Armenian civil society representatives laud meeting with Azerbaijani counterparts for promoting constructive engagement

The Armenian founding members of the Armenian-Azerbaijani "Peace Bridge" initiative have summarized the outcome of the meetings held in Armenia with Azerbaijani experts.

On 13–14 February 2026, a bilateral roundtable was held in Armenia within the framework of the “Peace Bridge” initiative, bringing together representatives of the civil societies of Armenia and Azerbaijan. In addition to the core participants of the "Peace Bridge" initiative, this roundtable also involved a broader group of participants from both sides.

Areg Kochinyan – National Coordinator, President of the Armenian Council, said at a press briefing that the initiative has already grown into a stable format.

“This is a format guided by its own rules, which will continue. Besides the main meetings, the parties also do serious homework. In both countries, the delegations organize meetings with representatives of civil society, media, and expert communities. Initiatives in all directions are working to create as inclusive an environment as possible. In addition, there are agreements on joint projects. We are writing joint articles and conducting research, the results of which we will soon make public,” said Kochinyan.

He added that the parties have the opportunity to raise and discuss all issues that concern their societies. According to him, the Armenian side proposed that the Azerbaijani delegates arrive via land route. The authorities of both countries welcomed this idea and implemented it. Kochinyan recalled that meetings in this format take place with the direct support and funding of the governments.

“Our goal is not to erase our history, our disagreements, or the pain that exists within our and their societies. Our aim, alongside addressing the burdens formed over the past decades, is to also develop projects that serve a peace agenda, hold discussions, and try to create a positive portfolio, supporting the resolution of existing issues by putting forward concrete ideas,” said Kochinyan.

Peace Bridge initiative member Naira Sultanyan noted that their goal is to normalize direct contacts, discuss the concerns of both sides in a constructive environment, and not miss opportunities to create mutually beneficial initiatives that have arisen at this stage.

“Our aim is to convey the Armenian agenda to decision-makers in Azerbaijan, as well as to their society. Many of us actively give interviews there as well. We also strive to involve Armenian civil society in these processes, because it is essential for the process to be inclusive. Of course, during the last meeting, the parties freely discussed the humanitarian issues that concern them. In our case, that is primarily the issue of captives, although our group does not have the authority to influence the processes in any way, it does have the opportunity to shape public opinion,” said Sultanyan.

She added that, once again, they tried to explain to their Azerbaijani counterparts why the presence of captives in Baku does not fit within the logic of the current peace processes. Both sides also raised the issue of those missing in the wars. According to Sultanyan, the process is moving very quickly for both societies, and people on both sides find it difficult to fully digest it, but there is an opportunity to move forward together. In her view, the societies have matured enough to discuss the future, but have not yet matured enough to discuss the painful past.

Boris Navasardyan noted that the parties are interested in ensuring that the discussions cover as many areas as possible.

“Without the involvement of the human rights communities of the two countries, the work will be less effective; therefore, the role of NGOs is also very important. The parties are interested in discussing what kind of language is used in public materials and how place names are used by both sides. On a voluntary basis, certain understandings can be reached here that would reduce tensions in the current information environment. A fairly interesting discussion also took place in the environmental sphere regarding the use of water resources, which is important not only for the two countries but for all neighboring states as well,” said Navasardyan.

He added that opportunities for cooperation in the business sector are gaining increasing importance, especially since private business representatives in Armenia and Azerbaijan are interested in each other’s markets. According to him, consumers are also interested, and therefore products from the two countries may generate mutual interest. In Navasardyan’s view, ideas emerging on this platform will also contribute to further cooperation in the economic sphere, particularly given the wide range of sectors involved.

Initiative member Narek Minasyan noted that both sides view the current situation as a window of opportunity. The negotiation process related to the conflict has lasted for decades; however, in recent times, especially experts and politicians, he said, have been looking back and, through analysis, speaking about missed opportunities.

“We are confident that within the context of the peace process, we have another window of opportunity that must not be missed. This initiative cannot achieve one hundred percent success, given that the process does not depend solely on us. There are various external and internal factors; nevertheless, missing this opportunity would be a mistake.

During the discussions, the focus is not on becoming friends or forgetting the pain and the past, but rather on building bridges of dialogue and developing ideas related to the future. No matter how heavy the legacy of the past may be, we must try to find those common points on the basis of which we can move forward and make the peace process irreversible,” said Minasyan.

He emphasized the importance of forming realistic expectations within the framework of this initiative. According to him, during the meetings both sides present their concerns and priorities; therefore, the initiative has a certain positive impact both in terms of changing narratives and generating different ideas. Minasyan also highlighted the importance of transparency in the meetings.

Initiative member Samvel Meliksetyan noted that bilateral contacts provide an additional opportunity to better understand each side’s approaches. As a result, a more detailed picture of mutual perceptions is formed.

“For us, the unblocking of communication routes is also very important, and it must take place under equal conditions and be comprehensive. Azerbaijan seeks to establish a connection with Kars via Nakhchivan through the TRIPP project, but if only that single route is launched, Armenia would find itself in a semi-isolated situation. Meanwhile, there is the Gyumri–Yeraskh–Meghri railway, which should also be put into operation. The impression is that the Azerbaijani side is not opposed and supports comprehensive approaches, but there is a competitive element, and it tries to prioritize its own projects. The shape these communications will take also depends on the work carried out on the Armenian side; therefore, within this process we have proposed various approaches. It is important to first have road communication, and then railway communication,” said Meliksetyan.

In his view, by understanding the perceptions of the Azerbaijani side, the Armenian side is able to formulate its own steps and expectations more clearly on a realistic basis, also recognizing that the other side will move slowly and take any new steps with certain intervals. Nevertheless, according to Meliksetyan, such contacts and meetings are very useful, which is one of the advantages of this format.