NATO's 75th anniversary summit in Washington in some ways mimicked the very first gathering of the Atlantic Alliance back in 1949, especially in the way Western leaders fixated on checking Russian aggression. But along the sidelines, a lot occurred with strategic implications for the South Caucasus.
On the summit's second day, United States tried to reinvigorate the Armenian-Azerbaijani peace process, as US Secretary of State Antony Blinken facilitated discussions between Armenian and Azerbaijani negotiators.
Earlier in 2024, Armenian leaders agreed to a transfer of disputed territory to Azerbaijan and said a lasting peace agreement appeared at hand. Since then, however, negotiations have appeared to stall. Blinken urged the parties to settle remaining differences, emphasizing "the importance of peace in promoting regional connectivity [i.e. trade], which would benefit the entire South Caucasus region."
US diplomats see the lack of a peace deal as an impediment to fulfilling the potential of the East-West corridor, which is designed to expand European Union trade with the Caucasus and Central Asia. A peace deal, Washington also holds, would reduce the ability of Russia to meddle in regional political affairs. A durable peace agreement "will both improve security cooperation with regard to neighbors who might have some adverse interests [and] enable the movement of goods from Central Asia through Azerbaijan and then out through both Georgia and Armenia to global markets," Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs James O'Brien said during a visit to Baku in June.
Blinken indicated that the two sides appeared close to finalizing a deal that the United States could "strongly, strongly support." His Armenian counterpart, Ararat Mirzoyan, echoed that sentiment: "Armenia has [the] political will to finalize and conclude the peace treaty with Azerbaijan in [the] soonest [possible] timeframe."
Azerbaijan's foreign minister, Jeyhun Bayramov, reaffirmed Baku's commitment to the peace process but provided no assessment on where discussions stand.
At a press conference, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Ankara, though a strategic ally of Azerbaijan with clear interests in the outcome, was striving to mediate a peace deal. "Our heart is in the process; we want the peace agreement to be signed," Erdogan said in translation. "We had discussions with the Armenian prime minister and... some concrete positive steps are being taken." He did not elaborate on the nature of the talks.
Meanwhile, the summit ended with a diplomatic disaster for Georgia. Whereas as recently as last year Tbilisi was regarded as a likely future member of the Atlantic Alliance, the final communique of this year's summit rendered Georgia basically a non-entity. The single reference to Georgia in the document is made within the context of NATO's call for Russian troops to leave occupied Georgian territory. Mention of Georgia was conspicuously absent in the communique's section on international partnerships, which praised Moldova for its democratic reforms and Bosnia and Herzegovina for its European integration efforts.
The communique also was silent on Georgia's NATO membership prospects, including a lack of any reference to a Membership Action Plan, which is the standard pathway to membership for aspiring states. The final communique following NATO's summit last year in Vilnius contained an entire section devoted to Georgia, including an affirmation that Georgia "will become a member of the Alliance with the Membership Action Plan (MAP)."
The communique's diplomatic ghosting of Georgia is a clear reaction to the Georgian government's geopolitical pivot away from the West, in which Tbilisi has strengthened ties with China and adopted Russian-style legislation designed to restrict democratic give-and-take and cripple the ability of watchdog entities to hold officials accountable for their actions.
The Georgian government responded to the NATO communique by pretending that the alliance's omission of references to Georgia was an aberration and not a reflection of the government's policies. Defense Minister Irakli Chikovani downplayed the document's significance, stressing instead the Atlantic Alliance's general commitment to being open to new members.
The US State Department and the Georgian Foreign Ministry did not respond to requests from Eurasianet for comment at the time of publication.
Tina Bokuchava, the Georgian opposition leader and faction chair of the United National Movement, blamed NATO's evident loss of faith in Georgia's membership potential on the "isolationist policy" of Bidzina Ivanishvili, the billionaire founder of Georgia's ruling party. Bokuchava said the only way to get Georgia back on a NATO track was for an opposition coalition to win parliamentary elections scheduled for the fall.
By Ekaterina Venkina via Eurasianet.org
More Top Reads From Oilprice.com
Eurasianet is an independent news organization that covers news from and about the South Caucasus and Central Asia, providing on-the-ground reporting and critical perspectives on… More
Why No Major Oil Company Is Rushing To Drill Pakistan's Huge Oil Reserves
Peak Oil: A Looming Threat to Economic Stability
Oil Markets Are Ignoring Imminent Production Cuts By 3 OPEC+ Members
Oil Prices Drop 4.5% On Record-Bearish Sentiment from Money Managers
Russian Oil Refining Capacity Plummets 14.5%