The Voice of Mirza Xazar

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

A government is the organization which is the governing authority of a political unit, also the ruling power in a political society, and the apparatus through which a governing body functions and exercises authority. Government have the authority to make laws, to arbitrate disputes, to issue administrative decisions, and a monopoly in authorizing force. A State, depending on size can have local, regional and national government. There are many types of governments, such as: Monarchy, Despotism, Dictatorship, Oligarchy, Plutocracy, Democracy, Theocracy, and Anarchy. A Government depending on type can by headed by politicians, monarchs, dictators, group of people (families), wealthy class, and religious elite. History does not have the exact date of the formation of the first governments, though; it holds some records of formation of very first governments 3000 years ago. Organized crime or criminal organizations are groups or operations run by controversial individuals most commonly for the purpose of generating a financial profit and social power (influence). Organized crime, however defined, is characterized by a few basic qualities including durability over time, diversified interests, hierarchical structure, capital accumulation, reinvestment, access to political protection and the use of violence to protect interests. The best known criminal organizations are: Cosa Nostra commonly known as Mafia, the Russian Mafia, the Japanese Yakuza, the Chinese Triads, the Colombian and the Mexican drug cartel, the Chechen Mafia, and young Mara Salvatrucha, among others. History has it, that the first sign of organized crime was seen 3000 years ago. It is important to make a distinction between organized crime (criminal organizations) and terrorist organizations, military organizations, political and paramilitary organizations, such as: Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, IRA, Irgun, among others. In relation, we should not forget the Nuremberg Trials in Germany, famous for prosecution of leadership of Nazi Germany. The best known was the Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal (IMT) in 1945. On this trial followed were indicted as criminal organizations: the Nationalsozialismus Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDP), the Nazi party - National Socialist German Workers Party. the Schutzstaffel (SS), Protective Squadron – military organization. the Sicherheitsdienst (SD), Security Service – intelligence service of SS and NSDP. the Gestapo, secret state police. the Sturmabteilung (SA), Storm Division – paramilitary organization. the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (OKW), Supreme Command of the Armed Forces. This concept of criminal organizations was, and still continues to be controversial, and it was not used in International Human Rights Law since then. Throughout history there has been constant struggle, but also connection between governments and organized crime. In addition, many world famous political and military leaders have been accused of running their countries like criminal organizations, for instance: Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Mao Zedong, Nicolae Ceausescu, Idi Amin Dada, Manuel Antonio Noriega Moreno, Augusto José Ramón Pinochet Ugarte, among others. For many top government politicians is believed to grow enormous wealth by running a kleptrocracy, a government that extends the personal wealth and political power of government officials and the ruling class at the expense of the population. Few years ago an unofficial list has been released of the people for who is believed to be the most self-enriching political leaders, top of which are: Suharto (former President of Indonesia/$15-$35 billion USD), Ferdinand Emmanuel Edralín Marcos (former President of the Philippines/$5-$10 billion USD), Mobutu Sese Seko Nkuku Ngbendu wa Za Banga (former President of Zaire/$5 billion USD), among many others. What make governments and organized crime to be so connected? Governments have Head of States, Leaders, military, laws, taxes, customs, punishments; governments control States and go into wars, among others. On the other side criminal organizations (organized crime) has bosses, dons, families, soldiers, gangs, codes and outs, a protection racket and extortion, punishments, they also control territories and small cities, and they also go into wars with other criminal organizations, and governments, among others. Looking at these examples we can see that there is many similarities in structure of government and organized crime. Many governments have been involved in criminal activities trough politicians, such as: weapons sales, narcotics, international loans, confiscation of private property, and corruption. A socio-political phenomenon called "Political corruption" is visible in all forms of governments, and includes extortion, nepotism, bribery, cronyism, patronage, graft and embezzlement. Global corruption is estimated at one trillion US Dollars, which is equal to what organized crime makes per year around the world. According to history, ancient civilizations like Summer, Indus Valley Civilization, Babylon, Maya Civilization, Yellow River, Ancient Egypt, Ancient Greece, and Ancient Rome had governments, military, Laws, and crimes. The Summer Civilization had the first ever written code of Law, and it was written by the ruler Urukagina who was best known for his reforms to combat corruption. Later King Ur-Nammu wrote "the Code of Ur-Nammu", which is oldest surviving code of Law in the world. His code of Law is considered remarkably advanced, and the capital crimes of murder, robbery, adultery and rape were punished with death. Many people mostly historians believe that organized crime emerged from piracy and banditry in 17th century or from some famous warriors and conquers earlier, however, if we look at this ancient Laws, we can see that organized crime and crime generally existed long before piracy and banditry period, even Julius Cesar was kidnapped and held prisoner in 75BC by Cilician pirates, he was later released when requested ransom was paid. Afterwards, Cesar raised fleet and captured the pirates, pirates was first imprisoned and later crucified on his authority. Pertinent historical question: so, what was formed first and what did set up the model for other; a government or organized crime? It is evident that crime and organized crime existed long before the formation of the first government. Governments implemented Laws because of the crime activities that were visible in their society, in relation to that; we can say that crime is older than the first Law and government. If tree of more individuals organize them self's to commit a crime, that crime is characterized as organized crime. It was very hard, for example, in Twenty-fourth Century BC to distinguish between what was right and what was wrong, however, people held something deep inside of themselves for centuries of human evolution, and that is the sense for righteousness on which civilisations were able to build their respective society. Did governments learned from organized crime or did organized crime learned from governments? They learned from each other, government's establishers applied some of the main principles of criminal organizations structure for the greater cause. In fact, many Laws and Government bodies were made because of crime activities. Criminal organizations followed the evolution of governments and learned to be more effective in criminal activities. Throughout history crime walked along governments, it was present in every known society, including dynasties, imperialism, colonialism, monarchism, communism, socialism, and modern democracy. In the contemporary world criminal organizations are still successful in their business. Some governments, on the other hand, cannot be distinguished from organized crime because of their inherent corruption and lawlessness in their activities. Today, many world governments, the United Nations and various law enforcement agencies are fighting criminal organizations and corruption, but as long as we have politicians and government official behaving like criminals and taking bribes, criminal organizations will continue to grow. Ivan Simic Belgrade, Serbia ************************************ Ivan Simic was born in Belgrade, Serbia and an Economics graduate. For the past decade, Simic has worked in various fields: business, diplomacy, and government. A prolific writer, Simic has written many articles and critiques or supported theories concerning global issues and international relations. Travel GuideView Map | Search the Web

THE FUTURE OF NABUCCO PIPELINE UP IN THE AIR
Khadija Ismayilova: 12/05/07

The prospects for construction of the Nabucco pipeline -- a route that would help Europe reduce its energy dependency on Russia -- appear to be fading. A decision on whether to proceed with the project has been postponed until early 2008 amid questions of whether the proposed route can be economically viable.

The five members of the Nabucco consortium opted recently not to make a final decision on the project until the first quarter of 2008. They originally had been expected to make a determination by the end of 2007. The pipeline, envisioned to stretch about 3,300 kilometers, would cost an estimated $5-6 billion. It would enable European Union member states to bypass Russia in importing gas from the Caspian Basin and Middle East, via Turkey and Central Europe. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Numerous logistical hurdles -- including issues related to financing, as well as questions about adequate supplies -- remain in Nabucco’s path. Russia is also a determined foe of the project. According to the most recent timetable, construction on Nabucco would begin in 2009 and wrap up three years later.

Nabucco’s future would seem to be tied to that of a proposed trans-Caspian pipeline (TCP), which would facilitate the delivery of gas from the Central Asian states of Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to Azerbaijan, where those supplies could be funneled through existing pipelines to eventually link up with Nabucco. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. While both Astana and Ashgabat have expressed interest in TCP, there are no indications that a pipeline pact is imminent.

Andre Mernier -- secretary general of the Energy Charter, a 56-nation organization dedicated to promoting global energy cooperation -- has gone on record as saying Nabucco may be impractical. "The project's implementation in uncertain circumstances in areas close to the Black Sea region is extremely difficult," Mernier said in a late October interview with the Turkish newspaper Cumhuriyet. He also suggested that the Caspian Basin may not possess sufficient reserves to support existing pipelines, in addition to Nabucco.

Ilham Shaban the head of the Baku-based Energy Research Center said it is too early to bury the Nabucco project. However, he agrees that the pipeline, with a planned capacity of 30 billion cubic meters (bcm) per year, requires addition feasibility studies. “First of all it needs to be clarified which energy resources will be carried by this pipeline, and [determine whether] there is enough to make the pipeline profitable,” Shaban told EurasiaNet.

“So far four countries are considered as potential suppliers for the pipeline,” Shaban continued. “Three of them are Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan [and] their gas resources are not clearly defined yet. Iran, the fourth country, is considered an unreliable source for energy, due to [international] sanctions.”

European Union officials insist that Iranian participation in Nabucco is not under consideration at this time. “For the realization of Nabucco, Iranian gas is neither necessary nor looked for,” EU spokesperson Ferran Taradellas Espuny said during a recent news briefing in Brussels. Despite the fact that a US intelligence finding determined that Iran is not striving to make nuclear weapons, the Bush administration has made it clear that Washington intends to keep economic pressure up on Tehran. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Azerbaijan has already declared its readiness to invest in Nabucco, but Shaban believes that Baku’s stance rests more on political than economic factors. It may be that the fate of the TCP route will have to be determined before a final decision is made on Nabucco. Sabit Bagirov, the former president of Azerbaijan’s State Oil Company (SOCAR) has stated that Nabucco’s viability depends on the ability of Central Asian nations, especially Turkmenistan, to supply the pipeline.

Thus, the answer to whether Nabucco becomes reality may ultimately be found in the capital of Turkmenistan, Ashgabat. Turkmen leader Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov has repeatedly expressed interest in opening new routes for Turkmen gas exports. However, many analysts suspect Berdymukhamedov is making more promises than he can keep. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Bagirov is one of several Azerbaijani experts who believe that Nabucco could be built, even if Turkmenistan doesn’t participate. Azerbaijan alone might be able to supply Nabucco, given that the reserves contained in the Shah Deniz field were recently revised upward by 20 percent. According to Rovnag Abdullayev, SOCAR’s current chief, Shah Deniz now has confirmed gas reserves of over 1.2 trillion cubic meters, along with 240 roughly million tons of gas condensate. Production at Shah Deniz began in late 2006 and is expected to total 2.8 bcm this year, rising to 8 bcm in 2008.

Members of the Nabucco consortium, meanwhile, continue to maneuver. One consortium participant, Hungary’s oil and gas company MOL, announced December 5 that it was negotiating with other Central European energy companies to form a regional gas distributor. The rationale behind the initiative is that a joint operation would likely make it easier to attract financing for infrastructure projects, such as Nabucco.

Editor’s Note: Khadija Ismayilova is a freelance journalist based in Baku.

(source: www.eurasianet.org)