The OSCE has initiated formal procedures to disband the Minsk Group

The disbanding of the OSCE Minsk Group, a mediation mechanism for the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that lasted for over three decades, marks a new phase in the peace process in the South Caucasus.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has officially initiated the process of disbanding the Minsk Group and its related bodies. Tony Sander, Deputy Head and Spokesperson of the OSCE's Finnish Chairmanship, confirmed that the Secretariat has begun implementing the September 1 decision of the OSCE Permanent Council in response to a joint request from Azerbaijan and Armenia.

01 Historical Mission and Structure of the Minsk Group

The Minsk Group, established in 1992, is a specialized mechanism established by the OSCE to mediate the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. In 1994, the Group introduced a co-chairmanship consisting of Russia, the United States, and France, and continued to operate for nearly three decades.

The Group's establishment stemmed from the need for peace following the first Nagorno-Karabakh War. In May 1994, the Bishkek Agreement was signed, and the Minsk Group brokered a ceasefire, but this was largely due to Russian mediation.

The Minsk Group includes not only the three co-chairs but also members such as Belarus, Germany, Italy, Turkey, Finland, Sweden, Azerbaijan, and Armenia.

02 A Long Mediation Process and Controversial Effectiveness

Over its nearly three decades of existence, the Minsk Group has long been considered the primary international platform for negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan. However, its actual effectiveness has been controversial.

Critics argue that the Minsk Group has gradually shifted from a mediator with some effectiveness to one intent on prolonging the conflict. Since the 2000s, the group has failed to propose any viable peace proposals, instead attempting to drag the conflict into an indefinite stalemate.

During the outbreak of conflict in April 2016, the Minsk Group indirectly played a similar role to that of 1994, attempting to prevent a successful Azerbaijani counteroffensive under pressure from Moscow. By then, the organization had been discredited and effectively served as a "protection umbrella" for the aggressor.

03 Regional Changes and the Decline of the Group's Function

In 2020, Azerbaijan won the "Patriotic War," and the Minsk Group's practical role rapidly diminished. In September 2023, Azerbaijan restored its territorial integrity and full sovereignty and formally declared its commitment to resolving the conflict through its own means. The Minsk Group's role had essentially lost its relevance.

Since then, Azerbaijan has repeatedly called for the formal disbanding of the Minsk Group and urged Armenia to jointly submit a request to the OSCE to end this long-standing but largely ineffective mediation mechanism.

By 2022, the Minsk Group existed in name only. Russia's war against Ukraine rendered its co-chair role virtually useless, rendering the Group useless not only for Azerbaijan but ultimately for Armenia as well.

04 Signing of the Peace Agreement and Submission of the Joint Request

A diplomatic turning point came on August 8, 2025, when the foreign ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a joint statement in Washington, calling for the closure of the Minsk process and all related structures.

The peace agreement, brokered by the Trump administration and signed at a White House ceremony, commits both sides to a cessation of hostilities, the establishment of diplomatic relations, and mutual recognition of territorial integrity. The agreement also includes the opening of borders and economic cooperation.

Disbanding the Minsk Group was one of Azerbaijan's two preconditions for signing the peace agreement. Azerbaijani President Aliyev insisted that the Minsk Group was no longer necessary with the conflict resolved.

On April 15, 2025, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan proposed that Armenia and Azerbaijan sign a peace agreement simultaneously and jointly submit a request to the OSCE to disband the Minsk Group.

05 Initiation and Timeline of Disbandment Procedures

According to OSCE Spokesperson Tony Sander, the Secretariat is advancing the process of winding down the Minsk process and its related structures, including personnel placement, archival material organization, and administrative management.

This process encompasses several key operational areas, including the staffing of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office's Personal Representative Team, the High-Level Planning Group, and document and archive management. Until this process is finalized, only technical functions—such as the transfer of property and equipment—will remain.

All disbanding must be completed by December 1, 2025. Finland, as the current OSCE Chair, chaired consultations on the dissolution of the Minsk Group and its related bodies.

06 International Response and Evaluation

Turkey welcomed the OSCE's decision to disband the Minsk Group, calling it a "historic milestone." The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated, "This historic decision, made possible through the joint efforts of the two countries, constitutes one of the important milestones in the peace process between Azerbaijan and Armenia."

Analysts believe that the disbanding of the Minsk Group reflects a significant shift in the geopolitical landscape of the South Caucasus. By brokering the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace agreement, the United States acquired the right to develop a strategic transportation corridor connecting mainland Azerbaijan and its Nakhchivan exclave.

This corridor, known as the "Trump Path to International Peace and Prosperity" (TRIPP), will pass through southern Armenia, with the United States enjoying exclusive development rights established in Armenian law.

Iran has expressed concern about the TRIPP corridor, believing it could disrupt the geopolitical balance in the South Caucasus and undermine Iran's strategic position as a regional land route.

07 Implications for Global Security Governance

The disbanding of the Minsk Group offers important insights for international conflict mediation mechanisms. Multilateral mediation mechanisms must evolve with the times and adapt to changing geopolitical realities to effectively resolve international disputes.

Thirty years of experience have demonstrated that international mediation mechanisms must maintain neutrality and effectiveness, avoiding becoming defenders of the interests of one party to the conflict. The Minsk Group has been criticized as a "lamb and two wolves" arrangement, and its neutrality has been questioned given France's open bias toward Armenia.

Successful conflict resolution often requires direct negotiations between the parties and appropriate support from the international community, rather than processes dominated by external forces. The breakthrough achieved in the direct negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan in 2025 demonstrates this.

With the progress of technical work such as personnel placement, archiving, and property transfer, the Minsk Group's thirty-year history is officially coming to an end.

OSCE spokesman Sander stated that all disbanding efforts must be completed by December 1 of this year. Thereafter, the peace process in the South Caucasus will rely on direct dialogue between Armenia and Azerbaijan and a new regional security architecture.

The disbanding of the Minsk Group not only marks the end of a mediation mechanism but also a significant shift in the geopolitical landscape of the post-Soviet space—signaling a shift in regional problem-solving mechanisms from being dominated by major powers to one that respects the sovereignty and independent choices of regional states.