The National Self (and the Other)

National identity is the essence of a nation before its formation, as a territory without its own identity cannot be considered a nation. According to Oxford English Dictionary, national identity is “a sense of a nation as a cohesive whole, as represented by (the maintenance of) distinctive traditions, culture, linguistic or political features, etc.” (n.d.). By sharing the same values, people from the same nation have formed their own unique type of bonding. In contrast, some have argued that the members of a nation were molded into a whole due to the influence of “others.” The New York Times has noted that individuals tend to adapt part of the national identity as their own, and any threats to this identity will be perceived as a threat to its own citizen (New York Times, 2021). Through this post, we will explore the key aspects of Azerbaijan’s national identity, and how the influence of ‘others’ has influenced the nation’s identity.

The formation of Azerbaijan’s identity

Currently, there are two leading theories about the initial formation of Azerbaijan’s ethnic groups. While both agreed that Azerbaijanis are part of the Turkic people; the first theory stated that they are solely Turkified Caucasus, but the other suggested that they are a combination of the indigenous Caucasian and Iranian people in the Caucasus, and the migrants of Oghuz Turks descendent from Central Asia (Meneshian, 2021). In either case, the Azerbaijan’s national identity was initially built around the Turkic ethnicity. In 1905, the Müsavat Party led a revolution against the Armenian Tatar with the intention of gaining its ‘independence of the Muslim nations,’ and unification within the Pro-Pan-Turkism community (Meneshian, 2021). 

Since the 19^th century, Azerbaijan has been in constant dispute and war over the Nargorno-Karabakh region with Armenia. As such, it would not be a stretch to consider Armenia as their greatest significant other. It all begins in 1813, Nagorno-Karabakh, a region with a population consisting of 95% Armenian was first acquired by Russia. Taking into consideration the fact that the Nargono-Karabakh region is landlocked between Armenia and Iran, the Soviet government’s decision to establish the region as Azerbaijan’s autonomous oblast in 1923 was questionable at best (Encyclopaedia Brittanica, 2020). From Azerbaijan’s perspective, they are facing two significant others according to Triandafyllidou’s definition: the first one being Armenia, the external significant other, and the latter being the Nagorno-Karabakh region, an internal significant other (1998).

It was not until 1991 when Azerbaijan declared its independence and regained its autonomous status from the Soviet Union (University of Central Arkansas, n.d.) – a major step towards forming its own national identity instead of sharing its values with the Soviet Union – which can be categorized as a multinational other according to Triandafyllidou’s definition (1998). However, as the year of the Soviet Union ruling fades away, the most immediate concern is that there are no longer any higher power to keep them in check hence, the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia reemerged (Schrek and Johnson, 2014).

Armenia is a nation independent of Azerbaijan who is trying to take back their nation’s irredenta, the Nagorno-Karabakh region, as such, it can also be considered an external significant other to Azerbaijan. With 99% of the ethnic-Armenian in the region voting for independence from Azerbaijan in a referendum held in 1991 (University of Central Arkansas, n.d.), supporting Armenia are the residents of the Nagorno-Karabakh region, an internal significant other – an ethnic minority – seeking to rejoin Armenia. Despite having the option to satisfy both Armenia and Armenian-majority region, Azerbaijan decided to engage in a two-ways conflict, both internally and externally. Since then, the Azerbaijani and ethnic-Armenian have been in active war from 1992 to 1994 (University of Central Arkansas, n.d.) where one tried to protect its territory, and the other to take back its irredenta. Ultimately, to the ethnic-Armenian residents, the Nagorno-Karabakh region became “a self-declared country whose independence is not internationally recognized” (Encyclopaedia Brittanica, 2020).

After the war settled, Azerbaijan actively participated in using created narratives such as “nationalist rhetoric, the feeling of injustice, and the anti-Armenian sentiment” to incite hate against the ethnic-Armenian, in an attempt to make “the Azerbaijani national identity stronger by reflection” (Meneshian, 2021). The action taken by Azerbaijan is certainly interesting as promoting the narrative against the ethnic-Armenian also meant that they have given up on trying to persuade the ethnic-Armenian within their Nagorno-Karabakh region. It could be said that Azerbaijan finally realized that the attempt to integrate the ethnic-Armenian into their nation is a fruitless one.

Additionally, according to Meneshian, the minorities such as Lezgin and Talysh were not assimilated into the nation. To overcome the ethnic differences, the regime turned to their national border, promoting it as their identity (2021). The regime’s decision to shift their identity from ethnicity to territorial control, one that encompasses all ethnicity within the nation was ultimately, an effective action to build an identity as they no longer have to choose an ethnicity to promote in an ethnically diverse nation.

Meneshian stated that Pan-Turkism returned to Azerbaijan due to the Azeri nationalist and Ebulfez Elcibey rising to power in the 1992 with an intention to turn back to culture and politics as their identity. Their effort went against the regime’s intention of defining their identity by their territory and is another instance of internal significant other attempting to undermine the regime’s effort to unite the nation’s identity. Despite all of them sharing similar cultural values, the citizens split themselves into two main groups, the Azeri and Turkish who shared linguistic ties, and the Caucasian. In 1993, Heydar Aliyev replaced Elcibey and reimpose the territorial nationalism state ideology which includes all citizen within the nation. Unfortunately, Regardless of Aliyev’s attempt to reestablish the territory-as-national-identity ideology and the healthy relationship between Azerbaijan and Turkey, the phrase “one nation, two states” dilutes Azerbaijan identity with the Turkic.

According to Tokluoglu, since Yerlicilik, or “favoring local loyalties,” was argued to “dominates all political relations, it is far more important than ethnic division as a reason for uncertainty about the future of Azerbaijan.” (2005, p. 729) The existence of Yerlicilik, takes an odd role as an internal significant other. Despite the Azerbaijanis having common Turkic identity and speaking their language, their value made it more difficult for the Azerbaijan official to establish a common culture to form an identity for the nation when their core values differ from region to region.

Conclusion

Azerbaijan is a country with diverse ethnic identity, and a culture that makes it more difficult to accept a common leader that is also shared with the Turkic. Its identity has been mostly threatened both internally and externally by the ethnic-Armenian over the Nagorno-Karabakh region. However, Aliyev’s attempt to shift the national identity to a more defined aspect like the nation’s border was their only logical attempt to unify the Azerbaijanis – regardless of their culture or ethnicity – to see themselves as part of Azerbaijan.

Word Count: 1147

References

Council on Foreign Relations. (2022, February 4). Nagorno-Karabakh conflict | global conflict tracker. Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved February 5, 2022, from https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/nagorno-karabakh-conflict 

Enclyclopaedia Britannica (n.d.). Nagorno-Karabakh. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved January 26, 2022, from https://www.britannica.com/place/Nagorno-Karabakh

Goyushov, A. (2018, September 26). The language of Azerbaijan: Turkish or Azerbaijani? Baku Research Institute.from https://bakuresearchinstitute.org/en/azerbaijani-turk-dili-yoxsa-azərbaycan-dili/

Meneshian, A. (2021, February 4). Exploring the Azerbaijani National Identity: a historical analysis Institute of Middle East, Central Asia and Caucasus Studies. from https://mecacs.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/2021/exploring-the-azerbaijani-national-identity-a-historical-analysis/

Oxford English Dictionary (n.d.). National identity, Retrieved February 1, 2022, from https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/125287?redirectedFrom=national+identity#eid35384451

Oxford English Dictionary (n.d.). Nationalism, Retrieved February 1, 2022, from https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/125289?redirectedFrom=nationalism#eid

Shreck, C., & Johnson, L. (2014, August 6). Explainer: The nagorno-karabakh conflict. Explainer: the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Retrieved February 6, 2022, from https://eurasianet.org/explainer-the-nagorno-karabakh-conflict 

The New York Times. (2018, February 28). How Nations Make Up National Identities | NYT - The Interpreter [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9qF6FvwrHI&t=1s

Tokluoglu, C. (2005). Definitions of national identity, nationalism and ethnicity in post-Soviet Azerbaijan 1990s. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28(4), 722-758. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.731.5939&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Triandafyllidou, A. (1998). National identity and the 'other'. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 21(4), 593-612. https://doi.org/10.1080/014198798329784

University of Central Arkansas. (n.d.). Azerbaijan/Nagorno-Karabakh (1991-present). Political Science. Retrieved January 26, 2022, from https://uca.edu/politicalscience/dadm-project/europerussiacentral-asia-region/azerbaijannagorno-karabakh-1991-present