Kremlin's friend wins in Ukraine, but democratic process could cause problems

The author of this article makes a very good point. Yes, Russia's preferred candidate won the election in Ukraine, yet the election he won stands in sharp contrast to recent heavily-managed elections in Russia. Will Russian's care that their Slavic cousins to the west have experienced a democratic presidential election? Some Russians tell me- "But we do have democracy at the local level." This local-level democracy, however, is inevitably limited by the fact that processes by which national leaders have been chosen in national years is anything but democratic. (It reminds me, in fact, of the apologists for autocracy of the tsar, when people could point to the local level zemstvo or the mir as examples of local democratic processes and autonomy. In reality, however, the autonomy was not grounded in law and was subject to the caprices of the tsar and his administration.)

One of the statistically significant factors in predicting whether a nation will be democratic is its contiguity to other democracies. So, if Ukraine is successful in holding its tenuous grip on democratic institutions, Russia's oligarchs and their patrons might just have reason to worry.

They expected democratic elections?

Radio Free Europe has a little article about the complaints of the Right Cause Party in Russia regarding the elections for the Moscow Duma. Apparently, the election process is blatantly unfair.

I am very sympathetic but very unsurprised.

Did Stalin hold free elections for city government during his reign? Does the opposition win municipal elections in Azerbaijan? In autocratic systems, there may be variation between how closely elected representatives hew to party orthodoxy, but free competition will not be tolerated.

Certainly a free election in the capital city would be unthinkable.

I'm not sure what the best strategy is for democrats in Russia. I don't see any free elections on the horizon.

Another analysis of Iran

Dilip Hiro has written interesting analysis of the situation in Iran. Surely some people will object to some elements of his piece, but I think he makes some good points, especially about the demographic factors that are influencing the situation in Iran.

The fact that he comes from a Hindu background might be seen as an influence on his understanding of Islam. Personally, I think that any theocratic state is bound to be undemocratic - Hindu, Buddhist, Christian or Muslim.

Students could pose challenge to government

The author, Liz Fuller, has reported from this region for several years, but I don't sense a close grip on the political realities of the country. For example, I can't see the authorities "quietly abandoning the Aliyev personality cult and tapping into accumulated oil revenues to finance a broad program of material benefits intended to make the political status quo more palatable." And in her last paragraph, she betrays a belief that elections in Azerbaijan are about counting votes. I'm not sure about that either.

read more | digg story

Election reflections

I followed the link given by one of the readers of this blog - and read the US reaction to the Azerbaijan election. I don't have the quotes in front of me - but the message was that this was an improvement over the last election. Incredible. Voter fraud was unnecessary - because the opposition boycotted the election. You can argue with the decision to boycott the election - but it's hard to call it a real contested election, where effectively there is only one candidate. Amazing. But does the US retain any credibility in the business of democracy promotion?

On a related note, I read yesterday about the team of Russian election observers going to check out the contest in the US. Good for them. There are some people in Florida, Mississippi, and Ohio (to name a few states) who could give first class lessons in voter fraud.

On the eve of the election

This town is crawling with election observers. It is absurd. I'm not sure how many total observers there are. Certainly hundreds. I don't think it's silly to have election observers, per se, but it's silly to pretend that the observers grant this election more credibility. How can this election be credible when the main opposition groups are boycotting the election? Why are they boycotting the election? Because they feel that they are systematically repressed. (Some argue that the opposition is ineffectual and disorganized too, and merely are looking for an excuse so that this fact isn't revealed.). The opposition is not repressed in a Stalinist manner. They are not being sent to gulags, although certainly there have been cases of physical abuse of opposition figures and the media. The opposition is repressed politically. The competition is not fair in any sense, and everyone knows this. The Azerbaijani people are not fools.

So, tomorrow thousands of people will go to the polls, to participate in some sort of civic exercise. It's not really a democratic exercise. It's more like going to a parade, a way to express patriotism by voting support for the government. And after the president has won re-election, what then?

That is the more important question. Price hikes? More concerted repression of dissent? These are distinct possibilities. But defeat at the polls for the president is completely impossible.

After the election, the hundreds of election observers will write their reports. The observers might see a few offenses, but I doubt that any shenanigans are necessary to ensure that the right result is obtained at the polls. Democracy is not about the conduct of any one election. Free elections are the result of months of democratic behavior that precede the elections. And in Azerbaijan, the political and social environment just doesn't allow an open consideration of alternatives in this election.

How to persuade people, or at least keep them quiet

Perhaps I am overly cynical, but I perceive the fevered pace of public works in Azerbaijan in the context of the coming election. People can look at the new lamps going up on the boulevard by the sea in Baku and think – “Oh, there’s my government at work.” They can be happy with the shiny new ride installed for the kids downtown. A small army of street sweepers is employed to scour the public areas around the center of the city throughout the day. It would be interesting to count how many are employed every day during this pre-election period, and compare it with the post-election employment. Hmm. That’s a possibility.

Today I took a long taxi ride – and hence had a long conversation with a taxi driver. The conversation spanned the gamut from geopolitical questions to local politics. His take on the elections was predictable – nothing will change. But his read on the current political climate was even darker than most people I talk to. His conclusion: If you criticize the government aloud, you put yourself and your family in danger. The man wasn’t talking about writing a letter to the editor or something. (That option doesn’t really exist here.) Even making open criticism at the market, for example, could be dangerous. People get killed for it. Just disappear.

The driver said he wouldn’t have expressed this opinion to other Azerbaijanis, but I’m an American, so he felt safe talking about the situation.

Whether or not his dark view is justified, I think he was being sincere in expressing his fears. In itself, this is disturbing. Repression works through fear. Actually going to the trouble of physically repressing all dissenters is quite labor intensive. But all you need to do is inspire enough fear, and the dissent will be manageable.

Election games

The election season has begun here - with posters similar to the one above plastered on walls around the city. The posters remind me of those that I saw in Russia before the election there, depicting "ordinary citizens" who are apparently going to exercise their civic duty and go vote.

The president also has some posters up, just a photo of himself and a short phrase that identifies himself as candidate. I haven't seen posters for any other candidates.

By chance, my path crossed that of the president earlier in the week. He was coming to Sheki as I was leaving. In preparation for his visit, the authorities had closed the only road to the city. Very inconvenient. My first taxi driver turned back - with a defeatist attitude. I'd just have to spend another day in Sheki, he said. I wasn't resigned to this - and was able to find a driver that had a pass through the police blockade.

While the president was in the northern part of the country, he supposedly visited a whole bunch of stuff that has been on hold for months, waiting for his visit. A new stadium, culture club, and hotel in Zaqatala, to name just a few projects. In Sheki, the scene was characterized by feverish activity, as people of all ages were painting, weeding, and cleaning along what I presume was the route of the presidential entourage.

The election, of course, isn't much of a contest, but that's not to say there's nothing to write about.

The last issue of Zerkalo carried on page two an article that depicts the contrasting situations for the the New Azerbaijan Party (the ruling party) and its opponents. YAP, as it is known from its Azerbaijani initials, held its meeting in a stadium. Attending the meeting thousands of government workers, who were essentially required to attend.

The opponents of the governments, however, were only able to get permission to meet at a remote location.

The president is coming!

The preparations for the president's visit here are accelerating. Today the main street was closed, as fresh cross-walks were painted. A whole string of projects is prepared for his arrival: a new hotel, stadium, airport, and a renovated culture center. A couple of my students are writing about the projects. I think it's interesting - just in the scope of preparations.

Of course, I've talked to numerous local citizens who are fairly cynical about the visit. People aren't stupid. They know that Azerbaijan has much natural wealth & they wonder why they don't see more of that in the hands of ordinary citizens.

Nonetheless, I'm sure many people are excited about the visit, if only because of the many new projects that connected to it. Of course, Zaqatala isn't alone. This set of ceremonial openings is coordinated across the country, as the nation prepares for presidential elections on Oct. 15. Today I was reading Baku Worker, a government paper written in Russian. The entire paper is devoted to speeches given at these ceremonial events.

The coverage brings new meaning to the words "boring" and "synchophantic." Here is a picture of the president cutting a ribbon. Here is a picture of him at the podium. Here is a picture of him cutting another ribbon. The speeches - particularly the speeches welcoming him - are really embarassingly effusive.

So, these are the examples of journalism with which my students are familiar. I'm not saying it's not journalism - but it is a completely different activity than what I teach.

Thinking about global politics at sunrise

At this point in the summer, the morning is not just the best time for walking; it’s the only time for walking. That is, if you want to walk comfortably without being soaked in sweat. At 9 a.m., the temperature is already more than 30 degree Celsius (85 or so Fahrenheit). So, I walk early in the morning.

It’s also a beautiful time for walking, the sun rising, the traffic sparse. On the pedestrian boulevard by the Caspian Sea, the ice cream vendors sleep on benches or next to their stands. The exercise aficionados of all ages walk, run, or roll along the pavement. The fishermen line the pier, tugging on their long poles in the strange hope of landing a fix perhaps three or maybe four inches long. The sun rises. I’ll include here some photos, and also a video clip I’ve put together.

As I walked, I thought about conversations of the previous day. I heard from a friend of mine in Moscow. We had a lively little e-mail exchange. I was curious about his opinion, because he is Western educated, and he was not a fan of Putin when Putin came to power. But in recent years, I have sensed that his opposition to the status quo has diminished. Like many Russians, he shares an understandable sense of being disrespected. In the last seven years especially, the United States has acted too often as if the objections of Russia to US strategic plans do not need to be taken seriously. The war in Georgia put the United States and the rest of the world that yes, Russia does still matter. Quite a bit. (My friend recommended this recent article in The Guardian for an even-handed treatment of the issue.) Here's another article that provides a some different perspectives. It's a bit rambling - but it makes some good points.

I was also thinking about a conversation with another friend – alluded to earlier – about the Russian people being losers in this war too. I think this is true. In fact, as I think about it – the one player who seems to act as if he has won from this situation is John McCain. I was thinking about this especially after a recent NY Times poll about voters and their priorities. If the voters are focused on the economy, McCain comes out behind. But the US public appears to think that he would be a better commander-in-chief. (This perception drives me crazy – because I think he is incomparably worse than Barack Obama in that regard too. To my mind, McCain’s statements on foreign relations have been rash and foolish. We do not need another fool in the White House.) So, creating some sort of international crisis situation plays to McCain’s perceived strength. Also, don’t forget that McCain’s top foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann received more than $730,000 in lobbying fees from Georgia since 2001.

So, it would be in McCain’s benefit if Georgia President Saakashvili felt emboldened to take aggressive action against the South Ossetians and their Russian protectors. The response of the Russians was almost entirely predictable, but it could be worth it for Saakashvili if he understood that the United States would support him.

Of course, Scheunemann couldn’t guarantee that support, and the Georgian people lose in the gamble. But John McCain gets an opportunity to look aggressive in a situation that seems to benefit a hawkish stance. Look at the polls. In the week after the fighting in Georgia, McCain has done well versus Obama. Reuters even produced a poll last week that showed him up by five points over Obama.

In general, I am not a conspiracy theorist. Conspiracy theories tend to make the world simpler than it is. But – secret arrangements in government and between governments occur all the time. Reality can be just as weird as anything dreamed up by Robert Ludlum. (Remember Oliver North?)

Free elections and human rights protected in Azerbaijan

In a little less than three months, this country will conduct a presidential election. This is fairly certain. There were rumors that the election might be delayed but those have been emphatically denied by government authorities. The victor in the election is if anything even more certain than the election date of Oct. 15.
While I do not present myself as an expert in Azerbaijani politics, I am a fairly perceptive political observer. As far as I can determine, no candidate who will oppose the incumbent Ilham Aliyev has mounted any sort of campaign. Formally, the nominating process for opponents to the president will continue until late August, according to the Central Election Commission.

Meanwhile, President Aliyev makes full use of his position – grabbing headlines every day with pronouncements about Azerbaijan’s great future, its military prowess and the pressing need to regain properties lost in Nagorno-Karabakh. This is to say nothing of the thousands of huge posters of Ilham and his father Heydar that grace town squares, highways, restaurants and just about every sort of public space available in this country. How is a democratic election even possible when the public is subjected to such a propaganda campaign?

Quirk Global Strategies provides a cynical assessment of the coming elections. “Cynical “is probably not the right word. That implies an attitude that is darker than is justifiable. “Utterly realistic” is probably a better modifier.

This week’s issue of AzerNews – run by a government proxy – devotes page three to a lengthy discourse about the wonderful state of Azerbaijani democracy, the country’s great record on human rights, the wise reforms initiated by President Ilham Aliyev, and the general fact that the president is a great guy! Here’s just an excerpt from the article, written by Elshad Abdullayev:

“Ilham Aliyev, who has proven himself in 1995-2003 as a monumental, patriotic, pragmatic, and initiative personality with high administration skills in all areas of his activity, secured his undisputed victory by gaining the trust and confidence of the required majority.”

For whom is this written, I wonder?

But when I look at the headline of the article - “Governance mechanism promoting protection of human rights and freedoms” – I also think about my own country, and its own hypocritical stance about the protection of human rights. The subject is fresh in my mind, after listening to an excellent program about Guantanamo Bay prison. I really feel that U.S. citizens who do not travel abroad receive much less information about their government. Yes, I have read articles about this prison in the Washington Post and the New York Times, but the television coverage of the subject is largely sanitized. Viewers abroad receive more information about the U.S. government’s brutal treatment of prisoners. And the natural question is – “So, how are you going to lecture us about our government? How can you talk about human rights with a straight face, when your own president effectively has ordered a policy of torture?”

My reply to that question – which I have faced – is that many U.S. citizens oppose the Bush administration. Unfortunately, this opposition has been insufficient to cause the changes that are necessary.