Author: Andranik Taslakhchian

                                        Thursday, October 8, 2020
Putin Pushes For End To Karabakh Fighting
RUSSIA -- Russian President Vladimir Putin addresses participants of the 7th 
Forum of the Regions of Russia and Belarus via video feed at the Novo-Ogaryovo 
state residence, outside Moscow, September 29, 2020
After what the Kremlin described as a series of phone calls with the leaders of 
Armenia and Azerbaijan, Russian President Vladimir Putin urged the warring sides 
in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict on Thursday night to stop hostilities.
In a written statement, Putin said they should do so “for humanitarian 
considerations with the aim of exchanging prisoners and the bodies of dead 
soldiers.”
“The foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan are invited to Moscow on 
October 9 for holding consultations on these issues mediated by the Russian 
Foreign Minister [Sergei Lavrov,]” concluded the statement.
Yerevan and Baku did not immediately react to the extraordinary appeal.
The Armenian Foreign Ministry said earlier on Thursday that face-to-face talks 
between Foreign Minister Zohrab Mnatsakanian and his Azerbaijani counterpart 
Jeyhun Bayramov are “not yet planned in any format.”
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova announced afterwards that 
Lavrov has offered to host a trilateral meeting with Mnatsakanian and Bayramov. 
She said the Russian, U.S. and French mediators co-heading the OSCE Minsk Group 
would also be in attendance.
“We are holding consultations with the parties regarding possible dates for the 
start of negotiations in this format,” Zakharova told journalists.
Putin issued his statement a few hours later.
Mnatsakanian was scheduled to travel to Moscow for an official visit on Monday. 
For his part, Bayramov was due to meet with the Minsk Group co-chairs in Geneva 
on Thursday.
The three world powers leading the group have persistently pressed the parties 
to restore a ceasefire regime since the large-scale hostilities in the Karabakh 
conflict zone broke out on September 27. Unlike Azerbaijan, Armenia has backed 
their calls for an unconditional halt to the fighting that has left hundreds of 
soldiers dead.
As recently as on Wednesday, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev continued to 
make the ceasefire conditional on Armenia presenting a “timetable for 
withdrawing its troops from the occupied territories.” Yerevan has rejected this 
precondition.
Another Journalist Wounded In Karabakh
NAGORNO-KARABAKH -- A photo shows damage to Ghazanchetsots church caused by 
shelling, October 8, 2020
A Russian journalist was gravely wounded on Thursday during a reported 
Azerbaijani missile strike on Nagorno-Karabakh’s largest Armenian church.
News reports from Karabakh said the Holy Savior Cathedral located in the town of 
Shushi (Shusha) was twice hit by rockets and seriously damaged as a result. 
Photographs taken at the scene showed a gaping hole on the roof of the church 
and debris scattered inside it.
Karabakh officials said Yuri Kotenok, who writes for the Segodnia.ru news 
service, was wounded as he inspected, together with another Russian reporter, 
damage caused to the church by the first missile strike.
The Nagorno-Karabakh Information Center said Kotenok was rushed to a hospital in 
Stepanakert and was undergoing surgery there in the evening. “Karabakh doctors 
are fighting to save his life,” it said in a statement.
The RIA Novosti news agency reported that the other journalist, identified as 
Levon Arzanov, and his Armenian companion suffered light injuries during the 
shelling of the 19th century church commonly known as Ghazanchetsots.
The Armenian Foreign Ministry condemned the shelling as a “war crime.” “With 
these actions Azerbaijan replicates the behavior of its newly acquired allies, 
infamous international terrorist organizations that are responsible for the 
destruction of numerous historical-cultural monuments in the Middle East,” it 
charged in a statement.
The Azerbaijani Defense Ministry claimed that its forces did not deliberately 
target the church.
Shushi, Stepanakert and other Karabakh towns have been heavily shelled since the 
outbreak on September 27 of large-scale hostilities along the 
Armenian-Azerbaijani “line of contact” around Karabakh.
Two French journalists working for Le Monde daily came under artillery fire and 
were wounded in one of those towns, Martuni, on October 2. One of them underwent 
life-saving surgery in Stepanakert.
Baku has also reported extensive Armenian shelling of Azerbaijani towns and 
villages which it said continued on Thursday.
Russian-Led Military Bloc Also Sees Foreign ‘Mercenaries’ In Karabakh War
        • Armen Koloyan
Armenia - Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian meets with CSTO Secretary General 
Stanislav Zas, February 28, 2020
The head of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) expressed concern 
on Thursday about the alleged participation of Syrian mercenaries in hostilities 
around Nagorno-Karabakh, saying that it poses a “challenge” to the Russian-led 
military alliance.
“It’s hard for me now to judge the scale and organization of militants’ transfer 
to the Karabakh conflict zone,” CSTO Secretary General Stanislav Zas told RT. 
“In all likelihood, it is the case, and militants and mercenaries emerge there.”
“Of course it does not help to normalize relations. It poses a certain challenge 
to the organization,” Zas said in remarks cited by the TASS news agency.
Russia last week implicitly accused Turkey of sending “terrorists and 
mercenaries” from Syria and Libya to fight in Karabakh on Azerbaijan’s side. It 
demanded their immediate withdrawal from the region.
The Russian foreign intelligence chief, Sergei Naryshkin, warned on Tuesday that 
the region could become a “launch pad” for Islamist militants to enter Russia.
French President Emmanuel Macron has also said that at least 300 “Syrian 
fighters from jihadist groups” were flown from Turkey to Azerbaijan ahead of the 
September 27 outbreak of fighting in Karabakh. Both Ankara and Baku strongly 
deny that.
The CSTO comprises Russia, Armenia, Belarus and three other ex-Soviet states. 
Zas said the bloc could intervene in the Karabakh conflict if Armenia’s 
sovereignty is threatened.
Russian President Vladimir Putin stressed on Wednesday that the CSTO statutes 
commit Moscow to defending Armenia against foreign aggression. “We have always 
fulfilled, are fulfilling and will fulfill our obligations,” he said in his 
first public comments on the Karabakh hostilities.
Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted afterwards that these “CSTO obligations do 
not extend to Karabakh.”
Armenian Security Chief Sacked
Armenia - Argishti Kyaramian, April 3, 2019
The director of Armenia’s National Security Service (NSS), Argishti Kyaramian, 
was sacked on Thursday after only four months in office.
President Armen Sarkissian relieved Kyaramian of his duties in a decree 
initiated by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian. The latter did not immediately make 
any statements on the development.
The 29-year-old Kyaramian headed an anti-corruption government body before being 
appointed as NSS director in June. He had never worked in Armenia’s most 
powerful security service before.
Kyaramian’s temporary replacement, Mikael Hambardzumian, is a long-serving NSS 
officer.
Hambardzumian is the fourth head of the former Armenian branch of the Soviet KGB 
appointed, albeit in an acting capacity, since Pashinian came to power in the 
2018 “Velvet Revolution.”
Artur Vanetsian, one of the former NSS chiefs fired last year, is now a bitter 
political opponent of Pashinian. Vanetsian set up an opposition party early this 
year.
More Fighting, Shelling In Karabakh Conflict Zone
        • Naira Nalbandian
Nagorno Karabakh - The Ghazanchetsots Cathedral in Shushi damaged by 
shelling,October 8, 2020
Nagorno-Karabakh towns again came under rocket fire on Thursday as heavy 
fighting continued in the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict zone for a twelfth day.
The shelling by Azerbaijani forces of the Karabakh capital Stepanakert resumed 
late on Wednesday and continued periodically until the next morning. The city’s 
remaining residents mostly hiding in bomb shelters could hear powerful 
explosions and the sound of air raid sirens during the night.
One local man examined afterwards the damage to his home caused by recent day’s 
artillery fire. “No one is staying home,” he told RFE/RL’s Armenian service. “So 
they shouldn’t try in vain to kill us.”
“My sons are on the frontline,” he added. “They say that everything will be 
alright.”
Another Stepanakert resident said he is still not planning to take refuge in 
Armenia. “Either we should die or live on our land,” said the middle-aged man.
NAGORNO-KARABAKH -- A view shows a house damaged by recent shelling in 
Stepanakert, October 8, 2020.
The Azerbaijani army shelled the nearby town of Shushi (Shusha) and seriously 
damaged its famous Armenian cathedral in the afternoon. Photographs taken at the 
scene and posted on social media showed a gaping hole on the Ghazanchetsots 
church’s roof and debris scattered inside it.
According to officials in Stepanakert, 19 civilian residents of Karabakh have 
been killed and 80 others wounded since the September 27 outbreak of large-scale 
hostilities along the “line of contact” around Karabakh. The fighting has also 
left two residents of Armenian villages close to the Azerbaijani border dead.
Azerbaijani authorities reported, meanwhile, continued Armenian shelling of 
Azerbaijani towns and villages close to the frontlines, saying that the death 
toll among their residents rose to 31. They said one of those towns, Barda, was 
hit particularly hard on Thursday.
AZERBAIJAN -- Police block the area around destroyed cars and buildings, 
following a missile attack by Armenian forces, in the city of Barda, October 8, 
2020
There were no signs of imminent end to the worst hostilities in the Karabakh 
conflict zone since 1994. According to the Armenian Defense Ministry, the 
southern sections of the “line of contact” adjacent to Iran remained the 
epicenter of the deadly fighting.
A ministry spokeswoman said Karabakh Armenian forces repelled at least two 
attacks launched by Azerbaijani troops deployed in that area. The latter 
suffered “substantial losses,” she said.
There was no immediate reaction to those statements from the Azerbaijani side. 
The Defense Ministry in Baku said only that Armenian-backed forces had shelled 
several Azerbaijani villages overnight, causing casualties. It said Azerbaijani 
forces are "taking adequate measures."
Also, the Karabakh army publicized on Thursday the names of 30 more of its 
soldiers killed in action since September 27. The total number of confirmed 
Armenian combat deaths thus reached 350.
The Azerbaijani army still not released its casualty figures.
Reprinted on ANN/Armenian News with permission from RFE/RL
Copyright (c) 2020 Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, Inc.
1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Washington DC 20036.
 

Asia Times
by Richard Giragossian
Sept. 28, 2020
Surprise assault on Nagorno Karabakh leaves dozens dead in what could
be the first salvo in a protracted conflict
YEREVAN – Following months of bellicose threats, Azerbaijan launched
on Sunday a coordinated military offensive against the Armenian-held
breakaway republic of Nagorno Karabakh, leaving dozens dead and
raising the specter of a protracted open war.
On Monday morning, Karabakh officials announced 32 Armenian soldiers
had been killed, as well as two civilians, a woman and child. Baku
said an Azeri family of five were killed by Armenian shelling but did
not announce any casualties among its armed forces.
Azerbaijan, a gas-rich state run by an authoritarian dynasty, declared
martial law on September 27, as did Armenia, whose president called
for a general mobilization of military personnel.
The eruption of hostilities over the vast and strategic mountainous
territory comes two months after Azeri forces launched a cross-border
attack, which only differed by targeting Armenia proper.
Since that foiled July incursion, Azerbaijan has been increasingly
open about its disdain for diplomacy and desire to rely on the force
of arms.
“Karabakh is ours! Karabakh is Azerbaijan,” Azeri President Ilham
Aliyev tweeted on Sunday.
For the nearly three decades since the implosion of the Soviet Union,
unresolved conflicts continue to litter the landscape. One of those is
over Nagorno Karabakh, seized by Armenian forces during the breakup of
the Soviet Union in 1991.
Azerbaijan, following the loss of the enclave which it had been
granted during the Soviet era, continues to claim Karabakh as part of
its territory – a claim recognized by the United Nations.
The unresolved nature of this and other lingering conflicts of the
Soviet breakup have served to distort economic development, discourage
democratization and, in most cases, defend Russian influence and
interests.
For Armenia and Azerbaijan, the Nagorno Karabakh conflict poses its
own burden, as an imperative for Armenia’s embrace of Russia for
security and as an impulse for Azerbaijan to challenge the status quo.
After decades of peace talks, Azerbaijan is frustrated by the lack of
any substantive progress in negotiating the status of the 4,400 square
kilometer territory.
Defined by a sense of national humiliation over the loss of the
historic region, Azerbaijan’s frustration has now reached a dangerous
level as it drives a resolution to the conflict by military means. The
country is armed with billions of dollars worth of armaments purchased
in recent years with its vast gas wealth.
This latest military offensive shows Azerbaijan’s desire to negotiate
on the battlefield rather than at diplomatic summits.
Despite a sometimes confusing war of words over who started the
fighting, the military reality on the ground suggests that the purely
defensive force posture for the Armenian and Karabakh sides greatly
reduces any offensive threat, thereby revealing little logic and even
less validity in Azerbaijan’s claims that Armenia attacked first.
From a military perspective, the Karabakh defenders would be unlikely
to cede their advantage by launching a risky offensive that negates or
diminishes tactical advantages inherent in their entrenched fortified
defensive positions.
Unlike the political and diplomatic context, however, it is less
important and largely irrelevant who attacked first. Once forces are
engaged in combat operations they tend to follow their own logic and
tempo.
Context of conflict
In the opening round of fighting on early Sunday morning, the
Azerbaijani attacks left 10 Karabakh soldiers and at least one
civilian dead, with more wounded. By Monday morning, the toll had
risen to 32 soldiers announced dead by the Armenian defense ministry.
This latest round of fighting is markedly different than previous
clashes, opening a new chapter of the Karabakh conflict. This latest
Azerbaijani offensive has been much grander in scale and space, with
coordinated attacks all along the line of contact separating Nagorno
Karabakh from Azerbaijan proper.
Unlike the two sides’ previous round of fighting in April 2016, which
at the time was the most serious seen since a fragile ceasefire was
reached in 1994, the latest salvos are marked for their intensity and
use of heavier firepower.
A second new aspect of the offensive is rooted in the scope of combat
operations. For example, this sudden offensive opened with preliminary
massive artillery and rocket barrages.
Those were then followed by an assault on three areas along the line
of contact between Karabakh and Azerbaijan that involved the use of
armored units in support of an infantry ground assault that was
bolstered by the deployment of more than two dozen UAVs, or
military-grade drones.
After inflicting the initial damage and casualties in the surprise
attack at dawn on Sunday, later that morning Karabakh defensive units
were able to repulse the broader offensive, although fighting
continued well into the early evening in border areas along the north-
and south-east.
A third defining feature of the initial offensive was the Azerbaijani
forces’ ability to seize and secure at least one and perhaps as many
as four Armenian military positions in the area. By the end of the
first day of fighting, the Armenian side also reported more than 100
wounded, largely from artillery bombardments.
Armenian military sources also showed evidence of the destruction or
capture of some 33 Azerbaijan tanks, 11 armored personnel carriers
and, in another rare achievement, the downing of four helicopters as
well as a number of UAVs.
The coordination and logistical preparation necessary to conduct this
expansive offensive demonstrated Azerbaijan’s improved capacity. Such
preparation confirms that this latest round of fighting was a
calculated and planned act of aggression.
Beyond the surprise nature of the attack, Azerbaijan’s willingness to
target civilian areas and population centers in Karabakh also
demonstrates an apparent new disregard for the loss of civilian life.
This may stem from the failure of the initial July offensive, which
was quickly halted and decisively repulsed due to the tactical
advantage of the defenders in terms of terrain and topography, and as
a result of the quick loss of the tactical element of surprise in the
location and intensity of the attack.
From this perspective and based on Azerbaijani military performance in
the past, local unit frustration and strategic failure on the ground
have translated into a desperate and deadly reliance on artillery and
rocket attacks on civilian areas that inflict damage with little or no
real military value.
External actors and factors
Despite its localized nature with no foreign presence on the ground,
the Karabakh conflict has the potential to morph into a much wider
confrontation of competing interests of larger, more powerful regional
actors including Russia, Turkey and Iran.
For Russia, the Karabakh conflict offers the most effective leverage
for maintaining its power and influence over both Armenia and
Azerbaijan, especially as it now serves as the primary arms supplier
to both sides.
As a key external actor, Russia is now seen and generally accepted as
having a legitimate interest in the conflict. That’s due mainly to its
diplomatic engagement and initiative as a co-chairing nation, along
with France and the United States, of the Organization for Security
and Cooperation in Europe’s (OSCE) “Minsk Group,” the sole diplomatic
entity empowered to mediate.
At the same time, the conflict is also a challenge for Russia, as it
has only revealed and deepened the weakness and inherent limits of its
“strategic partnership” and security alliance with Armenia.
Beyond the Karabakh conflict, there has been a profound crisis in
Armenian-Russian relations for several years. That stems from
Armenia’s deepening dissatisfaction with the unequal terms of the
relationship, marked by frustration with the asymmetry and disrespect
afforded to its alliance and exacerbated by a sense of betrayal by
Russia.
While Azerbaijan looks to Russia and Israel for military equipment, it
is Turkey – now engaged in proxy wars as far afield as Libya and Syria
– that has taken a most active and assertive policy in response to the
Karabakh conflict by forcefully backing Azerbaijan.
Turkey’s vocal defense of fellow Turkic Azerbaijan is partially driven
by a desire to regain its past role as Azerbaijan’s primary military
patron that Russia and Israel now serve. The Turkish response to the
latest eruption in violence was immediate and harsh, endorsing
Azerbaijan’s version of events well before the state of affairs on the
ground was determined.
Diverging domestic drivers
Every modern Azerbaijani leader up until the current President Aliyev
has either risen to or fallen from power due to events on Karabakh’s
battlefield.
It thus follows that resorting to force and resuming war is a risky
gambit for the Aliyev dynasty in Baku. Yet the use of military force
and an appeal to nationalism by the Azerbaijani leadership has also
served as a convenient, if temporary, distraction from domestic
problems, as was the case with the 2016 fighting.
On the other side, since a rare victory of non-violent people power in
2018, Armenia has emerged as a respected and legitimate democracy. Yet
this has only exacerbated the divergence and divide between the two
rival states.
This divergence is evident in the very nature of the regime in
Azerbaijan, whose political legitimacy is founded not on free and fair
elections but rather derived from family tradition and genetics, with
power passing from father-to-son through the rule of the Aliyev
dynasty.
Armenia and Karabakh now stand alone, with no partner for peace and
little hope for sincere or serious negotiations with Azerbaijan. The
imperative now is to focus on a back to basics diplomacy, aimed less
at substantive peace talks and more on preventing a further escalation
of renewed hostilities that threaten to lure in rival regional powers.