Introduction:
While the world is focused on the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, a deafening artillery fire has resounded in the Caucasus, which Russia once regarded as its "home garden". The Azerbaijani Ministry of Defense announced the launch of an "anti-terrorist operation" with the stated purpose of striking Armenian military facilities and driving Armenian troops out of the Nagorno-Karabakh region in order to "restore constitutional order in Azerbaijan." However, this "anti-terrorist operation" is strikingly similar to Russia's "special military operation" against Ukraine, which is an operation to achieve strategic goals and territorial claims through force.
Armenia's inaction
The Armenian side appeared inactive in the face of Azerbaijan's "anti-terrorist operation". Claiming that no troops were deployed in the Nagorno-Karabakh region, they called on the United Nations to take action to stop Azerbaijan's military operations. The Armenian Prime Minister even ordered the army not to act without permission, which eventually led to Armenia's direct abandonment of the Nagorno-Karabakh region.
This passive attitude is reminiscent of the resolute resistance of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during the Russian offensive. Zelensky did not choose to flee, but held on to Kiev and led the Ukrainian army to stubbornly resist. This determination made Ukraine a challenge for Russia to achieve a quick victory, while Armenia's inaction paved the way for Azerbaijan's victory.
Three reasons for quick fixes
Azerbaijan's quick victory against Armenia is no accident. In contrast, Russia has not achieved the same speed and effectiveness in the conflict against Ukraine for three main reasons.
First, Azerbaijan made clear its goals and focused on the Nagorno-Karabakh region, rather than declaring war on the entire territory of Ukraine at the outset. This clear strategic goal allows them to concentrate their firepower and move forward quickly.
Second, the gap in leaders played a key role in this quick fix. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky chose to hold on, leading the army to resist, while the Armenian Prime Minister showed hesitation and insoluteness in the face of Azerbaijan's "anti-terrorist operation". The decisions and attitudes of leaders have a profound impact on the outcome of conflict.
Most importantly, the UN recognized the Nagorno-Karabakh region as the territory of Azerbaijan, which provided Azerbaijan with de jure support. In contrast, the territorial issue of Ukraine is controversial in the international community and lacks a clear legal basis. This leaves Ukraine legally stronger, while Russia is mired in a protracted conflict.
conclusion
In these two conflicts, Russia could have achieved a quick victory, but it was caught in a protracted war due to a number of factors. The facts tell us that leaders' decisions, clarity of strategic goals, and support by international law all play an important role in determining the outcome of a conflict.
In any case, the two conflicts between Russia and Ukraine are shaping the world pattern and international relations. We must learn from this and recognize the cost of war and the profound impact of leaders' decisions on the course of conflict. Above all, we should cherish peace and strive to maintain peace and stability in the international community. Because in peace, the best way to resolve disputes can be found, and not to get bogged down in endless battles.