Author: Frangulian Shushan

NEXT PRESIDENT – ALI KERIMLI?

Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR)
21 Feb 05

The question headlining this article will be answered in the course of
time. However, if we follow attentively the home political developments
in Baku, we shall notice an important circumstance: the West seems to
have decided to rely on the leader of the political party Popular
Front of Azerbaijan (Popular Front of Azerbaijan – `reformers’) Ali
Kerimli. Butcan he an Azerbaijani Saakashvili or Yushchenko? We have
doubts in this reference which we will share with the reader later.
And now let us try to see why Ali Kerimli appeals to Western
political scientists and technologists. Compared with the leaders of
the other leading oppositionist parties the indisputable advantage of
Ali Kerimli is his pragmatism and consideration of new actualities.
These very characteristic features became the reason why after the
death of the leader of the Popular Front of Azerbaijan Abulfaz
Elchibey his first assistant Ali Kerimli divided the political party
into two separate parties one of which was called Popular Front of
Azerbaijan (`reformers’) the other Popular Front of Azerbaijan (`
classics’). The `classics’ were headed by anti-Armenian, supporter of
the line of Abulfaz Elchibey Mirmahmud Fataev. He is known to us the
people of Karabakhby the fact that he advised his fellow countrymen to
cut the ears of those representatives of Nagorni Karabakh (in
particular, the chairman of the NK committee of `Helsinki Undertaking
92′) who will decide to visit Azerbaijan. Ali Kerimli became the
leader of the `reformers’ getting rid ofthe politically blunt who
appeared in the camp of the `classics’. It is clear that this
circumstance could not but be commended by the western countries
accreditedin Baku, first of all the embassies of the USA, Great
Britain, France, Germany and Turkey. The other advantage of Ali
Kerimli is his attempt to bring together the right-wing radical
nationalist oppositionist forces in his struggle againstthe Aliev
regime: the musavatists of Isa Ghambar, `democrats’ of ex-speaker
Rasul Guliev, the National Independence Party till recently led by not
unknown Etibar Mamedov, the `grey wolves’ of Iskender Hamidov and
other influential political parties. In this direction Ali Kerimli was
especially active in autumn of 2003, on the eve of the latest
presidential election in Azerbaijan. However, his presumptuous false
supporters (particularly Isa Ghambar) did not allow the unification of
anti-Aliev forces. As a result Ilham Aliev who won the election
defeated the supporters of Gambar who were on the verge of raising
protest the next day. After such a blow the musavatists, as well as
all the left-wing and right-wing forces have been unable to recover.
That the efforts of Ali Kerimli to unify the Azerbaijani opposition
were approved by the West is asserted by the fact that the official
representatives of embassies of many leading countries in Azerbaijan
participated in the June 1 plenary meeting of the Popular Front of
Azerbaijan (`reformers’). It is also important that Ali Kerimli is
supported by such western authoritative organizations as the National
Democratic Institute (USA), the International Institute of Republicans
(USA) Friedrich Naumann Foundation (Germany), etc. Meanwhile, new
elections await the citizens of Azerbaijan, this time to the
parliament, which will take place in autumn. Ali Kerimli, as it could
be expected, is again actively seeking to bring together the
opposition. `Overcoming the stress the society underwent after the
presidential election in 2003 after long reflections I came to the
conclusion that an essential stimulus is needed to get out of the
current situation,’ shared his thoughts Ali Kerimli. `Such a stimulus
can become the new unification and cooperation of the Azerbaijani
opposition on a healthy basis. If we manage to form an alliance of all
those forces which want to see changes and reforms in the country, it
will first of all strengthen people’s belief in themselves and belief
in the prospect of changes.’ `The unification of forces,’ Kerimli went
on, `will also guarantee that after the parliamentary election people
will defend their votes if needed.’ Pay attention to the last phrase
`people will defend their votes’. Doesn’t it smell like the events in
Georgia and Ukraine in Azerbaijan? Quite possible. Also it is not
excluded that the West already works with the leader of the Popular
Front of Azerbaijan (`reformers’) in this direction. The evidence to
this is the recent visit of Ali Kerimli to a number of European
countries (Norway, Sweden and France), as well as the USA. Whatis
more, in this country he met with not secondary politicians. Thus, in
France he even met with the foreign minister, discussed the public and
political situation in Azerbaijan. In this reference it is significant
to mention thewords of the foreign minister that the international
organizations should start discussions with the Azerbaijani government
for creating a democratic atmosphere on the eve of the parliamentary
election. The other high officials he met with also spoke about the
vital interest of the West in conducting free and fair parliamentary
elections in Azerbaijan. Meanwhile, the leader of the `reformist’
popular front is mustering courage day by day. `Despite 2003 when we
behaved quite properly, this year we shall be tougher,’ stated Kerimli
in his interview to one of the popular newspapers of Baku. `We will
appealto the society to give a peculiar punishment to the leader who
will hinder unification. I believe in unification. We cannot make the
same mistake twice. We will not allow 2003 to repeat.’ Behind these
words it should be understood that Ali Kerimli’s intention is to stand
for elections with a unified candidate in each of the 124
constituencies. The election to Mili Mejlis (the parliament) of
Azerbaijan will be conducted by the majority system because election
by party tickets is forbidden by the authorities in this country.

Thus, in the upcoming parliamentary elections Ali Kerimli will rely on
the West and the unification of the opposition. Because there is no
doubt that the authorities will falsify the election results by all
means. Ali Kerimli also hopes that the unification of the opposition
backed by the West may cause the people to protest and not only
achieve the reconsideration of the election results but also demand
Ilham Aliev’s resignation. The same happened in Georgia once. However,
let us come back to the question set forth above: will Ali Kerimli
become an Azerbaijani Saakashvili or Yushchenko? Such a scenario seems
more than problematic to us. The thing is that Ali Kerimli has already
been in the government. It was during the governance of the popular
front which discredited itself. At the age of 27 he was appointed
state secretary of Azerbaijan by Abulfaz Elchibey. His fast move into
big politics is also interesting. In the summer of 1991 when the
national liberation movement of Karabakh had already underwent the
massacres of Armenians in Sumgait, Baku, Kirovabad (Ganja) and other
places in Azerbaijan, when the military action `Koltso’ of violent
displacement of Armenians from Karabakh implemented together by the
forces of the USSR Ministry of Home Affairs andthe Azerbaijani omon,
the special militia forces, was gathering momentum, Ali Amirhusein
oghli Kerimov, not yet `Kerimli’, was just graduating from the
department of law of Azerbaijani State University after Kirov at the
age of25. He intruded into politics through establishing the
non-official youth organization ` Yurd’ (`Fatherland’) which became a
peculiar `komsomol’ for the movement of ` popular front’. Thus, Ali
Kerimli came to power at the expense of the blood of innocent people,
unlike Saakashvili or Yushchenko. Second, we do not think that the
Azerbaijani opposition will agree to such a union in which Ali Kerimli
will order everybody. By the way, this was stated by the leader of
`Musavat’ Isa Gambar who advised the local journalists not to hurry in
making conclusions on the unification of oppositionist forces. Third,
the Azerbaijani authorities will do their best to prevent
unification. The Azerbaijani mentality which has got used to honouring
power will allow Ilham Aliev, as formerly allowed his father, to
achieve his aim. Thus, today already various coalitions are emerging
in Azerbaijan as mushrooms after rain which will hardly ally with Ali
Kerimli. Among these are the alliance `Solidarity and Confidence’ and
the union of the political parties `Civil Solidarity’, `Adalat’
(`Justice’), and ` Svoboda’ (`Freedom’). Undoubtedly, in the period
before the election the top government of Azerbaijan directly
encourages establishment of as many political alliances as
possible. Probably, the National Independence Party will play its
traditional game. The pro-Russian democrats together with their allies
from the `Vahdat’ and Islamic parties also will hardly resort
toalliance with the radical nationalist opposition. There is no need
even to speak about the communists. And fourth, the West itself may
refuse to support Ali Kerimli at a crucial moment because of his
militarist moods for the question of Karabakh. The West is for the
peaceful settlement of the Karabakh problem through compromise. It is
true that these days Ali Kerimli seeks to speak less about Karabakh
and more about democratization of Azerbaijan. However, this does not
mean that after coming to power he will deny his words. This
circumstance is, indeed,taken into account by the West. Therefore,
getting close with Ali Kerimli, at the same time the West will not
forget about Ilham Aliev who may in the future,on the whole, come to
the liking of the Europeans and Americans because they are aware that
the notions of `democracy’ and `Azerbaijan’ will hardly be compatible
in the near future.

ALEXANDER GRIGORIAN.
21-02-2005

Azeri Foreign Ministry condemns Armenian excavations in Karabakh

ANS TV, Baku
19 Feb 05

Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry has released a statement in connection
with the archaeological excavations launched by the separatist Nagornyy
Karabakh regime around the town of Susa.

The statement reads that this arbitrary move by the so-called
government in Azerbaijan’s occupied Nagornyy Karabakh region is an act
of vandalism aimed at falsifying the historical truth in favour of the
Armenians, the head of the ministry’s press service, Matin Mirza, has
said. The recent acts of this kind aimed at changing the demographic
situation and Armenianizing historical and cultural monuments in the
occupied territories show once again the nonconstructive position
of the so-called Armenian government of Nagornyy Karabakh on the
settlement process. These moves are nothing but an attempt to
strengthen the results of aggressive policy.

This arbitrary act, which followed the visit of the OSCE fact-finding
mission to the region, is viewed as an attempt to challenge
international organizations, ignore the accepted laws and display
disrespect for the international community.

The statement goes on to read that the states mediating the peace
process [between Armenia and Azerbaijan] and the international
community as a whole should not remain indifferent to the issue and
demand that the Armenians stop their arbitrary acts in the occupied
territories.

France and Turkey’s EU Bid

Journal of Turkish Weekly
Feb 18 2005

Many French are sceptical about Turkey’s EU bid according to a poll
by CSA published in Valeurs Actuelles.

57 per cent of respondents are opposed to the country’s entry into
the continental alliance, a seven per cent increase since December.

In December, the EU agreed to begin accession talks with Turkey on
Oct. 3, 2005. The EU with this decison confirmed that Turkey has
fulfiiled all the requirements for full-membership including
democratization, human rights contions and economy.

French President Jacques Chirac publicly supported the start of
accession talks between the EU and Turkey. However there is a strong
Armenian lobby group in France and the French Armenians strongly
oppose Turkey’s EU entry. Similarly the racist and anti-Muslim French
groups claim that Turkey is a Muslim country and there is no place in
the EU for the Muslims. Religionist groups in many European countries
defend that the EU is a civilasation project and Christianity is one
of the most important columns.

Polling Data

Do you support or oppose Turkey’s accession into the European Union
(EU)?

Feb. 2005 Dec. 2004

Support 28% 37%

Oppose 57% 50%

No reply 15% 13%

Voting intention of respondents who intend to participate in the
European Constitution referendum

Yes No

Those who support
Turkey’s accession 72% 28%

Those against
Turkey’s accession 50% 50%

Source: CSA / Valeurs Actuelles
Methodology: Telephone interviews to 798 French adults, conducted on
Feb. 2 and Feb. 3, 2005.

Agency WPS
What the Papers Say. Part A (Russia)
February 17, 2005, Thursday

THE CIS: ONE STEP AWAY FROM FALLING APART

SOURCE: Argumenty i Fakty, No. 7, February 16, 2005, p. 5

by Alexander Kolesnichenko

Konstantin Zatulin, Duma member and head of the Russian Institute for
CIS Countries, discusses the undercurrents in the Commonwealth of
Independent States.

* * *

Until recently, the purpose of existence for the CIS might have been
summed up as follows: to enable all member states to extract
privileges and concessions from Russia. Moscow was alone in insisting
that the CIS really existed. Over the past couple of years, however,
it’s become clear that the former Soviet republics are rapidly
sliding off in different directions. Moldova, Georgia, and Ukraine
seek to join European organizations, following in the footsteps of
the Baltic states. And Russia is even having problems in relations
with its closest partners: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, and
Belarus.

Ukraine has always been the greatest threat to the idea of preserving
the CIS. It is the only post-Soviet state capable of becoming a real
counterweight to Russia, and the fact that the pro-Western Viktor
Yushchenko has come to power may accelerate that process. The first
test of stability will be the Trans-Dniester region.

This unrecognized republic borders on Moldova and Ukraine. Moldovan
President Vladimir Voronin (the only CIS president to attend Viktor
Yushchenko’s inauguration) is relying on Ukraine to complete the
economic blockade of this “rebel territory.” Voronin believes that
once the Trans-Dniester region is entirely isolated from the outside
world, Tiraspol will surrender. But things aren’t that simple.
Ukraine’s nationalists consider the Trans-Dniester region to be
theirs. With their support, Yushchenko could start a game of his own,
turning the tables by offering active support to the Trans-Dniester
region. And Russia would be sidelined, losing its compatriots.

There are also some more far-reaching problems lying in store for us.
In the very near future, the GUUAM organization will make itself
heard. This is the only organization in the CIS of which Russia is
not a member. The GUUAM members are Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan,
Azerbaijan, and Moldova. GUUAM was founded in 1999 at a NATO meeting
in Brussels, as a counterweight to Russia.

All this makes it clear that the former Soviet Union is continuing to
separate into two camps. The first, pursuing advantages for itself,
still relies on Russia; but it is continuing to shrink. The second is
growing, but it is a channel for outside influence. And the greatest
tests for Russia in relations with its nearest neighbors are still to
come.

Ukraine’s potential ambitions are the main problem in the foreseeable
future. Some parts of southern Russia are susceptible to agitation
from Ukraine: the Voronezh region, the Krasnodar territory, and
others. Against a backdrop of dissatisfaction with Moscow, there
could be fertile soil here for the “Why do we need Moscow, if it
gives us nothing?” question and the slogan of “We’re sick and tired
of the Chechnya problem.”

Imagine that Russia – for a number of reasons, including due to a
confrontation with the West – becomes bogged down in its own
problems. Meanwhile, Ukraine – thanks to the West – grows rapidly and
seeks opportunites for expansion. The only possible direction for
Ukraine’s economic, cultural, and any other expansion is Russia. And
the West will be nudging Ukraine in that direction.

* * *

Addendum

The CIS Inter-State Statistical Committee recently released economic
development results for 2004. The best figures were recorded in
Ukraine: GDP growth of 12%. It was followed closely by Belarus, with
11%. Tajikistan’s economy grew by 10.6%, Azerbaijan’s by 10.2%, and
Armenia’s by 10.1%. But Russia was at the bottom of the list, with
GDP growth of only 7.1%, the worst result in the CIS.

Translated by Pavel Pushkin

SBC Communications Receives “2004 Diversity Award” from World’s Largest
Language Services Provider

Business Wire
Feb 16, 2005

Language Line Services recognizes SBC companies for outstanding
corporate leadership in serving customers of all languages and cultures

SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE: SBC) has been honored for the company’s
commitment to serving consumers in more than 150 languages. The “2004
Diversity Award” was presented to SBC Communications by Language
Line Services(a), the world’s largest provider of over-the-phone
interpretation.

The award recognizes the company for providing Interpreter service(a)
free of charge in more than 150 languages, and for reaching out
to California’s ethnic communities through creative outdoor media,
direct-mail, ethnic festivals and outreach programs, and advertising
in select ethnic periodicals and newspapers.

“It’s an honor to win this award because the SBC family of companies is
committed to understanding and serving the unique needs of our diverse
California customer base,” said Jody Garcia, SBC Vice President of
Diverse Markets Group. “Not only is it the right thing to do, but
providing telecommunications and entertainment services to consumers
in their own language is a sound business strategy for the company.”

Garcia points out that SBC representatives are fielding calls from
consumers in more than 100 languages. The top 10 languages for the
number of incoming calls are Russian, Armenian, Farsi, Punjabi,
Portuguese, Hmong, Arabic, French, Thai and Cambodian.

Language Line Services builds on the SBC tradition of providing
excellent customer service. In the 1980s, the SBC family of companies
began providing customer service in Spanish to meet the needs of the
growing Latino population. SBC California later expanded in-language
customer service support to include call centers in six additional
languages: Mandarin, Cantonese, Vietnamese, Tagalog, Japanese and
Korean.

With Language Line Services, customers call in the language of their
choice to inquire about their bill, set-up phone service, change or
add services such as SBC Long Distance or SBC Yahoo! DSL, or have
other questions answered. The service is free to customers.

“The SBC family of companies has distinguished itself as a true
corporate citizen,” said Louis Provenzano, senior vice president
of sales for Language Line Services. “It is a model for all other
organizations that aspire to understand the cultures of their
customers and to communicate in the languages their customers prefer –
their own.”

SBC California customers can access SBC Language Lines customer
service at no charge by dialing 1-800-203-8600.

(a) Interpreter services are provided by SBC California Customer
service through Language LineServices, Inc., a company that specializes
in translations and language interpretation.

SBC Communications Inc. is a Fortune 50 company whose subsidiaries,
operating under the SBC brand, provide a full range of voice, data,
networking, e-business, directory publishing and advertising, and
related services to businesses, consumers and other telecommunications
providers. SBC holds a 60 percent ownership interest in Cingular
Wireless, which serves 49.1 million wireless customers. SBC companies
provide high-speed DSL Internet access lines to more American consumers
than any other provider and are among the nation’s leading providers of
Internet services. SBC companies also now offer satellite TV service.
Additional information about SBC and SBC products and services is
available at

SBC is a registered trademark of SBC Knowledge Ventures, L.P. (C)
2004 SBC Knowledge Ventures, L.P. All rights reserved. Cingular
is a registered trademark of Cingular Wireless LLC. SBC logos are
trademarks of SBC Knowledge Ventures, L.P. (C) 2004 SBC Knowledge
Ventures, L.P. All rights reserved.SBC Carey Brock, 415-318-4240

Azerbaijan entering caliphate?
By Gayane Movsesian

Yerkir/arm
11 Feb 05

A number of websites linked to â~@~Hasb Ut-Tahrirâ~@~] and other
radical organizations have posted the â~@~new world mapâ~@~], which
has a caliphate in the center of the superpower. From 1517 to 1924,
â~@~caliphateâ~@~] stood for the Ottoman Empire. Presently it
involves 49 states. And later on, the ideologists of caliphate believe
it will include the empire of the whole world.

The article â~@~Basics of Caliphateâ~@~] says that the countries,
considered by the Islamic fundamentalists as their part, are called the
core and the dubious states are suburbs. There is data that indicates
that the potential caliphate today includes 49 countries and 4 lands
that are in Central Asia, Africa, and South-Eastern Asia.

The core of the caliphate includes: Afghanistan, Algeria, Azerbaijan,
Brunei, Cameroon, Chad, Ivory Coast, Egypt, Guinea, Iran, Iraq,
Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Libya, Maldives, Mauritania, Oman, Pakistan,
Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somali, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Togo, Tunisia,
Turkmenistan, UAE, Uzbekistan (31 states in total).

The suburbs of the caliphate are: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Burkina Faso,
Comorian isles, Djibouti, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Indonesia,
Kuwait, Malaysia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Yemen
(18 in total).

And now the actual caliphate also comes to include Chechnya,
Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, territories controlled by Palestinians
(4 in total).

According to approximate calculations, over 10 per cent of the world
population lives in the core caliphate as of 2005, while the suburbs
have 10.5 per cent of the world population.

Note for a comparison that USA have 10 per cent of the world population
and China â~@~S 20 per cent. In addition, some of the territories
are currently controlled by the caliphate ideologists. They have a
number of illegal armed groups. And there are also great deals of
people who support the caliphate ideology. The article also says
that most of them are not linked to terrorism. They live in the free
world states and promote the caliphate ideology via information items.

The Echo daily of Baku reports that the inclusion of Azerbaijan in that
list is conditioned by the presence of a number of fundamentalist
ideologists and relevant organizations in this country some of
which were consistently shut down by the government in them past
years, namely: â~@~Hasb Ut-Tahrir,â~@~] Islamic brothers and
others. However, â~@~Hasb Ut-Tahrirâ~@~] still reports on its
website that has a functioning cell in Azerbaijanâ~@¦

Baku believes this kind of network tries to diverge Azerbaijan from the
secular direction. On the other hand, certain analysts in Baku report
that the role of Islam in the life of the countryâ~@~Ys society grows.
As the Azerbaijani historian Arif Yunosov believes, it is first of
all related to the â~@~heating around the Karabakh issue, where
it was attempted to label the Azerbaijanis as fundamentalists.â~@~]
By the way, Yunosovâ~@~Ys book â~@~Islam in Azerbaijan is to come
out soon. We shall touch on this in our next edition.

–Boundary_(ID_X+Is8eZEo2UzDevS7jagEg)–

Oil-for-food for thought

Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, PA
Feb 13 2005

Once upon a time, it was possible to read the newspaper, single out a
national public figure and tell your family, gathered for breakfast,
“Now, that’s a man you can trust.”

Today, trust is in such short supply that to claim almost any one
as trustworthy takes real courage. Not just courage, but you have to
have a good, long memory.

Now, Washington and New York insiders are wondering just whom to
trust. This stems from the U.N. oil-for-food program. We are expected
to put our trust in a very mixed bag of individuals.

These “trustworthy” individuals range from the U.N. Secretary-General
Kofi Annan and his son Kojo, to former Secretary-General Boutros
Boutros-Ghali and his many relatives. Then there’s a very senior
U.N. employee, Benon Sevan, together with some 60 members of the
oil-for-food investigative group. And let’s not forget former chairman
of the U.S. Federal Reserve, Paul Volcker.

Everything began with stories on how Mr. Sevan, the head of the
oil-for-food efforts, received secret oil gifts from Saddam Hussein
and passed some of them to so-called statesmen in different parts of
the world who could use their influence for Saddam against the world.

After months of evasions and haggling, Mr. Annan took the very dubious
Dan Rather/CBS solution. Instead of putting a genuine independent in
charge of a truly autonomous inquiry team, he persuaded Mr. Volcker
to put his reputation on the line and lead the investigation.

This caused a problem. In his resume, as published by the United
Nations, there was no mention that he was a director of the U.N.
Nations Association of the United States of America or of the very
active Business Council of the United Nations.

So, in recent years the “independent” head of the oil-for-food
investigation was running the U.N.’s prime advocacy group in the
United States. In addition, Volcker is a former member of the elitist
Trilateral Commission, a small group of internationalists formed by
David Rockefeller in 1973.

There also are links between Volcker and a major shareholder in the
French oil company TotalFinaElf, which had billions of dollars in
contracts with the Iraqi government. That link ties into a shadowy
Iraqi, Achmed Chalabi, who last year was an “unofficial” adviser to
Iraq’s Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). Mr. Chalabi’s advice
was to initiate an oil-for-food investigation using TotalFinaElf’s
accounting firm.

This was done. But L. Paul Bremer, the CPA’s administrator, put in
Ernst & Young as his own watchdog.

Surprise, surprise. Lots turned out wrong. Our State Department
investigators came up with evidence that Chalabi was an Iranian spy.
Chalabi has defenders in the Pentagon who are now feuding with the
State Department and the suspected spy may well become an important
figure in the new Iraqi government.

But, bad news for Paul Volcker. He also was involved in the Enron
scam. He was the man with the whitewash brush brought in by Arthur
Andersen to make sure that none of its executives went to jail for
obstructing justice by shredding Enron’s documents.

Despite his years of experience, Volcker took his U.N. job without
asking for subpoena powers, or to safeguard documents held in Iraq,
or authority to cooperate with any U.S.law-enforcement organization.

Volcker’s initial report this month did not include a smoking gun. It
was considered “politically correct” to avoid the major role not
of Kofi Annan and his son Kojo, but also the former U.N. chieftain
Boutros-Ghali — an Egyptian — and his friends from Cyprus and
Lebanon who are of Armenian descent and who are all members of Coptic
Christian congregations.

There was Cypriot Joseph Stephanides, once director of public affairs
at the Security Council; Benon Sevan, another Cypriot, alleged to have
stolen from the United Nations for some 40 years, and who got his
hands on millions of barrels of oil allocations. There was Boutros,
who after one term at the United Nations, was vetoed by the United
States for a second term, but who set up the oil-for-food program.

Last week, in a British newspaper, Boutros ratted out Kofi Anan,
saying that he, Kofi, did everything that Boutros had done. And,
anyway, the Security Council was responsible.

Then there are Boutros’s relatives. A cousin of Boutros, the Egyptian
oil trader, Fakhry Abdelnour, owner of an oil company based in Geneva,
who lifted 7.3 million barrels at a profit of more than $1.5 million
and Boutros’ brother-in-law, Fred Nadler, who acted as a “good
friend and intermediary” to everybody involved in the oil-for-food
thieving. He shares lawyers who are relatives of Abdelnour.

To which august gathering we can add Kofi’s son, Kojo, who helped sell
2 million barrels of Iraqi oil to a Moroccan company for about $60
million. Kojo was employed by the company that monitored “humanitarian”
supplies imported into Iraq.

And, announcing these findings, the astute and trustworthy Volcker
said that no smoking gun was found. To which, let’s add, that
Annan’s spokesman is talking about “immunity for prosecution for
secretary-generals,” which can be awarded by the U.N. Security Council.

Dateline D.C. is written by a Washington-based British journalist
and political observer.

New bill to bar Armenian ombudsman from courts

Mediamax news agency
10 Feb 05

Yerevan, 10 February: The Armenian government has approved changes
to the law “On the Human Rights Defender”, which deny the ombudsman
the right to interfere in the course of court trials.

Under the new bill, the ombudsman can only consult the plaintiff on
appealing against court verdicts or sentences, the press service of
the Cabinet of Ministers reported today.

It was noted at the government’s meeting that this approach was
observed in the laws of a number of countries.

This Crisis Should be Resolved Too
By EKREM DUMANLI

Zaman, Turkey
Feb 10 2005

One cannot deny the long-term crisis in Turkish-American relations.
The tension, which began with the objection to the March 1
deployment, deepens a bit at every opportunity.

Turkey has many concerns about the developments in Northern Iraq.
Turkey’s expectation of an operation against the Kurdistan Workers’
Party (PKK) has turned into disappointment. Kurdish leaders make
provocative statements on the Kerkuk (Kirkuk) issue and the US
usually foots the bill. The idea that Iran will benefit the most from
a new Iraqi state with a Shiite majority is cause for concern…

The problem is not just limited to Iraq. The US position and Turkey’s
official discourse conflict with one another on the ecumenical
debate. Turkey wants to play a role in the Middle Eastern peace
process, but it also explicitly accuses Israel of “state terrorism.”
This position brings Turkey head to head with US foreign policy.

The magic of the diplomatic profession becomes apparent during
difficult times like these.

Turkey should continue its relations with the US on good terms and
also maintain balance in the rest of the world. Although policies
based on continuous tension straighten out over time, scars usually
remain. Diplomatic foresight allows intervention before tension
peaks.

Last week, I had the opportunity to chat with people in many places,
in particular at The Washington Post. Being in Washington was a big
advantage for a journalist just days before US Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice was scheduled to visit Turkey. Almost everyone was
busy making preparations; almost everyone had questions; almost
everyone had their own interpretation regarding the visit.

Apparently, the US wants to get rid of its negative image that was
created during the Iraqi war and is therefore looking for solutions.
It is also clear that they want to have a closer relationship with
other countries in the world (particularly with Europe) during Bush’s
new term in presidency. The worldwide spread of anti-Americanism is
cause for tremendous concern. Anti-Americanism in Turkey has reached
80 percent according to a British Broadcast Company’s (BBC) public
survey. This finding also concerns the US.

It is hard to believe that this public survey is correct. The Turkish
public is not an enemy to the US, but it is clear that there is
concern about US policies in the Middle East. The Turkish public has
not forgotten the cooperation of Muslims and Americans in Bosnia,
Kosovo, and Somalia, the US help in the seizure of PKK leader
Abdullah Ocalan, the direct US support for European Union (EU)
membership, etc. The chain of incidents that began with the March 1
motion, however, keep tensions running high. Being on scathing terms
sometimes strengthens conspiracy theories as well. As in the famous
sack incident [when US soldiers put bags over the heads of Turkish
soldiers in Iraq], there are other incidents such as being unable to
do anything about the PKK in Northern Iraq that ferment
misunderstanding and anger.

To be honest, US-Turkey relations may face a more difficult period in
the upcoming months. For instance, the “Armenian genocide bill,”
which may ward off a final attack at any minute, might harm Turkey. A
Turkish deputy’s description of US activity in Iraq as “genocide” was
discussed and passed over by Turkish interest groups. That the US
feels unbelievable discomfort is clear enough. A deputy’s remarks are
not, in fact, binding to the Turkish government, but since relations
are built on tension, a new crisis could emerge from almost any
issue.

There are critical issues that both countries have put in the deep
freeze. These issues should be dealt with using clear minds and
diplomatic courtesy. Of course, various possibilities could bring
some opportunities to Turkey, but Turkey cannot give up its role as
America’s “strategic partner.” Turkish diplomacy has solved many
crises skillfully, and it should solve this, too. I hope Rice’s visit
to Turkey becomes a significant step toward normalized relations.

–Boundary_(ID_AtEjL18vvyiGA5r5nYt4gw)–

Anadolu Agency, Turkey
Jan 29 2005

Nixon Center Expert Baran: The U.S. Intends To Change The Status Quo
In Turkey’s Region
Anadolu Agency: 1/29/2005

WASHINGTON, D.C. (AA) – The International Security & Energy Program
Director of the Nixon Center Zeyno Baran has stated that the United
States intends to change the status quo in Turkey’s region. ”Hence,
Turkey would have to pursue a more active policy,” affirmed Baran.
Participating in a panel discussion, sponsored by the
American-Turkish Council (ATC) and Atlantic Council in Washington,
D.C., Baran referred to U.S. President’s inaugural address, where he
mentioned the importance of the spread of democracy globally, and
remarked that in such a scenario Turkey must make clear where it
stands. ”Turkey’s stance will have an impact on the strategic
partnership between Turkey and the U.S..” she said.
Baran pointed out that understanding the reasons behind the Iraq
War is crucial. ”The United States believes that the status quo in
the region created a fertile ground for the September 11 attack. The
US’s intention is clear and they want to change the structure of the
region (Middle East),” remarked Baran. -TURKEY & RUSSIA DON’T WANT
ANY CHANGE-
Baran added that the recent close relations between Turkey and
Russia indicate that the cooperation between the two countries stand
to preserve the status quo in the region. ”Both Turkey and Russia
are worried about changes in the region. They want to preserve the
status quo,” expressed Baran.
According to Baran, being a NATO member, Turkey’s relations with
Russia are a matter of concern for security experts. Baran said that
the Turkish deputies’ qualification of events in Iraq as ”genocide”
will result in a ”tough” resolution on the so-called Armenian
genocide in the U.S. congress.
Meanwhile, the American-Turkish Council (ATC) Defense & Security
Relations Committee Chairman Preston Hughes indicated that the U.S.
strongly supports Turkey’s bid to join the EU. ”It is important for
Turkey to understand that it will come under pressure by the EU. We
must not abandon our beliefs that relations between Turkey and the
USA are in the interest of both countries,” told Hughes.
Hughes elaborated that time to time disappointments may occur on
both sides. ”For example, the Turks have been disappointed with the
lack of U.S. assistance to wipe away the terrorist organization PKK
in northern Iraq. Similarly, the U.S. was disappointed with Turkey’s
decision not to help Americans open a northern front in Iraq. Despite
such disappointments, the two countries must not forget that they
share common values on democracy. We must not burn the bridges that
so closely bring us together,” stressed Hughes.