The latest exacerbation of the situation on the demarcation line between the armed forces of Azerbaijan and Armenia is undoubtedly Baku’s desire to distract attention from 24 April – the tragic historical date marking the centenary of the Armenian genocide. Turkey is holding a series of national events marking the First World War with the same aim. The main reason for what is happening, however, is different.
The latest exacerbation of the situation on the demarcation line between the armed forces of Azerbaijan and Armenia is undoubtedly Baku’s desire to distract attention from 24 April – the tragic historical date marking the centenary of the Armenian genocide. Turkey is holding a series of national events marking the First World War with the same aim. The main reason for what is happening, however, is different.
For several years after the defeat in the 1992-1994 war in Nagorny Karabakh the situation in the conflict zone remained frozen. This period of relative stability ended at the beginning of the 2000s, and for many years now Baku has been harassing the Armenian side in an attempt to force Yerevan to capitulate. It’s not a question of compromise – Baku’s goal is the actual capitulation of Yerevan and the complete return of the former Soviet republic of Azerbaijan under Baku’s control, in other words the return of all the territories which they consider to be occupied by Armenia. The military component of this policy has been constantly increasing lately, which occasionally results in intensive armed clashes.
Furthermore, it is the socio-economic situation in Azerbaijan, which is completely out of alignment with the revenues the country receives from its energy riches. A significant part of the population is migrant workforce going to Russia, many people living in rural areas have no significant income and survive on farming. There is a very high degree of social polarisation in the society. In this context it is very convenient for the authorities to have an external enemy that is responsible for all the troubles and misfortunes of every Azerbaijani in the country. The authorities have an opportunity to let off the steam of discontent in society and prevent the situation from blowing up. This kind of ploy, however, cannot go on forever. It represents an obvious danger for the ruling elite in the form of a local version of the Arab spring or coloured revolution. In comparison it is helpful to recall Cyprus, where there is a “third state of the Turkish nation” – the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, which is recognised only by Turkey. It is obvious that if the Republic of Cyprus, which was divided in 1974, pursued a policy based exclusively on the idea of a military revenge, the country could lose its historical perspective, and the situation on the island would be far more dramatic than it is now.
At the moment it’s not a matter of Azerbaijan wanting to wage a large-scale war. The constant build-up of tension is one of the measures aimed at increasing the pressure on Armenia. The pressure itself is exerted in various forms: propaganda, diplomacy, military assets, the creation of lobbying groups in various states, etc. It’s a whole range of measures that are being implemented with enviable persistence for many years and are aimed at forcing Armenia to withdraw. Outbreaks of tension in the area of the Nagorny Karabakh occur periodically. Baku’s policy is aimed at wearing the Armenian side down physically and morally, breaking the enemy’s morale. So far, however, this policy does not include settling the conflict by force.
Baku can only give the order to start a new war if victory for the Azerbaijani army is guaranteed. This will only be possible if the Azerbaijani army has overwhelming superiority over the Armenian army, and if Azerbaijan gets international and military support from Turkey. Baku cannot leave aside Russia who is a regional player. For Baku starting a new war would be too big a gamble.
A further escalation of the conflict to wide-ranging military action is currently unlikely. A large role in this deals with Kremlin’s reaction to events alongside members of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation, which have more than once stated their unwavering stance on the unacceptability of a military solution to the problem. This does not mean that there is no risk of a new war. The rise in tension is dangerous because the authorities in Azerbaijan and Armenia could lose control of the situation at any moment. Another risk for the region is the zone of political instability that has emerged in the Middle East, and the growing activity of radical forces (IS, etc). This zone is constantly expanding in all directions, and the risk of it spreading to the neighbouring South Caucasus and Central Asia is growing every year.
