As Azerbaijan pushes advantage against Armenia, Russia’s role again under scrutiny

EurasiaNet.org
Nov 17 2021
Joshua Kucera Nov 17, 2021
A Russian peacekeeper mans a checkpoint in Lachin this month. (Russian Defense Ministry)

As conflict again erupted in the Caucasus, and Armenia reports that Azerbaijani troops again crossed their international border, a familiar question is again being asked: Where is Russia?

Following hours of heavy fighting on November 16, resulting the largest casualty totals since last year’s war, Russia managed to broker a ceasefire late in the day. November 17 passed without any violent incidents reported.

Armenian officials said that much of the fighting took place inside its territory, but did not specify a precise area. Many Armenian media reported that it was near the lake Sev Lich in the Syunik region, where Azerbaijani soldiers crossed the border in May and have reportedly remained since then.

The renewal of the border incursion prompted Armenia to seek help from its treaty ally, Russia. The chair of Armenia’s National Security Council, Armen Grigoryan, said on November 16 that the country was appealing to Russia on the basis of a 1997 mutual defense treaty. The next day, Russian newspaper Kommersant followed up with him and asked what sort of assistance Yerevan was seeking. “We are in favor of the problem being solved diplomatically,” he answered. “But if it can’t be solved diplomatically, then it will have to be resolved militarily.” He added a warning of a sort: that while Armenia was relying on Russia, “if a resolution isn’t found, then we will have to look at other possibilities.”

Russia’s public response has been understated. On November 17, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitriy Peskov said that President Vladimir Putin had undertaken “active efforts” to stop the fighting, including speaking with Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan (but not, apparently, Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev). “Thanks to these mediating efforts the Russian side was able yesterday to restrain the conflicting sides,” Peskov told a press conference.

But the repeated incursions across Armenia’s border would seem to call for a stronger Russian response. Russia has security guarantees, both bilaterally and via the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), that oblige it to come to Armenia’s defense in case of attack.

At a meeting of the National Security Council on the evening of November 16, Pashinyan said that Azerbaijani forces controlled about 41 square kilometers of Armenia and blamed the fighting on the “silence from our international partners.” (The figure of 41 kilometers has been used since May, following the incursion into Sev Lich and also in another region, near Vardenis. That would suggest that no new land was occupied in this newest round of fighting, but the Armenian Defense Ministry also reported that it had lost two military positions in the fighting.)

While Pashinyan was careful not to name names among “international partners,” others were more specific.

“Why do the CSTO and Russia ignore their alliance commitments to Yerevan when Azerbaijan is regularly and openly conducting incursions into the sovereign territory of Armenia,” wrote journalist Tatul Hakobyan. “What are the red lines, if any, beyond which Russia will no longer remain silent?”

Hakobyan also reported, citing unnamed diplomatic sources, that during their phone conversation, Putin had dissuaded Pashinyan from formally appealing for assistance from Moscow.

Russia’s inaction also was the source of much speculation during last year’s war. But that war was conducted in and around Nagorno-Karabakh, on territory that had been controlled by Armenian forces since the 1990s but internationally recognized as Azerbaijani and so not subject to the mutual defense pacts. These recent incursions into Armenian territory proper are different.

(Technically there is no border between the two countries in the absence of a bilateral agreement, and they are currently negotiating on a formal demarcation of their shared border. But the two sides have already come to a de facto agreement based on Soviet maps, most visible on the road through southern Armenia that passes through some slices of Azerbaijani territory. According to those maps however, Sev Lich lies firmly in Armenian territory.)

Russian troops guard some sections of Armenia’s border, and during last year’s war made a show of force, albeit a quiet one, by setting up new guard posts along the Azerbaijani border. They have continued to expand that presence since the war, including one new post along the northern section of the border next to the Azerbaijani exclave of Askipara (which Armenians call Voskepar). It is not clear, however, whether the Russians have set up such a post around Sev Lich, which is in a difficult-to-access area.

While Azerbaijan has claimed that this new round of fighting was set off by Armenian “provocations” along the border, it is a pretext that few take seriously. Azerbaijani analysts suggest that it was instigated by Baku in order to force Yerevan to sign new agreements, on border demarcation and new cross-border transportation routes, in support of last year’s ceasefire agreement.

But if that is the case, it is a direct challenge to Russia, which not only has mutual defense treaties with Armenia but also is the cosigner and guarantor of the ceasefire agreement.

Russia may, though, not have many options to respond.

“Russia has no room to maneuver here,” wrote Sergey Markedonov, an analyst of the Caucasus at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations, on Facebook. “This is Armenian territory, not disputed Karabakh. Turkey’s influence is many times greater than it was a year ago, so sharp movements would be problematic as it could put [Russia] at odds both with the West and Ankara.”

While it appeared that Azerbaijan was most likely “using force as pressure on the negotiations,” Markedonov added, “silence is dangerous and the information space now is not in Moscow’s favor. […] Simply staying quiet and putting out optimistic statements is not a solution!”

 

Joshua Kucera is the Turkey/Caucasus editor at Eurasianet, and author of .

https://eurasianet.org/as-azerbaijan-pushes-advantage-against-armenia-russias-role-again-under-scrutiny

Homenetmen Regional Convention Elects New Executive Board

A scene from last weekend's Homenetmen Regional Convention

The Homenetmen Western U.S. family gathered from November 12 to 14 to convene the organization’s 42nd Regional Convention, during which a new Regional Executive was elected to govern the organization for the upcoming two years.

Delegates representing Homenetmen chapters from across the Western U.S. and invited guests meticulously discussed and evaluated the organization’s activities of the past two years, provided the necessary assessments and adopted resolutions that will guide the newly-elected executive body’s work.

The 42nd Regional Representative Convention elected the following members to the 2021-2023 Regional Executive Board: Hagop Tufenkjian, Sevag Garabetian, Souzi Ohanian, Siran Marselian, Pierre Manoukian, Hrach Galoustian, Talin Ghazarian, Anita Derderian, Roubina Manouchehri, Tamar Kilijian, and Paul Bachkabakian.

The Convention executive met with the newly elected executive board on November 16 for a transfer meeting and supervised the board’s election of officers. The 2021-2023 Regional Executive Board elected the following officers: Chairperson, Hagop Tufenkjian, Vice Chairperson, Sevag Garabetian, Secretary, Souzi Ohanian, Treasurer, Siran Marselian.

Homenetmen Western US Region’s Executive Board said that it is looking forward to the opportunity to lead the region and the community through the course of the next two years, overcoming challenges presented by the pandemic, re-introducing in-person programs and activities such as the 45th Navasartian Games & Festival, the Regional Scouting Jamboree, the 11th Pan-Homenetmen Games and much more.

Documentary: Nagorno-Karabakh: A Fragile Peace

Arte TV, France
Nov 19 2021

 09/04/2021

In Armenia, the trauma of defeat continues to shake civil society. The human cost of war has been very high for this small country of 3 million inhabitants. More than 10 000 people have been injured and almost 4 000 killed with 1600 soldiers still missing.

Director :

  • Xavier Muntz, Gaspar-Thierry Karoglan

Producer :

  • Frédérique Pittau

Author :

  • Xavier Muntz

Country :

  • France

Year :

  • 2021

WATCH THE FULL DOCUMENTARY AT THE LINK BELOW

Suren Papikyan, who was sentenced to prison during military service, named Armenia’s defense minister

Panorama, Armenia
Nov 15 2021

Suren Papikyan, who was sentenced to prison during compulsory military service, has been appointed Defense Minister of Armenia, according to a decree published on the official website of the president.

Citing its sources, the Haykakan Zhamanak (Armenian Times) newspaper, owned by Nikol Pashinyan's family, reported earlier that Arshak Karapetyan would be dismissed as defense minister to be replaced by Suren Papikyan, who served as deputy prime minister.

There is no clear data on Papikyan's military service. According to his biography on the Armenian government website, Papikyan was drafted into the army while studying at the Faculty of History at the Yerevan State University.

When it became known that he was handed a jail term due to an incident during compulsory military service, Papikyan announced that the incident occurred during the service in 2004-2006, but not in the Armenian armed forces.

Papikyan acknowledged the criminal conviction, saying he was released under an amnesty.

"What happened is not something pleasant to me. It is one of the episodes that I regret," Papikyan noted.

The Hraparak newspaper reported last year that Suren Papikyan was sentenced to 2 years and 3 months in prison in 2006 for stabbing his commander during his military service which he performed at the Russian base in Armenia.

Papikyan served his sentence in the Nubarashen penitentiary and was released from prison a year later under the amnesty.

Armenia: opposition announces start of resistance movement

Caucasian Knot
Nov 9 2021

In the evening on November 8, an oppositional rally organized by the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) "Dashnaktsutyun" was held in Freedom Square in Yerevan. According to the organizers, the rally should initiate a nationwide resistance movement.

The “Caucasian Knot” has reported that on November 10, 2020, the trilateral agreement signed by Russia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia on the cessation of hostilities in Nagorno-Karabakh came into force. On the same day, residents of Yerevan, dissatisfied with the signing of the peace agreement with Azerbaijan, broke into the building of the Armenian government and demanded the resignation of Nikol Pashinyan.

The rally, headed by Robert Kocharyan, the second President of Armenia? was attended by the entire Aiastan parliamentary bloc; and the faction "I have the Honour" joined the rally.

In their speeches, the organizers of the rally accused the current power of the defeat in the Karabakh war, and noted that consolidation is needed to prevent further catastrophes, in particular, the Armenians' exodus from Nagorno-Karabakh and the Turkishization of Armenia.

The movement should work on two fronts: external and internal ones, Ishkhan Sagatelyan, an MP from the "Aiastan" bloc and a member of the ARF "Dashnaktsutyun" Party, has stated in his speech at the rally.

"On the external front, we must make it clear to the whole world that Nikol Pashinyan is not a collective image of the Armenian nation, and any anti-Armenian document signed by him is unacceptable for us," Mr Sagatelyan has stated. On the domestic (internal) front, Ishkhan Sagatelyan has suggested to oppose various destructive phenomena in all spheres.

This article was originally published on the Russian page of 24/7 Internet agency ‘Caucasian Knot’ on November 8, 2021 at 10:10 pm MSK. To access the full text of the article, click here.

Author: Armine MartirosyanSource: CK correspondent

Source: 
© Caucasian Knot

Experts raise alarm over fate of Georgia’s leading art museum amid political upheaval

The Art Newspaper

Experts raise alarm over fate of Georgia's leading art museum amid
political upheaval

By Sophia Kishkovsky
10 November 2021

[Concerns persist that a government-backed renovation of the Shalva
Amiranashvili Museum of Fine Arts in Tbilisi could endanger its
collection of 139,000 ancient and modern works.]

Uncertainty surrounds a controversial renovation plan for Georgia’s
leading art museum as political upheaval grips the South Caucasus
country. According to former and current staff members at the Shalva
Amiranashvili Museum of Fine Arts in Tbilisi, its 139,000-strong
collection of ancient and modern works could be endangered by a
relocation proposed by the culture minister, Tea Tsulukiani.
Meanwhile, architectural preservationists have raised concerns about
the rumoured demolition of the museum’s classical-style 1838 building,
a former seminary at which Joseph Stalin once studied.

The museum turmoil coincided with the cloak-and-dagger return to
Georgia of the exiled former president Mikheil Saakashvili ahead of
municipal elections on 2 October. He was arrested and has been on
hunger strike for more than a month—leading to his transfer this week
to a prison hospital—while thousands have rallied in Tbilisi to demand
his release and medical treatment in a civilian clinic. Mass
demonstrations have followed the elections, when the ruling Georgian
Dream party swept mayoral runoffs in Tbilisi and other major cities
amid widespread allegations of vote-buying. Georgian Dream defeated
Saakashvili’s United National Movement party in 2012 parliamentary
elections.

Tsulukiani is an ally of Georgian Dream’s founder Bidzina Ivanishvili,
a Kremlin-connected billionaire who bought Picasso’s Dora Maar with
Cat for $95.2m in 2006 and served as Georgia’s prime minister in
2012-13. She became culture minister in March, having served as
minister of justice from 2012 to 2020. Soon after her appointment,
Tsulukiani announced the renovation of the Shalva Amiranashvili Museum
as “a major generational endeavor” that will require "very significant
human and financial effort”. In July, she said urgent action would
have to be taken since Unesco experts had determined that precious
icons in the museum’s collection are seriously damaged and need to be
moved.

Meanwhile, opposition politicians and opposition-affiliated media
outlets have linked Tsulukiani’s overhaul of the museum building to
the real-estate interests of Ivanishvili, the lead investor behind the
$500m urban development project Panorama Tbilisi, which includes a
newly constructed hotel next door to the museum.

Eka Kiknadze, the museum’s former manager, tells The Art Newspaper
that she was abruptly demoted to laboratory assistant in a reshuffle
after she requested details about Tsulukiani’s plans. The new
director, Nika Akhalbedashvili, a former justice ministry official
appointed by Tsulukiani, told staff in July that the collection would
have to be moved within months. Museum employees and preservationists
have protested that the plan is ill-considered, amid fears that the
collection might never return to the building. According to Kiknadze,
a long-term strategy to move the museum’s collection to
climate-regulated temporary storage in adjacent buildings has gone
ignored.

The collection comprises “the main artefacts in Georgian culture, from
medieval icons to modern Georgian art”, Kiknadze says, with the most
valuable medieval works being known as the Treasury. These were
“supposed to be temporarily [relocated] while the historic building
was undergoing rehabilitation” under a “multi-stage” plan drawn up by
specialists of Georgia’s National Museum, an umbrella organisation
that oversees a dozen institutions including the Shalva Amiranashvili
Museum of Fine Arts. This would have provided a suitable 3,500 sq. m
space “equipped according to all modern standards for storing museum
collections in terms of climate and humidity, with the most up-to-date
micro-climate, fire and physical safety systems”, Kiknadze says.

The abandoned strategy, which is still visible on the National Museum’s website

, was created after the organisation partnered with Germany’s Prussian
Cultural Heritage Foundation in 2010-12 in a cultural “twinning”
programme funded by the European Union. It referred to a design
concept for the Shalva Amiranashvili Museum’s renovation by the French
architect Jean-Francois Milou, who also proposed a masterplan for an
“Avenue of the Arts” to unify various buildings of the Georgian
National Museum.

The current situation “is quite alarming and very offensive because
many years of work have gone down the drain”, says George
Partskhaladze, a member of the Georgian National Museum’s research
council who worked on the twinning project and restoration strategy.

Irina Koshoridze, the chief curator of Oriental collections, has
confirmed to The Art Newspaper that “the transfer of collections has
not started yet” at the Shalva Amiranashvili Museum but she warns that
“no temperature and climate conditions” are in place if objects are
relocated.In contrast, a decade ago the 5,000 works of the Oriental
collection were carefully moved to the Simon Janashia Museum of
Georgia nearby, including 25 early Persian paintings that Koshoridze
described as its “most important and world-renowned” works.

Supporters of the museum recently raised the alarm over the fate of
another prized artefact, the medieval Ancha Icon of the Saviour, which
dates to the sixth or seventh century. In August, the Patriarch of the
Georgian Orthodox Church, Ilia II, asked the prime minister Irakli
Garibashvili to hand over the icon to the Anchiskhati church after
which it is named, for use in religious services.

“The historic building of the Museum of Fine Arts to Bidzina
Ivanishvili, the museum’s treasures to the Patriarchate—this is the
goal for which Tsulukiani, who is capable of all, was appointed
minister of culture,” commented Roman Gotsiridze, a United National
Movement opposition MP, according to local news reports.

Neither the Georgian culture ministry nor the National Museum
responded to The Art Newspaper’s requests for comment. A ministry
statement posted this summer on Facebook decried the poor condition of
the Shalva Amiranashvili Museum, which it said “does not meet the
elementary standards of seismic resistance”. The statement refuted
claims that the building could be demolished, however, adding: “the
ministry intends to save the unique exhibits preserved in the museum”.
Tsulukiani has also claimed that works went missing under previous
museum management.

In late September, Akhalbedashvili, the museum’s new director, accused
local media of spreading lies and said: “the art museum building will
definitely be restored in the place where it is now”.


 

Armenia reports 1675 daily coronavirus cases

Save

Share

 11:04, 10 November, 2021

YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 10, ARMENPRESS. 1675 new cases of COVID-19 have been confirmed in Armenia in the past 24 hours, bringing the total number of confirmed cases to 324,039, the ministry of healthcare reports.

10,052 COVID-19 tests were conducted on November 9.

1277 patients have recovered in one day. The total number of recoveries has reached 286,334.

The death toll has risen to 6831(69 death cases have been registered in the past one day).

The number of active cases is 29,521.

 

Editing and Translating by Aneta Harutyunyan

Iran, Armenia to establish joint industrial park

Tehran Times
Nov 10 2021
  1. Economy
– 16:16

TEHRAN – Head of Iran-Armenia Joint Chamber of Commerce and Industry has said the two countries plan to establish a joint industrial park in the near future, the portal of Iran Chamber of Commerce, Industries, Mines and Agriculture (ICCIMA) reported on Wednesday.

Hervik Yarijanian said the two sides also have the potential to cooperate in other fields like banking, finance, agriculture, and extraterrestrial farming.

“We are negotiating with Armenian authorities to provide the necessary basis for the two sides’ businessmen to be able to invest and produce goods together with the aim of gaining access to more distant markets such as Europe and Canada,” he said.

"Currently, the preferential tariff between several European countries and Canada with Armenia is four percent, and in this situation, if a joint product with investment between Iran and Armenia is produced and exported to these markets, it can be actually exported to those markets with a four-percent customs duty."

Referring to a meeting between an Iranian trade delegation and the Armenian Economy Minister a few weeks ago, Yarijanian said: "The Armenian Economy Minister welcomed the development of trade relations between the two countries and is planning to allocate about 50 hectares of land for establishing a joint industrial park.”

"In fact, Iran's industrial zones, in cooperation with Armenia's industrial parks, are set to build a joint industrial zone, and this could lead to the transfer of technology and capital from the Islamic Republic of Iran and the processing and export of goods from Armenia," he explained.

Noting that currently there is no particular challenge to the development of Iran-Armenia trade, he said: "The problem with Iran-Armenia trade in recent years was that the two countries have relied heavily on energy exchange; That is, the Islamic Republic of Iran received electricity from Armenia in exchange for gas exports. But given that the Armenian government has banned the import of more than 1,000 commodity items of goods from Turkey, the conditions are now quite favorable for the development of trade between the two countries and the increase of Iran's exports to Armenia."

EF/MA

Armenian troops "stop Azerbaijanis’ attempted advance near Goris"

PanArmenian, Armenia
Nov 10 2021

PanARMENIAN.Net - The Azerbaijani troops attempted to advance near the Armenian town of Goris but met the resistance of the Armenian armed forces on Tuesday, November 9, Goris deputy mayor Karen Kocharyan has said, according to Sputnik Armenia.

Kocharyan confirmed media publications about an incident that happened near Sev Lake, which he described as "positional".

"No shots have been fired. The Azerbaijanis attempted to move forward, our guys stopped them. Our boys have improved their positions," Kocharyan added.

The mysterious origin of the name of Armenia city in Colombia

Nov 5 2021

Armenia, Quindio, Colombia. Photo by Luis Alveart/Flickr. (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Throughout the Americas, it is common to find cities with European names, but one, in particular, has generated controversy: Armenia in Colombia. Colombia has 43 geographical locations called Armenia. However, it is the capital of the Department of Quindío that sparked a debate about the reasons behind its name.

In the national collective imagination, there is the idea that the name Armenia commemorates the Armenian victims of the Ottoman Empire. When a foreigner learns about a city called Armenia in Colombia, he may assume that its name is due to the presence of diaspora or the origin of its colonizers. But scholars say none of these theories are true.

The Armenia at the center of this misunderstanding is located near the central mountain range of the Colombian Andes, about 290 kilometers west of Bogotá. It has about 300,000 inhabitants and a pleasant 20°C temperature throughout the year. Before the Spanish colonization, it was the main city of the extinct Quimbaya civilization. After its Spanish founding, the city was at the epicenter of the Colombian coffee bonanza, which lasted until the end of the 20th century.

Transportation by donkey. Courtesy of Carlos Alberto Castrillón

This Armenia has a very different history from that of the country of Armenia in the South Caucasus. This country is located in the mountain range between Europe and Asia. For centuries, Armenians were under the rule of different empires (Ottoman, Persian, and Russian), but they managed to maintain an identity with their millennial language, the early adoption of the Christian religion, and, more recently, the struggle for the recognition of the genocide of which they were victims.

The Armenian genocide refers to the killing and expulsion of about one million Armenians by the Ottoman Empire during World War I. More than 30 countries acknowledge the genocide, but Turkey, the country currently located in the former territory of the Ottoman Empire, never admitted the systematic annihilation of the Armenian people. It argued that the relocation of Armenians was a legitimate state action in response to the Armenian revolutionary movement that threatened the empire during the war. Although Colombia does not recognize the genocide either, the city of Armenia approved a decree commemorating the centenary of the genocide in 2017.

Armenian historians and the media did not miss the opportunity to attribute the existence of this Colombian city to Armenian compatriots. For example, Armenian historian Hovhannes Babesian had initially written that “the city was founded by a group of Armenian immigrants in the 19th century.”

This theory by the Armenians was further promoted byZavén Sabundjián, another historian, who, in 1983, commented that a monument had been erected “in memory of the founders of the city and its compatriot martyrs.” Later, the Yerevan Magazine even stated that “it is a symbolic monument that evokes the Armenian victims of 1896.” This is a reference to the emblematic Monument to the Founders (located in the park with the same name) which consists of an ax, a symbol of the work by the Antiochians who built the city by cutting down the thick jungle.

Monument to the Founders in Armenia, Colombia. Public domain photo.

It is understandable to assume there is an Armenian diaspora in Colombia. The violent expulsion or death of almost all Christian Armenians in the Ottoman Empire created the second-largest diaspora in the world, after the Jewish people. It is estimated that about three million Armenians live in the current Republic of Armenia and the territory of Nagorno Karabakh, while other ten million are spread around the world.

Various waves of Armenian migration have been recorded in Latin America since the 19th century, and the vast majority have escaped the alleged genocide. The largest diaspora is in Argentina, where there are approximately 150,000 Armenians, but the most noteworthy relationship is with Uruguay, which is the first state to recognize the Armenian genocide. No Armenian diasporas settled in Colombia. On the contrary, by the decree of 1937, this country banned the entry of several immigrants carrying Egyptian, Greek, Bulgarian, Romanian, Russian, Syrian and Turkish passports. Later, in 1954, the Armenian bishop Cirilo Zohrabián visited Colombia and observed that “in all of Colombia there is not even the shadow of an Armenian.”

The origin of the name of the Colombian city of Armenia is not due to the origin of its founders. What is known as a true fact is that the city of Armenia was founded on October 14, 1889, by settlers from the older state of Antioquia, who established hamlets at this intermediate point between eastern and western Colombia in search of fertile land, opportunities for the extraction of rubber, and the need to move away from the battlefield of the civil wars from 1876 to 1899.

In 1896, the massacre of more than 300,000 Armenians shocked the world at a time when the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, commonly known as Dashnaktsutyun, was advocating for a free, independent, and unified Armenia, or at least greater autonomy and protection of their rights as a minority in the Ottoman Empire. However, the city of Armenia in Colombia was founded almost a decade before these events, and twenty years before the alleged genocide.

In support of this theory, historian Miguel Ángel Rojas Arias from Quindío argues that “it is very likely that the priests in their pulpits mentioned Armenia, the first nation to adopt Christianity as the official religion, and a place known as the Paradise on Earth or as the landing port for Noah's Ark. This name would remain in the minds of the first settlers.

But there is not consensus on the origin of this name attributed to the church, either. In his article, Notes for a toponymy of Quindío,” Professor Carlos Alberto Castrillón from the Spanish and Literature Program at the University of Quindío explains that the use of foreign names in the department is due to the mystery and allure surrounding foreign place names, as well as the opportunities for a new life for the settlers in these lands.

View of the mountain range near Armenia, Colombia. Photo by McKay Savage/Flickr. (CC BY 2.0)

In an interview with Global Voices, Castrillón said: “None of the well-known texts from that time mention anything related to religious traditions. When analyzing the main toponymy of the region, no religious names are found, unlike other places in Colombia. The founding settlers defined themselves as freethinkers and educated men, which explains the abundance of names taken from universal history or literature.”

There is even a city in the Department named in reference to another Caucasian nation. One of its founders, a renowned freemason, proposed changing the ordinary name of the land “La Plancha” to a more exotic one: Circassia.

But more importantly, by the time the city was founded, the name was already used in the region. The sales contract for the settlers’ estates mentions the property as located in the village of Armenia. Consequently, Carlos Alberto concludes: “Relating, as some do, this name to the story of Noah seems pure historical imagination or post-toponymic explanation; if there was a religious motivation, it was for naming the village.”

Little has been said about the origin of the name of the hamlet where the city was later founded, which at some point it was attributed to settlers from the city of Armenia in Antioquia.

With no consensus, the motivations for the city's name remain a mystery.

https://globalvoices.org/2021/11/05/the-mysterious-origin-of-the-name-of-armenia-city-in-colombia/