The Second Karabakh War went down in history as an event that fundamentally changed the geopolitical map of the South Caucasus. This war did not only end with the restoration of territorial integrity, but also destroyed the status quo that had lasted for decades in the region. Azerbaijan formed a new reality with a military-political victory, and this reality directly affected the behavior model of the countries in the region. The situation that arose after the war showed that the concept of "frozen conflict" is already a thing of the past. The new stage has begun to be built on cooperation, opening of communication lines and integration.
In this context, a completely different geopolitical stage has begun for Armenia. This country, which has functioned as a outpost in the region for many years, is gradually forced to move away from that status. In particular, the model of dependence on Russia no longer seems as effective as before. The search for alternative security and development models has intensified in Armenian society and political elite. This can actually be considered as the beginning of the process of exiting Russia's vassalage system.
It is interesting that this transformation is accompanied not only by losses, but also by gains in a certain sense. For the first time, Armenia has faced real regional cooperation opportunities. If these opportunities are used correctly, the country can emerge from a long-term blockade. In this regard, the results of the 44-day war paradoxically open new perspectives for Armenia as well.
Azerbaijan, on the other hand, does not act only as the winning side in this process. Official Baku has become the main actor actively promoting the peace agenda in the post-conflict period. Azerbaijan showed the international community that military victory is a platform for peace, not for revanchism. This approach is also clearly observed on the diplomatic level. Baku comes up with initiatives for regional cooperation and opening of communications at every step.
In this context, the role of the Turkey factor should be specially noted. Ankara acts as one of the main promoters of the normalization process in the region after the war. Turkey's steps aimed at restoring relations with Armenia are a clear example of this. Finally, the meeting of Turkish Vice President Cevdet Yılmaz with Nikol Pashinyan within the framework of the European Political Community Summit held in Yerevan is considered as a continuation of this process.
It is no coincidence that cooperation opportunities in areas such as transport, customs, energy and digital infrastructure were discussed during the meeting. This shows that a new economic integration model is being formed in the region. In particular, the issue of opening communication lines can determine the future economic architecture of the South Caucasus.
From a symbolic point of view, the memorandum on the joint restoration of the Ani bridge attracts special attention. This project is not just an infrastructure initiative, but also a confidence-building mechanism. Building cooperation on historical heritage serves to remove psychological barriers between the parties. This is one of the important elements for long-term peace.
In fact, the Turkey-Armenia rapprochement serves Armenia's interests more. Because this country has been bearing the economic burden of closed borders with Turkey for many years. The opening of borders means access to new markets, transit opportunities and investment flow for Armenia. In this regard, the normalization process can play the role of an economic breath for Armenia.
On the other hand, Armenia's long-standing territorial claims and "genocide" narrative have been one of the main obstacles to this process. However, recent diplomatic dynamics show that these issues are gradually receding into the background. Reality politics is beginning to overcome ideological approaches. This leads to the formation of a more pragmatic system of relations in the region.
The reality that emerged after the 44-day war showed that the balance of power has already changed. Azerbaijan has become one of the main political and economic centers of the region. Strategic alliance with Turkey further strengthens this position. Armenia, on the other hand, is forced to accept and adapt to this new balance.
The main question at this stage is how Armenia will value this historical chance. If Yerevan takes a constructive position, new cooperation platforms can be created in the region. Otherwise, the continuation of the old policy can put Armenia in an even more isolated situation.
As a result, the 44-day war was not only a military victory, but also a geopolitical transformation point. This transformation laid the foundation for a new system of relations in the region. Azerbaijan plays a constructive role in this process by coming up with peace initiatives. Turkey is one of the main partners of this policy. For Armenia, the choice is clear: either adapt to new realities, or remain hostage to old approaches.
All this shows that the South Caucasus is already transitioning from the post-conflict stage to the post-peace building stage. Whether this transition will be successful or not will depend on the political will of the parties.
Sevinj MAHARRAMOVA
