Republic of Azerbaijan Embassy Incident; an Engineered Scenario or Surfing on an Accident?

  • 26 February 2023 - 14:53
Republic of Azerbaijan Embassy Incident; an Engineered Scenario or Surfing on an Accident?
Strategic Council Online – Opinion: The tragic and criminal incident at the embassy of the Republic of Azerbaijan in Tehran, which based on the explicit confession of the assailant, took place with personal motives, ended with the timely intervention of the police force.

Immediately after the gun attack, Iran’s high-ranking officials, including the president, the speaker of the Majlis and the minister of foreign affairs, expressed condolences and sympathy to the government, the nation and the bereaved families of the deceased diplomat. They also emphasized on the legal pursuit of the matter and the punishment of the assassin in issuing orders and taking positions that indicate Iran’s practical adherence to the principle of good neighborliness and the Vienna Convention of April 24, 1963 regarding diplomatic relations, overseeing the security of diplomatic places and persons.

Ahmad Kazemi – PhD in international law and senior researcher on Eurasian affairs

The Republic of Azerbaijan, in the incident of the attack on the country’s embassy in London in August 2023 by the Kuwaiti group “Mahdi Servants Union”, which took a considerable time, the Republic of Azerbaijan neither accused the London police of negligence, nor did it raise the uproar to evacuate the embassy and suspend or reduce the level of relations. In that incident, which was politically motivated, the media of the Republic of Azerbaijan were strictly managed so that significant negative material against London was not published, and even the possibility of an attack on diplomatic centers was normalized and, finally, the issue remained silent without enlightening the public opinion about the roots of that attack.

Based on global experiences and in accordance with legal and political custom, in such cases the parties refrain from hasty and baseless positions, but unfortunately, the media apparatus and some official authorities of the Republic of Azerbaijan from the very beginning and in a coordinated manner, while making intervening statements in Iran’s internal affairs alleged that the incident was terrorist, and claimed the role of Iran’s security institutions in it and made similar allegations. While this is not the first time that an attack has been made on one of the diplomatic places in the world, as we have seen the assassination of the Russian ambassador in Turkey or the attempted assassination of the German ambassador in Finland. Such cases were done with political motives, while what happened in the embassy of the Republic of Azerbaijan in Tehran was done with personal Motivation.

“Ziyafat Asgarov”, First Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly of the Republic of Azerbaijan, who has served as head of the delegation of the Republic of Azerbaijan in the NATO Parliamentary Assembly for about two decades and is considered the unofficial spokesman of NATO in the Baku Parliament due to his pro-NATO reputation, in the early hours while ignoring the documents related to the personal nature of the incident, described the gun attack on the embassy as state terrorism?!

One of the ambiguities of the incident is that considering the lack of information and lack of consent of the assailant (Yasin Hosseinzadeh), what role did the Baku embassy play in transferring his wife to the Republic of Azerbaijan? Which consular rules were violated in this process, and why did the embassy refuse to give a convincing answer to the complainant despite repeated appeals? Is the embassy’s behavior in this regard a violation of Article 55 of the Vienna Convention, as well as an example of the compulsory instability crime – which, of course, the Republic of Azerbaijan has a rich track record in this regard in different countries, or is it not an example of running away of a person and violating the rights of children of a family? Why has Baku prevented Yasin Hosseinzadeh’s wife from returning to Iran? What is the reason for summoning and holding a briefing session for the accused’s wife by the security service of the Republic of Azerbaijan in the hours after this incident?

The tweet of the Turkish foreign minister in association with Baku and the similar position of the European Union and the similarity of the positions of the Zionist regime in this regard with the positions of the media and political apparatus of Baku is very worthy of consideration. From this point of view, if the embassy incident is not a planned scenario from the beginning, the next approach of Baku and Tel Aviv shows negative and targeted propaganda against Iran and surfing on the issue.

It is noteworthy that the opening of the Baku embassy in Tel Aviv is not widely accepted by the people of the Republic of Azerbaijan, despite many government advertisements, even criticisms have been raised from within the government in this regard. Therefore, there is a need to strengthen black propaganda to normalize this anti-people measure. It is desired by the Zionist regime that at the same time as the opening of the Baku embassy in Tel Aviv, the Baku embassy in Tehran should be closed or its activities limited. In addition, creating a political and propaganda controversy about the incident is a suitable vehicle for projecting and diverting public opinion from the humanitarian disaster in Karabakh due to the blocking of the Lachin Corridor by Baku, which is an example of violating the security of the Armenians of Karabakh and committing the criminal act of “forced starvation of the civilians” which is considered a crime against humanity from the point of view of international law.

Although the Zionist regime pursues the scenario of creating a severe conflict between Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan (Ukrainization of the Republic of Azerbaijan) at every opportunity, for various political, geopolitical, military and regional reasons, this scenario is more of a psychological blackmail than a real threat in order to moderate Iran’s authoritative position in the Caucasus, if possible, while this process will not change Iran’s red lines in the Caucasus, while emphasizing the unbreakable friendship and brotherhood of the people of Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan.

After the embassy incident, in addition to baseless media uproar against Iran and its abuse to arrest a number of Islamists who make up the majority of the country’s people and in line with the Iranophobia approach of the US and the Zionist regime, Baku is looking to file a complaint against Tehran in international forums.

This is in a situation where there is no basis from a legal point of view to prove that this personal criminal incident is a terrorist measure because of the solid documentation about the personal nature of the incident.

Baku’s double behavior in closing the embassy in Tehran and continuation of its consulate in Tabriz, is a clear “legal statement” that shows that the claim of the Republic of Azerbaijan about lack of security for the country’s diplomatic activity in Iran is not true and that Baku is looking for political propaganda abuse of that incident. Therefore, if the issue enters the phase of a legal complaint, it is up to Tehran to file a counterclaim against Baku due to the violation of the Vienna Convention, especially Articles 36 and 55, the responsibility of the government of Baku in making intrusive and separatist claims against Iran, and communication and support of groups and anti-Iranian separatist networks, as well as filing other complaints due to Baku’s misuse of the embassy incident to spread systematic hatred against Iran in the form of the 1965 Convention on the Prohibition of Racial Discrimination. Therefore, it seems that the common interests of the two countries are in avoiding emotional behavior, not following the recommendations and biased goals of the third parties, stopping negative publicity, respecting the will of the people of the two countries to develop relations and pursuing dialogue and understanding, which is also emphasized in the Vienna Convention to solve the differences.

  • writer: javad madadi
  • source: Strategic Council for Foreign Relations

Comments are closed

برچسب ها