Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan remains a challenging goal despite a peace agreement announced in March. Azerbaijan, currently in a strong position, is hesitant to finalize the signing of this agreement. In Armenia, particularly near the border, many residents are filled with anxiety over potential new conflicts and feelings of defeat.

In Kirants, a small Armenian village with about 350 people, farmers have faced significant changes due to a newly constructed gray concrete wall that divides their land. This wall has obstructed access to fields where they used to graze livestock. The border demarcation process began in April 2024 based on old Soviet maps but has progressed slowly; only 12.7 kilometers out of more than 1,000 kilometers have been marked.

The villagers express bitterness over the situation as some families lost their homes and land was transferred to Azerbaijanis. A community official noted that several farmers had to sell their livestock and abandon their properties while others are trying to continue working on smaller plots of land. Although one local acknowledged the importance of the demarcation for peace efforts, she criticized how it was implemented, suggesting that it primarily benefits Azerbaijan at Armenia's expense.

Original article

The article does not provide any immediate actionable information for readers. It does not offer clear steps or a plan of action that individuals can take to address the situation or improve their circumstances. There are no mentioned tools or resources that readers can access to resolve the issues faced by the villagers.

In terms of educational depth, the article provides some context and historical background, explaining the ongoing border demarcation process and its impact on the villagers. It shares the perspective of a community official and a local resident, offering insights into the challenges and emotions experienced by those directly affected. However, it does not delve deeply into the causes or systems at play, nor does it provide a comprehensive understanding of the complex peace negotiations and their potential long-term effects.

The personal relevance of the article is evident, as it highlights the very real and immediate impact of political decisions on the lives of ordinary people. The construction of the concrete wall and the resulting loss of land and livelihood directly affect the villagers, and the article effectively conveys their anxiety and bitterness. The potential for new conflicts and the sense of defeat felt by those living near the border are also relevant to a wider audience, as it impacts the overall peace and stability of the region.

While the article does not explicitly provide a public service function, it does shed light on a situation that may not be widely known or understood by the public. By bringing attention to the human cost of political decisions, it indirectly serves a public interest by encouraging further discussion and potentially influencing future policies.

The practicality of the advice or steps mentioned in the article is limited. The villagers' options are constrained by the political situation and the slow progress of the border demarcation process. The article does not offer any realistic solutions or strategies for the villagers to navigate their current challenges.

The long-term impact of the article is somewhat uncertain. While it raises awareness about the ongoing issues and the potential for further conflict, it does not provide any clear ideas or actions that could lead to lasting positive change. The article does not offer any insights into potential long-term solutions or strategies that could bring about a more stable and peaceful future for the region.

In terms of emotional and psychological impact, the article effectively conveys the sense of anxiety, bitterness, and defeat experienced by the villagers. It humanizes the impact of political decisions and may evoke empathy in readers. However, it does not offer any strategies or support to help individuals cope with or overcome these emotions.

The article does not appear to be clickbait or driven by advertising. It presents a balanced and factual account of the situation, without using sensational language or making exaggerated claims.

The article could have provided more value by offering practical guidance or resources for the affected villagers. It could have suggested ways for them to access legal or advocacy support, or provided information on potential compensation or assistance programs. Additionally, the article could have directed readers to reputable sources or organizations working on peace-building initiatives in the region, allowing individuals to learn more and potentially get involved in constructive ways.

The situation described in the text poses a significant threat to the very fabric of local communities, families, and their ability to thrive and survive. The construction of the gray concrete wall, a physical barrier dividing land and disrupting traditional ways of life, has immediate and long-term consequences.

First, the wall's presence directly impacts the ability of families to provide for themselves. Farmers, who are the backbone of these communities, are now restricted from accessing their grazing fields, forcing some to sell their livestock and abandon their properties. This not only diminishes their economic stability but also threatens their ability to sustain their families and pass on their way of life to future generations. The loss of land and homes further exacerbates this issue, as it disrupts the natural cycle of family life and the intergenerational transfer of knowledge and resources.

The bitterness and sense of injustice felt by the villagers are valid concerns. When families are displaced and their land is taken, it not only affects the present but also undermines the future. The transfer of land to others, especially when it leads to the abandonment of properties, weakens the community's sense of ownership and stewardship of the land. This shift in land ownership can create an atmosphere of distrust and resentment, further fracturing the social fabric that binds families and communities together.

The slow progress of the border demarcation process, which has only marked a small fraction of the total distance, adds to the uncertainty and anxiety. This prolonged period of ambiguity leaves families in a state of limbo, unable to plan for the future or make decisions with confidence. It erodes the sense of security and stability that is essential for families to thrive and for children to grow up in a nurturing environment.

The criticism of the implementation process, suggesting that it primarily benefits one side at the expense of the other, is a valid concern. When one group feels that their needs and rights are being overlooked, it can lead to a breakdown of trust and cooperation, which are essential for peaceful coexistence and the resolution of conflicts. This sense of injustice can foster an environment where personal duties to the clan and community are neglected, as individuals may feel their contributions are not valued or fairly recognized.

The impact of these events on children and the elderly is particularly concerning. Children, who are the future of these communities, may grow up in an atmosphere of conflict and uncertainty, which can hinder their development and sense of security. The elderly, who are often the guardians of traditional knowledge and wisdom, may find their roles diminished or their voices unheard, further weakening the community's connection to its past and its ability to plan for the future.

If these ideas and behaviors spread unchecked, the consequences for these communities could be dire. The breakdown of family structures, the erosion of community trust, and the disruption of traditional ways of life could lead to a decline in birth rates and a weakening of the social fabric that has sustained these peoples for generations. The land, which is the source of their livelihood and identity, could be further divided and mismanaged, leading to environmental degradation and a loss of cultural heritage.

To mitigate these risks, it is essential to prioritize local accountability and personal responsibility. Restitution can be made through open dialogue, fair compensation, and a renewed commitment to the duties and responsibilities that bind families and communities together. By upholding the ancestral principles of protection, care, and stewardship, these communities can work towards a future where their survival and continuity are not threatened by external forces or internal divisions.

The text shows a clear bias towards the Armenian perspective and presents a one-sided view of the situation. It focuses on the negative impact of the border demarcation process on Armenian villagers, highlighting their losses and bitterness. The use of words like "strong position" for Azerbaijan and "anxiety" for Armenians creates an emotional contrast.

"Azerbaijan, currently in a strong position, is hesitant to finalize the signing of this agreement." This sentence implies that Azerbaijan has an advantage and is reluctant to conclude the peace agreement, potentially portraying them in a negative light.

There is an absence of Azerbaijan's perspective, which could provide a more balanced view. The text does not explore potential benefits or Azerbaijan's reasons for hesitation, leaving readers with an incomplete understanding. By only presenting the Armenian side, it creates an unfair portrayal.

The text evokes a range of emotions, primarily centered around anxiety, bitterness, and a sense of loss. These emotions are expressed by the villagers of Kirants and are a direct result of the ongoing border demarcation process and its impact on their lives.

Anxiety is a prominent emotion throughout the text. The residents of Armenia, especially those near the border, are filled with worry and apprehension. This fear is justified by the potential for new conflicts and the feeling of impending defeat. The construction of the gray concrete wall, which obstructs access to their fields, is a physical manifestation of this anxiety. It serves as a constant reminder of the uncertain future and the possibility of further upheaval.

Bitterness is another strong emotion expressed by the villagers. They feel a sense of resentment and anger towards the situation they find themselves in. The loss of homes and land, which has been transferred to Azerbaijanis, has caused deep emotional distress. This bitterness is further fueled by the slow progress of the border demarcation process, which has only marked a small fraction of the total distance. The villagers feel that their lives and livelihoods are being disrupted, and their sense of justice is being compromised.

The emotion of loss is also evident. Farmers have had to sell their livestock and abandon their properties, signifying a significant change in their way of life. The smaller plots of land they now have to work with are a far cry from their previous grazing fields. This loss of land and the associated way of life is a powerful emotional blow, impacting not only their economic stability but also their sense of identity and community.

These emotions guide the reader's reaction by evoking sympathy and concern for the villagers of Kirants. The text paints a picture of a community in distress, facing significant challenges and an uncertain future. By highlighting the personal stories of the villagers and their struggles, the writer aims to create an emotional connection with the reader, encouraging them to empathize with the situation and perhaps even take an interest in the ongoing peace efforts.

The writer employs several persuasive techniques to enhance the emotional impact of the text. One notable strategy is the use of vivid and descriptive language. Phrases like "gray concrete wall" and "old Soviet maps" create a visual image in the reader's mind, adding to the sense of unease and the feeling of being trapped. The repetition of the word "loss" and its various forms throughout the text also emphasizes the emotional toll on the villagers, making it a central theme of the narrative.

Additionally, the writer employs a personal tone by including direct quotes from a community official and a local villager. This adds authenticity and a sense of immediacy to the story, allowing the reader to connect with the individuals affected and understand their perspective. By presenting a balanced view, the writer also builds trust with the reader, as they are given a clear understanding of the situation from multiple angles.

In summary, the text skillfully utilizes emotional language and persuasive techniques to guide the reader's reaction, evoking sympathy and concern for the villagers of Kirants and their struggle in the face of political and geographical changes.