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
the South
north,
Caucasu
Turkey
often in
the s west
region
regarded
small, yetas
and is
the landIran
the in
completely
the bounded
bridge south.
dissimilar
present
this where
Thisby
the East
nations
region.
because the
region,
of it, and
character each country has managed to develop their own distinct character, culture and
in Black
the
have
of
Each
history. West
its
Like
Sea
combination
meet.
emerged
peoples
left itsare
in
a Within –neighbors in the Caucasus, Azerbaijan has
with
thisa
storied
thethe
Armenia, history.
west
inextricably
legacy, Baku, its capital, was a sacred place
for
Zoroastrians
and
Russian
geographicall
Azerbaijan
tied
for the because of the many natural fires fueled
to the
by
y
and escaping
Caspian
North
confined
legacy
better of gas. Over the centuries it was
dominated
by Persians,
Sea
Caucasus,
space
Georgia.
the
or in
three
several is Byzantines, Armenians, and Turks
before
its
The annexation
the
empires
worse, east, by the Tsar in 1813. From that time,
by
except
history
that
within Russia
have for
of a short period of freedom from 1918
to inregion
1920,
ruled
the it was a part of the Russian-Soviet Empire. As
over
the
three Soviet Union disintegrated, the Caucasus nations
saw
nations. their opportunity and, following the Georgian
lead,
Despite Azerbaijan declared its independence in
August
this
1991.
legacy,
or Despite
in the borders of present nation,
Azerbaijan only a portion of the land
encompasses
some
actually
inhabited
cases by ethnic Azerbaijanis. A full two thirds of
the
evenregional
Azerbaijani
for 24
population
percent
ongoing of
livesIranian
the
conflicts
Colonel
and to the
south, across
population,
for
Bernard
second
consolidat
theitsAras
with
Griffard,
(1826-
e
Aras the
domination
rule
River.
River,
city
of
USA,
1828)
over theof in
the
Seeking
northwestern
Tabriz
Caucasus
Retired,
Russo-
Since
entire asis nATO
inTegrATiOn
Iran.
their
between
a
Persian There
independenc
Caucasus
they
historic
Persia
Professor
Wars. account
and
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
Bothhasofworked
defining
Turkish-led force under
Thisto came
primarily
Logistics
which
the develop
about
through
in
ended
closer
the Center
northern in ties for Strategic Leadership, U.S. Army War College (USAWC).
the
through
the firstthe
Operations
significant
with
border of West
Colonel
(1812-
and
defeats
and isand James Shufelt is the Director of th USAWC Support Branch, OGD, CSL
Persia,
Mr.
1813)
Gaming
for Ritchie
Iran, Dion is a Senior Strategic Analyst (Contractor) in OGD, CSL.
actively
later Persia
Divison
allowing
as pursuing
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
Forces. in
In support
withdrawn
peacekeepin
of these
under
following
g the
operations
Kosovo’s the
its
in efforts
auspices
mission to
of
TCTU.S.
the
provide
seminarofin Azerbaijan September 9-11, 2008U.S.
declaration
Afghanistan that/ NATO Military Organization, Operations
European
Chairman
support
addressed
The to
Standardization
USAWC
Iraq. team
independence
and . &
consisted of Professor Bernard F. Griffard and Colonel James W. Shufelt, Jr. from
of
theCommand
the
Center
. In addition,
These for Strategic Leadership (CSL).
(USEUCOM)
Joint
Combatant
experiences
The
utilizes
Chiefs 16 Azerbaijani military participants ranged
of
Commanders,
compliment
thein
rank from
traveling
Staff’s
U.S. First Lieutenant (02) to Colonel/CAPT (06),
Army
the
and
War represented
contact
(CJCS) College their Ministry of Defense, the General
Staff,
teams
Joint
(USAWC) and(TCT)
the operational forces. Drawing from NATO
operations
Contact
conducted ain the Balkans and Afghanistan and
from
personal
Team experience, the team provided these officers with
a
p erspective on NATO military structure; the national and
Program.
NATO
As partrolesof 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
strategic planning NATO operational
procedures. techniques
Throughout
theflowing.
free
Armed
Theseminar
Their senior
Forces.
junior officers
thethe
officers
practical
They
from
theAzerbaijani
encouraged
experience
highlighted
Peacekeeping
s
theofficers
active
participants
provided
need that
Battalion
for
hadexhibited
participation
valuable
identified
more
served
professional theamilitary education for both commissioned and non-commissioned
by high
need the
insights
in-country
with to
NATO
officers. level
two
to
ChAllengeS
of U.S.
interest
Infantry
the
maintain
English
andProgress the Of
towards
independenCe
and in
Battalion
audience
momentum
classes
integration
Forces ofinto
as discussions
Commanders
ongoing
along
NATO,
a whole.
with
Afghanistan and military
within
At were ato
three
efforts
assistance complicated geo-political environment. Azerbaijan entered this most recent era
open
professionalization
the
and Iraq.
of independence
conclusion
further
in and modernization saddled with
CSL 2
of must
professionaliz
improving
the be
seminar
e
thetheir
accomplished
 mixed
“Azerbaijan is located in a tough
blessings
growth as
neighborhood...”
“Azerbaijan
. On the
they are is
“You
When
the knowin
located
United
Uunitedwe2 are at war”
a
States
.”States Senator Richard Lugar made this observation in January 2008 he could not
plus side
developed
have
.the On tough
the to
Similar
foreseen
to
nation
minus neighborhoo
all
Yugoslavia, how
century
tough
Caucasus
of d where
the
possesse
side, itthis
is
the
neither
leader bya
s present a are
countries
neighborhood
countries
concerns
NATO large
country
natural
s
nations. and
would
altered
of
backer under
their
integrationby of the
an ofas or a top foreign policy priority for Azerbaijan, progress However,
is the government is still
3
energy
split borders
progression
dividin
It was
the
become. tremendous
political
neighbors.
Azerbaijan’
measured.
committed
reserves
ethnicthe The
and to the professionalization and modernization of the Armed
nations
self
g
not
Soviet up
Armenian until
Russian
s
Forces.
that pressure
environment.
Russia
territorial
of Armenia to
determination.
region
1936
Union.
leadership
(SSR). Hetheir TrAnSfOrmATiOn
SuppOrTing
invasionkeep
Azerbaijan’s
and of
s
that asIranor
integration
promise
conflict.
and
Rather,
However,
and
awarded
Oblast, they
Georgia
into
a distance
geographic
prefer
high the
Azerbaijan and
evolved
they
Soviet
in
declared
the
NKAO. In
Moscow, region
support the of this goal the USEUCOM security
the
location
cooler from
Alliance.
level message
were of
through
saw
Premier
keeping
the
This fit
highest
government
cooperation
Azerbaijani the efforts that lead to the growth of professionalism
it sent
requires
relations
Though
economic
finally
actions fullSSR.
withou
Joseph
with
Nagorno-
level
action
of
and the ofof
technical proficiency of the Azerbaijani Armed
consideration
with
President
As the
defined
tvictorious
the
Stalin an ethnic,
in
Stalin’s
Karabakh
autonomy,
also
Azerbaijani
Forces
should continue to receive emphasis. Within the professional
West,
IlhamArmenian
and/or
thedid
approp
decided
policy 20th
of
region
designating
formalized
SSR
military aseducation
not sector it is important to focus efforts
while
Aliyev
populated
unification has 1991.
riate
to
“divide
part
it
the
on
Turkey
named
theof the
legallyThe Minsk
tomorrow’s is a andThe
leadersGroup shooting The
strategists. war new
lasted until a Russian-brokered ceasefire in 1994. Over
generation
with province
consid
recogniz
and
Nagorno-
regions
recognize Armenia
rule”
Azerbaijani of the intervening years all attempts to resolve the conflict, undertaken unilaterally
of
officers
Co-Chairs
member
NATO encountered
: France, during this TCT has the experience
Russia
was
he Azerbaijan,
eration
e each
Soviet a as
went
Karabakh
borders.
NKAO source
asa by the United States and Russia and through the auspices of the Minsk
of
working
of the and
United States.
of
a Nagorno-
armed
againstthe
Socialist
Autonomous
Despite
cohesive Group,
an organization specifically formed by the Organization for Security
with NATO
Armed
Karabakh’s
conflict
natural
separate
Republic
the
province prior States:
Participating and
Belarus,
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to address the conflict, have failed to find
forces
Forces. and
to demonstrated
borderand
republic
wishes
Germany,
actions
within of
of Italy,
the a
Portugal,
compromise acceptable to******
the all parties. The Russian invasion of Georgia in
possess This and other CSL publications may be found on the USAWC/CSL web site at:
*serve
the desire
following
s
within
Netherlands,
Soviet for August
Sweden,
2008 Finland,
will most likely only to further complicate the situation. Though our
the http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usacsl/IPapers.asp.
independence
Azerbaijan
betwe
Turkey, as well asguidelines
leadership Armenia and specifically put a discussion of a U.S. position on Nagorno-
leadership ******
independenc
en
in Azerbaijan. Karabakh
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
of the States Army Warconcerns.
required
United
The College, the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or any other Department
to form or Agency within the U.S. Government. This report is cleared for public release; distribution is unlimited.
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
3. Richard,
Khazri Azerbaijan,
Bakinsky and Mina “Azerbaijan Pursues NATO Eurasia , March 16, 2007,
of the
of declaration
community
confrontation
a large Muradova, of Integration,”
http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav031607.shtm Insight
l. eurasianet.org,
modern
will independenc
independent
between
”peaceke
economy allow by
With
Azeri
e
status
Nagorno-
Armenia
eping” by for
shrinking
the theand
“…considerable
United
Georgia’s
Karabakh
Azerbaijan
force
foreign
end in Statesto energy resources brighten its long-term
prospects.”
South
and
the and
follow
of could
investment, the
suit.
Such
also
SouthEuropean
Ossetia
resulting
the a and
provide in a
economic
Union
Abkhazia
situation
an
Caucasu
slowdown
Tsarist of
prosperity.
supported by
provinces
could
opportunity
s
the region.
mono trigger
Investment
modern
still a 1
raised
another
for
Such afears
Russia
modernization
modern
poly to
by the
infrastructure.
major
natural
impose
scenario
of
at
business
in
the
best,theArmed
Nobels and
Though
energy
gas
transit ethnic
would
Forces.
efforts.
only
sites.
early
the
strife
resource
producer,
infrastructure
CIA World at
most
However,
partially
Although
1870’
Rothschilds
destroyed
the time
Azerbaijan
from
Factbook the
likely
based
occupied.
Baku s ison
resulted
much
of
is the of the
the
Caucasus in
these
TheseBaku not
assessment
impact
becoming
the large
infrastructure
Bolshevik
origin
controlled
that for by
the experi oil
observations
buildings
a
government’s
development
in 1905,
Revolution.
the
Russia.
profits Baku- Baku
Our
,growing
may
largesse.
itencedbeare
showplace,
appears In
of
was major
Today,
T’bilisi-
personal
providing
the country in a may become a drag on sustained economic growth.
many
more
the itslong
Azeri
aof the
term,
oilfields
addition
Ceyhan
observations
big boost to
new
mechanism
hinterland
failure
first to to
being in
(BTC)
while a Baku
infrastructure
commercial
to
is
improve
energ
launder the
key 1. oilKing,
pipeline,
confirm
modernization and The,Ghost
(New York:
of Freedom
Oxford University Press 2008) 150. King points out that in 1914 there were
and
money
apparently
transportation
y-
the
oil only
wells Charles,
in Baku, and 2,541
that at the time of the Bolshevik revolution over 150 oil companies were active in the
residential
than
not
and fueled
housing
major
city. CSL 3
structures
human
sharing
infrastructure
periodin
petroleum
are,
shelters
the
throughout
of or