Nagorno-Karabakhin tilanne kiristyy jälleen

Maidan

Ylipäällikkö
Lahjoittaja
Oman kasitykseni mukaan Azerit ovat olleet 'loukattuna' osapuolena useammin, ja aloitteneet Nagorno-Karabahin osalta epamaaraista pakistanilais-henkista hairintatulta satunnaisin valiajoin, ilman edes mitaan toivottua tavoitetta... toisaalta Azerit ostavat aseita Israelista, toisaalta armenialaiset ovat alueen vanhin kristillinen valtio.
Kinkkinen pahkina purtavaksi nain suomalaisena ressuna... eli eikohan ruveta ottamaan muslimipakolaisia Azerbeizhanista sitten, siinapa se on bisnes (sorry OT.)
Ymmärsin että armenialaiset ovat maailman ensimmäinen kristillinen valtio, se tuli sinne aikasemmin kun mihinkään muualle, v300-400 e.K.s Azerit ovat islamilaiset. Heidän keskeinen tappelu oli niin kauan kun ne oli olemassa, juuri uskontojen sopimattomuudesta. Vaikka muuten ovat ihan samannäköiset, ja kirjoituskin samanlainen oikealta vasemmalle.
Jo tsaari Venäjän aikana venäläiset osanneet pitää heidän sopimattomuutta kesken ja yrittäneet eri tavalla ovelasti hallita heitä, jakamalla rajat milloin miten.
Venäjä nytkin aseisti kummatkin, ja ihan varmasti on tämän uuden sotasyttymisen takana, sitä venäläiset osaa parhaiten. Lisäksi se oli helppo kun mikä, azerien ja armenialaisten vihaan syttymiseen ei tarvittu paljon, on ollut erittäin raakoja tappamisia hisroriassa ja lähihistoriassa.
 

Fremen

Ylipäällikkö
Tiedatko, puhutaanko Armeniassa yleisesti Venajaa, osaavatko ihmiset sita? Opetetaanko sita kouluissa, nykyaan mahdollisesti englannin rinnalla?
 

Teme

Kapteeni
BAN
 

vlad

Ylipäällikkö
Lahjoittaja
Tiedatko, puhutaanko Armeniassa yleisesti Venajaa, osaavatko ihmiset sita? Opetetaanko sita kouluissa, nykyaan mahdollisesti englannin rinnalla?
Venäjä ei ainakaan tilastojen valossa ole kovinkaan yleinen kieli Armeniassa äidinkielenä.

CIA the World Factbook antaa seuraavialukemia Armenian kohdalla puhuttujen kielien suhteen:

Armenian (official) 97.9%, Kurdish (spoken by Yezidi minority) 1%, other 1% (2011 est.).

Wikipediasta löytyy sen verran täsmennystä, että Armeniassa venäjää puhuu 0,9 % äidinkielenään.

Mutta sitten kun kysytään toista puhuttua kieltä, niin venäjä nousee jo merkittävämmällä tapaa esille, kaikkiaan 90+ % armenialaisista osaa venäjästä vähintään perusteet. Edelleen maassa huomattavan moni vanhemmista on sitä mieltä, että lasten on hyvä oppia puhumaan venäjää.

Englannin osuus kasvaa maassa kaiken aikaa, kyselyiden perusteella englantia edes jonkin verran osaa puhua noin 40 % kansasta.

vlad
 

adam7

Ylipäällikkö
Vieläkö puhutaan "länsimaisesta hapatuksesta" ?
Mutta joo, kartalla katsoen onhan se A - A alueen maarakenne aikamoinen himmeli; Armenialla yksi osa kansasta Azerien sisällä ja Azerien yksi osa irrallisena Armenian eteläsuikaleen takana...huh...huh...
Tekisivät ny jonkun isomman alueiden vaihtokaupan ja rauhoittuisivat.

Onko muuten missään muualla maailmassa samanlaista alue-palastelua? Mulle ei nyt tule mieleen.

.
Siellä on kyllä nimellisesti kymmenkynta azerien aluetta Armeniassa + muitakin armenialaisten alueita Azerbaijanissa. Tosin Armenia hallinnoi Azerbaijanin enklaaveja Armeniassa ja toisinpäin, poikkeuksena Vuoristo-Karabah.
 

adam7

Ylipäällikkö
Enklaavi ja eksklaavi ovat sitten eri asioita.

Enklaavi on valtion alue , jonka toisen valtion alue kokonaan ympäröi, ts. "saari" toisen valtin sisällä. Eksklaavi on valtion alue joka on erillän emämaasta. Kaliningradista kirjoitetaan usein enklaavina, vaikka se on eksklaavi.

Myöskin tuo kiistelty alue Vuoristo-Karabah, liennee nykyinen suomenkielinen nimitys. Neuvostoliton aikoina sitä kutsuttiin Nagorno-Karabahiksi, mutta samoin kuin Georgiaa ei enää kutsuta Gruusiaksi, niin tämä alue lienee suomeksi nykyään Vuoristo-Karabakh. ;)
 

Leaderwolf

Ylipäällikkö
Lahjoittaja
Vähän päivitystä tähänkin sekasotkuun. Viime vuoden tappioita ja mitä tänä vuonna kerenneet touhuilemaan keskenään. Näköjään yhä ammuskelevat toisiaan tykistöllä ja ohjuksilla. Maailmaa ei kiinnosta.

2017
A Nagorno-Karabakh soldier was killed in action with Azerbaijiani forces on 6 February 2017.[79] On 8 February 2017, one Nagorno-Karabakh soldier was killed and another wounded in a firefight with Azerbajiani troops along the line of contact.[79] On 24 February 2017, Azerbaijani forces shelled the Armenian positions near the village of Talish with artillery.[80] The next day a large firefight broke out with Azerbajiani forces approaching Armenian lines in the same area, 5 Azerbaijani soldiers were killed in the ensuing engagement.[80][81]

On 15 May 2017, a Karabakh Osa air defense system was damaged or destroyed by a guided missile launched by Azerbaijani forces.[82] On 20 May 2017, an Armenian soldier was killed in a firefight with Azeri troops, the Azerbaijani military utilized anti-tank grenades and 60mm mortar fire in the action.[83]On 26 May 2017, a Nagorno-Karabakh soldier was killed in a skirmish with Azerbajiani forces involving mortars and grenade launches.[84][85] On 16 June 2017 three Nagorno-Karabakh soldiers were killed by Azeri forces.[86] On 22 June 2017 four Azeri soldiers were killed by Nagorno-Karakakh soldiers.[87] On July 4 an Azeri woman and her two-year-old grandchild were killed as a result of shelling by Armenian forces.[88] On 7 July several Armenian soldiers were killed by Azerbaijani Forces.[89] On 10 July 2017 a Nagorno-Karabakh soldier was killed in shelling by the Azerbaijani forces.[90] On 25 July 2017, Azerbaijan claimed that one of its soldiers was wounded by a munition dropped from an Armenian UCAV.[91] On 31 August 2017, Azerbaijani military positions were fired at and shelled at from Armenian military positions. The Armenian military were using large-caliber machine guns.[92]

2018
A Nagorno-Karabakh soldier was killed by an Azerbaijani sniper near the line of contact on 7 January 2018.[93] A Nagorno-Karabakh soldier was killed by Azerbaijani fire on 7 February 2018.[94] Three civilian volunteers were killed in a demining operation in Nagorno-Karabakh on 29 March 2018.[95] A Nagorno-Karabakh soldier was killed by Azerbaijani fire on 9 April 2018.[96]
 
Viimeksi muokattu:

Leaderwolf

Ylipäällikkö
Lahjoittaja
Tämä on kyllä sellainen sota, etten edes tiedä kenen puolella olisi. Mikä on todella harvinaista.

Onko täällä jollain selvää mielipidettä itsellä? Tästä Armenian ja Azerbaidžanin loputtomasta konfliktista?
 

Leaderwolf

Ylipäällikkö
Lahjoittaja
Nagorno-Karabakh: Greater involvement is required in the forgotten conflict
Publicerat: 16 februari, 2018

This is a translation of an article published in the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet (February 16, 2018).
With a war still raging in Syria, an increasingly aggressive Russia, the threat of terrorism and growing refugee flows, it’s no surprise that forgotten border conflicts Caucasus is not on the top of the agenda of the international community. However, the long-standing conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan deserves more attention than it has received, and this for a number of reasons. Therefore, I recently decided to visit Armenia and the region of Nagorno-Karabakh.
Nagorno-Karabakh has been isolated from the rest of the world since 1994 when the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan ended with a ceasefire. Peace talks have been held regularly in the context of the OSCE Minsk group, where both of the countries are included together with Turkey, France, Germany, Sweden, Czech Republic, Belarus and the United States. So far, no dialogue between Armenia and Azerbaijan has led to a peaceful solution of the conflict, which to a large extent is due to a lack of trust between the parties.
The prospects of lasting peace in the region are therefore remote. Two years ago, in April 2016, the two countries went from skirmishes to war for four days when Azerbaijan started a field offensive. Experts argue that the aggression was intended to break the status quo, as Baku is dissatisfied with the current situation in which the inhabitants govern the region in the form of the Republic of Artsakh, without any Azeri influence.
The background to Azerbajdzjan’s claim of the region dates back to the early 1920s. After the Soviet invasion of both Armenia and Azerbaijan, promises were made of a union between Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia. However, despite the overwhelming number of Armenians in the region, Josef Stalin decided that Nagorno-Karabakh should be a part of the Soviet Republic of Azerbaijan. During the fall of the Soviet Union, a majority of the region’ decision makers voted for a union with Armenia. Azerbaijan refused to accept it and the conflict escalated into a full-scale war between 1991 and 1994.
24 years later, there is still no peace is in sight and Nagorno-Karabakh have remained completely isolated. The European Union lacks any representation in the region and no visits are made due to the Azeri lack of tolerance when it comes to visits to the conflicted area.
The diplomatic isolation of the region leads to suffering inhabitants, inter alia when students from Nagorno-Karabakh are being prevented from studies in other European countries. Parties in the parliament of the capital Stepanakert, who are trying to build a knowledge base for democracy development, are not supported by international organizations and have limited opportunities for exchange of views with other political parties in Europe.
According to international law, the situation is complicated. The UN Security Council has called on Armenia to withdraw their troops. At the same time, it is impossible to ignore the fact that, while both Armenia and the Republic of Artsakh move in a democratic direction, the presidential Alijev family have been running Azerbaijan with an iron hand since 1993. The conflict also has geopolitical consequences. When Armenia was in the process of signing a Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA) with the EU in 2013, the country suddenly had a change of mind and preferred only to be part of the Russian-based Eurasian Economic Union (EEU). Russia had exerted heavy pressure on Yerevan and, among other things, done arms sales with Azerbaijan. Given that the Azeri defence budget corresponds with the state budget of Armenia, it is difficult to see any other explanation for the Armenian turn than that the country had to choose between Azeri military dominance or closer ties with the EU.
The fact that EU and Armenia now have negotiated a partnership agreement, CEPA, tailored specifically not to violate the country´s commitments under the EEU, is to be seen against this situation. The CEPA agreement is a positive step in the right direction that deepens our relation with Armenia, but it is clear that a peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict would reduce the security vulnerability of Armenia.
I am an advocate of dialogue, which is why I personally went to visit Nagorno-Karabakh. After my visit that took place in January, I´ve seen that its residents do their very best to build a functioning social system, despite the isolation and the permanent threat of a military conflict. The five parties in the region’ parliament are in agreement about foreign policy issues, but disagree about much else. Also, fundamental changes to secure the independence of courts have been implemented and the Ombudsman and his office are very active in carrying out the question about citizens´ rights towards the authorities.
However, it is clear that further commitment from EU and Sweden is necessary to ensure that the ceasefire is respected and that the peace talks will reach a solution:
▪ Install monitoring equipment at the contact line that separates the Armenian and Azeri forces in order to register those responsible for violating the ceasefire. Both the US administration and the OSSE have supported this proposal, as this step would minimize violence in border areas. However, Azerbaijan has not accepted the proposal, and although the proposal was presented two years ago, there is still no monitoring equipment in place.
▪The Republic of Artsakh is not recognized by EU member states, which makes it impossible for normal diplomatic relations to exist. However, in other cases, the EU has been able to carry out humanitarian work in the territory of unrecognized entities, which also should be possible in Nagorno-Karabakh.
▪ Today, peace talks only take place between Armenia and Azerbaijan. We must find a way to ensure that the people of Nagorno-Karabakh also can participate.
Within the framework of the Eastern Partnership, the EU must now work more actively for dialogue and a peaceful solution. Direct dialogue between the partners is the only opportunity to build trust and reach a long-term solution of the conflict. Something that the troubled and isolated population of Nagorno-Karabakh truly deserves

http://adaktusson.eu/nagorno-karabakh-greater-involvement-required-forgotten-conflict/
 

Rauhantekijä

Ylipäällikkö
Onko täällä jollain selvää mielipidettä itsellä?
Kyllä on.
Jos minä voisin ratkaista tuon konfliktin, lähtisin siitä, että samanmieliset kansalaiset laitetaan samalle alueelle. Näin ollen Iranin rajaa vasten olevan suikaleen Azerit luovuttaa Armenialle ja Vuoristo-Karabahin alueelta armenialaisia siirtyy tuolle alueelle. Karabach liitetään pääosin Azerbaizhaniin ja sille alueelle siirtyy enimmäkseen azereita ensisijassa ensin mainitulta luovutetulta alueelta (Nahitsevanin ympäristö) ja sitten muualtakin. Nuo pirstaloituneet maa-alueet on muokattava uudelleen yhtenäisiksi ja yhden kansan asuttamaksi alueeksi. Muuten ei rauhaa tule.

Ratkaisumalli on siis jotakuinkin YK:n vahvistaman mukainen mutta alueliitoksia ja kansansiirtoja tarvitaan. Armenialaiset ja azerit ovat erilaisia ja pitää laittaa omiin karsinoihinsa.

.
 

Talvela

Ylipäällikkö
Kyllä on.
Jos minä voisin ratkaista tuon konfliktin, lähtisin siitä, että samanmieliset kansalaiset laitetaan samalle alueelle. Näin ollen Iranin rajaa vasten olevan suikaleen Azerit luovuttaa Armenialle ja Vuoristo-Karabahin alueelta armenialaisia siirtyy tuolle alueelle. Karabach liitetään pääosin Azerbaizhaniin ja sille alueelle siirtyy enimmäkseen azereita ensisijassa ensin mainitulta luovutetulta alueelta (Nahitsevanin ympäristö) ja sitten muualtakin. Nuo pirstaloituneet maa-alueet on muokattava uudelleen yhtenäisiksi ja yhden kansan asuttamaksi alueeksi. Muuten ei rauhaa tule.

Ratkaisumalli on siis jotakuinkin YK:n vahvistaman mukainen mutta alueliitoksia ja kansansiirtoja tarvitaan. Armenialaiset ja azerit ovat erilaisia ja pitää laittaa omiin karsinoihinsa.

.
Ratkaisu on luonnollisesti monikulttuuri, lähialueilla on miljoonia sopivia ihmisiä väestönsiirtoihin.
Nöin voidaan taata että kaikilla on yhtä paska olla ja missään ei ole mitään yhtenäisiä kansakuntia, lopuksi voidaan kokeilla myös kommunismia.
 

Rauhantekijä

Ylipäällikkö
Ratkaisu on luonnollisesti monikulttuuri
Itse asiassa sekakulttuuri on juuri syy siihen miksi alueella on riitoja. Venäjä muodosti aikanaan "valtioiden" rajoja piittaamatta väestön etnisestä taustasta. Sinnehän nuo riidat juontavat.
Sekakulttuurit ovat riitaisia joka paikassa. Esimerkkejä epäonnisista on vissiin enemmän kuin esimerkkejä onnistuneista sekakulttuureista.
.
 

Leaderwolf

Ylipäällikkö
Lahjoittaja
Kyllä on.
Jos minä voisin ratkaista tuon konfliktin, lähtisin siitä, että samanmieliset kansalaiset laitetaan samalle alueelle. Näin ollen Iranin rajaa vasten olevan suikaleen Azerit luovuttaa Armenialle ja Vuoristo-Karabahin alueelta armenialaisia siirtyy tuolle alueelle. Karabach liitetään pääosin Azerbaizhaniin ja sille alueelle siirtyy enimmäkseen azereita ensisijassa ensin mainitulta luovutetulta alueelta (Nahitsevanin ympäristö) ja sitten muualtakin. Nuo pirstaloituneet maa-alueet on muokattava uudelleen yhtenäisiksi ja yhden kansan asuttamaksi alueeksi. Muuten ei rauhaa tule.

Ratkaisumalli on siis jotakuinkin YK:n vahvistaman mukainen mutta alueliitoksia ja kansansiirtoja tarvitaan. Armenialaiset ja azerit ovat erilaisia ja pitää laittaa omiin karsinoihinsa.

.
Noinhan sen pitäisi mennä, olisi varmaan ainoa toimiva ratkaisu poistaa tuo Azerien enklaavi, ja siirtää se tavallaan Azerien pääalueen kylkeen. Tämä luultavasti kävisi Armeniallekin, jonka sisäpoliittiset ongelmat heikentävät sitä. Sen sijaan en jaksa uskoa että rautanyrkin alla olevat Azerit suostuvat tuohon, he haluavat Nagorno Karabahin kokonaan itselleen, eivätkä tule hyväksymään mitään muuta, niin kauan kuin heillä on saavutettavissa sotilaallinen ylivoima, ja kosto edellisen sodan nöyryytyksestä. Ilman Venäjää Armenia olisi joutunut täysimittaisen hyökkäyksen kohteeksi jo muutamia vuosia sitten, nyt jos Armenia menettää vallanvaihdon yhteydessä Venäjän sateenvarjon, voi Azerit koittaa uudestaan onneaan. Olen itse asiassa lähes varma siitä. Koska jos Venäjä vetää kilven pois, ja maailman huomio on ihan muualla, voimatasapainon ollessa Azerien puolella, siitä tulee invaasio.
 

Talvela

Ylipäällikkö
Itse asiassa sekakulttuuri on juuri syy siihen miksi alueella on riitoja. Venäjä muodosti aikanaan "valtioiden" rajoja piittaamatta väestön etnisestä taustasta. Sinnehän nuo riidat juontavat.
Sekakulttuurit ovat riitaisia joka paikassa. Esimerkkejä epäonnisista on vissiin enemmän kuin esimerkkejä onnistuneista sekakulttuureista.
.
Esimerkeiksi onnistuneesta monikulttuurista nostetaan usein Yhdysvallat, Kanada ja Australia jotka ovat entisiä siirtomaita ja siirtolaisten asuttamia.
Tässä on perää viime sotiin saakka jonka jälkeen niiden balkanisaatio on edennyt niin pitkälle että sisäisten ristiriitojen määrä on kasvanut kiihtyvään tahtiin kuten kaikissa muissakin rajansa avanneissa länsimaissa.
Kansakunnan yhtenäisyyttä on vaikea mitata ja siihen vaikuttaa moni asia mutta sosialismin leviämisen lisäksi länsimaisia kansakuntia on hajaannuttanut nimenomaan maahanmuutto.
 

Leaderwolf

Ylipäällikkö
Lahjoittaja
BACKGROUND: Thanks to the substantial revenues from gas and oil exports in recent years, Azerbaijan’s armed forces are now a well-financed and equipped force. This year, Azerbaijan budgeted US$ 1.7 billion for its army of 66,000 personnel, amounting to 5.1 percent of the country’s GDP. Azerbaijan’s modernized armed forces feature a range of new equipment, 85 percent of which is imported from Russia. Armenia also allocates a significant amount of its GDP, (4.29 percent) to the military. However, for Armenia’s impoverished economy, this represents only US$ 430 million for its 45,800 servicemen.



Azerbaijani ground forces possess around 450 tanks, 100 of which are third generation T-90 SA tanks and the rest are mostly older second generation T-72 tanks. Ground forces are also well equipped with 200 BMP-1, 2, 3 and BMD-1 infantry fighting vehicles, as well as 750 BTR-70 and 80A armored personnel carriers. Armenian ground forces have 228 T-72 and medium T-55 tanks at their disposal. The third generation is represented only by 20 pieces of T-80 tanks. The 420 infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers that Armenia possesses display an even bigger disparity from its opponent. In addition, most of these vehicles are outdated and in a rather bad condition, with only 50 pieces of modern BMP-2 and 160 BTR-80.

Azerbaijan’s ground dominance is most visible in the field of artillery, with around 120 multiple rocket launchers and 60 older 2S1 Gvozdika self-propelled howitzers. It has also purchased more modern Msta-S self-propelled howitzers, the infamous TOS-1 Heavy Flamethrower System, the self-propelled 120 mm Vena mortar system and several pieces of Tochka-U tactical ballistic missiles from Russia. Azerbaijan inherited dozens of BM-21 “Grad” multiple rocket launchers from the USSR, but in 2013 also imported modern 9A52 Smerch multiple rocket launchers from Russia. It also purchased the portable anti-tank complex SKIF from Ukraine. Armenia also inherited dozens of Grads and purchased several WM-81 multiple rocket launchers from China in 1999 and later the French portable Milan anti-tank complex. Yet it lacks the more powerful Smerch and TOS-1 systems. Armenia also possesses the short range ballistic missile system 9K720 Iskander and Tochka-U tactical ballistic missiles.

With regard to air defense, Azerbaijan possesses the Tor and Buk (MB, MI1-2) missile systems, and Osa-1T and Strela-10, S-300, S-200, S-125 and Indian-Israeli (SAM) Barak 8 tactical surface-to-air missile systems. Armenia’s air defense is less modernized and variable, yet it is still formidable. Its backbone is the S-300 surface-to-air missile system, supported by S-200, S-125, S-75, Strela and portable SAM Igla.

In the air, Azerbaijan’s dominance is undeniable. Baku has 16 MiG-29 and MiG-29 UB fighter aircraft from Ukraine as well as 19 Su-25 jet aircraft supported by 2 Su-24 attack aircraft and 2 Il-76 strategic airlifters. Over the last five years, Azerbaijan’s air force has purchased 60 MI-17 helicopters and 24 modern MI-35M helicopters. Armenia is significantly lagging behind in terms of fighter aircraft and its ground forces are supported only by 15 obsolete Su-25 jet aircraft and L-39 trainer aircraft. Armenia has 12 MI-24 attack helicopters, along with 10 multipurpose Mi-8 and several very outdated Mi-2 transport helicopters.

In the case of Nagorno-Karabakh, the Armenian army is supported by ca 20,000 highly motivated servicemen of the Nagorno-Karabakh Defense Army, armed with about 170 T-55 tanks, 250 infantry fighting vehicles, 320 pieces of artillery including 40 Grads, with a limited number of SAM and air force units. In addition, many ordinary residents of Nagorno-Karabakh are war veterans whose cellars are stocked with weapons.

IMPLICATIONS: Azerbaijan’s army is both larger and better equipped than its Armenian counterpart. However, in order to assess the actual strength of both sides, additional factors need to be taken into account, which led to Armenia’s victory against a much stronger and better equipped Azerbaijan in the 1990s.

Unlike Azerbaijan, which descended into chaos during the Karabakh war, Armenia built its statehood and managed to keep its society coherent, avoiding protests and factional struggles during the war. It was the domestic power struggle in Azerbaijan that allowed Armenians to seize the crucial Azerbaijani stronghold of Shusha. Armenia was also able to swiftly create a professional army, absorbing various militias, and thus boosting both morale and political stability in its army. Armenia’s priority for effective anti-aircraft capabilities over air superiority was crucial, enabling it to decimate Azerbaijan’s air force with small losses. A similar tactic was applied regarding tanks. Armenians used the difficult terrain of Karabakh, in combination with anti-tank weapons, to first destroy enemy tanks and then deploying their own tanks in a counteroffensive.

Armenia was also more active and successful in the field of diplomacy, effectively lobbying for its interests in Moscow and Washington. The Russian presence in Gyumri secured Armenia’s western flank, enabling it to concentrate its forces in Karabakh. And finally, whereas victory was an issue of prestige and justice for Azerbaijanis, Armenians viewed it as a question of national survival, which was mirrored in the morale of Armenian soldiers.

Yet today, many factors that previously worked in Armenia’s favor are no longer present. Unlike in the early 1990s, Azerbaijan is a largely stable country, with a well-equipped and trained professional military. Azerbaijan also enjoys a larger advantage in terms of military equipment than ever before. On the other hand, Armenia’s diplomatic influence remains strong and Azerbaijan would suffer heavily in terms of international condemnation should it seek to reintegrate the separatist region by force. And although Russia seeks a more balanced relationship with Baku, it could hardly abandon its ally Armenia if facing an Azerbaijani onslaught. Also, unlike in the early 1990s, Karabakh with its densely forested high mountains towering as a natural fortress over the Kura-Aras lowland is under full control of well entrenched Armenians.

Therefore, despite Azerbaijan’s superiority, reintegrating Nagorno-Karabakh by force would probably cost Baku too much in terms of both diplomatic and military losses. Yet the imbalance of forces has never been larger and Baku recently found a window of opportunity to strike with small losses in order to bolster the stability of the regime and to break the status quo regarding the stuck peace process.

It seems that this rare window was opened by Russia, Armenia’s closest ally. As a member of the CSTO, Armenia can buy weapons and equipment from other members at discounted prices. Although Yerevan purchased 35 T-72 tanks and 110 armored vehicles from Russia, the current condition of Armenia’s economy has limited Yerevan to mostly purchase firearms such as AK-105 rifles, machine guns, carbines and several sniper rifles. In contrast, Moscow provided richer Azerbaijan with much of the devastating weaponry accounted for above.

These purchases have certainly tipped the military balance in Baku’s favor. In February 2016, Moscow announced it will provide Yerevan with a credit of US$ 200 million to buy new military equipment, including Smerch, TOS-1, the Avtobaza-M ground-based radar jamming and deception system, RPG-26 anti-tank rocket launchers, Tigr infantry mobility vehicles, Konkurs-M anti-tank missiles, Dragunov sniper rifles and KamAz trucks. Such purchases would probably reestablish the relative military balance between the parties. This might compel Baku to use the closing opportunity to conduct a limited and moderately successful operation in Karabakh..


3625D44D-346C-460C-BAEE-84CFE3BE7750.png
-

Mitähän sitä sanotaan asekauppiaasta joka muu kummallekin? Nojaa, Venäjä tarvitsee rahaa, siinä ei kunniaa tunneta.
 

Leaderwolf

Ylipäällikkö
Lahjoittaja
"Armenia’s priority for effective anti-aircraft capabilities over air superiority was crucial, enabling it to decimate Azerbaijan’s air force with small losses. A similar tactic was applied regarding tanks. Armenians used the difficult terrain of Karabakh, in combination with anti-tank weapons, to first destroy enemy tanks and then deploying their own tanks in a counteroffensive."

Tuostahan tulee mieleen ihan eräs pohjoinen valtio, jolla on myös agressiivisesti käyttäytyvä iso naapuri riesanaan :cool:
 

Leaderwolf

Ylipäällikkö
Lahjoittaja
Azerbaidžan totesi eilen ettei Nagorno Karabah ole mikään kiistanalainen alue (vaan heidän). Eli ei mitään uutta tähän kohtaan, mutta katsokaapa mikä nimi siellä on pistänyt lusikkansa soppaan. Oikein Suomalainen vihreiden edustaja itse sanomassa että tämä on sama asia kuin Karjalan menettäminen.

Nagorno-Karabakh is an Azerbaijani region, not a disputed territory, said Ambassador Kamil Khasiyev, a representative of Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry.

He made the remarks speaking about the process of negotiation on the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict during the 15th meeting of the EU-Azerbaijan Parliamentary Cooperation Committee in Baku on May 8.
The ambassador noted that the Nagorno-Karabakh problem must be considered the same as the conflicts in South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria and Ukraine.
Vice-President of the European Parliament Heidi Hautala also addressed the meeting.
“I’m a representative of a family expelled from Karelian peninsula during the World War II. Therefore, I share your feelings in connection with the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict,” she said.
The EP vice-president expressed support for a peaceful solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

“Noting that Western Sahara is one of disputed territories, Hautala pointed to the existing problems with goods and services in occupied lands.

Vice Speaker of the Azerbaijani Parliament Ziyafat Asgarov noted that the occupation of Azerbaijani lands was discussed with the European Commission as well.
"The territorial integrity of Azerbaijan is supported by the UN Security Council resolutions and other international documents. But why are these resolutions not fulfilled? Is it my fault that I am a Muslim born in Azerbaijan? Why does South Ossetia receives a different kind of attitude? If they had approached the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict from the prism of international law in 1989, there would have been no other conflicts in the world. Today separatist movements are on the rise in Spain and other European countries. I demand justice from European democracy,” he said.
The vice speaker said that Armenians claim that Nagorno-Karabakh was given to Azerbaijan under Stalin's decision in 1924.
"Stalin did not have such a decision. The Transcaucasian Bureau simply decided to leave Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan,” he added.

http://defence.az/en/news/127025

PS. On ne ehtiviä kavereita.

Over the past 24 hours, Armenia’s armed forces have 90 times violated the ceasefire along the line of contact between Azerbaijani and Armenian troops, the Azerbaijani Defense Ministry said May 8.
 
Viimeksi muokattu:

Norsu

Kersantti
Kesällä olisi tarkoitus tsekata Armenia ja Azerbaidžan moottoripyörällä. Konfliktialueen jätän suosiolla väliin, mutta varmasti mielenkiintoista menoa luvassa :)

Mikähän on Turkin peliliike, jos Venäjä poistaa käytännön turvatakuut alueelta?
 

Leaderwolf

Ylipäällikkö
Lahjoittaja
Kesällä olisi tarkoitus tsekata Armenia ja Azerbaidžan moottoripyörällä. Konfliktialueen jätän suosiolla väliin, mutta varmasti mielenkiintoista menoa luvassa :)

Mikähän on Turkin peliliike, jos Venäjä poistaa käytännön turvatakuut alueelta?
Venäjä tarvitsee Armeniaa. Se on sen tukevin jalansija kaukasuksella. Ainoa mikä saisi Venäjän vetämään tukensa, olisi Armenian uuden johdon siirtyminen euraasialaisista suhteista transatlanttisiin, ja vaikka uusi pääministeri onkin EU myönteinen, hän ymmärtää olla tekemättä itsemurhaa maallensa. Hän ei tule suututtamaan Venäjää niin kovin, että Venäjä vetäisi suojajoukkonsa pois Turkin rajalta. Josta on vain 20km Armenian pääkaupunkiin. Nyky Armenia on vain pieni häivähdys historiallisista alueistaan, ja ilman Venäjän joukkoja sekä poliittista tukea, katoaisi hyvin nopeasti kokonaan. Azerbaidžan ja Turkki söisivät Armenian saman tien elävältä jos Venäjä vetäytyisi. Armenia myy siksi itsensä uudestaan Venäjälle. Heillä ei ole vaihtoehtoa.
 
Top