IDENTIFYING A STRATEGY OF THE FUTURE: A NEW POLICY TOWARDS MODERNIZATION
Day.Az
Jan 10 2008
Azerbaijan
Lincoln’s legacy
"The work of a state in the long run is the work of the individuals
composing it" (John Stuart Mill, 1806-1873; an ideologue of liberalism)
On 19 November 1863 the American politician and statesman Abraham
Lincoln (1809-1865) delivered a speech on the occasion of the opening
of a memorial cemetery near Gettysburg for the victims of the Civil
War in the USA which became an outstanding example of political
eloquence. It was in this speech that Lincoln found a definition
for democracy which has since become a classic. A former lumberjack
and surveyor, the US president said the following: "We must swear
our allegiance here to the great task facing us, and that is to do
everything we possibly can to ensure that the sacrifices brought by
those from whom we have accepted the baton of loyalty to the cause
to which they fully devoted themselves, in hide and hair, that these
sacrifices were not in vain, and that this nation before God will
bring the beginning of a new birth of freedom and that the rule of
people by the people and for the people will never disappear from
the face of the earth."
Today, about 200 years after the time when these remarkable and
historically important words were spoken, the concept of democracy as
"the rule of people, by the people and for the people" is as topical
and crucial as ever. The world order, which is so often associated
with unilateralism, is shaping a new concept of social reality,
transferring to a new plane the place and role of the processes of
global integration. It is becoming obvious that our "post-mankind
future", as [the American philosopher] Francis Fukuyama recently wrote,
is being modified and is changing under the influence of the new
local factors derived from the general global system of coordinates.
That is why here it is hard not to recall Friedrich Nietzsche,
who wrote: "Enough! The time is coming when politics acquires a new
meaning." And if [George] Hegel in 1806 and Fukuyama in 1999 were
claiming the end of history, the former, basing himself on the lack of
movement beyond the French Revolution, and the latter, being confident
of the total triumph of liberalism after the collapse of the USSR,
then in the new conditions of mondialism the question arises as to
in what direction is history as a whole moving? This question is
extremely topical for societies in transformation for which history
predetermined the opportunity to formulate a new strategy of the
future at the end of the last century.
Reforms in Azerbaijan
In the 20th century Azerbaijan experienced not only a change in
its socioeconomic system, but also intensive reforms in political
and public institutions. After Gorbachev’s "democratisation", which
brought with it a process of complete stagnation and the collapse of
the communist system, which was already on the brink of total regress,
there followed years of "Brown’s" formation of statehood and the
breakdown and decentralization of the power hierarchy connected with
this. This period, which affected all the states of the post-Soviet
space, remained in the memory of millions as an era of dashed hopes,
frustrated illusions and lost positions.
The optimism in relation to the global socialist stranglehold was
very quickly replaced by uncertainty and pessimism over the future.
As the well-known American transitologist V.Bunce points out,
"post-communism is something considerably larger than a transition
to democracy; it is a revolution extending to politics, economics
and social life". (V.Bunce: Comparing East and West. "Journal of
Democracy", Vol 6, No 3, 1995. p92).
The discovery of independence set before the country the tasks of
a transition from dictatorship to democracy, from a command economy
to a free market, from being part of an empire with two centuries of
history of expansionism to a nation state. The results of the social
and geo-strategic realities of the epoch of Gorbachev’s failings,
as well as the subsequent institutional transformation gave rise to
a syndrome of marginality which latently, but purposefully had an
impact on shaping social, political and economic institutions.
As time passed it was not only the way of life and people’s standards
of behaviour that changed, but the mechanisms of the inter-action
between the governing and the governed, the "highs" and "lows" of
society, as a whole were modified. At the same time, the institutional
order which had been established by the epoch of communism, having
suffered collapse, gave birth to the desire to use the world experience
of political institutionalisation, having inevitably raised the
question of the legitimacy and the means of borrowing this experience.
In Azerbaijan in the middle of the 1990s [late President] Heydar
Aliyev began socio-political and economic changes aimed at creating
an independent state and strengthening statehood, the centralization
of the processes of government and a slowing down the process of the
stagnation of the national economy. This period of national history
became the basis and the primary source of the firm etatistic approach
to building national statehood that was necessary at that time, the
basic concept of which was Realpolitik as a priority component of the
political, economic and socio-cultural modernization of Azerbaijani
society. This approach radically cancelled out the aspirations,
based on political romanticism and short-sightedness, of those who
saw Azerbaijan as an arena of a clash of interests and a platform
for carrying out the experiments of various client groups.
Entering new millennium
In short, the end of the 20th century was a starting-off point for
national transformation, and Azerbaijan entered the new millennium
with a still unestablished institutional design, but at a level of
political-economical development which today enables one to make
judgements about real and effective steps in building a system of
effective statehood. In recent years a whole raft of decisions aimed
at modernization have been carried out enabling Azerbaijan to be
transformed from a society with a weak and backward economic system,
a decadent political institutional system and a marginalized public
awareness into a country of new behavioural standards and stereotypes,
a sound political system and gradually shaping democratic institutions,
characteristic of the market system of an economic structure.
The main thesis that was laid in the foundation of the structure
of effective statehood consisted of a desire to ensure Azerbaijan’s
ability to compete in the market place in the regional processes and
its full-fledged economic leadership of the South Caucasus.
The formation of a sound political system required an understanding
of one of the results of the 20th century, a lesson which was
extracted at the price of colossal social cataclysms. It was the
relative, but extremely important advantage of the democratic model of
socio-political institutions. The possibility of social consolidation,
the optimisation of government and inter-action between the social and
political factors, which is created by a fine, graded and well-oiled
system of democratic representative institutions substantially
consolidates a situation that enables even more effective work of
the market a most important factor of a democratically developed state.
Today two aspects of national transition economic and political
modernization determine socio-cultural transformation. Its substance
in the main lies in transparency, new management stereotypes and
other behavioural and socio-cultural standards and archetypes which
have been "imported" to societies which are diverse in their stage
of development and level of political and economic preparedness in
the light of the broadening of the "third democratic wave" (see S.
Huntington: "The Third Wave").
Being a part of the "global democratic invasion", the changes in
the socio-cultural background encourage the institutionalisation of
post-industrial values, the formation of effective administrative
factors and the building of a transparent social order. Democracy,
a market economy and the ideal of a civic society have gradually
been turned into the main reference point of the strategy of the
development of society, thus becoming the fundamental links of a
contemporary national state.
>From economics to democracy
"Politics is the same science as any other; it knows certain
provisions, laws, rules, and also endless different combinations;
it demands constant study and deep and long thought." (Jean-Paul
Marat, 1743-1793)
The year 2003 saw the beginning of a new stage of national
transformation, shifting the carefully aligned stable political
system to an environment of the intensive formation of an advancing
economic structure. The basic concept of Ilham Aliyev’s presidency
was the formation of a strong economic base to encourage the gradual
transformation of the mass consciousness and the socio-cultural basis
of society towards a course of post-industrial values and democratic
traditions. Along with this, it was necessary to resolve a complex
of geo-strategic and geo-economic tasks, to provide stability and
solidity of national growth and to turn the country into a subject
and not an object – of international relations, because in an age
of the worldwide transformations which shape the New World Order,
it was extremely important to ensure Azerbaijan’s participation in
the global processes.
In the context of understanding this fact, the country’s political
elite carried out a number of fateful projects which became
an important factor in ensuring Azerbaijan’s participation in
integration initiatives. In recent years such global projects as
the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan main export pipeline, which has enabled
Azerbaijani oil to enter world markets, have been launched and the
construction has begun of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway, which will
become an important link of regional economic cooperation, opening
up future prospects for wide-scale cooperation between North and South.
Within the context of the regeneration of the Great Silk Road,
Azerbaijan is being turned not only into a transit country, but is
frequently itself becoming an exporter, thus creating new opportunities
and prospects for the national economy.
At the same time, Azerbaijan is actively signing up to such projects
as Nabucco, which provides for the transit of Azerbaijani natural
gas through Georgia, Turkey, Greece and Italy and on to the countries
of the European Union, and is cooperating closely with the EU within
the framework of the New Neighbourhood programme. Azerbaijani gas is
already being supplied to the markets of the EU to Greece. Being at
the crossroads of two continents, Azerbaijan fulfils the role of a
bridge which can span not only cultures and civilizations, but also the
main economies of Europe and Asia. Taking advantage of its favourable
geographical position, Azerbaijan is trying to make effective use
of its potential. In the conditions of global competition, an active
economic policy is a most important factor in the effective solution
of national tasks.
Growth of GDP
At a national level measures have been taken in recent years which
create preconditions: first, for a substantial reduction in the level
of poverty in the county (it today stands at about 17 per cent),
which helps to form a middle class in the country and is a most
important aspect of a democratic developed society: second, for an
increase in the role and significance of the national manufacturer,
which qualitatively changes the character of the Azerbaijani economy;
third, for changing the nature of mutual relations between the state
and the private sector, which occurs in an evolutionary way, but in
reality typifies the desire to build an effective and transparent
system of relations, where the interests of all sides are taken into
account, and law and order and legality are seen as priority factors.
On the whole, the adoption of comprehensive measures, starting with
the denomination of the manat up to a real growth in the country’s
GDP, from a significant improvement in the number of jobs by over
600,000 to a tenfold increase in the national budget create a basis
for a strong economic structure and sound economic growth.
All this allows us to speak about the start of a process of the
liberalization of the national economy a most important achievement
of Ilham Aliyev’s first presidential term. As the president notes:
"In our country the proportion of the private sector in GDP is over 80
per cent. This is still taking into account the fact that oil and gas
are a state monopoly. This is the basis of the economy. A combination
of all these factors and, of course, the stable situation and the
trust of foreign investors in Azerbaijan have enabled us to achieve
this. Of course, this could be said to be a world record to achieve
a rate of growth of 30 and more per cent in three years. But for me
the most important figure is not even this. A more important figure
is the reduction in poverty in the country, because the level of GDP
is still not an indicator that we have all taken advantage of these
opportunities. The level of poverty has been reduced from 50 per cent
in 2003 to 20 per cent in 2007." (from an interview to Moldovan TV,
Channel 4, 19 December 2007)
The emergence of Azerbaijani investors and their going abroad is
another important aspect. The successful implementation of a number of
projects in Georgia, Turkey and other European countries creates the
opportunity for steady growth in foreign investment by Azerbaijan. This
is a real precondition for implementing specific steps to change the
structure of the national economy and to impart it with an innovative
quality. In this aspect we abide by two most important factors: first
investment abroad helps to create qualitatively different bilateral
relations; second it is not so much volume that is important as
the ability to correctly choose priorities. At the same time, it is
important to maintain the country’s economic policy, as chosen by
President Ilham Aliyev in 2003.
Liberalization of economy
If one analyses the past year of 2007 as a whole, then one may boldly
state that it was precisely this period that was the definitive
stage in the liberalization of the national economy. A whole range of
measures, including the beginning of the registration of entrepreneurs
according to the "single window" principle, the liberalization of
the inflow of direct foreign investments, the reorientation of
priorities in state expenses in favour of spheres ensuring high
economic return and profitability and providing the opportunity to
improve the distribution of incomes, have become truly revolutionary
changes which will encourage greater transparency of the work and
system of registration of businesses and the effective development
of the national economy.
The economic component in the country, as a whole, is creating a real
basis for a subsequent transformation from entrenched industrialism
to a level of post-industrialism. Modern trends, which shape the
current self-awareness and the national "me" of Azerbaijani society,
are tacitly shifting, freeing up space for post-modernist political
and economic factors. Globalization as such creates new opportunities
and opens up broader prospects for the development of the national
economy and improving political and democratic institutions.
Therefore one may boldly claim that the main task of Ilham Aliyev’s
first term, which consisted of shaping a sound and advancing economic
system, is being successfully implemented. It is precisely economic
modernization, stability of the market, improvement in the banking
sphere, formation of a middle class and strengthening the role of
private enterprise in the country’s GDP that will tacitly modify
public awareness, turning them to a new level of democratic traditions
and institutions.
By virtue of the strengthening of the economy and ensuring the welfare
of the citizens one may speak about a gradual democratisation of
society and a transformation from a transient democracy to one of a
stable, i.e. consolidated democracy. One should not forget that as
the economy grows in transient states the social and institutional
structure of society and the state changes. An increase in the solvency
of the population, as well as the flow of investments, as a result of
which the economy becomes more efficient and effective, encourage the
gradual modernization of economic life. In turn, this gives rise, as
Karl Marx wrote, to a situation where when the economy is modernized
in a country, capitalism is strengthened and a bourgeoisie is formed,
the transformation of the political system is inevitable. In Marxist
terminology, changes in the basis will always lead to changes in
the superstructure.
Capitalism and democracy
As the well-known American philosopher Francis Fukuyama points out,
"relations between capitalism and democracy are not straightforward.
Capitalism in itself does not put direct pressure on democracy. It gets
along perfectly well with many forms of authoritarianism (although,
of course, not with communist totalitarianism) and may even flourish
in non-democratic countries. But capitalism is a more effective motor
of economic growth than socialism, and therefore is more likely to
generate rapid socioeconomic changes which favour the emergence of
stable democracy" (F. Fukuyama, Capitalism and Democracy: The Missing
Link. In L. Diamond and M. F. Platter (Eds), Op.cit. p 102).
As another American political expert R. Duch stresses, "in the
past the market economy preceded the emergence of democratic
institutions". (R. Duch. Tolerating Economic Reform: Popular Support
for Transition to a Free Market in the Former Soviet Union. "American
Political Science Review", No 87, 1993, p.594). Therefore,
the occurrent efforts to impose on us a simultaneous transition
to democracy and to a market are an attempt to alter the model of
mutual relations between economic and political changes, which have
developed over centuries, and which constitute an experiment without
historical precedent.
History has shown that a democratic regime remains stable only if a
general electoral law emerges along with the achievement of a certain
level of per capita GDP. At this level the majority of the country’s
population is sufficiently well-off to be able to take responsible
decisions and to neutralize the effect of the lumpen proletarians who
receive ballot papers. Attempts to introduce a general electoral law
at lower levels of development lead either to its rapid abolition
or to its turning into a meaningless procedure, and at a level of
development at approximately three times higher than this the switch
to a democratic system is simply inevitable.
It is precisely the level of economic development that largely
determines the formation of political institutions preferable for
a country. The optimum political regime for stable economic growth
depends on the level of its economic development. Countries with
a higher level of development may tackle the tasks of adapting to
post-industrial challenges only if they have sufficiently developed
institutions of a contemporary democratic society.
The majority of the east Asian countries, who originally carried out
economic reforms and only then began political ones, have travelled
a similar path. In essence, political changes have more often become
an irreversible aspect of a developing economic system, as happened
in Singapore, Indonesia or Malaysia. For example, in Mexico, which
tried 20 years to free itself, real progress was only made once the
national per capita income reached 9,000 dollars. This threshold showed
the irreversible nature of the process of democratisation and lifted
Mexico into the number of countries with a consolidated democracy.
In Turkey democratic changes became successful after the stabilization
of the economic situation, a reduction in inflation and the beginning
of a growth in the well-being of society. In a short period of time
the Turkish political establishment achieved a growth in GDP of almost
6,500 US dollars per capita, which testifies to the stable and gradual
growth in the Turkish economy.
The democratisation of the last decade is closely linked with economic
growth which creates real and lasting preconditions for effective
transformation, although this idea should in no way be interpreted
literally to imply that "the rich are democratic".
Economic growth and democratisation
Economic growth and democratisation depend on one another with
economic factors playing the definitive role. Wealth and opportunity,
provided not by nature or the minerals under the earth, but acquired
as a result of the transition from a feudal society to a capitalist,
and later from an industrial to a post-industrial society, at the
same time transforming the priority of industry into an imperative of
the services sphere, enable one to speak about a real and consistent
transition to a path of market development. Such development, as the
experience of the West and Japan has shown, is the more effective.
States that possess large supplies of minerals and who use these
opportunities exclusively for the purpose of enriching the political
and financial elite, often remain underdeveloped, their people
uneducated and their specialists unqualified.
By attracting "brains" from outside, a consumer psychology of "western
intellectuals" is formed in these states, whereas the education system
remains at a low, and society at a primitive level.
As President Ilham Aliyev points out: "In countries where democracy has
become developed, there is also economic development. Where democracy
has not been developed, [economic] development has been slow. In
this question no natural resources, oil or gas play a major role,
these are temporary factors". (From President Ilham Aliyev’s speech
at the opening of Heydar Aliyev Park and at a meeting with the people
of Yardimli District, 9 September 2005).
In this context the editor of the respected American magazine Foreign
Affairs, Farid Zakariya, says with every justification: "Why does
wealth encourage freedom? Let us recall examples from European history:
the process of economic development usually leads to the emergence of
two elements which have decisive importance for the success of liberal
democracy. First, it gives an opportunity to key segments of society,
especially private business and the bourgeoisie as a whole to acquire
strength and independence from the state.
Second, in dealing with social groups of this nature, the state becomes
less predatory and capricious; it is more and more orientated towards
observing certain rules and the needs of society, at least on the
requirements of its elite". (see F. Zakariya: The future of freedom:
non-liberal democracy in the USA and abroad, p 67).
One possible reason for the stability of democracy in the
wealthy countries, put forward by the sociologist Seymour Martin
Lipset, is that through various social mechanisms wealth allows the
exacerbation of the conflicts of distribution to be reduced. Initially,
prosperity and the true distribution of financial resources create
the preconditions for economic growth, thus contributing towards the
recognition of freedom by the individual and the formation of a new
mass consciousness. The strength of such a thesis is confirmed also
by historical experience.
Alexander Hamilton once wrote: "So long as property remains roughly
equally divided and a considerable proportion of information permeates
through to society, in voting there will be a tendency to pay tribute
to the services of even the most obscure people. With the growth in
wealth and its concentration in the hands of the minority and with
society’s increasing desire for luxury, do-gooders will more and more
be seen merely as a happy addition to material values". (see Bruce
(?Mayerhof): The Faces of Democracy, page 60) Hamilton was sure that
a concentration of economic and political power was inevitable.
Seymour Martin Lipset holds a similar view, drawing this conclusion
in 1959: "The richer a nation gets, the greater its chances of a
stable democracy."
If one looks at history and the modern development of China, then one
can clearly trace that at the beginning of the 1990s it initiated a
number of economic reforms believing that they would lead to capitalism
"as in the West". And despite the fact that some of them failed,
nevertheless in China they realized that the county had to be rebuilt,
starting with the economy and moving on to political modernization
and democratic transformation.
Such a convergence allows one to speak about the possibility of the
implementation of political changes which are the logical continuation
of economic reforms. The essence of this whole process boils down
to the liberalization of all spheres of human activity, a change in
socio-cultural archetypes and the subsequent consolidation of the
democratic regime. Here also lies the central thesis of modernization
which "consists of economic growth giving rise to parallel, and to a
certain extent predictable changes in cultural, public and political
life". (see Theory and Practice of Democracy, page 143).
One of the leading economists and political thinkers of the 20th
century, Friedrich August von Hayek, writes in his book "The Road
to Serfdom": "Apart from the notorious ‘economic freedom’, economic
security is also quite justifiably described as a necessary condition
for true freedom. In a certain sense this is true. An independent
intellect or a strong character are rarely found among people who
are not confident of being able to feed themselves." (F. A. Hayek,
"The Road to Serfdom", Moscow, 2005, page 129)
In conditions of globalization and intensive expansion of the "third
democratic wave", such a strategy of social changes presents itself as
something obvious, because the increasing financial inter-connection
between continents calls forth a rejection of political insularity and
the desire to become the member of a club of democratic states. It
is precisely taking into account the specific nature of a country
or region in the post-authoritarian transition that determines the
preferences given to the strategy of "economy before politics".
These conditions create a basis for the liberalization and formation
of a civic society in regions where there have been transformations,
particularly in Azerbaijan. That is precisely why civic society forms
the only foundation for political democracy, without which the latter
is simply impossible or ineffective. It was precisely this thesis
that in 2003 was of paramount importance to Ilham Aliyev’s first term
as president.
>From stability to modernization
"The idea appears not as an accidental creation of human insight, but
is a natural precondition for the modern condition of human society".
(Alexis de Tocqueville, 1805-1859 French sociologist, historian
and politician)
In the course of recent years the main guideline of the
socio-political development of the state has been directed exclusively
towards forming a stable system of democratic institutions and
traditions. Democratization as such is a determining factor of the
strategy of national development and is an important component of
coexistence within the framework of a unified society.
In the conditions of a "third democratic wave", all kinds of
discussions around government by the people become even more
topical and fundamental because, on the one hand, they determine
the possibility of the sovereign development of the national state,
and on the other they create a bridgehead for "beacons of freedom"
for the export of the personal vision of various democratic concepts
to countries of "post-authoritarian transition".
Often such an export occurs by means of replacing different national
characteristics or without taking account of the real opportunities
for building democracy in a certain corner of the globe, i.e. without
comprehending the real results of institutional, behavioural and
socio-psychological changes the main indicators of society’s readiness
for the transition to democracy. At times this approach brings forth
depreciating effects of a global nature, which in the long run leads
to the emergence of such theories of global chaos, as a "clash of
civilizations". Democracy as such more often comes out as a factor
of new geopolitical, or it would be more accurate and precise to say,
geo-economic expansion.
However, before embarking on any discussions, one should decide on
the very understanding of "democracy", after all one frequently hears
overtones of the past which are very familiar to our generation. We
often speak about democracy, more and more rarely thinking about the
reality of its essence, although the basis for such discussions is very
firm and has the right to exist. Our main political-ideological task is
the development of the country as a free and democratic state. But one
needs to understand that in Azerbaijan there are objectively complex
processes occurring which more and more are becoming the subject of
discussion on the part of different individuals and organizations. Most
of all these discussions are about democracy, freedom of speech and
the press and the concept of "freedom" as a whole.
We are often accused of being unaccustomed to freedom, and that we
constantly need to look around us. However, one should draw a line
between democratic transformation and the geopolitical influence of
the West. After all, often, when we consider democracy exclusively as
a form of representation and government by the people, we do not take
into consideration the ideas and tasks of those who hold these views.
Democracy has long since ceased to be exclusively a form of the
representation of the majority, for often we are becoming witnesses of
how an exclusive minority is dictating the rules and this argument is
gaining support. Often we are seeing that the main foreign political
tasks are being carried out by means of democracy and an agenda is
being shaped in this or that part of the world.
These factors no longer come as a surprise when in societies to
whom historically democratic traditions and institutions have been
alien, new standards of behaviour are formed without taking account
of the factors of national-historic, cultural and socio-political
distinctiveness and a change in the public conscience. Even in
conditions where progress acquires an innovative nature, i.e. when
ideas, technologies and knowledge change more quickly than it takes
one generation to take the place of another, such sharp "political
body action" causes a shift in the centre of gravity of the public
conscience to a plane of radical rejections.
At the end of the 21st century democracy is being turned into
a dangerous geopolitical weapon capable in a very short time of
causing not only a change of regime, but also of contributing to an
escalation of tension, as we have already seen in Iraq, Afghanistan,
Kosovo, and so on.
Some champions of democracy, clearly, rarely think about the experience
of history, although the well-known German economist of the 19th
century, Friedrich von List, noted that with the clash between a
more developed, industrial society and a less developed society,
a pre-industrialist or fairly industrialist, the following happens:
In keeping with the position of a liberal economy, if you take a
country with a developed economy and integrate it with a country with
an undeveloped economy, then the level of development and modernization
will be distributed approximately equally.
>From the point of view of Friedrich von List’s economic school,
which is backed up by history, there will be a greater development
of the sector which was in a more developed state and an even greater
impoverishment and degradation of the "backward" economic system. In
other words, the direct contact between the more modernized system of
economy and a less modernized one does not lead to their equalization
on the principle of communicating vessels, but to a situation where
the more modernized and wealthier part becomes even more wealthy
and the less developed part even poorer, because a disproportionate
development of the economic sector occurs in this poor zone, it becomes
a primary appendage and, in point of fact, you have colonization.
The "new economy"
In the context of the situation of postmodernism and globalization,
this principle is repeated, but today we find ourselves in a different
situation. There exists a western ultra-liberal economy, developed
at the post-modern level, which turns with its methodology to other
countries, offering to develop and post-modernize these countries. This
"new economy" presents itself as an objective and as a definite
instrument for an economic breakthrough, and for the transition of
countries from an industrial to a post-industrial state. And here a
situation arises that is absolutely symmetrical to that model which
existed in the 19th century and was analysed by Friedrich von List.
But whereas yesterday it was the countries with an economy that was
predominately pre-modern that were an object of colonization, today
the industrially developed countries themselves are, in fact, becoming
nothing more than the object of exploitation of these post-modernist
systems. Production is being transferred there (as, for example,
to the zone of the Pacific community), and not only resources but
human labour are being exploited and, thus, the same phenomenon of
colonization emerges, but only in a new, covert form.
On 4 January 2008, an article was published in the British Guardian
newspaper by the well-known political observer of the London-based
Times, Simon Jenkins, in which, despite the existing view on democracy,
he gives his attitude to the essence of modern democracy.
He writes: "It seems that democracy today is not in the best of
health…Democracy has always been imperfect. From the moment the
concept of ‘self-government’ lost its inseparable link with the prefix
‘self’ i.e. it outgrew the framework of the agora…[ellipsis as
published] – it has gradually become adapted to various countries and
peoples. Democratic institutions depend more on the history, culture
and geography of specific countries than the ideas of Madison, Mill
and de Tocqueville…[ellipsis as published]
"With all the tragic nature of the events that have been happening
over the past week in Pakistan and Kenya, it would have been the
height of arrogance on the part of the West to demand that the
whole world followed the same path to people’s government that it
itself has followed for long bloody centuries. It is possible that
we also consider liberal democracy to be the only ‘true faith’,
but this opinion is scarcely shared today by the majority of people
in Russia or China. Like the citizens of many other countries, they
place security and well-being above everything else.
"We are not so holy that we can teach others what state system best
suits them especially when it comes to the countries whose political
atmosphere the West itself has polluted with financial aid, debts,
trade restrictions and border conflicts. It is possible and it
appears that today democracy in Pakistan and Kenya is suffering from
an attack of violence, but you know in the West, too, it is confined to
corruption when compiling party lists, eccentric results in ‘primaries’
and the existence of collegiates of electoral delegates.
"Today the people of Britain and the USA sharply criticize their
own constitutions for failing to comply with democratic ideals,
especially when it comes to accountability of the government and
constraints restricting the freedom of action of the executive power.
And the outcome of the [presidential] election in America in 2000
was generally determined not by the voting of the electorate, but by
the decision of a body consisting of people appointed by an oligarchy
(the results of the election were endorsed by the Supreme Court).
Finally, the American people would scarcely be pleased if observers
from Ukraine, India and Thailand, who had come to supervise the voting,
had been based at the Miami Hilton hotel.
"I personally believe that democracy is the best path to stability
and the prosperity of society and I hope that other people share my
opinion as to its advantages…[ellipsis as published]
"However, the best way to publicize democracy is by example, and not
interventions or official ‘reprobations’. Britain’s ‘white-collar
workers’ are not so pure that its leaders can give lectures to the
whole world in a tone reeking of neo-colonialism. It is possible
that the shortcomings of democracy in other countries are seen as a
‘beam in the eye’ compared with our ‘speck of dust’, but to sort out
this beam is their own business, and definitely not ours.
"Pakistan occupies sixth place in the world in size of population.
The frailty of ‘semi-democracy’ in this country is caused by the
upheavals of the recent past and desperate poverty. There are hundreds
of means of helping it to get through the rough path leading from
dictatorship to democracy which Britain was fortunate to overcome
by a ‘pleasure step’ over two centuries. But at the end of the day
Pakistan and Kenya will only be stronger if they travel this path by
themselves. And the last thing they need is a dressing down on the
telephone by a post-imperial ‘nanny’".
I have deliberately quoted the main points of this article so
extensively because his findings fully reflect the situation that
is being created by the West in the countries of the "new democracy"
under the cloak of democratic terminology.
Geo-democratic changes
Naturally, in the conditions of global integration, when not
only finances can easily and rapidly be moved around, but mutual
relations between people are shaped under the impact of information and
communication technology, and feelings, too, are conveyed by electronic
means (by smileys), it is impossible to speak about autocracy in its
past meaning. On the other hand, nowadays a national state, especially
if it is restricted by the laws of geographical determinism and sees
itself as a geographically important area, is more and more being
subjected to pressure from outside with the purpose of following
precisely that model of democracy and a civic society which should,
in the opinion of importers, form the best government of the people.
In today’s world we are more and more often becoming witness to
geo-democratic transformations when, with the aim of building a new
environment of democratic institutions and traditions, the state
principles in this or that country are being radically revamped.
The national democratic transition became a derivative of the global
disturbances on the world political map after the collapse of the
USSR. However, the internal cataclysms in Azerbaijan, caused by
the inept rule of a group of romantics, pushed discussions about
democracy back several years, because the political elite who came
to power in 1993 had to formulate a stable internal structure of
society, to avert a regression in the national economy and to ensure
an appropriate external background for the state’s activity.
As we know, without stability, no talks about democracy and a civic
society have any value. Without stability and an understanding by
the people of Aristotle’s truth that "a state is created so that the
people can live in a stable manner", it is difficult to form a public
awareness directed towards equality of rights and transparency.
Finally, without a stable political structure it is impossible to
imagine a stable economic system which is the determining factor of
a national democratic transition because, as President Ilham Aliyev
points out: "Economic growth and the democratisation of society are
the main elements of our policy which are impossible one without the
other. It is possible to be economically strong, but if there is no
democracy and no transparency, and if human rights are not protected,
then you cannot expect success". (from President Ilham Aliyev’s speech
at a meeting of the autumn session of the Parliamentary Assembly of
the Council of Europe; 29 April 2004).
Having digressed somewhat from the subject we were discussing, one
still has to state with regret that discussions about a national
democratic transition are rarely becoming a factor of popular debate
in the country. Such indifference to the current and future strategy
of national development cannot be explained. In conditions when
from scientific positions the proper place and acceptable model of
democratic development to meet with current realities in Azerbaijan
has not been defined, the political establishment often has to try
to decide both theoretical and practical tasks.
Although the scope for debate is very broad, it also requires that
national intellectuals join in the debate in an extremely active way.
This question has been frequently raised by the head of state who
believes it is necessary to use the country’s scientific potential
widely to solve these theoretical problems.
Azerbaijan’s new political space
The main task facing the Azerbaijani political elite in recent years
has been the formation of a new political space for the country,
where everyone understands their obligations and rights, where the
individual recognizes the truth once declared by Jean-Jacques Rousseau
that one person’s rights end where another’s begin. In other words,
as one politician put it, "the extent of the blow from my fist ends
where the other person’s cheek begins".
Azerbaijan’s new political space will be formed in time, because
such a process is not being sanctioned "by superiors" and is not
being implemented "to order". In the long term it will identify
the possibility of inter-action between the authorities and the
opposition for the benefit of the development of the state and
society. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the 32nd president of the USA
(1882-1945) once said: "Whatever the ideology in a country might be,
its national interests are invariable." It is precisely in this that
we see the ideal of constructive rivalry, where each player in the
political process understands that there is only one objective the
benefit of the country.
Intolerance, irreconcilability and a rejection of dialogue must be
replaced by healthy competition, tolerant mutual relations and a desire
to form an environment of constructive, functional, public debate
around the present and future state. This thesis was the fundamental
one when President Ilham Aliyev more than once asked the players in
the political process to take up a rational position in relation to the
nationwide projects and initiatives that were being carried out and to
become part of a dialogue between the authorities and the counter-elite
with the ultimate aim of forming a stable political playing field.
It is important to understand that democracy is not just a matter
of approaching the urn and casting your vote on a day specially set
aside for this. Democracy is a part of life, a way of thinking and
a form of inter-action within society between its members. It is a
process that helps to strengthen and develop states and not to set it
in regression. We in power clearly understand these truths. We realize
that the political environment is in need of constant renewal and we
recognize that we have to move on if our democratic development is
to be complete and stable. A whole range of urgent measures have been
carried out in this direction in recent years which allow, on the one
hand, to form the basis of a future civic society, and on the other,
to make the national democratic model effective and acceptable to
Azerbaijani society.
The foundations for a civic society are being purposefully and
systematically laid in Azerbaijan today. Here is contained the basic
context of the forthcoming transition to consolidated democracy. The
creation in 2007 of the State Foundation of Support non-government
organization under the Azerbaijani president was an important landmark
on the path to forming an effective "third sector" in the country,
independent of outside sponsors, dictating its own rules of the game
and behaviour, striving to build a diagonal of influence for the
adoption of political decisions required for grant providers by means
of the activities of the non-government sector. In Azerbaijan there
are currently over 3,000 non-government organizations functioning and
all these things are indicators of the formation of a civic society
in the country.
The minister of finances and chairman of the government of tsarist
Russia, Sergey Witte, wrote: "A state does not so much create as
replenish, it is the citizens who are the true creators…[ellipsis
as published] Not to point the way to independence, but to develop
it and help it in every way." The non-government sector must form an
open and transparent dialogue between the authorities and society, but
this is possible only with financial self-sufficiency and transparency
carried out in the national interests of policy.
Unfortunately, often those who hide behind the screen of a human
rights champion or a member of an NGO are carrying out their carefully
calibrated and formed tasks and objectives outside the country.
However, they would do well to realize that Azerbaijan is a country
which chose democracy for itself by the will of its own people.
Having embarked on this path, we intended, abiding by all democratic
standards, and taking account of the historical, geopolitical and
other specifics, to ensure the implementation of the principles of
freedom and democracy. In conditions of the formation of a stable
and sovereign statehood, the Azerbaijani people are capable of
independently determining the speed, timescale and levels of progress
on the path towards creating a society of consolidated democracy.
As President Ilham Aliyev notes, we have defined democratic development
as follows: "The creation and strengthening of a civic society, the
strengthening of the process of democratisation and the construction
of a law-based state this is not simply a slogan or an intention,
it is the main condition for Azerbaijan’s all-round development. Our
experience shows that the path chosen by Azerbaijan is the correct
one. The parallel conducting of economic, political and social
reforms develops Azerbaijan in all ways, strengthens stability which
is so vital to our country and also has a positive influence on the
socio-political situation". (from President Ilham Aliyev’s speech at
the opening if the autumn session of the Milli Maclis [Azerbaijani
parliament], on 2 October 2005).
Opponents of democratisation
It is quite obvious that Azerbaijan’s stable consistent development
does not please everyone. Many of those who use pseudo-democratic
language would like to go back to the past: some in order to plunder
national wealth with impunity, to rob people and the state, others to
deprive the country of economic and political independence and others
to realize their own ambitions. We must disappoint those who today
in and outside the country still harbour hopes of a return to the past.
Our country stands firmly on positions of adherence to its democratic
course and development, and despite difficulties and upheavals, we are
striving to bring the country to the necessary level of development to
provide three basic factors of the development of Azerbaijani society
national unity and political sovereignty, economic well-being and
integrity of spiritual unity and the moral values that bind us.
In this context I would like to stress quite an important aspect so
that the debate around national democratisation has a more lasting and
sound basis. I propose that such declarations are at times important
because they create an opportunity to make the argument more fruitful
and effective. In the modern world two concepts pay a key role in the
theoretical construction of the democratic system in one environment
or another "the transition to democracy" and "consolidation of the
democratic system" or "consolidation of democracy". The first process
leads to "the establishment of a democratic government", the second to
"the consolidation of democracy" or to "the effective functioning of
a democratic regime".
In point of fact, in the first case it is a question of an
institutional basis of democratic transformation, which assumes the
creation and functioning of a democratic regime, and the process of
changing and electing the legislative and executive authorities. In
the second case we are talking about a consolidation of democracy as
a socio-political system which assumes a qualitative change in the
mass conscience and society’s total inclusion in the new democratic
values, traditions and institutions.
Therefore, in the context of the concepts we have mentioned, the
occasional pessimistic arguments about the "results" of national
democratisation seem extremely hasty. It is obvious that such "results"
of democratisation cannot be accurate, because the political agenda
is still being defined by the tasks of the first period, when the
institutional base of the process of national democratisation was due
to be established. In this context the arguments of those who suggest
that 16 years is a sufficient period of time for total democratisation
seem quite groundless. It is well known how long the first stage of
democratisation turned out to be in some Latin American countries,
particularly Brazil, where it stretched from the mid 1970s to the
mid 1990s. In Britain democracy has been established over a period
of about 200 years.
Effective legal and political system
A determining factor of the development of democracy is the creation
of an effective legal and political system. But the price of the
development of democratic procedures should not be in conflict with law
and order, nor with stability which was achieved with such difficulty,
nor with the stable conducting of an economic course.
This thesis determines the modern state of a feasible policy which
is based on the realization that a strong power is the guarantee
of the durability of the principles of statehood. Hobbs once noted
that a formal order, which makes possible the joint life of private
individuals in society, creates a strong state power. Its absence is
a reason for anarchic tendencies and the collapse of the state.
The durability of state power is in many ways determined by the
authorities’ ability to protect the interests of different sections
of society, to maintain a balance between social forces and ensure the
progressive development of civilian, democratic and self-administrative
trends of human contact. If state power ceases to work for society
and restricts its activity to merely serving individual groups,
and its own apparatus, it is helping to alienate the citizens from
the state and its institutions, and creates conditions for conflict
between society and the authorities. The efforts of the president are
directed towards solving these tasks, which enables one to speak about
a desire to perfect in Azerbaijan the opportunity for active civilian
participation and a dialogue between society and the authorities,
i.e. to create a stable and strong power.
A significant aspect of the formation of a stable political system
in the country is the qualitative transformation of political culture.
It comes out as a factor for providing state sovereignty and an
element of building an effective model of mutual relations between
the authorities and the counter-elite in the country, and ensures the
participation of all players in the political process and accordingly
creates an opportunity for the consistent development of political
and public institutions. Meanwhile, the lack of proper cultural
orientation and the blind following of foreign examples inevitably lead
to a nation losing its own identity. Political culture must identify
the exclusively national factor of development and come out as the
major link in inter-political debate, ensuring the establishment of
a full-fledged political dialogue in the country.
Our political culture must embody the nation’s readiness for innovative
breakthroughs and new technological achievements.
President’s thesis
President Ilham Aliyev’s activities in recent years have contributed
to a change in the vector of development of the national political
environment. The thesis about the need for economic and political
stabilization in the country has gradually grown into the creation
and development of structures of a civic society. Parties and other
political organizations, in view of the low social order for their
existence and functioning, have started to cohabit in society or to
latently cancel themselves out. Associations, unions and blocs have
become a frontal part of the process which hides a total weakness of
opposition political organizations which are incapable of competing
in the struggle for power.
In such an inner-political structure the main aspect of President Ilham
Aliyev’s political concept is already being built on his main thesis
"from stability to development", which is identified by a desire to
conclude in the near future the process of democratic transformation
and to begin the formation of structures and institutions of a
civic society. So it is quite obvious that the recognition of
liberal-democratic models at a rhetorical level does not promise
success. The ability of politics to adjust is determined in the desire
of these models to become a part of social development.
At the same time, in trying to break away from hybrid forms, which
emerge during transformations, it is necessary to be able to build
a democratic basis based on the modernization of contemporary life.
It (modernization) determines the possibility of establishing
a full-fledged democratic society. In recent years the policy of
transformations which is being implemented in Azerbaijan has created
a stable foundation for the retransformation of socio-cultural
models. Henceforth democracy and the segments accompanying it are not
perceived by society as something alien and difficult to digest. This
is the main aspect of the retransformation of the mass conscience,
and as such it makes substantial adjustments to our national
self-awareness. Democracy sets itself up not only in the form of
freedom of the individual, but also creates a foundation for improving
the notional apparatus of "freedom" and ensuring the retransformation
of archetypes and the most important factors of national identity.
In recent years a clear basis of national democratisation has been
formed in the country which identifies with the understanding by
the power elite of the following factors of political, economic and
socio-cultural activity:
(i) the rights and freedoms of the individual are an important
and priority link in the horizontal of mutual relations between
state and society. At the same time, the state’s course towards
modernization, which is aimed at building a transparent and democratic
regime, embodies a system of values where the citizen is seen in
a qualitatively new aspect and the provision of his rights is an
imperative of modern democratic development. The basis of this
thesis is this quote from President Ilham Aliyev: "We are building
a society which will ensure the supremacy of the law, a high level
of transparency and each person will live in conditions of peace and
calm and take advantage of all freedoms". (from President Aliyev’s
interview with a correspondent of the Nikkei newspaper (Nihon Keizai
Shimbun", 13 June 2007);
(ii) a democratic course is the main vector of the development of
Azerbaijani statehood and a determining factor of the strategy of
national development;
(iii) democracy, like subsequent liberalization, which offers maximum
freedom to the citizen, defines the essence of the transformation in
the convergence of the idea of freedom and the concept of effective
statehood. At the same time by democracy is understood a form
of authority, and from this point of view it presents itself as a
teaching of the legitimisation of the power of the majority.
Liberalism, on the other hand, assumes limits of power;
(iv) the preconditions of democratisation and subsequent liberalization
in the country are laid down in the outcome of substantial economic
changes which ensure the implementation of a system of ECONOMIC
MODERNIZATION + STAGE-BY-STAGE DEMOCRATIZATION=THE START OF A PROCESS
OF THE FORMATION OF A CIVIC SOCIETY [capitalized as published]. This
is a true embodiment of the policy of the transformation period,
which is aimed at the formation of a new political space and an
economic model, consistent with the requirements of the contemporary
world order. This thesis is backed up by the president’s quote that
"macroeconomic indices in Azerbaijan are at the lowest level, without
parallel in the world". (Ilham Aliyev’s speech at a session of the
cabinet on 22 October 2007). The development of the economy as a whole
is leading the country to a factor of a more stable democratic system;
(v) a civic society in the country will be formed along with the
implementation of the paradigm THE MODERNIZATION OF THE ECONOMY, THE
DEMOCRATIZATION OF PUBLIC LIFE, THE SYSTEMIC LIBERALIZATION OF NATIONAL
SPACE [capitalized as published]. As Ilham Aliyev notes: "We believe
that the future of our region will depend on how successfully our
society is modernized. In other words, the development of democratic
reforms and the implementation of economic reforms will depend on our
activity in the policy of the modernization of the political system
and our society. (from President Aliyev’s speech at the opening of
the first extended session of the international investment forum
"An extraordinary round-table meeting on Ukraine", 16 June, 2005);
(vi) the basis of democratic transformation and the building of
a civic society in the country rests on an understanding of the
dichotomy TOTAL FREEDOM=STRONG POWER [capitalized as published],
which excludes anarchic tyranny and disorder, and also contributes
to concluding the process of the construction of effective statehood.
Summing up this thesis, President Ilham Aliyev stresses: "Our aim is
to build a modern, strong state, to create an economically strong
state and the building of a society of social prosperity and to
solve all the problems that concern people and the formation of a
free society so that people can live better, in happiness and with a
sense of well-being". (from President Aliyev’s speech at the opening
of the Qazax Olympic sports complex, 30 May 2007);
(vii) globalization, which in the 21st century presents itself as the
main aspect of the modern development of mankind, exerts considerable
influence on the formation of the inner-political environment. The
westernisation introduced by global tendencies is shifting the accents
of behavioural norms and stereotypes, eroding the concepts of the
sovereignty of a national state. That is why an important element
in protecting a stable and effective state system is the ability to
strike a balance between the imported and autogenous factors of the
development of society. "The endorsement of social justice and the
protection of our national-spiritual values," the president reminds us,
"are of vital importance for the country", (President Aliyev’s speech
in Qobustan District, 23 October 2007).
Priority must be based on local socio-cultural models as a basis of
sovereign development taking into account the positive aspects of
the western (westernising) world. The building of a civic society in
Azerbaijan cannot be carried out by copying western models. Taking
into consideration socio-cultural characteristics, local political
and economic factors, and the archetypes of the national "me" will
contribute towards certain autogenous transformations and develop
democratic institutions and traditions. This idea fully sits with
the thesis expressed by the president: "We must not blindly copy
in Azerbaijan everything we see abroad. There are some things there
which will be of no benefit to us. But we must bring in and make use
of everything there that is positive." (from President Aliyev’s speech
at a session of the cabinet on 22 October 2007)
The process of democratisation in Azerbaijan has already travelled
a definite path: Twelve years have passed since 1995, when the
general anarchy and political tyranny ended and the economic and
political reforms began. In 1995, 20 years after the overthrow of
dictatorship, Spain became a full-fledged and stable democracy. In
recent years Azerbaijan has been emerging from a protracted period
of post-revolutionary reaction, the tasks of which it has already
solved. We have reached the point where the authorities are ruling
by new methods.
"Interesting battles" ahead
OCTOBER 2008: A STRONG STATE, A MODERNIZED ECONOMY AND FREE CITIZENS
[capitalized as published]
2008 is an important period for adopting political decisions when
each of the players in the political process will rejoice in their
subject changes. From a retrospective position it is clear that we
can expect interesting political battles from the models of previous
elections. At the same time, there is no doubt that the authorities
are prepared to go to the ballot box with a substantial supply of new
political, economic and social proposals. We will try to reveal the
essence of what we can expect by October 2008 and what our proposals
are so that the country’s citizens can make the correct and rational
choice in favour of continuity of policy and the "new course".
The main objective which President Ilham Aliyev has achieved,
supported by the foundation of statehood laid down by Heydar Aliyev,
was the further strengthening and development of national statehood.
The task was to bring back the former economic strength and political
stability, in the framework of the new world order to ensure the
country’s active participation in regional and global processes, to
switch from a defensive foreign political concept to an offensive one
and to "pierce" the indifference of international organizations towards
a number of issues and problems that were important for the country.
In addition, it was necessary to carry out a whole range of tasks:
to begin the intensive modernization of the economy; to provide jobs
for 600,000 people; to lay the foundation for the formation of a
middle class and, having ensured consistent development, to begin
the liberalization of the national economy and to reduce the level
of poverty in the country as much as possible.
But this was not all: it was necessary to invest in the country’s
intellectual future and create a basis for forming an intellectual
medium by means of training 15,000 young people abroad; by a system of
mortgage crediting to create conditions for solving housing problems
for young people; to build more than 1,200 schools; with the support
of young, to create an effective mechanism for the formation in the
country of a democratic regime and a civic society.
In regional and international arenas the task is to step up efforts to
solve the Karabakh problem; to change the nature of foreign political
activity and the constant lobbying of the country’s interests in
uniting the diaspora around nationwide tasks. In the last four years
there has been a substantial improvement in the defence capability
of the national army, whose budget in 2008 is 1.2bn dollars. Even
quite recently one would often hear critical attacks regarding the
possibility of a tenfold increase in the country’s budget, but the
current realities have shown the soundness of the promises given by
the president in 2003.
Test of maturity
Today Azerbaijan is approaching a new stage in its test of maturity.
In recent years the face not only of the metropolis but also of the
periphery has seriously changed.
Public awareness is latently transforming the post-modernist trends
which will subsequently determine the strategy of tomorrow. However,
Ilham Aliyev’s domestic and foreign policy activities are still to
be assessed seriously and impartially. At the moment this is not
difficult, although proper analysis is at times being obstructed by
critical attacks. But the agenda which President Ilham Aliyev will
be working in the next five years is already clear. Without claiming
to be a precise and final prognosis, it is possible to reduce it to
seven basic tasks in general terms.
First, a stable economic system inevitably leads to greater
democratisation of public awareness. The implementation of a broad
range of economic measures in the course of the last four years or
so has created an opportunity for an increase in people’s financial
solvency, an increase in the financial opportunities of the individual,
and that means this will inevitably lead to a change in behavioural
stereotypes among members of society because, as J.-J.Rousseau wrote,
"equality, which makes people independent of one another, develops
in them a habit and a tendency to be guided in their private life
only by their own desires and will. That complete independence, which
they constantly use both in relations with their equals and in their
private life…shapes in them a concept of political freedom and an
adherence to it". (All politics: an anthology. Moscow, 2006, p 130).
Model of future economic development
The model of economic development in consequence, shaped at this stage,
will be: (i) to transform Azerbaijani society into a channel of the
formation of a new political environment in which the authorities
and the opposition co-exist in the context of constructive rivalry;
(ii) to assist in the completion of the stage of forming the basis of
a civic society; (iii) to lead public awareness to an environment of
post-industrial values, which will help to change the place of the
individual in society, the recognized understanding of the concept
of a "free citizen" and the modification of the content of politics
in Azerbaijan.
Second, the country’s economic development in recent years has
pursued the aim of consolidating the state’s role as regional leader
in the South Caucasus. Accordingly, Azerbaijan’s claims to the leading
role in the region require the formation of a system of stable union
relations. It is common knowledge that the best ally is a remunerative
partner. Accordingly, an alliance means investment in the future,
and as a rule this is a cost-plus factor, which does not bring an
immediate return, but is a true path towards forming a policy of
strategic and long-term goodneighbourly relations.
In continuing the policy which was carried out by President Ilham
Aliyev in relation to a whole number of countries, in the coming
years the vector of the strategy of foreign political activity will
most likely be directed also towards the East, because it is generally
accepted that the Asia-Pacific region will be the area where the main
political events of the 21st century will unfold. At the same time,
Azerbaijan is capable of being not just a factor of Europe’s energy
security, but also becoming an important aspect of the formation of
the security architecture in the East.
Third. It is natural that at the current stage the historic process of
the liberalization of the economy has acquired the nature of a global
world trend embracing more and more countries. Scope is opening up
for the activity of mechanisms of market regulation. The interference
of states in the economy and its administrative forms, as well as in
forms of direct state regulation, is being reduced. The main function
of a state is becoming the creation and maintenance of a competitive
environment by means of adopting economic and civil legislation,
simplifying and cheapening the creation of new private enterprises
and supporting medium-size and small businesses.
The process of the liberalization of the national economy is closely
linked with its level of growth. Along with economic growth and changes
in the basic factors of the formation of a stable economic system
there will occur an increase in transparency and the implementation
of a strategy of inter-economic liberalization, to which apply the
privatisation of state enterprises and the expansion of the sphere
of freely established prices and incomes, interest rates and credit
conditions, which are taking place within the framework of national
economies, and also, in particular, a strengthening of foreign
economic liberalization. The latter will help to expand the unhindered
international movement of goods and services, capital and information.
At the same time, this aspect will be an important factor in the
country’s entry into the WTO, because the liberalization of world
trade with goods and services is being shown by the tendency to lift
customs barriers and restrictions in trade between countries.
A TABLE: COUNTRIES WITH A TRANSITIONAL ECONOMY BY CATEGORIES DEPENDING
ON THE ORIGINAL STRATEGY OF REFORMS [capitalized as published]
Consistent strategy of Progressive start/ Interrupted Gradual Limited
" big explosion" stable progress "big explosion" Reforms Reforms
Estonia_ Hungary_Albania Azerbaijan Belarus
Latvia_ Slovenia_Bulgaria_Armenia Uzbekistan
Lithuania_ Croatia Macedonia Georgia Turkmenistan
Czech Republic Kyrgyzstan Kazakhstan
Poland_ Russia Ukraine
Slovakia*_Tajikistan
Romania
*In Slovakia the accelerated economic reforms took place in 1990-1992
when it entered the Czechoslovak Federation.
Fourth, in recent years a space has developed in the country for
forming a national idea which is based on the concepts of statehood
set out by Heydar Aliyev and will be based on the modernization
course of present-day Azerbaijan. It was Cicero who once said: "If
one looks at everything from the point of view of wisdom and passion,
then of all social relations for each of us the most important and the
most dear are our relations with the state. Our parents, our children,
our relatives and our close friends are dear to us, but our Fatherland
alone has embraced all the affections of all people."
(Cicero. On old age, On friendship, On duties. Moscow, 1975).
In this context, the pivotal aspect of a national idea is the primacy
of the state as the most important concept in the life of each
Azerbaijani. It is precisely Azerbaijan and being an Azerbaijani that
are the refraction of the socio-political, moral-spiritual and sacred
values formed by the Azerbaijani people over the centuries of history,
language, culture and religion as a cultural factor. These aspects
national history, the Azerbaijani language, the gift to traditions
and the distinctive nature of our culture, as well as religious
tolerance form the present and future of Azerbaijani statehood as a
sovereign subject of world politics, as a separate unit in the epoch
of global integration.
All this helps to unite politics and culture, helping to spiritualise
and aestheticize politics, which is turning more and more into
a game of sordid passions, to impart it with deep meaning. Such a
national idea will help to recreate national unity and unite natural
contradictions. "A nation implies common values, and nationalism the
creation of the significance of these values." (A.Moeller, The Third
Reich, Hamburg, 1935).
Political sovereignty
Fifth, as recent years have shown, the president’s task consists of
ensuring political sovereignty and stable economic prosperity by means
of an intellectual breakthrough in national development. In conditions
of the internationalisation of education and global competition it is
extremely important to create the necessary conditions for a constant
improvement in the intellectual level and the emergence of a priority
of the sphere of services. In a world where information-communicational
and nanotechnologies dictate the agenda, it is important to Azerbaijan
to form the necessary basis for participation in this race.
Without the necessary level of education and science it will be
difficult for us to think about the prospects of national development
and about the stable and consistent development of Azerbaijani
statehood. It is evident today that in the coming years Ilham Aliyev’s
main task will lie precisely in the renewal and expansion of the
nation’s intellectual basis, which will determine the strategy of
development for the future.
Sixth, in order to confirm the stated positions as an independent
centre of regional policy active diplomacy is needed in tackling
local tasks and active involvement in global problems. Naturally,
in the last decade and a half the West has become more egocentric
and has difficulty comprehending a different point of view. But
the general crisis of policy and diplomacy requires a search for
constructive proposals and the participation of all the components
of world politics in the processes of worldwide importance. The main
advantage of a multi-vector concept is the broad perspectives which
create a bridgehead so that each side is able to display initiative.
Seventh, the influence of the state on regional processes is closely
linked with the strengthening and perfection of the country’s defence
capability. A strong army is precisely what is capable of exerting
a systemic influence on all of Azerbaijan’s foreign policy. The
strengthening of the country’s positions in the region, as well
as solving the Karabakh conflict will be possible also given the
all-round development of the national military-industrial complex.
There should be no doubt that the coming years will be devoted to
resolving this task.
All that must be done in the next five years can be defined as having
a firm position and a flexible approach. Heydar Aliyev at one time
carried out a main function – he created and endorsed statehood.
Ilham Aliyev in his first presidential term fulfilled the main work in
advancing the country’s geo-economic factor. One may say with every
confidence that in the future he will implement to the full a range
of measures aimed at the country’s total modernization.
I concluded one of my articles published a few years ago with a quote
from Winston Churchill, a politician with great and restless strength
and an ability to be ahead of history and to predict its global
turns. Without altering tradition, I would like to close this article
with a quote from Sir Winston’s speech at Fulton (Missouri in 1946).
The choice of the Fulton speech is not by accident. It is believed to
be Churchill’s most important and vivid speech, where for the first
time such expressions as the "muscles of war" and "special relations"
were heard. It touched for the first time on that same "iron curtain"
which protected the West from the threat of communism.
Naturally, in an age of the transience and acceleration of history,
when the processes of decades of the past today take up only two-three
years, there can be no talk of curtains, and there is no point,
because it does not answer our priority objectives and national
interests. However, our national development and the processes
of a global nature that surround us force us to think more often
about sovereignty and national spirit. Both these factors help us to
develop and to progress, they inspire our aim for innovation and our
initiatives and they define the essence of how the Azerbaijani people
will live in the future.
Today we are happy that we have a sovereign national state and that we
have the opportunity to determine a national strategy of development,
taking into consideration our own vision of the path, and each of us
is proud that he is Azerbaijani. All this together is concordant with
what I would like to cite for each of us as a reminder of our mission
in this world: "Looking around us, we must be concerned not only about
doing our duty before mankind, but also that we do not fall below the
level we have reached…New, bright prospects and opportunities are
opening up. If we reject them, or ignore them, or do not use them in
full measure, we will invite the condemnation of our descendants for
a long time. It is necessary that consistency of thought, persistence
in the achievement of goals and dignified simplicity in decisions
have determined and directed our policy…[ellipsis as published]
We have an obligation to cope with this difficult task and I have no
doubt that we will succeed."