Dispute over Three Church Complexes on Azerbaijani-Georgian Border at Risk of Escalation, Moscow Scholar Says

Paul Goble

            Staunton, May 14 – Disputes over access to three ancient Christian monasteries on or near the Azerbaijani-Georgian border, disputes that have ebbed and flowed since 1991, could escalate into a larger conflict if either side presses for a new demarcation of the border or if relations between the two countries deteriorate for other reasons, Aleksandr Krylov says.

            The Russian specialist on the Caucasus at Moscow’s IMEMO notes that the two countries have been strategic partners and that pressure for demarcation has been limited; but he continues, the potential for serious conflict exist because both countries claim the same territory and “are not ready for compromise” (kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/335399/).

                “A civilized solution,” Krylov suggests, “would be to declare the territory one of common use,” which in fact Baku and Tbilisi have informally done in the past, “but for the Caucasus this won’t work: here, each of the sides to the last insists on its right to this or that territory” whenever demarcation insisted upon.

            According to Eldar Namazov, a former aide to the Azerbaijani president, “Azerbaijan never blocked visits to that part of the  Keshikchidag complex on its territory.” Instead, “we are our side created a unique ‘little Shengen zone’” which allowed Georgians to visit these religious places on Azerbaijani territory without any formalities.

            That arrangement lasted “many years,” he continues; but the situation first began to heat up at the end of April 2019 after Georgian President Salome Zurabishvili visited the border region and called for the speediest possible demarcation of the border,” a call that other Georgian politicians then echoed.

            At that point, Azerbaijani border guards blocked visits to the monasteries by some religious and an additional number of pilgrims and tourists.  The blockage ended quickly after the foreign ministers of the two countries spoke, but this event triggered new Georgian demand for border demarcation, something Azerbaijan views as a plan to change the border line.

            Namazov says that “Azerbaijan’s approach is based on European values: one need not change borders but act so that people do not feel them. It would be even more incorrect to draw borders on religious principles given that in Azerbaijan there are monuments” of a wide range of faiths, as there are in Armenia as well.

            Baku insists, he continues, that “not one of the sides must demand from the other, territories or monuments. We do not need ‘a second Karabakh,’ and Georgia doesn’t need ‘a new South Ossetia.’” Both countries understand that any territorial claims will harm both sides in any dispute.

Georgia, in contrast, has a different view. It considers the territories under the monasteries, two on the border (Udabno and Chichkhhituri) and a third near the border (Bertubani), as Georgian. That sets the stage for a potentially serious conflict. If that position remains unchanged, any discussion of demarcating of the border could cause problems.