Azerbaijan continues its unsubstantiated demands on Armenia, as recently demonstrated by Elchin Amirbekov, Azerbaijan’s senior envoy for special assignments. This information is conveyed by Joshua Kucera, a contributor to “Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty” (RFE/RL), in his article titled “As Peace Negotiations Advance, Armenia And Azerbaijan Are Going It Alone.”
As negotiations progress, it becomes increasingly apparent that Azerbaijan’s demands extend beyond reasonable expectations. These demands are not only unsupported by credible evidence but also raise questions about the legitimacy of Azerbaijan’s claims. The lack of transparency in their assertions further complicates the already delicate peace talks, creating a potential obstacle to finding a sustainable resolution.
Upon a preliminary examination of Joshua Kucera’s article, a discernible bias is evident, particularly in the way he introduces the topic before quoting Amirbekov. Kucera asserts that Azerbaijani officials have expressed dissatisfaction with Armenia’s formal claim to Karabakh in its constitution, citing a preamble referring to a 1989 act advocating for the unification of Karabakh with Armenia. While Kucera notes the lack of response from the Armenian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, he includes a statement from Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan on January 25, attempting to link it to the narrative presented by Amirbekov.
“Azerbaijani officials have complained that Armenia continues to stake a claim to Karabakh in its constitution formally, the preamble of which makes reference to a 1989 act calling to unify Karabakh with Armenia.
Amirbayov said there are several other such claims in Armenia’s formal statements and legislation. For example, when Armenia’s legislature ratified the 1991 Alma Ata accords, which accepted Soviet republic borders as the borders of the newly independent states, lawmakers added language saying that it did not apply to Karabakh. He also called attention to language on the Armenian Foreign Ministry website saying that Nagorno-Karabakh is “an integral part of historic Armenia,” and recent Armenian filings in the European Court of Human Rights that imply a claim on Azerbaijan.
“We have pointed the attention of the Armenian side to those facts many times, during our [in-person] negotiations, but also through different exchanges of comments,” he said. “And the Armenian side acknowledges that this is the fact, but nothing is being done…. When they try to cheat, if I may use the word, if they try to put all the blame and the responsibility on our shoulders, and at the same time in the back of their minds still having these territorial claims against us, it’s not going to work,” he said”, Kucera writes in his article, quoting Amirbayov’s words
Upon closer inspection of the article, Amirbekov’s assertions become increasingly dubious. Notably, he claims that the Armenian Ministry of Foreign Affairs website acknowledges Karabakh as an “integral part of historical Armenia.” However, this assertion aligns with historical facts widely accepted within academic circles. Amirbekov’s demand to negate this historical fact appears unreasonable, especially when considering that historical truths should not be subject to revisionist interference based on individual whims. It is worth mentioning that Amirbekov’s ancestors are historically associated with nomadic tribes residing in the steppes of Turkestan until the mid-Middle Ages, a fact supported by numerous academic monographs, establishing it as an accepted and proven historical reality.
Amirbekov’s unfounded statements extend beyond this point. He raises Armenia’s claims against Azerbaijan at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), a topic that seems to surpass the boundaries of reasonable discussion, particularly given the substantial evidence of Azerbaijani crimes, including those committed against civilians. Intermediate decisions from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) further affirm the groundlessness of Amirbekov’s accusations. Unfortunately, the article fails to include these crucial facts when describing the Armenian-Azerbaijani negotiation process.
In conclusion, Amirbekov’s position appears devoid of coherence and logical consistency, marked by tendentious and misleading disinformation disseminated by a representative of the Azerbaijani president. The article, in its current form, neglects to provide a balanced perspective and overlooks significant facts that could contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the ongoing Armenian-Azerbaijani negotiation process. It is imperative to approach such complex geopolitical issues with a commitment to unbiased reporting and a thorough consideration of all relevant information.
By Deputy Editor-in-Chief of “ARMENPRESS”, Ararat Petrosyan. His Twitter.
https://greekcitytimes.com/2024/02/11/aliyevs-representative-proposes-absurd-demands-against-armenia-reminiscent-of-medieval-expansionism/