Nagorno-Karabagh: Military Balance Between Armenia & Azerbaijan

[Eddo211]

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

Wow, are azeries really that blind?
They take a donkey with a torch as
a laser machine?
Wow such crazy imaginations these
baboons have :]

This is further proof of this ingenious mind of an Armenian to come up with such setup………….at the right time and at the right place.

I never forget when flour powder was dumped off from helicopters over Azeri positions causing a stampede.
Never knew Baboons can run that fast.

[KarotheGreat]

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

NATO Hints At Fastrack for Azerbaijan’s Membership

BRUSSELS (EurasiaNet)–A senior source within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s Joint Force Command has told EurasiaNet that Azerbaijan stands a better chance of gaining NATO membership in the near future than either Georgia or Ukraine.

“Earlier, the perception in both Brussels [North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO] headquarters] and Baku was that Georgia should integrate into NATO first and Azerbaijan should follow,” the source said. “However, the situation has changed and it might be that in the year to come Azerbaijan will become the frontrunner. Baku may enter NATO earlier than Ukraine and Georgia.”

After Georgia’s 2008 war with Russia, “[m]any NATO member-states believe that…it is simply impossible to provide membership to Georgia,” the source continued.

Ukraine’s domestic divisions over NATO and political turmoil have reduced its membership chances, he said. “It is unclear who will represent the Ukrainian government in six months or a year and what its position on NATO membership will be.”

By comparison, Azerbaijan appears a bastion of stability. Among its other “strong advantages” are the country’s “strong cultural links” with NATO member Turkey and its strategic importance for the planned Nabucco and TGI (Turkey-Greece-Italy) gas pipelines, projects which “will deepen Western support [for] Azerbaijan in the coming years,” according to the source.

If Azerbaijan opted to petition for NATO accession, “no one could stop it,” he continued. “And if NATO will decide to accept Azerbaijan, Russia would hardly be able to hold it back.” The source did not state whether or not there are active consultations underway with Baku on membership.

A NATO diplomatic source, who did not want to be named, said some key officials at NATO headquarters in Brussels were pushing hard for engaging Azerbaijan on the membership question. “Turkey, Romania, Italy, Poland, [the] UK and [the] Baltic states,” are among the member-states also backing a fast track for Azerbaijan’s NATO membership, the diplomatic source said.

A senior source within the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry confirmed the information, but added that not everyone in Brussels is enthusiastic about the idea of Baku’s membership in the alliance. “There are many opinions there,” the Azerbaijani government source said, referring to opinion in Brussels.

One potential accession weak spot is democratization in Azerbaijan. Baku has faced mounting international criticism for the recent lifting of term limits on President Ilham Aliyev. According to the Joint Forces Command source, however, the country’s political stability and strong government could make the accession process “smoother.”

Unlike Georgia and Ukraine, Azerbaijan, long careful about balancing its ties with both the West and Russia, has never openly expressed an aspiration to join NATO. Baku’s relations with the alliance are at the second stage of IPAP [Individual Partnership Action Plan], which supposes ongoing military and other reforms in compliance with NATO standards. By contrast, Georgia and Ukraine are at the “Intensified Dialogue” stage, ordinarily the last step before a Membership Action Plan and, eventually, a formal membership invitation.

A spokesperson for the Azerbaijani Ministry of Foreign Affairs declined to comment about Azerbaijan’s relations with NATO, referring a EurasiaNet correspondent instead to Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov’s remarks on the topic last month.

At a May 5 NATO-Azerbaijan conference in Baku, Azimov stated that, although he did not rule out Azerbaijan’s eventual accession to the alliance, “NATO membership is not a universal panacea. The example of Georgia showed that appropriate conditions must emerge for it.”

“Appropriate conditions” could be interpreted as shorthand for Moscow’s reaction. Amid recent talk of a potential breakthrough in its 21-year struggle with Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan has worked dexterously to massage the Kremlin’s ego — particularly on security issues.

At a May 30 meeting of the Intergovernmental Commission on Azerbaijani-Russian Cooperation, Azerbaijani First Deputy Prime Minister Yagub Eyubov expressed interest in expanding the two countries’ defense industry ties, the Turan news agency reported. In this game, energy also plays a role. Similar emphasis has been put on negotiations with Russian energy giant Gazprom about Azerbaijani gas sales, and on an agreement to increase gas deliveries to Russia by 80 percent in 2009.

At the same time, Baku has made clear its interest in closer ties with NATO. In late May, the government officially approved the transit of non-military NATO cargo to Afghanistan, and the parliament voted in March to double the number of Azerbaijani peacekeepers serving in Afghanistan to 184. A month later, President Aliyev told NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer that further troop increases could be possible.

In May, Baku also hosted two large conferences on partnership with NATO, marking the 15th anniversary of Azerbaijan’s cooperation with the Alliance. The month before, it hosted NATO military exercises, and took part in broader, month-long exercises in Georgia that ended on June 3.

One Baku-based political analyst, however, does not believe that these actions signal a change in Azerbaijan’s official go-slow policy on NATO. “The Karabakh conflict is the most important problem for Azerbaijan. It is clear that Azerbaijan’s NATO aspirations would make Russia an open ally of Armenia in the Karabakh conflict,” noted Elhan Shahinoglu. “Therefore, Aliyev’s government is likely to continue its balanced foreign policy until the time when and if it receives clear support from NATO members on the Karabakh issue.”

The NATO Joint Forces Command source conceded that Azerbaijan’s further integration with the alliance “would make the military alliance between Armenia and Russia even stronger,” but did not elaborate. Azerbaijan’s likely problems with Iran on the topic are also understood, he added.

Some NATO member-states have already publicly declared their interest in Azerbaijan joining the alliance — albeit, on condition that “[d]emocracy and human rights..and a strong and free economy” are established, according to Romanian Ambassador to Azerbaijan Nikolae Ureke, speaking at a May 12 NATO conference in Baku.

In the end, the case for Azerbaijan comes down to geography and energy. Said Ambassador Ureke: “Azerbaijan is NATO’s strategic point in the South Caucasus.”

[jgk3]

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

I wonder how much better NATO will militarize now through Georgia and Azerbaijan (which they are most surely doing as they are very keen on holding control in South Caucasus and using Baku as an airbase for operations in Central Asia), now that they've had time to reflect on how August 2008 played out. If the conflict becomes too big, Armenia (Artsakh especially) will most surely get sucked into it.

[KarotheGreat]

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

I wonder how much better NATO will militarize now through Georgia and Azerbaijan (which they are most surely doing as they are very keen on holding control in South Caucasus and using Baku as an airbase for operations in Central Asia), now that they've had time to reflect on how August 2008 played out. If the conflict becomes too big, Armenia (Artsakh especially) will most surely get sucked into it.

I think we should be expecting to hearing that we are getting new and cheap weapons from the Russians.

[Icy]

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

Wait so if Azerbaijan gets into NATO, we lose Artsakh?
Or what happens if Azerbaijan gets into NATO?

[hipeter924]

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

Wait so if Azerbaijan gets into NATO, we lose Artsakh?
Or what happens if Azerbaijan gets into NATO?

The EU will never get into armed conflict with Russia, they have their gas supply if not economic relationship with Russia to protect. You can be sure if Azerbaijan tried to use Nato against Armenia, the EU would refuse to go. Azerbaijan would be forced to back down. If it tried to use Nato to protect itself, after sufficient statements from Russia, the EU would refuse to go too. It will be a mixed blessing for the Azeri's really. It might even be positive as it will be forced by Nato to limit some of its military activity in the region.

[Icy]

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

That sounds good

[ninetoyadome]

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

CSTO SECRETARY GENERAL SAYS IN CASE OF AGGRESSION TOWARDS ARMENIA ORGANIZATION WILL HELP ITS PARTNER

The Collective Rapid Reaction Forces (CRRF) of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) are missioned at localizing military and border conflicts, averting acts of terrorism and distribution of drugs. And in case of applying aggression or territorial integrity infringements towards the CSTO member countries military activities will be started, Nikolai Bordyuzha, the secretary general of the CSTO told to Russian Kommersant.

To the question what type of conflicts are under the forces’ authorization, the secretary general said that it depends on the scope of conflict. “The Collective Rapid Reaction Forces are to solve not so big military clashes. If we speak about serious territorial integrities to be under threat, then we have Russian-Armenian and Russian- Byelorussian groups,” the secretary-general said.

The secretary-general talked about the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict also. To the reporter’s question if military activities start to reach the resolution of the NKR conflict, the CRRF would be sent to help Armenia, which is a CSTO country, Mr. Bordyuzha answered that military activities would not be used as the conflict of South Ossetia proved that such problems should not be solved out through weapons.

The reporter anyway tries to paraphrase the question, asking if A country, which is CSTO member, and B country, which is not CSTO member, start military oriented conflict, whether CRRF would be engaged to help the CSTO member. “If such conflict is raised then not only CRRF but the CSTO will be engaged to help its member country,” Bordyuzha said.

http://www.panorama.am/en/politics/2009/06/06/odkb/

[KarotheGreat]

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

CSTO SECRETARY GENERAL SAYS IN CASE OF AGGRESSION TOWARDS ARMENIA ORGANIZATION WILL HELP ITS PARTNER

The Collective Rapid Reaction Forces (CRRF) of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) are missioned at localizing military and border conflicts, averting acts of terrorism and distribution of drugs. And in case of applying aggression or territorial integrity infringements towards the CSTO member countries military activities will be started, Nikolai Bordyuzha, the secretary general of the CSTO told to Russian Kommersant.

To the question what type of conflicts are under the forces’ authorization, the secretary general said that it depends on the scope of conflict. “The Collective Rapid Reaction Forces are to solve not so big military clashes. If we speak about serious territorial integrities to be under threat, then we have Russian-Armenian and Russian- Byelorussian groups,” the secretary-general said.

The secretary-general talked about the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict also. To the reporter’s question if military activities start to reach the resolution of the NKR conflict, the CRRF would be sent to help Armenia, which is a CSTO country, Mr. Bordyuzha answered that military activities would not be used as the conflict of South Ossetia proved that such problems should not be solved out through weapons.

The reporter anyway tries to paraphrase the question, asking if A country, which is CSTO member, and B country, which is not CSTO member, start military oriented conflict, whether CRRF would be engaged to help the CSTO member. “If such conflict is raised then not only CRRF but the CSTO will be engaged to help its member country,” Bordyuzha said.

http://www.panorama.am/en/politics/2009/06/06/odkb/

You know what the xxxxed up part is here that they will only do something when RA is attacked and not before that.

New war over Karabakh will have devastating regional consequences
08.06.2009 21:58 GMT+04:00 Print version Send to mail

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh is far from frozen. Indeed, Nagorno-Karabakh is probably a more dangerous ‘frozen conflict' than those in Moldova and Georgia. Both sides continue to compete in an arms race, making the region the most heavily militarised in Europe. Azerbaijan is currently spending $2 billion (€1.4 bn) on military procurement, which is more than the state budget of Armenia. In both countries, the animosity is very evident, and hate-full propaganda appears each day. Peace remains a distant prospect, with the ‘Minsk Group' talks being held under the aegis of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) producing no visible results, European voice reports. According to the authors of the article, “Another Peace Role for the EU”, a war over Nagorno-Karabakh would have devastating regional consequences. It would destroy the region's fragile stability and undermine and seriously threaten the security of energy supplies from the Caspian to the international markets, including the prospects of the southern gas corridor connecting the EU gas market with Caspian producers. Turkey and Russia might find themselves supporting opposing sides, while Europe and the US would be hard pressed to intervene. The price of a conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh would be extremely high for the European Union, as it has been in the case of Georgia – and so it is surprising how little attention Europe is giving to the conflict.

“The EU needs to integrate itself into the Minsk Group. If Europe is to become the main implementer and guarantor of a peace deal, Europe also needs to be a part of the deal-making process. That means France will have to trade in its seat, and the new EU representative in the Minsk Process would need a clear and strong mandate, with room to negotiate on behalf of the twenty-seven member states. Besides, Europe needs to decide whether it supports Azerbaijan's territorial integrity or not. There will also come a time when Brussels will have to ask the Armenian government to withdraw its troops from the occupied territories, and use leverage – including the threat of suspending talks on a free-trade agreement and an association agreement – if Yerevan refuses. It is impossible, on the one hand, to laud Azerbaijan as an indispensable strategic ally in the quest to improve Europe's energy security while, on the other hand, to fail to support Azerbaijan in its efforts to regain control over its territory. Countless UN resolutions, NATO declarations and Council of Europe positions have reaffirmed Azerbaijan's territorial integrity,” says the article.

The EU's new Eastern Partnership cites as its goal stability, security and prosperity in the Eastern Neighborhood. “Without the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict this will never be achievable and the region will remain a ticking time bomb. Therefore the EU needs to show that it has learned its lesson in Georgia and become an active peacemaker in the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan,” the authors emphasize.

and found this neat article

[ninetoyadome]

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

You know what the xxxxed up part is here that they will only do something when RA is attacked and not before that.

What if they attack Armenian soldiers guarding the border, isnt that like attacking Armenia?

New war over Karabakh will have devastating regional consequences
08.06.2009 21:58 GMT+04:00 Print version Send to mail

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh is far from frozen. Indeed, Nagorno-Karabakh is probably a more dangerous ‘frozen conflict' than those in Moldova and Georgia. Both sides continue to compete in an arms race, making the region the most heavily militarised in Europe. Azerbaijan is currently spending $2 billion (€1.4 bn) on military procurement, which is more than the state budget of Armenia. In both countries, the animosity is very evident, and hate-full propaganda appears each day. Peace remains a distant prospect, with the ‘Minsk Group' talks being held under the aegis of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) producing no visible results, European voice reports. According to the authors of the article, “Another Peace Role for the EU”, a war over Nagorno-Karabakh would have devastating regional consequences. It would destroy the region's fragile stability and undermine and seriously threaten the security of energy supplies from the Caspian to the international markets, including the prospects of the southern gas corridor connecting the EU gas market with Caspian producers. Turkey and Russia might find themselves supporting opposing sides, while Europe and the US would be hard pressed to intervene. The price of a conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh would be extremely high for the European Union, as it has been in the case of Georgia – and so it is surprising how little attention Europe is giving to the conflict.

“The EU needs to integrate itself into the Minsk Group. If Europe is to become the main implementer and guarantor of a peace deal, Europe also needs to be a part of the deal-making process. That means France will have to trade in its seat, and the new EU representative in the Minsk Process would need a clear and strong mandate, with room to negotiate on behalf of the twenty-seven member states. Besides, Europe needs to decide whether it supports Azerbaijan's territorial integrity or not. There will also come a time when Brussels will have to ask the Armenian government to withdraw its troops from the occupied territories, and use leverage – including the threat of suspending talks on a free-trade agreement and an association agreement – if Yerevan refuses. It is impossible, on the one hand, to laud Azerbaijan as an indispensable strategic ally in the quest to improve Europe's energy security while, on the other hand, to fail to support Azerbaijan in its efforts to regain control over its territory. Countless UN resolutions, NATO declarations and Council of Europe positions have reaffirmed Azerbaijan's territorial integrity,” says the article.

The EU's new Eastern Partnership cites as its goal stability, security and prosperity in the Eastern Neighborhood. “Without the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict this will never be achievable and the region will remain a ticking time bomb. Therefore the EU needs to show that it has learned its lesson in Georgia and become an active peacemaker in the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan,” the authors emphasize.

and found this neat article

Like the article says no one is choosing a side, no one is trying to solve this conflict. oh the presidents are going to talk but we dont think there will be a breakthrough. Armenia says there was progress, OSCE says there was progress, azeris say no progress. Europe, OSCE, everyone has to stop azeris from making there threats. they are the reason why the conflict hasnt been resolved.
Also i dont see anti-azeri propaganda in Armenian news, they only print what azeris claim and those are from azeri news sites. the azeris are the ones who use anti-Armenian propaganda in there country. i read the news about how the Armenians are lying, about how the Armenians keep violating the cease fire, they blame Armenia for everything thats wrong with there country. The presidents car got a flat tire, Armenians tried to assassinate aliyev.