Karabakh refugee sitting on her bed in a cohabited room in a dilapidated kindergarten building in Massis, Armenia © Onnik James Krikorian 2024
Almost six months after the mass exodus of the Karabakh Armenians, their plight in Armenia remains as uncertain as ever. On Wednesday, some will even protest in Yerevan’s Freedom Square. There had been no major humanitarian crisis, despite claims of mass starvation as they crossed into Armenia via the Lachin checkpoint in late September, but the situation for many remains one of desperation or despair. A recent report by the International Crisis Group (ICG) highlighted that clearly earlier this month.
Malnourishment, insufficient medical assistance, and psychological trauma especially affected the most disadvantaged, previously inside Karabakh and now in Armenia. With limited financial support from the Armenian government, and trying to fit into an economy riding high mainly because of the re-export of EU goods to Russia, it was also hardly unexpected. Some of those problems were also borne out by my own visit last month to some of those refugees scattered across the country.
For a while, it was even uncertain how best to refer to the influx given that they simultaneously hold Armenian passports and are effectively considered as refugees inside Armenia itself. Some international non-governmental organisations internally used the term ‘displaced,’ while others such as the UN had their own – “persons in a refugee-like situation.” Now almost everyone calls them refugees.
Such ambiguities are not new and reminiscent of the situation I first encountered while documenting the plight of refugees in 1994 and then later from 2002 when terminology was dictated by the government. Those ethnic Armenians that fled Azerbaijan after the pogroms in Baku and Sumgait were “refugees,” but those from Karabakh were “displaced.”
[…]
Today, while Yerevan makes it possible for those from Karabakh to register for year-long temporary refugee status, it is nonetheless otherwise largely silent on their right to return even though the international community mentions it often. The government also makes certain assistance subject to applying for citizenship, such as loans to buy homes, something that Karabakh Armenians allege is by design.
Accepting that, some fear, could nullify any right to return, permanently or temporarily, or even disqualify them from claiming potential compensation in the future. Such fears are understandable since few of the displaced see a stable future in Armenia, though Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan rejects such accusations against his administration.
The full opinion piece can be read here.
