By Mikhail Belyayev exclusively for Vestnik Kavkaza
Azerbaijani fighters were scrambled and combat vehicles deployed to the frontline zone. Defense Minister Zakir Gasanov, being on vacation, suddenly returned to the country and headed right towards the frontline. Clashes with Armenian forces along the frontline became so dangerous that there have been many fears about transformation of the situation into a full-fledged war.
A large amount of misinformation has been spread throughout the mass media recently. For example, Azerbaijan is accused of using Grad systems to attack Armenian fortified positions or evacuating the Azerbaijani population from frontline villages and dozens of people killed on both sides. Armenian television has reported about a local “Rambo,” an ordinary conscript, who had beaten up Azerbaijani special troops armed to the teeth with his bare hands and had carried a couple of Israeli-made grenade launchers.
Considering the traditional propagandist nature of the mass media of any belligerent states, the validity of such information is very doubtful. Official statistics are the only reliable source in this case. According to the same data, confirmed by the defense ministries of both states, Azerbaijan lost 12 soldiers, Armenia lost 5. 9th-grader Shalyala Tagiyeva from Gyoyalli (Kedabek District) was injured in an attack on Azerbaijani positions on August 3.
So what could have provoked the most serious tensions on the contact line since the signing of the ceasefire agreement in 1994? There are different opinions we want to cover in this article.The technical version is as follows: mutual shooting and acts of vengeance are permanent, the outbreak of combat in this aspect is logical, it has no deep hidden subtext. But the fact that intensive shooting and mutual sabotage operations have not stopped for about a week contradicts this argument. The deployment of military vehicles and troops indicates how serious the situation is. So tensions along the frontline are rising systematically.
Azerbaijani civil activists raised by Western grants are searching for excuses in the internal political situation in the country. They are confident that the Azerbaijani government, attempting to justify more “cleansing” against agents of the West in the country, has decided to distract public attention with active combat on the front. The version is dragged by head and ears, to say the least. First of all, the fate of Leyla Yunus arrested for tax evasion, illegal business and espionage, or Rasul Jafarov, a notable pro-democracy singer, is of no importance to Azerbaijan. We could say the same about Russia annexing Crimea to distract the public from the arrest of Greenpeace activists from Denmark or Pussy Riot singers. Secondly, the Azerbaijani government is standing firmly on its feet and has been ignoring criticism from the West for quite a while, feeling itself more than confident. So it gains no benefit from playing with fire on the front, it is just not worth a few civil activists.
According to another version, mainly spread by Armenian mainstream press, Azerbaijan allegedly provoked a military operation in Karabakh while Russia was distracted by events in the east of Ukraine. On the other hand, it is quite a dubious option for Baku. Firstly, Russian-Azerbaijani relations have been consistently improving and governmental contacts intensifying since the visit of Vladimir Putin to Azerbaijan last year. SOCAR is forming joint ventures with Rosneft to realize joint energy projects in Russia, Azerbaijan and other countries. The Baku-Novorossiysk pipeline is back in operation. Emissaries of Moscow are welcome in Baku, the government supports the Russian language and higher education centers. Western institutions of influence are being pushed out of the country. Secondly, Azerbaijani military strategists have a good understanding that the Russian army has potential for two local conflicts, even involvement in the Ukrainian conflict would not be a burden for Russia. Thirdly, if Azerbaijan decided to follow this scenario, it would have asked the West for assistance, the way Georgia did in 2008 or Ukraine is doing now. But President Aliyev, unlike Saakashvili and Poroshenko, is not a puppet of the West and has not taken power in an Orange Revolution or Euromaidan. On the contrary, he prevented all colour political movements in the country mercilessly, rejected EU association and made it clear that it was not relying on Brussels and Washington to return the occupied territories. In one word, Ilham Aliyev is obviously opposed to political adventures inspired by Mikheil Saakashvili.
There is yet another version voiced by Armenian pro-Western political analysts such as Richard Kirakosyan. He said in one of his interviews: “Currently, it is dangerous that Russia can provoke tensions in the zone of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and it may result in Russia willing to deploy peacekeeping forces to Karabakh. This would be unacceptable for Armenia and Karabakh.” Then, Kirakosyan complains that Russia sells advanced weapons to Azerbaijan, complains about Russian functionaries who deny the influence of the CSTO in Nagorno-Karabakh. In other words, according to such an interpretation, Russia is a grey cardinal blackmailing Yerevan. The latter, in this case, is trying to put the brakes on joining Putin’s Eurasian Union. One such method of pressure is activation of combat actions in Karabakh, where the Kremlin encouraged Azerbaijan to go for it.
In reality, the wait-and-see attitude of Armenia in the light of the geopolitical clash between Russia and the West could not be left unnoticed in Moscow, the target of ever harsher U.S.-inspired sanctions. Armenia’s postponed membership of the Eurasian Union leaves an opportunity to make a political reshuffle and sign the EU Association Agreement. It is always nice to have a fall-back position in Europe. But is that a strong enough reason for Moscow to start tensions in the Karabakh conflict zone? If so, why would Baku want to play along for its Russian partners in such a game, sacrificing the lives of its soldiers? There could be secret agreements between Baku and Moscow, so such a scenario cannot just be ruled out.
It is possible that the escalation of tensions was provoked by the Armenian side, as Azerbaijani military say. The clashes on the night of July 31 – August 1, when 9 Azerbaijani soldiers died, could have been used to provoke Azerbaijan into a harsh response. A response that would trigger a cascade of mutually vindictive operations, resulting in a full-fledged military operation against the separatist regime in Armenia. Thus, Yerevan would effectively and in a timely way block Azerbaijani-Russian rapprochement, potentially dangerous to Armenian interests in Karabakh. Baku cannot leave the murder of its troops without a response, it is a blow to the image of the country and the ruling elite.Considering the importance and emotionality of the Karabakh issue for all Azerbaijanis, such a bet on a response would be an obvious win. Initiating a war with Russia’s only partners in the South Caucasus fits in with the logic of the West quite well. It is interested in instability around Russia. It should be noted that Armenia is very dependent on the well-structured Armenian diaspora in the West, mainly in France and the U.S. Surprisingly, the two favourite countries of the Armenian diaspora are co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk group.
Evidently, Russia does not want a renewal of war in Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding occupied districts of Azerbaijan, in terms of objective geopolitical interests. The Kremlin has so far been satisfied with Armenia, poor as a result of the conflict and extremely dependent, and Azerbaijan, financially successful but suffering from occupation of a fifth of its territories. This is why the reason for the sudden activation of Moscow’s diplomatic efforts, manifested in a quickly-organized meeting of the Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents in Sochi on August 8, is understandable. Russia is trying to prevent military actions between two of its allies.The current situation on the Armenian-Azerbaijani frontline proves again that defusing the “Karabakh bomb” immediately is a matter of national interest for Russia. When the bomb goes off, Moscow will end up with a very complicated and painful choice between Yerevan and Baku. Such a development could become another blow to Russia's positions in the Caucasus after the filigree match of the West in Georgia. Whether the scenario is realized or not depends on the trilateral meeting of the Russian, Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents in Sochi.
“Karabakh bomb” for RussiaFears about transformation of the situation into a full-fledged war are becoming more commonBy Mikhail Belyayev exclusively for Vestnik KavkazaAzerbaijani fighters were scrambled and combat vehicles deployed to the frontline zone. Defense Minister Zakir Gasanov, being on vacation, suddenly returned to the country and headed right towards the frontline. Clashes with Armenian forces along the frontline became so dangerous that there have been many fears about transformation of the situation into a full-fledged war.A large amount of misinformation has been spread throughout the mass media recently. For example, Azerbaijan is accused of using Grad systems to attack Armenian fortified positions or evacuating the Azerbaijani population from frontline villages and dozens of people killed on both sides. Armenian television has reported about a local “Rambo,” an ordinary conscript, who had beaten up Azerbaijani special troops armed to the teeth with his bare hands and had carried a couple of Israeli-made grenade launchers.Considering the traditional propagandist nature of the mass media of any belligerent states, the validity of such information is very doubtful. Official statistics are the only reliable source in this case. According to the same data, confirmed by the defense ministries of both states, Azerbaijan lost 12 soldiers, Armenia lost 5. 9th-grader Shalyala Tagiyeva from Gyoyalli (Kedabek District) was injured in an attack on Azerbaijani positions on August 3.So what could have provoked the most serious tensions on the contact line since the signing of the ceasefire agreement in 1994? There are different opinions we want to cover in this article.The technical version is as follows: mutual shooting and acts of vengeance are permanent, the outbreak of combat in this aspect is logical, it has no deep hidden subtext. But the fact that intensive shooting and mutual sabotage operations have not stopped for about a week contradicts this argument. The deployment of military vehicles and troops indicates how serious the situation is. So tensions along the frontline are rising systematically.Azerbaijani civil activists raised by Western grants are searching for excuses in the internal political situation in the country. They are confident that the Azerbaijani government, attempting to justify more “cleansing” against agents of the West in the country, has decided to distract public attention with active combat on the front. The version is dragged by head and ears, to say the least. First of all, the fate of Leyla Yunus arrested for tax evasion, illegal business and espionage, or Rasul Jafarov, a notable pro-democracy singer, is of no importance to Azerbaijan. We could say the same about Russia annexing Crimea to distract the public from the arrest of Greenpeace activists from Denmark or Pussy Riot singers. Secondly, the Azerbaijani government is standing firmly on its feet and has been ignoring criticism from the West for quite a while, feeling itself more than confident. So it gains no benefit from playing with fire on the front, it is just not worth a few civil activists.According to another version, mainly spread by Armenian mainstream press, Azerbaijan allegedly provoked a military operation in Karabakh while Russia was distracted by events in the east of Ukraine. On the other hand, it is quite a dubious option for Baku. Firstly, Russian-Azerbaijani relations have been consistently improving and governmental contacts intensifying since the visit of Vladimir Putin to Azerbaijan last year. SOCAR is forming joint ventures with Rosneft to realize joint energy projects in Russia, Azerbaijan and other countries. The Baku-Novorossiysk pipeline is back in operation. Emissaries of Moscow are welcome in Baku, the government supports the Russian language and higher education centers. Western institutions of influence are being pushed out of the country. Secondly, Azerbaijani military strategists have a good understanding that the Russian army has potential for two local conflicts, even involvement in the Ukrainian conflict would not be a burden for Russia. Thirdly, if Azerbaijan decided to follow this scenario, it would have asked the West for assistance, the way Georgia did in 2008 or Ukraine is doing now. But President Aliyev, unlike Saakashvili and Poroshenko, is not a puppet of the West and has not taken power in an Orange Revolution or Euromaidan. On the contrary, he prevented all colour political movements in the country mercilessly, rejected EU association and made it clear that it was not relying on Brussels and Washington to return the occupied territories. In one word, Ilham Aliyev is obviously opposed to political adventures inspired by Mikheil Saakashvili.There is yet another version voiced by Armenian pro-Western political analysts such as Richard Kirakosyan. He said in one of his interviews: “Currently, it is dangerous that Russia can provoke tensions in the zone of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and it may result in Russia willing to deploy peacekeeping forces to Karabakh. This would be unacceptable for Armenia and Karabakh.” Then, Kirakosyan complains that Russia sells advanced weapons to Azerbaijan, complains about Russian functionaries who deny the influence of the CSTO in Nagorno-Karabakh. In other words, according to such an interpretation, Russia is a grey cardinal blackmailing Yerevan. The latter, in this case, is trying to put the brakes on joining Putin’s Eurasian Union. One such method of pressure is activation of combat actions in Karabakh, where the Kremlin encouraged Azerbaijan to go for it.In reality, the wait-and-see attitude of Armenia in the light of the geopolitical clash between Russia and the West could not be left unnoticed in Moscow, the target of ever harsher U.S.-inspired sanctions. Armenia’s postponed membership of the Eurasian Union leaves an opportunity to make a political reshuffle and sign the EU Association Agreement. It is always nice to have a fall-back position in Europe. But is that a strong enough reason for Moscow to start tensions in the Karabakh conflict zone? If so, why would Baku want to play along for its Russian partners in such a game, sacrificing the lives of its soldiers? There could be secret agreements between Baku and Moscow, so such a scenario cannot just be ruled out.It is possible that the escalation of tensions was provoked by the Armenian side, as Azerbaijani military say. The clashes on the night of July 31 – August 1, when 9 Azerbaijani soldiers died, could have been used to provoke Azerbaijan into a harsh response. A response that would trigger a cascade of mutually vindictive operations, resulting in a full-fledged military operation against the separatist regime in Armenia. Thus, Yerevan would effectively and in a timely way block Azerbaijani-Russian rapprochement, potentially dangerous to Armenian interests in Karabakh. Baku cannot leave the murder of its troops without a response, it is a blow to the image of the country and the ruling elite.Considering the importance and emotionality of the Karabakh issue for all Azerbaijanis, such a bet on a response would be an obvious win. Initiating a war with Russia’s only partners in the South Caucasus fits in with the logic of the West quite well. It is interested in instability around Russia. It should be noted that Armenia is very dependent on the well-structured Armenian diaspora in the West, mainly in France and the U.S. Surprisingly, the two favourite countries of the Armenian diaspora are co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk group.Evidently, Russia does not want a renewal of war in Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding occupied districts of Azerbaijan, in terms of objective geopolitical interests. The Kremlin has so far been satisfied with Armenia, poor as a result of the conflict and extremely dependent, and Azerbaijan, financially successful but suffering from occupation of a fifth of its territories. This is why the reason for the sudden activation of Moscow’s diplomatic efforts, manifested in a quickly-organized meeting of the Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents in Sochi on August 8, is understandable. Russia is trying to prevent military actions between two of its allies.The current situation on the Armenian-Azerbaijani frontline proves again that defusing the “Karabakh bomb” immediately is a matter of national interest for Russia. When the bomb goes off, Moscow will end up with a very complicated and painful choice between Yerevan and Baku. Such a development could become another blow to Russia's positions in the Caucasus after the filigree match of the West in Georgia. Whether the scenario is realized or not depends on the trilateral meeting of the Russian, Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents in Sochi.
