Azerbaijan accuses Armenia of using heavy weapons in conflict zone

Azerbaijan has accused Armenia of violating the cease fire on the line of contact separating the two sides in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone 64 times in the last day. A statement by the Ministry of Defence of Azerbaijan said that the situation on the contact line between Azerbaijan and Armenia has remained tense. The Ministry said that the ceasefire "was violated in Alibayli and Kokhanabi villages of Tovuz district, Goyarkh village of Tartar district, Tapgaragoyunlu village of Goranboy district, Yusifjanli, Marzili, Kangarli, Shuraabad, Sarijali and Bash Garvand villages of Aghdam district, Kuropatkino village of Khojavand district, Horadiz, Garakhanbayli, Gorgan, Ashaghi Veysalli and Ashaghi Seyidahmadli villages of Fuzuli district, as well as unnamed hills in Khojavand and Fuzuli districts".

In a further statement the Azerbaijani Defence Ministry stated that on January 3 "the Armenian Armed Forces opened intensive fire at the positions of Azerbaijani Armed Forces and villages along the front-line by using large caliber weapons, anti-tank grenade launchers, and 60 and 82 mm mortars", according to the Azerbaijani news agency APA. The agency quoted a Ministry spokesperson as saying "We state unambiguously that Armenian armed forces' continuous firing at civilians and villages urges the Azerbaijani side to take adequate and drastic measures by using its all military capabilities which will lead the Armenian Armed Forces to more severe causalities, and the weak Armenian leadership will bear full responsibility for these actions." Neither side reported casualties overnight. The day before Armenia said that two of its military had been killed and one wounded on the night 2-3 January as they repelled an attempted Azerbaijani incursion. Azerbaijan denied the incident.

source: commonspace.eu with APA and Trend News Agencies

photo: General view of Karabakh conflict zone (archive picture)

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Finland’s decision to buy one million landmines creates a serious contradiction in the policy of the European Union, and is symbolic of a bigger dilemma facing European countries as they get used to the need to acquire “hard” power to face an increasing threat from Russia. Finland is seeking to acquire one million anti-personnel mines at a cost of 100 million euros. Finland, together with Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia last year abandoned the Ottawa agreement, the international framework that bans the use of anti-personnel mines, which the EU had been instrumental in establishing and supporting. All five countries cite the threat from Moscow as the reason. Colonel Riku Mikkonen of the Army Command told Finland’s national news agency STT that officials are now gathering information from suppliers regarding the deal, the AFP news agency reports. Helsinki would like domestic manufacturers to supply the mines, with contracts signed by the end of 2027 and production up and running by 2028. “It would be useful in many ways if Finnish companies produced the anti-personnel mines in Finland,” Mikkonen said. About half a dozen Finnish firms qualify, he told STT. “However, at this stage, buying the mines from abroad is not totally ruled out,” he added. LANDMINES PROVIDE THE EU WITH BOTH A CONTRADICTION, AND A DILEMMA Eliminating landmine contamination worldwide is one of the EU’s main soft power postures, and it basks in its record as the biggest funder of anti-landmine action in the world. But the fact that 5 of its 27 member states  have now left the Ottawa Treaty dents the EU moral high ground. It is a contradiction that is too big and important to be ignored. It also presents the European Union with a deeper dilemma. The threat from Russia is changing what the EU has stood for decades, namely a force for good able to mobilise its considerable soft power for the greater good of humanity. How the Union will implement this change will define its future. In the meantime landmines have not become any less lethal, benign, or unimportant. They remain in many parts of the world a major threat to life, an impediment to prosperity, and a potential trigger to further conflict. The 22 EU members states that still adhere to the Ottawa treaty must regroup, and be more assertive in their quest against anti-personnel land mines. All the reasons why they supported the Ottawa treaty in the first place still exist. The message must be clear: NO TO LANDMINES!
Editor's choice
News
Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Armenia should sign and ratify a peace treaty with Azerbaijan before 2031, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. He described the objective as the top priority for his administration. Earlier, the Armenian prime minister also spoke about a possible land-swap with Azerbaijan Armenia and Azerbaijan should agree to establish a clear, conventional border without enclaves or exclaves, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. Armenia controls three Azeri enclaves inside its borders while Baku controls one Armenian enclave – those could be subject to a land swap, Pashinyan announced.

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)