Month: March 2023

OPINION:

The Armenian genocide during World War I was perpetrated against a disarmed populace, whose own government took advantage of a registry of guns to confiscate the weapons from Christian minorities who would use them to defend themselves.

My family hails from the region of present-day Turkey that was ethnically cleansed of nearly all Christian minorities during the First World War. Thankfully, most of my direct ancestors escaped to the United States. But others were not so lucky.

While bigotry, nationalism and other factors contributed to the genocide, the gun registry was one of the most consequential reasons the Turks effectively carried out this barbaric act.

We know from the Ottoman Penal Code that the firearm registry was universal and instituted before the genocide. In addition to a gun registry, there were specific penalties put in place for Christians if they were caught openly bearing arms. Despite these restrictions, I’m proud that people in my ancestors’ village of Tomarza were known to openly carry guns in direct defiance of the tyrannical Turkish government.

Unfortunately, their defiance did not stop the Turks in the long run. My great-grandfather’s brother, an eyewitness, wrote in a letter that after the Turks declared that all registered guns would be confiscated, it resulted in “all weapons, even hunting guns, [being] surrendered to the government.” If anyone refused to do so, they would be put to death.

Recently, another relative uncovered a personal testimony from his father, John Armaganian, a survivor and another eyewitness to the Armenian genocide. In his recounting of events, not only did the Turks seek to confiscate “all military supplies and guns” but also “their knives and revolvers.”

In his testimony, Mr. Armaganian says his own father (my relative’s grandfather) was asked by the police how many guns and rifles he had, and he responded:

“’The ones I had were rusty and I turned them in already, and I haven’t anymore,’ but the officer didn’t believe him. He proceeded to ask about some buried underground. When he denied he had any, he was mercilessly beaten. Twice he was hauled into the police station and both times he was beaten worse than before, preventing him from walking for three weeks. Eventually, he was forced to work in a labor battalion and was never heard from again.”

Most Armenians were sent on death marches through the Syrian desert to die. The stated reason by the Ottoman Empire is because of the war, they needed to move “for their safety” — a common phrase also used as justification by gun control advocates to this day.

This recent historical example cannot paint a clearer picture of the immense danger of a gun registry and how gun confiscation would play out. Even without mass compliance, the authorities would know exactly who to target.

If the existence of a small minority within the Ottoman Empire could elicit such overwhelming violence from the regime, one can only imagine the lengths a modern regime would resort to against an armed minority here in America.

Some would argue that such an action would never happen here, but the groundwork is already being laid. Thanks to extensive Freedom of Information Act requests from Gun Owners of America, we can confirm that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the federal agency charged with regulating guns, has amassed nearly 1 billion firearm transaction records into a digitized, searchable database. These records contain several personally identifiable data points, and the compiling of these records, in direct contradiction to federal law, absolutely constitutes a registry of many guns in America today.

Alarmingly, the current administration is actively working to expand the records the ATF collects though both the “frame and receiver” rule, which will add homemade firearms into the registry, and via the zero-tolerance policy, which is aggressively shutting down lawful gun dealers, whose records will then be added to the registry.

Just as was done to my ancestors, our own government right now has the tools to enact a mass gun confiscation. The same excuse will be given: It’s being done in the name of safety or under emergency authority.

My family’s greatest tragedy should be our country’s greatest warning. Do not give the government an inch — not just because it’s a constitutional right, but because gun registration opens the door to unspeakable government-imposed tragedy.

Right now, some in Congress are actively working to destroy the registry. Ultimately, however, it’s up to the people to ensure our government swiftly and wholly destroys these records and erects further barriers to prevent this from ever occurring in the future.

• Alex Madajian is a federal affairs assistant for Gun Owners of America, a nonprofit grassroots lobbying organization with over 2 million members nationwide.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/armenia-warns-vladimir-putin-he-will-be-arrested-for-russian-war-crimes-if-he-visits .

Tensions between Azerbaijan and Armenia are threatening to destabilize the South Caucasus, prompting some to worry that Iran could eventually be pulled into a wider regional conflict. But is Iran really prepared to invade its Shia-majority neighbor to protect Armenia, or are recent military moves little more than bluster?

While Azerbaijan’s military continues to capture parts of Nagorno-Karabakh – internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan despite being under Armenian control for three decades – leaders in the energy-rich country accuse the Islamic Republic of amassing troops near its exclave of Nakhchivan, on Iran’s northwestern border.

Tehran hasn’t denied the allegations. On the contrary, the al-Quds Force – one of five branches of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) – has reported that its bases near the Armenia-Azerbaijan border are on high alert for a possible attack.

Heavy logistical movements of the Azerbaijani army raised concerns in Iran that an operation against Armenia was imminent, and IRGC commander Brigadier-General Mohammad Pakpour visited the area last Friday.

There are even reports that IRGC forces in Iran’s provinces of East and West Azerbaijan – where ethnic Azeris make up most of the population – have been ordered to full combat readiness. 

But despite the recent spike in tensions, the current situation in the South Caucasus remains manageable, and Iran’s calculations are more strategic than tactical. At least for now. 

Azerbaijan uses the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict as a way to pressure Armenia to build its section of the Nakhchivan corridor, a land route that would connect mainland Azerbaijan with Nakhchivan via southern Armenia’s province of Syunik. If built under Baku’s terms, the corridor would in effect cut off Iran from Armenia, something that Alireza Monadi, a representative of the Iranian city of Tabriz, said Tehran “will not allow.”

(Indeed, Mohammad-Reza Mirtajodini, Iran’s former vice-president for parliamentary affairs, has even called for Tehran to annex Nakhchivan in response.) 

The IRGC was even more direct. On its official Telegram channels, the Revolutionary Guard posted open threats to Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev over his “hostile actions against Armenia.” Iran seems determined to prevent a potential Azerbaijani attack on southern Armenia, though it remains unclear how far it might go to avert such a scenario.

The reason for Iran’s concern is simple: Azerbaijan’s control over southern Armenia would jeopardize Tehran’s positions in the South Caucasus, and pose an existential threat to the Islamic Republic itself.

In the north, Iran would be completely surrounded by Turkic countries, and Tehran fears that Azerbaijan could eventually allow Israel to use its territory for attacks on the Islamic Republic. Already, Azerbaijan is strengthening its military and intelligence relations with Israel – Iran’s arch-enemy. 

If Tehran turns a blind eye to Azerbaijani-Israeli cooperation, such a move could be interpreted as a sign of weakness. That’s why Tehran is expected to continue flexing its military muscles in the region – aiming to demonstrate that the territorial integrity of Armenia is Iran’s red line.

Time may be on Iran’s side, as the only major incident recently was in Nagorno-Karabakh, where Azerbaijani forces took “urgent measures” to prevent the construction of a road to bypass the Lachin corridor – the only road connecting Armenia with Nagorno-Karabakh.

For now, diplomacy appears to be the desired course of action. On March 11, Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry summoned the Iranian ambassador in Baku to protest against the presence of an Iranian warplane over the disputed area. 

Earlier this year, Azerbaijan closed its embassy in Tehran and evacuated staff and their families after a gunman stormed the diplomatic mission, killing the security chief and wounding two guards. Thus diplomatic relations between the two neighbors remain tense, and both sides occasionally add fuel to the fire.

The question now is whether diplomacy will be enough to pull all sides back from the brink. Azerbaijan has considered engaging ethnic Azerbaijanis living in Iran as instruments against the Islamic Republic.

Last November, President Aliyev stressed that Azerbaijan would “do everything to protect the rights, freedoms, and security of Azerbaijanis living abroad, including Azerbaijanis in Iran.” His statement was a direct message to the Islamic Republic, designed to show that Baku has significant leverage in, and over Tehran. 

Iran, for its part, could use the Shia factor as its trump card against Azerbaijan. But this could backfire, given that Baku frequently arrests members of Shiite groups that are allegedly planning to carry out acts of sabotage and disruption under the guise of religion.

If, however, Iran decides to raise the stakes and attack Israeli-backed Azerbaijan under any pretext, it risks an open confrontation with a country that will be strongly supported not only by Israel, but also by NATO member Turkey.

Thus policymakers in Tehran will have to think twice before taking any action in the South Caucasus. Direct confrontation can be avoided, but only if cooler heads prevail.

This article was provided by Syndication Bureau, which holds copyright.

Since the 2020 war over Nagorno-Karabakh, it has become apparent that Azerbaijan is set on reconquering the region, also called Artsakh, even at the risk of displacing the 120,000 indigenous ethnic Armenians that live there.

Armenia and Azerbaijan sit at a strategic location at the junction of Iran and Russia, so it is in the United States' national security interest to ensure a satisfactory resolution to this conflict. It is also in keeping with our national commitment to promoting religious freedom that we ensure endangered religious minorities receive protection.

Thankfully, the U.S. has strong relationships with both Armenia and Azerbaijan and we have a tool in the Section 907 waiver to pressure Azerbaijan to stop its aggressive behavior. The waiver allows the president to waive a law that blocks U.S. aid to Azerbaijan. This also provides an opportunity to call on Armenia to reassess its relationships with Russia and Iran.

Azerbaijan bases their claim to Karabakh on borders drawn by dictator Josef Stalin in the early days of the Soviet Union. In general, the international community has not refuted that claim, though there are reasons to think Stalin placed this Armenian mountain enclave within Azerbaijan in order to weaken both states and keep them beholden to the Soviet Union. After the collapse of the USSR, Armenia and Azerbaijan fought over the Karabakh and Armenia won a limited victory, in what eventually became a frozen conflict. Azerbaijan has made no secret that it wishes to reclaim control of the area, increasing its pressure on the inhabitants in recent years.

The current Azerbaijan blockade of the Lachin corridor, the only road for commerce in and out of Karabakh, has created unbearable hardship for the ethnic Armenians living there. Food and medicines are running out and disruptions in the flow of natural gas have been blamed on Azerbaijan. For hospitals and the elderly, the situation is critical.

A cleansing of ethnic Armenians from Azerbaijan is not without precedent. In the lead up to the first Nagorno-Karabakh War, Armenians were driven out of the rest of Azerbaijan, with a similar eradication of Azerbaijanis from Armenia occurring at the same time.

When pressed on the current blockade, the response from Azerbaijani authorities is to dodge responsibility, blaming organically organized environmental protesters and Russian peacekeepers for the road closure. These excuses are not very convincing as the government has directed Azerbaijanis not to enter the disputed territories without being issued a permit to do so. Some violators have been arrested. The protests seem to be coming with government approval and with protesters arriving on charter buses.

Azerbaijan also signed a significant treaty with Russia on the eve of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. President Ilham Aliyev has called it a full alliance between the two countries. Shifting responsibility isn't going to cut it.

The U.S. State Department and the International Court of Justice have both recognized Azerbaijan's responsibility for the blockade, calling on them to resolve the crisis. Even so, Azerbaijan refuses to do so, displaying confidence the U.S. will not hold them accountable. We should call their bluff.

The U.S. has an important strategic relationship with Azerbaijan that blossomed during the War on Terror. In 2002, Congress provided the U.S. president with the right to waive a law passed in 1992 restricting most types of aid to Azerbaijan (then-Senator Sam Brownback sponsored the amendment to provide the president with this waiver authority). Since then, presidents have consistently applied this waiver and provided a wide range of military aid to Azerbaijan. The Aliyev has been a key partner in containing Iranian ambitions and that should not be disregarded, but the value of the relationship with Azerbaijan does not give them license to strangle an ethnoreligious minority group with impunity.

Instead, our close relationship gives the U.S. the right to call them to account for their actions.

The president should act immediately to revoke the Section 907 waiver he has extended and put any aid on hold until Azerbaijan demonstrates they will work through peaceful means to resolve the conflict.

Revoking the Section 907 waiver would also send a strong message to the State Department that the White House and Congress rely on them to effectively and accurately meet their statutory reporting requirements. A report by the Government Accountability Office found that the State Department was woefully out of compliance with a provision in the Section 907 amendment requiring them to provide insight on whether U.S. aid was impacting the balance of military power between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

We should not miss this opportunity to also call on Armenia to reconsider its regional friendships with Russia and Iran. While there are few good options available to a small landlocked nation like Armenia, looking to Russia and Iran for protection is inviting the fox to guard the hen house. If Armenia is to survive in this rough neighborhood, they must look to expand their network of alliances and partnerships.

The U.S. is well positioned to be an arbiter in this conflict, ending an urgent humanitarian crisis and upholding our commitment to the protection of religious minorities, but to do so we will have to show Baku we mean business. Revoking the Section 907 waiver is the best way to do that.

Sam Brownback is the former U.S. ambassador-at-large for International Religious Freedom and co-chair of the IRF Summit.

Peter Burns (@peterburns_1861) is executive director of the International Religious Freedom Summit.

The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.

https://www.newsweek.com/we-have-right-tool-pressure-azerbaijan-over-nagorno-karabakh-opinion-1790979