In the ever-changing landscape of global conflicts, the future has always managed to surprise us. Regardless of our well-established doctrines, concepts, and experiences, each unfolding event somehow catches us off guard. This realization becomes particularly crucial when a war breaks out, introducing new methods and altering established pathways.
Post-2020, the focus revolves around three distinct courses. First is the large-scale operation in Ukraine, demanding attention due to its magnitude and implications. The second course is the Israel-Hamas conflict in 2021, with a unique emphasis on the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) as a modern approach to warfare. The third area of interest is the 2021 Nagorno-Karabakh war, notable for its mountain warfare dynamics, presenting a different operational challenges:
In the ever-changing landscape of global conflicts, the future has always managed to surprise us. Regardless of our well-established doctrines, concepts, and experiences, each unfolding event somehow catches us off guard. This realization becomes particularly crucial when a war breaks out, introducing new methods and altering established pathways.
Post-2020, the focus revolves around three distinct courses. First is the large-scale operation in Ukraine, demanding attention due to its magnitude and implications. The second course is the Israel-Hamas conflict in 2021, with a unique emphasis on the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) as a modern approach to warfare. The third area of interest is the 2021 Nagorno-Karabakh war, notable for its mountain warfare dynamics, presenting a different operational challenges:
“Second Nagorno-Karabakh War was the first war decided by autonomous weapons.”
Col. John F. Antal, U.S. Army (ret.)
Introduction
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict highlighted the challenges of mountain warfare, with its terrain peaks reaching 1800 meters and unpredictable weather. Steep landscapes covered by forests made infantry movement difficult, while communication hurdles emerged due to the topography. The 2020 operation in the southern part of Nagorno-Karabakh, bordered by Azerbaijan and Armenia, focused on vital territories, including the crucial Lachin corridor connecting the regions. This corridor, safeguarded at times by Russian peacekeepers, became a strategic lifeline.
The disputed area between Armenia and Azerbaijan with clearly visible importance of Lachin corridor as vital access route to the Nagorno Karabakh highland
In the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the Lachin corridor and Shushi city emerged as pivotal territories, holding the key to communication between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh cities. Positioned at 1368 meters, Shushi became a strategic linchpin, with the potential to sever vital connections. Before Azerbaijan’s 2020 offensive, Armenia fortified its defensive positions, boasting trenches, bunkers, minefields, and barbed wire established during the 90s war. The mountainous terrain provided a natural defence, and despite lacking modern camouflage, Armenians were confident in their ability to withstand Azerbaijani offensives. This shaped the dynamics of the conflict, with both sides keenly aware of the significance of key territories in this mountainous region.
Key and vital terrain in the area of operation
Azerbaijan concept of operation
Azerbaijan’s well-organized approach, supported by Turkey, unfolded in three strategic phases during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
In the initial phase, the focus was on dismantling key warfighting networks, with the primary effort directed towards Armenian air defence and missile systems. Azerbaijan employed a combination of low orbit satellites, UAVs, kamikaze drones, and Turkish firepower, creating a dynamic and swift operation. By October 3rd, Armenians faced substantial losses in tanks, artillery, and weapons.
Phase two involved a deep battle strategy with new robotic concepts, aiming to locate, fix, track, and destroy targets within the objective area. Azerbaijani forces targeted air defence systems, command and control structures, artillery units, and ground vehicles. Employing a swarming principle, this phase exploited advanced drone warfare, crippling Armenian defences. As the electronic warfare systems and artillery were neutralized, traditional land units faced vulnerability against drone attacks. Azerbaijani forces strategically cut off logistics, weakening Armenian defences in preparation for the final phase.
The third and decisive phase aimed at capturing the city of Shusha, a key element in the conflict. Shusha’s mountainous terrain made it a formidable fortress, but Azerbaijani specialized forces executed a surprise attack. Approximately 400 personnel crossed the Susha Lachin Road in three groups, strategically positioning themselves on the opposite side of Shusha. The successful capture of Shusha marked a pivotal moment in the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War, underscoring Azerbaijan’s adept use of strategic planning, technological advancements, and surprise tactics to secure victory.
Phase one: Blind, destroy and disrupt key warfighting networks. Phase 2: Fix Armenian combat power inside the strike zone and shape the battlespace. Phase 3: Maneuver to capture the center of gravity by seizing the decisive terrain.
During the third phase, Azerbaijan’s Special Forces pulled off a smart by surprising Shusha defenders. Over five days, navigating dense forests and ravines, cleverly divided into three smaller groups (consisting of approx. 100 personnel) to advance towards their target. The AZ Special Forces entered Shusha, successfully destroying artillery and armoured vehicles defended by approximately 2000 Armenian soldiers. Despite Shusha’s strong defences, the city was freed on November 8th using light vehicles with basic weapons. This unexpected strategy worked well, showing how clever tactics by Azerbaijan’s Special Forces secured Shusha’s liberation.
Staggering number of top attacks – the decisive method of engagement during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Conclusion: The Battlefield Is Transparent
In the aftermath of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, we can observe the crucial role of a full spectrum of defence. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan faced limitations in their short-range defence capabilities, with Azerbaijan utilising its large fleet of advanced drones effectively. The conflict underscores the importance of passive defence strategies, urging armed forces to explore new ways of camouflaging and masking units, equipment, and actions.
In an era of high-capability sensors and shooters, land forces must prioritize dispersion and deception tactics to limit their electronic, thermal and other signatures. The focus is not on becoming invisible but on staying in the shadow.
The conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh also emphasizes that individual weapon systems alone will not change the nature of war. The synchronization of new weapons enhances the precision of modern warfare, as seen in Azerbaijan’s successful combination of drones and artillery targeting high-value military assets.
Strategic planning is vital, encompassing an understanding of the situation, development of a strategy with clear ends, ways, and means, and immediate consideration of logistics. The mountainous terrain poses specific challenges, requiring thorough logistical planning and protection, as logistics often become a focal point for both friendly and enemy forces. Adaptation is key in the face of changing circumstances, recognizing that initial plans may be disrupted, and the ability to adjust to new challenges becomes crucial for success in modern warfare.
Key takeaways
The recent Nagorno-Karabakh conflict offers valuable insights into the evolving nature of warfare, emphasizing four critical lessons:
The concept of the battlefield has expanded to a more comprehensive battle space, incorporating land, air, cyber, and space domains.
Successful military strategies involve dominating as many domains as possible, requiring the orchestration of diverse activities in a multi-domain environment.
The importance of masking, an advanced concept beyond traditional camouflage will b of the utmost importance. Masking involves making it challenging for the enemy to detect and target, utilizing a full spectrum of active and passive means to disrupt sensors and targeting systems. The focus is not on invisibility but on reducing the probability of detection and confusing enemy targeting systems.
The conflict highlights the role of advanced technologies, including UAVs, satellites, missiles, and loitering ammunition systems. However, the technology alone cannot win wars. A successful approach requires a combination of concept, doctrine, and skilled individuals who can adapt to new technologies.
Also, there exist potential dangers posed by fully autonomous weapon systems, highlighting the need for ethical considerations. The decision cycle, ranging from semi-autonomous to fully autonomous systems, introduces complexities in determining responsibility and the potential misuse of such technologies. The broader implications emphasize the importance of ethical guidelines and international agreements in governing the development and deployment of autonomous weaponry.
05. NAGORNO-KARABAKH WAR 2020 &
In the ever-changing landscape of global conflicts, the future has always managed to surprise us. Regardless of our well-established doctrines, concepts, and experiences, each unfolding event somehow catches us off guard. This realization becomes particularly crucial when a war breaks out, introducing new methods and altering established pathways.
Post-2020, the focus revolves around three distinct courses. First is the large-scale operation in Ukraine, demanding attention due to its magnitude and implications. The second course is the Israel-Hamas conflict in 2021, with a unique emphasis on the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) as a modern approach to warfare. The third area of interest is the 2021 Nagorno-Karabakh war, notable for its mountain warfare dynamics, presenting a different operational challenges:
In the ever-changing landscape of global conflicts, the future has always managed to surprise us. Regardless of our well-established doctrines, concepts, and experiences, each unfolding event somehow catches us off guard. This realization becomes particularly crucial when a war breaks out, introducing new methods and altering established pathways.
Post-2020, the focus revolves around three distinct courses. First is the large-scale operation in Ukraine, demanding attention due to its magnitude and implications. The second course is the Israel-Hamas conflict in 2021, with a unique emphasis on the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) as a modern approach to warfare. The third area of interest is the 2021 Nagorno-Karabakh war, notable for its mountain warfare dynamics, presenting a different operational challenges:
Introduction
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict highlighted the challenges of mountain warfare, with its terrain peaks reaching 1800 meters and unpredictable weather. Steep landscapes covered by forests made infantry movement difficult, while communication hurdles emerged due to the topography. The 2020 operation in the southern part of Nagorno-Karabakh, bordered by Azerbaijan and Armenia, focused on vital territories, including the crucial Lachin corridor connecting the regions. This corridor, safeguarded at times by Russian peacekeepers, became a strategic lifeline.
In the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the Lachin corridor and Shushi city emerged as pivotal territories, holding the key to communication between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh cities. Positioned at 1368 meters, Shushi became a strategic linchpin, with the potential to sever vital connections. Before Azerbaijan’s 2020 offensive, Armenia fortified its defensive positions, boasting trenches, bunkers, minefields, and barbed wire established during the 90s war. The mountainous terrain provided a natural defence, and despite lacking modern camouflage, Armenians were confident in their ability to withstand Azerbaijani offensives. This shaped the dynamics of the conflict, with both sides keenly aware of the significance of key territories in this mountainous region.
Azerbaijan concept of operation
Azerbaijan’s well-organized approach, supported by Turkey, unfolded in three strategic phases during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
In the initial phase, the focus was on dismantling key warfighting networks, with the primary effort directed towards Armenian air defence and missile systems. Azerbaijan employed a combination of low orbit satellites, UAVs, kamikaze drones, and Turkish firepower, creating a dynamic and swift operation. By October 3rd, Armenians faced substantial losses in tanks, artillery, and weapons.
Phase two involved a deep battle strategy with new robotic concepts, aiming to locate, fix, track, and destroy targets within the objective area. Azerbaijani forces targeted air defence systems, command and control structures, artillery units, and ground vehicles. Employing a swarming principle, this phase exploited advanced drone warfare, crippling Armenian defences. As the electronic warfare systems and artillery were neutralized, traditional land units faced vulnerability against drone attacks. Azerbaijani forces strategically cut off logistics, weakening Armenian defences in preparation for the final phase.
The third and decisive phase aimed at capturing the city of Shusha, a key element in the conflict. Shusha’s mountainous terrain made it a formidable fortress, but Azerbaijani specialized forces executed a surprise attack. Approximately 400 personnel crossed the Susha Lachin Road in three groups, strategically positioning themselves on the opposite side of Shusha. The successful capture of Shusha marked a pivotal moment in the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War, underscoring Azerbaijan’s adept use of strategic planning, technological advancements, and surprise tactics to secure victory.
During the third phase, Azerbaijan’s Special Forces pulled off a smart by surprising Shusha defenders. Over five days, navigating dense forests and ravines, cleverly divided into three smaller groups (consisting of approx. 100 personnel) to advance towards their target. The AZ Special Forces entered Shusha, successfully destroying artillery and armoured vehicles defended by approximately 2000 Armenian soldiers. Despite Shusha’s strong defences, the city was freed on November 8th using light vehicles with basic weapons. This unexpected strategy worked well, showing how clever tactics by Azerbaijan’s Special Forces secured Shusha’s liberation.
Conclusion: The Battlefield Is Transparent
In the aftermath of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, we can observe the crucial role of a full spectrum of defence. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan faced limitations in their short-range defence capabilities, with Azerbaijan utilising its large fleet of advanced drones effectively. The conflict underscores the importance of passive defence strategies, urging armed forces to explore new ways of camouflaging and masking units, equipment, and actions.
In an era of high-capability sensors and shooters, land forces must prioritize dispersion and deception tactics to limit their electronic, thermal and other signatures. The focus is not on becoming invisible but on staying in the shadow.
The conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh also emphasizes that individual weapon systems alone will not change the nature of war. The synchronization of new weapons enhances the precision of modern warfare, as seen in Azerbaijan’s successful combination of drones and artillery targeting high-value military assets.
Strategic planning is vital, encompassing an understanding of the situation, development of a strategy with clear ends, ways, and means, and immediate consideration of logistics. The mountainous terrain poses specific challenges, requiring thorough logistical planning and protection, as logistics often become a focal point for both friendly and enemy forces. Adaptation is key in the face of changing circumstances, recognizing that initial plans may be disrupted, and the ability to adjust to new challenges becomes crucial for success in modern warfare.
Key takeaways
The recent Nagorno-Karabakh conflict offers valuable insights into the evolving nature of warfare, emphasizing four critical lessons:
Also, there exist potential dangers posed by fully autonomous weapon systems, highlighting the need for ethical considerations. The decision cycle, ranging from semi-autonomous to fully autonomous systems, introduces complexities in determining responsibility and the potential misuse of such technologies. The broader implications emphasize the importance of ethical guidelines and international agreements in governing the development and deployment of autonomous weaponry.