This report is the most recent published before the current conflict. It speaks on how the breakout of fighting in July 2020 “interrupted what had been a stretch of relative quiet on the Armenia-Azerbaijan border.” Importantly, it warns what the two nations must do in order to mediate this clash, and take preventative measures to evade the possibility of what could be an all-out war (which did end up occurring).
If they move quickly, Armenia and Azerbaijan could break out of their long impasse over the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. They could pursue quiet talks on thorny issues – settlements, peacekeepers and final status – but along separate tracks rather than in a single package.” Essentially, this report explores the narrow opening in potential discussions over Nagorno-Karabakh at the time, and offers advice on how the two nations “could start talks on issues underpinning the standoff.” This is all because “a new government in Yerevan said it was ready to seek a compromise solution,” and “Baku appeared to be more open to exploring ways to resolve the dispute.
This resource explains the fragility of the conflict settlement efforts in 2017, and speaks on how both countries were at the time closer to war than ever. It exposes the underlying distrust between the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan, and advises mediators Russia, France, and the U.S. to step in and “pressure Yerevan and Baku to tone down inflammatory rhetoric.”
This report explores the brief military battle between Armenia and Azerbaijan in April 2016. It talks about how the regional context had changed profoundly at the time, explains the negotiations agreed upon by both countries’ presidents, and warns how the risk of resumed military escalation could mean significant destruction.
This report explores the various factors that draw the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict both toward and away from war. With commentary on oil money, presidential elections in both countries, and authorizations from the co-chairs of the Minsk Group, this is a good resource to see how different elements contributed to the risk of war in 2007.
Eleven years after the 1994 ceasefire, burgeoning defense budgets, increasing ceasefire violations, and continuing demonization by each side of the other side are ominous signs that time for a peace agreement is running out. But a compromise can now be constructed around an approach that, while addressing all the matters in dispute, leaves the core issue of Nagorno-Karabakh’s ultimate status open for later resolution, after other measures have been put in place.
This report details the increasing risk in the Nagorno-Karabakh region between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Stating that in the region “there is neither war nor peace,” it explores the conflict from the ground up. Detailing the number of inhabitants of each nationality within the land, the internal declarations, and ceasefire violations, this source offers a good grasp of what is happening in Nagorno-Karabakh in 2005.
This resource explores every facet into determining exactly how free of a region Nagorno-Karabakh is. From describing recent political developments from the previous year, to including facts regarding civil liberties and individual rights, this report dives deep into the political relations in Nagorno-Karabakh. (2020 EDITION).
This resource explores every facet into determining exactly how free of a region Nagorno-Karabakh is. From describing recent political developments from the previous year, to including facts regarding civil liberties and individual rights, this report dives deep into the political relations in Nagorno-Karabakh. (2019 EDITION).
This report by the Helsinki Commission very generally explores the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. It provides background on the origins of the conflict, and serves as a timeline in describing when conflict broke out and what the outcome was. Additionally, it explains diplomatic relations between the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, and even offers the role of the U.S. Helsinki Commission in resolving this conflict.