International Crisis Group issues new report on Karabakh.

Stronger international engagement is needed to help prevent the deadly conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan from escalating gravely at a time of internal political tensions in both.

In its latest briefing, Armenia and Azerbaijan: A Season of Risks, the International Crisis Group examines possible scenarios for a conflict that could explode at any time. Since peace talks broke down in 2011 over Nagorno-Karabakh - the Azerbaijan enclave seized and occupied by Armenian forces in the fighting that accompanied the break-up of the Soviet Union - arms purchases and war rhetoric have gained momentum on both sides. In this tense situation, exacerbated by domestic political competition, the greatest danger is an accidental war.

The briefing's major findings and recommendations are:

•Since 2011, both sides have vastly augmented their military budgets and developed detailed war contingency plans. There is a real risk that miscalculations, brinkmanship or the increasingly frequent skirmishes in geographically widespread front-line areas could lead to an outbreak of full-scale fighting, pulling in some or all of the regional powers: Russia, Turkey and Iran.

•The coming months pose special challenges, as both countries deal with internal political tensions. In Armenia, opposition groups are planning an autumn of protest. In Azerbaijan, the government fears disorder after the presidential elections - virtually certain to be won by the authoritarian incumbent - in October. Both sides' domestic pressures could limit their efforts to re-invigorate the mediation process or enter direct negotiations.

•Vigilance from international actors, especially the mediators of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) - namely Russia, the U.S. and France, the co-chairs of its "Minsk Group" - as well as the EU, is needed to prevent an escalation. They should highlight the risks of miscalculation and the huge costs for both sides of any return to open hostilities. Russia, as an influential player in this conflict, should work more decisively towards an agreement and cease supplying arms to both sides.

•A crisis hotline should be re-established between Yerevan and Baku to lessen chances of a military escalation.

"Unrest at home might tempt leaders to deflect attention by raising military tensions or to embark on risky attempts to capitalise on their adversary's troubles", says Lawrence Scott Sheets, Crisis Group's South Caucasus Project Director. "Both sides are given to provocative gestures".

"The immediate effort required of mediators and other supporters of a peace process is modest, yet urgent", says Paul Quinn-Judge, Crisis Group's Europe and Central Asia Program Director. "They need to start talking about the risks of Baku's and Yerevan's ‘in-your-face' approach. Then, both countries need to be brought back to the table before someone decides the time has come to use their expensive new weapons".

You can read the full report in english here

source: International Crisis Group.

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

 Six major European countries have declared their support to Denmark following renewed insistence by the US that it must have control over Greenland. "Greenland belongs to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland can decide on matters concerning their relations," said the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain, in a joint statement, issued on Tuesday (6 January), together with Denmark. On Sunday, Donald Trump said the US "needed" Greenland - a semi-autonomous region of fellow Nato member Denmark - for security reasons. He has refused to rule out the use of force to take control of the territory, and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned on Monday that an attack by the US would spell the end of Nato. The issue of Greenland's future resurfaced in the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela, during which elite troops went in to seize the country's President Nicolás Maduro and take him to face drugs and weapons charges in New York. Following the raid, Trump said the US would "run" Venezuela for an unspecified period of time. He also said the US was returning to an 1823 policy of US supremacy in its sphere of influence in the Western hemisphere - and he warned a number of countries the US could turn its attention to them. The US military raid in Venezuela has reignited fears that the US may consider using force to secure control of Greenland. A day after the raid, Katie Miller - the wife of one of Trump's senior aides - posted on social media a map of Greenland in the colours of the American flag, alongside the word "SOON". On Monday, her husband Stephen Miller said it was "the formal position of the US government that Greenland should be part of the US". In an interview with CNN, he also said the US "is the power of Nato. For the US to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend Nato and Nato interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the US." Asked repeatedly whether the US would rule out using force to annex it, Miller responded: "Nobody's going to fight the US over the future of Greenland." Stressing they were as keen as the US in Arctic security, the seven European signatories of Tuesday's joint statement said this must be achieved by Nato allies, including the US "collectively" - whilst "upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders". Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen welcomed the statement and called for "respectful dialogue". "The dialogue must take place with respect for the fact that Greenland's status is rooted in international law and the principle of territorial integrity," Nielsen said. Trump has claimed that making Greenland part of the US would serve American security interests due to its strategic location and its abundance of minerals critical to high-tech sectors. Greenland, which has a population of 57,000 people, has had extensive self-government since 1979, though defence and foreign policy remain in Danish hands. While most Greenlanders favour eventual independence from Denmark, opinion polls show overwhelming opposition to becoming part of the US.

Popular