At the end of September, conflict erupted between forces fighting for Armenia and Azerbaijan, reviving a decades-old dispute over the region of Nagorno-Karabakh. Armine Ishkanian argues that while it remains to be seen if a diplomatic solution can be found, there seems little prospect of peace emerging in the short-term.
In the early morning of 27 September, Azerbaijan launched large-scale military operations along the entire line of contact (approximately 180 km) of Nagorno-Karabakh, an unrecognised state in the South Caucasus with a population of about 150,000 people. A week on, this is now an all-out war which involves numerous parties, including Armenia, Azerbaijan, Nagorno Karabakh, and Turkey. Armenians are vastly outnumbered both in terms of population size (Armenia has a population of 3 million, compared to 10 million in Azerbaijan and 80 million in Turkey) and military strength.
In this blog, I consider the conflict from the perspective of the political dimension in Armenia and examine the historical and contemporary factors which shape Armenians’ attitudes, perceptions, and responses to the conflict. These perceptions have implications for the resolution of the conflict and the prospects for peace in the region.
A brief history
The indigenous Armenian population has lived in Karabakh for millennia. Shortly after the establishment of the Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin included the territory of Karabakh, with its majority ethnic Armenian population, in the Soviet Socialist Republic of Azerbaijan. As such, it came to be known as the Nagorno Karabakh Autonomous Oblast (administrative division).
In 1988, responding to the political liberalisation initiated by General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev, the Armenians of Karabakh began a movement to have the oblast transferred to the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic. This move was supported by the Armenia SSR and opposed by the Azerbaijan SSR, leading to pogroms against Armenians in the cities of Sumgait and Baku. All attempts to resolve the matter within the framework of the Soviet Union failed.
On 10 December 1991, a referendum on the Independence of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic took place in which 108,736 registered voters (82.2% of the total) voted for independence. When Azerbaijan refused to honour the result of the referendum, a war ensued which left 30,000 people dead. The war ended in a ceasefire in 1994 and since then, Azerbaijan has demanded the return of Karabakh claiming territorial integrity, while Armenians have demanded their right to self-determination. Negotiations under the auspices of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk Group, which France, Russia, and the US co-chair, have failed to achieve a durable peace.
Today, Turkey’s direct participation in the current conflict is further complicating an already complex situation. Moreover, there is growing evidence from a number of international news outlets that Turkey has facilitated the movement of jihadist mercenaries from Syria to the region to take part in military operations against the Armenian side, creating concerns that the South Caucasus will become another theatre of operations for international terrorism.
The impact of Armenia’s 2018 Velvet Revolution
On 31 March 2018 now Prime Minister of Armenia, Nikol Pashinyan, began a protest march which would become the Velvet Revolution. On 23 April, then PM Serzh Sargsyan resigned from office and the corrupt and authoritarian Republican Party of Armenia was in disarray. The Velvet Revolution was not only a political revolution, but also a revolution of values. Today, the impact of the Velvet Revolution on Armenians’ attitudes is undeniable.
Nikol Pashinyan, Prime Minister of Armenia, Credit: European Council
The success of the revolution and the overthrow of the corrupt regime gave Armenians a deep sense of confidence and belief in their ability to affect change. The revolution’s slogan, “With Courage” (Duxov), strongly reverberates today. There is a determination among Armenians to protect the democracy they fought so hard to achieve. Armenians, both in Armenia and Karabakh, view this war as one for freedom, independence, self-determination, and ultimately, sheer survival.
Memories of genocide
Apart from the impact of the Velvet Revolution, the memories of the 1915 genocide of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire are also shaping attitudes today. The genocide has had a lasting impact on the consciousness of Armenians around the globe. It is a collective trauma which inspires feelings of existential threat.
The Turkish Government’s continued denial of and refusal to recognise the genocide, its active support for Azerbaijan in this war, coupled with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erodgan’s imperialist, neo-Ottomanist ideology and his criticisms of the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne that established the borders of modern Turkey, fuel fears among Armenians. These fears are widely shared and are reflected in Armenian PM Pashinyan’s following statement in which he accuses Turkey of “continuing its genocidal policy towards the Armenians” and adds that, “…this is an existential threat for us, and there is nothing else to do but to defend ourselves.”
Armenians living in Turkey, including MP Garo Paylan and the civil society group Nor Zartonk, have called for peace and expressed concerns that Turkey’s involvement in the war is leading to intimidation and hate speech towards them.
Democracy or dictatorship?
In contrast to Armenia’s democracy, Azerbaijan is an authoritarian state that has been ruled by members of one family for nearly three decades. Heydar Aliyev was president of Azerbaijan from 1993 until his death in 2003, after which his son, Ilham, became President and has held that post ever since. His wife, Mehriban, is Vice President. According to the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, the Aliyev family has taken large shares in lucrative industries including the telecom, minerals and construction industries often through government related deals. The 2020 Freedom House report describes Azerbaijan as an authoritarian regime where corruption is rampant and the formal political opposition parties and civil society have been weakened by years of persecution.
Karabakh Armenians have expressed their resolve and made it clear that they will never consent to live under Aliyev’s authoritarian regime. Furthermore, there has been too much bloodshed and the promotion of anti-Armenian propaganda by Azerbaijani leaders for them to feel safe in Azerbaijan. These factors cannot be ignored if peace is to be established.
This war will only spread suffering and destabilise the South Caucasus and the wider, already troubled, region. It remains to be seen if a diplomatic solution to the war can be found. A durable and lasting peace is of utmost importance, but it should not come at the price of the safety and security of Karabakh Armenians. The OSCE Minsk Group have called on the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan to “commit without delay to resuming substantive negotiations, in good faith and without preconditions.” But sadly, the outlook for a peace at present is grim.
Note: This article gives the views of the author, not the position of EUROPP – European Politics and Policy or the London School of Economics. Featured image credit: European Council
It’s a very informative post but obviously it is biased as it is written by armenian person solely from Armenian perspective. The history can tell many things, especially when it is distorted. But law remains the key component today. We have to respect the International law about territorial Integrity of Azerbaijan and four UN resolutions which state that Armenia has to withdraw its army from Karabakh immediately and unconditionally. If we start dividing boarders of all the countries according to who lived where 1000 years ago obviously it would be an absurd thing to do.
Why nobody talks about Khojaly genocide which happened in 1992? Lots of Azerbaijani civilians died in that tradegy.
Why UN resolution to withdraw Armenian forces is not implement yet?
Azerbaijan is a multicultural country and always act based on international law!
Dear LSE team,
As a LSE graduate I am disappointed that such biased and one sided article has been allowed to be published on LSE blog! It does not fit mission of London School of Economics as a centre of objective educational centre.
Please see biased points in this article written bu Armenian author:
1. Author says ‘Azerbaijan did not honour the result of referendum’ but she did not explain why Azerbaijan did not recognize result of referendum. It is because The referendum was held without consent of the Republic of Azerbaijan, and is not recognized internationally by the UN member states.
2. She did not mention anything about Armenian illegal occupation of 7 adjacent towns to Nagorno Karabakh. In these 7 towns there is no single Armenian lived. 1 million Azeri people were kicked out off their land and waiting to return to their home for 30 years.
3. She did not mention UN resolutions which urge Armenia to withdraw troops from occupied territories.
4. She did not mention that there are significant proofs that Armenia hired Kurdish terrorists/mercenaries from PKK to fight in Karabakh.
5. She did not mention that no one in the world including Armenia recognize seperatist regime in Karabakh.
6. The war is happening within internationally recognized borders of Azerbaijan. There is no attack happening on Armenia. Azerbaijan is liberating the land that is illegally kept under Armenian occupation for 30 years despite of several UN resolutions calling Armenia to withdraw troops immidiately. Armenia is shelling civil areas that are out of conflict zone.
Dear Ali,
Thank you for your comments. As we state in the terms at the end of the article, the views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the position of EUROPP – European Politics and Policy or the London School of Economics. The website is run as an open platform for academics to publish their personal views and research outputs. We have no editorial line on this or any other political issue and we welcome contributions from all sides of a debate.
Best wishes,
The EUROPP Team
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=FLQ8OGV7gKdhhFWaMQ-SkNGQ
This’s coming from a unbiased source.
What’s missing from Azeris perspective is the indigenous people right to choose their state.
Listen to the facts in this video.
As an LSE graduate in Politics from Azerbaijan, I would like to write several comments about the article, which in my view represents a rather one-sided view of the situation and does omit several important circumstance regarding the history and different aspects of the conflict. These are the following:
1) Azerbaijanis have also been living in the region of Karabakh for centuries, which is proved, among other by the local toponymics. In the 18th century, the area was governed by the dynasty of khans of the Turkic origin with distinctly Muslim names. In 1805, Russia signed the Kurekchay Treaty which included the khanate into the sphere of Russian protectorate with Ibrahimkhalil khan of Karabakh, the documents are well preserved.
2) The author unfortunately omits the fact that ethnic cleansings on a large scale happened initially in Armenia. starting in January 1988 very soon after the rise of the Karabakh movement. More than 250 thousand Azerbaijanis living in Armenia were expelled, often forcibly, throughout the following 2 years. Soon, Azerbaijanis living in NK (45 thousand people) also had to flee from their houses. Ethnic cleansings also featured several episodes of murder, the worst of them being the Khojaly massacre (26 February 1992) when 613 inhabitants of an Azerbaijani town were brutally slayed.
3) Nagorno-Karabakh had a status of an autonomous region within Azerbaijani SSR. According to Article 78, only Soviet Socialist Republics (such as Azerbaijan and Armenia) enjoyed a right of unilateral secession from the USSR, while autonomous regions within Soviet republics had not been granted this right and hence the Declaration of Independence of Nagorno-Karabakh was not valid from the legal point of view.
4) The author forgets to mention that during the war of 1991-1994, the Armenian forces occupied 7 adjacent districts of Azerbaijan whose population was predominantly (90%+) ethnically Azerbaijani. The aggregate size of these regions is twice as big as the NKAO itself. In total, more than 700 thousand Azerbaijanis from these regions, NKAO itself and Armenia became refugees or IDP’s. These regions have remained under occupation ever since and a significant part of them has been solely used for military purposes. remaining a wasteland.
5) The fact of occupation of the Azerbaijani territories by Armenian forces, as well as the calls for their liberation, was established by the UNSC resolutions 822, 853, 874 and 884 in 1993.
6) There is overwhelming evidence that the alleged “independence” of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic is just a fiction, while Armenia undertakes effective control over the territory of the republic. This conclusion was made in the decision of the European Courts of Human Rights as of 2015 on the Chiragov and others v Armenia case. Some further statements of various international organisations also de-facto confirmed this state of affairs, for example the EU resolution on building a second road from Armenia to Nagorno-Karabakh which stated that this project was a hostile act of Armenia that would thoroughly undermine the negotiation process with Azerbaijan.
7) Trying to contextualize the problem within the narrative of the Armenian genocide simply serves to disclose complex reality and uncomfortable truths. The tragic events of 1915 happened in the territory of the Ottoman Empire, while Azerbaijan back then was part of the Russian Empire and had no part in these events. Revoking the issue of genocide today is meant to attract international support and preserve the status-quo. Azerbaijan has always made it clear that it has no territorial claims against the Republic of Armenia and views the natives of Nagorno-Karabakh as its citizens fully enjoying all the rights stemming from this fact. Finally, information about the presence of Syrian mercenaries in Azerbaijan is based on several reports neither of which provides solid evidence. These reports have too many gaps and lacoons to be taken as evidence.
Kind regards
Murad Muradov
Dear Murad Muradov,
While you refer to Article 78, I would like to draw your attention to the law of secession from USSR [http://soviethistory.msu.edu/1991-2/shevarnadze-resigns/shevarnadze-resigns-texts/law-on-secession-from-the-ussr/], which permitted Azerbaijani SSR to gain independence from USSR and gain independence through a referendum.
Here is Article 3 of this law:
Article 3. In a Union republic which includes within its structure autonomous republics, autonomous oblasts, or autonomous okrugs, the referendum is held separately for each autonomous formation. The people of autonomous republics and autonomous formations retain the right to decide independently the question of remaining within the USSR or within the seceding Union republic, and also to raise the question of their own state-legal status.
In a Union republic on whose territory there are places densely populated by ethnic groups constituting a majority of the population of the locality in question, the results of the voting in these localities are recorded separately when the results of the referendum are being determined.
Following this article, the Autonomous Region of Nagorno-Karabakh had a legal right to perform a referendum and leave USSR, which is exactly what they did. Accordingly, Azerbaijani SSR had NO right to interfere with this decision of this autonomous oblast. So NK didn’t break any USSR laws, in fact it was Azerbaijan Republic, which didn’t accept the USSR law permitting the autonomous oblast to leave both the USSR and the Azerbaijani SSR.
Now, regarding your comment about Armenians “trying to contextualize” this problem withing the narrative of the Armenian genocide. I want to emphasize, that this is not Armenians “trying”, but exactly what the anti-Armenian propaganda from the Aliyev regime gives away. i) Do I need to remind you what happened to Ramil Safarov, who axed an Armenian lieutenant Gurgen Margaryan in his sleep purely on the basis of his ethnic identity? He was extradited to Azerbaijan and instantly pardoned by Ilham Aliyev. This is a clear demonstration, that killing an Armenian (even in their sleep) is being praised in Azerbaijan on the presidential level. Hence, all the claims of Ilham Aliyev, that Armenians of NK can peacefully cohabit as part of Azerbaijan are pure hypocrisy. ii) Residential areas of Stepanakert, the capital of NK, is heavily shelled every day and dozens of civilians have been killed. If Aliyev is ready to accept these people as rightful citizens of Azerbaijan, why is he killing these “citizens to-be”? iii) A few days ago, Aliyev proudly claimed, “we are chasing them(the Armenians) away like dogs!”. This clearly expresses Aliyev’s wish to have NK without Armenians. There are many more incidents showing, just how deep is the anti-Armenian hatred in the Azerbaijani population on all levels of governance and society. Hence, the Armenian population can not be safe in Azerbaijan, and NK can not be part of Azerbaijan.
On the contrary, Armenian government has never dissipated anti-Azeri hatred among the people of Armenia and no criminal act would be tolerated in Armenia against people of any nationality. I want to emphasize, that even on the government level, Armenians are not fighting against the people of Azerbaijan but the government, and this has been publicly stated by the president of NK. He even warned about the plans of hitting military targets in Ganja in his facebook page, so that the Azerbaijani government would take measures to protect their civilians, which they apparently didn’t.
I sincerely hope, that Azerbaijani people would have the courage to see the truth behind all that anti-Armenian hatred that the Aliyev regime has been spreading through all these years and building his empire on.
With kind regards
Anna Hyan, it is ridicuous for you and the rest of the armenian propaganda to quote the Law of secession from USSR and Article 3. You probably did not read the law very carefully, as it does NOT say or imply that holding a referendum only makes a region independent! That would have been a chaos, wouldnt it?! On the contrary, it imposes other rules and procedures for the results of the referendum to become legally valid, none of which of course were followed. Any non-Armenian international lawyer would confirm this, if you are still uncertain. The desperate attempts to legally justify the illegal occupation is ludicrous to say the least.
It is also gravely unfair to compare the “hatred” level in Armenia and Azerbaijan. In Armenia people did not lose their homes as the result of the conflict, in Azerbaijan nearly 15% of population unfortunately did! You don’t have to be a psychologist to understand the feelings of people in Azerbaijan, as Im sure you would not have liked to be kicked out of your home.
And finally, Karabagh war is not about Aliyev, it is the issue for every Azerbaijani national. As long as the conflict is not resolved, any Azeri leader has the responsibility to solve this problem and restore the justice.
And the peace will come only after the people in Armenia will refute the lies (including historically ficticious) they were made to beleive over the decades, accept their neighbours’ rights and try to look for the peaceful coexistence in the region.
Azerbaijan is fighting for its own territories, own homes in Nagorno-Karabakh which is occupied by Armenian armed forces for nearly 30 years. I strongly recommend you to read 1993 UN Security Council Resolutions on Nagorno-Karabakh, namely 822, 853, 874, 884. All four claim “unconditional withdrawal of all Arminian forces from the occupied territories of the Republic of Azerbaijan”. For 27 years Azerbaijan was open to peaceful resolutions, however Armenia never supported it. Besides that, Armenian armed forces are now targeting cities and regions that are miles away from the conflict zone, thus killing civilians.
I have to mention, that this woman included information about the Armenian genocide which has nothing to do with Azerbaijani people or Government. However, there is no word about the Khojaly Genocide/Massacre committed by Armenians to Azerbaijani people in 1992. Armenians were cutting stomachs of pregnant women, raping them, killing children and blowing people’s heads off.
Here is a reliable source (NY Times) for those who wants to check the credibility of the Khojaly Massacre. https://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/03/world/massacre-by-armenians-being-reported.html
1) Armenia must fulfil UN Security Council resolutions # 822, 853, 874 and 884 and leave occupied Azerbaijani territories.
2) Armenia must end hypocrisy pretending a “victim” when it is in fact an aggressor state.
3) Armenia stop mixing unrelated political arguments (Erdogan etc) to gain advantage – you are fooling no one!
I think this post is an extreme biased. You need to post Azerbaijani side’s opinion too.
29 years of pacifism or why did the war start on the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh? Weren’t there any other solutions? Who started first? Why didn’t they try to arrange negotiations?
These questions are asked by outside observers even today. However, many of them just recently heard about the existence of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict for the first time. What Azerbaijan was doing during the 29 years of occupation of its territory is described below.
The beginning of an armed confrontation
In 1991-1992 Armenia started military operations on the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, which is the part of Azerbaijan. It occupied territories by force. People were massacred; thousands were killed or disappeared.
1993 – ignoring UN resolutions
Azerbaijan was awaiting a decision from the UN Security Council, which was about to adopt Resolution number 853.
The only demand stated in this resolution was straightforward: Armenia had to end the occupation of the territory of Azerbaijan immediately and unconditionally.
Armenia ignored the resolution.
After that, the UN adopted Resolution number 874 demanding to take urgent, reciprocal and necessary actions to resolve the conflict, including the withdrawal of troops from the recently occupied territories.
Armenia ignored the resolution.
A month later, resolution number 884 was launched. It demanded the withdrawal of troops from the territory of Azerbaijan and the unconditional ending to bombings and armed attacks.
Armenia ignored the resolution.
The 21st meeting of the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) adopted a resolution condemning the occupation of Azerbaijani territories and demanding the immediate withdrawal of Armenian troops.
Armenia ignored the resolution.
1994
Armenia and Azerbaijan achieved the ceasefire agreement. The territory of Azerbaijan remained in the Armenian occupation.
1995
Summit in Lisbon took place. It was attended by fifty-four countries. During the summit, the fundamental principles of the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement were established. The settlement was supported by 53 countries, i.e. all the participants of the summit except Armenia.
Yet, the territory of Azerbaijan had remained occupied by Armenia.
2007
The OSCE Minsk Group had developed components for the conflict settlement called the Madrid Principles. The main provisions included the plan for the phased withdrawal of troops from the territory of Azerbaijan and its complete demilitarization.
Yet, the territory of Azerbaijan had remained occupied by Armenia.
2008
The presidents of Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Russia had signed the Mayendorf Declaration. And by doing so, the heads of state accepted the responsibility for facilitating the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. It seemed that the ice has had broken – Armenia made direct contact.
Yet, the territory of Azerbaijan had remained occupied. Azerbaijan was still waiting for the opportunity to settle the conflict peacefully.
The issue of the occupation raised again. As a result, the UN General Assembly adopted new resolution number 62243 titled “The Situation in the Occupied Territories of Azerbaijan.” It demanded to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, as well as the complete and unconditional withdrawal of troops from the occupied territories and recognized the illegal nature of this conflict in general.
Armenia ignored the resolution.
2016
Azerbaijan was still looking for a way to resolve the conflict peacefully. At the OIC summit in Istanbul, a “Contact Group in connection with the Armenian aggression against Azerbaijan” was created. Seven participating countries insisted on ending the occupation.
The occupation continued.
2017
The European Union reminded Armenia about four UN resolutions and again demanded to end the occupation. The Eastern Partnership Summit expressed its support for the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of every country.
The occupation continued.
2020
Armenia continued to ignore the resolutions and continued to occupy the territory of Azerbaijan.
On September 27th, in response to the actions of Armenia against the peaceful Azerbaijani population, the counter-offensive operation of the Azerbaijani armed forces began on the territory of Azerbaijan.
The events described above are just a small fraction of all the measures that Azerbaijan has taken: calls for negotiations, summits, speeches, dialogues, etc.
Many Presidents of different countries tried to establish a dialogue with Armenia. It seemed that they finally reached the consensus through the numerous meetings and discussions.
But there were no results.
Armenia ignored the warrants, logic, arguments, and demands of the whole world. All this time, Azerbaijan has been establishing dialogues, making statements, showing superior diplomacy skills and the patience of Job. The country received support from the international community and waited patiently.
It waited for 29 years …
An interesting post and responses on Armenian attitudes, perceptions, and responses to conflict.
I am from Azerbaijan; my grandfather was an ethnic Azerbaijani from Nagorno-Karabakh. After the war started in the late 1980s a lot of our relatives had to flee the area and come to Baku to rebuild their lives – this conflict is very close to my heart and there is nothing I want more than a lasting peace.
However, as long as there are narratives, which omit, broad-brush or mis-state facts to create convenient storylines, the region will never be free from conflict. I personally found the article unhelpful, inflammatory, and unlikely to contribute to a better understanding of the conflict.
The purpose of the below is not to point out every factual inaccuracy – other respondents have done a good job. The point is to highlight facts omitted from the narrative, which shape Azerbaijani attitudes, perceptions, and responses to the conflict:
• Armenia has invaded and continues to occupy not only Nagorno-Karabagh (NK) but also the seven adjacent districts together constituting 20% of Azerbaijani territory. This occupation created nearly 1 million of Azerbaijani Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs). The UN resolutions establish this fact and call for the liberation of Armenian occupied territories, which unfortunately Armenia has ignored for the past 30 years.
• The author is mentioning that an “all-out war” includes numerous parties “including Armenia, Azerbaijan, Nagorno Karabakh and Turkey”. For the sake of factual accuracy, the “all-out war” is between Armenia and Azerbaijan only. Turkey is not a party to this war but has always voiced its strong support for Azerbaijan and Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity.
• President Macron of France on 30 Sep 20 has openly expressed its support for Armenia. France is a member of the OSCE Minsk Group and has an obligation to maintain neutrality. Russia (member of the OSCE Minsk group) was historically seen as Armenia’s ally but in the recent years has maintained good relationship with both Azerbaijan and Armenia. It also brokered a very short-lived ceasefire agreement. So, if we include these additional significant players, the narrative regarding the balance of powers changes significantly.
• The statistics on population are misleading “Armenia has a population of 3 million, compared to 10 million in Azerbaijan and 80 million in Turkey”. Being outnumbered by the ratio 10+80 to 3 might sound impressive to the reader unfamiliar with the conflict, however, counting Turkey’s population in the war that is fought between Armenia and Azerbaijan creates a false narrative.
• You are raising a question Democracy or Dictatorship and providing views on both governments. Perhaps a better question to ask is – Peace or Fearmongering?
The previous and acting Armenian governments constantly use the tragic 1915 genocide, which was completely unrelated to Azerbaijan to create a potential genocide 2.0 narrative and justify the current aggression, incite hate and prevent Armenia from establishing good relationships with its neighbours. However, Armenia is the one who is occupying 20% of Azerbaijan, has created nearly 1m IDPs through its military actions, committed the Khojaly 1992 genocide, and has recently bombed civilian population in Ganja – the second largest city outside of theatre of military operations. If this is not a war crime, what is?
https://twitter.com/orlaguerin/status/1315197759129964548, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-54488386
Perhaps, it is time to stop portraying Armenia as a victim and start assuming full responsibility for its actions.
I absolutely agree that this war, if unresolved, will spread troubles, but articles of this kind are inflammatory and do nothing to prepare populations for peace.
Qualifying facts that do no support the Azerbaijan State narrative as false can also be one-sided too. I would expect students of the LSE from any side more openness to perspectives that are not theirs as respecting diversity is what the university is all about. The reality is never black or white. All I can read in comments is how you are all repeating the President’s discourse without even taking what he says with a pinch of salt. You claim one-sidedness because of one’s name (in other contexts you might have realised this is called discrimination). Here is an article by three co-authors from different ethnic backgrounds by the way — is that one sided too? https://www.jacobinmag.com/2020/10/azerbaijan-armenia-conflict-nationalism-colonialism
Finally, that Turkey is actively supplying Azerbaijan with weapons and mercenaries is a fact reported in the media (e.g., https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/azerbaijan-armenia-turkey-nagorno-karabakh/2020/10/13/2cdca1e6-08bf-11eb-8719-0df159d14794_story.html%3foutputType=amp)
In 1991-1992 Armenia started military operations on the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, which is the part of Azerbaijan. It occupied territories by force. People were massacred; thousands were killed or disappeared.
1993 – ignoring UN resolutions
Azerbaijan was awaiting a decision from the UN Security Council, which was about to adopt Resolution number 853.
The only demand stated in this resolution was straightforward: Armenia had to end the occupation of the territory of Azerbaijan immediately and unconditionally.
Armenia ignored the resolution.
After that, the UN adopted Resolution number 874 demanding to take urgent, reciprocal and necessary actions to resolve the conflict, including the withdrawal of troops from the recently occupied territories.
Armenia ignored the resolution.
A month later, resolution number 884 was launched. It demanded the withdrawal of troops from the territory of Azerbaijan and the unconditional ending to bombings and armed attacks.
Armenia ignored the resolution.
The 21st meeting of the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) adopted a resolution condemning the occupation of Azerbaijani territories and demanding the immediate withdrawal of Armenian troops.
Armenia ignored the resolution.
1994
Armenia and Azerbaijan achieved the ceasefire agreement. The territory of Azerbaijan remained in the Armenian occupation.
1995
Summit in Lisbon took place. It was attended by fifty-four countries. During the summit, the fundamental principles of the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement were established. The settlement was supported by 53 countries, i.e. all the participants of the summit except Armenia.
Yet, the territory of Azerbaijan had remained occupied by Armenia.
2007
The OSCE Minsk Group had developed components for the conflict settlement called the Madrid Principles. The main provisions included the plan for the phased withdrawal of troops from the territory of Azerbaijan and its complete demilitarization.
Yet, the territory of Azerbaijan had remained occupied by Armenia.
2008
The presidents of Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Russia had signed the Mayendorf Declaration. And by doing so, the heads of state accepted the responsibility for facilitating the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. It seemed that the ice has had broken – Armenia made direct contact.
Yet, the territory of Azerbaijan had remained occupied. Azerbaijan was still waiting for the opportunity to settle the conflict peacefully.
The issue of the occupation raised again. As a result, the UN General Assembly adopted new resolution number 62243 titled “The Situation in the Occupied Territories of Azerbaijan.” It demanded to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, as well as the complete and unconditional withdrawal of troops from the occupied territories and recognized the illegal nature of this conflict in general.
Armenia ignored the resolution.
2016
Azerbaijan was still looking for a way to resolve the conflict peacefully. At the OIC summit in Istanbul, a “Contact Group in connection with the Armenian aggression against Azerbaijan” was created. Seven participating countries insisted on ending the occupation.
The occupation continued.
2017
The European Union reminded Armenia about four UN resolutions and again demanded to end the occupation. The Eastern Partnership Summit expressed its support for the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of every country.
The occupation continued.
2020
Armenia continued to ignore the resolutions and continued to occupy the territory of Azerbaijan.
On September 27th, in response to the actions of Armenia against the peaceful Azerbaijani population, the counter-offensive operation of the Azerbaijani armed forces began on the territory of Azerbaijan.
The events described above are just a small fraction of all the measures that Azerbaijan has taken: calls for negotiations, summits, speeches, dialogues, etc.
We can not allow historical claims and presence of historical artefacts to trump international law. This is a vanity project of Armenian nationalists that goes on and on endangering lives in the region, creating 800K Azerbaijani and 200k Armenian refugees. If we despite UN resolutions, what is the outcome ? Regional war? This internationally recognised territory of Azerbaijan, the resolutions should simply be enforced to end the endless dispute.
Dear Armine
Thank you for your article. I have several study books expensively purchased from various laboratories on the subject and region and after cross referencing, I find your article very close to accurate. Furthermore, I am unsettled with pro Azerbaijani attacks on you on this page. In fact that’s what prompted me to write to you too. But I see it almost everywhere I turn my eye to these days.
Many of my colleagues visited Baku and expressed exactly what you are describing here. We literally have to put up an internal argument in the office trying to avoid going there.
The main issue with this blog comments as well as with this war currently is the uncompromising views that Azeri people thought to hold for generations. There is only one truth and it is from their point of view- a direct condemnation of democracy.
It is impossible to educate that opinions are never wrong, they are just different. I am not even sure this will ever change unfortunately. For as long as the government of Azerbaijan and so as Turkey to that matter defects and violates human rights and freedom of speech for its own people, the normal people will be groomed to the idea that there is a common enemy to fight with and against. You really nailed the problem here in your article.
My observations so far are In all these Azerbaijani runt (please excuse my language) not once I red a compassion or genuine human concern for another human. Whilst Armenian material largely concentrates on exactly that.
I truly feel for the situation, very disappointed with the UK and other countries that have allowed for this to go on this long and there is seems to be nothing is really done to stop it.
I am truly sorry for Armenian nation suffering this ordeal alone and having a hope of peace negotiation through countries like Russia – who’s imperialistic appetite knows no boundaries.
Turkey who kills and jails it’s people for having an opinions different from the government. Country pouring money in to the military industry and yet, little girls born in remote villages do not even make it in to the population register. Spreading like a cancer at the expense of other countries and nations.
Georgia – caught up in petty little politics of their own
Iran fully sanctioned by the most of the world and limited in actions.
I guess no need to go on further, the picture is becoming gloomier by the letter I write here.
So please…. do not get disheartened. And keep offering the information as you see it, as it is. And whilst so many o& your readers suggest for you to re write the historical facts to match the little fact books they have been handed out by their governments, none of them feels like apologising for assaulting our intelligence with none stop propaganda glaring from Israeli media pages. Apology that we here have to filter to get to some sort of information that is close to the reality, time robbing bandits.
I wish you strength and blessings.
Dear A. Taylor (or whoever you are)
I could not help not to reply to your very biased comment. It is very sad your “study books expensively purchased from various laboratories” were not capable of delivering you any truth. I certainly beleive you are not who you say you are, hence your words should be taken with a pinch of salt, and this includes your argument on your “colleagues who visited Baku and expressed exactly” what the Armenian author was describing in this article. Having nothing to say about the international law and occupation of a part of the UN-recognised sovereign territory of the independent state, the author tried to desperately appeal to the senses of international community, by involving buzz words such as Genocide, Freedom of speech in Azerbaijan, even in Turkey. As if they were important in why this conflict is still continuing!
The conflict is the decisive attempt to restore not only the territorial integrity of the country and law & order, but also the pride of Azerbaijani people, who suffered massacres and expulsions from their homes and centuries-old lands of their ancestors. Azerbaijanis were not allowed to return to their homes, their homes, mosques and cities were burnt and destroyed.
Despite this gross injustice that the world has chosen to tolerate for 30 years, Azerbaijan officials declared that the war is against the separatist/terrorist forces and armenian civilian population can continue living in Nagorno Karabakh together with Azerbaijanis.
But regardless of what the truth is, for some people like you, the glass will always be half empty, since the biases are sitting too deep. But luckily, it does not matter at all, the truth and justice will eventually prevail.
Azerbaijani propaganda is in full force in the comments:
There were multiple highlights in this dictating propaganda machine.
– It was dictated to use “War Zone” or “Conflict Zone” to refer to the area of Nagorno Karabakh. This term according to Azerbaijani narrative would grant Azerbaijan rights to bomb civilians and civilian infrastructure. It was not a “War Zone” before Azerbaijan attacked at 7;30 in the morning when many families were sleeping peacefully.
– The 4 legally non-binding UN security council resolutions seem to be very important to the Azerbaijani propaganda machine. They however fail to note that the UN General Assembly has requested global ceasefire because of the global pandemic. However, Azerbaijan conveniently ignored and started the war.
– They also conveniently bypass the facts around brutal ethnic cleansing of Armenians in Azerbaijan SSR that started in 1988. It went unpunished. So then they thought they could do the same in Nagorno Karabakh. The war started because the Armenians of Artsakh decided to defend themselves rather be massacred.
– They also keep mentioning Khojaly massacres.
In 1992 Armenians provided a corridor for civilians to leave Khojaly and many left safely. For massacres Azerbaijanis should refer to their own president as his father Heidar Aliyev was in opposition at the time. Mutalibov, who was the president of Azerbaijan at the time, gave a detailed interview and told that it was the opposition who organised the massacres to oust him. In addition, Chenghiz Mustafayev, a journalist covering the NKR war, demanded an investigation as to who organised the massacres as he was there and the bodies were far from where Armenians were. In fact, there were Azerbaijani militants walking around the bodies and not moving them. He found the same bodies in a different place 2 days later, now mutilated. Some of the bodies were taken to the unti-Mutalibov protest in Baku several days later. Mutalibov was ousted and the journalist was killed a month after demanding an investigation. The recordings of the Mutalibov’s interview and Mustafayev’s accounts are all on YouTube.
– They also claim Armenians recruited PKK terrorists to fight, which makes no sense as PKK fighters would first kill the Armenians if they came around.