YEREVAN—Armenia submitted a sixth proposal for a draft peace agreement to Azerbaijan on November 21, the Armenian Foreign Ministry announced. 

“Armenia remains committed to conclude and sign a document on normalization of relations based on previously announced principles,” the Armenian Foreign Ministry said. The proposal coincided with Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s public declaration that he is committed to intensifying efforts to sign a peace treaty with Azerbaijan.

While addressing the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly on November 18, PM Pashinyan highlighted the progress made during trilateral meetings facilitated by European Council president Charles Michel in Brussels. He specifically mentioned that three fundamental principles of peace have been agreed upon between Armenia and Azerbaijan during these negotiations. 

Elaborating on these principles, Pashinyan delineated the first as mutual recognition of each other’s territorial integrity, referring to maps from the USSR General Staff from 1974-1990. He further indicated that both countries have agreed to refrain from territorial claims against each other. PM Pashinyan urged Azerbaijan to publicly declare its commitment to these principles.

Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan addressing the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly in Yerevan, Nov. 18, 2023 (RA Prime Minister)

However, in response, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Azerbaijan released a press statement claiming that Azerbaijan submitted proposals for a draft peace treaty to Armenia in September and accusing Armenia of not providing a response. It called this delay a serious setback to the negotiation process.

Negotiations on a peace treaty are ongoing following Azerbaijan’s invasion of Artsakh on September 19 and its near 10-month blockade of the Berdzor (Lachin) corridor connecting Artsakh to Armenia and the rest of the world, depriving the local Armenian population of food, fuel and basic supplies. Azerbaijan’s September 19 assault on Artsakh led to a mass exodus of over 100,000 people fleeing towards Armenia, sparking widespread condemnation and accusations of ethnic cleansing.

PM Pashinyan also named unblocking of regional communications based on the sovereignty and jurisdiction of each side as another crucial element of a peace treaty. Despite the apparent agreement on several peace principles, Pashinyan said that a lack of mutual trust between the parties is a significant impediment to signing a treaty. He highlighted how past statements from Azerbaijan indicating reluctance towards signing a peace agreement, coupled with perceived intentions for aggressive actions, have hindered progress. Pashinyan called for establishing mechanisms for resolving disputes in interpreting the peace agreement and implementing security guarantees.

The recent shifts in attitude and policy in the West have affected the geopolitics of the region. Additionally, recent statements and actions between Armenia and Azerbaijan, echoed in a multifaceted geopolitical landscape, have intensified discussions around regional stability and the complexities of their diplomatic relations.

In comments to the press on November 20, Kremlin press secretary Dmitry Peskov denied Pashinyan’s remarks that Azerbaijan is preparing for war. Peskov stated that Azerbaijan has expressed its readiness to sign a peace treaty. Azerbaijan’s leadership also denied that such assertions have been made at the state level. It emphasized previous statements advocating for peace and a desire to conclude a peace treaty.

Kremlin Press Secretary Dimitry Peskov (Wikimedia Commons)

There has been a significant shift in Armenia’s stance regarding military threats from Azerbaijan. Formerly, Armenia had expressed concerns about a potential Azerbaijani invasion in its southern region, due to Azeri demands to open the so-called “Zangezur corridor” in Armenia’s Syunik province for communications. Moreover, international speculation, including from the American Stratfor analytical center, centered on Aliyev’s demands regarding transit through this corridor, potentially affecting the region’s geopolitical landscape. Armenia has rejected the demand for a corridor that would be free from customs and passport controls, insisting that regional communication links should respect the sovereignty of national borders. 

Notably, Iran also expressed apprehension regarding possible border changes in the South Caucasus, particularly its shared northern border with Armenia. Its concerns stemmed from broader geopolitical shifts in the region involving various external players such as Turkey, Israel, Europe and the United States.

Responding to escalating tensions, Azerbaijan renounced the idea of the “Zangezur corridor” and proposed an alternative route through Iran for transit to its exclave Nakhichevan. This move aimed to counter commentary that Azerbaijan is preparing to attack Armenia.

Consequently, Armenia faced challenges in its strategic maneuvering, leading PM Pashinyan to shift the battleground to the European platform. During a parliamentary session on November 16, Pashinyan reaffirmed Armenia’s stance on finalizing a peace treaty with Azerbaijan in the forthcoming months, emphasizing the necessity of mutual agreement between both nations. 

Pashinyan emphasized the collaborative nature of the peace process, asserting that while Armenia is ready to sign a peace treaty, Azerbaijan’s participation and signature are equally imperative for its successful implementation.

While the negotiation process on a peace deal appears to stall, Azerbaijan has also criticized a decision by the U.S. Senate to halt military aid to Azerbaijan. The U.S. Senate unanimously passed a bill on November 16 to halt military aid to Azerbaijan for the next two fiscal years, a move known as the Armenian Protection Act of 2023. This bill, if approved by the House and signed by the president, would prevent the State Department from granting a waiver necessary to provide military assistance to Azerbaijan under current legislation.

Introduced by Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) and enjoying bipartisan support, the measure represents Congress’ strong stance in restricting U.S. military support to Azerbaijan, particularly following its rapid military advancement in Artsakh in September.

The decision follows a previous joint appeal by 91 lawmakers to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, urging economic sanctions against Azerbaijani officials for their military actions and blockade in Artsakh. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Bob Menendez (D-NJ) also urged Blinken not to extend the waiver in response to Azerbaijan’s invasion of the region, emphasizing the importance of compliance with a 1992 law restricting U.S. aid until Azerbaijan ceases blockades and offensive actions against Armenia and Artsakh.

Despite the Biden administration’s historical practice of issuing waivers citing national security concerns, Ambassador James O’Brien from the State Department recently stated during a House hearing that there are no plans to issue a new waiver under Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act.

The Milli Majlis, Azerbaijan’s parliament, has strongly criticized this move by the U.S. Senate, viewing it as damaging to bilateral ties and impeding regional peace efforts. It accused the U.S. of supporting separatist movements within Azerbaijan, eroding trust in U.S. mediation of Armenia-Azerbaijan negotiations. The Milli Majlis vowed to firmly counter any actions perceived as detrimental to their national interests. This rebuke highlights growing tensions between both nations, adding complexity to the regional landscape.

Senator Peters emphasized that the bill aimed to hold Azerbaijan accountable for its actions and would restrict military aid for two years due to its failure to comply with previous agreements. He urged the Biden administration to take public action in response to the ongoing conflict.

Executive Director of the Armenian National Committee of Artsakh Gev Iskajyan told the Weekly in an interview that the recent developments in Washington D.C., namely the passage of the Senate resolution, are welcome steps towards addressing the conflict in the region. “However, it is imperative that we go beyond just these resolutions and aim for punitive measures against Azerbaijan, both for their ethnic cleansing of Artsakh and for their omnipresent threats of war against Armenia,” he stated. 

Members of the NAASR Board and staff (l-r): Ani Babaian (Library Curator), Laura Yardumian (Program and Administrative Associate), Nancy R. Kolligian (Board), Judith Saryan (Board), Jirair Balayan (Board), Marc A. Mamigonian (Director of Academic Affairs), Henry Theriault (Board), Silva Sedrakian (Executive Director), Joan E. Kolligian (Board) and Ara Araz (Board)

BELMONT, Mass.—The National Association for Armenian Studies and Research (NAASR) held its 69th Annual Assembly of Members on Saturday, November 4, 2023, at its Vartan Gregorian Building in Belmont, Massachusetts. The event was a hybrid meeting with both in-person attendees and online participation of NAASR members around the U.S. and abroad.

Board Chairperson Judith Saryan noted the presence of a quorum and called the meeting to order, remarking on the pain of the past year for Armenians in the Republic of Armenia and in Artsakh, in particular. She observed, “Preserving our cultural and historical heritage is even more crucial, and we should be proud of having an organization such as NAASR dedicated to this cause, which has become stronger and stronger.”

Saryan’s report as chairperson gave an overview of an exceptionally active year for the organization, including sponsoring or co-sponsoring more than 65 scholarly programs, supporting scholars through research grants, hosting events for young people, providing space for a number of Armenian sister organizations to hold their events, continuing the ongoing and valuable work of NAASR’s Mardigian Library and Bookstore and more. She thanked the full- and part-time staff as well as volunteers for their efforts and expressed special gratitude to several individuals who have honored NAASR with generous bequests.

Recognition of long-serving Board members

Of special significance was Saryan’s recognition of three outstanding and long-serving NAASR Board members who are retiring this year for their leadership, vision and dedicated service: Yervant Chekijian of Watertown, Mass., a NAASR member since 1963, Board member since 1998, and Board chairman from 2016 to 2022, leading the ambitious and highly successful campaign for our new headquarters and making a profound impact on NAASR’s growth; Raffi Yeghiayan of Bedford, Mass., a NAASR member since 1960, Board member since 1968, and Board chairman from 2010 to 2016, devoting his many talents to leading the organization; and Roxanne Etmekjian of West Newton, Mass., a NAASR member since 1986 and a Board member since 2006, including many years as treasurer.

Saryan concluded by stating that she has “felt privileged to serve as NAASR’s chair this past year and honored to work with all of you,” but had made the decision to step down as chair while remaining “as committed as ever to NAASR” and continuing to serve on the Board of Directors.

Following Saryan’s report, NAASR Director of Academic Affairs Marc A. Mamigonian introduced the featured speaker, Dr. Henry Theriault, Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs at Worcester State University and past president (2017-2021) of the International Association of Genocide Scholars, whose talk was entitled “The Artsakh Crisis: Scholarly Ethics, Activism, and Genocide.”

Insightful and timely talk by Dr. Henry Theriault

Theriault provided a succinct overview of the historical background of the current Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabakh crisis, going back to the post-World War I period and the Sovietization of the South Caucasus, noting that creation of the Artsakh enclave, as well as the Nakhichevan exclave and other such territories within the new Soviet republics, created a “perpetual tension” between ethnicities and a reliance on Moscow to resolve problems that inevitably arose.

Featured speaker Dr. Henry Theriault

He discussed the long-term outcomes of the first war over Artsakh that resulted in a stalemate in 1994 that left Armenians in control of the region as well as additional surrounding territories. He noted that the Artsakh Republic developed a legitimate democracy, albeit within a self-declared state that was unrecognized by other nations. Meanwhile a strong ultra-nationalist identity centered on anti-Armenian sentiment and avenging the defeat formed in Azerbaijan, and its government became increasingly oppressive and intolerant of any dissent.

Turning to the question of the relationship between the current conflict and the Armenian Genocide carried out by Ottoman Turkey, Theriault observed, “While there are certainly components specific to Azerbaijan and the immediate context, the anti-Armenian ideology and eliminationist project would not have formed or been pursued absent the history of genocide against Armenians.” Furthermore, “Azerbaijan has imported a ready-made fully genocidal ideology from Turkey.”

Azerbaijan’s stance, Theriault made clear, is harmful not only to Armenians. “Genocidal anti-Armenianism is destructive for Azeris as well,” he said, since “Heydar, then Ilham, Aliyev used this ideology as a tool of manipulation to dupe their subjects into willing subjugation in an authoritarian then totalitarian system of political control.” Connecting the current heads of state of Turkey and Azerbaijan, he stated, “Both Aliyev and Erdogan have stated repeatedly and in no uncertain terms that their goal is the elimination of the Armenian presence in the Caucasus; that is, they show the special intent to destroy Caucasus Armenians, because they are Armenian.” Therefore, there is a clear case for genocide as defined by the United Nations Genocide Convention.

Theriault then turned to the role of scholars in the contemporary crisis, faced with dilemmas regarding their perceived—albeit mythical—status as “disinterested” authorities who risk overstepping their roles by weighing in on political issues within Armenia. Rather, he argued, “The right kind of interest can drive deeply committed and effective scholarly work; it needs a moral component that militates against tainting of results.” “Is a scholar’s concern about Armenian issues based on an honest appraisal of the facts and generalized concern for all human rights or a narrower ethnocentrism that affects the scholar’s perceptions?” he posed. The former is entirely appropriate; the latter is not.

After highlighting that neither a preoccupation with past cultural achievements nor an exclusive focus on the future without awareness of the past is a productive approach for Armenian Studies scholars, Theriault concluded, “What is necessary is a model of a community of scholars engaging in both kinds of work in complementary and dynamically interactive ways.”  “In every aspect of its mission and actual activity, NAASR provides the space and lines of connection that allow, encourage and indeed are the very condition for this scholarly community. In the same way that specific territory—think of Artsakh, Ani, the Dakotas, or any other indigenous land where every hill and river, every constructed edifice and marker, every plant and animal, contributes to a unique medium through which social relations among those attached to this land are bound together—is the essential conduit and binder of interconnection and shared identity, so does NAASR provide that for the community of Armenian scholars.”

Reports from NAASR staff and committees

After Theriault’s presentation and discussion, the business session of the Assembly commenced, which included reports by Treasurer Bruce Roat, Executive Director Silva Sedrakian and Academic Director Mamigonian, as well as the presentation of the co-chairs of the Nominating Committee, Nancy R. Kolligian and Ara Araz, prior to the election of members of the Board of Directors.

Sedrakian reflected on positive developments, such as the addition of many new members around the United States as well as in other countries and encouraged all “who care about keeping our Armenian heritage, culture and history alive” to become members and to urge others to do likewise. She cited as highlights of the year two very successful outreach events: in Los Angeles, to mark the hiring of Dr. Taner Akçam as the inaugural director of the Armenian Genocide Research Program of the Promise Armenian Institute at UCLA, and in Cambridge, honoring Prof. Christina Maranci’s appointment to the Mashtots Chair in Armenian Studies at Harvard. She also presented a special gift to Saryan to recognize her time as NAASR chairperson.

Mamigonian emphasized the quality as well as the quantity of NAASR’s academic programming, which in 2023 included the co-sponsorship of several major international conferences and vital partnerships with a wide range of academic colleges and universities as well as community organizations, noting, “There is no possibility of doing all of these programs on our own, nor would it be desirable to try to…our strength lies in our ability to work with others towards our goals—namely, advancing Armenian studies and research.”

Results of elections

The following candidates were elected to the NAASR Board of Directors: incumbents Ara Araz of Franklin Lakes, New Jersey; Michael Bobelian of Cold Spring Harbor, New York; Dr. Gregory Ketabgian of La Canada, California; Stephen Kurkjian of Manomet, Massachusetts; Dr. Armineh Mirzabegian of Wellesley, Massachusetts; and Judith Saryan of Cambridge, Massachusetts; and new members Dr. Sharon Chekijian of New Haven, Connecticut; Ani Hovannisian of Los Angeles, California; Dr. Mary Papazian of Livermore, California; and Dr. Henry C. Theriault of Brookline, Massachusetts.

Tribute to longtime members and those of who have passed away

Chairperson Saryan recognized with gratitude 25, 50, 60 and 65-year members for their enduring commitment to NAASR. 25 years: Roger K. Hagopian, Paul R. Ignatius, Marc A. Mamigonian., Carissa D. Vanitzian and Gayle M. Yapchaian; 50 years: Eva A. Medzorian, Robin L. Tashjian and Dr. Edward H. Yeterian; 60 years: Yervant Chekijian and Michael Kilijian; 65 years: Mary-Louise Essaian and Edward Shooshanian.

Finally, Saryan paid respect to a number of extraordinary leaders in the community and dedicated supporters of NAASR who passed away during the past year: diplomat and author Edward Alexander, who passed away at the age of 103; NAASR Board member and principal benefactor for NAASR’s Vartan Gregorian Building, musician and philanthropist Edward Avedisian of Lexington, Massachusetts; Prof. Richard G. Hovannisian, one of the leading lights of Armenian Studies for more than half a century at UCLA; Dr. Mary Kilbourne Matossian, longtime NAASR member and pioneer scholar of Soviet Armenia and women’s studies; Peter Onanian, former NAASR Board member and prominent Boston-area community leader; and Dr. Dennis Papazian, NAASR charter member and former Board member and founder of the Armenian Research Center in Dearborn, Michigan.

Incoming Board Chair Ara Araz with outgoing Chair Judith Saryan

New Executive Committee formed

Following the close of the Assembly and the tallying of election results, the newly reconfigured Board of Directors met and approved a new Executive Committee consisting of Ara Araz, chairperson; Margaret Mgrublian of Pasadena, California, vice-chairperson; Arlene Saryan Alexander of Washington, D.C., secretary; Bruce W. Roat of Los Angeles, California, treasurer; Nancy R. Kolligian of Watertown, Massachusetts, advisor; Mark Momjian of Wayne, Pennsylvania, advisor; and Dr. Henry Theriault, advisor. Araz becomes the first NAASR chairperson from outside of the Greater Boston area in the organization’s history. The geographical diversity of the Executive Committee reflects that the work of the organization is truly national, if not international, in its scope.