Azernews.Az

Ulviyya Poladova

Read more

In recent weeks, claims accusing Azerbaijan of having "expelled" Armenians from Karabakh and carried out so-called "ethnic cleansing" have once again been circulating widely across social media and Armenian nationalist platforms. These accusations are politically motivated, deliberately misleading, and aimed at distorting the realities on the ground.

The language is not new. It has been repeated for years, often without sufficient reference to the broader history of the former Karabakh conflict, the decades of Azerbaijani displacement, the restoration of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity and the reintegration proposal that Baku put forward for the Armenian population of Karabakh in 2023.

The question, therefore, should be asked openly: what is the purpose of constantly reviving this narrative?

For Azerbaijan, the fundamental issue has always been territorial integrity. Karabakh and the surrounding territories were internationally recognised as part of Azerbaijan, even while Armenian forces and the separatist administration exercised control over much of the region for decades.

Following the 2020 war, when Azerbaijan restored control over significant territories internationally recognized as part of the country, Baku repeatedly stated that Armenian residents (who were born in Karabakh) of Karabakh could remain in their homes, acquire Azerbaijani citizenship and live as equal citizens of Azerbaijan.

This position was made particularly explicit in 2023, when Azerbaijan presented proposals for the reintegration of the Armenian population of Karabakh. The Azerbaijani authorities described the plan as providing for social and economic integration, access to public services, protection of cultural and religious rights, and opportunities for the use of the Armenian language. The official reintegration framework also stated that the cultural and ethno-cultural characteristics of Armenian residents would be protected and that freedom of religion and the protection of cultural and religious monuments would be guaranteed.

However, the Armenians refused to live peacefully and in harmony as more than a hundred other peoples live on the territory of Azerbaijan and left Karabakh. The President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, even emphasized at that time that if there had not been a separatist movement in Karabakh, Armenians would have lived even in better conditions than those in which they live now.

Armenian authorities and Armenian political groups have described it as "ethnic cleansing," while Azerbaijan has rejected that characterization and maintained that Armenians were not forcibly expelled and that those who wished to remain could do so under Azerbaijani sovereignty.

If Azerbaijan's objective had simply been the physical removal of Armenians from Karabakh, why did Baku publicly formulate a reintegration framework and invite Armenian residents to remain under Azerbaijani jurisdiction?

Such rhetoric does not serve peace. It serves only those who seek to keep hostility alive in the South Caucasus.

Azerbaijan has historically been a multiethnic and multicultural space situated at the crossroads of Europe, the Caucasus, Iran and Central Asia. Its population has included Azerbaijanis alongside Lezgins, Talysh, Avars, Udins, Tats, Tsakhurs, Khinaligs, Budughs, Ingiloys, Jews, Russians, Kurds and other communities.

This reality is important because the Caucasus has never been a region defined by a single ethnic identity. It has historically been one of the world's most diverse and complex regions, where different peoples, languages, religions and political traditions have intersected for centuries.

The ancient Caucasian Albanian heritage is one example of this complexity. The history of the territory that today constitutes Azerbaijan cannot be reduced to a single modern national narrative. Over the centuries, the region experienced the influence and rule of numerous states and empires, including the Achaemenid, Parthian and Sasanian realms, the Arab Caliphate, Seljuk and Mongol states, the Safavid and Ottoman empires, Persian dynasties and, later, the Russian Empire.

Consequently, the ethnic and cultural map of the Caucasus has never been static.

It is also worth noting that Armenians themselves have lived, and in some cases continue to live, in Azerbaijan. Claims that Azerbaijan is inherently hostile to ethnic or religious difference are contradicted by the country's own social reality. For decades, Azerbaijan has been home not only to Muslim communities, but also to Christians, Jews, and representatives of many other traditions who practice their beliefs freely and contribute to public life.

Against this historical background, efforts to portray Azerbaijan as a state intolerant of minorities are not only inaccurate, but cynical. During the Second Karabakh War, there were already attempts by anti-Azerbaijani groups to damage the country's international image by spreading exaggerated or false claims about the treatment of ethnic communities in Azerbaijan. Today, similar tactics are being used again under new slogans.

What these campaigns ignore is that Azerbaijan remains one of the few countries in the region where representatives of both indigenous and non-indigenous peoples live together in relative harmony. This is not a slogan, but a social fact visible in the everyday life of the country.

By contrast, Armenia is often described as a largely mono-ethnic state. This contrast raises an important question: who is truly in a position to lecture others about multicultural coexistence and ethnic tolerance?

False accusations about Karabakh do not help reconciliation. They deepen mistrust, inflame emotions, and obstruct the normalization process that the region so urgently needs. If peace is the real goal, then propaganda must give way to facts, and revanchism must give way to realism.

A durable future for the South Caucasus can only be built on respect for sovereignty, rejection of separatism, and recognition of the rights of all communities within internationally recognized borders. Azerbaijan has made its position clear. Those who continue to promote fabricated narratives are not defending justice - they are undermining peace.

At a time when the South Caucasus needs reconciliation and stability, inflammatory narratives about Karabakh are especially damaging. They do not advance justice, protect communities, or contribute to peace. Instead, they preserve old grievances and encourage new confrontation.

The path forward lies not in revanchism, but in mutual recognition, sovereignty, and lawful reintegration. If the region is to move beyond conflict, facts must prevail over myth, and peace must take precedence over propaganda.