Matin Mammadli: The European Parliament’s anti-Azerbaijan resolution is another manifestation of a biased approach

The anti-Azerbaijan resolution adopted by the European Parliament is not the first of its kind and represents yet another manifestation of a biased approach observed in previous years.

This was stated by Matin Mammadli, Head of Department at the Center of Analysis of International Relations, in a statement to “The Daily Baku.”

According to him, a review of the document clearly shows that the resolution is not based on any facts or legal reasoning and gives the impression of being commissioned by certain political circles:

“This is another biased and unjust resolution adopted by the European Parliament against Azerbaijan. The content of the document demonstrates that political objectives are prioritized over an objective approach.”

The expert noted that a number of claims included in the resolution are factually unfounded. In particular, statements concerning representatives of the former self-proclaimed regime that operated in Karabakh do not reflect legal realities:

“The war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by these individuals have been investigated and proven in court. No inhumane treatment against them has been recorded. Despite this, portraying them as ‘prisoners’ is a serious legal misrepresentation.”

Mammadli emphasized that issues related to the departure of the Armenian population from Karabakh in 2023 are also presented in a distorted manner in the resolution:

“Despite Azerbaijan putting forward concrete proposals for reintegration, these individuals chose not to take advantage of these opportunities and voluntarily left the region. Presenting this fact differently and putting forward claims about their return is far from reality.”

The expert added that claims in the document regarding the destruction of cultural heritage are also unfounded:

“Today, large-scale restoration and reconstruction work is being carried out in the territories liberated from occupation. The demolished structures in those areas were illegal constructions built during the occupation period, and this process is being conducted in accordance with both national legislation and international legal norms, including the Geneva Conventions.”

In his opinion, the accusations contained in the resolution lack both political and legal grounds:

“The essence of this document shows that it is far from an objective assessment and is the product of an anti-Azerbaijan approach.”

Mammadli stated that the adoption of such resolutions contradicts not only Azerbaijan’s interests but also those of the European Union:

“Recently, a positive dynamic has been observed in Azerbaijan–European Union relations. Cooperation is expanding, particularly in the field of energy security, and Azerbaijan is recognized as a reliable partner for Europe. In such circumstances, the adoption of this type of resolution damages relations.”

The expert stressed that such decisions also negatively affect the ongoing peace process in the region:

“Currently, certain progress is being observed in peace negotiations between Azerbaijan and Armenia. At such a sensitive stage, the adoption of these types of documents does not serve peace; on the contrary, it may slow down the process.”

According to him, the influence of various interest groups in the adoption of the resolution cannot be ruled out:

“The role of the Armenian lobby and diaspora organizations in this process is clearly visible. At the same time, attempts by certain external political centers to influence the adoption of such decisions cannot be excluded.”

In conclusion, Mammadli noted that Azerbaijan does not accept such pressure-driven approaches:

“It is not possible to speak with Azerbaijan in the language of threats or blackmail. Baseless resolutions cannot have any impact on our country’s position based on international law and justice.”