DOCSLIB.ORG

The Role of Participatory Journalism in Conflict Resolution: the Case of the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Role of Participatory Journalism in Conflict Resolution: the Case of the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict The role of participatory journalism in conflict resolution: The case of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Master thesis Evgenia Mamedkhanova (s1001154) February 2020 The role of participatory journalism in conflict resolution: The case of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Master thesis February 2020 Author: Evgenia Mamedkhanova (s1001154) [email protected] Radboud University Nijmegen Nijmegen School of Management Human Geography: Conflicts, Territories & Identities Supervisor: dr. H.W. Bomert [email protected] Radboud University Nijmegen Elinor Ostrom building Nijmegen, the Netherlands Cover image: Author: Anton Ramirez Source: https://www.instagram.com/p/aGhPkIx0A8/ I Preface The writing of this thesis was preceded by a series of events. One day back in time, when I was just a little bit older than my daughter is now, I was leafing through the newspaper of my grandmother and stumbled on a letter to the editor. This letter was written by a woman seeking advice on whom her son should live with after her separation with his father. The situation could be considered trivial, if it would not be about a separation resulting from the ethnic dispute then boiling in the Southern Caucasus. The mother, an ethnic Azerbaijani living in Armenia, could, due to the developing conflict in and around Karabakh, no longer stay with her husband, an ethnic Armenian, as she was afraid of the anti-Azerbaijani violence. The woman also feared that her son could fall victim to anti-Azerbaijani oppression and discrimination in Armenia. The family was breaking up for reasons beyond their control. The letter raised the question whether or not ordinary people who found themselves in circumstances of war could somehow change the situation and influence their own destinies. The answer took a long time to come. During my first Master’s in sociology, I could for the first time advance my understanding of ethnic disputes and it took me another ten years to find a Master program that would give me a possibility to dive deeper into the origins, causes, and processes of ethnic conflict and its resolution. Now I feel confident to share with you my understanding of how ordinary people can influence conflict dynamics and conflict responses. Writing this thesis would not have been possible without the help of some people. I would therefore like to thank prof. Bomert, my thesis supervisor, for his helpful comments on the draft of this thesis and his help during the editing process. I would also like to express my gratitude to Oksana Karpenko, executive director of the Centre for Social Research (CISR) in Saint Petersburg, my internship supervisor, for her willingness to share her ideas on research methods suitable for my study. I also owe a large debt of gratitude to my family and friends for supporting me during my study in whatever way they could. I am especially indebted to my husband and our daughter for being remarkably patient throughout my lengthy studying, researching, analyzing and thesis-writing process. Evgenia Mamedkhanova, February 2, 2020 II List of illustrations TABLES 1. Professional status of letter writers in 1988 .........................................................................56 2.1. Reasoning devices identified in the letters to the editor published in 1988 .......................68 2.2. Reasoning devices identified in the letters to the editor published in 1990 ......................70 2.3. Reasoning devices identified in the letters to the editor published in 1991 ......................71 2.4. Reasoning devices identified in the letters to the editor published in 2016 .......................72 3. Frame matrix for the Karabakh issue with their representative reasoning and framing devices ..........................................................79 4. Galtung’s table ......................................................................................................................82 FIGURES 1. Relations between state, capital and civil society ................................................................11 III Table of contents 1. Background to the study ...........................................................................................................1 1.1. Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1 1.2. Relationship between governments, citizens and the media in conflict-prone settings .........2 1.3. Media and public engagement in non-democratic societies ....................................................4 1.4. Structure of the Master thesis ..................................................................................................7 1.5. Societal and scientific relevance of the thesis ..........................................................................8 2. The conceptual framework ................................................................................................... 11 2.1. Media: whose story is being told? ......................................................................................... 11 2.1.1. The relationship between media and the state ............................................................. 12 2.1.2. The relationship between media and the market ......................................................... 14 2.1.3. The relationship between media and civil society ......................................................... 16 2.2. Participation: concepts, prerequisites and practices ............................................................. 19 2.3. Participation within media ..................................................................................................... 22 2.4. Participatory journalism and mainstream media .................................................................. 27 3. Methodology ............................................................................................................................. 33 3.1. Theoretical points of departure. Strengths and limitations of the chosen method ............... 33 3.2. Data gathering ........................................................................................................................ 35 4. Historical background of the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict .......................................... 38 5. Data analysis .............................................................................................................................. 41 5.1. Participatory journalism practices in Azerbaijan and Armenia: constraints and incentives then and now ......................................................................................................................... 42 5.2. Frame analysis ........................................................................................................................ 54 5.2.1. Coding procedure .......................................................................................................... 54 5.2.2. Letter writers ................................................................................................................. 55 5.2.3. Letter moderators ......................................................................................................... 60 5.3. Identifying frames in the letters to the editor ...................................................................... 65 5.3.1. Inductive approach ......................................................................................................... 66 5.3.1.1. Reasoning devices ............................................................................................... 67 5.3.1.2. Framing devices .................................................................................................. 73 5.3.1.3. Frames ................................................................................................................. 79 5.3.2. Deductive approach ....................................................................................................... 81 5.3.2.1. Assessment of the diplomacy frame ................................................................... 83 5.3.2.2. Assessment of the militarism frame ................................................................... 84 5.4. Citizen participation in news making and its impact on political agendas and policy-making in Azerbaijan and Armenia ......................................................................................................... 86 5.5. Interpretation of results: the main research question .......................................................... 90 6. Discussion ................................................................................................................................... 94 7. Bibliography ............................................................................................................................... 98 IV 8. Appendices ............................................................................................................................... 108 9. Executive summary ................................................................................................................ 119 V 1. Background to the study 1.1. Introduction The media’s role in conflicts has acquired attention of many scholars. A considerable body of research has examined the media’s role in promoting conflicts (Groebel, 1995; Kuznetsov, 2013; Kaufman, 2015; Novikova, 2012; Baghdasaryan et al., in Javakhishvili & Kvarchelia, 2013), while other scholars focus on the ability of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Final Report: Review of Export Permits to Turkey” Published by Global Affairs Canada
    CANADA: HUMAN RIGHTS CHAMPION OR PAWN TO AUTOCRATIC REGIMES IN THE GLOBAL ARMS TRADE? Response to the “Final report: Review of export permits to Turkey” published by Global Affairs Canada May 4, 2021 Mtre Anaïs Kadian and Mtre Emilie Béatrice Kokmanian, Attorneys-at-law* I. INTRODUCTION In its Final report: Review of export permits to Turkey (the “Final Report”) published in April 20211, Global Affairs Canada (“GAC”) concludes that Electro-Optical/Infra-Red imaging and targeting sensor systems manufactured by the Canadian company L3Harris Wescam (the “Targeting Sensors”) and exported to Turkey were found in Nagorno- Karabakh (also known as “Artsakh”) and used by the government of Azerbaijan to target and attack the Armenian population in the region, all of which was contrary to the end- assurances given by Turkey and to Canada’s foreign policy. 2 Yet, the Final Report is conveniently silent on the question of the responsibility of the Minister of Foreign Affairs (the “Minister” or “Ministry”) in the matter. In our opinion, given the criteria imposed by the Export and Import Permits Act (the “EIPA” or “Act”), the Minister should not have approved the export permits of Canadian military technology destined to Turkey in May 2020. Thus, the Final Report errs in its approach in that: (i) it omits to analyze the Minister’s initial decision to issue the export permits to Turkey in light of the EIPA’s criteria and (ii) it ignores the facts and evidence demonstrating the illegal use of this military technology by Turkey as well as the substantial risk which continues to exist today.
    [Show full text]
  • Ceasefire Agreement
    Ceasefire Agreement Unofficial translation P. S. Grachev Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation A. V. Kozyrev Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation V. N. Kazimirov Responding to the call for a cease-fire, as set out in the Bishkek Protocol of May 5, 1994, and based on the Protocol of 18 February 1994, the conflicting Parties agreed on the following: 1. Ensure the full cease-fire and cessation of hostilities from 00 hours 01 minutes of May 12, 1994. Relevant orders to cease-fire will be given and communicated to the commanders of military units responsible for their implementation, not later than May 11, 1994. On May 12 until 23.00, the Parties shall exchange the texts of their cease-fire orders with a view to their possible mutual complementarities and further harmonization of substantive provisions of similar documents. 2. Request the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation to convene in Moscow no later than May 12 an urgent meeting of defense ministers of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh army commander to agree on the lines of troops pullback and other urgent military-technical issues and prepare the deployment of an advance team of international observers. 3. This agreement will be used to complete the negotiations in the next 10 days and conclude an Agreement on Cessation of the Armed Conflict no later than May 22 of this year. 4. This agreement will take effect immediately after the Mediator notifies that he has received from the opposing forces completely identical documents signed by authorized representatives. Minister of Defense of Azerbaijan Minister of Defense of Armenia Nagorno Karabakh Army Commander The text was signed respectively by M.
    [Show full text]
  • European Court of Human Rights
    GRAND CHAMBER DECISION Application no. 40167/06 Minas SARGSYAN against Azerbaijan The European Court of Human Rights, sitting on 14 December 2011 as a Grand Chamber composed of: Nicolas Bratza, President, Jean-Paul Costa, Christos Rozakis, Françoise Tulkens, Josep Casadevall, Nina Vajić, Corneliu Bîrsan, Peer Lorenzen, Boštjan M. Zupančič, Elisabet Fura, Alvina Gyulumyan, Khanlar Hajiyev, Egbert Myjer, Sverre Erik Jebens, Giorgio Malinverni, George Nicolaou, Luis López Guerra, judges, and Michael O’Boyle, Deputy Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 11 August 2006, Having regard to the decision of 11 March 2010 by which the Chamber of the First Section to which the case had originally been assigned relinquished its jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber (Article 30 of the Convention), 2 SARGSYAN v. AZERBAIJAN DECISION Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant, Having regard to the comments submitted by the Armenian Government, Having regard to the oral submissions of the parties and the third party at the hearing on 15 September 2010, Having deliberated on 15, 16 and 22 September 2010 and on 14 December 2011 decides, on the last-mentioned date as follows: THE FACTS 1. The applicant, Mr Minas Sargsyan, is an Armenian national who was born in 1929 and died in 2009. His widow, Lena Sargsyan, born in 1936 and their children, Vladimir, Tsovinar and Nina Sargsyan, born in 1957, 1959, and 1966 respectively, have expressed the wish to pursue the application on his behalf. The applicant is represented before the Court by Ms N.
    [Show full text]
  • WAR for KARABAKH 2020: Origins, Reasons, Results
    Patriotic war – 2020 By Oleg KUZNETSOV, Candidate of Historical Sciences, Professor (Moscow, Russia) WAR FOR KARABAKH 2020: Origins, Reasons, Results 16 www.irs-az.com 47, SPRING 2021 www.irs-az.com 17 Patriotic war – 2020 Cannons of the Azerbaijani army fire at Armenian fortifications in Karabakh On 10 November 2020, the fourth Armenian- seven adjacent administrative districts of Azerbaijan, Azerbaijani war in the last two centuries ended. It has the expulsion of 1.2 million ethnic Azerbaijanis from already gone down in the history of the independent their homes (500,000 from Armenia and 700,000 from Azerbaijani state as a Patriotic war. The first of them, the occupied territories). So the Armenian-Azerbaijani which thanks to the tsar’s governor in the Caucasus, conflict did not start yesterday, it has a history of more Count I. Vorontsov-Dashkov, was labeled as the than a century, and the recent developments around “Armenian-Tatar massacre” in which 158 Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh that attracted the attention of the and 128 Armenian settlements were destroyed and world community are only a small part of it, very brief up to 10,000 people died, happened back in 1905- and not particularly significant in terms of spatial and 1906. In the second war, which occurred in 1918- geographical localization. 1920, the fighting involved the armies of the Dashnak If one looks at the history of the Armenian- Republic of Armenia and the Azerbaijan Democratic Azerbaijani confrontation with an honest and impartial Republic. The war and the genocide of the civilian view, one can see that it has never stopped over the population was stopped only at the end of 1920, after past one and a half centuries.
    [Show full text]
  • WAR for KARABAKH 2020: Origins, Reasons, Results
    Patriotic war – 2020 By Oleg KUZNETSOV, Candidate of Historical Sciences, Professor (Moscow, Russia) WAR FOR KARABAKH 2020: Origins, Reasons, Results 16 www.irs-az.com 47, SPRING 2021 www.irs-az.com 17 Patriotic war – 2020 Cannons of the Azerbaijani army fire at Armenian fortifications in Karabakh On 10 November 2020, the fourth Armenian- seven adjacent administrative districts of Azerbaijan, Azerbaijani war in the last two centuries ended. It has the expulsion of 1.2 million ethnic Azerbaijanis from already gone down in the history of the independent their homes (500,000 from Armenia and 700,000 from Azerbaijani state as a Patriotic war. The first of them, the occupied territories). So the Armenian-Azerbaijani which thanks to the tsar’s governor in the Caucasus, conflict did not start yesterday, it has a history of more Count I. Vorontsov-Dashkov, was labeled as the than a century, and the recent developments around “Armenian-Tatar massacre” in which 158 Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh that attracted the attention of the and 128 Armenian settlements were destroyed and world community are only a small part of it, very brief up to 10,000 people died, happened back in 1905- and not particularly significant in terms of spatial and 1906. In the second war, which occurred in 1918- geographical localization. 1920, the fighting involved the armies of the Dashnak If one looks at the history of the Armenian- Republic of Armenia and the Azerbaijan Democratic Azerbaijani confrontation with an honest and impartial Republic. The war and the genocide of the civilian view, one can see that it has never stopped over the population was stopped only at the end of 1920, after past one and a half centuries.
    [Show full text]
  • Forced Displacement in the Nagorny Karabakh Conflict: Return and Its Alternatives
    Forced displacement in the Nagorny Karabakh conflict: return and its alternatives August 2011 conciliation resources Place-names in the Nagorny Karabakh conflict are contested. Place-names within Nagorny Karabakh itself have been contested throughout the conflict. Place-names in the adjacent occupied territories have become increasingly contested over time in some, but not all (and not official), Armenian sources. Contributors have used their preferred terms without editorial restrictions. Variant spellings of the same name (e.g., Nagorny Karabakh vs Nagorno-Karabakh, Sumgait vs Sumqayit) have also been used in this publication according to authors’ preferences. Terminology used in the contributors’ biographies reflects their choices, not those of Conciliation Resources or the European Union. For the map at the end of the publication, Conciliation Resources has used the place-names current in 1988; where appropriate, alternative names are given in brackets in the text at first usage. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the authors and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of Conciliation Resources or the European Union. Altered street sign in Shusha (known as Shushi to Armenians). Source: bbcrussian.com Contents Executive summary and introduction to the Karabakh Contact Group 5 The Contact Group papers 1 Return and its alternatives: international law, norms and practices, and dilemmas of ethnocratic power, implementation, justice and development 7 Gerard Toal 2 Return and its alternatives: perspectives
    [Show full text]
  • Why the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict Is Still Not Resolved
    WHY IS THE NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT STILL NOT RESOLVED? Shavarsh Kocharyan Yerevan 2016 Shavarsh Kocharyan Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia since 2008. Associate professor at the faculty of International Relations and Diplomacy of the Yerevan State University. In 1971 he graduated from the State Engineering University (Yerevan), Faculty of Technical Cybernetics, with specialization as Mathematician-Engineer. In 1975 completed his postgraduate studies at the All-Union Scientifi c Research Institute of Genetics (Moscow). In 1977 defended his PhD thesis on Biological sciences. From 1976 to 1990 he worked in the Scientifi c Institutions of Armenia, holding the positions of Associate Scientist, Senior Scientist, Head of Laboratory and Head of Department. He is the author of more than 150 scientifi c works and more than 30 inventions licensed in dozens of countries. In 1990, 1995, 1999 and 2003 he was elected as Member of the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia. In the National Assembly he was the member of the Committee on Social, Health and Environmental issues,Committee on European Integration, was elected the Deputy Chairman of Committee on Foreign Relations (1990-1995) and the Chairman of Committee on Scientifi c, Educational, Cultural and Youth issues (1999-2003). He was a member of the delegations of the National Assembly of Armenia to the CIS Parliamentary Assembly (1992-1995 and 1999-2003), the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (1999-2003) and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (2003-2005). He was Chairman of the National Democratic Unity (1992-1993), Head of the Parliamentary Group “National Democrats” (1990-1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Case of Nagorno Karabakh
    MASARYKOVA UNIVERZITA FACULTY OF SOCIAL STUDIES Issue of IDP Integration: Case of Nagorno Karabakh Bachelor thesis KAROLÍNA HANZELKOVÁ Thesis Supervisor: Mgr. Tomáš Šmíd, Ph.D. Department of Political Sciences Security and Strategy Studies Brno 2018/2019 FSS ISSUE OF IDP INTEGRATION: CASE OF NAGORNO KARABAKH Bibliografický záznam Autor: Karolína Hanzelková Fakulta sociálních studií, Masarykova univerzita Department of Political Sciences Název práce: Issue of IDP Integration: Case of Nagorno Kara­ bakh Studijní program: Bezpečnostní a strategická studia Vedoucí práce: Mgr. Tomáš Šmíd, Ph.D. Akademický rok: 2018/2019 Počet stran: 58 Klíčová slova: IDP, vnitřně vysídlené osoby, Azerbajdžan, Ná­ horní Karabach, integrace, zamrzlý konflikt 3 ISSUE OF IDP INTEGRATION: CASE OF NAGORNO KARABAKH Bibliografie record Author: Karolina Hanzelkova Faculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University Department of Political Sciences Title of Thesis: Issue of IDP Integration: Case of Nagorno Kara• bakh Degree Programme: Security and Strategy Studies Supervisor: Mgr. Tomáš Šmíd, Ph.D. Academic Year: 2018/2019 Number of Pages: 58 Keywords: IDP, Internally Displaced People, Azerbaijan, Nagorno Karabakh, Baku, Integration, Frozen Conflict 4 ISSUE OF IDP INTEGRATION: CASE OF NAGORNO KARABAKH Abstrakt Bakalářská práce se zabývá tématem integrace vnitřně vysídlených osob zv případě IDPs z oblastní Náhorního Karabachu a sedmi sousedních re­ gionů, které jsou v současnosti okupovány. Práce zkoumá životní pod­ mínky IDPs a jejich integraci do celkové ázerbájdžánské společnosti. Na základě osobních výpovědí vysídlených osob a jejich potomků práce představuje jednu z prvních studií, která se zabývá mimo jiné i pohledem mileniální druhé generace na integrační problematiku vnitřně vysídle­ ných osob vÁzerbájdžánu. 1 ISSUE OF IDP INTEGRATION: CASE OF NAGORNO KARABAKH Abstract This bachelor thesis deals with the topic of integration of internally dis• placed people from Nagorno Karabakh and the seven neighbouring oc• cupied regions.
    [Show full text]
  • General Assembly Security Council Seventy-Third Session Seventy-Third Year Agenda Item 34 Prevention of Armed Conflict
    United Nations A/73/628–S/2018/1085 General Assembly Distr.: General Security Council 11 December 2018 Original: English General Assembly Security Council Seventy-third session Seventy-third year Agenda item 34 Prevention of armed conflict Letter dated 4 December 2018 from the Permanent Representative of Armenia to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General Upon the instructions of my Government, I am transmitting herewith a memorandum of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno Karabakh Republic) on the issue of missing persons in the context of the Azerbaijan- Karabakh conflict (see annex). I kindly request that the present letter and its annex be circulated as a document of the General Assembly, under agenda item 34, and of the Security Council. (Signed) Mher Margaryan Ambassador Permanent Representative 18-21102 (E) 121218 *1821102* A/73/628 S/2018/1085 Annex to the letter dated 4 December 2018 from the Permanent Representative of Armenia to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Artsakh Memorandum on the issue of missing persons in the context of the Azerbaijan- Karabakh conflict The issue of missing persons in the context of the Azerbaijan-Karabakh conflict emerged long before the full-scale war, which was unleashed by Azerbaijan against the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno Karabakh Republic)1 in 1991. Individual cases of hostage-taking and kidnapping of persons of Armenian nationality were taking place in Artsakh already in 1988–1989. The issue of hostages and missing persons became more acute as the conflict escalated.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Foreign Policy Analysis of Weak States: the Case of the Caucasus States Yasar Sari Charlottesville, Virginia B.A
    A Comparative Foreign Policy Analysis of Weak States: The Case of the Caucasus States Yasar Sari Charlottesville, Virginia B.A., Istanbul University, 1993 M.A., Old Dominion University, 1997 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The Woodrow Wilson Department of Politics University of Virginia December 2008 Abstract Keywords: Caucasus states, Russia, foreign policy analysis, weak state The key features of foreign policy formulation and execution in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia are selected in an attempt to reveal the sources of foreign policy-behavior of new, post- Soviet (and in effect post-imperial) states during the 1990s. More specifically, this is a comparative study of the foreign policies of the Caucasus states as new states toward the Russian Federation as the ex-imperial center. The purpose of the dissertation is to verify the relative significance of internal factors and level of external assistance in shaping the foreign policy of weak states. Therefore, the key theoretical contribution of the dissertation is to understand foreign policy change in weak states during their early years of independence. The newly independent Caucasus states are weak states. The most urgent problems facing these newly independent states following their independence were domestic ones. The time period covered is between 1991 and 1999, which in turn is divided into two sub-periods: 1991- 1995, the period of confusion and 1995 to 1999, the period of consolidation. This dissertation centers upon the explanation of two factors: the level of domestic strain of weak states and their relations to the external world.
    [Show full text]
  • "From Ter-Petrosian to Kocharian: Leadership Change in Armenia
    University of California, Berkeley FROM TER-PETROSIAN TO KOCHARIAN: LEADERSHIP CHANGE IN ARMENIA Stephan H. Astourian Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies Working Paper Series This PDF document preserves the page numbering of the printed version for accuracy of citation. When viewed with Acrobat Reader, the printed page numbers will not correspond with the electronic numbering. The Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies (BPS) is a leading center for graduate training on the Soviet Union and its successor states in the United States. Founded in 1983 as part of a nationwide effort to reinvigorate the field, BPSs mission has been to train a new cohort of scholars and professionals in both cross-disciplinary social science methodology and theory as well as the history, languages, and cultures of the former Soviet Union; to carry out an innovative program of scholarly research and publication on the Soviet Union and its successor states; and to undertake an active public outreach program for the local community, other national and international academic centers, and the U.S. and other governments. Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies University of California, Berkeley Institute of Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies 260 Stephens Hall #2304 Berkeley, California 94720-2304 Tel: (510) 643-6737 [email protected] http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~bsp/ FROM TER-PETROSIAN TO KOCHARIAN: LEADERSHIP CHANGE IN ARMENIA Stephan H. Astourian Winter 2000-2001 Stephan H. Astourian is the William Saroyan Visiting Assistant Professor in the Department of History at the University of California, Berkeley. Acknowledgements The author wishes to thank his friends and colleagues in Armenia for sharing their insights with him; Dana Sherry and Denise Monczewski for their cheerful production work; and Edward W.
    [Show full text]
  • Karabakh Is Azerbaijan!
    Karabakh is Azerbaijan! Karabakh is ancestral Azerbaijani land, one of its historical regions. Musa MARJANLI The name of this region translates into Russian as a “black garden”. Editor-in-Chief According to another version, it is a “large garden” or a “dense garden”. Up until the region was seized by the Russian Empire at the beginning of the 19th century, Karabakh was part of various Azerbaijani states. I will not bore you with arguments about who lived in Karabakh, who ruled it in certain historical periods – materials about that are available in most of the previous issues of IRS-Heritage. I only want to note that until the beginning of the 20th century, there was not a single Armenian ruler in Karabakh and indeed on the territory of present-day Armenia. This fact is graphic evidence that the Armenians always constituted an insignificant part of the population of these regions. On 14 May 1805, the ruler of the Karabakh Khanate, Ibrahim Khan, and the commander of the Russian troops, Prince P. Tsitsianov, signed the Treaty of Kurekchay, according to which the khanate was included in the Russian Empire. Subsequently, the Gulustan Peace Treaty of 18 October 1813 and the Turkmenchay Peace Treaty of 10 February 1828, signed as a result of two Russian-Iranian wars, formalized the final transfer of northern Azerbaijani khanates to the Russian Empire. Having taken possession of this land, Russia, striving to reinforce the Christian presence in the region, immediately began a systematic resettlement of Armenians here from Iran and the Ottoman Empire, placing them primarily on the lands of the former Azerbaijani khanates.
    [Show full text]