Back

Togrul Jouvarli
European Integration: A Remote but Realistic Prospect

[April 13, 2005]

Membership in the European Parliament and the OCSE, participation in NATO initiatives, and joining the program "Expansion of Europe - New Neighborhood" support the feeling in Azerbaijani society that full integration into European structures is a remote but realistic prospect. This feeling is also reinforced by the fact that Azerbaijan has signed most of the European Conventions, thus agreeing to play according to the European rules of the game. Since the beginning of the 2000's recurrent announcements have appeared in the mass media on plans for NATO deployment in Azerbaijan . Afterwards they are very often disavowed by officials in the USA . However, this issue has not lost its topicality. High-ranking NATO generals constantly emphasize the significance of this region from the geopolitical perspective. It is true that Azerbaijan cannot dictate the rules of this game. It can only prove its observance of these rules.

NATO and European Union affiliation is constantly discussed in Azerbaijan and practically, it has no opponents. Only more or less pro-Russian politicians strive to ritually place this problem in the context of Russia-EU and Russia-NATO relations. Even the pro-Islamic forces that do not yet have any significant political authority in the country are restrained from negative evaluations of this process and moreover, some philosopher-theologians like Haji Ilgar, of the Juma mosque in Baku , consistently demonstrate the consonance of fundamental democratic values and freedoms with Islam.

But things are not as simple as they may seem. After the three South Caucasian countries became members of the European Parliament and the representatives of European structures began more frequent visits to the region, there came the period of the first disappointments, at least in Azerbaijan . Both the society and the leadership were very quickly convinced that the European structures do not have enough "shock" force to influence the resolution of regional conflicts or political processes in these countries. Yes, some tactical inconveniences arose for those in power having to do with constant pressure on the part of Europe regarding human rights, political prisoners and the electoral process. But low marks are acceptable in the European family. The important thing is that you are not dismissed from the European school of political behavior - the European Parliament. The governments had to establish a constant defense, but they managed to maintain the status quo in the relations because other small change was thrown in - oil, transit roads and stability in the country as a guarantor of all this.

By the way, against this background it should not be surprising that the Parliamentary Assembly of Europe has gradually become the political arena where Armenia and Azerbaijan are trying to attain a diplomatic and moral advantage in the eyes of the European community. Azerbaijan did well in this regard last year.

The Road to Europe Has No Alternatives

If we speak of the general orientation of the processes, then the movement of Azerbaijan towards Europe appears to have no alternatives. First of all, purely historically, Azerbaijan has its experience as the first democratic state in the East (1918 - 20) with a definite orientation towards Europe . This experience was short but it has not been forgotten. Secondly, no matter what iron curtain the USSR was isolated by, the European ideas of democracy always had circulation in this space, and during the short periods of thaw, the country was literally overwhelmed by democratic aspirations. In short, devotion towards Europe has always existed. Europe has played the role of political laboratory, where grand socio-political experiments have constantly been conducted, each of them influencing the further history of mankind in a decisive manner.

We are witnessing the latest one - an attempt to create a single European space. The experiment has not been a complete success but it has been successful so far. The historical significance of this project is not sufficiently appreciated - for the first time in the history of mankind, on a voluntary basis a huge political formation of countries is being shaped which, according to its geography, is comparable to the empires of the past. The desire of the South Caucasian countries not to miss their chance and to join this unique experiment is completely natural. The experiment is twice as attractive because the region that has involuntarily become an arena of political conflicts can vividly see that the political will and the shared desire to arrive at a consensus can contribute to the resolution of the conflicts and of xenophobia at a high speed.

Purely political reasons are also quite significant. Since the declaration of independence of Azerbaijan in 1991, every single president of the country has tried to build bridges with Europe . Since the beginning of the era of independence, Azerbaijan 's relations with its immediate neighbors have developed very unevenly and sometimes there have been overt conflicts. Political threats have incited in the country a constant search for alternatives outside of this triangle. And yet these are not the only reasons accounting for the orientation of the country towards the European Union.

To get on in the world is, on the whole, difficult to do on ones own. In the era of globalization one must inevitably look for channels which would more effectively ensure that one's country can make its way into the global economy and political values. This can become a guarantee of the country's more painless and faster transition into a phase of a stable development. In this respect Europe seems to be the best choice.

Hypothetically it is quite possible to imagine how Azerbaijan might be integrated into the global community via Russia . This huge country with its rich resources and strong economy, which could lead the democratic processes in the region, has unfortunately recoiled from these values. With the completely pragmatic character of Putin's policy, Russia has not at all rid itself of the imperial syndrome. The strengthening of the central power and support for the authoritarian regimes in the country is frightening, too. There are also other, no less serious reasons for mistrust towards Russia , for example, having to do with the role of the country in the Karabakh conflict.

Azerbaijan could look for ways into the global community also through the Turkish community, but it turns out to be rather weak politically. The ideas of the unity of the Turkish world have lost their popularity and Turkey , rejecting its former unifying role in the Turkish world, is already knocking at the door of the European Union on its own.

Theoretically, the South Caucasus could also make itself known; however, the existing conflicts have in fact blocked this opportunity. Nevertheless, from time to time someone again starts to galvanize ideas on the Caucasian House or a South Caucasian Union. Mehman Aliyev, director of the information agency TURAN put forward the idea, considering that this challenging issue could have been brought to the attention of the European structures. No matter how unexpected or untimely this idea might seem, there is an undoubted advantage to it: it demonstrates a constant movement in the South Caucasus towards the European Union.

It is very important that a process of economic rapprochement with Europe is taking place: at some point this might be a shortcut to the EU. Azerbaijan , just like its natural ally Georgia, is looking for ways leading to the external world, but it is typical that almost all the projects have lately had a vividly expressed European geographic orientation. This also refers to the construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, which is coming to and end, and the Baku- Tbilisi-Erzerum gas pipeline, still under construction, to provide for the export of Azerbaijani gas into the markets of Southern Europe in the future. This European breakthrough has long been in process within the framework of the project "Inogate" and the planned delivery of Caspian oil to Eastern Europe through the Odessa-Brodi oil pipeline. Among these is also the creation of new train ferries between the South Caucasus and Europe and the discussion of the railroad branch that connects Tbilisi with Kars.

There is no doubt that the future integration into Europe will be accompanied by the growth in monetary aid from the EU. If they look from Europe , it might seem that the South Caucasus has made up its mind to feed itself with the European pie, but this is not true. It would be naïve to count on purely partnership relations: we give you oil and gas and you give us new technologies. This kind of "barter" is a Utopia in the context of an open economy. There are no abstract relations with Europe . There are relations between countries, individual firms and companies with Europe , and there is a very tense competition behind all this. However, the question should today be positioned on the plane of fair and mutually beneficial exchange. For instance, isn't Europe interested in countries with a population that is growing younger and is energetic, something that could compensate for the negative economic effect of Europe 's "poor" demography? (Demographers predict that the struggle between Europe and Russia will have become tenser by 2010 as a result of migration from CIS countries).

The further movement of Azerbaijan towards Europe will undoubtedly become a stimulus for the development of the social relations and the economy of our country. Closer relations of countries with the EU objectively lead to the introduction of European norms into socio-societal and political relations. The society on the whole is ready for the adoption of these norms. The leadership is also ready, reluctantly though, to adopt these norms but they are choosing the least "highly explosive."

Thus, full integration into the European Union for each of the South Caucasian republics would be an unquestionable guarantee for security and a stable future. Unfortunately, this is still only a project, and its realization of is a matter of the remote future.

What Hinders European Integration?

New Europe from our perspective is hurrying to effectively draw its political space. The logical continuation of this is the aspiration to gently push the process of democratic transformation in a number of countries. Simply, there is no time left for the countries to "mature" into democracy independently. Here, its interests distinctly coincide with the interests of the USA with the only difference that the latter is trying to retain the unipolar structure of the current global situation as long as possible. Democracy is an essential element for Western security doctrines.

These processes are very controversial. Russia and Iran are jealously watching NATO and the USA becoming more active in the region but are following the actions of the European Union quite calmly. Moreover, Russia itself is seeking its own balance in its relations with Europe and is a participant in many European initiatives. In this sense, the appeals addressed to Europe to become a mediator in the geopolitical disputes between the USA and Russia and also to increase its political and economic influence in the South Caucasus are characteristic and they have been heard more than once at European conferences and forums. Until recently, Russia and Iran have viewed this as a possibility of preventing the penetration of the USA into the region.

The not-yet established relations between the strong geopolitical players certainly influence the pace of the movement of the South Caucasus countries towards unified Europe . Let us at least remember how many times we witnessed the USA or Europe refusing a strict democratic standpoint in respect to this or that country for the current political and economic interests. Certainly there is no place for idealism in politics, but the situation is finally changing for the better.

Another serious hindrance on the way to the European Union is, of course, the conflicts in the region. Too many interests are interwoven, and the neighbors of the South Caucasus are big states with their own political and economic ambitions. This deprives the South Caucasian region of, for instance, the chance to declare itself neutral. This unstable situation also preconditioned the various geopolitical orientations of these countries. The simultaneous turn of the political vector of all the South Caucasian countries towards the European Union would be a decisive choice for them. This is taking place in some way formally but in fact the game of instability is going on.

Several years ago the political scientists who worked out the Security in the South Caucasus Pact straightforwardly wrote that Europe is interested only in a unified South Caucasus and without ambiguity spoke even of the possibility of the application of the compulsory model of conflict resolution in the South Caucasus . Europe , overloaded with the problems of the new member-states in the European Union, will hardly be able to find any resources (financial or military) for such decisions. But it is evident that it would be obligatory to decrease the level of the conflicts. Europe comes out in favor of economic integration in the region more actively than the USA , even under the circumstances of persistent conflicts, supposing that the movement towards integration will decrease the degree of the conflicts in the ideal case will be able to level them. Many external and internal observers are convinced that the democratization of the countries and the participation of the peoples in the decision making process would noticeably bring about the resolution of persistent conflicts, as in the democratic countries any decision is made by public consensus, and such a resolution is more secure. Other serious analysts propose to accentuate the humanitarian aspects of the problem, that is, to transfer the debates over territorial disputes onto the level of individual rights. The potential possibility of military conflicts still persists, but it is becoming less probable with the acceleration of the democratic processes in the region.

If we discuss internal hindrances, they are obvious, and have already been mentioned in part above. The strict observance of the European rules of the game automatically tears apart the authoritarian mechanisms of ruling the society. The authorities understand that joining the European structures is a political imperative. To be out of the "club" is practically impossible. On the other hand, a swift and fuller integration into these structures presupposes either a radical transformation in the system or a complete loss of power. The authorities prefer not to hurry and to preserve the right to determine the pace of the process. Even integration into NATO is looked at by the ruling elite as more of a tactical element of the current politics than a close reality. The same holds true for the rapprochement to Europe - this is part of a balanced foreign policy, which allows maneuvering more distinctly among the strong geopolitical players. Azerbaijani society is rather indifferent to the foreign policy of the government, as long as the latter does not interfere with its immediate interests. But it cannot yet notice the mimicry behind democracy. The formal outer kit of democratic institutions, democratic rhetoric is being assimilated (which is not bad either). Worst of all is the fact that this is happening against the background of the monopolization of power in legal, political, economic and informational spaces in the country. For a very long time Europe indulgently accepted the reasoning of the government on preserving stability in the region. But we cannot put off democratic reforms, emphasizing economic ones only. These processes should go hand in hand. On the whole, democracy is a mandatory societal rumbling, a fight of opinions, which makes it possible to find a true and stable path of development in the end.

The Azerbaijani opposition and a noticeable part of the whole society is full of determination to adhere to European democratic values. The best part of the opposition is sincerely devoted to democratic ideals, but from a purely pragmatic angle it see "rapprochement" with Europe as almost the only possibility of shaking the foundations of the existing power regime for the time being.

At first glance, there is simply no particular discordance in the understanding of "European standards" within Azerbaijani society. Ultimately, a large part of them, especially concerning human rights, have been incorporated into the Constitution of the country and adopted by the society. What is happening in reality is quite a different story.

The most challenging hindrance for the integration of the country into NATO or European structures is undoubtedly its incompliance with the standards in the broad sense of the word. Here we mean political, economic, military and even moral standards.

As was mentioned above, there are no serious radical forces in Azerbaijan that could in a very well organized manner resist European integration, and the latter seems to have no alternative in this purely practical sense. This is a matter of time and the cooperative efforts of both the society and the EU. But some hindrances are of a fundamental nature. Having obtained independence only recently, the society cherishes this new feeling. And the leadership very skillfully manipulates this sentiment even though it is more aware of the reality.

We do not notice or are unwilling to notice the "softening" of state sovereignty which has been noticeable since the end of last century practically all over the world. Nowadays any state exists on three levels - transnational, national, and subnational. It has already become hard to tell the internal aspects of decision making from the external ones; we have to acknowledge new norms of international behavior, and limitations of the right to independently choose which road to follow. We are the witnesses of the democratization of totalitarian societies, the creation of a global civil society, and the increased role of global organizations. There is a poignant search for the balance between creating a national state and the constant "presence of the external world in your own house" (on the transnational and subnational levels). To overcome this psychological discomfort is rather hard. Europe began to unite only after the process of the formation of the national states was complete. Azerbaijan has to build a national state and join the global community at the same time. It is hard to get used to this. Again and for the second time this century we are engaged in the search for our place in the world and our identity. At the beginning of the century, an attempt was made to find the balance between "Turkism, Islam and Europeanism," and this search has continued to a certain extent up to the present day, though the political background itself is constantly changing. But the answer should be found before we are completely involved in the integration processes happening in the world.

Another problem seems no less serious. Many researchers justly call our society homogeneous in the religious sense, as Muslims make up 95% of the population. But the religiousness of the Azerbaijani society should not be exaggerated. The author of these lines is convinced that the general level of religiousness in our society is considerably lower than that in Turkey and especially that in Iran . Nevertheless, the fact is that Azerbaijan is a secular Muslim republic regardless of its going through a process of spiritual formation and in this status it can easily be affected by external influences. The experience of Turkey shows that this can be a serious hindrance for accession into the European Union, especially if the Islamic sentiment in Azerbaijani society becomes stronger. This is already the choice of Europe , which has not yet decided whether it wants to remain a purely "Christian" union, or is ready to make a decisive step and find itself above this problem. Still this is a new and more difficult level of consensus.

The "boundless" European liberalism sometimes is in strong contrast not only to religion, but also to the Caucasian mentality peculiar to all three republics. It has already become popular to speak of the attitude in our societies toward the rights of sexual minorities. Demonstrating tolerance, they are even ready to turn a blind eye to phenomena not approved of by the national mentality, but only to the point when these minorities start to openly manifest themselves.

The movement towards Europe certainly makes such problems topical and will add its own dramatic effect to the process. It should be assumed that along with this, other myths will be destroyed, too: for instance, the myth regarding the natural inclination of Eastern nations towards authoritarianism.

In the Context of New Realia

There was one historic event that happened almost unnoticeably. As a result of the political changes in Georgia and the Ukraine , practically the whole Black Sea basin is now edged with democratic regimes. This change may cause a revision of a whole set of standpoints. It should be mentioned that the South Caucasus , regardless of all the conflicts in the region, has for a long time been considered a single political and geographic space. Now it will be necessary to separate geography from politics. No matter how attractive the idea of Caucasian integration might seem, Georgia is probably ready to force its way into Europe by itself. If this is what happens (and President Bush openly supported the Ukraine 's and Georgia 's accession into NATO during his recent European tour), Azerbaijan and Armenia will become immediate neighbors of Europe . It is not going to be easy. Even though Azerbaijan and Georgia are strategic allies, the difference in the political regimes, not very explicit on the political level, is already causing some problems of economic character.

Finally, now Azerbaijan will have to follow the peripeteia in Turkey-EU relations. We should agree that this would be a historical decision, and it cannot be imposed by anyone - neither EU, nor Turkey . Last December the process of Turkey 's transition from one level of negotiations to the next was being watched with no less interest in Azerbaijan and Armenia than in Europe and Turkey . Armenia expected that the block on this decision would make Turkey open their common border. Many people in Azerbaijan believed that blocking Turkey in this stage of EU accession would make the future prospects of Azerbaijan quite obscure.

Turkey stood the test, but the existence of closely interwoven interests around this event showed that the countries of the region most likely have no better alternative than moving towards the European Union.

February 2005