To recap: the behind-the-scenes maneuvering around this conference idea, pushed by the local Armenian lobby, has been ongoing since October. Back then, the Foreign Affairs Committee of Switzerland’s lower parliamentary house, influenced by the Armenian lobby, passed a resolution supporting such a conference. On paper, it seemed appealing: the forum was supposed to foster dialogue between Azerbaijan and the “Karabakh Armenians.” However, Swiss authorities have now officially rejected the idea, affirming that resolving the situation is a matter for Armenia and Azerbaijan.
This is undoubtedly a bitter failure for the Armenian lobby but also a testament to the quiet and effective work of Azerbaijani diplomats in Switzerland. In the Alpine republic, hosting international conferences is a core aspect of its global diplomatic activity. Moreover, events like “meet, talk, and leave” have become a preferred approach in modern European diplomacy—showing participation without real commitment.
Nevertheless, this failure of the Armenian lobby doesn’t mean the matter should be dismissed outright. One should at least ask: what were the actual intentions behind such plans?
Strictly speaking, after Azerbaijan expelled Armenian occupiers from its territory and Samvel Shahramanyan signed a decree disbanding the illegal occupation regime created by Armenia in Karabakh, Armenia’s role in this dialogue became irrelevant. Furthermore, Azerbaijan had been proposing such dialogue from the beginning. In an interview with Dmitry Kiselyov, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev emphasized, “Even before our one-day anti-terrorist operation in September 2023, we officially published a plan for the reintegration of Karabakh Armenians into the Azerbaijani state. This was made public and is available online. Our numerous attempts to establish contact with representatives of the Armenian community were unsuccessful. They ignored us, refused to meet, and didn’t want to talk. To reach out to those living there, we published the plan online. It clearly outlines everything—from education, cultural preservation, reintegration, pathways to integration, applications for residency, or citizenship, and work permits. If anyone believed they could continue living in some ‘Nagorno-Karabakh Republic’ after all that has happened, that’s their problem.” Notably, Azerbaijan has not forcibly retained those unwilling to live in areas under the country’s restored sovereignty.
Moreover, as the Armenian lobby’s failure in Switzerland demonstrates, global attention to the “return of Armenians to Karabakh” is gradually fading from international discourse and becoming a strictly “Armenian-related” issue. Azerbaijan has completed its agenda concerning Karabakh Armenians. The responsibility now lies with the Armenians themselves. Claims like “we want to live in Karabakh but not under Azerbaijan” are no longer viable. The world is no longer in 1988, 1994, or even 2019.
This raises a critical question: what is the purpose of the loud calls for “dialogue,” “international conferences,” and other similar displays? Are the proponents of these ideas simply out of touch with the realities on the ground?
Some, particularly Swiss MPs, might indeed be unaware. However, the Armenian political elite clearly understands what they are pursuing. As a “minimum program,” they aim to legitimize the remnants of the occupation regime. Despite Shahramanyan’s decree dissolving the regime, its structures remain operational in Armenia. Undoubtedly, these remnants were expected to represent “Karabakh Armenians.” The “maximum program” remains the idea of a “return under international security guarantees,” effectively paving the way for a re-occupation of Azerbaijani territories liberated during the 44-day war and anti-terrorist operations.
Thus, these attempts must be met with an appropriate response.
Nurani
Translated from minval.az
