Turkish Forum English

Tag: Ilham Aliyev

  • Armenia Should Exploit Rifts  Between Azerbaijan and Turkey

    Armenia Should Exploit Rifts  Between Azerbaijan and Turkey

    Countries must have various tools in their arsenal to counter or weaken their enemies. The most obvious one is the use of force. However, Armenia is unable to do that successfully because of its weak military.

    Another possible tool is destabilizing enemy states by creating internal turmoil and inciting their oppressed minorities.

    The third tool is to cause a rift between a hostile nation and its allies using the well-known method of divide and conquer. Armenia is surrounded by Azerbaijan and Turkey, two hostile neighbors that call themselves “one nation, two states.” Therefore, Armenia should try to drive a wedge between them by deepening their disagreements when such opportunities arise.

    In the last 30 years, there have been at least three occasions when Armenia’s two enemies were at odds with each other.

    The first opportunity was in March 1995, when members of Azerbaijan’s military, supported by some factions in Turkey, attempted to carry out a coup d’état against Pres. Heydar Aliyev. They wanted to return to power former Pres. Abulfaz Elchibey who was toppled by Aliyev in 1993.

    Prime Minister of Turkey Tansu Ciller, whose top aides were involved in the coup, gave the green light to get rid of Pres. Aliyev. The coup was foiled when Turkish President Suleyman Demirel became aware of the plot and alerted Pres. Aliyev. According to Wikipedia, the attempted coup “provoked a diplomatic crisis between Turkey and Azerbaijan.”

    This was a missed opportunity for the Armenian government in 1995 to take advantage of the attempted coup and the consequent chaos in Azerbaijan to further alienate the two enemies from each other by publicizing and accentuating the rift.

    The second crisis between Azerbaijan and Turkey happened in 2009 in the midst of signing the Armenia and Turkey Protocols, which envisioned normalizing relations between the two countries, including the establishment of formal diplomatic relations, opening of the Armenian-Turkish border and forming a joint historical commission to study the Armenian Genocide issue. These Protocols were brokered by the United States, Russia and France.

    Azerbaijan opposed the Protocols, fearing that if Turkey normalized relations with Armenia, it would weaken Azerbaijan’s pressure on Armenia in the Artsakh conflict.

    Turkey was caught in the middle of several conflicting interests:

    1) Turkey wanted to pursue its self-interest which was the softening of its antagonistic relations with Armenia to eliminate long-standing Armenian demands for the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide;

    2) Turkey was being pressured by the United States, Russia, and France to ratify these Protocols;

    3) Azerbaijan, Turkey’s junior partner, initially applied diplomatic pressure on Turkey and subsequently threatened to cut off the export of gas or increase its price. When that didn’t have the desired effect, Azerbaijan closed down several Turkish-funded mosques in Baku and took down Turkish flags. Azerbaijan’s foreign ministry declared that improving Armenia-Azerbaijan relations “directly contradicts the national interests of Azerbaijan and overshadows the spirit of brotherly relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey built on deep historical roots.”

    Once again, Armenia was merely a spectator in this conflict. Eventually, Turkey succumbed to the Azeri pressures and refused to ratify the Protocols.

    The third dispute between Ankara and Baku is happening at the moment after Pres. Erdogan embarrassed Azerbaijan by declaring on July 28: “Just as we entered Karabagh, just as we entered Libya, we should do the same with Israel. There is nothing stopping us. We just need to be strong to take this step.”

    Azerbaijan’s officials vehemently objected to Erdogan’s statement because it was exposing the Azeri myth that they won the Artsakh War without any outside help. The fact is that Azerbaijan was supported in the 2020 War by the Turkish military and commanders as well as the thousands of Jihadist mercenaries that Turkey brought to Azerbaijan from Syria to fight against Armenians.

    Despite the Azeri denials, Erdogan continued to repeat his statement about Turkish military’s involvement in the Artsakh conflict. On August 1, he said: “In Azerbaijan’s Karabagh, together with our Azerbaijani brothers, we completely eliminated the enemy forces.”

    Azerbaijan’s official Gazette responded in an editorial: “Our people, army and commander view with disappointment and deep sorrow the attempts to claim and take ownership of our rightful victory. Azerbaijan’s victory is for the entire Turkic world, but Turkey is not its architect. The Architects of the Karabagh victory are Commander-in-Chief Aliyev and the Azerbaijani Army.” The Azerbaijani Gazette described Erdogan’s words as “a heavy moral blow.”

    Baku pursued its disagreement with Turkey through diplomatic channels. On July 29, Azerbaijan’s ambassador to Turkey, Rashad Mammadov, met with Turkish Deputy Foreign Minister Mehmet Kemal Bozay to complain about Erdogan’s statement. Amb. Mammadov then paid a visit to Turkish Deputy Foreign Minister Berris Ekinci the following day to complain for the second time about Erdogan’s statement.

    Fortunately, Armenia’s Prime Minister reacted to this latest Azerbaijan-Turkey dispute when answering a reporter’s question during his August 31 press conference: “During the 44-day War [in 2020], in many locations, our military, our explorers saw Turkish flags, Turkish soldiers, Turkish Special Squadrons and Turkish high-ranking officers. Let’s not forget that prior to the 44-day War, there were large-scale military exercises between Azerbaijan and Turkey. And during the entire war, F-16 jets belonging to Turkey were literally in the air and drones belonging to Turkey were maintained by Turkish personnel.”

    Modern wars are not fought just with weapons. Nations also use psychological warfare, spread disinformation, instigate internal turmoil in hostile countries, and engage in divide and conquer tactics. Armenia needs to use all of these tools to undermine its enemies and defend its national interests.

    If Armenia lacks the expertise in such specialized operations, there are consulting firms that Armenia can hire, for a fraction of the millions spent on weapons, to weaken the enemy from within.

  • Should Pashinyan Go to Baku at Aliyev’s Invitation to Attend an Int’l Conference?

    Should Pashinyan Go to Baku at Aliyev’s Invitation to Attend an Int’l Conference?

    Hikmet Hajiyev, Head of Foreign Policy Department of Pres. Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan, announced on July 21 that Armenia was officially invited to the United Nations’ International Conference on Climate Change (COP29) to be held in Baku, Nov. 11-22. Hajiyev said that the invitation was sent by Mukhtar Babayev, Azerbaijan’s Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources, to the Armenian Foreign Ministry. Even though all UN members are automatically invited, Hajiyev made it sound like Azerbaijan was doing a special favor to Armenia by describing the invitation as a “goodwill and inclusive approach in the absence of diplomatic relations between the two countries.” Hajiyev added: “Now is the time for the Armenian authorities to make a decision.”

    Armenian officials have not issued a formal response to the invitation. They have made two evasive comments: The spokeswoman of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said: “such a visit is not planned in the work agenda of the Prime Minister,” and the spokeswoman of the Armenian Foreign Ministry told a journalist: “we will inform you in case the issue is addressed.”

    Baku claims that there will be 70-80,000 tourists visiting Baku on that occasion. Thousands of journalists, delegates of international environmental organizations, high-ranking officials of various governments and dozens of heads of state from around the world are expected to attend the Conference. 198 countries are parties to the Convention on Climate Change.

    On Dec. 7, 2023, the Armenian Prime Minister’s office and the Azerbaijani President’s administration had issued a joint declaration disclosing that in return for Armenia not exercising its veto power on Azerbaijan hosting the Climate conference, Azerbaijan would release 32 Armenian Prisoners of War held in Baku, and Armenia in turn would release two Azeri soldiers who were captured after crossing Armenia’s border and murdering an Armenian citizen. In addition, Azerbaijan agreed to support Armenia’s candidacy to the Eastern Europe Group‘s Bureau of COP29. At the time, I wrote that Pres. Aliyev was so obsessed with holding this prestigious international conference in Baku that Armenia should have insisted that Azerbaijan release all of the Armenian Prisoners of War held in Baku since the 2020 war as well as the eight high-ranking Artsakh officials held since September 2023.

    In recent months, at several international gatherings, Pres. Aliyev has boasted about Azerbaijan hosting the COP29 Conference, attributing that to “the increasing international respect for his country, two and a half month after” its occupation and ethnic cleansing of Artsakh. “Chairing the COP29 and holding this event in Baku is a clear example of the great trust that the international community has in our country. Almost 200 countries unanimously supported our candidacy,” Aliyev bragged.

    Pashinyan will respond to Azerbaijan’s invitation to participate in the COP29 Conference in Baku at a press conference in August, according to the Government Information and Public Relations Department of Armenia.

    Azeri officials have raised the possibility of Pashinyan and Aliyev signing during the November Conference in Baku a preliminary agreement outlining the basic principles of an eventual peace treaty. Hajiyev is touting the idea of “COP Truce,” suspending all hostilities around the world during the conference, similar to the concept of “Olympic Truce” to promote its false image as a peacemaker. At the end of May, Elchin Amirbekov, the Azerbaijani president’s Special Envoy, mentioned that the Conference could be a good opportunity for signing a peace treaty with Armenia.

    During his press conference on May 7, Pashinyan said that Yerevan agrees to sign a peace treaty with Azerbaijan before November. However, the Armenian Foreign Ministry warned on June 19 that “Azerbaijan will do everything possible to abort the process of signing a peace treaty with Armenia in November during the COP29 Summit in Baku in order to unleash a new aggression against the Republic of Armenia.”

    It is not known what Pashinyan will announce in August regarding his possible participation in the Baku Conference in November. However, in my opinion, Pashinyan should avoid falling in the trap set by Aliyev to gain bonus points in front of a worldwide audience at the expense of Armenia by showcasing the attendance of Pashinyan or his representative in the Conference in Baku. This would be a major coup for Aliyev, acting as a peacemaker, while continuing to make regular threats to Armenia and escalating his demands for concessions from Armenia. Furthermore, signing a piece of paper under the guise of a peace treaty will not obstruct Aliyev from any future attacks on Armenia.

    I believe that no Armenian official should consider going to Baku, while Azerbaijan is holding dozens of Armenian Prisoners of War and occupying parts of the Republic of Armenia since 2021. Without Azerbaijan first releasing all of the Armenian prisoners and withdrawing from Armenia, no Armenian official should go to Azerbaijan nor hold any kind of meeting or negotiation with Baku.

    A less desirable alternative would be for Pashinyan or his representative to go to Baku and demand to address the international conference of 196 nations, condemning Azerbaijan’s repeated threats to invade Armenia, castigating its occupation of Artsakh, ethnic cleansing of 120,000 Artsakh Armenians, refusal to allow them to return to their ancestral homeland under international guarantees, not releasing all of the Armenian Prisoners of War, and not withdrawing the Azeri troops from Armenia.

    However, there is a good chance that Azerbaijan may renege on its promise to allow Armenia’s representative to address the conference at the last minute. A much better option for Armenia would be to refuse to attend the conference unless Azerbaijan releases the Armenian Prisoners of War and withdraws its troops from Armenia in advance of the conference.

  • 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.

  • During 2.5-Hour-Interview, Pres. Aliyev Made Existential Threats to Armenia

    During 2.5-Hour-Interview, Pres. Aliyev Made Existential Threats to Armenia

    Pres. Ilham Aliyev, the dictator of Baku, gave a 2.5-hour-long press conference to Azeri journalists on January 10, 2024, during which he spewed not only his usual lies, but also made threats to Armenia’s very existence. Here are the highlights of Aliyev’s extremely arrogant and alarming words, emboldened by his military victories in the 2020 and 2023 Artsakh wars.

    To begin with, Aliyev claimed that “Today’s Azerbaijan is among the strongest countries of the world in the truest sense of the word.” This is not true. According to the globalfirepower.com website, as of 2024, Azerbaijan’s military is ranked 59th in the world. This is far from being one of the strongest countries in the world. Had it not been for the direct control of the Azeri military by Turkish Generals and bringing terrorist mercenaries from Syria during the 2020 Artsakh war, Azerbaijan would not have been able to defeat Artsakh. Aliyev admitted during his press conference that Azerbaijan enjoyed the full backing of Turkey during the 2020 war.

    Pres. Aliyev justified Azerbaijan’s serious violations of human rights, even genocide against Artsakh Armenians, by stating: “I have repeatedly said that international law does not work. These mechanisms are deployed only for the weaker countries. Bigger states ignore them. For them, it is as if law is not law, international law is not law. Under such circumstances, countries that demand justice, and rightly so, must secure this justice themselves.”

    Aliyev admitted the difficulties that Azerbaijan’s military faced during the 2020 war: “Had the war continued [after Nov. 10, 2020], it would have been very difficult to liberate the Kalbadjar and Lachin districts, especially in the winter season. However, we would have done that too. But our losses could have been extremely high, even higher than in the 44-day war. We all knew that well, because even now anyone visiting those regions can see how challenging the terrain is. However, if Armenia had not signed the act of capitulation, we would have continued the war until the end.”

    Aliyev’s next lie is that after the 2020 war, Armenia was “illegally transporting weapons, ammunition, mines and manpower to Karabakh.” This never happened. Aliyev used it as a pretext to attack Artsakh.

    The President of Azerbaijan revealed that before the Sept. 19, 2023 Azeri attack on Artsakh, “some of the local Armenians contacted our representatives and made suggestions about contacts, and we did not reject that.” Any Armenian who made secret contacts with the enemy should be considered a traitor.

    Aliyev then made another important admission. He said that, during the Sept. 19, 2023 attack on Artsakh, “had they [Artsakh Armenians] not surrendered, they would have been eliminated. There was no other option.” Aliyev is thus confirming that Artsakh leaders had no choice but to surrender in order to save the lives of 120,000 Artsakh Armenians.

    Aliyev confirmed that he had planned the arrest of Artsakh leaders who are now held in a Baku jail: “our position regarding the leaders of the separatists was unequivocal — their capture. Some of them tried to escape from there through the Lachin road, others were found in Khankendi [Stepanakert], and elsewhere. We knew their whereabouts.” He added that “only two people are missing from that group — they are in Yerevan.” Aliyev meant Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan.

    Pres. Aliyev disclosed that he had personally warned Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan about the impending Azeri attack on Artsakh on Sept. 19, 2023: “I told both the Armenian leadership and international actors that I could press the button and carry out this operation in a minute and they would not be able to do anything.”

    Aliyev also vented his anger at France’s support for Armenia, condemned that country’s colonial past and alleged that Paris had committed genocide against 1.5 million Algerians. He also ridiculed Armenia’s recent purchase of French armored personnel carriers, by calling them “tin cans” which are not “a real threat to us.”

    Aliyev also rejected the latest Pashinyan initiative — ‘Crossroads of Peace’– which is supposed to link Armenia, Azerbaijan, Turkey, Georgia and Iran. Aliyev said that this is just a PR campaign meant to replace his preferred ‘Zangezur Corridor.’ Ignoring Armenia’s sovereignty, Aliyev insisted that Armenia allow Azeri cargo to pass from Azerbaijan to its Nakhichevan exclave through Meghri, Armenia, without any inspection or customs clearance. If not, Aliyev warned, Azerbaijan will continue its blockade of Armenia.

    The President of Azerbaijan bragged that there is no longer any mention of Karabagh in the ‘Peace Treaty’ being negotiated between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

    Aliyev dismissed Pashinyan’s suggestion to demarcate the mutual border between Armenia and Azerbaijan on the basis of the 1975 Soviet maps, preferring older maps which he claimed gave Azerbaijan much more territory. He also mentioned the ridiculous notion that ‘Irevan’ (Yerevan) is an ancient Azeri city. Aliyev also claimed that there are eight Azeri villages which are located within Armenia. Importantly, Aliyev stated that Azerbaijan will not withdraw its military from parts of the territory of the Republic of Armenia it has occupied since May 2021 and September 2022. He suggested that Armenia and Azerbaijan sign a peace treaty now, leaving the demarcation of the border to a future date.

    Facing such an arrogant and warmongering leader as Aliyev, Pashinyan should stop begging for peace which is a sign of weakness, giving Azerbaijan the opportunity to demand more concessions from Armenia. Armenia’s top two priorities should be having a competent leader and a powerful military to fend off threats from its two enemies: Azerbaijan and Turkey.