The Dichotomy of Perspectives on the Exodus from Artsakh (#2)
Posted on April. 25. 2024
BY Z. S. ANDREW DEMIRDJIAN
“Azerbaijan’s blockade of the Lachin Corridor…
in December 2022 and Azerbaijan’s military
attack on September 19, 2023, constitute
genocide under Article II c) and b)
of the Genocide Convention”.
Luis Moreno Ocampo
By breaching the ceasefire agreement of November 9, 2020 between Armenia and Azerbaijan brokered by Russia, President Ilham Aliyev subdued Artsdakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) with a blitzkrieg surprise attack at indigenous people of Stepanakert on September 19, 2023. Out of fear of war, violence, and persecution, the people of Artsakh fled their homeland en mass. As a result, the pundits began to write whether the exodus constituted ethnic cleansing, or genocide or both.
Now, it is important to know as who in the international community is batting for the indigenous people of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) and who is going against their rights and interests for fawning on the dictator of Azerbaijan.
For the sake of brevity, I have not cited those who consider the exodus from Artsakh to be forced or voluntary in my article titled The Capturing of Artsakh: Implications for Ethnic Cleansing and Genocide (published in Keghart last year). My article would have been longer had I included a review of the literature.
In this article, however, I am presenting a review of the literature about the dichotomous perspectives of some individuals or organizations that have written on the exodus of the indigenous people from their homeland to highlight their positions. So, Armenians would know as to who exonerates Azerbaijan of any wrongdoing for the sake of fawning on President Aliyev and those who accuse Azerbaijan for crimes against humanity.
Ideas have changed the world; ideas can also enhance the position of Armenia and Artsakh as members of the international community by knowing who their genuine friends are and those who are deplorably their Judas.
Th review of the literature provided me with the dichotomy of perspectives on the forced exodus from Artsakh and, thus, gave me two categories of claims in which sources are not listed in any special order:
1. Skeptical/Denialist Perspective: Those who claim doubt, require more information, or outright deny of any wrongdoing by Azerbaijan are as numerous as those who claim that ethnic cleansing and/or genocide have actually taken place.. Here are some examples of comments made after the exodus from Artsakh:
Naturally, Azerbaijani officials have denied the war-crime accusations of many observers, including ethnic cleansing and responded in such a way to maintain the innocence of their genocidal dictator, the president of Azerbaijan.
According to Dr. Saeed Bagheri’s (a lecturer at the University of Reading) article titled Forced Movement of Civilians in Nagorno-Karabakh?, published in Opinio Juris on October 20, 2023, the mass displacement of Armenians fails to meet the requirements to be considered a case of “forced movement” (i.e,, ethnic cleansing) under the relevant international law. “Under relevant international law”? There are no laws enacted yet to govern ethnic cleansing. Dr. Bagheri has used intuition in arriving at his outragious conclusion.
The gist of Dr. Saeed Bagheri’s article is to deny there was an ethnic cleansing of the population of Artsakh and the UN assessment of no force was employed to make the Armenians flee their homes. There is a dire need to inoculate the public against false claims to exonerate Azerbaijan’s crimes against humanity.
To add insult to injury, a group of UN inspectors have recently biasedly concluded that the exodus of Armenians from Artsakh had been done out of their own volition and that there has been no forced expulsion of Armenians from their homes. How credible that they all willingly and swiftly left their homes. Would any normal person suddenly leave behind his or her home, animals, belongings without any good reason? What a shallow argument based on subjective reasoning!
The United Nations Refugee Agency representative in Armenia said on September 29, 2023, there were no recorded incidents or cases of mistreatment against people on the move, and in response to questions from the media, they said they could not comment on whether this constituted ethnic cleansing and that they viewed it as a refugee situation.
A spokesperson for the US State Department declined to comment on constituting the events as ethnic cleansing. A prejudiced position like that coming from the longest democracy in the world is a blatant practice of double standards.
Samantha Power, the U.S. Humanitarian Aid Official and a former genocide scholar, declined to use the term “genocide” when she visited Armenia in October of 2023, but she did brave to say that testimony was already being gathered “from people who have fled violence, deprivation, and with the fear of living under the government of Azerbaijan”. Honesty must be the mark of a true scholar.
On Octobrer 3, 2023, Charles Michael, the President of the European Council, sheepishly refrained from characterizing the forced exodus of the Nagorno- Karabakh population as an attempt at ethnic cleansing for fear of being ostracized by Azerbaijan.
Leo Docherty, the UK Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, stated that he did not agree that Azerbaijan’s military operation in Nagorno-Karabakh constituted ethnic cleansing, If the natives of Artsakh were not ethnically cleansed, they should be found at home now, at their farms, at their vineyards, in their homeland. but they are all in exile now.
Maria Zakharova, the Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman of the Russian Federation stated that she would like “some facts to be provided regarding the alleged ethnic cleansing in Nagorno-Karabakh”, and asked for references to “at least some document from any international organization that is considered authoritative in Yerevan (for example, the UN or some other), or a statement indicating that such ethnic cleansing did take place”. Like a true politician, she is able to skirt the issue by asking for more information to avoid making a truthful statement.
Deputy Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation Mikhail Galuzin stated that unfortunately most Karabakh Armenians left the region by their own difficult, but voluntary choice, and that Russia was ready to facilitate safe return of those Karabakh Armenians who wish to do so. Who could stay home when the artillery and missile strikes are falling on their heads like a thunder storm, Mr. Galuzin?
The United Nations in Azerbaijan sent on October 1, 2023, a mission to Nagorno-Karabakh, led by the UN Resident Coordinator in Azerbaijan Vladanka Andreeva, to address humanitarian needs. The team also included the Director of the Coordination Division of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, as well as representatives from the FAO, the UNHCR, the UNICEF, the WHO, and other UN bodies. The UN mission reported that “they did not come across any reports — either from the local population or from others — of violence against civilians following the latest ceasefire.” What a credible story! The local population did not report that out of fear for their lives, they had to flee their homeland; those who had stayed in Artsakh most likely were afraid to speak against Azeri atrocities.
While visiting Stepanakert, the United Nations team reported to have found no evidence of damage to public infrastructure in