[pikachu]

Back to topic subject though, Armenia has responded to the Azeri war threat with a threat of official recognition of the Nagorno-Karabakh territory. It does seem that the intensity of mutual threats has gone up a little in recent times. I presume this has a lot to do with Turkish-Armenian negotiations on improving the relations and opening their mutual border. In case such an event occurs without Armenian concessions on the Karabakh issue, this will be a major defeat for Azerbaijan, hence the escalation of threats.

[Aekos]

What do the Azeris want? Full reincorporation of Karabakh? What do they think they can get with these continued threats?

And considering what the Karabakhi Armenians stand to lose (at least the territories outside Karabakh proper), is a settlement really worth it for them?

[pikachu]

Well, according to public statements, the only acceptable solution to Azeri leadership is one that allows Azerbaijan to legally remain in the same boundaries as it is internationally recognized today. Furthermore, once again according to public pronouncements, the status of N-K can only be negotiated after Armenian military withdraws from the "occupied territories", and that the Azeri refugees be allowed to return. Until then, Azerbaijan doesn't even recognize N-K as an autonomous area. Although the negotiations are being held regularly and every time they are hailed by their hosts as "successes", it's hard to tell whether any progress has actually been made.

The Armenians seem to think that time is on their side, so they're dragging on the negotiations for as long as possible. Now that Turkey begins to change its strategy in the region, the Azeri leadership is getting worried. If Armenia "diversifies" its foreign policy and becomes an ally of the US as much as Russia, then the possibility of retaining N-K for Azerbaijan in any shape or form will sink very low.

[Aekos]

If Armenia "diversifies" its foreign policy and becomes an ally of the US as much as Russia, then the possibility of retaining N-K for Azerbaijan will sink very low.

So what's the best way forward for Azerbaijan? Concede the loss? Isn't wasting money on the military and becoming increasingly isolated only hurting it? (and it's not like Karabakh is a historical region of Azerbaijan)

[pikachu]

(and it's not like Karabakh is a historical region of Azerbaijan)

Depends on what you mean by "historical". Its historical importance to Azerbaijan may not be as great as Kosovo's importance is to Serbia, but that hardly changes anything. The territory used to be populated by Azeri muslims until late 19th century, when the Russian conquest changed everything, but the Azeri claims to the area remained intact throughout. From its very independence day in 1918 to present day, Azerbaijan laid claims to the area (before Sovietization it also claimed a big chunk of what is today Armenia proper), and held it at first, temporarily losing it to Armenians in 1919-1920, and 1994 to present - but retaining it for the rest of the period.

Isn't wasting money on the military and becoming increasingly isolated only hurting it?

Thanks to oil reserves and extremely strategically valuable location, there is practically no chance of Azerbaijan getting "internationally isolated". As for the military spending per GDP - it's on par with countries such as France and Britain, so nothing to worry about there.

I can't really advise on the best path to take. Russia still has the keys to Armenia's general security, so regular flights to Moscow are a must. But the kind of concessions Russia will want can only come at a price of abandoning lucrative US energy projects, which isn't even worth considering, so in short, IDK.

[eloweeth]

So what's the best way forward for Azerbaijan?

Best way for Azerbaijan is Turkey not opening its borders,so Armenia will eventually withdraw.

This will become just another Russian victim, and just another used up NATO puppet

Azerbaijan is far more important than Georgia for US,so you never know what NATO would do. Either way I don't think Azeri President really plans a war.It is just one of those regular "we are not done yet" threatens.

[Aekos]

The territory used to be populated by Azeri muslims until late 19th century

Source? Karabakh was the core of several Armenian kingdoms.

[pikachu]

Source? Karabakh was the core of several Armenian kingdoms.

http://cria-online.org/2_3.html
The data is from Russian imperial censuses.
Also, while I'm not too familiar, I think there is also bit of a dispute as to who those Karabak-Armenians are.. IIRC some Azeri scholars claim that many of them are simply former Seljuk Turks/Azeris who converted to Christianity, but I may be mistaking something.

[Aekos]

That article is a little biased toward Azeris.

Wikipedia says Karabakh made up five very small Armenian "melikdoms."

Thanks to the meliks from the end of the 17th century in Artsakh there arouse and spread the idea of liberation of the motherland from the Persian yoke. Parallel with the armed struggle Armenians in that period made diplomatic efforts, at first turning to Europe, then - to Russia. Such political and war leaders as Israel Ori, archimandrite Minas, the Catholicos of Gandsasar Yesai Jalalian, iuzbashis (the commanders of hundred; the capitans) Avan and Tarkhan become people leaders.

According to 1823, all Karabakh was occupied by 20.095 families (about 90.000 inhabitants), from them: Muslim 15.729 (78%) and Armenian 4.366 (22%). Armenians still prevailed in mountain Karabakh (was Khamsà, nowadays Nagorno-Karabakh), except for city Shusha where it was totaled 421 Armenian and 1.111 Muslim families.[29]

The Karabakh khanate was eliminated in 1822. A survey prepared by the Russian imperial authorities in 1823, a year after and several years before the 1828 Armenian migration from Persia to the newly-established Armenian Province, shows that all Armenians of Karabakh compactly resided in its highland portion, i.e. on the territory of the five traditional Armenian principalities, and constituted an absolute demographic majority on those lands.

It seems like Azeris didn't dominate Karabakh for more than 2-3 centuries.

It's bad English, but the sources are in Russian so I assume Russian speakers wrote it. Anyway, I checked out 3 books on Karabakh from the library, so in a little while I might be able to come up with something more constructive.

[pikachu]

That article is a little biased toward Azeris.

No shit. :P But the data it is referencing is pretty official though, furthermore I see absolutely no reason for the Russian census writers to bias their data against their Armenian allies. I don't know the ancient history of the region (well, besides the fact that it was part of a "Greater Armenian" kingdom at some point and other scattered facts) but judging from these figures, at least at the moment of Russian conquest of the region, the majority population there self-identified themselves Azerbaijani. This was preceded by the Turkic Khanate of Karabakh under Persian rule. In general from what I've read it appears that since around the time of Seljuk invasion of the region in 11th century and until 20th century, the area has been populated by muslim Turkic tribes. At some point in late 19th century to early 20th century, perhaps due to a combination of Armenian migration and conversion of these tribes, an Armenian majority emerged. The rest we know.

[Aekos]

the area has been populated by muslim Turkic tribes.

I doubt it, the whole area has hardly any genetically Turkic peoples.

[Vanasalus]

Russian censuses for Karabagh are not surprising. Similar Russian censuses show clear Azeri majority in many parts of today’s Armenia, including it’s current capital, Yerevan.

However, the issue here is not the demographic history of Karabagh.

The current rumor around is: Armenia soon will withdraw from 5 out of 7 Azeri rayons (provinces).

[Aekos]

The current rumor around is: Armenia soon will withdraw from 5 out of 7 Azeri rayons (provinces).

Where'd you hear that? It's consistent with keeping the Lachin corridor, but I call BS.

[dp_132]

There is one more thing in A-A conflict nobody is talking about.

N-K is connected with Armenia via small corridor. So Armenia has occupied not only N-K, but also Azeri regions nearby N-K. It needed for safety.



N-K marked with red
Armenia with yellow

[Aekos]

There is one more thing in A-A conflict nobody is talking about.

That's what everyone is talking about, actually. Azeris want the Armenians to return those "occupied territories" until any real peace deal would might be made. The Armenians (and rightfully so) reject this as it would put them in a much weaker position in possible conflict.

[Thunderhawk]

What is the relationship between Azerbaijan and Iran? Would Iran allow Azeri forces to move through Iran to strike at NK, ocuppied or Armenia dirrectly?

[Stipe]

Well, there wouldn't really be a need for Azerbaijan to make use of Iranian territory in an attack on Karabakh, since Karabakh (and the other occupied territories) lie solely between Azerbaijan and Armenia. That would make more sense for moving troops to Nakhchivan. Iran and Azerbaijan actually have had generally poor relations, since Azerbaijani politicians have occasionally voiced irredentist positions vis-a-vis Iranian territory which is majority populated by Azeris. So the answer to that question is a strong "probably not." In fact, in a conflict it's more likely (though still probably not terribly likely) that Iran would allow Armenia use of its territory. Iran and Armenia have developed pretty strong relations as a consequence of mutual antipathy towards Azerbaijan.

I was wondering though...what exactly is the territorial extent of the Lachin corridor? Is it just the very narrowest part of Lachin rayon or is the territory more extensive?

[Aekos]

and the other occupied territories

Why do you call Karabakh an occupied territory?

Iran and Armenia have developed pretty strong relations as a consequence of mutual antipathy towards Azerbaijan.

This isn't the main reason. There are very strong cultural and historic ties between Armenians and the Persian people. They're not rallying around "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."

I was wondering though...what exactly is the territorial extent of the Lachin corridor?

Armenians are not willing to give up any part of the Lachin rayon, so for them it's the whole thing.

Also, I found this interesting anecdote

[Stipe]

This isn't the main reason. There are very strong cultural and historic ties between Armenians and the Persian people. They're not rallying around "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."

It's certainly a much more concrete reason than abstractions like "cultural and historic ties". It is common sense that, whatever predilection either state might otherwise have had towards each other, modern Armenian-Iranian diplomatic relations fundamentaly must be understood with relations to both states' relations with Azerbaijan.

[Aekos]

It's certainly a much more concrete reason than abstractions like "cultural and historic ties". It is common sense that, whatever predilection either state might otherwise have had towards each other, modern Armenian-Iranian diplomatic relations fundamentaly must be understood with relations to both states' relations with Azerbaijan.

How do you explain the strong ties Armenians and Persians had before there was any major Persian-Azeri friction?