The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention

In a statement issued over the weekend, the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention urged the United Nations to send a “proper” mission to Artsakh, given the disappointing makeup and conclusion of its earlier visit there on October 1, which was orchestrated by Baku and included representatives of Azerbaijan’s allied countries.

Below is the text of the statement.

The Lemkin Institute of Genocide Prevention is disappointed with the outcome of the UN mission’s visit to Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) on October 1, which took place after the entire Armenian population of Artsakh had already fled due to forcible displacement following the recent Azerbaijani invasion.

It is difficult to understand what the purpose of such a mission was and why there was never more pressure for Azerbaijan to allow a mission into Artsakh during Azerbaijan’s 9-month blockade of the region that led up to the invasion.

The Lemkin Institute calls on the UN to prepare a proper mission to the Republic of Artsakh, one that is inclusive of international team members from countries neutral to the conflict to conduct a thorough analysis of the current situation on the ground. In order to ensure the rights of the Armenians in Artsakh, the UN must act with professionalism, impartiality, and commitment to the values presented in the UN Charter.

If the United Nations is not going to take genocide seriously, it would be better if it sent no missions at all to regions that have experienced genocide.
According to the UN, “the mission aimed to assess the situation on the ground and identify the humanitarian needs of both the people remaining and those who are on the move.”

Despite the complex purpose of this visit by the mission, the assessment itself and the statement on the outcome of that assessment were completed within one day, begging the question of just how seriously the UN mission could have taken the task of an assessment on the ground. It is worth mentioning that this was the first UN visit to the region in 30 years.

Prior to this visit, concerns about the consistent political insecurity of Armenians in Artsakh and threats to the Armenian population within the region had been raised several times within UN bodies. Two UN Security Council meetings were convened on the topic of ongoing threats to the Armenians of Artsakh (on August 16, regarding the full blockade imposed on the Republic of Artsakh by Azerbaijan, and on September 21, regarding the Azerbaijani military attack on the Armenian population in Artsakh).

In both meetings, the majority of the Security Council’s member states condemned Azerbaijan’s actions, stating that they posed a threat to the security and well-being of the region’s Armenians and discouraged any peacemaking efforts in the region. In addition to these condemnations, the International Court of Justice has ordered Azerbaijan on two separate occasions (on February 22 and July 6, 2023) to reopen the Lachin Corridor—the humanitarian route connecting the Republic of Artsakh with Armenia. All statements and ICJ orders have been ignored by Azerbaijan.

The Lemkin Institute has issued multiple Red Flag Alerts for Azerbaijan since the Lachin Corridor was blockaded in December 2022, as well as an Active Genocide Alert and SOS alerts indicating an extremely high risk of genocide for the Armenians in Artsakh.

Given the UN representatives’ clear knowledge of the risks to the Armenian population in Artsakh (as demonstrated by the convening of two Security Council meetings on the topic), it is very surprising to us that the mission would visit this region only after the end of the Azerbaijani offensive and after the exodus of more than 100,000 Armenians from the former Republic. The fact that Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev donated $1 million to the UN Human Settlements Program on September 30—just one day prior to the mission’s deployment to Nagorno-Karabakh—only increases our concerns regarding the honesty and transparency of the mission.

In examining the mission’s operation and statement, we found numerous controversial points. First, the mission arrived in the region only after the end of the bloodshed and exodus of the Armenians, and it only lasted only one day. In the briefing by Stephanie Dujarric, spokesperson for Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, it was stated that “they [the members of the mission] got to see quite a bit.”

However, in the context of a full-blockade, followed by military invasion and ethnic cleansing, 24 hours alone is certainly not sufficient to adequately assess the situation on the ground. Second, the information on the number of Armenians remaining in Artsakh (from 50 to 1,000) contradicts the numbers given by the former Ombudsman of Artsakh, Artak Beglaryan, who has argued that there are not more than 40 people remaining in the region at the moment. And third, as for the text of the statement itself, the UN visited certain unspecified parts of the city of Stepanakert, where it “saw no damage to civilian public infrastructure, including hospitals, schools and housing, or to cultural and religious structures.”

However, there is verifiable photographic evidence of the destruction of civilian infrastructure in the city of Stepanakert, as it was bombed by Azerbaijan during its military offensive. In addition to this limited access to Stepanakert, the team visited Agdam City—which was under Azerbaijani control and uninhabited by Armenians, and therefore not crucial for the agenda—and the Lachin Corridor, which was surveyed after the entire population had been forced to flee. It is notable that the UN mission failed to include any representatives from the Armenian mission to the UN, and it did not visit the Syunik region to speak with Armenian refugees who were forced to leave Artsakh. The concluding statement is extremely vague and uninformative.

With all of this said, the Lemkin Institute considers the operation of the mission to be unsuccessful, as it failed to accurately present or assess the reality of the situation in the Republic of Artsakh. We strongly believe that undertaking the “mission for the sake of a mission” and making a “statement for the sake of a statement” are not adequate responses to situations as serious and as dangerous as what has unfolded in the South Caucasus. We question the scruples and integrity of this mission.

The vague operating principles and assessments of the UN mission, which lacked any specific goals, methodology, or recommendations, severely risks undermining the trust that the international community collectively places in the work of the United Nations.

The Lemkin Institute calls on the UN to prepare a proper mission to the Republic of Artsakh, one that is inclusive of international team members from countries neutral to the conflict to conduct a thorough analysis of the current situation on the ground.

This reality, which is the result of a conflict that has endured for three decades, cannot be assessed in one day. In order to ensure the rights of the Armenians in Artsakh, the UN must act with professionalism, impartiality, and commitment to the values presented in the UN Charter,” the statement reads.

Artsakh President Samvel Shahramanyan in an interview with Artsakh Public TV on Oct. 28

Says Russia acted as Observers During Sept. 19 Attack

Artsakh President Samuel Sharamanyan said that he hopes conditions will be created so that the residents of Artsakh who fled en-masse will repatriate to their home.

Speaking in an interview Saturday with Artsakh State Television, Sharamanyan detailed the challenges facing his government and the Artsakh population since the large scale offensive launched by Azerbaijan on September 19 and his ensuing decision to sign an agreement on September 28 essentially dissolving the Artsakh Republic.

He also noted that during and after the military operations in September, that triggered a mass exodus of Artsakh residents to Armenia, Russia, through its peacekeeping forces, acted as mere “observers.”

Shahramanyan also made clear that one of his top priorities now is to assert “the right of our citizens displaced from Artsakh to return home.”

“Various political centers — the American, European and Russian ones — are interested in the issue of the return of the population,” Shahramanyan said. “I think that Azerbaijan is also interested in that because they are accused by the international community of forcibly deporting the population. And I think that negotiations should start on that issue.”

“Hours after the start of military operations [on Sept. 19], I realized that we were alone against Azerbaijan’s aggression,” Sharamanyan, who was selected by the Artsakh Parliament to assume the presidency 10 days before the attacks, said in the interview.

“On the morning of September 19, I was with the commander of the Russian peacekeeping forces. The initial indication of a potential military operation came when the Azerbaijani forces stationed at a base near Shushi approached the Russian base, which was at the same location, and advised them to take cover, as artillery would soon start firing. We brought this information to the attention of the Russian peacekeepers, who said they were already aware of it. After the necessary verification, it became evident to me that military operations were imminent,” recalled Shahramanyan.

“Over an extended period of time, our military forces and security apparatus were brought to a high combat level, appropriate instructions were given, including those related to civil defense. Half an hour after I went up to the office, military operations began. Almost all regions were under intense shelling and we had to do everything we could to resist,” explained the Artsakh president.

During the interview, Sharamanyan recalled in detail the events leading up to and during the September 19 attack, lamenting that Russian peacekeepers, with whose command he was meeting the morning of the attack, essentially left Artsakh residents on their own.

“The Russian side, one might say, was in the position of an observer, and we were left to deal with our issues on our own,” Sharamanyan said.

The Artsakh leadership was faced with the clear communication by the Azerbaijani side that their ultimate goal was to completely occupy Artsakh and that they would not stop until they reached their “ultimate goal.”

“Countermeasures were initiated in coordination with the defense forces, other relevant agencies, and our citizens. It was thanks to these actions that it was possible to start negotiations with Azerbaijan, which lasted 12 hours,” he said.

The Artsakh president emphasized that he and his team recognized the imperative to halt military operations, as the forces were significantly mismatched, and prolonging the conflict would only result in a greater number of casualties and losses.

“My goal as the president of Artsakh was to stop the war as soon as possible to avoid more casualties,” Shahramanyan stressed.

“Taking into consideration that Azerbaijan also had significant losses and our regions were under siege — the enemy’s special forces units and military equipment had approached Stepanakert, very close to the Krkjan area — we found ourselves compelled to make more substantial concessions in those circumstances. And I suggested that they send their demands in writing for an immediate cessation of hostilities,” recalled Shahramanyan.

“We clearly did not accept the initial document. We engaged in continuous discussions and modifications with a large team, involving the entire security council, former presidents, and nearly all political factions, while also keeping the Azerbaijani side informed of these developments,” Shahramanyan explained, adding that the initial document was essentially a surrender and, thus, was rejected.

“As a result of the negotiations, we adopted a document that provided for the cessation of hostilities in all directions on October 20 at 1 p.m. The second point was the dissolution of the defense army, withdrawal of the remnants of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Armenia, among them, heavy military equipment was handed over for further utilization,” he noted.

However, the President emphasized that the formulation that stipulated there were Armenian Armed Forces in Artsakh was Azerbaijan’s false narrative, since, of course, there were no Armenian forces in Artsakh.

“It was clear that such a wording was unacceptable for us, but it was Azerbaijan’s assertion. We, understanding that we do not endorse this document, did not accept any legal responsibility, and we informed them verbally and in writing that there are no Armenian Armed Forces in Artsakh,” the Artsakh leader explained.

Regarding the disarming of the armed forces, Shahramanyan said that with the establishment of the illegal Azerbaijani checkpoint on the Lachin Corridor, the opportunity to return weapons to Armenia was lost.

“We lost the opportunity to deliver weapons to Armenia after the Azerbaijani side established a checkpoint, and it was clear that we would not be able to leave Artsakh with heavy equipment. As per the statement, we handed over the equipment to the Russian side for further disposal. According to the agreement, it was to be destroyed,” Shahramanyan explained.

Per the third point of the agreement, a meeting took place in Yevlakh on September 21, during which the integration issues presented by Azerbaijan were supposed to be discussed. “This point was not new to us,” Sharamanyan said. “We had agreed to a meeting in Yevlakh even before this, with the aim of reducing and easing tensions.”

Shahramanyan emphasized that he and the Artsakh leadership made the decisions at the time in order “to save the lives of Artsakh people, the army, soldiers and officers,” which, in his opinion, they were able to do.

“After the end of the military hostilities, all Defense Army personnel were able to pass through the checkpoint, and no one was detained. This was the result of our agreement,” he concluded.

The Armenia-Azerbaijan border

Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan again vowed on Monday that his government plans to sign a peace treaty with Azerbaijan and normalize Armenia’s relations with Turkey.

“Signing a treaty on peace and normalization of relations with Azerbaijan, and the normalization of relations with Turkey is in our plans. As much as we realize that this won’t be easy, moving forward with this plan is in the state interest of Armenia,” Pashinyan told members of the parliament’s budget committee.

In the collapsing world order, the only tool for ensuring Armenia’s security is the identification of the homeland with the state, its territory, internationally recognized borders and territorial integrity, Pashinyan said.

“The key, practical issue stemming from this perception, as strange as it may sound, is the realization of the state’s geographic location, and before the global discussion on East-West, North-South, I find it important to realize that we are situated in the South Caucasian region, we have four neighbors, and all the main threats and possibilities that we could have are hidden in the relations with them. In this regard, the further deepening of the friendly and cooperative nature of relations with Georgia and Iran are also important,” Pashinyan explained.

He announced that the three main principles of normalization of relations and peace with Azerbaijan have been agreed upon and the signing of a peace treaty will be realistic if both the Armenian and Azerbaijani sides remain committed to these principles.

Pashinyan explained that the three principles are:
The mutual recognition by Armenia and Azerbaijan of each other’s territorial integrity, with the understanding that Armenia’s territory is 29,800 square km and Azerbaijan’s 86,600 square km. These numbers are taken from the latest USSR encyclopedias. The demarcation and delimitation will be carried out during further discussions and agreements.
Agreement by the parties agree to carry out delimitation based on the Alma-Ata Declaration, which means that the administrative borders that existed between the Armenian SSR and Azerbaijani SSR have become the state borders between the two countries when the USSR collapsed. The inviolability of these borders is recognized by the parties based on the Alma-Ata Declaration.
The opening of the regional connections based on the sovereignty and jurisdiction of the sides, and the regional connections will function on the basis of reciprocity and equality. The Armenian government has presented its position in the Crossroads of Peace concept in this regard.

“The presence of maps recording the situation when the Alma-Ata Declaration was adopted is of key importance in the delimitation process. Essentially, the parties have the maps that reflect those realities. Thus, in case of political will by the sides it is possible to swiftly and effectively move forward in this process as well,” Pashinyan added.

Pashinyan also expressed hope that the Armenia-Turkey land border will soon open to citizens of third countries and diplomatic passport holders.

“Speaking about the Armenia-Turkey relations, I’d like to express hope that soon we will have the implementation of the agreements reached as a result of the discussions and negotiations between the special representatives, which pertains to the following: At this phase the Armenia-Turkey border gets opened for citizens of third countries and diplomatic passport holders,” Pashinyan said.

“In addition to the political agreement, significant infrastructure work has been done. In particular, we worked in the Margara checkpoint in the direction of re-equipping and restoring it and in this regard, we are already ready for such developments. We hope that these agreements get implemented,” Pashinyan explained.

The Armenian leader said that the tense international situation has created serious threats for Armenia, “but the skillful management of these threats could create equally serious possibilities for the country.”

“The international situation has escalated significantly over the past two years,” Pashinyan said. “The likelihood of a nuclear war has become a serious topic of discussion among politicians and experts.”

“We are living in conditions of a collapsing world order that existed since the end of the Cold War. This situation creates serious threats for Armenia, but the skillful management of these threats could create equally serious possibilities for our state,” Pashinyan said.

He advanced that notion of equating homeland to statehood, saying discussion on these important issue is on his government’s national security agenda.

Pashinyan said that adjusting the conceptual foundations of the statehood is of key importance.

He went on to advance a new concept: “The homeland is the state. If you love your homeland, strengthen your state.”

Armenia's National Security chief Armen Grigoryan (left) meets with Ukrainian president's chief of staff Andriy Yermak in Malta on Oct. 28

For decades Ukraine has allied itself with Azerbaijan to a point that Kyiv not only sent assistance to Baku during the 2020 war, it also congratulated Azerbaijan on its “victory” after the war was over.

Now official Yerevan is making overtures to Kyiv with the aim of advancing cooperation between the two countries.

Whether this is stemming from the Armenian government’s ongoing campaign to alienate Russia or it is a by-product of Armenia’s obvious tilt toward the European Union, Yerevan is keen to push forward with this agenda.

Armenia’s National Security chief Armen Grigoryan met with Ukrainian presidential chief of staff Andriy Yermak on Saturday in Malta, where the two discussed ways to strengthen relations between the two countries.

Earlier this month, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan held a brief meeting with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, on the sidelines of a European Union summit in Granada, Spain, where the two reportedly discussed the security in the South Caucasus.

In announcing the meeting on Saturday, Armenia’s Embassy in Kyiv made reference to the Granada meeting.

”During the meeting the importance of the first meeting of the Ukrainian President  Volodymyr Zelensky with Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan was underscored, which took place on October 6 in Granada, Spain within the framework of the summit of the European Political Community,” a post on the social media platform X by Armenia’s embassy in Kyiv said on Saturday.

The embassy also said that Yermak “confirmed Ukraine’s commitment to strengthen cooperation with Armenia, particularly in European integration issues.”

“The parties congratulated each other on the election of Armenia and Ukraine to the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and discussed the cooperation of the two countries within the framework of that organization and in the field of energy in general,” reads the statement,” the Armenian embassy added in its post.

Following Pashinyan’s meeting with Zelensky on October 5 in Spain, the Ukrainian leader welcomed efforts to strengthen ties between Kyiv and Yerevan.

Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan meets with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine in Granada, Spain on Oct. 6

“During our first-ever meeting, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and I focused on the security situation in the South Caucasus. Ukraine is interested in the region’s stability and friendly relations with its nations. We also discussed our bilateral cooperation and interregional economic projects,” Zelenskyy wrote on his X account at the time.

Before meeting with Pashinyan, however, Zelensky held a telephone conversation with President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and reportedly thanked him for Baku’s significant humanitarian assistance to Ukraine. Zelensky also reiterated his country’s respect for the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity of the states.

The Pashinyan-Zelensky meeting in Spain was preceded by a visit to Kyiv by the Armenian leader’s wife, Anna Hakopyan, who participated in the Summit of First Ladies and Gentlemen in September.

Hakopyan also brought with her Armenia’s humanitarian assistance to Ukraine’s schoolchildren, for which she was thanked by Zelensky’s chief of staff when he met with Grigoryan on Saturday, according to the Armenian embassy.

Pashinyan’s meeting with Zelensky, as well as Hakopyan’s visit to Kyiv, did not go unnoticed by Moscow.

Russian officials warned that Pashinyan was “becoming the next Zelensky” and was being influenced by the EU and the West to do their bidding in the region.

After Hakopyan’s visit to Kyiv last month, the Russian Foreign Ministry summoned Armenia’s ambassador to Russia to the foreign ministry for “difficult” talks after Armenia signed off on the “transfer of humanitarian aid to Kyiv’s Nazi regime.”

YEREVAN, OCTOBER 24, ARMENPRESS. The International Committee of the Red Cross Baku Delegation representatives visited Nagorno-Karabakh former presidents Arkadi Ghukasyan, Bako Sahakyan and Arayik Harutyunyan, former minister of state Ruben Vardanyan, former foreign minister David Babayan, former Defense Army commander Levon Mnatsakanyan and former National Assembly speaker Davit Ishkhanyan.

"The visit took place on October 20, within the framework of ICRC standard procedures. The detainees were given an opportunity to contact their relatives," Zara Amatuni, Communication and Prevention Program Manager of the ICRC Armenia office, told Armenpress.

"During October, the ICRC representatives once again visited all previously arrested Armenians in Azerbaijan. Visits will be continuous," added Amatuni.