Latest news with #ElkhanShahinoglu
JAMnews
4 days ago
- Politics
- JAMnews
Peace treaty text sparks mixed reactions in Baku
Azerbaijan-Armenia peace treaty The peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia has drawn a mixed public reaction. The 17-point document sets out opportunities for cooperation in diplomacy, the economy, culture and humanitarian affairs, while committing both sides to refrain from hostile actions. Once signed, it will require both countries to withdraw all legal claims, complaints and disputes, and to refrain from pursuing them in the future. 'Azerbaijan has made a major concession' Ilgar Mammadov | photo: Ilgar Mammadov, a politician and former chair of the Republican Alternative party, believes the draft agreement does not clearly explain why it exists or what its purpose is. He argues that while Armenia has formally renounced territorial claims, there is no guarantee other states will not support such claims in the future. Mammadov says the agreement should have made it explicit that Armenia's territorial claims led to war and deportations – otherwise, Azerbaijan is making a major concession. 'Yerevan has only formally stepped back. In the past, we could at least respond to Armenian claims with our own claim to Western Zangezur. After the agreement, if they find another patron and act on it, what argument of justice will we have in response? I'm not talking about 'rights' – those don't seem to exist – I'm talking about justice. The draft should have at least acknowledged in some way that Armenia's territorial claims opened the door to war and deportations. Otherwise, Armenia is now, as if nothing happened, negotiating with us about the future. By agreeing to this, Azerbaijan has made a huge concession. Will anyone recognise it? They should.' He also says the document is too general and puts too much faith in the good faith of future actions. 'Looking at the text, I'm not convinced peace will last – but let them sign it, and we will all try to make sure there is no more war. An agreement alone cannot guarantee that.' 'We also had to make some concessions' Elkhan Shahinoglu | photo: Political analyst Elkhan Shahinoglu takes a more pragmatic view of the document. He says that including several of Azerbaijan's demands in the Washington agreement is an important achievement. These include abolishing the Minsk Group, opening the Zangezur corridor and suspending Amendment 907. Shahinoglu says that dropping the demand for compensation for Armenia's 30-year aggression has been met with mixed reactions, but mutual concessions were inevitable. 'Obviously, in exchange for what we achieved, we also had to make some concessions. If Armenia hesitates to implement the points set out in the peace agreement, we can return to our demand for compensation. In any case, there needs to be healthy debate around this issue.' 'Hard to say what the mood in the region will be in 15–20 days' Rauf Mirgadirov | photo: Meydan TV Political analyst Rauf Mirkadirov told Meydan TV that the process of bringing the peace treaty into legal force remains uncertain. 'For the signed agreement to be ratified in Armenia, a referendum must be held and constitutional changes made. In Armenia, the referendum is expected in 2027. It is very hard to predict what the political situation in Armenia will be in two years' time – or even what the mood in the region will be in three months or in 15–20 days. The 15 August meeting between Trump and Putin should also be taken into account.' Mirkadirov said that after the 44-day war in 2020, the statement signed by Azerbaijan and Armenia with the participation of Russian president Vladimir Putin included a provision on the 'Zangezur corridor,' which was meant to be under Russian control. 'Today, that document is nothing more than a useless scrap of paper that no one recalls,' he said. 'Now, with Trump's participation, they have signed a declaration. They called it the 'Trump Path'. You see how quickly things can change.' Still, he believes the declaration signed in the US can be seen as the basis for a peace agreement. 'This transport corridor is of great importance not only for Azerbaijan, but also for the wider region – for Turkiye, Central Asia, China and the European Union.' While the published text of the peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia sets out an important legal framework for lasting peace, discussion has shown it has drawn mixed reactions among the public and experts alike. Although the deal is seen as a key step towards preventing another war, its durability will ultimately depend on future political will and mutual trust. Azerbaijan-Armenia peace treaty
JAMnews
08-08-2025
- Politics
- JAMnews
Could Azerbaijan join the Abraham Accords?
Azerbaijan and the Abraham Accords The diplomatic initiative known as the Abraham Accords, launched by the United States in 2020, has not yet been signed by Azerbaijan, despite its close ties with Israel. Ilham Aliyev and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, 13 December 2016 | Photo: The Abraham Accords, a diplomatic initiative launched by the United States in 2020, were framed by the Trump administration as a historic peace effort. Donald Trump emphasised that the inclusion of more Middle Eastern and Central Asian countries would bring greater peace and stability to the region. One of the administration's key goals was to ease tensions in the Middle East (or Western Asia) by promoting the normalisation of relations between Israel and what it called 'moderate' Arab states. As part of the initiative, countries that join are promised access to advanced technologies and new trade opportunities. The main factor bringing the sides together is their shared perception of Iran as a common threat in the region. In this context, Trump's initiative aimed to bring Israel and Arab countries closer together through common interests — primarily countering Iran — and to reshape the regional balance of power. Although Azerbaijan is one of the few Muslim-majority countries with strong ties to Israel, it has so far stayed out of the Abraham Accords. So why does official Baku remain on the sidelines? What political and strategic considerations are behind this decision? It's these questions that Azerbaijani political analyst and head of the Atlas Research Centre, Elkhan Shahinoglu, seeks to answer. Shahinoglu breaks down why Azerbaijan hasn't joined the Abraham Accords and what's really driving that decision. Azerbaijan's position and Shahinoglu's analysis Azerbaijan has pursued an independent foreign policy for years, maintaining a strategic partnership with Israel while also keeping strong ties with the Islamic world. Its cooperation with Israel spans defence, energy, and security, but at the same time, Baku has remained an active member of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation and consistently backs Palestinian rights. Relations with neighbouring Iran, rooted in historical and cultural ties, also remain a priority. Within this delicate diplomatic balance, the question of joining the Abraham Accords requires careful consideration. When the accords were signed in 2020, there was speculation that Azerbaijan might be next. Reports suggested that US officials held talks with Baku at the time, but the government avoided public commitments and stayed cautious. So why this reluctance? Elkhan Shahinoglu | Photo: Teleqraf According to Elkhan Shahinoglu, Azerbaijan currently sees no practical need or political advantage in joining the accords. According to Shahinoglu, Azerbaijan already has extensive ties with Israel, so signing up to a separate agreement would be little more than a symbolic step. 'Azerbaijan has diplomatic relations with Israel. And beyond that, there are deep connections across multiple areas,' he says. 'In this context, does Azerbaijan really need the Abraham Accords?' In fact, Azerbaijan recognised Israel back in 1992, and official ties have only grown stronger since. In 2023, Baku opened an embassy in Tel Aviv. The two countries trade billions of dollars' worth of goods each year — mainly oil exports from Azerbaijan to Israel — and Baku purchases advanced weaponry from Israel for its defence sector. Senior officials from both sides regularly exchange visits. In practical terms, Azerbaijan is already benefiting from everything the Abraham Accords offer, on a bilateral basis. Shahinoglu underlines this point, arguing that with such a close partnership already in place, joining a broader framework agreement would be largely symbolic. What are the Abraham Accords? The term refers to a series of diplomatic agreements signed in 2020. On 15 September that year, at a formal ceremony in Washington, Israel signed official normalisation deals with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. These Gulf states became the first Arab countries since Egypt and Jordan to recognise Israel and establish diplomatic ties. The name 'Abraham Accords' refers to the prophet Abraham, a shared patriarch in Judaism, Islam and Christianity, symbolising peace and common heritage. At the heart of the agreements is the establishment of official diplomatic, economic and cultural relations between Israel and the signatory Muslim-majority countries, marking an end to decades of hostile rhetoric. Under the accords: Israel and the Arab signatories recognise each other and agree to open embassies; deals are signed to expand cooperation in trade, investment, tourism, aviation, security and technology; the US acts as a mediator, offering incentives such as lifting sanctions on Sudan or recognising Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara. The accords signalled a shift in the region, with some Islamic countries effectively recognising Israel and opening a new chapter in regional diplomacy. The move was widely seen as a landmark achievement. The Trump administration described it as a 'new dawn' for the Middle East (or West Asia) and framed it as a major step towards peace. Since mid-2025, the US has been pushing to expand the scope of the Abraham Accords. Countries such as Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan are now being floated as potential next participants. But joining is not straightforward — each country has its own political landscape and strategic interests to consider. Trump's initiative and goals US president Donald Trump, the architect of the Abraham Accords, introduced a new approach to the Middle East during his first term in office (2017–2021), breaking from traditional peace negotiation models. His son-in-law and adviser, Jared Kushner, led the development of an economic plan called Peace to Prosperity, which was presented at an international conference in Bahrain in 2019. The plan was built on the idea that geopolitical conflicts could be eased through geo-economic incentives. In other words, even with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at a stalemate, countries in the region could still normalise ties with Israel in exchange for economic benefits. Trump argued that the more countries in the Middle East (or West Asia) establish official relations with Israel, the better the chances of lasting peace in the region. He went further, calling on all Muslim-majority countries to join the initiative. In a 2025 statement, Trump declared that the Iranian nuclear threat had been eliminated and said: 'It's very important to me right now that all countries in the Middle East join the Abraham Accords.' He claimed this would be the key to lasting peace in the region. By mid-2025, Trump had renewed his push, aiming to bring more Muslim-majority states, including Saudi Arabia, into the fold. But there are also key factors making it harder for Azerbaijan to sign up. Elkhan Shahinoglu points to several geopolitical issues Baku needs to weigh carefully. The Turkey factor 'Azerbaijan's strategic ally, Turkey, isn't likely to join the Abraham Accords under current conditions,' says Shahinoglu. While Turkey has taken steps to rebuild ties with Israel — including military cooperation until the late 2000s and the restoration of diplomatic relations in 2022 — the government of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has stopped short of forming a deeper alliance. Since the 2023 war in Gaza, Ankara's stance towards Israel has become increasingly critical, both politically and across Turkish society. In this context, Turkey's decision to stay out of the Abraham Accords gives Azerbaijan further reason to hold back. Ankara and Baku tend to move in step on key regional issues, and Shahinoglu points out that taking part in an initiative that excludes Turkey could create a sense of imbalance. He adds that coordination between the two countries is essential in any regional framework — and when it comes to the Abraham Accords, Baku prefers to remain aligned with Ankara. The Palestinian issue and the war in Gaza Another major factor, Shahinoglu says, is the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 'As long as the humanitarian crisis in Gaza continues and Israel refuses to recognise Palestinian statehood, it will be difficult for Azerbaijan to join the accords,' he explains. The 2023 war in Gaza, which killed thousands of civilians and devastated local infrastructure, sparked strong reactions around the world — including in Azerbaijan. While some in the country voiced support for Israel, many were deeply angered by the scale of the destruction. Officially, Baku condemned attacks on civilians and reaffirmed its support for resolving the Palestinian issue through a two-state solution based on UN resolutions. In this climate, forming a formal alliance with Israel — especially under US sponsorship — risks provoking domestic backlash and damaging Azerbaijan's standing in the broader Islamic world. Shahinoglu argues that Baku is right to be cautious. Taking such a step without progress on Palestinian statehood or an end to the crisis in Gaza could be widely misinterpreted and harm the country's image. Azerbaijan has also consistently emphasised Islamic solidarity — partly due to longstanding support from the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation over the Khojaly tragedy. As a result, the Palestinian question remains especially sensitive, making it politically difficult for Baku to sign a new multilateral deal with Israel while the conflict remains unresolved. The Iran factor While Shahinoglu doesn't mention Iran directly, it's clear from the context that Tehran is a major geopolitical consideration for Azerbaijan. The two countries share more than 700 kilometres of border and deep historical and cultural ties. Although tensions have flared in recent years — particularly between 2021 and 2022 — Baku has tried to avoid open confrontation with Iran. At the same time, the Abraham Accords are widely seen as forming the basis for a regional bloc aimed at containing Iran. Both the US and Israel have made no secret of their intention to isolate Tehran through these agreements. Against this backdrop, any move by Azerbaijan to join the accords would almost certainly trigger a hostile response from Iran. Even now, Iranian officials and state media regularly criticise Azerbaijan's close ties with Israel, accusing Baku of cooperating with the 'Zionist regime.' If Azerbaijan were to formally sign on, tensions with Tehran could escalate sharply, with the risk of retaliation. This uneasy neighbourhood makes Iran a major factor in Baku's cautious approach. Shahinoglu also points out that while Washington is keen to bring Azerbaijan into the fold, joining simply to please the US would be a mistake — especially if the potential fallout outweighs the benefits. In this case, the costs would likely include a serious deterioration in relations with Iran and greater risks to national security. Central Asia and the Turkic world Elkhan Shahinoglu notes that Azerbaijan is not alone in its cautious stance. Other countries, such as Kazakhstan, are in a similar position. 'Astana is also taking a wait-and-see approach to the Abraham Accords,' he says. Several Turkic and Muslim-majority countries — including Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan — maintain good relations with Israel but remain wary of joining the initiative. Despite this, Washington is applying similar pressure on them, aiming to bring Central Asian republics into the fold. The broader goal is to expand the ring of containment around Iran while keeping these states within the US sphere of influence and away from Russia and China. But so far, neither Astana nor Baku is rushing in. This suggests that Turkic states are broadly aligned in their approach. As a member of the Organisation of Turkic States, Azerbaijan is aware of its geostrategic weight and prefers not to act alone. On the contrary, it has been strengthening its ties with Central Asia, seeing the region as a political bridge. If a decision is made, Shahinoglu suggests, it's likely to be a coordinated one. Israel's position Israel, for its part, is not pressuring Azerbaijan to join the Abraham Accords. As Elkhan Shahinoglu puts it, 'Tel Aviv is primarily focused on bringing in Arab countries and hasn't made any specific demands of Azerbaijan.' This is reflected in public statements by Israeli officials. In one interview, a former Israeli ambassador to Azerbaijan described the country as a strategic partner and said that there was no need for Baku to sign a multilateral agreement to prove it. Azerbaijan is already considered a close friend of Israel, and Tel Aviv sees no reason to push Baku into a move that could expose it to unnecessary risk. The current bilateral arrangement works well for both sides, and that cooperation is valued. Shahinoglu echoes this view: 'Azerbaijan and Israel don't need anything more than continued bilateral partnership.' In other words, even without joining the Abraham Accords, the relationship is already strong — and doesn't require an additional framework. At the same time, Shahinoglu suggests that Azerbaijan isn't closing the door completely. If circumstances change — for example, if there's real progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process or if key allies like Turkey shift their position — Baku may reassess. In fact, it appears Azerbaijan is even trying to play a quiet role in facilitating reconciliation between Tel Aviv and Ankara, which could help lower regional tensions. For now, though, a cautious wait-and-see approach remains the most pragmatic option. Azerbaijan continues to send friendly signals to both Washington and Tel Aviv while maintaining a delicate regional balance. This strategy allows Baku to sustain its strategic partnership with Israel while preserving its credibility in the Islamic world.
JAMnews
10-07-2025
- Business
- JAMnews
Meeting in Abu Dhabi: how close are Azerbaijan and Armenia to peace without Russia's involvement?
Aliyev and Pashinyan meeting in the UAE Today's meeting in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates, outlined the contours of a new political agenda aimed at ending the decades-long conflict in the South Caucasus. The first direct bilateral meeting without intermediaries between Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is shaping a new regional balance amid the decline of Russia's influence. The political context of the meeting: was it a summit, or a genuine effort to reach an agreement? In previous years, peace talks were often held with the mediation of powerful actors such as the European Union, Russia, or the United States. In this context, what makes the Abu Dhabi meeting notable is that, for the first time, the two leaders are negotiating face to face, without official intermediaries. Political historian Jirair Libaridian calls this 'an attempt to establish contact without interference': 'The chaos in the region has lasted for a very long time. This meeting is important as a first step toward reducing uncertainty.' What's on the agenda? Zangezur, the Crossroads of Peace, and international cargo control Key issues discussed at the meeting included: ● Zangezur corridor: Azerbaijan demands unrestricted land access to its Nakhchivan autonomy through Armenian territory. ● Armenia's alternative proposal — the Crossroads of Peace route: an international logistics link between the Black Sea, the Caspian Sea, and the Persian Gulf. ● Cargo control by international – not Russian – security companies. ● The role of American and European companies in these transport corridors. Political analyst Zaur Shiriyev notes: 'Azerbaijan no longer relies on Russian mediation – this opens real opportunities for progress.' Armenian political analyst Tigran Grigoryan believes that Russia is losing its role in the corridor, creating space for compromise on Pashinyan's part. Regional expert Olesya Vartanyan adds: 'Armenia is already proposing to involve international inspection companies, which aligns with the position of the US and Europe.' Elkhan Shahinoglu: 'Abu Dhabi has its own interests' Political commentator Elkhan Shahinoglu explains the UAE's interest in this process from an economic perspective: 'The UAE is the largest investor in Armenia and holds multi-billion-dollar projects in Azerbaijan. Peace in the region is a guarantee for the security of these investments.' According to him, this move reflects the UAE's ambition to become a regional peacemaker, similar to Qatar or Oman. 'Pashinyan on three fronts: domestic pressure and the Kremlin factor' 'It is also important that Pashinyan now faces pressure on three fronts: in Armenia, he is opposed by the radical opposition, the church, and oligarchic circles – all backed by the Kremlin. Despite a recent wave of arrests in response to this pressure, the situation remains uncertain,' says Elkhan Shahinoglu. The recent reports about Russia increasing its presence at its military base in Gyumri, Armenia, only deepen these concerns, the expert believes. As a result, in his view, 'By pressuring Pashinyan while damaging relations with Baku, the Kremlin has made a peace agreement even more urgent.' Peace agreement: why hasn't it been signed yet? The draft peace agreement, agreed upon in March, includes conditions proposed by Ilham Aliyev: Removal of references to Karabakh from the Armenian Constitution; The dissolution of the OSCE Minsk Group, which has facilitated the negotiation process on the Karabakh conflict since the early 1990s; Withdrawal of European Union observers from the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. Nikol Pashinyan stated that he agrees with almost all of these conditions but noted that changing the Constitution takes a long time. Armenian historian Jirair Libaridian believes this issue could be resolved through clarifications by the Constitutional Court. Washington and Ankara – new players? U.S. Senator Marco Rubio stated that the signing of a peace agreement could take place soon. The BBC reports that Armenian diplomats presented the peace process between Armenia and Azerbaijan to the Trump administration as a 'possible peace-making success.' This increased Washington's – specifically, conservative circles in the U.S. – interest in the issue and drew additional attention to the process. On the other hand, Pashinyan's visit to Istanbul in June also shows Ankara's interest in the settlement. Analyst Shujaat Ahmedzade notes that Ankara views this peace agreement as the beginning of a new geopolitical era in the South Caucasus. Where is the process heading? Held for the first time without intermediaries, this meeting between the two leaders itself signifies overcoming a psychological barrier. Although the peace agreement has not yet been signed, the format of direct negotiations is already a step forward. Against the backdrop of Russia's weakening influence in the region, players such as the West, the UAE, and Ankara are gaining opportunities to take more flexible initiatives. Nevertheless, the concrete outcome still depends on the following factors: Political stability within Armenia; Azerbaijan's willingness to reconsider its terms; Coordination between the West, Turkey, and the UAE. 'Unpredictability can be creative, but in our region, chaos has never brought anything good,' emphasizes historian Jirair Libaridian. News in Azerbaijan News in Armenia
