Parliament heads of four Caucasian states to meet

Parl heads of four Caucasian states to meet
By Lyudmila Yermakova

ITAR-TASS News Agency
May 14, 2004 Friday

SAMARA, May 14 — Parliament heads of the four Caucasian countries
(Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia and Russia) will meet without fail,
Russian Federation Council Speaker Sergei Mironov said on Friday
during a briefing.

The group of four meets once a quarter. But there was some pause to
wait for the results of the Georgian elections, Mironov explained.

The elections have passed, and the meeting can be held, he said.

The next meeting is expected to take place in Tbilisi.

The timing is not set yet. But the meeting will not be postponed for
a long time, Mironov noted.

One of the subjects to be discussed will be the Nagorno-Karabakh
problem, Armenian parliament head Artur Bagdasaryan said.

It is necessary to sit at a negotiating table and search for peaceful
solution to the problem, he said.

Commenting on the recent statement made by the Azerbaijani leaders on
Karabakh problem settlement, the Armenian speaker noted that such
statements were not new, but Armenia remained firmly adhered to
peaceful settlement of the problem.

Putin confident of intensive econ cooperation with Armenia

Putin confident of intensive econ cooperation with Armenia
By Veronika Romanenkova

ITAR-TASS News Agency
May 14, 2004 Friday

OGARYOVO, May 14 – Russian President Vladimir Putin said he was
confident that the Russian-Armenian top-level talks on Friday would
contribute to more intensive development of bilateral economic
interaction.

“Not only I am hoping, I’m confident that your working visit today
will help our interaction and intensify our relations,” Putin said
at a meeting with Armenian President Robert Kocharyan.

The head of the Russian state noted that his meetings with Kocharyan
were regular. “We are meeting for the fifth time in the recent past,
to discuss bilateral ties and coordinate activities on the post-Soviet
territory and international arena,” Putin said.

He added that he was very glad to see Robert Kocharyan.

Putin welcomed the Armenian president on the threshold of his
Novo-Ogaryovo residence. The leaders then retreated for talks in a
conference hall. Taking part in the negotiations for Russia were
Security Council Secretary Igor Ivanov and presidential adviser
Sergei Prikhodko.

Trade between Samara region, Armenia increases 14 times

Trade between Samara region, Armenia increases 14 times
By Lyudmila Yermakova

ITAR-TASS News Agency
May 14, 2004 Friday

SAMARA, May 14 — The trade turnover between the Samara region and
Armenia has increased 14 times for seven years, regional governor
Konstantin Titov cited the figure at the conference on interregional
Russian-Armenian cooperation on Friday.

He noted that “the CIS states are serious partners of the region, their
share in the export of the Samara region is stabilising and Armenia
holds one of the leading places in it.” The regional law on investments
that protects the deposits of businessmen promotes the capital inflow
in the region. The Samara region is a big supplier of oil, electricity,
aluminium, produce of machine-building and chemical industry.

The governor noted that the Samara region is traditionally
multinational, and the Armenian diaspora is one of the biggest there
that promotes the development of bilateral cooperation. “The state
support of multifaceted cooperation between Russian constituents
and the CIS states” is needed for the development of this tendency,
the governor pointed out.

Russia-Armenia conference on regional cooperation opens in Samara

Russia-Armenia confer on regional cooperation opens in Samara
By Lyudmila Yarmakova

ITAR-TASS News Agency
May 14, 2004 Friday

SAMARA, May 14 — A conference devoted to inter-regional cooperation
between Russia and Armenia opened in the city of Samara on Friday.

Delegations of the two countries comprising parliamentarians,
businesspeople, public leaders and regional officials are headed by
Speaker of the Federation Council (upper house of Russia’s parliament)
Sergei Mironov and Chairman of the National Assembly of Armenia Artur
Bagdasaryan, respectively.

The conference participants expressed the view that direct ties
between regions are a vital component of cooperation between Russia
and Armenia, which also can boost this cooperation strengthening and
developing it.

Mironov called Armenia “Russia’s reliable strategic partner in the
international arena.” He stressed that bilateral economic cooperation
is also developing rather dynamically.

Last year’s bilateral trade turnover increased by almost 35 percent,
as against 2002. Mironov admitted, however that “the economic
potential is just 35-40 percent used.” According to the Russian
speaker, the two states have reserves for expanding cooperation,
such as interregional ties.

Bagdasaryan has agreed with Mironov saying “ties between regions make
it possible to solve many problems more quickly and effectively than
it is done in the centre.”

The Armenian official pointed out that Armenia has adopted the law on
local self-government, which does not restrict the sphere of activities
of local administrations, but encourages them in every way, including
international activity.

Badgasaryan also admitted, “the positive dynamics in bilateral
relations exists, but the cooperation falls short of possibilities.”

Conferences of this kind, in the view of the Armenian speaker, should
be held annually. He proposed to hold the next conference in Yerevan.

Historian who sent Bush to war

The Times (London)
May 15, 2004, Saturday

Historian who sent Bush to war

by Michael Binyon

FROM BABEL TO DRAGOMANS
BY BERNARD LEWIS
Weidenfeld & Nicolson
£20; 350pp
ISBN 0 297 84884 4
£16 (p&p £2.25)
0870 1608080

Professor Bernard Lewis is one of the Western world’s foremost
authorities on Islam. Long a scholar and lecturer at the School of
Oriental and African Studies at London University, he moved to
Princeton 30 years ago, and continued to write incisively and
tellingly not only about the early history of the Muslims, Islamic
theology and Muslim reactions to the West, but also, increasingly,
about how the West should deal with the Muslim world. American
leaders sought him out for advice on the Muslim mind, and since the
September 11 atrocities he has rarely been silent, in demand by
newspapers, universities, conferences and especially at the White
House.

He is now identified as the unofficial author of the Bush doctrine of
spreading, by force if necessary, the values and democracy of the
West in Muslim countries, part of the justification for the Iraq war.
It is a role that has made Professor Lewis, 87, notorious in some
circles. He has become a figure of hatred to many Muslims – partly
because he is Jewish, and is assumed to be lobbying on behalf of
Israel, and partly because he is a relentless critic of what he sees
as decay and spiritual confusion in much of the Muslim world. His
latest book, published last year, on the crisis in Islam, is a
trenchant and incisive analysis of the turmoil now roiling a religion
that he has made his lifetime’s study.

This political role is regrettable. For it has overshadowed Professor
Lewis’s enormous achievements as a linguist – he speaks at least five
Middle Eastern languages – historian and researcher. He is one of a
handful of academics who has been labelled a hawk and whose writings
and research are, therefore, judged largely on the basis on the
policies to which they have been yoked. Richard Pipes suffered the
same fate: a brilliant scholar of the ancien regime in Russia, he was
adopted by the Reagan Administration as its resident apologist for
the anti Soviet line that was seen, at the time, as recklessly
aggressive. The fact that Pipes was largely proved right, after the
fall of communism, never quite restored his academic reputation among
political liberals.

Professor Lewis’s academic credentials are impeccable. Anyone
doubting the breadth of his knowledge and his scrupulously impartial
historical approach has only to dip into this weighty compendium of
his writings. The collection of essays, articles, reviews, lectures
and contributions to encyclopaedias gives a glimpse of his towering
scholarship. The title essay deals with the isolation of the early
Muslims from the learning and experience of the outside world and
their gradual need to find interpreters, “dragomans”, to translate
the manuals and writings, especially on warfare, of a resurgent West.
They tended to rely on people such as Lewis – cosmopolitans, often
Jews, Greeks or Armenians who had mastered another culture by
accident of birth or geography.

Some of the essays are studiously academic – an interpretation of
Fatamid history, the Moguls and the Ottomans, the Shia and attitudes
to monarchy in the Middle East. But the lucid writing is never dry or
obscure, even to the generalist. Even in scholarly analyses,
Professor Lewis brings the wisdom of historical background to issues
that baffle today’s politicians. Why do the Shia in Iraq still lay
such stress on the historical appeal to the wronged, the downtrodden
and the deprived? How much did the Assassins, a 12th-century sect
that prefigured the suicide bombers, influence today’s concept of
martyrdom? Or why, for example, have the rulers of the Middle East
only in the 20th century adopted the title of “king”, a term
originally associated with the West and seen primarily as military
and political rather than traditional weightier titles denoting
religious authority?

Other essays are more topical, political and controversial,
especially to Muslims who resent Western scholars questioning the
contemporary relevance of a theology that is, by definition,
immutable. “The enemies of God”, “The roots of Muslim rage”,
“Religion and murder in the Middle East” and “Not everyone hates
Saddam” deal with the here and now.

Though forthright, Professor Lewis is rarely dismissive or
patronising, although he has become more hawkish over confronting
Islamist activism. “There is an extraordinary belief in some circles
that politics is an exact science like mathematics; and that there
is, so to speak, one correct answer to any problem, all the others
being incorrect,” he says, discussing the Islamic revolutionaries in
Iran. “It is a delusion, a false theory, and its forcible application
has brought untold misery to untold millions of people.”

Professor Lewis is primarily an expert on Ottoman Turkey. This, as he
says in a revealing autobiographical introduction, is because the
Arab world was largely out of bounds to Jews after the establishment
of Israel. History was his first love, but an early fascination with
languages – at one time, he says, he was simulataneously studying
Latin, Greek, Biblical Hebrew and Classical Arabic – drew him to
research in the Middle East. He set out on his first trip there in
1937, enrolling at Cairo University. A year later he was offered the
post of assistant lecturer in Islamic history at the University of
London. With the outbreak of war, he put his languages to good use
with British Intelligence, dealing with Middle East in the Foreign
Office from 1941 to 1945.

After 1949, however, only three countries in the region were open to
Jewish scholars – Turkey, Iran and Israel. He focused on Turkey, and
was lucky to become the first Westerner admitted to the Imperial
Ottoman Archives. It was a treasure-house of neglected learning.
“Feeling rather like a child turned loose in a toy shop, or like an
intruder in Ali Baba’s cave, I hardly knew where to turn first.”

Professor Lewis’s authority rests on his own precept: “The first and
most rudimentary test of an historian’s competence is that he should
be able to read his sources.” He can. Dozens of books and articles
have flowed from his research.

Moving to Princeton in 1974 was a challenge, but a liberation from
the “administrative and bureaucratic entanglements that had built up,
over decades, in England”. Though he reached retirement age in 1986,
and became Emeritus Professor, his political authority grew. He
resisted any censorship or political correctness, just as he resisted
the notion of taboo subjects in many Muslim societies. He says that a
historian “owes it to himself and to his readers to try, to the best
of his ability, to be objective or at least to be fair”. But he
acknowledges the dangers of a historian becoming personally involved
and committed.

That, however, has been his fate. In early studies he says he was
most interested in the period when the Middle East was most different
from the West and least affected by it. Now it is deeply affected,
and scholars are being asked to predict the outcome of this clash.
Eight days after September 11 Professor Lewis was asked to address
the US Defence Policy Board. He has dined with Vice-President Cheney
and advised President Bush. Richard Perle, a lifelong hawk, called
him “the single most important intellectual influence countering the
conventional wisdom on managing the conflict between radical Islam
and the West”.

He has been seen as an apologist for the use of force to instil fear
“or at least respect” in an Islamic world that is on the defensive
and resentful of the West.

Much of this hawkishness can be traced to his loathing of appeasement
before the Second World War and his closeness to a succession of
Israeli prime ministers. It is a pity, for the “Lewis doctrine”, as
some term his call on the West to implant democracy in the Muslim
world, is far from a proven success. And political foolishness, in
Iraq and elsewhere, may yet overshadow the achievements of a great
scholar.

Read on

Islam in the World by Malise Ruthven (Penguin)

A Fury for God: the Islamist Attack on America by Malise Ruthven
(Granta)

The Islamic Threat: Myth or Reality? by John Esposito (OUP)

Rethinking Islam and Modernity by Abdelwahab El-Affendi (Islamic
Foundation)

Union of Armenians calls for comeback of chamber of nationalities

Union of Armenians calls for comeback of chamber of nationalities
By Lyudmila Yermakova

ITAR-TASS News Agency
May 14, 2004 Friday

SAMARA, May 14 — The Union of Armenians of Russia called for setting
up a public expert council under the permanent Russo-Armenian economic
cooperation commission.

Bringing forward this proposal at the conference on inter-regional
Russian-Armenian cooperation, the first vice-president of this
all-Russian public organization Khachatur Avetisyan noted that the
participation in the expert council of the Union of Armenians of Russia
“not only would contribute to the development of bilateral ties, but
also increase the responsibility of our diaspora in Russian-Armenian
strategic partnership.”

The largest Armenian community lives in Russia, being “a solid bridge
for Russian-Armenian cooperation,” president of the Union of Armenians
of Russia Ara Abramyan said.

He said in an interview with Itar-Tass that it was time to consider the
comeback of the house of nationalities in Russia’s Federal Assembly,
where many ethnic minorities could represent their interests.

In his view, it is necessary to strengthen inter-regional partnership
while taking into account the demand on the Russian labour market. A
transparent and economically justified tax system should contribute
to it, Abramyan said, adding that it should exclude high tax rates
and the motivation of illegal employment.

A legal socio-economic and psychological adaptation of refugees and
displaced persons is also of considerable importance, he said.

Economic cooperation has a special place in bilateral strategic
partnership, Abramyan emphasized. The repayment of Armenia’s foreign
debt by transferring a number of its companies to Russia’s ownership
is one of the forms to boost bilateral relations.

He believes that the transfer of part of the shares of these companies
– on a competitive basis – to private hands is expedient. It would
be fair to let business people from the Armenian community in Russia
take part in the tender.

The president of the Union expressed concern in connection with
instability in Transcaucasia, in particular in Georgia. In this
connection, he proposed more active involvement of the business and
public potential of the Armenian and Georgian communities in forming
a stable Russia-Georgia-Armenia transport link.

The Union of Armenians of Russia calls for uniting their potential for
the sake of the objectives aimed at strengthening Russia and providing
assistance to Armenia, Abramyan said, reiterating President Robert
Kocharyan’s statement that “Armenia with its diaspora and without it
are not of same weight.”

Russia PM, Armenia president discuss coop. in intl. energy projects

Russia PM, Armenia president discuss coop in intl energy projects
By Oksana Polishchuk

ITAR-TASS News Agency
May 14, 2004 Friday

MOSCOW, May 14 — The interaction in international energy projects
and projects of transporting energy carriers were discussed at
the meeting of Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov and Armenian
President Robert Kocharyan on Friday. Moscow “assesses highly the
forming of a reliable and solid infrastructure between Russia and
Armenia in the field of energy,” spokesman for the Russian premier
Alexander Zharov told journalists after the talks.

Mikhail Fradkov also stressed the importance of “all-round economic
ties of Russian constituents with Armenia.” The Russian prime minister
noted the importance of cooperation between the two countries in the
humanitarian sphere and stressed the success of the Days of Russian
Culture in Armenia.

According to Zharov, Fradkov supported “the view about the need of
further regular bilateral contacts for comprehensive development
of positive tendencies in trade and economic cooperation of the
countries.”

BAKU: Foreign ministers meeting yields no results

Foreign ministers meeting yields no results
by Zulfugar Agayev

Baku Sun, Azerbaijan
May 14 2004

BAKU — Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov’s meeting
with his Armenian counterpart Vardan Oskanian in Strasbourg has
yielded no result as the Armenian side rejected a suggestion to
release Azerbaijan’s seven occupied districts in return for opening
communication lines between the two countries, ANS reported on
Thursday.

The 12-13 May meeting was also attended by co-chairs of the Minsk
group of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE). The Armenian foreign minister Oskanian told Azerbaijani
reporters that the idea about Armenia’s releasing seven occupied
districts is “absurd and meaningless.”

Azerbaijan’s Mammadyarov had said on his way to the meeting that his
government would not support peace talks if they fail to give real
results. A cease-fire agreement reached between Baku and Yerevan is
frequently violated.

BAKU: Karabakh cannot be part of Baku says EU rapporteur

Karabakh cannot be part of Baku says EU rapporteur

525 NEWSPAPER, Azerbaijan
May 14 2004

Pier Garton, the European Union’s (EU) rapporteur on the South
Caucasus, said, “Nagorno-Karabakh cannot be subordinated to Baku”
during his visit to Yerevan.

The diplomat believes that firstly the conflicting sides should have
a desire to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh problem.

“[The conflict] can be solved if the peace continues, borders are
opened and people are not discriminated because of their citizenship,”
Garton said.

He drew parallels with Europe, saying that the issue of citizenship
is dwarfed when borders are open.

“I understand that Nagorno-Karabakh cannot be subordinated to Baku
and if Karabakh can provide itself with food and manage to live
independently, it is not important for it to officially be a part of
Azerbaijan or Armenia.”

Gulfood 2005 set to capitalise on burgeoning market

Gulfood 2005 set to capitalise on burgeoning market

zawya
15 May 2004

Gulfood 2005, the largest, most comprehensive and representative
show for the food, hotel & hospitality industry in the Middle East
and North Africa region, has set its sights firmly on accelerated
growth by building on its acknowledged track record as the premier
regional platform for the industry. The show, which takes place from
February 20 to 23, 2005, capitalises on the advantage of being at the
hub of a high-spending and rapidly growing target market, announced
organisers Dubai World Trade Centre (DWTC).

The tenth edition of the biennial event, which will be held at the DWTC
Complex, will offer an opportunity to food and hospitality industries
to display the latest developments and technologies as well as network
with fellow professionals located in a region which has recorded
a spectacular growth in tourism and hospitality infrastructure and
which as a result has become one of the key growth areas for both
these sectors. Some 1,304 particiapants from 44 countries including
25 country pavilions took part in the show last year.

The Middle East’s high disposable income, appetite and vision makes it
an increasingly important food and drinks consumer. The region is
also heavily dependant on large scale imports of food and food-related
products, with more than 90% of its needs being met from overseas. This
makes food and food related products in the Gulf a massively important
sector for any international manufacturer, importer or trader.

Gulfood facilitates the development of trade, tastes and trends by
attracting key industry buyers from over 75 countries and its position
is consolidated by Dubai’s key role as the region’s business and
re-exporting hub, being located on the crossroads of three continents
and the centre of a potential market of more than 2 billion people.

Going by early responses, all indications point to a considerably
larger show in 2005. Projected figures indicate a 30 per cent surge
in participation over 2003, which reinforces the fact that Gulfood is
the only exhibition of its kind that provides access to fast-growing
markets in the Middle East, North and East Africa, the GCC, the former
CIS and the booming Indian subcontinent.

The event will welcome new country pavilions from Argentina, Armenia,
Belgium’s Walloon region, India, Iran, Malaysia and South Africa who
have already signed up, with several others also planning to enter
the market for the first time.

Gulfood will once again be supported by Emirates Culinary Guild,
who will host the Emirates International Salon Culinaire 2005,
a four-day extravaganza of seminars, competitions and demonstrations.

Another significant development is the move of the Third Middle East
Food Marketing Forum from its usual January slot to run alongside
Gulfood 2005, which will offer senior managers a specially developed
programme to provide guidance, advice and debate on the latest issues
shaping food product development.

The exhibitor profile for Gulfood 2005 has been developed to include
the food processing, packaging and ingredients segments as well as the
firmly established food, drinks, bakery, foodservice and hospitality
equipment areas. The food processing and packing business in the
Middle East is significant and growing, with much of the technology
being imported. It is a natural and obvious progression, which will
bring synergy to Gulfood.

Gulfood 2003 received 12,000 high quality trade visitors from
71 countries. Exhibitor and visitor information can be found at

http://www.gulfood.com.