Nagorno-Karabakh: Viewing the conflict from the ground
Source: International Crisis Group (ICG)
Date: 14 Sep 2005
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh is the most significant obstacle to peace and stability in the South Caucasus. Eleven years into a ceasefire, the parties have been unable to sign a single document bringing them closer to a settlement. Whatever is being done at the internationally mediated negotiations, at ground level resumed war appears a real possibility. There is need to counter the hate propaganda and demonising engaged in by both sides and unlock the potential for confidence building and dialogue between average Azeris and Armenians before the memories of cohabitation fade and the divide becomes virtually unbridgeable.
Nagorno-Karabakh has aspirations for independence and argues with some reason that it has a democratically-elected government that is meeting the preconditions of statehood. However, it is internationally recognised as part of Azerbaijan and is still highly dependant on Armenia for its military security and economic survival: [...]. Nagono-Karabakh has mono-ethnic institutions and {has} become one of the world's most militarised societies.
Deprived of the basic right to return to their homes, over half a million Azeris displaced from Nagorno-Karabakh and seven adjacent districts have become highly dependent on the Azerbaijani state, without a clear sense of their future. For years Baku's policies toward the displaced were designed to meet short-term needs, with the expectation they could return home soon. [...] the displaced remain poorer and more disadvantaged than their fellow citizens, struggling to increase participation in political life not only to speed up prospects for return but also to improve their immediate situation.
[...]
Armenian and Azerbaijani public opinion on how to resolve the conflict is as divided as ever. [...].
[...] time for a peaceful settlement may be running out.
Parallel processes are needed for a stable settlement. [...].
[...]
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.
Date: 14 Sep 2005
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh is the most significant obstacle to peace and stability in the South Caucasus. Eleven years into a ceasefire, the parties have been unable to sign a single document bringing them closer to a settlement. Whatever is being done at the internationally mediated negotiations, at ground level resumed war appears a real possibility. There is need to counter the hate propaganda and demonising engaged in by both sides and unlock the potential for confidence building and dialogue between average Azeris and Armenians before the memories of cohabitation fade and the divide becomes virtually unbridgeable.
Nagorno-Karabakh has aspirations for independence and argues with some reason that it has a democratically-elected government that is meeting the preconditions of statehood. However, it is internationally recognised as part of Azerbaijan and is still highly dependant on Armenia for its military security and economic survival: [...]. Nagono-Karabakh has mono-ethnic institutions and {has} become one of the world's most militarised societies.
Deprived of the basic right to return to their homes, over half a million Azeris displaced from Nagorno-Karabakh and seven adjacent districts have become highly dependent on the Azerbaijani state, without a clear sense of their future. For years Baku's policies toward the displaced were designed to meet short-term needs, with the expectation they could return home soon. [...] the displaced remain poorer and more disadvantaged than their fellow citizens, struggling to increase participation in political life not only to speed up prospects for return but also to improve their immediate situation.
[...]
Armenian and Azerbaijani public opinion on how to resolve the conflict is as divided as ever. [...].
[...] time for a peaceful settlement may be running out.
Parallel processes are needed for a stable settlement. [...].
[...]
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.
posted by Vahe Balabanian at 7:49 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home