MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130848202 · doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(20)30552-0

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and the politicisation of science

2021· letter· en· W3130848202 on OpenAlexaff
Samir N. Babayev, Sabina Hajiyeva, Leyla Baghirzada, Sait Ashina, Tural Alekberli

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Global Health · 2021
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Conflict Studies
Canadian institutionsSouth Health CampusUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArmenianContext (archaeology)Political scienceHistoryMisrepresentationLawAncient historyEconomic historyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Airazat Kazaryan and colleagues (March, 2021)1Kazaryan AM Edwin B Darzi A et al.War in the time of COVID-19: humanitarian catastrophe in Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia.Lancet Glob Health. 2020; (published online Nov 27, 2020.)https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30510-6Date accessed: November 29, 2020Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (5) Google Scholar describe the unfortunate rise in COVID-19 cases in Armenia during the recent Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. We would argue that this Comment is an attempt to politicise scientific data via misrepresentation of COVID-19 statistics, distortion of facts, and omission of important historical context. The leading causes of the worldwide increase in COVID-19 cases since early September, 2020, include colder weather and lower humidity, a shift from outdoor to indoor gatherings, and reopening of businesses and schools. Although a military conflict could worsen the pandemic, the sharp rise in the number of daily reported COVID-19 cases predated the recent exacerbation of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Such a rise was reported in Georgia, a country that neighbours Azerbaijan and Armenia and is uninvolved in the conflict. The most recent fighting between Armenian and Azerbaijani forces started on Sept 27, 2020, and ended on Nov 10, 2020 (figure). We seek to clarify some of the claims made by Kazaryan and colleagues regarding the history of the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Nagorno-Karabakh is an internationally recognised territory of Azerbaijan, occupied and, we would argue, ethnically cleansed by Armenian forces in flagrant violation of international law. Since the conflict's beginning in the late 1980s, more than 1 million ethnic Azerbaijanis have fled their homes, causing an enormous humanitarian catastrophe.3Aljazeera Media NetworkAzerbaijanis forced to flee in the 1990s hope to return home.https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2020/11/9/azerbaijani-idps-hope-to-return#:~:text=Baku%2C%20Azerbaijan%20%E2%80%93%20The%20first%20Nagorno,10%20percent%20of%20the%20populationDate: Nov 9, 2020Date accessed: November 29, 2020Google Scholar Despite nearly 30 years of negotiations involving international intermediaries, a peace agreement has not been achieved. Four UN Security Council resolutions, adopted in 1993 (822, 853, 874, 884), demand immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the Armenian occupying forces from all Azerbaijan regions. To this day, they remain unfulfilled.4US Department of State1993 UN Security Council Resolutions on Nagorno-Karabakh.https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/eur/rls/or/13508.htmDate accessed: November 29, 2020Google Scholar Kazaryan and colleagues mention multiple civilian deaths on the Armenian side during recent hostilities. However, they fail to note that Armenia's attacks on remote, densely populated cities and villages of Azerbaijan led to 414 civilian injuries and 94 deaths.5Trend News AgencyAzerbaijani Prosecutor General's Office gives updates on civil casualties, damages.https://en.trend.az/azerbaijan/politics/3335280.htmlDate: Nov 16, 2020Date accessed: November 29, 2020Google Scholar Additionally, the Armed Forces of Armenia used heavy artillery, banned cluster munitions, and long-range rockets in these attacks.6Human Rights WatchArmenia: cluster munitions kill civilians in Azerbaijan.https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/10/30/armenia-cluster-munitions-kill-civilians-azerbaijanDate: Oct 30, 2020Date accessed: November 29, 2020Google Scholar We welcome the ceasefire signed by Armenia and Azerbaijan leaders on Nov 9, 2020, which resulted in the cessation of hostilities, restoration of international law, and the beginning of Armenian troops’ withdrawal from occupied lands. As health-care professionals, we are all united by universally recognised human rights and belief in the value of human life. The politicisation of science with ethnocentric views undermines the positive effect of science on our lives. It is imperative that we all seek to promote peace and prevent military conflict without using science for political gain. We declare no competing interests. Download .pdf (.15 MB) Help with pdf files Supplementary appendix Mr Tahir Taghizade, Ambassador of Azerbaijan in the UK, writes in response to “War in the time of COVID-19: humanitarian catastrophe in Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia”I am writing to you in connection with the Comment by Airazat Kazaryan and colleagues (published online first Nov 27, 2020).1 It is true that among all three south Caucasian countries, Armenia is the one which is most seriously hit by the COVID-19 pandemic. I understand the concern of the signatories of the Comment in that sense. What I do not understand is their deviation into political science and distorted history of the conflict to support their cause instead of relying on medical science, which stands at the heart of their profession and The Lancet group's principles. Full-Text PDF Open AccessConstructive criticism or distortion of the humanitarian narrative? – Authors' replyWe have read the Correspondence from Tahir Taghizade (the Ambassador of Azerbaijan in the UK)1 and Samir Babayev and colleagues2 regarding our recently published Comment.3 We are surprised to read that these authors are trying to change the primary focus of our publication from a humanitarian and health-care crisis around the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh) into a political discussion about its background and history. We, health-care professionals, believe that we should rise above politics and focus on the humanitarian and health-care crisis, which was also the main focus of our Comment as an outreach to the international community to support the collapsing health care in Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh due to a war during the COVID-19 pandemic. Full-Text PDF Open AccessWar in the time of COVID-19: humanitarian catastrophe in Nagorno-Karabakh and ArmeniaAs a small country with a population of 3 million, Armenia has been severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, and for several months was among the countries with the highest prevalence of COVID-19.1 On Oct 23, 2020, the number of confirmed cases was 70 836 and the number of new daily diagnosed cases reached 2484. As a result, Armenia is now the second country in the world with the highest number of new daily diagnosed cases per person (778 cases per million per day), overtaking only the Czech Republic (1321 cases per million per day). Full-Text PDF Open Access

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.133
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.353 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Global HealthSame topicHealth and Conflict StudiesFrench-language works237,207