New Year in the foreshortening of the 44-day war

***

- A psychological tension was observed in society before the New Year: to celebrate or not. What do you think was the reason for this socio - psychological state? What does your research say about this?

- I would like to answer this question based on the awareness of the Azerbaijani society about socio-political processes. According to a recent poll conducted by the Impulse Research Center, 81.5% of the population is interested in political news, and 46.9% of them receive information from social networks and Internet resources. The results of the poll showed that 29% of people receive political information on TV channels.

These figures give us enough information about the political awareness of our people so that, based on these data, we can make certain judgments regarding the approach of citizens to issues related to the socio-political life of the country. As for the answer to your question, the question was discussed precisely on these information channels, especially on social networks. Because of the important role of the social networks in shaping public opinion, it can be said that the discussion in wide layers of society on the topic of celebrating the New Year was a continuation of discussions on social networks and Internet resources.

However, these were rather post-war sentiments. People who opposed the New Year's celebration felt guilty towards their compatriots who died or went missing because of the war. You can say that the Victory Parade took place 20 days before the holiday. Yes, but the Victory Parade is a military spectacle; and the New Year is a holiday, fun.

“But the people, who suffered defeat for years, their lands were occupied and they had martyrs, did not react aggressively to the holiday. This holiday was celebrated despite the tragic event - in December 2015, because of the tragedy at the Guneshli field, 32 oil workers were killed. The New Year was traditionally celebrated, and no one objected to this. What could be the basis of the aggressive approach to the celebration of the New Year by the people who emerged victorious from the 44-day war?

-I want to answer this question again, starting with the results of this survey. In the survey, respondents were asked to indicate the most important problems of the country. The analysis of the survey showed that the respondents identified the Karabakh conflict as the most important problem for the country (32.6%).

 I would also like to note that the Impulse Center conducted this survey last summer, during the Tovuz war and the death of General Polad Gashimov. The unity and solidarity that arose in connection with the war in our society during the 44-day war that began on September 27 showed that the liberation of the Karabakh lands from occupation is the most important issue for our people. ”For 44 days, the whole society psychologically focused on monitoring the situation at the front.

Society together rejoiced at every news from the front, together they grieved. All of this also happened on the web. People virtually shared what was happening at the front, virtually experienced and supported each other. Every veteran, everyone who died at the front literally became a family for members of the social network. People saw and felt what was happening far away thanks to the power of social media. Naturally, all this in a certain way influenced the psychological state and approach of everyone.

Therefore, it was natural that a month and a half after the end of the war, discussions began in society about whether to celebrate the New Year or not. Because for 44 days, everyone shared videos, photographs, wills, pictures with the families of the martyrs killed in the war, everyone experienced this pain together, cried together. That is why people, who considered the celebration of the New Year a sin before the lost, called on society to unity in this matter as well. In general, in the second Karabakh war, our people have shown unprecedented solidarity and unity.

This gives grounds to say that our people can unite in an issue in which they believe and can actively participate in this process. For what I used the word faith, because in the survey, to which I referred shortly before, the reason for the political apathy of the citizens of Azerbaijan, the separation from the socio-political processes of the country and complete isolation was investigated. The analysis of the results obtained showed that the main reason for political apathy in society is distrust of the actors of the political scene, distrust of the institution of elections.

70% of respondents do not trust either politicians or political parties, and 82.6% of respondents do not trust the institution of elections. Therefore, we do not see the participation of our citizens in the social and political life of our country. In short, political activity and political participation are very low. In wartime, we saw the exact opposite of this. The mass of those wishing to go to war voluntarily, as well as the amount of assistance sent to the front from the bottom, showed that our citizens can not only unite, but also actively participate in solving the issue in which they believe and consider their own.

- Despite the fact that the winning president spoke on his birthday against the background of a Christmas tree, there were opponents of decorating Christmas trees in the country. Even the widespread video contains footage of soldiers burning Christmas trees. In addition, there were also small protests in some areas against the installation of the Christmas trees, as a result of which they were not installed. Could anyone use this situation for other purposes, citing to justify losing the war? What role could the religious factor play here?

-I do not think so. Because the New Year we celebrate, is an international holiday devoid of religious essence and symbolizing a change in the calendar. This holiday, which has been celebrated for decades, since Soviet times, has already entered our culture and has become the most beloved children's holiday. Children are not attached to the religious symbols of this holiday, but to those symbols that give them joyful moments, they wait for it every year. So many religious people do not regard all this as symbols associated with different religious roots. They regard it as symbols that bring joy to children. Therefore, I do not see this as a problem caused by religious views.

As for the image of the president against the background of a decorated Christmas tree, I took it as a message. If the photographs of previous years, published in connection with the President's birthday, consisted only of family photographs at the table, then this year the photograph of the President and Vice President was taken against the background of a decorated Christmas tree. I think that the first persons of the country through this photo demonstrated their position, joining the discussion in the society of celebrating the New Year.

- We understand those who are against fireworks, because in almost every village, district, city, quarter, street there is a family of martyrs. Fireworks can have a negative impact on these families. At the same time, for servicemen who had just returned from the combat zone, the sounds of salute and fireworks could excite the psychological trauma they received. Such an aggressive approach of people and in a mass form to the holiday, which everyone has celebrated in their home in a traditional way for many years, is suspicious. Even during the war, there were those who wanted to present this war as a religious conflict. Maybe some forces specifically fanned this topic in order to create a religious confrontation.

- With your permission, I do not agree with this opinion. There are many religious people in our country and this is a reality. Unfortunately, it is difficult to judge this, since there are no studies measuring the degree of religiosity in society. Based on my personal observations, I can say that we still do not have so many religious people for society to split in two on these issues. On the night of July 15 last year, I personally took part in a spontaneous march in Baku. My interest was to be in this protesting crowd of people and watch their behavior from close up. An interesting moment during that procession caught my attention. Religious slogans were repeatedly sounded both during the march and during the meeting in front of the parliament, but small groups tried to voice these slogans. Religious slogans were not shouted by the whole crowd, they were chanted, but they quickly died down. Slogans related to patriotism, martyrs or war did not stop chanting.

The small episodes that I saw that night give me reason to think that religious interests in society are much lower than political ones. In the survey, which I spoke about earlier, when answering the question “what do you value most in life,” respondents gave preference to family, justice, honesty, kindness, humanity, democracy and freedom, health, and put religion and faith on the 6th and 7th places, respectively. I want to say that religion has not taken root in our country to such an extent as to create confrontation in society.

-In conclusion, I would like to ask you how you think this tense socio-psychological situation would end. What steps should be taken to mitigate the psychological effects of war?

- To be honest, I do not see any serious tension in this issue. I see that the need for self-expression arises because the participation of our people in real life, social and political processes is very low. This need is also satisfied by expressing one's opinion on certain issues in social networks - in the virtual world. If you yourself observed, then before the war people looked very nervous, angry, stressed. During the war, on the contrary, friendliness and rapprochement began to be felt in people. The war is over; people again broke away from real social and political life and found themselves in a virtual space. I mean that without political openness, it is obvious that mass sentiment will remain so until trust is formed in political institutions and, in particular, in the institution of elections.