Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has set 2031 as his target for signing and ratifying the peace agreement with Azerbaijan, while Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan has stated that normalization with Türkiye has advanced sufficiently for their closed land border to reopen at short notice. Pashinyan has also outlinedseveral possible solutions to the longstanding enclave and exclave dispute with Azerbaijan, including territorial exchanges and relocating villages within their respective territories.

Speaking at the Warsaw Security Forum on October 13, Mirzoyan stated that the Armenia-Türkiye normalization process had “matured considerably” and that the border could open at any moment. “We could easily wake up tomorrow morning to a headline in the news feed” announcing its reopening, he remarked during a panel entitled “Half-Baked or Step-by-Step? Rethinking EU Enlargement.”

Mirzoyan reiterated his assessment on October 15 during a joint press conference in Yerevan with Swiss Foreign Minister and OSCE Chairperson-in-Office Ignazio Cassis. He noted that Armenian and Turkish officials remained in contact almost daily and that negotiations were continuing,although details were generally not made public before an agreement was reached. Mirzoyan questioned whether Armenia needed to appoint a new special envoy, suggesting that the border could reopen before a replacement was selected. The foreign minister cited several developments in support of his optimism. These included Türkiye’s lifting of restrictions on direct trade with Armenia, joint restoration work on the historic Ani Bridge and plans to restart the Gyumri-Kars railway. He also recalled that the border had been partially opened to allow an Armenian business delegation to attend a business forumin Türkiye. The event provedsuccessful for both sides to express interest in organizing a follow-up forum in Armenia,potentially with broader participation. Mirzoyan identified the establishment of diplomatic relations and the full reopening of the border as the ultimate objectives.

On relations with Azerbaijan, Pashinyan stated on October 15 that signing and ratifying the peace agreement initiated in Washington in August 2025 was one of his most important priorities. He set 2031,the end of the currentgovernment’s term, as his target for completing the process. Pashinyan stressed that this objective would not displace other priorities, including the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP), the reopening of regional transport links and economic development. The prime minister described the agreement’s eventual signing and ratification as a turning point that could close a significant chapter in Armenia’s history and establish a new basis for regional relations.

Pashinyan presented his broader vision for the post-agreement regional order on October 14. According to the prime minister, Armenia should retain a territoryof 29,743 square kilometres, and border delimitation and demarcation should proceed based on the Alma-Ata Declaration, which provides a framework for recognizing the former Soviet republics’ administrative borders as international borders. Pashinyan also proposed resolving the enclave and exclave issue so that neither country would retain such territories within the other’s borders, suggesting an exchange of territories of precisely corresponding sizes. In addition, he called for all regional roads and communication routes to be opened, not only those covered by TRIPP. This would include routes connecting parts of each country through the territory of the other. Pashinyan also argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan should abandon territorial claims against one another, including those associated with Karabakh, Gardman, Shirvan,Nakhchivan and the concept of “Western Azerbaijan.”

The enclave and exclave question became more complex on October 15, when Pashinyan clarified that no agreement had been reached with Azerbaijan and that territorial exchange was only one of several possible solutions. Pashinyan introduced another option: relocating villages within their respective territories to eliminate the geographical separation created by enclaves and exclaves. The territories involved include Kyarki, known in Armenia as Tigranashen, and the Azerbaijani settlements of Barkhudarlu, Sofulu and Askipara, which lie within Armenian territory. Artsvashen, an Armenian settlement surrounded by Azerbaijani territory and currentlyunder Azerbaijani control, is the corresponding Armenian exclave. Pashinyan explained that Artsvashen could be shifted within its own territory, moving it closer to the rest of Armenia so that Azerbaijani territory would no longer separate the settlement from the mainland.

The prime minister suggested that the same principle could be applied to the Azerbaijani settlements on the opposite side of the border. Foreign Minister Mirzoyan similarly said that several solutions remained possible and that the issue would be discussed further with Azerbaijan. Mirzoyan cautioned against predetermining an agreement, adding that any decision involving the transfer of part of Armenia’s internationally recognized territory of 29,743 squarekilometres in returnfor another area could raise the question of a nationwide vote. Mirzoyan called the Azerbaijani side’s approach constructive but did not identify an agreed arrangement.

The proposals have also drawn differing reactions within Armenia. Opposition MP Artur Khachatryan questioned the possible territorial consequences of an exchange, warning that its precise terms could leave Armenia in a disadvantageous position. He challenged the assumption that the territories exchanged would necessarily producean acceptable outcome for Armenia. In contrast, ruling Civil ContractMP Eduard Aghajanyan said that both an exchange and retaining the existing situation, subject to formal border delimitation under the Alma-Ata Declaration, could be acceptable options. Aghajanyan also raised the possibility of referendums in both countries.

No Azerbaijani response to the village relocation proposal had been announced. With this, the two normalization processes remain at different stages.