IRNA, Iran
January 18, 2005 Tuesday 2:37 PM EST

Armenia for expansion of scientific, educational cooperation

TEHRAN

Armenian Minister of Higher Education Sergo Yeritsian here on Tuesday
called for expansion of scientific and educational cooperation with
Gilan University.

In a meeting with the Chancellor of Gilan University Davood Ahmadi
Dastjerdi, he said Gilan province enjoys ample potentials for
expansion of mutual cooperation.

Given the educated people in the province, he said such a mutually
based cooperation should have been created earlier.

The Islamic Republic of Iran and Armenia have always enjoyed friendly
ties and should make use of each other capabilities more than before,
he said.

Referring to his meeting with Iranian minister of science, research
and technology as well as minister of education, he said it was
agreed that the two countries further broaden scientific, educational
and academic cooperation.

Chancellor of Gilan University, for his part, said, “We are glad to
welcome visitors from a country dubbed as land of science, , arts and
music.”

Underlining the need for expansion of academic cooperation between
the two countries, he said at present foreign students from
Tajikistan, Yemen, Syria and China are studying in Gilan University.

. There are various faculties throughout the province, he pointed
out.

The Armenian minister of higher education along with a nine member
delegation arrived in Gilan province on Tuesday.

PanArmenian News
Jan 18 2005

I DO NOT WISH TO FIGHT AND OTHERS WILL NOT GO EITHER, FORMER
COMMANDER OF AZERI BRIGADE SAYS

18.01.2005 18:04

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ I will not fight for Azerbaijan anymore,
41-year-old retired Colonel Azer Rustamov said in his interview with
Azeri weekly Obozrevatel.net (1/7/05 and 1/14/05). “I do not wish to
fight and others will not go either. They’ll prefer to trade in
bazaars”, he continues. Azer Rustamov is a veteran of Afghanistan and
Karabakh wars, who was decorated with Red Star soviet order as well
as by both Elchibey and Aliyev governments. He recollects the battles
in Karabakh in summer 1992. “About a hundred of Chechen volunteers
headed by Shamil Basayev and Salman Raduyev helped us a lot. But
suffering great losses they had to leave. Eventually Rustamov rose to
the rank of full Colonel and commander of a brigade in Fizuli
district (1999-2001). He resigned from the military in 2003. “If war
breaks out now I am not sure whether I’ll fight. I witnessed the
attitude showed towards the memory of the killed and those, who
remained invalid after the war. The army, of course, will fight for a
certain period. But what will happen when their depleted ranks would
need to be replenished? Who will go if over two million people now
work in Russia?” A. Rustamov also sibjects to criticism the foreign
policy pursued by the leadership, which presumes unreasoned
statements addressed to Russia. It is interesting that the Red Star
order he received in the Russian Embassy in Azerbaijan late last
year. At present he is focused on formation of “Combat Brotherhood,”
an NGO that would focus on veterans of Afghanistan and other wars.

Ukraine: a new cold war

ORANGE REVOLUTION, ORIGINS AND OUTCOME

Le Monde diplomatique
January 2005

The victory of Viktor Yushchenko in the third round of presidential
elections in Ukraine does not necessarily mean that the country will
completely join the Euro-Atlantic camp, bringing a dowry of oil and gas
pipelines and overland access to Central Asian markets.

By Jean-Marie Chauvier

Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was once President Jimmy Carter’s national
security adviser, spent much of his career predicting and preparing
for the current rollback of Russian power, in which Ukraine is playing
a decisive role. In his latest book (1) Brzezinski argues that as the
Euro-Atlantic sphere of influence spreads east, it is vital to include
the new independent states, especially Ukraine, that were previously
part of the Soviet Union.

His forecasts are fast coming true, and the impending political
upheaval maybe the largest since the break-up of the USSR and of
Yugoslavia. It would bring into the Euro-Atlantic camp a country
larger than France, with a population of 48 million, a powerful
network of oil pipelines and another pipeline that carries 90% of the
Siberian gas supplied to Europe. The orange revolution in Ukraine’s
capital, Kiev, and in the west of the country, both of which rejected
massive fraud during the two rounds of the presidential election on 31
October and 21 November, and voted again on December 26, suggests that
the process is already happening.

Viktor Yushchenko, at the head of a nationalist free-market coalition,
has won the third round of the election, backed by a massive popular
uprising, the United States, the European Union and international
media. By mid-December the orange wave had even spread into eastern
and southern areas, traditionally the power base of Victor Yanukovich,
the former prime minister and the candidate backed by the regime in
power. Electors in the chiefly industrial, Russian-speaking and
eastward-looking part of Ukraine failed to mobilise in favour of their
candidate, discouraged by the climate of distrust surrounding a
notoriously corrupt regime. The Communist party, led by Piotr
Simonenko, still exerts a certain influence, but refused to side with
either faction. Many working people are convinced that both sides are
led by oligarchs who lined their pockets privatising state industry.

The solidarity of southern and eastern Ukraine reflects the interests
of working people, who are worried that radical free-market reform
will close mines and factories, rather than their actual support for
the regime. They also fear the nationalism of western Ukraine. Those
who intended to stay on the right side of the people in power prepared
for a Yushchenko victory.

But there are solid obstacles in the way of the Euro-Atlantic dynamic.
Russia still has plenty of leverage, through its gas exports and the
oil debts that Ukraine has run up. The eastern regions account for a
large share of Ukraine’s overall income. There is also the question of
Crimea, an autonomous region, and the Russian naval base at
Sebastopol. Yushchenko has realised that complete victory for him is
impossible.

To avert disaster

As a US study notes: “The Russian defeat in Ukraine is nearly
complete” (2). But the EU, subcontracted as a troubleshooter, does not
want political upheaval to jeopardise its supply of natural gas. It
has to find a compromise or run the risk of a disaster. The colourful
international television presentation of the election standoff, with
its pro-western good guy and pro-Russian baddie, so completely
disregarded the worst-case scenario – that Ukraine would split in two
– that the president of the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, Jacques Attali, felt obliged to warn Europe of another
disaster on its doorstep, resembling that in Yugoslavia (3).

For some, the orange revolution came at just the right time. The
Ukrainian state is disintegrating, the economy is in tatters and
emigration rampant. The cultural and social divide is steadily
widening and people are disgusted at the criminal behaviour so common,
as it is in Russia, over the distribution of property and power. The
current events are an ideal opportunity to destabilise Ukraine and
open the way for the US and Nato to the heart of Eurasia. There is no
time to be lost. The economy in Russia and Ukraine is beginning to
pick up and Moscow is again promoting a Eurasian common market.

The Bush administration in the US is thought to have spent $65m
supporting Yushchenko (4), but preparations for the orange revolution
started long ago; it was launched in Kiev on 17 February 2002. Under
the aegis of financier George Soros’s celebrated foundation (5), the
former US secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, called on
representatives of 280 Ukrainian NGOs to contest the regime and
supervise the parliamentary elections in March 2003. A similar
technique proved most effective in Georgia’s rose revolution. At the
Davos Forum on 30 January last year, Albright, speaking as the chair
of the National Democratic Institute, singled out Ukraine, Colombia,
Nigeria and Indonesia as four key democracies ripe for immediate
change.

Saving democracy

Back in Kiev on 21 February, she spoke of the prospect of Ukraine soon
joining the EU and Nato, and recalled a letter from President George
Bush in August 2003, pressing President Leonid Kuchma not to run for
the presidency or any other public office (6). In March she wrote in
the New York Times: “Already on the agenda is the Bush
administration’s plan for promoting democracy in the Middle
East. Saving democracy in Ukraine belongs on that agenda, too”
(7). She added: “If, however, the elections are fraudulent, Ukraine’s
leaders should know that . . . their own bank accounts and visa
privileges will be jeopardised.” Western media kept quiet about the
supervisory role of a huge network of US institutes and foundations,
only too happy to be “spreading democracy”.

Although the campaigners had picked their targets well – corrupt
regimes and their electoral abuses – their indignation was initially
selective. They did not trouble presidents Yeltsin, Putin,
Shevardnadze or Kuchma as long as they could be useful, as is still
the case with the authoritarian regime in Azerbaijan (which turns the
taps on the Caspian oil wells and pipelines of strategic interest to
the West) and in Turkmenistan, with its gas fields.

In September 2004 Albright and the former Czech president, Vaclav
Havel, called for a tougher line on Moscow, backed by personalities
across the political spectrum (8). But, strangely, they said nothing
about the war in Chechnya, although it was much in the news after the
Beslan hostage tragedy earlier that month. Instead they opted to raise
a new issue, highlighting the threatening attitude of Putin’s foreign
policy towards “Russia’s neighbours and Europe’s energy security”.

Reading between the lines, the true issues are clear. The crisis in
Ukraine coincides with other events that are weakening Russia and
impacting directly or indirectly on oil and gas pipelines. Western
firms are building energy corridors, notably the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan
pipeline (9), to deprive Russian networks of control over energy
exports. At the same time the West is increasing its military
influence in Azerbaijan and Georgia and stirring up trouble in the
Caucasus. Further north, in Chechnya, the Russian army is embroiled in
a worsening, barbaric conflict with radical terrorists. The Beslan
tragedy, in predominantly Christian Ossetia, adds a religious
dimension to existing problems. Neighbouring multi-ethnic Dagestan
may slide into chaos. To the south separatist conflicts are brewing in
Georgia (Abkhazia, South Ossetia) and in Azerbaijan, locked in dispute
with Armenia over the Nagorno-Karabakh enclave.

The stage is set for a new cold war’

Putin’s geopolitical defeats, coupled with Russia’s demographic and
social problems, have prompted some CIA analysts to predict that
Russia will disintegrate within 10 years (10). Brzezinski imagined a
similar outcome in a 1997 book (11), positing a tri-partite Russian
confederation – a European Russia, a republic in Siberia and another
in East Asia. Recently he suggested that this process might start with
the Caucasus, claiming that Nato might have to intervene to rescue the
northern republics of the Caucasus from Russian domination (12). In
the strategy imagined by the joint founder of the Trilateral
Commission (13), Europe would act as a bridgehead, the long-term aims
being to prevent Russia from becoming a world power again, to colonise
Siberia and gain control of its energy resources. The stage is set for
a new cold war, of which the Kosovo conflict was just a foretaste.

When the communist bloc collapsed in 1989-91, its former members
rejoined the capitalist system. But the whole world had changed:
markets were becoming global, with transnational companies in a
pivotal position, under the overall hegemony of the US and a dominant
neoliberal ideology. The role ordained for former eastern bloc
countries was all too clear: supplying low-cost labour, brainpower,
know-how and the remains of their aerospace industry. They would open
their markets to competitive foreign products, and, above all, extract
and transport energy to the US, Europe, Japan and China (14).

The countries that once made up the USSR were far from equal. Under
the leadership of Boris Yeltsin, Russia could draw on generous
reserves of exportable oil and gas, while commanding a degree of
respect as a nuclear power. It also displayed the greatest
determination to carry out free-market shock treatment and qualified
as a priority for western investors. Ukraine, under Leonid Kravchuk,
had none of these assets – having agreed to give up its nuclear
weapons – and was consequently neglected. In 1991 President George
Bush senior went so far as to caution it against “suicidal
nationalism”.

Only later did the West wake up to the potential benefits of a truly
independent Ukraine opposed to Russia. In strategic terms it offered
several major advantages. It could act as a corridor for energy
exports and, in the opposite direction, a highway to the markets of
southern Russia as far as the Black Sea, the Caucasus and the Caspian
basin.

The dislocation of the USSR benefited Russia, but it stripped Ukraine
bare. It could no longer purchase energy at Soviet prices, but had to
pay the going international rate for oil and gas. To pay off its
mounting debts, Ukraine soon had to give Russian investors a share in
its industry. But the two countries realised they needed to work
together to rebuild the industrial processes destroyed in
1990-91. After a decade of decay, during which Ukraine’s gross
domestic product dropped more than 50% and absolute poverty gripped
much of the population, growth and investment finally returned to
Ukraine, as they had to Russia.

So Moscow has both assets and allies in the present game, and its
Ukrainian friends are not mere vassals. In 2004 the government in Kiev
opted for joint Russian and Ukrainian management of the gas pipeline,
rather than allowing the Russians to appropriate it. During the latest
round of privatisations, Yanukovich turned down Russian and US offers,
giving priority to a group from Eastern Ukraine. Clans left over from
the Soviet period govern industrial relations. One controls the
Donbass (Donets Basin), another the Dnepropetrovsk (right bank of the
Dnieper), and the third Kiev. Nepotism and organised crime are just as
common as in the west but take different forms. Yushchenko, a former
banker, takes good care of western investors. His aide, Yuliya
Timoshenko, is suspected of personally benefiting from dealings in
Siberian gas. The new nuclear power stations in western Ukraine use
Russian technology. All the while a common economic space,
encompassing Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, has been taking
shape as an alternative to the EU. Russia has been more active since
1999, launching initiatives in industry, oil, arms and trade in an
effort to restore its power and counter US penetration of its former
domain.

Russia is regaining its strength

Putin’s Eurasian projects, the start of nuclear weapons programmes,
the taming of oil oligarchs, and the reappraisal of the “illegal”
privatisations of the 1990s are all signs that Russia is regaining
strength and is still a force to be reckoned with. The crisis in
Ukraine seemed a good opportunity to show Putin that he was going too
far. But he is not easily impressed. On a recent visit to New Delhi he
broke with the cautious attitude that he has adopted since Russia
became a strategic ally of the US after 9/11, to accuse it, in veiled
terms, of “dictatorship” in the international arena (15).

Anti-western ideologists such as Alexander Dugin, recommend the
Eurasian route for Russia. The cold war that some see as imminent
would not confront two opposing systems, as before. Rather it would
attempt to use Ukraine, which has so far made little progress along
the road to free market reform, to undermine Russia, before it settles
its differences with its neighbours and realises its full economic
potential.

As the orange revolution unfolded in Kiev, a Russian arts weekly
appeared with a photomontage on its front page showing a row of tiny
members of the European parliament attacking gigantic Red Army
soldiers, who were wearing uniforms of the Great Patriotic War
(1941-45). Page two featured a picture of demonstrators in eastern
Ukraine carrying a banner marked “No to Banderovchtchina” (16). The
underlying message was that the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany,
which Russia is preparing to celebrate on 9 May 2005, was being
denigrated in Europe, especially at the European parliament (17), and
in western Ukraine. Here was further evidence that the cause once
defended by Stepan Bandera (18) was still alive.

Russian and Ukrainian history books differ on several points. Soviet
historians maintain that Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalist (OUN)
combatants collaborated with Nazi forces and were a party to genocide.
In Ukraine they have been partly rehabilitated. Stepan Bandera and the
Ukrainian Insurgent Army count as patriots who fought both Hitler and
Stalin (19). In Galicia and Ivano-Frankivsk, revisionism has gone so
far that some people now pay tribute to the Galicia Waffen SS
division. Extremists have daubed swastikas and anti-semitic slogans
on the Russian cultural centre in Lviv, and denouncing moskali-Kike
(Jewish Moscow supporters) is back in fashion. Despite being backed by
several far-right parties, Yushchenko has distanced himself from the
most radical groups.

Under the Kuchma regime, Ukraine celebrated the victories of the Red
Army and reinstated its adversaries in the national liberation
movement, its opposition to the Stalinist regime fuelled by resentment
born of the famine-genocide of 1932-33. According to the Ukrainian
historian Taras Kuzio, the diaspora in the US and Canada has played an
essential role in the battle to restore national identity. Many of the
exiles come from Galicia and are much influenced by branches of the
OUN, which is heavily committed to the democratic cause (disregarding
extreme minority factions). After 1991 the work of the diaspora in
Ukraine focused mainly on education, the arts and media. It has proved
remarkably effective, particularly when compared with the ideological
vacuum of the former nomenklatura (20).

Attraction of the West

The rebirth of a Ukrainian ideal competes with the huge attraction
that the West has for Ukraine’s youth, which has turned its back on
both the USSR and Russia. Alexander Tsipko, a conservative Russian
nationalist writer (21), complains that people in eastern and southern
Ukraine have lost their sense of Russian history, but agrees that in
the centre and west a new political identity is emerging. Unlike
eastern Ukraine, a generation has grown up that knows nothing of the
Soviet community and does not interact with contemporary Russia. These
are the people who demonstrated in Kiev.

To win them back, Russia and eastern Ukraine would have to move closer
to the free market model. Neoliberals in Russia hope the orange
revolution will prove contagious. The Union of the Right party
suffered defeat at home in the general elections of December 2003, but
its leader Boris Nemstov visited Kiev soon after the elections to hail
the victory of its allies in Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine party. He
accused Russia of being a leading rogue state.

The battle is now on for the general elections in 2006. On 8 December
the Rada (upper assembly) finally passed the constitutional reform
advocated by Kuchma, but refused by orange activists and their US
sponsors. Yushchenko agreed to the law in exchange for guarantees on
the 26 December vote and his rival Yanukovich’s resignation as prime
minister. Decisive political realignment now seems inevitable, as the
reform is designed to replace the existing presidential regime with
parliamentary democracy. At the same time the debate on a federal
division of Ukraine has new impetus. Does this mean that the Ukraine
is breaking up, or will it continue on a new footing, plural but
undivided?

The crisis in Ukraine raises other questions. How would Europe and
Ukraine benefit from closer relations? Should either oppose Russia,
rather than working with it? What do they stand to gain from a cold
war concocted in Washington, with help from Prague, Riga and Warsaw?
Is the EU in a position to honour Albright’s promises of speedy
integration?

The Kremlin can expect further attempts at destabilisation. How much
longer will it allow the West to encroach on its preserves, as it begs
for a seat at the high table? And for the investments it needs to
sustain oil revenue? Ukraine runs the risk of division but this crisis
may also lead to serious upheaval in Moscow.

NOTES

(1) Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Choice: Global Domination or Global
Leadership, Basic Books, New York, 2004.

(2) Peter Zeihan, “Russia: After Ukraine”, Stratfor, 10 December 2004.

(3) Le Figaro, Paris, 7 December 2004.

(4) Mat Kelley, Associated Press, 11 December 2004.

(5) The International Renaissance Foundation reports $50m spending
between 1990-9.

(6) Zerkalo Nedeli, Kiev, 28 February- 2 March 2004.

(7) New York Times, 8 March 2004.

(8) An open letter to heads of state and government of the EU and Nato
signed by 100 leading figures, 30 September 2004.

(9) BTC: Baku (Azerbaijan), Tbilisi (Georgia) Ceyhan (Turkey) pipeline.

(10) The Independent, London, 30 April 2004.

(11) Brzezinski, Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic
Imperatives, Basic Books, New York, 1997.

(12) Brzezinski, The Choice, op cit.

(13) The Trilateral Commission was established in 1973. Its founder and
primary financial angel was financier David Rockefeller, inspired by a
proposal by Brzezinski to form an alliance between North America,
western Europe and Japan.

(14) “Quelle place pour la Russie dans le monde?”, in “Les guerres
antiterroristes”, Contradictions, Brussels, 2004.

(15) Itar-Tass news agency, 4 December 2004.

(16) Literaturnaïa Gazeta, 1-7 December 2004.

(17) Regnum news agency claimed some 90 MEPs signed a letter calling for
a boycott of the ceremonies in Moscow in response to an appeal by
Estonian MEP Tunne Kelam.

(18) Leader of the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists who inspired
the Ukrainian Insurgent Army from 1942.

(19) See Bruno Drweski: “L’Ukraine, une nation en chantier” in La
Nouvelle Alternative, n° 36, December 1994.

(20) See Taras Kuzio, Courrier des Pays de l’Est, n° 1002, Paris,
February 2000.

(21) A former communist party ideologist, Tsipko became a leading critic
at the end of the 1980s.

Translated by Harry Forster

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Jan 17 2005

Japan supports fair settlement of Garabagh conflict

Japan supports a fair settlement of the Upper Garabagh conflict,
Japanese Senior Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Ichiro Aisawa said
in a Friday meeting with Parliament Speaker Murtuz Alasgarov.
Alasgarov informed the Japanese official of the Garabagh conflict,
pointing out the fruitless activity of the OSCE Minsk Group. He also
said the Azeri government attaches great importance to collaborating
with Japan.
Aisawa, in turn, said bilateral relations will further strengthen
with the upcoming opening of Azerbaijan’s embassy in Tokyo.*

Agency WPS
What the Papers Say. Part A (Russia)
January 17, 2005, Monday

DIPLOMACY WITH THE BRAKES OFF

SOURCE: Newsweek Russia, No. 1, January 2005, pp. 28-32

by Alexander Baunov

All the diplomats we approached for comments agree that Russia’s
foreign policy has become less diplomatic over the past year; and
this change was not prompted by the Foreign Ministry or the new
minister, Sergei Lavrov, though he has a reputation for being bold
and decisive. Its origins should be sought higher: there are plenty
of bold people in the Kremlin too.

Diplomats name three reasons behind the Kremlin’s change of attitude.
Firstly, the state’s economic position has grown stronger.

Andrei Kozyrev, former foreign minister: “These days, foreign policy
is backed by an unprecedented sense of a strong financial position.
In my day, we were working in an entirely different situation. Of
course, the IMF didn’t dictate terms directly, but the borrowing
situation did have an impact.”

Russia’s Stabilization Fund, which already contains almost $20
billion, is viewed in the European Union as a foreign policy tool. A
European Commission official in Moscow shared these concerns: “All
Russia has to do is drop a hint about how it wishes to invest part of
this money – and it can cause a shift in global markets.”

The second reason is that although the West is “drawing closer” all
the time, physical proximity still isn’t translating into real
warmth. One career diplomat told us: “Having made substantial
concessions to the West on several occasions, we formed the
impression that we are entitled to some compensation: we refrained
from raising obstacles for them, and now we can do something for our
own benefit.” The number of concessions made to the Americans was
particularly high, from the “temporary” US military bases in Central
Asia to the UN resolution permitting a temporary occupation of Iraq.

Russia also made some concessions to Europe, agreeing to accept EU
expansion without extra compensation and ratify the Kyoto Protocol,
which was ineffective without Russia’s participation. In exchange we
got Europe’s permission to join the World Trade Organization, an
increase in metals export quotas, and some other pleasant trifles.
But since then, according to diplomats, relations with the European
Union have been deteriorating to the point of collapse: neither side
expected such a clash over Ukraine.

Yet everything was heading in that direction. One diplomat told us:
“In private meetings, this is how they talk to us: you’re a civilized
country, and we are civilized countries, but we’re surrounded by some
kind of savage tribes – the Trans-Dniester region, Nagorno-Karabakh,
Abkhazia, and so on – so let’s get together like cultured people and
regulate all of that. But it’s perfectly obvious to us that all they
want to do is gain access to our territory, while not allowing us any
access to their conflict zones.”

Many decision-makers in Russia grew bold enough to assume that the
West would now permit Russia to do something for its own benefit. So
when the West didn’t permit this after all, the Kremlin’s annoyance
knew no bounds. The European Union bore the brunt of it. The
embarrassed Greeks, for example, had to listen nervously to President
Putin’s words: “We have normal visa procedures with Turkey, and I’ve
used them myself: I got my passport stamped at the airport, and was
able to enter the country. But it’s extremely difficult to enter
Greece.” The Greeks didn’t like these words; until now, Russia had
spoken to them more diplomatically, avoiding any direct comparisons
with Turkey, their age-old enemy.

At his December press conference, Putin was entirely unrestrained.
Never before had he answered foreign policy questions in such
forthright, undiplomatic language. According to him, the leadership
of Georgia is in the pay of George Soros; and he accused the United
States of seeking to gain power “over equals.”

The third reason concerns Russia’s successful foreign policy
exercises in Asia. The Foreign Ministry views the “all-inclusive
regulation of relations with China” as its major diplomatic
achievement for 2004. Relations with China had appeared to be
irreparably damaged by the drawn-out negotiations over building a
huge oil pipeline from the promising oil-fields of Eastern Siberia.
Last spring, when rumors spread that the Siberian pipeline would run
to the port of Nakhodka, at Japan’s request, rather than to China,
the usually-dull pages of Chinese newspapers were suddenly swept with
more grievances against Russia than at any time since Khrushchev
recalled our specialists from China in the late 1950s.

Yet there was a fairy-tale ending to all this: China received some
islands on the Amur River, and the right to send 500,000
guest-workers into Russia, and a border treaty which had been
disputed for a century, and two dozen other long-term agreements. And
the West is now being given some undiplomatic hints to the effect
that Russia has a special relationship with China. That means a lot,
these days. Russia’s relations with India are also good; the new
Indian government is prepared to cooperate with us, just as the old
government was.

The Kremlin is also seeking access to some new “Asian markets.” It
has attempted to repeat the successful “China scenario” in relations
with Japan, by once again offering Japan half of the disputed South
Kurile Islands. The Japanese refused. When asked if this is an
embarrassment, a Foreign Ministry official replied: “Everything will
remain as it is: trade continues, we have the islands, and we have
the pipeline to be built to Nakhodka. It’s the Japanese who need to
think things over.”

For the Kremlin, 2004 ended on a positive note. German Chancellor
Gerhard Schroeder “forgave” Putin following Russia’s quarrel with the
European Union over Ukraine. None of the US State Department’s
comments about Ukraine and the YUKOS affair disrupted the friendship
between Schroeder and Putin.

Finally, the heroes of another of the Kremlin’s “special operations”
returned to Russia from a prison in Qatar: the two agents who killed
Zelimkhan Yandarbiev. Now, according to diplomats, Russia can demand
compensation from the West again; or at least ask the West to stop
interfering with Russia’s actions within the CIS.

Translated by Pavel Pushkin

POSSIBILITY OF IRAN’S GETTING HOLD OF NUCLEAR WEAPON WORRIES
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY, POLITICAL SCIENTIST SAYS

YEREVAN, January 17 (Noyan Tapan). If the statement of Iran’s Defence
Minister Ali Shahmani about the possibility of the mass production of
meduim-range ballistic missiles in Iran is not just blackmail attempts
and have a serious ground, this will undoubtedly lead to a more strict
US policy with respect to Iran. Stepan Grigorian, a political
scientist and a board member of the NGO “Armat” (“Root”), stated this
while commenting, during his interview to NT, on Iran’s Defence
Minister’s statement that the country can produce “Shahab” missiles
that, according to some experts, can reach as far as Israel or
Ameriacan military bases stationed in the Persian Gulf.

According to him, in this connection it is very important that George
Bush has been re-elected US President, that is, the new conception of
Greater Middle East will be realized. In particular it lies in that an
attempt will be made to establish democratic regimes in Iran and Syria
and thus an increasing US pressure on Iran and Syria is not ruled out.

According to S. Grigorian’s estimates, the possibilty of Iran’s
getting hold of nuclear weapon worries not only the US but also the
European Union and Russia. Despite a more tolerant attitude to nuclear
programs implementation in Iran, Russia, however, is not interested in
Iran’s possessing nuclear weapon.

“The international community understands very well what an ideologized
regime is – it is very dangerous. We should not forget Iran is an
ideologized state and as soon as it gets a nuclear weapon, it will use
it,” the political scientist stressed.

ARKA News Agency, Armenia
Jan 17 2005

Both criminals escaped from Goris prison captured

Russia registers some progress in rapprochement of views of Yerevan
and Baku on Karabakh settlement

Forum in the framework of Zang legal socialization program to be held
in Armenia on January 24

Fight for power to continue in Armenia in 2005, believes the leader
of the Republican fraction

Armenian peacemakers to leave for Iraq tomorrow

*********************************************************************

BOTH CRIMINALS ESCAPED FROM GORIS PRISON CAPTURED

YEREVAN, January 17. /ARKA/. Both criminals escaped from Goris prison
– Mher Yenokian (1975) and Sohomon Kocharian (1966) have been
captured, RA Police press service told ARKA. Both prisoners are kept
in Nubarashen prison. L.D. –0–

*********************************************************************

RUSSIA REGISTERS SOME PROGRESS IN RAPPROCHEMENT OF VIEWS OF YEREVAN
AND BAKU ON KARABAKH SETTLEMENT

YEREVAN, January 17. /ARKA/. Russia registers some progress in
rapprochement of views of Yerevan and Baku on Karabakh settlement.
According to RF MFA, after regular round of Prague consultations on
Karabakh settlement, Moscow notes with satisfaction that meetings of
Armenian and Azeri parties at different levels including at the level
of presidents and in the frames of `Prague process’ received regular
character. `Armenian and Azeri representatives consider almost all
aspects of the situation related to the conflict. Among them are
withdrawal of forces, demilitarization of territories, international
guarantees, Nagorno Karabakh status and others’, press release notes.
It also notes that both parties confirm readiness to continue joint
work.
`The agreements of parties to continue realization of earlier passed
decision on direction of OSCE MG mission to occupied territories
around Karabakh and to conduct works on organization of new meeting
of RA and AR president in Warsaw in summer 2005 also included to this
context’, RA MFA notes.
At this press release stresses that Moscow as earlier express
readiness to assist in deepening of mutual understanding between
Armenia and Azerbaijan together with other OSCE MG participants.
Note on Jan 11, 2005 in Prague RA Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian
met with Azeri Foreign Minister Elmar Mamediarov with participation
of OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen (Russia, USA, France). L.D. –0–

*********************************************************************

FORUM IN THE FRAMEWORK OF ZANG LEGAL SOCIALIZATION PROGRAM TO BE HELD
IN ARMENIA ON JANUARY 24

YEREVAN, January 17. /ARKA/. The forum in the framework of Zang legal
socialization program will be held in Armenia on January 24.
According to the Press Service of Project Harmony, the forum will
summarize the results of the pilot stage of project implementation
and will discuss the further perspectives of its development in
Armenia. In the framework of the forum, the presentation of a
training manual and Zang community reference-book will take place.
Representatives of the US Embassy in Armenia, RA Police, RA Ministry
of Science and Education and representatives of local and
international organizations will participate in the forum..
Zang legal socialization program has been implemented in Armenia by
Project Harmony since September, 2003 and is financed by the
International Bureau for Legal Assistance and Fighting Drugs of the
US Department of State. Program objective is the training of
representatives of law enforcement structures and legal education
tutors of Armenia in legal socialization.
Zang legal socialization program is the second program of Project
Harmony implemented in Armenia. The first Armenia Connectivity
project is implemented by the Bureau of Cultural and Social Contacts
of US Department of State.
Project Harmony was established in March of 1985. It has 17
representations in teh USA, Russia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and
in the Ukraine. L.V.–0 –

*********************************************************************

FIGHT FOR POWER TO CONTINUE IN ARMENIA IN 2005, BELIEVES THE LEADER
OF THE REPUBLICAN FRACTION

YEREVAN, January 17. /ARKA/. Fight for power will continue in Armenia
in 2005, as stated Galust Sahakyan, the leader of the Republican
fraction of RA Parliament in Azdak discussion club. He noted that
calls for revolution, which had many times been stated by the
oppositional leaders- `are nothing else, but dreams of power
seizure’. `Unfortunately, there is fight for power, and not fight of
ideas in Armenia’, noted Sahakyan. Commenting on the events in the
Ukraine and Georgia in 2004, he said `If a tense situation occurs
somewhere, the opposition tries to repeat it in Armenia. However,
Georgian or Ukrainian events cannot be repeated in Armenia, as we are
not similar to any other country, we do not have premises for such
coups, as Armenia sets completely different public and national
tasks’. L.V. -0–

*********************************************************************

ARMENIAN PEACEMAKERS TO LEAVE FOR IRAQ TOMORROW

YEREVAN, January 17. /ARKA/. Armenian peacemakers will leave for Iraq
on January 18, according to the Information and Propaganda Department
of the RA Ministry of Defense.
Note, on September 6, 2004, Armenian and Polish Presidents signed a
security cooperation agreement, in the framework of which 46 Armenian
servicemen are to be sent to Iraq as a part of Polish battalion.
Earlier, RA Government approved the suggestion to join Memorandum of
Understanding `Command Arrangements and Related Matters for the
Multinational Division (Central South) (MND C-S) within the
Stabilization Force in Iraq, which was ratified by the RA President
on August 9, 2004.
On December 8, 2004, the RA Constitutional Court declared the
memorandum corresponding to the Constitution of RA. On December 24,
2004 the RA Parliament ratified the Memorandum which provided for the
dispatch of Armenian peacemakers to Iraq. The decision was made after
seven-hour closed discussions, which were attended by two
oppositional fractions boycotting the Parliament – Justice Bloc and
National Unity. Dashnaktsutyn Party of the ruling coalition and
Justice Opposition bloc opposed the decision to send Armenian
peacemakers to Iraq.
As Serge Sargsian, the RA Defence Minister told the reporters after
the ratification of the memorandum, Armenia will send a contingent of
46 peacemakers, including a General Commander, Signal Officer at the
staff of Polish division, Platoon Commander, 3 doctors (a
cardiologist, a therapist and a psychiatrist), 10 field engineers and
30 drivers. According to him, the RA Parliament gave consent to
twelve month’s stay of Armenian contingent in Iraq. The Minister
added that rotation of the main staff will take place in 6 months.
According to Sargsyan, the expenses of Armenia will not exceed $600
thou to be paid as salaries. L.V.–0–

FACTBOX-Military forces in Iraq

LONDON, Jan 17 (Reuters) – Some 400 British troops have begun arriving
in Iraq to help maintain security as insurgents step up attacks two
weeks before Iraqis go to the polls, Britain’s Ministry of Defence
said on Monday.

Romania also said it would send 100 more troops to Iraq to help
protect United Nations staff during the election.

Here is a table by country of military forces in Iraq. Some countries
have sent combat troops, others take up non-combat support roles such
as logistics and reconstruction. Some have said they wish to pull
troops out because of growing danger.

In Iraq+ En route or Withdrawn

alerted+ or intend to pull

out++

United States 150,000

Britain 8,930

OTHER COUNTRIES:

Albania 73

Armenia 50

Australia 850 30

Azerbaijan 150

Bulgaria 430

Czech Rep. 92

Denmark 525

Dominican Rep. 300

El Salvador 380

Estonia 55

Georgia 300 550

Honduras 370

Hungary 300 (By end-3/2005)

Italy 3,160

Japan 550 450

Kazakhstan 30

Latvia 120

Lithuania 105

Macedonia 28

Moldova 25

Mongolia 180

Netherlands 1,350 (By March 2005)

New Zealand 60

Nicaragua 115

Norway 10 140

Philippines 51

Poland 2,400 700##

Portugal 120

Romania 730 100

Singapore 200

Slovakia 105

South Korea 3,600

Spain 1,400

Thailand 460

Tonga 44

Ukraine 1,600 (First half 2005)

NOTE: Many figures are rounded or estimated.

As of Nov 2004

No date set or confirmed.

Precise figure not known.

Poland announced that it will have 1,700 troops in Iraq as of mid-February
2005.

Sources: Reuters news reports/GlobalSecurity.org.

01/17/05 14:11 ET

California Courier Online, January 20, 2005

1 – Commentary

By Harut Sassounian
California Courier Publisher
2 – Fresno Homenetmen Makes Donation
For Tsunami Victims to Red Cross
3 – $500,000 Raised for USC Armenian Institute
Ahead of Feb. 13 Inaugural Gala Dinner
4 – Krikorian Selected
By FSU as Head
Soccer Coach
5 – Scholars Will Address Community
Challenges at Jan. 29 Symposium
6 – Merdinian Student Invited
To Presidential Inauguration
*************************************************************************
1 – Commentary
Turks Are Inadvertently Helping
To Publicize the Armenian Cause

By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier

Who would have thought that 90 years after the Armenian Genocide, the Turks
would still be haunted by the mass murders committed by their ancestors?
The Ottoman leaders thought that they had put an end to the Armenian Cause,
once and for all, by deporting and killing the Armenian population of the
Empire.
For a long time, it appeared that the Ottomans had succeeded, after all. A
quarter of a century later, on the eve of his own genocidal campaign,
Hitler noted that no one remembered the “extermination of the Armenians.”
He, therefore, thought that he could carry out the Jewish Holocaust with
impunity.
Hitler’s observation about the Armenian precedent to the Holocaust was
accurate. For several decades, the world turned a deaf ear to the heart
wrenching eyewitness accounts of the survivors of the Armenian Genocide.
Apart from Armenians, few people spoke about what took place in 1915, and
even fewer cared.
On rare occasions when Armenians made even minor progress in bringing the
Armenian Genocide to public attention through a book, article or remark
made by a non-Armenian public official, the Turkish government would bring
to bear the full weight of the state and the massive resources at its
disposal to counter such assertions. Turkey allocated millions of dollars
to hire lobbyists in Washington and paid millions more to historical
revisionists to flood libraries worldwide with false accounts of what took
place in 1915.
The Turks, however, never seemed to realize that their eagerness to counter
every mention of the Armenian Genocide, no matter how minor, inadvertently
brought more attention to this issue. Even false and anti-Armenian
statements made by high-ranking Turkish officials, which were publicized by
the international media, helped revive this “Forgotten Genocide.”
To make matters worse for themselves, recently the Turks have embarked on
their anti-Armenian Jihad with a renewed zeal. Having become aware that
Armenians are planning to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the Genocide
this year, the Turks have driven themselves into an absolute frenzy,
desperately looking for tougher measures to counter the Armenian
observances which prominent Turkish journalist Mehmet Ali Birand described
as the approaching “Armenian tsunami.” Here is a short list of actions
announced by Turkish officials and historians:
— Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul announced last July the formation of a
government task force that would promote the denial of the Armenian
Genocide and counter the planned commemorative events on the 90th
anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. At the end of December, Gul met with
his advisors to plan the steps to be taken to counter the Armenian efforts;
— Hikmet Ozdemir, the Chairman of the Armenian Desk of the Turkish History
Institute, announced on CNN-Turk on January 5th that his group would launch
“a huge campaign” in February by publishing four volumes of documents
disproving “the Armenian allegations.” Ozdemir also suggested “the retrial”
of Soghomon Tehlirian who was set free by a German court in 1921 after
assassinating Talat Pasha, the mastermind of the Armenian Genocide. He
spoke about organizing TV debates with Armenian intellectuals and
symposiums in Turkish, European and American universities;
— Reuters reported on January 12th that Yusuf Halacoglu, the President of
the Turkish History Institute, called for the establishment of an
international commission of historians, under the auspices of the United
Nations, to study the facts of the Armenian Genocide. He also disclosed
that 7 mass graves would be uncovered this year to prove that “Armenians
committed genocide against the Turks;”
— Several former Turkish officials suggested taking the Armenian issue to
the World Court.
Armenians naturally welcome all of these Turkish efforts, no matter how
repulsive and depraved they might be. The world as well as the Turks
already know that genocide was committed against the Armenians. None of
these Turkish disingenuous attempts at disinformation would dissuade a
single soul anywhere in the world. In addition to wasting the Turks’ time,
money, and effort, these actions would only serve to attract international
attention to the Armenian Genocide.
Furthermore, by expanding their efforts to cover up such a heinous crime as
genocide, the Turks would be proving once again to the world that they are
not yet ready to be included in the family of civilized nations. Germany
would have never been accepted for membership in the European Union, had it
not acknowledged the Holocaust. The Turks are only harming their own
interests by continuing and escalating their denials and distortions!
**************************************************************************
2 – Fresno Homenetmen Makes Donation
For Tsunami Victims to Red Cross
FRESNO – After caroling on Armenian Christmas Eve, Jan. 5, Fresno
Homenetmen Armenian Boy Scouts Representatives presented a check for the
Asian tsunami victims to Ellen Schneider, CEO of the American Red Cross
Fresno-Madera Chapters.
Making the presentation were: Girl Scout Rep. Jenya Bakarian; Executive
Committee Chairman, Avedis Krikorian; Executive Committee Scouts Rep. Akabi
Atikian; Boy Scouts Rep. Shant Atikian, and Ellen Schneider.
On Jan. 5, Fresno Homenetmen Armenian Boy Scouts Troop 12 gathered at the
Armenian Center, to caravan in vans to carol at the homes of supporters and
collect donations, a 25-year tradition in Fresno. The donations from
their Christmas caroling are normally used for camping trips and
educational projects for the scouts. However, this year, the scouts
decided to donate the proceeds to the survivors of the tsunami as a gesture
of love toward humanity.
“We want to do our share to bring some relief to the survivors of the
Tsunami”, said Avo Krikorian, chairman of the Homenetmen Sassoon Chapter.
“We remember the Armenian earthquake of 1988 where over 25,000 people died.
It is sad to see thousands of humans suffer, we just want to help.”
***************************************************************************
3 – $500,000 Raised for USC Armenian Institute
Ahead of Feb. 13 Inaugural Gala Dinner
LOS ANGELES – The campaign leading to the February 13 Inaugural Gala
Banquet for funding USC’s Institute of Armenian Studies has gone into
overdrive in response to unprecedented expressions of widespread financial
support from the Armenian community.
As a result of rapidly increasing commitments during December 2004, over
$500,000 has already been raised.
This is a great start towards the initial target of $1,000,000 to be
achieved by the time of the banquet which would permit the Institute to
begin its work as a distinguished center of Armenian academic, intellectual
and cultural life. An endowment fund of several million dollars will
eventually be needed for a fully functional institute.
The list of donors is growing exponentially by the ever-expanding ranks of
Armenian Trojan alumni, students, parents and friends of the University of
Southern California. Prospective donors are invited to make their pledges
as soon as possible to be included in the Institute’s Honor Roll and
program listings, and to reserve a place at the February 13 Inaugural Gala
Banquet.
Early reservations are suggested because of the limited seating at USC’s
Town & Gown Banquet Hall.
For further information contact Savey Tufenkian at (818) 956-8455, Noelle
Moss at (213) 740-4996, or Dr. R. Hrair Dekmejian at (213) 740-3619
Tax-deductible contributions & reservations should be sent to: USC
Institute of Armenian Studies Inaugural Dinner, USC College of Letters,
Arts & Sciences, 3551 Trousdale Parkway, ADM 204 Los Angeles, CA 90089-4015
**************************************************************************
4 – Krikorian Selected
By FSU as Head
Soccer Coach
TALLAHASSEE, FL – United States U-19 National Team head coach and 2002 WUSA
Coach of the Year Mark Krikorian was announced as the new head women’s
soccer coach at Florida State last week by Athletics Director Dave Hart.
Krikorian brings 14 years of head coaching experience to Tallahassee at all
levels of the game including college, pro and with the US Olympic
Development Program. He is just the third coach in the history of the FSU
soccer program.
“Having Mark Krikorian accept our offer to become the head coach of our
women’s soccer program is certainly cause for much excitement and
anticipation,” said Hart. “Mark brings a wealth of experience and
knowledge from his prior positions on the college, professional and
national team levels of competition. He is an accomplished teacher, coach
and recruiter.”
**************************************************************************
5 – Scholars Will Address Community
Challenges at Jan. 29 Symposium
GLENDALE – Ten prominent scholars and community leaders will discuss the
“Challenges and Prospects of the Armenian American Community,” at the
Mashdots College annual symposium, Jan. 29, at the Glendale Central Public
Library Auditorium, from 9 to 5 p.m.
The scholars and their topics are: Prof. Richard H. Dekmejian, Armenian
Church Structure; Hagop Hagopian, Armenian Educational Structure, Prof.
Garo Momdjian, Armenian Political Structure, Prof. Kevork Kherlopian,
Armenian Cultural Structure, Prof. Osheen Keshishian, Armenian Mass Media
and Literary Structure, Nora Chitilian-Chalashian, Armenian Family
Structure, March Chenian, Armenian Economic Structure, and Ardashes
Kassakhian, Armenian Youth Structure.
Concluding remarks will be delivered by Harut Sassounian on “Assessing the
Present to Forge a Better Future.”
College President Dr. Garbis Der Yeghiayan will open the conference.
Admission is free and community members are invited to attend and
participate in the proceedings.
All papers presented at the symposium will be published in a book format.
The Library is located at 222 E. Harvard, Glendale.
For more information, contact Mashdots College at (818) 548-9345.
**************************************************************************
6 – Merdinian Student Invited
To Presidential Inauguration
SHERMAN OAKS, Calif. – An eight-grade student, Patrick Adamian, from C & E
Merdinian Armenian Evangelical School in Sherman Oaks, has been invited to
attend the Junior Presidential Youth Inaugural Conference in Washington,
DC, from Jan. 16-21.
Adamian’s invitation was the result of the leadership skills he
demonstrated during a Junior National Young Leader’s Conference last year.
On Jan. 20, the young Armenian-American student will be witnessing the
swearing-in of George W. Bush as U.S. President, view the Inaugural Parade,
and enjoy a moonlight cruise on the Potomac River.
Adamian will also have the opportunity to meet Members of Congress,
scholars and leading decision makers. He will also explore historic sites
in and around the nation’s capital.
***************************************************************************
*
**************************************************************************
The California Courier On-Line is a service provided by the California
Courier. Subscriptions or changes of address should not be transmitted
through this service. Information in that regard should be telephoned
to (818) 409-0949; faxed to: (818) 409-9207, or e-mailed to:
[email protected]. Letters to the editor concerning issues
addressed in the Courier may be e-mailed, provided it is signed by
the author. Phone and/or E-mail address is also required to verify
authorship.

RA DEFENCE MINISTRY COLLEGIUM OUTLINES ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO WHICH
WORK IS TO BE CARRIED OUT IN 2005

YEREVAN, January 17 (Noyan Tapan). The issues of the fighting and
mobilization preparedness in the 2004 academic year, results of the
operative and fighting readiness of the troops and staffs, the state
of the military discipline and law and order, as well as the
objectives of the 2005 academic year were discussed at the January 14
session of the RA Defence Ministry Collegium chaired by the Defence
Minister Serge Sargsian. The Chief of the RA Armed Forces General
Staff made a summary report, followed by the statements made by
Deputies of the RA Minister of Defence and commanders of the
formations. According to the RA Defence Ministry’s Information and
Propaganda Department, the issues, with respect to which work must be
done this year, were outlined at the session. Summarizing the
session, the Defence Minister Serge Sargsian outlined the priorities
for 2005, underlining the personal responsibility of each commander
and officer in increasing the fighting readiness and the military
discipline of the army.