Today.Az, Azerbaijan
May 29 2008
Swante Kornell: "Even if the central authorities are willing to hold
very democratic elections, the officials of the executive powers in
the regions may damage this process"
29 May 2008 [13:02] – Today.Az
Day.Az interview with Swante Kornell, research director of the
Institute of Middle Asia and the Caucasus of the Johns and Hopkins
University (USA).
– This week President Ilham Aliyev accused some external forces in
putting pressure on Azerbaijan, including by way of making
statements about existent of problems in the democratic development
in the country. What do you think is implied under that?
– Any country may have problems, but declaration of these problems by
other countries may be both true, or used as a means of pressure,
that is the latter does not imply existence of the problem
itself. It is not a secret that there are definite problems in
Azerbaijan and sometimes, the statements of external powers about
their existence may be used as a means of pressure. Most depends on
who is saying this, when and under which circumstances.
– What do you think about the statement that the West and in the
narrow sense the United States "have changed democracy for oil"
regarding Azerbaijan?
– I think a bit differently. Oil policy is a complex issue. This is
like a two-way traffic. We do not see any great pressure of the
United States on Saudi Arabia, for example, as it does not
exist. Yes, there can be statements on the level of the Department
of State about violations of human rights in this country, but the
problem is not raised on the political level.
The said issue depends not only on oil. For example, last week I was
in Georgia, where parliamentary elections were held. International
organizations were widely criticized there, our Georgian friends were
resented over the positions of the organizations, announcing: "In
Armenia authorities killed at least eight people and the world society
is silent and as soon as we have problems, it is raised on the global
level". I answered them like this: "You want to be a NATO member,
while Armenia has chosen Russia. You have changed the standards of
attitude towards you by declaring the intention to join NATO".
The same as I have many Turkish friends, who condemn the West of
excessive criticism of the state of human rights in Turkey, while
everyone is silent about Russia, where such violations are more
frequent. I asked them as well that Turkey strives for membership in
the European Union, which Russia does not have such an intention,
therefore, naturally the West will treat Turkey differently than
Russia and will assess the situation by higher standards.
I would say the following regarding Azerbaijan: the country is a
member of the Council of Europe, while, for example, Saudi Arabia is
not. President of Azerbaijan is right to say that one can attain
democracy by different ways and consider that the country should
conduct consistent economic and political reforms on par, so that one
would not lag behind the other.
In our history the transitive periods in the development of democracy
show which problems are created in weak countries, when authoritarian
regimes, such as Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Vladimir Putin in
Russia, are ruling of the country.
In this background such eastern-Asian models, as South Korea of
Singapore were based on the policy of gradual economic reforms. Ways
top political reforms were open for 20-30 years and so these countries
come to a more stable model of democratic state.
Some western scientists may not agree on it, but the fact is that in
the very beginning of its democratic development Azerbaijan signed
definite documents, including those about conduction of democratic
elections. This is my vision of the issue.
– What hinders the execution of commitments in conduction of
transparent elections?
– In this sense Azerbaijan faces different problems, but the biggest,
in line with my observations, is a manner of behavior, which is
peculiar of the elections period and remained since the Soviet
times. And if 10 years ago it was observed within the central
powers, now it is seen in the executive powers in the regions.
For example, I am the head of executive powers of one of the regions
of Azerbaijan, for example Aghjabedi. Presidential elections are held
and if my region’s support for the working president is 10% lower than
the neighbor region, I would fear the negative consequences for me and
therefore I will try to improve the situation to raise support for the
President. Here is a definite problem, peculiar not only of
Azerbaijan, but also all post-Soviet countries: even if the central
powers are willing to hold very democratic elections, the executive
powers in the regions may break the process.
At the last elections in 2005 we witnessed that the president
dismissed some heads of executive powers, as well as people, directly
responsible for conduction of elections. This is an important step,
which was undertaken in Azerbaijan in 2005 for the first time. I do
not remember that anyone had previously been punished for
falsifications during elections.
If you have asked my opinion, I would have recommended the President
to send exact signs to all executive bodies in the regions long before
the elections, not three weeks before them, about the inadmissibility
of violations and strict punishment of those, who are responsible for
the. This should be instructed to all responsible officials. This is
the first.
Second, Azerbaijan is improving in line with recommendations of
international organizations, yet this process is too late. For
example, some important reforms were conducted just a month or two
before the voting in the beginning of 2005 elections. In such
conditions, the political powers of the country find it difficult to
adapt to the changes of the system. Therefore, to conduct such
political reforms takes time and if elections are scheduled for
October, these reforms should be held not in August, but in May-June
so that political powers have enough time for adaptation.
The third is the problem of mass media. A number of measures for mass
media development should be taken in Azerbaijan to take them more open
and objective. For this purpose there is a need for unification of all
powers of the country. If Azerbaijan takes these steps, I think there
will be a great potential for ensuring the democracy of the upcoming
elections.
Previously there have been numerous problems in the election
administration and they have been settled. In the result no
significant violations have been observed during the elections. Yet
serious problems appeared on the stage of votes calculation. I
consider that this occurred due to the problems I have listed
above. These problems can be settled and I do hope that the
authorities will undertake serious measures to eliminate them.
Certainly, Azerbaijan is a young republic, a new democratic
state. Though the 90th anniversary of the Azerbaijan People’s Republic
is marked these days, Azerbaijan lived in conditions of Soviet
occupation for over 70 years and this, certainly, created great
problems in development of democracy here. Attainment of results of
reforms requires time, as is admitted by everyone. Azerbaijan has a
great potential, economic reforms are rapidly conducted here. There is
only the need for ensuring the same rate of conduction of political
reforms.
– Do you consider the soonest resolution of the Karabakh conflict
possible taking into account the fact that the leading mediator in
the problem settlement Russia considers Armenia its only military
and political strategic ally in the Caucasus?
– This is too difficult. Azerbaijan faces great problems in the
resolution of this conflict.
The first is a formation of Armenian political elite from among the
Karabakh origins. If no one in Armenia have spoken about it before,
while now it is openly stated especially following the erecent
elections. The working authorities of Armenia consider that time works
on them, the same as Azerbaijan. Each country considers: "I should
wait as it would be of more use". I do not agree with any of them and
consider that time works on none of them and protraction of the
conflict would complicate its even more.
One of the problems is that Armenian authorities are not ready to
compromise. They often participate in talks only to protract the
resolution without intention to make any concessions.
The second, as you have noted, lies in Russia. This country benefits
from the preservation of the current status-quo in the Karabakh
conflict settlement. In case the situation changes and the conflict
parties come to an agreement Russia will lose its traditional ties
with Armenia. In the result of the conflict resolution, Armenia’s
integration with neighbor countries, Azerbaijan and Turkey, as well as
Europe will accelerate. This means Russia will lose its control of
Armenia. Therefore, the current leadership of the Kremlin, does not
want it.
And the third: who can find the solution of the conflict today? These
are Europe and the United States, they are the parties, which are
interested in the resolution of the conflict and they need to put
pressure on Russia. They want it but do not have enough power.
– Why don’t they?
– Expansion of the European Union from 10 to 27 member-states within
10 years has reduced the mobility of this organization and
effectiveness of the decisions it adopts. Therefore, reforms, named
the Lisbon process, which would turn EU into a stronger actor on the
international arena, are needed. But this will take time, at least,
five years.
And the second is the weakening of the United States in the result of
the war in Iraq. In current conditions, even if the said powers are
interested in the restoration of peace in Karabakh. they have no
enough power to overcome Russia’s unwillingness, which of course,
complicates the resolution process.
/Day.Az/
URL:
http://www.today.az/news/politics/45282.html