France should follow the example of Turkiye. Being a fraternal and allied country to Azerbaijan, the latter does not try to interfere in the affairs of the region and interfere with positive processes. Ankara does not interfere in relations between Baku and Yerevan, does not make provocative statements against Armenia, so as not to destroy the fragile peace. France, as Armenia's closest ally, does exactly the opposite. Does she think she's helping her friend this way? Not at all. She's causing her problems.

The normalization observed in relations between Baku and Paris over the past month has allowed us to hope that adjustments will be made to the unconstructive rhetoric that we had previously heard from the French side. This was indeed the case for a while. But Paris couldn't stand it for long. The day before, speaking in the Senate, French Minister of Europe and Foreign Affairs Jean-Noel Barraud pulled the old narratives out of the naphthalene.

The now-defunct "Nagorno-Karabakh" was brought to light, accusations of the destruction of a certain "heritage" were voiced, as well as calls for UNESCO to immediately send an assessment mission to Karabakh. We emphasize that it is in Karabakh. France has never been interested in other liberated territories of Azerbaijan.

More recently, the same Jean-Noel Barraud welcomed peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia, and spoke of the importance of this process "for the prosperity of the region and for the benefit of all." And today he is trying to return to the old policy of Paris in order to destroy everything. What happened in Yerevan during the summit of the European Political Community that the French Foreign Ministry suddenly made a U-turn again?

The desire to separate Armenia from Russia is understandable, but if at the same time they sacrifice the barely established peace in the region, it already looks very different. Probably, this effect was caused by compliments to Macron and praise for what he did not do. The fact is that Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan called today's peace process the merit of France and Macron personally, and thanked him for some kind of determination and integrity. I think these statements came as a surprise to many, because everyone knows that the peace agenda began to develop after the meeting in Washington with the participation of someone other than the French president.

Apparently, Pashinyan was so convincing that Macron himself believed in his mission. And now provocative statements are being made in the French Senate again, as indicated in the statement of the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry, questioning Azerbaijan's sovereignty over its own territories and raising doubts about the protection of cultural and religious heritage. And this is at a time when, after the liberation war of 2020, conditions have been created for sustainable peace in the region.

In Yerevan, Macron promised Armenia to "release the prisoners" and save the "Armenian heritage." Paris decided to start with the second point, so Barraud attacked Baku in connection with the completely legitimate demolition of Armenian new buildings built on Azerbaijani territory during the occupation years. Perhaps, if the French Foreign Minister had spoken not in the Senate, but somewhere else, the statements would have been more thoughtful, but this body, as you know, is a nest of Armenian lobbying, and it is more expensive to speak there in a different spirit.

Barro accused Baku of all its sins, threatened an international court, and demanded that a UNESCO mission be sent to Khankendi. Why there was a need to talk about this in the French Senate is unclear. The French Senate does not decide on issues related to the internal affairs of other countries. Azerbaijan is a sovereign country, which neither the French Foreign Ministry nor the French Senate has the right to specify. If all this was meant for the ears of the EU leadership, then before speaking in the Senate, monsieur should have read the news, and then he might have realized the meaninglessness of his appeals. The EU will not demand anything from Azerbaijan, its main strategic and reliable partner in the region. Paris should have figured that out long ago. Nevertheless, we are inclined to believe that what Minister Barraud said was intended for the ears of the lobby and the diaspora, which still have a strong influence on the French government. However, this does not change the provocative essence of what was said.

The Azerbaijani side has repeatedly explained its actions. What is being done in the liberated territories is, firstly, an internal matter of Azerbaijan, and secondly, all this is being done within the framework of international law. International law prohibits the construction and settlement of occupied territories, which is exactly what Armenia has been doing for thirty years. Now that the lands have been liberated, the rightful owners are removing illegal buildings from the occupation period. They are not destroying, but demolishing. The objects that the entire diaspora and lobby in Europe and the United States are now howling about are nakhalstroy, illegal buildings that are symbols of occupation and separatist control over the internationally recognized territories of Azerbaijan. No one in our place would save them. They would have been demolished three years ago.

Azerbaijan's opponents get annoyed when Baku talks about double standards in its approach to the topic of spiritual and cultural heritage. But that's the way it is.

Don't get annoyed, you need to think about your behavior. France has never been concerned about the fate of the Azerbaijani heritage. From the word at all. Azerbaijan has repeatedly called on UNESCO to take control of this issue when something else could have been saved. But no one, except Azerbaijan itself, was worried about the condition of mosques, monuments and sanctuaries that remained under occupation. The result is the total destruction and destruction of hundreds of objects of cultural, historical and cultural significance. At the same time, after the Second Karabakh War, Azerbaijan is regularly required to enter Karabakh to monitor some kind of "Armenian heritage." This is, to put it mildly, dishonorable.

Immediately after the war, Azerbaijan stated that it expected a UNESCO fact-finding mission to be sent to the liberated lands. The mission has not arrived. But after the anti-terrorist operation in September 2023, rapid activity began. UNESCO has asked Baku to allow them to travel to the Karabakh region and monitor the state of the "Armenian heritage." Baku said it was not against it, but suggested that the organization's experts travel to Khankendi through Aghdam and first record what the Armenians had done to this city, its monuments, and the historical and cultural heritage of the Azerbaijani people during the occupation. UNESCO refused. They said they wanted to go directly to Khankendi and assess and document the condition of the Armenian facilities. It was a big mistake of the international organization. After that incident, it is not serious to talk about the mission's admission to Karabakh.

Another attempt by UNESCO to visit the region was stopped by Yerevan itself at the request of the Armenians, as Azerbaijan's condition was to send a similar mission to Armenia to monitor the state of the Azerbaijani heritage.

The French Foreign Minister, making demands, should understand that the admission of the UNESCO mission to Azerbaijan will not be unconditional. If it takes place, it will be only on Baku's terms, which the Armenian side will not like very much.

What do we have in the bottom line? We have the strange behavior of official Paris, which has brought old narratives back to life. If we are talking about normalization and the peace process, then these narratives are directed precisely against peace and stability in the South Caucasus.