ALIYEV IN WASHINGTON: AN IMPORTANT TEST FOR DEMOCRACY
Christopher Walker
A EurasiaNet Commentary
EurasiaNet, NY
April 27 2006
The rubber hits the road for President George W. Bush’s “Freedom
Agenda,” when he meets with President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan at
the White House on April 28. Aliyev sits atop a tightly controlled
system known for its denial of political or economic freedom to those
who aren’t members of the tiny and insular ruling elite.
The agenda for the meeting between the two presidents is likely to
focus on major geopolitical issues now making headlines, including
Iran’s nuclear program, energy security and the global campaign
against terrorism.
While these issues unquestionably deserve high billing, President
Bush should also emphasize Azerbaijan’s lagging performance on
democratic reform. Letting the country’s leadership off the hook for
its resistance to democratization would be a strategic mistake.
Encouraging democratic reforms in Azerbaijan not only would serve
the long-term interests of the West, it would benefit all Azerbaijani
citizens.
Azerbaijan is a Muslim country of roughly 8 million located in the
pivotal trans-Caucasus region. To the east is the Caspian Sea, key to
the region’s energy riches and a pathway to Central Asia. To the north
lies Russia. To the south, Iran. To round out this tough neighborhood,
the former Soviet republics of Georgia and Armenia are to Azerbaijan’s
west. Nagorno-Karabakh, over which Azerbaijan and Armenia remain
embroiled in a territorial dispute, is one of the world’s most bitter
“frozen” conflicts. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
Azerbaijan’s oil wealth, poised to balloon in the coming years,
adds another wrinkle. Oil and gas accounted for less than 20 percent
of Azerbaijan’s industrial output a decade and a half ago. Today,
it represents more than 60 percent, as well as more than half of
Azerbaijan’s budget revenue – figures that are both rising.
For countries with sound and independent institutions, such resources
can benefit wider society. In a country where more than 40 percent
of the population now lives below the poverty line, well managed oil
proceeds could help lift Azerbaijan to a level of prosperity unique
to the region. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
In Azerbaijan’s case, however, economic experts worry that the oil
wealth will fuel even more rapacious corruption among the ruling elite,
rather than genuine reform of the country’s closed, Soviet-oriented
institutions. The government is now setting in motion a host of large
scale infrastructure projects underwritten by oil proceeds, projects
that on their face seem sensible enough. However, given the country’s
rampant corruption and weak institutions, there is a great danger
that much of this money will find its way into the corrupt patronage
networks that steer the country’s economic and political activity.
A report issued in December 2005 by the Caspian Development Advisory
Panel, a body established by British Petroleum to study the impact
of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline project, said that “in the longer
term, development of the rule of law, transparency and good governance,
including full participation by the public, will be prerequisites
if Azerbaijan is to manage effectively its substantial oil and gas
wealth and avoid the ‘oil curse’.” Right now, given the state of its
institutions, odds are that Azerbaijan will not escape this oil curse.
Azerbaijan’s parliament is little more than a rubber stamp body. The
judiciary likewise is beholden to the executive. The country’s
television media is tightly controlled by President Aliyev’s family
and senior officials. Given the suffocating grip on the news media,
average Azerbaijanis essentially operate in the dark on public policy
issues. Parliamentary elections last November were rife with abuses,
including intimidation of opposition candidates and serious flaws in
vote counting.
Meanwhile, reformers in Azerbaijan are deflated, first due to the weak
Western response to the marred parliamentary elections in November and
now by the invitation of President Aliyev to the White House, which is
seen as an endorsement of the Azerbaijani leader’s repressive policies.
Azeri reformers are not naìve. They do not expect the United States to
ignore its own national security and energy interests. One Baku-based
reformer who has spent time in the West told me in early April:
“we recognize that the US has other interests in our country.
But we want a consistent message to our regime on the need for
democratic reform and a basic adherence to human rights standards –
which has been missing.”
Reformers see neither political will from their own leaders, nor
sufficiently strong commitment from the United States or European
Union to push the country’s authoritarian management style in a more
open direction. Therefore, the meeting between presidents Bush and
Aliyev is a golden opportunity for the United States to send a message
to Azerbaijan’s leadership – that the US is committed to democracy
there, too.
The important issues on which the West needs the cooperation of
Azerbaijan should not crowd out the development of accountable
institutions, as well as the emergence of greater political and
economic pluralism. A democratic Azerbaijan will still have oil,
and will be a more reliable partner to the West.
Editor’s Note: Christopher Walker is Director of Studies at Freedom
House. He is author of the Azerbaijan report in Freedom House’s
forthcoming survey of governance, “Countries at the Crossroads.” He
recently returned from a working visit to Azerbaijan.
–Boundary_(ID_aZHeP9Ksr7h0ItixL8gYWw )–