Normalizing conflict–concealing genocide? Expert neutrality in the Armenian Azerbaijani conflict

Abstract

The article investigates the issue of expert neutrality in the example of the Karabakh conflict. It interrogates the notion of neutrality. The expert publications are studied using the following methodology: first the information included in the text is analysed; second the silences of those texts are considered. In most cases, the experts rely on comparisons of two sides that present what appears to be a balanced picture. Two types of silences were revealed: experts practically always ignore the wider context that could upset the equilibrium of their analysis; expert analysis avoids considering those facts that do not fit the paradigm of bothsidesism. The article argues that this approach produces a normalization of the conflict for the international audience, which creates a dangerous precedent, whereby it successfully conceals a potential genocide in the making from international scrutiny.