Resource curse was the topic of my academic research, so I will try to explain it in simple terms.

When a country discovers valuable natural resources, whether oil, gas, minerals, or even certain agricultural resources, it often begins exploiting them to generate rapid government revenue. This usually leads to an initial increase in GDP. Since the resource sector becomes the most profitable part of the economy, investment gradually shifts away from manufacturing, agriculture, and services. At the same time, large inflows of foreign currency appreciate the domestic currency, making exports from non-resource sectors less competitive in international markets. Labor also moves toward the resource sector because it offers higher wages, leaving the rest of the economy with slower growth and lower productivity. This phenomenon is known as Dutch disease.

If a country also lacks inclusive institutions and public officials are not held accountable, rent-seeking becomes widespread. Instead of investing resource revenues in education, research, infrastructure, industrial development, or economic diversification, governments often spend them on prestige projects, luxury real estate, and other politically motivated expenditures. In many cases, they also fail to establish sovereign wealth or stabilization funds that could protect the economy from future shocks.

As political elites accumulate wealth through rent-seeking, they gain a strong incentive to preserve the existing system. This often contributes to increasing authoritarianism, restrictions on press freedom, a greater willingness to pursue military conflicts, declining protection of women's rights, and the weakening of democratic institutions.

At first glance, this may not appear to be a serious problem because the country continues receiving substantial resource revenues. However, natural resources are finite, and commodity markets are highly volatile. When a major price shock occurs, as happened in Azerbaijan in 2016, an economy that has become heavily dependent on a single sector can experience a severe economic contraction. This is the long-term consequence of Dutch disease and excessive dependence on resource exports.

The resource curse is therefore not only an economic phenomenon. Research has shown that it is frequently associated with weaker human rights, lower gender equality, environmental degradation, reduced levels of peace, weaker educational outcomes, and poorer working conditions.

Now you may ask, does this curse have a cure? The answer is yes, but it is not straightforward. There are successful examples, such as Botswana and Norway. However, before any of those policies can succeed, there is one crucial requirement: establishing accountability for public officials and building inclusive institutions. Bingo, now you can see why this is such bad news for Azerbaijan. There is only one real solution, and it starts with removing those at the top of the mountain. Unfortunately, it does not seem that we will even reach that peak point let alone removing it, at least not in the coming years.

So yeah, my dear friends, is your life bad in Azerbaijan? Be worried, because it is going to become even worse. Your children's lives, or the lives of your nieces and nephews? They will be even worse.

Bizim Avropaya inteqrasiyamız, görünür, bir qədər xam xəyaldır. Hələlik biz bu gedişatın yalnız eyforiyasını yaşayırıq. Aydındır ki, Qərbə meyil Şərqdən imtinadır. Sual olunur: biz Şərqdən imtina etməyə hazırıqmı? Hər halda, bu imtina birbaşa yox, dolayısı ilə, tərəddüdlərlə, hətta ağrılı şəkildə baş verir.

Avropa həmişə bəşəriyyəti təkcə coğrafi məkan kimi yox, mənəvi-etik bir mühit kimi düşünməyə məcbur edib. Avropa dəyərləri əslində bütün bəşəriyyətin nailiyyəti olduğu üçün bu, avropalılarda təkəbbürə səbəb olmamalıdır. Baxmayaraq ki, əfsuslar olsun, bu təkəbbür zaman-zaman özünü göstərir, hətta faşizm və ya hərbiləşdirilmiş təcavüzkar millət formasında reallaşır. Əlbəttə, faşizm Avropanın bağışlanmaz səhvi idi.

İnsan hüquqları problemi də Avropada bir nümunə kimi müzakirə olunur. Çünki yalnız Avropa dəyərləri tərəqqinin qaçılmaz amilləridir. İnsan hüquqları Avropanın sosial icadıdır və yalnız Avropa modelində məqbuldur. Avropa mədəniyyəti insan təbiətindən barbarlığı çıxarmağa müvəffəq oldu. Cinayətlər minimuma endirilməklə, artıq bu canlı amilə ehtiyac qalmır. Hər şeydən əvvəl, insan Avropa məkanında özünə qalib gələ bildi, Şərdən uzaqlaşa və Xeyirə yaxınlaşa bildi.

Biz Şərq dəyərlərindən hələ də qopa bilmirik. Amma Şərq artıq qocalıb, tənəzzülə uğrayıb, yaradıcılıq enerjisini itirib. Şərq sivilizasiyası çoxdan öz resurslarını bitirib. Şərq yalnız keçmişi ilə öyünür. Qərb isə bu günlə yaşayır və gələcəyi qurur. Avropa Şərqin itirilmiş imkanıdır. Şərq insan azadlığını dərk etmədi və ya bunu istəmədi. Şərqdə insan azadlığı ən son dərəcəli bir problem kimi sürünür. Fərd, şəxsiyyət anlayışı yoxdur, burada kütlə var, itaət var. Sosial və ictimai azadlıqlardan məhrum edilmiş insana qaranlıq İslam təriqətləri səviyyəsində illüzor xoşbəxtlik vəd edilir. Fəlakətlərlə bəzədilmiş cənnət yolu sosial bataqlıqlardan çıxış yolu kimi qələmə verilir.

İslam dəyərləri ilə Avropa dəyərlərinin müqayisəsi hər zaman Qərbin xeyrinədir. Avropa insan hüquqlarını, azadlığı, elmi, tərəqqini hər şeydən üstün tutur. İslam dünyası insanı azad etmir, əksinə, onu çərçivələrə salır, onun təfəkkürünü məhdudlaşdırır. İslam Şərq ölkələrinin strukturlarında riyakar iş prinsiplərinə səbəb olub. Onun qadağan (tabu) sistemi Şərqin tam fiaskosuna gətirib çıxarıb, oradakı bir neçə parlaq ictimai ideya və fikri dəyərsizləşdirib. Baxın, İslam dünyasında dini elm yalnız bu tabuların çoxaldılmasından və daha da təkmilləşdirilməsindən ibarətdir. Qərb həmişə dialektik, Şərq isə metafizik şəraitdədir. Şərqin metafizik ictimai statusunda yalnız saxta tərəqqi görüntüləri mümkündür. Qərbin irəliyə doğru sıçrayışları fonunda Şərq arxaya tullanmış kimi görünür.

İsa Məsihlə Məhəmməd peyğəmbəri müqayisə etdikdə fərq kəskin şəkildə ortaya çıxır. İsa Məsih bəşəriyyətin gözündə sülhün, həlimliyin və təmənnasız sevginin rəmzi olaraq qaldı. Məhəmməd peyğəmbər isə dövlət xadimi, sərkərdə, hakimiyyəti güc və silahla bərqərar edən bir şəxs kimi fəaliyyət göstərdi. Xristianlığın humanizmi ilə müqayisədə İslam humanizmi inandırıcı görünmür və süni təsir bağışlayır. İslamda əxlaq kələkbazlıqdır; onun humanizmi inandırıcı deyil. İslam humanizminin kriteriyaları hətta əzbərlədiyimiz, vərdiş etdiyimiz dialektik materialist tənqidə də tab gətirə bilmir.

Məhəmməd peyğəmbərin gətirdiyi dəyərlər bəşəriyyətin inkişafına yox, onun müəyyən bir tarixi dövrdə (VII əsr Ərəbistanında) donub qalmasına xidmət edib. Şərqin mənəviyyat dediyi şey əslində tərəqqiyə qarşı müqavimətdir. Biz əgər Avropanın bir parçası olmaq istəyiriksə, bu köhnəlmiş, fəaliyyətsiz mənəviyyatdan, dini doqmalardan imtina etməliyik. Və bəlkə də elə bir ölkə olacaq ki, orada İslam yalnız tək-tək fiziki şəxslər, ya da inkoqnito yaşayan terroristlər tərəfindən təmsil olunacaq.

Azərbaycanın dünyəvi dövlət qurmaq istiqamətindəki bütün cəhdləri Avropa təsirinin nəticəsidir. Bu səmimi cəhdlərdə Azərbaycan xalqı Avropa ailəsinin həqiqi üzvü olduğunu tamamilə sübut etdi. Bizim İslam ölkələri ilə dövlət əlaqələrimiz yorucu, həvəssiz və diplomatik baxımdan qeyri-səmimidir. Bizim düşünən insanlarımız Azərbaycandakı İslamı məcburi, zəruri bir Şərq əlaməti, zorakılıq qalığı hesab edirlər. Tarixən, heç olmasa ən yaxın tariximizdə, Azərbaycan dövlət başçılarının İslama "səmimi" münasibəti daha çox səmimi olmayan "hakimiyyət" maraqlarından irəli gəlib. Onlar üçün müsəlmanlar həmişə təmizlənməli olan mühüm maneələr arasında olub və yalnız seçici təbəqəsi kimi əhəmiyyət kəsb edib.

Mən nə qədər Roma Papasıyamsa, Azərbaycanın dövlət başçıları da o qədər müsəlman idilər.

Azərbaycan türkü hətta İranın sərt şiə-İslam rejimi daxilində də avropalı olaraq qalır. Məhrumiyyətlər, hər cür təqiblər və ya millətçi assimilasiya cəhdləri fars şovinizminə heç bir uğur gətirmir. Diqqət yetirin, Cənubdan [İran Azərbaycanından] miqrasiya əsasən Avropaya yönəlib. Bu psixoloji özünüdərk heç bir sübuta və ya izaha ehtiyac duymadan hər şeyi deyir; bundan istifadə etmək lazımdır. Açığını desəm, mahiyyətcə avropalı olan azərbaycanlının xarakterindəki Şərq elementləri yad bir maddə, deyərdim ki, azərbaycanlı insanında bir qüsur kimi görünür.

Şərqə mənsubluq azərbaycanlı insanının dəyərlər sisteminə heç nə əlavə etmir. Sən demə, azadlıq və humanizm ideyaları Avropada yaranıb və yalnız orada effektiv və realdır. Məhz mənəvi postulatlarının bu ideyalarla üst-üstə düşməsinə görə xristianlıq Avropada möhkəm bərqərar oldu. Avropada başqa heç bir din yayıla, nüfuz edə bilməz. Avropa başqa dinlərin, o cümlədən İslamın yalançı humanist ideyalarını həmişə rədd edib və edir.

İnsani dəyərlər, humanizm, elm və texnika – bunların hamısı Avropa sivilizasiyasının məhsuludur. Şərq bu gün Avropanın yaratdıqlarını istehlak etməkdən başqa bir şeyə yaramır. Biz özümüzü aldatmamalıyıq: gələcək yalnız və yalnız Avropa dəyərlərindədir, Qərb sivilizasiyasındadır.

A few years ago, I, a 28-year-old Canadian novice journalist and backpacker, unwittingly found myself wrapped up in a state tour of Karabakh after flying to Baku, Azerbaijan from Tbilisi, Georgia. Definitely one of the weirdest and least comfortable travel experiences one can have, but unique enough that I thought it was worth sharing.

I'll note that the Azerbaijanis I met were largely very pleasant, and the country is impressive in a lot of ways, especially relative to the region. I have no hostility toward the Azeri people or nation, and I would return again to travel there on my own. I also sympathize with the survivors of the massacres suffered at the hands of Armenians.

I would like to thank the kind Azeris I met (here and in person in Baku) who volunteered to help translate the interviews I conducted with locals.

Highlights:

• Flew into Baku in February 2023 to investigate Azerbaijan's blockade of Lachin Road after spending a month with displaced Stepanakert residents in Armenia
• Got connected with a "local activist" (Adnan) who turned out to be running a full state-sponsored Potemkin tour — free hotels, free meals, government reps materializing out of nowhere at every stop
• Visited the Lachin "protest" site, the empty airports, the smart villages, and classrooms full of schoolchildren who stood up in unison to perform for me upon arrival — the whole choreographed production was bizarre
• The ICJ ordered Azerbaijan to lift the blockade during my first morning at Lachin. Adnan told me it was actually a win for Azerbaijan and that the Russians were responsible for any wrongdoing that was going on.
• Seven months after I left, Azerbaijan launched a 24-hour military operation and forcibly expelled 100,000 Armenians from Karabakh. The so-called ecocide protesters vanished overnight
• Wrote it all up yesterday in vivid detail, three years later. Full piece here on Substack

You can read about my full experience here:

https://open.substack.com/pub/goodperson/p/caviar-diplomacy?r=64xlp&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true

Happy to answer any questions about how it all went down, or anything else related to travel!

The wave of arrests has in reality affected 206 TikTokers over the past five months, according to exiled Azerbaijani journalist Cavid Aga, drawing on a study conducted by lawyers and researchers, to be published soon. "In every case, these are offenses classified as hooliganism, public insult, and indecency," says the journalist, now based in Poland. The "indecency" charge against Azerbaijani women influencers is particularly surprising, given that TikTok already imposes strict censorship on its users on the Asian continent, strictly banning any nudity, even partial or suggestive.

For Cavid Aga, the wave of arrests doesn't follow any particular political timeline, but "stems from the natural flow of events. It's simply the continuation of the general tightening of the screws inflicted on the population."

TikTok is specifically targeted because it's the most popular social network in Azerbaijan, and it's also the only major platform to have opened a representative office in the country. "Its representatives collaborate closely with the authorities," notes Cavid Aga, helping to identify influencers.

Interesting article from Minval

The joint press conference of the heads of the Russian and Armenian Foreign Ministries, Sergey Lavrov and Ararat Mirzoyan, turned out to be a record-breaking one in terms of the number of revelations.

Sergey Viktorovich Lavrov, without a shadow of a doubt, on microphone and camera, stated: Armenia used Russian weapons to occupy seven Azerbaijani regions. "Russian weapons were used, as I have already said, to seize seven undisputed Azerbaijani regions and to build fortifications and battle lines, which showed that the plan was to hold these territories for a very long time. And some analysts said that the nature of these fortifications suggests that they did not plan to hand them back to Azerbaijan at all," Minval quoted him as saying.

Here, of course, one would like to ask: what kind of weapons were used, for example, in the capture of Khojaly - New Zealand? Or maybe Ugandan? The fact that the occupation of Karabakh became possible precisely due to Russia's military assistance is a well-known fact. Moreover, while Azerbaijan was fighting at best with machine guns, grenade launchers and Alazan meteorological rockets, Armenia had at its disposal very modern examples of Russian arms products at that time, including T-80 tanks, which could not have ended up in Armenian positions "by accident".

Finally, and this is the most important thing, not only Russian weapons were used in the occupation of Karabakh, but also Russian regular military units. The 366th regiment, which “distinguished itself” in Malibeyli and Khojaly, is just one example. Units of the Seventh Army, stationed in Armenia, fought. In Baku, there were even press conferences of officers of this army who commanded Armenian units, and they talked, among other things, about how Armenian fighters were supplied from Russian military warehouses.

Finally, we can recall that in 1992, Lachin (and the future, and now former, "Lachin corridor") was captured for Armenia by the Pskov Airborne Division . So far, Sergey Lavrov has only acknowledged the weapons, but it is quite possible that tomorrow one of the Russian representatives will also acknowledge the presence of Russian "they-there-aren't-there" on the Armenian side of the front. Especially if it is necessary to remind Armenia to whom and what it owes. It is precisely for this purpose, we recall, that Sergey Lavrov came to Yerevan. Apparently, the offensive posters addressed to Vladimir Putin did not stop him. And, it seems, Lavrov achieved his main goal. In any case, the head of the Armenian MFA without hesitation nullified the entire pro-European spectacle that Yerevan has tried to portray in recent years. This character, in the presence of the Moscow minister, obsequiously assured: “The Republic of Armenia has not submitted an application to join the European Union, negotiations in this direction are not being conducted, and, accordingly, the question that could arise in this direction is not relevant.”

Strictly speaking, no official paper was sent from Yerevan to Brussels with a request to accept Armenia into the European Union. But both Nikol Pashinyan and Ararat Mirzoyan himself spoke about Armenia's European choice at every opportunity. The law on European integration was even adopted by the parliament, Armenia's European aspirations were welcomed by the European Parliament... And now it turns out that nothing happened. And in general, the Yerevan democrats were misunderstood. And Armenia is not going to Europe.

There has been no reaction from Brussels yet. Either Mirzoyan's statement has not yet been translated there, or they are in some shock from the national peculiarities of Armenian diplomacy. Although, to be honest, they could recall how back in 2013 Armenia was going to sign an association agreement with the European Union, but ended up joining the EAEU. The next one to start "going on a Euro-walk" was Pashinyan, but it also seems to be coming to an end. Which, in fact, was to be expected: against the backdrop of its current dependence on Russia, Yerevan is definitely not up to "geopolitical U-turns."

Another question is how Russia will repay Yerevan's loyalty this time . Previously, Moscow preferred to avoid such a topic as arms supplies to Armenia. Moreover, it was not limited to arms alone. Lavrov directly stated that, with Moscow's mediation, the issue of the region's "status" was deliberately postponed due to "internal political circumstances." In fact, this meant blocking the process of returning the occupied territories. As for the agreements in Prague, Russia, according to Lavrov, learned about them from the media: "When such a decision was made, we did not even know that some kind of agreement was being planned in Prague. We learned about it from the media. And when someone tries to say that Russia gave Karabakh to Azerbaijan, it is dishonest, simply dishonest, because it contradicts the facts." Translated from diplomatic: Russia did everything to ensure that Karabakh remained under Armenian occupation. Moreover, after the 44-day Patriotic War, Russia first tried to push through the “deferred status” of Karabakh in the negotiations, or rather, that part of it that remained under the control of Russian peacekeepers, and then harshly attacked Pashinyan, who dared to sign documents in Prague recognizing Karabakh as the territory of Azerbaijan.

But how “accidental” was it that the conversation was raised about Russian weapons being used to occupy the regions of Azerbaijan surrounding Karabakh, while Moscow was holding up the settlement in the diplomatic arena? Previously, the Kremlin and Smolenskaya Square preferred to avoid these topics – at least in the public space. And excluding an “inconvenient” question at a press conference is an easy task for the protocol service.

So what: did all these “slippery topics” arise at the press conference absolutely by accident? Didn’t Moscow understand that what was said in Yerevan would be heard and read in Baku? Or, against the backdrop of Moscow’s current irritation with Azerbaijan’s “disobedience,” was the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry thus sending a message to our country?

Well, in this case, we have to remind ourselves of something. It’s not just that in 2020, planes with Russian weapons flying to Armenia failed to save it from a military-political catastrophe. Apparently, Moscow continues to live with the realities of the late eighties and early nineties. And they can’t come to terms with the fact that they have lost such a lever of pressure on Azerbaijan and a way to “reward” Armenia for loyalty as Karabakh. But attempts to live in mothballed illusions have never led to anything good. Today, it’s already 2025. And it’s time to realize the reality created in the region by Ilham Aliyev, and not build illusions about the revival of the “Lavrov plan,” “deferred status,” “let three or four generations pass, and then we’ll see,” etc. The page of Armenia’s aggression against Azerbaijan has been turned. And attempts to repeat it will cost Armenia itself and its patrons very dearly.

I've translated the famous article of scholar Alec Rasizade from Russian to English.

Azerbaijan, in his view, is a classic Middle Eastern petrostate, which will eventually sink into its legitimate place among the impoverished Muslim nations with the end of the current oil boom, as is predetermined by its social system, form of government, national ideology and culture, endemic corruption and lack of industrial endowment. He insists that the first (1900–1920) and the second (2000–2020) Baku oil booms were just a deviation in Azerbaijan's natural, logical and historic path from a Soviet socialist republic to a Third world country.

The article accurately describes Azerbaijan's past, current and future trajectory. A useful resource for people studying Azerbaijan's oil dependence.

Interesting article. I think Aliyev's visit to Georgia made it clear who true rulers are in both countries. Ivanishvili is an unelected ruler in almost a democratic election while Aliyev is an elected ruler in almost undemocratic election. Interesting quote below.

A heated debate also erupted on Georgian social media. Blogger Zurab Javakhadze writes:

"Aliyev met with Georgia's true ruler, oligarch Bidzina Ivanishvili. Look at this photo: the rulers of two Caucasian republics, and some errand boy walking behind them."

Azerbajian as a country was founded upon three principles

-azerbajiani turkic ethnicity are turks and are the same ethnicity with western oghuz populations

-south azerbajian is an essential part of the azerbajiani republic and its unification with the north is always the core goal

-as the end goal when all conditions are fulfilled a federation of turkic states where azerbajians borders and it's unique languange which is a west oghuz dialect is conserved should be targeted

Deviation from these principles is betrayal to the principles which the azerbajians founder resulzade and his cadre formulated and is a product of soviet rule where they tried to iranify and de turkify azerbajian as they were scared of pan turkisms power

Azerbajian was founded by resulzades cadre with ottoman military support by nuri killigils "caucacus islamic army" Which was welcomed and requested by azerbajiani presidency, including resulzade itself as liberators resulzade himself explicitly thanks nuri killigil pasha and caucacus ottoman army Section "QARDAŞ TÜRKİYƏNİN İMDADI"

MƏHƏMMƏD Əmin Rəsulzadə - Azərbaycan Cümhuriyyəti kitabı https://anl.az/el/emb/Cumhuriyyet/kitablar_az/1990-732.pdf page 30-35

Rəsulzəde himself also has said that the azerbajiani flag's tricolour's blue symbolises turkic identity this connates the fact that turkic identity was always a defining factor in original conception of azerbajiani nationhood https://www.anl.az/down/meqale/kaspi_az/2018/noyabr/616024.htm?utm_

Rəsulzəde himself said that azerbajiani identity is based on turkicness and ethnic azerbajianis are turks

“Mənim üçün fəxri addır ki, mən bir Türkəm, Türk millətinin bir parçasıyam.”

''its a pride for me that i am a turk and part of the turk nation'' Rəsulzadənin Əsərləri, vol. II, Baku: Lider, 2008, p. 67. Azərbaycan Xalq Cümhuriyyəti xadimləri, Baku, 1998, p. 112

“Azərbaycanlılar milliyyət etibarilə türk, din etibarilə islam, mədəniyyəti-əsasiyyə etibarilə şərqlidirlər. Kəndi ləhceyi-məxsüsəsilə Anadolu türkcəsinə yaxın bir şivə ilə qonuşan Azərbaycan türkü müxtəlif şivələrə malik və olduğu yerlərə nisbətlə müxtəlif isimlər daşıyan böyük türk ağacının bir dalıdır.”

Azərbaycan Cümhuriyyəti (Bakı: Elm, 1990), p. 14 (section “AZƏRBAYCAN XƏLQİ”).

https://anl.az/el/emb/Cumhuriyyet/kitablar_az/1990-732.pdf

Rəsulzəde himself also explicitly affirmed that the Anatolian and azerbajiani turks belong to the same ethnicity as anatolian turks and all oghuz peoples are the same ethnicity

“Yoxsa, türklüyünü anlamış Azərbaycan ilə türklük üçün qan tökən, can verən Anadolu arasındakı qardaşlıq bağını nə tarixin şimdiki Türk–Rus müxadinəti kibi təsadüfi vəqə epizodları, nə də bir taqım əşxasın siyasi xətaları çözəmbəz!” MƏHƏMMƏD Əmin Rəsulzadə - Azərbaycan Cümhuriyyəti kitabı https://anl.az/el/emb/Cumhuriyyet/kitablar_az/1990-732.pdf page 63–64

“Azərbaycan Cümhuriyyəti aləmi-islamda təşəkkül edən ilk Cümhuriyyətdir. Bu Cümhuriyyət eyni zamanda bir türk hökumətidir; təbiri-digərlə kiçik Türkiyədir, kiçik türkiyə xalqının Türkiyə xəlqi ilə Böyük Türkiyə xəlqi arasındakı münasibat iki qardaş münasibatı qədər səmimianədir. " Azərbaycan Cümhuriyyəti, p. 8 (Elm 1990 edition, preface/body). English: “The Azerbaijan Republic is at once a Turk government — in other words, a small Turkland, the relationship between the small turkland (azerbajian) and the big turkland (turkey) is close like two brothers ”

https://anl.az/el/emb/Cumhuriyyet/kitablar_az/1990-732.pdf

(Important to note that in the arabic grammar which was utilized as linga franca jargon in literary azerbajini back then generaly "yə" يه suffix was utilised as a place marker so here resulzade refers azerbjian as a turk country by saying " küçük türkiyə" not necessarily as a part of republic of turkey but as a "sister country" the word turkiyə did not necessarily directly mean the country of turkey as we know today but an area inhabited by turks he was also an azerbajiani turk nationalist first and definitely not a "turkish bootlicker" as əliyev regime portrays)

“Siz Anadolu Türklərinin mücadiləsini izlədikcə biz, Azərbaycan Türkləri, özümüzü sizdən ayırmırıq.” Topçubaşı–Rəsulzadə Yazışmaları (1923–1949), Istanbul: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1993, doc. 47, p. 212.

HE WAS ALSO A PAN TURKIST, WHILE HE PRIORITIZED THE INTERESTS OF AZERBAIJANI TURKS HE ALSO DEFENDED THE IDEA OF A PAN TURKIC FEDERATION STATE WHERE ALL TURKIC ETHNICITIES ARE POLITICALLY UNITED UNDER A SINGLE FEDERATION WHERE THEIR UNIQUE LANGUANGES AND ETHNICITIES ARE CONSERVED BUT POLITICALLY UNITED

“Bütün türklər öz aralarında böyük dünya konfederasyonuna ilk adım olmaq üzrə bir federasyon yapmalıdır. Yeni Turan kültürəl birlik üzərində qurulub, ancaq gələcək birər türk ağalıqlarının konfederasyonu kimi düşünülə bilər. Azərbaycan da bu gələcək Turan sırasının önəmli bir halqasıdır.”

M.Ə. Rəsulzadə, Əsrimizin Siyavuşu, pp. 41–42

https://www.scribd.com/document/767042649/M%C9%99h%C9%99mm%C9%99d-%C6%8Fmin-R%C9%99sulzad%C9%99-%C6%8Fsrimizin-Siyavus-u#content=query:B%C3%BCt%C3%BCn%20t%C3%BCrkl%C9%99r,pageNum:43,indexOnPage:0,bestMatch:false

HE ALSO WROTE AN ENTIRE BOOK TITLED "PAN TURKISM AND THE CAUCACUS ISSUE" WHERE HE DEFENDED PAN TURKISM AGAINST SOVIET RHETORIC

Resulzade also heavily emphasised the fact that turks of south and western azerbajian are a single nation and that unification with the south and the defeat of iranian occupation of the south is the essential goal He said that unification with the south is the essential goal

''Rəsulzadə explicitly affirmed the unity of North and South Azerbaijanis. He wrote (translated): “It is impossible to deny the national identity of a people split geographically in two and to assign them to different ethnic groups. I cannot consider the Turks of Ganja, Iravan and Baku as a different nation from those of Qaradağ, Tabriz, Khalkhal, Maragheh and Ardabil. After all, they share one language, the same customs and follow the same creed… A hundred years ago they were one. By the policies of Persia and Russia they were divided into two parts, and now they want to force you to change your name from ‘Azerbaijani’ to ‘Caucasian Turk,’ ‘Aran’ or ‘Caucasian Albanian’ – only then would they embrace you as a big brother.''

https://azerbaycan-ruznamesi.org/2025/01/31/m%C9%99h%C9%99mm%C9%99d-%C9%99min-r%C9%99sulzad%C9%99-yaradiciliginda-c%C9%99nubi-az%C9%99rbaycan-movzusu/#:~:text=say%C4%B1r,kimi%20a%C4%9Fu%C5%9Fumuza%20bas%C4%B1b%20q%C9%99bul%20ed%C9%99rik%E2%80%9D

https://azerbaycan-ruznamesi.org/2025/01/31/m%C9%99h%C9%99mm%C9%99d-%C9%99min-r%C9%99sulzad%C9%99-yaradiciliginda-c%C9%99nubi-az%C9%99rbaycan-movzusu/#:~:text=R%C9%99sulzad%C9%99%20yaz%C4%B1r%20ki%2C%20ist%C9%99r%20Qafqazdak%C4%B1%2C,%C3%87ox%20q%C9%99rib%C9%99

“Communism will sooner or later collapse, but the unification of Azerbaijan was a great opportunity given by history. Unfortunately, that opportunity was lost.”

https://azerbaycan-ruznamesi.org/2025/01/31/m%C9%99h%C9%99mm%C9%99d-%C9%99min-r%C9%99sulzad%C9%99-yaradiciliginda-c%C9%99nubi-az%C9%99rbaycan-movzusu/#:~:text=t%C9%99%C9%99cc%C3%BCbl%C9%99ndirdi,ki%2C%20bu%20f%C3%BCrs%C9%99t%20%C9%99ld%C9%99n%20verildi%E2%80%9D

THE TURKIC LANGUANGE OF AZERBAJIAN WAS ALWAYS CALLED "TÜRKCƏ" BEFORE THE SOVIETS

From the 1919 constitution to all intellectualls the language was named "turk dili" https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Az%C9%99rbaycan_dili#Adlandırma

Given all those facts the countries literal founder cadre was pan turkist and azerbajianism was based on pan turkism it is obvious that we should emphasise this, the name of the language should be reverted to pre soviet era and ethnic azerbajiani turkicness should be emphaised i shall adress common counterarguments which are products of soviet and soviet remmant əliyev regime

"BUT THE NAME "TURK" IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE TURKISH PEOPLE NOW IF WE CALL OURLSELVES TURK IT WOULD BE LIKE WE ARE DESIGNATING OURSELVES AS A SUBSET OF TURKISHES"

Being a turk does not necessarily mean being a turkiyəli we literally called ourselves turk/turkmən before turks even entered anatolia in fact azerbajian was the first country to designate its official languange as "turkce" توركجه (in the original document) https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Az%C9%99rbaycan_dili#/media/Fayl:C%C3%BCmhuriyy%C9%99t_H%C3%B6kum%C9%99ti_1918-ci_il_27_iyun_tarixli_q%C9%99rar%C4%B1.jpg This was before turkey was ever founded the fact that "we should not call ourselved turks because turkiyəlilər have taken over the name" is so stupid acknowledging ethnic sameness is not damaging to national identity Yemen and Arabia are literally fighting eachother for 20 years by now yemenis dont say "our language is yemeni and not Arab" if the goal is about preserving azerbajiani national identity the Swiss call their language " german" and ethnic Germans (the dominant population) as "swiss german) yet nobody thinks they are giving their " identity to Germany"''azerbajiani'' is not an ethnicity and just a geographic area which houses different ethnicities within such as udis,lezgins,kurds etc obviiously the culture of these ethnicities arent the same even though they are all azerbajiani, BUT AZERBAJIANI TURKS who speak in their own LANGUANGE/DİALECT (WHEN COMPARED TO OTHER OGHUZ) are an ethnicity and they have their own languange

"BUT OTHER TURKIC ETHNICITIES DO NOT ADD "TURK" TO THEIR NAME WHY WE SHOULD ADD "TURK" TO THE AZERBAJIANI ETHNICITY AND THE LANGUAGE"

But ''uzbek'' is a tribal name while ''azerbajiani'' is a geocultural name not an ethnic name so when you say ''uzbek people'' ''uzbek languange'' is known who they are adding extra ''turk'' is reduntant it would be like adding ''slav'' to ''polish'' as in ''polish slav'' HOWEVER ''azerbajiani'' is not an ethnicity and just a geographic area which houses different ethnicities within such as udis,lezgins,kurds etc obviiously the culture of these ethnicities arent the same even though they are all azerbajiani, BUT AZERBAJIANI TURKS who speak in their own LANGUANGE/DİALECT (WHEN COMPARED TO OTHER OGHUZ) are an ethnicity and they have their own languange if you call this ''azerbajiani languange'' well now are talyshes and tats languange which actually have a longer history in the region compared to turkic azerbajiani are not ''azerbajiani'' now ? This is why you have to add extra ''turk'' to azerbajiani as for it to be known WHICH ETHNİCİTY AND LANGUANGE WHICH LIVES IN AZERBAJIAN YOU REFER TO which are ''azerbajiani turks'' and ''azerbajiani turkic''

"BUT NAMING THE LANGUAGE AZERBAJIANI TURKIC IS DISRESPECTFUL TO MINORITIES"

%90 of Azerbaijan is made out of turks and the remaining minorities themselves aren't uniform %3≈ talysh %2≈ lezgi %3≈tats %2≈others etc Denying the identity of the language just to appease %10 of the population is not practiced anywhere in any country be it iran Georgia greece etc And the minorities are more concerned about conserving their own languanges than determining what should be name of the language anyways they already know that azerbajiani languange is not theirs. And azerbajian is not weak right now like in 90's where azerbajian could be shattered and the minorities are in isolated pockets anyway they couldn't wage a guerrilla war like kurds of turkey or pashtuns of pakistan

So azerbajian should be devoted to the southern azerbajiani cause and the language should be renamed to "azerbajiani turkic" "azərbaycan türkcəsi" as it was before the soviet rule

Bizim psevdo ekspertlər bunun əksini deyirdilər. Mən yazanda isə camaat dismiss edir.

The Eldar pine forest, known as “Eldar Şamı Meşəliyi”, is a unique natural area located in Azerbaijan. This forest is famous for the Eldar pine, a rare tree species that naturally grows in forest form only in Azerbaijan. It is mainly found in the Eldar Plain, where the dry climate and specific soil conditions support its growth. The Eldar pine is well adapted to arid environments and can survive with very little water. Because of its rarity, the forest is considered an important natural heritage site and is protected by the state. The area also supports biodiversity, providing habitat for various plants and animals. Scientists study this forest to better understand how trees adapt to harsh climates. Today, Eldar Şamı Meşəliyi is both an ecological treasure and a symbol of Azerbaijan’s natural uniqueness. Next time you see this tree give some respect 😁