Podcast Summary

New Books Network

Episode: Philip Gamaghelyan, "Conflict Resolution Beyond the International Relations Paradigm: Evolving Designs as a Transformative Practice in Nagorno-Karabakh and Syria" (Ibidem Press, 2017)
Date: November 16, 2025
Host: Piotr Pilchek
Guest: Professor Philip Gamaghelyan

Episode Overview

This episode features an in-depth conversation with Professor Philip Gamaghelyan about his groundbreaking book Conflict Resolution Beyond the International Relations Paradigm. The discussion focuses on the limitations of traditional conflict resolution frameworks, particularly in the context of Nagorno-Karabakh and Syria, and explores how evolving, non-binary, and transformative practices can better address the complexities of modern conflicts. Professor Gamaghelyan offers personal reflections, methodological insights, and commentary on recent events in the Caucasus, as well as on the shifting nature of diplomacy and peacebuilding in a post-liberal era.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Personal Journey and Relevance of the Book

• Gamaghelyan’s Background: Raised in Armenia during the first Nagorno-Karabakh war, he witnessed both the support among his community for the war effort and, later, profound disillusionment after seeing the destruction caused by his own side. This personal awakening drove his lifelong commitment to peace work.
  • Quote: “When I saw the destruction done by the war... particularly the destruction done by my side, that really changed my perspective.” (03:21)
• Scope of Practical Engagement: Gamaghelyan’s focus remains on his home region and neighboring conflict zones, prioritizing depth and practical engagement over breadth.
  • “I tried not to expand too far out... in terms of practical engagement, I tried to stay close to home, somewhat home immediately, but also the expanded region where I'm from.” (03:54)

2. The Problem of Binary Framing in Conflicts

• Flawed Paradigms: Most conflict resolution models still rely on bringing together two (or a finite number of) powerful sides, which leaves out diverse and often voiceless populations.
  • Quote: “By really framing conflict as a binary... we are actually empowering [the violent actors] and strongly disempowering and disenfranchising everybody else who are effectively the peace actors.” (05:21)
• Real-World Impact: In Syria, the binary frame forced most people either to align with Assad, the opposition, or remain voiceless, even though many influential figures didn’t identify with any main faction.
• Missed Peace Constituencies: In Nagorno-Karabakh, the binary Armenian/Azerbaijani schema ignored mixed families, Kurds, Russians, and those prioritizing identities apart from ethnic lines.
  • “[Peace processes] keep as peace field... actually empowering [aggressors]... while disenfranchising everybody else who are effectively the peace actors.” (05:53)

3. Rethinking Tracks of Diplomacy

• Critique of “Track” Language: Gamaghelyan challenges the hierarchy inherent in differentiating between ‘Track 1’ (official, governmental) and ‘Track 2/3+’ (non-governmental, civil society) diplomacy.
  • “By calling other work track two, track three, my argument is that we are subordinating them to this particular track or this particular government version…” (09:11)
• Advocacy for Multi-layered Approaches: Hierarchical track distinctions ignore the diversity of peace actors and the legitimacy of various non-official voices, especially on the societal level.
  • “We should... forget about the tracks and work on official level and then separately work on [unofficial] levels where we can see many more possibilities, many more peace actors and... framings…” (10:55)

4. The 2020–2023 Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict and Its Aftermath

• Diplomacy’s Failure & The End of Liberal Peace: The presumption of “peace through democracy” failed, particularly as Azerbaijan moved further from democratic norms. With no viable alternative peace paradigms, war became almost inevitable.
  • Quote: “What do you do once the regions are not democratizing?... The challenge is that... that made conceptual sense, the war inevitable, although in practical sense, of course, there were many missteps and refusals to negotiate.” (12:02)
• The Third War & Its Conclusion: Azerbaijan’s 2023 offensive resulted in full territorial control and the displacement (“ethnic cleansing”) of the remaining Armenian population.
  • “Azerbaijan took full control of the territory, Armenian population is fully ethnically cleansed... both sides fully influenced their respective populations. So... no reasons for a new war.” (14:46)
• Transactional Peace: Both governments sidelined international actors and negotiated bilaterally, prioritizing pragmatic arrangements over normative or rights-based solutions.
  • “All the peace deal... is negotiated word by word bilaterally... very transactional, very problematic... But right now neither wants [anything] from each other...” (27:30)

5. Impact on Civilian Populations

• Refugees and Displacement: The most recent wave of 100,000 Armenian refugees follows a pattern of mutually inflicted mass displacements since the 1990s.
  • “Ethnic cleansing has been really one of the big tools of war that both Armenia and Azerbaijan resorted to... So this 100,000 are the latest wave...” (19:02)
• Lack of Protections, Rights, & Restitution: No bilateral agreements exist for supporting displaced Armenians; new peace agreements explicitly close off options for legal recourse or restitution. Refugees “simply ignored.”
  • “The peace agreement... completely ignores any question of displacement, any question of rights of the displaced... they are simply ignored.” (19:43)
• Cultural Erasure: Each side systematically erases or renames the heritage of the other; full population exchanges and closed borders are now the norm.
  • “It's been a complete cultural erasure... All the cultural monuments have been either destroyed or renamed... you are dealing with full cultural erasure of each other because it’s reciprocal.” (22:01)

6. Media Silence and International Response

• Why Little Condemnation?: Present-day responses to mass displacement in the Caucasus contrast sharply with condemnation of Balkan ethnic cleansing. Gamaghelyan identifies waning liberal peace norms, transactionalism, and some relevance of Azerbaijani gas exports as partial explanations.
  • “It's not only the gas, but... even before the displacement happened, I believe most international actors had accepted that this is effectively the solution.” (24:28)
  • “We have moved to a problematic place where we don't have really norms... the liberal peace isn’t anymore the practice and you don’t have an alternative in place.” (26:05)

7. Philosophical Reflections: Realism, Fukuyama, End of History

• End of History Debunked: For the region, Fukuyama’s “end of history”—that democracy and peace would become universal after the Cold War—never materialized and is now irrelevant.
  • Quote: “I believe I don't need to be the one saying it, as complete, it didn't work. The end of history was supposed to be the liberal democratization of the world... that failed.” (27:30)
• New Peace Paradigms Needed: The core challenge for peacebuilders is to define new frameworks that address realities of transactional, non-normative, and multi-actor environments.

8. Regional Geopolitics: Russia, Turkey, US, China

• Azerbaijan’s Strategic Positioning: Managed to court essential relationships with Turkey, Russia, Europe, and act as intermediary, enhancing its leverage and regional indispensability.
  • “Azerbaijan... made itself quite currently at least indispensable... It's been like, yes, it supports Ukrainian territorial integrity and yet has strong trade relationship with Russia...” (31:23)
  • Russia’s diminishing leverage post-Ukraine as the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict ceases to be a useful “divide and rule” tool.
• China’s Modus Operandi: China’s approach is purely transactional and infrastructure-focused, avoiding normative questions and quietly expanding its influence via the Belt and Road Initiative.
  • “China has been doing all along... the transactional approach to relations.” (33:57)
  • “Not necessarily at the expense of Europe, but as a middle ground between the two, effectively.” (35:09)

9. Looking Ahead: The Future of Peacebuilding

• Normative & Identity Crisis in the Field: With the collapse of liberal peace, the peacebuilding community must grapple with its identity and redefine its aims and methods.
  • “I'm trying to... exactly answer the question, what is peace? What are we working for as a peace community?... Are we supportive of the transactional piece or... able to bring back the questions of the rights of conflict affected populations and work for peace for everybody?” (35:35)
• Research Pipeline: Gamaghelyan is collaborating on a new volume to address the future of peacebuilding, best practices, and contemporary challenges including AI, climate, and migration.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “By really framing conflict as a binary... we are actually empowering them and strongly disempowering and disenfranchising everybody else who are effectively the peace actors.” (05:43 – Prof. Gamaghelyan)
• “We should... forget about the tracks and work on official level and then separately work on non-official levels where we can see many more possibilities, many more peace actors…” (10:55 – Prof. Gamaghelyan)
• “Ethnic cleansing has been really one of the big tools of war that both Armenia and Azerbaijan resorted to… this 100,000 are the latest wave…” (19:02 – Prof. Gamaghelyan)
• “It's been a complete cultural erasure. So when Armenians were taking control of Azerbaijani heritage, they would quickly rename it… Similarly in Azerbaijan you have a strong, clear cultural erasure of everything Armenian.” (22:01 – Prof. Gamaghelyan)
• “We have moved to a problematic place where we don't have really norms, we don't have kind of post normative. The liberal peace isn't anymore the practice and you don't have an alternative in place.” (26:05 – Prof. Gamaghelyan)
• “I believe I don't need to be the one saying it as complete, it didn't work. The end of history... simply isn't relevant anymore for this region.” (27:30 – Prof. Gamaghelyan)
• “[Peacebuilding] moved to a very transactional space as we discussed, where even if we are seeing steps away from the war, they are extremely transactional and they are simply ignoring the needs and rights of the populations who suffered from a conflict.” (35:39 – Prof. Gamaghelyan)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 03:21 — Personal journey & how war shaped Gamaghelyan’s perspective
• 05:21 — On binary framing in conflict resolution
• 09:11 — Critique of diplomacy “tracks” and alternative approaches
• 12:02 — Analysis of the most recent Nagorno-Karabakh war & failures of diplomacy
• 19:02 — Refugee crisis, historic and ongoing displacement
• 22:01 — Systematic cultural erasure and impossibility of return for refugees
• 24:28 — Why the world is silent: Changing norms, gas, and transactionalism
• 27:30 — Fukuyama, the end of history, and the irrelevance of old paradigms
• 31:23 — Geopolitics: Azerbaijan, Russia, Turkey, and regional power games
• 33:57 — China's approach to the region
• 35:35 — The future of peacebuilding as a field

Conclusion

This episode provides a comprehensive critique of conventional international relations paradigms and peacebuilding practices, with Professor Gamaghelyan urging the field to reassess its norms, methodologies, and purpose in an era where old frameworks have failed and transactional politics dominate. The conversation is rich with personal reflection, scholarly insight, and urgent questions about the future of peace, rights, and post-conflict societies.