Search the Community

Oct 4 2022 Statement on the Western Media Narrative Regarding Azerbaijan’s September 13 Attack on Armenia October 4, 2022 The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention is deeply disturbed by the harmful and often ill-informed media rhetoric used in the coverage of the unilateral unprovoked attack launched against the Republic of Armenia’s sovereign territory by the state of Azerbaijan. Since the beginning of Azerbaijan’s shelling of several eastern Armenian towns on September 13 – in violation of fundamental principles of international and humanitarian law – Western media outlets reporting on the attacks have used terms that downplay, ignore, or make light of Azerbaijani war crimes and the crime of aggression. Western media outlets regularly utilize the same rhetorical devices that were mobilized in the reporting of Serb attacks on Bosniaks and the Hutu Power attacks on Tutsis in the 1990s – rhetoric which reframed genocidal assaults and plans as ancient hatreds and tribalism. Given that Azerbaijan’s actions are militarily, strategically, and diplomatically supported by Turkey, a key NATO member, the Western press should show particular interest in ensuring that this conflict is accurately represented. Much of the present media coverage fails to address the history of the conflict, specifically the complexities of the conflict in the contested territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. Nagorno-Karabakh (“Artsakh” to Armenians) is an ethnic Armenian enclave annexed by force, along with the territory of Nakhichevan, to Azerbaijan at the beginning of the 1920s under Soviet rule. It was formally annexed by Azerbaijan in the 1970s. Although Nagorno-Karabakh, like most of the South Caucasus region, was inhabited by an ethnically mixed population in the 1980s, Armenians have constituted the vast majority of its population for centuries and are considered indigenous to the region. In 1991, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Nagorno-Karabakh authorities held a referendum in which 99% of Artsakh’s population voted for independence from Azerbaijan. Although Nagorno-Karabakh is still currently internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan, its majority Armenian population has claimed independence since 1920 and has been steadily advocating for the recognition of its right to self-determination under international law. In the 1980s, when post-Soviet borders were being contested across the former empire, Azerbaijan violently repressed Artsakhsis who were peacefully advocating for independence. Azerbaijan further launched murderous pogroms against all Amenians living in Azerbaijani cities and towns as part of this repression, which began a process of flight that ended the long historical presence of Armenians in all territory controlled by Azerbaijan outside of Nagorno-Karabakh. In the face of abject brutality, which included a pattern of genocidal atrocities, ethnic Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh were convinced that there would be no respect for Armenian life in post-Soviet Azerbaijan. This started a war over Nagorno-Karabakh that has been ongoing – on and off – since the early 1990s. The first Nagorno-Karabakh war ended with an Armenian victory In 1994, after which Artsakh formally established a republican system of government with division of power in the 1990s. During the war in 2020, during which Azerbaijan committed horrific atrocity crimes against Armenian civilians and POWs, Azerbaijan regained much of the territory lost in 1994. The well-funded Azerbaijani state propaganda campaign, brought to international attention in 2018 with investigative reports of President Ilham Aliev’s “caviar diplomacy” that was a part of the $2.5b “Azerbaijani Laundromat” scheme, continues to present a narrative of Azerbaijani victimization at the hands of racialized Armenian enemies. Much of this narrative is patently false and based on fictitious historical claims. Other aspects of the narrative, such as those around the so-called “Khojaly Genocide” and the “Gugark Massacre,” misleadingly frame and present events in ways meant to conceal Azerbaijan’s intentional stoking of ethnic grievances in the 1980s, its official incitement to violence against Armenians, and its genocidal rhetoric and aims in the region. While Azeris have legitimate grievances, and while this territorial conflict has caused tragic outcomes for Azeris as well as Armenians, there has never been genocidal intent on the part of Armenian statesmen nor has the Armenian state supported any crimes committed by individual Armenians (such as during the Gugark riot or the Khojali war crimes). The ongoing conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh not only has caused the loss of life, but also has resulted in the systematic displacement of the indigenous Armenian population and the destruction of Armenian cultural heritage by Azeri forces in many areas of Artsakh under Azeri control as well as in other regions, such as Nakhichevan, the western Azerbaijan enclave nestled between Armenia and Turkey, where evidence of the historical Armenian presence (represented by ancient khachkars) has been completely eradicated. This massive cultural violence has been compared to vandalism against historical heritage committed by the Taliban in Afghanistan and ISIS in Syria. Not only do Azerbaijani state officials refuse to recognize the long historical presence of Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh while sanctioning the destruction of all traces of this presence, but also they refuse to use the internationally-recognized geographic term “Nagorno-Karabakh,” referring instead to the area only as “Karabakh,” which claims it as an integral part of the eastern Azeri territory of Karabakh. This geographic designation has found itself into Western press reporting, with the consequence of supporting and advancing Azeri expansionist claims. The reporting on the violence against Armenia stands in stark contrast with the reporting on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. At the outbreak of that war, the Western media was clear about which country was the aggressor. They offered in-depth analyses of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s speeches and other evidence of his attitude towards Ukraine and Ukrainians. While the South Caucasus is smaller and more distant from Europe than Ukraine, this is no excuse for ignoring Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliev’s hateful rhetoric, reproducing Azerbaijani propaganda, sowing confusion about causation, and failing to adequately report on the facts on the ground. The Lemkin Institute has identified a number of trends regarding the misleading, and therefore harmful, language used by media outlets regarding the conflict. The term “clash(es)” has been consistently used by the media since the 2020 war over Nagorno-Karabakh. The term itself cannot offer precise clarity about the details of the conflict, and it is often used as a breaking news “buzzword.” Its frequent use suggests that the conflict is playing itself out around incomprehensible issues that resist factual confirmation. For example, an Al Jazeera article from September 15, titled “Death toll in Azerbaijan-Armenia border clashes rises,” has the following subtitle: “United Nations welcomes ceasefire after 176 soldiers killed in two days of fighting, which each side blames on the other.” While it is true that each side blames the other, only one side invaded a sovereign state without provocation. On September 14, CNN ran the story “Ceasefire is short-lived as Azerbaijan and Armenia resume attacks,” which suggests that the decision to engage militarily was mutual, ignoring the spontaneity of Azerbaijan’s attack on the Republic of Armenia. Other short-cut descriptors like “tensions'' and “flare up” suggest equal responsibility for the violence and downplay the severity of an unprovoked attack by a strong adversary with an even stronger regional ally. (See: Times of Israel, 9/14/2022, “Death toll reaches 99 in fresh Armenia-Azerbaijan flareup”.) These words, along with balanced-sounding language like “armed conflict” and “hostilities,” incorrectly frames the actions of the aggressor and are used to imply equal power and assume equal responsibility for the attack. Similarly, several high-ranking diplomats called for “both sides [to] show restraint,” a term which is unfortunately most often invoked after a targeted nation or people responds in self-defense. In the case of the attack on September 13, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken issued a statement with this exact call, speaking up only after Armenia’s act of self-defense. As has been seen in so many other instances of genocide, the fallacy of bothsidesism serves only to support the aggressor party and mask its crimes. Other reporting describes Azerbaijan’s war of aggression against the Republic of Armenia’s sovereign borders as “linked to” the conflict over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh territory, which frames Azerbaijani aggression according to the justifications of the Azeri government. Azerbaijani aggression towards the Republic of Armenia should be analyzed in terms of its own government’s internal rhetoric, which frequently claims that all of present-day Armenia is Azeri land. On this note, there is a concerning number of articles quoting official statements made by the Turkish and Azeri governments that are not fully vetted for potential propaganda and are instead accepted at face value. It is not made clear to readers that Azeri assaults on the Republics of Artsakh and on Armenia are the consequence of an ideology of expansionism shared with and stoked by Turkey, an ideology that the presidents of both countries frequently speak about in public. Several articles also use childish words that are wholly inappropriate for an investigation into a serious decades-long war characterized by genocidal atrocities committed Azerbaijan and blame Armenia for invoking its own invasion (see, for example, “Armenia sides with Russia in snub to Azerbaijan over border fracas by Newsweek, 9/13/2022). A September 13 article published in Politico (“No good outcomes in latest Armenia-Azerbaijan fighting”) referred to the “decadeslong spat over Nagorno-Karabakh” (our emphasis). Finally, the Lemkin Institute is concerned by the number of Western media articles which do little to provide background information on Azerbaijan’s one-sided decision to violate the ceasefire agreement that has been in place since the end of the 44-day war in November of 2020. Even ostensibly well-meaning explanation articles ignore the high level of Armenophobic hate speech by Azeri officials, the documented atrocities committed by Azeri soldiers in the 2020 war against Armenian prisoners of war and civilians, the string of connected hate crimes against Armenians in the diaspora, the history of the 1915-1923 genocide against Armenians, Greeks, and Assyrians committed by the Ottoman Empire (which took the lives of at least 1.2 million Armenians), the well-funded and longtime denial of that genocide by Turkey and Azerbaijan, the internal human rights abuses committed by the government of Azerbaijan (which often uses hate speech against Armenians and war with Armenia as a distraction), and the series of broken ceasefire attacks such as this one that have been consistently committed by Azerbaijan with the military and diplomatic support of Turkey. The Lemkin Institute calls upon Western media outlets to clarify their language and avoid the false neutrality of “balanced reporting” that simply reproduces the propaganda of the aggressor and fuels genocidal actions and rhetoric. The Western media needs to tell the truth and call the war on Armenia what it is: an aggressive war with clearly demonstrated genocidal intent against Armenians. The governments of Turkey and Azerbaijan have been open about their animosity towards the nation, people, and culture of Armenia. If left unchecked, the world will be faced with addressing yet another devastating genocide and the press will have been complicit once again. https://www.lemkininstitute.com/statements-new-page/statement-on-the-western-media-narrative-regarding-azerbaijan%E2%80%99s-september-13-attack-on-armenia

Armenia celebrates 27th anniversary of national army January 28 marks a special day in Armenia, as the country is celebrating the 27th anniversary of the Armenian Armed Forces today. January 28 was officially declared the Army Day based on a decree by the Supreme Council to create the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Armenia in 1992, several months after the country declared its independence from the Soviet Union. The army's first head was the deputy chief of staff of the Soviet Ground Troops, Norat Ter-Grigoryants. Army Day has been an official holiday in Armenia since 2001 when second President Robert Kocharyan signed on January 6, 2001, the law “On Holidays and Memorable Days of the Republic of Armenia”. Experts say that the Armenian army can be rightly considered the most efficient in the region.

Armenia: the cleverest nation on earth https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p004j7zg

Give it a thumbs up on YouTube if you like it guys! Thank you

Barev dzez, I am half-Armenian from USA and was never raised to identify myself as Armenian, never learned to speak Armenian etc. A few years ago, I acutally went to Armenia, and lived and worked there for 4 months. Despite being on my own and not having the best living conditions, etc. I actually had a great time and for the most part met some really nice people. I have unique "outsider's perspective" on Armenia and diasporans and would like to share my thoughts. I would like to hear if anyone here on hyeforum can express thier opinions, suggestions, and experiences on the subject. 1) I noticed that many diasporans, especially Armenian-Americans treat Armenia almost as a vacation spot. It seems like a place for them to enjoy cheap rent, food, drinks, etc due to the currency exchange. Some treat it like a vacation resort rather than a homeland in my opinion. This shocked me at first. 2) Speaking of homeland, I know some diasporans have tried moving to Armenia to actually live and work there. I have heard of Armenians that have 'repatriated'. In other words, Armenian-Americans mostly that have moved to Armenia to live and work. A small group has done it. I was in Armenia on my own (althought many helped me in times of need), not knowing any Armenian, and lived in conditions most Armenians wouldn't live in. I bring the previous point up because I have heard of Armenian-Americans that have considered living and working in Armenia, and could not even last more than 2 months; I am referring to 100% ethnic Armenians, that are raised in Armenian households and speak Armenian. Typically they come to Armenia via certain diaspora programs and want to try to live in Armenia for a more long-term stay. How could I live and work in conditions that they could not? Especially since they are raised to be Armenian, speak Armenian, etc.? 3) I have met many people in the months I was there, who now don't even live in Armenia anymore. Many have left because of economic reasons. Some don't even care about Armenia anymore, they don't see it as a homeland because they can't live well in it. Bear in mind that these people are Hayastanci, very sad indeed to see them leave and feel that way about Armenia. My ultimate question and observation is this: I can understand how some diasporans (especially Armenian-Americans) cannot live in Armenia. If they are raised in good communities and in good homes, with comfortable conditions with job opportunites, why would they be willing to sacrifice all that to live in Armenia, where things are not as easy. I hate to say it, but I found many Amerikahyes to be "spolied", Patriotic, but too spoiled to live in Armenia like most Armenians are forced to live. Secondly, many Armenians don't have any care for thier own country and leave for economic reasons. I don't blame them for leaving, but to some it seems they don't understand the importance of a small ethnic group having a country, even a country on a map, whether it be corrupt or not. And that mentality is lethal to Armenian culture. Where are the diasporans that actually care and are genuine enough to sacrifice and particiapate? Where are the hayastanciner that understand the imporance of having a homeland? Where are those whose minds have not been destroyed by the soviet union and demoralized beyond belief? If patriotic Armenians have sacrificed to keep Armenian culture alive for so long, where are these kinds of Armenians today? Where do they connect and organize?

This Armenian made 12 minutes documentary in Russian shows how the "Azeris" have looked to invent an ethnonym for the various ethnic peoples living in their area and that this fake invention will collapse soon (according to the late prophetess Vanga sometimes in 2023) like a house of cards since it was made on fragile ground and on lies and deceptions coming from Tartars and Turks. "Ethnonym" means an ethnic name ascribed to a people or group; the proper name by which a people or ethnic group is called or known. Azeri: an ethnic group living in Azerbaijan. Ethnic minority: a group that has different national or cultural traditions from the majority of the population. The ethnonym Afghan has been used in reference to Pashtuns for over a thousand years. The name Afghanistan (Afghan + -stan) is a derivation from the ethnonym Afghan, originally in the loose meaning "land of the Afghans" and referred to the Pashtun tribal areas south of the Hindu Kush. On December 25, 2013 in Stepanakert, the film "Azerbaijan in search of the ethnonym" in Russian language has premiered: On December 25, 2013 in Stepanakert, the film "Azerbaijan in search of the ethnonym" in Russian language has premiered. And in this short period (As of middle of January 2014, it had more than 50,000 hits on the one posted in YouTube) it had started to produce tectonic shifts in the consciousness of the citizens of Azerbaijan. Today a resident of Baku, as a matter of fact, does not know of what nationality he is. That is, at the level of their own understanding of the subject, he could decide on one but his own brother often do not agree with him. Often it turns out that children of the same parents can be individually a Muslim (and in Azerbaijan this is an ethnonym), Azerbaijani, Turkish-Azeri, Azeri, or simply just Turk. At the end of the film the prediction of Vanga on the collapse of Azerbaijan is given: in 1993, she prophesied that this fake nation will collapse in 30 years, that is in 2023. The fact of the matter is that Azerbaijan is already on the path of decay and disintegration. The more its population grows the more decayed they become until they collapse in 2023. The more the population of Armenia decreases the stronger Armenia becomes, as its said in Isaiah 54:2-3 "Enlarge the place of your tent, and let them stretch out the curtains of your dwellings; Do not spare; lengthen your cords, and strengthen your stakes. For you shall expand to the right and to the left, and your descendants will inherit the nations, and make the desolate cities inhabited." "The Holy Spirit showed me an allegory of a large plant in a small flower pot. This plant had outgrown the pot in which it was originally placed in. It was created to grow wide and high in stature but the size of the pot confined the plant and hindered it's growth. The roots then become what is called "root bound". Root bound is when the roots have grown too large for its container resulting in matting or tangling, and they become strangled and restrained. The plant could no longer hold any water and there is no room for soil. If it stayed in this pot long enough, eventually it would die. In order for this plant to grow to its full potential it would have to be uprooted and replanted. The Lord is showing me that some of you are restrained just as that plant is. Jesus wants to bring you to a broader place, but you must be set free from being root bound. "The Lord says; allow Me to uproot you from the confines and the restrictions that you are in, and replant you into the place where you will be free to flourish and grow. When you are replanted you will be able to recognize the freedom that I have for you, and you will then begin to walk in maturity. You will no longer be bound to religious traditions or enslaved by the doctrines of man. My plan is not only to set you free, and release you from all strongholds, but also to advance you to a higher place. Don't allow anything to restrain you from pursuing what I have qualified you to do. Refuse to allow anything to hinder your spiritual growth. I have created you to be a Sequoia tree, not a Bonsai tree but you are limiting yourself. Don't let spiritual stagnation keep you from moving ahead to the greater life. I desire to set you free with a purpose and a plan which is to use you to set other captives free. Allow Me to bring you into the place where you will be able to grow and prosper. As you do, you will be able to discern My ways. "My Kingdom is about expansion. It is time to break out of the old pot, and replant your life for root expansion, so that you will no longer be limited to the confines of the old system. Do not allow root rot to set in due to stagnation. This will only bring death to your vision. Don't allow people to restrain you to smallness, but it is time to branch out into all that you have been created for. Allow Me to bring you into the liberty that I have for you, so that you will be free to walk with Me in Spirit and in truth. Don't allow anything to hinder you or tie you down. Now is the time to release old mindsets of doubt and unbelief. In your decisions, always pursue wisdom and follow after peace so that you will not make foolish choices any longer. Your circumstances will no longer control you, and manipulation will no longer rule you. My word is life and it will keep you from decay. My word is truth and it will keep you from denial. My plan for you is not only for you to survive, but also to thrive in all that I have called you to do, to expand My Kingdom says the Lord."

It is often hard to pick out a present for other people, and often due to social expectations, it is seen as being stingy to not give a gift. One possible solution is to give a Kiva microloan card out as a Christmas gift. What Kiva does is allow them to select someone from the developed world to give a microloan to. There is however a small chance you could lose your principle, but they have 98.98% repayment rate, so it is unlikely, and especially so if you look at the history of the local micro-lending partner and check out their repayment rate. Whatever you get someone in the developed world, they will not be very happy by it, but in the non-developed world even a $25 microloan makes a big difference in helping them obtain a livelihood. This way you can give your friends or family the money represented by the gift card eventually as the loan is eventually repaid and help someone else out in more dire need also. There are many Armenians you can choose to loan to. Mods/Admins: Maybe you can make this sticky or figure out other ways to make this far more visible on this forum?

Armenia wipes the floor with Azerbaijan in Dublin http://media.pn.am/media/issue/136/398/photo/136398.jpg http://static.pn.am/images/l_op1_eng.gifhttp://static.pn.am/images/cmnts.gifDecember 7, 2012 - 22:25 AMT PanARMENIAN.Net - The 19th meeting of OSCE ministerial council ended in Dubin, with both Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign ministers delivering speeches. Naturally, Nagorno Karabakh conflict settlement was in the focus of both speeches. Besides “ruling out any alternative to peaceful resolution of the conflict and offering to intensify OSCE Minsk Group efforts in development of a comprehensive peace agreement” Azerbaijan’s Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov came up with unfounded accusations against Armenia, such as, “Armenia reinforces status-quo by violating the OSCE regulation and uses force to maintain control over the occupied (in fact liberated) territories of Azerbaijan.” It’s not a secret that Armenia is the guarantor of Artsakh people’s security. It’s not a secret, either that realization of Azerbaijan’s disembodied dream, i.e. transfer of Nagorno Karabakh under Baku’s control may cause nothing but a genocide, considering the killings of Armenians in Sumgait and Baku, or the axe-murder of the Armenian soldier in sleep. Mammadyarov’s speech further went on, accusing Armenia of “hampering the intra-community dialogue, economic development of the region and attempts to erase all traces of Azerbaijani culture.” “No intact monuments of Azerbaijani culture remained in the territories occupied (in fact liberated) by Armenia,” Mammadyarov said. Intra-community dialogue? In contrast to Baku, Yerevan never hampered any reasonable dialogue, with visits of Azerbaijani intellectuals cited as an example. It’s Azerbaijan and Turkey that continue illegal blockade of Armenia, blocking its participation in regional economic programs. Azerbaijani cultural monuments? Not long ago, Azerbaijan itself unleashed a war in Artsakh, with shelling considered common during war. What about destruction of ancient Armenian cemetery in Julfa by brave Azerbaijani vandals? Mammadyarov also mentioned Stepanakert airport in his speech, saying “it would further escalate tensions in the region.” This is not even worth a comment. Meanwhile, Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian’s speech objectively pointed to Azerbaijani attempts to foil Karabakh conflict settlement. “It has become habitual for Azerbaijan to backtrack even on agreements to which it had previously consented to. Despite the agreement on the creation of a mechanism to investigate the ceasefire violations, as you know, Azerbaijan did everything to prevent its creation, even threatening to veto the entire OSCE budget. This was the case again after the Sochi Summit of January of this year. Despite the reached agreement to accelerate accord on the Basic Principles for a Settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, confirmed by Los Cabos Statement, Azerbaijan by its maximalist approaches is seeking one sided advantage in the negotiating process and is doing everything possible to neglect, even to reject this agreement. Azerbaijan is not only ignoring the expectations of the international community, but is constantly taking new steps against the values of civilized world. The latest such case is the Azeri government’s release and glorification of the murderer Safarov, who had slaughtered with an axe Armenian officer in his sleep, during a NATO program in Budapest simply because he was Armenian. The Azerbaijani leadership made him a symbol of national pride and an example to follow by youth. The world’s reaction was unanimous in condemning what was done by Baku, which has seriously undermined the Nagorno Karabakh negotiation process and endangered the fragile regional stability,” Minister Nalbandian said. It’s noteworthy that following all the speeches at Dublin-hosted meeting, Azerbaijan exercised the right to issue a response to Minister Nalbandian’s speech, “Unfortunately, OSCE repeatedly witnessed Armenian accusations addressed to Baku. However, Mr. Nalbandian’s speech didn’t much dwell on the steps Armenia takes to settle the conflict and overcome the current difficult situation as a result of occupation of Azerbaijani lands.” This really sounds ridiculous. In response to this, Armenian representative dubbed Baku’s additional speech a mere repetition of earlier allegations against Armenia. Thus, the Dublin battle ended 1:0 to Armenia.