State building and conflict resolution in the Caucasus

Download State building and conflict resolution in the Caucasus

Post on 22-Mar-2017




0 download

Embed Size (px)


<ul><li><p>This article was downloaded by: [University of Birmingham]On: 17 November 2014, At: 23:24Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK</p><p>Central Asian SurveyPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:</p><p>State building and conflict resolution inthe CaucasusBayram Balci aa Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches Internationales , ParisPublished online: 10 Dec 2012.</p><p>To cite this article: Bayram Balci (2012) State building and conflict resolution in the Caucasus,Central Asian Survey, 31:4, 467-469, DOI: 10.1080/02634937.2012.739293</p><p>To link to this article:</p><p>PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE</p><p>Taylor &amp; Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (theContent) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor &amp; Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor &amp; Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.</p><p>This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &amp;Conditions of access and use can be found at</p><p></p></li><li><p>box to the area appears to have stalled and is a stalemate at best (p. 235). The author then</p><p>moves on to describe a different operation in the country, reflecting only minimally on why</p><p>Moshtarak was not the success it planned to be. Where is the scrutiny? The criticism? The analy-</p><p>sis? How would the authors grasp of Afghan culture, politics and geography improve upon</p><p>Marjahs stalemate? In the absence of the ability to answer these questions, a more valuable</p><p>approach would have been to ignore events like Moshtarak altogether and instead focus more</p><p>deeply on drawing out the full value of weeks embedded with General Dostum, for instance,</p><p>or the authors access to Dostums Taliban prisoners.</p><p>It is perhaps the fact that this book begins with no driving question or argument that</p><p>opens it up to a confusing structure that does not overlap appropriately with the authors</p><p>clearly valuable experience, expertise and access. This is regrettable, because it is obvious</p><p>to the reader that only a fraction of the authors prized insight into Afghanistan is represented</p><p>in this book.</p><p>J. Edward Conway</p><p>University of St Andrews</p><p></p><p># 2012, J. Edward Conway</p><p>State building and conflict resolution in the Caucasus, by Charlotte Hille, Leiden, Brill, 2010,</p><p>xiv + 359 pp., US$153.00 (hardcover), ISBN 9789004179011</p><p>Charlotte Hilles monograph is more of an historical study than an essay on state building and</p><p>conflict resolution. Like the vast majority of scientists who have worked on the Caucasus, she</p><p>maintains that most of the tensions and conflicts here originate from the tormented history of</p><p>the region, and more especially from the period under the highly repressive and authoritarian</p><p>Soviet rule.</p><p>The 20 chapters in the book are of uneven value. The first chapter is an introduction to the</p><p>geography and history of settlement in the region. Incidentally, the author here questions clanism</p><p>in the Caucasian societies as a fundamental and constitutive phenomenon, and asks if it works as</p><p>an impediment to the development of modern states. To this last question she gives a hurried</p><p>judgment (p. 18), suggesting that clans after 1991 have perfectly managed the ideological</p><p>transition, adapting themselves from a communist to a nationalist regime.</p><p>Chapter 2 outlines theoretical elements and definitions that are used throughout the text:</p><p>population, territory, state, etc. The analysis of the state-building process in the Caucasus</p><p>through the theory of the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States is of</p><p>particular interest. The study of the principles codified and defined in the 1933 Montevideo</p><p>Convention as well as an overview of the historical context in which it took place casts a</p><p>new light on the state-building processes at work in the Caucasus today (pp. 2728).</p><p>Chapters 3 through 13 explain the phenomenon of state building in the South and North Cau-</p><p>casus before and after the period of the Russian Revolution. For each of the three countries</p><p>(Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia), but also for the Northern Caucasian republics included in</p><p>the Russian Federation, the author provides the chronology of the major events that encouraged</p><p>and facilitated the emerging of a national phenomenon. And each time, the role of Russia in the</p><p>state-building process is extremely important, as the imperial power has always been highly</p><p>influential in national and identity creation in the Caucasus (p. 47). Chapter 9 sheds light on</p><p>Book reviews 467</p><p>Dow</p><p>nloa</p><p>ded </p><p>by [</p><p>Uni</p><p>vers</p><p>ity o</p><p>f B</p><p>irm</p><p>ingh</p><p>am] </p><p>at 2</p><p>3:24</p><p> 17 </p><p>Nov</p><p>embe</p><p>r 20</p><p>14 </p></li><li><p>the particularly interesting disputed territories of Nagorno Karabakh, Nakhitchevan and</p><p>Zangezur (p. 163). However, it is regrettable that, on such delicate and sensitive matters, the</p><p>author uses almost exclusively Armenian sources and underuses the serious and exhaustive</p><p>works of Audrey Altstadt (p. 173).</p><p>Chapter 14 focuses on the year 1991, which is obviously an historical turning point for all</p><p>post-Soviet states. The author analyses the role and support of various international institutions</p><p>such as the UN, NATO and OSCE, and of neighbouring countries, whose contribution to the</p><p>emergence of the newly independent Caucasian states on the international scene has been</p><p>crucial. The author argues that from 1991 the debate over state building started again after</p><p>a 73-year break under Soviet rule (p. 212). To this reviewers mind, the collapse of the</p><p>Soviet Union indeed gave an impetus to the public debate over national identity and state</p><p>building in the Caucasus, but the peoples in the USSR had never really stopped, even</p><p>under the Soviets, questioning their own national identity within and outside the great</p><p>Soviet Union.</p><p>Chapters 15, 16 and 17 are respectively dedicated to the ongoing state-building processes in</p><p>Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan since 1991. The chronology that led these nations to emerge as</p><p>independent states lacks a deeper analysis of the various ideological trends that were in compe-</p><p>tition at the time. Debates and competition between conservative and progressive forces had an</p><p>impact on the processes of state building. Indeed, throughout the entire Caucasus region, as in</p><p>other parts of the former Soviet Union, the period between the perestroika year of 1986 and</p><p>1992/1993 was rich with debates involving all the very diverse social and political sides: nation-alists, religious, conservatives, pro-Russians, pro-Westerners. Alas, the book does not mention</p><p>these enriching moments of arising political and national self-awareness. In Azerbaijan, for</p><p>example, from the early years of the perestroika to the take-over by Heydar Aliyev in 1993,</p><p>Azeri nationalists, supporters of Pan-Turkism, Islamists, pro-Turkish, pro-Iranians, and pro-</p><p>Russians variously enjoyed a quite open political freedom. The author mentions the Azeri</p><p>leader Ebulfeyz Elchibey as an advocate for Pan-Turkism, but she fails to provide definition</p><p>and content for this multifold concept, which is a central and unavoidable notion in Caucasian</p><p>and Central Asian studies. One can only bemoan the authors overuse of sources from NGOs</p><p>compared to scientific studies: these latter works are included in the bibliography but rarely</p><p>used in the text.</p><p>The final two chapters, 19 and 20, deal with conflict resolution after 1991 in both the North</p><p>and South Caucasus. For the latter, the author reviews all the international initiatives and</p><p>mediation efforts from the UN, NATO, OSCE and EU, as well as all bilateral interferences</p><p>from neighbouring countries like Turkey, Iran and Russia (particularly the latter, which wants</p><p>to maintain its control over the South Caucasus). The Turks use their own Caucasian minority</p><p>groups to reinforce their influence in the North Caucasus and in Azerbaijan (p. 323). As for Iran,</p><p>they could be much more influential than they are now, and have apparently chosen to remain out</p><p>of the game (p. 324). Chapter 20 focuses on conflict resolution in the North Caucasus. Three</p><p>pages review the major conflicts and crises that affected or still affect the region since the</p><p>end of the USSR. It is regrettable that the author merely enumerates them rather than explaining</p><p>the reasons why they occurred. She fails to give a full picture of all the religious movements</p><p>that emerged in this period and got involved in local matters, or to decipher the rivalry</p><p>between the central federal government in Moscow and local forces. Chechnya and Daghestan,</p><p>where tensions have never ceased, certainly deserve in-depth research.</p><p>All in all, this work of Charlotte Hille is an overview of the numerous conflicts and crises</p><p>that have occurred in this troubled region throughout its entire history. More than a reference</p><p>book, it provides a detailed chronology of the conflicts and of the attempts to resolve them.</p><p>The exhaustive index and numerous maps add value to the whole.</p><p>468 Book reviews</p><p>Dow</p><p>nloa</p><p>ded </p><p>by [</p><p>Uni</p><p>vers</p><p>ity o</p><p>f B</p><p>irm</p><p>ingh</p><p>am] </p><p>at 2</p><p>3:24</p><p> 17 </p><p>Nov</p><p>embe</p><p>r 20</p><p>14 </p></li><li><p>Reference</p><p>Alstadt, A., 1992. The Azerbaijani Turks: power and identity under Russian rule. Stanford, CA: HooverInstitution Press.</p><p>Bayram Balci</p><p>Centre dEtudes et de Recherches Internationales, Paris</p><p>Email:</p><p># 2012, Bayram Balci</p><p>The genealogical construction of the Kyrgyz Republic: kinship, state and tribalism,</p><p>by David Gullette, Folkestone, Global Oriental, 2010, xii + 219 pp., 53.00 (hardcover),ISBN 9781906876104</p><p>In this book, David Gullette challenges conventional understandings of the role and influence of</p><p>clans and tribes in politics in Kyrgyzstan. Studies in the political sciences have long conceptu-</p><p>alized kinship groups as corporate agents to explain regime dynamics in Central Asia. Well-</p><p>known examples are the works of Kathleen Collins (2006) and Edward Schatz (2004). Gullette</p><p>aims to deconstruct such concepts and to highlight their foundation in theories that rest on</p><p>evolutionist assumptions, which lead observers to misread the social relevance of different</p><p>groups and networks in contemporary Central Asian society.</p><p>The problem under discussion is introduced with an account of the events of the Tulip Revo-</p><p>lution in March 2005. The author reconstructs the public debate around tribalism in that time as</p><p>a specific practice that political agents used to accuse opponents of corruption. This practice, the</p><p>author claims, must be understood as a consciously chosen strategy in a game played by political</p><p>elites. Elites compete for particular goals and loosely form factions, yet such factions do not</p><p>stand for corporate kinship groups as conceived in concepts of tribes and clans in the political</p><p>sciences.</p><p>To further develop his argument, Gullette employs the term genealogy in two different</p><p>ways. He first conceptualizes the social effects of memory practices that are used in Kyrgyzstan</p><p>to create relatedness, jeti-ata (the recounting of seven forefathers) and sanjyra (the recounting</p><p>of genealogical relationships), as forms of genealogical imagination. In Kyrgyzstan, people</p><p>practise jeti-ata and sanjyra to relate themselves to wider networks of relatives, networks that</p><p>in Kyrgyzstan are often referred to as uruu and uruk. These two terms have been inaccurately</p><p>translated as clan and tribe and led observers to assume the existence of corporate kinship</p><p>groups. Against this background, Gullette shows how relating to ones uruu and uruk indeed</p><p>serves for some individuals to add meaning and importance to their personal and wider commu-</p><p>nity identity. For example, moral guidance can be found when links to an idealized past are</p><p>established through sanjyra. The resulting relations, however, should not be mistaken as</p><p>indicators for the presence of corporate kinship groups. Here the author contrasts the effects</p><p>of everyday networks of help and assistance between close family members and colleagues</p><p>and friends with the often ritualized forms of generating links to the uruu and uruk. The</p><p>former he finds of much more significance to most people in Kyrgyzstan, thus further</p><p>questioning conventional perceptions of clans and tribes.</p><p>Gullette, secondly, uses genealogy as an analytical tool in a Foucauldian sense. He wants to</p><p>trace back the ideological foundations of the Akaev regimes efforts to create a Kyrgyz nation</p><p>Book reviews 469</p><p>Dow</p><p>nloa</p><p>ded </p><p>by [</p><p>Uni</p><p>vers</p><p>ity o</p><p>f B</p><p>irm</p><p>ingh</p><p>am] </p><p>at 2</p><p>3:24</p><p> 17 </p><p>Nov</p><p>embe</p><p>r 20</p><p>14 </p></li></ul>