Author: Ekmekjian Janet

THE EU-TURKEY-CYPRUS TRIANGLE: "TIME FOR TURKEY TO BE VISIONARY IN S. CAUCASUS"
By Sabine Freizer

Greek News
me=News&file=article&sid=10439
May 25 2009

Optimism about the normalisation of Turkey-Armenia bilateral relations,
so prevalent on 22 April when the two countries announced that they had
agreed on a comprehensive framework for reconciliation, has suddenly
faded. Normalisation would include opening of the Turkey-Armenia
border, establishing diplomatic relations, and setting up of bilateral
commissions to deal with multiple issues, including the historical
dimension of their relations. It first seemed that these steps could
be accomplished by Autumn 2009. Now they may be delayed for years.

Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan put a brake on the reconciliation
effort when in Baku on 13 May, he did not mince his words: "the
closure of the [Turkey-Armenia] border is a result of the [Armenian]
occupation in Karabakh […] until the occupation ends, the border
gates will remain closed."

The occupation of some 13.5 per cent of Azerbaijan’s territory by
Armenian-backed forces started in 1992, when Armenia and Azerbaijan
went to war over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh enclave which was
an Armenian majority autonomous region of Azerbaijan in Soviet
times. Since the signing of a 1994 ceasefire, there has been no pulling
back by any of the armed forces, and the ceasefire line remains an
active front line where there are regular casualties.

Since 1993, Turkey has maintained a policy of keeping its border
with Armenia closed until Armenian forces withdraw largely due to
its wish to express its respect for historical and ethnic ties with
Azerbaijan. The closed-border policy had no impact on Armenia’s
Nagorno-Karabakh stance, and arguably made Armenia less likely
to withdraw in exchange for peace; Turkey’s threatening posture
did however cost it considerable political capital in the U.S. and
Europe. But in 2008, after several years of secretive talks between
Turkey and Armenia, it seemed as though Ankara had foresightedly
de-linked its relations with Armenia from the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict. Turkey appeared ready to re-open its border with Armenia as
part of a broader normalization package with its immediate neighbour —
in exchange for Yerevan’s recognition of Turkey’s current borders and
participation in a commission to analyze their historical differences,
including about the great massacre of Ottoman Armenians of 1915.

This visionary policy shift not only had the potential to help resolve
one of the most strained relationships between two European countries
since World War I but also to open new transport and communication
links in the strategic South Caucasus. It was backed by Russia,
and even more strongly by U.S. President Obama during his visit to
Turkey in March.

For Turkey, breaking with its former tried and failed policy,
normalising with Armenia offers an opportunity to become a strategic
player in the South Caucasus. It has had success in establishing
discussions through a Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Platform,
but it will have difficulty promoting and leading this as long as
it blockades one of the countries that participates. It wants to
cooperate as equal partners with Russia in the South Caucasus, in
political and economic spheres, but it will be limited unless it is
seen as even handed.

Russia, which has signed a collective security arrangement with
Armenia, has understood this over the past several months and
repeated its overtures to Azerbaijan in a host of fields. Turkey is
interested in supporting the ongoing OSCE Minsk Process to resolve
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, but it cannot be a neutral broker
while it openly supports one of the conflicting sides. Finally an
open Turkey-Armenia border is likely to have the immediate effect
of ending Armenian perceptions of encirclement by hostile Turkic
peoples, and making them more likely to withdraw from territories
around Nagorno-Karabakh now retained as security guarantees. These
are the messages that Turkey’s leaders should be sending to their
Azerbaijani counterparts, rather than nationalist pledges to remain
"one nation in two states."

Instead, Turkey seems on the verge of giving up these benefits,
halting the momentum towards reconciliation and returning to its
traditional positions. This strengthens arguments that it only
used the promise of normalisation in its talks with Armenia to
delay U.S. genocide recognition, especially by President Obama,
on 24 April. But Turkey should not allow its Armenia policy to be
held hostage to the Nagorno-Karabakh stalemate or to Azerbaijani
blackmail. Baku is now threatening to sell natural gas from its
still-to-be-developed Shahdeniz 2 field to Russia, instead of Turkey,
but it is likely to do this regardless of Turkey’s relations with
Armenia, if Russia offers it a better pricing and transit deal.

There is no doubt that progress on resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict would enhance Turkey’s ability to normalise relations with
Armenia and stability in the South Caucasus. But Ankara’s best chance
of bringing a new positive momentum to the process is precisely by
normalising with Armenia. It is quite wrong in believing that with
its traditional policy it can have any impact on the talks mediated
since 1992 by the OSCE Minsk Group, led by its French, Russian and
U.S. co-chairs, and more specifically since 2005 with the aim of
obtaining agreement on a 2-3 page document on basic principles.

Regarding Nagorno-Karabakh, the best that can be expected any time
this year is agreement on these basic principles, and the mediators
sound optimistic about a possible breakthrough. Another meeting of the
Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents is expected in Saint Petersburg
around 4-6 June. But there is a long-running stalemate over several
issues, including the modalities of a plan to hold a referendum to
determine Nagorno-Karabakh’s final status and the status and size
of a possible corridor linking Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenia in the
Lachin district. Once an agreement on basic principles is signed,
lengthy and difficult talks await the sides to reach a comprehensive
settlement leading to the start of actual withdrawals.

If Turkey plans to wait until this occurs, it will remain on the
sidelines for many years to come in the South Caucasus, allowing
the U.S., EU and especially Russia to maintain the lead in its own
backyard.

Tehran Times , Iran
May 24 2009

Iran sees 10-fold rise in trade balance with Armenia
Tehran Times Economic Desk

TEHRAN ` A Trade Promotion Organization of Iran (TPOI) official here
on Saturday stated that Iran-Armenia trade balance has increased
ten-fold in favor of Iran during the ten-year period of March 1999 to
March 2009.

Abdolhamid Assadian, the TPOI’s bureau director for trade with
European and American countries, said that Iran-Armenia trade balance
was $11.8 million in March 1999 in favor of Iran, but the figure
surged to $119.61 million in March 2009, showing a nearly ten-fold
growth.

In 1999, Iran’s value of exports to Armenia stood at $37 million which
increased to $141.18 million in the Iranian calendar year ending in
March 2009, the official added, noting that Iran’s imports from
Armenia declined to $21.57 million in March 2009 from $25.2 million in
1999, according to the Mehr News Agency.

Establishment of a joint chamber of commerce, building Iranian stores
in Yerevan, establishment of the Iranian Trade Association, and
launching Bank Mellat branches in Yerevan were the main measures the
sides have taken to boost relations

KAZAKHSTAN INTERESTED IN COOPERATION WITH ARMENIA IN FINANCIAL SPHERE

ArmInfo
2009-05-23 12:44:00

ArmInfo. Kazakhstan is interested in cooperation with Armenia in
the financial system, Armenian Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan told
journalists on board the plane, Friday, when returning from the
sitting of the Council of CIS prime ministers held in Astana.

"Within the frames of the sitting, a meeting with Chairman of the
Central Bank of Kazakhstan Grigory Marchenko was held, which covered
the anti-crisis measures in the banking and financial sphere",-
the prime minister said. He pointed out that today Kazakhstan has
serious problems in this sphere which are not completely overcome,
but decisive steps have been taken in this matter. "I consider that
we’re interested in cooperation in the financial system",- he said.

At the same time, Tigran Sargsyan said that on May 22 he discussed
with his Kazakh counterpart Karim Masimov the issues on the agenda
of the Armenian-Kazakh intergovernmental commission, issues of
promotion of the bilateral economic cooperation and its further
stimulation. "Certain activity has recently been observed, but we
are still discontent with this level of economic cooperation",-
Sargsyan stressed.

To recall, an Armenian delegation headed by Armenian Prime Minister
Tigran Sargsyan participated in May 22 sitting of the Council of
CIS prime ministers in Astana. The delegation included Head of the
Governmental Administration David Sargsyan, Culture Minister Hasmik
Poghosyan, Deputy Foreign Minister Shavarsh Kocharyan, Armenian
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Kazakhstan Vasily
Kazaryan, Armenian Ambassador to Belarus Oleg Yesayan, Armenian
Representative Plenipotentiary to the Commission for Economic Issues
under CIS Economic Council Artak Vardanyan.

RESEARCH FINDINGS FROM A.A. HAKOBYAN ET AL UPDATE UNDERSTANDING OF ASTROPHYSICS

Science Letter
May 19, 2009

"The determination of the supernova (SN) rate is based not only on
the number of detected events, but also on the properties of the
parent galaxy population. This is the first paper of a series aimed
at obtaining new, refined, SN rates from a set of five SN surveys,
by making use of a joint analysis of near-infrared (NIR) data,"
scientists in Armenia report (see also Astrophysics).

"We describe the properties of the 3838 galaxies that were monitored
for SNe events, including newly determined morphologies and their
DENIS, and POSS-II/UKST I, 2MASS and DENIS J and K-s and 2MASS
H magnitudes. We have compared 2MASS, DENIS and POSS-II/UKST IJK
magnitudes in order to find possible systematic photometric shifts
in the measurements. The DENIS and POSS-II/UKST I band magnitudes
show large discrepancies (mean absolute difference of 0.4 mag.),
mostly due to different spectral responses of the two instruments,
with an important contribution (0.33 mag rms) from the large
uncertainties in the photometric calibration of the POSS-II and UKST
photographic plates. In the other wavebands, the limiting near infrared
magnitude, morphology, and inclination of the galaxies are the most
influential factors which affect the determination of photometry of
the galaxies. Nevertheless, no significant systematic differences
have been found between any pair of NIR magnitude measurements,
except for a few percent of galaxies showing large discrepancies,"
wrote A.A. Hakobyan and colleagues.

The researchers concluded: "This allows us to combine DENIS and 2MASS
data for the J and K-s filters."

Hakobyan and colleagues published their study in Astrophysics (Five
supernova survey galaxies in the southern hemisphere. I. Optical and
near-infrared database. Astrophysics, 2009;52(1):40-53).

PRESIDENT OF CROATIA IS VISITING ARMENIA IN THE INVITATION OF THE ARMENIAN PRESIDENT

armradio.am
21.05.2009 14:37

Styepan Mesich, the president of Croatia will arrive in Armenia today
on the invitation of the Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan. This is
the first official visit of Croatias President to our country. The
main goal of the visit is to intensify the interstate-relations,
pre-mention the first directions and problems within the economical
cooperation between this two countries and to contribute to the
educational and cultural development.

Tomorrow, on 22. of May the official welcome-ceremony of Croatias
President will take place in the residence of the President of Armenia,
which will be followed by the separate talk of The both presidents.

Than the official Delegations will join the talk, after which a number
of official documents will be signed. The presidents of Armenia and
Croatia will also give a press conference.

Within the frames of his visit Styepan Mesich will also meet the
President of the Parliament Hovik Abrahamyan and the Prime Minister
Tigran Sargsyan, he will also be invited by the Armenian Catholicos
Garegin the II. The President of Croatia will visit the Genocide
Memorandum and also the Genocide Museum.

In the President of Croatia Styepan Mesich will also have a meeting
with the Professors and Students of the Yerevan State University.

During his visit to Armenia he will alsi visit the Manuscript Museum
Matenadaran. President Mesich will leave Armenia on May.23.

RUSSIA LOANS ARMENIA 500 MILLION DOLLARS: FINANCE MINISTRY

MSN Indonesia
aspx?cp-documentid=3326979
May 20 2009

Russia on Wednesday agreed to lend Armenia 500 million dollars (365
million euros) to help the post-Soviet nation withstand the economic
crisis, a finance ministry spokesman said.

The loan agreement was signed at a meeting in Moscow between Russian
Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin and his Armenian counterpart Tigran
Davtian.

The 15-year loan is to be spent on "measures to develop infrastructure,
small and medium-sized business and the Armenian economy as a whole,"
Russian finance ministry spokesman Andrei Saiko told AFP.

It comes with a tolerable interest rate of four percent, he said.

The loan reflects Russia’s close economic ties to Armenia, which
is in a state of partial isolation due to conflicts with Azerbaijan
and Turkey.

It is also in line with a Kremlin policy of rewarding allies with
financial aide for their loyalty.

Moscow has repeatedly propped up Belarus’ struggling economy and
earlier this year promised more than two billion dollars in loans
and aide to Kyrgyzstan.

That announcement came after the Central Asian state said a US military
base on it territory would be closed.

Most recently, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, visiting Mongolia last
week, promised Ulan Bator "necessary credit resources," reflecting
Russia’s desire for a foothold in the resource-rich neighbour.

Ukraine has also asked Russia for a five-billion-dollar loan, but
the Kremlin said the country’s pro-Western stance jeopardized Kiev’s
chances of getting the money.

The finance ministry spokesman declined to comment on the Ukrainian
request Wednesday.

TURKEY TRIES TO OPEN THE BORDER WITH ARMENIA TO HAVE SOME INFLUENCE IN THE REGION

ArmInfo
2009-05-20 07:28:00

Interview by David Stepanyan

Interview of Director of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the
Armenian National Academy of Sciences, a well-known turcologist,
Professor Ruben Safrastyan with ArmInfo

Mr. Safrastyan, do the preconditions by the Turkish party with regard
to Armenia play any part in the "Roadmap"?. If yes, then what?

Today we have a situation when there are official statements by
our Foreign Ministry and by representatives of the US Department
of State, according to which the preconditions earlier set by
Turkey, in particular, the Karabakh issue, do not work in with the
Armenian-Turkish negotiations. That is to say, having signed the ,
Ankara abandons these preconditions. It is difficult to judge about
the content of this document unless it is fully published. However,
I am inclined to believe in the statements by Armenia’s FM and US
Department of State. As for the issue of the Armenian Genocide and
the Kars Treaty, I do not believe in publications of "Sabah" Turkish
newspaper saying they have been included in the Map as preconditions.

Moreover, I am inclined to suppose that this was a special media leak
organized by Turkey’s Foreign Ministry for internal use, first of all,
for relief of the flared up passions in Turkey and Azerbaijan.

In that case,=2 0what is Turkey’s benefit if it abandons preconditions?

This is just the major issue. Even so, I am inclined to connect this
desire of Ankara with the geopolitical situation in the South Caucasus,
taking into account the fact that after the August war Russia has
scored great advantage in the region: it violated the previous status
quo and created a new one in its own benefit. Thus, Turkey has lost its
positions in the region. In particular, Ankara invested great amounts
in the economy and military infrastructure of Georgia, and after the
August war all this was actually lost. Based on this Georgia, as a
real geopolitical factor, is presently in a quite deplorable state. On
the other hand, there is Azerbaijan which was on Georgia’s side on the
first day of the war, and then it flopped over Russia. Now, Azerbaijan
is closer to Russia than to the West. At the same time, Turkey offered
to create a small alliance to comprise Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey,
which would be headed by Turkey. Actually, this was just the plan
which went to smash after the Russian-Georgian war. Therefore,
Turkey tried to respond to this advantage of Russia and advanced
the concept of the Caucasus Platform which was an attempt to balance
the geopolitical success of Russia at the political level. However,
we see that the Platform has actually no chances to succeed. That’s
why, Turkey is trying to open the border with Armenia and provi de
itself with an opportunity to have some influence in the region. I
think just these geopolitical considerations played their part here.

Does it turn out that Turkey makes concessions in its sole discretion
based on its regional ambitions only?

First of all, I am not sure that the negotiation process will have any
more or less real result. It is still early to say about it. However,
it was clear up to this day that Turkey prefers its interests to those
of Azerbaijan. I used to always say that Turkey is not a country to
sacrifice its interests for those of its "younger brother".

How will Azerbaijan respond if the Roadmap is nevertheless published
and the Karabakh conflict is not mentioned in it as a precondition?

I think Baku has already accepted this. I do not think the relations
between the Azerbaijanis and Turks are actually brotherly, Azerbaijan
needs Turkey more or less, and it should swallow this pill.

What is your vision of the chronology of events in the Armenian-Turkish
relations? Many analysts claim that the border will be opened at first,
but it is impossible without establishment of diplomatic relations.

I also think so. Diplomatic relations should be established,
some representations should be opened, certain representatives and
then ambassadors must be appointed. I would still abstain from any
predictions, I am not sure that this will happen – the time will
show. Perhaps, no diplomatic relations will be establishment at all.

Why do you think so?

First, because the "Roadmap" signed is a framework agreement, i.e. this
document has no real force. Second, it does not contain many important
and principle issues. There is just a list of steps to be taken, and
specific negotiations with Turkey will be held just on these steps. It
is typical for the case when a framework agreement is signed, and I
am not sure these negotiations will have some result. The negotiations
may have success or a zero result.

Turkey’s interest in the Roadmap is clear, like its signing just
on April 23 is clear, as Barack Obama spoke Armenian on the next
day. What is Armenia’s interest?

I do not think we were interested in signing of the Roadmap just
on April 23. I think some diplomatic laws and regularities of the
negotiation process played their part here. Personally for me, it
would be more comfortable if it happened not on the eve of April 24.

Are we ready for opening of the borders?

I think our government should treat this issue very seriously. First,
it should prepare a concept – a document marking possible benefits
from the border opening, as well as possible risks related to this,
and, above all, some specific measures due to which Armenia would
receive more advantages than risks. I think this is just what we have
to do first of all.

Does Armen ia play independently in its game with Turkey or everything
is reduced to the collisions between the USA and Russia?

I had an article even in 2005 – a speech at the international
conference on the Genocide. The article was dedicated to the problem
of the Genocide recognition as a geopolitical factor. Even then I
came to the conclusion that the problem of the Genocide recognition
is one of the small opportunities of Armenia to conduct its policy
more or less independently.

This is the issue where we have the right to take a decision based
solely on our and not on others’ interests, unlike the Karabakh problem
which partially depends on other countries. Unlike the Genocide issue,
considerable pressure is put on us in the Karabakh problem. I think
we play independently also in the issue of the Armenian-Turkish
relations. It proceeds from the common concept of Armenia’s foreign
policy, i.e. normalization of the relations with Turkey without
preconditions. Second, the Russian-Georgian war has shown how we depend
on Georgia. Third, the entry in the external world is of geopolitical
importance for us. So, we have to solve this problem.

What about the Kars Treaty?

The Kars Treaty was signed under pressure on October 13, 1921,
by the government of the Soviet Armenia. But the point is that the
section concerning Armenia and Turkey and the borders between them was
almost completely withdrawn from the Sov iet-Turkish treaty signed in
March. Under this treaty, we accepted the Turkish border in the form
it exists now. And we perceive this treaty as unfair and compulsive,
and I do not think that Levon Ter-Petrosyan or Robert Kocharyan or
Serzh Sargsyan would accept the Kars Treaty. However, if proceed from
the pure realities, all the treaties are just a piece of paper.

The force bears the right. That’s it. The meaning of our refusal is
to accept that the Kars Treaty concerns not only the border to Turkey
but also the status of Nakhichevan. Moreover, it is an unfair and
compulsive treaty.

We did not sign it in fact. So, I think another treaty will be prepared
if the real process of normalization of the Armenian-Turkish relations
starts.

What is the present internal political situation in Turkey, especially
in the light of the Cabinet shake-up by Erdogan?

As for the relations with Armenia, conventionally we can say about
existence of two groupings in Turkey which have somewhat different
assessment of the relations with Armenia. One of them has been
represented by Premier Erdogan, a populist who very seriously uses
different kinds of slogans saying, in particular, that Turkey will
not betray Azerbaijan, it is discontent with the United States and
Barack Obama’s speeches on April 24. There is also a conventional
grouping of President Gul, which advocates the real policy.

However, there is a consent between the m, i.e. the decisions are made
jointly, as both of them are the leaders of the Justice and Development
party. As for the Cabinet shake-up, I positively treat appointment of
Ahmet Davutoglu the foreign minister. I am acquainted with his book
"Strategic Depth" and the approaches it presents. Davutoglu advocates
more considerable role of Turkey in the region and movement of the
foreign political vector of Ankara from the West to the East. Davutoglu
is an architect of the new and closer relations with the Arab world,
he also played a part of a mediator during the negotiations between
Syria and Israel. Davutoglu’s approach is as follows: zero problems
with the neighbours. If he implements his approaches, we should
consider his appointment in a favourable context for normalization
of the Armenian-Turkish relations. Davutoglu is homely with Gul and
Erdogan, however, he has his own views.

Recently, the president of France claimed once again that Turkey has
no place in EU. Did the latter accept it?

I think it did not, as France does not represent EU singly. In
case the social-democrats in Germany, for example, come to power,
the position of Germany with regard to the prospects of Turkey’s
membership in EU will apparently change. Moreover, Turkey has chances
to join EU against the background of USA’s aspiration to push it in
it, although the majority of the Europeans are against this. I think
the highlight of the European policy with respect to Turkey is just
to keep it at the doors of EU on petitioner’s bench, opening the door
but not letting Turkey in.

Thank you.

ITV DEPARTMENT CHIEF: "43 VOTES WERE SENT FROM AZERBAIJAN TO ARMENIA IN THE FINAL VOTING OF EUROVISION-2009"

APA
May 19 2009
Azerbaijan

Baku. Ulkar Gasimova – APA. "Armenia’s intention to sue the Public
Television is very wrong. All Azerbaijani people knew the numbers
of voting.

If Armenia’s number had not been known and the people had been
unaware of it, Azerbaijan would not have sent 43 votes to Armenian
representatives. This is the official information," chief of public
affairs department of Public Television and Radio Broadcasting Company
Tahir Mammadov told APA. ITV official expressed his confidence that
the court would properly assess Armenia’s step.

"If they do this, the court will properly assess their action. Their
action is ridiculous. This is not the political meaning. Those 43 votes
were not publicized because they did not make up 1 percent," he said.

RA FOREIGN AND DEFENCE MINISTERS TO TAKE PART IN NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL’S MAY 20 SITTING

Noyan Tapan
May 19, 2009

YEREVAN, MAY 19, NOYAN TAPAN. North Atlantic Council’s sitting in
the format 28+1 will be held on May 20. RA Foreign Minister Edward
Nalbandian and Defence Minister Seyran Ohanian will leave for Brussels
to take part in it.

The Armenia-NATO completed Individual Partnership Actions Plan (IPAP)
will be discussed at the sitting.

According to the RA Foreign Ministry Press and Information Department,
E. Nalbandian’s and S. Ohanian’s meeting with NATO Secretary General
is planned before the meeting.

According to the same source, at the invitation of Reformation Federal
Command Commander James Matis, head of Armenia’s mission in NATO Samvel
Mkrtchian visited Reformation Federal Command central headquarters
on May 11-13.

During the meetings with Reformation Federal Command high-ranking
representatives S. Mkrtchian presented Armenia’s security policy
principles, the process of last years of cooperation with NATO and
plans for the future, efforts aimed at normalizing the Armenian-Turkish
relations, the Nagorno Karabakh settlement negotiations process,
regional problems in the South

HAYASTAN FUND’S BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING IN YEREVAN
Shakeh Avoyan

"Radiolur"
18.05.2009 13:23

The 18th sitting of the Board of Trustless of the Hayastan
All-Armenian Fund is underway at the Government House of Receptions in
Yerevan. During the sitting the Trustees envisage to make changes in
the statute of the Fund, involve new members in the Board of Trustees
and confirm Ara Vardanyan as Executive Director of the Fund.

According to the President of Armenia, President of the Board of
Trustees of the Hayastan All-Armenian Fund ,Serzh Sargsyan, a new
issue has been put on the agenda of the sitting, i.e. the discussion
of issue of all-Armenian importance.

"The Board of Trustees of the Hayastan All Armenian Fund includes
the Heads of all pivotal structures of Armenia and Diaspora and
representatives of largest Armenian communities. Nevertheless, up to
now our sittings have been mostly restricted to discussions on ongoing
programs. I have decided to use this opportunity of the sittings of
the Board of Trustees to introduce you to the developments in the
existing issues of pan-Armenian importance.

Today I would like to make particular reference to the efforts
targeted at the normalization of the Armenian-Turkish relations and
the negotiations on the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh issue,"
President Sargsyan said.