Foreign Policy Blogs

It’s never pleasant for anyone to be caught in the middle between two friends who don’t get along and frequently argue with each other. It’s uncomfortable when you’re a child, it’s awkward when you’re an adult, and it becomes even more problematic when you’re a country that must protect its citizens from the threats of neighboring states. Recently, Azerbaijan found itself caught in the middle between two of its most important allies—Turkey and Israel.

Turkey is Azerbaijan’s long-standing and closest ally; both nations see themselves as part of the same people living in two countries. On the other hand, Israel is also a close partner of Azerbaijan, with extensive trade relations in fields such as oil, weapons, and even mobile telecommunications (Israeli companies were responsible for founding the first mobile networks in Azerbaijan). But how did Azerbaijan end up in a position where it has to mediate between its two closest allies? Has Azerbaijan gained anything positive from this situation?

Let’s begin with some background. About a month and a half ago, the event that shook the Middle East was the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, nearly 25 years after he succeeded his father as president and almost 15 years after the outbreak of the Syrian Civil War. The group that took control in Syria is the Sunni Islamist rebel organization Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, led by Abu Mohammed al-Julani, whose real name is Ahmed al-Sharaa. This group is a successor of Jabhat al-Nusra, which split from ISIS and was considered the official branch of Al-Qaeda in Syria.

According to the group, they have moderated their stance; they no longer participate in the actions of Al-Qaeda or ISIS and only want to rebuild Syria. Despite their political statements, the new regime in Syria still raises concerns among regional countries and among Syrians who do not support Islamism and jihadism—except for one country: Turkey. Under Erdogan’s leadership, Turkey has supported the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham group and other opposition Islamist groups against Assad since the beginning of the civil war. Erdogan’s decision to help these groups came from a geopolitical conflict with Assad, so Turkey’s interest was in having Assad removed from power. Now that Erdogan’s allies have finally taken control, the West expects the new Syrian regime to be completely pro-Turkish.

One of the countries most concerned about the rising Turkish influence on the new Islamist-jihadist regime in Syria is Israel, who has strained relations with the Erdogan government. However, it greatly pains Azerbaijan whenever Israel and Turkey do not get along, as they are a brother nation of Turkey, despite their close friendship with Israel. They would rather see the rising Turkish influence in the region be utilized to create a strategic front against Iran rather than used to harm Israel.

What should Azerbaijan do to ease the tensions between its two major allies? After all, both of these countries, Turkey and Israel, have supported Azerbaijan in recent years in several areas, particularly in defense and weaponry during the Second Karabakh War. The cooperation between these two countries strengthens Azerbaijan both internationally and regionally and enhances its position in the eyes of its southern enemy—Iran. A conflict between Azerbaijan’s two closest allies, not to mention a military one, would harm Azerbaijan directly.

Given this, Azerbaijan seeks to utilize all the diplomatic means at its disposal to mediate between the two conflicting nations. Such a move is important not only for Azerbaijan’s future security but also to position the country from the Caucasus in a much stronger strategic and geopolitical position. From a country relying on its allies, it will transform into a country that advises, mediates, and resolves conflicts in the Middle East, with surrounding countries viewing its status as higher than before. Moreover, mediating between Turkey and Israel will not only strengthen Azerbaijan’s security but also that of Israel and Turkey, and will boost stability in the entire region. Azerbaijan cannot miss this opportunity, because if it succeeds in its mediation, it will gain much, but if it fails, it stands to lose a great deal. But the question remains, can Azerbaijan mend Turkish-Israeli relations?

With the beginning of 2025 bringing in a new American administration, the effects of the new policy regime is eliciting reactions towards the great weight of American pressure on different parts of the world. The new test on the seriousness of America First policies may be seen as a trap by some or as empty threats by others, but in either case will have a lasting effect nonetheless.

The tariff threats to Mexico and Canada show that Mexico is likely going to work with the US in sorting out common interests as migration flows from abroad are also a detriment to Mexico. The Nearshoring of many companies from China to Mexico will bring a tremendous amount of investment into Mexico. Mexico’s manufacturing base and Agro sector’s focus towards the US market has always been a benefit to Mexico. Even when considering America First policies, many manufactured goods will still be made outside of the US due to cost considerations and benefits to the US market. Security issues are best dealt with using over the border supports as linking trade and safety is essential. Challenging negative elements like gang activity or foreign involvement that harms the US by using Mexico’s close relationship with the United States will be a common focus on both sides of the border, continuously working within that framework. Despite Mexico’s Government having a left wing orientation, the focus on promoting Mexico’s economy will be a productive approach as it involves added funding for social development and poverty reduction strategies.

The issue of security at the northern border seems to be vacant in the Canadian narrative on the upcoming tariffs. Canadian leaders touring US media to improve their personal reputation does nothing but use the tariff threat and new American administration as an election tool for local power shifts in Canada. With the exception of local leaders within Canada itself, the Federal Government of Canada chose to implode itself right before its most essential negotiation in ten years by avoiding discussions of simply securing the border. There are little to no mention of the major issues on the northern border, issues that are tied to international security threats to both Canadians and the United States. The management of expectations are that tariffs are coming, no matter what the costs, with no ability to work with the US administration on these issues. The internal personal stakes of self focused political leaders will cost Canadians greatly, a historic lose-lose scenario that should have never occurred. Canada would do well to not heavily counter-tariff the US and put Canada into an economic depression, but this has already been threatened via the energy market.

The ability to end the conflict between Russia and Ukraine comes at a time where little movement has taken place since 2014, minus the shores of the Black Sea towards Crimea and Ukraine’s recent movement into Russia itself. Considering the costs to both sides, and the depletion of weapons from both NATO allies and an almost completely diminished Soviet stockpile, preserving stable countries in the region might benefit all sides with the rise of terror attacks within Russia and Europe itself. At this point, the losses on both sides for so little gain may allow for a renewed recognition that families often have relatives on both sides of the conflict. While peace may not be the key element, the need for stability in the region is better than mutual weaknesses that collapses both nations from pressures abroad. The shared history of a united front against aggressors from abroad may be able to be re-constituted if there are willing partners who can work together to challenge a common threat. In reality, the world in 2025 abound with such threats.

Addressing conflicts in the Middle East will determine much of the security issues over the next decade. Any sign of weakness in negotiations or in response to threats to US interests and those of their allies will be exploited in the most erratic of ways. These few short weeks of January has already been characterized by chaos resulting from threats from abroad mixed with weakness in basic policy approaches towards health and safety. New methods using drones and asymmetric conflict will be pervasive if there are safety gaps within Western societies and even within the Secret Service themselves, soft targets being a focus along with using new tactics to evade security screening. Weakness in policy will encourage more instability, with Russia’s southern region, China’s sphere of influence and streets in the West being key battlegrounds for tensions. Stability vs. Chaos will determine new ties between Governments, as dashes for power come when weaknesses are momentarily exposed. Normalising these failures should be something that needs to be avoided, and allies who work against this framework should be met with tariffs or other similar policy responses.

Los Angeles’ Historic 2025 Fire

The new year is one that will give change to how conflicts are conducted on the world stage. As discussed previously, the War in Ukraine over the last few years has created a deficit in military equipment. The old Soviet arsenal has been sourced to such a great degree that Cold War stocks are being dwindled down to storage parts. With a deficit in complex equipment, new threats will come from new methods. While the last of the regimes fall, threats will surely not cease.

The ability for a society to defend itself comes from the idea that the society first needs to be defended. Recognizing future threats comes with the narrative that a threat may occur, and that resources will need to be designed to counter the future threat. Recent history shows that ignoring or legitimizing regimes that are clearly challenging democratic norms will never lead to a peaceful resolution. Repeating these errors weakens allies of democracies, and produces a situation where a larger conflict is inevitable, if not already in progress. National leaders need to defend their communities first, as all other viable nations would operate in a similar manner.

A society cannot function if a Constitution is applied via the political will of a few powerful individuals in society. Justice applied acts as a release valve for tensions in a society, so violence does not become the only last option. When there are those in power in a society that do not have the best interests of their community in mind, or are outwardly reticent to acting in good faith for the betterment of others, those communities rapidly deteriorate. When justice is reserved for others and laws are created to discourage good will among neighbours, the end result is an intentional corruption of stability and equality. A simple equation comes when you try and apply basic rights of safety, order, and proper Government to some groups above others, or even diminish those rights for one group beneath others, you have lost your democracy. The enormous push by some in society to deny those basic rights to punish those they dislike copies the worst regimes from a Milan Kundera novel, and is in no way a fair and just society.

A lost society is one that functions on the worst kept secrets of their community. The end result of the asymmetric eruption has been at the surface of some of the most horrendous acts of humanity, married to some of the most oppressive laws against freedom and liberty. Adjusting a society to one that reduces liberty for the sake for safety can often be avoided if the laws of the community are applied as they were designed to be used, and those in power have the honour and will to work for the betterment of their fellow community members. The degradation of a community does not simply come from an assault from abroad, but via decisions from within that betray the core values of a society in the most expressive of actions and the most meaningful of ways. Someone in their right just mind are always aware when their freedoms are neglected. It is often those who wish to degrade society who are the most vocal and aggressive to those who speak their mind openly when voicing their calls for justice. None of this is by accident or is a symptom of negligence, but is the end result of modern challenges to society, challenges that were known to those who created many democratic legacies.

In an effort to throw away the carrots and invest in new sticks, the new American administration has decided to use the economic and political weight of the United States to address non-trade policies with many of its traditional economic allies. One of the most notable instances of this strategy was used to encourage NATO members to increase funding for security, pulling funding obligations away from the United States for security issues abroad. While this tactic was not taken seriously at the time, the coming war between Ukraine and Russia proved it to be a useful shift. With all of Ukraine’s allies now contributing in the billions of dollars, compounded with the United States’ own significant contributions, Ukraine has been able to put up a historic level of resistance against Russian aggression.

More recently, President Trump has focused his energies on local issues within the United States connected to a poor border strategy. While trade has always been the focus of relations between NAFTA neighbours, the United States will use tariffs to enforce actions against drug trafficking and terror issues that are lacking on both sides of the Southern and Northern borders. With security issues being the main concern, it is likely the case that increased actions against Fentanyl and terror threats would benefit both the US, Mexico and Canada. The question then remains, whether the trade partners are aware of such benefits, and whether or not they will use local impressions of the US to bolster their own political fortunes?

Mexico, who had their own election fairly recently, had put back the same party in power with a new leader for the next six years. Despite the current party being of a left wing orientation, Mexico’s approach in re-signing the USMCA Agreement focused deeply on Mexican commercial interests. Mexico’s Government in the following years seemed to respond to US policy by mirroring the Biden Administration’s actions on the border. With very apparent border issues with US policy over the last four years, Mexico sought to limit the negative effects within Mexico itself during that period of time. The effect of record breaking migrations passing through Mexico put a great burden on Mexico’s social security system, encouraging Mexico to either prevent migrants on their own southern border, or allow them to reach the US border so they do not remain in Mexico. With the US border being the target of most migrants, Mexico chose the latter strategy in response to the lack of US border enforcement.

The eruption caused by abuses of the Maduro Government in Venezuela resulted in one of the largest refugee populations in modern times crossing through Latin America, Mexico, and the United States. While many Venezuelans have proper refugee claims due to their treatment under the Maduro regime, the chaos created by mass migrations out of Venezuela was used to transmit organised crime through the same routes used by many of these refugee claimants. These issues affected Mexico and many Latin American communities in the region, and were apparent in those communities in the United States months before it became the focus of the last US election. Spanish language news within the US would constantly put out reports of violence from those specific gangs that seemed to be frequent, coordinated, and ignored by most English language media, until it was no longer possible to ignore. Mexico clearly benefits in the US addressing their border issues and coordinated crime coming over the border as it has a negative effect on Mexico as well. Mexico is a net beneficiary to stable relations with the US, especially if it reduces its political ties with China in the process.

The Fentanyl Crisis has reached the point of inducing the tariff strategy on former NAFTA partners. US media has been detailing base ingredients being sent from China to Mexico for final production and export via cartel networks. Mexico and the US should immediately take a coordinated response to the imports from China and cartel control over the border. With many international companies Nearshoring their China based manufacturing to Mexico, the US-Mexico border can likely evolve into the manufacturing hub of the globe that was envisioned in 1994’s initial NAFTA agreement. Ever since China joined the WTO, Mexico had directly suffered from the loss of manufacturing to China, in 2025, this is no longer the case. With Mexico displacing part of China’s manufacturing base, Mexico may be entering its most successful period ever, if it can shrug off negative ties to China. Since the tariff is a security issue for President Trump, Mexico may find it easier to implement its own security with a strong US border in a win-win scenario.

Canada has often been able to avoid criticism, but has had many issues over the last few years that have raised the ire of the incoming US Administration. Fentanyl and drug issues on the Canadian border have risen dramatically, but the shocking statistics showing security issues related to terror threats as well and China’s influence over the current Canadian Government is shocking to both Americans and Canadians alike.

The response to the tariff threat has been absurd on the Canadian side, firstly concentrating it solely on trade when it was openly stated as a security issue, and now evolving into a near complete collapse of the Canadian Government in power. When communications from regional Provincial leaders toward the incoming US Administration displaced the Canadian Government’s own coordinated responses, the Premier of Quebec and the other Provinces collected themselves together to become Team Canada, without a proper Canadian Government spokesperson to respond to the security issues. With Justin Trudeau, it looks like he is planning to openly fight Trump to the detriment of all Canadians big and small, despite his Government creating one of the largest national deficit’s ever seen in Canada. Canada is considered quite dangerous for some cultural groups as well, more dangerous than it has been in generations, with security issues in Canada now famously being seen globally on a weekly basis. With a passive response by the Trudeau Government on the murder of Canadians on Flight 752 by Iran’s regime, Trudeau is now taking his less than 20% approval rating and choosing the opposite response against the Americans. Trudeau’s 2025 election strategy looks to use a Twitter fight with President Trump to garner local support. The first move however was against the US voter, ensuring his Government will incur tariffs in response. The error of being a foreign leader who makes public statements against all of those Americans who voted for their President is inappropriate on the best of days.

While Mexicans, Americans and Canadians benefit from increased border security, a lesson on consequences for voters is working rapidly in real time. The North American region can become the most economically successful region over the next few generations, if leaders in those countries can work towards benefitting their own communities and supporting each other’s economic growth over their own personal benefits. Without this basic level of awareness, tariffs will likely become a reality in 2025 for many in North America and abroad.

Russian ICBM and IRBM Missile Systems

The War in Ukraine has done more to deplete Cold War military stockpiles than any other event during and since the Cold War, including weather and rust. The dwindling numbers of tanks, troop carriers and artillery pieces litter the woods and fields of Ukraine, being disabled and destroyed by new simple drones and old artillery shells. If the war will not end by negotiation and diplomacy, it will likely be mired in more bloodshed from using ally equipment and a small number of newly made modern equipment, still costing many more lives than either side is willing to admit. With conventional land forces and sea forces reaching their limits, air forces being deterred by modern air defense systems, and missile systems being altered for purposes they are not designed for, the remaining strength of Russian forces are still preserved in their long range tactical missile forces.

A recent strike by an unconfirmed ballistic missile system by Russian forces in Ukraine appeared to use a type of SS-27 or SS-29 ICBM in the strike. While it was not a nuclear armed version of those types of missiles, it performed as a Multiple Launch Warhead missile, or MIRV, hitting the target with multiple warheads from one missile system. While it appears to be a smaller RS-26 Rubezh type Regional ranged missile version, or IRBM, it was likely one based on the SS-27 MIRV type. This non-nuclear version was altered to send a message to Ukraine’s allies without escalating tensions past a point of no return by using nuclear warheads in the field.

The rationale Russia used in deploying the SS-27 type missile was a response to ever increasing allowances by Ukraine’s allies in using longer range artillery against targets in Russia. Russian air defenses do not seem capable of stopping many of these munitions, and Russia has suffered internal losses due to these systems. Russia’s intact long range ballistic missile forces have rarely been used in a war, and is a fully equipped nuclear deterrent maintained over generations. With few options available with conventional arms, and a message of strength wanted to be demonstrated by Russia, the mystery ballistic missile has been re-introduced onto the battlefield. While inventory and a show of strength enabled the use of the SS-27 variant, diplomacy is likely still the best option by both sides over the future use of any ballistic IRBM systems.

New conflicts in the Middle East might bring another situation where these regional missiles may be used by Russia. With Russia’s most important ally in the Middle East being on their last legs recently, Russia may decide to use whatever systems they have left in helping maintain their ally’s regime. In the most recent scenario, the opposing forces do not have any modern systems to respond to Russia, and it is likely the case that adversaries in the Middle East may ignore the use of such weapons in certain circumstance as long as it is not nuclear armed, and does not create a big disadvantage to the US or their allies in the region. Diplomacy may make for strange bedfellows, and could alter the power dynamic in the region in ways previously unheard of due to the recent crisis. Diplomacy in one area may also provide the opportunity to end the conflict in Ukraine, and refocus on common threats to both the East and West. Only time will tell, but these days things seem to always escalate quickly and unpredictably.

In recent days, the Israeli Ambassador to Azerbaijan George Deek gave an interview to the Azerbaijani media, where he proclaimed that the friendship between Israel and Azerbaijan is blossoming: “Israel was among the first countries to recognize the independence of Azerbaijan; I think we were seventh. Since that day, we’ve had 32 years of a very close relationship that has developed into what we can today assess as a strategic partnership between our countries. This partnership has ranged across various areas in line with the development of this country and our relations with it, including energy, security, agriculture, water, and others.”

He continued: “Now, we see that this relationship has matured in such a way that, while in the past, relations were mostly government-to-government, today they are people-to-people, business-to-business, and civil society-to-civil society. We see booming tourism, a thriving trade relationship, and, above all, a very close political relationship between our leaders and executive powers. We should also remember that the relationship between Israel and Azerbaijan did not start only 30-some years ago. It began many centuries ago, with one of the largest and most prosperous Jewish diasporas living in this country alongside the rest of the population for at least 800 years, if not longer.”

Ambassador Deek added, “Unlike in other parts of the world, Jews in Azerbaijan have lived in harmony and tolerance with the rest of society for centuries. That, I believe, was the solid and healthy basis upon which the relationship I have described was able to thrive and evolve. We look forward to these relations growing and this strategic partnership strengthening further because we share many common interests, values, and cultural characteristics that make our people so close.”

“Last year’s trade between Israel and Azerbaijan amounted to about 1.3 billion U.S. dollars, including the oil and gas sectors,” Ambassador Deek noted. “While that may sound substantial, it’s well below the potential we could achieve in our relationship. We must be honest; until a few years ago, the economic relations between our countries were not very developed for various reasons. However, we’ve seen a breakthrough in recent years. This progress began with the opening of Azerbaijan’s trade office in Israel in 2021, which culminated in the opening of Azerbaijan’s embassy in Israel in 2023. These developments have injected significant energy into our country’s business sector.”

He stressed, “I understand Azerbaijan plans to appoint a commercial attaché to its embassy in Israel, and we may consider doing the same here. I believe this is a testament to the importance both countries place on our economic relations. Israeli companies are now recognizing the strategic importance of Azerbaijan, not only as a partner but also as a crossroads between East and West—the Middle Corridor—serving as a gateway to Central Asia, extending eastward to China, westward to Europe, and north to south. Azerbaijan’s ability to maintain balanced, positive relations with nearly every country gives it a unique position as a valuable partner.”

Ambassador Deek concluded, “Imagine if Azerbaijan were a partner to Israel in the economic sphere, not only for projects within Azerbaijan but also for joint economic ventures outside Azerbaijan. We could use Azerbaijan as a window into the broader potential of what our cooperation can achieve. Currently, our economic engagement with Azerbaijan spans various sectors. In recent years, for instance, Azerbaijan’s space agency Azerkosmos signed an agreement for an Israeli company to build a satellite, and there may be more such collaborations on the horizon. We also see extensive cooperation in agriculture, water management, dairy production, and high-tech. We are confident that our cooperation will continue to grow soon. I won’t deny that, since October 7th, Israel’s economy has been impacted by the ongoing war and the trauma it has caused. This year, the trade trend has not been as positive as we had hoped. However, I believe that as we overcome these challenges and move past the effects of the war, the economic sector—alongside all other sectors in Israel—will return to the momentum we previously enjoyed.”    

As we speak, millions of people who live in the Global South are experiencing the harsh reality of climate change, even though it was the Global North who disproportionately caused the problem.   Since the Industrial Revolution in the late 1700s, human beings have been the primary drivers of changes in the Earth’s climate. Countries that greatly benefitted from industrialization, e.g., America, the UK, Japan, Germany, etc., did so at the cost of pumping more and more carbon into the atmosphere.  China and India are the only countries in the Global South, who have greatly contributed to climate change.   Most of the main polluters are in the Global North.   

Between 1850 and 2011, the United States and EU were responsible for 79% of climate-changing emissions.  However, the countries expected to suffer the most from climate change are all in the Global South and are not top contributors to the problem.   One of the most visible victims of climate change are the people who live on coral atoll islands. 

According to various studies, about a million people live in coral atoll islands like those in the Maldives, Tuvalu, Kiribati, and the Marshall Islands. These islands are just a few feet in elevation, making them some of the places most at-risk from the rising sea levels that will result from climate change. Five uninhabited islands in the Solomon Islands have already vanished underwater in the past century. The Maldives, Kiribati, Tuvalu, and the Marshall Islands have the highest percentage of their land area at risk because they are all atolls; other countries also have low lying islands, but have more higher ground available to flee to and thus are less vulnerable than these islands. 

Nevertheless, all of the island countries are expected to suffer due to climate change.  Some of these islands, such as Guadeloupe, Martinique, Saint-Martin, Saint-Barthélemy, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, which are located in the Atlantic Ocean; Reunion, Mayotte and the French Southern and Antarctic Territories in the Indian Ocean; French Polynesia, New Caledonia, Wallis and Futuna are located in the Pacific Ocean; French Guiana is in South America, are colonized by France to date.  Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba are still controlled by the Netherlands.   In the West, people think that colonialism remains a thing of the past, yet unfortunately that is not the case.   French and Dutch colonialism is still alive and well.         

Yet according to a ranking that was performed recently, the countries that are not island nations yet are likely to suffer the most from climate change are the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic, Nigeria, Chad, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia and South Sudan.  It is critical to note that most of these countries are in Africa and have suffered under the yoke of European colonialism.    

A Greenpeace UK report claims that there is a link between colonialism and global warming: “The environmental emergency is the legacy of colonialism.  This was because colonialism had established a model through which the air and lands of the global south have been … used as places to dump waste the global north does not want.”  

Abbas Abbasov, the Executive Director of the Baku Initiative Group (BIG), recently gave an interview to the Azerbaijani press, where he highlighted the importance of the international community addressing the long-lasting impacts of colonial exploitation on the environment: “At COP29, we held a conference dedicated to the environmental impacts of colonial exploitation, particularly France and other European colonial powers.   We believe these issues have been largely overlooked in global climate discussions.  Our organization is committed to shedding light on how colonial legacies continue to affect the political, economic, and environmental landscapes of these regions.”

Abbasov continued: “We as an international NGO have repeatedly called for intergovernmental organizations to take stronger actions to address the specific needs of small island nations and colonized regions.   We hope that through increased global solidarity, there will be meaningful progress in securing the financial resources these regions urgently need.  With the participation of global leaders and organizations, we are hopeful that the call for a greener and more equitable world will not go unheard.”

For the first time in more than three decades since its inception, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) mentioned the term “colonialism” in a 2022 report. Leading climate scientists acknowledged that colonialism is a historic and ongoing driver of the climate crisis. “Present development challenges causing high vulnerability are influenced by historical and ongoing patterns of inequity such as colonialism, especially for many Indigenous peoples and local communities,” the report said. “​​Officials and scientists from around the globe now recognize the significant role colonialism has played in heating our planet and destroying its many gifts.”

“Instead of treating the Earth like a precious entity that gives us life, Western colonial legacies operate within a paradigm that assumes they can extract its natural resources as much as they want, and the Earth will regenerate itself,” Hadeel Assali, a lecturer and postdoctoral scholar at the Center for Science and Society, a Columbia Climate School affiliate, proclaimed.   “We cannot have environmental justice without reversing the harms of colonialism.” 

If one visits the war-torn Karabakh region, one can witness how Armenian settler colonialism created a grave ecological crisis in the region.   Six months after the conclusion of the Second Karabakh War, I visited the region together with a Russian delegation and witnessed polluted rivers with no fish in them, uprooted trees, burnt agricultural fields and mile after mile of ruined homes, surrounded by landmines and dirt roads full of potholes.   The situation was so grave from an environmental perspective that the region, once known as the “Black Garden” for its ecologically beautiful ecosystem has been dubbed “the Hiroshima of the Caucuses,” after enduring thirty years of Armenian settler colonialism in violation of four UN Security Council resolutions. 

However, after hosting COP29, Azerbaijan seeks to rebuild Karabakh as a green zone, thus inspiring other countries in the Global South who have witnessed the devastating effects of colonialism and how it has adversely affected the environment.  Last spring, I toured around Zangilan and saw that Azerbaijan recently built a green village with a beautiful fountain in the hopes of making Karabakh green again.     Around the clock, Azerbaijan is busy rebuilding homes, mosques, cultural heritage sites, and setting up agricultural and other green environmentally sound communities, so that Karabakh can be made great again.   

Indeed, the Karabakh of 2024 is not the Karabakh I first witnessed in 2021, thus showing to the world community that Karabakh can recover from the ecological disaster that it experienced and be rebuilt, smart village after smart village, with lush greenery being planted to replace the trees and other natural areas that the Armenians destroyed.    Indeed, under the leadership of Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, Armenian settler colonialism has been relegated to the dustbins of history.   May the other colonial powers soon follow.     

A rear seat gunner in a slower propeller airplane, common in the First and Second World Wars, may become a more common means to counter drone threats in 2025.

An analysis of Ukraine’s air defence successes and limitation was published detailing the effectiveness of Ukraine and its allies’ air defense capabilities against many generations and types of Russian and former Soviet missile systems. Despite the unexpected limited success rate of Ukraine’s supported air defense and considering the idea that intercepting high speed ballistic missiles was not common knowledge prior to 2022, any defense against advanced missile systems is an impressive technological achievement. While the production of the more advanced missiles is slow and old Soviet stockpiles get used up, the next elements of future conflicts will certainly come from numerous and low tech systems now tearing up the front lines in the Ukraine War.

Drones from both sides of the conflict in Ukraine set an example for the use of such weapons all over the world. There are numerous accounts of drones crippling tanks and giving accurate and real time artillery coordinates, a recent team approach that is a perfect symbiosis for artillery brigades. Drones have become the scourge of armour, rapidly eliminating armour threats directly and degrading the assault capabilities of units while inflicting high economic and personnel costs on the opposing forces. Something that mirrors some of the most terrifying 80s sci-fi and horror films is the phenomenon of drones that literally and ruthlessly hunt down any soldier on the battlefield. Swarms of such drones are often spoken about by Russian soldiers, keeping them at a constant state of anxiety.

With conventional conflicts entering a stage of attrition, stalemate, and in some cases rapid progress, the drone effect will likely be seen outside of these conflict zones. Until there is a common and coordinated defense of drone threats, expect domestic attacks to take place using drones. Defending against a shooter or someone rushing a stage is something protective services are well trained in, but for the time being there is no effective defense against a swarm of armed drones targeting important officials. While new technologies are being rapidly developed, as in rapid fire burst ammunition for newly designed tanks, much of the defense has been via using older Cold War Oerlikon cannons in the field. There have even been some accounts of slower planes being used, with a copilot sitting in an open cockpit armed with a shot gun or other weapon to target drones. Aviation history may have certainly come full circle.

The response to a static battlefield will also come from asymmetrical attacks as seen in the Iraq and Afghanistan War, but will become more common inside of Allied nations. Infiltration through insufficient border controls have already resulted in security issues, taking advantage of perplexed policy approaches to local and immediate security threats. The inability to succeed on the conventional battlefield will result in attacks in urban environments, but instead of them being contained to Baghdad and Grozny, they will be seen, well, everywhere. The addition of crime, drugs and violence issues will reshape long standing trade and policy agreements until those threats can be considered neutralised. The issues of unstopped crime, innovation of drones, and active foreign agents needed to have been addressed years ago. The unfortunate results will become a signature characteristic of 2025.

Macron’s call for an arms embargo on Israel and his unequivocal defense of the UNIFIL corps in Lebanon which since October 7 has taken no action to stop Hezbollah’s unprovoked attacks on Israeli civilians, benefits only Iran. This follows a pattern of similar statements, seemed designed to whitewash Tehran’s colonialist hand in the region; previously the French President in calling for de-escalation of Israel’s offensive in South Lebanon, failed to mention Hizbullah, the catalyst of the latest tensions in the north of Israel. This is not the first time Macron seemed to be whitewashing Hizbullah’s role as an international terrorist organization. In 2020, he was forced into taking a harsher rhetorical position on Hizbullah after an international backlash to his comments at the UN. The same year, speaking at the UN General Assembly, Saudi Arabia’s King Salman called for disarming Hizbullah. Macron’s apparent interest in expanding the French role in resolving the crisis, however, goes beyond general comments. France banned Israel from participating in arms show, equating its role in the current escalation to that of Iran.
On October 13th, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and French President Emmanuel Macron discussed the escalating crisis in southern Lebanon via a phone call.

Macron stressed “the responsibility of Iran to support a general de-escalation and to use its influence in this direction with the destabilizing actors that enjoy its support.” Iran-backed Hezbollah fighters are fighting Israeli troops in Lebanon. The Iranian presidential website said that in his conversation with Macron, Pezeshkian had called for an end to “crimes” in Lebanon and Gaza. Iran’s role in creating the crisis it is now pretending to try to solve went unchallenged by Macron. Rather, Macron portrayed Iran as a potential mediator and a benevolent power, which merely has leverage to improve the geopolitical situation. Iran, however, is not merely an incidental backer of Hizbullah; rather, Hizbullah was modeled after Iran’s IRGC Al Quds Brigade and its fealty lies with Iran, rather than with the Lebanese state.

More than a proxy, Hizbullah is a vassal for Iran’s colonial ambitions in the Middle East and beyond that. Recruitment of assets, criminal enterprises, such as drug trafficking, natural resources exploitation, and cultural hegemony such as the use of cultural centers for conversions of target demographics are all strategies employed by Hizbullah on Iran’s behalf from Africa to Latin America. Moreover, Hizbullah is not Iran’s only tool to advance its vision throughout the Middle East and well beyond that. Iran uses puppet regimes, such as the current government in Baghdad, to assert its control over Iraq and to impose exploitative economic arrangements.

Rather than extracting lessons from the blemished French colonial experience, Macron appears to be joining Iran for the ride. His diplomatic engagement with Tehran effectively puts violent terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hizbullah on the same political level as Israel. These efforts did not go unnoticed by the Islamic Republic. Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Baqer Ghalibaf in his interview published in France’s Le Figaro on October 15th, was quoted as saying his country would be ready to “negotiate” with France to implement United Nations Resolution 1701. That resolution calls for southern Lebanon to be free of any troops or weapons other than those of the Lebanese state. Lebanese PM Najib Mikati said on Friday that he was “surprised” by the comments, calling them “a blatant interference in Lebanese affairs and an attempt to establish a rejected guardianship over Lebanon”. Mikati said such a negotiation was the prerogative of the Lebanese state and asked Lebanese Foreign Minister Abdallah Bou Habib to summon the Chargé d’Affaires of the Iranian embassy in Beirut over Ghalibaf’s comments.

The resurgent French interest in Lebanon is not accidental. Lebanon used to be a colonial holding of France from the partition of the Ottoman Empire in 1920 until 1944, as the French Mandate of Lebanon. Today Paris treats the place as its colony. Macron’s willingness to bypass the Lebanese government and to negotiate directly with Iran while excluding Beirut underscores the French President’s attitude towards Lebanon as the French sphere of influence or a satellite rather than an independent state. In that, Macron has much in common with Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader.

Iran’s right arm in the region, Hezbollah, controls much of Lebanon’s Shiite-majority areas, including parts of Beirut, southern Lebanon, and the eastern Bekaa Valley region. The Lebanese Army (LAF) is either unable or unwilling to counter the terrorist organization. Despite good reasons to believe that LAF is infiltrated or else coerced into transferring military packages to Hizbullah, France continues to provide the Lebanese army with arms, such as armored personnel carriers (APCs), ignoring the high likelihood that the French weapons are likely to end up in the hands of Hizbullah sooner or later. Hezbollah uses Lebanese army communications antennae and radar, is present on Lebanese vehicles patrolling southern Lebanon, and “employs” soldiers and officers to collect information and influence operations.

US experts conclude that “the danger of arming Lebanon is nothing new. In 2016, the Israeli government presented evidence that Hezbollah was using APCs supplied by the United States to the LAF. In recent years, Iran was supplying shipments of Russian-made weapons to Hezbollah, which was getting ready to invade Israel, just as Hamas did on October 7th, 2023. Hezbollah was amassing these weapons near the border in the area, allegedly controlled by the LAF and UN peacekeepers UNIFIL.

While calling for an embargo on Israel, France has supplied arms to regimes linked to war crimes. A two-year investigation by FRANCE24 has revealed that French manufacturer Cheddite sold an extensive amount of ammunition to Iranian authorities, which used it during the violent crackdown on the “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests in 2022. The investigation reveals that this ammunition remains accessible in Iran, despite the EU Council Regulation No 359/2011 which prohibits “the export, directly or indirectly, [of] equipment that could be used for internal repression” in Iran, including “firearms, ammunition, and related accessories”. Currently the Myanmar military is relying extensively on French-manufactured Avions de Transport Regional (ATR) aircraft to transport troops, arms and supplies for its combat operations, as it commits war crimes and crimes against humanity with impunity. Evidence obtained by the “Justice For Myanmar” organization revealed that French companies played a key role in supporting Myanmar’s military aviation fleet, despite international sanctions.

ATR supplied at least 10 aircrafts to Myanmar’s military. “Justice For Myanmar” cited leaked military expenditure documents from the financial year after the coup that revealed planned purchases of nearly $19 million worth of parts for the air force’s ATR aircraft fleet. Additionally, French company Sabena Technics was involved in repairing crucial components and providing parts, which kept the aircraft operational. These services were often routed through commercial airlines with military ties. The report criticizes these companies for failing to perform adequate due diligence to avoid supporting Myanmar’s military war crimes.

France should choose whether it wishes to stand with the international community against war crimes, authoritarianism, and hegemonic neo-colonialism, or whether it wishes to continue to continue and to replicate its colonial legacy, which already cost it diplomatic, political, and economic influence in West Africa – and will likely earn it nothing but infamy in the future annals of the Middle East.

As the international community prepares for COP29, the focus should be how the world plans to address the global climate change crisis and there should be no distractions from this important goal.   

As we speak, nearly three billion people face water scarcity across the planet. In the Middle East, this water scarcity is acutely felt, as there was a grave heat wave this past summer, which led to a great drought and massive desertification.  When there is not enough rainfall, this adversely affects the production of crops, thus transforming entire green areas into barren wastelands.  

Take Yemen as an example. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy reported, “Estimates suggest that the rate of desertification and deforestation in Yemen increased from 90% in 2014 to 97% in 2022.”  They added: “Severe drought this year has stressed crop yields and reduced agricultural productivity, forcing many farmers to suspend their work.”  This has slashed food production and driven up food prices, which exasperated already existing food insecurity caused by the civil war.  

Yemen is not the only area in the Middle East suffering from climate change.  From Lebanon to Iraq to Syria, the peoples of the region are facing a grave humanitarian crisis, which has been exacerbated by climate change.  The disastrous war between Israel and the proxies of Iran has only made this process of desertification worse in the Middle East region, as Hamas and Hezbollah rockets have destroyed much greenery and farmland.   

Between January and June 2024, Hezbollah destroyed over 12,800 acres of natural areas in the Golan Heights and Upper Galilee alone.  According to the Israeli Agriculture Ministry, 5,435 acres of orchards, vines and avocado plantations within 1.25 miles of the Lebanese border are not being farmed consistently and 370 acres of fruits and vines have been damaged by rocket related fires.   In Southern Israel along the Gaza border, crops such as potatoes, wheat, peanuts and tomatoes have sustained damage due to rockets, fires and the inability of farmers to work in their fields.  

The situation is not better on the other side of the fence.  Almost 80 percent of the farmers in Southern Lebanon are unable to harvest their olive trees for the year 2023/4, leading to massive poverty.  And for the average Gazan, clean water and healthy food items like tomatoes have become luxury items, out of reach for the common person, due to the massive destruction in the coastal strip.  Climate change only worsens this situation.  It does not make it better.        

At the same time, while the Middle East and North Africa are suffering from water and food scarcity, historic landmarks like the city of Venice and certain Pacific islands such as Tuvalu, Kiribati, and Fiji are expected to suffer from a rise in the sea level, which will cause flooding and eventually for a significant part of these areas to be submerged underwater as climate change intensifies.   As the world faces such grave threats, the international community must focus on these issues at COP29.  It cannot afford to get sidetracked and to discuss other issues.

For this reason, I condemn the 60 members of the US Congress, led by Congressman Frank Pallone, founder and co-chair of the Armenian Caucus in the US Congress, and Senator Ed Markey, both of whom are backed by the Armenian lobbying organization ANCA, who asked US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to use the COP29 Conference to condemn Azerbaijan.  These congressmen and senators are calling on the US Secretary of State to condemn one of America’s strongest allies in the South Caucasus, who sent troops to Afghanistan to help the United States after the September 11 terror attacks.  These members of the US Congress are attacking a country that has always had America’s back in order to get support from a domestic lobbying group and this is wrong.  

The fact that Azerbaijan had a conflict with Armenia in the past should not affect the present.   What matters is that there is now a peace process to resolve the conflict between both nations, and Azerbaijan seeks to build a green future, so that its people can prosper while living in peace with its neighbors.   Attacking Azerbaijan at this time does not advance this peace process and goes contrary to US interests in the region as well, as it diminishes strategic cooperation between Azerbaijan and the US on issues of critical importance, such as Iran and climate change.   

But what is more important is that they are politicizing an important conference that should be exclusively focused on how the international community plans to address climate change, and nothing else.   The fact that Azerbaijan is hosting the conference is irrelevant.   What is important right now is that the community of nations put together an action plan to tackle climate change for the benefit of humanity and major polluters like India and China get on board with it!    Otherwise, all of humanity will suffer.   For this reason, I call upon these 60 members of the US Congress to not use COP29 to condemn Azerbaijan, as it politicizes one of the greatest issues of our times.   There should be no distractions from dealing with climate change at COP29.  Our future depends upon it.

During a conference at the Paris Business School on October 30th , 2024, prominent experts and politicians gathered to discuss the growing threat of nuclear escalation in the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Amid increasing concerns over the worsening geopolitical tensions, attendees warned of the risk of nuclear war between NATO and Russia, with almost all nuclear deterrence agreements between the U.S. and Russia currently suspended.   The conference was opened by Professor Frédéric Encel ,the chair of the conference who introduced the debate. Msgr. Vittorio Formenti, an influential representative of the Vatican, spoke out strongly against the dangers of nuclear war, recalling the horrors of Hiroshima. Formenti emphasized Pope Francis’s call for peace, warning of the devastating consequences of war and stressing that dialogue is the only path to a sustainable solution.   Jeffrey Sachs: Ukraine crisis fueled by NATO expansion   American economist Jeffrey Sachs then took the floor, arguing that NATO’s eastward expansion has played a significant role in the conflict. Sachs stressed that direct negotiations between Washington and Moscow are essential to prevent further escalation. He warned that the economic impact of the Ukraine conflict is already taking a severe toll on Europe, with an estimated $10 trillion projected to be spent on defense in the EU over the next decade.   Manel Msalmi on the impact on women and children   Manel Msalmi, president of the European Association for the Defense of Minorities, highlighted the effect of the war on women and children, who make up the vast majority of refugees fleeing Ukraine. She called for protecting their rights and warned that further escalation could have devastating consequences for future generations. Msalmi noted that recent statements by Ukrainian President Zelensky which show his concern about the difficult situation in his country, could be misinterpreted as encouraging escalation and the need to advocate for diplomatic solutions.   Gaidz Minassian and Gerard Chaliand: different perspectives, shared call for peace   French political scientist Gerard Chaliand, winner of the 2024 PUFF Geopolitical Book Prize, voiced sharp criticism of European leaders who he believes are blindly following U.S. strategy mainly Biden administration. He argued that a peace solution is not only inevitable but urgently needed. Gaidz Minassian from Le Monde offered a different view on the origins of the conflict and stressed the fact that Russia is the aggressor and the EU needs to support Ukraine but joined the call for diplomatic solutions in order to avoid further escalation.    An urgent call for peace and stability   The Paris conference highlighted the growing danger of nuclear conflict resulting from the war in Ukraine and underscored diplomacy and dialogue as the only solution. The influential speakers left no doubt about the need for international cooperation to prevent further escalation and ensure a safe future.   Paris, Ukraine, Conflict, Diplomacy, Nuclear Threat   Experts and politicians in Paris sound the alarm over the threat of nuclear war and call for urgent diplomatic efforts.

A phenomenon was noticed during the Second World War that certain shapes affected the ability for early radar to detect aircraft. When considering the material of the aircraft, it was also noticed that non-metallic materials like wood added to the reduced detection by radar. While this effect was not utilised in any major way until the science was applied to prototypes during the 1980s, it was a continuation of a long standing rivalry between aircraft and anti-air technologies throughout the Cold War.

One of the most well known rivalries of the early Cold War came from a famous incident where an SA-2 Anti-Aircraft missile was able to shoot down an American U-2 Spy Plane over the Soviet Union in 1960. The U-2 was designed to fly over enemy airspace at extremely high altitude, where most aircraft and anti-aircraft missile systems could not hit the U-2. While it was assumed that the radar could see the U-2, it was believed that the missile could not reach the aircraft. To their surprise, the SA-2 was able to reach the spy plane and knock it down, proving that even early missiles could eliminate aircraft hiding well above the target.

The SA-2 would earn much of its added fame by terrorising American attack aircraft over Vietnam in the 1960s and into the 1970s. Special “Wild Weasel” missions were formed in order to distract the SA-2 radar operators from targeting the bombers by using trained pilots to encourage the SA-2’s to fire at them in their more well equipped planes. These planes often used electronic jamming equipment along with piloting skills to evade SA-2 missiles, later using an anti-radar “Shrike” missile that tracked the radar beam from the SAM radar site. The next systems to be presented were the SA-3 Goa and SA-6 Kub systems, used in the Middle East conflicts of the 70s and early 80s, they were eventually met with the first drones that added non-lethal targets to the radar screen with the intent to deplete the 3-missile launchers of the SA-6’s mobile firing units.

Stealth technology during the 1991 Gulf War enabled the first F-117 bombers to succeed in their missions without any losses. It was surprising that just a few years later, one F-117 was shot down by an older SA-3 Goa missile over Yugoslavia. Stealth was designed to not go above a missile shield nor to go through it rapidly at low altitude, but as a means to cloak an aircraft from detection. If a radar cannot lock on a plane, a missile cannot be launched to intercept the target, and the attacking plane has a better chance at eliminating the radar site at closer range. Stealth did not make the planes invisible at all ranges however, and repeat tactics likely could lead to the loss of an advanced aircraft.

So what have we learned about the recent Radar War from the lessons of the Cold War and the loss of the F-117? Much like the past generations of missiles, new improvements to Stealth technology from the F-117 to F-22, B-2 and F-35 have been competing with more powerful radars that are designed to detect the detectable Stealth aircraft at closer ranges. The modern “Shrike”, or anti-radar missiles currently match or exceed S-300 and S-400 Missile detection and firing distances when Stealth is able to close the range of the massive radar site for the S-300 sites. While the S-300 and S-400 can likely see an F-35 coming, it likely has difficulty in locking on to the target so a missile could destroy an F-35. This is not only due to the F-35’s stealth design and materials, but because of electronic countermeasures and powerful radars as well as assistance from conventional planes, decoys and drones in the mission process. This information of course has not been made fully public, but it is likely the case that other hacking, electronic interference and intelligence assets also burdened the latest S-300 units before they were neutralised. Interceptor aircraft are also used of course, but their missiles will also have a reduced firing range against a Stealth intruder, with the F-35 having speed as another valuable asset in its suite of capabilities.

It is not clear where the next evolution will come from, but it looks to involve drone and missile swarms that are already being challenged by newer systems. The use of AI and more powerful radars will outpace human operators of many of these systems. A Vietnam Shrike situation taking out the radar crew may become less likely as systems become more spread out and automated. As older systems prevail in many regions, overburdened and under-trained operators may become the perpetrators of negligence, as seen in the downing of two civilian airliners, one over Ukraine and another over Iran in the last few years. Energy weapons have entered the battlefield as well, but not at the distances current missiles have been able to achieve. The only assurance is that new technology is always being developed.

It was recently reported in the media that Switzerland seeks to hold a Peace Forum on Karabakh, which will discuss the plight of the Armenians who left their homes after the Second Karabakh War and the subsequent military operation.   According to the reports, the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Swiss Federal Assembly passed a resolution mandating a peace forum in a year to initiate an open dialogue between the Azerbaijani government and the Armenians of Karabakh.

“The aim is to facilitate an open dialogue between Azerbaijan and representatives of the Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians, conducted under international supervision or in the presence of internationally relevant actors, in order to negotiate the safe and collective return of the historically resident Armenian population,” reads the text of the motion submitted to the Swiss parliament by the foreign affairs commission of the National Council.   The motion’s justification mentions that Nagorno-Karabakh has been emptied of its Armenian population since Azerbaijan’s last military advance in September 2023. 

“Fearing another genocide like that perpetrated against the Armenians in 1915, the historical population was forced to leave their homeland within a few days. The region has since experienced documented ethnic cleansing: Armenian cultural heritage, such as churches, monasteries and cemeteries, is systematically destroyed or reinterpreted with fake historical documents under the guise of “renovation”. Despite these serious developments, the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh maintain their desire to return to their homeland under security guarantees from the international community, to determine their own political future and to exercise democratic self-government.”

However, the peace forum is one-sided.  It does not discuss the plight of the close to one million Azerbaijanis who were ethnically cleansed from their homes and forced to live as refugees.  During my seven visits to Azerbaijan, I visited a displaced persons camp outside of Baku, where I met with Azerbaijanis who were forced from their homes in Karabakh.  Today, inside the refugee camps, they live in squalor without air conditioning in the summer, hoping and praying that they can return to their homes in Karabakh, which were destroyed by the Armenians and found booby-trapped with landmines.

The Swiss peace forum does not discuss the Azerbaijani mosques and cultural heritage sites that were destroyed and left in ruins during thirty years of Armenian occupation.   During my two trips to Shusha and two trips to Aghdam, I found cities that lay in ruins due to Armenia’s brutal ethnic cleansing campaign.  I also saw cemeteries, mosques, historic landmarks, and numerous homes that were reduced to rubble.   While on a recent trip to Zangilan, I saw that Azerbaijan rebuilt the mosque that was destroyed, while the remnants of what was remained to bear witness to what the Armenians did to that mosque.  But the Swiss ignore these inconvenient facts. 

Rather, their resolution only discusses the damage to Armenian cultural heritage and the plight of Armenian settlers, who fled after the Azerbaijanis reclaimed Karabakh and the seven Azerbaijani districts in accordance with four UN Security Council resolutions.  As someone who has been to Karabakh five times, I must say that the damage that was done to Armenian cultural heritage sites pales in comparison to what was done to Azerbaijani cultural heritage sites.  I saw an Armenian church in Shusha with mild damage to the roof during the war, and when I was there, the Azerbaijanis were in the process of fixing it up.   Compare that with mile after mile of cities and villages that lay in ruins due to Armenia’s ethnic cleansing campaign against one million Azerbaijanis who lived in Karabakh and the seven adjacent Azerbaijani districts.  

In the eyes of many Azerbaijanis, this makes this peace forum one-sided and violates Switzerland’s otherwise neutral foreign policy.  If the Swiss wish to be true impartial mediators, they must discuss the plight of refugees on both sides and the horrific conditions of cultural heritage sites that were destroyed on both sides.   Otherwise, they cannot be considered to be an impartial negotiator.    Therefore, Switzerland must also give respect to the plight of one million Azerbaijanis that were expelled from their homes in the First Karabakh War and the destruction the Armenians did during their thirty year occupation, and only discuss what Azerbaijan did afterwards in this context.   Otherwise, they are fueling the conflict rather than resolving it.   

This graphic shows how the THAAD system is networked via fiber optic cables to its various components to detect, identify, and engage an incoming missile. The THAAD missile, called an interceptor, has no warhead or explosives. Instead, it uses “kinet… (Photo Credit: U.S. Army)

After over 500 ballistic missiles demonstrated a historic threat to city centres and thoroughly established a Causus Belli, the United States’ responded to future threats by erecting a THAAD site in the Middle East. In past conflicts, a significantly smaller SCUD threat in the 1991 Gulf War was a large factor in establishing a coalition of willing powers to challenge tyranny in the region. With ballistic missiles being a known threat during the Second World War via V-2 rockets, it has only been a recent phenomenon where a defence against such threats even exists. Even during the 1991 Gulf War, early Patriot missile systems were largely ineffective in intercepting SCUD missiles, despite the SCUD being significantly older technology and in a lot smaller numbers. A notable strike on US personnel in Saudi Arabia showed there was little defense against the SCUD if the launchers were not intercepted within minutes of the missile being made ready to fire. The invention of THAAD came from the motivation to have missile interceptors protect allied forces as well as innocent civilian populations as promised in 1991. With that technology finally becoming active, missile interception systems closely belongs to the era of the 2020s.

The THAAD system was mostly known previously for its deployment and political tension created around it in the Pacific region. With North Korea continuously demonstrating the range of their ballistic missile programs, THAAD was proposed to be introduced in Asia at the protest of China’s Government. THAAD is designed to target long range, high altitude rockets and intercept them in the upper atmosphere. THAAD would protect America itself from a massive attack, often eliminating large warheads that are designed to create a lot of area damage, but also could carry chemical and nuclear warheads. THAAD, if successful, would mirror Reagan’s Star Wars system, eliminating missiles at the highest arc of their trajectory, except being based on the ground. THAAD would work however, whereas Star Wars was a proposal well beyond the technology of its time.

Despite there being versions of Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) systems surrounding Moscow since the 1960s, there were no confirmed successful uses of these systems in combat until recent more modern missile systems demonstrated they could target and eliminate other active missiles. During the War in Ukraine, older ballistic missiles like the OKA were able to beat out more modern S-300, SA-11 and SA-15 systems designed to knock missiles out of the sky. Only the most modern missile systems are able to knock out Russian missiles, with a spotty success rate at best. THAAD will likely be more active in the region soon, and a true test of its capabilities will be established. The ability of THAAD to coordinate missile defense with other systems is significant, as the THAAD radar is extremely powerful and able to detect missiles being fired from across the entire Middle East.

The THAAD system may have a weakness if it is not coordinated and connected to smaller defensive missile systems/Anti-Air systems that can protect the THAAD site and radar from smaller missile and drone threats. Bleeding THAAD and other expensive and complicated systems of their missiles was experienced in Ukraine as Russia used low cost drones to drown the radar detection with multiple targets and use up crucial missiles that are needed against high speed targets, as opposed to slow, inexpensive drones and missiles. The THAAD system therefore should only be used for its main purpose, and other systems need to be married to it for its own defense and a proper long term layered defense of the protected territory. Taking out a THAAD or something claimed as equivalent like a Russian S-400 system is a significant victory, as it shows that the territory cannot be protected and a new strategy needs to be initiated and installed, a task that can take a large amount of time in a difficult and ever expanding conflict. Suffering a missile barrage, even if defended successfully, allows the enemy to better target vital resources and civilians the next time around, and requires a defensive capability along with offensive action. The result of failures has already demonstrated the brutality of conflict when missile defense is relied upon too much and a military becomes complacent in war.

The Dutch Parliament has passed two fresh biased resolutions against Azerbaijan, a strong ally of the United States.  These two resolutions were passed after the Dutch Parliament recommended that the government support Armenia in every possible way, particularly in the context of the “seizure of Karabakh,” a resolution that was heavily criticized in Azerbaijan

The first fresh resolution states: “Considering that the Azerbaijani army attacked Nagorno-Karabakh (again! – Ed.) in September 2023, causing almost the entire population to flee to Armenia and not yet return to their homes, and also because Azerbaijan is destroying Armenian cultural heritage in the region… We call on the government to take action to protect Armenian cultural heritage, both under the 1954 Hague Convention and within the framework of UNESCO.”

The second resolution states: “that “obstacles (to the peace process – Ed.) still exist, including Azerbaijan’s continued detention of Armenian prisoners of war.” The resolution calls on the Dutch government, along with other European countries, to intensify pressure on Azerbaijan to expedite the release of all Armenian “prisoners of war.”

Following the parliamentary initiative, a representative of the executive branch—Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp—also expressed support for these resolutions during his speech. He called for the release of individuals associated with the former separatist regime and terrorists arrested by the Azerbaijani side, framing them as “prisoners of war.”

I have visited Karabakh five times and the only significant destruction of cultural heritage that I witnessed was that of Armenians destroying Azerbaijani cultural heritage.    I saw the ruins of Aghdam, where 100,000 people used to live in the Soviet period.  I saw the ruins of the historic Bread Museum, which used to house a loaf of bread that was preserved by Soviet soldiers dating from the Second World War. All that remains of that museum is a half-destroyed mural. I saw tombs dating from the Karabakh khanate, a world heritage site which were partially destroyed. I saw a mosque, which until recently housed pigs and goats, and was used as an Armenian watch tower. And I saw the remnants of a cemetery, where all of the bones were thrown away, with the tombstones and gold teeth in the graves being sold for use in the Islamic Republic of Iran.

I was in Shusha and saw a destroyed Azerbaijani palace, a destroyed bank, and destroyed government offices.  All of Shusha, the capital of Azerbaijani music and poetry, was essentially ruins, after the Armenians controlled the area for thirty years and literally lived among the ruins, not rebuilding anything.     I saw a monument to Soviet soldiers that was destroyed in the city of Sultanya.    I saw a ruined mosque in Zangilan, which was recently rebuilt but the ruins were preserved as a memorial to Armenia’s crimes against humanity.   Mile after mile, I saw destroyed agricultural fields, ruined homes and other cultural heritage sites, and many mosques that lay demolished or disrespected in cruel ways.   In contrast, I saw that the Azerbaijanis only caused mild damage to a church in Shusha, which they rushed to fix.   Yet, the Dutch Parliament is silent on all of this destroyed cultural heritage. 

They only care about the few churches that accidently got damaged in the fighting and that Azerbaijan imprisoned some Armenian separatists, like Ruben Vardanyan, a Russian oligarch of Armenian ethnicity close to Putin who committed crimes against Azerbaijanis.   Just as the West wants to see Israel release Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists in exchange for freeing the hostages, so does some Western countries like the Netherlands wish to see terrorists with Azerbaijani blood on their hands set free.      

The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry stated in its response: “It is regrettable that the aforementioned documents and expressed opinions completely ignore the fact of military occupation that was once perpetrated against our country, the ethnic cleansing of the Azerbaijani population, and the ongoing territorial claims of the Armenian side against Azerbaijan.”

This is major double standard on the part of the Netherlands: “The colonial past of the Netherlands is marked by the enslavement and exploitation of numerous peoples in Asia, Africa, and the Americas, along with numerous crimes committed against them. As they expanded their colonial empire through brutal tactics, the Netherlands consistently prioritized profit over human rights. A significant portion of the Netherlands’ development is built on the plundered national wealth of enslaved countries. Therefore, the statement from the Netherlands—who continue to keep various peoples around the world in a state of dependency—that they are making efforts to overcome the severe consequences of their own colonial history should be viewed as hypocrisy,” stated the Milli Majlis of Azerbaijan.

The Baku Initiative Group (BIG) has announced its invitation to the Parliament of the Netherlands to urge the government to put an end to the crimes occurring on the islands of Bonaire, Sint Maarten, Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Eustatius, and Saba. The group also called for the establishment of an investigative commission to hold accountable those responsible for past and ongoing crimes. Additionally, the Group urges the European Union to support the creation of a relevant body under the UN Human Rights Council to oversee criminal activities in these territories and facilitate forwarding recorded cases to other UN bodies. “We urge you to support initiatives against colonial crimes at the international level and back the activities of the Baku Initiative Group,” BIG stated.

 

The QN-506, a low cost option mirroring the BMPT Terminator may become the pre-AI standard in Urban Combat.

 

What would have been a simple narrative of popular sci-fi games just three short years ago, urban combat has become a mixture of traditional anxiety mixed with modern horrors on the battlefield. The Geo-political environment is asking for more of these conflict in urban environments, characterised by high losses and brutal victories at the best of times. While there has been little development of new and innovative arms or equipment in urban warfare from the Second World War into the Vietnam War, the last few major conflicts in urban situations gave rise to new concepts of protection and firepower via hard lessons in combat.

The Soviet experience in Afghanistan as well as Russian losses in the Chechen Wars was a lesson in armour support. While the traditional method of bringing tanks into an urban situation required accompanying soldiers to protect tanks and armour, the use of and development of a dedicated anti-personnel armour vehicle became a necessity. Anti-air systems like the ZSU-23-4 Shilka were stripped of their radar and used in a direct fire role against high angled targets in the mountains of Afghanistan. Despite this lesson, urban combat in Chechnya resulting in the loss of many Russian armoured vehicles, despite the past lessons of using the Shilka against high angled targets.

The era that approached the 2010s still required a proper system for protected urban combat, even after a generation of slow developments by urban warriors fighting in Iraq and extended fighting in Afghanistan. An independent system/assault drone was still out of reach, but was demonstrated in the movie Robocop in 2014. The classic ED-209 from the 1980s Robocop films was re-imagined and put in the role of urban combat droid, a concept that will likely be seen in the near future as a method to avoid casualties in urban combat.

When the War in Ukraine began, one of the most fear combat systems possessed by Russian Forces approaching Kyiv was the BMPT Terminator. Based on a modified T-72 hull and chassis, the mass produced T-72 was used with an updated unmanned turret to create a modern urban combat vehicle that utilised large reserve stocks of older classic T-72 hulls. Added protection to the T-72 enabled the crew of 2 to be buttoned up inside of the protected hull, while the active turret was controlled remotely. The turret consisted of an arsenal of weapons to suit an urban environment, notably two cannons from the BMP-2, machine guns, anti-tank missiles and other useful sensors to repel assaults from high angles above or from protected shelters. The BMPT Terminator was a manned version of something seen in sci-fi movies, with technology that could be developed into a BMPT that could perhaps be unmanned in the future. The Uran-9 concept was just that, a unmanned ground attack drone that is likely still in development today.

While systems like the Uran-9 require a new manufacture and design, the idea of using older T-72 hulls for a new system like the Terminator may become a solution for the ever dwindling armour stockpile being ground through in the War in Ukraine. The old Soviet stockpile being used by both Russia and Ukraine in combat is often not destroyed by other tanks, but by artillery, drones, and personnel using anti-tank weaponry. While the T-72s are being ripped apart on the battlefield, Russia possesses many T-55 hulls in storage from the mid-Cold War period with cannons that are not effective against modern armour on the battlefield. If these systems could be re-imagined for urban combat, they might provide an easily accessed and rapid solution for either army fighting in towns across Ukraine and Russia.

The idea of putting a modern system on an old and well stocked hull was attempted by China already with their QN-506 vehicle, China’s “Terminator” concept. The PLA’s copy of the Soviet T-54, the Type 59, is part of the same design family as the T-55, and is the basis for the QN-506 urban combat vehicle. While this system did not sell well on the international market when it was first presented, it was a concept that was meant as a option for countries who possessed the older T-55/Type 59 hulls to have a modern urban combat platform for their military. The QN-506 also had a single cannon like an M2 Bradley, but in an unmanned turret like the BMPT. The QN-506 also had a series of smaller rockets, anti-tank missiles, and its own drone, along with sensors and equipment to serve in an urban combat environment. While the concept did not sell well as few short years ago, such a system will likely be effective in urban conflicts where no such system alternatives exist at the moment. This low cost alternative will be the best option for many militaries, as traditional tanks have several drawbacks as experienced in Grozny, warfare that is increasingly urban and based on developing AI technologies. While conflicts grow, more of these systems will find their place in those battles. It is just a matter of time before we see an ED-506 perhaps, as losses of AI equipment can easily be replaced.

Representative Adam Schiff (D-California) should reconsider the Artsakh Revenue Recovery Act. It is an affront to an American ally. 

When the United States was fighting against the Taliban in Afghanistan, all American troops stopped in Baku in order to refuel en route to Kabul. Throughout all of the years that the United States was in Afghanistan, the Azerbaijanis provided this service to American servicemen and servicewomen, without complaints. And when the United States decided that it was time to evacuate from Afghanistan, Azerbaijan worked together with Turkey in order to ensure that American servicemen and servicewomen got home safely.

Usually, when a US ally does something like that for the United States, most Americans would show their appreciation, especially when this same country is helping Europe to obtain energy security in the wake of the war in the Ukraine. However, Representative Adam Schiff, a Democrat from California, does not show any appreciation for what Azerbaijan does for the United States and Europe. Instead, he cares about getting Armenian votes on Election Day, which prompted him to throw American values such as appreciation for US allies out of the window.

Recently, Representative Adam Schiff has demonstrated how much he values Armenian votes over America’s national interests when he introduced the Artsakh Revenue Recovery Act, which targets Azerbaijani assets in the United States and delivers them to Armenians who were displaced during the Second Karabakh War and the subsequent military operation.

Never mind that Karabakh was recognized as part of Azerbaijan under four UN Security Council resolutions and the 30-year Armenian occupation of the area was considered illegal under international law. Never mind that during the Armenian occupation of Karabakh and the seven Azerbaijani districts, around one million Azerbaijanis were displaced from their homes and never got any compensation from Armenia for all of their suffering.  Schiff wants to target only Azerbaijan and to have them pay for the Armenian settlers that got displaced from their homes.

This would be equivalent to asking Israel to pay compensation money to a Palestinian terrorist family that got evicted from their home, after their ancestors had already seized the home from a Jewish family that was massacred in Hebron following the 1929 riots. What Schiff is asking Azerbaijan to do is essentially the same thing, pay compensation to people that occupied and squatted on land that did not belong to them, and committed grave crimes against the original inhabitants of the land.

For this reason, everyone should condemn Representative Schiff for targeting Azerbaijan, a country that is an ally of both Israel and America in the struggle against a nuclear Iran. Representative Schiff should stop targeting US allies and to stop doing the bidding of proxies of Iran, who continuously work against America’s best interests in the Caucuses region. Instead of targeting the mullahs for their repression of Azerbaijanis, Baloch, Ahwaz and other repressed groups, and provide the victims of Iranian terrorism with compensation, Representative Schiff is going after Azerbaijan. American allies do not deserve to be treated in this manner.

Ayoob Kara, who served as Israel’s Communication Minister under Netanyahu, also called upon Representative Schiff to not pursue the Artsakh Revue Recovery Act: “As we speak, Israel is being attacked by Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis and other terror groups. During this period of time, Baku has provided us with a steady supply of oil and been a reliable partner. Out of respect for the Israel-US friendship, we ask that you not punish Azerbaijan in this manner.”      

The West Azerbaijani community also wrote a letter to Representative Schiff, proclaiming: “This draft is ill-informed and discriminatory as it promotes one-sided and out-of-context narratives that totally ignores the plight and suffering of one group of people and puts premium on the other group. We understand that the ethnic and religious sympathy is the main reason for your discrimination against Azerbaijan. If advanced, such a document will be an affront to human rights and international law, serving as a harbinger for instability, human suffering and damage to the US regional role.”

The West Azerbaijani community added: “We, as people who spent most of our lives in forcible displacement and destitution due to Armenia’s illegal occupation and ethnic cleansing, understand the utmost value and imperative nature of the right to return. This right is a part of fundamental human rights without regard to ethnic or religious background.  The UN team that visited the Karabakh region of Azerbaijan following the restoration of Azerbaijan’s sovereignty in September 2023 stated that “they saw no damage to civilian public infrastructure, including hospitals, schools and housing, or cultural and religious infrastructure” and “they did not come across any reports — either from the local population or from others — of violence against civilians following the latest ceasefire.”

They continued: “With a premium put on Armenian lobby groups, your discriminative approach to the right of Azerbaijanis forcibly displaced by Armenia to return to their homes is morally obnoxious. You were absolutely silent when 750,000 Azerbaijanis were ethnically cleansed, were subjected to genocide in Khojaly and denied their basic right to return for more than 30 years. You are now also silent as landmines implanted by Armenia continue to kill and maim innocent civilians who just exercise their right to return.”  

The policy of Representative Schiff is folly for the United States. Just imagine that one day, another September 11 occurs that originates with the Taliban government in Afghanistan. In such a case, the US would once again need to return to the war-torn country and will need once again stopover flights in Baku, as well as Azerbaijan’s assistance on the ground in fighting against the Taliban.  Given this, it would behoove the United States not to alienate allies that have had America’s back in the past just in order to win over some Armenian votes in California. After all, America’s national interests should come before any lobby, even if that lobby has quite a number of continents in Representative Schiff’s district.  

 

In a recent news conference, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan was asked whether he is pressing Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev to free Vardanyan and other Armenians remaining in Azerbaijani captivity.

“How did it happen so that Ruben Vardanyan renounced his Russian citizenship?” he replied. “Who advised or instructed him to take that step? Who sent him to Armenia, Nagorno Karabakh and for what purpose and with what promises?”

Vardanyan, who held the second-highest post in Karabakh’s leadership from November 2022 to February 2023, was arrested at an Azerbaijani checkpoint in the Lachin corridor as he fled the region along with tens of thousands of its ordinary residents following an Azerbaijani military offensive. He was charged with “financing terrorism,” illegally entering Karabakh and supplying its armed forces with military equipment.  

Today, Azerbaijan is imprisoning him for these crimes, yet this does not seem to bother Armenia’s Prime Minister.   The question is, why?   The Armenian government under Pashinyan recently faced a Russian coup attempt and has accused a group of people of training ethnic Armenians at a military base in Russia in order to oust the democratically elected sitting Armenian prime minister from power.  

This is the same Armenian Prime Minister who has been distancing himself from Moscow in recent times, culminating in Armenia’s withdrawal from the Moscow-led Collective Security Treaty Organization.  Armenia’s Investigative Committee recently announced the arrest of three people and the inclusion of four others on a wanted list for their desire to help Putin oust Armenia’s democratically elected leader. They stated that the seven suspects are Armenian citizens and Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians with close ties to Moscow, exactly like Vardanyan. They have been charged with usurping power, and if found guilty, face up to 15 years imprisonment.

Over the course of 2024, one year after the Russian oligarch Vardanyan was imprisoned, this group recruited an undisclosed number of Armenian citizens and former residents of Nagorno-Karabakh under the pretext of undergoing training sessions in Russia, along with a monthly stipend of ₽220,000 ($2,400). The recruits were told that these trainings would teach them how to use heavy weaponry, and that upon returning to Armenia, they would be able to utilize their new skills in carrying out combat duty, as well as in training others. 

According to Armenian authorities, once the recruits were transferred to Russia, they underwent preliminary checks, including a polygraph test, ‘in order to find out their personal characteristics and political views, the relationship with the Armenian law enforcement bodies’, etc. If they passed this initial test, the recruits were then deployed at the Russian Arbat Battalion’s military base to undergo combat training. It was only at this point that the recruits were told the actual goal of the training sessions — ‘to return to the Republic of Armenia and remove the current authority’.

An Armenian fact-checking outlet, Fip.am, reported that the Arbat Battalion was established in 2022, the very same year Vardanyan ruled the Karabakh separatist enclave, and that it primarily consisted of ethnic Armenians. They added that the battalion had signed an agreement with the Russian Defense Ministry. They also noted that the unit has been fighting in Ukraine.  The uncovering of this battalion makes Pashinyan ponder, what role did Vardanyan have in implementing Moscow’s sinister intentions for his country?    Did Vardanyan denounce his Russian citizenship and come to Karabakh only in order to weaken me at the expense of Moscow?   And if Vardanyan had any role in helping Russia to overthrow his rule, why would he want to help Vardanyan go anywhere outside of his Azerbaijani jail cell?   

Thus, Moscow, by attempting to topple the Pashinyan government, has now helped the Pashinyan government to turn against the Russian oligarch Vardanyan, who like the group that was recently arrested was very close to Putin.   Indeed, these days, the Armenian leadership prefers Iran, France and America to Russia.   In fact, in the wake of the coup attempt, they have grown weary of having a conflict with Baku, who does respect Armenia’s right to rule in Armenia proper, unlike Moscow.     This greatly enhances the prospects for peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan.   Thus, given the turn of events, Pashinyan has become an ally of Baku when it comes to possessing a desire to keep Vardanyan behind bars.   

On the other side of the coin, in the wake of Putin’s recent visit to Azerbaijan, the Armenians look with apprehension at the idea of Russia getting closer to Azerbaijan.   They view it as a threat to their interest to distance themselves from Moscow, especially in light of the recent coup attempt.   Therefore, they are hostile to Azerbaijan’s anti-vector policy, which seeks to have a balanced relationship where Baku supports Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sends them humanitarian aid while helping the West to wean off Russian oil and gas by offering itself as a viable alternative, while at the same time doing so in a way that will not antagonize Putin.  The Azerbaijanis see how much Ukraine has suffered for wanting to be part of NATO and has chosen to be smart over right.

However, the Armenian leadership has not chosen to be smart over right.   Despite their dependency on the Russian economy as a land-locked former Soviet bloc country, they have taken actions hostile to Moscow in retribution for their lack of assertiveness in helping Armenia in recent years. And for this reason, when Moscow gets closer to Baku, they grow even more hostile to Moscow, as their successful weening off of Moscow depends squarely on Armenia making peace with Azerbaijan and the Armenians do not want the Russians to sabotage this for them.   For this reason, they are hostile towards any rapprochement between Baku and Moscow, and are highly critical of Azerbaijan taking any steps in this direction.                  

 

At a conference titled “Persecuted Asian Minorities in the EU: Legal Remedies and Humanitarian Assistance” that was recently organized by Peace for Asia Switzerland, Aye Kari Soe, a human rights activist and President of International Burmese Students, discussed her recent trip to Thailand in order to investigate the human rights abuses that are presently taking place in Myanmar.  In her talk, she discussed how Myanmar poses a major threat to the global war on drugs.     

Soe noted that Myanmar stands behind many of the drug problems faced in America and Europe: “Not just traditional drugs like cocaine and heroin, but synthetic stimulants are flooding Europe. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Myanmar is the largest producer of meth and other drugs that are not yet fully traceable yet. These drugs are being transported worldwide, affecting our citizens here in Europe. The U.S. has already been faced with this alarming issue for years, with deaths involving synthetic opioids. Europe must therefore act quickly to prevent this supply from reaching our shores and harming our citizens.”

“The people producing these drugs are often not doing so of their own free will either,” she stressed.  “Many are enslaved, sold, and forced to work, their passports seized, and their freedom stripped away. In Myanmar, young Rohingya are kidnapped and sold into industries like fishing, where they are exploited by multi-million-dollar corporations exporting products to Europe. This is why I advocate for greater transparency in our supply chains. We must ensure that we are not only fighting against human rights abuses in Europe but also standing strong and advocating for human rights for everyone, everywhere.”

Not just Myanmar poses a grave threat in regards to the drug trade.   Pakistan and Afghanistan, particularly the western border of Pakistan, is home to the largest EU-bound drug trade cartels.   European MEP Fulvio Martusciello noted in his speech at the conference: “A report by the Atlantic Council highlighted the emergence of some extremist groups in Pakistan as the most important mode of Afghan terrorist groups who deal with drug trafficking to the EU.”  He indicated that the EU and Pakistani government as well as south Asian countries should work together to counter this phenomena.

Ramen Rahangmetan, co-founder of the Circle of Sustainable Europe, added at the conference that these drug cartels also exploit refugees seeking to flee to Europe.  In fact, a recent report in the Guardian found that these drug cartels even force migrant children to work as soldiers to smuggle cocaine into Europe. 

Rahangmetan proclaimed, “Traffickers exploit the weak, charging very high fees and subjecting migrants to violence, forced labor and sexual exploitation.  These refugees are victims twice over—once in their home country and again as they are smuggled into Europe.  The EU must strengthen its efforts to fight human trafficking through cooperation with international bodies like the UN Office on Drugs and Crime.   We must ensure that asylum seekers are protected not only from persecution at home but from predatory forces that await them on their journey to safety.”

Peace for Asia Switzerland is a non-profit research-based collective focused on human rights violations in Asia.   Senior journalists, activists and political leaders participate in this forum with insights from the region.   Since its creation in 2020, they have engaged with several heads of state, UN officials and diplomats through campaigns, conferences, and webinars.  Recently joining Peace for Asia Switzerland, Anhelina Tkachenko, the moderator of the conference, is committed to advancing the association’s mission and making a meaningful impact on human rights.  

A Monument to The Battle of Kursk, with a classical Soviet image of varied citizens of the Socialist Republic contributing to the battle.

The victories against Fascism in the regions around and between Kharkiv and Kursk are ones that have been seared into the national memory of the Soviet Union, Russia and Ukraine. Historically significant battles during the Second World War, including the largest tank battle ever to have taken place, occurred in the Kursk region. These battles not only determined the fate of the Soviet Union and the peoples within it, but also likely changed the outcome of the Second World War for all Allied nations.

The current conflict in the same region that is now taking place between Ukraine and Russia are made up of armies who often had ancestors who fought together against Napoleon and Fascism. In many cases, these modern soldiers have direct relatives on the other side of the border, represented on the other side of the conflict. Despite this common history, the battles around Kharkiv towards Kursk are no less brutal, bloody, or survivable, making the region one of the most fought over territories in human history, a land filled with those lost in brutal combat.

This week, Russia has announced that they will enlarge their regular armed forces by 1.5 million more soldiers, putting Russia’s Armed Forces at over 2 million. This would make the Russian Army one of the largest armies in the world. With the Rouble being fairly high, even under sanctions, and their weapons industry slowly working towards full capacity, it is uncertain if this enlargement would be viable as equipment stocks may not keep up with recruitment. In addition, it is likely the case that Russian citizens would be weary of entering front line combat units as more details come to light of the brutality of the front. While accurate information about conditions at the front are difficult to verify through any reliable sources, it is likely the case that it is much worse than anyone can imagine.

One account that has gained some attention over the last few months is from a hired former PLA soldier from China who is serving in the Russian Army in Ukraine. Like a number of foreign fighters with the Russian Army, he was hired as an independent paid soldier to bolster Russian forces. His personal videos and accounts of fighting demonstrate the brutality of war, an experience mirrored during past conflicts in the same region during the Second World War. Urban combat, modern weapons and the general anarchy of the conflict paints a picture worse than anyone could have imagined for soldiers on both sides of the conflict. Such accounts make one consider what the value of war is between Ukraine and Russia in 2024, and what value actions that can prevent a full scale war can have if it can reduce a conflict escalating further. Stating that, he also said his prospects in his home country make him prefer to stay in combat abroad, which details how much care must be taken to not ignite additional conflicts in other regions of the world. Bad policy certainly has its consequences, and those who have faced combat are often the only ones who have ever seen the reality of those consequences. They are also often the ones who work most diligently to prevent further conflicts, as a true victory is often not the end result.