Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

[HyeSocialist]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

what's still lacking is ability to see their formations deep inside, especially during the night time. UAV's can only see much before being gunned down. Their surprise attack in april last year could have been handled much better imho.

The April war, conflicts in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Donetsk have shown us a few things:
1. How air forces are losing favor to powerful SAMs and Balistic missiles (further reason to retire our air fleet and invest in ballistic missiles and SAMs)
2. How drones are replacing fighter aircraft in terms of recon and Attack.
3. The importance of investing in jammers and EW systems.
4. The importance of Artillry! If I could replace half the tanks in Armenia with artillery I would. 80% of casualties in Donetsk were due to artillery.
5. The importance of internal stability, aka equality and transparency at home. Nothing can cause greater harm than internal disintergration aka Syria.

[DieHard69]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

The April war, conflicts in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Donetsk have shown us a few things:
1. How air forces are losing favor to powerful SAMs and Balistic missiles (further reason to retire our air fleet and invest in ballistic missiles and SAMs)
2. How drones are replacing fighter aircraft in terms of recon and Attack.
3. The importance of investing in jammers and EW systems.
4. The importance of Artillry! If I could replace half the tanks in Armenia with artillery I would. 80% of casualties in Donetsk were due to artillery.
5. The importance of internal stability, aka equality and transparency at home. Nothing can cause greater harm than internal disintergration aka Syria.

I agree, but our tanks should not be abandoned yet, the ATGM's should be further invested and our N2's should as well, I remember how one of our guys customized a T-72A for a cheaper price yet, incredibly effective in combat, another thing we should do is what Syria did with there tanks, made them more ATGM resilient, we should do that to all of our armored vehicles and tanks, they are much cheaper to build and will greatly help us in the long run.

[ASALA2116]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

Tanks are useless unless you do something to counter ATGM strikes. Syria has honestly opened my eyes. The terrorists are blowing T72 tanks on a daily basis. MSTA SM howitzers should be our next buys. We hardly got howitzer fire power. Very important.

[HyeSocialist]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

I agree, but our tanks should not be abandoned yet, the ATGM's should be further invested and our N2's should as well, I remember how one of our guys customized a T-72A for a cheaper price yet, incredibly effective in combat, another thing we should do is what Syria did with there tanks, made them more ATGM resilient, we should do that to all of our armored vehicles and tanks, they are much cheaper to build and will greatly help us in the long run.

Tanks like that are good to have. A hit and run tactic needs to be used instead of being exposed in valleys. Using them as armored atgm carriers that happen to have a big gun is better than relying on the main gun.

It's important to note that ATGMs are good for canceling out the effectiveness of armors advance on the battlefield. ATGMs do not "replace" tanks as they do not provide you the ability to advance on the battlefield. You need combined arms movement, with artillery and infantry simultaneously moving together.

This is where armor vehicles come into play. You need them in order to move troops forward. A combination of mortars, artillery can shield advancements of infantry in APCs and increasingly important IFVs.

[burjuin]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

Արցախ. առաջնագծի զինվորները

[armnuke]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

I agree, but our tanks should not be abandoned yet, the ATGM's should be further invested and our N2's should as well, I remember how one of our guys customized a T-72A for a cheaper price yet, incredibly effective in combat, another thing we should do is what Syria did with there tanks, made them more ATGM resilient, we should do that to all of our armored vehicles and tanks, they are much cheaper to build and will greatly help us in the long run.

The only real trained tankers in Syria are those of the Republican Guard who are operating in Hay Jobar and Qaboun areas in Damascus.
The rest are all sorts of soldiers driving and commanding tanks, thus the tactics they use makes the tank more vulnerable.

[armnuke]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

what's still lacking is ability to see their formations deep inside, especially during the night time. UAV's can only see much before being gunned down. Their surprise attack in april last year could have been handled much better imho.

In April our surveillance was lacking big time.
Now we have some C4ISR system.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/nagorno-karabakh-ready-another-war-17959

[DieHard69]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

Tanks like that are good to have. A hit and run tactic needs to be used instead of being exposed in valleys. Using them as armored atgm carriers that happen to have a big gun is better than relying on the main gun.

It's important to note that ATGMs are good for canceling out the effectiveness of armors advance on the battlefield. ATGMs do not "replace" tanks as they do not provide you the ability to advance on the battlefield. You need combined arms movement, with artillery and infantry simultaneously moving together.

This is where armor vehicles come into play. You need them in order to move troops forward. A combination of mortars, artillery can shield advancements of infantry in APCs and increasingly important IFVs.

That is a excellent point but we still need more ATGM resilient tanks if we need to use a hit and run tactic, what happens if the ATGM's were Missile locked? then our hit and run tactic will be problematic.

[HyeSocialist]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

That is a excellent point but we still need more ATGM resilient tanks if we need to use a hit and run tactic, what happens if the ATGM's were Missile locked? then our hit and run tactic will be problematic.

Not disagreeing with you at all, yekhpayr! We need those armor plates!

[Haykakan]

Re: Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

Trump, Iran, Karabakh and Armenian lobby
April 18, 2017 10:41
6189 views


Areg Galstyan
Many high-ranking politicians and experts, who are close to the Kremlin, were confident that the victory of Republican Donald Trump would alter the nature of the US-Russian relations. According to Moscow, the new US President's foreign policy would be focused exclusively on resolving internal political problems as well as on paying much attention to the Chinese direction. Thus, following that logic, America would have to weaken its positions in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. Moreover, Russian experts actively promoted the thesis on the inevitability of the conflict between Washington and Brussels, which would lead to a split in NATO. Leading governmental media praised Trump, presenting him as a future partner in international affairs.

However, the latest developments in Syria, coupled with the consistent position of the new administration on the Ukrainian issue, have led to another round of tension between the countries. The crisis of the US-Russian political dialogue cannot but worry the Armenian public, as Washington and Moscow, along with official Paris, are the permanent Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group on the settlement of the Karabakh-Azerbaijani conflict. At the state level, Russia and the United States declare their commitment to the peaceful settlement of the conflict by political and diplomatic means. Indeed, the contacts of the Kremlin and the White House on this issue have remained stable, despite sharp deterioration in bilateral relations after the Ukrainian Maidan.

However, speaking about preserving general diplomatic tone, it is important not to overlook many objective and subjective factors. Thus, the administration of Democrat Barack Obama did not perceive Azerbaijan as a serious partner. What were the reasons for that? Firstly, an agreement was signed with Iran, which led to a sharp drop in geopolitical and geoenergetic importance of Azerbaijan in the Greater Middle East. Let's not forget that it was the Iranian problem, together with energetic attractiveness, that turned Azerbaijan into an important partner for America during the presidency of George W. Bush. Secondly, the White House did not hide its discontent with the fact that the political leadership in Baku systematically violated (and still does) human rights and pursued its political opponents. It is also noteworthy that Obama's attitude to the Turkish regime of Erdogan - the main ally and lobbyist of Azerbaijani interests - was similar. These objective contradictions resulted in the fact that Washington's political favor was on the Armenian side.

Yet, Obama's administration stayed in the past. Does this mean that there will be dramatic changes in the US policy in the Karabakh direction? Traditionally, Republicans are distinguished by a more rigid and consistent foreign policy philosophy, which is based on protection and preservation of America's global leadership. Bad news for Armenia and the NKR is the fact that Iran is really of great interest to the current administration. This means that the White House will strive to strengthen its relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey.x Ankara and Israeli authorities by the means of their influential lobbyists in Washington will try to convince Trump to involve Baku in resolving the Iranian issue. Last time such lobbying activity led to "freezing" Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act by Republican Bush Jr. That Section actually prohibited any possible assistance from America to Azerbaijan. Thus, there is no doubt that different political forces and lobby groups will make attempts to actualize the Azerbaijani factor.

Many key members of Trump's administration are in favor of urgent solving the Iranian problem. Thus, the Secretary of Defense James Mattis and the Director of CIA Mike Pompeo are convinced that the USA should use every opportunity to put maximum pressure on Tehran. Washington already has some experience of using Azerbaijan as an intelligence bridgehead. Probably, in case an appropriate political decision is made, Americans will plan to strengthen their presence in that country. The Secretary of State Rex Tillerson - the former head of Exxon Mobil Corporation - has extensive connections with representatives of Azerbaijani political elites. However, his position is very vulnerable due to an extremely high grade of responsibility for a particular foreign policy decision. In addition, after the scandalous resignation of Michael Flynn, it is unlikely that Tillerson will risk his position in the White House and use his lobbyist connections for political purposes.

The National Security Advisor Herbert McMaster and Reince Priebus - the White House Сhief of Staff - will be balancing the position of Mattis and Pompeo. McMaster is characterized as a cold- blooded professional that knows the price of political miscalculations. He has enough authority and influence to oppose the decisions of such experienced hawks as Mattis and Pompeo. Priebus, being an ethnic Greek and an active member of various pro-Greek lobby groups, is unlikely to passively watch the actions of pro-Turkish and pro-Azerbaijani groups of influence.

In the second echelon, there are also some politicians, experts and diplomats that know the peculiarities of the Karabakh-Azerbaijani conflict. Thus, Fiona Hill, an expert from the Brookings Institution, was appointed presidential Advisor on Russia and Europe. Hill published a lot of materials that covered political processes in the Transcaucasus. Despite the fact that she has a reputation of a critic of Russian politics, Fiona Hill is aware of existing realities in the region that can lead to a large-scale conflict with unpredictable consequences. In this regard, she repeatedly urged the White House to be cautious in its relations with Baku, which is actively expanding its military-technical capabilities.

Within the framework of the State Department, the Eurasian Affairs will be supervised by John Heffern, the former US ambassador to Armenia. Heffern was appointed to the post of Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary on European and Eurasian Affairs after Victoria Nuland. If he retains his position and is finally confirmed as an Advisor, Tillerson will get one of the most informed diplomats that is aware of details about the Karabakh-Azerbaijani conflict.

It is also important to understand which think tanks will play a key role in making political decisions. As a rule, Republican administrations use the services of such centers as the «Heritage Foundation», «Manhattan Institute for Policy Research», «Lexington Institute», «Hudson Institute» and «American Enterprise Institute». Under Trump both the «Atlantic Council» and "Brookings" will get ample opportunities. The president of the «Atlantic Council» was appointed the US ambassador to Russia while the "Brookings" has its own lobbyist in the White House - Fiona Hill. The abovementioned centers and institutions have different positions on the Karabakh -Azerbaijani conflict. Some experts are sympathetic to Armenia, others to Azerbaijan. However, most of them are neutral. Proceeding from this, the Armenian side should lobby its agenda and intensify its contacts with leading conservative centers.

Another important political instance is Congress. Democrats that failed to take the White House and Congress in November 2016 united in the struggle against the Republicans and the administration of President Trump. In an effort to take revenge on the forthcoming elections for Congress in 2018, "donkeys" will fight for preserving their foreign policy heritage. One of the main achievements of Democrats was the agreement with Iran. Undoubtedly, leaders of the Democratic Party will mobilize all resources to prevent cancellation of the signed agreement and new package of sanctions against Tehran. Meantime, that confrontation on the Iranian issue in Congress serves the interests of Armenia and the NKR, since the uncertainty of American policy in the Iranian direction detracts from the prospect of rapprochement between Washington and Baku.

Consequently, the Armenian lobby, which is mainly focused on the Democratic Party, should be interested in blocking any initiatives against Iran. In addition, the Armenian Diaspora should: a) initiate a large-scale process of political discussions to recognize the independence of the NKR at the level of individual states; b) launch a broad campaign to restore Section 907 to the Freedom Support Act; c) obtain increased external appropriations for Armenia and the NKR from the US Congress; d) form a lobbying coalition with other ethnolobbying influence groups (Greeks, Irish, Italians, Poles) to fight pro-Turkish and pro-Azerbaijani forces. To date, the Armenian Caucus includes many influential legislators: Paul Ryan - the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Charles Schumer - the leader of the Democratic Party in Senate, Edward Royce - the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs in the lower chamber, Adam Schiff - the head of the Democratic faction on the Committee on Intelligence, and others.

In general, these serious internal contradictions in the administration of the White House and Congress allow us to hope that America will maintain a balanced policy in the South Caucasus in the nearest future. This will be done to prevent excessive strengthening of any of the regional players. As it was mentioned above, much will depend on what a fundamental political decision will be made on Iran.

Areg Galstyan - PhD, regular contributor to The National Interest, Forbes, The Hill and The American Thinker. These views are his own.
- See more at: http://www.mediamax.am/en/column/127....MHs5Bbho.dpuf