CivilNet: Arif Yunusov: Azerbaijani Authorities Do Not Know How to Talk to People

CIVILNET.AM

11:29

CivilNet’s Stella Mehrabekyan spoke to Arif Yunusov (Yunus), an Azerbaijani author, historian, and human rights activist who lives in the Netherlands since 2016 and is the Head of the Department of Conflictology and Migration at the Azerbaijan Institute of Peace and Democracy. 

In April 2014, Arif Yunusov and his wife Leyla were jailed on charges of extortion and treason for allegedly spying for Armenia. After being detained, Arif Yunusov was sentenced to 7 years in jail; his wife, Leyla Yunusov, was sentenced to 8.5 years in jail. Their sentences were suspended 15 months later and the couple was allowed to leave for the Netherlands. On July 16, 2020, the day this interview was conducted, the  European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) recognized the violation of rights of Yunusovs and ruled against Azerbaijan. 

Arif Yunusov spoke to CivilNet on the recent escalation on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border and the internal developments in Azerbaijan.

– Mr. Yunusov, before talking about what is taking place on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, let’s begin with the internal political situation in Azerbaijan where in the last days there were protests and mostly anti-Armenian statements and there are some questions as to whether these were directed by the government or not, and if it is like that, in your opinion is it possible that the situation would get out of control? 

– Thank you. Yes it is true that, for a while, due to the coronavirus, we had a quiet period, you understand, just as it was there, and all of a sudden, with this incident the situation drastically changed, and not just in the capital. While the center of attention was on the capital, also in other population centers in Azerbaijan, gatherings and protests took place; all were connected to the escalation of the situation on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border and, in the first place, they were all tied to the funerals. The bodies arrived from the conflict zone and once  they were interred, that caused massive spontaneous meetings and protests but more accurately these were processions during which there were calls, of course, connected to Karabakh. If you heard the slogans, they were “Karabakh is ours”, “we need to return Karabakh”, and calls to the authorities to start a war. It is all correct that in the beginning everything was peaceful, even though there were calls to war but there were no anti-government slogans. 

Everything was within the framework of the situation on the border, because we have to take into consideration that, occasionally, here or there, people inaccurately think that each country thinks that for itself the question of Karabakh is important while for the other side it is not a priority. And then it heats up, here they think about the Armenians that Russia pulls the strings and vice versa. In reality the Karabakh issue is equally important for Armenians and for Azerbaijanis. Periodically, it can be in second or third place of importance when people are thinking for example about corruption or coronavirus, but the problem lies deep and as soon as it surfaces due to some incidents, clashes or especially death of many people, everything comes out. People came out to the streets not under orders; it was spontaneous. It can be said that during the period of coronavirus people were under pressure and this was a so-called explosion. Yes, there was stored up energy, that’s true. 

Energy had been accumulating due to lack of satisfaction with the authorities during the pandemic. They did many silly things. People were very distraught. There was also pent up   long standing dissatisfaction with the negotiation process and with the fact the Karabakh conflict is not resolved. Let’s not forget the fact that, in comparison to my generation, a new generation has grown that does not at all remember what happened in the 1980s and 1990s; they were born after, they don’t know. They know that every day the authorities are saying that we are mighty and that we have a strong army, but if everything is mighty, why haven’t we been able to return Karabakh? This has been a frequent slogan. And when these events took place, and these were not just incidents, people were stirred up that senior officers were killed. For example, in the history of the Karabakh conflict there hadn’t been a case of a general dying. 

This is the first case when an officer of such caliber died in the field, during  military operations. Colonels, yes, one from our side died in 1994, but never a general. This was the first time, and not just any general, but a very popular general who truly, as a rare case, a major general who lived in a rented apartment, who gave his salary to his soldiers, to whom in 2016 an apartment was given by presidential decree and he turned around and gifted it to the  family of a fallen soldier. So this was a person close to the people, very popular. He died. There is another angle too, people were very angry that he was buried, we have two honorary places of burial — the main and the secondary. He was buried in the secondary one and this really angered many people because rumors started that in the main cemetery there are too many people, people  whose names don’t mean anything, some even from the Soviet period – some deputies, communists. So they could be buried there, but a person who fought and died for the homeland is sent to the secondary cemetery This angered many people. In any case, the main protest that happened, I am not talking about the gatherings that were in Sumgait, Tovuz and other localities, the main one – that attracted the attention in Armenia too – was in Baku. 


– How high is the probability that the built-up dissatisfaction and all these processions might target Aliyev himself? 

– That’s the exact moment that very often gatherings that start and can even be supported by the authorities can turn against them. There have been such cases, even in Russia Putin was counting on football fans in a rally  during which the police started beating people and the slogans turned against Putin, so it is a common occurrence when you support something that can get out of hand. Especially in this case. That was football. But here in Azerbaijan these gatherings were connected to deaths. It was clear that the body arrived and this is not always an advantage for the authorities because a number of questions arose. How come a high-ranking officer died? And that’s exactly what happened. So when the leadership, it also needs to be said that in Azerbaijan the authorities don’t know how to talk to people, because the main argument there, if you watch the video, was that people wanted for someone to go out to them and give explanations. 

Our authorities simply don’t know how to do it. They can’t talk to people. They can give orders. And they gave the order to disperse. They dispersed harshly using tear gas, water cannons, batons and sticks and that strongly upset everyone and the situation got out of control. That’s why there was the reaction of Ilham Aliyev. He does not like these demonstrations at all. He entirely thinks that he decides everything in the country. He needs to figure it out. When he sees that anything isn’t going according to his scenario or by his order, that pushes him out of his confines. Of course these demonstrations in Azerbaijan with certain developments can bring negative outcomes for the authorities, because people were seriously bewildered that they were beat up when in reality they came out in support of the government. That’s where the paradox was – they came out in support. 

And here the situation is also unpleasant because Ilham Aliyev decided to berate the crowd,  either by stupidity or sloppiness, when he said that there were  provocateurs from the opposition. And most importantly, he said that he checked with  army recruitment offices, and was told  that  only 150 people had shown up to enlist. That was very insulting, because first, in Armenia, people mocked Azerbaijan, saying with a population of 10 million,only 150 people want to fight? This is of course untrue because just in Tovuz alone a few hundred people, not even the youth, but former servicemen came and expressed willingness to fight if weapons were issued to them. So, just over there, already there were more than what Ilham Aliyev had said. And more in other places. That too, seriously angered people. It’s clear that if there are other demonstrations and processions those might have unforeseen consequences. That’s why Ilham Aliyev also took jabs at the opposition. He sees the hand of the opposition everywhere when in reality in all of these demonstrations the opposition didn’t play any role. This was truly spontaneous. Just like the events on the border had the characteristics of spontaneity, similarly the demonstrations were spontaneous. I am going to repeat it again, because the topic of Karabakh is always present strongly in the hearts of Armenians and Azerbaijanis meaning that these same events could have taken place in Armenia and no one would have said it was  a scripted scenario. It  is simply the people for whom this is dear and here were bodies of casualties, and such personalities they were, so the reaction was stronger. 

– Since the dispersal  wasn’t very harsh, can it be inferred that people were given a chance to blow off steam in this manner?

– In reality these actions caught the authorities off guard and let’s say that on the border and with these demonstrations they were caught by surprise. No need to think that they were ready for these situations. It’s one thing when in a village or a small town people are returning from a cemetery and chanting slogans like “Karabakh is ours” or “Down with the Armenians” and such, that does not threaten the authorities. They closed their eyes to this. It’s another thing when in Baku, the demonstrations moved toward the Parliament building and even went inside and even more, that people were livid that the General was not buried where they demanded and specifically,  those in power did not come out and talk to them. 

So to speak about some kind of scripted set-up , by the authorities, yes there were provocative moments, we also paid attention to those, but those were provocations not from the opposition side but from the Azerbaijani authorities. For example, among those who entered the parliament building, I saw a general of the state security service,  Major General Rauf Khalafov. I understand that plainclothes members of the security service were in  the crowd, that’s understandable, but a general and a cousin to Ilham Aliyev was among those who entered the parliament? That already raises a question. There we also saw, and now it is actively being talked about on social media that among those who actively called for direct action were plainclothes police officers. This all speaks to the fact that, yes, they definitely tried to use this and maybe in the future will use it for reasons of provocation, most likely by the authorities because from the side of the opposition, I repeat, there was nothing of that nature. Even more, the opposition declared that it is ready to support the government in this regard, so to say that there is instigated action here, means it can only be by the authorities or from within the government. 

– Let’s talk a bit about the personnel changes in Azerbaijan’s government. In  recent days, the discussion is about the anticipated resignation of the Minister of Foreign Affairs Elmar Mammadyarov, there is also talk of the dismissal of Zakir Hasanov. All of this had started already months ago with the resignations of the old guard. Please share a bit about that. 

– Yes, in reality those resignations were not connected to the Karabakh conflict but with the internal political struggle within the ruling system. That struggle was between the Pashayev clan and Ilham and Mehriban Aliyev on the one side,  and the old guard of Heidar Aliyev on the other side whom we call Ramiz Mehdiyev’s team. This struggle has gone on for many years since the first days of 2009 and ended last year with Mehriban Aliyeva’s victory. Then Ramiz Mehdiyev resigned, Ali Hasanov, of the President’s office, followed him out. After that it was clear that a total change was starting and this was the exit from the political arena for all the officials of different ranks that were connected to the old command. There was  talk about parliamentarians, and civil servants in various ministries and also officials in the executive branch. 

The parliamentary elections happened within this framework where Mehriban Aliyeva’s supporters were voted in. Dismissals and arrests followed within the executive branch, and of ministers. For example the minister of culture resigned. So these processes were the so-called change of the old guard with the new team of the Pashayevs. True, the pandemic slowed this process a bit, but now in connection with the escalation on the border new scapegoats are necessary who can be packaged as fighting against corruption or even as a beginning of reforms. Here they always frame resignations as reform. In reality, one petty corruptionist is replaced by another one who will carry himself in the same manner except that he will be from the team. What is anticipated now? Yes, following the very harsh criticism that Ilham Aliyev publicly conveyed on the prime minister by saying that he is unable to find the minister of foreign affairs, it’s a bit funny, when he asks the prime minister, “have you called him?” It was a childish theater of the absurd or comedy. It is understandable what you want, just say it as it is. But presenting this as if he could not be located, who will believe in that tale? Yes, he will be dismissed.

Ilham Aliyev made him the focus of criticism also because he had spoken with  Armenia’s Foreign Minister Mnatsakanyan about cooperation during coronavirus and it came down as how can there be any sort of a talk about a cooperation with Armenia. So, here we have a question: then what are you doing with Pashinyan? This topic is a bit absurd. It is clear that he wants to gain some political capital on this and show himself in the light of recent events as a cool and resolute person. It’s clear that Mammadyarov’s fate is sealed, he will resign, and regarding Hasanov, he will most likely leave too. In that regard I will still wait because the question is not completely solved. Among the slogans that were uttered on July 15 during the processions in Baku there were calls for the resignation of the Chief of General Staff Sadikov who is Hassanov’s opponent. So there is also a struggle within the army between the minister and chief of general staff. This is an old struggle. Even many court cases were initiated due to this struggle, this is an old topic but the change of cadres is in process and will continue. 

– Mr. Yunusov, let’s talk about what is happening on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. Am I understanding correctly that you think that everything started with a spontaneous incident and was not a premeditated action? 

– I am more than sure that this was spontaneous because when compared to April 2016, you see that then there was some sort of logic. There, it was visible — maybe not across the entire line of contact but a small section of it –, there was some sort of a logic in the actions of the Azerbaijani military and authorities. But here there was no logic whatsoever. From the start it was evident that we are forgetting something. There is a Line of Contact at the front, in Karabakh. There everything is clear:  trenches here, trenches there and a neutral zone in between which you can’t cross because it is laid with mines and is also under direct target. On the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, the problem is with demarcation. Even with friendly Georgia, there are a mass of problems because there is no clear demarcation of borders, and there are regular incidents including the one around the monastery of David Gareja last year which almost escalated to a military incident but they were able to avoid it. That fact says that if a border is not clarified, then sooner or later, it ends badly. In our case the situation is even more difficult because we are in a war, we are not friends or allies. 

So what does an Armenian-Azerbaijani border mean? Each side interprets the  former Soviet borders as they see fit, the reality is that each side controls several strategic high grounds, has installed positions and declares that this is their territory. It is not clarified that this high point is yours and this one isn’t. It’s what you think is yours. Of course the opposing side does not agree with this and periodically incidents happen when either side wants to take this or another high ground, or someone gets confused and crosses the red line, this or that shepherd or soldier is sent back. So this is a common occurrence. The problem is the absence of demarcation and the absence of a clear border. Yes, since last year the border protection forces are there to decrease the possibility of a conflict. A year ago  we read a statement that the forces were pulled back and now border protection would do the monitoring. In reality as we saw that is not the case. When we read that the whole incident happened because of that UAZ vehicle, the first question that came up, since the Azerbaijani authorities a year ago ceremoniously declared that all border crossings have been supplied with Mercedes gelandewagen vehicles, there are no more UAZs. But the Ministry of Defense of course has them. 

So if this was an accident that the car ended up crossing the border territory, then this was not the work of border patrol. It’s clear that in the situation where the clear-marked border is lacking, the UAZ with Azerbaijani soldiers ended up there truly by accident. They didn’t know where, saw the high ground, and decided to go take the position. They were intercepted. The official Armenian version said there were warning shots, but that is the official version. In real war situations, the Azerbaijani side could have interpreted it as fire directed at them. One thing is to notify by phone and say you crossed a border, go back, another is to shoot and it doesn’t matter if you are shooting in the air or to kill. In either case it was an accident. Because if there was anything planned, they would not have acted that way, they would have come out in a different way. But here, because of some vehicle that definitely ended up on Armenian territory, there were military actions and everything escalated. The actions of both sides, and I looked at statements from officials in Azerbaijani presidential administration, from your government and others, I saw a lack of uniformity. That  signalled that everyone was caught by surprise. We are seeing that there are no clear borders.

– Mr. Yunusov, in any case, serious fighting continues as we speak.  In  your opinion, will this lead to a wide scale escalation and spread to other sections of the border or to Karabakh and what are your views on the common assumption that  everything depends on the Russian position. 

– I don’t believe that this will turn into a wide scale war. It will remain a border incident, a serious one. Moreover, I know that there are already unofficial negotiations along the triangle between Baku-Moscow-Yerevan. The Americans and Europeans are not participating, it’s a triangle but negotiations are ongoing. We are not told about these negotiations but they are and during these negotiations at midnight a truce was reached and no one will be shooting there. But, following the events in Baku, it looks like a command was given and since this morning the fighting restarted. But again, according to my sources a few hours ago, truce was reached again so most likely now something will be reached even if not at once or maybe with some conditions but a sort of a truce will be achieved because no one needs a wide scale war. War is always a major risk and a risk for everyone. No one will win especially when you are not even prepared for it. Wide scale war means massive losses. If now, after  short but serious fighting, there are deaths and the reaction was what it was,  can you imagine the situation when the numbers of dead are higher, what would the situation be let’s say during demonstrations in Baku or in Yerevan. No one needs that. In the big picture, Russia does not need that either. Another thing is your question about the Russian role in this. Certainly Russia plays a role. The region has seen a serious weakening of attention from the West and mainly the United States and the Europeans. Today in our region Russia plays the decisive role. Russia is the decider and according to my information there are negotiations now between Baku and Yerevan through Moscow. I don’t know on what terms the truce will be reached but I believe that we will know the results sometime soon. 

– Thank you, Mr. Yunusov for your time and the conversation. 

– Thank you, and we will be hoping for the best.   

CivilNet: The Karabakh Honeymoon is Officially Over: Azerbaijan Reverts Back to Its Old Ways

CIVILNET.AM

12:49

The deadly fighting along the Tavush-Tovuz section of the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, which started on July 12, once again turned the spotlight on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. After 3 years of relative calm on the frontline, we are now witnessing the biggest escalation since April 2016. At time of writing this, four Armenian and twelve Azerbaijani servicemen have been killed in combat. Azerbaijan’s casualties include a general and a colonel. Multiple reliable sources report that the Armenian Armed Forces took control of a strategic position near the villages of Chinari and Movses in Armenia’s Tavush region.

These unexpected losses on the battlefield sent shock waves through Azerbaijan. On July 14, tens of thousands of protesters flooded the streets of the capital city of Baku, demanding President Ilham Aliyev sack high-ranking officials in the military and launch a large-scale offensive on Karabakh. The pro-war demonstrators chanted anti-Armenian slogans for hours and even broke into the parliament building, they were eventually dispersed by riot police. Aliyev’s long-serving foreign minister Elmar Mammadyarov, who many saw as on his way out, was scapegoated the next day and dismissed by the president. Baku then sent a special forces unit to recapture the lost position but failed and reportedly suffered more casualties. Amid these chaotic developments, the spokesman of Azerbaijan’s Defense Ministry threatened to hit Armenia’s nuclear power plant, causing outrage in Yerevan.

This latest outbreak of the conflict signifies the end of the period of false hopes and illusions regarding the Karabakh peace process which lasted for about two years. in September 2018, Armenia’s newly elected Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azeri President Ilham Aliyev met for the first time on the margins of the CIS summit in Dushanbe. During this meeting, the two leaders agreed to reduce tensions on the frontline and establish a direct line of communication between their militaries. In the following months, the official rhetoric of both sides significantly softened and the ceasefire regime was maintained. The parties to the conflict also acknowledged the need to prepare the populations for peace and even took some symbolic steps in that direction.

However, it was clear from the very start that both leaders used this process to achieve very specific objectives. After taking office in May 2018, Pashinyan desperately needed time to consolidate his power inside the country and implement crucial reforms in the army. Aliyev’s purpose was to imitate a constructive stance against the backdrop of the democratic revolution in Armenia, show that he is willing to engage in meaningful peace talks, and then put the blame for the lack of progress in the negotiation process on Armenia. The ruling elite in Baku also naively hoped that Armenia’s new government would be more inclined to make unilateral concessions.

But as time passed, it became obvious that all the fuss about the rebooted peace process was massively overstated. Baku viewed the negotiation process as a means of legitimizing its future violent acts. Yerevan in its turn was not going to cross any Armenian red lines. That is why the latest escalation was quite anticipated. Ilham Aliyev himself denounced the peace process and slammed the Minsk group on July 7, threatening to use military force. The skirmishes on the border are a direct corollary of his statements. Azerbaijan decided to readopt its policy of “military diplomacy,” which was abandoned in 2017. The objective of that policy is to make Armenia more flexible when at the negotiating table by resorting to small-scale and controlled escalations on the frontline.

Substantive negotiations are impossible in an environment where Azerbaijani officials threaten Armenia with a nuclear holocaust and thousands of people demand war in Baku, chanting “Death to Armenians.” The society and the government of Azerbaijan should get off the vicious circle of hatred and Armenophobia.

This tactic will hardly yield positive results for Baku. Both Armenia and the NKR have learned their lessons from the April War of 2016 and have since implemented thorough reforms to strengthen their security infrastructure. The entire frontline in Artsakh and along the Armenian-Azerbaijani border has been equipped with cutting-edge surveillance technology which gives the Armenian side the capability to detect and prevent even small incursion attempts. Armenian Armed Forces are also much better at coping with the UAV threat. But most importantly, for the first time in more than 25 years, Armenia has a government which is legitimate and enjoys an unprecedented level of popular support. That is why Nikol Pashinyan has more room to maneuver. And as the latest developments have shown, if there is a provocation on the frontline, he won’t hesitate to retaliate.

The escalation in Tavush and Baku’s intention to implement its policy of “military diplomacy” will make the prospects for peace even bleaker. The Armenian side won’t be coerced into making unilateral concessions. Substantive negotiations are impossible in an environment where Azerbaijani officials threaten Armenia with a nuclear holocaust and thousands of people demand war in Baku, chanting “Death to Armenians.” The society and the government of Azerbaijan should get off the vicious circle of hatred and Armenophobia. Let’s not forget that the exact same demands and chants in Baku 30 years ago triggered the war, which created the current status-quo. The mistakes of the past should not be repeated.

Tigran Grigoryan is a political analyst from Nagorno-Karabakh. He holds a Master’s degree in Conflict, Governance, and International Development from the University of East Anglia. 

Recent military actions a big miscalculation from Azerbaijan – Armenian FM

Public Radio of Armenia
The Interview in Arabic can be watched at

Wedding in the rear: Armenian couple marries in border village amid escalation of tensions

Public Radio of Armenia

Azerbaijani Press: Global Community Calls on Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict Settlement within International Law, Supporting Territorial Integrity of Azerbaijan

Capsian News, Azerbaijani Press
 
 
Global Community Calls on Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict Settlement within International Law,
Supporting Territorial Integrity of Azerbaijan
 
By Vusala Abbasova
 
Tensions between Yerevan and Baku flared up following Armenia’s violation of the ceasefire agreement reached in 1994 after four-year full-scale war.
 
 
                               
As tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan remain high in the wake of recent border clashes, foreign government officials and international organizations have reiterated their support for political settlement of the conflict based on international law, which includes restoration of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity.
 
Condemnation of Armenia’s attacks, which broke out last Sunday when Armenian armed forces opened fire on Azerbaijani positions stationed along the border with Armenia by artillery fire, came from Turkey’s Foreign Ministry who blamed Armenia for its aggressive position that hinders peace and stability in the South Caucasus by illegally occupying Azerbaijani lands.
 
“This two-faced attitude of Armenia, which has been illegally occupying Azerbaijani territory for many years, clearly reveals who is the real obstacle to the establishment of lasting peace and stability in the South Caucasus,” the ministry said in a press release issued on Thursday, adding that “this approach is the manifestation of a mentality which constructs its identity by solely deriving enmity based on a one-sided interpretation of history and which tries to legitimize its own aggression in contravention of international law.”
 
“Armenian authorities need to come to their senses and comprehend, as soon as possible, that they should be part of the solutions, not problems, in the South Caucasus,” the ministry said.
 
Tensions between Yerevan and Baku flared up following Armenia’s violation of the ceasefire agreement reached in 1994 after four-year full-scale war. The recent border clashes resulted in the deaths of twelve Azerbaijani servicemen, including one general, one colonel and two majors. One civilian was also shot dead after the Armenian forces shelled Azerbaijani villages located near the border.
 
Earlier, Italian parliamentarians denounced Armenia’s provocation committed on the Azerbaijani-Armenian state border and expressed support for Azerbaijan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, referring to four United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions passed in 1993 that requires Armenia to immediately withdraw its occupying forces from Azerbaijani lands and return of internally displaced Azerbaijanis to their ancestral lands.
 
Along with Italy and other countries, Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry called on the parties to de-escalate the situation within the framework of international law, and, in particular, the UN Security Council resolutions – 822, 853, 874, and 884. The Ukrainian MFA also voiced support for “the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Azerbaijan within its internationally recognized borders.”
 
Meanwhile, the United Nations (UN), European Union (EU), the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), as well as the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), a military alliance of which Armenia is a member, expressed concerns over the aggravation of the situation and the ceasefire violation, calling the parties of the conflict to take immediate steps to de-escalate the situation.
 
Contrary to Armenia’s expectation for resorting to the Article 4 of the CSTO Charter, under which an attack on a member state is designated as an attack against all members, the CSTO did not give it support.
 
In addition, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the largest and most influential international organization of 57 Muslim-majority countries with a population of over 1.8 billion people, condemned Armenia for its attacks and demanded the full and unconditional withdrawal of the Armenian armed forces from the occupied territories of Azerbaijan under the resolutions and decisions of the OIC and the UN Security Council.
 
The occupation of Azerbaijan’s Nagorno-Karabakh region by Armenia came after both nations gained independence following the Soviet Union’s dissolution in 1991. Armenia kicked off military aggression against Azerbaijan to occupy the Nagorno-Karabakh region. The full-scale war lasted until a ceasefire deal in 1994. As a result of the bloody war, Armenia occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan’s internationally recognized territories – the Nagorno-Karabakh region and seven surrounding districts. The war claimed the lives of 30,000 ethnic Azerbaijanis and displaced one million others from their homeland.
 
In 1993, the United Nations Security Council adopted four resolutions demanding the immediate withdrawal of the occupying forces from Azerbaijani lands and the return of internally displaced Azerbaijanis to their ancestral lands. All four legally binding documents go unfulfilled by Armenia to date.
 
 
 

Governor of Armenia’s Tavush Province: Today we attended a wedding ceremony, people’s lives are back to normal

News.am, Armenia
Governor of Armenia’s Tavush Province: Today we attended a wedding ceremony, people’s lives are back to normal Governor of Armenia’s Tavush Province: Today we attended a wedding ceremony, people’s lives are back to normal

22:33, 19.07.2020

If you have any social issue, or any other problem, call the hotline of the regional governor’s office of Tavush Province. This is what Governor of Tavush Province Hayk Chobanyan told reporters in Ijevan, addressing the residents of Tavush Province.

“The people in Tavush Province have dignity, and we won’t let anyone violate our dignity for small dividends. I call on everyone to follow this rule. The state and government support our population, and be rest assured that we are capable of solving the issues facing us,” the governor said.

Chobanyan added that if there are people who have a great desire to help, they can join the declared platforms.

The governor assured that life is back on track in the borderline villages. “Today we attended a wedding ceremony at the church in Movses village, and it was very beautiful. Life is back on track, and people’s lives are back to normal,” he said.

https://news.am/eng/news/592287.html?__cf_chl_jschl_tk__=0a8ebc3d616ee6f70e7e73ba55222bf7667fe21d-1595189624-0-AYSza_cCwsaLwTVka6ORoOY8xwCP05xPNXD934WtpPfO7hnB0jGGSY4wevtBaYby1MX-hdHp60l43MNxg2k5IDVhaLAZU9Tv4W-Iv2NkV0cReco9hYQPMzBPBGbSq4AvjT3Ozh_JPQl8HdIIHsGrFEgMBGBnp6PRfVa0WRzAzx_dwwqENSdWjRHtHxQRmR6dgRDvWvy2qhr_ifK3dTpr4yrSm1Et_jC6iq9EPTsFYwiBzqqJcM_IpDVENq_SL7Q3EzuwRwPH0DPuPYswET_jWhL8TCX5o_nwYdirbA9i8bQxXfGmIe9mt4FmUbjJ7dAKfPu2829YP5dic5RP_TlYV2qivmKM_RuLhixkbBSWwzj6

Turkish Press: Switzerland: Protest held against Armenian attacks

Anadolu Agency, Turkey
Switzerland: Protest held against Armenian attacks

19.07.2020


GENEVA

Tens of people in Switzerland took to the streets on Sunday to protest against Armenia’s cross-border attacks on Azerbaijan and its continued occupation of the Upper Karabakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) region.

Organized by Switzerland-based Azerbaijan Diaspora Organizations Council, the protest was also attended by Turkish organizations in the country.

Carrying Turkish and Azerbaijani flags, the crowd gathered in front of the United Nations Office in Geneva.

The protesters held placards reading “Justice for Azerbaijan” and “Stop Armenian occupation”.

Armenian military attacks since last Sunday have martyred a dozen Azerbaijani soldiers. However, they have since withdrawn after suffering losses following retaliation from the Azerbaijani military.

Azerbaijan has blamed Armenia for the “provocative” actions, with Turkey supporting Baku and warning Yerevan that it will not hesitate to stand against any attack on its eastern neighbor.

Since 1991 the Armenian military has illegally occupied the Upper Karabakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) region, an internationally recognized territory of Azerbaijan.

Four UN Security Council and two UN General Assembly resolutions, as well as decisions by many international organizations, refer to the illegal occupation and demand the withdrawal of Armenian forces from Upper Karabakh and seven other occupied regions of Azerbaijan.



Meanwhile, a threat of war emerges on Europe’s borders

The Brussels Times, Belgium
Meanwhile, a threat of war emerges on Europe’s borders


It is a dry and dusty afternoon in Republic Square, Yerevan – the capital of Armenia. The sun labours low in the Eastern skies, washing the Soviet-era architecture of the plaza in a warm dew. It is October 2019.

I am talking to a group of young Armenian upstarts – all fledgling members of a modernising society in the Transcaucasia region. They are prim, proper, well-educated – a sense of vibrancy and hope manifests in their voices, for the future of their battle-scarred country. All of them played an active part in the previous year’s revolution.

“The way things were going, it was inevitable,” one of the young ‘revolutionaries’ tells me, the ash from his cigarette crumbling into flakes onto the cold, hard Soviet pavement. He uncorks a bottle of local wine and suggestively tilts it in my direction. I oblige.

“We felt as though 2018 was the perfect time for us to finally make progress.”

However, such ‘progress’ is now utterly incongruous with the threat of war that has emerged on the country’s north-eastern flank this week, as armed conflict with Azerbaijan in Armenia’s Tavush province has broken out.

Since the start of the hostilities on 12 July, 16 people have lost their lives. Should the conflict continue, it has the potential of drawing Armenia back into bygone years of aggression and hostility with neighbours.

Despite the geographical location of the recent clashes moving towards a more northerly region, the conflicts have been provoked by age-old disputes over the sovereignty of the mountainous Nagorno-Karabakh area, internationally recognised as part of Azerbaijan, but populated mostly by ethnic Armenians.

The military confrontations are the first major ones since the peaceful revolutions two years ago.

Armenia’s 2018 uprisings against former Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan’s consolidation of power in the country were a response to allegations of corruption at the highest levels of government. The uprisings were led by Nikol Pashinyan, who at the time had been a member of the opposition in Parliament.  Pashinyan had been imprisoned for his leadership of the protests, provoking further public outcry and leading to the government’s fall.

Pashinyan was eventually released and appointed as the country’s Prime Minister, where he sought to adopt a series of liberal reforms for the country, modernising the economy and promoting international trade and investment.

This radical transformation in the political culture of Armenia led to a newfound sense of hope for young people, who had grown up with the spectre of conflict looming large, being technically at war with Azerbaijan concerning Nagorno-Karabakh.

Following the 2018 revolution and at least up until this week’s clashes, Armenia had held lofty ambitions. During my time spent in the country last year, I also met with senior members of government, who were charting a closer relationship with Western partners as a result of their newfound liberty.  As it goes, most of the top brass around Pashinyan’s governmental table all played some part in the 2018 revolution.

Speaking candidly to Armenia’s Deputy-Prime Minister Tigran Avinyan one afternoon, he told me how the idea of accession to the European Union isn’t beyond the realms of reality, but ultimately it would be a question that citizens of his country may need to address in the future.

Armenians feel a profound sense of national pride and solidarity with their country, which achieved independence after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.  However, this was a liberty tinged with bitterness: the post-Soviet years were marred by economic struggles and transport blockades that disrupted vital supply chains to the country. And it wasn’t only Azerbaijan who instigated these disruptions. Turkey also took part, relegating many thousands of Armenians into abject poverty.

I’m walking down a winding road that leads away from the Armenian genocide memorial on the top of Tsitsernakaberd hill, which overlooks the city of Yerevan. The memorial commemorates the 1915 massacre of 1.5 million ethnic Armenians by the Ottoman Empire.

A battered 1980’s Lada pulls over and offers me a lift back into the city. As ever with these chance, serendipitous offerings, I do of course oblige.

‘Roman’ is the name of the driver – sun-kissed, weather-beaten skin and bony knuckles, he has dirt under his fingernails and speaks with a rusty voice. His girlfriend, sitting in the back of the car, translates as our conversation quickly turns to the revolution. Roman isn’t one of the liberal upstarts. He’s a die-hard Armenian patriot.

“We cannot trust anyone where we are in the world,” he says. “With Turkey to the West and Azerbaijan to the East, with are trapped.”

For Roman, 2018 was an ideological struggle to ensure Armenian independence, rather than seize grand ambitions to further liberalise the market economy. His revolution in 2018 was about Armenia’s history, not necessarily its future.

And yet for the country’s Generation Z, the future of the country is all that matters. They want social and economic liberalism, they want choice, Western indulgence and debauchery, and dare I say it, they want to be European Union members.

But Brussels is not best pleased with what it has seen this week in Tavush province. “The EU urges both sides to stop the armed confrontation, refrain from action and rhetoric that provokes tension, and undertake immediate measures to prevent further escalation,” a statement from the EU’s foreign affairs branch read this week, calling for diplomatic efforts to be pursued as part of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Minsk Group.

A de-escalation in tensions is, however, unlikely at this stage. Yerevan has fears that Azerbaijanis have a taste for blood. On Thursday in Baku, protesters marched through the streets, demanding the government deploy the army and announce War on Armenia.

“What scares us is the people of Baku taking to the streets and calling for War,” one Yerevan resident told me on Friday morning. “We are afraid that this could press the government into doing something that may completely destabilise the region.”

And indeed, the Azerbaijanis are not holding back. Defense Ministry spokesman Vagif Dargyakhly said on Thursday that his country might target an Armenian nuclear power plant, should Yerevan launch a strategic attack on a water reservoir in Azerbaijan.

So, while EU leaders in Brussels on Friday night engage in their own political skirmishes, the threat of full-blown war on Europe’s eastern flank is flaring up a rash that could leave a permanent bruise on the continent, unless a solution can soon be found.

Kardashians call on followers to make posts in support of Armenia and Artsakh

Save

Share

 14:38,

YEREVAN, JULY 18, ARMENPRESS. World famous TV stars Khloe, Kourtney and Rob Kardashians have made posts on their ”Instagram” pages in support of Armenia amid the clashes on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, informing the millions of their followers about the provocations of Azerbaijan and urged them to make posts supporting Armenia and Artsakh.

ARMENPRESS reports Kourtney Kardshian shared the articles of ”Zartonk” periodical, which say that Armenia has been attacked, proposing 4 options of assiistance.

The 1st one is about warning the Congress about the attack of Azerbaijan against Armenia and Artsakh. The 2nd is about making or sharing publications about Armenia and Artsakh. The 3rd proposal is making the OSCE and CSTO condemn Azerbaijan, and by the 4th proposal Kardashian urges to take necessary measures for detecting the source of the attacks along the contact line.

Edited and translated by Tigran Sirekanyan

Singer Cher urges not to turn blind eye on Azerbaijani provocation

s

Save

Share

 14:59,

YEREVAN, JULY 18, ARMENPRESS. World famous American pop-singer of Armenian origin Cher (Cherilyn Sarkisian) commented in her Twitter page to a post about the Azerbaijani threats to strike Armenia’s Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant.

”They have been killing Armenians since before I went there. We turn a blind eye. They have oil”, she wrote. Cher visited Armenia on April 28, 1993.

Edited and translated by Tigran Sirekanyan

https://armenpress.am/eng/news/1022276.html?fbclid=IwAR22aNAq4P6EJFi8CPqxKLYvVytUdPdufLBWqNFKUDxzDyJCjEyWbAixHzE