Special Еurasia: Baku may launch another offensive, taking advantage of Armenia’s vulnerability and the West’s reluctance to intervene
Special Еurasia made a report which examines Azerbaijan’s recent escalation of information dissemination strategies, particularly through the Ministry of Defense’s daily reports of alleged Armenian ceasefire violations. As noted, historically, similar narratives have been employed to shape public perception and create a justification framework for strategic manoeuvres.
Given Armenia’s significant concessions in the ongoing peace negotiations, the current trend raises concerns about the broader implications for regional stability. Historically, Azerbaijan has used strategic communication campaigns to justify military developments in its favor. Before the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, Baku similarly reported alleged Armenian attacks, influencing both domestic and international perceptions. The recent increase in such reports appears to be part of a broader narrative aimed at reinforcing the notion of self-defense in the event of future military actions. Despite Armenia’s repeated territorial concessions—including the recognition of Azerbaijani sovereignty over Karabakh and the return of four border villages—Azerbaijan has continued to escalate requests. Azerbaijan’s military takeover of Nagorno-Karabakh in 2023, after a 9-months blockade, served as a test of international resolve. Western governments, while condemning the ethnic cleansing of Armenians in the region, took no meaningful action to prevent it.
This lack of response has emboldened Azerbaijan, reinforcing the perception that it can continue its expansionist policies without consequences. The recent European Parliament resolution calling for sanctions on Azerbaijani officials responsible for human rights violations highlights growing frustration in some Western circles. It also calls on the International Criminal Court to investigate the forced displacement and ethnic cleansing of the Armenian population in Nagorno-Karabakh. MEPs want the EU to suspend the EU-Azerbaijan energy memorandum and make future bilateral agreements conditional on improvements in the respect to human rights, political prisoner releases, and a fair peace deal with Armenia. However, there is no clear indication that these measures will be implemented.
“Meanwhile, the United States’ decision to deploy military equipment to Armenia between July and August 2025 could signal a shift in strategic priorities, but whether Washington will intervene in the event of an Azerbaijani offensive remains uncertain,” reads the report. As noted, beyond the strategic agreement signed between Yerevan and Washington, this development may indicate that U.S. intelligence assesses a potential Azerbaijani offensive as likely. This concern is further reinforced by Azerbaijan’s rhetoric, which refers to parts of southern Armenia as “Western Azerbaijan”.
Similarly, it remains uncertain whether and to what extent the CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization) would intervene. While Yerevan has effectively frozen its membership and withheld its annual financial contribution, the organization’s General Secretary Imangali Tasmagambetov has reaffirmed that Armenia remains a full-fledged member with the same rights as other member states. Unlike the case of Nagorno-Karabakh, where international law was divided between Azerbaijan’s territorial sovereignty and the Armenian population’s right to self-determination, any Azerbaijani military action against Armenia’s sovereign territory would constitute a clear violation of international law. Armenia’s internal political divisions have severely weakened its strategic position. The Armenian government’s willingness to amend its constitution, dissolve the OSCE Minsk Group, and withdraw lawsuits against Azerbaijan has sparked significant domestic opposition.
Former Nagorno-Karabakh officials, including former Nagorno-Karabakh State Minister Artak Beglaryan, threatened legal action against Pashinyan’s government if the lawsuits against Azerbaijan are withdrawn. Public dissatisfaction with Pashinyan’s leadership has grown, particularly after his recognition of Azerbaijani sovereignty over Nagorno-Karabakh and the return, last year, of border villages to Azerbaijan. Protests led by the Tavush for Motherland Movement indicate that sections of the Armenian population perceive these concessions as a betrayal. If current trends continue, Baku may launch another offensive under the pretext of self-defence, taking advantage of Armenia’s vulnerability and the West’s reluctance to intervene. Without decisive international action, Armenia’s sovereignty and stability will remain at significant risk. The potential consequences for Europe are also significant. If sanctions are imposed on Azerbaijan’s energy sector, Brussels’ efforts to diversify its gas supply will face considerable challenges.
