The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict: How Soviet Choices Continue to Shake the Foundations of Eastern Europe
Image courtesy of Unsplash. Public domain.
While the world continues to wrestle with the increasing restrictions imposed by the Covid-19 pandemic, the residents of Nagorno-Karabakh are facing a crisis of an entirely different nature. Officially Azerbaijani territory, but predominantly inhabited by Christian Armenians eager to claim their independence, Nagorno-Karabakh has intermittently been the setting of brutal conflict between the two ethnicities since the end of the Soviet era. What’s more, the current ceasefire has failed to put a stop to the hostilities, with the numbers of casualties rising by the day. Nearly thirty years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, this dispute on the Eastern borders of Europe remains profoundly influenced by its years under communist rule – not least because Russia is yet to release its grip on the former satellite states.
Paradoxically, Russia has been at the fore of peace negotiations concerning Nagorno-Karabakh, while the conflict itself is rooted in the Soviet Union’s decision to allocate the area to the Soviet of Azerbaijan. And despite Russia playing host to the peace negotiations that culminated in the recent ceasefire, it is often unclear how invested Russia really is in a peaceful resolution to the conflict. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan have been the recipients of arms from Russia, suggesting that Russia is uninclined to put an end to the fighting. Some say that Russia’s distribution of the contested area to Azerbaijan was part of a calculated strategy to enable the Soviet capital to continue to exert power over its formerly subordinate regions. Russia certainly seems to be inconsistent in its loyalties; having first delegated Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan in the Soviet era, it now seems to be leaning towards Armenia, an important location for the Russian armed forces. In addition, the Karabakhi economy has benefited greatly from Russian funding, so it is worth questioning Russia’s supposed impartiality. Yet in the Soviet era, Nagorno-Karabakh’s plea for independence was not only dismissed, but the decision enforced by the establishment of more restrictive Soviet supervision in the area. Assertion of independence and individualism did not fit with the USSR’s principles of socialist solidarity and was therefore to be crushed swiftly and efficiently to prevent further challenges to communist unity. It is possible that Russia is trying to reclaim the dedication of its former satellite states from the US, a nation which has gained a foothold in Armenia through its financial contributions following the dissolution of the USSR. In light of the major ventures undertaken by the US to advance the self-sufficiency of former satellite states, Russia may feel that its position of dominance in the area is under attack. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict could be Russia’s way of showing the US that the country is still a force to be reckoned with.
But Russia is not the only major state eager to promote its interests in this hotly contested area of Eastern Europe. Like Russia’s support for Armenia, Turkey’s interventions on behalf of Azerbaijan are not without their historical precedent. The continued Armenian resentment towards Turkey as a result of the widespread murder of Armenians by the Ottomans during the First World War may be part of the cause of Turkey’s decision to ally itself with Azerbaijan. Another reason that has been brought to the fore is Turkey’s hope to assert its dominance in the area, aiming to replace Russia as the prevailing foreign power in the region that shares Turkey’s language and elements of its culture. Yet Turkey’s ability to provide unconditional backing for Azerbaijan may be limited by its personal political goals and relationship with other key international actors. In their bid to become part of the European Union, Turkish government officials may find themselves caught between loyalty to their Azerbaijani ally and unwillingness to aggravate major European powers.
One Turkish strategy which has proven to be particularly controversial is the alleged implementation of soldiers from Syria fighting for Turkey and Azerbaijan’s cause. The accusation is that Turkey is exploiting the extreme economic crisis faced by many Syrians as a result of the civil war, using the prospect of a lavish salary to convince young Syrian men on the brink of starvation to sign up. France, in particular, has openly condemned this choice on Turkey’s part, although the response from Turkey has been a complete rejection of the rumours. However, those speaking out on social media are insistent that Syrian mercenaries are fighting on the Nagorno-Karabakh battlefield.
To add to the complexity of the situation, there is another factor making the regional dispute in Nagorno-Karabakh a conflict of global importance. Although Azerbaijan may seem to be on the periphery of the European continent, its supply of oil and gas means the area is in many ways at the heart of the European economy. This makes it a particularly attractive area for Russia to gain command of, and this desire has only been intensified by the European Union’s attempts to cultivate the region as a potential alternative to Russia as a provider of fossil fuels. Not only will the European funding that has been poured into these projects go to waste if the conflict perseveres, but Europe will also find itself once more exposed to Russia’s whims, placing the continent in a tricky position politically and economically. The conflict that began as an ethnic dispute in a remote region of Eastern Europe has therefore taken on global proportions, acting as a battlefield for wider tensions between the European Union, Russia and Turkey, and it remains to be seen who will emerge victorious.
Only time will tell whether these major powers, alongside Armenia and Azerbaijan themselves, will succeed in coming to a peaceful settlement of the conflict. Decades after the dissolution of the USSR, Russia’s interest in the area has shown no signs of waning. The Nagorno-Karabakh controversially may provide the perfect opportunity for Russia to regain its status as a global superpower alongside its rivals in the US and the European Union. One thing, however, remains abundantly clear – the Covid-19 pandemic has by no means halted the development of political debates. On the contrary, the global economic crisis induced by the current health situation may mean that the stakes are higher than ever.
