PROVOCATION FROM TBILISI
By Edmond Y. Azadian; The Armenian Mirror Spectator, Boston
AZG Armenian Daily
19/05/2006
Armenian-Georgian relations can at best be defined in love-hate
terms. During the Soviet period inter-ethnic tensions were muted down
and even the people living in the Caucasus were forced to claim to
be brothers. But deep down animosities simmered and with the collapse
of the Soviet Union they became full-blown hatred.
Even under the Soviet rule the Azeris carried a purely chauvinistic
policy by depopulating Nakhijevan and oppressing Armenians in
Karabakh, The Georgians, co-religionists of the Armenians, did not
fare any better than their Azeri counterparts in their treatment
of Armenians. That is why today the Javakhk region, predominantly
Armenian populated area of Georgia, remains economically most
depressed province.
During the last two centuries there was no love lost between the
two neighbors, who also fought a territorial dispute during first
independence and Soviet take over of the two republics.
The capital city of Georgia, Tbilisi, which was the most sophisticated
and cultured metropolis before the Soviet era, was built by Armenians,
who constituted the majority of its population. Even the mayors of
the capital city were at one time mostly Armenians.
Predominance of Armenian presence in Tbilisi had always fueled the
jealousy of the local Georgians who had been looking for an opportunity
to get rid of the Armenians.
Professor Ronald Suny proposes a very interesting theory about
Georgian-Armenian relations in his book entitled “The Making of the
Georgian Nation”.
Throughout the Caucasus the triumph of the Soviet regime was hailed as
the victory of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie. But in Georgia
that class warfare was but a fig leaf for Georgian nationalists
disguised as Communists to fight Armenians. Over the years they
gradually destroyed the infrastructure of the Armenian community in
that country by taking over churches, closing down schools, theaters
and newspapers.
The desperate situation in the Javakhk region is endemic to the
relationship of the two ethnic groups.
Since the fall of the Soviet empire Georgia fought three
ethnic wars, if we discount the clashes between nationalists
and ultra-nationalists. The root cause of those conflicts was
the jingoistic treatment of minorities, which fragmented the
country. Edward Shevardnadze continued the Soviet legacy during
independence, only to be replaced by Gamsakhourdia, a zealot who
further destroyed the ethnic fabric of his country to be ousted
eventually by Shevardnadze forces. It was most ironic that he would
take refuge in Armenia before his subsequent exile and assassination.
Since Georgia’s independence Ajaria, a Moslem region, enjoyed
semi-independent status, under Asian Abashidze, who always defied the
central government in Tbilisi, with impunity until he was escorted out
by the Russians, who expected to gain favors from Mikhail Saakashvilli,
who took over the government through his “revolution of roses”.
The two other flash points still remain unresolved; Abkhazia has
declared its independence. During the Abkhaz-Georgian war, Armenians
were caught in the crossfire, and suffered from both sides, since
the two conflicting sides blamed Armenians for siding with the enemy
camp. Before the conflict Armenians presented the largest minority. But
since the war their number and influence have dwindled considerably.
Another factor that complicates further the issue is that the majority
of the Abkhazian population has taken Russian citizenship in recent
years to give Moscow an excuse to defend “its citizens” any time
in danger.
In Georgia’s North, the region of Southern Ossetia has declared
independence and the skirmishes and saber rattling continue across
the border.
Saakashvilli came to power on the crutches of US policy in the region
and the removal of Abashidze in Ajaria had whetted his appetite for
the resolution of the two other raging conflicts.
The US support has emboldened Saakashvilli to the point of defying
his neighbor in the North, namely Russia.
Georgia’s problems are created by the xenophobia of its leaders and,
unfortunately, also its people.
Armenian presence in Georgia needs to be viewed within the context
of this very complicated political landscape.
Javakhk, unlike Karabakh in the Soviet era, borders Armenia. Through
all the succeeding regimes, a deliberate policy of the central
government has kept the area underdeveloped. No roads have been built
or repaired for a long time, no public services provided, no jobs, no
economic projects. The only way Armenians have survived is through the
existence of Russian military base, which provides jobs and above all,
physical security in a hostile region, where conflicts and unresolved
crimes are many.
The Russian military base is a bone of contention between Russia and
Georgia. The government in Tbilisi wants the Russian base out, and
in return promises economic aid, jobs and security to the Armenians.
Promises, which have not been fulfilled and looks like they will
never be fulfilled any time soon. Only Russian military base would
have guaranteed security and economic viability for the Armenians.
On the other hand a country that claims to have achieved democracy,
uses ethnic tensions and threat of ethnic cleansing as a tool for
its political ends.
Indeed, Tbilisi appoints Georgian satraps by the central government
to rule this predominantly Armenia region. Armenians are denied
jobs and government positions for their lack of proficiency in the
Georgian language, whereas it seems to be perfectly normal to have
an unelected Georgian to govern Armenians without bothering to learn
the local language.
In addition to these pressures, the central government hangs over the
head of the Armenians, the return of Moslem Metskhets of Turkic origin,
who were deported by Stalin to Central Asia and other regions of the
Soviet Union, during World War II.
This policy of relocating indigenous people has the resonance of
human rights to the international community, but in fact it is no
different than the fig leaf of class warfare Georgians waged earlier
against the Armenians. For all intents and purposes this policy aims
at depopulating Javakhk of its Armenian population.
In recent months the interior minister and foreign minister of Georgia
visited Armenia, and after all the sweet talk of brotherly love
and refusal to enter into political deals, which would compromise
Armenia’s interests, the official and unofficial harassment of the
Armenians in Georgia continues.
Georgia helped Turkey and Azerbaijan to bypass Armenia in building
the Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline. There is talk that they intend to resume
railroad service again isolating Armenia.
Saakashvilli government is well aware that Armenia is in a bind and it
faces the same historic dilemma it faced during the first republic;
that is it cannot afford a second front while the Karabakh conflict
remains unresolved-Armenia is expected to calm down the tensions in
Javakhk while Georgians continue failing in their end of the deal.
Georgian leaders are convinced that the only way to restore the
territorial integrity of the country is to adopt a federal system to
lure back breakaway Abkhazia and Southern Ossetia to their fold. And
this process provides a golden opportunity for Javakhk Armenians to
claim the same level of autonomy as the other regions.
They have been agitating and demanding that autonomy, which the
official Yerevan cannot publicly support to avoid aggravating
Georgian-Armenian relations, which superficially remain calm.
US policy with regards to these issues remains singularly myopic and
one-dimensional. There is one thrust to that policy: to drive Russian
military bases out of Georgia regardless of the consequences to the
local groups. Rather than analyzing and solving the local problems
equitably, the US administration, very much in a Cold War mind set,
has been pursuing a blanket global policy of containing Russia.
As if all these problems were not enough, Georgian Orthodox Church
has launched a new provocation, certainly not without the knowledge
and blessing of the Tbilisi government, adding a new and alarming
twist to the relation of the two neighboring nations.
Georgian Orthodox Church has been confiscating Armenian churches on
the Georgian territory. Calls, appeals and protests by the Armenian
Church and government authorities have thus far been to no avail.
Pushing the envelope further, the Patriarchate of the Georgian Orthodox
Church has appointed a special commission to claim six churches in
the Northern region of Armenia, in Tavoush and Lori, as their own,
not withstanding the fact that no Georgians live in the area.
This new initiative seems to be designed to raise tensions between
the two nations, knowing full well that Armenia can ill afford to
handle another crisis at this time.
The announcement of the “Special Commission” was preceded by another
provocation: The Supreme Synod of the Georgian Orthodox Church decided
lo establish an eparchy (Diocese) of the Georgian Orthodox Church
in Armenia, without bothering to inform either the leadership of the
Armenian Church or the government.
The Georgian Church leaders claim that their decision intends
“to restore historical existence of the eparchy of Agarak-Tashir,
Dmanisi See”.
There is certainly a hidden agenda, which the Georgian authorities
are pursuing by this decision, because:
a) There are no Georgians to attend the presumed churches, nor are
there any religious structures.
b) The second issue is more suspicious than the first one, since that
region was included in the map of 1918, which the Georgian Mensheviks
claimed as their own.
Georgians living in Yerevan enjoy having their own church, courtesy
of the Armenian Apostolic Church, whereas the Armenian Church does
not have a defined status in Georgia, because there is separation of
church and state in Georgia, which becomes very handy to the Georgians
to keep Armenians in limbo and allow the opportunity to the Georgian
Orthodox Church to confiscate Armenian churches.
Georgian hidden agenda seems to counter the Armenian claims in Javakhk
and also the protest of Armenian Church leaders in the other parts
of Georgia.
The Dashnag party has been organizing and agitating Armenians in
Javakhk. Some people criticize this policy, which will raise tensions
in the area.
It is time for Armenia to resort to very delicate diplomacy. Any
retaliation in kind may rock the boat and trigger another crisis,
which may render life unbearable in Javakhk and overtax the resources
in Armenia. But on the other hand, Armenia cannot allow Georgia to
pursue its arrogant policy.
It looks like the wise course would be to carry a carrot and stick
until stability is restored in the region.