Hovsep Khurshudyan, ACNIS senior analyst
It is obvious thatBrussels,Washington, D.C., andYerevanwere all aware of the extradition of the fanatic murderer Ramil Safarov ahead of time. This act was silently allowed to have taken place, since three of these capitals had their own interest in causing this harm to both the current authorities ofHungaryand to Aliev.
The current Prime Minister of Hungary has become the eyesore of the European family since his regime was in power during 1998-2002. InBrusselshis nationalistic and xenophobic rhetoric and politics were always considered as contradicting and threatening to the European and common humanistic values.
Read also
Orban was also blamed for the application of authoritarian model of public administration, resulted in decrease of the parliament’s role and authority. In 2002―not withoutBrussels’ support―liberals and leftists won the elections, and Orban with his Fidesz right-centrist party (by the way, the party is a member of EPP) was complaining about fabrication of the results. But the only violation the European observers found was obviously more privileges given to Fidesz during the Public TV coverage.
Owing to discontent among the Hungarian people–stemming from the outcomes of the world economic crisis—in 2010 Fidesz again came to power, and Orban became the Prime Minister. However, this timeWashingtonwith Obama’s democratic administration―that attaches more importance to human rights, even sometimes compromising some geopolitical positions―also jointBrusselsin the team of Orban’s “dislikers.” Meanwhile Orban’s regime―nationalist, populist and xenophobic, supporter of the catholic priests (and for that having been awarded the cross of St. Gregory the Great by Vatican)―does not match the context of the international priorities declared by the US foreign policy, and has already gained the harsh criticism of the US.
By the way, it is not only catholic Vatican that admires Orban, but also Great Russia, from where always admiration is expressed towards “European Hugo Chavez,” who closed the roads for the projects of formation of European global elite” (https://www.fondsk.ru/news/2012/05/18/ugo-chaves-evropy.html.
Moscowis particularly excited about the new constitution ofHungarythat was enacted on January 1st, 2012. With thisHungarybecame the first the EU state that put an end to “cultural diversity.” In addition, the preamble of the new constitution mentions modern Hungary as a “successor” of the medieval Hungarian Empire, the territory of which exceeded two to three times that of contemporary Hungary, and included Slovakia in its entirety, the Ukrainian Carpathians, Serbian Vojvodina, almost all of Croatia, and half of Romania. In other words, this mishap that has come to power in the middle ofEuropestands in full contrast with the European values. Thus, it is not by accident thatHungaryfell in its own “pit of values,” when it ignored the humanistic and principal moral values for the sake of its “national interests.” That is, in order to ensure a few billion dollars worth of investment byAzerbaijaninHungary, it returned the criminal, who had committed a loathsome murder, to a country, whichEuropeunofficially considers to be an eastern petrol emirate, the foreign policy of which includes elements of racism, and where the murderer would clearly avoid enduring deserved punishment. Moreover, he was already turned into a hero before his transfer.
Thus, Orban belongs to those xenophobes who do not accept European values, and always takes the chance to discredit them. Now there is great opportunity forBrusselsandWashingtonto get rid of his exotic regime. Orban himself is giving the chance.
Aliev was no less foresighted, and ifBrusselsandWashingtonwere interested in his mistake, officialYerevan’s concern was even deeper. The first two solve at least three problems concerningAzerbaijan:
1. Formation of additional prerequisites for pressuring Azerbaijan as an uncompromising side that stimulates the undermining of the status quo, which is unacceptable for the West.
2. Global weakening of the ruling regime of Azerbaijan–that has become strictly stubborn due to oil super profits and irritates the West—and democratizating Azerbaijan by strengthening its system of checks and balances.
3. Creation of yet another opportunity for escalation of international pressure on Aliev a year ahead of Azerbaijani presidential elections to be held in October, 2013.
Meanwhile, Yerevan is the most interested party in the weakening of Azerbaijan’s status and of making Baku a target of international pressure the least effects of which may be at minimum the extortion of some concessions within the negotiation format, such as Republic of Mountainous Karabakh’s (MKR) return to the negotiating table, adoption of a more loyal attitude by the presidents of the OSCE Minsk Group’s Co-Chair countries France, the Russian Federation, and the United States of America towards the stimulation of the resettlement process of the liberated territories or at least a real restart of modernized Stepanakert airport, and at maximum a permission for the recognition of Artsakh’s freedom to be received from the aforementioned three presidents, which will become a starting point for the international recognition process of the MKR as a state. Eventually, the weakening of current racist and anti-ArmenianistAzerbaijanis a security issue forArmeniaand Artsakh. The dissolution of misanthropic feudal regime and the establishment of a modern democratic state in our neighboring country stems not only fromArmenia’s and Western countries’ interests, but also from the interests ofAzerbaijan’s multiethnic nation.