In Berdashen, eastern Nagorno-Karabakh, the ceasefire line between Azerbaijani and Armenian forces has come to a standstill 50 metres from a pomegranate field. The new border was fixed by the end of hostilities agreement signed on 9 November. With no apparent problems on this long empty plain, agricultural work continues.
The Russia brokered peace deal on November 10 has provided the much-needed respite in Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh area. A few weeks earlier, the US also brokered truce but it was too short-lived as it was widely believed that the US efforts were more aimed at garnering the support of the sizeable Armenian population in the US, for the US elections, rather than for a lasting solution. Such occasional cosmetic approach may not bring lasting peace in the region unless sustained efforts are made to address the root cause of the problem by bringing all three parties to the negotiating table.
The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh area has been dominated by sporadic border skirmishes, occasional flare-ups and full-scale war for the last three decades. Recently, the role played by external actors like Turkey, Russia, Israel and Pakistan, acquiring of sophisticated weaponry including Israeli drones and Turkish drones by Azerbaijan, internal pressures within the States, pushed the conflict to a large-scale battle, necessitating appeals from United Nations and other countries, to end hostilities and maintain peace.
However, these appeals did not yield any tangible results as both Armenia and Azerbaijan pledged to continue fighting and further escalated tensions by switching from cross border shelling to using long-range artillery.
Is the conflict due to ethnic, religious and cultural reasons? With its 97% Christian population and Christianity as the state religion, Armenia is considered a Christian state, whereas even with more than 90% Muslim population, mainly Shias, Azerbaijan is considered a secular state in the Muslim world.
Principles of territorial integrity and self-determination have dominated the conflict for the last three decades. But what pushed the dormant dispute to such a serious level? A brief history of the conflict and the changed geopolitical scenario in the region would provide some answers.
When the Red Army conquered the Caucasus in the early 1920s, former Soviet leader Joseph Stalin placed the Nagorno-Karabakh area into Azerbaijan but 90% of the population in that area were Armenians. Since then, the area remained a bone of contention between the Christian majority Armenia and Muslim majority Azerbaijan.
The Armenians living in 4,400 sq km area of Nagorno-Karabakh had declared independence in 1991 and some of them even turned to guerilla warfare. The Azerbaijan government sent security forces to suppress Armenian militants without much success. Nagorno-Karabakh soon declared that it was joining Armenia by its own will but Azerbaijan objected. The Azerbaijan government insists that Nagorno-Karabakh cannot be independent and is part of Azerbaijan province as recognised by the international community.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh, popularly known as Karabakhi fighters, aided and abetted by Armenian regular troops and Russian advisers, fought fierce battles with Azerbaijan for four years from 1991 to 1994. Karabakhis not only retained control over the 4,400 sq km area of Nagorno-Karabakh but also seized adjoining seven districts territory comprising 7,000 sq km.
The international community is concerned as the breaking of large scale fight will trigger civil unrest, leading to a humanitarian crisis, internally displaced persons, outflows of refugees, etc, which will also affect neighbouring States besides adversely affecting their economies. Azerbaijan is the main supplier of energy resources to neighbouring States and Europe, and intense fighting could disrupt energy transportation network. Moreover, Azerbaijan falls in the international North-South transport corridor route connecting India with Russia through Central Asia.
The fluctuation in oil prices, coupled with the Covid pandemic, adversely affected economies of both States. It was suspected that Azerbaijan authorities were trying to divert public attention from a declining economy and other governance issues by escalating conflict with Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia authorities by arousing nationalism. Similarly, the economy of Armenia is no better, and yet massive protests were organised in Armenia on the soft handling of the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh. These internal pressures prompted both States to maintain a tough public stand.
With revenues from rich oil resources, Azerbaijan has acquired air defence systems, drones from Israel and Turkey, Russian surface-to-air missiles and other advanced weaponry. In spite of its limited spending power, Armenia has also acquired heavy weapons and sophisticated missile systems from Russia. Russia is committed to defending Armenia, Turkey is committed to protecting Azerbaijan, Iran has a border with both countries and has a sizeable Azeri population.
In November, Azerbaijan, with its newly acquired sophisticated weaponry, particularly Israeli and Turkish drones and support from external actors, finally took control of the land surrounding villages of Nagorno-Karabakh, previously occupied by Armenian forces. It is widely believed that fielding of armed Israeli and Turkey drones by Azerbaijan in the latest fighting tilted the scales of victory in its favour.
The November 10 peace deal differed from the three previous ceasefire agreements, as it provided for the deployment of peacekeepers from Russia and Turkey. The deployment of peacekeepers in the conflict zone will not only keep the warring factions at bay but also have a sobering effect as it will prevent further escalation. In general, the peace deal has been interpreted as a sort of victory to Azerbaijan and defeat to Armenia. This is evident from the victory celebrations in Azerbaijan and internal turmoil in Armenia that erupted after signing of the peace deal. However, the deal has provided new hope for de-escalation of tensions in the region.
India, rightly, maintains a balanced approach by maintaining relations with both States. Due to the support extended by Armenia to India’s stand on Kashmir issue and other historical reasons, India maintains strong relations with Armenia. In fact, India signed a friendship and cooperation treaty with Armenia in 1995. So far as Azerbaijan is concerned, the ONGC made small investments in Azeri oil project and GAIL is exploring the possible cooperation in LNG. Ultimately, it is diplomacy and not military, which can pave the way for a lasting solution to the conflict.
(The author is IPS (Retd) and former Chief Security Adviser, United Nations)
Central Asian Turkish republics celebrated the liberation of Azerbaijan’s Nagorno-Karabakh region after almost 30 years of Armenian occupation. As Daily Sabah reports, an Uzbek political expert, Abduvali Saybnazarov, told Anadolu Agency (AA) that Azerbaijan’s 44-day-long military operation resulted in victory and that Shusha, which he said had been the cradle of Azerbaijani civilization, was liberated. He said 1 million Azerbaijani citizens could now return to their ancestral homes from which they were displaced between 1988 and 1994.
Underlining the significance of Turkey’s support in Azerbaijan’s victory, Saybnazarov said the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk Group “only negotiated to fulfill its duties and did not fulfill the demands of Baku.”
The Minsk Group, co-chaired by France, Russia and the U.S., was formed in 1992 to find a peaceful solution to the conflict between Baku and Yerevan over the occupied Nagorno-Karabakh region; however, for years it has been unable to provide a solution.
Saybnazarov underlined that Azerbaijan is a brotherly country to Uzbekistan and that Tashkent wanted the conflict to be resolved with respect to Baku’s territorial integrity and sovereignty since the beginning.
He also added that Turkish and Russian peacekeeping forces will serve to hinder bloodshed and provocations in the region.
Fresh clashes erupted on Sept. 27 and continued for 44 days, throughout which Baku liberated several cities and nearly 300 of its settlements and villages from the Armenian occupation.
On Nov. 10, the two countries signed a Russia-brokered deal to end fighting and work toward a comprehensive solution.
The Turkish Parliament last week approved the deployment of troops to Azerbaijan for a peacekeeping mission to monitor the cease-fire deal that aims to end the conflict.
The mandate will allow Turkish troops to be stationed at a peacekeeping center for one year as part of an accord between Ankara and Moscow to monitor the implementation of the cease-fire, which locked in territorial gains by Azerbaijan.
Kazakhstan also welcomed the liberation of the Nagorno-Karabakh region, Kazakh media representatives told AA. Serik Malayev, the chief editor of a Kazakh news website, stated that Azerbaijan’s only option for a solution was the use of military means after the failure of the Minsk Group for years.
“We must not forget that we are brothers. The people of Kazakhstan have supported Azerbaijan in its rightful case,” Malayev said.
Abai.kz news portal chief editor Nurgeldi Abdiganiuli also voiced support for the country, saying that several correspondents were sent to the region to provide better coverage of the conflict.
Saying that Nagorno-Karabakh is reflected in the names of places and historical and cultural structures, Abdiganiuli added that Azerbaijan has taken back its own lands.
Deputy Chairperson of the Free Kyrgyzstan Party Aydar Halikov also hailed Azerbaijan’s victory, saying that Bishkek enjoys brotherly relations with Baku. He added that the view of Central Asian leaders on cooperation and brotherhood between countries has changed for the better as well.
MOSCOW (Sputnik) – Medical specialists of the Russian Eastern Military District have started to arrive in Nagorno-Karabakh, more than 60 Russian medics are now present in Stepanakert, the Russian Defence Ministry says.
“The first units of the special medical forces detachment of the Eastern Military District have arrived in the capital of Nagorno-Karabakh, Stepanakert, to provide assistance to the local population,” the ministry said in a statement.
According to the release, the first unit consists of over 60 military surgeons, anesthesiologists-resuscitators, therapists and epidemiologists.
Il-76 airlifters are being used to bring Russian medical specialists to Nagorno-Karabakh, according to the Russian Defence Ministry.
On Wednesday, the Russian Defence Ministry said that Russian military medical specialists were heading from the Far East to Nagorno-Karabakh to provide assistance to the local population.
On Thursday, an additional team of Russian emergency workers, including rescuers and specialists from the Russian Energy Ministry, arrived in Stepanakert to help local residents.
Earlier this week, Russian military engineers arrived in Nagorno-Karabakh to assist with mine clearance in the regions that have been most affected by the recent hostilities.
Earlier this month, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and the president of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, signed a joint statement on the cessation of hostilities in Nagorno-Karabakh. The ceasefire agreement paved the way for the deployment of Russian peacekeepers to the region.
The decades-old conflict escalated into large-scale fighting on 27 September, when Armenia and Azerbaijan accused each other of launching artillery, missile, and air strikes in Nagorno-Karabakh, an Armenian-majority region, where tensions have persisted since 1988 and finally led to the region declaring independence from Azerbaijan amid the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991.
MOSCOW
Armenia’s president said Sunday that the government should resign, new elections should be held within a year at the latest and an interim government of national accord should be formed, preferably a technocratic one.
Armen Sarkissian also criticized the Armenian government during his meeting with representatives of the Armenian community in Russia.
He described Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s signing of a cease-fire agreement with Azerbaijan on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue and the withdrawal of Armenians from Karabakh as a “great tragedy.”
“There is a solution in any country where such a great tragedy has occurred. The government that led to this has to go,” he said.
He pointed out that the situation in Armenia was very different from two years ago when elections were held and proposed the establishment of a provisional national unity government and early elections.
Suggesting that a technocratic government be established on which all parties will agree, Sarkissian said this government could work for six months or a one-year period and lead the country to early elections.
– Referendum on Constitutional amendment
Sargsyan also said that a constitutional referendum needed to be organized before the new elections to amend the constitution.
Claiming that the president or the prime minister should not make important decisions for the country alone in Armenia, Sarkissian said “the Constitution is not balanced at all in our country. There should be a balance between the Parliament, the government and the Presidency.”
He also emphasized that the country’s president should be elected by popular vote, not by the parliament as it is now.
In 2018, Pashinyan rose to prominence as the leader of widespread demonstrations across the country against the political establishment, demanding a more democratic Armenia and an end to corruption.
He was elected prime minister by the parliament after the bloc he led received 70.4% of the vote in elections held in December 2018.
– What happened in Karabakh?
Relations between the former Soviet republics of Azerbaijan and Armenia have been tense since 1991, when the Armenian military occupied Nagorno-Karabakh, also known as Upper Karabakh, a territory recognized as part of Azerbaijan, and seven adjacent regions.
New clashes erupted on Sept. 27 and ended with a Russian-brokered truce six weeks later.
The Armenian army launched attacks on civilians and Azerbaijani forces and violated three humanitarian cease-fire agreements during the 44-day conflict.
After nearly 30 years, Azerbaijan managed to liberate its territories from illegal Armenian occupation, while Armenia was defeated and had to sign a cease-fire agreement with Azerbaijan that put an end to the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh on Nov.10.
Pashinyan said he had signed an “unspeakably painful” deal which allowed Azerbaijan to claim control over regions it took back in the fighting.
While Azerbaijan liberated several cities and nearly 300 settlements and villages amid the heavy fighting, Armenians are also handing over other territories under the deal, which is being monitored by both Russia and Turkey.
*Writing and contributions by Jeyhun Aliyev from Ankara
On November 12, 2020 V. Kazimirov published an article in the popular Russian information agency REGNUM. Vladimir Kazimirov – is a former ambassador, head of the Russian mediation mission in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in 1992-1996, honored worker of the Russian diplomatic service. V. Kazimirov’s website – http://vn.kazimirov.ru/mir.htm
Below is a non-official translation from Russian by AGA-Tribunal.info.
This repeated war against Nagorno-Karabakh attracted special attention with regular shelling and barbaric bombing of cities and settlements, the murder of civilians, contrary to all norms of humanitarian law. Michelle Bachelet, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, also saw signs of war crimes in the new conflict. Of course, this question should be investigated.
But for some reason, it is not paid due attention to the treacherous breakdown of the indefinite ceasefire (since May 12, 1994) and the too frequent violations of the ceasefire and military actions (even for the most moderate, humanitarian purposes). Agreements to end the fighting were thwarted three times in two weeks (by Azerbaijan). This is becoming almost the norm in this conflict, starting with the failure to comply with four UN Security Council resolutions. Should the international community ignore or tolerate this?
A special shame, no other than a crime, is the breaking of a long-standing truce for the sake of a second war in Karabakh with thousands of victims. Over the years, there have been many incidents (someone even needed them and was against their investigation), but in general, the truce was held for 26 years. It can be noted that “one and a half generations” of Azerbaijanis and Armenians have grown up who did not personally know the horrors of modern war. And suddenly the truce is blown up! Sudden death and blood of thousands of people. Shouldn’t the leaders of the parties to the conflict be held accountable for this?
It is a pity that there is no tribunal yet, as in Nuremberg. In this whirlwind of events, we must not forget those responsible for the new war, for so many troubles of both peoples. War crimes still need to be clarified. But responsibility, at least moral, for the breakdown of the truce should be assigned, and not later, but immediately, in these days. For everything that happened and is happening further is a direct consequence of this rude act of one of the leaders of the warring parties. Everything fatal and ominous is only a derivative of what he did on that date, September 27, 2020.
The parties to the conflict blame each other for the outbreak of hostilities. Could the Armenians encroach on one more height, strip or region to the seven regions of Azerbaijan? It’s time for them to think about how and for what to free them. And if they did, they could be rebuffed by the other side in the same area. But Azerbaijan launched its “counteroffensive” (Baku vocabulary) along the entire line of contact of the forces of the parties. And this required a lot of preparation ahead of time and everywhere.
How to believe in a “counteroffensive” so sudden and widespread? And how can we forget the decades of warlike threats to Baku, which have been discussed and condemned more than once? Remember the revelations of the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev himself at the military parade that the war is not over, will it continue. Was it a whole series of incidents to reassure compatriots? Eloquent is also Baku’s withdrawal from a number of proposals of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs … Or does all this taken together mean nothing at all?
I well remember a number of analogs from the first war in Karabakh. Azerbaijan even then had a clear superiority in potential, hoped to defeat the Armenians by force, did not even want to comply with the UN Security Council resolutions. But he failed, losing region by region. Breaks of the ceasefire were also more often allowed by Baku. I remember the funny thing about how Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev openly chastised his violators of the short truce of those years.
As before, the parties to the conflict do not prefer an integrated approach to controversial issues, but a selective one. They snatch from the UN Security Council resolutions only what is beneficial to them. Ilham Aliyev takes from them only the demand to liberate the occupied territories. And not a word about how Azerbaijan fulfilled their demands to cease fire, military actions and hostile acts. Baku did not want to fulfill them, it repeatedly disrupted, continued military operations, which actually helped the Armenians to occupy the regions of Azerbaijan, but it never admits it. By resolution 822, only two of the seven regions of Azerbaijan were occupied. When Russia, the United States, Italy (as the chairman of the CSCE MG) and even Turkey called on the parties to comply with this resolution, Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh agreed, Baku did not even respond.
In three resolutions of 1993, the UN Security Council did not want to convict the guilty of non-compliance, but in the fourth it named the violator, although for balance the Armenians were told about “excessive use of force in response to these violations”. Aware of the unreliability of the “counteroffensive” version, Baku today wants to justify the new war by the long-standing occupation of its territory (although he himself helped the Armenians with the battles of those years). Aliyev strenuously emphasizes that he is ready to end the war if the Armenians liberate the occupied territories. Is this accidental? Recently, undermining his own version, he argued that there is no military solution to the conflict (“we have proved that this is not so”). These words also make it clear who started the war.
In the well-known “triad” of international principles, two of them will confirm that each side of this conflict has its own truth. For some, the right of peoples to self-determination is sacred, for others – the territorial integrity of states. But the third principle is most important: the non-use of force and threats by force. It is universal. The international community is called upon to reject and criminalize disregard for this principle, no matter what its cover. And not at all in hindsight, but already in these days and now.