Balancing the military might in the Caucuses is vital to peace.
“If you want peace, prepare for war.” The alignment of military strengths tracks with sound negotiation for peace.
“Si vis pacem, para bellum.” The Latin adage, “If you want peace, prepare for war.” It is a concept developed as early as Plato’s work, providing insight into the fact that conditions for peace are often preserved by a readiness to make war or military strength. Armenia is and must continue to build its military capabilities to deter war.
In our American history, we are all too familiar with this concept. President George Washington, during his first annual address to a joint session of Congress, reiterated, “To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.” Ronald Reagan’s, at times, mocked strategy of “peace through strength” won the Cold War.
This concept of alignment of strength tracks with a sound negotiation strategy and, in this case, the negotiation of long-term peace with Armenia’s neighbor Azerbaijan. While every negotiation emanates from a conflict, relationship and trust remain critical criteria for cutting a deal. In addition, checking and balancing power is one of the ten critical elements of any negotiation that we discuss in our first book on “Newgotiation for Public Administration Professionals” and restated in our most recent book on “Advancing and Negotiating Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) a Toolkit.”
Sadly, neither the power balance nor trust and relationship exist for the possibility of lasting peace in the Caucuses. The proper framework of peace negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan is not in place until Armenia matches the capabilities of the Azeri military. Or at least Armenia develops the ability to strike Baku as Azerbaijan has threatened on many occasions to take “western Azerbaijan,” including Yerevan, which has been Armenian for several millennia. To be clear, lasting peace must be the goal. Violence is never the answer. To obtain this peace, Armenia must do what Azerbaijan has done to prepare for war since 2016.
The Associated Press reported in 2023 that Israeli arms helped Azerbaijan to effectively kill some and displace more than 120,000 ethnic Armenians from Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabakh. Ninety-two military cargo flights carried 70% of Azerbaijan’s arsenal between 2016 and 2020. Israeli long-range missiles, Turkish drones, Turkish and Pakistani military might, and substantial assistance gave Azerbaijan unprecedented superiority in the Caucuses.
In response, Armenia, to protect its sovereignty against the constant aggressions and infinite demands by its neighbor Azerbaijan, finally began to arm itself and upgrade its military establishment with the help of friendly nations like France, the United States, and India. Baku recently called these upgrades “provocative actions.” If nations are serious about seeing lasting peace in the Caucuses, they must support Armenia’s improvement of its military capabilities to deter war. Or, in the alternative, demand that Azerbaijan demilitarizes the borders with Armenia and disarms as opposed to raving about ten or more military joint exercises with its ally Turkey. Bragging about the full integration of their Azerbaijani and Turkish forces to fight with a “single fist” to grow their military strength does not build a much-needed relationship or trust in the Caucuses.
Armenia wants peace but must prepare for war. Until the negotiation framework has been neutralized, Armenia has no interest in making additional concessions to Azerbaijan. Lasting peace is, in fact, attainable, but it depends much on Azerbaijan’s behavior.
As to those who criticize the militarization of the Caucuses, they only have themselves to blame for failing to stop this madness. Some of us in academia and various political circles warned the world about the Azerbaijani military build-up with Israeli and Turkish arms sales and military consultants. The world witnessed the Azerbaijani blockade, aggression, dehumanization, and mass deportation of 120,000 ethnic Armenians. A series of events such as Russia’s betrayal of Armenia, a Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) partner, the EU’s silence and hypocrisy as a dependent on Azeri fossil fuel despite the Paris Accord, and the United States’ attention on Ukraine and transactional foreign policy brought us to this untenable tension in the caucuses.
Why should the United States, France, and the EU now care about leveling the military field? Judging from their words, actions, and continued military build-up, a new Azerbaijani offensive remains a real threat. An invasion of Armenia by armed aggression will delegitimize the world’s continued support of Ukraine-that international borders and sovereignty of democratic societies must be defended to preserve the world order. Finally, while the world did not care much about the humanitarian consequences for the 120,000 displaced Armenians, perhaps the human suffering in the Middle East will remind everyone of the true meaning of “never again!”
