Armenia Azerbaijan Conflict Over Nagorno Karabakh

The long-standing conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the Nagorno-Karabakh region has recently intensified. Nagorno-Karabakh, also known as Artsakh, is internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan, but the majority of the region is controlled by Armenian separatists. Historically, the territory has been part of Azerbaijan since the Soviet era. The population of Nagorno-Karabakh is primarily Armenian Christian, while Azerbaijan is a Muslim-majority country.

History and ethnicity are major factors fueling the conflict. Azerbaijan claims historical rule over the region, while Armenians claim it was part of an Armenian kingdom as far back as the fourth century BCE. The region's control has shifted across multiple dynasties, leading to a mix of ethnic communities. Peace talks have been ongoing since 1994, mediated by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk Group. The Minsk Group, chaired by France, Russia, and the US, is the only internationally agreed body mediating negotiations for a peaceful resolution.

Nagorno-Karabakh: A Crucible of Conflict in the Caucasus

The resurgence of the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over the Nagorno-Karabakh region is a stark reminder of the enduring power of historical grievances, ethnic tensions, and unresolved territorial disputes in shaping international relations. This conflict, rooted in the twilight years of the Soviet Union, continues to destabilize the South Caucasus, a strategically vital region bridging Europe and Asia. Understanding the complexities of this conflict requires a deep dive into its historical context, the key actors involved, the international frameworks attempting to manage it, and the broader implications for regional and global security.

The Nagorno-Karabakh region, also known as Artsakh by Armenians, is a landlocked territory situated within Azerbaijan. Its legal status under international law is unambiguous: it is recognized as part of Azerbaijan. However, the demographic reality on the ground presents a stark contrast. The majority of the region's population is Armenian, predominantly Christian, who have historically asserted their right to self-determination and sought either independence or unification with Armenia. This demographic composition, coupled with historical claims and counter-claims, has been the primary driver of the conflict.

Azerbaijan, a Muslim-majority country, vehemently asserts its sovereignty over Nagorno-Karabakh, viewing the Armenian presence as an occupation of its territory. This position is grounded in international law and the principle of territorial integrity. For Azerbaijan, regaining control over Nagorno-Karabakh is a matter of national pride and a strategic imperative.

The conflict's origins can be traced back to the Soviet era, specifically the late 1980s. As the Soviet Union began to weaken, nationalist movements gained momentum across its constituent republics. In Nagorno-Karabakh, the Armenian population began to openly demand unification with Armenia, triggering protests and clashes with the Azerbaijani authorities. In 1988, the regional Soviet of Nagorno-Karabakh voted to secede from Azerbaijan and join Armenia, a move that was vehemently opposed by Baku and ultimately rejected by Moscow.

This rejection marked a turning point, escalating tensions into a full-blown armed conflict. From 1988 to 1994, a brutal war raged between Armenian forces, including separatists from Nagorno-Karabakh and the Armenian military, and the Azerbaijani army. The war resulted in tens of thousands of casualties and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people, both Armenians and Azerbaijanis. By the time a ceasefire was reached in 1994, Armenian forces had established control over not only Nagorno-Karabakh but also several surrounding Azerbaijani territories, creating a buffer zone.

The 1994 ceasefire did not bring a lasting peace. The conflict remained frozen, with sporadic outbreaks of violence along the Line of Contact, the de facto border between Armenian-controlled territories and the rest of Azerbaijan. The absence of a comprehensive peace agreement meant that the underlying issues remained unresolved, creating a constant risk of renewed escalation.

The OSCE Minsk Group and the Search for a Peaceful Resolution

In the aftermath of the 1994 ceasefire, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) established the Minsk Group to mediate a peaceful resolution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The Minsk Group is co-chaired by France, Russia, and the United States, representing a consensus among major international powers on the need for a negotiated settlement.

The Minsk Group's mandate is to facilitate dialogue between Armenia and Azerbaijan, develop proposals for a peace agreement, and monitor the ceasefire. Over the years, the Minsk Group has presented various proposals, the most prominent being the Madrid Principles, first introduced in 2007.

The Madrid Principles outline a framework for a phased resolution of the conflict, based on the following key elements:

1. Return of territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijani control: This would involve the withdrawal of Armenian forces from the Azerbaijani territories occupied during the war, creating a demilitarized zone around Nagorno-Karabakh.

   Advertisement

2. Interim status for Nagorno-Karabakh providing guarantees for security and self-governance: During this interim period, the population of Nagorno-Karabakh would enjoy a degree of autonomy, with guarantees for their security and cultural rights.

3. A corridor linking Armenia to Nagorno-Karabakh: This corridor, often referred to as the Lachin Corridor, would ensure free movement between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

4. Future determination of the final legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh through a legally binding expression of will: This would involve a referendum or other form of popular consultation to determine the final status of Nagorno-Karabakh, allowing the population to decide whether they want independence, unification with Armenia, or remain part of Azerbaijan with a high degree of autonomy.

5. The right of all internally displaced persons and refugees to return to their former places of residence: This would address the humanitarian consequences of the conflict, allowing both Armenians and Azerbaijanis who were displaced during the war to return to their homes.

The Madrid Principles have been endorsed by both Armenia and Azerbaijan as a basis for negotiations, but significant disagreements remain on the details of their implementation. Azerbaijan insists on the unconditional return of all occupied territories, while Armenia emphasizes the need for security guarantees for the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh and the right to self-determination.

The Minsk Group's efforts have been hampered by several factors, including the lack of a strong enforcement mechanism to compel compliance with its proposals, the persistent mistrust between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and the involvement of external actors with competing interests. Despite these challenges, the Minsk Group remains the only internationally agreed body for mediating the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and its role is considered essential for preventing further escalation.

The Role of External Actors: Russia, Turkey, and the West

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is not simply a bilateral dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan. It is also a theater for regional and global power competition, with several external actors playing significant roles.

Russia: Russia has historically been the dominant power in the South Caucasus, and it maintains close ties with both Armenia and Azerbaijan. Russia is Armenia's main military ally, and it hosts a Russian military base in Armenia. Armenia is also a member of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), a Russia-led military alliance that provides collective defense to its members.

At the same time, Russia also maintains close economic and political ties with Azerbaijan, and it has supplied Azerbaijan with significant amounts of military equipment. Russia's policy towards the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is often described as "balancing," seeking to maintain its influence in the region without alienating either Armenia or Azerbaijan.

Russia's underlying interests in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict are to prevent further instability in the South Caucasus, maintain its role as a regional power broker, and prevent the expansion of Western influence in the region. Russia has repeatedly offered to mediate between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and it has played a key role in negotiating ceasefires and preventing further escalation.

Turkey: Turkey is a strong ally of Azerbaijan, based on shared Turkic heritage and close economic and political ties. Turkey has consistently supported Azerbaijan's position on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and it has condemned Armenia's occupation of Azerbaijani territories.

In recent years, Turkey has become increasingly assertive in the South Caucasus, seeking to expand its influence in the region. During the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, Turkey provided significant military support to Azerbaijan, including drones and other advanced weaponry.

Turkey's underlying interests in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict are to support its ally Azerbaijan, counter Russian influence in the South Caucasus, and promote its own regional ambitions. Turkey's involvement in the conflict has been a source of concern for Armenia and other regional actors, who fear that it could further destabilize the region.

The West: The United States and the European Union have also been involved in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, primarily through the OSCE Minsk Group. The US and the EU have called for a peaceful resolution to the conflict, based on the principles of territorial integrity, self-determination, and the non-use of force.

The West's underlying interests in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict are to promote stability in the South Caucasus, prevent further escalation of the conflict, and encourage democratic reforms in Armenia and Azerbaijan. The West has provided economic assistance to both Armenia and Azerbaijan, and it has supported the Minsk Group's efforts to mediate a peace agreement.

However, the West's influence in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is limited by its competing interests in the region and its reluctance to become directly involved in the conflict. The West's focus on other geopolitical priorities, such as the conflict in Ukraine and the rise of China, has also reduced its attention to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO): A Security Guarantee for Armenia?

The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) is a Russia-led military alliance that includes Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan. The CSTO's primary purpose is to provide collective defense to its member states against external aggression.

Under the CSTO treaty, an attack on one member state is considered an attack on all member states, and the other members are obligated to provide military assistance to the victim. Armenia's membership in the CSTO is often seen as a security guarantee against potential aggression from Azerbaijan or Turkey.

However, the CSTO's role in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is complex and controversial. The CSTO treaty only applies to external aggression against a member state's internationally recognized territory. Since Nagorno-Karabakh is internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan, the CSTO is not obligated to intervene in the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh.

During the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, Armenia appealed to the CSTO for assistance, but the CSTO declined to intervene, citing the fact that the fighting was taking place in Nagorno-Karabakh, not on Armenian territory. This decision was criticized by some in Armenia, who argued that the CSTO had failed to live up to its security obligations.

Despite its limitations, the CSTO remains an important factor in the security calculus of the South Caucasus. Armenia's membership in the CSTO provides a deterrent against potential aggression from Azerbaijan or Turkey, and it ensures that Armenia has access to Russian military assistance in the event of a major conflict.

Historical Precedents: Lessons from the Breakup of Yugoslavia

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict shares many similarities with other ethnic and territorial disputes that have emerged in the aftermath of the collapse of multinational states, such as the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s.

The breakup of Yugoslavia led to a series of bloody conflicts in the Balkans, as different ethnic groups fought for control over territory and self-determination. The conflicts in Bosnia, Croatia, and Kosovo were marked by ethnic cleansing, war crimes, and humanitarian disasters.

The international community's response to the conflicts in Yugoslavia was often slow and ineffective, and it took years of diplomatic efforts and military intervention to bring the conflicts to an end. The experience of the breakup of Yugoslavia provides several lessons for the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict:

1. Ethnic and territorial disputes can easily escalate into violent conflicts: The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, like the conflicts in Yugoslavia, is rooted in deep-seated ethnic and territorial grievances that can be easily exploited by nationalist politicians and warlords.

   Advertisement

2. The international community must act decisively to prevent escalation: The international community's slow response to the conflicts in Yugoslavia allowed the conflicts to escalate and spread, resulting in greater human suffering and instability.

3. A lasting peace requires addressing the underlying causes of the conflict: The peace agreements that ended the conflicts in Yugoslavia were successful because they addressed the underlying causes of the conflict, including ethnic tensions, territorial disputes, and political grievances.

4. The involvement of external actors can complicate the conflict: The involvement of external actors, such as Russia, Turkey, and the West, in the conflicts in Yugoslavia often exacerbated the conflicts and made it more difficult to reach a peaceful resolution.

The experience of the breakup of Yugoslavia underscores the importance of addressing the underlying causes of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and preventing further escalation. It also highlights the need for a coordinated international effort to promote a peaceful and lasting resolution to the conflict.

Stakeholder Positions: Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Russia

Understanding the positions of the key stakeholders is crucial for comprehending the dynamics of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Armenia: Armenia's official position is that it supports the self-determination of the Armenian population in Nagorno-Karabakh. Armenia argues that the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh has the right to decide its own future, including the right to independence or unification with Armenia.

Armenia's underlying interests in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict are to protect the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh, maintain its influence in the region, and prevent Azerbaijan from regaining control over Nagorno-Karabakh.

Armenia has provided military and economic support to the Armenian separatists in Nagorno-Karabakh, and it has consistently opposed Azerbaijan's efforts to regain control over the region. Armenia has also sought to internationalize the conflict, arguing that it is a matter of human rights and self-determination.

Azerbaijan: Azerbaijan's official position is that it claims sovereignty over Nagorno-Karabakh and demands the withdrawal of Armenian forces from the region. Azerbaijan argues that Nagorno-Karabakh is an integral part of Azerbaijan, and that the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh does not have the right to self-determination.

Azerbaijan's underlying interests in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict are to restore its territorial integrity, regain control over Nagorno-Karabakh, and assert its sovereignty over the region.

Azerbaijan has launched military operations to regain control over Nagorno-Karabakh, and it has pursued diplomatic efforts to isolate Armenia and garner international support for its position. Azerbaijan has also invested heavily in its military, seeking to acquire the military capabilities necessary to retake Nagorno-Karabakh by force.

Russia: Russia's official position is that it seeks a peaceful resolution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and maintains close ties with both Armenia and Azerbaijan. Russia argues that the conflict can only be resolved through negotiations and compromise, and that the use of force is unacceptable.

Russia's underlying interests in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict are to maintain its influence in the South Caucasus, prevent further instability in the region, and prevent the expansion of Western influence.

Russia has mediated peace talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and it has provided military support to Armenia through the CSTO. Russia has also sold military equipment to both Armenia and Azerbaijan, seeking to maintain its role as a major arms supplier in the region.

Broader Implications: Political, Diplomatic, Legal, Security, Humanitarian, and Economic

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has broad implications for regional and international affairs.

Political: The conflict has increased regional instability and created a potential for further escalation. The unresolved territorial dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan has fueled nationalist sentiments and undermined trust between the two countries. The conflict has also created a political divide within Armenia, with some advocating for a more aggressive stance towards Azerbaijan and others calling for a peaceful resolution.

Diplomatic: The conflict has strained relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan, as well as between regional powers. The conflict has complicated Russia's relations with both Armenia and Azerbaijan, as Russia seeks to maintain its influence in the region without alienating either country. The conflict has also created tensions between Russia and Turkey, as Turkey has strongly supported Azerbaijan's position.

Legal: The conflict raises questions of international law regarding self-determination and territorial integrity. Armenia argues that the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh has the right to self-determination, while Azerbaijan argues that it has the right to territorial integrity. International law does not provide a clear answer to this conflict, as both principles are recognized under international law.

Security: The conflict poses a risk of armed conflict and the potential for involvement of external actors. The unresolved territorial dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan has created a constant risk of renewed fighting, which could draw in regional powers such as Russia and Turkey. The conflict has also created a security dilemma for Armenia, which feels threatened by Azerbaijan's military buildup.

Humanitarian: The conflict has resulted in the displacement of populations and human rights concerns. The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan in the 1990s resulted in the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people, both Armenians and Azerbaijanis. The conflict has also raised concerns about human rights abuses, including allegations of war crimes and ethnic cleansing.

Economic: The conflict has disrupted trade and investment in the region. The unresolved territorial dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan has created uncertainty and discouraged investment in the region. The conflict has also disrupted trade routes and hampered economic development.

Connections and Context: Related Issues, Historical Connections, and Future Outlook

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is connected to several broader issues and historical events.

Related Ongoing Issues: The Russia-Ukraine conflict has had a significant impact on regional security dynamics. The conflict has diverted Russia's attention and resources away from the South Caucasus, creating a power vacuum that Turkey has sought to fill. The conflict has also increased tensions between Russia and the West, further complicating the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Geopolitical competition between Russia, Turkey, and the West in the South Caucasus is another related issue. The South Caucasus is a strategically important region that is located at the crossroads of Europe and Asia. Russia, Turkey, and the West are all vying for influence in the region, and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is one of the arenas in which this competition is playing out.

Historical Connections: The collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of independent states with unresolved territorial disputes is a key historical connection. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is one of several territorial disputes that emerged in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union. These disputes have been a source of instability and conflict in the region ever since.

The Armenian genocide and its impact on Armenian national identity and relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan is another important historical connection. The Armenian genocide, which took place in the Ottoman Empire during World War I, has had a profound impact on Armenian national identity and relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan. Armenians view the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict as part of a larger struggle for survival and self-determination.

Future Outlook: The future outlook for the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is uncertain. Continued tensions and the potential for renewed conflict remain a significant concern. Unless a comprehensive peace agreement is reached, the conflict is likely to continue to fester, with sporadic outbreaks of violence.

The role of external actors, particularly Russia and Turkey, will be crucial in shaping the future of the region. Russia and Turkey have competing interests in the South Caucasus, and their actions will have a significant impact on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. If Russia and Turkey can find a way to cooperate, they could help to promote a peaceful resolution to the conflict. However, if they continue to compete for influence, the conflict is likely to persist. The way forward for the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict requires a multi-faceted approach that addresses the underlying causes of the conflict, promotes dialogue and cooperation between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and involves the active participation of external actors. A comprehensive peace agreement that guarantees the security and rights of all people in the region is essential for achieving a lasting peace.