2024-03-04 08:38:22
Author: Elchin Alioglu
Source: Trend
The attitude of many Western countries towards Azerbaijan, which is characterized by the wrong, sarcastic and illogical phrase “Collective West”, is clear. That attitude is not based on logic and geopolitical interests, but on the interests of power establishments and political elites.
This flawed approach is not supported by the average voter or business in the West.
What are the mistakes made by the West trying to put pressure on Azerbaijan? Finally, what is needed to restore the cooled relationship?
Although the process of the agreement “On establishment of peace and interstate relations between Azerbaijan and Armenia” continues, the number of artificial problems and obstacles does not decrease.
After the tripartite meeting organized by their colleague Annalena Berbork, held in Berlin between the heads of the Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan and Armenia, Jeyhun Bayramov and Ararat Mirzoyan, where the main points related to the draft agreement were discussed, small hopes arose. At the Diplomatic Forum in Antalya, those hopes increased a bit.
However, it must be admitted that there was no serious progress in the Berlin round regarding the peace agreement.
The reason is known and previous.
Provisions reflecting territorial claims against Azerbaijan remain in the Constitution of Armenia and a number of legislative acts, revanchism in Armenian society and numerous statements such as “Armenians from Karabakh should return to Karabakh, there should be no conditions related to accepting Azerbaijani citizenship, they should live with the status of their choice” cannot be reduced.
Despite all this, if German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, whom French President Emmanuel Macron despised as a “very weak politician”, is dominated by constructive and logical elements in his positions regarding Azerbaijan, if Berlin’s political elites, who say that they are trying to support the process aimed at signing a peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia, show the necessary rationality. Baku will probably react adequately to what is happening.
That is, Baku will not object to Germany’s participation in the process in any form or format.
There is no doubt that the main goal of Germany, acting in parallel and even in tandem with France, in the South Caucasus is to achieve the withdrawal of Russia from the region, as well as the signing of a peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia.
If France has taken a clear hostile position towards our country, Germany is showing a neutral approach for the time being.
If Germany wants to do real work and be a participant in the process, Baku has two conditions against double standards.
1. The de jure author of the absurd resolution adopted against Azerbaijan in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) and which caused our delegation to leave the organization is the chairman of the party of which German MP Frank Schwabe is a functionary, Chancellor of Germany Olaf Scholtz.
If we remember that the German Social-Democratic Party (SDP), of which Scholtz is the vice-chairman, has a very strict internal discipline, it is impossible for F. Schwabe to take an initiative in PACE without the knowledge of Chancellor O. Scholtz.
If this is the case, official Berlin should be based on strategic pragmatism, not being exposed to French intrigues in contacts with Azerbaijan.
In PACE and other pan-European structures, there are two countries with a majority Muslim population – Turkey and Azerbaijan. Although the EU membership issue of both countries is described as a “debatable point”, the rhetoric of European politicians is hypocrisy, lies and deceit.
Because we are Muslims, the European Union closed the doors to us, and PACE and similar structures targeted Baku.
2. For some reason, the European Union, which talks about principles such as human rights, democratic values, and free civil society, always puts the principles of territorial integrity, sovereignty, and border inviolability in the background in matters related to Azerbaijan.
If Germany wants to have normal relations with our country and participate in the peace agreement process, it should not prevent us from establishing our sovereignty over our sovereign territory. That is, since the strengthening of the security system along the entire perimeter of our state border is a normal and international law process, Berlin should accept it.
France rapidly arms Armenia and provides military and technical assistance to Armenians. If we are not given such help and support, at least there should be no attempts to create obstacles to our steps within the framework of international law. Berlin must either support the process or withdraw. There is no other alternative.
It is an understandable and normal phenomenon that Azerbaijan is somewhat suspicious of the seriousness and sincerity of the intentions of the West, in particular Germany.
The West, which did not call Armenia an occupying state during the 30 years when 20 percent of Azerbaijan’s territories were under Armenian occupation, and did not accuse Yerevan of subjecting Azerbaijanis to ethnic cleansing, is now almost addressing us with those statements.
The West has not taken an objective position even now.
For this reason, the policy carried out by Armenia in PACE should be adequately evaluated, and the real situation should be understood to Armenians and those who support them.
If the West wants normal relations with Baku, it should declare that French President Emmanuel Macron is conducting a hysterical, aggressive and even idiotic policy regarding Azerbaijan.
Even if it is too late, the West should realize that the Karabakh issue is already over, consigned to history, and the return of Armenians from Karabakh, ensuring their security, etc. issues can be resolved only within the framework of the Constitution of Azerbaijan. If Karabakh Armenians with abstract status voluntarily left Azerbaijan and went to Armenia, their homeland, the West should accept their choice.
At least because Armenians from Karabakh carried Armenian passports during the 30-year occupation and now they do not want to become citizens of Azerbaijan.
If the West supports Armenia and Karabakh Armenians, this is an obvious one-sided, subjective approach.
If they want to be objective, they should also support the process of demining the territories liberated from the Armenian occupation, the reconstruction of the cities and villages destroyed by the Armenians, as well as the infrastructure restoration and the return of Azerbaijani IDPs to their native homes.
Western participation in the negotiation process between Azerbaijan and Armenia is not possible until the listed points are fulfilled.
The West must accept the new reality.
This is Baku’s only wish.