The new Karabakh war of 2020 and the Azerbaijani military victory has redrawn the landscape of the South Caucasus and fundamentally changed the dynamics of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict.
Yet the dispute over Nagorny Karabakh, now more than a century old, remains unresolved, and some kind of international peace process will continue to try to forge a full peace agreement. …>>>
South Caucasus Programme Director, Conciliation Resources, and associate fellow at the Russia and Eurasia Programme at the Royal Institute of International Affairs at Chatham House
Defeat in the second Karabakh war confronts Armenia with its gravest crisis in a century. In addition to the human cost of lives lost and maimed, Armenia’s military capacity has been ravaged, and its doctrines of deterrence, strategic depth and self-reliance in Nagorny Karabakh are broken. Armenia is now the weakest player in a wider geopolitical dynamic reshaping the South Caucasus, a process in which its leverage and decision-making power are marginal. …>>>
N 07 (115) July/2018
In this issue of the “Analyticon” we present to the readers’ attention the materials prepared within the framework of the project “Public Expertize of the Nation-Army Concept” implemented by Public Agenda NGO.
With the support of Open Society Foundations- Armenia, the “Public Agenda” NGO carried out work in three directions within the framework of the “Public Expertise of the Nation-Army Concept”
- Study of the political purposes of the concept, comparative analysis of the model of the Nation- army Concept or the Mass armies in other countries, as well as comparative analysis of their political prerequisites
- expert analysis of the concept
- Study of attitude towards the concept in a particular target group, among students;
The materials in this handbook are included in this same sequence as the three stages of the work carried out. …>>>
WHY DOES THE ARMENIAN GOVERNMENT SUBORDINATE THE POLITICAL COMPONENT OF SECURITY TO THE MILITARY ONE?
Fetishization of the Military Component
The four-day war in April 2016 once again showed that the Armenian society links the security issue with only the military component. In the expert-analytical circles it is widely believed that the second war in Karabakh started as a result of a breach of the military balance. There are serious grounds for such an assertion, given that Azerbaijan had through the recent years boosted its military budget, gained modern deadly offensive weapons and seriously prepared for large-scale military operations. Armenia’s strategic ally, Russia has not only rapidly contributed to the Azerbaijan’s armament efforts, but also slowed down the Armenian army’s re-arming arrangements, thereby contributing to a significant breach of the military balance and creating favorable conditions for the war’s resumption. …>>>
Armenia’s governance system is in deep crisis, which has its negative impact on the security and development prospects of the country. Certain processes, as well as numerous international reports, indicate the symptoms of a systemic crisis.
After the presidential elections in 2008 and the use of force against peaceful demonstrators on March 1, Armenia’s governance system appeared in a deep crisis, which has been manifested in different ways over the last 10 years. There is a pressure on the model of governance not only by the public, but also by international factors and external challenges, in particular in the form of threat from Azerbaijan, which Armenia is not able to properly respond to. …>>>
The Government System and the Army
Israel is a republic with a parliamentary model of governance. It does not have a constitution, which is substituted by a number of legislative acts. The Head of the State is the President, whose powers are limited. The executive government is headed by the prime minister. The supreme legislature is a single-house parliament (Knesset). The judicial system is made up of secular and spiritual courts and the Supreme Court. The Prime Minister and the Ministers are elected from among the members of the Parliament. After the Knesset’s approval, the ministers receive a vote of confidence from the “bottom”, the massive support, and from the “top”, i.e. from the parliament.
Israel is an agrarian-industrial country with militarized economy. The industry is developing in the direction of strengthening the military-economic potential, mainly at the expense of foreign capital. In 1970, 40% of the country’s budget was allocated to military spending. …>>>
Switzerland is one of the most democratic countries in the world. Switzerland is among the top 10 most democratic countries in the list of “Economist” authoritative magazine “Democratic Index – 2016” 16. Nominal GDP per capita in 2017 was $ 80,837, which is the second in the world after Luxembourg17. Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) of Transparency International Anti-Corruption Authority, which is is a composite index based on various surveys conducted among businessmen and experts measuring the level of perceived corruption in the public sector in one or another country, in 2016 has given Switzerland’s the rating of 86, and it ranks fifth among 176 countries.
Switzerland’s success is not due to its natural resources, which are less significant in comparison with other countries, but political institutions that provide citizens’ opportunities to participate in political decision-making, as well as allowing citizens to actively participate in the country’s governance. …>>>
15 experts participated in the survey. The picture of the first questionnaire answers is quite diverse, but regarding the issue of the purpose of the Nation-Army program and the suggestions at this stage, there is some agreement among the experts.
In response to the question «What is your opinion on the new draft law “On the status of the military service and the soldier status”?», three (20%) of the respondents assessed the bill positively, citing the necessity and relevance of the bill. 33% were not unequivocally against or unequivocally for the bill, because they think that an attempt is made to settle simultaneously a number of issues and therefore positively assess the bill in some aspects, but also see many gaps and incomprehensible provisions. Half of the experts (47%) have a clear negative attitude towards this bill. …>>>
PUBLIC EXPERTISE OF THE «NATION-ARMY» CONCEPT ANALYSIS OF FOCUS GROUPS RESULTS Januar y – Mar ch, 20 18
THE METHODOLOGY OF RESEARCH
On October 29, 2016, during the session of the Board adjunct to the Minister, the Minister of Defense of the Republic of Armenia delivered a speech on the concept of “Nation-army” ideology.
The program received controversial reception
among the public, and a diversity of views was formed, both in the special expert groups and in the broad public discourse (media).
Within the framework of this project, a public expertise of the “Nation-army” ideology was carried out with the aim of a deep analysis of the given doctrine. In the present study, Focus Groups and Qualitative Interviews were applied to study and analyze the scope of the issues set for the project objectives and issues, as well as to develop new suggestions related to the “Nation-army” concept, with the participation of Armenian state and non-state university students. …>>>