Ankara Shows Its Hand

ANKARA SHOWS ITS HAND
Christopher Hitchens

Slate.com
8/
April 20 2009

Turkey’s scheming at the Strasbourg summit proves it doesn’t belong
in the European Union.

The most underreported story of the month must surely be the
announcement by French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner that he
no longer supports the accession of Turkey as a full member of the
European Union. His reasoning was very simple and intelligible,
and it has huge implications for the Barack Obama "make nice" school
of diplomacy.

At a NATO summit in Strasbourg in the first week of April, it had
been considered a formality that the alliance would vote to confirm
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the prime minister of Denmark, as its new
secretary-general. But very suddenly, the Turkish delegation
threatened to veto the appointment. The grounds of Turkey’s
opposition were highly significant. Most important, they had to do
with the publication of some cartoons in a Danish newspaper in 2005
lampooning the Prophet Mohammed. In spite of an organized campaign of
violence and boycott against his country, and in spite of a demand
by a delegation of ambassadors from supposedly "Islamic" states,
Rasmussen consistently maintained that Danish law did not allow
him to interfere with the Danish press. Years later, resentment at
this position led Turkey–which is under its own constitution not an
"Islamic" country–to use the occasion of a NATO meeting to try again
to interfere with the internal affairs of a member state.

The second ground of Turkey’s objection is also worth noting. From
Danish soil a TV station broadcasts in the Kurdish language to Kurds
in Turkey and elsewhere. The government in Ankara, which evidently
believes that all European governments are as untrammeled as itself,
brusquely insists that Denmark do what it would do and simply shut
the transmitter down. Once again unclear on the concepts of the
open society and the rule of law–if the station is sympathetic to
terrorism, as Ankara alleges, there are procedures to be followed–the
Turkish authorities attempt a fiat that simply demands that others
do as they say.

The implications of all this, as Kouchner stated in an interview,
are extremely serious. "I was very shocked by the pressure that
was brought upon us," he said. "Turkey’s evolution in, let’s say, a
more religious direction, towards a less robust secularism, worries
me." This is to put it in the mildest possible way. It’s not just a
matter of a Turkish political party undermining Turkey’s own historic
secularism. It is a question of Turkey trying to impose its Islamist
and chauvinist policies on another European state–and indeed on the
whole NATO alliance. And if this is how it behaves before it has been
admitted to the European Union, has it not invited us all to guess
how it would behave when it had a veto power in those councils?

For contrast, one might mention the example of reunited federal
Germany, easily the strongest economic power in the European Union,
which painstakingly adjusted itself to its neighbors–to the extent of
giving up even the deutsche mark for the euro–and adopted the slogan
"not a Germanized Europe but a Europeanized Germany." With Turkey, it
seems the reverse is the case. Its troops already occupy one-third of
the territory of an EU member (Cyprus), and now it exploits its NATO
membership to try to bully one of the smaller nations with which it
is supposed to be conjoined in a common defense. For good measure,
it continues to be ambiguous about its recognition of the existence
of another non-Turkish people–the Kurds–within its frontiers.

President Obama’s emollient gifts were on display at the NATO summit,
where he eventually persuaded the Turks to withhold their veto on
the appointment of Prime Minister Rasmussen. Accounts differ as to
the price of this deal, but a number of plum jobs and positions now
appear to have been awarded to Turkish nominees. Much more important,
however, the foreign minister of France has reversed his previous
position and has now said: "It’s not for the Americans to decide who
comes into Europe or not. We are in charge in our own house." Put it
like this: Obama’s "quiet diplomacy" has temporarily conciliated the
Turks while perhaps permanently alienating the French and has made it
more, rather than less, likely that the American goal of Turkish EU
membership will now never be reached. And this is the administration
that staked so much on the idea of renewing our credit on the other
side of the Atlantic. This evidently can’t be done by sweetness alone.

On the question of Turkey’s accession, I used to be able to make
either case. Admitting the Turks could lead to the modernization of
the country, whereas exclusion could breed resentment and instability
and even a renewal of pseudo-Ataturkist military rule. On the other
hand, admission would put the frontiers of Europe up against Iran and
Iraq and the volatile Caucasus, so that instead of being a "bridge"
between East and West (to use the unvarying cliché), Turkey would
become a tunnel.

The Strasbourg crisis clarifies the entire picture and should make
us grateful to have been warned in such a timely fashion. Turkey
wants all the privileges of NATO and EU membership but also wishes to
continue occupying Cyprus, denying Kurdish rights, and lying about the
Armenian genocide. On top of this, it now desires to act as a proxy
for Islamization and dares to waste the time of a defensive alliance
in trying to censor the press of another member state! Kouchner was
quite right to speak out as he did, and the Turkish authorities will
now be able to blame the failure of their membership scheme not on
the unsleeping plots of their enemies, but on the belated awakening
of their former friends.

http://www.slate.com/id/221651

Armenian Expert Hails Cooperation with Iran

Moj News Agency, Iran
April 18, 2009 Saturday

Armenian Expert Hails Cooperation with Iran

"We are currently having developed relations with Iran in trade,
business and tourism," Stepan Grigoryan told Panorama. He added that
the basic aspects of the developing Armenian-Iranian relations are
transport communication and energy. "We have made the first steps in
energy cooperation by the construction of Iran-Armenia gas pipeline.

Unfortunately, no gas still flows through the pipeline but we should
solve that problem as soon as possible to guarantee our energetic
security and to make it useless to keep Armenia in blockade," said the
expert. "If we manage to make another step forward in Iran-Armenia gas
pipeline, then Turkey would become more interested to improve its
relations with Armenia," he added. When asked as to whether the
proposed Iran-Armenia railway project was justifiable, political
analyst Stepan Grigoryan responded, "Even the potential project will
be a major factor in the arena of foreign relations. When they even
speak of the plan, the policies of this or that country is changed in
the region." According to Mr. Grigoryan, the potential construction of
the railway forces Turkey to "begin to act", since, in his estimation,
"Everyone knows that Iran has $1.5 billion to construct that rail
link. We don’t have that amount and everyone knows it. This is a
political project for which the country gives money more easily than
other projects." If Armenia has a land link with Iran and the world
beyond in the next five years, the pressure exerted by Turkey on
Armenia will automatically lessen. "This is one of the reasons why
Turkey has quickened its efforts to normalize relations with Armenia,"
noted Mr. Grigoryan. He also drew parallels with the Nabucco
project. "It’s only words; there is no outline, no plan. But even this
impacts on the policies of many nations. If we could only construct
such a railway; it would open many doors for us. 2009/04/18

Country profile: Iran

Country profile: Iran

Story from BBC NEWS:
_east/country_profiles/790877.stm

Published: 2009/03/11 10:19:39 GMT

Iran became a unique Islamic republic in 1979, when the monarchy was
overthrown and religious clerics assumed political control under
supreme leader Ayatollah Khomenei.

The Iranian revolution put an end to the rule of the Shah, who had
alienated powerful religious and political forces with a program of
modernization and Westernization.

Persia, as Iran was known before 1935, was one of the greatest empires
of the ancient world, and the country has long maintained a distinct
cultural identity within the Islamic world by retaining its own
language and adhering to the Shia interpretation of Islam.

In 2002, US President George W Bush declared Iran as part of an "axis
of evil". Washington accuses it of undermining its efforts in Iraq and
of trying to develop nuclear weapons.

Iran, which is building its first atomic power station with Russian
help, says its nuclear ambitions are peaceful.

In 2006 the government announced that it had succeeded in enriching
uranium. President Ahmadinejad said Iran has an "inalienable right" to
produce nuclear fuel.

The country has an abundance of energy resources – substantial oil
reserves and natural gas reserves second only to those of Russia.

AT-A-GLANCE

Politics: Conservatives have kept reformers at bay and retain power in
the complex system of religious and democratic government
Economy: Iran holds 9% of world oil reserves; a critical shortfall in
jobs has hit the young
International: Iran has defied international pressure over its nuclear
programme; it is accused of funding terrorism and some fear its
burgeoning regional influence

Iran has been led by a conservative elite since 1979, but appeared to
be entering another era of political and social transformation with the
victory of the liberals in parliamentary elections in 2000.
But the reformists, kept on the political defensive by powerful
conservatives in the government and judiciary, failed to make good on
their promises.

Former President Mohammad Khatami’s support for greater social and
political freedoms made him popular with the young – an important
factor as around half of the population is under 25.

But his liberal ideas put him at odds with the supreme leader,
Ayatollah Khamenei, and hardliners reluctant to lose sight of
established Islamic traditions.

The elections of June 2005 dealt a blow to the reformists when Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad, Tehran’s ultra-conservative mayor, became president.

Full name: Islamic Republic of Iran
Population: 72.2 million (UN, 2008)
Capital: Tehran
Area: 1.65 million sq km (636,313 sq miles)
Major language: Persian
Major religion: Islam
Life expectancy: 69 years (men), 73 years (women) (UN)
Monetary unit: 10 Iranian rials = 1 toman
Main exports: Petroleum, carpets, agricultural products
GNI per capita: US $3,470 (World Bank, 2007)
Internet domain: .ir
International dialling code: +98

Supreme leader: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

The supreme leader – the highest power in the land – appoints the head
of the judiciary, military leaders, the head of radio and TV and Friday
prayer leaders.

Moreover, he selects six members of the Guardian Council, an
influential body which has to pass all legislation and which can veto
would-be election candidates.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was appointed for life in June 1989, succeeding
Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic republic. He served two
consecutive terms as president in the 1980s.

He has intervened on behalf of conservatives, coming into conflict with
former president Mohammad Khatami and other reformists.

President: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Tehran’s ultra-conservative mayor, won a run-off
vote in elections in June 2005, defeating his rival, the former
president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, to become Iran’s first non-cleric
president for 24 years.

Promising an administration of "peace and moderation", he said his
government would press on with Iran’s controversial nuclear programme.

Local elections in December 2006 – his first major test at the polls
since coming to power – saw his allies trailing moderate conservatives
and reformists.

But parliamentary elections in March 2008 – in which many pro-reform
candidates were disbarred from standing – saw a strong showing not only
by the president’s supporters but also by more pragmatic conservatives
who oppose his confrontational style of dealing with western countries.

In March 2008 Mr Ahmadinejad made an unprecedented official visit to
Iraq. He said the presence of foreign forces in Iraq was a humiliation
and insult to the region.

Born near Tehran in 1956, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a former provincial
governor and Revolutionary Guards officer. He was actively involved in
the Islamic revolution and was a founding member of the student union
that took over the US embassy in Tehran in 1979. But he denies being
one of the hostage-takers.

The struggle for influence and power in Iran is played out in the
media.

The relatively free press, a tangible achievement of former President
Khatami’s government, has been targeted by conservatives. Many
pro-reform publications have been closed and reformist writers and
editors jailed. The conservative judiciary has also campaigned against
the liberal media.

There are some 20 major national dailies, but few Iranians buy a
newspaper every day. Sports titles are the biggest sellers.

Broadcasters are more restricted than the press. Despite a ban on
owning dishes, foreign satellite TV channels are widely watched; this
is largely tolerated by the authorities. Stations operated by exiles in
the US were said to have played a role in student protests in 2003.

State-run Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting – IRIB – operates
national and provincial networks. Its Jaam-e Jam international TV
channels are available worldwide via satellite. IRIB targets Arabic
speakers in Iraq and the Middle East via the Al-Alam and Al-Kawthar TV
networks.

It launched an English-language satellite station, Press TV, in 2007.
President Ahmadinejad said its mission would be "to stand by the
oppressed of the world".

Television is very popular, with more than 80% of Iranians being
regular viewers. The most-watched network is the third state channel,
the youth channel.

IRIB’s radio channels include a parliamentary network and Radio Koran.
The Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran, an external radio service,
broadcasts via shortwave and the internet.

By early 2008 there were around 23 million internet users
(InternetWorldStats). The web is the main forum for dissident voices.
Access is easy to arrange and affordable for middle-class households.

However, service providers are prevented from allowing access to sites
deemed to be pornographic or anti-Islamic.

News sites are becoming increasingly important in providing information
and insight. They often have strong political leanings. There are tens
of thousands of weblogs, with bloggers active both in Iran and among
the diaspora. Officials, including President Ahmadinezhad, have
launched blogs.

Foreign broadcasters target audiences in Iran; they include the
Washington-backed Radio Farda, a music-based station aimed at younger
audiences.

The press

Tehran Times – English-language daily, published by state-run body
Iran Daily – English-language, published by official news agency IRNA
Iran News – English-language
Aftab-e Yazd (Sun of Yazd) – reformist daily
Kayhan (Universe) – conservative daily
Resalat (Message) – conservative daily
Etemaad (Confidence) – reformist daily
Etemaad-e Melli (National Trust) – owned by National Trust Party leader
Mehdi Karrubi
Jomhuri-ye-Eslami (Islamic Republic) – conservative daily
Jaam-e Jam (Jam’s Cup) – large-circulation daily, published by IRIB,
reflects broadcaster’s editorial line
Television

IRIB – state-run, operates four national networks, provincial and
international services
Press TV – IRIB’s English-language satellite channel
Radio

IRIB – state-run, operates eight national networks, provincial services
and an external service
News agencies

Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) – state-run, English-language pages
Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA) – English-language pages
Fars News Agency – affiliated to Revolutionary Guards, English-language
pages
Mehr News Agency – affiliated to Islamic Propagation Organisation,
English-language pages

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle

‘Depi Yerkir’ Information Fair To Promote Repatriation

‘DEPI YERKIR’ INFORMATION FAIR TO PROMOTE REPATRIATION

le=41618_4/18/2009_1
Friday, April 17, 2009

Armenians today live in a truly historic period. For the first time
in over 600 years, with the exception of the short-lived republic of
1918-1920, we have an independent Armenian state of our own. Unlike
many of our parents and those who came before us, our generation has a
tremendous opportunity–indeed, a responsibility–to reassemble within
our homeland and be a stake holder in its much needed development.

In recent years, we have seen a small but significant number of
Armenians from around the world rise up to this challenge and make
their way to the homeland. Some have gone as volunteers for extended
periods of time, while others have ventured one step further and
permanently repatriated there. These pioneering groups and individuals
are setting the foundation for a new, burgeoning tide of Diaspora
Armenians who realize the importance of looking to the homeland for
their future.

Simultaneously, the government in Armenia has recently taken steps to
begin embracing this process of repatriation and encouraging Diasporan
Armenians to take ownership in their homeland. This is perhaps best
illustrated by the government’s adoption of the Law on Dual Citizenship
in 2007 and its recent creation of the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs.

As members of the ARF Shant Student Association, we feel there has
never been a better time then now to bolster and expand this growing
movement. For this reason, we have initiated an ongoing campaign
aimed at encouraging Diasporan Armenians to travel, support, connect,
and, ultimately, resettle in the homeland. We plan to carry out
this campaign through a series of events, activities and initiatives
which call on students and youth, especially, to take part in this
"Depi Yerkir" movement.

Our first event along these lines will be an information fair on
May 14 at the Glendale Hilton Hotel, from 7 to 10 pm. Attendees will
have the opportunity to gain first-hand knowledge about opportunities
available in Armenia and explore many of the ways repatriation can
become a reality. There will also be an informative presentation
by Dr. Stephan Astourian, Chair of Armenian Studies at UC Berkeley,
regarding the importance of looking to the homeland for the future
of the Armenian nation.

We are fully aware of the difficulties of repatriation and the
sacrifice it entails. However, we are also aware of the repercussions
of staying trapped in foreign lands and fighting daily to maintain
our culture and identity

Although challenging, the fact is that repatriation is not only
possible, it is a viable option and great opportunity. By working
collectively, we can help foster this reality, creating a stronger
nation and a better future for ourselves and for the Republic of
Armenia.

We call on all Armenians to join the "Depi Yerkir" movement and look
toward Armenia for the future. Let us all unite, utilizing our talents
and resources for the betterment of our homeland; ensuring a brighter,
stronger and more prosperous Armenia.

www.asbarez.com/index.html?showartic

Don’t Say No To Turkey

DON’T SAY NO TO TURKEY
Pascal Boniface

Gulf News
April 17 2009
UAE

By publicly supporting Turkish candidacy for membership of the European
Union, US President Barack Obama has triggered a controversy among
many European leaders and commentators.

"It is none of your business," has been the most frequent retort from
Europeans. Just as European countries are not lecturing the United
States on the limits of the North American Free Trade Agreement –
by suggesting that Cuba be admitted, for example – it follows that
Washington should not seek to define the borders or the membership
of the EU.

The most outspoken critic on this issue has been French President
Nicolas Sarkozy, who has recently decided to fully reintegrate France
into the Nato military structure and has made a strong relationship
between France and the US a priority.

Knowing that the French are opposed to Turkish integration (figures
from a recent poll showed 55 per cent in opposition to Turkish
admission and only 35 per cent in favour), Sarkozy must think that
this is his chance to prove he is not an American lackey.

The public opposition to integrating Turkey into the EU can be
explained from various perspectives.

Some people argue that as Turkey is a Muslim country, it does not
meet European standards – despite its secular leadership. Others
point to the size of its population: with 75 million inhabitants,
Turkey would be the most heavily populated country in the union. It
would also be one of the poorest, with less than 5,000 euros of gross
national product per capita. Keeping in mind that new members are
provided with generous economic assistance, it is uncertain whether
Europe could afford to admit Turkey.

History and geography are also evoked. Turkey doesn’t belong to Europe,
some say. The army plays too important a role in Turkey for the nation
to be ranked as a truly democratic country by European standards,
others argue.

The Armenian community has mobilised and demands that Ankara recognise
and ask forgiveness for the 1915 genocide before any steps are
taken towards European membership. The Cyprus conflict also remains
unresolved, and the Kurdish minority contends that it is not fairly
treated.

The arguments against Turkey are clearly numerous. But another
viewpoint is possible.

The fact that Turkey is a Muslim country should not be seen as a
handicap. Rather, this should be considered an advantage at a time
when relations between Muslim and Western countries are of utmost
importance. Turkey is a secular country and could provide a bridge
between the two civilisations.

The Ottoman Empire was certainly a colonial power in Arab countries,
and the latter have had difficult relations with Ankara in the
past. But despite historical differences, the position taken by
European countries towards Muslim Turkey sends an important message
to Arab countries. Some think that Europe is a Christian club. Others
see Europe as a union of countries in which religion is a private
matter and where many Muslims already live.

It is true that the majority of Turkish territory is located
in Asia. But part of it is in Europe and this is sufficient
from a juridical point of view. Historically, Turkey belongs to
Eur-ope. Francis I of France had an alliance with the Ottoman Empire
in the 16th century.

During the 19th century, the Ottoman Empire was known as the ‘Sick
Man of Europe’ – hardly a compliment, but at least recognition of
being part of the family. The role of the Turkish army has also
been downsized, ironically by the ruling party, a Muslim party
which compares itself to European Christian democrat parties. Taking
advantage of a football World Cup qualification match between Armenia
and Turkey, Turkish President Abdullah Gul also recently made a trip
to Armenia.

Furthermore, the Turkish economy is growing steadily and quickly. The
demographic transition has already been achieved. With 2.2 children
per woman, Turkey is close to French standards (2.1), keeping in
mind that France has the highest birth rate in Europe. But there is
no reason to fear a demographic explosion in Turkey.

In fact, the reluctance of many Eur-opean citizens regarding European
enlargement to include Turkey is more an opposition to enlargement
itself than to Turkey in particular. Europe has grown too much and
too quickly and European citizens are demanding a break. They do not
recognise Europe and they fear that political power is further and
further from their daily preoccupations. Ironically, Europe is more
popular outside its boundaries than within.

Last but not least, Turkish integration is not an urgent
matter. Membership negotiations always involve a long process and
will last for at least 10 years if not more. So it is both highly
unwelcome and unnecessary to close the door on Turkey now. Europe
would do better to continue negotiations in good faith. To be truly
powerful, Europe will need Turkey’s help.

Dr Pascal Boniface is the founder and director of the Institut de
Relations Internationales et Strategiques.

IMF Does Not Propose Universal Recommendations

IMF DOES NOT PROPOSE UNIVERSAL RECOMMENDATIONS
Aram Gareginyan

ArmInfo
2009-04-17 14:58:00

Interview of ArmInfo and several other media with Regional
International Monetary Fund Director for Middle East and Central
Asia, Masood Ahmed, and the IMF Resident Representative in Armenia,
Nienke Oomes

What are the current trends of the global equity market? What’s the
envisaged strategy of IMF for Armenia in particular?

Masood Ahmed: Many countries now start to take action. You are
beginning to see some change in market perceptions. If you look at
what has been happening in equity markets within the last week or
two, you see a little bit of turnaround. I don’t think one should be
too much driven by what is happening week by week in equity markets,
but rather, try to identify the trend of regaining activity, which
is little by little gaining pace. At the G20 summit, a decision was
reached that IMF resources should be increased threefold – to 750
bln. dollars, along with the issuing of 250 bln SDRs.

This enables us to respond to countries’ needs, in a way that
is defined by their needs, rather than by the limits of our
resources. That’s very important, because it gives confidence to
countries.

In the case of Armenia, as you know, we had a PRGF (Poverty Reduction
and Growth Facility) program that had been agreed in November. But
then it became clear that the nature of the problems in Armenia was
different – the situation was more severe and the measures to be taken
more urgent than we had anticipated in November. So we cancelled the
old PRGF program and approved a new program, a Stand-By Arrangement,
of $540 mln. Our sense is that this amount responds to the current
assessment of Armenia’s financing needs. Once the assessment changes,
we can go back and reconsider the amount. We could have done so even
with our current resources, because the amount we approved for Armenia
was not constrained by the IMF’s total size, unlike in the case of,
for example, Mexico, which announced they would be coming to the
IMF for $47 bln. We would not have been able to respond to such
a request easily, if our size had not also been increased. In the
case of Armenia, the amount was not constrained by our size, and the
response we came up with was based on our assessment of the needs for
Armenia. But one must keep in mind that the amounts disbursed by the
IMF are intended to help strengthen the foreign currency reserves of
the country and provide it with a cushion – they are neither a grant
nor budget support. Armenia is also discussing with other institutions
and donor countries, including the World Bank and Russia, and their
resources will complement those of the Fund.

Before the transition to the floating exchange rate of the Armenian
dr am, there was a period of state policy of stabilizing the national
currency.

How does the IMF view it?

Masood Ahmed: Every country has to find its own time and methods for
elaborating its exchange rate policy. It was clear for the people
who follow the local market, that a lot of problems were becoming
increasingly significant with the previous approach. First, the central
bank was using up its foreign currency reserves, and the market was
actually sending signals in anticipation of a depreciation. Second,
other countries in the region all depreciated their currencies, and
the issue of regional competitiveness was getting more intense. That
is why our view has always been that, for a country with a small
and open economy like Armenia, a flexible exchange rate is the best
solution. Our assessment has worked out well, the Central Bank has
managed the transition to the flexible rate, and at the moment there
do not seem to be any signs of one-way pressure.

Nienke Oomes: What is encouraging is that, since the devaluation on
March 3, there has been very little outflow of deposits, and not much
further increase in dollarization of deposits, which suggests that
confidence in the banking system and the currency has been restored.

What are the limits for central bank interventions that the IMF
will tolerate?

Masood Ahmed: Having a flexible exchange rate does not exclude minor
day-to-day interventions to smoothen the=2 0volatility of the exchange
rate. It is the purpose of the interventions that matters, rather than
their amount by itself. The thing we want to avoid is getting into
a situation of systematic interventions, which are aimed to affect
the exchange rate trend. The trend should be determined by the market.

What are your expectations about the exchange rate of AMD?

Masood Ahmed: Nienke Oomes and her colleagues
recently wrote a paper on the equilibrium exchange
rate of the dram, which is published on our website:
res.cfm?sk=22783.0. Estimating
equilibrium exchange rates is very difficult, but what is interesting
is that several different models gave the same result, which was
that the dram was overvalued by 20 to 30% at the end of 2008. So the
depreciation that has happened since then has been in line with these
models, so that the dram is now approximately in equilibrium. What
happens in the future is hard to say – one cannot indicate a precise
benchmark, as everything is determined by the global market.

In the present situation, what are the main challenges for Armenian
economy?

Masood Ahmed: The main challenge for the national economy is
the slowdown in imports – even though it is less than that in
exports. Imports during the first two months of 2009 fell by 21
percent, while exports fell by 45 percent, compared with the first
two months of 2008. And the slowdown in imports leads to shortfalls
in tax revenues. As they slide down, government expenditures have
to be restrained. Our own sense has been that, in those restraints,
one has to take into account that the most vulnerable part of the
population has already been hurt by the reduction in remittances, on
which many families depend, and so we need to protect these people. The
second challenge is the inevitable slowdown in profitability and the
slackening in the corporate sector. This may have a lagged impact on
nonperforming loans in the financial sector. Lastly, the stance of
Armenia largely depends on its major trading partners, particularly
Russia, which in its turn depends on oil prices. Should the oil price
decline for a long time, it will require Armenian government policy
changes in the longer term.

What is the impact of the crisis on different social group of
people? Will it affect the poor more than the rich?

Nienke Oomes: It is all determined by the structure of the consumption
baskets of the poor and the rich. The poorest 10 percent of the
Armenian population spend about 75% of their expenditures on food,
7% on transport and medication, and 18% on other items. The richest
10 percent spend only 44% on food, and have much higher expenditures
on medical services, electronic equipment, and fuel. If we look at
the price changes of the mentioned goods and services, we see that,
between September 2007 and October 2008, inflation was higher for
the poor, as a result of the increase in food prices, which peaked
at 14% in April 2008, raising inflation for the poor to 12%, while
inflation for the rich was only 8%. Nevertheless, if we only look at
the impact of the crisis on prices in March, the crisis seems to have
more affected the rich, since prices for fuel and medication have risen
significantly among others (by 7-8 percent), although prices for butter
and sugar have also increased by 5-7 percent. On the other hand, the
decreased price for fruits and vegetables was more a benefit for the
poor, being a larger part of their consumption. This leads us to the
conclusion that the price increases in March had a larger impact on
the rich than on the poor. However, given the other negative impacts
of the crisis on the poor (for example, the large drop in remittances
and the increase in unemployment), the IMF urges the government to
protect social spending and to increase targeted support for the poor,
despite the fall in tax revenues.

The recently approved IMF program in fact allows for an increase in
social spending.

Is it reasonable for Armenia to increase its budget deficit?

Masood Ahmed: The level of the deficit is a function of what is a
sustainable gap between revenues and expenditures. Tax revenues are
falling (they feel by 17 percent during the first quarter of 2009
compared to the first quart er of 2008) and expenditures will have
to adjust to that. Armenia needs to be careful about how much above
revenues it can spend without having to cover the expenditures with
Central Bank reserves. The government’s IMF program that was approved
in March targets a budget deficit for 2009 of about 3 percent of
GDP, but their program allows them to spend any additional external
financing that may become available, up to a ceiling of US$200
million, which would imply a deficit of 5 percent of GDP. However,
these numbers were based on a projection for real GDP growth of -1.5
percent for 2009, which now already seems too optimistic. An IMF team
is coming to Armenia in May which will study the situation and update
the projections for real GDP growth and the fiscal deficit.

Do you believe in the safety of the social expenditures of the
budget? Is there a danger that the increase in salaries and pensions
will be annihilated by inflation?

Nienke Oomes: Last year pensions increased by 60%. This increase is
not going to be annihilated, unless there is inflation of more than
60%, which is certainly not what we expect. In fact, inflation in
March was quite low – only 1,4% compared to February, and 1% compared
to March 2008. There remains the possibility of a lagged effect of
depreciation on prices.

Because of the depreciation, there is pressure on prices to increase,
but at the same time, there is also a negative effect on prices that
you can expect from the slowdown in demand, which comes from the
slowdown of incomes.

Remittances are falling (gross non-commercial inflows fell by 34
percent in February 2009 compared to February 2008), which means that
people have less money to spend. The only positive effect from that
is that it could lead to lower prices.

I think the State Commission for the Protection of Economic
Competition (SCPEC) has been successful in preventing excessive price
hikes. Following the depreciation on March 3, commodity retailers
immediately increased their prices, well above the reasonable
level. The SCPEC has taken a careful look and prevented undesired
developments. But naturally they cannot prevent any price increases
because, as the dollar becomes more expensive in dram terms, it is
natural for the prices of imported goods to rise. However, if there’s
an appreciation of 20%, that certainly does not mean that all prices
should increase by 20%. Prices of purely domestic goods have no reason
to increase – in fact, they could even fall because of a fall in
demand. Moreover, imported goods in Armenia constitute no more than 20
percent of the consumer price basket used for estimating CPI inflation.

Besides, every imported good has a non-imported component, for
example, the cost of producing and selling an imported good includes
the salaries of sales staff, advertisement, distribution, etc, t he
costs of which are in dram. We estimate this non-imported component
of imported goods at about 20 percent. In addition, we estimate that
domestically produced goods have an imported component of about 30
percent, which is about the share of imports in GDP. The total import
component of consumer prices in Armenia can therefore be calculated
as 20% (the share of imported goods) times 80% (the import component
of imported goods) plus 80% (the share of domestic goods) times 30%
(the import component of domestic goods), which is 40%. Therefore,
we would expect the exchange rate depreciation of 20% to imply an
average price rise of 40% times 20%, which is only 8%. However,
this does not mean that inflation will necessarily increase by 8%,
because at the same time, there is pressure on prices to fall because
of the fall in incomes and fallen demand. Our latest projection for
inflation for December 2009 is 8%, but that was before we received
the low inflation data for March, and the low remittances data for
February, so we will likely revise our inflation forecast downward.

On the day of the depreciation, March 3, the CB announced that the
dram would balance in the range of 360 – 380 dram/$1. What if the
dram falls out of this range?

Nienke Oomes: It is important to understand that the range of 360-380
was just an expectation by the CB, and not a new target. I think
the purpose of the CB statement was to calm down the population
and give some idea of where they think the exchange rate will go,
since the population had been stirred up by some outrageous exchange
rate forecasts that had been published in some newspapers, such
as 850 dram/$1. So this 360-380 was rather an expectation than a
target. Whether the exchange rate may fall below or above the expected
corridor depends on the global market, including oil prices and their
influence on Russian economy.

We have always supported the Central Bank’s inflation targeting
regime that they had in the past and which was interrupted during 2008
because of the crisis. Now they have returned to a floating exchange
rate regime, which also implies that keeping inflation low will again
be one of the main goals of the Central Bank. It is very difficult to
say what is the optimal level of inflation, but experience shows that,
once inflation becomes double-digit, it is very difficult to bring
it down again. Moreover, inflation is bad for the poor, especially
when their incomes are already falling. This is why it is important
to keep inflation low.

What is you view of the actions of the Armenian government to
strengthen mortgage and equity markets, which are considered to have
caused the global crisis?

Masood Ahmed: The crisis had not been caused by the mortgage or
equity markets as such, but by the lack of supervision in some
elements of the mortgage market. The answer to that problem is to
fix the regulatory supervisory framework so that the housing finance
market doesn’t practice excessive lending to people who can’t afford
to pay back. So the goal is not to get rid of housing finance, which
has been an extraordinary lever to enable people to buy their own
houses around the world. In our view, the future of the financial
sector includes a very vibrant housing finance market. We also think
that the equity market will remain an important part of the financial
market structure. Developing both of these in emerging markets like
Armenia is an important part of the agenda. But one must recognize
that in all countries, those markets need to be actively supervised
and regulated. In Armenia, you don’t have the kinds of practices
that created the problem in some elements of the market in the
US. Therefore, I think you can always learn from the experiences of
other countries.

In the joint statement on the 2nd PRSP in Armenia, WB and IMF expressed
reservations against pension reform in Armenia…

Nienke Oomes: In general we do support the view that the pension
reform, e.g. transition to the private mandatory savings system,
is necessary. The current system is hardly able to ensure that there
will be sufficient resources to cover people’s pensions in the next
50 years. Incorporating private investors in the pension savings syste
m is an element of the long-term financial development of the country.

However, there should be clear risk management guidelines, because
people’s pension money should not be invested in assets or markets
that are too risky.

We also had some reservations about the readiness of the tax
administration to deal with the maintenance with individual account
records. That requires a certain amount of time and investments in
their IT infrastructure. They are currently making progress in this
area, but it is not clear yet whether they will be ready by January
2010. If not, then the pension reform may need to be postponed a bit.

Masood Ahmed: I don’t think we have a general view that private
management is more risky than the state one, because both state and
private pension finds often invest in the same markets. The coexistence
of two kinds of pension funds will also help to benchmark them.

The IMF stands for certain rules to be kept, which forbid large
financial interventions by the state, including Armenia. In that case,
how does the IMF tolerate massive US dollar emission?

Masood Ahmed: The IMF does not have any abstract and universal
rules that apply to all countries. Each country in its given
circumstances should find the most appropriate solutions. Today,
the primary danger for the global economy is a prolonged slowdown and
recession. A long-term issue is to regain lost liquidity. The primary
co ncern is to make sure that the functioning of the economy can be
facilitated. To enable that, we need to provide additional liquidity,
large fiscal stimuli, and control over the activities of commercial
banks to ensure their participation in the turnover of capital. This
is a good example of how the IMF’s advice is responding to the current
problems, rather than following abstract rules.

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/long

Meeting of BSEC Foreign Ministers held in Yerevan

Press and Information Department
of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
of the Republic of Armenia
Tel. + 37410 544041. ext. 202
Fax. + 37410 565601
e-mail: [email protected]
web:

The Meeting of the Council of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the
BSEC member-states held in Yerevan

On April 16, the 20th meeting of the Council of the Ministers of
Foreign Affairs of the member-states of Organization of the Black Sea
Economic Cooperation was held in Yerevan under the Chairmanship of
Foreign Minister of Armenia Edward Nalbandian. Delegations of 12
member-states, 9 observers, as well as representatives of partner
countries, the BSEC structural institutions and international
organizations also attended the meeting.

The agenda of the meeting included wide range of issues concerning the
deepening of economic cooperation between the countries of the Black
Sea region, the improvement of the efficiency of the organization, the
strengthening and enhancement of cooperation of member-states within
bilateral and multilateral formats, the promotion of EU-BSEC
partnership, as well as the joint efforts aimed at the reduction of
the consequences of global financial crisis.

In his opening remarks, Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian
summarized the results of the activities of Armenian six-month
Chairmanship-in-Office. Minister Nalbandian expressed hope that this
meeting will provide wider opportunities for practical steps aimed at
the promotion of cooperation between member-states, enhancement of
multilateral cooperation in the area of economy within the region, as
well as on the international arena, improvement of the efficiency of
Organization’s activity.

Armenian Foreign Minister mentioned that during the Armenian
Chairmanship-in-Office of the BSEC more than 50 events were held –
Ministerial meetings, conferences, seminars and sessions of the
working groups.

Edward Nalbandian stressed that the Armenian Chairmanship highly
appreciates the results reached through active partnership in the
areas of transport, energy, science and technologies, small and medium
entrepreneurship, health, tourism, education and culture.

Minister Nalbandian also mentioned that among the priorities of
Chairmanship-in-office, Armenia focused on the enhancement of
cooperation between the BSEC and international organizations.

In their speeches, heads of the delegations of the BSEC member-states
and BSEC Secretary General highly appreciated Armenia’s activity as a
Chairman-in-Office of the organization and mentioned that the BSEC’s
activity in that period was has been active and effective.

During the Ministerial session, Iran and Jordan became sectoral
dialogue partners of BSEC.

At the end of Ministerial Council the ceremony of handover of BSEC
Chairmanship by Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian to
Azerbaijani Deputy Foreign Minister Mahmud Mammad-Quliyev took place,
which was followed by joint press conference of Foreign Minister of
Armenia, Deputy Foreign Ministers of Azerbaijan and Albania BSEC
Secretary General.

www.armeniaforeignministry.am

Ankara: Turkish Foreign Minister In Armenia Pleads For Regional Coop

TURKISH FOREIGN MINISTER IN ARMENIA PLEADS FOR REGIONAL COOPERATION

Anadolu Agency
April 15 2009
Turkey

Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ali Babacan said Thursday Black Sea Economic
Cooperation (BSEC) was the backbone of regional stability and the
most practical mechanism in containing political risks and conflicts.

Delivering a speech at the 20th BSEC Foreign Ministers Council in
Armenian capital Yerevan, Babacan said with such perspective, Turkey
strongly supported BSEC.

Commenting on Turkey’s position regarding the global financial crisis,
Babacan said the dimensions of the crisis made regional and global
coordination all more important.

Babacan said enhancing the cooperation among BSEC members, which
gave way to concrete projects like ring and sea highways, would be
beneficial for all members.

Reiterating Turkey’s offer to host the Joint Technical Secretariat
of the Sea Highway Project, Babacan said Turkey, with its coasts in
both the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea, was the most suitable
candidate.

Babacan urged the private sector and the businessmen to participate
more actively in activities of BSEC, noting that visa practices set
an obstacle in the way of interaction between private sectors of
different countries.

He said Turkey favoured a closer relation between BSEC and the EU.

Babacan later separately met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey
Lavrov and Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Mahmud Mammad Guliev.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: Existing Ties Between Iran And Armenia Are Very

MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: EXISTING TIES BETWEEN IRAN AND ARMENIA ARE VERY DEEP-ROOTED

APA
April 15 2009
Azerbaijan

Tehran – APA. "Iran and Armenia are determined to bolster mutual and
regional cooperation to promote security and stability of entire region
Cooperation among countries of the region with cultural commonalties
will bring peace, development and security to the whole region", said
President of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at a joint press conference
with his Armenian counterpart Serzh Sargsyan, APA reports quoting
IRNA. Existing ties between Iran and Armenia are very deep-rooted,
friendly and developing and the two nations throughout history have
always trusted each other and enjoyed amicable ties, said the Iranian
president.

To a question on the status of Armenian minority in Iran, he said
they shared common culture, civilization and interests with their
Muslim countrymen. "Armenian minority in Iran like other Iranians are
protecting the country’s independence, dignity, culture, civilization
and territorial integrity", he said.

For his part, Sargsyan said signing of eight memorandums of
understanding on mutual cooperation would help deepen and consolidate
ties between the two nations.

ANKARA: I Will Close My Company If They Open Border

I WILL CLOSE MY COMPANY IF THEY OPEN BORDER

Hurriyet
April 15 2009
Turkey

Azerbaijani businessman Mubariz Mansimov, who is the chairman of
Palmali Group, assessed Turkey-Azerbaijan relations: "Azerbaijani
investments in Turkey only in the last two years are more than $10
billion. Turkish companies are also making significant business in
Azerbaijan. I will not stay in a country that has an open border with
Armenia, and I will close my company in Turkey."