(Ebook) Nagorno-Karabakh and the Lachin Corridor Crisis by Alexander Alvarez, Adam Muller, Jennifer E. Rich, Henry Theriault Bedross Der Matossian Armen T. Marsoobian Karena Avedissian Geoffrey Robertson Ani Garabed Ohanian Lindsey Snell

(Ebook) Nagorno-Karabakh and the Lachin Corridor Crisis by Alexander Alvarez, Adam Muller, Jennifer E. Rich, Henry Theriault Bedross Der Matossian Armen T. Marsoobian Karena Avedissian Geoffrey Robertson Ani Garabed Ohanian Lindsey Snell

In the first issue of Genocide Studies International, founding editor Herb Hirsch pre-sented a sharp critique of the field of Genocide Studies and urged scholars to take a morecompassionate, active, and practical approach in our work. He wrote:…we might conclude that one thing should take prominence above all else—something reflected in the Hippocratic Oath: do no harm. … there is a minimal policythat should be adopted on the way to more important and inclusive ones: we shouldhelp those who are hungry and sick and try to stop the violence.1This special issue, dedicated to the Azerbaijani blockade of the Lachin Corridor, takes upHirsch’s plea by highlighting the gross violations of the human rights of Armenians of theNagorno-Karabakh Republic2 (NKR), casting a critical eye on the current responses (orlack thereof) from the international community and offering practical steps toward theworthy goal of doing no harm.The independent area of the NKR, home to 120,000 Armenians, is surrounded bythe territory of Azerbaijan. There is only one route that connects the Armenian Republicwith the NKR—that connects families and friends, that carries everything from basicsupplies to lifesaving medications—the Lachin Corridor. For over six months (at the timeof this writing), the government of Azerbaijan and its proxies have blockaded the LachinCorridor, effectively strangling the Armenian community in the NKR. This has resulted inpreventable deaths due to dramatic shortages of food, medicine, and energy, and denial ofmedical care. The situation unfolding in the NKR is outlined in the International Court ofJustice (ICJ) order issued in response to Armenia’s case against Azerbaijan for impositionof the blockade and other human rights violations.3The ICJ order issued in February 2023 is a positive step forward, though a more carefulreading suggests that it does not go far enough. It includes a legally binding requirementthat Azerbaijan actively work to ensure free movement in both directions along the LachinCorridor, refuting the false assertions made by the Azerbaijani government that thereis, already, freedom of movement throughout this vital passage. In this way, the orderseemingly upholds the right of free movement out of—and back into—one’s country,implying that the NKR functions as an independent state vis-à-vis Azerbaijan. While itis likely that few international legal experts would see this as de facto recognition of theindependence of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, the application of law in this way seemsto derive from the fact that Nagorno-Karabakh, given the facts presented to the ICJ, doesin fact function as an independent state, particularly vis-à-vis Azerbaijan.However, while the ICJ decision might seem to be a significant victory for humanrights, we contend that this view ought to be tempered by the fact that the blockade ofthe Lachin Corridor continues. Moreover, the ICJ’s order comprises provisional measuresrather than a final decision—despite the abundance of evidence that supports a finaldetermination in favor of Armenia. On the whole, the order gives the impression thatthe ICJ has intervened to support human rights while, practically speaking, it is a politicaldodge that allows the court to postpone or avoid decisive action.Of course, more important than an interpretation of the contents of the ICJ order isan analysis of its effectiveness. Despite the legally binding nature of the order, Azerbaijanhas not only continued to maintain the blockade, but has increased its severity by settingup a military checkpoint and engaging in military aggression against Armenians in boththe NKR and the Republic of Armenia.We see Azerbaijan’s flagrant disregard of the ICJ order as a direct effect of regional andglobal indifference. Even when members of the international community have spoken outagainst the blockade, their words have not been accompanied by meaningful action. Fur-thermore, most—if not all—of the world’s governing bodies have maintained a relativistapproach to the situation, ignoring the growing asymmetry of power and obscuring thereality that Azerbaijan is the unprovoked aggressor. Even when the situation has been seenas a conflict rather than as a one-sided human rights catastrophe, though, there has beenno meaningful intervention.Ultimately, there is not a single international player helping NKR Armenians survive.The question, then, must be: Why is there such profound global indifference? Part of theanswer is that contemporary Armenians, especially in the NKR, are plagued by denial ofthe 1915 Armenian Genocide and the constant effort it takes to overcome this denial.4 Fun-damentally, many non-Armenians seem to feel that they have already done enough. Theyhave already argued on behalf of Armenia against genocide denial and are not interestedin supporting Armenians against even more mass human rights violations and violenceagainst them. This is partly because it is “easier” to recognize the unambiguousness ofgenocide, especially when it occurred a century ago, than it is to take a stand against themass oppression and violence that is currently unfolding and, once again, trending towardgenocide.Another part of the answer lies in the real effects of genocide on targeted groups. The1915 genocide reduced the global Armenian population by half, and created conditionsthat complicated rebuilding the Armenian community: families were fractured, womenof child-bearing age were abducted, education was cut short, and Armenians were forcedor coerced to eschew their cultural identity. There is an argument to be made that hadArmenia been supported in the wake of the genocide, it would now function as a re-gional power and, as such, experience relative safety from the malevolence of Azerbaijan.5Instead, Armenia suffers from profound geopolitical weakness and an uncomfortabledependence on Russia for protection. And so, whether one sees the actions of Azerbaijantoday as extensions of, or distinct from, the 1915 genocide, the contemporary impact ofthe genocidal past is perhaps the most significant factor rendering Armenians here andnow vulnerable to the destruction of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and, quite possibly,Armenia itself.It is easy—comfortable, acceptable, even—for the world to overlook contemporaryviolence perpetrated against Armenians because of the violence perpetrated against themin the past. It is as if we collectively decided to accept the death and dispersion ofArmenians; at the very least, we have normalized it. There is no mass outcry from thepolitical superpowers, no pressure put on the government of Azerbaijan to cease thestranglehold they have on the NKR. The blockade of the Lachin Corridor barely, if at all,registers in the consciousness of the global populace. We cannot help but think that, hadArmenians not been subjected to genocide in the past, the world community would findtheir current plight far more urgent.The articles within this special issue of Genocide Studies International are written bya diversity of scholars, journalists, and activists who approach the crisis of the LachinCorridor blockade from unique perspectives. All of these contributions lean into theopportunity for the global community to do the right things for the right reasons. Theyadhere to the “minimal policy” that Herb Hirsch argued for a decade ago, namely the viewthat “we should help those who are hungry and sick and try to stop the violence.”