THE ROLE THE ARMED FORCES LIKELY TO PLAY IN FUTURE CONFLICTS

Throughout history, changes in the character of war have always been difficult for contemporaries to identify and assess. The context of future conflicts and wars can help the nations to make sound decisions on designing the tasks and missions of future forces. This paper offers a view on the character of future conflicts, seeks to describe what Armed Forces are likely to experience in future conflicts in light of dynamic changes in current security environment, and provides recommendations on the areas with the shortfalls, which could be essential to their success. It assesses how we think about future war, drawing attention to its associated caveats, obstacles, and intellectual problems. The author focuses attention on the issues related the activities referred to as “hybrid”, and the possibility of using the Armed Forces’ potential in terms of identification and elimination of threats. The conclusion of the paper presents a clear picture of future generations of the soldiers based on the requirements predicted throughout the article

South caucasus and a ‘New Great Game’ : the communication of competition in securitised international relations

This article seeks to compare and analyse the historical and contemporary arguments concerning the existence of the brand the 'Great Game' in Central Asia with that of a 'new' Great Game in the South Caucasus, while assessing the validity and problems of using this term. The article analyses the regional state of affairs and possible impacts of the Russian factor in forging close relations between South Caucasus states and NATO. It is argued that Russia's and NATO's vested interests in the region rhetorically contribute to European security system in the context of the security environment after the Georgian-Russian War of 2008 and its repercussions. NATO's presence may be interpreted as counterbalancing the Russian military presence in the region, but there are also clear limits to the alliance's willingness to actively engage in the region, not least the reluctance to antagonize Moscow. The context of geopolitical competition may be interpreted as a 'new' Great Game sharing similarities with nineteenth century competition of great powers, yet a number of clear differences also exist relative to the traditional Great Game