CC BY
51
THE CAUCASUS & GLOBALIZATION
Ansgar JÖDICKE
Senior Lecturer at the Department of Social Sciences, University of Fribourg
(Fribourg, Switzerland).
RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN STATE SCHOOLS IN AZERBAIJAN, GEORGIA, AND ARMENIA. DEMOCRATIC POLITICS OF RELIGION AND THE PLURALITY OF RELIGIOUS REPRESENTATIONS
Abstract
p
olitical institutions determine specific education policies, although it is highly contested whether, or in what way,
religion should be part of the state school curriculum. All three Central Caucasian states tried to establish a religious education
THE CAUCASUS & GLOBALIZATION
course under the auspices of the state and all three countries failed.
This article analyses the historical background and interprets these developments as part of the negotiation process on
the role of religion in society. In conclusion, the author argues that the existence of different ways in which religion is represented in society fosters the democratic civilization of religion.
KEYWORDS: religious education, politics of religion, religion in the public sphere, state school, education policy, politics and religion, religion and governance.
Introduction
Many sociologists of religion accept that religion is a social power that can establish strong and long-lasting commitments. Boundary-setting in religious traditions can be as strong as the boundaries of ethnic and national identities. The religious factor should be taken into account when religious identities are associated with national or ethnic boundaries, which is the case in all three Central Caucasian states. Academic studies should not overestimate religion or address it as an explicit or hidden factor in all conflicts, nor should religion be neglected, because it is a powerful force in society.
The most intriguing issue regarding religion in society is the democratic regulation of religious pluralism. The contemporary armed conflicts are not religious conflicts, even if the religious factor has sometimes been mobilized during these conflicts. Therefore, the politics of religion has to cope with social tension, minority-majority relations, and ways of negotiating in the public sphere. Sometimes religious "the politics of religion" may succeed in civilizing religious actors; sometimes they themselves may be the origin of the conflicts. The relationship between political and religious institutions in society is in permanent negotiation.
Working on conflict resolution requires balanced politics of religion. The position of religion in society is influenced, but not completely determined, by the politics of religion. Religion and politics may be understood as two fields of power that are to be civilized in a peaceful society. In this respect, one of the most controversial questions is the presence of religion in the public sphere.1
This article draws attention to a small part of the public significance of religion by analyzing the politics of religion. The case-studies deal with religious education in state schools2 in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia.3 Comparable attempts to introduce a course about religion in state schools have been undertaken in all three countries. However, these attempts have either never been realized (Azerbaijan) or been abolished or revised a couple of years later (Georgia and Armenia).
A short description of the general situation of religion in post-Soviet Central Caucasian countries provides the framework for understanding state-organized religious education. An analysis of these findings gives evidence of the existence of different forms fostering the democratic civilization of religion in society.
1 The academic discussion started with J. Casanova, Religion in the Public Sphere, Chicago University Press, Chicago, 1994; today, he analyzes this sort of problems in the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs in Washington.
2 In the following, I will use the term "state school" to designate schools that represent the main part of the state's education system and whose curricula and teachers are under state supervision. The term "public school" may lead to misunderstanding because of its different use in British and American English.
3 Many thanks to Satenik Mkrtchyan, Tatia Kekelia, and Elnur Ismayilov for their help, though I take full responsibility for the content and interpretations presented here.
THE CAUCASUS & GLOBALIZATION
Religion
in the Post-Soviet Central Caucasus
After years of adherence to an anti-religious policy during the Soviet period, the situation pertaining to religion in the Central Caucasus began to change in the years before the collapse of the Soviet Union. The policy of Glasnost and the structural weakness of the state facilitated a slightly friendlier attitude toward religions. With the declarations of independence in 1991, the possibilities for religious communities rose dramatically in the three Central Caucasian countries. The two mainstream Churches in Armenia and Georgia profited the most from the change in regimes and the years of political instability. They (re-)established powerful institutions strongly related to politics. The religious situation in Azerbaijan is less centralized. However, the Islamic communities began to flourish under the new law of freedom of religion. In general, the situation pertaining to religion was more convenient than in Soviet times. Today, all three countries refer to a national heritage of either Georgian Orthodox, Armenian Apostolic, or the Islamic tradition, and sometimes religion also contributes to identity formation, as well as to nationalism.
As quantitative research points out, the support of religion is—to some extent—a political declaration of trust. The trust in religious institutions is much higher than in political institutions.4 In contrast, public religious activity in all three countries is as low as it is in the West European countries; however, most people declare themselves to be religious. The increase in public interest in religion does not contradict the broad consensus in favor of a secular state, at least in the cities and centers of civil society.
The political principles in all three countries are mainly oriented toward Western Europe and a secular separation policy. However, what does this mean in practice? Even countries like France and the U.S., which promote the separation scheme in a strong way, are forced to make more specific decisions about their special type of politics of religion. And even in those countries that have written the same principle of separation in their constitutions, the reality of the separation policy may include close cooperation with at least the dominant religious institutions.5 In all three Central Caucasian states, there has been a considerable shift from a strong secular attitude right after independence toward religion-friendly (however still secular) politics.
Whilst remaining, without doubt, a secular state, all three governments require markers that would distinguish them from their Soviet past. Religion played this role right after the instability of the new states became visible in the 1990s. Thanks to a slight religious revival at the end of the Soviet period, the groundwork was prepared for a positive evaluation of religion as part of national history. However, this did not automatically include a cooperative attitude to the existing mainstream religions and their institutional leaders. So the public reference to religion became an arena for power struggles and negotiation.
Religion in State Schools
State schools are an important part of the public sphere, and religion in state schools is at the crossroads between religion and politics. If the state or a religious community is active in this field,
4 See: R. Charles, "Religiosity and Trust in Religious Institutions. Tales from the South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia)," Politics and Religion, Vol. 3 (2), 2010, pp. 228-261.
5 See also the analysis of J. Fox, "Separation of Religion and State and Secularism in Theory and in Practice," Religion, State & Society, Vol. 39, 2011, pp. 384-401.
THE CAUCASUS & GLOBALIZATION
it will be closely observed reciprocally. Therefore, religious education concepts in state schools may serve as case-studies concerning the general relationship between religion and society.6
In some European countries such as Great Britain, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Germany, and Switzerland, the influence of the state on religious education in state schools steadily increased during the 20th century. These countries developed forms of teaching about religion that were completely under the control of the state authorities.7 Some of those courses also dealt with life skills, ethics, and civic education. Curricula development, teacher formation, and supervision were part of the state's education system and were clearly linked to general and civic values. At the beginning of the 21st century, even at the European level, there were attempts to foster such pedagogically legitimate religious education courses.8
Similarly, all three Caucasian states have undergone a phase of debate about such courses. They have used analogous arguments to legitimize the state's activity by referring to cultural, moral, in any case, pedagogical reasons. In the following discussion, I will take a closer look at these debates and developments.
Azerbaijan
The Azerbaijani government started debates regarding the introduction of a special discipline on religious issues in secondary schools during the first years of the 21st century. The idea was first proposed by Head of the Muslim Spiritual Administration of the Caucasus Sheikh-ul-Islam Haji Al-lahshukur Pashazade. Pashazade is the official representative of all Muslims in the Caucasus; however, he was chosen by the Azerbaijani government and performs only a limited representational function while being very active in interreligious activities.
Pashazade's initiative was also supported by Rafiq Aliev, the former head of the State Committee for Work with Religious Organizations (SCWRO). According to the SCWRO, it was necessary to introduce a special discipline on religious subjects that would not permit either the Shi'a or Sunni interpretation of Islam to predominate. SCWRO even prepared a special textbook on the basics of religion, which was also supported by several well-known Islamic thinkers and some secular public figures.
In the end, this project was stopped by its main opponent, Minister of Education Misir Mar-danov. According to him, the educational system—without any religious teaching in state schools— is based on the Constitution "with a rather well-founded legislative base."9 He stressed the peaceful relations between different departments (education and religion) and the secular character of Azerbaijan's educational system. Later, SCWRO Spokesman Allakhverdiev backed out, stating that secondary schools would not teach the subject of religion the following year. Committee Head Aliev explained that religion would not be a subject in its own right in secondary schools, but topics relating to religion would be taught within the context of history, social science, and literature.
The discourse on this matter started with a reference to value education and moral education; later on, it shifted to the politics of religion, assuming that knowledge about religion could prevent the youth from falling under the negative influence of internal or external radical religious circles. Last but not least, the idea was to strengthen religious tolerance in Azerbaijan. Some analysts thought
6 See: A. Jödicke, "Introduction," in: Religious Education Politics, the State, and Society, ed. by A. Jödicke, Ergon, Würzburg, 2013, pp. 7-22.
7 See the overview: Religious Education in Public Schools. Study of Comparative Law, ed. by J. Löpez-Muniz et al., Springer, Dordrecht, 2006. Close cooperation between the state and the main Christian churches can still be found, for example in Germany.
8 See: OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), Toledo Guiding Principles on Teaching about Religions and Beliefs in Public Schools: Prepared by the ODIHR Advisory Council of Experts on Freedom of Religion or Belief, 2007, available at [http://www.osce.org/odihr/29154].
9 [http://www.religioscope.com/notes/2002/066_azerb_edu.htm].
THE CAUCASUS & GLOBALIZATION
that the final decision against the new school subject was motivated by protection of the secular character of the education system. Especially when protecting Azerbaijan's image versus European institutions, the "pollution" of the secular character of the state could have dangerous consequences in international relations.
Another attempt occurred in September 2011 in the same direction and from the same origin. Haji Sabir Hasanli, the deputy chairman of the Caucasus Muslims Department, proposed introducing religious studies in secondary schools in Azerbaijan. He suggested that a pilot study be carried out in one of Baku's schools and the effect monitored. His idea was to offer general courses in Islam and other religions, and not to introduce prayer in schools. Students at Baku Islamic University "do not learn to be mullahs, but to be teachers."10 Discussions on the issue of religious education in school are still in progress.
Georgia
A new school subject "The History of Christianity" was introduced in Georgia during the last years of the Soviet Union. The purpose was cultural rather than religious. Pupils should complete their knowledge of history, art, and literature. After the declaration of independence in 1991, "the Patriarchate became increasingly active; especially in relation to the training of teachers... Moreover, the contents of 'The History of Religion' became the subject of disputes between some representatives of academic circles and the Patriarchate."11 In addition, the Patriarchate succeeded in influencing the Law on Education adopted in 1997, which states in Art 18.2 that the "Ministry of Education and Science of Georgia (MES) had to cooperate with the Georgian Patriarchate while working on the elaboration of the school curricula."12
The Georgian Orthodox Church especially concentrated on pushing back every attempt to implement teachings about other religions. The subject "Religion and Culture" had been taught in state schools for only a short period of time. It had to be removed from the curriculum in April 1999 as a result of the successful action of the Orthodox movement "Union of Orthodox Parents" to stick to a Christian Orthodox curriculum. Their position was that "the textbook dedicated a large section to the teaching of other religions, which, according to confessors, might confuse the child's mind."13
Public debates on religious education at state schools were held during the first decade of the 21st century. "Secular" or "human rights" activists complained about the religious character of the teachings. The Report on Conditions of Human Rights in Georgia in 2004 stated that the "nature of religious education at certain schools also causes concern." "A subject called 'The History of Religion and Culture' is taught at schools, which very often is understood by the teachers as teaching the 'Law of God.' The level of education of religion teachers at schools is very low. Praying before any classes start, as well as holding different types of religious-patriotic events at the initiative of the school administration... is a common practice... Many of the teachers admit that their goal is making the children religious or 'church-goers,' i.e. indoctrination."14
10 First statements from 2010: [http://en.trend.az/news/society/1689204.html].
11 S. Papuashvili, State of freedom of religion in Georgia since the Adoption of Constitutional Agreement between Government and the Orthodox Church of Georgia, Human Rights Center, Tbilisi, 2008, especially pp. 7-10.
12 Translated by Satenik Mkrtchyan.
13 "'ftg^o^oib (55 b3m^g5clo bigbft ob^5g^o5B ("Religion and Culture" Will Not Be Taught in Schools Anymore)," 3goftob (Weekly Times), No. 15 (207), 12-18 1999 (12-18 April, 1999), p. 2.
14 Published by the Office of the Public Defender (Ombudsman) of Georgia, Tbilisi, 2005, p. 41, available at [http:// www.ombudsman.ge/files/downloads/en/szounjmrncjpwcvdgasn.pdf]. Refer to the outcomes of the qualitative interviews in Assessment of Reform in Education System. Sociology Research Paper, The Caucasus Institute for Peace, Democracy and Development, Tbilisi, 2009, pp. 54-56, available at [http://dspace.cigilibrary.org/jspui/bitstream/123456789/24875/1/ Assessment%20of%20reform%20in%20Education%20System.pdf?1].
THE CAUCASUS & GLOBALIZATION
A fierce debate in November 2004 over the role of religion in school curricula illustrated the stakes involved. In an attempt to remove religious instruction altogether from state schools, some 70,000 Georgians signed a petition for the resignation of Minister of Education and Science Alexander Lomaia. As a compromise, the ministry settled on information about religion as a social sciences course.
In the meantime, Georgia's religious policy tried to curtail the influence of the Georgian Orthodox Church. The new Law on General Education (adopted on 8 April, 2005), as stated in Art 13.2, prohibited religious sermons and the teaching of any specific religion in state schools. The law identified several activities as illegitimate "indoctrination," "proselytism," or "measures of forced assimilation," such as exposing one religion as the only true religion to pupils in order to convert them, praying during lessons, and displaying religious symbols (icons, crosses) in the precincts of state schools. However, some exceptions are mentioned, such as religious symbols used for education, celebration of state holidays, and "universal values." So the Georgian Parliament left the possibility open for religion as a resource of cultural capital and did not completely ban religion from schools. On the contrary, the law states that "pupils of state schools can study religion or conduct religious rituals during their free time if the purpose is to receive religious education" (Art 18.4).
School textbooks were published in 2007 for some grades, and another textbook on the history of world religions followed in 2010, which is not yet widespread.15 An analysis of recently published history textbooks attests that the depiction of world religion is balanced.16 However, older textbooks are still in use, and some teachers claim the authority of the Georgian Orthodox Church.17
Armenia
Although there were attempts to establish regular courses about the history of religion right after the declaration of independence in 1991, the situation with regard to religion in the first ten years of the new Armenian state was confusing. There is empirical evidence of organized group baptism, as well as academic-like history of religion courses during these years.18
The story of religion in state schools in Armenia has its parallels in the reestablishment of the Armenian Apostolic Church as the national church which has been vested with enormous power. After an agreement between the Government and the Armenian Apostolic Church was signed in 2002, a course on "The History of the Armenian Apostolic Church" was introduced gradually in secondary and high schools. The Church also successfully affected the legal bases of the education system. According to Art 4 of Section 3 of the Law on Education, "The Republic of Armenia's educational system is aimed at strengthening the spiritual and intellectual potential of the Armenian nation, as well as maintaining and promoting universal human values. The Armenian Church contributes greatly to this work." Art 8 entitles the Armenian Apostolic Church to curricula and textbook development, as well as other possibilities of influence. It is obvious that the Armenian Church takes
15 This is one of the major outcomes of the project "Improving Environment for Minority Integration in Georgia through Supporting Reforms in the School Education System," funded by Evangelischer Entwicklungsdienst / EED (Germany). The project has also been supported by the Caucasus Institute for Peace, Democracy and Development (refer to the annual report 2010, especially footnote 15).
16 See: L. Gigineishvili, "Post-reform History Textbooks in Georgia: Changing Patterns and the Issue of Minorities in Georgian History," in: History Teaching in Georgia: Representation of Minorities in Georgian History Textbooks, ed. by CIMERA, Geneva, 2007, available at [www.cimera.org], pp. 7-22 (especially footnote 17).
17 See: D. Tinikashvili, "Religious Lessons in Public Schools, 20 February 2012," Humanrights.ge, available at [http:// www.humanrights.ge/index.php?a=main&pid=14476&lang=eng].
18 I follow the detailed depiction of S. Mkrtchyan, "State and Church in Armenian State Schools," in: Religious Education Politics, the State, and Society, pp. 149-161.
THE CAUCASUS & GLOBALIZATION
part in the organization, financing, control, and evaluation of the religious education lessons in Armenia. On 22 February, 2007, the government adopted the Law Regarding Relations between the Republic of Armenia and the Holy Armenian Apostolic Church. This permits the Church to initiate activities in state schools.
Compared with Georgia, the public debates on this structural cooperation are weak. Several authors have pointed out the incompatibility between compulsory courses and human rights, e.g. the report on religious tolerance in 2009/2010.19 Nevertheless, the political and Church authorities present themselves in great harmony. They argue that the courses are only courses in history and knowledge of religion. The participation of the Armenian Apostolic Church has to be understood because of its special significance for the people of Armenia (as written in the Constitution).
Discussion
All three states dealt with the topic of religion in state schools during the period of nationbuilding and identity formation in the early years of the post-Soviet era. The political arguments given by those promoting the state's activity in this field refer to a positive evaluation of religion in society, its significance for the nation's cultural tradition, and its support of social values. Principle ambivalence is sometimes visible, for example, when the state legitimizes its activity by giving a negative evaluation of religion, making courses in religion part of a prevention policy. Positive and negative judgments highlight that the presentation of religion in schools by state authorities is not identical to the religion presented by religious communities. The presentation of several world views under the headline "religion" makes them in principle comparable and to some extent equal. This is what democratic politics of religion requires as a precondition for any policy of religious tolerance. However, the mainstream religious communities will disagree radically when they feel their claims to truth and tradition are weakened.
We found two contradictory strategies of politics of religion, although both referred to the interpretation of the separation of state and religion. In Azerbaijan, politics refers to the separation of state and religion hoping that abstinence in this field will both convince the EU that Azerbaijan is a modern country and encourage religious communities to keep out of politics. Nevertheless, religion is not only represented in religious education courses, but also in history, the arts, and literature.
The state's politics of religion in Armenia welcomed the Church as a strong partner in identity and value formation. The influence of the Church on state schools has been increasing during the last decade as supported by parliament. Yet politics tries to substantiate the general difference between religion and politics although this is clearly not what happens in the field of religious education policy.
There are similar tendencies found in Georgia. However, the state remains more distant from the Church and the protests are far more elaborate. Even the policy of the state authorities is more skeptical about their collaboration with the church.
The activities of the religious communities were dependent on their sociopolitical situation. The two main Churches in Georgia and Armenia were far more centralized than Islam in Azerbaijan. They represented not only a tradition that was worth recovering after the atheistic period of the Soviet Union, but also provided the new societies with a stable institution during the years of instability. The Georgian Orthodox Church, as well as the Armenian Apostolic Church, stepped into the power vacuum. This has especially been the case in Armenia where the government did not really counter the
19 See a number of interview examples in: S. Danielyan & V. Vardanyan & A. Avtandilyan, "Religious Tolerance in Armenia," pp. 22-31, available at [http://www.osce.org/yerevan/74894].
THE CAUCASUS & GLOBALIZATION
Church's ambitions. In Georgia, the Church had to fight for its presence in schools and had to accept some compromises. In Azerbaijan, communication between political groups and religious communities was deeply impaired; political ambitions could not be negotiated in the public sphere like participation in schools, but seethed under the surface in some regions.
The reasons why the governments did not introduce a course on religious topics were two-fold. In Azerbaijan, it was a political decision. In Georgia and Armenia, the Church had too much power. In Armenia, the Church could capture the field; in Georgia, the Church was able to prevent the most radical form of state influence. However, the jury is still out. The failures might therefore be interpreted as an ongoing clarification process of the role of religion in society. In any case, there are doors open where religion remains part of the curriculum in state schools.
Conclusion
The findings show that religious education policy in state schools can obviously be interpreted as a crucial point of politics of religion. In all three Caucasian countries, the state authorities used the field of religious education in state schools as a means for their politics of religion. They all used the religion/politics separation scheme as an interpretative pattern to legitimize their politics. Furthermore, they found solutions to cope with the power of religion, though it is not yet clear how sustainable these solutions are. The change in political regime and the transformation of society may deepen the separation between religion-friendly and secular forces.
The separation paradigm may help to structure the politics of religion, however, it is not itself a solution in school, because there are many specific places where religion appears.20 Religion does not function within society in terms of a yes/no distinction. There are different forms of representing religion. There is a plurality of representations and people might react "religiously" in one context and "non-religiously" in another. There may be pupils and parents who would support a cultural representation of religion in school while refusing a strictly religious identity in their life.
The presentation of religion to pupils turns into a social factor itself and a specific form of representing religion in society. The use of "religion" as a universal term becomes obvious when the state insists on dealing with a plurality of religions in "its" schools. However, the question of plurality and the representation of a variety of religions is only the surface of the problem. What is the role of religion in a democratic society? Which institutions and persons speak about which religion(s)? How are these religions presented? Who represents religion and in what form? The public debate about these matters itself is a sign for negotiations about religion in society. The case of religion represented in school textbooks and lessons may be seen as a minor debate that takes place instead of a major battle for religious truth.
In pluralistic societies, when the state does not need to win religious-truth battles, there are many ways to deal with religion. In consequence, it is a misleading analysis when Dimitri K. Burlaka21 attempts to define the fields stating that "education localizes specialized information coming from such units within its various institutions and programs (e.g. political information is localized as the academic discipline of political science; religious information is localized as theology, etc.)."22 In con-
20 This is not only the case in history, literature and arts. It also happens to be a question of religious symbols with clothing, which has been left out in this article.
21 He is professor in St. Petersburg and Rector of Private educational establishment of higher professional education "Russian Christian Academy for Humanities." In this context, I just criticize his precondition saying nothing about his pedagogical proposition.
22 D.K. Burlaka, "Value-Cultural Pedagogy as a Method of Education for Tolerance in the Conditions of the Post-Secular Society," in: World Religions in the Context ofContemporary Culture: New Perspectives ofDialogue and Mutual Understanding, ed. by UNESCO, St. Petersburg Branch of the Russian Institute for Cultural Research, St. Petersburg, 2011, p. 193.
THE CAUCASUS & GLOBALIZATION
trast, there are far more academic disciplines that deal with religion, such as sociology/anthropology of religion, history of religion, and the scientific study of religion. Social sciences, history, and arts can manifest a different approach to religion, and this is an observable fact itself.
However, it is not only within the academic community that there are different ways to represent religion. Religion is represented in societies in other forms and not only by praying and religious hierarchy. Grace Davie emphasizes that church visiting in Europe may itself be regarded as an important factor for religion in a society.23 Even if we do not follow her interpretation that this is an example of "vicarious religion," we will certainly observe the significance of touristic or museum-related forms of religious representation. Besides religious rituals, religion is represented in museums, within the arts, and in school. The acceptance of pedagogical forms of representation within these contexts may foster a democratic culture.
Despite different configurations of churches and Muslim communities, the three Central Caucasian countries face similar challenges to their politics of religion. The politics of religion is linked with questions of stability, democratic structures, and negotiations on norms of society. The policy of separation of state and religious institutions is only a partial solution. In this situation, the politics of religion in state schools offers an enormous potential for dialog with religious communities as to the formats in which religion can be represented.24 The democratic process could benefit from keeping this debate open.
23 See: G. Davie, Religion in Modern Europe. A Memory Mutates, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000, pp. 156-160.
24 An example of a successful intervention in religious education in state schools very close to the Caucasus has been Tajikistan (see: From Confidence Building Towards Co-operative Co-existence. The Tajik Experiment of Islamic-Secular Dialog, ed. by J.-N. Bitter et al., Nomos, Baden-Baden, 2005).
