Abstract
The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh—a mountainous enclave within the former Soviet Republic of Azerbaijan with a majority Armenian population—erupted into violence shortly after the Soviet Union collapsed and periodically threatens to do so again. It is one of Central Asia’s frozen conflicts, impacting both shortterm and longterm regional security within a volatile, oil-rich crossroads. Applying the theoretical framework developed in chapter 2, this chapter argues that the international community links democratic governance with the broader question of security as it addresses the self-determination claim. I argue that judging the democratic capacity of the claimant group is treated as an implicit component of comprehensive peace.
“Therefore the question is not a matter of either-or but how to make those two principles [self-determination and sovereignty] somewhat work together.” 1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Stephen H. Astourian, “The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict: Dimensions, Lessons, and Prospects,” Mediterranean Quarterly 5:4 (Fall 1994), p. 90.
Arie Vaserman and Rami Ginat, “National, Territorial or Religious Conflict? The Case of Nagorno-Karabakh,” Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 17 (1994), p. 347.
Michael P. Croissant, The Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict: Causes and Implications (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1998), p. 27.
David Rieff, “Nagorno-Karabakh: Case Study in Ethnic Strife,” Foreign Affairs 76:3 (March/April 1997), p. 131.
In 2005, 99.7 percent of the enclave’s 138,000 residents were Armenian. Karine Ohaniyan, “Karabakh Ponders Kosovo’s Independence,” The Moscow Times February 18, 2008.
Ian Bremmer and Cory Welt, “Armenia’s New Autocrats,” Journal of Democracy 8:3 (1997), p. 80. The exact extent of Armenia’s role in the war from 1992–94 is not known, but is generally recognized as considerable.
Pavel Baev, Russia’s Policies in the Caucasus (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1997), p. 32; and Michael Mihalka, “Nagorno-Karabakh and Russian Peacekeeping: Prospects for a Second Dayton,” International Peacekeeping 3:3 (Autumn 1996), p. 21. Azerbaijan has been emboldened, thinking the West will help achieve diplomatically what it couldn’t militarily; oil deals are also providing Azerbaijan with capital to rebuild and prepare for re-opening of hostilities. See introduction in Croissant (1998).
Patricia Carley, “Nagorno-Karabakh: Searching for a Solution,” (United States Institute of Peace Roundtable Report: December 1998) and Mihalka (1996).
Thomas de Waal, “Fearing the Worst,” The World Today 62:12 (December 2006), p. 23.
Russia had given arms to Armenia worth over $1 billion; some say Moscow has an interest in keeping the conflict alive but “frozen” in order to maintain influence in the region and to secure for itself the role of key mediator. See Baev (1997), p. 37. Levon Chorbajian, et al. The Caucasian Knot: The History and Geopolitics of Nagorno-Karabakh (London and New Jersey: Zed Books, 1994), p. 75: Russian support oscillates between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Thomas de Waal, Black Garden: Armenian and Azerbaijan Thought Peace and War (New York: New York Press, 2003), pp. 252–253.
Sabrina Tavernise, “A Northern Neighbor Growls, and Azerbaijan Adjusts,” New York Times, October 23, 2008, p. A14.
International Crisis Group, Nagorno-Karabakh: A Plan for Peace, Europe Report No. 167 (October 11, 2005), pp. 4–5.
Razmik Panossian, “The Irony of Nagorno-Karabakh: Formal Institutions versus Informal Politics,” Regional and Federal Studies 11:3 (January 2001), p. 148.
See Rieff (1997) and Human Rights Watch/Helsinki. Azerbaijan: Seven Years of Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh (New York: Human Rights Watch, 1994).
Thomas Ambrosio, “Congressional Perceptions of Ethnic Cleansing: Reactions to the Nagorno-Karabakh War and the Influence of Ethnic Interest Groups,” The Review of International Affairs 2:1 (Autumn 2002), pp. 24–45.
Arminfo (Armenian news agency), “Polls Chance to Prove Karabakh is Democratic Country, President Says,” August 11, 2002 (supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring).
Arminfo (Armenian news agency), “Armenian Leader Hails Breakaway Karabakh Referendum,” December 11, 2006 (supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring).
BBC Worldwide Monitoring, “Karabakh Distances Itself from Other CIS Separatists — Armenian Agency,” June 17, 2006.
BBC Worldwide Monitoring “Separatist Karabakh Leader Urges Azerbaijan not to go to War,” September 2, 2006.
International Crisis Group, Azerbaijan’s 2005: Lost Opportunity Europe Briefing No. 40 (November 21, 2005). Footnotes 4 and 5 cite additional reports from ICG, OSCE, and Human Rights Watch denouncing the 2003 elections.
Levon Sevunts, “Breakaway State Still Struggling for Recognition,” The Washington Times, September 30, 2007, p. A7. Author quotes Sergie Markedov from the Institute of Political and Military Analysis, an independent Russian think tank.
Copyright information
© 2011 Anne-Marie Gardner
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gardner, AM. (2011). Nagorno-Karabakh: Balancing Standards?. In: Democratic Governance and Non-State Actors. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230117600_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230117600_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-29153-3
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-11760-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)