Baku 2015 - a tale of two cities.

This is an op-ed by Dennis Sammut, contributed to commonspace.eu

The 1st European Games open in Baku on 12 June 2015. It is an occasion for celebration for the six thousand athletes participating and for those who enjoy sports in its different forms. This event has however divided Azerbaijani society, as well as international public opinion. Some have questioned the wisdom of spending billions of dollars on sports in a country that still lacks many necessities in the fields of health and education. Others point to the arrests of dozens of human rights activists and journalists in the run up to the games. The Azerbaijani government on its part says that this criticism is orchestrated by enemies of Azerbaijan, and is based on double standards. It dismisses any claims of repression saying that all those arrested have broken the law in one form or the other.

These different views represent the very stark contradictions of contemporary Azerbaijan - on the one hand a country that has modernised and made tremendous progress in a very short time, on the other hand a country whose institutions often appear untouched by change, and continue to be managed in Brezhnev era style, some by people who were appointed during the Brezhnev era. The contradictions are everywhere - from the quality of life of the people, some enjoying prosperous living, others hardly having access to decent education and health care - down to the way that Azerbaijan communicates with the outside world, with sleek public relations firms and Soviet style propagandists dishing out daily contradictory messages to their heart's content.

Baku in 2015 is therefore a tale of two cities, and no one should dismiss either lightly or categorically because there is truth in both.

Fariz Ismailizade, a respected academic at Azerbaijan's Diplomatic Academy wrote on his facebook page on the eve of the Games,

"Today is the last day of preparations for the 1st European Games. Tomorrow will be the grand opening. Seeing so much colour, passion, energy, youthfulness in this city, I am absolutely convinced that it will be the best day in the thousands years long history of Baku and this nation. And some can say whatever they want about the purpose of these games. But the matter of the fact is that this nation, torn with war, poverty, desperation and occupation only 2 decades ago, has managed to transform itself to the levels which developed nations didn't achieve in such a short period of time and pulled together such a world class event with its own resources and this once again proves that this nation and this country does deserve an independent statehood and is capable to governing its own future. Congratulations, Azerbaijan !!!! Feeling very proud".

Emin Milli, an Azerbaijani dissident and former political prisoner who now manages an independent media outlet, Meidan TV, from exile in Berlin, wrote,

"As ‪Azerbaijan prepares to roll out the red carpet to European athletes, a number of journalists and activists are languishing in jails."

Elmira Khadijova, the mother of  one of those prisoners, journalist Khadija Ismailova, told Meidan TV,

"Personally, I will not watch these games. I am over 70 years old. Instead, I want to see Azerbaijan's open-minded, free thinking individuals released from the prison."

The success of critics to capture the attention of world public opinion has alarmed the Government of Azerbaijan. Many close to the Azerbaijani leadership have now convinced themselves that there is a conspiracy against their country, and an attempt by western countries to force regime change in Azerbaijan. This is dismissed as sheer fantasy by politicians and diplomats dealing with the country in western capitals.  Indeed many countries genuinely want Azerbaijan to succeed both politically and economically, and have constantly advised the government and its opponents to compromise and dialogue, rather than confront each other. There is however increased frustration in the international community at the actions of the Azerbaijani government. The decision to close down the Baku office of the OSCE, a few days before the start of the Baku Games, was greeted with astonishment and cited as yet another example of how Azerbaijan shoots itself in the foot.

There is some reason to believe that Baku's paranoia is being fed by a third country, whose interest it is to see Azerbaijan isolated. The government of Azerbaijan must not fall into this trap.

As long as Azerbaijan remains a part of the international community and the family of European nations, including through its membership of the Council of Europe and the OSCE and its partnership with the European Union, all of which demand from their members high standards in respect to human rights and good governance, it must expect rigorous scrutiny of its record in these fields. This is not interference in sovereignty but a process of solidarity between countries who share common values.

However those criticising Azerbaijan also need to be more targeted and focused in their criticism. Sheer outright condemnations are not useful for anybody.

For the reasons that Fariz Ismailizade mentioned, the Baku Games, with all their controversy, are an important moment for Azerbaijan, and one can only wish that they are successful -  an occasion  to celebrate unity in sports, as well as the European character and achievements of the modern Azerbaijani Republic.

Beyond the fun and games there are however more important issues. Once these games end the Azerbaijan leadership must take stock of the situation and take some hard decisions. In many ways the Baku 2015 Games have become a defining moment for Azerbaijan, not for what actually will happen during the time of the games, but for what will happen immediately after.

source: Dennis Sammut contributed this op-ed for commonspace.eu. Dennis Sammut is the Director of LINKS (Dialogue, Analysis and Research). 

photo: Soviet era style Government Building in the centre of Baku, illuminated ahead of the Baku 2015 games (picture courtesy of baku 2015).

 

 

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Editor's choice
News
UN Security Council Presidential Statement on the Role of Diplomacy during Active Hostilities

UN Security Council Presidential Statement on the Role of Diplomacy during Active Hostilities

The United Nations Security Council is today expected to adopt a presidential statement on the role of diplomacy during active hostilities. The draft text, which was authored by Pakistan, underscores the importance of maintaining diplomatic engagement even after the outbreak of armed conflict, with a view to containing escalation, facilitating cessations of hostilities and ceasefires, and creating conditions conducive to peaceful political settlements. Resolution 2788 of 22 July 2025, which was initiated by Pakistan, reaffirmed the Council’s commitment to the peaceful settlement of disputes under Chapter VI of the UN Charter. A year later, on 23 July, the Council convened an open debate to review the resolution’s implementation and examine ways of making more effective use of the peaceful dispute settlement tools available under Chapter VI.   The draft presidential statement builds on previous Council products, such as resolution 2788, but it is the first to focus specifically on the role of diplomacy in containing and de-escalating active hostilities. Since the open debate in July, Council members have continued to call for intensified efforts towards de-escalation and dialogue, although differences persist over how proactively the Council should promote mediation and other peaceful means of dispute settlement, particularly in situations where the consent of the parties is contested. In his statement opening the general debate of the 81st session of the General Assembly on 22 September, Secretary-General António Guterres highlighted the devastating consequences of ongoing conflicts in Ukraine, Sudan, and the Middle East, warning that these and other crises illustrate what happens when “force outpaces diplomacy” and stressing the urgency of sustained diplomatic engagement. The negotiations on the draft presidential statement do not appear to have been particularly contentious, although Council members expressed differing views on some elements of the text. Pakistan circulated the initial draft to Council members on 14 October. Following informal consultations with Council members to address comments on the initial draft, Pakistan circulated a first revised draft on 23 October, incorporating several proposed amendments. On 29 October, Pakistan circulated a second revised draft, which it placed under silence procedure until the following day (30 October). After the US broke silence, a third revised draft was circulated on 3 November and placed under silence procedure until this morning (4 November). The draft subsequently passed silence. The agreed presidential statement emphasises the importance of maintaining direct and indirect channels of communication between parties to armed conflict to reduce the risk of miscalculation and create opportunities for sustained political engagement. (click image to read more)

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)