April 5, 2005. Theme: The language of enmity and peace

Alexander Iskandaryan. Cruel Azerbaijanis and cunning Armenians.

Well, now, Arif, I cannot disagree with you. This is as regards the democratic character of the EU and other brilliant things. Then, why have you attacked the lady? What does the expulsion of Armenians from Georgia or from elsewhere have to do with anything here? When states are built on the basis of ethnic rather than civil consciousness, mono-national states are internally more stable. Is this a secret? In my opinion, not to mention theorists - from Gellner to Kelduri - the history of our region more than proves that. In our region, let me remind you, there exist generally monoethnic and rather homogeneous - from the cultural standpoint, Azerbaijan and Armenia and polyethnic, polycultural Georgia. As far as the stereotypes are concerned, yes, they are widespread, especially among the young people who have never seen a live Armenian (Azerbaijani). Are the stereotypes malicious? They are normal. Armenians are close knit, self-interested, cunning, dishonest, hardworking for themselves, vindictive. It's a typical stereotype of a trading minority described by, for instance, professor Dyatlov with tens of ethnic examples - from Africa to the Middle East.

As for stereotypes- "Azerbaijanis are wild, blood-thirsty, cruel, predisposed to mob violence, devoid of their own culture"-this is also a typical stereotype held by an agricultural, settled people about nomadic herders. It's normal. Are the images evil? Well there was a war; the existence of these images now is not ill will but a natural phenomenon. We have to understand that, to fight against it, instead of making pronouncements about our humanity. We are human. That is why we have stereotypes. It's characteristic of human beings. Have you ever spoken with a Frenchman about Germans while having a drink? I've had the opportunity. Armenians and Azerbaijanis don't compare!

Rasim Musabekov. Minimal political correctness.

I have to note pessimistically that without real progress in the process of the peaceful settlement of the conflict I do not expect any considerable positive strides away from hostile, often irrational propaganda. The only thing that is possible to do is to ensure minimal political correctness. I would like to emphasize that receive a packaged image of each other for the most part through Russian-language publications, and TV and radio broadcasts.

In these, one can still sense a degree of caution vis-à-vis possible external reaction, but the publications and broadcasts in the national language cast political correctness away completely and absolutely breathe zoological hatred. Our "experts" in this area do not conceal, and always emphasize, that they are following the example of Armenians, who have cultivated hatred toward the Turks (with whom they associate Azerbaijanis as well) for decades. I believe that while the generation that has had the experience of good neighborly relations is alive, the influence of the propaganda of enmity is, to some extent, limited, but children and teenagers who have grown up in a different atmosphere may become fully intoxicated with the poison of ethnic separation. With such a burden it is hard to imagine living as neighbors, let alone living together. What should we do about this situation? I am at a loss myself.

Laura Baghdasaryan. To Rasim Musabekov.

One thing that is not bad is that our president, in contrast to yours, has made some corrections to his statements. This means that it's time to come into accord with society. Meanwhile, Aliev Junior, for example, didn't even give a thought to apologizing to the scientific elite of Azerbaijan after having made a respected Azerbaijani academician stand in the corner for including the names of those Armenians who have earned a certain merit in the formation and the development of your country in the Encyclopedia of Azerbaijan. I don't quite understand what this means. Does it mean that Aliev Junior feels no need to come into accord with the dominant views of his own society? Or does it mean that he doesn't give a damn about his society's views? It is because of such things that the view that if at some point Karabakh finds itself under the jurisdiction of Azerbaijan there won't be a single Armenian left there is growing stronger in Armenia . This is what I mean when I talk about leaving some space for informational comfort.

Yelena Kurdyan

I do not know about publications in the national language in Azerbaijan , but the majority of Armenian-language publications can hardly be accused of "zoological" hatred. In continuation of the approach Laura suggest, I do not see any special difference in the approaches of the Armenian-language and the Russian-language newspapers when comparing publications in our press. Thus in the case of Armenia , at least, I think it would be incorrect to talk about caution vis-à-vis possible external reaction would be incorrect. And what is noticeable is the interest in each other-perhaps it is colored with mistrust, fear, and jealousy, but this interest exists and I think if there is good will this interest can become the base on which it will be possible to start building a dialogue.

Rasim Musabekov. To Laura Baghdasaryan.

At the meeting during which issues related to the republication of the encyclopedia were discussed, Ilham Aliev was outraged not because of the Armenian names but because his father did not appear in the materials on the end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s, or rather that he appeared in the negative context of "Alievism". It was perfectly clear in Azerbaijan that he only spoke about the Armenians to not leave the impression that he only cared about his surname, and that is why no significance was attached to this fact. But it is interesting whether many Armenian names will remain in the Azerbaijani encyclopedia and, vice versa, whether many Azerbaijani names will remain in the Armenian encyclopedia and with negative or positive signals. Unlike newspapers and magazines, encyclopedias are seldom reissued, once in thirty or forty years and, therefore, it is important to be scrupulously accurate. Public attention regarding this question is important and you are right, Laura, to turn to this subject.

Arif Yunusov. People and stereotypes are eternal and unified!

Stereotypes have always existed, and will exist as long as different people exist. I completely agree with Alexander's examples about Europeans. Today Armenians and Azerbaijanis can be enemies or colleagues within a project, but it is extremely difficult to picture them simply as friends. As for love and marriage - only as exceptions and in a neutral territory. We can talk about the degree of stereotyping by journalists and their involvement in disseminating stereotypes. And in this respect Azerbaijani journalists do more stereotyping; I agree with Laura on this. Moreover, this is exactly why the monitoring on the Azerbaijani part was quite difficult, for in the beginning it involved journalists. But they sincerely did not understand many things and it was even necessary to change the team. But I disagree that in the Armenian media there is no zoological image of the Azerbaijani. Believe me, from the point of view of an Azerbaijani -there is more than enough!

Karine Nalchadjyan

Concerning ethnic incompatibility: In the life of ethnoses there can be situations and periods when the level of interethnic tensions reaches the point of crisis. In such cases they, indeed, become neurotic up to the limit and yes, in a sense, incompatible. Such critical situations require constructive intervention- external and internal - after which yesterday's opponents and enemies become loving neighbors. By the way, Armenians and Azerbaijanis are able very much to live peacefully with each other when they are "guests" of other states where there is no ethnic hierarchy between them. Europe solved its ethnic problems a long time ago. Today's Austria is not considering claims on Hungary simply because at one time they existed as one monarchy. Czechs and Slovaks also lived together but have parted with each other peacefully and painlessly. We and you need time to travel this inevitable path and to adapt ourselves. And for now, we are what we are, we have what we have, and, to tell the truth, I don't think we are going to change in the near future. As a psychologist I am sure that the psychological resources for the establishment of normal, confident human relations between us have not been exhausted - we just need a "therapeutic" intervention.

Rauf Mirkadirov. I am an optimist.

My optimism is based on specific features of the mentality of our nations. Yes, Azerbaijanis are hot-tempered; their first reaction is not always appropriate. That's true. However, as a whole, Azerbaijanis are fairly tolerant and easy to appease. As far as I understand, Armenians are passionate in contrast to Azerbaijanis. Perhaps, this feature was the driving force behind the expansion of the "living space" as soon as the necessary prerequisites for this aim appeared. But, on the other hand, Armenians orient themselves very well to the changing world; As a rule, they adjust quickly to new situations, new conditions. Therefore, unlike Karine and Kocharyan, I think that our nations have enough resources to live in peace and cooperate actively. I fully agree with Rasim and Alexander that today it is necessary to gradually move in the direction of the settlement of the conflict with the subsequent adjustment of economic cooperation.

Yelena Kurdiyan. He who is strong is just [might makes right], and the weak will not survive.

Rauf, you know what surprises me most?! Armenians do not refers to themselves as the winning party as much as many Azerbaijanis talk about their defeat. I apologies beforehand if what I'm saying hurts the feelings of some of our distinguished interlocutors, but I have the impression that the feeling of victimization, defeat, resentment is being specially cultivated among the Azerbaijanis and what is the most annoying - and this is exactly the case - is that the intellectual elite creates the image first and then they themselves start to believe in it. Well let's be honest - all Nagorno Karabakh has won is its security!!! Nothing more!!! The territories that you call "occupied" and we call "liberated" were bridgeheads for the Azerbaijani Army from which the peaceful population of Stepanakert and other towns and villages was systematically destroyed.

And the phrase about the ethnic incompatibility mentioned in the forum was uttered within the context of security, of guarantees of the free existence of the Armenian population of Nagorno Karabakh. You write about the Armenian understanding of a compromise (independence, guaranteed overland connection with Armenia ). Is it unfair, or is it, in fact, just a guarantee of existence?! It is not "He who is strong is just;" it is "he who is weak will not survive." Thus, in the war, the Armenians simply had to make the just strong, so as not to allow Azerbaijan to prove that "he who is strong is just."

Alexander Iskandaryan. Then democratic ethnic cleaning is different?

Rauf, you have misunderstood me. I said that the image of the enemy in its present form is, substantially, a consequence of the conflict and, hence, it can start to soften with the softening of the conflict. That's all. For example, that nice Czech Republic - what is it? It is the result of massacring the Gypsies, burning the Jews in ovens, and the deporting Sudeten Germans. The result is a mononational country which is building a civil society with such an enthusiasm that it takes one's breath away. In every Kalsbad and Marienbad. That is, excuse me, Karlovy Vary and Mariánské Lázne. That is possible now. The dead are no longer present, and somehow nobody applies the phrase "ethnic cleaning" to the Czechs. Beautiful... And in fact, it's not five hundred years that have passed, only fifty. And Croatia is accepted into the in EU only ten years after they massacred the Republic of Serbia . And so on. Ask the Czech Republic if was "necessary" or "unnecessary to" move the Germans out of the Sudetenland ? It will have a noble little cry, brush away its greedy tears.. And then ask whether it is necessary to return a house in Karlovy Vary to its rightful owner. Just warn me not to be around when you do....

Azad Isazade. This conference is a continuation of the information war.

I have a strange impression that our conference is a continuation of the information war. I may be subjective, but our Armenian colleagues, in my opinion, are more aggressive (though according to the results of the war it should the other way round). The statements about Azerbaijan 's capacity to liberate half of Karabakh, and about Armenians dividing Azerbaijan in half are self-explanatory. And the "missile attack", generally speaking, smells slightly of blackmail. There has been said a lot about Azerbaijani propaganda and anti-Armenian sentiment, but I don't think the two societies differ too much from each other. Reading the statements of my colleagues on both sides, I recall how once, when they were working on the psychological rehabilitation of refugee children, some international organizations offered to work on the "removal" of the image of the enemy. Unfortunately, we had to turn the offer down, since it wasn't clear what the fate of the conflict would be. If there is peaceful resolution of the problem, Armenians and Azerbaijanis will have to live side by side in Karabakh, and the image of the enemy will certainly have to be eradicated. But what should we do if there is no peaceful way out? Remove the image of the enemy and subject another generation of people to risk? I don't know.

Arif Yunusov. On the genocide, the defeat, and the Armenization of Azerbaijanis.

About the syndrome of winners and losers. It has been alleged that Armenians talk about themselves as winners much less than the Azerbaijanis talk about defeat. I shall allow myself to not agree with this. First, even at this forum the main factor in the position of the Armenian side is: "We won and the Azerbaijanis should to reckon with it". True, lately, and at this forum as well, there have been no direct talk about that, but this is the corner stone of any proposal from the Armenian side. Let alone the reactions of your patriots from Yerkrapah and similar organizations. As soon as compromises and concessions are mentioned in the negotiating process, discussion of the sacrifices made and the impossibility of serious concessions on the part of the winners begins. They say nothing like that has ever happened in history. Haven't you read such statements? Moreover, more than once, more than twice, and I am sure I will have more occasions, I've happened to read articles in Armenia in which the authors did not understand why the Azerbaijanis do not want to acknowledge their defeat. True, in the first half of the 1990s in Azerbaijan it was not acceptable for the media to talk about many things, in particular, that the Azerbaijanis had lost the war.

They would write: Because of bribery among domestic politicians, Armenians have temporarily occupied the territories and it is necessary to get them back. Then the first statements about defeat began to appear; they were perceived with very painfully, but now they talk about it. Yes, certain changes in the mentality of Azerbaijanis have indeed taken place. For example, in 1992 we would discuss in the media and elsewhere what to call what had happened in Khodjali. We would use such terms as "slaughter", "pogrom", "massacre", "atrocity". I remember how all of a sudden one refugee from Armenia suggested using the term "genocide" in the media. My God, everyone pounced on him! Genocide, in the understanding of Azerbaijanis, could happen only to Armenians but not to Azerbaijanis. They saw something humiliating in this word: they slaughter you and you don't resist. But since Geidar Aliev came to power a different kind of propaganda has started to happen-Azerbaijani weeping about the lost territories has begun, something that I call the Armenization of Azerbaijanis has started to take place. And the terms "genocide" and "defeat" among others have begun to be widely used.