Nagorno-Karabakh announces end of Republic of Artsakh

After Azerbaijan’s military takeover of Nagorno-Karabakh, the structures of the internationally unrecognised Republic of Artsakh will be dissolved. The authorities declared that "all state institutions and organisations" would be dismantled by 1 January 2024. Commentators mull over how this came about and what it means for the region.

Avvenire (IT) /

Victims of realpolitik

Avvenire comments on why Armenia also failed to buckle down in defence of Nagorno-Karabakh:

“Prime Minister Pashinyan is taking in all the refugees, which is no small feat for a country with three million inhabitants and which is not exactly rich. ... But he has not lifted a finger to confront the Azerbaijanis, a fact for which he has been harshly criticised domestically. It seems clear that for him, for his government and for a large part of Armenians, the dissolution of the [self-declared] independent republic is also the dissolution of a spectre, namely a war with Azerbaijan, which could have turned into a regional conflict in the blink of an eye and which poses a very high risk for his country. ... In short, better to lose Nagorno-Karabakh than to lose everything. That, too, is realpolitik.”

Fulvio Scaglione
Echo (RU) /

Armenians fleeing forever

In a Telegram post republished by Echo, opposition politician Lev Shlosberg now considers humanitarian issues more important than political ones:

“The history of Nagorno-Karabakh, which declared its independence following a referendum in January 1992, is legally closed. ... The key issue now is not the territory’s affiliation, but the humanitarian consequences of the events. ... More than half of the inhabitants — over 65,000 of 120,000 people — have fled the Karabakh area. There are cases of people digging up the coffins of their relatives and taking their bones with them. They don’t believe in guarantees that they will be allowed to live on in Nagorno-Karabakh and are leaving it forever.”

Lew Schlosberg
Der Nordschleswiger (DK) /

Lost credibility

Europe must question any deals with dictators and autocrats on principle, says Der Nordschleswiger:

“The power of the strongest prevails. Which scenario does this remind us of? Exactly, of 2014, when Putin started the war against Ukraine by occupying Crimea. There were many voices at the time that said, ‘Oh, we have to let Putin have that’. ... Where this attitude got us is now glaringly obvious in the trenches and minefields of Ukraine. ... Europe must ask itself what our democracy is worth to us. Are we dependent on deals with the murderers and dictators of this world? If so, we shouldn’t be surprised if this world only views our high-sounding moralising with contempt.”

Jan Diedrichsen
Dilema Veche (RO) /

Too tired to deal with other people’s problems

Dilema Veche wonders why there is not more determination against Azerbaijan’s actions:

“Ordinary people, Armenians and Azerbaijanis, have lost their fortunes, families, and lives for the sake of unattainable ideals and irresponsible people. There are Armenians who wonder if Azerbaijan, emboldened by the recent successes, will not demand more. ... There is in fact no guarantee that this will not be the case. But why isn’t the West taking more decisive action? Why is it content with a few statements along the lines of ‘we are paying attention and concerned’? Why is Russia observing without doing anything? The answers are many and nuanced, but equally relevant is the explanation that we are all tired of other people’s problems.”

Teodor Tita