21
May
2026
Watch
Decision of the Azerbaijani Parliament on suspending cooperation with the European Parliament (debate)
Madam President! I share the view that it is regrettable and sad that the Azerbaijani Parliament has decided to cut off relations with the European Parliament. But we also need to look at what the explanation is and deal with it. Apparently, they don't like criticism when they violate fundamental rights. When you look at the rule of law and freedom of the press, you have to accept that you are subject to criticism. And when you treat prisoners of war and hostages in violation of all international law, you also have to accept criticism. And when you do not want to recognise that the people of Nagorno-Karabakh have the right to their own language and culture – what we say they have – then you have to accept that you are exposed to criticism. And when it comes to human rights and international law, it is good for the European Parliament to say clearly what we are in favour of. Someone mentioned double standards. I agree that we would like the European Parliament to always do so when it comes to violations of human rights and international law. However, having double standards should not be replaced by having no standards. We may not be able to find out exactly what the outcome was when we withdrew from cooperation and also from the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly, but that is, of course, their choice. We have not asked them to leave, they have left themselves, and therefore they are of course welcome back. And I think that would be wise, also because this is probably something that affects Azerbaijan and their people more than it affects us. Avoiding dialogue and debate is rarely a good idea. What we should try to remember is that this is not the first time that we have seen the regime in Azerbaijan take such steps. About 10 years ago, in 2015, they did something similar. At the time, it was also the allegations of human rights violations and corruption around the ruling family that made them dissatisfied. This is despite the fact that respect for fundamental rights was, in fact, written into several of the agreements the EU has with Azerbaijan. We have agreements where these things are written in, and therefore it is probably natural enough that we follow up on them. It may well be said that some of the formulations are so vague that it also gives rise to debate about how they should be understood. But that debate is important, and it is important to us, and it is important to them. At that time, it took about a year for relations to be re-established, and that is perhaps also why we can hope that it can be changed again. But I think – and I would like to emphasise this – that it is regrettable, because it is rarely a good thing to cut off dialogue or limit parliamentary work. Especially with people with whom you have partnerships. Nevertheless, I think it is important to say that one of the things that this shows is that it underlines the need for us to be independent of oil and gas imports. It may be that we are replacing Russia with Azerbaijan and other countries, but there is still dependence on countries and regimes on which we do not want to depend, and we must get out of that. And then I also see that even if there are angry reactions, it must not lead to us relaxing the criticism of Azerbaijan when it is justified. The easiest way to avoid criticism for violating human rights is to respect them. And I think it would be really good if Azerbaijan decided to do that. Because if they did, they were also free from criticism, and then maybe we could have a dialogue about some of the challenges we face together. Thank you.