The myth of the Shi'ite crescent
Sep 30, 2005
Asia Times
By Pepe Escobar
[...]
Azerbaijan - where 75% of the population is Shi'ite - could not be included in a Shi'ite crescent by any stretch of the imagination, even though it was a former province of the Persian empire that Russia took over in 1828.
Azeris speak a language close to Turkish, but at the same time they are kept at some distance by the Turks because they are in the majority Shi'ites. Unlike Iran, the basis of modern, secular Turkey is national - not religious - identity.
To complicate matters further, Shi'ism in Azerbaijan had to face the shock of a society secularized by seven decades of Soviet rule. Azeris would not be tempted - to say the least - to build an Iranian-style theocracy at home.
It's true that Azeri mullahs are "Iranified". But as Iran and Azerbaijan are contiguous, independent Azerbaijan fears too much Iranization. At the same time, Iran does not push too hard for Shi'ite influence on Azerbaijan because Azeri nationalism - sharing a common religion on both sides of the border - could embark on a reunification of Azerbaijan to the benefit of Baku, and not of Tehran.
And if this was not enough, there's the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, an enclave of Armenian people completely within Azerbaijan, where Iran supports Armenia for basically two reasons: to reduce Turkish influence in Azerbaijan and to help Russia counteract Turkey - perceived as an American Trojan horse - in the Caucasus.
A fair resume of this intractable equation would be that Azerbaijan is too Shi'ite to be totally pro-Turkish, not Shi'ite enough to be completely pro-Iranian, but Shi'ite enough to prevent itself from becoming a satellite of Russia - again.
[...]
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.
Asia Times
By Pepe Escobar
[...]
Azerbaijan - where 75% of the population is Shi'ite - could not be included in a Shi'ite crescent by any stretch of the imagination, even though it was a former province of the Persian empire that Russia took over in 1828.
Azeris speak a language close to Turkish, but at the same time they are kept at some distance by the Turks because they are in the majority Shi'ites. Unlike Iran, the basis of modern, secular Turkey is national - not religious - identity.
To complicate matters further, Shi'ism in Azerbaijan had to face the shock of a society secularized by seven decades of Soviet rule. Azeris would not be tempted - to say the least - to build an Iranian-style theocracy at home.
It's true that Azeri mullahs are "Iranified". But as Iran and Azerbaijan are contiguous, independent Azerbaijan fears too much Iranization. At the same time, Iran does not push too hard for Shi'ite influence on Azerbaijan because Azeri nationalism - sharing a common religion on both sides of the border - could embark on a reunification of Azerbaijan to the benefit of Baku, and not of Tehran.
And if this was not enough, there's the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, an enclave of Armenian people completely within Azerbaijan, where Iran supports Armenia for basically two reasons: to reduce Turkish influence in Azerbaijan and to help Russia counteract Turkey - perceived as an American Trojan horse - in the Caucasus.
A fair resume of this intractable equation would be that Azerbaijan is too Shi'ite to be totally pro-Turkish, not Shi'ite enough to be completely pro-Iranian, but Shi'ite enough to prevent itself from becoming a satellite of Russia - again.
[...]
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.
posted by Vahe Balabanian at 9:12 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home