The meeting between Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, and US President Donald Trump has rightly been called a historic event. A page has been turned on a conflict that lasted more than three decades, and an important milestone has been passed on the road toward a final and lasting peace. It is no coincidence that foreign ministries of various countries and international organizations have welcomed the outcome. Yet, as practice shows, historic events of this magnitude also serve as a test—one that, unfortunately, not everyone passes. The European Parliament, in its statement regarding the Washington meeting, started off well enough but ended in a way that could politely be described as self-inflicted damage to what remains of its own reputation, the Azerbaijani outlet Minval Politika writes.
While the statement was generally positive, the closing paragraphs reverted to a tired list of outdated and unfounded accusations against Azerbaijan. According to the European Parliament, Azerbaijan must “withdraw its troops from Armenian territory” and “resolve issues related to Armenian prisoners and displaced Karabakh Armenians.” In other words, release these alleged “prisoners” and ensure the “return of Armenians.”
Each of these points could be addressed in detail, especially in light of the agreements reached in Washington. First, there are no Azerbaijani troops on Armenian territory. Second, Baku and Yerevan have agreed to work on border delimitation and demarcation in a bilateral format. This is hardly a situation in which it is appropriate to make unilateral demands or attempt to appear “more Armenian” than Armenia’s own leadership.
The demand to “resolve the issue of Armenian prisoners” is equally absurd. Azerbaijan handed over Armenian prisoners of war to Armenia on an “all-for-all” basis immediately after the cessation of hostilities. To label as “prisoners” those accused under Azerbaijani criminal law—including charges of terrorism, war crimes, and crimes against humanity—is political fraud at best. These individuals are not prisoners of war, and their cases will be decided by Azerbaijani courts.
Similarly, the attempt to revive the topic of “displaced Karabakh Armenians” and demand that Azerbaijan take “measures” for their return is a cheap political ploy. From the outset, Azerbaijan expressed its willingness to grant Karabakh Armenians citizenship and political and cultural rights. However, these individuals chose not to live under Azerbaijani sovereignty and voluntarily relocated to Armenia. No one “displaced” them—they moved of their own accord. What “measures” do MEPs expect Azerbaijan to take? To nullify its sovereignty over part of its own territory?
Most importantly, after the Washington talks, this topic has been definitively removed from the peace process. These issues are not mentioned in either the draft peace agreement or the signed declaration. Did the European Parliament simply fail to read the documents before commenting? Or…
Here is the crux of the matter: European institutions, from the EU itself to the European Parliament, have been completely sidelined from the Azerbaijan–Armenia normalization process. The European Parliament’s own bias and lack of objectivity played no small part in this.
It hardly needs repeating that, first, the European Parliament contains many deputies whose qualifications are questionable—often people who failed to achieve anything significant in their national politics. Second, as recent scandals have shown, this body is steeped in corruption. Third, it has long harbored an excess of Turkophobes, Islamophobes, and lobbyists willing to sell their influence and votes. While the Armenia–Azerbaijan conflict continued, it was possible to monetize this issue—earning corrupt money and votes from target groups ranging from xenophobes to ethnic Armenians.
Now, however, Baku and Yerevan are putting an end to a drawn-out conflict in Washington. With a peace agenda—painfully and slowly—moving forward, these marginal MEPs have become prisoners of their own past, compounded by jealousy: how could Donald Trump succeed where European leaders failed? The result is provocative language aimed at derailing the peace process, reviving toxic tensions, and dragging Baku and Yerevan back into the past. Nothing personal—just business, profiting from someone else’s war.
It is also impossible to ignore how closely the wording and sentiments of the European Parliament’s leadership align with those of Russia and Iran—a “Union of the Aggrieved” suddenly deprived of their ability to manipulate the conflict. It is entirely possible that “influence groups” linked to the Kremlin, with which many MEPs and figures like Josep Borrell have discreet ties, are at work here. The list of corruption cases—searches, arrests of MEPs and aides, and dealings of figures like “diamond king” Aram Karampetyan—has already been documented and merits investigation. But the European Parliament’s leadership lacks the political will for such inquiries, not least because they might implicate themselves.
Of course, this crowd can stir up noise in the lobby, draft a few foul-smelling papers, and insert provocative language into certain documents. But reversing the course of political processes? That they cannot do. This applies even within Europe, where priority is given to the core interests of European states, particularly in the sensitive field of collective and energy security.
It is telling that relations between Azerbaijan and the EU are developing, and that there is ongoing communication between President Ilham Aliyev and EU leaders—including Roberta Metsola, Kaja Kallas, and Ursula von der Leyen—helping to advance cooperation. Unfortunately, some European actors remain stuck in outdated thinking.
Meanwhile, political processes move on. Strategic ties between Azerbaijan and the United States are growing stronger. Many dislike this, and many are envious. But there is no turning this process back.
