Category: Selected Articles

13 September, 2023

On September 13, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia Ararat Mirzoyan had a telephone conversation with Hossein Amir Abdollahian, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Following a telephone conversation between the Prime Minister of Armenia and the President of Iran a few days ago, the Foreign Ministers of the two countries discussed issues on stability and security in the South Caucasus.

Touching upon the latest regional developments, Minister Mirzoyan emphasised the importance of the efforts and messages of partners, aimed at restraining further escalation of the situation on the  Armenia-Azerbaijan state border and bringing Azerbaijan back to the constructive track. The need to address the rights and security issues of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh in the context of achieving lasting peace in the region was also emphasised. 

During the phone conversation, the sides also discussed issues regarding  bilateral relations.

Both sides reiterated their willingness to continue the dialogue on different platforms and formats.

Amidst the devastation caused by the recent earthquakes in Turkey on 6 February, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian made a strong statement warning against the threat posed by the Zionist regime to peace and stability in the region. Specifically, he pointed to Israel’s involvement in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, where Azerbaijan emerged victorious with significant support from Israel in the form of technology and arms. But why did Israel get involved in a conflict thousands of miles away, with no direct interests? In this post, we’ll take a closer look at Israel’s strategic partnerships with Azerbaijan and Turkey, and how they tie into its involvement in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

On 8 March, following devastating earthquakes in Turkey a month earlier, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian visited Turkey to show solidarity. During his visit, he met with his counterpart, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu. In a key moment of the press conference afterwards he noted:

“We see the presence of the Zionist regime in the region as a major threat to peace and stability. Wherever this regime is involved, there has been insecurity and crisis. The Islamic Republic of Iran warns the parties to pay close attention to the behavior of the Zionist regime. They should not allow its presence in the region.”

The Iranian Foreign Minister was referring to the Nagorno-Karabakh (NK) Conflict and specifically to Israel’s role in it. Between 27 September and 10 November 2020, the second NK war saw Azerbaijan emerge victorious over Armenia. However, what was surprising was the extent of Israel’s involvement in the conflict, with the country providing significant support in the form of technology and arms to Azerbaijan. This raises the question: why did Israel become involved in this conflict?

At first glance, Israel’s involvement may seem puzzling. After all, the country is located thousands of miles away from the region and has no direct interests in the conflict. However, a closer look reveals that Israel’s involvement is tied to its strategic partnerships with Azerbaijan and Turkey, both of which have become important regional allies for Israel. The alliance between Israel and Azerbaijan recently celebrated 30 years of diplomatic ties, that include but are not limited to, energy cooperation, arms trading, diaspora politics, memory politics of the Armenian genocide, and counter-intelligence of the Iranian nuclear project.

The NK Conflict: Historical Context

The NK conflict is a complex issue with significant relevance for many academic disciplines, including ethnic conflict studies and post-Soviet conflict studies. It also affects policy making in terms of great power struggles involving Russia, Turkey, Iran, the United States, and the European Union.

In 1988, as part of the disintegration of the Soviet Union, NK was made an autonomous region. However, tensions quickly escalated when the Armenians residing in NK declared their desire to secede from Azerbaijan and join the Republic of Armenia. This led to the first round of violence and war in NK, which lasted from 1988 to 1994. During this period, Azerbaijan lost control of several sub-regions in and around Nagorno-Karabakh, including Kalbajar, Lachin, Fuzuli, Aghdam, Jabrayil, Gubadli, and Zengilan. This process led to the occupation of 20 percent of Azerbaijani lands and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people.

The United Nations (UN) Security Council responded to the conflict by adopting several resolutions, including 822, 853, 874, and 884, which condemned the occupation of Azerbaijani territories and called for the cessation of hostilities and the withdrawal of all occupying forces. However, the NK conflict remained unresolved, and tensions continued to simmer between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

During the interwar period from 1994 to 2020, Armenia continued its occupation of the above sub-regions. The second NK war, also known as the 44 days war, began on 27 September 2020, with a counter-offensive operation along the entire front as the Azerbaijani army began liberating the territories that had been occupied by Armenia since the first NK war. The second war demonstrated the strength of the Azerbaijani army and ended with the decisive victory of Azerbaijan.

Thus, in practice, how does Israel back Azerbaijan in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict? Between September and November 2020, Israel’s defence industries were very busy as the ‘Second Nagorno-Karabakh (NK) War’ was launched between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Israel actually played a key role: during this conflict in the South Caucasus, Israel’s technology and arms were put to use extensively by Azerbaijan’s military against Armenia. The evidence documented in various news outlets demonstrates Israel’s support in the conflict: Baku’s alliance with Israel and Turkey enabled its military to assume a winning position on the battlefield against Yerevan. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) reported that Israel supplied 60 per cent of all Azerbaijan’s arms imports between 2015 and 2019.

The NK Conflict and Geopolitical Puzzle

Israel’s involvement in NK is part of a larger geopolitical puzzle; both Israel and Turkey have been using this conflict: not only as a ‘laboratory’ to examine the quality of their arms, but also to counter Iran’s aggressive ambitions in the region and to use NK as a ‘security buffer’. The arms Israel exported to the NK conflict during the 44 days of the war in 2020 left little doubt that Jerusalem seeks to support Azerbaijan in NK as a proxy war zone against Iran’s aggressiveness in the region that combines Holocaust denial, nuclear threats, and statements about the destruction of Israel and Zionism. Therefore, in other words, Israel, Turkey and Azerbaijan could be seen as one side in the conflict.

On the other side, the alliance between Iran, Armenia, and Russia is a significant factor in the NK conflict. These countries share historical and cultural ties and have long-standing diplomatic relations. During the 2020 war, Iran provided logistical support to Armenia, including the transportation of military equipment and personnel, while Russia supplied weapons and ammunition.

The potential implications of Netanyahu’s victory in the 2022 Israeli elections and his anti-Iran sentiment are indeed evident in numerous statements made by him and his government. Netanyahu has been a vocal critic of Iran and its nuclear program, arguing that it poses an existential threat to Israel’s security. While previous Israeli prime ministers, such as Naftali Bennett, Yair Lapid, and Ariel Sharon, emphasized their commitment to countering Iran and its nuclear program, Netanyahu took this to an unprecedented level by weaponizing the issue to an art form. In fact, during his famous 2015 address to the American Congress about the nuclear deal that allies were pursuing with Iran, Netanyahu went behind President Obama’s back and criticized the agreement by stating, “This is a bad deal — a very bad deal.”

Netanyahu’s previous actions as prime minister are likely to influence his actions in the region the future. This could lead to an increase in Israel’s presence in the South Caucasus, more pressure on Iran, greater support for Azerbaijan, and can explain the belligerent statements by the Iranian foreign minister above.

In conclusion, as long as the pieces of this firm geopolitical puzzle remain in play – particularly Iran and Israel’s mutual hostility – Jerusalem will maintain its high-profile support, training, and supply of arms to Azerbaijan.

For a longer form analysis of this topic, see Ben Aharon, Eldad (2023): Between Geopolitics and Identity Struggle: Why Israel Took Sides with Azerbaijan in the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict, PRIF Report 1/2023, Frankfurt/M.

Baku, September 4, AZERTAC

Speaker of Azerbaijani Milli Majlis Sahiba Gafarova has met with members of the Israel-Azerbaijan inter-parliamentary friendship group Evgeny Sova, Osher Shkalim, Tatiana Mazarsky and Almog Cohen.

Touching upon the friendly and partnership relations between Azerbaijan and Israel, Speaker Sahiba Gafarova emphasized the exceptional role of active political dialogue, high-level visits and meetings in the development of relations between the two countries.

She noted that Azerbaijanis and Jews have lived together for centuries in peace, friendship and mutual understanding.

During the meeting, the sides discussed issues of cooperation between the parliaments of Azerbaijan and Israel. They also noted the activity of friendship groups and the importance of mutual visits of members of parliament in the development of relations between the two countries’ legislative bodies.

Opinion by Lara Setrakian

(CNN) — Nothing about Luis Moreno Ocampo’s testimony to the US Congress last week was subtle. The legendary former prosecutor of the International Criminal Court told the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission that there is reasonable basis to believe that a genocide is underway in Nagorno-Karabakh, where an estimated 120,000 Armenians have been deprived of food, fuel and medical supplies for more than eight months.

Nagorno-Karabakh — known as the Republic of Artsakh by local Armenians — a mountaintop region populated by ethnic Armenians, has been officially within the borders of Azerbaijan since the days of the Soviet Union. Local Armenian authorities have vied for independence from Azerbaijan for decades, leading to an ongoing political and military conflict.

Since December, the Lachin Corridor, the main road into the mountaintop enclave, has been blocked by Azeri protesters and government forces, who stopped the normal flow of goods. Since June, the International Committee of the Red Cross has been barred from using the road to bring food to the Armenian population, in what local residents see as a way of forcing them to capitulate to a series of political demands, including a complete surrender of their local autonomy.

This weekend, the two sides had appeared to reach a deal on aid deliveries, but by Monday the agreement had either stalled or broken down. As the political dispute drags on, residents are running out of time. Multiple monitoring groups say there is widespread food scarcity on the ground, with child and adult malnutrition setting in. (On Tuesday, a single Russian Red Cross truck with supplies arrived in Nagorno-Karabakh carrying food, blankets and hygiene supplies, according to the local authority, as reported by Reuters.)

Its precious cargo is sorely needed. In strangling the supply of food, Ocampo said, Azerbaijan’s government has crossed a critical line.

“This is an ongoing genocide. This is happening now,” he told the hearing. “Genocide under Article IIC requires just creating the conditions to destroy a people … blocking the Lachin Corridor with its life systems for the Nagorno-Karabakh people is exactly creating those conditions.” Moreover, he said the US risked being complicit in genocide, should it fail to call out what is happening on the ground and prevent further loss of life.

The US appears to be trying to lift the blockade, though its efforts to date have been limited. Last Sunday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, voicing US concern over what he called “the deteriorating humanitarian situation” facing Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians. Since December, Blinken has repeatedly called on Aliyev to open the Lachin Corridor to humanitarian, commercial and passenger traffic.

The International Court of Justice said the same in February, ruling that Azerbaijan “shall ensure uninterrupted free movement of all persons, vehicles, and cargo.”

Azerbaijan insists it is not doing anything wrong. As an exercise of sovereign control over its territory, Azeri officials say that the checkpoints and restrictions it has put in place are an element of national security. It accused the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) of smuggling contraband goods through their aid deliveries and others of bringing in weapons to Nagorno-Karabakh. The ICRC said no unauthorized material had moved through any of its vehicles to Nagorno-Karabakh.

Azerbaijan also claims that Armenia continues to have a military presence in the Nagorno-Karabakh. In a statement to CNN, a spokesman of Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that his government “rejects in the strongest terms any contention that it is committing or intends to commit ‘genocide.’”

In June — six months after the blockade began — Baku offered to bring in supplies through another road from the city of Aghdam, under the control of the Azeri government. But the US and EU have said it is no substitute for reopening the Lachin Corridor, which was meant to remain open as part of a ceasefire deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan in November 2020.

Armenians are also wary of becoming reliant on aid from Azeri authorities who have reportedly cut food, electricity, gas and internet to the population at various points since the start of the blockade. (Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the source of the power and internet cuts.)

A multi-decade cycle of painful loss

Perhaps surprisingly, Armenia and Azerbaijan were well into a round of peace talks when the blockade began. As it has dragged on, the deprivation and now starvation of Armenians living in Nagorno-Karabakh have left an overtone of bitterness and distrust that is dampening the peace process. Armenians say Azerbaijan is strangling the population into submitting to oppressive demands. Azerbaijan says Armenians have been supporting criminal separatists trying to break away from the central state.

Nagorno-Karabakh, which had been an autonomous region run by Armenian authorities during the Soviet Union, has pursued its independence for decades. It falls officially within the borders of Azerbaijan, but has fought multiple wars to avoid integration with the country, fearful of its history of bloody massacres and cultural extinction of Armenians from different parts of its territory.

In one example captured in satellite photos from the region of Nakhichevan, Azeri authorities apparently demolished thousands of Armenian Christian monuments, known as khachkars, with an assessment showing the use of heavy machinery to raze the ground. (Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev denied having destroyed the site, saying the claims were “a lie and a provocation,” according to the Institute for War and Peace Reporting.)

Azerbaijanis themselves suffered mass displacement when Armenians won the First Karabakh War in 1994, claiming that scores of homes and mosques were ruined in the process.

Those episodes have left scars on all sides. Now Azerbaijan has the upper hand and conditions on the ground are deteriorating, with 30,000 children there potentially facing malnutrition and many more potentially dying of basic illness.

What comes next: 3 ways to turn around disaster

There is still time for a turnaround. There are at least three things that can be done to save lives and end a multi-decade cycle of painful loss. They would also renew the chance for an effective peace process.

First, food and medicine urgently need to reach the population in Nagorno-Karabakh. Civilians shouldn’t be held hostage to political and geopolitical contests for power. That is a basic principle of international humanitarian law. There needs to be humanitarian airlift, by plane or cargo drone, potentially with UN authorization of cross-border aid deliveries, as we have seen in Syria, Sarajevo and Darfur.

The fastest path would be for Azerbaijan to restore movement along the Lachin Corridor, letting in aid from the ICRC. If they are concerned about arms or other material seeping in, those concerns can be easily addressed. In addition to the ICRC already saying it undergoes customs clearance, international partners have offered to put incoming cargo through scanners to prevent weapons smuggling.

If the blockade isn’t lifted it will be time for a humanitarian intervention. Already, aid groups say fresh food is nearly impossible to find and bread lines last for hours, with food often running out. If the situation continues to devolve it will soon be too late to act, as people begin dying in large numbers because of a bitter political impasse.

If instead of feeding the ethnic Armenian population, they are offered an evacuation from Nagorno-Karabakh — Azerbaijan has already offered them a one-way ticket out — then it will constitute ethnic cleansing of the region. Like genocide, ethnic cleansing comes in more than one form; It can happen by removing people from their homes by making life practically unlivable. Thousands of people who otherwise had no intention of leaving their homes in Nagorno-Karabakh will flee out of desperation for food and sustenance.

Second, if President Aliyev is true to his word as a leader who champions tolerance and ethnic-religious harmony, he should treat the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh with dignity and a spirit of reconciliation. Rather than threaten Armenians with starvation, which poisons the well of co-existence, he should let aid move unimpeded into Nagorno-Karabakh.

He should also drop all state-sponsored hate speech and inflammatory rhetoric, which has included grotesque caricatures of Armenians in a controversial government-backed museum celebrating Azerbaijan’s victory in 2020. With leadership from the top, Aliyev and his government can create true space for interfaith and interethnic dialogue, including a pledge to maintain ancient Armenian churches and monasteries in Nagorno-Karabakh without the risk of desecration or destruction, which they have faced in the past.

Third, on the understanding that no one wants to see a new interstate war, the US, EU and Russia should put pressure on Azerbaijan’s main allies, Turkey and Israel, to discourage a military escalation in the region. Turkish and Israeli weapon supplies, as well as direct training, are vital to Azerbaijan’s military capacity. Those countries should be asked to help stabilize the situation, avoiding the threat of force or its actual use, particularly on a civilian population weakened by hunger.

There are many things that both Armenia and Azerbaijan can do to smooth the path toward peace. But in this crisis it must start with these urgent steps. What the final political outcome should be is not yet clear, but an imposed blockade and the starvation of civilians is no way to get to a good one.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2023 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

The 5th Consultative Meeting of the Heads of State of Central
Asia has kicked off in Dushanbe.

President of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev is
attending the meeting as the guest of honor.

President of Tajikistan Emomali Rahmon welcomed President of
Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev and other heads of state.

Then, a family photo was taken.

X X X

The initiative of holding consultative meetings of the Heads of
State of Central Asia was put forward by President of Uzbekistan
Shavkat Mirziyoyev in 2017. The first meeting was held in
Kazakhstan, the second in Uzbekistan, the third in Turkmenistan,
and the fourth in Kyrgyzstan.

—

Follow us on Twitter @AzerNewsAz

President of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev has
congratulated the Jewish community of Azerbaijan on the New Year –
Rosh Hashanah.

The letter reads:

Esteemed Mr. President,

On my own behalf and on behalf of the people of Azerbaijan, I am
happy to extend my cordial congratulations and sincerest wishes to
you and through you to the friendly people of Israel on the
occasion of the upcoming Jewish New Year – Rosh Hashana.

I wish that this bright holiday, which brings a new spirit to
people and gives new hopes for the future, brings you and your
family, your friendly people and your country good days, peace,
prosperity, abundance and blessings.

I am sure that we will continue to make joint efforts to further
strengthen and expand Azerbaijan-Israel friendship and cooperation
in line with the will of our peoples, who always cherish their
national and moral values.

Sincerely,

Ilham Aliyev

President of the Republic of Azerbaijan

Baku, 12 September 2023

—

Follow us on Twitter @AzerNewsAz

The Assistant to the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan
Hikmat Hajiyev, shared a post on his X (former twitter) page in response to the
pro-Armenian senator of the US Congress Bob Menendez’s biased
speech against Azerbaijan in the senate. The Azerbaijani official
said that the senator, who unilaterally serves the Armenians, lied
before the Foreign Relations Committee about the Armenian minority
in Garabagh and shared fake photos, Azernews reports.

“Instead of answering serious corruption allegations,
congressman Menendez lies to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
with false information and fake pictures. The person presented in
the picture died of cancer. Armenians themselves are ashamed to use
this naked lie any longer after provided substantial
criminal-medical evidence. This kind of lobbyism, ‘moneytalkism,’
sheer lie and racist hate against Azerbaijanis and others undermine
the image and global reputation of the United States Congress.
Shameful!”

Instead of answering serious corruption
allegations, congressman Menendez lies to the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee @SFRCdems
with false information and fake pictures. The person presented in
the picture died of cancer. Armenians themselves are ashamed to use
this naked lie… https://t.co/c2R18szRJr

— Hikmet Hajiyev (@HikmetHajiyev)
September 13, 2023

Pro-Armenian Bob Menendez, who was accused of corruption in
2015, tried to present a picture of an Armenian resident of
Garabagh, who died of cancer, as if he died of hunger.

Bob Menendez repeatedly made biased statements against
Azerbaijan in the US Congress. Menendez’s aggressive speech in the
senate stems from his extreme hatred for Azerbaijan and his
Turkophobic sentiment. It seems that Bob Menendez could not digest
the recent successful political steps taken by the Azerbaijani
leadership in exposing the Armenian provocations, and for this
reason, he vomited his hatred in front of the congress tribune with
all his might.

—

Follow us on Twitter @AzerNewsAz

Until June 2023, Russian President Vladimir Putin was apparently quite confident in his power and the lack of any true challenge to it. Anti-Putin activists were successfully squeezed out of the country, the most vociferous were imprisoned or killed. The more measured dissatisfied voices largely stayed silent. The Russian elites were seemingly willing to endure the president’s exhaustive foreign policy agenda, consistently supporting him in the public sphere (The Moscow Times, June 8).

However, Yevgeny Prigozhin’s “march for justice” broke that coerced calm. It turned out that several thousand armed men could move freely throughout Russia, take control of critical military facilities and major cities, as well as fire on the military aircraft that tried to stop them. Most importantly, none of Putin’s most ardent supporters came out to meet Prigozhin and defend Moscow with their forces. Some supporters allegedly even tried to flee from danger (Current Time TV, June 24; Vesma, June 27).

The Wagner Group’s mutiny shone a light on Putin’s weak side, demonstrating that it is possible to pressure the Russian president when possessing adequate resources. Thus, his image as a “strong leader” was irreparably damaged. At first, he characterized the march on Moscow as “treasonous” and a “betrayal,” promising to crush the “mutineers”; by the end of the day, his aggressive stance had all but evaporated. In this, the lasting damage to Putin’s image should be emphasized, as even the destruction of Prigozhin’s private jet cannot erase from memory how weakly and inadequately the Kremlin leader behaved on June 24 (Vazhnie Istorii; Meduza, June 24). It is unlikely that the Russian elites have forgotten that, in stopping the Wagnerites, Belarusian President Alyaksandr Lukashenka had to be involved.

As a result, Putin is now undoubtedly more suspicious of his entourage than he was when seeking to tighten his inner circle earlier this year, which has affected his approach to foreign policy (see EDM, April 10). The Russian president did not attend the BRICS summit in South Africa in person due to security concerns. He also abandoned the idea of attending the G20 summit in India in person. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was designated to replace Putin as Russia’s head of state at both events (Lenta.ru, July 19, TASS, August 25)

Summits often involve face-to-face communication between heads of state who determine the main areas of their interaction. If the head of state is unable to participate, it is logical to replace them with the next most senior person. However, in the Russian sense, the next most senior official is not Lavrov, but rather Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin.

Mishustin is often considered a possible compromise figure for a post-Putin Russia (24TV, October 20, 2022). He is an experienced administrator who has dealt primarily with economic issues. As such, Mishustin is one of the most informed Russian officials in regard to the true state of the domestic economy. At the same time, he is not a member of the siloviki clans, and he does not seem to share the extreme anti-Western views widely shared within Russia’s security services (Current Time TV, November 11, 2022). Thus, it is logical to assume that, once in power, Mishustin would be more likely to offer Ukraine and the West negotiations for a peaceful settlement of the war than other potential successors.

According to the Russian Constitution, it is the head of government who assumes the duties of the president in the case of the latter’s incapacity (Constitution.ru, accessed September 5). This was the case, for example, after the resignation of President Boris Yeltsin, when then–Prime Minister Putin acted as head of state until the presidential elections in the spring of 2000.

Prior to Prigozhin’s rebellion, Mishustin regularly traveled abroad. For example, in May 2023, he visited Beijing where he was received by Chinese President Xi Jinping (Government.ru, May 24). However, after the events of June 24, the prime minister’s foreign activities sharply decreased. He did not attend the BRICS summit, though, as the individual in charge of the economy, he would have been most effective in discussing all the issues on the agenda, including various economic integration projects. He will also not replace Putin at the G20 summit, where the state of the global economy is set to be the primary subject of discussion.

This suggests that, following the attempted coup, Putin has become wary of any contact between Mishustin and the leaders of other states, especially China and India. Both Beijing and New Delhi are important partners for Moscow, but they are increasingly concerned about Putin’s adventurous and unpredictable foreign policy. Within these circumstances, it is natural for a suspicious, aging dictator to fear that a younger, far less odious leader could negotiate more effectively in exchange for “some adjustment” in the Kremlin’s policies.

These considerations can be applied to the same extent to another potential “successor”—namely, Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin. Overall, Sobyanin might carry even more weight within the Kremlin “power vertical” than Mishustin, having formerly served as the governor of Tyumen region, head of the Presidential Administration and head of the Government Staff (Mos.ru, accessed September 5). Nevertheless, as mayor, his foreign contacts are more effectively and legally restricted.

Lavrov, unlike Mishustin and Sobyanin, does not possess such administrative and political weight. Nor is he an independent player. For two decades in office, he has proven himself to be Putin’s faithful weathercock, incapable of defending his own opinions, much less pursuing his own ambitions. Therefore, it is safe to say that Putin does not feel especially threatened by Lavrov.

Overall, it seems that Mishustin may represent the greatest direct threat to Putin. If this is indeed true, that likely means the Russian premier will no longer serve as the head of the Russian delegation at major international events, though he will likely be able to maintain his contacts in the Commonwealth of Independent States and Collective Security Treaty Organization. It will also give credence to speculation that tensions are growing within the Russian elites due to the failing war and have been further aggravated by Prigozhin’s mutiny and subsequent demise. And Putin’s increasing suspicions may lead him to commit more mistakes that could further exacerbate this tenuous situation.