Military tensions with Azerbaijan and the possibility of war

[Kharpert]

Recently I was reading a speech delivered by Ilham Aliyev, president of Azerbaijan. In a sort of State of the Union Aliyev pats himself on the back for Azerbaijan's accomplishments for the year 2006. There was one thing in particular, however, that caught my attention:

Great attention is also paid to army building. I stated as early as two years ago that Azerbaijan’s military budget should level the total budget of Armenia. We have managed to achieve the goal: Azerbaijan’s military spending is reaching the total budget of Armenia in 2007, and is expected to exceed it in the years to come.

Now, Aliyev's policy on Karabagh is no secret. It's very clear that he would love to invade Karabagh to claim it for Azerbaijan. The Azeri Youth is also pretty intent on military action.

However, I'm curious to know how realistic this sort of talk is. Is an Azeri invasion imminent? Does the Azeri military really pose a threat for the sovereignty of an Armenian Karabagh? Or are Azeri officials just blowing hot air to rile up their citizens?

[Joseph]

Recently I was reading a speech delivered by Ilham Aliyev, president of Azerbaijan. In a sort of State of the Union Aliyev pats himself on the back for Azerbaijan's accomplishments for the year 2006. There was one thing in particular, however, that caught my attention:



Now, Aliyev's policy on Karabagh is no secret. It's very clear that we would love to invade Karabagh to claim it for Azerbaijan. The Azeri Youth is also pretty intent on military action.

However, I'm curious to know how realistic this sort of talk is. Is an Azeri invasion imminent? Does the Azeri military really pose a threat for the sovereignty of an Armenian Karabagh? Or are Azeri officials just blowing hot air to rile up their citizens?

While remaing vigilant, I don't think the Armenian military is overly concerned or even suprised. Ilham, Abiyev, etc make these statements from time to time, mostly to show their bravado to the Azeri public. Though war may begin someday, if they were serious about an attack, they probably would have done so around 1996/1997.

Here are some facts to consider:

1. The Azeris have been clamoring about the size of their military budget but here is the reality:

a. The level and focus of their military procurement is lacking- they have been buying large amounts of outdated equipment of Soviet era tanks, rocket launchers and artillery (some from the 1950's era) while those in charge of the procurement have been siphoning off the money for their personal use.
b. They act as if Armenia has been sitting around doing nothing when in fact Armenia has been updating it's military as well on an effective basis. Armenia has been receiving the latest Russian technology (the latest versions of the RPG were recently used by Hezbollah quite effectively in Israel as seen this past summer). Some people dismiss the Russians but they do not realize that they still make the best weapons around. In addition, Armenia has some "private benefactors" in both Europe and South America who have purchased a large amount of material over the years. Obviously, this does not show up on the annual military budget.


Other factors to consider:


-The Armenian forces hold the high ground. It would take the Azeris five times the amount of troops to overrun the Armenian positions. Holding the higher ground and figthing a defensive war gives them a tactical advantage.

- The Armenian forces have built excellent defenses. They have a ring of close contact postions/ fortified trenches, behind that a large tank trap/moat which essentially stretches the whole length of their positions, and behind that another ring of defenses that hold the bulk of their forces, and behind that some reserve units. If need be, they would resort to guerilla war at which they proved very adept at in the early stages of the war. You can only imagine the amount of landmines and bobbytraps they have employed in their defenses.


- The forces of Armenia and Artsakh are now mostly integrated and boys from Armenia are sent to Artsakh to train and learn from veterans. They have a high morale and are generally treated and fed well. Bullying is still an issue and a carryover from the Soviet military but is decreasing as time passes. The army has maintained its size and stayed highly mobile.

- As shown in the late stages of 1993 until the present, the Armenians forces have demonstrated that they have a strong anti-air defense. The Azeris and their mercenaries lost many jets, planes, and helicopters during the first war. Not only was the anti-air defense effective, it is also much cheaper than maintaining a large airforce. That being said, they have been purchasing a few of the latest Sukhoi's and MIG's from time to time.

-My cousin, who was studying in Armenia for a year took a trip over to Artsakh this past fall and saw what appeared to be brand new artillery, missle launchers, tanks, and radar equipment all over the place. Normally, the authorities keep these objects out of view of the general public but in this case as he explained, they couldn't be hidden and everyone on the street was talking up the new arrivals very excitedly.

- A very good buddy from college who is now an officer the Marines visited the Azeri lines in 2003 as part of a NATO fact finding mission before his tour of duty in Iraq.He was accompanied by some Polish and Turkish military observers. He didn't get into too much detail but suffice it to say, the Azeri troops he came into contact with were very sickly and ill-equiped. Their lines of defense also looked weak.

Later her had a frank conversation with the Turkish officer and basically the Turks have tried to imporve the Azeri military but to little avail. They still have the same problems as 1993/1994.

They boast about war in Baku but reality is different. During the war, the Azeris hired Afghan and Pakistiani Mujaheddin too fight for them as well as Ukrainian mercenaries. They also sent Lezghins and Talish to die in the front lines. The Azeris don't really have the stomach for war.

I know the Armenians don't want a war either but they are very prepared to defend themselves and like before, would rally around their troops in defense. If they were to invade Azerbaijan, that would be a different matter.

[Kharpert]

Thanks for the response, Joseph. It's a relief to know that Artsakh is relatively secure.

But I've also been wondering about the diplomatic aspect. In the event of conflict, whether small skirmishes or all-out war, who will our neighbors support? Bahrain seems to support Azerbaijan (although it seems that the implications of such support is minimal; I don't know what Bahrain has to offer Azerbaijan). But what would Iran think of the conflict? What would the Arab community think of it? What would Russia or the United States think of it?

[Steph]

Thanks for the response, Joseph. It's a relief to know that Artsakh is relatively secure.

But I've also been wondering about the diplomatic aspect. In the event of conflict, whether small skirmishes or all-out war, who will our neighbors support? Bahrain seems to support Azerbaijan (although it seems that the implications of such support is minimal; I don't know what Bahrain has to offer Azerbaijan). But what would Iran think of the conflict? What would the Arab community think of it? What would Russia or the United States think of it?

I suspect that the diplomatic lines following any outbreak of conflict (God forbid) would be on similar lines to the situation in the early nineties. Georgia would fence sit and close borders to protect their position vis a vis Turkey and the oil/gas pipelines, Iran, whilst the only supporter of Armenia in the region must take into account America's view (regardless of their posturing, they still kowtow to the West) and of course, their large ethnic Azeri population.

Turkey's position is well anticipated by all, one analysis expects some kind of miltary action from/in Turkey during 2007. Potentially a military coup as they could be heading for constitutional breakdown, this would be the worst case scenario.

Should Azerbaijan attack Artsakh, they would receive a very bloody nose which potentially could accelerate the fall of their government.

A recent survey showed that 54% of young Azeris would prefer a miltary solution to the situation in Artsakh. That percentage would plummet if the question was posed on the lines of "Would you be willing to fight against Artsakh in an invasion by Azerbaijan?"


Any assault by Azerbaijan would have to be swift, decisive and gain as much ground as possible. International intervention would halt any conflict and redraw the lines at whichever place they had moved to. Considering Joseph's notes on these, hopefully the defence would stand firm for the necessary time.

Intervention by the West would probably be slow in coming, if at all, both the UK and the US are war-weary, and would probably be driven by Putin's Russia.
Putin's goal is to revive, in some fashion, a Russian Empire, based on historical territories but of an economic nature.

All in all, military action is unlikely and as seems to be the nature of these things, sabre rattling by Muslim leaders seems to be the order of the day.

[Joseph]

Thanks for the response, Joseph. It's a relief to know that Artsakh is relatively secure.

But I've also been wondering about the diplomatic aspect. In the event of conflict, whether small skirmishes or all-out war, who will our neighbors support? Bahrain seems to support Azerbaijan (although it seems that the implications of such support is minimal; I don't know what Bahrain has to offer Azerbaijan). But what would Iran think of the conflict? What would the Arab community think of it? What would Russia or the United States think of it?

I wouldn't be to worried about countries such as Bahrain, Kuwait, Pakistan, etc throwing in their lot with Azerbaijan (which seems to be because of Muslim solidarity). Most of their calls are symbolic. I believe Armenia has been solidifying their relations with Iran, India, Russia, Greece and China as a counterweight in the technology, energy, and military spheres.
Syria is generally neutral regarding the conflict and Lebanon is mostly pro-Armenian. The other Arab states don't really figure into the mix as like I said above give marginal support the Azerbaijan, have their own problems, and are competitive with Azerbaijan in the energy sector.

[Joseph]

I suspect that the diplomatic lines following any outbreak of conflict (God forbid) would be on similar lines to the situation in the early nineties. Georgia would fence sit and close borders to protect their position vis a vis Turkey and the oil/gas pipelines, Iran, whilst the only supporter of Armenia in the region must take into account America's view (regardless of their posturing, they still kowtow to the West) and of course, their large ethnic Azeri population.

Turkey's position is well anticipated by all, one analysis expects some kind of miltary action from/in Turkey during 2007. Potentially a military coup as they could be heading for constitutional breakdown, this would be the worst case scenario.

Should Azerbaijan attack Artsakh, they would receive a very bloody nose which potentially could accelerate the fall of their government.

A recent survey showed that 54% of young Azeris would prefer a miltary solution to the situation in Artsakh. That percentage would plummet if the question was posed on the lines of "Would you be willing to fight against Artsakh in an invasion by Azerbaijan?"


Any assault by Azerbaijan would have to be swift, decisive and gain as much ground as possible. International intervention would halt any conflict and redraw the lines at whichever place they had moved to. Considering Joseph's notes on these, hopefully the defence would stand firm for the necessary time.

Intervention by the West would probably be slow in coming, if at all, both the UK and the US are war-weary, and would probably be driven by Putin's Russia.
Putin's goal is to revive, in some fashion, a Russian Empire, based on historical territories but of an economic nature.

All in all, military action is unlikely and as seems to be the nature of these things, sabre rattling by Muslim leaders seems to be the order of the day.

Steph, your analysis is spot on.

The real wildcards are Turkey and Georgia.

If the Nationalists take over in Turkey (which they most likely will) in the next elections, I forsee Turkey getting involved in an expanded capacity... if the conflict were to become hot again. Although it seems trite to mention Russia, it is still a factor that worries the Turks as it should.

The Russians had their noses bloodied in Chechnya (much like the US in Iraq/ low intensity/ guerilla warfare) but fighting against them in a conventional war with long-range heavy weaponary, missles, etc is not very appetizing to the Turks..or for the U.S for that matter. Under the CIS Collective Security Treaty, Russia is obliged to come to Armenia's aid in the case of an invasion, not to mention they have increased the troop and material levels helping to guard the border with Turkey. Russia is not the greatest friend to have but you can be certain they will not relinquish full control over the region.

Should the war resume, Turkey would rattle its sabres and deploy troops to the border as it did in 1993 but it would take something drastic for them to invade Armenia; something like Armenian forces couter-attacking and seizing even more Azeri territory.

As Steph wrote very wisely, Georgia will again be a fence sitter. Though their army is now better organized, trained and equiped, it is still too small and not equal to Armenia's army... yet. Additionally they have Russia, Ossetia, and Abkhazia to deal with not to mention the restive Armenian population in Javakh (sidenote: You cannot underestimate just how much the Javakh Armenians supported the Armenians in Artsakh with weapons during the first war), which has easy access to disrupt the flow of the Baku Ceyhan pipeline and create even more problems for Georgia.

Yet, as Steph said, Georgia can cause problems for Armenia by shutting its borders and the Azeri population in Marneuli is certainly a factor as they have access to block roads and the gas pipeling leading to Armenia.

Stalin really was a mad genius!!!!

[Hovik]

I wouldn't be to worried about countries such as Bahrain, Kuwait, Pakistan, etc throwing in their lot with Azerbaijan (which seems to be because of Muslim solidarity). Most of their calls are symbolic. I believe Armenia has been solidifying their relations with Iran, India, Russia, Greece and China as a counterweight in the technology, energy, and military spheres.
Syria is generally neutral regarding the conflict and Lebanon is mostly pro-Armenian. The other Arab states don't really figure into the mix as like I said above give marginal support the Azerbaijan, have their own problems, and are competitive with Azerbaijan in the energy sector.

Let us not forget Israel's weapons support to Azerbaijan - an important influence.

[Kharpert]

Hovik makes a good point. If Azerbaijan can be painted as an ally of Israel they would lose a massive amount of support with the muslim world.

[Joseph]

Hovik makes a good point. If Azerbaijan can be painted as an ally of Israel they would lose a massive amount of support with the muslim world.

It does get mentioned from time to time from Middle Eastern sources but the fact that Turkey supports this trilateral alliance between themselves and both Azerbaijan and Israel is a larger and more immediate factor.
Things get very jumbled when you bring Iran and Israel into the picture. Here is what we know:

-Azerbaijan courts Israel as leverage against Iran and to show the US that it is pro-Western in orientation.
-Some Azeris in Azerbaijan and Iran want unification into one state, this angers the Iranian authorities and thus pleases Israel ( check out anything written by Brenda Shaeffer which attests to this fact)
- Iran uses its relationship with Armenia as a counterweight to these aims. Armenians and Persians also generally have good relations regardless of religion.
- Israel needs Muslim allies so has been courting Azerbaijan and although it is angering their ally Turkey, they have made inroads into Northern Iraq with the Kurds incase the Kurds should one day have their own state.
-Being that Israel is a Turkish ally, it is an Azeri ally by extension.
-Azerbaijan can export energy through Baku-Ceyhan which can then be shipped in tankers directly to Israel.
-Azerbaijan wants energy independence from Iran and Russia.
-Azerbaijan has issues with Iran over claims in the Caspian oil fields.
-The fact that Israel and Iran are mortal enemies and that there is a large Azeri population in Iran, the Azeris and Israelis seem to be natural allies
- Azerbaijan can use Armenia's warm relationship with Iran as an indicator of Armenia being anti-Western.
-While the Muslim world is generally pro-Azeri in a symbolic sense, they are weary of Azerbaijans ties to Israel but at the same time they fear Iran and are generally not pro-Shiite.
- Most wealthy Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, etc don't seem to care about Israel that much.
- At the same time, Pakistan is openly allied with Azerbaijan


Please add more!

[Kharpert]

Good points, Joseph. Although if you take a holistic view of all those reasons you get a rather clear impression impression that Arab countries aren't particularly united in one way or another. Shi'ites are wary of Sunnis, richer arab countries aren't supporting their muslim brothers, etc. So I think as long as Armenia maintains good relations with Iran we wouldn't have to fret much over the rest of the muslim world.