Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan Through Peace and War, Case Study Example

Introduction

Territorial conflicts have often become the source of complications within international relationships among neighboring countries. Through the pages of history, such points of conflicts are already considered to be nothing new. The truth is, it is these conflicts that often create a new sense of recognition on which nation owns what territory therefore redefining their reputation in the international scene; most likely, the struggle for territory involves the consideration over two elements of importance, one of which is that of the economic value and the other is dedicated towards admonishing how the nation is able to embrace the political power that such struggle for a land-ownership is undergone by particular national administrations.

For many years, the struggle between Azerbaijan and Armenia for the territorial ownership of Nagorno-Karabakh has been specifically noted as one of the bloodiest struggles in human history. A battle that involved the desire of the Armenian region to take claim of the territory because of the supposed right they have based on the topographical positioning of the land; and the desire of Azerbaijan to take note of the said option of ownership as they base their claim on the historical value that binds their nation with that of Nagorno-Karabakh. In the presentation that follows, a determination on how Nagorno-Karabakh could be considered to duly belong to the legal territorial ownership of Azerbaijan shall be proven through different elements of distinction that places Azerbaijan as the sole owner of the territory being fought for.

The Impact of Historical Data

Nagorno-Karabakh is considered to be the first Muslim-majority destination that is under the rule of a democratic and secular republic. This political situation in the nation allows it to become less connected to issues of religious traditions that often bind other purely Muslim nations. This is the reason why there had been a chance for old Christian churches to be built around the area. According to record, the builders of these churches include Caucasian Albanians which were noted as originally from Azerbaijan[1]. This claim is fully supported by historical records pointing out that Caucasian Albanians used to be original settlers of Azerbaijan even before the rise of the USSR.

Why is this historical data important? Before the emergence of the topographical measurement of areal territories, there already existed a sense of respect for what belongs to a nation based on culture, tradition and the form of governance that such nation follows. Before the onset of the wars, territorial lands were awarded either to the nearest neighboring government or to the most competent form of governance that could support the lifestyle of the residents of the land being fought for. However, at the onset of the wars, the condition of owning a land was already based on who or what particular military force could conquer the area[2]. The value for historical or traditional identification of the real essence of development that a nation or an area has been known for many years is not given so much high importance anymore especially of rational division of area-territories have already been undergone.

Nevertheless, Azerbaijan administrators stick to the fact they have more right in owning Nagorno-Karabakh because of the fact that they have been awarded such ownership during the administrative rule of Mustafa Kemal, a leader coming from the Turkish Nationalist Army. Recognizing the power of history, there is then no question as to what particular nation the territorial ownership ought to be awarded to. However, because of the emergent existence of the international law on topographical and geological measurements, it seems that Armenia deserves a fair share of the land and its produce.

Conflicts and Irate Bickering

The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan has cost the lives of many in the society. Instead of being a point of refuge, the Nagorno-Karabakh planes and other mountainous regions became the battle field for such conflicting parties. This is another reason why Azerbaijan continues to try to impose that the point of territorial ownership belongs to them simply because of the fact that they had many ancestors who already fought for the land in the past; their efforts and their lives would be put to no sense of recognition if the land would be awarded to Armenia, the force that put down the culture that has already been established by the forefathers of the Azerbaijan tribes.
The rising of military powers on the part of Armenia was a distinct course of showing Azerbaijan how they ought to react to the attacks[3]. They were expected to give up the fight and give up Nagorno-Karabakh to the other claimant. Nevertheless, Azerbaijan knew that they were fighting not only for the land [as they do have other territories they could call as their property, but for the reputation of those who have fought for the land for a long time[4]. The people of Azerbaijan do not only try to save the land but also that of their dignity and that of their forefathers. The sentiment over the value that Nagorno-Karabakh play in the lives and history of the Azerbaijanis further motivates the people to push for the desire to own the land again. Nevertheless, the conflict-bickering continues up to this day.

The Concept of Toponymy

According to the orientalist philological linguistic principles, the toponymy of a nation’s name tells so much about its history and how its real value and origin should be recognized accordingly. The name of a nation tells so much about how it should be respected and what reputation it is supposed to hold. Noted as the elements of the survivals of the past, the areas in Nagorno-Karabakh tells so much as to which nation it has originally belonged to and what nation deserves to gain the territorial provision that allows such administration to use the resources and other elements of progress that can be provided by the said area being considered for ownership.

Through the years, there have already been several changes to the toponymy of the names of the streets found in Nagorno-Karabakh, especially because of the entrant of the Russian and German conquerors. Due to this fact, some of the names of the streets in the area need to be traced back through the evident use of the records that history itself boasts. Azerbaijan language is still being commonly used by the people living in the area; this is the reason why it has been rather evident that most of the streets in the area are called by the natives by their original names and not by their given Russian and German identities[5]. The reason behind this is the fact that history has already familiarized people with such names and their history is something valuable to them that no point of foreign invasion has directly destroyed or disturbed the original culture existing in the area.

As part of the investigation over the validity of the use of historical value in making formal claims of the land, it is important to note the population of the early settlers in the area; which again is being claimed by the administration to be rather an awry foundation in pointing out what land belongs to who. This s why the implementation of a legal metric system that involves distinct mathematics to assign areas of interest to particular nations, is supposedly going to be able to create a sense of control on how territories are to be decided upon and to whom they are likely supposed to be awarded to in the end. However, when it comes to historical value, there will always be someone to stand alongside the traditional way of awarding lands; a more peaceful, yet is considered old-fashioned or even not applicable for use as noted by some[6].

Conclusion

Based from the case of land conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, it could be understood how territorial divisions have been done then and how difficult the situations are depending on these points of time-concerns. History and traditions give lands like Azerbaijan the chance to invoke on their rights regarding a particular area being fought upon. Noticeably, Azerbaijan is one country that duly needs the ownership of Nagorno-Karabakh. Considering their economic position, they are in dire need of using the resources that the area could offer the nation with[7]. However, Armenia is more focused on the power that the said ownership brings. The conflict of interest between these two nations has made it possible for the wars to occur and for many lives to be lost in the process. The continuous bickering that exists between these two nations is expected to create further points of conflicts later on that cannot be fully controlled by other allied nations surrounding both areas. The creation of a settling decision on this matter is then considered as an important part of the process of advancement that both nations want to incur.

Coming up with a proper decision as to which nation Nagorno-Karabakh ought to be awarded to need to be given attention to. Although at present, because of the legal divisions that have been implemented, the land of Nagorno-Karabakh is recognized to be under the ownership of Armenia, Azerbaijan is still being motivated to fight for their right for the land based on historical values and the traditional ways of living that have already been established in the area under the guidance of the Azerbaijanis[8]. When decisions like this ought to be made, it is considered important to involve third parties that are specifically objective in seeing the situation and recognizing both legal and cultural backgrounds accordingly.

References

Fuller, Elizabeth. Nagorno-Karabakh: The Death and Casualty Toll to Date, RL 531/88, December 14, 1988, pp. 1–2

Waal, Thomas (2003). Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan Through Peace and War. New York: New York University Press.

Lieberman, Benjamin (2006). Terrible Fate: Ethnic Cleansing in the Making of Modern Europe. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee. pp. 284–92.

Miller, Donald E. and Lorna Touryan Miller. Armenia: Portraits of Survival and Hope. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003. 

[1] Fuller, Elizabeth. Nagorno-Karabakh: The Death and Casualty Toll to Date, RL 531/88, December 14, 1988, pp. 1–2

[2] Miller, Donald E. and Lorna Touryan Miller. Armenia: Portraits of Survival and Hope. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003.

[3] Miller, Donald E. and Lorna Touryan Miller. Armenia: Portraits of Survival and Hope. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003.

[4] Lieberman, Benjamin (2006). Terrible Fate: Ethnic Cleansing in the Making of Modern Europe. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee. pp. 284–92.

[5] Lieberman, Benjamin (2006). Terrible Fate: Ethnic Cleansing in the Making of Modern Europe. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee. pp. 284–92.

[6] Lieberman, Benjamin (2006). Terrible Fate: Ethnic Cleansing in the Making of Modern Europe. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee. pp. 284–92.

[7] Waal, Thomas (2003). Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan Through Peace and War. New York: New York University Press.

[8] Waal, Thomas (2003). Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan Through Peace and War. New York: New York University Press.