Postponement of Azerbaijani-Armenian Peace Treaty Prolongs Uncertainty

Conclusion of a peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia, initially expected after the signing of a ceasefire agreement on November 9, 2020, has been indefinitely delayed. While the ceasefire put an end to active hostilities, it didn't formally terminate the war, resulting in sporadic military clashes and shifts in territorial control over the subsequent period.

Despite intermittent diplomatic efforts, progress on political and reconciliation fronts has remained stagnant. Baku and Yerevan conveyed willingness to acknowledge each other's territorial integrity, including the Armenian-inhabited segment of Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan. Regrettably, this intent has stayed confined to verbal affirmations. Disagreements persist, particularly regarding the distinct status of the Armenian-populated region of Karabakh. This impasse fuels a continued face-off, marked by divergent objectives: Armenia seeks vindication, while Azerbaijan pursues an ultimate triumph in the Karabakh dispute. The exact timeline of this collision remains uncertain, whether echoing the three-decade interval between the preceding Karabakh conflicts or something will happen earlier.

Nevertheless, neither outcome proves beneficial or meaningful, considering the potential to avoid military escalation and foster a fresh strategic framework for regional harmony. Prior pieces have proposed a comprehensive endeavor for coexistence, envisioning the fusion of Azerbaijan and Armenia within the ambit of the Caucasian House, a concept involving Georgia as well. This approach, first advocated in the article "The European Model as a Blueprint for Crafting a Unified Caucasus" on August 5, 2004, garnered support within Azerbaijani sociopolitical circles.

The concept revolves around a historical lens to navigate a course for an encompassing Caucasian union—a shared domain encompassing unified policies, economies, and security systems. Embracing such a model could expedite resolutions for matters like of the Armenian-populated region of Karabakh's status and border delineations. This strategy prioritizes a peaceful future and harmonious cohabitation over settling historical scores.

Analogous to this, the European Union (EU) model emerges as an apt mechanism for realizing this united Caucasus vision. The EU, with its proven viability in fostering cooperation, outshines alternatives. The Soviet model, once effective in reconciling conflicting factions, has lost relevance, contributing to protracted conflicts in the South Caucasus. Efforts to revamp this model through institutions like the CIS have faltered. It's doubtful whether Russia, the nucleus of the CIS and entangled in disputes with former Soviet republics, can effectively undertake such a long-term role.

Pioneering EU founders Germany and France, with their history of enmity-turned-peace, could mediate and contribute to the transformation of South Caucasus relations, specifically between Armenia and Azerbaijan. This doesn't preclude involvement from Russia, the United States, or other intermediaries. Their contributions would be invaluable in fostering a harmonious Caucasus. The EU's involvement could shape a blueprint and roadmap for the South Caucasus Union, involving the leadership and societies of all three nations.

This approach could succeed with the following preconditions:

1.Agreement by all parties to collaboratively construct the Caucasian House as a shared home for the region's peoples.

2.Renunciation of territorial claims, accompanied by a formal peace treaty.

3.Commitment to refrain from the use of force.

4.Karabakh Armenians abandoning aspirations for independence.

Though challenges loom large, such a strategy holds potential to forge an unprecedented path towards a more harmonious and cooperative South Caucasus.