Sergei Rekeda, exclusively for Vestnik Kavkaza
The development of political processes in the countries of the post-Soviet space is stepping into a new stage which coincides with the Ukrainian crisis in time. “Traditional” political parties, which have been considered as the top achievements of democratic process in some CIS countries, are losing influence with voters and losing their real weight. I should note that the tendency touches on both ruling and opposition parties, even though there are various reasons for this in different countries, from Armenia to Kyrgyzstan.
Continuation
The same situation occurred in Azerbaijan, when the People’s Front collapsed. Members of the “ruling party” scattered, before the former president left the country’s territory. According to a report by experts of the Berlek-Unity Center, today there are 190 political parties in Kyrgyzstan, but most of them exist only on paper. Real power belongs not to political parties, but to clannish and family ties, relying on which politicians compete for power.
So there is no surprise that the alliances of “Maidan NGOs” turned out to be stronger than the parties, which are far from the interests of common citizens. They can quickly find a unifying idea, as they take it from life (struggle against corruption, price growth, and so on). And only after that do those who are supported by Western sponsors begin to initiate a political struggle. And there is no need to use the factor of an election campaign, and this is the main difference from the events in Ukraine in 2004. They use any political event and organize a relevant group on a social network.
Experts well know the coordinators of the process – the National Democratic Institute, the International Republican Institute, the International Foundation of Electronic Systems, the Soros Foundation, the Open Society Institute, Freedom House. Azerbaijan has many times faced provocative activities by several of the mentioned organizations. In 2013 the General Prosecution Service of Azerbaijan found the activity of the National Democratic Institute contradicted local legislation. For example, it mentioned violation of standards of financial reporting, issuing grants without informing relevant structures, operation of regional offices of the NDI in Baku, Gyandzha, Tovuz, Shirvan, Yevlakh, Sheki, Khachmaz and Dzhalilabad without any registration or accreditation. As a result, in July 2014 the office of the organization was finally shut down in Baku. According to law-enforcement agencies, there is an investigation into the activity of the office; moreover, the Ministry of Taxes found out that the NDI evaded taxes.
A contemporary alternative which could resist “Maidan” grassroots structures could be major social movements. In Russia – the United People’s Front, in Kazakhstan – the all-national movement Kazakhstan-2050. These organizations are focused on greater political creativity, freedom and attracting people who don’t want to be members of United Russia or Eni Azerbaijan.
Apparently the idea is promising. But it will be successful only if the responsibilities of the all-national movements are clearly defined. Vladimir Putin clearly stated the strategic goals of the UPF, but they have vague definitions – “all citizens should have an opportunity to set their people’s goals, achieve their fulfillment, achieve progress on issues which often sink in the bureaucratic swamp, present their initiatives directly, which will become laws and state decisions in the future.” It is thought that the movement should support civil initiatives, social projects, developments of local self-administration, and new social leaders. However, at the moment when the leader’s encouragement should become concrete programs and practical steps, the momentum effect occurs, just like in the situation with parties. There are few differences between the principles of establishing political parties and major social movements.
The circle has been closed. This means attempts to create color revolutions in the South Caucasus and Central Asia will still be prevented by restrictive measures. In this context, Saudi Arabia’s methods of struggle against NGOs don’t seem crude and out of date.
To be continued
