Echoes of Europe’s Armenian mission in Azerbaijan Realities versus allegations

Caucasus Watch has recently published a biased anti-Azerbaijan analysis by Thijs Korsten, a former Junior Research Fellow at the Institute of Caucasus Studies in Jena, Germany about the European mission’s (EUMA) operation on the Armenia-Azerbaijan border. The article is all but focused on discrediting Azerbaijan and its undeniable role in fetching regional peace.

Furthermore, Caliber.Az was mentioned by the author in his piece to “justify” his arguments. However, distortion of our analysis is obvious since Korsten seemingly does not compromise on his hysteria for disgracing Azerbaijan.

We think there should be some comments on the author’s allegations:

First, in response to Korsten’s claims, we do confirm that Caliber.Az is in no way associated with any government structure in Azerbaijan, including the Defence Ministry. We are an independent media and broadcasting company covering multi-theme news across the world, with a key focus on our region.

Korsten refers to our analysis of the military-intelligence nature of the European mission in Armenia, calling it “allegations”. But we are more than confident that it is based solely on facts, including those about the mission’s chief Markus Ritter - an experienced intelligence agent under police cover, whose track record includes the duty as chief of staff of the UN mission in Kosovo (2004-2005), the chief of staff of the UN observation mission in Georgia (2007-2008), Head of Programming and Operations of the EU Aviation Security Mission in South Sudan (2012-2013), and Head of the EU Advisory Mission in Baghdad (2017-2019).

Ritter’s high-level involvement in territories engulfed in military conflicts casts doubt on his “humanitarian purposes” in Armenia. We have exclusively exposed what EUMA has been using the cameras at its disposal for– spying on Russian servicemen’s “intimate relationships” in collaboration with the Armenian special services.

Korsten largely highlights and almost criticizes Russia’s reaction to the deployment of the European mission in Armenia. A kind reminder: Russia’s bellicose rhetoric about EUMA is not a bolt from the blue. A brief overview of the Armenian government’s recent political hike could be helpful in understanding the concerns of Moscow. Yerevan is obviously and increasingly distancing itself from its largest ally, and the mission from Europe, including the military-intelligence background of its chief, could play into the hands of the smallest South Caucasus nation to ditch possible military-political confrontations through “unarmed” delegation from the Old Continent.

Meanwhile, the author mentions France as one of the active supporters of EUMA’s operation in Armenia. This should not be in vain. France’s zeal for deploying the mission in Armenia could be traced to its handicapped reputation as a co-chair of the impotent OSCE Minsk Group, of which a 30-year-long shuttle diplomacy could not settle the former conflict in Karabakh. Vice versa it was well established to act as a tool to prolong the occupation of the Azerbaijani territories. So, the active role of France in the new mission in Armenia could be analyzed as the next attempt of Paris to support the ongoing claims of Yerevan for Karabakh or at least for a so-called “status” for Karabakh Armenians

Last but not least, Korsten should realize that EUMA cannot in any way intervene in Azerbaijan’s internal policy agenda regarding its internationally recognized Karabakh economic region, including the “red line” narrative. It should first set “red lines” for Armenia to urge its partner to refrain from territorial claims & prioritize peace. It should probably be a success for the mission rather than alleging a “spring attack” by Azerbaijan, which Ritter & his guys think could not take place largely due to the presence of the European mission & eventually gain a "hurt locker" reputation for it.