The world order that emerged after World War II presupposes two fundamental principles for the settlement of territorial disputes: territorial integrity and self-determination of nations. These two principles were also at the heart of negotiations to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, at least until the 2020 war. Although Yerevan, Baku and Stepanakert, at their own discretion, have referred to certain precedents for resolving territorial conflicts (Palestine, Kosovo, Eritrea, Bangladesh, etc.), it is clear that each of those conflicts, with certain similarities, is exceptional, just as the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh is exceptional. On the other hand, the international community does not have a unified approach – different actors have taken different positions on resolving similar territorial conflicts in different situations.
What is the peculiarity of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict from the point of view of international perception, how did different countries and lobbying groups operating in these countries try to present the conflict, what techniques did the conflicting parties use to make their point of view understandable and acceptable to the international community? Can the experience of Nagorno-Karabakh serve as an example for resolving conflicts in other regions, and if so, how?
Conflict expert Arsen Kharatyan from Armenia and independent researcher Shujaat Ahmadzada from Azerbaijan spoke about it on Aliq Media. The program was prepared within the framework of the joint initiative “Line of contact” of the Yerevan and Baku Press Clubs.