UNAMBIGUOUS MESSAGE

At times, silence can convey more than words. This adage aptly describes the current stance of the French Foreign Ministry, which maintains a conspicuous silence, seemingly overlooking the commencement of the long-awaited border delimitation process between Azerbaijan and Armenia. Experts interpret this indifference as a stark indication of Paris' reluctance to foster peace in the South Caucasus, with French diplomacy appearing more inclined towards an Armenian-centric approach to the conflict.

This diplomatic inertia from the French Foreign Ministry coincides with another burgeoning diplomatic rift between Paris and Baku.

When ambassadors get recalled...

On April 16, 2024, Paris summoned its ambassador to Azerbaijan, Anne Bouillon, back to France for consultations. According to the French Foreign Ministry, "France has decided to recall its ambassador to Azerbaijan for consultations due to the continuation of unilateral actions by Azerbaijan in recent months that have strained our bilateral relations." The specific actions in question were not detailed by Paris. However, reports surfaced that French President Emmanuel Macron met with the ambassador, expressing his "regret over Azerbaijan's actions" and urging a clarification of intentions.

In a swift response to inquiries from local media, the press service of the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry clarified: "Although the French side has accused Azerbaijan of unilateral actions, our country's measures and official statements have been solely reactive to France's destructive activities. Despite the smear campaign against our nation, we have consistently kept the door open for dialogue." The Foreign Ministry highlighted France's scepticism towards efforts to normalise Azerbaijan-Armenia relations based on sovereignty and territorial integrity, accusing it of exacerbating tensions over the past three and a half years. Foreign Ministry spokesperson A. Hajizade pointed out that "France has initiated draft documents against Azerbaijan at the UN Security Council, the European Union, Francophonie, and other international platforms." Furthermore, "decisions and resolutions full of baseless accusations, insults, and threats against our country have been passed on the initiative of the ruling party's representatives in the French Parliament, challenging Azerbaijan's territorial integrity and sovereignty, and recognising the so-called puppet regime." The Ministry also recalled incidents such as the attack on the Azerbaijani Embassy and the vandalism of the Khurshidbanu Natavan monument, suggesting that it was Paris, not Baku, that engaged in unilateral actions detrimental to the bilateral relations.

Love will come by accident...

As noted by both official sources and independent analysts, the relationship between the two nations had been evolving constructively until a recent downturn. Surprisingly, France was the second country, following Türkiye, to establish its embassy in Azerbaijan, even preceding Iran, which had a consulate in Baku. French oil companies secured contracts, Paris provided radar systems for civilian airports, and Azerbaijani satellites were launched from a French space centre...

The sudden deterioration in relations is linked to Emmanuel Macron's tenure, during which official Paris began courting Yerevan. While the French executive branch might have distanced itself from certain parliamentary initiatives or actions at the municipal level, the ruling party's vote for another resolution recognising the "independence of Garabagh" left no room for official Paris to disengage. Deputies certainly have the right to their opinions, yet factional discipline remains uncancelled. The statements of the foreign ministers, both former (Catherine Colonna) and current (Stephane Sejournet), cannot simply be "washed away." The military cooperation between Paris and Yerevan has understandably sparked indignation in Azerbaijan. Furthermore, the decision to dispatch the Minister of Defence to Armenia, along with the provision of radars and armoured personnel carriers on the banks of the Seine, proceeded without awaiting the signing of a peace treaty between Baku and Yerevan. Indeed, as its ambassador to Armenia, Olivier Decatigny, acknowledged, France has broken a general taboo by commencing arms supplies to the CSTO member state.

And yet, it is France, not Azerbaijan, that recalls its ambassador.

Official Truth

Several months prior, a French intelligence network was uncovered in Azerbaijan. Two embassy staff members, intelligence officers under diplomatic cover, were promptly declared persona non grata and sent home, while another French citizen remains under arrest in Baku, awaiting trial. If the recall of the ambassador is a reaction to this espionage scandal, it appears belated.

On the eve of her departure, Ambassador Bouillon vociferously expressed her grievances against Azerbaijani journalists. Nonetheless, it seems improbable that the head of the diplomatic mission was recalled in response to Azerbaijani media publications.

The arrival of a delegation from New Caledonia in Baku and their addresses in the Milli Majlis may have provoked ire on the banks of the Seine. Indeed, Azerbaijan, as a prominent leader of the Non-Aligned Movement, endorses the anti-colonial efforts of New Caledonia's indigenous Kanak people. However, under these circumstances, Paris should have opted to summon the head of the Azerbaijani diplomatic mission to the French Foreign Ministry to present its grievances, rather than recalling its ambassador. Effective communication is imperative in the realm of high-stakes politics and diplomacy, where speculation is a deliberate faux pas. In recalling the ambassador, the French Foreign Ministry ought to have provided an explanation and specifics for its actions. Yet, on April 30, reports emerged stating, "Anne Bouillon returned to Azerbaijan and continues her diplomatic duties."

Baku's Categorical Move

Meanwhile, Baku has declared the closure of the French Lyceum. The official rationale cites a student deficit impacting funding, rendering the institution financially incapable of sustaining its operations. Nevertheless, many believe this as a calculated countermeasure by Baku. In light of the ambassador's recall, calls for reciprocal actions have been vocal in Baku, particularly advocating for the cessation of business with French companies in Azerbaijan. To date, Total's business interests remain untouched in Baku. Yet, the shuttering of the French Lyceum is undeniably a preliminary signal. As articulated in Baku, bilateral relations between France and Azerbaijan are effectively frozen. This marks the inaugural instance of project closures though.

It is difficult to say whether new steps will follow. Baku retains fond memories of a period when its rapport with Paris was notably constructive. Moreover, the national interests of France necessitate a realignment towards Azerbaijan rather than Armenia. It is conceivable that France may soon forsake its current alliance with Armenia in favour of re-establishing connections with Azerbaijan. Hence, it might be prudent to preserve the "final bridge."

Yet, this remains a future consideration, with a considerable margin of error. Presently, bilateral relations, already tenuous, continue to diminish. This development warrants profound contemplation, more so in Paris than in Baku.

Outcomes

For some, the initiation of Macron's South Caucasus strategy may herald the rise of a new, robust, influential, and ambitious player in the region—France, a nuclear power and a permanent member of the UN Security Council. However, Macron's strategy in the Caucasus has rather resembled a last-ditch effort. France has, as repeatedly noted, encountered one political setback after another. Its sway over its former African colonies is waning, its attempts to independently navigate the Libyan conflict have ended in stark failure, and Paris has been unceremoniously ousted from the Western alliance in the Pacific. Emmanuel Macron and his team saw the South Caucasus as an opportunity for an easy victory. They aimed to establish a stronghold in a highly sensitive area, to boldly challenge Putin, Erdogan, among others, and to advance the concept of a 'European army,' or at the very least, to bolster military programs within the European Union. Within NATO, France is relegated to a tertiary role, acknowledging US leadership and sharing influence with Great Britain. As the sole nuclear power in the EU, the Élysée Palace overlooked the possibility that Azerbaijan might dissent from Paris' efforts to militarily support Yerevan.

Now, it appears, the phase of 'counting and lamenting' has arrived. Initially, Paris' Armenian-centric approach was met with silent disapproval in Baku. Subsequently, Azerbaijan's retort proved to be more stringent, impactful, and detrimental to Paris than anticipated. Previously, Azerbaijan's responses were confined to the international stage, notably in New Caledonia, without disrupting French projects within its borders. However, the closure of the French Lyceum signifies a radical shift. Baku is sending a clear message to Paris: repercussions for its anti-Azerbaijani stance are imminent.

The decision now rests with Paris.