Call Off the Great Game

It's time to stop seeing the South Caucasus as a geopolitical chessboard.

BY THOMAS DE WAAL | SEPTEMBER 13, 2010

Twenty years after the end of the Soviet Union, news from the South Caucasus is bleak. The region's two longest borders, which stretch between Armenia and Azerbaijan and between Georgia and Russia, remain wholly or partially shut. Corrupt bureaucrats make even the nominally open borders closed to free trade.  Three de facto statelets - Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno-Karabakh -- exist in a twilight zone, separate from their Soviet-era "parents," Georgia and Azerbaijan, but not quite sovereign states either. Hundreds of thousands of refugees remain displaced by war. Poverty and unemployment are endemic. Millions work away from home as migrant workers, mainly in Russia. Both locals and outsiders share the blame for creating this miserable picture.

How do outsiders share responsibility? We are at fault, I believe, because our faulty perceptions and interpretations have helped make bad local politics worse. I identify three dangerous mirages -- misguided approaches to this region that reverberate in decidedly unhelpful ways.

The first mirage may be the oldest: the notion that the region is a "Great Chessboard" where the big powers push the locals around like pawns to serve their own goals. That is not what actually happens. In actual fact, however the geopolitical weather changes, the locals always manage to manipulate the outside powers at least as much as the other way round.

In the 21st century the Caucasus is still the Caucasus, in all its complexity and variety -- not an assimilated province of Russia, Turkey, or Iran. The peoples of the Caucasus may be too weak to prosper, but they remain strong enough to withstand fading into their bigger neighbors. You could call it a "balance of insecurity." Over the course of history, Armenians, Azerbaijanis, and Georgians, as well as the region's other smaller ethnic groups, have all persistently survived invasion and resisted assimilation. It's true the price of survival has come in the form of Faustian pacts with other Great Powers, in which the Azerbaijanis allied themselves with Turks and British; Georgians with Germans and British; Armenians, Abkhaz and Ossetians with Russians.

The outside power that has most determined the fate of the region over the last century has been Soviet Russia, which for a period of time did not so much resolve the contradictions of the Caucasus as smother them. Beginning in 1920, the region was under the Soviets' suffocating authoritarian rule. When Soviet power waned in the late Gorbachev period, the pendulum swung again. The years 1919 and 1991 bore many similarities; Abkhaz and Ossetians sought Russian assistance against what they saw to be a Georgian nationalist threat, while newly independent Georgia looked to new Western allies to protect itself against a perceived Russian threat. Fast forward to August 2008, and long-simmering tensions helped make South Ossetia the arena of the worst clash between Russia and the United States since the end of the Cold War.

Given the complexity of these relationships, it is better to describe this picture not as a giant chessboard, but as a castle of dominoes, wherein the whole construction totters if you dislodge one piece.

VANO SHLAMOV/AFP/Getty Images
*Update, Sept. 14, 2010: "Akhalgori" corrects an earlier incorrect spelling.

 SUBJECTS: RUSSIA, GEORGIA, CAUCASUS
 

Thomas de Waal is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and author of The Caucasus: An Introduction, published this week by Oxford University Press.

AR

11:28 AM ET

September 14, 2010

The little sultan of baku's

The little sultan of baku's rhetoric doesn't help the situation either. It is easy and somewhat true to blame larger powers for the mess in the Caucasus but leaders of the various groups and nation-states in the area do not make the situation any easier. The best example of a negative leader is aliyev jr. of azerbaijan.

 

MELIKEBU

4:15 PM ET

September 14, 2010

identifies the video pictures

identifies the video pictures so dizi

 

JFC1

1:05 AM ET

September 16, 2010

you're an idiot...

...with a keyboard.

You're talking about a region of the world that is 3,000 miles away. Sorry, we're not responsible for what is going on there. At all. In any way.

 

DAVID BOYAJIAN

5:16 PM ET

September 16, 2010

Article makes numerous errors

First, the name "Azerbaijan" is a misnomer, and the country of that name is truly a made-up country. It is not ancient at all, unlike Armenia and Georgia.

"Azerbaijan" is actually territory to the south of what is today erroneously called the country of Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan's fictional claims have complicated its relations with Armenia. This is not propaganda but fact:

http://www.armenianweekly.com/2010/07/08/chorbajian-sleight-of-hand-on-the-world-stage/

Second, Armenian Americans do not, as the author claims, drive US policy toward Armenia. If they did, recent US administrations (and Congress) would have done more to not only have NATO "ally" Turkey acknowledge the Armenian genocide but also open its border with Armenia (unilaterally closed by Turkey due to a conflict - Karabagh/Artsakh - that is none of Turkey's business).

To explicate the latter point, consider what DeWaal would now being saying if Armenia had closed its border with Turkey by pointing out that the land and property of its Armenian and Christian Greek brethren on Cyprus is being illegally occupied by Turkey.

Turkey's denial of genocide is a threat to Armenia just, to use a hypothetical case, Germany would be a threat to Israel it they were situated next to each other and if Germany denied that it had ever mistreated or murdered Jews. How interesting that De Waal does not criticize Turkey in his article.

 

TEYMUR

1:08 AM ET

September 17, 2010

Baloney...yet again

OK, here we go again

Name Azerbaijan did not just came up in 1918 - Azerbaijanis to the north of Araz also called themselves Azerbaijanis and they were known as Azerbaijanis - just look at this official "Alphabetical list of peoples of Russian Empire" (publ. in 1895) http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2005/0187/perep04.php - you'll see an article "Aderbeidjani tatars" (Russians called turkic etnicities tatars at the time) - the population of Baku, and Elisavetpol (Ganja) provinces - that is the territory of modern Republic of Azerbaijan . I mean the term was well-established, although they were also called Caucasus tatars. Azeri writers and intellectuals called the land Azerbaijan long before 1918 independence act. Etc.

And what's that about being ancient - does that mean that e.g. Hungary has no right to exist because hungarians came to the place only in 10th century. And what about US ?

David, what "complicates" Azerbaijan's relations with Armenia is that for years the minds of Armenian society is poisoned by radical nationalists wanking about the necessity of killing Turks and Azeris to create a "Great Armenia". Fact is Armenians drove 700 000 of Azeris from their homelands, perpetrated one of the most atrocious mass murders of recent times - Khojali, killed and maimed thousands of AZERI CIVILIANS taking their revenge for 1915 mass murders of Armenians committed by OTTOMAN ARMY.

Now it is time for peace in the region, we need it, we really do. But every time there is a serious discussion about it, the stupid nationalist baloney by blockheads like you or the people who post comments about the non-existence of Azerbaijan and Turkey (and sometimes even Georgia - have you heard about the "war" on Armenian and Georgian forums over Javakh) on that stupid link of yours gets in the way.
Come on, everybody's sick of it by now

 

AR

7:42 PM ET

September 22, 2010

Khojali fabricated.

"On the night of February 25, 1992 Artsakh forces started the operation and after a mere five hours they had conquered and neutralized the Khojaly base. Besides dozens of enemy combatants, the collateral loss of 11 civilians was also the low price the “Azeri” side had to pay before they had to give up their genocidal fun. Later, the remaining civilians were handed over to “Azeris” and the POWs exchanged for their Armenian counterparts.

Along with the civilians who used the corridor, a group of “Azeri” soldiers also fled to Aghdam (Agdam). On the way they provoked skirmishes with the defenders of the Armenian village of Nakhijevanik which resulted in deaths on both parties.

On February 29, 1992 journalists were flown to the “Azeri” controlled area where images of dead bodies were photographed and videotaped. On a second visit, on March 2, 1992 another batch of journalists examined the bodies and because of a blunder on the “Azeri” part to control the identities of the journalists, at least two of them who had been on the first visit noticed that some of the bodies were severely mutilated.

The Czech journalist Yana Mazalova was one of those on both flights and noticed the considerable alteration of the bodies on the second visit where only two days after the first demonstration, Turkish corpse art had been performed to bring the Armenians down to their genocidal level in front of the cameras and in the pro-Turkish western media controlled eyes of world.
The independent “Azeri” TV journalist Chingiz Mustafayev (Fuat-oghli) who had filmed the bodies on both visits realized the malevolent intent and led his own investigation. He reported his conclusion of the “Azeri” falsifications of the affair to “DR-Press”, a News Agency in Moscow. Soon afterwards, he was mysteriously killed near Aghdam, an area still under full “Azeri” control.
In his report Chingiz Mustafayev had stated that he had not seen a single dead body in Khojaly and only a couple dozen dead “Azeri” soldiers near Aghdam killed in the Nakhijevanik skirmishes were filmed on the first visit on February 29.

After the second visit on March 2, 1992, where they had noticed the mutilations Chingiz Mustafayev informed the “Azeri” president Mutalibov about the changes. Mutalibov warned him he could risk his life if he imparted the information. The prophesy came true.

It is especially remarkable that the main culprit in spreading the lie of a thousand dead without proof, the rascal, Thomas Goltz was present on both visits and withheld the information regarding the alteration of the corpses. This is criminal behavior that in the least should have cost him his job, yet the miscreant still holds his position and is busy earning his miserable life writing misleading articles."