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"

- 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/