Danielyan, Azerbaijan’s emphasis on “TRIPP obligations” is revealing in itself. He argues that Armenia cannot have international or legal obligations regarding its own territory unless this implies a reduction of sovereignty.
“If the issue concerns a road passing through Syunik, to whom can Armenia have obligations? Clearly, to no one, unless the current authorities have renounced their sovereign rights. What we see today is Azerbaijan trying to dictate under what conditions such a route should pass through Armenian territory,” the analyst notes.
He adds that this once again confirms the view that the current prime minister has effectively placed the territory under a logic of external governance, where Azerbaijan is the real claimant. According to Danielyan, the peace agreement is being presented not as a mutual compromise, but as a package of demands whose fulfillment is set as a precondition.
Demands that will not end
Danielyan is convinced that the promised peace agreement will not ensure long-term stability, as the demands will continue. Moreover, he says, these demands are being voiced not only by Azerbaijan, but also by Turkey.
He points to recent reports about a possible transfer of the Araks River’s water resources to Turkey for 99 years. Although these claims have been officially denied, they raise serious concerns. Danielyan also recalls earlier information about the decision not to build a new reservoir on the Akhuryan River, justified by the fact that its waters flow into the Araks, which serves as a boundary river.
“In reality, this is not just about roads. It is about concessions involving territories, water resources, and vital infrastructure,” he stresses.
What Armenia receives in return
According to the analyst, Armenia receives nothing in exchange for these concessions. He believes the current authorities are taking such steps to ensure their own political reproduction, expecting political and symbolic support from Turkey and Azerbaijan.
Danielyan recalls statements by Turkish leaders and Azerbaijani officials claiming that fuel supplies and other “goodwill gestures” are being carried out at Armenia’s request. It is precisely these steps, he says, that the authorities attempt to present to the public, especially ahead of elections.
“Azerbaijan may release one or two prisoners as a gesture, but strategically Armenia continues to lose everything,” he notes.
The final threat to sovereignty
Danielyan considers the most alarming developments to be those that go beyond politics and enter the realm of national institutions. He refers to claims circulating in Turkish and Azerbaijani analytical circles suggesting that even the election of a new Catholicos of the Armenian Apostolic Church could come under external influence.
“If this government remains in power, we will lose not only territories, roads, and water resources, but ultimately Armenian statehood itself,” the analyst concludes, recalling his belief that the current authorities’ reproduction has already once occurred under conditions of external agreement.