While Pashinyan is building a ‘crossroads of peace’ and insists that independence is dependence on many, Azerbaijan is building subjectness for itself and making other players dependent on itself. The terrorist state has completed the formation of its new foreign policy architecture, finally stepping out of the shadow of even its senior allies. Instead of the traditional reliance on its big brother – Turkey, Baku is building a parallel network of ties with China, Iran, Israel, Southern and Eastern Europe, the Gulf countries, and even India. Armenia and Georgia are left behind. These two countries had the opportunity to build broad coalitions in their support, but chose to become ‘crossroads of peace’ – in other words, a throughfare for Turkish-Azerbaijani business. Georgia is already questioning this choice, but Armenia still has a long way to go.
Many Armenian media outlets were stirred up after the recent statement by the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Masoud Pezeshkian, about Artsakh’s belonging to Azerbaijan – as if Iran’s official position had ever expressed otherwise and as if official Yerevan itself did not make similar statements. From a tactical point of view, everything is the same with Iran as before. Tehran stands for the immutability of borders in the region and insists on Azerbaijan using the corridor to Nakhichevan through Iranian territory, not the Armenian one.
However, Pezeshkian’s visit and the agreements signed during it reflect new regional realities – in case of choosing between Azerbaijan and Armenia, Iran will have to choose the former. Let us remind that Iran was quite satisfied with the Armenian neighbourhood in Artsakh and implemented infrastructure projects in the south of Artsakh. Now they are being resumed with the signature and blessing of Aliyev. After all, the rescue of drowning is the handiwork of drowning in the first place. Iran benefits from a strong Armenia, but if Armenia has other plans, it will obviously rebuild its own ones, too.
Azerbaijan does not settle for less. The country is actively involved in Eurasian, Islamic, Turkic, and global formats simultaneously, effectively blocking Armenia’s possible participation in them. This is not difficult at all, given the passivity of the Armenian ‘diplomacy’ and its unscrupulousness, the inability to convey the Armenian position to the traditionally friendly states of the Islamic world, small states, and middle powers. By expanding its ties and at the same time refusing to participate in military-political and economic blocs, our neighbour is becoming an intermediary between the centres of power (Israel – Turkey, partly Russia – Ukraine), a link in regional and global stability. To achieve this, Azerbaijan also resorts to destructive measures, such as destabilisation in New Caledonia, forcing to be reckoned with and applying for participation in the establishment of a new world order, when the previous fragile consensus has obviously been destroyed.
It is logical that China is becoming one of the key centres of attraction for Azerbaijan, as it is rewriting the rules of the new world not by word, but by deed. While Armenia has pointedly ignored the invitations from the Chinese side to cooperate for more than 10 years, Azerbaijan has become the second most important investor in the Belt and Road initiative after China. It has invested more than $20 billion in the logistics of the New Silk Road, officially becoming China’s strategic partner and representative in the region. Obviously, the issue for Beijing is not the sums that it is able to invest itself, but the demonstration of Baku’s serious intentions. Now China is one of the main stakeholders in the success and stability of Aliyev’s rule.
Remaining a key gas exporter to Europe, Azerbaijan is doing everything possible to exclude the ‘collective West’ from the decision-making process in the region. The country demonstrates its commitment to the ‘3+3’ format (Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia + Russia, Iran, Turkey), in which there is not a single country that would at least document the right of return of the Armenians of Artsakh to their historical homeland, including the now Turkish-servant Armenia itself. Among all of these six, only Iran is concerned about the issue of Armenia’s territorial integrity in any way.
Such loyalty to the ‘3+3’ platform is not unreasonable. Aliyev has probed the red lines of all regional actors and knows that the tolerance threshold of Iran and Turkey has raised due to the internal political and economic problems. Moreover, although dissatisfied with Azerbaijan’s ‘pro-Israel’ policy, these countries grew to appreciate the opportunities it provides them. As the Kremlin’s reaction (or rather, its absence and the subsequent installation of a monument to Heydar Aliyev) to Aliyev’s hysteria after the crash of the Baku-Grozny plane and the closure of the ‘Russian House’ in Baku showed, the mini-sultan has not even approached the limits of the Russian patience.
Finally, let us talk about India, the largest importer of weapons to Armenia in recent years. India once refused to conclude such deals with Azerbaijan, relying on Armenia (which, let us remind you, is still not recognised by Pakistan – India’s enemy and Azerbaijan’s ally). What are we witnessing against the background of the escalation of the Indian-Pakistani confrontation? Azerbaijan is increasing the intensity of flights and trade with India and reaching out to the Indian leadership through Israel, which is friendly to both states. Israel benefits from a strong Azerbaijan and, as we wrote earlier, Israel provides Azerbaijan with its lobbying channels around the world for this.
Thus, Azerbaijan is building a solid foundation for its impunity for the ethnic cleansing of Artsakh and the occupation of the territory of Armenia in the future. When regional and global actors sit down to consolidate the already emerging rules of the new world order, it is Azerbaijan that will become one of their intermediaries and platforms for negotiations. It is very convenient to justify Armenia’s passivity with the Azerbaijani oil, but it is indisputable that balancing between Israel and Iran, Israel and Turkey, Russia and Turkey, India and Pakistan is a matter of political will and the implementation of politics as an art of the possible – and not a simple distillation of oil and gas through pipes.
Isolated and fancying itself to be the crossroads of a non-existent peace, Armenia in the evolving configuration simply will not be of interest to anyone, and no one’s ‘goodwill’, even if there turns out to be one, will not help us. At least, Azerbaijan itself does not rely on the goodwill of its loyal allies that secured its military victory in Artsakh, and therefore it is diversifying its foreign policy. At the beginning of the 20th century, we failed to consolidate our success against the rogue state (new Turkey). Now, our worst enemy will be the co-author of the new rules, the existence and identity of which is based on hatred towards Armenia and everything Armenian.
