Connect with us

Eastern Europe

Azerbaijan Democratic Republic as the first democratic, parliamentary and secular republic in Islamic East

Published

on

Authors: Rusif Huseynov and Elmira Hasanova*

The flag once raised will never fall!-Mammad Amin Rasulzade

Despite being divided by Russia and Iran and deprived of its own statehood in the early 19th century, the Azerbaijanis in both north and south underwent the national awakening and fought for liberty in the beginning of the 20th century, this struggle peaking with the declaration of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic on 28 May 1918.

It was a tough time for the whole region: despite internal turbulences and civil war, the Russians, both Whites and Reds, retained their claims over the South Caucasus. The British, victorious out of the First World War, was gradually penetrating into the region. Different ethnic groups and political movements were struggling over each village.

Interestingly enough, the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic was proclaimed by the National Council in Tiflis (Tbilisi), the capital of another newborn state, Georgia. To cover its sovereignty over the entire Azerbaijan, the founding fathers not only built a new army but also requested military aid from the Ottoman Empire. Terribly defeated Ottomans with their resources exhausted, however, managed to dispatch an army to the Caucasus, which, during the entire summer of 1918 liberated the Azerbaijani lands from different political groups (Bolsheviks), ultranationalistic movements (Dashnaks) and various gangs, finally victoriously entering Baku in September.

Within short time, the main state institutions were built and divided into three branches of governance. Six months into the independence, the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic also celebrated a parliament which reflected all ethnic and religious groups in the country 80 seats to the titular ethnic group, Azerbaijanis, 21 – Armenians, 10 – Russians, 1 – Germans, 1- Jews, 1 – Georgians, 1 to Poles.

The newly-formed republic faced challenges almost in all spheres. A national army was set up for protecting the territorial integrity, a task which it fulfilled by restoring sovereignty in a number of territories, including Karabakh.

Education was paid big attention to, with old schools were being modernized or replaced by new ones. An important milestone became the opening of Baku State University in 1919, making it the first modern university in the territory of Azerbaijan. Despite hardships and financial shortages, the Azerbaijani authorities sent 100 young people to various educational institutions in Germany, France, Italy and the United Kingdom.

A big achievement in democratization process was the abolition of censorship, a remnant of czarist period.

Another big achievement, which laid foundation of a democratic and secular statehood in Azerbaijan, was women suffrage. By granting women the right to vote in 1918, the same year as Poland did, Azerbaijan, however, pioneered the universal suffrage before the Benelux countries (1919), the United States (1920), France and Italy (1945).

From the very outset, the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic conducted an active foreign policy. Besides building bilateral relations with a number of countries, establishing and hosting numerous diplomatic missions, the Azerbaijani government also sought international recognition at the highest level. A delegation sent to the Paris Peace Conference met with world leaders, including Woodrow Wilson, who initiated the first discussion of the Azerbaijani question at the Council of the Four in May 1919. Although Wilson, who had presented the concept of self-determination for ethnic groups from former empires, failed to proceed with the Azerbaijani issue, he himself later recounted his meeting with Azerbaijani delegates. In his September 1919 speech in San Franscisco, Wilson outlined his positive impression of Azerbaijani delegation: “Do you know where Azerbaijan is? Well, one day there came in a very dignified and interesting group of gentlemen who were from Azerbaijan. I didn’t have time, until they were gone, to find out where they came from. But I did find this out immediately: that I was talking to men who talked the same language that I did in respect of ideas, in respect of conceptions of liberty, in respect of conceptions of right and justice.”

However, Azerbaijan found support by British Prime Minister Lloyd George. At the initiative of the British side, the Paris Peace Conference issued a resolution of de facto recognition of the Azerbaijani government by the Allies and the Entente in January 1920.

This recognition, historic, albeit came very late. Azerbaijan’s participation in the international system of international relations was interrupted due to the military intervention of Soviet Russia in April 1920. Having consolidated its power within Russia, the Bolsheviks started collecting former parts of the empire and chose Azerbaijan as the number one target in the South Caucasus as they desperately needed to collect Baku`s huge oil deposits.

Despite the fall, the national idea that bore during the 23-month independence survived and revived the independent Azerbaijan towards the end of the 20th century. Having restored its independence in 1991, the Azerbaijan Republic declared herself a successor state of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic.

The founding fathers of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic, Məmməd Əmin Rəsulzadə, Əlimərdan bəy Topçubaşov, Fətəli xan Xoyski, Nəsib bəy Yusifbəyli and others, were committed to build a parliamentary republic in a country with a population having majorly Oriental mentality and traditions. Under circumstances when the South Caucasus became a scene confrontation among the various powers, both dying and triumphing in the world war, and when the Azerbaijani people became subject to ethnic cleansing by neighboring nationalists, a bunch of progressive, Western-minded people proclaimed the first parliamentary republic in the Muslim East. Thus, 28 May is not only an Azerbaijani date; it should be an important date throughout the whole Orient as it celebrated democratic and republican values. And these values will be a guiding star for many peoples into the 21st century.

*Elmira Hasanova is a research fellow of the Topchubashov Center.

Rusif Huseynov is the co-founder of the Topchubashov Center. His main interest is peace and conflict studies, while his focus area covers mainly Eastern Europe, Middle East, Caucasus and Central Asia.

Continue Reading
Comments

Eastern Europe

Unhappy Iran Battles for Lost Influence in South Caucasus

Published

on

Events that might not matter elsewhere in the world matter quite a lot in the South Caucasus. Given a recent history of conflict, with all the bad feelings that generates, plus outside powers playing geostrategic games, and its growing importance as an energy corridor between Europe and Central Asia, the region is vulnerable. 

This has been worsened by the two-year-long Western absence of engagement. In 2020, Europe and the U.S. were barely involved as the second Nagorno-Karabakh war broke out between Armenia and Azerbaijan, leaving about 7,000 dead. With tensions now on the rise between Azerbaijan and Iran, Western uninterest is again evident, even though this might have wider ramifications for future re-alignment in the South Caucasus. 

The drumbeat of Iranian activity against Azerbaijan has been consistent in recent months. Iran is getting increasingly edgy about Israel’s presence in the South Caucasus — hardly surprising given Israel’s painfully well-targeted assassination and computer hacking campaigns against nuclear staff and facilities — and especially its growing security and military ties with Azerbaijan, with whom Iran shares a 765km (430 mile) border. Iran has also voiced concern about the presence in the region of Turkish-backed Syrian mercenaries, who were used as Azeri assault troops last year.  

Much of the anger has been played out in military exercises. The Azeri military has been busy since its victory, exercising near the strategic Lachin corridor which connects the separatist region to Armenia, and in the Caspian Sea, where it has jointly exercised with Turkish personnel. Iran, in turn, sent units to the border region this month for drills of an unstated scale. 

This week, the Azeri and Iranian foreign ministers agreed to dial down the rhetoric amid much talk of mutual understanding. Whether that involved promises regarding the Israeli presence or a pledge by Iran to abandon a newly promised road to Armenia was not stated. 

Iran’s behavior is a recognition of the long-term strategic changes caused by the Armenian defeat last year. Iran has been sidelined. Its diplomatic initiatives have failed, and it has been unwelcome in post-conflict discussions. 

It is true that Iran was never a dominant power in the South Caucasus. Unlike Russia or Turkey, the traditional power brokers, it has not had a true ally. Iran was certainly part of the calculus for states in the region, but it was not feared, like Russia or Turkey. And yet, the South Caucasus represents an area of key influence, based on millennia of close political and cultural contacts. 

Seen in this light, it is unsurprising that Iran ratcheted up tensions with Azerbaijan. Firstly, this reasserted the involvement of the Islamic Republic in the geopolitics of the South Caucasus. It was also a thinly-veiled warning to Turkey that its growing ambitions and presence in the region are seen as a threat. In Iran’s view, Turkey’s key role as an enabler of Azeri irridentism is unmistakable. 

Turkish involvement has disrupted the foundations of the South Caucasian status quo established in the 1990s. To expect Turkey to become a major power there is an overstretch, but it nevertheless worries Iran. For example, the recent Caspian Sea exercises between Azerbaijan and Turkey appear to run counter to a 2018 agreement among the sea’s littoral states stipulating no external military involvement. 

The Caspian Sea has always been regarded by Iranians as an exclusive zone shared first with the Russian Empire, later the Soviets, and presently the Russian Federation. Other littoral states play a minor role. This makes Turkish moves in the basin and the recent improvement of ties between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan an unpleasant development for Iran — fewer barriers to the Trans-Caspian Pipeline threatens the Islamic Republic’s ability to block the project.  

This is where Iranian views align almost squarely with the Kremlin’s. Both fear Turkish progress and new energy routes. The new Iranian leadership might now lean strongly toward Russia. With Russia’s backing, opposition to Turkey would become more serious; Iran’s foreign minister said this month that his country was seeking a “big jump” in relations with Russia. 

The fact is that the region is increasingly fractured and is being pulled in different directions by the greater powers around it. This state of affairs essentially dooms the prospects of pan-regional peace and cooperation initiatives. Take the latest effort by Russia and Turkey to introduce a 3+3 platform with Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia, as well as Iran. Beyond excluding the West, disagreements will eventually preclude any meaningful progress. There is no unity of purpose between the six states and there are profound disagreements. 

Thus, trouble will at some point recur between Iran and Azerbaijan, and by extension Turkey. Given the current situation, and Iran’s visible discontent, it is likely it will take some kind of initiative lest it loses completely its position to Turkey and Russia. 

Author’s note: first published in cepa

Continue Reading

Eastern Europe

Right-wing extremist soldiers pose threat to Lithuania

Published

on

It is no secret that Lithuania has become a victim of German army’s radicalization. Could this country count on its partners further or foreign military criminals threaten locals?

It is well known that Germany is one of the largest provider of troops in NATO. There are about 600 German troops in Lithuania, leading a Nato battlegroup. According to Lithuanian authorities, Lithuania needs their support to train national military and to protect NATO’s Central and Northern European member states on NATO’s eastern flank.

Two sides of the same coin should be mentioned when we look at foreign troops in Lithuania.

Though Russian threat fortunately remains hypothetical, foreign soldiers deployed in the country cause serious trouble. Thus, the German defence minister admitted that reported this year cases of racist and sexual abuse in a German platoon based in Lithuania was unacceptable.

Members of the platoon allegedly filmed an incident of sexual assault against another soldier and sang anti-Semitic songs. Later more allegations emerged of sexual and racial abuse in the platoon, including soldiers singing a song to mark Adolf Hitler’s birthday on 20 April this year.

It turned out that German media report that far-right abuses among the Lithuania-based troops had already surfaced last year. In one case, a soldier allegedly racially abused a non-white fellow soldier. In another case, four German soldiers smoking outside a Lithuanian barracks made animal noises when a black soldier walked past.

Lithuania’s Defence Minister Arvydas Anušauskas said later that the investigation was carried out by Germany and that Lithuania was not privy to its details. The more so, Lithuania is not privy to its details even now. “We are not being informed about the details of the investigation. […] The Lithuanian military is not involved in the investigation, nor can it be,” Anušauskas told reporters, stressing that Germany was in charge of the matter.

Ms Kramp-Karrenbauer, German defence minister, said that these misdeeds would be severely prosecuted and punished. Time has passed, and the details are not still known.

It should be said Germany has for years struggled to modernize its military as it becomes more involved in Nato operations. Nevertheless problems existed and have not been solved yet. According to the annual report on the state of the Bundeswehr made in 2020 by Hans-Peter Bartel, then armed forces commissioner for the German Bundestag, Germany’s army “has too little materiel, too few personnel and too much bureaucracy despite a big budget increase.” Mr Bartels’ report made clear that the Bundeswehr continues to be plagued by deep-seated problems. Recruitment remains a key problem. Mr Bartels said 20,000 army posts remained unfilled, and last year the number of newly recruited soldiers stood at just over 20,000, 3,000 fewer than in 2017. The other problem is radicalization of the armed forces.

Apparently, moral requirements for those wishing to serve in the German army have been reduced. Federal Volunteer Military Service Candidate must be subjected to a thorough medical examination. Desirable to play sports, have a driver’s license and be able to eliminate minor malfunctions in the motor, to speak at least one foreign language, have experience of communicating with representatives of other nationalities, be initiative and independent. After the general the interview follows the establishment of the candidate’s suitability for service in certain types of armed forces, taking into account his wishes. Further candidate passes a test on a computer. He will be asked if he wants study a foreign language and attend courses, then serve in German French, German-Dutch formations or institutions NATO.

So, any strong and healthy person could be admitted, even though he or she could adhere to far-right views or even belong to neo-Nazi groups. Such persons served in Lithuania and, probably, serve now and pose a real threat to Lithuanian military, local population. Neo-Nazism leads to cultivating racial inequalities. The main goal of the neo-Nazis is to cause disorder and chaos in the country, as well as to take over the army and security organs. Lithuanian authorities should fully realize this threat and do not turn a blind eye to the criminal behaviour of foreign military in Lithuania. There is no room to excessive loyalty in this case.

Continue Reading

Eastern Europe

Lithuanian foreign policy: Image is everything

Published

on

It seems as if Lithuanian government takes care of its image in the eyes of EU and NATO partners much more than of its population. Over the past year Lithuania managed to quarrel with such important for its economy states like China and Belarus, condemned Hungary for the ban on the distribution of images of LGBT relationships among minors, Latvia and Estonia for refusing to completely cut energy from Belarus. Judging by the actions of the authorities, Lithuania has few tools to achieve its political goals. So, it failed to find a compromise and to maintain mutually beneficial relations with economic partners and neighbours. The authorities decided to achieve the desired results by demanding from EU and NATO member states various sanctions for those countries that, in their opinion, are misbehaving.

Calling for sanctions and demonstrating its “enduring political will”, Lithuania exposed the welfare of its own population. Thus, district heating prices will surge by around 30 percent on average across Lithuania.

The more so, prices for biofuels, which make up 70 percent of heat production on average, are now about 40 higher than last year, Taparauskas, a member of the National Energy Regulatory Council (VERT) said.

“Such a huge jump in prices at such a tense time could threaten a social crisis and an even greater increase in tensions in society. We believe that the state must take responsibility for managing rising prices, especially given the situation of the most vulnerable members of society and the potential consequences for them. All the more so as companies such as Ignitis or Vilnius heating networks “has not only financial resources, but also a certain duty again,” sums up Lukas Tamulynas, the chairman of the LSDP Momentum Vilnius movement.

It should be said, that according to the Lithuanian Department of Statistics, prices for consumer goods and services have been rising for the eighth month in a row. According to the latest figures, the annual inflation rate is five percent.

Earlier it became known that in 2020 every fifth inhabitant of Lithuania was below the poverty risk line.

Pensioners are considered one of the most vulnerable groups in Lithuania. In 2019, Lithuania was included in the top five EU anti-leaders in terms of poverty risk for pensioners. The share of people over 65 at risk of poverty was 18.7 percent.

In such situation sanctions imposed on neighbouring countries which tightly connected to Lithuanian economy and directly influence the welfare of people in Lithuania are at least damaging. The more so, according Vladimir Andreichenko, the speaker of the House of Representatives of the Belarus parliament, “the unification of the economic potentials of Minsk and Moscow would be a good response to sanctions.” It turned out that Lithuania itself makes its opponents stronger. Such counter-productiveness is obvious to everyone in Lithuania except for its authorities.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Trending