BAKU, Azerbaijan, August 8. To view the events
that took place in Washington on August 8, 2025, solely as a
meeting between the leaders of Azerbaijan, Armenia, and the US, the
initialing of a peace agreement, and the signing of a Joint
Declaration is to fail to fully capture the political significance
of that day.
A year later, when assessing this date in a broader context, a
larger picture emerges: following a long-standing conflict,
Azerbaijan has charted a consistent course toward consolidating the
new realities not only in the military-political sphere, but also
in the diplomatic, legal, economic, and transportation spheres.
Washington, in turn, has become one of the most important
milestones of this course on the international political stage.
The Broader Political Context Behind August
8
To understand the essence of the Washington summit, we need to
take a step back and examine the events that preceded what happened
that day at the White House. After all, August 8, 2025, was not a
diplomatic outcome that materialized in an instant. It was driven
by the new realities that had taken shape in the South Caucasus
after 2020, the peace initiative put forward by Azerbaijan, the
negotiation process between the two nations, and efforts to define
the future legal framework for interstate relations.
The key feature of Azerbaijan’s approach was that its goal was
not to keep the postwar situation in a state of uncertainty, but to
consolidate the new reality through legal and political mechanisms.
To this end, Baku proposed drafting a peace treaty and outlined
five fundamental principles.
These five principles formed the political foundation for
subsequent negotiations. According to Azerbaijan’s position, a
lasting peace is possible only through the recognition of mutual
sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the inviolability of
borders; the rejection of territorial claims against one another;
and the establishment of interstate relations based on the
fundamental principles of international law.
Thus, Azerbaijan’s peace agenda was not merely a diplomatic move
undertaken after the war, but a strategy to transform the military
outcome into a political and legal result. The position articulated
by President Ilham Aliyev in Washington also emphasized that
drafting a peace treaty following the end of the war is the next
logical step.
In this regard, the key question on August 8 is not “What
happened in Washington?” but “To what level has the peace agenda
formulated by Azerbaijan in Washington been elevated?”
Turning Victory into a Political
Outcome
The 2020 war changed the previous status quo in the South
Caucasus. The full restoration of Azerbaijan’s sovereignty over
Karabakh in 2023 effectively brought the military-political phase
of the conflict to an end.
After that, we faced an entirely different task: establishing a
new system of relations between the two states in place of the
former conflict.
It was precisely here that an important feature of Azerbaijan’s
diplomatic approach became apparent. Baku did not opt for a policy
of maintaining the status quo or continuing the confrontation after
its military victory. On the contrary, it proposed an initiative to
legally enshrine the new reality in a peace agreement.
This point is also emphasized in the documents: Azerbaijan is
presented as the initiator of the five principles outlined in the
peace agreement, and the signing of the agreement on August 8 is
assessed as the result of a long-term diplomatic strategy.
This fits into the broader logic of Azerbaijan’s foreign policy.
The goal was not only to end the war but also to shape the postwar
period in accordance with Azerbaijan’s national interests.
The True Essence of the Washington
Documents
The political significance of the Joint Declaration signed on
August 8 lies, first and foremost, in the consolidation of several
parallel processes into a single document.
The leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia witnessed the signing by
the foreign ministers of the agreed-upon text of the agreement on
peace and the establishment of interstate relations. At the same
time, the need for additional measures to sign and ratify the
agreement was identified.
This detail is particularly important. After all, the signed
text was not the final peace treaty itself. In other words,
Washington did not define the endpoint of the peace process, but
rather a decisive stage for the legal finalization of the political
agreement.
On the other hand, a key part of the documents was the signing
by the foreign ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia of a joint
statement calling for the closure of the OSCE Minsk Process and its
associated structures.
This step is more than symbolic. After all, the Minsk mechanism
was created specifically to resolve the Azerbaijani-Armenian
conflict. The fact that the conflict has already entered a new
phase in a new reality has made it necessary to consign this
mechanism to history.
Thus, on the one hand, a new peace mechanism has been
established in Washington, and on the other, a step has been taken
toward closing one of the main elements of the conflict’s former
architecture.
The Post-Minsk Phase
This phase reveals a broader political outcome.
For more than thirty years, efforts to resolve the
Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict have been conducted within the
framework of international mediation mechanisms. However, a final
resolution has not been achieved. In this new phase, responsibility
for the process is being transferred directly to Baku and
Yerevan.
According to the Azerbaijani Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the
termination of the Minsk Process and its associated structures was
one of the issues that Azerbaijan had continued to advance on its
agenda since 2020, and this step is viewed as the removal of one of
the major obstacles to the peace process.
This signifies a shift in the model of mediation in the South
Caucasus. Whereas the main question used to be, “How will the
conflict be resolved?”, the key question now is, “What legal and
economic mechanisms will be used to consolidate peace?”
The Trump Factor and the Choice of
Washington
The choice of Washington also carried its own distinct political
significance.
President Ilham Aliyev’s visit to Washington at the invitation
of U.S. President Donald Trump brought together two key themes on a
single platform: the peace agenda in Azerbaijan and Armenia, and
the transition of Azerbaijani-American relations to a new
phase.
On the first day of the visit, President Ilham Aliyev met with
U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, and the signing of a memorandum
of cooperation between SOCAR and ExxonMobil already demonstrated
that the visit’s agenda was not limited to political issues.
The following day, President Ilham Aliyev met with President
Donald Trump at the White House. Later, the two countries signed a
memorandum of understanding on the establishment of a Strategic
Working Group to draft a Charter of Strategic Partnership.
Thus, the Washington meeting yielded two parallel outcomes: a
political foundation for a transition toward peace in
Azerbaijani-Armenian relations and an institutional foundation for
a strategic partnership in Azerbaijani-American relations.
A New Chapter in Baku-Washington
Relations
The establishment of the Strategic Working Group is not a
typical diplomatic mechanism. According to the document, the plan
was to draft a Strategic Partnership Charter within the next six
months. The group’s scope of activity included regional ties,
particularly in energy, trade, and transit; artificial intelligence
and digital infrastructure; economic investment; defense; security;
and counterterrorism.
Taken together, it becomes clear that Azerbaijani-American
relations are no longer viewed exclusively through the prism of
energy and security.
Energy remains as important as ever, but alongside it, transit,
digital technologies, artificial intelligence, investment, and
defense cooperation are also developing. This implies a transition
toward a more multifaceted model of relations.
President Ilham Aliyev also spoke highly of the results of the
visit and stated that a new chapter has begun in
Azerbaijani-American relations — a chapter of cooperation and
strategic partnership.
This assessment is one of the main points explaining the essence
of the visit to Washington.
Repeal of Amendment 907
Another important outcome of the visit was the decision to
suspend the application of Amendment 907 to the U.S. “Support for
Freedom” Act.
This issue, which had remained unresolved for many years in
Azerbaijani-American relations, was particularly politically
sensitive. The Azerbaijani Ministry of Foreign Affairs viewed the
suspension of Amendment 907 as an important step toward eliminating
the negative legacy of the past in bilateral relations.
This is not merely about the removal of a technical restriction.
In a broader sense, this decision signaled a shift in the previous
political framework governing Washington’s relations with Baku.
Thus, August 8 became a date that marked the end of certain
elements of the previous phase in both Azerbaijani-Armenian
relations and Azerbaijani-American cooperation.
TRIPP: Economic Support for Peace
One of the most strategically important elements of the
Washington documents is the “Trump Route for International Peace
and Prosperity” project—TRIPP.
According to the documents, the project aims to ensure unimpeded
connectivity between the main part of Azerbaijan and the Nakhchivan
Autonomous Republic through Armenian territory.
It would be incorrect to view this project solely as a
transportation issue.
In fact, the idea is to transform the geography of the South
Caucasus—which for many years has been defined by conflicts and
closed borders—into a landscape of economic ties.
If the connection between Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan through
Armenian territory is fully realized, it will not only facilitate
communication between the two parts of Azerbaijan. The new route
could expand connections with Turkey and, more broadly, the
capabilities of the East-West transportation system.
Thus, an economic dimension of peace emerges: a geography that
was yesterday the subject of conflicts and confrontations is today
becoming an opportunity for trade, transit, and investment.
This could become one of the strongest guarantees of peace.
Because as real economic interests take shape alongside a political
agreement, the economic costs of violating it also increase.
The Energy Sector Is Once Again Moving Closer to the
U.S.
The economic implications of the visit to Washington extend
beyond TRIPP.
The memorandum of cooperation signed between SOCAR and
ExxonMobil could mark a new phase of collaboration with U.S.
companies in Azerbaijan’s energy sector.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs reported that the document
covers potential cooperation in assessing both conventional and
unconventional opportunities in the oil and gas industry.
This is particularly significant, as the foundation of the
Azerbaijani-American energy partnership was laid in the 1990s. Now,
this cooperation is being revitalized amid new geopolitical and
technological conditions.
Thus, during the visit to Washington, the energy issue was on
the agenda not only as a reminder of past successes but also as an
opportunity to explore new investment and technological
possibilities.
The statistics already paint a positive
picture.
When assessing the results of the Washington Summit one year
later, the most interesting aspect is not only the political
documents but also the changes that have occurred in economic
statistics.
Trade ties between Azerbaijan and Armenia, which had been
virtually nonexistent for many years, have already begun to be
reflected in official statistics.
In the first half of 2026, the volume of Azerbaijan’s exports to
Armenia reached approximately $17.1 million. This figure remains
modest compared to the economic potential of the two countries.
However, what matters most here is not the size of the figure, but
its political significance.
This marks the beginning of actual economic transactions between
two countries that have been in a state of conflict for
decades.
In the first five months of 2026, trade between Azerbaijan and
Armenia totaled $11,273,000. Of this amount, $11,272,000 came from
Azerbaijan’s exports to Armenia, while imports from Armenia totaled
just $1,000.
The bulk of exports consisted of heavy distillates and gas oils,
including diesel fuel, amounting to $9,426,000, motor
gasoline—$1,167,000, motor gasoline with specific technical
characteristics—$672,000, and plastic construction components worth
$6,000.
These figures point to a significant shift: in
Azerbaijani-Armenian relations, economic cooperation is no longer
viewed solely as a prospect for the future—it has, in fact, begun
to take shape.
Fuel exports are particularly noteworthy from a political
standpoint. The fact that two countries that once waged war against
each other now act as buyer and seller of energy resources is one
of the most concrete indicators of the new realities that have
taken shape in the region.
Washington’s Second Outcome for
Azerbaijan
Thus, the consequences of August 8 cannot be assessed solely in
the context of the Baku–Yerevan axis.
On the same day, Azerbaijan entered a new phase in its relations
with the United States as well.
The creation of the Strategic Working Group, the inclusion of
energy and transit issues on the agenda, plans for cooperation in
the fields of artificial intelligence and digital infrastructure,
the expansion of investment and security initiatives, the
suspension of the application of the 907 Amendment, and the signing
of a memorandum between SOCAR and ExxonMobil may appear to be
separate events. However, in reality, they are different elements
of a single strategic approach.
Azerbaijan presents itself not only as a party advocating for
peace in the South Caucasus, but also as one of the key players in
the region’s new economic and transportation architecture.
The United States, for its part, is demonstrating the potential
to shift its relations with Azerbaijan into a broader strategic
framework.
The Main Problem Facing the Peace
Process
Despite all these positive results, we must not overlook one
important aspect of the Washington documents: on August 8, only the
agreed-upon text of the peace treaty was signed.
The Joint Declaration clearly stated that additional measures
are necessary for the signing and possible ratification of the
agreement.
From Azerbaijan’s perspective, the removal of territorial claims
against Azerbaijan from the Armenian Constitution is one of the key
issues for signing the peace treaty. This issue is also
particularly emphasized in the materials released by the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs.
This is, in essence, a matter of principle from the standpoint
of the very nature of peace.
This is because peace must be reinforced not only by the
political will of the two leaders, but also by legal mechanisms
that account for the possibility of that will changing in the
future.
Once the peace treaty is signed, its ratification and
incorporation into the domestic legal system will mean that the
political agreement becomes an institutional guarantee.
The True Significance of August 8
August 8, 2025, holds significance for the South Caucasus that
extends far beyond a single date.
On this day, with the initialing of the agreed text of the peace
agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia, an important step was
taken toward legally enshrining the political outcomes of a
conflict that had lasted more than three decades. At the same time,
a joint step was taken toward ending the activities of the Minsk
Process and its associated structures, marking a departure from one
of the key elements of the previous conflict architecture.
The peace agenda, shaped on the basis of the five principles put
forward by Azerbaijan, received international political endorsement
in Washington.
At the same time, a new phase began in relations between
Azerbaijan and the United States. An institutional mechanism was
established to draft a Strategic Partnership Charter, and an agenda
was defined covering a wide range of areas, including energy,
trade, transit, investment, artificial intelligence, digital
infrastructure, defense, and security. The suspension of the
application of the 907 Amendment took on particular significance in
terms of resolving a political issue that had lingered in relations
between the two countries from the previous period.
The TRIPP project has placed all these processes within a
broader regional context. The idea of establishing a connection
between the main part of Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan through Armenian
territory creates a new mechanism linking the region with
transportation and economic interests.
The fact that trade between Azerbaijan and Armenia is already
appearing in official statistics just one year later is one of the
first indicators that the process is moving from political
documents to actual implementation. Fuel exports to Armenia are
particularly symbolic in this regard: the two countries, which were
once parties to the conflict, have now begun to establish economic
relations, at least in certain areas.
All of this points to one truth: the essence of the Washington
meeting lies not only in the signing of a peace treaty.
The real changes lie in the fact that Azerbaijan is gradually
transforming the new post-war status quo into a system of peace,
law, diplomacy, transportation, energy, and economic
cooperation.
This also reflects Azerbaijan’s position regarding the political
leadership of this process. The reality that changed on the
military front in 2020 shifted to the diplomatic and legal spheres
in the following years; in 2023, a new phase began with the full
restoration of Azerbaijan’s sovereignty; And on August 8, 2025, a
historic step was taken toward transforming this reality into an
agenda for global and regional cooperation.
The main task now is to bring this process to its final stage:
signing the initial text, ratification, strengthening mutual trust,
opening communication channels, and expanding economic ties.
If these stages are completed, August 8, 2025, will go down in
history not only as a turning point in the Azerbaijani-Armenian
peace process, but also as the beginning of a new post-conflict
political and economic order in the South Caucasus.
And the defining feature of this new order—conceived by
President Ilham Aliyev- will no longer be the preservation of the
status quo of the past, but rather the institutionalization of the
reality created by Azerbaijan through peace and cooperation.
