After four days of heavy fighting that threatened to escalate into a larger conflict, Azerbaijan and Armenia agreed to a cease-fire. While the deal could halt most of the violence, skirmishes along the forces' line of contact will continue, and the risk of more serious flare-ups will remain high.
The latest round of fighting was the heaviest in the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh since 1994, but it was relatively contained to the front lines. Azerbaijan likely wanted to avoid drawing in Russia, which may have intervened in the event of a wider conflict. The battlefield's geography also contributed to limiting the scope of military operations. Armenia and Azerbaijan have invested heavily in modernizing their militaries over the past two decades; Azerbaijan in particular has used the profits from exporting its sizable energy resources to expand its defense budget. Yet despite Azerbaijan's significantly upgraded firepower, it had no way to quickly dislodge Armenia's prepared and tenacious defenses from the region's mountainous terrain.
Air support, for instance, can be a vital tool against prepared and fixed defenses or enemy supply and relief convoys. Though Azerbaijan was able to use its bigger air force to gain the upper hand in the disputed region's airspace, Armenia's extensive land-based air defenses severely limited Azerbaijan's air support capabilities. Consequently, Azerbaijan had to rely on low-flying helicopter gunships and unmanned aerial vehicles during the fighting. Azerbaijani forces had some success with these aircraft, but it came at a heavy cost: Video footage confirmed that many of Azerbaijan's drones were lost or shot down.
With the air power of both sides significantly restricted, artillery support became the central feature of the conflict. Whereas armored vehicles were stalled by rough terrain and anti-tank defenses, tube and rocket artillery played a crucial role in reducing enemy defenses, supporting defending troops and interdicting supply lines. Given the substantial impact of the artillery systems, it would not be surprising if both sides continued to invest heavily in them.
In the face of Armenia's determined defense in difficult terrain, Azerbaijan opted to focus its efforts on incrementally seizing territory. Even then, Azerbaijan was aware that its slow and methodical strategy, based heavily on its technological and demographic advantages, was not foolproof. And as the final days of fighting showed, those advantages were not enough to ensure outright triumph on the battlefield.
Though both parties have claimed resounding victories, the fog of war still hangs heavy in Nagorno-Karabakh. We can draw informed conclusions about the tactics used in the fighting, but a more complete appraisal of the conflict will have to wait for the two countries' widely diverging assessments of territory gained and casualties inflicted to be reconciled. Still, that will not stop Armenia and Azerbaijan from drawing military lessons from the past few days of fighting.
Their conclusions will be important because the cease-fire will not endure. Expect violations to take place about as often as they have over the past year as Azerbaijan continues to look for ways to use its military might to press its claim over Nagorno-Karabakh. And as both sides re-evaluate their strategies, their findings will undoubtedly influence the fighting ahead.
