What are the borders of Nagorno-Karabakh?

[Federate]

Re: What are the borders of Nagorno-Karabakh?

World community’s stance on Nagorno-Karabakh borders differs from ours, ARFD says

March 25, 2011 | 13:55

The OSCE Co-Chairs’ remarks about poor living conditions of residents of the territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh is a disgrace to the Armenian side, head of ARF Dashnaktsutyun said in parliament today.

Vahan Hovhannisyan stressed if the Armenian side had been engaged with settlement of the territories and creation of normal living conditions, the international community’s position would be different, whereas Baku’s statements would be less impudent. “International community’s notion on Nagorno-Karabakh’s borders differs from ours. They consider borders of Nagorno-Karabakh coincide with those of former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast (NKAO). For us it is the territory of former NKAO and surrounding regions,” he said.

Yesterday the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs issued the Executive Summary of the report of Field Assessment Mission conducted in territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh.

http://news.am/eng/news/52745.html

[levon]

Re: What are the borders of Nagorno-Karabakh?

Nakhichevan is garanteed by Russia and turkey, it would not have gone easily. But you can be sure, the fate of nakhichevan has not been seeled yet, it will be decided in a future war between turkey/azerbijan vs Armenia/russia which is inevitable.
As for north Arstakh that's all depends on wether the baboon will take try to take matters into their own hands.
Maybe this wont happen in our lifetime, but it will, history has a nasty way of repeating itself.

I don't think a war between Turkey/Azerbaijan and Armenia/Russia is inevitable.
Turkey hasn't much to gain from getting involved in a war with Russia, and as such it will never make a direct involvement in any conflict with Armenia so long as the region is in a psuedo-stable state. As for Azerbaijan, I'm certain that Aliev and his crew are much more interested in staying in power than liberating parts of Artsakh. Keeping the status quo is beneficial in that it affords Aliev the power to blame all current problems on the "unresolved conflict" and therefore postpone "indefinitely" anything that is not directly related to the "most important task" of liberating "occupied azeri lands".

This way they can continue on spending 2 billion dollars a year on military spending (some portion of which is guaranteed to be going into the pockets of top military and government officials) instead of focusing on more important issues such as creating an actual infrastructure that can reduce the dependence on oil exports.

The mere fact that every negotiation ends with the "uncompromising" position of the azeris, just shows, that "solving" the conflict is really not their top priority. Any sane diplomat realizes that land lost to war cannot be gotten back without "significant" compromise. Either the Azeri diplomats are extremely naive, or they know exactly what they are doing, and their actions are just a show for the domestic audience.

Furthermore, Aliev has been "promising" to "liberate" karabakh with "force" since he came to power. Informing the "enemy" of a possible attack will only put the other side into a more alert state; thus, making it less likely that the offending side will succeed. The only possible long-term strategy in this could be to slow down economic growth in Armenia by forcing her to spend more on military and less on infrastructure. However, if Aliev was seriously going down that route, he would have paid "much more" attention to strengthening sectors of the economy that don't have anything to do with oil/gas export, as that would actually put Azerbaijan at a definite advantage in the long run. However, from the general view of things, the Azeris are putting all their energy into exporting more oil and gas, which will eventually put Azerbaijan at a major disadvantage compared to Armenia when the land is completely "sucked" dry of resources.

The likely scenario would be that either after some more years of "fake promises" Aliev will get kicked out only to be replaced by another one full of "fake promises" who will continue on the same route as Aliev, or Aliev and crew will stay in power until the land is sucked dry of resources, then "jet" out of the country.

[arakeretzig]

Re: What are the borders of Nagorno-Karabakh?

It wouldn't hurt had Armenians liberated Nakhijevan and the northern half of Artsakh until Gandzak and River Kur. This way the problem with fake “Azerbaijan” would have been solved to a great degree... Well, Utik and Pytakaran would still need to be liberated which would completely cut off fake “Azerbaijan” from Iran and would force them to let go of the stolen name, the mother of the whole fraud.

Nakhichevan is garanteed by Russia and turkey, it would not have gone easily. But you can be sure, the fate of nakhichevan has not been seeled yet, it will be decided in a future war between turkey/azerbijan vs Armenia/russia which is inevitable.
As for north Arstakh that's all depends on wether the baboon will take try to take matters into their own hands.
Maybe this wont happen in our lifetime, but it will, history has a nasty way of repeating itself.

[Hellektor]

Re: What are the N.K. borders?

so why is it that they have nakhitchevan and we cant get karabagh to be recognised by the world

Because of the Cult of Turk Phallus Worship, the majority of the “Christian” world being ardent adherents of for the last few centuries.

[Hellektor]

Re: What are the borders of Nagorno-Karabakh?

We could have had a lot more than what we have now if it wasn't for Russia.

It wouldn't hurt had Armenians liberated Nakhijevan and the northern half of Artsakh until Gandzak and River Kur. This way the problem with fake “Azerbaijan” would have been solved to a great degree... Well, Utik and Pytakaran would still need to be liberated which would completely cut off fake “Azerbaijan” from Iran and would force them to let go of the stolen name, the mother of the whole fraud.

[Davo88]

Armenia and NKR in Euratlas.com maps

Some nice maps from Euratlas.com showing Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh together:

[Karabed]

Re: What are the borders of Nagorno-Karabakh?

[Eddo211]

Re: What are the borders of Nagorno-Karabakh?

The Azerbaijani army was exhausted and Armenia/NKR did have an unimpeded way all the way to Baku.

I am not sure how unimpeded it was..........all that open ground advancing towards Baku without proper air support screams of high casualties.

...It's one thing to conquer a region, it's another thing to keep it under your control.

Well said.

[SevSpitak]

Re: What are the borders of Nagorno-Karabakh?

Oh my bad then, because I remember my coach saying something about how during the war Armenia threatened to seize Nakhichevan and to raid Baku.

The Azerbaijani army was exhausted and Armenia/NKR did have an unimpeded way all the way to Baku. We could have had a lot more than what we have now if it wasn't for Russia. But I guess it's better this way anyway. It's one thing to conquer a region, it's another thing to keep it under your control.

But just the fact that we could have is enough for me

[Icy]

Re: What are the borders of Nagorno-Karabakh?

In southern NKR or south of NKR (Iran)? If it's the first, it is already cut-off, our borders with Azerbaijan are closed, NKR shares a border with Iran. Azerbaijan cannot reach Nakhichevan through Armenia/NKR.

Oh my bad then, because I remember my coach saying something about how during the war Armenia threatened to seize Nakhichevan and to raid Baku.