СТРАТЕГИЧЕСКИЕ ОБОРОННО-БЕЗОПАСНОСТНЫЕ ОЦЕНКИ
THE DEVELOPMENT OF STRATEGIC DEFENSE SECURITY ASSESSMENTS AND DOCUMENTS AS A THEORETICAL- METHODOLOGICAL AND ACADEMIC-EXPERT BASIS FOR THE STRATEGIC DEFENSE REVIEW HAYK S. KOTANJIAN, Major General, Doctor of Political Science (Russian Federation), Professor of Political Science (Republic of Armenia), Visiting Professor at the US National Defense University, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary, Elected Full Member of the Academy of Military Sciences of the Russian Federation, Chairman of the Political Science Association of Armenia, Member of the CSTO Academic-Expert Council, Head of the INSS, MOD, RA
In general, universal principles guided the development of the National Security Strategy (NSS) for the Republic of Armenia (RA). I carefully honed them through a comparative analysis of both Western and Russian systems of strategic security thinking, using my personal experience and official involvement in postdoctoral academic on-the-job trainings and fellowships at the most prestigious security studies research-educational institutions of the RF and the US – the Russian Academy of Public Administration at the RF President, as well as the US Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University. Later at the behest of the Armenian Leadership, it became possible to conduct a Strategic Defense Reassessment.
This innovative research-based development process was launched during the final phase of Perestroika and then continued after the collapse of the Soviet Union– when Armenia gained its independence and the RA Armed Forces were created. This was a starting point for gaining a theoretical and methodological approach of how to develop a System of Military Policy and Military Diplomacy, as well as the NSS of independent Armenia, which at the beginning of the independent nation-state building was developed and refined during my direct involvement in the activities of the Center for Research Methodology of International Relations at the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (RF), the Chair of Military and Political Sciences of the Military Academy of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces, and the Russian Association of National and International Security1.
1 See N. Ter-Grigoryants. About the Author. Hayk S. Kotanjian. Political Problems of
STRATEGIC DEFENSE REVIEW 1
H. S. KOTANJIAN
In 1991-1992, while Armenia was gaining independence and the country’s Armed Forces were being created, I served as a Senior Research Fellow at the Russian Academy of Public Administration, research environments of the above- mentioned think tanks of Moscow. During this period, I developed the “Principles of the Military Policy of the Republic of Armenia: Military and Political Perspective of National Security, and a glossary of defense security concepts and terms “To the Basics of the RA’s Military Policy”2.
In order to establish the best international standards of defense analysis and methodology for developing strategic defense security documents for the Ministry of Defense of the RA, two academic fellowships in the US particularly hold an important place. The first was withinthe generals’ program “National Security Strategy Formulation and Managing Strategic Change” under the leadership of the US Secretary of Defense William Cohen at the College of International and Security Studies of theUS-German George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies in 1998. The second was the program “Challenges, New Techniques: Defense Analysis for the 21st Century”, which was under the leadership of the US Under Secretary of Defense Dr. David Chu at the RAND Graduate School in 2001.
The further accumulation and systematization of knowledge in the field of NSS and defense doctrinal documents’ development methodology through academic fellowships was conditioned by the decision of the Minister of Defense Serzh Sargsyan – to clarify the strategic assessments of possible guidelines of optimal dynamics of Armenia’s defense security cooperation balance with the US-NATO and Russia-CSTO after the adoption of the more advanced Individual Partnership Action Plan within the Partnership for Peace Program at the 2002 NATO Summit in Prague. The solution to this question was obtained during my academic fellowship at the US National Defense University (NDU) within the “NATO Staff Officer Orientation Course”, the Research Fellowship with the involvementin Strategic Studies at the INSS, as well as at the School for National Security Executive Education (now College of International Security Affairs) in 2003- 2004. Also contributing were completion of a Distinguished Faculty Fellowship at the Institute for National Strategic Studies of the US NDU, Visiting Scholar at the National Security Program of Harvard University’s Kennedy School of
Security: Perestroika in the USSR–Karabakh, Armenia, the South Caucasus–Afghanistan. Yerevan, 2009, pp. 546-549. 2 See Hayk S. Kotanjian. Principles of the Military Policy of the Republic of Armenia: Military and Political Perspective of National Security. Defense Policy Department, MOD, RA. Yerevan, 1992.
2 HAYKAKAN BANAK 3. 2015
СТРАТЕГИЧЕСКИЕ ОБОРОННО-БЕЗОПАСНОСТНЫЕ ОЦЕНКИ
Government, and as a Consultant on the US-Russia Strategic Dialogue –within the same program in 2010 at the beginning of the“reset” policy.
I paid particular attention to the mastering of methodological tool kit for the development of the US NSS in the INSS, US, NDU, which is the leading state center of research and review of the principles, research approaches and methodological tools for the development of both the US NSS, and its review from administrationto administration of the elected US Presidents. In the field of strategic research the US has established a tradition of comprehensive academic rethinking of domestic and foreign policies. In particular, they focus upon the theory of the so-called Grand Strategy, which is the broadest vision of optimal ways to effectively use the full power of the state for achieving foreign policy goals by non-military and military methods and means. At the same time, it should be noted that the Grand Strategy, in contrast to the NSS, is not an official document approved by the Head of the State. It does not have a political mission, unlikethe NSS, which servesthe US President to officially and publicly consult the American Society about strategic guidelines of national security during the period of the elected US Administration3.
In summation, I have listed an overview of academic approaches to the introduction into Armenia’s political defense security culture of meaningful innovation achievements of the Russian and American defense security science schools in terms of strategic interests of its national security. As a result, our country achieved a harmonious and balanced manifestation of political and diplomatic cooperation, which is represented by the newly created INSS in the triangle of leading think tanks of Moscow, Washington, and Brussels. It wast his fruitful complementarity of cooperation that, on the author’s initiative and under the political leadership of the Minister of Defense, Serzh Sargsyan, made possible the implementation of the academic guidance of this academic-expert interagency cooperation, which was innovative for Armenia at that time4. During the interagency and multi-step development of the NSS, which was conducted according to the US methodology, the following were developed and tested:
3 See for instance, “The Grand Strategy of the United States” by R.D. Hooker, Jr. INSS Strategic Monograph, National Defense University Press, Washington, D.C., October 2014. 4 See “Interview with the Secretary of the President’s National Security Council, Minister of Defense of the Republic of Armenia, Chairman of the Interagency Commission for Coordinating activities on Development of Draft National Security Strategy Serzh Sargsyan”. “National Security Strategy of the Republic of Armenia”. The Special Issue of the Defense- Academic Journal “Haykakan Banak” MOD, RA, 2007, pp. 95-99.
STRATEGIC DEFENSE REVIEW 3
H. S. KOTANJIAN
• the author’s monographic study “Guidelines on Developing Armenian National Security Strategy in the Context of Regional Security Architecture”5;
• the acquisition and consolidation of factors and indicators for the assessment of the RA’s national security aspects by agencies;
• the “Presentation by Mr. Serzh Sargsyan, Secretary of the President’s National Security Council, Minister of Defense of the Republic of Armenia for the Commanders of the RA Armed Forces”: “National Security Strategy Landmarks of the Republic of Armenia”6;
• the trilingual (Armenian-Russian-English) explanatory dictionary of key defense security terms on the NSS of the RA7;
• the review and defense of the results of the phased harmonization of the draft NSS elements in the Interagency Commission under the guidance of the Secretary of the President’s National Security Council, Minister of Defense Serzh Sargsyan carried out: in Moscow – at the enlarged session of the Chair of National Security of the Russian Academy of Public Administrationat the RF President (Professor, Major General A.A.Prokhozhev); in Washington – at the Academic Council (Academic Committee) of the US NDU National War College (Professor Dr. Theresa Sabonis-Helf); in Brussels – at the meeting of NATO Advisory Group on International Security (Major General of the British Armed Forces John Drevinkevich)8.
At the time of Colonel General Seyran Ohanyan’s appointment as a Chief of the General Staff of the RA Armed Forcesin 2007, the defense and political basis of
5 See Hayk. S. Kotanjian. “Guidelines on Developing Armenian National Security Strategy in the Context of Regional Security Architecture of the South Caucasus”. Washington-Yerevan, 2004-2005. Guidelines on Developing Armenian National Security Strategy in the Context of Regional Security Architecture.Yerevan, 2008, pp. 445-480. 6 See“Presentation by Mr. Serzh Sargsyan, Secretary of the President’s National Security Council, Minister Of Defense of the Republic of Armenia for the Commanders of the RA Armed Forces”. “National Security Strategy Landmarks of the Republic of Armenia”. Yerevan, 2005, pp. 65-89. 7See Appendix 2, Key Terms and Concepts.”Hakyakan Banak”, 2006, № 2. 8See “Interview with the Secretary of the President’s National Security Council, Minister of Defense of the Republic of Armenia, Chairman of the Interagency Commission for Coordinating Activities on Development of Draft National Security Strategy Serzh Sargsyan”. “National Security Strategy of the Republic of Armenia”. The Special Issue of the Defense- Academic Journal “Haykakan Banak” MOD, RA, 2007.
4 HAYKAKAN BANAK 3. 2015
СТРАТЕГИЧЕСКИЕ ОБОРОННО-БЕЗОПАСНОСТНЫЕ ОЦЕНКИ
the RA Military Doctrine were developed and then reviewed under his leadership in the INSS, MOD, RA, which was aimed at complementing and improving the RA’s first defense security strategic documents’ development9.
In 2008, a year after the adoption of the NSS and Military Doctrine of the RA in 2007, at the INSS, MOD, RA, it was important to hold the basic academic-expert workshop – on the methodology of organizing the Strategic Defense Review (SDR) for the experts of the RA Ministry of Defense and the General Staff of the RA Armed Forces by the NATO Advisory Group on International Security.
Launching the fundamental workshop, dedicated to the Methodology of Strategic Defense Review, organized by the NATO Advisory Group on International Security and the Institute for National Strategic Studies, MOD, RA, for the top officials of the MOD, RA. Presided by: Head of the INSS, MOD, RA Major General H. Kotanjian and Head of the Department of International Military Cooperation and Defense Programs, MOD, RA Colonel D. Tonoyan (currently – First Deputy Minister of Defense). INSS, MOD, RA, 2008
This workshop, held in cooperation with the Department of International Military Cooperation and Defense Programs of the MOD, RA (Colonel David Tonoyan), should be considered as a point of reference for the introduction into the RA’s political and defense culture of the methodology of Strategic Defense Review’s interagency development in accordance with the advanced international standards of global security10.
The International Strategic Policy Forums of the INSS, MOD,RA – organized in collaboration with such authoritative think tanks as the National Defense University and the Kennedy School of Government of Harvard University (US); Center for Euro-Atlantic Security of MGIMO (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the RF; Chatham House (UK); Center for Strategic Studies of Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences (China); Kadir Has University of Istanbul
9 “The Military Doctrine of the Republic of Armenia”. “Working Notebooks”, 2007, № 4. 10 See S. M. Ohanyan. The defense Reforms of the Republic of Armenia: Second Stage. Defense-Academic Journal of the MOD, RA “Haykakan Banak”, 2008, № 2-3.
STRATEGIC DEFENSE REVIEW 5
H. S. KOTANJIAN
(Turkey); the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the International Center for Electoral Systems (Israel), International Partners Committee of the International Forum for the Challenges of Peace operations, and others – contribute to the development of academic-expert notions among the Armenian experts of the future of defense security assessments of security environments in the South Caucasus and in the surrounding region11.
As a successful example of Strategic Forums of the INSS, MOD, RA – in terms of innovative upgrade of academic-expert notions of organizing the Strategic Defense Review – we can givethe International Strategic Forum of May 4-5, 2009, on the “Reassessment of Security in the South Caucasus: Regional Conflicts, Stability and Transformation”12, dedicated to the 15th anniversary of the signing by the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Republic of Armenia, and the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic of the tripartite Agreement on ceasefire in Karabakh. The organizers of this academic forum, which was held after the basic international workshop on the methodology of Strategic Defense Review at the INSS, MOD, RA, were the Center for Defense and Security Studies of the University of Lyon Jean Moulin and the INSS, MOD, RA. Twenty distinguished experts attended the Forum from Armenia, the Great Britain, Georgia, Iran, Norway, Russia, Turkey, and the US. An important contribution was also the Partner-State Committee’s Meeting and the Annual Forum of one of the leading international peacekeeping organizations – International Forum Challenges of Peace Operations, with the participation of the INSS held in Yerevan on October 4-6. Hundred representatives from reputable international security organizations and twenty one states developed recommendations, the implementation of which will foster the efficiency of peace operations and will turn the post-conflict institution-building into a reliable nexus between peacekeeping and peacebuilding.
From the above-mentioned, it clearly follows that, according to the Western practice, the main developers of strategic security documents are the leading
11 See “Reassessing Security in the South Caucasus: Regional Conflicts, Stability and Transformation”. “Working Notebooks” Defense Academic-Journal of the MOD, RA “Haykakan Banak”), 2009, № 1; see also “The Collective Security Treaty Organization and the South Caucasus: Prospects of Peace and Security in the Region”. “Working Notebooks”, 2011, № 1-2; also” Materials of the International Strategic Policy Forum “Regional Security Dynamics In the South Caucasus. (29-30 November, 2012)”.“Working Notebooks”. Special Issue, 2013; “Materials of the International Strategic Policy Forum “The Integration of National and Regional Peacekeeping Capacities into the Global System of Peace Operations Based on the Principles and Standards of the UN. (1-2 July, 2014)”. “Working Notebooks”. Special Issue, 2015. 12 See “Reassessing Security in the South Caucasus: Regional Conflicts, Stability and Transformation”. “Working Notebooks”, 2009, № 1. 6 HAYKAKAN BANAK 3. 2015
СТРАТЕГИЧЕСКИЕ ОБОРОННО-БЕЗОПАСНОСТНЫЕ ОЦЕНКИ
research organizations (think tanks), which, when necessary, can be assisted by apparatus structures that are assigned to effectively carry out the interagency development of these documents and meaningfully implement their provisions after the approval by the top military and political leadership of the state13. It should be emphasized that the INSS, MOD, RA has already accumulated theoretical-methodological, as well as academic and practical experience in strategic review,using modern research methods. Strategic reassessmentsare carried out in respect of Azerbaijan (2007 and 2013), Georgia (2008 and 2014)14, the NKR, domestic military-industrial complex15, and military education system16. “These reassessments can guide not only the Strategic Defense Review of the RA, launched in 2014, but also in course of time and if necessary – the amendments in the RA’s National Security Strategy”17.
In the above-mentioned studies, along with the methodology of comparative analysis during the review of the strategic assessments of the dynamics of political and security processes in the region and neighboring countries, the methodology of strategic games was used as an innovative tool. The results were reviewed by reference to the outcomes of field studies (in Georgia and the NKR). Fellowships for the researchers of the INSS, MOD, RA at the US NDU were organizedto deepen their knowledge about the methodology of strategic games – then practically strengthened in the course of strategic games heldin the INSS, MOD, RA.
In the strategic analysis and development on its basis of forecasts carried out during the SDR the use of such innovative research methods like PESTLE- analysis, scenario planning, SWOT-analysis, decision trees, and others, seems appropriate.
I would like to especially emphasize that for ensuring the high effectivenessof planning in the process of SDR the parallel use of different research methods are deemed to be necessary, many of which have already been refined or are in the process of development in the INSS, MOD, RA.
13 See D. S. Chilingaryan, V. P. Avetisyan, T. R. Martirosyan. On the Experience of the Governance and Management of the USA Defense Policy System, “Haykakan Banak”, 2008, № 4. 14 See “Strategic Security Studies”, vol. 1. pp. 289 – 364, 453 – 580; vol. 4, pp. 563 – 709. Yerevan, 2014. (in Armenian). 15 See “Haykakan Banak”, 2008, № 1; 2011, № 3. 16See “Haykakan Banak”, 2010, № 1; 2012, № 3. 17 H. S. Kotanjian. “The Strategic Outlines of Azerbaijan’s Security Dynamics in 2007-2014”. “Strategic Security Studies”, vol. 4. Yerevan, 2014, p. 572.
STRATEGIC DEFENSE REVIEW 7