People’s Peacemaking Perspectives maY 2012 Nagorny Karabakh conflict and frontline areas

Over the past two decades progress on finding a resolution to the Nagorny Karabakh Key outcomes (NK) conflict has proved elusive. The unresolved conflict continues to evolve and pose persistent n CBMs need to happen, where and shifting challenges on the ground, including insecurity, long-term displacement, ingrained possible, independently of the mistrust and serious limits on development and regional opportunities. Since fighting ended broader more intractable political in 1994, there has been an uneasy situation of ‘no war, no peace’ between and frameworks, to help create the . conditions for a sustainable peace agreement. The geography of the NK conflict has resulted in two distinct border contexts (see map). One features a heavily militarised and entrenched Line of Contact (LOC) along a fiercely contested n The EU can and should play a de facto border deep inside internationally recognised Azerbaijani territory, where mostly one more active role in promoting the side () has a civilian population. The second features civilian populations living on practical benefits of CBMs for either side of the state border between and Azerbaijan, which although also closed conflict-affected people, as part of and militarised is less tense and offers more opportunities for mutually beneficial cooperation. its support for the OSCE Minsk Group, and challenge more the use of militant This brief highlights the potential for a number of key confidence building measures (CBMs); rhetoric. both military (joint investigation, sniper withdrawal) and civilian (resource management). n Local people living near the Line of Military CBMs are clearly required and expected by the international community; without Contact require special attention cooperation on them, the sides are only undermining their own international standing. from both government and Cooperation is also urgently required on issues around missing persons and the measures each international donors, as they face side needs to take when remains are found in the front-line area. a double vulnerability, related to both Findings and recommendations in this policy brief and accompanying report were drawn from security and livelihoods. consultations and interviews conducted in early 2012 among people directly affected by the n Improving governance, including in conflict, both in a number of Azerbaijani villages near the LOC and in frontline areas in Tovuz the security, justice and economic and Gazakh districts on the Azerbaijani side of the international border; and also in villages in sectors, is essential for peaceful and region on the Armenian side of the border. Consultations and discussion groups were normalised development in the region. also carried out in NK, in the same time-frame and in several locations. The European Union (EU) is a significant donor and political actor in the region and is well placed to play a key role in support of an eventual agreement mediated by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in (OSCE) Minsk Co-Chairs (France, Russia, US). The EU could do more to promote the case for CBMs, in support of and in full complementarity with the Minsk Group and the framework agreement (the Madrid principles).

The People’s Peacemaking Perspectives project “Local voices in society must be heard. We hope The People’s Peacemaking Perspectives project is a joint initiative implemented by Conciliation that the authorities take Resources and Saferworld and financed under the European Commission’s Instrument for Stability. our views into account.” The project provides European Union institutions with analysis and recommendations based on the opinions and experiences of local people in a range of countries and regions affected by fragility Karabakh Armenian resident, and violent conflict. Krasniy Bazar, January 2012 People’s Peacemaking Perspectives: nagorny karabakh conflict and frontline areas

Findings and Recommendations 1. CBMs need to happen, where possible, independently of the broader more intractable political frameworks, to help create the conditions for a sustainable peace agreement.

If CBMs are tied to progress on the wider A view expressed in the accompanying people’s lives, and such CBMs could be a political strand, they are unlikely to happen report is that by tying military CBMs vehicle for achieving such changes. and will not exercise their intended effect in the frontline to progress in political “We cannot make long-term plans, of making that progress more likely. negotiations, Azerbaijan is applying we live one day at a time. We feel Underlying the findings in this study is aspects of a ‘package’ approach, i.e. constant worry for the future of our a basic question about how the sides insisting on the simultaneous movement children.” understand CBMs, and indeed, why the across a range of tracks, rather than Interviewee, Karabakh Armenian research, authorities at least appear to believe that accepting an incremental approach, in January 2012 certain CBMs are not in their interests. relation to the implementation of CBMs. That, in turn, contributes to the prolonging For some local participants on either side Recommendations of an inherently unstable status quo, with of the conflict, for whom their day-to-day significant risks for authorities on all sides, n Reconsider current understandings of existence is a constant challenge, the case and continued losses for ordinary citizens. CBMs in order to achieve their potential for implementing CBMs is viewed, albeit as a device for establishing predictable All parties have opportunities, as evidenced implicitly, in terms of the potential for protocols of behaviour on issues and in in the current research in local areas, to practical steps to improve their situation. contexts independent of headline political engage on CBMs resulting in no significant issues. “There were seasons when we could loss of strategic advantage, while holding not harvest our crops at all [because out the possibility of strengthening their n The EU should encourage governing of the shootings]. Once they see image as credible and reliable actors. authorities to work with local government a tractor or a combine-harvester and NGOs to identify locally relevant “We need to achieve reconciliation at working in the field, they shoot it… policy areas where cooperation resulting the national level to prevent renewal in practical benefits for local populations We have to work on our lands at of hostilities. [For that to happen] may be possible; these areas may include nights, like thieves.” the foreign diplomatic policies of water sharing, reconstruction of irrigation Azeri resident, Gapanly village both parties have to function well. canals on the border, joint action against ( district), January 2012 Our intentions alone are unable to environmental pollution, fighting forest Local research raises questions as to yield positive results; consent of both fires or returning each other’s grazing whether and to what extent CBMs should parties is needed.” cattle which accidentally cross the border. be explored as a strategy in the Armenia- Armenian resident, Berdavan village n The governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan international border context (Tavush region), January 2012 Azerbaijan, in cooperation with the OSCE irrespective of whether they could apply in monitoring mechanism under the A particular point in the Azerbaijani the LOC context. Clearly, what is needed is Chairman-in-Office Personal Representative analysis is that confidence-building a more evolved and defined understanding, and his team, should agree to jointly measures involving militaries and civilian on both sides, of what CBMs mean. On the investigate incidents which involve the administrations on both sides of the one hand, the sides have at least affirmed, targeting of civilians and their property. Armenia-Azerbaijan border, aimed primarily on several occasions, a degree of support n The governments of Armenia and at supporting the safety and security of for CBMs. But part of a more defined Azerbaijan may benefit from an internal the local civilian populations, could be understanding should entail a combination process of reconsidering the possible relatively easier to realise. If these work, the of the more ‘legalistic’ approach (holding value and benefits of CBMs. The specific cooperative relationship that could stem politicians to their words) and the context of the international Armenia- from such military CBMs on the Armenia- persuasive approach, highlighting the Azerbaijan border may offer opportunities Azerbaijan border could then be used to potential benefits. to pilot certain kinds of measures and set up similar arrangements in the NK initiative with no loss of strategic military “The water from the artesian wells in context as well. This idea does not emerge advantage. the village is salty. We want to go and in the same way from the interviews and repair the pipeline at night, but our discussions held in Armenia, yet this does military does not let us, because the not mean that the idea should be ruled area is mined.” out: there is a clear need for steps that Azeri resident, Kemerli village lead to concrete improvements in ordinary (Gazakh district), January 2012 2. The EU can and should play a more active role in promoting the practical benefits of CBMs for conflict-affected people, as part of its support for the OSCE Minsk Group, and challenge more the use of militant rhetoric.

The EU as a body with both economic resources, wide and relevant experience among its member states, and an interest in supporting political settlement, is well placed to make the case, in practical terms, for what CBMs can offer. The EU has been an important donor supporting a number of conflict resolution and confidence- building projects. Participants’ views on both sides of the conflict divide suggest that the EU could do more in a situation where a final political settlement between Armenia and Azerbaijan remains elusive. “We doubt that the EU is ready to help us.” Karabakh Armenian resident, Mardakert, January 2012 Two boys sitting on the top of the minaret of a destroyed mosque, /i, Nagorny Karabakh. © r a s t i s l a v k o l e s a r /d e m o t i x In spite of the stated goals in its partnership documents with Azerbaijan The consultations in the study point to Recommendations and Armenia prioritising conflict resolution, the idea of having joint internationally- n The OSCE should extend the mandate of the EU has so far maintained a low-profile supported investigations into incidents that its monitoring mechanism, and the work role more broadly in NK conflict resolution have specifically involved civilian casualties of the EUSR could usefully include closer efforts. , in particular, has been luke- and damage to their property. This deserves engagement with the conflict-affected warm on the idea of direct EU involvement particular attention and could be one of populations in border areas, including in CBM projects on the ground in NK, the most realistic and promising CBMs in regular visits and facilitating joint fearing that its direct involvement may the immediate term. This is a particular investigations of the incidents involving strengthen and legitimise the territory’s initiative in which the EU, in full support civilians and their property. authorities. As a result, there is still no of and in coordination with the OSCE, n International actors at multiple levels consensus either within the EU or between and specifically through the mechanism should actively discourage the use of its partners – Armenia and Azerbaijan – of the EU Special Representative (EUSR) militant rhetoric, demonstrating the about what role it might best play by its with an adjusted mandate, could have an damaging impact this has on specific direct involvement at the present stage. important role. It is also something that policy fields of mutual interest, as well as Some local respondents harked back could be started independently of specific the wider rhetorical climate. to the basic trade and barter contacts progress in political talks and military n The international community, and EU Azerbaijanis and Armenians had before the confidence-building measures. Another specifically, is recommended to find 1991–94 war. key area that requires a more proactive ways to provide assistance in relevant approach now is that of tackling and “We used to have regular trade human rights and development domains challenging the use of militant rhetoric contacts with Azerbaijanis. We mostly irrespective of the legal status of territory, and hate narrative; and encouraging also bought fruits from them and sold for example in the fields of child rights, a more participatory approach in the gender and the freedom of expression. them our cheese, ghee and other peace process, drawing in stakeholders at products … We used to sell them n Explore what could be done in the border different levels of society. 80 percent of our meat products.” context on socio-economic assistance and Armenian resident, Kirants village “How can we stay in contact with also on cross-border initiatives. (Tavush region), January 2012 Azerbaijanis, if we see on TV that they are filled with hostility?” Armenian resident, Voskepar village, Tavush region People’s Peacemaking Perspectives: nagorny karabakh conflict and frontline areas

3. Local people living near the Line of Contact require special attention from both government and international donors, as they face a double vulnerability, related to both security and livelihoods.

People living near the LOC are particularly or, in fact, than Armenians living in Tavush issues must be resolved simultaneously’ vulnerable to any escalation of the conflict, region. Unlike the NK context, on the is a view which conveniently feeds the regular shooting incidents and landmines. Armenia–Azerbaijan border both sides argument of proponents of a ‘package’ The unresolved conflict not only poses have substantial civilian settlements and, solution; and underlines the complexity a lethal threat, but also undermines the therefore, they usually avoid escalating and contentious nature of the challenges livelihoods of the population in these the situation in order not to put their and of dealing with them. impoverished conflict-affected areas. Since own civilians at greater risk. That said, “At present, servicemen forbid us to most of the pasturelands of the frontline because of the shootings and the mine graze our cattle on lands (closer to villages are held by the other side, the hazard, people living in the border the border), but these are our main scarcity of land forces shepherds to take districts cannot use substantial parts of pastures. Consequently, our cattle risks in grazing their cattle in areas close their farmlands and pastures. There are population has fallen sharply; that to minefields and in dangerous proximity virtually no employment and income- is quite awful as people here live by to Armenian positions. On the one hand, generating opportunities. Small-scale keeping cattle; in fact, we all live by the Azerbaijani Government has focused subsistence farming is the only means of our land. Given lack of agricultural on responding to the livelihood needs of earning one’s living and this opportunity land, many people left the village.” people living in these areas by rebuilding is also undermined by the impact of the Armenian resident, village social infrastructure, such as providing unresolved conflict and relatively poor (Tavush region), January 2012 uninterrupted access to electricity, natural social infrastructure available. gas, drilling new artesian wells and “We have houses in the exposed Recommendations building new roads. However, a chronic areas. But we do not have a serious n The Azerbaijani Government should lack of transparency, public oversight concern for our security… They engage in wider and regular consultations and consultation mechanisms reduces [Armenians] do not shoot [at the with the affected populations on its side the effectiveness of the state-provided village], because they also have of the LOC to ensure that its existing assistance policies. Research in Azerbaijani villages and land plots close to our assistance strategies are not mismanaged frontline villages indicates that the positions. So, in a way, we are acting and are effectively implemented to meet Government does not appear to have an by the principle ‘you do not touch me, local needs. In particular, this relates to the evacuation plan in the event of large- and I do not touch you’.” distribution of targeted social assistance, scale hostilities. That prompts a concern rebuilding the social infrastructure and Group discussion with Azeri participants, about duty of care issues and suggests improving access of these communities to Kemerli village (Gazakh district), that, in the absence of adequate security potable and irrigation water. This should January 2012 guarantees, the Azerbaijani Government be done by the Armenian Government and should refrain from resettling more IDPs in Local populations near the LOC face two NK authorities as well. proximity to the LOC. different though interconnected orders of n Practical cooperation is recommended, “Sometimes when the intensity of problem; a difficult socio-economic context with international support, around missing the shootings declines, people start plus a conflict situation. The distinct persons and facilitating ways to achieve cooperation when remains are found in the working during the daytime and then implications of each problem, and how they frontline areas; this is a clear opportunity they start shooting again. This is how interact, need to be unpacked. For many in for confidence-building with no loss of I myself got wounded.” rural areas it comes down to the basic issue of what access they can get to pasture- tactical advantage. Azeri resident, Gapanly village land to graze their cattle. An Armenian n (), January 2012 The EU should encourage governing view expressed is that the resolution of the authorities to focus specifically on the One of the findings that emerges from NK conflict is a necessary yet insufficient issue of sniper deployment and to accept the interviews in the different contexts condition for resolving salient socio- the mediators’ proposal to withdraw is that those settled near the Line of economic problems in the frontier areas. Yet snipers to a distance of 500 meters from Contact around NK are indeed more in a chicken and egg situation, appropriate the border. concerned about their safety than either conditions for addressing socio-economic n Governing authorities in control of different their Azerbaijani compatriots living in the issues cannot be imagined without the patches of territory are recommended to border areas (Tovuz and Gazakh districts) resolution of the conflict first. ‘All such coordinate landmine clearance. People’s Peacemaking Perspectives: nagorny karabakh conflict and frontline areas

4. Improving governance, including in the security, justice and economic sectors, is essential for peaceful and normalised development in the region.

Reports from both sides of the conflict divide note numerous ‘governance’ or CBMs – chicken or egg? ‘state-building’ deficiencies to do with an obsolete production system in a new Conflict parties together with international stakeholders can and should agree to take up economic context, an inefficient and joint CBMs to reduce the conflict’s impact on the civilian population and their property. Such measures need not wait for progress at the peace talks or the strengthening of the top-down system of resource distribution, cease-fire regime. corruption and resulting socio-economic problems that is independent of, though The findings from this preliminary research point to the fact that insecurity is experienced exacerbated by, the conflict. Official in different ways on each side of the conflict divide. Azeris, settled compactly right up to policies have often been mismanaged, the LOC, experience insecurity as part of the personal danger associated with everyday because they were implemented with little life on a frontline. Armenians living in NK (generally not in frontline areas) feel a general transparency, oversight and consultation sense of insecurity living in an unrecognised entity with little prospect of gaining with intended direct beneficiaries. Lack of recognition. Given the differing perceptions of insecurity, it is unclear whether measures to build confidence in one context would necessarily work in the other, for example, adapting irrigation water was mentioned as a major successful pilot CBMs conducted on the Armenia–Azerbaijan border for implementation problem in every village visited. in the areas near the LOC around NK. Certainly the Armenian research for this study “They conducted a fake official does not present a convincing case to suggest this and further research into local views opening of the irrigation pipeline two is merited. Yet it is clear that a way needs to be found to advocate CBMs as a means to years ago, but the fact is the pump alleviate these different experiences of insecurity, promote the interests of and improve does not work. They spent three the lives and livelihoods of ordinary people in these conflict affected areas, while avoiding for the work and put ten in their criticisms of ‘false symmetry’, i.e. portraying Armenian and Azerbaijani interests as more pockets… The new road was poorly compatible and similar then they actually are. built. Look, it already has cracks in the surface and the traffic lines are One possible benefit from well-tailored Recommendations rubbed out… We are thankful to the CBMs that could be promoted through n Local authorities should provide more state for allocating money [for the international efforts would precisely be a effective solutions to community social construction of the road], but it is local governance dividend, including in and economic problems (schools, embezzled locally.” the area of practical human rights, that it recreation centres, libraries, sports Azeri residents, Gaymagly village is hoped would have wider resonance. For schools). (Gazakh district), January 2012 now, the situation of ‘no war, no peace’ n The EU and other international actors remains stuck in dispiriting gridlock. But Among common views expressed is the are recommended to find ways to provide the merits of practical CBMs need to be assistance in the sphere of human rights suggestion that the authorities should be promoted even more effectively as they and development irrespective of the legal more attentive towards local needs and offer an important way forward. status of territory. seek to engage the population in frontline districts in regular consultations prior to “We do not feel safe in the village n A recommendation cited locally in NK, and taking decisions aimed at improving their for as long as we know that peace is addressed to local political authorities, safety and livelihoods. That way they could not established, and we live on the calls for work to be intensified to attract not only significantly increase the efficiency frontier. Whether they shoot or not, support in key governance domains (such of their own assistance programmes, but at present we have only a cease-fire. as the judiciary) from international donors. would also help improve the self-reliance of Hence, it would be wrong to say that n International actors and primarily the the local communities. we are very safe. We will be safe Governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan when peace is established.” should explore and define ways in which “There is no organisation in the Armenian resident, Dovegh village the population living in NK today, and village to raise an issue on its behalf. (Tavush region), January 2012 those who were displaced from it as a And when someone raises an issue result of conflict could be more involved individually, they [the authorities] and engaged in peace talks and decision- do not even respond.” making directly affecting them. Azeri residents, Kemerli village (Gazakh district), January 2012 RUSSIAN FEDERATION Sukhum/i Zugdidi

SOUTH Kutaisi OSSETIA* People’s Peacemaking Perspectives: nagorny karabakh conflict and frontline areas

GEORGIA Tbilisi BLACK CASPIAN Cover photo shows a group of shepherds SEA Tavush Tovuz SEA region district from the village of in grazing their cattle on the border with The International Armenia, January 2012. Shepherds are AZERBAIJAN among the most vulnerable population Criminal Court process Baku and its implicationsARMENIA on groups in the frontline villages. © s a f e r w o r l d NAGORNY future elections: Nyanza KARABAKH TURKEYand Rift Valley perspectives NAKHCHEV

AN TERRITORY AZERBAIJAN UNDER ARMENIAN CONTROL IRAN

This map is intended for illustrative purposes only. Conciliation Resources and Saferworld take no position on whether this representation is legally or politically valid. Methodology

The perspectives and ideas in this policy brief and accompanying report are drawn from a series of individual and group interviews held in the first two months of 2012 in a range of locations: on the Azerbaijani side, in six villages close to the LOC in Agdam, Fizuli, Tartar and districts in January 2012; and in seven villages in Tovuz and Gazakh districts, close to the international border with Armenia. On the Armenian side, consultations were held in ten villages in Tavush region (marz) in January; and in six communities in Karabakh, including four villages and two towns, which were visited in January and February 2012. Two Armenian girls from a family displaced by conflict. Originally from Baku, The people the researchers spoke to were the family now live in Shusha/i in Nagorny Karabakh. representative in terms of age, gender © l a u r e n c e b r o e r s /conciliation r e s o u r c e s and social group. Given the constraints of resource and time, this partly drew References and Acknowledgements on some established contacts with local researchers in the region. The findings in this policy brief were drawn from a wider report entitled Putting people first: Reducing frontline tensions in Armenia and Azerbaijan, The policy brief reflects the perspectives Nagorny Karabakh, produced under Saferworld’s auspices as part of the of local people from either side of the People’s Peacemaking Perspectives project. Saferworld are grateful to Tabib divide and inevitably reflects starkly Huseynov and Tevan Poghosyan for their work in leading the separate divergent viewpoints which need to be research. For full details of the project on which this brief is based, please visit: considered. In the research the differences www.saferworld.org.uk/PPP in these perspectives are clear and not For further information contact: Craig Oliphant, Senior Advisor on least in the use of place names identified Europe/Central , Saferworld, [email protected] in the brief. Qualitative methods of social research were used for the study in order This document has been produced with the financial assistance to fit in with a participatory approach; of the European Union. The contents of this are the sole and the methodology sought to gather responsibility of Saferworld and Conciliation Resources and voices from the local areas which were can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the EU. summarised and analysed by the authors. Saferworld Conciliation Resources Altogether, around 280 people were The Grayston Centre 173 Upper Street interviewed in the component studies. 28 Charles Square N1 1RG London N1 6HT UK The accompanying report, Putting UK people first: Reducing frontline tensions Phone: +44 (0)20 7324 4646 Phone: +44 (0)20 7359 7728 in Armenia and Azerbaijan, Nagorny Fax: +44 (0)20 7324 4647 Fax: +44 (0)20 7359 4081 Karabakh, looks at the mix of challenges Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] and possible opportunities in the region, Web: www.saferworld.org.uk Web: www.c-r.org and specifically how these are seen from Registered charity no. 1043843 Registered charity no. 1055436 local perspectives. A company limited by guarantee A company limited by guarantee no. 3015948 no. 03196482