CC BY
0COMMON PROBLEMS, INDIVIDUAL SOLUTIONS AROUND THE DYNAMICS OF CONFLICTS IN NAGORNO-KARABAKH, ABKHAZIA, SOUTH OSSETIA AND TRANSNISTRIA *
UDC 328 DOI: 10.52063/25792652-2024.1.20-84
VAHEZARGARYAN
Yerevan State University, Faculty of International Relations, Chair of the International Relations and Diplomacy, Ph.D. Student, Yerevan, the Republic of Armenia vahe. zargaryan@gmail. com ORCID: 0009-0002-7518-6295
There are about 25 de facto states in the world, five of them in the postSoviet space. The emergence of de facto regimes is directly related to the impasse and conflict-causing reality when the de jure state, which is directly related to the state, is no longer able to exercise its (self-) authority over the population and territory of the de facto state.
The purpose of this article is to analyse and compare the ethno-political conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Transnistria. The focus is on the similarities and differences in the causes, processes and consequences of the conflicts, which provides a comprehensive understanding of the dynamics of the conflicts and reveals the existence of possible commonalities in the context of ethno-political disputes.
In order to achieve this goal, the task was to examine the role and significance of historical background, political developments, ethnic composition and international influences in the regions.
The methodological approach of the article is based on a comparative analysis of the mentioned ethno-political conflicts. Both qualitative and quantitative research methods are employed. Primary sources are used, including official documents, political statements and articles, mainly from the German news media.
Ethno-political conflicts have always been found to have complex and contradictory dynamics, which in turn provide fertile ground for the interests of major regional actors.
The conclusion is that cross-cutting research on ethno-political conflicts provides an opportunity to develop a clear understanding of the causes and consequences of conflict in order to identify possible patterns and commonalities in conflict resolution in comparable situations.
Key words: Ethnopolitical conflicts, Soviet Union, post-Soviet state, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Georgia, Transnistria, Moldova, Artsakh, Nagorno-Karabakh, Armenia, Azerbaijan.
* Япф4шЬ|] libp^oijmgi4b[ t 02.02.2024р., фш^пиф[' 14.02.2024р., rnqmqpnLpjmli QliiyiLlii4bf 30.04.2024р.:
Preface
De facto states, created in specific geographical areas without internationally recognised status, are often used as tools of instability by third parties seeking to gain dominance in the region. These conflicts are commonly referred to as 'frozen', but they can occasionally flare up, causing greater instability for both the de facto and associated de jure states.
De facto states are political entities that operate independently but are not fully recognised by the international community. This situation is similar to a matryoshka doll, where a smaller doll is hidden inside a larger one (Bartmann 21). The Matryoshka effect manifests itself in the multi-layered reality of de facto states. They present themselves as independent political entities with their own institutions, flags and laws. However, de facto states are often dependent on a 'superior' (de-jure) state that can support or even control them financially, militarily or politically. Additionally, the Matryoshka effect can cause internal fragmentation within de facto states due to ethnic, religious or cultural differences, leading to tensions and a complex stratification that obscures the image of a homogeneous political entity. The international community is confronted with the challenge of addressing this intricate phenomenon. Failure to acknowledge de facto states on the global stage can leave their residents in a political state of uncertainty, without complete access to international resources and institutions.
The Matryoshka effect of de facto states not only demonstrates the complexity of political realities but also calls for deeper analysis and a more nuanced approach to international politics. It reminds us that behind the outer layers of these political entities lie complex social, cultural, and political realities that require thorough shared understanding and individual solutions.
Transnistria
Following perestroika in the Republic of Moldova, Romanian national movements gained power. This caused concern among the Russian-speaking population, the Gagauz, and other national minorities (Müller 13-30), particularly the Russians. A significant number of nationalist movement representatives called for the expulsion of Russian immigrants from the country.
In 1990, the Transnistrian leadership organised a plebiscite in which more than 90 per cent of the electorate voted for secession from Moldova (Analyse: Postsowjetische De-facto-Regime): In early March 1992, Moldova launched a military offensive to retake Transnistria, with Romanian volunteers fighting on the Moldovan side and Transnistria supported by Russian, Ukrainian and Cossack fighters. The fighting ended on 25 July 1992 with a ceasefire controlled by "peacekeepers". In 2003, Dmitry Kozak proposed giving half of the parliamentary seats to Transnistria, but this was unsuccessful (Hofbauer 11).
Transnistria remains a stable de facto regime thanks to Russian troop protection, financial support and acceptance of the status quo. Despite tensions with Moldova, the two sides meet regularly and economic relations are relatively uncomplicated. All major political parties in Transnistria support independence or accession to Russia. Since 2014, Transnistria has applied to join the Russian Federation, (Russlands nächster Beitrittskandidat), but this has not been supported by Russia in order not to jeopardise its influence on pro-Russian parties in Moldova.
Transnistria has been a member of the Community of Unrecognised States since 2001, but is not diplomatically recognised by any state. The EU Border Assistance Mission (Border Assistance Mission to Moldova and Ukraine) has been operating on the Moldovan-Ukrainian border since 2005. Since the annexation of Crimea, Ukraine has
refused to supply the Russian military in Transnistria. The "Five plus Two" negotiations, which started in autumn 2005, have stalled after the Ukrainian crisis.
Abkhazia
Since 1991, the secession of Georgia has had a significant impact on political developments in Abkhazia. In May 1991, the elected President of Georgia, Zviad Gamsakhurdia, announced a nationalist policy under the slogan 'Georgia for Georgians', which raised fears in Abkhazia, particularly among the Abkhazians, of a repeat of Stalinist repression.1 A military intervention by Georgian troops in August 1992 led to heavy fighting and displacement. Russia provided air support to the besieged Abkhazians and local Russians, leading to a Russian-brokered ceasefire agreement in July 1993. (Die Lunte am Pulverfass hat Feuer gefangen):
Since 1993, Abkhazia has had independent state structures and a multi-ethnic population. The population includes Abkhazians, Georgians, Armenians, Russians, and other minorities(Erkämpfte Souveränität. Vor zwanzig Jahren proklamierte die vormalige Sowjetrepublik Abchasien ihre Unabhängigkeit): The disengagement aimed to reduce the proportion of the ethnic Georgian population, resulting in significant refugee movements. Russian troops have been monitoring a ceasefire regime since 1994 with the support of the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG). Negotiations to end the conflict under the auspices of the United Nations have been unsuccessful as Abkhazia insists on its independence.
During Mikheil Saakashvili's presidency from 2004 to 2013, the Georgian government aimed to reintegrate Abkhazia in a similar way to Ajaria. However, this plan was rejected by Abkhazia and Russia. In August 2008, Georgia attempted to regain control of South Ossetia, which led to Russian intervention and the defeat of the Georgian army, ultimately resulting in Georgia losing control of Abkhazia.
Abkhazia, a region that has been recognised by Russia, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Nauru, and Syria since 2008, has strong ties with Russia. These ties include financial aid and the establishment of a joint military force (Russland baut Kontrolle über Abchasien aus). Abkhazia's economic development has been hindered by mismanagement and corruption, resulting in stagnation. Additionally, the region heavily relies on imports from Russia.
South Ossetia
Under international law, South Ossetia is considered a part of Georgia, but in practice, it strives for independence. The 1989 Soviet census reported that the population was composed of approximately two-thirds Ossetians, 29 percent Georgians, and other minorities. (Der georgisch-südossetische Konflikt). The official languages of the region are Ossetian and Russian, with Georgian being predominantly spoken by the Georgian population and less frequently used by the Ossetians.
The conflict began in 1989 when the Union Republic of Georgia encouraged the resettlement of ethnic Georgians in Ossetian minority areas. This caused unrest among the minorities, and in response, the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Region of South Ossetia declared independence as the 'Soviet Democratic Republic' on November 20, 1990 (Postsowjetische De-facto-Regime). Following a 1992 referendum in which over
1 According to Gamsakhurdia, the phrase behind the slogan was distorted and taken out of context, and his whole statement sounded like "Georgia is a country of Georgians, but representatives of all nationalities have equal rights in Georgia".- Первый Президент Грузии / Кто такой Звиад Гамсахурдия? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XixYl CGVxg&t=834s 13:54 (Accessed: 27 January 2024)
90% voted in favour of independence and annexation to Russia's North Ossetia, armed clashes erupted between Georgian and South Ossetian forces, accompanied by Russian intervention (Vor 25 Jahren: Georgien erklärt seine Unabhängigkeit).
Since 1994, a peacekeeping force composed of Russians, Ossetians, and Georgians has maintained a ceasefire. However, this ceasefire has been threatened by repeated skirmishes. In 2004, with the mediation of Moscow, Georgia and South Ossetia agreed on a ceasefire and demilitarization of the region (Konflikt in Georgien - wer trägt die Schuld?). Despite these efforts, the region remained contested, particularly regarding its independence. This was expressed in a controversial 2006 referendum (Unabhängiges Südossetien?).
In August 2008, escalations resulted in a military conflict involving Georgia, South Ossetia, and Russia (Der Kaukasuskrieg 2008). On August 26, 2008, following Georgia's unsuccessful attempt to regain control over South Ossetia, Russia acknowledged the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia (Neue Fronten nach dem Krieg, Russland, der Westen und die Zukunft im Südkaukasus). Since then, the region has been under complete Russian control.
South Ossetia is pursuing an independent political direction with its own constitution, administrative structures, and military power. The region's economic situation has improved, despite the high level of unemployment, due to Russian financial aid. Strategically, the region is important for transit trade from Georgia to Russia, particularly because of the preferential tariff in the Rock tunnel. Despite the presence of various political parties, including the right-wing conservative Unity and the Communist Party, the political elite remains independent of Russia. In recent years, South Ossetia has received significant financial aid, which has helped to stabilize its economy.
Nagorno Karabakh
The conflict over the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh (Neue Fronten nach dem Krieg, Russland, der Westen und die Zukunft im Südkaukasus) has its roots in the 18th century and escalated during the collapse of the Soviet Union, resulting in the war of 1992-1994. Although a cease-fire agreement was signed in May 1994, the warring parties have yet to achieve a lasting peace settlement.
Nagorno Karabakh is a 'frozen' conflict, with a relatively stable status quo since 1994. The international community did not recognize its independence from Azerbaijan in 1991. However, Armenia provided military support for this independence, resulting in control of seven Azerbaijani regions as a buffer zone between Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan.
In September 2020, Azerbaijan launched a military offensive to retake what they described as 'occupied territories' (2020 Der 44-tägige Krieg zwischen Aserbaidschan und Bergkarabach). The battles lasted for 44 days, resulting in significant human and material losses for both sides. On November 9, 2020, a statement was signed with the mediation of Russia. However, the statement failed to achieve its intended purpose, as subsequent events demonstrated.
The European Union Civilian Observation Mission was deployed in January 2023 to contribute to de-escalation and reduce the number of incidents in the conflict zone. Its aim was to establish peace and stability in the region.
In September 2023, Azerbaijan conducted another attack on the region (Aserbaidschan startet Militäreinsatz in Berg-Karabach). Shortly after that, Azerbaijan announced a military victory over Armenia in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. (Berg-Karabach: Aserbaidschan beendet seinen Militäreinsatz). Following the conflict, Azerbaijan blockaded the entire territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, closing all roads entering
the region (Berg-Karabach: Harte Prüfung für die Armenier). This resulted in a large-scale emigration of the Armenian population from Nagorno Karabakh to Armenia.
On January 1, 2024, Nagorno-Karabakh was dissolved by presidential decree of Nagorno-Karabakh (Berg-Karabach wird zum 1. Januar 2024 aufgelöst).
Comparative analysis Similarities
The conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Transnistria reveal political features and changes in regional dynamics that keep the region in a constant state of tension. Despite their unique historical backgrounds and geopolitical developments, these regions share similarities and commonalities. It is important to note that this analysis is objective and avoids any subjective evaluations.
The common factor among all de facto states is their origin in independence movements and separatist conflicts. Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Transnistria declared their independence from the former Soviet republics during the collapse of the Soviet Union and the subsequent geopolitical upheaval. These events resulted in protracted and complex conflicts that continue to shape their political landscape today.
Another similarity between de facto states is their reliance on external support. Russia has played varying degrees of roles as a political and economic actor, with some states, such as Abkhazia and South Ossetia, enjoying greater international recognition than others. The nature and extent of these external relations shape the geopolitical framework of de facto states' operations and economic development.
De facto status
The status of Nagorno Karabakh, also known as the Republic of Artsakh, is complex and controversial. Following the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in the early 1990s, the region became de facto independent from Azerbaijan. However, it is still internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan. Nagorno-Karabakh has established its own government, armed forces, and institutions that operate independently and are recognized under international law by several countries. The de facto status remains a crucial aspect of the negotiations concerning the future of the region and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
The de facto status of Abkhazia emerged after the conflict with Georgia in the early 1990s. In 1992, Abkhazia declared independence from Georgia and established its own institutions, including an independent government and armed forces. Although Russia and some other countries recognize Abkhazia, it is largely unrecognized internationally and is considered part of Georgia. Abkhazia's status remains a contentious issue that affects the region politically and from a security perspective.
The de facto status of South Ossetia is the result of a conflict between Georgia and the breakaway region. In 1992, after a bloody conflict in the 1990s, South Ossetia declared its independence from Georgia. Russia defends this de facto status and maintains a military presence in the region. Although South Ossetia is recognized by Russia and several other states, most countries and international organizations continue to consider it part of Georgia. The independence of South Ossetia is a contentious issue in the region's geopolitical relations.
Transnistria's de facto status is a result of the conflict between Transnistria and Moldova in the 1990s. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Transnistria declared its independence in 1990. However, it was not recognized by most countries. Transnistria has established its own institutions, including its own government and armed forces, and
considers itself an independent republic. Despite not being recognized by any major international organization, it maintains close ties with Russia. The status of Transnistria remains a persistent challenge in the relationship between Moldova, Russia, and the international community.
Ethnicity Component
Another unifying element is the complex ethnic composition of the populations of Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Transnistria. The social structures and cultural traditions of these regions reflect the diversity of ethnic groups and their different historical roots. This diversity significantly contributes to the dynamism and complexity of political processes.
The conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh has a strong ethnic component. The region has a predominantly Armenian population, who consider Nagorno-Karabakh to be culturally and historically connected to Armenia.
Azerbaijan, on the other hand, emphasizes territorial integrity and views the conflict as a matter of sovereignty. The inter-ethnic dispute between the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh and the Azerbaijani population of the surrounding regions has political and social implications, including displacement and refugee movements. To achieve a comprehensive solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, it is crucial to consider this ethnic dimension.
The conflict over Abkhazia is largely driven by ethnic differences. The region's population is predominantly Abkhaz, and they strongly identify with their ethnic group, which sets them apart from the Georgian population. This difference in ethnicity has been a major source of conflict since Abkhazia declared independence from Georgia in 1992.
The conflict reflects ethnic tensions arising from the historical, cultural, and linguistic differences between the Abkhazian and Georgian populations. Therefore, resolving the conflict requires acknowledging and addressing this ethnic dimension, as well as developing mechanisms that adequately consider the rights and needs of both groups. The role of ethnicity remains crucial for achieving a stable and peaceful settlement of the conflict over Abkhazia.
Similarly, the conflict over South Ossetia is largely influenced by the ethnic divide between the predominantly Ossetian population and the Georgian population, who have distinct historical and cultural backgrounds. This has resulted in tensions, which ultimately led to South Ossetia's declaration of independence from Georgia in 1992.
The conflict dynamics between the Ossetian population of South Ossetia and the Georgian population of the surrounding areas are influenced by deep ethnic differences that shape the regional balance of power. In the negotiations for conflict settlement, the main factors that should be considered are the issue of ethnic identity and the respect for the rights of the affected population. The ethnic component remains a crucial aspect for achieving a long-term and peaceful solution to the conflict over South Ossetia.
Similarly, in the Transnistrian conflict, the predominantly Russian-Ukrainian population of the region is ethnically distinct from the predominantly Moldovan population of Moldova, which led to the declaration of independence of Transnistria in the early 1990s, accompanied by armed conflicts.
The conflict in Transnistria is rooted in deep ethnic differences between the Russian-Ukrainian population of Transnistria and the Moldovan population of the surrounding regions. To find a lasting solution to the conflict, it is crucial to recognize and consider the issue of ethnic identity. This will enable the development of measures that adequately take into account the rights and interests of all affected populations in Transnistria. Overall, the ethnic component remains a crucial aspect for a comprehensive and sustainable peace settlement in the region.
Territorial Requirements
Questioning the territorial integrity of the former Soviet republics from which these de facto states emerged is a commonality shared by them. The disengagement and resulting tensions have led to protracted political conflicts that are often viewed as controversial and complex by the international community.
It is worth noting that Nagorno Karabakh had a predominantly Armenian population. Nagorno-Karabakh sought autonomy or recognition of Armenia, while Azerbaijan emphasized territorial integrity and considered Nagorno-Karabakh an integral part of its territory.
The conflict over Abkhazia stems from the region's autonomy and independence from Georgia. Abkhazia declared independence in 1992 after the conflict with Georgia escalated in the early 1990s. Abkhazia claims independence while Georgia asserts its territorial integrity and considers Abkhazia an integral part of its national territory.
The conflict over South Ossetia centres on territorial claims between Georgia and the breakaway region. South Ossetia aims for independent sovereignty, while Georgia asserts territorial integrity and considers South Ossetia an integral part of its national territory.
Similarly, in the Transnistrian conflict, territorial claims refer to the region's aspirations for independence from Moldova. Following an armed conflict in the 1990s, Transnistria declared its independence. However, it is not recognised by most countries. While Transnistria aspires to independent sovereignty, Moldova's motive is to maintain territorial integrity and considers Transnistria as part of its national territory.
The Presence of the Russian Factor
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia and other member states experienced significant changes and instability. It is important to note that this text has been written in an objective and clear manner, adhering to conventional structure, formal register, precise word choice, and grammatical correctness. As the successor to the former Soviet Union, Russia is involved in the de facto and de jure relations between states within the framework of multilateralism resulting from historical changes. However, it should be noted objectively that during the last decade of the 20th century, Russia was largely preoccupied with its own domestic political crises and was therefore unable to directly intervene in these tensions.
In the 1990s, after the collapse of the union, regions such as Transnistria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia declared their independence. The text is already well-structured, concise, and free from grammatical errors, so no changes were made. Although Russia still faced domestic challenges, it established close ties with de facto states through economic support, military presence, or diplomatic relations. However, over time, Russia began to use these tensions strategically for its own interests. The recognition of de facto states' autonomy, particularly in Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova, led to further conflicts and tensions.
The conflict between NATO, the US, the EU and Russia became more significant in the early 2000s. The aim of this conflict was to gain and maintain dominant influence in the region. The peak of this tension occurred in 2014 with the Ukrainian crisis, which directly and indirectly affected not only Ukraine but also other post-Soviet de jure countries. Russia has used this as leverage to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries and influence state decisions when necessary.
It is important to note that Russia's control and influence varies from country to country, indicating that the key to these conflicts is not solely in Russia's hands. Developments also differ, and opportunities for interaction remain in some regions, while others end up in isolation.
It is clear that Russia has no active interest in the settlement of these conflicts. This tool is reliable for countering the perceived 'West' by Russia as a unipolar world order and neutralising the challenges of the USSR's collapse. The main point of the Russian strategy is to reject the unipolar world order and emphasise the multipolar perspective, with a central role played by pursuing security in regions and protecting Russian interests. However, it is important to consider that Russia's motivation is not to create a new Russian Empire or an entity like the Soviet Union, but to ensure its security and act as a player in the West.
Russia has been involved in the internal and external affairs of neighbouring states, particularly in South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria, and to some extent, Nagorno Karabakh. Russia has exerted significant influence on these conflicts, using various methods of control.
Differences
A thorough analysis of the cases of the de facto states of Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Transnistria reveals a complex system of political, socioeconomic, and cultural characteristics. This text will now focus on the significant differences that distinguish these conflicts from one another, as the main similarities have already been presented.
Historical Context
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict originated from ethno-nationalist tensions between Armenians and Azerbaijanis, which escalated after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The conflict resulted in a violent war for control of Nagorno Karabakh and surrounding territories in the 1990s, leading to a de facto regime.
Similarly, the conflict in Abkhazia originated from ethnic and political unrest in the late 1980s, when Abkhazians demanded more autonomy from Georgia. In the 1990s, the independence movement in Abkhazia led to armed conflicts and secession from Georgia.
Similarly, the conflict in South Ossetia also arose in the 1990s due to inter-ethnic tensions and the desire for independence from Georgia, resulting in armed clashes and the establishment of a de facto regime with close Russian support.
The Transnistrian conflict is a consequence of the political upheaval that occurred during the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Russian-speaking population in Transnistria demanded greater independence from Moldova, leading to armed clashes and the establishment of a de facto regime.
Parties Involved
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict involves Azerbaijan, Armenia, and local forces in Nagorno-Karabakh. Russia and Turkey also play an indirect role due to regional geopolitical dynamics.
The conflict in Abkhazia involves Georgia and Abkhazia, with Russia playing a crucial role as Abkhazia's backer. Geopolitical interests and influences are strong.
Georgia and South Ossetia are involved, with a significant Russian presence. Russia plays a central role both as a supporter of South Ossetia and as a geopolitical actor.
The conflicting parties in Transnistria are Moldova, Transnistria, and Russia. Russia's influence is also significant in this region, where geopolitical interests are at play.
International Reactions
The de facto states of Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Transnistria have elicited varied reactions on the international stage, with countries and
organizations taking differing positions. This diversity of responses reflects the complexity of the geopolitical situation and the distinct historical contexts in which these regions developed.
Following the conflict of the early 1990s, Nagorno-Karabakh came under effective control of Armenia. Armenia supports the independence of Nagorno Karabakh, however, it is important to note that the international community does not recognize the region as a sovereign state. Azerbaijan considers Nagorno-Karabakh as part of its territory and receives broad support for its territorial integrity, particularly from countries such as Turkey,
South Ossetia, and Abkhazia. Russia has recognized both regions since the conflicts of the 1990s and maintains close political, economic, and military ties with them. Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Syria have also recognized Transnistria's independence. However, the EU and the US, among others, consider it a part of Georgia. These differing perspectives have led to diplomatic tensions and challenges.
Transnistria has sought autonomy since the 1990s, and while Russia has close ties with the region, most countries do not recognize its independence. Moldova claims that the area is part of its national territory. However, the international community has not adopted a clear and consistent position on this matter yet.
The Degree of Development of De Facto States
The economic situations in Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Transnistria differ significantly. Nagorno-Karabakh has invested in telecommunications, gold mining, and agriculture, while other de facto states rely on various economic sectors and external sources of aid. Transnistria, in particular, has developed closer ties with Russia and enjoys some political stability. South Ossetia and Transnistria also depend on Russian support and have varying levels of development.
Political Structures and Governance
De facto states have diverse political structures that reflect their complex historical and geopolitical backgrounds. Nagorno-Karabakh has an elected president, parliament, and army, while South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Transnistria have different models of political governance, ranging from presidential systems to parliamentary structures.
Socio-Cultural Features
The socio-cultural features of de facto states reflect the diversity and historical origins of their populations. There are striking differences in ethnic makeup and cultural traditions that shape the identity and social fabric of these regions. These features play a central role in their self-representation and relations with neighboring states.
Conclusion
A comparative analysis of ethno-political conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Transnistria reveals commonalities in the dynamics of these conflicts.
Despite the varying historical contexts and individual characteristics of the conflicts, certain similarities can be identified.
1. Structural similarities: Ethno-cultural identities play a crucial role in the escalation of conflicts in all examined cases. Demands for autonomy or independence are often closely related to the desire to preserve one's identity and cultural characteristics.
2. External influences such as international interests, geopolitical considerations, and strategic alliances have a direct impact on developments in their respective regions.
3. Unclear borders and territorial claims: Conflicts are frequently characterised by poorly defined borders and territorial claims, which can lead to ongoing tensions and make sustainable conflict resolution more difficult.
4. Lack of effective peace mechanisms: Despite international efforts to resolve conflicts, peace mechanisms in the researched regions remain limited. The peace agreement remains incomplete due to the inherently controversial nature of the underlying issue.
Considering these conclusions, it is evident that ethno-political conflicts are interconnected in complex ways and have a significant impact not only on the affected states but also on the entire region. Therefore, it is crucial to take into account all the similarities and differences that link the aforementioned conflicts when implementing future conflict prevention and resolution efforts.
REFERENCES
1. 2020 Der 44-tägige Krieg zwischen Aserbaidschan und Bergkarabach -https://www.baks.bund.de/de/arbeitspapiere/2021/krieg-um-berg-karabach-2020-implikationen-fuer-streitkraeftestruktur-und Accessed: 05 January 2024.
2. Analyse: Postsowjetische De-facto-Regime -https://www.bpb.de/themen/europa/russland-analysen/nr-394/322085/analyse-postsowjetische-de-facto-regime/ Accessed: 15 January 2024.
3. Aserbaidschan startet Militäreinsatz in Berg-Karabach -https://www.dw.com/de/aserbaidschan-startet-milit%C3%A4reinsatz-in-berg-karabach/a-66862231 Accessed: 22 January 2024.
4. Bartmann, Barry. Political Realities and Legal Anomalies. Revising the Politics of International Recognition. In T. Bahcheli, B. Bartmann & H. Srebrnik (Hrsg.), De Facto States. The Quest for Sovereignty (S. 13 - 31). London and New York: Routledge, 2004.
5. Berg-Karabach wird zum 1. Januar 2024 aufgelöst -https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/berg-karabach-wird-zum-1-januar-2024-aufgeloest-102.html Accessed: 27 January 2024.
6. Berg-Karabach: Aserbaidschan beendet seinen Militäreinsatz -https://www.dw.com/de/berg-karabach-aserbaidschan-beendet-seinen-milit%C3%A4reinsatz/a-66870274 Accessed: 12 January 2024.
7. Berg-Karabach: Harte Prüfung für die Armenier -https://www.vaticannews.va/de/welt/news/2023-01/armenien-berg-karabach-aserbaidschan-krieg-blockade-russland.html Accessed: 07 January 2024.
8. Border Assistance Mission to Moldova and Ukraine - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=LEGISSUM:ps0002#:~:text=The%20European%20Border% 20Assistance%20Mission%20to%20the%20Republic,It%20forms%20part%20of%20the% 20European%20Neighbourhood%20Policy. Accessed: 20 January 2024.
9. Der georgisch-südossetische Konflikt - https://ifsh.de/file-C0RE/documents/jahrbuch/04/Koenig-dt.pdf Accessed: 25 January 2024.
10. Der Kaukasuskrieg 2008 - https://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/hintergrund-aktuell/523728/der-kaukasuskrieg-2008/ Accessed: 16 January 2024.
11. Die Lunte am Pulverfass hat Feuer gefangen -https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/georgien-ts-120.html Accessed: 20 January 2024.
12. Erkämpfte Souveränität Vor zwanzig Jahren proklamierte die vormalige Sowjetrepublik Abchasien ihre Unabhängigkeit - http://www.ag-friedensforschung.de/regionen/Georgien/abchasien14.html Accessed: 08 January 2024.
13. First President of Georgia / Who is Zviad Gamsakhurdia?-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XixYl CGVxg&t=834s 13:54 Accessed: 11 January 2024.
14. Hofbauer, Hannes. Transnistrien: Niemandsland Am Dnjestr, S. 146/147 sowie Wolfgang Grabowski: Russland auf dem Weg zu neuer Macht, Berlin 2008.
15. Konflikt in Georgien - wer trägt die Schuld? -https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/faqgeorgien-ts-100.html Accessed: 20 January 2024.
16. Müller, Dietmar. Rumänische Politik in Europa in historischer Perspektive: Verflechtungen, Transfers und nationale Selbstbehauptung. In: Lorenz, A., Maris, DM. (eds) Das politische System Rumäniens. Springer VS, Wiesbaden., https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-36343-7 2, Accessed: 06 January 2024.
17. Neue Fronten nach dem Krieg, Russland, der Westen und die Zukunft im Südkaukasus - Zeitschrift OSTEUROPA | Neue Fronten nach dem Krieg (zeitschrift-osteuropa.de) Accessed: 10 January 2024.
18. Postsowjetische De-facto-Regime - https://www.laender-analysen.de/russland-analysen/394/postsowjetische-de-facto-regime/
Accessed: 22 January 2024.
19. Russland baut Kontrolle über Abchasien aus -https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/abchasien-und-russland-schliessen-strategische-partnerschaft-a-1004776.html Accessed: 16 January 2024.
20. Russlands nächster Beitrittskandidat -https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/transnistrien-will-in-die-russische-foederation-12851911.html Accessed: 14 January 2024.
21. Unabhängiges Südossetien? - https://www.dw.com/de/s%C3%BCdossetien-stimmt-f%C3%BCr-unabh%C3%A4ngigkeit/a-2237542
Accessed: 20 January 2024.
22. Vor 25 Jahren: Georgien erklärt seine Unabhängigkeit - https://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/hintergrund-aktuell/224445/vor-25-jahren-georgien-erklaert-seine-unabhaengigkeit/ Accessed: 31 January 2024.
23. Sender, Wolfgang. Die Republik Moldau auf dem Weg zu Demokratie und Marktwirtschaft, Munich, GRIN Verlag, 2003.
съ^иъпт UüPSü^Pü^bPLbP, иъяиэичиъ LnhönhUbbr LbPLU3hL T.üPüPüT.h, UP^ü2hü3h, ^UPü^üShL OUhU3h ЬЧ UbPQTbbUSPh ^U4UU"UPSnhß-3nhUUbPh 4hLÜUh4U3h CnLPS
ЧЫЯЬ 2ÜP^ÜP3ÜL
Ьр^шЬ/ щЬтшЦшЬ hшüш[uшpшU^ ф2шqqшJfiЬ hшршphрпLpJпLЬЬhр фшЦпLLmhmfi ф2шqqшJfiЬ hшршphрпLpJпLЬЬhрfi шф/пЬ/ hшJgnрp, f. Ьр^шЬ, ^шJшumшЬfi ^шЬршщЬт^^пСЬ
qnjnLpjnLÜ nLüh 2nLH2 25 Qb фш^тп ^brnnLpjnLÜ, npnbg^g h^UqQ* hbrnfanphp^j^U тшршб^й: 1-b фш^тп nbdhdbbnh h hoijm дшщ nLq^^npbb шпЪ^^й t ш^ фш^^ш^и U hnnQnLp^UQ, nnh Qb^ßnLÜ
^bmnLp^U hbs nLq^^hnnbU шгсЪ^Цп^ ^b jnLnb ^bmnLpjnLüü шд^и h фбш^ kh
l|UnLJ ^ршдЪЬп |р фUpU)|2NшUпLpJпLUQ ^Ь фш^тп щЬmпLpJшU рЪш^^^ш! и тшрш&р| Ъ^штишир:
ипц! hпQЦшb| Ъщштш^Ъ t ЦЬр^&Ь и hшJЬJшmЬl фЬпрш^шрш^шЪ hш4шUшрmпLpJпLUUbрp LЬnUшJ|U Пшршрш^и, ЯшршЦш^Ъ Ои|ш^и, Uр^шq|шJпLU и UЬрйQUЬumрпLJ: nL2ШQрпLpJшU 4ЫmрпUпLJ ЬЪ hш4шUшрmпLpJпLШbр| щштбшпЪЬр|, дпрЬрЬршдЪЬр! и hЬmUшUpUЬр| ШшUпLpJпLШЬрU пL mшррЬрпLpJпLШЬрQ, прр тш[|и t hш4шJшрmпLpjпLШЬр| фЪши^ш^ hшJшщшрфш4 щшm4ЬршgпLU и ршgшhшJmпLJ t ^Ьпрш^шрш^шЪ ЦЬбЬр| hшUшmЬpumпLU hUшршЦпр QUQhшUрпLpJпLШЬр| шп^ш^^пьЬр:
Ъщштш^Ъ ^рш^шЪшдЬЬп hшUшр ^Ъфр t ^рЦЬ[ пLuпLUUшu|рЬlпL mшршbш2P2шUUЬрпLU щштиш^ш! фпЪ|, рш^шрш^ш! qшрqшgпLUUЬр|, и шqQЬgпLpJпLШЬр| пьЬЬдшЬ ^ЬрЪ пL ^шЪш^^пьЬр:
иЬрп^шршЪш^ш! UпmЬgпLUp h|UUЦшb t Ъ2ЦшЬ ^йпрш^шрш^шЪ hш4шUшрmпLpJпLUUЬр| hшUЬUшmш4шU фрп&^^шЪ Црш: ОдтЦЬ[ ЬЪр прш^ш^шЪ, шуйщЬи tl ршЪш^ш^шЪ hЬmшqпmпLpjшй иЬрп^ЪЬр|д: ОдтшдпрЬЦЬ[ ЬЪ шпш21ш]|Ъ ш^р]^риЬр'> ЪЬршп^ щш2тпиш^ши фшитшр^рЬр, рш^шрш^ш! hшJmшршрпLpJпLШЬр и hпQЦшbUЬр* h|UUш4шUпLJ дЬришЪш^шЪ
1рштЦш^шШЬр|д:
Я|иЬшЦпрЦЬ[ ^ пр фЬпрш^шрш^шЪ hш4шJшрmпLpJпLШЬрQ и2тшщЬи пLUЫпLU ЬЪ ршр^ пL hш4шuш4шU фЪшф^ш, прЪ tl |р hЬрp|U щшршрт hпq t UшfaшщшmршumпLJ тшршЬш2р2шЪш]|и ^П2пр ^ш^шдпфЬр!
hЬmшpрpрnLpjnLШЬр| hшUшр:
bqрш4шgпLpJпLUU ш^ t, пр ^Ъпрш^шрш^шЪ hш4шJшрmпLpjпLШЬр| ЦЬршрЬр^ ршqUш4пQUшU| hЬmшqпmпLpjпLШЬрQ hUшршЦпрпLpJпLU ЬЪ тш[|и йишЦпрЬп humш4 щшm4ЬршgпLUUЬр hш4шJшрmпLpJпLШЬр| щштбшпЪЬр| и hЬmUшUpUЬр| ЦЬршрЬр^^ hшUшQрЬl| |ршфбш4IЬрпLU hш4шJшрmпLpJпLШЬр| hUшршЦпр oр|йш^шфпLpJпLUйЬрU пL pUQhшUрпLpJпLUUЬрp ршgшhшJmЬlпL
hшUшр:
Я^иишршпЬр^ ^ЬпршцшршЦшЬ ЦпЬф^ЦтЬЬр, Гип^р^рЬ UfiпLpJпLU, hhmfaпрhрцшJUпLpJпLU, Ыр^шцрш, Зшрш^^Ь Оирш, ЦршитшЬ, иЬрдфЬитр, ипщпЦш, Ырдш^, LbnhшJfih Н.шршршц,, ^ШJШumшЬ, ЩррЬршЬ:
ОБЩИЕ ПРОБЛЕМЫ, ИНДИВИДУАЛЬНЫЕ РЕШЕНИЯ ВОКРУГ ДИНАМИКИ КОНФЛИКТОВ В НАГОРНОМ КАРАБАХЕ, АБХАЗИИ, ЮЖНОЙ ОСЕТИИ И ПРИДНЕСТРОВЬЕ
ВАГЕ ЗАРГАРЯН
соискатель кафедры международных отношений и дипломатии факультета международных отношений Ереванского государственного университета, г. Ереван, Республика Армения
В мире насчитывается около 25 де-факто государств, пять из которых находятся на постсоветской территории. Появление режимов де-факто напрямую связано с тупиковой ситуацией и реальностью, вызывающей конфликты, когда государство де-юре, напрямую связанное с государством, больше не может утверждать свою (само) власть над населением и тем самым осуществлять территорию де-факто государства.
Целью данной статьи является анализ и сравнение этнополитических конфликтов в Нагорном Карабахе, Южной Осетии, Абхазии и Приднестровье. Основное внимание уделяется сходству и различиям в причинах, процессах и последствиях конфликта, которые позволяют комплексно понять динамику конфликта и выделить возможные сходства в контексте этнополитических конфликтов.
Для достижения этой цели была поставлена задача изучить роль и значение исторического фона, политического развития, этнического состава и международных влияний в регионах.
Методологический подход статьи основан на сравнительном анализе упомянутых этнополитических конфликтов. Используются как качественные, так и количественные методы исследования. В качестве первоисточников используются официальные документы, политические заявления и статьи, в первую очередь, немецких СМИ.
Показано, что этнополитические конфликты всегда имеют сложную и противоречивую динамику, что, в свою очередь, создает благодатную почву для интересов важных региональных акторов.
Вывод состоит в том, что перекрестное исследование этнополитических конфликтов дает возможность получить четкое представление об их причинах и последствиях в, чтобы выявить возможные закономерности и общие черты в управлении конфликтами в сходных ситуациях.
Ключевые слова: этнополитические конфликты, Советский Союз, постсоветское государство, Абхазия, Южная Осетия, Грузия, Приднестровье, Молдова, Арцах, Нагорный Карабах, Армения, Азербайджан.
