Azerbaijan can take into account the EU-US tandem

- PACE held serious discussions on issues related to Azerbaijan. How do you think what our country can face after this?

- Before, nothing has been done regarding Azerbaijan yet. The Secretary General appealed to the Committee of Ministers (CM) in order that the European Court considers the issue of the conformity of Azerbaijan's actions with Article 46 of the Convention. But when the court proceeds to this, it is not known. However, in any case, the European Court will say that Azerbaijan has violated this Article. Then the case will be returned to the CM, and the latter will have to decide what measures should be taken to the official Baku. It is likely that Azerbaijan will be deprived of the right to vote in PACE. True, one of the options for these measures involves the exclusion of the country from the Council of Europe, but, in my opinion, this is no longer valid. Well, if only because, for example, Russia occupied the Crimea, but was not withdrawn from the Council of Europe. True, its right to vote was suspended. It may be that this will be applied to Azerbaijan. There will be no talk of postponement. Because Baku has been given time many times. For example, in connection with the implementation of the decision in the case of Ilgar Mammadov. Meanwhile, during discussions in PACE, it was decided that national states should conduct an investigation into the case of deputies involved in corruption scandals.

-What steps can Azerbaijan take against this background?

-It's hard to say what step Baku will take. To foresee foreign policy moves of Azerbaijan is very difficult. It is very likely that we will again witness statements in the media against PACE, European structures. Actually, recently the head of the presidential administration issued a statement of accusation against Europe. It is possible that this will continue. Again, in turn, Baku will not recognize the realities associated with the corruption scandal. However, it is difficult to say anything about Ilgar Mammadov's case. Why, on what basis is the decision of the European Court on it not being carried out? One must assume that again the words about anti-Azerbaijani rhetoric will sound, again it will be said that the Council of Europe and other international structures do not protect the legitimate rights and interests of Azerbaijan. As always, we will hear the words that 4 UN resolutions are not being implemented. That is, why, why, they say, the non-implementation of these resolutions is ignored, and the failure to implement the decision of the European Court is paid so much attention? In other words, this attitude will be expressed.

-Of course, such discussions in PACE strikes a blow to the image of Azerbaijan and stains the country. Some government media of the country regarded this as an abuse of its hospitality, and some - as a means of pressure on official Baku. In addition, there is an opinion that international organizations approach Azerbaijan from the standpoint of double standards. Do you think there is some truth in what has been said?

-Both have true and wrong sides. As for the relations between the Council of Europe and Azerbaijan, I must say that on April 25 in Strasbourg I met with Jagland. He tried to assure that he was doing everything under the Convention and the Charter of the Council of Europe and did not want to mix diplomacy. In essence, it should be so. But the truth is precisely that diplomacy is mixed with the matter. Jagland himself admits that although he as Secretary General of the Council of Europe he tries not to go beyond the Charter and the Convention, but not everything is within his power. Because here national governments interfere. He advises to ask the national governments, national parliaments about such an approach to the issue. In these words of Jagland there is a certain share of truth. I want to say that this is not a question of double standards. But, let's say that in England BP signs a contract with Azerbaijan. When signing such contracts, Western governments can exert pressure by using different things. True, they do not say this, but insist that the provisions of the treaty were formulated in their favor. This means: "if you agree to our terms, then, naturally, we will take your side in another matter." In fact, this is some kind of message, a message to the government. But the provisions of the treaty state that "we want to sign this contract under these conditions." Here, of course, there may be indirect pressure. But, of course, one cannot identify BP or the government of England with the PACE. In addition to England, in the actions of France and Italy, one can also see some attitude, approaches exceeding requirements, PACE provisions departing from them. That is, you asked a very difficult question. For example, if you approach the issue in the context of the European Union, then there is the EU Eastern Partnership Program and the standards contained in it, etc. Along with this, the member states of the European Union in defining their foreign policy are not fully bound by the standards and directives of the EU. They to some extent also have the opportunity and authority to formulate their foreign policy. The main question is what do we mean when we talk about double standards? Sometimes they prefer the norms of international law, sometimes they prefer to observe the standards of democracy, and some consider their national interest"s priority. If this is called double standards, then, yes, this is the case. But you know what is considered to be double standards. The manifestation of a different attitude towards us and Armenia in the same issues. But it is not. If it is a question of the Council of Europe, then PACE does not apply only to Russia, but to other standards in relation to Azerbaijan. True, here the role of relations between deputies plays, and some deputy can vote in someone's favor, and in someone's - no. Azerbaijan tried through lobbying to enlist the support of deputies. Yes, this is the case. However, what was the result of such lobbying? To good or bad? You cannot blame anyone here. However, the Committee of Ministers often takes the side of Azerbaijan. Yes, and Jagland himself for a long time supported Baku. PACE asked him exactly why, he, long knowing about the events criticized today, was silent? And he answered in his own way. As for the discussions between the deputies united in the faction in the PACE, all their thoughts, convictions and information are summarized and a conclusion is drawn on this basis. All decisions made in the PACE are recommendatory in nature. But there can be given a legal assessment. And this has to do with the image of the country. It damages the international reputation of the state. For example, no decision taken by the PACE has any effect on Azerbaijan's responsibility under international law. Someone's status in the context of international law is affected by the decisions of the Committee of Ministers and the decision of the European Court of Human Rights.

- Ali Hasanov, the assistant of the president, said that Azerbaijan will not support sanctions against Russia, Iran and Turkey. Can the West put pressure on Baku because of this issue? That is, can these discussions in the PACE be a part of this pressure?

- I participated in the discussions on the sidelines of the PACE, and drew attention to the fact that when depriving Russia of the right to vote, Azerbaijani deputies spoke instead of Russian deputies. Of course, you know about the situation connected with Turkey. And Iran is not a member of the Council of Europe at all. And the Council of Europe has no authority over Iran.

- In fact, Ali Hasanov mean not PACE, but the sanctions of the West. My question was whether it is possible to consider what is happening in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe as the pressure of the West on official Baku on this issue?

- In reality, the West in some form can put pressure on these three states. Turkey can be influenced by Azerbaijan, protesting against the supply of cheap gas to Turkey. Turkey does not have any dependence on us. Secondly, despite the fact that the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway opened, I do not think that from this country will receive serious dividends. As for Russia, how can we weaken it by exerting pressure through Azerbaijan? Weakening its dominant position in the energy market, building some alternative lines of delivery to the energy market. In addition, Baku has its own alternative energy transportation lines and, in the main, uses them. This statement is simply aimed at preventing the emergence of tension in the relationship. And in terms of content, I do not believe that it reflects events as they are.

- "Speaking at the PACE, Samad Seyidov said that we do not need such a Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Earlier we saw how Azerbaijan left the Coalition on increasing transparency in the extractive industry after discussing its issue in this organization. Does this statement give grounds to consider it a threat to the PACE? Say, "In response to your criticism, we can leave the Parliamentary Assembly." Is it possible? Or, on the contrary, what steps should official Baku undertake, if desired, to re-establish relations with the PACE?

- If the Azerbaijani government is confident that it will be expelled from the Parliamentary Assembly, it can leave it. But, as I have already said, it is very likely that Azerbaijan will not exclude, but will deprive of the right to vote in PACE. One must assume that in this case Baku, following the example of Russia, which had been deprived of the right to vote in the Assembly, will not leave the structure of the structure. And Russia simply stopped paying to the PACE. The suspension of payments by Azerbaijan, whose weight and population is not so large, is not considered a serious pressure on PACE. And it is very easy to improve relations with the Parliamentary Assembly for Baku. For us, the most critical issue today is the release of Ilgar Mammadov. Presidential elections have already been held.

To what serious can the liberation of Ilgar Mammadov lead? If Ilgar Mammadov was to be released, many questions would be considerably softened. In reality, the legislation has many regulations that do not comply with European standards. Their change will again be put on the agenda. But the lack of progress in this regard will not seriously affect membership. It is necessary to execute judicial decisions. Their ignoring is a step back in the matter of fulfilling obligations. One thing is when you do not react to PACE resolutions of a recommendatory nature, and quite another matter is not to implement the decisions of the European Court. Under the Article 46 of the Convention, states undertake to implement them. The consequences of these two failures are different.

-All these events are due to the rejection in 2013 of the Strasser"s Report on Political Prisoners in Azerbaijan. Later it turned out that in this refusal there were elements of corruption: those MPs who voted against the Report were bribed. So, can now the Azerbaijani government, against all these events, make any changes in its domestic policy, at least in terms of solving the problem of political prisoners?

- In this question, I do not expect any reforms. Because in such countries as Azerbaijan, the pressure of foreign states, mainly of the USA, Russia, and Turkey, can lead to certain results. Pressure, wishes of Turkey to some extent are taken into account. However, in comparison with Russia, to a lesser extent. But any pressure or demand of the Council of Europe and the European Union, without the participation of the United States, does not play any role in changing the policy of official Baku. In some issues, the European Union can exert pressure together with America. If they act together, this can lead to certain changes in Azerbaijan's domestic or foreign policy. And if they put pressure separately, this will never happen. Because they are not the main forces that we fear. I do not believe that Europe itself can exert pressure on official Baku. Another thing is Russia, America. Baku is well aware that it will not go on a lengthy confrontation with these states. Under their pressure it can make certain reforms.