On 11 November, the spokesperson of UN’s Secretary General Stephane Dujarric expressed his gratitude to Russia for its effort in halting military action in Nagorno-Karabakh. He added that the brokered agreement would end the suffering of civilians in the region.

The spokesperson for the EU foreign affairs and security policy Peter Stano also welcomed the cessation of hostilities in Nagorno-Karabakh. “We (the EU) have called for this since the beginning of hostilities. Now we are analysing the consequences of the hostilities and the current situation in the region, after which we will disseminate a statement,” he added.

The US Department of State also welcomed the end of the hostilities. “Although we are glad to see the ending of violence, we can’t yet make a statement about concrete details of the existing ceasefire or the next steps. Any question regarding how the parties perceive the new agreements should be posed to them. We are aware of halting of military operations by Russia’s mediation and we are also interested in obtaining more information about details and plans of implementation of this new agreement just as much as in the matter of to what extent this new agreement reflects in itself the final form,“ emphasised the statement of the US State Department. 

The President of NATO’s Parliamentary Assembly Attila Mesterhazy expressed his relief that the hostilities ended between the two warring factions. “As I have said from the beginning of this latest crisis, peace can only be achieved through diplomacy. The time has come for de-escalation and responsible behaviour and rhetoric, and I call on my Armenian and Azerbaijani parliamentary colleagues to play their part. Ultimately, the region needs a long-term solution under the auspices of the Minsk Group to finally bring lasting peace and stability for all its people,” he added. 

The Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan stated that the Turkish military would operate in Karabakh for the purpose of observation and monitoring on the same basis as the Russian military. He also emphasised that Turkey would from now on have closer and stronger cooperation with Azerbaijan. It was also reported that Russian Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu and Turkish Defence Minister Hulusi Akar discussed the Nagorno-Karabakh peace deal.

The spokesperson of Russia’s President Dmitry Peskov stated that the functions of Russian peacekeepers in Nagorno-Karabakh, including the question of whether they will be responsible for guarding cultural and religious sites, have yet to be specified. The spokesperson of Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs Maria Zakharova stated that the Russian-Turkish monitoring centre for control of ceasefire observance in Nagorno-Karabakh is unrelated to the peacekeeping efforts in the region. 

The Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for political affairs Abbas Araghchi said that Tehran’s proposals contributed heavily to the establishment of the ceasefire over Nagorno-Karabakh, especially the introduced principles and framework for a ceasefire. “The conflict was a cause for concern, and it caused concerns along our borders. Even in certain cases, the conflict caused damage on our borders. There were some ensuing concerns as well, making it all the more necessary for the conflict to come to an end as soon as possible,” he noted. 

Statement from France and Azerbaijan’s response

The French Minister of Foreign Affairs Jean-Yves Le Drian issued a statement regarding the settlement of the conflict. In his statement he said that he expects Azerbaijan to strictly uphold the commitments that it has made and to put an immediate end to its offensive and called on Turkey not to do anything that goes against this key priority. “At this difficult time, France reaffirms its wholehearted friendship with the Armenian people in light of our close human, cultural and historic ties with Armenia. In these tragic circumstances, we stand alongside it. In particular, we will work to lend it all the humanitarian support it needs. Finally, the resumption of negotiations between the parties on a lasting settlement of the conflict remains necessary, beyond the ceasefire announced yesterday. As Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, France will be an active participant in this effort. Discussions between the two parties must resume without delay. They must allow for the return of people displaced by the conflict in recent weeks, and for the definition of the future status of Nagorno-Karabakh,” his statement further highlighted.

Le Drian’s statement faced harsh reactions from Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan’s MFA response emphasised that Le Drian’s statement was contrary to France’s mandate as a Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk group and completely biased. The Assistant to Azerbaijan’s President Hikmet Hajiyev said that France did not have any role in the adoption of a joint statement. “Probably, France is jealous of Russia’s role in this issue. Armenian Prime Minister’s signing this document says all. Now France attempts to be Armenian much more [than] Armenians. France does not have any authority to speak on behalf of OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs,“ Hajiyev said. 

Expert opinions

The senior fellow for Carnegie Europe, Thomas De Waal, who specialises in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus region wrote that “the Armenian side was the big loser in this outcome, and the repercussions will be felt for years to come.” De Waal further emphasised that it is hard to see how, even if Pashinyan loses his post, the next Armenian leader could make a different decision regarding Nagorno-Karabakh.

“For three years now, Russia has been proposing to the conflict parties what became known as the “Lavrov Plan”–although its existence was always publicly denied. The essence of it was that there would be a phased withdrawal by Armenia from the occupied territories around Nagorno-Karabakh, and a Russian peacekeeping force would enter the region to guarantee the security of the Karabakh Armenians. The core of the Lavrov Plan is now being implemented—but on much more favourable terms for Baku than before. A new line of contact is being established that runs through Karabakh itself. The Armenians are set to lose territory that includes a large part of the southern Hadrut region. Moreover, the status of Nagorno-Karabakh itself is not mentioned in the document,” he further wrote.

“Azerbaijan is the obvious winner. If President Ilham Aliyev were to run for election in a free vote tomorrow, he would almost certainly win by a landslide. He has suddenly got far more than could have imagined possible only a few weeks ago: the return of all seven territories around Nagorno-Karabakh, plus the town of Shusha.  Turkey is also a big beneficiary. The main prize for Ankara in the nine-point deal is the promise of a corridor across Armenia’s Meghri region that would theoretically connect Turkey to Central Asia via Nakhichevan, the rest of Azerbaijan and the Caspian Sea. This resurrects a key ambition of both Azerbaijan and Turkey that was a central part of an unsuccessful deal for Karabakh negotiated in 1999-2000. It will be extremely difficult for Armenia to facilitate the building of this Turkic corridor across its own territory,” De Waal added.

“In short, Russia has played a spectacular diplomatic move, but has also taken on great responsibility and will be blamed by both sides if things start to go wrong. There is a chance that the 10 November  agreement will turn out to be a rapidly assembled construction that is not sustainable. In particular, there are questions as to whether the Russian security deployment is robust enough to guarantee that Armenians of Karabakh can continue to live without fear in their homeland. If many Karabakh Armenians displaced in the new conflict choose not to return to Karabakh, that will be ominous, and could presage the continuation of the conflict in a new form. For that reason, Moscow may soon decide that it cannot implement this plan by itself. In that case it is likely to remember its multilateral role and call for the support of the other Minsk Group Co-Chairs and the OSCE as a whole. It can also call for help upon United Nations agencies, international organisations, and, very likely, practical assistance from Western countries too,” he concluded.

The International Crisis Group (ICG) also made critical remarks towards the deal. “A deal that Armenians view as capitulation will not be a reliable foundation for more sustained peace. While it will be hard for them to accept it, steps should be taken to mitigate the blow and to prevent Azerbaijani overreach. That means in particular ensuring Armenians can return to, leave or remain in Nagorno-Karabakh safely. Responsibility in this matter lies first and foremost with Russia, which should both cement and clarify the agreement. If Nagorno-Karabakh, or part of it, is to become a de facto Russian protectorate, it will be up to Moscow to negotiate a viable governance and security plan with both Armenians and Azerbaijanis,” read the report by the ICG.

“An imposed peace that leaves a generation of Armenians resentful is no recipe for peace; in a way, it would be a mere mirror image of the reality with which Azerbaijanis have lived for the last three decades. Coupled with the accusations of war crimes coming from both sides, which will also emanate for years to come, it could plant the seeds of the next stage of conflict. At a minimum, a more sustainable settlement will require a deal in which refugees and IDPs are treated fairly, people have access to their homes and economic development benefits all involved,” the report added.