Michel's doubletalk closes the book of EU mediation Does Baku need such "peace brokers"?

"Sometimes it is better to chew than to talk!" goes the message of a popular commercial for chewing gum in the 1990s. It still has relevance, not least when it comes to assessing statements made by politicians trying to play some role in resolving various conflicts around the world. One of them is the President of the EU Council, Charles Michel.

The other day he stated that the Council of the European Union continues its efforts to organise a meeting between the leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia. According to him, a peace agreement is necessary for the settlement of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan, which should be based on the demarcation process. "At the same time, it can be a positive framework that we can use as a tool for our cooperation in the region," Michel uttered.

There is no room for argument here. The official Baku has always been very vocal about its desire for a just peace. These statements predate the 44-day war, and Azerbaijan has always meant 'fair peace' in the same way. It was always about the principles of territorial integrity of states. Armenia, unfortunately, did not want to follow this principle, ignored the well-known resolutions of the Security Council and the UN General Assembly and brought the war closer in every possible manner.

Charles Michel has a good memory of all that. He also remembers the outcome of the 44-day war and all the twists and turns of the negotiations between the leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia in Brussels. He also remembers the outcome of the meeting in Prague. The parties agreed to sign a peace treaty based on the UN Charter and the Almaty Declaration. This is a major diplomatic victory for official Baku, all the more significant because the meeting took place in the presence of French President Emmanuel Macron - a politician who is, to say the least, less than favourable towards our country.

In general, official Baku has consistently supported the efforts of EU President Charles Michel to conclude a peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan. However, it is important to add that Michel made some unacceptable statements this time. In an interview with Radio Liberty he suddenly for some reason remembered the rights and security of the Karabakh Armenians. It makes sense to quote his statement in full.

"We believe that ethnic Armenians should have the right to return or at least be able to visit this part of Azerbaijan, and their security and rights should be guaranteed. In terms of minority protection, there are international standards that should be respected according to the Constitution of Azerbaijan, within which the rights of minorities should be guaranteed," Michel said.

In fact, the president stressed that the rights of the Armenians living in Karabakh should be guaranteed within the framework of Azerbaijan's constitution. At the same time, the rights of Azerbaijanis expelled from Armenia were not mentioned by the European Council President. After all, we are talking about 250,000 people. Charles Michel is aware of the official position of Baku. It is that if the issue of the Armenian minority in Azerbaijan is included in the text of the peace treaty, then the issue of Azerbaijanis expelled from Armenia should also be included, who have the right to return, and their rights and security should also be respected. Everything is fair, everything is logical.

All the more surprising was Michel's one-sided argumentation. Surely he knows what Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev recently said at a forum at the Diplomatic Academy. The head of our state replied to a question about the fate of Armenians who want to live in Karabakh. He clearly stated that those who want to return can do so. Moreover, he pointed out that the houses of the Armenians remain intact, unlike the houses of the Azerbaijanis, which were completely destroyed during the years of Armenian occupation. "Full protection of the Armenian historical heritage is guaranteed and our military police are now protecting very important objects, including the property of people who want to become citizens of Azerbaijan," the Azerbaijani president said.

So it would make sense for Charles Michel to shift accents in his statements. After all, as we can see, official Baku has clearly stated its position on the issue that concerns it. But did official Yerevan make the same kind of statements regarding the rights of Azerbaijanis who were expelled from Armenia? No, they have not. There was no consent of Yerevan for the return of Azerbaijanis to the land of their ancestors, and no guarantees for their safety either. And this is exactly what could well become the subject of negotiations between Baku and Yerevan with the participation of Charles Michel. It could have been, but it is hardly possible anymore. Michel's ambiguous position may become the last straw in the cup of patience of Baku, which has already proved its ability to negotiate with official Yerevan without intermediaries. Michel has no mandate to talk about Karabakh. The format of the negotiations in which he was involved had some kind of deliberative function. And it did not concern the Karabakh issue. The Karabakh issue is closed for us and Armenia as well. Against this background, Charles Michel makes statements that raise questions and make us remember the old commercial of that very chewing gum. So should we continue to consider Brussels as a negotiating platform with such behaviour of Michel?

And there is also Borrell, who is spouting negative statements against Azerbaijan, turning into a staff Armenian mythmaker. However, he was not the only one who was talking nonsense.

"The EU considers it important that the Karabakh Armenians concentrate around a de facto leadership capable and ready to conduct constructive negotiations with Baku. The EU is keen to support this process," EU foreign policy spokesperson Nabila Massrali said in early September, commenting on the circus show called "presidential elections" in the proxy entity in the Karabakh region. This was open support for the Karabakh junta, encouraging separatism, and provoking a new Armenian-Azerbaijani war.

But that is not all. The EU and some of its member states, which fancied themselves important players in the South Caucasus, decided to "stake their claim" to "security issues" in our region. We are talking about the EU's reconnaissance and observation mission in Armenia, which is made up of intelligence officers, police officers and ex-military personnel. As we remember, the dispatch of the EU mission to the territory of Armenia for two months became known after last year's meeting of the President of the European Council Charles Michel, French President Emmanuel Macron, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in Prague. Azerbaijan then prudently refused to send a similar mission to its territory since we can control the situation on the conventional border ourselves. But the Europeans sneakily disrupted all the agreements and this year it was announced the extension of the mission for another 2 years, and recently its number was increased.

It is obvious that the provocative statements of Michel and Borrell, Paris' subjugation of EU structures, and the expansion of the EU mission in Armenia, uncoordinated with Baku, have undermined Azerbaijan's trust in Brussels. They do not want to take into account Azerbaijan's position and concerns. This means that the EU mediation is a dead end. Especially since, as recent events show, Baku and Yerevan are quite capable of reaching an agreement with each other without intrusive mediators.