Publications /
Opinion

Back
Conflict Returns to the Caucasus
Authors
October 27, 2020

War has started again in the Caucasus, a region between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea consisting of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and parts of Southern Russia. It is a kind of mountainous border between Asia and Europe, in a region with vast oil resources that was conquered by Russia a few hundred years ago. The fighting that has erupted is over an enclave known as Nagorno-Karabakh, a remote territory without strategic value that is nevertheless, as writer Andrew Higgins concluded in the New York Times (October 4), “the center of the most enduring and venomous of the ‘frozen conflicts’ left by the collapse of the Soviet Union”. Nagorno-Karabakh has 100,000 inhabitants, predominantly Armenians, and is located within the borders of Azerbaijan and controlled by factions with close ties to Armenia’s capital Yerevan. Relations between the two former Soviet republics, which together have fewer than 13 million people, have been tense since 1991, when Armenian military forces occupied Nagorno-Karabakh, which is internationally-recognized as a territory of Azerbaijan, a mainly Muslim nation.

The current fighting marks the worst round of violence since the early 1990s when as many as 30,000 people were killed and thousands were displaced before a 1994 ceasefire brought a fragile peace to the Caucasus. Moscow has signed a formal security alliance with Armenia, but is also delivering arms to its neighbor Azerbaijan. Turkey is a supporter of Armenia’s enemy in Azerbaijan’s capital Baku, which also receives military hardware from Israel and F-16s from Washington. Azerbaijan has not only established a giant pipeline connecting its oil resources with Turkey, but has established notably close relations with Israel and occasionally is at odds with Iran, which publicly denied allegations that the mullahs were sending assistance to Armenia, which lacks economic resources and military hardware, unlike its enemy.

The Middle East research newsletter Al-Monitor (October 5) reported: “As Turkish-Israeli relations go from bad to worse, both Ankara and Jerusalem are backing Azerbaijan in the conflict. Armenia recalled its ambassador to Israel because of Israel’s selling arms to Azerbaijan.” When the battle began, Ankara deployed its drones and, allegedly, transferred a couple of thousand mercenaries from Syria to the front line. American made F-16s attacked targets around towns including Stepanakert, the main city in the contested enclave, which is also known as the republic of Artsakh. Armenia targeted the enemy’s second city, Ganja, which is located near oil and gas pipeline terminals. It is a diplomatic, political cacophony, which may develop into a global conflict, since Russia may be obliged to employ troops to aid Armenia, thus confronting fighters financed by Ankara. Azerbaijan’s military issued a statement that its objectives were to shift the status quo by seizing territory from the enclave. Armenia’s Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan alerted U.S. President Donald Trump’s national security adviser Robert O Brien by phone, asking why Washington was tolerating Turkey, its NATO ally, hitting Armenian targets with U.S. fighter jets. Possibly the U.S. President was still trying to recover from his COVID-19 infection. Heavy fighting continued in the Caucasus, a ceasefire agreement was ignored, members of the Minsk Group, established in 1992 by the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, deplored the fighting, considered as an unacceptable threat to the stability of the region. Yet rockets were aimed at villages, artillery fire exchanged, fighter jets hit civilian targets. With Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan allegedly sending jihadist groups into the battle, the Turkish President crossed “a red line”, declared his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron, who is also opposing Erdogan’s actions in Libya.

‘Putin and Erdogan Are no Longer Speed Dialing Each Other’

According to Andrew Higgins in the New York Times (October 6), the “conflict has set off alarms about the risks of a wider war and put the United States, with its large and politically influential Armenian diaspora, in the uncomfortable position of watching Turkey, a vital ally, deploying F-16 jets in support of Armenia’s enemies”. If the conflict spirals and spreads to flash points far from Nagorno-Karabakh, analysts suggest it raises the possibility of Russia and Turkey pitted in yet another proxy war.

Even more complicated, noted the New York Times (September 30): “At the same time, the countries kept up trade ties and cut natural gas deals and Turkey bought anti-aircraft missiles from Russia, angering the United States”. A Turkish news agency reported that Turkish-made drones had hit targets in Nagorno-Karabakh “raising the specter” warns Andrew Kramer, “of a proxy battle in the enclave”. Trespassing into former Soviet territory with arms “is not something Russia will look kindly at”, said Dmitry Trenin, director of the Moscow Carnegie Center. Nick Paton Walsh insisted in the CNN newsletter (October 5) that Putin and Erdogan “are no longer speed dialing each other. Erdogan has left Putin in perhaps his most delicate spot in years”. Moscow is deeply involved in conflicts in Libya and Syria, is dealing with a crisis in neighboring Belarus, whose dictator is threatened to lose power to a democratic movement. Recep Tayyip Erdogan is threatening to intervene for as long as needed in the Caucasus crisis: “As Turkey, with all our means and with all our heart, we stand with fellow and brother Azerbaijan and we continue to stand with it, God willing, until Nagarno-Karabakh is liberated from invasion, this struggle will continue” (Washington Post Newsletter, ‘Today’s world view’, October 5). Intervention by Ankara, writes Fehim Tastekin (Al-Monitor, October 3) “risks escalation with Russia. If Moscow comes to believe that Ankara has ulterior motives, such as expanding its Turco-Islamist influence to the South Caucasus as part of Erdogans’s neo-Ottoman ambitions, it won’t stand idle”.

For Armenia’s Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, the current fighting poses an “existential threat” because of the role of Turkey, whose precursor, the Ottoman Empire killed an estimated 1.5 million Armenians at the end of the First World War. Political analyst Amberin Zaman claimed in the Al-Monitor newsletter (October 3), that Azerbaijan’s military action “was not sparked by accident but was preplanned by Azerbaijan and its regional ally Turkey”. Zaman’s analysis is that Turkey’s all-in support, including providing arms and training, can allow Erdogan “to claim credit for winning back Azerbaijani territory, however little, [which] would be an enormous boost to his droopy poll numbers in the midst of a looming economic crisis”.

 

The opinions expressed in this article belongs to the author.

RELATED CONTENT

  • November 21, 2024
    In this episode of Africafé, Dr. Marcus Vinicius de Freitas, Senior Fellow at the Policy Center for the New South, examines the evolution of transatlantic relations over the past three decades. From NATO's strategic role to the impact of Russia and China's global ambitions, the discussi...
  • Authors
    November 19, 2024
    This essay examines the implications of the new Trump administration’s ‘America First’ approach for multilateralism, particularly in the context of the Bretton Woods institutions and the World Trade Organization (WTO), and its consequences for the New South. The first Trump administration’s selective multilateralism, marked by the prioritization of U.S. interests over global cooperation, contributed to a more fragmented global order. This was seen in the administration’s withdrawal ...
  • Authors
    Bilal Mahli
    November 14, 2024
    The Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region is characterised by its diversity in political systems, economic conditions, and social structures. It is home to a mix of high-income countries such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, as well as low-income and conflict-affected states like Yemen and Iraq. This diversity creates a complex environment for think tanks. Political instability in some areas, coupled with economic uncertainty, presents a challenging landsca ...
  • October 24, 2024
    Depuis 2016, le Policy Center for the New South et le Centre de Géopolitique de l’école HEC Paris organisent chaque année deux éditions des « Dialogues Stratégiques ». Cette plateforme d’analyse et d’échange réunit des experts, des chercheurs provenant de différents think-tanks et du mo...
  • Authors
    Eugène Berg
    Pascal Chaigneau
    Thierry Garcin
    Jeremy Ghez
    Jacques Gravereau
    Alain Oudot de Dainville
    Florent Parmentier
    Anne-Sophie Raujol
    Emmanuel Véron
    October 24, 2024
    Prochainement disponible sur Livremoi et Amazon.   Les Dialogues Stratégiques, fruit d'une collaboration entre le HEC Center for Geopolitics et le Policy Center for the New South, constituent une plateforme d'échanges biannuelle dédiée à l'analyse des grandes tendances mondiales et des problématiques régionales qui lient l'Europe et l'Afrique. Réunissant praticiens, décideurs, universitaires et représentants des médias, cet espace de réflexion permet de décoder les transformations ...
  • Authors
    Bilal Mahli
    October 15, 2024
    This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the role and impact of Yemen's Presidential Leadership Council (PLC), formed in April 2022, in navigating the complexities of Yemen's ongoing civil conflict. The PLC was created to unite various anti-Houthi factions under a single governance framework, with the support of Saudi Arabia and the UAE, and to steer Yemen toward peace and stability. However, the PLC has faced numerous obstacles, including internal divisions, resistance from ...
  • Authors
    Paul Isbell
    October 11, 2024
    The evolving structure of international power—from the erosion of unipolarity to the emergence of multipolarity (though still susceptible to a scenario where multipolarity evolves into a new form of bipolarity)—is giving rise to various material and ideological factors that are steering global dynamics toward a new ‘regionalization of globalization’. The real opportunity lies in not just considering a new form of regionalism, but in focusing on the potential of a new kind of region: ...
  • Authors
    Paul Isbell
    October 9, 2024
    From a realist perspective, during a period of rising multipolarity, the Atlantic Basin can be identified as an emerging geostrategic region and a potential focal point of geostrategic competition, especially in the Southern Atlantic, raising the sub-basin’s strategic significance and its potential strategic autonomy. The liberal perspective – although its highest goal might be a global multilateral order – has embraced regionalism before, under the bipolar international regime of t ...
  • Authors
    Antonio Jorge Martins
    October 9, 2024
    The road to decarbonizing the planet runs through the energy transition, which includes the shift from fossil-fueled cars to renewable energy vehicles. This automotive transition is unfolding as a true revolution in the industry. The evolution toward electric and hybrid vehicles has come in tandem with the ascent of Chinese producers. In the current context of geopolitical and technological rivalries, the automotive transition has been marked by an intense trade war, with implicati ...
  • Authors
    October 3, 2024
    In an era marked by shifting global dynamics, Africa and the Middle East are experiencing a profound transition from traditional geopolitics to a more nuanced geoeconomic framework. This evolution reflects the growing recognition that economic interests, rather than mere political allegiances, are driving international relations in these regions. The rise of emerging powers, particularly China and other Asian nations, has challenged the long-standing dominance of Western economies, ...