Democratization and Conflict Escalation : Assessing the Relationship between the Democratic Transition in Armenia and the Conflict Escalation in the Run-up to the Second Karabakh War

There is a widespread assumption that democracy usually promotes peace, not a conflict. In
the "Democratization and War" theory, however, Mansfield and Snyder argue that countries
become more conflict-prone in the transition phase of democracy. Applying to this theory,
the study examines the relationship between democratic transition in Armenia and the rise of
violent conflict prior to the 2020 Karabakh war. Obviously, different factors led to the
grievous escalation of the conflict in September 2020, which made war inevitable.
Nevertheless, this study primarily aims to find out how Armenia’s democratization process
under Nikol Pashinyan contributed to conflict escalation in the run-up to the war. The
argument is that the key element linking democratic transition to war was the increasingly
nationalist and populist behaviors of the Armenian leadership. To answer the research
question, the study uses qualitative research methods with a focus on a single case study and
process tracing. The findings of this study are compatible with the "Democratization and
War" theory. The study concludes that domestic political competition in Armenia between
the old and new elites in the deficit of strong democratic institutions, compelled the Pashinyan
government to employ hardline nationalist, populist policy over the Karabakh conflict to
mobilize public support; prove its security credentials among nationalist circles in Armenia,
and prevent the old elite from being able to use the conflict as a trump card against democratic
trajectory of Armenia. However, while adopting such bellicose rhetoric and actions over the
conflict to deal with the domestic opposition against his government, he underestimated the
impact of his behaviors would have on Baku and, thereby, inevitably provoked Azerbaijan
into a war.