The new EP Library Catalogue allows you to search the EP collection for:
- Journals, books and articles in paper or electronic format
- EPRS and Policy Department publications
Abstract: This study assesses the EU's actorness in the resolution of the conflict in Karabakh with a focus on its recognition as a peace actor by the government of Azerbaijan. It builds on the criteria for measurement proposed by the actorness thesis and the previous academic literature to determine how the EU's actorness changed in 2020 and how that impacted its recognition by the conflict actors. The study focuses on the external dimension of actorness, arguing that limited recognition of the EU as a peace actor by the Azerbaijani side restrained its involvement in the peace process as did the lack of coherence and cohesion in its engagement.
Abstract: Since the 1979 revolution, the Islamic Republic of Iran has generally pursued an ideological foreign policy. While Iran's stance on Nagorno-Karabakh has shown occasional variations, it has maintained a consistent approach within its own framework. Overall, Iran has approached the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, which has persisted for thirty years, with considerable sensitivity. The primary source of this sensitivity is the significant Turkish population in Iran, particularly the South Azerbaijani Turks. However, Azerbaijan's growing alliance with Turkey, the strengthening of Turkey's influence in the Caucasus, and Azerbaijan's developing relations with the U.S. and Israel have raised concerns in Iran. Despite ostensibly supporting Shia-majority Azerbaijan, Iran has often aligned its policy with Armenia. This study aims to outline this process in broad terms. Additionally, it highlights the impact of Iran's foreign policy on establishing the geoeconomic and geostrategic equation in the region and emphasizes how the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has become a key, if not deadlocked, element in Iran-Azerbaijan relations.
Abstract: This paper explores the pivotal role of science and education in post-conflict recovery, focusing on Azerbaijan's Karabakh region following the 2020 Second Karabakh War. The study examines the contributions of Karabakh University to regional recovery by evaluating the initial student enrollment and placement process, the university's early activities and procedures, and the narratives of students, which reflect their observations and recommendations. Utilizing qualitative methods—including document analysis and thematic evaluation of publicly available resources—the research assesses how the university’s strategies align with national recovery goals, contributing to economic revitalization, social cohesion, and long-term development. Addressing the challenge of limited institutional data, this study provides valuable insights into the transformative potential of higher education in promoting regional stability and sustainable development in post-conflict environments. The findings contribute to the broader discourse on the role of education in peacebuilding and socio-economic recovery, offering practical lessons for similar regions worldwide. (…)
Resumen: El objeto del presente estudio es analizar por qué el Derecho internacional no logró prevenir ni abordar el crimen de genocidio cometido con el bloqueo de cerca de diez mesesdel corredor de Lachín y la posterior invasión de Nagorno Karabaj por parte de Azerbaiyán en septiembre de 2023. Dicha invasión resultó en el desplazamiento forzoso de prácticamente toda la población armenia de la región, lo que en la doctrina internacional ya se califica como la primera limpiezaétnica del sigloxx. Así, mediante este análisis se pretende evidenciar el fracaso de los ins[1]trumentos jurídico-internacionales destinados a prevenir la limpieza étnica en Nagorno Karabaj y de las fuerzas depaz rusas desplegadas en la región, como factores geopolíticos que posibilitaron tal hecho.
Abstract: The modern phase of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan has lasted for over three decades. Since the independent republics of Armenia and Azerbaijan emerged in 1991, the status of Nagorno-Karabakh has been at the centre of these countries' foreign and domestic policies. Using Robert Entman's theory, this article examines speeches about possible remedies to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict by the leaders of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey between 2002 and 2022 and identifies frames that these leaders create over the conflict's resolution. By enhancing our understanding of how state leaders frame their perspectives on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict for external audiences, this article demonstrates the complex challenges in achieving a peaceful resolution. Understanding these framing strategies is crucial for comprehending the underlying motivations and interests of the involved parties and sheds light on the challenges faced in resolving the conflict through peaceful means.
Abstract: The Nagorno-Karabakh War was a dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan concerning the region of Nagorno-Karabakh (referred to as Artsakh) and seven nearby districts. This territorial and ethnic conflict centered around the fact that the region is predominantly inhabited by ethnic Armenians, while the neighboring areas were mainly populated by Azerbaijanis until they were evacuated during the First Nagorno-Karabakh War, which occurred between 1988-1994. Although the conflict dates back to the early 1900s, it resurfaced in 1988 when ethnic Armenians living in Nagorno-Karabakh called for the region to be transferred from Soviet Azerbaijan to Soviet Armenia. The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan began as a full-blown war in the early 1990s and later de-escalated to a low-intensity conflict until it resurfaced in April 2016 during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, also referred to as the April War, Four-Day War, or April Clashes. Four years later, in September 2020, it erupted into a full-scale war, known as the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War, or the Forty-Four-Day War. As a result of the consistent military clashes, a significant number of ethnic Armenians were forced to leave Nagorno-Karabakh. The recent intensification of the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War in 2020 led to the mass exodus of around 91,000 refugees from Nagorno-Karabakh into Armenia, consisting of mostly women, elderly, and children.
Abstract: A pesar de que su influencia regional ha declinado con los años, Armenia sigue siendo un actor importante para las dinámicas en Eurasia sobre todo cuando se analiza desde la óptica del multilateralismo y las dinámicas de poder. El objetivo de este artículo es analizar la crisis del multilateralismo en Eurasia a través de la comprensión del conflicto de Nagorno-Karabaj y como este puede generar no solo nuevos antagonismos como la intervención en baja escala de potencias occidentales o aumentar la influencia de ciertos actores como Azerbaiyán impulsado por el apoyo de Turquía, sino que también pueden aumentar las tensiones y rivalidades históricas que se han mantenido y, por ende, debilitar los procesos institucionales en la región. Para la consecución del objetivo planteado, se recurre a la metodología de estudio de caso, donde se analiza la particularidad de un fenómeno o evento desde múltiples perspectivas para lograr una comprensión detallada y explicar sus efectos. En una primera sección, el texto estudia el contexto histórico, así como la actual situación de Armenia desde los conceptos de eurasianismo, multilateralismo, multipolarismo y regionalismo. A través del análisis de la geopolítica de la región, así como de los hechos históricos más relevantes se permite al lector entender las dinámicas de poder que se desdoblan en Eurasia a través de la gestión de los recursos naturales y la implementación de políticas exteriores contrastantes y convergentes al mismo tiempo. La segunda sección revisa los principales elementos del conflicto de Nagorno-Karabaj y los efectos que las acciones de setiembre de 2023 tienen sobre la gobernanza de la región euroasiática, la forma en la que concluyó el conflicto ocasionó cambios en las dinámicas regionales y sus efectos continúan viéndose en las relaciones entre los países del área. Del mismo modo el resultado ha provocado un desplazamiento masivo de personas lo que supone nuevos retos para los estados involucrados, en un contexto ya de por sí tenso por los acontecimientos mundiales. Además, este segundo apartado, analiza otros conflictos latentes que amenazan la estabilidad de la zona. Como corolario, se estudia el panorama para Armenia y se esbozan posibles escenarios ante el cambio en la balanza de poder de las potencias regionales.
Abstract: The conflict that arose between Soviet Armenia and Soviet Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh in 1988 festered throughout the final years of the Soviet Union and sparked a major war between the newly independent Armenia and Azerbaijan in 1992–1994. Most accounts of this period have suggested that the administration of George H. W. Bush took a largely hands-off approach to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, but this article shows that in fact the Bush administration pursued a much more active policy that reflected support for the Soviet Union and then Russia, a strong domestic Armenian-American lobby, and regional priorities, as well as a growing awareness of the West's failure to stem violence in Yugoslavia. The Bush administration was hoping to prevent all-out war between Armenia and Azerbaijan, but after the war began, the administration did what it could to try to limit and halt the violence.
Resumé : En septembre 2023, l'Azerbaïdjan a rétabli sur la région du Haut-Karabagh le contrôle qu'il avait perdu au début des années 1990. Le retour de ce contrôle territorial, obtenu notamment grâce au blocage du corridor de Latchine, a entraîné l'autodissolution de la « République de l'Artsakh », soutenue par l'Arménie voisine mais jamais reconnue internationalement. Cet épisode marquant de l'année 2023 invite à se pencher sur une question assez peu traitée en droit international, car finalement assez rare dans le contexte géopolitique contemporain : quelles règles gouvernent-elles la fin de l'occupation et du conflit armé ? Comment identifier cette fin et quelles en sont les conséquences juridiques, tant pour les acteurs du conflit que pour celles et ceux qui en sont victimes ? Par une analyse du droit international humanitaire applicable à ces situations, cet article revient sur les règles d'identification de la fin d'une occupation et sur les droits qui perdurent après celle-ci.
Abstract: The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict began in 1988 after the regional Supreme Council declared the transfer of the region from the Azerbaijani SSR to the Armenian SSR. The full-scale war started in 1992 after the dissolution of the USSR and ended with the May 1994 armistice. In the following quarter century, a peaceful resolution of the conflict was mediated by OSCE’s Minsk Group in a form of facilitative mediation. The warring sides have never reached a final solution and a new war started in the autumn of 2020. This paper examines how facilitative mediation was conducted by the Minsk Group and why it eventually failed. The conclusion of this paper is that the combination of the weak mandate and the co-chairs’ separate and incongruous interests in the Caucasus resulted in the failure of the conflict resolution in Nagorno-Karabakh
Abstract: The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan has long troubled the European Union’s (EU’s) neighbourhood. As a latecomer to the region, the EU played no role in the conflict in the 1990s. The subsequent establishment of bilateral relations with Armenia and Azerbaijan, including a closer engagement through the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) did not herald any significant changes in this respect. The bilateral relations with both countries advanced despite the military build-up, hostile rhetoric and periodic fighting. When another war erupted in September 2020, the EU was strikingly absent from the international scene in stark contrast to its rhetoric and pledges of the last two decades. Meanwhile, the Russian-brokered ceasefire did not resolve the conflict and led to further aggression demanding a more hands-on approach by the EU. In a welcome development, the EU undertook various efforts to engage the parties in a continuous dialogue for resolving the outstanding issues. In this context, the article argues for a more enhanced role of the EU in resolving this conflict based on a principled position in line with EU values and respect for international law.
Abstract: This paper examines Azerbaijan's decision to go to war in Nagorno-Karabakh in 2020. It aims to unveil the lessons Azerbaijan learned from the reaction of major regional actors in the South Caucasus to rising tensions in Armenian-Azerbaijani relations from the mid-2000s to the 2020 July border crisis. The paper argues that the consistent unresponsiveness of the international community emboldened Azerbaijan to proceed with its war preparations. It shows that Azerbaijan perceived the attitude of regional powers as inability and/or reluctance to interfere in the conflict, and this created a permissive environment for an all-out war.
Abstract: Since April 2018, Armenia has gone through a series of dramatic events. Convinced of its 'democratic invincibility,' the regime that emerged after 'the Velvet Revolution' espoused the view that Armenia's new, democratic facade must secure increased support from Brussels and Washington and continued loyalty from its security provider - the Kremlin. Nevertheless, the perennial security issues, chief among them the unresolved Nagorno Karabakh conflict, were overlooked by the new elite. This article examines the sources of the foreign policy-making style of the populist regime in Armenia and explores the extent to which they have affected the decision-making process and its 'resultants.' The article argues that the incoherent and erratic nature of the new regime's policy formulation and enactment, which underestimated acute security challenges and degraded existing institutional checks and balances, caused unprecedented wreckage to Armenia's national security architecture.
Abstract: One of the most critical disputes in the Post-Soviet space is the long-lasting Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia. While this issue has long been regarded as a land-based dispute to a large extent, it can also be stated from the securitization perspective that it is a conflict inherent in ethnic identity. The proposed way to solve a problem in the securitization approach is the desecuritization of the issue. However, negotiations conducted by the Minsk Group on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which were initiated within the framework of the OSCE, did not yield any results. In this context, the process of resolving the issue through negotiations, in other words, desecuritization, failed. This has led to the re-securitization of the problem and paved the way for taking extraordinary measures to come to a solution. The final military confrontation experienced in 2020 has also been triggered specifically by this approach.
Abstract: This article highlights the realities facing Azerbaijan’s internally displaced persons (IDPs), living in a state of protracted displacement. It argues that the World Bank’s development approach to the IDP population in Azerbaijan and to IDP populations elsewhere has likely done more for these populations’ long-term welfare and prospects than exclusively humanitarian approaches could have accomplished, even though displaced peoples have traditionally been presumed to be the responsibility of the humanitarian community. The article begins with a brief discussion of the differences between refugees and IDPs and between humanitarian and development approaches. It then outlines a history of the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia over the contested region of Nagorno-Karabakh which, in the early 1990s, produced upward of a half-million Azerbaijani IDPs. Next, the article discusses some of the realities (economic, social, and mental health, among others) that confronted Azerbaijan’s IDPs 15 years into their displacement. (…)
Abstract: Analyses of the transformation and political change in Armenia pays noticeable attention to the dominant role of discourses of the Armenian Genocide and the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh for nation and state-building processes. At the same time, the two issues usually are investigated separately. Attempts are rarely made to interpret the interrelation and connection between the two narratives. Nevertheless, the trauma-based discourse of memory is linking the two narratives as technology of power through discursive structures/mechanisms of analogy and continuity. Methods of discourse analysis combined with expert interviews, internet questionnaires and ethnographic field research aim to analyse the crucial discursive patterns and mechanisms. Hypothetically, instrumentalized and ideological usage of combined narratives are impacting the political changes, in Post-Soviet Armenia. The article touches upon only one aspect of the discursive interrelation between the Armenian Genocide and the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. Thus, the subject under the question is the impact of theusage of historical analogy and the idea of continuity understand as technologies on contemporary Armenian politics of memory.
Abstract: The article examines Turkey’s role in the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh that erupted between Azerbaijan and Armenia in September 2020. It analyses how changes and continuity in Turkey’s foreign policy have influenced the conflict’s outcome, as well as the extent to which it has been exploited to fulfil Turkey’s foreign policy objectives. Thus, unlike most research on Nagorno-Karabakh, this article focuses on the role of one external actor, and not on the conflict itself or possible hypotheses for its resolution. The article’s special focus was influenced by the fact that Turkey’s participation resulted in a change in the long-standing status quo in Nagorno-Karabakh, allowing the situation to turn dramatically in Baku’s favour. Turkey, along with Russia, has emerged as one of the most important regional players in this conflict. This is the result of Turkey’s emphasised foreign policy ambitions, which were influenced by changes in its international security environment as well as changes in the country’s domestic policy. In any case, with its role in the second conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, Turkey has once again shown its determination to pursue its foreign, and especially regional, policy independently and in accordance with its national interests, despite being a member of NATO.
Abstract : Au cours de l’histoire contemporaine, le processus d’élaboration d’un droit international a consacré deux principes : celui du droit des peuples à disposer d’eux-mêmes a été inscrit dans la Charte de l’ONU de 1945, tandis que celui de l’intangibilité des frontières a été affirmé par la jurisprudence internationale et mis en œuvre lors de grands soubresauts géopolitiques (décolonisation, implosion des régimes communistes, accords mettant fin aux guerres de l’ex-Yougoslavie…). Toutefois, ces deux principes sont appliqués à géométrie variable, notamment parce qu’ils s’avèrent contradictoires. L’exemple du Caucase du Sud, avec l’évolution du conflit concernant le Haut-Karabagh, et en conséquence l’Arménie et l’Azerbaïdjan, permet d’illustrer tout particulièrement les questions géopolitiques passées, actuelles et futures que posent ces deux principes.
Abstract by the author: The 2020 war in Nagorny Karabakh brought not merely a shift in the actual borders in the southern Caucasus; it also led to a change in control over several religious buildings or places that had become sacralized as symbols for one or the other side. Using selected examples of sacred places associated with Armenian or Azerbaijani historical memory, this article seeks to cast light on the fate of cultural monuments in war and its aftermath. In connection with the long-lasting conflict, these monuments are forced to undergo a cycle of sacralization, desacralization and reinterpretation of their origins and functions, depending on the approach taken by the winning side. Churches, monasteries and mosques in Nagorny Karabakh thus serve as sad examples of unsuccessful conflict transformation.
If you are unable to access the article you need, please contact us and we will get it for you as soon as possible.
| Data Protection Notice | Cookie Policy & Inventory |
 |
|
 |
Journals on all devices |
Search the EP Library Catalogue |
Newspapers on all devices |