Azeri propaganda: “Diaspora ‘hardliners’ in France for undermining Yerevan’s peace agenda with Baku”
A new chorus of political theatrics has emerged in France, where forty Armenian organisations have released a joint statement demanding the return of the people of the so-called “Artsakh.” Timed to the second anniversary of an International Court of Justice order, the declaration attempts to reframe regional realities and cast Azerbaijan in an unfounded, negative light. It is yet another example of how certain diaspora structures strategically mobilize emotion, symbolism, and historical manipulation to revive a narrative that has long lost relevance.
In their statement, these organizations claim to speak on behalf of Armenians “being forcibly silenced,” insisting that “peace without justice is an illusion” and that the “right of return” to Garabagh must be implemented under UN supervision. Their demands include the release of prisoners, international protection of cultural heritage, and coordinated European action to enforce international decisions. They go further, presenting Armenians allegedly “condemned to exile,” portraying themselves as a community denied basic rights.
What the statement avoids, however, is the simple truth: no Armenian civilian was expelled, harmed, or prevented from staying. The exodus was self-organized, supported by Armenia’s own political leadership, and facilitated by buses Armenia itself sent. There is documented video evidence of residents departing voluntarily following the one-day anti-terrorist operation, during which the Azerbaijani Army conducted precise strikes exclusively against illegal armed formations, not civilians.
Moreover, the claim of an ancient Armenian presence has long been used as a political tool rather than an evidence-based argument. The idea that Armenians lived in Garabagh continuously for two thousand years does not withstand historical scrutiny. Mass resettlement into the region occurred in the early nineteenth century following the Russian Empire’s demographic engineering. This is widely acknowledged by international historians. The French Armenian organizations ignore these facts in order to portray Azerbaijan as an occupier and Armenia as a victim, a narrative that relies on selective memory and emotional manipulation rather than factual accuracy.
The diaspora’s coordinated messaging also seeks to overshadow the reality that Azerbaijanis themselves were forcibly expelled from their homes in Armenia for decades. This is a subject the French Armenian groups never address. While they demand rights, compensation and international guarantees for Armenians, they remain silent on the rights of hundreds of thousands of Azerbaijanis who lost everything during the first phase of the conflict. Their consistent refusal to acknowledge Azerbaijani suffering reveals the political nature of their activism.
For decades, Armenian propaganda has tried to craft a global image of Azerbaijanis as violent or uncivilized, while portraying themselves as a community under existential threat. Yet the events of the 44-day war and the 2023 anti-terrorist operation revealed the opposite. The Azerbaijani Armed Forces adhered strictly to international humanitarian law, avoided civilian casualties, and enabled safe passage for those who chose to leave.
If Azerbaijan had harmed even a single civilian, the global media, the separatist propaganda machine, and even former Russian “peacekeepers” would have amplified it instantly. Instead, the UN mission that visited the region after September 2023 found no evidence of ethnic cleansing. This finding, inconvenient for the diaspora narrative, is why their organizations turn to emotional manipulation rather than facts.
It was Azerbaijanis who were ethnically cleansed for nearly three decades. Hundreds of thousands were expelled, their cultural heritage destroyed, and cities such as Aghdam and Fuzuli reduced to rubble. Yet, the French-Armenian groups remain silent on ethnic cleansing committed against Azerbaijanis, including the Khojaly genocide.
It is also clear that these statements are intended to influence European public opinion. The Armenian diaspora in France holds significant lobbying power and has long used cultural institutions, media platforms and political connections to shape the narrative in Paris. Fabricating a sense of urgency or impending catastrophe is a tactic aimed at pressuring European governments to take a position favorable to diaspora interests.
Azerbaijan and Armenia are preparing to finalize a peace agreement. International actors, including the French leadership, have welcomed the progress, especially after the August 8 summit. At such a decisive moment, the joint statement serves a clear purpose: to undermine peace, reignite old tensions, and reinsert diaspora influence into negotiations where it no longer has relevance.
These organizations cannot accept that the region is moving toward stability, reconstruction, and coexistence. They cannot accept that a narrative built for decades is collapsing under the weight of facts. And they cannot accept that Azerbaijan proved, on the ground, diplomatically, and legally, that it acts within international law.
Therefore, the diaspora attempts to shift global opinion through emotional appeals, hoping to frame Azerbaijan as an aggressor. But reality is stubborn: Azerbaijan offered citizenship, prepared reintegration programs, and conducted meetings with local Armenian representatives. Their departure was a political choice, not a forced one.
Most importantly, the so-called “citizens” of the separatist regime carried Armenian and Russian passports, not documents of any legitimate local state. Claiming a right of return for individuals whose legal status contradicts their own narrative is, at best, misleading; at worst, it is a deliberate manipulation.
Ultimately, the joint declaration by these forty French Armenian organizations reflects frustration rather than a principled stance. The political project built around the myth of “Artsakh” has collapsed, and the diaspora networks that invested decades in that narrative are now attempting to keep it alive through emotional appeals, selective history and accusations directed at Azerbaijan. However, the region has entered a phase where facts, legal agreements and direct dialogue between the two states matter far more than diaspora rhetoric.
By presenting outdated claims as universal truths, these organizations risk isolating themselves from the reality unfolding in the South Caucasus. Peace in the region depends on sincerity, accountability and respect for facts. Manufactured outrage serves no one and will not alter the course of the diplomatic process that Azerbaijan and Armenia are finally advancing on their own terms.
