Azerbaijan Insists on 'Corridor in Exchange for Corridor' Narrative; Artsakh Comments on Aliyev's Statements

The advisor to the President of the Republic of Artsakh on international relations, Nelli Baghdasaryan, discussed Azerbaijan's disinformation regarding the transfer of military equipment to Artsakh via the Lachin Corridor in an interview with an Armenpress correspondent. She addressed several accusations from official and informational circles of Azerbaijan against the Russian peacekeeping mission, the remarks made by Ilham Aliyev in Shushi on November 8, 2022, as well as the aggressive rhetoric surrounding these statements.

Here is the interview:

- Ms. Baghdasaryan, recently the Azerbaijani side spread rumors claiming that military equipment is being transferred to Artsakh via the Lachin Corridor. It is noteworthy that this occurred following the meeting in Sochi. In your opinion, what warrants the circulation of such news, and what do they aim to achieve?

- Azerbaijan is trying to gain control over the corridor at all costs. The official circles of the Republic of Artsakh have denied this news, and if the topic develops, it may also require a denial from the Russian peacekeeping forces as it pertains to their area of responsibility and is clearly disinformation. It is a fact that Azerbaijan has been promoting similar narratives regarding the former route of the corridor as well. In March of this year, Azerbaijan addressed the UN, the Council of Europe, the EU, the OSCE, NATO, and the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, claiming that the 'Lachin Corridor was being used for military purposes.' Azerbaijan has been conducting a consistent policy openly accusing the Russian peacekeeping mission of facilitating the militarization of the Republic of Artsakh. Azerbaijan is developing an illegitimate discourse on the deployment of checkpoints in the new corridor and insists on the 'corridor in exchange for corridor' narrative. Notably, immediately following the Sochi meeting, Russia referred to 'routes' regarding transportation communications.

- In Shushi on November 8, 2022, regarding the topic of the Russian peacekeeping mission in Artsakh, Aliyev hinted that 'the Russian peacekeepers are stationed there temporarily, as specified in the announcement of November 10, 2020.' In your view, what underlying messages does such a hint contain?

- This statement from the President of Azerbaijan was directed at the repeated assertions made by the President of the Republic of Artsakh regarding the necessity for the indefinite presence of Russian peacekeepers, the declaration adopted by the Artsakh National Assembly during the public rally held in Stepanakert on October 30 this year, the proposal from Armenia to extend the peacekeepers' mandate, and discussions on this topic at the 'Valdai' Club and in Sochi. Azerbaijan has set the task of preventing the development of this topic by any means.

- In the same speech, the President of Azerbaijan claimed that Armenia has not completely withdrawn its troops from Artsakh. In your opinion, what accounts for this assertion, which, by the way, is made regularly and does not correspond with reality?

- This is Azerbaijan's consistent policy of portraying Armenia as the aggressor and occupier. These statements have been repeatedly denied by the Republic of Artsakh. The self-defense functions are carried out by the Defense Army of the Republic of Artsakh. Moreover, following the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War, the geographical complexities and length of the contact line, as well as the periodic ceasefire violations by Azerbaijan, led to the consideration of increasing the number of peacekeepers in an official letter directed at the President of Russia, Security Council President Vladimir Putin, following the meeting of the Security Council of Artsakh on March 26.

- The statements made by the President of Azerbaijan contained clear threats. In particular, what would you highlight in this regard, and what conclusions should be drawn from them?

- The international community, if interested, can discuss several emphases from the speech. Specifically, the Azerbaijani operations 'Parukh' and 'Compensation' against the Republic of Artsakh were presented as successful means of achieving objectives through the use of force, which is yet another manifestation of the threat of force. Hints were made about the 'future utilization possibilities' of several occupied heights on the territory of Armenia. I believe the international community should also consider the disrespectful characterizations directed at them, especially when their most significant partners are de jure allies or strategic partners of Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan continues to speak the language of ultimatums, aiming to force the signing of a peace treaty on its own terms. Of course, this is not the first speech of this kind from Azerbaijan; however, it is yet another wake-up call that the issue of the right of self-determination of the Republic of Artsakh is a vital necessity.