REECA: Post-Soviet Legacy of the Armenian & Azerbaijan Border
by Jo Hall
Image of the Artsakh region (Credit: nunuxxx, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia
Earlier, in September, another instance of fighting at the Armenian-Azerbaijani border broke out. Yet, this conflict was not an isolated event as the Armenian-Azerbaijan border has remained a site of tension since the two nations gained independence after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Unfortunately, this escalation was the deadliest since the six-week war that broke out in 2020. That the border continues to remain a conflictual locale highlights the urgency of committing to a sustainable resolution to the territorial claims of both nations. The fighting in September broke into Armenian territories, in particular, the Nagorno-Karabakh enclave. Since the Soviet Union, this enclave has been at the heart of tension between the two states. However, the tension relating to Nagorno-Karabakh highlights the difficulty of relinquishing the post-Soviet legacy of the twentieth century.
On October 6, both Armenia and Azerbaijan responded to the recent fighting by confirming their commitments to the UN Charter and the Alma-Ata Declaration of 1991 within the first meeting of the European Political Community in Prague. The confirmations maintain that both sides recognise the other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. The EU will send a civilian mission to the region for a period of up to two months.
Some key points from this conflict:
1) The 2022 conflict on the border was not isolated to a singular event: fighting flared in March (settled by EU), August (mediated again by the EU), and reached a precipice in September.
2) This territorial conflict regarding Nagorno-Karabakh has existed since the early 1990’s. The truce after the 2020 war did not settle the territory’s final status or the authorities administering areas held by ethnic Armenians.
3) This is a conflict that has seldom received significant news coverage, but it remains at the heart of stability in the Caucasus. The UN Security Council has been keeping the conflict within purview, and the region will likely require sustained diplomatic engagement by external actors. However, both Armenia and Azerbaijan have been open to diplomatic mediation to curtail further violence.
Although the conflict has been ongoing for decades, peace brokering is actively underway. Considering the recency of 2020, the international community must sense the urgency required for the situation’s resolution.
Why this conflict matters in light of the war in Ukraine:
Practically, Europe feels that solving conflict issues is in its self-interest as Azerbaijan can substantially increase its gas exports. In fact, Azerbaijan has the capacity to double its supply to the EU by 2027, thus allowing Europeans to reduce dependency on Russian gas.
Yet, more pressing is the need for wellsprings of tension to be contained effectively. Although the conflict in Armenia and Azerbaijan might seem small, the longstanding border tensions point to the tentative nature of world peace as it stands. Around the same time, disputes occurred at the Kyrgyz and Tajik border where fire was exchanged. These conflicts only add to the ongoing air of disquiet as Russians fleeing draft service pour into Georgia. Tensions are inevitable as Russian forces continue to occupy ~20% of Georgian soil after the 2008 Russo-Georgian war while domestic housing prices have surged as a result of an influx of Russian residents.
As such, particularly in light of the ongoing war in Ukraine, peace in the post-Soviet space remains tentatively held in place. Although the atrocities of the war in Ukraine require immediate attention, global leadership would be unwise to relegate the border conflicts in Central Asia and the Caucasus as secondary matters of importance.
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict represents the unsteady divisions which arose following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. While the USSR was not an imperial power, per se, it was nonetheless a pseudo-imperial structure which has been succeeded by nations determining the balance of continuity and reform. After two subsequent chapters of autonomous suppression—by the Russian Empire and Soviet Union—many of the post-Soviet nations must grapple with questions of historical narrative. At what point does the nation ‘resume’ its national history? How does the administration deal with the education regarding these chapters of history?
The tension at the Armenian and Azerbaijan border represents the aftermath of the twentieth century’s complicated series of events. Although the conception of empire seems a far-removed idea, separated by momentous events such as the digital revolution, the Global Financial Crisis, and COVID, its influence remains and necessitates a decentred perspective on the current affairs in the region.
Why this matters for the university:
Employing a post-imperial perspective to the Caucasian region is essential; the events of 2022 have demonstrated the erroneous worldview which broadly considered Eurasia as ‘Russian’. Russia looms large in Europe’s global mental map as it was a longstanding empire, and one which demarcated the liminal space between the Occident and Orient.
Rather, instances such as the Nagorno-Karabakh region necessitate a thorough re-evaluation of how ethnicity, language, and cultural history can clarify the lens by which individuals and governments alike view the Caucasus to shape contemporary history. Academia’s progress in decolonialising and decentring historical perspectives involves acknowledging the approach’s applicability to regions outside the domain of Europe’s usual imperial suspects (Britain, France, Belgium, and Holland). For those of us at Cambridge with an interest in disciplines such as history, development, and economics, the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict underscores the need for intellectual sensitivity in our analysis of the world. Rather than considering this matter as a strictly ‘geopolitical’ affair or a conflict between ‘underdeveloped’ states, a humanistic approach of identity and community reveals new perspectives which a Eurocentric worldview fails to consider.
Please consider donations to victims of the border conflicts:
https://www.halotrust.org/get-involved/give/appeal-for-nagorno-karabakh/
https://www.halotrust.org/where-we-work/europe-and-caucasus/nagorno-karabakh/
