A Debilitating Silence
by Irina Ghaplanyan
A response to a previous article by Fariz Ismailzade - Dialogue is Welcomed, Denial Not
Voicing a problem or concern is the first step towards a solution however some are not willing to take that step; especially if they are affiliated or part of what makes speaking of these problems a taboo. Silence then becomes a way of life, an alleged reality, and if it is broken the system punishes you, the society ostracizes you and you become an outcast. The fascinating element of this whole system is that almost each and everyone knows the real truth, just chooses to live in denial for the mere sake of safety and comfort.
Whether it is Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan or Zimbabwe, the societies of these countries are fully conscious of the regimes that their respective governments have imposed on them, but due to the precedent of inhumane treatment of those who choose to speak up, most remain silent. As a result the invented truth becomes the modus operandi of government’s propaganda machine and those who choose to side with it.
I hope that the dialogue with Mr. Islmailzade, in a way launched on behalf of Armenian and Azeri views, but in essence expressing our personal views, will be conducted outside of the boundaries of the invented truth. I have yet to witness the willingness of my Azeri counterpart to do so.
Mr. Ismailzade states that my previous article 'Groundless Anti-Armenian Propaganda Discourages Any Form of Debate' was defensive. He is absolutely right - the article was on a defense against the unsubstantiated and false information. My article presented reliable and true facts and references about the situation in Armenia. However, Mr. Ismailzade is wrong to accuse the article of being defensive of criticism. On the contrary, had he read the article carefully, he would note that I extensively criticized the Armenian government for all the human rights violations that took place, something that any free-willed individual who cares for his/her own country would do.
Beyond the alleged defensiveness there was absolutely no denial, rather a correction of what Mr. Ismailzade laid out in his initial article.
In fact, I was hoping to see a response which would address all those issues that I raised in my previous article: the imprisoned journalists, the virtual absence of political opposition in the country, a total control of the government over every major sector in the country, the mesmerizing levels of corruption. Here Armenia and Azerbaijan have a lot in common and it would be encouraging to see that people in Azerbaijan address these problems by at least talking about them. At least in Armenia people have been able to talk about these problems, raise them and hold the government accountable. We have yet to see this from Azerbaijani scholars and the civil society at large.
Over the extended five pages of my previous article, it was critical to lay out all the details and explain to the reader the true state of the art of the political, social and economic situation in Armenia. Despite Mr. Islmailzade’s claim, that “details are not important at this point”, I assure you that our readers would be more than willing to dive into the details that we present. It is, indeed, extremely important to understand and talk about problems in our countries, as Mr. Ismailzade pointed out, so let us do that, and let us hear some of the problems that Azerbaijan experiences, as so far none have been addressed.
I have read Mr. Ismailzade’s previous writings in the international journals and publications that he has mentioned and am honored to have him as my direct challenger in this dialogue. But let us not forget, that it is not important where you publish your article or who you are affiliated with; what is, however, important is what you are trying to convey in your article. Above all, let us be frank and talk about the facts as they are – JSMT is a very respectable and impartial organization, but that does not mean that everything that the Trust publishes is impartial or fact based. In fact all the organizations and publications warn their readers that “the views expressed in this article are solely his/her own and do not represent the views of this organization”.
I do believe Mr. Ismailzade that the Azerbaijani people (unlike the Azerbaijani government that does everything to isolate Armenia from the regional projects) perhaps do care about what happens in Armenia, as we are your bordering neighbor. What do our neighboring issues have to do with Russia? The regional isolation comes from Turkey and Azerbaijan, and they are the countries that should reconsider their policies towards opening the borders, if they are so concerned about the well being of Armenians. Russia in Armenia is solely by invitation. This is not to be forgotten. Just like the US-NATO is in Georgia by invitation, so is Russia in Armenia. The latter has a well articulated foreign policy of complementarity whereby one does not exclude the other one – Armenia is in close relations with Russia and cooperates with the NATO as well. So I urge the readers to not be so concerned about Russia’s positive presence in Armenia, but be rather more concerned about the only closed borders of the OSCE and NATO members (Turkey), and largely, the only closed borders in Europe – those between Armenia and Turkey, and Armenia and Azerbaijan.
In fact, Mr. Ismailzade in his initial article did not mention anything about Russia’s presence in Armenia and it was in a way haphazard and irrelevant to mention it in the second article and underline that it was “what [he] was trying to say in [his] article”.
What is truly worrisome in the region beyond the closed borders is the penetration of Islamic fundamentalists into the Azerbaijani society, that prides itself for secularism; the increasingly bellicose statements of the Azerbaijani politicians to resort to war; the false and Armenophobic information spread by the Azerbaijani government controlled media, etc. These are the facts that are truly worrisome.
It is also important to remember that Armenians have always been open to dialogue in any international forum, and have welcomed Azerbaijanis in Armenia. Unfortunately, it has been exactly the opposite with Azerbaijan, when on several occasions Azerbaijan denied entry to Armenians into the country, even for such events as NATO exercises. So let us be clear here and lay out the facts as they are – it is Azerbaijan that needs to work a little bit harder at expressing tolerance and willingness to engage in a dialogue with Armenians and letting its people to do this without fear of persecution or being branded as a dissident or outcast.
I believe that silencing truth is indeed a denial of its existence. I wonder what I have denied in my previous article that Mr. Ismailzade decided to brand as denial. Perhaps his silencing of the facts about the reality in Azerbaijan is that very denial that he is talking about and I believe our readers would very much like to read not general statements but clear and specific facts about the “democratic progress” in Azerbaijan.
I hope this debate continues and raises issues that do need to be talked about.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author. The John Smith Memorial Trust expresses no views on the content of articles but is pleased to be able to encourage debate on issues of this kind.
August 2008