Prime Minister chairs consultation with the participation of representatives of IT companies

 16:16,

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 15, ARMENPRESS. A consultation was held today chaired by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, in which representatives of about 30 large IT companies participated.

Vice President of the National Assembly Hakob Arshakyan, Minister of High-tech Industry Robert Khachatryan, Minister of Finance Vahe Hovhannisyan and other officials also participated in the consultation, the Prime Minister's Office said in a readout.

"At the beginning of the meeting, the Prime Minister noted that the purpose of the consultation is to understand what problems exist in the sector, to find out the effectiveness of the policies implemented by the government for the development of the sector, as well as to discuss the future tasks.

The representatives of the IT sector presented the problems solved in the sector through the programs carried out by the government, presented their ideas on improving the existing regulations, as well as suggestions for long-term solutions of the existing problems in the sector, reads the statement.

According to the source, based on the results of the discussion, the Prime Minister instructed to create a working group, to carry out follow-up work on the raised issues, to develop an effective solution model, to set a timetable and to present it at the next meeting. The Head of the Government emphasized that seeing Armenia as a technological and technologically developed country has been a strategic goal since 2018. "My message is that the government has that political will, and it is a program thesis for us," added the Prime Minister.

PM Pashinyan addresses the probability of peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan

 11:54,

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 14, ARMENPRESS. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has referred to the possibility of establishing peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan, outlining the principles within which it would happen.

In his opening remarks at the Ministerial Meeting of Landlocked Developing Countries, which the capital Yerevan is hosting, Pashinyan said that there are three main principles.

First,  the agreements on the unblocking of transport links should  be based on the principle of sovereignty, jurisdiction, equality and reciprocity of countries.

Secondly, Armenia and Azerbaijan should fully recognize each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, based on the understanding that Armenia's territory covers 29,800 square kilometers and Azerbaijan's 86,600 square kilometers.

According to the third principle, Armenia and Azerbaijan should reaffirm their unconditional commitment to the 1991 Alma-Ata Declaration as the political basis for the border demarcation. 


“These principles were reached during negotiations with the President of Azerbaijan in Brussels, and these agreements had been recorded in the statements by European Council President Charles Michel after tripartite meetings on May 14 and July 15, 2023,” noted the PM.

"If Azerbaijan does not abandon the already reached agreements, signing a peace treaty with Azerbaijan in the near future becomes very realistic.

Armenia reaffirms its commitment to these agreements. And the main question is about the possibility of signing the peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan in the near future.

One can focus on the facts that indicate that the probability of such an event is not high, and one can focus on the facts that can create a more positive impression that the probability of such developments is high.

"Both groups of facts exist. Yesterday an exchange of captured persons between Armenia and Azerbaijan took place, which is a very important event. I would prefer not to focus on facts that inspire pessimism. 
I would like to consider yesterday's event as a ‘zero point’ from which we will be able to at least make efforts so that all further developmets will indicate an increased probability of signing a peace treaty-rather than the opposite," Pashinyan said.

Russia always ready to host Armenia-Azerbaijan negotiations, Russia’s Galuzin

 21:04,

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 12, ARMENPRESS. Russia is always ready to host negotiations on the Azerbaijani-Armenian settlement process and hopes that Baku and Yerevan take into account the relevance of the corresponding proposal, Deputy Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation Mikhail Galuzin has said, Tass reports.

Our proposals for holding negotiations on a peaceful settlement between Armenia and Azerbaijan in Moscow are open to our partners for Armenia and Azerbaijan," said the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister, expressing hope that Yerevan and Baku remember and understand it.

When asked whether the meeting of the foreign ministers of the three countries in Moscow is currently being arranged through diplomatic channels, Galuzin affirmed that they are always ready for such work.

France’s arms sales are a ‘provocation’, says Turkey’s Erdogan

Dec 8 2023
Turkish president expressed anger at sale of 50 Bastion armoured vehicles to Yerevan by Paris
By Ragip Soylu in Ankara
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has labelled the French government’s decision to supply Armenia with 50 Bastion armoured vehicles as a “provocation”.

Erdogan suggested that Yerevan should focus on peace, rather than falling into traps set by other countries.

"What France is doing is just provocation. France should know that it is not doing good to Armenia, on the contrary, it is doing harm," Erdogan told a group of journalists on Friday who had accompanied him on a state visit to Greece. 

“France has previously supported Armenia. What result did they get? Nothing," he added.

French Foreign Minister Catherine Colonna said during a visit to Armenia in October that Paris had agreed to deliver military equipment to Armenian forces following Azerbaijan’s seizure of Nagorno-Karabakh, despite the presence of Russian peacekeepers in the area.

More than 100,000 ethnic Armenians left Nagorno-Karabakh after Azerbaijan attacked the area in a "counter-terror" operation in September, forcing Armenian separatists to sign a disarmament deal less than 24 hours after the offensive. 

Nagorno-Karabakh is a nominal Azerbaijani territory under international law, with a majority ethnic Armenian population. It had previously been run by a breakaway Armenian authority.

Armenia did not resist the Azerbaijani offensive three months ago, blaming Russian forces for the failure. Yerevan confirmed that it recognised Azerbaijan's territorial unity, but called the ethnic Armenian exodus from Nagorno-Karabakh "forced displacement". 

Armenian news site Armenpress reported earlier this week that France had already delivered 24 Bastion armoured vehicles, citing an internal document from the French Senate.

The remaining 26 vehicles were in the production phase and will arrive at a later date, the report said. 

The internal document, as quoted by Armenpress, stated that Armenia had recently signed an order for the purchase of three GM200 radars from French company Thales, and was in talks over a delivery of French-made Mistral 3 surface-to-air missiles. 

It added a recommendation that a delivery of France's Caesar self-propelled howitzer artillery system should also be studied.

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in a joint statement on Thursday announced that they had taken a number of confidence-building measures, including releasing several prisoners of war from each side and supporting each other in international forums such as the Cop28 climate summit. 

The Turkish foreign ministry in an official statement on Friday backed the move and said it hoped both countries will sign a peace agreement soon. 

Turkey backed Azerbaijan during a previous offensive against Armenian separatists in Nagorno-Karabakh in 2020, with armed drones and other sophisticated weapons, as well as with Syrian fighters. 

National Assembly Committee votes against “Hayakve” project in Armenia

Protester outside of the National Assembly building during the NA State and Legal Committee Session holds a sign that reads, “The Republic of Armenia Constitution forbids recognizing Artsakh as a part of Azerbaijan” (Hayakve, December 4, 2023)

YEREVAN—The Republic of Armenia’s National Assembly State Legal Committee, on December 4, 2023, decided to reject the “Hayakve” project. This project was initiated earlier in the summer by a coalition of Armenian public, cultural and political figures, aiming to criminalize the recognition of Artsakh as part of Azerbaijan. The initiative also sought to maintain consistent attention on the Artsakh issue and the Armenian Genocide within the national discourse.

The suggested modifications to the Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia proposed the addition of two new articles. Article 1 proposed the incorporation of Articles 420.1 and 420.2 into the existing Criminal Code of Armenia. Article 420.1 states that “recognizing Artsakh as part of any other state on behalf of the Republic of Armenia is punishable by imprisonment for ten to fifteen years.” Article 420.2 pertains to penalties, including imprisonment for 10-15 years for refusal to recognize the Armenian Genocide or public denial, justification or belittling of the Armenian Genocide on behalf of the Republic of Armenia. Article 2 stated that this law would come into effect 10 days after its official publication.

The “Hayakve” movement gained significant traction, with approximately 58,000 citizens of the Republic of Armenia supporting the cause to uphold Artsakh’s Armenian identity. On November 24, project coordinators presented these amassed signatures to the National Assembly, seeking hearings on the matter. However, during the State Legal Committee session of the RA National Assembly, members of Parliament from the ruling party voted against the project, delaying further discussions for a period of two months.

Civil Contract MPs in favor of rejecting the proposed bill argued that the initiative does not align with the country’s interests. They characterized it as a populist measure, emotionally driven, unrelated to Armenia’s state interests and potentially provocative towards Azerbaijan, anticipating adverse consequences such as new aggression. 

This decision sparked controversy, particularly as it occurred amidst ongoing tensions in the region. While some members of the ruling party have maintained conciliatory tones towards Azerbaijan, Armenia has continued to suffer casualties due to enemy fire.

At approximately 2:35 p.m. on December 4, the Azerbaijani Armed Forces opened fire towards an Armenian position in the Bardzruni region of the Vayots Dzor province. Gerasim Avetiki Arakelyan, a soldier serving in the Nth military unit of the RA Defense Force, suffered a fatal gunshot wound. The soldier was injured by an enemy sniper shot in the chest area and died in the hospital. Authorities have launched an immediate investigation to thoroughly unravel the circumstances surrounding this event.

Artsvik Minasian, a parliament member representing the opposition Hayastan alliance, has leveled accusations against the Civil Contract party. He alleged that the ruling party deceived Armenian voters who supported it in the June 2021 general elections, arguing that Civil Contract, in its election manifesto, committed to championing the right to self-determination for Artsakh Armenians.

Asked about the potential outcomes of passing the bill and its impact on Artsakh’s control, the former State Minister and Human Rights Ombudsman of Artsakh Artak Beglaryan expressed that its approval would signify Armenia’s acknowledgment and defense of the people of Artsakh’s right to self-determination. He emphasized that Armenia’s acceptance of this bill would set a significant precedent, indicating that no international entity would establish a higher standard than Armenia itself.

Amidst discussions surrounding the “Hayakve” bill, Tsolak Akopyan, a former vice-rector at Brusov State University in Armenia and member of the “Hayakve” initiative group, faced attempted detainment by authorities in Armenia on December 1. Facing accusations of academic misconduct and of allegedly substituting for an absent lecturer during exams, he was placed in administrative control after his defenders prevented his arrest. His detention, seen as politically motivated, comes amidst Akopyan’s affiliation with the initiative seeking to criminalize recognizing Artsakh as part of another state. His supporters have urged solidarity, calling for support from academia, former students, international human rights groups and the courts to address what they perceive as unjust persecution.

The rejection of the “Hayakve” project reflects a broader political landscape, where the government, accused of sidelining the Armenian Genocide issue and downplaying the Artsakh situation, appears reluctant to pass any legislation that might condemn anti-Armenian positions. This rejection aligns with the government’s strategy, seemingly prioritizing diplomatic relations over addressing historical and territorial grievances and the present humanitarian catastrophe facing the people of Artsakh.

Shant Charshafjian, who was living in Artsakh during the blockade and is the founder of the Lorik Humanitarian Fund, is currently spearheading the “Homes for Artsakh” initiative aimed at rebuilding Artsakh’s Armenian communities by providing homes and livelihoods, expressed his frustration in an interview with the Armenian Weekly

Citing government announcements welcoming foreign nationals and an apparent growth in Armenia’s population, Charshafjian criticized the government’s failure to retain Artsakh residents. He said the government issues work visas to foreign nationals while neglecting to provide job opportunities for the Armenians of Artsakh.

Charshafjian emphasized that political motivations have caused issues even while planning seemingly innocuous events like puppet shows for kids in the Syunik province. He claimed that due to perceived political affiliations with the de facto regime, schools and their principals face hindrances in organizing activities, causing distress among children.

Charshafjian expressed grievances about the lack of support and aid for Artsakh residents. Challenges include integration into the workforce, bureaucratic hurdles and inadequate housing support, painting a grim picture of Artsakh residents’ plight.

Following his return to Armenia following a 10-month blockade in Artsakh, Charshafjian noted his frustration over the prevailing circumstances, denouncing the prioritization of increasing police presence over vital sectors like education and military development. He criticized the government’s response to the ongoing crises, particularly regarding the government’s silence and inaction on critical issues such as the lack of substantial efforts to secure the release of Armenian prisoners of war that continue to be held inhumanely in Baku. 

Charshafjian highlighted the dire situation faced by Artsakh residents in Syunik, citing uncertainty over their future due to impending threats and government inaction. He questioned the leadership’s commitment to peace and its new “Crossroads of Peace” plan amid ongoing threats and the absence of concrete actions to protect Armenian citizens.

The interview concluded on a precarious note, with Charshafjian cautioning against the direction Armenia is heading under current leadership and the unaddressed challenges facing Artsakh residents.

Hoory Minoyan was an active member of the Armenian community in Los Angeles until she moved to Armenia prior to the 44-day war. She graduated with a master's in International Affairs from Boston University, where she was also the recipient of the William R. Keylor Travel Grant. The research and interviews she conducted while in Armenia later became the foundation of her Master’s thesis, “Shaping Identity Through Conflict: The Armenian Experience.” Hoory continues to follow her passion for research and writing by contributing to the Armenian Weekly.


AW: What does Advent mean to us?

Armenian nativity scene created by T’oros Roslin in the 13th century (Wikimedia)

Advent is the first season of the Christian year. The word originates from the Latin word Adventus, which means coming. The season prepares Christians for Christ’s coming in the flesh and future coming in judgment.

Characteristically, we think of Advent in terms of the Christmas story. This is when we pause to look back across the centuries and remember that the Son of God, Jesus Christ, came into the world as a baby, born in the little town of Bethlehem. That is the classic and historical meaning of Advent.

At other times, we turn our focus to the future, remembering that He promised to come again, marking the culmination of history and the fulfillment of God’s purpose on earth. We refer to this as the “Second Advent” or “Second Coming of Christ.”

Today, we address the season before Christmas, which is called Advent. In Western churches this season begins on the Sunday nearest to St. Andrew’s Day (November 30). It is the first Sunday of the beginning of the Christian calendar.

The observance of the Advent season dates from the fourth century. It varied from four to seven weeks until the sixth century, when it was set in the Western church at four weeks.

In the Armenian Apostolic church this season is called Hissnag. Its duration is seven weeks and begins with the Parekentan of this season.

This holy season preceding Christmas is a season of spiritual preparation for penitence, meditation and prayer.

For every important event in life, whether it is the birth of a child, the purchase of a new home, the marriage of a daughter or a son or the prospect of retirement, people spend a lot of time preparing themselves. When we throw a party and expect guests, or plan to travel abroad, we make careful preparations ahead of time.

The season of Advent, like the prophet of old, tells us to prepare ourselves for a very important event in our life—the coming of God to earth. It is the voice that cries in the wilderness of our life, “Prepare ye the way of the Lord.”

As Christians, we often say that we want the power and presence of God in our lives. And yet, we assume that while every other important activity in life needs care and preparation, the coming of God needs none. The message of Christmas is that God offers Himself to us. We are called to get ready for Him. Through prayer, worship and holy expectation, we are called to make straight what is crooked and smooth the rough surfaces of the road that will bring the healing and the restoring grace of Christ into our hearts and lives. Then, we will have cause to celebrate Christmas.

Yes, the coming of Christ is an event that requires preparation. More than two thousand years ago, he came to the little town of Bethlehem. But for most of the people in Bethlehem that night, it was as if he did not come at all. They missed it. The same episode was repeated over and over again throughout Jesus’ life. 

Others, however, were prepared to welcome him. Those who were looking forward to his coming were truly blessed.

Rev. Dr. Vahan H. Tootikian is the Executive Director of the Armenian Evangelical World Council.


The Kardashians: Unraveling their Armenian Heritage

Gillett News
Nov 29 2023

In the captivating realm of reality television and pop culture, no family has captivated the world quite like the Kardashians. Known for their extravagant lifestyles, various entrepreneurial pursuits, and omnipresent media coverage, the Kardashian-Jenner clan has undoubtedly etched its name into the public consciousness. However, the pervasive question that often lingers in the minds of fans and onlookers alike is a simple yet intriguing one: what race are the Kardashians?

Delving into the depths of their lineage, the Kardashians trace their roots to Armenia, an ethnic group heralding from the mesmerizing region nestled in the South Caucasus of Eurasia. Armenia, renowned for its engrossing history and vibrant culture, has gifted the world with an abundance of artistic, literary, and musical treasures.

Unveiling the Kardashians’ Armenian heritage reveals a poignant connection to their late father, Robert Kardashian Sr., who was of Armenian-American descent. Remembered as an esteemed attorney and astute businessman, Robert Kardashian Sr. left an indelible mark on the world with his involvement in the infamous O.J. Simpson trial—an event that still reverberates throughout history. In 2003, Robert Kardashian Sr. passed away, leaving behind a lasting legacy.

FAQ:

Q: Are all the Kardashians of Armenian descent?
A: Although Kourtney, Kim, Khloé, and Rob Kardashian share Armenian roots through their father, their mother, Kris Jenner, hails from Scottish, Dutch, and English ancestry. Nevertheless, the family has wholeheartedly embraced and celebrated their Armenian heritage, perpetuating its significance throughout the years.

Q: Do the Kardashians identify themselves as Armenian?
A: Yes, the Kardashians champion their Armenian heritage, expressing pride and solidarity. They have embarked on multiple journeys to Armenia, avidly participating in cultural affairs and leveraging their influential platforms to raise awareness regarding Armenian history and pertinent issues.

Q: Are there other notable Armenians in the entertainment industry?
A: Beyond the Kardashians, the entertainment industry boasts a wealth of talented Armenian individuals. Amongst them are Serj Tankian and the renowned band System of a Down, acclaimed filmmaker Atom Egoyan, and the esteemed actress Angela Sarafyan.

In essence, the Kardashian siblings are inherently tied to their Armenian ancestry, bestowed upon them by their late father, Robert Kardashian Sr. Their unabashed celebration and perpetuation of their heritage have catapulted them into the realms of not just pop culture icons, but influential figures shaping the public’s perception of Armenia, its history, and its indomitable spirit.

https://gillettnews.com/news/the-kardashians-unraveling-their-armenian-heritage/267242/#gsc.tab=0



‘We are in a zombie state’: Armenian refugees endure a life in limbo

Washington Post
Nov 28 2023

By Anush Babajanyan and Ruby Mellen

YEREVAN, Armenia — They fled their homes with few belongings.

After a brutal military operation restored Azerbaijan’s sovereign control of the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh in September, tens of thousands of ethnic Armenians from the enclave have left, many afraid they would lose their freedom under Azerbaijani rule. Azerbaijani officials insisted that no one was being forced to leave, but they could offer few guarantees of safety.

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, explained

For decades, since Soviet times, Armenia and Azerbaijan have clashed over the mountainous region, which is in Azerbaijan’s internationally recognized territory but whose population, following wars and expulsions, was 95 percent ethnic Armenian.

Azerbaijan took back much of its territory in a brief war in 2020 that ended in a fragile Russian-brokered truce but left uncertain the fate of more than 120,000 residents, including those in the capital, Stepanakert.

What you need to know about Nagorno-Karabakh

In the 1920′s, as part of a divide-and-rule tactic, the Soviet government first established the autonomous region of Nagorno-Karabakh, where at least 95 percent of the population is ethnically Armenian, in Azerbaijan.

In 1988 authorities in Nagorno-Karabakh sought to unite with the then-Soviet republic of Armenia and declared independence from Azerbaijan, another Soviet republic.
After the Soviet Union collapsed, a full-scale war broke out in 1992 between the two new countries over control of the region. Nagorno-Karabakh is located within the internationally recognized borders of Azerbaijan but is mostly controlled by political factions linked to Armenia.
Between 20,000 and 30,000 people were killed in that conflict and hundreds of thousands were displaced before a cease-fire was declared in 1994. Armenia ended up controlling the region, and occupying 20 percent of total Azerbaijani territory.
In 2020, a full-scale war broke out after Azerbaijan launched an offensive across the line of contact held by Armenian forces and local fighters. As part of the Russian-mediated cease-fire, Armenia had to cede swaths of territory it had controlled for decades.
More than 7,000 combatants were killed, according to the International Crisis Group, and Russian peacekeepers were deployed to patrol the region.
In September of this year, Azerbaijan took over the region after a 24 hour military operation, leading to thousands of Armenians to flee.

Armenia and Azerbaijan have fought two wars over the territory in the past 30 years. More than 1 million people were displaced in the late-1990s, including more than 700,000 ethnic Azeris.

On Sept. 19, Azerbaijani forces stormed deeper into Nagorno-Karabakh, toppling the regional Armenia-aligned government and setting off a mass exodus of ethnic Armenian residents.

For many, a new life in Armenia is an unsettling reality. The shock of leaving their homes remains all-consuming; the memories of the moment everything changed are constantly present.

“I cannot accept that this is the end.”

Ani Balayan, 18

A student, photographer and videographer from the city of Stepanakert, Balayan relocated to work at a news outlet, Civilnet, and to study in Yerevan this summer.

I have been displaced twice. Once in 2020, and now. This summer, when I was about to travel to Armenia for my studies I was afraid that I might not be able to go back. I still cannot believe I won’t be able to go back.

I just try to go to my classes, come to work and not think of it all. I cannot accept that this is the end and that we have lost what was ours. I feel half myself, rather than the complete Ani I used to be.

Your home is different from any other home, no matter how well you are accepted and welcomed. I have friends here, but I cannot communicate with them.

One day we were having lunch with Civilnet colleagues. When we were done I looked at my phone and read that Stepanakert was being attacked. I called my mother to ask what was going on and right there in the middle of the street I fell and began to cry, because all of it was absurd.

We were hoping that one day it would be better, with no war. We were hoping we would return to our village. But Sept. 19 changed everything, and now there is no hope of going home. All of that has turned into a dream.

________________________________

“We are in a zombie state.”

Armine Avanesyan, 39

Armine and her daughter Anjelika are from Stepanakert. They settled in a relative’s home in the village of Noramarg, an hour away from Yerevan.

Single mother Armine Avanesyan, 39, and her daughter Anjelika, 8, stand outside their temporary home in Noramarg Village, Armenia, on Oct. 3. (Anush Babajanyan for The Washington Post)

It was all unexpected. We felt horrible when we were told we had to leave everything — our jobs, our home. My daughter had just learned to go to school on her own. She attended dancing and chess classes.

Anjelika says every day that she wants to go back. She wants to go to our house. We understand that it is unfortunately impossible. She was returning home when the bombing began. I made a quick video call. She stood there crying, and I didn’t even know what to tell her.

We didn’t have a basement in our building. I told her to run toward our house and find some people who could protect her until I came. Two girls took her to a basement. I came to her under the sounds of bombing.

We are in a zombie state. We wish all of this was a dream.

________________________________

“They were shooting directly at houses, at people.”

Gegham Babayan, 50

A veteran of the first Nagorno-Karabakh war and father of 10 children, Babayan fled Stepanakert and lives in an apartment in Yerevan.

A veteran of the first Nagorno-Karabakh war, Gegham Babayan, 50, poses for a photo at his newly rented home in Yerevan, Armenia, on Oct. 4. (Anush Babajanyan for The Washington Post)

As my first-grader Mosi came from school, the bombing began. They were shooting directly at houses, at people. Another son, Tigo, was missing. It was 5 p.m. I was looking and couldn’t find him. There was no connection. Around 11 p.m., the neighbor called us and said Tigo was alive. My neighbor had hidden him in a basement to protect him from the bombings.

I grew up with Azerbaijanis. During the Soviet Union, we all lived in peace together. Now, there is no Soviet Union, and [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is weak. Those [Azerbaijani] soldiers killed Russians, too.

I was at home when I saw around 10 [Azerbaijanis] approach my house. They were young boys. They told me they were protecting us. I asked them what they wanted, and they asked for potatoes. They were hungry. I told them we did not have any — we were in a blockade. They were not bad boys.

The people of Armenia have accepted us. But when we recover, we have to unite and take Karabakh back.

________________________________

“I looked at my father, and he said, ‘I will come back, it is okay.’”

Hasmik Aghababyan, 10

Hasmik was at school when the attacks began. She and her family fled to a hotel in southern Armenia.

Hasmik Aghababyan, 10, is outside Hotel Goris, in Goris, Armenia, on Oct. 2. (Anush Babajanyan for The Washington Post)

We were at school and class was over. My mother was there, too, at a parent-teacher meeting. Then everything started. My mother and I ran into the basement. When it was calmer, my father came and took us to another basement.

Then we went to the [Stepanakert] airport [which was not operational but was a staging ground for evacuations]. We stayed at the airport for three or four days. Buses were provided for us to leave.

On the way to Armenia, we saw the [Azerbaijanis]. They asked my father to get out of the car. My mother was scared that they would take him away.

I looked at my father, and he said: “I will come back. It is okay.” Then they let him go.

My mother has not told me when we are going back to school. I want to go, but my brother does not. I have one friend here, her name is Mariam. I will play with her a bit, until my friends come.

________________________________

“I want to go to a place where there is no shooting, where there is peace.”

Natasha Petrosyan, 66

Petrosyan fled from the Martakert province of Nagorno-Karabakh to Goris, Armenia. She has nowhere to live and plans to travel to Yerevan.

Natasha Petrosyan, 66, waits in central Goris, Armenia, for transportation to the capital Yerevan on Oct. 1. (Anush Babajanyan for The Washington Post)

It was sudden. They started bombing at 1 p.m. on Sept 19. Around 2 p.m., our window burst open. A bomb fell into our backyard.

In the Stepanakert airport, kids were crying. Some had two kids, others had six. I stayed at the airport around four days, and then in someone’s backyard for six days. The road [to Armenia] took three days.

I could not imagine before that we would willingly leave our homes. And I cannot imagine that now. I want to go to a place where there is no shooting, where there is peace.

________________________________

Mellen reported from Washington.

Testimonies were edited for clarity.

Armenpress: EU shares Armenian Prime Minister’s vision of open South Caucasus

 10:48, 20 November 2023

YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 20, ARMENPRESS. EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus and the crisis in Georgia, Toivo Klaar, has expressed support to the Armenian government’s Crossroads of Peace project.

In an interview with Armenpress Brussels correspondent, Klaar said that there ought to be no issue of extraterritoriality concerning the connections. He said that it is quite logical that any road, any railway that goes through Armenian territory is controlled by Armenia. 

Special Representative Klaar also spoke about the possible peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan and the guaranteed right to return of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians.

Unlike Azerbaijan, which regularly talks about the so-called Zangezur Corridor in the context of unblocking regional communications, obviously implying the idea of having an extra-territorial corridor through the sovereign territory of Armenia, the Armenian government proposes the Crossroads of Peace project, which implies the unblocking of regional communications based on the jurisdiction and sovereignty of countries and as a result of its implementation the region can become an important international logistics and trade intersection and also a kind of guarantee for peace. How would you interpret this initiative of the Armenian government and what opportunities do you see here? Do you consider the implementation of this project possible, taking into account the destructive position of Azerbaijan in the matter of unblocking communications?

First of all, I think that, a few months ago [in May 2023], in Moscow, President Aliyev very clearly said publicly on television, in a meeting that they had with Prime Minister Pashinyan in the presence of President Putin, that naming it a ‘corridor’ doesn't imply extra-territoriality. President Aliyev has said – also on other occasions in smaller settings – that this does not imply extra-territoriality. Yes, calling it a corridor, as you know, we say transport corridors in reference to different corridors that we have in Europe and we never imply extra-territoriality. So, obviously, from our perspective, it is quite logical that any road, any railway that goes through Armenian territory is controlled by Armenia, or any road or railway that goes through Azerbaijani territory or goes through, I don't know, German territory, is controlled by the country in question. So, that is absolutely the one and only logical arrangement. And what is also very legitimate is, for instance, in this case Azerbaijan, to want to have an assurance that Azerbaijani citizens and cargo crossing Armenian territory will be safe and secure. That is perfectly logical and normal. But how that is being done in terms of how it is ensured is the responsibility of the Armenian authorities. I think the vision of Prime Minister Pashinyan of road and railway connections uniting countries is something we absolutely share. We absolutely share that vision of an open South Caucasus where railway and road connections are open, and countries are reconnected in a way that they were at the end of the Soviet period and even more so, because also the road and railway connections across  to Türkiye, and naturally Iran, which is already the case, but also to Türkiye, should also be open. That is how we see the future, absolutely, our vision of a South Caucasus at peace is one where these transport connections are all open again and there is trade, there is people travelling across the various frontiers.

Since you have mentioned the Azerbaijani President’s request that the Azerbaijani citizens should cross this corridor in a very safe way, here I want to ask a question, which concerns the Nagorno-Karabakh Armenian residents who were forcibly displaced. What is your take concerning the right of these people to go back and also to make sure that we will not forget that and just jump to other issues in a few months’ time? But the Lachin corridor was blocked and Armenians did not have the chance to cross safely, many of them are arrested and charged. And Azerbaijani forces didn’t guarantee any kind of safety for these Armenians. So, Azerbaijan is asking for things that it didn't do as well. So what is your take on this, mainly on the Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians’ right to be back?

I think you are bringing in many different issues, but I would focus on the core question of the former residents of Nagorno-Karabakh being able to return. We absolutely believe that this is a very important thing, that first of all, they are guaranteed the right to return. And secondly, that the kind of conditions are created, that will provide them with sufficient security, and a sense of safety that they will wish to do so. And we have said that very clearly from the EU’ point of view, that all persons who have been displaced should be able to return to their former places of residence if they wish to do so, in safety and security. And, in that sense, this is something that we have been pushing for, in all kinds of different fora. We believe that that is a very important issue that does need to be addressed. But of course, nobody can be forced to return if they don't wish to. But if they are, the maximum effort should be made to provide them with the kind of conditions that would allow at least a fair number of them to be able to decide to return.

Since you talked about peace in the region… Azerbaijan continues its expansionist rhetoric and wants to reach a peace agreement only within the framework that suits itself. How do you imagine the peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan? What points should be included in it so that it can be called fair and balanced and be sustainable?

From my perspective, I think it is important that, on the one hand, you have a treaty, you have a text, which may or may not be very exhaustive in its wording. It all depends on how Armenia and Azerbaijan in the end decide how to frame, how to phrase things in that treaty text. At least as important as the eventual peace treaty, is what you refer to as the implementation, the conditions that come afterwards. And there of course, we talked about the opening of communications, we talked about the delimitation of the border, to me also what is very important is to ensure the kind of conditions along the border, which means that there is a distancing of forces, a genuine sense of security that arises, and that is provided to residents along the border, but also more broadly. And then, of course, you have all these issues like, you know, opening of embassies, ensuring opening of direct air links, people being able to travel back and forth. Rhetoric, naturally also, will be an important thing for all concerned. After more than 30 years of conflict, it is not only about rhetoric being used by Azerbaijan, there is also in Armenia. There have been statements by different actors and in different contexts. The whole context has to change in terms of really providing a sense for the populations in Armenia and Azerbaijan, that, really, we are in a different world now, in a situation where the South Caucasus can really fulfil its role as crossroads, crossroads of peace in the north-south and east-west directions. And so, this is to me at least as important as the signing of a peace treaty text, which, as I say is important, but what follows that is at least as important, so that there's this real sense of a change in the circumstances.

The EU wants to be the broker who will mediate this Peace Treaty. However, the Azerbaijani side first refused the meeting in Granada at the last moment, then the meeting scheduled for the end of October in Brussels. How do you interpret these rejections by Aliyev? To what extent does the EU consider Azerbaijan's steps as constructive?

First of all, the EU doesn't have to be anywhere in this context. We have offered, and President Michel in particular has offered, his good offices. For us, the primary interest is to actually have an agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan. And where that is ultimately signed is to us much less important than the fact that there is genuine normalisation between Armenia and Azerbaijan. So that's one thing. As far as President Aliyev deciding not to come to Grenada is concerned, well, we were disappointed, we thought that it was an important possibility and quite important forum to send strong messages. We are still, President Michel is still, ready and willing to organise a meeting of the leaders in Brussels at the earliest possible opportunity. Well, dates certainly are important. But the most important thing is to actually move forward and that is what we are focused on, to try to encourage forward movement in a genuine normalisation of relations.

Many political experts think that Azerbaijan is not really interested in the European platform and the 3+3 format is more beneficial to Aliyev. What is your assessment of this approach?

I have no particular opinion, from our perspective, we look at the “3+3” meeting, the recent one as well as the previous ones, as something where countries of the region certainly have issues that, as neighbours, they want to discuss and they should be able to discuss in a sort of regional setting. At the same time, I understand also that the understanding has been, at least initially, that particularly the conflict, the peace agreement, the settlement, should not really be a subject of discussion in that particular format. So, again, for us, the most important thing is progress, where that progress happens is much less important. But we do believe that, actually, in our view, there is no real reason why we cannot have serious progress in the settlement process, because, for us, the issues on the table are very few and we believe these have been discussed many times over, so we don't really see a reason why we could not move and why Azerbaijan and Armenia could not move very quickly towards normalisation of relations.

Azerbaijan criticizes the arming of Armenia, while it has three times higher military budget, and weapons shipments do not stop landing at the Baku airport. How do you interpret this rhetoric of Azerbaijan?

Well, I think that every country has the right to defend itself and to purchase the necessary weapons that it deems necessary for the defense of its territory. That’s my simple answer. Most countries in the world are purchasing weapons from abroad for the purpose of defending their territory. So, in that sense, there is nothing spectacular or wrong about this.

The Foreign Ministry of Azerbaijan criticized Mr. Borrell's statement during the press conference and said that "The EU's attempts to supply Armenia with weaponry and thereby support its insidious militarization policy that undermines peace and stability in our region, encourages a policy leading to new confrontations in the region, that lays a responsibility on the EU. Plans to employ the European Peace Facility, which, among other areas, implies the buildup of military capabilities, serve to exacerbate tensions in the region". In fact, Azerbaijan threatens not only Armenia but also the EU. What is your take on this? 

Well, I think we very much welcome the interest of the Armenian government to expand its relationship with the European Union. As for Armenia’s interest in the European Peace Facility, from our perspective, this is about potentially supporting Armenia in certain areas where it sees itself to be vulnerable – cyber security has been mentioned as one – and there again, if it does go forward (this is still in the planning phase), we don't see this as being aimed against anybody but rather, for the purpose of strengthening Armenia’s sovereignty, which, I think, is in the interest of everyone, not only of Armenia, but also of Armenia’s neighbours and of the wider international community. We want to have a strong, self-confident Armenia that is a good partner to the European Union and is equally a good partner to its neighbours, including to Azerbaijan.

 

Lilit Gasparyan