User:Fadix/Karabakh

Azerbaijan SSR telegram Karabakh

As of today the border disputes between Armenian and Azerbaijan are declared resolved. Mountainous Karabakh, Zangezur and Nakhichevan are considered part of the Soviet Republic of Armenia. The Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict- Causes and Implications, Michael P Croissant, Praeger/Greenwood 1998, also in Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia, Tim Potier, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2001 p. 3

Which is basically the same as the one recieved by Soviet Armenia which provides a source of that time. [1]

Stalin Recognition of the Telegram

The Telegram confirmed few days later by Stalin and Ordzhinikidze

Soviet Azerbaijan has officially renounced to its claim to the disputed territories... (Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia, Tim Potier, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2001 p. 3)

The actual statment by Stalin was published in Pravda(No. 273, 12-4-1920), and was the following. (Stalin Speech also in J. V. Stalin, Works, Volo. 4 (M. 1953, pp. 426-427).

On December 1, [1920], Soviet Azerbaijan voluntarily renounces all claims to the disputed provinces, and declares the transfer to Soviet Armenia of Zangezur, Nakhichevan and Nagornyi Karabakh.

G. Ordzhinikidze words are in the same issue of Pavda, which reads: Advise comrades Lenin and Stalin about the following: A communique from Erivan has just been received announcing the establishment of Soviet power in Armenia. Azerbaijan yesterday declared the transfer of Zangezur, Nakhichevan and Nagornyi Karabakh to Soviet Armenia.

Kirov and Karabakh refusal to Azerbaijan administration

S.M. Kirov, member of the Military Council of the 11th Red Army wrote to Lenin about Muslim Mussavat demands on Zankezur and Karabakh.

Karabakh and Zangezur do not recognize the Azerbaijani government. (Kirov, S.M.,Articles, Speeches and Documents; Volume I, Moscow, 1936, p.144)

Stalin and 9 November 1920 declaration

Stalin claimed that Zankezur and Karabakh could not be handed to Dashnak Armenia. (Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia, Tim Potier, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2001 p. 3)

June 12 and 13 decree

Sur la base de l'accord réalisé entre les gouvernements des Républiques socialistes de l'Azerbaijan et de l'Arménie, il est proclamé que dorénavant le district montagneux du Karabakh forme une partie intégrante de la République d'Arménie Soviétique.

Erevan, le 12 Juin 1921 Signé: A. Miasnikian (Al. Mardouni), président M. Gharapekian, secrétaire.

Le district montagneux du Karabakh, sur la base d'un accord récent, est proclamé par le Gouvernement de l'Arménie Soviétique, partie intégrante de l'Arménie.

Erevan, le 13 Juin 1921 Signé: A. Miasnikian (Al. Mardouni), président B. Makinitzian, A. Peksadian, S. Srabionian (Lougachine) A. Karinian, membres du Conseil des Commissaire du Peuple M. Gharapekian, secrétaire.

Traduction from Armenian: K. Lazian, L'Arménie et la Cause arménienne selon les traités. Le Caire, 1942 p. 172-173

Narimanov threats of blocked Kerosene

if Armenia demands Karabakh, we will not deliver kerosene. Quoted in Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan Through Peace and War, Thomas De Waal, NYU Press, 2004 p. 130 (please replace this comment with a date. - FrancisTyers · 16:30, 15 July 2006 (UTC))

It was part of the complaints from the Armenian Bolshevic leader Alexander Miasnikian regarding the forced droping by Armenia of Karabakh after constent threats by Azeris leadership. They both go together, but neither have clear dates (the Treaty and the Threat). Fad (ix) 16:40, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Illegallity

...Karabakh was illegally ceded to Azerbaijan by the Russian Communist Party in 1921, partly to curb secessionist ambitions within Armenia and partly to reward Baku for its support of the Bolshevik Revolution during the civil war that forged the Soviet Union. (The Fate of Small Nations: The Karabagh Conflict Ten Years Later, Graham Usher, Middle East Report, No. 213, Millennial Middle East: Changing Orders, Shifting Borders. (Winter, 1999) p. 21)

Incorporated

...resulted in the incorporation of Nagorno-Karabakh. (The Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict- Causes and Implications, Michael P Croissant, Praeger/Greenwood 1998)

...Armenian enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh, which was incorporated into the neighboring republic of Azerbaijan in 1923. (Dateline USSR: Ethnic Tremors, Patrick Cockburn Foreign Policy, No. 74 (Spring, 1989), p. 128)

On 2 September 1991 Nagorno-Karabakh (incorporated in 1923) declared indepedence... (Socialist Economies and the Transition to the Market, an Jeffries, Routledge (UK), 1993, p. 82

The fabrication regarding the Peace Conference

Both Potier and Altstadt write word by word the same thing in their respective works.

Early in 1920, the Peace Conference recognised Azerbaijan's claim to Karabakh. The reference supposed to support this information is simply a distraction. Potier provides this footnote as support. It is interesting to note the words of Anastas Mikoyan, member of the Transcaucasus Regional Party Committee (Zakraikom), in a report he wrote to Lenin dated 22 May 1919: 'The unification of Karabagh to Armenia would mean, for the population of Karabagh, deprivation of their source of life in Baku and being tied to Erevan, with which they have never had any kind of connection'.

Altstadt diversion was the following. The decision upheld earlier Entente policy. It may have been bolstered by reports of Allied observers in the field, like Haskell, and by a recognition of the veracity of what Mikoyan told Lenin: "The unification of Karabagh to Armenia would mean, for the population of Karabagh, deprivation of their source of life in Baku and being tied to Erevan, with which they have never had any kind of connection."

Books I have consulted(excluding the recent ones):

The inside Story of the Peace Conference by E. J. Dillon Dr.; Harper & Brothers, 1920
Some Problems of the Peace Conference by Charles Homer Haskins, Robert Howard Lord; Harvard University Press, 1920
The Big Four and Others of the Peace Conference by Robert Lansing; Houghton Mifflin Company, 1921
What Really Happened at Paris: The Story of the Peace Conference, 1918-1919 by Edward Mandell House, Charles Seymour; Charles Scribner's Sons, 1921
Peacemaking, 1919, Being Reminiscences of the Paris Peace Conference by Harold Nicolson; Houghton Mifflin Company, 1933
At the Paris Peace Conference by James T. Shotwell; Macmillan, 1937
The Truth about the Peace Treaties - Vol. 1 by David Lloyd George; V. Gollancz, 1938

Nothing NADA! The only thing the sources refers to is the disputes between Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.

Here an example: The Georgians and Azerbaijan Tartars presented claims to independent statehood which overlapped, each upon the other, territorially; and both delegations claimed, as their own, areas within the northern and eastern limits of the state outlined on the maps of the Armenians as the minimum of the Armenian territorial area. As a side-line the Georgians had interesting business proposals in manganese. The Azerbaijan Tartars talked big money in oil, especially in the Groszny oil regions. (What Really Happened at Paris: The Story of the Peace Conference, 1918-1919 by Edward Mandell House, Charles Seymour; Charles Scribner's Sons, 1921, p. 189)

Also, it was requested to defend Armenia from Turkey and Azerbaijan.

Hoover, who was directing relief operations in Armenia as well as at Constantinople, learned from House that Wilson would appoint Hoover "governor" under the American mandate that the president had in mind. "I ... knew from hard experience much about this part of the world," Hoover wrote later. "I was sure the president knew little of the conditions which had to be met.... I advised him [House] that Armenia could never protect herself from her fierce neighbors—Turkey and Azerbaijan—without a foreign garrison of at least 150,000 troops." If the United States took this responsibility, it would be at war with Turkey or Russia sooner or later, Hoover thought. Regarding Armenia as "the poor house of Europe," he proposed an American investigating mission. (Wilson and His Peacemakers: American Diplomacy at the Paris Peace Conference, 1919, by Arthur Walworth; W. W. Norton, 1986, p. 505)

The Eastern frontiers were left pending. The Sevres discussions were in the same direction.

The frontiers between Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia were to be determined by direct agreement between the states concerned; or, if they failed to agree, by the Allied Powers.

Security against War Vol. 1, by Antonia Hatvany, Frances Kellor; Macmillan Co., 1924 p. 349

The decision was to accept an Azeris governor until the decisions reached at the Peace Conference, there was no discussion about it, each sides came with their own maps and did not agree, even during the Sevres negotiations, there still was no agreement. More to add later. Fad (ix) 14:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)