Pashinyan: Probability of escalation of tension along Armenia border and in Karabakh is now very high

NEWS.am
Armenia – March 14 2023

Aggressive rhetoric of Azerbaijan has constantly increased. It has increased before the 2020 war, after it, and I believe that yes, now there is a very high probability of escalation [of tension] both along the border of Armenia and in Nagorno-Karabakh. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan stated this during his press conference today.

“My conclusion is from Azerbaijan’s increasingly aggressive rhetoric and there are certain other data. We are convinced and know 100 percent that it is not Armenia that initiates aggressive actions; and this is the reason why Armenia decided to invite EU observers. Realizing that we are getting questions, we said that ‘we don’t mind if you send observers so that you don’t need to get our information, you have information on the spot,’” said Pashinyan.

He noted that the initial agreement in Prague in October 2022 was that there would be EU observers on both sides of the border or the line of contact.

“Moreover, the president of Azerbaijan agreed in the presence of everyone, later he refused that option. Azerbaijan accused us of having an army in Nagorno-Karabakh. I said that we do not have an army in Nagorno-Karabakh. I said, this debate has no end, we can do the following: invite international observers to Nagorno-Karabakh, let them assess the situation on the spot and come up with a report. Azerbaijan rejected this option. Even today, I believe that the international community should record that the risk of escalation [of tension] is very high. And taking into account the closure of the Lachin corridor [by Azerbaijan] and the existence of a [resulting] humanitarian crisis in Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as the obvious preparations of Azerbaijan to carry out [Armenian] ethnic cleansing, our position continues to be that it would be a good opportunity to send a fact-finding mission to the Nagorno-Karabakh and the Lachin corridor,” said Pashinyan.

The Armenian Prime Minister stated that the most important factor here is the human and people’s will.

“The most important factor here is the will of the Nagorno-Karabakh people to live in their own homeland. By and large, this is what we are talking about. Azerbaijan is trying to break the will of the Nagorno-Karabakh people to live in their homeland. If that will remains steadfast, it is the foundation of all subsequent events.

If anyone thinks that the will of the Armenian people to have an independent state can be broken, I don’t think so. We must show our will to have an independent sovereign state.

It is very important that we notice and evaluate those actions aimed at weakening the will to have an independent, sovereign state, which in all cases have an external source. There is no such source within Armenia. If there are such manifestations, they have an external source.

It is very important to prove that we are not to blame for the escalation [of tension]. We have solved that problem along the border. That mechanism exists in Nagorno-Karabakh as well, which I hope will work properly. It’s about the Russian peacekeeping forces in Nagorno-Karabakh and the facts being publicized by them.”

European Chess Championship: 4 Armenian players win in 8th round

Panorama
Armenia –

Eight rounds have already been played at the European Individual Chess Championship 2023 in Vrnjacka Banja, Serbia.

Armenia’s Mamikon Gharibyan, Samvel Ter-Sahakyan, Vahe Danielyan and Sargis Manukyan scored victories in the 8th round on Friday, the Armenian Chess Federation reported.

The games of Gabriel Sargissian, Haik Martirosyan, Manuel Petrosyan, Shant Sargsyan, Robert Hovhannisyan, Emin Ohanyan, Armen Barseghyan and Robert Piliposyan ended in a draw.

At the moment, the sole leader of the championship is Ukrainian GM Anton Korobov, who scored 7 points out of 8.

Gabriel Sargissian, Manuel Petrosyan, Haik Martirosyan, Shant Sargsyan, Mamikon Gharibyan and Robert Hovhannisyan scored 5.5 points.

Mamikon Gharibyan and Robert Hovhannisyan will play against each other in the 9th round.

https://www.panorama.am/en/news/2023/03/11/European-Chess-Championship/2805546

EU-Armenia Parliamentary Partnership Committee urges Azerbaijan to immediately withdraw from Armenian territories

Save

Share

 21:03,

YEREVAN, MARCH 10, ARMENPRESS. The European Parliament and the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia held the second meeting of the EU-Armenia Parliamentary Partnership Committee (PPC) on 24 February 2022 in Yerevan, marking a strong commitment to the deepening of relations between the EU and Armenia, ARMENPRESS was informed from the official website of the EU.

“This was the first meeting since the Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA) entered into force in March last year and an occasion for us to review the state of its implementation. We welcome the progress made and encourage the Armenian authorities to continue on the reform path.

We also note the substantial EU support provided, such as in the crucial area of justice reform. We applaud the fact that the EU’s Economic and Investment Plan will provide a sizable stimulus to investments in key areas, including strategically important connectivity projects and support to the most vulnerable regions, and appreciate the EU’s efforts to help Armenia deal with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The recent signing of the Common Aviation Area Agreement in November marks a significant step with tangible benefits for the citizens and businesses of both the EU and Armenia. Enhanced connectivity helps boost people-to-people contacts as well as economic growth. Among other concrete steps to achieve tangible results, we also welcomed the recent agreement on Armenia’s association status to the Horizon Europe research and innovation programme and the agreement on strategic cooperation with Europol.

We appreciated that despite the difficult context created by the Second NagornoKarabakh War and the COVID-19 pandemic, the early parliamentary elections of June 2021 were competitive and generally well-managed, living up to democratic standards. They also delivered a clear mandate for the Government of Armenia to further reform the country, improve governance, tackle corruption and modernise the economy.

We stressed the need to decrease polarisation in politics and called on all political forces to show restraint. We also highlighted the importance of ensuring that all reforms respect the principles of separation of powers and the rule of law and recommended seeking and following advice of the Venice Commission on all constitutional matters.

We reiterated our unwavering support to a comprehensive and peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and to the process within the mandate of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmanship, based on the principles of non-use of force, territorial integrity and the equal rights and self-determination of peoples.

We appreciate the engagement of the President of the European Council in order to help create an atmosphere of trust and build confidence, including through the creation of a direct communication link between the Ministers of Defence of Armenia and Azerbaijan and the EU’s mediation to repatriate detained Armenian servicemen. We encourage stepping up the EU’s involvement to help address urgent outstanding issues, such as the return of all remaining Armenian prisoners of war and other detainees, the protection of cultural heritage in the conflict area, and the unblocking of humanitarian access to Nagorno-Karabakh.

We find it unacceptable that on 12 May 2021, troops from Azerbaijan temporarily entered the territory of Armenia, which amounts to a violation of the territorial integrity of Armenia and of international law. Further progress on border delimitation and demarcation between Armenia and Azerbaijan is of utmost importance; in the meantime, we call for the withdrawal of all military forces from the border areas, returning to positions before 12 May 2021, to prevent escalation and guarantee the rights of the local population.

The unblocking of regional communications, in line with the trilateral statements of 9 November 2020 and 11 January 2021, will present a significant opportunity for Armenia and the entire South Caucasus region. We support the Armenian government in pursuing this ambitious objective and encourage further progress. Likewise, the recently started efforts to normalise relations with Turkey without preconditions have our strong support, as their success would be a boon to the regional economic development and stability.

We look forward to further developing our interparliamentary relations and holding the 3rd meeting of the Committee in 2023 in Brussels or Strasbourg”, reads the statement of the meeting.

Russia urges restraint after shootout near Nagorno-Karabakh

Canada – March 6 2023
MOSCOW – 

Russia said Monday that its forces helped end a deadly weekend clash between Azerbaijani soldiers and the police of Nagorno-Karabakh, urging all parties to show restraint.

Nagorno-Karabakh lies within Azerbaijan but has been under the control of ethnic Armenian forces backed by Armenia since a separatist war there ended in 1994. In 2020, Azerbaijani troops routed Armenian forces in six weeks of fighting that ended with a Russia-brokered peace deal allowing Azerbaijan to take a significant part of Nagorno-Karabakh and reclaim nearby areas which had been in Armenian hands for nearly two decades.

Tensions soared again in December when Azerbaijani protesters claiming to be environmental activists blocked the main road between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh, leaving its 120,000 residents short of food and other basic supplies.

Last month, the United Nations’ highest court ordered Azerbaijan to allow the resumption of free movement along the so-called Lachin corridor, but the situation has remained tense.

On Sunday, Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry said a shootout occurred when Azerbaijani soldiers went to check vehicles suspected of transporting weapons along an auxiliary dirt road that links Armenia with Nagorno-Karabakh. Armenia’s Interior Ministry dismissed the claim and described the shooting as an “ambush,” saying that three police officers from Nagorno-Karabakh were killed.

The Russian Defense Ministry said on Monday that its troops patrolling the region as peacekeepers under the 2020 Moscow-brokered deal moved quickly to halt the clash. The ministry confirmed that three Nagorno-Karabakh police officers were killed and added that two Azerbaijani troops also died in the shootout.

The Russian Foreign Ministry expressed concern about Sunday’s shooting and urged all parties to show restraints and make steps to de-escalate the situation.

Armenia: Fact-checking competition for local media

March 7 2023

The ‘European Media Facility in Armenia – Creating Sustainable and Professional Media’ project has announced a competition for journalistic publications using fact-checking.

Materials can be from any media field (TV, radio, online, print) and must have been published between 1 January and 31 December 2022. The main condition is that the material submitted must contain a fact checking.

Everyone can submit only one article under their own authorship, but can co-author a maximum of one other article. However, only one of the two submissions signed by the same person can be awarded.

The deadline for applications is 9 March. 

Find out more

Press release

Asbarez: NAASR to Host Talk on New English Translation of Soghomon Tehlirian’s Memoir


Book cover of the English translation of Soghomon Tehlirian’s memoir, Remembrances: The Assassination of Talaat Pasha”

The National Association for Armenian Studies and Research will host an online program marking the publication of the first English translation of Soghomon Tehlirian’s memoir, “Remembrances: The Assassination of Talaat Pasha” (Gomidas Institute, 2022), on Wednesday, March 15, at 10 a.m. PST. This program is co-sponsored by NAASR, the Armenian Film Foundation, and the Ararat-Eskijian Museum.

The webinar will be accessible live on Zoom (registration required) and on NAASR’s YouTube page.

Dr. Carla Garapedian, who wrote the preface to this new edition, will provide a general introduction and Bedo Demirdjian, translator of the memoir, will talk about the challenges of working with this manuscript.

Marking the 102nd anniversary of the shooting of Talaat Pasha in Berlin, this program will focus on the process and the complexities of translating Tehlirian’s memoir, originally published in Armenian in Cairo in 1953 as “Soghomon Tehlirean: Verhishumner,” and its repercussions.  The assassination and Tehlirian’s trial had far-reaching consequences, including a direct impact on Raphael Lemkin, who coined the word “genocide” and worked for the adoption of the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in 1948.

Bedo Demirdjian was born in Beirut, Lebanon. He is a graduate of Melkonian Educational Institute in Nicosia, Cyprus, and studied Economics and European Union Integration at the University of Peireaus in Greece. He has worked as a journalist, as Communications and Public Relations Director at the ANC Europe, and as the office coordinator of the Artsakh Republic permanent representative to the Middle East. In 2020 Bedo settled in Armenia, in the province of Lori, where he headed the COAF SMART Center. He is currently in Yerevan promoting “Remembrances.” 

For more information contact NAASR at [email protected].

Karabakh movement: "From the desire for freedom to its loss"

Feb 20 2023

  • Armine Martirosyan
  • Yerevan

35th anniversary of the Karabakh movement

Participants in the beginnings of the “Karabakh movement”, which began 35 years ago, are discussing what they saw and how it started. On February 12, 1988, the first rally was held in the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region. On February 20 an extraordinary session of the Council of People’s Deputies of the NKAR decided to petition the Supreme Soviets of Armenia and Azerbaijan for the transfer of the NKAR to Armenia.

Baku’s response was harsh. On June 13, 1988, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Azerbaijan SSR categorically refused to “satisfy the request of the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh.” And the Supreme Council of the Armenian SSR, two days after that, gave “consent to the accession of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region into the Armenian SSR.” In July 1988 the Council of People’s Deputies of the NKAO announced the “withdrawal of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region from the Azerbaijan SSR.”

Ethnic riots broke out in Azerbaijan. A pogrom of Armenians in Sumgayit on February 27-29, 1988, was called by British expert Thomas de Waal “the first outbreak of mass violence in modern Soviet history.” From January 13 to January 20, 1990, pogroms were repeated in Baku. In 1992 the Karabakh war began, the active phase of which lasted two years.

“I started a diary on the second day of the movement – by the day, by the hour. For about a month I wrote down everything that happened. It described all the events: round-the-clock rallies, speeches by the leaders – Artur Mkrtchyan, Emil Abrahamyan. They explained to the audience the essence of the decision of the Caucasian Bureau of the early 20th century, why they decided to leave Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan, despite the uprising of Armenians living there. It talked about a clause in the USSR constitution, according to which the NKAR can secede from Azerbaijan and independently decide its future fate.

In my diar, I also described how on the first night of the rally Armen Isagulov, head of the regional police department, came to Hadrut demanding it end. He warned the protesters that if they did not immediately disperse, “Bird cherry” – tear gas used to disperse demonstrations – would be used against them at 4 am. They wanted to disperse everyone in order to arrest the leaders and decapitate the movement. The women marched in the front row, the leaders were surrounded on all sides so that the police could not get close to them.

And after the pogroms of Armenians in Sumgayit, there was somehow no time for a diary. When Arthur Mkrtchyan became the leader of Nagorno-Karabakh, he asked for the diary so he could write a book. He died, and the diary was lost.

Then, under the Soviet system, all participants in the rally and especially the organizers could expect severe punishment. I remember once, after a rally, Artur Mkrtchyan told me: “Get out of here, you have a small child, because sunny Magadan is waiting for us.”

Our romantic feelings – freedom, pride, dignity – were mixed with a sense of fear for our parents. And they were worried about us, because they remembered the Stalinist repressions well.

There were also many women at the rallies. Everyone dreamed of living among their own people, traveling freely to Yerevan, not being afraid that Azerbaijanis would oppress them on trains. They wanted to speak their native language, listen to their folk music.

But people realized that no one would give freedom easily. And we went through the blockade, deprivation, hunger, cold, lack of medicines. Only this did not frighten people who had never lived in particularly comfortable conditions. The struggle for freedom, this euphoria has gripped everyone.”

“I was 29 when the movement started. I lived in Meghri. I am a journalist, we received word that there were rallies in Yerevan. And we, three friends, decided to go to Yerevan to find out what was really going on and to inform our readers. And when we returned to Meghri, rallies began there too. Gradually the movement covered all regions of Armenia, and strikes began.

The State Security Committee closely monitored who was doing what, meeting with whom, everything was under control. And people from the Central Committee came to pacify the people – the situation was explosive, since Azerbaijanis also lived in our area. The authorities feared that there would be no clashes. The Communist Party sent its people to the region, who urged not to hold rallies.

Various groups were formed: some sent their forces, as they said then, to the “civilized struggle”, others guarded strategic heights on the border, tension reigned in the air.

I worked in the Meghri regional newspaper, there was a certain freedom, people brought their articles each with their own views. Convinced communists wrote that the rallies should be stopped, “the party will deal with” this issue.

“The Karabakh movement began in the Soviet period and, in essence, concerned the territorial reorganization of the Soviet republics in the Transcaucasus. The political tasks of the movement did not include the separation of Armenia from the USSR. But as global political changes took place in the Soviet Union, the situation began to develop differently.

The Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region was the only territory of the USSR where the activities of the Communist Party were cancelled. This is an unprecedented case when the political and civil rights of the population were completely banned. This decision of the Central Committee of the CPSU was made in connection with the state of emergency introduced in 1989 by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, which has not been canceled.

Since 1989, the fundamental principle of the declaration of human rights to the international order in Nagorno-Karabakh has been violated, and is violated to this day – first by the Soviet Union, then by Azerbaijan.

In essence, there was a change of states. With regard to the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh the legal regime was changing. The Soviet Union specified the rights of autonomies and recognized autonomies’ right to self-determination. In the event of a union republic secession from the USSR, autonomous regions and republics had the right to independently determine the issue of their status in accordance with the legislation of the USSR. But the new state formed on the territory of the former Azerbaijan SSR – the Republic of Azerbaijan – does not recognize any rights for Nagorno-Karabakh at all.”

“The Karabakh movement has achieved its goal, which was expressed in the proclamation of the NKR. But after the defeat in the 2020 war, one can say that a new, most difficult phase has begun for the people of Artsakh – the loss of freedom.

Artsakh today is essentially interned and occupied. Part of the territory of the NKR is occupied by Azerbaijani troops, the other part is under the intervention of Russian troops.

Artsakh lost its freedom, it was taken away by force, and Armenia failed to protect it from this aggression. Now society is held hostage, and the blockade itself, which Azerbaijan began on December 12 last year, is a manifestation of lack of freedom. This is one of the most difficult stages in the political fate of Artsakh. But this is not the end, as people are not determined to give up the fight for their rights.”

“The active stage of the Karabakh movement began in 1988, but the process itself started in the 1920s. Back then it was suppressed by the Soviet authorities. The Karabakh conflict developed under the conditions of a totalitarian Soviet state, where the _expression_ of an opinion, some position, and even more so national liberation, was perceived as a crime and severely punished.

But in 1987, with perestroika and glasnost announced by Gorbachev, all latent questions began to gradually rise to the surface. And the first, most striking, was the Karabakh movement. Not because of any special organization, but because of the undeniable factual and legal grounds for this movement.

In 1988, legal grounds began to be spoken about more openly. People began to think more freely. There was no reason not to correct the mistake made in 1923 by the Bolsheviks in conjunction with the Turkish government.

The absence of any argument against the movement was proved by Azerbaijan, which could not oppose anything other than the Sumgayit pogroms and military force.”

“The Karabakh movement has been changing the paradigm for 35 years. In 1994, when Armenia won the war started by Azerbaijan, actual territorial reunification took place. Prior to this, there was no connection between Armenia and Artsakh, which was very problematic since without a geographical connection, political connection becomes more difficult.

Armenia has somewhat calmed down: the goal has been achieved, physical reunification has taken place.

They tried to legalize this de facto reunion at the international level as well. The process within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group was moving towards this. The meaning of the Minsk processes was to recognize Artsakh’s right to self-determination and ensure physical ties with Armenia.

The Karabakh conflict has always been different from the Georgian and Moldovan crises, where the world community demanded the restoration of the territorial integrity of Georgia and Moldova, and afterward Crimea.

In the case of Nagorno-Karabakh there was no such unequivocal demand. Along with territorial integrity, among the fundamental principles of the conflict settlement was the right to self-determination and the physical connection of NK with Armenia. This has not been disputed by anyone and still is not disputed, including in the tripartite statement of November 9, 2020, which includes the concept of the Lachin corridor.”

“The Russian authorities have been saying for a very long time that the Karabakh problem can be solved by returning Armenia and Azerbaijan to the Soviet Union, where instead of interstate borders there will be administrative borders.

Russia’s ambitions peaked with unrest in Belarus and the 2020 Karabakh war. It is no coincidence that it ended with Russian troops in Artsakh, a tripartite statement blocking the intervention of the world community into the Karabakh problem. Until now not a single international organization has been able to enter Karabakh and observe the situation on the ground.”

“With the outbreak of the Ukrainian war, the external situation has changed and it can be said that the paradigm of the Karabakh movement will change again. It will change after determining the legal grounds for resolving the Ukrainian crisis. This scheme will be traced and transferred to other post-Soviet crises. To what extent these principles will be reflected in the Karabakh issue depends on Armenia, whose authorities are currently pursuing an insufficiently thought-out policy.

This haste, the desire to sign a peace agreement with Azerbaijan before a global scheme for resolving post-Soviet conflicts is worked out, may lead to the fact that the Karabakh problem will remain and be resolved in a Russian-Turkish cabal. As it has been so far.”

35th anniversary of the Karabakh movement

https://jam-news.net/35th-anniversary-of-the-karabakh-movement/







The EU’s new role in mediating between Armenia and Azerbaijan




Feb 21 2023


Olesya Vartanyan

The first unarmed civilian observers of a ground-breaking European Union mission have just arrived in Armenia to keep tabs on worsening tensions with Azerbaijan. They will patrol the border to ensure Brussels knows of any flareups immediately, giving it a better chance of intervening fast enough to keep the peace. The mission must tread carefully in an area that also hosts Russian military and border guards. To help it succeed, the EU must provide the mission full funding and as much freedom of manoeuvre as possible.

In theory, this deployment should significantly shorten the time it takes the EU or member states to react if any new fighting flares up at the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. The neighbours fought their last war in 2020 over Nagorno-Karabakh, an Armenian-populated region that declared independence from Azerbaijan, and since then their long state border has seen several clashes, each bloodier than the last. Yerevan lost ground in 2020 and has been unable to restock its weapons, as its traditional supplier and security partner, Russia, has stockpiled armaments for its own war in Ukraine. In contrast, Baku is growing militarily stronger and more confident, bolstered by revenues from its oil and gas and supported by its strategic ally, Turkey.

The risk of new hostilities is real. In last September’s latest escalation, Azerbaijan’s soldiers took over important mountain positions deep inside Armenia. One front line area in the south of Armenia now poses a particular threat. If there is a new flareup, troops there could advance and cut Armenia in two, with severe humanitarian consequences for over 200,000 people living in the southern border areas who could find themselves isolated. Azerbaijani soldiers could also control the only passable road to Nagorno-Karabakh, the so-called Lachin corridor, which Baku-backed activists have already blocked for over two months with catastrophic humanitarian implications as local residents lost access to food and medical supplies. Baku could make a push to take more territory and put Armenia’s leaders under enormous pressure to make concessions in peace talks which plod along despite the hostile atmosphere, but this is unlikely to promote a stable and longer-term settlement in the region.

Armenia’s decision to invite EU observers shows it no longer considers it can rely solely on its decades-long strategic ally, Russia. Since Russia invaded Ukraine a year ago, Azerbaijan – sensing Moscow was distracted – has initiated three major attacks, each of which has strengthened its hand militarily. Neither Russian peacekeepers present in Nagorno-Karabakh, nor Russian soldiers and guards along Armenia’s borders elsewhere, did anything to curb these advances. This is why Armenia declined an autumn offer by the Russian-dominated military alliance, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), to deploy more troops on its border with Azerbaijan, and instead, invited the European mission.

By sending its observers, the EU is strengthening a mediatory role, which only began a year ago, between Armenia and Azerbaijan over their core problem of Nagorno-Karabakh. Both countries have been part of the European Union’s Eastern Partnership since 2009, but until very recently Moscow was the chief outside party in the region. It had close bilateral ties with both Caucasian countries and championed the CSTO in Europe’s Minsk Group that it co-chaired with France and the United States since the mid-1990s. Now, Russia can no longer set the agenda alone but will have to consider Brussels’ role in its diplomatic engagements with Baku and Yerevan.  

Formally the Russian forces are subordinated into Armenian structures, which should help cooperation with the EU observers at least at a technical level.

Brussels still needs to work out many operational details for the two-year mission — its first full-fledged and long-term civilian presence to a country in a formal security alliance with Russia. EU member states have to announce how many people they will each send, and whether the total strength will be around 100 observers, as is being discussed. Much is at stake, and the mission could fail if it is poorly funded or undermanned, or confined by too narrow a mandate.

It must also try to improve cooperation with Azerbaijan. Armenia is offering the observers unrestricted access, but to report accurately on security incidents, they need the same from Azerbaijan. Baku remains unconvinced and would prefer not to let EU observers cross onto its territory. If this stance remains, the EU will have to find other ways to ensure its observers stay safe near dangerous areas where gunfire is common.

The observers must pay heed to the other important party in the region — Russia, which has military and border guards along Armenia’s border with Azerbaijan. The war in Ukraine makes it harder, but all the more important, for the EU to find a way to cooperate with them. Mutual contacts on the ground could provide a useful information exchange, avoid tensions and prevent misunderstandings. Formally the Russian forces are subordinated into Armenian structures, which should help cooperation with the EU observers at least at a technical level.

The EU should give its mission the tools to facilitate dialogue between Armenian and Azerbaijani military and border guards posted along the border if that might help prevent or damp down violence. This has been tried successfully elsewhere, for example with the EU civilian mission in Georgia. Helping Tbilisi, its breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and Russian security personnel based in these regions to talk to each other. It aided the setup of a ‘hotline’ connecting officials responsible for security along the lines of separation in conflict zones, and arranged face-to-face meetings between them. Similar efforts could be useful at the Armenia-Azerbaijan border.

With Russia focused on Ukraine, the EU has been taking over its role in mediating between Armenia and Azerbaijan. But these diplomatic efforts will come to naught if the two countries keep falling back into ever deadlier armed confrontations. By deploying the mission to Armenia, Brussels has shown it has the political willto take on a new and crucial role in steering them away from conflict. But now it must give its observers the flexible mandate, diplomatic support and resources they will need to succeed.


Olesya Vartanyan
Tbilisi

Olesya Vartanyan is the Senior South Caucasus Analyst at the conflict prevention non-governmental organisation International Crisis Group. She focuses on the conflict regions of Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh and South Ossetia.


Armenia could again take Azerbaijan to world court over gas and power supply cut-offs in NK

Save

Share

 11:37, 23 February 2023

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 23, ARMENPRESS. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said that Armenia will again file a request to the International Court of Justice against Azerbaijan over the gas and electricity supply interruptions in Artsakh when sufficient evidence is collected.

The United Nations’ highest court – the International Court of Justice – ordered Azerbaijan on Wednesday to “take all steps at its disposal” to ensure unimpeded movement of persons, vehicles and cargo along the Lachin Corridor in both directions. The Lachin Corridor is blocked by Azerbaijan since 12 December 2022. 

However, the court ruled that Armenia has not presented sufficient evidence that Azerbaijan is behind the gas and power supply interruptions.

“Of course, the reason for this situation is that the valve of the gas supply pipeline of Nagorno Karabakh is in a location inaccessible for Armenia. The same can be said about the point of interruption of the electric energy. And here, Armenia simply couldn’t present undeniable evidence. But this also means that the moment when we’ll be able to collect direct evidence we will appeal to the court over this issue again. And there will be high likelihood that the court will satisfy this request as well,” PM Pashinyan said, noting that at this moment the gas supply in Nagorno Karabakh is being carried out normally.

An Ancient Hate: Why Armenia Will Never Know Peace From Surrounding Islam

Sept 30 2022

By RAYMOND IBRAHIM Published on 

In late 2020, war broke out between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Two months later, peace was achieved on condition that the Christian nation cede its ancestral lands in Artsakh, internationally known as “Nagorno-Karabakh,” to its Muslim neighbor.

The peace bought by such Armenian appeasement has been fickle at best. Two weeks ago, Azerbaijan launched yet another attack on Armenia — one just as, if not more, savage than in 2020, as seen by one particularly grotesque atrocity.

The fact is, no amount of appeasement short of total capitulation will ever satisfy Armenia’s powerful Muslim neighbors, namely Azerbaijan and its “big brother,” Turkey.

Appropriating Nagorno-Karabakh was only the first step of a larger project. As Azerbaijan’s president, Ilham Aliyev, once openly proclaimed, “Yerevan [the capital of Armenia] is our historical land and we Azerbaijanis must return to these historical lands.” He has also referred to other ancient Armenian territories, including the Zangezur and Lake Sevan regions, as “our historic lands.” Taking over those territories “is our political and strategic goal,” Aliyev maintains, “and we need to work step-by-step to get closer to it.”

This unrelenting history of hate makes one thing perfectly clear: all modern day pretexts and “territorial disputes” aside, true and permanent peace between Armenia and its Muslim neighbors will only be achieved when the Christian nation has either been conquered or ceded itself into nonexistence.

To this, Tigran Balayan, spokesman for Armenia’s foreign ministry, said: “The statement about territorial claims of the president of Azerbaijan, a state appearing on the political map of the world only 100 years ago … yet again demonstrates the racist character of the ruling regime in Baku.”

This is a rather restrained and diplomatic way of saying that, not only are these claims absolutely false; they are — as most falsehoods nowadays tend to be — the exact inverse of the truth.

Armenia is one of the world’s oldest nations. Armenians founded Yerevan, their current capital, in 782 BC — exactly 2,700 years before Azerbaijan came into being in 1918. And yet, here is the president of Azerbaijan waging war because “Yerevan is our historical land and we Azerbaijanis must return to these historical lands.”

Armenia was also significantly bigger, encompassing even modern day Azerbaijan within its borders, over two thousand years ago. Then the Turks and their offshoots (e.g., Azeris) came riding in from the east, slaughtering, enslaving, terrorizing and stealing the lands of Armenians and other Christians of the region in the name of jihad.

Anyone who doubts this summation should consult the Chronicle of Matthew of Edessa (d.1144). According to this nearly thousand year old chronicle, which is near coterminous with the events it describes, it was only in 1019 that “the first appearance of the bloodthirsty beasts … the savage nation of infidels called Turks entered Armenia … and mercilessly slaughtered the Christian faithful with the sword.”

Three decades later the raids were virtually nonstop. In 1049, the founder of the Turkic Seljuk Empire himself, Sultan Tughril Bey (r. 1037–1063), reached the Armenian city of Arzden, west of Lake Van, and “put the whole town to the sword, causing severe slaughter, as many as one hundred and fifty thousand persons.”

Other contemporaries confirm the devastation visited upon Arzden. “Like famished dogs,” writes Aristakes (d.1080) an eye witness, the Turks “hurled themselves on our city, surrounded it and pushed inside, massacring the men and mowing everything down like reapers in the fields, making the city a desert. Without mercy, they incinerated those who had hidden themselves in houses and churches.”

Eleven years later, in 1060, the Turk’s laid siege to Sebastia (which, though now a Turkish city, was originally Armenian). Six hundred churches were destroyed, “many and innumerable people were burned [to death],” and countless women and children “were led into captivity.”

Please Support The Stream: Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.

Between 1064 and 1065, Tughril’s successor, Sultan Muhammad bin Dawud Chaghri — known to posterity as Alp Arslan, one of Turkey’s unsavory but national heroes — laid siege to Ani, then the capital of Armenia. The thunderous bombardment of Muhammad’s siege engines caused the entire city to quake, and Matthew describes countless terror-stricken families huddled together and weeping. Once inside, the Muslims “began to mercilessly slaughter the inhabitants of the entire city… and piling up their bodies one on top of the other…. Innumerable and countless boys with bright faces and pretty girls were carried off together with their mothers.”

Not only do several Christian sources document the sack of Armenia’s capital — one contemporary succinctly notes that Muhammad “rendered Ani a desert by massacres and fire” — but so do Muslim sources, often in apocalyptic terms: “I wanted to enter the city and see it with my own eyes,” one Arab explained. “I tried to find a street without having to walk over the corpses. But that was impossible.”

Such “was the beginning of the misfortunes of Armenia,” Matthew of Edessa concludes his account: “So, lend an ear to this melancholy recital.” This has proven to be an ominous remark, for the aforementioned history of blood and tears was, indeed, just “the beginning of the misfortunes of Armenia,” whose “melancholy recital” continues to this day.

But what was the reason the Turks invaded and so ruthlessly attacked Armenia? What “grievance” did they have? Simple: Armenia was Christian and the Turks were Muslim — and Islam makes all non-Muslims enemies to be put to the sword, until and unless they embrace Islam.

Incidentally, Islam’s animus for Christianity was on display then no less than now. Thus, during the aforementioned sack of Ani, a Muslim fighter climbed atop the city’s main cathedral “and pulled down the very heavy cross which was on the dome, throwing it to the ground,” wrote Matthew. Made of pure silver and the “size of a man” — and now symbolic of Islam’s might over Christianity — the broken crucifix was sent as a trophy to adorn a mosque in, ironically enough, modern-day Azerbaijan. Fast forward nearly a millennium to Azerbaijan’s war on Armenia in 2020, a Muslim fighter was videotaped triumphantly shouting “Allahu Akbar!” while standing atop an Armenian church chapel where the cross had been broken off.

Such is an idea of what Muslim Turks did to Christian Armenians — not during the Armenian Genocide of a century ago, when some 1.5 million Armenians were massacred and even more displaced — but one thousand years ago, when the Islamic conquest of Armenia first began.

This unrelenting history of hate makes one thing perfectly clear: all modern day pretexts and “territorial disputes” aside, true and permanent peace between Armenia and its Muslim neighbors will only be achieved when the Christian nation has either been conquered or ceded itself into nonexistence.

Nor would it be the first to do so. It is worth recalling that the heart of what is today called “the Muslim world” — the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) — was thoroughly Christian before the sword of Islam invaded. Bit by bit, century after century after the initial Muslim conquests and occupations, it lost its Christian identity, and became lost in the morass of Islam, so that few today even remember that Egypt, Iraq, Syria, etc., were among the first and oldest Christian nations.

Armenia — the first nation in the world to adopt Christianity — is a holdout, a thorn in Islam’s side, and, as such, can never know lasting peace from the Muslims surrounding it.

 

Note: Quotes from Matthew of Edessa were excerpted from the author’s book, Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War Between Islam and the West. Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute, and a Judith Rosen Friedman Fellow at the Middle East Forum.