Menu
Latest
Menu
Latest
News

Serious incidents reported in Karabakh conflict zone early Saturday morning; incidents spread to international border (Updated 5)

25 February 2017

Update 5 1800 CET

Whilst fighting has been going on sporadically throughout the day in the Karabakh conflict zone, another battle has raged, this time in the information sphere. The Ministries of Defence and Foreign Affairs of both countries have been busy putting across their version of events.

Armenian Foreign Ministry spokesman Tigran Balayan tweeted that Armenia had brought the incidents to the attention of the international community

The Armenian Foreign Ministry also issued a statement blaming Azerbaijan for the incidents.

Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry spokesman Hikmat Hadjiev has also been busy giving his country's version of events, and stating that Armenia had launched the provocation to deflect attention of the international community from the anniversary of the Khojaly massacre.

Politicians have now joined in, with statements from MPs and political leaders from both Armenia and Azerbaijan.

In the meantime defence Attaches in diplomatic missions in Yerevan were called to the Armenian Defence Ministry where they were briefed on the situation by Armenian officials.

Update 4 1630 CET

Both sides in the Karabakh conflict continue to report incidents in the Karabakh conflict zone on Saturday (25 February). Azerbaijan earlier said it had suffered casualties during an attempted Armenian incursion overnight. Later in the day the Azerbaijani Defence Ministry said it had destroyed an Armenian firing position in the Karabakh conflict zone and that a number of Armenian soldiers have been killed.

On its part Armenia has so far not admitted incurring any casualties. Armenia said that Azerbaijan made two attempts to penetrate the buffer zone between the two sides last night. It said that during the incident a number of Azerbaijani soldiers were killed. It has now also released names of two officers that it says were among the dead. It reports that some of the bodies of the dead are still in the buffer zone.

Earlier Armenian also said that there were incidents on the international border with Azerbaijan.

Armenian analyst Richard Giragosian wrote on his facebook page on Saturday afternoon:

As the risk of renewed hostilities over Karabakh is clearly escalating, a repeat offensive by Azerbaijani forces within the coming two months is ever more likely. Similar to the April 2016 offensive, the temptation for Azerbaijan to seek a repeat military success, aimed at seizing and securing territory, combined with the effective distraction from Azerbaijan's domestic economic problems, suggest a dangerous and destabilizing fresh round of fighting. However, there are two distinctly different factors that will limit the potential gains from any renewed offensive by Azerbaijan- the element of surprise is no longer an advantage, and second, the defending Armenian and Karabakh sides are better equipped to repulse any attack. 
Therefore, the next round of fighting may be more deadly, as the Azerbaijani offensive will quickly stall, becoming more of a drawn out battle of attrition that may trigger the deployment and use of more deadly offensive weapon systems, including artillery, multiple launch missile launchers and (rotary wing) air power. Sadly, as diplomacy remains deadlocked, there is no real deterrence to such a scenario.

The incidents are taking place as Azerbaijan is preparing to mark on Sunday the 25th anniversary of the massacre in Khojaly in which nearly two hundred Azerbaijani civilians were killed at the height of the fighting in 1992.

Update 3 1430 CET

Armenia claims that Azerbaijan has fired artillary shots across its international border, away from the Karabakh conflict zone. Spokesperson for the Armenian Ministry of Defence, Artsrun Hovhannisyan, said that Azerbaijan opened fire in the directions of the Armenian border village of Baghanis killing two cows. The official Armenpress news agency described the incident as a provoation and accused Azerbaijan of targeting civilians.

Politicians in both countries have been making inflamatoury statements throughout the day, accusing the other side of starting the incidents and promising response

Other reports suggest that the situation on the line of contact in the Karabakh conflict zone calmed down during the day.

Update 2 - 09.15 CET

There is now an official Azerbaijani account of the incidents this morning in the Karabakh conflict zone. Azertac, the official news agency of Azerbaijan quotes a statement by the Azerbaijani Defemce Ministry stating:

"On February 25 at midnight, the Armenian Armed Forces' military units have made an attempt to penetrate into the positions of Azerbaijani Armed Forces in different directions with the aim to carry out a large-scale provocation on the frontline," Azerbaijan`s Defense Ministry said.

"As a result of constant surveillance of the enemy, setting up ambushes and combat security, the enemy action has been identified in advance. The military units of the Azerbaijani Armed Forces have taken firm measures to prevent the enemy penetration to the depth of our defense."

According to the Ministry "fierce fighting took place between the enemy, trying to seize advantageous positions in Khojavand-Fuzuli direction of the front and our military units. The enemy forces were forced to retreat as a result of brave action of the units of the Azerbaijani Armed Forces which were standing in ambush set up in this direction.Azerbaijani side suffered losses as a result of fighting."

"Failing to move forward in various areas, the enemy using heavy artillery currently subjected to fire the positions of the Azerbaijani Armed Forces.In accordance with the operational situation, appropriate countermeasures are taken against the firing positions and staging areas of the enemy".

In the meantime the blame game continues. This is a tweet by the Armenian Defence Ministry

The whole responsibility for the consequences of the tension on the contact-line  are on military-political leadership of #Azerbaijan

Commonspace.eu is not in a position to verify the accuracy of the reports of events on the line of contact and, our coverage is based on Armenian and Azerbaijani sources to which we attribute the information whenever possible..

Update 1 - 09.00 CET

Details are starting to come in of the incidents that have been taking place this morning in the Karabakh conflict zone. The Ministry of Defence of the self-declared Nagorno-Karabakh Republic has claimed that it has killed two Azerbaijani soldiers during an attempted incursion.

We prevented #Azerbaijan 2 attempts of diversion,killed at least 2 servicemen in neutral zone, we have no losses.
Noticed movement of troops

Azerbaijan says there were two attempted Armenian incursions and that its troops suffered casualties whilst repellling them.

There are reports of heavy shelling and use of artillary but these cannot as yet be confirmed

....

Armenia and Azerbaijan report serious incidents in the Karabakh conflict zone overnight. The two sides accuse each other of attempted incursions. Azerbaijan says it has suffered casualties overnight.

Diplomatic sources say the situation on the line of contact is very tense.

source: commonspace.eu

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?
Trending

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

19 October 2026
Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Dennis Sammut
Editor's choice
News
Ukraine Peace Talks Set to Expand as Russia and Europe Clash Over Post-war Security
Trending

Ukraine Peace Talks Set to Expand as Russia and Europe Clash Over Post-war Security

13 November 2026
Ukraine and Russia could see European countries join the next round of peace negotiations, following talks between US special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Thursday (November 12). However, conflicting positions over European military involvement, Ukraine’s territorial future and the continent’s security arrangements highlight the difficulties facing the diplomatic process. Speaking after the meeting, Witkoff said European participation would be an important development, describing the countries concerned as key partners. Kushner also indicated that Washington had noticed a shift in European attitudes and believed their involvement would not obstruct progress. In a statement published on X, he said the expanded discussions would address broader European security arrangements alongside territorial disputes between Russia and Ukraine. The US envoys subsequently travelled to Dublin, where they met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during a European summit. Zelenskyy welcomed the possibility of European participation and expressed hope that the negotiations would include measures to reduce tensions and establish ceasefires. He also reiterated the importance of European representation in decisions concerning the continent’s security. Moscow, however, has offered a more cautious interpretation of the proposed expansion. Putin's aide, Yuri Ushakov, suggested that European countries should first reconsider their military assistance to Kyiv, arguing that their current actions demonstrated an unwillingness to pursue peace. Putin similarly called on Washington to work with its European allies to establish whether they genuinely wanted peace or continued confrontation with Russia. The Russian president also rejected the prospect of European peacekeeping troops being deployed to Ukraine following a potential agreement, describing such a presence as a continuation of the war. His position reflects wider disagreements over the future European security architecture, with Moscow seeking discussions on the continent's broader security arrangements, while European leaders insist that such negotiations cannot replace a settlement of the war. Simultaneously, Zelenskyy raised concerns about disruptions to Starshield, the US-made satellite communications service used by Ukrainian forces. He described Washington’s discussions with Moscow about Europe's future security as unusual and warned against decisions that could undermine Ukraine's sovereignty. Despite the diplomatic activity, fighting continued. Russian drone attacks killed two people in Ukraine's Sumy region and injured five in Rivne, while a separate attack in Russia's Belgorod region killed one person and injured four. Ukrainian agricultural company Kernel Holding also suspended operations at all its oilseed extraction facilities following repeated Russian attacks.

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest
Trending

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

7 September 2026
Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Dennis Sammut
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”
Trending

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

21 September 2026
There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)
Dennis Sammut