Provocative Armenian Constitution: What prevents Pashinyan from acting on amending preamble?

By Fatime Letifova

Until the 19th century, there was no state named Armenia or any territory belonging to Armenians in the South Caucasus. All historical sources indicate that present-day Armenia was once part of the Christianization policies implemented by Tsarist Russia in the region. As a result of these policies, there was prolonged ethnic cleansing and genocides committed against Azerbaijanis.

Having adhered to some traditions left by the tsarist Russia, the policy of the former Soviet regime led to the creation of a fabricated Armenian state in the South Caucasus. The city of Yerevan, which is now presented as the capital of Armenia, was once part of Azerbaijani territory.

Using the protection of other states, the Armenian government later set its sights on other Azerbaijani territories. Thus, starting from the 1980s, the Armenian army carried out plans to occupy Azerbaijan's Garabagh. Those provocations and occupation, which continued until 2020, ended with the counteroffensive operations of the Azerbaijani Army. In September 2023, local anti-terror measures neutralized separatist elements trying to create a second so-called "state" in the region that is reflected in the current "Armenian constitution'.

Peace talks between the two countries began for the first time in 30 years. The meeting of foreign ministers in Almaty in May was a significant contribution to the potential peace agreement in the South Caucasus. However, the presence of territorial claims against Azerbaijani land in the Armenian constitution remains a potential threat to the peace process exacerbating already-tense relations between the two countries.

It is worth noting that although there have been several constitutional amendments in Armenia, the articles referencing the unification of Garabagh with Armenia in the Declaration of Independence have not been changed. Last month, on Armenia's Constitution Day, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan stated that the country needs a new constitution.

However, after this proposal, protests against Pashinyan's peace-oriented steps increased. Even Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan has voiced opinions contrary to Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan's statements. Since Pashinyan came to power, he has made various remarks about amending the Armenian constitution. On January 19, the Prime Minister had already declared that the country needs a new constitution.

In a comment for Azernews on the issue, Patrick Walsh, an Irish historian and political analyst, said that the Armenian Constitution is very provocative.

"The Armenian Constitution is both provocative and outdated, and an offence to international law and Azerbaijan’s sovereignty, so it makes it unlikely that a peace settlement can be concluded while Armenia asserts a Constitutional claim on Azerbaijani territory. The articles refer to miatsum and quite obviously this is dead and buried since 2020. In fact, the Yerevan government did not attempt to put the Constitutional claim into action when there was a chance," he added.

The expert commented on Pashinyan's attempts for a new constitution.

"Pashinyan has indicated on a number of occasions he desires a new Constitution for Armenia, but his problem is in bringing this about. He has opposition which will attempt to use the issue against him to bring him down. To copperfasten and make for an enduring treaty settlement with Azerbaijan the Armenian public does need to be brought along with an all-encompassing deal, with a validating referendum.

I would guess that in the end some form of choreography will be worked out as in the 1998 Northern Ireland peace agreement. This would involve a parallel process in which the Armenians have a take it or leave it offer in return for signing up to a comprehensive agreement. The agreement would depend on a referendum deleting the articles and finally ratification of the deal by both Armenia and Azerbaijan in parallel," the historian stressed.

In his comment on the same issue, British expert Neil Watson explained the miastsum concept that Armenia still holds in its ambiguous constitution.

Watson says the concept of miatsum - Armenian claims on the Azerbaijani region of Garabagh written in the preamble to its constitution - is now the major hurdle in achieving a peace treaty, particularly at a time when the negotiations are purely bilateral. In my view, we will see no change to the constitution before a referendum in 2026, but we could see a framework agreement from Armenia that would indicate a genuine plan for a change and this could form the basis for further understanding leading to the striking of a peace treaty before the end of the year," the expert noted.

Furthermore, pro-Armenian forces in the West and Russia have begun to pressure the Pashinyan government and delay peace through various means. It is naturally difficult to say whether Pashinyan has maintained a strong resolve against these protests. For instance, the engagement of a US representative in the army and the European Union's gift of a modest sum of 10 million euros to the Armenian army seem to have diverted Pashinyan from pursuing peace and caused him to avoid meetings in the West-suggested peace platforms.

Currently, there are three main issues obstructing peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia:

1. The Armenian government must provide an official report to Baku regarding the fate of Azerbaijani prisoners and missing persons from the first Garabagh War.
2. The transfer of accurate minefield maps planted in Garabagh to Azerbaijan.
3. The repeal of territorial claims against Azerbaijani land in the Armenian Constitution.

Armenia continues to reject the peace conditions proposed by Azerbaijan, engage in provocations at the border, and increase tensions in the South Caucasus. The resolution of these key issues obstructing peace remains delayed.