Patrol of hypocrisy Euro-spies’ binoculars against Azerbaijan’s peace agenda

The EU Monitoring Mission in Armenia (EUMA) posted on X, with a tone of self-satisfied triumph, claiming a “milestone” in which 200 representatives from 25 EU member states and Canada are patrolling “day and night” along the Armenia–Azerbaijan border.

Even from a distance, these words reek of pride, excitement, and pomp, giving the impression that Europe has just saved the world from nuclear war. However, speaking frankly and setting aside all diplomatic niceties, this statement is openly cynical and provocative.

Cynical, because this mission is operating on Armenian territory without Azerbaijan’s consent, thus violating basic principles of international law that require respect for the sovereignty of neighbouring states; and provocative, because it comes at a time when Azerbaijan is demonstrating a genuine, not merely declarative, commitment to peace.

Indeed, today, during his state visit to Kazakhstan, President Ilham Aliyev stated: “Azerbaijan has lifted all restrictions on cargo transit to Armenia that had existed since the time of occupation. The first such transit cargo was a shipment of Kazakh grain to Armenia.”

Azerbaijan is not merely speaking about peace—it is taking concrete action. Twenty percent of the country’s territory had been under Armenian occupation for nearly three decades, during which Armenians ruthlessly plundered lands and destroyed cultural heritage. Despite this, Azerbaijan restored its sovereignty and territorial integrity independently, achieving this not thanks to, but in spite of, the positions of the world’s leading powers, including the co-chairs of the now-defunct OSCE Minsk Group, one of which, France, is particularly active in EUMA.

Despite the pain and injustice endured, Azerbaijan remains committed to peace and has opened a corridor for Armenian cargo. Against this backdrop, EUMA’s “proud” statement about patrolling the border appears both inappropriate and hypocritical, creating the impression that tensions still persist in the region and that foreign intervention is necessary.

This represents clear manipulation, with an evident aim: Europe seeks to maintain control over the South Caucasus agenda and portray itself as a “guarantor of stability,” even though its involvement often contributes to regional destabilisation. It is important to note that EUMA operates under a bilateral agreement with Armenia, without Azerbaijan’s consent. From the perspective of international law, this constitutes a unilateral initiative that does not hold the status of a monitoring mission in the generally accepted sense.

Yet their representatives, with all the airs of “saviours of the region,” patrol along Azerbaijan’s border, peering through binoculars at the territory of a neighbouring state. And here, quite logical questions arise: “Who exactly are they planning to ‘protect’ Armenia from, if even Yerevan admits that the border is calm today?”; “From Azerbaijani farmers harvesting their crops, or from Azerbaijani border guards protecting the state frontier of the sovereign Republic of Azerbaijan?”

If these “peacekeepers” genuinely wish to carry out a monitoring mission, why not send them to the Russian–Ukrainian border, for example, to the section between Kharkiv and Belgorod? There, they would quickly experience what a real front line looks like, what real war entails, and the risks that “night patrols” truly carry.

In any case, the facts speak for themselves. Azerbaijan has opened cargo transit to Armenia, threatens no one, does not close communications, and does not block transport. On the contrary—it creates opportunities for economic cooperation, which in itself is proof of political maturity and responsibility. What more steps must be taken for Europe to finally believe in the sincerity of Azerbaijan’s position? Perhaps hand over the keys to its own borders to EUMA, or provide their binocular-wielding representatives with housing on Azerbaijani soil so they can “observe” from there?

Baku has already demonstrated to the world the futility and meaninglessness of any such formats. For almost three decades, the OSCE Minsk Group fed the region illusions, held meetings, drafted protocols, issued statements—and… resolved nothing. In the end, peace was brought not by office-bound diplomats, but by Azerbaijan’s “Iron Fist.”

Today, the Minsk Group lies in the abyss of oblivion. We believe that EUMA should follow it there, as its presence brings no benefit, does not contribute to genuine peace, and does not foster trust. It is a tool of political pressure, designed to keep Europe’s hand on the pulse of the South Caucasus.

Azerbaijan now has every right to demand that Armenia end the activities of this mission. If Yerevan is truly committed to peace, if it wants to develop transport and economic links, if it is interested in trust, then why does it need foreign observers with binoculars and political instructions from Brussels? This is by no means a rhetorical question—it requires urgent action on the part of Armenia.