The Irony of Nagorno-Karabakh: Formal Institutions versus Informal Politics
The Irony of Nagorno-Karabakh: Formal Institutions versus Informal Politics
复制标题
纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫的讽刺：正式制度与非正式政治
DOI：
10.1080/714004708
复制
发表时间：
2001
影响因子：
1.4
通讯作者：
R. Panossian
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Panossian
近十年来，纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫（NK）的自我宣布的“独立共和国”一直在后苏联过渡的背景下进行民族国家建设。卡拉巴赫通常被认为是摇摇欲坠的苏联内部种族冲突的一个主要例子，也是亚美尼亚和阿塞拜疆之间战争的原因。然而，从本书的角度来看，人们可以说，卡拉巴赫也是一个在向后苏联体制建设和国家形成过渡方面-至少在其正式体制结构方面-相对成功的地区的例子。纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫给自己以共和国的地位，并以独立的方式行事，尽管它没有得到任何其他国家-甚至亚美尼亚-或国际机构的承认。纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫是一个微型国家，人口约8万，面积4400平方公里。它有市场经济和民主制度的标志，但它远非一个“开放的社会”，在经济上完全依赖亚美尼亚。在这篇文章中，我将讨论有关纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫的后苏联过渡的模糊性。卡拉巴赫案例研究是对苏联解体后出现的新实体进行多层面分析的一个很好的测试案例。围绕飞地的战争及其后果对亚美尼亚和阿塞拜疆的过渡产生了至关重要和有害的连锁反应。卡拉巴赫的“问题”同时是一个民族主义冲突，一个地区问题，并试图在国家建设。围绕北朝鲜的冲突也具有很强的国际层面，是国家间战争的一个原因。最后，纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫的地位是欧安组织地区一个尚未解决的重大法律的问题。纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫地区（以前是阿塞拜疆的一个自治州）由于种族冲突，已正式成为一个事实上的微型国家，具有制度化的国家地位。然而，非正式地，它作为亚美尼亚的附属地区运作。与此同时，卡拉巴赫的区域精英已经控制了亚美尼亚国家政治议程的关键要素，“接管”了国家中心。在接下来的研究中，第一部分提供了纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫问题的历史概述，第二部分从沿着四个方面分析了纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫：（a）作为阿塞拜疆的一个地区，（B）作为一个“独立”国家，（c）作为一个
For almost a decade now, the self-declared ‘independent republic’ of Nagorno-Karabakh (NK) has been engaged in a process of nation-state building in the context of post-Soviet transition. Karabakh is usually cited as a major instance of ethnic conflict within the crumbling Soviet Union, and the cause of war between Armenia and Azerbaijan. However, examined from the perspective of this volume, one can make the argument that Karabakh also serves as an example of a region which has been relatively successful in its transition to post-Soviet institution building and state-formation – at least in its formal institutional architecture. NK has given itself the status of a republic and acts as if independent, even though it is not recognized as such by any other country – even Armenia – or international agency. The micro-state of NK has a population of around 80,000 and an area of 4400 sq km. It has the trappings of a market economy and democratic institutions, but it is far from being an ‘open society’ and is wholly dependent on Armenia economically. In this essay, I will discuss the ambiguities relating to NagornoKarabakh’s post-Soviet transition. The Karabakh case study is a good test case for a multi-dimensional analysis of a new entity that has emerged from the collapse of the Soviet Union. The war over the enclave, and its consequences, have had crucial and detrimental knock-on effects on both the Armenian and Azerbaijani transitions. The Karabakh ‘problem’ is simultaneously an ethno-nationalist conflict, a regional issue, and an attempt at state-building. The conflict over NK also has a very strong international dimension, being a cause of inter-state war. Finally, NK’s status is a major unresolved legal problem in the OSCE area. The region of NK (formerly an autonomous oblast’ in Azerbaijan) has formally become a de facto micro-state with an institutionalized statehood as a result of ethnic conflict. Informally, however, it functions as a dependent region of Armenia. At the same time, the regional elites of Karabakh have come to control key elements of the national political agenda of Armenia, ‘taking over’ the national centre. In the study that follows, the first part provides an historical overview of the NK issue, and the second part analyses NK along four dimensions: (a) as a region of Azerbaijan, (b) as an ‘independent’ state, (c) as an