Iran Orders Truckers Not To Travel To Nagorno Karabakh

Iran International
Oct 20 2021


Iran’s Roads and Transportation Agency has banned Iranian trucks from travelling to Nagorno Karabakh controlled by Armenians to avoid Azerbaijani protests.

In September tensions flared up between Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan after Baku arrested two Iranian truck drivers, accusing them of going to Nagorno Karabakh that lies within its international borders.

The tensions led to military drills by each side and political mudslinging, including Iranian accusations that Azerbaijan allows an Israeli military and intelligence presence on its territory.

Iran has tried to remain neutral in the conflict between its two northern neighbors but is concerned of more Azerbaijani encroachments on Armenian territory after last year’s war in which Baku took back most of the territories it had lost to Armenia in the early 1990s.

The Agency has told transportation companies not to send trucks to the disputed region from Armenia, reminding them of a foreign ministry directive that entering the region from any point other than Azerbaijani border posts would violate the latter’s territorial integrity.

Most of Iran’s exports to Armenia travel along a road partly controlled by Azerbaijan. Tehran and Yerevan earlier agreed to widen and expand another route that would allow trucks to travel without hindrance.

Iran Orders Truckers Not To Travel To Nagorno Karabakh

Iran International
Oct 20 2021


Iran’s Roads and Transportation Agency has banned Iranian trucks from travelling to Nagorno Karabakh controlled by Armenians to avoid Azerbaijani protests.

In September tensions flared up between Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan after Baku arrested two Iranian truck drivers, accusing them of going to Nagorno Karabakh that lies within its international borders.

The tensions led to military drills by each side and political mudslinging, including Iranian accusations that Azerbaijan allows an Israeli military and intelligence presence on its territory.

Iran has tried to remain neutral in the conflict between its two northern neighbors but is concerned of more Azerbaijani encroachments on Armenian territory after last year’s war in which Baku took back most of the territories it had lost to Armenia in the early 1990s.

The Agency has told transportation companies not to send trucks to the disputed region from Armenia, reminding them of a foreign ministry directive that entering the region from any point other than Azerbaijani border posts would violate the latter’s territorial integrity.

Most of Iran’s exports to Armenia travel along a road partly controlled by Azerbaijan. Tehran and Yerevan earlier agreed to widen and expand another route that would allow trucks to travel without hindrance.

Azerbaijan prepares for Karabakh resettlement in “smart villages”

EurasiaNet.org
Oct 20 2021
Heydar Isayev Oct 20, 2021
President Ilham Aliyev and his wife Mehriban Aliyeva inspect plans for a smart village in Fuzuli district this week. (photos: president.az)

As Azerbaijan prepares to resettle hundreds of thousands of its citizens in the territory it retook during last year’s war, it has embraced a new development concept: “smart villages.”

The idea has become popular around the world; it envisages small communities using the latest technologies like digital connectivity, automation, and renewable energy to maximize economic development. 

The Azerbaijani government tentatively explored the idea before the war: a State Program of Socio-Economic Development of Regions of the Republic of Azerbaijan 2019-2023 called for two pilot “smart villages” to be created. 

But the idea has gained momentum following last year’s war, in which Azerbaijan retook more than 8,000 square kilometers of territory in and around Nagorno-Karabakh, about 75 percent of the land it had lost to Armenian forces in the first war in the 1990s. More than 600,000 Azerbaijanis were displaced in that war; many of those now hope to return.

In February, President Ilham Aliyev said that the first smart village project would be implemented in Uchunju Agali, in the Zangilan district. In a September interview with Turkish media, Aliyev said that the first displaced people would return to a pilot smart village in Zangilan “by the end of this year or early next year,” though he didn’t name the village. On October 17, he formally laid the foundation for another smart village in the Fuzuli region.

The Ministry of Agriculture has explained that the smart villages will introduce agriculture based on “modern technologies and joint management and control,” but that the concept goes beyond simply farming methods. “The concept consists of ‘smart’ street lighting, cold- and heat-resistant homes, management of household waste, the installation of hydro and solar power stations and biogas energy,” the ministry told the Turan news agency.

The government is spending $1.3 billion this year alone on building “smart cities and villages,” Aliyev told a September meeting of the United Nations General Assembly. 

Azerbaijani state-affiliated media have covered the smart village concept extensively, repeating government talking points that the use of automation will reduce the need for human labor.

But analysts are divided on whether the government's enthusiasm for "smart villages" is warranted. 

Gubad Ibadoglu, an economist and opposition politician, said that the government could have implemented projects like "transparent villages" or "accountable municipalities" instead of smart villages. 

"But in this case, corrupt officials and businessmen will take control of the allocated money, and the work they do will only be an imitation," Ibadoglu told local outlet Toplum TV, adding: "Then it will turn out that there are no smart people or smart government to manage the ‘smart villages.’”

The Aliyevs watch plans in Fuzuli this week.

Critical attention also has fallen on another of the government’s plans for redeveloping rural Karabakh: the expansion of the country’s “agropark” system.

Agroparks are large-scale, government-backed agribusiness enterprises that started operating in Azerbaijan in 2012. A total of 49 agroparks have already been established in Azerbaijan, and a recent journalistic investigation by the independent news agency Turan identified the owners of 38 of them, who were primarily businesspeople connected to the government. The largest single operator of agroparks was Pasha Holding, owned by Aliyev’s two daughters, which owns nine agroparks around Azerbaijan. 

Agroparks in Azerbaijan are "sustainable businesses because the government creates all the infrastructure necessary and provides subsidies for them to operate," Ibadoglu told Eurasianet. 

Turan found that two of the agroparks were in Karabakh, in Sugovushan and Hakari. The outlet did not identify who the owners were.

The government signaled its interest in expanding the agroparks into Karabakh shortly after the end of last year’s war. In March, the Economy Ministry told state-affiliated cable Space TV that research is “being carried out in the liberated territories regarding the creation of agroparks and proposals are being prepared.” 

While there have been no further details announced, during a visit this month by Aliyev to the Jabrayil region, the president was briefed on a new 50-hectare agropark there.

Ibadoglu said that the agroparks in the newly retaken territories likely will be controlled by powerful people, as well. "Those with a high degree of loyalty to the ruling family are prioritized, and Karabakh won't be an exception," he said. 

Other analysts, though, emphasize the potential efficiency of the government’s development model. The “smart village” system will allow all government services in Karabakh to be organized in one centralized system, said Elmir Safarli, another economist. "And this in turn will pave the way for the best tech projects in the region to be applied and facilitate the flow of investments into Karabakh in the future," Safarli said. 

While Azerbaijan faces challenges implementing the smart village (and the related “smart city” concept), Karabakh is an ideal place to experiment, wrote urbanist Anar Valiyev in an article for the Baku Research Institute. “The whole territory is devastated, and there is no infrastructure now; therefore, it should be built from scratch, and certain types of innovations should be implemented,” he wrote. “While doing this, the needs and demands of the population should be the primary consideration.”

The attitude of would-be returnees – many of whom fondly recall their previous, non-“smart” form of small-scale agriculture – is another variable. 

After the war, the government announced that it was conducting a major survey among displaced people to find how many are interested in returning to the region and what they would like to do there; results of the survey have not yet been made public. 

But Bakhtiyar Aslanov, a researcher and national coordinator for Germany’s Berghof Foundation, and himself a displaced person from the first war, said attitudes on the “smart village” concept appear to be changing. 

"In the beginning, people were uncertain about the idea, partly because the concept is new to Azerbaijani society, but also because most were imagining their homes just like they left them 30 years ago," Aslanov told Eurasianet. 

Many of the displaced are concerned that the government is planning to allot them smaller plots of land than the ones that they had fled a quarter century ago, a fear that is fed by news about the “smart village” system, Aslanov said.

"To resolve that, government agencies responsible for the planning of ‘smart villages’ need to provide the public with detailed, in-depth information and welcome public discussion" about the issue, he said.

 

Heydar Isayev is a journalist from Baku.

Azerbaijan prepares for Karabakh resettlement in “smart villages”

EurasiaNet.org
Oct 20 2021
Heydar Isayev Oct 20, 2021
President Ilham Aliyev and his wife Mehriban Aliyeva inspect plans for a smart village in Fuzuli district this week. (photos: president.az)

As Azerbaijan prepares to resettle hundreds of thousands of its citizens in the territory it retook during last year’s war, it has embraced a new development concept: “smart villages.”

The idea has become popular around the world; it envisages small communities using the latest technologies like digital connectivity, automation, and renewable energy to maximize economic development. 

The Azerbaijani government tentatively explored the idea before the war: a State Program of Socio-Economic Development of Regions of the Republic of Azerbaijan 2019-2023 called for two pilot “smart villages” to be created. 

But the idea has gained momentum following last year’s war, in which Azerbaijan retook more than 8,000 square kilometers of territory in and around Nagorno-Karabakh, about 75 percent of the land it had lost to Armenian forces in the first war in the 1990s. More than 600,000 Azerbaijanis were displaced in that war; many of those now hope to return.

In February, President Ilham Aliyev said that the first smart village project would be implemented in Uchunju Agali, in the Zangilan district. In a September interview with Turkish media, Aliyev said that the first displaced people would return to a pilot smart village in Zangilan “by the end of this year or early next year,” though he didn’t name the village. On October 17, he formally laid the foundation for another smart village in the Fuzuli region.

The Ministry of Agriculture has explained that the smart villages will introduce agriculture based on “modern technologies and joint management and control,” but that the concept goes beyond simply farming methods. “The concept consists of ‘smart’ street lighting, cold- and heat-resistant homes, management of household waste, the installation of hydro and solar power stations and biogas energy,” the ministry told the Turan news agency.

The government is spending $1.3 billion this year alone on building “smart cities and villages,” Aliyev told a September meeting of the United Nations General Assembly. 

Azerbaijani state-affiliated media have covered the smart village concept extensively, repeating government talking points that the use of automation will reduce the need for human labor.

But analysts are divided on whether the government's enthusiasm for "smart villages" is warranted. 

Gubad Ibadoglu, an economist and opposition politician, said that the government could have implemented projects like "transparent villages" or "accountable municipalities" instead of smart villages. 

"But in this case, corrupt officials and businessmen will take control of the allocated money, and the work they do will only be an imitation," Ibadoglu told local outlet Toplum TV, adding: "Then it will turn out that there are no smart people or smart government to manage the ‘smart villages.’”

The Aliyevs watch plans in Fuzuli this week.

Critical attention also has fallen on another of the government’s plans for redeveloping rural Karabakh: the expansion of the country’s “agropark” system.

Agroparks are large-scale, government-backed agribusiness enterprises that started operating in Azerbaijan in 2012. A total of 49 agroparks have already been established in Azerbaijan, and a recent journalistic investigation by the independent news agency Turan identified the owners of 38 of them, who were primarily businesspeople connected to the government. The largest single operator of agroparks was Pasha Holding, owned by Aliyev’s two daughters, which owns nine agroparks around Azerbaijan. 

Agroparks in Azerbaijan are "sustainable businesses because the government creates all the infrastructure necessary and provides subsidies for them to operate," Ibadoglu told Eurasianet. 

Turan found that two of the agroparks were in Karabakh, in Sugovushan and Hakari. The outlet did not identify who the owners were.

The government signaled its interest in expanding the agroparks into Karabakh shortly after the end of last year’s war. In March, the Economy Ministry told state-affiliated cable Space TV that research is “being carried out in the liberated territories regarding the creation of agroparks and proposals are being prepared.” 

While there have been no further details announced, during a visit this month by Aliyev to the Jabrayil region, the president was briefed on a new 50-hectare agropark there.

Ibadoglu said that the agroparks in the newly retaken territories likely will be controlled by powerful people, as well. "Those with a high degree of loyalty to the ruling family are prioritized, and Karabakh won't be an exception," he said. 

Other analysts, though, emphasize the potential efficiency of the government’s development model. The “smart village” system will allow all government services in Karabakh to be organized in one centralized system, said Elmir Safarli, another economist. "And this in turn will pave the way for the best tech projects in the region to be applied and facilitate the flow of investments into Karabakh in the future," Safarli said. 

While Azerbaijan faces challenges implementing the smart village (and the related “smart city” concept), Karabakh is an ideal place to experiment, wrote urbanist Anar Valiyev in an article for the Baku Research Institute. “The whole territory is devastated, and there is no infrastructure now; therefore, it should be built from scratch, and certain types of innovations should be implemented,” he wrote. “While doing this, the needs and demands of the population should be the primary consideration.”

The attitude of would-be returnees – many of whom fondly recall their previous, non-“smart” form of small-scale agriculture – is another variable. 

After the war, the government announced that it was conducting a major survey among displaced people to find how many are interested in returning to the region and what they would like to do there; results of the survey have not yet been made public. 

But Bakhtiyar Aslanov, a researcher and national coordinator for Germany’s Berghof Foundation, and himself a displaced person from the first war, said attitudes on the “smart village” concept appear to be changing. 

"In the beginning, people were uncertain about the idea, partly because the concept is new to Azerbaijani society, but also because most were imagining their homes just like they left them 30 years ago," Aslanov told Eurasianet. 

Many of the displaced are concerned that the government is planning to allot them smaller plots of land than the ones that they had fled a quarter century ago, a fear that is fed by news about the “smart village” system, Aslanov said.

"To resolve that, government agencies responsible for the planning of ‘smart villages’ need to provide the public with detailed, in-depth information and welcome public discussion" about the issue, he said.

 

Heydar Isayev is a journalist from Baku.

International Community Needs Access to Nagorny Karabakh

Oct 20 2021

Europe’s leading human rights organisation calls on both sides to cooperate.

Wednesday, 20 October, 2021
Oksana Musayelyan, CONTRIBUTOR

A Council of Europe report on the humanitarian consequences of last year’s Nagorny Karabakh war has called for international organisations and the media to have “unimpeded access” to the territory. The council also said it was “appalled” by the conflict’s death toll, which included over 3,900 Armenian and 2,900 Azerbaijani military personnel killed or missing. It called for all remaining captives to be released and condemned the damage and destruction to cultural heritage on both sides. Paul Gavan, an Irish member of the parliament and the document’s rapporteur, described the challenges in researching the report and outlined potential next steps.

IWPR: The Assembly calls on both sides to provide the international community with access to Nagorny Karabakh. Why is this so crucial and what role can it play post war?

Paul Gavan: I think it is important to recognise that the people of Nagorny Karabakh do feel abandoned by the international community. The most frustrating thing about writing the report was that I could not access Karabakh. I do believe that international community can do more, and we have to gain access. Real pressure has to be increased to ensure that we have proper access, not just the Red Cross, not just the Russians, that we have proper access for humanitarian organisations like the Council of Europe, like the UN so that we can help people on the ground, and of course see what is actually happening.

Which side prevents access to Karabakh?

I was hoping that I would be able to get access from one side and leave from the other, but I have no cooperation from either side basically. In Armenia they told me to go via the Lachin corridor, but I can’t do that, because no international organisation recognises that as a legitimate way to go. I tried to find a compromise, and I have not got that from either side. The report would benefit hugely for me if I could have been there in Karabakh, it is a weaker report because I was not there.

You recognised in the document the existential threat that Armenians feel living in Karabakh. Many are already leaving; what should be done to prevent this depopulation and exodus of Armenians?

It should not be happening, I agree with you. People have the right to live in their homeland. It applies equally, by the way, to Azerbaijanis. That is why one of the important points I make is that we need to see -at least in the short term – some kind of demilitarised zone operating across that border, particularly across Karabakh, to try to give some level of reassurance to the people living there.

You were critical about atrocities on both sides. What was the most worrying violence in your mind?

I singled out the trophy park [a park in Baku displaying militaries trophies from the 2020 war], and when I met a senior aide to President [Ilham] Aliev, I said exactly the same to him – that the Baku trophy park sends all the wrong messages. I am very clear in relation to that. There has to be the means of moving forward here, and what I was trying to do in my report is to suggest concrete actions that could help. I mentioned prisoner release, mine maps… those  mine maps have to be released, and to be honest I don’t believe that Armenia does not have any more to hand over. The issue of border tension is the one that worries me most, and I think the idea to demilitarise the zone around the border is something that both sides and indeed the international community should work towards.

I also singled out the fact that Council of Europe bodies have highlighted in particular the problems of hate speech in Azerbaijan. There are problems on both sides and I have got a huge dossier from the Azeris in relation to hate speech episodes on the Armenian side in social media. Awful stuff, but I think the difference is it seems to be tolerated, and at some degree, propagated at state level in Azerbaijan, and this… has to be called out.

Many in Armenia were disturbed with an amendment which added the Azerbaijani name Ghazanchi to the description of the Armenian Ghazanchetsots church in Shushi. How does this comply with your previous references to cultural heritage?

When I was referring to areas I would use both Armenian and Azerbaijan [terms], I am not replacing one with the other, I would say Stepanakert/Khankendi. You know how important language is, and I am going to unintentionally offend someone every time. The simple reason I adopted this amendment was not to replace the name, but to say, here is how the Armenians are calling it, and here is how the Azerbaijanis are calling it.

My point is to try to be as inclusive in the report as I can, I am not suggesting that one name is better than the other…Who I am to say that he is wrong and somebody else is right? My job here is not to judge, but simply to be inclusive.

The resolution seems to believe that there might be an opening of trade corridors . How is it possible, considering the recent war and the involvement of Turkey, which is a clear reminder for Armenians of the 1915 genocide?

I can understand why would you say that. In the report I clearly said that Turkey had a role, I clearly called out that they were involved in recruiting mercenaries, so I have no illusions about the challenges that Armenia face in that respect.

It strikes me that ultimately Armenia and Azerbaijan are going to  have to work things out as neighbours. And I would have thought trade might not be a bad way to start. Our peace process in Northern Ireland did not start until there was dialogue, and you won’t convince me that there are not some people of goodwill on the other side.

International Community Needs Access to Nagorny Karabakh

Oct 20 2021

Europe’s leading human rights organisation calls on both sides to cooperate.

Wednesday, 20 October, 2021
Oksana Musayelyan, CONTRIBUTOR

A Council of Europe report on the humanitarian consequences of last year’s Nagorny Karabakh war has called for international organisations and the media to have “unimpeded access” to the territory. The council also said it was “appalled” by the conflict’s death toll, which included over 3,900 Armenian and 2,900 Azerbaijani military personnel killed or missing. It called for all remaining captives to be released and condemned the damage and destruction to cultural heritage on both sides. Paul Gavan, an Irish member of the parliament and the document’s rapporteur, described the challenges in researching the report and outlined potential next steps.

IWPR: The Assembly calls on both sides to provide the international community with access to Nagorny Karabakh. Why is this so crucial and what role can it play post war?

Paul Gavan: I think it is important to recognise that the people of Nagorny Karabakh do feel abandoned by the international community. The most frustrating thing about writing the report was that I could not access Karabakh. I do believe that international community can do more, and we have to gain access. Real pressure has to be increased to ensure that we have proper access, not just the Red Cross, not just the Russians, that we have proper access for humanitarian organisations like the Council of Europe, like the UN so that we can help people on the ground, and of course see what is actually happening.

Which side prevents access to Karabakh?

I was hoping that I would be able to get access from one side and leave from the other, but I have no cooperation from either side basically. In Armenia they told me to go via the Lachin corridor, but I can’t do that, because no international organisation recognises that as a legitimate way to go. I tried to find a compromise, and I have not got that from either side. The report would benefit hugely for me if I could have been there in Karabakh, it is a weaker report because I was not there.

You recognised in the document the existential threat that Armenians feel living in Karabakh. Many are already leaving; what should be done to prevent this depopulation and exodus of Armenians?

It should not be happening, I agree with you. People have the right to live in their homeland. It applies equally, by the way, to Azerbaijanis. That is why one of the important points I make is that we need to see -at least in the short term – some kind of demilitarised zone operating across that border, particularly across Karabakh, to try to give some level of reassurance to the people living there.

You were critical about atrocities on both sides. What was the most worrying violence in your mind?

I singled out the trophy park [a park in Baku displaying militaries trophies from the 2020 war], and when I met a senior aide to President [Ilham] Aliev, I said exactly the same to him – that the Baku trophy park sends all the wrong messages. I am very clear in relation to that. There has to be the means of moving forward here, and what I was trying to do in my report is to suggest concrete actions that could help. I mentioned prisoner release, mine maps… those  mine maps have to be released, and to be honest I don’t believe that Armenia does not have any more to hand over. The issue of border tension is the one that worries me most, and I think the idea to demilitarise the zone around the border is something that both sides and indeed the international community should work towards.

I also singled out the fact that Council of Europe bodies have highlighted in particular the problems of hate speech in Azerbaijan. There are problems on both sides and I have got a huge dossier from the Azeris in relation to hate speech episodes on the Armenian side in social media. Awful stuff, but I think the difference is it seems to be tolerated, and at some degree, propagated at state level in Azerbaijan, and this… has to be called out.

Many in Armenia were disturbed with an amendment which added the Azerbaijani name Ghazanchi to the description of the Armenian Ghazanchetsots church in Shushi. How does this comply with your previous references to cultural heritage?

When I was referring to areas I would use both Armenian and Azerbaijan [terms], I am not replacing one with the other, I would say Stepanakert/Khankendi. You know how important language is, and I am going to unintentionally offend someone every time. The simple reason I adopted this amendment was not to replace the name, but to say, here is how the Armenians are calling it, and here is how the Azerbaijanis are calling it.

My point is to try to be as inclusive in the report as I can, I am not suggesting that one name is better than the other…Who I am to say that he is wrong and somebody else is right? My job here is not to judge, but simply to be inclusive.

The resolution seems to believe that there might be an opening of trade corridors . How is it possible, considering the recent war and the involvement of Turkey, which is a clear reminder for Armenians of the 1915 genocide?

I can understand why would you say that. In the report I clearly said that Turkey had a role, I clearly called out that they were involved in recruiting mercenaries, so I have no illusions about the challenges that Armenia face in that respect.

It strikes me that ultimately Armenia and Azerbaijan are going to  have to work things out as neighbours. And I would have thought trade might not be a bad way to start. Our peace process in Northern Ireland did not start until there was dialogue, and you won’t convince me that there are not some people of goodwill on the other side.

Azerbaijan vs Armenia in UN court: what happened in Hague?


Oct 20 2021


    BakuJAMnews

The UN International Court of Justice held hearings on the Azerbaijan vs Armenia case. Baku accuses Yerevan of violating the International Convention on the Abolition of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The interests of Azerbaijan were represented by Deputy Foreign Minister Elnur Mammadov in court.

Prior to that, the UN International Court of Justice held hearings on a similar claim by Armenia against Azerbaijan.

For two days in a row, on October 14-15, the UN International Court of Justice has been considering the demand for the application of urgent measures in the Armenia vs Azerbaijan lawsuit

On September 24, 2021, Azerbaijan filed a lawsuit, according to which “Armenia has committed and continues to commit discriminatory actions against Azerbaijanis on the basis of their national and ethnic origin”.


  • How Ilham Aliyev and Nikol Pashinyan see Armenian-Azerbaijani problems
  • Armenia’s Security Council Secretary: There will be no exchange of territories with Azerbaijan
  • Op-ed: Azerbaijan has a plan if OSCE Minsk Group returns to the issue of the status of Armenians in Karabakh

Speaking in court, Mammadov noted that Azerbaijan considers it necessary to urgently introduce temporary interim measures against Armenia: “Armenia’s campaign of ethnic cleansing and incitement to violence continues and in order to prevent irreparable damage to Azerbaijanis, temporary interim measures are urgently required”.

The deputy minister gave information about the death, injury, seizure of civilians as a result of the Khojaly tragedy in 1992. “In the eyes of the Armenian armed formations, their only crime was that they are ethnic Azerbaijanis. For this reason alone, they were killed, taken hostage, tortured, driven out of their homes. Armenia has been continuing the policy of ethnic cleansing for decades”, he said.

According to Mammadov, temporary interim measures against Armenia are necessary to protect people against an immediate threat: “Having sheltered armed groups, financing the spread of disinformation and supporting the like, Armenia continues the violence and incitement of hatred against Azerbaijanis”.

Elnur Mammadov called on the UN International Court of Justice to take a number of measures against Armenia. He noted that Armenia “must take all necessary steps for the prompt, safe and effective clearance of landmines planted in Azerbaijani territories by the Armenian military and / or other groups under the leadership, controlled or sponsored by Yerevan, including by immediately providing comprehensive and accurate information on the location and characteristics of landmines on the territory of Azerbaijan”.

In conclusion, the representative of Azerbaijan added that his country “conducted negotiations with Armenia for a long time and appealed to the court only after Yerevan avoided negotiations”.

The decision of the International Court of Justice on both claims will be made later.

Azerbaijan vs Armenia in UN court: what happened in Hague?


Oct 20 2021


    BakuJAMnews

The UN International Court of Justice held hearings on the Azerbaijan vs Armenia case. Baku accuses Yerevan of violating the International Convention on the Abolition of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The interests of Azerbaijan were represented by Deputy Foreign Minister Elnur Mammadov in court.

Prior to that, the UN International Court of Justice held hearings on a similar claim by Armenia against Azerbaijan.

For two days in a row, on October 14-15, the UN International Court of Justice has been considering the demand for the application of urgent measures in the Armenia vs Azerbaijan lawsuit

On September 24, 2021, Azerbaijan filed a lawsuit, according to which “Armenia has committed and continues to commit discriminatory actions against Azerbaijanis on the basis of their national and ethnic origin”.


  • How Ilham Aliyev and Nikol Pashinyan see Armenian-Azerbaijani problems
  • Armenia’s Security Council Secretary: There will be no exchange of territories with Azerbaijan
  • Op-ed: Azerbaijan has a plan if OSCE Minsk Group returns to the issue of the status of Armenians in Karabakh

Speaking in court, Mammadov noted that Azerbaijan considers it necessary to urgently introduce temporary interim measures against Armenia: “Armenia’s campaign of ethnic cleansing and incitement to violence continues and in order to prevent irreparable damage to Azerbaijanis, temporary interim measures are urgently required”.

The deputy minister gave information about the death, injury, seizure of civilians as a result of the Khojaly tragedy in 1992. “In the eyes of the Armenian armed formations, their only crime was that they are ethnic Azerbaijanis. For this reason alone, they were killed, taken hostage, tortured, driven out of their homes. Armenia has been continuing the policy of ethnic cleansing for decades”, he said.

According to Mammadov, temporary interim measures against Armenia are necessary to protect people against an immediate threat: “Having sheltered armed groups, financing the spread of disinformation and supporting the like, Armenia continues the violence and incitement of hatred against Azerbaijanis”.

Elnur Mammadov called on the UN International Court of Justice to take a number of measures against Armenia. He noted that Armenia “must take all necessary steps for the prompt, safe and effective clearance of landmines planted in Azerbaijani territories by the Armenian military and / or other groups under the leadership, controlled or sponsored by Yerevan, including by immediately providing comprehensive and accurate information on the location and characteristics of landmines on the territory of Azerbaijan”.

In conclusion, the representative of Azerbaijan added that his country “conducted negotiations with Armenia for a long time and appealed to the court only after Yerevan avoided negotiations”.

The decision of the International Court of Justice on both claims will be made later.

Azerbaijan vs Armenia in UN court: what happened in Hague?


Oct 20 2021


    BakuJAMnews

The UN International Court of Justice held hearings on the Azerbaijan vs Armenia case. Baku accuses Yerevan of violating the International Convention on the Abolition of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The interests of Azerbaijan were represented by Deputy Foreign Minister Elnur Mammadov in court.

Prior to that, the UN International Court of Justice held hearings on a similar claim by Armenia against Azerbaijan.

For two days in a row, on October 14-15, the UN International Court of Justice has been considering the demand for the application of urgent measures in the Armenia vs Azerbaijan lawsuit

On September 24, 2021, Azerbaijan filed a lawsuit, according to which “Armenia has committed and continues to commit discriminatory actions against Azerbaijanis on the basis of their national and ethnic origin”.


  • How Ilham Aliyev and Nikol Pashinyan see Armenian-Azerbaijani problems
  • Armenia’s Security Council Secretary: There will be no exchange of territories with Azerbaijan
  • Op-ed: Azerbaijan has a plan if OSCE Minsk Group returns to the issue of the status of Armenians in Karabakh

Speaking in court, Mammadov noted that Azerbaijan considers it necessary to urgently introduce temporary interim measures against Armenia: “Armenia’s campaign of ethnic cleansing and incitement to violence continues and in order to prevent irreparable damage to Azerbaijanis, temporary interim measures are urgently required”.

The deputy minister gave information about the death, injury, seizure of civilians as a result of the Khojaly tragedy in 1992. “In the eyes of the Armenian armed formations, their only crime was that they are ethnic Azerbaijanis. For this reason alone, they were killed, taken hostage, tortured, driven out of their homes. Armenia has been continuing the policy of ethnic cleansing for decades”, he said.

According to Mammadov, temporary interim measures against Armenia are necessary to protect people against an immediate threat: “Having sheltered armed groups, financing the spread of disinformation and supporting the like, Armenia continues the violence and incitement of hatred against Azerbaijanis”.

Elnur Mammadov called on the UN International Court of Justice to take a number of measures against Armenia. He noted that Armenia “must take all necessary steps for the prompt, safe and effective clearance of landmines planted in Azerbaijani territories by the Armenian military and / or other groups under the leadership, controlled or sponsored by Yerevan, including by immediately providing comprehensive and accurate information on the location and characteristics of landmines on the territory of Azerbaijan”.

In conclusion, the representative of Azerbaijan added that his country “conducted negotiations with Armenia for a long time and appealed to the court only after Yerevan avoided negotiations”.

The decision of the International Court of Justice on both claims will be made later.

Armenia’s representative wins in International Microelectronics Olympiad

Oct 20 2021

The Organizing Committee of the Annual International Microelectronics Olympiad today announced the winners of the 16th Annual International Microelectronics Olympiad during an online awarding ceremony:

-    Zhanna Khajoyan from Armenia became the first prize winner.
-    Hassan Mostafa Imam Ali from Egypt got the second place.
-    Three third prizes were awarded to –  Khaled Hammuda Mohamed Abdelrazek from Egypt, Angela Kostik from Serbia, Dejan Gutik from Bosnia-Herzegovina.

The initiator and general organizer of the Olympiad is Synopsys Armenia, and the general partner is Viva-MTS. The main supporter is "Unicomp" company.

Viva-MTS said in a press release that this year's Olympiad featured the diversity of the geography of the participating countries, including representatives from the Argentina, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Egypt, Peru, Russia, Serbia, Vietnam, UAE, Ukraine and the United States.

The Olympiad was conducted in two stages. The first stage, held simultaneously in the participants’ countries, involved a test to establish a baseline. The second, the final stage involved a challenging contest consisting of advanced engineering tasks requiring complex solutions. Of 436 participants in the first stage, 21 were qualified to progress to the second stage, which was held on October 8.  Of these 21 contestants, 6 were from Yerevan, and 15 were from a variety of other countries.
 
“For 16 years in a row Viva-MTS supports this initiative. Why? Obviously, because, in IT, in fulfillment of the global agenda of digitalization Armenia possesses immense potential, which is still very far from being fully used. I am happy our compatriots participate and what is more win in international Olympiad. The competition is now a reality and initiative like this one are extremely important for the development of competitive advantages of the country, increasing the ranking of the country, ensuring its economic growth, as well as for prevention of the brain drain,” Ralph Yirikian, the General Manager of the Olympiad’s General Partner, Viva-MTS, said.

The Olympiad covers the following topics: Digital IC Design and Test, Analog and Mixed Signal IC Design and Test, Semiconductor Devices and Technology, and Mathematic and Algorithmic Issues of Electronic Design Automation (EDA).  

"The fact that the student of the Synopsys educational program implemented jointly with the Polytechnic was recognized as the best among 436 participants from 13 countries of the world, testifies to the international quality of our educational programs in the field of microelectronics," Yervand Zoryan, the President of Synopsys Armenia, said.