home · electrical safety · Azerbaijanis of Georgia – who are they? Azerbaijanis of Georgia (Ibrahimli Khaladdin) How many Azerbaijanis live in Georgia

Azerbaijanis of Georgia – who are they? Azerbaijanis of Georgia (Ibrahimli Khaladdin) How many Azerbaijanis live in Georgia

BAKU, Oct 29 – Sputnik, Alexandra Zueva. Azerbaijanis in Georgia have complaints against the country's presidential candidate Salome Zurabishvili related to her harsh statements against the Turks, Azer Suleymanov, a member of the Georgian parliament from the United National Movement (UNM) party, told Sputnik Azerbaijan.

According to preliminary data from the Central Election Commission, based on the results of counting the voting results in 100% of polling stations, presidential candidate Salome Zurabishvili gains 38.64% of the votes, and her main competitor Grigol Vashadze - 37.74%. Thus, the second round of the presidential elections was announced, which will take place no later than December 2.

Azerbaijanis against Zurabishvili

For the first time in the history of Georgia, Azerbaijanis came out in such large numbers in opposition to the ruling Georgian Dream party. In all regions of the country, they voted against Bidzina Ivanishvili and for the revival of Georgia, Suleymanov noted with enthusiasm.

The deputy believes that if the presidential elections held the day before had been held without violations, then everything would have ended in one round and in favor of Vashadze. At the same time, he noted that Vashadze’s victory in the second round is inevitable, if only because several representatives of opposition parties have already announced their joining the National Movement.

Answering the question why the Azerbaijanis voted against Zurabishvili in such a consolidated manner, the parliamentarian noted that, among other things, the Azerbaijanis have their own complaints against her related to her harsh statements against the Turks.

Sputnik’s interlocutor recalled that during the election campaign, Zurabishvili, at meetings with the Armenian population of Akhalkalaki, declared her love for the Armenian people, while expressing hostility towards the Turks.

“All this could not but affect the opinion of Azerbaijanis in Georgia during the elections,” Suleymanov concluded.

The position of the leader of the opposition is still vacant

Azerbaijani political scientist Ilgar Velizade also pointed out the reckless statements Zurabishvili made to the Armenian population of Georgia during the election campaign. According to him, these statements were interpreted by the Azerbaijani public in Georgia as a sign of unfriendliness on its part. And this moment played a significant role in the fact that the Azerbaijanis of Georgia voted against Zurabishvili.

Sputnik’s interlocutor urged not to look for other internal political factors in this matter. Azerbaijanis voted for Vashadze or for other opponents of Zurabishvili not because they came out with some other, more convenient political program, they voted that way precisely in connection with her statements.

Of course, the expert noted, if Zurabishvili still wins, then at first there will be political turbulence in Georgia. Those people who oppose it today will try to consolidate the bulk of the protest electorate around themselves. In addition, there will definitely be a struggle for the position of opposition leader, which is still vacant after certain events.

Despite the fact that there are a lot of prominent opposition figures in Georgia, there is no consolidating leader in the country yet, the political scientist noted.

“Both the opposition and the government will begin to prepare for the parliamentary elections after the second round. After all, it is the parliamentary elections that will decide the future fate of Georgia,” he said.

However, Velizade noted, if Zurabishvili wins, the party in power will receive carte blanche. And having virtually unlimited resources, its preparation for the parliamentary elections will be more confident. Otherwise, if Vashadze wins, the ruling party’s preparations for the parliamentary elections will proceed against the backdrop of a downward trend, Sputnik’s interlocutor concluded.

Step towards democracy

In almost all regions densely populated by Azerbaijanis, except for Gardabani - in Bolnisi, Dmanisi, Marneuli - Zurabishvili won, said Georgian political scientist Gela Vasadze, discussing the role of Georgian Azerbaijanis in the last elections.

But there are two points here. Firstly, voter turnout was unusually low for this region, which means that the authorities there did not count a large number of the expected votes. And secondly, and this is very important, for the first time in an area densely populated by Azerbaijanis (Gardabani - ed.) and national minorities in general, the opposition won, the expert emphasized.

“Of course, the return to politics of Ramin Bayramov (ex-deputy of the Georgian parliament, member of the National Movement party - ed.), who has great authority among the Azerbaijani population of Georgia, played a role here,” the Sputnik interlocutor said, emphasizing that the influence of the Azerbaijanis on elections in Georgia as a whole is quite significant.

At the same time, Vasadze found it difficult to answer how the second round of the presidential elections would end. But the fact that it will take place is already a huge step for Georgia on the path to democracy, the political scientist emphasized.

In the second round, both the psychological and electoral advantage, of course, goes to Vashadze. The second round of the presidential elections in Georgia itself is an unprecedented case for Georgian society, especially considering the financial, administrative and political resources that the ruling party had, the expert noted.

It seemed that it was impossible to oppose anything to all these possibilities of the current government. However, what happened happened. And this happened because the world has changed - it has changed in terms of technology, Georgian society has become very open, he emphasized.

“Political technologies won these elections, and of course, the opposition has a wonderful candidate, very strong and the best of those that came before,” the Sputnik source said.

At the same time, the political scientist pointed to three components that contributed to the opposition’s victory in the elections: 1) the organizational component, which was handled by the team of Chief of Staff Vashadze; 2) political technologies - there was a very serious team of political strategists led by Vitaly Shklyarov; 3) television - Rustavi2 television company, headed by General Director Nika Gvaramia.

It was these people, according to Vasadze, who created a system in which the government was unable to use its administrative and financial resources.

However, it is still impossible to say that Vashadze won. Here we still need to see how the ruling party team will work in the second round. Another thing is that Vashadze today has more opportunities and a better chance of winning than Zurabishvili, taking into account the purely psychological state of society, Sputnik’s interlocutor concluded.

The future depends on cleanliness

Senior researcher at the Caucasus Studies Sector of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies, Konstantin Tasits, also noted the role of Azerbaijanis in the Georgian elections. According to him, during the election campaign Zurabishvili made anti-Turkish statements, which could well ultimately affect the choice of Azerbaijanis.

In addition, the expert recalled that, in particular, in Marneuli, in all previous elections, Azerbaijanis were also more likely to support the UNM, which is explained by the close rapprochement between Georgia and Azerbaijan precisely under Saakashvili.

Speaking about the outcome of the second round, the political scientist noted that it would be difficult to predict now. Everything will be decided over the next two weeks. It will be important for the current government to mobilize its electorate and the main obvious incentive for this will be the danger of Saakashvili’s return, Sputnik’s interlocutor said. At the same time, he recalled Vashadze’s statement, promising that one of his first actions as president would be to pardon the ex-head of state and return him to Georgian citizenship.

“And since the basis of the Georgian Dream electorate is radical opponents of Saakashvili who do not want his return, they will exploit this topic,” the expert said.

On the other hand, it is noticeable that the opposition is truly consolidating. The leader of "European Georgia - Movement for Freedom" David Bakradze (scored 10.97% in the elections) and the Republicans have already expressed their readiness to support Vashadze in the second round. And if they all unite, they will get more than 50%. But this will happen if the turnout is the same as in the first round, Tasits emphasized.

The future now depends on the integrity of the elections. If it is possible to avoid massive falsifications during the second round, if the victory of one candidate or another is fair, then the opposite side will recognize it one way or another, he said.

Moreover, considering that these elections are not fateful. The President of Georgia is deprived of any significant powers. These elections are now perceived by both sides as a rehearsal, as a test of strength before the 2020 parliamentary elections, Tasits explained.

There will be no Orange Revolution

The Azerbaijani factor in Georgia is generally stabilizing. The Georgian leadership, as well as the opposition, values ​​the country's Azerbaijani minority. And the hydrocarbon-pipeline factor is not the determining factor here, emphasized Artur Ataev, candidate of political sciences, associate professor, senior researcher at the Double-Headed Eagle society.

The fact is, the expert explained, that historically and politically the Azerbaijanis of Georgia fit into the sociocultural landscape of this country.

“As for the elections themselves, Zurabishvili behaved very ambiguously with the Armenian community. Maybe this is the reason for the Azerbaijani consolidated opinion regarding Vashadze,” Ataev noted.

The further development of the situation in Georgia, in his opinion, depends on a number of quite important subjective and objective factors. Sputnik’s interlocutor believes that the “Saakashvili-Ivanishvili factor” is among the objective ones, since what is happening is a confrontation between two political actors.

As for the subjective ones, 25 candidates took part in the elections, two of which were the main ones. The remaining 23 candidates will largely determine the course of the election campaign and the voting itself in the second round. This is the classic shape. This was the case in Russia in 1996, when Alexander Lebed played a key role in Boris Yeltsin's victory. The same will happen in Georgia, the expert recalled.

In addition, there is also an external factor. The fact is that the sympathies of Western actors have not yet been determined. The external component is the Western elite, which plays a very important role in the Georgian internal political system, and has not yet clearly decided in what form and how to support Zurabishvili or Vashadze. After all, both of these candidates are emphatically actively promoting a course towards European integration and Georgia’s entry into NATO, the political scientist noted.

Ataev also noted that it is unlikely that if Zurabishvili wins, any protests will begin in Georgia, since, in his opinion, this country has already exhausted its resources for the “orange revolution.”

Muslim communities in Georgia have gone through a difficult and contradictory path throughout their history. One of the most significant modern communities is made up of Azerbaijanis, the majority of whom adhere to Shiite Islam and inhabit the regions of southeastern Georgia - Gardabani, Marneuli, Dmanisi, Bolnisi, and Tbilisi.

The history of the Azerbaijani community in Georgia has repeatedly become the subject of scientific understanding, and in recent years, the object of close attention of modern researchers - political scientists. But still, despite such extensive scientific research, there are still “blank spots” in the chronicle telling about the life of Azerbaijanis in Georgia.

The appearance of the Azerbaijani community on the territory of Georgia is usually associated with one of the longest waves of Muslim expansion at the end of the 15th century, with the advance of Persian rulers into the territory of the South Caucasus. The appearance of a Muslim population on the territory of eastern Georgia dates back to this time, which subsequently formed the Azerbaijani community of the country. In particular, the famous historian N.G. Volkova notes that in the 1480s, during the offensive of the Persian shahs on the southern borders of Georgia - along the river. Akstafe, Debed, etc., Azerbaijanis (Kazakh, Pambak and Shuragel groups) settle here.

The following statement can be found in the sources: “At the beginning of the 17th century (1615-1616), Shah Abbas I invaded Georgia several times, devastating it and robbing churches. In addition, he takes away most of the inhabitants of Kakheti, instead of whom he resettles up to 15 thousand households of Aderbeijan Tatars to Georgia.” In a later period - the beginning of the 18th - the first half of the 19th centuries. Azerbaijani settlements arose in the Dmanisi region.

As Kh. M. Ibragimbeili points out, at the beginning of the 19th century, Azerbaijani settlements in the Borchali region (now Kvemo Kartli), in the south of Georgia, guarded the borders of Georgia from outside invasion and participated in expeditions of Russian regular troops.

In general, the process of resettlement of representatives of Muslim peoples to Georgia and, on the contrary, resettlement of the Georgian population to the territory of Persia and the Ottoman Empire is a very complex and controversial process, causing constant discussions between representatives of various historical schools.

However, as Georgian experts note, “if we start listening to these arguments, arguing about whether the ancestors of today’s Azerbaijanis lived in Georgia for more than a thousand years or were resettled by Shah Abbas, nothing worthwhile will come of it. By the way, the question of whether they lived in Georgia or whether this territory was then the territory of Azerbaijan is quite meaningless, because then there were no national states, and citizenship was determined by the power of a specific ruler.” Considering the negative role “historical wars” can play for relations between the countries of the South Caucasus, this advice is worth heeding.

Currently, most of the Azerbaijanis live in the Kvemo Kartli region - historically one of the areas of compact residence of the population professing Islam. The majority are Azerbaijanis, who also inhabit the Kakheti region - Sagarejoy, Lagodekhi and Telavi municipalities. More than 177 thousand ethnic Azerbaijanis live in Kvemo Kartli alone, and in general the number of the Azerbaijani community in the country reaches about 233 thousand people. Although, I note that these data are also questioned.

How do Azerbaijanis live in Georgia? What problems does the Azerbaijani community face? Probably the most correct answer is this – with the whole complex of social problems of the population of all Georgia. In this regard, there is no big difference between Azerbaijanis and other ethnic groups.

However, in the last few years, the problems of the Azerbaijani community have been discussed at the highest level in Georgia itself and beyond its borders - through the mouthpiece of international organizations.

First of all, this is a question about the level of integration of the Azerbaijani community into Georgian society. According to international experts, the solution to this problem is hampered by the low level of proficiency of the Georgian language by the local population and a number of aspects of the so-called. religious issue - as part of a more general problem of the situation of Muslim minorities in Christian Georgia.

To be continued

Ekaterina Shishkina (Moscow)

In 2006, the Moscow publishing house “Europe”, with funds from the Development Fund “Institute of Eurasian Studies”, published the book “Azerbaijanis of Georgia”. The author, Doctor of Historical Sciences Khaladdin Ibrahimli, director of the Caucasus Research Center in Baku, examines and comments on the main problems faced by the Turkic-speaking population living in the Georgian region of Kvemo Kartli. The brochure, according to the author, “is designed to play an important positive role in breaking the information blockade... organized by the Georgian authorities.” Probably, it would not make sense to turn to the long-standing work of the Baku historian if not for his very free interpretation of the concepts of “Azerbaijan” and “Azerbaijanis”. In a small brochure, Ibrahimli managed to make territorial claims to both Georgia and Armenia, and in his opus almost the entire Turkic-speaking population of the Caucasus becomes “Azerbaijanis”.

As is well known, the Transcaucasian Turks - “Azerbaijanis” (self-designation - Muslims) have still not decided on the issue of their own ethnogenesis. Since the proclamation of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic in May 1918, so named in order to make territorial claims to the province of the same name in Iran, they have been concerned with the question: who are we? Where did our tribes come from? Until this time, the Caucasian Tatars or Transcaucasian Turks lived quietly, wandering after the sheep through rich pastures, not interested in such complex issues. And only when the Anatolian Turks, damn them, built a state for them with the help of the army, did these questions arise in full force before the Transcaucasian Turks. Like children thrown to the threshold of an orphanage and all their lives searching for their unlucky parents, Transcaucasian Turks have been in a fruitless search for decades for their history, long lost in the steppes of Turan.

In fact, all nations have their own history, but why are they worse, even if they have not yet become people? They managed to acquire “their own” state, but there is still no history. In search of their own history, the neighbors went through four stages in less than a hundred years. At the first stage, they, following Sysoev, came to the conclusion that they are the descendants of nomadic Turkic tribes that first appeared in our region in the 11th-12th centuries AD and continued to migrate to us until the second half of the 18th century.. And everything would be fine, and no one disputed, but here’s the problem: the theory of the arrival of the Caucasian Tatars (Transcaucasian Turks) deprived them of the right and opportunity to claim the lands of their neighbors, who, as luck would have it, turned out to be autochthons. I had to look for other ancestors, fortunately, and the USSR’s relations with Turkey deteriorated. Looking into books that were not theirs, the Transcaucasian Turks were happy to learn that in the south of Transcaucasia, long before our era, there was a militarily and culturally strong state of Media.

Taking this “news” as a gift of fate, the Transcaucasian Turks, renamed Azerbaijanis by Stalin’s decree in 1936, did not fail to declare themselves descendants of the Medes. This was done on the orders of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the AzSSR, which was then headed by M.J. Bagirov. He began a campaign to appropriate the Median heritage. At the same time, Bagirov portrayed the nomadic Turks as robbers and murderers, arguing that these character traits had nothing to do with the mentality of the Azerbaijanis. Then Baku writers and historians en masse rejected even the common Turkic epic “Dede Gorkut”, as the work of barbarian nomads. However, the “Median” theory, designed to “prove” the autochthony of the Transcaucasian Turks in the region, had a serious drawback: Media never extended into the territory of Armenia and Georgia and only affected the south of modern Azerbaijan. Just that part of it where the Talysh, the true heirs of Median culture, have lived since time immemorial. And the Medes spoke one of the Iranian dialects. The “Median” theory of the ethnogenesis of the “Azerbaijanis” became a real disaster for the Iranian-speaking Talysh, as it led to their “erasing” from the pages of statistics of the peoples living in Azerbaijan. Nevertheless, Baku realized its shortcomings and continued to look for a new version of “their” history.

Then the “Albanian” version of the history and ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijanis was born. The founder of this theory was the historian, academician and hero Z. Buniyatov, who proposed to consider Azerbaijanis as descendants of the tribes inhabiting Caucasian Albania. At the same time, Buniyatov did not recommend abandoning the “Median” theory. Everyone liked this theory: firstly, the Albanians were autochthons; secondly, Caucasian Albania was not deprived of a rich history and culture, as well as outstanding figures. Now you can claim all this wealth as your own. All that remains is to “expand” the borders of Albania, “unite” it with Media, the north of modern Iran, and the eastern provinces of Armenia, and you’re done. It has its own history and worthy ethnogenesis.

Soon, however, this theory too died out. Relations between the USSR and Turkey lost their pronounced hostility, and the Turks in the USSR began to be treated more loyally. Here, independence arrived, and the role of the main guardian of Azerbaijan - Turkey - began to become relevant again. And the Transcaucasian Turks remembered that they are Turks. It was inopportune that they remembered, it must be said, because now they had to give up such a tasty inheritance from others. However, as they say, there is a way out of any situation. And he was found. A new wave of young historians in Azerbaijan has syncretized all previous theories. Now it has “turned out” that the Azerbaijanis are direct descendants of the Medes and Albanians at the same time, and that both of them were... Turks. At the same time, the Scythians, Saks, and Sarmatians were called Turks, and also, don’t be surprised, the Sumerians and Scandinavian Vikings, declared either the descendants or ancestors of the Transcaucasian Turks. In short, everyone who ever came into contact with the territory now called the Azerbaijan Republic was declared Turks. That is why, they say, other Turks were drawn here: Oguzes, Seljuks, Kipchaks, etc. If earlier it was believed that the newcomer Turkic tribes were completely assimilated among the “local Azerbaijanis” and only left the Turkic language in memory of themselves, now all the autochthonous peoples of the vast The territories were ordered to be considered originally Turkic-speaking. And all sorts of Armenians and Irans, annoyingly mentioned in the histories of all the peoples of the region, will be “resettled” thousands of kilometers from the borders of Azerbaijan.

Be that as it may, the logic of the development of the “history of Azerbaijan” leaves no room for doubt: new “theories”, each of which will prove an even greater antiquity of the Azerbaijanis and an even larger area of ​​Azerbaijan, will certainly be born. Although, it seemed, where else, if the President of Azerbaijan, and after him the press of this entity, calls Yerevan and Etchmiadzin “originally Azerbaijani” cities. And the younger generation of scientists has already managed to christen the forefather of all nations Noah... the great Azerbaijani astronomer.

Now is the time to return to Ibrahimli's brochure. Concerned about the well-being of the “Azerbaijanis” in Georgia, the author does not agree with the history textbooks published in Georgia, in which the nomadic Borchalu tribes resettled to Georgia by Shah Abbas (1571 - 1629) are indicated as the ancestors of the current Turkic-speaking population of the republic. Later, as it is written in the textbooks, they were joined by representatives of the Mughal tribe. The offended Ibrahimli believes that the current Turkic-speaking population of Georgia is the descendants of the Turkic tribes of the Karapapakhs, Kipchaks, Barsils, the same Borchalu, Mughals... who migrated to the territory of modern Georgia for more than two thousand years. And they moved here because rebels, indigenous Turks, have always lived here since the beginning of time.

There is no point in arguing with Ibrahimli, he has his own logic, although I would really like to understand how monolingual tribes arose in parallel at a distance of thousands of kilometers? And it is still unclear what relation these same rebels have to the Azerbaijanis? According to the theory currently dominant among Baku historians, Azerbaijanis are indigenous Albanians and Medes. The Turkic-speaking population of Georgia, it must be understood, has nothing to do with either one or the other. Otherwise, it turns out that “Azerbaijanis” are the entire Turkic-speaking world plus the indigenous population of the Azerbaijan Republic, northern Iran, southern Georgia and Dagestan, and the eastern provinces of Armenia. It is very reminiscent of an auction in which everyone tries to outdo the other with the absurdity of ideas. However, Azerbaijani historians should decide who the Azerbaijanis are: local indigenous peoples, or alien Turkic tribes. Regardless of the answer, by the way, Azerbaijanis cannot simultaneously be the Turkic-speaking tribes of Georgia or Azerbaijan and the indigenous peoples living in the Azerbaijan Republic: Talysh, Lezgins, Parsis (Tats), Avars, etc.

Concerned about the situation of “Azerbaijanis” in Georgia, Ibrahimli writes that Tbilisi’s policies over the past 15-20 years “have led to numerous victims and hardships: more than 100 thousand Azerbaijanis were expelled or “voluntarily” left their homes on historical lands, they are almost completely left the regional centers of Dmanisi and Bolnisi, over these years approximately 150 Azerbaijanis were killed on religious grounds, hundreds of houses were destroyed or looted, hundreds of people were kidnapped, tortured, only some of them were released after paying a ransom. One of the main reasons for all these lawlessness, arbitrariness and inhumanity was the lack of resistance on the part of the Azerbaijanis, this is what explains the different picture that we see, on the one hand, in Abkhazia, Ossetia, Adjara, Javakheti and, on the other, in Borchaly.”

We will refrain from commenting on the situation in the named regions, as well as from calling for confrontation - what is happening in the Republic of Georgia goes beyond the scope of this article. Let us present only some rather interesting information from the statistical collection of the TSFSR published in 1927.

According to this collection, in 1923, 12 thousand 264 Georgians lived in Azerbaijan. And according to the 1999 census, the number of Georgians in Azerbaijan increased by 2,632 people, amounting to 14,900.

As the same collection reports, in 1923 there were 76 thousand 664 Turkic-speaking people living in Georgia. Now, according to information from Ibrahimli himself and many other authors, after the departure of over 100 thousand people, over 500 thousand “Azerbaijanis” remain in Georgia. That is, over 80 years, the number of “oppressed” “Azerbaijanis” in Georgia has increased by more than 550%. Over the same period, the number of Georgians “prospering” in Azerbaijan increased by only 22%. We leave conclusions to the reader.

Levon MELIK-SHAHNAZARYAN

A serious political conflict is brewing between Baku and Tbilisi. In December 2017, the European Center for National Minorities presented a report entitled Nomen Est Omen? Naming and Renaming of Places in Minority Inhabited Areas in Georgia by Maria Diego Gordon. This document has attracted increased attention from Azerbaijan because it states alarming facts. First: the Georgian government is purposefully renaming toponyms in areas densely populated by national minorities. Second: it is mainly Turkic (Azerbaijani) toponyms and hydronyms that are being renamed, and this policy did not affect other national minorities.

Let us note that experts have been recording a similar trend in Transcaucasia for a long time, almost since the emergence of independent states there - Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia. But it was typical for Baku and Yerevan, which found themselves in a state of war over Nagorno-Karabakh. Toponymy was actively changing in the two republics. At the same time, President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, pointing to the so-called “alien” origin of the Armenians, often cited as an example topographic maps of the Russian Empire, which actually contain a noticeable set of toponyms of Turkic origin. Now Georgian historians are already writing about the “newcomer” nature of the appearance of Azerbaijanis on the territory of Georgia, and politicians, as it turns out, have been quietly revising the self-identity of Azerbaijanis in Georgia for several years.

Let us recall that the renaming of Azerbaijani villages in Georgia in the early 1990s was carried out under the slogan of “restoring historical justice.” This campaign was based on the calculations of Georgian historians, who believe that during the Persian offensive on Georgia in the 1480s, Azerbaijanis settled on the southern outskirts of the country, in the area of ​​the Akstafa, Debed and other rivers (Kazakh, Pambak and Shuragel groups). At the beginning of the 17th century, under Shah Abbas I of Persia, the Turkic Borchalu tribe came to the Debed Valley, which gave the Borchali region its name. In 1604, the Borchalinsky khakanate (sultanate) was formed here, which existed until the 18th century. Migrants changed the names of local villages, which they did not understand, to Turkic place names. However, Azerbaijani historians have a slightly different opinion: various Turkic tribes began to settle in the southeastern regions of Georgia even before our era.

The battle for names between Baku and Yerevan, as we have already said, is understandable. What is happening in the relationship between Azerbaijan and Georgia? After all, at the official level, the two republics declare a strategic partnership; during the tenure of Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili in Tbilisi they even announced “virtually confederal relations with Baku.” In addition, Azerbaijanis in Georgia, who are the largest minority community and live in the southern, southeastern and central regions of the country, have never claimed autonomous status. At a time when the possibility of the emergence of Armenian autonomy in Javakheti was discussed at various times both at the academic and political levels. Gordon's report records only the trend of changes in Turkic toponymy in Georgia. Accidentally?

Historians know that this happens only when renaming is determined by foreign policy reasons, the desire to preserve or change state borders, as well as a pronounced desire to emphasize the national or civilizational affiliation of the objects of the nomination. In Georgia, there have been extensive discussions regarding the country’s civilizational identity for several years now. As is known, the territories on which the republics of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia were later formed were part of the Persian Empire and were in the area of ​​Muslim civilization at the beginning of the 19th century. After the collapse of the USSR and gaining independence, Baku, together with Ankara, adopted the doctrine of “one nation, two states,” thus denoting its civilizational affiliation and placing Tbilisi and Yerevan in the zone of border or marginal cultures.

But as Georgia and Armenia began to develop cooperation with the EU, these countries are positioning themselves as Eastern Christian civilization, heirs of the Byzantine Empire. As one Georgian researcher writes, there is a point of view according to which Georgia and Armenia are subdominants of the Eurasian civilization. Other concepts can be named, but the main thing that unites them is distancing from the Islamic, or more precisely, the Turkic world. Perhaps, this is the only way to explain Tbilisi’s policy of clearing toponyms on its territory, which, of course, is connected with the emerging geopolitical situation in Transcaucasia and the complex and contradictory process of searching for stable value guidelines. And this is the dominant trend.

But in practice, the prospects for a strategic partnership between Baku and Tbilisi turn out to be intriguing. Georgia is actually the only transport corridor for Azerbaijan to bring its energy resources to the world market. At the same time, Baku, although it now acts in relation to Tbilisi as almost the only guarantor of its energy security, may lose its position. But in general, a unique situation is emerging for Azerbaijan. Having called the Armenians on the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh “newcomers,” the Azerbaijanis themselves in Georgia are declared the same. The battle is taking place on the field of toponymy, where there are still many unsolved historical mysteries.

Stanislav Tarasov

The brochure examines the main problems faced by ethnic Azerbaijanis living in the Kvemo Kartli region (Borchali - Azeri) of Georgia. The author presents a historical view of the life of Azerbaijanis in Georgia, showing the beginning of active discriminatory policies against them on the part of the Georgian authorities in the late 1980s in the areas of land use, education and public life. The author supported the presented material with facts and statistical data, which gives the work additional significance. The brochure is intended to play an important positive role in breaking the information blockade around the pressing problems of Azerbaijanis in Georgia, organized by the Georgian authorities.

HISTORY AND ETHNOGRAPHY

AZERBAIJANIANS LIVE in most of the regions of Eastern Georgia. According to the official population census, in 1989, 91,923 Azerbaijanis lived in the Marneuli region (territory 955.2 km2), 53,808 in the Bolnisi region (804.2 km2), and 53,808 in the Dmanisi region (1207.6 km2). 33,107, in the Gardabani district (1,734.0 km 2) - 48,781, in the Sagarejoy region - 15,804, in the Telavi region - 7094, in the Lagodekhi region - 7094, in the Caspian region - 2872, in the Karelian region - 1426, in Tsalka district - 2228, in Tetritskaro district - 2499, in Mtskheta district - 2199, in Tbilisi - 17,986, in Rustavi - 11,576. In addition to the above, in Samtskhe-Javakheti, a region densely populated by Armenians, 947 Azerbaijanis were recorded, in the Gori region - 600 and Adjara - 1,700 people.

Historically, the main region of compact residence of Azerbaijanis is Borchali, located in southeast Georgia and officially called Kvemo Kartli (Lower Kartli). After Georgia gained independence, Borchaly became part of the newly formed province of Kvemo Kartli with its administrative center in the city of Rustavi (historical name Bostansheher). According to official data, the total area of ​​the province is 7 thousand km 2, the population is about 600 thousand people. The ethnic composition of the population is as follows: Azerbaijanis - 49%, Georgians - 40%, the remaining 11% are Russians, Armenians, Greeks and representatives of other nations (1). The province includes the administrative districts of Gardabani (historical name Garatepe), Marneuli (Borchaly), Bolnisi (Bolus Kepenekchi), Dmanisi (Bashkechid), Tetri-Tskaro (Akbulag), Tsalka (Barmagsyz). The territory of Borchali within Georgia extends from the borders with Azerbaijan along the borders of Georgia with Armenia and to the Childir Pass near the borders with Turkey.

The region's territory has historically undergone changes, resulting in different ethnographic and digital assumptions. HELL. Eritsov defined the boundaries of Borchaly as follows: “The district, which includes the Borchalinskaya plain, Lori and the Ardzhivan ridge, is located in the southeast of the Tiflis province between 40 degrees 47 seconds north and 62 degrees 22 seconds south latitude. The district borders with the Gazakh district of Elizavetpol and Alexandropol district of Erivan provinces. The southern border runs along the Goshadag ridge, through the Pambak valley, then in the north-west direction on the right hand there are the Chubuglu and Aglagan ridges, also called Bozabdal. In the west, Airigar separates Borchaly from Akhalkalaki district, the border between Gori and Borchali district runs along the Jam-Dzham and Arjivan ridges. Located in Manglisi, Sarydag separates Borchaly from Tiflis. From here the borders of Borchaly, including Yagluj, reach the Red Bridge. The total length of the Borchaly border is 480 versts, of which 100 versts are on the border with the Alexandropol district, 80 versts with the Gori district, 145 with the Tiflis district and 100 versts with the Gazakh district” (2). HELL. Eritsov notes that the boundaries of the Borchaly district are more extensive than the neighboring districts: “Twice the size of the neighboring Akhaltsikhe, Akhalkalaki and Telavi districts, Borchaly is also larger than the Tiflis, Tianet and Dusheti districts. In terms of area, there is no such large district in either the Kutaisi, Erivan, Elizavetpol or Baku provinces” (3). From the information provided, it is clear that the territory of the Borchali district covered the southeastern regions of the modern Georgian Republic - Dmanisi (Bashkechid), Bolnisi (Bolus Kepenekchi), Marneuli (Sarvan), Gardabani (Garatepe) completely, partially Tsalka district (Barmagsyz), the city of Rustavi, as well as the northern part of present-day Armenia - Spitak (Hamamli), Amassi (Agbaba), Stepanavan (Jalaloglu) and Kalinin (Tashir) regions.

According to the chamber census of 1832, there were 145 settlements and 4092 houses in Borchali, and the male population was 3634 Armenians, 787 Greeks, 669 Georgians, 213 Germans and 8479 Azerbaijanis (4).

According to archival materials, the ethnic composition of the population of the county in 1886 was as follows (5):

As can be seen from the above extracts, the majority of the population of the district were Azerbaijanis. This is also noted by the famous Georgian writer and public figure I. Chavchavadze. In the 244th and 245th issues of the newspaper “Iveria” he published on November 16–17, 1890, in the article “Borchalos Mazra” (“Borchaly district”), he writes that almost two-thirds of the population of Borchaly district are Azerbaijanis. The “Caucasian Calendar for 1907” (6), published in Tiflis, notes the presence of 628,850.00 acres of land in the Borchalinsky district, and also provides data on residence in the Borchalinsky area 11,630, the Ekaterinenfeld area (the current Bolnisi district. - Kh.I. ) – 16,615, Lori – 1820, Trialeti – 12,435 Muslim Turks.

After the Sovietization of Georgia, several population censuses were carried out, but their data on the number of Azerbaijanis living in the republic was distorted each time: according to the 1930 census, the number of Azerbaijanis was presented at 200 thousand people, in 1979 - 250 thousand, in 1989 - 307,556 people (5 .7%), according to official data in 2002 - 284,761 people (6.5%) (7).

The latest figures indicate recognition of discrimination and hidden deportation of Azerbaijanis during the decade of Georgian independence. In addition to the above, the deliberate reduction in digital indicators is confirmed by indirect data: according to the 1926 census, 132 thousand people lived in Adjara, 210 thousand in Abkhazia, 225 thousand in Inner Kartli, 88 thousand in South Ossetia and 86 thousand in Borchaly, after 50 years, these figures were respectively 294 thousand, 462 thousand, 353 thousand, 101 thousand and in Borchaly - 465 thousand. In percentage terms, this is as follows: 223%, 219.7%, 156.4%, 115.7% and 231%. The logic of the rate of reproduction suggests that the number of Azerbaijanis, who were significantly ahead of the Georgians in demographic reproduction, could not increase by only 50 thousand people. Hence the conclusion - the figures of the latest census are significantly underestimated, while we also mean that in terms of population density among the regions of Georgia, Borchaly is in the first row.

So how many Azerbaijanis actually live in Georgia? In reality, this is not so difficult to identify and clarify: in all of Georgia there are approximately 200 Azerbaijani villages and hamlets, and a certain number of families from each of them live in Baku. With their help, it is not so difficult to establish - even approximately - the number of families and their composition. Back in 1989, part of the intelligentsia, immigrants from Georgia, created the Borchaly society in Baku. Using the method described above, a detailed survey was conducted and a certificate was compiled, as a result it turned out that the number of Azerbaijanis in Georgia is about 600 thousand people. Taking into account the above and the policy of outright discrimination unleashed by the Georgian authorities since 1989, as a result of which over 100 thousand people left the country, the current number of Azerbaijanis in Georgia, according to our estimates, is approximately 500 thousand. The Georgian authorities, who have always been afraid of the demographic growth rate of the number of Azerbaijanis , constantly resorted to discriminatory measures against them and hid the real numbers of their numbers.

Downplaying the number of Azerbaijanis was not the only discriminatory measure. Both in Soviet times and subsequently, all sorts of ideological concepts were created to oust them from Georgia. Georgian historians claim that Azerbaijani Turks first appeared in Georgia in the 11th century during the Seljuk invasion, and mass settlements are associated with the reign of the Safavid Shah Abbas I in the 17th century (8). The distortion of the history of the settlement of Borchaly by the Turks took place back in the Soviet period and acquired ideological and conceptual overtones. The most outrageous thing is that all far-fetched concepts and falsified schemes have found a place in school textbooks. For example, in the textbook on the geography of Georgia for the ninth grade of secondary schools, approved by the Ministry of Education of Georgia, in the section “Geography of ethnic groups and religions” it is said: “The ancestors of most of the Azerbaijanis living in Georgia were the nomads of the Borchali tribe. They were resettled to Georgia by Shah Abbas. The rest are descendants of the Mughals, who migrated much later” (9). History textbooks abound with similar tendentious statements.

What's the real story?

One of the auxiliary disciplines in the study of historical events is toponymy, therefore, before moving on to the presentation of the history of Borchaly, let us turn to toponymy data. Even the medieval Arab author Yaghut al-Hamawi noted: “Borchali is the name of a locality in Arran” (10). Another Arab author Gardizi called this region “Borucholya”, i.e. “Wolf Steppe”, and the famous historian and statesman of the late 13th – early 14th centuries, author of the multi-volume “Jami attavarikh” Fazlullah Rashidaddin also uses the term “Borchaly” as a toponym, and as an ethnonym. The author of the “History of the Albanian Country”, Moses Kalankatuysky (VII century), as well as famous modern Turkish historians A. Togan and F. Kyrzyoglu, associate the origin of the toponym Borchaly with those who settled in the South Caucasus in the 2nd century BC. e. Turkic-Hunnic tribe Barsils.

In the Georgian sources themselves, the name of the region is found as “Gurdis Khevi” (“Wolf Valley”), in the Middle Persian (“Pahlavi”) sources “Gordman” - “Country of the Wolf People” (11). Of the listed options, the assumption of M. Kalankatuisky, A. Togan and F. Kyrzyoglu about the direct connection of the toponym Borchaly with the tribal name of the Barsils seems more justified. We draw the reader's attention to the fact that these historians enjoy well-deserved authority as reliable and competent specialists in the history and ethnography of the South Caucasus.

A sufficient amount of information on the history of Borchaly is available in Persian and Arabic written sources. We have already provided information from some of the Arabic-speaking authors. In this study, we consider it appropriate to place the main emphasis on data from Georgian sources, since the groundlessness of the historical claims of Georgian historians is proven by evidence, first of all, of Georgian written works, among which attention is drawn to the collection “Kartlis Tskhovreba” (“Life of Kartli”) and “Moktsevai” Kartlisai" (“Conversion [to Christianity] of Kartli”). “Kartlis Tskhovreba” begins with the events of the 8th century, i.e., reflects the relationship between the Khazarian Turks and Kartli, then gives a brief description of the fall of the Sasanian Empire under the blows of the Muslim Arab army, as well as the emergence and history of the Tiflis Emirate. The manuscript of the chronicle “Moktsevai Kartlisai”, which tells about the conversion of the population of Kartli (Eastern Georgia) to Christianity, was found in 1888. Two years later, it was published in Georgian by the famous historian E. Takaishvili, and in 1900 - translated into Russian. The chronicle begins with the following words: “When King Alexander put them to flight and pushed them into the midnight country, then for the first time he saw the ferocious tribes of rebels living along the Kura in four cities with their suburbs - Sarkine, Kaspi, Urbnisi and Odzrakh, and their fortresses: the great fortress of Sarkine, the fortresses of Kaspi, Urbnisi, Odzrakhe... Then the warlike tribe of the Huns, which had separated from the Chaldeans, arrived and asked the ruler of the rebels for a place on condition of paying tribute, and they settled in Zanavi” (12).

E. Takaishvili calls the “rebel Turks” of the text “Turanians” (13), according to academician N.Ya. Marra, the term should be understood as “indigenous Turks”. Soviet Georgian historian S.N. Janashia gives his interpretation of the source’s message and accuses the author of the chronicle of anachronism, considering the Turks to be aliens in the Caucasus and it is impossible for them to stay here in the 4th century BC. e. Modern Georgian historian E.S. Chkhartishvili approaches the problem more objectively, accuses S.N. Janashia is biased and believes that the “Bunturks,” being part of the Huns, could well have settled in the southeast of present-day Georgia, i.e., on the land of Borchali, back in the 4th century BC. e. A.V. Togan in his work “Introduction to the General History of the Turks” also notes the residence of the Barsil Huns in Borchaly and connects the appearance of the term “Borchaly” with the name of this particular tribe.

In parallel with information about the residence of “Bunturks” in the territory of present-day Borchaly, the sources also contain sufficient material about the Bulgars. For example, the Armenian author of the 5th century (some historians date his life and work to the 7th century) Moses Khorensky calls the southern foothills of the Caucasus “Bulgar lands”, and the Albanian historian Moses Kalankatuysky in “History of the Albanian Country” talks about the frequent wars of one of the Bulgarian tribes - Barsilov (14). All the reports given here by the authors of ancient works give reason to conclude that, after the rebels, the Barsils were the second Turkic ethnic layer that mastered the lands of Borchaly already in the first centuries of our era. Thus, that part of the Huns, which with their main mass did not move to the west and remained in the Caucasus, is called in the sources “Bulgars”, sometimes “Burchali”. In turn, the Bulgarian association included Barsils, Khazars, Savirs, and Garynjalars.

Another Turkic people who participated in the formation of the Turkic population of Borchaly were the Khazars, and it is known that the Turkic tribes of the Bulgar-Barsils, Savirs and Hailandurs also participated in the creation and strengthening of the Khazar Khaganate itself, which existed during the 7th–10th centuries.

Another Turkic ethnic group that took a close part in the formation of the Turkic population of Borchaly is, undoubtedly, the Kipchaks. It is known that by the 10th century the Kipchaks, following the Huns, the Turks of the Great Khaganate and the Khazars, became the sole masters of the Great Eurasian Steppe. So far, the earliest source where the ethnonym “Kypchak” is first encountered is considered to be a tombstone stele with an inscription dating back to 759. Medieval Georgian sources know the “new” and “old” Kipchaks; the historian Rashidaddin considers the Kipchaks to be one of the five associations of the Turkic ulus, which was headed by Oguz Khagan. The concept “Deshte Kipchak” (“Kypchak steppes”), known from historical and geographical literature, included, among others, the steppes of the Black Sea and Caspian regions.

There is enough historical research about the settlement of the Kipchaks in the Borchaly region and the presence of the “Garapapag” and “Garaberkler” tribes in their composition. A.V. Togan, A. Jafaroglu, Z.M. Buniyatov and others considered one of the divisions of the Kipchaks - “garapapag” (in Russian historical literature they are called “karakolpak”, “black hoods”) one of the main Turkic tribes that became part of the Turkic Azerbaijani population of present-day Georgia.

The Kipchaks played an important role in the defense of Georgia and its active foreign policy at the beginning of the 12th century. The Abkhaz-Georgian king David IV the Builder, in the fight against the Oghuz Turks of the Seljuk Empire, invited and settled in Borchaly and adjacent areas a Kipchak horde numbering 40 thousand warriors, i.e., according to the estimates of medievalists, together with members of their families, only about 200 thousand people (15). It would be appropriate to note that at the same time King David IV became related to the Kipchaks, taking the khan’s daughter as his wife (16). The historian of King David writes that “he brought a great multitude, and his father-in-law and his wife’s brothers did not work in vain, and it was not in vain that he resettled the Kipchaks, for with their hands he destroyed the forces of all Persia and brought fear to all the kings...” (17).

Looking ahead a little, we note that it was from among the Kipchaks who remained in Georgia that the famous commander of Queen Tamar, commander of the Georgian troops Kubasar, came from. The Kipchaks, brought by King David, played a major role in strengthening the independence of the Georgian kingdom and the power of the king himself. With their help, campaigns were made deep into the territory of Shirvan, the Kipchaks played a major role in the victory of David IV over the Ganja atabek of the Seljuks in the Battle of Didgori in 1121, as a result of which the Tiflis Emirate was annexed to the Georgian kingdom in the next 1122. Soon Dmanis (Tumanis fortress in the epic “Dede Gorgud”) and Ani were annexed. At the same time, King David, in order not to completely ruin relations with the Muslim world, visited the Juma Mosque in Tiflis and forbade the Christian population of Tiflis to keep pigs.

The Mongol conquests of the early 13th century ended with the inclusion of the entire South Caucasus, including Borchaly, into the Elkhanid state - the ulus of Hulagu Khan and his descendants. Later, as a result of the campaign against Georgia in 1386, Emir Tamerlane subjugated the Kipchak settlements north of Tiflis. In the 14th–15th centuries, Georgia was part of or under the influence of the states of Garagoyunlu and Bayandurlu (Aggoyonlu). Since the 16th century, during the Ottoman-Safavid wars, Borchali, which passed from hand to hand, was mainly in the Safavid sphere of influence. It is an undeniable reality that during the reign of Shah Abbas I (1587–1629) Turkic Azerbaijanis were resettled in Borchali and other lands of the present Georgian Republic, but at the same time the reverse process cannot be denied: Shah Abbas I, knowing about the disposition of the Garapapags towards the Ottomans , residents of many villages of Borchaly - Gazakh mahal were resettled in the regions (beglyarbekty) of Ganja - Garabakh and Shirvan.

The 18th century can be considered the most difficult period in the history of Borchaly. This is due to the fact that during the “election” of Nadir Khan as Shah in February 1736, who overthrew the Safavids from the Shah’s throne and usurped power, the very influential Ziyadoglu family, whose representatives were traditionally beglarbeys (governors) of Ganja and Karabakh, opposed it. A year after this, the vindictive Nadir Shah, in revenge, took away the lands of the Borchali and Gazakh sultanates from them and reassigned them to his vassal, the Georgian king Teimuraz II.

With the collapse of the state of Nadir Shah after his assassination in 1747, more than two dozen khanates and sultans were formed in Azerbaijan, including the Borchali Sultanate. The sultanate included Garayazi (Gardabani), Sarvan (Marneuli), Agbulag (Tetritskaro), Bolnisi, Dmanisi, as well as Jalaloglu, Barana, Tashir and Hamamli, now as administrative units located within Armenia. The transfer of Borchala first under the control of the king of Kartli, and then the civil strife between the khanates became the reason for the resettlement of part of the Turkic population from Borchala. This process even intensified after the death of Nadir Shah in 1747. This situation worried the king of Kartli and Kakheti, Irakli II, who feared the depopulation of tax-paying villages, and he asked the village elders not to leave the country (18). Despite the king's requests, many families left their native lands and moved to Turkey and Iran.

The resettlement of Azerbaijanis from Georgia became more widespread after the annexation of the South Caucasus to Russia. This process, with a certain strengthening and weakening, continued until the establishment of Soviet power in Georgia. Thus, in the spring of 1828, more than 800 Garagapagli families moved from Borchali to the Tabriz region. Subject to the payment of 12 thousand tyumens in gold to the governor of Azerbaijan and crown prince Abbas Mirza, as well as the service in his army of 400 horsemen with their equipment, they were settled in the Sulduz region. As for Turkey, according to Turkish researcher, Professor A.B. Arjilasuna, refugees who arrived from the South Caucasus settled mainly in the Kars province. And now there are 92 villages here, most of which have names that coincide with the names of the native villages they left in Borchaly (19). About the subsequent wave of relocations M.F. Kyrzioglu writes: “... arrived in 1920–1921. as refugees, and after 1924, as a result of the exchange, 45 thousand Turks found shelter and the opportunity for a quiet life in the lands of Kars. These were Garaga-Paglys, people from the regions of Agbaba, Borchaly-Lori and Garayazi” (20).

The forced or voluntary resettlement of Azerbaijanis from Georgia continued during the Second World War and after it. Finally, at the end of the twentieth century, with the development of the national liberation movement for independence in Georgia, a new stage in the policy of discrimination and deportation began (we consider these issues separately in our study).

In 1880, the tsarist authorities liquidated the Borchalinsky sultanate, creating instead the Borchalinsky district as part of the Tiflis province. When the county was created, the districts of Garatepe (present-day Gardabani) and Garachep (mostly present-day Sagarejo) were separated from it.

As is known, with the fall of the Romanov autocracy, three independent republics were formed in the South Caucasus, which immediately developed territorial claims against each other. The main object of claims of all three republics was the territory of Borchaly. After the declaration of independence of Georgia on May 26, 1918, Prime Minister Ramishvili announced the establishment of state borders along the administrative boundaries of the former Elizavetpol and Tiflis provinces. Based on its statement, the Georgian government in June 1918 stationed units of its troops in Borchali, relying on which the newly appointed Georgian officials began to organize their administration, confiscate food supplies of the population, and force the Azerbaijani population of the region to leave their place of residence through arbitrariness and oppression. The local population, rightly considering Borchaly their homeland, asked for help from the government of the Republic of Azerbaijan and urgently demanded the creation of their own authorities in Borchaly. The then Azerbaijani government, in turn, did not show indifference towards the Borchaly region, adjacent to the Elizavetpol province and with a predominant Turkic population. Already on June 14, the government of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic sent a note of protest to the Georgian side in connection with the deployment of its troops in Borchali and expressed its desire to resolve the problem through negotiations. In July, the Georgian government issued an ultimatum demanding the withdrawal of its military units from the Garayazy area within 24 hours. The Azerbaijani side again recalled that the borders between the two states have not yet been determined, it is better to avoid open confrontation and resolve issues through negotiations. As a way out of this situation, the Azerbaijani government proposed the creation of an international commission. Under pressure from representatives of Germany and Turkey in the Caucasus, the Georgian government, in connection with the issue of disputed territories, in August 1918 gave its consent to the creation of an arbitration commission, and a little later the parties decided to transfer this issue to the upcoming Istanbul Conference. In anticipation of the conference, both the local and Turkish press, each side published numerous articles outlining its position on the controversial issue. The Azerbaijani delegation cited as its main argument the fact of the overwhelming numerical advantage of the Turkic population in Borchaly and parts of the Sygnakh district, as well as urgent appeals and wishes of the local population asking for the inclusion of these territories into the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic. The Georgian delegation, in turn, justified the need to include Borchaly in Georgia by the close, literally “on the threshold”, location of the lands of Borchaly to the capital of the republic. The Istanbul Conference was unable to resolve the controversial territorial problems of the South Caucasus countries. The lands of the Borchaly, Garayaz and Sygnakh regions with an area of ​​8.7 thousand km 2 with an overwhelming Azerbaijani population remained “disputed territories”. Although the parties agreed to bring this issue to the Paris Peace Conference, representatives of the great powers limited themselves to de facto recognition of the three South Caucasian republics, but left territorial problems until the international situation was fully clarified (21).

In connection with the created uncertain situation and the aggressive behavior of the Georgian side, the Borchaly residents came to the decision to proclaim an independent state entity “Garapapag”. Their appeal to the Council of Ministers of the Azerbaijan Republic said: “We are the original inhabitants of these places, and the numerical majority is ours. We have every reason, and we are worthy to organize our power here. Based on our intentions, we turned to the Sultan and the Grand Vizier with a request to recognize our rights and, under the auspices of the Sublime Porte, to promote the reunification of our lands with Azerbaijan” (22). However, in view of the extremely confusing and tense situation in the Caucasus, as well as in order to ensure the safety of the population, the creators of the “Republic of Borchaly - Garapapag” decided to unite with the Araz-Turkic Republic, which included the lands of Nakhichevan - Surmeli and the Araks River basin, and the Kars Republic, which included the territories Kars region and the land of Meskhetian Turks Akhaltsikhe - Akhalkalaki.

In January 1919, representatives of these Turkic republics held a conference in Kars, where they proclaimed the creation of the “Turkic Republic of the South-West Caucasus” with its center in Kars, covering the territories from Batum to Ordubad in the Nakhchivan region. The territory of the republic was about 40 thousand km 2, and the population was 1 million 764 thousand people. Unfortunately, due to the intervention of the great powers in the person of England, this republic lasted only a few months (23).

On December 17, 1918, Armenia officially declared war on Georgia. Military operations took place mainly on the territory of the former Borchaly district, and the local Azerbaijani population suffered heavy human and material losses. After 14 days of inglorious military operations, under the threat of defeat and with the assistance of the Allied Commission of representatives of England and France, on December 30, the Armenian government sent a telegram agreeing to the immediate cessation of hostilities and the withdrawal of troops, as was decided with the participation of the English General Rycroft, from 24.00 hours on December 31 (24). At a conference held in Tiflis on January 9-17, a decision was made regarding Borchaly. It said: “The points occupied in the neutral zone of Borchali by Georgian troops by 24.00 on December 31 shall be considered as the troop demarcation line” (25).

This demarcation basically coincides with the current borders between Georgia and Armenia. The delimitation agreement divided the former Borchali district into 3 parts: the northern part was transferred to Georgia, the southern part to Armenia, the Lori district was declared a neutral zone. The opinion of the local Muslim population was not taken into account at all, which is why representatives of the Azerbaijani population of Lori and other parts of Borchali, in numerous appeals to the governments of Georgia, Azerbaijan and Turkey, expressed categorical protest against the dismemberment of their lands.

In the fall of 1920, when Turkish troops occupied Gyumryu and Garakilse and were on the approaches to Lori, Armenia turned to Georgia for help. On November 13 of the same year, an agreement was concluded between the two countries, according to which the neutral zone of Lori was transferred to the control of Georgia. After the establishment of Soviet power in Armenia, the Armenian side again began to demand the return of Lori. Here, with the assistance of the relevant services of the 11th Red Army, which had already occupied Azerbaijan and Armenia, the Lori Armenians organized an anti-government rebellion, as a result of which on February 11–12, 1921, Georgian units were withdrawn from the region. The Lori rebellion created the conditions for the invasion of the Red Army, as a result of this and other related reasons, on February 23 of the same year, Soviet power was established in Georgia. Some time later, after long discussions, on November 6, 1921, by decision of the Caucasian Bureau of the RCP (b), the Lori section was finally transferred to Armenia. An article entitled “How was the historical territory of Georgia - Lori lost?”, published in the Georgian Times newspaper on October 20–27, 2005, emphasizes Stalin’s opinion at the meeting of the Central Committee of the RCP (b) and his special role in the transfer of the neutral zone of Lori Armenia. The total area of ​​the Lori section of the Borchali district transferred to Armenia was 2367.44 km 2. On December 22, 1922, on the recommendation of the commission on border issues of the South Caucasus Delimitation Council, the Vorontsovsky district of the Borchalinsky district was also annexed to the Lori-Pambaksky district of Armenia.

In 1929, Borchalinsky district was liquidated, and in its place three administrative districts were formed - Borchalinsky (Marneuli), Luxembourg (Bolnisi) and Bashkechidsky (Dmanis). The name “Borchaly” has been preserved in relation only to the current Marneuli district. In 1949, a replacement was made here too - instead of “Borchaly” the name “Marneuli” appeared, although the term “Borchaly” has always been and is still in wide circulation among the people and in the unofficial lexicon. With the declaration of independence by Georgia in 1991 and the subsequent new administrative division of the country, the province of Kvemo Kartli with its center in the city of Rustavi appeared on the Georgian part of the territory of historical Borchali. From the other, Armenian part of Borchaly, Azerbaijanis were expelled during the events of autumn 1988 - early 1989.

Thus,

First: the ethnic roots of the Azerbaijanis of Georgia go back to the Turkic tribes (Bunturks, Barsils, Bulgars, Khazars, Kipchaks, Oguzes, Garapapags) who lived on the historical territory of Borchaly in the last centuries BC - in the first millennium AD. Azerbaijanis living in Georgia are the autochthonous population of their lands, and not migrants. During the Soviet period, not without the knowledge of the center, Georgian historians and the executive power, in order to create confusion and exert psychological influence and justify their discriminatory policies against Azerbaijanis, declared them descendants of nomadic Turkic tribes and aliens, renamed the names of settlements that had existed for centuries, in other words , actively implemented the policy of “Georgianization”;

Second: the territory of Borchaly at different periods of history was part of various states and great empires, subjected to political and administrative changes, until, as a result of the last division and renaming in the Soviet period, it acquired its current form;

Third: over the past hundred years, Azerbaijanis in Georgia have been subjected to discrimination and pressure on ethno-religious grounds several times, which in some cases led to forced displacement from their native places of residence;

Fourth: the number of Azerbaijanis living in Georgia was deliberately underestimated during the census, and statistical data was falsified;

Fifth: despite the difficulties created in socio-economic life and everyday life, thanks to their hard work and patience, the Azerbaijanis of Georgia were able to resist the discriminatory policies of the Georgian authorities, and whenever possible they always sought to actively participate in the socio-political life of the country. Contrary to the official ideological concept, they never considered themselves “aliens”; on the contrary, they always perceived themselves as masters and sons of their native land – Borchaly.

SOURCES

1. Diyar newspaper, January 1998.

2. Eritsov A.D. The economic life of state peasants of the Borchalinsky district of the Tiflis province. – T. 7 – Tiflis, 1887.

4. Shamyoglu Sh. Interethnic relations and ethnic processes in Borchaly. – Baku, 1997 (in Azerbaijani).

5. Azerbaijan State Archive. Fund 970, file 227, l. 110.

6. Caucasian calendar for 1907. Tiflis, 1906.

8. Azerbaijan Central State Archive of Contemporary History. Fond 970, list 1, pp. 5–6.

9. Berudzhashvili N., Davitashvili Z., Elizbarashvili N. Geography of Georgia. – Tbilisi, 1999; Asatiani N. History of Georgia. – Tbilisi, 1995, etc.

10. Mamedov K. Forgotten and forced to oblivion history. – Newspaper “Borchalynyn sesi”, No. 1, July 2–9, 2005.

11. Ibid.

12. Takaishvili E.S. Sources of Georgian chronicles. Three Chronicles. Per. from Georgian language. SMOMPC, vol. XXVIII. – Tiflis, 1900.

13. Ibid.

14. History of Azerbaijan. Ed. Prof. S.S. Aliyarli. – Baku, 1996 (in Azerbaijani).

15. Kotlyar I.F. Polovtsy in Georgia and Vladimir Monomakh. – In the book: From the history of Ukrainian-Georgian relations. Part 1. – Tbilisi, 1968. P. 23.

16. Biography of the King of Kings David. Translation from ancient Georgian, notes and comments by Yu. Nasibov. See: Medieval East: history and modernity. Ed. Z.M. Buniyatov. – Baku, 1990. P. 134.

17. Ibid., p. 134–135.

18. Mamedov K. Borchaly against the background of Azerbaijani-Georgian relations. – Newspaper “Borchalynyn sesi”, August 27 – September 2, 2005.

20. Kyrzyoglu M.F. A look at the 1800-year history of the Garapapag tribe in the Kura and Araz river basin. – Erzurum, 1772 (in Turkish).

21. Nasibli N. Azerbaijan Democratic Republic. – Baku, 1990 (in Azerbaijani).

22. Mammadli Sh. Divided Borchali. – Baku, 1991 (in Azerbaijani language).

23. Musaev Ismail. Political situation in the Nakhichevan and Zangezur regions of Azerbaijan and the policies of foreign powers (1917–1921). – Baku, 1996 (in Azerbaijani).

24. Documents and materials on the foreign policy of Transcaucasia and Georgia. – Tiflis, 1919. P. 483.

25. Mammadli Sh. Specified work.