TWENTY YEARS SINCE INDEPENDENCE
Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Nov 15 2011
Last week, in Washington, D.C., the nationwide public awareness
campaign “If You See Something, Say Something” prompted me to think
about our region, and what we see and how we are delivering political
messages in the Caucasus.
We have seen the role played by social media in the revolutions in the
Middle East and North Africa over the past year, but few of us have
stopped to reflect or analyze the revolution that happened 20 years
ago. We are focusing on the Middle East and North Africa (MENA)-type
revolutions, ignoring the historical challenge of the 1991 revolution.
Back in 1991, few in the West had the guts or the imagination to
believe that a system as brutal as that of the Soviet Union would
fall. Starting in 1988, popular revolutions in the geopolitically
significant zone of Eurasia, the countries of the South Caucasus,
brought about independence via the crowds that gathered in the streets
of Baku and Tbilisi. During this independence movement, there were no
iPhones or iPads, no Twitter, no Facebook, and there was no Internet.
A handful of international media outlets such as Radio Free
Europe/Radio Liberty and Voice of America along with local and
international newspapers followed the independence movements in the
South Caucasus countries.
Despite the principle of glasnost (“openness”), which had
revolutionized the heretofore closed Soviet media, the regime reacted
harshly towards independence movements in Baku and Tbilisi. When Soviet
troops invaded Azerbaijan’s capital city in 1990, murdering innocent
people, they first shut down the television and radio stations in
order to limit access to information. Today, this measure would have
much less impact than it did two decades ago, given that these days
Internet technologies cover all breaking news.
A comparison between the 2011 Arab Awakening and the post-Soviet
Awakening is a difficult one, but history suggests that two decades
is sufficient time to calculate the impact of independence on the
South Caucasus countries, and what they have achieved. This is a very
important question, and one that will illuminate the future.
Twenty years after independence, the countries of the South Caucasus
are still experiencing problems, among them the consequences of the
violent conflicts that continue to influence internal and external
political and economic developments as well as determine foreign
policy priorities. Hence, the Caucasus states, with the exception of
Azerbaijan, are still incapable of defending their national interests
and providing for their security.
After two decades, Azerbaijan drives the development of the region.
The East-West dynamic of world politics is reflected in Baku’s
foreign policy as Azerbaijan is becoming a geostrategic-geo-economic
hub between Asia and Europe. Current energy projects and future
geostrategic plans are strengthening relations with neighboring
countries like Georgia and Turkey, as well as boosting regional
cooperation. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline and the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars
railway represent these trilateral relations.
Azerbaijan is able to bring its energy resources to world markets,
in addition to diversifying transport routes to increase European
energy security.
The main challenge during its post-independence period has been
Armenia’s occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh and the seven adjunct
regions. This bloody war has brought 1 million internally displaced
persons (IDPs) into Azerbaijan’s unoccupied territory, most of whom
left their homes with little more than the clothes on their back —
one of the world’s great human crises. This conflict has played a
significant role in shaping the mirroring national identities of
Armenia and Azerbaijan.
It also continues to have a major impact on political-military and
socioeconomic development in both countries, as well as across the
region and beyond. Azerbaijan remains focused on finding a peaceful
solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict — but after two decades
Armenia has not shown its readiness to accept the territorial integrity
of Azerbaijan. The conflict resolution process has missed several
“golden opportunities” for peace during the past two decades.
In terms of economic stability, the construction of Azerbaijan’s state
system has shown the real results of Baku’s policy, as demonstrated by
the “2010-2011 Global Competitiveness Report” — in the macroeconomic
stability sub-index, Azerbaijan is 16th of 142 countries. In addition,
according to the 2010 UNDP Human Development Report, Azerbaijan has
moved up to the category of “high human development.” Indeed, over the
past five years, Azerbaijan has achieved the most rapid development
of all of the 169 countries covered by the UNDP report. Additionally,
Azerbaijan recently gained a non-permanent seat on the United Nation
Security Council. This two-year membership marks a great diplomatic
success, and will affect Baku’s foreign policy over the next decade.
Through this development, Azerbaijan will have the opportunity to
play a larger role in international diplomacy.
Georgia, after two decades, has managed to stabilize its economy,
opening up to international investors. Like Azerbaijan, unresolved
conflicts and infringements on its territorial integrity remain the
main challenges to independence. Pushing for peace and prosperity,
Tbilisi saw serious setbacks after the 2008 August War between Russia
and Georgia. Regional cooperation has been crucial in difficult
situations such as this. After the August War, Azerbaijani companies
invested in the Georgian economy, which not only advanced Azerbaijan’s
regional leadership, but also increased Georgia’s economic prosperity,
which in turn has strengthened and intensified the relationship
between these two countries and their peoples. Furthermore, political
stability, economic policy and the maturity of key sectors of the
economy generate conditions conducive to new geo-economic initiatives
funded by both states. Azerbaijan and Georgia share an opportunity,
and believe that the South Caucasus will be a place of peace and
dialogue, with mutual understanding between peoples and cultures.
At the moment, Armenia stands largely separate from its two Caucasian
neighbors, and being unable to develop relations with Turkey, acts
more as an observer than a participant in the region’s emerging
partnerships. Armenia is not only geographically landlocked, but
also — more dangerously — politically landlocked. It seems that
if Azerbaijan and Georgia are focused on the future of the region,
Armenia is still preoccupied by its past. Thus, not much room is left
for thinking about the present, which is, perhaps, a common trend in
transitional periods.
As regional projects expand and develop, Armenia’s non-involvement
increasingly limits the possibilities for its integration into the
South Caucasus as a whole, which is destructive and isolating. Should
the current stalemate between Baku and Yerevan continue, it may in
the future be even more difficult to bridge these differences and help
Armenia become a fully integrated member of the South Caucasus region.
Even today, 20 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, we need
to believe that it is our challenge to find common ground, to bridge
divides, to scale walls. What we most likely need is a psychological
revolution — a deep change in attitudes and thinking. Let’s “say
something,” and help bring peace and prosperity to the Caucasus
and beyond.
*Zaur Shiriyev is a foreign policy analyst at the Center for Strategic
Studies in Baku.