re armenia and azerbaijan two views in article may seas smu edu pts seas smu edu paul thompson schreiber posted pts armenia and azerbaijan two views pts pts washington report on middle east affairs pts april may vol xi no pts pts pts pts pts life under blockade in yerevan pts pts by nancy najarian ms najarian wrote on her personal observations if somebody wishes to counter the reality she described fine pts pts pts pts the conflict over nagorno karabakh an azeri perspective pts pts by alec rasizade pts pts ar western readers have learned of the nagorno upper karabakh ar controversy through reports from that remote area by western ar correspondents and from commentaries by member of the long established ar armenian american community azeri views on this dispute have ar appeared rarely if at all in the western news media therefore let me ar present washington report readers with some basic truths about the ar origins of the conflict during the past two years if one reads all the commentaries on the subject a small minority of the writers have been armenia or azeri the following should be interesting ar armenian leaders claim that azerbaijan was the first to oppress and ar expel the armenian minority from the azerbaijani republic actually ar the initiative to banish the azeri minority and convert the armenian ar republic into a homogeneous state began in the winter of ar when azeris were driven out of armenia following that move ar there were massacres of armenians in the azerbaijani cities of sumgait ar in february and two years later in baku in january this not true other than simply checking the newspapers i will quote from an independent human rights report in the pax cristi netherlands september page we read by mid november many incidents took place in several places in azerbaijan the apf azeri popular front challenged the communist party for power after ten days the authorities came in with tanks to reimpose their power in nakhitchevan the last armenian villages were deported in ganja armenians were attacked and killed all armenian inhabitants fled the city between november and december refugees from ganja arrived in armenia while all azeris in armenia were chased away in this part of the world february start of organized anti armenian pogroms in azerbaijan come before november and december of ar azeri parliamentary committees have compiled evidence indicating that ar both events were inspired from moscow to secure russian imperial rule ar in the transcaucasus according to the roman principle of divide and ar rule similar conspiracies are evident throughout the five year ar history of the conflict it is interesting that the azeris killed burnt raped the armenians but the perpetrators blame russians and armenians themselves on other occasions ar each time the parties have been about to reach an agreement in ar zheleznovodsk moscow tehran rome geneva and alma ata an ar invisible hand provoked further bloodshed those interested in ar maintaining the azeri armenian conflict as well as the georgian ar turmoil are imperialist forces in russia and probably in iran incorrect when were the people of nagorno karabakh ever involved in an agreement never until azerbaijan sits down with the armenians of nagorno karabakh there will never be an end to this conflict ar the armenian offensive last spring created more than new azeri ar refugees from the captured towns of upper and lower karabakh and ar adjacent rural districts today azeri refugees throng the ar city of baku and environs providing more problems for the newly ar elected popular front government which is opposed by the rigidly ar nationalistic national independence party it s called war if the azerbaijanis didn t try to deport and allow the armenians of nagorno karabakh to live in their ways keep their armenian culture these armenians would not have had to defend their existence the azeris should not have assumed that armenians were going to roll over and play dead ar how can a western style democracy survive in a small muslim country ar where million of the million inhabitants are unemployed in the ar absence of any international effort to help azeri refugees as kurdish ar and bosnian refugees have been helped how can the azeri government ar reject the demand of these exiles to recapture their lands homes and ar possessions the azeri government should have thought about such thnings before they attempted to deprive armenians of lands homes and possessions ar such simple realities must be understood in the west ar misunderstanding caucasian politics leads both western and russian ar public opinion to imagine a permanent and therefore irreversible ar ethnic and religious rivalry in the caucasus true and you dr alec rasizade should practice what you preach ar i think western reluctance to interfere derives from this idea ar meanwhile continuation of the war could draw both eastern and western ar states into the conflict through activation of various security ar alliances these include on the armenian side the moscow led ar commonwealth forces under the tashkent mutual security pact signed ar may on the azeri side should turkey get involved as the ar guarantor of the nakhichevan autonomy through the kars treaty of oct ar these include the north atlantic treaty forces western interference turkish intervention the moment turkey dares step into this conflict it will close the doors of any chance of turkey being part of europe as if it ever will and will destroy the eastern third of anatolia dr rasizade international realpolitik is not as simple minded as you would have us believe ar upper karabakh generally is described in western press reports as an ar armenian enclave within azerbaijan the truth is that the armenians ar began to appear there only in the middle of the last century incorrect once again a brief scan of history addresses such a foolish claim armenians today refer to the area of nagorno karabakh as artsakh which comes from the urartian term urtekhe urtekhini no azeris yet ancient greeks referred to artsakh as orkhistena no azeris yet in the first half of the th century b c artsakh as part of ervandid armenia of media no azeris yet from the end of the th century b c artsakh was part of the armenian kingdom of ervan no azeris yet artsakh was still part of the armenian empire of tigran orkhistena or artsakh is refereed to by strabo as part of armenia no azeris yet after armenia was divided between the persian and byzantine empires in a d until artsakh was part of armenia no azeris yet end of the th century utik and artsakh became principalities of the aranshakhiks no azeris yet by the th century an artsakh dialect of armenian formed no azeris yet emperor konstantin addressees a letter to the prince of khachen to armenia khachen was the central principality of artsakh no azeris yet in the decree of paul i the number of armenian families in this area was stated as it was from the th to the th centuries that non armenians from central asia asia minor and kurdistan first began to be exercise political influence in the planes of artsakh caucasian muslims around karabakh in karabagh becomes part of russia officiallt part of russia some muslims in karabakh in the number of armenian churches in nagorno karabagh was priests parishioners in armenian towns and villages the armenian percentage of the population was over max azeris in karabakh assuming no kurds consider the following statement by the azerbaijani revcom on december the worker peasant government of azerbaidzan having been informed of the proclamation of armenia a soviet socialist republic sends its greetings to the brother people from this day the previous boundaries between armenia and azerbaidzan are annulled nagornyi karabakh zangezur and nakhichevan are recognized as integral parts of the armenian socialis republic long live the brotherhood and union of the workers and peasants of soviet armenia and azerbaidzan chairman of the revcom of azerbaidzan n narimanov people s commissar for foreign affairs guseinov ar a few years ago they celebrated the th anniversary of their ar resettlement from persia to karabakh after it came under russian ar rule no incorrect the celebration was the th anniversary of russian rule in the caucasus including karabakh ar at the same time the russian colonial administration also drew ar in russian and german settlers who were welcomed by azeris how ar would americans react if the large numbers of armenians living in ar southern california suddenly claimed an armenian homeland and ar demanded separation from california non sequitur ar armenian historians insist that before the armenian resettlement ar karabakh was inhabited by aboriginal christians that is correct armenian historians don t say this ar the people of medieval caucasian albania adopted christianity in the ar fourth century but those ancient residents had no link to and ar nothing in common with armenians considering the caucasian albans were of the armenian apostolic faith and their utilization of the armenian language in their liturgy makes such an argument totally invalid ar azeris would have a better claim to ar be successors of albania since azeris have for centuries inhabited ar dominated and developed the karabakh part of the azeri nation wishing to be part of a people non existent for nearly a millennium for geo political advantage is rather outrageous in addition to such absurdity azeris claim to be turks persians and all the while are azerizing their minorities such as the lezgians kurds tat talish and a host of other nationalities which may amount to nearly half the population of azerbaijan ar both armenia and azerbaijan last year signed the final act of the ar conference on security and cooperation in europe of and the ar paris charter for new europe of confirming their mutual ar adherence to the principle of inviolability of existing borders this ar principle means that the borders and territorial integrity of the ar republic of azerbaijan are to be guaranteed by all of the signatory ar nations not just by turkey such agreements do not give azerbaijan the right to de populate karabakh of armenians ar this is one key to intervention on behalf either of the u n the ar csce the commonwealth nato or iran the second key to untying the ar caucasian knot is to determine who is the aggressor according to the ar u n definition of fine so why has azerbaijan refused to allow un troops into the armenian enclave what is azerbaijan afraid of perhaps the fact that the territory is the home of armenians the un would by definition support the local population ar when that is accomplished the international community can and should ar apply to the aggressor in the caucasus international sanctions such as ar those presently being employed against serbia and montenegro in the ar former yugoslavia such decisive collective international action can ar halt further aggression in karabakh and prevent the armenian azeri ar conflict from growing and spreading azerbaijan s refusal to allow the armenians of karabakh to determine their own future the is issue not viewing isolating events out of context are actions that will address the karabakh conflict viewing events in a war in isolation and out of context is like viewing the landing at normandy as an act of allied aggression ar dr alec rasizade senior research officer at the academy of sciences ar of azerbaijan is a visiting researcher at the harriman institute of ar columbia university in new york ha david davidian dbd urartu sdpa org armenia has not learned a lesson in s d p a center for regional studies anatolia and has forgotten the p o box punishment inflicted on it cambridge ma late turkish president turgut ozal
