Follow us on social

google cta
Armenia Azerbaijan Nagorno-Karabakh

Armenians' fate in Nagorno-Karabakh hangs in the balance

Azerbaijan launches military assault while Russia is distracted in Ukraine

Analysis | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

Update 9/19, 2 p.m.: A United States official said that U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken will hold urgent talks in the next 24 hours with all sides to end the “egregious” operation by Azerbaijan. A press statement by Blinken called "for an immediate end to hostilities and for respectful dialogue between Baku and representatives of the population of Nagorno-Karabakh."



It appears that Azerbaijan has decided to finish off by force what remains of the ethnic Armenian population in the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh; and judging by the response of the international community to Azerbaijani moves in recent years, nobody appears willing to do much to prevent it.

In the early afternoon of September 19, the Azerbaijani military launched a “local anti-terrorist” operation against the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh to “...ultimately restore the constitutional order of the Republic of Azerbaijan.” The move follows their disputed claims that mines “planted by the reconnaissance-subversion groups of Armenia’s armed forces” blew up civilian and military vehicles, resulting in six dead.

This development comes after weeks of anticipation of such an attack given Azerbaijani troop movements near the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, the increased airborne deliveries from Israel which supplies Azerbaijan with a large proportion of its armaments, and counter-preparations by the ethnic Armenian forces amidst an over nine-month long blockade of the Lachin Corridor.

The Azerbaijani Ministry of Defense statement claimed that “the civilian population and civilian infrastructure facilities are not targeted. Only legitimate military targets are being incapacitated.” However, reports from on the ground in the de facto capital of Stepanakert show shelling and civilian casualties.

Since the Moscow-brokered ceasefire that ended the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War in 2020 and brought Russian peacekeepers to the region, tensions have been escalating as Baku has sought to fully assert its control over the long-disputed territory. At first, the peacekeepers were generally able to protect what remained of Armenian Nagorno-Karabakh after the successful Azerbaijani 2020 assault. However, since the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the huge commitment and losses of Russian forces there, Russia’s military ability to intervene in Nagorno-Karabakh seems largely to have vanished.

Azerbaijan for its part had repeatedly and unequivocally stated that there is no need for outside intervention in its domestic affairs as Yerevan, Brussels, and Washington increased their calls for the future guarantee of the rights and security of Karabakh Armenians under Azerbaijani rule.

Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan has said that Azerbaijan wants to involve Armenia into a large-scale war but that Armenia is not and will not become involved in the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh.

Charles Michel, President of the European Council, said on X, formerly Twitter, that the “Military actions of Azerbaijan must be immediately halted to allow for a genuine dialogue between Baku and Karabakh Armenians.” The office of EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell issued a statement condemning the military escalation.

Russia has urged the conflicting parties to “stop the bloodshed, immediately cease hostilities and return to the path of a political and diplomatic settlement.” Moscow also rejected Baku’s claim that they had informed the Russian side in advance of the assault.

The U.S. still has yet to make any statement on the situation. However, in comments to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week, Yuri Kim, Acting Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs made clear that the U.S. condemns the use of force and will not accept any moves “to ethnically cleanse or commit other atrocities against the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh.”

What the fate of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh illustrates with tragic force is that while for a generation the United States and its NATO allies have been implacably hostile to Russia’s presence in the South Caucasus, they have neither the ability nor the will to replace Russia — which is now bogged down in Ukraine — as a security provider in the region, and to resolve or contain its ethnic disputes. Therefore, for Armenians, the tragedy of the war in Ukraine and its repercussions are being felt directly in the South Caucasus.

Editor's Note: Artin Dersimonian was an intern at the Armenian Embassy in Washington in 2018. The Terjenian-Thomas Assembly Internship Program at the Armenian Assembly — which is mentioned in the QI brief on which this article is based — facilitated Dersimonian's internship with the embassy.


Protesters gather near the government building, after Azerbaijan launched a military operation in the region of Nagorno-Karabakh, in Yerevan, Armenia, September 19, 2023. Vahram Baghdasaryan/Photolure via REUTERS ATTENTION EDITORS - THIS IMAGE HAS BEEN SUPPLIED BY A THIRD PARTY.

google cta
Analysis | QiOSK
Trump Central Asia
Top image credit: U.S. President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and Senator Jim Risch (R-ID) attend a dinner with the leaders of the C5+1Central Asian countries of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, in the East Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., November 6, 2025. REUTERS/Nathan Howard

Central Asia doesn't need another great game

Asia-Pacific

The November 6 summit between President Donald Trump and the leaders of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan in Washington, D.C. represents a significant moment in U.S.-Central Asia relations (C5+1). It was the first time a U.S. president hosted the C5+1 group in the White House, marking a turning point for U.S. relations with Central Asia.

The summit signaled a clear shift toward economic engagement. Uzbekistan pledged $35 billion in U.S. investments over three years (potentially $100 billion over a decade) and Kazakhstan signed $17 billion in bilateral agreements and agreed to cooperate with the U.S. on critical minerals. Most controversially, Kazakhstan became the first country in Trump's second term to join the Abraham Accords.

keep readingShow less
POGO The Bunker
Top image credit: Project on Government Oversight

Golden Dome, mission impossible

Military Industrial Complex

The Bunker appears originally at the Project on Government Oversight and is republished here with permission.

keep readingShow less
Xi Jinping
Top image credit: Photo agency and Lev Radin via shutterstock.com

Why Texas should invite Xi Jinping to a rodeo

Asia-Pacific

Last year, Texas banned professional contact by state employees (including university professors) with mainland China, to “harden” itself against the influence of the Communist Party of China – an entity that has governed the country since 1949, and whose then-leader, Deng Xiaoping, attended a Texas rodeo in 1979.

Defending the policy, the new provost of the University of Texas, my colleague Will Inboden, writes in National Affairs that “the US government estimates that the CPC has purloined up to $600 billion worth of American technology each year – some of it from American companies but much of it from American universities.” US GDP is currently around $30 trillion, so $600 billion would represent 2% of that sum, or roughly 70% of the US defense budget ($880 billion). It also amounts to about one-third of all spending ($1.8 trillion) by all US colleges and universities, on all subjects and activities, every year. Make that 30 cents of every tuition dollar and a third of every federal research grant.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.