The future may come tomorrow

***

- Arastun bey, how do you assess the recent relations between the government and the opposition in Azerbaijan? The Azerbaijani government says it offers dialogue to all parties, including opposition parties. Even in this context, the official of the Presidential Administration met with several party leaders. The National Council and the Azerbaijan Popular Front Party said they would attend the meeting if several conditions were met. Do you think there are any prospects for these meetings and dialogue?

- Let me say from the beginning that the current relations between the government and the opposition in Azerbaijan are more reminiscent of personal animosity than the political competition, and sometimes quarrels at the domestic level. Forms of mutual accusations, gossip, threats, swearing, and insults - all this have nothing to do with political competition or political relations in general. As for the issue of dialogue, in fact, the dialogue is completely normal practice, and even in the late 90s of the last century, while working at the Friedrich Naumann Foundation in Germany, I was personally to some extent involved in the organization of such a dialogue. We are talking about an open dialogue, not a behind-the-scenes deal. I must admit that during the rule of Heydar Aliyev, establishing and developing such a dialogue was many times easier and more effective than now. Apparently, there was the political will necessary for this. Otherwise, representatives of the ruling party could not join the process. But, unfortunately, at the next stage, the form and content of that dialogue changed a bit and moved to a completely different level.

Attempts at dialogue today are, in fact, a normal initiative. But, unfortunately, the current state of government-opposition relations does not serve the implementation of this initiative. Dialogue requires transparency and mutual trust in the first place, but none of this exists. First of all, the trust, because time, will, and trust are necessary for those who have been in a hostile relationship for a long time to get behind the dialogue table. As I said, at least there is no trust. In addition, in my opinion, the most successful version was not chosen as a form of dialogue.  It would be more successful to hold it in the form of a round table with the participation of the media and civil society. This would be conducive both to the dialogue participants' accountability to society and to transparency, and would not to spread rumors about the existence of some invisible intentions. The dialogue in today's format, on the contrary, raises more doubts and rumors about separate talks. From this point of view, it is difficult to expect it to succeed.

- On the one hand, they make dialogue proposals in front of society, and on the other hand, the president shakes his finger at the opposition in his holiday greetings. They are called the representatives of “the fifth column”. He said that if a state of emergency was declared, those representatives would be isolated. What is the cause of this concern?

- To be honest, against the background of the dialogue proposal, Ilham Aliyev's messages seemed a bit strange, and moreover, it called into question the government's approach to dialogue as a serious process. In particular, holiday greetings were not the best time for such threats. Therefore, it is only possible to guess what such a contradictory situation is related to. Probabilities suggest that the events on a global scale and their impact on Azerbaijan have caused serious panic and tension on the ruling side. On the one hand, the deepening economic crisis in the context of the pandemic, on the other hand, the sharp decline in oil prices, which is almost the only source of revenue for Azerbaijan, and finally happening of all this on the eve of referendum plans, of which goals and objectives are still unknown, seems to have caused serious confusion. I think that in such a situation, the tension is natural and it is necessary to prepare for an even worse situation, but confusion, threats, and intimidation can never be a successful means of resolving these issues. Furthermore, there are some signs of rising tensions within the government, which are likely to increase that confusion a bit. But in any case, the dialogue initiative and the accusations in that speech do not match at all.

- Recently, one of the leading figures of the opposition, Tofig Yagublu, was arrested. During the quarantine period, several activists and opposition functionaries were administratively arrested and warned. They were summoned to the police station. In other words, is the government worried that the opposition may cause any riots during these quarantine days, or are there other reasons behind these arrests?

- The events you mentioned can be considered as the initial results of that speech, and I do not think they will be limited to that. However, it does not seem plausible that the opposition could cause riots during the quarantine days. First of all, it is not convincing that the opposition wants to riot at any usual time, and on the other hand, its opportunity to cause riots is limited. I do not think that the government does not know this simple reality. So, it seems that there are other, more serious reasons for this, and I think that the above mentioned are not the most insignificant of these reasons. As for the riots, whether they occur or not will depend on the steps taken by the government during the current quarantine period and their effectiveness. Of course, even the most democratic countries in the world are taking very drastic steps against the pandemic, but in developed countries, people have certain resources that will last at least 1-2 months, and the authorities are taking appropriate steps to avoid possible social tensions, providing them with assistance, applying concessions, and so on. In Azerbaijan, however, a large part of the population was already in need and worked daily to meet their daily needs. From this, it can be understood that many families are now either completely deprived of their last resources or on the verge of deprivation. The most paradoxical thing is that the government has created the Foundation for Combatting Coronavirus in such a situation, encouraging or forcing entrepreneurs to transfer money there. This is either a misunderstanding in the true sense of the word or ignorance of the real situation in society. Regardless of the reason, such absurd steps do not promise good results, and they can provoke mass riots on social grounds in the country, which will be the responsibility of the government, which took the wrong steps.

- Recently, the government has been voicing its views on political dialogue with the opposition and the new political configuration through government representatives, such as Hikmat Hajiyev and Samad Seyidov. And they say that many opposition members are in high positions in the new parliament. They try to spread such ideas in the international arena. Is this a new political line of the Azerbaijani government or a new PR campaign?

- There is no new political line or new political configuration but there may be PR. But then the question is, for whom such publicity is carried out today and what will be its effect? Let me answer the question myself: there are so many vital issues in the world now that no one remembers what happened in any country, whether in domestic politics or in the field of human rights and freedoms. It is unknown how long the current situation will last. So, common sense says that there is no need for PR, it is important to take the necessary political, legal, and socio-economic steps to achieve stability and development within the country. This will be the most successful PR when the initial results, albeit small, are revealed. As for the allegations that the opposition representatives are in high positions in the parliament, I think this is a bit like PR, but still unsuccessful PR. On the other hand, if there is no political will to have a real and sincere dialogue, then there is no need to imitate it. Because imitation can be counterproductive. In other words, it can have the opposite effect, and therefore, instead of such imitations, all efforts should be directed to the serious problems facing the country today. These problems may seem small compared to the consequences they may cause in the near future. Again, unfortunately, there is no reason to express an opinion on the fact that all of the above have been properly assessed. Of course, a number of effective steps are being taken in connection with the pandemic, but there are lots of mistakes and abuses. The emerging reality requires different approaches, high professionalism, and high real results. If they do not take into account the severity of the situation, continue misappropriation in the traditional way, corruption, struggles for more positions without feeling responsible at the same pace today, then we should not expect a miracle. There is no miracle in politics.

- How should political dialogue be conducted? Is it possible to have a dialogue with pressure on the one hand and proposals on the other?

- First of all, the need for political dialogue should not be caused by any circumstance, difficulty, or other similar reasons. Dialogue should be a permanent process that stems from the political will of the parties and is an important part of the socio-political life of the country. Dialogue must be organized in the right format, conducted in good faith, fairly and sincerely, based on mutual trust and transparent to society. Only then the dialogue can be welcomed, accepted, and supported by society. There is no need for a dialogue that is hidden from society or not of interest to society because it will either be an imitation and will be forgotten after a while, or worse - it will aggravate relations and lead to a political crisis. The most important condition for dialogue is that those who should conduct it correctly assess the current reality and understand their responsibility for the future of the country and the people. The future is not necessarily five, three or even a year later, may be tomorrow.