Armenia’s Message and Mission at the World Forum

After being elected president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s former prime minister, he made his first foreign trip to the US and he was expecting better treatment than what he was accorded. He received a cold shoulder in diplomatic circles when the most he received was a meeting with Vice President Joe Biden. It is also rumored that he was infuriated at a reception when the protocol had been downgraded.

Despite its caviar diplomacy, Azerbaijan is in worst shape and it has almost become a pariah state because of its human rights abuses. The UN subcommittee on Prevention of Torture recently suspended its visit to Baku because the latter was found to be uncooperative with that world body.

Human rights groups and the international press have been extremely critical of Azerbaijan’s repressive regime. Even President Obama, in one his recent speeches, castigated the leaders in Baku for their authoritarian rule.

Europe’s foremost human rights body came out with a very damning statement, which says, “The Azeri government’s systematic crackdown on human rights defenders and other perceived government critics shows sheer contempt for its commitments to the Council of Europe. To let the relentless repression go on unanswered threatens the very credibility of the institution.” (Giorgio Gogia, senior South Caucasus researcher at Human Rights Watch.)

Recently Armenia emerged ahead of Azerbaijan in the index of media freedom in the Eastern Partnership countries.

Thomas De Waal, a senior associate in the Russian and Eurasian program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, is no friend of Armenia by any measure. But he warns western countries about the potential danger that Azerbaijan poses to the region and to the interests of the Western powers.

In a paper released on September 26, here is how De Waal defines Azerbaijan’s dangerous political trends: “In recent months, Azerbaijan’s leaders have embarked upon the biggest human rights crackdowns in wider Europe and have taken a more bellicose line on their number-one domestic and foreign policy issue: the protracted conflict with their country’s longtime foe, Armenia. Western policymakers need to pay more attention and ask themselves what this new hard line means to both Azerbaijan and its neighbors.

De Waal’s conclusion is even more alarming when he writes at the end of his paper: “This is a dangerous dynamic. It seems only a matter of time until a combination of Azerbaijan’s domestic insecurity, its military build-up and the instability of the ceasefire live push Baku to abandon peace talks and embark on a campaign to reconquer Karabagh by force — a move that all outside experts on the conflict predict would end in a catastrophe for all sides.”

When Armenia warns of the situation, many world leaders ascribe it to self-interest. But when experts bring out the potential danger, Armenia’s warning becomes more meaningful.

It is in this backdrop and context that President Sargisian raised his voice, hopefully for a more attentive audience.

The irony of the situation is that after this gripping performance, the president is heading home to face the opposition, which is asking for his resignation. Armenians are living in an unreal world. When the country is at war against poverty, against depopulation, against the blockade while its destiny still hangs in limbo, between the European Union and the Customs Union, it behooves all forces to rally to win the war and then settle domestic scores. This position does not absolve the government of its corruption, nor does it justify actions such as the reappointment of a criminal kingpin Liska (Souren Khachatryan) as the governor of Syunik province. All in the opposition ranks today, however, have taken their turn at the helm of power and they have not fared any better.

Historically, our petty quarrels have cost the loss of our homeland. Let us win the war and then settle the scores.