Will Azerbaijan fighting end after declared ceasefire?

Following weekend fighting between ethnic Armenian and Azerbaijani forces in the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region, Azerbaijan announced it would implement a ceasefire in the territory – although rebel forces say the government may not be upholding its side of the agreement.

Hrayr Badalyan/PAN Photo via AP
In this photo taken Saturday, April 2, 2016, Armenian volunteers are in a state of readiness in the town of Askeran in the separatist Nagorno-Karabakh region. Officials in Azerbaijan and the separatist region of Nagorno-Karabakh say fighting is persisting a day after the worst outburst of hostilities in nearly 20 years killed 30 soldiers.

Following weeks of escalating tensions that culminated in deadly fighting this weekend, Azerbaijan announced a unilateral ceasefire between its military and separatist forces in the Nagorno-Karabakh region on Sunday.

Despite the eastern European country’s Defense Ministry pledge to put conflict on hold in the autonomous Caucasus nation, Nagorno-Karabakh rebels are saying that Azerbaijani forces are still firing on them, per The Associated Press.

Nagorno-Karabakh, while technically contained within the Republic of Azerbaijan’s borders, has been under Armenian control since a violent conflict ended without resolution in the waning years of the Soviet Union's influence. Since a 1994 ceasefire was declared between Azerbaijan and Armenia over the 4,400-square-mile territory, its official status has not been determined.

Despite two decades of relative calm, at least 30 were killed on both Azerbaijani and separatist sides this weekend including a boy, per the AP. Armenia reported 18 fatalities Saturday, and Azerbaijan 12.

Azerbaijani Defense Ministry spokesman Vagif Dargyakhly said early Sunday that his military was involved in conflict overnight, and that civilian areas also came under fire.

Under international pressure, Azerbaijan’s Defense Ministry said it would be “suspending a counter-offensive and response on the territories occupied by Armenia.”

Azerbaijan’s president Ilham Aliyev said that his side would lay down their arms despite what they view as Armenian transgression.

“Armenia has violated all the norms of international law,” Mr. Aliyev said on Azeri state TV, per Reuters. “We won't abandon our principal position. But at the same time we will observe the ceasefire and after that we will try to solve the conflict peacefully.”

Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan expressed solidarity with the former Soviet republic, saying Sunday that Turkey country “will support Azerbaijan to the end.”

“We pray our Azerbaijani brothers will prevail in these clashes with the least casualties,” he added.

Turkey shares an extensive border with Armenia, which has suffered from the unresolved Nagorno-Karabakh situation as both Azerbaijan and Turkey closed their borders with the state.

Both the United States and Russia urged restraint in the contested area. Russia maintains a military installation in northern Armenia, and Russian President Vladimir Putin asked that both sides should “immediately stop firing and exercise restraint,” his spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

US Secretary of State John Kerry said that Armenian and Azerbaijani forces should “show restraint, avoid further escalation and strictly adhere to the cease-fire,” per The Washington Post.

The Post also reported that Azerbaijan suppressed a Nagorno-Karabakh assault Sunday, and that it would support “liberated” territories in the conflict despite the cessation of fighting. Armenian officials disputed the sincerity of the motion from Baku, with Radio Free Europe reporting that military operations were continuing.

David Babayan, spokesman for the president of the breakaway Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, called the Azerbaijani announcement an “information trick,” according to RFE, although the region’s military leaders say they are still open to a ceasefire – if aimed at “restoring former positions.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.