Author: Topchian Jane

AZERBAIJAN AND UZBEKISTAN IDENTIFIED UNITY OF POSITIONS

Turan News Agency
Sept 15 2008
Azerbaijan

The visit of Uzbek President Islom Karimov to Azerbaijan on 11-12
September was successful, the Uzbek Foreign Ministry reported,
underlying similarity of positions on many issues of the regional
political and economic nature. It was noted that Uzbekistan and
Azerbaijan share same aims and attempts on the issue of the development
of mutual cooperation and that the countries are partners on political
matters. This assessment was also highlighted at the joint communique
which the two presidents signed at the end of the visit.

Judging by the scarce official statements and reports about the visit,
the sides paid more attention to political aspects of the development
of the situation in the Central Asia and the Southern Caucasus that
has emerged in the wake of the crisis events in Georgia.

The overall bilateral trade between the countries stands at 60m dollars
and could only be a topic of regret but not of important discussions. A
conclusion inevitably springs to mind as a result of the visit is
that the sides have a consolidated position on the events in Georgia.

They assess negatively the military intervention of the Russian
army in Georgia and encroachment upon its territorial integrity. In
Baku Karimov backed in rather direct terms a plan for a peaceful
resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict within the framework
of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity and likewise, along with other
countries of the Central Asia, he did not support Russia’s steps to rip
Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgia. Earlier, Baku in response to
Moscow’s challenges repeatedly insisted on inviolability of Georgia’s
frontiers by recognizing the territorial integrity of this country.

The latest aggressive behaviour of Moscow could not but push slightly
countries of the CIS (the Commonwealth of Independent States)
to coordination of their positions and speeding up the process of
integration on the basis of bilateral and regional levels. Welcoming
Karimov, Aliyev underlined that the integration of Azerbaijan and
Uzbekistan is of great significance not only for the two countries but
also for the Central Asian, the Caucasus and Caspian region countries.

Aliyev even described the results of the meeting exclusive for
the cooperation of the two countries with strong positions in the
region. The issue in question is most likely about cooperation and
coordination of actions of the countries within a general strategy for
the development of transport and communication and energy corridors
East-West. It is not by chance that the meeting attached a special
significance to the development of transport and transit shipments.

At the same time, proceeding from Karimov’s assessment of Aliyev’s
foreign policy course as balanced, pragmatic and reasonable, the
sides probably would stick to cautious evolutionary steps to reach
the highest degree of independence of their countries from ties
and influence that remained after the demise of the USSR. The sides
experience similar discomfort from similar threats and influence.

Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan are experiencing similar risks of being
subjected to military, political, psychological pressure due to efforts
to diversify their energy routes. The countries are vulnerable from
standpoint of regional disagreements with neighbours, international
terrorism, interests of drug syndicates and other threats.

The recognition by Russia (although with reservation about
inadmissibility of this threat for Azerbaijan) of independence
of the separatists in Georgia, the strengthening of the military
presence in this country and the support of dangerous for Uzbekistan
hydropower projects in Tajikistan and reinforcement of the military
presence in this country are factors that cannot but be conducive to
rapprochement of these countries. As is known, in August President
Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin simultaneously visited Central
Asia. Medvedev agreed upon stationing of a Russian air base near
Dushanbe, the handover of 1bn dollar worth arms to the Tajik army,
the exploitation of gas and uranium deposits and the construction
of three hydroelectric facilities in Tajikistan, the realization of
which may lead to dewatering of the eastern part of Uzbekistan.

Against the backdrop of Medvedev’s initiative, the Russian prime
minister "slightly" proposed Karimov cooperation in the gas sector
which should be expressed in reinforcement of Tashkent’s independence
on Moscow. Similarly, practically at the same time, Deputy Prime
Minister Zubkov suggested in Asgabat Turkmen President Gurbanguly
Berdimuhamedow to purchase whole gas at European prices.

Moscow’s political and military actions in August along the southern
direction from the Black Sea to the Pamirs were assessed by several
observers as a preventive step against intensification of West’s
strategy to infiltrate into the former Soviet space. The consolidated
tough military and political repulse to the Kremlin efforts to slow
down this process was heard from Brussels. What will be an energy
reaction of the EU-US tandem will be obvious in the forthcoming
November energy summit in Baku where Uzbekistan’s involvement is not
ruled out.

"HAYKAKAN ZHAMANAK" WILL NOT BE FORCED OFF

A1+
[02:08 pm] 15 October, 2008

What is to become of "Haykakan Zhamanak" daily if the latter is forced
to vacate the premises at 37 Israyelyan? In reply to A1+’s concern,
Head of the "Dareskizb" Ltd Anna Hakobian said: "We shall not be
appear in the street as soon as the final decision is rendered. Gagik
Beglarian /head of Kentron’s municipal council/ will not achieve his
aim no matter how hard he tries to evict the premises."

Note, on October 17 the RoA Administrative Court will make a decision
on upholding or dismissing the claim of "Dareskizb" against Kentron’s
municipal council according to which the staff of "Haykakan Zhamanak"
is to vacate the premises. The disputed belongs to the municipal
council and will henceforth serve to promote children’s aesthetic
upbringing.

Anna Hakobian doesn’t have great expectations from the Administrative
Court. "We shall attend the court sitting to learn their decision
and then we shall act on our own," she said. Then she reminded that
the municipal council had bought its decision still on March 28. "The
decision followed the state of emergency in the country and Beglarian
believed it would be a crushing blow to our newspaper."

The organisation is going to appeal to the European Court of Human
Rights in case Armenian courts do not uphold their claim.

"They will have to recoup for all losses and inconveniences inflicted
on us," added Anna Hakobian.

WHY I REFUSE TO VOTE
By Theodoros Karakostas

Greek News
October 13 @ 11:35:32
New York

Every time there is an election, there is the usual well intended
public campaign to encourage voting. I am perhaps being cynical
but I do not wish to participate in a process that for all intents
and purposes is devoid of legitimacy. The fundamental topic of
this commentary pertains to foreign policy and the defacto media
blackout of certain issues, but the farce that constitutes present
day politics deserves at least a slight mention as can be seen by
the intellectually bankrupt displays that were showcased at both the
Democratic and Republican National Conventions this past summer. Both
of them constituted nothing more than entertainment value.

There is a documentary film entitled, "Days Made of Fear" which
features footage shot in Kosovo between 1999 and 2004. The difference
between this film and what American television media outlets
traditionally aired is that this features footage of the Serbian
community. This film is evidence of the ethnic cleansing process of
Serbs that has taken place under the auspices of NATO, the European
Union, and the United Nations. Hundreds of Serbian Orthodox Churches
and Monasteries were destroyed by Albanian Muslims during this period
without any intervention on the part of the Western powers. Even
worse, this footage has never been aired on American television
because apparently it contradicts official anti-Serb hysteria that
fueled the 1999 war on Belgrade.

Earlier this year, the Bush administration emulated the Balkan
policies of the Clinton administration and supported "independence" for
Kosovo. American and European diplomats paid lip service to the rights
of the Serbs in Kosovo, but no one addressed the horrific mistreatment
of Serbs in Kosovo, nor have the westerners taken measures to impose
sanctions on the Kosovo leadership in response to the mistreatment
of Serbs and the destruction of Churches and Monasteries that have
enormous spiritual and historic value.

In addition, the Bush administration opposed passage of a Congressional
Resolution that would have recognized the Armenian Genocide. During
the period of 1914-1923, the Islamic leadership of the Ottoman
Empire and its successor under the murderous figure of Mustafa
Kemal slaughtered at least three million Armenian, Assyrian, and
Greek Orthodox Christians. Turkish policies of ethnic cleansing have
continued through the infamous anti-Greek pogroms of 1955, the Turkish
invasions of Cyprus, and the present war by the Turkish paramilitary
State against the Ecumenical Patriachate. Between 1993 and 2007, there
have been at least six attempts to murder the Ecumenical Patriarch, but
if one watched American television, one would not have noticed a thing.

Events in Turkey, as with Kosovo and Serbia serve to demonstrate that
censorship is a fact! The glorification of the late Turkish dictator
Mustafa Kemal by numerous American think tanks and other interests
doing the sinister bidding of the Turkish Islamo-military ruling
coalition demonstrates for me the utter futility of participating
in an election where the winner will inevitably be influenced by
the notorious and well financed Turkish lobby into manipulating both
history and supporting policies of ethnic cleansing against the Greeks
of Cyprus. The degree to which American policy is manipulated can
be seen by the fact that the official foreign policy establishment
successfully persuaded both the Clinton and Bush administrations into
betraying Greece by recognizing the government of Skopje under the
name of "Macedonia".

An enormous tragedy is playing out for the Christians of Iraq. During
this past summer, the Archbishop of the Chaldean Catholics was murdered
for refusing to pay extortion money to Islamic extremists. The
Christians were at least secure under the former dictatorship that
the Bush administration and its neo conservatives overthrew. The
administration that waged war on Iraq never took into consideration
what would happen to the Christians who have been fleeing to Syria,
another potential target for the neo conservatives. Damascus is the
home of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch and there are at
least one million Christians in Syria who will be secure, unless the
next administration decides to implement "regime change" there.

What has happened to the "war on terror"? The only discernible war to
be noticed is the war on the Christian East which has been under way
for decades. The West permitted Muslim Turkey to take Constantinople
and Asia Minor in 1922, the Turkish invasions of Cyprus, and gave
Kosovo, Serbia’s Jerusalem to the Muslims. In Kosovo, Saudi Arabia
is funding the construction of Mosques while Orthodox Churches and
Monasteries burn. In the occupied territories of Cyprus, over five
hundred and fifty Churches and Monasteries have been converted into
Mosques, or are being used as stables where settlers from Turkey are
housing their farm animals.

In light of the appalling turmoil and tragedy that continues to
engulf the Christian East, and in light of the fact that no matter
which party comes to power, the think tanks will continue to press
the next administration to continue with policies that have been to
the detriment of Hellenism and Orthodoxy, I refuse to participate in
the "voting" process since I believe that such participation would
legitimize the undemocratic think tanks that continue to shape policies
toward the Balkans, Turkey, Russia, and the Middle East.

In conclusion, I lament and mourn the Churches and Monasteries of
Kosovo and Cyprus, and their missing faithful. Very soon, there may be
no more Greek Orthodox Christians in Turkey. Democratic Presidential
Candidate Barack Obama has been accused of being a Muslim. The fact
remains that no matter who becomes President, foreign policy could not
possibly be any more pro-Islamic to the detriment of the Christian East
than it already is. May the persecution of the forgotten Christians
of the East come to an end.

SECRETARY’S REMARKS: REMARKS WITH ARMENIAN PRESIDENT SERZH SARGSIAN BEFORE THEIR MEETING

State Department Documents and Publications
September 24, 2008

Secretary Condoleezza Rice
Trump International Hotel and Tower
New York City
September 24, 2008

PRESIDENT SARGSIAN: (Via interpreter.) I would like to once again thank
the Government of the United States of America for all the assistance
it has employed that the Republic of Armenia (inaudible) accepts, both
financial assistance and non-financial help. They are both important.

SECRETARY RICE: Well, thank you. Well, we want to be a good partner
for Armenia and its (inaudible) mission as it makes healing reforms
(inaudible). We believe that you have made some good steps to address
this, and so I’m here to build on that and to move forward.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, how do you assess U.S.-Armenia
relationship?

SECRETARY RICE: I just said how I assess them. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Okay, thank you.

EDWARD NALBANDIAN PARTOOK IN THE CIS MINISTERIAL MEETING

armradio.am
10.10.2008 11:37

On October 9 the Foreign Minister of Armenia, Edward Nalbandian,
participated in the recurrent sitting of the Council of Foreign
Ministers of CIS member states in Bishkek.

The main issues on the agenda included the strategy of further
development of the CIS, development of cooperation between member
states in the security, economic and humanitarian spheres.

Participants of the sitting discussed the process of structural
reformation of the organization, the ways of raising the effectiveness
of its activity, as well as issues related to the deepening of
multilateral cooperation in the field of economy, particularly energy.

About 30 documents were signed at the end of the meeting.

ARMENIAN MINISTER OF JUSTICE IS IN SLOVAK REPUBLIC

Noyan Tapan

Oc t 8, 2008

BRATISLAVA, OCTOBER 8, NOYAN TAPAN. The delegation of the RA Ministry
of Justice led by Minister Gevorg Danielian is in the Slovak Republic
on a three-day visit. As Noyan Tapan correspondent reported from
Bratislava, this is the return visit of Stefan Harabin, the Deputy
Prime Minister and Minister of Justice of the Slovak Republic to
Armenia in May. The Slovak side presented the Armenian delegation with
the reforms implemented in the justice system of Slovakia. Minister
Gevorg Danielian positively estimated visit’s results and said that the
Slovak experience is rather interesting and can be immediately used to
solve a number of problems in the system of the RA Ministry of Justice.

Within the framework of the visit the Armenian delegation laid a
wreath to the memorial of the victims of the Armenian Genocide in
Bratislava. Lubomir Jahnatek, the former Deputy Prime Minister of
the Slovak Republic, Minister of Economy, a number of members of the
Armenian community of Slovakia and Ashot Grigorian, the Chairman of the
Forum of Armenian Associations of Europe and the Armenian community
of Slovakia also took part in the ceremony. The latter had initiated
the mutual visits of the two countries’ Ministers of Justice.

INTERNATIONAL TALKS ON SOUTH CAUCASUS DUE IN GENEVA OCT. 15

PanARMENIAN.Net
07.10.2008 13:56 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ International talks on the South Caucasus will open
in Geneva on Oct. 15.

As a representative of the French Foreign Ministry told
PanARMENIAN.Net, the leadership of three international organizations,
namely the OSCE, UN and EU, will hold a meeting a day earlier to
consider some cooperation issues.

"The problem of refugees and displaced persons will be in focus of the
talks. However, any other topic may be included in the agenda, with
agreement of the sides. Participation of Abkhazian and South Ossetian
representatives is still being discussed. EU Special Representative
Pierre Morel, tasked with the organization of the meetings, continues
consultations," the French MFA official said.

NALBANDIAN TO DEPART FOR BISHKEK TO ATTEND CIS FOREIGN MINISTERS COUNCIL MEETING

PanARMENIAN.Net
07.10.2008 18:02 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenian FM Edward Nalbandian will depart for
Bishkek to attend a meeting of the Council of CIS Foreign Ministers
due on October 8-9, the RA MFA press office told PanARMENIAN.Net.

The Ministers will focus on improvement of CIS activities and
cooperation between the members of the Commonwealth. The agenda
includes over 20 urgent issues, specifically security and migration,
says a statement posted on the Russian Foreign Ministry’s website

Nagorno Karabakh Republic PRESIDENT: NAGORNO-KARABAKH’S INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY NOT SUBJECT TO SPECULATIONS AND BARGAINING

De Facto
2008-10-07 15:13:00

STEPANAKERT, 07.10.08. DE FACTO. Artsakh’s independence and security
are not subject to speculations and bargaining, Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic President Bako Sahakian said in an interview with Azat
Artsakh newspaper.

Answering a question if Georgian events will influence on NKR foreign
policy Nagorno- Karabakh President noted that change of the situation
in the South Caucasus would be taken into consideration, however,
Nagorno-Karabakh’s principal approaches will not be subject to changes.

"Military-political situation in the South Caucasus has really
changed, and it is taken into account in our policy. However, there
are basic principles, which will remain unchangeable. It is balance of
foreign policy, succession in the Karabakh-Azeri conflict’s peaceful
settlement, talks’ resumption with Artsakh’s participation as a
negotiating party. Our approach to Nagorno-Karabakh Republic’s future
has also remained unchangeable. Artsakh’s independence and security
are not subject to speculations and bargaining", NKR President Bako
Sahakian underscored.

IN THE CAUCASUS, BEING CAUTIOUS WORKS BEST
Mansur Aslanov

Turkish Daily News
Monday, October 6, 2008
Turkey

Recently, Azerbaijan has lived through some dramatic changes, which are
having profound effect on the nation’s outlook and perceptions. The
most obvious, of course, is Russia’s show of force against the
fellow Caucasus nation of Georgia. For Azerbaijan, Moscow’s easy and
previously unthinkable blatant annexation of Georgia’s territories
demonstrated the vulnerability of its main access route to the outside
world. Suddenly, the idea of the East-West Corridor, a cornerstone of
the regional developments since the early 90s, is severely undermined.

Perhaps even more shocking was that the Western reaction to the
outright crossing of once clearly marked "red line" of entering Georgia
amounted to nothing serious and has, in effect, condoned Russian
behavior. If Russian readiness to invade and erratic moves by Georgia’s
leaders came as little surprise, the degree of weakness of the West,
especially that of the United States, was unexpected. Similarly
surprising has been Turkey’s cold shoulder to Tbilisi. If Ankara’s
willingness to blur its regional vision from time to time in order to
accommodate Moscow has been a persistent pattern, Turkish easy-going
view of Georgia’s tragedy does not make much sense in the long term.

Emotional scar of Gul’s visit

Speaking of Turkey, many Azerbaijanis watched in disbelief as President
Abdullah Gul joined Armenia’s Sarkissian in Yerevan. Within two months
since Radovan Karadzic’s arrest for war crimes, the Turkish President
was visiting a leader who admitted to an international journalist that
he was behind the mass murder in Khojaly during the Armenia-Azerbaijan
war and that the objective was to instill mass terror. While smaller
in scope, in Azerbaijani psychology, Khojali has a place very similar
to the tragedy of Srebrenica in Bosnian minds. Therefore, the deep
emotional scar of seeing together Gul, the leader of Azerbaijan’s
closest people, and Sarkissian should not be underestimated. Of course,
Azerbaijan’s President Aliyev and his Armenian counterparts meet,
but those meetings take place on neutral grounds and have a goal of
discussing specific proposals toward resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict, not grand symbolism.

Turkey has also chosen rather interesting timing for new and somewhat
vague proposals as well as major symbolic gestures. Azerbaijanis,
seeing their main regional partner, Georgia, being strangled and
still digesting the implications of Western impotence, suddenly faced
ambiguity from fraternal Turkey. All of this combined, can produce
a major re-evaluation of Azerbaijan’s perceptions and, certainly,
contributes to strengthening Russia’s regional dominance. In an
unpleasant deja vu, some in Azerbaijan were reminded about being
abandoned by Turkey in the 1920s only to be consumed by Russia. The
history of Moscow playing regional games more skillfully than Ankara
should not be ignored by Turkish policymakers as they assess the
costs and benefits of their next steps.

Turkey’s relative success in the region has been built on its strategic
relations with both Azerbaijan and Georgia and its alliance with
the West. In fact, Turkey has done pretty well in the region. Today,
Ankara can either expand that success rightfully claiming the mantle
of a regional leader and peacemaker, which seems to be a new obsession
of Turkish leaders, or waste the credit it has earned over the last
two decades trading real benefits for ephemeral symbolism.

More dialogue on more sophisticated terms is needed between
Azerbaijanis and Turks. The former, often seeing Turkey in simplistic
terms, have not been fully successful in making their case to the
more liberal sections of Turkish society. The liberals, in turn, keep
seeing Azerbaijan through a misleading prism of domestic politics. For
instance, the ideas of Turkism do not bear anti-liberal flavor in
Azerbaijan and other Turkic nations, quite to the contrary. They,
as often happens, fall victim to misnomers. Nor is Azerbaijan’s
problem with Armenia that of history and symbols. The conflict around
Nagorno-Karabakh is a practical issue, which should be resolved
on practical terms with respect to the rights of Azerbaijanis and
Armenians alike. This is not about digging in one’s past and projecting
it on present-day political divisions, it is about actual people and
issues of today. Turkish liberals taking a closer look may find it
still more comfortable to side with Azerbaijani victims of ethnic
cleansing than with radical Armenian nationalists all too ready to
use violence. Furthermore, what would be the choice of a liberal
Turk: a society, ideally, based on civic identity and, by the way,
rather tolerant of expression of religious identity or an exclusive
ethnicity-dominated political system?

Assuming direct ownership of Nagorno-Karabakh

Thus, looking at Armenia and Azerbaijan, Turkey should employ
healthy and informed pragmatism. If Armenia’s leader is serious about
ending its nation’s self-isolation, Turkey can and should use this
opportunity to help re-integrate the region. This could be the case
with Sarkissian because his country’s strategic vulnerability has
been made plenty clear by the war in Georgia and because he needs
to restore his legitimacy, which, after coming to power, was marred
by shooting protesters. If so, he also understands that the real
sustainability of Armenia’s future lies not in opening borders with
Turkey alone, but in a comprehensive approach involving normalization
with Azerbaijan and joining the regional infrastructure. For Armenia,
the difference between being an impasse on Turkey’s east and a major
transit point between East and West seems pretty clear.

So it should be to Turkish leaders. Moreover, whatever symbolic
benefits new friendship with Armenia can bring to Ankara, potentially
losing a stronghold in Azerbaijan would immediately decrease Turkey’s
regional role. Therefore, Turkey’s approach should focus on expanding
its presence, not losing the most important pillar of it. To do
so, Turkey’s leaders should be much more forceful in explaining
to Sarkissian that any progress should involve some progress on
Nagorno-Karabakh. They should also work diligently to continuously
reassure Azerbaijan, especially the public opinion, that Turkey does
consider Azerbaijani interests when talking to Armenia, even better
involve Azerbaijan in the conversation. This is important not only
because should the efforts succeed, the benefits can be enormous,
but also, because if they fail, Turkey wouldn’t lose Azerbaijan. Of
course, any attempts to bring in Armenia into a more integrated region
should not be done at the expense of abandoning Georgia, a wounded,
yet very important regional friend.

By stepping up its regional activism and its president visiting
Yerevan, Turkey has assumed direct ownership of the Armenia-Azerbaijan
conflict. If some think that it has made its life easier, they need
to look at the history of international involvement with protracted
conflicts. Owning the conflict means that Turkey will be more than
ever involved in the Caucasus and bear greater responsibility than
before. If Ankara threads carefully and cautiously, this could be
Turkey’s best hour. If not, then the 1920’s may return to haunt all
of us with a vengeance.