Statements made by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev during the European Political Community summit in Yerevan revealed the real position of Europeans regarding resistance to Baku. This opinion was expressed by Azerbaijan expert Tatev Hayrapetyan.
He came, insulted Europeans — and they applauded
Hayrapetyan reacted sharply to Ilham Aliyev’s online speech. According to her, the entire address was built on anti-Armenian and anti-European rhetoric.
She noted that Aliyev was openly accusing European institutions of having an anti-Azerbaijani position, calling the people of Artsakh “separatists,” and presenting his own policies as justified and correct.
In her assessment, the most surprising part was the European reaction. “Aliyev was speaking against them, yet the audience applauded,” she said.
According to Hayrapetyan, the only response came from the President of the European Council, who reminded the audience that Aliyev represents an authoritarian system. However, the discussion ended there.
Hayrapetyan believes Aliyev pursued several goals at once in his speech. In her view, he was not only promoting anti-Armenian propaganda but also trying to portray the realities created by war and ethnic cleansing in Artsakh as “peace” and “victory.”
Moreover, he even attempted to present the existence of prisoners as an achievement.
“This is direct mockery of the European system of values,” she stated. According to her, those values should be based on negotiations, not war and violence.
“Pashinyan was not going to say anything. What could he say?”
Commenting on the Armenian prime minister’s reaction, Hayrapetyan said it was pointless to expect any serious response.
According to her, Armenia had broad opportunities for international mediation in recent months, especially from the United States, but those opportunities were not used.
In her assessment, the only result achieved was a conditional “non-attack” arrangement, which represents only a temporary pause rather than a real solution.
“For this to become long-term, work is needed, but nothing has been done,” she said.
Hayrapetyan also criticized the fact that even during high-level meetings, the Armenian side does not use the platform to raise issues related to prisoners or other humanitarian concerns.
Pashinyan is convenient for them because he demands nothing
Hayrapetyan warned against presenting the current situation as Pashinyan’s “political capital.”
According to her, external actors are interested not in personalities but in how convenient a leader is for them.
“If there is someone who demands nothing, raises no issues, and is ready to do whatever is expected, naturally they will say: he is a wonderful person, let him stay,” she said, using a simple everyday example.
At the same time, Hayrapetyan stressed that the same external forces would calmly work with any future Armenian leader if it served their interests.