Search

Begin New Search Topic Conflict Political Geography Azerbaijan

21. Winning the Peace Azerbaijan’s Karabakh Reintegration Challenges

Author:
F. Murat Ozkaleli
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
The Karabakh conflict was not resolved peacefully. Decades of unfruitful negotiations held under the aus­pices of the Co‑chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group (France, Russia, and the United States) produced no dip­lomatic solution. The 30‑year‑long stalemate ended when Azerbaijan re‑gained its occupied territories with a decisive military victory after 44 days of fighting. After the Second Karabakh War, Azerbaijan restored its territorial integrity in conformity with four UN Security Council resolutions. Formally, Azerbaijan’s sover­eignty over all Karabakh was re­stored through the signing of a tri­lateral settlement that was reached between Azerbaijan and Armenia on November 10th, 2010, with Russia being the facilitator and third signatory. The settlement, which is more than a conventional truce but less than a full peace agreement, ensured the return of the remaining five occupied Azerbaijani areas immediately. A five‑kilometer‑wide corridor con­necting Armenia to Karabakh was opened through Lachin, with con­trol granted to a newly‑established Russian peacekeeping force, which also took over control of Khan­kendi and some surrounding areas populated by ethnic‑Armenians. Despite some delays, the trilat­eral settlement is being enforced and the Armenian occupation of 20 percent of Azerbaijani territo­ries came to an end in early 2021. Other provisions of the settlement, such as the establishment of the free movement of all Azerbaijani persons, services, and capital to the region, is to follow.
Topic:
Diplomacy, United Nations, Conflict, Peace, and Reintegration
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, and Azerbaijan

22. Georgia After the Second Karabakh War

Author:
Mamuka Tsereteli
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
The outcome of the Second Karabakh War between Azerbaijan and Armenia significantly trans­formed the geopolitical reality in the South Caucasus, with im­plications for the wider Black Sea‑Caspian region. The unsettled political geography of the South Caucasus and the ethno‑political separatism fueled by external actors since the early 1990s left bleeding wounds on the bodies of the newly re‑emerged sovereign states of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. These conflicts have determined the trajectory of the geopolitical developments of the region for the last 30 years, including on the for­eign policy orientations of these new states. The conflicts in the South Caucasus were the primary challenge for transforming the strategic assets of this region into greater political and economic success. Three major conflict areas in the South Caucasus were former autonomous regions, created in the early Soviet period: Nagorno‑Karabakh, Abkhazia, and the Tskhinvali region, what was called South Ossetia. (Briefly: the latter term was introduced by the Soviets in the 1920s as a name for the newly created autonomous area in Georgia, popu­lated by Ossetians alongside ethnic Georgians. The historic homeland of Ossetians is located to the north of the Greater Caucasus mountains. Following the Soviet tradition of planting ethno‑political time bombs, Ossetia proper—located in the Russian Federation—was named North Ossetia, while the Tskhinvali region of Georgia—with the Ossetian population at the time concentrated in the border areas with Russia—was named South Ossetia.) As of today, all three of these areas are self‑proclaimed indepen­dent states, are formally ruled by de facto governments, and saw fierce military confrontation in the early 1990s. In 2008, the Tskhinvali region became the battleground between Russian and Georgian forces. In 2020, Azerbaijan regained through a combination of military action and diplomatic brinksmanship all seven regions outside of Nagorno‑ Karabakh that had been occupied by Armenia, as well as one‑third of the former Nagorno‑Karabakh region. In the case of Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali region/South Ossetia, as of mid‑2021, these ter­ritories remain, in reality, governed by Russian occupational forces. The Russian military influence was in­serted into Karabakh after the war that ended on November 10th, 2020, with Russian peacekeepers playing an increasing role in the governance of the region. In terms of geopolitical orienta­tion, Armenia willingly allowed Russian troops onto its territory, seeing them as a security guar­antee and deterrent against Azer­baijan. Georgia aligned itself with the Western powers, determined to join NATO and the EU. The conflicts on Georgian territory are seen as punishment from Russia for Georgia’s pro‑Western focus. As a result, there has been a heavy Russian military presence in the separatist areas of Georgia since the Russian invasion to Georgia in 2008.
Topic:
Security, Economics, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Peace
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia

23. Azerbaijan’s Pathways After the Second Karabakh War

Author:
Laurence Broers
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
n the aftermath of the Second Karabakh War, Azerbaijan stands at a critical moment in its history. The war has re­solved many of the issues driving Azerbaijani grievances over the last three decades. Yet it leaves others both unresolved and entangled within a new regional configura­tion that more than ever hinges on the interactions of external great powers and the fractured local politics of the South Caucasus. The regionalization of the Armenian‑Azerbaijani conflict— meaning its transition to a Russian‑Turkish condominium— ultimately links the conflict to the vagaries of what Pavel Baev and Kemal Kirişci call the “serpentine” relations between Moscow and Ankara in the era of Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Vladimir Putin. The conflict is now one link in a string of conflict theatres where Russia and Turkey are involved, and across which Moscow and Ankara may negotiate trade‑offs that have little to do with the in­terests of local parties. To be sure, Azerbaijan’s closeness to Turkey assuages concerns over Russian in­fluence for now. And the strategic, rather than tactical, outlook on Azerbaijani‑Turkish partnership means that few in Azerbaijan be­lieve that Turkey would ever engage in trade‑offs that cross Azerbaijani red lines. This belief is reflected in the experience of the Turkish‑ Armenian “football diplomacy” normalization initiative that took place in in 2008‑2009. Nevertheless, while the Armenian‑Azerbaijani conflict is now seen by many in Azerbaijan as resolved, it has in fact been re­packaged and embedded in a new, highly complex, and unpredict­able web of linkages.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Conflict, Peace, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, and Azerbaijan

24. From Struggle to Permanent Failure Why the Karabakh Attempt at Secession Failed

Author:
Azer Babayev
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
After 44 days of fighting, the Second Karabakh War came to an end on 10 November 2020 as a result of a Russian‑brokered ceasefire agree­ment. The most important questions here appear to be: what led to this dangerous military escalation, and what does it mean for the conflict, given that it seems to have now entered into a (new) political phase, again? In the declining Soviet Union, what was originally a status dispute over the autonomous Nagorno‑Karabakh region escalated into an international violent conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan in the early 1990s. Following the end of a bloody war in 1994 (the First Karabakh War, 1992‑ 1994), a fragile situation around the conflict region took root: the “frozen conflict,” as it came to be known, lasted for nearly three decades and led to conditions of neither war nor peace. And during this period, it was feared that the longer the sides had to wait for a peace agreement to be reached, the more likely the conflict would re‑escalate and even­tually erupt again into a hot war. As it turned out, this is exactly what happened: an all‑out six‑week war erupted again unexpectedly between the conflict parties in late September 2020, and, as a result, the Armenian side more or less capitulated. But first things first: in the First Karabakh War, Azerbaijan suffered a major defeat, ceding to Armenian forces not only the secessionist region itself but also seven surrounding territo­ries. These other lands were, as a whole, twice the size of Nagorno‑ Karabakh itself and contained five times the old oblast’s population, the entirety of which was expelled by the time an armistice was signed in 1994. And that is why during this war the UN Security Council re­sponded by passing four resolutions demanding the withdrawal of Arme­nian forces from the occupied areas of Azerbaijan. However, the UN res­olutions failed to have any effect. Since that time, no international protagonists felt a strong, compelling need to try to resolve the Nagorno‑ Karabakh conflict. In addition, all in­ternational actors dismissed the idea of “power mediation.” Moreover, although Russia as a key international actor is directly involved in all the conflicts on the territory of the former Soviet Union, its involvement in the Nagorno‑Karabakh dispute has been rather indirect: in the Karabakh case, Moscow has been both a critical and a questionable actor. On the one hand, the Kremlin has taken a central position in me­diating a peaceful settlement to the conflict while, on the other hand, it has been delivering weapons to both sides. This last represents perhaps the most striking situation regarding the international dimension of the con­flict. Russia is militarily allied with Armenia and has a military presence in the country. It has provided secu­rity guarantees to Yerevan, primarily through their shared membership in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), which neu­tralized to a certain extent the poten­tial effects of Russian arms being sold to financially strong Azerbaijan on a purely commercial basis.
Topic:
Security, War, Conflict, and Peace
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan

25. After the Karabakh War: Key Issues of Politics and Security

Author:
Aleksandre Kvakhadze
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
As a result of the 40-day war between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan established control over certain areas of the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region and seven adjacent districts. In particular, after this war, the jurisdiction of Azerbaijan fully extends to the districts of Jabrail, Fizuli, Zangilan, Qubadli, Aghdam, and Kalbajar, while control over the Lachin district is only partial, excluding the highway connecting Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh, the so called Lachin corridor. Azerbaijan also controls most of the Hadrut and Shusha districts, and a small part of the Martuni and Askeran districts. According to the ceasefire agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Azerbaijani cargo will be able to enter Nakhchivan through the Armenian territory, while Armenia will be supplied from Russia via Azerbaijan. After the end of hostilities between the parties, the processes in the region continue to develop dynamically. Tensions have been mounting along the Armenian-Azerbaijani state border since May 2021, in particular in the vicinity of the Black Lake. In the following publication, we review the new political status-quo in the region and the Azerbaijani initiatives in the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh.
Topic:
Security, Politics, Treaties and Agreements, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Eurasia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Nagorno-Karabakh

26. The Regional Security Dynamics of the South Caucasus After the 2020 Karabakh War

Author:
Benyamin Poghosyan
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
The 2020 Karabakh war has significantly shifted the geopolitics of the South Caucasus. Armenia suffered a tough defeat while the non-recognized Republic of Artsakh (Republic of Nagorno Karabakh) lost almost 80 percent of its territories. Azerbaijan won a decisive victory and took not only territories outside of the former Nagorno Karabakh Autonomous Region (NKAR) but 30 percent of NKAR itself. The November 10 trilateral statement signed by Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia not only stopped the war in Karabakh but ushered in a new era in regional geopolitics.1 The key features of the new status quo are the increased role of Russia and Turkey and the significant reduction of Western involvement. However, the South Caucasus is far away from stability and, most probably, volatility will continue. We will seek to analyze the main interests of the key regional and external players and what may play out in a short/mid-term perspective.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, War, Geopolitics, Political stability, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Russia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Nagorno-Karabakh

27. Iran’s Intimidation of Azerbaijan Must Be Answered

Author:
Eran Lerman
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
The way Tehran uses military intimidation, as well as terror by proxy and other means of threatening regional players, must become a factor in the formulation of Western policy towards Iran in this decisive period.
Topic:
Regional Cooperation, Terrorism, Military Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, and Azerbaijan

28. The Human Rights Situation in the Nagorno-karabakh Conflict: A Synopsis from the Un Protection Mechanisms/La situación de los derechos humanos en el conflicto de Nagorno-Karabaj. Una visión desde los mecanismos de protección de Naciones Unidas

Author:
Dorothy Estrada Tanck
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:
Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:
The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh has deep historical roots and has been exacerbated by the armed conflict of 2020. In this context, the human rights situation of those affected, and especially of women and girls, is often left invisible. Thus, this article analyses the conflict by referring to the general position of the UN and public international law and by widening the lens, in particular, on international human rights law and the UN mechanisms articulated for the protection of those rights. A distinct focus on the human rights of women and girls is presented, giving an account of the empirical situations they face, to then study them through the lens of human rights with a gender perspective, emphasizing what the main international protection mechanisms dedicated to the issue have expressed in this regard./El conflicto entre Armenia y Azerbaiyán sobre el Nagorno-Karabaj presenta hondas raíces históricas y se ha visto exacerbado por el conflicto armado de 2020. En este contexto, a menudo la situación de los derechos humanos de las personas afectadas y, en particular, los de las mujeres y niñas, queda invisibilizada. Así, este artículo analiza el conflicto refiriendo la postura general de la ONU y el Derecho Internacional Público y ampliando el lente, en especial, sobre el Derecho internacional de los derechos humanos y los mecanismos de Naciones Unidas articulados para su protección. Se presenta un enfoque específico sobre los derechos humanos de las mujeres y niñas, dando cuenta de las situaciones empíricas que enfrentan, para estudiarlas después bajo la mirada de los derechos humanos con una perspectiva de género, poniendo énfasis en lo que al respecto han manifestado los principales mecanismos de protección internacional dedicados al tema.
Topic:
Human Rights, United Nations, Women, Conflict, and Girls
Political Geography:
Caucasus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Nagorno-Karabakh

29. The European Union and the Nagorno-Karabaj conflict/La Unión Europea y el Conflicto de Nagorno-Karabaj

Author:
Juan Jorge Piernas López
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:
Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:
The purpose of this article is to analyse the European Union's policies and activities in relation to the Armenia-Azerbaijan Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. To this end, the article first describes the broad outline of the conflict. Secondly, the article analyzes the role of the European Union in the conflict and the policies and measures it proposes for its resolution within the framework of the Neighborhood Policy and the Eastern Partnership the Union maintains with the two States involved in the conflict, Finally, the article concludes with a series of considerations highlighting the role that the EU can play in the future in relation to this conflict./El presente artículo tiene por objeto analizar la actuación de la Unión Europea en relación con el conflicto entre Armenia y Azerbaiyán sobre Nagorno-Karabaj. Con este fin, el trabajo describe, en primer lugar, la evolución a grandes rasgos del conflicto. En segundo lugar, el artículo analiza el papel de la Unión Europea en el conflicto y las medidas que propone para contribuir a su resolución en el marco de la relación que la Unión mantiene con los dos Estados implicados en el mismo, con los que colabora a través de la Política de Vecindad y la Asociación Oriental. Finalmente, el trabajo presenta una serie de consideraciones a modo de conclusión en las que se destaca el papel que la Unión Europea puede desempeñar en el futuro en relación con este conflicto.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, European Union, Partnerships, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Europe, Caucasus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Nagorno-Karabakh

30. Spring 2021 edition of Contemporary Eurasia

Author:
Vahram Ter-Matevosyan
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Contemporary Eurasia
Institution:
Institute of Oriental Studies, National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia
Abstract:
CONTENTS ANI MATEVOSYAN EXAMINING STATE-BUILDING OF THE SYRIAN REPUBLIC AND THE LEGACY OF ITS COLONIAL PAST ..................................................................... 5 JINGXIN PU NEW INSPIRATION FROM CHINA'S PHILOSOPHY OF "UNITY OF MAN AND HEAVEN": CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS UNDER THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ................................................................. 21 GARNIK DAVTYAN THE INFLUENCE OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE ELECTORAL CODE OF AZERBAIJAN ON THE OPPOSITION PARTIES ............................. 34 MARI AVETISYAN THE IMPACT OF THE CYPRUS CONFLICT ON TURKEY'S EU ACCESSION PROCESS ........................................................................................ 48 AUTHORS LIST .................................................................................................... 62 ANNEX .................................................................................................................. 63
Topic:
Military Affairs, Conflict, State Building, Political Parties, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
China, Eurasia, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Syria