Azerbaijan: Poverty in Midst of Plenty (Institute for War & Peace Reporting)
Homeless oil workers wait years for flats, as officials argue amongst themselves over who is to blame.
By Diana Isayeva in Surakhany (CRS No. 478, 30-Jan-09)
Azerbaijan’s oil wealth has filled the capital Baku with gleaming office blocks and foreign cars, but for some oil workers the picture has been as bleak as could be.
In 2003, eighteen oil workers and their families in the Surakhany region, about 20 kilometres from the centre of Baku, were moved out of their apartment block into a kindergarten. They are still there, and have no clue as to when they might be able to move out.
“There are cockroaches swarming in our accommodation, rats are always running out of the pipes, the house is so damp that slugs and beetles come up from under the floor. There is no running water, we wash in the room over a basin because there is no bathroom. There is one toilet for everyone. Our one room serves as a dining-room and a bedroom,” said Roza Ismailova, a 48-year-old resident of the block.
“I have a big family, with four sons, one of whom is married with his own family, and they live with us too. We made a bathroom-kitchen from one room. But there is no water, so we have to stand in a queue in the courtyard to fetch it. And even there we argue, who’s after whom. And there isn’t always enough water for everyone.”
More than 80 people live in the old kindergarten, and privacy is impossible since the walls are so thin and every word spoken by their neighbours is audible.
Such poverty is in the midst of plenty. The state’s oil fund is spending 145 million manats (180 million US dollars) on social support for refugees, with 330 million manats going on infrastructure spending. On January 1, the funds assets came to almost 9 billion manats (11.2 billion dollars).
But that money has not helped the homeless oil workers.
Recently, a municipal team came and repaired the heating system, which upset the residents who feel it may be a sign they will be stuck in the building permanently. And, according to Mirvari Gahramanly, chairwoman of the Organisation to Protect the Rights of Azerbaijan’s Oil Workers, they are right to worry.
“There are many families like this. Such families regularly appeal to our organisation. Around 300 people are on the waiting list for flats from the oil company. SOCAR (the state oil company) has promised to give flats to people who have waited for 15 or 20 years,” she said.
“These families live for years in hostels, or have eight or nine people in one room. We have many times appealed to SOCAR to know when they will get flats, but have got no firm answer. In 2008, we got an answer than the question hadn’t been examined.”
The local authorities and Azneft, a subsidiary of SOCAR, argue among themselves over who is responsible for the Surakhany workers’ plight. The site of their old house, which was condemned as dangerous, is now occupied by a school and a new house that has been built is not yet ready for habitation.
“At SOCAR’s request, all necessary documents for putting communal services were sent to Azneft, for filling in the demands for the flats. It is not clear why the process is still going on. Only the social department of Azneft could know,” said Elkhan Zakhirli, head of the legal department in the Surakhany regionional government.
Azneft’s social department batted the blame back again.
“A nearby house, which was built earlier, is not finished, although people are living in it… When the first building is finished, then communication lines must be connected between the two buildings, and these poor people can move in. We do not know how long the process will take, but there is no cause for alarm,” said Tofik Sharifov, head of the department.
But the residents say they have learned not to trust such promises. Four years ago, they were promised rooms in another building, but those went to different families.
“If they don’t take the necessary steps and take this to court, then the story might repeat itself,” said Irada Dzhavadova, a lawyer defending the residents’ interests.
“There are many laws that regulate this question. According to Article 157 of Azerbaijan’s civil code, property can be confiscated by the state, if social needs demand it but only in circumstances allowed by law, and only with compensation based on its market value, and in this case no compensation was paid.”
Meanwhile, the families are losing hope.
“First they offered us flats by the holiday of Nouruz, then by the birthday of (the late former president) Heidar Aliev, then our last hope was to get a flat before the presidential elections. Now it’s unlikely anyone will remember us. We don’t believe anyone and don’t know where to turn,” said 49-year-old Farkhad Farzaliev.
Diana Isayeva is a freelance journalist.
Azerbaijan: Poverty in Midst of Plenty (Institute for War & Peace Reporting)
Homeless oil workers wait years for flats, as officials argue amongst themselves over who is to blame.
By Diana Isayeva in Surakhany (CRS No. 478, 30-Jan-09)
Azerbaijan’s oil wealth has filled the capital Baku with gleaming office blocks and foreign cars, but for some oil workers the picture has been as bleak as could be.
In 2003, eighteen oil workers and their families in the Surakhany region, about 20 kilometres from the centre of Baku, were moved out of their apartment block into a kindergarten. They are still there, and have no clue as to when they might be able to move out.
“There are cockroaches swarming in our accommodation, rats are always running out of the pipes, the house is so damp that slugs and beetles come up from under the floor. There is no running water, we wash in the room over a basin because there is no bathroom. There is one toilet for everyone. Our one room serves as a dining-room and a bedroom,” said Roza Ismailova, a 48-year-old resident of the block.
“I have a big family, with four sons, one of whom is married with his own family, and they live with us too. We made a bathroom-kitchen from one room. But there is no water, so we have to stand in a queue in the courtyard to fetch it. And even there we argue, who’s after whom. And there isn’t always enough water for everyone.”
More than 80 people live in the old kindergarten, and privacy is impossible since the walls are so thin and every word spoken by their neighbours is audible.
Such poverty is in the midst of plenty. The state’s oil fund is spending 145 million manats (180 million US dollars) on social support for refugees, with 330 million manats going on infrastructure spending. On January 1, the funds assets came to almost 9 billion manats (11.2 billion dollars).
But that money has not helped the homeless oil workers.
Recently, a municipal team came and repaired the heating system, which upset the residents who feel it may be a sign they will be stuck in the building permanently. And, according to Mirvari Gahramanly, chairwoman of the Organisation to Protect the Rights of Azerbaijan’s Oil Workers, they are right to worry.
“There are many families like this. Such families regularly appeal to our organisation. Around 300 people are on the waiting list for flats from the oil company. SOCAR (the state oil company) has promised to give flats to people who have waited for 15 or 20 years,” she said.
“These families live for years in hostels, or have eight or nine people in one room. We have many times appealed to SOCAR to know when they will get flats, but have got no firm answer. In 2008, we got an answer than the question hadn’t been examined.”
The local authorities and Azneft, a subsidiary of SOCAR, argue among themselves over who is responsible for the Surakhany workers’ plight. The site of their old house, which was condemned as dangerous, is now occupied by a school and a new house that has been built is not yet ready for habitation.
“At SOCAR’s request, all necessary documents for putting communal services were sent to Azneft, for filling in the demands for the flats. It is not clear why the process is still going on. Only the social department of Azneft could know,” said Elkhan Zakhirli, head of the legal department in the Surakhany regionional government.
Azneft’s social department batted the blame back again.
“A nearby house, which was built earlier, is not finished, although people are living in it… When the first building is finished, then communication lines must be connected between the two buildings, and these poor people can move in. We do not know how long the process will take, but there is no cause for alarm,” said Tofik Sharifov, head of the department.
But the residents say they have learned not to trust such promises. Four years ago, they were promised rooms in another building, but those went to different families.
“If they don’t take the necessary steps and take this to court, then the story might repeat itself,” said Irada Dzhavadova, a lawyer defending the residents’ interests.
“There are many laws that regulate this question. According to Article 157 of Azerbaijan’s civil code, property can be confiscated by the state, if social needs demand it but only in circumstances allowed by law, and only with compensation based on its market value, and in this case no compensation was paid.”
Meanwhile, the families are losing hope.
“First they offered us flats by the holiday of Nouruz, then by the birthday of (the late former president) Heidar Aliev, then our last hope was to get a flat before the presidential elections. Now it’s unlikely anyone will remember us. We don’t believe anyone and don’t know where to turn,” said 49-year-old Farkhad Farzaliev.
Diana Isayeva is a freelance journalist.
War Trend Will Soon Face Its End
By Ivan Simic
History has it that there was not yet a single year without war in history known to a mankind, and that war has been fought since time immemorial. Therefore, the biggest question today would be: Is it really possible to end wars? Throughout our human history we heard many politicians, leaders and rulers saying that there will be no more wars and that things will change, but nothing has changed. Even today, there are around thirty ongoing wars in the world.
Consequently, how and who will end wars: the United Nations, Non-Government Organizations, International Laws and Conventions, who?
The United Nations was established to stop wars between countries, to provide a platform for dialogue, and to maintain international peace and security, and justice. The UN has very noble charters and articles; however, the UN is not capable to maintain international peace and security. In one word; the UN is not influential and strong enough because some Member States do not respect the UN Charters.
Why the UN is not capable to maintain international peace and security? Perhaps, statements by the former US President George W. Bush and former US Ambassador to the UN John R. Biden will provide some answer. President Bush said; "free nations will not allow the United Nations to fade into history as an ineffective, irrelevant debating society." The Ambassador Biden said; "There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is only the international community, which can only be led by the only remaining superpower, which is the United States."
Because of such statements and hegemony of some Member States to get their will throughout, the UN is not able to prevent wars; it can only assist Member States in humanitarian issues and try to maintain peace with peacekeeping missions, after all military operations ends. The only serious resolutions issued by the UN will be visible when the Security Council passes its power to the General Assembly, and therefore, when the General Assembly get serious in its business and start working as one voice to bring peace
to the world.
When it comes to NGO's, well, they are private institutions which are not directly a part of a structure of government, but relies significantly on funding from governments, individual donors, foundations, corporations. Currently, there are over 5 million NGO's around the world, out of which 0.1% is actually doing their jobs in terms of supporting and helping people in distress. Other 99.9% can be divided in two categories: ones who lobby for their financiers and others who do nothing at all, just waiting for
easy money to come.
Pertaining to the International Laws and Charters, they are more or less associated with the United Nations, and without the UN they do not stand any chance of survival.
Then, how to prevent wars?
We saw that the international organizations and laws are not able to do anything serious to prevent wars; therefore, the answer for this global phenomenon lies in the domestic laws, not international. In order to prevent future wars we should focus our attention on domestic issues first. In relation, here are some possible solutions how to prevent wars, trough terms called the Head of State and Referendum.
According to definition, the Head of State is the general term for the individual or collective office that serves as the chief public representative of a monarchic or republican nation-state, federation, commonwealth or any other political state. In terms of protocol, states are distinguished as monarchy or republic, depending on the style of their head of state.
Different state constitutions establish different political systems, but four major types of heads of state can be distinguished:
1. the non-executive head of state system, in which the head of state does not hold any executive power and mainly plays a symbolic role on behalf of the state;
2. the parliamentary system, in which the head of state possesses executive power but the exercise of this power is done on the advice of a cabinet;
3. the presidential system (sometimes called 'imperial'), in which the head of state is also the head of government and actively exercises executive power; and,
4. the semi-presidential system, in which the head of state shares exercise of executive power with a head of government.
In everyday life, the Head of State is a legal representative of the people-citizens of the country in which he/she was elected. His/hers duties, therefore is to serve and work in the best inertest of the nation which he/she represents as the Head of State.
Consequently, if the Head of State-collective office wishes to start a war and think that war is in the best interest of the nation, than it behooves on them to go to that same war. There is no better way for the Head of State-collective office to justify war than to be personally involved in one. They should not hide behind their desks and behind diplomatic immunities while soldiers die on the battle field, they should go and fight and it should be their honor.
This is nothing new to the world; many years ago Head of States and rulers went to wars to fight, for example: Genghis Khan, Saladin, Alexander the Great, Cleopatra VII, Julius Caesar, Napoleon I, Adolf Hitler, among many others. Maybe, when they find themselves in the middle of war and on the line of fire, then they will realize how wars are dangerous and hopefully end them.
Since there is no chance that we will see a Head of State brave enough to go to war, let's see more appropriate and reasonable solution to prevent the war trend, called referendum.
A referendum is a direct vote in which an entire electorate is asked to either accept or reject a particular proposal. This may result in the adoption of a new constitution, a constitutional amendment, a law, the recall of an elected official or simply a specific government policy.
In contemporary days, war can be declared and started with the decision of the Head of State-Monarch-collective office, however, that needs to be changed. Before the government decides to engage in war, government should ask citizens for their approval. Approval to engage in war should be asked trough the War Referendum. It is nothing personal, however, certain decisions are best taken out of the hands of governments and determined directly by the people, especially when it comes to war.
Referendum is the best way to identify the spirit of the nation, and many countries have used it, for example: In Venezuela, in the Venezuelan recall referendum of 2004 voters determined whether or not Hugo Chavez, the current President of Venezuela, should be recalled from office. In Spain, in 1986 referendum approved Spain's membership to NATO. In Brazil, in 2005 referendum, 122 million voters decided to continue to allow the sale of firearms in Brazil. In Iraq, two years after the United States-led invasion,
the current Constitution of Iraq was approved by referendum.
There is also one very popular referendum, called the independence referendum, a type of referendum in which citizens of one territory would decide whether that territory should become independent country. There were many successful independence referendums in the past, such as: 1990 Slovenia independence referendum, 1991 Croatian, Macedonian, Georgia and Ukraine independence referendum, 1993 Eritrean independence referendum, and most recent 2006 Montenegrin independence referendum, among others.
Also, here is a list of some expected independence referendums which will be held in the near future, such as: Scottish (the UK), Bougainville (Papa New Guinea), New Caledonia (France), Quebec (Canada), Republika Srpska (Bosnia and Herzegovina), among others.
Still, there are some countries that do not like to use referendums, such as: Canada, the United States, Chile, the Netherlands, among others. Imagine who many lives would be saved if the US government had used a referendum before engaging in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.
Some politicians say that referendums are too expensive to be held, but are they. For example, in Denmark referendums usually happen every time when new treaties of the European Union have to be approved. Therefore, referendums are not expensive, wars are.
We can see that many important issues are determined by the people trough referendums, but never when it comes to wars. Why is there no war referendum? Because there is no nation in the world which will vote in favor of war and government officials knows that.
Maybe, this is the time when we the people should take the matters into our own hands and stop this war trend since nobody else can.