It is Time to Start Planning for the Next War:
Norayr Eblighatian
Because all the strategy, tactics, technology, and needed manpower have been planned and are being executed in the war of September 2020. Yes, we can be busy on social media which is full of fake news, claims, and counter-claims. We can also collect supplies and send them to the front, which we hope will reach the front and be distributed. But let’s face it, during a modern conflict extreme organization is a prerequisite & that takes time, while ad hoc efforts are questionable.
Goals, Strategies & Tactics:
• The goal of the Azeris is to reconquer lost land; while the Armenians are trying to hold it. That is why, every couple of years there is an attempt to test the capabilities of the Armenian army, study lessons learned, re-arm and prepare for the next (hopefully successful) battle. In the time between battles, the Azeris try to inflict pain by sniping on soldiers of the frontier demarcation line. The expectation is to reduce morale.
• I would suggest that a defensive goal is objectionable:
It deprives the Armenians of any initiative.
It paves the way to an age-old dilemma: The Azeris can lose many battles, however, the Armenians cannot lose any; it can become catastrophic. Let’s remind the reader that the distance between the Azeri and Turkish borders is not a long one.
It is much more reasonable to change the goal and try to acquire more distance between Azerbaijan and Armenia. This approach will also send a message that there is a cost to be paid for every incursion.
• What about international public opinion?
My conviction is that we need to rely on our own. Let’s be realistic. Other than lip service, the “international community” will ask for an immediate cease-fire, period.
The historians will study the event and ‘might’ come to a conclusion of who was the aggressor and initiator of the battle. I say ‘might’ because history is written by the victors not the vanquished.
Ever since 1994, the Azeris have tried multiple times to initiate conflict and their president has declared his intentions that he will reconquer Karabakh by force. Has the international public opinion condemned such action or taken any tangible step to prevent it?
• Turkey has changed the old rules by introducing Jihadi fighters into this conflict. The goal is to buy fighters who will bleed us to death, with little casualties from either the Azeris or the Turks. This method has been tried in Syria and has proven to be quite efficient.
The Turks were also successful in establishing ‘observation posts’ of their army in Jihadi areas of Syria with the acquiescence of the Russians. These observation posts were nothing but a defensive shield in case the Jihadists lost ground in their region.
Are we heading towards observation posts to be erected on the border of Artsakh?
• Armenia is a member of CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization), which states that aggression against one signatory would be perceived as an aggression against all. Yet Russia prefers to act as a ‘diplomat’ instead of a collective security ally.
Russia is also a member of the OSCE Minsk Group, which is charged in finding a peaceful solution to the Karabakh conflict. So, Russia has chosen the OSCE platform as opposed to the CSTO agreement.
The OSCE has published “Madrid Principles”, where article 5 states:
“The right of all internally displaced persons and refugees to return to their former places of residence”.
I have one question about this “principle”:
Do you think sending Armenians back to Sumgait, Azerbaijan is a good idea? Or, is this a ruse to ensure that there is a permanent state of war between Armenia and Azerbaijan?
• And finally, should we try and find the answer of dividing the Armenian homeland into two republics as a vehicle for giving our ally diplomatic cover?
Artsakh is a district of Armenia. Period.