Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Commentary On Thomas De Vaal's Report "The Karabakh Trap

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Commentary On Thomas De Vaal's Report "The Karabakh Trap

    COMMENTARY ON THOMAS DE VAAL'S REPORT "THE KARABAKH TRAP

    Azat Artsakh Daily
    24 Feb 09
    Republic of Nagorno Karabakh [NKR]

    Threats and Dilemmas of the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict" 2009-02-23
    16:51 In the middle of January Thomas de Vaal's report "The Karabakh
    Trap: Threats and Dilemmas of the Nagorno Karabakh Conflict" was
    published in a number of Azerbaijani internet resources. (as it was
    mentioned in the foreword to the report, it is the rough draft for
    discussion). The report covers the force majéur scenarios of the
    development of the Azerbaijani-Karabakhi conflict and gives a number
    of recommendations both to the Armenian and Azerbaijani parties, as
    well as to the mediators. According to the author himself, his work
    aimed at persuading the parties that "neither of them can completely
    "win" in the NK conflict".

    In a wider context, the author's aim was to convince all the actors,
    involved in the Azerbaijani-Karabakhi conflict settlement process,
    of the necessity to change the present status-quo. The author's task
    was complicated by the fact that the current state of affairs, to
    this or that extent, suits both the parties directly involved in the
    conflict and the main centers of power. This circumstance influenced
    the arguments and theses brought by the author, which in most cases
    were of declarative character, were not =0 D corroborated with real
    facts and very often contradicted one other. The author had chosen
    the "scare tactics" as a means of persuading the Armenian party. In
    particular, in the part "The situation in the region: the Armenian
    party" the author tried to describe the development prospects of
    Armenia in the darkest colors by using the following formulations:
    "Isolation of Armenia", "Armenia's vulnerability within its closed
    borders", "global economic crisis presents a real threat for Armenia",
    "Russia stops subsidizing the gas exported to Armenia", "ten-year
    development "boom" comes to an end", etc. Meanwhile the situation
    in Azerbaijan is described in a rather different way: "Azerbaijan is
    changing due to its rich oil reserves" , "the international reputation
    of the country is today much more influential", "today Azerbaijan has
    50 embassies abroad", "a grandiose military parade took place in Baku",
    "Azerbaijan demonstrates its newly-acquired military might to the
    world". The author compared the military potential of Azerbaijan and
    Armenia in the analogous manner. Speaking about Azerbaijan the author
    has used such assertions as: "in 2008 the military budget of Azerbaijan
    exceeds the military budget of Armenia three times", "Azerbaijan buys
    a great number of new 0Aequipment", "American and Turkish instructors
    train the personnel", etc. Whereas Armenia was favored with only one
    positive evaluation - "deeper martial traditions exist in the Armenian
    Armed Forces, and they continue playing a leading role in the Armenian
    society". However, it was immediately leveled with the statement that
    "this, in its turn, brings to the corruption and distortions in the
    economy". The assessment of the military might of a state is one of the
    actual tasks of military-scientific researches. The methodology of the
    solution of this task is not simple, as it deals with heterogeneous
    indices, characterizing various resources. In the technical sense
    the correlation of the potentials of the two republics was reduced
    to the comparison of the air park of the air forces and the reactive
    systems of volley fire of high caliber, as a result of which the author
    came to the conclusion that "the technical basis of the Armenian air
    forces is much more modest". In the meantime the military might of any
    country involves several potentials: economic, scientific, military,
    moral-psychological and social. The author superficially touched only
    two of the above-mentioned potentials. Whereas it's hardly possible
    to get an objective assessment of the military might of Armenia and
    Azerbaijan, without analyzing the whole complex of the mentioned aspec
    ts. With this comparison the author also tries to lead the key players
    to the idea that it is impossible to keep the status-quo in the future,
    as "the defeated party feels itself surer and surer and impatiently
    craves for changing it (the status) in its favor". Meanwhile, fearing
    that the analysis of the situation, suggested in this report, may
    somehow play into the hands of the revanchist forces in Azerbaijan,
    the author of the report warns against hasty conclusions: "To conclude
    with I would like to say that there is not any real military solution
    of the conflict for Azerbaijan and that the military aggression may
    lead to a catastrophe for the country". Three possible scenarios
    of war have also been covered in the report. From the military
    viewpoint, the given modeling may hardly present any interest, as
    it is of superficial character and contains general phrases. On the
    whole, Thomas de Vaal, justifying his surname, under the cover of an
    expert-peacemaker practically calls Azerbaijan to unleash a new big
    war in the South Caucasus. Meanwhile, it seems to him that he and
    his like will not be responsible for anything. But he is mistaken...
Working...
X