The Voice of Mirza Xazar

Eurasia Insight, EurasiaNet

by Mina Muradova

May 12, 2008

Six months ahead of Azerbaijan's presidential elections, American criticism of President Ilham Aliyev administration's political practices suggest that the normally strong relations between Washington and Baku have hit a speed bump. Some local analysts contend that the sharp exchanges are not that unusual during a campaign season, and have little significance for long-term relations.

The verbal spat started at the US Peace Corps 2008 Worldwide Country Director Conference on April 29, when US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asserted that "there is important work to be done" in Azerbaijan and "to a certain extent Armenia" to bring the two Caucasus states "closer to standards that we thought they were once meeting." Rice termed the two countries' democratization progress to date "a disappointment." [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

The remarks were followed by a May 1 statement by US President George W. Bush that placed Azerbaijan in company with China, Cuba, Eritrea and Iran, in terms of Baku's harsh treatment of independent journalists. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
An influential senior Azerbaijani official characterized the US criticism as "at variance with the real situation in Azerbaijan and [is] not based on the truth."

"It appears that the public and political situation in Georgia and Armenia and all issues in general have been perfectly settled, and that Azerbaijan is a country that is lagging behind in the region," fumed presidential administration chief Ramiz Mehdiyev in remarks quoted on May 6 by the government-run Yeni Azerbaijan newspaper.

"[A]zerbaijan is proceeding on its own path," he continued. "Azerbaijan is developing under the leadership of Mr. President [Ilham Aliyev]."

The administration chief went on to target more than $3 million in US-funded election training for Azerbaijan's October 15 presidential vote. "As an Azerbaijani citizen, I assess this as interference in Azerbaijan's internal affairs. Is Azerbaijan or any other country allowed to finance someone in the USA, to interfere in elections or to monitor elections? Is this allowed in Britain? No. Then why should we have this in Azerbaijan?" Mehdiyev said.

In response, the US Embassy in Baku states that it is running programs via the local offices of American non-governmental organizations to help Azerbaijani political parties develop party platforms, to assist with broadcast election debates, to train judges and election officials to respond to claims of violations during the presidential vote. Support for an individual political party or candidate is not part of the assistance, embassy officials emphasize.

"Our programs are designed not to interfere with Azerbaijan's goal [of holding democratic elections]," asserted embassy spokesperson Jonathan Henick. "Our programs are designed to help Azerbaijan to achieve state commitments on democratic reforms and conduct free and fair elections in October."

The embassy's programs, Henick continued, were "prepared very closely" in conjunction with the Azerbaijani government, and are meant "to help fulfil Azerbaijan's commitments to the Council of Europe. "

What appears to sting the most for Azerbaijani officials is Secretary of State Rice's comparison of Azerbaijan with Georgia and Armenia - always a risky approach in a region whose member countries have little or no history of longstanding partnership. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Khazar Ibrahim dismissed Rice's remarks as indicative of "double standards." The impression left is that "in Washington they do not have a real picture of the region," Ibrahim said.

"Democracy in Azerbaijan is at least not worse than in Georgia, and comparison with Armenia is not possible at all," he said. "We do not shoot and kill demonstrators. We do not impose a state of emergency and we do not close down TV channels and other media outlets," Ibrahim stated in reference to recent events in Armenia [For background see the Eurasia archive] and Georgia. [For background see the Eurasia archive].

Not all analysts see the statements as a sign that relations are souring between Baku and Washington. "Elections are not the first priority in US-Azerbaijani relations," commented Rasim Musabeyov, an independent political analyst in Baku. "As the State Department announced, the strategic partnership between the two countries is based on security and energy. Although democracy and human rights are included [in this list], they go after [security and energy]."

The sharp words coming out of Baku appear to be more a reaction to the fact that Rice's comments came as a surprise, he added. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ibrahim termed the statements "unexpected." No moves to discontinue the embassy's election programs have followed. "Azerbaijan's authorities understand US influence in the world and the fact that solutions to an array of problems today are not possible without the involvement by the United States," he added, referring to Baku's uneasy relations with Iran, as well as to the conflict with Armenia over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh territory. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Based on reactions to previous elections, Musabeyov and pro-opposition analyst Zardusht Alizade suggested that Washington would, at most, give Azerbaijan a verbal reprimand, if violations mar the election - provided that any such violations are not flagrant. In comments broadcast by ANS television on May 1, however, US Ambassador Anne Derse stressed that Washington had criticized the crackdowns in Armenia and Georgia against opposition protestors, and would take similar action against officials in Baku, if events in Azerbaijan merited such a step.

For his part, Mehdiyev, the presidential administration chief, has pledged that the vote will be "the most democratic election in the history of Azerbaijan."

Editor's Note: Mina Muradova is a freelance reporter based in Baku.

Posted May 12, 2008 © Eurasianet

URL: http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav051208a.shtml

Mina Muradova EurasiaNet, Eurasia Insight May 6, 20008 Controversy is enveloping state-controlled media outlets in Azerbaijan after the broadcast of a television program that alleges Ali Karimli, one of the government's most vocal critics, is a homosexual. Karimli supporters maintain that the broadcast is designed to discredit him as a potential presidential candidate in the autumn election. Opposition leaders see the film as the de facto sequel to a broadcast aired earlier in April about a knife attack on Agil Khalil, a reporter for the Azadlig (Freedom) newspaper, a publication with ties to the Popular Front of Azerbaijan, the opposition party headed by Karimli. Prior to the attack, Khalil had alleged senior city government officials were selling city-owned land privately to construction companies. In February, Khalil was badly beaten by national security officers, and, later, stabbed by unknown assailants. In early April, the state-run AzTV and the pro-government Lider TV broadcast a 30-minute tape that claimed Khalil's alleged homosexual lover stabbed the journalist in a fit of jealousy. The reporter denies the allegations, which were roundly condemned by international human rights observers. A similar claim has now emerged against Karimli. On April 22, Lider TV broadcast a 40-minute program that presented both Karimli and Khalil as the alleged representatives of a "sexual minority." "Agil Khalil not only shares the same personality as Ali Karimli, but he also shares the same color," the program's narrator alleges, making a reference to "goluboi" (light blue), the colloquial Russian expression for a gay man. "It looks like the inclination toward [this] sexual minority is a weakness of Ali Karimli’s and his circle." The program cites a "list of people with whom Agil Khalil has friendly relationships" to substantiate its claims. The broadcast added that Kerimli supposedly "directed" Khalil’s "youthful passion in the wrong direction." Fuad Mustafayev, deputy head of the Popular Front, contends that the broadcast was defamatory and intentionally styled to inflict political damage on the opposition. To underscore the political intent of the program, Mustafayev added, it was rebroadcast a second time on April 29, Karimli's birthday. Other Baku observers agree that the programming was politically motivated. "Once again, it shows the immorality of the authorities," charged pro-opposition political analyst Zardusht Alizade. "They are using electronic media they control to frighten and to discourage not only their political opponents, but also potential voters. It is a lesson to others." As yet, there has been no international reaction to the broadcasts concerning Karimli. Meanwhile, representatives of President Ilham Aliyev's administration vigorously deny any coordinated effort to discredit Kerimli. "There is no black PR," insisted Ali Hasanov, a top presidential aide. "If it existed, the opposition media would be on the top of this," Hasanov told reporters on April 25. "Whether pro-government or opposition, journalists should always respect people's honor and dignity." At first glance, there would seem to be little reason for such a vicious personal attack on Karimli. Azerbaijan's opposition, never robust, has weakened since the 2005 parliamentary elections. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. In addition, the consensus among observers is that Aliyev should cruise to victory in the autumn presidential vote. Partisans of the Popular Front, arguably one of the best known and organized of Azerbaijan's opposition parties, claim that the television program is designed to encourage the party to boycott the presidential election. Under the present circumstances, opposition leaders say they feel disinclined to participate. "There are no conditions for an election campaign; in particular, there is no real freedom of assembly, while freedom of speech is dramatically limited," the Popular Front's Mustafayev complained to EurasiaNet. "Under the current conditions, it is naìve to think about democratic elections in Azerbaijan. It is a farce, a tragicomedy and we do not want to contribute to this by our participation [in the elections]." Former presidential advisor Eldar Namazov, now an opposition leader running for president, sees a broader purpose behind the broadcasts. "A smear campaign against opponents like this is used to prevent an outburst of people's political and social [welfare] frustrations," suggested Namazov. To date, aside from Namazov, only one other nominee has been officially designated to contest the October 15 election. On May 5, in an unusual twist on international election practices, Defense Minister Safar Abiyev nominated Aliyev for reelection. Five opposition parties are expected to eventually nominate candidates. An opposition party boycott, said Hasanov, would have little impact on the campaign. "The participation or non-participation in the election is the business of each party," the Trend news agency quoted Hasanov as saying on April 23. "There will be enough candidates taking part in the elections." Editor's Note: Mina Muradova is a freelance reporter based in Baku. Posted May 6, 2008 © Eurasianet http://www.eurasianet.org URL: http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav050608.shtml

Nasidze, I., T. Sarkisian, A. Kerimov, and M. Stoneking. 2003. Testing hypotheses of language replacement in the Caucasus: evidence from the Y-chromosome. Human Genetics 112: 255-261.

Abstract:

A previous analysis of mtDNA variation in the Caucasus found that Indo-European-speaking Armenians and Turkic-speaking Azerbaijanians were more closely related genetically to other Caucasus populations (who speak Caucasian languages) than to other Indo-European or Turkic groups, respectively. Armenian and Azerbaijanian therefore represent language replacements, possibly via elite dominance involving primarily male migrants, in which case genetic relationships of Armenians and Azerbaijanians based on the Y-chromosome should more closely reflect their linguistic relationships. We therefore analyzed 11 bi-allelic Y-chromosome markers in 389 males from eight populations, representing all major linguistic groups in the Caucasus. As with the mtDNA study, based on the Y-chromosome Armenians and Azerbaijanians are more closely-related genetically to their geographic neighbors in the Caucasus than to their linguistic neighbors elsewhere. However, whereas the mtDNA results show that Caucasian groups are more closely related genetically to European than to Near Eastern groups, by contrast the Y-chromosome shows a closer genetic relationship with the Near East than with Europe.

PDF here: http://www.eva.mpg.de/genetics/pdf/Y-paper.pdf