In a region where peace talks often collapse as quickly as they begin, quiet diplomacy may hold the key.

The South Caucasus is a region of deep history and complex conflicts. Borders are disputed, ceasefires are fragile, and official talks often stall. When formal diplomacy hits a wall, Track II diplomacy steps in — an informal but structured approach where experts, analysts, former officials, and civil society representatives meet to exchange ideas, test solutions, and build trust without political pressure.

Track II diplomacy refers to informal, non-governmental, non-binding dialogue and problem-solving efforts carried out by individuals or groups outside official state negotiations (diplomacy.edu; USIP, 2019). Unlike formal “Track I” diplomacy — where accredited diplomats negotiate treaties — Track II provides a safe space to explore ideas, test proposals, and address underlying social or psychological aspects of conflict. Common methods include workshops, private seminars, cultural exchanges, and joint research. It is most useful when official negotiations are stalled, helping keep dialogue alive and build trust for future agreements.

Miran Norderland, an experienced diplomat and expert in crisis negotiation and peacebuilding, has worked extensively in fragile regions. Drawing on decades of experience, he emphasizes how informal dialogue, careful planning, and innovation can sustain peace even when official negotiations falter. “Track II diplomacy is not just a mechanism for crisis moments — it is essential across the entire lifecycle of a peace process,” he says. Track II “staff” organize workshops, run simulations, and analyze policy options to complement official talks, helping preserve knowledge and reduce misunderstandings (USIP, 2019).

Negotiating Under Pressure

Negotiation in post-conflict settings is never easy. Norderland emphasizes three keys: preparation, clear authority, and smart sequencing.

“Negotiators perform effectively under pressure when three elements align: disciplined preparation, empowered mandates, and clear strategic priorities,” he says. Clear authority shows that negotiators can act confidently, maintaining momentum in talks.

History shows the cost of unclear authority: during the Dayton Accords implementation, rushed planning and ambiguous roles caused long-term challenges, especially for small states (USIP Special Report, 1997).

He adds: “Effective teams also establish red lines, sequencing, and realistic priorities early on, thereby avoiding the most contentious issues until sufficient trust is built.” Knowing when to pause, when to push, and which issues to address first often decides whether peace talks succeed or fail (Harvard PON, 2023).

Critical Minerals: A Hidden Factor in Peace

Peace is not only about borders or dialogue — it also intersects with economics. The global race for critical minerals like cobalt, lithium, and rare earths is reshaping geopolitics. China dominates 65–85% of processing, leaving other countries with incomplete or unreliable data (OECD, 2024; World Bank, 2023).

Norderland notes: “Transparency becomes less about perfect information and more about closing the most harmful gaps: improving comparability, identifying bottlenecks, reducing speculation, and creating minimum shared baselines that support cooperation.” Even partial transparency can help resource-dependent countries make better decisions and reduce conflict risks (CSIS, 2024).

Governance in Transition Economies

Countries like Armenia often add new governance structures during crises. While this may help temporarily, too many layers can create confusion, weaken institutions, and slow reforms (EBRD Transition Report 2024–25).

Norderland explains: “Risk assessment must account not only for existing institutional weaknesses but also for how governance structures evolve under crisis.”

The solution? Reform in order:

Stabilize institutions; Consolidate processes; Make strategic investments.

Early successes build confidence, but lasting change depends on clear rules, transparency, and coordination across sectors (World Bank – Worldwide Governance Indicators, 2023).

Digital Tools and Peace: Can AI Help?

Technology is changing how peace is made. AI can simulate negotiations, analyze past agreements, and help mediators predict obstacles before they arise. Digital platforms can counter misinformation, include more voices, and increase transparency (UNDP Digital Strategy, 2022-2025; USIP, Inside the PeaceTech Lab, 2023).

Norderland warns: “Digital innovation has not yet developed tools that truly span the full continuum from conflict prevention to negotiation, peacekeeping, and long-term implementation… Technology must complement, not replace, human relationships, trust-building, and institutional ownership.” Digital tools are best as a support to human-led peacebuilding, making processes more inclusive, flexible, and resilient (DiploFoundation, 2023).

Why It Matters for the Caucasus

Peacebuilding is not a straight line. It requires patience, strategy, and multiple layers of work. Norderland’s insights show that:

• Track II diplomacy keeps dialogue alive when official talks stall
• Clear authority and careful planning improve negotiations
• Transparency in critical sectors reduces tension and encourages cooperation
• Transition economies should avoid unnecessary complexity
• Technology can enhance, but never replace, human-led peacebuilding

In the Caucasus, where history and geopolitics collide, these lessons are more than theory — they offer a practical roadmap for sustaining dialogue and resilience.

Contributed by Siranush Grigoryan, a Lecturer at Armenian National Polytechnic University.