Armenia 'does not set goals for escalation'—what about Azerbaijan? Analysis from Yerevan
Is Baku accusing Yerevan ahead of its own aggression
“Although we have announced the completion of work on the peace agreement draft, in recent days, Azerbaijan has made completely false accusations of ceasefire violations. Armenia categorically denies them. To achieve our desired goal—peace—we need reciprocal political will to support Armenia’s steadfast commitment to this path,” Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan stated just hours ago.
For five consecutive days, Baku has claimed that Armenian armed forces have shelled Azerbaijani positions in the east and southeast.
Each time, Armenian authorities have denied these claims, emphasizing that they are ready to investigate any evidence supporting Azerbaijan’s allegations—if such evidence exists. However, no proof has been provided to date.
“The Armenian army has no reason or orders to violate the ceasefire. The Armenian government is committed to a peaceful agenda, as evidenced by the steps taken to finalize the text of the peace and interstate relations agreement,” the Prime Minister’s Office stated.
The ceasefire violation claims came right after Armenia confirmed the finalization of the peace treaty text and expressed readiness to sign it.
As a result, Armenian experts believe Azerbaijan is deliberately delaying the signing of the agreement. Analysts suggest various reasons for Baku’s reluctance, with some arguing that Azerbaijan sees the treaty as a bargaining chip in negotiations with larger geopolitical players.
Political analyst Hakob Badalyan views reports of shelling as part of Baku’s strategic toolkit, which it is not willing to abandon. However, he is not certain that these claims are being used as a direct pretext for military escalation at this moment.
- ‘Baku seeks to sow doubt in Armenian society over peace treaty’ – expert opinion
- ‘Their only guilt is being Armenian’: European Parliament urges Baku to release prisoners
- Opinion: ‘If Armenia abandons its red lines, it will only be state on paper’
Why is Baku claiming shelling in this specific direction?
Azerbaijani statements consistently report alleged shelling from Armenia’s Syunik region—the very area where Azerbaijan demands an extraterritorial corridor to connect with Nakhichevan, known as the “Zangezur Corridor.” In response, Yerevan has proposed a broader regional reopening of transport routes—but without infringing on the sovereignty and jurisdiction of the involved countries. This initiative by the Armenian government is called the “Crossroads of Peace.”
“Armenia has no unilateral obligations when it comes to reopening regional economic and transport links,” Armenian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ani Badalyan stated yesterday.
In an interview with Armenpress, she reiterated that transport routes between western Azerbaijan and Nakhichevanare part of a larger regional initiative to restore transportation and economic ties—including Armenia’s own connectivity.
“At the first stage, Armenia proposed launching rail freight services on the Zangilan-Meghri-Ordubad-Yeraskhroute. This is the shortest possible railway connection between Zangilan and Ordubad. As for highways, we have the roads that we have. And we have the terrain that we have. Accusing us of being a mountainous country is, at the very least, unserious,” Badalyan remarked.
Her comments were a response to Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry spokesman Aykhan Hajizade, who accused Yerevan of failing to meet its commitments: “Instead, they are proposing impractical, long, and irrelevant routes, trying to distract from the process and their obligations.”
Azerbaijan demands “unrestricted passage from Azerbaijan to Azerbaijan.” Yerevan, however, maintains that “unrestricted” does not mean bypassing Armenia’s sovereignty and jurisdiction over its own territory.
Three social media posts from Armenia’s PM calling for peace
Amid statements from the defense ministries of Azerbaijan and Armenia, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan took to Facebook to remind the public that the peace treaty between the two countries has been finalized and is ready for signing.
“I’m ready to put my signature under the agreed draft,” he emphasized.
Later, Pashinyan posted again, assuring that Armenia’s Ministry of Defense has received clear instructions from him to fully uphold the ceasefire:
“Armenia is heading for peace, not war.”
This morning, he made a direct appeal to Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, suggesting that they “begin joint consultations on the signing of the agreed draft peace agreement.”
Armenian MFA on countering potential aggression
Armenian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ani Badalyan responded to Azerbaijan’s accusations of ceasefire violations, stating:
“The Government of the Republic of Armenia has announced on the highest level that it has neither an objective nor a goal to escalate the situation and continues to act by the principles of the peace agenda. The Armed Forces of Armenia are subordinate to the Government and function under this very logic.”
Badalyan also noted that Azerbaijan has yet to respond to Armenia’s proposal from June 2024, which called for the creation of a joint mechanism to investigate ceasefire violations and related reports.
She further addressed Baku’s claims about Armenia’s militarization and alleged preparations for a military scenario, emphasizing that Yerevan has no intention of using force, even to reclaim over 200 square kilometers of Armenian territory occupied by Azerbaijan:
“[…] the Republic of Armenia has clearly expressed its stance about this, that it doesn’t seek to solve this issue through force because the delimitation process, and now also the finalized text of the peace agreement, have created all possibilities for peacefully resolving that issue.
Armenia can only prepare for one scenario of force, i.e., to withstand a possible aggression, which is the legitimate right of any country, and every step by Armenia in the border regions fit exclusively in the logic of defense.”
Badalyan also reminded that Armenia proposed a bilateral mechanism for mutual arms control, but Azerbaijan has yet to respond to this initiative as well.
Expert commentary
Political analyst Hakob Badalyan shared his analysis of the situation on his Telegram channel:
“For Azerbaijan, the ‘information tool’ of ceasefire violations is one of the cards in its strategic game—one that Baku will certainly not discard.
In Armenia, this tool is often perceived as preparation for military provocation—that is, Baku intends to launch aggression and is first creating an information narrative to claim that the Armenian side initiated the escalation. Of course, that’s part of it. But I don’t think it’s the only motive behind this tactic.
This information strategy serves multiple functions for Baku. It aligns with Azerbaijan’s broader coercive policy methodology.
Moreover, I don’t rule out that Azerbaijan might also be using this tactic for defensive purposes—not in terms of protecting itself from Armenia (since Armenia poses no threat to Azerbaijan), but in managing risks in international relations.
It is about mitigating risks in international relations. Azerbaijan faces challenges that are being exacerbated by tensions between the U.S. and the EU, as well as between Washington and London.
This raises the question: What does Azerbaijan’s disinformation about ceasefire violations have to do with all of this?
I believe it’s possible that by amplifying these claims, Azerbaijan is trying to relieve itself of behind-the-scenes pressure, likely coming from London.
At first glance, this may look like Azerbaijan is attempting to justify itself—as if “poor Azerbaijan” is trying to distract from London’s diplomatic pressure with ceasefire violation claims. But in reality, this isn’t about a “weak Azerbaijan.”
Azerbaijan remains aggressive and determined to extract maximum concessions from Armenia—that is its strategy. But Baku is not reckless. It carefully chooses the timing, context, and conditions for using force.
Right now, Azerbaijan might be testing the waters, assessing reactions, and gathering intelligence. However, despite making ceasefire violation claims for several consecutive days, Baku has not provided any real escalation in the content of its accusations.
This suggests that, at least for now, the spread of disinformation is not intended to justify an imminent military provocation.
Of course, this does not mean Armenia should lower its guard—on the contrary, it must prepare for worst-case scenarios. But based on current observations, the lack of significant escalation in Baku’s rhetoric indicates that there is no immediate decision or readiness for aggression.”
