The recent statements by Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and his press secretary regarding the potential dissolution of the Minsk Group (MG) are not only alarming but also cast serious doubts on the foundations of Armenian statehood. The current government, under the guise of a “constructive” stance, seems to be advancing processes without adequate preventive measures, potentially leading to the weakening or even the eventual loss of Armenia’s sovereignty.
The Potential Dissolution of the Minsk Group and Its Consequences
The Minsk Group, despite failing to meet the expectations of the Armenian people during its existence, remained a diplomatic platform for addressing the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict on the international stage. Its dissolution, initiated by Azerbaijan and seemingly supported by the current Armenian authorities, would mean abandoning internationally recognized mechanisms for resolving the Artsakh issue and posing a genuine threat to Armenia. Azerbaijani claims involving concepts like “Western Azerbaijan” and the “Zangezur Corridor” aim to legitimize demands on Armenian territories.
Pashinyan’s statements about “constructiveness” and “abandoning rhetoric” go beyond mere politics; they prepare Armenia for subjugation to Azerbaijani and Turkish pressures. If Armenia agrees to dismantle the Minsk Group without clear diplomatic guarantees, it would signify not only relinquishing Artsakh but also compromising parts of Armenian territory and key components of its sovereignty.
The Chronology of the Issue
This process can be traced back to statements by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev aimed at dismantling the Minsk Group, a move intended to legitimize his crimes against humanity, war crimes, killings, hostage-taking, and other violations of international norms. Aliyev exploited the international community’s indifference to the Artsakh issue and leveled accusations against the Minsk Group co-chairs—Russia, the United States, and France.
Pashinyan, in turn, responded by placing blame on former Armenian leaders for failing to resolve the issue. However, the reality is different. Under previous administrations, the Minsk Group, despite its shortcomings, maintained an international framework for addressing the conflict, and Armenia was presented as a party seeking a legal resolution. This stood in stark contrast to Pashinyan’s “constructive” approach, which practically amounts to surrendering Armenia’s identity and rights.
The Emergence of Threats
Aliyev’s “Western Azerbaijan” rhetoric, coupled with Pashinyan’s responses, clearly outlines the path Azerbaijan is taking to restrict Armenia’s sovereignty. If claims about “Western Azerbaijan” enter the international agenda, it will threaten Armenia’s territorial integrity.
Instead of countering such rhetoric, Pashinyan appears to agree with the idea that if there is no “conflict,” there is no need for mechanisms to address it. However, it is evident that dissolving the Minsk Group would provide Azerbaijan and Turkey with a free hand to advance their ambitions over Armenia.
Armenia’s Future Without the Minsk Group
The dissolution of the Minsk Group would result in Armenia losing yet another important platform that, despite its flaws, attracted international attention. Armenia’s government must understand that dismantling international mechanisms only serves Azerbaijan’s continued agenda.
It is crucial that international partners, particularly France and the United States, oppose this process. Armenia still has diplomatic avenues to prevent the dissolution of the Minsk Group, but achieving this requires focused and responsible policies based on Armenia’s interests, not on Aliyev’s “constructiveness.”
A Different Perspective on the Conclusion
The dissolution of the Minsk Group should not be seen as a “constructive” step but as a path toward jeopardizing Armenia’s sovereignty. The consequences of this process could be catastrophic. Armenia stands at a historic crossroads: either it will fight for its interests in international platforms, or, as implied by the Prime Minister’s words, it will attempt to convince its people that dissolution is inevitable.
Can Armenia stop this process? The answer depends on the support of the international community and the genuine will of Armenia’s leadership to protect its people’s future. However, the key players in preventing this process are Armenia’s citizens, who, unfortunately, have been atomized and lack unified agendas.