How Similar and How Different Are Conflicts Over Nagorno Karabakh and Kosovo?

Abstract

The science of international relations considers frozen conflicts to be situations in which, after the end of the war, either a satisfactory peace agreement is not reached or the conflicting parties remained in their own political positions, diametrically opposed in interpreting legal acts that contributed to the cessation of fighting. The Paper takes a comparative analysis of two frozen conflicts: the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh and Kosovo and Metohija. By giving an overview of the political history of conflicts and disputes over these two territories, the Paper analyzes issues related to the legal status and attempts of international negotiations on the disputed territories, all in order to draw conclusions about the similarities and differences between the two “frozen conflicts” and the prospects for their permanent resolution. The main similarities between Kosovo and Metohija and Nagorno-Karabakh include post-socialist social circumstances, geopolitical position and importance of both regions, religious dimensions of interethnic conflicts, numerous historical and political circumstances, the course of international negotiations, etc. The main differences include the timing of secession, the legal aspect of secession, the role of the great powers, the degree of their support for the conflicting parties, the change of position of some of the great powers, the existence or non-existence of attempts at military reintegration of the secessionist entity, etc.