Villagers in Kalbajar District outside of Nagorno-Karabakh region set their houses on fire on Saturday. The district is part of the territory previously controlled by Armenian Separatists which will now be handed over to Azerbaijan as a part of the peace agreement.&nbsp;

"This is my house, I can't leave it to the Turks," as Azerbaijanis are often called by Armenians, said one resident as he threw burning wooden planks and rags soaked in gasoline into a completely empty house. He was quoted by AFP.

"Everybody is going to burn down their house today... We were given until midnight to leave," he said.

"We also moved our parents' graves, the Azerbaijanis will take great pleasure in desecrating our graves. It's unbearable," he added.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/russian-peacekeepers-enter-nagorno-karabakh-as-kremlin-seeks-un-presence-343168">Russian peacekeepers enter Nagorno-Karabakh as Kremlin seeks UN presence</a>

Armenia and Azerbaijan entered into an armed conflict in late September. The fight lasted for six weeks.

Armenia on Saturday said that 2,317 of it fighters were killed in the clashes, an increase of nearly 1,000 deaths compared to the last confirmed death toll among Armenian fighters.

Azerbaijan has not revealed its military casualties and the real toll after weeks of fighting is expected to be much higher.

(With AFP inputs)

Villagers in Kalbajar District outside of Nagorno-Karabakh region set their houses on fire on Saturday. The district is part of the territory previously controlled by Armenian Separatists which will now be handed over to Azerbaijan as a part of the peace agreement.

Villagers in Kalbajar District outside of Nagorno-Karabakh region set their houses on fire on Saturday. The district is part of the territory previously controlled by Armenian Separatists which will now be handed over to Azerbaijan as a part of the peace agreement. "This is my house, I can't leave it to the Turks," as Azerbaijanis are often called by Armenians, said one resident as he threw burning wooden planks and rags soaked in gasoline into a completely empty house. He was quoted by AFP. "Everybody is going to burn down their house today... We were given until midnight to leave," he said. "We also moved our parents' graves, the Azerbaijanis will take great pleasure in desecrating our graves. It's unbearable," he added. Also Read | Russian peacekeepers enter Nagorno-Karabakh as Kremlin seeks UN presence Armenia and Azerbaijan entered into an armed conflict in late September. The fight lasted for six weeks. Armenia on Saturday said that 2,317 of it fighters were killed in the clashes, an increase of nearly 1,000 deaths compared to the last confirmed death toll among Armenian fighters. Azerbaijan has not revealed its military casualties and the real toll after weeks of fighting is expected to be much higher. (With AFP inputs)

Armenian villagers burn their houses just ahead of Azerbaijan takeover

The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan is over, but violence is still on. Armenians have declared a war on their govt after it signed a peace deal with Azerbaijan following 6 weeks of fighting. WION's Palki Sharma has a report.

Gravitas: Armenia, Azerbaijan sign a peace deal

Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia said they have signed a deal with to end the military conflict over the Nagorno-Karabakh region after more than a month of bloodshed.

Azeris celebrate after Nagorno-Karabakh conflict deal signed

After days of fierce clashes in disputed Nagorno Karabakh region, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia have finally signed a deal to end the war.

WION Dispatch: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Russia sign deal to end fight

Hundreds of Baku residents took to the streets on Sunday after President Ilham Aliyev said that, the Azeri forces have taken control over Shusha which is the second largest city in the Nagorno-Karabakh enclave.

Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict: Azeri President claims gain over Shusha

Armenian Foreign Ministry spokesperson said that there will be no bilateral talks or meetings between Armenia & Azerbaijan during the Geneva talks on (Friday) October 30, 2020.

Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict: No bilateral talks between diplomats during Geneva

For many, the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the region of Nagorno-Karabakh has erupted suddenly. But the dispute is old. There are various geopolitical and ethnic reasons why the dispute has gone on for far too long. WION's Manas Joshi interviewed Achal Malhotra, IFS (Retd.), India's former ambassador to Armenia and Georgia about the conflict and its contours.

Malhotra has distilled his experience in the region in his new book 'The South Caucasus: Transition from subjugation to independence (Tracing India’s Footprints)' published by Indian Council of World Affairs. In his interaction with WION, he touched upon many aspects of the conflict currently unfolding in the Caucasus.

Manas Joshi: Tell us about your insights on this conflict. You say that this conflict has been decades in the making

Achal Malhotra: The Armenia –Azerbaijan armed conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh is almost three decades old. Its seeds were however sown almost one hundred years ago. In July 1921, during the incorporation of the South Caucasus region into then evolving USSR, a Christian Armenian majority autonomous enclave was created on the territory of a Muslim majority Azerbaijan.

It was a flawed decision by any standards as logically Nagorno-Karabakh should have been a part of the neighbouring Armenia with which it shares ethnic, religious and linguistic links. Several petitions from Nagorno-Karabakh to central authorities in Moscow during the next seventy years for its merger with Armenia were rejected.

Nagorno-Karabakh’s decision to declare its independence in September 1991 in the backdrop of imminent disintegration of USSR &nbsp;and emergence of its constituent Republics as independent States resulted in a war between Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh in which the latter was supported whole-heartedly by Armenia.

By the time a ceasefire was brokered by Russia in 1994, the Armenians had established control not only over Nagorno-Karabakh but also surrounding seven districts of Azerbaijan. Since then the USA, Russia and France as co-chairs of the Minsk Group of the OSCE have engaged both Armenia and Azerbaijan extensively to resolve the conflict, albeit without success. Russia also has been mediating in a parallel triangular format.

Manas Joshi: During your years as Ambassador of India to Armenia and Georgia, what was the situation? Was the tension between Armenia and Azerbaijan palpable even then?

Achal Malhotra: The Nagorno-Karabakh issue has remained etched in the hearts and minds of the leaders as well as people in Armenia, Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan for several decades. It evokes strong nationalist fervour on both sides of the divide. The young generations of Armenians and Azeris have been fed on hatred for each other.

There have been several incidents of ceasefire since 1994, some of which were extremely serious for example the Four Days War of April 2016. The international interlocutors, however, managed to control the flare-up and to resume the dialogue process. The flare-up this time on 27th September is however unprecedented in terms of scope and scale, and the three ceasefire agreements brokered by Russia and USA could not hold for more than a few minutes&nbsp;

Manas Joshi: What makes the eruption of conflict this time different from the previous occasions?&nbsp;

Achal Malhotra: In my opinion, there are two reasons: First is the role of Turkey and to some extent also Pakistan. Both these countries have extremely poor relations with Armenia and have all along extended moral support to Azerbaijan; this time Turkey has assured all possible active support and so has done Pakistan. Turkey is also seeking to be associated with the dialogue process as one of the co-Chairs of Minsk Group.

Turkey’s actions fit into its ambitions to acquire the leadership of world Islamic community. The second important factor is that Azerbaijan appears to be fed up with the dialogue process while its seven districts, besides Nagorno-Karabakh, remain under the control of Armenians since 1994.

Emboldened by the assurance from Turkey and Pakistan, Azerbaijan now appears to be determined to retrieve as many lost territories as possible in this round of conflict.

Manas Joshi: Given the area's proximity to Middle East/ West Asia, do you think this is going to be another long drawn conflict with proxy elements involved?

Achal Malhotra: The conflict so far has remained more or less local in nature. Turkey’s entry and alleged participation of mercenaries on the side of Azerbaijan has however imparted new dimensions. Neither Armenia nor Azerbaijan can sustain the war for too long unless there is tacit or explicit material support from outside. If this happens the conflict will then become a proxy war between Russia and Turkey.

If the war zone is extended beyond Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding territories of Azerbaijan and spills over to Republic of Armenia, Russia, as well as CSTO, will be obliged to intervene under treaty obligations. Turkey’s membership of NATO can further complicate the matters.

Manas Joshi: Do you think this is headed to a stalemate like Syria?

Achal Malhotra: I hope NOT. The USA, Russia and Europe are interested in the stability of the region: each for its own vested interests. Russia treats the region as its backyard as post-Soviet space of its natural influence. The USA and Europe have made huge investments in the energy sector in Azerbaijan and Europe’s energy security depends to a certain extent on an uninterrupted supply of oil and natural gas from Azerbaijan.

Sooner or later they will put in all possible efforts to stop war and restore normalcy. Whether they succeed also in resolving the conflict is a million-dollar question.

Manas Joshi: What do you think will be an effective way to end the conflict?

Achal Malhotra: The first priority is to stop the war. For that NATO must put adequate pressure on Turkey. It must be ensured that no further arms and ammunition are supplied to either of the two countries. The next focus would be on the settlement of the dispute. In my assessment, the chances of an amicable final solution will remain remote unless the parties to the conflict give up their maximalist positions and agree on a compromise formula.

At this point of time, Nagorno-Karabakh, supported by Armenia, &nbsp;doesn’t want to settle down for anything less than full independence whereas Azerbaijan at best is willing to grant some autonomy to Nagorno-Karabakh within the territorial limits of Azerbaijan.

The conflict is thus between the principle of “right to self-determination” (as propounded by Nagorno-Karabakh and the principle) and &nbsp;“territorial integrity” (as invoked by Azerbaijan and supported by international community as no country has so far recognised the self-declared independence of Nagorno-Karabakh)&nbsp;

The real challenge is in devising a proposal which offers a win-win situation for the parties to the conflict. Armenia must agree to vacate the occupied territories. The international status of NK be determined in a manner that is acceptable to Armenians: it could be substantial autonomy, federal structure; some international guarantees will be needed to assure Nagorno-Karabakh that there will be no existential threat to this small landlocked entity with a population of just about 15,000.

The land Lachin Corridor created post-1992, linking Armenia with Nagorno-Karabakh should be allowed under international supervision.

Manas Joshi: The conflict is taking place far away from India, but does India have any stakes? Is there any threat to Indian equations?

Achal Malhotra: India’s equations with the three countries of the region –Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia -are more or less already determined. There is a palpable asymmetry in India‘s relations with these countries. India has an excellent political understanding with Armenia-the only country in the region with which India has a Friendship and Cooperation Treaty. India has received three Heads of State level visits from Armenia and twice a Vice President of India has visited Armenia.

In comparison, no high-level contacts have taken place between India and Azerbaijan and also Georgia. The levels of India’s trade or investment with Armenia have remained very low, though recently we sold them some equipment in defence sector. We do have some investments and interests in the energy sector of Azerbaijan, which is also an important link on the International North-South Transport Corridor.

On the key issue of Kashmir, Armenia’s support for India is unequivocal, whereas Azerbaijan not only supports but also promotes Pakistan’s narrative.&nbsp;

As a matter of policy and practice, India refrains from taking sides in matters of conflicts between the states. In the given case, India has every reason not to support Azerbaijan on the issue of its territorial integrity as Azerbaijan has shown scant regard for the territorial integrity of India violated by Pakistan.

At the same time India would not like to be seen openly endorsing Nagorno – Karabakh’s right to self-determination as it may have some implications within our own country. Under the circumstances, India has adopted a balanced and neutral stand reflected in the politically correct statement of 1st October 2020.

Manas Joshi: You've distilled your experience in your book 'The South Caucasus: Transition from subjugation to independence( Tracing India’s Footprints)' Tell us more about it.

Achal Malhotra: This is a publication of the Indian Council of World Affairs, published by Macmillan and released very recently on 23rd October. It covers the multiple transitions the region has undergone from subjugation under the medieval Persian, Ottoman and Russian Empires to subservience under the USSR and finally its evolution as independent region.

I have discussed at length the diverse political trajectories and foreign policy orientations adopted by the three countries. Also the objectives and motives of various regional and global players in seeking a foothold in the region have been identified in detail.

I have devoted considerable space to the simmering ethno-territorial disputes in the region and the reasons as to why it has not been possible to resolve them despite mediation by the international agencies and global players. And finally, I have traced India’s footprints in the region from ancient times through medieval periods and right up-to current modern times. 
&nbsp;

For many, the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the region of Nagorno-Karabakh has erupted suddenly. But the dispute is old. There are various geopolitical and ethnic reasons why the dispute has gone on for far too long.

For many, the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the region of Nagorno-Karabakh has erupted suddenly. But the dispute is old. There are various geopolitical and ethnic reasons why the dispute has gone on for far too long. WION's Manas Joshi interviewed Achal Malhotra, IFS (Retd.), India's former ambassador to Armenia and Georgia about the conflict and its contours. Malhotra has distilled his experience in the region in his new book 'The South Caucasus: Transition from subjugation to independence (Tracing India’s Footprints)' published by Indian Council of World Affairs. In his interaction with WION, he touched upon many aspects of the conflict currently unfolding in the Caucasus. Manas Joshi: Tell us about your insights on this conflict. You say that this conflict has been decades in the making Achal Malhotra: The Armenia –Azerbaijan armed conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh is almost three decades old. Its seeds were however sown almost one hundred years ago. In July 1921, during the incorporation of the South Caucasus region into then evolving USSR, a Christian Armenian majority autonomous enclave was created on the territory of a Muslim majority Azerbaijan. It was a flawed decision by any standards as logically Nagorno-Karabakh should have been a part of the neighbouring Armenia with which it shares ethnic, religious and linguistic links. Several petitions from Nagorno-Karabakh to central authorities in Moscow during the next seventy years for its merger with Armenia were rejected. Nagorno-Karabakh’s decision to declare its independence in September 1991 in the backdrop of imminent disintegration of USSR and emergence of its constituent Republics as independent States resulted in a war between Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh in which the latter was supported whole-heartedly by Armenia. By the time a ceasefire was brokered by Russia in 1994, the Armenians had established control not only over Nagorno-Karabakh but also surrounding seven districts of Azerbaijan. Since then the USA, Russia and France as co-chairs of the Minsk Group of the OSCE have engaged both Armenia and Azerbaijan extensively to resolve the conflict, albeit without success. Russia also has been mediating in a parallel triangular format. Manas Joshi: During your years as Ambassador of India to Armenia and Georgia, what was the situation? Was the tension between Armenia and Azerbaijan palpable even then? Achal Malhotra: The Nagorno-Karabakh issue has remained etched in the hearts and minds of the leaders as well as people in Armenia, Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan for several decades. It evokes strong nationalist fervour on both sides of the divide. The young generations of Armenians and Azeris have been fed on hatred for each other. There have been several incidents of ceasefire since 1994, some of which were extremely serious for example the Four Days War of April 2016. The international interlocutors, however, managed to control the flare-up and to resume the dialogue process. The flare-up this time on 27th September is however unprecedented in terms of scope and scale, and the three ceasefire agreements brokered by Russia and USA could not hold for more than a few minutes Manas Joshi: What makes the eruption of conflict this time different from the previous occasions? Achal Malhotra: In my opinion, there are two reasons: First is the role of Turkey and to some extent also Pakistan. Both these countries have extremely poor relations with Armenia and have all along extended moral support to Azerbaijan; this time Turkey has assured all possible active support and so has done Pakistan. Turkey is also seeking to be associated with the dialogue process as one of the co-Chairs of Minsk Group. Turkey’s actions fit into its ambitions to acquire the leadership of world Islamic community. The second important factor is that Azerbaijan appears to be fed up with the dialogue process while its seven districts, besides Nagorno-Karabakh, remain under the control of Armenians since 1994. Emboldened by the assurance from Turkey and Pakistan, Azerbaijan now appears to be determined to retrieve as many lost territories as possible in this round of conflict. Manas Joshi: Given the area's proximity to Middle East/ West Asia, do you think this is going to be another long drawn conflict with proxy elements involved? Achal Malhotra: The conflict so far has remained more or less local in nature. Turkey’s entry and alleged participation of mercenaries on the side of Azerbaijan has however imparted new dimensions. Neither Armenia nor Azerbaijan can sustain the war for too long unless there is tacit or explicit material support from outside. If this happens the conflict will then become a proxy war between Russia and Turkey. If the war zone is extended beyond Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding territories of Azerbaijan and spills over to Republic of Armenia, Russia, as well as CSTO, will be obliged to intervene under treaty obligations. Turkey’s membership of NATO can further complicate the matters. Manas Joshi: Do you think this is headed to a stalemate like Syria? Achal Malhotra: I hope NOT. The USA, Russia and Europe are interested in the stability of the region: each for its own vested interests. Russia treats the region as its backyard as post-Soviet space of its natural influence. The USA and Europe have made huge investments in the energy sector in Azerbaijan and Europe’s energy security depends to a certain extent on an uninterrupted supply of oil and natural gas from Azerbaijan. Sooner or later they will put in all possible efforts to stop war and restore normalcy. Whether they succeed also in resolving the conflict is a million-dollar question. Manas Joshi: What do you think will be an effective way to end the conflict? Achal Malhotra: The first priority is to stop the war. For that NATO must put adequate pressure on Turkey. It must be ensured that no further arms and ammunition are supplied to either of the two countries. The next focus would be on the settlement of the dispute. In my assessment, the chances of an amicable final solution will remain remote unless the parties to the conflict give up their maximalist positions and agree on a compromise formula. At this point of time, Nagorno-Karabakh, supported by Armenia, doesn’t want to settle down for anything less than full independence whereas Azerbaijan at best is willing to grant some autonomy to Nagorno-Karabakh within the territorial limits of Azerbaijan. The conflict is thus between the principle of “right to self-determination” (as propounded by Nagorno-Karabakh and the principle) and “territorial integrity” (as invoked by Azerbaijan and supported by international community as no country has so far recognised the self-declared independence of Nagorno-Karabakh) The real challenge is in devising a proposal which offers a win-win situation for the parties to the conflict. Armenia must agree to vacate the occupied territories. The international status of NK be determined in a manner that is acceptable to Armenians: it could be substantial autonomy, federal structure; some international guarantees will be needed to assure Nagorno-Karabakh that there will be no existential threat to this small landlocked entity with a population of just about 15,000. The land Lachin Corridor created post-1992, linking Armenia with Nagorno-Karabakh should be allowed under international supervision. Manas Joshi: The conflict is taking place far away from India, but does India have any stakes? Is there any threat to Indian equations? Achal Malhotra: India’s equations with the three countries of the region –Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia -are more or less already determined. There is a palpable asymmetry in India‘s relations with these countries. India has an excellent political understanding with Armenia-the only country in the region with which India has a Friendship and Cooperation Treaty. India has received three Heads of State level visits from Armenia and twice a Vice President of India has visited Armenia. In comparison, no high-level contacts have taken place between India and Azerbaijan and also Georgia. The levels of India’s trade or investment with Armenia have remained very low, though recently we sold them some equipment in defence sector. We do have some investments and interests in the energy sector of Azerbaijan, which is also an important link on the International North-South Transport Corridor. On the key issue of Kashmir, Armenia’s support for India is unequivocal, whereas Azerbaijan not only supports but also promotes Pakistan’s narrative. As a matter of policy and practice, India refrains from taking sides in matters of conflicts between the states. In the given case, India has every reason not to support Azerbaijan on the issue of its territorial integrity as Azerbaijan has shown scant regard for the territorial integrity of India violated by Pakistan. At the same time India would not like to be seen openly endorsing Nagorno – Karabakh’s right to self-determination as it may have some implications within our own country. Under the circumstances, India has adopted a balanced and neutral stand reflected in the politically correct statement of 1st October 2020. Manas Joshi: You've distilled your experience in your book 'The South Caucasus: Transition from subjugation to independence( Tracing India’s Footprints)' Tell us more about it. Achal Malhotra: This is a publication of the Indian Council of World Affairs, published by Macmillan and released very recently on 23rd October. It covers the multiple transitions the region has undergone from subjugation under the medieval Persian, Ottoman and Russian Empires to subservience under the USSR and finally its evolution as independent region. I have discussed at length the diverse political trajectories and foreign policy orientations adopted by the three countries. Also the objectives and motives of various regional and global players in seeking a foothold in the region have been identified in detail. I have devoted considerable space to the simmering ethno-territorial disputes in the region and the reasons as to why it has not been possible to resolve them despite mediation by the international agencies and global players. And finally, I have traced India’s footprints in the region from ancient times through medieval periods and right up-to current modern times.

I hope Nagorno-Karabakh conflict doesn't go the Syrian way, says ex-Indian Ambassador to Armenia

Azerbaijan and Armenia accused each other of killing civilians by shelling cities in and around Nagorno-Karabakh on Wednesday (October 28), in an escalation of a month-long conflict over the mountain enclave that has defied three ceasefires.

Azerbaijan says 21 killed by Armenian shelling of Barda

Close quarters, poor ventilation and no masks: in the cellars of Stepanakert, the capital of the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh province, residents who have not fled fierce fighting may be safe from shelling, but not coronavirus.

Adjoining basements beneath one unassuming three-storey building in the city have been repurposed as a bomb shelter, where residents &nbsp;are seeking refuge from frequent bouts of shelling by Azerbaijan's forces, including on Friday evening.&nbsp;

The majority of Stepanakert's 60,000 residents fled after fighting erupted late last month between separatists in the Armenian-majority mountainous region and the Azerbaijani army.

The largest room in the basement -- around 50 square metres with a ceiling lower than 2 metres (6.5 feet) -- serves as the sleeping quarters.

Around ten mattresses and blankets are placed on stone benches built against the walls and the earthen floor is carpeted with cardboard boxes.

A few dim lamps hang from the ceiling over an ageing wood stove in the middle of the room, its chimney running to an outside wall.

Lusine Tovmasyan used to run a medical testing centre in Stepanakert.

But when fighting erupted four weeks ago, the 44-year-old began working for the health authorities, carrying out coronavirus tests at the city's main hospital or at the homes of residents unable to travel.&nbsp;

On Friday morning she arrived at the building to test two women aged 63 and 76 thought to be possibly infected.

Bundled up in a coat, the older woman waits to be swabbed, sitting on a chair in the middle of the dormitory cellar.&nbsp;

- 'High infection rate' -

She coughs and groans when a cotton swab is pushed up her nose and then down her throat.&nbsp;

The sixty-year-old woman with a shawl over her shoulders is tested in the living room of her apartment on the ground floor and experiences similar discomfort, muttering a few words in a weak voice and grimacing.

"We do an average of 60 tests per day," says Tovmasyan, the only person among a half-dozen women in the cellar to be wearing a mask.&nbsp;

"The infection rate is quite high," she says because "people are living in groups in basements without masks".

"Between 40 and 60 percent of people test positive. It depends on the day".

After swabs are processed in the Armenian capital Yerevan -- around four hours away by road -- Tovmasyan says health workers compile lists of whose returned positive and the people they were in contact with.

There is no testing at an infectious diseases clinic near the central hospital in Stepanakert, but the facility does treat patients with coronavirus symptoms.

Nurses are busy in one of the wards administering intravenous drips for three seated and masked men.

Samvel Galstyan, 62, doesn't know whether or not he has coronavirus. He came to the facility because he had "a high temperature".

"It's cold in the basement. You go to bed and get up without changing your clothes. You can't stay there so you come in and out often. Hot, cold, hot, cold, and here I am," he said.

The chief doctor on the ward, 63-year-old Raya Simonyan, estimates that 90 percent of Stepanakert's remaining residents have coronavirus, but admits she has no official figures.

"The situation is very bad (...) A majority of residents are sick," she says.

Back in the basement, a brown-haired 15-year-old teenage girl briefly emerges from under a large blanket before disappearing again.

Next to her on the edge of the bed, the girl's mother is staring vacantly.

Her husband and son are fighting at the front, she says, and she does not know where exactly they are although she speaks to them regularly.

"We want peace and for the war to end as soon as possible," she says tearfully.

&nbsp;

Close quarters, poor ventilation and no masks: in the cellars of Stepanakert, the capital of the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh province, residents who have not fled fierce fighting may be safe from shelling, but not coronavirus.

Close quarters, poor ventilation and no masks: in the cellars of Stepanakert, the capital of the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh province, residents who have not fled fierce fighting may be safe from shelling, but not coronavirus. Adjoining basements beneath one unassuming three-storey building in the city have been repurposed as a bomb shelter, where residents are seeking refuge from frequent bouts of shelling by Azerbaijan's forces, including on Friday evening. The majority of Stepanakert's 60,000 residents fled after fighting erupted late last month between separatists in the Armenian-majority mountainous region and the Azerbaijani army. The largest room in the basement -- around 50 square metres with a ceiling lower than 2 metres (6.5 feet) -- serves as the sleeping quarters. Around ten mattresses and blankets are placed on stone benches built against the walls and the earthen floor is carpeted with cardboard boxes. A few dim lamps hang from the ceiling over an ageing wood stove in the middle of the room, its chimney running to an outside wall. Lusine Tovmasyan used to run a medical testing centre in Stepanakert. But when fighting erupted four weeks ago, the 44-year-old began working for the health authorities, carrying out coronavirus tests at the city's main hospital or at the homes of residents unable to travel. On Friday morning she arrived at the building to test two women aged 63 and 76 thought to be possibly infected. Bundled up in a coat, the older woman waits to be swabbed, sitting on a chair in the middle of the dormitory cellar. - 'High infection rate' - She coughs and groans when a cotton swab is pushed up her nose and then down her throat. The sixty-year-old woman with a shawl over her shoulders is tested in the living room of her apartment on the ground floor and experiences similar discomfort, muttering a few words in a weak voice and grimacing. "We do an average of 60 tests per day," says Tovmasyan, the only person among a half-dozen women in the cellar to be wearing a mask. "The infection rate is quite high," she says because "people are living in groups in basements without masks". "Between 40 and 60 percent of people test positive. It depends on the day". After swabs are processed in the Armenian capital Yerevan -- around four hours away by road -- Tovmasyan says health workers compile lists of whose returned positive and the people they were in contact with. There is no testing at an infectious diseases clinic near the central hospital in Stepanakert, but the facility does treat patients with coronavirus symptoms. Nurses are busy in one of the wards administering intravenous drips for three seated and masked men. Samvel Galstyan, 62, doesn't know whether or not he has coronavirus. He came to the facility because he had "a high temperature". "It's cold in the basement. You go to bed and get up without changing your clothes. You can't stay there so you come in and out often. Hot, cold, hot, cold, and here I am," he said. The chief doctor on the ward, 63-year-old Raya Simonyan, estimates that 90 percent of Stepanakert's remaining residents have coronavirus, but admits she has no official figures. "The situation is very bad (...) A majority of residents are sick," she says. Back in the basement, a brown-haired 15-year-old teenage girl briefly emerges from under a large blanket before disappearing again. Next to her on the edge of the bed, the girl's mother is staring vacantly. Her husband and son are fighting at the front, she says, and she does not know where exactly they are although she speaks to them regularly. "We want peace and for the war to end as soon as possible," she says tearfully.

Coronavirus thrives in Karabakh's bomb shelters

In an exclusive interview with WION, Armenia's Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said that the United States should merge its peace efforts for Nagorno Karabakh with Russia. WION's Palki Sharma brings you an excerpt.

Gravitas: Armenian PM says US should merge its peace efforts with Russia

Nagorno-Karabakh is battling a dual crisis, not only is the region facing the clashes in decades but also the challenge to survive COVID-19. Watch the report to know more.

COVID-19 secondary for Nagorno-Karabakh civilians; Truce trays amid fresh shelling

As the fight between Armenia & Azerbaijan continues to escalate, Armenian forces are now getting support from school teachers & parents.

Armenia: Parents and teachers make camouflage nets for Karabakh soldiers