So, the following people- Head of the Delegation of the European Parliament for Relations with the South Caucasus Marina Kaljurand (Estonia), Standing Rapporteur for Armenia in the European Parliament Andrey Kovatchev (Bulgaria) and Standing Rapporteur for Azerbaijan Željana Zovko (Croatia) issued a joint statement, dramatically titled “On the serious humanitarian crisis in Nagorno- Karabakh”.
It is worth recalling that the “magnificent three MEP” once sat in a puddle. As recently as the spring of this year these MEPs have already adopted a joint statement, which, among other things, expressed dissatisfaction with Azerbaijan’s installation of “Lachin” border checkpoint on April 23, 2023. This means that three middle-aged politicians, with certain experience in international organizations, used to shuffling lacquered shoes on the soft carpets of Strasbourg and Brussels cabinets, tried to convince a state, which had to endure fire, water and copper pipes in recent decades, the invasion of the enemy, the indifference of world public opinion and the unjust accusations of some illegal actions but has overcome all those, restored its territorial integrity checkmated rivals on the diplomatic field, that the creation of a border crossing point on its own sovereign territory was “dangerous”. It is gratifying that, at least, the lawyers of the International Court of Justice were more competent and did not find that the border crossing prevented traffic on the Lachin Road, as they noted in their ruling from July 6.
One would think that after this, the embarrassed fighters “for the rights and welfare of the first Christian people” would sit quietly in the last rows, but no, they keep torturing the European Parliament printer with their pseudo-legal creations.
Take a look at this: “We are deeply worried by the rapidly deteriorating humanitarian situation in Nagorno-Karabakh due to Azerbaijan’s ongoing blockade of the Lachin Corridor in violation of its commitments under the ceasefire statement of 9 November 2020 “. Thus begins their new blossom.
It is visible with the naked eye that this paragraph contains contemptuous contempt for both the International Court of Justice and the President of the Council of Europe, Charles Michel and his moderated negotiating process. In his last statement following the bilateral meeting of the heads of Azerbaijan and Armenia, Michel did not use the word “Nagorno-Karabakh”, naming the region “former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region”. Yet the use of the term “Nagorno-Karabakh” by the EU MPs, which was granted to live on for a long following the 44-day war, on the one hand, stops the negotiation process, and on the other deprives the EU of gaining trust from Baku.
It should also be added that in accordance with the Trilateral Statement of November 10, 2020, “the Republic of Azerbaijan guarantees the safety of traffic along the Lachin corridor of citizens, vehicles and cargo in both directions”. By the way, it is precisely security concerns, among other reasons, which made it necessary to allow only vehicles for the purpose of medical evacuation and delivery, especially following the shelling of that checkpoint by the Armenian side on June 15.
“We fully support and subscribe to the statement of the EU High Representative Josep Borrell of 26 July 2023. We condemn the ongoing blockade of humanitarian supplies and the politicization of humanitarian access, which further aggravates the already dire situation in the region”, the formidable troika continues.
So that’s where all this noise is coming from! Josep Borrel is another representative of the pro-Armenian party in the EU. By the way, unprofessionalism and lack of basic logical thinking are reflected in the accusation of Baku in the politicization of humanitarian issue. In fact, it is Armenia and its patrons who are politicizing the issue by denying Karabakh Armenians access to the Aghdam-Khankandi road. After all, if the problem is purely humanitarian (should it exist at all), then the good hearts of Armenia, Europe and the Armenian community of Karabakh should seize every opportunity to solve it. So why are they turning down the Aghdam-Khankandi road?
There are two answers to this question and both are true. First, there is no humanitarian crisis, much less a famine in Karabakh. Second, as we have said, the Armenian side and its patrons are thus politicizing the humanitarian issue. For them, the desire to prevent the reintegration of Karabakh Armenians into Azerbaijani society prevails over humanitarian considerations.
Confirming our theory, the European “servants of the people” issued a passage, horribly unsound from a common sense point of view horribly: “Azerbaijan’s offer of providing aid via Aghdam is separate to its existing obligations regarding the Lachin Corridor which must be respected. Humanitarian aid must be allowed to the region and any impediment to access constitutes a violation of international humanitarian law. Opening additional routes can only be encouraged, but it is a separate issue, which should be mutually agreed upon in the context of direct negotiations between Baku and Stepanakert”.
The last phrase is, by the way, another ignoring of Charles Michel, who in the statement mentioned just above (agreed upon with the Armenian side, in fact), did not use the phrase “negotiations between Baku and Stepanakert” but instead “dialogue between Baku and Armenians of the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region”. In this way, the teachers managed to make two mistakes in the same sentence. It is needless to point out that the European Parliament does not possess any right to grant the Armenian community of Khankandi a negotiating status.
Moreover, by their persistent refusal to consider the Aghdam road, Kaljurand, Zovko and Kovatchev are obstructing humanitarian access to the region, and thus, following their own logic, are violating international humanitarian law.
Thus, enthusiasts of Armenian-European solidarity are doomed to go around in circles, without the need for more paperwork with texts. However, is that unnecessary? Marina Kaljurand’s corrupt relationship with the Armenian diaspora has been the subject of several media reports. So it seems that the senseless infusion of millions of dollars to lobby the Armenian project for over 30 years did not teach the Armenian diaspora anything. This campaign has failed to save Armenia from defeat, much less prevent Azerbaijan from reintegrating Karabakh.
There is, however, one positive aspect in the statement of the three, and this is the acknowledgment of the presence of the Aghdam Road. In the context of the Armenian-Azerbaijani settlement, it has become common to cite five stages of acceptance of the inevitable. Now Europe carefully pronounces “Aghdam” once, tomorrow it will say it three times, and in a month it will only be talking about Aghdam.
Murad Abiyev
Caliber.Az
