Azadliq newspaper 19.10.2008

"ILHAM ALIYEV HAS WON A VICTORY OVER HIS TOY SOLDIERS" Lala SHEVKET: "The election has been carried out according to a scenario we had predicted"

- What is your view of how the presidential election went? - There have been no unexpected events at the presidential election. The election has been carried out according to a scenario we had predicted. A year ago the opposition has stated that the presidential election would look like a spectacle and there would be no real election, simply a president would be announced on 15 October. This election resembles the ones held in soviet times. Just in the same way the election carried a procedural character. The election's result has shown that our predictions were right. Percentage data and the number of votes allocated to the so-called "opposition" candidates were expected. - Has the society boycotted the election in a way envisaged and expected by the opposition? - It has found its reflection in the assessments of the international organisations that there has been no election atmosphere in the country during this election. It has been held in an inert and uncompetitive atmosphere. This situation has been witnessed not only by us, but by the whole world, and the international organisations have reflected this matter in their reports. - Despite all the processes in the country the government still claims it has the support of the people. What do you think then are the reasons for such an attitude of the people? - 15 October events were a passive protest of the society against the government. "Carousel" operation has been carried out again on the voting day, people were forced into the polling stations. It is regrettable that even democratic means have been used by the government as instruments of repression. To be precise, web-cameras have been installed at the polling station and voters' fingers have been marked with ultraviolet ink. The voters were told that their presence at the polling stations would be recorded on the cameras and the ink would be checked at the workplace. Employees of the budgetary organisations (i.e. schools, hospitals, etc.) were told that if they did not vote for Ilham Aliyev they would be fired from their work. It was quite unfortunate that democratic measures were used by the regime to strengthen dictatorship. These actions clearly show that the government has been expecting such a passive resistance of the people. Very low turnout was expected since there was no competition. So, the government was trying to increase the turnout artificially. It has been officially announced that the turnout has was 75 %. This figure is very far from reality, for approximately 2 million of our citizens left Azerbaijan to earn their living in Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Turkey, China and Europe. Even if there was competition at the election there could never be such a turnout because the majority of the electorate is abroad. - What do you think about the opinion of OSCE, Council of Europe and the EU concerning the election? - They have declared that Ilham Aliyev won the election. I think so too. But which election? Andres Herkel made here a good comparison, saying that Azerbaijani election looked like a swimming contest in an empty pool. Well, it was a victory, and a clear one. But two questions arise here - victory over whom, and victory of what? Answering the first question. A small boy, for instance, plays with his toy soldiers. He arranges them neatly, then tramples on them, scatters them around, and declares himself a great general and victor. Ilham Aliyev too has won a victory over the toy soldiers of his own. Answer to the second question is victory of dictatorship and neomonarchy. Applauses to this victory of dictatorship over democracy on the part of the North are quite understandable. After all they are pretty far from democracy themselves. The most regrettable thing here is a standing ovation given to this victory by the West. International organisations are stating there has been a progress in this election. Great Polish writer Stanislaw Jerzi Lec has a wonderful phrase: "If a cannibal uses fork and knife, is it progress?" This so-called progress resembles precisely the use of fork and knife by a cannibal. In general the West sees Azerbaijan as a petrol station with only one goal to function properly. Here the West keeps its interests higher than its values. The number of idealists decreases day-by-day in the West as well. There are no more steinar gils or andreas grosses in Azerbaijan today, who would call a spade a spade. - Majority of experts have declared that the election was very inert. It has been expected that government would make some adjustments to create an appearance. But on the contrary the government falsified both the turnout results and the number of votes for Ilham Aliyev ... - The government doesn't even want to tire itself with imitation. They care nothing for what the people want. No head of a democratic country can gather 89 percent of votes. Such a figure can only be achieved in an authoritarian, totalitarian states. On one hand those inflated figures show that the government has inferiority complex. Otherwise they would never have falsified the figures so much. On the other hand, against such rivals Ilham Aliyev could have really gathered such a number of votes. Such a result is not unthinkable in an unopposed election. But the turnout figures are simply ludicrous. The government understands the situation in the country. They know perfectly well that the people are dissatisfied with them. The election has been won by fraud and repression. They have even distorted the words of international observers. They were giving interviews in English on TV and their words were translated very differently to their original position. The government has achieved its goal. But how, by what means, it knows perfectly well. - There has been an opinion before the election that in order to keep Azerbaijan from Russia the Western reaction to whatever happens at the election would not be too hard. Was it evident? - Geopolitical situation in the South Caucasus is very grave indeed. The West sees that Azerbaijan is inclined to Russia. In such a situation comparatively loyal attitude (not the standing ovation of course) of the West, especially the US, to the presidential election in Azerbaijan has been somewhat expected. That is it would probably be yet another blank check to encourage Ilham Aliyev to make a choice. - After the election what choice would Ilham Aliyev take between the centres of force? Will the government continue its balanced foreign policy? - Traditional balanced policy is impossible from no on. The situation in the region does not allow for it. There is a clash between Russia and the West in the South Caucasus, not a mere competition. Balanced policy is out of the question. Therefore Azerbaijan is expected to make a clear choice. Loyal attitude of the West is connected to this situation. At the same time we cannot rule out the possibility of some sort of undercover talks and taking obligations. - Opposition has long ago called this election a spectacle. Participation in it was compared to getting a role. Have the other candidates fulfilled their role? - Government's expectations were not obviously met. More has been expected on their part, but they happened to be very weak actors. Their congratulations to Ilham Aliyev and speeches during election campaigning showed they were not fit even for such a role. In any case I must thank Ilham Aliyev for screening the opposition and showing who is who. - After the presidential election supporters of the opposition are waiting for the democratic camp's answer to a question "what to do next?" In your opinion, what should be done to change the situation in the country? - The obligation to act in this matter is not opposition's alone. Opposition can do nothing by itself. Opposition is connected to the society and the public. It is absurd to wait something only from the opposition. Because today all the resources are in government's hands. Political activity is practically forbidden to the opposition. There is no public space for the opposition to express its views. Opposition is not able to hold mass-rallies, it has no access to television, it has no offices, it cannot go to the regions to meet with the people. Nevertheless, despite all that, opposition will continue its struggle for democracy, whatever the cost. But in order for this struggle to be effective we need activity of the society and the public, and the support of intelligentsia and the journalists. That is opposition's efforts would not be enough to build democracy in this country. The society must know its rights and be prepared to defend them. The main role here must play the society and its every single member. Without this opposition would not be able to achieve anything. If there is no demand for democracy, freedom, defence of human rights and dignity, there can never be supply. On the whole if we look at history, we'll see that democratic reforms and changes are successful only when the society is prepared for them. If the society is indifferent, passive, apolitical, resigned, unrepugnant and has a spectator's attitude towards its own life, then our last hope is God. By the way recently a member of Nebraska State Senate Ernie Chambers has brought an action against God to the court for bringing so many natural disasters to his voters. The court has dismissed the case on the grounds of not possessing respondent's address. In any case it is a precedent ...

Khayal Shahinoglu