Members of the European Parliament’s foreign affairs committee took the unusual decision last week of not deploying an observer mission to the upcoming Azeri presidential elections. At a Brussels press conference, hosted by Slovakian MEP Miriam Lexmann (EPP), Armenia’s ambassador to Belgium Tigran Balayan raised concerns about the legitimacy of Azerbaijan’s electoral process on January 24th.
In an exception to its normal approach, the European Parliament stated that, as part of not sending election observers, it will also not comment on the legitimacy of the election results. While sovereigntists might welcome this decision to mind its own business, there is suspicion about Brussels’ underlying motives.
The gas-rich majority-Muslim nation has been in the media crosshairs following its annexation of the contested Nagorno-Karabakh region. The country has also been accused of the ethnic cleansing of 120,000 Armenians last year. The EU, meanwhile, has been heavily criticised for its energy partnerships with the authoritarian Azeri government.
After the military victory in Nagorno-Karabakh, Azeri President Ilham Aliyev called a snap presidential election, scheduled for February 7th. According to Western NGOs, the Azeri government has a notorious record of semi-overt vote rigging.
Despite these claims of election fraud, ethnic cleansing, and ‘laundering’ Russian oil, Azerbaijan has a strong lobbying presence in Brussels.
During Lexmann’s press conference on the protection of Armenia’s cultural heritage, Balayan, Armenia’s ambassador to Belgium, cast doubt on the legitimacy of Azerbaijan’s upcoming election. He pointed to the power held by the Aliyev clan—referring to the marriage between President Aliyev and his Vice President Mehriban Aliyeva.
When asked by The European Conservative if aggressive Azeri lobbying could have influenced the EU’s decision not to send observers, Lexmann claimed that the Parliament was unable to send a mission due to a lack of a formal invitation from the Azeri government, but did not rule out additional “political reasons” for the decisions.
Lexmann added that, while energy security is of paramount importance to the EU, energy deals with Azerbaijan risk ruining Brussels’ credibility on the international stage. She also criticised recent Slovakian arms deals with Azerbaijan, following claims of ethnic cleansing in Nagorno-Karabakh.
Members of the Armenian clergy and cultural historians also addressed the media, reporting that the Azeri government is ramping up anti-Armenian historical revisionism following the military takeover of Nagorno-Karabakh—even labelling Armenia “Western Azerbaijan” and erecting monuments to figures associated with the Armenian genocide.
The Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs did not respond to media requests to clarify its reasoning behind the decision not to send election observers. Over the summer, Azerbaijan’s top diplomat in Brussels came under fire after making social media threats to an official EU delegation, including sarcastically posting a picture of a sniper rifle.
The relative indifference shown to Azerbaijan contrasts with the harsher line taken against Serbia, where the EU and MEPs have been decrying alleged voter fraud in last December’s parliamentary elections.
While expansive rule-of-law electoral policing is undesirable, inconsistency makes the process even more troubling.
