ELECTIONS IN AZERBAIJAN: NO SURPRISES
Azerbaijan’s recent parliamentary elections once again highlighted the economic factor in the country’s domestic politics. In an era of rapid economic growth, the opposition finds it very hard to compete with the ruling party. At the same time, the latest elections showed the changing dynamics within the ruling party. Compared with previous elections, The Yeni Azerbaijan Party spoke with a more unified voice and fewer party members dared to run against each other, as had been the case in 2005.
BACKGROUND: On November 7, the citizens of Azerbaijan went to the polling stations to elect the fourth Parliament in the country’s post-Soviet history. 690 candidates contested 125 seats in the legislative body. Almost half of them represented 14 parties, blocks of parties as well as initiative groups, while the rest were independent candidates. It should be noted that all major political parties in the country, including the opposition Musavat, Popular Front, Liberal and National Independence Parties participated in the race, as opposed to previous elections, where boycotts were common. The ruling Yeni Azerbaijan Party nominated 111 candidates, most of which were registered, while the tandem of the Musavat Party and the Popular Front Party managed to register only 37 candidates, mainly in Baku and its surrounding regions – many opposition candidates failed to achieve registration. Candidates were given four minutes on the Public TV to address the voters. Town hall meetings were held in almost all of the constituencies, and posters and banners were widespread. However, mass rallies in the streets were prohibited.
According to the Central Election Commission, some 47,000 local and more than 1,000 international observers monitored the election process. The latter represented the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the representation of the European Union in Baku, the European Parliament, the Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-Speaking Countries, OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, the OSCE Bureau for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, the Commonwealth of Independent States, the GUAM countries, the embassies of the U.S., Great Britain, Kazakhstan, Norway, Bulgaria, Poland, Japan, Finland and Belgium, as well as the European Election Observation Academy and the Central Election Commission of Kazakhstan (including individuals from 48 countries). In 500 election precincts, web cameras were installed in order to ensure the transparency of the process. Several NGOs have exit poll surveys on election day.
Voter turnout was reported to be 50.14% of 4.9 million registered voters. The results of the elections showed an overwhelming victory for the ruling party, which gained 69 seats, with 35 seats going to independents, whereas the opposition gained only 11 seats. These results were confirmed by exit poll data. The number of women in the new Parliament increased from 14 to 19.
Paul Wille, Head of the Delegation of the Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly said that “in a welcome departure from the past, the run-up to the elections and election day were peaceful and not marred by violent incidents, all opposition parties opted to participate in the political process, sometimes running as part of electoral blocs, rather than to boycott it as was the case in the past. A positive environment was created by good co-operation between the authorities, international institutions and the domestic actors." Observers from CIS and Turkic Parliamentary Assembly also praised the process.
Other international observers have noted that the technical aspects of the elections have been administered well, while the overall situation with democracy in the country remains to be improved. "It is never easy to do justice to a country which is developing its democratic institutions, especially in a difficult environment. We have seen the many efforts made to make progress and the areas in which the country does very well, and we welcome them as much as the hospitality demonstrated by all our interlocutors. However, despite all the efforts made, the country needs to do much more to make progress in developing a truly pluralist democracy," said Wolfgang Grossruck who led the short-term OSCE observer mission and headed the delegation of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly. The Joint Statement of the major electoral observation missions concluded that the conduct of the elections “was not sufficient to constitute meaningful progress in the democratic development of the country”.
Opposition parties refused to recognize the results of the elections, pointing out to the prohibition to hold rallies in the streets, the lack of media time to address their voters, the shortened official electoral campaign period, and the general low voter turnout in the elections.
IMPLICATIONS: The conduct of the Parliamentary elections once again showed that the balance of power in the country is unlikely to change with President Aliyev and his ruling party being more confident than ever, and in firm control. Primarily, this has to do with the fast pace of economic development, the large-scale infrastructure projects going on in the country, as well as a successful foreign policy. Azerbaijan in the past five years not only increased its GDP to US$50 billion and its national budget from $3 Billion to $15 billion, but also maintained friendly relations with regional powers Russia, Iran, Turkey, avoided major conflicts like the war between Russia and Georgia and channeled skyrocketing oil revenues into the construction of roads, bridges, hospitals, schools and other transport facilities. All of these efforts not only increased the welfare of people but also contribute to long-term sustainable development and to the much-needed diversification of its economy. "The economic growth and stability are evident in Azerbaijan," said Anneli Jäätteenmaki, Head of the delegation of the European Parliament, adding that the “sustainability of this situation can only be reinforced by greater political liberalization and democratization of the country.”
Under these conditions, it is not a surprise that the voters prefer stability and certainty over the populist promises by the opposition. The latter, although claiming that the majority of the population supports change, in reality appears to have further lost a basis of serious support. The fragmentation of the opposition, the lack of a clear message, poor electoral tactics, as well as reliance on old rhetoric further weakened its position. Most of the opposition parties have had the same leaders and chairmen for the past 15 years. The old guard in the opposition rarely uses modern communication tools to reach out to the voters. While Azerbaijan is rapidly moving forward, opposition parties remain stuck in 1990s. The frustration of the opposition leaders with their situation was illustrated by their refusal to meet with the leaders of the international observation mission, something the latter’s members termed “unique”.
Unlike the case in the 2005 elections, external assistance to the opposition parties has also weakened, which further had an adverse effect on the opposition’s performance. In 2005, inspired by the color revolutions in Georgia and Ukraine, many international organizations trained the Azerbaijani opposition. The international attention to the election was much higher in 2005 than was the case this year, when the results seemed considered a foregone conclusion. Moreover, the opposition was more united in 2005 than it was this year.
The perhaps most important development in the elections, thus, were not in the realm of the competition between the government and the opposition, but developments within the governing elite itself. In 2005, just two years after the election of President Ilham Aliyev, the unity within the party was shaky and uncertain. Several prominent ministers, who were later arrested, showed disloyalty to the party line and in many districts the official party candidates faced tight races with challenges not from the opposition, but from fellow ruling party members, or nominally independent candidates close to the government. In a sense, the ruling party was passing through turbulent transition. Yet this year, the Yeni Azerbaijan Party experienced fewer challengers from within the party as compared to the 2005 elections. Indeed, internal rivalry was almost non-existent and internal disciple was much firmer and more consolidated. The trend shows the increasing unity within the party.
CONCLUSIONS: All of these factors indicate that the chances of the opposition to come to power in Azerbaijan are gradually decreasing. As oil and gas revenues continue to fuel the Azerbaijani economy, the ruling party is likely to remain stay in firm control. President Aliyev will aim at further development of the economy in order to provide jobs to the population, and ensure political stability.
The November 7 Parliamentary elections in Azerbaijan showed how economic development has helped preserve the ruling Yeni Azerbaijan Party’s dominance of the political landscape. Foreign powers are unlikely to seek to jeopardize this political stability. The new Parliament will remain dominated by Aliyev loyalists, who will be certain to support his course of economic reforms. The opposition, on the other hand, finds it hard to compete with the ruling party in an era of oil boom.
