September 1999 Sir, There are several very important points that must be clarified and added in regards to the Mr. Paul Harris’ "Karabakhis preside over an uneasy truce" article in the September 1999 Volume 11 issue of JIR. The very ambiguous way the Armenians of Karabakh, brief way the history of Karabakh, are portrayed is very deceptive. I do not want to bore everyone with historic references and official censuses and treaties firmly proving that Karabakh always belonged to Azerbaijan. However, a reference to the report of the Representative of the UN Secretary-General, Mr. Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission on Human Rights, resolution 1998/50 (E/CN.4/1999/79/Add.1, 25 January 1999, Original: English), would sum up some of the points: "Nagorno-Karabakh is a region to which both Azerbaijan and Armenia claim historical ties stretching back centuries. However, the roots of the present conflict can be traced to the early twentieth century. After the Russian revolution, Azerbaijan and Armenia fought as newly independent States over Nagorno-Karabakh. The Paris Peace Conference of 1919 recognized Azerbaijan's claim to the territory. After Azerbaijan and Armenia were incorporated in the Soviet Union, this territorial arrangement for Nagorno-Karabakh was retained, while Armenia was awarded the district of Zangezur which had connected Azerbaijan to its westernmost region of Nakhichevan. Thus, on the resulting map of the region, Nagorno-Karabakh and Nakhichevan were enclaves whose inhabitants were separated from their ethnic kin in the titular republics of Armenia and Azerbaijan respectively.” (See also Bill Frelick, Faultlines of Nationality Conflict: Refugees and Displaced Persons from Armenia and Azerbaijan, Washington, U.S. Committee for Refugees, March 1994, pp. 7-9.)" Therefore, Karabakh could never have been “arbitrarily split from Armenia,” as the article claims, as it never belonged to it in the first place. Another issue is the misunderstanding of the Soviet territorial-administrative division, where the author identifies Karabakh (then NKAO) as "Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous REPUBLIC" as opposed to simply oblast' (province). Karabakh was an oblast', which lacked the broad legal rights which Autonomous (e.g., Naxcivan within Azerbaijan) and Union Republics (e.g., Azerbaijan or Armenia) enjoyed, such as its own constitution, flag, coat of arms, foreign representation, and ability to declare sovereignty and ultimately independence (at least on paper). Karabakh could not declare independence, as it was just an autonomous oblast' within Azerbaijan SSR -- a Union Republic. In fact, not only the Azerbaijani Supreme Soviet annulled both illegal Armenian and NKAO resolutions, but so did the USSR Supreme Soviet, the ultimate legislative organ of the Soviet Union. Moreover, the author is simply confused himself when he, with all due seriousness, states that "98% of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh voted to split from Azerbaijan and adopt an independent status" during the illegal 10 December 1991 activity, referred to as "referendum on independence." As mentioned above, the oblast and its regional leaders lacked any capacity to declare any independence from Azerbaijan SSR -- it was unconstitutional and illegal. Moreover, that would have contradicted many previous (illegitimate) acts of NKAO Oblast Soviet and Armenian Parliament to annex Karabakh to Armenia, all of which were illegal, and declared null and void by Azerbaijani Parliament, and the USSR Supreme Soviet. It is very important to keep in mind that Azerbaijanis made up 25% of the population of Karabakh region until 1988 (over 40,000 people), and have been subjected to "ethnic cleansing" since until there was none left as it is the case today. In response to the author’s downplaying of the massacre of peaceful civilians in Khojaly, as well as omitting to mention nearly one million displaced Azerbaijanis (at least 10% of population) due to Armenian aggression, here’s another relevant quote from Mr. Deng’s official report: "A series of violent attacks, by which Karabakh forces gained control of the cities of Khojaly and Shusha in Nagorno-Karabakh in the spring of 1992 and of a land corridor between Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia in the area around Lachin in June 1992, resulted in the wholesale displacement of the ethnic Azerbaijani and Kurdish populations, as well as of Meskhetian Turk refugees settled in these areas." The author goes on to make several more far-reaching statements, such as that "Despite these deliveries to Armenia [of S-300 SAM and 18 MiG-29's], it is probable that Azerbaijan is armed twice as heavily. A report by the US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency estimates that Azerbaijan imported arms valued at US$115 million during the period 1992-96, with Armenia's imports standing at $60 million." First, Azerbaijan is twice as big as Armenia and hosts no foreign bases to "protect" itself -- as Armenia -- and is the victim of aggression with land still occupied, and thus needs more weapons than Armenia. Second, even if we are to determine how one side is armed based on dollar figures -- as opposed to actual quantity -- then it would be a good idea to mention the covert and illegal arms deliveries to Armenia from late 1992 till 1996, worth close to TWO BILLION DOLLARS according to the late General L.Rokhlin, then Chair of the Duma Defense Committee. It included such arms as 84 T-72 tanks, 50 BMP-2, 32 SCUD-B ballistic missiles, 18 GRAD launchers, as well as Igla's, Krug's, Osa's and other systems, missiles and howitzers (for more details, please refer to Jane's Defence Weekly, April 16, 1997, ASIA PACIFIC; Vol. 27; No. 15; Pg. 15 "Russia details illegal deliveries to Armenia" BY: Nikolai Novichkov, in Moscow.) Meanwhile, if we are to speak about real arms holdings, already in 1997 Armenia had placed an estimated 253 battle tanks, 278 armoured vehicles and 298 artillery units in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan (including Karabakh region) -- that is in addition to the weapons stationed on its own territory and that of foreign bases stationed on its territory. Mr. Harris seems to be at ease with ignoring the correct figures and statistics regarding Azerbaijani casualties, while coming up with some astronomical figures for the Armenians, as is the claim about "an estimated 22,000 Karabakhis....died." Estimated by whom, may I ask? Only if by “Karabakhis” the author means all Armenian casualties (i.e., combined forces of Republic of Armenia, Armenians of Azerbaijan, Diaspora and mercenaries), it might be correct. Human Rights Watch/Helsinki in its 1994 book “Seven Years of Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh” estimated total losses for both sides at around 25,000, while the official Azerbaijani estimates are twice as much. Although, there is little doubt that most casualties were Azerbaijanis, as the Armenian aggression was conducted entirely on Azerbaijani territory. A very strange note about some "allies" -- the author obviously implies mercenaries -- of Azerbaijan who died in the war opens another issue. Mr. Harris ignores the proof and evidence by UN, OSCE, HRW, etc., about the participation of mercenaries and foreign volunteers on both sides. Moreover, the author goes on to claim that "There has been no evidence of foreign trainers in the country." I beg to disagree. Anatoliy Vladimirovich Zinevich is a Major General and even "Chief of the Nagorno-Karabakh Army Headquarters." (One can read his interview in Yerevan's VREMYA newspaper in Russian, 24 August 1996, p. 3, by Ara Tatevosyan, MOSKOVSKIYE NOVOSTI staff correspondent, entitled "Once a Russian General...") Meanwhile extensive cases of mercenaries fighting on Armenia’s side are well noted by Enrique Bernales Ballesteros, the UN Special Rapporteur on Mercenaries (see: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Question of the Use of Mercenaries E/CN.4/1994/23). Here is an excerpt: "(a) On 26 January 1992, a French mercenary was killed during an Azerbaijani attack on the village of Karin-Tak, near Stepanakert; (b) In February 1992, a foreign mercenary fighting with the Armenian self-defence forces was killed in the attack on the Azerbaijani town of Khojaly; (c) From 12 to 14 June 1992, nine foreign mercenaries fighting in the Armenian forces were killed in the battles around Askeran; (d) On 1 July 1992, the commander of a battalion of the self-defence forces of Azerbaijan, stated to the Turan News Agency that, in a battle in the Mardakert region, a foreign mercenary who had sided with the Armenian National Army was killed; (e) On 1 June 1993, six former Russian soldiers [members of elite Spetsnaz forces] were captured in action, after reportedly carrying out subversive operations in Nagorny Karabakh. According to the information received, they were recruited by Russian officers to train Armenian units in Nagorny Karabakh after their Russian units in Armenia had been dissolved and they had been discharged. They were reportedly convicted as mercenaries; (f) It is reported that foreign mercenaries working for payment for the Nagorny Karabakh and the Armenian forces, but also for the Azerbaijani forces, have shelled houses, hospitals and churches, looted and burned houses, and intentionally terrorized and forced the civilian population out of villages, by killing and wounding civilians, including women and children, and by taking civilian hostages;" Interestingly, out of the three Trans-Caucasian states, only two have both signed and ratified the International Convention against Mercenaries (adopted by UN GA in 1989). Armenia is not one of those countries. Sincerely, Adil Baguirov