A NOT SO ‘FROZEN’ CONFLICT IN THE SOUTH CAUCASUS
Russia Today
Aug 8 2014
Published time: August 08, 2014 15:57
Vahan Dilanyan and Vilen Khlgatyan for RT
As the world is preoccupied with the events unfolding in Gaza and
eastern Ukraine, another zone of conflict has flared up in the South
Caucasus.
The military attacks of the Azerbaijani army intensified in mid-July
straining the status quo on the Line of Contact (LoC) between Artsakh
(Nagorno-Karabkah Republic) and Azerbaijan as well as along the
Azerbaijan-Armenia border.
Between July 28 and August 2, five Artsakhi and twenty-five Azerbaijani
soldiers were killed as a result of these actions. The numbers of
dead are higher than all of last year’s deaths.
While both states were quick to blame one another, the fact
remains that only Azerbaijan has repeatedly stated its intentions
to restart the war in order to conquer Artsakh and force its freedom
loving people to live under the Ilham Aliyev tyrannical regime. Only
Azerbaijan has consistently portrayed Armenians as the evil ‘other,’
and only Azerbaijan has regularly refused to ease tensions on the
LoC via confidence building measures such as removing snipers, or at
the very least agreeing not to fire upon civilians farming near the
border regions.
The high numbers of casualties among Azerbaijani soldiers suggest
that they are the attacking side. Moreover, a defending side cannot
leave armaments and equipment on the other side’s territory.
The Azerbaijani policy of firing at the peaceful population living in
Armenian border villages, as well as medical vehicles with the symbol
of the International Red Cross, cynically violates core humanitarian
principles, affirmed in the Geneva Conventions. Baku also sponsors
and utilizes human resources to conduct sabotage and subversive acts
within Armenia and Artsakh.
Such a move could accelerate the growth of terrorism in Azerbaijan,
where the irrational facets of the hatred culture serve as a basis
for the development of a pathological cruelty that is at the root of
terrorism. Stemming from low socio-economic conditions and homelessness
in many regions of the country, Azerbaijanis are an easy target for
recruiters of terrorist and radical extremist groups.
Experience shows that there is an active link between terrorist
attacks and a conflict zone, with the latter serving as a fertile
soil for conducting such attacks. The large number of Azerbaijani
nationals engaged in terrorist activities in Chechnya, Afghanistan,
Pakistan, Syria, and recently Iraq, alongside the Islamic State
(formerly known as ISIS) reaffirms this notion.
The recent inhuman behavior by Azerbaijani saboteurs as part of an
intelligence-diversion activity in Artsakh’s Shahumyan district,
resulted in the callous killing of a 17 year old Armenian. This
is yet another example of the kill-mania of Aliyev’s regime and the
terroristic essence of the Azerbaijani party. An earlier expression of
this was the hero’s welcome given to Azerbaijani officer and convicted
axe murderer, Ramil Safarov, who, during a NATO training seminar,
hacked to death a sleeping soldier with an axe solely because he
was Armenian.
Encouraging further aggression
Meanwhile, the OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairmen states (US, France,
Russia) were quick to resort to their usual script of telling all
sides to respect the ceasefire, refrain from violence, and look for
a peaceful political solution.
Infographics from emedia.am / Sedrak Lazarian
What this policy of false parity generates is a sense of impunity for
the Azerbaijani regime to continue to raise tensions, threaten war,
and stigmatize Armenians in the eyes of their citizens, in other words,
the exact opposite of what the Co-chairmen states desire.
The OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmanship also lacks (thus should be
granted) a mandate to conduct investigations of incidents in the
conflict zone, and requires more resources to prevent and condemn
such aggressive acts.
Additionally, the so-called Madrid principles of conflict settlement
proposed by the mediators, which have been serving as a factor ensuring
relative stability in the region, are much more unrealistic in light
of Azerbaijani behavior both internally and externally.
The recent spate of attacks coincides with Baku’s crackdown on civil
society and democracy activists. Most recently Arif and Leyla Yunus,
and Rasul Jafarov were arrested on trumped up charges of tax evasion
and treason.
Official Baku aims to channel the unhappiness of its citizens away from
its inept and corrupt rule toward the external enemy by escalating
tensions against Armenia and Artsakh. Other than mild criticism from
the OSCE, and the US State Department, no pressure has been brought
to bear on Aliyev’s regime for its increased authoritarianism.
The reasons are obvious enough: the West needs Azerbaijan as part
of its wider plan to weaken Russia’s stranglehold on energy supplies
to the EU, and fears that any criticism will drive Aliyev to seek a
partnership with Russia instead.
The planned withdrawal from Afghanistan also requires Azerbaijani
support, since some NATO equipment will require transit through
Azerbaijan.
Moreover, since the West knows it has no chance of prying Armenia
away from its alliance with Russia, it is not willing to expend much
if any of its political capital to force Azerbaijan to behave.
After all, the West prefers Azerbaijan’s hydrocarbons to anything
Armenia may have to offer them.
The aforementioned resulted in the inclusion of Azerbaijan along with
several other countries in a new US Senate bill called the “Russian
Aggression Prevention Act” aimed at “preventing further Russian
aggression toward Ukraine and other sovereign states in Europe and
Eurasia, and for other purposes.”
If enacted the bill authorizes substantial increase of
“military-to-military interactions” of the US armed forces with the
ones of Azerbaijan “including specifically increasing the current tempo
of military exercises and training efforts and exchanges” as well as
“strengthening existing, bilateral and multilateral defense cooperation
agreements including agreements related to cyber defense cooperation.”
The irony here is that the bill would encourage Azerbaijan to
continue its aggressive policies, since it is the most militarized
and warmongering party in the region, and the primary obstacle to
the creation of regional security architecture.
>From the other side, Russia, which is preoccupied with its internal
economic situation due to Western sanctions, and the civil war in
Ukraine, might be loath to see another conflict flare up so close
to its borders. Although there is a possibility of the Kremlin
stimulating these tensions in order to find a pretext to station its
‘peacekeepers’ in the area, officials in Yerevan and Stepanakert have
repeatedly and categorically eschewed such a prospect.
Hence, at the end of this week, Sargsyan and Aliyev will meet Putin
in Sochi. Although Moscow aims to control a region of its so-called
“exclusive zone of interests” with only one meeting, nothing of
substance for conflict resolution will come out of the Sochi talks.
However, President Sargsyan must use the occasion to bring up the topic
of Azerbaijan’s militarization with a strong notice of criticism toward
Russia’s willingness to sell billions of dollars in armaments to Baku,
and how this is directly contributing to a rise in bloodshed.
Therefore Sargsyan ought to press for a halt in sales of weaponry
to Azerbaijan.
Nevertheless, tensions will remain high along the LoC with further
escalations and incidents initiated by the Azerbaijani side. If things
continue as they have, it is only a matter of time before one side
miscalculates, likely Azerbaijan, and ignites a new round of war.
Even if a rational war is not predicted, an adventurous one
is likely. The situation could get out of hand as a result of
misinformation stimulating policymakers within the Baku regime to
remain belligerent and escalate the conflict.
Due to the effective and accurate policy of Armenia’s Ministry of
Defense, which is releasing cautionary statements, holding meetings
with foreign military attaches, ambassadors, and providing up-to-date
information on the developments along the LoC, an appropriate
information environment has been set for an Armenian counter-attack.
Thus, if Azerbaijan continues to keep tensions high, the Armenian
military response would be intense and unexpected.
In any scenario the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmen states, and other
interested actors, such as the UK will bear as much responsibility
as the instigating party. One cannot arm the aggressor on the one
hand and expect peace on the other.
Dr. Vahan Dilanyan is a recognized expert on regional security and
conflict resolution. He serves as the Chairman of the Political
Developments Research Center (PDRC), a think-tank based in Yerevan.
Vilen Khlgatyan specializes in integrated strategy and national
security with an emphasis in the geopolitics of energy. He is the
Vice Chairman of the PDRC.
http://rt.com/op-edge/179052-south-caucasus-conflict-azerbaijan/