Soviet Karabakh Newspaper Archive

Sovetakan Karabakh (Soviet Karabakh) was an Armenian newspaper of the Nagorno Karabakh Autonomous Oblast, founded in 1923. Originally, the newspaper was known as Karabakhigekhchuk (The Karabakh Peasant), and later Khorurdain Karabakh. Its name was changed to Sovetakan Karabakh in 1940 with publications released six times weekly. In 1973, the newspaper received the Soviet Union’s Order of the Badge of Honor. Sovetakan Karabakh’s publications often addressed the “Karabakh Problem,” chronicling the persecution of the indigenous Karabakh / Artsakh Armenians and expressing their will for self-determination. In some cases, the editors of Sovetakan Karabakh were fired or persecuted when writing about their injustices caried out against the Armenians by the Azerbaijani SSR. In 1965, for instance, the Second Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan, Pyotr Elistratov, removed Lazar Gasparyan, Sovetakan Karabakh’s editor, from his post, for his participation in a letter to Brezhnev detailing the Karabakh Problem and asking for reunification. The name Sovetakan Karabakh was later changed to Artsakh Hanrapetutyun (Artsakh Republic) and today it is known as Azat Artsakh (Free Artsakh). 

 The following are select translations of articles published spanning the years of the Armenian Artsakh struggle of 1988-1992, covering the Artsakh Liberation War and other notable Armenian issues of the time. The translated articles include first-hand accounts of the lives and tribulations of Artsakh-Armenians: their hopes, their dreams, their wit, their perseverance, and their struggle! Join us in reading the thoughts and stories of Artsakh-Armenians living through the precipice of change.

Gegham Baghdasaryan

August 24, 1988

Nagorno Karabakh. It would not be an exaggeration to say that the year 1988 began with these two words. These two words were used everywhere, in all different manners. It is no secret that many people heard these words for the first time (probably not only through their own fault - for many years the region remained aloof from the big events taking place in the world), but many have just begun to look for this small mountainous region on the geographical map. And before that, the appearance of, for example, such a phrase was still possible: “What is happening in the region, can’t the Armenians and Azerbaijanis pacify these recalcitrant Karabakhians (Karabakh-Armenians)?” After the Sumgait tragedy, dozens of angry letters came to us - what have you done? It was with such public awareness that the Karabakh movement gained momentum. Almost the entire country participated in the discussion (an unprecedented expansion of the geography of editorial mail is evidence of this), including the aforementioned “many,” who still had to explain that the Karabakh people are not some recently discovered people, but a particle of the same Armenian people. And that Sumgait is located 400 kilometers from the NKAO. Hence the diversity of our mail, hence the polarity of opinions, the obvious confrontation of views.

These letters, which make up the lion's share of editorial mail in recent months, can be characterized by one feature - social activity, a feeling of general pain. “I can’t write calmly because tears choke me, ” writes Angelina Savelyeva from Odessa. People are simply not able to indifferently pass by the issues of concern to the country, they are trying to be useful to some extent, to participate in the solution. And they do it as best they can, whatever one is good at.

Kharkiv resident A. Zhukov (member of the party since 1937) used the words “nationalist” and “extremist” so often that it was simply difficult to avoid the temptation to count the number of these words in his letter on eleven pages - he used them 75 times (not counting the words “provocateur,” “reactionary,” “blackmailer,” “lackey,” “enemy,” “sycophant,” and other “related” words).  Zhukov looked through black glasses at the events in Nagorno-Karabakh and "around" it, and as a result he saw only two groups of people - nationalists (extremists, blackmailers, etc.) and misguided ones. He ranked the last group ... the communists, "who in the current situation had to maneuver politically, that is, move away from the positions of the outfit and take a stronger position.” From this letter, which is flooded with such "discoveries," breathes the cold breath of the 37th year. In the year the author of the letter joined the party, many true Leninists were "isolated." Perhaps after such letters.

Labeling has probably always been easy. For this, special data is not needed. It is much more difficult to understand the essence of the phenomenon. That Zhukov is not alone is evidenced by a letter from Muscovite N. Selyutina: “Come to your senses, what are you doing? Let's say you seceded from Azerbaijan, but you will remain neighbors. Your children will hate you, no one will trust you. Where are the instigators taking you?” Is it possible to divide the body into two parts? Popov (Donetsk) is indignant, referring to the withdrawal of the autonomous region from the republic, not knowing that both the body and the heart have been divided into two parts for a long time. This and other authors in their categorical judgments and conclusions, like individual authors of publications in the press, without knowing the history, without delving into the essence of the issue, perceive everything in a simplified way. Teachers from the city of Miass, Chelyabinsk region Akimova, Koldina, Martynova, Podkorytova also show ingenuity: “No more than 30 percent of Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh want to join Armenia.” It remains only to guess what referendum data, unknown to us, respected teachers had in order to draw such a conclusion. These are the first responses.

I don't know about others, but after reading these letters, I felt sympathy for their authors. To judge the phenomenon, first of all, it is necessary to delve into it, for which the above-mentioned persons (and not only them) simply did not have the opportunity. Those who, on duty, were obliged to create such an opportunity, today it is no longer a secret, turned out to be not up to par. It's about printing. After the historic April (1985) Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU, our press began to change before our eyes. Newspapers and magazines were read with interest, they increasingly found a place for criticism - an outcast of our society in the years of stagnation. Yes, it was impossible not to notice the revival of our press. But, unfortunately, the relapse of the "old disease" was repeated. In this regard, Alexander Gelman, perhaps, aptly wrote in "Soviet Culture" (April 9, 1988): "The unpreparedness of our media to humanely and honestly cover dramatic events was revealed."

In conditions of information hunger, and then half-truths, it is not surprising that the following lines also appeared in our mail: “Unfortunately, we receive much less information than we would like” (G. Khobotev, Moscow); “The bitter experience of the past made us doubt certain publications” (A. Kuchmenko, Krasnodar). And a resident of the city of Tartu, Russian poetess Lyudmila Loginova, wanting to navigate the complex labyrinth of conflicting messages, literally asks us: “Send us the numbers of your newspaper.” All these are facts, history, which cannot be brushed aside.

And it is quite natural that after the wide coverage on Central Television of the well-known meeting of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, which became, in fact, the most complete, most objective information about Nagorno-Karabakh, letters of a different content fell into the editorial mail, as if from a cornucopia, and more sentiment. People received information, as they say, first-hand. And for the majority, much was a revelation. These letters no longer had labels. All exceptions, having condemned the strike, tried to understand, to see the roots of the phenomenon itself.

“Comrades, it is really impossible to violate the Constitution, ” writes Russian Vitaly Mitin from Novosibirsk. “t is impossible to change its borders without the consent of the Union Republic. There is no need to change the Constitution. But, on the other hand, justice requires that both parts of one people finally reunite. The way out, in my opinion, is as follows - it is necessary to achieve the consent of the Azerbaijan SSR, it is necessary to convince it. In fact, everything turned out the opposite - they convince the Armenians. They convince... to give up their just demand. Today it is no longer a secret that Azerbaijan is largely to blame for the people of Karabakh. The best way to redeem yourself is to let the autonomous region decide its own fate. Only after this kind gesture will it be possible to restore friendship between the two neighboring peoples.”

Brothers Anatoly and Aleksey Kuchmenko from Krasnodar write: “The Karabakh people are defending their vital rights, fighting for their national dignity, their holy rights – the right to a language and, let’s not be hypocrites, the right to their past, because they are under threat. The Karabakh problem gave a clinical picture of the cancer that struck the healthy organism of our society. A fair solution to the problem will be a true indicator of the policy of glasnost, of perestroika in general.”

The first offers of help began to come to us. Anatoly Alexandrovich Medvedev, a resident of the city of Vorkuta of the Komi ASSR, a Belarusian by nationality and a lawyer by profession, sent 100 rubles to the editors, sending the money transfer with the following words: “I ask you to accept personal savings to help the people of Nagorno-Karabakh. Justice must prevail." We received the following letter from Yerevan: “Probably, Karabakh graduates in this difficult time do not have the opportunity to properly prepare for entrance exams and continue their studies at universities. I am a mathematician and I want to help Karabakh youth prepare for entrance exams for charitable purposes. Those who have the opportunity to stay with us during this period can contact me at the following address; 375019, Yerevan-19, st. Aygedzor, house number 62, Suren Tovmasyan.” But the most exciting, perhaps, was a letter from the city of Kamo in the Armenian SSR: “I was collecting money for a bicycle. Now I decided to send them to the Karabakh people. - Little Hovik.”

Under the heading "Dear Editors,” we publish letters from our readers, allowing everyone to freely express their opinion. Under this heading, we also printed a telegram from Doctor of Medical Sciences S. Manafov. The tone of the telegram addressed to the first secretary of the Nagorno-Karabakh regional party committee, G. A. Poghosyan, and aroused the indignation of the newspaper's readers.

Letters and telegrams to the editorial office were sent by G. Avanesov (Stepanakert), N. Petrosyan (Mardakert), L. Hakobyan (Vank), residents of Yerevan N. Asatryan, S. Grigoryan, A. Onipchenko, S. Gabrielyan, S. Ghukasyan, Zh Hakobyan, L. Poghosyan, X. Asryan, G. Nazaryan, G. Antonin, as well as S. Dovlatyan (Tbilisi), R. Harutyunyan (Hadrut), V. Danielyan (Mets Shen), Y. Harutyunyan and Y. Avakyan (Samarkand), L. Kamalyan (Meghri), M. Soghomonyan (Karakend), residents of Stepanakert V. Balayan and S. Khachatryan, H. Sarkisyan and R. Musaelyan and many, many others - it is impossible to list them all.

In their letters, readers approve the course chosen by the regional newspaper, and write with satisfaction that its authority has immeasurably increased. I am pleased that I subscribed to your newspaper - this idea runs like a red thread through many letters. The bond “newspaper-reader” has been strengthened and given new content. But not only laudatory words are heard in our address. Readers make comments, make suggestions, respond to each article. Of course, the editors do not agree with all the comments, but one thing is clear - they are all taken into account. Some of our readers disagree with certain posts. It is worth noting here that we have based our activities on the resolution of the 19th Party Conference on Glasnost and the principles of socialist pluralism. Every citizen has the right to his own opinion on every socially significant issue.

Sevil Novruzova from Shushi writes: “I want to turn to the Soviet Karabakh newspaper and say that it publishes materials that contradict the spirit of internationalism. They write - my homeland is Nagorno-Karabakh. But after all, we have one homeland - the Soviet Union.” While advising S. Novruzova to listen to the famous song “Where Motherland Begins,” we would also like to draw her attention to the article “Who is Akhmedbek Agayev?” published in the regional newspaper Shusha on August 2nd of this year. Really, who is he? Deputy Chairman of the Parliament of the Musavat government of Azerbaijan, political adviser to the Turkish troops, member of the notorious Young Turks party. How not to ask: for what purpose, dear S. Novruzova, is your newspaper Shusha these days promoting this "hero,” exiled together with the leaders of the well-known organization "Committee of Union and Progress" to Malta?

The events of recent months laid the foundation for a powerful patriotic movement, which aroused a keen interest in the historical past of the Armenian people. Readers literally demand to periodically write about all the facts of the history of the region, the formation of the autonomous region, which were not known to the general reader until now, to sound the alarm in the name of saving our historical and architectural monuments that are on the verge of destruction, to restore Armenian toponyms, to raise issues of the native language, the history of the Armenian people, the establishment of Soviet power, socialist transformations in Nagorno-Karabakh, talks about the Great Patriotic War, and restructuring in the region. There is no point in hiding that, in the recent past, an innocent patriotic poem was qualified differently, and some classics of Armenian literature acquired the status of “unwanted personas.”

Reflecting on all these questions, our correspondents, of course, could not ignore the well-known resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on Nagorno-Karabakh, the program for the socio-economic development of the region. Opinions are ambiguous, but one of them prevails - everyone, to the best of their ability, should participate in the implementation of large-scale tasks provided for by the decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. But it opens up a wide scope for strengthening ties with Armenia, developing Armenian culture, and the national and spiritual life of the population of the region. This goal is not easy to achieve. “Let's not be naive,” writes K. Aharonyan, “this is not easy to implement. However, I think that a lot depends on us. Our perseverance matters. We should not forget: we are our mountains.”

Only selfless labor can achieve the highest goal to which we all aspire.

November 3, 1988

The Nagorno-Karabakh Regional Party Committee and the Regional Executive Committee received a letter from a resident of the city of Baku, Comrade N. N. Zeynalov. Published below is the letter of Comrade N. N. Zeynalov and the answer to his letter.

Letter From N. N. Zeynalov:

Dear comrades! I personally am very seriously concerned about the fact that, despite all the appeals, decisions, and resolutions adopted by the Central Committee of the CPSU, the Council of Ministers of the USSR and the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, the situation in the NKAR has not only not stabilized, but has become even more dramatic and has already crippled the life and destinies of many thousands of innocent families, creating the problem of refugees in their own Fatherland.

The solution of issues related to the normalization of the situation in the NKAR, to a large extent, depends on those who are entrusted with the party and state leadership of the region, and on who they are, what their position in life is in this extremely tense situation, and how and for what purposes they use the power given to them. 

Any decisions will remain only good intentions if there are no interested performers. Framing decides everything! Our affairs and life to a greater extent depend on what the leaders are in business, political, intellectual and moral terms, and on how objective and accessible information about these figures and their activities is. To this day, at best, only a small biographical note appears in the press about this or that leader, and even then only after his appointment, since we practice appointments from above. We are almost completely deprived of the opportunity to somehow influence such an appointment and therefore, unfortunately, we show complete indifference to the next personnel reshuffle and over the years have developed an instinct of confident “they know better,” amd developed the habit of applauding violently at the beginning of a career, admiring him while he is in power and furiously mistreating him after a forced departure of yet another leader.

The existing tradition must be outlived. This is guaranteed by our perestroika, glasnost, and the policy of creating a rule of law state, which allows me to address you, the representatives of the press and the leaders of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region, with questions that concern not only me, and ask you to provide the necessary information on them.

1. Do you think that you were able to “take power” into your own hands, control and manage the situation in Stepanakert and the region as a whole, and that the situation has improved with your “coming to power?”

2. What is planned and what has been concretely done by you in order to normalize interethnic relations and the situation in the region?

3. Do you consider your position on the issue of transferring the NKAO to Armenia as a party position and did it change after the meeting of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on July 18th of this year?

4. In your appeal to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Armenia dated September 24, 1988, you note that in order for "a fair solution to the Karabakh problem" you are ready to provide daily information reports on events in the region. Does it not follow from this that neither the resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR on accelerating the socio-economic development of the region, nor the resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of July 18, 1988 in connection with the events in the NKAR and around it, are aimed at a fair solution of the problem? And further, what is the connection between the subjectivity of the perception of your information and the need for an objective solution to the problems of the field?

5. What solution do you consider "a fair solution to the Karabakh problem"?

6. What have you been solving and are solving: the “Karabakh problem” or the problems that have accumulated in the NKAR?

7. What role do you assign to the press in accelerating the resolution of the problems of the region, and why is there not a single correspondent of the central newspaper in Stepanakert? (This question of Komsomolskaya Pravda dated September 30, 1988 remains unanswered).

8. What should be done to eliminate national tensions, national distrust, and create  rapprochement between Azerbaijanis and Armenians? Can the abolition of Article 78 of the Constitutions of the USSR become an incentive for strengthening interethnic relations?

9. Was there interaction between you and the Central Committee of the Communist Party, the Council of Ministers and the Supreme Soviet of Azerbaijan in the matter of the speedy normalization of the situation and the solution of pressing issues in the region?

10. What, in your opinion, is the significance (besides purely moral) of Armenia's intervention in the course of events in the NKAR, was there a need for this and what are its real results?

11. What are the main political and civil lessons of the events in and around the NKAR for the peoples of our country?

12. What is your main task under the current conditions and what kind of help do you need to achieve it?

The answer will suit anyone: in person or through the press. Regardless of form. Thank you in advance.

N. N. ZEYNALOV Design engineer, member of the CPSU, labor veteran

  Answer to the Letter of N. N. Zeynalov:

    Dear Comrade Zeynalov N.N.!

Party and Soviet bodies of the region, whose leaders, by the way, were elected democratically, and did not "take power" into their own hands, in the current situation are doing everything to normalize the situation and could achieve a significant improvement in the situation if it were not for the constant provocations by certain forces in the republic and beyond its borders, aimed at destabilizing the situation. It was the actions of these forces that created the refugee problem and crippled the lives and destinies of thousands of people.

During the first seven months since the beginning of the events, not a single case of disrespectful attitude towards the Azerbaijani population of the region and the Azerbaijani people as a whole was allowed by the Armenian population of the autonomous region. Even after the tragic events of Sumgait, nothing was done that could become a pretext for aggravating interethnic relations between our two peoples.

We consider the position of the governing bodies of the region on the issue of the reunification of Nagorno-Karabakh with the Armenian SSR as a party one, because it reflects the position of the overwhelming majority of communists and the population of the autonomous region. Does the use of the right of self-determination of nations given by the Constitution of the USSR contradict the ongoing perestroika and expanding democracy in the country? What is wrong with the fact that a compactly living part of one nation wants to reunite with a nearby main part of the same nation? Why should such a natural desire of the Armenian people offend the honor and dignity of the Azerbaijani people, as the opponents of a just solution to the Karabakh problem want to present?

This position was further strengthened after the formation of the well-known Commission of the Council of Nationalities and M. S. Gorbachev's speech at a meeting of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on July 18, 1988, in which he said that not a single issue can be considered finally resolved.

Apparently, there is a need to clarify the concepts "Karabakh problem" and "problems of the region." The difference between them is significant. In the first case, we are talking about the political side, meaning the withdrawal of Nagorno-Karabakh from the subordination of the Azerbaijan SSR and its reunification with the Armenian SSR, and in the second case, about the socio-economic, spiritual, and cultural problems that have accumulated in the region as a result of a negative attitude towards it from outside republican bodies. It is appropriate to point out that such an attitude hindered the development of the entire region.

A fair solution to the "Karabakh problem," which means satisfaction of the will and aspirations of the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh, depends to a decisive extent on truthful information about the causes of its occurrence and the current state of affairs in the region. Unfortunately, in the vast majority of publications, the media misinformed the population of the country. Nevertheless, their representatives had and now have the opportunity to be in Nagorno-Karabakh and work without hindrance. As for the case with the Komsomolskaya Pravda correspondents, the regional authorities have nothing to do with it.

We believe that the peaceful expression of the will of the Armenian population of the region should not have led to forceful forms of objection, intimidation, and physical violence. As is known, the Armenians living in the Azerbaijan SSR outside the territory of the region were not involved in the solution of the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh, but they suffered first of all.

Our attitude to Article 78 of the Constitution of the USSR is as follows. Firstly, the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh cannot be considered from the standpoint of this article, since in this case we are not talking about territorial disputes between the two republics, but about self-determination of the compactly living part of the Soviet people of the same nationality. Secondly, considering that as a result of self-determination of densely residing national minorities, it may be necessary to change the territory and borders of the union republics and in order to prevent the forced abandonment of national autonomous entities in them, there is indeed a need to amend the content of this article in the sense that it was not a hindrance in matters of self-determination of national minorities. This will stimulate the strengthening of interethnic relations, for all nations and national minorities will acquire a real and equal freedom of self-determination. On the other hand, the existence of the right to secede from the federal republic will induce it to show more concern for the needs and demands of the national minorities living on its territory.

Interaction between the governing bodies of the republic and the region took place during the events in Nagorno-Karabakh and around it, aimed at normalizing the situation and solving pressing issues in the region. However, after it became clear that the goal was to be limited to this and consider the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh removed from the agenda, such interaction practically ceased.

The Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh is part of the entire Armenian people, and therefore the intervention of Armenia in the course of events in the NKAR is quite natural, despite the fact that at the beginning of their movement, the Karabakh people did not turn to Armenia for assistance. The real and main result of Armenia's intervention in the course of events in the NKAR, in addition to moral support, is that, figuratively speaking, the wall that had been built for decades between the autonomous region and the Armenian SSR finally collapsed.

Today, every Soviet person understands that the policy of perestroika is aimed not only at revolutionary transformations in the economy and the social sphere, but also in interethnic relations that have developed in our multinational state. The events in Nagorno-Karabakh showed that the solution of problems in interethnic relations is urgent.

The political lesson from the events of recent months is that we must abandon the erroneous opinion that there are no problems in our country in the national question, react to them in a timely manner, and resolutely implement the Leninist national policy. The civic lesson will be that Soviet people should show more sympathy and support for each other, and show in practice truly proletarian internationalism. We did not understand the appearances on television and in the newspapers of individual workers more worried about their monthly bonus than striving to figure out what happened to their class brothers in Nagorno-Karabakh or trying to help them in any way.

The main task in the current conditions is to achieve a solution to the Karabakh problem without infringing on the interests of other nationalities. It is also very important to implement the planned measures for the socio-economic development of the region.. The main assistance in solving this problem could be expressed in the manifestation of good will, which consists in not putting obstacles in the way of the reunification of Nagorno-Karabakh with the Armenian SSR. Our future generations will remember with gratitude those who contributed to the solution of an issue that is a constant cause of tension between our two peoples.

V. Tovmasyan Member of the Bureau of the Regional Committee of the Party

S. Petrosyan  Deputy Chairman of the Regional Executive Committee