The antagonism of the goals of the warring parties gave rise to an exceptional fierceness of the fighting
On September 27, 2020, fighting began between Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh, and in fact Armenia, and on the night of November 10, the parties signed a cease-fire Agreement and the entry of Russian peacekeepers into the conflict zone. For the duration of the conflict amounted to almost a month and a half. During this time, a complete military-strategic and military-political assessment of it, at least in open sources, was not made.
In particular, how its outcome will affect the situation in the region, the situation in Russia, will form or, conversely, eliminate military and other threats to our country from this direction. Therefore, the analysis of the nature of the seemingly ended armed conflict is very important for the security of our country and the development of correct actions in the foreign policy arena – on the example of the development of the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh and the reaction of the warring parties to various peacekeeping initiatives.
The conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh was caused by Azerbaijan's territorial claims to the entire region, which, according to Baku, was illegally torn away as a result of the armed conflict in 1994. From this point of view, the war for the return of the lost territories is quite fair and cannot be considered an aggression against the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. Moreover, this state is not recognized by any country in the world, including Armenia itself. Administration and residents of NKR and Armenia believe that living in the country have the full right to self-determination, since the inclusion of the region in the Azerbaijani SSR was implemented without regard for the ethnic composition of the population and against the wishes of the majority of the population of this Autonomous region to be part of the Armenian SSR.
With the collapse of the USSR, the Azerbaijani authorities attempted to solve the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh by military means. However, the hastily formed NKR defense Army was able to defend the independence of its unrecognized state in the early 90s, which was enshrined in the ceasefire Agreement, which was in effect to some extent until September 27, 2020. The Azerbaijanis ousted Armenians from the territory of the former Shahumyan region ASSR and parts of Martakert and Martuni regions of Nagorno-Karabakh, supported by Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh Republic took control of several districts of Azerbaijan, adjacent to the former autonomy, forming a kind of security zone. At the same time, Nakhichevan – the former klav of Azerbaijan-was even more isolated from the main territory of this country. Since 1994, within the framework of the OSCE Minsk group, negotiations have been held on the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem on terms acceptable to both sides.
Goals of the parties
The political assessment of the validity of the claims of both sides to this region determines the military-political content of this armed conflict to a decisive extent. However, despite the importance of studying the nature of any war or armed conflict in its military-political aspect, in this case I will refrain from a full legal and historical assessment of it in order to avoid possible accusations of inciting ethnic hatred, as well as provoking a negative reaction from the Armenian and Azerbaijani diasporas in Russia. After all, the fresh wounds from this exceptionally fierce and bloody conflict are still very fresh in the minds of the peoples of both States. As a citizen of the USSR and an officer of the Soviet Navy, both Armenian and Azerbaijani peoples are close and dear to me, and I consider them my fellow citizens. Their sacrifices are equally painful to me. In this regard, I will focus only on the key aspects of the military-political content of this conflict, without which the study of its nature as a whole will be incomplete. Here it is appropriate to note that all these victims and destruction should be attributed to the crimes of Gorbachev and his associates, members of the Gorbachev Central Committee of the CPSU, the Republican elites of that time, who were responsible for the destruction of the USSR, as well as their current heirs.
Therefore, I will start directly with the goals of the parties to this conflict, which are the main element of the analysis of the military-political content of any armed conflict or war. In Nagorno-Karabakh, the stated goals of the parties were quite obvious. On the part of Azerbaijan, they were officially announced by the President of this country, Ilham Aliyev, who said that the armed forces of his country should restore Azerbaijan's sovereignty over the entire territory of the Nagorno-Karabakh region and the adjacent region occupied by the Nagorno-Karabakh defense Army. In turn, the NKR's goal of military actions was to protect sovereignty and independence while maintaining control over the territories previously mainly populated by ethnic Azerbaijanis that were torn away from Azerbaijan in 1994.
It should be emphasized that this armed conflict was of an antagonistic nature-Azerbaijan claimed the entire territory currently occupied by the NKR, while the leadership and population of this unrecognized Republic and Armenia sought to preserve the state of Affairs that developed as a result of the armed conflict of the early 90's. The latter was especially important for the residents of the NKR, for whom the occupation of the territory of this Republic by Azerbaijani troops meant turning into refugees with the loss of all property, and often death. Compromises none of the parties were not looking. For this reason, the armed struggle was extremely fierce, with heavy losses among personnel and civilians, military equipment, weapons, and material resources in General. On the part of the NKR, this armed conflict was actually total, since it covered almost the entire territory of the Republic, and the enemy's fire impact was carried out on objects throughout the entire territory of this Republic.
Azerbaijan was the first to launch full-scale military operations, conducting a "counter-offensive operation". However, this armed conflict was largely initiated by the post-revolutionary Armenian leadership led by Nikola Pashinyan, which effectively led to an impasse in the negotiations within the OSCE Minsk group on Nagorno-Karabakh. By the time the new administration came to power, Armenia was able to reach a preliminary agreement on ending the frozen conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh on the basis of mutual concessions from the parties. The NKR and Armenia were to hand over to Azerbaijan seven districts inhabited by Azerbaijani population until 1994, and in return, Azerbaijan was to renounce its claims to the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh proper. Judging by the actions and statements of the country's leadership, Turkey has made a serious contribution to inciting contradictions, hoping to radically strengthen its influence in the Transcaucasus.
Azerbaijan has conducted full-fledged advance and direct training of troops for the start of hostilities, creating powerful groups of troops and forces in the areas of the main attacks. Against this background, the NKR and Armenia demonstrated very careless behavior during a series of border incidents, which indicated either a lack of information about the scale of Azerbaijan's military preparations, or an underestimation of the determination of its leadership to launch full-scale military operations.
Overwhelming superiority
Analysis of the military-strategic nature of any military conflict begins with a comparison of the combat strength of the opposing sides, comparing their strengths and weaknesses. According to open sources, the defense army of Nagorno-Karabakh numbered from 18 to 20 thousand people and from 80 to 100 thousand military-trained reserves as of September 2020. It is based on the ground forces, which are armed with 200-300 t-72 tanks of early modifications and T-55, as well as up to 320 units of various types of Soviet-made BBM, 44 BM-21 Grad installations, about 300 field artillery guns, including only 24 self-propelled, 12 self-propelled ATGMs ("Sturm-S" and"konkurs"), several Elbrus otrk and Tochka-U TRK. Air defense systems are represented by one division of the modern s-300 air defense system, the rest are outdated, Soviet – made S-125, Krug (15-18 PU), KUB (one division), S-75, OSA and Strela-10. In addition, six ZSU-23-4 "Shilka", a certain number of ZU-23-2, MANPADS"Igla". Aviation is represented by two su-25 attack aircraft, five Mi-24 and five Mi-8 helicopters, as well as a number of Armenian-made Krunk UAVS. The latter, with a take-off weight of 60 kilograms, has a cruising speed of about 150 kilometers per hour, a flight range of up to 750 kilometers (5 hours of action in the air) and is designed to solve reconnaissance and target designation tasks.
The defense army of Nagorno-Karabakh is opposed by the Azerbaijani armed forces, which numbered about 67,000 people at the beginning of September 2020 and had about 300,000 military-trained reserves. The basis of the Azerbaijani army is made up of land forces with a total peacetime strength of about 57,000 people. At the beginning of the conflict, they were armed with about 450 tanks, of which up to 100 were the latest Russian T – 90S, more than 1,100 BBM, including 110 Israeli m-462 Abir BRM, about 140 self-propelled guns, including 12 203-mm 2S7 "pion", 18 2S19 "Msta-S" and 5 Israeli 155-mm SOLTAM, more than 210 towed field artillery guns, up to 90 MLRS of 300 mm caliber, including about 40 Turkish-made and 10 Israeli, about 40 MLRS of 220 mm caliber, including about 20 TOS-1A "solntsepek" and more than 220 MLRS of 122-160 mm caliber, mainly Turkish and Israeli production, about 6-8 TRK, including 4 "TOCHKA-U" and 2-4 Israeli LORA. Anti-tank weapons are represented by the latest Russian-made ATGM "Kornet" – about 100 units, the Israeli Spike – about 150 units and the Ukrainian" SKIF " - about 100 units. In addition, there were about 200 anti-tank artillery guns and a significant number of older, but still effective against tanks of previous generations of Soviet-made ATGMs. Naturally, there were a large number of various anti-tank grenade launchers. The SV air defense system had approximately 130 short-range self-propelled SAMS and 40 ZSU-23-4 Shilka, as well as more than 300 Igla MANPADS. The Azerbaijani air force had 15 MiG-29, 2 su-24, 19 su-25 and su-25UB fighters in combat units, 26 Mi-24 helicopters of various modifications, about 40 transport and combat Mi-8, Mi-17 and Ka-32, and more than 60 Israeli-made UAVS, of which about 20 were shock. By the beginning of military operations, significant quantities of UAVS from Turkey for reconnaissance and strike purposes were delivered to Azerbaijan. The air defense forces of Azerbaijan consisted of about 130 SAMS of various types, of which about 20 long-range-S-300PMU2 and S-200. Among the rest, we can note a certain number of modern Israeli-made SAMS "Barak-8" (9 PU) and SPYDERSR. The SAMS of the Azerbaijani air defense forces relied on a developed network of radar posts that create a radar field over the combat area.
Only the low-lying areas of the Martakert and Martuni districts of Nagorno-Karabakh are relatively flat, while the main part of the Republic's territory has a highly rugged mountainous terrain. This created favorable conditions for the organization of defense by relatively small forces. The operational capacity of the combat area is small.
The NKR was supported by Armenia. However, the Armenian armed forces did not formally participate directly in the fighting. For this reason, it makes no sense to take them into account in this conflict, as well as the Turkish armed forces, which actively supported Azerbaijan in the conflict, providing weapons, military equipment, advisers and even Islamist militants.
Comparison of the combat strength of the Azerbaijani armed forces and the defense Army of Nagorno-Karabakh shows that the former had an overwhelming superiority in forces and means. Only the tanks forces can be considered as quantitatively comparable 1:1.5 in favor of Azerbaijan, but if we consider the qualitative side, the superiority of Azerbaijanis reaches 1:3-1:3.5 mm. BBM ratio in favor of the Azerbaijani army even more – 1:4, artillery and air defense systems – 1:5 and 1:8 respectively based on the quality indicators, anti-tank weapons, combat aircraft and UAVS – absolute superiority. Armenia could strengthen the NKR armed forces by transferring tanks, armored vehicles and ATGMs to the Republic. However, the amount of equipment available to Armenia is small and this step could not significantly change the unfavorable balance of forces in the NKR zone.
Strengths and weaknesses
Despite the overall military and technical superiority of the Azerbaijani armed forces, the Nagorno-Karabakh defense Army had its own strengths. This is primarily the presence of the Elbrus missile defense system with a firing range of about 300 kilometers, in the zone of fire impact of which the most important economic objects of Azerbaijan were located deep in its territory. Another strong point of the army of the self-proclaimed Republic was the presence of the s-300 air defense system, which covers most of the territory of the NKR with a zone of destruction and thus practically excludes the possibility of using manned aircraft of the Azerbaijani armed forces. Also, the strengths of the NKR defense Army include strong motivation, high morale, readiness to fight to the end, good tactical training of the soldiers, and decent tactical and operational training of the command staff. On the side of the defenders was the nature of the terrain, which greatly restricts the use of armored vehicles and the introduction of large masses of troops into battle at the same time.
One of the weaknesses of the Nagorno-Karabakh army is the practical lack of air defense systems that can effectively counteract small-sized UAVS. In this regard, it was essentially deprived of the ability to effectively counter the enemy's intelligence system, which actively and massively uses UAVS. The lack of long-range field artillery and MLRS, combined with the acute lack of intelligence and target designation tools that have acceptable combat stability in a combined-arms battle and counter the enemy's air defense forces, made it extremely difficult to conduct counter-battery warfare and strike enemy reserves in areas of their concentration and on the March. A small number of ATGMs did not allow creating a reliable anti-tank defense even in one separate direction.
Among the strengths of the Azerbaijani army, first of all, it should be attributed more than three-fold superiority in the number of personnel and military-trained reserve, which allowed creating full-fledged groups of troops along the entire front line with the achievement of overwhelming superiority in forces and means in the main directions. Another major strength of the Azerbaijani armed forces is the availability of sufficient forces and means, in particular UAVS, to conduct reconnaissance and issue target designation to strike vehicles. In combination with the overwhelming superiority in long-range artillery, heavy MLRS with a long range of fire, and attack UAVS in conditions of limited capabilities of the defenders to combat drones, this made it possible to effectively solve the problems of identifying and destroying critical objects almost at the entire depth of the operational formation of enemy forces. The presence of modern anti-tank weapons, which outnumber the total tank fleet of Armenia and the NKR, allowed the Azerbaijani army to create a stable anti-tank defense along almost the entire front line, thereby making it very difficult for the defense Army of Nagorno-Karabakh to conduct offensive operations and use armored vehicles.
The weak points of the Azerbaijani army include a slightly lower morale of the troops and the level of tactical and operational training of the command staff. These weaknesses of the Azerbaijanis were partially compensated by the Turkish side. Another weakness of the Azerbaijani army is the insufficient number of combat aircraft. Despite the multiple superiority in the number of combat aircraft over the NKR and Armenian aviation, they are not enough to conduct a full-fledged air operation with the suppression of even a relatively weak air defense system, including the s-300 air defense system. For this reason, Azerbaijan could not fully use its aviation, limiting itself to individual flights in conditions when serious fire resistance from the NKR air defense was not expected.
Further analysis suggests based on the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of opponents formulating ideas about possible pre-war plans, the armed conflict and its outcome, factors determining it, the configuration of the postwar world in the region, and the impact of the conflict and its outcome in a neighboring state, and the geopolitical situation as a whole.
Konstantin Sivkov, Deputy President of the Russian Academy of Sciences for information policy, doctor of military Sciences
Military-industrial courier newspaper, published in issue # 44 (857) for November 17, 2020