I t has been more than a month since the Azerbaijani “environmentalist” blocked the Lachin corridor. Based on a classical typology, it is one of the tools of warfare.

Azerbaijan, taking advantage of the fact that most of the world is engaged in the fight against coronavirus, the US isolation policy and other favorable conditions, attacked Nagorno-Karabakh in September, 2020.

Based on the same logic, the blockade of the Lachin corridor was carried out. Active actors of the West and Russia are focused on the ongoing war in Ukraine, due to which the escalation and growth of tension in other regions are not as sensitive for them, as could be expected in other situations.

Such a development of events gave rise to various, sometimes contradictory viewpoints, offers and comparisons in the Armenian socio-political discourse. The quintessence of all that is what can be done in such a situation and what is the way out? There are comparisons with other conflicts to find possible ways to resolve such situations. However, it is necessary to take into account the uniqueness of each conflict, the historical era, the prevailing environment and the characteristics of sides of the conflict in comparisons.

In the past two years, the doctrine of “separation for the sake of salvation”, relatively new concept of self-determination of nations in international law has being circulated. It allows nations and ethnic communities to secede from any state, where there is discrimination, the threat of genocide and violations of fundamental human rights. More specifically, there is an impossibility of peaceful coexistence within the framework of that state. In the case of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh, this doctrine is more than typical.

The blockade of Lachin provides grounds for yet another historical parallel. During World War II, even before the attack on the USSR, the Nazi leadership of Germany planned to blockade the city of Leningrad, one of the symbols of the country [1]. The aim was to deprive the city’s population of subsistence and conquer the city by starving them to death.  In its nature and content, the Lachin blockade repeats the Nazi practice applied decades ago. 

T he Armenian-Azerbaijani dialogue in this case is necessary at least so that the wall of silence doesn’t lead to an explosion following such vacuum-like situations. In parallel, work with the international community, states and intergovernmental associations would be highly desirable.  The history and experience of the conflicts show that non-commercial organizations can do an important and useful work by developing aspects related to the international-legal status of a given conflict.

It is useful to consider the experience of such organizations on the example of Kosovo. Before the declaration of independence in Kosovo, the Public International Law and Policy Group, PILPG [2], presented by the United States, played an important role among such non-governmental organizations. This group consisted of well-known lawyers, former high-ranking American diplomats who were able to apply their knowledge and experience in such important issues as peacebuilding, international justice, post-conflict political development and public international law. These are the important factors, which are applicable in the case of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Despite its crisis nature, the Lachin blockade contains opportunities to bring the Karabakh conflict to a new international level. In case of comparisons with the Kosovo conflict, they can be observed considering the regional features. The level of internationalization of the problem stems from this.

In the 20^th century, the separatist sentiments of the Albanians of Kosovo had the support of regional actors [3]. During World War II, it was Italy and Germany, and during the breakup of Yugoslavia, it was the European countries and the Unite States. In case of Nagorno-Karabakh, there was no such support. Here, the problem has another meaning. In case of the Yugoslavian crisis, the Western states considered first Yugoslavia and then Serbia as a Russian area of influence. Hence such actions against Belgrade fit into the logic of weakening Russia’s influence in the Balkan part of Europe. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, in particular, the current blockade of the Lachin corridor is geographically not as close to Europe as the Balkans. This does not exclude the desire of the Western axis to weaken or at best eliminate the Russian presence in the South Caucasus. However, the sensitivity of the reaction of the main actors to the Kosovo crisis and the blockade of Lachin is still measured in units of geographical distance. This does not mean, that it is not possible to bring the Karabakh conflict to a new international level, by taking the advantage of the Lachin blockade.

One of the tools to prevent violent conflicts could be the United Nations Preventative Deployment Force. In case of its failure, the use of the UN Defense Force is another means to prevent the spread of the fire of the conflict, that is to manage the conflict. It should be noted that the UN Preventative and Defense Forces are subdivisions of the UN Peacekeeping Forces, which perform relevant functions at different stages of conflict development. In case of the failure at this stage, the next attempt to eliminate the fire may be the use of force, the settlement of conflict. The precedent for this is the use of NATO forces in July 1995, in the city of Srebrenica in Bosnia and Herzegovina, first through Implementation Forces and later through Stabilization Forces [4]. The above-mentioned are intermediate measures with the involvement of the third party, that is international intermediary actors. After all this, it is possible to initiate the investigation and solution of the immediate causes of the conflict, the conditions for its transition to an open stage and start looking for solutions. After that, the possible development and implementation of models of coexistence between the direct parties to the conflict can serve to prevent the conflict’s new outbreak. Bringing up and implementation of possible historical-political and legal potential of the Lachin blockade make the above-mentioned scenarios realistic, if not entirely, then at least partially. In the current stalemate, it is also a significant progress, with the possibility of uncovering new paths in the future.

[1] The Nazis planned the blockade of Leningrad in May 1941 (https://ria.ru/20200127/1563903769.html last paragraph 11.01.2023).
[2] Minority uprising. Kosovo. Moldova. Ukraine. Georgia. Kurdistan, an Anthology. Series: Eurovostok, Publisher: Europe, 2006:
[3] Kosovo: History, Character and Dynamics of the Conflict, (https://polit.ru/article/2009/10/04/kosovo/  last paragraph 12.01.2023).
[4] Conflict: From Analysis to Intervention, editors: Sandra Cheldelin, Daniel Druckman and Larissa Fast, 2007, p. 81։