Fuel of peace and the war bill An anti-Azerbaijani move in the US Congress

For the first time, Baku has begun supplying Azerbaijani petroleum products to Armenia. On December 18, 1,220 tonnes of AI-95 automotive gasoline, loaded into 22 tank cars, were delivered to the neighbouring country. In response, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan thanked President Ilham Aliyev for unblocking the transit of goods through Azerbaijani territory and for creating the conditions for the resumption of bilateral trade. He made this statement during a meeting of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council in Saint Petersburg.

This development is a clear signal that Baku and Yerevan are moving closer to the final signing of a peace treaty, following the initialling of the “Agreement on the Establishment of Peace and Interstate Relations between the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Republic of Armenia” on August 8 in Washington, in the presence of both countries’ leaders and U.S. President Donald Trump. Leaders of numerous states and heads of international organisations have welcomed this step.

Yet, against this positive momentum, a troubling event unfolded in the United States, highlighting the continued influence of the Armenian diaspora and the politicians long aligned with it—a move that threatens to undermine progress and inject destructive, counterproductive dynamics into the peace process.

Thus, members of the U.S. House of Representatives have introduced a new bill concerning the partnership between the United States and Armenia in the field of security. Baku would likely have ignored this document, presented on behalf of Republican Gus Bilirakis of Florida and Democrat Frank Pallone of New Jersey, if it were not openly anti-Azerbaijani in nature. In particular, the bill proposes to prohibit the U.S. President from lifting restrictions on Azerbaijan that were imposed under Section 907. In this way, the authors of the initiative are attempting to legally block the White House from independently adjusting its policy toward Baku, even amid a changing regional reality.

So, what is the set of “arguments” put forward by the U.S. pro-Armenian Congress members? The repertoire contains everything that has long since become tired and overused. In short, they demand that any future assistance provided by the United States to Azerbaijan be made conditional on the fulfilment of a number of requirements, including the “return of Armenians to Karabakh.”

It goes without saying that these American legislators conveniently “overlook” the fact that no one expelled the Armenians from there—they left voluntarily, following the instructions of the former leaders of the Karabakh junta. Nor do they mention that the Armenians departed comfortably, taking all their belongings with them by car, as documented by the Azerbaijani side.

Moreover, it should be specially emphasised that the Washington agreements contain not a word about the “return of Armenians to Karabakh,” nor about the “release of prisoners,” by which the former leaders of the Karabakh junta, accused of serious crimes, are meant.

As for the call by these Congress members to “halt military actions against Armenia,” it is simply absurd. Even Nikol Pashinyan himself stated in September at the 7th Congress of the ruling Civil Contract party that “for a year and seven months, not a single soldier has been killed or wounded in the border shootings.”

Moreover, the First Karabakh War, the 44-day war in the autumn of 2020, and the one-day anti-terrorist operation in Karabakh all took place on Azerbaijani territory. It was Armenia that, for nearly three decades, occupied 20% of Azerbaijan’s territory and cynically ignored the well-known UN Security Council resolutions.

As we can see, the authors of this latest anti-Azerbaijani provocation have reached disgraceful “heights” in their brazen and immoral distortion of indisputable facts. By now, however, such tactics are hardly surprising. It is enough to recall that the unjust Section 907 was adopted in 1992, at the very time Armenia was committing the Khojaly genocide and occupying Shusha and Lachin. Yet history—the relentless judge—has since put everything in its place: despite enormous challenges, Azerbaijan has restored its territorial integrity and sovereignty.

This provocative move by certain members of Congress came shortly after Florida Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna, aligned with President Trump, introduced a legislative initiative to repeal Section 907. We view this not only as a direct attack on Azerbaijan but also as a challenge to the U.S. president’s peace-making efforts—and it is by no means the first. In September, the House of Representatives failed to vote on similar anti-Azerbaijani amendments pushed by Frank Pallone and Gus Bilirakis. How this latest attempt will unfold remains to be seen.