The document discusses the impact of media and digital technologies on the conflicts between Armenia and Azerbaijan, highlighting issues of self-censorship, stereotype perpetuation, and the role of social media in facilitating dialogue. Despite historical animosities, there are calls for increased communication and cooperation through online platforms to foster understanding and conflict resolution. The document emphasizes the dual-edged nature of social media, capable of both reaffirming biases and promoting positive interactions among the conflicting parties.

1. Onnik Krikorian Caucasus Regional Editor, Global Voices Online http://www.globalvoicesonline.org [email_address] [email_address] Arzu Geybullayeva Regional Analyst http://www.flyingcarpetsandbrokenpipelines.com [email_address]

2. Background Armenia February 2008 presidential election left 10 dead Media censored during a 20-day state of emergency

3. Azerbaijan Foreign radio stations taken off the air in January 2009 Arrest and imprisonment of two video blogging youth activists

4. Georgia August 2008 war with Russia Internet fastest and cheapest in region

5. Nagorno Karabakh 1994 ceasefire

6. Approx 25,000 dead

7. Approx 1 million refugees and IDPs

8. 14-16 percent of Azerbaijan occupied by Armenian forces (Baku says 20 percent)

9. Border skirmishes and clashes

10. Territorial integrity vs. Right to self-determination

11. Peace deal still elusive

12. Threat of new war

13. Media & Civil Society Media on both sides practices self-censorship

14. Civil society on both sides largely ineffective and/or closed

15. Notion that Armenians and Azerbaijanis are 'ethnically incompatible' put into widespread circulation

16. Media on both sides perpetuates negative stereotypes of the 'enemy'

17. Communication with the 'enemy' discouraged on both sides

18. Opposition as well as government in Armenia and government in Azerbaijan exploit Nagorno Karabakh conflict for short-term domestic political gain

19. Stereotyping the 'enemy' [A] negative context [is set] in the public consciousness, which hinders dialogue and mutual understanding […] 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. Report on media in Armenia and Azerbaijan , Caucasus Resource Research Center

20. Another View Nowhere in the world can you find two groups of people closer to each other. That is why we often have these stupid disputes between Armenians and Azeris. "This house is Armenian" or "this house is Azeri." Or "this music is Armenian or Azeri." This is exactly because the two have so much in common. [...] I normally say, and people don't like this, that Armenians are just Christian Azeris and Azeris are just Muslim Armenians . That is how much they are alike. Azerbaijani journalist , Re-arming the Caucasus, Al Jazeera English

21. Digital media and conflict Throughout history, war has affected media, with conflict often creating an information void. In the 21st century, media has begun to affect war more than ever before. Digital media technologies [...] have increased communication and information dissemination in conflict settings [...]. These new tools can be used to foment violence or to foster peace , and it is possible to build communication systems that encourage dialogue and nonviolent political solutions. Ivan Sigal, Global Voices Online Executive Director, Digital media in conflict-prone societies, Center for International Media Assistance (CIMA)

22. Crossing the ceasefire line Facebook , Internet chat, email

23. Blogs such as Flying Carpets and Broken Pipelines

24. Global Voices Online

25. Skype for secure communication

26. Skype for interviews