If the provisions of the bilateral agenda are not discussed, then what benefit we will gain from the signing of the agreement? Abrahamyan

If the main provisions of the bilateral agenda are not discussed in the document of normalization of relations, then what will be the signing of an agreement in some form, Tigran Abrahamyan, secretary of the NA "I have honor" faction, wrote about this on his Facebook page.

He specifically noted: "The agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan to remove the issue of regional blockade from the "peace document" and discuss it separately raises a large number of questions.

Initially, the "peace treaty" had 3 major components: the Artsakh issue, regional de-encirclement and border delimitation/demarcation.

Now its two key points have been left out, and the negotiations are mostly only about border delimitation.

But this is where the main question arises, if the main provisions of the bilateral agenda are not discussed in the document on the normalization of relations, then what will be the result of signing an agreement in some form?

In other words, is the problem to get a formal document or are there other issues that are in the invisible part of the iceberg?