Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict: The Great Betrayal

[Insaanistan]

The Armenians (roughly ~75% of the area's population at the time) did. The Azeris boycotted it and called for Baku to invade and ethnically cleanse the area.

Huh. So the Armenians are the "good" side?

More or less.

[An-Tanwir]

Huh. So the Armenians are the "good" side?

More or less.

What would armenian annexation look like? Would people lose any rights they have as Azeris?

[Lower Nubia]

The Armenians (roughly ~75% of the area's population at the time) did. The Azeris boycotted it and called for Baku to invade and ethnically cleanse the area.

Huh. So the Armenians are the "good" side?

Azerbaijan is a dictatorship with similar freedoms, democratic and journalistic, which are rivalled only by North Korea, or similarly vile dictatorships.

The other is one of three actual democracies in the region.

[Shofercia]

The Armenians (roughly ~75% of the area's population at the time) did. The Azeris boycotted it and called for Baku to invade and ethnically cleanse the area.

Huh. So the Armenians are the "good" side?

As far as I'm concerned, those who start warfare in a war torn region, aren't the good guys. Azerbaijan started this mess and Armenia simply defended their citizens, which makes Armenia the good guys in this, specific, conflict. You have to do it on a case by case basis, but in this case, it's extremely blatant.

[Heloin]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karki,_Azerbaijan

I’d say 1990 is a little different scenario to today.

The clashes back in July of this year where along the border at Tavush and Nakhichevan.

[The Restored Danelaw]

More or less.

What would armenian annexation look like? Would people lose any rights they have as Azeris?

Annexation of what?

[Heloin]

More or less.

What would armenian annexation look like? Would people lose any rights they have as Azeris?

Azerbaijan doesn't consider the people living there as anything really. Armenian rule for them would be a continuation of how things are, Azerbaijani rule would mean the expulsion and ethnic cleansing of the whole population. That being said Artsakh if it where to join Armenia would probably want to remain someone autonomous, thirty years of self rule will do that.

[Lower Nubia]

I’d say 1990 is a little different scenario to today.

The clashes back in July of this year where along the border at Tavush and Nakhichevan.

That’s the thing though. Clashes are different to territorial exchanges. An exchange in 1990 is not the same as an exchange today.

[Insaanistan]

More or less.

What would armenian annexation look like? Would people lose any rights they have as Azeris?

You mean what would happen if to Azeris living there if Armenia took over?

[An-Tanwir]

What would armenian annexation look like? Would people lose any rights they have as Azeris?

Azerbaijan doesn't consider the people living there as anything really. Armenian rule for them would be a continuation of how things are, Azerbaijani rule would mean the expulsion and ethnic cleansing of the whole population. That being said Artsakh if it where to join Armenia would probably want to remain someone autonomous, thirty years of self rule will do that.

so uh, go Armenia?

[The Restored Danelaw]

What would armenian annexation look like? Would people lose any rights they have as Azeris?

You mean what would happen if to Azeris living there if Armenia took over?

There aren't any Azeris in the area. The people settled in the area in the 1926-89 era fled when it became obvious there wasn't going to be an ethnic cleansing of the Armenians there.

[Heloin]

The clashes back in July of this year where along the border at Tavush and Nakhichevan.

That’s the thing though. Clashes are different to territorial exchanges. An exchange in 1990 is not the same as an exchange today.

Armenia doesn't want Nakhichevan, then or now. The problem with your statement was that Nakhichevan is not some neutral third party that's being ignored though. They have been involved in the fighting since day one, they have been the only part of Azerbaijan that has really suffered hardship from the war, and Armenia hasn't invaded because Armenia isn't interested in territorial expansion.

[Lower Nubia]

That’s the thing though. Clashes are different to territorial exchanges. An exchange in 1990 is not the same as an exchange today.

Armenia doesn't want Nakhichevan, then or now. The problem with your statement was that Nakhichevan is not some neutral third party that's being ignored though. They have been involved in the fighting since day one, they have been the only part of Azerbaijan that has really suffered hardship from the war, and Armenia hasn't invaded because Armenia isn't interested in territorial expansion.

It blatantly is a different scenario. It’s neutral territory for both nations, which is not to say it does not belong to a warring party for Armenia. It’s a simple fact that no territorial fighting is happening along that front, because it is said so by the Minsk group as no-go territory either for Armenia to take, or for Azerbaijan to launch an invasion from.

[Heloin]

Armenia doesn't want Nakhichevan, then or now. The problem with your statement was that Nakhichevan is not some neutral third party that's being ignored though. They have been involved in the fighting since day one, they have been the only part of Azerbaijan that has really suffered hardship from the war, and Armenia hasn't invaded because Armenia isn't interested in territorial expansion.

It blatantly is a different scenario. It’s neutral territory for both nations, which is not to say it does not belong to a warring party for Armenia. It’s a simple fact that no territorial fighting is happening along that front, because it is said so by the Minsk group as no-go territory either for Armenia to take, or for Azerbaijan to launch an invasion from.

Let me explain this again. This

Nakhchivan is accepted by both sides as non-combative

is the only part I object to because it's utterly false.

Nakhichevan doesn't hold much strategic interest for Armenia who doesn't want the territory and Azerbaijan knows invading Armenia proper Nakhichevan would likely drag Russia into the conflict. It doesn't mean it isn't just as militarised as the rest of the border with clashes happening just the same as every part of the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. That there isn't fighting happening along that front right now doesn't actually mean what you think it means.

[Lower Nubia]

It blatantly is a different scenario. It’s neutral territory for both nations, which is not to say it does not belong to a warring party for Armenia. It’s a simple fact that no territorial fighting is happening along that front, because it is said so by the Minsk group as no-go territory either for Armenia to take, or for Azerbaijan to launch an invasion from.

Let me explain this again. This

Nakhchivan is accepted by both sides as non-combative

is the only part I object to because it's utterly false.

Nakhichevan doesn't hold much strategic interest for Armenia who doesn't want the territory and Azerbaijan knows invading Armenia proper Nakhichevan would likely drag Russia into the conflict. It doesn't mean it isn't just as militarised as the rest of the border with clashes happening just the same as every part of the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. That there isn't fighting happening along that front right now doesn't actually mean what you think it means.

Nakhchivan holds a lot of strategic interest. First, it reduces the border with Azerbaijan. Second, it cuts Azerbaijan off from Turkey. Third, increases the routes into Iran. Armenia is interested in all the territory contained in the Treaty of Sevres to a certain extent, but won’t take that territory, not because it’s not valuable, but because they’re no significant Armenian population there, even prior to the conflict, from which a reasonable justification can be made - that was before the defensive agreements surrounding the territory were made.

So is Nakhchivan a non-combat zone? Well it’s very easy to check. Is Armenia and Azerbaijan at war? Yes. Does Nakhchivan belong to Azerbaijan? Yes. Does Armenia border the nation it is at war with in regards to Nakhchivan? Yes. Has any combat happened here? No. Has any exchange of territory happened here? No. Has any artillery been fired from or into here? No. Has any missile landed been launched there? No. Clearly it’s treated differently. Just like non-Artsakh territory is treated differently. Azerbaijan hasn’t launched an offensive from Ganja-Gazakh into Tavush. Yet I know the restrictions on combat crossing the border of Nakhchivan are even more restricted than between Ganja-Gazakh and Tavush.

It’s non-combative. It will remain that way as long as any attack across that border will invoke defensive agreements of CSTO or Turkey.

[New Rogernomics]

Huh. So the Armenians are the "good" side?

As far as I'm concerned, those who start warfare in a war torn region, aren't the good guys. Azerbaijan started this mess and Armenia simply defended their citizens, which makes Armenia the good guys in this, specific, conflict. You have to do it on a case by case basis, but in this case, it's extremely blatant.

It is never clear cut in ethnic and religious conflicts. There is evidence of ethnic cleansing by both sides during the last war, and an exchange of citizens. On the side of Armenia in this, as they aren't a dictatorship or out to control territory they don't have legitimate claims to.

The Republic of Armenia was conquered by the Soviet Union, and then Karabagh was forcibly removed from Armenia, and then Azeris were moved in on mass as part of the much derided policy of Sovietfication. Modern day equivalent would be the Chinese government's treatment of Tibet or Upper Mongolia.

Yet, the absurd thing is that Turkey and Azerbaijan argue that forcible removal of territory as legitimate. Certainly if we follow their logic, Poland, and the Baltic states still belong to Russia, as the Soviet Union is a successor state. Russia would never argue such an absurd notion as that was the past, but you see it from Turkey and Azerbaijan over Karabagh.

[Rio Cana]

The following seems to be the latest news on what is happening.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-s1LlIvbws&t=14m40s

[The Nover Thura]

It's sad that Turkey and Azerbaijan bully Armenia so much. This needs to be stop soon. Too many innocent people are suffer from this horrible aggression.

[Parxland]

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/arme ... key-drones

Turkey is using drones to assist azerbaijan now.

[Woldoina]

Once again the middle east is in conflict. But hey! whats new?

[Pan-Asiatic States]

War is hell. May the day come that a mother never mourns her son again.

[The New California Republic]

Something I've noted: the air defences of both sides don't seem to be that good, as shown by a lot of the armoured vehicles getting spotted and hit from the air. If it was me I'd be mixing some SA-13s and Shilkas amongst the tanks to provide at least some cover.

Has either side started doing this yet? The utter lack of independent media coverage from the conflict means that it's difficult to see what both sides are using.

[Norastan]

We can all agree that this is all Stalin's fault for making the current internationally recognized borders this way.

[Lower Nubia]

Something I've noted: the air defences of both sides don't seem to be that good, as shown by a lot of the armoured vehicles getting spotted and hit from the air. If it was me I'd be mixing some SA-13s and Shilkas amongst the tanks to provide at least some cover.

Has either side started doing this yet? The utter lack of independent media coverage from the conflict means that it's difficult to see what both sides are using.

It’s not possible to tell. Currently there are very few reports. I’m waiting for info on the southern offensive but I only have hearsay, let alone composition of forces.

[SD_Film Artists]

We can all agree that this is all Stalin's fault for making the current internationally recognized borders this way.

Indirectly at fault. If Azerbaijan wanted to respect the principle of self-determination and basic history then they could end this war today. Otherwise it fellows the same logic as people who blame Britain for the wars of its former-colonies despite the fact that the whole point of independence is that Britain has no power over the situation. Similarly, Russia just wants this conflict to end yet Azerbaijan will hear none of it.