Last week, the 4M Journalism and Social Media Forum came to the South Caucasus. Organised by Canal France International (CFI), previous 4M’s have been held in Nairobi, Cairo, Abidjan, Belgrade, and Tunis. Earlier this year, I had also been invited to speak at their 3rd annual meeting in Montpellier, France, although an air traffic controller strike meant I arrived a day late and couldn’t.
Walking through Tbilisi’s Old Town, it seemed only natural to pop in to my favorite teahouse in Tbilisi. Run by ethnic Armenians from Azerbaijan, I’ve taken countless Armenian and Azerbaijani journalists to the chaikhana and with good reason — it’s a breath of fresh air in the conflict-riven South Caucasus. Alas, when I got there it was already dark so the light was only artificial and less than perfect, but anyway, some photos from tonight.
While it might be nearly 19 years since a May 1994 ceasefire put the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh on hold, analysts are increasingly viewing the situation on the Line of Contact (LOC) with alarm. Over 20,000 died in the war waged in the early 1990s and a million were forced to flee their homes. Frontline skirmishes and sniper incidents remain common with The Economist recently putting the number of dead since the armistice at over 3,000. More significantly, new generations are brought up unable to remember the time when both Armenians and Azerbaijanis lived side by side together in peace.
More than 18 years have passed since a 1994 ceasefire agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan put the conflict over the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh on hold, but a last- ing peace remains elusive. The war fought in the early 1990s left over 25,000 dead and forced
a million to flee their homes, leaving Armenian-backed forces in control of just over 16 per cent of Azerbaijan. But despite often being referred to as a “frozen conflict,” skirmishes on the Line
of Contact (LOC) separating the two sides have claimed over 3,000 lives since the armistice. So concerning is the situation that the International Crisis Group (ICG) last year warned of the risk of a new “accidental war” breaking out.
With 2012 having dashed many hopes for peace in the South Caucasus, the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh remains one of the most intractable in the region. Over 20,000 people lost their lives in the war waged in the early 1990s and a million were forced to flee their homes. Around 3,000 have been killed in cross-border skirmishes and sniper incidents since a 1994 ceasefire effectively put the larger war on hold, but organizations such as the International Crisis Group (ICG) warn that the danger of an ‘accidental war’ breaking out increases with each passing year.
Recent clashes on the Line of Contact (LOC) separating Armenian and Azerbaijani forces have again raised concerns over the fragility of the 1994 ceasefire agreement. That should have put fighting over the disputed territory of Karabakh on hold, but with a final peace deal still elusive, thousands have been killed in cross-border skirmishes in the eighteen years since. At least three Armenian and five Azerbaijani soldiers died in the latest major skirmishes on the LOC, which reportedly included incursions into Armenia proper, while both sides blamed the other for the violence.
Strategically situated as a major conduit for vital energy resources, the South Caucasus has long been an area for competing regional and geopolitical interests. But while competition between Russia and the United States has preoccupied many analysts since 1991 when the three countries making up the region declared their independence from the former Soviet Union, some consider that Turkey could also play an important role in the Caucasus. Despite its well-known problems with Armenia, this is particularly true since tensions between Russia and Georgia culminated in the August 2008 war.
Моя статья продиктована многолетним опытом участия в миротворческих встречах. В 2000 году я в составе азербайджанской группы встретился в Упсале с армянскими коллегами в семинаре, организованным факультетом Университета Упсалы по мирному разрешению конфликтов. В нем, помнится, тон обсуждений был таков: армянская сторона стремилась доказать, что нам надо исходить из существующей ситуации и согласиться с отделением Нагорного Карабаха. Правда, все это было представлено в дружелюбном тоне и оснащено миротворческими и гуманистическими призывами об отвратительности войны и истребления людей. Только один человек из Нагорного Карабаха, живущего в Армении внес в этот общий тон некоторые милитаристские нюансы, намекая, что армия Нагорного Карабаха ой как сильна, так сильна что даже способна дойти до Анкары.
In the present phase of the conflict over Mountainous Karabakh, the deadlock in the peace process is due to symbolism. There is no solution through standard methods: the Armenians are not ready to give away the symbol of an independent republic, while the Azeris refuse the alteration of their borders. Similar situations exist in the conflicts between Chechnya and Russia, and between Abkhazia and Georgia. In order to resolve this deadlock, we are proposing a new autonomy model (‘nomy’ is law in Greek, ‘autonomy’ means ‘ruling oneself according to one’s own laws’).