Raucous in the Caucasus: Intense fighting breaks out between Armenia and Azerbaijan
- Thread starter Sir Matt
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
Yes it's a very interesting region but also diverse. Ask an Egyptian is he is Arab and he gets upset. The Jordanians claim that they are the real Arabs of the Holy Prophet and not the Saudis who are actually Bedouins.Also, it's a forum, we're here to chat about stuff. I know! I just felt funny judging Erdogan on his work. As if I know better what to do if I were a head of state! But again, it's a forum, not a scientific journal.
I've never been to Turkey either actually. But having studied the ancient Middle East, and especially Turkey, back when I was a researcher, it's a region that really interests me.
The Turks are from the Steppes. You never know what tomorrow is going to bring. Today's enemies are best friends tomorrow.
As for Erdogan he WAS very popular when he became the Prime Minister of Turkey. He seemed to have been acting as a moderate and that was attractive to lots of Muslims in most countries. Plus he was pro Palestine.
yes no Turkish leader will accept a country for the Kurds but it is time that they are given a country of their own.
But now his antics have his popularity coming down among most Muslims. Obviously he is extremely unpopular in the Gulf and in Egypt. He is not longer popular in Asia either.
As for Libya yes it is a mess but the House of Representatives is the only elected body so it should have the legality instead of the UN recognised government in Tripoli. The UN recognised on the basis of the agreement by both parties but the stipulations have never been implemented.
As for Hafktar, yes he is a military man who lived in the US for a long time after a fall out with Gazzafi so no one knows his current background of his supporters.
It is surely a mess in the middle east and the fact that every known Prophet was sent to the Middle East shows that this has always been the hot spot in the World.
I wonder how this is going to end? The Russians are going to have a major say in this for sure.
You might be missing something.
First off, it's a civil war. By directly intervening militarily to prop one side up and save them, that side de facto becomes a Turkish puppet. That's not just my empty words. He wielded that influence to get the government to sign the Libya-Turkey maritime agreement which is in breach of the UN Law of the Seas (UNCLOS). A law that Turkey isn't signatory to, and therefore not bound by, but Libya is. In fact that was a Turkish requirement for intervention. That agreement causes problems for Libya itself and all its maritime neighbours but it's ok cause it suits Turkey I guess. Definitely not a puppet.
Haftar is a warlord and cnut. But people conveniently forget the UN-led political agreement was for a recognised government, the GNA (Government of National Accord) and an elected legislature, the HoR (House of Representatives). The GNA and the HoR fell out, the HoR members fled to Tabruk. Haftar was appointed by the HoR to lead the forces against the GNA. It's a civil war between Government and Parliament, both of which are UN recognised. If it wasn't Haftar, they'd likely appoint the next general with the highest approval in the military structure that is on their side.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Representatives_(Libya)#Libyan_Political_Agreement
Hence the agreement by everyone else was to stay out of it, enforce a weapons embargo and let them sort it out between them. NATO (of which Turkey is a member) agreed on an operation named Sea Guardian, to guard the Libyan waters and enforce the embargo on deliveries of heavy weapons by inspecting vessels.
https://mc.nato.int/missions/operation-sea-guardian
France had assigned a Frigate, named Courbet, to the NATO command for that operation. When a Turkish cargo ship (presumably loaded with heavy weapons) made for the Libyan coast, the Courbet went for the routine inspection only for 3 Turkish frigates to turn up and force the Courbet away by fixing weapons on it. Thus prompting France to pull out of the NATO mission, since another NATO member was acting on their own accord and in disregard of Alliance agreements.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-53262725
Anyhow, the assertion that a GNA backed by Turkey is better than HoR backed by the military needs more argumentation than "the GNA is UN recognised". That's not a qualifier. And the UN agreement wasn't for a government free off parliament, and one that is a foreign puppet. Both have lost their legitimacy with their actions. Things (as always) are complicated. The situation isn't black and white, it's more nuanced. If it appears black and white, you're probably not looking close enough.
Last edited:
Ah, I've been overestimating that, then. Come to think of it, I think the article I read was actually more about Turkish independence from others for their gas, not on them becoming a super provider.
Yes, this is the real mess - also because a Kurdish state would require territory from Iran, Turkey, and Irak. At least in Irak the Kurds already have their autonomous region, but it's full of oil, so full independence probably isn't on the cards there either.
correct Mike. Hafktar was just a figurehead for them. If not him, then it would have been someone else. He probably was the biggest name they could find. Furhtermore, since UAE and Egypt are backing them, I am sure the US behind the scenes are also alright with it. Even the French are silently backing them. Halifa's time spent in USA as an anti Gazzafi person would have counted a lot for him.
You're either misrepresenting or (much more likely) misunderstanding my post.
My intention was never to say what Erdogan and Turkey is doing are right or that one group in Libya are right and the other is wrong. As has been pointed out multiple times already, both sides are pretty terrible, both sides are corrupt and power hungry and both sides will, I'm sure, end up being no better for the Libyan people than what preceded them.
My point was that, as is often the case when any analysis of Erdogan's actions happen in western media (or indeed on here), the analysis does tend to be quite black and white. Basically Turkey (and whatever its actions are) bad, whatever the other side is doing, good. It is, of course, as you say, a bit more complex that that. I don't agree with Erdogan's actions in Libya but let's not pretend that he's rocked up to a stable situation and started arming one side unilaterally. France has been incredibly involved with Haftar from the beginning, training forces, potentially supplying weapons and flying operations over the country. All, I'm sure, in the name of peace and democracy. Not to mention the flagrant drone and airstrikes of the UAE in support of Haftar.
Again, never said that what Turkey is doing is good, anything but selfish and also a source of persistent trouble for the country.
And again, never said that one side is better than the other. But even the way you've framed that falls into what I was talking about and the framing of this particular debate. The GNA backed by Turkey...and the HoR backed by the army. Except of course, they're not just backed by the army. They're back by Egypt, UAE, Russia and seemingly France, though they all have different levels of what they're willing to admit they do.
My intention was not to make the situation black and white at all but instead to do the total opposite. It isn't quite as easy as Turkey bad, France, UAE and Egypt (if you're in bed with the latter 2 when it comes to ME politics, you might start to think there's something not 100% pure about your actions), good.
I can tell you exactly Haftar's background. He's a military dictatorial cnut who'll rob his people blind, just like the military men and various tinpot dictatorships of the Arab speaking countries have been doing for decades now.
As I said above, Erdogan's popularity in the ME Arabic countries tends to fall pretty neatly on what your own political beliefs are. It certainly isn't universal either way, though its certainly less than in the late 2000s or early 2010s when he was seen as relatively benign and a strong defender of Palestine and Muslim rights in general.
Agree about the Kurds, I'd give them a state tomorrow if I could. My point though wasn't that what Erdogan is doing to them is right, its that he's doing nothing different than what Turkish leaders of any political persuasion have been doing for decades. Which isn't to excuse him (or the Turks) but to say he isn't acting in a crazy, irrational way but, within the Turkish viewing glass, in the way probably most Turkish leaders would, even if their methods may be slightly different.
You do not need to tell me about Halifa Khaftar. I know who he is and what he is. I do not need to read about him to know it too. Erdogan is not popular about the Muslims anymore apart from in Qatar and people who support the Ikwan. Even the Egyptians who follow them are not enamoured of Erdogan anymore. The only reason why he has any popularity and a lot less than before is his support of the Palestinian people. Even the Palestinians themselves do not like him as per. They know he is doing for political mileage only and not because he loves them. Just like all others in the Middle East.
Yeah it seems I misunderstood your post. That is a much better representation.
We could go further. Haftar is a known CIA asset and the GNA has been infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood. Hence the Turkish support and the Egyptian/UAE ire who don't want MB run states to take hold. They don't want to see Islamist revolutionaries topple hereditary monarchies (Ba'athi or otherwise) and turn them into Sunni versions of Iran that are hostile to them.
There are no clean horses in this race. I don't know which side would make a better dictatorship for Libya (democracy is out of the question), but I do know that if Turkey hadn't intervened the war would likely be over by now. Haftar was camped outside of Tripoli. Erdogan saved the GNA and now the war goes on. Like the war in Yemen, most people have more to gain by a quick cessation of hostilities one way or another, compared to a protracted war. It'll likely be same old shit tinpot dictatorship whoever wins, anyway.
One thing I haven't figured out is why Russia are seemingly backing the American horse in this.
Last edited:
This isn’t particularly relevant to the discussion, but Kurds comprise the largest ethnic minority in Armenia today. I’d be interested to understand where they tend to stand in the midst of all this.
It’s interesting to compare the respective nationalist maps of “Greater Armenia” and “Kurdistan” - they overlap to a considerable degree.
It’s interesting to compare the respective nationalist maps of “Greater Armenia” and “Kurdistan” - they overlap to a considerable degree.
I do think, as you indicate, that this polarization about Erdogan is largely of his own making. He could be much more nuanced (for example by not pushing the islamization of Turkey they way he does), and have wider appeal. I think that's one of his blind spots that @2cents talked about - although obviously, for Erdogan this is a core issue of his work.
Agree on this as well. The situation has never been much different for the Kurds in the past decades. Actually, it could be considered that they were on the up a little earlier during Erdogan's leadership over Turkey, when their national political party was polling well. But that's now largely been crushed back to where things were before, as part of the repercussions following the coup. (If I'm not conflating things too much here.)
Afaik Yazidis are the largest minority by far (debatable whether Yazidis are Kurdish or not) and that's still only 1.2%. Which is ~30k people.
Armenia is one of the most homogeneous countries with >98% of the population being ethnic Armenians.
Erdogan was always an islamist at heart. The Turkey now is extremely different from before Erdogan. In fact it's now very different from when he was Prime Minister.
How I wish he was good enough to turn pro. Fenarbache wanted him but his dad refused to send him there. So he joined a local club.
The Russians don't seem that keen on Halifa now. He was a psyco even when he was young.
I think Putin is tweaking Erdogan' nose by supporting Halifa.
How I wish he was good enough to turn pro. Fenarbache wanted him but his dad refused to send him there. So he joined a local club.
The Russians don't seem that keen on Halifa now. He was a psyco even when he was young.
I think Putin is tweaking Erdogan' nose by supporting Halifa.
It’s hard to say, as Russia has close relationships (and some issues) with both. Opposing Turkey in another proxy-war wouldn’t be something too surprising, but I still think that Putin will try to be seen as a peacemaker instead of supporting either side openly. Funnily enough, Russia supplies weapons for both countries.
Edit: looks like I wrote a shorter and a less informative version of MadMike’s reply.
I visited Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh in 2008, and made a little trip to the ghost city of Agdam, an Azerbaijani town which was completely destroyed during the 91-94 war. Some pictures:
The two above were taken from the top of the minaret of this destroyed mosque:
Graveyards in Armenia were full of these tributes to their fallen martyrs:
The two above were taken from the top of the minaret of this destroyed mosque:
Graveyards in Armenia were full of these tributes to their fallen martyrs:
Thanks for the pics @2cents !
Yeah, they're great (and sad). I have always been fascinated by the geology of areas, as they shape their history in important ways (and inform my previous work on the ancient history of the area). That wasn't really your point I suppose, but it comes out very well as well.
Will reply to the other posts later when I have a bit more time (interesting conversation all round) but thanks so much for the pictures @2cents , really striking and very sad.
Insightful and very informative posting as always on this region!
Insightful and very informative posting as always on this region!
2cents, Thanks for the pictures. Are the pictures of the destroyed mosques in Armenia? Is there such a religious divide there? The Iranians seems to be on the side of Armenia so it doesn't look as this would become a religious war though the Turks are trying to make it so.
It’s funny you should mention that. I’ve found this particular region - east Turkey, southern Caucasus, north-west Iran - to be very striking geographically. It has really evocative landscapes - brown rolling hills, rocky gorges, rushing rivers, cypress trees, high and wide green steppes, and of course snowy mountains. It feels wild, spread out and big. It’s like how I imagine the Montana/Idaho/Wyoming part of the US to be, although I’m probably off the mark there.
No the mosque is one of the last buildings left standing in Agdam, it’s where visitors are taken so they can climb the minaret for a view of the destroyed city.
There is an Iranian government-sponsored mosque in Yerevan, complete with pictures of Khomeini and Khamenei. No issues there, as I’m sure you know Armenians have done alright for themselves in modern Iran and the two countries have good relations (it also maybe helps that Tehran is sometimes a bit suspicious of separatist sentiments in its own Azerbaijan region, although this hasn’t been a serious concern for quite some time if ever).
There’s no religious divide in Armenia because there are pretty much no Muslims left there. Mutual ethnic cleansing/mass flight has been the way many of these kinds of disputes have been settled in that region for quite some time now, and the result is that, as Mike pointed out above, Armenia is extremely ethnically/religiously homogeneous.
I don’t know enough about these two countries or the conflict to say to what degree they incorporate their religious identities into their nationalist programs. But my vague impression from speaking to Armenians is that it’s all a bit intertwined. How this plays out in propaganda, etc. I don’t know. Another impression I got is that there is pretty much no peace camp of any significance on either side - speaking about this conflict to seemingly reasonable people tends to bring out nationalist rhetoric of the most fanatical kind.
I guess it is why maybe Turkey is playing the religious card as there seems to be no Muslims in Armenia while Azerbaijan is Muslim. So sad about these conflicts.
yes!
Thanks.I need to catch up on this story. I just saw Kim Kardashian tweeting about it the other day...
If they are it's mostly for the foreign audience. Azeris are Turkmen and a brotherly state to Turkey. The Turkish domestic audience doesn't need any convincing to unequivocally side with Azerbaijan.
Indeed it is for foreign consumption. After all no love lost between the Armenians and the Turks.
There are reports - I don’t know how credible - that things aren’t going too well for the Armenians, and there is a real prospect of significant territorial conquest for Azerbaijan if things continue.
Yes this is what I have heard too. The Russians have refused to enter the battle on their side unlike the Turks on the side of Azerbaijan. I wonder what is Putin's game here.
Interesting how there is an actual regional war apparently going on , and so little of it is shown in the western media.
In Karabakh or in Armenia itself? Sorry, haven't seen any of this.
Karabakh and/or surrounding occupied territory I’d assume.
Yeah, it's what I assumed. Invading Armenia itself would take the situation to a whole new level, I'd think.
@Sir Matt - shouldn’t it be “Ruckus in the Caucasus” .... raucous is loud or something?
Doubt we’d see that even if the occupying Armenian forces completely collapse. There’s no Azeri claim or population in Armenia to justify it, no reason why Baku would push it.
Yep, totally agree. So I guess my question was unnecessary, but figured I'd ask anyway.
Nato says Turkey will calm the situation after Turkey deployed Al-Qaeda and ISIS affiliated mercenaries.
Guns and bombs are loud!
Interestingly, the census of the Russian Empire taken in 1897 revealed that Azeris comprised 37.5% of the population of the Erivan (Yerevan) Governorate, which comprised most of modern-day Armenia and parts of modern Turkey as well as the Nakhichevan enclave of modern Azerbaijan. They were actually a majority in Erivan District, and 42.6% in Erivan City itself. Today there are pretty much no Azeris in Armenia. Just one of many examples of how the demographics of this wider region have been in a constant state of flux for at least a century and a half due to mass flight, forced transfer, and genocide.Yep, totally agree. So I guess my question was unnecessary, but figured I'd ask anyway.
(edit): the above perhaps provides a warning for the Armenians of Karabakh as to what might lie in store for them if Azeri forces re-take the region.
Last edited:
I wonder what Putin's role is in this whole mess?
From what I understand, he's mostly trying to stop the fighting. He has interests in both Azerbaijan and Armenia, and would not want to get into a conflict with Turkey, which is actively supporting Azerbaijan. So for Putin, everything to go back to the status quo would probably be ideal. (Or a peaceful long-term resolution - but that doesn't seem to be in the cards.)
Is there ever a peaceful solution in anything that Erdogan is involved? I have never seen anyone who loves being arrogant or loves creating chaos more than him. Trump is a novice compared to him.