文章信源：Feminist Peace Collective女权和平集体
Media Profile: The Feminist Peace Collective was founded in 2020 by Azerbaijani feminists to explore the concepts of peace, conflict, militarism, imperialism, capitalism, nationalism, gender, masculinity and other related issues in response to the Second Karabakh War, in order to convey a feminist peace discourse to society.
In recent weeks, discussions around feminism and LGBTQI+ rights have re-emerged as tensions between Azerbaijan and the United States have escalated. The resurgence of the issue began with a series of actions, including against USAID and its financial partners, which were seen as a threat to Azerbaijan's national security.
As a result, members of Abzas Media and other independent journalists have been arrested, and individuals studying Xi in the United States have been labeled as secret service networks. These new rounds of repression against civil society are not isolated incidents, but are inextricably linked to the regime's paranoia about the loss of power and the broader geopolitical changes in the region following the passage of Section 907 by the US Senate. What is curious, however, is that LGBTQI+ rights are highly instrumentalized in government rhetoric as a tactic to counter external interference and maintain domestic security.
Article 907 of the Freedom Support Act, which has been in force since 24 October 1992, stems from the blockade of Nagorno-Karabakh by Azerbaijan. These restrictions have particularly affected direct US military and economic assistance to Azerbaijan. In 2001, the Senate introduced an amendment that would allow the president to waive Section 907. But on November 15, 2023, the U.S. Senate passed a bill ending all military aid to Azerbaijan and effectively adopting the exemption from Section 907 of the Liberal Support Act, which led to a significant shift in the relationship. This move, historically linked to the blockade of Nagorno-Karabakh by Azerbaijan in the early 90s of the 20th century, is now applied again after regaining full control of the enclave in September 2023.
These changes in foreign policy, which may seem sudden, reveal deep links to the long-standing Karabakh problem. However, in this geopolitical dynamic, it is particularly noteworthy the deliberate attack on the so-called "LGBT agenda". As early as a year ago, in 2022, US President Joe Biden's administration discussed the possibility of applying Article 907 to Azerbaijan, citing the oppression faced by the LGBTQI+ community in Azerbaijan.
In response to this call in 2022, news sites affiliated with the state Milli.az took the opportunity to use homosexuals as an instrument of US foreign policy. The author presents a large number of contradictory arguments, initially acknowledging the existence of LGBTQI+s as a "sexual minority" in Azerbaijan and acknowledging that homophobia is bad. However, the author's discourse takes a turn when he expresses disdain for the so-called "glorification of sexual minorities" and links it to the Western agenda. In the Azerbaijani media, this prevailing narrative, along with the use of the "sexual minority" label, has been strategically used to disparage homosexuals and portray them as people who have no political clout and are destined to be ignored.
Of course, the question arises: Is there a real connection between gay politics and U.S. foreign policy goals? Moreover, what is the significance of LGBTQI+ issues in the context of tensions between the United States and Azerbaijan? To critically examine these issues, it is necessary to explore the historical weaponization of rights in the spheres of diplomacy and domestic politics.
Exploitation abroad vs. exploitation at home
Imperialist countries have historically tried to extend their agendas to the periphery, which has often led to the subordination of local authorities and peoples through neo-colonial tools and soft power. Notably, the use of LGBTQI+ and women's rights as a strategic camouflage diverts attention from the true nature of these policies.
Examining examples such as the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in the name of women's freedom, its invasion of Iraq in the name of promoting human rights, and its attempt to justify Israel's apartheid in Palestine under the pretext of protecting the rights of Palestinian homosexuals reveals complex ways in which identity politics can be manipulated to advance geopolitical interests. However, the affected groups, whether women and homosexuals in Afghanistan, Iraq or Palestine, have been adamantly opposed to being used as a tool for these political manoeuvres, crying out: "Never in our name!"
Protecting LGBTIQ+ rights in foreign policy thus becomes a tool that threatens to further oppress postcolonial peoples. In another, darker aspect of this instrumentalization, marginalized peoples often find themselves at the mercy of local authoritarian, traditional, or right-wing rulers, becoming tools in the hands of their political elites, while seeking refuge in the so-called Western values of universal freedom, but only in response rather than real support.
On the global stage, Azerbaijan seeks to assert its sovereign power and maintain its position in the global order, navigating the collective space between the West and the East (more specifically, the United States and Russia). In reality, however, Azerbaijan selectively accepts rhetoric from both ends, while employing the rhetoric and tactics of other authoritarian regimes.
On the other hand, Azerbaijan has always adjusted itself to the geopolitical conflict of interests, behaving its foreign policy in a balanced manner, while at the same time acting cautiously, especially with Western countries. Despite President Aliyev's rhetoric suggesting that he wants to "punish the West," his real intention in suppressing civil society is to strengthen internal control and seek regional hegemony. Domestically, President Aliyev sees this as a defense against Western threats such as the revolution of color, the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender agenda, and radical feminism, which aims to disintegrate civil society by creating a cultural conflict.
Today, the Azerbaijani government uses gender and LGBTQI+ rights as a tool, especially during a period of tension with the United States following the acceptance of Section 907, which is a direct result of these political dynamics. Azerbaijan seems to be aware of its ability to manipulate the rhetoric surrounding the weaponization of LGBTIQ+ rights in the United States in the name of "decolonialism" for its own benefit. At the same time, Azerbaijan has adopted a cultural strategy that positions the issue of homosexuality as alien and alien to Azerbaijani society, and a securitization strategy that considers LGBTIQ+ rights as a matter of national security.
LGBTIQ+ as a national security issue
In recent days, in a new round of attacks on civil society, the Azerbaijani state-run AzTV channel has been keen to participate in a persistent smear campaign, constantly interspersed with discussions about the "LGBT agenda" related to the United States and the West. It claims that the United States supports color revolutions by integrating LGBTIQ+ frameworks into local politics.
The channel describes LGBTIQ+ as a by-product of "radical feminism" imported from abroad, which is allegedly aimed at eroding the foundations of the family system. This argument argues that this influence is aimed at promoting homosexuality while branding national consciousness as a regression. This portrayal not only emphasizes the accusatory tone towards the West, but also highlights the nationalist perspective that introducing LGBT rhetoric into the local political environment has implications.
The pro-government news agency APA also published an article opposing USAID policy in Azerbaijan, providing an in-depth analysis of the national agenda. The article instructs a sustained focus on issues related to feminists and LGBTQI+ people, viewing them as atypical of Azerbaijani society:
"Another directive is to constantly pay attention to issues related to feminists and LGBT people, which are not typical in Azerbaijani society, and to form a kind of public opinion on the ground and in the international community that Azerbaijan "discriminates" against these people.
All of this rhetoric perpetuates a narrative that fosters a sense of cultural clash between the West and Azerbaijan, characterizing homosexuality as something foreign to the country, in addition to securitizing LGBTQI+s as a "threat." Escalating the LGBTQI+ issue to the level of national security reveals a carefully orchestrated strategy by the Azerbaijani government. After the victory over Karabakh and the success of national unity, a new round of nationalism needs to find other imaginary threats to preserve that unity. To achieve this, the government has strategically used nationalist and religious sentiments to portray LGBTQI+ activism alongside feminism as a threat to Azerbaijani traditions and Islam.
This strategy aims to manipulate cultural and religious values and delegitimize the gay community's demands for equality and rights. It deliberately conflates nationalist and religious congruence with liberal individual freedoms, reinforcing the conservative agenda adopted by right-wing authorities around the globe. The current shift in Azerbaijani cultural politics towards conservatism serves a dual purpose, to marginalize dissent against the regime, and to try to rally the Azerbaijani public around so-called "traditional, conservative values".
This shift is not accidental, but is inextricably linked to the discourse that promotes morality and "traditional values" that are intrinsically opposed to Western ideals, especially gender equality, reproductive rights, sex education, and the acceptance of different sexual identities. In this way, it becomes fairly easy to promote their conspiracy theories, label LGBTQI+ resistance activists and genuine efforts as Western-funded and directed.
As part of a broader strategy to unify the Azerbaijani people, Azerbaijan is working together to celebrate traditional gender roles. The body plays a central role in these control mechanisms, both as a symbol of nationalization and as a tool for enforcing heterosexual norms. Through discourses that define "appropriate behavior" collectively formed in the name of the state, these mechanisms seek to regulate and reinforce traditional values.
Restrictions on sexuality and women's rights are strategically framed as defenders of "traditional values" rather than the disciplinary power and politics of the state. By labeling these restrictions as "traditional values," the state seeks to legitimize its control over individual choices and actions as an important part of national identity. This strategy not only reinforces conservative ideologies, but also consolidates power by suppressing dissent and dissenting opinions under the guise of protecting traditional norms and national security.
Head ahead at the intersection
Looking to the future, the conflict of values between Azerbaijani tradition and modernity is rooted in solid material foundations. In this oil-rich country, where a significant portion of the population lives in an environment of poverty and instability, the issue of values often comes into focus to divert attention from pressing political and economic issues. This trick is well known to countries around the world, and it is a form of capitalism. The reproduction mechanism of patriarchy. Its main purpose is to divert attention from the core issues, to blame external factors for people's grievances, and to foster a culture of blaming "others".
There is a noteworthy similarity with European policies targeting immigrants, where similar tactics have succeeded in portraying immigrants as a threat and fueling widespread Islamophobia. The Azerbaijani authorities are adept at adopting Western right-wing rhetoric, from Western education to sexual expression, in the guise of generalized modernity. However, when this modernity reaches ordinary people, it is often hidden under the cloak of traditionalism. Intriguingly, even traditionalism operates under control, and religious communities and groups face severe repression.
In the current situation, the core goal is to strategically use the gay community as a political tool, while turning a blind eye to the denial of their basic rights to health, life and work. If necessary, control is exercised through strong biopolitics, such as conscripting them into the army and exposing them to the dangers of war. The gay-feminist resistance movement against this oppression is, in essence, against the control and oppressive apparatus of the government.
In the case of Azerbaijan, a balanced foreign policy in the post-Soviet space requires a delicate balance between military-strategic cooperation with Russia and close economic ties with the West. However, the Azerbaijani regime ostensibly embraces the modernization driven by Western neoliberal economies, but strategically obscures this under the discourse of national modernization – selectively adopting elements that the West deems beneficial. This practice contributes to the exploitation of labour, including women and homosexuals, and allows Azerbaijan to participate in global politics and the economy without strong verification and accountability mechanisms.
While strategic relations with Russia are recognized for their security implications, Azerbaijan has been discerning when it comes to adopting certain Russian legislative measures, such as the "anti-gay propaganda" law. Although Azerbaijan has applied Russia's "foreign funding restrictions" law since 2014, it has been hesitant to enact a stricter "anti-gay propaganda" law and Russia's recent classification of LGBTQI+ people as an "extremist group." However, this strategic restraint does not reduce the likelihood that Azerbaijan will use power as a destructive tool against homosexuals in the future. The incomplete adoption of Russia's approach can perhaps be seen as part of a balanced foreign policy decision, when in fact Azerbaijan does not need so much effort at all to harmonize its legislation to use the right as explosives. The absence of legal restraint does not prevent the regime from resorting to other means of repression.
Still, the topic has emerged in political discussions last year, with lawmaker Javanshir Pashazade and Baku State University Law School professor Afsar Sadigov commenting on the possible passage of a law similar to Russia's law on gay propaganda. At the same time, the government has not rushed to implement this agenda, opting for more subtle means, imposing restrictions on the LGBTQI+ community through legislative acts that are overshadowed by national security concerns.
At the intersection of gay and feminist resistance groups, new tactics must be considered, especially with dwindling funding from the West and the lack of significant political pressure from the Azerbaijani government. As safe spaces and social services dwindle in already constrained settings, the ideologically and practically choices these movements make will determine their strategies. Driven by absolute power, the Aliyev regime seeks to completely eradicate or co-opt civil society, beyond existing limits. However, this challenging period also opens up the possibility of autonomous struggles that transcend the dualistic framework of the Global West and the Global East.
Azerbaijan's subtle foreign policy dance between Russia and the collective West has exposed a deeper exploitation of labor, and rights have become a weapon. Thus, escalating LGBTQI+ issues to national security concerns reflects a deliberate strategy to silence dissent. As traditional gender roles have been celebrated and the body has become a national symbol for enforcing heterosexual norms, the LGBTQI+ community has become a tool for right-wing and authoritarianism in Azerbaijan and around the world.