Center for Strategic Assessment and forecasts

Autonomous non-profit organization

Home / Defence and security / / Articles
About the reasons for the "Four day war"
Material posted: Publication date: 26-04-2016

Azerbaijan-initiated military action and tough resistance from the Armenian side will discuss the analytical community. Such a discussion is more than relevant, and the conclusions made by analysts can be important in possible future developments. In this context, we will try to present some observations regarding the April events.

Global strategic plane. Commenting on any meaningful political process, analysts first try to answer the question of who all is profitable. If we consider this problem from the point of view of global developments, it is necessary to state that the major actors of the current "Cold war" – Russia and the United States. Today, their confrontation is manifested not only in military-political and economic processes around the Ukrainian crisis (Crimea, Donbass and Lugansk). In the strategic plan are subject to the same logic of events in Syria, where Russian intervention has blocked the distribution policy "chaos", which, in the opinion of a significant part of the analytical community (including Western), aimed at the creation of turbulence "in the vicinity" of Russia and China. Based on these realities, and given that one of the main purposes of any cold war – the depletion of the aggregate resources of the enemy, it is logical to consider the hypothesis that "April adventure" on the global plane is consistent or, at least, does not contradict the national interests of the United States. The Russian involvement in military actions in the South Caucasus would mean opening a "third front" against it.

In this regard, considering that the attack on NKR was started at a time when Ilham Aliyev was in the United States, some analysts have drawn Parallels between this event and the gamble taken against South Ossetia in August 2008 which preceded the famous telephone conversation between U.S. Secretary of state Condoleezza rice and Mikhail Saakashvili. In this context, worth mentioning is also the initiative intercosma Briton Robert Walter to PACE1.

At the same time, "four-day war" also some of the best actors on the regional scale.

Regional strategic plane. As a co-author of "April adventures" Turkey rightly pointed out that in the context of the Artsakh events has added to its motto "two States – one nation" and the phrase "one army". The motives of this state more than obvious. In a geopolitical project to create chaos in the greater middle East Turkey, with its neoromanesque geoideological, plays an important role, and before the intervention of Russia in the events in Syria quite successfully carried out its multi-faceted strategy, the principal components of which:

  • Military policy, whose goal is the overthrow of Assad, establishing control over part of Syrian territory. This policy was expressed in aid acting against the legitimate government of Syria to Islamic state and terrorist organizations.
  • Economic policy, manifested not only in the oil trade with ISIS, but the transit trade of the militants looted artifacts with great historic value.
  • Domestic policy aimed at a final solution to the "Kurdish question".

Mentioned push and pull factors can be supplemented by another circumstance, at this time, not rational properties. Talking about traditionally genocidaires, destructive essence of the policy of the leaders of Turkey, continuously pushing them to implement the genocides (Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians) and aggressive war (in particular, recall the occupation of Northern Cyprus in 1974).

Due to Russian interference in the Syrian events to the above program largely failed, and eventually the Turks got:

  • Over tense relations with Russia and the resulting economic decline,
  • Attacks accompanied by civil war inside the country
  • Who left Syria and returned to Turkey of aggressive Turkish and foreign fighters.

Thus, not only failed regional policy of Turkey, but all neoromantika concept and ideology. In the existing difficult situation, the Turkish side was just necessary successful revanchist campaign, in other words, the "small victorious war" directed, including against Russia and is, therefore, not condemn "international community". This "revenge" was more profitable to carry out indirectly, especially in "Artsakh issue" Azerbaijan long to persuade is not necessary, especially given that in Baku, "Turkish lobby" in the person of the Minister of defense Zakir Hasanov.

Regional tactical plane. The readiness of Azerbaijan to start military actions against Armenia (RA and NKR) due to several factors. From external causes need to highlight the fact that Azerbaijan (within their capabilities) is a full-fledged "actor" in the process of "formation of chaos" in the middle East. This is due not only a commitment to support "older brother" in the political sphere or the fact that the leadership of this country subscribes to the tenets of the doctrine "neo-Ottomanism". In some middle Eastern scenarios, it was assumed the failure of Iran and Russia in the Syrian war that would weaken the role of the latter in the South Caucasus. Obviously, such a scenario directly coincide with the interests of Azerbaijan.

Note also that Baku and Ankara made direct contacts with the IG. It is known that the recruitment of fighters for ISIS engaged the brother of the chief personal security Aliyev, created the appropriate network in Russia. It is noteworthy that at the present time, the survivors of Azerbaijani militants of the IGreturn to Azerbaijan, and this, along with economic difficulties caused by falling oil prices, causing trouble inside the country.

In addition to the above circumstances, the present rather tumultuous events in the world seems to be overshadowed by issues connected with the NKR. The question was "revive", and this is another motivation to make a decision about the beginning of hostilities.

Russia's Strategy. Summarizing the observations on "April adventure", perhaps, it is necessary very briefly to touch and "balancing" diplomacy of the Russian Federation. It should be noted that if the sale of arms to the enemy of his state of the Union may have some economic explanations, concerning the overall regional strategy of justification is hard to find. It cannot be excluded that Moscow sees as a positive precedent of policy in 1918-1921 policy, thanks to which she managed to gain control over the whole South Caucasus. Meanwhile today there is no unifying ideology, which then was a socialist. Specifically for Azerbaijan's membership in the EEU is not such an appealing prospect. Besides, in that period Russia had to deal with a weakened Turkey, just trying to recover after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. It is obvious that the present Turkey and Azerbaijan are not the ones that a century ago. In the face of Azerbaijan, Russia even in the economic sphere will have a partner, and a kind of "Outpost" of Turkey in his own camp. Because today relations of Russia-Turkey are subject to logic "geopolitical incompatibility" that must be considered in any actions connected with Azerbaijan. Of course, an important factor in this process are also known orientations of the partners of the Russian Federation in the format of EurAsEC and CSTO. At the same time, it seems that only a more stringent policy of Azerbaijan can lead to more tangible results from the point of view of national interests of Russia.

1 Հրայր Փաշայան, Լիանա Բալայան, Ռոբերտ Ուոլթերի հակահայկական զեկույցը. հայացք Արցախից (Pashayan Hrayr, Lianna Balayan, Armenian report of Robert Walter: a view from Artsakh (in Armenian.lang.)),


Gagik Harutyunyan



RELATED MATERIALS: Defence and security