American "aid" What does USAID want?

In a series of provocative statements by representatives of various countries and organisations, a tweet by United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Administrator Samantha Power, has also been noticed.

"The lack of food security and the shortage of medicines in Nagorno-Karabakh are very worrying. The Lachin corridor is important for the delivery of vital goods to the population of Nagorno-Karabakh. I join Secretary [Antony] Blinken's call for the free movement of commercial and humanitarian goods through the corridor," Power wrote.

To recall, this lady has long been known for her pro-Armenian position. So, back in January of 2023, a month after the start of the rally by Azerbaijani eco-activists on the Lachin road, Power tweeted the following: "Transport links through the Lachin corridor have been blocked for more than a month. Every day when commercial transportation and humanitarian aid cannot freely enter Nagorno-Karabakh, the likelihood of a humanitarian crisis increases. Free movement along the corridor should be restored."

By the way, digressing a little from the topic, I would like to note that all these answers sound surreal. So, six months ago there was a "humanitarian crisis", and now there is a "humanitarian crisis"? And for some reason, no one has died from the crisis in six months. Just as the Armenians shouted about "120,000 starving people", they still cite this figure. This is absurd.

After all, in six months this figure should have decreased to at least 119,950. Well, it can't be that at least 50 people did not die in the conditions of the "blockade". By the way, this is a big omission of the Armenian propaganda machine, which partly suggests that it, like the entire Armenian society, is in some apathy. After all, wasn’t it easy to write off natural deaths as the blockade? Have you forgotten? Here’s some advice.

But we have diverted from the heart of the matter. First of all, I would like to draw attention to the quite rude substitution made by Samantha Power. The fact is that Secretary Blinken did not call for the free movement of goods, in any case, he did not tie this movement exclusively to the Lachin road.

Below is Blinken's tweet, which Power herself referred to: "Yesterday, I spoke with Azerbaijani President Aliyev to express our deep concern about the deterioration of the humanitarian situation in Nagorno-Karabakh. The United States calls on all parties to continue dialogue to reach a lasting peace agreement."

As we can see, Blinken expresses concern about the deterioration of the humanitarian situation (whether it actually takes place is another question) in Karabakh. However, he does not associate this deterioration with the actions of the Azerbaijani side. And the direct appeal contained in the Secretary of State's tweet, and referred to by the head of USAID, is addressed to both sides and concerns only the desire to "continue the dialogue." Who's against it?

This tweet of Blinken fits perfectly with the result of his telephone conversation with President Aliyev. The Azerbaijani leader brought to Blinken's attention the incessant provocations against the Lachin checkpoint by Armenia, noted the refusal of the Armenian side to use the Aghdam-Khankandi route for humanitarian supplies, and explained to him that the claims of the Armenian side related to the "humanitarian situation" and the "blockade" are political manipulation.

In response, Secretary Blinken, "expressing the continued support of the United States for the discussions on the peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia, touched upon the importance of crossing the Lachin state border checkpoint and other alternative routes, the importance of maintaining positive dynamics in the negotiations."

That's all. Thus, as already mentioned, Secretary Blinken only called on the parties to continue the dialogue. I would like to think that Samantha Power has yet to be reprimanded in the White House for freely interpreting the statements of state officials. The case may be presented in such a way that, being traditionally pro-Armenian, Power manipulates everything that comes to hand in order to help her sucklings.

However, this is probably a naive assumption. USAID is not a simple organisation, so Power's attack does not look accidental and, perhaps, reflects the position of certain circles in the current American administration. Which, as political scientist Ramiz Yunus, who lives in the United States, has repeatedly stressed, is the most pro-Armenian in recent years.

Here we can assume that the position of the White House (or, by analogy with the towers of the Kremlin, one of its offices) could well depart from the constructiveness planned at the Arlington meetings, given the fact that Brussels and Moscow in a peculiar way demonstrate the contours of a mediating consensus in the negotiations between Azerbaijan and Armenia – first of all, this is noticeable by the statements regarding the unblocking of communications and the functioning of the railway line of the Zangazur corridor.

Whatever the geopolitical motives of the US actions are, Baku does not accept such good cop/bad cop games and builds its policy purely in line with its national interests. And these interests strongly dictate the termination of USAID activities in Azerbaijan.

It's no secret that USAID is essentially one of Langley's divisions. This structure is currently engaged in active interference in the internal affairs of individual countries under the guise of assisting in several areas, implementing, under the guise of assistance in the creation of civil society institutions, plans to commit coups and velvet revolutions. It is no coincidence that this organisation has allocated $9.5 billion to create a "civil society" in various countries in 2023-2025.

Since 1991, USAID has been operating in Azerbaijan. The stated mission of this organisation is to support underdeveloped countries and countries in need. And if its activities in Azerbaijan during the 1990s and 2000s were quite explainable, now that Azerbaijan has become economically stronger and is itself a donor of international aid, it would seem that the "helpers" should bow out and say goodbye. But for some reason, this does not happen. The organisation continues to operate in the country. By the way, about 200 people work in its Baku office.

In principle, USAID's activities in Azerbaijan are not justified by any necessity for our country, and even more so after Power's blatantly provocative statement, they should be stopped.

USAID, as well as official representatives of the United States or any other state, has no right to interfere in the internal affairs of Azerbaijan, including in issues of the operational regime on its state border.

Of course, I would like a public reaction from the US presidential administration to such high-handed behaviour of the head of an agency funded by the US state budget. This would demonstrate the sincerity of Washington's intentions to contribute to the establishment of long-term peace in the South Caucasus.