1) Personal observation: some Dutch media e.g., @NOS @nrc, and politicians do not have strong background information about the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Thus, they constantly highlight the religious aspect of the conflict. Below some explanations from respectful Western experts.

At the domestic level, it needs to be constantly stated and restated that Armenian–Azerbaijani rivalry is not enduring because of fundamental cultural – still less religious – differences between Armenians and Azerbaijanis (Laurence Broers, 2019, p311).

The frequent bookending of references to a
dispute between ‘mainly Christian Armenia’ and ‘mostly Muslim Azerbaijan’ in Western media reporting serves more to locate an obscure conflict than to accurately convey its nature ( @LaurenceBroers, 2019, p.40).

While Iran’s relations with Armenia are rhetorically
warmer than with Azerbaijan, in practice deeper relations
have continually confronted, as we have seen, the limits imposed by Russia’s dominance of Armenia’s strategic linkages...(Laurence Broers, 2019, p. 231)

Many Western observers sought to define the conflict in terms of ethnicity and religion: it was a convulsion of “ancient hatreds” that had been deep-frozen by the Soviet system but had thawed back into violent life as soon as Gorbachev allowed it to. That too was a simplification

After all, relations between the two communities were good in the Soviet period and the quarrel was not over religion (Thomas de Waal 2003, p.9).

Nalbandian has been supervising the restoration of the mosque complex in a joint venture of Armenia and Iran, two countries that, despite religious differences, are political allies. The mosque walls had been restored with Armenian red brick and faced with Persian turquoise tiles

We took off our shoes to go into the echoing interior, whose floor had just been re-laid with Isfahan marble (De Waal, 2003, p.74).