• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Thomas de Waal"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
  "programAffiliation": "russia",
  "programs": [
    "Russia and Eurasia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Caucasus",
    "Azerbaijan",
    "Armenia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie Europe

Azerbaijan and the Frozen Conflict Over Nagorno-Karabakh

While war is not likely to break out over Nagorno-Karabakh in the near future, there is a growing possibility that escalation in the tension between Azerbaijan and Armenia could kill the peace process.

Link Copied
By Thomas de Waal
Published on Nov 24, 2010

Source: NEWS.am

Azerbaijan and the Frozen Conflict Over Nagorno-KaIs agreement on basic principles on Karabakh or at least any progress possible during the Astana summit?  If no, then why?

Unfortunately there is no basis to believe that there will be a political breakthrough in the talks on Nagorno-Karabakh in Astana. Rather the opposite. Ever since the freezing of the Armenia-Turkey process earlier this year, the Karabakh talks have been dead and the situation on the Line of Contact has worsened. Also, domestic public opinion in both Azerbaijan and on the Armenian side is pushing against compromise and peace which makes it even harder for Presidents Aliyev and Sarkisian to agree to the Basic Principles, even if they wish to. This means that the only pressure on the two leaders to make peace must come from abroad, but the basic problem remains that the international powers do not have a high enough level of interest or resources to push Armenians and Azerbaijanis to sign an agreement. Local factors are much stronger than geopolitical ones in this conflict.

There is an opinion that the negotiations will last till Azerbaijan launches a war. What do you think is war likely to break out in the Karabakh conflict zone?

I don’t believe there is a strong likelihood of a war over Karabakh, in the next two or three years at least, although the logic of Azerbaijan’s military build-up makes it a danger in the long term. My main worry is that another bad incident on the Line of Contact could escalate, result in the death of a few dozen young men and kill off the current peace process. That would make the situation much more difficult and the Line of Contact much more dangerous. That is why I believe the priority is to strengthen the ceasefire regime around Nagorno-Karabakh.

Will the negotiations bring to final solution to the conflict or they pursue another goal, for instance freezing of the conflict?

The current negotiation process looks more like “conflict management” than a substantial peace process. Of course a frozen conflict is better than war but I don’t believe that Azerbaijan will allow this conflict to be frozen in the long term without at least the return of the five territories east of Nagorno-Karabakh. So I believe it is better to begin confidence-building-measures that will restore trust between the two sides and that will reduce the likelihood of conflict.

About the Author

Thomas de Waal

Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe

Thomas de Waal is a senior fellow at Carnegie Europe, specializing in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    There Is No Shortcut for Europe in Armenia

      Thomas de Waal

  • Article
    Rewiring the South Caucasus: TRIPP and the New Geopolitics of Connectivity
      • Areg Kochinyan

      Thomas de Waal, Areg Kochinyan, Zaur Shiriyev

Thomas de Waal
Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe
Thomas de Waal
SecurityCaucasusAzerbaijanArmenia

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    The Much-Touted Middle Corridor Transport Route Could Prove a Dead End

    For the Middle Corridor to fulfill its promises, one of these routes must become scalable. At present, neither is.

      Friedrich Conradi

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What Does Nuclear Proliferation in East Asia Mean for Russia?

    Troubled by the growing salience of nuclear debates in East Asia, Moscow has responded in its usual way: with condemnation and threats. But by exacerbating insecurity, Russia is forcing South Korea and Japan to consider radical security options.

      James D.J. Brown

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Is Opposition to Online Restrictions an Inflection Point for the Russian Regime?

    After four years of war, there is no one who can stand up to the security establishment, and President Vladimir Putin is increasingly passive. 

      Tatiana Stanovaya

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Russia Is Meddling for Meddling’s Sake in the Middle East

    The Russian leadership wants to avoid a dangerous precedent in which it is squeezed out of Iran by the United States and Israel—and left powerless to respond in any meaningful way.

      Nikita Smagin

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Is Frustration With Armenia’s Pashinyan Enough to Bring the Pro-Russia Opposition to Power?

    It’s true that many Armenians would vote for anyone just to be rid of Pashinyan, whom they blame for the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh, but the pro-Russia opposition is unlikely to be able to channel that frustration into an electoral victory.

      Mikayel Zolyan

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.