but why is this a concern now and what's the role of foreign powers? this is inside story. ♪ hello and welcome to the program. i am imran khan. the collapse of the soviet union left unresolved and complex

political disputes. when between azerbaijan and army -- one between azerbaijan and armenia. tensions are escalating once again. so why is this happening now and where might it lead and what role are russia, the u.s., eu and turkey playing in this? first this report. >> skirmishes that brokered between azerbaijan and armenia have escalated -- broke out between azerbaijan and armenia have escalated at the border despite their commitment to a peace process. >> the military political situation in our region has seriously deteriorated in the past week because azerbaijan has been amassing troops for several days along the contact line at

the border. >> azerbaijan insists armenia is the instigator. >> armenia still does not demonstrate goodwill. the armenian side is playing a game of delay and confusion. >> the mountainous region lies within azerbaijan's territory. it is controlled by ethnic armenian forces. the former soviet republics have thought two wars for control of this region. a six-year conflict that ended with a cease-fire in 1994, then again in 2020 when more than 5000 people were killed. while a russian brokered cease-fire ended that war and armenia was forced to give up much of the land controlled, tensions have continued to simmer.

armenia says the region has been under blockade since december, accusing azerbaijan of cutting off its residents. azerbaijan says it does allow supplies in, but maintains the only direct route to armenia has been used to smuggle weapons. last week the u.s. called the humanitarian situation deeply concerning with people unable to access food easily. russia has called for aid to be allowed in. >> we are acting within the framework of the trilateral agreement by the leaders of russia, azerbaijan and armenia. we stand for unhindered access to humanitarian aid into the region. we call on all sides to refrain from unnecessary politicizing of this matter. >> as the focal point of complex and shifting geopolitical alliances, international efforts

to find a lasting solution haven't succeeded in resolving this decades long conflict. >> let's bring in our guest. chairman at the center of the center of analysis of international relations and a former azerbaijani ambassador to canada. and professor of international relations at stonehill college and the author of the neighborhood effect, the imperial roots of regional fracture in eurasia. in berlin, the founder and editor in chief of a business media company focusing on emerging markets. he is also the former moscow bureau chief for the daily telegraph. we have already seen the accusation and the counter accusation coming from azerbaijan and armenia, but there was at one point a peace

process and it seemed to be working. why has that seemingly broken down? >> a couple of reasons. we have quite positive development and finally after so many years, the armenian president who previously said the region is armenia finally acknowledged that as part of azerbaijan as is internationally recognized. and both countries worked on the draft of the peace agreement. but then things get worse, a tense situation on the ground. still illegal troops in azerbaijan's territory. i think some external forces also gave negative influence. russia playing kind of double role, one on one hand it's the

peacekeeping force that's deployed there. on the other hand, russia still wants to control both countries. they are looking for some leverage. there are some external forces i believe, countries like france are more bending to demand from the radical elements of armenian diaspora. so they are interfering into negotiation process and getting one sided statements to support armenia, which is not conducive to the piece. so that's my opinion why we have tense situation on the ground. >> we've got several players in this conflict that aren't armenia or azerbaijan. all of them have differing agendas and seemingly we are at a broken down peace process once again.

there are aren't helpful right now. -- their roles aren't helpful right now. >> i think geopolitical lens is important, but i would not minimize the agency and rule of local actors. armenia and azerbaijan but azerbaijan in particular simply because it won the war in 2020, so this period is very fragile, postwar processes are fragile. they either lead to the next war or consolidate the fragile peace. emerging as victorious, azerbaijan essentially won the war, but the president is struggling to win the peace. the peace process has been russia obviously does play a role, but azerbaijan has been pulling in russia much more than it could have otherwise.

the western peace track has been trying to move the peace process by protecting the minorities as opposed to simply getting rid of the rights of the armenians which are internationally recognized as part of azerbaijan. to provide a little bit more context in terms of big data, since 1970's, the number of ethnic conflict has been going down and the research is connected to the increased willingness of states to accommodate, provide group rights in cases of ethnic conflict. >> what do you think of that statement? he is struggling to win the peace. does that make sense to you? >> indeed. he was comprehensively defeated militarily in the war in 2020

and azerbaijan has been taking its oil wealth, economy has been booming ever since it got hooked up to a pipeline and international market, and it spends a lot of that money on arming itself. the azerbaijanis were the ones that use them to devastating effect during the conflict. so he is on his back foot now. militarily he is weak, cannot defend the territory, did not win the war. he is casting around for a solution. there was a tripartite cease-fire agreement brokered by russia that hasn't been working, as my colleagues are suggesting the russians haven't really stepped up to their abilities. russia is supposed to be the guarantor of peace and security in the region and it has been

distracted increasingly by ukraine recently. so now you have this very tense situation where azerbaijan is blocking the corridor, the only route out to armenia and the area is predominantly populated by armenians. everyone agrees the territory is azerbaijani but is overwhelmingly populated by armenians. i think that's the problem. azerbaijan is trying to push those people out, but they are still there. and this blockade is all about persuading the locals to go. >> what -- actually said was that russia was playing a double game. that has kind of been reiterated by ben as well.

russia has been distracted by ukraine. it is still the peace broker that we need it to be? >> i do agree that russia might be playing the double game. let me just add a particular point. i do not think the condition, azerbaijan emerging as victorious, there is a myth of azerbaijan offering an alternative energy for europe. the gdp per capita in azerbaijan is right now the lowest in the south caucasus. i do think the way this conflict will be resolved, this is very much goes at the heart of the political identity of the azerbaijani state. in regards to russia, russia's policy in managing conflict before the war in ukraine has

been -- meaning there is a nature as to how russia gets involved and mediates and several of my books have been focused on this. i do believe that russia is playing the double game. i don't think it is distracted by the war in ukraine, i think that thesis is overestimating russia's capacities. russia historically has been playing multiple roles in various theaters around fast territory of eurasian continent. i do think that russia by not implementing the very agreement that it negotiated ended the war by essentially pushing back against rules against transparency that one way as attacking the rules of the world order.

luncheon corridor, the blockade in particular which is in that agreement, which russia is not protecting, the opening of the corridor has been issued a ruling by the international court of justice. the corridor is a linchpin to a peace process that can be institutionalized, that can provide predictability, transparency, security and dignity to the ethnic group. on one hand, this is a massive humanitarian crisis. the blockade, subjecting community to hunger. from a political perspective, he is using that to avoid political accommodation which -- with -- which has enjoyed self-governance. >> is he avoiding political accommodation deliberately?

>> when we speak about unilaterally the rights of armenians, we should also speak about the security of azerbaijanis. remember the whole armenia was ethnically cleansed from azerbaijanis, even the territory which is under control of russian peacekeepers. armenians had autonomy. azerbaijan offered during the years of occupation highest degree of autonomy for armenians within azerbaijan, but it's all declined. now azerbaijan offering the reintegration of armenians into azerbaijan's jurisdiction. i have to make comments because two of my colleagues set about the corridor, we should remember that it is the first region which was occupied in 1992. and through that occupation, it

allowed armenians to attack from both directions our region of azerbaijan and occupy them. and so it is the road not only to humanitarian but also military supply for armenians. by the way, despite that, azerbaijan offered to armenia after the war. let's keep it open. follow custom control. but the same azerbaijan asked from armenia to have wrote to -- route to -- it has both closes about launching -- but the armenian side refused. it didn't establish custom and passport control. >> once all of this -- whilst all of this was going on, there

is a massive humanitarian crisis unfolding. there is no food in many of the supermarkets. a lot of businesses are going bust. that is happening. something needs to happen and nothing seems to be happening. what's the holdup? >> azerbaijan offered alternative routes, humanitarian help to the armenians. but i think it's the intransigence of the armenians and also they would like to show sort of theatrics to the global media that we are starving, nobody is helping them. if they need food, food is available. route is available. they should comply with azerbaijan's jurisdiction. >> that's a very interesting word that was used, the theatrics of global media. these people aren't actually starving. they just can't come up with an agreement. what do you make of that?

>> i think you are right, there is a humanitarian crisis. people are starving. the pictures coming out of supermarkets, empty shelves. we had a report the other day of a mother whose child had died as a result of this blockade around the region. and the mayor of paris was just on the border 10 days ago with trucks for the food and tried to cross into the enclave. and was refused by the border guards. so there is a deliberate policy of blocking the entrance of this humanitarian aid supplies. the entire region relies on that corridor for supplies of food in order to keep its people fed. i think azerbaijan is just playing hardball here, and so much as they blocked off the enclave in order to push through with their political agenda effectively by force, starving

the population into submission. that's a hard line to take. the alternatives i don't think are realistic. at the same time, all the gas, the electricity, the internet has been cut off. the region has been completely isolated from the outside world. >> one of the big problems about the conflict is the lack of a peace broker that both sides can agree on. russia was almost the best of a bad bunch. no one can really agree that the u.s. should be involved in this. but we are now at a stage where perhaps there needs to be an alternative peace broker with a strong role to play. can you see one that all sides can agree on? >> i'm sorry -- my voice is cracking. i do agree with ben's description of what's going on on the ground.

i think that's a local road, sooner or later perhaps it will be opened, it will be used i'm assuming as a supplement, not an alternative to the corridor. i do want to highlight that the president is using the road as a strategy of hybrid warfare, meaning using the peace process, coercing a population maximalist agendas without using military force, which can be quite costly and that's problematic, needless to say. >> that could go away if there was a peace process that was actually working and that's the question i'm asking. is there a peace process that everyone can agree to? >> i think so far, both armenia and azerbaijan have actually been working, the level of diplomatic activity between them has been unprecedented. they have utilized the russian

and the western channel. the absence from the negotiation table is hugely problematic because peace research data shows that peace processes that are not inclusive do not have a high chance of being implemented. as to a credible third that could fill this void, i do think it's a matter of whether we are looking at -- russian process obviously is self-serving. russia has been able to stop the war but has not stopped the bleeding, but it has not been able to heal the wounds so to speak. whether i do think that it is important to move the process to the western track, whether it's the united states, a western country, the eu that has been playing an important role. and the european powers do have

leverage over azerbaijan which i do think holds a lot of cards right now. a lot of agency. in that respect, i am finding the november 9 agreement now increasingly defunct because the corridor is blocked. the border opening is not happening, which would have created interdependencies between the nations and azerbaijan's own borders are closed to traffic. that are open only to cargo as well as airflight. so azerbaijan itself has closed its borders to its neighbors and i'm quite pessimistic that azerbaijan is willing to open the borders and armenia has opened the borders to azerbaijan to allow maximum connectivity. >> there is a problem with the borders. there's also the fact that we are talking about peace broking

here and trying to get these borders open and get the goods and trade flowing back in. the russians aren't able to do it, the u.s. has about 85 troops on the armenian side making an honest broker in the peace process. is there a peace broker that you would be satisfied with that the armenians would be satisfied with as well? >> i would like to highlight if you want to deliver humanitarian aid, you apply to the government and the government tells you which way you are going to supply. that's because both insisted that the corridor is blocked and azerbaijan is not allowing in foreign aid. the mayor of paris brought the coordination with azerbaijan. it should be done with

coordination. as far as the peace process, it's very complex, but it's core andaman -- it's core element is the coordination of -- with azerbaijan. we heard the positive statement that he recognized the region as part of azerbaijan. so it's two contradictory statements. that's why we need unambiguous position. we need firm commitments moving toward a peace treaty based on the mutual recognition and one point about open borders, azerbaijan again i repeat in 2021 offered armenians to open borders but for some reason were

not discussing the route for azerbaijan. >> you have been a veteran of the region for many years. there is no accommodation right now, there is no peace process right now. but we are not looking at another shooting war. or are we? >> the situation on the border is still unstable. there are occasional shooting incidents. this thing about the peace process, what i'm seeing is that it's all starting to splinter, insomuch as -- is fed up, he is frustrated that he's not making any progress. and the security deal was supposed to provide that. this week they were holding exercises and they were supposed to happen in armenia this year, but they ended up being moved to

minsk, which was a major slap in the face for this collective security deal. what's bound to happen now is that america has been invited to hold military exercises together with armenia for the first time. there's going to be some 85 u.s. troops. and this is clearly designed as a gesture to moscow saying you were supposed to guarantee the piece, you are not doing it, i am reaching out to the americans. he also talks about maybe russia should leave the caucuses. at the same time macron has got involved. he had phone conversations with both at the beginning of this month. and this is also the paris mayor getting involved because france has a very large diaspora of armenians living there, as does america. >> we are running out of time.

are you afraid that if something radical doesn't happen very soon that we are going to see another war in that region? >> i am very afraid and that's a very good question to pose. the lack of an institutionalized peace process is problematic. the sabotage of the western negotiation tracks is problematic. there is credibility problem. i understand -- is mentioning these alternatives, but he has also been using force since 2020 so i am worried. >> thank you, we are running out of time. i just want to ask the exact same question. are you afraid that war might break out? >> i don't think any large-scale things like war happens because

i don't think so. but small provocations happens all the time and the most worrisome element of that we have illegal troops. >> i want to thank all of our guests and thank you as well for watching. see the program anytime by visiting our website. and for further discussion go to our facebook page and you can also join the conversation on x formerly known as twitter. from me imran khan and the entire team here, off and out.

♪♪♪ sally sara: a secret war, right on our doorstep. [chanting] sally: west papuan activists are fighting for independence from indonesia like never before. [guns firing] sally: jakarta is cracking down hard, cutting communications, and banning foreign media. sally: but we've managed to get inside where a long-running insurgency has reignited. [gun firing]