Bridging East and West: Azerbaijan’s Diplomatic Balancing Act and Vision for Peace

From deepening energy and diplomatic ties with the European Union to unprecedented progress toward peace with Armenia, the Ambassador outlines a vision of Azerbaijan as a sovereign, independent actor that is determined not to be tethered to any single power center. Touching on regional conflicts, including the war in Ukraine and tensions in the Middle East, he speaks candidly about the challenges and opportunities ahead—particularly through strengthening ties with Greece and ensuring stability through diplomacy.

Ambassador Elchin Amirbayov, Azerbaijan President’s representative on Special Assignments.

Ambassador, you said recently that Baku aims to build pragmatic relations with all the major international actors and does not intend to depend on any single geopolitical center. Can you elaborate on that? Who are these actors, and does that also include the European Union?

Thank you for your question. I meant that Azerbaijan has chosen to pursue a multi-vectoral, balanced and pragmatic foreign policy based on our own assessment and perception of our national interests. In other words, given our geographical position, rather than joining pro-Western or pro-Eastern alliances of any kind, we have always opted to build highly predictable and positive relations with all of our neighbors–except one: Armenia. However, given the fact that the conflict with Armenia is over, we are now trying to start a new chapter in our relations with Yerevan, too.

With regards to our independent political standing, we consider it one of the prerequisites for remaining sovereign and independent, and not dependent on any one power center. As they say, it’s not good to put all of your eggs in one basket. Which is why we try to build highly pragmatic relations with major international power centers like the United States and the European Union, as well as with big neighbors like Russia, Iran and Turkey. And at the same time, it allows us to be considered credible partners by different interlocutors. That is why I think Azerbaijan’s foreign policy can be considered unique.

So, do you consider the EU to be an ally?

Yes, we consider the EU to be one of our strategic partners, because we have had a very close relationship in the field of energy for decades now. This is particularly crucial now in today’s turbulent geopolitical realities, with the Russia-Ukraine war and its implications for relations between the EU and Russia.

Azerbaijan is one of those countries which wants to serve as an alternative source of energy. And Azerbaijan is proud to be contributing to Europe’s energy security already through the provision of natural gas and crude oil to ten EU member states. Of course, another factor that unites Azerbaijan and Greece is the so-called Southern Gas Corridor and the segment of the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) which passes through Greece. So Greece and Azerbaijan are jointly contributing to European energy security as a transit country and a provider of natural gas, respectively.

However, our relations with the European Union go well beyond energy. And I have to say that, as of this year, we have witnessed a positive dynamic and desire on the part of Brussels to reset this relationship. As a result, from being on pause for a time, Azerbaijan- EU engagement is now taking place at the highest level. Our latest meeting was in Tirana on the sidelines of the European Political Community summit, where President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev met President of the European Council Antonio Costa and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen. And before that, in April, we were paid a visit by High Representative Kaya Kallas.

Consequently, since these discussions, we have already had a security dialogue with the EU at the end of May. In June, just a couple of weeks ago, we had another round of energy talks in Brussels. And when we talk about energy, it’s good to remember that here, too, we are trying to diversify the portfolio of our cooperation past hydrocarbons and fossil fuels to include cooperation in green energy, because Azerbaijan has enormous potential in renewable energy sources. We are also planning to export electricity to European markets along submarine cables running through the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea in partnership with several EU member states. So even energy-wise, we want to be one of the countries exporting clean energy to Europe.

Then there is the EU’s growing interest in the issue of connectivity. The so-called Middle Corridor, or Trans-Caspian Transportation Corridor, links Central Asia with the Southern Caucasus, and thus East Asia with Western Europe. So connectivity and transportation are another pivotal field of potential cooperation. That is why we plan to engage in a transportation dialogue with the EU soon. Additionally, we agreed with the European Union that we should revisit our so-called partnership priorities, since the realities on the ground have changed. We also want to resume negotiations on the new comprehensive cooperation agreement between the EU and Azerbaijan.

In answer to your question, all these examples show that that the EU and Azerbaijan are on the threshold of a completely new relationship, qualitatively speaking, which I believe responds to the interests of both the EU and Azerbaijan—especially given our history of cooperation and our geographical location, mineral resources and role as a gateway linking Europe to Central Asia. For all these reasons, I think the EU and Azerbaijan are right to try and extend this partnership further and to upgrade it to the level of a strategic partnership not only in the field of energy, but to cover other fields, too.

Are you worried that the war in Ukraine will drag on and on, since there seems to be little indication that President Putin and Russia want peace? How does that affect Azerbaijan?

We are neighbours with both Ukraine and Russia and enjoy good relations with both, so we can only be worried and concerned by the indications that there seems to be no rapid end to this tragic situation. At the same time, we know that the international community is doing its best to find a way to stop the bloodshed. We believe that peaceful dialogue and negotiations could be the only sure way to find a solution. However, given the complexity of the situation, and the fact the views of the two sides remain diametrically opposed, it will be very difficult to find the right formula.

Yes, but Russia is the aggressor: Russia invaded a sovereign country.

Azerbaijan has made its position clear from the start: we support Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. This is because Azerbaijan acts on the basis of international law–in part, because we have ourselves suffered from violations of international law in the past. Indeed, a fifth of our territory was under illegal foreign occupation for 30 years.

We also understand that it will be very difficult to find a solution through fighting. And the European Union, the United States, and every reasonable actor who would like to put an end to this tragic situation, agrees.

You mentioned at the start of our discussion that your relationship with Armenia is improving. Do you believe you’re getting closer to peace, closer to establishing good relations with Armenia after so many years? You were a member of the negotiating team, if I’m not mistaken, so you know what’s going on.

Yes, and I can confirm that Armenia and Azerbaijan have never been closer to peace than they are today. And I say that in the light of the concrete progress we have made since we started to negotiate the concrete text of the peace agreement.

I should note that, right after the end of the second Karabakh war, Azerbaijan decided to come up with a list of fundamental principles which could form the basis of the peace agreement. We then drafted the peace agreement and proposed it to Armenia. Two and a half years later, in March 2025, both our ministries of foreign affairs announced that the text was agreed ad referendum. Now, before signing the text of the peace agreement we must do what it takes in order to make sure that the peace is lasting, sustainable and irreversible. But for it to be irreversible and sustainable, we need to make sure the text does not contravene the legal or constitutional frameworks of both countries. And here we hit a problem: the Armenian constitution. Because it still enshrines a territorial claim to part of Azerbaijan’s territory: the Karabakh.

Of course, that constitution was adopted in the early 90s, so it reflects neither the reality today nor the current position of the Armenian government. Prime Minister Pashinyan and his team have said on numerous occasions that they recognize Azerbaijan’s sovereignty over Karabakh, which means they must also recognize its territorial integrity. And that is what the peace agreement says. But this contradiction between the constitution and the peace agreement in unacceptable, must be removed since it can undermine prospects of durable peace.

But changing a constitution is never easy. I know that’s the case for Greece, at least.

We understand that, but there are numerous examples of countries changing their constitutions when peace was at stake. North Macedonia, for instance, or the Good Friday Agreement, for which Ireland resolved to address a territorial claim in search of long-term peace. So while we can agree it’s not an easy thing to do, I think it is the only way to achieve peace in the long term.

And if you look at the essence of what we expect from Armenia, there’s nothing out of the ordinary there. We simply want them to formalize their position, which is that Karabakh is part of Azerbaijan. We don’t want the constitution to serve as a new irritator or as a reversal mechanism for the peace agreement. And that’s why I believe that Armenia has every reason to align their constitutional framework with their actual position .

Now let’s talk about relations between Athens and Baku. You came to Greece, so is our relationship growing stronger now?

Well, I can say we consider 2024 to have been a very good year. We are glad we were able to restore our political dialogue after a hiatus. We were very happy that political consultations took place in Baku last year between the two foreign ministries. We also had the first meeting in eight years of the intergovernmental joint committee on economic, industrial and technological cooperation, which came up with an action plan and identified concrete areas for possible cooperation. Our foreign ministers also conducted meetings. Last but not least, there was the very important visit which Prime Minister Mitsotakis made to Azerbaijan in November to attend the COP29 Global Climate Summit. We appreciated this decision by your Prime Minister, who also used this visit as an opportunity to have a bilateral meeting with President Ilham Aliyev. The two also met in Sofia, at the opening ceremony of the Greece-Bulgaria Gas Interconnector, where they had a highly productive and useful exchange of views on how to take our bilateral relationship further.

We established diplomatic relations with Greece back in ’92. Over the intervening 33 years, we have enjoyed periods of excellent relations, where–in the energy field, at least–we remained completely aligned. And now, of course, we are both part of the Southern Gas Corridor, which is the most important mechanism for providing natural gas to Western markets.

One area where we think we could do better is trade, because I think the current figures do not reflect the potential that exists. We believe our bilateral trade could increase in diversity as well as quantity. The meeting of the joint committee was valuable, in part, because we were able to identify a series of domains in which we can do better: trade and investment, agriculture, transportation, healthcare, tourism and culture.

It is also important that Athens and Baku agree that relations between Greece and Azerbaijan should be free from any outside influence. Why do we say that? Well, I wouldn’t name a particular country, but you can imagine that not everyone is happy about this relationship–Armenia, for example, which has a very close relationship with Greece. Still, we reject zero-sum approaches and firmly believe that if one country has excellent relations with another, that does not prevent that country from having excellent relations with a third nation. The main criteria here should be every country’s assessment of its own national interests. So, today, I feel that there is a growing understanding that Greece could have equally good relations with both Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Still, it is a key important prerequisite, I think, for our nations to move forward, because I think we have enough reasons and opportunities to take this relationship forward in an efficient way, if we try not to allow external factors to keep our relations hostage. That’s why I believe we are moving forward.

We are very happy that Aegean Airlines has restored its direct flights between Athens and Baku. From what I hear, planes are full, which shows that there is considerable interest among Greeks and Azerbaijanis alike to discover each other’s countries and cultures and foster people-to-people contacts. I think we have always had a very positive impression of ancient Greek culture, history, music and so on. I know we teach Greek in Azerbaijani universities, too, and there are many Azerbaijanis who choose to learn it as a foreign language. I think the same could be done in Greek universities. Last but not least, we might also pay more attention to improving our inter-parliamentary ties, because I am a firm believer in parliamentary diplomacy. I feel that parliamentarians, as the elected representatives of the people, have a special role to play in strengthening friendship. I think our countries deserve a healthy relationship that is not dependent on any other factors, and I am happy to hear that my Greek counterparts share this point of view.

I have one last question and it is about the Middle East. You talked about Iran and your relations with Tehran, and we saw what happened with the bombing and everything. Are you optimistic about the Middle East after all?

Well, it’s a very difficult question to answer. I wish I had a crystal ball, but I don’t. I believe that, as countries which some consider part of a greater Middle East, both Azerbaijan and Greece are inclined to support any efforts which could de-escalate the tensions. We were very worried and unhappy with this military escalation in our backyard, which we condemn. And, of course, we support the resolution of differences between nations through dialogue and diplomacy in every case. Because we have seen over and over again that choosing the military option rarely produces a magic solution. Of course, wars also have consequences for regional and international stability and security. Especially in this conflict between two nations close to us: Iran, a historic neighbor, a country with which we share a lot of common history and with which we have developed pragmatic economic relations, and Israel, which is a strategic partner of Azerbaijan, as it is of Greece. So we will try to encourage both parties to privilege diplomatic and political routes to solving their problem.

Thank you so much. Thank you.