Hostile Workshop against Circassians Held in Rostov

Hostile Workshop against Circassians Held in Rostov 

Translated from Arabic by: Adel Bashqawi
25, December, 2012

This article was published on 8th of December, 2012 on “kavkazoved” Website known by its hostile orientations towards Circassians.

A workshop was held in the city of Rostov on the “Circassian Question” with the participation of experts from each of Rostov, Moscow and St. Petersburg, Cherkessk, and Pyatigorsk, in the presence of a number of representatives of the media, educational institutions and social organizations. The meeting was held and organized by the Center for Information and Analysis for the Black Sea region and the Caspian Sea of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies; the theme of the meeting was the so-called “Circassian Question” which has become the subject of different speculations with the approach of the Olympic Games in Sochi. The meeting was initiated by the director of the Center of the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea of the Institute of the Russian Strategic Studies (the city of Rostov) Edward Popov pointing out that the so-called “Circassian Question” has received wide reactions both on the internal and exterior levels, and its related to attempts of some external actors (some Circassian communities and non-governmental foreign institutions) to politicize the issue of the Caucasian war that had taken place in the period between 1817-1864 and the resulting adverse consequences for the peoples of the two regions of North-western and South-western Caucasus such as Kabardians, Adygas, Circassians, Abkhazians, and others. Today the most radical Circassian social organizations and their leaders are demanding the recognition of the genocide committed by the Russian Empire against the Circassians, and to redraw the boundaries of certain entities located within the two federal North and South Caucasus regions, and the establishment of a unified Circassian entity namely so-called “Greater Circassia”.

The expert expressed his belief – supported by the rest of the participants – which the formula issue described as the “Circassian Question” is a devastating formula and largely rejected. In this regard, it is necessary to develop a different alternative formula of what ails the peoples of the Northwest Caucasus away from the use of a narrow ethnic approach.

A number of experts have pointed out in their speeches to the strong media support that the “Circassian Question” enjoys by foreign “agents”, whereas without that, it was unlikely to receive wide social reactions. The participant researcher in the Arab and Islamic Studies Center of the Institute of Orientalism in the Russian Scientific Academy, Veronica Ivanova (St. Petersburg – Moscow) has confirmed that the major role in the modernization of the “Circassian Question” is related to the Circassian community in Turkey that is numbering 300 thousand, despite the presence of some other contradicting and controversial numbers (between 5 and 15 million people). The report noted that in Turkey and other countries, the descendants of all Caucasian peoples that departed the Russian Empire after the Caucasian war are considered of the Circassians. The Circassians of Turkey who are preserving their traditions present to a large extent material and media support for the Circassian activists in Russia. At the same time, the Circassians of Turkey, particularly the elite of them, are closely integrated in authorities and economical structures in modern Turkey, and their Adigha identity is only part of their Islamic identity and Caucasian identity, in addition, the Turkish authorities do not encourage manifestations of the Circassian identity inside Turkey, in an attempt to impose one Turkish project for all those who live in it. For these reasons, the role of Circassians of Turkey in activating the “Circassian Question” is limited, and their ability to migrate is extremely over exaggerated.

The editor of “Geopolitica” Leonid Safin (Moscow) also drew the attention in his speech to the attempts by some to fabricate an ethnic tension, including through the Circassian social networks pointing out that Western society imposes on the world, including Russia, stereotypes and theories of their own. Many of the intellectual centers in the United States of America, including the Jamestown Foundation and the RAND Corporation develop global geopolitical plans by provoking ethnic conflicts in the so-called “Greater Middle East” including the North Caucasus Region. The “Circassian Question” is part of the “Greater Middle East” project and it is managed and steered from abroad especially from the United States to a great extent. The United States of America employs the “soft power” factor as a key tool to achieve its interests abroad, including the social networks and the Non Governmental Bodies. Many “Circassian” websites that spread extremist ideas about creating so-called “Greater Circassia” are hosted abroad. As for some infiltrators (hackers) who act on behalf of the Circassians and they attack the Russian government websites, they reside in Europe and the United States. Many non-governmental organizations including the ones of foreign origin, often work to undermine the stability in the “Circassian” entities in the two North and South Caucasus federal regions. In conclusion, the expert pointed out that the Law of Foreign Agents must be the starting point in the development of appropriate measures to challenge the influence of foreign power centers in the internal affairs of the Russian Federation.

The assistant professor in the Department of Sociology and Political Science Rinat Batiev (City of Rostov) has referred to the relationship between the Circassian radicals and the Islamists in the North Caucasus and the possibilities of cooperation between them, pointing out that at present, the national element clearly prevails over the religious element in the ideological constants of the nationalist Circassian organizations, where Islamic factor is a catalyst one rather than a fundamental, and Circassian activists exploit it to attract young religious youth to their ranks.

Traditionally, the Western Caucasus region was less religious than the North-East part. Adigha got no great place in the “Caucasus Emirate” supposed project, and their role is diminished in link to the role of other local minorities, such as the Noghai for an example. Even the Islamic leaders in the two republics of Karachaevo – Cherkessia and Kabardino – Balkaria are not Circassians, but they are belonging to other Turkish peoples and others. In the conclusion of his speech, Batiev referred to the possibility of a rapprochement between the two, the Islamic and the Circassian radical and the extent of its danger as of the new phenomena, the compatibility between the political and religious groups and movements which were traditionally hostile to each other.

The expert at the Center of ِAnalysis and Information of the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies, Anton Avryanov, he touched in his speech to the issue of Georgia’s exploitation of the “Circassian Question” to achieve its own interests, and Georgia has intensified its political efforts in the North Caucasus region in recent years. The Georgian authorities have taken a series of actions aimed at strengthening the “Circassian Question”, including the establishment of the Circassian Center in Tbilisi and the establishment of a monument to commemorate the immigrants in Anaklia, as it hosted periodically, conferences and workshops in order to prove Russian commitment of “crimes” against the Circassian peoples during the Caucasian War. This policy had reached its peak when the Georgian Parliament in May, 2011, had recognized the “genocide” against the Circassians by the Russian Empire. The Georgian official policy did not change towards the “Circassian Question” much, even after the victory of the Georgian opposition led by B. Ivanishvili in the parliamentary elections. According to some reports, there is an idea circulated within experts in Georgia about the need to recognize the “genocide” against the Chechens and Ingush. In conclusion, A. Avryanov mentioned that relations with the Circassian community are of a great importance for Georgia in the light of its attempts to spread its influence in Abkhazia.

A number of experts have pointed out to the increase of youth participation in the devastating social activities in the “Circassian Question” context and suggested countermeasure procedures to prevent extremism among the youth. The Director of the Center for Ethnic and Political Research and Studies at the North Caucasus Institute (Branch of the Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration of the President of the Russian Federation) Ekaterina Agyeva (Pyatigorsk) mentioned some of the obstacles that prevent the establishment of a cultural dialogue with the youth, including: Ignoring the problem by State celebrities, and follow an official approach to solve, the far-off distance that separates the large part of the civil society organizations, including the political parties from the real issues, and a number of social and economical problems, including unemployment. In this regard, the expert believes that it is necessary to work on promoting the national education in schools, universities and other educational institutions, as well as organizing youth activities with the participation of young people from different Russian regions, and the introduction of new curricula within the variable regional curriculum, including the “Federal National Relations”, the “Political Administration of the National Relations in the North Caucasus”, and the “Civil Society in Modern Russia”, and to highlight the positive aspects of the national historical and contemporary interactions, between Circassians and others of Russian peoples in the educational process context. Generally, and according to the expert, the prevention of extremism must combine the public objectives and individual forms of work to be applied with certain individuals.

The Deputy Director of the Institute of Regional Issues of the Russian State in the North Caucasus, Anzor Astakhov (Pyatigorsk), in addition to the exciting external factors of the “Circassian Question”, there are significant problems within the Adigha (Circassian) society itself. According to the expert, the extremism in the “Circassian Question” is connected to the Adigha sensing of losing the leadership status that they used to enjoy among the peoples of the region after the war Caucasian War. In addition to this, the historical sense of loss of power of other contemporary issues, including the decrease of birth rate and the spiritual vacuum, the loss of many traditions, customs and the fear of assimilation and so on. For these reasons, you find the nationalism and separatism ideas, as fertile environment, especially among youth. Thus, all concerned parties claim that Russia is the only responsible for all the problems suffered by the Circassians today.

A. Astakhov drew the attention to the role of the Internet as a main channel for anti-Russian propaganda for the simplicity of its use, therefore, opposing measure must be taken by using the internet, to spread the idea of unity between the Circassian community and Russia, and the historical friendship and cooperation between them among youth, with a focus on the positive effects of Circassians’ integration in the Russian space in general (to cancel revenge and the status of writing, etc.), the joint achievements, and the fight against external enemies together, who had often exploited the Circassians for their own private gains. According to the expert, the Adigha peoples cannot maintain their traditions and avoid assimilation in the globalization conditions existing nowadays except within the Russian State.

The Director of the Center for Studies and Regional Forecasts of the Institute of Training and Upgrade Efficiency at the Southern Federal University, Victor Chernoos (City of Rostov) in his speech, on the subject of the present division in the scientific circles about the assessment of the effects of the Caucasian War, including the Circassian peoples. There are a number of researchers and experts who assert that the joining Adigha peoples to Russia got purely negative consequences, while others believe that the integration occurred peacefully with distinction, and what happened of different problems and difficulties were sporadic and random. V. Chernoos believes that it is imperative to develop an objective picture of the past and present in the relations between Russia and the Circassians without fear of touching sharp angles, and for this objective a constructive dialogue must be established between the various historic scientific institutions (and nationalist one upon them) and find common ground for debate. What is happening now, according to the expert, is publishing numerous press writings that hold unconfirmed and biased information, instead of publishing real scientific research. He added as saying that it is not possible to look into the “Circassian Question” in isolation from the historical and contemporary context, as that generates new contradictions and nationalism lies and contributes to the emergence of more conflicts. As if common platforms are created for scientific discussions by involving intellectuals from the North Caucasus, which will form a key for “easing the extent of tension in the scientific communities concerning the “Circassian Question”.

Senior Research Fellow at the Center for the North Caucasian Languages of the Institute of Language Studies at the University of Pyatigorsk for foreign languages Ruslan kambeyiv (Pyatigorsk – Cherkessk) devoted his speech to the issue of establishing a constructive dialogue with the Circassian community, and pointed out that it contains incompatible mixture to a great extent, from movements and social trends between radical and moderate, which is what the foreign forces seek to exploit. Consequently, Russia must adopt the “Circassian Question” agenda by itself and withdraw it from the hands of its geopolitical competitors, and that through ongoing monitoring of trends and opinions within the Circassian community and to create social, media and scientific arenas to discuss this issue with the Circassian activists in order to place the “Circassian Question” in a constructive track. The policy of public disregard practiced by Russia toward the “Circassian Question” would lead – according to expert – to extremism and directs some of the Circassian activists to the foreign power centers which in turn are using the Circassian factor in its favor contrary to the interests of Russia and the Circassians themselves.

During the debate, the experts reached a conclusion that the “Circassian Question”, which had received in recent years a wide international response and became a tool of media pressure on Russia, especially with the approach of the date of Olympic Games in Sochi in 2014, and its escalation might lead to the expansion of the scope of instability in the North Caucasus and the spread of extremist ideas, especially among the youth. To prevent extremism in the “Circassian Question” a constructive dialogue must be conducted with the moderate part of the Circassian community. Publishing the archival materials on the Caucasian war, and to reinforce the positive examples of the Russian – Circassian cooperation including common struggle against a common enemy, preventive action with the youth, and to develop a true scientific body – such measures could lead to significantly reduce the heat of the controversy associated with the “Circassian Question”.

Source: http://www.hekupsa.com/obzor/anticherkesizm/1040-v-rostove-proshel-anticherkesskij-kruglyj-stol.html

Published by: Circassian Nationalist Movement CNM
Date: 27, December, 2012

Share Button