2024-04-30 23:40:31
In the Parliament of the United Kingdom, a discussion was held under the title “International support for the refugees of Nagorno-Karabakh”.
Carol Monaghan MP noted that the South Caucasus is a melting pot of cultures, religions and ethnic groups. Over the centuries, these different groups have sometimes coexisted peacefully, and sometimes there has been turmoil and bloodshed.
“We witnessed the Armenian Genocide of 1915-1923, when about 1.5 million people were killed by the forces of the Ottoman Empire. As the Soviet Union began to collapse in the late 1980s, the Nagorno Karabakh region, an Armenian enclave within Azerbaijan, officially voted to become part of Armenia. Azerbaijan sought to suppress the separatist movement, and Armenia supported it. This led to clashes and eventually full-scale war. Amid reports of ethnic cleansing and massacres on both sides, tens of thousands have died and up to 1 million have been displaced.
Recent hostilities between Armenia and Azerbaijan show that conflict is never far away. Although they have recently negotiated a peace agreement, tensions remain high and if there is peace, it is certainly fragile. Last year, some of us spoke out in Westminster Hall about the blockade of the Lachine Corridor, the main supply route from Armenia to Nagorno-Karabakh. At the time, several honorable members highlighted the possibility of famine and humanitarian disaster. The alleged Russian peacekeepers were at best observers, and at worst actively supporting the ongoing persecution of the local Armenian population.
Unfortunately, the outcome we most feared came true last September, when the Azerbaijani military expelled the Armenian population after a nine-month siege. Since Armenia is a small country with a population of 3 million, the arrival of more than 100,000 refugees from Nagorno Karabakh, as well as another 40,000 refugees after the war in 2020, has had a significant impact on the latter.
I was a member of the Inter-Parliamentary Union delegation that visited Armenia last month. We met a group of refugees from Nagorno-Karabakh who described the harrowing details of the siege and their eventual expulsion. They described so-called Russian peacekeepers traveling to Armenia with a privileged status that the local population did not have, and buying goods only to resell to the starving people at massively inflated prices. They described the difficulty of obtaining medical supplies, fuel and even water. They described the violent end of the siege, when people were shelled in their homes. We heard how the shelling started at 12:30, when the children were at school and were being separated from their parents. They described the chaos as people tried to find their loved ones, as well as people leaving their homes with only the clothes on their backs. The lucky ones had fuel in their cars, others just walked. The 40 km journey to Armenia took three days due to the continuous bombings by the Azerbaijani military.
Most of the refugees now stay with family members in border towns and in and around Jermuk, but every Armenian city has been affected by the influx of refugees. The refugees, of course, criticize Azerbaijan, but they also criticize Russian peacekeepers for failing to protect them.
A number of officials we met believe that Russian forces have been directed by Moscow to create instability, not peace. This seems to be justified by the Kremlin’s rhetoric. Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov insisted that Russia is not guilty. He said that there is “no direct reason” for the escape, it’s just that people are ready to leave. Non-intervention by Russian peacekeepers sets a dangerous precedent that international humanitarian law can be violated without consequence and creates the risk of future Azerbaijani incursions into Armenia, for example to secure the road to the Nakhichevan exclave.
For many, this ethnic cleansing of the people is reminiscent of the Armenian Genocide of 1915-1923. It is noteworthy that some 34 countries, including the USA, Canada and France, have recognized the historical genocide, but the UK has not been able to do so. By denying official recognition of the historic atrocity, the UK government continues to delegitimize the collective pain suffered by the Armenian community. A 1999 Foreign Office memo reveals the motivations behind the UK’s position. It says: “Given the importance of our relationship (political, strategic, commercial) with Turkey…recognition of the genocide would not be of practical benefit to the UK.” I would like to ask the minister whether not recognizing the historical genocide is just an attempt to appease a trading partner.
Let me return to the situation in Armenia. In October 2023, UNHCR launched the $97 million Refugee Emergency Response Program to provide urgent humanitarian assistance and protection to refugees and their hosts in Armenia. That support ends at the end of this month, but no refugees have been able to return home. Although there has been international support, for which the Armenian government is grateful, much more is required. Since 2020, the US has provided $28 million, the EU has provided €17.5 million since September, and France €27.5 million in 2023. The UK has committed £1 million to date. I think £1 million is a good starting point, but more needs to be done. Question to the Minister, what further financial and humanitarian support will the UK provide to the Government of Armenia to support refugees and their hosts in Armenia? In addition to providing aid, the UK government has a moral responsibility to provide leadership in the region. They should make every diplomatic effort to promote dialogue between Armenia and Azerbaijan and help create the conditions for a real lasting peace that will allow displaced Armenians to return home.
In October 2023, the UK government argued: “It is important that international humanitarian organizations have independent access… We therefore welcome Azerbaijan’s decision to allow UN agencies into Nagorno-Karabakh to complement the ICRC’s ongoing efforts.” However, taking into account that a month ago the Armenian population was subjected to ethnic cleansing, it was quite a pointless step.
In January 2024, the UK government announced: “We welcome the historic joint statement of the two countries on December 7, which announced important confidence-building measures aimed at reaching a historic agreement and ensuring lasting peace in the region.”
However, there is little confidence that the peace agreement will be preserved,” he said in his speech.
Responding to the MP: pro-Azerbaijan MP David Dugitt, whose wife is Azerbaijani, said. “The honorable member notes the lack of confidence that the progress towards peace will be maintained. I have a couple of questions. Firstly, does he welcome the bilateral agreements and discussions between the leaders and foreign ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia for this purpose? Second, can he explain why or from whom the mistrust comes from?’
In response to the pro-Azerbaijani MP: Monaghan emphasizedAny agreement that is reached should be welcomed.
“Any forward step should be welcomed. As for who is concerned, the people we talked to in the border towns, who see the Azerbaijani incursions, who see the troops coming across the border, tell us that they do not trust the agreement.
Given the events of the past six months, I was concerned to read that in November 2023 Foreign Office officials were encouraging British business leaders to use lucrative trade opportunities in Nagorno-Karabakh to support President Aliyev’s reconstruction agenda. This is simply an abdication of the UK Government’s moral and ethical responsibilities. That is also hypocrisy. How can the UK government condemn Azerbaijan’s “unacceptable use of force” in Nagorno-Karabakh in September and then six weeks later encourage British commercial involvement in the region? Can the Minister clarify the reasons for encouraging British business to exploit the tragic situation?
Despite the limited attention of the international media, the situation in Armenia remains critical. Urgent help is needed for refugees and their supporters. When we asked the refugees about their hopes for the future, they answered that they just want to return home. The International Court of Justice issued a ruling requiring Azerbaijan to “Ensure that people who have left…and who wish to return to Nagorno-Karabakh can do so safely, unhindered and quickly…free from the use of force or intimidation.” Although the government of Azerbaijan declares that it is safe to return, the refugees were clear that this is impossible. They were being starved, bombed and killed, so their hope of return cannot be realized, certainly not at this time. My last question to the minister is this. What statements did he make to the Azerbaijani government regarding the treatment of refugees and their safe return to their homes in Nagorno-Karabakh?