Nagorno-Karabakh conflict: Why are Armenia and Azerbaijan fighting over the region?

What began almost a century ago as a dispute over Nagor-Karabakh region, has over years resulted in severe human rights violations, failed diplomatic talks, refugee crisis, deaths and destruction. Tensions over contended South Caucasus piece of land mounted up again last week, with Armenia and Azerbaijan blaming each or over who instigated most recent conflict. While both Transcaucasian countries held 'substantive' talks on October 10 in Moscow, re were alrey reports of fresh fighting between two forces just hours after a ceasefire came into force. 

Fresh conflict hit Nagor-Karabakh region on September 27, bringing issue back into limelight. More than 400 people have been reportedly killed since n and thousands more displaced (Azerbaijan has still t released data of losses on ir side). Both former Soviet nations have blamed each or for fresh round of artillery firings, considered worst flare-up region has seen so far.

So what led to this conflict? Why are Armenia and Azerbaijan fighting over Nagor-Karabakh region? And more importantly, what are stakes here for Russia and Turkey? 

Roots of conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan

While internationally, Nagor-Karabakh region is recognised as a de jure part of Azerbaijan, Armenians claim that region was a part of ir kingdom from fourth century BCE. Joseph Stalin decided to make Nagor-Karabakh region an automous oblast of Azerbaijan. 

conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagor-Karabakh region flared up soon after breakdown of Soviet Union in late 1980s. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan have claimed strategic territory, with occasional flare-ups and fightings.

Holding a referendum at that time, Automous Oblast of Nagor-Karabakh region decided to stay independent inste of joining eir territory. What began as a relatively peaceful demand to unify with Armenia, soon turned into an increasingly violent conflict between ethnic Armenians and ethnic Azerbaijans. fightings that lasted up until approximately 1994, hit a low point when both former Soviet Union nations accused each or of ethnic cleansing. 

situation worsened after Nagor-Karabakh Automous Oblast in Azerbaijan decided to unify with Armenia (given its massive Armenian population) in early 1988. Full-scale fighting in 1992 compelled international bodies to take tice and mediate a ceasefire between Armenia and Azerbaijan. After several failed diplomatic talks, a Russian-brokered ceasefire was agreed upon in 1994, essentially leing to a diplomatic mediation. 

However, this full-blown conflict has its roots in early 20th century when former Soviet Union drew borders. drawing out of borders (to define territories among various ethnic groups) play a major role in conflict between two nations today. 
Policy expert Svante E Cornell in his paper, 'Undeclared war: Nagor-Karabakh conflict reconsidered' explains how 'when Transcaucasus was incorporated into Soviet Empire in 1920-21, border between republics of Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia were t determined immediately'. It took Soviet Union three years to determine political struggle of Karabakh region. Initially, Stalin and Azerbaijan (under Soviet pressure) agreed to transfer Karabakh, Zangezur, and Nakhichevan to Armenian control. However, Azerbaijan later refused and as Cornell points out, ' pendulum swung back'. 

Location and extent of former Nagor-Karabakh Automous Oblast (lighter color). Source - Wikipedia

Joseph Stalin (premier of Soviet Union), under Turkish influence ( beginning of Turkish stakes), determined that both Karabakh and Nakhichevan were to be under Azerbaijan control. Nakhichevan became an automous republic in 1924, and Nagor-Karabakh was given status of an automous oblast. While region is under Azerbaijan, it has been given a substantial amount of automy. Cornell writes, 'Armenia has, ever since, consistently attempted to reverse decision'.

Ar reason for Soviet Union favouring Azerbaijan was that Bolshevik ideology was very well received in Caucasus. Armenia, on or hand, h shown communist tendencies.

What are stakes for Russia? 

Apart from brokering a ceasefire in 1994, and latest in October 2020, Russia has its own interests in Caucasus. Russia has its troops placed in both Armenia and Azerbaijan and has over years (after collapse of Soviet Union) taken a neutral position between two. 

As Cornell furr explains in his paper, following a policy of 'divide and rule', Russia has been stepping up military support for Armenia to force Azerbaijan to make concessions and return to Moscow's influence. Russia prefers a Russian-only mediation to Minsk process of Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Moscow first wants to re-establish control over borders of CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) with Turkey and Iran, and thus wants to have troops posted in Azerbaijan, as it does in Armenia and Georgia. Moscow also has vested interests in Azerbaijan's oil riches. 

What are stakes for Turkey?

Joseph Stalin, who transferred Nagor-Karabakh region under Azerbaijan was under Turkish influence. Soviet Union during 1920s deemed Turkey as a potential ally (due to historical revolts against ir respective countries' regimes and war with Britain), making Ankara's role in Nagor-Karabakh conflict significant. 

Turkey, under Ataturk, couldn't have favoured any territorial arrangements favouring Soviet Armenia, since a strong Armenia could have potential territorial claims on Turkey. Thus, to establish territorial integrity of Turkish republic, it was imperative for Ataturk (former president of Turkey) to keep Armenia weak. 

Turkey has voiced out its complete support for Azerbaijan even in recent conflicts. As NPR points out, Ankara has close ethnic and linguistic kinship with Azerbaijan (majorly Muslim population). Turkey's relations with Armenia on or hand are slain by Ottoman Empire's 1915 mass killing of 1.5 million Armenians. re has been increasing demand in global community to term it as a 'gecide', a term that Turkey rejects. 

Armenia and Kremlin also accused Turkey (without taking its name) of flying fighters from Syria and Libya to Nagor-Karabakh region and providing direct military support to Azerbaijan. Turkish military is highly active in both Arab nations. 

Can Nagor-Karabakh conflict spill over?

With tension flaring high in most recent hostilities in  gor-Karabakh region, most political analysts have warned of issue resulting in a 'regional war' in case of ceasefire. As South Caucasus expert Laurence Broers writes in his BBC article, "In scale and scope, fighting that broke out on Sunday surpasses periodic escalations of recent years, involving heavy artillery, tanks, missiles and drones." Broers explains how recent hostilities are worse than previous conflicts that region has experienced. "Both sides appear to be digging in for a longer conflict. Azerbaijan has rejected renewed negotiations with Armenia, and unlike in previous escalations, it has a greater degree of Turkish support to count on. danger is that a longer, protracted conflict will see increased involvement by outside powers, risking a wider regional war," writes Broers. 

Thomas de Waal, an expert on Caucasus region, on or hand, explains how Turkey's open backing to Azerbaijan is first factor that makes recent conflict dangerous. second factor, Waal explains is that of United States' 'unusual disengment'. US has been, since 1998, one of three co-chairs of Minsk Group mediation effort (France and Russia being or two). "Given that public expectations in both societies run extremely high, it will be harder for leers to stop soon and claim success. risk of escalation and of mass destruction is alarmingly high," writes Waal. 

While Russia informed that Armenia and Azerbaijan agreed to a ceasefire starting on October 10 midnight and hold 'substantive' talks, truce failed to hold. A day after truce, both former Soviet Union nations accused each or of violating ceasefire. According to reports, while Azerbaijan's top diplomat said that truce never entered force, Armenian military accused Azeri forces of shelling area near Kapan that claimed a life. In response, Azerbaijan's defense ministry rejected claims and called it as "provocation". In dition, Azerbaijani forces accused Armenia of striking missiles in Terter and Agdam regions and ded that Armenia attempted to launch offensives in Agdere-Terter and Fizuli-Jabrail areas.

In fact, hours before start of ceasefire,  Azerbaijani Defence Ministry released foot showing airstrikes against alleged Armenian troops in Nagor-Karabakh. On or hand, Armenia accused Azerbaijan forces of "trying in every possible way to ensure an vant over beginning of a humanitarian truce."