Under kriget i Nagorno-Karabach år 2020 nyttjades drönare på ett för omvärldenuppseendeväckande sätt. Drönare uppfattas ha spelat en stor roll när Azerbajdzjan besegradeArmenien i kriget vilket får drönare att framstå som ett lättillgängligt och billigt alternativ till dedyra och komplicerade bemannade stridsflygplanen.Denna fallstudie nyttjar Douhets och Papes luftmaktsteorier för att skapa vetenskapligt grundadkunskap om nyttjandet av drönare i kriget i Nagorno-Karabach 2020. Genom att betrakta kriget urdessa två teoretikers perspektiv utreds hur drönare användes och på vilket sätt de bidrog med militärnytta. Syftet är att bidra till en mer välinformerad debatt om drönares plats i modern krigföring. Genom analys ur Douhets perspektiv framkommer att drönares fria rörlighet i tre dimensioner har varit till stor fördel för dess brukare. Genom att nyttja denna egenskap lyckades Azerbajdzjan inledningsvis skapa luftöverlägsenhet över krigsområdet och sedan bekämpa armeniska mål både ianslutning till fronten och bakom densamma på ett till synes avgörande sätt. Dock framkommer att kriget avgjordes av flera vapenslag i samverkan, inte enskilt av drönare. Genom analys ur Papes perspektiv framkommer att de azerbajdzjanska drönarna har nått stor effektnär de nyttjats som direkt understöd till marktrupper genom dess effektiva anfall mot försvararensförband och dess nära bakomvarande stödfunktioner. Genom att på detta sätt förneka Armenien möjligheten att effektivt försvara sig användes de azerbajdzjanska drönarna enligt Papes nekandestrategi. I analysen framkommer ett flertal faktorer som är specifika för kriget i Nagorno-Karabach 2020 somverkat till drönarnas fördel. Om dessa faktorer varit annorlunda hade drönarnas effektivitet troligen minskat.

This study examines the correlation between tactics and technology in the case of the war overNagorno-Karabakh 2020, between Azerbaijan and Armenia. There is a debate going on aboutwhether the high-tech drones from Turkey and Israel were the decisive factors in the war, or if thetactical aspects and preparations is what gave the main success of the war.This will be tested against parts of Geoffrey Till ́s theory “Understanding victory” through a theoryconsuming case study using some of his perspectives, with qualitative text analysis of the empiricaldata consisting of think tanks, news articles, government documents and analysts ́ statements. Theresult of the study indicates that none of the perspectives could carry the war itself, but tactics werea slightly bigger factor for success.

The conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh and eastern Ukraine have spurred a great deal of interest regarding the implications for modern warfare. Both schoolers and militaries alike have been trying  to decern what kind of implications these conflicts, complete with new weapons and capabilities have upon tomorrow’s battlefield. Theories that try to provide an explanatory outcome of conflicts has often been centered down to the age-old question whether it is the scientific material side or the artistic maneuver that takes the precedence for explaining victory on the battlefield. The purpose of this paper is to try and combine those views by using Randall Collins theory regarding the outcome of conflicts, to explain the battles of Ilovaisk 2014 and the Azerbaijani advance in Sothern Nagorno-Karabakh 2020. That way both sides are taken into account and help mitigate the debate. Furthermore, the making of a structural analytical framework tests the theory and is beneficial for further research. The framework developed from the theory, have two different main casual ways to explain victory on the battlefield. One stem from the material side called attrition and one from the artistic side called maneuverer. The framework was then applied upon a number of different reports, books, and other open sources from the conflicts. Conclusions from the results are that attritional warfare has been a viable way to achieve victory and that the long-range precision firepower that drone warfare offer has the advantage over the defensive counters.

Abstract – From de facto to de jure: A comparative study between three post-Soviet territories path towards diplomatic recognition The purpose of this essay has been to study how well three post-Soviet de facto states live up to the definition of the concepts of state and sovereignty. Basically, the focus has been to, with the help of an analysis scheme constructed specifically for this study, analyse the situation the three de facto states are currently in and then compare their situations to one another. With the study I want to show that the history of the de facto states, as well as their current legal status, carry with them differences and similarities that play a major role in their future. By analysing a number of scientific articles and other research material within the social science sphere, I have been able to compile a table that shows how well the case studies live up to the seven criteria of the state outlined by Martin Glassner in Political Geography (2004). The main result of the study has been that various historical and demographic circumstances in the three de facto states have distinguished them from one another during the more than three decades that have passed since the fall of the Soviet Union. However, this is in stark contrast to the strong ties they all have to a patron state, which in all cases is crucial to the legal state of limbo they are all currently residing in.