BAKU, Azerbaijan, Might 4. The Momentary
Fee of the Azerbaijani Parliament in opposition to International
Interference and Hybrid Threats has issued an announcement on the
hybrid assault campaigns carried out in opposition to Azerbaijan by
pro-Armenian circles primarily based within the West.
Pattern presents
the assertion.
In opposition to the backdrop of the continual successes achieved by
Azerbaijan beneath the management of President Ilham Aliyev and the
implementation of the peace agenda between Azerbaijan and Armenia,
in addition to on the eve of the thirteenth session of the UN World City
Discussion board (WUF13) to be held in Baku, the usage of hybrid menace parts
in opposition to Azerbaijan by pro-Armenian circles primarily based in Western
nations has been not too long ago noticed.
The similarity of the noticed exercise with the actions
carried out on the eve of and throughout the COP29 convention held in
Azerbaijan necessitated an investigation by the Momentary
Fee of the Azerbaijani Parliament in opposition to International
Interference and Hybrid Threats (the fee) inside its
powers.
At the moment, two foremost kinds of hybrid threats in opposition to
Azerbaijan had been widespread – “Lawfare”, that’s, stress by way of
authorized means, and disinformation campaigns.
The fee issued an announcement on Might 2 of this yr
concerning the coordinated disinformation marketing campaign carried out by
pro-Armenian circles. On the similar time, the Azerbaijani Parliament
gave the European Parliament, the Home of Representatives of the
Belgian Federal Parliament, and the Home of Representatives of the
Netherlands, who wished to place stress on Azerbaijan, the
acceptable responses, took the required steps, and expressed its
robust protest in opposition to the unfair and anti-Azerbaijani resolutions
adopted.
The fee first uncovered fraud after a comparative evaluation
of the texts of each the draft model (04.02.2026) and the adopted
model (16.04.2026) of the decision adopted by the Chamber of
Representatives of the Belgian Federal Parliament, which additionally has
no authorized power and isn’t binding.
Thus, whereas the draft was introduced to the committee by creator
Michel De Maegd and 4 different co-authors with a light language, a
impartial title (“Decision calling on Belgium to make use of the European
Union-Armenia and European Political Neighborhood summits to be held
in Yerevan in Might 2026 to strengthen the peace course of between
Armenia and Azerbaijan”), the ultimate model was extra radical,
“enriched” with calls for for robust steps in opposition to Azerbaijan and
interference within the inside affairs of the nation.
The aim of utilizing such techniques was to cross the draft
decision by way of the International Affairs Committee and suggest it
to the plenary session in a handy kind.
One other undeniable fact that will increase the doubts on this regard is expounded
to the processes that befell throughout the plenary session on
April 16. Initially, in accordance with the principles of process within the
Belgian parliament, all points put to a vote throughout the plenary
session (whether or not a decision or one other doc) are put to the
vote on the finish of the session, not instantly after the
dialogue.
As might be seen from the video footage of the dialogue and
voting on this decision in opposition to Azerbaijan, the assembly corridor was
nearly empty throughout the discussions, and solely 30-35 out of 150 MPs
had been current. This implies that for about 80% of Belgian MPs,
neither the speeches made on the decision nor its content material had been
essential. Nonetheless, since there have been different essential points on the
agenda that day and participation within the vote was mandatory, all
MPs within the corridor (134 individuals) routinely voted for the decision
in opposition to Azerbaijan.
One other noteworthy level about this decision is that it
explicitly requires “appearing in accordance with the examples of the
Netherlands and Luxembourg in relations with Armenia.” The
inclusion of such a phrase within the decision means that MPs from
a lot of European Union member states, working beneath the
affect of the Armenian foyer, have shaped a coordinated
“pro-Armenian bloc”.
The info established that the foyer group “European
Armenian Federation for Justice and Democracy (EAFJD)”,
headquartered in Brussels and working in 13 European nations,
performed a key function on this matter, that it had shut relations with
a number of members of the Belgian Parliament International Affairs
Committee, and that it made a presentation to that committee in
April 2025.
Contemplating Michel De Maegdin’s actions in parliament from
2019 by way of 2026, seven of all of the draft resolutions he authored
or co-authored had been completely in opposition to Azerbaijan. Inside the
framework of this exercise, he addressed a complete of six written
inquiries to authorities officers of Belgium concerning
anti-Azerbaijani points or points mentioning Azerbaijan. The quantity
of verbal questions he requested throughout plenary classes was three, and
the variety of such questions throughout committee conferences was 19.
The investigation decided that De Maegd was in institutional
cooperation with Armenian officers and Armenian foyer teams
working in Belgium, together with the “EAFJD”. The evaluation of his
social media and media actions confirmed that he typically gave
interviews to Armenian media retailers and unequivocally displayed a
pro-Armenian place. De Maegd’s statements in an interview with
Armenian media in March final yr clearly exhibit that the
parliamentarian was used as a device of a hybrid menace by the
Armenian foyer.
“We should elevate our voice. We should improve the stress on
Azerbaijan by all attainable means. I’ve mentioned this subject once more
with the International Minister and the Prime Minister. This subject is
pressing. This draft decision serves this objective exactly. It
calls on the Belgian Authorities to take motion and use its
affect. The decision requires sanctions in opposition to the Aliyev
regime. I might be as energetic on this subject as ever, and I’ll by no means
surrender on this battle,” he stated.
The investigation into the “movement” doc in opposition to Azerbaijan,
initiated by Don Ceder within the Dutch Home of Representatives, has
decided that the Armenian foyer was behind these actions.
Initially, such paperwork, referred to as “motions,” are a type of
proposal addressed in writing by MPs and adopted by vote on any legislation
or coverage doc in committee conferences, and on any subject
mentioned in plenary classes.
On April 16, one of many “motions” voiced by Don Ceder was in opposition to
Azerbaijan, and the opposite was in opposition to Türkiye, mentioning
Azerbaijan by identify. A noteworthy truth concerning the second “movement”
concerning the popularity of the so-called “Armenian genocide” by
the Dutch Authorities is that it additionally requires utilizing the expertise
of different states, as within the decision of the Belgian Parliament
dated April 16. If the experiences of the Netherlands and
Luxembourg had been referred to there, Don Ceder’s proposal requests
“to show to Belgium and Luxembourg for recommendation and professional help,
if mandatory.”
An evaluation of his anti-Azerbaijani and anti-Turkish actions
within the Dutch Parliament, written requests (Word: 12 of the full
requests he has submitted since he was elected as a member of
parliament have been anti-Azerbaijani and anti-Turkish), social
media and media posts and posts reveals that, throughout the framework of
shut cooperation with the foyer group “Federation of
Armenian Organizations of the Netherlands (FAON)”, he is additionally used
as a device of hybrid menace in opposition to Azerbaijan, like his Belgian
colleagues. The official web site of the Dutch Parliament signifies
that on January 28, 2024, he accepted two live performance tickets as a present
from the “Armenian Basis of the Netherlands”.
An evaluation of the decision “Supporting democratic stability
in Armenia”, adopted by the European Parliament (EP) on April 30,
additionally revealed a lot of attention-grabbing factors.
The European Parliament consists of 720 members (at present this
determine is 719), which unite eight political teams and
independents.
The primary placing level concerning the aforementioned decision was
the date of the proposed adjustments to its draft. Thus, though every
of the six political teams represented within the EP submitted their
proposals individually, the truth that the date coincides with the
anniversary of the so-called Armenian genocide – April 24 – and the
reference there to the EP decision “one centesimal anniversary of the
Armenian genocide” dated April 15, 2015, additional will increase
suspicions concerning the function of the worldwide Armenian community.
Examination of the identities and connections of a complete of 36
individuals who submitted the proposals decided that the majority of
them had connections with the Armenian foyer and sometimes spoke
out with pro-Armenian positions.
On April 28, the ultimate draft of the decision was proposed by 42
individuals represented in various political teams and submitted to the
plenary session. On April 30, out of the particular 719 MPs, 571 individuals
participated within the vote, of which 476 had been in favor of the
decision, 47 had been in opposition to, and 48 abstained. Later, two MPs additionally
expressed their intention to vote in favor of the doc.
The nation illustration of these 42 individuals is as follows:
• Poland – 8 individuals;
• Belgium and Lithuania – 5 individuals every;
• Czech Republic and Slovakia – 3 individuals every;
• Germany, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Croatia, and France – 2
individuals every;
• Austria, Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, and Romania – 1
particular person every.
By political group:
• European Folks’s Social gathering – 19 individuals;
• European Conservatives and Reformists – 9 individuals;
• Renew Europe – 8 individuals;
• Socialists and Democrats – 5 individuals;
• Greens/European Free Alliance – 1 particular person.
Though the decision is instantly associated to Armenia, all
factors criticizing the nation’s home coverage within the proposals
for the draft had been faraway from the ultimate model.
On the similar time, though two of the tasks proposed by the
six political teams don’t comprise any unfavorable factors concerning
Azerbaijan, the evaluation of the proposals of 34 MPs representing
the Left, Socialists and Democrats, European Folks’s Social gathering and
European Conservatives and Reformists teams reveals that they
comprise a number of unfair, biased and very biased statements
concerning Azerbaijan, which indicate interference within the inside
affairs of the nation, contradict the norms and rules of
worldwide legislation. The parliamentarians who got here up with essentially the most
strongly anti-Azerbaijani initiatives had been Giorgos Georgiou
(Cyprus) and Marina Mesure (France) on behalf of the Left
group.
The evaluation of the initiatives used in opposition to Azerbaijan within the
decision itself and the proposed annexes to it decided that
they’re equivalent to the theses periodically voiced by the worldwide
Armenian community and particular person foyer teams.
The info concerning the people represented in all three
parliaments as soon as once more give purpose to say that they’re energetic
members of the Armenian foyer community, act in a coordinated method
in accordance with the anti-Azerbaijani and anti-Turkish agenda,
and are used as hybrid menace instruments.
Evaluation of those networks reveals that the identical organizations and
people demonstrated comparable “exercise” within the anti-Azerbaijani
processes in 2024. Detailed details about them might be present in
the report “Hybrid assaults in opposition to COP29: Our society should not fall
sufferer to hybrid threats!”, introduced by the fee in December
2024.
(https://meclis.gov.az/information.php?id=5851&lang=az)
Forces that do not need the implementation of the peace agenda
between Armenia and Azerbaijan and the method to achieve its logical
conclusion, sure circles that oppose the cooperation,
growth, and prosperity within the area, and the comfortable way forward for
the peoples, are attempting to undermine the relations which can be being
shaped between the 2 nations in each attainable approach.
In line with the сommission’s conclusion, such actions are
being carried out purposefully and goal to draw consideration forward
of the “European Political Neighborhood” Summit and the European
Union-Armenia Summit in Armenia.
The extent to which the Armenian authorities are concerned in
these processes can be a severe query and topic to doubt.
The Armenian officers ought to take severe steps to stop such
conditions that may undermine the peace agenda, or make clear the
subject. In any other case, this can be perceived as a disingenuous strategy
to the peace agenda.
Lastly, the Fee in opposition to International Interference and Hybrid
Threats appeals to its parliamentary colleagues in international
parliaments and asks them to not help the false and
“peace-loving” initiatives of a few of their colleagues on points
that would undermine the delicate peace course of between Armenia and
Azerbaijan, on account of the theses and actions of the
Armenian foyer, in addition to relations between the nations.
