Azeri public has little confidence in army – paper

Zerkalo, Baku
20 Nov 04

One of the key reasons behind the lack of public confidence in the
Azerbaijani army is that although the country is going through a
period of economic development, the government cannot provide even
for the basic needs of its army and keeps the social problems of
servicemen largely unresolved, an analytical article in Zerkalo
newspaper said. The article also said violations of the law and
unjustified fatalities were aggravating the already precarious
situation in the army. At the same time, people still have vivid
memories of the army’s defeat on the battlefield in 1991-94, which
resulted in the occupation of Azerbaijani territories by Armenia. The
following is an excerpt from C. Sumarinli and F. Teymurxanli report
by Azerbaijani newspaper Zerkalo on 20 November headlined “Society
still mistrusts the army” and subheaded “Azerbaijan will have to
‘bend over backwards’ to establish normal relations between the army
and the public”; subheads as published:

While the army is popular with society, many prefer to dodge military
service. This phrase is known in many countries of the world. Although
today the army acts as the guarantor of society, its Constitution and
statehood, the issue of trust in the armed forced is still high on
the agenda. If our state is to return the occupied territories, it has
to cover a long road in boosting the authority of the Azerbaijani army.

The official authorities claim that public confidence in the
Azerbaijani army has risen many times over the past several years. For
instance, the army’s top brass say 90-95 per cent of conscripts aged
between 18 and 35 are serving in the army now. According to official
information, 25-30 per cent of draftees receive deferment every year.

While in 1991 a little over 13,000 people received adjournment
from military service for being full-time students, in 2001 the
figure rose to 52,000. Whereas in 1991 some 1,300-1,500 people
received adjournment for family reasons, in 2001 the figure reached
17,000. According to a Defence Ministry source, these indicators have
barely changed to date.

Statistics shows that the number of deferments is on the increase. This
and other facts show that society is treating military service quite
negatively. Several examples will be sufficient to confirm this. A
17-year-old resident of the Sabuncu district Baku , Rafiq Asadov,
sees military service as a task beyond his strength. He says that if
he can find a decent job after leaving school, he will forego military
service. He is also opposed to the fact that recruitment age limit has
been brought to 35 years. “Now thanks to this age limit I will have
to live in fear of military service for 17 years,” he says with horror.

At the same time, another interviewee, a 14-year-old resident of
Salyan, Elnur Tagiyev, has a great confidence in the army. “I want to
become a military man. For this, I am going to apply for admission to
the Camsid Naxcivanski military lyceum. I think I can find myself only
in this sphere,” he said. Tagiyev added that military service attracts
him also in material terms. “There are no jobs in the countryside. Even
a university degree doesn’t guarantee you a job.”

However, quite a few people are trying to leave the armed forces
as soon as possible. For instance, not very long ago the officer of
a Mingacevir military unit, Maj Telman Abilov, was discharged from
the armed forced only after going on a hunger-strike. Lt-Col Uzeyir
Cafarov, who is better known as a military expert now, had to go to
court to be discharged from the army. Another employee of the Defence
Ministry’s educational and training centre, Col Elnur Mammadov, has
also taken the ministry administration to court in an effort to leave
the armed forces.

So what is going on? Why are servicemen eager to be discharged from
the armed forces? Everyone is saying one and the same thing: they want
to wage an irreconcilable struggle against negative phenomena. Some
believe that their military careers are over, others think civilian
life is easier and more profitable. If we take public sentiments
into account, it can be inferred that society is split into two camps:
representatives of one camp think military service is detrimental to
their careers, those of the other take pride in it.

Is the army to blame for our losses?

A major role in the widespread negative attitude towards the army
was played by the military defeat which is still vivid in people’s
memories. However, a representative of the military and scientific
centre under the Defence Ministry, Maj-Gen Tacaddin Mehdiyev, denies
that the army played a crucial role in the defeat. He believes that
major obstacles were put up in the way of army building in 1991.

“There was an order of the first Azerbaijani defence minister, Valeh
Barsadli, to establish self-defence battalions. According to the plan,
the battalions were to defend the positions held, while the process
of army formation was to run in parallel. But that required five to
six months,” he said.

Passage omitted: minor details

Mehdiyev said in the first stages of army building the bodies of
all soldiers killed in action were defiantly carried in front of
the presidential administration building and it was demanded that the
minister join the funeral procession. “Such actions served as the Sword
of Damocles hanging over the heads of officers and commanders. Military
commanders were afraid of launching offensive operations as they knew
that the death of just one soldier could trigger protest demonstrations
in Baku. For this and a number of other reasons it can be said with
a high degree of confidence that it wasn’t the army but the country’s
political administration and the opposition which preconditioned the
defeat in the Armenian-Azerbaijani war. This holds true for the period
between 1991 and 1994,” Mehdiyev said.

He also pointed to the contribution of the mass media to the country’s
defeat. To substantiate his remarks, he said: “Any redeployment
of troops on the front line was immediately reflected in the
press. Consequently, the Armenians, capitalizing on this information,
subjected the necessary directions to attacks.”

Society intends to condemn

The state military policy is based on the public opinion which
regulates whether this policy is enjoying popular support.

Passage omitted: examples from history

In the issues of security and army building, coordination between
the authorities and public opinion is an important strategic
factor. Experts believe that the process of army formation and
modernization must be open to specialists, as well as society in
general, because this is not only the prerogative of the state but also
that of society. Several experts believe that otherwise a gaping abyss
may appear between the authorities and the people. Namely, despite
what the official authorities are saying about military reforms and
improved conditions in the army, the public mostly thinks there are
no reforms as such, that only attempts are being made to imitate them
and that the army decay is continuing. Public opinion contradicts
statements about military reforms and in some cases translates into
overt condemnation. Some even believe that there is no confidence in
society that the state can repel possible military intervention. We,
in our turn, would like to say that society can be mistaken, but we
should not forget the centuries-long military experience of our people.

Defectors are still not condemned by society

The defeat of the Azerbaijani army in the military operations of
1991-94 and the ensuing occupation of our districts preconditioned
the loss of public confidence in the army, which, in turn, weakened
the Azerbaijani public’s enthusiasm.

Those advocating pacifist ideas think “it is better to be alive than
dead”, and proceeding from this principle refuse to take up arms to
defend their motherland in the event of clear intervention. One of
the horrors of the years of war is that those who defect from the
armed forces do not come under public condemnation. They are looked
upon almost as heroes “exemplifying courage”.

As an example, we can cite a recent incident: a street patrol detained
a soldier in the vicinity of the 20 Yanvar underground station (it
later transpired that the soldier had defected from the armed forces
– author). The surrounding people violently sprang at the patrol
officers as if they were defending someone absolutely innocent. The
dumbfounded street patrol had to let the soldier go under pressure
of the “patriotic” mob. And this is not just an isolated incident.

Passage omitted: statistical data of popular support for the army in
other countries

International military experts believe that the prestige of the
military profession has hit its all-time low. Experts maintain that
there are certain criteria for securing a victory. The success of a
military operation has a direct connection with the support for it
by at least 70 per cent of the population (40-60 per cent in the
worst case scenario). If the support level is below 40 per cent,
the military defeat is inevitable.

Azerbaijani society regards violations of the law in the army,
the unjustified deaths of servicemen and other negative facts as
indicators of the ongoing degradation of the armed forces. Ordinary
citizens cannot understand why the state cannot provide for the basic
needs of its army against the backdrop of the country’s large-scale
economic development. One of the reasons behind the loss of public
trust in the army is the fact that the salaries of servicemen in
Azerbaijan, a country rich in oil, is far from world standards,
while their social problems have yet to be resolved.

Passage to end omitted: repetition