An Interview with Kjell Engebretsen, Country Director, Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC)
Refugee, Silikyan, Yerevan, Republic of Armenia © Onnik Krikorian / Oneworld Multimedia 1994
After mentioning the problem of Internally Placed Persons (IDPs) as a result of cross border shelling, landmines, the deterioration of infrastructure and a lack of investment in areas bordering Azerbaijan it was coincidental but interesting to be asked by Hetq Online to interview the new Country Director of the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) this morning. I had previously interviewed Engebretsen’s predecessor a year and half or so ago.
Central to this brief interview was the issue of possibly inflated figure for the number of refugees and IDPs in Armenia and the necessity for allowing refugees and IDPs to return to their homes in the event of a peace deal being signed to end the conflict over Nagorno Karabakh. Regardless of what many Armenians might think, the return of territory and the right to return for Azerbaijani refugees will be part of any deal.
OK: When I interviewed your predecessor, Tim Straight, about a year and a half ago, he mentioned that a survey on Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) was going to be taken in Armenia in cooperation with the Armenian Government. This is a new focus for the NRC, and I wondered has the survey been held and what were the findings?
KE: It was held and the result was that the figures for the number of IDPs in Armenia decreased considerably from 70,000 to 8,000.
OK: That’s quite a decrease. We’re talking about those regions of Armenia bordering Azerbaijan where there’s still a problem with landmines as well as a lack of infrastructure and investment so what’s the reason for this reduction?
KE: That’s still a problem, but I don’t know what the reason is for this reduction. However, I would suspect that the explanation is the same when it comes to refugees and the population in general. A lot of people flee the country for a while. They go to Russia or the United States and we hope that they’ll come back one day.
OK: There’s been a survey on IDPs, but another contentious issue is the number of refugees [from Azerbaijan] in the country. We’re still working with the figure of over 250,000, but I’ve heard anecdotal evidence that it might be as low as 80-90,000. It’s significantly smaller as well. Does anybody know?
KE: No one knows, but UNHCR is holding a survey now and I think that the number of refugees in Armenia will also be lowered quite a lot as well. The Government has its figure, but we think that it’s too high and UNHCR is absolutely certain that this number will go down after the survey is completed this year.
OK: At the moment there’s a lot of talk about the return of IDPs in Azerbaijan and refugees in Armenia to their former homes in and around Nagorno Karabakh once a peace deal is signed. Most recently, the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State referred to this issue and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) is also including the matter on its agenda. Is the Norwegian Refugee Council and UNHCR involved in this matter?
KE: No, in Armenia we are not. However, our office in Baku is looking into this very carefully, of course. It should happen, but the situation in Azerbaijan is very different from that in Armenia because here we’re still struggling with the economy, whereas Azerbaijan has become very, very rich. If something were to happen regarding Nagorno Karabakh or the areas surrounding it, that would have to happen after some kind of peace deal.
OK: When some people talk of the return of IDPs to territory surrounding Nagorno Karabakh, and we’re talking about Azerbaijanis and Kurds, some Armenians don’t understand why there should be the “right to return” included in any peace deal. Maybe this is a political question, perhaps, but in your opinion, why is it important that refugees and IDPs have the “right to return?”
KE: Well, lets put Nagorno Karabakh aside and talk about the area surrounding it. As far as I understand, and this is accepted by Armenia as well, that land is considered to be an occupied area — a security zone around Karabakh. If there was an agreement then I guess that this area surrounding Karabakh would be given back to the Azeris. I don’t know much about this, but I think that this would be the situation.
If this happened, then of course the people that lived there would be entitled to return to their homes. That’s the way I see it.
Anyway, the full interview can be read online here, and there’s also an article on moves to find a solution to the Karabakh conflict by local analyst Tatul Hakobyan here. According to recent news reports, the CE, EU and US are still undaunted by the failure to achieve a much anticipated breakthrough in ending the deadlock over Nagorno Karabakh.
However, nothing is certain as to whether 2006 will herald a long anticipated pece deal that should go some way in bringing peace and stability to part of the South Caucasus region.
Kjell Engebretsen, Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) Country Director, Yerevan, Republic of Armenia © Onnik Krikorian / Hetq Online 2006
The problem is that were Azeri refugees given the right to return to their homes, espeically those living in the occupied territories/liberated lands, they would not necessarily have a home to go to. Aghdam is a fine example of this. And although Shushi was a a huge cultural center for the Azeris/ Tartars or whatever they historically were called, Azeris who fled their homes more than a dozen years ago probably would not risk returning there. There no longer is a mosque to worship in, cemetaries have been descecrated, and Armenians are now living in former Azeri homes or such homes were completely bombed out. So even though the right for refugees to return to their homes would probably be part of a peace deal, it would be a symbolic gesture on the Armenian side. Realistically, no one will return to nothing.
Comment by Christian Garbis — March 27, 2006 @ 6:49 pm
There will be a massive influx of international assistance to rebuild villages and towns in both Azerbaijan and Karabakh. Otherwise, the argument that there is nothing there would imply that villages, towns and cities would not exist throughout the globe. Besides, the reconstruction of in the former Yugolslavia occured as it also did after two World Wars in Europe. Hell, we can even look at Dresden and Hiroshima as examples of that.
Certainly, it’s not a symbolic gesture on the part of Armenia — it’s as crucial to a peace settlement as is the status of Karabakh. Five or possibly six regions outside of Karabakh would be returned to Azerbaijan and refugees — or actually, IDPs — would return. Such aspects of peace settlements are not new. People returned to their homes after total devastation during Vietnam, Bosnia and Kosovo.
It will just take a long time and be very problematic. If you’re referring to Shushi/a — as opposed to Aghdam and other Azeri villages and towns outside of Karabakh — then yes, maybe this is symbolic and crtainly, another matter entirely. However, it is not referred to in the context of the right to return to territory outside of Karabakh proper.
Likely it is being discussed, but not in the context of what the international community hopes is a withdrawal of Armenian forces from 5 or 6 of 7 regions at the beginning of a possible phased peace deal. Incidenty, this article recently went out on RFE/RL and says a lot about the fact that a return of refugees/IDPs would need to occur in the opinion of the international community.
Comment by Onnik — March 27, 2006 @ 7:01 pm
Curiously there is no mention of the return of Armenian refugees to Baku, Sumgait, Kirovabad, Shahumyan or at least compensation for their property.
Comment by Liborale — March 27, 2006 @ 8:44 pm
Yes, Onnik, but we’re talking about Turks and Armenians who have historically had a love/hate relationship. You cannot compare other post-war world events, community building, and so forth with what’s happening in the South Caucasus. Bottom line is that Azeris will very unlikely return to their homes in Karabagh. In the territories east of Aghdam and Martuni perhaps. I would doubt they would return to Fizuli or Lachin en masse or not at all. Armenians never returned to their homes in Eastern Turkey after the Genocide or “war” as the Turks put it–the Armenians that remained became muslim and assumed new lives as well as identities.
Armenians are unique in that they have a logic system that defies what coherent, logical thought may be for those looking in or outsiders trying to live with them. Although Armenians lived side by side in many villages throughout Armenia before the war, such as in “Voskedab”, now called “Shirazlu” located not far from Ararat, I really doubt that they will ever live closely again or any time soon. It will take decades if it does, it won’t happen overnight when a peace deal is signed. And sorry but I have a hard time believing that cities like Aghdam will ever be rebuilt. It will be up to the Azeri side to do so regardless.
Besides, Aliev keeps threatening to restart the war with the most recent threats on March 28. It’s hard to get everything your way when you break a cease fire and thus throw out the cards you had already laid out on the table, even though all bets were not yet off. So the return of refugees, lands, or anything else is still up in the air and far from reality as far as I’m concerned.
Comment by Christian Garbis — March 28, 2006 @ 11:13 am
Here we go again. Start talking about Armenia, Azerbaijan and Karabakh and it turns into an Armenia-Turkey debate. And for the last time, nobody is talking about Lachin or Karabakh, we’re talking about 5 or 6 of 7 regions outside of Karabakh AND Lachin (and possibly Kelbajar).
And they will return because nobody is going to leave them empty. Other than Armenians, of course, because there is very little settlement going on in anywhere other than Lachin and Kelbajar. There is absolutely none in Fizuli and Aghdam and an insignificant number of people in Zangelan.
Meanwhile, in Azerbaijan, refugees and IDPs are living in squalid refugee camps so if the international community comes and says here’s a lot of money to go rebuild your homes they most probably will. They have not become integrated into larger Azerbaijani society. Actually, this has been official policy.
Comment by Onnik — March 28, 2006 @ 11:56 am
Re. Aghdam, like I said, it will not be easy, but apply your same logic to Hiroshima. In fact, it should be easier in a place like Aghdam because it’s a lot smaller. You might have a hard time believing that, but I’d suggest you look at the following pages on Mostar.
http://www.iht.it/arte/bih/pan2e.htm
Or what about Dresden?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dresden
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWdresden.htm
Comment by Onnik — March 28, 2006 @ 12:12 pm
Wishful thinking.
This is a debate about Armenians and Turks. It’s not about what happened in Dresden, Bosnia, Hiroshima or anywhere else. Fact is this is a volatile region. Foreign powers would be hesitant to invest a penny unless they get guarantees that a peace deal will actually be enforced once it is signed. Logic does not apply to peoples living in this region, especially to Armenians. True sustainable democracy as well as diplomacy still have yet to come into place in this region, and until they start to I would not expect a peace deal, return of refugees, lands or anything else. What will happen as a result is really hard to say, although may observers seem to believe that Armenia will suffer long term.
Maybe I’m being pessimistic but this is what I am believing more and more each day. And it’s too bad I do, I admit.
Comment by Christian — March 29, 2006 @ 11:13 am
No, it’s a debate about Armenians and Azerbaijanis as well as post-war reconstruction. Anyway, as all international reports and analysts believe that the region can progress forward only when conflicts such as Karabakh are resolved and three pitifully small markets become united, I guess you were talking about Armenian observers and not anyone else.
For example, no sooner than we have this exchange of comments comes the following news:
It won’t be easy, it won’t be quick and most probably it will be problematic to the extreme, but one day it will happen. When is the only thing we don’t know.
Comment by Onnik — March 29, 2006 @ 6:06 pm
BTW: Talking of Armenian-Turkish relations, New Neighbours — a site to promote regional integration by people apparently close to Kocharian — has two interesting articles. One is on Armenian-Turkish marriages, and the other is an interview with the Armenian Foreign Minister, Vartan Oskanian, on Armenian-Turkish relations etc.
http://www.newneighbors.am/
Comment by Onnik — March 29, 2006 @ 7:43 pm
Comment by Onnik — March 31, 2006 @ 6:16 pm