Yerevan took offense at history On Armenian lawmakers’ reaction to Aliyev’s speech

There is no doubt that developments in Azerbaijan are closely followed in Armenia, with particular attention paid to President Ilham Aliyev’s speeches. Armenian officials frequently comment on his statements, and this time was no exception. President Aliyev’s address marking the 80th anniversary of the Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences provoked a sharp reaction in Armenia, including from the Speaker of the National Assembly, Alen Simonyan, and his deputy, Ruben Rubinyan.

Armenian lawmakers were unsettled by the following words of Ilham Aliyev:

“We must return to our historical lands - not in tanks, but in automobiles…It is enough to look at early-20th-century maps published by Tsarist Russia to see that the overwhelming majority of toponyms in what is now Armenia are of Azerbaijani origin. There was no lake Sevan on those maps. There is Lake Goycha on those maps, along with all other Azerbaijani historical toponyms we use.

We did not compile those maps for anyone to say that we are committing fraud. This was done by Tsarist Russia, the very Tsarist Russia that once brought Armenians from Iran and Eastern Anatolia and settled them in Garabagh lands to alter the ethnic and religious composition there. In other words, these maps are based on pure historical truth.”

The Speaker of the Armenian Parliament, Alen Simonyan, commenting on President Ilham Aliyev’s speech, stated that “if we delve into history, it becomes clear that Azerbaijanis came from the Altai.”

Here is what Ruben Rubinyan said: “If we go back far enough, at some point we will not see the name Sevan on old maps. Instead, we will see the Gegam or Gegharkunik Sea. And we will not see Azerbaijan.”

These statements evoke a strong sense of déjà vu (incidentally, exactly a year ago Simonyan made a similar claim) and boil down to the same set of clichéd narratives propagated by the apologists of Armenian ideological exceptionalism — narratives that, unfortunately, for a long time served as the official state ideology of Armenia. According to these narratives, “Azerbaijanis came from the Altai, while Armenians are the indigenous people of the Caucasus,” and “Azerbaijan did not exist in history before 1918.”

This discourse was once cultivated by three former Armenian presidents with fascist leanings, one of whom even went so far as to claim the “genetic incompatibility” of Armenians and Azerbaijanis. Under Ter-Petrosyan, Kocharyan, and Sargsyan, Armenia implemented policies at the state level that promoted Turkophobia, as well as ethnic and racial discrimination.

And while the positions of previous Armenian leaders are already well known, the reiteration of similar narratives by the current ruling elite of Armenia calls into question their engagement with reality. The statements of Simonyan and Rubinyan are essentially components of Azerbaijani-phobia and a policy of ethnic and racial intolerance.

Emphasising the historical name of Lake Goycha does not imply any territorial claims against Armenia. The concept of “Return to Western Azerbaijan,” promoted by civil society institutions, is based on the principle of the right of return. Moreover, Aliyev clearly stated that “the return of Azerbaijanis to the present-day Armenia should not intimidate the people or the state of Armenia.”

Nevertheless, Yerevan once again chose to take offense. “Essentially, there is nothing to add except that such statements do not arise from the existing logic of bilateral relations,” Simonyan said. Rubinyan added that returning in the first place makes no sense. “We must move forward. That is the essence of the Declaration of August 8.”

But moving forward does not mean turning a blind eye to the rights of the several hundred thousand Azerbaijanis who were expelled from their ancestral homes. Within the Azerbaijani society, there is a legitimate concern that supporters of “Miatsum” could once again come to power in Armenia and attempt a revivalist revenge. The very least we can do to mitigate this risk is to remember it.

This means we must remember Zangezur, the Goycha region, and other territories — not as lands to be annexed to Azerbaijan, but purely as a historical fact: lands where Azerbaijanis lived for centuries and to which they have a right to return. We need to keep this in mind to ensure that war never happens again.