Author: Zakarian Garnik

EurasiaNet
Feb 24 2005

ARMENIAN-RUSSIAN RELATIONS FACE UNCERTAIN TIMES
Samvel Martirosyan 2/24/05

Despite Moscow’s strong interest in Armenia’s energy sector,
officials in Yerevan worry that the Kremlin is considering a policy
realignment that would enhance Azerbaijan’s stature at the expense of
the Russian-Armenian special strategic relationship.

The main source of Yerevan’s concern is a planned railway project
that would connect Iran to Russia via Azerbaijan. Armenian officials
fear that the railway, if built according to current plans, would
deepen Armenia’s regional economic isolation. The proposed Kazvin
(Iran) – Astara (Azerbaijan) line would skirt Armenian territory,
denying Armenia an opportunity to expand trade with Russia. Given the
existing economic blockade maintained by Turkey and Azerbaijan,
Armenia can ill afford to be left on the sidelines of such a project,
officials in Yerevan say. [For background see the Eurasia Insight
archive].

Since the 1991 Soviet collapse, Armenia has maintained a close
strategic relationship with Russia, in part to offset the
geopolitical disadvantage of having hostile neighbors on its eastern
and western flanks. In recent years, the special relationship has
shown signs of fraying. Russia-Azerbaijani relations have thawed,
while Yerevan has expanded contacts with both Iran and the United
States. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Armenian officials took note of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei
Lavrov’s February 2 trip to Azerbaijan. Lavrov’s comment in Baku that
“there are no unresolved problems” between the Russian and
Azerbaijani governments heightened concerned in Yerevan about
Moscow’s potentially shifting loyalties in the South Caucasus.

Lavrov’s February 16-17 visit to Armenia did little to assuage
Yerevan’s concerns. During talks with Lavrov, Armenian Prime Minister
Andranik Markarian voiced concern about the railway project,
according to official sources. In response, Lavrov merely indicated
he would relay the Armenian government’s views to Russian Transport
Minister Igor Levitin and Russian Railways President Gennady Fadeyev.

Markarian and Lavrov also reportedly discussed the possibility of
reopening the Abkhaz section of Georgia’s railway system, a link that
would reestablish Armenia’s railway ties with Russia. Officials
provided no details on the substance of those discussions.

Problems between Yerevan and Moscow are not limited to rail-related
topics. For the past two years, five Armenian companies, handed over
to Russia as compensation for $100 million in unpaid Armenian debt to
Moscow, have stood idle. In his meeting with Markarian, Lavrov
assured the prime minister that Russia is doing everything possible
to reopen the companies, but neither Moscow nor Yerevan has announced
a concrete plan for getting the firms up and running again. Golos
Armenii (Voice of Armenia), a Yerevan-based Russian-language
newspaper, has described the fate of these companies as the most
sensitive issue in relations between Russia and Armenia.

Armenian media outlets also looked askance at Lavrov’s actions on his
recent visit to Azerbaijan, when the foreign minister visited Baku’s
Martyr’s Avenue, a memorial to the 130 people killed during the
Soviet Army’s 1990 crackdown on anti-Armenian pogroms in the
Azerbaijani capital. Meanwhile, as Armenia commemorates 2005 as a
Year of Russia, Russia has declared 2005 a Year of Azerbaijan.

Moscow’s recent behavior has left some Armenian political leaders
feeling confused. “Honestly speaking, Armenia sometimes does not
understand some of Russia’s steps, especially those concerning
relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey,” Giro Manoyan, international
secretary of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, a member of
Armenia’s ruling coalition, said in a recent interview with the
Caucasus Journalists Network.

Amid the uncertainty surrounding the Armenian-Russian special
relationship, Armenia’s energy sector is one strategic area in which
Russia, sensitive to growing Western influence in the South Caucasus,
maintains a strong interest. Accordingly, Lavrov probed economic
cooperation possibilities with Markarian.

The Russian energy company United Energy Systems (UES) is reportedly
considering the purchase of Armenia’s electricity distribution
network, according to the Armenian news agency ARKA. UES already
holds three power stations in Armenia – Sevan-Hrazdan hydropower
plant, the Hrazdan thermal power station and the Armenian Nuclear
Electric Plant – facilities that generate some 75-80 percent of the
country’s electricity. With the purchase of UK holding company
Midland Resources’ 80 percent stake in the distribution network, UES
would hold control over almost the entire Armenian electrical power
grid.

Russian energy giant GazProm, has been similarly active. The
Iranian-Armenian gas pipeline, scheduled to be operational before
2007, could provide stiff competition for gas in European markets
from GazProm’s own Blue Stream gas pipeline project with Turkey,
according to GazProm Deputy Chief Executive Officer Alexander
Ryazanov. “If we do not take part in the construction of [the] Iran –
Armenia gas pipeline, no one knows where that gas will go,” the news
site PanArmenian Network reported Ryazanov as saying at a recent
session of the Federation Council, the Russian parliament’s upper
chamber.

During his trip to Armenia, Lavrov confirmed Russia’s interest in
joining a pipeline construction consortium. “We received an offer,
inviting our corresponding structures to take part in this project,”
Lavrov said, repeating past assurances that the pipeline meets with
Russia’s approval. “This offer is presently under consideration and I
am convinced we will be able to give an answer in the nearest
future.”

Editor’s Note: Samvel Martirosyan is a Yerevan-based journalist and
political analyst.

World’s First Anti-Smoking Treaty Becomes Law

MANILA, Philippines, Feb. 24 /Xinhua-PRNewswire/ — The world’s first
tobacco control treaty, the World Health Organization Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC), becomes binding
international law on Sunday, 27 February 2005. One of the most
rapidly embraced UN treaties of all time, the WHO FCTC is aimed at
improving global health by reducing tobacco consumption, currently the
cause of premature death for nearly 5 million people every year.

”The devastation caused by the tobacco pandemic dwarfs SARS and the
recent tsunami. Every year, five million people die from
tobacco-related diseases. In the Western Pacific Region alone, 3000
people die each day from tobacco use,” stated Dr Shigeru Omi, Director
of WHO’s Western Pacific Region. “Now we have the global tools to
fight a global problem. It’s time for all countries to join the
battle.”

The WHO FCTC is intended to control what has become the second biggest
killer of our time. Tobacco consumption is the single leading
preventable cause of death. It will prematurely end the lives of 10
million people a year by 2020 if current trends are not reversed.
Tobacco is the only legal product that causes the death of one half of
its regular users. This means that of the current 1.3 billion smokers
worldwide, 650 million people will die prematurely due to tobacco.

Convention provisions set international standards on tobacco price and
tax increases, tobacco advertising and sponsorship, labelling, illicit
trade and second-hand smoke.

The WHO FCTC was unanimously adopted by the Fifty-sixth World Health
Assembly in May 2003, following almost three years of negotiations.
During the year that followed, while it was open for signature, 167
countries and the European Community signed, and 23 countries became
contracting parties.

On 30 November 2004, the 40th country ratified the convention,
triggering a 90-day countdown for its entry into force. As of 23
February 2005, a total of 57 countries had ratified the convention.

In the Western Pacific Region, 13 countries have ratified the
convention. They are Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Cook Islands,
Fiji, Japan, the Marshall Islands, Mongolia, Nauru, New Zealand,
Palau, Singapore, Solomon Islands and Viet Nam. Fiji was the first
Western Pacific country to ratify, on 3 October 2003.

Notes to editors:

The 40 contracting parties to the WHO FCTC as of 30 November 2004 were
Armenia, Australia, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Canada,
Cook Islands, Fiji, France, Ghana, Hungary, Iceland, India, Japan,
Jordan, Kenya, Madagascar, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico,
Mongolia, Myanmar, Nauru, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Palau,
Panama, Peru, Qatar, San Marino, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia,
Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago and Uruguay.

The treaty continues from now on to be open for ratification,
acceptance or approval for those countries that have signed, and is
open for accession for those that have not. There is no deadline for
countries to become contracting parties. Any state that becomes a
contracting party will be bound by the treaty 90 days following the
deposit of its instrument of ratification (or equivalent) in the
United Nations headquarters in New York.

The body that will govern the WHO FCTC is the Conference of the
Parties (COP). The first session of the COP will take place within a
year from the date of entry into force, as specified in the
convention. The first session has tentatively been scheduled for
February 2006. The COP is expected to determine further procedural and
technical issues relating to its future development.

For current status and full text of the WHO FCTC, please visit:
_
()
. For further information, please contact: Burke Fishburn, Tobacco
Free Initiative, WHO WPRO Tel: +63-2-528-9894 Email:
[email protected] All WHO press releases, fact sheets and
features, as well as other information can be obtained at
_
() .

SOURCE World Health Organization

02/24/2005 02:27 ET

LADWP Science Bowl is Most Successful Regional Competition in U.S.
Department of Energy National Program; 13th Annual Event Set for
Sat. Feb. 26 with 42 Team Field

LOS ANGELES–(BUSINESS WIRE)—- North Hollywood To Defend Regional
Title

With the 2005 theme, “Give Me a Place to Stand, and I Will Move the
Earth,” by Archimedes, the 13th Annual LADWP Science Bowl, the most
successful regional high school competition in the U.S. Department of
Energy National Science Bowl program, will be held Saturday, Feb. 26
from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. at the L.A. Department of Water and Power
downtown headquarters, 111 N. Hope St. The public is welcome to
attend.

A total of 42 teams from 26 public and private high schools throughout
the city of Los Angeles are expected to participate this year. Last
year North Hollywood High School won the LADWP Science Bowl and won
the fifth place trophy at the National Science Bowl in Washington,
D.C. LADWP regional championship teams have won four national titles
and placed in the top five ranking teams eight out of the last 10
years, a record.

Dr. E.C. Krupp, director of the Griffith Observatory, will serve as
the celebrity moderator at the final round of the competition.

Also for the first time, an alumni moderator, Adam Diament, PhD, a
former Science Bowl team member, will serve as one of the officials
asking the difficult questions during competition. Dr. Diament is a
post doctoral fellow in genetics at UCLA. He was a member of the 1993
Venice High School Team that was the first LADWP regional champion to
represent the city at the National Science Bowl.

“We are indeed proud that the LADWP Science Bowl has grown to become
an important annual event attracting some of the nation’s most
talented and hardworking students. The amount of knowledge and depth
of understanding that the students possess is amazing,” said Melinda
Rho, chair of the Science Bowl Volunteer Steering Committee.

Rho added that the program encourages participation by students from
all backgrounds and parts of the city. The program, she said, has
attained such high esteem that colleges look to a student’s success at
the event as a hallmark of achievement.

Winning participating team members, she said, at regional and national
levels have gone on to attend some of the most competitive colleges
and universities in the nation including Harvard University, Yale
University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, California
Institute of Technology, University of California, Berkeley, Columbia
University, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and Stanford
University.

Science Bowl is a fast-paced game-show style competition in which two
teams of four students, with an alternate, answer toss-up questions
from a moderator. Individual students buzz in. The student that
buzzes in the fastest with the correct answer earns four points for
his or her team. Then that team has the exclusive right to answer the
bonus question worth 10 points.

The LADWP Science Bowl buzzer competition is in two parts. In the
morning, from 8:30 a.m. to approximately 12:30 p.m., teams will be
competing in six divisions or leagues of seven teams each. The top two
or three schools from each division will advance to the double
elimination tournament in the afternoon. The final round to determine
the champion is expected to start about 4:30 p.m.

Based on the format of the General Electric College Bowl television
program, Science Bowl questions cover such technical fields as
physics, chemistry, astronomy, earth and physical science, calculus,
trigonometry, technology and current events in math, science and
computer fields.

The winning team members in the LADWP Science Bowl will each receive
the $1000 Hitachi Scholarship. Their school will also receive a trophy
and $2000 toward the purchase of science equipment or materials.
Additional prizes for second to fourth place team members range from
$1,000 U.S. Savings Bonds to $200 gift cards. Also, $1250 to $1750 in
equipment or materials will be awarded to schools for teams placing
second through fourth. The winning team will travel to Washington,
D.C., April 28 to May 2, to represent the city and the regional
competition at the National Science Bowl.

The national grand prize this year is a trip to Australia to attend
the International Science School in Sydney. Other prizes for the
second to fourth place national finishers and to the team winning the
Good Sportsmanship Award include weeklong trips to U.S. Department of
Energy labs and facilities.

In addition to the “buzzer competition,” schools in the Science Bowl
also have an opportunity to participate in the Franklin Lu Hands-On
Competition, which poses a different activity and challenge every
year. A separate group of prizes are provided to student team members
that are successful in this event. The hands-on competition is named
for the late Franklin Lu, a DWP engineer and volunteer, who was
instrumental in establishing this event as part of the LADWP Science
Bowl program.

This year more than 11,000 students in 1800 high from 40 states, the
District of Columbia, the Virgin Island and the Indian Nations will
participate in one of the 66 regional competitions. Since the National
Science Bowl program began in 1991, more than 70,000 students have
participated. Nine regional competitions are held in California
including the JPL Science Bowl for schools outside the city of Los
Angeles and Los Angeles Unified School District areas.

The LADWP Science Bowl is made possible by 100 volunteers, mainly
LADWP employees and their families. In addition to the Department of
Water and Power, other sponsors include the Hitachi Southern
California Regional Community Action Committee, Institute of
Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), the Water and Power
Community Credit Union, the San Fernando Valley Engineers’ Council,
and the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD).

The Science Bowl is one of several LADWP educational partnership
programs that include the Youth Services Academy; Teacher Workshop
Series and Adopt-A-Schools. Additional information about LADWP
education programs can be received by logging on to and
clicking on the community and safety section or by calling 1-800-DIAL
DWP.

The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is the nation’s largest
municipally owned utility. It has provided services to the residents
and businesses of the city for more than a century. LADWP Science
Bowl XIII Participating Schools A.G.B.U. Demirdjian High School
Lincoln High School Arshag Dickranian Armenian School Louisville High
School Birmingham High School Manual Arts High School Bravo Medical
Magnet High School Marshall High School Downtown Magnet High School
Milken Community High School El Camino Real High School North
Hollywood High School Fairfax High School Reseda High School Francis
Polytechnic High School San Pedro High School Gardena High School
Sherman Oaks Center for Granada Hills Charter High School Enriched
Studies Grant High School St. Genevieve High School Hamilton High
School Van Nuys High School Hollywood High School Venice High School
Holy Martyrs Ferrahian High School

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Walter Zeisl, 213-367-1342
cell phone: 213-792-5521 Kimberley Hughes, 213-367-4417 cell phone:
213-792-5521

02/23/2005 15:34 ET

Zenit, Italy
Feb 23 2005

What Christians in Holy Land Are Armed With

Auxiliary Bishop Marcuzzo of Jerusalem Surveys Scene

JERUSALEM, FEB. 22, 2005 (Zenit.org).- A bishop of Jerusalem says
that Christians, as bearers of values such as justice, peace, dignity
and human rights, can make a key contribution to solving the Mideast
conflict.

Christians’ weapons are those of “negotiation, patience and
bridge-building,” said Auxiliary Bishop Giacinto-Boulos Marcuzzo, in
a statement to ZENIT.

The Italian-born prelate has been in the Holy Land for 44 years. He
was ordained bishop 11 years ago and has been patriarchal vicar of
the Latin Church in Israel for the past decade.

Although designated as such in newspapers, he is not bishop of
Nazareth, but a bishop who lives in Nazareth, since most Christians
in the region live in that area.

The prelate said that there has always been a Christian community
there, “a thread that runs through everything, incarnated in the
culture and local society, through the ups and downs of political and
ecclesial powers and jurisdictions.”

“Today Christians in the Holy Land regard themselves as heirs of the
first Christian community, something that cannot be understood if one
does not keep in mind this transmission of the teachings of Christ
from one generation to the other, from one people to another, between
one regime and another,” the auxiliary bishop said.

The first Christians in the main were Jews, while the present
community is Arab-Palestinian, but this does not mean that the latter
“do not consider themselves descendants of the first Christian
community, in the thread of faith,” he noted.

That the Christian community is surrounded by a Muslim majority,
under the political jurisdiction of Israel, is “a new historical,
cultural and social experience,” for which there is no “model or
experience of reference,” said Bishop Marcuzzo.

“We must mark out our path,” he said. “The Christian community lives
a twofold minority condition, in the Arab community and in Israel.
Consider a person who is Arab, Christian and a citizen of Israel. To
be these three things at the same time is difficult; it is a
challenge that we have addressed in our diocesan synod.

“During the synod we said that we should recover the original land of
our identity, that is, the Mother Church, the Church of the Apostles,
the Church of the Holy Sites, the Church of the Gospel; we have
rediscovered there a fertile terrain, not tainted by history.”

He added: “By vocation, we chose to be the Church in the Holy Land
and to stay here.”

The Diocesan Synod of the Catholic Churches in the Holy Land closed
in February 2000 with the holding of an assembly that gave origin to
the General Pastoral Plan.

The plan was the result of a process of several years involving the
Latin, Greek-Catholic (Melkite), Syro-Catholic, Maronite,
Armenian-Catholic and Chaldean Churches, and the Franciscan Custody
of the Holy Land.

The plan is entitled “Faithful to Christ, Co-responsible in the
Church, Witnesses in Society.”

Bishop Marcuzzo said that there are difficulties in relations with
Muslims, but the problems are not “insurmountable.”

The General Pastoral Plan may be requested from the Latin
Patriarchate of Jerusalem at [email protected] or from the Vicariate of
Nazareth at [email protected].

The Messenger
Tuesday, February 22, 2005

Commission investigates disappearance of USD 45 million
Credit allotted by Japan to rehabilitate two power stations in 1999-2002,
but commission says 90 percent has been misused
By Christina Tashkevich

Parliamentarians accuse officials from
the former government for siphoning of
funds from a grant to rehabilitate portions
of Georgia’s troubled electricity system
The Parliamentary Temporary Investigation Commission on violations in the
energy sector met on Monday to discuss the fate of the USD 45 million credit
allotted by Japan to the Georgian government to rehabilitate Khrami-2 and
Lajanur hydroelectric power stations in 1999-2002.
Head of the commission MP Gia Natsvlishvili said at the meeting that the
credit should have been spent on “fully rehabilitating” these two
hydroelectric stations. “As a result, Georgia would have 220 megawatts more
this winter,” he said.
Natsvlishvili stressed that this would be a cheap energy resource “while we
now have problems with Russian imports and have to buy very expensive
energy.”
But according to the commission, the rehabilitation works are now in the
same condition as they were when the credit was allotted. “About 90 percent
of this credit has been misused,” said Natsvlishvili.
According to the commission chair, former high-ranking officials such as
officials from the ministry of energy and heads of energy companies could
have been involved in misusing the money. For example, he names the former
Sakenergo Director and former minister of energy David Mirtskhulava as one
suspect in this case. He thinks that the names of other people involved in
this case will be revealed during an investigation by law enforcers.
“The commission will discuss this issue, and it will decide whether to send
the documents to the General Prosecutor’s Office for launching a criminal
case,” Natsvlishvili explained on Monday.
Meanwhile the head of the commission also commented on the fate of the other
cases they sent to the Prosecutor’s Office. “We monitor how the Prosecutor’s
Office investigates cases we have already sent to them,” Natsvlishvili said.
One particular issue the commission investigated was the rehabilitation of
Enguri hydroelectric station. Natsvlishvili said the Prosecutor’s Office
launched two criminal cases on this issue, which are currently under
investigation.
Meanwhile, former minister David Mirtskhulava, who was also previously head
of the National Energy Regulatory Commission, is accused of abuse of power
and hiding secret materials.
In particular, the General Prosecutor’s Office named a contract agreed with
Armenergo during the period when Mirtskhulava was minister, which the
investigation claims is one-sided and artificially increased Georgian
Railway’s debt to Armenergo from USD 4 million to USD 6 million.
The investigation says that Mirtskhulava agreed to this in return for
certain benefits – namely, helping mediator company Energomanqkorporatsia to
embezzle 90 percent of the USD 6 million transmitted from Georgian Railway.
Georgia still had to pay the debt as a result of the one-sided contract
Mirtskhulava had signed.
As for the second charge against Mirtskhulava, according to the Prosecutor’s
Office, he took secret materials relating to Georgia-Armenia criminal
relations from the Energy Ministry and hid them in the office of the
National Regulation Commission.

Agency WPS
What the Papers Say. Part A (Russia)
February 21, 2005, Monday

A COLLECTIVE FAREWELL TO ARMS

SOURCE: Nezavisimoe Voennoe Obozrenie, No. 6, February 18, 2005, p. 2

by Vladimir Mukhin

The CIS collective defense system has started falling apart rapidly.
The first evidence that this system is falling apart is the upcoming
closure of the headquarters for coordination of CIS military
cooperation (SHKVS). According to informed sources at the Russian
Defense Ministry, after lengthy and intensive consultations Russia
has finally agreed with Astana’s proposal to disband this
super-national body. The structure that has somehow tried to regulate
military relations among the CIS countries throughout post-Soviet
history is being shut down.

Colonel General Leonid Ivashov, vice-president of the Geopolitical
Studies Academy, confirmed that such a decision would probably be
made at the summit of CIS heads of state in August 2005 in Kazan.
Ivashov initially set up the SHKVS, and headed the secretariat of the
CIS council of defense ministers (SMO) and main department of
international military cooperation at the Russian Defense Ministry
for a long time. Ivashov considers this step “very wrong and harmful,
significantly weakening Russia’s positions in the former Soviet
Union.” Until recently, Russia was averse to disbanding of the SHKVS
and even at the meeting of the SMO held in November 2004 initiated
support of the staff on the part of other CIS republics, first of
all, Central Asian republics and Armenia. Now there is a 180-degree
turn. Why?

To some extent this question is answered by leaders of various
structures of the CIS and defense ministers of the former Soviet
republics. General Secretary of the CIS Nikolai Bordyuzha presumes,
“There is no common Eurasian security space now. It remains
fragmentary and diluted and internally contradictory to some extent
because its separate elements are not simply harmonious but even
compete against each other.” According to Bordyuzha, to avoid this
“It is necessary to limit the areas of influence in the issues of
provision of collective security among the integration structures
operating in the region, namely CIS, Shanghai Organization of
Cooperation, EvrAzES, Organization of the Collective Security Treaty
and others.” This means that Bordyuzha diplomatically does not speak
about disbanding of military structures in the framework of the CIS
(SHKVS and SMO) but obviously points at Organization of the
Collective Security Treaty (ODKB) subordinated to him. According to
Bordyuzha, ODKB could become a “locomotive of integration processes
in the CIS.” Defense Minister of Kazakhstan Mukhtar Altynbaev is
harsher on this matter. Like Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbaev he
believes that “instead of the inefficient SHKVS and SMO a security
council of the CIS countries should be established and work in the
framework of the Commonwealth.” This idea was already partially
supported by Defense Minister of Belarus Leonid Maltsev. Maltsev
proposes disbanding of SHKVS and preserving of the SMO secretariat.

In any case, ODKB includes only 6 of the 12 former Soviet republics
(Baltic republics are excluded). Let us presume that they will be
“locomotives of integration” but what can the rest do? The security
council of the CIS countries will be unable to become a “locomotive”
too if it is created because there have been and there are no
military integration processes in the post-Soviet space.

We need to say that the CIS as a traditional form from republics of
the USSR to the post-Soviet sovereign countries is slowly dying. At
this point military collective relations are not an exception. The
countries are forming their military relations not according to the
patterns established in the 1990s but according to their national
interests. This is obviously an objective process. This is an
illusion that the military staff of ODKB is more efficient than
SHKVS. For example, already now in the framework of ODKB there is a
nucleus of countries united by their own coalition forces in Central
Asia. There is a united group of forces of Russia and Belarus in the
west of the CIS and Russia and Armenia in the south. All these groups
have their own staffs and only with difficulties it is possible to
unite them under the flag of ODKB. Along with this, the recent tenth
anniversary of establishment of the united air defense system of the
CIS showed that many post-Soviet countries had common interests in
defense of their airspace. Of course, ODKB member states form the
backbone of these countries but among them there is already
competition and there are problems. Thus, Kyrgyzstan being an ODKB
member is obviously lagging behind the integration processes in the
framework of establishment of the united air defense system.
Commander of air defense of Kyrgyzstan Colonel Vladimir Valyaev was
not even present at the solemn meeting of the member states of the
united air defense system dedicated to discussion of the plans for
2005. However, Ukraine and Uzbekistan, which are not ODKB members,
demonstrated their interest in this even.

Kazakhstan is active as usual. It proposed organization of the air
defense exercises not only on the Russian testing range like it had
happened before but also at its Sary-Shagan testing range. Ukraine
already accepted this proposal having terminated agreements with
Moscow on organization of military exercises in Ashuluk (Astrakhan
Region). Ukraine is currently preparing an intergovernmental
agreement on military exercises on the Kazakh testing range. Thus,
there is an obvious military technology cooperation between Astana
and Moscow, allies in the ODKB. Astana is obviously wining because
its testing range is much bigger and is more attractive from the
financial point of view. This circumstance is another evidence of the
fact that military relations are built not according to the patterns
of ODKB and SHKVS but according to interests of military structures
of the CIS countries.

Moscow traditionally supplies armament and services to member states
of the united air defense system of the CIS countries at its domestic
prices and undertakes arrangement of military infrastructure
(airdromes, testing ranges, staffs), training of personnel and so on.
In exchange Russia receives only unhealthy competition of military
testing ranges, “semi-hostile” blocs (like GUUAM), purchase of
armament and hardware and training of officers of air forces of the
CIS countries in NATO countries (Ukraine is going to do this and
Georgia is already doing this).

Vladimir Popov from the Academy of Military Sciences says:
“Collective staffs and collective defense bodies have exhausted their
capacities in their current form, also because Russia has not finally
determined its principles and its ideology in relations with other
CIS countries.”

According to the analyst, the SHKVS has exhausted its capacities. Its
personnel numbers were halved in 2004. The 55 remaining officers are
very ineffective. All the same, this does not mean that the staff
should be disbanded. Its members could do theoretical work, work out
concepts, identify threats and plan joint events in the interests of
Moscow. It was the SHKVS that worked out the documents determining
the contents of such notions as collective defense and security of
the CIS.

The SHKVS is also located in Moscow. The capital of Russia provides
the base for work, solves everyday problems of officers from the CIS
countries, pays additionally for communication, for electricity and
so on. And it is said that he who pays the piper calls the tune.

Military-political structures in the CIS

ODKB – CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization. Established on
May 15, 1992, by six CIS countries (Russia, Armenia, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Belarus, Tajikistan). The treaty implies military
political cooperation of the member states and assistance, including
military assistance, in case of aggression against any of them.

SMO – Council of Defense Ministers. Established on February 14, 1992.
This is a body of the council of the heads of states for the issues
of military policy of the CIS member states. Activities of the SMO
are coordinated by the secretariat headed by Lieutenant General
Alexander Sinaisky.

SHKVS – Staff for Coordination of Military Cooperation of the CIS
countries. This is an interstate permanent working body of SMO and is
intended for assistance to development of comprehensive military
cooperation of the CIS countries and coordination of implementation
of the decisions of the council of the heads of the states, council
of the heads of the governments and SMO in this area. The head of
staff is Army General Vladimir Yakovlev (former commander of the
Strategic Missile Forces of Russia).

United air defense system of the CIS. It includes 10 CIS member
states that have signed a special agreement in 1995, but only
Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Russia have
active cooperation in this area.

Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Established on April 26, 1996, by
Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Uzbekistan
joined the “Shanghai five” later.

EvrAzES – Euro-Asian Economic Cooperation. This is an organization
established in 2000, including Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Russia and Tajikistan. Moldova and Ukraine have observer status.

Translated by Pavel Pushkin

Azeri POWs feeling well – separatist official

ANS Radio, Baku
19 Feb 05

The first news of the missing Azerbaijani soldiers has come from the
separatist Karabakh regime. The head of the regime’s executive staff,
Armen Zaryan, said that relevant work is being carried out with the
POWs, their health is normal and they are not being subjected to
physical pressure.

[Passage omitted: names of the soldiers]

OSCE concerned about truce violations on Karabakh front line – Azeri agency

Assa-Irada
18 Feb 05

Baku, 17 February: Co-chairs of the Minsk Group (MG) have requested
the OSCE chairman-in-office that the special OSCE mission prepare
a report on the situation on the front line, a source from the
Tbilisi-based office of the OSCE chairman’s special envoy, Andrzej
Kasprzyk, has said.

The MG co-chairs have expressed their concerns over the frequent
cease-fire breaches on the front line over the last few days. “The
situation is clear. The cease-fire has been violated and this should
stop soon. The countries co-chairing the MG are concerned over the
cease-fire breaches, which question the OSCE mediation mission,”
the same source said.

Armenian military units have breached the cease-fire several times
over the last few days, killing and wounding Azerbaijani soldiers
and civilians.

Few signs of hardline agenda after Russian church’s TV station takeover

Channel 3 TV, Moscow
16 Feb 05

A Moscow Region television report has found little evidence of
conservative changes at a small TV station in the Urals recently
bought by the Russian Orthodox Church. Channel 3 TV, whose views
often coincide with the church’s, said Moscow media analysts were
wrong to assume that secular journalists would fail to work with the
new proprietor and that Islam and non-Orthodox Christian faiths would
not be represented in programmes. The following are excerpts from
“Reportazh” programme by Moscow Region Channel 3 TV on 16 February;
subheadings inserted editorially:

[Presenter] The creation of Russia’s first Orthodox Christian
television channel in the Urals has given rise to a lot of rumours and
controversy in Moscow. Human rights activists in Moscow believe that
in this way the Orthodoxy is encroaching on secular life. Furthermore,
an Orthodox television might infringe on the rights of Muslims who
live in the Urals. It was reported in the press that all the former
staff of the Soyuz TV company were dismissed. Journalists are shocked;
they are complaining about the Orthodox Church and protesting. What
is really happening around the Orthodox television channel? Aleksandr
Yegortsev reports.

Church builds multiplatform media empire

[Newsreader presenting the programme] Hello and welcome to the
latest issue of “Eparchy [diocese]: Events of the Week”. I’m Anton
Pepelyayev. In the next 30 minutes –

[Correspondent – interrupting recording] Russia’s first Orthodox
television channel has begun to broadcast in the Urals this year. It
has taken the Yekaterinburg eparchy almost 10 years to get a television
station of its own.

[Dmitriy Baybakov, head of the Yekaterinburg eparchy’s information
and publishing department, captioned] It all started with a parochial
Orthodox newspaper, a church newspaper on two small sheets. Now it
is a church weekly. Several more newspapers have been added to it,
as well as a children’s magazine, a web site and a news agency. We
have a printing works and a 24-hour radio.

[Passage omitted]

[Correspondent] The town of Pervouralsk lies 40 km away from
Yekaterinburg. There, in a hotel building, the limited liability
company Soyuz Television Company is based. The previous owners met
the eparchy halfway and sold the station to the Orthodox Church for
a comparatively low price.

[Passage omitted: journalists say station’s original name was retained
after change of ownership]

Rights activists were wrong

[Correspondent] The rumour that the Yekaterinburg eparchy had purchased
a TV company reached Moscow. That was just the sort of thing that
bored human rights activists in Moscow had been waiting for. Without
getting to know what’s what, news agencies rushed to stir up a scandal.

[Baybakov] Some sort of Council of Europe experts held news conferences
in Moscow to say this was a very dangerous precedent for Russia.

[Correspondent] Instantly, serious accusations were levelled against
the Yekaterinburg eparchy. One accusation was that the eparchy had
broken the law. The statute of the Russian Orthodox Church does not
have a clause to allow it to engage in television-related activities.

[Baybakov] Pardon me, but the statute of the Russian Orthodox Church
does not mention even things such as using telephones or computers.

[Correspondent] Accusation No 2: the creation of an Orthodox TV
channel is inappropriate towards Muslims. A lot of ethnic Tatars live
in the Urals.

[Baybakov] The Muslim programme will remain on the channel. In
principle, we would be very willing to have ethnic diasporas on the
channel, so there are programmes about national cultures – Armenian,
Belarusian, Ukrainian, Tatar, Russian – all cultures.

[Correspondent] Finally, the third accusation, the most damaging one
in the eyes of Moscow human rights activists, was that after buying the
Pervouralsk TV station, the Yekaterinburg eparchy dismissed the entire
staff. The journalists are shocked and angry and they are protesting.

[Vladimir Antipin, director of Soyuz television company, captioned]
None of the staff were dismissed. Not a single member of staff
resigned. It’s all how it used to be. I still have a staff of 23
people and, for that matter, five extra people have been taken on.

[Olga Litvinova, correspondent, captioned] We work in the same way
as we used to work. All the staff are where they were. And there have
been no restrictions.

News agenda

[Correspondent] At present, Russia’s first Orthodox TV station is
made up of two teams, who have yet to become friends. But already,
secular journalists and eparchy journalists are working for the same
projects. [Passage omitted] Orthodox programmes are still made for
Soyuz by the eparchy’s own studio. [Passage omitted]

Eparchy news bulletins are broadcast every day. [Passage omitted]

One day in the life of an Orthodox film crew. It’s difficult for
people who film to be filmed. Important visitors are flying in late in
the evening for the Yekaterinburg eparchy’s anniversary: Metropolitan
Kliment, the manager of Moscow Patriarchy’s property, and other senior
clerics. For Soyuz, this is the top story of the day. [Passage omitted]

Late at night, the Moscow delegation comes to the Yekaterinburg
eparchy’s Orthodox TV studio. The Moscow visitors goes straight on
the air on the Orthodox radio station.

At midnight, the camera man watches the footage. Spiritual shots on
a spiritual channel have to be bright.

Women journalists banned from wearing trousers

For newsreaders and correspondents, the channel’s peculiarity entails
other rules. No clinging garments and no make-up.

[Baybakov] Many just began to wear beautiful women’s clothing and
it is all fine and very stylish. I go round paying them compliments,
although perhaps this is not very appropriate for me.

[Correspondent] The journalists have compromised. If anyone ever
smokes on Orthodox TV, they do so only in the corridor. Skirts are
worn on top of jeans as working clothes.

[Antipin] To be honest, I have two male staff journalists and the rest
are girls. If she has to go to a freezing settlement, what goddamn
skirt, if you pardon the expression, is she going to wear there? It’s
more convenient to wear trousers. Well, the boss is the boss, so they
put on aprons on top when they come back. What else would they do?

[Baybakov] If you go about it gently, the understanding that the
Orthodox approach is the right one will gradually come.

[Correspondent] Only six months ago, the management of the small
Urals-based Soyuz TV channel could not imagine it becoming known
nationwide. The debate that has unfolded over the idea of Orthodox
television has made provincial news programme makers the main story
from the Urals. Today, the neighbouring regions are speaking about
Soyuz’s experience. Talks about possible rebroadcast are already
under way.

RUSSIA MAKES EVERY EFFORT FOR NORMAL FUNCTIONING OF ARMENIAN ENTERPRISES CONVEYED TO IT

PanArmenian News
Feb 17 2005

17.02.2005 18:22

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Russia makes every effort for normal functioning of
the Armenian enterprises, conveyed to it within the framework of the
Property in Exchange for Debt agreement, Russian Foreign Minister
Sergey Lavrov stated at a meeting with Armenian Prime Minister
Andranik Margarian. Lavrov assured that “the Russian party is doing
its best for the necessary investments into the Armenian enterprises
conveyed to Russia,” including Mars factory and the scientific
research institutes and for securing their normal functioning. He
also emphasized the importance of timely provision of nuclear fuel for
securing uninterrupted functioning of the Armenian Nuclear Power Plant
and works for modernization of the atomic station. At the same time the
parties noted that there are some problems in the bilateral commercial
and economic relations, which are being discussed within the framework
of the Armenian-Russian Inter-Governmental Commission for Economic
Cooperation and the Armenian-Russian Business Association. Speaking of
the transport cooperation Andranik Margarian noted, “Armenia pays much
attention to the opening of rail and ferry road Caucasus (Russia) –
Poti (Georgia), which will allow to considerably increase the cargo
transportation volume between Armenia and Russia.” Margarian also
said he was satisfied with the completion of the process of Armenia
joining the North-South transport corridor agreement. At the same
time he state that Armenia is concerned over the issue of possible
launching of Kazvin-Resht-Astara new line, which will link Russia with
Iran through Azerbaijan when there is a real infrastructure in Armenia,
allowing to connect all countries of the region. On his part speaking
of regional transport problems Lavrov noted that “Russia in that field
takes into account Armenia’s interests to the most degree possible
and it will not take steps, which can harm it.” Margarian emphasized
that at present “Russia is the largest trade and economic partner of
Armenia.” During the meeting the parties also exchanged view on the
prospect of opening the Abkhazian lost of the Transcaucasian railway
and discussed other issues of mutual interest.