A serious challenge that faces those interested in understanding the crossroad of international communication and conflict studies in the context of Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, is that there is no extensive research on the cases of changing and emerging roles of the mass media in these countries. Media plays a substantial role in framing public discourse (Golcevski et al. 2013, p. 121), well-organized media activities can significantly impact audiences during conflict periods ( Bratic 2008). Despite its restrictions, the media can facilitate future peace operations. Moreover, the negative impact of media on the audience can be diminished by reducing the level and amount of hate messages in times of conflicts. In this context, Manoff (1998) suggested working on the positive impact of media during and post-war situations. The key purpose of this article is to figure out the role of modern technologies and the media in the spread of hostile speech in Armenia and Azerbaijan during and after the last Nagorno-Karabakh war period. Additionally, to look at opposite cases, when mass media tools and public figures’ are activity geared towards fostering constructive discussions or rehumanizing each other.
Propaganda and media-warfares have taken on a leading role in contemporary hybrid wars. Being one of the most violent conflicts in the South Caucasus for three decades, it seems that Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict has received at least a preliminary solution today based on the principles of the Gordian knot, that is: the resolution of the issue by force. However, mutual censure, attacks, and hate speech in the Armenian and Azerbaijani media persist. Considering the power media contains in shaping social relations, in this article I try to portray a comparative picture of media landscape in both countries.
Media landscape and Cyber War in Azerbaijan and Armenia
In Azerbaijan, public demands, accusations, defamation of the adversary are almost identically acute by both the government and the opposition. This is explained by the nationwide hatred among population, which arose from 30 years of wartime ordeal. A recent survey from Azerbaijani think-tank the Agora Analytical Collective shows which countries young Azerbaijanis like and dislike, which they see as a threat or an ally. Accordingly, 73% of dislike goes to Armenia by naming these country as a security threat to Azerbaijan.
The image of the anti-Azerbaijani propaganda in Armenia is different. If the enmity towards the neighboring people is viral in Azerbaijan, so to say, is led by the state, then the state propaganda in Armenia is conducted with the loser’s discretion. Under these conditions, the opposition has taken the entire "burden" of the propaganda warfare, consistently responding to Azeri media attacks and actively criticizing the domestic government in its defeatism. And the opposition in Armenia is robust: it has two active factions in parliament and controls a significant media field, including several 24/7 TV stations broadcasting on public multiplexes, four-five daily newspapers, a large number of electronic media with a significant public audience. Inherently, in such conditions, there are also numerous cases of gross violations of ethical norms in the information warfare in Armenia, which go against the rules of freedom of speech.
Especially during intensified military actions, from both sides intensive hacker attacks also occur. Azerbaijani hackers have played a significant role in the conditions of martial law. They obtained users' personal data from their social networks, then used it to spread disinformation and panic in society. The biggest hacker groups emphasize Armenian targeting in their names: Anti-Armenia Team and Karabakh Hacking Team. According to statements, they managed to hack the websites of the Armenian government, the National Security Committee, and thousands of Armenian accounts. During the war, an account called "Tavush bot" which was operating by the Azerbaijan in the Armenian domain of Facebook was usually spreading false information on behalf of the Ministry of Defense spokesperson of Armenia. Azerbaijan has also received assistance from Israel in cyberwarfare, acquiring software that cannot be sold without government permission.
Armenians were not far behind either: Armenian cyber specialists managed to dismantle the main Anti-Armenia Team website, which was engaged in anti-Armenian activities. An Armenian hacker group called Monte Melkonyan Cyber Army had hacked about a dozen Azerbaijani websites, including the official website of the ministry of emergency situations, stole data and posted part of the documents in the Internet. Armenian hackers have also attacked the banking system of Azerbaijan.
Faint attempts of building trust and fostering dialogue through media
In the conditions of such antagonism, attempts at positive activity and cross-border reconciliation in the mass media are very weak and are not even encouraged by the societies per se. In both republics, radio and TV stations broadcasting in the language of the neighboring people operate with different statuses. The CBC (Channel Baku Cable) Azerbaijani TV channel broadcasts in five languages: Azerbaijani, English, Armenian, Persian, and Russian. It was previously known as ATV International and continues to offer programming in these languages, including news, documentaries, and films. Specifically, it broadcasts news programming in all five languages (source: Wikipedia). In Yerevan, Public Radio also broadcasts programs in the Azerbaijani language, inter alia, Azerbaijani music and news.
According to some opinions, people in both republics do not accept these programs with confidence, realizing their poorly hidden sabotaged goals. At least, the language of these programs do not carry the pronounced hostile tones that express their real, negative opinion about the side they consider a conflicting party, and mainly, an enemy.There are also several online media outlets that counteract hateful narratives in Armenia, inter alia, Epress (20.000 followers), Aliq Media (21.000 followers), Civilnet (515.000 followers). In Azerbaijan, the two most followed and popular online news sites: MeydanTv (954.000 followers) and Azadliqradiosu (742.000 followers) form a reconciliation frame through the news focused on the peace settlement negotiations (9.39%), stories of Armenian villagers (9.39%) which are about their concerns or expectations for social cohesion, and the stories of war victims (9.80%) (Makalesi 2023).
The fate of the bearers of the idea of constructive reconciliation
Parallel to media attempts to establish a constructive dialogue between two countries, there are serious public figures in both states who have devoted their activities to the task of regulating relations with the neighboring conflicting nations. Unfortunately, virtually all of them have either been persecuted and subjected to various punishments, or isolated from society to one degree or another, or deprived of the right to be published in their homeland. In Armenia, Georgi Vanyan, a film director, was engaged in the establishment and development of Armenian-Azerbaijani ties in the mass media, sharply criticizing the shortcomings and limitations in this sphere. He invited Azerbaijani journalists to Armenia, who published positive or at least neutral publications or made speeches about Armenia on social networks. He tried to organize a screening of Azerbaijani films in Armenia. With fateful persistence, he published his Azerbaijani friend's novel about Armenian and Azerbaijani gay friends in Armenia. This provoked backlash in a conservative Armenian media environment: the doors of the mass media were closed to him, he lost his audience and, ultimately, isolated himself in a village on the outskirts of Armenia, near the border with Azerbaijan.
There are still active journalists and political commentators in Armenia today who speak from a more pragmatic position in favor of constructive dialogue between the two states. Tatul Hakobyan, editor-in-chief of "Aliq Media", for example, believes that after the last war, Armenia has no choice but to try not to remain out of regional processes and considers it extremely important that the territory of Armenia becomes accessible to all neighboring states. Journalist, politician, editor-in-chief of 1in.am news website Arman Babajanyan believes that the main guarantee of Armenia's security is the establishment of normal relations with neighboring countries.
In Azerbaijan, opposition authors are facing bigger problems in their relations with the press, especially in cases of expressing even the slightest neutral opinions on Armenian topics. Dozens of journalists and human rights defenders are imprisoned there. Azerbaijan has repeatedly been severely criticized and sanctioned for blatant cases of restrictions on free speech. Rauf Mirkadirov is one of those Azerbaijani journalists who have tried to find reconciliation in the decades-long conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, establishing contacts with the Armenian side at events and on personal initiative. He was arrested on charges of meeting with Armenian journalists, allegedly providing them with strategic information, and receiving money.
Arif Yunusov- Head of the Conflict Studies and Migration Department of the Azerbaijan Institute for Peace and Democracy was prosecuted on charges of high treason and fraud in connection with joint public diplomacy projects with Armenian colleagues, and was then arrested with his wife. Akram Aylisli - Azerbaijan's popular writer, editor, publicist after the publication of his novel "Stone Dreams", which depicted the massacres committed by Azerbaijanis against Armenians in Sumgait and Baku, and where Armenians were portrayed in a sympathetic light, President Aliyev signed a presidential decree, which deprived Aylisli of the title of "People's Writer" and presidential pension. Now he lives in complete seclusion.
This brief study leads us to the idea from where the hateful narratives are born - government affiliated media in Azerbaijan and opposition media in Armenia. In the case of Azerbaijan, this shows that the state is in a more combative mood, buoyed by the recent victory which may complicate the chances of further reconciliation. In the case of Armenia, this shows that the opposition and the state are sharply divided on this issue, and in the upcoming 2026 elections, this split may lead the authorities to defeat, not being able to fight against Armenian nationalism. And if the authorities are defeated, the regulation of Armenian-Azerbaijani relations will be even more unrealistic.
References:
Golčevski, N., von Engelhardt, J., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2013). Facing the past: Media framing of war crimes in post-conflict Serbia. Media, War & Conflict, 6(2), 117–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635213479206
Bratic, V. (2008). Examining peace-oriented media in areas of violent conflict. International Communication Gazette, 70(6), 487- 503. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048508096397
Makalesi , A. (2023) The role of the media following the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War: The cases of AzadliqRadiosu and MeydanTV news sites in Azerbaijan. Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences.https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/2C284B2236524B2EA6838FB054D2056C#:~:text=Most%20importantly%2C%20there%20is%20a%20very%20deep,become%20important%20in%20the%20post%2Dconflict%20period.%20conflict.
** This research had been carried out in the frames of the Mercator Fellowship for a Journalist-in-Residence programme within the “Ambivalent Enmity” postgraduate research and training group at the Center for Transcultural Studies of the Heidelberg University, Germany.