RFE/RL Armenian Report – 04/09/2021

                                        Friday, April 9, 2021
Pashinian, Kocharian Urged To Drop Out Of Parliamentary Race
        • Gayane Saribekian
Armenia - Edmon Marukian, the leader of the opposition Bright Armenia Party, 
March 22, 2021.
Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian and former President Robert Kocharian must not 
participate in snap parliamentary elections expected in June, the leader of a 
major opposition party said on Friday.
Edmon Marukian said they both must “leave and free the political arena” because 
Armenia needs to a follow a “third path” represented by his Bright Armenia Party 
(LHK), one of the two opposition groups represented in the current parliament.
“Armenia has no right to remain stuck: this is what Pashinian’s reelection would 
mean. Nor does Armenia have a right to move backwards,” he told RFE/RL’s 
Armenian Service.
Marukian dismissed suggestions that the political forces led by Pashinian and 
Kocharian will be the main election contenders.
“Most voters now reject both the current and former authorities,” he claimed. He 
said his meetings with many citizens have exposed a “deep disappointment” with 
Pashinian’s government.
Hrachya Hakobian, a pro-government lawmaker and Pashinian’s brother-in-law, 
shrugged off the LHK leader’s comments.
“Edmon Marukian cannot decide who must leave the arena,” he said. “Armenia’s 
citizens will decide that through the elections.”
Kocharian reaffirmed this week his plans to participate in the elections. He 
said he will lead an electoral alliance comprising at least two opposition 
parties.
The ex-president, who had ruled Armenia from 1998-2008, predicted earlier this 
year a “bipolar” parliamentary race, implying that he will be Pashinian’s main 
challenger.
For his part, Pashinian referred to his principal political foes late last month 
as “wolves seeking to come to power.”
Government Withdraws Controversial Bill On Rights Defender
        • Nane Sahakian
Armenia -- Human right ombudsman Arman Tatoyan speaks during parliamentary 
hearings in Yerevan, April 5, 2019.
In an apparent response to international criticism, the government has withdrawn 
a bill that would allow it to cut state funding to Armenia’s office of the human 
rights ombudsman.
An Armenian law bans any year-on-year reduction in the amount of budgetary funds 
allocated to the office as well as a number of other public bodies. The bill 
drafted by the Ministry of Finance and approved by Prime Minister Nikol 
Pashinian’s cabinet as recently as on March 11 would abolish this clause.
The ministry has given budgetary and economic reasons for the proposed measure 
condemned by Ombudsman Arman Tatoyan and opposition parties as politically 
motivated.
Tatoyan has insisted that the bill runs counter to international standards and 
would effectively end his office’s independence from the government and the 
pro-government majority in the National Assembly.
“If the bill had been passed and led to a change in our current status, it would 
have meant an immediate drop in the country’s democracy indicators,” Tatoyan 
told RFE/RL’s Armenian Service on Friday.
He suggested that the government decided not to push the bill through the 
Armenian parliament because of concerns voiced by the Office of the UN High 
Commissioner for Human Rights, the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission and 
Western human rights groups such as Freedom House.
“This new bill, if passed, will further constrain the independence of the [Human 
Rights Defender’s Office] and impede its mandate to protect human rights in 
Armenia,” Freedom House said in a March 12 statement.
The government has so far declined to comment on its decision to withdraw the 
proposed change. It is not clear whether the government plans to amend the bill 
or scrap it altogether.
Tatoyan has regularly criticized the current and former Armenian governments’ 
actions and policies since taking over as ombudsman in 2016. While the 
U.S.-educated lawyer has rarely faced public criticism from the current 
government, Pashinian’s supporters have attacked him on social media in recent 
months.
Russian, Turkish Leaders Again Discuss Karabakh
        • Heghine Buniatian
Russian President Vladimir Putin looks at a screen showing Turkish President 
Tayyip Erdogan as he attends a foundation-laying ceremony for the third reactor 
of the Akkuyu nuclear plant in Turkey, via a video link in Moscow, March 10, 
2021.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip 
Erdogan discussed the conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh and other regions in a phone 
call on Friday.
The Kremlin reported that Erdogan praised Russia’s efforts to “further stabilize 
the situation” in the Karabakh conflict zone and ensure the implementation of 
Russian-brokered agreements that stopped last year’s Armenian-Azerbaijani war.
In a statement, it said Putin briefed Erdogan on his latest conversations with 
Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev. 
The Russian and Turkish leaders agreed on the “need to step up work on restoring 
the transport infrastructure in the South Caucasus,” added the statement.
Putin met with Pashinian in Moscow on Wednesday and spoke with Aliyev by phone 
the following day. The Russian president reportedly discussed with them the 
implementation of the ceasefire agreement brokered by him on November 9.
The agreement calls, among other things, for the restoration of transport links 
between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Putin, Pashinian and Aliyev decided to set up a 
trilateral task force for that purpose when they held a trilateral meeting in 
Moscow in January.
Later in January, Russia and Turkey opened a joint center in Azerbaijan to 
monitor the Karabakh ceasefire. The center operates independently from around 
2,000 Russian peacekeepers deployed in Karabakh.
During the six-week war, Turkey supported the Azerbaijan with weapons and expert 
advice. It also reportedly recruited thousands of Syrian mercenaries and sent 
them to fight in Karabakh on the Azerbaijani side.
Baku Accused Of Breaking Deal On Armenian Prisoner Release
        • Naira Nalbandian
        • Satenik Kaghzvantsian
        • Satenik Hayrapetian
ARMENIA -- An Armenian captive, wearing a face mask to curb the spread of 
COVID-19, is escorted off a Russian military plane upon arrival at a military 
airport outside Yerevan, December 14, 2020
Armenian officials accused Azerbaijan on Friday of reneging on a pledge to free 
Armenian soldiers and civilians remaining in Azerbaijani captivity five months 
after a Russian-brokered ceasefire stopped the war in Nagorno-Karabakh.
Armenian government representatives said late on Thursday that a new group of 
Armenian prisoners is about to be set free and repatriated. However, none of 
them was on board a Russian plane that arrived from Baku to Yerevan shortly 
after midnight.
“Unfortunately, the return of prisoners is again delayed,” the office of Deputy 
Prime Minister Tigran Avinian said in a statement posted on Facebook. It said 
that Azerbaijan is continuing to violate one of the key terms of the truce 
agreement.
“Negotiations mediated by Russia are continuing and we hope that the Azerbaijani 
side will at last respect the statement signed by it and implement the 
humanitarian agreement,” added the statement.
Andranik Kocharian, a senior lawmaker representing the ruling My Step bloc, said 
that Baku pledged to free more Armenian prisoners of war (POWs) and civilian 
captives as a result of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s latest conversations 
with Armenia’s and Azerbaijan’s leaders.
Putin met with Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian in Moscow on Wednesday and had a 
phone call with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev the following day.
Kocharian claimed that Lieutenant-General Rustam Muradov, the commander of 
Russian peacekeeping forces deployed in Karabakh, travelled to Baku to “escort 
the prisoners back to Armenia.”
Muradov, who reportedly arrived in Yerevan on board the Russian plane early on 
Friday, categorically denied that, however. “It was an ordinary working visit,” 
he told the Armenian newspaper “Hraparak.”
Armenia -- Lieutenant-General Rustam Muradov, the commander of Russian 
peacekeepering forces stationed in Nagorno-Karabakh, meets with Armenian Defense 
Minister Vagharshak Harutiunian, Yerevan, February 10, 2021.
Asked to comment on the Armenian officials’ statements about the impending 
release of prisoners, Muradov said: “They are misleading the population.”
The Armenian-Azerbaijani agreement, brokered by Putin on November 9, calls for 
the unconditional release of all prisoners held by the conflicting sides. The 
Russian peacekeepers arranged several prisoner swaps in December and early this 
year.
A total of 69 Armenian POWs and civilians have been freed to date. More than 100 
others are believed to remain in Azerbaijani captivity.
Azerbaijan’s Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov again claimed on Thursday that all 
of them were captured after the truce accord took effect on November 10 and are 
therefore not covered by it. He said Baku regards them as “terrorists” and does 
not intend to release them.
More than 50 of the remaining POWs were captured in early December when the 
Azerbaijani army occupied the last two Armenian-controlled villages in 
Karabakh’s southern Hadrut district. They all are army reservists who were 
drafted from Armenia’s Shirak province during the six-week war.
Scores of their angry relatives blocked on Friday morning the roads leading to 
Shirak to demand an urgent meeting with Pashinian. Many of them gathered at 
Yerevan’s Erebuni airport late on Thursday after hearing reports about the 
impending release of their loved ones.
“No official at the airport bothered to answer our questions,” one of the 
protesters told RFE/RL’s Armenian Service.
“We are waiting to see when the country’s leader, our commander-in-chief, will 
agree to meet us. We won’t go to Yerevan anymore,” he said.
Armenia - Relatives of Armenian POWs block a roads in Shirak province, April 9, 
2021
Relatives of other POWs and missing soldiers blockaded, meanwhile, the Defense 
Ministry compound in Yerevan. Defense Minister Vagharshak Harutiunian and chief 
of the Armenian army’s General Staff, Lieutenant-General Artak Davtian, offered 
to receive their representatives.
The protesters rejected the offer, demanding that Harutiunian and Davtian emerge 
from the compound and talk to them on the spot.
They tried at one point to break into the compound but were stopped by riot 
police. The chief of the Armenian police, Vahe Davtian, arrived at the scene to 
talk to the protesters.
Pashinian’s government also faced strong criticism from the opposition. Edmon 
Marukian, the leader of the Bright Armenia Party (LHK), accused the government 
of botching the prisoner release in a failed attempt to score political points.
“This is yet another result of their inept and sloppy behavior which was coupled 
with their attempt to use this tragedy for a publicity stunt,” Marukian told 
reporters.
Reprinted on ANN/Armenian News with permission from RFE/RL
Copyright (c) 2021 Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, Inc.
1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Washington DC 20036.
 

Armenia’s Karen Avagyan crowned Europe’s Weightlifting Champion

Public Radio of Armenia
April 8 2021

Armenia’s Karen Avagyan snatched gold at the European Weightlifting Championships, and Andranik Karapetyan took the third place in the 89 kg weight category.

Karen Avagyan won the title with a total result of 375 kg. He lifted 170 kg in the snatch and pushed 200 kg in the clean & jerk.

Georgia’s Revaz Davitadze took the second place in the same weight category.

 

Obit: Charles H. DeMirjian, veteran, marketing whiz, and proud Armenian American, dies at 95

Philadelphia Inquirer
April 7 2021
Obituaries

He was one of the brains behind successful marketing campaigns for Rain Dance car care products, Corian countertops, and Stainmaster flooring.

  

Charles H. DeMirjian, 95, of Media, a veteran of World War II, a marketing innovator at DuPont, and an engaged Armenian American, died Monday, March 8, of heart disease at home.

A creative artist with a mind attuned to leadership and merchandising, Mr. DeMirjian spent 37 years at E.I. du Pont de Nemours Co., and rose to marketing and communications director for the consumer products division.

Beginning in 1954 until his retirement in 1991, Mr. DeMirjian worked on, among other things, marketing strategy, package design, advertising, and media communications for many of the company’s most notable successes.

He worked on popular campaigns for Rain Dance car care products, Corian countertops, and Stainmaster flooring, and won three CLIO Awards for excellence in international advertising, design, and communication.

A museum patron his whole life, Mr. DeMirjian created the Charles DeMirjian Collection at the Hagley Museum in Wilmington after he retired. It features examples of DuPont packaging, advertising, and other items that commemorate the company’s marketing history from the early 1940s through the 1980s.

“He was creative and energetic, and he saw people for who they were,” said his daughter, Susan.

Mr. DeMirjian was born Aug. 20, 1925, in Philadelphia to Minas and Keghany Demirjian, Armenian immigrants and survivors of the Armenian Genocide, and he helped his parents navigate their new lives in America. His father was a metalsmith in Turkey, and Mr. DeMirjian, who later capitalized the M in his name for easier pronunciation, inherited his father’s skill and appreciation of craft and art.

He graduated from West Philadelphia High School in 1943, enlisted in the Marine Corps on his 18th birthday, and served in the Pacific theater until he was honorably discharged in 1946. Wanting to work as an artist, he used the GI Bill to study at the University of the Arts, and the Charles Morris Price School of Advertising and Journalism.

His first advertising job was with Sunray Drugs in 1950. He joined DuPont in 1954, and described his job this way: “Transposing business objectives into advertising and merchandising strategies.”

A member of the American Management Association and the New York Design Council, he loved working with other designers, illustrators, and writers, and often made time to visit museums or catch a jazz concert when he was in New York or elsewhere.

He courted Diane Zobian, a fellow member at the Armenian Martyrs’ Congregational Church in Havertown, and found they had common passions for family, art, music, and literature. They went to the Philadelphia Museum of Art and worked a crossword puzzle on their first date.

They married in 1952, had daughter Susan and sons Timothy and Michael and lived in West Philadelphia, Swarthmore, and Media. Mr. DeMirjian was “demonstrably affectionate (to her delight!)” with his wife, his family wrote in a tribute.

Mr. DeMirjian and his wife, Diane, married in 1952. He liked that she was smart and had attended Philadelphia High School for Girls.Courtesy of the family

He also liked to help the kids with their writing and art projects, and he took them to many museums and concerts. A tenor, he sang in the church choir and joined the Philadelphia Chamber Chorus after he retired.

Mr. DeMirjian was an avid photographer and recycler. At church, he was a Sunday school teacher, chair of several boards and committees, youth director, and deacon. The church’s Charles DeMirjian Music Fund was established in 2004 in recognition of his musical leadership.

In the wider community, he served, among other roles, on the boards of the Armenian Missionary Association of America and the Armenian Evangelical Union of North America. He wrote the words on the commemorative plaque on the Meher statue that stands outside the Art Museum.

In 1997, Mr. DeMirjian described his philosophy on practically everything like this: “You brought a challenge to fruition, and when it worked, it was enormously satisfying.”

In addition to his wife and children, Mr. DeMirjian is survived by four grandchildren, one great-grandchild, one sister, and other relatives. One sister, two stepsisters and two stepbrothers died earlier.

A service is to be held later.

Donations in his name may be made to the Armenian Martyrs’ Congregational Church, 100 North Edmonds Ave., Havertown, Pa. 19083.

Mr. DeMirjian was active and popular as a youth leader at his church, often taking his students to museums and historical sites.Courtesy of the family
Published 

April 7, 2021

  

Armenia’s defense and high-tech ministers discuss military industry-related issues

Save

Share

 17:29, 6 April, 2021

YEREVAN, APRIL 6, ARMENPRESS. Defense Minister Vagharshak Harutyunyan today held a meeting with Minister of High Technological Industry Hayk Chobanyan, the defense ministry told Armenpress.

At the meeting the two ministers discussed a number of issues relating to the military industry field and outlined the activity directions aimed at the efficient and purposeful development of the sector.

Editing and Translating by Aneta Harutyunyan

Newspaper: Armenia PM instructs to assemble "dossiers" against teammates who will be left out of their electoral list

News.am, Armenia
April 3 2021

YEREVAN. – Hraparak daily of Armenia writes: Along with compiling the electoral list [for the upcoming snap parliamentary elections], [PM] Nikol Pashinyan, according to some information, has instructed [his chief of staff] Arsen Torosyan and [Deputy PM] Tigran Avinyan to assemble dossiers—through law enforcement agencies—on all the [ruling] My Step [bloc] members who are going to be left out of the list. And their number will be incomparably large.

We were told that there already are “thick files” on some [My Step] MPs; for example, of suspicious episodes in the process of acquiring property.

The meaning of this process is that no one [in the My Step] would even think about rebelling against Pashinyan and not working in the elections.

Homeland Salvation Movement unblocks Demirchyan Street in central Yerevan

Save

Share

 13:58, 3 April, 2021

YEREVAN, APRIL 3, ARMENPRESS. The Homeland Salvation Movement is unblocking the Demirchyan Street in central Yerevan where they had set up tents and were protesting against the Pashinyan administration. Now, the movement says it is shifting the “main actions of struggle” to various towns and cities across the country.

In a statement, the Homeland Salvation Movement called on citizens to join them and actively participate in their gatherings.

It said that they’ll hold a meeting on April 6 at 14:00 with local residents in the town of Sevan.

Editing and Translating by Stepan Kocharyan

President Sarkissian extends condolences over passing of legendary commander

 

Save

Share

 17:50, 31 March, 2021

YEREVAN, MARCH 31, ARMENPRESS. President of Armenia Armen Sarkissian issued a condolence message on the occasion of the demise of legendary commander, Major-General Arkady Ter-Tadevosyan.

ARMENPRESS reports, the message runs as follows,

‘’I feel an unspeakable pain. Arkady Ter-Tadevosyan, the legendary Komandos, is no longer with us.

The death of Arkady Ter-Tadevosyan is not just a loss of a military man, excellent commander. He was a military figure who had a great contribution to the creation of our army and our military achievements, trying to be useful for the fatherland until the end of his life.

We will still need the Komandos-style knowledge of the military art, his criteria for morality, experience and skills, which he brilliantly used during the 1st Artsakh war.

His life is a guide for military courage, military education and military-patriotic upbringing, for example, how to live, how to serve the fatherland, how to remain faithful to one’s specialization and principles, how to get devoted to Artsakh and struggle for its freedom, how not to betray Shushi and Artsakh…

I offer my condolences to the family members, relatives and comrades-in-arms of Arkady Ter-Tadevosyan’’.

Down with Nagorno-Karabakh – long live Karabakh

EurasiaNet.org
April 2 2021
Joshua Kucera Apr 2, 2021

Last year’s war between Armenia and Azerbaijan not only changed the map, but also the dictionary. What was “occupied” became “liberated,” and vice versa. And Azerbaijan has introduced a subtle, but significant, shift in the way it refers to the lands it regained.

At a recent press conference, President Ilham Aliyev said that Azerbaijanis should drop the “Nagorno” (“mountainous”) in “Nagorno-Karabakh” and call the region simply “Karabakh”

“Nagorno-Karabakh is ancestral Azerbaijani land,” he said at a press conference. “As a matter of fact, we should not be using the words ‘Nagorno-Karabakh’ at all today. Karabakh with its flat and mountainous parts is an integral part of Azerbaijan. The Armenian people live in one part of it.”

Even before this announcement, Aliyev, other officials, and Azerbaijani media had begun more widely using the term “Karabakh” or “the Karabakh region.”

In a February trip to Lachin, for example, he declared: “We will turn Karabakh into a ‘green energy’ zone. We will turn this region, Karabakh, into a paradise.” On a visit to Gubadli in December, he said, “Today, as commander-in-chief, I am meeting with soldiers in these liberated lands. Specific steps have already been taken to restore this region, the Karabakh region.”

The term “Karabakh” used to describe a region is not new, but it was rarely used in a political context in Azerbaijan before the war. Then, it was much more common to use a narrower term, “Nagorno-Karabakh.” Translated literally from Russian, that means “Mountainous Karabakh” and gave its name to the Soviet entity, the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast (NKAO), which was the object of contention in the first war between the two sides in the 1990s.

“Karabakh,” without an adjective in front, refers to a broader geographical entity that also includes territory in the plains just to the east of Nagorno-Karabakh, called Lower Karabakh.

Generally, Armenians have preferred a focus on Nagorno-Karabakh, since the mountainous region was populated mostly by Armenians (but by Azerbaijanis as well), while it has suited Azerbaijanis to consider Karabakh as a whole, as very few Armenians traditionally lived in Lower Karabakh, making “Karabakh” a more Azerbaijani entity.

“The term Karabakh itself has attached inconsistently to highland and lowland spaces,” Laurence Broers wrote in his recent study of the conflict, Armenia and Azerbaijan: Anatomy of a Rivalry. “Whereas Azerbaijani geographies see both as indivisible components of a single, wider space encompassing the territory between the Aras and Kura rivers, Armenian geographies more often differentiate an Armenian-majority highland as a separate space.”

So, what’s at stake here in 2021? Aliyev laid it out in his press conference, in the sentence just before he declared that “Nagorno-Karabakh” should no longer be used: “Therefore, the issue of status should be completely removed from the agenda.”

Before the war, Aliyev and other officials regularly promised that, if Armenia would agree to return to Azerbaijan the territories taken during the first war, the Armenians of the region would enjoy “the highest possible autonomy” within Azerbaijan, offering examples like the culturally German Tyrol district of Italy and the culturally Swedish Aland Islands in Finland.

But once the war started, that promise was revoked. “We offered them autonomy … but they rejected everything,” he said during the war. Immediately after the fighting ended with Armenia’s capitulation, he memorably crowed: “To hell with the status, the status has gone to the grave, the status has disappeared, it is gone.”

And now, it seems, not only has the promise of an autonomous status for Nagorno-Karabakh disappeared, but so has the name itself. The name was “an artificial Soviet creation of 1923, a chimera of the Russian word ‘Nagorno—mountainous’ and the historical region of Karabakh,” said Farid Shafiyev, the head of an Azerbaijani government-affiliated think tank, Center of Analysis of International Relations. (The NKAO was established in 1923.) “After the Second Karabakh War, Nagorno-Karabakh as geographic term lost its relevancy,” Shafiyev told Eurasianet.

The cancelation of the name also dovetails with a broader Azerbaijani push to sideline the de facto government of the self-proclaimed “Nagorno-Karabakh Republic” since the end of the war. Azerbaijan has always considered this government to be illegitimate usurpers on its territory, but since the war Baku has more aggressively sought to isolate and sideline the government, which isn’t recognized by any country in the world, even Armenia.

Azerbaijan has lately complained more vociferously about visits by Armenian government officials to Nagorno-Karabakh, and is pushing to get Armenia to withdraw its military forces, appearing to put that withdrawal as a condition for returning the dozens of Armenian prisoners it still holds.

“There is now no territorial unit called Nagorno-Karabakh,” Aliyev said this week, at a video summit of leaders of Turkic-speaking countries. “Azerbaijan solved this issue with its historic victory.”

Of course, that’s not how Armenians see it. The de facto Nagorno-Karabakh Republic is still going strong, and in fact considers the parts of the old NKAO that are now controlled by Azerbaijanis to be “occupied.” (Though, interestingly, it doesn’t use that word to describe the non-NKAO territories that Azerbaijan also regained.)

On March 22, the 101st anniversary of the massacres of the Armenian population of Shusha/Shoushi at the hands of Turks and Azerbaijanis, the de facto government issued a statement using yet another name for the region: “The Armenians of Artsakh will never accept the loss of Shoushi. Shoushi was, is and will be an integral part of Artsakh, and everything will be done to liberate the occupied territories of the Republic and restore the historical justice.”

The Azerbaijani reimagination of this territory follows, in a way, the evolution of pre-war Armenian thinking on the same area. The territory under dispute, the lands that Armenia won during the first war, consisted of two different types of entities. One was the NKAO, the Armenian-majority territory inside the borders of Soviet Azerbaijan that the 1980s Karabakh Movement demanded be joined to Armenia. The other was the territory surrounding the NKAO that Armenians won during the course of the 1990s war, which were initially conceived as a security zone for the NKAO or as bargaining chips, to be given back in an eventual deal (most likely in exchange for recognition of Armenian control of NKAO). Those territories surrounding the NKAO became known as “liberated” to Armenians and “occupied” by Azerbaijanis.

But Broers’s book also traces how, over time, that distinction became blurred, with the help of another name: Artsakh. This ancient Armenian name for the territory evolved to encompass both NKAO and the surrounding territories, which were all reimagined as historic Armenian territory. (And today, the de facto government goes by both names: Artsakh and Nagorno-Karabakh.)

“Whether your preferred term is Karabakh or Artsakh, it has come and gone and it has moved around,” Broers wrote. “Neither term provides an all-encompassing frame for the region’s tumultuous history.”

 

Joshua Kucera is the Turkey/Caucasus editor at Eurasianet, and author of .

Armenpress: Armenian, Russian FMs discuss unblocking region’s infrastructures

Armenian, Russian FMs discuss unblocking region’s infrastructures

Save

Share

 20:44, 1 April, 2021

YEREVAN, APRIL 1, ARMENPRESS. Foreign Minister of Russia Sergey Lavrov met with his Armenian counterpart Ara Ayvazian in Moscow in the sidelines of the session of the Foreign Ministers of the CIS member states. ARMENPRESS reports, citing the press service of the Russian MFA, the sides discussed the implementation process of the agreements reached on November 9, 2020 and January 11, 2021 reached between the leaders of Armenia, Russia and Azerbaijan.

A special reference was made to the humanitarian rapid response issues in Nagorno Karabakh and unblocking of the economic and transport infrastructures of the region.

The Ministers exchanged views on the cooperation between Armenia and Russia, as well as referred to a number of international issues of bilateral interest.

Determining Borders by Soviet-Era Maps ‘Impermissible,’ Says Tatoyan



The Soviet Armenia and Azerbaijan borders

An announcement that Armenia and Azerbaijan border positions are temporarily being determined using Soviet-era military maps has raised red flags with Armenia’s Human Rights Defender Arman Tatoyan, who said Tuesday that such methods cannot be permitted.

Armenia’s Deputy Prime Minister Tigran Avinyan told RFE/RL’s Armenian Service on Friday that until comprehensive discussions reach fruition, Soviet-era military maps from 1975 and 1976 are being used for border demarcation purposes, a practice, which thus far has cause heightened tensions in Armenia’s border regions impacted by this approach.

As a consequence of the November 9 agreement, more than 190 settlements in Artsakh and adjacent seven regions came under the control of Azerbaijan. As a result, the borders of the Syunik Province in the south of Armenia (including Kapan, its administrative center) appeared to be in close proximity to the new borders of Azerbaijan, drawn up during the Soviet times.

In a Facebook post on Tuesday, Tatoyan illustrated through a series of arguments why the determination of state borders using Soviet-era maps or GPS data is impermissible, warning that this practice will undermine the rights and interests of the population in border regions.

Below are the six points presented by Tatotoyan on this critically important matter.

1. Justifying Azerbaijani deployments in the vicinity of Syunik and Gegharkunik provinces and on the Syunik roads by relianceon Soviet Armenia or Azerbaijan borders of the 1970s, 1980s, 1940s (for example, 1975-1976, 1985, 1942), or other maps and GPS data is impermissible. As sovereign states, there has never been a demarcation or delimitation between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and furthermore no international document on this matters has been signed.

2. What happened in the Soviet Union was not determination of state borders between two sovereign states—Armenia and Azerbaijan—but rather administrative division of borders between two subjects within one sovereign state, the USSR. Soviet maps are just that. Case in point is why the 1920s maps are not referenced in connection with the border process these days.

3. The process of determining the state borders of the Republic of Armenia cannot be cross-referenced with the administrative-territorial division. These are phenomena which are completely different from one another;

4. The borders and maps of the First Republic of Armenia cannot be ignored in the process of determining state borders of the Republic of Armenia today. This requires the imperative of a real guarantee of the rights of citizens, population of the Republic of Armenia;

5. Today’s deployments by Azerbaijan have been carried out in gross and massive violations of international, including human rights standards, under the real threat of war and use of force and in the context of Azerbaijani open genocidal policy;

6. The process of determining state borders may not undermine normal life of border population or cause rights and legitimate interests of the citizen of the state, including the right to life and physical safety, the safe living of children, the cultivation of one’s own land, and the full enjoyment of water resources, pastures and grasslands; These points are among the key factors guaranteeing rights and normal life of Armenian citizens and its border population.