Author: Tambiyan Samvel

RPA COUNCIL SHARES THE SAME OPINION REGARDING THE CANDIDACY OF NA NEW SPEAKER
Naira Khachatryan

Hayots Ashkhar Daily
18 Sep 2008
Armenia

RPA Spokesman, MP Edward Sharmazanov was the guest of "Urbat" club
yesterday.

During his press conference convened the day before yesterday,
Tigran Torosyan who has submitted two applications, regarding his
leaving the Party and resignation from the position of NA Speaker,
characterized immoral the behavior of some of his party members,
saying that false information has been represented regarding the
voting and the process of the session.

According to Edward Sharmazanov members of RPA don’t agree with
T. Torosyan’s assessments: "We can understand him, because he is
a human being and his emotional outburst is quite natural at this
stage, but we hope that after some time he will give more sensible
estimations. As for the results of the voting I must say that our
partners have published them, as for the session of RPA council,
only 8 from 102 members were absent and 94 members unanimously voted
for Hovik Abrahamyan’s candidacy.

Meanwhile it is regrettable that RPA vice-Chairman is leaving the
party: "Because as President Serge Sargsyan underscored in his
interview given to the Mass Media, the Republican Party intends to
use his skills and knowledge in another sphere and bring benefit to
the country first of all, and only=2 0after that – the party. So the
party didn’t have any intentions to dismiss Tigran Torosyan or to
restrict his activity in the party’s structure.

The fellow party-members were unaware of his "intolerable
disagreements". "For the first time we came to know that he had
disagreements linked with the party’s political line. For the last two
years I have been the member RPA council, I have been participating
in all the sessions of the council and I haven’t heard him to have
any serious differences in his stance regarding the party’s political
line."

"Tigran Torosyan became an MP by the list of RPA. What is the attitude
of the Republicans towards his intentions to become an independent MP?"

"Despite the fact that he is no more a member of RPA, we shouldn’t
forget that he had a great role in the party. And it is up to him to
decide the issue of remaining an MP. There is no breach of law here.

Edward Sharmazanov didn’t exclude that in a party with 150.000 members
there can be people who will not agree to the decision of the session.

"But those represented in the council have been sent from the
territorial organizations of the party and we have no problem of a
split in our party. RPA has overcome more serious temptations. It has
lost three leaders, but it has become more united. At present we have
more20serious problems, and we are united around our Chairman."

"The period of the resignation of NA Speaker and the President
of Cassation Court matched. Is it a simple coincidence or certain
manifestation of a political process?"

"We all want changes. You can’t make reforms without cadre changes.

Though I don’t have any details about the resignation of the Chairman
of Cassation Court, but one thing is clear, we must be ready for
cadre changes.

It is a fact that our society needs reforms. As a representative
of a pro-governmental party I must say that our country faces lots
of problems.

And both the opposition and the ruling power have a big job in
this regard.

For us any constructive approach is acceptable," the speaker announced.

After Hovik Abrahamyan is elected as the Speaker of the Parliament,
according to the rumors the issue of changing the Prime Minister will
be put to discussion. And ex President Robert Kocharyan is considered
a possible candidate in this position.

Edward Sharmazanov said that the party hasn’t discussed similar issue:
"Only recently has the party approved Tigran Sargsyan’s candidacy as
a Prime Minister and his government action plan. In my view Tigran
Sargsyan is the person who is able to solve all the issues he has
put forward. The ten years of his governing have been years of lots
of achievements."

THE FORMAT UNAFFECTED

Hayots Ashkhar Daily
18 Sep 2008
Armenia

The main format of the negotiation process on the settlement of
Karabakh issue is unaffected. The parties will continue the work
around the "Madrid" principles represented by OSCE Minsk group
co-chairmanship.

It is also expected that the meeting of Azerbaijani and Armenian
Foreign Ministers will take place in New York, next week, in the
framework of the 63rd session of UN General Assembly.

OSCE Minsk Group French Chairman Bernard Facieses underscored that his
visit is aimed at the organization of that meeting. The co-Chairman
hoped that after the meeting between the Foreign Ministers of the two
countries favorable conditions would be established for the meeting of
the Presidents of the two countries after the Presidential elections
in Azerbaijan to take place in October.

POWERS OF RA CASSATION COURT CHAIRMAN HOVHANNES MANUKIAN STOPPED

Noyan Tapan

Se p 17, 2008

YEREVAN, SEPTEMBER 17, NOYAN TAPAN. RA President Serzh Sargsyan on
September 16 signed a decree on stopping the powers of Cassation
Court Chairman Hovhannes Manukian. Noyan Tapan was informed about it
by the RA President’s Press Office.

BOSTON UNIVERSITY HOSTS INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON THE LEGACY OF THE FIRST REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA

armradio.am
15.09.2008 11:11

Boston University will host an international symposium on the
"Legacy of the First Republic of Armenia, 1918-1921" on September 27,
2008. The conference will probe the long-term impact of the Republic
on the Armenian people both in Armenia and the Diaspora.

The conference is sponsored by the Charles K. and Elisabeth M. Kenosian
Chair in Modern Armenian History and Literature at Boston University
and is co-sponsored by BU’s International History Institute, the
Department of History, and the Department of International Relations,
and by the National Association for Armenian Studies and Research in
Belmont, Massachusetts.

Professor Simon Payaslian, Holder of the Kenosian Chair, commented
that this conference is a celebration of the ninetieth anniversary
of the re-emergence of Armenian statehood in 1918 as well as the
Republic’s independence after the disintegration of the Soviet Union
in 1991. This conference brings together some of the best scholars
with different perspectives to share their analyses with the public.

The speakers in the morning session (10:00am-12:00 noon), in addition
to the opening remarks by Professor Payaslian, are Professor Erik
Goldstein, Chair of the Department of International Relations at Boston
University; Professor Ara Sanjian, University of Michigan-Dearborn;
and Dr.20Victoria Rowe, University of Greenwich, United Kingdom.

Professor Erik Goldstein will present a paper, titled "Great Britain
and the Re-Emergence of Armenian Statehood," which discusses the
British fascination with and involvement in the Eastern Christians,
how British engagement in the region became a popular cause. The paper
then focuses on the extent to which the pro-Armenian groups in the
British government influenced foreign policy in the First World War,
and finally why British support for the Republic collapsed.

Professor Ara Sanjian, Director of the Armenian Research Center at the
University of Michigan-Dearborn since 2006, will present a paper titled
"Continuing the All-Russian Revolution of February 1917: The Challenge
of Land Reform." His talk covers the attempts to introduce land reform
in Eastern Armenia from 1917 to 1920, during the periods of rule by the
Provisional Government in Petrograd, the Transcaucasian Federation,
and the Republic of Armenia. The paper sheds light on social and
economic program of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation. It also
examines the approaches of the other political parties active among
the Armenians in Transcaucasia.

Dr. Victoria Rowe (University of Greenwich, United Kingdom) will
present a paper titled "Women as Political Actors in the First
Republic of Armenia and in the Creation of International Networks of
Refugee Relief, 1918-1925." Her paper examines the poli tical status
of Armenian women in the first Republic of Armenia and activism by
women on behalf of the Republic at the League of Nations. She then
discusses the resulting legacy of political participation of women
in the Armenian Diaspora.

Dr. Razmik Panossian will present a paper titled "The Impact of the
First Republic on Armenian Identity in the 20th Century." His paper
explores the extent to which the first Republic shaped subsequent
Armenian political thought both in Soviet Armenia and in the Armenian
Diasporan communities.

Dr. Robert Owen Krikorian will present a paper titled "The Legacy
of the First Independent Republic of Armenia and the Collapse of
Soviet Power."

His study explores the historical paradigm shift which occurred
in Soviet Armenia during the democratic movement and analyzes the
competing historical narratives and their political implications in
Armenia as the Soviet era approached its end.

Day.az , Azerbaijan
Sept 9 2008

Zardust Alizada: We can easily come to terms with the Armenian public
on friendly terms with Turkey as against the part of the Armenian
public depending unambiguously on Russia

9 September: A Day.az interview with Azerbaijani political expert
Zardust Alizada.

[Correspondent] The fuss around the latest visit of Turkish President
Abdullah Gul to Yerevan is not dying down. The majority of the
observers in Azerbaijan inclined to see more negative aspects rather
than positive moments. What is your assessment of the processes under
way?

Successful ever government

[Alizada] [Passage omitted: The Turkish prime minister has been
carrying out profound reforms]

So everything is fine with [Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan]. The only problem is the Armenian issue. Armenia speaks about
the "genocide" everywhere, has territorial claims to Turkey. Since
Turkey was very interested in Azerbaijan in the beginning of 1990s, it
has begun to strategically support our country.

Nevertheless, Azerbaijan turned out to be insufficiently good
partner. Turks started to train our military, supply ammunition and
weapons, but eventually, they saw that Azerbaijan was not interested
in Karabakh up to the mark. Turkey is in excellent relations with
Syria, Iraq, Iran, Georgia, and Russia with everyone, except for
Armenia.

The security of any state is measured by its relations with
neighbours. What should the government do in such conditions? Turkey
has done a lot for the adjustment of dialogue and improvement of the
relations, having no diplomatic relations with Armenia; it allowed
Armenian citizens to arrive in Turkey in search of a living. That is
to say, they have made some layers of the Armenian population
economically dependent on themselves, like, for example, Russia has
made the major part of the Azerbaijani population dependent on itself.

Ankara boosts business ties with Yerevan

Ankara has begun to encourage the development of the Armenian-Turkish
business relations and at present Armenian businessmen do business
absolutely free in Turkey. The Turkish leadership has been encouraging
contacts at the level of civil societies, which is also good.

And finally, voices are being heard in Armenia that Turks are not
enemies but neighbours through which the road runs to Europe. Of
course, these voices are weak against the background of those who
shout "Russia is our future!", "Owing to Russia, we have taken away
Karabakh!" and so on. Nevertheless, a struggle has started, the
stratification of Armenian society has started and Turkey will benefit
from it.

Therefore, I think that the visit of Gul to Yerevan is very wise step;
it is a very bold step towards the start of intensive dialogue. This
reminds me "a ping pong diplomacy" between America and China in 1970s,
and "the wrestlers’ diplomacy" when Iranian wrestlers arrived in
America and Americans to Iran.

I think that Gul undertook a positive step which will serve
improvement of the relations between Armenia and Turkey and increases
the level of security and mutual understanding in the region. Here
crops up another issue: do we not need the establishment of security
and cooperation in the region for a peaceful resolution of the
Karabakh problem as our government claims? Or, does everyone need to
be at loggerheads with one another for this? The second is absolutely
illogical. I think Erdogan is a wisest Turkish politician after
Ataturk, he has been ruling over the country in a brilliant manner and
reforms Turkey by leading it forward.

Improvement of ties to be conducive to regional cooperation

[Correspondent] Consequently, will the visit of Gul to Armenia be only
to our benefit?

[Alizada] Certainly. Just imagine a situation, the mutual relations
between Armenia and Turkey will improve, the Armenian economy will be
attached to the Turkish one, Armenian society will orient itself to
the Turkish one, and given this voices of those who shout: "Enmity
between Turks and Armenians are for ever" will not enjoy support. And
in this situation, we shall easily agree, find a compromise decision
with the Armenian public in friendly terms with Turkey but not with
that part of the Armenian public depending unambiguously on Russia.

Russia’s influence over Armenia huge

[Correspondent] Incidentally, will it be possible to succeed in all
these, bearing in mind the current dependence of the Armenian
leadership from Russia?

[Alizada] It is outright that Russia has fastened Armenia to itself
with many belts. The first such a belt is the military bases which
have been established by no means against Azerbaijan but to keep the
Armenian society under control as well as the army as the most
effective instrument of the Armenian society.

The second belt is the Armenian national mythology about the enmity to
Turks, which has been cultivated and supported by the Russian science,
propaganda and special services, knowing thereby that they tear
Armenia from the Turkic world and fasten to Russia.

The third belt is the Karabakh army, which sits around Yerevan and
controls the Armenian opposition.

The fourth is the Armenian politicians, mainly; those who have come
out from the Karabakh movement and are for a union with Russia,
including the same Levon Ter-Petrosyan.

The fifth belt is [Karabakh president] Bako Sahakyan, an officer of
the GRU [Main Intelligence Directorate of the Russian Defence
Ministry] who is in Karabakh to control both [Armenian President]
Serzh [Sargsyan] and Robik [ex-president] Robert Kocharyan, through
whom Russia governs Armenia.

In order to break all those belts, Turkey has begun to alter its
policy, using peace potential, economy, cooperation, and Azerbaijan
also should change its approaches since our country’s foreign policy
in this direction is completely ineffective.

Turkish prime minister’s initiative doomed to failure

[Correspondent] And, nevertheless, are you still convinced that the
initiative of Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan on a Caucasus Stability
and Cooperation Platform lacks any prospect?

[Alizada] Yes, this initiative is absolutely senseless. Look: Georgia
has unambiguously orients itself to Europe, America and NATO, Armenia
is now unambiguously attached to Russia; in its turn, Azerbaijan
balances between them, saying: "Do not hinder us to rob our own
people". That’s it. Can there be an alliance among a crawfish, a pike
and a crane?

[Correspondent] Will Turkey succeed in realizing own interests in such
a complicated situation?

[Alizada] Turkey is very powerful and independent country in order to
be subjected to someone’s influence. Yes, Turks use Georgia as a
transit route, they built an oil pipeline worth 4bn dollars at our
expense, although the Iranian route to the tune of 300m dollars would
be more profitable and secure.

Azerbaijan for Turkey is a jumping board for entering more promising
and powerful Central Asian region. Owing to the future of Turkey in
the Turkic speaking world, the price of this country grows in the eyes
of America. I myself heard in Ankara words of the [now former]
chairman of the Social Democratic People’s Party, Erdal Inonu, that
after the demise of the USSR, Turkey has gained brilliant chance with
regard to Turkic countries of the former Soviet Union, and that one
should not forget that Ankara can realize this potential only in
alliance with the USA.

In other words, Turks and Americans act in tandem in the issue of
entering of the West and Turkey into the Turkic republics. In this
process, quoting cultural and other common features with other
countries of the Turkic world, Turks realize their economic and
geopolitical interests and this is normal.

KARABAKHIS’ RENEWED INDEPENDENCE HOPES
By Karine Ohanian

Institute for War and Peace Reporting
Sept 11 2008
UK

Local politicians say goal of international recognition should be
pursued more strongly in wake of Georgian war.

The conflict in Georgia and Russia’s recognition of Abkhazia and
South Ossetia as independent states have fundamentally shaken up the
unresolved Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorny Karabakh.

Two of the three mediators in the OSCE body charged with resolving
the Nagorny Karabakh conflict, the so-called Minsk Group – consisting
of the United States, Russia and France – have clashed over Georgia,
with Washington deeply opposed to Moscow backing the independence of
South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

"The mediators in the Karabakh peace process need some mediation
themselves," commented Armen Sargsian, a deputy in the parliament in
Nagorny Karabakh.

"When you consider the fact that the two opposing poles are recognizing
a right to self-determination – the West in Kosovo and Russia in
Abkhazia and South Ossetia – their joint activity on Nagorny Karabakh
will be interesting now."

Armenian-majority Nagorny Karabakh declared independence from
Azerbaijan in 1991 and has been de facto separate from Azerbaijan
since war ended in 1994. But no one, not even Armenia, has recognised
the territory as an independent state.

The Nagorny Karabakh Republic has for years been part of an informal
"Commonwealth of Independent States-2", maintaining links with the
three other post-Soviet unrecognised territories of Abkhazia, South
Ossetia and Transdniestria. They sent observers to each other’s
elections and conducted high-level meetings.

About three years ago, Nagorny Karabakh began to distance itself a
little from the others, saying that there were differences between
the conflicts.

However, this did not prevent the Karabakhi leadership from
congratulating the Abkhaz and South Ossetians on their recognition
by Moscow. Karabakh’s president Bako Sahakian told his counterparts
Sergei Bagapsh and Eduard Kokoity, "The people of Karabakh have
received this long-awaited news with sincere joy." He expressed the
hope that "international recognition of independence will give a new
impulse to the development and prosperity of our brotherly countries".

Nagorny Karabakh’s foreign ministry also issued a statement welcoming
the developments and expressing the hope that "all powers interested
in the peace of the region will draw conclusions from events that have
occurred in the South Caucasus and will take real steps to resolve the
problems that exist only by peaceful means and within the framework
of regional stability".

Politicians were more forthright, saying Karabakhis should now pursue
the goal of international recognition more strongly. Parliamentarian
Artur Tovmasian said that Nagorny Karabakh had just as good a case
for independence as other breakaway territories.

"We are proposing that recognising the independence of South Ossetia,
Abkhazia and – why not? – Kosovo be put on the agenda of the parliament
of the Nagorny Karabakh Republic," he said.

Sargsian, a member of the nationalist Dashnaktsutiun party, agreed that
Nagorny Karabakh should recognise the independence of "all unrecognised
state entities", saying that this would be a step towards reconciling
the interests of Washington and Moscow.

Politician and humanitarian activist Karen Ohanjanian also argued
for recognition of unrecognised territories, regardless of their
international allegiances, "so that all people on earth can live in
one mutually agreed world order".

An important issue that arose in a public meeting in Stepanakert
to discuss events in Georgia was whether Armenia should not now
recognise the independence of Nagorny Karabakh, and whether Yerevan
could recognise the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia without
hurting its relations with Georgia.

The Georgian crisis had already caused a fuel shortage in Karabakh. "I
was supposed to go to work in Yerevan and it was hard for me to find
fuel at double the price," said Aren Baghdasarian, a driver. "There
was also a problem in Yerevan. People said that a bridge in Georgia
had been blown up and petrol was not being imported."

Baghdasarian said that many of his friends were predicting there
might also be shortages of flour and gas.

In Karabakh courtyards and offices, the Georgian conflict has dominated
conversations over the last month and also reawakened memories of
their own war of the early Nineties.

Ruzanna Khachatrian, a shop assistant, said that she cried when she
saw broadcasts from South Ossetia on television. "I remembered how
we lived with rats in the cellars when they were bombing us with
the same kinds of Grad [rocket-launcher] artillery and planes and
how every day innocent old people, women and children were dying,"
she said. "I watched television and didn’t know how to help these
people and stop this bloodshed. It was terrible!"

Svetlana Danielian, an economist, said, "If Georgia had been
successful, the Azerbaijanis could have gone down the same
route. Although I understand that our army is stronger, all the same
no one, I think, wants to live through yet another war.

"I’m angry that no one either here or in Azerbaijan takes into account
the opinion of ordinary people. I’m angry that thousands of lives can
be cut short because of the ambitions of two or three powers. But
if war does start, we will still have to resist because we have no
other place in this world except Karabakh."

Former presidential candidate Masis Mailian, now an independent
expert, said that he hoped the Georgian crisis would "cool hotheads"
in Azerbaijan and elsewhere who thought they could retake breakaway
territories by force. He said it had also revealed the weakness of
international conflict-prevention efforts in the Caucasus.

"Events in South Ossetia have shown up the low effectiveness
of international mechanisms to stabilise the situation in the
Georgian-Ossetian conflict zone," said Mailian. "The UN Security
Council has been unable to take any proper decisions."

Political analyst David Babayan said that he hoped recognition of
Abkhazia and South Ossetia would set a precedent for Nagorny Karabakh
but argued that this was not the most important point.

"Recognition for Karabakh is only a matter of time, but fortunately
people in Nagorny Karabakh are already ridding themselves of the
so-called ‘non-recognition complex’ and they do not link their future
exclusively to the recognition of our independence. The reverse is
true – they think of recognition as something that follows on from
achieving a certain level of statehood."

Karine Ohanian is a correspondent with Demo newspaper in Nagorny
Karabakh.

TURKEY SEEKS FENCE-MENDING MEETING WITH ARMENIA, AZERBAIJAN

Agence France Presse
September 10, 2008 Wednesday 9:10 AM GMT

Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan Wednesday said he was trying to
organise a meeting with counterparts from Armenia and Azerbaijan to
discuss decades-old disputes plaguing ties between them.

The idea, Babacan said, emerged during a historic visit to Yereven
by President Abdullah Gul on Saturday, which raised hopes that Turkey
and Armenia could overcome traditional enmity and establish diplomatic
relations.

"We have many reasons to be hopeful, the most important of which is
the presence of a strong political will" to improve ties, the minister
said in an interview with NTV television.

Babacan and Armenian Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian are already
scheduled to meet on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New
York later this month.

Babacan said he suggested that their Azeri counterpart also join the
meeting and Nalbandian agreed.

"We will now seek Azerbaijan’s consent… The problems between Turkey
and Armenia and not independent from the problems between Azerbaijan
and Armenia," he said.

The issue would be discussed when Gul visits Baku later Wednesday,
he said.

Turkey has refused to establish diplomatic ties with eastern neighbour
Armenia because of Yerevan’s campaign for the recognition of the mass
killings of Armenians under the Ottoman Empire during World War I
as genocide.

In 1993, Turkey dealt a heavy economic blow to its impoverished
neighbour by shutting the border in a show of solidarity with its close
ally Azerbaijan, then at war with Armenia over Nagorny Karabakh —
an Armenian-majority region in Azerbaijan which declared independence.

Babacan said Gul’s visit to Armenia, the first by a Turkish head of
state, had raised hopes that the two sides could mend fences.

"In our talks in Yereven we decided to speed up the process (of
reconciliation)… We are entering a period in which we will have
frequent contacts," he told NTV.

Gul travelled to Yereven for several hours to watch a World Cup
qualifying football match between Turkey and Armenia following an
invitation by his counterpart Serzh Sarkisian.

TO JOIN NATO, BAKU SHOULD EITHER RESOLVE KARABAKH PROBLEM OR FORGET IT

PanARMENIAN.Net
11.09.2008 14:43 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ To join NATO, a country is obliged to meet all
conditions of the Alliance’s Regulations.

"The aspirant country has first of all to resolve conflicts, if it
experiences such. It refers both to Georgia, which ‘resolved’ the
South Ossetian and Abkhazian conflicts, and to Azerbaijan," Tevan
Poghosyan, Executive Director of the Armenian Atlantic Association,
told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter.

"I think, Russian political scientists are quite right to say that
if Azerbaijan wants to join NATO, it has either to resolve Karabakh
problem or forget it. No progress has been fixed in talks. So,
Azerbaijan can’t follow the path of Georgia or Ukraine," he said.

The other day, Russian political scientist Alexey Makarkin said,
"Let Georgia without South Ossetia and Abkhazia and then Azerbaijan
without Nagorno Karabakh join NATO, nobody is stopping them. This
will be the price of pleasure. And it’s not Russia’s fault."

"However, Karabakh is a painful problem for Azerbaijan, which will
work to return the region at any price, including rapprochement with
Russia," he said.

TURKEY SEEKS MEETING WITH ARMENIA, AZERBAIJAN

Hurriye
Sept 10 2008
Turkey

Turkey’s FM Wednesday said he was trying to organize a meeting with his
Armenia and Azerbaijan counterparts to discuss decades-old disputes
plaguing ties between them. The Azerbaijani FM responded positively
to talk of a trilateral meeting, a spokesman said. (UPDATED)

The idea emerged during a historic visit to Yerevan by President
Abdullah Gul on Saturday, Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ali Babacan said
in an interview with NTV television.

"We have many reasons to be hopeful, the most important of which is
the presence of a strong political will" to improve ties, the minister
said in an interview with NTV television.

Babacan and Armenian Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian are already
scheduled to meet on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly in
New York later this month.

Babacan said he suggested that their Azeri counterpart also join the
meeting and Nalbandian agreed.

"We will now seek Azerbaijan’s consent… The problems between Turkey
and Armenia and not independent from the problems between Azerbaijan
and Armenia," he said.

The issue would be discussed when Gul visits Baku, he said. Gul
Wednesday will fly to Azerbaijan to meet his Azerbaijani counterpart
Ilham Aliyev.

Babacan said Gul’s visit to Armenia, the first by a Turkish head of
state, had raised hopes that the two sides could mend fences.

"In our talks in Yerevan we decided to speed up the process (of
reconciliation)… We are entering a period in which we will have
frequent contacts," he added.

"Armenia seems to have passed a threshold now, and the diplomatic
traffic and our impression from the Armenian president and the foreign
minister reveals that there is a strong will for solution in Armenia,"
Babacan also said.

"They do understand our sensitivities and we do understand theirs. We
have many reasons to be optimistic," he added.

Babacan, however, said "there were quite a few problematic issues"
between Turkey and Armenia, such as the incidents of 1915, and the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Gul paid last week a landmark visit to Yerevan after Armenian President
Serzh Sargsyan invited him to watch a 2010 World Cup qualifying match
between the two countries’ national teams.

Turkey is among the first countries that recognized Armenia when it
declared its independency in the early 1990s.

However there are no diplomatic relations between the two countries,
as Armenia presses the international community to admit the so-called
"genocide" claims instead of accepting Turkey’s call to investigate the
allegations, and its invasion of 20 percent of Azerbaijani territory
despite U.N. Security Council resolutions on the issue.

BABACAN TALKS TO AZERI FM Babacan held a telephone conversation with
his Azerbaijani counterpart Elmar Mammadyarov, spokesman for the
Turkish Foreign Ministry, Burak Ozugergin, told the Anatolian Agency.

He said Babacan and Mammadyarov discussed the recent situation in
the Caucasus, and added Mammadyarov gave a positive response on a
possible trilateral meeting between the foreign ministers of Turkey,
Armenia and Azerbaijan in the United States.

Ozugergin said Turkish foreign minister gave information to Mammadyarov
on Gul’s Yerevan visit and on his talks with Nalbandian.

Babacan told Mammadyarov Turkey would always support Azerbaijan,
Ozugergin added.

WHETHER THE POLICE OPERATIONS WERE ADEQUATE

Hayots Ashkhar Daily
10 Sep 2008
Armenia

Why is the interim report of the NA committee investigating the March
1-2 events being delayed?

In response to this question of "Hayots Ashkharh", Head of the
Committee SAMVEL NIKOYAN mentioned, "We still need to clarify a couple
of episodes from the incidents that occurred on the Freedom Square
in the morning of March 1. In particular, the conversation is about
the number of the demonstrators.

That is very important for assessing the adequacy of the police
operations because the figures mentioned vary between the ranges of
200-300 to 4000. If there were 200-300 people on the square, then
a question arises as to why 730 policemen were sent to disperse the
crowd and whether there was a disproportional use of forces?"