At the beginning of October, representatives of the Berliner Zeitung welcomed a delegation from Azerbaijan at the Berliner Verlag premises. Together with Elchin Amirbayov, the Advisor to the Azerbaijani President for Special Assignments, and the Ambassador of the Republic of Azerbaijan to Germany, Nasimi Aghayev, employees of the Berliner Zeitung and Berliner Verlag discussed current topics such as conflict resolution in the South Caucasus, the war in Ukraine, the upcoming UN Climate Conference, the human rights situation in Azerbaijan, as well as energy relations between Berlin and Baku.
During the discussion, Amirbayov, a close confidant of President Ilham Aliyev, shared insights into Azerbaijan’s perspective on the global political situation. Representatives from the Berliner Zeitung also addressed controversial topics, such as press freedom and human rights in Azerbaijan. Amirbayov, in turn, commented on Baku’s relations with the European Union, the United States, Russia, and the possibilities for a peaceful resolution with Armenia.
The preparation for COP29, the World Climate Conference, which will take place in mid-November in the Azerbaijani capital Baku, is currently at the top of the Aliyev government’s agenda. In the upcoming weekend edition of the Berliner Zeitung, to be published on Saturday, October 19, 2024, an interview with Elchin Amirbayov will be featured.
Mr. Amirbayov, in an interview with the Berliner Zeitung, the Armenian ambassador to Germany recently stated that a peace treaty with Azerbaijan could be signed “next Monday.” Do you agree with this?
I would question the sincerity of that statement. Suggesting that a peace agreement in its current incomplete form could be signed tomorrow is clearly unrealistic, unacceptable and deliberately misleading. There are still very important issues in the draft peace agreement that have to be fully addressed. Otherwise, the agreement would be half-baked and deficient.
What specific issues are involved?
The most important stumbling block on the road to peace deal today is the territorial claim still embedded in current Armenian constitution on the territory that is internationally recognized as Azerbaijani. Ignoring this problem would amount to ignore the elephant in the room. I believe Armenia wants to mislead the international community, creating the impression that it is constructively engaged in the peace process but in reality Armenia procrastinates and leads the peace process to a dead-end.
In my view, Armenian willingness for peace has even declined recently. They have realized the extent to which the U.S., the European Union, and some EU member states are providing Armenia with diplomatic, economic, military, and other support. Armenia’s militarization, including arms deliveries from countries like France, undermines the prospects for peace. Armenia is now in a comfort zone where peace with Azerbaijan doesn’t seem to be a priority.
Your country wants Armenia to remove its claim on Azerbaijani Karabakh from its constitution. A second point of contention, the so-called Zangezur Corridor, has already been excluded from peace talks. Would it be possible to postpone the constitutional amendment as well?
It would be wrong to make a parallel between these two issues, they are very different.
Territorial claim of Armenia to Azerbaijan has been from day one the root cause of the conflict and needs to be addressed once and forever. While we respect the desire for a peace agreement as soon as possible, our main goal is that peace should be lasting and irreversible. Without a constitutional amendment in Armenia, this won’t be possible. If a new government in Armenia were to come to power, they could decide that the peace agreement contradicts the Armenian constitution. Since their constitution has a supreme legal force and holds more legal authority than a peace agreement, a new government could declare the agreement invalid.
In short, we don’t want peace solely with Prime Minister Pashinyan. We seek an agreement with Armenia that will endure beyond this administration and future ones. We cannot leave any legal loophole that could lead to the revival of the conflict in the future. As long as the root cause of the conflict remains unaddressed, we can’t be satisfied with any peace agreement. And we won’t sign something just to please the outside world.
And the Zangezur Corridor?
Regarding the Zangezur Corridor between the two parts of Azerbaijan, we still strongly support this idea but we don’t want to give anyone the chance to claim we’re using this as a dealbreaker. At the same time, this issue is not seen by us as a sine qua non for the achievement of a peace deal, we could return to this issue afterwards. But the issue of constitutional territorial claim to Azerbaijan is of crucial importance and cannot be postponed. Without it, durable peace will not be achievable.
To clarify: The focus is on Armenia’s constitutional claim on Karabakh, legally part of Azerbaijan, and the need for a constitutional amendment. Are there any other points of contention?
There are some Armenian laws that are consequences of the territorial claim. For example, there is a law passed by the Armenian parliament prohibiting the Armenian government from signing agreements recognizing Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan. But these are all the derivatives of the current constitutional framework and could be effectively address as soon as the Constitution is amended.
So, it really is all about Karabakh…
Yes, about Karabakh. This includes the diplomatic and legal cases that Armenia is pursuing against us in international forums and courts. Azerbaijan is accused of various crimes, such as the expulsion of Armenians from Karabakh. It is widely known, however, that the mass departure of ethnic Armenians from Karabakh in September 2023 was an orchestrated operation by the separatist regime Armenia had installed on our territory. Azerbaijan had encouraged the Armenian civilian population to stay and integrate as citizens.
Interestingly, nobody talks about the 300,000 Azerbaijanis who were expelled from Armenia in the late 1980s and still don’t have the right to return to their homeland. Or about the ethnic cleansing of a million Azerbaijanis in Karabakh and other Azerbaijani territories occupied by Armenia for 28 years.
Again, there is a double standard: Azerbaijani refugees and internally displaced persons are ignored, but when it comes to Armenian refugees, they must be supported. This double standard has convinced us that we cannot rely on external support. We must resolve our issues with Armenia bilaterally. Fortunately, Armenia also prefers a bilateral format. The successes in the peace process so far are the result of bilateral talks. This includes the December 2023 agreement for mutual diplomatic support during the COP-29 conference and most recent adoption by border commissions of both countries of the regulation on delimitation of the future common border. This border is over 1,000 kilometers long, our longest with any neighbor. So, to sum up, we now hope that Armenians will find the courage to amend their constitution, and effectively renounce territorial claims on Azerbaijan which will facilitate the road to concluding a peace deal.
What interests might the U.S. and the EU have in your conflict? Recently, there were reports that the U.S. is pushing for sanctions against Azerbaijan.
The U.S. is on the verge of presidential elections. Both candidates are also vying for support from Armenian-American voters. However, I still believe that it’s in the U.S. and European interests to give Armenia and Azerbaijan the chance to complete the path to peace.
We’re in a critical final phase. The less interference from external actors, the greater the chance that Armenia won’t foster unrealistic expectations. Unfortunately, the South Caucasus is also a point of contention for larger geopolitical players. I hope that Armenia shares the view that we don’t want to be the grass where elephants fight.
Azerbaijan’s international ranking on human rights and press freedom isn’t particularly high. As a result, Azerbaijan frequently receives negative press in Europe. How do you intend to address this?
Negative press shouldn’t be taken to mean that we are always to blame. We’ve often been the victims of intense misinformation, especially on the eve of major events. The same holds true ahead of the COP 29 climate conference in November. But you’re right: every country should recognize it can make progress in human rights. This isn’t just about press freedom but also about racism, extremism, and Islamophobia—even in Germany and other countries. No one is perfect.
Azerbaijan has the political will, and we’re making efforts. Yet, some countries or individual EU parliamentarians want to deny Azerbaijan the right to participate in a democratic institution like the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE). Why? Because Azerbaijan restored its territorial integrity in accordance with international law?
If Europe is truly a leader in human rights and moral values, where was Europe when the fundamental rights of a million Azerbaijanis were trampled on for 28 years? This brings us back to what I mentioned earlier: double standards. Azerbaijani refugees and internally displaced persons are one issue; Armenians are another.
In November, Azerbaijan will host COP 29. After COP 28 last year in Dubai, there were plans to secure financing for upcoming climate measures in Baku. However, it’s now reported that several major banks and investors won’t be coming to Baku, citing logistical reasons. What’s your take on this?
It doesn’t surprise me. It might be a pretext to politicize the event and pressure Azerbaijan on other issues. Since December 2023, we’ve done everything to ensure the best conditions for all participants. As the host country, we bring together a broad spectrum of global interest groups—not just governments, but also non-state actors, civil society, indigenous populations, and youth. As the recent chairman of the Non-Aligned Movement, representing over 120 countries, we maintain close contacts with the Global South . At the same time, we interact closely with the European Union, other European countries and the U.S and try to act as bridge-builders to achieve the desired outcome.
To ensure continuity and coherence among COP presidencies, we work in the format of troika comprising the United Arab Emirates, Azerbaijan, and Brazil, which will host COP 30 next year. As our contribution to the principle of international solidarity we will be funding the participation of small island states and supporting numerous innovative initiatives.
Not least, Azerbaijan launched the COP Truce Appeal, calling for a global ceasefire during COP 29, similar to the Olympic Truce. We would welcome as many countries as possible joining this peace initiative and hope that it will be the case.
It’s said that Azerbaijan wants to join BRICS. Your trade with China is significant. Could your country be turning away from the West?
No, this shouldn’t be viewed in black-and-white terms. Since regaining independence, we have pursued a multi-faceted foreign policy. Our relationships with the European Union, the United States, and other Western countries remain equally important. At the same time, we are diversifying our partnerships and cooperation, which is only natural.
Regarding BRICS: Yes, we intend to join. We’re not the only ones. This raises the question of why that’s the case. In our case, the message is also that no partner is indispensable and that you should always take your decisions on the basis of national interests.
As to the West, we have demonstrated over decades that Europe and the West in general can view us as credible strategic partners, whether in energy security, fight against terrorism or connectivity. Today the eyes of the world are on the Middle Corridor, the trans-Caspian route that unites Europe with Asia. There are many ways to deepen relations with Western countries. And the more we diversify our options, the better it will be for our country.
Translated from Berliner Zeitung
