On October 14-15, 2023, the general meeting of the Civic Education Network under the European Union Eastern Partnership program took place in Georgia. The network's primary donor is the Federal Agency for Civic Education (Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung / bpb), which is funded by the German Federal Foreign Office. Originally established in 2015 as NECE (Networking European Civic Education), it later continued its operations under the name EENCE (Eastern European Network for Citizenship Education). EENCE serves as a network of organizations and experts committed to fostering the exchange and development of knowledge, skills, and values in civic education throughout the Eastern European region.
BRIEF: Before the official network meeting, a delegation of six representatives from Azerbaijan engaged in substantial discussions. They declared their intention to nominate two members for the Coordination Council (CO) and agreed that the Azerbaijani delegation would collaborate as a cohesive team, both in discussions and voting. Although membership in the network and the election process for the Board of Directors are not contingent on country representation but rather on expert criteria, it was asserted that a form of country representation was essential.
On the second day of the event, the Steering Committee (SC) report was presented, and during the question-and-answer session, I voiced my concerns regarding the use of terminology. I emphasized the importance of employing terminology in correspondence and discussions that aligns with the laws and normative documents of each country. Specifically, I noted that in Azerbaijan, there is no "Nagorno-Karabakh" zone, but rather a "Karabakh Economic Zone." I asserted that the statement issued on September 23, made by a small group with limited knowledge of the region, did not accurately represent the reality. Correct terminology is crucial within EENCE, especially when addressing sensitive issues such as violence and ethnic cleansing, and it is essential to consult with the platform's members and stakeholders before making such statements.
I sought to highlight that the SC's statement was made without proper consultation, and I urged its recognition as an incorrect step. The Azerbaijani delegation considered this statement biased against Azerbaijan. Subsequently, a participant from Ukraine, if I recall correctly, expressed agreement with our concerns. The chairman stated that future SC members should avoid making such statements and recommended refraining from doing so in the future, and at least consulting the relevant parties before issuing any statements. Following this discussion, representatives from Armenia made speeches condemning democracy, human rights, and war, to which Khalida Musayeva responded by pointing out that Azerbaijan had conducted an anti-terrorist operation within its borders, taking care to avoid civilian casualties. She highlighted the suffering endured by Azerbaijan, including the loss of her cousin.
Following these speeches, the meeting aimed to proceed with a vote, but I requested the opportunity to first establish the rules for the election procedure. I proposed that the primary criterion for elections should be country representation and insisted that this proposal be put to a vote. My speech emphasized the importance of preserving country representation and suggested that a lack of such representation could lead to separatism and internal discontent within the network. I argued that the network represents Eastern Partnership countries, as indicated by its name, and that the absence of this criterion contradicts the mission of the Coordination Council.
Despite my proposal receiving support from all the members from Azerbaijan and a few members from other countries, it garnered relatively few votes. Nevertheless, the moderator urged voters to consider the necessity of having representatives from each country in the Coordination Council.