Search Results: 1 - 10 of 100 matches for " "
All listed articles are free for downloading (OA Articles)
Page 1 /100
Display every page Item
State at War, State in War: The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict and State-Making in Armenia, 1991-1995  [cached]
Taline Papazian
Journal of Power Institutions in Post-Soviet Societies , 2008,
Abstract: The Republic of Armenia’s accession to independence came along with open war with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh, an Armenian populated enclave dispatched within the Azerbaijani SSR in 1923. These specific conditions determined state-building in Armenia, launching two complementary processes: building of a national army from a meagre Soviet heritage and accumulating scarce resources into a restricted number of state institutions, the Defence Ministry in particular. Open conflict ended in 1994, freezing Armenian advances in Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan, thus marking victory in the eyes of the Armenian military. This sense of victory coupled with the return of soldiers to civilian life transcribed into a “Karabakh syndrome”, a tentative notion for the mindset of victorious militiamen eager to be rewarded for their sacrifices in war by economic or political benefits. Starting from 1995, this syndrome weighed on the Republic’s political life, eventually resulting in the resignation of then President Levon Ter Petrossian.
The Galtung Triangle and Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict  [cached]
Taleh Ziyadov
Caucasian Review of International Affairs , 2006,
Abstract: The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is one of the longest - standing conflicts in the former Soviet Union. Despite numerous attempts by mediating parties and direct talks between the governments of the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan, the conflict remains unresolved. In this paper, I will try to analyze the general causes of the conflict within the framework of Johan Galtung’s conflict triangle. After giving a brief description of the Galtung conflict triangle and short asymmetry and symmetry analysis, I will examine the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict using the model’s three axes – structural, cultural (social constructs) and behavioral (direct violence). The paper will investigate the nature and dynamics of the conflict in chronological order, starting from 1988 and ending with the signing of the cease-fire agreement in 1994. Hence, the purpose of this paper is limited to the three theoretical aspects of Johan Galtung’s conflict triangle and does not include the conflict’s detailed history and its post-ceasefire developments. This study aims to increase understanding of the cultural and structural causes of interethnic violence between Armenians and Azerbaijanis in 1988-1994.
A Brief Overview on Karabakh History from Past to Today
Ercan Karakoc
International Journal of Human Sciences , 2011,
Abstract: After initiation of the glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring) policies in the USSR by Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet Union started to crumble, and old, forgotten, suppressed problems especially regarding territorial claims between Azerbaijanis and Armenians re-emerged. Although Mountainous (Nagorno) Karabakh is officially part of Azerbaijan Republic, after fierce and bloody clashes between Armenians and Azerbaijanis, the entire Nagorno Karabakh region and seven additional surrounding districts of Lachin, Kelbajar, Agdam, Jabrail, Fizuli, Khubadly and Zengilan, it means over 20 per cent of Azerbaijan, were occupied by Armenians, and because of serious war situations, many Azerbaijanis living in these areas had to migrate from their homeland to Azerbaijan and have been living under miserable conditions since the early 1990s.
Legal Aspects of the Nagorno-Garabagh Conflict  [cached]
Caucasian Review of International Affairs , 2006,
Abstract: The Nagorno-Garabagh conflict has been going on since 1988. The conflict between Armenia (although it denies its involvement in the conflict claiming that it is just “an interested party”) and Azerbaijan is considered to be the most important conflict in the South Caucasus. Though the object of this conflict is Nagorno-Garabagh Autonomous Region (the region was called so as an administrative-territorial area during the Soviet time), seven other districts of Azerbaijan which have nothing common with this autonomous region are also occupied by the Armed Forces of Armenia. So, as a result of the conflict approximately 20% of the territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan is still under occupation and more than one million Azerbaijanis have become refugees and internally displaced persons. In May 1994 the parties concluded cease-fire agreement which is still in force today. The Republic of Azerbaijan states that Armenia should be recognized as an aggressor according to the Charter of the UN, but it is not the case yet. The Republic of Armenia claims that the Armenians of Nagorno-Garabagh are entitled to secede from Azerbaijan and build their own state on the base of the self-determination principle of international law. Now the Minsk Group of the OSCE is exercizing a mediation function between the parties to the conflict. No political agreement on the settlement of the conflict has been achieved yet.
Aspects regarding the security environment in South Caucasus  [cached]
Lavinia Lupu
Sfera Politicii , 2012,
Abstract: Transitions from Soviet authoritarianism and planned economies to democracy and market economies have not been successfully completed in any of the three states from South Caucasus. This region continues to be characterized by high instability and insecurity due the absence of solutions to the protracted or frozen” conflicts between Armenia and Azerbaijan – over the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh – and between Georgia and Russia – over the breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Finding common ground upon which all parties can agree has proven to be an impossible task. Protracted or frozen” conflicts present a challenge for the stability and security of South Caucasus.
Mustafa G?K?E
Turkish Studies , 2011,
Abstract: The Upper Karabakh issue has been one of the most important issues affecting stability in Caucasia after the fall of Soviets. In Karabakh which is a historical Turkish native country, Armenians were placed as from the Russia of Tsarizm and a region where the Armenians have a high population was created within the Azerbaijan lands. This field which is a mountainous region located in the upper parts of Karabakh is called Upper Karabakh or Nagorno- Karabakh. Due to the activities of Armenians settling in the region, conflicts started to happen as of the 19th Century and when came to 20th Century, these conflicts confronted us as a serious issue. During the fall of Soviets that have continued the population policies of the Russia of Tsarizm, the conflicts in Azerbaijan lands awaked again. In Upper Karabakh issue, Turkey has been seen as an important actor that would affect the process because of its historical and cultural bonds with Azerbaijan and also being a border neighbour to the region. While its military intervention in the region was discussed at the process when conflicts were experienced, Turkey has followed a more cautious policy and made efforts for solving the problem through peaceful ways at an international platform. Turkey, which is among the countries first recognizing the independencies of Azerbaijan and Armenia, has given importance to the Upper Karabakh issue in its relations with these countries. Being on the side of Azerbaijan, Turkey has closed the border of Armenia as a sanction. Within this scope, the relations started with Armenia were broken in a short time. And the steps taken towards normalizing the relations recently didn’t give any positive results due to the historical problems with Armenia and the continuation of occupancy in Azerbaijan lands. Yukar Karaba sorunu, Sovyetlerin kü ünden sonra Kafkasya’daki istikrar etkileyen sorunlar n ba nda yer almaktad r. Tarihi bir Türk yurdu olan Karaba ’a arl k Rusyas d neminden itibaren Ermeniler yerle tirilerek Azerbaycan topraklar i inde Ermenilerin yo unlukta oldu u bir b lge olu turulmu tur. Karaba ’ n üst k s mlar ndaki da l k bir yer olan bu b lge; Yukar Karaba veya Da l k Karaba olarak adland r lmaktad r. B lgeye yerle en Ermenilerin faaliyetleri nedeniyle 19. yüzy ldan itibaren at malar ya anmaya ba lam , 20. as rda ise bu at malar ciddi bir sorun olarak kar m za km t r. arl k Rusyas ’n n nüfus politikalar n devam ettiren Sovyetlerin kü ü s ras nda Azerbaycan topraklar ndaki at malar tekrar canlanm t r. Yukar Karaba meselesinde Türkiye hem Azerbayca
Coddling the Caucasus: Iran’s Strategic Relationship with Azerbaijan and Armenia  [cached]
Geoffrey Gresh
Caucasian Review of International Affairs , 2006,
Abstract: Fearful of losing its economic regional and global dominance, Iran has sought to align itself diplomatically and economically with Armenia and Russia to counter Azerbaijan’s new pro-western policies and rising economic power. This paper analyzes the international relations of the Southern Caucasus through a Neorealist paradigm to demonstrate how Iran’s behavior and action in the area were a direct result of the anarchical system that ensued after the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990s. The lack of a bipolar system in the Caucasus has pushed the region to the brink of another regional conflict that could potentially be more far-reaching and widespread than that of the previously contained Nagorno-Garabagh conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia. Iran’s foreign policy of the past decade demonstrates Iran’s pragmatism in the Southern Caucasus that is not dictated by religious ideology, but rather by Iran’s national interests, both economic and political, and national security concerns. The “New Great Game” of the post-Cold War era in the southern Caucasus will radically transform the region into one of great strategic and geopolitical importance.
The Territory-Identity Nexus in the Conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh: Implications for OSCE Peace Efforts
Nadia Milanova
Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe , 2003,
Abstract: The conflict over Nagorno Karabakh stands out as the most intractable on the territory of the South Caucasus as it represents a combination of separatism and irredentism and has exacerbated the relations between two neighbouring countries - Armenia and Ajerbaijan - whose geo-political orientation, subject to cross-cutting regional and external interests and influences, is still in the balance. Nagorno Karabakh is the first full-blown conflict where the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has been primarily involved as a mediator and the first conflict related to the OSCE's concrete talks to operationalize its concept of peacekeeping. This article argues that the OSCE normative context is one of the factors that has made the conflict resolution a daunting task. Focus is placed on the effect international norms and principles have on the conflict dynamics and on conflict resolution efforts in general. The article further examines the main constraints on reconciling the adversarial ositions of the conflicting parties and concludes that there is a need for creating a framework to search for cooperative solutions based on common needs and interests.
In the light of bilateral relations of OSCE Minsk group member countries  [PDF]
Jovi?-Lazi? Ana,Jelisavac-Tro?i? Sanja,Jazi? Aleksandar
Medjunarodni Problemi , 2011, DOI: 10.2298/medjp1104583j
Abstract: This paper analyses confrontation that occurred between Armenia and Azerbaijan concerning Nagorno Karabakh territory, as well as the many attempts to finally get this conflict resolved. The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the territory of Nagorno Karabakh ended with the ceasefire agreement under the auspices of the OSCE Minsk Group, which is empowered for final resolvment of this issue. This process has been going on for years, but a solution is yet to come. The European Union in recent years is trying to reduce dependence on Russian natural gas and orients to new suppliers, primarily in the southern Caucasus region. Western countries are interested in resolving conflicts in South Caucasus due to its economic and political interests in the region and the fact that these conflicts pose a risk to investment. The authors of the paper will bring forth the views of all stakeholders in addressing the problem of Nagorno Karabakh and analyze their interests in an attempt to predict the possible final solution to the conflict.
European Union and South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia)
Marijana Musladin
Suvremene Teme : Contemporary Issues , 2011,
Abstract: This paper will show the development of bilateral relations between theEuropean Union and the countries of South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijanand Georgia) through Partnership and Cooperation Agreements, the EuropeanNeighbourhood Policy and Eastern Partnership. The aim is to emphasizethe strategic importance of the South Caucasus for the EU and present keyissues which group of former Soviet republics faced from the beginnings oftheir independence. In order to successfully balance their national and political interests, historical connections and traditions, but also pressures from outside,foreign policy orientation of the South Caucasian countries revolves in a circle between Russia and the European Union. In the same time, these countries are facing many problems in their relationships - lack of bilateral and regional cooperation and frozen ethnic problems, which at any moment can turn into open conflicts. This paper aims to show how the European Union, from the collapse of the Soviet Union, through various policies and instruments, works towards stabilization of the eastern neighborhoods. The key security challenges in the South Caucasus region are performed from a review of bilateral relations between EU and Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.
Page 1 /100
Display every page Item

Copyright © 2008-2017 Open Access Library. All rights reserved.