Mikhail Belyaev especially for Vestnik Kavkaza
On April 7 Armenian news agencies with reference to the Investigative Committee of Armenia reported about the killing of 44-year-old Armenian Ensign Ike Keshishoglyana in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Keshishoglyan became the 27th Armenian soldier killed by Azerbaijani military since the beginning of the year. Thus, in just the first three months of 2015 casualties officially recognized the Armenian army exceeded all of its front-line loss for 2014, when 26 soldiers were killed. They should add wounded soldiers Sarkis Gabrielian and Mount Dolmanyan, who had their arm and leg amputated, respectively, as a result of which they are not able to return to duty. In total, on January 1 the irreparable losses of the army amounted to 29 people. This statistic is alarming for the military and political leadership of Armenia, which never miss an opportunity to declare an unprecedented aggravation along the line of contact between Armenian and Azerbaijani troops.
There are instances of intensified fighting on the front there. On average, the Armenian soldiers in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan since the beginning of the year have been dying four times more than the year before. To believe that this is a mere accident would be naive. It has barely escaped the attention of observers watching the conflict the fact that the military rhetoric of Azerbaijan, for which it was often criticized, has greatly diminished. Baku realized that the regular shooting of the occupying forces of the enemy is far more effective than menacing statements, for which the country later criticized the pacifist Europeans. Now President Aliyev, commenting on the escalation of violence on the front, just shrugs and asks a rhetorical question - what exactly are the Armenian soldiers in Agdam and Fizuli doing? After all, even the President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan publicly admitted: "Agdam is not our homeland." It is symbolic that in the autumn of last year Azerbaijani defense systems destroyed a dangerously-close Armenian combat helicopter, which was in the Agdam district. As a consequence, the Armenian Defense Ministry launched an investigation in connection with the incident and admitted that the helicopter was off course.
Defense Minister Seyran Ohanyan, seeing the negative development of the situation in January, actually gave carte blanche to the commanders of the lower and mid-level managers to conduct special operations at the front. However, the tactic is clearly failing, and Ohanian was unable to perform the big promises about a ten-fold response to the killing of each Armenian soldier. From the beginning, the recognized casualties of the Azerbaijani army were 12 people. That is, instead of the promised results when one killed Armenian soldier, in theory, should account for ten Azerbaijanis, the reality is that for one killed Azerbaijani soldier 2.3 Armenians fall. We deliberately consider only the recognized losses of each party, as all other messages are obviously speculative and cannot come under independent and impartial verification.
In this regard, it is necessary to rethink the situation created in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The countries chairing the OSCE and Azerbaijan have repeatedly stated about the unacceptability of the existing conflict zone in the status quo. Armenia, which is holding Nagorno-Karabakh and seven other regions of Azerbaijan under its own control, for obvious reasons is able to tolerate the status quo for a long time. However, reality dictates the conditions and price increases for Yerevan. CSTO ally Russia, despite the openly expressed dissatisfaction with the Armenian leadership, continues to sell high-tech weaponry to Azerbaijan - its solvency and, not least, politically loyal customers. Moreover, at the current level of close cooperation between Baku and Moscow, which was founded after Vladimir Putin's visit to Baku in the summer of 2013, an escalation at the front could not be discussed between the parties. It is obvious that the Kremlin is well informed about what is happening in the conflict zone, but, in its own reasons, did not consider it necessary to actively intervene in the situation.
Meanwhile, the dynamics of the events at the front indicate that the effect of the ceasefire agreement of 1994 is coming to its logical conclusion. Since the signing of the Bishkek protocol it is already 21 years, and during this period the peace process has brought absolutely no results. Yes, the parties in accordance with the terms of the armistice are not using mortars (rare reports of their use in the past year have not been confirmed) or artillery. This is a "gentleman's agreement" between the parties, which could not be supported without Moscow's participation. However, sniper and commando warfare is likely to be a flare up, and the price of Armenian troops staying in the occupied territories is growing. It is for this reason that the Armenian side for many years insisted on the withdrawal of snipers from the front line as a "confidence-building measures", in that over and over again gets a firm refusal from Azerbaijan, believing that it is not a direct path to a solution and a final cessation of the conflict. And that Baku will discourage, in the interests of its national security.
