Author: Topchian Jane

Hurriyet, Turkey
Jan 5 2010

Armenian community to hold `co-patriarchy’ election

Tuesday, January 5, 2010
VERCÄ°HAN ZÄ°FLÄ°OÄ?LU
ISTANBUL – Hürriyet Daily News

Turkey’s Armenian community has officially applied to the Istanbul
governorship to begin the election process for a co-patriarch because
of the illness of the current patriarch, Mesrop II. Under the Armenian
Church’s canon law, Mesrop II will retain the title until his death
even after the co-patriarch is elected. The electorate is composed of
50,000 members of Istanbul’s Armenian community

The Armenian community is preparing for the second `co-patriarchy’
election in the history of the Turkish Republic.

Current Patriarch Mesrop II, the 84th to hold the office, is ill and,
in case of his death, the co-patriarch will assume the job after 40
days. According to the Armenian Church’s canon law, Mesrop II will
keep his title until his death. But because he is suffering from
dementia, it is necessary to elect a co-patriarch.

The official application for the elections has been made to the
Istanbul governor’s office although the election has raised debate
about the function of the patriarch. Some community members believe
the patriarch should act as a more symbolic figure.

When Mesrop II became patriarch, Turkey’s Armenian community was
largely inward looking. The patriarch drew attention through his
intellectual background, foreign education and modern point of view in
contrast to many of his predecessors during the republican period.

At the time, Mesrop II’s candidacy aroused much debate both in the
local Armenian community and the Turkish press. The community was
skeptical of a young cleric becoming patriarch while the Turkish press
focused on his political views.

Despite these questions, Mesrop Mutafyan won the election in 1998 and
became Mesrop II, Patriarch of Turkey’s Armenians. Besides handling
his spiritual duties and fulfilling his community responsibilities,
Mesrop II also played an active role in bringing the problems of the
Armenian community to Turkey’s agenda.

The year 2007 was a near-breaking point for Mesrop II; he retreated
into a deep silence following the assassination of his close friend,
Hrant Dink. Mesrop II was the one who suggested founding Agos, a
bilingual daily in both Turkish and Armenian that was run by Dink.

Despite his comparatively young age, the patriarch’s medical prognosis
is not encouraging. In an attempt to avoid upsetting the community,
his health issue was initially reported as a thyroid tumor. Afterward,
however, it was announced that the patriarch had dementia at the age
of 53.

Some remained suspicious of the diagnosis while others connected the
announcement with threats against the Armenian community. Nonetheless,
the patriarchate’s clerical council has been handling Mesrop II’s
duties for more than a year and has said it will look for a
co-patriarch because of the patriarch’s irreversible condition.

Regarding the recent events, the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review
spoke to Agos chief editor Etyen Mahçupyan and Seven NiÅ?anyan, an
academic and author. Mahçupyan and NiÅ?anyan represent different faces
of the Armenian community, both through their ideas and their
identities: Mahçupyan is from the Catholic Armenian Church while
NiÅ?anyan is a member of the Apostolic Armenian Church.

Suspicious circumstances

NiÅ?anyan, who is also a close friend of Mesrop II, said he has closely
observed every step of the patriarch’s illness and said he skeptical
of the illness: `I have met the patriarch many times, ¦ it is too hard
for me to believe his illness has natural causes.’

NiÅ?anyan agrees that there is a possibility that Mesrop II may have
fallen ill under suspicious circumstances. `This is a very serious
matter and it needs to be looked into. There might be people who want
Mutafyan to be in this condition. It is inevitable that there would be
people who want him to be weak as much as people who would want him to
be strong in both Turkish and Armenian communities.’

Mahçupyan spoke about Mesrop II’s intellectual vision and education
but said those qualities are insufficient for spiritually leading a
community. `At first, Mutafyan gave the impression that he would be a
patriarch to act in solidarity with his community but in time, he
founded a small clan among those in the community with whom he was
close. If he weren’t ill and there were elections again, he would only
be able to receive half the votes.’

`The position of patriarch should be a symbolic one’

Mahçupyan said the Armenian community has rapidly entered a new phase
following the Dink assassination, adding that the community’s
spiritual and daily affairs should be separated. `The position of
patriarch should be a symbolic one,’ said Mahçupyan.

`The person who would be patriarch could have a representative
authority like the [Turkish] president. He should act like a
counseling mechanism whose opinions would be asked when necessary,’
Mahçupyan said.

He claimed the patriarchate has become a political tool due to the
pressure Turkey exerts on minorities. `Whoever is selected as
patriarch will be turned into a political target; it is not possible
to prevent that,’ Mahçupyan said but emphasized that the community was
adapting to the situation.

A patriarch above the standards of others

In contrast to Mahçupyan’s criticism of Mesrop II, NiÅ?anyan said both
Turkey and its Armenian community have been fortunate to have him.
`Through his courage and intelligence, Mesrop II went beyond the usual
standards Turkey’s Armenian community is used to seeing in church
leaders.’ He also praised the patriarch for changing the perception
that being afraid of one’s own shadow was a commendable trait.

Regarding the patriarch’s religious and secular duties, NiÅ?anyan said:
`Of course it is a source of contradiction and problem that the
Armenian community, which has a secular and dynamic structure, is
being represented by a religious position. On the other hand, I don’t
think it’s wise to say we don’t like it and [that we should] eliminate
such an influential mechanism of so many years.’

On the prospective new patriarch, NiÅ?anyan said, `Let us hope the
community and church members who select the new patriarch will not
prefer the old policy of succumbing and silence in the name of peace
and accord in the country.’

Patriarch moves to Istanbul

Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II transferred the Armenian Pontificate from
Bursa to Istanbul after he conquered the city in 1453. He also brought
Episkopos Hovagim Golod, leader of the Armenian community in Bursa, to
Istanbul and assigned him as patriarch. The patriarch’s building is in
Istanbul’s Kumkapı neighborhood today.

216co-patriarch8217-election-among-the-armenian-co mmunity-for-the-second-time-in-the-history-of-repu blic-2010-01-05

news.am, Armenia
Jan 2 2010

Protocols will be approved in Turkey in near months: Expert

15:06 / 01/02/20102009 is marked by turning point in Armenia-Turkey
relations that had huge impact on foreign political and domestic
developments of Armenia, the Chairman of Analytical Center on
Globalization and Regional Cooperation Stepan Grigoryan told NEWS.am.
According to him, Azerbaijan’s reaction to Armenia-Turkey Protocols
and entailed warlike statements by Azerbaijani officials also impacted
foreign policy.

Forecasting the coming year developments, Grigoryan stated that
international community made an attempt to intensify the Karabakh
peace process and dictate signing of the framework agreement that with
no specifics. The expert underlined that any comprehensive settlement
of Karabakh issue, for instance on the matter of security zone around
Karabakh will dramatically destabilize domestic political situation in
Armenia. `If a framework agreement like Madrid Principles is signed,
the situation will not aggravate, but if the document mentions the
territories controlled by Armenian side, the situation escalation in
Armenia is inevitable,’ the expert said.

As to Armenia-Turkey relations and possible ratification of the
Protocols, the expert considers that documents will be approved by
Turkish Parliament in the months ahead.

A.G.

TOWARDS LONG-AWAITED BREAKTHROUGH: RESOLVING KARABAKH CONFLICT – NO RESULTS WITH SURVIVING HOPES

Today
Dec 29 2009
Azerbaijan

The year 2009 is nearing end. Contrary to expectations, this year
did not brought long-awaited breakthrough in the peaceful settlement
of Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. But is unfair to
call negotiations imitation and mediating efforts of the OSCE Minsk
Group – failure. Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev gave an adequate
assessment of the situation in his recent interview with a Russian TV
channel. He described this year in terms of the settlement "… as a
positive, but less positive than it might be", adding that "… we
hope it will be possible to agree on the basic positions in 2010,
but we oppose that negotiation will become a permanent process."

What the year 2009 was noted for in the context of the settlement
of the Karabakh conflict? First of all, perhaps, for intensified
negotiation process. The presidents of the conflicting parties held six
meetings. The foreign ministers met more often. The co-chairs of the
Minsk group visited the region together or individually almost every
month sometimes making the shuttle visits between Baku and Yerevan.

The support for a peaceful settlement was not limited to efforts of
Special representatives of Minsk Group co-chairing countries. Russian
President Dmitry Medvedev directly participated in the three
Armenian-Azerbaijani summit meetings. At the G-8 summit in L’Aquila
(Italy), Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, United States President
Barack Obama and French President Sarkozy issued a joint statement on
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. 17th meeting of the OSCE Ministerial
Council Meeting held in Athens in December supported a statement by
the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan, as well as foreign
ministers of France, Russia and U.S. Undersecretary of State which
said efforts to resolve the Karabakh conflict on the basis of three
principles of the Helsinki Final Act – non-use or threat of force,
equality and self-determination of peoples and territorial integrity –
was continuing.

Without exaggerating importance of this document, I draw attention
to the fact that for the first time the Armenian side agreed to
the document which called for resolving the Karabakh conflict under
territorial integrity. To be more exact, ten years ago Armenia refused
to accede to the document which stipulated self-determination for
Nagorno-Karabakh in the context of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity
at the OSCE summit in Lisbon. Even in last year’s Mein Dorf Declaration
on political settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict signed by
the presidents of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Russia, due to conflicting
approaches of the conflicting parties they had to refer to general
principles and norms of international law and decisions and documents
adopted in this framework.

Negotiations were difficult and tough throughout 2009. The parties
made strides not only forward but backward, returning to matters
that seemed to be earlier coordinated. Presumably, the parties have
agreed on a phased withdrawal of Armenian forces from occupied areas
outside Nagorno-Karabakh. Baku also signaled that it does not object
to a corridor linking Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia. Evidence is a
visit of a special mission to the Lachin region to review possible
route and secure width of the corridor. The issue of "interim status"
also saw some progress, but a possibility to reconcile positions
of the sides on the final status of Nagorno-Karabakh, or rather,
a mechanism for determining have been elusive.

Azerbaijan insists that regardless of the will of the Nagorno-Karabakh
people, the legal power has been and should rest with Azerbaijan,
and, consequently, one can speak only about extent of autonomy and
self-government. Armenia required not to set boundaries for the will
of the Nagorno-Karabakh people (referring to the Armenian majority)
seeking to legalize secession from Azerbaijan through the referendum.

Offering a to define status of Nagorno-Karabakh through mechanism of a
delayed referendum, the Minsk Group co-chairs want to simultaneously
solve the difficult question of establishing cooperation between
Armenia and the Nagorno-Karabakh separatists with Azerbaijan.

Armenians are interested in such cooperation to a great degree. Even
if to assume hypothetically that the great powers recognize secession
of Nagorno-Karabakh from Azerbaijan, no one can force Azerbaijan to
cooperate with Armenia. Deferred referendum to determine the permanent
status allows the mediating powers to push Baku to appease the Armenian
side with economic preferences, to demonstrate its willingness to
forget the past in every possible way, open communications and to make
investments in the hope that the Armenians will vote for a referendum
to remain within the borders of Azerbaijan.

However, we have closely studied history and behavioral patterns of
Armenians which leave no room for illusions about their "gratitude and
prudence." So, attempts to catch Baku in a trap of referendum failed.

Therefore, in response to requirement to formulate a question about
will of the people in the most general form and to postpone it for
a long-term perspective, Yerevan once again raised the issue of a
"transitional status".

Armenians want to fill in details which in practice means formation of
de facto independence of Nagorno-Karabakh without declaring it. Since,
"transitional status" in the Armenian interpretation is identical
to independence to be consolidated with international agreements and
guarantees. Nevertheless, one can try find a balance and to reach a
mutually acceptable compromise on the timing and time of a referendum
on one hand and the scope of powers defined by "transitional status"
on the other.

Meanwhile, mediators hope to move the negotiating process forward. The
official websites of the OSCE and the American White House released
part of the the Madrid Principles in summer to make public aware of
them. The co-chairs began to meet more with the leaders of public
opinion, NGO activists, representatives of political parties and
the media and to inform on the state of settlement of the Karabakh
conflict. Foreign donors began to fund more projects that involve
contacts and dialogue between civil society representatives of the
conflicting parties. The noteworthy is that Russia initiated the
meeting of parliamentarians from Armenia and Azerbaijan, later media
leaders and later that of independent experts and NGO leaders.

To prevent Armenian separatists monopolize the right to speak on behalf
of the Nagorno-Karabakh, finally steps were taken to strengthen and
grant an official status to the Azerbaijani community of Karabakh.

It is important to give an impetus to this community to ensure its
voice will be loudly sounded in Azerbaijan and abroad.

Negotiations within the Minsk Group are in homestretch. It is hard
to protract them indefinitely in a bid extend the existing status quo.

Azerbaijan is developing and growing while Armenia is stagnating
amid a blockade. The burden of sustaining its economy, finances and
armaments, which falls primarily on Russia is becoming harder.

An attempt to play against Azerbaijan a card of "historical
Armenian-Turkish reconciliation" developed by Armenians and
sponsored by their patrons failed. It true goal was to break
the Turkish-Azerbaijani alliance to cause confusion and to
persuade Azerbaijan to make concessions, leading to secession of
Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijan’s leaders showed firmness, but the
Turkish government, after a little hesitation, unequivocally confirmed
that without progress in the settlement of the Karabakh ratification
conflict, Armenian-Turkish protocols will not be ratified and borders
between the two countries will not open. Moreover, Armenia and Turkey
have signed a deal according to which Turkey will provide assistance
and help strengthen defense capacity of Azerbaijan.

In these circumstances, there is only one way to avoid complications
of war in the region which greatly increases the risk in case the
negotiations fail – to bring Armenia to reason so that it will
lower its territorial ambitions. Hardness, realism and reliance on
interests rather than history and emotion leaves a chance to implement
long-awaited breakthrough in the negotiations within the OSCE Minsk
Group in the coming year.

"I CAN!" – THIS IS HOW ALL VICTORIES BEGIN, PRESIDENT URGES

Panorama.am
18:02 28/12/2009

At the initiative of the Armenian First Lady Rita Sargsyan, the 20
winners of the republican composition competition and 138 pupils to
leave school in 2010 and due to receive medals for excellence got
together at the Presidential residence today.

"I greet you all. As you remember I announced three months ago that I
will personally shake hands with and will publicly thank all the teens
to demonstrate best qualities in any sphere. May 2010 be a year of
achievements and progress. You are facing a hard year – school-leaving
exams, entrance exams. May 2010 be the first year of your most serious
achievements. Excellent results are victories, your victories. To win,
one must overcome oneself first, one’s doubts and diffidence. "I can!"

– this is how all victories begin. I wish you self-confidence, I
have confidence in you and I have all the basis for it," Armenian
President Serzh Sargsyan told the pupils present at the reception.

President said, he was delighted to read their compositions and
highlighted patriotism, belief in tomorrow and the readiness to assume
responsibility – so vividly expressed in their works.

"I saw pride, fire and ability to dream in your compositions. This is
very significant. After reading the compositions, I am fully convinced
that you believe in yourselves and see the future confidently," S.
Sargsyan said.

"I wish you to enter the universities you want in 2010. No matter what
profession you will choose, I wish you to become good specialists for
our country. I am sure, so it will be," the First Lady Rita Sargsyan
said. She voiced hope the event will become traditional.

The President gave "Narek" by Grigor Narekatsi to all the pupils. "Let
Narek be always with you," President said. S. Sargsyan also said he
commissioned the Education and Science Minister to publish all 20 works
so that everyone can get acquainted with these and everyone can say:
"Who, if not me?"

This is the topic of the composition competition held early December.

The pupils also received cell phones from Orange Armenia.

UKRAINIAN ANALYST: ARMENIA’S POSSIBLE REFUSAL TO RATIFY THE PROTOCOLS IS A LOSING POSITION

Today
Dec 28 2009
Azerbaijan

Day.Az interview with senior consultant at Ukraine-based National
Institute for International Security Studies Elena Kotelyanets.

Do you believe the intensified negotiations on Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict will have a real impact on speedy resolution of the conflict?

Intensification of the Nagorno-Karabakh negotiations was consequence
of new geopolitical realities in the South Caucasus that emerged
in aftermath of the war in August 2008. The possibility of another
war in the Caucasus due to the unresolved issue of Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict pushed the region as well as external players (EU and the
U.S.) to correct security system in the subregion, including a more
active search for a peaceful solution to the Karabakh conflict.

Moreover, a desire to achieve dominance in the South Caucasus
encourages members of the Minsk Group as well as Turkey to compete for
an initiative to organize Armenian-Azerbaijani high-level meetings
on settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem. Over the past year,
presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan held six round of talks, the
outcome of which remains unknown.

However, this activity by the Armenian and Azerbaijani sides and
foreign players’ open interest in intensification of settlement
process most likely will accelerate a search for compromise solutions
to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict or at least create preconditions for
a consensus between the parties in the most pressing issues. Also,
it is hoped that this process will facilitate creation of effective
mechanisms to prevent new armed clashes in the South Caucasus.

Armenia may waive the Turkish-Armenian protocols in case of their
delayed ratification by the Turkish Parliament. How will the leading
world powers respond this ? What is your opinion about this possible
move by Armenia?

Taking a step towards normalization of relations, Armenia and Turkey
are very conscious that the old nature of bilateral ties do not meet
requirements of the current situation in the region and neither
did it correspond global and regional political trends, and most
importantly – the national interests of those states. Unresolved
questions – a relationship with Azerbaijan, in the context of solving
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict for Turkey and dissident part of society
inside the country and the diaspora – for Armenia serve as pitfalls
on a way to final settlement of the Armenian-Turkish relations.

Regarding Armenia’s possible refusal to ratify the protocols, this
step will bring rather great losses to Yerevan than dividends.

Reopening of borders with Turkey is very important for Armenia for
the following reasons: this is a way out of years of isolation, a
productive way to address the dire economic situation that was deepened
by the global financial crisis, an effective integration into the
regional economy as well as increased geopolitical position as a whole.

The leadership of both countries will make every effort to ratify the
protocols in their parliaments as a huge work done and also national
interests of both countries stand behind this. Moreover, world’s
leading states are interested in normalization of Armenian-Turkish
relations and will make maximum efforts to ensure successful completion
of this process.

Iran intends to begin implementing simplified visa system with
Azerbaijan next year. Moreover, Azerbaijan and Iran recently signed
an agreement to supply gas to Iran. Do you think that these actions
point to certain rapprochement between the countries? Does it somehow
impact the Armenian-Iranian relations?

Iran’s decision to unilaterally abolish visa regime with Azerbaijan
fully meets Iranian regional interests. This step by Tehran can
be viewed as a timely and sensible thing to do. It is mainly due
to the process of normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations. The
prospect of normalization of interstate relations between Armenia and
Turkey and a possibility of Turkey’s gaining position in the South
Caucasus compelled Iran to become more assertive. Cancelling visa
regime means Iran’s willingness to fight with Turkey for Azerbaijan
not on political, diplomatic or military arenas, but in demographic,
cultural and religious areas.

Azerbaijan’s quite restrained reaction to Iran’s actions may indicate
an awareness of possible risks from simplification of visa regime
between the countries. Primarily, it concerns an uncontrolled flow
of refugees (Iranian Azerbaijanis) to the territory of Azerbaijan as
a result of possible military action against Iran. Such a situation
can lead to inevitable humanitarian crisis in Azerbaijan. Internal
destabilization involving ethnic problems provoked by external forces
is also dangerous for Azerbaijan.

Thus, establishment of relations between Iran and Azerbaijan can be
explained by a desire of both countries to control the possible risks
to their safety, regardless of alignment of forces and developments in
the region. Concerning the development of Armenian-Iranian relations
in connection with normalization Azerbaijan-Iran relations between,
we should not expect them to deteriorate. Teheran has been an ally of
Yerevan throughout the history of Armenia’s independence. Moreover,
given virtuosity of Iranian diplomacy, we should expect a flexible
policy by Iran towards both Azerbaijan and Armenia.

During his U.S. trip, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan criticized
the OSCE Minsk Group, urging them to show will to resolve the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. In your opinion, what can really make the
OSCE Minsk Group to accelerate the process of resolving the conflict?

Velocity of settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict will largely depend
on fate of the Armenian-Turkish protocols. Their ratification in near
future may give impetus to solution of the Karabakh problem whereas
further delay will be an obstacle for future Armenian-Azerbaijani
negotiations on this issue. Not the Minsk Group, but flexibility of the
conflicting positions, as well as interested parties to the conflict
can speed up the settlement process. There is no unanimity concerning
various components of settlement of the Karabakh conflict while is
a consensus among the major global players about opening of borders
and establishing diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey.

How can you comment on U.S. Congress efforts to allocate $8 million
in assistance to the break-away Nagorno-Karabakh in 2010? Do you
think it is right to provide direct assistance to Karabakh separatists?

Providing direct financial assistance to separatist republics is
misconduct, and this applies not only to the U.S. actions in relation
to the Nagorno-Karabakh. Until recently, financing separatist republics
has been raised repeatedly and criticized by international community
in connection with Russia’s financial assistance to Abkhazia and South
Ossetia. Such actions by the United States and Russia can be seen by
other countries as a norm of international politics, a fact of open
support of separatism and quite a dangerous precedent for formation
of an area of stability and security in the multinational regions,
particularly in the South Caucasus.

The U.S. financial assistance to Nagorno-Karabakh population shows
a strong Armenian lobby in the U.S. Congress. Despite reduction of
expenditures on foreign policy programs, as well as Barack Obama’s
suggestions to cuts in next year’s aid to Armenia by 38 percent,
it will remain the same – $ 48 million and the amount of aid to
Nagorno-Karabakh will increase up to $10 million compared with the
last year’s amount.

news.am, Armenia
Dec 26 2009

Armenian President meets with journalists

15:38 / 12/26/2009On December 26, on the occasion of the coming New
Year, the RA President Serzh Sargsyan received more than 200
journalists at his residence.

The Armenian leader congratulated the journalists on the coming New
Year. He particularly said: `It is common knowledge that journalists’
word is really influential for shaping public opinion. Thus,
journalists are writing the annals of our state. I want the annals to
be as full and unbiased as possible. Try understanding a historian who
wants to study the present situation in Armenia using media reports.
Let us admit, he is not always able to get full and unbiased
information,’ President Serzh Sargsyan said.

The Armenian leader expressed his appreciation of journalists’ work,
which is `hard and requires real courage.’ The President assured the
journalists that any article dealing with Armenia’s topical problems
dopes not remain unnoticed. `Your articles, which raise the most
topical problems, help us keep on the alert,’ stated the Armenian
President. Serzh Sargsyan wished `good news and vast audience’ to
journalists in 2010, as well as a high level of political freedom,
democracy and tolerance.

The Armenian leader believes that this year has been a favorable one
for the Armenian mass media. He stressed that cooperation with
journalists will contribute to great progress in Armenia next year. In
conclusion, Serzh Sargsyan wished Armenian journalists to be active
and impartial persons of principle.

T.P.

WPS Agency, Russia
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
December 25, 2009 Friday

IRANIAN EXPANSION INTO SOUTH CAUCASUS

By Yuri Simonjan

2010 WILL BE A YEAR OF IRANIAN POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC EXPANSION INTO
THE SOUTH CAUCASUS; Offering all sorts of economic projects to the
countries of the South Caucasus, Iran gradually develops political
clout.

Commenting on the efforts to have Abkhazia recognized by the
international community, President Sergei Bagapsh said that official
Sukhumi was closely working with the Middle East and Caribbean
countries. "We maintain active contacts with Iran whose
representatives actually visited Abkhazia. Besides, certain meetings
were organized in Moscow," he said. "By and large, Iran is prepared to
take part in economic processes in Abkhazia." The Abkhazian leader
said, however, that recognition of the republic by Tehran was out of
the question for the time being.

As a matter of fact, this state of affairs suits Sukhumi fine. Tehran
emulates the Turkish-Abkhazian arrangement – active economic contacts
without political recognition. Considering that years of Georgian
blockade left Abkhazia impoverished, importance of its economic ties
with Turkey and Iran, each a serious regional player, cannot be
overestimated.

Political aspects of the arrangement, something Sukhumi does not
comment on for the time being, are important as well. Should Turkey
and Iran go for major investment projects indeed, this development
will greatly allay Abkhazian fears to be assimilated by Russia, its
powerful neighbor and primary patron.

Turkey and Iran in their turn perceive Abkhazia as a convenient tool
for political manipulations at all levels from the regional to the
global – in the relations with Russia promoting Abkhazia and the
United States supporting Georgia. Moreover, it is also a tool for
maneuvering in the relations with Georgia itself and with Azerbaijan
that experiences analogous problems. And even with Armenia, a country
directly involved in the problems that exasperate Azerbaijan.

Tehran’s genuine interests in Abkhazia are not known at this time.
Considering Iranian aspirations for regional leadership, however, they
may turn out to be considerable indeed. Official Tehran reiterated its
ambitions in the South Caucasus eighteen months ago when it proclaimed
investments plans regarding Armenia and Georgia to the total amount of
$4 billion. Yerevan was offered construction of a gas pipeline and
power lines between the two countries, refinery, and connection of
railroad networks. As for Tbilisi, it was merely promised $1 billion
and told to use the money the way it saw fit. What with Georgia’s
special kind of relations with the United States, it was all Tehran
could do.

The Georgian authorities were spared the necessity to decide how to
use the Iranian financial aid. Official Washington promptly made its
displeasure known, reminded Tbilisi of its duties as America’s
partner, and strongly advised it to keep boycotting the Iranian
regime. Point was taken.

As a matter of fact, the United States was displeased even with the
Armenian-Iranian cooperation but knew better than object or try to
circumvent it. All but isolated from the rest of the world, Armenia
would have ignored objections anyway. The joint plans Yerevan and
Tehran charted were impressive but never proceeded beyond the gas
pipeline and power lines. Armenian Minister of Transport and
Communications Gurgen Sarkisjan said at the press conference last
Tuesday that the Asian Bank of Development had loaned Armenia $1
million for the feasibility study of a railroad to connect Armenia
with Iran.

Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Armen Movsesjan in the
meantime reiterated firm resolve on the part of Armenia and Iran to
bring the joint energy projects already launched to their logical
conclusion. Movsesjan acknowledged that these projects had been
impaired by "certain domestic political processes in Iran." The
projects in question concerned construction of a pipeline from Tebriz
in Iran to a refinery in the Armenian Yeraskh, said refinery to be
built yet. "Work will begin next year," Movsesjan said.

Putting out economic feelers and offering all sorts of projects to
countries of the South Caucasus region, Iran developed sufficient
clout that earned it an invitation to join political processes under
way there. Eager to use the Iranian expansion to its own benefit,
official Baku expressed willingness to see Tehran among intermediaries
grappling with the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijani Foreign
Minister Elmar Mamedjarov met with his Iranian counterpart Manouchehr
Mottaki in Tehran earlier this week. Once the meeting was over,
Mottaki said Iran was ready for this mission.

Azerbaijan clearly aimed to impress Turkey. Baku had been enraged by
the signing of the Turkish-Armenian protocols on normalization which
it condemned as treachery. The impression is that Azerbaijan no longer
trusts Turkey’s assurances of friendship. On the other hand, it should
know that Iran cannot just up and become one of the intermediaries. At
the very least, consent of the directly involved parties will be
needed first, and perhaps even the consent of other intermediaries as
well. These latter in the meantime include the United States, a
country Iran is traditionally at odds with. Still, there is no law
saying that there could be no parallel processes seeking a solution to
the problem.

Source: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, December 24, 2009, pp. 1, 6

SCR KEEPS ON REDUCING TICKET PRICES

ArmInfo
2009-12-25 14:48:00

ArmInfo. SCR CJSC announces reduction of the cost of a full ticket
of Yerevan-Ararat-Yerevan timing electric train by 50 drams, aimed at
creation of conditions for availability of railway passenger traffic
in local communication for the population of Ararat region. The new
cost takes effect from December 28.

According to Chief of Directorate of Passenger Traffic of the South
Caucasus Railways JCSC Samvel Galechyan, ‘reduction of the ticket
cost for the timing electric trains is confirmation of the Company’s
policy aimed at facilitation of the general cost loading experienced
by our clients, as well as increase of attractiveness of the railway
movement’.

DIASPORA MINISTRY TO BE ESTABLISHED IN TURKEY

PanARMENIAN.Net
22.12.2009 13:32 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The Turkish Cabinet has decided to established
Ministry of Diaspora, Hurriyet reported.

"Turkey comes across various problems because of the Armenian and Greek
lobbying. It’s time to strengthen our potential and establishment
of Ministry will promote the process," State Minister Cemil Cicek
said. "5 millions of Turks are scattered all over the world. Our
state will help them resolve their problems."

FOREIGN MINISTERS OF AZERBAIJAN, TURKEY, TO DISCUSS THE KARABAKH ISSUE

armradio.am
22.12.2009 11:58

Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov will pay an official
visit to Turkey at the invitation of Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet
Davutoglu Dec. 25-26 to discuss bilateral relations and the protracted
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Turkish Foreign Ministry’s statement said,
Today’s Zaman reports.

"Along with discussing bilateral relations with the Azerbaijani foreign
minister, the talks will also cover regional problems that concern
both nations particularly including the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict,"
the statement read.

The statement also said the Azerbaijani foreign minister’s visit will
also create an opportunity to display the political will to strengthen
solidarity and mutual understanding between the two countries.

Davutoglu met with his Azerbaijani counterpart on Oct. 24 this year
in Baku to alleviate tensions surrounding Turkish-Armenian relations
and mitigate the so-called flag crisis.