"ERROR" SLIPS IN "UNNOTICEABLY"

When the article about the renaming of several Azerbaijani villages by the Georgian State Registry was published, we expected a prompt reaction to this information from Tbilisi. But this did not happen, and in search of an official explanation for the situation, our correspondents had to go to great pain.

According to a study by the Georgian-based Human Rights Monitoring Group of Ethnic Minorities (MRMG), during 2010-2011 the Georgian authorities renamed 18 Azerbaijani villages in Marneuli District and 12 villages in Tsalka District.

Elbrus Mammadov, the head of the human rights organization, told R+ that there were mass changes of Turkic toponyms to Georgian names on the website of the Georgian State Registry (www.reestri.gov.ge).

For instance, the village of Damya Corarxi in Marneuli District was renamed Zenamkhari in the Georgian State Registry, Yenikand - Axalsopeli; Baytari - Tskhaltashua; the village of Yeddikilsa in Tsalka District - Sakdrioni; Gunyagala - Sameba etc.

This news is strongly reminiscent of the early 1990s when, under the rule of the Georgian administration headed by the ultra-nationalist Zviad Gamsakhurdia, the process of mass renaming of Azerbaijani villages was launched.

At that time - in 1991 - 38 Azerbaijani villages in Bolnisi District were given Georgian names in the blink of an eye.

After Eduard Shevardnadze came to power, the process of renaming somewhat stopped. But the fate of the renamed Azerbaijani villages has thus far remained unresolved - their previous names have not been restored.

"However, the incumbent Georgian authorities have changed their tactics and methods: while in the 1990s the policy of changing toponyms was conducted openly and officially, today this is being done covertly and is hidden from society," says Mammadov.

In his opinion, fearing a negative reaction from the Azerbaijani population, the Georgian authorities consider it expedient to change names on official maps and documents without informing inhabitants of those villages. But in the course of time, the local population will simply be presented with a fait accompli.

In the meantime, our investigation found out that relevant bodies in Georgia were not ready to explain what had happened. Some began to assert that there was no renaming of Azerbaijani villages, but others, who saw for themselves the map mentioned in the MRMG report on the website of the State Registry, described it as a misunderstanding.

For example, this fact astonished Georgi Dolidze, a representative of the Georgian Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure, whose interview you can read on page 20. He believes that the decisions to rename populated areas are made exactly at their ministry, but the abovementioned changes were not made by the ministry. Dolidze promised that they would soon deal with the issue and it seems they have already clarified it.

The next day (on 14 April), in an interview with R+, the head of the Georgian Public State Registry Agency, Sergo Tsikarishvili, admitted that there had been an annoying error on the website of the agency, about which employees of the organization learnt just recently.

"There can be no talk of changing Turkic toponyms to Georgian ones," he said. Explaining how this map appeared on the website of the Georgian registry, Tsikarishvili noted that it was legally invalid. These designations, he believes, were adopted in Soviet times, and they were mistakenly reanimated by a private company, which conducted the cadastre registration of the country's territorial sections at the request of the Georgian Public Registry Agency. "The fact is that this company did not know about the existence of other cadastre maps and used old maps in its work."

Tsikarishvili noted that a decision to change the Turkic toponyms of Azerbaijani villages to Georgian ones was not taken by state bodies of this country.

"This is a misunderstanding. Our omission was that we did not verify the information posted on the website. We have already contacted the heads of municipalities to find out if they had put forward relevant initiatives. They answered that nothing similar had occurred. I think this annoying misunderstanding on the website will be corrected by our employees today. I can say more. We revealed that even those Georgian names, which were written on these Soviet maps, were incorrect. In Georgian, they are pronounced and written differently. I want to note again that what happened is a pure misunderstanding," Tsikarishvili said.

However, Georgian maps of 1982 available to us (i.e. Soviet map) and the ethnic map of 2005 testify that the majority of the renamed villages had Turkic names both in Soviet times and during Georgia's independence. So the arguments of the head of the agency are inconsistent with reality. It emerges that either the minister was left holding the bag, or he is someone else.

On the other hand, how can the Public Registry Agency of Georgia, the main product of which is to draw up accurate maps with accurate names, accept an actual defect from the contractor? Indeed, this is not a booklet of some organization distant from cartography, where such errors can be pardonable.

And finally, how come that no "annoying error" connected with the name, for example, of an Armenian village slipped into the "defective map", while more than 30 "omissions" were connected precisely with Azerbaijani villages?

This is strongly reminiscent of the style of the Armenians, who blame a "technical error" every time their attempts to doctor historical facts and falsify maps are exposed.

We are familiar with more than hundred facts when Baku had to appeal to different media outlets, including the Russian ORT and RTR television channels, demanding that they rectify "inaccuracies" in their maps where Nagornyy Karabakh, in particular, is presented as Armenian territory. And every time we heard apologies like "there was a misunderstanding", "this is an annoying error", "we will clarify it" and so forth. According to the probability theory, the same "annoying technical error" could apply, say, to Zangazur, which is currently in Armenia, and it could once be presented as territory of Azerbaijan. But nothing like that has ever happened yet.

Quite possibly, this is a provocation of a purely "Armenian nature". It is no secret that the friendly relations between Azerbaijan and Georgia and the support of Georgia's ethnic Azerbaijanis for Saakashvili are seriously irritate Armenia and Georgia's ethnic Armenians. Especially as the next presidential elections in Georgia will be held in 2013 - isn't it perfect time to set the incumbent president against the active Azerbaijani electorate?

We should say in January 2008, the Georgian Central Electoral Commission (CEC) reported that the presidential candidate Mikheil Saakashvili had gained the largest number of votes (over 87 per cent) in the elections in Marneuli, which is home to the Azerbaijani population. By the way, it is interesting that the change of toponyms happened only in Azerbaijani-populated regions.

For example, the MRMG study showed that Armenian toponyms in Javakhetia remain unchanged.

And this happens at a time when the Javakh Armenians, backed by Armenia,  continue to make separatist demands on Tbilisi, which is not the case among the Azerbaijanis who show respect for the Georgian state and the laws of their country, trying to integrate into Georgian society.

R+ has already reported in one of its previous issues that the policy of changing village names to Georgian ones is also not welcomed by leading international organizations, which previously recommended that Tbilisi rectify the situation in this region. Here, for example, is the recommendation of the Council of Europe's Advisory Committee on a Framework Convention on the Protection of the Rights of Ethnic Minorities:

"…the Advisory Committee notes with regret that no measures were undertaken or planned to rectify the situation with respect to changes in the traditional names of places of densely populated ethnic minorities, which were introduced in the 1990s. Among such localities, it is worth mentioning the Azerbaijani villages of Kvemo-Kartli region, the names of which were changed in 1990-1991… This situation is incompatible with the principles of Article 11 of the Framework Convention. Consequently, the Advisory Committee advises the authorities, together with the representatives of the ethnic minorities, to determine a mechanism for the return to these geographical villages, and possibly also to other localities, of their traditional names which are an inseparable part of them."

Apparently, certain forces in Tbilisi are not only turning a blind eye to these recommendations but, on the contrary, are continuing to change the remaining Azerbaijani-Turkic place names.

Such steps run counter to the principles being declared by Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili. "You are part of our state, and I am glad that more and more Azerbaijanis are learning the Georgian language and integrating into a single society without losing their own identity and culture that is part of our common culture," Saakashvili said in March of this year congratulating Georgia's ethnic Azerbaijanis on Novruz.

One may ask whose decision it was to change Azerbaijani place names the Georgian president considers "part of a single culture" of his country. What is the motivation behind such a disrespectful attitude towards Azerbaijani place names at a time when Azerbaijan, according to Saakashvili himself, is at least a guarantor of Georgia's energy independence? It has not been forgotten yet that Azerbaijan once prevented the Georgian population from freezing in prejudice of its own relations with neighbouring Russia. The Georgian president occasionally remembers this with gratitude.

"Ilham Aliyev is a man of his word, he has always supported us at the time of crisis. Today's event is a graphic example of that. The people of Georgia will never forget this," Saakashvili told a ceremony marking gasification of the town of Zugdidi in western Georgia in 2009.

There are also strategic relations between Azerbaijan and Georgia. According to Saakashvili himself, the two neighbouring countries "have practically formed an informal confederation". Georgian-Azerbaijani relations are characterized "not only by wishes, but by specific plans and decisions on their implementation", he said. This assessment of bilateral relations is shared by Azerbaijani leaders, which is confirmed by numerous top level statements.

Thus, the strategic partnership between Azerbaijan and Georgia has assumed a practically irreversible nature. From the standpoint of a mutually beneficial regional cooperation, Georgia is first of all a significant transport corridor for Azerbaijan, albeit not the only one. Azerbaijan, as we have indicated, is in essence a guarantor of Georgia's energy security. Besides, Tbilisi derives significant financial dividends from the transit through its territory of Azerbaijani oil and gas within the framework of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum projects.

Azerbaijan credits Georgia's share in the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars regional railway project on favourable terms. Direct investment by the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan in the Georgian economy has considerably increased in recent years.

On the other hand, both Azerbaijan and Georgia are still suffering from separatism and territorial conflicts. This is making it necessary for the two countries to coordinate their activities within international organizations.

All these are key components of informal confederative relations between the two countries. At the same time, these relations can be stronger if the sides remain faithful to their pledges and consistent in their actions towards each other. Not in word, but in deed.

It remains to be hoped that the Georgian government will take this issue under control, punish those culpable of "provocation", "misunderstanding" or "an unfortunate mistake" and stop the violations of the rights of ethnic minorities, Georgian laws and Tbilisi's international commitments. It is clear that there are people trying to undermine Azerbaijani-Georgian relations. And while the traces of provocation are usually blurred, today there is a situation when specific names, state bodies and companies can be brought to account. So why not do that? We, for our part, will continue to monitor the situation.