YEREVAN — While Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev publicly project an end to the conflict and the prospect of long-awaited “peace,” a key obstacle remains: Aliyev continues to insist that Armenia amend its Constitution.
The demand centers on the Constitution’s preamble, which references the 1990 Declaration of Independence and, by extension, a 1989 unification act adopted by the legislative bodies of Soviet Armenia and the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast. Under Armenian law, altering that provision would require adopting a new constitution through a nationwide referendum — a politically and procedurally complex process.
In an interview with France 24 during the Munich Security Conference, which Pashinyan did not attend, Aliyev framed recent developments as marking the end of the decades-long conflict. He pointed to the signing of what he called a “historic document” at the White House as signaling the conclusion of hostilities and the beginning of a new phase.
According to Aliyev, more than six months have passed without shootings or casualties along the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. Yet, he made clear that a formal peace treaty hinges on constitutional change in Armenia.
“Once the amendment to Armenia’s constitution is made, we can sign the peace agreement the very next day,” he said, while also asserting that, in practice, peace between the two countries has already been achieved.
Aliyev also ruled out pardoning Armenian detainees held in Baku, describing them as “separatists” who acted illegally on territory internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan. He said the issue was raised by U.S. Vice President JD Vance, to whom he presented Azerbaijan’s position.
Despite the absence of international media at the trials in Baku — which have been covered exclusively by Azerbaijani outlets — Aliyev maintained that the proceedings are fully transparent. He compared the prosecution of former Artsakh officials to the Nuremberg trials and claimed the accused committed crimes against humanity more serious than those of Nazis during World War II.
On regional connectivity, Aliyev said Azerbaijan is constructing nearly 400 kilometers of railway to its border, with just over 40 kilometers remaining on what he referred to as the Armenian section of the “Zangezur” corridor. He added that almost 200 kilometers of railway infrastructure in Nakhichevan would be restored and expressed confidence that the so-called “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity” (TRIPP) project — intended to link mainland Azerbaijan to Nakhichevan through Armenian territory — would be realized.
Regarding the potential return of the Armenian population of Artsakh, Aliyev said the matter could be considered only on the basis of reciprocity.
Political scientist and Azerbaijan expert Tatevik Hayrapetyan has sharply criticized Aliyev’s comparison of detained former Nagorno-Karabakh officials to Nazis, arguing that such rhetoric undermines both legal logic and the stated goals of the peace process.
Hayrapetyan said that if the Armenian government were fully defending national interests, it would publicly challenge Baku’s position. “If Azerbaijan possesses such overwhelming evidence of crimes, why then include a provision in the draft peace treaty calling for the withdrawal of international lawsuits?” she asked, suggesting that any allegations should be tested in international courts rather than resolved through political bargaining.
Hayrapetyan also pointed to what she described as a contradiction in Aliyev’s rhetoric, noting that he has long celebrated Ramil Safarov, the Azerbaijani officer convicted of murdering an Armenian serviceman with an axe in Hungary in 2004 and later pardoned after his transfer to Azerbaijan. She argued that accusations of “Nazism” ring hollow coming from a leadership that, in her view, has tolerated or glorified such violence.
The analyst further alleged that policies under Aliyev’s leadership contributed to serious violations during recent hostilities, including documented cases of abuse and the killing of Armenian soldiers. She cited, in particular, the 2022 incident involving the mutilation of an Armenian female soldier during clashes on Armenian territory, footage of which circulated widely online.
Hayrapetyan also criticized Pashinyan, arguing that concessions made during negotiations have allowed Azerbaijan to deflect scrutiny over allegations of war crimes, blockade policies and forced displacement while advancing what she characterized as expansionist aims under the banner of peace.
Mane Tandilyan, chairwoman of the Country to Live political party, has also condemned Aliyev’s remarks, describing them as “not mere rhetoric, but explicit hate speech aimed at human dignity.”
“These are individuals who lived and worked in their homeland — soldiers, civilians and officials born and raised in Artsakh, on their own land,” she said. “They did not invade foreign territory, occupy other peoples or seek to destroy anyone. They defended their families, their communities and their right to exist.”
According to Tandilyan, the term “Nazi” is being weaponized to legitimize the forced displacement of Artsakh residents, justify ethnic cleansing and silence international scrutiny. She accused Aliyev of attempting to cloak the crimes of his own regime — including blockades, policies of starvation, war crimes, terror against civilians, forced displacements and ethnic cleansing — under the language of historical atrocity.
“The most painful aspect,” Tandilyan wrote, “is that the Armenian authorities, led by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, have responded not with state dignity but with silence, concessions and a defeatist policy labeled as a ‘peace agenda.'”
She argued that such an approach makes any genuine peace unattainable.
“Peace is impossible when your prisoners are presented as Nazis, yet you continue to play the role of a ‘constructive partner,’ she wrote. “Peace is impossible when your people are deprived of rights and you remain silent in the name of ‘improving relations.'”
“Peace is impossible,” she added, “when the victim is forced to justify the executioner.”
Tandilyan concluded with a forceful rejection of the comparison: “Armenian prisoners are not fascists. They are Armenians. They are people who lived in their homes and defended their right to life. Anyone comparing them to Nazis is either deliberately lying or attempting to provide a moral pretext for their own crimes. Silence in response to this cynical statement is complicity in crime.”
Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) member and Armenia “Alliance” MP Artur Khachatryan described recent developments as emblematic of Armenia’s diplomatic passivity, arguing that international engagement has been more symbolic than substantive.
Khachatryan noted that Pashinyan also skipped the World Economic Forum in Davos, attending only briefly to sign a document establishing the so-called Peace Council initiated by U.S. President Donald Trump.
In Munich, his absence was even more pronounced. Pashinyan did not take part in discussions on national interest and foreign policy, including forums organized by figures such as U.S. Senator Marco Rubio.
Khachatryan argued that for Pashinyan, the pursuit of “legitimacy” has become an overriding concern, eclipsing the concrete defense of Armenia’s national interests. “For him, small-scale national concerns matter less than legitimizing concessions made to Azerbaijan and Turkey,” Khachatryan wrote.
Aliyev, by contrast, used the Munich platform to reiterate Baku’s position that Armenia’s Constitution contains territorial claims — an assertion Pashinyan has repeatedly denied.
Aliyev also referenced the timeline of regional conflict, framing recent clashes and the 2023 war as part of a two-year trajectory since the Washington summit. He portrayed Armenia as the primary aggressor, asserting that Baku’s military actions were a response to Yerevan’s “inaction,” while simultaneously conducting operations in Artsakh and implementing policies leading to the forced displacement of its population.
Khachatryan argued that this framing helps explain Pashinyan’s reluctance to confront Aliyev publicly, as well as his repeated assertions that peace has already been achieved in the region — a narrative that, he suggested, conveniently aligns with both leaders’ domestic agendas ahead of elections.
Reflecting on Pashinyan’s earlier diplomatic efforts, Khachatryan recalled the “Munich Principles,” which were intended to articulate Armenia’s position on Nagorno-Karabakh. The framework emphasized the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh, the necessity of negotiation, security as a non-negotiable factor and the importance of incremental “micro” and “mini” reforms to resolve the conflict.
It also stipulated that any settlement must be acceptable to the peoples of Armenia, Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan, while rejecting military solutions as illegitimate.
Khachatryan contrasted those principles with the current state of affairs, writing, “We see why Pashinyan avoided Munich. Aliyev set the agenda, defined the conditions for ‘peace’ and left Armenia on the sidelines.”
He argued that the so-called Munich Principles have become largely irrelevant, with Armenia’s foreign policy now yielding a far more precarious position. “The narrative of peace and regional infrastructure is dictated by the victor rather than by negotiation or law,” Khachatryan wrote.
These developments, he suggested, reflect broader concerns about Armenia’s diplomatic posture — including its absence from key forums, deference to Azerbaijani initiatives and reliance on symbolic gestures over assertive advocacy.
“Where did we end up?” Khachatryan concluded. “Pashinyan did not go to Munich; Aliyev did, and the terms of peace are now being defined entirely by Azerbaijan.”
It is quite interesting that Aliev is labelling our unjustly imprisoned compatriots as Terrorists, while he himself is the one who has committed terror, war crimes, genocide, and ethnic cleansing against the people of Artsakh (and Armenia – with territories that still remain occupied), and one is to point out this fact to him. No one is telling him to erase the Western Azerbaidjan nomenclature from his vocabulary (that is the most blatant TERRITORIAL CLAIM against Armenian sovereign territory. But of course, as the saying goes, “Money talks, bullshit walks”, so far we are not the ones with the money, so our leadership is resorting to the talk part of this equation. It is not enough to demand concessions. Concessions, if any, have already been made on the Armenian side. But there is no saying where it will stop. So someone has to draw the line and say, “STOP, this is the limit.” No more concessions unless counter concessions are met, such as liberating occupied land, freeing unlawfully imprisoned Armenians, and reversing the Western Azerbaidjan rhetoric (the most difficult of these because the Azery people have alreay been brainwashed to see Armenians as the devil, the enemy, and their leaderships the savior.) Fortunately, not every Azeri thinks that way, but the totalitarian Azeri Regime has silenced those voices, and their equivalent is silenced, often by the same unlawful methods, on the Armenian side.
Hopefully, the future Armenian leadership can rectify this unbalanced equation.
When you negotiate on your knees and have no concept of International relations what can you expect?
The current Armenian government has simply caved in to every demand the turks have made, by now leaning towards the West they have simply stopped grovelling to Russia and have begun grovelling to USA. Both Russia & USA will always use Armenia as a cheap pawn to sacrifice.
This pseudo-Turkish chicken-hawk Aliyev comparing the prosecution of former Artsakh officials, in Azerbaijani closed Kangaroo court, to the Nuremberg trials and claim the accused committed crimes against humanity more serious than those of Nazis during WW2 is hilarious. I’m not surprised this hollow statement coming from him because he despises the Armenians and their leaders who took up arms in defense of Artsakh as a result of a war his KGB daddy Heydar imposed on the Artsakh Armenians who ended up liberating it from illegal Azerbaijani occupation and in the process bringing his father to his knees and humiliating him right in front of his eyes. What I am surprised about is the Jewish silence on his statement comparing the two because under normal circumstances they would be up in arms demanding an apology for the “unjust” comparison which in their eyes would be “humanizing” the WW2 German leaders and denigrating their victims and trivializing their loss. Then again, I am not surprised for their silence because it was Israel that armed Aliyev with state-of-the-art weaponry enabling him to ethnically cleanse Artsakh of all Armenians with full military support from Turkey’s terrorist defense ministry. Shame on both!
The occupation of Artsakh was facilitated by the Soviets who invented this artificial dictatorship in the first place. This criminal Aliyev talks from both sides of his mouth. On the one hand, he refers to Artsakh as “territory internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan” while, on the other hand, he says international law is no longer valid and that the rule of force matters more than international norms. Given the centuries-old and deeply-seeded hatred between the two nations, how was it possible for Artsakh to be almost exclusively (95%) Armenian-populated if it belonged to them? It makes no sense because they would never have allowed an Armenian presence there let alone allow the population to be almost all Armenian. Simply put, the boundaries of their artificial state were extended to include this piece of ancient Armenian land with its Armenian population held hostage to their rule. The same happened in Nakhichevan which was at least 50% Armenian-populated and was depopulated of all Armenians by 1979. These criminals put the last nail on Armenians’ coffin in Nakhichven in 2005 by desecrating and destroying a 1,300 year-old Armenian cemetery in Julfa and built a military training camp in its place to train more terrorists. The LIVE video of this destruction is available on YouTube.
P.S. The Aliyev mafia clan is actually from a village in Armenia. They forged their birth documents to become “Azerbaijani” and seize power there. Aliyev’s KGB father Heydar ordered his fake historians to begin the rewriting of the Armenian history claiming Azerbaijani everything Armenian. They have published books giving all Armenian houses of worship Turkish names. These former homeless Caucasian Tatars even claim to be the descendants of the former Caucasian Albanian Christians (Aghvank or Աղվանք in Armenian) who converted to Islam in the 7th century yet they must have continued building churches centuries after their conversion, hilarious and outright racist lie, because those churches in reality are all Armenian. I mean who in his right mind converts to Islam and continues building churches centuries after conversion? They are their own worst enemies but unfortunately our incompetent and unpatriotic sorry excuse for leaders remain silent.
Hoory Minoyan has lumped two grave, but distinct issues onto one and provocatively titled it “peace on Baku’s terms” when she knows – it would be serious blow to her credibility as a reporter if she comes forth claiming that she did not know that the issue of the Armenian prisoners in Baku was not, and is not part of the crossroad for peace initiative. Moreover, no opposition in Armenia has stated that it will make the release of Armenian prisoners issue conditional to Armenia’s policy with its neighbors, should it come to power.
I do not know why Hoory Manyon has such a provocative title. I also do not know where she stands on the issue of amending the Hrchagakir-Armenia’s Declaration of Independence, if she has a stand.
My stand is the following:
I support the choice the citizens of Armenia will make, even if they may amend the Hrchagakir – Declaration of Independence – or exclude its preamble from the Constitution.
The criticism that Armenia should refuse negotiations because Azerbaijan is acting coercively misunderstands both statecraft and Armenian historical experience. A responsible government does not negotiate only when conditions are ideal; it negotiates because the alternative to negotiation is worse.
Armenia’s decision to remain at the table is not a sign of weakness. It is a sign of maturity — the recognition that diplomacy is not a reward for good behaviour, but a tool for protecting national interests even in the most difficult circumstances.
And Armenian history proves this point with absolute clarity.
Between 1918 and 1921, the First Republic of Armenia faced a situation far more catastrophic than today:
• the Armenian Genocide was still ongoing,
• the state was starving, blockaded and militarily exhausted,
• and both the Ottoman Empire and Kemalist Turkey were advancing with overwhelming force.
Yet the Armenian government continued negotiating, not because it trusted Ankara, and certainly not because it accepted Turkish narratives, but because negotiation was the only available instrument to preserve any form of Armenian statehood.
Those negotiations did not delegitimise Armenian claims.
They did not erase the Genocide.
They did not imply acceptance of Turkish demands.
They were simply the actions of a government that understood a basic truth:
states negotiate with adversaries, not with friends.
This is exactly the logic guiding Armenia today.
Remaining engaged in talks does not mean accepting Azerbaijan’s maximalist demands.
It does not mean rewriting the Constitution.
It does not mean abandoning sovereignty or historical memory.
It means keeping the diplomatic channel open so that Armenia is not forced into a position where military escalation becomes the only remaining path.
In fact, refusing to negotiate would hand Baku the very leverage it seeks. It would allow Azerbaijan to claim that Armenia is the obstacle to peace, justify further pressure, and frame any future aggression as “forced” by Armenian intransigence.
By contrast, negotiating calmly, consistently, and without conceding core principles, protects Armenia’s international position. It demonstrates that Armenia is the responsible actor, the side committed to stability, and the party willing to engage in lawful, recognised diplomatic processes.
This is not capitulation.
It is statecraft.
Just as in 1918–1921, Armenia negotiates not because it is naïve, but because it is realistic.
And just as then, negotiation is not the abandonment of national dignity, it is the
ipreservation of national continuity.
A sovereign state does not walk away from diplomacy.
A sovereign state uses diplomacy to survive, to buy time, to build alliances, and to shape the future on its own terms.
That is exactly what the Armenian government is doing.
Seems you are living in La-La land Nicol’s intention is to create a society so weak and uninformed thus wiping out critical thinking and awareness,
The expression Nazis is really just an old chestnut and rather tiresome also ironic as the south Caucasia wasn’t directly affected by them during their ascendancy. Certainly for Europe it’s a collective metaphor for baddies although generational and demographic shift renders it rather passe nowadays. Israel would be loathe to criticise Azerbaijan so would probably just be silent. When Russia invaded Ukraine there was the farcical situation of both sides calling eachother Nazis over their actions.
Armenia, under the leadership of PM Pashinyan and his “Collaborationits Enemy Appeasing” government is ready to change the Armenian Constitution. But do we have any indication that Aliyev is ready to change Azerbaijan’s Constitution and the territorial claims targeting Armenia?
Let us start with the historical context. Following the collapse of The Soviet Union, on October 18, 1991, Azerbaijan’s Supreme Council announced the creation of the independent Republic of Azerbaijan with and forged a constitution clearly highlighting the fact that the new Republic of Azerbaijan is the SUCCESSOR OF THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF AZERBAIJAN (1918-1920) not the Soviet Socialist Republic of Azerbaijan.
The problem is that the “Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan” (DRA) claimed sovereignty on a landmass of 110,000Sq Km. The territorial claims of the DRA extended to the entire Syunik region, and portions of Gegharkunik, Tavush, and Vayots Dzor regions. The map presented by the DRA to the Paris Peace Conference (1919) was never endorsed by the victorious powers of World War I, but Azerbaijan refused to relinquish its territorial claims.
Under Soviet rule Azerbaijan’s landmass was and still is today 86,600 Sq Km. Aliyev never acknowledged Armenian sovereignty over an area of 29,800Sq Km. The Petro-Dictator strongly believes that the Soviet rulers stole from Azerbaijan more that
20,000Sq Km of land, and gifted what belongs to Azerbaijan to Armenian settlers planted by Tsarist Russia in the South Caucasus.
Pashinyan, gave up more than 200Sq Km of Armenian sovereign land to Azerbaijan since the end of the 44-Day War. He is supporting Aliyev’s position that Armenia’s borders are “Provisional” until the delimitation/demarcation process clearly highlight what belongs to Armenia, and what should be returned to Azerbijan.
Is Pashinyan part of the problem or the solution?
Armenia has given in way too much already. They have given us nothing.
Of course, you can have peace on Baku’s terms.
Just get on your knees, forget that you were ever men, and live the rest of your meaningless lives as dhimmis.
OR
Remember that you are the heirs of Soghomon Tehlirian; that you are Crusaders; tell the Turks where to get off and impose peace on Hayastan’s terms.
The choice is there.
Robert, these people are too busy posting their kefs on instagram or making cheesy music videos to care.
Soghomon Tehlirian would be deeply ashamed of, and appalled by, today’s Armenia.
Returning to his values would be a mark of Armenia’s revival.
When a peoples’ uprising or a coup d’état don’t materialize in getting rid of this traitor and his equally traitorous allies, then individuals and/or groups will form to take the initiative to get rid of him and his allies, a Soghomon Tehlirian and Nemesis 2.0, because the situation of Armenia is becoming increasingly desperate. After all, Nemesis, not only got rid of the main Turkish and Azeri Armenian Genocide perpetrators, but also Armenian traitors who collaborated with them.
Pashinyan is a real-life example of “Uncle Tom”, the black house slave who is excessively subservient and servile to his white master, and who tries in vain to please him. Pashinyan is humiliating Armenia by grovelling before the Turks and Azeris, in his foolish and futile belief that they will be somehow lenient and go easy on Armenia. No chance of that.
Thanks to Pashinyan’s total inexperience in diplomacy and foreign affairs, political short-sightedness, recklessness and incompetence, Armenia is now on its knees and he is seeking “magnamity” from these two Turkic predators who have decimated Armenia and now have Armenia on a leash.
This is the most shameful chapter in Armenian history.
The apparent shame brought on the Armenian nation is of dysfunctional, incompetent, unpatriotic and traitorous Pashinyan’s and of his inexperienced and arrogant Civil Contract party know-it-all charlatans and of no one else’s. Those who voted into office this shameful bunch were deceived and most of them were from politically ignorant and gullible segment of the population. Among them many have come to their senses realizing they were duped and have turned against him and his party ever since. These are the people who are now being targeted to regain their loyalty by way of enticing them to that fake “era of peace” nonsense concocted and cooked up by Armenia’s traitor-in-chief Pashinyan that has been dragging on and on & never seems to materialize until his full and complete capitulation to our filthy and racist enemy demands. His die-hard and equally unpatriotic followers are content with all his failures and humiliations because they measure his success in leadership and patriotism by how much increase in their monthly stipends, pensions or social security benefits, commonly referred to as Toshak or Թոշակ in Armenian, they have been receiving primarily without any regards to the loss and ethnic-cleansing of Artsakh as well as an entire generation lost unnecessarily due to their selected and appointed leader’s incompetence in dismantling the army by retiring and forcing out battle-hardened officers and generals with many hard-fought victories under their belts and replacing them with inexperienced and incompetent ones subservient to his rule.
The Armenian true patriots should not and must not feel any shame whatsoever because, despite their unqualified inept and incapable leader, they put up a heroic fight for a month and a half against half dozen terrorist states and entities such as the joint forces of NATO member terrorist Turkey and artificial Azerbaijan and their terrorist Pakistani and ISIS proxies and paid-mercenaries, as well as both direct and indirect military assistance from hypocritical and morally-bankrupt Israel and Belarus, not to mention massive amounts of weapons acquired from Russia with their dwindling petrodollars over the years. I’m convinced the NATO leadership had a hand in this too because it is inconceivable for NATO weapons to be used against the Armenians, by way of terrorist Turkey, without their knowledge and blessings. For decades their representatives, as part of the OSCE Minsk Group tasked to resolve this conflict peacefully, preached assured and reassured repeatedly that there can’t be any military solution to this conflict but when time came to put their money where their mouths were they did not even lift a finger to help or even stop the war. With treasonous Pashinyan in office, they had found a perfect opportunity to put an end to this “frozen” conflict in favor of our enemy to safeguard and secure their investments in the Caspian energy infrastructure, exploration and importation into the European countries by way of terrorist Turkey acting as the main transportation hub. They carved out a homeland for the Kosovans with no historic connection to the land by violating Serbian territorial integrity while denying native Artsakh Armenians the same right, the right to self-determination, over a piece of land with their deep roots on which they had lived and existed well over a millennium! Let’s hope this year marks the end of this incompetent, unpatriotic and traitorous regime in Armenia!
Well Aliyev bought Artsakh and made the traitorous weasel pashoglu a billionaire. Now he just wanted to make this insidious evil deal look legal.
How did they grovel to Russia? The Russians provided Armenia gas at a discount and protected their western border against a turkish attack. During this time Armenia was free to pursue recognition for the Armenian Genocide and free to strengthen their defenses and clean up corruption. Instead their leaders let corruption thrive and enriched themselves at the expense of the country. This present pathetic situation is Armenia’s fault, no one elses.
With lapdog Pashinyan at the “helm” Aliyev has the best opportunity to get everything done in his favor. So long as he is “kept” in power, dark days will not leave Armenia.