Thomas Melia: We do not sacrifice democracy for oil

 “ I am very happy to be back here in Azerbaijan for my second visit in three months, and my third visit in 18 months.  And I think with an interagency team from the Justice Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the State Department.  And the fact that this broad team is coming to Azerbaijan relatively frequently is a sign of how important the relationship is with Azerbaijan for us, and also indicates how closely we’re watching developments here” – said Deputy Assistant Secretary Thomas Melia in interview with Turan news agency.

Question:  Mr. Melia, you know the troubles, the local civil society.  I think you are aware of our problems.  I’m not going to repeat them.  This is arrests of youth organization members, the closure of Free Thought University and so on and so on. 

Did you discuss these issues with Azeri President?  And what was your message?  What was the message of Washington for President Aliyev on these topics?

Answer: We’re very closely following the developments here.  As Ambassador Morningstar has said on more than one occasion, it’s very troubling that people are being arrested or incarcerated for their peaceful civic activism.

The closure of Free Thought University in particular was very disappointing to us . I visited there in December.  I met many of the people who were organizing different programs there, and it seems like the best kind of civic space where young people can come together to have different kinds of discussions and the best kind of university activity, serious thoughtful discussions.

So we have said more than once and we continue to believe that that’s very unfortunate, and does not contribute to stability in Azerbaijan.  And in fact to eliminate spaces for peaceful discussion about civic life is going to slow down Azerbaijan’s modernization and not accelerate it.

Question:  So you discussed it with President Aliyev. What was his reply?

Mr. Melia:  I’m not going to get into I said this, he said that.  That’s not useful.  It’s been conveyed to him more than once.

Question:  Mr. Melia, you show that you care about the issue of NDI in Azerbaijan.  What do you think about that? 

Mr. Melia:  You may know that I’m a former Vice President of NDI. I spent 12 years working at NDI, so I’m very familiar with the way it operates.  Some of the charges that have been aired in the media I would describe as fantastical about assertions about what NDI is and does.

The leadership of NDI, the President and the Regional Director, are in Baku this week as we speak.  They came here to provide a lot of information about how their money has been spent in the first, in Azerbaijan over the recent years.  They’re very interested in trying to clarify and answer any questions about how their money has been spent and what kind of activities they have supported.  I think that when the full story is clarified, I think it will become, there won’t be any doubts that NDI is one of the premier ways that people can learn about democratic politics in various countries in a way that does not support one party over or another party.

The way to understand NDI best is to think of it as the hub of the global social network in which civic activists and political professionals can come together and share experience and information.  That’s what NDI was doing here.  And I’m hopeful that the questions will be cleared up and that NDI and that global resource that could be beneficial to Azerbaijan can get back to the work that they’ve been doing here for years.

Question:  Was that an issue you were discussing with the President as well?

Mr. Melia:  Again,  I don’t want to get into he said, she said.  But I think it’s very clear to the President that the United States government feels very strongly about NDI and the appropriateness of its work here.  We hope that a way forward can be found.

I think it’s just a question of getting accurate information and clarifying the people and the spending.

Question:  My question about another problem, the mission of OSCE.  You are aware that idea of Azeri Foreign Minister to downgrade  the level of the mission.

We have unofficial information that there was some conversations between Baku and Washington on this issue.  Baku was warned that this decision may be blocked but our Foreign Minister  called this some kind of blackmail, meaning that Washington makes pressure to Baku on this issue.  What is your estimation of the situation? 

Mr. Melia:  The OSCE provides an important framework for Azerbaijan and 46 other countries to work on a wide range of issues together.  OSCE is trying to play a key role in assisting in a resolution of the conflict with Armenia over NK.  It’s an important standard reference point for democratic standards on elections, other things.

We’re hoping that the mission will continue and not be downgraded or have its mandate changed.  These are what they call consensus decisions in Vienna, so we’re continuing to discuss with the government here again the way forward and if there’s been any threats issued I think we’ve got to convey how important we think it is for the OSCE to remain on the ground here and provide the kind of technical advisory assistance that it can and to share information.

So that’s an open question at this point.  We’re hopeful that a way forward can be found that will keep the OSCE mission.

Question: Are you  aware of the opinion of the head of the Presidential Administration, Ramiz Mehdiyev, that the activities of NDI and  some project within the frameworks of the OSCE is  an  interference in the internal affairs of Azerbaijan?

Mr. Melia:  No.  I think it’s not interference in another country to do trade or to provide scholarships or for people to travel back and forth, tourists.  And the same thing is true of civic organizations that work across borders.  As I said earlier, the way to understand NDI is as part of a global network of professionals who share information and it’s not an interference, it’s an opportunity.

Question:  After each visit of high-ranking people like you from Washington, we have severe loses.  Civil society position.  For example after the last visit there was a, during your last visit there was interesting ceremony, Art for Democracy, and you attended.  So after that, this project was called like something prepared by NIS.  A citizen of the United States, Rebecca Wilson, was particularly persona non grata . Her visa was canceled.  A lot of young activists were arrested, so on and so on.

What losses we will have after your recent visit?  And I want to continue.  Azeri position in civil society, things that -- We should have something like Black Magnitsky for Azerbaijan before Russia has.  Would you think it possible something like this?  Why United States can have such blacklist for Russia which is big power, is not for Azerbaijan?

Mr. Melia:  I did attend the Art for Democracy soiree, event, reception, at the Baku Jazz Club. I thought it was a terrific celebration of Azerbaijani citizenship.  I saw a number of artists and others there that presented artistic shows and read their poetry and things like that.

There was nothing anti-Azerbaijani about that.  It was a very pro-Azerbaijani event.  So I was delighted to be there along with some Ambassadors from other countries, friends of Azerbaijan.

So I think there was certainly a terrible misunderstanding by some people who thought this was something unpatriotic.  I thought it was exactly the opposite of that.  I thought it was a terrific event.

And it’s unfortunate that some people who are not friends of Azerbaijan and not friends of Azerbaijan’s inclusion in the international community, tried to turn this into something negative, of this very positive event.  I think we’ve made that clear to both the people who participated in it and to people in the government who misunderstood what that event was about.

The so-called Magnitsky Legislation relating to Russia emerged from a deliberative process in our Congress over a couple of years’ discussion about the human rights situation in Russia and the terrible case of Sergei Magnitsky.  Most of what the law requires of the executive branch was already in the laws, that people who are credibly alleged to be responsible for gross human rights violations can be denied access to the United States.  So that already happens.  There are people in a lot of countries who can’t go to the United States because we believe they are responsible for human rights violations or other criminal activity.

I think before we draw large conclusions about how well the Russia-oriented Magnitsky legislation works, let’s give it a little while and see what the impact is.

It was enacted in December.  The first report to Congress was delivered a week ago, last Friday.  So I think we’re in the very early stage to make big conclusions about how useful it is for protecting or advancing interests, but it’s something we’re very much involved in and very much look forward to developing.

Question: Of course time will show  the efficiency, but it's not just about the practical, but also a psychological effect. Now every official in Azerbaijan  is sure  that whatever he does, whoever is arrested, the supreme power will protect him. However, in Russia there is no such certainty for anybody.

So why  can the United States can adopt such a law against the great power, Russia, and can not or does not want to take it against Azerbaijan? It is believed that the United States did not do so because of oil, sacrificing democracy?

Mr. Melia:  The answer to that is no.  Our policy towards Azerbaijan is based on three principles.  Support for democracy.  Human rights is one.  Support for energy cooperation is another.  And security cooperation.  Democracy, energy, security.  These are the three major arenas in our relationship, and all of them are equally important.  So we don’t sacrifice security for energy or energy for security, and we don’t sacrifice democracy for anything.  These are important issues for the United States and they’re an important part of our bilateral dialogue in our relationship.

One of the things to keep in mind about the Magnitsky legislation is that it doesn’t intervene in other countries.  It doesn’t intervene in Russia.  There are some Russians who have claimed that this is an interference in Russian sovereignty.  There’s nothing inside Russia about this at all.  It’s about visas to come to the United States and about using American financial institutions . Neither of those is an infringement on Russian sovereignty.

I’d just ask you to remind your readers of that as well.  That this allegation of somehow it’s an infringement on sovereignty is just misplaced.

Question: How do you assess the situation in Azerbaijan on the eve of the presidential election, and what does Washington think about the desire of Ilham Aliyev to run for a third time?

Mr. Melia:  We don’t know officially who’s going to be a candidate for President of Azerbaijan in October.  We hope and anticipate, because it’s been the practice here, that the international observers will be invited and their work will be facilitated.  We hope that the advice that came from the previous missions by ODIHR will be incorporated into the procedures going forward this year.  Also that the work of domestic election monitors -- there’s a network called EMDS that mobilized thousands of people from previous elections to ensure that Azerbaijanis can be monitors of the elections here.  It would be very important that their work be facilitated going forward.

So we’re at the beginning of an election season.  There’s a lot to unfold in the coming six months.  We hope that Azerbaijan will use this as an occasion to improve on some of the administrative things. Access to the media, facilitating freedom of association so that candidates, parties and voters can meet each other.  So there’s great opportunity here for Azerbaijan to demonstrate that it’s moving forward.  We’re prepared to support that process and look forward to what we hope will be continuing improvement in electoral performance.

Question: Let's assume  that Ilham Aliyev is running for the third time. Do you think it is normal for a OSCE-member country and the Council of Europe and whether it complies with international standards of democracy?

Mr. Melia:  That will be part of the debate going forward about how the constitution is adhered to and how this whole process unfolds.  I don’t think we can say automatically that there’s any black line or red line.  We’ll reserve discussion on that until my next visit.

Question: Recently  the President Aliyev made a statement saying that no one can teach Azerbaijan, how to behave. Observers interpreted this as a response to criticism for violations of democracy. How do you assess this statement by  Aliyev?

Mr. Melia:  I think there are a lot of opportunities for learning.  In my country it’s sometimes very difficult for politicians to admit that they have learned something, which obviously they should be doing all the time.  And I hope that people in Azerbaijan won’t think that advice or information that they can gather from around the world is lecturing in a harsh way, but it’s mean to be providing information so that people can learn from one another.  That’s what a lot of these programs are about.  In fact that’s what some criticism is about.  It’s really about trying to learn best practices.  So I think there are some great opportunities for Azerbaijan and its institutions to learn from the experiences of some of the other post-Soviet states and also from neighbors further afield in the world.  So I’d turn the teaching question to a learning question. -0-