Monday Morning, Lebanon
Jan 17 2005

Turkey, russia: Celebrating booming trade

President Vladimir Putin shakes hands with Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan at Putin’s country residence outside Moscow. Bilateral
commercial ties `growing in accordance with the best possible
scenario’

President Vladimir Putin and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan
last week celebrated booming trade relations between the two former
Cold War foes during Kremlin talks focused on energy and military
affairs.
Putin — who invited Erdogan for a private dinner at his lavish
suburban Moscow estate evening — told the Turkish prime minister
that economic ties were growing in accordance with the best possible
scenario as old tension waned.
Erdogan, accompanied by a group of 600 businessmen, was paying a
return visit to Moscow after Putin in December became the first
Russian leader to appear in Turkey in 32 years.
`Our most optimistic forecasts about economic cooperation have come
true’, Putin told Erdogan as the two sat around a small table with
their interpreters in the Kremlin’s gilded oval reception hall.
`According to our forecasts, trade volume could reach 15 billion
dollars [annually] very soon’, Putin said.
Erdogan had forecast bilateral trade reaching up to 25 billion
dollars by 2007 on his arrival to Moscow.
Trade between the two countries reached 10 billion dollars last year
to make Russia Turkey’s second-largest trading partner after Germany.
NTV television reported that Putin was `surprised’ to hear the news.
The two Black Sea states have a raft of diplomatic disagreements that
the two sides try to hide at public meetings at which prized economic
trade — in both private and public sectors — takes center stage.
Both sides had previously accused the other of hiding enemy rebels —
Moscow charges that Chechen guerrillas hide in Turkey and Ankara
counters that its independence-driven Kurdish minority finds support
in Russia.
Diplomatic ties have also been complicated by Armenia: a former
Soviet republic which remains a close Moscow regional ally but which
demands that the world accept that Turkey committed `genocide’
against its people during World War I.
But Putin made it clear he thought these disputes paled in comparison
to the size of potential trade.
Turkey relies heavily on Russia’s natural gas supplies, which run
through the Blue Stream pipe under the Black Sea.
Ankara had already negotiated a discount in 2003 for the gas supplies
and Turkish media reports said it was hoping to do the same for the
coming year.
Putin said vaguely last week that an agreement on an increase in gas
supplies had been reached but made no mention of the price.
He also tried to appease his guest by saying he would press the
international community to speed up its effort to lift an
international blockade on the unrecognized Turkish-controlled
northern third of Cyprus.
The Russian leader said he recently spoke to UN Secretary-General
Kofi Annan about `plans for developing economic cooperation with the
northern part of Cyprus and the lifting of its economic blockade’.
It remained unclear however what military agreements may have been
struck by the two sides. Putin said only that `we have had previous
plans concerning military-technological cooperation’.
Erdogan replied that `we will have a chance to discuss the expansion
of military-technological cooperation’ before reporters were ushered
out of the Kremlin hall.
Erdogan later attended a meeting of Russian and Turkish businessmen
and inaugurated a Turkish Trade Center — a 9,000-square-meter
complex of shops and businesses — in downtown Moscow.

Baku Sun, Azerbaijan
Jan 18 2005

PACE notes violations

by Zulfugar Agayev

BAKU – Andreas Gross, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of
Europe’s (PACE) rapporteur on Azerbaijan, said at the meeting of the
high European body’s Monitoring Committee on Wednesday that the
Azerbaijani authorities have failed to check up on the election
violations fixed during the country’s last presidential vote, ANS
reported.

Bakhtiyar Aliyev, an MP and a member of the Azerbaijani delegation at
the PACE, told the local TV Company that the rapporteur mentioned
violations noted by observers in 600 polling stations.

Gross reportedly said that it was mandatory for the Azerbaijani
government to check up on the election irregularities so that no
citizens remain skeptical about the legitimacy of the new President
Ilham Aliyev.

The PACE Monitoring Committee also heard from the other
co-rapporteurs regarding Azerbaijan, such as from Martinez Casan,
Daniel Goulet and Malcolm Bruce.

MP Aliyev said that as the reports were prepared before 19 December
2003, they didn’t consider the recent laws adopted by the Azerbaijani
parliament, ratified conventions and the latest presidential decree
of pardon.

A total of 160 prisoners, including former interior minister Iskender
Hamidov, former head of Interpol’s Baku office Ilgar Safikhanov, and
also former members of the Special Police Force (OPON), were freed
from jail in President Aliyev’s amnesty decree signed on 30 December.

The decree also reduced the sentence terms of four other prisoners.

MP Aliyev noted that the Monitoring Group’s meeting didn’t criticise
the results of Azerbaijan’s 15 October presidential vote and that
Gross stressed Aliyev’s absolute victory in the election.

The rapporteurs also stressed the country’s failure to meet all the
commitments it took before joining the Council of Europe (CE) in
2001, Aliyev said.

However, Murtuz Aleskerov, speaker of the Azerbaijani parliament,
said the country has fulfilled `99 percent’ of all its obligations.
Aleskerov added the other commitments would be fulfilled soon.

Debates on Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia’s honouring of the CE
obligations are planned for the winter session of the Assembly on 26
January.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Baku Sun, Azerbaijan
Jan 18 2005

New talks for Karabakh

by Mammad Bagirov

Eldar Namazov, former Presidential aide
for Heydar Aliyev is skeptical
about movements to resolve
the Nagorno (Daghlig) Karabakh
conflict in 2004. His concern
lies with a lack of
basis.. (Sun Photo by Samir Aliyev)

A new stage in settling the conflict in the Nagorno (Daghlig)Karabakh
region of Azerbaijan may begin this year, Ilham Aliyev, the
Azerbaijani president said in his New Year’s address to the nation,
RFE/RL reported.

Aliyev noted that Azerbaijan is ready to resume talks on the issue.

At the same time, he added that there has been no any change in
Azerbaijan’s stance: the conflict must be settled without violating
the territorial integrity of the country.

Conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia around the mainly Armenian
populated Nagorno Karabakh region started in 1988. During the
conflict, Azerbaijan lost control over 20% of its territory,
including the Nagorno (Daghlig) Karabakh region. A ceasefire was
reached in 1994, but the situation has yet to be resolved on a
permanent basis.

Aliyev said he hopes international mediators such as OSCE’s Minsk
Group will play a more active role in solving the problem.

For his part, Vardan Oskanyan, Armenia’s minister of foreign affairs,
in an interview with Russia’s Interfax news agency said that last
year saw positive movements towards the process of the conflict’s
settlement. He elaborated by saying that last year was remarkable if
not only for the resumption of the dialogue, after a long break,
between the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan.

`It provided some clarity to our plans for the next year, and I think
in 2004, this dialogue will continue,’ Oskanyan said.

The presidents of the two conflicting nations met in Geneva last
December and agreed to continue with the negotiations. It was the
first meeting of Azerbaijan’s new leader Ilham Aliyev with his
Armenian counterpart Robert Kocharyan.

Earlier last month, co-chairmen of OSCE’s Minsk Group paid a visit to
the region and met with the two leaders. Although there had been
hopes that the international mediators would present new ideas for
the settlement of the conflict, no such ideas were offered.

Oskanyan, Armenia’s foreign minister said that during this last visit
of OSCE’s Minsk Group’ co-chairmen, they `didn’t present new
approaches’, although he admitted that there were such `expectations’
in Armenia. `Our expectations were based on the co-chairmen’s
statements made before their visit to the region,’ Oskanyan added.
`They probably considered that it’s not an ideal time for the
advancement of new ideas, especially in Azerbaijan,’ he said.In
regards to the expectations of Armenian leadership for the 2004 year,
Oskanyan said `we hope that all agreements that were reached during
the talks with former Azerbaijani president Heydar Aliyev won’t be
lost and will serve as a basis for the continuation of negotiations.’

Commenting on Ilham Aliyev’s New Year’s address, Azerbaijani
political scientist Rasim Musabekov told Baku Sun that this could
mean `some efforts’ may be taken to intensify the process of the
settlement this year.

`It’s obvious that after solving all the issues related to the
presidential elections that took place in both countries last year,
both sides will renew the talks on Nagorno (Daghlig) Karabakh
problem,’ said Musabekov, adding that the main question is how
productive this dialogue would be. The political scientist added that
he isn’t optimistic on the results of future talks.

`I don’t see any grounds to consider that both sides are ready for
compromise,’ he added.

Musabekov went on to say that limit of compromises on Azerbaijan’s
side had been practically exhausted and new compromises would lead to
the loss of Azerbaijan’s sovereignty over its territories.

Another local political expert, former president’s aide, Eldar
Namazov, is also skeptical about productivity of negotiations. `What
we (representatives of the Azerbaijani community) have seen to date
isn’t enough to predict that radical changes could take place by the
end of 2004,’ he said in an interview with Baku Sun.

The political expert agrees with Musabekov, stressing that Azerbaijan
has made all possible concessions to Armenia during negotiations.

“Azerbaijan proposed the highest level of of autonomy to Nagorno
(Daghlig) Karabakh region and further compromises would lead to
independence, which isn’t acceptable,’ said Namazov.

Namazov also pointed out that there had been no serious changes in
the stance of Armenia’s leadership, which continues to demand either
independence for Nagorno (Daghlig) Karabakh region from Azerbaijan or
its annexation to Armenia. Namazov added that there is nothing new in
the activities of OSCE’s Minsk group. `The co-chairmen continue to
say that both sides should reach an agreement on their own, and that
the mediators have no intentions to pressure either side,’ he said.

In regards to statements from Armenian foreign minister about his
nation’s `hopes’ to renew talks on the basis of previous agreements
reached with former Azerbaijan president Heydar Aliyev, Namazov said
that Armenian officials `repeatedly’ claimed that such Agreements had
been reached in Paris (France) and Key West (U.S.).

Meanwhile, Russian news agency Rosbalt reported that Arkadi Gukasyan,
head of the self-proclaimed Nagorno Karabakh Republic, said in his
New Year’s speech that the main tasks for leadership of this
unrecognized territory in 2004 will be to continue the struggle for
independence and international recognition.

`All of our foreign policy activity in the New Year will be aimed on
solving these crucial tasks,’ Gukasyan said.

The former Azerbaijani leader and his Armenian counterpart met in
France and the U.S. in 2001 to discuss prospects of conflict
settlement around Nagorno (Daghlig) Karabakh region. Azerbaijani
officials claimed that during these negotiations no outcomes were
reached while their Armenian counterparts claim that the presidents
agreed on the `principles’ of a settlement.

`There is such a rule in diplomacy – either all or nothing, which
means that when the talks are still ongoing and no mutual consent has
been reached on all issues, in reality, there is no agreement,’
elaborated Namazov. `Suppose that such an agreement exists and
consists of ten items. Even if both sides agreed on nine of these
items, but there is no consent on the tenth it is considered in
diplomacy, that there is still no agreement,’ he added.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Swissinfo / Neue Zürcher Zeitung AG
Dienstag, 18. Januar 2005

Swiss expert spearheads quake surveillance

The head of the Swiss Seismological Service says early-warning
systems are needed to prevent disasters like the Asian tsunami from
happening again.

As the World Conference on Disaster Reduction gets underway in
Japan, Domenico Giardini talks to swissinfo about the challenges
facing the international community following the catastrophe.

Millions of people were caught off-guard on December 26, when an
undersea quake off the coast of Sumatra sent killer waves crashing
into coastlines across southeast Asia.

Here in Switzerland, the national seismological service relies on a
network of monitoring stations to localise and measure the magnitude
of earthquakes deep beneath the country’s surface.

The organisation also forms part of a wider, worldwide network of
observation centres, including the European-Mediterranean
Seismological Centre and the Federation of Digital Broadband
Seismograph Networks (FDSN).

Giardini, who heads both the Swiss service and the FDSN, says local
and international alert systems play an integral role in saving
lives.

swissinfo: How does the international community of seismologists work
together to monitor the earth’s activity?
Domenico Giardini: Before the earthquake on December 26, we had two
meetings on our agenda – this week’s World Conference on Disaster
Reduction in Kobe, Japan, and the 3rd Earth Observation Summit, which
is due to take place next month in Brussels.

Originally, the meeting in Kobe aimed to come up with a ten-year
action plan to improve the gathering and distribution of information
about our planet. But after the quake off the coast of Sumatra, the
focus of the meeting’s agenda shifted to include a special session on
the tsunami. Countries will also be discussing the creation of
early-warning systems in the Indian Ocean, as well as the
Mediterranean and the Atlantic.

swissinfo: How would such a system work?
D.G.: We would have to create a network of seismic sensors and
install ways to measure underwater landslides, which can also cause
major tidal waves. We would also employ instruments that can measure
the energy of such waves. That said, a global-warning system is not
enough… local-alert systems also need to be established to keep
at-risk populations informed about seismic activity.

swissinfo: What is Switzerland’s role in the seismological field?
D.G.: In cooperation with the Swiss Agency for Development and
Cooperation (SDC), we work a lot with developing countries, such as
Armenia, Georgia, Chile and Colombia, to maintain
earthquake-surveillance systems. We’re also in the process of
establishing a national monitoring network in Tajikistan, as well as
a surveillance system at Egypt’s Aswan Dam.

We’re also studying the possibility of providing similar support to
other developing nations and we’re looking into ways of improving the
protection of the Swiss abroad. For example, an automatic-alert
network using the Short Messaging System (SMS) might be an option.

swissinfo: What gaps need to be filled here in Switzerland?
D.G.: The alarm systems and protection measures against natural
disasters are very advanced in this country. But we lack ways of
preventing tidal waves on our big lakes from causing serious damage…
and that danger exists. For example, the 1601 earthquake in Lucerne
caused waves that were two to three metres high.

Tidal waves can also be caused by landslides, and cities like Geneva
and Zurich, which lie at the end of large lakes, could experience
major damage should a landslide occur.

swissinfo-interview: Frédéric Burnand
From: Baghdasarian

Montreal Gazette, Canada
Jan 18 2005

CIBC broker never told couple about guarantee

Compliance officers hoodwinked; Migirdic lied to supervisors; ex-VP
says brokerage didn’t check what he told them

PAUL DELEAN
The Gazette

CREDIT: JOHN KENNEY, THE GAZETTE
Harry Migirdic tries to conceal himself from a photographer yesterday
at the Montreal courthouse. He told his Superior Court trial he did
not know how he was able to avoid detection so long with his
deceptive practices while he worked at CIBC World Markets.

Former CIBC World Markets broker and vice-president Harry Migirdic
never informed a retired Montreal couple their investments were
guaranteeing the trading accounts of two people they didn’t know, one
of them his uncle in Istanbul, Turkey.

But whenever CIBC’s compliance department questioned him about the
accounts, Migirdic insisted that Haroutioun Markarian, 71, and his
wife, Alice, 67, knew all about the guarantees and were comfortable
with them. He only fessed up to CIBC officials in 2001, just before
being terminated.

Migirdic was asked yesterday by the Markarians’ lawyer, Serge
Letourneau, how he managed to avoid detection despite repeated
inquiries from the compliance department over the years.

“I don’t know,” replied Migirdic, 49, a key witness in the Superior
Court trial in which the Markarians are seeking $10 million in
punitive damages from CIBC, plus the return of $1.4 million seized
from them by the brokerage when the guarantees were exercised in
2001.

Although the couple had never met Migirdic clients Rita Luthi and
Sebuh Gazarosyan, the beneficiaries of the guarantees, the broker
told his supervisors at CIBC that Luthi was a business partner of
Markarian and Gazarosyan was a shareholder in his company.

Migirdic said that, to his knowledge, the CIBC never attempted to
contact Gazarosyan directly, though the trading account had been in
the red for years and previously was guaranteed by other clients.

The former broker admitted yesterday to changing the risk tolerance
on the Markarians’ know-your-client forms without their knowledge or
consent, misleading them about why they were getting statements
bearing Gazarosyan’s name (he blamed it on a mix-up in the Toronto
office), and falsely telling CIBC the Markarians had specifically
asked not to receive monthly statements of trading activity in the
Luthi account.

Asked by Letourneau why Markarian routinely signed whatever he handed
him, without verifying the contents, Migirdic said “he trusted me …
I guess because I’ve done good for him in past years.”

In the course of yesterday’s proceedings, it emerged that Migirdic –
now unemployed – had run afoul of CIBC’s trading practices in the
mid-1990s, when he was found guilty of discretionary trading in an
account that ran up losses of $250,000. CIBC repaid the client but
each month kept a portion of Migirdic’s commissions as repayment, he
testified.

Asked by Letourneau if CIBC had ever asked him to pay back any of the
almost $1 million in accumulated losses in the Gazarosyan account,
and for which the Markarians were ultimately held responsible,
Migirdic said no.

In other testimony yesterday, Alice Markarian said the couple’s trust
in Migirdic was such that when he asked them to sign something, they
did it. “I trusted my husband, who trusted Harry Migirdic.”

Like them, Migirdic was an active member of Montreal’s Armenian
community, from which he drew about half his 400 clients.

Migirdic even came to the house and helped organize their financial
papers, she said. “I saw him tearing stuff up sometimes.”

She said the CIBC seizure had a profound effect on her husband, who
had only $300 to his name when he immigrated with her from Egypt in
1962 and built a prosperous machine-shop business here.

“He didn’t want to go to Armenian functions. He didn’t want to face
people who wanted to talk about (what happened). He felt humiliated
personally.”

Son Arek, 37, also testified his father took it hard. “He was a
respected man, a founding member of the Armenian community, one of
the builders. It was a tremendous blow to his ego, his self-esteem
…. Losing half what you worked your life for, in one afternoon, at
his age – it changed him. It aged him.”

The trial continues today.

Caucaz.com, Georgia
Jan 18 2005

US-Armenia Relations : The Challenges of Cooperation [GEOPOLITICS]

By Annie JAFALIAN in Paris
On 18/01/2005

In a press release dated December 23, 2004, the news agency
ArmenPress announced that the construction work for the new US
embassy in Armenia will be completed by the end of March 2005. Built
on a nine-hectare site, this embassy will be the largest US
diplomatic mission in the world. For many observers, this project,
which was concluded in August 2001 and budgeted at$80 million, would
be a demonstration of Washington’s growing interest in Armenia.

Although Armenia is geographically isolated, economically weak and
sparsely populated, American leaders are considering it as an
important country for the United States. Since 1992, Washington has
been pursuing two strategic objectives in its relations with Armenia.
The first one has been to promote the settlement of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict: the US administration is acting as a
mediator in the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group. The United States
is notably interested in strengthening security around the
neighboring oil pipeline stretching from Azerbaijan to Turkey. Its
second objective has consisted in tying Armenia to the Euro-Atlantic
structures, and in encouraging its rapprochement with Turkey. One of
the major stakes of the Turkish-Armenian rapprochement has been the
opening of the economic borders between the two countries. Indeed,
Washington wants to promote the development of a regional East-West
axis so as to diversify those countries’ relations with other states
than Russia and to limit Iran’s role in the region.

Given the US interest, Armenia has, under the leadership Foreign
Affairs’ Minister, Vartan Oskanian, adopted a foreign policy based on
the concept of « complementarity ». As a matter of fact, the country
has developed its links with the regional powers along a North-South
axis. As a member of the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization,
Armenia has perceived Russia as its major strategic partner, the
guarantor of its security. As for Iran, it is providing Armenia –
with its only connection with the rest of the world outside Georgia.
But Yerevan has also strengthened its relations with Washington.
Since 1992, the Armenian government has received $1.4 billion from
the US government. More recently, military cooperation between
Armenia and the United States has increased, notably for the fight
against terrorism. In other respects, Armenia has joined NATO’s
Partnership for Peace. However, contrary to its Georgian and
Azerbaijani neighbors, it has officially declared that it was not
willing to integrate the Atlantic alliance. Besides, Yerevan has
taken a different stance to Washington’s regarding the Iraq crisis.
Indeed, its position was closer to Moscow’s oneand partly motivated
by security concerns for the Armenian community in Iraq.

The Need for A New Balance

During the year 2004, it seems that Armenia, which has developed
asymmetric cooperation with the US, Russia and Iran, has been under
indirect pressure from Washington. In February 2004, the Bush
Administration submitted to the Congress a budget request for
-foreign assistance programs that would have broken the military
parity between Armenia and Azerbaijan.For the fiscal year 2005, it
requested to allocate $ 8.7 million military aid to Azerbaijan, and
$2.7 million to Armenia. The US Administration has emphasized that it
was determined to prioritize cooperation with Baku in order to fight
against terrorism, promote peacekeeping operations and secure oil
flows. In April 2004, it also named ambassador Steven Mann to be the
special negotiator for Nagorno-Karabakh and Eurasian conflicts. As
such, it showed its intention of reactivating the mediation process,
paralyzed by the inertia of both sides.

Consequently, Armenia has strived to set new strategic balances in
its foreign relations. At several occasions in the year 2004, it has
demonstrated its commitment to taking part, like Georgia and
Azerbaijan, in the operations supported by NATO. In February 2004, a
platoon of 34 Armenian soldiers was deployed in Kosovo and joined the
multinational brigade East led by American general Tod Carmony.
Moreover, in September, President Kocharian officially offered to
send 46 Armenian medical doctors, drivers and engineers to Iraq, in
the framework of the Polish-led Center-South multinational division.
According to the Armenian Defense Minister , Serge Sargsian, this
decision, which was highly debated throughout the nation, was aimed
at breaking Armenia’s regional isolation. Probably because of these
measures and the reactions of the Armenian diaspora living in
Washington, the American Congress eventually passed a budget that
restored military parity between Yerevan and Baku.In FY 2005, it will
allocate an equal $5 million foreign military aid to Armenia and
Azerbaijan.

Coordinating the different partnerships

Contrary to the strategic objectives prioritized by the United
States, Armenia has also strengthened its partnership with Iran,
especially in the field of energy. According to the US Department of
State, Armenia was to satisfy its energy demand by opting for the
development of domestic sources such as the hydroelectric power or
the wind power. In May 2004, Yerevan preferred to finalize its
agreement with Tehran for the supply of Iranian gas to Armenia for a
period of 20 years. Toward that end, the Armenian government
officially started in November 2004 to build a gas pipeline that will
connect the two countries. This event was celebrated as an historical
day for the republic as it gives Armenia the tangible prospect of a
strengthened energy security . Owing to this agreement, Yerevan will
become able to import gas from another country than Russia. Thhis
deal will also alleviate the effects of the Nagorno-Karabkh war, and
particularly the economic blockade by Turkey and Azerbaijan.

In parallel to those decisions, the Russian-Armenian partnership,
contested in the economic sphere, was not criticized in the military
field. A part of the Armenian political elite and media, notably from
the opposition, deplored that the investments made by Russian
companies inside the republic were not high enough to bring about
economic development. Besides, the relations between Russia and
Armenia got deteriorated after the Beslan attack. When Vladimir Putin
decided in September 2004 to close the border between North Ossetia
and Georgia, he shut down the only road connecting Russia and
Armenia. As a consequence, Armenia has been getting deprived of
supply essential to the workings of its economy. On the other hand,
the military cooperation between Yerevan and Moscow has not been
questioned. On the contrary, it was asserted by the joint military
exercises organized in Armenia in August 2004.

Without any agreement on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Armenia does
not have much room for developing its foreign policy. In order to
ensure its security, the country has to deal with the USA, as well as
with Russia and Iran. For the Armenian government, the diplomatic
challenge will consist in finding ways to preserve Armenia’s
interests in the framework of evolving relations between Washington
on the one hand and Moscow, Tehran and Ankara on the other hand. As
for the US government, it will probably give increasing importance to
the Armenian domestic and foreign policies in order to lift the last
obstacles that stand in the way of realizing its strategic objectives
in the Caucasus.

Annie JAFALIAN is a Research Fellow at the Foundation for strategic
research (FRS, Paris).

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Jan 18 2005

Powell states support for Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity

US Secretary of State Colin Powell, in a reciprocal letter to
Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov, stated US support for
Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity.
`The United States supports Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity and
believes the Upper Garabagh conflict must be fully resolved through
peace talks being held by the two sides, considering their
positions.’
Powell expressed his gratitude for the letter sent by Azerbaijan,
which lays out the country’s initiative to discuss the situation in
the occupied Azeri land at the UN General Assembly. Powell said
Washington remains committed to a peace conflict resolution and
welcomed the talks between Azeri and Armenian foreign ministers in
the Prague format and those held by the two countries’ Presidents in
Warsaw and Astana.
With regard to the draft resolution submitted by Baku to the UN
General Assembly, Powell said the OSCE Minsk Group, while keeping the
talks in the same format, will outline actual ways of eliminating the
concerns indicated by Azerbaijan.
Powell also said he was satisfied with the fact that the fact-finding
mission to visit occupied Azerbaijani territories will include
experts and is looking forward to getting the results.*

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Jan 18 2005

Armenia one of major spenders on military in CIS

Amidst the 7-9% increase of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in CIS
states in 2004, these countries’ military spending has increased 30%
on average.
Russian Marketing and Consulting news agency reports that the share
of 2005 designated military expenses of Armenia in the GDP grew 3.6%.

The same source said that the Upper Garabagh army is supported at
Armenia’s expense. This country’s military spending, including these
expenses, make up over 4% of the GDP, or $127 million. The figure
exceeds that of 2004 by 35%.
The news agency said that Azerbaijan has also earmarked more funds
for the military this year. Whereas the figure grew 12% and 20% in
2003 and 2004 respectively, the increase in 2005 made up 36%.
Azerbaijan allotted a total of $245 million from the state budget for
this year.
The same source said that Georgia increased its 2005 military
expenses 44% as compared to 2004. It said that the South Caucasus
countries are conducting new large-scale military exercises to
increase their defense capability. This implies that the Upper
Garabagh and Abkhazia conflicts may resume this year, the news agency
said.*

US-Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce (USACC), DC
Jan 18 2005

US Extends Waiver of Section 907

President of the United States George Bush signed a Presidential
Determination to extend the waiver of Section 907 of the Freedom
Support Act with respect to assistance to government of Azerbaijan on
January 13.

Section 907 prohibits U.S. assistance (with the exception of
humanitarian assistance and assistance for nonproliferation and
disarmament programs) to the government of Azerbaijan under the
Freedom for Russia and Emerging Eurasian Democracies and Open Markets
Support Act of 1992 (also known as the Freedom Support Act) `until
the President determines, and so reports to the Congress, that the
Government of Azerbaijan is taking demonstrable steps to cease all
blockades and other offensive uses of force against Armenia and
Nagorno-Karabakh.’ The legislation imposed sanctions on Azerbaijan,
despite Armenia’s continued occupation of Nagorno-Karabagh and seven
additional regions of Azerbaijan.

Daily Star, Lebanon
Jan 18 2005

Behind the lens in Sidon: 50 years and 50,000 images
A new book pays tribute to Hashem El Madani’s recording of social
history

By Kaelen Wilson-Goldie
Daily Star staff

BEIRUT: When Hashem El Madani was five years old, his cousins in
Palestine sent him a set of portraits to keep as souvenirs. Madani’s
father, a moderate sheikh who had settled in Lebanon from Saudi
Arabia, wanted to return the favor but these images gave him pause.
Were they haram (a sin)? Madani’s father decided no, they were not.
They were just like seeing one’s reflection in a pond. So he sent
Madani and his brother to a photography studio to have their pictures
taken. This was in the early 1930s in Sidon, and in all likelihood,
the novelty of sitting in a studio, watching a photographer work and
grabbing hold of a postcard-size print of oneself sparked Madani’s
lifelong fascination with portraiture. Seven decades later, Madani is
the oldest living studio photographer in Sidon. He has maintained a
business there for more than 50 years, building up an archive of some
50,000 images and posing close to 90 percent of the city’s
inhabitants in front of his camera. He recently turned his entire
collection over to the Beirut-based Arab Image Foundation (AIF), a
nonprofit organization that was established eight years ago to
locate, collect and preserve the region’s photographic heritage. This
past fall, the AIF (which is directed by Zeina Arida) assembled an
exhibition of Madani’s work for the Photographer’s Gallery in London.
Last month, the AIF (in collaboration with the Photographer’s Gallery
and the Beirut graphic design firm Mind the Gap) published a slim but
potent volume of Madani’s photographs. And given the sheer breadth of
Madani’s archive, more projects are in the works. “Hashem El Madani:
Studio Practices” is a tiny, black, cloth-bound book of just under
130 pages. It is densely packed with a surprising wealth of
information – both visual and textual – conveyed through essays,
interviews and over 150 reproductions of Madani’s pictures. All the
images have been reprinted under Madani’s supervision from 35
millimeter, 6-by-6 centimeter, 6-by-4.5 centimeter and 4-by-5 inch
negatives. Edited by Akram Zaatari and Lisa Le Feuvre, the book opens
with a forward that slips Madani’s work into the context of rising
(art world) interest in studio portraiture and its role in the
history and understanding of photography at large. The Paris-based
writer and theorist Stephen Wright offers a nuanced essay on the
meaning of Madani’s images – how pictures taken for commercial
purposes can be read for sociopolitical and philosophical content.
And Akram Zaatari assembles a lively, often acutely detailed and at
times hilariously revealing interview with the photographer, covering
the development of his business, the intricacies of his working
process and the silent societal observations that have registered in
his mind over the past half century. After falling in love with
photography at the age of five, Madani finished school and left
Lebanon for Palestine to find work. He hooked up with a Jewish
photographer in Haifa named Katz, who taught him the tools and tricks
of the trade. When Israel declared its statehood in 1948, Madani
traveled to Amman and then to Damascus before securing the necessary
paperwork to get back home. When he arrived in Sidon, he bought a
cheap box camera, picked up some chemicals from a photographer in
Beirut and set up shop in his parents’ living room. Madani developed
his business slowly. He bought equipment on credit, one piece at a
time, from a photo shop run by an Armenian in Bab Idriss (the old
downtown district of Beirut). As soon as he paid off one purchase,
he’d make another. He retired the box camera for a Kodak Retinet; he
shelled out for a 35 millimeter enlarger. He started selling 6-by-9
centimeter contact prints for just 25 cents. Business picked up, and
in 1953, Madani moved his studio into the first floor of the
Shehrazade building in Sidon. He bought himself a large desk, props
and a stool for his subjects to sit on, a podium for elevation when
necessary. He named his business Studio Shehrazade.

On average, 30 customers strode into Madani’s studio a day. During
the 1960s and ’70s, Studio Shehrazade was flooded with over 100
portrait-seekers a day. Part of what propelled Madani’s business was
a government decree requiring photographs on passports and ID cards.
The Lebanese Army insisted that all candidates for service submit
both frontal and profile portraits. But judging from the pictures in
this book, Madani’s customers had fun with having their pictures
taken too. They decked themselves out in cowboy costumes and aped the
gestures of film stars. They played with all manner of identity
markers. Two maids dolled themselves up as glamour girls. A
particularly effeminate man returned again and again to pose like a
screen siren. Civilians donned the guise of resistance fighters.
Pairs of women and pairs of men assumed opposing gender roles and
arranged themselves in intimate embraces and campy kisses.
Intriguingly, these couples were always of the same sex. Madani
remembers only one instance of a man and woman kissing for the
camera. They were not married. “Films inspired people a lot,” he
explains in the book. “They came to perform kissing in front of a
camera … People were willing to play the kiss between two people of
the same sex, but very rarely between a man and a woman.” In his
interview with Zaatari, Madani insists that his photography practice
has always been a profession. He never considered himself an artist.
He provided a service and accommodated the desires of his customers.
In addition to producing black and white prints, he taught himself
retouching and hand-coloring to make his subjects more beautiful. The
only quasi personal project he ever embarked on was an attempt to
take pictures of every resident in Sidon, simply because it was his
home. He remarks with admirable grumpiness that some of his customers
never bothered to pick up their prints. Still, Madani felt it
necessary to run his business up on the first rather than the ground
floor of his building. In Haifa, photographers could operate on
street level because the city was cosmopolitan and religiously
diverse. In Sidon, however, discretion was key as photography,
particularly for women, was still considered shameful. In the book,
Madani relates a tragic incident in which a local woman used to come
in for portraits, unbeknownst to her husband. When he found out about
the photo sessions, the husband crashed into Studio Shehrazade and
insisted that Madani destroy the negatives. Not wanting to wreck a
full roll of film, Madani scratched out her face as the husband
watched. Years later, the woman burned herself to death. The husband
returned to the studio, desperate to see if Madani had any
photographs of his dead wife to develop. Two images of her, the
surfaces deeply gouged, are reprinted in the book. Madani remembers
the time when Mir Shakib Arslan, then the defense minister, came in
and uttered brusquely, “Make me a good portrait.” He also recalls how
a supporter of Adel Osseiran, who would later be prime minister, paid
a visit to the studio during the election season of 1952, when
Osseiran was running as a deputy to the South. The supporter asked
Madani to take pictures of all the area’s voters who didn’t have
valid picture ID cards. Another time, representatives from the United
Nations Relief and Works Agency came in and asked Madani to take ID
pictures for all the students in their schools, both for their
records and for the students’ refugee cards. During the civil war of
1958, people began showing up at the studio to have their pictures
taken with guns. The same convention took root with the rise of the
Palestinian resistance in the late 1960s, and again, after the civil
war broke out in 1975 and a crew of Iraqi Baathists took over the
Shehrazade building. When Gamal Abdel Nasser died, members of the
militias loyal to him let their beards grow for 40 days and then came
in for a portrait at the end of the mourning period. “It was all show
off,” Madani recalls in one of the interview’s most brilliant little
interludes. “They came and acted sad faces. It was fashionable to be
sad when Nasser died.” In addition to the anecdotes and observations
on human behavior, “Hashem El Madani: Studio Practices” is
interesting as an attempt to frame what was essentially a
commercially driven trade in a broader and more inquisitive context.
The book’s texts are clear-sighted in detailing what these pictures
were and what the motivation for taking them was. They do not leap
across the line and consider these images as artworks proper (as has
been the case with photographers such as Malick Sadibe and Seydou
Keita, who maintained commercial studios in Bamako, Mali and were
then feted by the art scenes in New York and London). Stephen Wright
is particularly adept at navigating these nuances. “Inserting these
images into a narrative, thus giving them a use-value, is an act of
reconstruction,” he writes. “Though it was not their initial intent,
Hashem El Madani’s photographs offer one of the most extensive and
fascinating laboratories of how, for instance, Christians perform
Christianity, or patriots perform patriotism, and perhaps most
strikingly, how men perform masculinity and women perform femininity
… Understanding an image is not only to focus on its declared
meanings – that is, the explicit intentions underwritten and
authorized by its user – but above all to decipher the surplus
meaning which it betrays in its role in the symbolic complex of a
social class, a particular confession, or simply, to some extent, of
an individual.”