Thomas de Waal: President Aliyev had a choice, but he chose to use  force

ArmInfo. The military operation marked the "formal end" of the Armenian-majority region of Nagorno-Karabakh, a  territorial entity that had existed under that name since 1923 and for centuries under other names. Thomas de Waal, scholar and writer, Senior Fellow at Carnegie Europe, the author of the famous book about the Karabakh conflict: "Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan Through Peace and War", stated at a special PACE Hearing on the human rights and humanitarian situation of Karabakh Armenians and the international obligations of Azerbaijan.

As the specialist noted,  September 19th military assault by  Azerbaijan on Nagorno-Karabakh resulted in several hundred deaths  including civilians. This is a human tragedy, a tragedy of more than  100,000 people, since almost the entire Armenian population of  Nagorno-Karabakh fled to Armenia.

According to Thomas de Waal, the Karabakh conflict is very complex,  with many phases and turns. And for decades, it was force, not  diplomacy, that determined the outcomes "on the ground". Over the  years, many questions have arisen - both Armenians and Azerbaijanis  engaged in what can be described as ethnic cleansing. Recent events  are also a blow to the prospects for peace in the South Caucasus.

The specialist emphasized that this could have been avoided, as  active diplomatic efforts were made. Since December 2021, the West  has pursued an active diplomatic mediation process chaired by Charles  Michel, which has demanded greater input from all sides, particularly  from Azerbaijan, in parallel with negotiations between Armenia and  Azerbaijan mediated by Moscow.

In recent weeks, a dialogue has begun between the Armenians of  Karabakh and representatives of Baku, even despite the actual  blockade of Karabakh by Azerbaijan, which has caused "humanitarian  suffering" to the population of Karabakh. This new process between  the Armenians of Karabakh and Baku required time and patience.  Everyone, including the Armenians of Karabakh, understood that a  final settlement was possible within the framework of the territorial  integrity of Azerbaijan.

So, acting in the most dominant position, President Aliyev had a  choices but he chose to use force on September 19th. It also  undermined Western leaders' confidence in the process and interrupted  dialogue with the Armenians of Karabakh. And although a small number  of civilians were injured, as a result the entire Armenian population  no longer felt safe and left Karabakh.

We know that Azerbaijan's military operation was coordinated with  Turkey and, although we do not know any details, we can be fairly  sure that military actions were also coordinated with Russia. Russian  peacekeepers were ordered to stand down in Karabakh themselves,  allowing Azerbaijani forces to proceed and the media outlets were  instructed to blame Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan, rather than  Azerbaijan, for the outbreak of this violence.

The UN and Moscow gave a much softer description of this military  operation than the West. And now the time has come for a  comprehensive reassessment of these events by organizations such as  PACE. Now Azerbaijan is proposing a "reintegration agenda", according  to which Armenians can return to Karabakh and become citizens of  Azerbaijan, taking into account that there is no dual citizenship in  Azerbaijan, and therefore renouncing Armenian citizenship. Therefore,  organizations like the Council of Europe should be very careful  regarding such initiatives. For example, why is this initiative being  proposed after 99% of the Armenians of Karabakh have already left  their land. This initiative should be considered within the broader  framework of Azerbaijan's international obligations.

In this context, three broader issues need to be addressed:

The first one concerns the general condition of minorities in  Azerbaijan. None of Azerbaijan's minorities have any special rights  or autonomy. The language of the two main minorities - Talysh and  Lezgin - iare taught to 28,000 children in schools, according to  Azerbaijani data for 2022. According to the Committee of the  Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities of  2017, national minorities are under pressure in the context of  demonstrating loyalty to the state. Also, national minorities do not  have the opportunity to fully express themselves in the public  sector. In this context, it is difficult to imagine the integration  of Armenians into Azerbaijani society.

The second point is, as the many independent reports have confirmed,  the Azerbaijani education system teaches children strongly negative  hatred towards Armenians as vandals and occupiers who committed  genocide against Azerbaijanis in the 1990s. It should be noted that  the Armenian education system does the same thing, just not as  actively. Therefore, without comprehensive reforms in the national  rhetoric (education system, political discourse and media) of  Azerbaijan, it is difficult to imagine a quiet life for Armenians in  Azerbaijan.

Thirdly, any such initiative requires careful study by the  international community, since Azerbaijan's record on this matter is  very poor. Despite many calls to Azerbaijan from the international  community for its representatives to visit Nagorno-Karabakh, all of  them were rejected by Azerbaijan. As a result, Nagorno- Karabakh  remained completely isolated, with only the ICRC on the ground. It is  known that the Parliamentary Assembly also called for a fact-finding  mission to be sent to Nagorno-Karabakh during the blockade in June,  but Azerbaijan rejected this call as well.

Thomas de Waal also spoke about the danger that threatens the  Armenian cultural heritage, mentioning the fact of the destruction  and complete liquidation of the rich and historically important  medieval cemetery in Julfa (Nakhichevan).

Azerbaijan, he said, also had a choice: a strong Armenia with  normalization of relations with Turkey and less dependence on Russia,  or a weak Armenia forced to rely more on Russia. Unfortunately,  Azerbaijan has opted for the second option. And this is not  accidental, since in this context the specialist mentioned Baku's  claims to the so-called on the territory of  Armenia and on the so-called . Thomas de Waal also  recalled Baku's claims to the territory of Armenia in the context of  the rhetoric about the so-called .