Azerbaijan’s Actions Undermine Peace Efforts with Armenia
The anticipated peace deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan, set to be signed at the White House on August 7, 2025, faces skepticism regarding its potential to establish lasting stability in the South Caucasus. Critics argue that without addressing Azerbaijan’s aggressive actions, the agreement lacks substance and fails to hold the nation accountable for its past and ongoing conduct.
Historical Context and Current Tensions
During the tumultuous period of the 2024 US presidential campaign, former President Donald Trump publicly criticized the Biden administration for its perceived inaction in preventing the persecution of Armenians by Azerbaijan. He stated, “Kamala Harris did NOTHING as 120,000 Armenian Christians were horrifically persecuted and forcibly displaced in Artsakh.” This rhetoric highlighted a broader concern about the treatment of Armenians in their ancestral lands, known as Nagorno-Karabakh.
The situation escalated dramatically in September 2023, when Azerbaijan’s blockade resulted in the displacement of over 120,000 Armenians, marking a significant humanitarian crisis. This displacement was described as the largest since the Armenian Genocide of 1915.
Despite the forthcoming peace agreement, Azerbaijan’s government, led by Ilham Aliyev, has continued to display behavior that contradicts the ideals of peace. Reports indicate that the Azerbaijani authorities have detained Armenian political prisoners without fair trials, attracting criticism from human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.
Azerbaijan’s Cultural and Human Rights Violations
Azerbaijan’s actions extend beyond political prisoners to include the systematic destruction of Armenian cultural heritage. Since 2020, Azerbaijani forces have reportedly defaced or destroyed approximately 400 Armenian churches and historical sites, undermining the rich cultural and religious history of the Armenian people. The government has justified these actions under the guise of “restoration,” which critics argue is a deliberate attempt to erase Armenian identity in the region.
Additionally, Aliyev’s rhetoric has increasingly claimed Armenian territories as “historical lands” of Azerbaijan. Such statements raise alarms about Azerbaijan’s intentions and willingness to coexist peacefully with its neighbor. The former president’s dismissal of these claims as mere bombast ignores the tangible threats they pose to Armenia’s sovereignty.
As the peace negotiations unfold, it is crucial for any agreement to include the immediate release of all Armenian political prisoners and prisoners of war. Furthermore, there must be an end to the cultural erasure of Armenian heritage and a commitment to uphold the rulings of the International Court of Justice, which mandated Azerbaijan to allow the safe return of Armenians to Artsakh.
Without accountability for past and ongoing violations, the prospect of a genuine peace remains bleak. Azerbaijan’s actions reveal a preference for confrontation rather than cooperation, casting doubt on their commitment to a peaceful resolution.
In summary, while the peace deal may symbolize a step forward, the realities on the ground suggest a need for a more robust framework that prioritizes human rights and cultural preservation. For peace to take root in the South Caucasus, accountability must be at the forefront of any negotiations.
As the world watches the developments in this volatile region, the stakes are high for both Armenia and Azerbaijan, as well as for the stability of the broader Eurasian landscape.
