CHAPTER 12
Previous attempts to construct a Caucasian home
For a Peaceful Caucasus
My own recommendations
Comment
The Community of Transcaucasian States
Conclusion

Peace in the Caucasus
"The Caucasian nations have to realise that while fighting against each other they can never become free and independent. In the eyes of the outside world such a region deserves not freedom but permanent occupation by a greater power and its armed forces ... I would recommend all the autonomous republics of the Caucasus to unite within one republic, which existed under the name, ‘the Republic of Mountain Peoples' " [1] (A. Avtorkhanov, Sovietologist)
To achieve 'Peace in the Caucasus' is not merely to conclude constitutional settlements to the conflicts in Chechnya, Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and North Ossetia. The Caucasus has problems which are far broader than these. To assist in the process of restoration of shattered economies and broken relationships, the region as a whole, I believe, will need to establish international organisations/conferences of peace and security, to solidify any more 'municipal' gains.
The extent of conflict in the Caucasus since the break-up of the former Soviet Union, the continued threat of its re-ignition and even the (very real) danger of a wholescale Caucasian war, has, undoubtedly, concentrated the minds of the 'political establishment' both within and without. One thing is certain, nobody wants another Karabakh or Chechnya.
The South Caucasus is a fairly self-contained region, so much of it enclosed by sea and mountain. Despite this, if peace and security are to be maintained, mechanisms will have to be formulated in order to ensure cooperation and active relationships with their nearest neighbours. To the north, in the Russian north Caucasus, are republics such as Chechnya and Dagestan. To the west is Turkey and to the south Iran. Peace will not be secured if any of these feel excluded from the region.
It is true that, during the past 150 years, the conception of what would, in effect, be a 'Caucasian Home' has derived, almost entirely, from the mountainous peoples of the Caucasus range, both north and south. Azerbaijanis and Armenians (to the south) and Cossacks (and Russians) to the north, have played a relatively minor role in its formulation. While this is still, broadly, the case today - the Azeris fear that it could lead to a dangerous mothballing of the Karabakh issue [2]; the Armenians see it as a pan-Turkic Islamic front [3] - there is an increasing recognition among all sides that the present, rather 'raw' constitutional framework is not sustainable.
The desire for the establishment of a Caucasian Home has come, particularly, from Abkhazia, Chechnya and Georgia. President Shevardnadze of Georgia has promoted the idea, particularly since the Kislovodsk summit (June 1996), by way of his 'For a Peaceful Caucasus' programme. In February 1997, he even established a commission to 'monitor, streamline and develop' the provisions of the Declaration adopted at the summit [4]. The search for a Caucasian Home has also been strongly promoted by Chechnya. For example, Chechen First Deputy Prime Minister (recently appointed Foreign Minister), Movladi Udugov has called for the establishment of an organisation for the Caucasus modelled upon the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe - an idea that received the backing of Abkhaz President, Vladislav Ardzinba, on 7 June 1997. Ardzinba claimed that such an organisation could become 'a reliable tool' for preventing possible conflicts and settling existing problems in the region [5]. The failure to solidify any of these, however, has been very much the product of conflict, mutual suspicion and competition. Georgia is, ostensibly, still at war with Abkhazia; Groznyy has a strained relationship with the present authorities in Tbilisi [6]; and Georgia aspires to 'take a lead' in the Caucasus [7].
Of course, while these are the contemporary aspirations (/models), we should not forget that the last 150 years have seen many attempts to create some kind of 'Caucasian Home', if not, at the very least, Caucasian unity. Although they have been, largely, in vain, they have at least demonstrated the desire, among the vast majority of the peoples of the region, to set aside antagonism.

PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS TO CONSTRUCT A CAUCASIAN HOME
For centuries the entire Caucasus, or part of it, has been, at the same time or different periods of time, part of Iran, Turkey and Russia. Turkey sees the Caucasus within the Great Turkic state of 'Turan' [8]. Iran sees the possibility of some Caucasian states within a union with Iran and some Central Asian republics. Russia still sees the 'Transcaucasus' (the term itself is a product of past conflict with Turkey and Iran [9]), other than merely the North Caucasus, as just its own.
The idea of the unity of the Caucasus was first proclaimed, on 1 May 1917, at the First Congress of Mountain Peoples in Vladikavkaz. The Congress established the 'Union of the United Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus'. In November 1917, the 'Mountain Republic' was established and, on 11 May 1918, the independence of the 'North Caucasian Republic' and its secession from Russia were declared. The Republic comprised: Dagestan, Checheno-Ingushetia, Ossetia, Kabarda, Kara-chayevo-Balkaria, Abkhazia and Adygea. A territory of 6.5 million people.
Imperial and Soviet Russia has not proved sympathetic to the idea of Caucasian unity. The Caucasian war from 1817-1864, culminating in the national liberation movement of Imam Shamil, resulted in the massacre and deportation of hundreds of thousands of Caucasians [10]. History 'repeated' itself, under Stalin, between October 1943 and April 1944, with, once again, systematic brutality [11]. This is not to mention his previous repressions, deportations and executions of those with sympathies towards the idea of a Caucasian confederation.
Following the establishment of Soviet power in the Caucasus, the 'Mountain Government' was forced to emigrate, finding exile in Prague, Paris and Warsaw. On 14 July 1934, in Brussels, representatives of the national centres of the North Caucasus, Georgia and Azerbaijan signed a treaty, the Pact of the Confederation of the Caucasus, which, additionally, found a place for Armenia [12]. They also established a Committee for the Independence of the Caucasus and a Council of the Confederation of the Caucasus, at that time the region's 'leading' body in diplomatic activities.
On 9 May 1984, the US Congress adopted, 'An Address to the Peoples of the North Caucasus to Celebrate the 60th Anniversary of the Declaration of their Independence' [13]. For fifty years the outside world had forgotten the region's struggle. However, it was to be another five years until the First Congress of the Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus (25-26 August 1989) was to collect (in Sukhumi, Abkhazia). During the Congress, the Assembly of Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus was formed by analogy with the Union of the United Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus of 1917.
The Second Congress of the 'Assembly' was held on 13-14 October 1990, in Nalchik (Kabardino-Balkaria). Principal among its decisions, the Congress determined that the time had come for implementing a project on establishing a new state structure of the North Caucasus. Special attention was drawn to the unity of the Caucasian nations as manifested, on the 11 May 1918, with the proclamation of the North Caucasus Republic [14].
The Third Congress of the Assembly was held, once again in Sukhumi, from the 1-2 November 1991. Partaking in the Congress were representatives of the Abaza, Abkhazian, Avar, Adyghei, Akin Chechen, Darginian, Kabardian, Lak, Ossetian (both North and South), Circassian, Chechen and Shapsug peoples. Representatives of the 'popular political movement of Georgia' (those supporting, the then President, Zviad Gamsakhurdia) were also present. Indeed one of these, a member of parliament (unidentified), called the whole Caucasus to 'unite into one fist'. At the suggestion of the 'deputies', the Assembly of Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus was transformed later, in 1992, in Groznyy, into the Confederation of Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus (CM PC).
The Third Congress stated in particular: 'It is quite possible that at an early stage, all the Caucasian autonomous republics and provinces (oblasts) will declare themselves sovereign states. And after such an act of national self-determination, most probably they will start uniting in a new union - the Confederation of the Caucasus; which will be composed of the following equal states: Chechnya, Dagestan, Georgia, Ingushetia, Ossetia, Kabarda, Karachayevo-Balkaria, Abkhazia, Adygea and others' [15]. The Third Congress signed an agreement and adopted a 'Declaration on a Confederative Union of the Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus'. It was decided to form the Caucasian Parliament, a Court of Arbitration, the Defence Committee, the Committee of the Caucasian Association and other structures of the Confederation, with its headquarters in Sukhumi [16].
At an Extraordinary Congress of Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus, on 4 October 1992, it was decided that the CMPC be, 'once again', renamed, to the Confederation of Peoples of the Caucasus (CPC). In its concluding declaration, the Congress called upon the leaders of the North Caucasian republics to denounce the Russian Federation Treaty as 'not in keeping with the national interests of the peoples of the North Caucasus' and further recommended that all public-political organisations and movements demand that the leaders of their republics strive for real independence, conclude a treaty of political, economic and cultural cooperation among themselves, recognise the independence of Chechnya, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and create a joint regional security force on the basis of their national guards. The declaration added that should the republics' leaders refuse to take these measures, the Confederation intended to organise peaceful actions of mass protest and civil disobedience, demanding the resignation of the anti-popular leaders and the organisation of early elections to the republics' parliaments. The Congress, also, demanded that all Russian troops be withdrawn from the region immediately [17].
This Congress was held amid mounting concern, both in the Kremlin and among the official leadership of the North Caucasus republics, as to the 'CPC's' increasing role and 'legitimacy' in the region. Armed detachments of the CMPC were actively involved in the war in Abkhazia, and the arrest of its President, Musa Shanibov, upon this pretext, had led to a state of emergency being declared in Nalchik (Kabardino-Balkaria) [18]. Answering a question from an ITAR-TASS correspondent about his attitude toward the Confederation, Valeriy Kokov, President of Kabardino-Balkaria, said that he did not know of any such organisation: 'We have nothing to do with the Confederation of Mountain Peoples. It is an organisation of some sort of kindred spirits who were not delegated by the peoples they consider to be its members. Moreover, we intend to state this officially, so that all Russia will know that our republic has no official relationship to that organisation' [19].
The CPC kept a relatively low profile until its congress of the 24-25 August 1996, in Vladikavkaz (North Ossetia). While the resolution adopted at the end of the congress was important; calling for a prompt and peaceful end to the war in Chechnya, and condemning those who it accused of deliberately trying to stir-up inter-ethnic hostility in the region [20]; what was, undoubtedly, of greatest significance was the comprehensive attendance of the Cossacks of southern Russia and the 'blessing' of (former) North Ossetian President, Akhsarbek Galazov. He said: 'So far as I am concerned, I support any public organisation that works for peace and consolidation of friendship and cooperation among nations, and that supports the idea of strengthening the united, indivisible and multinational Russia' [21].

FOR A PEACEFUL CAUCASUS
While the 'unofficial' (largely) authorities of the Caucasus have attempted, recently, to rework the inheritance of the 'Mountain Republic', the 'official' Caucasus has increasingly worked, separately, on its own model. At the head of this latter campaign is Tbilisi. President Eduard Shevardnadze of Georgia has developed his own specific model to develop a Caucasian Home, during the past two years, in his 'For a Peaceful Caucasus' initiative. First presented, on 28 February 1996, before the employees of the Georgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the heads of Georgian diplomatic missions accredited abroad, according to Chief State Foreign Policy Advisor, Archil Gegeshidze the initiative is based on six 'fundamental principles': 'the restoration of the sovereignty of the states within the framework of internationally recognised borders; the security of their territorial integrity; the safe and guaranteed return of refugees to their permanent place of residence, and respect at all times in all places for man's rights and basic freedoms, including the right of individuals belonging to national minorities; cooperation in the further development of transportation and other communications and their safety, all-round cooperation on issues protecting the Caucasus's unique environment and eliminating the consequences and results of natural disasters and armed conflicts and in developing international tourism; ethnic and confessional tolerance; a protective, respectful attitude toward the cultural linguistic diversity of the Caucasus, the world's richest reserve; active support for international projects; and the attraction and encouragement of foreign investments' [22].
Speaking during an interview for the Georgian, Russian-language newspaper, Svobodnaya Gruziya (Free Georgia) (published on 22 May 1997), Teymuraz Mosiashvili, Chairman of the State Office of the CIS and a Peaceful Caucasus in the State Chancellery noted that the 'For a Peaceful Caucasus' initiative contained 'a number of specific plans in such areas of work as propaganda, the creation, ultimately, of a common information space for all countries of the region, the broadening of contacts with the power structures and representatives of foreign states and international organisations accredited in Georgia, use of the facilities of public diplomacy, the development of cultural and scientific ties, propaganda of the idea of the historical community of the Caucasus, the establishment of closer economic relations between countries of the region, study of the Caucasus market and so forth'. Responding to a question about the role of the initiative in the matter of 'Caucasian' conflict settlement, Mosiashvili replied: The achievement of peace in the Caucasus is the essence, the cornerstone of Shevardnadze's initiative. The basis, without which dreaming of the prosperity and development of the countries of the Caucasus is pointless. Our entire activity serves precisely this goal' [23].
The 'For a Peaceful Caucasus' initiative had been given an important boost with the convening of the Kislovodsk summit, on 3 June 1996. Georgian President, Eduard Shevardnadze, in his regular, weekly, interview on Georgian Radio, on 27 May 1996, described the 'forthcoming' Caucasus summit as having the potential to play 'a historic role in establishing peace and stability in the Caucasus' [24]. At the summit a Declaration 'On Interethnic Accord and Economic and Cultural Cooperation in the Caucasus' was signed by the presidents of Russia, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan. The Declaration stated that 'the basis for resolving conflicts' was observation of the principles of territorial integrity and respect for the rights and freedoms of the individual, including persons belonging to national minorities'. The Declaration condemned 'aggressive separatism, interethnic differences and religious extremism'. The heads of the four states also declared their readiness to 'combine their efforts' in eradicating terrorism in all its forms [25].
During 1997 specific ideas were proposed in order to develop the 'Peaceful Caucasus' into reality. Proposals concerning the organisation in Tbilisi of a conference on the subject, The Caucasus as a Single Industrial and Economic Space', with the participation of prominent representatives of the business world of the Caucasus countries and international economic organisations; the institution of an international Caucasus Peace Prize and Caucasus prizes in the spheres of literature and art; the title 'Honorary Individual of the Caucasus'; and Caucasus sports games, were proposed. In order to realise such programmes, the idea for the creation of a Revival of the Caucasus fund was mooted. This fund would target international organisations and governments for support.

MY OWN RECOMMENDATIONS
While Shevardnadze's programmes are creditable in themselves, I do not think they go far enough. I believe the region requires more permanent bodies (/institutions) for any 'Peaceful Caucasus' initiative to be successful. It is, therefore, with this in mind that I recommend the following three 'organisations' to cover the entire region (north and south). These organisations are as follows: The Society of Friends', the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in the Caucasus, and the Council of Caucasian Mountain Peoples.
The Society of Friends' will act as a regional conference of States and republics who have recently experienced conflict and who have an important role to play in facilitating regional peace. The purpose of the conference will be to promote mutual cooperation and understanding between its members. It should be a forward-looking organisation. It should concentrate on the future social and economic development of the Caucasus. Its members should support their fellow members who have had a recent or previous history of conflict and hostility. The Society of Friends' will form an essential bridge in promoting peace, understanding and tolerance in a region which has been, tragically, susceptible to war and conflict. If/when tensions arise, The Society of Friends' will provide an excellent 'sanctuary' for mutual-support and peace-building. Under such circumstances, it will be the responsibility of all the members of the organisation to, collectively, present their good offices to ensure that any conflagration does not occur. The Society of Friends' will, initially, have 12 members: Abkhazia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Chechnya, Georgia, Ingushetia, Iran, Nagorno-Karabakh, North Ossetia, Russia, South Ossetia and Turkey. The organisation will be headed by a Council of Heads of State and Heads of Republics, which will meet every six months. It will be bolstered by a Council of (Foreign) Ministers which will meet every two months. There will be a rotating Chairmanship every six months and it is to be hoped that, eventually, summits/meetings of the two Councils will be able to be held in all the 12 capitals/republican capitals of the 'Society'. Other Caucasian republics will have the right, if they so wish, to join the organisation. The 'Society of Friends' will have treaty-making powers and will work towards the wholescale protection of human/minority rights, as well as peace and security (including early-warning) in the region. The Society of Friends' will be supported by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in the Caucasus (or OSCC).
The OSCC will be a standing organisation, with its own Secretariat. It will have a Council of Heads of State and Heads of Republics/Territories, a Council of Ministers, a Parliamentary Assembly and a Forum of Peoples. The Council of Heads of State and Heads of Republics/ Territories will meet every six months. Meetings of the Council of Ministers will be every two months. Sessions of the Parliamentary Assembly and the Forum of Peoples will be every three months. There will be a rotating Chairmanship every six months and it is to be hoped that, eventually, summits/meetings of the various Councils will be able to be held in all the capitals/republican/territorial capitals of the Organisation. The Organisation will have 17 members: Abkhazia, Adygea, Ajaria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Chechnya, Dagestan, Georgia, Ingushetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Kalmykia, Karachayevo-Circassia, Krasnodar Territory, Nagorno-Karabakh, North Ossetia, South Ossetia and Stavropol Territory. It should be noted that the Forum of Peoples will provide an assembly for the non-titular peoples of each State/republic/territory. It is to be hoped that this Forum will represent all 'shades' of political opinion in the region. The OSCC headquarters will be in Tbilisi.
The OSCC would enjoy the following competences: agriculture, education, energy, mines and natural resources, science and technology, tourism and transportation, communications, the environment, legal matters, cultural affairs (including the organisation of a Caucasian Games and the establishment of a Caucasian Cultural Fund), regional policy and, crucially, law enforcement (with the establishment of a Caucasian Interpol). The OSCC, like the 'Society of Friends', will also have treaty-making powers. It will work to establish collective security mechanisms and aim to establish a, permanently operational, Caucasian peacekeeping force.
'The Society of Friends' and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in the Caucasus will be supported by the Council of Caucasian Mountain Peoples (or CCMP).
The CCMP will be a standing organisation, with its own Secretariat. It will have a Council of Heads of Republics, a Council of Ministers, a Parliamentary Assembly and a Forum of Peoples. The Council of Heads of Republics will meet every six months. Sessions of the Parliamentary Assembly and the Forum of Peoples will be every three months. There will be a rotating Chairmanship every six months. The organisation will have 9 members and 2 associate members. The Council's members will be: Abkhazia, Adygea, Chechnya, Dagestan, Ingushetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachayevo-Circassia, North Ossetia and South Ossetia. Georgia and Russia will act as associate members. It should be noted that the Forum of Peoples will provide an assembly for the non-titular peoples of each republic. It is to be hoped that this Forum will represent all 'shades' of political opinion in the region. The CCMP headquarters will be in Groznyy.
The CCMP would enjoy the following competences: agriculture, education, protection of natural resources, legal matters and cultural affairs (including Caucasian heritage).

COMMENT
The tiered nature of these 'organisations' would not be unique. The Organisation of East Caribbean States (OECS: founded in 1981) [26] remains today an associate institution of the Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM: founded in 1973) [27]. While CARICOM is a regional grouping with 14 members and 2 associate members, the OECS is a sub-regional grouping of nine governments, with, additionally, 2 associate members. Both have secretariats (CARICOM's is in Georgetown, Guyana; the OECS's is in Castries, St Lucia) and their respective supreme authorities are the Conference of Heads of Government and the Authority of the Heads of Government. Although working in similar spheres (mainly economic), the two organisations have managed to complement each other perfectly.
Membership of such 'organisations' for sub-state entities would, 'similarly', not be a first. The Nordic Council (founded in 1952) [28], an organ for cooperation between the parliaments and governments of the Nordic countries permits the 'same'. While Denmark and Finland are, naturally, members, the Faroe Islands (since 1970), Greenland (since 1984) and the Aland Islands (since 1970) all sit as independent members. Although the delegates representing the Faroe Islands and Greenland form part of Denmark's delegation on the 87-member Council (with 2 representatives each) and the Aland Islands Finland's (again with 2 representatives), these three non-state members have the right to raise matters independently and initiate debates. I would not recommend, however, that the 'non-state republics' form part of the delegations of the State to which they form a part, even in the Assemblies of the OSCC or CCMP.
The Nordic Council's counterpart, the Nordic Council of Ministers (founded in 1971) [29] has, I believe, a novel method of financing its institutions and cooperation bodies. Each country makes an annual contribution based on its respective share of total Nordic GDP. This ranges from Sweden's 35.6% to Iceland's 1.1%. It should be noted that the Faroe Islands, Greenland and the Aland Islands are not separate members of the Nordic Council of Ministers. Naturally, this, therefore, facilitates calculation of each country's share. However, I do not believe it would be impossible to calculate a total Caucasian GDP, according to the individual membership of both the OSCC and CCMP. The Nordic Council of Ministers' method of financing should, provided there is good will on all sides, provide a convenient method for "calculation'.

THE COMMUNITY OF TRANSCAUCASIAN STATES
The Council of Europe Committee on Relations with European Non-Member Countries [30] has been discussing the idea of establishing a Community of Transcaucasian States. Although the idea is still in its early stages - David Atkinson MP (UK), Chairman of the European Democratic Group of the Parliamentary Assembly has told me that it might take some years to 'construct' - I do believe that it represents an important first step in establishing a Caucasian Home. Where I feel it fails, however, is that it is 'to be', 'simply', a Community of Transcaucasian States. There is no evidence, so far, to suggest that Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia (let alone Ajaria) would be entitled to separate membership, and the 'Community' would appear (anyway) to exclude the Russian north Caucasus republics (and territories).
The following is the text of the 'Peace Plan for Transcaucasia', submitted for discussion by David Atkinson MP to the Committee on Relations with Non-Member Countries, on 11 March 1997:
'Realities:
1. The present status quo in Abkhazia and Nagorno-Karabakh is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. Negotiations are at stalemate and a military solution is not an option.
2. The political solution that is necessary can only emerge from the parties concerned.
Aim of the plan:
To create a climate of co-operation, confidence building and mutual progress within a regional institutional framework which will enable a peaceful solution to emerge over time.
Recommendations:
1. Accept that the status quo in both Abkhazia and Nagorno-Karabakh is likely to remain for the foreseeable future, that is, independent of Georgia and Azerbaijan respectively de facto but not de jure.
2. The three Transcaucasian countries (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia) to commence serious consideration and negotiations about the establishment of a Community of Transcaucasian States (CTS) based on agreed principles and policy.
3. A parliamentary assembly for the CTS could be established (PACTS).
4. A conference of local and regional authorities of the CTS could also be established.
5. An early priority of a CTS would be to assess outstanding obstacles in the way of freedom of movement, labour, currency, goods and services. Parallel to this will be an analysis of the obstacles in the way of the implementation of fundamental freedoms and human rights as defined in the Council of Europe Conventions which would pave the way for the return of refugees to their original homes. This would require all the parties involved in the dispute to produce position statements and proposals for confidence building measures.
6. The above initiatives will result in appropriate recommendations for consideration by the CTS and its Parliamentary Assembly; and for the national parliaments of the three countries; for submission to their Governments.
7. The aim of the recommendations should be to eliminate the practical obstacles which the frontiers between them present, as the basis of a Final States Agreement in pursuit of a peaceful and prosperous Community of Transcaucasian States.
8. The outcome will allow the peoples of Abkhazia and Nagorno-Karabakh to return to a pre-conflict situation at which they live in peace, confident that within the new framework of the Community of Transcaucasian States (CTS) human rights are protected, private property restored, and the opportunities for progress and prosperity created on the basis of mutual co-operation within existing frontiers'.
On 22 April 1997, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, in a resolution calling for a political settlement to the conflicts in Abkhazia and Nagorno-Karabakh, additionally recommended cooperation between Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, 'in the long-run' possibly as part of a 'Community of Transcaucasian States' [31].

Conclusion
When a region is exhausted by war, racked with ethnic hostility and broken by abject poverty, the last thing its, multitude of peoples may want to construct are 'organisations' of the above type. I sincerely believe, however, that unless and until the Caucasus begins to build its own relationships, it will continue, always, to be subject to outside manipulation. Conflict is not the only adversity that these peoples suffer from. They have economies that need to be restored, trading relations that need to be created and new friendships that need to be founded. While my own recommendations would not resolve all the region's ills, it would facilitate something which is so sorely lacking at the moment, dialogue.

NOTES
[1] (The Caucasus, Sukhumi, 1990, no. 1, p. 1).
[2] Still, Baku is, in principle, in favour of such an organisation. Following her arrival at Bina airport (Baku), on 30 April 1997, Chairwoman of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Leni Fischer told journalists that during her
visit she would be discussing (inter alia) the establishment of a 'Commonwealth of Transcaucasian States'. Interestingly, she immediately qualified this by saying that the issue could only be looked into 'more closely' following the resolution of the 'Abkhaz and Nagorno-Karabakh' conflicts and 'the establishment, throughout the region, of a lasting peace'. Responding to this, Azerbaijani Parliament Speaker, Murtuz Aleskerov stated that the Azerbaijani side welcomed the idea, adding that the matter had been discussed when (unspecified) Georgian MPs had visited Azerbaijan. See (Baku, Zerkalo, in Russian, 3 May 1997, p. 9) (FBIS-SOV-087, 7 May 1997): 'Weekly disappointed by PACE Chiefs visit'.
[3] During a meeting with the 'Ambassador' to Yerevan of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Naira Melkumyan (now Foreign Minister), in early April 1996, I was informed that such an organisation was 'premature'.
More recently, at a news conference in Yerevan, on 22 July 1998, Armenian President, Robert Kocharyan, responding to a question on the implementation of the 'Peaceful Caucasus' initiative, voiced doubts that such a task 'could be resolved quickly'. He then added: The idea is attractive as a slogan and an aim; however, its implementation now seems rather doubtful to me'. (Yerevan, Snark, in Russian, 0500 gmt, 23 July 1998) (FBIS-SOV-98-205, 28 July 1998).
[4] See (Georgian Television, Tbilisi, in Georgian, 1500 gmt, 1 Feb. 1997) (SU/2834 F/ 3, 4 Feb. 1997): 'President Shevardnadze sets up commission to manage Peaceful Caucasus programme'.
[5] See (Interfax news agency, Moscow, in English, 1256 gmt, 7 June 1997) (SU/2941 F/2, 10 June 1997): 'Abkhaz leader opposes autonomy within Georgia, favours peacekeepers' presence'.
[6] This is for two reasons. First, following his overthrow, former Georgian President, Zviad Gamsakhurdia was granted 'asylum' in Chechnya. Indeed, he died in Groznyy, on 5 January 1994. Second, a detachment of Chechen fighters, under the command of Chechen war hero Shamil Basayev, assisted Abkhazia during the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict.
[7] The Moscow newspaper Obschchaya Gaieta had accused President Shevardnadze of 'laying claim' to leadership in the Caucasus. An allegation forcefully denied by the Georgian President during his interview on Georgian Radio, on 7 July 1997. See (Georgian Radio. Tbilisi, in Georgian, 0505 gmt, 7 July 1997) (SU/2967 F/2, 10 July 1997): 'President Shevardnadze stresses significance of Georgian-Abkhaz dialogue'.
[8] Pan-Turkism, an intellectual movement prevalent particularly during the 19th and early 20th centuries created a 'symbolic' state of Turan. Ziya Gokalp, a leading pan-Turkist, in 1911, was the author of a poem 'Turan' the last couplet of which is:
'The country of the Turks is not Turkey,
nor yet Turkestan, 
Their country is a broad and everlasting land - Turan'.
Gokalp maintained that all the 'Turkish' peoples - the Ottomans, Azerbaijanis, Crimean Tatars, Turkmens, Kyrghyz, Uzbeks etc. - potentially formed one nation. This was 'Turan'. See C.W. Hostler, Turkism and the Soviets, London, George Alien and Unwin Ltd, 1957, pp. 142-143.
[9] The Russian for Transcaucasus is Zakavkazye, which literally means 'over the Caucasus'.
[10] During the 1860s, for example. 600000 Circassians were deported (mostly to Ottoman Turkey) and their lands settled, in their place, by Russians. R. Conquest, The Nation Killers: The Soviet Deportation of Nationalities (London. Macmillan, 1970), p. 20.
[11] The Karachay (in Oct-Nov. 1943), Kalmyks (Dec. 1943), Chechens and Ingush (22 Feb. 1944), Balkars (March-April 1944). Ibid, at 210.
[12] (The North Caucasus, 1935, no. 9, p. 11).
[13] (Bulletin of the US Congressional meetings, 9 May 1984, the II session, 98 Congress, vol. 130, no. 59).
[14] (Unity, Sukhumi, 1991, no. 1).
[15] (Abkhazia, 1991, no. 51, 2nd issue, December).
[16] See (Russia's Radio, 2000 gmt, 2 Nov. 1991) (SU/1221 B/8, 5 Nov. 1991): 'Congress of Mountain Peoples ends deliberations'.
[17] (Nezavisimaya Gazeta, Moscow, in Russian, 1 Oct. 1992, p. 3) (Current Digest of the Post-Soviet Press, vol. xliv, no. 39, 1992, p. 8): 'Moscow as 'Satan''.
[18] (Izvestia, Moscow, in Russian, 28 Sep. 1992, pp. 1-2) (Current Digest of the Post-soviet Press, vol. xliv, no. 39, 1992, p. 5): 'A state of emergency is declared in Nalchik and is immediately suspended'.
[19] (Nezavisimaya Gazeta, Moscow, in Russian, 1 Oct. 1992, p. 3) (Current Digest of the Post-Soviet Press, vol. xliv, no. 39, 1992, p. 8): ‘Moscow as Satan’".
[20] See (Radio Russia, Moscow, in Russian, 2000 gmt, 25 Aug. 1996) (SU/2701 B/9, 27 Aug. 1996): 'Congress of Caucasian nations ends, deplores escalation of hostilities in Chechnya'. [21] See (ITAR-TASS news agency World Service, Moscow, in English, 1932 gmt, 24 Aug. 1996) (SU/2700 B/12, 26 Aug. 1996): 'Peoples of the Caucasus congress opens in Vladikavkaz; Ingushetia stays away'.
[22] See (Svobodnaya Gruziya, Tbilisi, in Russian, 26 March 1996, p. 1) (FBIS-SOV-96-085, 2 May 1996): 'Adviser on President's Caucasus initiative'.
[23] See (Svobodnaya Gruziya, Tbilisi, in Russian, 22 May 1997, pp. 1, 3) (FBIS-SOV-97-121, 25 June 1997): 'Georgian Caucasus reconciliation moves'.
[24] See (Georgian Radio, Tbilisi, in Georgian, 0712 gmt, 27 May 1996) (SU/2626 F/2, 31 May 1996): 'President Shevardnadze interviewed on Caucasus summit, freeing of bread prices'.
[25] See (Interfax news agency, Moscow, in Russian, 0853 gmt, 3 June 1996) (SU/2629 B/1, 4 June 1996): 'Yeltsin and leaders of Transcaucasus republics sign declaration on Caucasus'.
[26] The OECS succeeded the East Caribbean Common Market (ECCM: founded in 1968). For further information on the OECS see: <http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/decdo/oecs.php>
[27] CARICOM succeeded the Caribbean Free Trade Association (CARIFTA: founded in 1968). For further information on CARICOM see: http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/decdo/caricom.php
[28] For further information on the Nordic Council (and the Nordic Council of Ministers) see: http://www.norden.org/index-uk.phpl
[29] Ibid.
[30] Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia have all enjoyed Special Guest Status (SGS) of the Council of Europe since 1996. Armenia formally applied to join the Council of Europe on 7 March 1996, and was awarded SGS, by the Committee of Ministers, on 15 May 1996, according to Resolution (96) 21; Azerbaijan formally applied on 13 July 1996, and was awarded SGS on 11 September 1996, according to Resolution (96) 32; Georgia formally applied on 14 July 1996, and was awarded SGS, also, on 11 September 1996, according to Resolution (96) 33.
[31] See: http://www.coe.fr/cp/97/233a%2897%29.php

Pages | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |