‘In liberated Artsakh Azeris’ graves were not being destroyed’: Reference to BBC report

Panorama, Armenia
Culture 12:21 26/03/2021Armenia

“In liberated Artsakh Azeris’ graves were not being destroyed,” Facebook user Narine Arzumanyan said on Friday, referring to a part of the BBC News report “Nagorno-Karabakh: The mystery of the missing church”, which claimed the Armenians had allegedly destroyed the graves of Azerbaijanis.

“BBC News yesterday showed the totally demolished Armenian church in the territory of Artsakh occupied by Azerbaijan and then, to equate, some stones that Azerbaijanis were collecting and presenting as “ruined-by-Armenians-grave”.

“These photos were taken at archeological site of Tigranakert in Artsakh years ago,” Arzumanyan wrote, sharing the photos.

BBC correspondent Jonah Fisher has investigated the disappearance of an Armenian church that fell under the control of Azerbaijan in the recent Nagorno-Karabakh war. An online video shows Zoravor Surb Astvatsatsin Church near the town of Mekhakavan (Jebrayil) was intact when Azerbaijan occupied the territory.

“Azerbaijan has said ethnic Armenians are welcome to stay in Nagorno-Karabakh but Armenia has accused it of damaging and destroying Armenian cultural heritage left behind in the region, including churches and monuments. Both sides accuse the other of war crimes,” the BBC reported. 

War in the media – Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict driven by hatred and atrocities

March 2021

Download article PDF

The texts published by the individual authors reflect only their opinions and not those of the editors and publishing platforms
  
Author: Simon Jacob, Valentin Hoffmann
Place: Armenia
Class: Text
Subject: Politics, Society, Religion, Extremism, Minorities
Date: 08.03.2021
Website: www.oannesjournalism.com
Reading time: ca. 20 min.
Language: English
Title: 
  
 
(picture: private)
 
  
Professor Dr. Anahit Khosroeva teaches at North Park University in Chicago, is an expert on genocide research, and habilitated at the National Academy of Science in Armenia in 2003 on the topic of the genocide of the Assyrians, entitled: “The Assyrian Massacres in the Ottoman Turkey and on the Turkish Territories of Iran (late 19th – the first quarter of the 20th century). Excerpts can be found via the following link – “Assyrian Massacre in the Ottoman Turkey and Adjacent Turkish Territories“.
  
Related to the borderline conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, with the territory known as ” Nagorno Karabakh” as the central point of conflict, which was historically settled by Armenians, also a digital conflict manifested itself in the social media. It seems that this conflict was especially influenced by religious-nationalist ideas and intentionally triggered with memories of the genocide of Christians in the Ottoman Empire (1915-1918). Looking at the extremely martial rhetoric in the media, it seems obvious that the narrative of the “Armenian” as subhuman is propagated, especially driven by the fascist view of Pan-Turkish nationalists such as the “Grey Wolves”, in order to intimidate and demoralize the opponent. Protagonists deliberately refer to the genocidal murder of Christian Armenians, Assyrians, Arameans, Chaldeans, Pontos Greeks, etc. in the Ottoman Empire in order to create the impression that the nearly full annihilation of any Christian ethnic culture in the former Ottoman Empire is now being completed. In the media, both recordings of drones exported by Turkey to war zones and a strong presence of various trolls in social media, are used to fuel the conflict.
  
With Professor Dr. Anahit Khosroeva, a native Armenian and ethnically half Assyrian, we talk about the impact of fascist and nationalist ideas, which connect the history of the genocide of Christians in the Ottoman Empire with the current developments in Nagorno-Karabakh becoming a digitally toxic mixture, which also reaches and divides the European society. Especially when it comes to dealing with fascist ideologies that originate from the mindset of German citizens with a Turkish or Middle Eastern background and which are becoming a serious danger.
  
Dr. Khosroeva – How do you feel as an Armenian, how do you feel as a Christian?
I am often asked this question, and every time I am amused because in Armenia, where I grew up and spent most of my life, over 99% of the population are Christians. I think this is something that makes Armenia unique. For me, being a Christian with a maximum of religious freedom, which every Christian can dream of, does not mean following rules and regulations, performing rituals or even going to church. It means much more. Maybe it’s because I grew up in the Soviet Union, where religion was mostly prohibited. The first time I went to church was in my teens, and I wasn’t baptized until I was 25..
  
For me, as a Christian, it is mainly about a friendship that is based on a connection with Jesus Christ. And about the characteristics of Christianity, in the meaning of being God-fearing and humble. Christians should reveal the fruit of the Spirit given to them in Galatians 6 Paul’s letter from the Bible to the Galatians) – love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness and self-control.
  
Would there have been any other solution to solve the conflict, except the current agreement between Armenia, Russia and Azerbaijan?
This is the most difficult question of all because there is so much to say about the situation, but I try to keep it short. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is not new, but it started in 1988, when the Karabakh region was part of the Soviet Republic of Azerbaijan, just before it collapsed. Most people living in this area belonged to the Armenian ethnicity and expressed their wish to leave the Azerbaijani Republic. At the beginning of the war, the Soviet Union was alive and well, but by the end of the war in 1994, Armenia and Azerbaijan were two independent states. Unfortunately, no other country recognized Nagorno-Karabakh as an independent territory. The first ceasefire agreement between Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia, representing the OSCE Minsk Group, was concluded in 1994 and called the “Bishkek Protocol.” The protocol should remain in place with no expiry date until a final agreement could be reached. However, a new agreement that could have secured peace or at least a cease-fire was not reached before war broke out last year.
  
But let’s turn to the question of why the conflict has started again. From the Armenian perspective, the area is called Artsakh and was traditionally and historically one of the 15 Armenian heartlands, mainly inhabited by Armenians. Basically, we consider it as our ancestral homeland. After the first Armenia – Azerbaijan War (1994) Armenia has conquered territory in Azerbaijan, which can be assigned to Armenia in the historical context, but which is considered “occupied” territory according to international law. This is related to Stalin’s decision in 1921, when the Communists granted autonomy to the Armenians in what is now Nagorno Karabakh, but incorporated the territory into the Soviet Republic of Azerbaijan. A fateful decision, fueling the current conflicts. Armenia’s hope and strategy was to wait for Nagorno-Karabakh to be recognized as an independent region.
  
The current conflict is another one, and it differs from the previous clashes because from the very beginning, the NATO member Turkey was involved in the planning, conception, and realization. An aggravating factor is that our new Government, which was established after the “revolution” in 2018, is organized inside the context of a parliamentarian democracy. Due to this, the newly elected prime minister, without any experience in military structures or war missions, was considered to be the commander-in-chief of the army. This may be standard practice for European politicians. But especially in a high-conflict region like the Caucasus, wedged between hostile countries, military experience is of primary importance. All presidents before were familiar with Nagorno-Karabakh and grasped the intricacies of the extremely complex situation. Many senior politicians in the previous administration were veterans of earlier conflicts and accordingly experienced in military matters. Academics like myself warned about the upcoming war because the reason of the conflict, as I mentioned earlier, is located in the past and had not been solved yet. Also, Armenia’s economic growth was limited due to a lack of resources and it is still suffering from the outbreak of the war today. But the government did not listen and ignored all our warnings. As a consequence, the people were not ready and not sufficiently prepared for this conflict, if one can be prepared at all.
  
In my opinion, our Prime Minister betrayed his own people; based on the fact that throughout the whole war, the government conveyed that we were winning and provided us false information. Later, the political leadership conveyed that, they were aware of losing the war just a few days after it started. This raises the question of why our prime minister was not aware of this right from the beginning. Why didn´t they tell us the truth? Maybe we would have been prepared better, emotionally and socially, if we had been treated honestly. In fact, it has to be said that our own government told us lies. 
  
Unfortunately, I worry that the conflict will continue. We have to decide whether to reclaim the territory or accept the current status.
  
How was the media involved in the conflict and is the conflict continuing in the media?
First of all, I am surprised that the international media reported barely on the situation. How can it be that in a highly digitalized and eminently media-saturated world, hardly anyone is talking about this conflict? It almost seems as if no one cared. Azerbaijani media were instructed not to report during the war, which was a good idea. Ordinary media should not be dragged into a conflict without knowing the full facts. In contrast, the Armenian media reported on casualties and damages every day, but it turned out that the news from the Armenian side were not always truthful. Facts were not presented correctly. But I cannot blame the media. They were given the information they disseminated directly by the respective departments of the government. As a consequence of the painful defeat, the Armenian people want the government to step down. That is the reason why many demonstrations are taking place in the country. But so far the prime minister could not be convinced to resign. By the way, this is one of the main topics of media coverage at the moment.
  
Is there evidence that members of the Azerbaijani military have committed human rights violations and shared them on social media?
Yes, there are videos on social media that clearly show human rights violations. They did not only torture people, but also used biological weapons. For instance, Amnesty International reported on it
  
Does this apply to members of the Armenian military as well?
So far, I have not seen any evidence for such assertions. And frankly speaking, I don’t believe that Armenians who adhere to Christian values and call themselves Christians would do such atrocities. But, of course, the Azerbaijani propaganda claims the opposite.
  
How much do such actions and the spreading of such content poison the already difficult relations between the parties?
There is no doubt that such intentionally disseminated videos and human rights violations, especially spread on social media, just fuel the conflicts even more..
  
Are inhumane crimes, such as the ones possibly committed by members of the Azerbaijani military, part of an ideology that could be related to the genocide of Christians in the Ottoman Empire? 
This is one of my main subjects, about which I have already stated several times, in various forms, always based on scientifically proven work. At the end of the 19th century Sultan Abdul Hamid II of the Ottoman Empire had 300 thousands Armenian and 55 thousands Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac Christians being killed. During the First World War (1914-1918) over 2 million Christian minorities of the Ottoman Empire were killed by the ruling Young Turks’ government. This genocide was against Armenians, Assyrians and other Christian minorities. Even today, Turkey, as the successor of the Ottoman Empire, refuses to admit that this mass murder was a genocide.
  
At the same time, Turkey and Azerbaijan have a strong military, economic, ideological and cultural relationship. We Armenians call Azerbaijanis the younger brother of the Turks. The language is also very similar. Erdoğan expressed that the two countries are one nation of two states. In recent years, Turkey has intensively supported Azerbaijan and encouraged the government in Baku to become more proactive – especially in the context of Nagorno-Karabakh. After the outbreak of the military conflict in July 2020, Turkey supported Azerbaijan heavily at various levels. For example, two Turkish F16 jets guarded the Azerbaijani airspace. They also supported Azerbaijani troops in military training, exported modern weapons to the country, in particular strategically important drone technology. Azerbaijan is of geopolitical and strategic importance to Turkey’s energy stability, as well as an important investor supporting Turkey’s struggling economy. Erdoğan aims to build a greater Turkey. His foreign policy is based on the idea of neo-Ottomanism, pan-Turkism and pan-Islamism. Pan-Turkism is a nationalistic ideology believing that all Turkic-speaking people in all parts of Asia are one unique nation.
  
At the same time, neo-Ottomanism is a religiously based ideology where all Turkish speaking people should be united. Both ideologies share the same goal, which is a “new great Turkey.” Erdoğan wants to be, figuratively and historically, the sultan of this new great Turkey. All people who stand in opposition to this ideology either leave the country or are imprisoned. Those who follow this ideology consider Christians, anchored in a nationalist-religious worldview, to be their enemy.
  
At a symposium on “Human Rights in Turkey” some time ago, the Middle East expert and journalist Simon Jacob gave a geopolitical lecture about this, explaining in more detail the connections between Turkish expansion policy, technological – military development, digitalization, nationalist – Islamic fascism and events in the past. The entire lecture is available with this link as a video on the website of a human rights organization as well as Mr. Jacobs comprehensive and interesting power point presentation in pdf – format.
  
Also interesting is the report „EASTERN EUROPE – Azerbaijan and Turkey’s genocidal assault against Armenians“ at the website „moderndiplomacy“, Also interesting is the report “EASTERN EUROPE – Azerbaijan and Turkey’s genocidal assault against Armenians” at the website “moderndiplomacy”, which deals with the topic objectively and factually.
  
How close is the ideology of extremist groups such as ISIS?
In my opinion, the Turkish government has deployed extremists in the Nagorno-Karabakh region. During the Karabakh war, Turkey mobilized about 4,000 former jihadists from Syria and other countries to fight against Armenia. This is a major problem, as it was no longer just a conflict between two countries, but became a trans-regional conflict after extremist groups were involved. But Ankara, of course, denies the fact that Islamist-inspired militiamen have been deployed. At the same time, this is also a problem for Russia, as more jihadists are entering to Dagestan via the Caucasus and contributing the expansion of Islamism.
  
For example, Turkey and the “IS” have much in common in terms of their ideology. The “Islamic State” is a Sunni jihadist group with a very brutal ideology that claims religious dominance on the Muslim community. Therefore, both groups try to get control over a certain territory to establish their own state, which is governed through their radical ideologies. It could be said that the pan-Turkish nationalists are a modern version of IS with more sophisticated technology and weapons – regardless of the fact that Shiites dominate Azerbaijan whom the IS religiously considers apostates and combats.
  
How strong is the effect on the Caucasus and Europe in this context?
When IS destroyed Christian Assyrian villages near the Khabour Valley in 2016, I told people on Armenian television that this was a problem in Syria at the moment, but sooner or later it could become a problem all over the world. I was given little credence in 2016 and it simply was unbelievable that extremist groups such as the IS could reach our region. But unfortunately, I was right. Based on Erdogan’s threat to stability in the Caucasus, he is playing with Europeans’ concerns about refugees at the same time. He also causes a split in France, when he is talking about Islamophobia, for example, and thus trying to incite citizens of Turkish origin and encouraging them to turn to terror. Related to this is the problem that Europe is trying to be more liberal and open to refugees, but in my opinion they are getting into a cultural conflict with them. Europe has difficulties in integrating them into the culture of the country they seek protection. Integration often fails bringing the above-mentioned problems, which leaders like Erdogan use for their own benefit.
  
One last question: Do you see a similarity between the ideology of IS and nationalists like the group of so-called “Grey Wolves”?
The ideology of the Grey Wolves highlights Turkish history by insisting on its glory days and instrumentalizing events such as the founding of the first Turkish states in Central Asia to form the idea of a purely “Turkish Race”. At the same time, the concept of the Turkish nation is linked to religion, Islam, as an ideal. The ideology of the “Grey Wolves” is based on the ” superiority idea” of the Turkish race and the Turkish nation. A “…striving for an “ideal” Turkish nation, which they define as Sunni Islamic and mono-ethnic: inhabited only by “true” Turks. A Turk is anyone who lives on Turkish territory, feels Turkish, and calls himself Turkish.”
  
Similarly, the IS promotes religious violence and considers Muslims who disagree with its interpretations as infidels or apostates, and there are very many of them; including Shiites in Azerbaijan. Such symbolism, similar to that of the “Grey Wolves,” is meant to resurrect past glory, whether it is the ” Caliphate” (IS) or the “Ottoman Empire” (Grey Wolves, nationalists)
  
Accordingly, there are many similarities, but also differences. Both are ultra-nationalist, Islamist and neo-fascist groups. For example, the Grey Wolves were also involved in the first Karabakh war. Members of the Grey Wolves fought on the side of Azerbaijan. For example, a picture of a parade in Azerbaijan after the victory shows a General of the Azerbaijani army giving the “wolf salute” – the distinctive identifying sign of the “Gray Wolves”, now banned in France but allowed in Germany. The Armenian radio station reported about that.
  
The significant difference between the ideologies is that the IS is a religiously motivated group. The Grey Wolves are motivated by Turkey’s history and the idea of the pure “Turkish Race”. But both of them usurp the same brutality, religiously justified, in order to use violence and spread as much fear and terror as possible.
  
In this context, it should be mentioned that the leader of the Turkish Nationalist Movement Party, or MHP for short, and coalition partner of the AKP, considers the Grey Wolves to be part of the MHP and more than shares its ideology. Recently, their chairman, Devlet Bahçeli (MHP) announced to start building a nationalist school in Shushi (the city in Nagorno Karabakh, which was captured by Azerbaijan on November 9th, 2020).
  
According to Turkish Daily News “Hurriyet”, Devlet Bahçeli said that both President Erdogan and President Aliyev approved his proposal to build the school in Shushi. They laid the cornerstone for this school on January 30th, 2021. I am sure that this was an ideological and symbolic act to demonstrate power.
   
Ms. Khosroeva, many thanks for these interesting information and your time.
   
Simon Jacob, Valentin Hoffmann

 

 
Lectures – Oannes Consulting GmbH offers several lecture series dealing with important social topics. Click here to get to the lecture portal.
 

Armenpress: Pashinyan comments on problems existing in judiciary

Pashinyan comments on problems existing in judiciary

Save

Share

 17:40,

YEREVAN, MARCH 20, ARMENPRESS. Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan has touched upon the problems existing in the judicial system during his meeting with the residents of Ujan community in Aragatsotn province.

“Today the greatest problem are courts. We have granted freedom and independence to the courts. For 20 years the judges in Armenia have not had an opportunity for making decisions independently, and we have granted them that opportunity, but some of them have used this opportunity for running to their old leaders for fulfilling their will. And they will be punished”, the PM said.

 

Editing and Translating by Aneta Harutyunyan

Karabakh peace process lasting till revolution did not express people’s wish

Aysor, Armenia

The negotiation process over Nagorno Karabakh from the very first moment till the launch of the revolution did not express the inner wishes of the Armenian people, PM Nikol Pashinyan stated in Aragatsotn province today.

He stressed that if they continued moving forward with the process they had in 2018 it would have mean handing Artsakh to Azerbaijan in stage-by-stage way.

He said he defended people’s strives till the last second.

“We have stopped the war when it was already senseless to continue it, we did not see any prospect, we faced the issue of saving the lives of 25,000-30,000 soldiers and releasing them from the danger of blockade,” the PM said.

Pashinyan said many accuse him of treachery.

“At the same time we are accused of handing over the lands and not handing them over. We stood until it was possible to stand, we made the decision when it was necessary to make the decision, otherwise a greater disaster would have happened, this is the truth,” Pashinyan said.

He said they are guilty in what happened and added, “But there is one thing we cannot be accused of, it is treachery,” Pashinyan said.

Human Rights Defender’s Report Details Azerbaijani Crimes Against Humanity



A new report says Azerbaijan committed crimes against humanity

The office of Armenia’s Human Rights Defender, Arman Tatoyan, has published an ad hoc public report, stating that Azerbaijani authorities have carried out crimes against humanity with the armed attacks against Artsakh and Armenia during COVID-19, Armenpress reported.

The report discusses the “issue of launching a wide-scale aggressive war against Artsakh (Nagorno Karabakh) and Armenia by Azerbaijan during the COVID-19 pandemic, in opposition to a call for global ceasefire by the UN Secretary-General and the demand of the UN Security Council for a general and immediate cessation of hostilities in all situations. It discusses the Azerbaijani state policy to make a human-made disaster during the pandemic to accelerate the rapid spread of the deadly virus, to achieve the eventual collapse of the health care system, causing increased deaths, other serious injuries and great sufferings to the population.”

“As part of a widespread and systematic attack, affecting not only the entire Armenian population, but also its own population, Azerbaijani armed forces intentionally accelerated the rapid spread of the deadly virus, instigated the collapse of the health care system, thus causing increased great sufferings,” said the report.

The Human Rights Defender’s report said that from March 1 to September 26, 49,400 Covid cases were reported in Armenia, adding that during the war, from September 27 to November 9, the number of reported Covid cases reached to 59,287. The report also delineates that during the 44-day war, 658 people died from Covid in Armenia, compared to 951 during the seven-month period between March 1 to September 26.

“These facts once again prove the claims of the Ombudsman that the Azerbaijani authorities should be held accountable for the war crimes as impunity leads to new, more severe crimes. The report will be submitted to the respective international organizations and the state authorities of Armenia,” the Human Rights Defender’s office said.

Armenian ombudsman presents Azerbaijani war crimes at UN Human Rights Council

Panorama, Armenia

During the 46th session of the UN Human Rights Council, on March 8, 2021, the video message of Armenia’s Human Rights Defender (Ombudsman) Arman Tatoyan was published and broadcast in a special format, the ombudsman said in a statement on Thursday.

Only national human rights institutions with an international “A” status have such an opportunity.

Prior to the video message, a more extensive written report of the ombudsman was submitted to the Human Rights Council.

Both in the video message and in the written report refer to the atrocities during the 2020 September-November war in Artsakh, setting forth the Azerbaijani armed forces torture and ill-treatment of Armenian servicemen and civilians. In addition, references are made to Azeri servicemen’s use of the same words and utterances in videos depicting such tortures and ill-treatment as those made in official Azeri speeches.

Ethnically motivated crimes against Armenians are encouraged by the Azerbaijani authorities and this fact has been confirmed by ECHR judgments, Tatoyan said.

The video message and written report specifically emphasize the Azerbaijani authorities’ artificial delay of the release and return of prisoners of war (POWs), including servicemen and civilians, despite the unequivocal requirements of international humanitarian law, which causes mental anguish to the families of the illegally held prisoners, and inflicts deep emotional pain to Armenian society.

This particular session was dedicated to the discussion with the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture.

CivilNet: Majority of Armenians Back Snap Polls, Says New Survey

CIVILNET.AM

12 Mar, 2021 10:03

By Mark Dovich

The majority of Armenian citizens “definitely” or “somewhat” believe that early parliamentary elections should be held, according to a newly-published public opinion survey. That finding directly contradicts a February 7 statement from the ruling My Step alliance claiming that “there is no demand for snap elections among the general public.” The study, conducted last month, was spearheaded by the Center for Insights in Survey Research at the International Republican Institute (IRI), a Washington-based group that bills itself as “the premier international democracy-development organization.”

According to the study, 55% of respondents reported “definitely” or “somewhat” believing that early elections should be held, while 42% reported “somewhat not” or “definitely not” believing that snap elections should take place. Breaking down responses by demographic categories and political beliefs, the poll found that support for early elections was highest among residents of Yerevan (43% of whom said elections “definitely” should be held), those who reported believing that “Armenia is heading in the wrong direction” (52%), and those who reported an “unfavorable view of the prime minister’s office” (54%). By contrast, 48% of respondents who reported believing that “Armenia is heading in the right direction” said they opposed snap polls.

The issue of holding early elections has dominated Armenia’s politics since late last year, when Armenian forces’ disastrous handling of the September-November war in and around Nagorno-Karabakh boiled over into seething discontent with Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. Several prominent institutions and individuals in the country, including President Armen Sarkissian, the Armenian Apostolic Church, the National Academy of Sciences, the Armenian General Benevolent Union, and, most recently, the Armed Forces, have backed snap polls and/or the prime minister’s resignation. The Homeland Salvation Movement, a recently-formed alliance of nearly 20 opposition parties, has demanded that Pashinyan resign and an interim government of national unity take over to oversee the vote.

Meanwhile, Pashinyan and his My Step alliance, whose overwhelming majority in the National Assembly (Armenia’s parliament) has largely stymied opposition demands for Pashinyan’s dismissal, have repeatedly flip-flopped on the issue of whether to hold early elections. Late last year, Pashinyan publicly stated his openness to the possibility of holding snap polls. Within two months, though, My Step had backtracked, culminating in the February 7 statement claiming that “there is no demand” for such a vote. However, on March 1, at a large rally in downtown Yerevan, Pashinyan again said that he is open to holding early elections. As of March 11, talks over snap polls between the My Step alliance and the two opposition parties with seats in the National Assembly, Bright Armenia and Prosperous Armenia, remain ongoing.

The IRI survey suggests that Pashinyan’s government would likely win such a vote, were it to be held in the near future. In response to the question “please tell me which political party, if any, you would vote for if national parliamentary elections were held next Sunday,” the top two answers were “none” at 42% and “Civil Contract/My Step” at 33%.

Prosperous Armenia received support from 3% of respondents, while Bright Armenia, the former ruling Republican Party, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun), and “17 parties” (a reference to the Homeland Salvation Movement) each received support from one 1% or less of those polled. Under the current Electoral Code, individual political parties must pass a threshold of 5% to enter the National Assembly. For political alliances, like My Step and the Homeland Salvation Movement, that threshold is 7%.

The fact that more respondents answered “none” than My Step — and that support for all other parties remains low — suggests that a potential third party could mount a serious challenge to Pashinyan’s government. Moreover, My Step’s 33% level of support in the February 2021 poll represents a massive decline from the level it once enjoyed: in a September-October 2019 IRI poll, 55% of respondents answered “My Step” when asked the same question, while only 10% of respondents said “none.” Nonetheless, My Step apparently remains Armenia’s most popular political force.

Conversely, when asked “for which of these political parties, if any, would you never vote,” the most popular answers were the Republican Party (25%), “I am against everyone else” (24%), and Prosperous Armenia (17%). 14% of respondents said “Civil Contract/My Step,” while 11% said “there is no party I will never vote for.” Those numbers suggest that opposition to the Republican Party has declined in recent years: in the 2019 IRI survey, the majority (59%) of respondents said they would never vote for the party. Still, the Republican Party seemingly remains the most unpopular political force in the country.

Among other questions, respondents were also asked if they planned on voting in the next parliamentary elections, regardless of when they are held. 82% of respondents said they “definitely” or “probably” would vote, while only 16% said they “definitely” or “probably” would not. In the most recent parliamentary election, held in December 2018, turnout did not even top 50%. In that election, My Step won more than 70% of the vote.

Respondents were also questioned about their support for term limits on prime ministers. In response, overwhelming majorities in all demographic and political belief categories answered “yes.” In total, 59% of respondents said they believe prime ministers should be term-limited. Of those respondents, 61% said two terms was an appropriate limit. Under the current Armenian Constitution, prime ministers are not term-limited.

Armenian Bar Calls Out Grey Wolves to U.N. Special Rapporteur on Racism

March 4, 2021



United Nations

In response to a call for input by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance, Armenian Bar Association associate members Astghik Hairapetian, Anoush Baghdassarian, Mariam Nazaretyan, and Dickran Khodanian, prepared a report submitted to the U.N. Special Rapporteur.

The purpose of the report is to help stop the activities of the Grey Wolves before they further realize their racist worldview. The Grey Wolves’ vitriol and invective have become increasingly evident, especially during Azerbaijan’s recent aggression against Artsakh.

The mandate of the Special Rapporteur and UCLA Law School Professor E. Tendayi Achiume is to combat and prevent varied forms of racism, racial discrimination, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, and related intolerance. Not only do these established forms of racism exist, they are continually changing. To combat such violations of basic human rights, the Special Rapporteur transmits urgent appeals and communications to States regarding alleged violations of international human rights law, performs country visits, and submits reports to the UN Human Rights Council and the General Assembly.

To inform the Special Rapporteur’s 2021 report to the Human Rights Council on combatting the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism, and other practices that fuel contemporary forms of racism and related intolerance, Special Rapporteur Achiume requested written submissions from civil society organizations and other stakeholders who can share their experience and knowledge. To this end, the Armenian Bar’s submission details the harmful and intolerant activities of the Grey Wolves, a group whose ideology is characterized by exaggerated nationalism and racist violence against ethnic minorities in Turkey and around the world and, in particular, against Armenians.

Lucy Varpetian, Chairwoman of the Armenian Bar Association, commented, “In a time when ultra-nationalist policies propel discrimination and violence in many parts of the world, we applaud the Special Rapporteur’s commitment to receiving substantiated reports about the full scope of the threat of neo-Nazism and related practices. We hope that the diverse submissions will lead to a thematic report that highlights this trend in all its forms and serves to oppose it.”

The report details who the Grey Wolves are, their acts against Armenians and other groups, including in the military context, Turkey and Azerbaijan’s support of the group, and European governments’ policies to combat the group. It concludes by stating: “Particularly in the context of Erdogan’s Pan-Turkic expansionist vision from the Mediterranean to Libya and beyond, and Turkey’s illicit use of armed force to reach its objectives, it is critical to understand the radical ideological streams undergirding the politics of the region and around the world. The Grey Wolves and its sympathizers drive racist violence towards ethnic minorities. The group should be understood as a dangerous ideology paralleling Nazism in form – in light of indications of state support – and in substance – in light of explicit calls for the eradication of certain ethnic groups. Azerbaijan’s aggression towards Artsakh and its Armenians is both a recent manifestation of this dangerous ideology, and a warning of a disturbing, growing trend.

The Mystery Of Fly Armenia’s ‘Missing’ Boeing 737 Now In Iran

Simple Flying
March 2 2021

The Mystery Of Fly Armenia’s ‘Missing’ Boeing 737 Now In Iran

byJoanna Bailey
March 2, 2021

A Boeing 737-300 operated by Fly Armenia has vanished in Iran. The aircraft was supposed to be heading to Ukraine for maintenance ahead of its entry into service with the airline. It deviated from the planned flight path and declared an emergency over Iran; it has not been seen since.
The Mystery Of Fly Armenia’s ‘Missing’ Boeing 737 Now In Iran – Simple Flying

Where did the 737 go?

On February 19th, a Boeing 737 operated by Fly Armenia left its storage in Tallinn, Estonia, to undergo maintenance ahead of entry into service. The 737-300, registered EK-FAA, departed Tallinn just after 08:00 GMT; its destination, according to Armenian authorities, should have been Hostomel in Ukraine, where it would be brought into shape and returned to the airline at a later date.

But the plane did not fly to Hostomel. Instead, it headed south to Varan, Bulgaria, where it landed at just after midday. That in itself is bizarre, given that Bulgaria, as well as Romania and the Baltic states through which the aircraft passed, are in the EU. The EU has banned Armenian aircraft from flying through its airspace since June last year.

Also bizarre is the lack of tracking data. Searching for the aircraft on various tracking websites under its registration brings up nothing. However, Plane Finder allows for searching via HEX code, a unique number relating to the tracker fitted inside the aircraft, which in this plane’s case is 600011. That shows its trip down to Bulgaria clearly tracked.





Only one subsequent flight is tracked by that HEX number. The following day, a plane with the same transponder left Bulgaria at 09:25 GMT, and flew southeast. A lack of ADB-S data coverage over Turkey meant it was only partially tracked, but the parts available show it was not headed for Hostomel, or to its home in Armenia.


The last little sliver of tracking data we have is that the plane entered Iranian airspace at around 11:43 GMT that day. It has not been seen since.

The Mystery Of Fly Armenia’s ‘Missing’ Boeing 737 Now In Iran – Simple Flying

Two Poets, Drawn by History, Headline Thursday’s Lowell Poetry Reading

BU Today, Boston University
Feb 18 2021
February 18, 2021
  • John O’Rourke

A generation separates Armenian-American poets Peter Balakian and Susan Barba, yet their stories have striking similarities. Both grew up hearing about grandparents who had survived the Armenian Genocide, which claimed the lives of an estimated 1.5 million people during World War I. Balakian heard only bits and pieces of his maternal grandmother’s past—it was years later when he learned she had been her family’s sole adult survivor of a death march orchestrated by the Ottoman government. Barba’s grandfather was more forthcoming about the atrocities he witnessed. 

“I think Americans could find more common ground of mind and imagination if they read poems as a constant part of living—the way they watch movies or TV or read the news,” says Peter Balakian, whose collection Ozone Journal won the 2016 Pulitzer Prize for Poetry. Photo by Mark D’Orio

Both Balakian and Barba (GRS’12) will read from their work Thursday, February 18, at 7:30 pm at this semester’s virtual Robert Lowell Memorial Poetry Reading.

Their grandparents’ stories of loss and survival and of the broader Armenian diaspora have figured prominently in each writer’s work. Bakalian’s Pulitzer Prize–winning collection Ozone Journal (University of Chicago Press, 2015) recounts the speaker’s experience excavating the bones of Armenian genocide victims in the Syrian desert with a crew of television journalists in 2009. The poet’s 1997 memoir, Black Dog of Fate, revisits his childhood and the unspoken losses his maternal grandmother suffered. He also wrote the nonfiction book The Burning Tigris: The Armenian Genocide and America’s Response, and was one of the translators of a first-person narrative by his great-uncle Girgoris Balakian, Armenian Golgotha: A Memoir of the Armenian Genocide.  

“In the late 1970s, I began writing some poems that were engaging a history that preceded my life,” Balakian says. “That history was animating me largely through my knowledge of the experience of my grandmother’s Armenian Genocide survivor story, an experience that had been conveyed to me in various indirect ways or veiled gestures such as my grandmother’s folktales and dreams.”

In “Andranik,” the poem that forms the center section of Barba’s debut collection, Fair Sun (David R. Godine, 2017), the speaker (her grandfather) describes watching as his father was murdered by a group of Kurds, who took his clothing, leaving nothing behind. 

“From a young age, I remember him telling stories of his survival, and hearing these horrific, brutal stories was an everyday part of my existence, but so were his stories of the homeland he had lost, the folktales, the poems, and scripture he knew by heart,” Barba says. 

“The Armenian Genocide of 1915 involved lethal cultural forces the modern world is still trying to comprehend,” says Robert Pinsky, a William Fairfield Warren Distinguished Professor, a College of Arts & Sciences professor of English, and three-time US poet laureate. “Peter Balakian’s poems and prose are recognized as the most valued understanding of those forces in the English language—an understanding that ranges from the specific origins in Anatolia to recent American and world history.”

In her own generation, Pinsky says, Barba “extends Armenian history, and the legacy of the Genocide, into new, personal terrain. 

“Her work, like Balakian’s, has a particular relation to the realm of literature: a first, preparatory step of the mass killing was an attempt to round up and suppress intellectuals, writers, teachers—all the world of literacy in the targeted ethnic group.” 

Balakian, Colgate University’s Donald M. and Constance H. Rebar Professor of the Humanities, has written seven poetry collections. He says all kinds of histories—not just the Armenian diaspora—have interested him as a poet, among them World War II, the AIDS epidemic, and New York City in the aftermath of 9/11.

“Poets should write about what moves their imaginations and what draws language out of them,” Balakian says. “I’ve been drawn to some of the realities and histories for many reasons. Those histories and human dilemmas are rich with meaning and complexity, and they prod my imagination.” 

He cites the long literary tradition of poets who have navigated history “for its depth and meaning,” dating back to Homer and Virgil and including such contemporary poets as Adrienne Rich, Gwendolyn Brooks, Derek Walcott (Hon.’93), and Pinsky. 

His own poems are known for their ability to blend the personal and the political. “The personal intersection with the historical or social event generates a special energy, perhaps more depth of feeling,” he says. He takes seriously the role poets play in civic life, either through their work or through their activism, advocating for change. “Writers answer to language first, but they move into the civic sphere when they need to do what they feel compelled to do,” he says.

An outspoken critic of the Trump presidency—one the poet described in an interview as “mired in corruption, incompetence, and astonishing assaults on democratic institutions and norms”—Balakian was a founding member in 2020 of a group called Writers Against Trump, now called Writers for Democratic Action, which numbers over 2,000 members. “One need not write about politics to be part of the organization,” he says. 

Balakian says he’d like poetry’s role in civic life to be larger than it is at present. “I think Americans could find more common ground of mind and imagination if they read poems as a constant part of living—the way they watch movies or TV or read the news.” 

Susan Barba (GRS’12) says that her poems often start “with an image, a scrap, a word or phrase, a fact that I need to archive in my memory.” Photo by Sharona Jacobs

Barba’s poems, too, address pressing social issues. Her latest collection, geode (Black Sparrow Press, 2020) is a meditation on the environment, the climate crisis, and man’s relationship to the natural world. The poems, writes poet Rosanna Warren, who taught Barba at BU, are “an eerie mix of delicacy and terror.” Barba says she hopes readers feel a sense of urgency in reading geode, “because that is what I felt writing the poems—that there was not a moment to be lost, and while this urgency creates great anguish, I hope it’s not only the urgency and anguish that readers are left with…in the end, I wanted the book to be an ode to Earth, not an elegy.” 

Growing up, Barba says, she dreamed of being an archaeologist or a biologist. It wasn’t until she was an undergrad at Dartmouth, taking courses with poets Tom Sleigh and Cleopatra Mathis, that she set her sights on poetry. 

She says she finds inspiration in unpredictable places.

“Sometimes it’s generated by an encounter with beauty, in art or in nature, an impulse to praise, and sometimes it’s generated by confusion, by anger, an impulse to protest or to mourn or to understand something,” Barba says. Often it starts with an image, a scrap, a word or phrase, a fact that I need to archive into my memory, and in order to do so, I need to weave it into what’s already there, like a bird building a nest, to create this made thing.”

A successful poem, she says, is one “that’s alive, that you experience, that sets your neurotransmitters humming, that gets the serotonin pumping in your body.”

The Robert Lowell Memorial Poetry Reading, being held virtually over Zoom, is tonight, Thursday, February 18, at 7 pm. The event is free and open to the public. Find more information and register here. The readings will be followed by a Q&A. 

The Robert Lowell Memorial Reading series was established by Nancy Livingston (COM’69) and her husband, Fred M. Levin, through the Shenson Foundation, in memory of Ben and A. Jess Shenson.