Hollow

Asked about my emotional experience due to the conquest of Shusha and declaration of armistice, there was a look of triumph, hurrahing and… immediate blackout into hollow: nerves grew limp and consciousness became flabby after more than thirty years of inner tension.

At first I thought it was the end of thirty years long tragedy; however, when I saw a slogan of Nazi Garegin Njde «Not a single day without a fight against Turks» on news site of Russian Armenians yerkramas.org  (There are no slogans of this sort in Azerbaijan), I realized that we won’t escape so easily.

This happened after it became evident that followers of the concept of Armenian exceptionalism and hatred to those having ostensibly grabbed away a mythical «Great Armenia» have drawn themselves and the whole region into a whirlpool of adversities that could be evaded if not a concept of centuries-old feud with their historical neighbors.

It should be noted that this ideology is based on a concept of incompatibility of Turks and Armenians.  My first-hand experience indicates that this Nazi idea has been cultivated and implanted in public’s mind thereby turning them into carriers of misanthropic ideology.

It has to be noted that in the 1970s Baku’ image was associated with «The City of the Sun» by Tommazo Campanella. Impregnated with various ethno-cultures and religions, Baku lived in harmony and striking system of values and unprecedented tolerance. Note that this co-existence came as no result of invasive idea of the creation of homo sovieticus, secular community but that of non-cultivation of exceptionalism and inter-ethnic and inter-religious incompatibility ideology. 

Of interest is the fact that during Shia mourning over dead grandchildren of Prophet Mohammad the Christians declined from celebrating weddings. Added to this can be that during religious and national holidays all of them congratulated each other, for instance, Slavs, Armenians, Jews congratulated Azerbaijanis  on the occasion of Novruz-bayram, received gifts from Azerbaijani neighbors. The same of true of Christians who helped Moslems to Easter cakes in Easter. Those were the days when an Armenian in Baku slaughtered an African student in reply to great insult and was declared a hero, by Azerbaijanis as well, for upholding his honor. At that time the honor was much appreciated.

Our pop-group, rather, two vocal-instrumental ensembles, I was a member of, and even led by me, discussed the case as well, so the solidarity prevailed between 16-17-year old Armenians and Azerbaijanis. Also, football, beach, gambling games, etc. – all these were common heritage. We served in the army in chain order, each after each…

This also holds true for the army: Armenians and Azerbaijanis as natives of Azerbaijan kept together. Typical for the then army traditions were ethnic associations of fellow-countrymen; in particular, Baku, Ganja, Sumgait and Karabakh Armenians and Azerbaijanis stood close up to one another in the fight, wall on wall. There were several clashes over the course of two years army service.

I first came across Yerevan Armenians in the army when graduation from artillery sergeant school in Tbilisi I furthered my service in motorized division in Ahalkalaki, artillery division #412 of motor-rifle regiment. I noticed that they kept aloof from Armenians of Azerbaijan and even held them in contempt. 

Of interest is the fact that in 10 months of army service a headquarters director, Armenian from Karabakh, hard-edged man, appointed me as a battery sergeant major. That was a token of thanks for successful shooting exercises following which he was assigned as a battalion commander of Valeh fortified area.

A year after four Yerevan Armenians came to our battery – three sergeants – commanders of guns and one common soldier – Gevork Avakyan. He served in a sporting squadron, made a slip and sent to «Caucasian Siberia» - Ahalkalaki. There was no summer, just three months, the rest – winter, from later September to May. I remember him, because we jointly indited a song from Yesenin’ verses set to my music. Note that before the army service he was a laureate of the competition for the best performance of Yesenin’ verses.

The song was based on his verse titled "It makes me sad to look at you"; it ended on down note, so we added first two quatrains from the verse:

Oh, age of autumn!

It is beyond youth

 And summer.

Got prettier twice

To poet’s imagination.

.It is worth reminding that Yerevan Armenians felt suspicious during our first meeting at a barrack. I was aware of their bias against Turks. I did my best to break this mold through creating fair conditions for them: there was no hazing at our military unit. We, Azerbaijanis, senior conscripts kept no down anybody. Gyunduz Zeynalov was a battalion sergeant- major; Azamat Bananyarskiy – a reconnaissance sergeant. As a matter of fact, it was a flower of division artillery. Deputy chief of missile corps and artillery of Transcaucasian military district, Major-General Mahno ordered all artillery subdivisions to  remove caps before us for phenomenal shooting results – all of them obtained ranks of the first class specialists, division commander Anatoliy Ivanovich Sitnikov – a rank of lieutenant- colonel.

After we restored mutual confidence, Yerevan servicemen grilled about our identity with Ottoman Turks and nibbled at the genocide subject. Later on these subjects receded into the background and gave way to real human relations.

One day, one of them told me a horrifying news from Leninakan (Gyumri): «Two frontier guards – Russian and Armenian were on duty and patrolled border area.  When going by a Tatar village, they heard music and noise, it was wedding. The Armenian said to the Russian: «I’ll visit them and refresh myself, wait me a little». It was long, but the Armenian did not come back. The Russian came to the hut and noticed an Armenian head on a table in front of bride and groom. That was the way the things were done among them: make a sacrifice of Armenian during a wedding. The Russian burst into the hut and shot all guests down. Now he is expected to be taken to Moscow and courtmartialed there. However, Leninakan rose, the Russian is hidden, he is a national hero».

«But where are Tatars coming from there?!», I asked. He was confused, and I figured out that he referred to us.

There was a storekeeper in charge of material equipment, a lad from Rostov Victor Tereshenko. I sent him to a division department to discover the truth. And I heard the truth – all was picked out of nose.

Once upon a time, with my countryman Azer Mamedov, we went to the town to phone parents at post-office. On the way to post-office we were speaking Azeri and past 20 metres by two grandmothers aged 70. Suddenly one of them addressed us in Turkish: «Turka, Turka, come here».

Discontentedly I said to Azer: «Tough tittles. They’ll start with genocide». We came up, she asked: «Turka?». «No, I’m Azerbaijani», I said. «Turka, Turka», she repeated, another woman laughed.

They invited us to sit down but we refused, for it was not accepted to sit in the presence of elders and women. They told us in Turkish a story about their resettlement here from Turkey in 1946 (prior to that, Meskhetin Turks were exiled to the Central Asia); that they maintained good relations with Turks, and not a word about the genocide. However, they would not let us go, gave us a cordial welcome. I was enthralled by this meeting. In fact, these little old ladies ran through tragic 1915-18 but had no hatred and enmity while Armenians that heard about these years from hearsay are vitriolic and malicious. The first group is made of people of reality; the second group of people of myths. My conclusion is final and conclusive up to the present day, especially as my impressions are complemented by new stories of interactions with Armenians representing various generations and regions.

Earlier 1980s were marked by issue of provocation nationalistic literature about selectness of the Armenian nation, ideas of Armenia from sea to sea. There were rumors about certain funds for the Armenian case and that Baku was a territory of Great Armenia. The tables had turned, and the pandemic of nationalism had a global reach.

But we still played football. Once upon a time a match took place at Zagulba beach: our neighborhood Azerbaijani-Armenian team was behind in the score 0:5 handicap to a team of chess-players headed by aspiring star Harry Kasparov. But then we scored 6 unanswered goals and won. Kasparov was sitting in the water seizing his head and trying to understand what had happened. He brushed aside despite his mother’s calls to calm down.

At this time, as a lifeguard, I am still rescuing Azerbaijanis and Armenians drowning in the sea, just like my Armenian partner Boris. The last years of idyll…

It was December 1987. I was in the final year of the faculty of journalism. I was told that my coursemate Musheg Ovsepyan, now Professor of the Yerevan University, was engaged in collecting signatures on an appeal to the Political Bureau of the CPSU about transfer of the Nagorno Karabakh Autonomous Region to the Armenian SSR.

I found him asking: «What signatures are you collecting?». He felt confused as saying: «Mister (coursemates nicknamed me) there is little or nothing to trouble about. What’s the harm: you have a lot of land while we are lacking of it. Karabakh is a fertile place to ensure Armenia’s independent existence».

Musheg showed me a reference of the faculty of history of the Yerevan State University which said that Stalin and the Caucasian Bureau transferred Nagorno Karabakh to Azerbaijan in defiance of the will of the Armenian people. So the appeal called to return Nagorno Karabakh to Armenia.

It has to be kept in mind that authors of this unhistorical document took advantage of the situation: there was anti-Stalin campaign at universities and higher educational institutions as well as among intellectuals aimed at tearing Karabakh away from Azerbaijan.

I said to Musheg: «You are greatly mistaken, we shall never agree to this. We love this land, no concessions will be made. All your activities are sure to result in a great tragedy».

Then Musheg showed me an Armenian newspaper which said that Azerbaijani exploded a monument to marshal Bagramyan in a village of Chardahly. A question arises; why did they decide to explode the monument?  

Then there arose news about Azerbaijani refugees from Kafan in Armenia.

In January I arrived in Baku to have my last holidays. Everything was calm here, and nobody could even imagine that the situation would radically change. I was surprised at fecklessness of Republican leadership, for it was none other than the head-in-the-sand policy.

I expected the provocation to take place in Baku as was the case in 1905 when the tsarist secret police set Azerbaijanis against Armenians to thus weaken the strike movement; or in 1918 when Armenia and Azerbaijan declared their independence but lost it due to the war.

It was at first near Askeran: two Azerbaijanis were killed on February 22; then on February 28 Armenians organized pogroms and killings of Armenians in Sumgait. Authors of ethnic cleansings and Karabakh’s annexation to Armenia were in need of blood-letting and inter-ethnic vendetta to get pot-committed.

It was as sure as eggs is eggs.

A conference titled «Karabakh is our pain and suffering» was held on March 3 at the faculty of journalism of MSU. It was attended by students of various faculties. There were scores of Armenians and a limited number of Azerbaijanis. There was not future ideologist Ali Hasanov and his associates.

Much had been said about sympathy to Armenians, restoration of historical justice, criticism against Stalin, etc.

I rose to speak: «We are now witnessing a farce leading to the confrontation between the two peoples as was the case in 1905 and 1918. You are perpetrating these evil deeds. You are gearing up for high blood on all of you».

The Armenian students kissed off objections and protested.

Next day a dean of faculty, Yasen Nikolayevich Zasurskiy asked me back and said: «Mehman, what have you done there yesterday. KGB is having interest in you».

We exchanged views on Karabakh. In the end he noted: «Go and mind your step».

Note that Yasen Nikolaevich had an educational work with me. This involved a case of Iraqi students-communists. They behaved in a highly questionable manner. I put them in their place. They complained to the MSU management, and Zasurskiy carried out a prophylactic work. He asked me to step back. However, I refused flatly. In the end. He backed me.

Five years ago we first met with Musheg at the OSCE South Caucasian Conference in Tbilisi.

I told him that I was right. He perplexedly shrugged his shoulders. Later on, in the presence of participants I stressed: «Blood of thousands of people rests with him». He replied: «Give a break, mister».

A meeting of Yerevan and Karabakh Armenians and Azerbaijanis was held last year in Tbilisi within the framework of OSCE and EU project on preparation of peoples for peace. The participants of the meeting exchanged their views on return to peace. I shared my vision of the conflict beginning and its transition from harmless signature collection to bloodshed.

One of Karabakh Armenians exclaimed: «Well then, you knew that there’d be bloodshed! ».

«The blood is inevitable in cases like that, and is needed for those interested in the conflict and its preservation», I replied.

Suffice it to look at authorities’ aggressive response to the religiously motivated murder of a teacher in France; or reaction of black-skin society to the murder of an Afro-American in the USA. Religious and national issues are exacerbating to show worth in crisis periods. This is an axiom of revolutionary situations – the Karabakh conflict came as a result of the crisis of the Soviet system.

What did 33 conflict years bring to the Armenian and Azerbaijani peoples? Approx. 2 million suffered from both sides – hardships, blood, destructions, loss of friends and relatives. The two peoples suffered; eternal war and hatred instead of prosperity and welfare. Scores of people became a hostage of crazy ideas, and had to fight for survival.

After Azerbaijan’s triumph, a journalist pointed out that a drawn game 1:1 (Azerbaijan was defeated in 1994). But he was too optimistic: I read the following in a final press-release of the recent joint session of the World Armenian Congress and the Union of Russian Armenians: «We lost the fighting but not the battle», and it became evident that the hatchet has not been buried on November 10, 2020. Armenia is preparing for a next vengeance in this centuries-long war.

And what about the Azerbaijani society? It is prepared for any eventuality, we learned a great deal from Armenians.

But it is drifting toward peace, for it is eager to enjoy life and flourish.

It should be remembered that the Azerbaijani society is living in hope of peace resolution to the conflict and, moreover, is hopeful of implementing a concept of the Caucasian House having been put forward in the course of gaining independence by Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia in 1918 where the Caucasian Confederation had just been formed but lived for a short time.

The idea had flown through minds in the Caucasus since the USSR disintegration and even became a topic of debates between Presidents Elchibey, Gamsahurdia and Dudayev. There were contacts with Ter-Petrosyan as well but failed. The topic has been played up by political lobby of Azerbaijan and during joint meetings of politicians and public figures of Caucasus to this day.

In August 2004 I decided to offer insights into this idea. Comrades underestimating sentiments of masses are forecasting a stern censure. I’m acting contrary to admonitions. On August 5, 2004 (16:14:45 / GMT+04:00) a topical article is posted on Turan: 

EUROPEAN MODEL AS THE BASIS OF FORMATION OF SINGLE CAUCASIAN SPACE

To readers,

The latest events in the country and in the region, unclearness of the situation and deepening of the crisis in the question of settlement of the conflicts urge me, as a citizen, to publish my vision of the perspectives of development of the country in the regional and in the European contexts. The article contains the conclusions which I made dealing for 15 years in information activity.

Mehman Aliyev, Director Turan News Agency

***

Numerous attempts and initiatives of the international organizations and of the countries for solution of the conflicts in the South Caucasus and establishment of stability has been taken from the moment of destruction of the USSR. But over 14 years none of the conflicts has been settled. The only positive result of the mediators became stop of military actions in the conflict zones. It happened 10 years ago. And since then there is not any progress in the question of settling of the conflicts. Of course, the countries of the region received the opportunity to deal in state building, develop integration into the world community, but under the condition of existing of "frozen conflicts" they could not achieve any success neither in economics nor in the building of civil society.

 The reasons of non-resolution of the conflicts

For more than 10s year all participants to the process of regulation, both local and foreign were dealing in resolution of some problems in the economy and in the politics. For example , in the question of resolution of the most actual problems - the regional conflicts, the approaches of the countries were contradictory, inconsequent and tried to eliminate the problems separately from the common-Caucasian context. So, the Abkhazian conflict is being solved within the frameworks of the UNO, the Karabakh conflict- within the frameworks of the Minsk group, the Osetin - with mediation of Russia. In all cases, certain condition for the solution of the conflict and establishment of good neighbor relations is satisfaction of their own approaches and interests: the right of nations for self-determination and territorial integrity.

Just disability of the mediators and the sides to the conflict to provide coincidence of these two interests brings the process into deadlock. Everything may change if the sides solve these problems in the context of the Caucasian integration and creation of the Caucasian union.

Preconditions for settling the conflict

There are all preconditions for the solution of the conflicts through the Caucasian integration. The most important argument for this is the statements of the participants of the conflicts to establish good-neighboring relations after concession of the opposite side and settlement of the conflicts.

None of the sides stated about antagonism and refusal from cooperation with the other side. On the contrary, all sides state about readiness to cooperation after satisfaction of their conflict interests. The other precondition is common space , under which we understand the geographic area, mutually dependent long history. All people of the region have been under constant pressing and all together entered some state formations, beginning from the Rome empire up to the Soviet empire.

They have similar Caucasian culture, traditions, mentality which are so strong that push back their religious and political orientations. And at last, common perspective of the people of the region.

They all declare devotion to the European values and try to integrate into European space. And they made real steps in this direction: they became the members of the CE, of the program PRM and of the other European programs, carry out integration political and economic reforms.

Ways of resolution

The basis for the future development of the country must be complex approach. Resolution of the problems without complex approach will not bring to long-term stability and dynamic break of the countries and peoples of the region in all spheres. It is necessary to start with creation of the legal basis of the future Caucasian union. For example, the Agreement of the Caucasian House and single space: political, economic, cultural and military. It must be broad document and should contain the program and plan with concrete terms, providing the whole process: from the situation status-qvo (recognition of territorial integrity of states and existing realities) up to creation of a single Caucasian space and its joining the European union, as the guarantor of stability in our region. The legal basis should be created by all sides with participation of international mediators- the guarantors of implementation of the adopted decisions.

In the basis of super-state and interdepartmental institutions should be taken the European structures: Eurounion, CE, Europarliament, the Cabinet of Ministers NATO and so on. It is necessary to provide withdrawal of the foreign troops from Caucasus, except the forces supporting peace during transition period.

The European experience of construction of a Single Europe should be taken into account as the main instrument of the building of Caucasian House. The European structures have long-experience of the state building accompanied by wars, and change of borders. Last century there were two world wars in Europe which ended with lost of ten millions of lives. But despite hard history, and sometimes, hostility lasting for many centuries, the Europeans were strong enough to build the European house, as the only guarantor of stability and development. In this construction Europe started from status-qvo and step by step solved the problems: came to unanimity. We should not waste time to creation of bicycle. Turning to the European experience Caucasus can pass the way of construction of the Caucasian house within short period of time. Creation of the Caucasian region will simplify adaptation of the region to the European union. Building of the Caucasian House in the South Caucasus with further attraction of the Northern Caucasus, of course, will provide stability in the south of Russia. Within the frameworks of the project the Caucasian house territorial belonging, isolation of ethnic groups fully loose their sense, because their rights and interests will be provided in the Caucasian parliament, government, court and so on, wherever they are represented. A single Caucasian space can and must become the guarantor of safety, development and welfare of all ethnic groups, regardless the place of their location and the number. In this context, Azerbaijan has necessary resource potential to become the locomotive of this process. Moreover, it must lead this movement.

***

It ought to be noted that the reaction proved just the opposite: no fact of condemnation, support only. Leaders of political parties and public organizations – opposition, pro-governmental - crowded together at the International Baku press-club, Hagani str., to discuss the article. Variety of opinions, and all pro unambiguously.

It is highly unlikely that people in Azerbaijan uphold the view as Armenia does; to paraphrase, the fighting is won but not the battle.

Regretfully, they are forcing us out to fight, and an eloquent testimony to this is a decision of the French Senate to recognize independence of Daghlig Garabagh thereby encouraging revanchism and continuation of the war. The French people is used to everlasting wars, victories and defeats on their own or away battlefields. That’s their choice. However, I think that it is not up to our choice.

It seemed to me a horribly familiar Armenian phrase «We have lost the fighting but not the battle».

I have tried the Internet and taken to Charles de Gaulle.

Following France’s defeat from Germans in 1940, the General attempted to encourage his fellow countrymen by a slogan "France has lost the fighting but not the war». I don’t know if the Frenchmen are seeking to continue a war they want us to wage.