Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict – A Multidimensional Analysis
In this collection of articles, the IFLRY Caucasus Program research team offers a multidimensional analysis of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The perspectives proposed in our inquiry explore and comprehend the topic from different perspectives, therefore providing clarity of diverse events and categories that have influenced the dispute at early stages and continue to shape it to this day. We hope that our work, even in the slightest bit, will contribute to finding a peaceful and just resolution to this conflict.
–
The Nagorno-Karabakh war, which started in 1988, may reach unprecedented depths in the coming years. The formation of an uneven status quo, as well as the short-term military triumphs in times of economic difficulty, are elements that contribute to long-term instability and may lead to a new conflict. In a region where economic interests are so intertwined and power is so divided, an actual war between Armenia and Azerbaijan would be terrible for the whole area, especially neighboring Georgia. While the potential impacts for all sides involved in the dispute are evident, the question here is whether and how Georgia can act as a trustworthy mediator and productively impact the conflict. These concerns will be highlighted in the noted section. It is crucial to think about Georgia’s position in this war. It is also essential to assess the positions that should be taken in order to sustain the peace. Even at this level, Georgia must choose between two fronts, which is vital for boosting its international standing.
Apart from the fact that Georgia’s external relations are deteriorating, domestic challenges are also expanding. Georgia’s placing should be discussed separately, since the ethnic Azerbaijani and Armenian minorities are the country’s two major ethnic communities. The attitudes of these groups toward the dispute have a considerable influence on the fragmentation of Georgian state policy and the process of constructing new institutional obstacles, which is it is needed to think of new ways to prevent the situation from worsening. Before stepping into the spectrum of international relations, it is necessary to conduct a brief examination of the internal structural collapse, which presents itself in many ways (Mammadli, Chachibaia, & Tarzyan, 2021, p. 5). During the Second Karabakh War, ethnic Azerbaijani and Armenian minorities in Georgia frequently conducted protests and rallies in support of the conflicting countries. The events mentioned above produce cracks and disputes within Georgia, which is typically one of the most unpleasant concepts in our country’s history. In reality, there have been instances of distinct conflicts between various ethnic groups in Georgia, which have harmed not just them but also Georgian civilization. Furthermore, they frequently express a wish to be included in the war, both indirectly and directly. These features should be viewed negatively because, as a result of the opposing views of the local ethnic groups, excessive identification and emotional participation in the politics of the neighboring nation was noticed. At the same time, the representatives of these ethnic groups clearly emphasized their connection with their country, specifically Georgia, which encourages them to violate the peaceful environment on Georgian territory (Mammadli, Chachibaia, & Tarzyan, 2021, pp. 5, 6).
When we examine the international nature of the aforementioned dispute, its significance grows. Because of the complexity of the conflict, multiple major states are involved, each attempting to participate for various reasons. This has the potential to shift the balance of power in such a way that Georgia finds itself in jeopardy. The most notable component is Russia’s action, that is attempting to strengthen its imperialist ideology and maximize its own profits through a variety of efforts. The aggressor state has the ability to worsen this conflict by adjusting the role of a competent mediator and spreading the spheres of influence in the South Caucasus, which is going to help its strength. Consequently, many threats arise for Georgia precisely because of Russia’s activity (Grix, 2019, p. 3).
If Russia continues to clearly interfere in the crisis, the quality of democracy in the region may deteriorate and increase the distrust in the West (Sienrukos, 2006, p. 6). Obviously, this will prohibit Georgia from achieving its national goals and will generate additional problems. One of the most critical challenges for Georgia, for example, is the maintenance of territorial integrity, which Russian policy responds to in several ways through the Karabakh conflict. One of them is the prospect of the formation of alternative transportation and energy infrastructure, as well as transit routes, the aggressor state initiating. Following the second Karabakh conflict, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Russia stated the intent of activating all existing transport corridors and circles in the South Caucasus (Shelia, 2022, p. 51). Obviously, each party participating in the matter has their own goals, which presents a number of contentious concerns; nonetheless, the most crucial thing for us is the unblocking of all commercial and transportation linkages in the region. There is a risk that Russia might take advantage of the Moscow suggestions to include the occupied areas of Georgia in transportation projects and strengthen its influence in the noted regions. Even a simple involvement of Georgia in the debate of such measures will result in acknowledgment of the independence of the occupied areas, weakening the matter of territorial integrity. In fact, Russia’s present position towards Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali area excludes any compromise from the Kremlin, which is both cautious and hazardous for Georgia (Shelia, 2022, p. 51).
In addition, Georgia’s defensive capabilities, which are fairly limited in the country, should be considered. If the crisis grows more intense, Georgia will be left in a vulnerable position because it lacks the necessary force to maintain its own safety. This might result in huge geopolitical changes that damage democratic foundations as well as economic, social, and other vital spheres.
When discussing this topic, the question of what position Georgia should take during the continuing conflict arises. In fact, this condition gives Georgia the ability to act as a stabilizer and moderator among the sides of the dispute. Furthermore, in order to obtain a worthy place in the international space, it is essential to combine the function of a sort of mediator with the development of new initiatives to maintain peace. If our stance is wrongly formed, there will be a serious risk of decreasing the country’s development and European integration chances. Georgia now maintains a neutral stance, which is one of the crucial viewpoints. In order to build a calm and stable environment in the Caucasus region, it is critical not to encourage confrontations, as Russia does (Grix, 2019, p. 4).
On the other hand, if the dispute takes on a large-scale and intense form, it is possible to evaluate the options of a relatively active posture, however such an attitude would be inappropriate at this moment. Now, Georgia should try to preserve neutrality as much as possible, but in severe instances, a decision in a particular direction may be taken. In this instance, one possibility is to support Turkey, which is also involved in the dispute. It is notable that since Azerbaijan has become Turkey’s primary gas exporter, the links with Russia is significantly reducing.
On the contrary, Russia’s collaboration relations with Armenia are becoming more frequent. As a result, it will be highly beneficial for Georgia to share Azerbaijan’s mindset, taking into consideration the aspect of Turkey’s engagement, because the quality of democracy within the region is unlikely to deteriorate in this case (HELVACIKYLÜ, 2021, p. 170-171). Azerbaijan’s victory in the conflict may not provide a strategic blow to Russia, but it will weaken it, and Western partners will remain interested in the Caucasus. It should also be noted that Turkey is a NATO member; hence, solid connections with it and sharing its views would greatly assist Georgia in securing a fitting place in the international community.
Finally, the Nagorno-Karabakh war is a large-scale concern for the Caucasus region, which obliges Georgia to maintain strong and neutral stances. Absolute integration with the West is the greatest approach for promoting democratization and the formation of European ideals in the region so that the war does not delay these processes. However, the partnership relations of both sides engaged in the disagreement, should be considered, as well. In this scenario, Russia and Turkey are involved, and Georgia must select the acceptable political path. In this regard, the ideal answer might be the support of Azerbaijan and Turkey in order to decrease Russian influence in the region as much as possible.
References
Grix, V. L. (2019). A Positive Influence in the South Caucasus? Georgia’s Potential as a Regional Stabilizer. Georgian Institute of Politics.
HELVACIKÖYLÜ, G. (2021). THE ROLE OF TURKEY AND RUSSIA ON THE RESOLUTION OF THE NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT. UPA Strategic Affairs, 158-174.
Mammadli, K., Chachibaia, K., & Tarzyan, T. (2021). The Implications of the Second Karabakh War on Georgia’s Non-Dominant Ethnic Groups. Tbilisi: Social Justice Center.
Shelia, Z. (2022). The Second Karabakh War. A year after. Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (KAS) . Sienrukos, H. (2006). OIL, DEMOCRACY AND THE GLOBALIZATION OF THE NAGORNO KARABAKH CONFLICT. MALD Paper.