Author: Virabian Jhanna

The Japan Times, Japan
Dec 29 2004

GANTLET OF REFERENDUMS AWAIT

Turkey’s long march to an EU wedding

By ANDRE FONTAINE

PARIS — Although a wedding date has yet to be set between the
European Union and Turkey, the two parties managed to conclude what
several participants at the Dec. 17 European summit have called a
formal “engagement.”

Such an outcome had long looked doubtful because a majority of the
public in EU countries that have a large number of Turkish workers
oppose Turkish membership in the EU.

In Germany, 55 percent are opposed; in Austria, 62 percent; and in
France, 67 percent. Such opposition has increased following the
murder of a popular filmmaker by a Muslim immigrant in the
Netherlands. In addition, the EU now has 25 members, making it all
the more difficult to attain the unanimous approval required for
Turkey to join the union.

Talks on the conditions of Ankara’s entry into the EU will begin Oct.
3, 2005. It will be a long process due to the need to harmonize
Turkish law with no less than 80,000 pages of European rules, and to
find the immense funds needed to provide Turkey the economic and
social help to which it will be entitled.

This means that Turkey’s entry into the union cannot possibly take
place before 2014. Furthermore, the eventual treaty of admission will
have to be submitted to a referendum in every member country if the
draft European Constitution — the subject of a special convention
chaired by former French President Giscard d’Estaing and unanimously
approved June 18 — is ratified, as the document makes such a step
compulsory for any enlargement of the EU.

Even if the draft constitution is not adopted, several countries will
still organize their own referendums. As French President Jacques
Chirac has made a strong commitment to such a move, count France
among these countries.

At 72, Chirac is unlikely to still be in charge when such a
referendum takes place. While initiating a referendum designed to
take place so long from now may sound strange, it was apparently the
only way he found to avoid a crisis not only with his European
colleagues but within his own party, the Union for a Popular
Movement.

UMP’s new chairman, Nicolas Sarkozy, and two former prime ministers,
Edouard Balladur and Alain Juppe, openly express their hostility to
Turkey’s entry, thus reflecting the mood of a majority of their
countrymen. D’Estaing has equally declared himself against it, as
have the Christian Democrat members of the Union for French Democracy
party.

All of these politicians prefer the formula of a “privileged
partnership” advocated by the German rightist opposition but
categorically opposed by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan
and an overwhelming majority of the Turkish public.

It’s easy to understand Erdogan’s reasons. For decades Turkey has
belonged to the Council of Europe, and it has been an associate
member of the EU since 1963. At that time, French President Charles
de Gaulle didn’t hesitate to hail Turkey’s “European vocation.”
Turkey has also joined the Customs Union created in 1995, and at the
1999 European summit its “partnership” was recognized.

In any case, another European referendum will take place in France
next year, probably in May, on the draft constitution. As France’s
Socialist Party has decided by a large majority to back this
agreement, the “yes” side is likely to win by a small margin.
Nevertheless, one cannot rule out a negative vote, which could in
turn affect the outcome of the talks on Turkey’s admission.

Referendums are not the only obstacles that could deal Ankara’s
application a fatal blow. In addition, the Dec. 17 agreement mentions
a formal condition: Turkey must make a decisive improvement in its
observance of human rights.

Nobody denies that Turkey has made significant progress in this area
since Erdogan took power following the 2002 general election. His
party, the AKP (Justice and Development Party), is supposed to be
both conservative and Islamic, but it resembles a Muslim version of
the Christian-Democrat parties of Western Europe, maintaining a
commitment to upholding human rights.

Turkey has abolished the death penalty — a prerequisite to enter the
EU — as well as a law that demanded the jailing of adulterous wives.
In addition, a law opening university doors to pupils of religious
schools has been “suspended” and the use of torture by police has
seriously diminished.

Much remains to be done as many abuses still take place in various
fields, particularly regarding women and the country’s Kurdish
minority. The EU Council has decided that if serious human rights
violations take place in Turkey, a vote by a third of its members
will be enough to halt the admission talks.

Two other “conditions” don’t figure in the Dec. 17 agreement but will
play a serious role in the future:

The first concerns the deaths of up to 2 million Armenians during
World War I at the hands of Turks, responsibility for which Ankara
has never accepted. The proud Turks despise the idea of having to own
up to such an act, but why should they not do so when Germany has
repeatedly apologized for its slaughter of millions of Jews in World
War II.

Chirac has been particularly insistent on the Armenian issue, as has
the European Parliament in Strasbourg. While approving in principle
Turkey’s entry into the union, the Parliament has insisted that
Ankara should clearly acknowledge the Armenian genocide.

The second issue concerns Cyprus, a British colony from 1878 to 1960.
The population of this beautiful island in the eastern Mediterranean
is roughly 80 percent Greek and 20 percent Turkish. An attempt by
Greek rightists to unite the country with Greece led the Turkish Army
to intervene in 1974 and occupy one-third of the territory.

Later Ankara created the Cyprus Turkish Republic, which no country
but Turkey has recognized. Although many mediation efforts have taken
place, the division issue remains unresolved.

Now that the Greek government of the island is member of the EU,
everyone thinks that Turkey will finally accept a reunification of
Cyprus in the framework of a confederation.

Important steps have been made, including the opening of the border,
allowing some 200,000 Greek Cypriots who had to flee their homes in
1974 to freely visit their former residences. And Ankara has signed
the Greek Cyprus regime. It’s difficult to imagine the Turks not
going further. But they clearly hate the idea, so it will take time.

Andre Fontaine is former editor in chief of Le Monde.

PanArmenian News
Dec 25 2004

ARMENIAN CONTINGENT CAN LEAVE FOR IRAQ ALREADY JANUARY 5

25.12.2004 15:04

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Yesterday by 10 p.m. at its closed sitting the
Armenian Parliament passed a decision to send Armenian military
specialists to Iraq. 91 deputies voted for it, 23 – against it, while
one abstained. Justice opposition faction and Dashnaktsutyun party,
forming part of the ruling coalition, voted against. The rest of the
factions, including the oppositionist National Unity, voted for
Armenia joining the Memorandum concluded between Poland and 19 other
countries, including Armenia. Thus, 46 Armenian specialists,
including one common commander, one signal officer at the staff of
the Polish division in Iraq, a platoon commander, three physicians (a
cardiologist, a general practitioner and a psychiatrist), 10 sappers
and 30 drivers will leave for Iraq. A salary of 600 thousand Armenian
drams will be paid to them from the state budget of Armenia, while
the US Government will cover the rest of the costs. At the same time,
a survey held by Vox Populi center for public opinion research shows
that only 6% of Armenian citizens, who took part in the study, have a
positive attitude towards sending Armenian specialists to Iraq.
Meanwhile 24% of the respondents do not have an opinion on the matter
and 60% hold a negative posture on the decision in question.
Nevertheless, in the words of the Armenian Defense Minister, the
Armenian contingent may be sent to Iraq already in January. All the
specialists leaving for Iraq are volunteers. The main doubts in the
society over the decision in question concern apprehensions regarding
the security of Armenian Diaspora in Arab countries, who can become
targets of attacks by Islamic radicals.

Azerbaijan failing to meet commitments to Council of Europe – rights activist

Turan news agency
27 Dec 04

BAKU

Azerbaijan has failed to fulfil some of its vital commitments to the
Council of Europe and the OSCE this year, the director of the Human
Rights Centre of Azerbaijan HRCA , Eldar Zeynalov, has told Turan.

These commitments are connected to the fight against corruption, the
policy to set up public TV, the laws on elections and lawyers, a
solution to the problem of political prisoners, the freedom of the
press and other issues.

Asked how the law-enforcement system is being reformed, Zeynalov said
that it is being done “formally”. The Constitutional Court plays the
role of the “fourth instance”, overturning the rulings of the Supreme
Court only in civil cases. The “new” board of lawyers is in fact a
copy of the old one and keeps a monopoly in this area. It still
remains unclear when and how new members will be admitted to the
board.

The police remain unpunished for torture and the rude treatment of
citizens. Some police officers were rewarded last year for dispersing
opposition rallies in October 2003. Among them are employees from the
department to fight organized crime, who fight demonstrators and
journalists.

The National Security Ministry “got into a scandal” after failing to
ensure security at NATO events in Baku and “missing” Armenian
fugitives who said they came to Baku to seek asylum . “Reforms” in
this ministry were reflected in the replacement of the leadership at
the ministry and the arrival of police officers there.

An experiment on public control over prisons was conducted in the
penitentiary system, which drew a lot of criticism for the
administration’s attempts to control experts from the public council.

As for ensuring the rights of national and other minorities, there are
no problems that could cause conflict. Nevertheless, the law on
national minorities and some other European conventions have not been
passed and there is no government support for education and literature
in the languages of national minorities (for example in Talish). The
consequences of the Karabakh conflict are telling on some citizens of
Armenian origin, the human rights activist said.

Asked what tasks the Azerbaijani public and the authorities are facing
in the light of the European Union’s New Neighbourhood policy,
Zeynalov said that the main problems to be resolved are the completion
of market reforms. Besides, it is necessary to intensify the fight
against corruption, ensure human rights and resolve the Karabakh
problem. Otherwise, Azerbaijan will not be admitted to the EU.

At the same time closeness to the EU will lead to gradual integration
into European civilization and, in the distant future, concessions in
economic, political and other relations with EU member states,
Zeynalov thinks.

Commenting on the attitude of the authorities to the activities of
human rights activists, Zeynalov said that the authorities are trying
to use NGOs to convey the ideas of the ruling party to various strata
of society. Any refusal to accept this role is perceived as an NGO’s
“disloyalty”, Zeynalov noted.

Asked about attacks on his own organization, the activist said that
they were not a manifestation of “public outrage”. The authorities do
not accept the culture of dialogue with their opponents. Therefore,
the so-called investigation into the attack on the office of the HRCA
ended with nothing in view of the “absence” of witnesses to the
attack. Thus, the police did not review video footage from three days
of filming and announced the absence of witnesses to the attack.

The authorities value their human rights activists even lower than
visiting Armenians whose attackers were convicted. “I believe in the
possibility that human rights activists may cooperate with the
authorities. This is the only way of effectively protecting human
rights, something we see in the West. Much energy is being allocated
to the fight against artificial obstacles made by the
authorities. This energy could have been channelled in a useful
direction,” Zeynalov said.

Railway accident kills three in Armenia

Arminfo
25 Dec 04

YEREVAN

Three people, including two women, died and two were slightly injured
when an electric locomotive derailed in Nurnus-Nor Achn at 1310 [0910
gmt] today.

Nikolay Grigoryan, adviser to the head of the State Directorate for
Emergency Situations under the Armenian government, told Arminfo that
the electric locomotive which was driving at a high speed derailed and
hit electricity poles. Preliminary reports say that the accident was
caused by a brake failure. The Kotayk District prosecutor’s office has
instituted criminal proceedings into the accident.

Pipeline perks for Russia in Armenia-Iran Deal

IranMania, Iran
Dec 24 2004

LONDON, Dec 24 (IranMania) – Iran has moved closer to gaining a
strategic foothold in Caucasian energy markets with the start of
work on a gas pipeline to Armenia that has been heralded by Yerevan
as bringing “definite changes in the region.”

The project has the potential to undercut Russia’s control of Armenia’s
energy supply, yet two new gas projects could act as potential deal
sweeteners for this longtime Armenian ally. Plans were recently
announced for an increase in Armenian orders for Russian gas and
a possible role in the Iranian pipeline project for Russian energy
giant Gazprom.

According to Iran News, construction on Armenia’s section of the
142-kilometer gas pipeline began on November 30, with $30 mln in
costs for the 42-kilometer strip from the Armenian border town of
Agarak to Kajaran, south of Yerevan, picked up by the Iranian Export
and Development Bank.

Upon completion in late 2006, the pipeline will supply the tiny South
Caucasus state with 36 billion cubic meters of Iranian gas over the
next 20 years. Gas from Turkmenistan is also scheduled to be delivered
to Armenia via the pipeline.

At an official ceremony to mark the project’s debut, Armenian Deputy
Prime Minister Andranik Margarian stated that the pipeline, in the
works since 1992, would bring economic benefits to Armenia as well
as foster regional stability. “This project has been implemented
throughout Armenia’s political and economic sufferings,” Armenian
media reported Margarian as saying. “In Armenia’s years of hardship,
Iran has stretched out its hand to help us.”

Expanding Armenia’s energy sources is a critical goal for the
administration of President Robert Kocharian – for both economic and
political reasons. Chronic energy shortages contributed to much of
the country’s economic decline after the collapse of the Soviet Union,
and Armenia’s economic woes continue to attract the criticism of the
country’s opposition.

Speaking to reporters about Armenia’s energy deal with Iran,
Kocharian commented during a December 2 visit by Iranian Energy
Minister Habibollah Bitaraf that “[w]e are ready to do everything
possible to support the current level of cooperation,” according to
the Russian news agency Interfax.

In exchange for the gas, Armenia will eventually deliver up to
1,000 megawatts of electricity to Iran with the construction of two
high-voltage power lines between the countries.

Additional electricity projects are also in the works. In 2005 or
2006 Armenia hopes to start construction on two hydropower plants
on the banks of the Arax River between Armenia and Iran, according
to Margarian.

Oil could reinforce Tehran’s ties with Yerevan still further. At a
December 4 meeting between Armenian Defense Minister Serzh Sarkisian
and Iran’s Armenian Ambassador Ali-Reza Haghighian, plans were
discussed for construction of a 60-kilometer oil pipeline from the
Iranian town of Julfa to the Armenian border town of Meghri.

Geopolitics, though, rather than the attractions of the Armenian
energy market, appears to drive much of Iran’s push for partnership.
With American troops stationed in neighboring Afghanistan and Iraq and
Iran’s nuclear energy program under intense international scrutiny,
the country’s ruling clerics have taken steps to assure the outside
world that the Islamic Republic is a force for stability in the region.

Iranian President Mohammad Khatami’s on September 2004 visit to
Armenia, a close US ally, reinforced that campaign with a “good
neighbor” message that “Iran is interested in peace and stability in
the South Caucasus”.

But in drawing closer to Iran, Yerevan has risked alienating another
longtime ally – Russia. Though Russian Deputy Prime Minister Boris
Alyoshin assured reporters in Yerevan earlier this year that the
pipeline deal with Iran would only provide additional business for
Russian-operated electricity stations in Armenia, the deal has been
scrutinized with some trepidation. The Russian company United Energy
Systems controls 40 percent of Armenia’s electricity generation
facilities, while heavy hitters Gazprom and Itera control 55 percent
of ArmRogazprom, currently Armenia’s sole natural gas supplier.

When the Iranian pipeline is complete, however, Armenia will no longer
need to depend solely on Russia for its natural gas needs. In Yerevan,
Kremlin concerns about the prospect of Armenia providing a conduit
for Iranian gas to Europe, a key Russian market, are widely believed
to have resulted in a reduction of the pipeline’s size to a width
too narrow for exports.

Yet Russian energy companies have not been idle in defending their
interests. The Russian news agency Interfax reported an unidentified
Armenian government source as saying on December 8 that Gazprom may
be invited to build and repair one part of the Armenian-Iranian gas
pipeline, between Kadjaran and Ararat, at a cost of $90 million. As
payment for its work, Gazprom would receive the No. 5 generating
unit at the Razdan power plant, Armenia’s largest heating and power
plant, which supplies 20 percent of the country’s electricity needs.
Armenian President Robert Kocharian had earlier dismissed reports of
such a deal.

Still other sweeteners are in the works. On December 11, ArmRogazprom
CEO and General Director Karen Karapetyan announced plans to increase
gas supplies to Armenia by roughly 31 percent during 2005 to some
1.6-1.7 billion cubic meters. A $27 million expansion of Armenia’s
gas pipeline from Russia is planned to handle the increased flow.

“I am convinced that the problem of Armenia’s energy security will be
solved soon,” the Russian news agency Novosti reported Karapetyan as
saying, “given the forthcoming opening of the alternative Iran-Armenia
gas pipeline.”

For now, the government line out of Yerevan is that what benefits
Iran benefits Russia.

At a May 13-15 summit in Moscow with Russian President Vladimir
Putin, Kocharian took pains to stress that the pipeline deal with
Iran would not damage Russia’s own energy interests in Armenia or
result in a fall-off in Armenian orders for Russian gas. Gazprom,
Itera and United Energy Systems will all collect “major dividends from
the deal,” Kocharian said, Novosti reported. “They will benefit, too.”

–Boundary_(ID_0TOjHE/t6Ti4lbNUn8UcJQ)–

PRESIDENT PUTIN: RUSSIA AS NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT INTERMEDIARY AND
GUARANTOR ONLY

RIA Novosti, Russia
Dec 23 2004

MOSCOW, December 23 (RIA Novosti) – As far as the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict is concerned, Russia is ready to act as an intermediary and
a guarantor only, Russian President Vladimir Putin said.

“We have formulated our approach [that is as follows]: we are ready
to act as an intermediary and a guarantor of the agreements possible
between the parties to the conflict – Armenia and Azerbaijan,” the
president said at a news conference on Thursday.

“We do not want to become a long-term unfavorable partner for one
of the parties. We are unwilling to assume responsibility for that,”
President Putin emphasised.

In his opinion, the two sides have to reach agreement on their own.

President Putin underlined that Russia had been present at the
Caucasus for centuries, “We’ve got our own interests in the South
Caucasus. These interests should be assured but, of course, they also
have to go with the interests of other nations, including Georgia,
Armenia and Azerbaijan.”

According to the president, Russia has been pursuing proactive policies
in the region.

Armenia among countries mostly violating human rights

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Dec 22 2004

Armenia is among the countries mostly violating human rights, the
US Freedom House human rights organisation said in its annual report
last week.

According to analysts of the organisation, although Ukraine and Georgia
have achieved progress in defence of human rights, the situation in
this field has become worse in Belarus and Lithuania. According to
the report, citizens in Russia cannot properly enjoy their rights to
freedom, as the power has been monopolized, independent press is put
pressures on and executive authorities have been involved in political
affairs in the country.

The organization’s analysts believe that the existence of such cases
may lead to authoritarianism in Russia.*

Political reason motivates extraordinary session on deposits

Yerkir
17 Dec 04

Political reason motivates the initiative for extraordinary session
on deposits. This opinion has been expressed by ARF faction secretary
Hrayr Karapetian during a briefing, saying that the real reason for
the session is not to return the deposits. Karapetian believes the
issue still needs scrutiny. In addition, MP finds the return of 30
dollars for lost 1000 rubles not just.

This topic was discussed with the prime minister the other day, who
said that return of the deposits will imply big cuts in teachers,
doctors, etc. He said that one of the ways for returning the deposits
could be privileges in taxes, etc. However, he found impossible to
destabilize political situation by the initiative.

The ARF faction secretary said that their party had not yet discussed
the issue, but may present its approaches in the near future. The
political situation in Armenia was rather stable throughout 2004
and seems to have same prospects the coming year. Karapetian noted
the political fight which resulted in the opposition’s decision to
boycott. But the main thing was that the people could live another
peaceful, stable and creative year.

The secretary expressed hope that during the coming year, the
coalition will be able to expand its social programs and provide
rise of salaries to civil servants in 2006. He also prioritized
parliamentary activities, adoption of laws on national security and
social system. He welcomed the decision of EU which offers Turkey
to recognize the genocide and open borders soon. He also said that
“our foreign policy has set Karabagh issue on proper rails and we
will succeed, if we continue in this direction.” Finally, he said
the ARF position on this issue has not changed.

Armenian party calls for troops dispatch to other than Iraq “hot spots”

Noyan Tapan news agency
20 Dec 04

Yerevan, 20 December: The New Times party understands the importance of
[Armenia’s] participation in the worldwide comprehensive programme
of the fight against terrorism. However, this must not go against
Armenia’s vital interests especially as “alternative ways of
participating in this programme could be found should we decide to
pursue a sensible policy”, the party said in a statement released
on 17 December. The party expressed regret that “the number of
alternative choices has been brought to the minimum as a result of
our unwise policy”.

“The issue of sending Armenian servicemen to Iraq has recently
become topical again. Numerous public and political organizations of
Armenia and Spyurk [the diaspora] have sent anxious messages to the
authorities, strongly protesting against this short-sighted initiative
by the government, nevertheless the aforesaid issue will be discussed
at the NA [National Assembly],” the statement said.

The party stressed that many Armenians who have fled from the genocide
found refuge in countries of the Middle East and then harmoniously
participated in the public, political, social and economic processes in
these countries, “whereas now we are wasting the invaluable potential
of the Armenian Spyurk community”.

Speaking about the way out of “this critical situation”, the party
said the NA should discuss the dispatch of Armenian servicemen to any
other hot spot where the antiterror fight is being waged under the
aegis of the UN and “where the interests of the Armenian Republic do
not go against those of the Armenia-friendly Arab world”.

The New Time party insists that the NA should hold an open and
name-by-name voting on the issue “so that not only those who make
decisions but also those who ratify such short-sighted decisions
felt responsible”.

“Georgian President Saakashvili’s Campaign Against Corruption”

The Power and Interest News Report
Dec 20 2004

Corruption has plagued Georgia — as well as its neighbors Armenia
and Azerbaijan — for generations. While it was a problem even
during the Soviet regime, ever since the former republics gained
their independence in the early 1990s, the degree of corruption has
crippled economic development and stifled attempts at reform. The
new government in Georgia, which won power on a reformist platform,
is widely viewed in the country as Georgia’s last chance to defeat
the spread of corruption and create a stable economy and law-abiding
society.

Before the peaceful revolution of November 2003, Georgian President
Eduard Shevardnadze had been unsuccessful in curbing the rapid growth
of corruption throughout Georgian society and the political process.
Corruption in Georgia under the leadership of Shevardnadze was so
widespread it affected life on nearly every level. Despite very
strong laws against corruption, little was done to enforce them.
Blatant vote rigging and fraud led to his government’s demise last
fall, shortly replaced by younger politicians on a reform platform.
Even as Georgians rejoiced Mikhail Saakashvili’s victory, activists
stated that the new government would have to prove it was better at
fighting corruption than the former president, otherwise Saakashvili
would share his fate.

Corruption among the Georgian authorities is so widespread that it
consistently affects foreign investments. Investors originally saw
Georgia as a land of opportunity as the country is strategically
located between Europe and Asia. Plans for new oil and gas pipelines
created an economic boom for Azerbaijan in the early 1990s and
observers fully expected Georgia to receive part of that wealth. But
corrupt officials, coupled with unclear laws and tax policies,
continue to frustrate investors.

The foreign investment community was further antagonized by high-level
kidnappings and threats for ransom and bribes. The American electricity
provider, AES, which took over electricity distribution in Georgia in
the late 1990s, was repeatedly taken to court and threatened. In August
of 2002, the company’s C.F.O., Nika Lominadze, was murdered. Other
high profile cases include the kidnapping of the Welsh banker
Peter Shaw in July 2002. Although no ransom was reportedly paid,
Shaw escaped his captors after four months of imprisonment. While
the Georgian government ascertained Shaw escaped due to a special
military operation, speculation continued after Shaw’s release that
members of the government were involved in the kidnapping business.

A Turn of the Tide

While the 2003 parliament election might have started like business as
usual, protestors and politicians quickly assembled in front of the
parliament to protest the voting results. After weeks of protests,
Shevardnadze resigned on November 23. Mikhail Saakashvili, a former
justice minister in Shevardnadze’s government from 2000-2001, was voted
into office January 4, 2004 with 96 percent of the vote. Originally
seen as Shevardnadze’s groomed pupil, Saakashvili left his position
as the justice minister, citing that he believed it was “immoral” to
remain a part of the corrupt government. He became one of the loudest
voices of the opposition in the years leading up to his election,
and one of the country’s most popular politicians. He was a visible
face during the protests and led the charge into parliament the day
before Shevardnadze resigned.

Saakashvili started out his presidency with strong words. “We
need to introduce in the parliament very drastic anti-corruption
legislation that would give vast powers to a new elite, small, honest
investigative unit that would really tackle high-level corruption,”
he said in January 2004. During his inauguration speech, he pressed,
“We must root out corruption. As far as I am concerned, every corrupt
official is a traitor who betrays the national interest.” Many hoped
the difference would be Saakashvili’s young age, 36, and the Western
influence brought through his education in the United States.

With a high popularity rating — and no real opposition — Saakashvili
was free to implement any reforms or laws he felt fit. Many supporters
were alarmed when one of his first acts, in addition to the high
profile arrests of infamous businessmen like Gia Jokhtaberidze,
Shevardnadze’s son-in-law, included constitutional amendments to
consolidate his power. While the overall response to reforms from the
business sector has been positive, Badri Patarkatsishvili, who is the
president of the Georgian Federation of Businessmen, has repeatedly
stated that businessmen in Georgia should feel secure and know that
their rights will be honored. In an interview with the B.B.C. in
January 2003, Saakashvili stated that one of his top priorities for
Georgia was creating a stable and safe climate for investors.

As early as February, the new government was warned by the Visiting
Council of Europe Secretary-General Walter Schwimmer that the country’s
fight against corruption should not abuse the law. Critics of the
new government also began citing media intimidation and accusing the
government of arresting political enemies without adhering to the
due process required by law.

Although criticism of the new government continued, culminating in an
open letter to the president by prominent civil leaders in Georgia,
the new president has not backed down from his system of arrests
and has not made any open efforts to compromise with the growing
opposition. The open letter, published widely in Georgia, spoke of a
growing concern that Saakashvili was actively squashing public debate
with nationalist rhetoric, as well as failing to come to terms with his
power in a “post-revolution” society. Nevertheless, during his first
year in office, Saakashvili has made progress encouraging foreign
investment in his country. Georgia was included in the E.U.’s New
Neighborhood Initiative and received one billion dollars in pledges
to help finance reforms.

Neighboring States Concerned Over the Georgian Example

Neighboring countries throughout the Caucasus and Central Asia are
threatened by Saakashvili’s November rise to power and his rhetoric
against corruption. A November 25, 2003 emergency meeting of foreign
ministers from the Commonwealth of Independent States in Kiev
highlighted the fear of neighboring governments that Georgia’s new
crusader against corruption would also adversely affect the status
quo in their countries.

In both Armenia and Azerbaijan, opposition parties celebrated the
resignation of Shevardnadze. Although both Azerbaijani President
Ilham Aliyev and Armenian President Robert Kocharian were not openly
supportive of Saakashvili in November, the overriding element in their
relationship revolves around commerce and trade. Both presidents
have conducted high profile trips to Georgia in the past year, and
Saakashvili has warmly welcomed them both as “brothers.”

Georgian election observers, however, were not welcome in Ukraine.
Despite the chilly official reception, Georgians traveled to Kiev and
participated in the protests following the November run-off election.
The Georgian Foreign Ministry issued statements on November 28
supporting the call for a Ukrainian revote. Georgian Prime Minister
Zurab Zhvania also supported the protestors, wishing Ukraine a
“victory of justice and democracy”

Georgia’s relationship with Russia was strained during Shevardnadze’s
presidency. Despite a positive beginning, that relationship has
rapidly deteriorated under Saakashvili. During the protests calling
for Shevardnadze’s resignation, it was widely feared in the country
that Russia would strongly back Shevardnadze. However, after some
initial support, then Russian Foreign Minister Ivan Ivanov flew to
Tbilisi November 22 to help ease tensions, and he has been given
credit for helping the country avoid violence.

Warm relations between the countries continued through the summer,
highlighted when a large group of potential Russian investors came
to Tbilisi in May to discuss joint business projects between the
countries. During the convention, Russian businessmen repeatedly
emphasized the need for a stable, safe investment climate and
tax reforms. Talk of business investment was overshadowed by the
growing violence in South Ossetia, however, and Russian involvement
in Abkhazia.

Currently, the administration in Georgia is dealing with Moscow’s
accusations of anti-Russian militants hiding in the country, near
the border between Chechnya and Georgia, and the likelihood that
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe border patrols will
not continue after the mandate expires later this month. Furthermore,
an ongoing point of contention between the two governments is the
existence of two Russian army bases that still exist within Georgian
territory. The Russians use the bases to potentially influence Georgian
affairs, explaining why Tbilisi wants them removed. No real progress
has been made on this issue.

Georgia’s relationship with the United States has improved under
Saakashvili. Although accusations of heavy-handed policies have grown
against the current administration, the United States has been a
steadfast supporter of Saakashvili and his reforms. In light of the
current reforms taking place in the military, the U.S. government
has pledged over $15 million to help modernize the Georgian army and
Saakashvili has already sent over 150 soldiers to Iraq. Georgian
soldiers are involved in peacekeeping missions in Afghanistan as
well, and Saakashvili has promised that over Georgian 800 soldiers
will eventually be dispatched. While Western powers initially faced
a quandary supporting the overthrow of an elected president, once the
degree of civil outrage toward the election became obvious, the U.S.
issued a strong rebuke against Shevardnadze and his handling of
the election.

Conclusion

President Mikhail Saakashvili has had some success fighting corruption
through tax reform and large scale arrests that include politicians
from the former regime and powerful businessmen. His peaceful
acquisition of the semi-autonomous Adjarian republic has given the
central government a great opportunity to reform invasive corruption
throughout the republic, especially in tax collection. The new tax
code, scheduled to begin February 2005, should help the government
receive lost revenue as well as prove to potential investors that
the new regime is serious about reform.

Criticism of Saakashvili’s policies is not unfounded. By refusing to
follow due process, his program of arrests could backfire by turning
the accused into victims in the eyes of the public. To date, the
arrests have largely been centered on high profile politicians and
business leaders. In order to fully eradicate corruption, citizens
and low-level civil servants involved in bribery and the black market
will also need to be arrested. Once the government starts interfering
with the status quo of people’s daily lives, Saakashvili’s popularity
might drop and the public could quickly lose taste for strong reforms.

While he has hired supporters of democracy into his government, he
has distanced himself from civil leaders outside of his government.
Prominent civil leaders in Georgia are giving Saakashvili some leeway
as he gains experience in office. However, his success will depend
on his ability to compromise heady rhetoric with reasonable public
policy to lead his country through difficult and painful reforms.

Report Drafted By: Molly Corso