Mass exodus from Nagorno-Karabakh: what's next?

Commenting on Facebook, historian Andrey Zubov hopes for reconciliation:

“The talks that are soon due to begin in Spain between Aliyev and Pashinyan could deal not only with Karabakh's problems today, but with the entire 35-year tragedy of the South Caucasus. ... I am sure the international community will help both nations, which, fuelled by a nationalist-egoist delusion reinforced by the archaic notion of 'one nation - one country', have committed numerous crimes against their neighbours and their own populations in the recent past. If Azerbaijan, heeding the calls of the global community, now generously takes the first step in this direction, it will reap glory, respect and considerable profit.”

Radio Kommersant FM fears the conflict could expand beyond Nagorno-Karabakh:

“Baku's next goal is to create a corridor between the Azerbaijani core area and the Autonomous Republic of Nakhchivan, which are now separated by Armenian territory. Especially since Azerbaijani nationalists, whose theses, spurred on by the recent victory, are increasingly being adopted by the central government, consider this area to be their own rather than Armenian. ... The danger is that this issue will not be limited to transport and logistics and that their appetite will grown as they eat - and that Baku will decide to strike while the iron is hot and eliminate the Armenians at a time when the global situation is uniquely favourable for this.”

Turkey should protect both Azerbaijan and Armenia, T24 warns:

“Ankara should be a mentor to Yerevan and Baku and warn Pashinyan not to further antagonise Russia. Baku, in turn, could be advised to avoid steps that would further endanger Pashinyan's power. The meeting between Erdoğan and Aliyev in Nakhchivan is of symbolic importance. However, an ultimatum to open the Zangezur corridor as soon as possible was not issued here, as some foreign commentators had expected. To avoid jeopardising the Middle Corridor, the Zangezur issue requires finely tuned diplomacy.”

Armenians who do not leave Nagorno-Karabakh now have no idea what the future holds for them, conflict analyst Iulian Chifu comments in Adevărul:

“The biggest concern at the moment is the prospects of the Armenian minority in Karabakh. The Azerbaijani side has announced that the minority can either accept Azerbaijani passports and authority or leave for Armenia or Russia. It is estimated that of the 120,000 Armenians still in the enclave, between 50,000 and 70,000 want to leave the Azerbaijani region. The main problem is the security guarantees that Azerbaijan could offer without the involvement of Armenia, Russia or any European organisation. Fears range from exclusion and gradual expulsion to discrimination and ethnic cleansing.”

The EU must set boundaries for Azerbaijan, De Volkskrant demands:

“The EU wants to mediate between the two countries with US diplomatic support. ... In an ironic twist, the EU has also recently started sourcing part of the gas it no longer wants to buy from Moscow from Baku. Despite both countries' negotiations with the EU, and to some extent with Russia, it has been clear for more than a year that Azerbaijan is uncompromising in negotiations. The blatant human rights violations could herald even worse violence if Azerbaijan's ambitions are not curbed. The EU must now prove that its foreign policy goes beyond its new gas dependence on Baku.”

Russia will try to expand its influence in Armenia, political scientist Ina Paitjan comments in an open letter published by La Libre Belgique and other newspapers:

“The Russian authorities are helping to provoke disputes within the Armenian population with the goal of weakening and destabilising the country from within. Pro-Russian supporters in Armenia and Russia are trying to divide the Armenians in order to replace the Pashinyan government with a pro-Russian government. Armenians are paying a high price for their pursuit of democratic values, their fight against corruption and having distanced themselves from Moscow.”

Russia's lack of loyalty has consequences for the entire region, says The Times:

“The lesson for Russia's erstwhile allies is clear: as long as it is engaged in its bloody campaign against Kyiv, it does not have the energy or bandwidth to deter attack elsewhere. If there ever was a Pax Russica it has shrivelled and died in the late Putin era. Mr Putin, viewed from the Russian periphery, is an increasingly unimpressive peacekeeper. ... Mr Putin's attention has wandered and his lack of loyalty to neighbours and traditional allies like Armenia will be rewarded in kind. The outcome, say Armenian analysts, could be a breakdown in talks and a new broader war, dragging in Turkey, Iran and perhaps even Russia by the end of next month.”

In a Facebook post political scientist Valery Solovei compares Baku's Nagorno-Karabakh operation with the Ukraine invasion and draws conclusions that are not very flattering for Moscow:

“It is possible to solve an international problem militarily if: 1) international law (or at least some aspects of it) is on your side; 2) there is no danger that a powerful external force will perceive what is happening as a threat to itself and intervene; 3) military capabilities match political objectives. ... Under the leadership of its wise Kremlin elders, Russia has made every mistake it could have made. Its 'special military operation' will serve for decades as an example to the world of how NOT to do things.”