EuarasiaNet Organization
April 15 2005
IRRECONCILABLE MOOD HOVERS OVER NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT ZONE
Daniel Gerstle 4/15/05
Armenian and Azerbaijani diplomats, along with the OSCE Minsk Group
co-chairs, gathered in London on April 15 to probe for a breakthrough
in the stalemated Nagorno-Karabakh peace talks. A recent visit to the
conflict zone in an around Karabakh indicated that even if officials
make progress towards a negotiated settlement, selling any peace deal
to local inhabitants and soldiers on both sides could prove
difficult.
The London gathering on Karabakh sought to advance new peace
proposals prepared by the Minsk Group, which comprises
representatives from the United States, Russia and France, and is
charged with overseeing the peace process. [For background see the
Eurasia Insight archive]. Discussions reportedly focused on laying
the groundwork for a meeting of the Armenian and Azerbaijani
presidents, envisioned for May. [For background see the Eurasia
Insight archive]. Prior to the meeting, the Minsk group co-chairs
issued a statement that urged Armenia and Azerbaijan to show greater
restraint. It specifically warned that a recent increase in armed
clashes along the “contact line” were “causing needless loss of life
and jeopardizing the cease-fire.”
The statement went on to criticize recent comments made by officials
about the possible resumption of full-scale armed operations. Both
Armenia and Azerbaijan should “recognize that a renewal of
hostilities cannot provide a lasting solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict, but would be disastrous for the population of both
countries, resulting in loss of life, more destruction, additional
refugees and displaced persons, and enormous financial costs.”
The mood among those in the conflict zone remains hostile, indicating
that both Armenians and Azerbaijanis are not yet able to move on. For
many, it is as if the horrors of the conflict’s deadliest phase
occurred yesterday — and not over a decade ago.
Armin and Savash are gentle teenagers with dark innocent eyes. Had
they not worn camouflage fatigues, it would have been easy to mistake
them for high school students. In fact, they are soldiers in the
Nagorno-Karabakh Defense Army — the ethnic Armenian force that
secured the enclave’s de facto independence during fighting from
1992-94.
Armin and Savash, both 19, have lived most of their lives on a
war-footing, identifying Azeris only as the enemy. During a recent
interview in Stepanakert, the Karabakh capital, both said that they
could not recall ever having had a conversation with an Azeri. And
neither seemed curious to do so. “What is there to talk about with
people like that?” said Savash, referring to Azeris.
The armed conflict displaced hundreds of thousands of Armenians and
Azeris, and finding a formula for the return of the dispossessed is a
major dilemma for peace negotiators. When asked if they could ever
envision a day when Azeris could return to territory currently
occupied by Armenian military units, both Armin and Savash seemed
skeptical. Like many soldiers and veterans interviewed on both sides
of the Karabakh front-line, Armin chose not to answer my question
about returns directly. Instead, he focused on perceived grievances
against the Azerbaijani military’s behavior during the conflict.
“The Azerbaijanis bombed the city from Shusha,” Armin urged, pointing
toward a town on a nearby hill. “They destroyed the whole town
[Stepanakert]. All of Azatamartikneri Street was leveled, but we
rebuilt it. People had to hide from the bombs in the basement without
heat or light.”
“We can’t live with them, and we can’t mix with them either because
the Armenians are at threat of disappearing,” Armin said. “We have to
protect our culture and our land.”
Karabakh is equally dear to most Azeris, so much so that an
increasing number seem to be growing tired of the prolonged stalemate
in negotiations, and appears willing to again resort to force. Those
Azeris agitating for a new military campaign tend to look past the
fact that Armenian forces routed the Azerbaijani military in the
early 1990s.
Fikrat, a mustachioed man with cool blue eyes, served in the
Azerbaijani military in 1992 when its fighting capability collapsed,
in part due to political turmoil in Baku. He recalled that an
Armenian offensive quickly drove Azerbaijani forces out of Karabakh,
adding that at one point the front line ran near his home village
Mahmudlu. As artillery shells fell on a house nearby, Fikrat’s family
fled eastward. The mental scars from the experience still seem fresh,
as Fikrat’s voice filled with bitterness as he spoke. “The Armenians
had planes and heavy weapons when we only had rifles. When the line
broke, we were told to go home to guard our villages,” he said.
Fikrat’s brother Heidar now serves as an officer in the Azerbaijani
Army in the border town of Qazakh where 2004 violence left at least
one Armenian officer dead. Declining to comment candidly while in
uniform, Heidar simply echoed the widely held view that a peaceful
resolution with Karabakh Armenian rebels would be nice, but that the
use of force could be justified in an attempt to restore Azerbaijani
authority in Karabakh. On the return of ethnic Armenians to areas of
Azerbaijan, both Fikrat and Heidar would not give a clear answer.
In and around Khojali — where Armenian forces reportedly massacred
hundreds of Azeri civilians in February, 1992 – the scene remains one
of desolation, with no buildings remaining intact. “Azerbaijanis
can’t return,” Gagik, a weary Karabakh veteran, told me. “Why do you
think they’d want to? There’s nothing here for them.”
Editor’s Note: Daniel J Gerstle was a 2004 Summer Research Fellow for
Columbia University’s Center for International Conflict Resolution
covering the Caucasus and Central Asia.