European parliament criticized its own line on Azerbaijan

A group of European deputies criticized the actions of the European Parliament that led to the termination of Azerbaijan’s cooperation with the structure, Report reports.

It is noted that the evening before, at the end of the plenary hearings of the European Parliament in Strasbourg, the issue of the Milli Majlis of Azerbaijan’s decision to suspend cooperation with the European Parliament and withdraw from Euronest was put on the agenda.

In particular, the head of the European Parliament delegation to Euronest, Sergey Lagodinsky, called on Baku to reconsider its decision to withdraw. He noted that the country remains an important part of the regional dialogue within the Eastern Partnership and its participation is necessary for discussions on the Black Sea strategy, transport connectivity, energy, digital infrastructure and cooperation projects in the region.

Some deputies in their speeches openly said that the actions of the EU and the European Parliament themselves became one of the reasons for the crisis in relations with Baku.

One of the sharpest speeches was the statement by Christian Terhes, a deputy from the European Conservatives and Reformists group.

He stated that the decision of the Azerbaijani parliament should be an alarming signal for Brussels. Terhes directly accused the European Parliament of using the April resolution on Armenia as a tool of pressure on Baku: “This parliament (European Parliament - ed.) used the April 2026 resolution on Armenia, which we all supported in terms of the democratic development of Armenia, to attack Azerbaijan, which was completely unnecessary, unreasonable and counterproductive.”

Terhes paid special attention to the fact that right now Armenia and Azerbaijan are trying to reach a peace agreement: “After decades of wars, they are finally working together and making real efforts for reconciliation and signing a peace treaty.” Against this background, in his opinion, the actions of the European Parliament looked politically shortsighted.

He also criticized the general style of European policy: “Constant moralizing, obsession with ideological condemnation - this is not foreign policy. This is political immaturity and geopolitical suicide.”

Terhes warned that such practice is already leading to the alienation of partners: “We see the same dynamics in relation to Georgia and other states that are increasingly distancing themselves from the European Union due to double standards and an arrogant approach.”

In his assessment, the EU risks losing its positions precisely when the South Caucasus and Central Asia are becoming strategically important.

“Azerbaijan is not just another EU partner. It is key to Europe’s energy security and transport connectivity,” Terhes added.

He stressed that Azerbaijan helped Europe reduce its dependence on Russian gas, supplies fuel and provides humanitarian aid to Ukraine.

“Alienating countries like Azerbaijan is not just irresponsible, it is geopolitically self-destructive,” the MEP stressed. According to him, Europe needs realism, strategic thinking and partnership based on mutual respect, rather than constant lectures and a sense of its own superiority.”

Patriots for Europe group deputy Angeline Furet presented the crisis in relations with Baku as a failure of European strategy in the region. “Azerbaijan’s decision to leave Euronest cannot be considered just a procedural step. This is a strategic punishment of Europe,” she noted.

Furet directly linked the crisis to the actions of the EU: “We are paying for your interference and for our approach to Armenia.”

According to her, Europe tried to maintain energy cooperation with Baku and at the same time increase political pressure. “You thought you would secure gas supplies, but at the same time you adopted all these resolutions,” she said, noting that Europe failed to achieve humanitarian goals and at the same time worsened relations with Azerbaijan.

Furet also accused European structures of trying to replace states: “You have taken on the role of states to lecture morality.”

She then moved on to geopolitics and stated that while the EU was engaged in declarations, the region began to restructure without Europe. According to her, the US administration was able to create a transit corridor by aligning the interests of Azerbaijan and Armenia.

Furet paid special attention to the fact that the new route (“Trump Route”, TRIPP - ed.) has already acquired an economic dimension: “A new strategic road has appeared - peaceful and actually controlled by American capital.”

In geo-economic terms, Europe found itself isolated, and the new face of Central Asia is being formed without the EU, the deputy noted. Meanwhile, Europe must stop watching the world being restructured before its eyes.

Her final appeal was addressed to European institutions: “Stop teaching the world and giving lectures. Let countries mind their own business and move to adult realpolitik.”

Deputy Thierry Mariani, for his part, stated that the South Caucasus is now at a unique point when, after decades of conflict, Baku and Yerevan have moved closer to peace. He recalled that earlier settlement was considered practically impossible: “Today what many considered impossible is happening - the process of reconciliation is beginning.”

However, in his opinion, the European Parliament is acting in the opposite direction; it adopts resolutions that add fuel to the fire. Mariani noted that Azerbaijan wanted to have constructive relations with the European Parliament, but closed the door due to its legitimate concerns.”

“Peace in the Caucasus will be achieved not by the intervention of the European Parliament, but by negotiations in the region,” he concluded.

MEP Thomas Froehlich linked the crisis around Azerbaijan to a broader problem of EU foreign policy: “Bad relations with the US. Bad relations with China. No relations with Russia.”

It seems that the European Union is gradually finding itself on the sidelines of world politics, he noted. According to the deputy, Azerbaijan is tired of the moral assessments of the European Parliament and noted that he agrees with this.

Froehlich warned that further conflict with Baku could hit Europe’s energy sector: “If we continue to communicate with Azerbaijan like this, it could be the final blow to Europe’s energy security.”

As a result, during the discussions, the question arose - whether European policy itself - a combination of resolutions, pressure, public reproaches and value rhetoric - led to the loss of EU influence in a strategically important region precisely at the moment when the South Caucasus began to enter the phase of peaceful settlement.