Ip 11-08 - Azerbaijan

CSL

CENTERfor S T R AT E G I C LEADERSHIP

Issue Center for Strategic Leadership, Paper U.S. Army War College October 2008 Volume 11-08

Transformation of the Azerbaijani Armed ByForces Professor B.F. Griffard, Colonel James W. Shufelt, Jr, and Mr. Ritchie Dion The South the north, Caucasu Turkey often in s west region the regarded small, yetas is and Iran the land completely the in bounded the south. bridge where dissimilar present this by the This region, the East nations character region. because of it, and each country has managed to develop their own distinct character, culture and in Black the West have of its Each history. Like itsare Sea in combination meet. emerged –neighbors in the Caucasus, Azerbaijan has peoples left a Within a storied history. Baku, its capital, was a sacred place thethe west with this Armenia, inextricably legacy, for Zoroastrians and Russian geographicall Azerbaijan tied to the the because of the many natural fires fueled for by escaping gas. Over the centuries it was Caspian North y confined and legacy of better dominated by Persians, Byzantines, Armenians, and Turks Sea in Caucasus, is space three Georgia. the several or before its annexation by the Tsar in 1813. From that time, the east, The empires worse, by Russia except for a short period of freedom from 1918 history of that have within inregion to 1920, it was a part of the Russian-Soviet Empire. As ruled over the the Soviet Union disintegrated, the Caucasus nations three saw their opportunity and, following the Georgian nations. lead, Azerbaijan declared its independence in Despite August this 1991. legacy, the borders of present nation, or Despite in Azerbaijan only a portion of the land encompasses some actually inhabited by ethnic Azerbaijanis. A full two thirds of cases the evenregional Azerbaijani for 24 population percent of ongoing livesIranian to the the conflicts Colonel and south, across population, for Bernard second consolidat the with the domination Griffard, (1826e itsAras rule Aras River. River, in city of of the USA, 1828) over the Seeking northwestern Tabriz asis nATO Caucasus Retired, RussoSince entire inTegrATiOn Iran. There their between a Persian independenc Caucasus they account historic Persia and Professor Wars. e Azerbaijan region, and integration. In support of this goal it provided a 34-member unit in Kosovo as part of a capital. Russia, of Both hasofworked defining Turkish-led force under This primarily Logistics which to came develop the about through in ended closer the Center in ties for Strategic Leadership, U.S. Army War College (USAWC). northern the through the firstthe Operations significant with border of West Colonel James Shufelt is the Director of th USAWC Support Branch, OGD, CSL (1812and defeats and isand Persia, Mr. Ritchie 1813) Gaming for actively Persia later Iran, Dion is a Senior Strategic Analyst (Contractor) in OGD, CSL. Divison allowing pursuing as the (OGD) Russia NATOof to

Azerbaijani Armed Forces officers participate in USAWC-conducted NATO Operations Seminar

NATO supervision; Azerbaijani however, this troops continuing modernization and professionalization of the Azerbaijani Armed unit was participate in Forces. In support withdrawn peacekeepin of these under the following g operations efforts auspices its mission to Kosovo’s the in U.S. of the provide TCT seminarofin Azerbaijan September 9-11, 2008U.S. that/ NATO Military Organization, Operations declaration Afghanistan European Chairman support to addressed & The Standardization USAWC . consisted of Professor Bernard F. Griffard and Colonel James W. Shufelt, Jr. from independence and Iraq. team Command of the the Center for Strategic Leadership (CSL). . In addition, These (USEUCOM) Joint Combatant experiences The 16 Azerbaijani military participants ranged utilizes Chiefs of Commanders, compliment in rank from First Lieutenant (02) to Colonel/CAPT (06), traveling Staff’s the U.S. Army the and represented their Ministry of Defense, the General contact (CJCS) War College Staff, and(TCT) the operational forces. Drawing from NATO teams Joint (USAWC) operations Contact conducted ain the Balkans and Afghanistan and from personal experience, the team provided these officers with Team a p erspective on NATO military structure; the national and Program. NATO As partroles of of U.S. organizations; command relationships, and the procedures for Task Force development. Stressing the key role that NATO military standards (STANAGS) and standardization play in successful operations, the Azerbaijani planners were introduced to techniques for integrating NATO requirements into their operating and Colonel James Shufelt discusses NATO operational strategic planning techniques procedures. Throughout theflowing. free Armed seminar The senior Their Forces. junior officers thethe officers practical They from Azerbaijani encouraged experience the highlighted Peacekeeping officers active s participants the provided need that Battalion exhibited amilitary education for both commissioned and non-commissioned participation valuable identified for more the had served professional high level by the two insights need in-country to to with NATO officers. ChAllengeS Of of U.S. interest Infantry the maintain English Progress the towards and and in independenCe Battalion audience momentum classes integration ofinto Forces discussions Commanders as ongoing along NATO, a whole. with and military Afghanistan within ato complicated geo-political environment. Azerbaijan entered this most recent era were open three At efforts assistance professionalization the and Iraq. of independence saddled with conclusion further in and modernization CSL 2 of must professionaliz improving the be seminar e the their accomplished

mixed “Azerbaijan is located in a tough blessings growth as neighborhood...” “Azerbaijan is . On the they are 2 are at war” “You knowin we located a When the United Uunited States .” States Senator Richard Lugar made this observation in January 2008 he could not plus side developed

tough have .the On the to Similar neighborhoo foreseen how to all nation minus Yugoslavia, century d where tough Caucasus of the possesse side, itthis is the neither bya leader countries neighborhood countries concerns NATO and s large country present a are natural s nations. 3 under would altered the of their backer integration However, is the government is still energy split by of an ofas borders progression or a top foreign policy priority for Azerbaijan, progress dividin It was the tremendous become. The political neighbors. Azerbaijan’ measured. committed reserves ethnic and to the professionalization and modernization of the Armed the nations self g up not until Soviet Armenian pressure to Russian environment. Russia s Forces. that territorial of Armenia determination. region 1936 Union. leadership (SSR). Hetheir TrAnSfOrmATiOn SuppOrTing keep invasion of Azerbaijan’s and integration promise conflict. and Rather, they s asIranor that However, and awarded Oblast, distance Georgia and geographic prefer into the a high Azerbaijan evolved they Soviet in declared the region NKAO. In support Moscow, the of this goal the USEUCOM security from the message location cooler Alliance. level of were through the saw fit Premier keeping the highest This government cooperation efforts that lead to the growth of professionalism Azerbaijani it sent requires fullSSR. relations Though economic finally actions withou Joseph with Nagornolevel ofof action of the and technical proficiency of the Azerbaijani Armed consideration with the President As an ethnic, defined in tvictorious the Stalin Stalin’s Karabakh autonomy, also Azerbaijani Forces should continue to receive emphasis. Within the professional West, Ilham Armenian and/or thedid 20th approp decided policy of region aseducation designating formalized SSR not military sector it is important to focus efforts while Aliyev has populated unification 1991. shooting The war new lasted until a Russian-brokered ceasefire in 1994. Over riate to “divide part of the it the the legallyThe Minsk on tomorrow’s leadersGroup andThe strategists. generation Turkey is a named province of with Armenia the intervening years all attempts to resolve the conflict, undertaken unilaterally consid recogniz and rule” Azerbaijani Nagornoregions recognize of officers encountered during this TCT has the experience Co-Chairs member : France, Russia NATO Azerbaijan, was a as source by the United States and Russia and through the auspices of the Minsk eration e each asa he went Soviet Karabakh borders. NKAO of working of and the United States. Nagornoof armed Group, the an organization specifically formed by the Organization for Security a against Socialist Autonomous Despite cohesive with NATO Armed Karabakh’s conflict prior States: natural Participating and separate Belarus, Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to address the conflict, have failed to find Republic the province forces and Forces. demonstrated to and border republic a wishes of Germany, Portugal, the compromise acceptable to****** all parties. The Russian invasion of Georgia in actions of Italy, within the possess This and other CSL publications may be found on the USAWC/CSL web site at: *serve desire for following s within August Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, 2008 will most likely only to further complicate the situation. Though our the Soviet the http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usacsl/IPapers.asp. independence Azerbaijan betwe Turkey, as well asguidelines Armenia and specifically put a discussion of a U.S. position on Nagornoleadership leadership ****** independenc en Karabakh in Azerbaijan. off the table, wethewere able to explore the participants’ underlying traits The views expressed in this report is that of author * and do not necessarily reflect official policy or position e in required United College, the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or any other Department of the States Army Warconcerns. The or Agency within the U.S. Government. This report is cleared for public release; distribution is unlimited. to form recognition followed by of the Kosovo’s Russia’s that 2. the Lugar, Lugar offers repeal of Jackson-Vanik forPress Release January 29, 2008 backbone unilateral declaration international military Richard, Azerbaijan, 3. Khazri Bakinsky and Mina Eurasia , March 16, 2007, “Azerbaijan Pursues NATO of the declaration of Muradova, Integration,” Insight eurasianet.org, of http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav031607.shtm l. community confrontation a large modern independenc independent will allow by between ”peaceke economy With Azeri e by for the status NagornoArmenia and eping” shrinking the “…considerable energy resources brighten its long-term United Georgia’s Karabakh to Azerbaijan force in States foreign end prospects.” and the South follow suit. and the investment, of could European Ossetia Such a and also provide South resulting the in a economic Union Abkhazia situation an Caucasu slowdown Tsarist of prosperity. supported by provinces could trigger opportunity s region. the mono 1 Investment modern still a raised another for Russia to Such afears modernization modern poly by the infrastructure. major natural impose scenario of at business in the best, the Armed Nobels and Though ethnic energy gas transit would Forces. efforts. only sites. early the strife resource at producer, infrastructure CIA World most However, partially Although 1870’ Rothschilds destroyed the time Azerbaijan from the Factbook likely based occupied. Baku s ison resulted in much of the of the is the Caucasus assessment impact these These becoming Baku not the large infrastructure Bolshevik origin for by controlled that the observations buildings a government’s experi oil development in 1905, Baku Revolution. the BakuRussia. Our profits ,growing may showplace, largesse. itenced appears beare In of major was Today, in T’bilisipersonal providing a may become a drag on sustained economic growth. the country many more the itslong Azeri aof the term, oilfields addition to Ceyhan observations big boost new mechanism hinterland failure first to to being in a Baku (BTC) while infrastructure commercial to is improve energ launder the key and pipeline, confirm modernization 1. oilKing, The,Ghost (New York: of Freedom Oxford University Press 2008) 150. King points out that in 1914 there were and money apparently transportation ythe only Charles, 2,541 oil wells in Baku, and that at the time of the Bolshevik revolution over 150 oil companies were active in the residential than not and fueled housing CSL 3 city. major structures human sharing infrastructure periodin petroleum are, shelters the throughout of or