Perspectives | Dam building on the Kura-Aras and water tensions in the Caucasus

 eurasianet 
Dec 28 2021

Nareg Kuyumjian Dec 28, 2021

Lake Azat, near Yerevan, was built in 1976. (iStock)

Among many other threats, global climate change promises unprecedented water variability in the South Caucasus. The region is facing increasingly erratic rainfall and snowmelt, which is endangering drinking supplies, agricultural output, and hydropower generation.

This is made still more complicated by the fact that the region’s water flows across the borders of countries with already tense relations.

The region receives the large majority of its fresh water from the transboundary Kura and Aras rivers, which both originate in Turkey and flow into the Caucasus. As the most upstream actor, Turkey has responded to climate-induced water variability by building dams that can capture as much of the water supply as possible before it flows outside its borders. This dam development is coming at the expense of downstream water users in the Caucasus.

Usually, when talking about Turkey’s dam development, the Tigris-Euphrates river basin gets most of the attention. Over the past 50 years, Turkey's State Hydraulic Works (known by its Turkish acronym DSI) has built 22 dams and 19 hydropower plants on the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, as part of its multi-billion dollar Southeast Anatolia Project (GAP). The GAP’s effect on downstream rivers has left large parts of Syria and Iraq in severe drought, increasing Ankara’s leverage over its Middle Eastern neighbors and particularly threatening Kurdish political movements in Syria, among other strategic geopolitical considerations.

Similar effects could be in store for the South Caucasus.

Over the last two decades, the DSI also has been damming water resources on both the Kura and Aras rivers. On the Kura, DSI is pursuing the Kura Project Master Plan, which was launched with the aim of increasing irrigated lands in the Ardahan province, near the border with Georgia, from 3,000 to 51,000 hectares. As shown in the map below, the plan envisages five major dams along the upper Kura. The Besikkaya Dam (map; 4) is expected to be the largest upstream dam on the Kura at 107 meters and with a carrying capacity of 211.6 million cubic meters. This has particularly raised concerns both among local activists and downstream in Azerbaijan.

Caption: Dam (completion date): (1) Demirdoven (1995); (2) Soylemez (planned) ; (3) Durancam (NA); (4) Besikkaya (planned); (5) Karakurt (2020); (6) Bayburt (2003); (7) Koroglu (2017); (8) Kayabeyi (2015); (9) Gurturk (planned); (10) Arpacay/Akhuryan (1980); (11) Arpi (1951); (12) Kaps (planned); (13) Surmalu (planned); (14) Tsalka (1946); (15) Aparan (1968); (16) Algeti (1983); (17) Azat (1976); (18) Vedi (2021). (map by @carte.ophile)

According to activists in the province of Ardahan, Besikkaya would divert 70 percent of the Kura’s water flow to the Coruh River, a transboundary river shared by Turkey and Georgia. The direct impact of the dam on the region’s agriculture and ecology has led activists to oppose construction. Climate-induced water shortages have already led to economic decline in the largely agricultural province, giving Ardahan the third-highest rate of population loss among 81 Turkish provinces between 2000 and 2020.

What’s more, Azerbaijani environmentalists also have pointed to the Besikkaya Dam as a threat to their country’s water security. The dam threatens to lower the level of the Kura in Azerbaijan, thus endangering water supplies for irrigation and drinking water.

Turkey also has substantially increased its dam-building efforts on the upper Aras river. Compared to the projects on the Kura, Turkey has built a greater number of dams on the Aras, though with a lower capacity. From 2012 to 2014, Turkey constructed six hydropower plants on the Aras and is currently planning eight more.

Among the completed projects, the Karakurt and Alp-Aslan 2 projects in the Kars and Mush provinces, respectively, stand out for their proximity to the Armenian border. Downstream actors have already voiced concerns about the Karakurt Dam, which has reduced the Aras’ flow by 1.6 billion cubic meters.

More and potentially larger projects are still in the queue. Among these, the recently announced Soylemez Dam particularly stands out. With a planned height of 113 meters and a carrying capacity of 1.4 billion cubic meters, the project would create the fourth-largest reservoir in Turkey. According to Turkish press reports, construction of the dam is planned to begin in Koprukoy, near the city of Erzurum, as early as 2022.

The consequences of this upstream dam would be felt most strongly in Armenia’s Ararat Valley, the source of 36 percent of Armenia’s agricultural yield. In fact, many of the 21 dams that Armenia is itself planning target exactly that issue, by expanding irrigation capacity for farms in the valley. Compared to those in Turkey, Armenian dams are smaller in scale, with the reservoir of the largest planned project, Kaps, projected at a capacity of 70 million cubic meters, one-twentieth the size of Soylemez.

Georgia has likewise upped its game on dam-building, planning 40 hydropower plants in the coming years. With hydropower representing about 80 percent of its current electricity mix, Georgian dam projects have focused on bolstering the country’s energy independence by reducing its need for gas from Azerbaijan. Of late, the environmental impacts of dam development have made these projects increasingly controversial. But, to date, no major projects have been planned or built on the Kura. The only exception is the Gurturk Dam (map; 9) which is planned to be constructed where the river crosses the Turkish-Georgian border.  

Azerbaijan, the country furthest downstream in the basin, might have something to do with Georgia’s lack of dam development on the Kura. Geographically speaking, Azerbaijan is the most vulnerable to upstream dam development: 76.6 percent of its water originates outside its borders. Accordingly, Azerbaijan has actively negotiated with Georgia over water quality and supply. Baku has been seeking a water treaty with Tbilisi since at least 2013, and efforts are currently underway to finalize a bilateral agreement on how to manage the Kura, under the aegis of the European Union. And while Azerbaijan has sought cooperation on water with Georgia, water has been a key driver of the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

But even as it has attempted to fight against upstream development, Azerbaijan has by far the highest dam capacity on the Kura-Aras: 21,587 million cubic meters, compared to about 10,000 million among Turkey, Armenia, and Georgia combined. The country is home to the four-largest reservoirs in the basin: Mingachevir (1.57 billion cubic meters), Shamkir (268 million cubic meters), Khudaferin (161 million cubic meters), and Aras (135 million cubic meters). This clear imbalance in water catchment, paired with climate-induced water variability, will likely place water on the regional agenda for decades to come.

Water usage on the Kura-Aras is currently regulated by Soviet-legacy central planning norms not well suited to the variability that climate change poses. In the post-Soviet era, outdated treaties signed bilaterally between Turkey and the USSR don’t take into account downstream interests and pose enforceability challenges. Instead, dam development in the basin has been left to direct state-to-state negotiation.

Turkey has benefited the most from this hydroanarchic status quo. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Turkey has built the largest dams in the region and has been the least compliant with international water law among the Kura-Aras basin countries, failing to participate in five of the eight international agreements regulating regional water use. In fact, Turkey was one of only three countries to vote against the 1997 UN Watercourses Convention, which serves as the primary source of international water law.

As dam-building and climate-induced water variability continue to stress regional resources, the countries around the Caucasus will look for ways to use – or avoid – international law to effectively manage the Kura-Aras basin.

And as the region moves toward a new status quo following last year’s war, hydropolitics will likely be a vital agenda item in any negotiation format.

 

Read part 1 of this series.

 

Nareg Kuyumjian is a recent graduate of Georgetown University’s Walsh School of Foreign Service with a B.S. in International Relations and a certificate in Eurasian, Russian and Eastern European Studies. 

Turkish press: Railway from liberated areas to Armenian border to be ready late 2023

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev attends a joint press conference with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in Brussels, Belgium, Dec. 14 2021. (EPA Photo)

Arailway line from the liberated Azerbaijani territories to the Armenian border is expected to be ready toward the end of 2023, President Ilham Aliyev said on Sunday, indicating that Baku already started work.

“We hope that by that time, Armenia will complete their part of the homework,” Aliyev said, speaking about his meeting with Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian and European Council President Charles Michel last week.

“After the Second Karabakh War, there is an opportunity to open a new corridor everywhere, called the Zangezur Corridor,” Aliyev elaborated, referring to the corridor that will go from Azerbaijan to Armenia and then to Azerbaijan’s Nakhchivan autonomous republic, and from there to Turkey and Europe.

This will be an alternative route for transportation, the president added.

“Plus, we are actively working on the creation of the free zone close to Baku in the Alat district, which will be in operation next year and we hope that this geographic location and already diversified transportation network will help us attract investors who would prefer to work there.”

As stipulated in last November's cease-fire agreement, Azerbaijan and Armenia have been working on reopening regional transit lines.

Azerbaijan has focused on projects in the Zangezur corridor. Zangezur was part of Azerbaijan, but in the 1920s the Soviets gave the region to Armenia. After this move, Azerbaijan lost its link with Nakhchivan and some parts of the railway between the two countries were destroyed.

Meanwhile, in another step toward reconciliation, Azerbaijan handed over 10 more captive soldiers to Armenia upon the initiative of the EU, Baku's State Security Service said on Sunday.

In a statement, the agency said the soldiers were detained while attempting a provocation in the Kalbajar border region on Nov. 16.

Citing a recent trilateral meeting in Brussels on Tuesday initiated by Michel with the participation of Aliyev and Pashinian, the statement further said that the detainees were handed over as "a manifestation of (Azerbaijan's) commitment to the principles of humanism" and "through the mediation of the European Union."

"Warmly welcome Baku's release of 10 Armenian detainees in follow up to discussions with @azpresident and @NikolPashinyan," Michel wrote in a tweet on Sunday.

"An important humanitarian gesture demonstrating the mutual will to strengthen confidence as discussed in Brussels. EU facilitated transfer to Yerevan."

Azerbaijan had already handed over 10 prisoners to Yerevan on Dec. 4 following Russia-mediated talks, in the first concrete sign of a decrease in tensions since last month's fighting, which killed 13 people.

Those were the worst clashes along the shared border since a six-week war last year over Nagorno-Karabakh that claimed more than 6,500 lives.

Turkish press: Islam’s reformists: Jamal al-Din al-Afghani and Pan-Islamism

Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, circa 1883. (WikiMedia Commons Photo)

Italian freemason Giuseppe Mazzini, a member of the Carbonari – an informal network of secret revolutionary societies – formed a political union called Giovane Italia (Young Italy) in the 19th century to create a national republic.

This revolutionary organization born in Italy begot the likes of Young Germany, Young Poland, Young France, Young Ireland, Young Serbs, Young Arabs, Young Ottomans (Young Turks), Young Egypt and more in different countries.

Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a notable member of Young Egypt, lived in the Jewish neighborhood of Cairo. He was born in Iran. His family was Babi, a religion founded by Sayyed Ali Muḥammad Shirazi with roots in Shiism.

Al-Afghani studied in Karbala – in modern day Iraq – and traveled to Afghanistan and India, where he worked as a spy for Russia. He introduced himself as an Istanbulite, eventually ending up there, where he gave lectures at Istanbul University thanks to Hasan Tahsini, or Hoca Tahsin Efendi, a member of the Young Ottomans.

However, the masonic messages he included in his lectures disturbed Muslims. Finally, he was expelled from the city when he said that prophethood was an art that could be learned through studying, just like philosophy.

After leaving Istanbul, al-Afghani came to Egypt in 1871. He taught philosophy at Al-Azhar University. But here, too, he was accused of being irreligious and had to leave the university. He continued his lessons in his own home. The most famous of his students was Muhammad Abduh.

Al-Afghani, who entered many Masonic lodges in Cairo, also became the leader of a lodge called the Star of the East, which was under the United Grand Lodge of England. The members of the lodge included the likes of Tewfik Pasha, son of Isma'il Pasha who was the Khedive (Viceroy) of Egypt, and Abduh. Al-Afghani's friends were all freemasons. The most famous of these was Yaqub Sanu. Sanu, an Italian Jew, met the Carbonari in Italy and came to Egypt to spread Mazzini's ideas.

Muhammad Abduh (C) with Ali Kemal (C-L) the grandfather of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, in Paris, France. (Photo courtesy of Mehmet Hasan Bulut)

Young Egypt openly took a front against Khedive Isma'il. They formed a secret society of low-ranking fellah (peasant) officers of the Egyptian army. They sought an Egyptian Napoleon to lead the society and they found the man they were looking for in a naive officer named Ahmed ʻUrabi, who resembled Turkey's Enver Pasha.

The Young Egyptians provoked the military students, causing Europe to intervene. Upon the pressure, Khedive Isma'il left his homeland, giving up his throne to his son Tewfik. Thus, al-Afghani's mission in Egypt was completed. Because he did not believe in a creator, he was expelled from the Masonic lodge he was leading and sent to India. But his heart was at ease as he left Abduh behind.

Abduh met English spy Wilfrid Scawen Blunt in 1881. Blunt was traveling through Ottoman lands seeking a humanist reform of Islam and to drive the Turks out of Arabia. When he saw Abduh in Egypt, he realized that he had found the most suitable candidate for his mission. He bought a large piece of land outside Cairo, established a farm there and settled there with Abduh.

With the arrival of Blunt, the Young Egypt society was revived. Their purpose: separating Egypt, which they wished to turn into a republic, from the Ottomans. But Blunt's main goal was to use the Young Egyptians to enable England to invade Egypt and make the African country the center of Islamic reform under British auspices.

The Young Egyptians, through ‘Urabi Pasha, provoked the soldiers into revolt and formed a nationalist regime by staging a coup against the government. Britain, waiting for this moment, invaded Egypt, using the financial policies of the Nationalists and the uprisings as an excuse.

After the occupation of Egypt, al-Afghani, Abduh and Sanu met in Paris. They published a newspaper called Al-Urwah al-Wuthqa (The Firmest Bond). By spreading the newspaper throughout the Islamic world, they called for Islamic unity against British imperialism. But they were secretly engaged in activities to break up the unity of Islam and take the caliphate from the Turks. On the other hand, in the articles they sent to French journals, they accused all religions, including Islam, of hindering science, free thought and progress.

Al-Afghani also would host old friends like Helena Petrovna Blavatsky – the leading theoretician of Theosophy – in his Paris apartment. Russian-born Madam Blavatsky had founded the Theosophical Society in New York in 1875. They believed that there was a perennial philosophy called “Ancient Wisdom” that served as the basis of all religions and beliefs in the world, and that religions emerged as a result of its falsification. They wanted to lay the foundation of the Universal Brotherhood of Humanity by uniting all people in this wisdom, regardless of race, color or creed. The reason for their visiting al-Afghani was to talk about one of Al-Afghani's disciples, namely Muhammad Ahmad, who had declared himself the Mahdi and led a rebellion in Sudan.

Al-Afghani, who went to London in July 1885, stayed at Blunt's house for three months. Blunt wanted to meet with Sultan Abdülhamid for him to lead the religious reform project, but the sultan, who was a sincere devotee, did not accept him or his offer. Blunt and Al-Afghani talked about the transfer of the caliphate to the Arabs. Al-Afghani said he once offered it to the Sharif of Mecca. But the Sharif refused, saying that this was impossible without armed support and that the Arabs would unite only in the name of religion and not in the name of nationalism.

Blunt also brought his guest Al-Afghani to meet with his friend Lord Randolph Churchill, who was the Secretary of State for India. He told Churchill what al-Afghani had done in Egypt and India and said, “He is in the black book of everyone here, and an enemy of England. But if he was not he would be of no use to us.”

Al-Afghani, who left England with his new duty, went to Iran. Al-Afghani's home in Iran soon became the center of the opposition to Naser al-Din Shah Qajar, the shah of Iran. Thereupon, the shah expelled him.

Al-Afghani returned to London again in the summer of 1891. Together with the Armenian master of the Iranian masons, Mirza Melkum Khan, or Joseph Melkumyan, they began to publish works to overthrow the Shah. Professor Edward G. Browne, who had close ties with the Babis, joined them. They sent letters to Iranian scholars opposing the tobacco concession given to the British. In their newspaper Qanun, they accused the Iranian government of selling the country to “some foreign Jews.”

A report on al-Afghani submitted to Sultan Abdülhamid said: “Sheikh Jamal al-Din is one of the elders of the Babi Society and a bandit, and he is a man who is not respected or trusted by any party. And the aforementioned person has relations and secret communications with the Masonic society and Armenian committees and the Young Turks organization.”

Sultan Abdülhamid kept his friends close to him and his enemies closer. The Sultan, who closely followed the works of this turbaned revolutionary, invited him to Istanbul. His purpose was to keep this revolutionary under control, as he was inciting the Arab sheikhs to revolt against the Turks with the articles he wrote. Al-Afghani accepted the invitation, thinking that he could persuade Sultan Abdülhamid, the charismatic leader of the Islamic world, to reform.

Sultan Abdülhamid placed al-Afghani, whom he wanted keep in his sight, in a guesthouse in Nişantaşı, close to Yıldız Palace. Through his spies, he had al-Afghani's every step and his meetings with the Babis followed closely. When the pressure on him increased, al-Afghani wanted to leave Istanbul with a British visa. He claimed that he was an Afghan national, thus under British protection. But the Sultan did not allow this.

While in custody, al-Afghani was in touch with Melkum Khan through an Ismaili – a person belonging to a sub-sect of Shiite Islam. He convinced his student Mirza Reza Kermani, who came to visit him, to kill the Shah. Mirza Reza was a Babi who made propaganda in favor of the Young Turks in Iran. Having received al-Afghani's endorsement, he returned to Iran and killed the Shah in May 1896.

After the assassination, al-Afghani was no longer allowed to publish or talk to people in any way. Al-Afghani, who had jaw cancer, died in the arms of his Christian servant in 1897. He was buried in Istanbul's Nişantaşı. John D. Rockefeller's friend and head of the Robert College board of trustees in Istanbul, Charles R. Crane, built a beautiful tomb for him years later.

After leaving his master al-Afghani, Abduh devoted himself to reform in religion. He quickly climbed the career ladder in Egypt, where he returned to in 1889. After serving as judge in the city of Benha, he was appointed head of the administration of the Al-Azhar University in 1895. Despite the fierce opposition of the conservative ulama (scholars) of Al-Azhar and Khedive Abbas, who knew him for a long time, with the support of the British he implemented the religious reforms he had always wanted and reorganized the Al-Azhar curriculum.

Abduh, together with his Syrian student Muḥammad Rashid Riḍa, began publishing the newspaper Al-Manar in 1898. They wrote a commentary on the Quran based on Darwin's theory of evolution and technical and other scientific developments of the time, such as the telephone, radio and microscope, and interpreted the verses accordingly.

At Blunt's request, the Governor of Egypt, Lord Cromer, dismissed the former mufti (Islamic jurist), who had opposed the reforms, and made Abduh chief mufti of Egypt in 1899. Abduh, who remained in this position until his death in 1905, trained many reformist students, especially Rashid Rida.

Blunt, in his book “The Future of Islam” published in 1882, emphasized the importance of reforming Islam for the Humanist New World Order.

“The main point is, that England should fulfill the trust she has accepted of developing, not destroying, the existing elements of good in Asia. She cannot destroy Islam, nor dissolve her own connection with her. Therefore, in God's name, let her take Islam by the hand and encourage her boldly in the path of virtue. This is the only worthy course, and the only wise one, wiser and worthier, I venture to assert, than a whole century of crusade,” Blunt wrote.

Thanks to the reforms that were to be made, the Turks would move away from their religion.

“It will be a strange revenge of history if the Ottoman Turks, whom Europe has for so many centuries held to be the symbolic figure of Mohammedanism (Islam), shall one day cease to be Mohammedan (Muslim). Yet it is a revenge our children or our grandchildren may well live to see.”

With Blunt’s support, al-Afghani and Abduh founded modern pan-Islamism and left many followers in the Islamic world. Some of those influenced by al-Afghani include:

Hassan al-Banna, founder of Muslim Brothers and member of Jama'iyyat al-Shubban al-Muslimeen (Young Muslims Society); Indian poet Muhammad Iqbal; activist Abul Kalam Azad; Pakistan's founder Muhammad Ali Jinnah; philosopher Fazlur Rahman, whose Islamic reform works in the 1950s and 60s were funded by Rockefeller and the Ford Foundation; Bosnian leader Alija Izetbegovic, who was also a member of Mladi Muslimani (Young Muslims); Young Turks' Namık Kemal, Ziya Gökalp, Said Nursi, Mehmet Akif Ersoy; mason Shaykh al-Islam Musa Kazım; Ismail Hakkı; M. Emin Yurdakul; Ahmet Ağaoğlu; Yusuf Akçura; and Dean of Istanbul University Faculty of Theology Şemseddin Günaltay.

Pashinyan Says Meeting With Erdogan Possible If Envoys’ Talks Successful

SPUTNIK
Dec 24 2021
YEREVAN (Sputnik) – Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said that his meeting with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan would be possible if the talks between the special representatives of the two countries are successful.
Earlier in December, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said that in order to normalise relations with Armenia, the parties would soon mutually appoint special envoys, and charter flights with Yerevan would also be opened. The minister noted that Ankara was considering the applications of Turkish and Armenian airlines for flights Istanbul — Yerevan — Istanbul.
"There is no such idea, no agreement. But if the negotiation process with the participation of Mr. [Deputy Chairman of the Armenian parliament, Armenian Special Representative Ruben] Rubinyan successfully advances and the process matures to this point, then this should be followed by a meeting at a high and the highest level," Pashinyan said during an online press conference.

Armenpress: President of Artsakh discusses a number of issues with representatives of Hadrout region and community heads

President of Artsakh discusses a number of issues with representatives of Hadrout region and community heads

Save

Share

 20:06, 23 December, 2021

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 23, ARMENPRESS. Artsakh Republic President Arayik Harutyunyan received representatives of the Hadrout regional administration and a group of community heads on December 23.

As ARMENPRESS was informed from the press service of the President’s Office, issues related to the population forcibly displaced in the aftermath of the hostilities against Artsakh in 2020, who temporarily sheltered in different settlements of the Republic of Armenia and Artsakh, the process of construction of new settlements for them in the territory of the Artsakh Republic, as well as other issues were on the discussion agenda.

 The Head of the State presented the measures envisaged by the 2022 State budget in that direction, social assistance programs, noting that development programs will be implemented in parallel with them.

“The construction of new settlements for the forcibly displaced people does not mean that the Artsakh authorities are retracting from the demand for the restoration of the territorial integrity. It remains one of the key directions of Artsakh’s foreign policy,” Arayik Harutyunyan said.




Turkish press: Armenia appoints special representative to lead dialogue with Turkey

Armenian national flag flying at the spire of the railway station building in Yerevan, Armenia, Apr. 18, 2018. (Getty Images)

Armenia on Saturday appointed its special representative for dialogue with Turkey, the Armenian Foreign Ministry spokesperson said on Saturday.

“Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly Ruben Rubinyan will be the special representative of the Republic of #Armenia for the process of the dialogue between Armenia and #Turkey,” the spokesperson said on Twitter.

On Wednesday, Turkey appointed Serdar Kılıç, former ambassador to the United States, as a special envoy to discuss steps for the normalization of ties with Armenia.

Kılıç was appointed with the approval of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu said.

Çavuşoğlu said that positive statements for the normalization of relations were recently made from both sides, adding that there is a need to take confidence-building measures.

The borders between the two countries have been closed for decades and diplomatic relations have been on hold.

Armenia and Turkey signed a landmark peace accord in 2009 to restore ties and open their shared border after decades, but the deal was never ratified and ties have remained tense.

Relations between Armenia and Turkey have historically been complicated. Turkey's position on the events of 1915 is that Armenians lost their lives in eastern Anatolia after some sided with the invading Russians and revolted against the Ottoman forces. The subsequent relocation of Armenians resulted in numerous casualties, with massacres by militaries and militia groups from both sides increasing the death toll.

Turkey objects to the presentation of the incidents as "genocide" but describes the 1915 events as a tragedy in which both sides suffered casualties.

Ankara has repeatedly proposed the creation of a joint commission made up of historians from Turkey and Armenia and international experts to tackle the issue.

During the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict last year, Ankara supported Baku and accused Yerevan of occupying Azerbaijan’s territories.

Armen Kotolyan presents details of the meeting between PM Pashinyan and members of “My step” faction

Save

Share

 20:15,

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 16, ARMENPRESS. Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan discussed with the members of the "My Step" faction of the Yerevan Council of Elders the crisis around the Yerevan Mayor and the Yerevan Municipality, ARMENPRESS reports member of the “My step” faction of Yerevan Council of Elders Armen Kotolyan told the reporters.

“There is a political crisis, there are differences in political guidelines; it is already known that it has been a year since Hayk Marutyan left the "Civil Contract" party. We have been trying to find edges for cooperation for nearly a year, but unfortunately we have not succeeded”, Kotolyan said.

He added that soon the faction will issue a statement.

Earlier today, PM Pashinyan had convened a meeting with the members of “My step” faction of Yerevan Council of Elders. According to various media reports, issue of initiating motion of no confidence in Yerevan Mayor Hayk Marutyan was discussed.




CivilNet: “Our mission here is to improve the healing process of wounded soldiers”

CIVILNET.AM

13 Dec, 2021 07:12

Dr. Aram Gazarian, in conversation with Lara Tcholakian, speaks about his mission with the French medical team in Armenia since the 2020 Artsakh War, and about his experience working with French and local medical experts and wounded soldiers. He reflects on the ways in which his inherited family history have played an important role in his childhood as an Armenian in France, and on his existence, his identity, sense of resilience and service for the good. He shares his thoughts on the possibility of transforming pain into good, and the role of having a mission in life that allows us to be open to opportunities, to have a sense of necessity, and hope.

About Aram Gazarian

Dr. Aram Gazarian is Head of the Hand & Upper Limb Surgery Department at Edouard Herriot Hospital in Lyon, France. He led the medical team that performed one of the world’s first double-arm-and-shoulder transplant surgeries in Lyon. He is also Associate Professor at the Lyon Universities in France. He is Vice President of the International Union of the Land & Culture Organizations, and a member of the board of directors of the Armenian Medical Union of France in the Lyon region. Dr. Aram is the author of numerous publications in French journals.

Program overview

Armenian leaders share inherited cultural and historical narratives, memories, life learnings and experiences. Down-to-earth, authentic and mindful conversations preserve the stories and legacies of families, and reflect on the lessons learnt from inherited collective trauma and introspective leadership.

Nagorno Karabakh: thirty years ago the people said Yes to independence but still waiting for freedom

Dec 10 2021

Let’s try to go back in time and understand what really happened in that patch of land in those years. As the territory of Artsakh (historically Armenian) is known it was forcibly incorporated in Azerbaijan in 1921 with the direct interference of Stalin. Later, in 1923 it was incorporated into the Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic as a oblast autonomous. It should be emphasized that, in 1923, 94.4 percent of the population of Artsakh was Armenian and that, as a result of Azerbaijan’s discriminatory, aggressive and violent policy, dropped dramatically.

The turning point was in 1988, when the local parliament of the Nagorno Karabakh Autonomous Oblast passed a resolution calling on Moscow, Yerevan and Baku to withdraw the region from Soviet Azerbaijan and to annex it to Soviet Armenia. Both Moscow and Baku considered it unacceptable.

Read Also

In response to the desire for self-determination of the population of Nagorno Karabakh, the Azerbaijani authorities organized the massacres of the Armenians turning them into military actions. As a solution to the conflict Azerbaijan chose war and not peace. In 1991 Artsakh declared its independence in full compliance with international law. It should be noted that the referendum took place in accordance with existing legal regulations. Two dozen international observers were present on the day of the referendum and later presented their report.

The Armenian population dreamed of being able to realize their rights and being able to choose to be independent. Their will was instead responded with attacks and aggressions. On the day of the referendum, Stepanakert and other Armenian settlements were under constant bombardment, but the determination of the population was so great that nothing could stop the voters. According to data provided by the authorities, ten people were killed and eleven civilians were injured. In fact, the report of two dozen international observers following the referendum stated that the referendum was held “under conditions of armed aggression” by Azerbaijan against Artsakh.

Note that the Azerbaijani population of Nagorno Karabakh refused to participate in the referendum, even if the electoral commission had created the necessary conditions for the conduct of the referendum throughout the territory of the republic, including their settlements. In those years the Azeris living in Artsakh made up about twenty percent of the population and did not participate in the referendum on the orders of Baku.

Read Also

Back in 1991, in the midst of the horror and hatred promoted by the Azerbaijani authorities, the people of Nagorno Karabakh did not hesitate to say yes to independence. For thirty long and uncertain years, the people of this unrecognized republic waited their turn to be able to be free and independent. Thirty years after this referendum, the international community continues to remain impassive and mute. Indifference that is perceived as an insult to humanity, felt particularly strongly exactly one year ago, when Azerbaijan unleashed the war by attacking the entire territory of Nagorno Karabakh. The Azerbaijani authorities spared nothing: scenes of violence, war crimes, use of prohibited weapons, acts of vandalism. The peace treaty signed on November 9 ended the 44-day war won by Azerbaijan in the first place thanks to the military support of Turkey and the involvement of foreign terrorists.

The war is over but not in the memories of the Armenian population. It had a dramatic impact on the physical, social and emotional well-being of the inhabitants but has not taken away the hope of a brighter future, when their undeniable right to self-determination will finally be recognized. When the dust of indifference is blown away, hope always remains and it is possible to understand its true essence only when one decides to act.

* Professor of Italian at the Brusov University of Yerevan and at the American University in Armenia, he collaborates for some Armenian and Italian newspapers

https://d1softballnews.com/nagorno-karabakh-thirty-years-ago-the-people-said-yes-to-independence-but-still-waiting-for-freedom/