Turkish Forum

Author: Harut Sassounian

  • We Must Keep the Memory and Dream Alive To Recover Artsakh and Western Armenia

    We Must Keep the Memory and Dream Alive To Recover Artsakh and Western Armenia

    There is a dispute among those who want to struggle for the recovery of Artsakh and those who say that Artsakh is lost forever and that we should forget about it. The latter shameful position is promoted by the current regime in Armenia which is responsible for losing Artsakh and is now doing everything possible to bury its memory.

    I would like to share with the readers my decades-long view on the recovery of Western Armenia and its parallels to actions we need to take for Artsakh.

    After every lecture I have given around the world on the Armenian Genocide and Western Armenia, some of the attendees immediately ask: what is the point of pursuing such a lost cause, particularly since the powerful Turkish military is occupying our historic lands?

    I respond by saying that the worst thing Armenians can do now is to forget about Western Armenia. That is the surest way of losing forever our Armenian territories.

    In addition to doing everything possible now, Armenians need to transmit to the next generation our demands for Artsakh and Western Armenia in order to keep the dream alive. If we don’t, our future generations, not knowing anything about our historic lands, will have no idea that they belong to us. Consequently, even if someday the geostrategic situation on the ground changes and an opportunity arises to recover our lost lands, our future generations will not show any interest in them.

    Remember that for over 2,000 years, the Jewish people had lost their homeland and were dispersed throughout the world. The succeeding Jewish generations passed on the knowledge of their homeland to their offspring. For more than 2,000 years, parents transmitted the memory of Jerusalem and Israel to their children and they in turn passed it on to their children, and so on. They did not forget their roots and history while living in exile in Russia, Europe and elsewhere. They repeatedly told their children and grandchildren, ‘next year in Jerusalem!’ Two thousand years later, when the opportunity arose to recover their lands, they took advantage of it and realized their long-held dream. Palestinians, who were and still are forcefully displaced from their lands, are in a similar situation. They too are struggling to keep their dream alive and are proclaiming the right of return to their ancestral homes.

    If Jewish people can keep their dream of returning to their homeland for 2,000 years, why can’t Armenians keep their dream alive of returning to Artsakh and Western Armenia someday? Armenians should tell their children and grandchildren: ‘next year in Shushi’ and ‘next year in Van’.

    The question is: how can Armenians return to their lands someday if powerful enemies are occupying Artsakh and Western Armenia? We should not forget that nothing remains constant forever. There is not a single country in the world that has had the same boundaries since the beginning of history. Over the years, some countries have enlarged their borders, while others lost their territories. Some have become large empires, while others have disappeared from the face of the earth. But one thing is clear: No one can claim that today’s boundaries of Azerbaijan and Turkey will remain the same forever. Just 100 years ago, the vast and powerful Ottoman Empire was reduced to the much smaller territory of the Republic of Turkey. Even though it is not possible to predict the exact date when the boundaries of Azerbaijan and Turkey will change, they will certainly not remain the same. How will such changes come about? There are several scenarios, such as regional wars, even world war, civil war, and nuclear or other types of disasters. Such events have happened in the past and will surely happen again in the future.

    When changes on the ground do take place, will future generations of Armenians know and have the memory that Artsakh and Western Armenia are part of their historic homeland or will they be clueless, having never heard of Shushi and Van? If they are deprived of that knowledge, when opportunities arise in the future, even if an unlikely benevolent Azeri or Turkish leader returns those lands to our grandchildren, they will not be interested in them, since they had never heard of them.

    In conclusion, my advice is to keep the dream alive. While we are deprived of our lands due to the actions of our enemies, it is up to us not to lose the memory and dream of someday returning to our lands. Let’s pass on our demands to future generations. The enemy took away our lands, but did not and cannot take away our memory. By forgetting about our historic lands, we ourselves will be helping our enemies put the final stone on the grave of our cause!

  • Despite His Denials, Aliyev is Upset By International Criticism of Azerbaijan

    Despite His Denials, Aliyev is Upset By International Criticism of Azerbaijan

    Pres. Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan repeatedly states that he ignores all international criticisms regarding his violations of the human rights of his own citizens, war crimes by his soldiers, and ethnic cleansing of Artsakh Armenians. Aliyev tries to cover up these violations and crimes through ‘Caviar diplomacy,’ by providing billions of dollars in bribes to various European officials.

    Anytime Azerbaijan has a problem with a foreign country, Europeans institutions or international courts, he puts on a brave face and acts like nothing has happened. He repeatedly says, “I don’t care who says what, I will do what I want.”

    I would like to cite a recent example of Aliyev being so bothered by such issues that, rather than ignoring them, has gone to unusual lengths to resolve them.

    This example has to do with France. In recent months, Aliyev has been quite outspoken with his harsh criticism of French President Emmanuel Macron for supporting Armenia. Aliyev has refused to meet with Pres. Macron and Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan to discuss the Artsakh conflict. Aliyev also complained about France selling a number of armored personnel carriers to Armenia. While spending billions of dollars to arm Azerbaijan with the latest Israeli and Turkish drones and missiles, Aliyev dares to complain about Armenia procuring a limited number of arms to defend itself.

    Late last year, the Azerbaijan-France confrontation got more heated when Azerbaijan expelled two French embassy officials from Baku and in return France expelled two Azeri embassy officials from Paris.

    The Intelligence Online website reported that, according to its confidential sources, Azerbaijan’s intelligence services asked Mossad, Israel’s Institute for Intelligence and Special Operations, to intervene with France to resolve their outstanding conflicts.

    According to confidential Mossad sources, Azerbaijan’s Foreign Intelligence Service (XKX), led by General Orkhan Sultanov, asked his counterpart in Israel to intervene with the General Directorate of External Security (DGSE) of France to deescalate the tension between Baku and Paris. Azerbaijan indicated that it would not want to worsen the existing dispute.

    However, the Azeri effort failed, as Mossad did not transmit the Azeri request to France, according to Intelligence Online sources. This was a delicate issue for Israel as it wanted on one hand to preserve its good relations with Azerbaijan, while on the other hand Israel’s intelligence agency did not want to attempt such mediation at a time when it was preoccupied with the conflict in Gaza and other Middle Eastern hot spots.

    Intelligence Online reported that Mossad enjoys a high degree of influence over Baku, since Israel uses the Azeri territory for its operations in Iran. When Mossad stole Iran’s nuclear documents from Tehran in 2018, Israel’s agents used Azerbaijan’s border to flee from Iran. In return, Mossad greatly facilitated Azerbaijan’s acquisition of sophisticated weapons from Israel, which aided Baku, the second largest buyer of Israeli arms, to score victories in 2020 and 2023 in Artsakh. Just before the attack on Artsakh in September 2023, Azerbaijan’s security services informed the experts of Mossad and Unit 8200 (Aman) of Israel’s Military Intelligence Directorate of their plans and sought their advice.

    According to Intelligence Online, Mossad has in recent years brought its cooperation with the French External Security Directorate to a higher operational level, notably on Iran. The French Agency has also been mobilized over the situation in Gaza.

    The new director of French Intelligence Agency, Nicolas Lerner, met with David Barnea, the director of Mossad when the latter came to Paris in the last week of January. Attending the closed-door meeting on the Israeli-Palestinian issue were Abbas Kamel, head of the Egyptian General Intelligence Directorate (Mukhabarat el-amma); Ronen Bar, head of Shin Bet, Israel’s Internal Security Agency; William Barnes, head of the CIA; and Qatari officials.

    Intelligence Online importantly reported that the CIA let Baku know that it was not pleased with Azerbaijan’s conflict with French Intelligence, while France is trying to hinder Moscow in the Caucasus and needs Azerbaijan’s platform.

    Having exposed Aliyev’s deception about ignoring international pressure on Azerbaijan, my advice to the international community is to continue pressuring Aliyev to stop his unacceptable behavior. Otherwise, he will go on with his multitude of ever-increasing violations and crimes, causing great harm to Azeris and Armenians alike.

    Next week, I will expose another one of Aliyev’s efforts to counter international pressures on Azerbaijan, despite his denials of not paying any attention to them.

  • Hollywood Proposed to Make Propaganda Films on Aliyev and Erdogan for a Price

    Hollywood Proposed to Make Propaganda Films on Aliyev and Erdogan for a Price

    A team of investigative journalists from the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) revealed that a Hollywood producer planned to make propaganda films that would glorify several authoritarian leaders for a payment of millions of dollars.

    Igor Lopatonok, a native of Ukraine who is now a US citizen, in collaboration with Oscar-winning filmmaker Oliver Stone, initially produced two documentaries on Ukraine which were described as “pro-Kremlin propaganda” and a highly flattering eight-part mini-series on Kazakhstan’s President Nursultan Nazarbayev.

    In addition, Lopatonok planned to make several propaganda documentaries casting a positive light on the autocratic leaders of Azerbaijan and Turkey, among others. However, it is not clear if Stone would have been involved in any of these proposed projects. None of these documentaries were made.

    OCCRP stated that Aliyev, Putin and Lukashenko “have all been accused of horrific crimes against the citizens of the countries they rule…. But where the world sees brutal dictators, Igor Lopatonok sees opportunity [to make money].” Since these authoritarian leaders were to pay for their propaganda documentaries, no mention would have been made of their brutal rule.

    “One of Lopatonok’s glossy pitches, ‘Untitled Oliver Stone Documentary’ or ‘About Ilham Aliyev and Azerbaijan’, promises that Stone would ‘sit face to face’ with the Azerbaijani strongman [Aliyev] and cover not only ‘emerging of leader to the head of state rank, but all questions of colorful and fascinating history of Azerbaijan,’” OCCRP reported.

    “Lopatonok seemed to have hit upon a promising formula. He had assembled a small team of screenwriters and producers who churned out film ideas to pitch to dictators, making an enticing offer: copious screen time with a world-famous director [Oliver Stone]. The key to ‘monetizing’ the process was simple, said an insider who worked on the team, and agreed to speak with reporters on condition of anonymity. Lopatonok had figured out how to offer powerful people something they couldn’t resist: Legitimacy on the world stage,” OCCRP wrote.

    “In his pitch to Aliyev for the ‘Oliver Stone documentary,’ Lopatonok underscores that the planned film would ‘have a unique positive impact on publicity of the president and Azerbaijan.’ Although it’s unclear if Aliyev ever engaged with the pitch, an expert on Eurasia said it would be in line with the strongman’s previous efforts to present his regime as a dynamic, modernizing influence in the region. ‘I do see it as in line with all of these potential vectors of image washing — culture, sports, those are the big ones, and global events, global conferences,’ said Alexander Cooley, a political science professor at New York’s Barnard College and an expert on Eurasian transnational networks.”

    It is obvious that a documentary made by Hollywood filmmakers touting the greatness of Aliyev would have much more credibility than the cheap propaganda produced in Azerbaijan.

    “When authoritarian leaders get a Hollywood glow-up, it often comes at the expense of the people they rule over, said Casey Michel, head of the Human Rights Foundation’s Combating Kleptocracy Program. The foundation has spent years campaigning for Hollywood stars to stop working with dictatorial regimes. ‘I can’t imagine how dispiriting it must be for citizens in places like Kazakhstan … to watch this American director come and turn into a propaganda mouthpiece for their dictators,’ Michel said. These people know how horrific these regimes truly are — and then they watch this American parachute in, and gobble up all of the dictators’ talking points, without even bothering to push back,” OCCRP stated.

    The funding to produce these documentaries is to be provided by the dictators “or people close to them.” In 2019, when Stone and Lopatonok produced the documentary “Qazaq: History of the Golden Man,” about Nursultan Nazarbayev, the President of Kazakhstan, a charitable foundation controlled by him paid the duo at least $5 million,” OCCRP reported.

    Documents obtained by OCCRP reporters revealed that Lopatonok’s “team prepared synopses of potential films about at least six other authoritarian governments, including China, the United Arab Emirates, and the Russian republic of Tatarstan, alongside the pitches to Aliyev and Lukashenko, promising that Stone would interview their leaders and help tell their ‘true story.’”

    Lopatonok’s team proposed that during his interview with Aliyev, Stone discuss “the country’s ‘success’ under the ‘dynastic rule’ of the Aliyev family, and its ongoing conflict with ‘an Armenia that is losing its stability and teetering on the edge of an abyss.’ A summary of the proposed film makes clear the tenor of Lopatonok’s approach: It describes Aliyev as a ‘true successor’ to his father, the previous president, who had taught him to be a ‘wise leader.’” The pitch asked: “Can you really call the existing state system in Azerbaijan a ‘Cult of Personality’? Or is it just a tribute of people’s respect to a leader who was able to turn the country from poverty into one of the developed, prosperous countries?” The film about Aliyev would cost $15 million, according to OCCRP.

    Lopatonok told the Azeri media during his visit to Baku in 2021: “This country [Azerbaijan] has a very rich and colorful culture. When I was here in 2012-2013, I learned to distinguish the Karabakh carpets from all others, identifying [them] by their ornament. I would make a good film about Azerbaijan.”

    There was another synopsis for a film on Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, “offering him a chance to tout his defense of Turkish interests.” Here is what the synopsis said: “Erdogan is a Turk and hardly needs to be basing his actions on the interests of other countries. But what interests does he have? Can he restore the Great Silk Road? And does he really have expansionist plans? What is Erdogan trying to achieve? He should answer these questions himself. And only himself. We should not try to divine [Erdogan’s plans] from coffee grounds, even if it is magnificent Turkish coffee that they know how to make only in Istanbul.”

    “In a 2018 interview, Ibrahim Kalin, then the spokesman for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, confirmed that they had received a pitch for a documentary about Erdogan around the same time Stone was in Turkey. ‘We are looking at it, we are evaluating it,’ he said,” OCCRP reported.

  • Aliyev Asks the Arab League and Turkey To Pressure PACE to Readmit Azerbaijan

    Aliyev Asks the Arab League and Turkey To Pressure PACE to Readmit Azerbaijan

    Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev repeatedly states: “I doesn’t care who says what about my country, I will continue doing whatever I want.” However, this is a cover up. Regardless of his public tough talk, Azerbaijan is working behind the scenes to manage its conflicts with other countries.

    Last week, I wrote that Azerbaijan asked the Israeli government to intercede with France to improve their relations which have deteriorated in recent years due to the French support of Armenia in the Artsakh conflict. Since Israel turned down Aliyev’s request to mediate with France, Azerbaijan started looking for other channels to resolve its problems with Europe.

    After the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) suspended Azerbaijan’s membership, Aliyev asked the League of Arab States to intervene with Europeans to restore Azerbaijan’s status. On February 13, 2024, at Azerbaijan’s request, Adel bin Abdul Rahman Al-Asoomi, the President of the Arab League’s Parliament, sent a letter to the President of PACE, Theodoros Rousopoulos, complaining about the resolution PACE had adopted refusing to ratify the credentials of the delegation of Azerbaijan.

    The President of the Arab Parliament told PACE: “The Arab Parliament expresses its deep regret over the adoption of this resolution; the Republic of Azerbaijan is a friend and strategic partner of the Arab States and plays a significant and influential role to preserve cultural diversity and to promote dialogue among civilizations. …The Republic of Azerbaijan is a member of the Council of Europe since 2001 and plays a major role in promoting activities of this Organization and achieving its principles and objectives. At the global level, it makes concerted efforts to lower tensions and conflicts….”

    The President of the Arab Parliament then counseled PACE: “Multilateral parliamentary diplomacy must be an instrument to reconcile points of view, and a wall of resistance in front of any divisions, and an added value for the diffusion of the principles of peace and tolerance.”

    The letter ended by urging PACE to reconsider its earlier resolution that had refused to ratify the credentials of Azerbaijan’s parliamentary delegation “which contradict the principles of dialog and cooperation.”

    Naturally, Azerbaijan’s Parliament (Milli Majlis) immediately publicized the Arab Parliament’s letter which was also published by several Azeri newspapers.

    It is very odd that the Arab Parliament would intervene with PACE on a matter that has nothing to do with Arab states. Azerbaijan is neither a member nor an observer of the Arab League. How can the President of the Arab Parliament call Azerbaijan “a friend and strategic partner of Arab States,” when it is an ally of Israel and buys billions of dollars of Israeli weapons? That is the reason Azerbaijan’s request in the past for observer status was rejected by the Arab League. The only possible explanation for the Arab Parliament’s willingness to write a letter to PACE is that Azerbaijan was engaged in its usual practice of ‘Caviar Diplomacy,’ meaning that it made a very generous donation to the Arab League. Therefore, the Arab Parliament’s statement about Azerbaijan seeking dialog and peace has nothing to do with reality.

    Since Armenia has had an Observer status with the League of Arab States since 2005, I am curious to know if Armenia’s representative in the League was aware that the Arab Parliament was considering sending such a letter to PACE in support of Azerbaijan. If yes, what actions, if any, he or she took to object to sending such a letter?

    In addition to the Arab League, Azerbaijan is pursuing its lobbying efforts at PACE through its big brother Erdogan, the President of Turkey. Yasar Yakis, the former Foreign Minister of Turkey and founder of the ruling AK Party, wrote in ARAB NEWS on February 25: “Turkey has strongly opposed the suspension of Azerbaijan [from PACE]…. Even if Azerbaijan’s membership of the Council of Europe is suspended, it could survive without being a member.”

    Earlier in February, when Aliyev visited Erdogan in Ankara, the Turkish President pledged to do everything possible “to get Azerbaijan’s credentials validated at PACE. We will continue our support and efforts for Azerbaijan until the decision [not ratifying its credentials] is overturned.” Erdogan added that Turkey will stress that PACE should be a platform for “parliamentary democracy rather than conflict.” However, Aliyev and Erdogan do not have parliamentary democracy and peace in their own countries.

    If Aliyev truly did not care what actions other countries take against Azerbaijan, he would not have gone to such great lengths to lobby the Arab League and Pres. Erdogan to restore his country’s credentials at PACE. He would have simply ignored PACE’s decision.

    The truth is that Aliyev deeply cares about his image. Most dictators, having violated all sorts of domestic and international laws, do everything possible to whitewash their crimes and try to look like an angel in the eyes of the world.

  • Fake Names on List of Donors to Pashinyan’s Candidate for Yerevan Mayor

    Fake Names on List of Donors to Pashinyan’s Candidate for Yerevan Mayor

    Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan has boasted for five years about his political party’s fair conduct in elections, blaming the former leaders of carrying out fraudulent elections. As the proverb says, “People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”

    Pashinyan has used the considerable resources of his government to gain an unfair advantage over his political opponents during local and parliamentary elections. Nevertheless, some of the opposition candidates, following their election to a public office, are removed after being arrested, tried and jailed by pro-Pashinyan judges.

    A recent example of fraud carried out by Pashinyan’s political party is the September 17, 2023 elections for the City Council of Yerevan. After ousting his own party member Hayk Marutyan from the position of mayor for daring to criticize the ruling party, Pashinyan planned to replace him with former Deputy Prime Minister Tigran Avinyan.

    Pashinyan’s backers resorted to a typical fundraising trick to ensure that Avinyan, who had little public support, becomes the Mayor of Yerevan. To accomplish their objective, they raised over one million dollars in campaign funds from mysterious individuals under fake names, an investigation revealed.

    Infocom.am journalists contacted many of the names on the donors’ list and found out that some of them were fake.

    The scandal starts with a Pashinyan supporter borrowing the ID card of a friend to donate using her name 2.5 million dram ($6,200), the maximum amount allowed by law, to Pashinyan’s political party, Civil Contract. This lady’s ID card was used to hide the real donor’s name. Unbeknownst to her, she was listed as a large donor to Pashinyan’s party. The fraudulent transaction took place on July 31, 2023, hours before a fundraising event held later that evening during which Pashinyan’s party claimed that 987 donors had raised over one million dollars (506 million dram), for the City Council race.

    When asked by the media, Pashinyan’s political party refused to make the donors’ names public. Only after the Freedom of Information Center filed a lawsuit, the party disclosed the list of donors with fake names on January 12, 2024. The list included 996 names who had donated nearly $1.3 million (509 million dram) to the campaign.

    When the lady, who was reported as donating 2.5 million dram, saw her name on the donors’ list, she was very upset. Infocom.am contacted other names on the donors’ list. Many of them were surprised that their names were used as donors to a political campaign. 87% of the donors were listed as donating over a million dram each, 70% of whom (140 individuals) were listed as donating the maximum amount of 2.5 million dram. Among the large donors were 88 candidates for City Council from the ruling Civil Contract party.

    Infocom.am disclosed that the largest donors were the owners of major corporations, their executives and employees. Eight of the large donors worked for a single prominent company. It was confirmed that its employees had not donated from their personal funds, but the business owners had paid in their names. Several other big businessmen were listed as donating the maximum amount. Among the donors on the list were the names of employees of the City Council of Yerevan.

    Infocom.am, after contacting the donors on the list provided by the Civil Contract party, concluded that some of the names on the donors’ list are “at least suspicious. The investigation showed that through organized mechanisms, funds of unknown origin were directed to the Civil Contract party’s fundraising, sometimes under the names of citizens who were generally unaware of the process.” In addition, since the law does not allow fundraising donations in cash, Infocom.am asked Avinyan’s campaign officials how the donations were made during the fundraising event. They answered that employees of ‘Hayeconobank’, who were present, transferred the cash to the account of the party. Among the shareholders of Hayeconobank is the ruling party parliament member and well-known oligarch Khachatur Sukiasyan, known as Grzo.

    Infocom.am told the Deputy Head of the Civil Contract party Vahagn Aleksanyan that the donors it contacted said that they have made no such donations. Aleksanyan asked for the names of these individuals in order to verify them. When told that Infocom.am cannot disclose their names, Aleksanyan replied that perhaps they did not identify the correct individuals.

    According to the law, the government can inspect the fundraising of a campaign only eight months after the election. The law states that by May 31 of the year following an election, political parties have to present their financial reports to the Anti-Corruption Committee.

    When Infocom.am asked the former President of the Central Election Committee Vahagn Hovakimyan, a former Parliament member from the Civil Contract party, about its refusal to disclose the list of donors, Hovakimyan replied: “You are treating the political forces as potential criminals.”

    This is a clear illustration of the fraud committed by Pashinyan’s party during the elections for the City Council of Yerevan. Nevertheless, the election was not as successful as expected for the ruling party. Avinyan was elected mayor only after the opposition parties, which had more City Council members than the ruling party, had failed to combine their votes to elect their own candidate for mayor.

    This is the sad picture of the so-called democracy in Armenia. I seriously doubt that the Anti-Corruption Committee will take any legal action against Pashinyan’s political party for violating election laws.

  • Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe Voted 76-10 to Kick Azerbaijan Out

    Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe Voted 76-10 to Kick Azerbaijan Out

    With each passing day, the noose is tightening around Pres. Ilham Aliyev’s neck. The European Union’s Chief of Foreign Policy Josep Borrell warned Azerbaijan on January 22 that there would be ‘severe consequences’ if Armenia’s territory were to be violated. The French Senate adopted a resolution by a vote of 336 to 1 on January 17 supporting Armenia’s territorial integrity and calling for sanctions against Azerbaijan. On January 18, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov publicly contradicted Aliyev’s repeated demands that Armenia provide Azerbaijan a ‘Corridor’ through ‘Zangezur.’ Lavrov said that there is no mention of ‘Zangezur Corridor’ in the Nov. 10, 2020 agreement signed by the leaders of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia.

    The latest blow to Azerbaijan was delivered last week by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) which voted overwhelmingly to reject the credentials of Azerbaijan’s delegates, thus ejecting Baku’s participation in its meetings for at least one year. By a vote of 76 to 10, with four abstentions, PACE delegates decided to expel Azerbaijan on January 24, 2024.

    The resolution adopted by PACE stated: “Very serious concerns remain as to [Azerbaijan’s] ability to conduct free and fair elections, the separation of powers, the weakness of its legislature vis-à-vis the executive, the independence of the judiciary and respect for human rights, as illustrated by numerous judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and opinions of the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission).” PACE recalled its previous resolutions which had referred to multiple problems with Azerbaijan, including the functioning of democratic institutions, organized crime, corruption, and money laundering, political prisoners, restrictions on NGO activities, violations of the rights of LGBTI people, non-implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, transnational repression as a growing threat to the rule of law and human rights, Pegasus and similar spyware and secret state surveillance, and the cases of at least 18 Azeri journalists and media actors who are currently in detention. PACE concluded that “more than 20 years after joining the Council of Europe, Azerbaijan has not fulfilled [its] major commitments.”

    Referring to Artsakh, PACE mentioned its 2023 report which had specified that Azerbaijan “did not acknowledge the very serious humanitarian and human rights consequences stemming from … the absence of free and safe access through the Lachin Corridor … which lasted for nearly 10 months.” PACE also condemned “the Azerbaijan army’s military operations of September 2023, which led to the flight of the entire Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia and to allegations of ‘ethnic cleansing.’”

    PACE expressed its concern about Azerbaijan’s lack of cooperation with the “rapporteurs of the Monitoring Committee [who] were not allowed to meet with persons detained allegedly on politically motivated charges.” PACE was also not invited “to observe the forthcoming presidential election despite Azerbaijan’s obligation to send such an invitation as the country is under monitoring procedure.” Furthermore, Azerbaijan had refused three times the visit of a PACE rapporteur.

    Ignoring Azerbaijan’s multiple violations of its commitments to the Council of Europe, Azerbaijan’s Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov condemned PACE’s decision. However, he acknowledged that Azerbaijan was ejected because of its invasion of Artsakh, which he described as “restoration by Azerbaijan of its sovereignty.”

    Even though Azerbaijan had dismissed all of its violations of international law, including the numerous judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and rulings of the International Court of Justice, this time around, Baku reacted extremely negatively. The Azeri delegation in PACE announced that their country has decided to “cease its engagement with and presence at PACE until further notice.” Some have compared Azerbaijan’s withdrawal from PACE after its ejection to Nazi Germany leaving the League of Nations in 1933.

    PACE’s vote was overwhelmingly against Azerbaijan because only nine Turkish delegates and one Albanian delegate voted in favor of Azerbaijan. One of the Turkish delegates even voted against Azerbaijan. Meanwhile, 76 delegates from 28 countries, including all four Armenian delegates, voted to eject Azerbaijan.

    Azerbaijan’s loss at PACE is Armenia’s gain:

    1) Azerbaijan’s reputation was further tarnished after its ejection from PACE, exposing its numerous human rights violations and flagrant disregard for European values.

    2) Baku is now deprived of the opportunity to raise its issues in Europe through PACE.

    3) Azerbaijan will no longer be able to criticize Armenia during PACE meetings.

    4) Azerbaijan will be unable to vote in favor of its interests and against those of Armenia at PACE meetings.

    For far too long, Azerbaijan has been spoiled by the international community, particularly Western countries, blinded by Baku’s vast oil and gas supplies. After its ejection from PACE, Azerbaijan should now be expelled from the Council of Europe.