阿塞拜疆对欧安组织明斯克小组的看法

IF 0.3 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Zaur Shiriyev
{"title":"阿塞拜疆对欧安组织明斯克小组的看法","authors":"Zaur Shiriyev","doi":"10.1163/18750230-02703016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe ( OSCE ) led Minsk Group – the principal mediator tasked with the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, is often criticised by Azerbaijan, due to the stalemate in negotiations. The intensive period of engagement between 2006 and 2009 brought first the initial and then the “updated” Madrid Principles. This was the chief working document that set forth the basic principles for peaceful resolution. The inactivity of the Minsk Group is often conceded as the result of maintaining “minimalist goals” – preventing full scale war and trying to bring conflict parties to the negotiating table. The April war in 2016 tested the fragility of the first goal: preventing skirmishes from leading to larger scale conflict. Similarly, after the April 2016 war, the attempt to revitalise the second goal – i.e. bringing the parties to the negotiating table – also collapsed, due to the increased mistrust between the parties after the war.The article will evaluate the geopolitical changes and their impact on the Minsk Group’s work since 2008, the reasons for the demands to change the format of the Minsk Group, and finally Azerbaijan’s perspectives on the limitations of the Minsk Group’s current mandate and mechanisms.","PeriodicalId":39991,"journal":{"name":"Security and Human Rights","volume":"27 1","pages":"442-466"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18750230-02703016","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Azerbaijan’s Perspectives on the osce Minsk Group\",\"authors\":\"Zaur Shiriyev\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18750230-02703016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe ( OSCE ) led Minsk Group – the principal mediator tasked with the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, is often criticised by Azerbaijan, due to the stalemate in negotiations. The intensive period of engagement between 2006 and 2009 brought first the initial and then the “updated” Madrid Principles. This was the chief working document that set forth the basic principles for peaceful resolution. The inactivity of the Minsk Group is often conceded as the result of maintaining “minimalist goals” – preventing full scale war and trying to bring conflict parties to the negotiating table. The April war in 2016 tested the fragility of the first goal: preventing skirmishes from leading to larger scale conflict. Similarly, after the April 2016 war, the attempt to revitalise the second goal – i.e. bringing the parties to the negotiating table – also collapsed, due to the increased mistrust between the parties after the war.The article will evaluate the geopolitical changes and their impact on the Minsk Group’s work since 2008, the reasons for the demands to change the format of the Minsk Group, and finally Azerbaijan’s perspectives on the limitations of the Minsk Group’s current mandate and mechanisms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39991,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Security and Human Rights\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"442-466\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18750230-02703016\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Security and Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18750230-02703016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Security and Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18750230-02703016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

欧洲安全与合作组织(OSCE)领导的明斯克小组是负责解决纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫冲突的主要调解人,由于谈判陷入僵局,经常受到阿塞拜疆的批评。在2006年至2009年的密集接触期间,首先制定了最初的《马德里原则》,然后“更新”了《马德里原则》。这是提出和平解决的基本原则的主要工作文件。明斯克小组的不作为常常被认为是维持“最低限度目标”的结果,即防止全面战争和设法使冲突各方坐到谈判桌前。2016年4月的战争考验了第一个目标的脆弱性:防止小规模冲突导致更大规模的冲突。同样,在2016年4月的战争之后,由于战争后各方之间的不信任增加,重振第二个目标(即将各方带到谈判桌上)的尝试也失败了。本文将评估自2008年以来的地缘政治变化及其对明斯克小组工作的影响,要求改变明斯克小组形式的原因,以及阿塞拜疆对明斯克小组当前任务和机制局限性的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Azerbaijan’s Perspectives on the osce Minsk Group
The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe ( OSCE ) led Minsk Group – the principal mediator tasked with the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, is often criticised by Azerbaijan, due to the stalemate in negotiations. The intensive period of engagement between 2006 and 2009 brought first the initial and then the “updated” Madrid Principles. This was the chief working document that set forth the basic principles for peaceful resolution. The inactivity of the Minsk Group is often conceded as the result of maintaining “minimalist goals” – preventing full scale war and trying to bring conflict parties to the negotiating table. The April war in 2016 tested the fragility of the first goal: preventing skirmishes from leading to larger scale conflict. Similarly, after the April 2016 war, the attempt to revitalise the second goal – i.e. bringing the parties to the negotiating table – also collapsed, due to the increased mistrust between the parties after the war.The article will evaluate the geopolitical changes and their impact on the Minsk Group’s work since 2008, the reasons for the demands to change the format of the Minsk Group, and finally Azerbaijan’s perspectives on the limitations of the Minsk Group’s current mandate and mechanisms.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Security and Human Rights
Security and Human Rights Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: Security and Human Rights (formerly Helsinki Monitor) is a quarterly journal devoted to issues inspired by the work and principles of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). It looks at the challenge of building security through cooperation across the northern hemisphere, from Vancouver to Vladivostok, as well as how this experience can be applied to other parts of the world. It aims to stimulate thinking on the question of protecting and promoting human rights in a world faced with serious threats to security.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信