The destruction of an Armenian memorial in Karabakh sparked a debate on social media.

Some Facebook* users considered the dismantling of the Armenian monument erected in 2015 in territory that later came under Baku's control a logical step. Their opponents pointed out that the memorial was unveiled on the anniversary of the tragic events and held special significance for Armenians.

As "Caucasian Knot" reported, on May 4, Caucasus Heritage Watch reported that a memorial to the victims of the Armenian Genocide in Stepanakert (the Azerbaijani name is Khankendi) was destroyed.

The 2015 report of the memorial's destruction adds to accusations of the destruction of ancient monuments.

Karabakh historians and activists have repeatedly reported the destruction of historical buildings and memorial structures in Azerbaijan. However, these reports referred to ancient monuments.

In particular, in December 2025, a video of destruction inside the Yerits Mankants Monastery appeared on Azerbaijani social media, and satellite imagery showed the destruction of the Holy Savior Monastery. Historians called on the international community to respond to the destruction of Armenian monuments. Christian monuments in Azerbaijan are protected by the state, Azerbaijani experts insist.

On December 5, 2024, Karabakh public organizations appealed to the UN and UNESCO demanding that a mission be sent to the region to stop the destruction of Armenian cultural heritage sites by the Azerbaijani side.

In March 2025, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) published a report in which it reported on the destruction of Armenian cultural and historical monuments in Karabakh by Azerbaijan. The report was based partly on data from Caucasus Heritage Watch and partly on information from an American non-governmental organization.

This organization found that Azerbaijan carried out "a comprehensive, methodical strategy to empty Nagorno-Karabakh of its ethnic Armenian population and historical and cultural presence" during military operations in 2020 and 2023, the report's authors stated.

Many commentators considered the dismantling of the newly constructed monument logical.

A "Caucasian Knot" post about the Caucasus Heritage Watch report sparked a lively discussion among Facebook users*. As of 12:55 PM Moscow time on May 6, more than 330 comments had been posted.

A significant number of commenters supported the dismantling of the memorial, considering it an illegal construction dating back to the Karabakh conflict on Azerbaijani territory. "All structures erected without state consent are subject to demolition; this is normal practice," stated Musa Akhundov. "If the structure appeared during the conflict, its dismantling is logical after control is restored," wrote Elcin Huseynov.

Users believed the memorial lacked historical value, as it was built relatively recently. In their opinion, this is a political symbol, not a heritage site.

"This is a new building; it's not an ancient monument, so its dismantling isn't surprising," Nigar Safi stated. "What historical value does a 2015 structure have?" Elgun Atalyev asked.

Some commentators emphasize that the state has the right to independently decide which sites to preserve. "This is our territory, and we ourselves determine what should be on it," wrote Yashar Ismayilov.

"The state is not obligated to preserve objects it deems illegal," agreed Oktay Aliyev. "This is not the destruction of heritage, but the restoration of the rule of law," stated Sanuber Nazarova.

"If there is no permission, then the object cannot be considered legal," commented Asif Ilyasov. "This is common practice in any territorial disputes," wrote Mahmud Huseynov.

Some users expressed support for the authorities' actions, but without providing any arguments. "The right decision, this should have been done long ago," wrote Faig Safarov. "I think this is a logical step," stated Rafail Hacıyev.

Some users expressed a willingness to compromise. "A monument could be erected to other events that are important to the local population," wrote Haci Akhmedov. "The region's history is complex, and monuments should reflect this," noted Roza Qulieva.

Opponents of the dismantling recalled the memorial's significance for Armenians

In turn, opponents of the dismantling, including many users with Armenian first and last names in their nicknames, view it as the destruction of cultural and historical memory. They pointed to the memorial's symbolic significance for Armenians.

"This is not just an object, but a memory of tragic events that cannot be erased," wrote Anna Beklyarova. "The destruction of monuments is a blow to historical memory," stated Armine Avagyan. "Their destruction does not solve problems, but creates new ones," she added in another comment.

"For many, this [the events of 1915] is connected with family history, not politics," wrote I.G. "The human aspect of such decisions cannot be ignored," agreed Susanna Danielyan. "It's important to treat all monuments equally," wrote Marina Mkhitaryan.

Some participants in the discussion emphasized that the memorial was officially erected and had significance for the local population. They questioned the argument that it was "illegal."

"If people lived there and built there, then it had significance," wrote Anna Jalladyan. "You can't simply erase something that was part of the life of the region," stated Garik Hovakimyan. "Monuments are part of a people's identity," he added in another comment.

As a reminder, in 2015, the centenary of the Armenian Genocide, 1.5 million victims of the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire from 1915-1923 were canonized in Armenia. At the same time, memorial events of various levels were held in populated areas of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as in cities in Russia and other countries.

The Caucasian Knot covered materials for the 100th anniversary of the massacre of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire on the thematic page "The Armenian Genocide: 100 Years of Admissions and Denials".