Conflict and Peace

The G7 Foreign Ministers, representing Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the High Representative of the European Union, concluded their two-day meeting in Tokyo on Wednesday (8 November), with a statement touching on a number of ongoing global crises. Winding up their meeting at the Iikura Guest House on 7-8 November under Japan's G7 Presidency, the ministers called for humanitarian pauses in the Israel-Hamas war to allow in aid and help the release of hostages and sought a return to a "broader peace process", as Israeli forces continue to strike the Gaza Strip. In the joint statement they said that Israel had the right to defend itself, while underscoring the need to protect civilians and to comply with international humanitarian law. On Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the Ministers said: Our steadfast commitment to supporting Ukraine’s fight for its independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity will never waver. We continue to condemn in the strongest possible terms Russia’s ongoing aggression, and we commit to standing by Ukraine for as long as it takes, while increasing economic pressure and imposing robust sanctions and other restrictions against Russia. A just and lasting peace cannot be realized without the immediate, complete, and unconditional withdrawal of Russia’s troops and military equipment from the internationally recognized territory of Ukraine. The statement also made reference to the situation in Central Asia and the South Caucasus. In their concluding statement, the ministers expressed unwavering support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Central Asian nations. "We remain resolved to support the sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity of Central Asian countries," the statement read. On the South Caucasus the statement said: "We are gravely concerned over the humanitarian consequences of the displacement of Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh after the military operation conducted by Azerbaijan. We urge Azerbaijan to fully comply with its obligations under international humanitarian law and welcome international efforts to address urgent humanitarian needs for those who have been displaced. We underline our support for advancing a sustainable and lasting peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan based on the principles of non-use of force, respect for sovereignty, the inviolability of borders, and territorial integrity."

The ongoing conflict, and accompanying humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza has cast a shadow over the entire Middle East. It is clear that no Arab country can now avoid being embroiled in one way or another. Pictures of the suffering that the Palestinian people in Gaza have to endure on a daily basis fill the screens of all news programmes, and on social media the situation is hotly debated. Arabs are overwhelmingly incensed that the world allows the suffering of the Palestinian people to continue. For the young generation, especially in the Gulf, this is the first exposure to a crisis of this kind. No doubt, the present atmosphere adds to the radicalisation of some among this generation. Those countries that only very recently took the bold step of establishing relations with Israel now face criticism which they cannot ignore. One of these countries, Bahrain, on Thursday (2 November) recalled its Ambassador to Israel and suspended economic ties. Earlier, Saudi Arabia stepped back from the process of normalising relations with Israel, and has become a very vocal critic of Israeli policy.

The Karabakh conflict, which has persisted for the past century, appears to have reached its inevitable conclusion. For Azerbaijan, this marks the end of separatism and the restoration of sovereignty. For the Armenians, it signifies the end of a long-held belief in a policy of confrontation with Azerbaijan. However, the  Azerbaijani-Armenian enmity still lingers, and we must earnestly assess whether it is moving towards stabilization, de-escalation, settlement, or forging a new equilibrium, writes Ramazan Samadov in this op-ed for commonspace.eu. "The current situation drags the region into some kind vicious circle. The three years that passed since the 2020 war were a bright example of such a circle, however it was stopped by Azerbaijan in a lighting style military operation in September 2023 and some new equilibrium emerged. Will  history repeat itself? We will see in the next few weeks and few months", he argues

The United Nations General Assembly on Friday (27 October), voted overwhelmingly, with 120 countries in favour, 14 against and 45 abstentions, to a resolution calling for an end of hostilities in Gaza and for humanitarian relief to the Palestinian people of Gaza. The resolution calls for an “immediate, durable and sustained humanitarian truce leading to a cessation of hostilities.” The vote, whilst not binding, gives moral support to efforts to get a similar resolution passed in the Security Council. As decided by the General Assembly earlier, the resolution required a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting to be adopted. There are 193 members of the United Nations. Most members of the Non-Aligned Movement, eight members of the European Union, and UN Security Council members France, China  and Russia were amongst those voting for the resolution. There could be noted however divisions in the voting patterns of EU members: Several of the EU 27 member states voted for the resolution, including: Belgium, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Spain and Slovenia. Five, joined the United States and Israel to vote against, namely Austria, Croatia, Czechia, Hungary Most EU countries abstained, including Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, The Netherlands, Poland and Romania, Slovakia and Sweden. Of the three South Caucasus countries, Armenia and Azerbaijan voted for the resolution, Georgia abstained. Ukraine and Moldova also abstained.

A meeting with the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan will be held in Brussels in the very near future, but it will not be held before the end of this month as had been previously hoped. This was stated by the EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus, Toivo Klaar. Speaking about the state of Armenia-Azerbaijan negotiations that are being facilitated by the European Union, Klaar said "We are moving slowly in the right direction". The EUSR for the South Caucasus addressed the forum "Making Progress in time of uncertainty" organised in Yerevan by the Applied Policy Research Institute, Armenia. Klaar spoke to participants on-line from Brussels. In his address Klaar spoke about the reaction of the European Union to events in Nagorno-Karabakh in September and said that the EU had taken a clear position , which was robustly communicated to interested parties. The EU is now calling for conditions to be created for the safe return of Armenians displaced from Nagorno-Karabakh. As regards on-going negotiations, Toivo Klaar said that the situation now is qualitatively different. The objective is the normalisation of relations between the sovereign state of Azerbaijan and the sovereign state of Armenia. There is now a window of opportunity to move forward with the objective of normalising relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The signing of a peace treaty is not an aim in itself, but simply an expression of this objective. Klaar said that peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan will have benefit for the whole region, and the aim of the EU was to see the South Caucasus as a place where all countries have normal diplomatic relations, there is movement of people and goods, and the whole region is opened up for economic co-operation. Speaking about Russia, EUSR Klaar said that the EU is not in the business of including and excluding anyone from the South Caucasus. Russia was an important close neighbour of the region and has its interests, as have the EU and the US. Klaar criticised the negative rhetoric coming from Moscow. Toivo Klaar said the EU will continue to support civil society initiatives aimed at promoting trust and confidence across the South Caucasus. He however emphasised that this can never be an alternative to political will on the part of the governments who need to lead by changing official narratives.