Email · kontakt@ine.org.pl
Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe
  • About
  • Publications
      • Publications

        The primary categories of materials published by the Institute as part of its research and analytical activities.

      • SEE ALL PUBLICATIONS

      • Analyses
        Daily commentary and analysis on international issues provided by our experts and analysts
      • Reports
        Comprehensive thematic studies on international relations and socio-political issues
      • Video
        Recordings of expert debates and series of video podcasts created by our team and experts
      • Maps
        Selection of maps depicting international alliances and foreign visits of key politicians
  • Programmes
      • Programmes

        The main areas of research and publication activities at the Institute with separate teams of experts, functioning under the supervision of the head of a particular programme.

      • WEBSITE OF THE THREE SEAS PROJECT

      • Europe
        Analyses and commentaries on European integration and the place of Europe on the political and economic map of the world
      • Security
        Studies in the field of international and internal security of individual states, with particular emphasis on the role of NATO
      • Indo-Pacific
        An overview of the political and economic situation in the region, the status of the U.S.-China rivalry, and the EU’s policy towards China
      • Three Seas Think Tanks Hub
        Analyses and studies of the Three Seas Initiative, taking into account the perspectives of the participating states
  • People
  • Contact-Careers
  • Polish-Czech Forum
  • Polski
Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe
  • About
  • Publications
      • Publications

        The primary categories of materials published by the Institute as part of its research and analytical activities.

      • SEE ALL PUBLICATIONS

      • Analyses
        Daily commentary and analysis on international issues provided by our experts and analysts
      • Reports
        Comprehensive thematic studies on international relations and socio-political issues
      • Video
        Recordings of expert debates and series of video podcasts created by our team and experts
      • Maps
        Selection of maps depicting international alliances and foreign visits of key politicians
  • Programmes
      • Programmes

        The main areas of research and publication activities at the Institute with separate teams of experts, functioning under the supervision of the head of a particular programme.

      • WEBSITE OF THE THREE SEAS PROJECT

      • Europe
        Analyses and commentaries on European integration and the place of Europe on the political and economic map of the world
      • Security
        Studies in the field of international and internal security of individual states, with particular emphasis on the role of NATO
      • Indo-Pacific
        An overview of the political and economic situation in the region, the status of the U.S.-China rivalry, and the EU’s policy towards China
      • Three Seas Think Tanks Hub
        Analyses and studies of the Three Seas Initiative, taking into account the perspectives of the participating states
  • People
  • Contact-Careers
  • Polish-Czech Forum
  • Polski
Sep 28
Analysis, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Caucasus, Geopolitics, Georgia, Iran, Publications, Russia, Turkey

A year since the war in Nagorno-Karabakh

September 28, 2021
A year since the war in Nagorno-KarabakhDownload

Key points:

– As a result of last year’s armed conflict, Armenians lost about 75% of the territory that had been controlled by the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic since 1994.

– The status of Nagorno-Karabakh remains unresolved.

– Russia has established a stronger presence in the South Caucasus, for example by deploying peacekeeping troops in the aftermath of the war.

– The conflict has shown a definite change in the balance of power in the region compared to the situation during the First Nagorno-Karabakh War (1988-1994).

Introduction

During armed conflict between Armenians and Azerbaijanis in Nagorno-Karabakh, which lasted six weeks (27 September – 10 November) last autumn, a total of about 5,000 soldiers from both sides as well as several hundred civilians lost their lives[1]. It also resulted in migration surge as people were fleeing the war zones. On the night of November 9-10, 2020, after a series of spectacular successes of the Azerbaijani army, a ceasefire agreement was signed. It was signed by Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan, President of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev and President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin. The terms of the agreement allowed Russia to deploy peacekeeping forces whose objective was to ensure stability in the region. The existing conflict has shown both significant variations in the military potential of the warring parties and the extent of involvement of international actors, compared to the situation in the 1990s (First Nagorno-Karabakh War), which prompts the following analysis.

The consequences of the war and the agreement

During the autumn offensive, the Azerbaijani army gained control of 4 districts that constitute part of the so-called Nagorno-Karabakh security belt. Later, in accordance with the terms of the Armenian surrender, the remaining areas surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh including the Aghdam region (November 20), the Kelbajar region (November 25) and the Lachin region (December 1) were handed over to the Azerbaijanis[2]. The aforementioned area returned to Baku’s control after 26 years. The Azeris achieved their most significant successes on the southern front, where they captured the strategic part of Nagorno-Karabakh, along with the city of Shusha. The continuation of military operations would have undoubtedly led to the capture of the capital of the region, Stepanakert, located in the valley[3].

The Russian Federation, a guarantor of the November agreement, sent 1960 peacekeepers of the 15th Mechanized Brigade to Nagorno-Karabakh. They were entrusted with the task of supervising and maintaining security, primarily on the route leading from the territories of Armenia proper to Karabakh, the so-called Lachin Corridor[4]. According to the terms of the agreement, the stationing of Russian troops was envisaged for a period of 5 years, with the possibility of its extension being enacted through mutual consent.

From the perspective of both sides of the conflict, the signing of the agreement posed numerous challenges, even in terms of road infrastructure. The Armenians lost Shusha, through which the route from the Armenian Syunik Province to Stepanakert led, and thus a new road section had to be built. Meanwhile, for Baku, the creation of an overland route from Azerbaijan to the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, the so-called Zangezur corridor, became an important infrastructural goal. This project faced disapproval from Armenia, which fears the creation of an extraterritorial road along its border with Iran. This is an extremely important issue for Armenians, since they fear losing control over the border area, and being de facto cut off from their southern neighbor[5].

The situation in Nagorno-Karabakh after the 2020 war

Source: Eurasianet, https://eurasianet.org/in-karabakh-deal-as-many-questions-as-answers. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

Armenia-Azerbaijan relations

The long-standing Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan should be primarily perceived as a dispute based on nationality and territory. In addition, claims of an “Islamic threat” are also frequently made from the Armenian side. On the territory of Karabakh, the acts of wiping out the historical heritage of the predecessors have repeatedly occurred. In 2020, in Shusha, Armenian monuments, such as the Cathedral of the Holy Savior, commonly known as Ghazanchetsots, suffered damages. Works are currently underway to “restore it to its former shape”[6]. However, Armenians fear manipulation, as well as pushing the Azeri’s own historical narrative, for instance by removing elements attesting to its Armenian origins.

On the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, violations and clashes where soldiers are killed still occur. These incidents do not take place only in the Karabakh region, but in many other border areas between Armenia and Azerbaijan. This state of affairs makes it difficult for civilians to return to everyday life under the conditions of post-war reality. It is worth mentioning that in July 2021, an Azerbaijani court sentenced a group of Armenian soldiers to 6 years in prison for crossing the border and possessing weapons. Undoubtedly, they serve as a kind of bargaining chip, although some of them have already returned to their homeland as part of the prisoner exchange[7]. Due to ongoing tensions and incidents along the current borders, the Pashinyan government currently sees no possibility of implementing a plan to unblock transport routes in the region[8].

Doomed Prime Minister Pashinyan still in power

The year 2020 shook Armenia. Among the countries of the South Caucasus, it was in Armenia that the epidemic situation was most severe. The struggling economy received another hit from the resumption of the war. As a result, Armenia’s GDP fell by 7.6% compared to the previous year[9].

After the announcement of the agreement, events in Yerevan took a rapid turn. The decision to sign an agreement on the cessation of hostilities, which was unfavourable for Armenia, was met with a harsh reaction from the large part of society, including opposition groups. The demonstrators demanded the resignation of Prime Minister Nikola Pashinyan, who was considered a “traitor” to his country[10]. The police arrested, among others, the leader of the opposition party “Prosperous Armenia” – Gagik Tsarukyan. During the riots, government buildings were demolished, including the parliament building, whose chairman, Ararat Mirzojan, was beaten[11].

In February 2021, senior army officials published a statement demanding the resignation of Nikola Pashinyan due to “ineffective management and serious mistakes in foreign policy”[12]. They were supported by two former presidents of the republic, who originated from the so-called “Karabakh clan”[13] – Robert Kocharian and Serzh Sargsyan. Pashinyan himself condemned the action, considering it an “attempted coup”, while calling on his supporters to show their solidarity. However, at the end of March, after a period of public unrest, he announced his resignation, which made early elections possible[14]. In the following weeks, demonstrations of both supporters and opponents of the current government took place in the capital. Many experts predicted a rapid fall of Pashinyan and his political death.

Early parliamentary elections were held in Armenia on June 20, 2021. A record number of 25 parties and blocs took part in the election campaign. Prime Minister Pashinyan’s electoral coalition, “My Step”, consisting of his “Civic Contract” party and the “Mission” party, was victorious. It received 53.9% of the vote, which resulted in 71 seats in parliament and a constitutional majority. The largest opposition force was the alliance “Armenia”, founded by Robert Kocharyan, which gained 29 seats, while the last seven went to the “I have Honour” camp of Serzh Sargsyan and former head of the special services Artur Vanecian[15].

The new government faced many difficult challenges related to the consequences of the events that took place in the tragic year 2020. As early as July, Pashinyan’s cabinet presented an ambitious plan for Armenia’s economic development, which primarily aimed at opening up to investments that would eventually lead to stable growth after the pandemic and increased tax revenues. At the same time, he announced that he expected 6% GDP growth in 2021[16]. According to World Bank forecasts, the Armenian economy will grow by 3.4% in 2021, and 4.3% in 2022[17]. In late August, the parliament finally approved the government’s plan for 2021-2026, which includes security, foreign, economic, infrastructure development policies, as well as the improvement of the justice system and state institutions. However, this was done in an atmosphere that accurately reflects the state of the political situation in Armenia. During the debate on the draft there were brawls and fights, and the vote itself was boycotted by opposition members of parliament[18].

Azeri consistency

The Azeris have learned from the course of the conflict so far, they have also taken into account the methods of conducting the so-called “new generation war”, in which social media messages and non-kinetic actions play an extremely important role. At the same time, they were aware of the predominance of the Armenian narrative present in Western media. For this reason, emphasis was put on strong engagement with ordinary Azeri users on social networks. Simultaneously, the so-called “troll factories” also conducted their activities, using fake profiles and Facebook pages which, according to the information revealed by a former analyst of the social networking site[19], obtrusively promoted discourse consistent with the ideological line of Baku, at the same time praising the actions of the ruling “New Azerbaijan Party”[20].

Not surprisingly, after the recapture of Shusha, euphoria spread in the streets of Baku and in other cities. Large demonstrations in Azeri and Turkish colors also appeared in the cities of other countries, inhabited by the Azeri diaspora[21]. At the same time, the deployment of Russian peacekeepers in Karabakh is causing dissatisfaction and concern among Azerbaijanis. Opposition groups also draw attention to the fact that the Russian military returned to the territory of Azerbaijan (the Russian-Turkish center in Giyameddinli) after nearly 8 years, since the Russians left the radar station in Gabala [22].

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan took part in a military parade in Baku, exactly one month after the cessation of hostilities. He congratulated the Azeris on their “magnificent victory” and also called on Armenians to allow the people into power who would make it possible to start a new chapter in relations with their neighbors and take steps to open borders and regional communication[23]. On June 15, 2021, Erdoğan visited Shusha, where he and Ilham Aliyev signed a declaration of alliance. Several areas of cooperation were marked in it, with particular emphasis on the military sphere[24]. This memorandum confirms that Turkish-Azerbaijani relations have entered a new level.

Russian and Turkish dividends

The Azeri offensive in Nagorno-Karabakh was opposed by Moscow, whose intention was to preserve the status quo and keep the conflict frozen. However, the Kremlin has been able to successfully exploit this situation in such a way that not only does it not affect its positive relations with Baku, but also strongly strengthens its position towards Yerevan. Moscow, explaining the lack of direct military assistance to Armenia within the framework of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (Russian: Организация Договора о Коллективной Безопасности, ODKB), argued that military operations are not conducted on Armenian territory, but only in the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, which de-jure belongs to Azerbaijan. Such a narrative led to forcing Yerevan into complete submission to the Russian side. The agreement, containing the escalation of the conflict, was concluded on terms favoring Azerbaijanis and aimed at weakening the position of Pashinyan, who came to power as a result of the 2018 Color Revolution and was associated with Armenia’s potentially definite turn towards the West.

Several perspectives regarding Turkish benefits resulting from the conflict should be considered. First, it has allowed for the extensive promotion of the arms industry, which has been intensively developing for 20 years. Bayraktar TB2 unmanned drones, the use of which significantly contributed to the success of the Azerbaijani offensive, have been purchased from Turkey by a number of countries, including Poland as the first NATO country[25].

Another benefit for Turkey is that domestic companies have been concluding contracts to build roads, public buildings or operate mines in the territories recaptured by the government in Baku[26]. As a rule, this is done without a tender, under non-transparent contract terms, through a presidential decree.

It is also worth noting the likely increase in Baku’s support for Ankara’s actions in the international arena. Turkey’s involvement in foreign operations in Libya, Syria or in the Cyprus issue may gain Azeri approval.

A significant achievement in Ankara’s efforts to extend its influence in the Southern Caucasus is the joint military center negotiated with Russia and inaugurated in January this year, which primarily monitors and responds to conflict situations in the Karabakh region[27]. This means the return of the Turkish military presence to the Caucasus area after more than 100 years. Although only 60 soldiers from both countries operate there, and the center itself is located far from Nagorno-Karabakh, this state of affairs is also satisfactory for Azerbaijan, which supports all activities balancing Moscow’s influence.

Russian soldier near Dadivank Monastery. Photo: Stanislav Krasilnikov, TASS. https://tass.com/pressreview/1225391. Accessed: 26.08.2021.

A view from Georgia

For Tbilisi, armed conflict between neighbors is a problem that threatens the security and stability of the entire region. Georgia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs has rejected the possibility of joining the “3+3” format (Russia, Turkey and Iran plus Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia) proposed by Ankara[28]. Georgians are concerned primarily about Russia’s powerful position and the fact that Western countries have been omitted from the peace mediation process[29]. This situation also demonstrated that the “frozen conflict” over Nagorno-Karabakh could escalate at any time, thus destabilising the entire South Caucasus region.

The then Prime Minister Giorgi Gacharia expressed his willingness to mediate even in the initial phase of the war[30]. The authorities in Tbilisi clearly and consistently emphasized their neutrality and good relations with both Armenians and Azerbaijanis. Thanks to the efforts of the Georgian party, in June 2021, Armenian prisoners of war were exchanged for maps of mined areas on the side recaptured by the Azeris[31].

For Georgia, a key aspect of the post-war reality is the functioning of future transport routes. Their increased competitiveness may weaken Georgia’s position as a transit country[32]. However, this is a matter for the distant future, depending on Armenia’s relations with Ankara and Baku. Moreover, nothing indicates that this state of affairs will change, as evidenced by further large investments, for example, the modernisation of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railroad link[33].

Iran’s loss of influence

The Islamic Republic of Iran had incomparably less influence on the course of events during last year’s escalation of hostilities in Nagorno-Karabakh than on those of the early 1990s. At that time, Tehran was involved in the mediation process between Yerevan and Baku. This time, Iran’s role was limited to calling for a cessation of fighting and starting the negotiation process. Moreover, Tehran warned both sides of the conflict against invading Iranian territories and the shelling of civilians[34].

There are several reasons why the South Caucasus region is important to Iran. The Azeri minority makes up about 16% of the population there[35]. The Azerbaijanis, who live mainly in the northwest of the country and in larger urban areas, are – just like the Persians – followers of Shiite Islam. Numerous street demonstrations of Iranian Azeris expressing their support for Azerbaijan took place during the conflict, which shows an increase in their ethnic consciousness. In a way, the authorities in Tehran were forced to explicitly approve of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity, as well as diplomatically support Baku’s actions[36].

In the face of its own problems, including its strained relations with the U.S. and its military involvement in the Middle East, Iran has been unable to actively participate in the peace process. However, Baku’s regaining control over the entire Azerbaijani-Iranian border is a positive development for Tehran. In practice, this means actual proximity to an internationally recognized state, and thus the possibility of joint exploitation of the Khoda Arafin dam on the Araks River, constructed in 2008[37]. At the same time, this opens up the prospect of launching transport routes in the region, and raises hopes for the implementation of projects such as the International North South Transport Corridor (INSTC) from Russia to India[38].

Absence of the West

Throughout the escalation of the conflict, as well as after the cessation of hostilities the inability of the United States and the European Union to have a real impact on events was noticeable. The OSCE Minsk Group, established in 1992, did not participate in the mediation process to any extent. This state of affairs undoubtedly demonstrates a change in geopolitical reality in the South Caucasus region. For years, Azerbaijan questioned both the possibilities and intentions of Western structures that could become involved in the Nagorno-Karabakh mediation process. Armenia expressed a different opinion. Nevertheless, being heavily dependent on Russia, it had to accept that Western countries would not participate in the peace process.

Conclusion

Paying particular attention to Moscow’s immediate reaction at a key moment of the Nagorno-Karabakh war, right after the seizure of the strategically located Shusha, and the consequent suspension of further fighting, it should be acknowledged that Russia still has visible leverage in the region, as well as the ability to exert effective pressure on Baku. The trilateral statement signed at Russia’s behest does not bring an end to the conflict and does not set specific conditions for its permanent resolution. In the longer term, further attempts of Azerbaijan to gain control over the remaining territory of Nagorno-Karabakh can be expected.

The power of Russian arguments, which deters offensive actions by Azerbaijan, will play a crucial role in maintaining relative stability in the region. Both the “3+3” formula proposed by Turkey and the opening of Armenia’s borders are highly uncertain. In a broader perspective, the events in Nagorno-Karabakh seem to prove the ever-increasing role of regional powers in building a political order and security architecture, and thus a multipolar geopolitical order.


[1] BBC. Nagorno-Karabakh conflict killed 5,000 soldiers. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55174211  Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[2] J. Kucera. Azerbaijan retakes control of final region as part of ceasefire deal with Armenia. Eurasianet. https://eurasianet.org/azerbaijan-retakes-control-of-final-region-as-part-of-ceasefire-deal-with-armenia  Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[3] T. Grzywaczewski. Granice marzeń. O państwach nieuznawanych. Wydawnictwo Czarne. Wołowiec 2018. P. 210.

[4] Reuters. Sandbags and monks in khaki: Russian troops guard Armenian monastery after ceasefire. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-armenia-azerbaijan-ceasefire-idUSKBN27V0OL. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[5] Reuters. Sandbags and monks in khaki: Russian troops guard Armenian monastery after ceasefire. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-armenia-azerbaijan-ceasefire-idUSKBN27V0OL. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[6] J. Kucera. Azerbaijan begins controversial renovation of Armenian church. Eurasianet. https://eurasianet.org/azerbaijan-begins-controversial-renovation-of-armenian-church. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[7] Caucasian Knot. Thirteen Armenian soldiers sentenced in Baku on terrorism charges. https://www.eng.kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/56275/. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[8] J. Kucera. Armenia and Azerbaijan suspend “corridor” talks. Eurasianet. https://eurasianet.org/armenia-and-azerbaijan-suspend-corridor-talks. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[9] Bank Światowy. GDP growth (annual %) – Armenia. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=AM. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[10] Reuters. Armenians protest over Nagorno-Karabakh ceasefire deal. https://www.reuters.com/article/armenia-politics-int-idUSKBN2AP1OG. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[11] Azatutyun. Parliament Speaker Injured In Riots Over Karabakh Deal As Political Tensions Grow In Armenia. https://www.azatutyun.am/a/30939728.html. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[12] N. Howhannisjan. Thousands rally behind Armenia’s PM after he accuses army of coup attempt. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/armenia-politics-int-idUSKBN2AP1OG. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[13] A group of heroes of the victorious First Karabakh War, politicians of Nagorno-Karabakh origin shaping Armenian politics from 1998 to 2018.

[14] Deutsche Welle. Armenian prime minister to step down in April. https://www.dw.com/en/armenian-prime-minister-to-step-down-in-april/a-57032226. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[15] Armenia News. CEC shares final results of snap elections: Pashinyan’s party has 53.91%, Kocharyan’s bloc has 21.09%. https://news.am/eng/news/651069.html. Accessed: 25.08.2021

[16] A. Harutiunjan. Armenian Government Sets Ambitious Growth Targets. Azatutyun. https://www.azatutyun.am/a/31354919.html. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[17] Ibidem.

[18] Vestnik Kavkaza. Armenian parliament approves new Pashinyan’s program. https://vestnikkavkaza.net/news/Armenian-parliament-approves-new-Pashinyan%E2%80%99s-program.html. Accessed: 26.08.2021.

[19] C. Silverman. R. Mac. P. Dixit. “I Have Blood on My Hands”: A Whistleblower Says Facebook Ignored Global Political Manipulation. BuzzFeed News. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/facebook-ignore-political-manipulation-whistleblower-memo. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[20] I. Alonzo. Facebook Removes Azerbaijan’s Massive 8,000 Troll Pages, Thanks to Whistleblower Sophie Zhang’s ‚Political Manipulation’ Leaks. Tech Times. https://www.techtimes.com/articles/253194/20201008/facebook-finally-removes-azerbaijans-massive-8-000-troll-pages-influence.htm. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[21] Daily Sabah. Azerbaijanis celebrate Shusha’s liberation after 28 years. https://www.dailysabah.com/gallery/azerbaijanis-celebrate-shushas-liberation-after-28-years/images. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[22] J. Kucera. Russia and Turkey open joint military center in Azerbaijan. Eurasianet. https://eurasianet.org/russia-and-turkey-open-joint-military-center-in-azerbaijan. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[23] Deutsche Welle. Erdogan praises Azerbaijan’s ‚glorious victory,’ calls for regime change in Armenia. https://www.dw.com/en/erdogan-praises-azerbaijans-glorious-victory-calls-for-regime-change-in-armenia/a-55898699. Accessed: 26.08.2021.

[24] Ö. Erbay. Erdoğan visits Azerbaijan’s liberated Shusha. Daily Sabah. https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/diplomacy/erdogan-visits-azerbaijans-liberated-shusha. Accessed: 26.08.2021.

[25] Daily Sabah. Poland buys 24 Turkish drones in first for NATO and EU. https://www.dailysabah.com/business/defense/poland-buys-24-turkish-drones-in-first-for-nato-and-eu. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[26] Middle East Monitor. Turkish contractors to help rebuild Nagorno-Karabakh. https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20210404-turkish-contractors-to-help-rebuild-nagorno-karabakh/. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[27] J. Kucera. Russia and Turkey open joint military center in Azerbaijan. Eurasianet. https://eurasianet.org/russia-and-turkey-open-joint-military-center-in-azerbaijan. Accessed: 26.08.2021.

[28] Z. Anjaparidze. The Second Karabakh War and Georgia’s Threatened Transit Role. Jamestown Foundation. https://jamestown.org/program/the-second-karabakh-war-and-georgias-threatened-transit-role/. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[29] Ibidem.

[30] Civil.ge. Georgian PM: Tbilisi Ready to Host Dialogue Between Baku. Yerevan. https://civil.ge/archives/371807. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[31] Civil.ge. Georgia-U.S. Mediation: Azerbaijan Swaps 15 Armenian Captives for Mine Maps. https://civil.ge/archives/427221. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[32] Z. Anjaparidze. The Second… op. cit.

[33] L. Coffey. Georgia should not fear new transit routes in the South Caucasus. Middle East Institute. https://www.mei.edu/publications/georgia-should-not-fear-new-transit-routes-south-caucasus. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[34] Defence24. Iran ostrzega Azerbejdżan i Armenię przed naruszaniem granic. https://www.defence24.pl/iran-ostrzega-azerbejdzan-i-armenie-przed-naruszaniem-granic. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[35] World Directory of Minorities and Indigenous Peoples. Azeris in Iran. https://minorityrights.org/minorities/azeris-2/. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[36] Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Protests Erupt In Iran Backing Azerbaijan In Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict. https://www.rferl.org/a/protests-erupt-in-iran-backing-azerbaijan-in-nagorno-karabakh-conflict/30870217.html. Accessed: 25.08.2021.

[37] V. Kaleji. The 2020 Karabakh War’s Impact on the Northwestern Border of Iran. Jamestown Foundation. https://jamestown.org/program/the-2020-karabakh-wars-impact-on-the-northwestern-border-of-iran/. Accessed: 26.08.2021.

[38] Rail Freight. Missing link on the Russia-India corridor: will it ever be made?. https://www.railfreight.com/corridors/2021/07/06/the-iranian-missing-link-on-the-russia-india-corridor-do-we-miss-it/. Accessed: 26.08.2021.

IF YOU VALUE THE INSTITUTE OF NEW EUROPE’S WORK, BECOME ONE OF ITS DONORS!

Funds received will allow us to finance further publications.

You can contribute by making donations to INE’s bank account:

95 2530 0008 2090 1053 7214 0001

with the following payment title: „darowizna na cele statutowe”

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Tumblr
  • Pinterest
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • E-Mail
Piotr Puzio Piotr Puzio. Graduate of International Economic Relations at the Cracow University of Economics and a fifth-year student of Eurasian Studies at the Jagiellonian University. His research interests include international relations in the Caucasus region, the activity and influence of regional powers, Georgia's internal policy and its relations with Euro-Atlantic structures. He is also interested in economic cooperation, energy security and conflicts in the post-Soviet area.

Related Posts

See All Publications
  • China, European Union, Indo-Pacific, Publications

EU-China Affairs Review January 2026

Mikołaj Woźniak, Karolina Czarnowska 1.01. China warns EU against restrictions on carbon emissions trading The Chinese Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM)…
  • Mikołaj Woźniak
  • February 16, 2026
  • Europe, Publications, Russia

Russia Affairs Review January 2026

Ksawery Stawiński, Kateryna Vasylyk 6.01 – Major Demographic Crisis in RussiaDuring the annual international conference “Foundry Council” in Chelyabinsk, renowned…
  • Ksawery Stawiński
  • February 16, 2026
  • Africa and Middle East, Analysis, Publications

Overview of Events in the Middle East – December 2025

Israel–Lebanon Relations: Status as of December 2025 Beirut, December 1–31 Since October 2024, a ceasefire has been in effect between…
  • Kasjusz Matyjasek
  • January 31, 2026
See All Publications

Comments are closed.

Piotr Puzio Piotr Puzio. Graduate of International Economic Relations at the Cracow University of Economics and a fifth-year student of Eurasian Studies at the Jagiellonian University. His research interests include international relations in the Caucasus region, the activity and influence of regional powers, Georgia's internal policy and its relations with Euro-Atlantic structures. He is also interested in economic cooperation, energy security and conflicts in the post-Soviet area.
Program Europa tworzą:

Marcin Chruściel

Dyrektor programu. Absolwent studiów doktoranckich z zakresu nauk o polityce na Uniwersytecie Wrocławskim, magister stosunków międzynarodowych i europeistyki Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prezes Zarządu Instytutu Nowej Europy.

dr Artur Bartoszewicz

Przewodniczący Rady Programowej Instytutu Nowej Europy. Doktor nauk ekonomicznych Szkoły Głównej Handlowej. Ekspert w dziedzinie polityki publicznej, w tym m. in. strategii państwa i gospodarki.

Michał Banasiak

Specjalizuje się w relacjach sportu i polityki. Autor analiz, komentarzy i wywiadów z zakresu dyplomacji sportowej i polityki międzynarodowej. Były dziennikarz Polsat News i wysłannik redakcji zagranicznej Telewizji Polskiej.

Maciej Pawłowski

Ekspert ds. migracji, gospodarki i polityki państw basenu Morza Śródziemnego. W latach 2018-2020 Analityk PISM ds. Południowej Europy. Autor publikacji w polskiej i zagranicznej prasie na temat Hiszpanii, Włoch, Grecji, Egiptu i państw Magrebu. Od września 2020 r. mieszka w północnej Afryce (Egipt, Algieria).

Jędrzej Błaszczak

Absolwent studiów prawniczych Uniwersytetu Śląskiego w Katowicach. Jego zainteresowania badawcze koncentrują się na Inicjatywie Trójmorza i polityce w Bułgarii. Doświadczenie zdobywał w European Foundation of Human Rights w Wilnie, Center for the Study of Democracy w Sofii i polskich placówkach dyplomatycznych w Teheranie i Tbilisi.

Program Bezpieczeństwo tworzą:

dr Aleksander Olech

Dyrektor programu. Wykładowca na Baltic Defence College, absolwent Europejskiej Akademii Dyplomacji oraz Akademii Sztuki Wojennej. Jego główne zainteresowania badawcze to terroryzm, bezpieczeństwo w Europie Środkowo-Wschodniej oraz rola NATO i UE w środowisku zagrożeń hybrydowych.

dr Agnieszka Rogozińska

Członek Rady Programowej Instytutu Nowej Europy. Doktor nauk społecznych w dyscyplinie nauki o polityce. Zainteresowania badawcze koncentruje na problematyce bezpieczeństwa euroatlantyckiego, instytucjonalnym wymiarze bezpieczeństwa i współczesnych zagrożeniach.

Aleksy Borówka

Doktorant na Wydziale Nauk Społecznych Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, Przewodniczący Krajowej Reprezentacji Doktorantów w kadencji 2020. Autor kilkunastu prac naukowych, poświęconych naukom o bezpieczeństwie, naukom o polityce i administracji oraz stosunkom międzynarodowym. Laureat I, II oraz III Międzynarodowej Olimpiady Geopolitycznej.

Karolina Siekierka

Absolwentka Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego na kierunku stosunki międzynarodowe, specjalizacji Bezpieczeństwo i Studia Strategiczne. Jej zainteresowania badawcze obejmują politykę zagraniczną i wewnętrzną Francji, prawa człowieka oraz konflikty zbrojne.

Stanisław Waszczykowski

Podoficer rezerwy, student studiów magisterskich na kierunku Bezpieczeństwo Międzynarodowe i Dyplomacja na Akademii Sztuki Wojennej, były praktykant w BBN. Jego zainteresowania badawcze obejmują m.in. operacje pokojowe ONZ oraz bezpieczeństwo Ukrainy.

Leon Pińczak

Student studiów drugiego stopnia na Uniwersytecie Warszawskim na kierunku stosunki międzynarodowe. Dziennikarz polskojęzycznej redakcji Biełsatu. Zawodowo zajmuje się obszarem postsowieckim, rosyjską polityką wewnętrzną i doktrynami FR. Biegle włada językiem rosyjskim.

Program Indo-Pacyfik tworzą:

Łukasz Kobierski

Dyrektor programu. Współzałożyciel INE oraz prezes zarządu w latach 2019-2021. Stypendysta szkoleń z zakresu bezpieczeństwa na Daniel Morgan Graduate School of National Security w Waszyngtonie, ekspert od stosunków międzynarodowych. Absolwent Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego oraz Uniwersytetu Mikołaja Kopernika. Wiceprezes Zarządu INE.

dr Joanna Siekiera

Prawnik międzynarodowy, doktor nauk społecznych, adiunkt na Wydziale Prawa Uniwersytetu w Bergen w Norwegii. Była stypendystką rządu Nowej Zelandii na Uniwersytecie Victorii w Wellington, niemieckiego Institute of Cultural Diplomacy, a także francuskiego Institut de relations internationales et stratégiques.

Paweł Paszak

Absolwent stosunków międzynarodowych (spec. Wschodnioazjatycka) na Uniwersytecie Warszawskim oraz stypendysta University of Kent (W. Brytania) i Hainan University (ChRL). Doktorant UW i Akademii Sztuki Wojennej. Jego zainteresowania badawcze obejmują politykę zagraniczną ChRL oraz strategiczną rywalizację Chiny-USA.

Jakub Graca

Magister stosunków międzynarodowych na Uniwersytecie Jagiellońskim; studiował także filologię orientalną (specjalność: arabistyka). Analityk Centrum Inicjatyw Międzynarodowych (Warszawa) oraz Instytutu Nowej Europy. Zainteresowania badawcze: Stany Zjednoczone (z naciskiem na politykę zagraniczną), relacje transatlantyckie.

Patryk Szczotka

Absolwent filologii dalekowschodniej ze specjalnością chińską na Uniwersytecie Wrocławskim oraz student kierunku double degree China and International Relations na Aalborg University oraz University of International Relations (国际关系学院) w Pekinie. Jego zainteresowania naukowe to relacje polityczne i gospodarcze UE-ChRL oraz dyplomacja.

The programme's team:

Marcin Chruściel

Programme director. Graduate of PhD studies in Political Science at the University of Wroclaw and Master studies in International Relations at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. President of the Management Board at the Institute of New Europe.

PhD Artur Bartoszewicz

Chairman of the Institute's Programme Board. Doctor of Economic Sciences at the SGH Warsaw School of Economics. Expert in the field of public policy, including state and economic strategies. Expert at the National Centre for Research and Development and the Digital Poland Projects Centre.

Michał Banasiak

He specializes in relationship of sports and politics. Author of analysis, comments and interviews in the field of sports diplomacy and international politics. Former Polsat News and Polish Television’s foreign desk journalist.

Maciej Pawłowski

Expert on migration, economics and politics of Mediterranean countries. In the period of 2018-2020 PISM Analyst on Southern Europe. Author of various articles in Polish and foreign press about Spain, Italy, Greece, Egypt and Maghreb countries. Since September 2020 lives in North Africa (Egypt, Algeria).

Jędrzej Błaszczak

Graduate of Law at the University of Silesia. His research interests focus on the Three Seas Initiative and politics in Bulgaria. He acquired experience at the European Foundation of Human Rights in Vilnius, the Center for the Study of Democracy in Sofia, and in Polish embassies in Tehran and Tbilisi.

PhD Aleksander Olech

Programme director. Visiting lecturer at the Baltic Defence College, graduate of the European Academy of Diplomacy and War Studies University. His main research interests include terrorism, international cooperation for security in Eastern Europe and the role of NATO and the EU with regard to hybrid threats.

PhD Agnieszka Rogozińska

Member of the Institute's Programme Board. Doctor of Social Sciences in the discipline of Political Science. Editorial secretary of the academic journals "Politics & Security" and "Independence: journal devoted to Poland's recent history". Her research interests focus on security issues.

Aleksy Borówka

PhD candidate at the Faculty of Social Sciences in the University of Wroclaw, the President of the Polish National Associations of PhD Candidates in 2020. The author of dozen of scientific papers, concerning security studies, political science, administration, international relations. Laureate of the I, II and III International Geopolitical Olympiad.

Karolina Siekierka

Graduate of International Relations specializing in Security and Strategic Studies at University of Warsaw. Erasmus student at the Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1) and the Institut d’Etudes Politique de Paris (Sciences Po Paris). Her research areas include human rights, climate change and armed conflicts.

Stanisław Waszczykowski

Reserve non-commissioned officer. Master's degree student in International Security and Diplomacy at the War Studies University in Warsaw, former trainee at the National Security Bureau. His research interests include issues related to UN peacekeeping operations and the security of Ukraine.

Leon Pińczak

A second-degree student at the University of Warsaw, majoring in international relations. A journalist of the Polish language edition of Belsat. Interested in the post-Soviet area, with a particular focus on Russian internal politics and Russian doctrines - foreign, defense and information-cybernetic.

Łukasz Kobierski

Programme director. Deputy President of the Management Board. Scholarship holder at the Daniel Morgan Graduate School of National Security in Washington and an expert in the field of international relations. Graduate of the University of Warsaw and the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń

PhD Joanna Siekiera

International lawyer, Doctor of social sciences, postdoctor at the Faculty of Law, University of Bergen, Norway. She was a scholarship holder of the New Zealand government at the Victoria University of Wellington, Institute of Cultural Diplomacy in Germany, Institut de relations internationales et stratégiques in France.

Paweł Paszak

Graduate of International Relations (specialisation in East Asian Studies) from the University of Warsaw and scholarship holder at the University of Kent (UK) and Hainan University (China). PhD candidate at the University of Warsaw and the War Studies University. His research areas include the foreign policy of China and the strategic rivalry between China and the US in the Indo-Pacific.

Jakub Graca

Master of International Relations at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. He also studied Arabic therein. An analyst at the Center for International Initiatives (Warsaw) and the Institute of New Europe. Research interests: United States (mainly foreign policy), transatlantic relations.

Patryk Szczotka

A graduate of Far Eastern Philology with a specialization in China Studies at the University of Wroclaw and a student of a double degree “China and International Relations” at Aalborg University and University of International Relations (国际关系学院) in Beijing. His research interests include EU-China political and economic relations, as well as diplomacy.

Three Seas Think Tanks Hub is a platform of cooperation among different think tanks based in 3SI member countries. Their common goal is to strengthen public debate and understanding of the Three Seas region seen from the political, economic and security perspective. The project aims at exchanging ideas, research and publications on the region’s potential and challenges.

Members

The Baltic Security Foundation (Latvia)

The BSF promotes the security and defense of the Baltic Sea region. It gathers security experts from the region and beyond, provides a platform for discussion and research, promotes solutions that lead to stronger regional security in the military and other areas.

The Institute for Politics and Society (Czech Republic)

The Institute analyses important economic, political, and social areas that affect today’s society. The mission of the Institute is to cultivate the Czech political and public sphere through professional and open discussion.

Nézöpont Institute (Hungary)

The Institute aims at improving Hungarian public life and public discourse by providing real data, facts and opinions based on those. Its primary focus points are Hungarian youth, media policy and Central European cooperation.

The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (Austria)

The wiiw is one of the principal centres for research on Central, East and Southeast Europe with 50 years of experience. Over the years, the Institute has broadened its expertise, increasing its regional coverage – to European integration, the countries of Wider Europe and selected issues of the global economy.

The International Institute for Peace (Austria)

The Institute strives to address the most topical issues of the day and promote dialogue, public engagement, and a common understanding to ensure a holistic approach to conflict resolution and a durable peace. The IIP functions as a platform to promote peace and non-violent conflict resolution across the world.

The Institute for Regional and International Studies (Bulgaria)

The IRIS initiates, develops and implements civic strategies for democratic politics at the national, regional and international level. The Institute promotes the values of democracy, civil society, freedom and respect for law and assists the process of deepening Bulgarian integration in NATO and the EU.

The European Institute of Romania

EIR is a public institution whose mission is to provide expertise in the field of European Affairs to the public administration, the business community, the social partners and the civil society. EIR’s activity is focused on four key domains: research, training, communication, translation of the EHRC case-law.

The Institute of New Europe (Poland)

The Institute is an advisory and analytical non-governmental organisation active in the fields of international politics, international security and economics. The Institute supports policy-makers by providing them with expert opinions, as well as creating a platform for academics, publicists, and commentators to exchange ideas.

YouTube

Latest publications

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
  • EU-China Affairs Review January 2026
    by Mikołaj Woźniak
    February 16, 2026
  • Russia Affairs Review January 2026
    by Ksawery Stawiński
    February 16, 2026
  • Overview of Events in the Middle East – December 2025
    by Kasjusz Matyjasek
    January 31, 2026

Categories

THE MOST POPULAR TAGS:

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

China European Union International politics International security Map Middle East Poland Russia Security Ukraine USA

  • About
  • Publications
  • Europe
  • Security
  • O nas
  • Publikacje
  • Europa
  • Bezpieczeństwo
  • Indo-Pacific
  • Three Seas Think Tanks Hub
  • People
  • Contact – Careers
  • Indo-Pacyfik
  • Trójmorze
  • Ludzie
  • Kontakt – Kariera

Financed with funds from the National Freedom Institute - Center for Civil Society Development under the Governmental Civil Society Organisations Development Programme for 2018-2030.

Sfinansowano ze środków Narodowego Instytutu Wolności – Centrum Rozwoju Społeczeństwa Obywatelskiego w ramach Rządowego Programu Rozwoju Organizacji Obywatelskich na lata 2018-2030.



© 2019-2024 The Institute of New Europe Foundation · All rights reserved · Support us