CONTEMPORARY EURASIA VOLUME VII (1, 2) Contemporary-Eurasia-3new | Page 25

TINA KHARATYAN
on defense policies improving the military environment and capabilities
of armed forces during peacetime. 13
MD’s defi nitions given by diff erent countries are quite similar, although
some marginal variations exist. The NATO Glossary of Terms and Defi ni-
tions’ defi nition of doctrine is entirely inclusive; “doctrine includes funda-
mental principles by which the military forces guide their actions in support
of objectives. It is authoritative but requires judgment in application.” 14
In order to understand Russia’s approach in guiding the elaboration of
the MD, it is important to fi nd out the role and contribution of the Soviet
legacy in this regard. Although contemporary Russia’s defi nition does not
emphasize the importance of military preparations exclusively as the MD
of USSR did 15 , the directedness of Russian and Soviet MDs remains the
same. 16 As during the Cold War, the USSR aimed to counter the West,
contemporary Russia does not go far prioritizing “the challenges that the
policies of Western states create for Russian security”. 17
Described as a “soul of warfare” 18 the doctrine itself is theoretical and
this creates some diffi culties. Logical fl aws in doctrine are inescapable
as it is elaborated in a peaceful time identifying the ways how an army
should operate in case of war. 19 Therefore, doctrine should be revised pe-
riodically in a way to remain “practical and teachable” and harmonized
with the external changes of confl ict environment. 20
The Military Doctrine of the Republic of Azerbaijan
Brief overview: the process of adoption
The formation and adoption of the MD of Azerbaijan took quite an
extended period. Since Ilham Aliyev came to power in 2003, the initiative
to develop the MD was put into the process. This period coincided with
the intensifi ed cooperation with NATO in the framework of IPAP (Indi-
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Ibid., 161; Arnold L. Horelick, “Perspective of the study of comparative military doctrines,”
The RAND Corporation, 1973: 1-17.
“NATO Glossary of Terms and Defi nitions: Listing terms of military signifi cance and their
defi nitions for use in NATO,” AAP-6 22, 2010.
CIA Special Collection Release, “The Nature of Soviet Military Doctrine,” 2000.
“The Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation,” (2014): https://www.offi ziere.ch/wp-con-
tent/uploads-001/2015/08/Russia-s-2014-Military-Doctrine.pdf (accessed May 7, 2018).
Izabelle Facon, “Russia’s National Security Strategy and Military Doctrine and their impli-
cations for the EU,” European Parliament, Policy Department, 2017; “Russia’s New Mili-
tary Doctrine: Same as the Old Doctrine,” RAND Corporation, 2015: https://www.rand.org/
blog/2015/01/russias-new-military-doctrine-same-as-the-old-doctrine.html (accessed Decem-
ber 7, 2018).
Geoff rey Sloan, “Military doctrine, command philosophy and the generation of fi ghting
power: genesis and theory,” International Aff airs 88, no. 2 (2012): 243 -263.
Latawski, “The Inherent Tensions”; Sloan, “Military doctrine, command philosophy”.
Latawski, “The Inherent Tensions”; “Sloan, Military doctrine, command philosophy”; Posen,
“Foreword,” 170.
25