Azernews.Az

Elnur Enveroglu

Read more

France is once again becoming a stage for separatist and anarchist groups seeking to turn political grievances into public spectacle. At a moment when France itself is experiencing considerable political and social instability, a group of anarchists linked to an Armenian lobbying organisation has sought to create noise in the streets of Paris. That such an action could take place in France is hardly surprising. For decades, Armenian lobbying networks have found a receptive environment there, turning the country into an important base for narratives and political campaigns directed at Azerbaijan.

The destruction of what Azerbaijan describes as a terrorist infrastructure in Karabakh during the September 2023 anti-terror operation appears to have had an unexpected afterlife in France. With the separatist structure dismantled on the ground, its remnants have increasingly resurfaced in European political and public spaces.

Those brought to Baku after the operation and accused of war crimes are now facing trial and, where guilt is established, punishment before the courts. Unfortunately, justice is not always accepted uniformly across the world. The principle should be straightforward: the sovereignty of one state cannot simply be disregarded because a political lobby or activist group finds that sovereignty inconvenient.

If those behind the Paris demonstration understood that their action could be interpreted as an attack on another country's sovereignty and as a challenge to international law, perhaps such political theatre would not be presented as something worthy of public attention.

The most striking example is the large banner proclaiming that 120,000 Armenians were "expelled" from Karabakh. This claim, from the perspective of the argument being advanced here, is not simply a political accusation against Azerbaijan. It represents a broader campaign to portray the events in Karabakh through a single narrative while excluding the circumstances that preceded the departure of the Armenian population.

The central point that these groups seek to obscure is that Baku did not simply close its doors to Armenians who had been living in Karabakh. The argument from Azerbaijan's side is that the population left voluntarily, under the influence of forces seeking to provoke confrontation from outside, after the separatist structure that had existed there was dismantled.

The underlying principle, however, is clear. Azerbaijan's territory is indivisible. The establishment of a so-called state or "whatever" republic on Azerbaijani territory was never going to be accepted by Baku, and the events of 2023 demonstrated that the separatist project had reached its end.

However, political causes rarely disappear simply because they have failed on the ground. They search for new stages, new audiences and new political patrons. Today, separatist groups and their supporters appear to be doing precisely that on the streets of France, using striking posters and exhibitions to revive a narrative that has already lost its territorial foundation.

The latest episode is particularly revealing. Audrey Pulvar, Deputy Mayor of Paris, together with CCAF co-presidents Mourad Papazian and Ara Toranian, installed panels on the forecourt of Paris City Hall displaying photographs of so-called former "Artsakh" leaders.

This raises a broader political question for France. How far should a democratic state go in accommodating political activism when that activism promotes a separatist narrative concerning the territory of another sovereign state?

The contrast with the United States is also worth noting. Similar Armenian diaspora activism appeared to enjoy considerable political space during the previous Biden administration. However, the political environment in Washington has changed, and narratives that were once treated as politically convenient do not necessarily carry the same weight everywhere or at every moment.

The ability to present a political narrative as an unquestionable truth may have worked in some Western political circles. But it does not make the narrative true, and it does not guarantee that the same strategy will succeed indefinitely.

Paris, however, appears determined to remain faithful to an older tradition.

The real issue is therefore not simply another street demonstration or another political exhibition. It is whether France is prepared to provide an increasingly prominent platform for groups seeking to undermine the territorial integrity and sovereignty of another country.

France is, of course, entitled to defend freedom of expression and political assembly. But that principle should apply consistently. The question is whether the French state is equally open to all such exhibitions, gatherings and street demonstrations when they challenge the sovereignty or territorial integrity of other countries.

Or is there something more specific at work here?

If Paris continues to provide political space for organisations associated with the Armenian lobbying movement to promote separatist narratives about Azerbaijan's Karabakh, it will inevitably invite a difficult conclusion: that this is less about universal principles of democracy and more about a particular political sympathy towards Armenian lobbying.

The separatist project may have disappeared from Karabakh. But in the streets of Paris, its political afterlife is clearly still being cultivated.

And that is a question France can no longer avoid.