"The work carried out by Heydar Aliyev in the years of leadership of the Azerbaijan SSR, his principledness, personal qualities, of course, were highly appreciated in the Soviet leadership. In 1982, after the death of Leonid Brezhnev and the coming to power of Yuri Andropov, his first appointment was connected with Heydar Aliyev. He invited Heydar Aliyev to Moscow and offered him high positions - the first deputy chairman of the Council of Ministers and a member of the Politburo. I remember well that my father hesitated for several days, did not want to leave Azerbaijan, " Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev said at a solemn ceremony dedicated to the 95th anniversary of Heydar Aliyev, APA reports.
According to the head of state, the work he accomplished ensured the significant development of Azerbaijan, he had big plans related to the further development of Azerbaijan: "But at that time, naturally, there was iron discipline, in addition, the Soviet state faced new tasks, and he took on yourself this high responsibility. Leading in 1982-1987 many very important branches, he contributed to the successful development of the Soviet state. Under his direct leadership, the Baikal-Amur Main Line was successfully laid, which was a major infrastructure project, and its construction was completed. At the same time, he always paid great attention to Azerbaijan and provided assistance. Of course, the work done by him here, his activities allowed Azerbaijan to develop after he left the republic. But, despite this, the socio-economic indicators in the republic were gradually decreasing, the matter was on the decline. As a result, in the late 1980s and early 1990s Azerbaijan came face to face with a great catastrophe."
President Ilham Aliyev recalled that in 1987 Heydar Aliyev was dismissed by Soviet leadership from all the posts without any grounds: "There were no grounds for this, because his professionalism, the results of the work done, of course, did not correspond to that shown in relation to to him injustice. But the people who were at that time in the Soviet leadership, the leader of the Soviet state, showed him a very negative attitude. Heydar Aliyev was a very principled man, who spoke everything frankly. He saw that the situation in the country is deteriorating. I saw that, instead of real reforms, empty talk, populism prevail. I saw that the decisions being taken served to weaken the Soviet state. At the same time, since 1985, large violations in the field of national relations have been committed in the Soviet Union. The Soviet state was held, as a unified state primarily, by regulating national relations. Until 1985, these relations could be said to have been built on a sound basis. All peoples could safely develop, maintain their culture.Therefore, Heydar Aliyev could not remain indifferent to all these unpleasant tendencies, expressed his position, which, of course, the Soviet leadership did not like. After his removal from all positions without any grounds, Azerbaijan lost much support. Our insidious neighbors immediately took advantage of this, less than two weeks after his resignation, how the Armenian separatists and their patrons in the center raised the issue of withdrawing Nagorno-Karabakh from the composition of Azerbaijan and transferring it to Armenia."
The President noted that Heydar Aliyev's factor, finding a strong personality in the center of the state did not allow such separatist tendencies to raise his head: "Although up to 1969, such trends were. Only after Heydar Aliyev came to the leadership of Azerbaijan, all these trends were stopped. Since that time, a great injustice was shown against our people, the republic. As a result, Azerbaijan was faced with a great catastrophe. With full confidence, I can say that if Heydar Aliyev was in Azerbaijan at that time, then as the head of Azerbaijan never allowed the separatist tendencies to raise their heads and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict began. Because his determination, courage, authority would never give the possibility that such trends exist. However, the subsequent leaders, unfortunately, showed weakness, did not show adherence to principles, for them the personal career was much higher than the interests of the people."