A senior Armenian legislator, Tigran Abrahamyan, has indicated that Nagorno-Karabakh residents who fled their homes after the region came under Azerbaijani control are unlikely to return. He argued that the international community has shown limited concern for Karabakh’s people, describing the action as insufficient to influence the fate of those displaced. His remarks reflect a broader sentiment in parts of Armenia that global actors have not provided the reassurances or guarantees that would make returnees feel secure enough to go back to their former communities. The emphasis is on realistic expectations about external mediation and the need for practical steps that could help displaced residents regain a sense of stability inside their own country.
Abrahamyan reportedly spoke to a gathering of Artsakh residents, noting that with Armenia effectively under influence from Azerbaijan, the chances of resettlement in the near term look dim. He cautioned that persistently appealing to the international community could lead to renewed disappointment and a growing sense of separation from Artsakh. For those clinging to the idea of outside mediation, he suggested preparing for alternative paths and opportunities beyond traditional homes. He also urged a measured stance toward criticizing Armenian leadership, arguing that blame rarely changes the immediate realities faced by Karabakh residents and that constructive efforts could yield more tangible gains in the months ahead.
During the week, developments unfolded as Azerbaijan announced an anti-terrorism operation in Nagorno-Karabakh. Official statements framed the move as a response to provocations and as an effort to disarm Armenian forces and withdraw them from the region. The operation intensified tensions and altered the security dynamics on the ground. A few days later, Russia brokered a ceasefire between Baku and Karabakh forces, with the understanding that Armenian military units would be disbanded and heavy equipment withdrawn under Russian peacekeeping supervision. The mission was tasked with monitoring the accord’s implementation and ensuring a controlled, orderly process to minimize further violence. The ceasefire marked a pivotal shift in the security landscape and the responsibilities of international actors involved in the region.
The escalation and subsequent ceasefire sparked widespread protests across Armenia, including calls for the resignation of officials perceived as responsible for the handling of the Karabakh situation. Roughly one hundred thousand internally displaced people sought refuge within Armenian territory as a result of the clashes. Meanwhile, the government in Nagorno-Karabakh moved to formalize the dissolution of the unrecognized republic, setting a final date for ending its administrative existence and integrating its structures into recognized state frameworks. The removal of the Karabakh administration from public life signaled a historic and contentious shift in governance and identity for many residents and their supporters, prompting questions about the region’s future trajectory and ties to Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Earlier discussions inside Armenia highlighted the sensitivity of the Karabakh status issue and the heated political debate surrounding its future. The broader narrative has framed the status question as requiring new assumptions about sovereignty, security, and the rights of displaced communities. In this context, policymakers and observers emphasize humanitarian priorities, regional stability, and the practical needs of people who have endured years of displacement. The evolving situation continues to prompt a reassessment of long-term plans, including strategies for reconstruction, repatriation, and reconciliation among communities affected by the conflict. Analysts point to the necessity of balancing national interests with the humanitarian imperative to protect those who remain affected by the ongoing tensions and to support a sustainable path forward for the region.