Nagorno-Karabakh: Developments on ceasefire, withdrawals, and regional implications
Reports indicate that the armed formations in Nagorno-Karabakh began transferring weapons and military gear under the oversight of Russian peacekeepers, according to a statement from the Russian Ministry of Defense. The announcement outlines the initial clockwork of disarmament steps aligned with the terms agreed to curb hostilities and slow the tempo of fighting in the contested region.
As described by the military department, within the framework of the agreed cessation of hostilities, the transfer included six armored vehicles, more than 800 light weapons and anti-tank weapons, and nearly 5,000 rounds of ammunition. These figures reflect early stages of a broader process intended to reduce the immediate military footprint while maintaining stability on the ground through the engagement of international peacekeepers and local authorities.
Earlier statements by Hikmet Hajiyev, a deputy to the Azerbaijani leadership, noted that a portion of the Nagorno-Karabakh military personnel who voluntarily surrendered their arms during Azerbaijan’s counter-terrorism operation were still at large. This point emphasizes ongoing challenges in aligning all factions with the agreed framework and highlights the complexity of enforcing a durable cessation of hostilities in a volatile security environment.
On 19 September 2023, Azerbaijan announced the launch of what it described as an anti-terrorist operation in Nagorno-Karabakh and declared that it had assumed control of Armenian military positions in the region. The timing and framing of these moves were presented as essential steps in reasserting authority and restoring order within the disputed area, a scenario watched closely by international observers and neighboring states seeking to understand the evolving balance of power.
By 20 September, Nagorno-Karabakh authorities announced a halt to hostilities, signaling a potential transition toward stabilization and negotiation. The cessation statement marked a critical inflection point, with regional actors keen to assess the durability of the pause and the prospects for formal talks aimed at a long-term settlement.
Nagorno-Karabakh remains a disputed enclave on the border between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The self-proclaimed republic has not received formal recognition from United Nations member states, adding layers of diplomatic sensitivity to any security arrangements and political dialogue in the area. The absence of wide international recognition means that peacekeeping efforts and mediation roles often rely heavily on external powers and regional organizations to create a conducive environment for durable agreements.
In the aftermath of action and counter-action, Baku’s invitation of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenian representatives into negotiations in Yevlakh underscored a willingness to pursue talks in a structured setting. Such invitations reflect a broader strategy to channel disagreements toward dialogue, even as security operations and ceasefire mechanisms continue to shape daily life for communities in the region. The negotiation format and the participants chosen to engage in discussions are closely watched by observers who seek signs of sincerity, flexibility, and practical steps toward a lasting settlement.
Across these events, the role of international peacekeepers, regional diplomacy, and local governance structures remains pivotal. The process of weapons handover, verification of compliance, and the alignment of security forces with agreed terms are essential components of a credible ceasefire. While the situation has moved beyond the peak of direct clashes in several moments, the potential for flare-ups and misunderstandings persists, underscoring the need for transparent reporting, robust verification, and sustained diplomatic engagement. Observers continue to monitor the cadence of disarmament, the disposition of military assets, and the trajectory of negotiations as indicators of future stability in Nagorno-Karabakh and the broader South Caucasus region. (Source: Russian Ministry of Defense; regional analyses from allied and regional actors)