Results of Azerbaijan-Armenia Negotiations in Washington and Prospects for a Peace Agreement Before COP29

The Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict remains one of the most complex and longstanding disputes in the South Caucasus. After the end of the Second Karabakh War in 2020, hopes for a lasting peace were high. However, the path to a final peace agreement has been fraught with setbacks and mutual distrust. The recent negotiations in Washington between the foreign ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia, Jeyhun Bayramov and Ararat Mirzoyan, mediated by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, were viewed as another crucial attempt to bridge the remaining gaps and pave the way for a comprehensive peace agreement. These talks come at a time when both countries face international pressure to resolve their conflict and move towards stability.

The United States, which has been involved in the peace process since the end of the Second Karabakh War, positioned itself as a mediator seeking to support the establishment of a lasting peace in the region. Ahead of the talks, U.S. State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller reiterated Washington's commitment, stating: “We continue to support the efforts of both countries to reach a durable and dignified peace agreement,” and expressed the United States’ willingness to provide “any” assistance needed to Azerbaijan and Armenia.

During the trilateral meeting, Secretary Blinken emphasized the importance of concluding a peace treaty, which he believes would bring greater stability and prosperity to the region. Tom Sullivan, Senior Policy Advisor to the Secretary of State, stressed the urgency of finalizing an agreement before COP29, the annual UN climate conference scheduled to be held in Baku this autumn. Sullivan explained: “Yesterday’s meeting focused on how we can overcome the remaining gaps because we see COP29 in Azerbaijan as a potential opportunity for both sides to come together and show the world that they are entering into a new relationship with one another.”

Ultimately, the Washington talks concluded with what U.S. officials described as “significant progress” on several elements of a potential peace treaty. Secretary Blinken underscored that a peace agreement would have transformative implications not only for bilateral relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan but for the broader region as well. According to Tom Sullivan, only a few unresolved issues remain, and the teams have agreed to continue working in the coming days and weeks to explore possible solutions.

While the details of the discussions remain confidential, sources familiar with the matter told TURAN's Washington correspondent that the meeting marked the second trilateral session between Blinken and his Azerbaijani and Armenian counterparts in less than three months, following a similar meeting during the NATO summit in Washington. Such a level of engagement reflects Washington's deep interest in achieving a breakthrough.

Why the Peace Agreement is Delayed

Distrust and Security Concerns. Azerbaijan remains skeptical of Armenia's intentions and sees signs of revanchist tendencies within Armenia's political establishment. In a recent speech in parliament, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev expressed concern that “revanchist forces are gaining strength in Armenia,” and noted that “the current authorities of Armenia share similar thoughts and dreams.” He also accused Armenia of stalling the peace process by delaying the exchange of draft proposals and excluding unresolved issues from the proposed peace treaty.

Border Delimitation and Demarcation. Despite the agreements reached, the parties are still unable to come to a consensus on a number of strategic territories. Issues related to the definition of state borders remain one of the most important issues on the way to signing a settlement agreement.

Constitutional Amendments and Legal Guarantees. Azerbaijan insists that Armenia remove anti-Azerbaijani provisions from its constitution as a precondition for meaningful peace negotiations. Meanwhile, the Armenian government is cautious about making legal changes that could be perceived as capitulation by its domestic audience. This includes the mandatory removal of the clause on the reunification of Armenia and the former Nagorno-Karabakh region from its constitution.

Return of Armenians to Karabakh. Following last September's events, when most ethnic Armenians left Karabakh for Armenia, Baku linked their possible return to a set of stringent conditions. Acceptance of Azerbaijani citizenship, recognition of its laws, and renunciation of any political ambitions—these are requirements the Azerbaijani side has put forward as mandatory for those wishing to return. In turn, Armenia demands international security guarantees and rights for ethnic Armenians. President Aliyev has repeatedly stated that the return of Armenians to Karabakh should be accompanied by reciprocal measures—the return of Azerbaijanis who were forced to leave Armenia in the late 1980s.

Can a Peace Agreement be Reached Before COP29?

Given the complexity of the current negotiations and mutual distrust, it remains unclear whether a peace agreement can be reached before COP29. Although U.S. officials remain optimistic and Prime Minister Pashinyan has proposed signing already agreed-upon sections of the peace treaty before the conference, significant obstacles persist. In Yerevan, his speech at the UN sparked a strong reaction within the country, with critics accusing him of adopting a conciliatory tone that contradicts Armenia's nationalist sentiments. This internal division may further complicate the negotiations.

While it can cautiously be said that the recent Washington talks have advanced the peace process, the path to a final agreement remains uncertain. The United States is likely to continue playing a crucial role in bridging the differences between the two sides, but whether a peace treaty will be signed before COP29 will depend on the willingness of both countries to compromise and address each other’s security concerns and legal demands.

For now, the primary focus seems to be on maintaining momentum and ensuring that any agreement reached is robust and addresses the core concerns of both parties.