AMERICAN EXPERT: EVERYONE IN WASHINGTON IS FED UP WITH AZERBAIJANI LOBBYISTS, THERE ARE COMPLAINTS AGAINST THEM
17:47 05/03/2015 >> IN THE WORLD
Audrey Altstadt, a US Kennan Institute fellow, professor of History
from University of Massachusetts, in an interview to the Azerbaijani
information agency Turan commented on the situation in Azerbaijan and
its relations with the West. Turning to the fact of persecutions of
civil society activists and journalists, she noted that the situation
in Azerbaijan has evolved slowly through the past few years.
“I think the regime is afraid of something like the Ukrainian Maidan
phenomena or something like the Arab Spring — something like the
Azerbaijani version of that kind of unrest. And because they’re
afraid of that, they’ve taken whole lot of serious measures. They have
attracted especially the younger generation into government service
or the kinds of jobs where they are not necessarily doing political
work but where are also not threatening to the regime as their jobs
really keep them from moving into opposition. But if someone doesn’t
listen to those small signals at the beginning they run into the
risks of increasingly threatening harassment of different types:
threats against individual, against family members, to be taken
into questioning, charged for a crime discovering that there have
been drugs or weapons planted in their yard, or home or their car,
then come pre-trial detentions, jail for years,” the professor
noted adding that the number of those who disagree with the regime
grows, and people who decide to get involved in politics under these
circumstances are very brave and they take a huge risk.
It is also noted that the current regime is afraid of losing the
privileges of power. And when the journalists, like Khadija Ismayilova,
explore the corruption of the ruling circles, they are subjected
to threats.
Altstadt remembered that in 1991-1992 lots of people looked into
the future with optimism, thinking that it was very likely to be the
beginning of path toward democratization, toward an open civil society,
towards serious economical and other developments. But it did not
happen. The same thing happened with the first democratic republic in
1918-1920. There was republic, democracy ideals and huge opportunities.
“However, the wide range of suppression of journalists, of public
speech, public assemblies of critical voices go far beyond what you
could really explain with security interests. You really can see which
regimes talk about trying to protect national security as an excuse
to suppress their critics. I don’t see how beating prisoners in jail
helps Azerbaijan’s national security. I don’t see how increasing by 10
times the fine for public demonstrations contributes to Azerbaijan’s
national security; I don’t see how throwing drugs into the pockets
of young people contributes to Azerbaijan’s national security; I
don’t see how the framing of the children of political activists and
setting them up so that they can be arrested and convicted on fake
charges – how that contributes to Azerbaijan’s national security,”
the expert stressed.
During the interview the professor also touched on the topic of the
upcoming parliamentary elections in Azerbaijan noting that several
distinct steps are pointed out in the old copies of Council of Europe
statements. The Central Election Commission needs to be formed anew and
become independent, unlike what it is now dominated by the ruling Yeni
Azerbaijan Party. A second step would be giving opening the country
to more election monitors: not just those that are in fact recruited
by the government, but that actually belong to the international
organizations. That would mean that all the participants including
those at the polling stations have to understand that they will
also be supposed to play by the rules. Fair elections are impossible
without free pr-election atmosphere, when a candidate can easily get
registered, and opposition candidates get air time.
“We know most people get their news completely from television, which
is completely controlled by the state. Open spaces for candidates
and not allowing the kind of antics we saw in 2013 where you have
people sitting around the table and where the one actual opposition
candidate that talks, somebody else across him start yelling and throws
a plastic bottle across the way — that just really has to stop. It
doesn’t help Azerbaijan’s reputation anywhere in the world,” she added.
Regarding the Assistant Secretary of the Department of State Victoria
Nuland’s statement about launching a new US-Azerbaijan structure of
human rights and democracy, Altstadt noted that dialog is better than
no dialog. But having the long history of other dialogs, mainly between
Azerbaijan and the CoE, the numerous commissions, discussions and
reports, including plans of improvement, they did not give anything.
“Many of us worry seeing how they torture Gunel Hasanli only because
she is an oppositionist’s daughter. Such phenomena cannot shape a
positive image of Azerbaijan in the American’s perceptions. These
are the very facts that become the main source for the international
organizations’ criticism,” Altstadt highlighted.
Regarding the millions of dollars that the Azerbaijani government
spends in Washington to improve its country’s image, the expert said
that such efforts bring about an interesting effect.
“The most important thing for the lobbyists is to get money and report;
that is why they take up any tricks. Over the past half year more and
more people have told me that they are annoyed by that intrusive praise
or advertising. Recently I have been told about a case when a lobbying
company employee introduced himself as a scientist in order to get
into hearings about the issue of democracy violations in Azerbaijan. He
was unmasked at the event and those present saw that. When a lobbying
firm takes up such measures and meanwhile praises Azerbaijan, these
efforts will go useless. I have more than once heard complaints in
the Congress that they are already fed up of hearing all that. If such
propaganda brought some positive effects for Azerbaijan in the past,
now it works against Azerbaijan,” the expert highlighted noting that
she herself sees this reaction in Washington and hears it from people
who are obliged to listen to “all that lobbying talks.”