OSCE observers' hypocrisy exposed after elections in Azerbaijan

Yesterday at 7:00 PM, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) observer mission on the February 7 presidential election in Azerbaijan convened at the Baku Marriott Hotel Boulevard to wrap up their work. Each observer presented their report, revealing that the violations identified by ODIHR observers amounted to just 3% of the total incidents reported.

3% of "violations" and 97% of full compliance not only with Azerbaijan's legislation but also with the principles and norms of international law, as well as international conventions, agreements, treaties, and so on, signed by the country. 

Even the observers who visited the polling stations directly expressed frustration during this meeting. They openly voiced their confusion to the mission leaders: why was the report so biased with only 3% negative findings? 

…In the realm of politics and diplomacy, election observation becomes a pivotal moment in assessing democratic processes. However, as is often the case, behind the glossy facade of international observers' activities lies something far less appealing, dirty, and off-putting - political manipulation and playing to one's interests. 

The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), being an important actor in this field, should serve as an impartial arbiter, shedding light on the world with its observations. However, recent events surrounding the release of the report by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) on the presidential election held in Azerbaijan on February 7 raise fair doubts about this organization. 

In election observation, it's not just the voting procedure itself that matters, but also the approach to analyzing the gathered data. Unfortunately, as the latest OSCE report indicates, instead of an objective analysis of real events, we're faced with a biased approach oriented towards the expected outcome.

The OSCE observers' meeting yesterday at the Baku Marriott Hotel Boulevard, where they debriefed each other and also held online discussions with their supervisors from the US, became a telling symbol of how political interests align with official reports. Surprisingly, despite the 3% of negative findings, there was an overwhelming 97% of positive assessments, which raises eyebrows given the current political climate. 

As for the "report" itself, it's rife with signs of collective cognitive dissonance, showing not only a complete misunderstanding of the current socio-political situation in Azerbaijan but also blatant falsehoods, manipulations, and, paradoxically, stark misanthropy. It's a bizarre mix where fiction and selective adherence to international legal principles are woven together with delusions.

Quoting directly from the report: “The 7 February early presidential election took place in a restrictive environment, and while preparations were efficiently managed, it was marked by the stifling of critical voices and the absence of political alternatives. Of the six presidential candidates standing in this election other than the incumbent, all have been supportive of the President in the recent past”. 

What more do we need, gentlemen observers? Effective preparation, and then let each candidate present their platform. But really, what's the point? No matter what we do, no matter how many candidates from different parties are registered, whatever platforms they have, it won't matter to OSCE observers. The bottom line will be the same - political bias and a predetermined outcome.

As the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau once said: “Any government not grounded in the knowledge of the people is useless and wrong”. And here, we have to ask ourselves: were the OSCE reports based on real facts, visible to the on-site observers, or were they molded to fit the agendas of external forces?

And judges - in this particular scenario, the ODIHR OSCE observer mission could be seen as ignorant, subjective, but they still hold the title of observers.

Picture this process like a movie production: the script is written, roles are cast, and every actor knows their lines. Regardless of how many candidates are in the spotlight, what platforms they represent, or which parties they belong to, all of that takes a back seat. The crux of the matter is political bias and a pre-set outcome. And what we witness here is how ODIHR OSCE observers, following the directives of their handlers, or rather the behind-the-scenes players and political “big shots”, actively shape their reports to fit this preconceived narrative.

Being objective is no easy feat, especially when dealing with individuals who have a skewed understanding of the concept. And in this particular instance, political maneuvering and manipulations, concealed beneath the guise of international democracy, pose a daunting challenge for election observers. 

However, the question of whether ODIHR OSCE observers are aware of the concept of societal cohesion at such a crucial moment for the state remains highly relevant. Because how can we discuss a genuine and unbiased analysis of elections if there's a lack of understanding about societal dynamics and their impact on the political landscape in Azerbaijan?

Consequently, OSCE observers have turned into actors in a low-quality, third-rate theatrical production instead of being impartial arbiters tasked with delivering an objective, truthful assessment of Azerbaijan's snap presidential election. 

Let's be honest: the OSCE's report on the elections in Azerbaijan resembles more of a choreographed routine than an impartial analysis. It's as rehearsed and scripted as a robot following its programmed commands. What truly unfolds is irrelevant - what matters is fulfilling the expectations of their US curators.

Truth is unyielding and always finds its way. Yet, it appears that OSCE observers have lost sight of this principle, getting entangled in political maneuvering and self-serving agendas. They seem content playing the role of blind critics, oblivious to reality, and dancing to the tune of their supervisors.

Furthermore, what about the concept of societal cohesion? It seems OSCE observers have only heard what they were told, failing to grasp anything beyond that. Their mission seems limited to following orders and justifying biased decisions, rather than conducting objective analyses and seeking genuine truths.

Let's call it as it is: the OSCE report is nothing more than a tool for political manipulation.

Because justice isn't about their actions, but about their observations. Yet, OSCE observers prefer to turn a blind eye to reality to justify their prejudices, falsehoods, and biases.

As long as OSCE observers continue playing this game of political manipulation, the true truth about Azerbaijan's election will remain obscured behind false smiles and empty rhetoric from pseudo-observers.

The truth always prevails, breaking through the barriers of false reports and biased opinions, shining brightest in the darkness of political machinations.

Perhaps within this labyrinth of political games, there's still room for hope. Maybe the real truth will eventually pierce through the political fog, bringing light and transparency to the realm of elections and democracy.

The genuine truth about the elections will ultimately emerge from the political darkness of ODIHR OSCE, but it requires a focus on true democratic values and the principles of objectivity in observer missions.

Despite the challenges and contradictions posed by OSCE reports and their political motivations, truth and justice will ultimately triumph.

Because, as Albert Einstein famously said, “Ultimately, truth always triumphs because it is unyielding”.