Rethinking the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict: Identity, Politics, Scholarship

Abstract

This article builds on the author’s research concerning the role of collective memory in identity-based conflicts, as well as his practical work as the co-director of the Imagine Center for Conflict Transformation and as a trainer and facilitator with various Azerbaijani-Armenian dialogue initiatives. It is not a comprehensive study of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, but presents a general overview of the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process, what has contributed to its failure, and which areas require major rethinking of conventional approaches. The discussion does not intend to present readers with a set of conclusions, but to provide suggestions for further critical research.

A State of Longing: Perspectives from Nagorno-Karabakh IDPs

“…Qualitative methodologies have been shown to be an effective way of documenting and preserving history and perspectives, and engaging with cultural issues and values (Bernard et al, 2015;Seidman, 1998). In the case of Nagorno-Karabakh, there has been very little qualitative work from researchers outside of the conflict (Gamaghelyan, 2010). While I am not a stakeholder in this conflict, I am an American researcher who is personally involved in this community and am cognizant of being limited in only representing the Azerbaijani side.…”

“…The conflict is discussed in terms of its strategic location, the demographics of its people, and the natural resources available to be exploited by competing states. Attempts at resolution have focused on interest-based solutions with assessments based on how much arable land, lumber, mineral resources, political space and so forth can be traded in negotiations between heads of state (Gamaghelyan, 2010). However, looking at conflict in terms of resources is highly insufficient when it comes to understanding how people from Karabakh and greater Azerbaijan ascribe symbolic value to the land and thus why this conflict persists (Newman, 2006).…”

“…5 Claiming right to the land is substantiated by a primordial narrative of belongingness ("home of the grandfathers") which is reproduced as much on the community-story level (through oral histories of kinship and folk heroes) as through the state-centric reproduction (Geukjian, 2016). As Armenia and Azerbaijan continue in competition for the territory, their stances are rooted in contending and incompatible claims to this ancestral homeland, with each state engaged in reproductions of narratives which substantiate their own mythologies and invalidate the other's (Newman, 2006;Gahramanova, 2010;Gamaghelyan, 2010).…”

“…To lose the physical land-along with their savings, homes, and worldly possessions in the blink of an eye, was a trauma that remains alive in their hearts and their memories. As common in long-term conflict situations, these personal stories have been passed down to the younger generations and crystallized in the oral history of their families and communities (Atran and Axelrod, 2008;Gamaghelyan, 2010). One man from Qubatli spoke about this feeling for Karabakh:…”

“…In the case of intractable conflict, these collective imaginings seem ubiquitous and monolithic, but as any form of institutionalized culture, they can also be changed and give way to alternate futures. In order for that to happen, the discourse on the institutional level will need to change, and mid-level politicians who played a critical part in fueling the conflict must now play an active role in deconstructing the victim-enemy narrative from the top down (Gahramanova, 2010;Gamaghelyan, 2010). Ethnonationalist discourse in both Azerbaijan and Armenian politics, media, and education does not allow for a reckoning of the land as the home and the source of livelihood for both peoples.…”