<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>----<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>
<<>><<>><<>> TURKISTAN NEWSLETTER ISSN: 1386-6265 <<>><<>><<>>
<<>><<>><<>>--------------------------------------------<<>><<>><<>><<>>
<<>><<>><<>> Editor/Manager: Mehmet Tutuncu <<>><<>><<>><<>>
<<>><<>><<>> Business: H. Savas, S.Bogut <<>><<>><<>><<>>
<<>><<>><<>> Features: I. Noyan-Izmirli, Y. Puersuen <<>><<>><<>><<>>
<<>><<>><<>> Technical: T. Ates, K. Cagiltay <<>><<>><<>><<>>
<<>> Associate Editors: A. Baguirov, A. Eren, mrs. Z.Kadir <<>>
<<>> Editorial Board: Dr.T.Kocaoglu, Dr.M.Hubey, Dr.Nesrin Sariahmetoglu
<<>>------------------------------------------------------------<<>><<>>
<<>><<>><<>><<>> Vol: 97-1:5 5 June 1997 <<>><<>><<>><<>>
<<>> Reactions and submissions: <Turkistan-n@turkistan.org> <<>>
<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>-----------------------------<<><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>
<>Uze kok tengri asra yagiz yer kilintukta ekin ara kisi ogli kilinmis<>
<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>----<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>
*** SPECIAL ISSUE ***
Report of the Conference on Etnic Conflicts Haarlem (1-2 June 1997)
This report contains:
1. Conclusions
2. Conference programme
3. Abstracts
4. Call for Papers
<<>><<>><<>><<<>><<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>
1. Conclusions of the SOTA Conference on Ethnic Conflicts in the Caucasus.
First day there were 11 contributors who presented papers, both experts
from the West as representatives from the region. Only mr. Urushadze was
not able to participate, but send his paper.
Second day of the conference on Causes and Solutions for Conflicts in the
Caucasus included panel discussions addressing conflicts in Abkhazia,
Nagorno-Karabakh and Chechnya.
Similarities and differences between these conflicts as well as possible
ways of resolution were main topics during the conference.
Both western scholars and guests from the region noted that while all of
these conflicts are taking place in the Caucasus region and have common
elements, there are important differences between them which ignoring which
would only hinder prospects for peaceful solution. For instance, if in
Abkhazia and Karabakh ones sees somewhat hidden "hand of Moscow", in
Chechnya it was Russian Army who participated in full-scale war. Attempts
of Abkhaz to control territory of the autonomous republic where they used
to be a minority before the war cannot be directly compared with the
Armenia trying to annex territory of Nagorno-Karabakh and neighboring
districts of Azerbaijan (Recent appointment of R. Kocharian as
Prime-Minister of Republic of Armenia has clearly underlined both deep
involvement of Armenia in the war in neighboring Azerbaijan and the
puppet-nature of so-called "NKR"). This is an important difference between
the conflicts in Abkhazia and Chechenya on one side and Karabakh on the
other side.
Speakers also touched upon role of intellectuals in igniting ethnic hatred
among different communities and called for more responsibility and
soul-searching among intellectual elites of Armenia, Georgia and
Azerbaijan. Example of Chechnya has clearly shown lack of effective
involvement of international community and its inability to aggressively
intervene in order to resolve conflict situations. In fact, international
community had basically given Russian military "green light" and even
funding to wage war against Chechnya and therefore violated principles it
claims to adhere to. Thus, the Chechen representative bitterly remarked
that the only thing they want from international community is not to help
Russians to destroy Chechnya. Generally it seems that western leadership is
more interested in simply silencing guns and removing a conflict from TV
screens than in actually addressing the causes of it.
Another aspect of these conflicts is humanitarian tragedy of hundreds of
thousands of refugees. Refugees are on all sides taking part in these
conflicts, however the most pressing this issue is in Azerbaijan (about 1
million refugees and internally displaced people from Armenia and occupied
territories of Western Azerbaijan) and in Georgia (refugees from Abkhazia).
Refugees produce increasing pressure on the governments and may become a
"time-bomb" if the issue is not resolved. Here lies one more difference
between Chechnya and two other conflicts in the Caucasus as return of the
refugees to Chechnya is more of a technical problem, while in Azerbaijan
and Georgia it is a political issue. Using tragedy of refugee population as
a political tool and delaying its solution is unacceptable and amounts to
gross violation of basic human rights.
Participants in the discussion put forward a number of suggestions
regarding conflict resolution in the Caucasus.
1. Promoting democracy and rule of law in the region is one of them.
2. Abkhaz and Georgian representatives called for building trust between
two sides, to which dialogue at this very conference was a step, and
changing mentality of confrontation.
3. Azeri and Chechen representatives proposed constructing a regional
system of cooperation and conflict prevention which would include all
people of Caucasus. In fact, such a Caucasian structure can become a
corner-stone of future community based on democratic principles, respect to
human rights and to unique culture of this very diverse region, something
which has not been established after the collapse of USSR.
<<>><<>><<>><<<>><<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>
2. PROGRAM
1 Haziran/ June 1997
9:30-10.00: Registration
10.00 : Wellcome word drs. Mehmet Tütüncü
I. Session / I. Oturum (chairman/ baskan Elin Suleymanov, interpretors/
Tercümanlar Zülfiye Kadirova or Ayten Kiliç)
10.15-12.30: Women and War. The women as a victims, soldiers and
pea-cenegoti-ators in the Armenian - Azerbaijan war
dr. Leila Yunusova (chairman of Vahdet Party of Azerbaijan)
: Chechen independence / Al Hazer Suleymanov (1st. aid on foreign affairs
of acting Prime minister Shamil Basayev)
: Russians in Chechenya/ Çeçenistanda Ruslar
Marie Benningsen (Editor Central Asian Survey)
: The Russo-Chechen conflict in historical perspective
dr. Moshe Gammer (Tel Aviv University)
Negotiations on inde-pendence of Cheche-nya: January -May 1997
Cem Oguz (Bilkent University Ankara)
12:30 Lunch / Ögle yemegi
II. Session / II. Oturum
(chairman/ baskan Moshe Gammer, Interpretors/ Tercümanlar Zülfiye Kadirova
or Ayten Kiliç)
14:00- 16:00 : Abkhazia: role of UN in Abkhazia
dr. Slava Chirikba (Abkhazia)
:The role of scholars in the Abkhazians' loss of trust in the Georgians and
how to remedy the situation
Prof. dr. George Hewitt (SOAS London)
: Transition to What? Obstacles for lasting Peace in Caucasus
George Khutsishvili (International Center on Conflict and Negotiation
(ICCN) Georgia
: The Role of Russia in Ethnic Conflicts in the Caucasus
Prof. dr. Levan Urusadze Publisher, independent newspaper "Adamia-nis
Uplebebi" ("Human Rights)
16:00-16.30 Tea/Coffee break
III. Session / III. Oturum
(Chairman: Cem Oguz)
16:30 -18:00 : Daglik Karabag olaylarinin perde arkasi (background of
Kara-bakh conflict)
Dr. Nesrin Sariahmetoglu (Marmara University)
Oil cards and ethnic conflicts
Charles van der Leeuw (from baku)
Erol Karayel (Kafkas Vakfi-Istanbul) Kafkasyadaki etnik sorunlarin mahiyeti
ve çözüm yolu The causes of ethnic con-flicts in caucasus and the way of
solutions
18:00 Dinner
2 June/Haziran 1997
Panel discussion/ Workshops :
10.00-12.00
Panel discussion: Abkhazia and Chechenya the differences and and similarities
(chairman Moshe Gammer)
(panelists: George Hewitt, Slava Chirikba, George Khutishvili, Aslambek
Kadiyev)
12.00 - 12.30
13.30 - 15.30 Azerbaijan/ Georgia/ Armenia and Democracy
(Rushen Gamber, Leyla Yunusova, Charles van der Leeuw, Nesrin Sar_ahmeto_lu)
Azerbaijan and Democracy in the Caucasus This session will be in Turkish.
International media and Caucasus (Charles van der Leeuw)
15.30 Conclusion
<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>
3. ABSTRACTS
LEILA YUNUSOVA (Doctor of History)
Women and War.
The women as a victims, soldiers and peacenego-tiators in the Armenian -
Azerbaijan war
Summary
The report contains many facts, numbers and information about the tragic
situation of women during the Karabakh war 1988-1994, especially concerning
the women-refugees. First of all, the role of women in the Azerbaijan army
is discussed.
Throughout the Karabakh conflict, peaceful negotiations have
been attempted time and again in order to stop the war.
In June 1994, the Dialogue of Women of the Transcaucasus for
Peace and Democracy was initiated by the National Peace Foundation
(USA). This report will inform the audience on the
peace-negotiations during the war and after the cease-fire and
especially on the participation of women in these negotiations.
Autobiography
Yunusova Leila Islam gizi was born in Baku on Dec.21, 1955. Graduated from
department of History, Baku University in 1978. Doctor of history.
Since beginning of Armenian aggression against Azerbaijan in 1988,
published in Azerbaijan and foreign press over 80 researches and articles
on problems of ethnic minorities in Azerbaijan, reasons of
Azerbaijan-Armenian conflict and role of Russia in this confrontation with
human rights in republic including: multi-colour pallet of informal
organisations in Azerbaijan (in New Russian Word, New-York, Sept. 19,
1989); End of the Glacier Period. Azerbaijan on August-September of 1989
(in Choronicles of Central Asia and Caucasus, London, 1990,N6);
Azerbaijan-Look into the Future (ethnic Conflicts and Nationalism in the
Soviet Union, Milan, 1992)
In 1988 Leila Yunusova became one of the creators of the Initiative Center
of the Popular Front of Azerbaijan, on July 16, 1989 was elected a member
of the first board of the Popylar Front. Since Dec., 1989-one of the
founders of the Social Democratic Party of Azerbaijan. In both parties
headed Commissions on Human Rights. In Aug., 1991 she was elected
chairperson to Independent Democratic Party of Azerbaijan. In May 1996
Independent Democratic Party of Azerbaijan united with "Vahdat" party and
L.Yunusova was elected chairman of "Vahdat" party.
Since April, 1992 she held position of Head of the Informational and
Analitical Center of Azerbaijan Ministry of Defence. In March, 1993
resigned as confrontation between political and military leaders of
the country emerged.
Since July 1994 head Azerbaijan Council of Dialogue of Women for Peace and
Democracy in Transcau-casus, initiated by the National Peace Foundation,
USA. The latter supports implementati-on of 3
humanitarian projects in Azerbaijan, one of which is Institute of
Democracy, also headed by Leila Yunusova.
In 1994 at department of Military Studies, King's College, University of
London finalised an academic research Armenian-Azerbaijan War and it Effect
on Change of Geopolitical Situation in the Region.
Since 1990 delivers lectures on problems of history and modern history of
Transcaucasus in universities of Italy, Great Britain, USA.
Since 1988 is one of the active members of human rights protection movement
in the former Soviet Union, works for Russian human rights protecting
newspaper Express Chronicles. Participated in many international seminars
on protection of human rights and basic principles of democracy. Many times
acted as public attorney for Azerbaijan political prisoners. Participated
in search and returned
to home of Azerbaijan military prisoners and hostages. Since 1994 member
of Amnesty Internatio-nal-international human rights protecting
organisation. Since Sept., 1995 is a head of newly set up NGO - Institute
of Peace and Democracy and head of its Human Rights Protection Department.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Moshe Gammer
To the Chechens the recent fighting with Russia is but the latest round in
a war which started three centuries ago. The paper will put the recent war
into perspective by surveying the different manifestations of Chechen
resistance to Russian/Soviet conquest and rule since the Jihad of Sheikh
Mansur (1785) to the uprising of Israilov 1941).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. LEVAN URUSHADZE
Member of the International Society for Human Rights (ISHR-IGFM), Editor
and Publisher of the independent newspaper "Adamianis Uplebebi" (Human
Rights) Tbilisi, Republic of Georgia
THE ROLE OF RUSSIA IN ETHNIC CONFLICTS IN THE CAUCASUS
The Russian Empire's devastating domination in the Caucasus that lasted for
two centuries was not caused only by the desire of having access to the
Black and Caspian Seas.
One of the main purposes for "Tsarist", as well as for Soviet-Communist and
the so called "Post Communist" Russia (the latter with its communist
mentality and dictatori-al-conque-ring spirit does not differ from the
Soviet tyrany that was revealed again in Russia's unheard of barbaric
actions in the Independent Republic of Chechenia) was dividing the
Caucasian nations and putting them up against the non-Caucasian elements of
Indo-European origin - Armenians and Ossetians; and thus cause their
physical destruction which was systematically and purposefully carried out
during 250 years.
To realize her dirty wishes (using Ossetians and Armenians of
non-autochthonic Indo-European origin) Russian rulers from the very first
days of their invasion in the Caucasus, have purposefully
aroused in them an anti-Caucasian attitude of mind, and always sought to
use these two nations as their support, and springboard for their
anti-Caucasian politics. Such politics together with other aims, had one
most important aim: as soon as the enslaved Caucasian nations attempted
to escape from the heavy paws of Russian bear,they would immediately be
opposed by the Ossetian and Armenian elements (who were under "Mother"
Russia's wings and disposed to anti-Caucasian attitudes) and absolutely
unnatural ethnic conflicts would have to result.
We do not know to what extent the authorities of Armenia and Ossetia have
realized this fact but with Russia's efforts this mechanism was used more
than once.
We consider and call Ossetia only the region which is included in the
Russian Federation- the Republic of North Ossetia. As for the so-called
"South Ossetia", which has existed on the territory of Georgia since 1923 (
and is actually central Kartli - "Shida Kartli"), it is devoid on any
historical grounds; it is an artificially made unit which is proved by the
Georgian and not only Georgian historical sources.
Parts of this continual chain are:
1) 1918-1921 the attemps of Armenians and Ossetians opposition against
Democratic Republic of Georgia. The fact should be taken into consideration
that in that period the politics of white General Denikin and
Bolshevic-tyrant Lenin can hardly be distinguished.
2) Georgian-Ossetian conflict in 1990-1992;
3) the bloodshed and war between Armenia and Azerbaijan connected with
Karabakh;
4) Conflict between Ingushetia and Ossetia;
5)Bagramian armed Armenian Unit's barbaric actions against peaceful
Georgian people in Abkhazia (1992-1993), etc.
The same is confirmed with the words of the first and last President of the
former USSR - M. Gorbachov that were addressed to Independent Georgia's
first President, Dr. Zviad Gamsakhurdia, if he, Georgia's President, did
not sign the agreement of a new alliance, Georgia would
have serious problems in Central Kartli and Abkhazia. Zviad Gamsakhurdia
with his clever politics was able to avoid all kinds of conflicts in
Abkhazia in 1990-1991. And in Central Kartli the situation was becoming
stable (the armed conflict in Central Kartli had begun before Zviad
Gamsakhurdia came to power). But the Russian Government (we mean
post-communist, "democratic" government) realized their dirty purposes in
1991 - 1992 December-January after a criminal military coup d'etat:
Russia began a bloody war in Abkhazia and renewed military actions in
Central Kartli. And as a result Georgia (to be more precise - the actual
pro-Russian regime) ceded Abkhazia and greater part of Central Kartli
(Shida Kartli). Besides the above Russia used other means: she always
attempted to divide and set the Caucasian autochthonic nations up against
one another.
Here I want to note that autochthonic nations are: on the one hand
Iberia-Caucasian people (Georgians, Vainakhs - Chechens and Ingushes,
ethnic groups of Daghestan, Abkhazhians and so on) and on the other hand
the nations originated by mixing Iberia-Caucasian and Turkish ethnic
elements (Azerbaijanians, Balkarians, Kumuchians and others).
Russia could never bear the idea of the native nations being united and the
Caucasian idea in general. The examples of the creation of antagonisms
between Caucasian autochthonic nations are:
1) Russian and Georgian "Georgievski Treaty" of 1783, which pit the Kartli
and Kakheti Kingdom against her loyal North Caucasian Principalities;
2) The pitting of Georgian Generals and officers, who served in the Russian
occupational Army, against Sheikh Mansur's and Imam Shamil's national
liberation fight and those generals and officers participating in the
punitive expeditions in the North Caucasus from the end of the
18th century to the sixties of the 19th century;
3) with the purpose of disrupting the unity of views and purposes of
Georgian and Vainakh peoples, and of crushing the friendship between the
two outsanding Caucasian leaders - Dr. Zviad Gamsakhurdia and General
Jokhar Dudaev- the settlements of Chechenia had been repeatedly bombed from
the territory of Georgia;
4) during Russia-Chechenia war there were attempts to create enmity between
the neighbours Dagestan and Chechenia, etc.
In Russian (and not only in Russian) mass media one can often come across
such an absurd phrases as if the denominational differences prevents the
nations in the Caucasian region from uniting. This false conception was
refuted by the common purpose of Georgian and Vainakh
peoples, and relationship of their leaders Zviad Gamsakhurdia and Jokhar
Dudaev.
In the end I can say the following: the Caucasian region will not be stable
until it is no longer under Russia's influence, until the idea of the
"Whole Caucasian House" founded by Zviad Gamsakhurdia and Jokhar Dudaev is
realized and the idea of Confederation of Independent Nations and
States on par with one another becomes real and its foreign policy is that
of neutrality, until the West understands that the independent and powerful
Caucasus is in its interests, until the Armenians and Ossetians realize the
idea that their peaceful co-existence with Caucasian native
nations depends on their escaping from the influence of Russia and on being
loyal members of the Whole Caucasian House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. George Khutsishvili
TRANSITION TO WHAT? Obstacles to Lasting Peace in the Caucasus
Compared with its already partly realized potential for high-intensity
conflict and violence, the Caucasus region of the Former Soviet Union still
belongs to the least studied areas in the world. The Caucasus represents a
unique conglomerate of cultures, psychologies, traditions, and life-styles
which gives a sufficient basis to speak of a civilizational not just ethnic
or supra-national identity of the region. Despite its inter-ethnic, as well
as intra-ethnic diversity, among which Georgia is particularly remarkable,
the Caucasus (not Transcaucasus, which pertains only to the area south of
Great Caucasian Range, and reflects only a Russian perspective), or
Caucasia, including the "Russian" North Caucasus, should be regarded and
approached as one global entity
regardless of the political borders.
The protracted conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh, Chechenia, Abkhazia, South
Ossetia, Ingushetia, an immediate outcome of the rapid collapse of Soviet
empire, produced specific perception of threats even in titular ethnic
groups, let alone minorities of the region, created ultranationalist
ethnocratic regimes and strong isolationist and separatist tendencies along
with victimization. Not very visible on the surface of an etiquette-based
community, fragmentation of social and cultural
reality, distortions in mass psychology, no longer healable in traditional
ways, have taken most dangerous forms in the Caucasus in the recent years.
In approaching the problems that the Caucasus faces too much is being
attributed to the so-called transition period which every post-Soviet
nation should go through. Transition to what? On the one hand, social and
economic conditions, as well as legacy of totalitarian mentality make a
rapid transition to European standards, values and merits unrealistic,
although all (Trans)Caucasian nations like to demonstrate their
Eurocentrism. This might happen in a more distant future. It cannot be a
(re)Russification either, as Russia does not offer anything attractive
and worthy of the pains of integration under Russian dominance.
Military presence and a certain control over relations with the West are
utmost achievements expectable for Russia in the region. If nothing worse
happens in the meanwhile...
Since the fall of the Soviet empire, Russia exerted all kinds of
manipulation to maintain its dominance in the post-Soviet states. Forced
stability has been exerted in Northern Caucasus. It is not true Chechenia
is moving toward, or has been granted independence. From the Russian
perspective, it is only a matter of time to reverse the process, as they
realize the Chechen nation has little prospect to shape into an
internationally recognized statehood. Of the (Trans)Caucasian states,
land-locked and resourceless Armenia has, much more closely, tied its
interest with Russia than Georgia and Azerbaijan; Georgia is at odds with
Russia because of the unsolved ethnoterrito-rial disputes where Russia has
uneffectively mediated, while Azerbaijan is promoting its oil-based
Western connections. This logically fosters Georgian-Azeri ties marking a
growing faultline in globality of the region.
Although the prospect of an all-Caucasian war is unrealistic at the moment,
repeated exodus has produced powerful migrating waves and clusters of
refugees, spreading insecurity and tension all over the region. New, so far
latent conflicts are waiting for their hour to
explode. Russia has tried to demonstrate to the world that the Caucasian
nations are unable to sustain themselves and develop peacefully, and thus
need a comprehensive and strong supervisor. A real guarantor of stability
and constructive development in the Caucasus region can be the unified
Europe with its international structures.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--George Hewitt
Being privileged to hold the only full-time academic post in the UK for
Caucasian languages, I openly confess my simple and firm conviction that
anyone with a professional concern for the languages of the Caucasus should
be actively engaged in helping to preserve them. This may
(regrettably) mean that on occasions, rather than take the easy option of
looking the other way and remaining silent, one has to speak out when the
survival of one Caucasian group is threatened by the actions of others
(even when those others are fellow-Caucasians). It was adherence
to this belief which led to my involvement in the developing
Georgian-Abkhazian crisis of 1989 and which has conditioned my statements
and/or writings on the topic ever since; in no way was I motivated by
anti-Georgian sentiment, even if this to some was a convenient accusation.
If my wishes for the well-being of the region's languages and speakers
means that I have to criticise Georgian behaviour towards Abkhazia (or, to
take a different example, Georgian attitudes on the ethnic identity of
Mingrelians, Svans and Laz, namely that they are 'Georgians'), then I shall
voice those criticisms, convinced that encouragement (even through silence)
of Georgian views in these matters is ultimately not in the best interests
of even Georgians themselves. I do not propose to repeat the whole history
of Georgian-Abkhazian relations, culminating in the war of 1992-93, for I
assume this is common knowledge -- for details see my 1993 paper. If (i)
the occupation of Abkhazia by Menshevik forces in 1918, (ii) its forced
subordination to Tbilisi in 1931 by Stalin, (iii) the gross attempt to
'georgianise' Abkhazia by Stalin's local henchmen (Mingrelian L. Beria,
Svan K'. Chark'viani, and Georgian A. Mgeladze) between 1936 and 1953 by
slaughtering the local intelligentsia and political leadership, massive
importations of non-Abkhazians (mainly Mingrelians), and closure of
Abkhazian schools and possibilities of publishing in Abkhaz, (iv) the
whipping up of ethnic hatred towards all Georgia's minorities in 1988-89 by
such unofficial leaders as M. K'ost'ava, Z. Gamsakhurdia and G.
Ch'ant'uria, and (v) even the war started by Shevardnad-ze on 14 Aug 1992
were purely and simply acts of the seriously defective political leaders
that Georgia has long produced, the resulting wounds, though deep, could
heal more rapidly. But Georgian-Abkhazian relations have been characterised
by something more sinister than mere political folly. I have no time for
scheming politicians; but I have even less for scholars
who put their disciplines at the service of such politicians' schemes . It
is this aspect of the conflict that I shall now address.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles van der Leeuw (journalist from Baku)
Oil: Cards on the Table:
The XIXth century impact of western commercial interests on developments of
the Caspian oil market has been profound and colorful. Today the game is
being played once more, but under different conditions. A historical
and up to date strategic comparison.
<<>><<>><<>><<<>><<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>
4. Call for Papers
As a follow up to the conference we are planning to publish a book
entitled: "Ethnic Conflicts of the Caucsus". This will contain articles
highlighting various aspects of the situation in the region. In addition to
containing presentations made at the conference itself (see program under
2.). we wish to broaden the perspective with further commentaries and
professional insight.
The book will be divided in five parts, this dividion is not absolute and
can be :
Abkhaz-Georgian conflicts
Chechenya
Karabakh
Other potential conflict areas (e.g. Dagestan and other Caucasus)
Causes and similarities methods to prevent them
You may choose freely from within the sections indicated.
We hope you will find the idea of contributing an article, both challenging
and interesting. If you do, then we would ask you to submit your article
before the deadline of
1 September 1997.
Articles must be in English or Turkish and must not exceed a maximum of 10
single space A4 pages.
Submissions must sent by email to
<sota@euronet.nl>
or by post in disc format (Wp51, ASCII or Word (all versions), to the
postal adress of SOTA
Postbus 9642
2003 Haarlem
Netherlands
Contributors should also include a short biographical note.
Any further queries should be adressed to the adress of SOTA as indicated
above.
You are invited to distribute this call to other people, who in your
opinion, might be able to make a valuable contribution.
For practicle reasons we want to hear from the potential contributors as
soon as possible the title of their article.
************************************************
Mehmet Tutuncu
(SOTA) Research centre for Turkestan, Azerbaijan, Crimea, Caucasus and Siberia
P.o. box 9642
2003 LP Haarlem
The Netherlands
e-mail: <mtutuncu@turkiye.net> or <sota@euronet.nl>
Turkish World Home Page:<http://www.turkiye.net/sota/sota.html>
Crimean Tatars Home-Page: <http://www.euronet.nl/users/sota/krimtatar.html>
*******************************
**********
*Turkistan-N, a newsletter on Turkic Peoples
*
*To subscribe: send a message to <majordomo@turkistan.org>
* subscribe Turkistan-N
*
*To unsubscribe: send a message to <majordomo@turkistan.org> with
* unsubscribe Turkistan-N
*
*For questions: email: <owner-turkistan-N@turkistan.org>
**********