BACKGROUND: A Doctrine on National Security, second in importance only after the Constitution in the contemporary international system, has been absent in Azerbaijan during Heydar Aliyev’s presidency, although he has been in power for close to ten years. The Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan obliges the President-elect to present such a document to the Parliament shortly after the elections, but the current administration has not yet done so. This in spite of the fact that two presidential races have been held in 1993 and in 1998, and that a third one is to be held in October of this year. In view of the fact that such documents already exist in most of the post-Soviet states, among them Russia and Armenia – countries of direct and overwhelming relevance to Azerbaijan – the question arises why the Azerbaijani administration been so slow to produce one. Towards the end of October 2002, the European Marshall Center together with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan organized a four day conference in Baku entitled “National Security Concept”, which was supposed to be attended by, and benefit, the members of the Parliamentary Commission on Security and Defense. As the only member of Parliament to attend the conference, retired Major General Vladimir Timoshenko told the journalists that matters discussed during the meetings were mainly focused on the topics of the process and system of enhancing of decision-making in national security affairs; the duties, mission and control of security services; matters of coalition, cooperation and alliances. According to Timoshenko, the adoption of the discussed document will determine the state’s priorities in protecting the country’s security, harmonize relations of different bureaucratic institutions and determine the priorities for distribution of resources among them. This seems to imply indirectly that the above-mentioned fundamental duties of the state in Azerbaijan have been ignored so far. These issues with great influence on the effective operation of the state have only recently been included into the pool of topics to be discussed during the spring session of the Parliament’s meetings.

IMPLICATIONS: Security has historically been of utmost importance to all modern polities and the corresponding document – the Doctrine of National Security – was first developed in the industrialized states of the West. The operation and implications of this concept has been and is still in many ways significantly different in the case of the so called ‘weak states’ of Asia, Africa and Latin America, which bear many similarities to the post-Soviet states of the South Caucasus and Central Asia. First and foremost, problems arise in the notion of ‘national’ in its application to these states, for most of them are ethnically heterogeneous and socio-politically divided societies. The incoherent idea of national identity and the process of nation-building in these states, still far from complete, create this uneasiness. Secondly, the idea of security, when combined with the interests of elites, create a unique blend of its own in many of the weak states. The predicament in this case is that there is a constant clash between the subjective interests of the regime and the objective needs of the state, which operates in an environment of insecurity. History is a witness to numerous examples when threats to regime survival and security were usurped by these elites and presented as genuine threats to the state per se. Today’s political arena in Azerbaijan is not very different from the picture drawn here. Almost all of political parties are based on regional affiliation and/or on personalities of party leaders; effective channels of state-society relations are weak; society at large is disillusioned and apathetic, and elites lack legitimacy among the masses; and in the case of NGOs, the backbone of democratic civil society, these are not receiving an adequate treatment by the state. Therefore the creation of an effective and workable Doctrine of National Security in such countries seems to present serious challenges. This, of course, is no justification for its complete absence. Of fundamental importance is the comprehensiveness and scope of the Doctrine. It should incorporate in itself and address internal as well as external threats and vulnerabilities to the state and society divided into realms of military-strategic, political, societal, economic and environmental arenas. Geopolitically, problems facing the country are the ‘frozen’ conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as the increasing pace of the militarization of the Caspian Sea, related to the conflicts among the five littoral states regarding the development and export of energy resources from this basin to world markets. There are yet no prospects for any groundbreaking progress on these problems anytime soon. Additionally, Azerbaijan’s economy faces real dangers of falling into the grips of the Dutch Disease, resulting from overspecialization and reliance on oil and gas reserves and the resulting distortion of the export-import balance. Recent disagreements of the administration with the visiting IMF mission have been exactly on this very issue, which is of direct relevance to the country’s economic security and development.

CONCLUSIONS: It is yet too early to come up with sound predictions as to the comprehensiveness and relevance to the threats and vulnerabilities facing the country of the forthcoming National Security Doctrine of the Azerbaijani Republic. At this stage, though, it can be stated that the achievement of socio-political cohesiveness, of a consensus upon the basic premises of the major organizing principles of the state and the creation of strong and legitimate institutions – all the primary requirements of successful state- and nation-building – should be the main target. It is crucial that the aforementioned document be genuinely national in content. In Azerbaijan, regionalism and clan allegiances have been elevated to the political level, thus creating an imminent threat to the overall stability of the state. Moreover, social instincts are strained and explosive, suggesting that this process will take time, resources and substantial effort.

AUTHOR BIO: Teymur Huseyinov is pursuing a postgraduate degree in Russian and East European Studies at Oxford University.