Tweet
SOCIAL MEDIA IN THE ARMENIA-AZERBAIJAN CONFLICT
Transitions Online, Czech Rep
April 17 2013
By Onnik Krikorian, Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso
Social media have become one of the few places where young people from
Armenia and Azerbaijan can meet. Yet, not without risks
While it might be nearly 19 years since a May 1994 ceasefire put the
conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed territory of
Nagorno Karabakh on hold, analysts are increasingly viewing the
situation on the Line of Contact (LOC) with alarm. Over 20,000 died in
the war waged in the early 1990s and a million were forced to flee
their homes. Frontline skirmishes and sniper incidents remain common
withThe Economist recently putting the number of dead since the
armistice at over 3,000. More significantly, new generations are
brought up unable to remember the time when both Armenians and
Azerbaijanis lived side by side together in peace.
Given concerns that a new war might break, with attempts to reach a
negotiated settlement through the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) so far unsuccessful, militaristic
rhetoric continues to define much of the domestic political discourse
in Armenia and Azerbaijan, especially with a new cycle of presidential
elections this year. The media plays its role too, as a paper from the
Caucasus Research Resource Centers (CRRC) opined. "Without more
accurate and unbiased information [...] free of negative rhetoric and
stereotypes, Armenians and Azerbaijanis will continue to see
themselves as enemies without any common ground," the 2008 report
read.
And recent statistics also from CRRC highlight the problem further. In
its 2009 household survey, 70 percent of respondents in Armenia said
they were against forming friendships with Azerbaijanis while 97
percent of Azerbaijanis were opposed to friendship with Armenians. "My
background is with the Israelis and Palestinians," Elizabeth Metraux,
Program Director of a U.S. State Department program designed to bring
Armenian and Azerbaijani teenagers together, told this author in 2009
. "There were times when it just gets explosive and there really were
those moments were I just thought I had underestimated the intensity
of the conflict."
The project, undertaken through Project Harmony, was one of the first
to use online tools in combination with offline meetings, albeit only
using blogs. Because of the sensitivities of being seen to connect
with the other side in the conflict, the Armenian and Azerbaijani
teenagers chose not to use Facebook to remain in contact once they
were back home. Such a situation was not surprising given the
intensity of the information war conducted online and the monitoring
of activity by security services. The same year, for example, Adnan
Hajizade and Emin Milli, two online activists in Azerbaijan, were
arrested, albeit for criticizing their government.
"The reason why the KGB wants you to join Facebook is because it
allows them to, first of all, learn more about you from afar," Evgeny
Morozov, author of The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet
Freedom, told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) in a 2011
interview , arguing that the Internet is just as important a tool for
governments to engage in mass surveillance and political repression as
well as for nationalists to spread extremist propaganda. "They don't
have to [...] interrogate you, and obviously you disclose quite a bit.
It allows them to identify certain social graphs and social
connections between activists."
Nevertheless, even if using social networking sites to bridge the
divide was unthinkable for some, others were not so hesitant despite
the inherent risks involved.
Indeed, on 1 March 2011, online Azerbaijani news site Qaynar.Info
published the names of prominent activists and journalists in the
country who had Armenian 'friends' on Facebook in an attempt to
discredit them and to further engage in a campaign to warn citizens of
the danger of social networking sites. "It is possible that secret
agents sit in social networks trying to lure people to cooperate," one
parliamentary deputy even told journalists, suggesting that this
perceived threat should be legislated against. "In my opinion, one
cannot exclude that the intelligence services of various countries can
also lead Azerbaijani nationals to secret cooperation through social
networks."
Despite the negative publicity, however, hundreds of Armenians and
Azerbaijanis continued to use Facebook, and to a lesser extent
Twitter, to make contact and communicate online.
However, notes Global Voices co-founder and MIT Center for Civic Media
Director Ethan Zuckerman, this might have led to what he terms
'imaginary cosmopolitanism,' something that one American-Armenian
journalist also considers. "Because social media allows you to connect
to people within the same overlapping circles and ideologies, you know
that the people you're befriending think the way you do in the sense
that they're curious about you too," Liana Aghajanian told
Osservatorio. "In person or by other means, you'd have to second guess
to make sure that person wouldn't have animosity towards you, for
example."
Nevertheless, she adds, social media still has an important role to
play in preparing the ground for peace, something that Yelena Osipova,
an Armenian citizen now studying abroad also notes. "Social media can
potentially be a great tool for the initial stages of conflict
resolution," she says. "It helps to establish and maintain direct
people-to-people communication without in-person contact. This
distance can help mitigate the potential hostility and induce more
civil conversations. Equally important is the fact that social media
can help put a face on a faceless and evil 'enemy' whose image has
been constructed and implanted in the minds of those involved."
Osipova also notes that there is an inherent danger with social media,
and not least from nationalists on both sides who might attempt to
hijack the communication or intimidate and threaten those engaged in
cross-border communication. Others such as Nigar Hajizade, an
Azerbaijani now living in Turkey, are also cautious. "I support and
appreciate peace or conflict-resolution efforts that stem from or are
supported by social media, but I'm not very optimistic in terms of
their overall impact given how large and powerful all the
counter-initiatives are, starting with state institutions themselves,
lobbying groups, and the media," she says.
"When looking at the role of public diplomacy and communications in
conflict resolution, it is no longer possible to ignore online
communications," Sarah Crozier, Press and Public Information Officer
for the OSCE Secretariat told Osservatorio. "When an ever greater
number of people can make their voices heard online, and information -
or misinformation - can quickly spread, it is important that those
involved in conflict prevention, conflict resolution and post-conflict
rehabilitation can get beyond casually used terms like 'e-diplomacy'
and 'Twitter revolutions' and have a clear understanding of what the
real potential of online communications is in this area."
Meanwhile, with no other way for like-minded Armenians and
Azerbaijanis to connect, Hajizade ends on a more optimistic note. "Two
more friends are always better than two more enemies."
This post is written by Onnik Krikorian and reprinted from
Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso under a Creative Commons license.
Preparing for Peace: Communications in Conflict Resolution , an OSCE
report, which also includes a section on the Nagorno Karabakh conflict
by Onnik Krikorian, is available for download
athttp://www.osce.org/secretariat/98116?download=true . Photo
flickr/mkhmarketing
http://netprophet.tol.org/2013/04/17/social-media-in-the-armenia-azerbaijan-conflict/
Transitions Online, Czech Rep
April 17 2013
By Onnik Krikorian, Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso
Social media have become one of the few places where young people from
Armenia and Azerbaijan can meet. Yet, not without risks
While it might be nearly 19 years since a May 1994 ceasefire put the
conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed territory of
Nagorno Karabakh on hold, analysts are increasingly viewing the
situation on the Line of Contact (LOC) with alarm. Over 20,000 died in
the war waged in the early 1990s and a million were forced to flee
their homes. Frontline skirmishes and sniper incidents remain common
withThe Economist recently putting the number of dead since the
armistice at over 3,000. More significantly, new generations are
brought up unable to remember the time when both Armenians and
Azerbaijanis lived side by side together in peace.
Given concerns that a new war might break, with attempts to reach a
negotiated settlement through the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) so far unsuccessful, militaristic
rhetoric continues to define much of the domestic political discourse
in Armenia and Azerbaijan, especially with a new cycle of presidential
elections this year. The media plays its role too, as a paper from the
Caucasus Research Resource Centers (CRRC) opined. "Without more
accurate and unbiased information [...] free of negative rhetoric and
stereotypes, Armenians and Azerbaijanis will continue to see
themselves as enemies without any common ground," the 2008 report
read.
And recent statistics also from CRRC highlight the problem further. In
its 2009 household survey, 70 percent of respondents in Armenia said
they were against forming friendships with Azerbaijanis while 97
percent of Azerbaijanis were opposed to friendship with Armenians. "My
background is with the Israelis and Palestinians," Elizabeth Metraux,
Program Director of a U.S. State Department program designed to bring
Armenian and Azerbaijani teenagers together, told this author in 2009
. "There were times when it just gets explosive and there really were
those moments were I just thought I had underestimated the intensity
of the conflict."
The project, undertaken through Project Harmony, was one of the first
to use online tools in combination with offline meetings, albeit only
using blogs. Because of the sensitivities of being seen to connect
with the other side in the conflict, the Armenian and Azerbaijani
teenagers chose not to use Facebook to remain in contact once they
were back home. Such a situation was not surprising given the
intensity of the information war conducted online and the monitoring
of activity by security services. The same year, for example, Adnan
Hajizade and Emin Milli, two online activists in Azerbaijan, were
arrested, albeit for criticizing their government.
"The reason why the KGB wants you to join Facebook is because it
allows them to, first of all, learn more about you from afar," Evgeny
Morozov, author of The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet
Freedom, told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) in a 2011
interview , arguing that the Internet is just as important a tool for
governments to engage in mass surveillance and political repression as
well as for nationalists to spread extremist propaganda. "They don't
have to [...] interrogate you, and obviously you disclose quite a bit.
It allows them to identify certain social graphs and social
connections between activists."
Nevertheless, even if using social networking sites to bridge the
divide was unthinkable for some, others were not so hesitant despite
the inherent risks involved.
Indeed, on 1 March 2011, online Azerbaijani news site Qaynar.Info
published the names of prominent activists and journalists in the
country who had Armenian 'friends' on Facebook in an attempt to
discredit them and to further engage in a campaign to warn citizens of
the danger of social networking sites. "It is possible that secret
agents sit in social networks trying to lure people to cooperate," one
parliamentary deputy even told journalists, suggesting that this
perceived threat should be legislated against. "In my opinion, one
cannot exclude that the intelligence services of various countries can
also lead Azerbaijani nationals to secret cooperation through social
networks."
Despite the negative publicity, however, hundreds of Armenians and
Azerbaijanis continued to use Facebook, and to a lesser extent
Twitter, to make contact and communicate online.
However, notes Global Voices co-founder and MIT Center for Civic Media
Director Ethan Zuckerman, this might have led to what he terms
'imaginary cosmopolitanism,' something that one American-Armenian
journalist also considers. "Because social media allows you to connect
to people within the same overlapping circles and ideologies, you know
that the people you're befriending think the way you do in the sense
that they're curious about you too," Liana Aghajanian told
Osservatorio. "In person or by other means, you'd have to second guess
to make sure that person wouldn't have animosity towards you, for
example."
Nevertheless, she adds, social media still has an important role to
play in preparing the ground for peace, something that Yelena Osipova,
an Armenian citizen now studying abroad also notes. "Social media can
potentially be a great tool for the initial stages of conflict
resolution," she says. "It helps to establish and maintain direct
people-to-people communication without in-person contact. This
distance can help mitigate the potential hostility and induce more
civil conversations. Equally important is the fact that social media
can help put a face on a faceless and evil 'enemy' whose image has
been constructed and implanted in the minds of those involved."
Osipova also notes that there is an inherent danger with social media,
and not least from nationalists on both sides who might attempt to
hijack the communication or intimidate and threaten those engaged in
cross-border communication. Others such as Nigar Hajizade, an
Azerbaijani now living in Turkey, are also cautious. "I support and
appreciate peace or conflict-resolution efforts that stem from or are
supported by social media, but I'm not very optimistic in terms of
their overall impact given how large and powerful all the
counter-initiatives are, starting with state institutions themselves,
lobbying groups, and the media," she says.
"When looking at the role of public diplomacy and communications in
conflict resolution, it is no longer possible to ignore online
communications," Sarah Crozier, Press and Public Information Officer
for the OSCE Secretariat told Osservatorio. "When an ever greater
number of people can make their voices heard online, and information -
or misinformation - can quickly spread, it is important that those
involved in conflict prevention, conflict resolution and post-conflict
rehabilitation can get beyond casually used terms like 'e-diplomacy'
and 'Twitter revolutions' and have a clear understanding of what the
real potential of online communications is in this area."
Meanwhile, with no other way for like-minded Armenians and
Azerbaijanis to connect, Hajizade ends on a more optimistic note. "Two
more friends are always better than two more enemies."
This post is written by Onnik Krikorian and reprinted from
Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso under a Creative Commons license.
Preparing for Peace: Communications in Conflict Resolution , an OSCE
report, which also includes a section on the Nagorno Karabakh conflict
by Onnik Krikorian, is available for download
athttp://www.osce.org/secretariat/98116?download=true . Photo
flickr/mkhmarketing
http://netprophet.tol.org/2013/04/17/social-media-in-the-armenia-azerbaijan-conflict/