In November 2006, Azerbaijan took two important steps in integration towards Europe. Baku & Brussels signed a memorandum on energy partnership as well as an Action Plan as part of the European Neighbourhood Policy. President Aliev's regime in Baku pledged itself to democracy & rule of law. There is much to suggest that this was lip service. The European Union's energy policy & security policy interests in a partnership with Azerbaijan are far too big to place at risk because of Azerbaijan domestic policy. Moreover, Baku has an alternative partner in co-operation in Russia, which is even less interested in civil & human rights. Adapted from the source document.
"Im November 2006 hat Azerbajdzan zwei wichtige Schritte in Richtung Europa gemacht. Baku und Brüssel unterzeichneten ein Memorandum über eine Energiepartnerschaft sowie als Teil der Europäischen Nachbarschaftspolitik einen Aktionsplan. Die Aliev-Regierung in Baku verpflichtet sich damit auf Demokratie und Rechtsstaatlichkeit. Vieles spricht dafür, dass dies nur Lippenbekenntnisse sind. Das energiepolitische und sicherheitspolitische Interesse der EU an einer Partnerschaft mit Azerbajdzan ist viel zu groß, als dass sie es wegen der azerbajdzanischen Innenpolitik aufs Spiel setzen würde. Darüber hinaus hat Baku mit Russland einen alternativen Kooperationspartner in der Hinterhand, dem noch weniger an Bürger- und Menschenrechten gelegen ist." (Autorenreferat)
This study examines the trust in political institutions in Azerbaijan using the data from the survey Caucasus Barometer (CB) conducted by the Caucasus Research Resource Center (CRRC) in 2012–2013. Two hypotheses – cultural and institutional – were tested. The study partially confirms the previous findings that national culture, as well as individual socialization (macro and micro-cultural theories) are the main determinants of trust in Azerbaijan. Meanwhile, government performance and individual evaluation (macro-and micro institutional theories) did not affect much on the trust level in the country.
There are active debates on the scale of inflation-economic growth causality in the short- and long-term perspectives and factors affecting the correlation and effectiveness of anti-inflationary measures depending on initial economic conditions. These scientific debates result in controversial results. This study aims to explore short- and long-run relationships in the inflation-economic growth chain of 12 post-Soviet countries (Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Belarus, Moldova, Ukraine, and Georgia) to determine the most effective system of anti-inflationary policy. The paper employed statistical analysis and trend line extrapolation (analysis of inflationary trends in 2000–2021 and forecast for 2022–2024), pooled mean group of the autoregressive distributed lag model in the Stata 14.2/SE software (identification of the short and long-run coefficients characterizing relationships between inflation and economic growth), and ordinary least squares regression (country-specific modeling results). Statistical analysis showed that Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia have the most effective anti-inflationary policy; Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Moldova demonstrate moderate effectiveness, and the other countries have low effectiveness. It is also established that in the long run, a 1% increase in inflation results in a 0.195% decrease in GDP growth with a 99% confidence probability, while in the short run, this causal relationship is insignificant. Country-specific modeling results revealed that within 12 post-Soviet countries, economic growth in Kazakhstan, Lithuania, and Ukraine in a short-term perspective depends on inflation dynamics. According to the modeling results, Lithuania has the most effective anti-inflationary policy to ensure sustainable economic growth.
