What does the West want in the Caucasus – Peace or war? – 2024-03-30 08:21:56

Author: Elchin Alioglu

Source: Trend

The joint conference between the United States, the European Union and Armenia to be held in Brussels on April 5 may fundamentally change the situation in the South Caucasus.

In the meeting between United States Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, European Commission Chairman Ursula von der Leyen and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, it is planned to increase Western aid to Yerevan.

Each of the parties emphasizes that only economic and political issues will be discussed at the meeting. But the Armenians declare that a “military-political pact” will be signed between the West and Armenia in Brussels. Moreover, it is said that the Brussels meeting will accelerate the military and technical assistance to Armenia.

The position of the official Baku regarding what happened is known.

“It is interesting that while Azerbaijan has been a victim of armed aggression, occupation and ethnic cleansing for nearly 30 years, and despite the 4 resolutions of the UN Security Council demanding the immediate, complete and unconditional withdrawal of the occupying forces of Armenia, there has never been such a statement from the EU and the USA. – did not receive unconditional support”.

These are the views reflected in the statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan (MFA).

The ongoing peace process between Azerbaijan and Armenia was initiated by Azerbaijan, where it has always taken a constructive position on all issues of post-conflict normalization. In addition, during the quadrilateral Prague meeting on October 6, 2022, Azerbaijan requested to agree to the deployment of a short-term European Union Monitoring Potential (EUMP) consisting of 40 civilian monitoring experts along the Armenian side of the delimited border, which is expected to contribute to building trust between Azerbaijan and Armenia. done.

After the initial two-month period, without the consent of Azerbaijan, the AIMP was transformed into the EU Mission in Armenia (EUMM) with a significantly extended period and a larger number of observers.

Since then, this mission has been actively exploited as an anti-Azerbaijani propaganda tool. In addition, with Canada’s accession to AIEM, it has the status of a de facto NATO mission. These steps are also accompanied by statements calling the AIEM a deterrent and creating the illusion of Azerbaijan’s possible intervention without any basis. Thus, in order to ensure that AIEM operates as a fully neutral, civilian and unarmed mission in accordance with its stated mandate, as well as to refrain from any activity directed against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan or that would affect its legitimate security interests in one way or another. the EU side was seriously called upon to take all necessary measures.

Another area of ​​concern is France’s campaign to militarize Armenia, which includes new promises of greater military equipment (including lethal and assault weapons). Another member of the EU, Greece, has recently made statements regarding the deepening of military cooperation with Armenia. In addition, plans to provide military aid to Armenia within the framework of the European Peace Fund and reports that the meeting on April 5 includes military components raise additional concerns and undermine peace-building efforts in the region.

As you can see, the EU-Armenia-USA joint conference is clearly one-sided and biased, but it is also a direct and complete manifestation of the double standard approach of the West in our region.

The preparation for the Brussels conference lacks transparency and regional inclusion, and is completely contrary to the efforts to build trust and start integration processes, which the South Caucasus needs most at the moment.

Instead of encouraging the Armenian side to negotiate in good faith, this conference creates new dividing lines and “spheres of influence” in the region.

Against the background of the revanchist mood in Armenia, such an open pro-Armenian public manifestation by Washington and Brussels can create a dangerous illusion in this country that the EU and the US will support Armenia in possible provocations by Armenia against Azerbaijan.

Official Baku believes that in this case, the EU and the US will share responsibility for any possible destabilizing action of Armenia.

The foundation of the Brussels conference was laid at the 3rd summit meeting of the European Political Union held in Granada, Spain last October.

It was at that summit that the West unequivocally demonstrated that it is far from taking an objective position in the negotiation process aimed at signing a peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia and unequivocally supports Armenia.

The presidents of Azerbaijan and Turkey did not attend the Granada meeting of the European Political Union, which is considered one of French President Emmanuel Macron’s “favorite geopolitical toys”.

Despite this, Emmanuel Macron, European Council head Charles Michel, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan signed a quadripartite statement.

The statement was a very rude attempt to interfere in the internal affairs of Azerbaijan.

Later, at the same summit, Ursula von der Leyen, the chairman of the European Commission, met with N. Pashinyan and signed a joint document. The document strongly condemned “Azerbaijan’s military operations against Karabakh Armenians” and defined the format of aid to Armenia.

The decision on the conference to be held in Brussels on April 5 was also made at the Granada summit.

Well, if so, what does the Brussels conference promise and what is the reason for Baku’s tough position?

First of all, there is no basis for claims that any “military-political pact” was signed between the West and Armenia in Brussels. The political elites of the United States and the European Union do not intend to apply to Armenia the analogues of the agreements with Ukraine.

The maximum “success” that Armenians can achieve may be the increase of military-technical assistance.

There are reasons why Azerbaijan is shown as a “potential military threat”.

The main goals of the European Union and the United States regarding the South Caucasus are to reduce the influence of Russia and Iran in the region, and to push Russia out of the region in general.

Therefore, Armenia is supported and Western Yerevan has set a condition in return for aid and support, to minimize dependence on Russia, and then, in general, to weaken Russian-Armenian relations, to remove Russia’s 102nd military base in Armenia, etc. is required.

Brussels and Washington have a political, economic, military, financial, etc. relationship between Yerevan and Moscow. He wants to end his dependence on the fields.

But it is different to want, it is different to make this wish come true.

Despite all the anti-Russian statements and demarches, the Armenian leadership knows that it will not be able to leave the CSTO, the Eurasian Economic Union, or the Eurasian Customs Union in the near future, and it brings this to the attention of the West.

The removal of the 102nd base in Gyumri in the coming years is a very problematic issue for Armenia.

The leadership of the US and the European Union asked Americans and Europeans why we should give large amounts of aid to Armenia, which is still dependent on Russia and continues to cooperate closely. they might have to answer a logical question.

Washington, Brussels and Yerevan decided after a long discussion that the mythic “threat from Azerbaijan” narrative should be launched to justify the aid to Armenia, which continues to depend on Russia, and the support of Yerevan.

The point we are talking about is at the root of the hysteria of European Union politicians, media and, of course, Armenia’s leadership, “Azerbaijan can attack at any moment, war can happen”.

However, Azerbaijan has no such intention, and even the Chief of General Staff of the Armenian Armed Forces, Lieutenant General Edward Asryan, stated that “what is said about Azerbaijan’s gathering of personal personnel and equipment to the border is unfounded.”

But the West’s attempts to create an image of “aggressive Azerbaijan”, this dirty game, have not stopped.

This is the issue that irritates Baku the most.

But this is not the main issue.

However, if the four-way statement in Granada is mentioned in the final document of the US-EU-Armenia meeting to be held on April 5, and if that document is referred to in some form, this point will seriously worry Azerbaijan and will seriously affect the negotiation process with Armenia.

If the statement in Granada is remembered in the document to be signed in Brussels, Azerbaijan’s cooperation with the West on specific issues, areas and directions will, of course, continue.

But our response to the West, which supports Armenia and will continue to do so at the expense of the interests of our country, will be to unilaterally reduce the activity in the negotiations with Yerevan.

If the West behaves like this towards us, our position will become even more specific, and the subject of the peace negotiation process will remain open.

If the West makes a “bet” on Armenia regarding the near future in our region, if it intends to support Yerevan in the long term – this is the choice of the United States and the European Union.

It should be recalled that Armenia was supported by one country in the last 30 years in the same way.

But now that country, realizing that it made a serious mistake, is trying to develop relations with Baku.

Azerbaijan is ready for the development of events in any direction.