The editor-in-chief of VK Alexei Vlasov and the director of the Caucasiology Center of the RSUH Ismail Agakishiyev discuss events of 1918-1920 in the Caucasus.
Alexei Vlasov
Events that took place in the South Caucasus in 1918-1920 were studied piecewise, in fact they are bad known among Russian readers, as March pogroms in Baku in 1918 and the Karabakh war in 1920 are pages of the history that they do not know and wouldn’t know because Azerbaijan is not a part of the Russian history anymore. Touching on the theme of “unlearned lessons” in the previous article (http://www.vestikavkaza.ru/analytics/politika/54823.html), I meant not Armenia or Azerbaijan, but Russia.
Ismail Agakishiyev
Yes, I think it is a serious methodological problem because the roots of some conflicts are not as deep as they seem to be. It isn’t necessary to study history of 200-300 years ago for understanding reasons and consequences of events happened in the South Caucasus in the late XXth century. And materials on events of March 30-31 in Baku are read as an acute text correlated with reality of the 1980-1990s, of course excluding specificity of the Civil War.
Alexei Vlasov
It is embarrassing that historic events are often understood through the political context. For example, the situation around developments in March 1918 is considered by the Armenian side as clashes between Bolsheviks and Musavat Party during which Armenians were neutral and didn’t participate in the clashes. The Azerbaijani side emphasizes ambiguity of Baku commissioners’ activity and participation of the Armenian armed troops in repressions against the Muslim population.
Of course, people who learn history only from Internet-publications or live in 26 Baku Commissioners Street are gradually losing interest to consideration of such problems. How could the truth be found in a crossroad of two opposite points of view when the Armenian side refers to the publicist Sergey Rafalovich and the Azerbaijani historians intensively cite Tadeush Sventokhovsky?
Ismail Agakishiyev
I believe we should rely on sources that were available in the 1960-1970s, for example, the materials from villages of the Shamakhin County on violence against the local population. There is the record of interrogation, statements by elders and inventory of destroyed property. How many people strive for finding out the truth and reading documents carefully? I understand your skepticism, as even less ancient developments, for example, Khodjaly, with a huge documental base and witnesses’ evidences are often mythologized.
Alexei Vlasov
We can speak a lot about the generation raised under new information conditions and lay responsibility of examination doubtful historic events on it. But where would it lead us a decade later? The identity desired by the countries of the post-Soviet space is only a cloud-castle.
Of course every national history has its own priorities, as they have different ends and all of them are happy. But if two histories contradict each other in key aspects of cooperation between the countries, it means mistrust to both of them. The global information space will explore the conflict. Separate warlike groups will falsify the history adjusting it to their interests. But in general the next generation will have all chances to see “truthful history of our people” as one of bad fruits of globalization.
Ismail Agakishiyev
However, there is a way out – it is high time to look at our common history objectively. But not political speculators should do it, but serious professional historians. VK provides such an opportunity.
