The United States, as in 1918 and 1991, does not appear interested today in the disintegration of Russia. Thomas Woodrow Wilson, the 28th President of the United States and a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, in his address to Congress on January 8, 1918, defended Russia's decision to halt peace negotiations with Germany and expressed support for the Russians in rejecting the territorial claims of the Germans.
Based on the ideas contained in Wilson's January 8, 1918 address to Congress, the peace program titled "War Aims and Peace Terms," known in history as "Wilson's Fourteen Points," paved the way for the decolonization of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires and legitimized the emergence of numerous new independent states based on ethnic-national principles in their place. Wilson, who firmly demanded the decolonization of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires, adopted a completely opposite stance regarding Russia.
Admiring Soviet Union Communist Party General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev, the 41st President of the United States, George H.W. Bush, threatened Kyiv during his speech at the Supreme Soviet of Ukraine on August 1, 1991, calling on Kyiv to refrain from declaring independence and to support Gorbachev's reforms. Twenty-three days after George H.W. Bush's speech, known in history as the "Chicken Kiev" speech, on August 24, 1991, the Supreme Soviet of Ukraine adopted the law on Ukraine's independence, and the Soviet Union collapsed.
The United States, as in 1918 and 1991, does not appear interested today in the disintegration of Russia. I would like to note in a footnote that Washington's views on Iran align with its attitude towards Russia. The U.S., which is not interested in the disintegration of Russia, also does not desire the division of Iran. After World War II, the United States ensured the territorial integrity of a practically divided Iran by threatening Moscow with a nuclear strike. Even after the historical event of American diplomats being taken hostage during the Iranian Islamic Revolution, Washington did not support independence movements in South Azerbaijan, Baluchistan, Khuzestan, or Kurdistan. The U.S. has demonstrated that it is not interested in the division of Iran by maintaining the unity of Syria, which is de facto divided. After Saddam Hussein's defeat, Washington ensured the unity of Iraq, divided along Shia, Sunni, and Kurdistan regions. Recently, Washington is implementing projects to further strengthen Iraq's central government.
Incidentally, Washington opposed Quebec's separation from Canada, Catalonia's separation from Spain, and did not recognize the referendum on Scotland's separation from the United Kingdom. In other words, Washington is far from supporting the process of dividing existing states and creating new ones. However, this does not mean that Washington's position will remain unchanged.
Alongside all this, the creation in 1959, under President Dwight Eisenhower's leadership, of the "National Committee of Captive Nations" and the inclusion in this committee of representatives from almost all USSR republics, even the Idel-Ural region, was a triggering event in the Soviet Union's collapse.
In my opinion, future historians will equate the international support for the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria Government and the Council of Patriots’ appeal condemning the occupation of the sovereign and independent Chechen Republic of Ichkeria by the Russian Federation and the genocide of the Chechen people with the establishment of the "National Committee of Captive Nations" in 1959, calling it the beginning of Russia's decolonization. Undoubtedly, this incident is the first political event that started Russia's decolonization.
Historical events justified thinkers such as Donald James, Janusz Bugajski, Luc Coffey, and Andrei Amalrik, who believed in the inevitable collapse of the empire, not politicians who believed in the eternity of the second Russian empire called the Soviet Union. The near future will justify the thinkers who believe that the empire will disintegrate once and for all for the third and final time, rather than the states trying to preserve Russia’s unity.
The massive losses suffered by Russia in Ukraine have triggered the same reaction as the losses the Soviet Union faced in Afghanistan, setting off a center-fleeing process that disintegrates the Russian Federation's unity. This process is irreversible.
Another important process is that Trump, who does not want the division of Russia, Iran, and other states, has unknowingly initiated the process that transforms the Caucasus, Idel-Ural, and Turkestan into a unified space. The parallel development of these two processes—the breaking of ties between the subjects of the Russian Federation and the center and the deepening daily of the process that will unify the Caucasus, Idel-Ural, and Turkestan—is placing Washington’s political elite before a choice.
The attention of Washington’s political elite, influenced by rapid events, is turning to our geography, the space consisting of the Caucasus, Idel-Ural, and Turkestan. If the process develops at this pace, the importance of the Caucasus, Idel-Ural, and Turkestan will surpass that of all other geographies for the U.S. Russia's strategists clearly see this and have begun sounding an alarm.
The statement by Viktor Vasilyev, the current Chair of the Collective Security Treaty Organization Permanent Council, warning that the steps of Western countries around Armenia could further escalate the situation in the South Caucasus, is a result of this. For the first time in the past 35 years, cooperation is observed among the South Caucasus republics. The bilateral agreements signed by "AzerTelecom" and "Telecom Armenia" for providing Armenia’s international internet connection through Azerbaijan show that unprecedented cooperation has started in the South Caucasus in the last 35 years. Russia, through the CSTO, is trying to create a false impression that the situation in the South Caucasus might worsen.
I will try to write separately about the process turning the Caucasus, Idel-Ural, and Turkestan into a unified space because this process will also give birth to Greater Azerbaijan.
Xaqani Jafarli,
political scientist