The French Assembly Voted in favour of the Independence of the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh): The Geopolitical Consequences of the Decision

The French National Assembly adopted a resolution supporting the recognition of the Independence of the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh). The resolution was adopted by 188 votes against to 3. The recognition of the Republic of Artsakh was voted in favour on 25 November 2020 and the French Senate by a vote of 305 in favour and one vote against.

Given that France and Germany are the leading EU countries with France holding a permanent position on the UN Security Council, this development is perhaps the strongest step towards the final international recognition of the Republic of Artsakh.

by Thanos S. Chonthrogiannis

©The law of intellectual property is prohibited in any way unlawful use/appropriation of this article, with heavy civil and criminal penalties for the infringer.

French National Assembly
Photo by the website www.franch24.com

This resolution condemns Azerbaijan’s recent attack on the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) by stressing that Azerbaijan has been supported by Turkey and the resolution calls for theimmediate withdrawal of Azerbaijan’s armed forces from the territories occupied after 27 September 2020.

Because of its leading role in the EU, France now leads the anti-Turkish axis in the EU (Greece, Cyprus, Italy, Netherlands, Austria) and since Azerbaijan was supported by Turkey without forgetting that a large Armenian community is living in France.

The Geopolitical Consequences of This Decision

If France insists on its decision to withdraw Azerbaijan’s troops completely from the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) and in the event of Azerbaijan’s non-compliance, the EU could impose heavy sanctions on Azerbaijan that could go as far as the closure of the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) gas flow (read the analyses entitled «The Geopolitical Benefits Turkey Expects to Reap from the West through the Armenia-Azerbaijan war in the Caucasus» & «The Geopolitical Benefits of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Russia and Turkey from the Ceasefire in Nagorno-Karabakh».

The TAP starts from Azerbaijan and arrives via Georgia, Turkey, Greece (EU), and Albania in Italy (EU) and continues in Central EU.

Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP)
Photo by the website www.inkomotini.news

Given that France is leading the extraction and exploitation of natural gas and oil in the maritime areas of the Eastern Mediterranean on which international law is based belong to the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of the EU member countries of Greece and Cyprus equally, while at the same time implementing the plan of the transition to the green economy and as announced by the Commission, the EU could interrupt the gas flows of the TAP through sanctions imposed on Azerbaijan.

In this case the economic damage would be great for both Azerbaijan and Turkey, while Turkey would lose the ability to “sell” to the EU its geopolitical importance in terms of the EU’s dependence on fossil fuel energy produced.

In addition, Turkey would suffer a terrible blow to its relationship with China and given that Turkey aims to operate a trade corridor in the region, through Nakhichivan and Azerbaijan linking Turkey directly with Central Asia.

This trade corridor was secured by the ceasefire in the recent war of Nagorno-Karabakh. Last week Azerbaijani President Ilam Aliyev announced that a road and rail link would be established (the railway road will be parallel and within walking distance of the corresponding road link) between Nagorno-Karabakh and the second autonomous region of Nakhichivan.

The concrete rail projects that will take place along this road are progressing rapidly. Baku-Shirvan-Sabirabad-Horadiz-Ordubad-Julfa-Nakhichivan-Sadarak-Igdir-Kars corridor railways will be able to show off the current Silk Road.

Baku-Shirvan-Sabirabad-Horadiz-Ordubad-Julfa-Nakhichivan-Sadarak-Igdir-Kars corridor
Photo by the website www.tekdeeps.com

This road and rail corridor will start from Azerbaijan’s capital Baku and will go parallel to the Border of Iran but to the territory of Azerbaijan and then pass through Southern Armenia, Nagorno-Karabakh and then to Turkey. Iran, Georgia, and Russia are excluded once and for all. That is why USA supports Turkey and Azerbaijan.

It is immediately understood that in this case great wealth produced through Iran over the last thirty years (from where the trade corridor until now passed) will be lost forever to Iran’s economy creating even more pressure on Iran’s economy and society. At the same time, Iran will lose its political influence in Azerbaijan to date.

This new railway corridor will connect China with Turkey starting from Baku-Nakichivan-Igdir while the journey between China and Turkey will take place within eight days.

Reducing travel time means reducing transport and export costs, with an increase in volume of exports and daily commercial volume.

In the event that the EU wishes to exchange the lifting of strict sanctions on Azerbaijan with the withdrawal of Azeri troops from the occupied areas without, however, tampering with the concrete projects that will guarantee the uninterrupted flow of goods and people from this trade route (making it essentially a buffer zone guaranteed by the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) and the West in order to safeguard its security then there is a good chance that the certain occupying troops to be withdrawn.

But if Turkey and Azerbaijan insist on not withdrawing their troops then their access to EU markets is likely to be lost, while China’s pressure on Azerbaijan and Turkey will continue to increase. 

About the author

The Liberal Globe is an independent online magazine that provides carefully selected varieties of stories. Our authoritative insight opinions, analyses, researches are reflected in the sections which are both thematic and geographical. We do not attach ourselves to any political party. Our political agenda is liberal in the classical sense. We continue to advocate bold policies in favour of individual freedoms, even if that means we must oppose the will and the majority view, even if these positions that we express may be unpleasant and unbearable for the majority.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *