Army is like its commander - lack of valor in Armed Forces of Armenia

Recently, one of the Armenian Telegram channels published the results of a closed survey conducted among Armenian military personnel. The results of the survey shocked many. To clarify, the Armenian couch patriots, who have never smelled gunpowder, were shocked.

And so, only 15 percent of Armenian servicemen are ready to participate in real combat operations. Only about 20 of them know how to use weapons. Two thirds of the respondents believe that the army is poorly prepared to repel external aggression.

Only 25 percent of military personnel consider the authority of commanders to be high, even less confident in the competence of the General Staff, and very few - only 18 percent call the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces competent.

How can we not recall the completely opposite results of a survey conducted by the Gallup international research center at the beginning of the year. As a result, it turned out that Armenia has the highest fighting spirit in the world - as many as 95.7 percent of the surveyed citizens of this country said they were ready to fight for Armenia if there was a war. Interestingly, this indicator has always been high in Armenia. 

A few years before the Second Karabakh War, Gallup conducted a similar survey and found 72 percent of Armenians ready to fight. However, it is unclear where this valor and belligerence went later, when the Armenian servicemen fled from the front in droves. In a country showing such high results, this should not be the case. 

For example, in Azerbaijan, the result in the same survey was 85 percent, and it was fully justified on the battlefield - there was not a single deserter among the Azerbaijani servicemen. In Armenia, after the war, more than 10,000 criminal cases were opened on the facts of desertion. For such a small country and such a small army, this is simply a disaster.

I remember a year ago, the wife of Prime Minister Pashinyan, Anna Hakobyan, started talking about 10 thousand deserters in the Armenian army, and after that the anger of the couch patriots, the opposition, the "Karabakh clan" and other scum of society descended on her. Before the Second Karabakh War, the myth of the "invincibility" of the Armenian "warrior of light", the highest level of fighting spirit and patriotism in the army and so on was maintained in Armenia and pro-Armenian foreign circles. The 44-day war broke these illusions.

Anna Hakobyan was accused of immoral attempts to humiliate the Armenian people and defame the Armenian army. Meanwhile, Hakobyan only announced official data, and so many deserters were counted not in Baku, but in Armenia itself. The "Warriors of Light" began to desert almost from the first days of the war. Probably, those "patriots" who were included in 72 percent of Gallup's respondents were not among them.

They may object, they say, that the respondents of the opinion poll pledged to fight for Armenia, not for Karabakh. It would have been a logical objection, but for some reason none of the neighbors dared to utter it. After all, this would be a recognition that the Armenian Armed Forces fought on foreign soil, on the territories of another state annexed by their country.

Military expert, former corps commander, holder of the Order of the Azerbaijani Banner, Colonel of the reserve Shair Ramaldanov:

"Finally, our neighbors began to produce indicators that meet the realities. The answers reflect the situation that actually takes place. Those 15 percent of military personnel who want to fight... By the way, we still need to figure out who they are. Most likely, these are those who have never participated in hostilities and have not seen what the Armenian army faced during the 44-day war.

It is also not surprising that only 20 percent of the military surveyed know how to use weapons. I think this indicator will continue to decrease. Armenia is now rapidly concluding contracts for the purchase of modern weapons. But buying weapons is one thing, and being able to use them is quite another. In order to master the purchased weapons, it is necessary to conduct training, shooting, exercises, and improve professionalism, as is done in the Azerbaijani army. American instructors at the Ministry of Defense will not help Armenia solve this problem.

As for "repelling aggression", I do not even know who is threatening Armenia. I think she's threatening herself. Azerbaijan has made it quite clear that it recognizes the territorial integrity of this country, has offered it peace and is not going to attack it. Our country will reconsider this position only if Armenia forces us to do so by its behavior.

I do not see anything surprising in the low authority of the command staff and in the distrust of the General Staff. With the unhealthy moral and psychological atmosphere in the Armenian army, with the level of irregular relations and corruption that take place, there can be no question of the authority of the commanding staff. Officers should be an example for soldiers. And what kind of example can such commanders set? Let's move on. 

The Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces is a special position for any country. I don't think even the military in Armenia perceives Nikol Pashinyan in this capacity. The policy pursued by the Supreme Commander of the Armenian Armed Forces provides for militarization without the development of the armed forces themselves. To stuff an army with weapons does not mean to make it stronger. In addition, he constantly baffles both intra-Armenian and regional processes. 

This politician does not have any definite position and tries to balance according to the old tradition of Yerevan. While still a member of the CSTO, Armenia conducts exercises with NATO. Pashinyan is doing everything so that Russia does not trust Yerevan, but he also fails to earn the full trust of the West. 

All these games have led to the fact that Armenia's Western guardians have become unwanted players in the region, which does not strengthen Pashinyan's position in any way. His foreign policy can be called treacherous towards his neighbors in the region. And even worse, it creates conditions for a clash of interests of external actors in the South Caucasus. Non-regional players are trying to enter the region through Armenia in order to control the logistics corridors, but this does not meet the interests of the regional states themselves. 

"Thanks to" Pashinyan, who put his country at risk of "Syrization," the security of the South Caucasus as a whole is now in question. Pashinyan pursues a policy based on the notes of his new patrons, leading the region to escalation. 

By arming Armenia under the pretext of protecting its security, they inspire the former occupier to provocations, which, of course, will not go unanswered. Western patrons need destabilization to expand their presence. And hardly anyone here is thinking about the future of the Armenian people.   

So the attitude towards Pashinyan as the supreme commander of the armed forces is completely natural. 18 percent is even, I think, a lot in the current situation.

To sum up, I will say: what kind of commander-in-chief is the General Staff, what kind of General Staff is the army."