Author: Jilavian Emma

SAMVEL FARMANYAN: "IT HAS BEEN STATED MANY TIMES THAT THE CORE OF THE NEGOTIATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS IS THE ISSUE ON THE STATUS OF NAGORNO KARABAKH. THE REST OF THE ISSUES ARE SECONDARY"

ARMENPRESS
NOVEMBER 23, 2009
YEREVAN

YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 23, ARMENPRESS: Spokesman for the Armenian President
Samvel Farmanyan with the request of Armenpress news agency commented
on the statements of the Azerbaijani president and on certain
publications of the Azerbaijani press.

– A day before the Munich meeting the president of Azerbaijan made a
regular military statement, threatening with war. What will Armenia
do if the tension connected with the Nagorno Karabakh conflict really
increases?

– We have already had an occasion to note that no matter how much
such statements are being voiced for the inner audience, at the same
time they hardly create favorable atmosphere for the negotiation
process. The statements of the Azerbaijani president once again
witness about the unconstructive position of Azerbaijan.

The increase of tension over the Nagorno Karabakh conflict of course is
the most undesirable result. It will be the most undesirable reality
for Nagorno Karabakh, Armenia and the whole region. But the Republic
of Armenia cannot be indifferent toward the fate of Nagorno Karabakh
people and that is why the President of Armenia and other officials
have many times stated that we are responsible for the security of
the people of Nagorno Karabakh. There are adopted ways in the world:
in case of such developments, for instance, the Republic of Armenia may
recognize the independence of Nagorno Karabakh with all the stemming
consequences. Secondly, the Republic of Armenia may sign a contract
of mutual assistance with the Republic of Nagorno Karabakh.

There are ways, and I am sure that the Republic of Armenia will make
use of these few variants separately or simultaneously. And I must
note that the Republic of Armenia has not by now recognized the
Nagorno Karabakh Republic for only one reason – not to impede the
negotiations over the peaceful regulation of the conflict. And if
the peaceful negotiations are interrupted and military actions launch
nothing will hinder Armenia to recognize the independence of Nagorno
Karabakh. But today the reality is that the negotiations continue.

Armenia has always stated that it does not see alternative to
the peaceful regulation of the issue. Armenia thinks that through
negotiations it is possible to reach peaceful and comprehensive
settlement of the issue.

– After the Munich meeting certain Azerbaijani mass media spread
information as if during the negotiations it was spoken that by
the end of the year Armenians might liberate Kelbajar region which
will give Turkey an opportunity to ratify Armenian-Turkish protocols
and Azerbaijan to smooth its position in the pre-context of Nagorno
Karabakh conflict settlement. How much does it correspond to reality?

– In Armenia it became usual for us that after each meeting of the
Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents the "strictly aware" sources report
about the not existing discussions and arrangements. It is a clear
disinformation and has no relation with reality. Such issue is not
being discussed, consequently there cannot be such arrangement. It
has been stated many times that the core of the negotiations and
discussions is the issue on the status of Nagorno Karabakh. The rest
of the issues are secondary.

news.am, Armenia
Nov 21 2009

A. Baghdasaryan received Vygaudas Usackas

17:22 / 11/21/2009November 21, 2009 RA National Council Security
Secretary Arthur Baghdasaryan received Lithuanian Foreign Minister
Vygaudas Usackas. The officials discussed issues on bilateral
cooperation as well as collaboration in the frames of international
organizations, RA National Council Security press service informed
NEWS.am.

There is a great potential of cooperation intensification in different
fields between the states, Baghdasaryan outlined. An agreement was
reached to develop the cooperation in food security and other fields.
Mutual visits will be paid in the near future for further discussions.

Issues related to Armenia-EU cooperation reforms in Armenia and
Eastern Partnership project were canvassed in the course of the
meeting. The parties attached significance to Armenia-EU dialogue
intensification and enhancement of the cooperation within committee’s
framework on justice, liberty and security.

The diplomats also exchanged views on regional issues, particularly
Karabakh conflict and Armenia-Turkey normalization process. Vygaudas
Usackas appreciated high Armenia’s efforts to normalize relations with
neighboring countries, adding that Lithuania supports Armenia-Turkey
reconciliation.

THE NEW POLICY SHIFT FOR TURKEY
By Azat Oganesian

Conservative-Examiner~y2009m11d19-The-new-policy-s hift-for-Turkey
The Examiner
Nov 19 2009

There are some countries in the world that may be categorized as
transcontinental, both in the geographical and cultural sense. One such
country is the Republic of Turkey. A predominantly Muslim country,
it has been a secular republic since its inception from the ruins
of the Ottoman Empire in 1923. Its first president, Mustafa Kemal
Ataturk, sought to mold Turkey in the European image- going as
far as replacing the country’s Arabic script for a Latin one, and
forbidding the wearing of the fez for men and headscarves in secular
contexts for women. It made one contemporary Armenian novelist, Gostan
Zarian, write during his time at Istanbul in the late 1920’s novel
"The Traveler and His Road", that now the Turks have sold out their
nation and religion. That may not have been the view of the Turkish
elites who grew up in the Europeanized atmosphere of Salonika and
Istanbul, but it must have been for the agrarian majority of Turks at
the time. From that period Turkey has tried to be accepted into the
European family, has been given many promises, yet has been always
kept at arm’s length. The most obvious example of this has been the
dialogue since 1963 about Turkey’s accession to the European Union,
which has been accepted by a few countries in Europe, delayed by most
and rejected as absurd by others. In the last year there has been
a new attitude coming from Turkey, that makes one think that this
country is slowly turning its head back to the East, and guiding its
foreign policy in a new way as a result.

"Why be a third rate European country, rather than a first rate Middle
Eastern one" quipped one British poster on a discussion board about
possible Turkish accession to the EU a few years ago. Why indeed?

Turkish passivity regarding many Middle Eastern issues over the last
80 years has recently turned into active engagement. This became
most noticeable at the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland
last year during the Israeli offensive into the Gaza Strip. As
Palestinian civilian casualties mounted, the Turkish Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdo?an lectured the Israeli President Shimon Peres
about his country’s actions in Gaza, to the glee of the present Arab
League President Amr Moussa. The session ended with Erdo?an leaving
the stage angrily. Recently Turkey has refused to hold scheduled
military exercises that Israel was going to be a part of. Likewise,
Turkey is considering having an open border with Syria, with whom it
has many cultural and historic ties; and on a recent trip to Teheran,
Erdo?an stated that he found nothing wrong with Iran’s nuclear
program, which he deemed to be peaceful. To its northeast flank,
Turkey has been more active in the South Caucasus, beyond being the
transit country for oil pipelines from Azerbaijan. Last year, Turkish
President Abdullah Gul visited the Caucasus and spoke about setting up
a forum to solve regional problems. Most importantly for the Caucasus
has been a thaw in relations between Turkey and Armenia, after Gul
accepted the invitation from Armenia’s President Serge Sarkisian
to watch a soccer match in Armenia between the two countries last
year. In October a protocol was signed between the two historical
enemies that would pave the way for an opening of their borders,
which would change the balance of power in the Caucasus.

With this new "ostpolitik" Turkey is playing a leading role in its
neighborhood and is sending a clear message to Europe that it can do
without it, and may even be an obstacle to European security if it
is in Turkey’s interest. Turkey has not rescinded from its official
policy to be a candidate for membership of the European Union, but
it is also widening its options. This new policy is neither in the
interest of the European Union, which would find a new competitor for
influence in the Middle East, nor for the United States, that has
always had a compliant NATO ally in Turkey during the Cold War and
the two Gulf Wars (though Turkey notably refused the US a "northern
corridor" into northern Iraq during the planning for the Iraq War).

The US also has a major military base in Incirlik, Turkey, whose
future may be in question if Turkey chose a policy of a regional
reintegration. So is this new mood a warning shot or a real policy
change? Countries don’t make such drastic changes overnight, so one’s
bound to assume a bluff. But oftentimes a bluff may become a reality
if events unroll in an unexpected manner. All parties involved should
take that into serious consideration.

MAMMA LI TURCHI!

Hurriyet Daily News
Nov 19 2009
Turkey

Every fresh piece of scientific evidence in the shape of "Turkey by
the numbers" verifies what anyone with an IQ higher than my cat’s
should empirically know: You can push for better laws for European
Union accession, but the social engineering in favor of conservatism
is swiftly making the Turks unqualified for the club they wish to join.

We already knew that two-thirds of Turks believed EU membership would
never happen; and only one-third thought they shared common values
with the West. We knew that 50 to 70 percent of Turks refused to have
Christian, Jewish, American or atheist neighbors, depending on the
chosen "other." We also knew that 78 percent of younger Turks wished
to live abroad (and we know that in this phrase "abroad" does not
mean Saudi Arabia, Iran or Pakistan).

More recently, we learned that 54 percent of Turks either tolerated
torture or thought torture must be absolutely legal. And most
recently we have learned from research by two professors from Sabancı
University, under the framework of the International Social Survey
Program, that:

1. There has been a significant increase since 1999 in the number of
people who identify themselves as religious.

2. Of the 43 countries surveyed, Turkey, Poland, the Philippines and
the United States are among the most religious.

3. Although 89 percent of Turks say they tolerate non-Muslim faiths,
only 13 percent had positive views of Christians, 10 percent for Jews
and 7 percent for non-believers.

4. Almost half of them say they would either absolutely or most likely
not accept political candidates from different religions.

5. Only 13 percent say they would respect laws contradicting religious
(Muslim) teachings.

It’s a pity the pollsters did not ask the Turks about anti-Semitism.

The results would have read something like this: Survey X found that
only 2 percent of Turks have anti-Semitic sentiment, although it
revealed that 92 percent of Turks say they hate Jews. We don’t hate
Jews unless they are Jews!

But is self-contradiction not a traditional Turkish pastime? Did Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan not say that he viewed Middle Eastern
disputes with a Muslim’s approach? Did he not say that he viewed the
plight of Palestinians as a prime minister and as a Muslim? And has
he not often accused the EU of being a "Christian club"? It’s up to
you to see the merit in the Turkish proverb "Balık baÅ~_tan kokar"
(the fish smells from the head).

Can we really blame the Europeans who would not like to sit in the
same club with 35-50 million Turks who would refuse to have Christian,
Jewish and atheist neighbors? With 35 million Turks who would not
accept political candidates from non-Muslim religions? Or with 38
million Turks who think torture is fine? Or with 60 million Turks who
say they would not respect laws if they contracted Islamic teachings?

Or with 46 million Turks who think they don’t share common values with
the West? Or with 60 million Turks who don’t have positive views of
Christians or 63 million Turks with a negative opinion of Jews? Is
this really what Europe is about?

We all wholeheartedly support the EU’s cliché prescriptions like
democratic control of the military, curbing the military’s role
in politics, better cultural and political rights for the Kurds,
better religious rights for non-Muslim minorities and good neighborly
relations with Armenia. But Turkey looks like an unpredictable student
trying to memorize textbook sections to please his teachers and get
passing marks in final exams but at the same time metamorphosing into
a bully who terrorizes most its classmates. And he gets generous pats
on the shoulders because he really tries hard to memorize textbook
sections.

Saudi Arabia is not a democracy merely because its military has no
role in politics, nor is either of Egypt or Jordan a democracy because
they treat their non-Muslim minorities well. And Iran certainly would
not qualify to join the EU because it has good relations with most
of its neighbors.

No doubt, meeting the cliché requirements is fine; that is being —
hopefully — done. But the heart of the matter is missed: the social
engineering that makes the Turks increasingly conservative both
ethnically and religiously.

You can always pass new laws for the better. You can amend laws for
the better too. But you cannot easily "make or amend" nations so that
they fit well into established civilizations.

ANDREY NESTERENKO MAKES NEW COMMENT ON ARMENIA-TURKEY, NAGORNO-KARABAKH PROCESSES

news.am
Nov 20 2009
Armenia

Andrey Nesterenko, official representative of the RF Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, made a new comment on "the combination of the
Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia-Turkey normalization processes."

NEWS.am reminds readers that at a November 17 press briefing,
Nesterenko made the following statement: "As far as we know issues
related to Nagorno-Karabakh were raised during the Yerevan-Ankara
negotiations. This range of issue must be considered in this process.

Let us hope that all the issues will be settled in conformity with the
decisions made by international organizations and meet the interests
of all the nations of the region."

NEWS.am sent the following inquiry to the Press and Information
Department, RF Foreign Office: "At a November 17 press briefing,
the official representative of the RF Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Andrey Nesterenko stated Armenia and Turkey are discussing the
Nagorno-Karabakh peace process. Does it mean that the OSCE Minsk
Group has been enlarged or has stopped working? What is official
Moscow’s attitude to Turkey’s involvement in the Nagorno-Karabakh
peace process?"

Speaking at the RA Parliament on November 18, RA Foreign Minister
Nalbandyan refuted any linkage between the Nagorno-Karabakh peace
process and Armenia-Turkey normalization. "We, OSCE MG Co-Chairs as
well as the leaders of the world powers repeatedly stated that these
are two different processes. And if certain country representatives
periodically make statements on the interconnection of the issues,
then it’s a misunderstanding, but not the official position of
these states," the Minister said. He also said that Russia should be
expected to make new statements confirming the absence of any linkage
between the Armenia-Turkey normalization and the Nagorno-Karabakh
peace processes.

The "new statement" was made quite soon. It particularly reads:

"Moscow has noticed that some Armenian media outlets raised an
alarm about the statements made by the official representative of
the RF Ministry of Foreign Affairs on November 17, 2009. Official
Moscow is claimed to have changed its stance and be linking the
Nagorno-Karabakh and the Armenia-Turkey normalization processes. It was
a misunderstanding. RF Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has repeatedly
explained Russia’s position. It has remained unchanged: two different
processes are in question.

"We welcome the Armenian-Turkish document, which determine the sides’
further actions to progress to comprehensive normalization of bilateral
relations.

"We are sure that the establishment of good neighborly relations
between Armenia and Turkey will facilitate to further steps to
strengthen peace and stability in the Transcaucasus.

"As regards the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, despite unsettled
disagreements, the sides have succeeded in agreeing on the fundamental
settlement principles.

"We see our role in contributing to this process and the sides’
finding mutually acceptable solutions to key problems, without,
however, imposing any formulas on the conflicting parties. We admit
the fact that it is the Armenians and Azerbaijanis that bear the main
responsibility for their final choice. Russia is ready to support the
solution to the problem that will be acceptable to all the parties
involved and act as guarantor for settlement if any compromise is
achieved. It is clear that a viable solution is one that would restore
peace and stability in the Transcaucasus and, in the post-conflict
period, maintain the geopolitical balance of forces there, preventing
the region from becoming an arena for international politico-military
competition."

ARFD CONSIDERS ARMENIAN GOVERNMENT INCAPABLE OF CONDUCTING EFFECTIVE ECONOMIC POLICY

/PanARMENIAN.Net/
19.11.2009 19:49 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ "Armenian government failed the anti-crisis policy:
18,3% economic downfall and high inflation are registered in Armenia
at present," ARF Dashnaktsutyun parliamentary faction MP Artsvik
Minasyan stated at 2010 state budget parliament hearing.

According to the MP, Armenian government is conducting ineffective
credit policy, which is the reason for lack of financial stability
in RA.

Commenting on 2010 budget project, the MP characterized the project as
reactionary as opposed to initiatory or anti-crisis one. "Which spells
inability of state budget to resolve our citizens’ social-economic
problems in 2010," Artsvik Minasyan emphasized.

The MP offered the ruling coalition to demand implementation of more
effective economic policy program from executive authority, adding
that ARFD will insist on this point until the government acknowledges
its inability to conduct effective economic policy.

KARABAKH GOOD EXAMPLE OF EU-RUSSIA COOPERATION, SAYS MEDVEDEV

Tert
Nov 19 2009
Armenia

Russia and the European Union have to be more approachable in their
positions regarding the South Caucasus, with the purpose of stabilizing
the situation in the region, said Russian President Dmitry Medvedev
during a press conference which summarized the results of the EU-Russia
Summit in Stockholm.

"On the subject of the Transcaucasus [meaning, the South Caucasus],
our positions don’t correspond, we must accept that. However, this
isn’t a reason to dramatize the situation," noted Medvedev.

According to the Russian president, Moscow again intends to conduct
negotiations, in the spirit of compromise, on "complex matters"
in the future.

Though, according to Medvedev, there are good examples of cooperation
with Europe. "The settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict:
positive changes are noted in this regard. This is an example of how
we can cooperate or we could’ve cooperated if not for last year’s
well-known aggression."

GUIDE FOR JOURNALISTS COVERING ECONOMY PRESENTED IN YEREVAN

/PanARMENIAN.Net/
19.11.2009 15:17 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Guide for journalists "Economy Coverage" was
presented November 19 at the NASDAQ OMX Armenia’s office in Yerevan.

The guide was prepared by the British Irving International Limited
company under "Workshops for Business and Economic Journalism" with
support of the British Embassy in Armenia. Experts of Internews NGO
participated in the preparation of the guide.

According to the executive director of Internews Nune Sargsyan, a
guide for journalists has been created through a series of workshops
to raise awareness of media representatives in the field of economics
and finance.

According to the British Ambassador in Armenia Charles Lonsdale
the UK is interested in promoting educated media in Armenian, which
contribute to the development of the society.

AZERBAIJAN DISTRIBUTES NAGORNO-KARABAKH RELATED DOCUMENT IN UN

news.az
Nov 18 2009
Azerbaijan

United Nations Azerbaijan has distributed another document in the
United Nations relating to Armenia`s military aggression against it.

The report, "Military aggression of the Republic of Armenia against
the Republic of Azerbaijan: reasons and results", has been distributed
in the UN General Assembly and Security Council.

The 30-page document features several chapters, including The
History of the Conflict, The Situation in the Occupied Territories
of Azerbaijan, Mediation Efforts and Azerbaijan`s Position on the
Conflict`s Settlement.

The report reiterates Azerbaijan`s "international legal norms-based"
position on the settlement of the conflict.

The report also recalls a memorandum issued by the Armenian permanent
representation to the UN in response to Azerbaijan`s documents.

"What is very interesting is that the Armenian memorandum did not
list relevant resolutions of the UN Security Council and General
Assembly and OSCE Parliamentary Assembly as well as the OSCE
Chairman-in-Office`s statements among documents related to the
conflict`s resolution," the report underlines.

"Although it is the United Nations` resolutions that are the most
crucial documents regarding the dispute`s settlement. The Azerbaijani
side expresses hope the UN member states will assure Armenia to
give up its aggressive policy, respect international legal norms and
demonstrate a sincere position in the peace talks to find a durable
solution to the conflict," the report stresses.

IS TURKEY DRIFTING AWAY OR NAVIGATING ITS WAY? (I)

Hurriyet Daily News
Nov 16 2009
Turkey

Since the Justice and the Development Party, or AKP, came to power in
2002, there have been many articles and discussions that questioned
AKP’s "real" intentions, and whether some of AKP’s foreign policies
should be taken as signs of Turkey leaving the Western alliance.

The AKP establishment, if I may call it this way, has strongly opposed
such scenarios and has given many instances to prove that AKP aims to
make Turkey a strong part of the western world and if EU, concomitantly
with ever-stronger ties with the eastern and the Muslim world. And if
one takes a closer look into this paradigm and hotly debated question,
one finds plenty of arguments to support both sides.

Therefore, when this unavoidable question was posed to me last week,
I felt obliged to delve into the underlying cogency or reasoning of
the AKP leadership, and I found it useful to enter into the discussion
in light of this underlying assumption, that I believe what drives
the AKP leadership to view and conduct its foreign policy. That
underlying assumption is the pragmatist modality of the AKP foreign
policy makers, which suggests that of ‘what works’ policies are the
main driving force for this leadership in order to be able to navigate
in this difficult geographical set up in which Turkey is situated. I
hope that I will able to analyze this difficult question diligently
and in an impartial fashion, as it gets increasingly harder to find
such objective analyses of this question nowadays.

First, I think the AKP administration, as said in the previous
paragraph, should be taken primarily as a pragmatist administration,
rather than an ideological one. I would even argue that this is the
most pragmatist administration Turkey has ever seen. In terms of this
pragmatic modus regarding foreign relations, the AKP sometimes comes
into view as the most liberal and most Western government in Turkey’s
history and sometimes the most conservative and pro-Islamic. Though one
must confess, AKP is most successful, while it plays its pro-Islamic
role, which suits it much better and appears to be genuine, because
of the electors it addresses and also because of the ideologies that
the many leaders of AKP have been fed and raised into.

It is true that today the administration in Turkey aims to capitalize
the Turkish Republic’s Ottoman links, and while doing that they
never needed to hide this sentiment. If one wishes to emphasize one
of these identities more than the others, and would like to call this
administration a newborn Ottomanist, or neo-Ottomanist, I think this
could be possible as well, even though as far as I know and hear, Mr.

Ahmet Davutoglu, himself, never used the term neo-Ottomanism.

Albeit we have witnessed in the recent history that the same AKP
administration utilized Turkey’s secular identity in many instances
as well, when it sees it fit. However, it is possible to view that
the AKP administration likes to emphasize Turkey’s secular identity
more while it engages with the Western world and the religious,
historic and democratic identity more while it engages with the Muslim
countries. This pattern is also another glimpse of its pragmatism.

I can elaborate on this argument with pure speculation to make my
point clear. And it is not a product of an outrageous imagination to
think that when the leaders of the AKP visit another Muslim country
or are visited by one of them, behind closed doors they quite possibly
would emphasize and refer to the common religious identity, let’s say,
against the Western hegemony, to further the relations. At the same
time, again as a pure conjecture, it is not so far off the chart
to think that the same Turkish political leaders, when they engage
with a Western leader, would turn to Turkey’s secular identity and
emphasize how different Turkey is from those backward countries in
the region in following a progressive path, whatever that path may be.

However, one matter is established and for that there is no need for
any speculation, and that is that today’s Turkey strives to calculate
its moves and likes to play a pro-active, pre-emptive role while
charming the immediate neighbors in a wide variety of foreign affairs.

This makes the AKP administration very unique and different from
past administrations.

The biggest reason for these pro-active policies, I believe, is to
level Turkey as one of those regional powers like in the other parts
of the world. Turkish foreign policy thinkers including Davutoglu,
the Turkish Foreign Minister, as a leading actor, apparently believes
that Turkey has enough tools in its toolbox to play this role. Its
history, growing economy, relatively vast population, geographical
location with its advantages or complications, religious identity as
well as secular one, lead them to think that Turkey is indeed up to
the task of being a regional power.

Turkey is trying to unlock its historic impasse with Armenia and
looking for better relations with the Kurdish autonomy in northern
Iraq as well as the Kurdish population within Turkey. It also
supported the reunification talks in Cyprus, especially during the
referendum in 2004, contrary to the state establishment views; and
it still maintains a persistent approach for full membership of the
EU by appointing a minister for the accession talks, even though the
appointment came very late. Hence, it can be argued that Turkey is
trying to advance its profile both in the East and the West. Turkey
with ever-improving relations with the Balkan countries, contrary
to arguments that it only engages with the Muslim world, even though
the Muslim world visits are more apparent and have brought tangible
results so far, tries to engineer "East and West together" paradigm
to reclaim a regional power status it once held in the Ottoman
times. And I think the AKP administration should be credited with
these intense engagement policies. In light of these developments,
it is safe to say that Turkey now has a self-confident and outward
looking administration, rather than an inward looking traditional one,
whether one likes many parts of this approach or not.

That being said, I do believe that this strategic deep thinking and
multi-dimensional approach incorporates many hazards. And sometimes
having too much self or miscalculated confidence would disillusion
this team about the country’s real power and with that it carries
enormous risks. And if this self-confidence spirit is mismanaged,
some of its consequences may be quite traumatic.

Next: Analyzing AKP’s foreign policy re-orientation in light of the
relationship with Syria, Iran and Israel.