Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Talysh Identity and Geopolitics in the South Caucasus

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Talysh Identity and Geopolitics in the South Caucasus

    Talysh Identity and Geopolitics in the South Caucasus
    By Bradley Jardine
    2/17/2015


    In Azerbaijan, a sensitive debate is being reintroduced to the
    political foreground: `Did Talyshistan belong to the Azerbaijan
    Republic? And if not can the current Republic of Azerbaijan
    legitimately claim the region as its sovereign territory?' Although
    this seems like an academic question, debated in the confines of
    history departments; the discussion is loaded with geopolitical
    baggage. Due to the vast number of ethnic groups and language
    communities living side by side in the small, mountainous region of
    the Caucasus, local disputes are often manipulated by regional powers
    keen to either exploit, or hinder the Caucasus's potential as both an
    energy producer and transit corridor linking European markets with
    Asia. Still, it came as a surprise to many when last week, the Russian
    news agency IAREX published an article by the Talysh nationalist
    leader Fakhraddin Aboszoda. As one might expect, Aboszoda uses the
    article to argue in favour of Talysh national self-determination,
    claiming that Baku has no sovereign right to Talysh lands. But why are
    his views suddenly gaining traction in Russian newspapers? In the
    South Caucasus, historical narratives are often used as geopolitical
    weapons.

    Context

    Azerbaijan's Talysh population are a Persian-speaking community
    concentrated in the south of the country along the Iranian border,
    with their capital in Lenkoran. The group has a history of
    Russian-backed resistance to Baku. The Bolsheviks established the
    Mughan Soviet Republic as a communist puppet state in 1919, with the
    raison d'état of undermining the democratic Musavat government of
    Azerbaijan. In 1993 again, amidst the chaos of post-soviet political
    transition, Russia backed a separatist movement: the `Talysh-Mughan
    Autonomous Republic' led by Alikram Humbatov. This pseudo-state was
    quickly dissolved three months later during Heydar Aliyev's
    consolidation of power. Aboszoda is himself steeped in controversy
    because of his involvement with this would-be separatist state, and
    furthermore, he recently argued that Azerbaijan functioned as a
    miniature empire. This debate was expanded, and backed by researchers
    at the Kremlin-connected think-tank, the Russian Institute for
    Strategic Studies (RISI). There's no data showing how well his views
    are supported or opposed by ordinary Talysh, yet this hasn't stopped
    the Russian Federation and Armenia from involving themselves in other
    recent `provocations' of Talysh minorities.

    On November 29th 2014, a television station calling itself `The
    National Television of Talyshton,' began broadcasting in Azerbaijan
    under the direction of Talysh poet Zabig Madozh. The station adopted
    the Russian Cyrillic script, rather than the Perso-Arabic script
    typical of Talysh nationalists. Aboszoda again made a controversial
    appearance, being picked as a presenter. The other host was
    Zakhiraddin Ibragimi, the chairman of the Committee for the Defence of
    the Rights of the Talysh. Then, in February 2007 the former
    Talysh-Mughan Republic's President Alikram Hummatov, made a guest
    appearance at Yerevan State University for an event concerning the
    preservation of the Talysh language.

    During his speech at the University Hummatov said that: `In
    Azerbaijan, the Talysh are deprived of basic rights. We are not
    respected; we are being extirpated, with a policy of assimilation
    being implemented against us.' Some of his concerns are warranted. For
    example, in lowland communities that were once homogenous and are now
    becoming multi-ethnic, Azerbaijani is becoming the favoured language
    for wider communication. In particular, children's proficiency in
    Talysh is reportedly declining, except in remote, mountain villages.

    The Azeri regime predictably responded by cracking down on outspoken
    individuals in the Talysh community. The day after Hummatov visited
    the Armenian occupied territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, the Azeri
    government sentenced the editor of the newspaper `Tolyshi Sado (Voice
    of the Talysh), Hilal Mammedov to five years in prison for trumped up
    charges of `ethnic hatred' and `drug-trafficking.' This echoed an
    earlier case in February 2007, when another of the paper's editors,
    Novruzali Mammadov, , was arrested and charged with treason, before
    dying in 2009 due to lack of adequate prison healthcare.

    More recently in 2013, a Talysh-language radio station, `The Voice of
    Talyshstan,' was launched in the Armenian occupied territories; a move
    criticised by Baku as an attempt to stir up ethnic conflict. It began
    broadcasting from the city of Shusha, in Nagorno-Karabakh on March
    20th at the initiative of the Caucasus Centre of Iranian Studies at
    the Modus Vivendi Centre. The station was founded by the Armenian
    intellectual, Garnik Asatrian, who also established the Talysh Studies
    program at Yerevan State University. Welcoming Hummatov, Asatrian
    denied any accusations of ulterior motives behind Armenia's interest
    in Talysh minorities. Asatrian insisted that the department was merely
    broadening its focus on Iranian studies. Armenian agitation of this
    sort is nothing new. Armenian officials have a long history of denying
    the existence of an `Azerbaijani' nationality, altogether. But loose
    arguments based on sweeping historically deterministic allegations
    notwithstanding, the question still remains ` why now?

    Geopolitical Anlaysis

    Recently Paul Goble at the Jamestown Foundation wrote an article
    questioning whether Moscow is putting the Talysh in play against
    Azerbaijan. In it he suggests three possible reasons why Talysh
    activists are rising in prominence. First, he suggests that by
    supporting Talysh nationalist activities Moscow may be countering
    Iranian activities in the region (i.e. the financing of Mosques).
    Second, that Moscow might be trying to court Armenia after tensions
    between the two countries have come to a fore over the murders in
    Gyumri. Finally, that the `Kremlin' is sending a `signal to Baku' that
    Russia has `resources within Azerbaijan' and that they are ready to
    use them `if Azerbaijan does not go along with Russia's wishes.'

    It's worth exploring each one of these in-depth to see if they hold
    any standing. Firstly, it should be noted that there's an inordinate
    amount of suspicion about Russian intentions vis-a-vis Azerbaijan and
    an excessively exaggerated account of Russian abilities to act upon
    them. The situation in Ukraine, and the recent treaty (read:
    annexation) of South Ossetia has many analysts rightly unnerved. But
    much of their suspicions regarding Russian relations with Azerbaijan
    appear either fabricated or unduly influenced by the myriad of state
    propaganda in the region. Unfortunately reporting on geopolitical
    events of suspect importance in the Caucasus seems especially prone to
    this particular brand of hyperbole.

    Second, Azerbaijan is the key economic and military actor in the
    Caucasus ` and Russia knows it. Its oil reserves have given the Aliyev
    regime a degree of independence from outside meddling that Georgia and
    Armenia simply haven't been able to purchase. Since the completion of
    the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, Azerbaijan's GDP has grown year over
    year at an unprecedented rate, reaching US $73 billion in 2013 (in
    comparison: Georgia US $16 billion; Armenia US $10 billion). The
    increase in oil revenues has sent Azeri military expenditures
    skyrocketing to a record US $4.8 billion (mostly spent purchasing
    Russian arms) and forced Armenia's sickly economy to attempt to keep
    pace. The situation is advantageous to Russia, because it keeps
    Armenian national security dependent on Moscow's support, and sends
    capital flowing into the coffers of Russia's military industrial
    complex. With the Russian economy in a tailspin, it's unlikely that
    Putin would jeopardize lucrative arms deals with their southern
    neighbor by overtly provoking some kind of Talysh separatist movement.
    Further, Putin's attempt to establish a Eurasian Economic Union would
    be boosted significantly with Azeri cooperation and alienating the
    regime seems like a sure way to jeopardize any future membership.

    Third, unlike South Ossetia and Abkhazia ` there is no group in
    Azerbaijan that would favor reunification with Russia and no sizable
    Russian minority that Russia could intervene on behalf of. Quite the
    contrary, Russia is already dealing with separatists in neighboring
    Dagestan and Chechnya. Historically, Russia has favored stability in
    the Caucasus to chaos, which is one reason why Russian authorities
    tend to look favorably on the region's strong-armed dictators who can
    keep their constituent populations `in line.' So given these
    geopolitical considerations what are we to make of Goble's three
    propositions?

    The first, that Russia is attempting to vie for influence vis-a-vis
    Iran is not outside the realm of possibility. Moscow's troubles with
    Islamic separatists throughout the Caucasus are well-notedand it may
    perceive Iran's supposed support of the Talysh as threatening.
    However, if this is indeed the case, it would seem that Russia's best
    option would be ensuring a stable secular regime in Baku ` not
    attempting to undermine the one already there. The second possibility
    that Russia is essentially performing a Public Relations coup in order
    to repair relations with Armenia is questionable on several lines of
    reasoning ` most important among them is the fact that much happened
    before the Gyumri murders suggesting that if Russia is indeed involved
    at all, there's a longer strategy at play. The last possibility, that
    Russia is sending a signal to Baku is the most difficult to refute but
    also unlikely on several grounds which have already been mentioned `
    namely that there are no sizable minorities in Azerbaijan that could
    pose a significant threat to Baku.

    With the aforementioned caution that much geopolitical analysis is
    essentially guess work the following represents the most likely
    scenario. In all probability there are many Talysh who are worried
    about their loss of language and identity. There are equally likely
    Talysh who resent the Aliyev regime's brutal suppression of basic
    freedoms ` just as there are many Azeris who feel the same way. Some
    people within Armenia are undoubtedly stoking these concerns as part
    of a much longer line of propaganda that tries to deny Azeri
    nationality on questionable grounds. If Russia is indeed involved at
    all, it is probably to provoke the Aliyev regime into further
    crackdowns and human rights abuses. It's partially Aliyev's
    willingness to continue to imprison journalists and anyone with
    grievances that is keeping Azerbaijan from fully pursuing a Western
    orientation (a la Georgia). Pursuing policies that don't pose a real
    threat to the stability of the regime, yet cause Aliyev to react in a
    way that draws the ire of European and US institutions is an effective
    strategy to keep Azerbaijan away from greater economic and political
    integration with the West.

    As is often the case, Russia's relationship with post-Soviet minority
    communities is both ambiguous, and highly pragmatic.

    http://registan.net/2015/02/17/talysh-identity-and-geopolitics-in-the-south-caucasus/

Working...
X