South Caucasus: the debate on democracy

The situation in the South Caucasus in the field of human rights has undergone some changes over the past six months which introduced electoral issues  in three countries  of the region - Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.

If the parliamentary elections in Georgia last fall brought the region, the first experience of democratic change of power, in Armenia the February presidential elections were another uncontested farce, except that the memorable attack on one of the candidates. Azerbaijan, which has not yet entered the stage of the campaign, but with the beginning of the year felt the tremors of public activity long before the October vote.

The situation is monitored by the expert community in the region to discuss in Baku on a wide range of issues in the seminar "Human Rights, Democracy and Conflict in the South Caucasus" in the Azerbaijani-Georgian bilateral format.

Peter Bateman, head of the diplomatic mission of the United Kingdom, which has supported the project of the Helsinki Citizens Assembly, said that the peace process for the karabakh  is hard, but important and essential way, as it was in the Ulster conflict. He  repeated  the U.S. Ambassador Richard Morningstar, who outlined the importance of social dialogue in the three countries with the aim of successful political reforms.

All three countries involved in the inter-ethnic, inter-state conflict, has an impact on the state of democracy, human rights and freedoms which  should be improved.  Even Georgian President Saakashvili, who, as a state,  is regarded by many in Armenia and Azerbaijan as a democrat, was presented by the  human rights defender, Nana Kakabadze as a prison of nations. Kakabadse announced a fivefold increase in the number of inmates in prison to 23,000 people during the reign of Saakashvili and expansion of elitist corruption.

Dissatisfaction of the  Georgian Azerbaijani human rights activists the participants considered excessive. MP Fazil Mustafa said that the mere fact of a peaceful change of power through transparent elections indicates the presence of democracy in this country.

In Georgia, the degree of pluralism and  access of community groups access to the media and the Internet,   is higher, in  Armenia the  information space is less open, but it looks more freely against the state control of the media in Azerbaijan. For example, an unprecedented new initiative for the region showed the government-controlled Press Council, which took the initiative to impose control over the Internet, allegedly in order to self-regulation and the public interest.

According to the chairman of the Majlis of the  REAL  Movement, Erkin Gadirli, to approve true democratic systems in the region is first necessary to form a broad section of owners who are ready to defend their interests, and not some abstract concept.

But still it is impossible to solve  the problems of the region and the conflict without democracy, says the head of the South Caucasus Institute of Regional Security, Alexander Rusetsky. He proposed to consider the human rights and conflict in the complex and in the wider regional context, as part of the Black Sea-Caspian Basin, and in the dialogue with the subjects of conflict.

"However, the political systems of the three countries are unlikely to resolve the issues at stake, said Fazil Mustafa.  They may  be solved by  free enterprise, which is able to generate such strong economic ties, which sideline political claims and interests."—0—