LETTER FROM GENERAL BAGRATUNI

History

LETTER FROM GENERAL BAGRATUNI TO THE PRIME MINISTER, MINISTER OF WAR OF ARMENIA, AND GENERAL SILIKOV ON AZERBAIJAN’S PLANS TO SEIZE KARABAKH AND COUNTERMEASURES

Top Secret — March 19, 1919

In the context of Armenian-Tatar relations, the issue of Karabakh is currently taking a new turn.

According to the information available to us, the Azerbaijani government is demonstrating a clear and deliberate intention to extend its authority over all ethnically Armenian regions of Karabakh—not only in areas previously invaded by Turkish forces but also in places untouched by either the Turks or the power of the Azerbaijani Republic.

The Azerbaijani government is actively attempting to establish, organize, and implement its administrative structures in Karabakh, aiming to peacefully subordinate the Armenian-populated regions through these mechanisms.*

Until recently, General Andranik was stationed in the western part of Karabakh (in Kapan, Sisian, and Zangezur). He has been the subject of relentless defamation by the Tatars, particularly in efforts to discredit him in the eyes of the British.

I found it necessary to explain to General Thomson the role and significance of General Andranik—especially now, when his mission is purely defensive: to protect the Armenian-inhabited regions of Karabakh from Tatar incursions. It appears that British attitudes toward General Andranik are now favorable. Indeed, his role in defending Zangezur and the western parts of Karabakh is highly significant.

The Tatars are not only attempting to introduce their administration throughout Karabakh but are also gathering some forces, primarily in the Shushi district (in Zabukh, between Aghdam and Askeran).

It is imperative to take decisive measures to establish Armenian governance in the Armenian-populated areas of Karabakh. This task is extremely urgent—we must not lose a moment.

In December of last year, I transferred one million rubles to General Andranik for the needs of refugees (of whom he has, as you know, a great many) and his troops (400,000 rubles for the troops and 600,000 for the refugees).

As indicated above, the Azerbaijanis are actively seeking to penetrate and occupy Karabakh.

I have received information that the Republic’s government has dispatched 10–15 individuals to Karabakh to institute civil administration. Clearly, this number must be increased four to fivefold without delay.

I have also learned that General D. Pirumov was expected to arrive in Karabakh to organize a brigade and establish civil administration—both of which are extremely urgent tasks.

If General Pirumov has not yet departed, it is vital that he—or another authoritative individual, preferably someone with personal merit and connections to Karabakh—be sent immediately to both form the brigade and introduce civil administration.

The entire region of Karabakh eagerly awaits the arrival of such an authoritative figure. For now, a commission is being dispatched from here with substantial financial resources. This commission will, quietly and without invoking the name of the Republic, begin organizing and establishing civil governance in the Armenian-inhabited parts of Karabakh.**

Upon the representative’s arrival, the commission is to submit to his authority and transfer its funds to his disposal. It is essential that the Republic’s representative also be provided with financial resources (and ammunition for the population’s self-defense).

<…>

Major General Bagratuni

Central State Historical Archive of Armenia, f. 200, op. 1, d. 243, pp. 47–50. Authorized typescript.

Published in: Nagorno-Karabakh in 1918–1923, Yerevan, 1992, Doc. No. 79. (Highlighted by us — Yu.B.)

  • The Council of Ministers has just established the post of Governor-General of Karabakh with special powers; his authority should cover the districts of Shushi, Zangezur, and Jevanshir. (Author’s note.)

** It is desirable and necessary for all individuals introducing civil administration to act not in the name of the Republic. Governance should be implemented in the form of local self-government by the local population. (Author’s note.)

LETTER FROM THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF ARMENIA TO THE BRITISH MILITARY REPRESENTATIVE IN ERIVAN REGARDING THE NECESSITY OF EXCLUDING ZANGEZUR AND ARMENIAN KARABAKH FROM THE GOVERNOR-GENERALSHIP, THE WITHDRAWAL OF AZERBAIJANI TROOPS, AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION UNDER BRITISH COMMAND

No. 727 Erivan, March 21, 1919

The situation in Karabakh is extremely dire. The native Armenian population of Zangezur and Armenian Karabakh, which constitutes the majority in this region, has firmly and unequivocally expressed its desire not to be part of Azerbaijan. The residents of these areas have clearly stated their preference to join Armenia.

All of Armenia, in its path toward political revival, views the Karabakh issue as inextricably linked to its vital interests and the strengthening of its statehood. The participation of Zangezur and Armenian Karabakh in the national life and political movement of the Armenian people has always been significant. From historical, geographical, ethnographic, and strategic standpoints, these regions are of great importance to Armenia. They truly represent key elements of Armenia’s internal resilience, reinforcing and simplifying its external defense.

During the Turkish-German invasion of the Caucasus, Turkish forces managed to penetrate only a few small localities of Armenian Karabakh. After the official withdrawal of Turkish forces—although, in reality, a portion of their military units remained in Karabakh and continued to operate both covertly and overtly under the direction of Muslim elements in Azerbaijan—the implementation of Turkish-German plans persisted.

The Armenian population was able to preserve its independence and hoped—just as it continues to hope now, alongside the Armenian government—that the status quo existing before the arrival of Turkish forces would be restored, and that under no circumstances should Karabakh fall under Azerbaijani control.

When in January 1919 the Azerbaijani government announced the establishment of the Governor-Generalship, which was to include Zangezur and part of Armenian Karabakh, the government of the Republic of Armenia responded with a formal note of protest addressed to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

In February, General Walker, via General Asser, communicated to me a telegram from General Thomson stating that Dr. Sultanov would assume the role of Governor-General in Shusha, covering the districts of Zangezur, Jebrail, Shusha, and Karabakh. I felt it my duty to declare that the transmission of this telegram could not be interpreted by us as a recognition by the British command of any Azerbaijani claims to these contested territories.

Only after receiving the most recent letter (dated March 5, No. 204/4) from General Forestier-Walker on this matter did I officially learn that Dr. Sultanov had been appointed to his post by General Thomson.

However, to my great regret, I currently lack sufficient information to definitively determine Dr. Sultanov’s official status: whether he is solely a representative and official of the British command, an independent figure not affiliated with the Azerbaijani government, or whether he should be considered a Governor-General appointed by the Azerbaijani government, albeit with the sanction of the British command.

LETTER FROM THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF ARMENIA TO THE BRITISH MILITARY REPRESENTATIVE IN ERIVAN REGARDING THE NECESSITY OF EXCLUDING ZANGEZUR AND ARMENIAN KARABAKH FROM THE GOVERNOR-GENERALSHIP, THE WITHDRAWAL OF AZERBAIJANI TROOPS, AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION UNDER BRITISH SUPERVISION

No. 727 Erivan, March 21, 1919

In the text of the aforementioned telegram as communicated to me, there is no mention of the British Command’s participation in appointing Dr. Sultanov as Governor-General. On the other hand, Dr. Sultanov’s public proclamations clearly indicate that he was appointed Governor-General by the Government of Azerbaijan. Conversely, in General Walker’s recent letter, Dr. Sultanov’s appointment is described solely as an independent act by General Thomson, with no reference whatsoever to the involvement of the Azerbaijani Government.

I set aside these ambiguities and respectfully draw Your Excellency’s attention to the fact that any unilateral attempt by the Azerbaijani Government to forcibly establish its administrative and political authority over disputed territories will inevitably encounter resistance and will result in grave violations of peace, order, and legality in this country.

Furthermore, the following developments—the creation of the Governor-Generalship, the appointment of Dr. Sultanov, and especially the military preparations and movement of Azerbaijani detachments, including the occupation by force of several strategic points in Armenian Karabakh—can only be interpreted as a clear violation of the decision of the Peace Conference of January 24, 1919. That decision called upon governments to refrain from any coercive measures and to await the outcome of conference deliberations regarding all disputed matters, warning that any breach of these protocols would entail disastrous consequences for the aggressor.

The British Command, for its part, has repeatedly affirmed that its primary mission in the Caucasus is to uphold peace, order, and legality. It is self-evident that this mission also includes ensuring that the resolutions of the Peace Conference are honored by all parties.

All these considerations provide ample grounds for me to respectfully request Your Excellency—on behalf of peace and order, on behalf of the right of nations to determine their own destinies, and in the name of the just interests of Armenia, which is reviving its independent political existence—to extend your distinguished and favorable attention to these matters.

In conclusion, I take the liberty of submitting for Your Excellency’s consideration the list of measures proposed by the Government of Armenia, which, in our view, offer the best peaceful and lawful path to resolve the critical issues mentioned above:

  1. Zangezur and Armenian Karabakh should remain, as before, independent from Azerbaijan, and the aforementioned territories should be excluded from the proposed Governor-Generalship.
  2. If at present the British Command finds it impossible to incorporate these regions into the territory of the Republic of Armenia, then at the very least, Azerbaijani forces must be withdrawn from the area, and an autonomous administration should be established with the support of local national councils, under the supervision and supreme authority of the British Command—whether in the form of a British Governor-General or in any other arrangement that the British authorities may deem appropriate.

With the highest expressions of respect, Minister of Foreign Affairs — Tigranyan

Central State Historical Archive of Armenia, f. 200, op. 1, d. 243, pp. 63–64 rev. Draft manuscript. Published in: Nagorno-Karabakh in 1918–1923, Yerevan, 1992, Doc. No. 80. (Emphasis ours — Yu.B.)

“Kavkazskoe Slovo” Newspaper on the Treacherous Policy of the British Command, Yielding to Azerbaijan Regarding the Armenian Population of Karabakh March 21, 1919

<…>

With the victory of the Allies, Karabakh breathed a momentary sigh of relief. It was saved. The Allies triumphed—and along with those great powers, Karabakh too prevailed, a small yet valiant ally…*

But then…

Diplomatic games and schemes began. Those who for years had served as Turkish mercenaries—who conspired and orchestrated the Baku massacre and infernal pits, whose hands are stained with the innocent blood of passengers pulled from trains and peasants dragged from their carts—these well-known members of a vast bandit organization, with the knowledge and consent of the Allied Command, now seek to achieve by manipulation what they failed to seize by force and Turkish yataghan, aided by the “kiasarakh” of the Khoi and Jafarov factions.

Today, Sultanov—rather than being placed on trial—is appointed Governor of Karabakh and, with the assistance of the Allies, attempts to take this region under his “paternal” protection. Meanwhile, the Allied Command, instead of recognizing the unanimously and resolutely expressed will of the population—to unite with Armenia or, pending a final decision at the Paris Conference, to remain independent and free from Azerbaijani oversight—on the one hand, weakens and sows discord among Karabakh’s leadership through negotiations and promises; and on the other hand, turns a blind eye as Azerbaijan concentrates military forces and munitions, violating the armistice terms and occupying critical strategic points…

This tense and uncertain situation must be resolved. The working peasantry must be allowed to return to peaceful labor. The three paths acceptable to the population of Karabakh are: unification with Armenia, the establishment of exclusive British administration, or the temporary recognition of Karabakh’s independence. One of these must be chosen by the Allied Command without delay. Procrastination would be criminal, and diplomatic maneuvering or concessions to Azerbaijan’s ambitions could trigger new complications—responsibility for which would rest not with the people of Karabakh.

—Ashkhatavor Kavkazskoe Slovo, March 21, 1919 Published in: Nagorno-Karabakh in 1918–1923, Yerevan, 1992, Doc. No. 81 (Emphasis ours — Yu.B.)

RUSSIAN PUBLIC FIGURE AND JOURNALIST S. GORODETSKY ON THE SIGNIFICANCE OF KARABAKH FOR THE ARMENIAN PEOPLE March 23, 1919

Every country, every nation has its cherished strongholds. When a nation’s history unfolds favorably, such places become centers of cultural and political life. When fate turns against a people, these bastions become the backbone of national spirit, islands of hope, and pledges of rebirth. This is precisely the role that the mountainous region of Karabakh has played—and continues to play—for the Armenian people.

Nature itself bestowed immense significance upon it. For over two thousand years, in the unapproachable heights of Karabakh—extensions of the Kars and Sevan ranges—the Armenian nation has withstood the onslaught of nomadic tribes, preserving its culture and defending its national identity.

United in ethnography, economy, and language, Karabakh became Armenia’s citadel—its eastern flank. So it was in the past, so it is today, and so it shall remain, for the heart of Armenia, the Ararat Valley, cannot be defended without control over Karabakh. Time and again throughout history, waves of invasions have crashed against Karabakh’s ramparts, penetrating only through its river valleys—yet never lingering long. Repeatedly, the melikdoms of the principality of Syunik, as Karabakh was once known, repelled enemies through their own strength. History repeats itself, and once again we have witnessed such moments with our own eyes.

Nature and history have molded in Karabakh a distinctive character. Scattered across the globe, Karabakh Armenians are easily recognizable: bold, unrestrained, courageous, risk-taking, self-assured, with a peculiar stubbornness, straightforward persistence, and patriarchal family traditions—these are the admirable traits of a Karabakh Armenian, traits that concentrate ancient Armenian virtues, dulled by history’s harshness, yet preserved in their purest form in Karabakh. A tall, broad-shouldered people who fled to the mountains to preserve their lives, they grew stronger in the mountain air, shielded from the afflictions that plague valley dwellers.

Armenia’s national memory must retain the many illustrious names of Karabakh Armenians. There is no sphere in which they have not demonstrated their talent and enterprise: politics, literature, public service, commerce—all served as arenas for their contributions. Numerous examples could be cited…

Bound to its traditions and way of life, Karabakh has not tarnished its ancient glory even today. As in the days of Tamerlane, its meliks rallied their forces and defended the independence of Karabakh. The Shusha episode did not alter the broader picture of Nuri Pasha’s defeat; the line of defense, in essence, remained intact, just as during prior invasions.

Such is the significance of Karabakh for Armenia. Undoubtedly, were Armenia to lose it, the principle of national self-determination would suffer a serious blow. Conversely, by possessing Karabakh, Armenia gains a powerful infusion of cultural energy—an energy that would stream into Armenia’s devastated lands, reviving them with culture and bringing to completion the illustrious, centuries-old history of Karabakh.

Today, every nation seeks its foundation. The future of all reborn peoples depends on whether they can discover within themselves a sufficient reservoir—so to speak, the yeast—of their national culture. Under such conditions, every center where cultural life has concentrated for any reason assumes exceptional importance. Such, too, is the role of Karabakh for Armenia. <…>

Kavkazskoe Slovo, March 23, 1919

Карта: историческая карта армянского Карабаха и Зангезура 1919 года, с обозначением стратегических пунктов, упомянутых в письмах — Шуши, Кафан, Сисиан, Агдам, Аскеран.

Yuri Barsegov “Nagorno-Karabakh in International Law and Global Politics” 276

Artatsolum

Read Also:

You might also like:

THE KARABAKH CONFLICT

THE KARABAKH CONFLICT

TESTIMONY OF USSR MVD OFFICER V. KRIVOPUSKOV

TESTIMONY OF USSR MVD OFFICER V. KRIVOPUSKOV

RESOLUTION OF THE SUPREME SOVIET OF THE USSR On the Enactment of the Law of the USSR

RESOLUTION OF THE SUPREME SOVIET OF THE USSR On the Enactment of the Law of the USSR

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *