Azerbaijan pushes ‘prerequisites’ for signing Armenia peace deal

Azerbaijan has announced that they have two ‘prerequisites’ before a peace deal can be signed with Armenia, after news broke that the two sides had agreed on all terms of the deal.

In a statement on Thursday evening, hours after the deal was announced, the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry named amendments to Armenia’s constitution and the dissolution of the ‘obsolete and dysfunctional’ OSCE Minsk Group as preconditions to signing the deal.

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev had voiced similar demands earlier that day, stating that trust in Armenia was ‘close to zero’.

‘So, we do not trust any of their words’.

‘We need documents; we need papers. We need their constitution to be free of territorial claims against Azerbaijan. It still contains territorial claims against Azerbaijan. We need the OSCE Minsk Group to be dissolved’, Aliyev said.

Armenia’s Foreign Ministry has stated that Armenia was ‘prepared to initiate consultations with […] Azerbaijan regarding the time and venue for the signing of the agreement’.

The terms of the deal have not yet been made public.

Armenia and Azerbaijan agree terms of peace deal

The two countries have reportedly agreed on the terms of a historic peace deal, after over three decades of bitter conflict.

OC MediaOC Media

In the decades that followed the First Nagorno-Karabakh War in the 1990s, the OSCE Minsk Group, co-chaired by France, Russia, and the US, was the main venue for talks between the two sides. However, following Azerbaijan’s victory in the 2020 Second Nagorno-Karabakh War, several competing negotiation formats emerged, with Russia and the EU vying to mediate a deal. Azerbaijan, however, pushed for direct bilateral negotiations, which concluded with the current agreement.

Will Armenia meet the preconditions?

Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has been actively pushing the need for a new constitution. In February, he again spoke in favour of adopting a new constitution through a national referendum in a speech dedicated to the ‘Real Armenia’ ideology developed by his government.

As part of his ‘Real Armenia’ ideology, Pashinyan reiterates need for a new constitution

Azerbaijani officials have repeatedly demanded a change of Armenia’s constitution, stating that it contains territorial claims to their country.

OC MediaArshaluys Barseghyan

Despite the government insisting the change of constitution is an internal process and is not being done to meet Azerbaijani demands, critics have argued the move represents a bowing to pressure from Azerbaijani.

In February, Justice Minister Srbuhi Galyan said that the referendum would ‘most likely’ take place after the parliamentary elections in 2026.

Regarding the Minsk Group, Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan reiterated Armenia’s stance on Friday, saying that ‘after normalising relations, after the signing of the agreement on peace and establishment’  Armenia ‘would consider that institutionally the conflict is nearing its end, and at that moment we would be able to say that there is no need for the Minsk Group activities’.

‘Up to this moment, unfortunately, we’ve been seeing elements of a certain rhetoric, unconstructive elements which we continuously see from Azerbaijan’, Mirzoyan said.

Meanwhile, Mirzoyan has called the conclusion of peace treaty negotiations with Azerbaijan ‘an extremely important milestone’.

Why has Armenia accepted the Azerbaijani proposal now?

Thursday’s announcement came amid a heightened new round of tensions, with the Azerbaijani pro-government media outlet Caliber claiming that Armenia was preparing to launch a war against Azerbaijan in April with the help of the civilian EU Mission in Armenia.

Earlier in 2025, Aliyev openly threatened Armenia, calling the country a ‘fascist state’ and saying that ‘either the Armenian leadership will destroy it or we will’.

Azerbaijani pro-government media claims Armenia will launch war against Azerbaijan in April

Caliber claimed, citing ‘trusted sources’, that the ‘region is on the brink of another war, likely provoked by Armenia’.

OC MediaArshaluys Barseghyan

During a press briefing on Thursday evening, Pashinyan commented on why Armenia accepted Azerbaijani’s latest proposal on the long-standing two sticking points of the peace treaty, claiming that those provisions ‘have undergone a small but significant evolution’.

‘Since it became clear that we are unable — and likely will not be able — to achieve ideal formulations in this regard, we also discussed them in the Security Council format and concluded that the current content can be considered a compromise option acceptable to Armenia’.

The two sticking points were ‘exclusion of third-party forces’ on the Armenia–Azerbaijan interstate border, a reference to the removal of EU monitors from the border, and the dropping of lawsuits in international venues.

Pashinyan also spoke about outstanding issues in an interview broadcast Thursday evening on Turkish media outlets. In the interview, which was recorded earlier in the week, he spoke about the ongoing trial of Armenians in Azerbaijan, saying that they ‘are a smokescreen, which have one goal, at least that’s our perception, to nullify the achievements that we have had in the peace process’.

Other Armenian officials claimed that the alternative to a peace agreement would be war with Azerbaijan.

The announcement that the peace treaty had been agreed upon nonetheless had a frosty reception in Armenia. Several political analysts raised a number of concerns, especially considering Azerbaijan’s ongoing demands for a ‘Zangezur Corridor’ through Armenian territory, Baku’s rhetoric regarding what it calls ‘Western Azerbaijan’, a reference to southern Armenia, and criticising Armenia’s arms purchases despite Azerbaijan consistently purchasing new weapons systems.

Many also raised concerns over the removal of the EU monitoring mission in light of unresolved issues and threats to Armenia coming from top Azerbaijani officials.

Narek Sukiasyan, a researcher at the Centre for Culture and Civilization Studies, argued on X called the deal ‘a lukewarm agreement that is unfortunately not worth the paper it is on’.

‘We are witnessing [the] same patterns as before. Azerbaijan increases military threat (war propaganda of recent weeks, media and diplomatic provocations, intensified threat) coerces Armenia to concede. Since most other things are conceded now it was the turn for the “peace deal” ’, Sukiasyan wrote.

Armenia’s former ruling party, the Republican Party demanded the ‘immediate publication of the final text’.

The party also noted that ‘any outcome of negotiations with an open threat of the use of force is unacceptable for the citizens of the Republic of Armenia, and it cannot ensure a just and long-term peace in the region’.

International reactions

A number of countries welcomed the agreement, including the US, EU, Iran, France, Germany, Spain, and Estonia. Salome Zourabichvili, Georgia’s fifth president, called it a ‘historic achievement’.

António Costa, President of the European Council, congratulated Pashinyan and Aliyev, calling the agreement a ‘decisive step towards the full normalisation of relations’ and  ‘encourage[d]’ them ‘to move forward with a swift signature of the peace agreement’.

Similarly, French President Emmanuel Macron noted that ‘now nothing prevents the signing of a peace treaty’. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock noted that after long negotiations, ‘Armenia's courageous concessions make this final step on the path possible — a path we have accompanied both countries on’.

In an interview with Azerbaijani state-run media outlet APA, the Turkish President’s Chief Adviser on Foreign Policy and Security Issues, Akif Çağatay Kılıç, said that their position regarding the normalisation process with Armenia was ‘already known’ and that ‘the security and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan is our main priority’. He also said that the peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia ‘will be the key to resolving many issues’.On Friday, Pashinyan’s office said that Armenia’s PM had a telephone conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin, and ‘informed […] about the completion of negotiations on the agreement on the draft text’.