Armenia and Azerbaijan returned to the negotiating table in Geneva this week, marking a significant step toward potential reconciliation after decades of hostility and last year’s bloody conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. Talks are being facilitated by Switzerland with the support of the European Union and the United States. Both nations are under increasing pressure to commit to a roadmap for sustainable peace, particularly as border skirmishes and political mistrust have repeatedly derailed earlier attempts. Analysts view the Geneva meeting as a test of whether dialogue can hold in the absence of direct Russian mediation, which has weakened since Moscow’s focus shifted to Ukraine.
According to diplomatic sources, the agenda includes agreements on demarcation of borders, the return of prisoners of war, and reopening of transport corridors that have been disrupted since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Armenia has pressed for international guarantees to protect ethnic Armenians still in Azerbaijan, while Baku has insisted on full sovereignty over Nagorno-Karabakh and demanded recognition of its territorial integrity. The complexity of these positions demonstrates that any settlement will require concessions on both sides, though neither government faces an easy path domestically toward compromise.
For Armenia, the political cost of ceding claims to Nagorno-Karabakh remains extremely high. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan faces protests at home, with opposition figures accusing him of betraying national interests if he makes concessions. Conversely, Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev, buoyed by last year’s military victories, maintains strong public backing for a hardline stance, limiting his room for flexibility. These domestic pressures could make Geneva’s negotiations fragile from the outset.
The geopolitical dimension further complicates the process. Russia, historically the main mediator in the South Caucasus, has lost considerable influence as it diverts resources to the war in Ukraine. This vacuum has allowed the EU and the U.S. to step in as primary facilitators, though Moscow has warned against what it sees as Western encroachment in its traditional sphere of influence. Turkey, a close ally of Azerbaijan, continues to provide strategic support, while Iran has expressed concern about any border changes that might affect its regional interests. Thus, Geneva represents not just a bilateral negotiation but a multi-layered geopolitical contest.
Humanitarian concerns remain at the heart of the talks. Thousands of ethnic Armenians fled Nagorno-Karabakh during last year’s offensive, creating a refugee crisis that has strained Armenia’s social systems. International organizations have urged both governments to prioritize the safe return of displaced people, ensure human rights protections, and allow independent monitoring of border areas. Aid agencies argue that without tangible improvements in humanitarian conditions, peace agreements will lack legitimacy on the ground, where trust remains at a historic low.
The EU has pledged financial assistance and development programs contingent on progress in the talks. Brussels views stabilization of the South Caucasus as essential to its energy diversification strategy, given Azerbaijan’s role as a gas supplier. Similarly, Washington has linked peace in the region to broader goals of preventing instability that could spill into the Middle East or Central Asia. By tying economic incentives to political dialogue, mediators hope to create momentum for compromise.
Whether Geneva will produce lasting results remains uncertain. Previous efforts have repeatedly collapsed under the weight of nationalism, security fears, and external rivalries. Yet the fact that both Armenia and Azerbaijan agreed to attend amid domestic opposition signals recognition that dialogue is less costly than another war. The coming weeks will reveal whether the sides can translate talks into concrete steps toward peace or whether old grievances will once again derail progress.
