All countries involved in the process of settling Armenian-Azerbaijani relations, including the parties in conflict themselves, are calling for the signing of a peace treaty as soon as possible. But there is no peace treaty, as there has not been one in the entire history of independence of these neighbouring states.

What are the reasons for this situation: the war is over, yet peace will not come? And can the civil societies of the two countries help to accelerate the achievement of harmony between their states? The conversation between Azerbaijani journalist Arif Aliyev and Armenian human rights defender Vardan Harutyunyan, organised by the Baku and Yerevan Press Clubs, deals with these issues.

They met but did not talk....

"On our planet, almost all neighbouring countries have claims against each other. The subject of dispute can be anything: a border, some part of it, one small village or even bare rocks somewhere in the middle of the sea. A few years ago, the Turks and Greeks clashed again over such rocks. But this time they had the wisdom not to bring the dispute to mutual extermination. Will Armenians and Azerbaijanis show the same wisdom?" Arif Aliyev wonders.

Vardan Harutyunyan believes that neighbours, even those who have passed the way of long wars and heavy losses, should talk to each other, no matter how painful the conversation may be:

"Our ancestors were unable to solve the problems of that time in the early 20th century and passed them on to us.... We were also either or unwilling. Now we have very little time left to resolve this. Otherwise, time will pass, we will be gone, our grandchildren will sit down and discuss the same problems again. It would be a shame. Even if there were no great examples of solving such complex interethnic and interstate problems before the middle of the XX century, we had the experience of Europe after the Second World War before our eyes to consider. Especially since our two nations had lived together for so long, it would be much easier for us to reach peace than, for example, for the French and Germans or the French and Italians. But we couldn't... I can't say what will happen tomorrow, but judging by the process that is going on now, there is nothing to be happy about".

Civil dialogue between Azerbaijanis and Armenians is indisputable. But how to build the conversation so that it would also be benficial? So that the authorities would be interested in such a dialogue and the people would see the sense in it?

According to the Armenian human rights activist, for this purpose, first of all, it is necessary to find strength in oneself and understand that what happened, happened and proceed from this reality:

"Live not with dreams of what we could have, but with what we have now. Unfortunately, too much blood has been spilled. Young men, both Azerbaijanis and Armenians, who could have lived, met eachother, maybe become friends, died instead. They are already gone... Yes, there was always a dialogue. But those who talked had no influence on their states as a whole. And those who made decisions did not talk. They met everywhere, presented these meetings as a conversation, and the last two wars showed that there was no conversation.... Even today our countries are still feuding. All this is transmitted to the people, remains in their memory as dangerou... Everything that has happened before our eyes should serve as a reason for those who make decisions on behalf of the Azerbaijani and Armenian people to realise that the only true solution is to lay the foundation for future peaceful coexistence".

What mainly hinders the dialogue?

But in order for the conversation not to be empty, it is necessary to start understanding and trusting each other. The Azerbaijani journalist recalls an article by Vardan Harutyunyan published in January 2023:

"You wrote that no matter how hard the conversation is now, it should be continued, even though our defeat has made the neighbour unrestrained... They are dictating terms... They want to tear off Armenia's sovereign territory peace by piece..." What is it: the influence of established stereotypes or are Azerbaijan's actions really just perceived as such in Armenian society...? Tell me, what in the behavior of Azerbaijanis, from the Armenians point of view, makes it difficult to start a civil dialogue for peaceful coexistence, and what could accelerate it?"

The Armenian human rights activist notes that in his articles he has always tried to make Armenians face reality and accept it:

"I don't remember at what time I wrote the words you are quoting, but I was still writing based on the statements that were heard from the Azerbaijani side. I read, for example, the speech of the President of Azerbaijan, his statements that one or the other part of Armenia is Azerbaijani’s. After November 2020, these statements are provocative to Armenians and are dangerous You want to understand what an Armenian might think about this. Even an Armenian like me could ask: wait, now what? Is Yerevan being taken? Is Zangezur being taken? Will it keep going like this? Naturally, when I wrote the article, I was influenced by such statements.I can say that such harsh statements have not been heard lately, but what has been heard is enough to make the Armenians wary. It may bother me when I write an article or talk to you. But it should not interfere with Armenian officials when talking to Azerbaijani representatives. Because they and the Azerbaijani government have a great responsibility: to move future dangers, possibility of future war away from each other as quickly and correctly as possible".

Arif Aliyev's next question concerns what in the behavior of Armenians themselves, from Vardan Harutyunyan's point of view, hinders the dialogue for peaceful coexistence between the representatives of the sides?

The human rights defender believes that Armenia lacks consistency in its steps and predictability - representatives of the Armenian authorities make one statement, then another, which contradict the previous ones or are not a continuation of them:

"High officials should be consistent in their statements, so that those who talk to will speak the same way tomorrow....The Armenian authorities should be as consistent as possible.At first, when they came to power, I thought they were still young.But 5 years have passed, during this time you can learn a lot, and naturally, my demands for consistency are more and more frequent". them can be sure that the official speaks specifically and

Fighting for peace...with weapons in hand?

Armenian society has different approaches to peaceful dialogue."Now is not the time," some believe, "we should gain strength and then go for a conversation so that the enemy retreats.An indirect reflection of this approach is Prime Minister Pashinyan's recent words that "the increase in military spending is not preparation for war, but for peace." The Azerbaijani journalist asks Vardan Harutyunyan's opinion about those who seek peace but think they need to arm themselves to achieve it. How strong are such sentiments in Armenian society?

Confirming that they talk about it quite often and a lot in Armenia, Vardan Harutyunyan considers such perceptions "naive" - while you arm yourself,  your opponent won't stay idle either, after all.

"But I understand them, I can explain ...We've lived together so long that we've become very similar to each other.And there are similarities here too.The Azerbaijani side thinks that while Armenia is so weak, they should tear off as much as possible.The Armenian side thinks: let's gain strength so that they can't tear off as much as they want.But this unwillingness to stop....The winning side has more responsibility than the losing side.I want Azerbaijanis to understand this. Any Azerbaijani can say: Armenia was also in such a role in its time! Why didn't they...? Here I will raise my hands and say that yes, it happened.Although I have an excuse: I have always written that it is necessary to make a decision. But, be that as it may, both Azerbaijan and Armenia should understand that the arms race will not lead to anything good, because the accumulated weapons will be fired at some point. But our goal is to make it so that there is no need to shoot.".

Arif Aliyev adds his thoughts on the Armenian society's responsibility to create conditions for the cohabitation of the two nations to Vardan Harutyunyan's thoughts "on the greater responsibility of the victorious side for peace":

"Nationalism is everywhere. But it has different roots in different nations. Kazakh and Estonian nationalism, for example, is based on the struggle against physical Russification, Ukrainian and Georgian nationalism was based on the preservation of language, Moldovan nationalism was based on the definition of identity (are we Romanians or not?), Azerbaijani nationalism was also based on identity, on the desire for the commonality of the Turkic world, and Armenian nationalism was based on the rejection of everything Turkic and Azerbaijani. Hence, eradicating the enemy image of Turks and Azerbaijanis that the Armenians have is more difficult and requires more effort. Do you agree?"

Speaking about the "special attitude" of Armenians towards Turks, Vardan Harutyunyan points out that it "comes from the beginning of the 20th century":

"There is an explanation here, it is genocide, a huge tragedy in the history of the nation.A huge part of Armenians living in Turkey lost their homeland. It left an imprint in the consciousness of the people. But I have always said that it is possible and necessary to move away from it.    It happened, it is impossible to forget it, but it certainly prevents us from building today's life based on the past. I wrote that our patriotism is ether Azerbaijan, personally, accepts the genocide or not - this is already secondary, the primary thing is what Armenians feel... But the Armenian-Azerbaijani peace, which is bound to come, can proportional to anti-Turkism. This is bad, it is unhealthy patriotism. But it is there, we carry it with us. Whserve to make all this soften and get better....If we solve the problem with Azerbaijanis, it means that we solve it with Turks, then it will turn out that our small hostel, which is called South Caucasus, becomes peaceful.Then, if there are any problems, it will be possible to talk about everything, to write without distorting history, to treat past wounds with peace".

What do we seek more today: peace or punishment?

During the Soviet regime there was a popular phrase: "friendship of nations".But people are friends, and nations coexist. And the more communication between people, the more chances for peaceful coexistence of nations       .

"So far on our side, only the authorities are communicating," Arif Aliyev says.- But on what wave? Mostly mutual accusations, endless claims on all kinds of courts and tribunals. So far, we can see a desire to punish rather than to reconcile. For the third year we have been hearing that the signing of a peace treaty is realistic. As the year ends, they say that there are still unresolved issues. After all, a peace treaty is exactly what is needed in order to resolve unresolved issues peacefully in the future.With Georgia, for example, neither you nor we waited for the demarcation to be completed in order to make peace. Why do you think there is still no peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan? And can society influence the acceleration of signing such a treaty?"

Vardan Harutyunyan is sure that if the societies of the two countries were ready and organised enough, their highest representatives would also be forced to take the necessary steps. But for now, everything depends on specific individuals themselves.

"I have already said about Pashinyan that I expected consistency in steps and statements from him. But from Aliyev's side - his refusal to go to talks at different platforms... Each of them is solving his own issues. I understand Aliyev's task, he is now focused on being accepted by the Azerbaijani society as much as possible.He won the war, solved the issue, which people have been waiting for a long time, now he wants to deepen this perception even more.His moves are not directed at Armenia, the international community, but at Azerbaijan.I have already started to notice consistency on the part of Armenia lately.It is slowly withdrawing from Russian influence. And Russian influence is the continuation of the conflict. Russia needs the conflict to maintain its presence in the region.If Armenia is closer to the Western world, it will be forced to be consistent, because that is what is demanded and expected from there. Then peace can be concluded. But now.. Just the other day Aliyev said that there are no problems for signing a peace treaty. I wouldn't be surprised if tomorrow it turns out that there is still a small problem that will become the most important one."

"Why do you think Aliyev doesn't go to these platforms - to Europe, to America - for a meeting?" asks the Armenian human rights activist.

Arif Aliyev does not think that President Aliyev's position on peace talks is dictated mainly by the desire to please the public in the country itself more: "In my opinion, he needs it the least now, because there are no problems there." According to the journalist from Baku, the choice of the president is influenced by more serious processes:

"There is clearly a perception here that both the U.S. and Brussels are mainly engaged in an extramural dialogue with Russia, rather than talking to Azerbaijan and Armenia, serving interests that do not always meet the direct interests of our countries. They impose conditions or speak not always fairly. This creates and in the future may create problems not only for Azerbaijan, but also for the whole region. Therefore, the main emphasis is placed on the fact that we should continue negotiations, trying to limit the influence of third parties on them as much as possible, so that direct bilateral negotiations between Azerbaijan and Armenia take place. As for the matter location, there could of course, be difference in preferences. You have probably observed that, as a venue, Azerbaijan is leaning towards Georgia, but this is not final. However, in my understanding, the main reason for this is the desire to limit the influence of third parties, who are not always fair towards Armenia and Azerbaijan. They are seen as serious obstacles for the future of the region. It is important to note fact that this region has great prospects. The interests are not limited only to how the war will end, where the border will be, whether Russians will be here or not.  The interests are also in the fact that the region is of great importance in terms of future global projects - East-West, and so on. After all, the roadmaps recently put forward by Armenia also bear the imprint of possible future global changes. Sooner or later, of course, this peace treaty will be a reality, but what life will be like after that is no less important."

(The conversation between human rights defender Vardan Harutyunyan and journalist Arif Aliyev is given in abridged form.The full version is available on