Artsakh reports fresh ceasefire violation by Azerbaijan

Panorama
Armenia –

Artsakh’s military authorities reported a new ceasefire breach by Azerbaijani forces on Sunday and early on Monday.

"From 9:30am June 18 to 1:08am June 19, the Azerbaijani armed forces violated the ceasefire in directions of the towns of Martuni and Martakert, using small arms," the Artsakh Defense Ministry said in a statement.

The Artsakh militray did not suffer casualties.

The ceasefire violation was reported to the command of the Russian peacekeeping contingent.

"As of 9:15am June 19, the situation on the line of contact is relatively stable," the ministry said.

French-Armenian Resistance hero Missak Manouchian to enter France’s Panthéon

July 18 2023

Missak Manouchian, an Armenian genocide survivor who went on to become a French Resistance hero, will enter France’s Panthéon mausoleum of revered historical figures next year, President Emmanuel Macron announced in a statement Sunday.

During World War II, Manouchian led a small group of Resistance fighters which carried out a string of attacks against occupying Nazi forces in 1943. He was executed by the Germans on February 21, 1944. © FRANCE 24/ File picture

"Manouchian carries a part of our greatness", Macron said in the statement issued by the Élysée Palace, adding the French-Armenian poet and communist embodied France’s “universal values” of liberty, equality and fraternity.  

Macron said Manouchian will be inducted into the Panthéon - which already honours eight other French Resistance heroes, including Jean Moulin – on February 21, 2024.

According to the wishes of his family, his wife Mélinée will join him in the mausoleum, although she will not receive the “pantheonisation” of her husband – the rare tribute reserved only for those who have played an important role in French history, such as Victor Hugo, Voltaire and Marie Curie.

Manouchian arrived in France in 1925 as a stateless refugee after fleeing the Armenian genocide with his brother, and joined the country’s communist Resistance movement in 1943 during World War II. He led a small group of fighters that carried out a string of successsful attacks against the occupying Nazi forces .

In 1944, the group, which included a number of Jews, was put out of action when 23 of its members were rounded up and sentenced to death by a German military court.

Manouchian was shot by a Nazi firing squad on February 21, 1944.

The collaborationist Vichy regime later tried to discredit the group and defuse the anger over the executions in an infamous red poster depicting the dead fighters as terrorists.

By entering the Panthéon, Manouchian will become both the first foreign and communist Resistance fighter to be awarded the honour.

In his tribute, Macron also pointed to the “bravery” and “quiet heroism” of Manouchian and other foreign Resistance fighters.

Macron decorated Robert Birenbaum—part of the foreign Resistance fighter group alongside Manouchian—at the Mont Valerien site where Manouchian and other resistants were executed by the Nazis.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)

https://amp.france24.com/en/europe/20230618-french-armenian-resistance-hero-missak-manouchian-to-enter-france-s-panth%C3%A9on 

READ ALSO
French-Armenian Resistance hero Missak Manouchian to enter Panthéon (modernghana.com)
https://www.modernghana.com/news/1238846/french-armenian-resistance-hero-missak-manouchian.html
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/french-armenian-resistance-hero-missak-manouchian-to-enter-france-s-panth%C3%A9on/ar-AA1cHs3s

Ara Zohrabyan slams use of force by police against lawyer

Panorama
Armenia – June 13 2023

Ara Zohrabyan, a former chairman of Armenia’s Chamber of Advocates, has denounced the use of force by police officers against a lawyer.

"This is a very dangerous incident. This is the second time something like this has happened,” he told a news conference in Yerevan on Tuesday.

Zohrabyan recalled that they demanded the dismissal of the officers who beat up two lawyers in a police custody in February this year, stressing the need for tougher measures to prevent such incidents in the future.

“This is a terrible act. It’s too much for us to swallow," Zohrabyan said.

Lawmaker rules out extraterritorial corridor through Armenia

 13:14,

YEREVAN, JUNE 14, ARMENPRESS. Armenia will never negotiate around providing a corridor to Azerbaijan through its territory, a lawmaker said Wednesday.

Sargis Khandanyan, the Chair of the Parliamentary Foreign Relations Committee, told reporters that the topic on the “Zangezur corridor” wording is closed for Armenia.

“The topic of the made up “Zangezur corridor” wording is closed for the Republic of Armenia. This is obvious, as well as acceptable and understandable also for the parties who are mediating in the negotiations,” he said, ruling out a corridor through Armenia’s territory. He said Armenia will never negotiate around such issue.

Khandanyan added that Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev’s statements cause concern because they aren’t conducive to the negotiations process.

100 Years Ago, Martyrs of the Armenian Genocide Marched Straight to Heaven

The prisoners in Mardin Castle knew that to die for the One who died for us all is the greatest honor.

The prisoners in Mardin Castle were rounded up at nightfall. Soldiers called out their names, one by one, and tied them with ropes. Rings were pressed around the necks, and chains put around the wrists, of those thought to be Armenian. All of them stood like that, for several hours, until the soldiers had finished arranging them into columns and rows. They were marched out through the prison gate.

The prisoners were young and old. No distinction had been made by the authorities as to whether they were Catholic or Orthodox or Protestant. Those belonging to the Latin or Chaldean or Syriac Rites had been bound all the same. They were all Christians, and thus deemed enemies of the state.

Mamdooh Bek, the chief of police of Mardin, led the caravan at the front. He considered himself to be a hero, a warrior for his faith, for this. His desire to lead this march had been rendered feasible only after Hilmi Bey, the district governor just a few days prior, had been deposed for energetically protesting the treatment that the Christians of Mardin had been dealt — the former governor being transferred to a new post, over in Mosul. 

Ignatius Maloyan, the Armenian Catholic Archbishop of Mardin, was in chains at the back of the caravan. The bruises on his body, from beatings he’d endured over the last week, were still sore. The bruise on his face from the pistol-whipping dealt to him by Mamdooh Bek was a fading bluish-purple. His toenails were extracted. The recent thrashings he’d taken on the soles of his feet made him walk with a limp.

The archbishop had been loyal to his country. He’d urged his fellow Catholics to remain loyal as well. But the lot of Christians in the Ottoman Empire had taken a turn since the outbreak of the Great War. While young men still were dug in the trenches and dying yonder in Gallipoli, weapons had been planted in the cathedral here in Mardin to serve as “evidence” of a planned insurrection. The archbishop had been arrested, dragged into court in chains, and given the choice to convert to Islam or to die. The beatings had begun when he’d refused to convert.

The prisoners continued marching onward.

“The Christian residents who leave their houses,” shouted a familiar voice, that of the town crier, “will be amputated and put together with their co-religionists.” 

The prisoners, more than 400 in all, many priests among them, exited that castle which, much like the empire, had long been in disrepair. They trudged along the main street. The fingers and feet of those who’d had their nails extracted bled. Some of the men had broken bones, and gashes on their heads. 

They passed through the Muslim quarters of Mardin. Women came out from their homes and mocked them and laughed at them. Children giggled and threw stones at them. They kept on marching.

They passed through the Christian quarter. The streets were silent and clear. Residents wept and prayed behind closed doors, and by the railings of their roofs, as the prisoners passed by their houses. Mourning had made it so easy to forget that these men were being marched straight to Heaven. 

They approached the western gate. The monks and missionaries, those in Mardin who still were free, went up to the roofs to see their friends for one last time and say farewell. They wondered whether they themselves would soon share a similar destiny as their chained brethren, of imitating the Lord even in his Passion.

The monks and missionaries on that roof looked down upon the prisoners, recognizing the battered faces of some, and recognizing the face of Christ in all. There among those prisoners was Brother Léonard Melki, a Lebanese Capuchin friar, who’d been falsely accused of conspiring with the French government. He’d been a great promoter of the Third Order of St. Francis during his time in Mardin. He likewise had been offered the choice to convert or die. His torture began when he’d declined to convert. Blood was trickling from his toes and fingers.

Brother Léonard wondered as he left the city whether his old friend, Brother Thomas Saleh, a Maronite Catholic, and fellow Capuchin friar, was elsewhere suffering for the Lord’s sake in such a manner. The time for Brother Thomas’ martyrdom would come soon enough.

Those men up on the roof continued watching on until the backs of their brethren faded into the darkness of night.

The desert night was turning cold. The lights of Mardin faded behind them, until it looked as though a match had been lit behind them, and then disappeared altogether. The waning crescent moon hovered above them on this night of June 10, 1915. The stars, as many as the children of Abraham, surrounded sister moon in the firmament.

The shivering prisoners continued to march barefoot in the desert for several hours. Blood stained the sands beneath the wounded. The pain of it was near to blinding for some. Some of them stumbled and fell. Those who could no longer walk were supported by those who could. They reached Adercheck, a Kurdish village, in the early morning hours of Friday, June 11, the Feast of the Sacred Heart. 

Some of the villagers got out of their homes to see what all of the commotion was about. The bulk of the prisoners were escorted by the soldiers onward from there, followed by curious villagers, to nearby caves.

They stopped. Mamdooh Bek stood there before the prisoners. He read to them what he’d insisted was an imperial decree saying that all Christians were considered traitors and were to be sentenced to death. He assured them that amnesty would be granted to those who converted to Islam and that they’d be returned to Mardin. Those unwilling to convert would be executed within the hour.

The archbishop replied that he would prefer to die as a Christian than to live as a Muslim. He knelt and prayed that the men along with him would accept their martyrdom courageously. 

The vast majority of the prisoners knelt with the archbishop.

A few of the men remained standing, nodding their heads, agreeing to convert. Soldiers made gestures with their hands for them to go along with some of the Kurdish villagers who were present, to immediately be brought before the local sheik, that they may say the words: “I bear witness that there is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.”

The soldiers made their preparations. 

The archbishop ordered his priests to circulate among the other prisoners. They heard the confessions of those who soon would die, absolving them, using their chained hands to make the sign of the cross. 

The archbishop took what bread he could find. He said the words of consecration and had his priests distribute the Body of Christ. This one last feast had become an occasion for joy. The prisoners knew then what all the holy martyrs before them had taught: that to die for the One who died for us all is the greatest honor.

Some of the soldiers marveled at the faith of the prisoners as they watched on.

Rage swelled up from the heart of Mamdooh Bek until it felt as though his head would burst. He was a man who preferred to be feared, never defied. He stood next to the archbishop at the designated site and then gave the order.

The blasting sounds of gunfire erupted and echoed. Clouds of smoke filled the air. The stench of gunpowder filled the nostrils of the violent men like an unholy incense. Blood splattered from the bodies of the lined-up prisoners as they fell limp onto the earth below. Soon enough, all of the prisoners were dead, save for one.

The archbishop had been allowed to watch all of this.

Mamdooh Bek looked at the archbishop. He said that it was his religious duty to offer one last chance to say the words of the Shahadah and convert.

“I've told you I shall live and die for the sake of my faith and religion,” the archbishop replied. “I take pride in the Cross of my God and Lord.”

Mamdooh Bek coldly drew out his pistol and fired a shot at the archbishop.

“My God!” the archbishop cried with his last breath, “have mercy on me; into your hands I commend my spirit.” He collapsed onto the ground and died.

As their bodies were being disposed of, the newest dwellers of Paradise were welcomed to their eternal home.

Christians throughout the Muslim World face severe persecution today. Little to no distinction ever gets made between Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant Christians by those who persecute them. 

In May of this year the Holy See added the 21 Coptic Christian men who’d been executed for their faith by the Islamic State on Feb. 15, 2015, to the Roman Martyrology.

Blessed Ignatius Maloyan, the Armenian Catholic Archbishop of Mardin, was beatified Oct. 7, 2001, by Pope John Paul II. He’d spent much energy encouraging devotion to the Sacred Heart, and was martyred on the Feast of the Sacred Heart in 1915. His feast day is on 11.

Blessed Léonard Melki, along with Blessed Thomas Saleh (a Maronite Catholic martyred in 1917), both of whom were Capuchin Friars, were beatified by Pope Francis on June 4, 2022. Their feast day is June 10.

All of you Holy Martyrs, pray for us! 

Statement of the Armenian Bar Association on Armenia-Azerbaijan Negotiations

The Board of Governors of the Armenian Bar Association continues to monitor public announcements related to negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan in connection with the resolution of disputes between the countries. The Armenian Bar Association is a non-profit non-political organization and we are not, and would not be, privy to any non-public details about those negotiations as they evolve. 

We are deeply concerned about statements suggesting that, as part of a potential peace treaty with Azerbaijan, Armenia may recognize Azeri sovereignty over Artsakh and its people, making them subject to stated Azeri genocidal intentions. We have monitored and extensively documented over the last three years the genocidal and hate filled policies of the Azerbaijan government against Artsakh and Armenia and their populations, from acts of torture against civilians and POWs to extrajudicial and summary executions, from racial discrimination to destruction of cultural heritage and religious persecution, culminating with a cruel blockade violating the basic human rights of the people of Artsakh and creating humanitarian crises with severe shortages of food, water, fuel, electricity and internet communication. These are realities that make even the suggestion of Armenians of Artsakh being at the mercy of the Azeri regime unconscionable. There can be no assurance that Azerbaijan would respect any of its obligations under a treaty with Armenia, including one where Armenia has agreed to Azeri sovereignty over Artsakh. In fact, observed Azeri actions to date suggest that it would almost certainly abrogate its obligations. 

As an organization, our mission is always to protect, advocate for and defend, first and foremost, persons and their inalienable rights to live freely, without fear of oppression or persecution and with respect for their human rights and dignity, whether they are in Armenia, Artsakh or elsewhere around the world. We can only offer our own guiding principles on the means to achieve peace:

Agreements made under duress are void. Article 52 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties states that “a treaty is void if its conclusion has been procured by threat or use of force in violation of the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations.” No one would argue that peace is preferable to war. True lasting peace comes from respect for human rights and dignity. A peace agreement obtained under threats of aggression and ethnic cleansing, peace obtained under the chokehold of an illegal 170-day siege, peace obtained by sacrificing human rights is not true peace, and is unlikely to actually result in any meaningful reduction in aggression and human rights abuses. It would be only a reward incentivizing further violations of law and human rights. 

Human Rights Cannot be Bargained Away in Peace Treaties. The human rights of the people of Artsakh cannot be negotiated away. Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties states that “a treaty is void, if at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law,” a “norm accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from with no derogation is permitted.” 

The People of Artsakh Have Their Independent Voice and Need a Seat at the Table. It is impossible to conclude peace negotiations without the involvement of the people directly affected by the negotiations, the people of Artsakh. 

We will always stand with the people of Artsakh and advocate for their human rights, including their right to self-determination. We will continue to raise our voices until Armenians everywhere can live without fear of persecution and violence.

May 30, 2023




Nagorno-Karabakh: The History And Present Situation Of Bloody Conflict – Analysis


May 30 2023


By Matija Šerić

When any objective observer looks at the geopolitical map of the world and its crisis hotspots sooner or later he will reach Nagorno Karabakh in the South Caucasus. This ethnically Armenian region within Azerbaijan has been the subject of a dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan for a century. Because of it, two countries and two peoples have been at war for more than 100 years, of course at intervals.

Fragile peace reigns there for the most part, but wars and incidents occasionally break out, resulting in heavy casualties. What’s worse, that remote mountainous region is toxically poisoning Armenian-Azerbaijani relations, and there is no end in sight to the conflict. Although there are crisis hotspots around the globe, in terms of the use of force, the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh can only be compared to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Even during the most peaceful periods, it is a matter of a week or a month when the blood of soldiers or civilians will be spilled.

The name of the province has interesting roots. The word nagorno means “mountainous” in Russian, while the word “karabah” is a combination of Turkish and Persian words that together mean “black garden”. The region is located between Lower Karabakh and Syunik on the southeastern massif of the Lesser Caucasus. Through Nagorno-Karabakh flow several small, fast-moving rivers that pass through mineral-rich country on their way to the central valley. The result is rugged but agriculturally rich land with a handful of forests. The area of the region is 4,400 square kilometers. That it is a mountainous area is indicated by the fact that, on average, the region is 1,100 meters above sea level. The capital is Stepanakert, which in practice is the capital of the unrecognized Republic of Artsakh.

The region does not directly border Armenia, but it is connected to it through the Lachin Corridor – a mountain pass that has been under the control of Russian peacekeeping forces since the end of 2020. The natural environment varies from the steppe in the lowlands to dense forests of oak, hornbeam and beech on the lower mountain slopes to birch forest and alpine meadows. The region has numerous resources such as mineral springs and deposits of zinc, coal, lead, gold, marble and limestone. Relatively close, somewhat further north, important oil and gas pipelines from the direction of Azerbaijan to Turkey and the European Union pass, therefore the energy importance of the province is visible. Any conflict threatens to disrupt Europe’s oil and gas supply.

The Ottoman, Persian and Russian Empires have long considered Nagorno-Karabakh as part of the Caucasus Mountains, which formed a natural barrier against the attacks of other powers. The province has been home to Armenian Christians and Azeri Muslims since ancient times. Depending on which great power had power, it favored one nation at the expense of another. This helped build a firm enmity between the two very related Caucasian peoples. In the 19th century, the region was ruled by Tsarist Russia, which granted privileges to Armenians. That is why the Armenian Orthodox Christian population grew, while the number of Muslims continuously decreased, and they fled to Iran and Turkey. The Russian census of 1897 revealed that Nagorno-Karabakh was home to 43% Armenians and 55% Azeris.

The tension between the two nations grew under Russian rule. Pogroms claimed the lives of thousands of both nations during the chaotic Russian Revolution of 1905. This happened again on a much larger scale after the collapse of the Russian Empire in 1917. When the newly independent Azerbaijan claimed Nagorno-Karabakh in 1918, the province’s majority Armenian population resisted, forming the Armenian Karabakh National Council. British forces stationed in the region after the end of World War I provided support to Azerbaijan, hoping to break the country away from Soviet influence and gain access to significant oil reserves. Fearing a hostile environment, Karabakh Armenians attacked Azerbaijani garrisons in 1920. In response, the Azerbaijani army razed the Armenian quarter of Shusha, the largest city in the region, and thousands of Armenian civilians were killed.

While the Azerbaijani army was occupying Nagorno-Karabakh, it lost control of Baku in April 1920, which was occupied by the Bolsheviks. By 1921, the entire South Caucasus was under Soviet control. With the departure of the British, there were some indications that Nagorno-Karabakh would be transferred to the Armenian state, but the geopolitical situation changed in early 1921 with the normalization of relations between the USSR and Turkey. As a concession to Turkey (the Turks were afraid of a strong Armenian state), the province was incorporated into the Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic as an autonomous province. This was foreseen by the Turkish-Soviet agreement on the normalization of relations.

However, it did not go smoothly either. The Soviet authorities formed the Kavburo (a seven-member commission for the South Caucasus) which on July 4, 1921 made a controversial decision to include Nagorno-Karabakh in the Armenian SSR! However, the very next day there was a protest by Azeri comrades, so Stalin only confirmed what had already been agreed with the Turks that the province would remain part of Azerbaijan. Stalin did not invent anything new, but only confirmed the observance of historical borders. Finally, a decree from Baku in July 1923 defined the province as part of the autonomous province of the Azerbaijan SSR. Nagorno-Karabakh received broad regional autonomy, the center was in Shusha, which was later transferred to Stepanakert.

The borders of the province were drawn to include Armenian villages and to exclude as many Azerbaijani ones as possible. However, the emigration of Azerbaijanis continued and by 1926 the province was 94% Armenian. The seasonal presence of Azeris in the region was further reduced during the collectivization campaigns of the 1930s. All this helped strengthen Armenian aspirations for territory.

The Armenian majority in the province soon resented what they saw as excessive Azerbaijani influence. Although the autonomous provinces in the Soviet Union were granted wide cultural and linguistic freedom, Armenian language teachers in Azerbaijan could study in Stepanakert or Baku, but Azerbaijani officials never gave them permission to study in the Armenian capital of Yerevan. The residents of Nagorno-Karabakh demanded greater autonomy, but the authorities of Soviet Azerbaijan persistently refused. Armenian birth rates began to decline and many left the region to work in larger cities. The rural population of the area was once again taking on an Azerbaijani character, aided by the republican government from Baku, which encouraged Azerbaijani settlement.

By 1979, Nagorno-Karabakh was approximately 25% Azerbaijani. This change exacerbated tensions again. Armenian and Azerbaijani historians at this time also began to propagate radically different views of the history and culture of the region, setting the stage for the coming conflict. That conflict would have to wait until the USSR entered its final phase of existence under Mikhail Gorbachev in the late 1980s. It should be noted that despite the ethnic tensions, as long as the USSR was strong, the province lived in peace.

Gorbachev’s policy of glasnost put the wind behind Karabakh secessionist demands for unification with Armenia in 1988. Later that year, ethnic conflicts erupted, and anti-Armenian riots claimed many lives in the Azerbaijani cities of Baku and Sumgait. Attacks on Azeris took place in Nagorno-Karabakh and then spread to Armenia. Moscow placed the province under a state of emergency in the winter of 1988, but the weakening Soviet state could do little to reconcile the two sides. The incidents became even more violent and by November 1989 the Soviets had come to terms with the situation, lifting the state of emergency without a clear peace plan.

The situation spiraled out of control after Azerbaijan declared independence from the USSR in October 1991, and Nagorno-Karabakh declared independence from Azerbaijan in December 1991 following a referendum in which 99% of voters opted for independence. Azeris boycotted the referendum. Armenia supported the secessionist aspirations of its compatriots, however, with the collapse of the USSR, the republic’s borders became interstate borders, so the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh became an internal issue of Azerbaijan. However, Armenia intervened and civil war between the two new nations began.

From the beginning of 1992 to the beginning of 1994, the first war for Nagorno-Karabakh was fought. An additional impetus to the war was given by the expulsion of the population: Armenians from Azerbaijan and Azeris from Armenia. Armenian troops focused their forces on Agdam, Fuzuli and Jabrayil districts. After a siege and heavy fighting, the Armenians captured Agdam and then Fuzuli and Jabrayil. These are strategically very important areas between Nagorno-Karabakh and the border with Iran.

At the same time, the Armenians consolidated control over the key Lachin Corridor, which connects the disputed region with Armenia. Although at the end of 1993, Azerbaijani troops launched a counter-offensive, it failed and did not bring significant progress. Through the mediation of the Russian Federation, a truce was signed in May 1994 in the Kyrgyz capital, Bishkek. At that moment, Armenian troops controlled 14% of Azerbaijan.

The result was an Armenian victory, that is, control over the disputed province as well as seven additional border regions of Azerbaijan that were used as buffer zones around Nagorno-Karabakh. Between 15,000 and 20,000 people, including civilians, are estimated to have been killed during the fighting and hundreds of thousands displaced. About 200,000 Armenians left Azerbaijan, and 185,000 Azerbaijanis fled Armenia. 50 thousand Azeris left Nagorno-Karabakh and an additional 500 thousand fled from the Azerbaijani provinces occupied by the Armenian army. Numerous foreign mercenaries and/or volunteers from Ukraine, Russia and beyond took part in the war. Between 1,500 and 2,500 Afghan Mujahideen and Chechen fighters participated on the Azeri side. Both sides made extensive use of Russian weapons and equipment.

For the next twenty years, a fragile peace followed, in which both sides were still considered enemies, and the truce would occasionally be violated. The issue of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh continued to dominate the political life of both countries. At least two Armenian prime ministers came from that province, which has taken an important place in the Armenian identity – it is even presented as the “Armenian paradise”. Unlike them, the Azerbaijani government continued to remind its population of the conflict and problems caused by the Armenian occupation of the south of the country.

This was followed by diplomatic efforts of the international community for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. Back in 1992, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) created the Minsk Group in order to find a diplomatic solution. In 1996 in Lisbon, the co-chairs of the Minsk Group became Russia, France and the USA, which took over the leadership of the peace process. The group proposed ending the Armenian occupation of seven Azerbaijani regions and granting autonomy to Nagorno-Karabakh out of respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of both Azerbaijan and Armenia.

The plan was to give the disputed province the greatest degree of autonomy in exchange for its remaining in Azerbaijan. Also, care was always taken of the return of displaced persons. The plans failed in 1996 and 1997 due to Armenian opposition as the Armenians did not want to give up the stolen parts of Azerbaijani territory. In 1999, under the auspices of the Minsk Group, the Armenian-Azerbaijani negotiations continued in the USA, but there were no results.

Diplomatic mediations continued in Prague in April 2004. That and the following year, 11 meetings of representatives of the two countries were held, but no peace agreement was reached. In 2006, it seemed that there might be a convergence of views, but the negotiations in Rambouillet and Bucharest ended ingloriously. In November 2007, negotiations were held in Madrid. The so-called Madrid principles: the withdrawal of Armenian troops from Azerbaijan, the granting of autonomy to Nagorno-Karabakh within Azerbaijan, free access to the Lachin corridor, the right of refugees to return, etc.

In December 2009, a joint statement was adopted by the Minsk Group and the foreign ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia, which stated on progress in the adoption of the “Madrid principles”. In October 2010, in Astrakhan, the two presidents agreed to exchange prisoners and enable the return of the remains of those killed. Commitment to a peaceful solution was reaffirmed. However, all these efforts of the Minsk Group and other mediators did not yield concrete results. In April 2016, a four-day war broke out on Azeri initiative, as they were annoyed by the failure of diplomacy. Territorial changes were minor and losses were suffered by both.

Tensions continued in an extremely uneasy geopolitical atmosphere between the West and the East. In July 2020, Armenian forces attacked the city of Tovuz in Azerbaijan, which is of strategic importance as it is located on important energy routes. The conflict motivated the Azeri side to try to improve the situation on the battlefield in their favor with a major offensive. At the end of September 2020, the six-week Second War for Nagorno-Karabakh began, in which Azerbaijan won a significant victory. Thanks to Russian diplomacy, the war ended on November 10.

Baku returned all occupied territories outside the disputed region as well as parts of Nagorno-Karabakh, including the culturally significant city of Shusha. Approximately two thousand Russian soldiers are deployed as peacekeepers along the Lachin Corridor with a mandate of at least five years. The war was marked by the use of drones, sensors, long-range heavy artillery and rocket attacks, as well as state propaganda. The UN strongly condemned the war, but this did not stop its duration.

The war of 2020 brought changes in favor of Azerbaijan, but the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh still remains relevant. There still exists the internationally unrecognized Republic of Artsakh on 3,100 square kilometers, which is isolated from the world except Armenia. An illegal Armenian entity still exists in the heart of Azerbaijan. The population is 99.7% Armenian, and the primary language is Armenian. The region is connected to Armenia via the narrow Lachin Corridor.

The international community called for a peaceful solution to the conflict through negotiations, but the US, Russia and China remained mostly neutral without taking more concrete steps. Azerbaijan, now that it has the strong support of Turkey after the armistice, remains a far more powerful country. Admittedly, recently, while Armenia is ruled by a pro-Western government in principle with Nikola Pashinyan, the USA is trying to support the Armenians, but concrete results have not been seen yet.

In recent months, the situation has been heating up even more. March and April of this year saw sporadic clashes, the deadliest since a brief escalation in September 2022 when Armenian officials said Azerbaijan had killed 105 of their officers and Azerbaijanis reported 71 of its forces were killed. Since December 2022, the Laca corridor has been blocked by activists under the guise of environmental protection, but actually for political reasons.

The blockade generates severe consequences for the population. The import of food, fuel and medicine was blocked, and 120 thousand inhabitants of the province were captured, creating a humanitarian crisis. Shortages of food, medicine and electricity are widespread. Armenia’s foreign ministry said the checkpoints were a “flagrant violation” of the 2020 ceasefire agreement. It called on Russian peacekeepers in Nagorno-Karabakh to “eliminate the illegal blockade” and ensure the withdrawal of Azerbaijani forces.

With Russia preoccupied with Ukraine, the EU has taken a leading role in mediating between Armenia and Azerbaijan in the last two years, and for good reason: success in stabilizing the South Caucasus would pay off economically. That is it would mitigate the negative consequences of sanctions against Russia, as Azerbaijan could easily become the main supplier of oil and gas to the EU. At the strategic level, the EU does not need new wars in the neighborhood, but peace. President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev and Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan spoke on May 14 in Brussels, hosted by Charles Michel, President of the European Council. In the coming weeks, it is planned that additional talks will follow in other countries of the East and West, but the question is whether they will bring concrete progress. Even if something is agreed upon, it is questionable whether and how it will be implemented on the field. A good example is the Israeli-Palestinian agreements, for example, from Oslo in 1993, which were never implemented on the ground.

Whatever solution is agreed upon for Nagorno-Karabakh, it is important that it be of a peaceful character. Neither side has the ability to unilaterally defeat the other and get what they want. No one can carry out their Opeation Storm like Croatia in 1995. The only rational solution is to respect the international borders of Azerbaijan and the peaceful reintegration of the disputed region into the constitutional and legal order of Azerbaijan. At the same time, Armenians should receive all possible rights as a national minority and Nagorno Karabakh as a majority Armenian province. A good example is the successful reintegration of the Croatian Danube region from 1996 to 1998 under the supervision of the UN.

The province could be given a high degree of autonomy like the German-majority South Tyrol in Italy or the Swedish autonomous province of Åland within Finland. A good example is the rights of cantons in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina according to the original Washington Agreement. In any case, demilitarization should be started, political autonomy should be granted to Nagorno-Karabakh, and the political, cultural, linguistic and religious rights of minorities should be institutionally ensured. The agreement should be created by the representatives of the Azerbaijani and Armenian people, not EU bureaucrats or bureaucrats from America, Russia or Turkey. There are exceptions, but most of them are arrogant foreigners who primarily look at their own promotion. After all, it is unthinkable that the EU, USA or Turkey were shaped by foreign diplomatic negotiators. Foreigners can only be mediators and never tutors. When Armenians and Azeris realize that they are directed at each other more than at anyone else, the solution will be in sight.

CSI launches social media campaign for Armenians threatened by genocide

May 30 2023

As Azerbaijan tightens noose around Armenians, “The Cost of Silence” campaign seeks to mobilize support

ZURICH, SWITZERLAND, May 30, 2023/EINPresswire.com/ — Human rights group Christian Solidarity International is launching a month-long social media campaign, entitled “The Cost of Silence,” on Tuesday, May 30, to highlight the growing threat of genocide faced by Armenian Christians in Nagorno Karabakh and the Republic of Armenia.

The campaign grew out of a fact-finding mission to southern Armenia in late March this year. A CSI team traveled to several villages on the tense Armenia-Azerbaijan border, where they were able to meet with Armenian families displaced from Karabakh by Azerbaijan’s 2020 invasion and ethnic cleansing campaign, as well as survivors of Azerbaijan’s 2022 assault on the Republic of Armenia.

The night before the CSI team arrived in the region, Azerbaijani forces occupied 110 hectares of Armenian farmland nearby. Two weeks after their visit, on April 11 the same villages they visited were bombarded by the Azerbaijani military.

“The Cost of Silence” seeks to share the stories of these Armenians with a wide audience. People who interact with the campaign will have the opportunity to sign a pledge of solidarity with Armenian Christians under attack, calling on their governments to do everything in their power to break Azerbaijan’s siege. They will also be directed to a range of advocacy resources to take action on behalf of the Armenians.

The region of Nagorno Karabakh, where 120,000 Armenian Christians live, has been under siege by the dictatorship of Azerbaijan since December 12. Azerbaijan has blocked the only road connecting the region to the Republic of Armenia, and thus to the rest of the world. It has also cut gas and electricity lines into the region. A humanitarian disaster is in the making.

In 2020, Azerbaijan launched a full-scale war against Nagorno Karabakh, killing thousands, driving tens of thousands of Armenians out of their homes, and committing numerous war crimes against civilians and captured soldiers. In September 2022, Azerbaijan launched a two-day assault on the Republic of Armenia itself.

Azerbaijan’s dictator, Ilham Aliyev, has referred to Armenians as “dogs,” “rats,” and “humanoid creatures,” and pledged to “drive them out of our lands” – which according to Aliyev, includes not only Nagorno Karabakh, but nearly all of the Republic of Armenia itself.

Christian Solidarity International (CSI) and other human rights organizations have issued a Genocide Warning for Armenian Christians in Nagorno Karabakh.
CSI’s campaign webpage for “The Cost of Silence” can be visited at: www.csi-int.org/campaigns/karabakh/the-cost-of-silence/

Contact: Joel Veldkamp | [email protected]

CSI is an interconfessional Christian human rights organization, campaigning for religious liberty and human dignity.

Joel Veldkamp
Christian Solidarity International
email us here
Visit us on social media:
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram

CSI's Joel Veldkamp discusses the looming threat of potential genocide in Armenia.

https://www.einnews.com/pr_news/636409504/csi-launches-social-media-campaign-for-armenians-threatened-by-genocide

Overcoming the Challenges of Transitional Mobilization

May 31 2023

Tuesday, May 30, 2023 / BY: Suha Hassen;  Jonathan Pinckney

Nonviolent action can be a powerful way to bring about peaceful transitions from autocratic rule to democracy. But even when initially successful, movement leaders often face significant challenges, from frustrations that grievances are not addressed quickly enough to counterrevolutions aimed at restoring the authoritarian status quo. This report examines two recent transitions—the 2011 Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia and Armenia’s 2018 Velvet Revolution—and presents recommendations for improving the likelihood that change initiated through nonviolent action leads to robust and lasting democracy.

Political transitions that originate in nonviolent action campaigns are more likely to lead to democracy than transitions that originate through other means. Yet even political transitions that begin with this democratizing advantage face several challenges along the uncertain road to democracy. The organizers, activists, and political parties that unified to initiate the transition often face pressure to fragment into competing factions, a dynamic that can lead to outbreaks of violence. Previously independent civil society forces must decide whether and how to engage with the transitional government, which may deprive them of critical leadership and temper the transformative character of their demands. And actors across the political spectrum must balance retaining autonomy with accepting external support from foreign donors and aid organizations.

A growing literature and the examples of two recent cases, the 2011–2014 transition in Tunisia, the so-called Jasmine Revolution, and the 2018 transition in Armenia, the Velvet Revolution, serve to illustrate these challenges. While the details differ from case to case, an overarching finding is that the challenges, and hence their solutions, are embedded in the kinds of relationships activist movements develop internally and with civil society, the transitional government, and external actors. This schema provides a way for activists and supporters to understand better how to respond to and mitigate disruptions that could threaten the success of a transition, particularly preventing outbreaks of violence.

The actionable recommendations provided in this report emphasize excellent communication among the different actors, shared strategies for engagement among activist groups, and clarity in the roles external partners may play, all as means to improve the likelihood of achieving a robust and lasting post-transition democracy.

Among activists and civil society actors, the report recommends developing dense networks of communication, expanding tactical repertoires to include tactics that have lower risks of violent escalation, and pursuing contention through systematized, structured interactions that lower the stakes of any single political struggle. For the relationship between activists and transitional governments, the report recommends fostering a wide spectrum of civil society–government interactions, from confrontational to cooperative, to build the capacity of transitional governments to bring about political reforms while maintaining external accountability structures to ensure they will do so. Finally, for the relationship between civil society activists and international actors, the report emphasizes the importance of local autonomy and providing types of support (particularly training and convening) that allow local actors to be the primary drivers of transitional reforms.

Civic engagement and mobilization vary in political transitions that originate in nonviolent action, with ramifications for long-term peace and democracy. This report provides recommendations for resolving common challenges that arise during the transition period, drawing on insights from the 2011 Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia and the 2018 Velvet Revolution in Armenia. The report was funded through an interagency agreement between the United States Institute of Peace and the Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance Center at USAID.

Suha Hassen is a PhD candidate at George Mason University and a research analyst for the Nonviolent Action program at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP). Jonathan Pinckney is the director of applied research at the Horizons Project and a former senior researcher with the Nonviolent Action program at USIP.

EU expects Armenia and Azerbaijan to reiterate political will to normalize relations

Save

 13:31, 1 June 2023

CHISINAU, JUNE 1, ARMENPRESS. President of the European Council Charles Michel has expressed hope that during the upcoming June 1 meeting in Chisinau Armenia and Azerbaijan will once again reiterate political will to normalize relations.

“This important meeting will take place today,” Michel told reporters during the opening of the 2nd European Political Community Summit in Chisinau when asked on his expectations from the Armenia-Azerbaijan summit, where Michel himself will participate together with the German and French leaders. “I’ve had the occasion to meet with the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan in Brussels a few weeks ago. We had some progress. And I hope this will once again be a chance to reiterate common political will to normalize relations between the two countries,” he said.