SEO Header Title

July 15, 2010

By Elmar Chakhtakhtinski

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit to South Caucasus, following her meetings in Ukraine and Poland, became a subject of discussions even before it was officially announced. She issued strong statements in Poland about the importance of democracy in the US foreign policy agenda and promised to speak on this issue during her visit to Baku. Unfortunately, the statements Secretary Clinton made in Azerbaijan did not meet the expectations of those who hoped for a strong support for democracy, and her July Fourth visit was mostly interpreted as a reassurance to the local dictator Ilham Aliyev of continuous support for his government.

All major international rights organizations consistently rank Azerbaijan among the worst in suppression of freedoms, human rights violations and corruption, and cite a steady slide into totalitarianism under the 17 years rule by Aliyev dynasty. Only last April, President Obama cited Azerbaijan next to Zimbabwe in regards to press freedom. But answering the question on Azerbaijan’s poor human rights record, Secretary Clinton cited “a lot of progress”.

When the local journalist pressed to explain what progress did the Secretary see, she referred to business and energy reforms. But a quick look into the US State Department’s own annual reports and a brief survey of media would have been sufficient to find that businesses in Azerbaijan suffer from rampant corruption and a tight control over economy by the ruling circle of oligarchs.

In a country where the authorities have been accused of wholesale fraud and violent suppression of protests after each and every election, Secretary Clinton noted that “Democracy is not about elections. In today's world, it's about the way new technologies and social media can help the democratic dialogue flourish”.  She also advised the youth there to be patient and “put yourselves into the government’s shoes and look at the issues with their eyes”. 

According to media reports, two young Azerbaijani bloggers, Adnan Hajizada and Emin Milli, were put behind bars precisely because they voiced their critical opinions through those “new technologies and social media” advocated by Mrs. Clinton. In light of earlier official protests against their detention by the US State Department, completely ignored by the local authorities, many hoped that this time America’s top diplomat would publicly demand their immediate release.  To be fair, the Secretary said that both President Obama and she have been receiving numerous letters about the two bloggers and she “raised the issue” during her private talks with President Aliyev. However, no release demands or strong disapproval statements were issued.

She met with the opposition leaders in the neighboring Georgia run by a pro-Western democratic government. However, in Azerbaijan, ruled by an authoritarian Aliyev regime, Mrs. Clinton’s did not meet with any major opposition leaders, which could have been a visible show of support to democratic forces.

In her remarks, Secretary Clinton drew parallels between the current Azerbaijani dictatorship and America’s own beginnings, saying: “When our country came into being, only white property-owning men could vote. And so, every country has to be on a journey”. Thinking about “white property-owning men” in today’s Azerbaijan, one cannot help but recall the Washington Post report from March of this year informing that President Aliyev’s 11-years old son owns a $45 million luxury property in Dubai, costing 228 years of the president’s official salary.  Of course, Secretary Clinton hardly sees this corrupt despotic regime as the beginning of a journey similar to the one undertaken by America’s founding fathers 234 years ago. But her words will give credence to the Azerbaijani leadership to claim so.

Many consider Azerbaijan’s importance as a vital transit route for the US efforts in Afghanistan as the primary reason for its inclusion on Secretary Clinton’s itinerary.  However, the messages brought by Mrs. Clinton did little to encourage those inside Azerbaijan who struggle for the same values of freedom and democracy that the US purportedly tries to instill in Afghanistan and Iraq. 

The leadership in Baku recently hinted on scaling down security and energy cooperation with the United States in response to the perceived neglect by Obama administration - not inviting President Aliyev to the Nuclear Security Summit this April and leaving the U.S. ambassador's slot empty for more than a year. Now, it seems, the world’s strongest democracy, eager to secure its frail national interests, was forced to soft-pedal on democracy and pay homage to the rulers of a small petro-dictatorship.

The developments that took place in Azerbaijan immediately before and after Secretary Clinton’s visit give a good indication of how her visit and words spoken in Baku were interpreted by that country’s leadership. The day Mrs. Clinton landed in Baku, the police violently dispersed peaceful opposition rallies. As she departed, the blogger Emin Milli, who was allowed to temporarily leave jail to attend his father’s funeral, was brought back to prison to serve the remainder of his term under fabricated “hooliganism” charges. The next day, the journalist Eynulla Fatullayev, who is being kept in jail despite the European Human Rights Court ordering his immediate release, was sentenced to additional two and half years on “drug possession” charges. The local newspaper called this verdict a “new punishment in honor of Hillary Clinton”, and the US State Department in Washington issued a statement of concern…