“ How conflict and casualties of Nagorno-Karabkh lead to globalization?”
In this research paper one will go through the history of the two states and their role during the Soviet Era.One will also undergo the casualties faced by the troops on the both sides, Armenians as well as Azeris. Two Wars fought by Armenia and Azerbaijan other than the conflict that has occurred on the cause of negative Nagorno-Karabakh. One will discuss the role of Russia and Turkey in the peacekeeping and how these countries globalized to seek resolution for the conflict. One will also go through the role of United Nations and Pakistan in a very brief manner. Factors leading to resolution will also be discussed.
The mountainous territory of Nagorno and Karabakh having Armenian Christian majority and ruled by Muslim Azeri ruler, called, Khan. It is in south west of Azerbaijan. In early 1800s, control was passed to Russian Empire and then to Soviet Union following Bolshevik revolution in 1918 after World War I. After World War I, in the middle of confusion and chaos pf Russian civil war, Armenia and Azerbaijan declared independence. From then the real conflict originated. There was often clash for territories among two states. Nagorno-Karabakh was one of them. Russia called a territory Caucasus, was surrounded by red army. Stalin being native of that area. Borders of Karabakh were assigned in 1923 and Nagorno-Karabakh sovereign territory became a part of Azerbaijan S.S.R(Soviet Socialist Republic). Due to this settlement an area called Naxcivan came into being which is sandwiched between Armenia and Iran but, does not define properly, the border of Azerbaijan. At that time Nagorno-Karabakh was claimed by both Armenia and Azerbaijan.
In 1918 ethno-religious rigidity arose between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Thousands of Muslims were assassinated. Azerbaijan seek aid from Great Britain to occupy Nagorno-Karabakh.
WAR OF NAGORNO-KARABAKH (1920)
In 1920 a war was fought between Azerbaijan and Armenia for Nagorno-Karabakh. It all began when Armenia unpredictably launched attacks. But due to bad co-ordination the attacks failed badly and city of Shusha, Armenia was shattered into pieces.
THE SOVIET ERA
In July 1920, Soviet Union without any plebiscite decided the faith of Karabakh. It was decided to merge Karabakh in to Armenia, but later on this plan was cancelled. Many decisions were made to relocate the territories during the times of Stalin in 1923. Azeri people were largely discriminated by dominant Armenian population.
WAR OF NAGORNO-KARABAKH (1991)
On September 26, 1991 Soviet Union dissolved which resulted in 15 independent republics. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan became independent states. Military action between two countries continued and it was impacted by Russia. This war caused many casualties and both countries suffered harsh consequences. Thousands of people died on both sides. Countries like Russia, Kazakhstan and Iran tried mediation, even UN tried to resolve the issue which advanced to peace talks. In 1993 UN asked Armenia for ceasefire. Turkey deployed its forces on Armenian border to threaten Armenian forces forceasefire was signed but most of territory was still under Armenian forces. But this region is internationally known as Azerbaijani territory but it was under Armenian forces since 1994.
The search for solution to conflict was complicated due to territories political yearning and hope.
Territory of Nagorno-Karabakh announced independence in 1992 and held several elections yet it was not free from forces of the sides.
In 2008, Armenian president Serzh Sarkisyan and Azeri president signed a pact so intensify the efforts towards resolution. Despite of the efforts, many clashes occurred during 2010s.
Four days of war
In April 2016 there was a wave of war between Armenia and Azerbaijan. This war continued for four days but it was very destructive. It caused many deaths of military troops as well as civilians. More than 30,000 people were killed on both sides since 1992.
In 2019, new government came in Armenia after long term ruler Serzh Sarkisyan. But, there was disintegration in diplomacy which lead to a huge conflict in 2020.
NAGORONO-KARABAKH WAR OF 2020
July 12 2020, on the day of Sunday, conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan was once again initiated. Initial conflict initiated in Province Tavush in Armenia and Tovuz district in Azerbaijan, at the borders of two states. Armenia and Azerbaijan, both countries accused each other of re-engaging in the conflict. Ganja gap, a route that is economic, energy and transport corridor of Azerbaijan. Armenia , in that region revived its old military checkpoint. According to a source it was revealed that scrimmage was initiated by Armenia. This ignition disrupted the function of Ganja gap. These skirmishes caused many casualties. Many people went homeless, many died including military personnel and civilians.
OPERATION IRON FIST
War of 2020 is named as “Operation Iron Fist” by Azerbaijan. It was an armed conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan following the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. It was ignition of the past unresolved conflict. Armed confrontation began on September 27, 2020 on the line of control. Armenia and Azerbaijan, both announced martial law, and mobilization was also introduced by Armenia. Turkey, in order to increase its scope of influence supported Azerbaijan militarly. In this war types of modern warfare were used. Heavy artillery, drones and long range missiles were used. United Nations vigorously accursed both countries and advised for ceasefire.
After the occupation of Shusha which is 2nd largest occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh a peace treaty was signed between two countries with help of Russian President. On 10th November 2020. It was decided in the peace treaty that Azerbaijan would keep the territory it occupied and Armenia will return the areas that it occupied in past (1994).
BREACHING OF PEACE TREATY
On November 26 2020, peace treaty was breached when 3 Azeri servicemen were killed Armenian forces. Same steps were followed on December 8, when another person was killed by Armenian forces. Russian peace keeping forces also witnessed breaching of ceasefire on December 11th.
TURKISH AND RUSSIAN PEACEKEEPING (PATH TOWARDS GLOBALIZATION)
Russia have good ties with Azerbaijan and Armenia as well and it had to defend Armenia in the recent conflict Russia contributed 2000 servicemen for peacekeeping mission. It was part of ceasefire agreement. ICRC was accompanied by Russian peacekeeping forces in collecting the dead bodies of people and soldiers. Turkey and Russia signed a memorandum for creating a monitoring center in Azerbaijan. Both countries are going to work together to enhance the phenomenon of “Globalization” Turkish parliament approved the request for deploying peacekeepers in Azerbaijan, the motion got approval. Turkish excavator came to Azerbaijan. Turkish defense minister and minister of foreign affairs of Russia agreed that both countries will work remotely in the monitoring center. On December 16th, 136 Turkish land troops were deployed in Azerbaijan. Further, Turkey has religious and ethnic ties with Azerbaijan. They also have some historical ties. Back then when Turkey was Ottoman empire it helped Azerbaijan regain independence from Russia in 1918.
Pakistan and Turkey are great allies. Pakistan firmly supported Azerbaijan on the cause of Nagorno-Karabakh.
This support influenced the diplomacy of Pakistan greatly.
CONFLICT LEADING TO GLOBALIZATION
We saw how two countries globalized for peace process. Role of United Nations, Pakistan, Iran, Syria is worth mentioning. This conflict lead to globalization of many countries of world which lead to resolution of the conflict.
After the conflict that has continued for more than a century, even after ceasefires, conflict finally came to an end in 2020 when Azerbaijan was announced victorious after more than two wars on the cause of disputed territories. Azeri people commemorated this triumph with great joy and vigor.
Conclusion of all this above held argument was that to describe the role of the two states in the conflict of Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijan and Armenia have been facing many casualties since past times. More than two Wars were fought between the two countries. first war did not provide any fruit to either of the state but the second war which was initiated by Armenia itself decided the fate of Nagorno-Karabakh. The Second war which was initiated in 2020 came with outcomes, Azerbaijan as the victor will Armenia as the loser. Control of Nagorno-Karabakh and other disputed areas was given to Azerbaijan subsequently peace Treaty which was signed between the two States with assistance of Russia. Wars are never joyous after-shots of War are unpredictable. The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan also resulted in many casualties including the death of many troops as well as civilians on both sides and destruction of houses and many buildings.
Latvia developed new tasks for NATO soldiers
Member of the Latvian Saemas’ national association “Everything for Latvia!” and Freedom”/LNNK Jānis Dombrava stated the need to attract NATO troops to resolve the migration crisis. This is reported by la.lv. In his opinion, illegal migration from the Middle East to Europe may acquire the feature of an invasion. He believes that under the guise of refugees, foreign military and intelligence officers can enter the country. To his mind, in this case, the involvement of the alliance forces is more reasonable and effective than the actions of the European border agencies. Dombrava also noted that in the face of an increase in the flow of refugees, the government may even neglect the observance of human rights.
The Canadian-led battlegroup in Latvia at Camp Ādaži consists of approximately 1512 soldiers, as well as military equipment, including tanks and armoured fighting vehicles.
Though the main task of the battlegroup in Latvia is country’s defence in case of military aggression, Latvian officials unilaterally invented new tasks for NATO soldiers So, it is absolutely clear, that Latvian politicians are ready to allow NATO troops to resolve any problem even without legal basis. Such deification and complete trust could lead to the full substitution of NATO’s real tasks in Latvia.
It should be noted that NATO troops are very far from being ideal soldiers. Their inappropriate behaviour is very often in a centre of scandals. The recent incidents prove the existing problems within NATO contingents in the Baltic States.
They are not always ready to fulfill their tasks during military exercises and training. And in this situation Latvian politicians call to use them as border guards! It is nonsense! It seems as if it is time to narrow their tasks rather than to widen them. They are just guests for some time in the territory of the Baltic States. It could happen that they would decide who will enter Latvia and who will be forbidden to cross the border!
Changes are Possible: Which Reforms does Ukraine Need Now?
The past 16 months have tested our resilience to sudden, unexpected, and prolonged shocks. As for an individual, resilience for a country or economy is reflected in how well it has prepared for an uncertain future.
A look around the globe reveals how resilient countries have been to the COVID-19 pandemic. Some have done well, others less so. The costs of having done less well are almost always borne by the poor. It is for this reason the World Bank and the international community more broadly urge—and provide support to—countries to undertake economic and structural reforms, not just for today’s challenges but tomorrow’s.
One country where the dialogue on reform has been longstanding and intense is Ukraine. This is particularly true since the economic crisis of 2014-2015 in the wake of the Maidan Revolution, when the economy collapsed, and poverty skyrocketed. Many feared the COVID pandemic would have similar effects on the country.
The good news is that thanks to a sustained, even if often difficult, movement on reforms, Ukraine is better positioned to emerge from the pandemic than many expected. Our initial projection in the World Bank, for example, was that the economy would contract by nearly 8 percent in 2020; the actual decline was half that. Gross international reserves at end-2020 were US$10 billion higher than projected. Most important, there are far fewer poor than anticipated.
Let’s consider three reform areas which have contributed to these outcomes.
First, no area of the economy contributed more to the economic crisis of 2014-2015 than the banking sector. Powerful interests captured the largest banks, distorted the flow of capital, and strangled economic activity. Fortunately, Ukraine developed a framework to resolve and recapitalize banks and strengthen supervision. Privatbank was nationalized and is now earning profits. It is now being prepared for privatization.
Second, COVID halted and threatened to reverse a five-year trend in poverty reduction. Thanks to reforms of the social safety net, Ukraine is avoiding this reversal. A few years back, the government was spending some 4.7 percent of GDP on social programs with limited poverty impact. Nearly half these resources went to an energy subsidy that expanded to cover one-in-two of the country’s households.
Since 2018, the Government has been restructuring the system by reducing broad subsidies and targeting resources to the poor. This is working. Transfers going to the poorest one-fifth of the population are rising significantly—from just 37 percent in 2019 to 50 percent this year and are projected to reach 55 percent in 2023.
Third, the health system itself. Ukrainians live a decade less than their EU neighbors. Basic epidemiological vulnerabilities are exacerbated by a health delivery system centered around outdated hospitals and an excessive reliance on out-of-pocket spending. In 2017, Ukraine passed a landmark health financing law defining a package of primary care for all Ukrainians, free-of-charge. The law is transforming Ukraine’s constitutional commitment to free health care from an aspiration into specific critical services that are actually being delivered.
The performance of these sectors, which were on the “front line” during COVID, demonstrate the payoff of reforms. The job now is to tackle the outstanding challenges.
The first is to reduce the reach of the public sector in the economy. Ukraine has some 3,500 companies owned by the state—most of them loss-making—in sectors from machine building to hotels. Ukraine needs far fewer SOEs. Those that remain must be better managed.
Ukraine has demonstrated that progress can be made in this area. The first round of corporate governance reforms has been successfully implemented at state-owned banks. Naftogaz was unbundled in 2020. The electricity sector too is being gradually liberalized. Tariffs have increased and reforms are expected to support investment in aging electricity-producing and transmitting infrastructure. Investments in renewable energy are also surging.
But there are developments of concern, including a recent removal of the CEO of an SOE which raised concerns among Ukraine’s friends eager to see management independence of these enterprises. Management functions of SOE supervisory boards and their members need to remain free of interference.
The second challenge is to strengthen the rule of law. Over recent years, the country has established—and has committed to protect—new institutions to combat corruption. These need to be allowed to function professionally and independently. And they need to be supported by a judicial system defined by integrity and transparency. The move to re-establish an independent High Qualification Council is a welcome step in this direction.
Finally, we know change is possible because after nearly twenty years, Ukraine on July first opened its agricultural land market. Farmers are now free to sell their land which will help unleash the country’s greatest potential source of economic growth and employment.
Ukraine has demonstrated its ability to undertake tough reforms and, thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic, has seen the real-life benefits of these reforms. The World Bank looks forward to providing continued assistance as the country takes on new challenges on the way to closer European integration.
This article was first published in European Pravda via World Bank
Liberal Development at Stake as LGBT+ Flags Burn in Georgia
Protests against Georgia’s LGBT+ Pride parade turned ugly in Tbilisi on July 5 when members of the community were hunted down and attacked, around 50 journalists beaten up and the offices of various organizations vandalized. Tensions continued the following day, despite a heavy police presence.
On the face of it, the Georgian state condemned the violence. President Salome Zourabichvili was among the first with a clear statement supporting freedom of expression, members of parliament did likewise and the Ministry of Internal Affairs condemned any form of violence.
But behind the scenes, another less tolerant message had been spread before the attacks. Anxiety about this year’s events had been rising as a result of statements by the government and clergy. Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili suggested the march “poses a threat of civil strife.” The Georgian Orthodox Church meanwhile condemned the event, saying it, “contains signs of provocation, conflicts with socially recognized moral norms and aims to legalize grave sin.”
For many, these statements signified tacit approval for the abuse of peaceful demonstrators. Meanwhile, the near-complete absence of security at the outset of the five-day event was all too obvious in Tbilisi’s streets and caused a public outcry. Many alleged the government was less focused on public safety than on upcoming elections where will need support from socially conservative voters and the powerful clergy, in a country where more than 80% of the population is tied to the Georgian Orthodox Church.
The violence brought a joint statement of condemnation from Western embassies. “Violence is simply unacceptable and cannot be excused,” it said. The Pride event was not the first and had previously been used by anti-gay groups. Violence was widespread in 2013 — and the reality of attacks against sexual minorities in Georgia remains ever-present.
In a socially conservative country such as Georgia, antagonism to all things liberal can run deep. Resistance to non-traditional sexual and religious mores divides society. This in turn causes political tension and polarization and can drown out discussion of other problems the country is marred in. It very obviously damages the country’s reputation abroad, where the treatment of minorities is considered a key marker of democratic progress and readiness for further involvement in European institutions.
That is why this violence should also be seen from a broader perspective. It is a challenge to liberal ideas and ultimately to the liberal world order.
A country can be democratic, have a multiplicity of parties, active election campaigns, and other features characteristic of rule by popular consent. But democracies can also be ruled by illiberal methods, used for the preservation of political power, the denigration of opposing political forces, and most of all the use of religious and nationalist sentiments to raise or lower tensions.
It happens across Eurasia, and Georgia is no exception. These are hybrid democracies with nominally democratic rule. Armenia, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, and others have increasingly more in common, despite geographic distance and cultural differences.
Hungary too has been treading this path. Its recent law banning the supposed propagation of LGBT+ materials in schools must be repealed, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on July 7. “This legislation uses the protection of children . . . to discriminate against people because of their sexual orientation . . . It is a disgrace,” she said.
One of the defining features of illiberalism is agility in appropriating ideas on state governance and molding them to the illiberal agenda.
It is true that a mere 30 years since the collapse of the Soviet Union is not enough to have built a truly liberal democratic state. Generations born and raised in the Soviet period or in the troubled 1990s still dominate the political landscape. This means that a different worldview still prevails. It favors democratic development but is also violently nationalistic in opposing liberal state-building.
Georgia’s growing illiberalism has to be understood in the context of the Russian gravitational pull. Blaming all the internal problems of Russia’s neighbors has become mainstream thinking among opposition politicians, NGOs, and sometimes even government figures. Exaggeration is commonplace, but when looking at the illiberal challenge from a long-term perspective, it becomes clear where Russia has succeeded in its illiberal goals. It is determined to stop Georgia from joining NATO and the EU. Partly as a result, the process drags on and this causes friction across society. Belief in the ultimate success of the liberal agenda is meanwhile undermined and alternatives are sought. Hybrid illiberal governments are the most plausible development. The next stage could well be a total abandonment of Euro-Atlantic aspirations.
Indeed what seemed irrevocable now seems probable, if not real. Pushback against Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic choice is growing stronger. Protesters in front of the parliament in central Tbilisi violently brought tore the EU flag. Twice.
The message of anti-liberal groups has also been evolving. There has been significant growth in their messaging. The anti-pride sentiment is evolving into a wider resistance to the Western way of life and Georgia’s Western foreign policy path, perhaps because it is easily attacked and misrepresented.
To deal with this, Western support is important, but much depends on Georgian governments and the population at large. A pushback against radicalism and anti-liberalism should come in the guise of time and resources for the development of stronger and currently faltering institutions. Urgency in addressing these problems has never been higher — internal and foreign challenges converge and present a fundamental challenge to what Georgia has been pursuing since the days of Eduard Shevardnadze – the Western path to development.
Author’s note: first published at cepa
GCC Countries Back on Path to Economic Growth after Contraction Due to the Pandemic
Following a year of economic distress, Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) economies are expected to return to an aggregate growth of...
To the Beat of its Own Drum: On Internal Logic of Events in Tunisia
Once every five years or so, Tunisia finds itself in the headlines around the world. Last time, in 2015, it...
What Does NATO Withdrawal from Afghanistan Mean for Regional Actors?
By September 11, 2021, NATO’s 20-year operation in Afghanistan will come to a close. That date marks the 20th anniversary...
Afghanistan may be a bellwether for Saudi-Iranian rivalry
Boasting an almost 1,000-kilometer border with Iran and a history of troubled relations between the Iranians and Sunni Muslim militants,...
The various ways you can buy gold
Gold is usually valued as a commodity, currency, and investment for many years. This is why it’s still popular nowadays...
Passing the Test of the Covid Pandemic
For love of domination we must substitute equality; for love of victory we must substitute justice; for brutality we must...
How to ensure your Canadian public documents will be recognized in the EU?
If you are moving to the EU for work or educational purposes, or you want to live there for a...
South Asia3 days ago
Why Strategies of Stakeholders in Afghanistan Failing Against Taliban?
East Asia3 days ago
Belt & Road ABCs: Analysis of “One Belt – One Road” initiative
Economy3 days ago
The Politico-Economic Crisis of Lebanon
East Asia3 days ago
Behind the Rise of China is the Centenary Aspiration of the CPC for a Great China
Human Rights3 days ago
COVID-19: Education replaced by shuttered schools, violence, teenage pregnancy
Reports3 days ago
New Skills Development Key to Further Improving Students’ Learning Outcomes
Development2 days ago
Tanzania’s Economic Growth by Transforming Its Tourism Sector
Human Rights2 days ago
Conflict, COVID, climate crisis, likely to fuel acute food insecurity in 23 ‘hunger hotspots’