The BBC’s Azerbaijani Service has published a gallery of my photographs taken in the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh in 1994. Over 25,000 people were killed in the war waged in the early 1990s and a million forced to flee their homes.
Expectations of ending the long-running conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh are high ahead of a meeting between the two presidents hosted by Russian President Dimitry Medvedev in Kazan on 25 June. The war fought in the early 1990s ended in a ceasefire agreement signed in May 1994. Over 25,000 died and a million forced to flee from their homes.
Caucasus Conflict Voices is a voluntary grassroots initiative to amplify alternative views on the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh. Today marks the 17th anniversary of the 1994 ceasefire, but both sides are as far away as ever from signing a permanent peace deal. Marking the anniversary, the second edition of Caucasus Conflict Voices is now available for browsing online or downloading.
While it didn’t come as much of a surprise, the latest report from the International Crisis Group (ICG) makes depressing reading. Locked in a bitter stalemate since the war over the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh during which around 25,000 were killed and a million forced to flee their homes, a final peace deal remains as elusive as ever.
In a situation where Armenia and Azerbaijan are meant to be negotiating to end the conflict over the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh, civil society should be very active. However, it doesn’t appear as though it is, and not least because few people actually believe that a breakthrough is possible, especially when cross-border activities are far simpler to conduct in the area of Armenia-Turkey relations. Indeed, and to be quite frank, it is difficult to consider that much is going on at all. Meanwhile, the situation isn’t helped by the fact that few Azerbaijani civil society activists visit Armenia, and even fewer Armenians visit Azerbaijan. In short, an environment conducive to peace or conflict resolution doesn’t seem to exist.
Since taking the first tentative steps to bring bloggers from Armenia and Azerbaijan together online in June 2008, it’s been both amazing and surprising to look back at how new media has managed to encourage and facilitate communication between the two countries. Locked into a bitter conflict over the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh, the online environment which exists today was unimaginable two and half years ago. Even professionally it has opened up new possibilities. As a journalist, for example, the first time I ever co-penned an article with a counterpart in Azerbaijan, ironically enough entitled Nagorno Karabakh Dispute Takes to Cyberspace, was in isolation. We both wrote two separate pieces and submitted them to an American editor who then cut and put them together as one. Today, even though many publications covering the Caucasus still work like this, I can now do so without any in between involved.
Being based in Armenia for 12 years hasn’t only given me plenty to photograph and write about, but also provides me with an opportunity to fix for many large media organizations. Last year, for example, I regularly fixed for the BBC, Al Jazeera English and The Wall Street Journal as well as photographed and organized a series of reports for The National. However, albeit with a few exceptions, the subject matters were the same — Armenia-Turkey relations and the unresolved conflict with Azerbaijan over the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh.
With a peaceful resolution to the conflict over Nagorno Karabakh as elusive as ever, Armenians and Azerbaijanis are unable to visit each other’s country or communicate through traditional means such as telephone or mail. However, as the local media usually self-censors or resorts to propaganda when it comes to relations between the two countries, can new and social media step in to fill the gap to break the information blockade?
While most were enjoying a sunny afternoon in the Armenian capital, a few dozen members of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation – Dashnaktsutyun (ARF-D) continued their round the clock hunger strike outside the main government building and the adjacent Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The nationalist party is staging the action to protest what many consider to be the likely signing of two protocols establishing diplomatic relations and opening up the country’s border closed by Turkey in 1993 as Armenia and Azerbaijan waged war over the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh. Armenian forces currently control about 14 percent of Azerbaijan.
The announcement of the return of the four non-enclave villages of Baghanis Ayrim, Ashagi Askipara, Kheyrimli, and Gizilhajili comes as a welcome development. Situated in that part of Azerbaijan’s Gazakh region under Armenian control since the early 1990s, they were initially mentioned in an early version of the November trilateral ceasefire statement before being removed from the final version.
Nikol Pashinyan is a populist. Whether on the domestic or international scene, it is difficult to consider him a statesman. Populism defines his words and permeates his actions. But in comparison with those leaders before him, he is also a rarity in Armenia’s post-independence history – he is a democratically elected leader. Despite the devastating defeat in Armenia’s recent war with Azerbaijan in 2020, Pashinyan emerged victorious in snap parliamentary elections held just seven months later.
On November 9, 2020, the leaders of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Russia signed a trilateral ceasefire statement ending the Second Karabakh War. An initial draft of the agreement was mistakenly uploaded to the Kremlin’s website. According to the draft, in addition to the return of the remainder of territory under Yerevan’s control immediately surrounding Karabakh, four villages in the Gazakh region of Azerbaijan were mentioned.