On August 8, 2025, Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders met at the White House and signed a joint declaration committing to peace after decades of conflict. Yet more than a year later, Armenian heritage in Nagorno-Karabakh remains under threat. Findings released in October 2026 documented four additional cases of destruction, four episodes of damage, and five newly threatened sites. Diplomatic progress has not yet translated into effective protection for the heritage left behind by displaced Armenians.

These losses deepen the consequences of their displacement. In September 2023, more than 100,000 ethnic Armenians were forcibly displaced from Nagorno-Karabakh following months of an Azerbaijani military offensive and blockade. Since their expulsion, Armenian cultural institutions have either been destroyed or presented as belonging to a different historical tradition. The removal of a community and the erasure of its heritage are distinct acts, but their consequences reinforce each other. One separates people from their homeland. The other threatens the evidence of their existence there.

The destruction of religious and cultural sites deepens that displacement. Kanach Zham, a nineteenth-century Armenian church in Shushi, was still standing in December 2023. By April 2024, it was demolished. The historic Ghazanchetsots cemetery was intact at the beginning of the offensive and destroyed by April 2024, months after the fighting ended and the area was under Azerbaijani control.Four additional cases of destruction and  damage and five newly threatened sites were documented in findings released this October. Independent access is needed before more sites disappear, not merely afterward to establish what was lost. These sites are more than historic landmarks. Churches preserve memories of worship and community life. Cemeteries connect families to their ancestors. Their destruction eradicates connections to home, even while living elsewhere.

But a building does not have to be demolished for its history to be erased. Gandzasar monastery illustrates another danger. Its Cathedral of St. John the Baptist was built and consecrated in the early 13th century under Prince Hasan-Jalal Dawla. Medieval Armenian inscriptions record its patronage and construction. Yet during a government-organized diplomatic visit in September 2026, Azerbaijani officials presented Gandzasar and Dadivank as Caucasian Albanian heritage, accusing Armenians of conducting “unauthorized alterations” during the early years of the conflict.

Nakhichevan offers another warning. From 1997 to 2011, 108 of 110 Armenian monasteries, churches, and cemeteries were destroyed. Before their destruction, some of these churches were officially listed as “Albanian temples.” Relabeling did not protect them; it denied their Armenian origins before their eventual eradication.  Nagorno-Karabakh needs independent scrutiny before further losses make preservation impossible. Preserving its walls while rewriting its history would leave the building visible but erase its Armenian past. The displacement of people and the removal of their historical presence must therefore be addressed together.

Having helped broker the August 2025 Washington declaration between Armenia and Azerbaijan, the United States should make heritage protection part of its diplomatic strategy in the region. UNESCO proposed an independent heritage mission after the 2020 ceasefire, but reported that December that it could not proceed because Azerbaijan did not provide the agreement needed for access. Washington should press Azerbaijan to allow independent experts access, support continued documentation, and seek safeguards for churches, cemeteries, khachkars, and inscriptions. UNESCO should lead the assessment and develop conservation recommendations. Displaced Armenians must also have a voice in decisions affecting these places. Their connection to their heritage did not end when they fled, and their absence should not exclude them from its future.

The U.S. government should support efforts to achieve meaningful peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan, while recognizing that diplomatic progress alone cannot resolve the consequences of ethnic cleansing. Meaningful peace would not only protect the rights and safety of displaced Armenians but also safeguard their cultural and religious heritage. These are essential conditions of a credible settlement. Nagorno-Karabakh’s Armenians have already lost access to their homes. They should not also lose their voice in shaping their future or the places that preserve their history.