The Khojaly Massacre, an event during the Nagorno-Karabakh War, is a deeply contested and tragic chapter in the history of the South Caucasus. On the night of February 25-26, 1992, hundreds of Azerbaijani civilians were killed by Armenian armed forces as they fled the town of Khojaly. The specifics of what transpired, the motivations behind it, and the international community’s response remain subjects of intense debate and conflicting narratives.
The town of Khojaly, located in the Nagorno-Karabakh region, was strategically important due to its airport, the only one in the mountainous enclave, and its position on the road connecting Stepanakert (Khankendi in Azerbaijani) to Agdam. As the Nagorno-Karabakh War escalated in late 1991 and early 1992, Azerbaijani forces used Khojaly airport for resupplying their troops and evacuating civilians. Armenian forces, aiming to secure their self-proclaimed capital of Stepanakert and gain full control over the region, saw Khojaly as a key military target.
The Siege and Evacuation
For several months leading up to the massacre, Khojaly was under siege by Armenian forces. The town suffered from continuous shelling, cutting off electricity, gas, and water supplies. Food and medical provisions were scarce. As the situation became increasingly dire, the Azerbaijani government attempted to evacuate civilians, but the mountainous terrain and constant fighting made this extremely difficult. By February 1992, an estimated 2,500-3,000 civilians, mostly Azerbaijanis, were still trapped in the town.
The Attack
On the night of February 25, 1992, Armenian forces, reportedly with the support of Russia’s 366th Motor Rifle Regiment (though the extent of their involvement is a major point of contention), launched a large-scale assault on Khojaly. The attack was preceded by heavy artillery shelling, which intensified after midnight. The goal was to capture the town and secure the airport.
The Escape Route and the Ambush
Azerbaijani civilians, following what they believed to be a pre-arranged humanitarian corridor, attempted to flee the besieged town. This corridor, reportedly agreed upon by both sides, was meant to lead them through a valley towards the Azerbaijani-controlled town of Agdam. However, as they made their way through the snowy terrain, they were ambushed by Armenian forces. This ambush, in particular, is where the vast majority of civilian casualties occurred. Survivors recounted being shot at from multiple directions, often at close range, with no possibility of escape.
Civilian Casualties
The exact number of casualties remains disputed, but Azerbaijani sources claim 613 civilians were killed, including 106 women, 83 children, and 70 elderly people. Hundreds more were wounded, captured, or went missing. International organisations and independent journalists who visited the scene shortly after the event largely corroborated the high number of civilian deaths and the brutality of the killings.
Conflicting Narratives and Claims
The events of Khojaly are viewed very differently by Azerbaijan and Armenia, leading to deeply entrenched and often irreconcilable narratives. Understanding these different perspectives is crucial for grasping the complexities of the historical debate.
The Azerbaijani Narrative: A Deliberate Act of Genocide
Azerbaijan unequivocally describes the Khojaly Massacre as an act of genocide, a deliberate and systematic extermination of its civilian population. They point to the high number of civilian casualties, the reported brutality of the killings (including mutilation and scalping), and the alleged intent to instill terror and cleanse the region of Azerbaijanis.
- Intentional Slaughter: Azerbaijan argues that the humanitarian corridor was a trap, designed to funnel fleeing civilians into an ambush where they would be systematically slaughtered.
- War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity: They contend that the attack on a civilian population, the indiscriminate killings, and the targeting of non-combatants constitute grave war crimes and crimes against humanity.
- Genocidal Intent: The Azerbaijani government and many international observers sympathetic to their cause believe the massacre was part of a broader strategy of ethnic cleansing, aimed at driving out the Azerbaijani population from Nagorno-Karabakh.
- International Recognition: Azerbaijan actively campaigns for international recognition of the Khojaly Massacre as genocide, drawing parallels with other genocidal acts in history.
The Armenian Narrative: Wartime Tragedy and Self-Defense
Armenia, while acknowledging civilian deaths, disputes the “genocide” label and presents a significantly different interpretation of events. They tend to frame it as a tragic consequence of war, an inevitable outcome of a military operation, and place responsibility, at least partially, on the Azerbaijani side.
- Legitimate Military Operation: Armenian forces maintain that the attack on Khojaly was a legitimate military operation aimed at capturing a strategic military target and breaking the Azerbaijani blockade of Stepanakert.
- Warning to Civilians: They claim that warnings were given to Khojaly residents about the impending attack and that a safe corridor was indeed provided. The responsibility for civilian deaths, they argue, lies with the Azerbaijani authorities who prevented their timely evacuation or directed them into dangerous areas.
- Crossfire and Retreating Soldiers: Armenian sources suggest that many civilian casualties occurred in crossfire between Armenian forces and retreating Azerbaijani armed units who were interspersed among the civilians. They also claim that some Azerbaijani soldiers, disguised as civilians, were part of the fleeing column.
- Absence of Genocidal Intent: Armenia vehemently denies any genocidal intent, stating that their actions were driven by military necessity and self-defence. They often highlight the fact that many civilians successfully passed through the corridor and reached Azerbaijani-controlled territory.
- “Fabricated” Evidence: Some Armenian sources have gone so far as to suggest that some of the evidence of brutality was fabricated or exaggerated for propaganda purposes.
The Role of the 366th Motor Rifle Regiment
The involvement of the Russian 366th Motor Rifle Regiment (MRR) is a significant and contentious aspect of the Khojaly narrative. This unit, part of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) peacekeeping forces, was stationed in Stepanakert.
Azerbaijani Claims of Direct Involvement
Azerbaijan asserts that the 366th MRR directly participated in the attack on Khojaly, providing artillery support, armoured vehicles, and even personnel. They point to eyewitness testimonies from Khojaly survivors who claimed to have seen Russian soldiers among the attacking forces.
- Heavy Weaponry: The scale and intensity of the attack, particularly the use of heavy artillery, are often attributed to the 366th MRR’s capabilities.
- Defectors: Reports emerged that some Russian soldiers from the 366th MRR, disillusioned with their orders or for other reasons, defected and fought alongside Armenian forces.
- Forensic Evidence: Some Azerbaijani reports cite forensic evidence suggesting the use of weaponry exclusively possessed by the Russian military at the time.
Armenian and Russian Counter-Claims
Armenia and Russia largely deny direct military involvement of the 366th MRR as a unit. They argue that any participation was limited to individual soldiers acting on their own initiative or under duress.
- Individual Acts: The official Russian stance is that some individual soldiers, upon the withdrawal of the regiment from Nagorno-Karabakh shortly after the events, chose to stay behind and fight for the Armenian side.
- Desertion and Mercenaries: It’s acknowledged that some soldiers from the disbanded 366th MRR might have sold their weapons or fought as mercenaries, but this wasn’t an official unit-level participation.
- Confusion of Uniforms: During the chaos of war, it’s possible that uniform similarities led to confusion, and non-Russian combatants might have been mistaken for Russian soldiers.
The Russian Factor
The 366th MRR was scheduled for withdrawal from Nagorno-Karabakh around the time of the Khojaly attack. This timing raises questions about its role. Was its involvement a deliberate act by Russia, or was it a breakdown of command and control leading to individual actions? This remains a critical point of contention, with Azerbaijan often suggesting Russian complicity and Armenia downplaying any official involvement.
International Investigations and Reactions
The Khojaly Massacre garnered international attention, leading to various investigations and reactions, though a definitive, universally accepted legal judgment has remained elusive.
Human Rights Watch Report
One of the most important early international assessments came from Human Rights Watch/Helsinki (now Human Rights Watch). In its 1993 report, “Azerbaijan: Seven Years of Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh,” HRW extensively documented the massacre, concluding:
- Indiscriminate Shooting: HRW confirmed that Armenian forces were responsible for the “massacre of civilians” and that “the scale of the atrocities…cannot be explained as mere ‘cross-fire’.”
- Evidence of Atrocities: The report cited eyewitness accounts, journalistic reports, and photographic evidence consistent with widespread killings of unarmed civilians, including women and children.
- Violation of International Humanitarian Law: HRW stated that Armenian forces violated international humanitarian law, particularly Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits violence against persons taking no active part in hostilities.
- No Genocidal Intent Found: While condemning the killings, HRW did not explicitly label the event as genocide, primarily due to the difficulty in proving specific genocidal intent under international law.
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)
In 2010, the European Court of Human Rights, in the case of Sargsyan v. Azerbaijan, indirectly addressed Khojaly. While the case primarily concerned the rights of an Armenian refugee from Azerbaijan, the ECtHR referenced the massacre, noting that “it was an atrocity which occurred in the context of the Armenian forces’ offensive against the town of Khojaly on the night of 25 to 26 February 1992” and that “the number of victims and the severity of their suffering was significant.” The Court didn’t make a direct ruling on the nature of the crime but acknowledged the scale of civilian suffering.
Parliamentary Assemblies and Resolutions
Several national parliaments and international parliamentary assemblies have issued resolutions or statements regarding Khojaly:
- PACE Resolution 1832 (2012): The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) adopted a resolution in 2012, which, while not directly addressing Khojaly, referenced the “ethnic cleansing” and “massive human rights violations” that occurred during the conflict.
- National Recognitions: The parliaments of Mexico, Pakistan, Colombia, Peru, Honduras, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the Czech Republic, among others, have adopted resolutions recognizing the Khojaly Massacre and condemning it as a crime against humanity or mass killing. These recognitions are often the result of intensive diplomatic efforts by Azerbaijan.
Lack of International Criminal Tribunal
Despite calls from Azerbaijan, no international criminal tribunal has been established to investigate and prosecute those responsible for the Khojaly Massacre. This absence contributes to the ongoing debate and the lack of a definitive legal judgment, leaving victims and their families without closure.
The Broader Historical Context and Propaganda
| Event | Details |
|---|---|
| Date | February 25-26, 1992 |
| Location | Khojaly, Azerbaijan |
| Deaths | Estimates range from 200 to 613 |
| Perpetrators | Armenian armed forces |
| Claims | Armenian forces committed war crimes and ethnic cleansing |
| Historical Debate | Controversy over the events and casualty figures |
The Khojaly Massacre is not an isolated event but rather a tragic episode within the broader and often brutal conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. Understanding its place in this wider historical context is essential.
Nagorno-Karabakh War (1988-1994)
The war itself was a complex ethno-territorial conflict that emerged during the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Armenian majority in Nagorno-Karabakh, supported by Armenia, sought secession from Azerbaijan, while Azerbaijan sought to maintain its territorial integrity. Both sides committed atrocities and displaced hundreds of thousands of people. Khojaly occurred at a particularly intense phase of the war when both sides were desperate for strategic gains.
Escalation of Violence
Before Khojaly, there had already been significant violence against both Azerbaijani and Armenian civilians. For instance, Azerbaijanis point to the Armenian attacks on Azerbaijani villages and the siege of Stepanakert. Armenians, in turn, highlight the anti-Armenian pogroms in Sumgait (1988) and Baku (1990) as evidence of Azerbaijani aggression. These earlier events fed into a cycle of retribution and escalating brutality.
Mutual Accusations of “Ethnic Cleansing”
Both Azerbaijan and Armenia accuse each other of “ethnic cleansing.” Azerbaijan points to the displacement of its population from Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding districts, including the Khojaly Massacre, as evidence. Armenia points to the exodus of its population from Azerbaijan, particularly after the anti-Armenian pogroms, as evidence. This mutual accusation makes it harder to objectively assess individual events, as each side frames them within their broader narrative of victimhood.
The “Genocide” Debate and Propaganda
The debate over whether Khojaly constitutes “genocide” is highly charged and deeply intertwined with national identity and political narratives.
- Azerbaijani Perspective: For Azerbaijan, labelling Khojaly as genocide is not just about justice but also about solidifying their narrative of victimhood and drawing international sympathy and support for their position on Nagorno-Karabakh. It’s seen as a direct parallel to the Armenian Genocide of 1915, thus creating a shared experience of historical trauma.
- Armenian Perspective: Armenia vehemently rejects the genocide label for Khojaly, primarily because it could undermine their own claims of genocide and victimhood, especially regarding the Armenian Genocide of 1915. They view it as a politicized attempt to equate the two events and dilute the historical significance of their own suffering.
- Propaganda Wars: Both sides engage in extensive propaganda efforts, using historical events like Khojaly to bolster their respective claims and demonize the other. This often involves selective use of evidence, exaggeration, and suppression of counter-narratives, making it incredibly difficult for outsiders to arrive at an objective truth.
The Khojaly Massacre remains a deeply painful and politically sensitive issue. While the fact of significant civilian deaths is largely undisputed, the intent behind the killings, the degree of planning, and the precise identity of all perpetrators are still fiercely debated. Without a universally accepted international legal judgment, the historical debate will likely continue, reflecting the deep-seated grievances and conflicting narratives that define the unresolved conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh.
FAQs
What was the Khojaly Massacre?
The Khojaly Massacre was a tragic event that occurred on February 26, 1992, during the Nagorno-Karabakh War. It involved the killing of hundreds of Azerbaijani civilians in the town of Khojaly in Azerbaijan by Armenian armed forces.
What are the main claims surrounding the Khojaly Massacre?
The main claim is that Armenian armed forces, with the support of the 366th CIS regiment, attacked the town of Khojaly, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of Azerbaijani civilians. The Armenian side disputes this claim, stating that the deaths were a result of crossfire and that they had allowed a humanitarian corridor for civilians to leave the town.
What is the historical debate surrounding the Khojaly Massacre?
The historical debate surrounding the Khojaly Massacre revolves around the conflicting narratives of the Azerbaijani and Armenian sides. The Azerbaijani side presents the event as a deliberate massacre, while the Armenian side argues that the deaths were a result of the chaotic nature of war and denies any intentional targeting of civilians.
What evidence supports the claims of the Khojaly Massacre?
Evidence supporting the claims of the Khojaly Massacre includes eyewitness testimonies, reports from international human rights organizations, and investigations by journalists and researchers. Additionally, there are documented accounts of the suffering and displacement of the survivors.
How has the Khojaly Massacre impacted the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?
The Khojaly Massacre has had a lasting impact on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, contributing to the deep-seated animosity between Azerbaijan and Armenia. It has also been a significant factor in shaping the historical narratives and memory of the conflict for both sides.
