Op-ed by the Caucasus Institute
One in 20 people now living in Armenia is a refugee from Nagorno-Karabakh. Of the total of around 150,000, one-third fled between 2020 and 2022, from the start of the war until the start of the blockade. The remaining two-thirds found refuge in Armenia within the space of one week in September 2023, most of them with just the clothes on their backs, all traumatized, many wounded or bereaved.
Armenia’s authorities provided some payouts, some shelter, and some access to healthcare and education. However, it was the efforts of the society that has allowed refugees to survive. In the first weeks following the exodus, Armenian society worked hard. Civil society groups and volunteers provided first aid at the border crossing. Refugees were hosted by family members, friends, or compassionate strangers. Huge amounts of humanitarian aid were donated, collected, and handed out. Numerous civic initiatives have been crucial to the refugees’ survival, with charities and individuals donating money, clothing, and household items, providing shelter, and helping the families organize their lives and find job and training opportunities.
Six months on, many refugees still lack minimal living conditions, such as running water and heating. Many have rented homes that they can barely afford amid a hike of rental costs. It is not known exactly how many have found employment or started businesses. Unemployment is clearly a key concern, especially for women, many of whom did not do paid work in Nagorno-Karabakh and now need to learn a trade.
While charitable projects by domestic and international organizations continue and even expand, and official measures appear to be under way, social consolidation around the rescue effort is inevitably decreasing. The ubiquitous presence of traumatized, destitute people from Nagorno-Karabakh struggling to make a living is gradually becoming the norm in Armenia. Long-term programs are essential to ensure proper housing, employment, and social integration for such a large number of people in need.
As ethnic Armenians who speak the language and share the culture, refugees from Nagorno-Karabakh can have a future in Armenia. Yet, they face a multitude of problems adapting to their new lives, finding their place in a new job market, and creating new social ties. A significant number require psychological aid, having survived blockade, war, and displacement, and for many families, also having lost loved ones. Many refugee families consist entirely of women, minors, and seniors, placing an extreme burden on women.
Public agencies say they are actively working on optimal solutions for the refugees. However, the policy process in connection with the refugee crisis is not public. Public administration is clearly unprepared for the challenge and reluctant to involve the broader society in elaborating solutions. With the exception of a few public events organized by civil society organizations, discussions and decision making are happening behind closed doors.
A key issue that should by no means be overlooked is that the refugees consist of distinct groups with clearly different needs. Some are rural dwellers, and others urban. The rural dwellers come from several distinct geographical zones – the plains, the foothills, and the highlands – and vary markedly in terms of their farming skills and their use of agricultural technologies. Most of the urban dwellers come from Stepanakert, but some come from other towns with much less urbanized lifestyles. And although more than half of the refugees resided in Stepanakert prior to the exodus, in reality, this number includes people who moved to Stepanakert from villages and towns captured by Azerbaijan in the 2020 war and are, in fact, more adapted to rural lifestyles than urban ones.
Accordingly, an efficient government policy would involve housing rural dwellers in geographical areas similar to the ones they came from and helping rural dwellers find work and residence in towns with job opportunities that match their skill sets. Some of the refugees may want to recreate their original communities, for instance, in abandoned villages or in new villages specially created for this purpose. Others might want to integrate into existing villages or towns. There is a clear need to gather and process information on the refugees’ capacities and needs, as well as on the potential demands for what they have to offer. Unless this is done, the society and public administration will continue offering the refugees options that they do not need or are unable to use properly.
Even though exact numbers are unknown, one can say with certainty that half or more of the refugees have flocked to Yerevan, with its substantially larger job market, though also with much more expensive housing and stronger competition. Many end up doing manual labor that does not pay well enough to cover rent. This has driven an unknown number of the refugees to emigration, chiefly to Russia, given the still-existing option of visa-free travel and the widespread command of Russian among people from Nagorno-Karabakh. However, this strategy is also prone to disappointment, given Russia’s economic problems, increasingly repressive political environment, widespread anti-migrant sentiment, and mass conscription for its ongoing war against Ukraine. According to data that varies across government agencies, many or most of the Nagorno-Karabakh residents who tried to settle in Russia have already returned to Armenia.
Elaborating efficient aid strategies requires gathering and processing information on the forcibly displaced persons’ capacities and strategies, as well as needs. That, then, can be matched to resources and existing demand for what they have to offer. Learning from international experience is also essential. Otherwise, the government and civil society will be offering options that the beneficiaries do not need or are unable to use. Rather than trying to help the non-existent “average” forcibly displaced person, coordinated efforts by government agencies and civil society should provide targeted aid, ensuring full-fledged inclusion in Armenian society. The alternative is the fate that met the two previous major waves of ethnic Armenian migrants to Armenia – from Azerbaijan in the 1990s and from Syria in the 2000s – who in the end were marginalized and largely emigrated.
What can government agencies and civil society do? The first important step is to upgrade the register of refugees from Nagorno-Karabakh with detailed data, including place and geographical area of origin, occupation and skills, family size, gender composition, and bereavement status. The second is to conduct sociological research, including quantitative and qualitative studies, to help identify the refugees’ needs, plans, and life strategies, including by breaking them down into groups (for instance, gender, rural/urban lifestyle, type of settlement and geographical area). The third is to prepare an overview of the experiences of other countries in integrating large numbers of ethnically similar refugees, such as in Israel, Greece, andGermany, with a focus on strategies, challenges, and outcomes for the various groups. Finally, all this data can be used to elaborate targeted programs engaging state and non-state actors in a consolidated effort to provide aid, employment, and housing for the refugees.
