On August 8, 2025, during President Ilham Aliyev's historic visit to Washington, US leader Donald Trump suspended the 907th amendment against Azerbaijan. However, according to US legislation, the Senate and Congress must make a decision for the full legal repeal of the issue. After the Washington meeting, the first step in this direction was taken by US House of Representatives member Anna Paulina Luna. She introduced a bill aimed at completely repealing the 907th amendment.
However, no significant changes have been observed since December 2025, when the bill was introduced.
It is interesting to know, at what stage is the process?
Modern.az website contacted Samad Seyidov, Chairman of the Milli Majlis Committee on International Relations and Interparliamentary Union, and head of the Azerbaijan-US interparliamentary working group, regarding the issue.
In a statement to our website, the committee chairman stated that everyone has now understood that the 907th amendment is contrary to US interests:
“During President Ilham Aliyev's visit to the White House on August 8, 2025, US President Donald Trump suspended the 907th amendment to the Freedom Support Act, adopted in 1992. However, according to the US Constitution, this does not mean the completion of the procedure for the full repeal of the amendment. Temporarily suspending any amendment is entirely within the authority of the US leader. The final decision is made by the Senate and Congress.
We have consistently raised the issue of this amendment in relations with the US. This amendment was an unfair and biased step against Azerbaijan. Indeed, this is an unjust approach. After the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, in New York State, the US declared war on Afghanistan. During that period, the US suspended the 907th amendment because it needed Azerbaijan's airspace and logistics.
Azerbaijan provided conditions for the US to use its airports and logistical capabilities in the fight against terrorism. In addition, Azerbaijan sent military personnel to Afghanistan within the framework of the international coalition. Azerbaijan defended the airport in Kabul and was among the last to leave the country. While defending the airport, we were, in fact, also protecting Americans.
However, after the US withdrew from Afghanistan, the perception seemed to form that there was no longer a need for Azerbaijan, and a new campaign against our country began under the influence of the Armenian lobby. Unfortunately, the Biden-Blinken administration sided with the Armenians and reinstated the 907th amendment. Such cunning and hypocrisy are rarely seen in international relations. This step negatively affected Azerbaijan-US relations.
However, after the change of power in the US, the unjust actions of the Biden-Blinken administration against Azerbaijan were ended. Overall, it is now clear to everyone that the reinstatement of the 907th amendment is contrary to US national interests. This is because this amendment did not have a real impact on an economically strengthened Azerbaijan with a reinforced army, but its moral impact remained.
From this perspective, establishing and developing relations with the US was not possible with the 907th amendment in place. Its existence inherently limited relations. The historic Washington meeting, however, resolved several important issues. Firstly, the issue of strategic partnership with the US was brought to the agenda, and a document was signed regarding the preparation of a special charter for this purpose.
Cooperation has already begun in areas such as energy, logistics, and the acquisition of military equipment. All of this would not have been possible under the conditions where the 907th amendment was in force. At the Washington meeting on August 8, 2025, Donald Trump suspended this amendment again.
Today, everyone understands that the 907th amendment is contrary to US interests and is biased. However, according to the US Constitution, the President cannot fully repeal it; he can only reduce its impact and suspend its application. The full repeal of the amendment is within the authority of Congress and the Senate, and a relevant initiative must be put forward for this.
The initiative to repeal the 907th amendment, put forward by Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna after the Washington meeting, was an extremely important and historic step.”
S. Seyidov added that two weeks ago, he met with Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna in the US and held discussions on the matter:
“A bill was once introduced by the US Senate and Congress against the Soviet Union. That law included the Jackson-Vanik amendment, which provided for the restriction of relations with the USSR. The USSR no longer exists; it disintegrated many years ago, and independent states have emerged. Nevertheless, the Jackson-Vanik amendment still remains in US legislation.
Due to the specifics of US legislation, the repeal of such adopted amendments is an extremely difficult process. For the full repeal of the 907th amendment, a bill must be introduced in Congress, discussed in accordance with special procedural rules, and then the same bill must be submitted to the Senate. After being passed by both chambers, it must be put to a final vote.
For this reason, the process is long, complex, and multi-staged. Currently, work in this direction is actively continuing. I have recently been to the US and met with Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna two weeks ago. We discussed this issue in detail.
However, given the complexity of the procedure, it would not be correct to expect results in a short period. This is a long-term process, and immediate results are not realistic. Nevertheless, this is a necessary and possible process, and we continue our activities in this direction. There is no halt or delay here.”
It should be noted that the 907th amendment has been one of the most controversial topics in US-Azerbaijan relations since the early 1990s, and its application has only been temporarily suspended with exceptions during various administrations. The adoption of a new bill could result in the complete removal of the legal basis for these restrictions.
Observers believe that bringing the document to the Congressional agenda can be regarded as an important signal of a new political stage in US-Azerbaijan relations and a change in Washington's geopolitical approach in the region.
