Aliyev is against Armenia’s sovereignty and against the EAEU

The day before, we noted that during the August 20 meeting, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexey Overchuk and Nikol Pashinyan discussed the situation that arose after the signing of the August 8 documents in Washington. The discussion centered on Russia’s continued insistence that Armenia holds obligations both within the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) customs framework and under bilateral Armenian-Russian agreements concerning border control along Armenia’s southern borders.

In other words, the Russian side pointed out that Azerbaijan’s desired corridor through Armenian territory, where Azerbaijani passengers and cargo do not have to undergo border or customs control, cannot be implemented, as it contradicts both Armenia’s bilateral obligations and obligations within the EAEU.

However, the commitments that Nikol Pashinyan appears to have made on August 8 directly contradict not only Armenia’s sovereign right to exercise all forms of control over its territory but also the legal acts of the EAEU and the provisions of the Armenian-Russian treaties. The justified doubts that Pashinyan’s commitments contradict Armenia’s sovereignty and clash with his previous international obligations are based not only on his previous leadership but also on the statements made in recent weeks.

So, ahead of the meeting in Washington, Arman Yeghoyan, head of the Permanent Commission on European Integration and a member of the Civil Contract faction, commented on the idea of leasing communications infrastructure in Syunik to the United States.
“We saw the danger of ceding sovereignty. We saw the danger not in the implementation of the function, but in the lease itself. This option was unacceptable to us. There was an exchange of ideas with the Americans, but the topic was not developed in this direction. If we said no, it means no,” he said.

However, after Yeghoyan’s statement, a meeting was held, and according to Donald Trump, Pashinyan did lease the communications infrastructure for 99 years. Additionally, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev stated that Baku does not consider Armenia’s security guarantees sufficient for its citizens to travel through the “Zangezur corridor” on Armenian territory.

“What is important for us is that it is built and that there are international security guarantees. In other words, when Azerbaijanis travel from Nakhichevan to the mainland and back, they should not feel discomfort. They should not be afraid for their security, taking into account the long-lasting standoff and hostility,” Aliyev explained in an interview with Al Arabiya.

Adding to this, Aliyev claimed that the August 8 document entitles Azerbaijan to unrestricted access to Nakhichevan. It becomes clear that in Washington, Pashinyan has not only surrendered the corridor but also something that contradicts the Armenian-Russian treaties and the provisions of the Eurasian Economic Union. In other words, Aliyev’s policies are also directed against the Eurasian Union.

This is how the narrative promoted by some Russian theorists and officials—that by backing Azerbaijan in the Karabakh conflict, Russia would secure Baku as a strategic ally—is being destroyed before our eyes. Aliyev not only failed to become an ally but is also trying to destroy the basic foundations of the economic union created by Russia. And why is that? Because the “small and insignificant” Nagorno-Karabakh Republic has disappeared.

Think about it…