Tweet
ARMENIA'S EUROPEAN FRIENDS COUNTER CAVIAR MOTIVATED POLITICIANS
ARMENPRESS
8 October, 2012
BRUSSELS
BRUSSELS, OCTOBER 8, ARMENPRESS: The essence of Azerbaijan's
"caviar diplomacy" is widely discussed by various structures of
the international community. Armenpress had an interview with the
Secretary-General of the EuFoA-Dr. Michael Kambeck about Azeri
multi-million spending on anti- Armenian propaganda, as well as on
the activities of the "European Friends of Armenia".
-Armenpress: Dr. Kambeck, Azerbaijani high-ranking officials, including
President Aliyev, often describe Armenian lobbying as the biggest
threat. Whereas in reality we have a completely different picture
in Brussels, with the increasing number of different Azerbaijani
organizations such as the European Azerbaijan Society (TEAS) and the
Office of Communication of Azerbaijan (OCAZ).
- This is true, but if I express any opinion on their activities it
will be considered as biased. So I better refer you to an interesting
summery published by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, a London
based not-for-profit organization. They have well summarized who
is behind TEAS i.e. the son of Azerbaijan's Minister for Emergency
Situations, Kamaladdin Heydarov. The fact of "caviar diplomacy"
and luxurious trips to Azerbaijan were all well illustrated in the
article. TEAS became active in Brussels shortly after EuFoA was
established (2009). From our experience and observations, in most
cases this type of lobbying takes an effect but very quickly the
involved persons realize that they have been used and thus do not
stay committed for a long time. Only very few do stay committed to
Azerbaijan, whatever their motivations are. It is up to investigative
journalism to uncover this.
Armenpress: How do they conduct their lobbying in the EP?
-Dr. Kambeck: They provide their own MEPs and coordinate an Azerbaijani
secret friendship group within the institution. I call it secret,
because the membership is secret. MEP Evgeni Kirilov (Group of the
Progressive Alliance of Socialists & Democrats (S&D), Bulgaria) once
mentioned that he was a member of that group though without specifying
his concrete function. It is until now unclear who covers the expenses
of this group and there is no public information either on the web or
somewhere else. We believe that these types of activities are against
the spirit and the letter of European lobbying rules.
-Armenpress: Could you please bring concrete examples?
Dr. Kambeck: We had two resolutions on Armenia and Azerbaijan in
the spring session (April, Strasburg week) of the EP. The friendship
group was very active. We had amendments circulated in the EP which
strangely enough matched with the statements of Azerbaijani officials,
published on official governmental sites, even including grammatical
mistakes. This has been tabled by totally different people from
different groups. Obviously, it was drafted outside of the EP and
not by the MEPs themselves.
A more recent example concerns MEP Inese Vaidere (European People's
Party (EPP), Latvia) who circulated an email on 12 September about the
Safarov case in the EP (one day before the resolution's adoption),
spreading objectively false information about Garabedyan's case,
obviously given by an Azeri source. Despite the whole machinery of
Azeri lobbying, this case did not get into the final version of the
resolution, as several MEPs requested both from us and other sources
a verification of the information about Mr. Garabedyan. When MEPs
saw that no parallels could be drawn, they deleted the respective line.
Unfortunately, the European Parliament is not the only institution
where an Armenophobic strategy is attempted by Azerbaijan. They try
to reach as many national parliaments in Europe as possible and this
is a very dangerous pattern. Look at the national parliaments where
Azerbaijan tries to push for resolutions for the commemoration of
what they call the "Khojali genocide", without providing reliable
information, for example the UN documentation on that case.
Some innocent and poorly informed MPs, some even with best intentions,
follow this line. This is a misuse of naivety and lack of knowledge.
We have just stopped this type of resolution in Rome. The wider
public is not informed about how many agencies Azerbaijan hired in
most EU capitals to back up their activities. For example, we were
informed that Hans-Dietrich Genscher (former Foreign Minister and
Vice-Chancellor of Germany) called an MEP to talk about the April
resolutions. He is a board member of Consultum, a PR agency working for
Azerbaijan in Berlin. Another example of how bad lobbying is conducted:
the case of MEP Vytautas Landsbergis, Vice Chair of the EP's South
Caucasus Delegation (EPP, Lithuania). I respect him for what he has
done for his country. However, with his age and convictions he seems
to be Russo- and Armenophobic. He normally does not travel due to
his health condition. Yet, during the April Strasburg week, where EP
reports on Armenia and Azerbaijan where discussed, he was quoted by
Azeri media as just having been in Baku and meeting President Aliyev.
Then, in the same week, on the voting day he walks into the EP
plenary. So he took the trouble to travel to Baku and then be back
in time on the voting day in Strasburg, which is logistically very
complicated. A source told us that he used a private jet but we
were not able to verify the information. The online news service
'EU Observer' questioned him about the same issue and he refused
to elaborate as to who paid for his trip to Baku and back. He then
presented a last-minute oral amendment, introducing the official
Azerbaijani demand on "first" withdrawing troops from Karabakh,
contrary to the Minsk Group's Madrid Principles, which the EP has
always strongly supported.
According to the rules of procedure, such last-minute oral amendments
cannot be admitted in the Parliament if a group of MEPs disagrees
- which was the case. But the EP staff made a mistake and allowed
voting, thus mistakenly amending the final text, even though it was
agreed that both resolutions on Armenia and Azerbaijan will have the
same wording on NK, i.e. in line with the Minsk Group principles. The
text immediately appeared in Azeri media, stating that the EP fully
side-lines with the Azerbaijani position of an unconditional withdrawal
of troops. For many experienced MEPs with years of experience in the EP
it was a shock to see such things happening, because Mr. Landsbergis
knew that his own group was against such an amendment. But apparently
he had a reason to show that he was trying "something" pro-Azeri,
and by mistake, he even managed. Some days later, the Conference of
Presidents reversed this mistake and Mr.
Landsbergis was cautioned in the EPP group for his behavior. Armenia
is constantly running against this type of activities all around
Europe. The Azerbaijani embassies are very well equipped and have
more staff than the Armenian ones.
I believe that Armenia should reinforce the strength of the embassies
in the EU as much as possible.
Armenpress: Could you please elaborate on ALDE's (Alliance of Liberals
and Democrats for Europe) last minute decision to vote against the
Safarov resolution? They were one of the initiators of the resolution
- weren't there questions raised within the Parliament as to why
it happened?
Dr. Kambeck: Yes, this surprised many and this question was raised
during the debate in the plenary. One day before the resolution was
voted, the Chairman of Azerbaijani Delegation to the EURONEST PA -
Elkhan Suleymanov - published an article in the Azeri press in which
he publicly boasted about having flipped around the ALDE group not
to vote on their own resolution, using MEP Norica Nicolai (Romania,
ALDE). Armenpress: How then do you counter misinformation? Dr.
Kambeck: By showing to the decision makers that some forces are
playing with them. We provide facts and figures, reliable sources
where the information can be checked. Over the years we have become
a credible source of information and people ask us for our views. By
now, MEPs and other decision makers know they can rely on us.
ARMENPRESS
8 October, 2012
BRUSSELS
BRUSSELS, OCTOBER 8, ARMENPRESS: The essence of Azerbaijan's
"caviar diplomacy" is widely discussed by various structures of
the international community. Armenpress had an interview with the
Secretary-General of the EuFoA-Dr. Michael Kambeck about Azeri
multi-million spending on anti- Armenian propaganda, as well as on
the activities of the "European Friends of Armenia".
-Armenpress: Dr. Kambeck, Azerbaijani high-ranking officials, including
President Aliyev, often describe Armenian lobbying as the biggest
threat. Whereas in reality we have a completely different picture
in Brussels, with the increasing number of different Azerbaijani
organizations such as the European Azerbaijan Society (TEAS) and the
Office of Communication of Azerbaijan (OCAZ).
- This is true, but if I express any opinion on their activities it
will be considered as biased. So I better refer you to an interesting
summery published by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, a London
based not-for-profit organization. They have well summarized who
is behind TEAS i.e. the son of Azerbaijan's Minister for Emergency
Situations, Kamaladdin Heydarov. The fact of "caviar diplomacy"
and luxurious trips to Azerbaijan were all well illustrated in the
article. TEAS became active in Brussels shortly after EuFoA was
established (2009). From our experience and observations, in most
cases this type of lobbying takes an effect but very quickly the
involved persons realize that they have been used and thus do not
stay committed for a long time. Only very few do stay committed to
Azerbaijan, whatever their motivations are. It is up to investigative
journalism to uncover this.
Armenpress: How do they conduct their lobbying in the EP?
-Dr. Kambeck: They provide their own MEPs and coordinate an Azerbaijani
secret friendship group within the institution. I call it secret,
because the membership is secret. MEP Evgeni Kirilov (Group of the
Progressive Alliance of Socialists & Democrats (S&D), Bulgaria) once
mentioned that he was a member of that group though without specifying
his concrete function. It is until now unclear who covers the expenses
of this group and there is no public information either on the web or
somewhere else. We believe that these types of activities are against
the spirit and the letter of European lobbying rules.
-Armenpress: Could you please bring concrete examples?
Dr. Kambeck: We had two resolutions on Armenia and Azerbaijan in
the spring session (April, Strasburg week) of the EP. The friendship
group was very active. We had amendments circulated in the EP which
strangely enough matched with the statements of Azerbaijani officials,
published on official governmental sites, even including grammatical
mistakes. This has been tabled by totally different people from
different groups. Obviously, it was drafted outside of the EP and
not by the MEPs themselves.
A more recent example concerns MEP Inese Vaidere (European People's
Party (EPP), Latvia) who circulated an email on 12 September about the
Safarov case in the EP (one day before the resolution's adoption),
spreading objectively false information about Garabedyan's case,
obviously given by an Azeri source. Despite the whole machinery of
Azeri lobbying, this case did not get into the final version of the
resolution, as several MEPs requested both from us and other sources
a verification of the information about Mr. Garabedyan. When MEPs
saw that no parallels could be drawn, they deleted the respective line.
Unfortunately, the European Parliament is not the only institution
where an Armenophobic strategy is attempted by Azerbaijan. They try
to reach as many national parliaments in Europe as possible and this
is a very dangerous pattern. Look at the national parliaments where
Azerbaijan tries to push for resolutions for the commemoration of
what they call the "Khojali genocide", without providing reliable
information, for example the UN documentation on that case.
Some innocent and poorly informed MPs, some even with best intentions,
follow this line. This is a misuse of naivety and lack of knowledge.
We have just stopped this type of resolution in Rome. The wider
public is not informed about how many agencies Azerbaijan hired in
most EU capitals to back up their activities. For example, we were
informed that Hans-Dietrich Genscher (former Foreign Minister and
Vice-Chancellor of Germany) called an MEP to talk about the April
resolutions. He is a board member of Consultum, a PR agency working for
Azerbaijan in Berlin. Another example of how bad lobbying is conducted:
the case of MEP Vytautas Landsbergis, Vice Chair of the EP's South
Caucasus Delegation (EPP, Lithuania). I respect him for what he has
done for his country. However, with his age and convictions he seems
to be Russo- and Armenophobic. He normally does not travel due to
his health condition. Yet, during the April Strasburg week, where EP
reports on Armenia and Azerbaijan where discussed, he was quoted by
Azeri media as just having been in Baku and meeting President Aliyev.
Then, in the same week, on the voting day he walks into the EP
plenary. So he took the trouble to travel to Baku and then be back
in time on the voting day in Strasburg, which is logistically very
complicated. A source told us that he used a private jet but we
were not able to verify the information. The online news service
'EU Observer' questioned him about the same issue and he refused
to elaborate as to who paid for his trip to Baku and back. He then
presented a last-minute oral amendment, introducing the official
Azerbaijani demand on "first" withdrawing troops from Karabakh,
contrary to the Minsk Group's Madrid Principles, which the EP has
always strongly supported.
According to the rules of procedure, such last-minute oral amendments
cannot be admitted in the Parliament if a group of MEPs disagrees
- which was the case. But the EP staff made a mistake and allowed
voting, thus mistakenly amending the final text, even though it was
agreed that both resolutions on Armenia and Azerbaijan will have the
same wording on NK, i.e. in line with the Minsk Group principles. The
text immediately appeared in Azeri media, stating that the EP fully
side-lines with the Azerbaijani position of an unconditional withdrawal
of troops. For many experienced MEPs with years of experience in the EP
it was a shock to see such things happening, because Mr. Landsbergis
knew that his own group was against such an amendment. But apparently
he had a reason to show that he was trying "something" pro-Azeri,
and by mistake, he even managed. Some days later, the Conference of
Presidents reversed this mistake and Mr.
Landsbergis was cautioned in the EPP group for his behavior. Armenia
is constantly running against this type of activities all around
Europe. The Azerbaijani embassies are very well equipped and have
more staff than the Armenian ones.
I believe that Armenia should reinforce the strength of the embassies
in the EU as much as possible.
Armenpress: Could you please elaborate on ALDE's (Alliance of Liberals
and Democrats for Europe) last minute decision to vote against the
Safarov resolution? They were one of the initiators of the resolution
- weren't there questions raised within the Parliament as to why
it happened?
Dr. Kambeck: Yes, this surprised many and this question was raised
during the debate in the plenary. One day before the resolution was
voted, the Chairman of Azerbaijani Delegation to the EURONEST PA -
Elkhan Suleymanov - published an article in the Azeri press in which
he publicly boasted about having flipped around the ALDE group not
to vote on their own resolution, using MEP Norica Nicolai (Romania,
ALDE). Armenpress: How then do you counter misinformation? Dr.
Kambeck: By showing to the decision makers that some forces are
playing with them. We provide facts and figures, reliable sources
where the information can be checked. Over the years we have become
a credible source of information and people ask us for our views. By
now, MEPs and other decision makers know they can rely on us.