Хабзэ Логотип Public and Political Organization
🌐 English ▼

History of the Organisation

It is logical to view the history of the Circassian socio-political organisation “Khabze” as a continuation of a single Circassian socio-political line: from the International Circassian Association through regional structures such as the “Circassian Congress” to a new form of self-organisation represented by “Khabze.” Between the ICA (early 1990s), the “Circassian Congress” (2000s – early 2010s), and “Khabze” (late 2010s), a direct line of continuity can be traced: each successive structure took up and developed the previous agenda, adapting it to new political conditions.

Ideological Continuity — from the ICA to the “Circassian Congress”

In the 1990s, the ICA formulated a foundational set of ideas. The main goals and objectives that the International Circassian Association set for itself:

Main Areas of Activity

At the level of congresses and associated organisations, several main areas can be identified:

In the 1990s, the ICA and congresses played a notable political role, including in relation to the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict and projects for the unification of Adyghe, Kabardians, and Circassians (the proclamation of a sovereign Circassia).

After Russian authorities and security services conducted an operation in 2000 in Nalchik at a regular assembly of the International Circassian Association to forcibly seize control and replace the organisation’s leadership with their own appointees, a vacuum formed in the Circassian political field. However, new organisations soon emerged at the local level, including the networked Circassian movement known as the “Circassian Congress.”

The “Circassian Congress” took the ideological foundation of the International Circassian Association and reformatted it for current realities:
— it named the events of the 19th century a genocide and demanded legal recognition first from Russia, then from other states;
— it elevated the idea of Circassian unity into the category of a political project (a unified Circassia, the right of return).

In brief: in the 2000s and early 2010s, the “Circassian Congress” was the ideological centre of the political wing of the Circassian movement. Its ideology was built around recognition of the genocide, the right of return, and the restoration of the unity of the Circassian people, while the campaign that culminated in the recognition of the genocide by the Parliament of Georgia in 2011 became the main foreign policy achievement of this line.

Ideological Foundation and Goals (2000s – early 2010s)

The main elements of the ideology of the “Circassian Congress” during this period:

Recognition of the genocide: the assertion that the events of the Russo-Circassian War and the mass expulsion of the Adyghe constitute a genocide of the Circassian people committed by the Russian Empire; the necessity of pursuing international and, above all, Russian recognition of this fact.

Unity of Circassians: the idea that Adyghe, Kabardians, Circassians, and Shapsugs are a single Circassian people, divided administratively, and that the “just resolution of the Circassian question” is the right to live on their own land as a unified nation.

The right of return: recognition of the genocide is viewed as an instrument for opening a political and legal pathway for the repatriation of a significant portion of the diaspora to the North Caucasus.

Security within Russia, rather than immediate independence: according to the leaders of the Congress, the goal was not the immediate creation of a separate state called “Circassia,” but rather the recognition of the genocide and the provision of conditions for the return and development of the people within Russia. At the same time, the idea of a unified Circassia was discussed as a strategic horizon.

The role of the “Circassian Congress” here was pivotal: it was one of the main driving forces behind street and online campaigns to popularise the flag, historical memory, and efforts to shape a unified self-identity as “Circassians,” particularly in the 2000s and early 2010s.

The Flag and Public Cultural Actions

Researchers of the Circassian movement note that new networked organisations such as the “Circassian Congress” placed their emphasis on public street actions and mass symbolism — marches on 21 May with Circassian flags, green ribbons bearing the flag and the dates 1763–1864.

These marches became not merely commemorative but also cultural and political: the flag, music, national dress, slogans about Circassia and genocide — all of this created in the urban spaces of Nalchik, Maykop, and Cherkessk a sense of a living, contemporary Circassian people.

Analysts state directly: the 21 May actions with Circassian symbols became a means of publicly representing memory and “manifesting postcolonial claims” — demands to recognise the genocide and respect Circassian subjecthood.

Social Media and Youth Mobilisation

An expert report on the “Circassian question” emphasises that the “Circassian Congress” and allied structures actively employed modern networked methods of mobilisation — the internet, forums, social media — to coordinate actions and disseminate the flag and slogans.

This made it possible to extend the themes of the flag and 21 May beyond the republican capitals alone and to involve the diaspora, creating a unified information space around Circassian symbolism.

The Campaign for Unified Self-Identification in the Census

The drive toward the single name “Circassians” logically follows from the ideology of the “Circassian Congress” and the entire national movement: the people are one, and the division into “Adyghe, Kabardians, Circassians, Shapsugs” is artificial.

By the 2010 census, Circassian organisations had already begun recommending that people register as “Circassians,” despite resistance from census-takers and officials. Instructions on how to insist upon the designation “Circassian” in the “nationality” field were published on the websites of Adyghe organisations.

This effort gained further momentum ahead of the 2020 census (which was postponed): the flash mob #IAmCircassianAndYou? called on everyone who calls themselves “Adyghe” in their native language to indicate the unified designation “Circassian” in the census.

Although this flash mob was formally led by activists of “Adyghe Khase” and other structures, the ideological foundation (“one people — one name”) and the experience of online mobilisation came precisely from the milieu of the “Circassian Congress” and related organisations.

From the “Circassian Congress” to “Khabze”

The “Circassian Congress” in the 2000s and early 2010s openly confronted the Kremlin: genocide, Circassia, the Georgian campaign — all of this made it a target of intense scrutiny and pressure.

Formally, the “Circassian Congress” did not cease its activities all at once; rather, it was progressively marginalised and de facto lost its cohesion: some regional legal entities were liquidated, the unified organisational network was significantly weakened under state pressure, and its agenda and activists were redistributed among new structures and the Circassian diaspora.

Many active members of the organisation “Khabze” had previously been part of the “Circassian Congress,” including the leader of “Khabze,” Martin Kochesoko, who was one of the founders of the “Circassian Congress” in Kabardino-Balkaria in 2006.

Initially, as early as 2009, “Khabze” took shape as the ideological wing of the “Circassian Congress” in the KBR, and Martin Kochesoko was already at its helm. As an independent movement, “Khabze” emerged in 2015 — following the de facto cessation of the “Circassian Congress” activities in the KBR under pressure on its leaders in the run-up to the 2014 Sochi Olympics.

Thus, “Khabze” de facto became the successor to the core ideas of the “Circassian Congress.”

Under the harsher conditions of the late 2010s, “Khabze” carried forward the message but changed the “packaging”:
— instead of the direct slogan “genocide + Circassia” — emphasis on Adyghe Khabze, on dignity and the people’s right to self-governance;
— instead of direct demands to Moscow — discussion of genuine federalism, language rights, and respect for repatriates, but with the same underlying message: Circassians must be subjects, not objects.

In essence, the ideological line extends as follows:
ICA (unity, repatriation, and memory; bringing the Circassian question to the international level) → “Circassian Congress” (Circassia, the right to the homeland, genocide as a legal instrument) → “Khabze” (Adyghe Khabze + people’s rights + federalism as a form of political subjecthood).

Goals and Objectives: What Recurs, What Changes

Recurring elements:

Consolidation of Circassians:
— ICA — consolidation of “compatriots” in the Caucasus and the diaspora.
— “Congress” — consolidation around the “Circassian question” and the genocide.
— “Khabze” — consolidation on the basis of Adyghe Khabze and national interests.

Language and culture: all three structures consider the preservation of the language and traditions to be the foundation for the survival of the people.

Ties with the diaspora:
— ICA — official channels and repatriation programmes.
— “Congress” — political lobbying through the diaspora (including Georgia).
— “Khabze” — moral and media support; criticism of the authorities’ treatment of repatriates in the homeland.

What changes:

In the 1990s, the ICA still believed in the possibility of reaching agreement with the state as a partner.

The “Circassian Congress” in the 2000s proceeded from the premise that Moscow was ignoring demands, and shifted the centre of gravity to international pressure and firm political demands (Georgia, the 21 May campaigns).

“Khabze” already operates under the conditions of an openly repressive state: legally — a cultural and human rights organisation; in reality — a bearer of a politically sensitive agenda (federalism, people’s rights, criticism of the centre), for which it faces criminal prosecution and bureaucratic liquidation.

Evolution of Forms of Activity

Organisational level:

The ICA — a large, formally recognised international association with congresses, offices, a president, and a charter, operating openly before the eyes of states.

The “Circassian Congress” — a more flexible networked structure across three republics and the diaspora, capable of independent political actions and international initiatives.

“Khabze” — a small socio-political NGO relying on media, social networks, the organisation of mass street actions, and local events; formally — “culture,” in substance — a new type of political actor.

Type of activity:

ICA — congresses, official delegations, repatriation programmes, cultural festivals, cooperation with authorities.

“Congress” — rallies on 21 May, appeals regarding the genocide, international conferences, engagement with the Parliament of Georgia.

“Khabze” — organisation of mass events, educational and media projects, participation in roundtables on federalism, constructive criticism of laws and government practices.

Relations with the State

ICA (early 1990s): difficult, but dialogue was possible; later — a gradual takeover and transformation into a loyalist structure.

“Circassian Congress”: constant confrontation; attempts by authorities to marginalise it by portraying its members as “radicals.”

“Khabze”: targeted repressions (the Kochesoko case, pressure on his family, liquidation of the legal entity), which forced its leader to emigrate.

Analytical Conclusion

Ideological trajectory:

The ICA did substantial work in preserving the language, establishing contacts with the diaspora, and launching repatriation projects.

The “Circassian Congress” added sharpness — genocide, political status, international pressure.

“Khabze” gave it a form for the 21st century — the fusion of tradition (Adyghe Khabze) with rights and federalism under conditions of repression.

Continuity and rupture simultaneously:

In substance, “Khabze” continues precisely the “radical” line of the ICA/Congress: the subjecthood of the people, language, memory, criticism of the centre.

In form, the organisation was forced to retreat from the direct political arena into “ethics and culture” in order to have any chance of survival at all — until even that was suppressed.

Due to repression in the KBR, the centre of activity of “Khabze” and of Martin Kochesoko personally was forced to shift beyond the borders of the homeland. Now the key work is carried out through the Circassian diaspora, which he strives to unite and direct toward support for the idea of a unified Circassia in the Caucasus.

Pressure on “Khabze” in the Homeland

In 2019, a blow was struck against the organisation “Khabze”: Martin Kochesoko was detained on fabricated “drug” charges, the office was searched, and activists were arrested. Human rights defenders and the participants themselves call the case politically motivated.

Following a suspended sentence, the designation of “foreign agent” status, new cases, and regular visits by security forces to his parents, continuing open activity in the KBR became impossible.

Against this backdrop, “Khabze” as a registered entity in the KBR was liquidated, and the organisation de facto ceased operating within Russia.

Relocation of the Centre of Activity Abroad

Kochesoko left for Turkey and in his interviews openly states that he continues to work on the Circassian question from the diaspora: raising the issue of genocide, the right of return, and the future of Circassia.

Circassian and independent media note: since his arrival in Turkey, rallies and actions of various federations (KAFFED, CherkesFED, the “patriots,” and others) have increasingly taken place jointly rather than separately — in other words, he acts as a unifying figure, bringing together different wings of the diaspora.

Building Ties with the Diaspora

Kochesoko actively travels among Circassian communities in Turkey, participates in meetings, roundtables, and projects such as the “Circassian Circle,” where the common tasks of the people in the homeland and abroad are discussed.

In his speeches, he emphasises:
— the “roots” of the people are in the homeland;
— but “the strength today lies in the diaspora,” which has greater resources;
— the task is to direct these resources toward the revival of the people in the Caucasus and to achieve international recognition of the historical injustice and the right of return.

Thus, pressure on “Khabze” within the KBR effectively forced the centre of activity to shift to the diaspora, and the main line now is not only to preserve Adyghe Khabze and identity but also to consolidate the resources of overseas Circassians in support of Circassia and the political goals of the movement.

Work is currently underway on the reorganisation and re-registration of “Khabze” in Europe — as the safest platform for the open expression and promotion of the interests of the Circassian people. The new structure relies on Circassians who have left the homeland in recent years, including Circassian activists, as well as on strengthening ties with the Circassian diaspora. At the same time, the organisation retains the ideological foundation and key goals developed in previous years.

The Circassian socio-political organisation “Khabze” is a modern movement of Circassians (Adyghe) that takes Adyghe Khabze as its ideological foundation and, on this basis, formulates its political and national goals.

What Lies at the Foundation

The word “khabze” is understood not simply as “etiquette,” but as a philosophical and worldview system and the moral-legal code of the Circassians — “the language of everything / the language of the universe,” regulating all aspects of human and social life.

Adyghe Khabze is described as a living “constitution of the people”: a system of norms of honour, dignity, respect, courage, reasonableness, and humanity, thanks to which the Circassians preserved their identity. It is the order that is accepted as the norm among Circassians, wherever they may live and wherever they may meet.

How the Organisation Defines Itself

“Khabze” calls itself a Circassian socio-political organisation whose mission is the consolidation of the Circassian (Adyghe) community worldwide for the protection of national interests and sustainable development.

The organisation states directly that no structure exists in the world that consistently and openly represents the interests of all Circassians as a unified body, and declares that it takes on this task.

Goals and Objectives

According to the programme text of “Khabze,” the key goals are as follows:
— to achieve historical justice and the restoration of the historical borders of Circassia as they stood before the Russo-Circassian War;
— to ensure that all Circassians can freely learn and speak Adyghebze and live according to Adyghe Khabze, wherever they may be;
— to secure for every Circassian who wishes to live in the historical homeland an unconditional right to repatriation, and for every Circassian who wishes to visit Circassia — a free and unimpeded opportunity to do so;
— to ensure that the Circassian people, as a unified body, advocate for the health, safety, dignified life, and personal development of every Circassian.

The organisation emphasises that it has no interest in “Russian, Turkish, or American” interests as such; it proceeds solely from the interests of the Circassian people and is prepared to cooperate with any forces that advance these goals.

Format of Activity

“Khabze” declares that it is not confined to either culture or pure politics: it is prepared to employ any legal forms (educational projects, public campaigns, international work) in the countries where it operates, while remaining within the framework of local laws.

In practice, this means a combination of:
— cultural and educational initiatives centred on Adyghe Khabze, language, and history;
— work to consolidate Circassians in different countries and diasporas;
— articulation of political demands (Circassia, language, return) in a form grounded in the code of Adyghe Khabze and the rights of the people.

In other words, this is an organisation that takes the traditional code of Adyghe Khabze as its foundation and, on its basis, builds a modern national-political programme — the unity of Circassians, Circassia, language, and the right of return — while emphasising that it acts not for the sake of foreign states, but for the sake of its own people.

30 March 2026