According to a French negotiator, the usual “progress” (that occurs in all peace talks before they fail) is occurring in current talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabagh. Yet, far more interesting than the lack of actual information from that report and than the talks which are very likely to fail, are the statements coming from the Azerbaijani President.
But in remarks broadcast on Azeri TV on Saturday, Mr Aliyev said that if the Munich talks failed to reach agreement he would be “left with no other option”. “We have the full right to liberate our land by military means,” he said.
Granted, this statement is nothing new. Baku has been crying wolf for years after being thoroughly beaten and embarassed by the (Russian backed) Armenian forces in the 90s. Yet, Azerbaijan seems to be indicating that it sees the current Munich talks as the last ones. On the one hand, this could merely be a tactic to put pressure on Armenia and others to reach a settlement. On the other hand, Baku may be issuing a genuine warning. Given it’s long insistence on the right to use force, its constantly growing military budget, and its clout as a major energy producer, the idea that Baku may have finally had enough of talks and waiting approximately 15 years to get its territory back (from its perspective), is hardly far fetched.
Additionally, it’s not as if hostilities have ceased. Mine fields still abound (as this author saw while carefully walking around NK) and each side still fires on the other almost daily. Since the international community failed to insert peacekeepers or at least monitors along the cease fire line, it would take very little for full scale fighting to resume. Were that to happen, Baku may count on the world’s dire energy situation and the West’s current focus on non-Russian energy routes to come down on Baku’s side. Given Armenia’s pro-Russian foreign policy and its allowing Russian troops to be stationed on its soil, it would likely find few friends, save Moscow. Lord knows Moscow would surely like to intervene elsewhere in the Caucasus.
While it would be easy to continue with conjecture, it would be wise to follow the current Munich talks closely as well as signs coming from Baku, Yerevan and Moscow. Like so many other rounds in the past this may be nothing again, but when something does happen, it is bound to be big.

Comments to this entry
ElamBend
November 23, 2009
8:09 pm
Chirol
November 23, 2009
8:35 pm
dj
November 23, 2009
9:36 pm
Thomas
November 23, 2009
11:16 pm
Damn you! Now I have to go research.
Oliver
November 24, 2009
10:50 am
Robert
November 24, 2009
5:06 pm
OLIVER - Absolutely! How many articles have you read pointing out the total inconsistency of western policy accepting the situation in NK and at the same time shrieking about sacred Georgian territory not to mention ex Yugoslavia and Serbia.
Richard
November 25, 2009
1:50 am
The Georgian / Russian war of 2008 has changed everyone's calculations. It is unlikely that the Azeris, despite their military spending, are ready for a military adventure. Not least they would be concerned about the BTC pipeline which passes within 30 kms of Armenian territory and which would be a target in the event of an attack by Azerbaijan.
For an interesting analysis:
http://www.acnis.am/publications/2009/THE%20MILITARY%20BALANCE%20OF%20POWER%20IN%20THE%20SOUTH%20CAUCASUS.pdf
von Moltke
November 27, 2009
6:55 am
Not sure if this is Western inconsistency, or that Georgia has substantial democratizing elements that Azerbaijan does not. In Yugoslavia, the question may be more of a Bosnian one, as "Yugoslavia" has no history. Why not also the territorial integrity of Hungary or Germany? Armenia? Cyprus? Jordan? The general inclination appears to be towards territorial integrity of modern, recognized nations, viz. Iraq, Sudan, Slovakia, Bosnia (?), Yemen, Georgia, Somalia ... all candidates for partition through local self-determination.
Azeris are essentially Turks who settled in Persia. It is not clear whether they gravitate more towards the contiguous state of Turkey, occupying substantial parts of traditional Armenia, or to their fellow-Shi'i Persians, who more or less dominated Azeri politics and culture from their arrival in the Caucasus until around the 1800s. Azerbaijan itself is little more than a Soviet fiefdom, as the remainder of the Azeris are not the minor fraction in NK, but rather the majority living happily in northern Iran. Note that the relations between Persia and Armenia are quite good.