Azernews.Az

Akbar Novruz

Read more

Armenian parliamentary speaker Alen Simonyan has once again presented Yerevan’s familiar narrative: that the government is “doing everything” to secure the return of Armenians held in Azerbaijan. With confident language, he claimed that all detainees will eventually be brought home, pointing to the decrease in numbers since 2020 as proof that the government’s efforts are working. Simonyan even suggested that former separatist figures, including those who once held leadership roles in the self-proclaimed structure in Khankandi, would eventually return to Armenia.

This message is crafted to instill hope, yet it relies on a terminology that fundamentally distorts reality. Armenian officials and media insist on calling these individuals “prisoners of war,” even though none of them were captured on the battlefield. They were not soldiers detained with weapons in their hands. They were the political and military elite of a separatist entity that operated illegally within Azerbaijan’s internationally recognized territory and were detained after the region was restored to Azerbaijani jurisdiction.

Despite this, the Armenian government continues to frame their detention as a humanitarian crisis, echoing claims made by figures like Siranush Sahakyan, who argued that individuals such as Ruben Vardanyan were held “only because they were Armenians.” This narrative travels easily through Armenian diaspora organizations and lobbying structures that need symbolic causes to rally around.

The real question, however, is not whether these individuals will be released tomorrow. The real question is what their political value is, and for whom.

Inside Armenia, the detainees have become a domestic pressure tool. They provide emotional fuel for revanchist groups that accuse the government of surrendering national interests.

For Prime Minister Pashinyan’s administration, presenting periodic statements about “ongoing efforts” helps absorb public frustration without committing to any real diplomatic strategy. Yerevan knows that a large-scale campaign for the release of these former separatist leaders could strengthen its internal opposition more than the government itself. This explains why its “appeals” are largely rhetorical rather than practical.

On the Azerbaijani side, the legal process is clear. These individuals were charged with crimes that fall under serious articles of national legislation. Their trials and detention conditions follow the same rules applied to Azerbaijani citizens held on similar charges. For Baku, there is a categorical distinction between wartime prisoners of war and those imprisoned for political, military, or financial participation in a separatist regime. The former has been resolved. The latter cannot be equated with POWs, regardless of how forcefully Armenia insists on using that term.

What remains uncertain is the long-term trajectory. Will Baku ever consider releasing some of these detainees on humanitarian grounds or within a larger political package? Possibly, but not as a unilateral gesture and certainly not under external pressure. Any discussion on this issue will likely emerge only after a formal peace treaty is signed and regional relations enter a stable phase. Even then, any transfer would be gradual and symbolic, not sweeping.

For now, the Armenian government’s discourse on the detainees serves more as political theatre than policy. Yerevan raises the issue periodically to satisfy domestic expectations, knowing that the international negotiation track has placed it far down the agenda.

Neither the Washington draft nor current talks include this matter as a priority. The gap between rhetoric and action is intentional, and perhaps necessary, for the Armenian leadership to navigate its own political reality.

Until a peace agreement is finalized and the region enters a new stage, the detainees will remain where they are. Their fate will be decided not by emotional statements or media campaigns, but by the strategic logic of post-conflict diplomacy and the balance of interests between Baku and Yerevan.