Last April, violence erupted in a place known as
Nagorno-Karabakh. If this doesn’t sound
familiar, how about Armenia and Azerbaijan?
No? Perhaps the furthest
southwest corner of the former Soviet Union, just east of Eastern Turkey? OK, try this: the other side of the world?
When hearing of this outbreak of violence and reading
something of the history, it struck me that the situation offered a real-time
opportunity to consider secession, decentralization and property rights;
further, the issue of culture binding people together for purposes of defense
and security. But I am getting ahead of
myself – first some background about the place:
Nagorno-Karabakh is a landlocked
region in the South Caucasus, lying between Lower Karabakh and Zangezur and
covering the southeastern range of the Lesser Caucasus mountains. The region is
mostly mountainous and forested.
It may be landlocked, mountainous and forested, but I don’t
believe anyone will confuse it with Switzerland.
Nagorno-Karabakh is internationally
recognized as part of Azerbaijan, but most of the region is governed by the
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, a de facto independent nation established on the
basis of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast of the Azerbaijan Soviet
Socialist Republic. Azerbaijan has not exercised political authority over the
region since the advent of the Karabakh movement in 1988. Since the end of the
Nagorno-Karabakh War in 1994, representatives of the governments of Armenia and
Azerbaijan have been holding peace talks mediated by the OSCE Minsk Group on
the region's disputed status.
The history of the place is the history of the region –
Ottoman, Russian, Persian forces; land regularly changing hands; lines drawn to
achieve political ends – think Stalin; religion – Christian and Muslim. Do you want to go back further? Turks for a thousand years and dominant for
much of it, Armenians for three thousand years and dominant rarely.
Armenia, a Christian nation, is surrounded west and east by
Muslim Turkic countries (Turkey and Azerbaijan, respectively), and to the south
by Muslim Iran; to the north, a less-than-friendly Georgia (no, not the one
with peaches).
So what of this Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic?
Nagorno-Karabakh, officially the
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Artsakh Republic or Republic of Artsakh is a
republic in the South Caucasus recognised only by three non-United Nations (UN)
states. The region is considered by the UN to be part of Azerbaijan.
Nagorno-Karabakh controls most of the territory of the former Nagorno-Karabakh
Autonomous Oblast and some of the surrounding area, giving it a border with
Armenia to the west and Iran to the south. It functions as de facto part of
Armenia.
The population was and remains predominantly Armenian.
Finally, what of this war that
came during the early 1990s?
The Nagorno-Karabakh War, referred
to as the Artsakh Liberation War by Armenians, was an ethnic conflict that took
place in the late 1980s to May 1994, in the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh in
southwestern Azerbaijan, between the majority ethnic Armenians of
Nagorno-Karabakh backed by the Republic of Armenia, and the Republic of
Azerbaijan.
I will skip over the reports of atrocities
that occurred during the dying days of the Soviet Union. To make a long story short, in the dying days
of the communist empire a referendum was held in Karabakh. The majority Armenian population voted to
join with the Armenian Republic; the minority Azeris boycotted the
election. One thing led to another…then
war. Armenians – with memories of
genocide at the hands of Muslim Ottoman Turks – did not want to live through
genocide at the hands of Muslim Turkic Azerbaijan.
A cease fire was declared in 1994. Since then, sporadic gunfire has been a
regular feature in the region; this changed last April with the major
confrontation along the disputed regions.
Which brings me to an analysis of this recent situation,
offered at The
Saker:
On April 2nd, at the time of
escalation of skirmishes in Donbas, with the Ukrainian military attacking and
shelling Donetsk and nearby villages, Azerbaijan has attacked the
Armenian-populated Karabakh.
Coincidence? Perhaps
not. Three days earlier…
On March 30, 2016 Kerry met with
the president of Azerbaijan Aliev and called for an ‘ultimate resolution’ of
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
I should mention: Azerbaijan has oil, and Turkey – a NATO
ally – obviously favors Azerbaijan over Armenia.
The author of the post suggests this is one more step in the
war on Russia and China. Certainly, this
region is about as close to Russia as is the Ukraine and perhaps even more
dangerous given the added fuel of Muslim / Christian concerns, Russia’s very
volatile South Caucasus, Turkey’s recent aggression toward Russia, trained
terrorists in the region, conflict stretching from here through Iraq and Syria,
eastward to Afghanistan, etc.
Finally, in case there is confusion regarding Turkey’s
official position:
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of
Turkey backed the Azerbaijani position “to the end,” according to a statement
from his office. “We pray our Azerbaijani brothers will prevail in these
clashes,” he was quoted as saying.
The only country interrupting a continuous arc of Turkic
nations from Istanbul to western China is…Armenia. One hundred years ago, the
Turks came close to solving this “problem.”
I accept the fog of war – which side started it, etc. Yet…since hearing of this sudden increase in
the conflict…one question doesn’t leave me: what does Nagorno-Karabakh have to
gain by launching an attack against Azerbaijan?
To the extent I understand the situation, I can think of none – the
status quo allows for the local Armenians an independence from the Azeri
government. Do the Armenians believe
they will conquer Baku?
What took me so long to begin writing about this most recent
event – now several months old? I had to
wait for a book: Armenia
in Crisis: The 1988 Earthquake, by Pierre Verluise. I wanted some more information about the
recent history – the history of secession.
What does an earthquake have to do with any of this? At the same time that secessionist stirring
was occurring in the Nagorno-Karabakh region, northern Armenia was hit with a
devastating earthquake. The story of the
earthquake and its aftermath cannot be told without also telling the story of
the war.
In this book are some interesting tidbits about the immediate
aftermath of the war of over twenty years ago:
What would be ideal for Turkey and Azerbaijan
is to draw Armenia into a brief but intense war between Armenia and Azerbaijan,
with Turkey aiding the Azerbaijanis but putting up a publicly neutral
face. Armenia would be subdued and
forced to surrender her southern provinces, thus linking the two Turkish states
to the east (Azerbaijan) and west (Turkey) of Armenia.
Again, writing regarding the earlier hot war:
The Turkish Defense Minister,
Nevzat Ayaz, has denied the participation of any Turkish troops in the Karabagh
conflict, although he did acknowledge that retired Turkish generals may have
gone to Azerbaijan on their own initiative.
At least one Turkish and one Arabic paper report more direct
involvement. A story in the 5 July 1992
issue of Cumhuriet (a Turkish paper)
reported that ten Turkish generals were in Azerbaijan to train military forces
there. On 10 July Alshark-el-Aswat (an Arabic paper) reported the presence of over
1,000 Turkish military specialists, including 160 officers, in Azerbaijan. Alpaslan Turkesh, founder of the Turkish
fascist Gray Wolves, admitted that his followers were fighting in Karabagh with
Azerbaijani forces. Since that time,
President [of Azerbaijan] Aliyev has imported as many as 2,000 mujaheddin fighters from Afghanistan as
well as other mercenary forces.
So I still can’t get to what I intend to get to –
decentralization, secession, culture etc., because what I have read from the
history of twenty years ago sounds very familiar.
Azerbaijan’s latest violent
escalation was gleefully egged on by Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu:
The whole world should know that
Turkey will stand shoulder to shoulder with Azerbaijan against these Armenian
attacks until the end of the world. Our 78 million-strong population will
continue to stand on Azerbaijan’s side until all of its lands under occupation
have been liberated.
From a second
post by Hagopian:
Spokesman for the Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic David Babayan stated several days ago that evidence is emerging that
strongly points to Azerbaijan once again being joined by the unsavory likes of
Turkish Grey Wolves and even Islamic State terrorists fresh from the Raqqa,
Syria battlefields. Firsthand accounts from witnesses in the overrun NK village
of Talish claim that Armenian families and soldiers are being beheaded and
brutally executed with ears cut off that confirm the pattern of barbaric
foreign mercenaries fighting alongside the Azeri army.
Other accounts based on military
sources also reveal that an Azeri ISIS brigade has rushed from Syria to fight
another war in Nagorno-Karabakh. Finally the Iranian ARAN agency has published
that ISIS has had a special training ground reserved for Azeri Islamic State
recruits located on the Iraqi-Syrian border that is now fighting against
Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh.
Apparently US-birthed ISIS fighters are not only coming to
the west.
In case this mix isn’t toxic enough: arms sales by Russia to
both Armenia and Azerbaijan; arms sales by Israel to Azerbaijan, Russian troops
man the border between Armenia and Turkey (the border between the former Soviet
Union and NATO); an intractable situation on the ground – no peaceful solution
is acceptable to all parties, and genocide both remembered by and being
threatened against the Armenian population.
A tiny enclave, in an obscure corner of the world; the
poorest of the poor, barely carving out a life.
If a village has one cow, it is considered a wealthy village. No oil – the Azeri oil is east of this
region, in the Caspian Sea. Why would
anyone outside of the region care about managing the affairs of those in the
region? Frankly, why would anyone in the
region care to manage the affairs of those inside?
In other words, why does it matter to anyone but the people
who live there? Control. Power and authority are its own rewards. This is true for the Azeri desire to exercise
political control over a very poor lot of people who do not want to be governed
by Baku.
It is also true geopolitically. This conflict offers turmoil about as close
as one can get to the world island of Russia and China. The objective of surrounding this island has
proven sufficient to explain virtually every significant conflict in Europe,
Asia, and the Middle East over the last one hundred years and more.
Conclusion
With all of that background information out of the way, as
mentioned up front: I think this situation offers a real-world example of the
benefits offered by secession, decentralization and respect for property rights.
It is the precise sentiment behind the American Revolution
and also behind what is referred to as the American Civil War. It has nothing to do with racism, angry white
men, or being pro-slavery – in fact, it offers the most anti-slavery possibility.
If one is looking for a peaceful method by which to resolve
such conflicts, I can think of no other.
I have to agree with the general logic set forth. But as to the Civil War, the intractable part of the issue was the extensible territory then recently taken from Mexico. Governance and the dependent issue of free/slave regarding this territory lent a certain intractability to the North/South issue.
ReplyDeleteTomO