Azernews.Az

Azerbaijani officials have recently stated -- both openly and implicitly -- that Azerbaijan has come under pressure to make concessions in the ongoing talks to settle the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over Upper (Nagorno) Garabagh.
President Ilham Aliyev told a cabinet meeting last week that, at a crucial point, Armenia is being provided with a strong political backing, which could prompt Baku to even pull out of peace talks. According to the president, setting aside the Garabagh conflict and trying to resolve other problems facing the turbulent region would be absolutely erroneous and defy Azerbaijan`s interests.
``What position can we display to those who are displaying a stance contradicting our national interests?! If our national interests are being violated, how can we defend or support the position of the one who tramples on our interests? Regardless of the size of countries, everything is reciprocal in the world. And we are not the ones who came up with this. The world community operates on this basis. Neither economic potential nor military might, the population count or the size of territory can play a role in bilateral relations. Otherwise, the UN should cease to exist. All countries have equal rights and all countries are forging and should forge full-fledged relations. In any case, Azerbaijan is one of the countries that accept only this approach.``
President Aliyev went on to highlight public resentment with the unfair attitude toward Azerbaijan.
``Certainly, if our interests are tossed aside, if they are turning a blind eye to the occupation of our territory and are making every effort to extricate the occupying country from a challenging economic situation, how can the Azerbaijani public accept this? Why doesn`t the occupying country face pressure? Why is Azerbaijan displaying, we can say, the greatest constructivism in the current talks, while Armenia is disrupting the negotiations? We are witnessing attempts to extricate Armenia from the predicament. Why should the Turkish-Armenian border specifically open, so that Armenia would, so to speak, take a breath?``
Aliyev added, however, that the border opening is an affair of Turkey and Armenia proper. ``No one should interfere with this issue - neither us nor anyone else. And that is notwithstanding the fact that some countries believe they can meddle in any issues. These are relations between the two countries. Let these two countries regulate their relations [on their own].``
``What are those who are unaware of everything, and of the ongoing developments in the region trying to accomplish by exerting pressure, by blackmail and slander?`` President Aliyev asked. ``This is how we see it. This is a policy explicitly contradicting Azerbaijan`s interests. The Azerbaijani government is taking, and will continue to take, adequate steps on its policy.``
Official statements that followed the Azerbaijani leader`s comments indicate that the criticism was aimed at the United States, one of the countries co-chairing the OSCE Minsk Group (MG), which is mediating Garabagh settlement negotiations.
Ali Hasanov, the head of the Presidential Administration socio-political department, recently said Baku`s discontent with US policy was primarily due to the lack of an impartial position that the U.S. should adhere to as a mediating country.
Hasanov noted that Azerbaijan has repeatedly raised - on different levels - the issue of the violation of its territorial integrity. ``But, unfortunately, some US institutions and circles, under pressure from the Armenian lobby, are failing to display neutrality and are openly giving support to Armenia.``
Armenia and Azerbaijan waged a war in the early 1990s, which claimed some 30,000 lives and displaced about one million Azerbaijanis. Armenia has been occupying over 20% of Azerbaijan`s internationally recognized territory since then. Peace talks, brokered by the Minsk Group and co-chaired by the United States, Russia and France, have so far accomplished little.
Hasanov emphasized that Washington`s policy has recently been aimed at extricating Armenia from its socio-economic predicament, and neighboring states, particularly Turkey, have come under pressure to forge relations with Armenia.
``We believe that this is not in line with the US mission, particularly that carried out within the OSCE Minsk Group,`` noted Hasanov.
Hasanov noted that the US administration`s latest steps have disturbed the Azerbaijani public, saying recent anti-American statements made in Azerbaijan stem from ``the real environment``.
``The U.S., without making substantial efforts at resolving the Upper Garabagh problem, is trying to extricate Armenia from [a dire] situation. Why? Because Armenia has been sidelined from trans-national projects being implemented in the region due to its occupying Azerbaijani territory, its situation is increasingly deteriorating, and its population is fleeing the country. Rectifying the situation in Armenia, in the opinion of our own and that of the progressive world, should dwell upon ending the policy of occupation…All this is justly causing discontent of the Azerbaijani public. Therefore, no one should be blamed for anti-American statements.``
According to Hasanov, the U.S. should look for the cause of such statements primarily in Congress, which determines Washington`s political course, and US government agencies and non-governmental organizations, which often make decisions under the influence of the Armenian lobby.
Further, Hasanov said Azerbaijani policymakers have always taken into account US interests, however, the U.S. has not reciprocated this approach and, on the contrary, is pursuing a policy of supporting hostile Armenia.
``The U.S. considers Azerbaijan a strategic ally. In the fight against international terrorism, Azerbaijan was the first Muslim state to stand by America`s side. Azerbaijan nearly spoiled its relations with other Muslim countries over this. Also, Azerbaijan has consistently taken into consideration American interests in its energy policy. And there are other issues as well.``
The presidential administration official`s statement points to Baku beginning to take steps to counter the shifting US policy. ``Why should Azerbaijan display a friendly and partner-like attitude toward a country that does not display a normal, friendly and partner-like attitude? In this sense, the Azerbaijani authorities and public are taking adequate steps and seeking alternative ways [without US involvement] for resolving the Upper Garabagh problem and is opposed to US co-chairmanship in the Minsk Group,`` Hasanov said. He also hinted that Baku might stop defending US energy interests.
First Vice-Speaker Ziyafat Asgarov concurred with the presidential administration official.
``The U.S. and other Minsk Group co-chairing countries` outright support for Armenia has resulted in Yerevan`s backtracking even from the previously-agreed issues regarding the Upper Garabagh issue.
``If the U.S. considers us a strategic ally, we call on it to be fair. We demand that the Minsk Group co-chairs be fair and stop pressuring Turkey. They are telling Turkey that Armenia may stick to its policy of occupation, but you should definitely open up the border.``
Turkey closed its border with Armenia in 1993 due to Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territory and claims on 1915 ``genocide``. In October 2009, the two governments signed agreements to establish diplomatic relations and reopen their borders. However, Turkish officials have assured Azerbaijan, Turkey`s ally, that the border will remain closed until progress is achieved in settling the Garabagh conflict.
Some commentators suggest that the Azerbaijani leaders, along with praising Russia, have recently been trying to diminish public confidence in the West. According to analyst Ilgar Mammadov, a campaign is being pursued in Azerbaijan against the West, and the U.S. in particular. This is clearly seen from the reports being published by state-run media. This being said, the president`s latest statement cannot be interpreted any differently, Mammadov said.
``In this statement, Ilham Aliyev directed pounding criticism specifically at the US position. If these views had been expressed under different conditions, we may have thought that criticism of Russia, which played a key role in the invasion of Azerbaijani lands and their being kept under occupation, was implied. But taking into account the ongoing campaign against the U.S., we can say with confidence that the target of that criticism was America.``
The fact that Azerbaijan did not participate in the nuclear security summit in Washington is a serious mistake for the Obama administration, said Frederick Starr, chairman of Johns Hopkins University`s Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, in an interview with Azerbaijan`s state news agency Azertaj.
According to Starr, notwithstanding the White House official statement, everyone understands that Azerbaijan was left out of the summit to smooth the way for Turkey-Armenia talks.
``President Obama most likely thought that the presence of the leader of the country, whose territory was occupied by Armenia, would prevent the reaching of an agreement between Turkey and Armenia. Certainly, it is a serious mistake and the Obama administration has already realized it. A majority of Congressmen have stated that this was wrong…President Ilham Aliyev was right when he openly expressed an opinion on the issue,`` said Starr.
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said the fact that Azerbaijan had not been invited to the summit was ``a missed opportunity`` and blamed the White House for this.
``Azerbaijan`s not being represented here was a major shortfall. We have done everything in our power, but the final say was up to the U.S., the hosting country. If Azerbaijan had been here, our discussions would have been more successful. This is a missed opportunity.`` *