Your trusted source

Audrey Altstadt, a US Kennan Institute fellow, professor of History from University of Massachusetts, in an interview to the Azerbaijani information agency Turan commented on the situation in Azerbaijan and its relations with the West. Turning to the fact of persecutions of civil society activists and journalists, she noted that the situation in Azerbaijan has evolved slowly through the past few years.

“I think the regime is afraid of something like the Ukrainian Maidan phenomena or something like the Arab Spring -- something like the Azerbaijani version of that kind of unrest. And because they're afraid of that, they've taken whole lot of serious measures. They have attracted especially the younger generation into government service or the kinds of jobs where they are not necessarily doing political work but where are also not threatening to the regime as their jobs really keep them from moving into opposition. But if someone doesn't listen to those small signals at the beginning they run into the risks of increasingly threatening harassment of different types: threats against individual, against family members, to be taken into questioning, charged for a crime discovering that there have been drugs or weapons planted in their yard, or home or their car, then come pre-trial detentions, jail for years,” the professor noted adding that the number of those who disagree with the regime grows, and people who decide to get involved in politics under these circumstances are very brave and they take a huge risk. 

It is also noted that the current regime is afraid of losing the privileges of power. And when the journalists, like Khadija Ismayilova, explore the corruption of the ruling circles, they are subjected to threats.

Altstadt remembered that in 1991-1992 lots of people looked into the future with optimism, thinking that it was very likely to be the beginning of path toward democratization, toward an open civil society, towards serious economical and other developments. But it did not happen. The same thing happened with the first democratic republic in 1918-1920. There was republic, democracy ideals and huge opportunities.

“However, the wide range of suppression of journalists, of public speech, public assemblies of critical voices go far beyond what you could really explain with security interests. You really can see which regimes talk about trying to protect national security as an excuse to suppress their critics. I don't see how beating prisoners in jail helps Azerbaijan's national security. I don't see how increasing by 10 times the fine for public demonstrations contributes to Azerbaijan’s national security; I don’t see how throwing drugs into the pockets of young people contributes to Azerbaijan’s national security; I don’t see how the framing of the children of political activists and setting them up so that they can be arrested and convicted on fake charges - how that contributes to Azerbaijan’s national security,” the expert stressed.

During the interview the professor also touched on the topic of the upcoming parliamentary elections in Azerbaijan noting that several distinct steps are pointed out in the old copies of Council of Europe statements. The Central Election Commission needs to be formed anew and become independent, unlike what it is now dominated by the ruling Yeni Azerbaijan Party. A second step would be giving opening the country to more election monitors: not just those that are in fact recruited by the government, but that actually belong to the international organizations. That would mean that all the participants including those at the polling stations have to understand that they will also be supposed to play by the rules. Fair elections are impossible without free pr-election atmosphere, when a candidate can easily get registered, and opposition candidates get air time.

“We know most people get their news completely from television, which is completely controlled by the state. Open spaces for candidates and not allowing the kind of antics we saw in 2013 where you have people sitting around the table and where the one actual opposition candidate that talks, somebody else across him start yelling and throws a plastic bottle across the way -- that just really has to stop. It doesn't help Azerbaijan's reputation anywhere in the world,” she added.

Regarding the Assistant Secretary of the Department of State Victoria Nuland’s statement about launching a new US-Azerbaijan structure of human rights and democracy, Altstadt noted that dialog is better than no dialog. But having the long history of other dialogs, mainly between Azerbaijan and the CoE, the numerous commissions, discussions and reports, including plans of improvement, they did not give anything.

“Many of us worry seeing how they torture Gunel Hasanli only because she is an oppositionist’s daughter. Such phenomena cannot shape a positive image of Azerbaijan in the American’s perceptions. These are the very facts that become the main source for the international organizations’ criticism,” Altstadt highlighted.

Regarding the millions of dollars that the Azerbaijani government spends in Washington to improve its country’s image, the expert said that such efforts bring about an interesting effect.

“The most important thing for the lobbyists is to get money and report; that is why they take up any tricks. Over the past half year more and more people have told me that they are annoyed by that intrusive praise or advertising. Recently I have been told about a case when a lobbying company employee introduced himself as a scientist in order to get into hearings about the issue of democracy violations in Azerbaijan. He was unmasked at the event and those present saw that. When a lobbying firm takes up such measures and meanwhile praises Azerbaijan, these efforts will go useless. I have more than once heard complaints in the Congress that they are already fed up of hearing all that. If such propaganda brought some positive effects for Azerbaijan in the past, now it works against Azerbaijan,” the expert highlighted noting that she herself sees this reaction in Washington and hears it from people who are obliged to listen to “all that lobbying talks.”