U.S. House panel urges release of Armenian prisoners

Big News Network
July 23, 2026

PanArmenian.Net
23rd July 2026, 15:44 GMT+11

PanARMENIAN.Net – The U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee voted 44-7 on July 22 to approve an amendment calling for the immediate and unconditional release of all Armenian hostages held in Azerbaijan, according to the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA).

The ANCA-backed amendment was introduced by Congressional Armenian Caucus Vice Chair Brad Sherman, a California Democrat. Committee Chairman Brian Mast, a Florida Republican, also supported the initiative, Factor.am reported.

“Today, the House Foreign Affairs Committee voted 44-7 in favor of my amendment calling on Azerbaijan to immediately release all Armenian POWs. I am proud to have put Congress on the record and will continue fighting to free Armenians unjustly and illegally held, tortured, and abused by Azerbaijan,” Sherman said after the vote.

On June 10, the committee proposal advanced with Chairman Mast’s support. This followed Sherman’s agreement to amend the text by removing a paragraph concerning application of Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act.

Sherman also urged the committee to take action based on documented abuses of Armenians held in Azerbaijani captivity.

“Given the documented executions of Armenian prisoners of war by Azerbaijani forces, including several executions that were horrifyingly recorded and circulated on social media, as documented by Human Rights Watch, it is vital that the United States unequivocally support the immediate and unconditional release of all Armenian prisoners of war,” Sherman told the committee in June.

The congressman also linked the release of the hostages to the U.S. administration’s diplomatic efforts in the region.

“As President Trump continues his efforts to secure lasting peace in the South Caucasus, securing the release of Armenian prisoners of war and political prisoners would be a significant step toward this achievement,” he said.

Ruben Vardanyan was sentenced to 20 years in prison by a court in Baku.

Former Nagorno-Karabakh President Arayik Harutyunyan was sentenced to life imprisonment. Former Defense Army commander Levon Mnatsakanyan and former first deputy commander Davit Manukyan were also sentenced to life imprisonment, as were former Nagorno-Karabakh Foreign Minister Davit Babayan and parliament speaker Davit Ishkhanyan. Former Nagorno-Karabakh presidents Arkadi Ghukasyan and Bako Sahakyan were sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Madat Babayan and Melikset Pashayan were sentenced to 19 years in prison, Garik Martirosyan to 18 years, Davit Allahverdyan and Levon Balayan to 16 years, and Erik Ghazaryan, Gurgen Stepanyan and Vasily Beglaryan to 15 years.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance said after meeting Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan that Armenia and the U.S. had completed negotiations on a 123 Agreement on peaceful nuclear cooperation, opening broad opportunities for major projects. He said this could involve up to $5 billion in initial U.S. exports, plus $4 billion in support through fuel and servicing.

Source: PanArmenian.Net

—

Jerusalem and Baku owe each other loyalty, not sovereignty

July 23, 2026

The Jewish state does not bargain over truth – and Azerbaijan deserves Israel’s loyalty, not a veto over its memory.

Israel’s Cabinet recognized the Armenian Genocide. Then Jerusalem yielded to Baku and withheld the Knesset vote that would have completed the act.

The recognition stands. The capitulation does too.

A Jewish state does not bargain over truth. Azerbaijan deserves Israel’s loyalty, not a veto over Israeli memory.

After the Soviet collapse, Israel forged ties across the South Caucasus. Armenia anchored itself in Moscow and Tehran; Azerbaijan made Israel central to its sovereign foreign policy. Centuries of Jewish life anchor the relationship in Azerbaijani society.

Jerusalem will not apologize for choosing the ally that chose it.

Israeli systems helped Baku overturn the military balance in 2020 and secure the outcome in 2023. Azerbaijan reciprocated with energy and intelligence, safeguarded Jewish communities and Israeli missions, and resisted pressure from Ankara and Tehran.

In 2025, Azerbaijani crude supplied almost half of Israel’s oil imports. This is interdependence, not oil for arms.

Iran is the core. Along Iran’s border, Azerbaijan faces Revolutionary Guard subversion and terror; Israel confronts the same regime across the region. In March 2026, Baku exposed Iranian plots against the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, Israel’s embassy, a synagogue, and a leader of the Mountain Jewish community.

Intelligence binds them; cyber, air defense, and infrastructure protection turn alignment into power. Israel needs a sovereign Azerbaijan on Iran’s northern frontier, not a battlefield or launchpad. Azerbaijan needs an Israel that confronts Tehran.

Beyond Iran, the partnership reaches orbit: Israel Aerospace Industries supplies Azercosmos with advanced satellites, the Technion builds Baku’s cyber capacity, and cooperation spans artificial intelligence, water, agriculture, trade, and investment. Azerbaijan also bridged Jerusalem and Ankara, hosting talks to avert a clash in Syria.

“One nation, two states” binds Azerbaijan to Turkey. Yet Baku preserved its ties with Israel when Ankara sought its isolation, and blocked Turkey’s 2009 opening to Armenia until Azerbaijani interests were secured.

Turkey is Azerbaijan’s closest ally, not its master.

Pro-government Turkish outlets cast Baku’s ties with Jerusalem as a betrayal of the Muslim world. State-aligned Azerbaijani media exposed the campaign. Turkey’s presidential disinformation apparatus stayed silent.

In Erdogan’s media system, silence is authorization. The campaign sought to punish Baku’s ties with Israel and subordinate its policy to Ankara.

The Armenian Genocide is where Azerbaijani sovereignty stops, and Ankara’s denial begins.

1915 was an Ottoman crime committed before Azerbaijan existed as a state, while most Azerbaijanis lived under Russian rule. Responsibility lies with the Committee of Union and Progress and the military, police, officials, and auxiliaries that organized deportation, dispossession, and mass death.

Baku inherited no guilt from 1915. By dismissing the genocide as “so-called,” denouncing Israel’s recognition and demanding reversal, Baku made Ankara’s denial its own.

Azerbaijan must recognize a genocide it did not commit. Recognition reclaims its history from Ankara and opens reconciliation on three terms: truth without inherited guilt, responsibility without humiliation, peace without amnesia.

The South Caucasus has its own ledger. The violence of 1905 and 1906 destroyed Armenian and Muslim communities alike. In March 1918, Bolshevik and Dashnak forces massacred Muslims in Baku. That September, the Ottoman Army of Islam, supported by local Azerbaijani forces, massacred Armenians in the same city. In 1920, Shusha’s Armenian quarter was destroyed and its community erased.

Decades later came Sumgait, the Baku pogrom, Khojaly, mass displacement, and two wars.

A grave is not an argument against another grave.

Azerbaijani suffering belongs in the record. Armenian selectivity demands a fuller history, not Turkish falsification.

The Washington agreement, initialled on August 8, 2025, remains unsigned over Baku’s demand for constitutional revision. It recognizes neither genocide nor atrocity from the early twentieth century, requires no apology, forecloses new interstate claims predating signature, and compels the withdrawal or settlement of existing proceedings.

It is amnesia codified.

Defeat constrained Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. It did not require him to purge genocide recognition from Armenian foreign policy or reduce peace to borders, transit, and survival. Survival is his duty, not erasure.

Under the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity, Armenia retains jurisdiction, customs, and border control; a company jointly owned by the United States and Armenia receives a concession for 49 years, renewable for another 50, to develop roads, railways, pipelines, power, and fibre.

Armenia keeps the flag. Baku receives the corridor’s function.

The treaty must codify Azerbaijani recognition of the Armenian Genocide and require Yerevan to name the March 1918 massacre of Muslims in Baku, the expulsions of Azerbaijanis, and the Khojaly. Shusha, Sumgait, and the Baku pogrom must enter a shared historical record.

Peace without truth is transient.

Azerbaijan has won. Conditioning peace on constitutional revision turns victory into obstruction.

Jerusalem cannot demand historical truth from Baku and Yerevan while recognizing only one part of the crime.

Israeli historians Benny Morris and Dror Ze’evi call the destruction of Armenians, Assyrians, and Ottoman Greeks, including the Pontic Greeks, the Thirty-Year Genocide. From the Hamidian massacres through the Young Turks and into the early Turkish Republic, governments and uniforms changed; the project did not.

It destroyed Anatolia’s Armenian, Assyrian, and Greek Christian peoples through murder, deportation, forced conversion, confiscation, and erasure. It was Turkification through dispossession: peoples, histories, and holy places consumed to fabricate a nation pure enough for its own mythology.

NILI, the Jewish intelligence network in Ottoman Palestine, understood before Jewish statehood. Sarah Aaronsohn witnessed the Ottoman machinery turned against the Armenians; Aaronsohn grasped the warning: once a state brands an indigenous people a security threat, extermination becomes administration. The Jews of the Land of Israel were close enough to know they could be next.

Israel must recognize the whole 30-year genocide.

Geography divides Jerusalem and Baku.

The Syunik route through Armenia, linking Azerbaijan to Nakhchivan, strengthens the Middle Corridor by carrying Central Asian trade across the Caspian through Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey into Europe. The India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor runs from India through the Gulf, Jordan, and Israel to Europe, carrying freight, energy, and data.

The routes coexist physically but compete for capital, cargo, standards, data, insurance and control of Asia’s European gateway. Every railway, guarantee, and regulatory regime entrenches one architecture and erodes the other.

IMEC binds Israel to India, the Gulf, Cyprus, Greece, and Europe. The Middle Corridor ties Azerbaijan’s rise to Turkey’s control of the western exit. South Asia exposes the strategic cost: Baku and Ankara backed Pakistan, a nuclear state that refuses to recognize Israel, against India, Jerusalem’s principal Asian partner.

Israel will trade with Baku and build IMEC.

Baku converted Turkey’s occupation of parts of Cyprus into a protocol. The illegal secessionist entity entered the Organization of Turkic States as an observer in 2022. President Ilham Aliyev hosted and chaired the October 7, 2025, summit in Gabala, Azerbaijan, then signed its declaration styling Turkish Cypriot leader Ersin Tatar as president and recasting occupation as an “existing reality.”

The same summit deepened integration among defence industries and proposed joint exercises in Azerbaijan. Baku operates Israeli systems; Israel must firewall the technology, doctrine, and operational knowledge behind those systems from Ankara through transfer controls, compartmentalization, and cyber safeguards.

Azerbaijan cannot invoke territorial integrity in Karabakh while legitimizing Turkey’s partition of Cyprus.

Ankara is militarizing the occupied areas at Lefkoniko and Bogazi, extending its reach over Israel’s sea lanes, energy fields, undersea cables, air approaches, and IMEC’s Mediterranean outlet.

Israel’s objective is Turkish withdrawal and the Republic’s reunification. If Ankara entrenches and weaponizes the occupation, Jerusalem will, at Nicosia’s request and with Greece, restore the Republic’s sovereignty by force.

Jerusalem and Baku will stand by one another. Loyalty runs both ways. Sovereignty remains each capital’s own.

Shay Gal is the founder and principal of Line of State, a strategic practice that works with governments, institutions, and decision-makers on strategy, risk, access, and security decisions in high-stakes environments.


—

Armenian rights lawyer files ECHR complaint over Ruben Vardanyan’s 20-year jai

JAM News
July 23, 2026
  • JAMnews
  • Yerevan

Human rights lawyer Siranush Sahakyan has filed a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) over the case of Ruben Vardanyan, the former state minister of the former unrecognised Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. She said she would represent Vardanyan before the court. Sahakyan has represented Armenian detainees at the ECHR for many years.

“The application sets out in detail violations of eight articles of the European Convention on Human Rights, supported by comprehensive legal and factual arguments,” Sahakyan said in a statement shared with the media and posted on social media.

Vardanyan is one of 19 Armenians still held in Azerbaijani prisons. In February 2026, a military court in Baku sentenced him to 20 years in prison.

According to Sahakyan, the defence was only recently able to obtain the court’s written judgment, which was required before an application could be submitted to the ECHR. She said Azerbaijan had withheld the ruling until then, which is why the complaint was filed only on 19 July.

The court found Vardanyan guilty of a number of serious offences, including waging war, financing terrorism and deportation.

Armenian rights groups, however, have described the trial in Baku as “political rather than legal”. Vardanyan himself called the proceedings “a farce” and “a mockery of justice”. During the hearings, he instructed his lawyer not to present arguments in his defence.

“It is impossible to protect rights in a system that fundamentally denies the right to a fair trial. That is why Ruben Vardanyan decided to continue his fight for justice through international legal mechanisms,” Sahakyan said.


  • Opinion: ‘ECHR ruling is indisputable historical fact’
  • Four ethnic Armenians held in Azerbaijan jails handed over to Armenia
  • Ruben Vardanyan not allowed to finish what he wanted to tell Azerbaijan’s ombudsman

Details of Vardanyan case

In her statement, Sahakyan disclosed further details of the case. She said the military court in Baku did not read out the full verdict. Now that Vardanyan’s family has passed the written judgment to his lawyers, it has become clear that he was convicted on 41 counts under 21 articles of Azerbaijan’s Criminal Code.

According to Sahakyan, the judgment does not substantiate Vardanyan’s personal criminal responsibility with facts or evidence.

“Instead, the court concluded that the ‘criminal organisation’ – the leadership of the self-proclaimed Republic of Artsakh – had been operating in Nagorno-Karabakh since 1988. It also found that Vardanyan joined this ‘organisation’ in December 2020, although he was living in Moscow at the time.”

She also said the court treated Vardanyan’s appointment to a civilian administrative post as a violent seizure of power. His commercial and charitable activities were classified as illegal entrepreneurship and financing terrorism, while his entry into Nagorno-Karabakh via the Lachin Corridor was deemed an illegal crossing of Azerbaijan‘s state border.

Sahakyan said Vardanyan had not appealed against the verdict because he regarded the trial as staged and pre-planned, and considered all domestic legal remedies ineffective.

‘Shocking but expected verdict’: Ruben Vardanyan sentenced to 20 years in Baku

The former state minister of the unrecognised NKR barred his lawyer from presenting arguments in his defence, saying it was “not a court, but a tribunal”. Vardanyan’s final statement, his family’s response and expert commentary

Background

On 17 February, a military court in Baku sentenced Russian-Armenian businessman, billionaire and philanthropist Ruben Vardanyan to 20 years in prison. His case was heard separately from those of the former leadership of Nagorno-Karabakh.

A month after the verdict, Vardanyan’s family said he had tried to raise concerns with Azerbaijan’s Human Rights Commissioner, Sabina Aliyeva, during a phone call with relatives, but the call was cut off.

The family has repeatedly appealed to the international community, saying that neither Vardanyan nor the other Armenian detainees in Azerbaijan have access to institutional protection. They argue that the country lacks independent human rights protection mechanisms. They have also noted that the International Committee of the Red Cross, which had facilitated contact between detainees and their families, has ceased operations in Azerbaijan.

On 5 February, two weeks before Vardanyan’s sentence was announced, an Azerbaijani court handed life sentences to several other former Nagorno-Karabakh leaders, including former President Arayik Harutyunyan, former Defence Army commander Levon Mnatsakanyan, his deputy Davit Manukyan, former parliament speaker Davit Ishkhanyan and former Foreign Minister Davit Babayan. Former presidents Arkady Ghukasyan and Bako Sahakyan were sentenced to 20 years in prison.

All of the detainees faced a range of serious charges, including terrorism and genocide. Ghukasyan and Sahakyan received lighter sentences because they are over 65, and Azerbaijani law does not allow life imprisonment for people above that age.

Independent media and human rights observers were not allowed to attend the trials. Information about the proceedings was published by Azerbaijani state and pro-government media.

—

Armenian sellers suffer losses after Ukraine strikes Wildberries warehouses in

OC Media
July 23, 2026

Armenian businesses selling through Russia’s largest online marketplace Wildberries have been affected by Ukrainian drone strikes targeting the company’s logistics centres and warehouses, with many now uncertain whether they will be compensated for their losses.

Since 18 July, Ukraine has launched a series of long-range drone strikes on Wildberries warehouses across Russia. The attacks caused extensive material damage, killing at least eight workers and injuring around 80.

Wildberries remains one of the most widely used e-commerce platforms in Armenia, both for consumers and sellers.

In 2025, the company ranked as Armenia’s 39th-largest taxpayer, paying over ֏8 billion ($21 million) in taxes. However, it was absent from the State Revenue Committee’s list of the country’s 1,000 largest taxpayers for the first quarter of 2026.

The strikes came amid an intensification of Ukraine’s attacks against Russian logistics and military infrastructure. Since early July, Ukrainian attacks on Russian energy facilities have contributed to fuel shortages in parts of Russia.

In a statement following the attacks, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyi said Ukrainian long-range drones ‘successfully struck important targets’ in Russia, which he called ‘logistics hubs involved in supplying the Russian army with drone components, navigation equipment, and other gear’.

‘We are, quite justly, bringing the war back home — to Russia’, Zelenskyi added.

On 21 July, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov acknowledged that the situation facing Wildberries and the small and medium-sized businesses using the platform was ‘difficult’, adding that the Russian government was in contact with the company.

He also denied allegations that Wildberries warehouses were being used to supply the Russian military.

However, the BBC reported that Wildberries sells a range of military-related goods, including body armour, alongside products that have both civilian and drone-production applications. It also cited pro-war bloggers as saying that volunteers regularly purchase equipment through online marketplaces to send to the front, while noting there was no independent evidence that the warehouses targeted in the attacks stored such supplies.

The BBC also noted that the strikes disrupted the livelihoods of hundreds of Russian sellers who rely on online marketplaces, adding that Wildberries and its competitor Ozon are used by an estimated 85–90% of Russia’s economically active population.

The attacks have also heightened concerns over compensation.

Earlier in July, Wildberries amended its contracts with sellers, adding drone attacks to the list of force majeure events for which the company bears no liability.

Although Wildberries owner Tatyana Kim pledged not to ‘abandon’ sellers and announced temporary discounts and waived shipment fees, many merchants remain sceptical that they will receive compensation.

According to Forbes Russia, rebuilding just the first two damaged warehouses could cost ₽33 billion ($420 million). The outlet estimated sellers’ losses at no less than ₽150 billion ($1.9 billion), noting that compensating sellers in full would likely consume almost all of the company’s 2025 net profit, which is ₽175 billion ($2.2 billion).

RFE/RL reported that more than 10,000 Armenian businesses sell their products through Wildberries. Many of the sellers the outlet spoke to said they had received no clear information about compensation, while some feared any support measures would primarily benefit Russian businesses.

Gurgen Tadevosyan, who sells silver jewellery on Wildberries, estimated his losses at around ֏1.5 million ($3,900). Like many sellers, he had stored his products in several of the company’s warehouses across Russia, as required by Wildberries to speed up deliveries to customers. He now does not know whether his goods survived the attacks.

Donara Grigoryan, who sells household goods, also told RFE/RL she was unsure about the status of her assets.

‘I currently have products stored in seven warehouses, and two of them are now gone. That means I’m left hoping that the other five warehouses are still intact. I’m in such a state of panic now that I don’t know whether, when I wake up tomorrow morning, another warehouse will have been targeted overnight’, Grigoryan said.

After Wildberries revised its seller contracts, Grigoryan suspected that ‘something might happen’, though she never expected the scale of the destruction.

Grigoryan said Armenian sellers should organise collectively to ensure their concerns are heard and to press for equal treatment in any future compensation programme.

As uncertainty persists, Armenian influencers have sought to draw attention to the issue, urging sellers to share the codes of products still stored in Russian warehouses and encouraging consumers to order them in support of Armenian businesses.

—

How does Armenian cuisine travel from the Caucasus Valley to Chinese dining ta

Street Insider
July 23, 2026
July 23, 2026 7:10 AM EDT

 — Step into the open-air markets of Yerevan, the capital of Armenia, or venture into the rural farms of the Ararat Valley, and you’ll find the unique delicacies nurtured by the Caucasian sun: plump, golden dried apricots, rich and natural jams, fragrant pomegranate products, pure and sweet mountain mineral water, and premium wines with a thousand-year history.

These distinctive products, embodying Armenia’s natural bounty and national culture, have long been a staple on the tables of local residents and a vital symbol of the country’s agricultural and food industries. However, due to limited international logistics networks and insufficient overseas sales channels in the past, many high-quality, affordable local products could only circulate through traditional trade models, making it difficult to truly reach a broader international consumer market.

In recent years, with the rapid development of global cross-border e-commerce and the continuous improvement of international logistics infrastructure, Armenian specialty products have ushered in new development opportunities. As a major global consumer market, China’s demand for natural, organic, and high-quality imported foods continues to grow. Armenian dried fruits, jams, wines, mineral water, and other products, with their unique flavors and high cost-performance ratio, are gradually gaining favor among Chinese consumers and becoming new highlights in cross-border trade.

The Chinese market opens up new growth opportunities for Armenia’s distinctive industries.

“In the past, our dried apricots and pomegranate juice were mainly sold to neighboring countries, and the market size was limited. During the harvest season, we often faced price fluctuations and inventory pressure,” said Aram Sargsyan, an agricultural exporter from the Ararat Valley.

“But in recent years, the Chinese market has brought us new opportunities. More and more Chinese consumers prefer high-quality foods that are naturally processed and additive-free, and our order volume has increased significantly, while product prices have become more stable. More importantly, more and more young people are willing to return to their hometowns to participate in agricultural processing and export trade.”

Alan’s experience is a microcosm of how many small and medium-sized enterprises in Armenia have achieved transformation and upgrading through cross-border trade.

The development of cross-border markets has not only changed traditional sales models but is also driving the upgrading of local industrial chains. From agricultural product planting, processing, and packaging to international transportation, warehousing, and distribution, and then to overseas sales services, a new industrial ecosystem centered around the export of specialty products is gradually taking shape.

Innovating the “city agency model” to create a local Armenian cross-border entrepreneurship ecosystem

To further help high-quality Armenian products enter the international market, cross-border supply chain service companies, such as Panyuan International Logistics, are exploring innovative cooperation models that are closer to the local market – the “city agent model.”

This model upgrades the traditional single export model into a comprehensive system of “city operation + cross-border supply chain + international sales” by recruiting local partners in Armenia to become city agents responsible for regional product integration, procurement , and marketing.

This model not only lowers the barriers for local businesses to enter the international market, but also allows more ordinary residents to share the benefits of cross-border economic development, realizing the transformation from “product export” to “industrial co-construction”.

For many young Armenian entrepreneurs, the city agency model offers a new career development path. They don’t need to invest heavily in building complex supply chain systems; they can participate in international trade and achieve local entrepreneurship and income growth simply by leveraging established cross-border logistics platforms and supply chain resources.

Pan-Yuan International is building a “New Silk Road Corridor” connecting the Caucasus region with the Chinese market.

High-quality products cannot reach the world without the support of a stable, efficient, and secure cross-border logistics system.

In response to the transportation needs of Armenian specialty products, Panyuan International Logistics, leveraging its years of experience in cross-border e-commerce logistics, provides local businesses with integrated supply chain solutions covering the export end, international transportation end, and Chinese consumer end.

From local warehousing and consolidation, product sorting and professional packaging, to international air and sea freight, and then to customs clearance and last-mile delivery in China, Panyuan International helps Armenian businesses reduce logistics costs and improve transportation efficiency through a full-process service.

Meanwhile, relying on the digital supply chain management system, Panyuan International has achieved full-process visual tracking of logistics, real-time monitoring of cargo transportation status, and improved the security and stability of cross-border transactions.

By combining logistics infrastructure with local operating networks, Panyuan International not only helps Armenian specialty products enter the Chinese market faster, but also promotes the formation of a more complete cross-border business ecosystem in the region.

From a single dried apricot to an entire industry chain, Armenia’s distinctive economy is ushering in a new future.

Today, Armenian goods are traversing mountains and rivers, connecting two vibrant markets, from traditional agricultural products in the Caucasus Valley to the distinctive delicacies on Chinese consumers’ tables.

Cross-border trade brings not only the flow of goods, but also industrial upgrading, employment growth, and entrepreneurial opportunities.

In the future, with the continuous deepening of the city agency model and the continuous improvement of the cross-border supply chain system represented by Pan Yuan International, more Armenian local enterprises and individuals will have the opportunity to participate in global trade, allowing more high-quality products from the Caucasus region to reach the world.

This “New Silk Road Corridor” connecting Armenia and China is becoming a new bridge to promote economic exchanges between the two countries and allowing more consumers to experience the unique flavors and cultural charm of Armenia.

Contact Info:
Name: Meng Xiao
Email: Send Email
Organization: FAR INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS Co., Ltd.
Website: https://www.far800.com/about?to=p1

Release ID: 89198624

Should you detect any errors, issues, or discrepancies with the content contained within this press release, or if you need assistance with a press release takedown, we kindly request that you inform us immediately by contacting [email protected] (it is important to note that this email is the authorized channel for such matters, sending multiple emails to multiple addresses does not necessarily help expedite your request). Our expert team will be available to promptly respond and take necessary steps within the next 8 hours to resolve any identified issues or guide you through the removal process. We value the trust placed in us by our readers and remain dedicated to providing accurate and reliable information.


—

Armenian Church Ready for New Clashes with PM Pashinyan

July 23, 2026
  • Linkedin
  • Email

By Benoit Lannoo*

ANTWERP, Belgium | 23 July 2026 (IDN) — It was a remarkable meeting at the Vardavar celebration – the 14th Sunday after Easter – in Etchmiadzin. Armenian Apostolic Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan was blessed by Catholicos Garegin II in the mother-cathedral of this autocephalous (independent) Eastern Church. ‘Blessing with lots of water’ plays a central role on Vardavar.

This encounter was striking since the primate of Tavush is under house arrest. Bagrat was arrested a year ago on charges of planning a coup, and he was released from a prison in the centre of Yerevan just before the Armenian parliamentary elections of Sunday, 7 June. But Bagrat is apparently allowed to attend the liturgy, and he took advantage of this to go to the patriarchal mother-church and to be openly blessed by his Catholicos.

In doing so, both prelates subtly make it clear that they remain allies in their opposition to the Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and his U-turn concerning the former Armenian enclave of Artsakh. That enclave – also known by its Russian name Nagorno-Karabakh – was ‘cleansed’ of its more than one hundred thousand Armenian residents by Azerbaijan in the autumn of 2023. Pashinyan, however, prefers not to talk about it anymore. Pashinyan won the elections and his renewed government recently formally approved the peace agreement he signed with Azerbaijan in August last year. That agreement also provides for Armenia to amend the constitution, because it still contains an indirect reference to the reunification of the motherland with Nagorno-Karabakh.

But Pashinyan’s electoral Civil Contract alliance has no constitutional majority. The question is whether Pashinyan will succeed in completely wiping the Artsakh issue off the agenda in the coming months. He is not exactly helped by his former opponent and new partner, Ilham Aliyev, the President of Azerbaijan. Aliyev is not the man to settle for a resounding victory. His adversaries must be humiliated, and new conditions added to every ceasefire or peace agreement. A few days ago, Aliyev publicly declared that the ethnic cleansing of Artsakh was justified, criticised the European and international bodies that defend the right to self-determination of the Artsakhians and – oh irony! – added that the South Caucasus should be governed by… international law.

Aliyev, however, does not care about any international law. In Artsakh’s capital Stepanakert, the Azeri’s just before the commemoration of the Armenian Genocide destroyed the Armenian Apostolic Cathedral entirely. Aliyev also consistently calls Armenia ‘West Azerbaijan,’ not hiding new territorial expansion claims. Meanwhile, the Azerbaijani strongman turns his back on anyone who stands in his way: he explicitly left the Council of Europe and do not want to deal anymore with the European Parliament, because both institutions are insisting on international law and the rights of the Artsakhians. But meanwhile, Aliyev has become one of Europe’s most prominent suppliers of gas and oil – or is it still Russian gas oil with a new label on it?

That is why Commission President Ursula von der Leyen continues to pamper the Azerbaijanis. Last Week, it became clear once again that the European Parliament is not happy with Von der Leyen’s politics in the South Caucasus. At a conference about some twenty former politicians and military leaders from Artsakh, who were sentenced to heavy prison terms in Baku in mock trials, and whose release is demanded by the European Parliament in an almost unanimously adopted motion, it appeared that the European Union can no longer maintain its stance on this matter. The European elected representatives are asking to support Artsakh, but the European Commission and the member states united in the European Council are reluctant to do so.

Meanwhile, the Armenian Apostolic Church has gone through its deepest crisis since the end of the Soviet Union. Last summer, Prime Minister Pashinyan started a smear campaign against the Catholicos of All Armenians through his Facebook account. The prime minister and his wife openly accused the supreme leader of the Church of not taking celibacy too seriously and even having fathered a child. On several occasions, he also explicitly called on the faithful to go to the Veharan – the residence of the Catholicos in Etchmiadzin, about thirty kilometres west of the capital Yerevan – to depose the Catholicos, a declaration that each time caused a lot of commotion there.

Armenians in Armenia and in the diaspora repeatedly ask me: ‘Why is Pashinyan attacking the Catholicos only since last Summer? He has been Armenia’s strongman since 2018, so why did he never make those accusations earlier?’ Rumours about the ‘Catholicos of all Armenians’ are not new; just about every observer says that there have been complaints behind the scenes for years about the luxurious lifestyle of Ktritsch Nersissian (Prime Minister Pashinyan since last Summer invariably calls the patriarch by his baptismal name), about his authoritarian Church government, and even about the vow of celibacy that he would not respect. The answer to the question ‘why now?’ is not ecclesiastical at all, but pure political; and it has a lot to do with Artsakh.

Someone who made the effort to look at the complex situation in the Southern Caucasus from all angles is the Lebanese-born journalist and researcher Vicken Cheterian. This lector in international relations in Geneva has coordinated the publication The 44-Day War: Armenia, Azerbaijan, and the struggle for Nagorno-Karabakh. In that book from 2025, several scholars look back from both Armenian and Azerbaijani angles on the 44-Day War of 2020, when Azerbaijan, with the explicit support of Turkey and with Israeli drones, managed to recapture all buffer areas around the enclave of Artsakh from the Armenians who had gained them after the bloody first war for Nagorno-Karabakh (1988-1994).

Some argue that Pashinyan unintentionally provoked that 44-Day War by stating with fanfare during a military parade in Shushi in May 2020 – in the middle of the enclave – that ‘Karabakh is Armenian; period!’ In doing so, he ignored how much Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev had not only fuelled anti-Armenian hatred in his country, but in the meantime also had heavily weaponized his military. Yerevan apparently had not understood that the Armenians would stand alone if Baku attacked again. Indeed, when the Azeris advanced on Stepanakert and Shushi in September 2020, no other country was ready to properly defend the Artsakhians. The European Union, for example, was overflowing with large and senseless declarations and no action at all.

Russian President Vladimir Putin forced both sides into a ceasefire on 10 November 2020. When I drove past the road to Shushi a few days later, a Turkish flag was flying unabashedly next to an Azerbaijani flag. Pashinyan misjudged the situation once again. As so-called environmentalists blocked the only corridor to what remained of Artsakh in December 2022, the Russian peacekeepers did not intervene. Nor did they when Azerbaijan attacked again in September 2023 and the hundred thousand remaining Artsakhians fled the enclave within Azerbaijan’s borders to the Armenian motherland. Only then did Pashinyan understand: Nagorno-Karabakh has been lost, and he no longer had any ally to count on!

That is why Prime Minister Pashinyan made his U-turn: he resigned himself to the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh and tried to normalize relations with former enemies Azerbaijan and Türkiye. But the Armenian Apostolic Church rejected this U-turn. ‘Before, the Church was always loyal to those who call the shots in Yerevan,’ Cheterian explains. Catholicos Garegin I (1983-1995) did not interfere with the politics of President Levon Ter-Petrossian (1991-1998), nor with those of his successors Robert Kotcharian (1998-2008) and Serzh Sarksyan (2008-2018). Even after his Velvet Revolution of 2018 and after his first re-election in 2021, the relationship of Armenia’s new Prime Minister, former journalist Nikol Pashinyan, with Catholicos Garegin II at first remained cordial.

However secularized the former Soviet republic may be, the Armenian Apostolic Church is the linchpin of the Armenian identity. People with money support her. Philanthropists, for example, have funded the construction of the gigantic cathedral of Saint Gregory the Illuminator, which was inaugurated in Yerevan in 2001 to celebrate 1700 years of Christianity in the country. Women invariably wear a cross on a necklace; men have Christian symbols tattooed on their arms. The Metz Yeghern – ‘Great Crime’ – also plays a key role within this national narrative. During the Armenian genocide of 1915, the government of the Young Turks in Istanbul killed one and a half million Armenians and systematically wiped out the Armenian identity of western Armenia.

There are no Armenians anymore in Eastern Anatolia and any remaining churches or monasteries are now in ruins, like those of the city of Ani, where Turkish tourist guides do not even dare to admit that it is Armenian heritage. The Azerbaijani regime, under the father Heydar and the son Ilham Aliyev, has done the same in the Nakhichevan exclave southeast of Armenia and is currently doing it again in Artsakh. Several churches are already destroyed, graveyards have been desacralized, and hundreds of khachkars (carved memorial steles bearing a cross, characteristic of medieval Christian Armenian art) have disappeared. Aliyev takes his time, but no doubt that the Armenian heritage of Artsakh will be erased from memory as it has been done before in Anatolia and in Nakhichevan.

Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, the primate of the northern diocese of Tavush, has always been revolting most strongly against Pashinyan’s political turn. ‘Artsakh is ours,’ he told me explicitly when I met him in November 2023, before his arrest. ‘It is in the monasteries of Artsakh that Armenian Christianity and even our language and our alphabet were conceived. You cannot separate the loss of Artsakh from the broader Armenian question, from the Armenian Genocide and from the attacks and the negationism of Türkiye and Azerbaijan.’ In May 2024, Galstanyan organised ‘Tavush for the Homeland’, a protest march on Yerevan, and he called for Prime Minister Pashinyan to be removed from power.

That is not to say that the Catholicos himself sided with the opposition. Strategically, Garegin II is keeping a low profile on narrowly political issues. But everyone knows that Etchmiadzin is very sympathetic to Galstanyan’s analysis. There were even whispers that Galstanyan could be a viable candidate for the premiership. Cheterian, however, stresses the pointlessness of Galstanyan’s movement. ‘It is inconceivable that Baku will leave Nagorno-Karabakh, certainly not in the near future. Who would encourage President Aliyev to do so? Not the Russians, not the Europeans, and not the Americans, because since the war in Ukraine, they all prefer to keep oil and gas-rich Azerbaijan as friendly as possible.’

Pashinyan, Aliyev and ‘peace broker’ Donald J. Trump in Washington on 8 August last year signed a memorandum of understanding. This was never a peace agreement! It is a business deal that gives in to all Azerbaijan’s aggression in recent years in exchange for a lucrative trade corridor through the southern Armenian province of Syunik – the memorandum of understanding text does not even have the courtesy of giving that corridor an Armenian name but already uses the Azerbaijani name for the province in question, Zangezur. It also does not mention Artsakh, nor the hundred thousand Artsakhians on the run, nor the Artsakhian political prisoners in Baku, nor the Armenian cultural-religious heritage that the Azeris are already destroying…

Analyst Cheterian does not think it is possible to go back on the Washington agreement. Pashinyan’s U-turn might not be liked by the Church, the Armenian diaspora in Europe and the United States, nor the political opposition in the homeland; that opposition is hopelessly divided. Meanwhile, Pashinyan has been playing it hard: anyone who criticises his policy is taken before the courts for alleged crimes. Armenia’s richest man and important philanthropist of the Armenian Apostolic Church, Samvel Karapetyan, has been in jail since last Summer. Following the election, his ‘Strong Armenia’ alliance became the largest opposition force in the National Assembly, but only half as big as Pashinyan’s Civil Contract.

‘In 2018 Pashinyan had promised to tackle corruption in the country and to reform its governance in a transparent, democratic way,’ Cheterian points out. ‘He didn’t keep any of those promises.’ On the contrary, the Prime Minister has become an autocratic leader abusing all institutions for his personal ambitions, just like Soviet leaders did at their time and Armenian politicians have done since independence.’ Three Archbishops were put behind bars: Bagrat Galstanyan of Tavush, Mikael Ajapahjan of Shirak, and Mkrtich Proshan of Aragatsotn, as are other Church leaders, priests and opposition leaders. Experts from the United Nations, meanwhile, are challenging Armenia’s prosecution over terrorism charges against Archbishop Galstanyan.

At the end of November last year, ten prelates shocked observers as they sat around the table with Pashinyan and… joined his calls for the Catholicos to step aside. Among them were archbishops of dioceses in the motherland, such as Sion Adamyan of Armavir, Arakel Karamyan of Kotayk, and Abraham Mkrtchjan of Vayots Dzor. They were joined by bishops from the diaspora, like Vazgen Mizakhanyan of the diocese in the Baltic States, or Hovnan Derderian of the diocese in the western United States. But during a remarkable meeting in the Austrian abbey of Sankt Pölten last February, Archbishop Derderian, considered one of the leading figures of the dissidence, signed an appeal for unity in the Armenian Apostolic Church and confirmed his loyalty to the katholikos.

The most surprising element of the crisis was that Archbishop Vrtanes Abrahamyan of the diocese of Artsakh – the diocese in exile – was also among the dissidents opposing the katholikos. His participation to the movement showed that it obviously was no longer just about Artsakh. What, then, was it about? It is true that each of the ten dissidents was rumoured to nurse personal ambitions, to have fallen victim to corruption or to be involved in private business deals. They did not form a solid, united front. However, many observers think that the ‘dissidents’ had had enough of the pro-Russian position of the leaders of the Armenian Apostolic Church. (Now that the dissidence has disappeared, Archbishop Abrahamyan of Artsakh seems to suffer from a serious burnout.)

Pashinyan & Co. indeed have realized that Armenia can expect little from its historical allies in Moscow, and therefore better turn towards Washington and seek a normalization of relations with Baku and Ankara. ‘There is a lot to be said for that,’ Cheterian remarks, ‘if you want effectively to prevent new violence in the Southern Caucasus.’ After all, the Azerbaijani President Aliyev will not need much justification to attack again. That is why it is so dangerous to cherish Aliyev without holding him accountable for what he is doing in Nagorno-Karabakh or with the Artsakhian political hostages held in prison in Baku. Was there ever before in history a peace agreement without releasing prisoners before the agreement?’

Unfortunately, the Churches also are cherishing Aliyev. Pope Leo XIV received the Armenian Apostolic Catholicos Aram I of Cilicia in mid-May. Publicly, the emphasis was on the situation in Lebanon, where many of Aram’s believers live. However, it is obvious that the developments around Artsakh were also discussed during the conversation. But at the same time, the Vatican continues to carefully maintain relations with Azerbaijan. The financial support of the Heydar Aliyev Foundation to Vatican projects might play a key role in the good relationship between Rome and Baku. The Heydar Aliyev Foundation richly finances the Vatican Museums and other cultural projects in Catholic Rome. Can the ‘first diplomacy’ in the world continue to be led by Mammon?

*Benoit Lannoo is Church historian and expert in Eastern Oriental Churches.

https://indepthnews.net/armenian-church-ready-for-new-clashes-with-pm-pashinyan/

—

Armenia okays referendum initiative on constitutional amendment

Muslim Network
July 23, 2026
Central Election Commission approved initiative, with organizers now required to collect 200,000 signatures to trigger a nationwide referendum

YEREVAN, Armenia (MNTV) — Armenia’s Central Election Commission (CEC) has registered a citizen-initiated referendum seeking amendments to the country’s Constitution, approving a civic initiative that now moves to the signature collection stage, Iravunk reported.

The initiative was submitted in early July by the ‘Eurasian Alliance’ civic group, a 53-member organization formed by representatives of the Alliance Party of former lawmaker Tigran Urikhanyan. The group’s proposed legislation was notarized before being filed with the CEC for registration.

According to the proposal, the constitutional amendment is intended to “neutralize and prevent the economic and social risks and crisis” that organizers say could arise from the March 26, 2025, law launching Armenia’s European Union accession process. The initiative argues that the customs regimes of the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) are incompatible.

The draft amendment proposes enshrining in the Constitution a prohibition on Armenia signing interstate treaties that directly contradict international agreements already in force and previously concluded by the country.

The report said lengthy discussions took place between the CEC and the initiative’s organizers before the commission approved the application at an extraordinary session on July 16, the final day permitted under the legal deadline.

Under CEC regulations, organizers must collect 200,000 signatures within 60 days for the referendum to proceed. If the threshold is met, a nationwide vote will be scheduled. According to the commission’s decision, the official signature collection campaign will begin on Aug. 3.

The report said the referendum, if held, would effectively ask Armenian voters to determine whether the country should continue its European Union accession process or retain its orientation toward the Eurasian Economic Union.

The report also referred to remarks that it said were made by Russian President Vladimir Putin during a meeting with Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan in April, in which he urged Armenia to hold a referendum on its strategic direction. It added that leaders of EAEU member states had also called for the issue to be resolved through a nationwide vote.

Commenting on the initiative, Armenian journalist and blogger Roman Baghdasaryan said he did not believe it would gain sufficient public support.

“He will not collect 200,000 signatures,” Baghdasaryan said, referring to Urikhanyan. “And even if he does, it still won’t make any difference.”

Baghdasaryan said Armenia’s Constitution would ultimately be amended through the broader constitutional reform process. He noted that the justice minister has said a draft of the new Constitution, including its principal amendments, is expected to be published by the end of the year.

Analyst and publicist Ishkhan Verdyan said a referendum on Armenia’s geopolitical orientation could produce an outcome different from what its organizers expect.

He argued that if Armenian citizens were asked to choose between closer integration with the European Union and continued alignment with the EAEU, a majority would likely favor the European path.

Verdyan also said such a referendum could overlap with the government’s broader constitutional reform agenda, including possible amendments to provisions that neighboring countries have interpreted as containing territorial claims, and could serve as a model for future constitutional referendums.


—

‘Unsolved crimes are being passed off as suicides’: Armenian soldier’s death s

JAM News
July 23, 2026
  • JAMnews
  • Yerevan

A serviceman has died at an Armenian military base. Investigators found the body of 20-year-old conscript Narek Torosyan on July 21. The Investigative Committee released only limited information after the incident. It said authorities had opened a criminal case and launched an investigation.

The committee later charged two of Torosyan’s fellow servicemen with driving him to suicide through negligence. One is a junior sergeant and the other a private. Authorities have placed both men under arrest.

The Ministry of Defence has made no public statement about the soldier’s death. Human rights activists and politicians have condemned the ministry’s silence.

Among them was human rights defender Zhanna Aleksanyan, who regularly raises concerns about human rights violations in the armed forces. She wrote on social media that Defence Minister Suren Papikyan ultimately bears responsibility for the lives of servicemen.

“The minister remains strikingly detached when soldiers die. At the end of each year, he tries to downplay the numbers, but no genuine effort exists to reduce the death toll,” she said.

According to official figures, eight servicemen have died since the beginning of 2026.


  • Armenia begins recruiting and training border guards for Azerbaijan border
  • ‘New army, new weapons’: military parade in Yerevan marks Republic Day
  • ‘Armenia must not be an attractive target for aggression,’ says Pashinyan on Army Day

What we know so far

Armenian media report that Narek came from the town of Charentsavan and was a fourth-year student at the Russian-Armenian University. He hoped to become a sports journalist. The army drafted him in January 2026. Shortly before the incident, he had gone home on leave and visited his family. Reports also identify Chambarak as his duty station.

Authorities have not disclosed where the incident took place or what exactly happened.

According to a version published by several local media outlets, other servicemen severely beat the soldier before he took his own life.

Charentsavan Mayor Hakob Shahgeldyan also told reporters that, according to the information available to him, Narek had died by suicide. However, the mayor provided no further details.

Armenia’s army to continue acquiring advanced weaponry, defence minister says

At the same time, Suren Papikyan said Armenia does not intend to enter an arms race with any country, including Azerbaijan. The defence minister summed up the results of 2025.

Human rights activist Zhanna Aleksanyan wrote:

“The Ministry of Defence remains silent about the death of 20-year-old serviceman Narek Torosyan.

The minister has still offered no explanation or clarification. Did he visit the military unit to find out what happened and why? I am certain he did not. He bears responsibility for the life of every serviceman, and he is accountable to both their families and society.

I cannot accept the ‘suicide’ version circulating in the media. Journalists may learn that a serviceman has died, but they cannot know the circumstances of his death. Law enforcement agencies often leak such versions to the press. They later use those same reports to support their own conclusion that it was ‘suicide.’

And in the army, most ‘suicides’ are in fact unsolved murders.”

Tigran Abrahamyan, an opposition MP from the I Have Honour alliance, wrote on social media:

“Soldier Narek Torosyan, who died following the incident at the Chambarak military base, was my student. […]

Narek was a kind, gentle person with outstanding personal qualities. Both students and lecturers respected and cared for him.

Given the sensitivity of the case, I do not want to comment on the different versions or discuss the information available to me.

One thing is clear, however. The state has failed to ensure proper discipline, maintain a healthy psychological environment in military units, and provide effective oversight. That failure ultimately leads to incidents like this.

The authorities must carry out an objective and comprehensive investigation and take steps to prevent similar tragedies in the future.”

Mané Tandilyan, founder of the Country to Live party, said:

“Do not say that incidents like this are inevitable in the army. We must not accept such an attitude. After so many losses, it is unacceptable that we continue to lose our young people in peacetime.

How do officers demonstrate accountability? How has violence and cruelty become so deeply rooted among 18- to 20-year-olds that it repeatedly leads to deaths? What is the army doing to foster mutual respect, discipline and responsibility?

What is especially alarming is that intolerance and aggression are becoming increasingly visible in society. And yes, much of the responsibility lies with the country’s top leadership, which speaks to society in a language that fuels division, hostility and hatred. That atmosphere eventually seeps into people’s everyday relationships.

We must overcome this nightmare. Let us each begin with the people around us.”

—

Nagorno-Karabakh and the Conflict That Never Ended

World Atlas
July 23, 2026

Nagorno-Karabakh contains a lot of history within its small area. Although the region is officially part of Azerbaijan, it has connections with Armenian traditions and identity. That duality has fueled competing claims to the region for generations. During years of Soviet control, the tension remained, but it was buried under Moscow’s tight control. Nevertheless, after the USSR collapsed, the conflict and pressure which had existed beneath the surface emerged. The conflict that intensified during the Soviet Union’s collapse continued for more than three decades. Azerbaijan’s return to full control in 2023 ended the separatist administration, but mass displacement and unresolved relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan ensured that the conflict’s consequences did not disappear.

The Historical Roots of Conflict

Dadivank is an Armenian monastery in Azerbaijan’s Kalbajar District. Much of it was built between the 9th and 13th centuries.

Nagorno-Karabakh sits in the South Caucasus, where decades of land and identity conflict have left their mark. At almost 1,700 square miles, most of the world recognizes it as part of Azerbaijan. Until the 2023 Azerbaijani offensive, most residents were ethnically Armenian. The region, known to Armenians as Artsakh, has long been associated with Armenian political, religious, and cultural history. It was incorporated into Armenian kingdoms during parts of antiquity and later contained a substantial Armenian population, although Armenian and Azerbaijani historians dispute aspects of its earlier political and ethnic history.

Despite the Armenian presence, it was often under foreign rule. At different points, the territory was controlled by Persian and Caucasian Albanian powers. Armenian noble clans, called meliks, managed to keep control in the highlands, using the Armenian language, with some local self-rule, even as real power belonged to Persian rulers and, later, to the Russians.

In the early nineteenth century, the balance of power shifted following the Russo-Persian Wars. Russia defeated Persia and annexed much of the South Caucasus, including the area around Nagorno-Karabakh. While control changed hands, the area’s mixed ethnic composition and historical claims remained, laying the groundwork for future disputes. When the Russian Empire fell apart, it left a power gap all across the South Caucasus. Armenia, along with Azerbaijan, emerged as independent states and clashed over territories, Nagorno-Karabakh being one of them.

Life Under the Soviets

Shusha’s Armenian quarters after conflict of 1920. Via Wikimedia Commons / Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute.

When the Red Army moved into the South Caucasus in the 1920s, Soviet rule brought changes to the region. It brought an end to the brief independence of the First Republic of Armenia and the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic. Both countries asserted their rights over Nagorno-Karabakh before their absorption into the Soviet Union. Soviet authorities placed the predominantly Armenian region within the Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic and established the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast in 1923. The decision remained deeply contested, with Armenians repeatedly seeking the region’s transfer to Soviet Armenia and Azerbaijani authorities defending its position within their republic.

In his article “Nationalities Problem in USSR: Discord over Nagorno-Karabakh”, P. L. Dash argues that the Soviet decision in 1923 to keep the region within Azerbaijan was shaped less by ethnic identity than by administrative and economic considerations, since transport links and infrastructure tied it closely to Azerbaijani territory, even though the population was largely Armenian.

On paper, the directive looked simple, but in reality, it was the opposite. Many children studied in Armenian schools, parents worshipped in Armenian churches, people talked in Armenian out on the sidewalks, but their bureaucratic superiors were Azerbaijani. Soviet officials from Moscow, along with Azerbaijan’s Communist Party, kept a tight grip on Nagorno-Karabakh’s political scene. Public demonstrations were forbidden, and security agencies monitored political actions and prevented any kind of public dialogue about the region’s position in places like schools and media outlets.

In the 1960s and 1970s, the Soviets strengthened Azerbaijan’s control by running the area’s economy and administration through Baku, Azerbaijan’s capital. They built new roads and industry to pull the region tighter into Azerbaijan’s sphere. Even though Moscow’s strict security stopped protests, ethnic Armenian dissatisfaction was rising. To many Armenians, it felt like Azerbaijani officials were erasing Armenian representation in the regional government. To Azerbaijanis, these policies were efforts to strengthen territorial integration and economic development within the Azerbaijani Soviet republic.

Circumstances changed in the 1980s. Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev brought reforms which relaxed restrictions throughout the USSR. When Moscow’s control got weaker, public protests started emerging, and soon, violence broke out, and the hidden conflict that had existed for years was exposed.

First War (1988-1994): The Soviet Collapse and Ethnic Conflict

Armenian soldiers in Karabakh, 1994, wearing Soviet Army combat helmets. Armdesant, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

In 1988, crowds filled the streets of Stepanakert, the largest city in Nagorno-Karabakh, demanding changes to the region’s political status. There was a sizeable portion that wanted to break free from Azerbaijan and tie their future to Armenia. News caught fire, and Yerevan, the Armenian capital, quickly threw its weight behind the movement. If you asked Azerbaijanis, the events weren’t just street protests; it was a legitimate threat to their own existence. People in Sumgait began attacking Armenians, leaving hundreds injured and dozens killed in what became known as the Sumgait pogrom.

Then, in 1990, things in Baku just got worse as protests and anti-Armenian violence broke out all over the city. Many hurried to escape, as families slipped away during the night, grabbing whatever they could carry with them. Once the Soviet Union fell apart in 1991, with it went any barriers stopping outright conflict between Armenians and Azerbaijanis.

Arms were removed from Soviet military storage, and both Armenian and Azerbaijani sides started to form their own armed units. Fighting extended over Nagorno-Karabakh and nearby territories as battles for control of towns and supply lines started to break out. In “State at War, State in War: The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict and State-Making in Armenia, 1991-1995,” Taline Papazian says that after 1988, insecurity and violence drove Armenians to create self-defense organizations as an answer to pogroms and other attacks; later, these groups became integrated into one centralized national army.

By 1992-1993, these formations had changed from militias into structured units fighting coordinated battles for land, while authorities allocated resources toward the Defense Ministry. Both sides experienced major casualties. However, both adjusted the figures to support their political narrative. Armenian sources often emphasized battlefield successes or highlighted their ability to withstand larger Azerbaijani forces.

On the other hand, Azerbaijani leaders emphasized the extent of the territory they had lost and the destruction inflicted on their towns and villages. By 1993, Armenian troops held the advantage, with swift offensives that let them take over not just Nagorno-Karabakh but also Azerbaijani regions like Kelbajar and Fuzuli. These advances forced large numbers of Azerbaijani civilians to flee, placing additional strain on the country as its government struggled to respond.

A ceasefire came into effect in 1994, but this was not the result of a genuine willingness to make peace. Instead, both sides were simply exhausted by the fighting. Russia helped broker the ceasefire through negotiations. Armenia and its allies in Nagorno-Karabakh retained control of Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding territories. Azerbaijan was left with the pain of losing and faced the challenge of hundreds of thousands of displaced people. The fighting had largely stopped; however, there was little belief that the dispute was truly over, and the possibility of renewed conflict was still present.

The Frozen Conflict

An abandoned armored vehicle in Nagorno-Karabakh, 2015. Via Shutterstock / Sebastian Kastelier

The 1994 truce might have stopped the fighting, but in reality, the conflict never went away. Armenian-backed forces remained in control of Nagorno-Karabakh and seven surrounding Azerbaijani districts. The region’s Armenian authorities declared the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic in 1991. The unrecognized entity, later commonly called the Republic of Artsakh, developed its own institutions and armed forces with extensive political, economic, and military support from Armenia.

Together, Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding Azerbaijani districts under Armenian control amounted to roughly 13 to 14 percent of Azerbaijan’s internationally recognized territory. Even with the ceasefire, with opposing forces positioned close to one another along the line of contact, the risk of more conflict was always present.

No side was willing to compromise, but mediation was conducted by the OSCE Minsk Group, an international body established to find a resolution to the conflict. Armenia and Azerbaijan had polarizing ideas regarding the area’s status and what would happen with the adjacent regions, so peace negotiations dragged on.

Russia, France, and the US threw themselves into the effort to steer the mediation, with a plan that outlined Armenia giving up Azerbaijani territory near Nagorno-Karabakh. At the same time, Nagorno-Karabakh would be granted autonomy and later have a say in figuring out its own future status. The proposal also dealt with allowing refugees to return to their homes and placing foreign peacekeepers on the ground. However, disagreements over sovereignty ultimately prevented the two sides from reaching a lasting agreement.

The two sides remained highly militarized. Elizabeth Fuller, in her work “Azerbaijan’s Foreign Policy and the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict,” says that Armenian and Azerbaijani troops kept their positions across a tense frontline, with both sides refusing to surrender any land, while Azerbaijan invested more and more of its energy income into modernizing and reinforcing its military. On the other hand, Armenia, with its smaller economy, was increasingly dependent on Russian arms and security guarantees. The difference between their militaries was getting larger and larger.

In April 2016, the biggest battle since the 1994 ceasefire took place after Azerbaijan launched a major offensive along the line of contact. Over 200 people died during four days of intense fighting. Azerbaijan managed to regain territory for the first time in decades, signaling a shift in the balance of power and showing the conflict was far from resolved. Although a ceasefire was restored, the fighting showed both sides that another, much larger war was getting more likely.

The Second War (2020): Azerbaijan’s Military Offensive

Russian peacekeepers assisting ethnic Armenian refugees evacuating Stepanakert. By Mil.ru, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Just a few years later, fighting started again. Azerbaijan launched an attack on 27 September 2020. This wasn’t a brief skirmish but a large-scale military campaign. The results of years of military investment became obvious. Azerbaijan deployed Turkish unmanned aircraft, mainly Bayraktar TB2s, operated nearly non-stop. Israeli loitering munitions were also used. In the first stage of the attack, numerous Armenian tanks and heavy guns were destroyed.

The fighting stretched on for forty-four days. Azerbaijan pushed through the south, taking Jabrayil and Fuzuli. Then Zangilan and Qubadli fell. Each week brought another former district under their control. By early November, troops had reached Shusha. The city sat above the main road to Stepanakert. Its loss broke Armenian defenses and left the capital exposed. Casualties were steep. Armenian authorities reported more than 3,700 Armenian and Nagorno-Karabakh military deaths, while Azerbaijan claimed nearly 3,000 on their side. Rockets and missiles hammered Stepanakert, Ganja, and Barda.

As the conflict raged, thousands of Armenians fled the area, swelling the numbers who’d already been uprooted in previous years. Then, Russia once again stepped in to broker a ceasefire and bring an end to the fighting. The ceasefire agreement required Armenia to return the territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh, and Azerbaijan took back most of the territories it had lost years prior.

Nearly 2,000 Russian peacekeepers were deployed to secure the Lachin corridor and also to observe the ceasefire. The 2020 war finished not as a stalemate but with an obvious Azerbaijani military success. The ceasefire reflected the military situation on the ground rather than the outcome of negotiations, requiring Armenia to cede territory and marking a clear shift in the balance of power. The six-week conflict altered the map once again. Azerbaijan saw it as a major victory, regaining the districts they had once lost. Armenia experienced political unrest domestically and had to face the reality of a major defeat.

A Shifting Balance and the 2023 Offensive

After the 2020 war, Azerbaijan was stronger than at any point since its independence. The army had modern weapons and funding from oil and gas. On the other hand, Armenia was divided. The territorial loss resulted in demonstrations in Yerevan, and the army found it difficult to recover from its previous defeat. Even as Russia maintained peacekeepers within the region, their responsibilities were restricted, mainly including checkpoint operations and road patrols.

In December 2022, groups calling themselves environmental activists stopped traffic on the road, although Armenia, together with many analysts, claimed there was actually support from the Azerbaijani state. What looked temporary dragged on, developing into a severe humanitarian crisis. Because of the blockade, by the middle of 2023, stores in Stepanakert lacked food and medicine. Azerbaijan’s growing military advantage reduced its incentive to compromise, making a negotiated resolution increasingly difficult despite the presence of Russian peacekeepers.

Nothing about the Russian peacekeepers could prevent the balance of power from moving more and more toward Baku. In the years following the war, this reality influenced events locally. Azerbaijan used its advantage by controlling territory and key transport routes. The Lachin Corridor was the only roadway linking Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenia. Azerbaijan progressively restricted movement along the Lachin Corridor and established a checkpoint there in April 2023. Russian peacekeepers proved unable or unwilling to restore normal access. In February 2023, the International Court of Justice ordered Azerbaijan to take all measures at its disposal to ensure the unimpeded movement of people, vehicles, and cargo in both directions, but severe shortages continued inside Nagorno-Karabakh.

Then, on 19 September 2023, Azerbaijan launched another military offensive. This time, drones and artillery targeted the positions of Nagorno-Karabakh’s Armenian forces before Azerbaijani ground troops advanced from multiple directions. Within a day, the de facto region’s defenses collapsed, and its authorities agreed to a ceasefire and the disbandment of their armed forces. By the end of the month, Azerbaijan had re-established full control over Nagorno-Karabakh.

Aftermath and Ongoing Peace Efforts

Azerbaijani soldiers and Russian peacekeepers at a checkpoint in Kalbajar District. Via Mil.ru, CC BY 4.0 / Wikimedia Commons.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees says the military action in September 2023 caused Armenians to flee at a shocking rate, with more than 100,000 finding their way into Armenia in only days. Villages and towns were emptied, some entirely deserted. For many families, this was another forced exile inside of a cycle that dated back decades.

The consequences of the 2023 offensive have also put a fresh focus on the cultural heritage in the region. Some organizations and observers have mentioned that Armenian monuments and other historical locations were damaged, while discussions about their protection are still ongoing. These events amplified concerns about what will happen to Armenian cultural heritage in the area now that control has changed. But Azerbaijan maintains it is restoring and protecting cultural sites while rejecting allegations of deliberate destruction and emphasizing its preservation efforts.

Although Azerbaijan had restored control over Nagorno-Karabakh, relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan remained unsettled. In March 2025, the two governments announced that they had completed negotiations over the text of a peace agreement. Their foreign ministers initialled the document in Washington, D.C., on August 8, 2025, while the countries’ leaders signed a separate joint declaration supporting further normalization.

The initialling represented a major diplomatic breakthrough, but it was not the same as the treaty taking full legal effect. The two governments acknowledged that further steps were required for formal signature and ratification. As of mid-2026, Azerbaijan remained in control of Nagorno-Karabakh, while more than 100,000 Armenians displaced in September 2023 continued rebuilding their lives in Armenia. The question of whether Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh will ever return remains unanswered. The conflict might no longer lie on the battlefield, but its legacy continues through displaced communities and the challenge of building a lasting peace in a region shaped by decades of division.

In Conclusion

The history of Nagorno-Karabakh shows how disputes over territory and identity can shape generations. Even during periods of calm, tensions between Armenians and Azerbaijanis remained unresolved. Each new wave of violence reinforced past grievances, making a lasting political settlement harder and harder to achieve.

Over more than three decades, the conflict developed from competing historical claims into repeated wars that displaced hundreds of thousands of people and reshaped the political landscape of the South Caucasus. The wars of 2020 and 2023 restored Azerbaijani control over Nagorno-Karabakh, but they didn’t resolve the humanitarian consequences of the conflict or the questions surrounding the future of those who were forced to leave. Although large-scale fighting has ended, the legacy of the conflict continues to influence the relationship between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

—

Tennis: Avanesyan outlasts Putintseva in Hamburg, makes Armenian history

WTA Tennis
July 23, 2026

Avanesyan outlasts Putintseva in Hamburg, makes Armenian history

Qualifier Elina Avanesyan defeated No. 7 seed Yulia Putintseva for the first time in three meetings in a 2-hour, 11-minute three-setter in the MSC Hamburg Ladies Open second round, advancing to her first tour-level quarterfinal since Merida 2025. Avanesyan joined Armenian compatriot Alina Charaeva in the last eight, marking the first time that two Armenians have reached the quarterfinals of a WTA Tour main draw.

—