Why didn't the Aliyev-Pashinyan meeting take place?

The past day has not clarified the question of why the meeting between Aliyev and Pashinyan  in London  on July18 broke down. The announcement of the upcoming meeting was made a week ago from Armenian sources, and Baku was silent about the upcoming meeting.

Apparently, the initiative came from the British side.  According to international practice, the organizers of such a meeting first notify the parties and only after receiving their consent begin to prepare a meeting. At the same time, everything is agreed upon: the topic and the issues proposed for discussion, the composition of the participants and their status, as well as the time and place.

The issue of the final document is also being agreed upon (do the parties wish to adopt a statement following the meeting or not, and do the parties want to announce the meeting itself in advance?)

It is very strange that the meeting broke down after solving all these protocol procedures. Something happened at the very last moment. Baku announced Yerevan's refusal of the meeting, but the Armenian side denied this, saying that it was Azerbaijan that refused. Neither side has clarified this situation, so one can only guess.

Armenia's situation is not such as to dictate conditions. Pashinyan and his entourage have stated many times that they are ready to sign a peace agreement within a month, but Baku opposes this. Azerbaijan, in turn, continues to repeat that without changing the Armenian constitution and opening the Zangezur corridor, the agreement will not be signed.

Yerevan has certainly proposed to include these issues on the agenda of the meeting. Discussing these topics in the presence of the British side would hardly have satisfied the Azerbaijani side, because they had to explain why a peace agreement should not be signed.

It is possible that some other issues were included in the agenda, which the Armenian side considered unacceptable.  Therefore, the dispute over the agenda is the most real reason for the disruption of the meeting. This fact will not have a positive impact on the course of the peace talks and only indicates that the parties are taking an unapproachable position on some issues.