How Toivo Klaar forgot all about the principles of international law while in Yerevan And how Baku sees, remembers everything

Armenia continues its worldwide hysteria around the Lachin road in order to earn some points of support from the EU, USA and NATO, and a brief visit of the European Union Special Representative for the South Caucasus and the Crisis in Georgia, Toivo Klaar to Armenia is just another confirmation.

The Armenian media rushed to report that Klaar discussed the situation in the region during a meeting with Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan while in Yerevan with the parties stressing the importance of the decision to deploy a new EU civilian mission “to contribute to the stability and security of the region”, as well as for the “resolution of the situation” on the Lachin road.

Meanwhile, during Toivo Klaar’s current visit to Armenia, given the prospect of a new EU mission arriving there soon, it would have been logical to discuss issues related to this event. But the European envoy came to Yerevan mainly to support Armenia in the situation around the Lachin road, and this gives a good reason for the official Baku’s resentment.

The reasons are as follows: first, the situation on the Lachin road is an internal affair of Azerbaijan, and discussions with Armenia are inadmissible in principle, especially without Baku’s participation.

Secondly, the rights and security of the civilian Armenian population living in the Karabakh Economic Zone of Azerbaijan will be ensured on the basis of the constitution and laws of the Republic of Azerbaijan, only. This piece of information is personally addressed to the European diplomat, who, apparently, is not sufficiently enlightened on the norms of international law.

Thirdly, a diplomat with such solid experience in regional and international politics should not blindly trust one of the two parties of a conflict without substantial evidence. If Klaar is so concerned about the fate of the Armenians of Karabakh, what is it that prevents him from traveling to the Lachin road and seeing for himself that there is no blockade?

The answer is obvious. Klaar seems to be quite satisfied with the fables of the Armenian side that the situation in the zone of responsibility of the Russian peacekeeping contingent in Karabakh is deteriorating every day, schools and kindergartens, health institutions are being closed, and that there is an acute shortage of medicines, problems with gas supply from Armenia and growing disruptions of power supply. Even though he is well aware that the situation he was told about in Yerevan is complete nonsense and that there is no blockade and hungry Armenians in Karabakh. After all, did Azerbaijan forbid him to attend the rally by environmental activists?

Such assumptions are well grounded, primarily because of the biased European policy that Azerbaijan has constantly faced during both the Armenian occupation and the post-conflict period. The recent anti-Azerbaijani resolution of the European Parliament, which has actually become an instrument of manipulation of the influential Armenian lobby, has also demonstrated this. This fact once again showed that Yerevan receives its political bonuses through the funding of unscrupulous European politicians, an influential lobby that does not care about the norms of international law. And the openly biased position of the European Parliament regarding Baku contradicts the common predetermined policy of the European Union, which professes its commitment to a peaceful settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijnai conflict and, in general, its long-term cooperation with our country, but turns a blind eye to the adoption by authoritative European organizations of anti-Azerbaijani documents. Undoubtedly, the current visit to Armenia of the European Special Representative and his one-sided support for Armenian interests are in the same context.

The forthcoming meeting of Klaar in Baku will show to a large extent whether Klaar will succeed in promoting Armenia’s interests, where he is likely to be reminded of the main principles of Azerbaijan’s foreign policy based on national interests, which is not in opposition to the rules of international law, which, as it seems, the European diplomat suddenly forgot all about in Yerevan.