 No matter how the Turkish population of Azerbaijan Republic treat Armenians, they should recognize that the Armenians were the unwitting catalyst of the unification process of Turkish tribes into the united national community. However, "the push”, obtained as a result of the opposition of the Turks of Azerbaijan with the Armenians, does not completely mean that the process will be completed and new nation will appear. History has seen a considerable number of examples of decay or death of the nation in its formative stages. It occurs not only on the background of the lack or absence of the "stimulus”, let say common enemy, but also in the relatively calm period.
Karabakh war can and should be examined from different points of view. However, in its main aspect it must be recognized as the inevitable and even necessary aspect in development and dialectical establishment of the Turkish nation in the east of the South Caucasus. In this case the management of Azerbaijan Republic, which selected the military way of the consolidation of Turkish tribes, proved unable to understand the simple truth: any national organism tends to ethnic development (or to retention, it doesn’t change the value of the process) of its natural boundaries. One of the basic errors of all of the leaders of Azerbaijan since 1991 is in failing to understand this simple truth.
The Azerbaijan "nation” does not have sense of natural ethnic boundaries. The area of different and often not very friendly treating each other Turkish tribes, with any fantasy pressure can’t be considered as the ethnic boundaries. This situation happened not historically, but necessary and often as possible, and it does not contain any reasons for incorrect conclusions and inferences. This is - the natural reflection of the past centuries-old nomad way of life, when natural answer to the external and natural challenges was a departure from the fight and the selection of a new habitat.
It would be a mistake to assume that the withdrawal of the fight is a sign of weakness. Often withdrawal itself is accompanied by the heroic overcoming of the new difficulties that manifest themselves the resistance of the natural and human obstacles. The passage of Hunns into Europe or Turkish tribes into Front Asia, and then in the Caucasus, was not and could not be carefree walk and was accompanied by considerable loss of life. Possibly, here is more appropriate the formula explaining the stimulus of withdrawal from the fight with climatic challenges to struggle for the survival in another ethnic environment.
No matter how we qualify this form of struggle one thing is certain nomad people and nomad tribes used to fight through the retreat. In certain situations, this form of struggle was the guarantee of victory. Thus, many Iranian shahs never managed to defeat the hordes of nomadic Turks of Turan, constantly raided the settled villages. Each time the Shah sent an army to destroy the eternal enemy, the nomads scattered across the steppe. Shah's troops simply had no one to fight! Quite often wandering in the steppe for months or even years, the Iranians returned with the large losses (diseases, the burden mounted transitions, accidents), and all of it without even encountering the enemy. Loss of the territory is not perceived by nomads as a defeat.
In nomadic tribes, with the strong respect of organization (state), is weakly developed feeling of the native land. The concept of the native land in them by centuries was associated with the temporary inhabitant, nomadic area. Strictly speaking, the concept itself of the "Motherland”, in sense that is given to this word by settled people, for nomads simply does not exist. And again let us emphasize: this special feature of nomads was one of the forms for the survival, since very structure of the life of nomads did not assume another output. The basic idea of avoidance from the fight for the nomads is to step back in order to survive. This form of fight is completely unacceptable for the settled people and that is also predetermined the outcome of Karabakh war.
In the summer of 1993, when the Secretary of the State of Azerbaijan Lala Shovket (Gadzhieva) rebuked anxiously crowded around the Araks people of Agdam - "more than hundred days we daily bombed Stepanakert, but Armenians did not leave their houses. You ran away at the time when there were not yet shell bursts heard” - she, without even realizing, actually based the theory of the avoidance of nomads from the fight. It was also confirmed by the Azerbaijan officer, who wrote in his memoirs: "When we arrived in Agdam, we, with surprise, noted that the inhabitants did not want us to protect them. They wanted to run”.
Classical nomad (in our case - Turkish) society does not consider it dishonorable to run from the fight. However, they easily give up their housing, while tenaciously holding on to livestock and utensils. What is a house? House for them is a few pair of tens of produced sheep skins. If there would be sheep, "the construction of house” will not be difficult.
Let’s face it: history was favorable to the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. If Armenian territory would be located in the surroundings of settled udis, for example (even those who became Turks), then the opposition would be the way more bitter and bloody. However, the history "corrected” its "error”: udis, as other indigenous people of Azerbaijan, live on the left bank of Kura, the same place where their ancestors lived by millennia. On the right bank (Armenian provinces Utik and Artsakh, now all together called Karabakh) lived native Armenians and nomadic tribes of newcomers. Armenians could not lose in the war with the nomads. In addition to the numerous advantages - intellect, the ability to war (love of "iron”) – Armenians had the main thing, which by definition could not have the hereditary nomad - sense of responsibility to the country.
It is hard to believe that in Azerbaijan they do not understand it. The observed attack of Azerbaijanizm on Turkism in this Republic pursues as one of the aims to get rid of syndrome of nomad form of fight, - to retreat in front of the challenges in the inhabitants of Azerbaijan. However, the current campaign of Azerbaijanizm is late in the time and there is a little chance for the success. Since it is carried out after the defeat of Azerbaijan in the war, against the backdrop of incessant searches "for traitors”. With the entire activity of the Azerbaijanizm propaganda "the culprits” of the defeat of Azerbaijan are located, as a rule, among the not-turkish people. "Avars, Lezgins, Talysh etc. did not want (or - they did not know how) to war”, this phrase very often could be heard from the representatives of the Turkish tribes of Azerbaijan.
Meanwhile the representatives of indigenous peoples most fiercely fought during the years of Karabakh war. There are myriads of examples. Another matter, how justified were their sacrifices in the name of Turkish interests? Unfortunately, enlightenment came only in recent years, when the indigenous peoples of Azerbaijan close encountered "tolerant” and indiscriminate policy of independent Azerbaijan. Since, both Azerbaijanizm and Turkism simply do not represent the presence in Azerbaijan a nation other than Turks or "Azeris”.
Confrontation of Azerbaijanizm with Turkism, it is a struggle for the right of national traits of indigenous people of the Republic, the struggle of the choice of form and methods of the extrusion of not-Turkish elements from the Republic, struggle for the right to destroy and to use the right of "winner”.
In 1988 Azerbaijan had a choice: to agree with the request of deputies of Nagorno-Karabakh about the reunification of this land with Armenia and… to win, or to decide to have a war the completely unpredictable (for the Armenians) result. However, Baku chose the bloody adventure. Possibly it happened because in the Republic were not found (or were ignored) scientists, able to explain to the leaders how disastrous this decision would be. In fact, if at that time Azerbaijan would agree to return Artsakh to the bosom of Armenia, then today a at least half of the Artsakh population would be Turkish. Taking into the account the difference in the demographic increase between Armenians and Turks, Artsakh sooner than later would become the Turk-inhabitant edge. With the complete visibility of the friendly relations. Indeed, during the Soviet years it was the way for many villages of Karabakh to become Turk-inhabitant: Bradjur in Khanlar region, Karkhat in Dashkesans region, Khoylar in Samkhors, Khodjalu, Malibekli, Farukh, Khokher (Goga), Salakatin and many others in Karabakh and former Armenian autonomy. About the Armenian past there resembled only deserted and slowly destroyed from time and vandalism Armenian churches and temples.
However, in Azerbaijan there was made a decision about the radical acceleration of the expulsion of Armenians. It is possible that "the idea” of such decision considered the presence in Republic of the compact living indigenous peoples. It is no secret that on the left bank of the Kura in Azerbaijan the number of indigenous peoples considerably is much higher than the number of Turks. Value of Turks - that are rooted in Azerbaijan, to some extent equates the presence of a large number of Caucasian Turks, on the right bank of the Kura. Today, many of the Turks from the right bank, as well as from Georgia and Armenia, are resettled in areas where indigenous peoples live. By allocating for newcomers large land holdings and numerous privileges, created at the expense of local residents. Azerbaijan has learned from the defeat in the Karabakh war and today it attempts to rehabilitate north and south of the Republic. At the expense of the indigenous people of these regions.
Levon MELIK-SHAHNAZARYAN
|
