Aliyev walks the walk and talks the talk: What is in store for Karabakh Armenians? Contemplations with Orkhan Amashov/VIDEO

In the latest episode of Contemplations with Orkhan Amashov, the author assesses what is in store for Karabakh Armenians, the motives and behavioural patterns of the interested parties and reflects on the importance of the message delivered by President Aliyev, in a recent interview with Euronews, to the locals residing in the region. 

"Hello everybody, 

The situation in Karabakh is abnormal. This abnormality stems from the fact that the local inhabitants, Karabakh Armenians, are in limbo, tyrannised by a separatist junta based in Khankandi which, despite being in state of impending dismemberment, are keeping them wilful hostage for the sake of a hopeless venture.

Harutyunyan and Co - the upper crust of this clique - who are still physically present on sovereign Azerbaijani territory - are increasingly out on a limb. Their military and political resources are depleted, with the establishment of an Azerbaijani border checkpoint at the entrance to the Lachin Road on 23 April preying heavily on the minds of the separatists, making them slowly grasp the sheer impossibility of any further escapades.

This illegal creation is indeed isolated, but there are a few factors propping up its low-rise edifices. They hope in vain, but still hope and imagine, in their wildest dreams, that the situation may take a U-turn. 

Russia is present on the ground and, as normal, has ulterior motives. Moscow’s moral support for the separatists, currently backed by temporary physical protection, appears to be linked with its desire to maintain its military footprint in Karabakh and stranglehold across the South Caucasus. However, ultimately, when the Kremlin needs to make a final decision, choosing between “keeping their boots on the ground” and maintaining good amicable relations with Azerbaijan, which are multidimensional, it will be required to act rationally.

In light of its preoccupation with and declining fortunes in Ukraine, it would not be judicious of Russia to further antagonise Baku. In other words, if we compare the advantages of the ‘prestige” associated with its military presence in Karabakh and the wide plethora of economic benefits stemming from the opening of communications and other concomitant developments, Moscow’s sense of what is right, in all probability, will be determined by cold reason, and not by vague imperial pretensions.

Another factor is Armenia which, presently, is either gutless or merely unwilling to exert influence on the separatist clique in inducing it to be receptive to Azerbaijan’s legitimate demands. Pashinyan makes a great deal of sense when he says that Armenia is ready to recognise Azerbaijan's territorial integrity formally, as all sovereign nations have done so, and the Armenians of Karabakh should decide their problems with Baku. But his words appear perfunctory, not backed up with deeds. Pashinyan’s government, instead of convincing the separatist entity to receive humanitarian supplies from Aghdam, has outlandishly sent convoys to the Armenian side of the conditional border, without an accord with Baku, exacerbating the tensions. In addition, by insisting on an international mechanism to address the rights and security guarantees made to Karabakh Armenians, Pashinyan gives Russia extra justification for stalling the internal dialogue between Baku and those in Khankandi and its outskirts. 

Therefore, the combination of Russia’s ulterior motives and Armenia’s lack of courage, will or guts, results in the root of what imbues the last straw-clenching separatists in Karabakh with hope. They are encouraged. They are being given false hope. In addition to Russia and Armenia, there are some other actors, such as France, who play a significant role in sustaining secessionist hopes in Karabakh.

On the whole, regarding the West, which is not always unified, with internal divisions and power struggles in abundance, there is a great deal of hypocrisy that is very unhelpful. Although the joint efforts of Brussels and Washington in the Azerbaijani-Armenian peace process, based on the concept of the mutual recognition of territorial integrity and sovereignty, is commendable, nevertheless, when one throws a glance at a wider picture, one can discern some oversights and omissions.

For instance, let us compare two cases involving the situation in Eastern Ukraine, namely Luhansk and Donetsk in 2014, and the Karabakh region of Azerbaijan in 2023. When, nine years ago, Russia attempted and eventually sent so-called “humanitarian" convoys to the rebellious regions of Ukraine, the West unanimously considered this as a unilateral operation violating the territorial integrity of Ukraine, due to the absence of Kyiv's consent. The government of Ukraine wanted to control the supplies, eventually demanding that all aid going to Luhansk and Donetsk should proceed, not from Russia, but from its own territory. This was reasonable, and major Western powers rightly supported Ukraine.

When, in July 2023, Azerbaijan proposed the transportation of humanitarian trucks to Karabakh from Aghdam, as opposed to their transfer from Armenia via the Lachin Road, the reaction from the West was fundamentally different, and flawed. In 2014, Kiyev wanted supplies to proceed from its own territory, under its control. Baku logically wants the same now, regarding Karabakh. 

The facts on the ground are similar. Applicable norms and standards should be identical. This adds to Baku's incredulity about the West's sincerity and noble intentions. Azerbaijan sees the unmistakable signs of a tasteless and burlesque charade in the attempts to portray the present situation in Karabakh as a humanitarian catastrophe and counteract Baku’s legitimate steps towards reintegrating the region. 

Anyway, there is a detailed article and video on this published by Caliber. Please examine these for yourself. 

Back to the original discussion on the designs of different actors regarding the Karabakh Armenians. I have not said much about what the major player, Azerbaijan, on the sovereign territory of which all of these developments are occurring, wishes to achieve. It is not just about the question of navigating supply routes, to which I have already referred, but also a plethora of other issues.

In a recent interview with Euronews, published on 1 August, President Ilham Aliyev stated that, for Karabakh Armenians, being part of Azerbaijani society would signal the implementation of  “security guarantees, with their rights, including educational, cultural, religious and municipal ones”, being ensured. This is not just an acceptable offer, but also very generous, albeit needing to be appreciated in the proper light. 

As stressed during his interview, President Aliyev means what he says. Did he not say before the war with Armenia in 2020 that Azerbaijan would liberate its occupied lands and restore its territorial integrity? It was his life’s mission, which Aliyev completed with the hand of history weighing upon his shoulders. Did he not say that it was the sovereign right of Azerbaijan to establish a border checkpoint at the entrance to the Lachin Road? Has it not happened? It has.

He is also saying that the Azerbaijani flag will be foisted upon Khankandi and hoisted high, with the local Armenian residents who decide to remain enjoying full constitutional guarantees and rights as citizens of Azerbaijan. That will also happen sooner than one may predict. President Aliyev is a man who walks the walk and talks the talk. Of that, there is no shred of doubt.

Thank you very much."