Commenatry: Azerbaijan and the EU embark on a new chapter in their relationship

Commentary:  The visit of President Aliev to Brussels this week has been very positively assessed in both Brussels and Baku, however this relationship is not an automatic fit, and it will take time and effort on both sides for relations to develop to the qualitative higher level that the two sides want. But what is abundantly clear to both sides is that, this notwithstanding, Azerbaijan and the EU have much to benefit from a strong relationship, and also much to contribute. 

President Ilham Aliev of Azerbaijan visited Brussels on Monday (6 February) for meetings with the leadership of the European Union. The visit was hailed in both Brussels and Baku as the start of a new phase in EU-Azerbaijan relations. President Aliev met with EU Council President Donald Tusk, EU Commission President Junker, High Representative Morgherini and other EU officials. The visit has been very positvely assessed in both Brussels and Baku.

As a result of the visit, Azerbaijan and the European Union immediately started negotiations on a new agreement between them that "will broaden the scope of co-operation and upgrade relations to a new level".

Speaking at a joint press briefing President Tusk started by re-affirming the support of the European Union for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. President Tusk  reminded that the EU is the main trading partner of Azerbaijan, and said that the discussions focussed on how the EU can help to diversify Azerbaijan's economy.

Referring to human rights issues, Donald Tusk said that the EU always highlights the importance it attaches to human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression. "The EU believes an open society is the best guarantor for stability and prosperity" he added.

On Nagorno-Karabakh President Tusk said that the status quo is unacceptable, and the EU believes there is no military solution to this conflict but there should be a political solution based on international law. The President of the EU Council said that the EU wants to broaden the scope of its relations with Azerbaijan and negotiations to upgrade the existing agreement will start immediately.

Replying to the comments of President Tusk, President Aliev thanked the European Union for its support for the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and reminded that a large chunk of Azerbaijani territory remains under occupation.

Speaking in English, President Aliev said a new chapter was opening in EU-Azerbaijan co-operation. He welcomed the start of negotiations on a new agreement tomorrow, and said the negotiators should hurry and not lose time in order that a new strategic phase in EU-Azerbaijan relations may start soon.

Azerbaijan and the European Union have had relations since 1992. In 1999 they signed a Partnership and Co-operation Agreement, and this remains the basis of the relations up to now. Azerbaijan was offered an Association Agreement similar to the one signed in 2014 with Georgia, but politely declined. Indeed, for the last few years relations have been strained, mainly as a result of differences on issues related to governance and human rights. Azerbaijan took exception to several statements made by the European Parliament - and by individual MEPs on this topic. These are lingering problems. President Aliev cancelled at the last minute a meeting with the new president of the European Parliament, Antonio Tajani. The reason it seems was a meeting held at the parliament, on the margins of the visit, hosted by several MEPs, that focused on the country's human rights shortcomings. Some observers considered this an over-reaction, since the parliament hosts dozens of meetings every week on a whole range of issues and the Parliament sees this as part of its mission to be a hub for diverse views.

The incident highlighted the fact that relations between the EU and Azerbaijan may not necessarily be an automatic fit. It will take time and effort on both sides for them to develop to the qualitative higher level that the two sides want. But what is abundantly clear to both sides is that, this notwithstanding, Azerbaijan and the EU have much to benefit from a strong relationship, and also much contribute to. For Europe, Azerbaijan is an important part of its strategy to ensure energy security - not only thanks to its own natural resources, but also because of its location as an energy transit country. Azerbaijan is also a reliable partner in the fight against terrorism and radicalisation. On its part Europe is Azerbaijan's most important trade partner, and Azerbaijan sees Europe as an important part of its efforts to modernise and diversify its economy. Europe is also an important counterweight to a creeping Russian influence, at least in the non-military sphere. The statement of president Tusk committing EU support for Azerbaijan's territorial integrity was not a new development, but for Baku, it is a message always worth repeating.

In some circles in Europe, as well as in Azerbaijan there is concern that the EU may not be doing enough to push the human rights and democracy agenda in Azerbaijan. There may be differences of view on tactics, but it should be clearly evident to everybody that a better relationship between the EU and Azerbaijan can only benefit those defending human rights and fundamental freedoms. As Azerbaijan enters a challenging time in its process of reform and economic transformation the European Union is the best placed international partner to accompany it on this journey. The work on the new agreement should therefore proceed in earnest in order to give the relations a sound legal basis, and in order to provide for the necessary spaces where both sides can address problems as friends and partners.

This commentary was prepared by the editorial team of Caucasus Concise, with data collected from commonspace.eu. Commonspace.eu ran a live blog during the visit of president Ilham Aliev to Brussels on 6 February with comments from experts in Baku and Brussels. You may read the blog here.

Photo: President Aliev of Azerbaijan and the President of the European Council Donald Tusk, at a press brieifing in Brussels on 6 February 2017. (picture courtesy of the EU press service)

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Editor's choice
News
Ukraine Peace Talks Set to Expand as Russia and Europe Clash Over Post-war Security

Ukraine Peace Talks Set to Expand as Russia and Europe Clash Over Post-war Security

Ukraine and Russia could see European countries join the next round of peace negotiations, following talks between US special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Thursday (November 12). However, conflicting positions over European military involvement, Ukraine’s territorial future and the continent’s security arrangements highlight the difficulties facing the diplomatic process. Speaking after the meeting, Witkoff said European participation would be an important development, describing the countries concerned as key partners. Kushner also indicated that Washington had noticed a shift in European attitudes and believed their involvement would not obstruct progress. In a statement published on X, he said the expanded discussions would address broader European security arrangements alongside territorial disputes between Russia and Ukraine. The US envoys subsequently travelled to Dublin, where they met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during a European summit. Zelenskyy welcomed the possibility of European participation and expressed hope that the negotiations would include measures to reduce tensions and establish ceasefires. He also reiterated the importance of European representation in decisions concerning the continent’s security. Moscow, however, has offered a more cautious interpretation of the proposed expansion. Putin's aide, Yuri Ushakov, suggested that European countries should first reconsider their military assistance to Kyiv, arguing that their current actions demonstrated an unwillingness to pursue peace. Putin similarly called on Washington to work with its European allies to establish whether they genuinely wanted peace or continued confrontation with Russia. The Russian president also rejected the prospect of European peacekeeping troops being deployed to Ukraine following a potential agreement, describing such a presence as a continuation of the war. His position reflects wider disagreements over the future European security architecture, with Moscow seeking discussions on the continent's broader security arrangements, while European leaders insist that such negotiations cannot replace a settlement of the war. Simultaneously, Zelenskyy raised concerns about disruptions to Starshield, the US-made satellite communications service used by Ukrainian forces. He described Washington’s discussions with Moscow about Europe's future security as unusual and warned against decisions that could undermine Ukraine's sovereignty. Despite the diplomatic activity, fighting continued. Russian drone attacks killed two people in Ukraine's Sumy region and injured five in Rivne, while a separate attack in Russia's Belgorod region killed one person and injured four. Ukrainian agricultural company Kernel Holding also suspended operations at all its oilseed extraction facilities following repeated Russian attacks.

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)