Tag: Azerbaijan

  • When Armenia Occupied Azerbaijani Lands Josep Borrell Was Very Silent…

    When Armenia Occupied Azerbaijani Lands Josep Borrell Was Very Silent…

    By Azer HASRET

    During his press remarks after the Foreign Affairs Council the High Representative on Foreign Affairs of the European Union Josep Borrell voiced baseless and unjustified claims regarding Azerbaijan. He noted that Azerbaijan has territorial claims against Armenia. He had even stressed that the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev voiced these claims.

    To see the issue deeper let’s read through what was said by Mr. Borrell on Jan 22, 2024, during his press remarks.

    “…we agreed that Azerbaijan needs to return to substantive peace and normalization talks with Armenia. The latest territorial claims by President [of Azerbaijan, Ilham] Aliyev are very concerning. And any violation of Armenia’s territorial integrity will be unacceptable and will have severe consequences for our relations with Azerbaijan.”

    As is seen Mr. Borrell is talking about President Aliyev’s territorial claims against Armenia. But as a citizen of Azerbaijan, plus as a person closely following political developments not only within, but outside of Azerbaijan I can strongly oppose these claims by Mr. Borrell and assure that President Aliyev never voiced territorial claims against Armenia. What I know the President continuously states that Azerbaijan has no intention to occupy any piece of territory of any other country including Armenia.

    This is obvious and even Mr. Borrell has an opportunity to contact Mr. Aliyev and ask him if he has territorial claims against Armenia. But as we see Mr. Borrell didn’t dare to do this and check the truthfulness of the claims spread by some propaganda centers. He made himself a tool of propaganda for those centers. Unfortunately…

    Now we’ll see which country has the territorial claims against its neighbor. That is Armenia, not Azerbaijan having territorial claims. And we have quite enough evidence to prove this.

    Let’s read through The Constitution of Armenia. Just in its Preamble, we can see that Armenia has territorial claims against Azerbaijan! And this is the major soul of that Constitution thus making this country an aggressor.

    To see the details let’s read through the mentioned Preamble:

    “The Armenian People, accepting as a basis the fundamental principles of Armenian statehood and pan-national aspirations enshrined in the Declaration on the Independence of Armenia, having fulfilled the sacred behest of its freedom-loving ancestors to restore the sovereign state, dedicated to the strengthening and prosperity of the fatherland, with the aim of ensuring the freedom, general well-being, and civic solidarity of the generations, and affirming its commitment to universal values, adopts the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia”.

    One who doesn’t know the issue well would say that where is the territorial claim here? We’ll explain.

    The Preamble is quoting The Declaration on the Independence of Armenia. And very this document openly expresses territorial claims against Azerbaijan!

    Let’s see this time the mentioned Declaration:

    “The Supreme Council of the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic

    Expressing the united will of the Armenian people;

    …Based on the December 1, 1989, joint decision of the Armenian SSR Supreme Council and the Artsakh National Council on the “Reunification of the Armenian SSR and the Mountainous Region of Karabakh”;..

    Declares

    The beginning of the process of establishing of independent statehood positioning the question of the creation of a democratic society based on the rule of law;..”

    This Declaration was adopted on August 23, 1990, and is taken as a basis for The Constitution of Armenia. Mr. Borrell before accusing Azerbaijan of territorial claims against Armenia could look through this Constitution and see the real territorial claimers…

    And this is not even the last evidence showing Armenia’s territorial claims against its neighbors. The Constitution of Armenia has one more piece of evidence, this time against Türkiye.

    Let’s see again The Constitution:

    Article 21. The Symbols of the Republic of Armenia

    …The coat of arms of the Republic of Armenia shall depict, in the center on a shield, Mount Ararat with Noah’s ark and the coats of arms of the four kingdoms of historical Armenia…

    Thus, once again a person with no imagination about the region would see nothing here. But if look deeper one can see that Armenia has territorial claims against Türkiye. As we know the mount which Armenia calls “Ararat” is a Mount Aghri based in the territory of Türkiye. Why would a country depict a natural object of another country on its national symbol? Where is the logic?

    This is one more piece of evidence proving that Armenia has territorial claims against at least two of its neighbors: Azerbaijan and Türkiye. But Mr. Borrell is accusing Azerbaijan of “having territorial claims against Armenia”…

    Going through this evidence we can once more see that the EU High Representative Josep Borrell is voluntarily acting as part of the Armenian propaganda machine. But we here in Azerbaijan and other countries of the region were seeing the European Union and its representatives as those who could guarantee more freedom, justice, and well-being for our people…

    P.S. Armenia kept under its occupation about 20 percent of the territory of Azerbaijan for more than 28 years. This very Mr. Borrell never talked about Armenia’s obvious occupation while the evidence was very clear. But now he is accusing Azerbaijan for having territorial claims against Azerbaijan while he has no single evidence to prove this…

  • U.S. Religious Freedom report… compiled by Armenia…

    U.S. Religious Freedom report… compiled by Armenia…

    By Azer HASRET

    “The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) is an independent, bipartisan federal government entity established by the U.S. Congress to monitor, analyze, and report on religious freedom abroad.”

    This is stated by the mentioned Commission on its “Annual Report of The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom”. This means that the Commission is independent of any outside influence.

    Is it?

    We’ll see…

    Recently The Commission has announced its 2023 report where Azerbaijan among other several Turkic and Muslim countries is accused of “suppressing the religious freedoms”. All Turkic countries – Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Türkiye and Turkmenistan – except Kyrgyzstan are those which is seen by this very Commission as “a perpetrator of religious freedoms”.

    According to this report’s Azerbaijan chapter (just 2 pages) this country is in a very disturbing position and must be included “on the State Department’s Special Watch List” for violating religious freedoms…

    religious

    Now let’s see some citations from the Report:

    1. “This report provides an update on religious freedom conditions in Azerbaijan in 2023. It describes the legislative framework that facilitates the official regulation of religious practice, concerns for religious sites in Nagorno-Karabakh, the ongoing repression of Shi’a Muslim religious activists, and the impact of the government’s refusal to allow conscientious objection.”

    “Concerns for religious sites in Nagorno-Karabakh”. One must think that the Report is overseeing the destruction of more than 60 Mosques in Karabakh during its occupation by Armenia. Yes, even all Mosques in Karabakh and other occupied lands of Azerbaijan were wiped off by Armenia. But no single word about this in the Report!

    Plus, we must add that there is no territorial entity within Azerbaijan called “Nagorno-Karabakh”. Seems the compliers of the Report are using occupant Armenia’s terminology while talking about Azerbaijan…

    While talking about “the ongoing repression of Shi’a Muslim religious activists” The Commission forgets about the realities of our region. Those so-called “repressed Shi’a Muslims”, who are defended by the US Government are mostly the followers of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani. This General was eliminated on Jan 3, 2020, by the US drones in Baghdad, Iraq as a terrorist. And those so-called Shi’a Muslims “repressed by Azerbaijan” are mostly the supporters and followers of this very terrorist! So, the U.S. must decide and rethink if this very country has killed Qasem Soleimani by mistake…

    2. “The law also prohibits non-Azerbaijani citizens from engaging in “religious propaganda” or missionary activity without explicit state permission.”

    What is strange here? Why Azerbaijan must be accused of preventing its citizens from the religious propaganda? People, even foreigners are free to practice their religion. But religious propaganda by foreigners is and must be prevented!

    3. “In May 2023, the chairman of the SCWRA Mubariz Gurbanli explicitly called for Armenian priests to abandon the Dadivank Monastery in the Kalbajar region as he falsely claimed that they had no connection to the site. While a United Nations mission to Nagorno-Karabakh completed in October 2023 reported that it “saw no damage…to cultural or religious structures”, human rights organizations continued to urge the government to ensure protections for religious and cultural sites and rights.”

    I would say that No Comment! But The Commission needs a bit explanation and enlightenment. The Monastery which they claim to be called as “Dadivank” is Khudaveng Monastery and has nothing to do with Armenians. It was built by Albanian Christians and is under state protection of Azerbaijan. But as other religious sites it was occupied by Armenia and then renovated a bit to prove that it is “an ancient Armenian Monastery”. Even the UN mission also stated that no damage “to cultural and religious structures”.

    4. “The government has particularly targeted the unregistered Muslim Unity Movement (Müsəlman Birliyi Hərəkatı) or MUM, a group that has criticized the government’s repressive policies toward religion and whose persecution many human rights defenders believe to be politically motivated.”

    This so-called Muslim Movement is that very organization which supports Qasem Soleimani and Iran’s clerical regime. These people hate the U.S. and other major Western democracies and want to overthrow the government in Azerbaijan… in order to establish a new one which would support such terrorist organizations like HAMAS, Hezbollah…

    5. “The United States should pressure Azerbaijan to address its severe violations of religious freedom and place the country on the State Department’s Special Watch List until the Azerbaijani government amends its 2009 law “On Freedom of Religious Beliefs” in line with international human rights standards and ceases other policies and practices that routinely infringe upon its citizens’ freedom of religion or belief.”

    I’d ask, are you serious? Do you really think that Azerbaijan must be included in this List just only for preventing the country and its people from the so-called religious interference of the terror-sponsor state – Iran? What is the connection between Iran and The U.S. Commission which compiles such reports?

    Maybe there is someone in The Commission who has the ties with Iran or its close allies?

    Yes, there is someone called Danielle Saroyan Ashbahian, who is a Chief of Public Affairs at The Commission. If review her social media accounts, one easily can see that she is an active member of Armenian propaganda against Turks – Azerbaijan and Türkiye! But she must be neutral person, isn’t it?

    This very Danielle worked for the Armenian Assembly of America before joining The Commission dealing with the religious issues throughout the world…

    “Danielle Saroyan Ashbahian is the Chief of Public Affairs at the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, overseeing the Communications and Congressional Relations. Before joining USCIRF, she was the Director of Communications at the Armenian Assembly of America. Prior to that, she was the Layout Editor at the Public Diplomacy Magazine and worked at the Los Angeles Consular Corps. She has had previous experience at the office of former U.S. Congresswoman Janice Hahn, the United Nations Department of Public Information in Armenia, the Lebanese Consulate in Los Angeles, and the San Francisco Ethics Commission” reads The Commission’s web site…

    One more important point: The Commission is trying to support its claims against Azerbaijan siting so-called “Caucasus Heritage Watch”, a pro-Armenian entity launched in 2020 by Armenians, supported by Armenian organizations…

    Just again, No Comment!

    BTW, there is no report on Armenia at all! We’ll remind The Commission that for example the Jewish Synagogue was set to fire in Yerevan in 2023. Or all Muslims are religiously cleansed from Armenia! And Armenia is one of the very few countries of the world denying multiculturalism and having even 98 percent of population of Armenian ethnic background…

  • After major blackout in Azerbaijan is Baku’s bid for EXPO2025 still on?

    After major blackout in Azerbaijan is Baku’s bid for EXPO2025 still on?

    A massive blackout hit Azerbaijan and affected most of the cities including the capital, Baku, the EXPO 2025 candidate, on Tuesday. The blackout reportedly became the worst power cut since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.

    electricity supply gradually restored in azerbaijan after major blackout 1

    The accident was investigated under personal control of President Ilham Aliiyev at a power plant in Mingechavir that caused the blackout, according to officials. The Emergencies Ministry said the breakdown of a transformer in Mingechavir initiated a fire that was put out in 20 minutes. No deaths were reported, though.

    Among the extra reasons of the power outage is the extreme hot weather in the Caspian region with temperatures exceeding 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees Fahrenheit) that caused power consumption to spike.

    Officials said power was restored in Baku after several hours, but a number of subway stations in the capital remained closed for a while. Furthermore, on Tuesday evening, Baku and other regions suffered a second blackout.

    Due to extremely dynamic economic and urban development of Azerbaijan such accidents are uncommon for the Caspian country. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union Baku has demonstrated fantastic development and became an attractive destination both for tourists and investors from all over the world. However, many experts believe that Baku’s victory to host EXPO2025 is most unlikely. For instance, Urso Chappell, the founder of digital ExpoMuseum said the city is perfectly designed for hosting national or regional events, but still lacks some key components of a smart city, e.g. automation systems, energy and water efficiency and others.

  • View of the history Azerbaijani-Chechen interaction

    View of the history Azerbaijani-Chechen interaction

    sevinc-israfil Sevinj Aliyeva, PhD Institute of History Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences
    On November 15, 2012, head of the Chechen Republic Ramzan Kadyrov paid a visitto Azerbaijan to discuss prospects for cooperation between the two republics. Thevisit of the Chechen leader to Baku was not the first contact between Azerbaijan and Chechnya. AZPROMO, the Azerbaijani Foundation for Supporting Exports andInvestments, on April 4, 2012, organized in Baku a presentation on investment possibilities in the Chechen Republic. The presentation was attended by a Chechendelegation headed by the Deputy Chairman of the Government of the Chechen Republic and Finance Minister Ali Isayev. Among others in the delegations were alsothe Industrial and Trade Minister of Chechnya Galas Taymaskhanov and CultureMinister Dikalu Muzakayev. The delegation met both with members of theAzerbaijani government and with the countrys business circles, in which they with a view to laying the groundwork for mutually profitable economic cooperationbetween the two sides proposed projects in various segments of the economy.
    [1]This elicited interest from the Azerbaijani side, which prepared a draft agreement oncultural and economic cooperation. The Chechen delegation also visited majorindustrial objects of the country, and an agreement was reached on a visit by anAzerbaijani delegation to Chechna at a later point. Still earlier, in November 2011, an Azerbaijani delegation headed by Economic Development Minister ShahinMustafayev visited Grozny, the capital of Chechnya. [2]An interest to foster bilateral relations is shared by both sides, with ChechenPresident Kadyrov having emphasized that, [w]e must strive for all-sidedstrengthening of contacts with Azerbaijan. [3] Azerbaijan, in turn, which now hostsa representation office for Daghestan and Chechnya, has been expanding itscooperation with a range of republics and oblasts  of the North Caucasus, includingChechnya. With the latter, BakuÕs relations have been advancing both in the tradeand economic sectors and in the military and political directions.
    Baku  engagement with the Chechen people is far from a new phenomenon andtraces back to many decades ago in history. By early 20th century, Baku emergedas the center not only of religious, spiritual and cultural life of the Muslim peoples ofthe Caucasus, but also a focal point of the ethnically varied work force of the region.In 1917, 999 North Caucasians lived in Baku, including Chechens, Daghestanis,Osetins, and others. Baku got to know quite a handful of prominent Chechens andIngush in the 20th century who lived and developed their activity in the Azerbaijanicapital, including enlightener Adil-Girei Dolgiyev; ethnographer, regionalist andfolklorist Chakh Akhriyev; public teacher Tashtemir Eldarkhanov; famous composerand pedagogue Muslim Magomayev, and others. The daughter of Chakh Akhriyev,Tamara (Gul-Bahar khanum) Akhriyeva received her education in Bakus St. Ninafemale academic institute and stayed to teach in Baku afterwards. In 1911-1915,she worked as the head of the female Russian-Muslim Aleksander Institute. [4]In the second half of the 19 th century, Azerbaijani oil specialists would share theirexperience in the development of all aspects of the oil industry in Grozny, which wasthe main oil centre in the North Caucasus. One of the well-known oil industrialistsinvolved in the Grozny works was A. Akhverdov. [5]
    The improvement of rail,highway, sea and air communications in the 20 th  century to a still greater degreemade possible the close economic and cultural ties of the regions of the Caucasus.A new stage of Azerbaijani-Chechen relations set in following the February 1917revolution: National Councils and various political organizations came to surface.The Chechen Congress in Grozny sent a telegram to members of the Ozakom M.Yu.Jafarov and M.I. Papadzhanov requesting that the Ozakom send the inspector of theGoychay higher educational institution Eldarkhanov to serve as inspector of primaryschools in Chechnya. [6]Following the February 1917 revolution, virtually in all regions of the former RussianEmpire the tsarist administration began to be disbanded and replaced by all-nationalinstitutions, the latter dominated by bourgeois nationalist parties. The nationalbourgeoisie and intelligentsia, the Cossacks, and various strata of the population,having supported the democratic transformation in the country, began to insist uponfreedom of speech and the press, the creation of national schools and a nationaladministration.Cooperation between the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic (1918-20) and theMountaineer Republic included the dispatch of Azerbaijani military units to the latter.Azerbaijani-Turkish forces, supplemented by native gortsy  forces, occupied the coastbetween Derbent and Petrovsk. On 7 November 1918, Petrovsk was seized.
    Theterritory of Daghestan and Chechnya was freed from the Bolsheviks and powerpassed to the Mountaineer Government. Turkish forces let by Col. Ismail Haki-bey, together with Azerbaijani units and others from the North Caucasus, began an attackagainst the Denikin-led Armed Forces of White Russia. Ismail-pasha was sent toDaghestan and Chechnya, while Shukri-bey went to the Terek and Kuban regions.However, as a result of the defeat of the German bloc in World War I and thewithdrawal of the Ottoman Empire from the war in November 1918, Turkish forceshad to quickly leave the territory of Daghestan and the South Caucasus.In these conditions, an independent Mountaineer Republic was proclaimed at ageneral assembly of representatives of the peoples of Daghestan and Chechnya.
    According to the representative of the Azerbaijan Republic to the Mountaineer Republic, A. Akhverdov, there were no political parties in the latter, which onlyfeatured national fractions instead, such as the Ingush, Chechen, Kumyk, and thelike; and the majority of the members of the Union Council were spiritual leaders andinfluential people. [7]A delegation of the Mountaineer Republic, together with the Azerbaijani delegation,set off for the Paris Peace Conference in January 1919 to seek internationalrecognition. However, the White Army occupied Chechnya and Ingushetia.
    Thesenior commander of the units of the Volunteer Army in the Caucasus, Maj.Gen.Shatilov, sent the Azerbaijani Government a letter on February 13, 1919, in which heassured the latter about the voluntary nature of the subordination of these two North Caucasus regions to the Volunteer Army and about the introduction in these placesof self-administration. He consequently recommended that the MountaineerGovernment yield its authority given the lack of demand for it. The Chechen delegation visited the diplomatic representative of the Azerbaijan Republic in theMountaineer Republic, described in detail their republicÕs fight with the White Armyand declared that if it did not receive support, it would be forced to surrender sinceits supplies and materiel were near exhaustion.In his proclamation, Shatilov noted that the command of the Volunteer Army knewabout the preparation of the Azerbaijan Republic to support the Chechens with itsown forces and about the disinformation of the Chechens by statements that theWhite Army wanted to subordinate Chechnya to the Cossacks.
    Regarding theCossacks, he gave assurances that the White Army intended to make peace with theChechens. [8] One should note that after the occupation of the Terek oblast byDenikinÕs army, a dubious attitude toward the events could be seen. The ChechenNational Council headed by Chulikov supported the appointment as ruler of ChechnyaVoluntary Army General Iris-Khan Aliyev. But part of the population of Chechnyaspoke out against the occupation of its territory by the White Army. On April 26, A.Kantemir, at the direction of the chairman of the Mountaineer Government P. Kotsev,sent the government of Azerbaijan and the allied command a note of protest againstthe actions of the White Army on the territory of Chechnya. The commander ofBritish forces in Petrovsk responded that Denikin would not continue his militaryactions and would make peace with the Chechens, Ingush, Balkars, and Osetins andawait the decision of the Peace Conference on the independence and borders ofstates formed on the ruins of the Russian Empire.
    In exchange, he wrote, theMountaineer Government must allow the White Army to struggle against theBolsheviks on the territory of the Mountaineer Republic.Following the defeat of the forces of the Mountaineer Republic, a powerful uprisingled by the local spiritual leaders broke out in Chechnya and Daghestan. In hismemoirs, Denikin described this as follows: In its search for a way out, theMountaineer Parliament began to seek political union with Azerbaijan in the name of  the defense of religion and the unique qualities of Daghestan  The MountaineerGovernment continued its agitation and set to mountainous Chechnya small Daghestani units and Azerbaijani volunteers. [9] A. Akhverdov, in turn, was askingthe Azerbaijani Government to send Azerbaijani officers to provide help to theChechens, because Òthis could have  a moral impact on those who are fighting.ÓAkhverdov also asked Baku to send a small unit toward Khasavyurt.
    A detachmentunder the command of Kazim-bey was dispatched for the defense of the MountaineerRepublic. Representatives of the Ingush met with told Akhverdov that they had assembled a serious force and were preparing an attack from three sides:Ingushetia, Chechnya ad the Georgian military highways. According to Akhverdov, Òthe Chechens also were inclined to unite with Azerbaijan. It was particularlyemphasized that the head of the Noth Caucasus Emirate Uzun-Haji also called for joining with Azerbaijan. [10]
    The White Army at that time was engaged in battles onthe territory of the Terek region, in particular in Ingushetia and in Chechnya. As iswell known, Denikin set as his main task the liquidation of all newly formedsovereign states and the restoration of a single and indivisible Russia.ÓFollowing the seizure of Gudermes station by Denikin, the English colonel Rowlandson officially declared to Chechen governor Col. Jafarov about the inclusionof the North Caucasus into the sphere of influence of the White Army and of Daghestan into the English sphere of influence. In response, a session of the inter-party commission in Baku adopted an appeal to the citizens of Azerbaijan in which itdeclared, In the North Caucasus, the freedom-loving mountaineers true to thebehest of their ancestors and the principles of freedom and independence of smallpeoples, is shedding blood in an unequal battle with the reactionary forces of Denikin and company it is the responsibility of every Muslim to provide help to the fraternalmountaineers in a timely fashion. The Inter-party commission set on the formationof an Azerbaijan Volunteer Detachment under the leadership of experienced officersto provide such help.Uzun-Haji, the head of the North Caucasus emirate, sought to achieve via thediplomatic channels of Georgia and Azerbaijan recognition of his monarchy by theworld powers. He asked Akhverdiyev to convey from him a message of greetings tothe Azerbaijani government.
    In the middle of May 1919, it was reported that UzunHaji, together with Akhverdov, was getting ready to come to Baku for talksconcerning Chechnya. However, it appears that he sent as his representatives thebrother of Mogamed Efendi Dibir-Magomayev and the honorary Chechen MagomedPiralov, while he himself went to Chechnya. According to a dispatch from A.Akhverdov, Òafter the seizure of Petrovsk, Daghestan, Chechnya and Ingushetia willrecognize the authorities of Azerbaijan; they are prepared for this. After this, theMountaineer Republic can be reestablished under the protectorate of Azerbaijan.Ó[11]At the beginning of June 1919, Azerbaijani agents were dispatched to Temir-Khan-Shura, Shamil-Kala (Petrovsk), Grozny and Vladikavkaz in order to follow the actionsof the Volunteer Army. According to Akhverdov, the population of Daghestan andChechnya impatiently awaited the arrival of Azerbaijani forces. Uzun-Haji fromBotlikh reported about the readiness of the Avar and Andi districts to rise againstDenikins army.
    The residents of the auls  of mountainous Chechnya reachedagreement about not subordinating themselves to Denikin. And already at acongress in Shali, the Chechens resolved to defend the interests of the mountaineersto the last drop of blood and to preserve their freedom, and not to help in any waythe Volunteer Army. Akhverdov sent two letters to Baku from the Chechen people – one written in Arabic and one in TurkicÑreporting about the situation in Chechnyaand the destruction of villages there by the Denikin forces. In July, intense battlesagainst the Denikin forces and the Cossacks were conducted by Ingush and Chechenmutineers in the directions of Vladikavkaz and Grozny. They cut the Grozny-Beslanline.
    The Ingush National Council organized a rising against Denikin, which seizedthe lower portions of Ingushetia in the middle of July 1919. On June 28, AbubakarPliyev, the representative of the Ingush people and a member of the United Councilof the Mountaineer Republic, sent a special letter to the Chairman of the Parliamentof the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic requesting assistance and left for Baku. [12]In September 1919, a new wave of the national liberation movement of the peoplesof the North Caucasus began. The national movement in Daghestan was headed byN. Gotsinsky, that in Chechnya by Uzun-Haji, and that in the Northwestern Caucasusby Sultan Klych Girey. Meanwhile, members of the Mountaineer Government,located provisionally in Tiflis, reached agreement on forming a Committee ofMountaineers consisting of 12 people under the chairmanship of A. Tsalikov. Theconduct of foreign policy was entrusted to Dzhabagiyev.
    They appealed to Vekilovwith a request to the Azerbaijani government for subsidies and the transfer of theactivities of this Committee to Baku. Vekilov transferred to Dzhabagiyev a 250,000rubles loan for the needs of the Mountaineer organization. [13]In November 1919, the Azerbaijani government sent Nuri Pasha to Daghestan as thecommander in chief of the North Caucasus front. He and his Turkish officers formeda regular division in Daghestan and a cavalry division in Chechnya. Nuri-pashaorganized negotiations between the commanders and the leaders of Daghestan andthe North Caucasus, Ali Haji Akushinsky, Ibrahim-Haji, Kazim-bey, N. Gotsinsky, andK. Alikhanov. Nuri-pasha promised military assistance from Azerbaijan. He plannedfirst to liberate the territories of Daghestan, then to establish a new provisionalgovernment and together with Uzun Haji occupy the Terek district. He also plannedto conclude an agreement with the parliament of the Mountaineer Republic.
    Following the recognition of the Azerbaijani Republic by the major powers and thenon-recognition by them of the Mountaineer Republic, Azerbaijan continued tosupport the North Caucasus peoples in their struggle for independence. [14]Following the victory of the Red Army in Azerbaijan and in the North Caucasus, thepower of the Bolsheviks was established, but even during Soviet times, relationsbetween the Azerbaijani and Chechen peoples did not break off and continued withinthe framework of the Soviet state, the latter having promoted a mutual enrichmentof cultures and the establishment of cultural links. According to the 1989 census,456 Chechens lived in Azerbaijan.
    Following the war in Chechnya, the number ofChechen refugees there reached 4,700. And Azerbaijan took them in despite theproblems it had with its own refugees as a result of the occupation of Azerbaijanilands by Armenian forces. If the Azerbaijani refugees had somewhere to retreat to,the Chechens did not.Consequently, in the 1990s and 2000s, a new wave of resettlement ofrepresentatives of many North Caucasus peoples to Azerbaijan was under way. Theyfound work, sought education, and received local residence permits (Rasulov 2005,pp. 42-43). In 1995, a Cultural Center of the Chechen Republic-Ichkeria was openedin Baku.
    Azerbaijan President Heydar Aliyev considered the political problem of Chechnya as an internal affair of Russia, but the Chechen issue as a humanitarianproblem. For the resolution of the problems of Chechen refugees, the main office ofthe plenipotentiary representative of Chechnya to the Muslim countries, Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev, was opened in Baku. The number of Chechen refugees in Azerbaijangrew to 10,000 by the year 2000. Despite its own problems with refugees,Azerbaijan could not close its borders to suffering people who were hostages tolarger political games. And most of the latter found refuge and a better life there.The situation changed in the fall of 1999. According to Azerbaijani political scientistR. Musabayov, the watershed became the explosions of the fall of 1999 when theChechen resistance turned to terrorism. Azerbaijani society could not find a justification for this type of action, which discredited the Chechen resistance. In July2000, the office of the representation of the Government of Ichkeria in MuslimCountries was suspended. Pressure from Russia played an essential role in thatdecision. With the coming to power in Russia of Vladimir Putin, relations between Azerbaijan and Russia improved. According to the director of the
    Chechen humanrights center in Baku, Mairbek Taramov, after the events of September 11, theinternational Islamic foundations which were operating in Baku in 1999-2000 underpressure from the US, Russia and Azerbaijan, ceased their activities and assistanceto the Chechens.As a result, in March 2001, the Chechen refugees turned to President Heydar Aliyevwith an open letter, noting that they did not want to be returned to Russia andinsisted on their rights under the 1951 convention. These refugees indicated thatthey were encountering difficulties in obtaining the necessary documentation,because Azerbaijani officials were referring them to the Russian embassy. Theyasked that their problems be referred to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees(UNHCR) and that their position in Azerbaijan be regularized. As a result, they wereissued a form of UNHCR identification, which legalized their status only in Azerbaijan,but stayed short of guaranteeing the provision of financial, humanitarian, medical,and other kinds of assistance. At the present time, there are 4,930 Chechenrefugees in Azerbaijan.
    They continue to complain about problems with the police,obtaining documents for themselves and their children, and access to education.These minor problems notwithstanding, the Chechen refugees in Azerbaijan have notlost hope and continue to support the position of an independent Azerbaijan in allquestions and share the feelings of Azerbaijani refugees and martyrs who just likethemselvesÑsuffered in the early 1990s. Thus, the Council of Chechen Refugeesexpressed its solidarity with Azerbaijan and sympathies on the occasion of thetragedy of January 20, 1990: ÒJanuary 20 in the history of the Caucasus will alwaysremain a day of loss and gaining: patriots died and a worthy Republic was born- The Chechen, sympathetic to the ideas of freedom and independence and having sufferedenormous losses on this path have a deep understanding of what is taking placetoday on the territory of Azerbaijan. We will never forget the asylum offered toChechen refugees on this land, the warmth and tolerance of the Azerbaijani people.
    The glorious action by the Azerbaijanis was among the first and served as a worthyexample for the continuation of the national liberation war of the Caucasus. At thepresent time in Baku, there is a Chechen school, various committees established forwork with mountaineers arriving from the North Caucasus, and a womenÕscommittee of Chechnya. There are also representations of Daghestan andChechnya, as well as other organizations.Indeed, the Azerbaijani population, despite its own far from simple position,continues to show tolerance and friendship toward its North Caucasus neighbors.There is no ethnic discrimination or hostile attitude toward other ethnoses inAzerbaijani society. The North Caucasus population in Azerbaijan is involved in trade and transit through the country. Now, thanks to the stabilization of the situation inAzerbaijan itself, the efforts of individual extremists have been blocked. Chechensare living in a stable environment, and everything is being done to ensure that they,like all the other ethnic minorities of Azerbaijan, can continue to do so.
    In the post-Soviet period, several projects for the integration of the peoples of theCaucasus have been developed. On August 26, 1989, at a congress of mountainpeoples of the Caucasus in Sukhumi, on the initiative of the Popular Front ofAbkhazia, the Assembly of Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus was established, withKabardin Yury Shanibov as its president. In the fall of 1991, General D. Dudayevtook the Assembly under his protection. In November of the same year, thatorganization was transformed into the Confederation of Mountain Peoples of theCaucasus. The confederation united in its midst the Chechens, Kabardins, Cherkess,Adygeys, Abaza, Abkhaz, and others.
    The Ingush did not joint it, nor did the Turkiclanguage mountain peoples (the Kumyks, Balkars, and Karachays) save AkhyskTurks. The Nogays and Azerbaijanis who were living on the territory ofcontemporary Daghestan also refused to join that group. Instead, they entered theAssociation of Turkic Peoples.A round table on a common Caucasus home took place in Grozny on September 4-5, 1992. Participants proclaimed the creation of a Higher Religious Council of thePeoples of the Caucasus and a Single Information Center of the Caucasus.Allahshukur Pashazade, sheikh-ul-Islam and head of the Muslims of Azerbaijan, waselected chairman of the religious council. In the declaration of this meeting,reference was made to Òthe necessity of creating a confederation of Caucasusstates.Ó On September 27, 1992, the International Forum of the Caucasus Homewas established in the Chechen Republic, and a program was developed for theunification of the peoples of the Caucasus. On October 19, 1992, at the initiative ofDzh.Dudayev, the Confederation of the Mountaineer Peoples of the Caucasus wasreformed as the Confederation of the Peoples of the Caucasus. The group discussedthe participation of the Cossacks and the possible formation of Cossack autonomiesin places where the Cossacks lived together. This congress was created in oppositionto the CIS. Its second conference was scheduled for Baku in the fall of 1993, but itwas not held.
    References
    Rasulov M.A. (2005) Embployment and Labor Market in Daghestan (1991-2001 .),in Russian, Makhachkala: Epoch.
    Notes
    [1] See (accessed 13 April2013).[2] Ibid.

    [3] See (accessed 13 April2013).13

    [4]  [The first generalcensus of the population of the Russian empire], 1897,
     [Bakuprovince], 1904, pp. 52-53.
    [5]  Kaspi, No. 222, 12 September 1893;  Kaspi, No. 81, 16 April 1895
    [6]  Baku, No. 137, 27 June 1906;  Kaspi, No. 66, 23 March 1917.
    [7] State Archive of the Azerbaijan Republic (henceforth SAAR), f. 897, op. 1, d. 22

    Kaspi, No. 74, 9October (26 September) 1918.

    [8] SAAR, f. 970, op. 1, d. 23, l. 9-10; SAAR, f. 970, op. 1, d. 59, l. 1-3.
    [9]  (Georgia), No. 55, 11 March 1919;  (Georgia), No. 39, 20 February 1919;  (Georgia), No. 93, 3 May 1919;  (Georgia), No. 54, 9 March 1919.
    [10] SAAR, f.970, op.1, d.59, l.13-16ob., 17 ob., 21, 25, 26, 26 ob.

    [11] SAAR, f.894, op.10, d.62, l.37ob., 40; SAAR, f.970, op.1, d.59, l.5ob.-16, 28,31;

     (Georgia), No. 93, 3 May 1919.
    [12] SAAR, f.894, op.10, d.62, l.41, 41ob., 62-63; SAAR, f.970, op.1, d.46, l.6-6 ob.
    [13]  (Dawn of Russia), No. 25, 14 (27) September 1919.
    [14]  (Struggle), No. 82 (637), 14 April 1920
    AZERBAIJAN IN THE WORLDADA Biweekly Newsletter
    Vol. 6, No. 8April 15, 2013
  • Azerbaijan in the context of Caucasus policy of the Russia empire: from Peter to Pavel Part II

    Azerbaijan in the context of Caucasus policy of the Russia empire: from Peter to Pavel Part II

    caucasian-provinces- historyUnder Catherine II, Russia’s struggle for the Caucasus was carried out purposefully. By signing the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca (1774), Russia has strengthened its positions in the Crimea and the Azov coast, and thereby expanded its sphere of influence in the mega region – Caucasus.  Catherine II, in order to establish its political domination in this choronym, had been conducting an active resettlement policy. In so doing, just like her forefather, she has not refused to play the “Armeniancard”. The Highest Charter of March 9, 1779, by the Russian Empress gave rise to the Armeniancolonization of the Don coast. Nakhichevan city was established on the outskirts of the St. Demetrius of Rostov Fortress and Russia resettled 20 thousand Armenians from Crimea, including the newly formed city of Novorossiysk province. Active efforts of representatives of the wealthier segments of Armenians contributed to this colonization. In the XVIII century, rich Armenian merchants, natives of New Julfa, who left the Safavid state during its fall, appear in Russia. Sparing no expense, they set the Armenian tandem in motion. The Sarafovs and Lazarevs made a special effort in this direction. Ivan Lazarev was especially distinguished. By turning into a major industrialist and landowner in theRussian Empire as a result of successful commercial and financial deals, he invested huge subsidies in imposing intelligible dreams of the Armenians among the highest circles of Russian society.  Stressing the primary role of the Armenian Gregorian Church, the carrier of mythical idea of “Great Armenia”, this Armenian wealthy man, in the last quarter of the XVIII century, built Armenian churches in the capital cities of the Russian Empire. Ivan Lazarev became one of the key “players”, who integrated the “Armenian question” into the policy of Catherine’s Russia. By entering into negotiations with the famous favorite of Catherine II Prince G. Potemkin, this wealthy Armenian, in unison with the head of the Armenian Church in Russia Archbishop Joseph Argutinsky, tried to convince the Russiannobleman in feasibility of the formation of the Armenian statehood with the center in Irevan, while not recalling the historical homeland of the Armenians, located on the banks of the Euphrates, and which has no relation to the Caucasus, and thus, to Irevan. The duo of Lazarev- Argutinsky, in the presented draft, insisted on capturing of this ancient Azerbaijani city by the Russian army. Short memory of the Armenian tandem during the creation of this project has “failed” and it “forgot” about the pre-Caucasus homeland of Armenians – Eastern Anatolia.

    In the second half of the XVIII century, the Armenian statehood projects have been also developed by rich Armenians of Indian colonies. The authors of projects – Joseph Emin, Sh. Shaamiryan tried to draw the attention of Catherine’s Russia to the centuries-old dream of Armenians. These designers of “Great Armenia”, as well as their predecessors, considered it appropriate to act in union with the Kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti. Presenting projects identical in content, the representatives of the Indian colonies, in order to achieve their intelligible dream, just like their fellow-designers of Russiancolonies, “forgot” the original oecumene, Asia Minor, which served as the matrix in the process of formation of the Armenian statehood and, by creating virtual geographic framework of their centuries-old dream, set their sights on foreign soil, on the ancestral lands of Azerbaijan.

    Hajar Verdiyeva Doctor of Historical Science

    Azerbaijan in the context of Caucasus policy of the Russia empire: from Peter to Pavel (PART I)

    Part I is here

    Source // “International Academic Herald” 2014 »5 (5) // .pp. 4-11

  • Azerbaijan in the context of Caucasus policy of the Russia empire: from Peter to Pavel (PART I)

    Azerbaijan in the context of Caucasus policy of the Russia empire: from Peter to Pavel (PART I)

    riossia caucasus warRussia’s interest in the Caucasus was built during the reign of Ivan the Terrible. But the unfolding socio-political processes in Russia at the end of XVI and the beginning of XVII centuries did not allow the upstream development of Caucasus policy of Romanov Russia. XVII century was a turning point in the East-West confrontation. Post-Karlovitsk rubicon changed the foundations of the international system of the continent. The Emperor-reformer – Peter I, abandoning the stagnation positions of the Old Rus, joined Europe in order to strengthen Russia’s position in the international system, launching a policy of conquest.

    Russia, by defeating Charles XII during the Great Northern War (1700-1721), took possession of the Baltic Sea and has become a maritime power. But European countries have become a barrier to the further advancement of Russia to the west, and Peter I activated Russian policy in the Caucasus, in the area of the coastal strip of the Caspian Sea. The interest of the Russian Emperor in the coastal strip of the Caspian Sea was due to rich natural resources, which could give new impetus to the development of the Russian economy. At the same time, Peter I also tried to form an ethno-confessional basis, for the establishment of Russia’s political position in the region, decided to bet on the “Armenian issue”, the idea of “Great Armenia” invented by Mkhitarists and featured by Armenianfalsifiers. Here, the Armenian-Gregorian church acted as the “first violin”. Already at the beginning of the Northern War, the representative of the Armenian Gregorian Church I.Ori met with Peter I and drew the attention of the Russian tsar to “Armenian issue”, developing a fictitious map of Armeniaaccording to the algorithm of the Armenian Gregorian Church,  directs him to Azerbaijani Irevan fortress, at the same time convinces the emperor about advisability of Asia Minor route, that opens the way to Istanbul, where the Christian population of this choronim would be social support for theRussian troops. After receiving this information, Peter I, during the Northern War, developed the contours of Caucasian policy and made plans for the upcoming military operations with states that dominate in the region. When designing grandiose plans for the Caspian lands, as strategically important for Russia, Tsar considered it expedient to form ethno-social basis for his political power in this confessional Muslim area. And for this purpose, Peter I planned the formation of a “united under the scepter of Russia the Georgian-Armenian alliance led by the Georgian king (ruler of Kartli-Kakheti kingdom-ed.) Vakhtang VI, with the intention of turning it into an outpost in the South Caucasus.

    In the policy of the Christianization of the conquered lands, the emperor included not only the formation of units of the Armenian-Georgian Christian Union. During the Caspian campaign, Peter I, not concealing his plans of Christianization, planned an “ethnic cleansing” of the cities of the coast of the Caspian Sea, evicting the autochthonous population of Azerbaijan – Azerbaijanis – from these lands, in order to prevent the influence of the Ottoman factor in the region, which intensified after the Shamakhi events in 1721.

    The international situation and the domestic political situation in the Empire did not allow Peter I to realize his targeted plans of integral Caucasus policy, the Christian colonization of the Caspian coast strip. As a result of the Caspian campaign of Peter I, the Istanbul agreement was signed in 1724, establishing the Russian conquest of the lands on the Caspian coast. However, after the death of Peter I, the “bironovshchina”, established in Russia during the reign of Anna Ivanovna, was not interested in the issue of the Caucasus, and Russia, by signing Rasht (1732) and Ganja (1735) agreements, easily abandoned Peter’s policies in the Caucasus.

    Source // “International Academic Herald” 2014 »5 (5) // .pp. 4-11

    Hajar Verdiyeva Doctor of Historical Science.