Category: 2023

Nearly 22,500 refugees in Armenia will experience a mental health condition following the recent conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, according to a recent estimate by the World Health Organization. September marked the rapid escalation of a decades-long conflict in Armenia and Azerbaijan, forcing more than 100,000 refugees to flee their homes. Families were forced to make dangerous journeys and arrived in Armenia with little food, water, or shelter.

“These refugees arrived with nothing,” said Marcella Maxfield, Action Against Hunger’s Regional Director for South Caucasus. “Facing an uncertain future, they are now in desperate need of emergency assistance—for both urgent needs like food and water and necessities like bedding, medicine, mental healthcare and psychosocial support.”

Prior to the sudden violence, many ethnic Armenians lived in an autonomous small enclave region or “oblast” called Nagorno-Karabakh. It’s been home to around 120,000 people for decades. But when Azerbaijan launched a sudden offensive at the end of September, nearly all ethnic Armenians left in an exodus. The military offensive was preceded by a nine-month blockade, during which most families in Nagorno-Karabakh faced severe hunger, little electricity, and constant fear.

After a nearly 30-year bid for independence, the de facto authorities in Nagorno-Karabakh agreed to disband its government and armed forces following the attack.

Most of the population was forced to abandon their homes and relocate to the Armenian border province of Syunik, especially in the town of Goris. The journey was long and exhausting. There was only one escape route out of Nagorno-Karabakh: a winding mountain road. Many people were already weak and underprepared after enduring a nine-month blockade, where most families were only allocated small food rations. The forced mass departure only exacerbated many illnesses or cases of malnutrition.

After three days in the car with very little food or water—or, in some cases, hours of walking miles and miles—many grew malnourished or fell ill. Some of the most vulnerable or eldest of the group died along the way.

Today, many refugees have spread out in larger cities like Yerevan, Kotayk and Ararat. Armenia is now faced with an extensive refugee crisis; 1 in 30 people throughout the country is a refugee. More than half of the refugees are women and girls, nearly one third are children, and nearly one fifth are elderly. Their whole lives are uprooted. In the coming weeks, they will have to restart their lives: finding a home, a job, and personal belongings, since most arrived with practically nothing.

The conflict has sparked a mental health crisis, too. Yet even with little to their names, they are showcasing resilience, strength, and hope. Here are their stories.

Anoush, 38 

When Anoush was forced to flee her home on September 26, she only had time to bring three things—the last of her onions and potatoes and a few winter coats. She left with her husband and her son and traveled for two days before reaching Goris. They had nothing to eat, and out of desperation, asked people in passing cars for water to survive the long trek.

Before the violence escalated, Anoush and her family endured a nine-month blockade in Nagorno-Karabakh with little food. They relied on pasta and rice for months, and desperately stocked up on as much medicine as possible for their son’s allergies. In May, Anoush ran out of flour, and she resorted to baking bread out of a mix of different cereals. She and her neighbors began baking bread in a shared outdoor fireplace—no electricity was available. To start a fire, she had to collect wood from the forest, since no fuel was to be found either.

During the rare months that the schools were open, Anoush’s son had to do homework during the day. At night there was only candlelight, which reinforced his anxiety about the ongoing blockade.

Anoush is a trained psychologist, and in Nagorno-Karabakh, she worked in a university and center for elders.

“After the blockade started, all that my patients could think about was the situation. There was chaos. Everyone forgot why they were coming to the psychologist in the first place and could only think about the blockade,” she said. “Before the blockade, I told my patients to look forward to the future. After the blockade, I could not say that anymore. Which future did we have?”

This is the third time Anoush has been displaced. In 2020, her house in Nagorno-Karabakh was destroyed during the conflict. She and her family rebuilt it, but “now, we are not going to be able to reconstruct anything.”

Now, Anoush lives in a small apartment in Goris. She is still in survival-mode—she used to love making toys and baking desserts, but no longer has any interest. Each night, she sleeps next to her son.

“My son is still afraid of the bombardments,” she said. “He does not want to sleep alone.”

Nora, 26

Nora fled the conflict on September 25 with her whole family—her grandmother, aunt, niece, newborn cousin, mother, father, husband, sisters, and brother. They arrived three days later in Goris. For the last two days of their journey, they had nothing to eat. They were forced to resort to drinking water from lakes and rivers in the surrounding mountains. Throughout the entire trip, Nora said that no one was able to sleep for even one hour.

During the blockade, Nora was pregnant, but she miscarried due to acute stress and malnutrition. Access to health services was limited, and it took Nora over an hour and a half to walk to work. They relied mostly on the potatoes they grew themselves.

Now, Nora lives with a family member in a city called Parakar, in Armenia. Her apartment has no electricity, gas, or water. They have a small reserve of savings to buy food, but it is already running low.

Nora worries for her seven-year-old brother, who has already suffered so much for someone so young.

“He needs psychological support. He cannot sleep because he still hears the bombarding.”

Nora has one wish—to return home. “I want to go back to Nagorno-Karabakh,” she said.

Armine and Sasun, 44

Armine and Sasun have leaned on each other for over two decades. Without each other to rely on—or without the kindness of friends—they would have had to suffer through challenges and conflicts alone.

The pair met in childhood. They grew up as neighbors and even went to the same kindergarten. They have been together for 23 years now and have a son and daughter. Armine and Sasun have endured many seasons of life by each other’s side.

In 2009, Armine and Sasun met a soldier in Armenia by chance. The soldier, who wishes to remain anonymous, immediately bonded with Armine and Sasun and the three became very good friends. They all stayed in touch for years, and in 2020, when the first conflict broke out, Armine and Sasun took refuge in the soldier’s home in Goris. Armine’s brother was killed during the war, and the soldier offered a safe place for the family to stay and mourn.

The soldier repeated the same hospitality and kindness in September 2023, when Armine and Sasun fled Nagorno-Karabakh. Armine is especially grateful for their soldier friend, who has hosted four families since September. Right when the conflict broke out, the soldier opened up her home to 17 people. Now, only four remain: Armine, Sasun, and their children.

For months prior to the conflict, Armine and Sasun had already been living off meager food rations during the blockade. They were given vouchers to buy food, but the amounts were hardly sufficient—three kilograms of vegetables, two kilograms of fruit, two kilograms of potatoes and a small amount of bread. Armine and Sasun were expected to divide this portion amongst the entire family. If they didn’t use the vouchers to buy food within a two-week period, they missed their opportunity— and there would be no telling when the next round of vouchers would arrive. It was expensive, too: even though they had vouchers, they still had to purchase the food themselves. A single cabbage could cost over $16.

Just like the soldier had done for them, Armine and Sasun tried their best to lend a helping hand to others in their town. “There were exchanges, and people helped each other as much as possible,” Sasun said.

Armine agreed, adding that her son once went to buy bread and stood in a queue until 5am. On the way home, however, he gave the bread away to a disabled man that was struggling.

“We were taking care of each other. It would have been impossible to survive if we had not supported each other.”

____________________________________________________________________________________________

Armine and Sasun were forced to flee Nagorno-Karabakh on Sep. 26 with barely any notice. Their apartment was completely destroyed by the war. They were on the road for two days and only had one loaf of bread to share between them. The soldier greeted them with open arms when they arrived in Armenia.

“These are my friends: how could I not invite them to my house?” she said. “Even before this war, during the blockade, we tried to be in touch as much as possible to try and help them.”

The soldier said that it makes her happy to be surrounded by people. “The doors of my house were always open,” she said. “Your hearts and doors should always be open. When the house is empty, my soul is empty. We do not care about our money and savings, we care about hospitality. Helping each other.”

Narine, 46

Narine has been displaced twice now. The first time was in 2020, during which her whole family moved to Yerevan, Armenia’s capital city. They stayed in a hotel for 44 days. Her son joined the army to fight on the border, and Narine experienced a severe mental health crisis. “I was very bad psychologically,” she said. “I was depressed.”

After a month and a half, Narine returned home to Nagorno-Karabakh. She only experienced a short period of peace before her life was disrupted again. During the long blockade, there was no transportation, no fuel, and little access to healthcare. She said the drug stores were empty and she was barely able to find painkillers. “The closest hospital was over 15 miles away from our house. I have a heart illness and am unable to walk such long distances.”

Food was also scarce—like many others during the blockade, Narine relied on the mandated 200 grams of bread per family member. She mostly survived on a diet of potatoes and poorly made bread, which she whipped up out of what little ingredients she could find.

“The bread we made was almost black, but at least we had that,” she said. “We were hungry.”
When Narine fled to Goris, she could only bring a few items: clothes for her six kids and a little bit of bread, cheese, and water—only enough to sustain her for one day. Her supply ran out quickly during the long journey to Armenia. Now, Narine can barely afford rent for an apartment in Goris. She has little money and is quickly losing hope.

Action Against Hunger’s Response

Action Against Hunger has responded to emergencies in South Caucasus since 1993. Today, our teams are on the ground in Kotayk, Ararat, Vayots Dzor, Yerevan, and Syunik, assessing needs and providing urgent assistance.

Since the onset of the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, we have been carrying out emergency preparedness and response projects to support displaced people. Today, we’re coordinating multipurpose cash and voucher assistance, supporting nutrition initiatives, offering protection and legal assistance, establishing child-friendly and breastfeeding spaces, helping people find homes and livelihoods, and more. We are providing cash and voucher assistance for 3,500 households and mental health and psychosocial support for 1,500 individuals across the country.

We are partnering with local community centers and ensuring that we offer safety and support to as many refugees as possible.

•   Published:
• • WRITTEN BY HENRY POPE

The final stages of the Soviet Union’s life cycle set the chain of events in motion, leading to territorial disputes in various areas of the Union. Azerbaijan and Armenia have, unfortunately, shared the fate of being locked in a six-year-long deadly war that claimed the lives of thousands on both sides. As the parties continued their fight for Karabakh, internationally recognized as a territory of Azerbaijan, both Baku and Yerevan could not conclude the war either by the military or by diplomatic means.

After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, conflicting sides found themselves in a challenging economic and humanitarian situation. Consequently, several mediation attempts have been launched to bring the conflict to its conclusion. One of the most promising mechanisms was the OSCE Minsk Group. The Minsk Group was initially formed as an international mediation effort to find a political solution to the Karabakh conflict. It was formed in 1992 by the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), now known as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). The efforts of the Minsk group were spearheaded by three co-chair nations: France, the United States of America, and Russia. Several other countries, including Germany, Belarus, Turkey, Italy, Finland, Sweden, Azerbaijan, and Armenia, enjoyed the rights of permanent membership. However, in reality, these states’ roles have been extremely limited to the point of being almost non-existent.

On paper, establishing a team of international mediators was essential to achieving sustainable peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia. It is expected that after prolonged fighting, conflicting sides cannot find a comprehensive settlement, and indeed, Azerbaijan and Armenia have not been in a position to negotiate on their own. Hence, the birth of the OSCE Minsk Group was a step in the right direction. In retrospect, it is possible to say that the moment for the mediation became ripe as both sides engaged in hostilities for a significant amount of time, including after the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Additionally, the ongoing fighting took its toll on both nations. The fact that the Minsk Group operated under the auspices of the OSCE gave it a high level of credibility necessary to deal with the challenge of unraveling the puzzle.

The best way to analyze the diplomatic efforts of the OSCE Minsk Group is to divide its lifetime into three stages: early stage (pre-2000), mid-stage (2000-2010), and later stage (2010-2020).

Early attempts of the Group revolved around curbing the potential for another escalation in the region and finding a political settlement to the conflict. Three separate deals were put forward in the late 90s. The first deal was introduced in July 1997. It was labeled a “comprehensive agreement” and aimed to achieve two key objectives: end the armed hostilities and find a political solution for settling the region’s status. Armenia rejected this proposal due to a lack of consensus between President Ter-Petrosyan and other members of the political establishment. In September 1997, OSCE Minsk Group came up with another deal known as the “step-by-step deal”, which was once again rejected by Armenia. This deal entailed gradually removing forces and the sequence of other steps, with an eventual deployment of multinational OSCE peacekeeping forces.

The final proposal arrived in November 1998, widely known as “the common state deal.” Implementing this approach would have given Karabakh some aspects of sovereignty, including influencing Azerbaijan’s foreign policy, own borders, police and security forces, national anthem, constitution, and other symbols. Such an agreement could not have been implemented in practice because it would mean that Azerbaijan would have had to relinquish its sovereignty over the region and endanger its security permanently. It was consequently rejected.

The mid-stage of the Minsk Group mediation efforts coincided with the introduction of the Madrid Principles at the 2007 OSCE ministerial conference in Madrid. In 2009, during the G8 summit in L’Aquila, the US President Obama, Russian President Medvedev, and French President Sarkozy released a joint statement on the Karabakh Conflict by outlining the Basic Principles (also known as modified Madrid Principles) for conflict resolution:

• Return of the territories surrounding Karabakh to Azerbaijani control;
• An interim status for Karabakh providing guarantees for security and self-governance;
• A corridor linking Armenia to Karabakh;
• Future determination of the final legal status of Karabakh through a legally binding _expression_ of will;
• The right of all internally displaced persons and refugees to return to their former places of residence;
• International security guarantees that would include a peacekeeping operation.

This set of criteria paved the way for a systemic approach to dealing with the conflict. These guidelines imply the willingness of the sides to move in the direction of compromise. This view was somewhat reinforced by the introduction of the “Kazan formula” in 2011, according to which Armenia would have to return five occupied regions around Karabakh to Azerbaijan, followed by the remaining two. In turn, Azerbaijan would lift the economic blockade against Armenia and sign the economic, humanitarian cooperation, and non-violence agreements. Additionally, peacekeepers would be deployed in the area. In this context, it is essential to note that the “Kazan Formula,” in contrast to the Basic Principles, would have infringed upon the interests of Azerbaijan because now Baku would receive only five regions immediately. From this perspective, the “Kazan Formula” was a significant step back in mediation from the perspective of Baku.

After 2011, the Group failed to achieve any objectives. Furthermore, the Minsk Group’s apparent inability to deliver results tarnished its reputation and credibility. The best description of the Group’s mediation efforts came from the retired US Ambassador Richard E. Hoagland: “We stayed in fivestar hotels where we were usually assigned suites on the executive floor that gave us access to a private dining room and full bar at no additional expense. We always sought out the best restaurants in the cities where we found ourselves. We lived well while we showed the OSCE flag and reminded Baku and Yerevan that the Minsk Group exists. But to be blunt, very, very little ever got accomplished.”

Things went from bad to worse before the start of the Second Karabakh war. The two statements by top officials in Armenia illustrated that the peace talks have approached the end of their life cycle. First, the former Defense Minister of Armenia, David Tonoyan, publicly announced a strategic approach of “New war for new territories,” aimed to “rid Armenia of this trench condition, the constant defensive state, and will add the units which may shift the military actions to the territory of the enemy.” The statement made in 2019 is considered as one of the causes of the Second Karabakh War in September 2020 between Azerbaijan and Armenia.

Another statement that further damaged the likelihood of reaching an agreement was made by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, who claimed that Karabakh is the territory of Armenia.

If we look at the situation through the lens of Mr. Tonoyan’s statements and plans, it becomes understandable why Baku had reasons to doubt the security of its other territories and people. A principle of anarchy in international relations, i.e., the fact that there is no higher authority capable of refereeing contentious issues among the states, contributed to the perception of a security threat, which diminished the chances of finding a solution to a protracted conflict. Adding Mr. Pashinyan’s comment to a discussion will show that by 2020, peace talks were doomed. Consequently, Azerbaijan exercised the right for self-defense outlined in the Article 51 of the UN Charter.

After the conclusion of the 2020 war, several rounds of talks were held in the US, the EU, and Russia. These talks have not led to any tangible results. The failure of the post-war peace-building initiatives can be attributed to the unresolved fate of the separatists at that time. Armenia tried to secure special privileges for the region, a demand Azerbaijan was unwilling to accommodate.

The analysis of earlier mediation attempts between Baku and Yerevan, both before and after the Second war, indicates that the presence of a separatist entity and the irreconcilable views on its future were the key issues preventing the sides from ending a long-lasting conflict. It is essential to realize that from Yerevan’s point of view, the presence of a separatist regime on Azerbaijani territory was a way to gain a competitive advantage over Baku. Meanwhile, Baku saw the presence of such a regime as a legitimate security threat. Hence, Azerbaijan opposed the presence of separatist forces on its territory, while Armenia benefitted from directly controlling separatists. This dynamic led to a zero-sum game between the two South Caucasus states, making it challenging to conclude the hostilities between the sides. Therefore, while the separatist regime continued to exist, Baku and Yerevan had a very slim chance of reaching a comprehensive agreement on normalizing relations. This is particularly evident from the analysis of mediation efforts spearheaded by the OSCE Minsk Group. Despite its fall into obscurity, the Group retained a monopoly over the Karabakh conflict mediation for a significant amount of time. Every proposal failed because Baku and Yerevan could not synchronize their views on Karabakh’s future.

However, now there is a glimmer of hope for Azerbaijan and Armenia. Following the September 2023 events, the separatist regime operating in the internationally recognized territory of Azerbaijan ceased to exist. Thus, the root causes preventing Baku and Yerevan from reaching an agreement on normalizing relations are now history.

Eliminating a separatist entity on the territory of Azerbaijan enables the sides to search for a mutually beneficial solution and sign a peace document. From the mediation perspective, this development is the single most significant transformation that has taken place in the conflict. As things stand today, the risk-reward ratio shifted toward finding a solution because continuing hostilities carries more risks than potential rewards.

Peace treaty is the best way to guarantee security

After all, Armenia is more worried about its security. Looking at the balance of power dynamic between Baku and Yerevan paints a grim picture for Armenia. The population of Armenia stands roughly at 3 million people, while the Azerbaijani population exceeds 10 million inhabitants. The gross domestic product of Azerbaijan surpasses that of Armenia by more than threefold. Finally, Baku enjoys more substantial relations with other states.

Meanwhile, up until recently, Armenia was heavily reliant on Russia for security, and Moscow was the sole diplomatic partner of Yerevan. Considering the radical policy shift of Armenia and its subsequent attempts to foster ties with other states, it is unclear whether Yerevan will be able to achieve its foreign policy objectives in short order. Furthermore, at this point, there are serious reasons to consider that Armenia may become a metaphorical battlefield for dominance between the West and Russia or Iran. Therefore, an unresolved conflict with Azerbaijan will further challenge Armenia’s position, and contribute to the security concerns of Yerevan.

Finally, in the context of a possible peace agreement with Azerbaijan, Yerevan will find rapprochement with Baku economically beneficial. A peace deal between Baku and Yerevan will open opportunities for Armenia to join several international projects, including the Middle Corridor, which will further strengthen Armenian security via the mechanism of interdependence.

Signing a peace deal is the solution to the security competition that plagues the South Caucasus. Otherwise, the conflict dynamic between Baku and Yerevan may emerge once again. In principle, there is no alternative to the formal peace agreement between Baku and Yerevan. After all, this is how every conflict is supposed to end.

YEREVAN. Nov 22 (Interfax) – The German government will provide 84.6 million euros to Armenia in grants and loans, Armenia's state news agency Armenpress quoted Economy Minister Vahan Kerobyan and Parliamentary State Secretary at the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development Niels Annen as saying at a press conference in Yerevan following two-day intergovernmental negotiations.

"The additional support provided by Germany will be used to implement new programs in vocational education and training and in the renewable energy sector," Kerobyan said.

The Armenian and German governments have signed a protocol on intergovernmental negotiations. These have been the first official negotiations between the two countries since 2014.

"I think this is a very clear message to the entire world that Germany and Armenia are opening a new path of cooperation. Armenia has proven yet again that it is committed to democracy and a democratic society," Annen said.

"Special support is planned for the Armenian government to accommodate and integrate the people who have come to Armenia from Nagorno-Karabakh," he said.

Germany will also attach more significance to bolstering Armenia's energy independence, he said.

https://interfax.com/newsroom/top-stories/96773/

Washington, D.C.- Senators Gary Peters’ (D-MI) and Marco Rubio’s (R-FL) bipartisan Armenian Protection Act has successfully passed in the Senate.

Last September, Azerbaijan launched a military invasion into the Armenian-held  Nagorno-Karabakh ethnic enclave and seized control of the area. 

Hundreds of thousands have been forced to flee and hundreds have been killed or injured. 

The military offensive was preceded by a 9-month siege of Nagorno-Karabakh, which reportedly prevented the flow of medical supplies and food. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in February ordered Azerbaijan call-off its blockade, which Azerbaijan failed to do. 

A group of bipartisan Senators had penned a letter to Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Secretary of the Treasury Jannet Yellen requesting immediate sanctions on the Azerbaijan government. 

Absent action from the White House, the Armenian Protection Act would cut all US aid to Azerbaijan until blockades and offensive acts towards Armenia and the Nagorno-Karabakh region cease.

“U.S. taxpayer dollars should not be going towards Azerbaijan, a nation that has brought instability to the region,” said Senator Rubio in support of the bill’s passage. 

The Armenian Assembly of America, an advocacy group seeking to increase US-Armenia relations and bolster US support of Armenian public institutions, welcomed the bill’s passage. 

“We commend Senator Peters along with Senator Rubio for this bipartisan legislation,” stated Congressional Relations Director Mariam Khaloyan. “Passage of this Bill sends a strong message in the face of Azerbaijan’s genocidal policies against the Armenian people,” Khaloyan continued.

Earlier in November, Armenian Apostolic Church leaders met with Congressmembers in the House of Representatives to lobby for American support of Armenia 

Given the bi-partisan support for the Armenian Protection Act in the Senate, its speedy passage in the House is expected.