The border delimitation announcement following the previous day's meeting between the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan means that there is still no official border, and that's bad. Russian historian and analyst Modest Kolerov stated this in an interview with Armenian News-NEWS.am.

He explained that before the formation of the official border between Armenia and Azerbaijan—that is, the delimitation; that is, marking the border on the spot—, there should be long negotiations on delimitation; that is, there should be negotiations on the deciding of the border on the map.

According to Kolerov, this agreement shows that the border between the aforesaid two countries is not even on the map, and the very invitation to delimitation means that this border can be moved by the force of occupation, by the force of advancing troops, as much as necessary and in any direction.

"If there is no border delimitation, then everything is possible, and this is the worst result. The agreement on border delimitation itself recognizes that there is no border, and after this recognition, Yerevan will not be able to scold Azerbaijan for violating the borders," he added.

Kolerov believes that the West, in general, has only a theoretical relationship with this border delimitation.

"Russia, when discussing this issue with the parties, voluntarily helped in this discussion, voluntarily provided the maps it has. In this case, Brussels' mediation is purely rhetorical. Border delimitation has been used as a slogan for a long time, which means that there is no border yet [between Armenia and Azerbaijan], and there was no demand to maintain at least some border. ‘So, do whatever you want, capture whatever you want,’" he said.

The Russian historian and analyst stated that Armenia has already renounced Nagorno-Karabakh, and the meeting in Brussels on the issue of ensuring the rights of the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh did not take a single step forward.

"And this is a disaster because if you are forced into unfavorable arrangements, if you cannot avoid them, then you can resort to the last resort: verbally declaring that you are doing it by force. And let the world see that you are concerned about the Karabakh issue.

"But the subject of Karabakh was not mentioned in the official comments of the Brussels meeting. I think that Yerevan removed the Karabakh issue from the agenda, it is closed for Yerevan. Yes, Russia is bad, the [Russian] peacekeepers [in Karabakh] are bad, but did they take ownership of Karabakh in Brussels? Did they protect your border from the creeping expansion? Why did you go to the West? The point will not be set, as there is no border even on paper. A peace treaty without borders is empty sound," Kolerov said.

According to him, it is not comforting that Armenia has stopped the fight for the solution of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem and focused on border delimitation.

"It is obvious that Azerbaijan has solved the Karabakh problem for itself, and the meaning of Russia's or the West's or anyone else's mediation is to constantly resume the talks about Karabakh, so that this issue is always on the discussion table. Yerevan should have constantly talked about the unresolved status of Nagorno-Karabakh every day, everywhere, even in public statements, in the presence of [European Council President Charles] Michel, anyone. Now, when the whole problem has been brought to border delimitation, the picture has changed. If Yerevan were to talk about the unresolved issue of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh, then at least the problem of blockade would arise. But now it is gone.

"If until recently, Karabakh was the main problem of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan, now it is not Karabakh, but border delimitation. Replacing the Karabakh issue with the border delimitation issue is a disaster," concluded the Russian historian and analyst.