Author: Armenag Aprahamian, October 22, 2025

Finland, which currently holds the chairmanship of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), faces an important decision: whether to redefine or maintain the role of the Minsk Group as the only international format for a peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh) conflict.

Frozen but not revoked mandate

The Minsk Group was established in 1992 under the auspices of the OSCE with the aim of promoting a peaceful resolution of the conflict, co-chaired by Russia, the United States and France.

However, after the 2020 war and Azerbaijan’s annexation of the territory of Artsakh, the group has been effectively inactive, although it has not yet been legally dissolved.

Baku claims that the Minsk Group is “obsolete,” while Moscow and Washington have downgraded its diplomatic priority.

However, Armenian lawyers and diplomats believe that until the OSCE Ministerial Council officially revokes this mandate, it continues to have legal force.

Reference to international law

The National Council of the Republic of Western Armenia, in a letter to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Finland, Elina Valtonen, called for the maintenance of the Minsk Group mandate and the implementation of the right of return of displaced Armenians of Artsakh.

The document is based on international legal provisions: the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 13) and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

The decisions of the UN International Court of Justice of December 7, 2021, February 22, and November 17, 2023 (in the case of Armenia v. Azerbaijan) oblige Baku to ensure the security, free movement and protection of cultural heritage of Armenians of Artsakh. These legal obligations create the basis for an international mechanism under the supervision of the OSCE to guarantee the voluntary and safe return of displaced people.

Helsinki: at the crossroads of law and diplomacy

This issue has a special symbolic significance for Finland itself. On 31 December 1917, Russia recognized Finland’s independence, just two days after the declaration (December 29, 1917) by which the Soviet government also recognized the right of the people of Western Armenia to self-determination.

This historical coincidence is used today as a symbolic argument: the right of peoples to self-determination is a common value for both countries. Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen, as the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office, faces a choice: whether to preserve the legal format of the Minsk Group as an internationally recognized mediation platform or accept its de facto abolition for the sake of the regional balance of power.

A touchstone for European consistency

Finland’s position as a member of the EU and NATO is being closely watched internationally. If Helsinki defends the idea of ​​preserving the Minsk Group, it could be seen as a demonstration of Europe’s diplomatic independence against the weakening of multilateral formats.

Otherwise, a silent relinquishment of the mandate would mean a reduction in the role of the OSCE and a weakening of the cooperative model of European security that was formed in Helsinki in 1975.

According to human rights defenders, this issue goes beyond the Armenian issue. It concerns the clash between the rule of international law and the rule of military force.

The future of the Minsk Group, now in the hands of Finnish diplomacy, becomes a measure of Europe’s ability to defend the principles that Europe itself has created.