WESTERN ARMENIA: One can often read on social networks that Armenians complain about the “inhuman” attitude towards the Armenian heritage in Western Armenia and Artsakh.

But are the same people informed that UNESCO is not responding if the competent services do not immediately file complaints with UNESCO?

Conversely, when complaints are filed by law enforcement agencies, UNESCO not only takes into account the complaint, but also tries to find political solutions so that the complaint under consideration has its influence.


This can be seen in the example of the medieval city of Ani, which was included in the World Heritage List.

    However, UNESCO did not take into account the special mention of the International Council for the Preservation of Monuments (ICOMOS), which mentions the political and cultural context of the medieval city of Ani.

In fact, a “legal context” could be added. This is a way for UNESCO to achieve the goal of protection, in this case to the detriment of the rights of the directly connected population (the reasons must be understood).

Let’s return to the question of the destruction of the cemetery in Jugha.

Detailed information about the process:



Inclusion in the World Heritage List 2016



UNESCO’s answer, which is immediately backed by A.A.

However, ICOMOS believes that the inclusion of possible events related to the complex history of Ani after 1918 is necessary for a full understanding of the current political and cultural context of the proposed topics.


It’s time to be objective.