cease-fire violations by azeris

[MosJan]

chgitem yexpayrs chgitemmmmmmm

[Yervant1]

Der Spiegel, Germany

Nov 24 2020

Through the Fog Nagorno-Karabakh Settles in for Five Years of Uncertainty

Russian troops have arrived in Nagorno-Karabakh to keep the peace, but thousands of Armenians are having to flee the region. They are leaving nothing to the arriving Azerbaijanis – and it is unclear when normalcy might return.

By Christian Esch

24.11.2020, 17.59 Uhr

The Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh is not even 30 years old, and it is uncertain whether it will grow much older. Built on the ruins of the Soviet Union, it is now melting away like snow in the sun.

The Dadivank Monastery, which is more than 800 years old, looks as if it was carved into the mountains. If you want to understand what is happening in Nagorno-Karabakh these days, it is best to start here. It is good to have something permanent to hold on to.

On this particular Monday morning, there are few worshippers in the monastery. But there are other visitors: Down on the road below, which leads from Armenia to the city of Stepanakert, there is a Russian armored personnel carrier, a second one is parked in front of the monastery gate. A press officer barks at a group of freezing cold Russian journalists who have just arrived in an open truck.

The monastery of St. Dadi is a special place – for religious, art-historical, and, more recently, also political reasons. Russian President Vladimir Putin has explicitly placed it under Russian protection. Dadivank certainly needs it. It is located in the area from which the Armenian-controlled quasi-state of Nagorno-Karabakh – called the "Republic of Artsakh" – must withdraw. Azerbaijani troops will take over control again.

That is stipulated in the cease-fire agreement, signed by the defeated Armenia following a successful, large-scale offensive by Azerbaijan and negotiated with the help of Russian mediation. Many Armenians have already come to tearfully bid farewell to the monastery, Dadi's grave and also the abbot.

Father Hovhannes Hovhannesyan, a tall man with a white beard, is well-known among Armenians. When war broke out at the end of September, he had himself photographed with a cross in one hand and a Kalashnikov in the other. The official Twitter account of the Republic of Armenia shared the photo with the slogan "Faith & Power!” It underscored the country's confidence in victory and the conviction that this was, in a sense, a holy war. Christianity in Armenia is not just a religion, it is a national identity.

Father Hovhannes will stay in Dadivank. He says that the Kalashnikov in the photo does not symbolize aggression, but the readiness to defend oneself. Yet contempt, hostility and mistrust seep through his words.

"We Armenians are God’s people. We build and do good. For the Azerbaijanis, the temptation is great to destroy that, it gives them pleasure," he claims. Father Hovhannes is grateful for Putin's protection. But he feels the whole of Christendom should protect his monastery. "How long will the peacekeeping troops be around? Five years? Fifty years? Nobody knows."

That is the core problem on which everything else depends. A war has ended and a cease-fire is in force, which is good news. But only the strong presence of Russian troops can ensure the status quo. The peace mission is limited to five years for the time being and can be terminated unilaterally. Will the rest of Nagorno-Karabakh then fall into Azerbaijani hands as well?

The road leading past Dadivank is one of only two arterials connecting Nagorno-Karabakh with the motherland of Armenia. Without those, the Republic of Artsakh would be doomed. At its core, it consists of an Armenian autonomous region within Azerbaijan, which declared itself independent toward the end of the Soviet Union. Before long, though, the island of territory became a de-facto extension of the motherland, following Armenia's surprising success in a war that led to hundreds of thousands of Azerbaijanis fleeing the area and the island being connected to Armenia proper in 1994.

The new road across Dadivank was inaugurated in 2017. For poor Armenia, the construction was a major project, an investment in the future of Artsakh. But it was also a clear indication that Armenia had no intention of returning the additional territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh that it had conquered, despite the fact that peace talks since the early 1990s had foreseen just such a return. Instead, Armenia was clearly interested in promoting the region's economy, infrastructure and settlement.

Now, after a lost war, these districts must be returned after all. The Republic of Artsakh will become an island again, and the road past Dadivank is essentially severed, with part of it coming under Azerbaijani control.

Khanum Grigoryan is one of those whose livelihood used to depend on the road. She had a store in the town of Yeghegnut, not far from the monastery, where she sold jingalov hats, the traditional herbal flatbread. Now, she is harvesting the last potatoes from her garden and – like all Armenians – preparing to leave before the territory is handed back over to the Azerbaijanis on Nov. 25. But she is not planning on lighting her house on fire, as others have done. "How could I do such a thing? My grandchildren were born here," she says.

Her home has already taken a beating anyway: At a time when both Khanum and her husband Volodya were away, they were robbed of furniture, bed linens, the porch roof and their tandoor oven. The region has been overtaken by an anything-goes mentality and whatever isn't nailed down is at risk of being swiped. Meanwhile, the forest is being culled for firewood lest it fall into enemy hands.

The situation was precisely the reverse when Khanum and Volodya moved to Yeghegnut in the early 1990s. The walls of the Azerbaijani home they moved into and later expanded were charred by fire. They constantly lived in uncertainty, not knowing if their region might fall back into Azerbaijani hands. When Khanum's daughter renovated her own home, Khanum asked: "Why are you doing that? The Turks are coming anyway." That's what Azerbaijanis are called in these parts: Turks.

For Khanum, it is the second time she has been displaced. In the late 1980s, she had to flee the Azerbaijani city of Mingachevir when violence erupted against local Armenians. She is part of the generation that still speaks fluent Azerbaijani. Back then, she was unable to take anything with her, but this time, she at least has time to pack and to cry.

In Stepanakert, the capital of Nagorno-Karabakh, life is cautiously resuming. Many of the facades are damaged, not a single café is open, garbage is piling up in the smoky hallways of Hotel Armenia and the market has been almost completely destroyed. Most of the people you see out and about are men in uniform. Still, the streets are being cleaned up and every evening, buses full of returnees arrive from the Armenian capital of Yerevan.

Mayor David Sargsyan governs the city from the ground floor of city hall, where food packages are being handed out to those in need. He abandoned his office on the third floor when the city came under artillery fire. One shell hit right next door.

Some 70 percent of the city’s buildings have been damaged, he says. Fifteen percent have been left without natural gas and electricity. Much of his staff have yet to return. To complicate things, COVID-19 is rampant in Stepanakert, an illness that Sargsyan himself has already had. Of Stepanakert's more than 50,000 residents, only about half of them are currently in the city.

David Sargsyan avoids talking about politics, since it is rather dangerous to do so in Armenia at the moment, with society deeply divided. In Yerevan, many see Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan as a traitor for signing the cease-fire agreement. Sargsyan merely says: "It's not important which territories are being handed over to whom. What's important is how many residents return to Nagorno-Karabakh." Before the war, his city's most important revenue source was tourism, but it is difficult to imagine visitors returning anytime soon.

First, the dead must be buried – or even identified. In the evening, a number of uniformed men are standing in front of the city's morgue, awaiting the arrival of 28 bodies from the village of Karintak. "First, you Germans helped out the Turks with the 1915 genocide of the Armenians, and now you're in league with Turkey again," screams an enraged, desperate and drunk officer. Most of the dead from Karintak were under his command, another explains.

This interpretation of the war is widespread here: namely that Armenians fought not with Azerbaijan, but with the much larger country of Turkey. And that what was at stake was not a specific piece of land, but the survival of the Armenian people.

Hundreds of casualties still haven't been identified, and the severity of Armenian losses only became clear once the cease-fire had gone into effect. Instead of around 1,300 dead, it was suddenly closer to 2,300. Military and government leaders had remained confident right up until the end, making it all the more difficult to accept defeat.

"For me, the war ended just as quickly as it started," says artilleryman Armen Khachatryan, who was fighting just half-an-hour from Stepanakert. "At 2 a.m., we were suddenly ordered to cease fire. If it could stop so fast, then why did it take so long?"

Khachatryan was born in 1992, back when his father was fighting on the frontlines. His daughter was born in 2016, at a time when he himself was fighting against Azerbaijan. He wants to remain in Stepanakert and speaks of the Azerbaijanis without hate. But he is convinced that if the Russian peacekeeping troops withdraw in five years, "it will be the final day" for Nagorno-Karabakh.

Wherever you go at the moment, you run into Russian troops. But nowhere is the Russian presence as important as it is on the old road leading from Stepanakert to Armenia via Lachin. It will be the only connection remaining once the new road via Dadivank is blocked. And it is a security nightmare for the Armenians.

High above Stepanakert lies the city of Shusha, or Shushi in Armenian. Its fall proved decisive in this war. It is the gate to Nagorno-Karabakh and the keys to the gate are now in the hands of Baku. In early November, Azerbaijani troops reconquered the city after suffering significant losses, which meant they also had control over the road below. The cease-fire came a short time later. Armenia's prime minister says that had they continued fighting, they likely would have lost Stepanakert as well.

Father Hovhannes: "How long will the peacekeeping troops be around? Five years? Fifty years? Nobody knows." Foto: Johanna-Maria Fritz / DER SPIEGEL

Winning that battle was also a symbolic victory for Azerbaijan. Shusha is the historical capital of the region and at the end of the Soviet era, it was almost exclusively populated by Azerbaijanis.

The road from Stepanakert to Armenia first winds up the mountain and runs right past Shusha. It was reopened last week, secured by Russian checkpoints. Thick fog hangs over the mountain. The bodies that lined the road have been removed – most of them, that is. A mangled corpse with no head or legs appears out of the fog, then jackets, fractured helmets and a bingo game battered by the wind.

The second Russian checkpoint is located right behind the new town sign. An Azerbaijani flag is waving in the wind, with a smaller, Turkish flag next to it – an _expression_ of gratitude to Turkey, which actively supported the offensive. Only a thin metal fence separates the road from land under Azerbaijan control and Azerbaijani troops are standing at a gate. It would be simple enough for them to close the road.

But according to the cease-fire agreement, a five-kilometer-wide corridor to the left and right of the road must be free from Azerbaijan's control. For Shusha, that means that the road must be rerouted at significant effort.

For Lachin (called Berdsor in Armenian), after which the corridor is named, it also means trouble. There are peacekeeping troops in Lachin but all shops except for one are closed and a modern looking supermarket is being cleared out. No one feels safe anymore, a worker there says.

The stores are closed because it was bombed shortly before the cease-fire went into effect, says David Davtyan, chief of staff for the district head. He hopes the residents will eventually return.

But Davtyan's Kashatagh district will no longer exist in its current form. Only 3,000 of its residents live in the future corridor – in Lachin and two other settlements. The other 9,000 people will have to look for new homes, with the rest of the province set to be handed over to Azerbaijan on Dec. 1. "Only Russia and France helped us. The rest of the world was silent," Davtyan says gloomily.

Behind Lachin, where the corridor comes to an end and Armenia begins, stands a long column of military hardware, from self-propelled artillery to supply trucks. Like everywhere in Nagorno-Karabakh, the Russian military has demonstrated here just how quickly it can mobilize its forces.

The peacekeeping mission is to include 1,960 soldiers, 90 armored personnel carriers and 380 additional vehicles. One can be grateful to Moscow for having brought the conflict to an end. But the peace mission only extends for five years. What then?

The Republic of Artsakh, it seems, is like a ripe piece of fruit for Azerbaijan to pick at the next opportunity. It is not yet clear how the cease-fire could evolve into a lasting peace for both sides. Much like the road itself, what lies ahead is shrouded by fog.

https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/journey-through-a-lost-land-nagorno-karabakh-settles-in-for-five-years-of-uncertainty-a-144acf6e-937c-489b-9ce8-c9aafb50ce20

[Yervant1]

Panorama, Armenia

Nov 24 2020

Varuzhan Geghamyan: Turkey set to employ 'demographic engineering' in Karabakh

Expert in Turkish studies, Aide to the president of Armenia Varuzhan Geghamyan has commented on Sky News Arabia report about Turkey's plans to transfer hundreds of families from Syria's northwestern parts to territories of Nagorno-Karabakh ceded to Azerbaijan as a result of the trilateral statement signed on November 9. As Geghamyan said, those families are mostly Turkoman people, who will be resettled in Karabakh to change the demographic character of the region.

In Geghamyan's words, Turkey has used this policy in northern Syria over the past years, through employing the so-called 'demographic engineering' aimed at uprooting the locals and settling pro-Turkish groups, as evidenced by numerous reports.

"If you look at the map, you will see what the change of demographics means. Armenia and the remaining part of Artsakh will be surrounded by new Turks backed by Ankara, and those people are ready militants. This is something that may disturb equally Russia, Iran and Georgia," said Geghamyan, adding: "We must realize the imminent physical threat we are facing and need a competent and real policy instead of circus and an imitation of policy."

https://www.panorama.am/en/news/2020/11/24/Varuzhan-Geghamyan/2407692?

[Yervant1]

Voltaire Network

Nov 24 2020

Nagorno-Karabakh: victory of London and Ankara, defeat of Soros and the Armenians

by Thierry Meyssan

The Pentagon, which had planned the war in Nagorno-Karabakh, was overtaken by its British allies. But none of the great powers worried about the deaths it would cause. Moreover, while London and Ankara renewed their historic alliance, Washington and Moscow gained nothing, while George Soros and the Armenians lost much.

VOLTAIRE NETWORK | PARIS (FRANCE) | 24 NOVEMBER 2020

After 44 days of war, Armenia was forced to sign a ceasefire with Azerbaijan, acknowledging the loss of part of its territories. However, as we reported in the form of an interrogation, the initial plan of the United States was to blame Turkey, let it massacre part of the Armenian population, then intervene, overthrow President Erdoğan and restore peace [1].

However, this plan did not work. It masked a British ploy. Underhandedly, London took advantage of the confusion of the US presidential election to double-cross Washington. It used the situation to try to deprive Russia of the map of Nagorno-Karabakh and resume the "Great Game" of the nineteenth century. [2] At the time, London was the ally of the Ottoman Empire against the Tsarist Empire. When Moscow realized this, it imposed a cease-fire to stop the massacre.

1- The "Great Game

Throughout the 19th century, the British and Russian empires engaged in a fierce rivalry to control the Caucasus and all of Central Asia. This episode is known in England as the "Great Game" and in Russia as the "Tournament of Shadows".

Russia began to win the game when it seized Nagorno-Karabakh. By a domino effect, it then extended its domination over the Caucasus.

In view of this historical precedent, London now believes that recovering Nagorno-Karabakh could allow it to undermine Moscow’s influence in the Caucasus and then throughout Central Asia.

The current British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, claims to be the continuator of the imperial policy of Winston Churchill, of whom he is a biographer. He has just made public a costly plan to modernize his armies [3].

To relaunch the "Great Game", on July 29, 2020, he appointed Richard Moore, director general of the Foreign Office, as director of MI6 (foreign secret services). He had previously served as His Majesty’s ambassador to Ankara, speaks Turkish fluently, and has made friends with President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. He did not take up his new post until October 1, four days after the Azeri attack on Nagorno-Karabakh.

2- The pivotal role of Richard Moore

Richard Moore is a personal friend of Prince Charles, himself patron of the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, where the intellectuals of the Muslim Brotherhood have been trained for twenty-five years. The former Turkish president, Abdullah Gül, is also administrator of this center.

As ambassador to Ankara (2014-17), Richard Moore accompanied President Erdoğan to become the patron of the Brotherhood.

He also played a role in the British withdrawal from the war against Syria in 2014. London did not intend to pursue a conflict in which it had engaged for colonial purposes, but which turned into a US imperial operation (Rumsfeld/Cebrowski strategy).

Richard Moore has just undertaken a tour of Egypt and Turkey. He was in Cairo on November 9th (the day of the Russian imposition of a cease-fire in Karabagh) to meet President al-Sissi and in Ankara on November 11th. Officially, he would not have had an audience with his old friend, President Erdoğan, but only met his spokesman at the White Palace.

3- Facing the States, Soros does not count

In the Azeri-Turkish war in Nagorno-Karabakh, Washington believed it could count on President Armen Sarkissian and the Armenian Prime Minister, Nikol Pashinyan, one of George Soros’ men, [4] as bait.

George Soros is an American speculator who pursues his own political agenda, but works in concert with the CIA [5]. Unfortunately, the British do not have the same relationship with Soros: he owes his fortune to a vast operation against the pound sterling (on Black Wednesday, September 16, 1992), hence his nickname "the man who broke the Bank of England".

4- The double game of "Perfidious Albion"

London let Washington do it first. The Americans encouraged the "Two-State Nation" (Turkey and Azerbaijan) to forcibly end the Artsakh Republic.

MI6 helped its Turkish partner to transfer jihadists to Azerbaijan [6], not to kill Armenians, but Russians. But there are were Russians in Karabagh yet.

Soros reacted by sending Kurdish mercenaries to support the Armenian side [7].

Pretending to play the US game, London supported Baku and Ankara. During the first days, the three powers of the Minsk Group (in charge of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict since the dissolution of the USSR) - i.e. the United States, France and Russia - all three tried to obtain a halt to the fighting and a resumption of negotiations [8]. When they each successively noted Azeri bad faith, they presented a proposal for a resolution to the Security Council. For Washington, it was a question of operating in a coordinated manner a reversal, from neutrality to the condemnation of the "two-state nation".

In the first days, the Armenians defended themselves as best they could. However, the head of state, Armen Sarkissian, modified the plans of the military staff and brought up inexperienced volunteers to the front. [9] Sarkissian has dual Armenian-British nationality. The result was a massacre among the Armenian army.

Suddenly, the United Kingdom announced that it would use its veto if the text was put to a vote. The United States, taken aback, publicly accused Azerbaijan of bad faith on 25 October.

But it would take another two weeks for Russia to understand that Washington, entangled in its presidential election campaign, was no longer handling the issue.

5- Russia whistles the end of the game before it is too late

It is only around October 6 that Russia became certain of the existence of an English trap in the American trap. It quickly concluded that London had relaunched the "Great Game" and was preparing to steal its influence in Nagorno-Karabakh.

Russian President Vladimir Putin called his Turkish counterpart on October 7th. He negotiated with him a cease-fire very unfavorable to the Armenians. Erdoğan, who has understood that he will not be able to resist a stabilization of the political situation in the United States, agrees to gain only territory and renounces the relaunch of the Armenian genocide. President Putin then summoned his Azerbaijani counterpart, Ilham Aliyev, and the Armenian Prime Minister, Nikol Pachinian, to the Kremlin. He saved what could still be saved by forcing his interlocutors to sign a ceasefire on October 10tj under the terms negotiated by Erdoğan [10]. His priorities were to draw up the Russian military presence via a peace force and then to stop the bloodbath. He then addressed the Russian people to announce that he had saved the interests of his country by saving Armenia from an even more terrible defeat.

The Armenians realized, far too late, that by taking them away from Russia for the USA, Nikol Pachinian had bet on the wrong horse. They understand in retrospect that however corrupt the former team that led them was, it was patriotic, while Soros’ men are opposed to the very concept of nationhood, and therefore to the independence of their country.

Demonstrations and resignations followed one another: the Chief of Staff, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Defence, but not the Prime Minister. For his part, the Azerbaijani President, Ilham Aliyev, is jubilant. He mocks copiously the Council of Europe and the Parliament of the European Union, proclaims his victory and announces the reconstruction of the conquered territories [11]. The British will have new privileges for British Petroleum and apply to exploit the Azeri gold mines.

Thierry Meyssan

Translation
Roger Lagassé

[1] “Will Artsakh (Karabagh) be the tomb of Erdoğan ?”, “Karabagh: NATO supports Turkey while seeking to eliminate President Erdoğan”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Roger Lagassé, Voltaire Network, 6 and 15 October 2020.

[2] The Great Game. On Secret Service in High Asia, by Peter Hopkirk, John Murray (1990).

[3] “Boris Johnson Statement to the House on the Integrated Review”, by Boris Johnson, Voltaire Network, 19 November 2020.

[4] “Larisa Minasyan: OSF-Armenia has supported and supports the velvet revolution in the country”, Arm Info, March 5 2019.

[5] “George Soros, speculator and philanthropist”, Voltaire Network, 15 January 2004.

[6] “4 000 jihadists in Nagorno-Karabakh”, Voltaire Network, 29 September 2020.

[7] “Soros sent 2 000 Kurdish mercenaries to Armenia, says Erdoğan”, Voltaire Network, 29 October 2020.

[8] “Third Karabakh ceasefire breached”, Voltaire Network, 27 October 2020.

[9] Conférence de presse du chef d’état-major sortant, le général Movses Hakobyan, Erevan, 19 novembre 2020.

[10] “Statement by Presidents of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Russia”, Voltaire Network, 10 November 2020.

[11] “Ilham Aliyev’s Victory Speech”, Voltaire Network, 20 November 2020.

https://www.voltairenet.org/article211746.html?fbclid=IwAR2Dm7W976JzI3l2PqGrNzw_AHvpPjpRoXAp0eda3JeUgJW6yylemfEsAIM

[Yervant1]

CIVILNET.AM

24 November, 2020 19:44

Onik Gasparyan, Chief of Staff of Armenian Armed Forces, has released a statement following the “end of war” statement signed by Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Russia that saw the loss of large parts of Karabakh territory.

His full statement has been translated into English.

“Dear compatriots, comrades-in-arms. Starting on September 27, the Armenian armed forces took upon themselves the blow of the war launched by Azerbaijan, its ally Turkey and terrorist-mercenaries, and from the very first minutes on did everything possible and impossible in their power. The Armenian soldier gave a selfless fight for life and death.

Some politicians have voiced accusations that the leadership of the Armed Forces presented the head of the government with an unrealistic analysis of the likely nature of the adversary’s actions and its military capabilities. This is not consistent with the reality.

I was appointed Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces on June 8 of this year and already on June 12 presented to the Prime Minister of Armenia, and a few days later to the Security Council, an analysis of the military-political situation in the region and the capabilities of our Armed Forces.

Based on the analysis, I made proposals to improve the level of military security in the country. In particular, I noted that:

Our adversary is no longer solely Azerbaijan, but also Turkey. Consequently, Armenia cannot effectively resist the combined military potential of these states, and it is necessary to apply all the political and diplomatic potential to avoid or at least postpone a war.

The proposal was accepted by the Security Council and the Prime Minister, but the question was asked: “And if the war cannot be avoided, what should be done?” I replied that if the war is imposed on us, we should try to inflict heavy losses on the enemy as soon as possible and force it to abandon further actions. I pointed out that we must avoid a protracted war, given the availability of our resources. Numerous proposals were discussed and approved, the implementation of which was supposed to significantly increase our combat potential. This concerned both the acquisition of weapons and military equipment, and the all-round support of combat operations.

Then the question was raised about the formation of a hundred thousand member home guard militia. Nevertheless, we did not manage to avoid the war, and on September 27 the enemy launched an offensive with vastly exceeding forces along the entire front in Artsakh. The Defense Army successfully repelled all these attacks, inflicting heavy losses, destroying a large number of manpower and military equipment. Unfortunately, our troops also incurred heavy losses.

On the fourth day of the war, during the meeting of the Security Council, I presented our losses and the assessment of the Armed Forces on the situation, noting that measures must be taken to end the war in two or three days. Otherwise, in conditions of such intense military operations, our resources will be depleted shortly, and with every passing day we will have more unfavorable conditions for the negotiation process.

I have repeatedly presented similar assessments during my round-the-clock work with the prime minister, as well as at the meetings of the Security Council.

All attempts and proposals to halt the war at a certain stage were rejected by Turkey and Azerbaijan, and we were forced to continue the military operations, trying to inflict heavy losses upon the enemy and force it to come around to the negotiating table.

For all of us, the agreement with the harsh terms was truly adopted as a result of a comprehensive assessment of the situation. We had to choose between a very bad situation and a tragedy. We chose the very bad.

That day was the worst day of my life, a personal tragedy for me.

Also Watch: Is the West Losing Armenia?

But, the realization that as a result of this decision, we managed to preserve most of Artsakh and the main military capabilities of the Defense Army, suggests that we have no right to fall into depression, we must unite, swiftly recover and be ready to continue the struggle.

As Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces and simply as a commander, I am responsible for all the successes and failures of the Armed Forces.

I bow my head in memory of all the fallen and before their families. A very cruel war was imposed on us, and in the unequal struggle the Armenian soldiers and officers showed the highest moral and volitional qualities and the determination to fight to the end.

It was a real heroic battle, a battle for survival. The Armenian nation can be proud of its soldiers, officers and generals.

Comrades-in-arms,

We must not despair and must continue to defend the borders of our homeland, seriously analyze, draw conclusions, and, while restoring the Armenian army, increase its combat capability.

Thank you for your selfless service. With a high level of consciousness and responsibility, we will fulfill the combat tasks assigned to us, with our unity and unshakability of our will, let us be worthy of comrades’ and martyrs' dedication.”

https://www.civilnet.am/news/2020/11/24/%E2%80%9CWe-had-to-choose-between-a-very-bad-situation-and-a-tragedy%E2%80%9D-Armenian-Armed-Forces-Chief-of-Staff-of-says/409712

[Yervant1]

 

Asbarez.com

 

Turkey, Azerbaijan Actively Opposing French Senate Vote on Artsakh

November 24, 2020

http://asbarez.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/25466588.jpg

ARF Bureau member Mourad Papazian. He is also the co-chair of the Coordinating Council of Armenian Organizations in France.

The governments of Turkey and Azerbaijan are working overtime to exert pressure to ensure that a resolution recognizing Artsakh, scheduled to be discussed by the French Senate on Wednesday, fails.

“There is enormous pressure not only from Azerbaijan but also from Turkey,” Armenian Revolutionary Federation Bureau member and the co-chair of the Coordinating Council of Armenian Organizations is France Mourad Papazian told Sputnik Armenia on Tuesday.

Papazian said, however, that the French-Armenian community is working to counter those pressures both within the political and diplomatic arenas to ensure that “France remains steadfastly behind the concept of recognizing Artsakh, which will resolve the security issue.”

He pointed out that France is a co-chairing country of the OSCE Minsk Group, thus it is important for it to realize that the future status of Artsakh can only hinge on its independence.

On numerous occasions, France has discussed the status of Artsakh and has said that only through the recognition of Artsakh’s independence can the security its security be guaranteed, explained Papazian who cited the 45-day war as an example, as well as the now-infamous November 9 announcement that ended the military activities. He said the agreement demonstrates the imperative for the international recognition of Artsakh.

He said that negotiations on the settlement of the Karabakh conflict must continue because not only are there territories and cultural monuments that were lost, but also individuals who have been captured. “It is quite evident how Azerbaijan is treating those captives,” said Papazian.

The ARF leader explained that the Armenian community in France has worked hard to get various municipal and regional government, as well as influential individuals to call on the French government to recognize Artsakh. He said Paris and its surrounding townships, Marseilles and its regional cities, as well as other areas have already expressed their position on the matter, paving the way for the French Senate to take up the measure, scheduled for Wednesday.

“We are confident that [the measure] will succeed,” Papazian told Sputnik-Armenia. “The ‘end of war’ agreement does not contain any provisions for Artsakh’s future status. However Artsakh still exists—there’s a government, a parliament, and displaced persons are returning to their homes. Hence, we have to work toward strengthening Artsakh by advancing its international recognition.”

“When senators are calling on France’s president to recognize Artsakh, it means the people of France are supporting us, which is an importance aspect for the Armenian advocacy efforts. There have to be more such resolutions passed,” said Papazian.

Last week, mayors of 15 cities, as well as the Paris city council, recognized Artsakh and urged a vote on the pending resolution in the French Senate, which has been signed and endorsed by leaders of the five most influential factions represented in the senate.

http://asbarez.com/198731/turkey-azerbaijan-actively-opposing-french-senate-vote-on-artsakh/?fbclid=IwAR2J0JVLiaVGEnIA07CCTeyRku04hQEF9yyh9dciAosPwJRBvsrYgULH3oc

[Yervant1]

Armenpress.am

Debates on recognition of Artsakh’s independence to kick off in French Senate on November 25

Save

Share

19:42, 24 November, 2020

YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 24, ARMENPRESS. The French senate will discuss the resolution on the necessity to recognize the independence of Nagorno Karabakh Republic (Artsakh) on November 25. ARMENPRESS reports, citing the official website of the Senate, the debates will start at 19:30 by Yerevan time.

The resolution is authored by Bruno Retailleau, Patrick Kanner, Hervé Marseille, Éliane Assassi, Guillaume Gontard.

‘’On November 25 the Senate will discuss the draft resolution which urges France to recognize Nagorno Karabakh Republic. Only the independence can protect the rights and freedoms of the population of Nagorno Karabakh for a lasting period who have encountered Turkey’s Islamic expansionism’’, Bruno Retailleau wrote on his Twitter page.

 

 

https://armenpress.am/eng/news/1035798.html?fbclid=IwAR3ppam5RM4ODfwm--yKGt7-8fZdl-NsaxiXFDnfgC225FbXtcOkSe2sQuA

[Yervant1]

Azeri ill-treatment against Armenian POWs must be scrutinized, says MEP Lars Patrick Berg

Save

Share3

11:40, 25 November, 2020

YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 25, ARMENPRESS. Member of the European Parliament Lars Patrick Berg is planning to raise the issue of Azeri use of Syrian mercenaries against Artsakh at the European Parliament.

The MEP held a video call with Armenian lawmaker Viktor Yengibaryan to discuss the situation in Nagorno Karabakh and Armenia. Berg said he discussed several issues concerning the Artsakh war.

“I will address these issues in the European Parliament, especially the involvement of Syrian mercenaries by Azerbaijan in the war. We talked about the use of the internationally banned cluster munitions, for which there are multiple evidences, and the need for the international community to launch an investigation into this. We also agreed that all war crimes must be scrutinized, especially the ill-treatment against Armenian prisoners of war,” Berg said.

Editing and Translating by Stepan Kocharyan

[MosJan]

[Yervant1]

Church Militant

Nov 2020

ARMENIANS DIMINISHED
NEWS: VIDEO REPORTS

by Trey Blanton • ChurchMilitant.com • November 25, 2020

TRANSCRIPT

Armenians fear a bleak future after losing territory in a seven-week military conflict with neighboring Azerbaijan.

Exiled Armenians have burnt their homes before fleeing to keep Muslim invaders from occupying them. Many fear the Muslim jihadists will destroy their Christian sanctuaries as well.

This chaos was fostered by a Russian-brokered peace deal, allowing Azerbaijan, aided by Turkey and bolstered by Syrian mercenaries, to conquer portions of Armenian-occupied territory named Artsakh, also known as Nagorno-Karabakh.

Journalist and editor Jerry Tutunjian says Russian power plays are nothing new, "In 1921, the Caucasian Central Congress of the Communist Party decided rather than to Azerbaijan, Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh), should belong to Armenia. The next day, Stalin rejected the idea."

With the fall of the Soviet Union, Artsakh declared its independence as an Armenian enclave. The region has been Armenian for centuries, predating the birth of Christ and was the first nation to embrace Christianity as the state religion in the fourth century.

In spite of this history, Western media bluntly proclaimed the Armenian-settled region as legally belonging to Azerbaijan: Under international law, though, current international law, Armenia has been illegally occupying Nagorno-Karabakh and the adjacent areas for more than 25 years," one journalist said.

Armenians are furious with their elected officials for capitulating to Azerbaijan but also with the international community — including Israel — for selling weapons to their enemies; and with the United States for supplying military funding in the tens of millions to Azerbaijan, which used these resources to dominate its isolated Christian neighbor.

Video at

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/armenians-diminished

[Yervant1]

Expert says Russia would not tolerate Turkey’s actions to populate NK territories with Syrians

Save

Share2

09:07, 26 November, 2020

YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 26, ARMENPRESS. Turkey’s plans to populate the territories of Nagorno Karabakh, which have come under the Azerbaijani control, with Syrians will not be accepted by both Russia and Iran. Russia would not allow it or will take anti-terrorist measures later, Expert on Turkish studies Ruben Melkonyan told Armenpress, commenting on the foreign and local media reports according to which Turkey is transferring Syrians to the territories of Nagorno Karabakh currently controlled by Azerbaijan.

The expert said these reports, even they are not coming from real facts, have a very serious potential of becoming a reality.

According to him, the issue should be viewed from two important domains. “The first one is that Turkey’s open participation to the recent war [in Karabakh] made us suppose that after the war as well Turkey will continue to keep its active presence in this matter. And it’s natural that Turkey will try to take some steps in its policy priorities. Secondly, we need to take into account that the demography policy or the demographic engineering has a very important place in Turkey’s policy. It is based on a state tradition and has a history of centuries. In the occupied territories Turkey is immediately starting the policy of neutralizing the further threats and creating additional threats for the enemy countries”, the expert said.

Melkonyan reminded that before the Armenian Genocide Turkey has populated various territories of historic Armenia with different Muslim nations which later played a role in the implementation of the Armenian Genocide. He said Turkey, by occupying several territories in Syria, is populating them with people faithful to it. According to the expert, Turkey is trying the same also in the territories of Artsakh which have come under the Azerbaijani control. “My analysis is based on the principles of the Turkish demographic policy, and these principles allow to claim that populating the occupied territories of Artsakh with people faithful to Turkey is very realistic”, he said.

Melkonyan is sure that some of these people will be terrorists with their families who can turn from a ‘peaceful civilian’ to an extreme terrorist at any moment, by participating in military or terrorist operations. “In other words, by populating that territories with that people, Turkey in fact is deploying a special division of the army in the face of terrorists and their families”, the expert on Turkish studies noted.

Asked why there is no wish to populate those territories with Azerbaijanis, Melkonyan said the question should be viewed in the context of expected public developments, complaints in Azerbaijan and we should understand whether Azerbaijan’s statement that the refugees want to move to Aghdam and other territories is true or is another myth.

Melkonyan also stated that Turkey’s such plans are not in the interests of Iran and Russia.

“Russia should not allow transfer of terrorists to that region which is closer to its borders. But if we look at the issue from political perspective, the presence of terrorists in this territory would allow Russia to take certain steps at any moment under the anti-terrorist war flag or other”, he said.

Ruben Melkonyan proposed to wait for developments and understand which priority will be more influential for Russia – the humanitarian one or the anti-terrorist one. The expert, however, believes that both Russia and Iran would not accept these steps and may take some actions either now or later. “Nevertheless, we need to understand that this issue is going to be one of the key points of the Russian-Turkish or Turkish-Iranian clash”, Ruben Melkonyan said.

Interview by Anna Grigoryan

Editing and Translating by Aneta Harutyunyan

[Yervant1]

Azeri troops filmed toppling, destroying Armenian tombstones

November 26, 2020 - 15:33 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net - Azerbaijani social media users have been disseminating more footage of their troops in territories ceded by the Armenian side in Nagorno-Karabakh.

In two new videos, Azeri soldiers are filmed toppling and destroying gravestones belonging to deceased Armenians.

Throughout the war between September 27 and November 10, the Azerbaijani armed forces have been committing war crimes against Armenian prisoners of war and civilians, shelling peaceful settlements and destroying indigenous Armenian cultural heritage sites.

In October, Azerbaijani forces launched two targeted attacks on the Holy Savior Ghazanchetsots Cathedral in Shushi. After taking control of the city, they destroyed the domes of Saint John the Baptist Church.

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, Russian and Azerbaijani Presidents Vladimir Putin and Ilham Aliyev on November 9 signed a statement to end the war in Karabakh after almost 45 days. Under the deal, the Armenian side is returning all the seven regions surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh, having lost a part of Karabakh itself in hostilities.

[Yervant1]

Greek City Times

Nov 26 2020

The territorial integrity of Azerbaijan has nothing in common with Nagorno-Karabakhby Guest Blogger

Its common opinion that Nagorno-Karabakh, is an unsolvable conflict as the two principles of international law contradict themselves: the right to self-determination and the right to territorial integrity.

But the picture seems to be different as Artsakh – the historic Armenian name of Nagorno-Karabakh – has nothing in common with the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, and I am going to show why.

Pre-Soviet Period

Artsakh is an integral part of Historic Armenia, it is mentioned in the works of Strabo, Pliny the Elder, Claudius Ptolemy, Plutarch, Dio Cassius, and other ancient authors. Ancient Greek sources called the area Orkhistene.

In contrast, Azerbaijan is a relatively young country, which first appeared on the political map in 1918 with the name Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan (1918-1920). It was never formally recognized by the international community or by the League of Nations.

During 1918-1920, 95 percent of the population of Nagorno-Karabakh were Armenians, and they convened their first congress, which proclaimed Nagorno-Karabakh as an independent political unit. The legislative power in Nagorno-Karabakh was exercised by the Assemblies of Armenians of Karabakh.

Between May 1918 and April 1920, Azerbaijan, supported by the military units from Turkey, committed acts of violence and mass killings against the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh.

The efforts of the Government of Azerbaijan to solve the Karabakh problem by military means provoked the organization of Karabakh’s` self-defense.

Soon after, military units from the Republic of Armenia came to rescue the oppressed population of Karabakh and fully liberate Karabakh. On April 23, 1920, the Ninth Assembly of Armenians of Karabakh declared Nagorno-Karabakh as an inalienable part of the Republic of Armenia.

Soviet Period

On November 30, 1920, the now-Soviet Government of Azerbaijan adopted a Declaration on recognizing Nagorno-Karabakh, Zanghezour, and Nakhichevan as part of Soviet Armenia. On July 4th, 1921, The Caucasian Bureau of the Communist Party of Russia convened a plenary meeting in the capital of Georgia, Tbilisi, during which it again confirmed the fact that Nagorno-Karabakh belongs to the Armenian SSR.

However, during the nights of July 4 and 5, 1921, a new decision was dictated by Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, which stated: “Proceeding from the necessity of establishing peace between Muslims and Armenians… include Nagorno-Karabakh in the Azerbaijan SSR, granting it wide regional autonomy with an administrative center of Shushi, included in the autonomous region.”

These facts demonstrate, Nagorno-Karabakh belonged to the Azerbaijan SSR, neither during the Sovietization of Azerbaijan nor after the establishment of the Soviet power in Armenia when Baku recognized all disputed territories as Armenian.

On the other hand, with or without procedural violations, the legitimacy of this forum is seriously questioned.

The decision of the Caucasian Bureau of the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party-Bolsheviks is an unprecedented legal act in the history of International Law: the political party of a third country, with no legal power or jurisdiction, decided the status of the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh.

In 1988, in response to the self-determination claims of the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh, the Azerbaijani authorities organized massacres and ethnic cleansing of the Armenians on the entire territory of Azerbaijan, particularly in Sumgait, Baku, and Kirovabad.

A victim of the Azeri perpetrated Sumgait pogrom against Armenians.

Process of independence:

On September 2, 1991, based on the USSR Law on “The procedures of the resolution of problems on the Secession of a Union Republic from the USSR,” a joint session of deputies of all levels of Nagorno-Karabakh and the Shahumyan region proclaimed the independence of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR), which was strengthened by the referendum of Independence of Nagorno-Karabakh, where 99.89% of participants voted “in favor” of Independence.

On October 18, 1991, the Republic of Azerbaijan confirmed its independence by the adoption of a “Constitutional Act on State Independence.” The same Constitutional Act considered the establishment of the Soviet power in Azerbaijan as “annexation by Soviet Russia” which “overthrew Azerbaijan’s legal Government.”

Thus, the Republic of Azerbaijan declared the establishment of Soviet power in Baku illegal and rejected the whole Soviet political and legal heritage.

When the Republic of Azerbaijan rejected Soviet legal heritage in 1991, the international subject to which the territories were passed in 1920 ceased to exist.

By rejecting the legal heritage of the Azerbaijan SSR of 1920-1991, the Republic of Azerbaijan has lost all claims to the territories passed to Soviet Azerbaijan in July 1921 – namely Nagorno-Karabakh.

It is important to highlight that Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan became independent according to the same domestic Soviet Law, so the legal bases of the independence of these two republics are equivalent.

Current stage:

In 1991, Azerbaijan launched a war against Nagorno-Karabakh, which lasted until May 1994, when Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh, and Armenia via the mediation of Russia, signed a ceasefire agreement. The fact that Azerbaijan signed a ceasefire agreement with Nagorno-Karabakh is evidence that Karabakh was considered a distinct legal entity.

During all these years, Azerbaijani authorities, having all the necessary resources and a permanent military partner (Turkey), kept violating the ceasefire agreement.

The border clashes turned into wars in summer 2014, and in April 2016, both times military activities stopped by the mediation of Russia.

Fighting during the April 2016 conflict.

On September 27, 2020, Azerbaijan, backed by Turkey and with the involvement of foreign terrorist fighters, launched a new war against Artsakh. Thousands of soldiers from both sides were killed before the ceasefire was made.

Still, now the Republic of Artsakh has no status, and there is no real guarantee that Armenians of Artsakh will not face the new ethnic cleansing,

So, we can conclude that the territorial integrity of the Republic of Azerbaijan has nothing in common with the Republic of Artsakh, as Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh), was never been part of independent Azerbaijan, neither in 1918-1920 nor after 1991.

Anzhela Mnatsakanyan is a PhD student from Armenia. She specializes is the Eastern Partnership, Russia, and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

https://greekcitytimes.com/2020/11/26/azerbaijan-nagorno-karabakh-common/

[Yervant1]

Turkish Minute

Nov 26 2020

Russian media points finger at Turkey, UK for downed helicopter in Nagorno-Karabakh

By

TM

-

November 19, 2020

News reports in the Russian media have said Russian officials do not blame Azerbaijan for the downing of a Mi-24 Russian military helicopter in last month’s clashes between Azerbaijan and Armenia. Instead, they hold responsible Turkey and the United Kingdom, which are perceived to be dissatisfied with the Russian-brokered ceasefire that put an end to the fighting in and around Nagorno-Karabakh.

The Russian helicopter was shot down on Nov. 9 by a portable ground-to-air missile near the Armenian village of Yeraskh, located near the Azeri border. It had taken off from a Russian military base in Armenia. Russia announced that it was downed in Armenian airspace and that two of its crewmembers died while one was critically injured.

A few hours later Azeri President Ilham Aliyev released a statement taking responsibility for the incident, apologizing and announcing that they were prepared to pay compensation. The Kremlin accepted Aliyev’s apology, and the ceasefire talks under Russian guarantee moved forward unobstructed.

The Strategic Culture Foundation, a well-known Russian think tank reportedly affiliated with the country’s foreign ministry, published an article by Vladimir Kudryavtsev examining the downing and highlighting the recently growing cooperation between Turkey and the UK.

According to the analysis, the UK has been using Turkey as a battering ram, especially for its designs in the Caucasus region, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is happy to play the role. It also claims that Richard Moore, the new chief of Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), was the architect of the close partnership between the two countries.

The article said with the support of Turkey and the UK, Azerbaijan gained significant ground in Nagorno-Karabakh and that Aliyev chose to strike a deal with Russia so as not to become further drawn into Turkey and the UK’s influence.

Kudryavtsev cited sources from the Kremlin, alleging that the Russian helicopter was downed with the aim of undermining the talks for a ceasefire by sparking a crisis between Baku and Moscow.

Moore visits Turkey after the ceasefire

MI6 Chief Moore had previously served as the UK’s ambassador to Turkey. He is known for being one of the most prominent backers of Erdoğan’s government in the aftermath of a failed Turkish coup attempt in July 2016. Moore paid a visit to Turkey on Nov. 11, immediately after the ceasefire deal was struck in Nagorno-Karabakh.

During the visit Moore met with Presidential Spokesperson İbrahim Kalın, one of the people closest to President Erdoğan. His preference for meeting with Kalın instead of his counterpart, Hakan Fidan, from Turkey’s National Intelligence Organization (MİT) was widely discussed in Ankara. However, Kalın is undisputedly one of the most influential figures in Erdoğan’s presidential palace.

According to reports in the Russian media, Moore successfully took advantage of the vacuum left by the US lack of interest in Turkey’s actions and developments in the region and transformed Turkey into a vanguard of British foreign policy.

Turkey’s military spending jumps amid involvement in regional conflict

In October, when the fighting in Nagorno-Karabakh was in full swing, Turkey’s military spending saw a significant surge. Throughout the month, Turkey made purchases valued at TL 1.6 billion ($175 million), more than double the country’s average monthly defense spending. Turkey brought to the conflict some 200 military personnel as well as high-tech equipment and armed drones.

https://www.turkishminute.com/2020/11/19/russian-media-points-finger-at-turkey-uk-for-downed-helicopter-in-nagorno-karabakh/?fbclid=IwAR1ZxTqGwhktlKAlsm-Y4zXy5i2HMW8Hj6JjEGfv0iK9OaVahTy2MX_Xnjg

[Yervant1]

Armenpress.am

Numerous historical-cultural monuments destroyed, damaged or desecrated by Azeri armed forces

Save

Share

14:53, 26 November, 2020

YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 26, ARMENPRESS. The military and political leadership of the Republic of Azerbaijan, violating tripartite agreement entered into force on May 12, 1994, the sanction approved by the UN General Assembly Resolution XXIX on aggressive military actions, the Geneva Convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, as well as the application of customary international humanitarian law by using prohibited means and methods in time of war, by motives of national hatred, by putting at danger lives of many, by illegally killing two or more people, civilian persons of the peaceful settlements of the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Artsakh, deliberately targeting with attacks, intentionally exploding property, humanitarian and cultural objects, the Office of the Prosecutor General of Armenia told Armenpress.

Within that framework, both in the course of active military operations and after the ceasefire agreement between Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia signed on November 9, the representatives of the Armed Forces of Azerbaijan has deliberately targeted Armenian historical and cultural monuments, objects of special historical or cultural value, destroying, damaging or desecrating them.

In particular, factual information was received that during the period from September 27 to November 9, 2020, the Armed Forces of the Republic of Azerbaijan, by regularly targeting artillery shells, damaged Ghazanchetsots Cathedral in Shushi city, Azerbaijan, as well as later desecrated the church with various inscriptions on exterior and interior walls.

Besides, other historical and cultural monuments, in particular, the monument devoted to the victims of the Great Patriotic War in the village Avetaranots, the cross-stones placed in different settlements of the Republic of Artsakh, the graves of Armenian soldiers and the monuments devoted to them became victim of such "behavior" of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

After the adoption of the above-mentioned tripartite declaration of the ceasefire, the dome and the bell tower of the "Green church" or St. HovhannesMkrtich church located in Shushi city were destroyed by the Armed Forces of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

According to the video appeared on the internet on November 16, 2020, the servicemen of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Azerbaijan desecrated and damaged the church of ZoravorSt.Astvatsatsinlocated in Mekhakavansettlement /Jabrahil/ of the Republic of Artzakh, breaking the cross of the church.

According to a photo appeared on the internet on the same day, a serviceman of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Azerbaijan desecrated the monument of Commander Vazgen Sargsyan sitting on it.

The mentioned circumstances were investigated under Article 384, Part 2, Article 390, Part 3, Points 1 and 2, Article 391, Part 3, Article 387, Part 1, Article 104, Part 2, Points 1, 6, 7 and 13, Article 34-104, Part 2, Points 1, 6 and 7of the RA Criminal Code and Article 185, Part 3, Points 1 and 2 of the RA Criminal Code and within the framework of criminal cases.

The above-mentioned data obtained in the course of the preliminary investigation are checked according to a proper legal procedure, other investigative and judicial actions are undertaken, operative and investigative measures are undertaken to collect facts of other similar cases in order to reveal all the circumstances of the mentioned cases regarding destroying historical and cultural monuments, detecting the perpetrators, giving full criminal assessment to such acts typical of war crimes and solving the issue of criminal responsibility of the perpetrators.

The Prosecutor General's Office of the Republic of Armenia also undertakes measures to draw the attention of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and other international organizations engaged in the protection of cultural values to assess the above-mentioned criminal acts, to prevent the possible destruction and damage of other structures as well as to undertake measures in order to protect and use effective protection mechanisms for preventing the further destroying and damaging of the monuments and objects of Armenian historical and cultural monuments in the territories of the Republic of Artsakh, which came under the Republic of Azerbaijan.

 

 

https://armenpress.am/eng/news/1035983.html?fbclid=IwAR3xb2ftSieubSPyhE9Eayt2ar5kcgZ8Ryvf0ikhIz8E11wmIDunBDyuvPc

[Yervant1]

The National Interest

Nov 29 2020

Israel’s Azerbaijan Mistake

Israelis may justify their relationship with Azerbaijan in realpolitik consideration: In its crudest terms, it is a relationship based on a weapons-for-energy calculation. Jerusalem sold Baku billions of dollars’ worth of top-shelf military equipment, and Israel received almost half of its oil needs from Azerbaijan. The long-term detriment to ties may soon surpass any short-term gains, however.

by Michael Rubin

Nagorno-Karabakh War was largely the result of its forfeiting dominance over the skies. Armenia does not have Azerbaijan’s vast oil wealth. Its economy remains strangled by a Turkish and Azerbaijani land blockade. That economic reality influenced Armenia’s military strategy to focus on parity with Azerbaijan’s ground forces. Azerbaijan’s air force, after all, both small and equipped with legacy Soviet Sukhoi-25s, MiG-21s and MiG-24s. Nagorno-Karabakh’s topography, meanwhile, resembles Switzerland. Even with smaller ground forces, the Armenians believed they could hold the higher ground. It was a fatal miscalculation. Not only did Azerbaijan augment its air force with Turkish F-16s, but its purchase and use of dozens of Israeli kamikaze and surveillance drones tipped the balance of the war against Armenia.

Israelis may justify their relationship with Azerbaijan in realpolitik consideration: In its crudest terms, it is a relationship based on a weapons-for-energy calculation. Jerusalem sold Baku billions of dollars’ worth of top-shelf military equipment, and Israel received almost half of its oil needs from Azerbaijan. The long-term detriment to ties may soon surpass any short-term gains, however.

Many Armenians—and ordinary outside observers—focus on the moral argument: The victims of one Holocaust not only turning a blind eye toward but also selling weapons to the potential perpetrators of another. That the Azeris (and Turkish Special Forces) started the war almost one hundred years to the day after Turks invaded the newly-independent Republic of Armenia against the backdrop of the Armenian Genocide colored Armenians’ understanding of the war. President Reuven Rivlin’s assurances to his Armenian counterpart Armen Sarkissian that Israel’s military trade was “not aimed against any side” further rang hollow given the rapid delivery of arms in the days prior to and perhaps during the conflict. Realists in Israel and elsewhere might dismiss moral arguments given the immediacy of other interests but, in the case of Israel’s Azerbaijan involvement, cynical short-termism will come at a high price.

Consider Israel’s own border considerations: The need for “defensible borders” has, for nearly a half-century, been among Israel’s top priorities in any peace settlement. The late Yigal Allon was a founder of the Palmach, the pre-independence Jewish special forces, and his subsequent political career included eight years as deputy prime minister and three years as minister of foreign affairs. In 1976, he wrote a Foreign Affairs article entitled “Israel: The Case for Defensible Borders” which articulated Israeli fears and shaped its understanding of how land-for-peace might develop. Dore Gold, an academic who advised both prime ministers Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu, and Israeli political and military veterans associated with his Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, have authored several reports on defensible borders as a critical need for viable peace.

Armenia has long made similar security calculations to Israel: The districts which separate Armenia from Nagorno-Karabakh are crucial to the security of both. At issue is not only the high ground and communication links, but the Kelbajar [Qarvachar] district which the Russia- and Turkey-imposed ceasefire agreement awarded to Azerbaijan is also the source of 85 percent of the entire Republic of Armenia’s water supply. Not only does Azerbaijan now have the power to cut-off Armenia’s water supply, but Armenians officials worry that Azerbaijan or the radical Syrian Arab Islamists whom they employed as mercenaries, could simply dump toxic or radioactive waste into the stream and poison Lake Sevan which serves as Armenia’s main reservoir. Israel, of course, has previously raised water security issues with regard to the Sea of Galilee and the Golan Heights. Now, however, the precedents it has established by backing Azerbaijan against Armenia so that Baku could impose a solution that ignores defensible borders and water security undercut Israel’s future negotiating position. Azerbaijan may happily have purchased Israel’s drones, but the cost to Israel’s long-term security is far greater than Israelis realize.

Nor is it clear that the peace-keeping lines will work. The Russian peacekeepers I encountered both in Stepanakert and in the Kelbajar district were professional. They were friendly toward locals. They let children sit on top of their BTRs, drank vodka with older residents in order to build rapport, and systematically reached out to NGO, both Western and local, in order to establish mechanisms to coordinate. That said, their lines are thin. The Russians have neither been able to stop kidnappings of Armenian civilians by Azeri forces or their mercenaries, even along the safe-passage Lachin corridor nor have they been able to prevent skirmishing around the Sotk goldmine. Should chaos envelop Russia when President Vladimir Putin dies, the Russian peacekeepers could evaporate as quickly as they came and leave Armenia exposed.

The situation along the Azerbaijan-Armenia border is a far cry from the buffer zone which Israel required from Egypt upon the return of the Sinai. Israel’s assistance to Azerbaijan in the war and the lack of buffer or demilitarized zones in the districts separating Armenia from Nagorno-Karabakh likewise will set a precedent to enable the avoidance of demilitarized zones in portions of the West Bank which will ultimately become part of a Palestinian state.

Israel’s embrace of Azerbaijan has not only been commercial but also strategic as the two countries cooperated against a common adversary in Iran. Many Israeli officials, of course, believe the Islamic Republic poses an existential challenge. The clerical regime in Iran, however, has also threatened Azerbaijan because that country’s secular Shi’ite regime provided an alternate model which many Iranians craved. Supporters of strong Israel-Azerbaijan ties juxtaposed the two countries’ surveillance, monitoring, and espionage cooperation against Armenia’s traditionally strong ties to the Islamic Republic.

Here, Israeli officials’ misreading of the regional dynamics creates a self-fulfilling prophecy: By embracing Azerbaijan and Turkey but remaining silent on those two countries’ blockade of Armenia, they force Armenia to rely on Iran as an economic lifeline. Nearly one-third of Armenians make their living in agriculture. To export produce by air because of the blockade would be expensive and make the good uncompetitive. Iran, then, becomes the only real option. The same is true with regard to minerals and most manufactured goods. A more far-sighted Israeli policy would be to help Armenia bypass reliance on Iran by demanding Turkey and Azerbaijan open their borders to Armenian goods.

The final aspect of Israel’s short-sightedness involves the more than 7,700 Arab or Turkmen mercenaries transported into Azerbaijan from Syria by Turkey in order to wage religious jihad against Christians. The identities of these mercenaries are increasingly known: Many come from Syria and some previously fought for Al Qaeda-linked groups or the Islamic State. Israelis may depict Azerbaijan as secular and respectful of freedom of religion but, for President Ilham Aliyev to embrace militiamen who destroy churches, behead prisoners, and engage in anti-Christian polemic as they cut off ears and gauge out eyes of captured prisoners, suggests the opposite. At the very least, Azerbaijan’s embrace of Islamist mercenaries might not only destabilize the country in the long run, but it could also make Israel more vulnerable. Simply put, there is no such thing as a good terrorist and by turning a blind eye toward Aliyev’s most recent actions, Israel is undercutting its own war on terror: how can it complain that Hamas terrorists in the Gaza Strip are beyond the pale when Jerusalem simultaneously albeit indirectly cooperates with such mercenaries against Armenia?

Israel’s relations with Azerbaijan have developed over decades. Perhaps the tight embrace of the two states once made sense, but times have changed. Armenia is a democracy, while Azerbaijan has become a family-run dictatorship. Armenia embraces religious freedom while Azerbaijan works with Islamist extremists. Azerbaijan’s hatred toward Armenians further allows Iran to exploit divisions. At the same time, whereas Israel once had few options to fulfill its energy needs, it now can rely not only upon Cyprus and its own Eastern Mediterranean gas fields, but also the United Arab Emirates. Abu Dhabi’s human rights record is far from perfect, but at least it does not incite genocide.

Israel need not break ties with Azerbaijan; there is still much about which the two countries can cooperate. But, just as the United States did not let its Arab partners dictate the U.S. relationship with Israel nor let Pakistan and India dictate Washington’s ties to the other, neither should Azerbaijan presume to dictate Israel’s relationship with Armenia. Rather than be partisan in the dispute, Israel’s goal should be to have cordial relations with all parties. So long as Jerusalem supports Baku uncritically, however, not only will Israel bring a lasting moral shame upon itself, but it will also create precedents corrosive to its own long-term strategic interests.

Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). You can follow him on Twitter: @mrubin1971.

https://nationalinterest.org/feature/israel%E2%80%99s-azerbaijan-mistake-173476?fbclid=IwAR1p9cV76lG4hNLtE2vknHa_svE1We3VXU5wT0fn3Aoq5HgreLC80fNuHRU

[Yervant1]

The National Interest

Nov 29 2020

Sanctions on Azerbaijan Should Go Beyond Military and Aid Embargo

It is time for Congress to act, acknowledge the illegality of any further aid to Azerbaijan and ensure individuals responsible for war crimes are held to account.

by Michael Rubin

STEPANAKERT, NAGORNO-KARABAKH—Armenians are angry at the U.S. State Department. On March 26, 2020, Deputy Secretary Stephen Biegun granted Azerbaijan its annual waiver to Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act of 1992. In effect, Biegun certified that Azerbaijan both remained committed to diplomacy to resolve its dispute with Armenia and would assist to counter terrorism. Absent such certification, the United States would be unable to provide aid and military assistance to Azerbaijan.

Either there was a massive intelligence failure or diplomats lied. Azerbaijanis surprised Armenians when they launched a massive, multi-pronged assault on Nagorno-Karabakh in the early morning hours of September 27, a sleepy Sunday with Armenians at home or in church. Missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, and airstrikes targeted military bases, key infrastructure, and civilian targets near-simultaneously across Nagorno-Karabakh, a territory which Josef Stalin had awarded to Azerbaijan at the beginning of his rule but which sought union with Armenia as the Soviet Union began to crumble and declared its independence as the Soviet Union dissolved. Over subsequent years, ethnic violence grew. Azeris launched pogroms against the Armenian Christian population in Sumgait and Baku while Armenian forces reportedly killed villagers at Khujaly. Ultimately, Armenians broke Azerbaijan’s siege of Nagorno-Karabakh and occupied Azerbaijani districts separating Nagorno-Karabakh from Armenia proper. The self-declared but unrecognized Republic of Artsakh has since ruled the territories.

In 1992, Azerbaijan and Armenia committed themselves to resolve the dispute diplomatically through the Minsk Group, an Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe body co-chaired by France, Russia, and the United States. Diplomats say the parties agreed to a basic land-for-peace deal which neutral peacekeepers likely from Scandinavia would guarantee.

While fighting flared on occasion over the decades along the lines-of-control, the most recent war was an order of magnitude greater than anything seen in decades. Officials in Nagorno-Karabakh (where I have traveled using my own general travel funding and without the sponsorship of any Armenian, Azeri, or other organization) liken it to “Pearl Harbor.” In hindsight, they are right.

The Azerbaijan-Turkey surprise attack came after an escalating series of joint military exercise which the State Department and U.S. intelligence community seemingly ignored. Between July 29 and August 10, 2020, for example, the two armies carried out the so-called TurAz Eagle 2020 exercises involving ground and air assaults with live fire. Turkish F-16s used in the exercise remained in Azerbaijan and subsequently participated in the September 27 attack. The two armies also conducted “war games“ in May. That same month, Azerbaijan deployed a Turkish-manufactured multiple launch rocket system near the Nagorno-Karabakh border. On February 25, 2020, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Ilham Aliyev, the presidents of Turkey and Azerbaijan respectively, inked an agreement to provide greater Turkish weaponry to Azerbaijan. In short, Turkey and Azerbaijan appear to have decided months before their surprise attack to dispense with the Minsk process.

Azerbaijan’s abandonment of diplomacy would be reason enough for the White House and State Department to end its waiver of Section 907, but Aliyev has also violated counter-terror commitments by utilizing Syrian mercenaries who apparently have Al Qaeda or Islamic State links in the fight. Armenian officials confirm to me the capture of Syrian mercenaries. International journalists have also confirmed the participation of the Syrians. Simply put, any continued waiver for Azerbaijan flies in the face of the law and insults Congress.

Now that the guns have fallen silent, however, the incoming Biden administration should impose Global Magnitsky Act sanctions on those responsible for human rights abuses and war crimes in the conflict. Azerbaijan is an absolute dictatorship, ranked below both Cuba and the Hamas-run Gaza Strip in political freedom. The decision to deceive the United States and resort to a military surprise attack rests with both Aliyev and his wife (and vice president) Mehriban. Indeed, the Dutch Parliament has already approved sanctions on the pair for this reason.

The need for Magnitsky sanctions is also crucial because both during the war and in its aftermath, Azeri forces and Syrian mercenaries have videoed themselves torturing and subsequently executing prisoners, both military and civilian. At the very least, the United States and Europe must demand Azerbaijan identify its personnel and militias who appear on the videos and to hand them over to international authorities for war crimes prosecutions. Any Azeri or Turkish official under whom they served should also face prosecution if they gave the order to conduct atrocities or if they failed to stop such actions.

Eight years ago, I testified before Congress on the South Caucasus. At the time, I considered Azerbaijan a better ally to the United States than Armenia, but today the reality is the opposite because of two factors: First, in 2018, Armenia underwent a democratic revolution. Today, it is a democracy while Azerbaijan has slid further into dictatorship. Second, Azerbaijan’s use of Syrian mercenaries shows it has become a terror sponsor rather than counter-terror partner.

Now that the guns in Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan have fallen silent, it is easy to ignore Nagorno-Karabakh and move on. This would be a mistake. Not only is the integrity of U.S. and multilateral diplomacy at stake, but so is the credibility of U.S. law. To do nothing would both affirm the idea that might makes right and reward the aggressors. Inaction would guarantee Turkey and Azerbaijan would continue to use Islamist mercenaries in a way that could inflame ethnic tension and promote religious warfare. It is time for Congress to act, acknowledge the illegality of any further aid to Azerbaijan and ensure individuals responsible for war crimes are held to account.

Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

https://nationalinterest.org/feature/sanctions-azerbaijan-should-go-beyond-military-and-aid-embargo-173499?fbclid=IwAR1HxdSu136RZppIHspwk3a7Lw1sytJpUo-Jiejd3BGIoJGoqyOIXkaCzIo

[MosJan]

"Aleksander Lapshin

 

 

Friends, I wanted to say that my famous red jacket in which I flew with a personal jet of President Aliyev from Minsk to Baku on February 7, 2017 sold for $ 2700 The jacket has been kept in a vacuum bag all the time, never been washed and preserves the smell of a chair that the head of Azerbaijan, his family members and other cones in the government of this regime.
The money will go to help wounded Armenian soldiers and literally tomorrow we will divide this amount into about 15-20 guys in hospitals in Yerevan. It's the small thing I can do.
Tomorrow night, or the day after tomorrow morning we will edit a video of what we do these days. I think it will be released on Vadim Harutyunov's channel ′′ Antitopor ", he is here with me in Yerevan."

[Yervant1]

Modern Diplomacy

Nov 13 2020

Azeri, Turkish War Crimes Against Armenians Must Not Go Unpunished

Published

3 weeks ago

on

November 13, 2020

By

Uzay Bulut

• • 1 Comment

The war launched by Azerbaijan and Turkey against the Armenian Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno Karabakh) in the South Caucuses on September 27 has been halted through an agreement, which was brokered by Russia and imposed on Armenia. Based on the circulating agreement, Armenians must relinquish most of their homeland in Artsakh to Azerbaijan by December 1, forcing any Armenians living in those regions to depart before that date.

During their indiscriminate shelling of Artsakh, the aggressors – Azerbaijan, and Turkey, accompanied by Syrian jihadist forces – have committed many war crimes against Armenians. They have murdered civilians and injured journalists. They have burned villages, forests, and churches. They have tortured and beheaded Armenians, and executed prisoners.

BBC reported on October 24:”One video posted on a messaging app shows what appears to be two Armenians in military uniforms being captured by troops from Azerbaijan.A second video seemingly shows the same Armenians being shot with their hands behind their backs.Armenian authorities have identified the men as Benik Hakobyan, 73, and 25-year-old Yuri Adamyan.”

Azerbaijani forces also used cluster munitions and white phosphorus against Artsakh. “Azerbaijan has repeatedly used widely banned cluster munitions in residential areas in Nagorno-Karabakh,” according to an October 23 report by Human Rights Watch (HRW). “Cluster munitions have been banned because of their widespread indiscriminate effect and long-lasting danger to civilians,” it added.

The false, obsessive belief that Artsakh belongs to Azerbaijan has resulted in an ethnic cleansing against indigenous Armenians from their lands.

The area called Artsakh, originally one of the ancient provinces of Armenia, has preserved a majority Armenian population throughout the centuries. Despite this, Artsakh was annexed by Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin to the New Soviet Republic of Azerbaijan in the early 1920s. Armenian peaceful requests for self-determination were violently punished by Azerbaijan.

Under Azeri control, Armenians were subject to severe persecution such as pogroms in Sumgait and Baku from 1988 to 1990. The Soviet Union collapsed the following year, and Azerbaijan, Armenia and Artsakh declared independence. Azerbaijan, however, rejected Artsakh’s independence claim and chose to launch a war in 1992, which lasted two years and cost the lives of approximately 30,000 people.

26 years later, Armenians in Artsakh are once again assaulted by Azerbaijan. This time, arms supplies and diplomatic support from Turkey helped give Azerbaijan the upper hand in the conflict. Several news agencies, governments and the United Nations have also reported that Turkey sent jihadist terrorists from Syria to support Azerbaijan in its fight against the Armenians.

“We now have information which indicates that Syrian fighters from jihadist groups have (transited) through Gaziantep (southeastern Turkey) to reach the Nagorno-Karabakh theatre of operations,” French President Emmanuel Macron told reporters at an EU summit in Brussels. “It is a very serious new fact, which changes the situation.”

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UN Human Rights)also reported on November 11:

“The UN Working Group on the use of mercenaries said there were widespread reports that the Government of Azerbaijan, with Turkey’s assistance, relied on Syrian fighters to shore-up and sustain its military operations in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone, including on the frontline. The fighters appeared to be motivated primarily by private gain, given the dire economic situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, the UN experts said. In case of death, their relatives were reportedly promised financial compensation and Turkish nationality.

“‘The way in which these individuals were recruited, transported and used in and around the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone appeared consistent with the definition of a mercenary, as set out by relevant international legal instruments, including the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries, to which Azerbaijan is a party,’ said Chris Kwaja, who chairs the Working Group.

“‘Moreover, reports indicate that Turkey engaged in large-scale recruitment and transfer of Syrian men to Azerbaijan through armed factions, some of which are affiliated with the Syrian National Army. The alleged role of Turkey is all the more concerning given the similar allegations addressed earlier this year by the Working Group in relation its role in recruiting, deploying and financing such fighters to take part in the conflict in Libya,’ Kwaja added.”

The UN report was released two days after the treaty was signed, but Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was always transparent about his support for the war against Artsakh. “We support Azerbaijan until victory,” Erdogan said on October 6. “I tell my Azerbaijani brothers: May your ghazwa be blessed.”

Ghazwa in Islam refers to a battle or raid against non-Muslims for the expansion of Muslim territory and/or conversion of non-Muslims to Islam.

In another speech on November 1, Erdogan said, “We are in Syria, Libya, Azerbaijan. We have displayed the same dignified attitude from the Mediterranean to the Black Sea, from Syria to Libya, from Cyprus to Karabakh.”

Prior to the war, Artsakh’s population was around 150,000. Turkish and Azeri aggression against the region has caused massive destruction on civilian infrastructure including homes and hospitals and the displacement of about 90,000 Armenians. On October 23, a group of genocide scholars issued a statement “on the imminent genocidal threat deriving from Azerbaijan and Turkey against Artsakh.”

Completely abandoned by the international community and faced with an existential threat, Armenia had to sign an agreement which allows Azerbaijan to take over much of Artsakh. With 60% of Artsakh destroyed and the remainder of land to be surrounded by hostile Azeri forces, many indigenous Armenians who have lived in Artsakh for generations see no choice other than to flee their homeland.

Meanwhile, during the war, hundreds of Turks and Azeris took to the streets in the French city of Lyon, looking for Armenians. They marched with Turkish flags, chanting Allahuakbar (Allah is the greatest), and “Where are you Armenians? Where are you? We are here… sons of bitches.”

Jonathan Lacôte, French ambassador to Armenia, announced that French police were protecting Armenian community centers in France from Turkish and Azeri attacks and vandalism.

In another move to counter Turkish aggression, the French Interior Ministry banned a Turkish ultra-nationalist group known as the Grey Wolves after a memorial to victims of the 1915 Armenian Genocide was defaced.

The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned the decision, saying that “there is no such a movement called ‘Grey Wolves’. Attempts to resort to imaginary decisions presuming the existence of such a movement or formation based on some individuals and their actions, reflects the latest contradictory psychology that this country lives in.”

The Grey Wolf movement, however, does exist. The Grey Wolves (Turkish: Bozkurtlar), officially known as Idealist Hearths (Turkish: Ülkü Ocakları) is a Turkish far-right, racist organization and movement affiliated with Turkey’s Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). The movement has been involved in many acts of violence against civilians as well as political and religious figures. This includes the Alevi massacre in the city of Maras in southeast Turkey in 1978 and the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II in 1981.

Attacks against Armenians in the South Caucasus and Europe demonstrate that this war is not only about land. It is about pan-Turkic, expansionist aspirations of Turkey and Azerbaijanas well as their unrelenting, genocidal hatred against Armenians.

As was the case during the 1915 Armenian genocide by Ottoman Turkey, the international community has once again abandoned Armenians, who are an indigenous and peaceful people. If new and effective steps are not taken by the civilized world immediately, neo-Ottomanism, pan-Turkism and jihad will win through the agreement imposed on Armenia.

Meanwhile, some opposition to the agreement has begun emerging in Europe. On November 11, France 24 reported that the French presidency said it was studying the parameters of the Russian-brokered ceasefire, adding that a long-term deal should also “preserve Armenia’s interests.” Macron’s office quoted him as saying that efforts should be made “without delay” to try to come up with a “lasting political solution to the conflict that allows for the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh to remain in good conditions and the return of tens of thousands of people who have fled their homes.”

To guarantee the return of Armenians to their ancient homeland and to prevent the complete erasure of the remaining Armenian cultural heritage by totalitarian Azerbaijan, Western governments must officially recognize Artsakh. The West must let dictators know that their war crimes and genocidal ambitions will not go unpunished.

 

https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2020/11/13/azeri-turkish-war-crimes-against-armenians-must-not-go-unpunished/?fbclid=IwAR2XUL8E_mqL6RXRmu-HpWF4eKcGbvnaz5Lm-eLPJ9N-rnNRk3fZjxP_3EU

[Yervant1]

The National Interest

Nov 30 2020

Is This the End of Azerbaijan?

Azeris may celebrate November 10 as the date of their victory over Armenia in the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War but, when the heady days of celebration recede, they may just realize it marks the beginning of the end to true Azeri independence.

by Michael Rubin

When Armenian prime minister Nikol Pashinyan accepted a ceasefire on Nov. 10, 2020, Azerbaijan president Ilham Aliyev had reason to feel triumphant. He reversed the territorial losses suffered by his father, Azerbaijan’s former president, at the end of the first Nagorno-Karabakh War. He had successfully fooled the United States by committing to diplomacy in exchange for cash and military aid only to then launch a surprise attack to achieve militarily far more than he might have diplomatically. He also cemented his own power: By transforming himself into an indispensable ally for Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Russian president Vladimir Putin, he may calculate that they will preserve his power in Azerbaijan should there be any significant unrest, much as Putin has spared no effort to protect Russian interests by propping up Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.

Armenia lost the war and Aliyev won. But Azerbaijan also lost. Azerbaijani flags may fly over Shusha, also known among Armenians as Shushi, and Kalbajar, but Aliyev’s victory comes at the expense of Azerbaijani independence. In order to cement personal power and the likely guarantee that his wife and son will succeed him, Aliyev has sold out Azerbaijani sovereignty.

Russian troops are now in Azerbaijan. In both theory and reality, they are enforcing a ceasefire between Azerbaijan and Armenia, but the re-insertion of Russian forces in the region has also been Putin’s longstanding goal as step-by-step he appears to return all former Soviet states to his fold. Perhaps Aliyev felt confident accepting Russian troops because they cemented the gains he and Turkish forces achieved during the war, but Aliyev forgot that while Russian troops are quick to enter, they seldom exit.

The Turks, too, are unlikely to leave Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan’s war aim was Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding Azeri districts, which Armenia had taken in the 1988—1994 war. But Turkey’s motivation was different. Erdogan and the military’s intellectual drivers like Doğu Perinçek have long embraced pan-Turkic ambitions to link Turkey culturally, economically, and politically with Azerbaijan and Turkic states of Central Asia. Driving from Ankara’s Esenboğa Airport into town, visitors pass a roadside mural decorated with the flags of Turkic republics from Azerbaijan to East Turkestan, as pro-independence Chinese Uighurs call it. Armenia, however, is an impediment to Erdoğan’s grand ambitions as it (and Georgia) physically separate Turkey from the Turkic republics. The ceasefire agreement not only reportedly gave Turkey a corridor through Armenian territory (although the mechanisms of that road remains unclear), but Turkey will also send troops to a joint Turkish-Russian monitoring center. Turkish special forces are in Baku, and Turkish F-16 jets remain stationed at Azerbaijani bases. Aliyev may look at Erdoğan as a friend but Erdoğan sees Aliyev as the means to an end.

Finally, there are the Syrian mercenaries. Turkey facilitated their transport into Azerbaijan, and Aliyev welcomed their contribution. Now, however, it is unlikely Aliyev has the ability to force their exit, even if he wanted to do so. Just as Turkey was able to direct the mercenaries’ fire against Armenians, they could just as easily utilize them to target any Azeris who oppose Turkey’s aims.

Azerbaijan first won independence in 1918, but that lasted a mere twenty-three months as Russian forces moved in on Azerbaijan’s oil-rich territory. The dissolution of the Soviet Union gave Azerbaijan a second chance. The Supreme Council of the Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic declared Azerbaijan’s independence on Oct. 18, 1991, a move subsequently confirmed by referendum. While this period of independence has lasted considerably longer, the end result is the same: foreign troops on Azeri territory answering not to Baku but rather to the Kremlin and the Ak Saray. Azeris may celebrate Nov. 10 as the date of their victory over Armenia in the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War but, when the heady days of celebration recede, they may just realize it marks the beginning of the end to true Azeri independence and the beginning of the country’s subordination to Russian and Turkish suzerainty.

Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a frequent author for the National Interest.

https://nationalinterest.org/feature/end-azerbaijan-173513?fbclid=IwAR3wY4vUUi4iLK94wtacbCcs5TLfTbaat2lroxGEIv2ej_sAUKFRlAcnKiM

[Yervant1]

Statehood: A Unifying Force Based on Facts

K.M. Greg Sarkissian

December 2, 2020

I write this letter with the hope that it will reach out to each and every citizen of Armenia and implore them to see Armenia from a perspective that takes into account the realities of the situation today. I hope it will encourage us all to remember that there are current issues of statehood which are of greater priority than placing blame and seeking revenge. If chaos ensues and the country’s rule of law is jeopardized, another loser in this process would be the people of Armenia and The Republic of Artsakh.

 

Before I begin assessing the facts and realities of Armenia’s position

today, I want to acknowledge that many of the points I will raise may have been made at various times, by well-regarded members of the Armenian community, people like Eric Hacopian, Jirair Libaridian, Ruben Vardanyan, Noubar Afeyan, Daron Acemoglu, and others. My contribution to this important conversation will focus on not only what has happened, but on how Armenia can refocus itself on advancing the country. I should say, I do not pretend to have the answers or solutions to advancing the country. I would rather like to highlight the importance of transcending the current ethos of individualism for collectivism.

 

As a state, Armenia must decipher how it can best operate in the geopolitical system: at the heart of this, the attributes of statehood must be upheld. One thing is crystal clear to us all - without a realistic detached approach by experienced professionals on the current state of the nation, no leadership can hope to sustain Armenia’s statehood. Statehood does not have to mean a democratic, independent entity as some would like to consider Armenia, but rather, statehood is formed by a number of attributes that a country must actively uphold. To this end, Armenia must resist blind nationalism and the urge to point fingers, to place blame, and to spread needless hatred. We cannot keep looking over our shoulders for the knife in our backs. We must reorient ourselves to consider the unstable reality that Armenia currently faces.

 

Much has been said about the facts and realities Armenia is facing. Still, I present some of them here again as they are vital and therefore must form the basis of any conversation or analysis.

• Armenia lost the war in Artsakh against the invasion of Azerbaijani forces who were supported by NATO member Turkey, equipped with imported Foreign Terrorist Fighters (FTFs) and armed with advanced Israeli weaponry, including drones, which played a major role in destroying Artsakh’s defenses. Anyone who anticipated an outcome other than a loss against this large offensive was not carrying out an honest assessment of the factors at play.
• Armenia has lost some of its youngest and brightest. The country has suffered the loss of thousands of civilians as victims of this war. People have lost their homes, schools, livelihoods, and the pillars of their communities.
• The Republic of Artsakh has, within a month and a half, lost seven districts, held supposedly as a protective buffer zone and some of their own territory, in exchange for a forced ceasefire without a peace treaty for a future relationship with Azerbaijan.
• Turkey has become a tremendous powerhouse due to its strategic location, with numerous pipelines directly passing through its territory: Caspian Pipeline, Baku-Novorossiysk, Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan Pipeline, Baku–Tbilisi–Erzurum Pipeline, BlueStream Gas Pipeline, Trans Anatolian Pipeline, and Nabucco West pipeline, to name a few. Moreover, with this war, Turkey has solidified its place in the South Caucasus, an area it has long aspired to influence: to the detriment of Russia.
• Azerbaijan has had its territories and more returned, and as such, it does not mind if this conflict freezes in this fashion for the foreseeable future.
• Overall, this war quickly became a regional game of chess between Russia and Turkey, with stakes in this region between these two powers already high, given their conflicts in Syria, Libya, and the Eastern Mediterranean and now in the Caucasus. In essence, The Republic of Artsakh became another pawn in this regional, geopolitical game of chess. Depending on the ensuing actions of these powers, Armenia’s statehood and sovereignty may be threatened.
• For Israel, whose relationship with Azerbaijan is largely transactional (through arms and oil), this war has solidified the utility of the relationship between these nations. With its military abilities heightened thanks to Israel's weaponry and drones, Azerbaijan gained the upper hand against Armenia, in the process securing for Israel key strategic footholds. This relationship continues beyond the battlefield, Israel-Azerbaijan cooperation will enable each nation to expedite its respective agenda, further risking Armenia’s security. Thus, Iran has also been dealt a blow to its security due to this war: with Israel now having a base in Azerbaijan towards Iran’s northern border, it will place the entirety of Iran within range of Israeli offensives.
• If the situation were to escalate to a war between Iran and the US-Israel alliance, Azerbaijan's relationship provides important military strongholds for Israel, which they can operate in a broader area.
• It is in this context that we must recognize the many fault lines where Armenia finds itself. These being at the heart of the Christian and Muslim world, the Shia and Sunni world, the East and West, EU and EEU Russia and NATO member (Turkey). A quick look at the maps below will demonstrate the many demographic considerations between Turkey and Russia, where at least 12 million Turkic speaking people live:

• Armenia has lost a significant element of its sovereignty. Russian forces now control the South, East, and West borders of the country. One can only imagine what will happen if Russia withdraws from these borders. Notwithstanding the above, Armenia is a key strategic foothold for Russia in the Caucasus.

Keeping the above realities in mind, an honest assessment must be undertaken. One must analyze the importance of the ceasefire for Artsakh, and consider if there was any feasible alternative but to sign such an agreement, irrespective the governmental body in power. There should also be a candid analysis of the country’s military preparedness for defense and security over the last 30 years. It is vital to remember that a ceasefire is not a peace treaty or a final agreement; much is still subject to change at the will and whim of those involved. The ceasefire, if upheld, offers five years for Armenia to position itself in such a way that the negotiated peace can provide defended borders and security, and repair and rebuild the infrastructure it needs to secure a sustainable statehood. In any assessment of how Armenia should conduct negotiations for peace, the current realities must be considered. Collective unity of major parties towards sustaining Armenian statehood is the only viable mechanism to finding a solution to the precarious spot in which the country finds itself.

 

It is natural to expect that when an organization has failed, the head of the entity will resign. It is similarly natural that the anger of the people, exposed to the complacency of the state over the last thirty years, will be directed at the face of the current government, Prime Minister Pashinyan. With this said, it is not an issue about individuals. One person alone will not solve this crisis as one person alone has not caused it. Nevertheless, if there is a change to be made in government, it must be done by way of the constitutional processes, or through a vote of confidence or no confidence process in the Parliament.

 

The outcome, and arguably the likelihood, of this war, should not have been a shock to those in power in Armenia had they carefully considered the changing geopolitical climate around the Republic of Artsakh. So much of the geopolitics have changed in the last ten years, especially relating to the US and Israel versus Iran conflict. Additionally, rapid changes in technology within the region continues to change in ways that have hinted at the threat to Armenia’s borders for some time. Those leading Armenia now and in the future must not shy away from these realities. To protect its statehood, Armenia must adapt with them.

 

The current government's representatives, together with the opposition, have a choice: either they play politics and promote hate speech towards one another, weakening the state from within and therefore allowing the country to descend into chaos. Or, they allow an independent body to analyze the current situation and act as a facilitator for communication between these rival parties. This would create a plausible next step that is critical to sustaining statehood and bringing peace to the streets.

 

There is a profound hunger for true leadership in Armenia. There are tangible problems that must be dealt with: security, humanitarian needs of refugees and IDPs affected by the destruction and death of war, the rampant COVID-19 pandemic, ensuring the foundations of statehood and sovereignty are upheld, and the rule of law protected in this tremendously fragile and emotional time. These issues cannot be dealt with by tribal parties congregated around one person. More than ever, populism should make way for the serious considerations of statehood. No more fanning public sentiments and anger. The impending negotiations and conversations cannot be politicized; they must be earnestly focused on the future of Armenia while upholding statehood as the top priority.

 

Writing this plea as one of the founders of Zoryan Institute, I am urging the powers inside and outside the government of Armenia to consider this suggestion: bring together prominent representatives from the various factions of society into a committee for discussion. This committee will include government representatives from the past four administrations of the Republic of Armenia, including Levon Ter Petrosian, Robert Kocharyan, Serzh Sargsyan, and Nikol Pashinyan, each selecting a representative to join this committee on their behalf. For example, Levon Ter Petrosian may select Jirair Libaridian as a historian and former special envoy, whose experience and involvement in negotiations with various sides of this conflict on behalf of Armenia would be invaluable. I also suggest that this committee should include former and current presidents of Artsakh and their own selected representatives.

 

Further, I would suggest the inclusion of other professionals from across the diaspora. Possible names that come mind are Ruben Vardanyan (for the Russian-Armenian diaspora, one of the founders of Aurora Prize), Dr. Noubar Afeyan (as head of Moderna, bringing his immense scientific knowledge, specifically vaccination and pandemic expertise), Daron Acemoglu (renowned international economist whose input would be critical to the rebuilding of the economy of the state), and a long time career diplomat and representative of Armenia, His Excellency Amb. Armen Yeganian, whose knowledge would be a valuable contribution to bridging the gaps between Armenia and the nations where he served as an Ambassador. This committee will bring other experts as they see fit to aid in their analysis in search for solutions. This group can then transmit their findings to the government and recommendations to their network worldwide, engaging the diaspora and mobilizing the support that Armenia desperately needs.

 

I urge the current government of the Republic of Armenia and all opposition parties not to waste any more time in forming such committees as described above. The country must assess the forces and factors that have shaped its current reality and create a plan to move forward. The sooner this can occur, the sooner Armenia can act on a plausible solution for statehood, bringing peace and stability for all Armenians.

 

 

The content of this article solely reflects the personal opinion of the author and does not represent the official position of the Zoryan Institute.

[Yervant1]

Public Radio of Armenia

Dec 2 2020

Belgian parliamentary panel adopt resolution condemning Azerbaijani-Turkish aggression against Karabakh

The Federal Parliament of Belgium is expected to consider a resolution calling for the immediate withdrawal of the Azerbaijani armed forces from Nagorno-Karabakh.

The Chamber of Representatives of the Belgian Parliament will consider the resolution in the plenary session shortly. The resolution was approved by the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Belgian Federal Parliament today, the European Armenian Federation for Justice and Development (FEAJD) reports.

The resolution condemns the military aggression of Azerbaijan, supported by the Turkish authorities and foreign mercenaries, against the Armenian population of the Republic of Artsakh, as well as the deliberate Azerbaijani attacks on civilians and the use of cluster munitions and phosphorus bombs.

The resolution clearly calls for the immediate withdrawal of the Azerbaijani armed forces and their Turkish and mercenary allies from the Nagorno-Karabakh region, conquered by the use of force and violence. In its preamble, the resolution recalls that in addition to the right to self-determination of the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh, the principle of non-use of force constitutes a basic principle of the OSCE Minsk Group, which was not respected by Azerbaijan.

Since the final status of Artsakh was not mentioned in the ceasefire declaration signed on November 9, the Chamber calls on the Belgian Government to support the resumption of the negotiations, under the aegis of the OSCE Minsk Group, which will have to take into account in particular the right to self-determination of the population of Artsakh when drawing up a compromise on the final status of Nagorno-Karabakh.

After adoption of the resolution in plenary session of the Chamber, the Belgian Government will have the task of demanding that Turkey no longer interfere militarily in the conflict, that it immediately cease playing a destabilizing role in the Caucasus and especially that it stops promoting the transfer of Syrian mercenaries and jihadists to Nagorno-Karabakh, by organizing their immediate withdrawal from the region.

According to the resolution, any interference by Turkey in the ceasefire monitoring mission is seen as dangerous for the safety of the local population. Any such mechanism will have to be implemented within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group.

The FEAJD and the Armenian National Committee of Belgium ((CDCA Belgium) welcome the fact that the Chamber asks the Federal Government to do everything possible to contribute, with its European partners, to the reconstruction of the destroyed or damaged buildings of Artsakh and to provide humanitarian aid to the local population and all the families of the victims and refugees. The Government should support the dispatch of a UNESCO mission to preserve the architectural and religious heritage located in the areas of Artsakh now controlled by Azerbaijan.

Finally, the Chamber condemns in the strongest terms the execution of prisoners of war and demands that the perpetrators of these crimes be prosecuted and punished. It proposes the dispatch of international observers without delay to gather evidence of war crimes, such as torture and the execution of prisoners.

The FEAJD and the (CDCA Belgium) are now calling on all federal parliamentarians to adopt this resolution during the next plenary session and will remain attentive to ensuring that the motions voted on are effectively implemented by the federal government as quickly as possible.

https://en.armradio.am/2020/12/02/belgian-parliament-to-adopt-resolution-calling-for-withdrawal-of-azerbaijani-forces-from-nagorno-karabakh/

[Yervant1]

The Telegraph, UK

Dec 2 2020

Dispatch: Knife-wielding Armenian refuses to leave home as Azerbaijani troops move in to reclaim final swathe of territory

“We built this place with our sweat. I have no concerns about dying here.”

By Jack Losh Lachin 2 December 2020 • 8:00pm

As trucks packed with Azerbaijani soldiers rolled through the empty streets of Lachin on Tuesday, Levon Kevorkyan sat outside his shop armed only with a knife.

Mr Kevorkyan, a 48-year-old Armenian, moved to the town in Nagorno-Karabakh at the end of the last war over the territory between his country and Azerbaijan, two former members of the Soviet bloc.

Now he swears he will not leave, despite the Armenian government’s pledge to return the land as part of a bitterly contested peace deal following the latest eruption of hostilities.

“I will stay here until they raze this place to the ground,” he told the Telegraph, wearing camouflage and a leather biker jacket. “We built this place with our sweat. I have no concerns about dying here.”

On Tuesday, Lachin district was the last of three areas of Nagorno-Karabakh ceded by Yerevan to Azerbaijan under the terms of a Russia-brokered peace deal that ended weeks of armed conflict.

Russian peacekeepers now control the single, winding road that connects Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenia - ensuring safe passage for the ethnic Armenians moving through what is now Azerbaijani-held territory .

In theory the Armenian settlements on either side of the so-called Lachin Corridor fall under the aegis of the peacekeepers, but their fate is unclear as Azerbaijani troops surround them on all sides.

“Nobody knows what’s going to happen to the town,” said Vache Sargsyan, 35, who joined Mr Kervokyan by his shop. “Pretty much everyone has left but we decided to stay here."

Mr Sarsgsyan, a former employee of the local seismological centre, sent his wife and children into Armenia for sanctuary when he was conscripted into the war effort.

“I have a hunting rifle and I’m ready to use it," he said. At this point though the Russians aren’t allowing us to walk around with guns.”

In fact for the Russian taskforce sent to the region to smooth over the transfer of power, these militant hold-outs present an unwelcome obstacle to the tentative deal.

“Go inside and change out of your uniform,” one shouted at Mr Kevorkyan, as an Armenian military officer warned he would be arrested if he failed to comply.

When Mr Kevorkyan moved here in 1994, ethnic Armenian forces had taken not only Nagorno Karabakh but also seven surrounding areas including the districts of Aghdam, Kalbajar and Lachin - all of which have now been returned to the control of Azerbaijan.

During that brutal, six-year conflict - one of the most devastating to erupt during the fall of the Soviet Union - hundreds of thousands of both ethnic Armenians and Azeris were violently ejected from each other's lands.

Today the cycle of displacement and uncertainty has begun again.

“There was a rumour going around the governor had ordered everyone to evacuate by the end of the last week,” said Narine Rasoyan, a 39-year-old who lives with her five children and mother in the village of Aghayno, on the Lachin Corridor.

“Then we were told we don't need to leave. Nothing is clear,” she said, as she strolled down the road past a Russian checkpoint fortified with sandbags and a gun turret. An hour earlier, a dozen Azerbaijani military trucks carrying men and weapons had rumbled along the same road.

“We'd heard that the convoy would pass our homes and that we should be cautious,” she told the Telegraph. “They told us to stay calm. But look at my children - how can I not worry?”

The last remnant of Armenian authority in Lachin is found in a dilapidated building on the road that zigzags up to the hilltop town.

Inside Kerob Movsisyan, a lean and grey-haired officer, oversees a handful of men from the emergency services department who have stayed behind despite the departure of all Armenian soldiers.

“We haven't received that order yet so, until then, we continue our service,” said Mr Movsisyan. “No one really knows who's going to control this area. A few civilians have remained but almost everyone has left - they don't know what's going to happen and just don't feel safe.”

Asked about the mood among his men, he replied with a smile: "Martyrdom."

Back in the town centre, Mr Sargsyan and Mr Kevorkyan watched the Russian peacekeepers mill around the deserted town square - outgunned, outmanoeuvred and yet determined to remain.

“This is our land,” Mr Sargsyan said, among vehicles pockmarked by gunfire and houses burned down by fleeing residents to deny Azerbaijanis use of them.

“There is every reason to stay here.” He glanced at the desolate scene. "Well, one day there might be."

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/12/02/dispatch-knife-wielding-armenian-refuses-leave-home-azerbaijani/

[Yervant1]

Armenpress.am

Human Rights Watch: Armenian POWs badly mistreated in Azerbaijan

Save

Share

19:50, 2 December, 2020

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 2, ARMENPRESS. Azerbaijani forces have inhumanely treated numerous ethnic Armenian military troops captured in the conflict over Nagorno Karabakh, Human Rights Watch said today. They subjected these prisoners of war (POWs) to physical abuse and humiliation, in actions that were captured on videos and widely circulated on social media since October.

The videos depict Azerbaijani captors variously slapping, kicking, and prodding Armenian POWs, and compelling them, under obvious duress and with the apparent intent to humiliate, to kiss the Azerbaijani flag, praise Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, swear at Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, and declare that Nagorno-Karabakh is Azerbaijan. In most of the videos, the captors’ faces are visible, suggesting that they did not fear being held accountable.

“There can be no justification for the violent and humiliating treatment of prisoners of war,” said Hugh Williamson, Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Humanitarian law is absolutely clear on the obligation to protect POWs. Azerbaijan’s authorities should ensure that this treatment ends immediately.”

Although some of the prisoners depicted in videos Human Rights Watch reviewed have, in subsequent communications with their families, said they are being treated well, there are serious grounds for concern about their safety and well-being.

International humanitarian law, or the law of armed conflict, requires parties to an international armed conflict to treat POWs humanely in all circumstances. The third Geneva Convention protects POWs “particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.”

 

 

https://armenpress.am/eng/news/1036570.html?fbclid=IwAR1JY8tlvlrOoxiFgggdFknA98l_jEH5UjI0uV4vJEhvLPVqmV5_C4j6cts

[Yervant1]

CIVILNET.AM

3 December, 2020 03:05

Click CC for English.

After the fall of Hadrut, Hayk Khanumyan relocated to the western part of the Hadrut region, gathered a detachment of troops, and began organizing the self-defense of the villages. Volunteer soldier Angel Galstyan and Armenian Defense Army soldier Gary Abrahamyan and his men joined Khanumyan’s detachment.

A group of about sixty has been defending the villages of Khtsaberd and Hin Tagher since mid-October. They carried out military missions and prevented enemy advancements towards Lisagor and Shushi. Today the villages of Khtsaberd and Hin Tagher, as well as Mount Dizapayt and Kataro Monastery are all under Armenian control.

The CivilNet team spent two days with the detachment to hear their stories of war and hopes for the future.

https://www.civilnet.am/news/2020/12/03/A-Piece-of-Hadrut-Remains-Armenian/411299