WEB DESK: European and Western institutions have once again shown their true intentions by acting from their biased positions. From 2020 until today, the political agents of Europe, suffering from serious anxiety syndrome, can neither calm down nor retreat from their pro-Armenian positions.
Toivo Klaar, EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus and the Crisis in Georgia, was remembered for a very regrettable step when he was about to leave his 10-year term. In fact, it is not something new that we witness in this region, but at least being honest once in life when especially completing the service, would be a generous step.
Toivo Klaar’s biased comment also spontaneously invalidates the meetings held by Europe, either in Brussels or in the United States, under the name of “peace platform”. The unjust position of the EU Special Representative literally breaks the balance of the scales of justice.
Klaar says that the EU did not play an active role in Azerbaijan-Armenia relations until 2020. His role was mostly to support the “work” of the former Minsk Group co-chairs. The activity of the European Union started mostly after 2020, i.e. after the period when Azerbaijan liberated its territories from Armenian occupation during the Patriotic War.
Does the West seem to be more aggressor than Armenia?
Undoubtedly, the fact that Azerbaijani territories were once under occupation could not worry the West as much as it does now. Western and European institutions, organizations, and politicians thought that time was in their favour until a war broke out in Garabagh with Armenia’s provocations. They believed that the Garabagh conflict would be permanently frozen and the conflict status would be removed after some time.
However, Azerbaijan’s changing geostrategic situation in the South Caucasus disappointed the parties and even made them suffer from anxiety syndrome.
Realities behind West’s “Peace Talks Platform”
Although the Garabagh conflict ended with the victory of Azerbaijan in the just struggle, the Western side still refuses to comply with realities. The negotiation process, which is deliberately prolonged, either is cancelled with an excuse every time, or remains fruitless until the next negotiation process thrown by a third party for Armenia’s favour. For example, the West, which said that the processes between Armenia and Azerbaijan were progressing positively after the last negotiations, soon brought up the unnecessary issue of the release of separatist criminals imprisoned in Baku at the request of Armenia. Later, it led to a baseless accusation against Baku, regarding Armenians who voluntarily moved from Garabagh to Armenia. Toivo Klaar’s comment is part of these unjust statements. He does not mention the fate of Azerbaijanis who were displaced from current Armenian territories in the late 1980s and from Garabagh following the first Garabagh War in the 1990s. His biased position pushes beyond Armenia’s claims.
Nevertheless, why so much zeal, and so much initiative in peace negotiations? Maybe it is time to make the position clear and say who is with which side and what they are serving.
It turns out that Armenia gains time with the support of their European allies by prolonging the negotiation process. However, Baku is blamed when things go wrong and do not match the plan of Western institutions.
The European representative is already preparing to hand over his post to his new colleague, and the Council appoints Magdalena Grono as EUSR for the South Caucasus and the crisis in Georgia. And we still try to find answer to the question of whether this will change anything, or is it worth believing that the arrival of the new representative will bring a positive atmosphere to the region?
