That Nagorno Karabahk Should be Reunited with Armenia

Kasmic (PRO)
4 points

Blackflag (CON)
WINNER!
6 points

Debate
Comments (31)
Rules
Judging (4)

Kasmic (PRO)
Good luck to Stag!

As Pro it is my burden to show that Nargorno Karbakh should be reunited with Armenia. I will do this by affirming the following.

1. Self-Determination ought to be respected
2. The People of Nargorno Karabakh have repeatedly self-determined themselves part of Armenia

If the above is true than it follows that…

C. Nargorno Karabakh should be reunited with Armenia

Definitions:

Self Determination: The fundamental right of a nation or people of a given area to freely determine its own political status or form of government and to freely pursue its own cultural, economic, and social development without outside influence; independence.

1: Self-Determination ought to be respected

The root value of Self-Determination is freedom. Freedom is widely accepted as a fundamental right people inherently have. To infringe on this right is tyranny. Tyranny results in suffering. i.e. the holocaust is a quintessential example of harm that occurs when peoples freedom is ignored. Thus individual freedom ought to be respected. Included in this value is the freedom as a nation or people to self-determine.

A fundamental principle of international relations is Identity. Identity can be effective at binding a group of people that share a territory, language, culture, and/or customs. It can also tightly tie together groups of people that share economic, political, and/or religious history. Self-Determination exemplifies the principle of identity as a group of people collectively decide together the type of government they will establish. Identity binds a group together cohesively.

2: The People of Nargorno Karabakh have repeatedly self-determined themselves part of Armenia

“On 13 February 1988, Karabakh Armenians began demonstrating in their capital, Stepanakert, in favour of unification with the Armenian republic. Six days later they were joined by mass marches in Yerevan. On February 20, the Soviet of People's Deputies in Karabakh voted 110 to 17 to request the transfer of the region to Armenia.” (1)

“On 29 November 1989….. a joint session of the Armenian Supreme Soviet and the National Council, the legislative body of Nagorno-Karabakh, proclaimed the unification of Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenia.”(1)

It is a historical fact that the people have elected to self-determine as part of Armenia. They share an identity. Therefore,Nargorno Karbakh should be reunited with Armenia.

Sources:
(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagorno-Karabakh

Return To Top | Posted:

2015-05-28 05:24:32

| Speak Round

Blackflag (CON)
I am glad my opponent chose to venture outside of his comfort zone when he selected to do this debate. There is one clarification I would like to make before we begin . The topic says "reunited," implying that Nagorno Karabahk was once apart of modern day Armenia, which it was not, unless you include the ancient Kingdom of Armenia.

Nagorno-Karabahk is an internationally recognized autonomous region of Azerbaijan locked between Lower Karabahk and Syunik Provinces. Unlike the majority of Azerbaijan, Nagorno Karabahk is the only region in which there are not a majority of Azeri Muslims, but rather Armenian Christians. In the late 80's during the Soviet reform period under Mikail Gorbachev, a strong Armenian secessionist movement occurred in the Nagorno-Karabahk region of the Azerbaijan SSR, followed by a brief skirmish of Armenian and Azeri SSR troop reserves across the countryside.

Two months after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the creation of the Armenian and Azerbaijan nation states, Armenian guerrillas started a high intensity warfare campaign within Nagorno-Karabakh which led to the establishment of a temporary government known as the Republic of Artsakh, or the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. To prevent the Azerbaijan army from crushing the rebellion, the Armenian army invaded the country through the desert valley around the city of Zanrijan, where they established a heavily fortified supply route to the rebels, in which reinforcements, heavy artillery, and equipment would supplement the battered mountain militias.

It was three years after the violence stopped with a combined Artsahk and Armenian victory, but tensions were still wide on the borders, and since 1994 many ethnic clashes and border skirmishes have occurred between Armenians and Azeri citizens.

That is a short and much needed background of the current circumstances of the Republic of Artsahk. We are debating the topic on whether Artsahk should be reunited with Armenia. There are several immediate reasons I could think of that led me to believe this would be a terrible idea.

If the republic was annexed, the Artsakh would almost certainly be made into an autonomous province of Armenia with independent governance, which is what they already have under the Azerbaijan government
There is no recognized land connection between Armenia and Artsahk, and Azeri airspace would never be granted to Armenia. Artsakh therefore would be isolated entirely from the world and Armenia, whereas they wouldn't be as an autonomous republic under Azerbaijan, or even an independent state in which they had received political recognition from Azerbaijan
Due to a blockade from Turkey and Azerbaijan, Armenia only has one trade route, and that is through the port of Batumi, Georgia. The Republic of Georgia, like almost every other country in the world, recognizes Nagorno-Karabahk as an autonomous province of Azerbaijan. The annexation of the Republic of Artsakh would likely result in a reaction from Georgia and other coastal nations in which Armenian goods go to from Batumi.
The current republic of Artsakh is a puppet state of Armenia. The region is a cold war frozen conflict zone. Diplomatic annexation may very well unthaw the region and lead to an all out war. Even if it were to not, giving Armenia the legitimacy to build an army in Nagorno-Karabakh wouldn't be good for anybody.
Azerbaijan is a state renowned for its post-soviet secular policies, and Azeri citizens under the Soviet Union had developed and invested in Nagorno-Karabakh for decades. They should have a say when it comes to a vote on secession, because they justifiably believe Nagorno-Karabakh to be apart of the Azeri Turkish homeland. As it has been shown, a vote on secession would fail if you included all Karabakh and Azerbaijan peoples.

It is in the interests of all parties except power hungry imperialists to not support the annexation of Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia.

Return To Top | Posted:

2015-05-30 06:15:52

| Speak Round

Kasmic (PRO)

Stag offers a kritik of the resolve stating “The topic says "reunited," implying that Nagorno Karabahk was once apart of modern day Armenia, which it was not…” There are two reasons not to buy this kritik.

1. He rebuts it himself saying “, unless you include the ancient Kingdom of Armenia.”

2. We are arguing what “should” be, thus the kritik hardly effects the outcome as it only address what the resolution implies “was.”

My opponent than lists 5 reasons as to why he is opposed to the resolution.

1. First he argues little change would occur regarding governance. The impact of this argument is nill as he has not outlined any harm.

2. He argues there is no land connection. This is an especially weak argument as many nations of the world have their land split in similar ways. Firstly any nation that has an island. Perhaps the best example is Alaska being a part of the U.S. No land connection there, and no harm. My opponent claims the harm for this is Azeri airspace would never be granted. He does not provide any reasoning to back this just claims it to be true… this is what we call, hearsay.

3. Here my opponent claims that annexation would likely result in a reaction from Georgia and other coastal nations. He does not indicate whether this result would be harmful or beneficial and thus there is no harm indicated in this argument.

4. My opponent claims this change to be the cause of a “all out war.” Oddly he does not offer any reason for this conclusion. He just claims it. Again a case of hearsay.

5. This is perhaps my opponent’s strongest objection. He says “Azeri citizens under the Soviet Union had developed and invested in Nagorno-Karabakh for decades. They should have a say when it comes to a vote on secession.” This is outweighed by the value of self-determination. He claims that “, a vote on secession would fail if you included all Karabakh and Azerbaijan peoples.” I have provided historical examples of these people attempting to self-determine themselves part of Armenia. Clearly this is their right… and their desire.

Conclusion:

My opponents contentions include little to no harm, and little to no sources. He has made many claims without providing reasoning. The arguments are also outweighed by the value of freedom exemplified by self-determination.

It is a historical fact that the people have elected to self-determine as part of Armenia. They share an identity. Therefore,Nargorno Karbakh should be reunited with Armenia.

Return To Top | Posted:

2015-05-30 15:13:17

| Speak Round

Blackflag (CON)
Kudos for David's speedy reply. I'll be sure to return the favor. I am aware of the bug below this sentence and I am leaving it for admin to reference #RhymeZone

3585 characters remaining (4000 maximum)
Drafts are being saved for you automatically, but keeping your own backup is still a good idea Save Draft Manually NowSave Draft Manually Now

This scope of argumentation on this debate has been clearly outlined by the affirming position. David feels strongly in his belief that self determination trumps all, to the point where he is comfortable just rebutting my contentions for the rest of the debate. I would like to challenge this "belief." In the West, there has became a disillusioned concept that self determination should be respected to the utmost, and under any circumstances. The concept is silly in every sense of the world, and really just an appeal to Ad Populum Sophisma . The majority of people in the Republic of Artsakh may want to unify with Armenia, but that wont stop me from arguing that it wouldn't be in their best interests.

Thankfully the scope of the debate has been narrowed down to a handy 5 points. I'll respond to David's numerical list in sequential order.

1. The reason I established the fact that Nagorno-Karabakh would have the exact same form of government under Armenian administration was to show just how much things would improve living under an Armenian banner....... not at all, and maybe even a little worse.

2. I suppose the affirming position is justified in asking for a bit more clarification. Armenia does not have access to Azeri airspace right now, and it is less likely that they will have access to Azeri airspace if they were to annex Nagorno-Karabakh. Right now, the Armenian Armed Forces are occupying a large strip of land full of ethnic Azeri Turks, and they don't want to be Armenian. The only connection Armenia would have to Nagorno-Karabakh is this illegal strip of land, and obviously we cannot allow that to happen because we respect the self determination of indigenous populations.

3. Okay, I can clarify that. Georgia is heavily alligned with western NATO powers, aspiring to join themselves. The illegal annexation of a region internationally recognized to be apart of the Azerbaijan nation state would definitely see a reaction from the UN and some major NATO players. That reaction would not under any circumstances be a "good" one. It is extremely likely that Georgia may turn back Armenian traders and cut off the Armenia's pipelines with Russia if Armenia were to illegally annex Nagorno-Karabakh. Even if Georgia decides to stay neutral, you have to wonder how many other nations will choose to do the same. Would Turkey even allow Armenian traders to exit the black sea?

4. The argument is hardly hearsay. War has been fought over this region before, and judging from how militarized Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding regions are, it is more likely that Azerbaijan will resort to all out war than not.

5. Self determination is all relative. Citizens voted in referendums saying that they wanted the creation of Azerbaijan. That area of land included Nagorno-Karabakh. To the Azeri people, Nagorno-Karabakh is one ethnic enclave in their ancestral Turkish homeland. Azeri Turks need to have a say in any policy of secession, or in a way we would be committing a major moral imperative.

Return To Top | Posted:

2015-05-30 15:55:18

| Speak Round

View As PDF

Enjoyed this debate? Please share it!

You need to be logged in to be able to comment

Kasmic
Great feedback. Thanks!

Posted 2015-05-31 11:23:34