TREACHEROUS ATTACK

On January 27, Azerbaijan was shocked by the news of an armed attack on its embassy in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The terrorist attack has claimed the life of the head of the security service, Orkhan Askerov, leaving two other members of the embassy's security personnel injured. This tragic event is an obvious consequence of Tehran's anti-Azerbaijani policy.

Where does the evidence lead?

President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev harshly condemned the attack on the Embassy of the Republic of Azerbaijan in Tehran. During his telephone conversation with the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Seyyed Ibrahim Raisi, Mr. Aliyev strongly condemned the terrorist act. He expressed his hope that the bloody act of terror will be thoroughly investigated and the perpetrators will be punished. President Aliyev also highlighted the importance of a transparent investigation. "Mr. President noted that another embassy guard was unarmed but could fearlessly disarm the terrorist. Mr. President said that if the terrorist had not been disarmed, he could have targeted other employees of the embassy and their family members living in the residential sector of the embassy. Mr. President underlined the importance of ensuring the security of diplomatic missions," the press office of the President of Azerbaijan said.

Azerbaijani Minister of Foreign Affairs Jeyhun Bayramov also assessed the event as a treacherous terrorist attack and demanded that the perpetrators and their contractors be punished in the harshest possible way.

Meanwhile, the position of the Iranian authorities, their clear demonstration of insincerity and intention to ward off responsibility for the tragedy in Tehran, with a total absence of any expression of sympathy and compassion for the Azerbaijani side, only confirm the validity of assessments made by Baku.

Iranian authorities claim that the armed attack has been allegedly ‘family motivated’, and that the attacker came to the Azerbaijani embassy with two children. Whereas the publicly available video footage of the incident shows that the terrorist did not enter the embassy with children, but approached the building in a car. The car was driving quite fast, hence crashing into an embassy car parked outside the building. Then the criminal armed with a Kalashnikov assault rifle headed for the embassy building. The police guarding the embassy did not stop him. In fact, the Iranian police has demonstrated essentially nothing to neutralise the assaulter. His actions indicated that the purpose of the attack was to shoot all the embassy staff present in the building. Only thanks to the dedication of the embassy staff it was possible to prevent the goal of the criminal act.

Obviously, the attack on the Azerbaijani embassy to Tehran was a planned terrorist attack. Yet the deceitful version presented by the Iranian police suggests that they have something to hide and cover up.

There are strong suspicions that the Iranian citizen Yassin Hosseinzadeh, who committed the attack, is associated with the Iranian intelligence services, in particular the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Theoretically, all the circumstances of the crime should become available if investigated objectively. But frankly there is very little hope that the Iranian authorities will do this properly.

Either way, the main conclusion is that the Islamic Republic of Iran is primarily responsible for the armed attack on the Azerbaijani embassy. After all, according to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the security of diplomatic missions must be ensured by the authorities of the host country. The territory of the embassy is considered inviolable and the intrusion into it is an act of aggression against the country represented by the embassy.

Meanwhile, Iran's historical practice of ‘hospitality’ towards foreign diplomatic missions shows that these international laws have never been respected. The seizure of the US embassy in 1979, aggressive actions against the Danish, French and British diplomatic missions in 2006 and 2011, attacks on the Saudi embassy and consulate in Tehran and Mashhad in 2016 are the key milestones of the ‘rich tradition’ of attacks on foreign embassies in Iran in the recent era.

Added to these facts is the despicable bloody attack on the Azerbaijani embassy. All these incidents prove that the security of any foreign mission in Iran is not guaranteed.

It is noteworthy to mention the fact of negligent attitude of the Iranian security services and law enforcement agencies towards ensuring the security of the Azerbaijani embassy. Especially when the same services and agencies have been brutally and methodically suppressing protests in Iran itself, which have been going on for almost six months.

Interestingly, the statement of Azerbaijan Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the attack announced that there had been previous attempts to threaten the Azerbaijani diplomatic mission in Iran. The issue had been continuously raised with the Iranian authorities. However, the Iranian leadership had failed to take necessary measures to ensure the embassy's security.

Anti-Azerbaijani policies of the mullah regime

It is now clear what was behind the threats against Azerbaijani diplomats. It was the unprecedented anti-Azerbaijani campaign launched by the Iranian media and political circles with the tacit consent, if not instigation, of the Iranian authorities. This rampant propaganda against the Republic of Azerbaijan creates a fertile ground for the practical implementation of anti-Azerbaijani threats. The bloody terrorist attack against the Azerbaijani embassy was a proof of that.

The Tehran attack, which killed the chief of security of the Azerbaijani embassy, has been a continuation of the long line of crimes in which Azerbaijani citizens have fallen victim due to direct or indirect Iranian involvement. There is irrefutable evidence of Iran's support for Armenia's longstanding military aggression against Azerbaijan. During both the First and Second Garabagh Wars, Iran has supported the Armenian occupants both explicitly and implicitly, sharing with them all the responsibility for the blood of Azerbaijani soldiers and civilians. It is no secret that Iran passed intel data and used its territory to supply weapons to Armenia during the 44-day war, attempted to impede the advance of the Azerbaijani army liberating Azerbaijani districts bordering the Islamic Republic in autumn 2020.

Given all the political, legal and propaganda circumstances accompanying the armed attack on the Azerbaijani embassy in Iran, this criminal act is another confirmation of Tehran's unfriendly policy towards Baku. Moreover, this policy is logically connected with Iran's demonstrative support of Armenia also proved by large-scale IRGC military exercises near the Azerbaijani border, opening of Iranian consulate in the Western Azerbaijani city of Gafan, which is now part of Armenia, twinning of Tehran with Yerevan, a historical Azerbaijani city, which is now the Armenian capital.

Despite the richest heritage of the Azerbaijani Muslim culture destroyed by Armenia in the territory it presently occupies and in Garabagh, which Armenia has occupied for 30 years, Iran's pro-Armenian advances is evidence of Tehran's openly hostile attitude towards the Republic of Azerbaijan. Following this policy, Iran does not even mind throwing off the mask of the "defender of Islam and Muslims".

Astonishingly, Tehran, which had calmly observed the Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territories, including the 132-kilometre stretch of the interstate border with Iran, now refers to the alleged threat to the territorial integrity of Armenia as a red line for itself. Mainly because of the Zangezur corridor being established near the 40-kilometre-long Armenian-Iranian border, as agreed by the November 10, 2020 trilateral statement of the leaders of Azerbaijan, Russia and Armenia, an act of Armenia’s surrender in the 44-day war.

Equally astonishing is the hypocritical Iranian reference to the partnership between Azerbaijan and Israel as a factor allegedly justifying the alliance of the Iranian mullocracy with Islamophobic and Turkophobic Armenia. Yet this "justified argument" can be easily torn to shreds by the simplest question: has Israel occupied or is occupying the Iranian territory?

Incidentally, speculation that certain Iranian circles behind the armed attack on the Azerbaijani embassy reacted so explicitly to the meeting of Israeli ambassadors in Baku and the imminent opening of the Azerbaijani embassy in Israel had a reasons to exist. Perhaps the date of the terrorist attack in Tehran, the Holocaust Memorial Day, is no coincidence.

Payback is imminent

The bloody attack on the Azerbaijani embassy will definitely have consequences for relations between Baku and Tehran. But they will be even more complicated if the Iranian authorities do not conduct an objective investigation and do not bring the responsible individuals to justice. Not only direct perpetrators of the act, but also the organisers. Azerbaijan has made it clear that it would use all opportunities secured by international mechanisms to ensure that the perpetrators of the terrorist attack are identified and punished appropriately.

The world community, Azerbaijan and even Iran can draw the following conclusions from the terrorist attack in Tehran.

The armed attack on the Azerbaijani embassy has once again demonstrated the essentially terrorist nature of the Iranian regime. The mullocracy resorts to any means, even the most unacceptable from the point of view of international law and the principles of international community, to strengthen its own power and the regional position of Iran. In the same vein should be the attitude of the international community to the regime that poses a clear threat not only to its own population, but also to neighbouring states.

This is particularly relevant for Azerbaijan, which is suffering from the hostile policy of Iranian mullahs. But modern Azerbaijan is not a state which can be subject to terror and subversion with impunity. It is therefore expected that the state of Azerbaijan intensify its efforts to eradicate the agents of Iranian influence from its territory once and for all.

Most importantly, Iran has one-sidedly removed the veil that had kept Azerbaijan from promoting its policy in the "Iranian" direction—the policy of defending the rights and freedoms of millions of Azerbaijanis across the Araz River and promoting the national awakening and sovereignty of southern Azerbaijan.