Open AccessThe ‘Museums of the Frontline’ in Stepanakert, or on the Armenian Remembrance of the Armed Conflict with Azerbaijan
Author(s) -
Magdalena Lorenc
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
przegląd strategiczny
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.151
H-Index - 2
eISSN - 2956-5073
pISSN - 2084-6991
DOI - 10.14746/ps.2019.1.25
Subject(s) - armenian , politics , meaning (existential) , nationalism , element (criminal law) , ideology , sociology , political science , law , aesthetics , history , ancient history , art , epistemology , philosophy
Nagorno-Karabakh is currently considered the most militarized area in the South Caucasus region. The key political decision-makers of Armenia come from Stepanakert. The issue of the future of this territory is an important element of any electoral campaign in Armenia. Any plans to make concessions to the Azerbaijani side are opposed by Armenian nationalist and veteran circles. The memory of the armed conflict with Azerbaijan remains vivid and is reflected in numerous commemorative initiatives in the NKR, as exemplified by the Memorial Museum of the Perished Soldiers and the Memorial Museum – The Union of Relatives of Missing Warriors of the NKR in Stepanakert. These institutions are a synthesis of museum and funeral practices. To quote Aleksander Wallis, replacing ‘monuments’ with ‘museums,’ it may be concluded that they “were created to historicize current events” which “evoke the greatest emotions, tensions and conflicts” and stem from “profound moral needs.” However, unlike monuments whose “artistic shape and symbolic meaning [...] permit different interpre- tations in formal and artistic categories as well as in the categories of meaning, ideology and politics” (Wallis, 1968), the two museums do not give such freedom. Besides commemoration, they also serve the purpose of constructing and consolidating hostility towards Azerbaijan – the raison d’être of the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. The conflict is the foundation of the idea of Artsakh and the main political implication of the spatial values represented by the MMPS and MMMW. The unique character of these museums, however, is not related to the politicization of re-membrance, which is a common feature of such establishments, but rather to the short temporal distance between the armed conflict and the emergence of the exhibitions. Consequently, the memory of the museums’ creators has not been ‘borrowed’ and the message of the museums reflects the current attitude to Azerbaijan.