Category Archives: News

Revolution Next? Azerbaijan – Part II: The Reform Movement

Posted on by
Reply

Opposition Rally - Baku, Azerbaijan - June 5th, 2005 (Photo by Shakh Aivazov/AP Photo)

Azerbaijan has had a history of popular protest as far back as 1918 when it declared independence from the Russian Empire. More recently in 1990 citizens rallied for independence from the USSR, Soviet troops moved into the capital Baku and opened fire on civilians in what would become known as Black January.

After independence protests against then-president Heydar Aliyev were regular but muted. Many Azerbaijanis were willing to tolerate rampant corruption because they believed that after the country had stabilized and grown economically, Aliyev would be able to bring reform. As time wore on, this belief came to be held by fewer and fewer people as Aliyev made moves to secure more wealth and power for himself and his associates.

Before his death in 2003, Aliyev set in motion a transfer of power to his son, Ilham who remains in office to this day. This culminated in the 2003 presidential elections that saw Ilham Aliyev win by a large margin. The process was widely condemned as being a fraud, with various international organizations citing examples of corruption from before campaigning had even begun, right up until the final results were announced.

This widespread fraud served as a catalyst that saw the ranks of reform-minded groups and political parties swell, their aim was democratic reform and the moment that they chose for this were the 2005 parliamentary elections.

The run-up to and aftermath of this election is detailed in the excellent BBC Documentary How to Plan a Revolution, which was broadcast on CBC several years ago.

You can find the other five parts here: part 2, part 3, part 4, part 5, and part 6.

The film follows the efforts of young activists Emin Hüseynov and Murad Gassanly as they try to organize popular support for democratic reforms. The film has an incredible amount of access to the reform movement, camera crews follow the pair at night as they spray graffiti, drop leaflets into public spaces, and organize protests – all acts which could land them treason charges and life imprisonment.

It’s also an excellent document on the various kinds of corruption an autocratic regime engages in order to suppress popular will during an election and de-rail reformists. Some methods used include using government-sponsored volunteer clubs to provoke protestors into shoving matches, thus justifying use of force by riot police, seizing ballot boxes, arresting election officials who witness fraud, and refusing to register opposition candidates without reason.

In one of the film’s most absurd moments, a bag of hand grenades and explosives is found out in the open in the building that houses the offices for various youth movements. Murat speculates that Azerbaijani security forces employed an old KGB tactic: planting weapons to try and link the movement to violence, discrediting them and giving police grounds for mass arrests. Activists immediately phone journalists to the scene and proceed to call the police to report the explosives. A few officers arrive, take a quick look at the weapons, and leave without making any statements. This prompts the group to turn in the explosives to the police themselves, accompanied by journalists.

Protestors from the "Azadliq" (Freedom) youth group, including Emin Hüseynov, during a protest against election fraud. Baku, Azerbaijan - November 10th, 2005 (photo: Joseph Sywenkyj/New York Times)

The protests against the Aliyev regime culminated with a rally following the announcement of the election results (which saw Aliyev’s NAP and his “independent candidate” supporters win a large majority), and soon after that a day of protest on November 27th. This rally was attended by a cross section of Azerbaijani society: women, men, young, old, elites, the poor and working class. It was brutally crushed by riot police who used tear gas, water canons and beat protestors indiscriminately.

It was difficult enough to watch the final minutes of the film and seeing the hopes of many Azerbaijanis dashed by brute force. What makes it worse in my opinion is that it happened within the context of a deeply hypocritical US foreign policy in the region.

When the neighbouring state of Georgia had it’s Rose Revolution in 2003, and Ukraine had it’s Orange Revolution in 2004, then US president George W. Bush not only supported the reform movement with words, but also with diplomatic initiatives, and cash for activist groups. Perhaps most importantly for the reform movement: Bush pressured both governments to allow peaceful protest and the security forces largely stood aside. This allowed protests to build quickly into a critical mass over the course of only a few days, much like what happened in Egypt during the early days of its recent revolution.

The Bush administration gave the appearance that it was supportive of democratic reform throughout the region. In May of 2005, six months before the Azerbaijani elections, Bush visited Georgia’s capital of Tblisi to give a speech. He congratulated that nation’s reformers and reaffirmed the United State’s commitment to spreading democracy, saying: “Now, across the Caucasus . . . we see the same desire for liberty burning in the hearts of young people. They are demanding their freedom – and they will have it.”

Many Azerbaijanis took this as a sign that the US, and even Bush himself, would back their efforts for democratic reform. They were to be profoundly disappointed.

A young protestor holding a poster of U.S. President George W. Bush. Baku, Azerbaijan - June 5th, 2005. (photo: Shakh Aivazov/AP Photo)

The Bush administration did not even acknowledge the reform movement’s existence, it did not comment on abuses of power by Ilham Aliyev’s regime, and it ignored a report by election observers and resolution by the European Council that condemned widespread election fraud. By turning a blind eye to the situation, the US showed that it was willing to let Aliyev crush the opposition, thus allowing him to send in the riot police during the November 27th protest of 2005.

To add insult to injury, just over a year later, Bush held talks with Ilham Aliyev at the White House. Bush looked on as Aliyev remarked at how he looks to the US as a model of a secular, democratic nation that he wished to emulate. Bush also remarked about Aliyev’s key role in energy security, which was telling.

As I pointed out in my last post, Azerbaijan is a major oil exporter. But more specifically, Aliyev was a key figure in the construction of several crucial oil pipelines that serve Western markets. It’s pretty clear to most observers that energy politics determined Bush’s foreign policy in the region, and not the spread of democratic reform, as he claimed in his Tblisi speech. He had a leader in Aliyev that was receptive to Western energy demands and an early ally in Bush’s War on Terror. Whatever leader emerged from an Azerbaijani revolution may not be as warm to the U.S. as Aliyev was. They may build the next pipeline to service southern Russia or Central Asia instead of Europe.

Much like elsewhere in the world, The U.S. was willing to overlook an autocratic leader’s corruption so long as they aligned themselves with Western interests.

Revolution Next? Azerbaijan – Part I

Posted on by
1

Election protests - Baku, Azerbaijan, 2003 (photo: Oleg Nikishin/Getty Images)

At first glance, you might think the above photo was a lead-in to another post, about another recent democratic uprising against an autocratic leader, in yet another Arab nation.

The people in the photograph are protesting a disputed election win by a corrupt autocratic leader, they are mostly Muslim, but they aren’t Arab and their country isn’t in the Middle East or North Africa. What’s more, they’ve been protesting this regime on and off for several years now. Welcome to Azerbaijan, the most important country you’ve never heard of.

Baku, Azerbaijan (photo: David Davidson)

Azerbaijan is a country located on the shores of the Caspian Sea in the Caucasus between Iran and Russia and has been fought over by both of those nations for centuries. When it declared independence following the collapse of the Russian Empire in 1918, it became the first secular, democratic, Muslim-majority country in the world (five years ahead of Turkey). When the Soviet Union was established, it immediately invaded and absorbed Azerbaijan because, according to Vladimir Lenin, it couldn’t survive without it.

So why was Azerbaijan so important, and why does it continue to be a vital country today, even if we don’t hear about it often? You may have guessed it – oil.

SOCAR Oil Fields #9 - Baku, Azerbaijan (photo: Edward Burtynsky)

One of the first oil wells in the world was built in the capital city of Baku in 1871, and the petroleum industry has been raking in money for the state ever since. Oil has been the biggest driving force of international interest in Azerbaijan and has shaped its own domestic and foreign policies.

Azerbaijan shares many demographic similarities with several North African states that have been or are currently undergoing popular uprisings. It has similar rates of internet usage, urbanization, and the average age of citizens is about the same as in Tunisia and Egypt. Most importantly, there is a large gap in living standards between the elite and the rest of the population.

The country also has a history of being ruled by autocratic strongmen.

Former Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev and former President George W. Bush at the White House. Washington, 2003 (photo: Eric Draper)

The former ruler of Azerbaijan when it was a Soviet Republica, and then again when it became independent after the collapse of the USSR, Heydar Aliyev is a polarizing figure. During his time as a Soviet leader He used his influence as a former deputy chairman of the Azerbaijani KGB to go after political opponents with corruption charges. Ironically enough, he was also known for showering lavish gifts paid for with state money on officials from Moscow, who then awarded him high-ranking positions within the Soviet government.

When former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev launched his anti-corruption initiative, Aliyev and his associates were a prime target. Interestingly, several mafia figures and government officials with ties to Aliyev died of mysterious circumstances or committed suicide while investigations were underway. After the Soviet Union fell there was turmoil within Azerbaijan for several years with no one figure solidly in charge of the country. Aliyez emerged from this unrest as an elected president  and presided over a period of great economic growth, and as such is remembered fondly by some of the population.

His later years in office were marked, again, by corruption and abuses of power, and his regime became increasingly autocratic. Before he died in 2003 his son, Ilham Aliyev, became president in an election widely condemned as a sham, sparking massive protests. In the years that followed, the opposition movement, spearheaded by many young activists organizing via the internet, would work to follow in the “colour revolutions” of many countries close to Azerbaijan.

In many ways, their aspirations and methods mirror what is currently underway in the Middle East and North Africa. Tomorrow I’ll be taking a closer look at the protest movement in Azerbaijan and reviewing an excellent documentary released several years ago that had an amazing amount of access to the activist community.

Egypt: A Million Indignities Now

Posted on by
2

After the events in Egypt of the last several weeks, most of us are familiar with the main criticisms of the former Mubarak regime: It snuffed out free speech and political representation, its interior ministry ran a police state rather than a police force, the services it provided were wretchedly ineffective and mismanaged, and Mubarak and his cronies siphoned off public money into their own pockets with impunity.

Ordinary citizens fought against this regime in a variety of ways, such as organizing protests, or exposing police corruption. They paid for these actions with jail time, torture, and in some cases, their very lives.

But you didn’t need to choose to become an activist in order to feel the weight of all that corruption bearing down on your shoulders. Mubarak’s kleptocracy ensured that ordinary Egyptians endured countless indignities that often existed out in the open, for everyone to see.

When I visited Cairo in April, 2010 it didn’t take me long to spot a blatant example of this corruption: hundreds, perhaps thousands of what appeared to be apartment buildings still under construction. Their concrete skeletons poured, walls patched up with rough brick, steel rebar jutting out of roofs and walls. Yet for all this construction, there was a mysterious absence of any construction workers, equipment, or scaffolding. In fact, many of these buildings appeared to have residents – as evidenced by laundry hanging in windows that lacked shutters.

I found out via a travel companion and several Egyptians I spoke to that these buildings are primarily a result of a loophole. So long as a building is still under construction, it’s not subjectable to property tax. And because the housing shortage in many cities like Cairo is so severe, owners have no trouble finding families willing to live in a shell of a building. For some it’s a better option than living on a roof, or in a cemetery, but that isn’t really saying much.

The photos in the gallery above were taken on an elevated highway in the western suburbs of Cairo that is one of the main routes to get from downtown to the pyramids. The fact that anyone visiting Egypt’s number one tourist attraction can see these structures says a lot about how comfortable Mubarak’s regime had become with their rampant corruption – they didn’t even attempt to hide its most visible representations. Nor did the officials responsible for the loophole make any attempt to distance themselves from the developers and landlords they were supposedly regulating.

We drove at highway speeds for over ten minutes, and the entire time almost all the buildings we could see were unfinished, they cover an enormous area, and that’s just in one suburb. In between photographs I took some video on my old Canon HV40 which you can see below. I didn’t bring my gorillapod with me on the trip (I hadn’t planned to do much filming in cars), so please excuse the handheld.

(Music: “Reach for the Door” by my friend Elevator Boy)

These construction sites don’t have electricity or water, and given their height I can’t imagine how difficult it must be to live in these structures. Residents either go to the washroom in buckets which they carry downstairs or share a communal toilet on the ground floor. When a sandstorm rolls in off the desert, their apartments and all their possessions are covered with sand due to a lack of windows or even properly sealed walls. And as with any construction site there are nails, steel, and rough concrete edges that are hazardous enough to workers, let alone the many children that live in these structures.

The indignity of life in these buildings must be bad enough, but what makes it much worse is how much money developers, landowners and government officials have been making by charging rent for buildings which cost literally nothing to operate, and almost nothing to build. Ahmed al-Maghraby, who was Mubarak’s Minister of Housing until the revolution, has a net worth estimated at $1.8 billion.

Now that Egypt’s state prosecutor is free from intimidation and threats, he’s preparing with investigations against several former ministers, including Maghraby. The cases need the approval of the military to proceed and the supreme council is reviewing the evidence. It remains to be seen if the new government can start to grapple with the indignities of the old, and provide Egyptians with a more promising future.