Armenia and Azerbaijan finalize peace agreement to end decades of hostilities
- Armenian and Azerbaijani officials have reached an agreement on a peace treaty to resolve longstanding disputes.
- The ongoing conflict began in the late 1980s with the breakaway of Nagorno-Karabakh from Azerbaijan.
- While a significant breakthrough has been made, final approval depends on constitutional amendments in Armenia.
In March 2025, Armenian and Azerbaijani officials announced the finalization of a peace agreement meant to conclude nearly four decades of conflict between the two nations. This development follows a history of hostilities that began in the late 1980s when the Nagorno-Karabakh region broke away from Azerbaijan, largely supported by Armenia. This conflict resulted in widespread violence and mass displacements, leaving deep scars between the ethnic communities involved. The finalized text of the agreement reportedly establishes formal relations aimed at peace, although the timeline for signing remains uncertain due to various political factors that require adjustments to Armenia's constitution. The agreement comes at a time when both nations seek to recover from previous tensions and aim for a resolution of outstanding territorial disputes that have plagued their relationship since the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Armenia's Foreign Ministry has expressed readiness for consultations on the agreement's signing date, while Azerbaijan has indicated that changes to Armenia's constitution, which it claims make implicit territorial assertions, need to occur prior to their endorsement. Despite this promising step, several hurdles exist that could delay the adoption of the peace treaty, including Azerbaijan's conditions for signature and the ongoing distrust between the two sides. Regional powers, including Russia, have shown interest in the stability of both nations but have voiced concerns over foreign military presence in the area, which may complicate the implementation of the agreement. The existing militarization and closed borders along their jointly held boundary serve as a reminder of their past clashing interests, which may continue to impede the full realization of the peace agreement. While the finalized peace agreement is a significant milestone, it remains to be seen how both governments will navigate their internal politics and the historical grievances that may arise in the wake of potential constitutional changes. As pressures mount, domestic opinions may influence the leaders' initiatives toward peace, making it paramount for both governments to engage with their citizens and stakeholders to achieve lasting stability in the region.