The Washington meeting strengthened prospects for lasting peace, regional stability and economic cooperation while creating new opportunities for transport and energy connectivity. It also demonstrated Azerbaijan’s growing role in shaping the post-conflict regional order. One year later, the agreements remain an important foundation for normalization between Baku and Yerevan and for a more interconnected South Caucasus.
Zaur Mammadov, Associate Professor at the Academy of Public Administration under the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan and political scientist,in an interview with News.Az notes that both the new realities that emerged in the region after 2020 and the reassessment of Washington’s approach toward the South Caucasus following the change of administration in the United States played an important role in the process leading to the Washington meeting.
Photo: Zaur Mammadov, Associate Professor at the Academy of Public Administration under the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan and political scientist
“During the Biden administration, we witnessed a rather complicated period in US-Azerbaijan relations. Washington’s failure to adequately take into account the new realities created by Azerbaijan after the Second Karabakh War, and in some cases the demonstration of one-sided approaches, had a negative impact on bilateral relations. The inadequate assessment of Azerbaijan’s political, economic, energy and transport weight in the region also limited the effectiveness of the United States’ own South Caucasus policy,” the political scientist said.
According to Zaur Mammadov, a more pragmatic approach toward the region began to emerge after Donald Trump returned to power.
“One of the main differences in the Trump administration’s approach is that it proceeds from the realities on the ground, takes into account the sovereign interests of states and does not separate economic cooperation from the peace process. Within precisely this approach, Azerbaijan emerges as an important regional partner for the United States. Azerbaijan’s role in energy security, its position in the Middle Corridor, its connectivity potential between Central Asia and Europe and its political weight in the South Caucasus have begun to be assessed more realistically by Washington,” he noted.
Ilham Aliyev-Trump Dialogue Contributed to the Formation of New Political Dynamics
The political scientist believes that the political dialogue established between President Ilham Aliyev and Donald Trump was also one of the factors contributing to the emergence of new dynamics in bilateral relations.
According to him, the contacts and correspondence that existed between the sides before Donald Trump’s election as president helped lay the groundwork for mutual political trust.
“The importance of relations at the level of leaders should be taken into account here. President Ilham Aliyev has for many years pursued a consistent and pragmatic policy toward the United States based on Azerbaijan’s national interests. In Donald Trump’s approach, meanwhile, there is a clearer tendency to view Azerbaijan not through old stereotypes and the prism of conflict, but as an independent regional actor. The convergence of these two approaches created new opportunities in bilateral relations,” Zaur Mammadov said.
In his view, President Ilham Aliyev’s visit to the United States on August 8-9, 2025 became the turning point in this process.
“It would be incorrect to regard this visit as an ordinary diplomatic trip. Two strategic processes took place simultaneously. On the one hand, historic results were achieved on the Azerbaijan-Armenia peace agenda; on the other hand, an institutional foundation was created for moving US-Azerbaijan relations to a qualitatively new stage. In this sense, the regional peace process and the transformation of US-Azerbaijan relations are mutually complementary processes,” the political scientist emphasized.
Strategic Partnership and “Section 907”
Zaur Mammadov said the agreement reached between the governments of Azerbaijan and the United States on preparing a Charter on Strategic Partnership should be regarded as an important step in terms of the future architecture of bilateral relations.
In his view, the strategic partnership format demonstrates that relations are no longer limited to energy and security issues, but are moving toward a broader political, economic, transport and technological agenda.
“Moving Azerbaijan-US relations to the level of strategic partnership means a transformation in the very nature of cooperation between the two countries. Azerbaijan is no longer merely a country participating in energy projects from Washington’s perspective. We are talking about an important partner in terms of security in the South Caucasus, the Middle Corridor, access to Central Asia, energy, investment and regional economic integration,” he said.
The political scientist emphasized that the suspension of the application of “Section 907” also carries political and symbolic significance.
“For many years, Section 907 was perceived in Azerbaijani society as one of the symbols of an unfair approach toward Azerbaijan in US policy. Steps toward removing this restriction can be viewed as an indication of moving away from old approaches and building relations on new political foundations,” Zaur Mammadov noted.
He added that the continued contacts, correspondence and high-level reciprocal visits following the Washington meeting demonstrate that the political momentum achieved has acquired a sustainable character.
According to the political scientist, the visit of US Vice President JD Vance to Azerbaijan and the results achieved in the direction of strategic partnership should also be regarded among the factors demonstrating that relations have already entered an institutional stage.
“Azerbaijan Is the Architect of the Peace Agenda”
Zaur Mammadov believes that another important aspect of the Washington meeting was the international consolidation of the results of the peace strategy advanced by Azerbaijan since 2020.
“After restoring its territorial integrity in the Second Karabakh War, Azerbaijan did not set itself the goal of turning Armenia’s defeat into a permanent instrument of political pressure. On the contrary, Baku proposed signing a peace treaty and building relations between the two states on the principles of international law. From this perspective, Azerbaijan is not only the victor of the war, but also one of the principal architects of the peace agenda of the post-conflict period,” he said.
The political scientist noted the particular importance of the five basic principles proposed by Azerbaijan for the normalization of relations with Armenia.
According to him, the essence of these principles lies in mutual recognition of sovereignty and territorial integrity, renunciation of territorial claims, delimitation and demarcation of the interstate border, establishment of diplomatic relations, and opening of transport and communication links.
“If we examine the essence of the peace agreement initialed in Washington, we see the main elements of the approach Azerbaijan put forward years ago. Therefore, it is possible to say that the five principles played an important role in shaping the conceptual basis of the peace process. The acceptance of these principles is an important outcome of Azerbaijan’s post-conflict diplomacy,” Zaur Mammadov said.
The Road from 2020 to Washington
The political scientist believes that the results achieved in 2025 cannot be assessed separately from the developments that followed 2020.
According to him, before the Second Karabakh War, the position of the Armenian leadership not only sought to preserve the existing status quo, but also effectively rendered the negotiation process fruitless.
“The 44-day war fundamentally changed the situation in the region. The missile attacks on Ganja, Barda and other Azerbaijani settlements during the war also demonstrated how dangerous the conflict had become. After the war, certain political circles in Armenia continued revanchist rhetoric. All of this showed that peace would not emerge automatically,” he noted.
According to Zaur Mammadov, the local anti-terror measures carried out by Azerbaijan in September 2023 became the next decisive turning point in the post-conflict period.
“After September 2023, the separatism factor was eliminated in the region, creating an entirely new situation for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations to be built purely on an interstate basis. From that point onward, it became increasingly clear to Yerevan that there was no alternative to taking the new regional realities into account. The subsequent acceleration of the peace process cannot be assessed separately from this factor,” the political scientist said.
In his view, the 2020 war, the 2023 anti-terror measures and the 2025 Washington outcomes can be regarded as interconnected political stages.
“Azerbaijan Has Achieved Results Both in War and Diplomacy”
Zaur Mammadov said it would be incorrect to limit the results of Azerbaijan’s policy in recent years solely to the concept of military victory.
“Azerbaijan restored its territorial integrity through war, and at the subsequent stage succeeded in transforming the military results into a political and diplomatic framework based on international law. From this perspective, one of the principal results of President Ilham Aliyev’s policy is that Azerbaijan complemented its victory in war by shaping a peace agenda in the post-conflict period,” the political scientist said.
According to him, President Ilham Aliyev’s maintenance of a principled position throughout the peace process also played an important role in achieving the results.
“Azerbaijan’s position did not change: territorial integrity must be mutually recognized, there must be no territorial claims, sovereignty must be respected and future relations must be built on the basis of international law. As these principles were consistently upheld over the years, the process moved closer to the conceptual framework advanced by Azerbaijan. Therefore, it is possible to say that President Ilham Aliyev implemented a consistent strategy at both the military and diplomatic stages,” Zaur Mammadov said.
According to the political scientist, the initialing in Washington of the agreed text of the peace agreement approximately two years after the anti-terror measures of September 2023 is an important indicator of the rapid development of post-conflict diplomacy.
He noted that history contains examples in which former adversaries required much longer periods to normalize relations after prolonged wars and confrontations.
“It would not be correct to fully equate the path of Franco-German relations after World War II with Azerbaijan-Armenia relations. The historical circumstances are different. However, the comparison demonstrates one important point: after prolonged confrontation, building political relations on new legal and economic foundations requires time and political will. In the Azerbaijan-Armenia process, however, considerable diplomatic ground was covered in a relatively short period between 2023 and the Washington meeting in 2025,” he said.
TRIPP and Connectivity to Nakhchivan
Zaur Mammadov noted that the Washington outcomes also carry strategic importance in terms of opening regional communications.
According to him, establishing unimpeded transport connectivity between mainland Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan is one of Baku’s key post-conflict priorities.
“The emergence of the TRIPP project demonstrates that this issue is no longer merely the subject of political discussion, but has moved into a concrete international and institutional framework. Establishing reliable connectivity between mainland Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan is of strategic importance both for Azerbaijan’s national interests and for the development of the East-West transport system,” the political scientist said.
In his view, opening communications in this direction could expand the capacity of the Middle Corridor, strengthen connectivity between Türkiye and Central Asia and increase the South Caucasus’ importance as a transit region.
“Whereas transport connectivity in the Zangezur direction was previously mainly a subject of political discussion, after Washington more concrete mechanisms and international interests emerged for its implementation. This in itself is an outcome capable of changing the region’s geoeconomic map,” Zaur Mammadov emphasized.
Armenia’s Constitution and Final Peace
The political scientist said the initialing of the peace agreement does not mean that the process has been completed and that outstanding issues must be resolved before the final treaty can be signed.
According to him, one of the main issues for Azerbaijan is the removal from Armenia’s legal framework of provisions that could enable territorial claims against Azerbaijan.
“Azerbaijan’s approach is that peace must be based not only on statements by political leaders, but on a legal framework that will prevent any future government from bringing territorial claims back onto the agenda. Therefore, the issue concerning Armenia’s Constitution is not technical, but strategic in nature,” he said.
Zaur Mammadov believes that the connection between constitutional changes in Armenia and the peace agenda should also be assessed precisely within this context.
Revanchism and Geopolitical Competition Remain Among the Main Risks
According to the political scientist, despite the results achieved in recent years, it would be premature to say that the peace process has become irreversible.
“Revanchist forces exist within Armenia, and they do not want to accept the new realities that have emerged in the region. Following Azerbaijan’s military and political successes, a more realistic approach can be observed strengthening within Armenia’s state policy. However, the ability of revanchist circles to influence the process in the future should not be overlooked,” Zaur Mammadov said.
In his view, another important risk is the possibility of the South Caucasus becoming an arena of geopolitical confrontation among major powers.
“Azerbaijan’s interest is to transform the South Caucasus into a space of cooperation rather than confrontation. For Baku, the main issue is the formation of a new security system based on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of regional states and mutual economic interests. Armenia’s long-term interests also lie not in turning the region into an arena of confrontation among external powers, but in establishing normal relations with Azerbaijan and its other neighbors,” the political scientist emphasized.
According to Zaur Mammadov, the historic significance of the Washington meeting should be assessed precisely within this broader context.
“The August 8, 2025 Washington meeting can be regarded as one of the important political and diplomatic outcomes of the post-conflict strategy shaped by President Ilham Aliyev since 2020. After its military victory, Azerbaijan advanced a peace agenda based on international law, secured acceptance of the fundamental principles of that agenda and, at the same time, entered a new strategic stage in its relations with the United States. The main task now is to fully consolidate the results achieved in legal and institutional terms, sign the final peace treaty and ensure long-term stability in the South Caucasus,” Zaur Mammadov concluded.
