The report of mine incidents in Karabakh has sparked a debate about the causes of injuries and deaths.

Mine danger remains one of the main problems in Karabakh. Armenian troops, who mined the territories, are responsible for the injuries suffered by IDPs after explosions, according to users with Azerbaijani surnames. Users with Armenian surnames countered that the mines protected civilians in Nagorno-Karabakh. However, all parties to the dispute agreed on the need to observe safety regulations outside villages.

As reported by "Caucasian Knot," on May 11, two Azerbaijani army servicemen were blown up by a mine in the Kelbajar region and were hospitalized with injuries. The villages of Karabakh and Eastern Zangezur, where residents are returning, have been completely cleared of mines, but danger zones remain outside populated areas, where violations of safety regulations lead to incidents. Complete demining of the former conflict zone may take many years, experts say.

A post about the persistence of mine threats in Karabakh outside populated areas garnered 399 comments on the Caucasian Knot* Facebook page.

Facebook* users from Azerbaijan largely supported the return of displaced persons to Karabakh and emphasized that mine threats remain one of the region's main problems. Many commenters accused the Armenian side of large-scale mining of territories, discussed the restoration of infrastructure and the return of residents, and also argued with Armenian users about the ownership of Karabakh and Zangezur.

For example, some Azerbaijani users emphasized that resettlement is actively taking place in the Karabakh economic region.

"They are definitely returning, I am a living witness," wrote Lolita Rustamova.

"I am a resident of Khankendi. I have lived in Khankendi for two years; anyone who wants to can visit us," stated Zaur Mirzeyev.

"It is not only internally displaced persons who are returning to the Karabakh economic region of Azerbaijan. For example, recently a large group of doctors permanently resettled in Khankendi," said Adyl Gadzhiev..

Some Azerbaijani users emphasized the issue of mine clearance and the need to observe safety measures when people return to populated areas. Commenters expressed the opinion that clearing the territories would take many more years.

"The mine problem remains one of the most serious humanitarian threats in Karabakh and Eastern Zangezur. Complete demining and educational work are extremely important," wrote Sabuhi Pashayev.

"People have been blown up since World War II. It takes time, and five years is not much," said Rashad Jafarov.

If they considered these lands theirs, then why did they mine them?

Many users from Azerbaijan in the discussion accused the Armenian side of destruction and mining of the territories during the conflict. Some commentators claimed that the return of people to Karabakh would continue despite the risks.

"If they considered these lands theirs, then why did they mine them?" wrote Malik Mamedovich.

"They even mined the cemetery, knowing that people would visit the graves of their relatives upon returning to their homeland," said Javid Iskenderli.

"They knew that the owners would return to their lands and planted mines everywhere," commented Naina Omar.

The region's post-war reconstruction became a separate topic. Users discussed construction, the relocation of specialists, and infrastructure development plans.

"We're rebuilding everything from scratch now. Karabakh has become the pearl of the Caucasus," wrote Eldar Mamedov.

"I'm personally ready to buy a house in Khankendi," declared Eldaniz Hasanov.

In the comments, Azerbaijani users also actively debated the names of territories and the historical affiliations of regions. Many supported the use of the term "Eastern Zangezur" and referred to Karabakh as Azerbaijani territory.

"We are waiting for the return to Zangezur," wrote oldazerbaijan.

"These are our historical lands," declared Elshad Aliyev.

Some participants in the discussion recalled the relations between Armenians and Azerbaijanis during the Soviet period and shared personal stories of families leaving Azerbaijan in the late 1980s.

"Then we had to see off many more Armenian families, and they all sold their apartments and houses. They left in tears," wrote Hasan Musayev.

At this rate, the "great return" will end in 2226. year

Armenian Facebook* users' comments primarily questioned the scale of the return of displaced persons to Karabakh and criticized the Azerbaijani authorities. Many authors referred to Karabakh as Armenian territory, opposed the term "Eastern Zangezur," and claimed that the mine issue was being used for political purposes.

"What is this 'Eastern' Zangezur? Don't mislead people!!!" - wrote Ada Avanyan.

"The real Zangezur is the Syunik region of the sovereign Republic of Armenia," stated Artur Aramyan.

Analysts assess the pace of resettlement to Karabakh and Eastern Zangezur

Many Armenian users claimed that people are in no hurry to resettle in Karabakh, and that claims of a mass return are exaggerated. Some commentators linked this to security issues and distrust of the authorities.

"No one is returning anywhere; ordinary people no longer trust Aliyev> and his wife," wrote Artur Hovsepyan.

"At this rate, the 'great return' will end in 2226," stated Gagik Sargsyan.

"Mines are not the reason," said Artur Hovsepyan.

Some Armenian users in the comments emphasized that they consider Karabakh to be Armenian territory and linked the mine problem to the consequences of the war.

"Artsakh is Armenia," wrote Dikran Iskenderian.

"Mines protected the civilians of Artsakh," stated Hasmik Khachatryan.

The discussion also included recollections of the events of the late 1980s and early 1990s. Users recalled the flight of Armenians from Baku and disputes over property and housing.

"We had three apartments in Baku. What do I need to clear to return?" - wrote Slava Arutyunov.

"Between January 13 and 19, 1990 alone, tens of thousands of Armenians fled by ferries to Krasnovodsk," said Slava Arutyunov.

"I also saw Armenians selling their houses when they left," wrote Doris Kerry.

Disputes about the region's history, the origin of its names, and Russia's role in the formation of the South Caucasus states became a separate topic for Armenian users.

"If it weren't for the Russian Empire, you wouldn't have a state," wrote Artur Hovsepyan.

"This isn't a historical name, but an artificial political construct," said Artur Aramyan..

"There is a region of Armenia - Syunik," wrote Hasmik Khachatryan.

Explanatory work is extremely important so that people can safely return to their homes.

Despite the large number of harsh and emotional comments, part of the discussion still touched on the humanitarian side of the issue - the threat of mines, the safety of civilians, and the difficulty of returning people to the former conflict zone.

"We were strictly warned: do not go beyond the fences, do not touch suspicious objects," said Ilyas Akhmedov.v.

"Explanatory work is extremely important so that people can safely return to their homes," wrote Sabuhi Pashayev.

"Completely demining the former conflict zone could take many years," noted Gasan Musayev.