On July 18, the European Union announced an agreement with Azerbaijan to double imports of natural gas from that country. According to political science professor Nerses Kopelyan, Europe has no good reason to turn to "such a dubious player" on the world stage. Nerses Kopelyan writes that the conflict in Ukraine has shaken global energy markets, fueled inflation and prompted the European Union to look for alternatives to Russian gas. The EU has not found anything better than asking "alms from Azerbaijan." In his opinion, replacing dependence on Russia with dependence on Azerbaijan means nothing more than making a deal "with another devil."

Kopelyan believes that this undermines "our sanctions regime against Russia, since the Russian company Lukoil now owns about 20% of Azerbaijan's vital Shah Deniz pipeline, and this situation, harmful to the sanctions regime, has existed since the beginning of this year."

The author believes that Azerbaijan is unlikely to be able to supply such a quantity of gas as it promised, despite the hype spread by "Baku itself about its capabilities." He writes that when “we talk about Azerbaijan, we are talking about a kind of ‘Potemkin village’ in the form of an oil-based economy. Azerbaijan is among the most disadvantaged oil-producing countries when it comes to the excessive dependence of public spending on oil.

“Of course, the Aliyev regime poses a threat not only to its people, but also to the neighboring country, Armenia. It was already attacked by Azerbaijan in 2020 without any reason... The world community, and especially neighboring countries, should closely monitor the level unrest and repression in Azerbaijan," writes Kopelyan.

Kopelyan goes on to refer to the US Democracy Index compiled by Freedom House, which ranks Azerbaijan "as one of the most repressive countries on the planet, noting that "in recent years, the authorities have launched a massive campaign to suppress civil liberties, leaving little room for freedom of speech or political activity."

Faktyoxla Lab. has tried to find out how justified such statements of Nerses Kopelyan are.

Let's start with the fact that Nerses Kopelyan is a professor of political science at the University of Nevada at Las Vegas. He specializes in international security, geopolitics, political theory and philosophy of science. His current research focuses on geopolitical and great power relations with a focus on Eurasia. It is noted in open sources that “he did extensive work on the study of political events in Armenia before and after the Velvet Revolution.” But most importantly, he “wrote several program documents for the Armenian government and worked as an adviser to the Armenian government.”

Given that Nerses Kopelyan is a conductor of anti-Azerbaijani ideas, let us dwell on some of his fabrications.

First, Baku knows its strengths, and the volumes it can provide are small. The Energy Memorandum of Understanding signed with the EU provides for an increase in gas supplies from 10 to 20 billion cubic meters by 2027. As limited as this scope may be for the EU as a whole, it is nonetheless significant for South Eastern Europe.

Baku helps the EU, and this gives it the right to short-term influence. At the same time, it saves Brussels at a difficult moment, when every billion cubic meter is important. Large investments are needed to ensure Baku's energy influence, as 4 percent will never replace 45 percent.

For example, the other day the daily volume of gas supplied by Azerbaijan to Europe through the Southern Gas Corridor increased to 37 million cubic meters, Western media wrote. The old record of 36 million cubic meters was broken in July this year. While maintaining the current pace, annual exports will reach 13.5 billion cubic meters.

Cooperation with the European Union is not connected only with the export of gas. Europe continues to be the main foreign trade partner of Azerbaijan; in 2021, the total trade between Azerbaijan and the EU amounted to $15.2 billion. The EU has launched some projects under the Azerbaijan Action Plan for 2022-2025 (the project was approved by the Committee of Ministers on February 16, 2022). This is a strategic programming tool for the compliance of Azerbaijani legislation, the work of local authorities, the sphere of human rights, the rule of law and democracy with European standards. The Action Plan provides support for the work and efforts of the country as a member of the European Council in fulfilling its obligations to the structure. It serves to increase the effectiveness of legislation in accordance with European and world standards, increase institutional capacity, apply best practices, and, as a result, improve the living standards of Azerbaijani citizens. The total budget of this Plan is 9.6 million euros.

Secondly, as The New York Times noted, in the short term, the main hope of European countries is LNG supplies and contracts with other gas suppliers. That is, Europe is feverishly looking for a replacement for Russian gas, and the whims of Kapelyan and others like him do not solve anything in this case.

For example, on July 29, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell said in an interview with the DW media company that it is impossible to demand that the European economy abandon Russian gas overnight. The EU has already halved purchases of Russian natural gas and will continue to do so.

“If before the “special operation” the share of Russian energy carriers in the EU was 40%, now it has dropped to 20%. It is impossible to demand from the European economy to stop buying gas overnight, we cannot work miracles,” he said.

The supply gap is already closing additional LNG imports. This is the main alternative to pipeline supplies from Russia. But as experts feared earlier, the substitution of Russian LNG gas from other sources has reached its limit, Bruegel noted.

Another option is green energy. On the one hand, the geopolitical conflict again - after the pandemic - pushed the environmental agenda into the background. On the other hand, as experts from the International Economic Forum (IEF) noted, the energy transition is becoming important not only from the point of view of the climate, but also for national security.

The EU has outlined a "massive expansion" of the use of alternative energy sources as part of plans to phase out energy from Russia. The goal is for the share of renewable energy sources in the energy mix to be 45% by 2030.

However, in order to achieve these results, the countries of the union will have to increase coal consumption in the short term, the IEF notes. In 2021, due to the rapid recovery of the economy, coal consumption in Europe increased for the first time since 2017 - by 12%. And the EU is expected to burn 5% more coal over the next five to ten years than it has hitherto.

Nuclear power plants can also become an alternative to gas. Thus, Washington intends to discuss with Brussels the increase in electricity generation at nuclear power plants in Europe. In particular, US officials want to convince the German government to postpone the phase-out of nuclear power and extend the operation of three nuclear power plants. But the country is not in the mood to revive nuclear energy.

In addition, Europe imports the "finished product" - electricity from the territory of Ukraine. This allows Ukraine to compensate for the lack of financial resources, and the EU to receive additional energy in the face of refusing gas.

Thirdly, Azerbaijan began supplying gas to Europe in December 2020 with the commissioning of the TAP pipeline. The current memorandum provides for the expansion of the Southern Gas Corridor and an increase in gas supplies by 2 times. Thus, relying on close cooperation proven over the years, Brussels set a new roadmap by signing a Memorandum on Gas Supplies with its partner Azerbaijan on July 18. By the way, the holding of a memorable meeting of the EU-Azerbaijan Cooperation Council in Brussels the next day, July 19, after the signing of the Memorandum on Gas Supplies, went down in history as a statement of the official political directive of Brussels, once again announcing the beginning of a new era of EU-Azerbaijan bilateral cooperation.

Fourthly, the Armenian author writes that the Lukoil company, under the regime of severe sanctions against Russia, owns 20% in the Shah Deniz project, and that this will harm the energy security of the EU in the future.

- Azerbaijan sells gas from Shah Deniz-2 to Europe, not Lukoil;

- BP is the main shareholder and operator of the Shah Deniz consortium. LUKOIL is one of the ordinary shareholders of SOCAR, Tpao, Petronas, Nico and SCC in the project.

- The European Union has imposed direct sanctions against Russian companies, and has not sanctioned companies with an oil and gas share in an international consortium in any country.

Fifthly, Kopelyan puts forward such an argument that, despite Baku's declared fuel reserves, it seems impossible to provide Europe with the promised volumes of gas. Allegedly, Azerbaijan's natural gas resources are not proportional to the 20 billion cubic meters per year provided for by the Memorandum.

Quote: “Azerbaijan is unlikely to be able to supply as much gas as it promised, despite the hype spread by Baku itself about its capabilities. This also follows from the agreement signed recently in Baku, in which Azerbaijan promised to double its natural gas supplies to Europe to 20 billion cubic meters per year.”

At the same time, the author disseminates incorrect information on behalf of such an authoritative scientific center as the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. He notes that the Oxford Institute allegedly circulated reasonable assumptions in its report that Azerbaijan's ability to produce more gas for Europe is limited.

It is completely incomprehensible how Kopelyan refers to this scientific institution in such a way, while the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies gives only positive reviews about the Southern Gas Corridor. In fact, the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, welcoming the TAP pipeline, issued a statement in support of Azerbaijan's role in European energy security: “It is clear that the stability of Azerbaijani gas exports, Azerbaijan's ability to reliably supply gas from Shah Deniz-2 through the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) is a positive factor in the EU gas balance... In the long term, Azerbaijan needs to accelerate gas exploration and production.”

Sixthly, the undeniable reality is that the Southern Gas Corridor is one of the main gas arteries for Europe, and as a result of the political will of Azerbaijan, the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP), which is the most important part of this corridor, is currently transporting 10-12 billion cubic meters of gas.

This volume will be doubled in the next five years. Let's pay attention to the statement of Ursula von der Leyen: “We will double the supply of gas from Azerbaijan to the European Union. With this MoU, we commit to the expansion of the Southern Gas Corridor. This is already a very important supply route for the European Union, delivering currently more than 8 billion cubic meters of gas per year. And we will expand its capacity to 20 billion cubic meters in a few years. From next year on, we should already reach 12 billion cubic meters. This will help compensate for cuts in supplies of Russian gas and contribute significantly to Europe's security of supply.”

The fact is that the EU also aims to ensure the Trans-Caspian transport area, taking into account the extremely advantageous geographical position and logistical potential of Azerbaijan, modern transport infrastructure, the largest merchant fleet on the Caspian Sea, shipbuilding capabilities, a new international seaport, broad-gauge railways in the North-South and East-West directions. One of the goals is to send Turkmen gas to Europe through TAP. Ursula von der Leyen stated this in Baku: “The European Union wants to work with Azerbaijan to build connections with Central Asia and beyond. So we follow with great interest the discussions and the ideas about trans-Caspian connections. We will deepen these discussions.”

Italian Deputy Foreign Minister Manlio Di Stefano also said that Azerbaijan sees the TAP pipeline, the author of which Baku is, as the most profitable gas route in the near future. Stefano said that in order to solve his country's dependence on Russian gas, preference will be given to three sources - Algerian, Turkmen and Azerbaijani gas. From this point of view, the most reliable energy security corridor is considered to be the diversification of gas sources in the Caspian, the connection of the Trans-Caspian gas pipeline with TAP and an increase in TAP's capacity by 2-3 times.

Thus, Azerbaijan will supply Europe with 20 billion cubic meters of gas in the next 5 years, and 25 billion in 2030. Together with all the resources, it is possible to increase the annual capacity of TAP to 25-30 and even up to 35 billion cubic meters.

Seventhly, the Armenian author distorts the facts on another issue as well. According to him, Azerbaijan sells gas to Europe more than all other countries. Quote: “For example, natural gas already supplied to Italy costs almost twice as much as Russian gas and three times as much as Algerian gas. Azerbaijani gas is competitive in Turkey, but not in the European market.”

Exchange prices are open to everyone, in Europe now the average price is $1,900 for 1,000 cubic meters.

Currently, it is Azerbaijan that sells the cheapest natural gas to Europe and other countries in the region. The average selling price of gas transported by Azerbaijan in 2021 was about $180-235. At that time in Europe the price was $1,200 -1,300. At present, the average selling price of gas has doubled compared to last year and amounted to $497.95 per 1,000 cubic meters. This is four times cheaper than the exchange price that other countries are selling.

Eighthly, it is surprising that Kopelyan fraudulently abuses the authority of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). He claims that the IMF, predicting a reduction in oil production in Azerbaijan until 2030, said that this would lead to the transformation of Azerbaijan into a debtor country. The IMF statement allegedly says that the link between recession and domestic instability is a constant axiom in oil-rich rentier states, especially in countries whose economies are not very diversified. In this context, Azerbaijan is extremely sensitive to economic shocks and, accordingly, to internal crises.

The IMF does not have such a gloomy forecast for Azerbaijan.

The IMF report on the economy of Azerbaijan is posted on the official website of this organization, and anyone can read the document, consisting of 24 articles. In this presentation, the general opinion is that the recovery of the Azerbaijani economy after the pandemic on the basis of global financial crises, regional conflicts, conflicts in Ukraine is accompanied by an acceleration of economic growth. The stability of the financial sector and the balance of payments has increased.

Is there any suggestion in this report about economic recession and domestic instability?

In addition, the IMF report “World Economic Outlook” raised the forecast for the Azerbaijani economy. The Fund’s research team predicts that, thanks to the government’s long-term development plan, dependence on hydrocarbon exports will be reduced, and the stimulation of a sustainable and diversified economy will allow non-oil economic growth to grow.

Ninthly, the Armenian analyst does not hesitate to refer to the World Bank (WB), reporting that the WB has been regularly lowering Azerbaijan’s political stability rating in recent years, reducing it from -2.5 to -0.75 points.

WB does not have such a rating. The author should have indicated the source, if any.

The World Bank statement on strong economic stability in Azerbaijan is available, the document is open to the international community. This document shows positive feedback on almost all economic parameters.

The WB also gave an analytical opinion, in which he positively described the vital importance of the TANAP and TAP pipelines for Europe and the geo-economic advantages of this project.

Tenth, Kopelyan notes that Europe should think about more promising ways of supplying oil and gas so that it can solve its fuel problems by supplying liquefied gas both through pipelines and by sea from North Africa, the Eastern Mediterranean, the Persian Gulf and other places: "There are more promising ways to supply oil - whether by pipeline or by transferring liquefied gas by sea from North Africa, the Eastern Mediterranean, the Persian Gulf and other places."

The specialist in "international security, geopolitics, political theory and philosophy" insists that the European Union should not buy gas from Azerbaijan, violate energy cooperation with Azerbaijan and turn to other countries. For example, to the Persian Gulf countries, Iran, etc.

The fact is that such "wise advice", cheap political shows started by the world Armenians do not work, and even have the opposite effect. The EU is further strengthening its close ties with Azerbaijan, laying a new solid foundation. By signing the Memorandum, the EU has determined who it is with and whom it trusts.

It is useful to recall the statement of the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, delivered in Baku at a meeting with President Ilham Aliyev: “You are indeed a crucial energy partner for us and you have always been reliable. You were a crucial partner not only for our security of supply, but also in our efforts to become climate neutral. The Memorandum of Understanding that we have just signed makes our energy partnership even stronger.”

Finally, Kopelyan writes about the lack of democracy and freedoms in Azerbaijan, referring to Freedom House and other international organizations. But here it is important to understand that it has long been known that the Freedom House organization has long been deprived of any objectivity.

Freedom House was founded in October 1941 by Eleanor Roosevelt to convince the American public to move away from isolationism and intervene in the ongoing world war. It operates under a 501(c)3 non-government tax relief license, in practice more than 88% funded by the US government.

Freedom House rather vaguely and ambiguously calls itself a controlling (watchdog) organization, which, at the same time, is actively engaged, supposedly, in promoting freedom and democracy.

The organization's website states: “We speak out against the main threats to democracy and empower citizens to exercise their fundamental rights through a unique combination of analysis, advocacy, and direct support to frontline defenders of freedom, especially those working in closed authoritarian societies. Freedom House produces research and reports on a number of core thematic issues related to democracy, political rights and civil liberties. Our research and analysis frame the policy debate in the United States and abroad on the progress and decline of freedom.”

Therefore, it is quite logical, even obvious, that among the 71 structures patronized by Freedom House and included in the International Association for the Defense of Freedom of Speech, in addition to the International Republican Institute of the United States, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, there are also such completely odious organizations as the American Committee for Peace in the Caucasus and International Center on Nonviolent Conflict - a firm dealing exclusively with the theory and practice of "color revolutions."

In its ratings and publications, Freedom House constantly refers to Azerbaijan as a "not free country", thereby denigrating the country and consistently putting "expert" pressure on the international community.

This organization denies the legitimacy of the Azerbaijani elections and, accordingly, the representatives of power elected in them; distribution and in every possible way advertises Gene Sharp's books "From Dictatorship to Democracy" - textbooks on overthrowing governments; implements gross and tendentious information attacks, constantly directed against Azerbaijan and its interests; supports the radical opposition in the country and by all means tries to achieve a systemic protest mass.

The problem is that very often the media and experts like Kapelyan use data from Freedom House, Human Rights Watch (HRW) or Amnesty International (AI) reports and publish them without any independent verification of the accuracy of these data. In many cases they do not have a local presence but rely on information from local NGOs without verifying the data. That is, local NGOs or oppositionists provide incorrect information, and international non-governmental organizations pass it on to the media, which publish it, which is then used by some experts.

Often these organizations falsify the facts to justify their work to the sponsor. Similarly, they may have a lobbying program that results in one-sided coverage.

All ill-wishers should take one thing into account. The development and success of Azerbaijan are known not only in the region, but throughout the world. The country actively cooperates with an incredible number of foreign partners, millions of Europeans hope for Azerbaijani projects. What is important is that Azerbaijan has never let anyone down in word or deed.

Of course, there will always be those who want to spoil this picture. The anti-Azerbaijani forces use not only pseudo-experts, but also organize campaigns on far-fetched pretexts - and all in order to bring discord into the country's stable relations with foreign partners. A small but self-sufficient, developing and, most importantly, politically independent state is not to the liking of the critics. People like Kopelyan cannot even make their frankly absurd thoughts justified in any way. It is not surprising - there are few false reasons, and there is not enough to come up with new ones or fantasy, or the customer does not require. This, in fact, says a lot - the anti-Azerbaijani forces do not care what they try to cling to, the fact itself is important, they need a conveyor.

Any person today can not only come to Azerbaijan and see with their own eyes the colossal success achieved, but also see how absurd and false the anti-Azerbaijani hysteria is. Free access to information - also thanks to the freedom of the Internet in the country - is the best answer and a blow to critics.