Sto-li-tsa Na-khi-che-van-sky Av-to-nom-noy Res-pub-li-ki.
The population is about 86 thousand people (2012). Ras-po-lo-zhen on the right bank of the Na-khi-che-van-chay river (a tributary of the Araks river). Railroad station. Knot auto-to-horn. International Airport.
Nakhichevan is one of the most ancient cities on the territory of Azerbaijan-bai-ja-na (ancient and medieval city located in the northern part of the modern city; according to to the opinion of J. Ha-li-lo-va and V. G. Aliev, medieval Nakhichevan was located 12 km from the modern city). The most early references to the city are contained in the works of the ancient scientists Io-si-fa Flavius (I century A.D. .; name pe-re-da-no in the form “Apo-ba-te-ri-on”) and Claudia Pto-le-meya (II century AD; name pe-re-da- but in the form "Na-ksua-na"); not-something-rye medieval sources-no-ki yes-ti-ru-yut os-no-va-nie of the city of 1539 BC e. Nakhichevan enters di-la into the composition of the Man-ney-th-king-st-va (IX-VII centuries), then Media. In the VI-IV centuries in the 14th sat-ra-pii Ahe-me-ni-dov of the state-sudar-st-va, then in the so-hundred-ve of Atro-pa-te-ny, etc. From V -VI century AD e. Nakhichevan is an important tor-go-in-re-mes-len-ny and administrative-political center. In the 7th-9th centuries, under the control of Ha-li-fa-ta. At the end of the 10th - the middle of the 11th centuries, the hundred-person of the not-pain-sho-go-s-mo-stand-yately Na-khi-che-van-sko-go shah-st-va (Turkic "Na-khchy-van shah-lyg"), os-no-van-no-go Abu Du-la-fa-mi. In 1064, for-hva-che-na sel-dzhuk-sky sul-ta-nom Alp-Ars-la-nom, someone created his re-zi-den-tion there. In the XII century, the hundred-face of the state of Il-de-gi-zi-dov, the meaning of the city-ro-yes grew-lo, about 150-200 thousand people lived in it. the people of Nakhichevan de-li-las on the shekh-ri-stan (inside the cre-on-st-walls) and ra-bat (ba-za-ry and ka-ra-van-sa-rai). You-so-development dos-tig-la me-st-naya architectural school.
In 1221, Nakhichevan for-hwa-che-na and raz-ru-she-na mon-go-la-mi. The city began to revive in the state of Hu-la-gui-dov in the reign of Gazan-khan-na (1295-1304). In 1386, for-nya-ta and raz-ru-she-na khan Zo-lo-toy Or-dy Tokh-ta-my-shem, and in 1387 - Ti-mu-rum. In the 15th century, it entered di-la into the states of Ak-Ko-yun-lu and Ka-ra-Ko-yun-lu. During the Turkish-Persian wars of the 16th-17th centuries, Nachevan was not-one-but-times-but re-ho-di-la from hand to hand and ra-zo-rya-las; pra-vi-te-lei Nakhichevan at this time on-know-cha-li, as pra-vi-lo, from among the tribe-me-ni kyan-ger-li. In 1588-1603 (it was the center of the sand-ja-ka) and 1724-1735 it was under the rule of the Os-man empire. Since the 2nd half of the 17th century, it has been included in the composition of Chu-khur-sa-ad-sko-bey-ler-bey-st-va of the state of Se-fe-vid-dov.
In 1735 Nakhchivan occupied Na-dir-Ku-li-khan Af-shar (since 1736 Na-dir-shah). After his gi-be-li Nakhichevan - hundred-li-tsa Na-khi-che-van-sko-go khan-st-va (1747-1828). In 1808, behind the Russian troops during the Russian-Persian war of 1804-1813, secondarily behind them in June 1827 during the Russian-Persian war of 1826-1828. According to the Turk-man-chai-sko-mu peace of 1828, Nakhichevan, in the co-hundred Na-khi-che-van-sko-go khan-st-va, entered the Russian im-pe rii. The center of the Na-khi-che-van province of the Ar-myan-sk region-las-ti (until 1840), the county town of Gruz-i-no-Ime-re-tin-skoy (1840-1846 years), Tiflis-sky (1846-1849), Eri-van-sky (1849-1920) gu-ber-ny. In the 2nd third of the 19th century, pro-is-ho-di-lo mass-so-ve-re-se-le-tion in Nakhichevan of Armenian families from Persia and the Osman-im- per-rii. According to the city-ro-to-in-mu in 1870, in the city of vve-de-no-city self-management. In 1908, the opening of the movement along the railway line Ulu-khan-lu (now not Ma-sis, Ar-menia) - Jul-fa .
The South Caucasus is of great geostrategic importance in the system of international relations, it is an actual connecting space between the Middle East and Russia, Europe and Central Asia. Geography, unlike ethnography, ethnopolitics and economics, has a more constant characteristic and naturally determines politics.
Unfortunately, the modern geopolitical characteristics of the South Caucasus indicate that this region remains one of the most controversial and conflict-prone, retains a high potential for destabilization due to the presence of acute territorial disputes.
Thus, the basis of the existing Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict was laid by the well-known agreements between the Bolshevik and Kemalist governments in 1920–1921. It is primarily about:
- secret agreements of August 24, 1920, which initiated another Turkish aggression against independent Armenia in September-November 1920;
- the Moscow Treaty of March 16, 1921, according to which Soviet Russia and Kemalist Turkey carried out the division of Armenia;
- The Treaty of Kars of October 13, 1921, which confirmed the borders with Turkey and Azerbaijan imposed on the same Armenia.
The possibility of a secret agreement between the Bolsheviks and the Kemalists in August 1920 is noted by a very competent, scientifically trained and politically informed source - the first president of Armenia Levon Ter-Petrosyan, as well as the course of subsequent events in September - November 1920, which led to the offensive of the Turkish army under the command of General Karabekir to Armenia.
After the Entente countries signed the Treaty of Sevres on August 10, 1920, according to the provisions of which Armenia received its own ethnic territory of 170 thousand square meters. km and access to the Black Sea near Trabzon, an official delegation of independent Armenia headed by Levon Shant urgently left for Moscow to negotiate with the head of the People's Commissariat for Foreign Affairs of the RSFSR Georgy Chicherin and conclude an appropriate Armenian-Russian treaty. Yerevan, which was in allied relations with the countries that won the First World War (Entente), expected that Russia would also recognize independent Armenia within the boundaries of the Treaty of Sevres, which corresponded to the provisions of the secret Sykes-Picot-Sazonov agreement of 1916, which was signed and Russian side. However, the Armenian side did not realize the fact that the government of V.I. Lenin renounced the obligations of tsarist Russia and the same Sykes-Picot-Sazonov agreement.
Following L. Shant, a Turkish delegation of the government of Mustafa Kemal Pasha, unrecognized at that time, headed by Ali-Fuad Jebesoy, left for Moscow with the sole purpose of preventing Soviet Russia from recognizing independent Armenia within the boundaries of the Treaty of Sevres, and in general to exclude the concept "Armenia" from the political map of the region. The result of the mission of A.-F. Jebesoy became the Turkish-Russian treaty of August 24, 1920.
The Russian-Armenian negotiations, as you know, were interrupted not without pressure from the Turks. Chicherin made the fact of recognition and signing of the treaty with Armenia dependent on Yerevan's rejection of the decisions of Sèvres. Naturally, Armenia could not renounce the Treaty of Sevres with its own hands, since it was about primordially Armenian territories with access to the Black Sea. At the same time, the Armenian people survived the genocide during the First World War and lost most of their people.
At the same time, Armenia guaranteed Russia the passage of the Red Army through its territory, but Moscow supported Turkey, suspended the negotiations and promised to resume them by sending its representative Legrand to Baku. In reality, the Bolsheviks concluded secret agreements with the Kemalists on the subject of launching a new military campaign (more precisely, another aggression) against independent Armenia, which is in allied relations with the Entente countries. The war, of course, led to the defeat of Armenia (since the West, represented by the United States and Great Britain, did not provide military assistance to Yerevan, and Menshevik Georgia remained neutral), the fall of the Dashnak government and the transfer of power to the Revkom, that is, the Armenian Bolsheviks.
In other words, Moscow was not interested in the fate of Armenia and its tragedy, Lenin only hoped to stay in power and expand the movement of Bolshevism to the periphery of the former Russian Empire.
The results of the autumn military campaign of 1920 led to the Sovietization of Armenia and the signing of the Moscow Treaty of March 16, 1921, which determined the fate of the status of the ancient Armenian province of Nakhichevan as an autonomy within formally then independent Azerbaijan.
During the Soviet period of history, the Azerbaijani authorities undertook a targeted policy to oust the indigenous Armenian population from Nakhichevan. The Armenian population of the region in 1917 was 41%, despite the massacre by the Turks. By the end of Soviet power in this autonomy, the number of Armenians had decreased to less than 1%, but with the beginning of the next stage of the Karabakh movement in 1988, the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict and the collapse of the USSR, there were no Armenians left in the Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic at all. In this regard, the question arises: what then is the essence of autonomy, if, apart from the Azerbaijani population, there is no one in this region? Autonomy for whom and from whom?
Conflict relations between Baku and Yerevan led to a transport blockade of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh by Azerbaijan and Turkey. And in this regard, the most important transport communication in the region - the Nakhichevan railway (connecting Iran, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Russia, the Black Sea) ceased to function. At the same time, Nakhichevan, blockading Armenia, itself suffers from this economic absurdity.
Azerbaijan is deploying a large military group in Nakhichevan - the 5th brigade of the Armed Forces, and is trying to establish the economic life of this autonomy through Iran and Turkey. Armenia also keeps a significant part of its armed forces on the border with Nakhichevan to repel possible provocations from the neighboring side.
The issue of Nakhichevan in bilateral Armenian-Azerbaijani relations is of particular importance both from a political and legal point of view, and from a transport and economic point of view. The unblocking of the Nakhichevan railway is of serious regional and international importance, and this urgency is gaining momentum given the lifting of Western sanctions against Iran on January 16, 2016 and the April 4-day conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh.
Tehran, building up trade and economic relations with the outside world (primarily with the EU countries), is extremely interested in unblocking the Nakhichevan railway to connect Julfa and Yeraskh. China may also be interested in this communication, taking into account the implementation of the Silk Road megaproject, where Iran, the countries of the South Caucasus, and the Black Sea can become one of the routes to Europe. Accordingly, the parties interested in Nakhichevan in the new configuration after January 16, 2016 may be the EU countries and, of course, the United States.
However, the solution of this issue only within the framework of Armenian-Azerbaijani relations becomes unrealistic due to the unresolved Karabakh issue and the contradictory approaches of Yerevan and Baku to the topic of compromise. The Azerbaijani aggression against Nagorno-Karabakh on April 2–5, 2016, counting on a blitzkrieg, failed again, which further distanced the parties from the political settlement of this territorial problem. Until recently, the political and economic format for resolving the Nakhichevan problem in expert circles could only be considered in the format of a military confrontation between Armenia and Azerbaijan in the event of a new large-scale conflict in Karabakh. Although on April 5, through the mediation of the Russian General Staff, the conflicting parties reached a verbal truce, however, skirmishes along the line of contact in Nagorno-Karabakh and on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border (including Nakhichevan) continue regularly. The authorities of Baku do not stop carrying out provocations, but they are not able to win a convincing military victory over Artsakh and force Stepanakert to capitulate.
Over the past years of Azerbaijan’s independence and the Karabakh conflict, the Baku authorities have taken additional anti-Armenian destructive actions in Nakhichevan aimed at destroying the material and ethno-cultural monuments of the history of the Armenian people in this province (for example, the destruction of the ancient Armenian cemetery in New Julfa by the Azerbaijani Armed Forces and turning it into a military polygon). All this further exacerbates the Nakhichevan issue.
Almost a century-long period of such a division of the territories of Armenia between Russia and Turkey is coming to a denouement. With the collapse of the USSR, Russia first recognized the independence of Azerbaijan, and then in 1992 was forced to withdraw its troops from this country, including the territory of the Nakhichevan autonomy. The latter, in my opinion, was an erroneous decision, however, as in the situation with determining the status of Crimea in the same 1992?, and under the terms of the Budapest summit in 1994. But if Russia still retained its Black Sea naval base in Sevastopol and the fleet, then Moscow had no military presence in Nakhichevan and provided Turkey and Azerbaijan with all the opportunities to Turkify this province, unleash the transport blockade and create new geopolitical threats. And every time the Russian authorities hoped that, you see, the Azerbaijani government, in agreement with Turkey and the United States, was refusing Russia to place military bases and Russian border guards on its territory. But for some reason, the Kremlin does not remember the terms of the Moscow Treaty of 1921, does not remind Baku of how Nakhichevan became an autonomy and ended up in the same Azerbaijan.
Azerbaijan, hoping for a military-technical superiority, on April 2-5 unleashed a new military aggression against Karabakh, but its plan for a rapid breakthrough of the layered Armenian defense failed miserably, led to significant losses in manpower and equipment, which forced the Baku authorities to request a truce through Moscow . Azerbaijan opposes the initiatives of the American side, supported by other mediators and the EU, to place technical sensor devices on the line of contact in the conflict zone to identify violators of the conditions of the 1994 Bishkek truce. and conducting appropriate investigations into these facts.
What is Azerbaijan counting on? As the experience of the April 4-day war showed, Baku is not in a position to wage a large-scale war today, since it can get the opposite result to its expectations, which will inevitably lead to sad consequences for the country. Azerbaijan cannot count on military assistance and intervention in the conflict with Armenia from fraternal Turkey (despite the loud propaganda statements of its leaders and diplomats) in the current conditions in which Turkey finds itself, since such liberties by Ankara are unlikely to please Russia, the United States and Europe. Turkey will most likely find itself on the verge of territorial collapse, taking into account the Kurdish and Armenian issues.
Relying on Russian offensive military equipment (MLRS Smerch, TOS-1A Solntsepek, T-90S tanks, etc.) gives the Azerbaijani army a certain advantage, but does not bring the expected result due to the skillful defense of the NKR Defense Army. Yes, and Russia, with its supply of weapons and equipment to Azerbaijan, undermined its own political reputation as an ally of Armenia. The Russians cynically betrayed once again the interests of Armenia. Statements that if Russia does not sell weapons to Azerbaijan, then someone else will do it, sound even more ridiculous and unrealistic, because, firstly, this “someone” (or rather Turkey, Israel, Pakistan) as they sold and continue these deliveries to Azerbaijan, and secondly, apart from Russia, other countries do not have such deadly weapons as the Smerch MLRS, TOS-1A Solntsepek, T-90S tanks.
The oil-dependent economy of Azerbaijan is suffering heavy losses due to the fall in world oil prices, which will soon affect the military budget. The West will put pressure on the administration of Ilham Aliyev on the fact of expanding purchases of Russian weapons, and not so much because of the interests of Armenia, but from the need to increase the degree of economic pressure on Russia.
Baku must understand that Armenia and its Armed Forces are capable of not only adequately responding to military provocations and aggression in the Karabakh direction, but also creating a certain tension in the Nakhichevan sector as well. This can take place in two cases: a) if Azerbaijan does not stop the escalation of tension against Nagorno-Karabakh; b) if Iran, the US, the EU countries and Russia wish to change the situation around Nakhichevan and go for its unblocking.
The defense doctrine of Armenia is forced to move from "passive defense" to "containment and curbing" of the enemy. This strategy will be devoted to the strategy of rearmament of the Armenian army, the military-technical cooperation of Armenia with Russia, China and, possibly, Iran. Yerevan and Stepanakert are rather tired of Baku's provocations and intend to launch a counteroffensive in the event of another military provocation by Azerbaijan in order to change the status quo of the NKR in the direction of expanding the bridgehead in the eastern direction to natural boundaries. The fact that the Armenian command agreed to a truce on April 5, 2016 and did not give a command for a counterattack caused great criticism in the military circles of Artsakh and Armenia. However, this war showed that the Armenian side would be categorically against the issue of territorial concessions, because Baku once again showed its unwillingness to a political settlement of the problem. Moreover, the Armenian side will have a negative attitude towards any attempts to deploy foreign (international) peacekeeping military units due to the lack of trust in them and the corresponding rejection of them both by Yerevan and Stepanakert, and Tehran.
Iran and the six powers (USA, France, UK, Germany, China and Russia) reached a historic agreement in Vienna on July 14, 2015 to resolve the longstanding problem of the Iranian atom. As a result, the Vienna Accords led to the fact that January 16, 2016 became a historic day for Iran, as part of the sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council, the EU and the United States were lifted from it.
As a result of the lifting of sanctions, Iran gained access to its frozen foreign assets, which, according to the US Treasury Department, amount to more than $50 billion. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani called the nuclear deal a "golden page in Iran's history" and a "turning point" in the development of the country's economy.
The lifting of sanctions against Iran, undertaken by the West (or rather the US), despite the steady opposition of Israel and its Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, comes from a new configuration in the Middle East and South Caucasus. The foreign ministries of the leading countries of the world (Russia, the USA, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, China) stated that the agreements with Iran contribute to strengthening security in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf.
In this regard, the geopolitical situation in the Transcaucasian region has also changed. Armenia, for one, has the opportunity to build strategic relations with Iran. As a direct neighbor of Iran, Armenia should benefit directly from the situation.
Iranian gas and oil are of great importance for the same Europe, which today opens its doors wide to Iran and provides large investments to the Iranian economy. As already noted, one of the routes of the Chinese Silk Road project can also pass through Iran, followed by Indian goods.
After the decisions to complete the first stage of creating new borders in the Middle East (that is, in Syria and Iraq), according to Igor Muradyan, “the United States and Europe will be forced to unambiguously choose Iran and the Shiite communities as their strategic ally in the region. This will be a difficult and difficult decision, but over the course of the 21st century. the Atlantic community will have no other strategic allies in the Middle East.”
In other words, Tehran considers Armenia as a link and a bridge for communication with Georgia, the EU countries and Russia (EAEU). Armenia can become an important logistical entity in the South Caucasus, in much the same way as Georgia for the connection of Western countries and Turkey with Azerbaijan and the Central Asian republics, as well as Azerbaijan for the connection of Russia and Iran, Turkey and the EU countries with Central Asia.
The issue of opening a transport corridor between Iran and Armenia has become one of the discussed issues in official and expert circles in recent months. The main joint Iranian-Armenian economic projects are the construction of a hydroelectric power station on the Araks River near the Armenian city of Meghri, a third high-voltage transmission line and a railway.
China is showing particular interest in the Iran-Armenia Southern High-Speed Railway project. According to the Chinese Ambassador to Armenia, Mr. Tian Erlong, Beijing is considering the possibility of investing in the Iran-Armenia railway construction project. The railway project was developed by China International Construction and Communications Company (CCCC International). Chinese banks are showing interest in the project and have expressed their readiness to finance 60% of the program. However, there is a time gap until 2022, during which important events may occur in the region. The high cost of building the Armenian section of the railway in high mountainous conditions not only delays the process of its implementation, but also allows Tehran to look for workarounds through Azerbaijan (Astara and Nakhichevan).
Thus, the February visit of Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev to Iran confirmed that by the end of 2016, Iran and Azerbaijan will unite the railways and they will become part of the North-South corridor. It remains to build across the river. Araks railway bridge connecting Iranian Astara with Azerbaijani Astara. The implementation of this project may "devalue" the Armenian-Iranian railway. If Azerbaijan unites its railways with Iran, then after the commissioning of the Kars-Akhalkalaki-Baku railway, trains from Iran can reach the Black Sea. Then the Armenian-Iranian railway, estimated at $3.5 billion, may lose its meaning for Tehran, if there was one.
True, in such a case, Iran will become dependent on the Turkish-Azerbaijani communication corridor and will be forced to take into account the interests of Ankara and Baku, which does not quite correspond to Tehran's intentions.
However, it is important for Iran to have alternative communications, given the unpredictability of regional relations and the presence of conflict potential. In addition, Armenia demonstrated a high degree of political loyalty towards Iran even under the sanctions regime, which is not forgotten in the East. And the West, represented by the United States, will be interested in the Armenian corridor of investment relations with Iran.
It was no coincidence that the April 4-day war in the Karabakh zone was unleashed by Azerbaijan after the Washington nuclear security summit and on the eve of the trilateral summit of the heads of the foreign ministries of Azerbaijan, Iran and Russia on the fate of North-South transport communications. But Russia is deeply mistaken that Azerbaijan will be Moscow's best friend in relations with Tehran, for which the interests of Armenia can be sacrificed. The war in Karabakh did not allow Azerbaijan to move south towards Fizuli, Jebrail, Zangelan and Kubatlu, that is, to restore Azerbaijani control over the lost areas and the 132-km border with Iran along the river. Arax. Conversely, the expected counter-offensive of the NKR Defense Army could plunge Azerbaijan and its allies (partners) into shock if Armenian control over the border with Iran is expanded. In other words, in the eastern direction, the construction of new communications across the river. Araks and Azerbaijan is an unsafe event, given the unresolved Karabakh conflict and the possibility of its resumption.
In this regard, the Nakhichevan theme is updated. If Iran and its Western partners succeed in "persuading" Azerbaijan to unblock Nakhichevan, then the corridor will become a reality.
Thus, Iran and the West (USA, leading EU countries) are faced with the need to unblock the Nakhichevan railway through Julfa in the direction of Armenia-Georgia-Black Sea-Europe. Given the fall in oil prices, Azerbaijan is suffering serious economic and financial losses, which leads to serious social costs. And from this point of view, Azerbaijan, like Armenia and Georgia, is objectively interested in Iranian traffic through Nakhichevan and Astara. The topic of the Nakhichevan railway (as, indeed, of Nakhichevan itself) is becoming an urgent geo-economic and geopolitical problem in relations with Azerbaijan (and not only and not so much Armenia, but also Iran, the USA, the EU, Russia and China).
Azerbaijan still considers the unblocking of Nakhichevan unacceptable for itself without resolving the Karabakh issue on the terms of Baku, because otherwise it may lead to a freeze on the Nagorno-Karabakh problem and the economic growth of Armenia, which will also change the military balance between the conflicting parties. However, in this case, as they say, the stake is higher than the issue of Azerbaijani-Armenian relations. It is no coincidence that Tehran recently reiterated its readiness to assist the Karabakh settlement, and representatives of the Iranian Foreign Ministry held relevant talks in Moscow with Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia Grigory Karasin.
Referring to the April military crisis in Karabakh, Iran, through the speaker of its parliament, Mr. Larijani, once again called on the parties to peaceful negotiations and a political settlement. At the same time, the Iranian politician noted that the resumption of a large-scale war in Nagorno-Karabakh is unacceptable due to turbulent processes in the region, which could lead to the proliferation and internationalization of the conflict itself, to devastating consequences for its participants. At the same time, Larijani stressed that it is not known who will emerge victorious in this new war. In other words, Iran made it clear to Azerbaijan that it is not worth counting on success in the Karabakh war, because this may force Tehran to take appropriate military measures. It is known that during the April war, the 7th Armored Brigade of the Iranian Armed Forces was put on full alert and could cross the Araks River to the north.
How will the West react? The US is very interested in opening a corridor for connecting Iran through Armenia with Europe. Washington, using its positions in the IMF and WB, actually refused to provide Azerbaijan with a loan in the amount of $4 billion. The West, of course, can achieve a default by Azerbaijan if I. Aliyev continues his uncompromising position on Karabakh. However, Washington can take this step if Yerevan adjusts its foreign policy from the EAEU in favor of the EU, the CSTO to NATO, Russia to the United States.
The Nakhichevan issue is acquiring a special geo-economic attraction for the outside world, and Azerbaijan should pursue a more cautious and pragmatic policy. The well-known high-profile propaganda action - the initiative of the deputies of the State Duma of Russia from the Communist Party faction V. Rashkin and S. Obukhov to denounce the Moscow Treaty of March 16, 1921, which determined, among other things, the status of the Nakhichevan autonomy - can also be considered a kind of signal to Azerbaijan on the fate Nakhichevan railway.
So far, Moscow does not unilaterally intend to revise the borders of the Transcaucasian republics, but it can, in agreement with the Western countries (the United States, for example), launch a new historical process and deploy its troops here as a guarantor of regional stability. In this regard, the fate of Azerbaijan itself will largely depend on the position of the leadership of Azerbaijan. Baku, while maintaining fraternal friendship with ethnically related Turkey, nevertheless does not lose reality and does not allow itself to be drawn into Turkish-Russian conflict relations. And on Syria, Deputy Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan Azimov noted the well-founded support of Russia.
The fact of the US-Russian regional partnership to establish a truce in Syria after the obvious success of the Russian Aerospace Forces, the positive assessment of Russia's role in the Syrian settlement given in February 2016 by US Secretary of State John Kerry, and his warning about sanctions against violators of the agreements (that is, Turkey ) speaks of the possibility of US-Russian success in the South Caucasus as well. Washington did not remove sanctions from Iran in order for someone to block Tehran's transport interchanges in the region.
In the Karabakh issue, Azerbaijan and Armenia are able to achieve great success if Nakhichevan is unblocked, the Azerbaijani-Armenian trade and economic cooperation is established and the ethnic communities in the region are reconciled. The issue of returning certain territories from the security zone around the NKR cannot be resolved without simultaneously determining the status of Nagorno-Karabakh, solving the problems of all refugees (both Azerbaijani and Armenian), returning the Shahumyan region to Stepanakert and unblocking Nakhichevan.
If Azerbaijan again stakes on the military method of resolving the issue and continues to propagate anti-Armenian hatred, then Baku has no chance of success. The military victory will be for Artsakh and Armenia.
The opinion of Russian politicians and diplomats that no one has solved problems like Karabakh by military means is, in our opinion, extremely inadequate. I wholeheartedly agree with everyone who advocates political methods for resolving this issue. But desire is one thing, reality is another. One might think that the capitulation of fascist Germany in May 1945 was the result of 4 years of painstaking Soviet-German negotiations. The fate of the same Crimea in the spring of 2014, Russia decided not at all based on the results of political consultations with Kyiv, but thanks to its naval base in Sevastopol and the so-called little green men of the Russian special forces, hastily transferred to Crimea to exclude provocations, to hold a meeting of the then Supreme Council of the Crimean autonomous republic in order to make the necessary political decision in favor of secession from Ukraine and joining Russia. One might think that the independent status of South Ossetia and Abkhazia was decided by a political settlement between Russia and Georgia, and not by the results of the 5-day war in August 2008.
At the same time, the 4-day war in Artsakh did not help Azerbaijan resolve the issue of Armenian capitulation, even despite the military-technical assistance from Russia. But who guaranteed Azerbaijan from another devastating defeat, the loss of new territories and complete capitulation under the threat of the collapse of statehood? No one will dare to give such a guarantee to Baku, since no one has a peaceful plan for solving this problem. The only way out is for Azerbaijan and Armenia, through the mediation of the same Iran, the United States, the EU countries and Russia, to gradually, step by step, restore trade and economic ties through the transit of the Julfa railway to Nakhichevan. This policy over time can lead to a decrease in the degree of mutual intolerance and hatred between the two societies, the restoration of the degree of trust and traditions of good neighborliness. Accordingly, the democratization of Armenian-Azerbaijani relations will also stimulate the political resolution of the territorial issue in Karabakh.
Alexander Svarants, Doctor of Political Sciences, Professor
You can’t go around, it’s not easy to fly on an airplane. Therefore, the trip here was postponed until better times.
Garbage bins.
Trash dumpsters.
Front address plates.
Front entrance address signs.
Poster stand.
An advertising pillar.
The hatches read the word "design".
An alternate spelling of “design.”
Each gas pipe has a round cap. Probably some kind of Iranian-made assembly.
Every gas pipe has a round contraption attached to it. Some sort of Iranian-made fitting, it seems.
High voltage.
The edge is unkempt.
The unpolished outskirts.
TV plates.
satellite tv dishes.
As in Baku, it is customary here to add as many meters to your apartment as there is enough money. It doesn't matter which floor. Upstairs and downstairs neighbors participate in the housing expansion program as they get richer.
Like in Baku, it’s common practice to build on extensions to apartments here, their size limited only by how much one can afford. It doesn't matter which floor the apartment is on. Upstairs and downstairs neighbors participate in the square footage expansion program to the best of their financial ability.
It is curious that all road signs are duplicated on asphalt.
It's interesting to note that all the traffic signs are also painted on the road surface.
It is also curious that plastic bottles are used here to collect condensate from air conditioners, just like in Male.
It’s also interesting that plastic bottles are used here to collect AC condensate, just like in Malé .
Unfortunately, by this point all the fun is over.
Unfortunately, at this point all the interesting things had run out.
It was two in the afternoon. From idleness, I went and looked at the local stunted landmark.
It was two in the afternoon. Finding nothing better to do, I went to see the lackluster local attraction.
Three times drove along and across the city.
Drove up and down the city three times.
And I realized that I couldn't stand another day here. I had a ticket for the day after tomorrow, but the longing was serious. And I went to the Air Ticket Office. She is here alone. There was a crowd of a hundred people in front of the building, who were signing up for a queue. There are still so many people inside the building. At first, I failed to enter, got my three-digit number and sat down under a tree to spin.
And realized I couldn't bear to spend another day here. My return ticket was for the day after next, but I was already bored to tears. So off I went to the airline ticket office. There's only one for all the airlines here. a hundred people were crowding to register for the queue outside; another hundred were waiting inside. I wasn't able to get in at first; I received my three-digit number and sat down under a tree to wallow in my sorrow.
Good people began to ask how and why. Fly away, I say, today I want to. So go to the cops, tell them what you need today, they answer. Approached - it worked.
Kind people began to inquire about my troubles. I want, I said, to fly out today. So go up to the cops and tell them you need to leave today, they replied. I did—and it worked.
Inside, the system is as follows: there are ten cashiers, each responsible for one direction. One sells tickets only to Moscow, the other to Istanbul, the third to Baku. I ran from one to another until it turned out that there were tickets to Baku tonight.
— :-)
Only business class left.
— :-(
- Costs $99.
— :-)
The system inside works like this: there are ten cashiers, each of whom is responsible for one destination. One sells tickets only to Moscow, another to Istanbul, a third to Baku. I ran around from one to the next until I found out that there were tickets to Baku available for that night.
“:-)”
“We only have business class left.”
“:-(”
“It's $99.”
“:-)”
No, no, not Nakhichevan.
Anything, anything but Nakhchivan.
Nakhichevan - Originally Armenian land, under the occupation of the Transcaucasian Tatars (1923-Azerbaijan)
Flag of Nakhichevan
Administrative division of nakhijevan
Nakhijevan-Hands off Nakhijevan
History of Nakhijevan
Nakhichevan is Noah's first stop after the Flood. A number of languages have their own interpretation of the word. "Nakhichevan" - arm. → “Nakh” - primary, “Ijevan” - landing; The Jewish historian Josephus Flavius (I century) reports on the ethnic composition of the region, using the toponym “Apobaterion”, which is a grammatical literal translation of the Armenian “Nakhijevan”, and means “landing place”: “ Seven days later, Noah released a dove for the same purpose ... Then, having made a sacrifice to the Lord God, he, along with his relatives, arranged a sacrificial feast. The Armenians call this place the “landing place”, and even now the natives show the remains of the ark there.” From the end of the 4th century, the scientist and monk Mesrop Mashtots conducted active preaching work in the Goltn and Yernjak gavars near Nakhichevan, after which he faced the need translation of the Bible into Armenian, for understanding by the local population. The oldest monuments of the material culture of the tribes that inhabited the territory of modern
Brief chronicle
Nakhichevan, belong to the Neolithic era (9500 BC).
Hayastan
Ayasa
Arrata
Torgom(2570-2507)
Hayasa (2492 - 331 BC)
History of Nakhichevan (Nakhichevan) - Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron notes that according to legend, the city of Nakhichevan was founded by Noah, and the date of the foundation of the city according to Persian and Armenian sources is 1539 BC. e. Noah's first stop after the Flood. A number of languages have their own interpretation of the word. "Nakhichevan" - Arm. → "Nakh" Modern science also places the foundation of the city in 1500 BC. e. - primary, "Ijevan" - landing; The Jewish historian Josephus Flavius (I century) reports on the ethnic composition of the region, using the toponym "Apobaterion", which is a grammatical literal translation of the Armenian "Nakhijevan", and means "landing place": "In seven days Noah released a dove for the same purpose ... Then, after offering a sacrifice to the Lord God, he, along with his relatives, arranged a sacrificial feast. The Armenians call this place the ‘landing place’, and even now the natives show the remains of the ark there.” From the end of the 4th century, the scholar and monk Mesrop Mashtots conducted active preaching work in the Goltn and Yernjak gavars near Nakhchivan, after which he faced the need for translation Bibles into Armenian, for understanding by the local population. The oldest monuments of the material culture of the tribes that inhabited the territory of modern
Armenian, Hittite, Assyro-Babylonian, Persian and Greek sources testify to the rule of seven main pan-Armenian royal dynasties in Armenia:
590 BC e. - as part of Ararat (in Assyrian Urartu)
In the 2nd century A.D. e. Nakhchivan was already known to Ptolemy under the name Ναξουὰνα.
Tigran II -140 BC e. - 55 BC e.
The capitals of Artashat, from c. 200 Vagharshapat, from 338 Dvin
Movses Khorenatsi (V or IX centuries AD), describing the deeds of the legendary Armenian king Tigran I Yervandid (Tigran I the Ancient), tells about the fortress of Nakhijevan (arm.Նախիջևան).
According to Iranian mythology, the medieval Turkish traveler of the 17th century, Evliya Chelebi, attributed the foundation of Nakhichevan to the legendary king of Turan, Afrasiyab. The Iranian historian and geographer of the 14th century, Hamdallah Qazvini, in his book “Nuzkhat Al-Kulub” (“Delight of the Hearts”), considered the Sasanian Iranian commander, later the Shahinshah of Iran, Bahram Chubin, who lived at the end of the 6th century, to be the founder of the city of Nakhichevan (Naksh i-Jahan). n. e.
As part of Greater Armenia
From the beginning of the II century BC. e. to 428 AD e. part of Greater Armenia. Nakhchavan was located in the center of the lands inhabited by Armenians, stretching, as the encyclopedia "Iranica" notes, from the Kura to the upper reaches of the Euphrates and Tigranes. As part of Armenia, the region belonged to the nakhangs (provinces) of Vaspurakan and Syunik, and the lands along the Araks, that is, the gavars (districts) of Nakhchavan (later also Nakhichevan) and the “abundant wine” Gokhtan (in the ancient Armenian pronunciation Goltn, Ordubad region) were part of Vaspurakan, while the more northern lands belonged to the Chahuk (now Shahbuz region) and Yernjak (Dzhulfa region) Gavars of Syunik Nakhang. This region was ruled by the hereditary chamberlains of the Armenian kings, who bore the title of “mardpets”, and their clan was called “Mardpetakan”. At the end of the 4th century. in Goltna and Yernjak, the scholar and monk Mesrop Mashtots preached, and it was there that he came to the idea of the need to translate the Bible into Armenian for the understanding of the local population. The monastery on the site where Mashtots preached (built in 456) was preserved until recently in the village, which bore the name Mesropavan in honor of Mashtotsan.
In the VI-IV centuries. BC e. the city is part of the Persian satrapy "Armenia".
Dominion of the Persians and Arabs
Since 428, the region has been part of the Armenian marzpanism (governorship) of Persia.
In the V-VII centuries. the capital of Persian (so-called Marzpan) Armenia, after the Arab Caliphate as part of the province of Armenia.
590 BC e. - as part of Media, from the VI century BC. e. - as part of the state of the Achaemenids, within the boundaries of the satrapy "Armenia", as part of Greater Armenia. From the beginning of the II century BC. e. to 428 AD e. part of Greater Armenia. Nakhchavan was located in the center of the lands inhabited by Armenians, stretching, as the Iranica encyclopedia notes, from the Kura to the upper reaches of the Euphrates and Tigranes. As part of Armenia, the region belonged to the nakhangs (provinces) of Vaspurakan and Syunik, and the lands along the Araks, that is, the gavars (districts) of Nakhchavan (later also Nakhichevan) and the “abundant wine” Gokhtan (in the ancient Armenian pronunciation Goltn, Ordubad region) were part of Vaspurakan , while the more northern lands belonged to the Chahuk (now Shahbuz region) and Yernjak (Dzhulfa region) Gavars of Syunik Nakhang. This region was ruled by the hereditary chamberlains of the Armenian kings, who bore the title of “mardpets”, and their clan was called “Mardpetakan” .. At the end of the 4th century. in Goltna and Yernjak, the scholar and monk Mesrop Mashtots preached, and it was there that he came to the idea of the need to translate the Bible into Armenian for the understanding of the local population. The monastery on the site where Mashtots preached (built in 456) was preserved until recently in the village, which bore the name Mesropavan in honor of Mashtots.
In 623 he temporarily went to Byzantium, in
the middle of the 7th century was conquered by the Arabs.
In 705, the Arabs burned alive in the churches of Nakhichevan and the neighboring village of Kharm the representatives of the Armenian nobility, invited by them supposedly to conclude an agreement (800 people)
In the 8th century, the population of this area was associated with the movement of Babek, although it did not play a big role in it.
In 705, the Arabs burned alive in the churches of Nakhichevan and the neighboring village of Kharm representatives of the Armenian nobility, invited by them supposedly to conclude an agreement (800 people).
Ani kingdom of the Bagratids
At the end of the 9th century, Nakhichevan was conquered from the Arabs by the second king of the Ani kingdom, Smbat I Bagratuni, who in 891/92 gave it to the Prince of Syunik as conditional possession. In 902, about the possession of the prince of Syunik. In 902
Dominion of the Persians and Arabs
Since 428, the region has been part of the Armenian marzpanism (governorship) of Persia. In 623, it temporarily went to Byzantium, in the middle of the 7th century it was conquered by the Arabs. In 705, the Arabs burned alive in the churches of Nakhichevan and the neighboring village of Kharm representatives of the Armenian nobility, invited by them supposedly to conclude an agreement (800 people). In the VIII century, the population of this region was associated with the Babek movement, although it did not play a big role in it.
Ani kingdom of the Bagratids
At the end of the 9th century, Nakhichevan was conquered from the Arabs by the second king of the Ani kingdom, Smbat I Bagratuni, who in 891/92 gave it to the Prince of Syunik as conditional possession. In 902, Smbat handed it over to the owner of Vaspurakan, Ashot Artsruni, and after the death of the latter in 904, again to the owner of Syunik, Smbat. After that, Nakhichevan remained part of Syunik, which eventually gained de facto independence from Ani. In the area of Nakhichevan, the families of Orbelyans and Proshyans ruled, which, as can be seen from the chronicle of Stepanos Orbelyan (XIII century), retained their significance even after the Turkic conquest. According to the testimony of the papal ambassador Rubruk, on the eve of the Mongol invasion there were 800 Armenian churches in Nakhichevan.
Smbat handed it over to the owner of Vaspurakan, Ashot Artsruni, and after the death of the latter in 904, again to the owner of Syunik, Smbat. After that, Nakhichevan remained part of Syunik, which eventually gained de facto independence from Ani. In the region of Nakhichevan, the families of Orbelyans and Proshyans ruled, which, as can be seen from the chronicle of Stepanos Orbelyan (XIII century), retained their significance even after the Turkic conquest. According to the testimony of the papal ambassador Rubruk, on the eve of the Mongol invasion there were 800 Armenian churches in Nakhichevan.
In 902, Smbat handed it over to the owner of Vaspurakan, Ashot Artsruni, and after the death of the latter in 904, again to the owner of Syunik, Smbat. In the second half of the 9th century, and especially during the reign of Gagik I, Nakhichevan, like the rest of the southern regions of Armenia, was not attacked.
After that, Nakhchavan, or Nakhichevan, as it was also called, remained part of Syunik, which eventually gained de facto independence from Ani.
Seljuks, Mongols, Timur
Seljuks, Mongols, Timur In 1064 Nakhichevan was conquered by the Seljuk sultan Alp-Arslan; in the 12th century here was the center of the state.
Zakarian dynasty (Yerkarabazuk, Mkhargrdzeli) (1196 - 1261)
In 1064 Nakhichevan was conquered by the Seljuk sultan Alp-Arslan; in the 12th century the center of the state of the Ildegizids was located here. In the XIII-XIV centuries. Nakhichevan was subjected to invasions by the Mongol conquerors and Timur. Robruk, who visited Nakhichevan after the Mongol invasion, writes that the city “formerly was the capital of some great kingdom and the greatest and most beautiful city; but the Tatars turned it almost into a desert. Previously, there were eight hundred Armenian churches in it, and now there are only two small ones, and the rest were destroyed by the Saracens. "The pushing back of the Armenian population by the Turks. Already in the Seljuk era, the centuries-old process of pushing the Armenian population back to the newcomer Turkic began in the region, which especially intensified after the invasions of Timur. In 1603, all Nakhichevan Armenians, as well as Muslims, were taken away by Shah Abbas I to Persia. At the same time, in the 16th-17th centuries, Turkmen nomadic tribes settled in Transcaucasia not only spontaneously, but also deliberately, which the local rulers considered as their support
In the area of Nakhichevan, the clans of Orbelyans and Proshyans ruled, which, as can be seen from the chronicle of Stepanos Orbelyan (XIII century), retained their significance even after the Turkic conquest. It was ruined by the Mongols (XIII century), Tamerlane (end of the XIV century).
Ildegizids.
In the XIII-XIV centuries. Nakhichevan was subjected to invasions by the Mongol conquerors and Timur. Robruk, who visited Nakhichevan after the Mongol invasion, writes that the city “formerly was the capital of some great kingdom and the greatest and most beautiful city; but the Tatars turned it almost into a desert. Previously, there were eight hundred Armenian churches in it, but now there are only two small ones, and the rest were destroyed by the Saracens.
The papal ambassador Rubruk, who visited Nakhichevan shortly after its defeat by the Mongols, found “almost a desert” on the site of this once “greatest and most beautiful city”: “Before, there were eight hundred Armenian churches, and now only two small ones, and the rest were destroyed by the Saracens.”
In the 17th century, it became part of the Safavid state.
Pushing the Armenian population out by the Turks Already in the Seljuk era, a centuries-old process of pushing the Armenian population out by the newcomer Turks began in the region, which especially intensified after the invasions of Timur. In 1603, all the Armenians of Nakhichevan, however, as Muslims, were taken away by Shah Abbas I to Persia.
In November 1603, Shah Abbas I, with his 120 thousandth army, captured Nakhichevan from the Turks, which practically did not resist, Georg Tektander, who visited the Austrian embassy, testifies to this, noting that “All cities and villages, then, wherever we came, submitted to the Persians voluntarily, without any opposition, as the city of Marand in Media, Nakhichevan, Julfa in Armenia and many others, which I myself witnessed "" After the occupation of the city, the shah evicted all its population deep into Persia, according to the Armenian author Arakel Davrizhetsi, "turning it into an uninhabited [desert] prosperous and fertile Armenia.” The Turkish traveler Evliya Celebi, who visited the Nakhichevan region in 1648, described the region as a flourishing region. Celebi wrote about Nakhichevan that “the city is decorated with 10,000 large houses covered with clay; there are 70 cathedral mosques and places of worship, 40 quarter mosques, 20 houses for visitors, 7 beautiful baths, about 1000 shops.
At the same time, in the 16th-17th centuries, not only spontaneously, but also deliberately, Turkmen nomadic tribes settled in Transcaucasia, whom the local rulers considered as their support.
The era of the Persian-Turkish wars
In the XV century. Nakhichevan was part of the states of Kara-Koyunlu and Ak-Koyunlu, in the 16th century. disputed by Turkey and the power of the Safavids. In the autumn of 1603, Shah Abbas I, during the war with the Ottoman Empire, occupied the Nakhichevan region. The Turkish garrison of the city of Nakhichevan capitulated to the Safavid troops and left Nakhichevan together with the Sunni residents, while the “warriors of the city” (from local Muslims), according to Arakel Davrizhetsi, hastened to declare their adherence to Shiism: they “quickly took off their Ottoman clothes, cut their long beards, put on the Kyzylbash clothes and became like the ancient Kyzylbash. However, in the summer of 1604, Ottoman troops launched a counteroffensive that took Shah Abbas by surprise. Not hoping to hold on to the region, Shah Abbas decided to carry out the scorched earth tactics and brought the entire population of Nakhichevan and Erivan (both Armenian and Muslim) deep into Persia, according to Arakel, "turning into an uninhabited prosperous and fertile Armenia." In total, according to Armenian authors, 400,000 Armenians were deported to Persia from Nakhichevan and Yerevan. In particular, a large city populated mainly by Armenians and a former center of Armenian trade (primarily silk) in the region, Dzhugha (Julfa), lost its population, the inhabitants of which, when occupied by the Persians, solemnly came out to meet Shah Abbas, led by priests. Its population of about 20,000 people was resettled in Isfahan, where they formed an Armenian suburb that still exists - New Julfa. At the same time, many Armenian artisans and the poor died during the resettlement, and rich merchants turned into the Shah's clerks. The modern researcher E. Rodionova identifies several reasons for the eviction of Armenians to Persia (called the “great surgun”):
a) military-strategic: weaken the enemy, leave a "scorched earth";
b) political: strengthening the central government, weakening the separatist regions);
c) economic (the intention to establish an Armenian colony in the center of their state and move the center of caravan
from Julfa to Iran) and the desire to use the labor of skilled Armenian artisans in construction work in Isfahan Among the resettled was the Turkic tribe of Kangarli, who were allowed to return to Nakhichevan under the descendant of Shah Abbas I, Shah Abbas II. During the conquest of the Nakhichevan region, Shah Abbas I massacred the Sunni population. According to the Iranian-British historian Aptin Khanbagi, during the Turkish-Persian wars, the Armenians were more fortunate than the Muslims, since the Turks killed the Shiites, and the Persians - the Sunnis. As part of Persia. Nakhichevan Khanate. The Turkish traveler Evliya Chelebi, who visited the Nakhichevan region in 1648, described it as a flourishing region and called Nakhichevan "the pride among the cities of Iranian land." According to him, in the comfortable city of Karabaglar, which constituted a separate sultanate in the Nakhichevan land, he was treated to 26 varieties of pears. Describing the city of Nakhichevan, Celebi noted that “the city is decorated with 10,000 large houses covered with clay; there are 70 cathedral mosques and places of worship, 40 quarter mosques, 20 houses for visitors, 7 beautiful baths, about 1000 shops. after death
The era of the Persian-Turkish wars.
In the XV century. Nakhichevan was part of the states of Kara-Koyunlu and Ak-Koyunlu, in the 16th century. disputed by Turkey and the Safavid power.
Safavids.
In the autumn of 1603, Shah Abbas I occupied the Nakhichevan region during the war with the Ottoman Empire. The Turkish garrison of the city of Nakhichevan capitulated to the Safavid troops and left Nakhichevan together with the Sunnis, while the "warriors of the city" (from local Muslims), according to Arakel Davrizhetsi, hastened to declare their adherence to Shiism: they "quickly took off their Ottoman clothes, cut their long beards their own, dressed in Kyzylbash clothes and became like the ancient Kyzylbash. However, in the summer of 1604, Ottoman troops launched a counteroffensive that took Shah Abbas by surprise. Not hoping to hold on to the region, Shah Abbas decided to implement a scorched earth tactic and withdrew the entire population of Nakhichevan and Erivan (both Armenian and Muslim) deep into Persia, according to Arakel, "turning prosperous and fertile Armenia into an uninhabited [desert]". In total, according to Armenian authors, 400,000 Armenians were driven to Persia from Nakhichevan and Yerevan. In particular, a large city populated mainly by Armenians and a former center of Armenian trade (primarily silk) in the region, Dzhugha (Julfa), lost its population, the inhabitants of which, when occupied by the Persians, solemnly came out to meet Shah Abbas, led by co-priests. Its population of about 20,000 people was resettled in Isfahan, where they formed an Armenian suburb that still exists - New Julfa. At the same time, many Armenian artisans and the poor died during the resettlement, and rich merchants turned into the Shah's clerks. The modern researcher E. Rodionova highlights several reasons for the eviction of Armenians to Persia (called the “great Surgun”): a) military-strategic: to weaken the enemy, leaving a “scorched earth”; b) political: strengthening the central government, weakening separatist regions); c) economic (the intention to establish an Armenian colony in the center of their state and move the center of the caravan routes from Julfa to Iran) and the desire to use the labor of skilled Armenian artisans in construction work in Isfahan. Among the resettled was the Turkic tribe of Kangarli, who was allowed to return to Nakhichevan under the descendant of Shah Abbas I Shah Abbas II. During the conquest of the Nakhichevan region, Shah Abbas I massacred the Sunni population. According to the Iranian-British historian Aptin Khanbagi, during the Turkish-Persian wars, the Armenians were more fortunate than the Muslims, since the Turks killed the Shiites, and the Persians killed the Sunnis.
Nadir Shah Heydar-Kuli Khan from the Kangarli clan created the Nakhichevan Khanate.
As part of Persia. Nakhichevan Khanate.
The Turkish traveler Evliya Chelebi, who visited the Nakhichevan region in 1648, described it as a flourishing region and called Nakhichevan "the pride among the cities of Iranian land." According to him, in the comfortable city of Karabaglar, which constituted a separate sultanate in the Nakhichevan land, he was treated to 26 varieties of pears. Describing the city of Nakhichevan, Chelebi noted that “the city is decorated with 10,000 large houses covered with clay; there are 70 cathedral mosques and places of worship, 40 quarter mosques, 20 houses for visitors, 7 beautiful baths, about 1000 shops. After the death of Nadir Shah, Heidar-Kuli Khan from the Kangarli clan created the Nakhichevan Khanate.
At the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th centuries, the capital of the independent Nakhichevan Khanate. On June 26, 1827, it was occupied by the Russian troops of General Paskevich without a fight.
According to Article III of the Turkmanchay peace treaty, signed on February 10, 1828
Together with the entire khanate, it was ceded by the shah "to the full ownership" of the Russian Empire. Then it became part of the Armenian region.
As part of Russia
At the beginning of the 19th century, the region became the scene of Russian-Persian wars. According to the Gulistan Treaty, Russia abandoned its attempts to capture Nakhichevan, recognizing the khanate "in perfect power" of Persia, however, during the new Russian-Persian war, Nakhichevan was occupied by the troops of General Paskevich, met by the population with complete obedience, and according to Article III of the Turkmanchay Treaty signed in 1828 , the Nakhichevan and Erivan khanates were transferred by the shah "to the perfect property" of Russia. Kelbali Khan of Nakhichevan was once blinded by Agha-Mohammed Khan Qajar, which caused a natural hatred in the family for the Qajar dynasty; in
as a result, his son, the ruler of the khanate, Ehsan-khan Kangarli, together with his brother Shih-Ali bek, voluntarily went over to the side of Russia, providing important assistance in the war with Persia, for which he was granted the rank of major general of the Russian service and field ataman of the troops of Kangerli .; he was appointed naib (captain-captain, head of the civilian unit) of the Nakhichevan district, while his brother - of Ordubad. According to the rescript of Nicholas I of March 20, 1828, immediately after the conclusion of the Turkmanchay Treaty, the Armenian region was formed from the Nakhichevan and Erivan khanates annexed to Russia, from which in 1849, with the accession
Erivan province was formed in the Alexandropol district. By the time the Nakhichevan Khanate was annexed to Russia, this province had a predominantly Turkic population. According to the terms of the Turkmenchay peace, the Russian government organized a mass
resettlement of Armenians from Persia to the Armenian region. This caused dissatisfaction among the Muslim population, who were deprived of their lands, which were given to the settlers. In order to reduce tension in the region, the Russian ambassador to Persia, A.S. Griboedov, recommended that the commander-in-chief of the Russian army in the Caucasus, Count Paskevich, give an order to move part of the Armenians who had resettled from Persia to Nakhichevan to Daralagez. .95%, "Aderbeijan Tatars" (that is, Azerbaijanis) - 42.21%,. There was 1 Orthodox church, 66 Armenian-Gregorian churches, 58 mosques in the county. Pogrom of Armenians in Nakhichevan 1905-1906 Vandalism of Azerbaijanis 1905-1906
Since 1849, the center of the Nakhichevan district of the Erivan province.
By the time the Nakhichevan Khanate was annexed to Russia, this province had a predominantly Turkic population. According to the terms of the Turkmanchay peace, the Russian government organized a mass resettlement of Armenians from Persia to the Armenian region. This caused dissatisfaction among the Muslim population, who were deprived of their lands, which were given to the settlers. In order to reduce tension in the region, the Russian ambassador to Persia, A.S. Griboedov, recommended that the commander-in-chief of the Russian army in the Caucasus, Count Paskevich, issue an order to move part of the Armenians who had resettled from Persia to Nakhichevan to Daralagez. %, "Aderbeijan Tatars" (that is, Azerbaijanis) - 42.21%,. There was 1 Orthodox church, 66 Armenian-Gregorian churches, 58 mosques in the county.
Nakhichevan(also Nakhchivan, Nakhchivan) is a small city in Azerbaijan, located in the Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic, cut off from the main territory of the country by the territory of Armenia. The population is about 75 thousand people (2013).
The city is located about 400 kilometers southwest of Baku, 150 kilometers southeast of Yerevan, near the Iranian border.
The German linguist Max Vasmer argues that the name of the city came from the merger of the Armenian words: "nakhich" - a proper name - and "avan", which means "place" in translation. According to legend, the city was founded by Noah, and its name is associated with the "landing place" of the ark.
You will hardly find any particularly unique sights for which it is worth flying a couple of thousand kilometers to find yourself in Nakhichevan. Rare foreign tourists usually visit the Khan's Palace, several ancient mausoleums and tombs. The city itself does not represent anything interesting in architectural terms - ordinary impersonal box houses lined with tiles and glass or sheathed with siding. In the center, everything is “combed” and ennobled, on the outskirts it is simpler.
History of Nakhichevan
Persian and Armenian sources claim that the city of Nakhichevan was founded in the 16th century BC. The first mention of Nakhichevan dates back to the 2nd century AD. For several centuries the city was subjected to raids and conquests. In the 11th century, Nakhichevan became the residence of the Seljuk sultan, and a century later, the capital of the Great Azerbaijan Atabeks from the Ildegizids dynasty.
In the 13th and 14th centuries, respectively, the city was ravaged by the Mongols and Tamerlane. Then Nakhichevan was restored, and the period of its heyday came. In the 18-19 centuries, the city became the capital of the Nakhichevan Khanate, and in 1827 Russian troops occupied it, and a year later Nakhichevan became part of the Armenian region.
In a referendum in 1921, 90% of the population voted for joining Azerbaijan as an autonomous republic, and since 1924 the city became the capital of the Nakhichevan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. During the times of the USSR, the city was reconstructed and built up.
Last changes: 08/07/2014Sights of Nakhichevan
Tomb of Yusif ibn Quseir- a building of the 12th century, created by the architect Ajami ibn Abubekr Nakhchivani. The tomb is made up of eight faces, and its roof is crowned with a pyramidal shape. This is one of the oldest monuments in the city.
Mausoleum of Momine Khatun (Mömünə xatun türbəsi)- this is a wonderful work of the same famous architect Ajami Nakhchivani. The height of the mausoleum, built in the 12th century, previously reached 34 meters, but now its height is only 25 meters. The mausoleum was built for the wife of the ruler Jahan Pahlavan.
, also known as Prophet Nuh's Tomb (Nuh peyğəmbərin türbəsi)- located in the southern part of the city on the territory of the Old Fortress (Kohnya-gala). It was built in 2006 on the remains of an ancient temple. It is believed that the relics of Noah are in the crypt of this tomb.
Khan's Palace- a landmark of a later period, it was built in the 18th century. It was created by the father of the last of the Nakhichevan khans. Until the 20th century, khans lived in it, and since 1998 the Carpet Museum has been located in the palace.
How to get to Nakhichevan
Nakhichevan has an airport located 4 km from the city, which receives flights from Moscow, Kyiv, Ganja, Baku, Istanbul. From the Russian capital, only the UTair airline flies here without a transfer on Mondays, the travel time is 3 hours 15 minutes.
Last changes: 08/07/2014