Downtown center proposed

Major developer wants to build south of stadium.

By Jim Davis
The Fresno Bee
Updated Friday, March 26, 2004, 7:21 AM

A major developer wants to create a $350 million to $400 million development
with retail, entertainment and housing in downtown Fresno south of Grizzlies
Stadium, city officials announced Thursday.

The project could include a lake, river walk or series of fountains.

Forest City Enterprises will ask the Fresno City Council on Tuesday for an
exclusive agreement to develop 85 acres south of the stadium.

City Council Member Tom Boyajian called it a “defining moment” in moving
downtown Fresno forward.

“When we voted for this baseball stadium, we really hoped something like
this would happen,” Boyajian said. The project would be in an area generally
bounded by Union Pacific Railroad, Van Ness Avenue, Tulare Street and
Freeway 41.

Forest City Enterprises, a real estate company based in Ohio, is a property
owner and partner in the River Park shopping center in north Fresno. The
company has also developed urban centers throughout the country, said Dan
Fitzpatrick, executive director of the city’s Redevelopment Agency.

“What’s very important about this project is drawing a major developer —
they’re listed on the New York Stock Exchange — to make a commitment of
hundreds of millions [of dollars] in downtown,” Fitzpatrick said.

Council Member Cynthia Sterling said the proposal dovetails with other
projects in downtown and the Regional Jobs Initiative to create jobs for the
community.

“With this push, this will open up an opportunity to put people back to
work,” said Sterling, who represents downtown.

Known as the South Stadium project, it will be sandwiched between two other
major downtown developments.

To the west, a development group has proposed building hundreds of homes and
adding retail and commercial shopping to the historic Chinatown district.

To the east, Gunner-Andros Investments is planning to build Old Armenian
Town, a series of high-rise office buildings anchored by a state appellate
courthouse.

Marlene Murphy, the city’s redevelopment administrator, said the City
Council will be asked Tuesday whether to allow the agency to negotiate an
exclusive agreement with Forest City.

The project would be built in four or five phases over 10 years.

“This is not a small project,” Murphy said. “It’s the size of … Universal
Studios.”

Forest City, its partners and the city of Fresno have been studying the area
south of the stadium for the past 18 months.

Forest City’s partners are The Legaspi Co., Streetscape Equities and Johnson
Fain Architects.

Forest City has assets of about $5 billion. Fitzpatrick praised it as one of
the top four or five companies in the country that redevelop urban areas.

“They don’t have to worry about getting financing,” Fitzpatrick said.
“They’re self-financing.”

Fitzpatrick said council members and Mayor Alan Autry have played key roles
in persuading the company to consider investing in downtown Fresno.

Boyajian said he’s been questioned constantly about voting for the $46
million baseball stadium. He said the stadium was an investment and that the
payoff is finally occurring with this proposed development.

“The investors really see an opportunity here,” Boyajian said.

Forest City is looking at a mixed-use development including restaurants, a
multiplex theater and other commercial uses combined with downtown housing.
It could include big-box and department stores.

The company expects that the project will draw people within 30 miles of
downtown as well as people driving on the freeways to Yosemite and Kings
Canyon national parks.

The company also expects to draw traffic from the baseball stadium, the
Convention Center, the IRS building and downtown government agencies.

While the project is expected to bring in national retailers and chains,
Boyajian and Fitzpatrick said, Forest City also will seek local businesses
and small entrepreneurs.

Fitzpatrick said landmarks such as Coney Island restaurant — which has been
downtown for 80 years — “will obviously stay.”

The company in its exclusive agreement will seek the city’s help in aiding
the development including, if necessary, eminent domain to consolidate land.

Pat Cody has owned Wilson’s Motorcycles at 443 Broadway for 15 years, and
the business has been in the same location for 85 years. He had not heard
about the proposal and will withhold judgment until he sees details.

But he believes the city should have talked with businesses “who are
employing people, generating tax dollars and have been here.”

“They keep talking about bringing business in downtown Fresno, but nobody
talks to us, who have been doing business in downtown,” he said.

The reporter can be reached
at [email protected]
or 441-6171.

Radio Free Europe, Czech Republic
March 26 2004

Western Press Review: British-Libyan Rapprochement, NATO Priorities
In South Caucasus

By Khatya Chhor

Prague, 26 March 2004 (RFE/RL) — Some of the topics at issue in the
press today include NATO priorities in the Black Sea-South Caucuses
region; British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s visit to Libya; shifting
U.S. interests in Central Asia; and the ongoing testimony in the
United States regarding intelligence failures that may have
contributed to the failure to prevent the attacks of 11 September
2001.

THE NEW YORK TIMES

Two items in the New York-based daily discuss the defensiveness with
which the White House has responded to criticisms that it did not
take the threat of terrorism seriously before the 11 September
attacks on the United States.

Former presidential counterterrorism adviser Richard Clarke alleges
in a new book (“Against All Enemies”) that not only was Al-Qaeda not
a focus of the administration’s threat assessments, but that even
after the 2001 attacks, the White House sought to focus on Iraq.

Bob Herbert of “The New York Times” says the administration focused
on the wrong war. “The president wanted war with Iraq, and ultimately
he would have his war. The drumbeat for an invasion of Iraq in the
aftermath of the [Al-]Qaeda attack was as incessant as it was
bizarre,” he writes. The United States “never pursued Al-Qaeda with
the focus, tenacity and resources it would expend — and continues to
expend — on Iraq. The war against Iraq was sold [as] something that
was good for us. The administration and its apologists went out of
their way to create the false impression that Saddam [Hussein] and
Iraq were somehow involved in the September 11 attacks, and that he
was an imminent threat to the U.S.”

Herbert says former adviser Clarke “has been consistently right on
the facts, and the White House and its apologists consistently wrong.
Which is why the White House is waging such a ferocious and
unconscionable campaign of character assassination against Mr.
Clarke.”

In an editorial today, “The New York Times” also comments on the
defensive campaign the U.S. administration is waging against Clarke.
It says U.S. President George W. Bush and his aides are “so
preoccupied with defending his image as a can-do commander in chief
that it has no energy left to engage the legitimate questions that
have been raised by Mr. Clarke and by others who have appeared before
the independent 9/11 commission.”

The administration is “so thin-skinned and defensive” that it is
unable to take part in any serious discussion of how to confront the
threat of terrorism. The paper compares the White House reaction to
childish “name-calling,” adding that Bush appears “far more
interested in undermining Mr. Clarke’s credibility than in addressing
the heart of his critique” — intelligence failures that preceded the
11 September attacks.

THE INDEPENDENT

A commentary in the London-based “The Independent” discusses British
Prime Minister Tony Blair’s meeting yesterday with Libyan leader
Moammar Gadhafi, whom the paper calls “the Arab world’s most
eccentric and unpredictable leader.”

The prime minister is correct in his assertion that “there is real
cause for rejoicing” in Libya’s decision to relinquish its quest for
banned arms and join in Western-led antiterrorism efforts, it says.
“However distasteful to the families of those murdered, an engagement
and reconciliation with Libya that leads to the admission of guilt
and compensation is better than continued isolation of the North
African country.”

However, “The Independent” also acknowledges the symbolism of Blair’s
decision to meet with a dictator with “so much blood on his hands.”
Gadhafi, it says, “still locks up his opponents and pursues close
relations with some of the most unpleasant and destructive regimes in
Africa. For a small country with a low population, the number of
citizens locked up and tortured puts [Gadhafi] pretty near the top of
repressive regimes.”

Ultimately, Britain is right to pursue relations with Libya, for
engagement “is more productive than invasion.” Nevertheless, the
message this meeting may send to the Middle East could be that, “in
the new world of terror, we are abandoning the ethical concerns which
the prime minister so proudly proclaimed when he came to power.”

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL EUROPE

In a contribution to the European edition of “The Wall Street
Journal,” Vladimir Socor of the Washington-based Institute for
Advanced Strategic and Political Studies says NATO must renew its
focus on the Black Sea-South Caucasus region.

The countries of the Euro-Atlantic community’s “eastern doorstep,”
from Ukraine and Moldova to Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia are “weak
and vulnerable states. Most of them are riven by local armed
conflicts, undermined by corruption and organized crime, and have
been targeted by the Kremlin for reincorporation in its sphere of
dominance.”

The Black Sea-South Caucasus vicinity must therefore be “anchored” to
the Euro-Atlantic system by ensuring regional security.

Socor writes: “Turning this region into a Euro-Atlantic priority
makes sense geopolitically, economically, and strategically.” The
Black Sea and the South Caucasus will soon form the boundaries of
Europe. Azerbaijan and Georgia provide a transit route for Caspian
energy to Western markets, as well as an access corridor for Western
forces into Central Asia and the Middle East.

To ensure a “secure and stable” neighborhood in the South Caucasus,
Socor says “a proactive, coordinated Euro-Atlantic approach to
peace-support missions and conflict-resolution” is called for.

And a new debate on wider NATO priorities is necessary, for the
alliance today “seems to have relegated the Black Sea-South Caucasus
region to the bottom of peace-support priorities or even to have
excluded it altogether.”

EURASIA VIEW

In a commentary in “Eurasia View,” Stephen Blank of the U.S. Army War
College discusses the evolving U.S. military strategy in Central
Asia.

It is looking increasingly likely that Washington will seek to
establish a permanent presence in the region, he says. And this could
cause friction with regional powers Russia — which views Central
Asia as its sphere of influence — as well as China.

Bases in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan were established in the wake of
the 11 September 2001 attacks to support U.S. operations in
Afghanistan. To assuage the fears of Moscow and Beijing, “U.S.
political and military leaders indicated that American forces would
stay only as long as the regional terrorism threat remained.”

But it now appears that the United States is looking “to be prepared
for future strategic contingencies in Asia,” says Blank. Washington
has been strengthening military ties with Japan, the Southeast Asian
nations and Australia, and there has been talk of a regional
organization for collective security — an “Asian NATO.”

But Blank says it may be difficult to establish a new U.S. military
posture in Asia: “Even if U.S. military planners can overcome Chinese
and Russian opposition, it is no sure thing that U.S. taxpayers will
be willing to sustain the financial burden of maintaining operating
sites.”

LE FIGARO

In a comment in “Le Figaro,” Alexandrine Bouilhet, writing from
Brussels, says Europe is hard-pressed to show any originality in its
own war on terrorism.

The heads of state of the 25 EU current and accession members meeting
in the Belgian capital adopted a resolution on 25 March declaring a
coordinated, EU-wide campaign against terrorism.

The declaration “carefully avoids employing the warlike terms of the
American administration,” she says. But in the details of the
measures it envisions, the issue of security is primary.

While the document does not attempt to compete with the measures set
up by the United States in the wake of the 11 September attacks,
Europe nevertheless cannot escape from a certain replication,
Bouilhet says.

The “solidarity clause” of the declaration — that in the event of an
attack on one state, all EU members will come to the common defense
— directly mirrors NATO’s Article 5.

The ministers also designated their own counterterrorism chief, a
European “Mr. Terrorism” who Bouilhet says is a “pale imitation” of
Washington’s own Tom Ridge, head of the Department of Homeland
Security.

But little progress was made on the controversial idea of creating a
“European CIA” (Central Intelligence Agency), she says. In spite of
persistent calls from some nations, the bloc decided to continue to
work bilaterally when it comes to sharing sensitive information.

Christianity Today
March 26 2004

Lost in America
Arab Christians in the U.S. have a rich heritage and a shaky future.
by Elesha Coffman |

The very Rev. Mouris Amsih spent more than 300 hours flying on
Continental Airlines last year, traveling between Syriac Orthodox
churches in Villa Park, Illinois; Indianapolis; and Corpus Christi,
Texas. Airline personnel came to recognize him, but they never quite
figured him out. “They would say to me, Shalom!” Mouris says. “They
think I am a rabbi. Usually, I just say Shalom back to them. I do
speak the language of Jesus, Aramaic.”

Continental employees are not the only people to mistake the Syrian
native’s identity. He was studying at a Catholic college in the
United States during the 9/11 terrorist strikes. “The next day,” he
recalls, “students started asking me, ‘Father, are you Muslim?’ They
called me father and asked if I was Muslim! I wear a big cross every
day. I told them, ‘Muslims don’t believe in the Cross. If I am
Muslim, I don’t wear a cross.’ Students don’t have a big vision of
the differences between Christianity and Islam.”

As the differences between these two religions grow sharper in many
Americans’ minds, the existence of Christians with Arab faces remains
mysterious. Yet 70 percent of Arab immigrants to the United States
are Christians. Even those of us who have heard this statistic once,
twice, or 10 times struggle to comprehend it. Arab American
Christians never appear on the news, have no voice in the academy,
never figure in the plotlines of The West Wing or Law & Order. Who
are these Christians, why have they come here, and how do they
experience America?

How many?
Identifying and counting Arab Christians is difficult. The religions
of immigrants to this country, even those who cite persecution as a
reason for their immigration, have not been recorded consistently or
reliably. The U.S. Bureau of the Census only collected information on
religion from 1900 to 1936, and it relied on information from
religious bodies themselves.

It is difficult to find even ballpark estimates of Arabs in America.
Recent estimates range from 2 to 3 million, of whom 1.4 to 2.1
million would be Christians. In lieu of hard immigration or census
data, membership statistics for the American branches of Middle
Eastern churches seem to be the next best option. But these numbers
are tricky as well, for three reasons.

First, not all Arab Christian immigrants hail from historically
Middle Eastern churches. Naim S. Aweida of Boulder, Colorado,
exemplifies this complication. When he was born, in Haifa in 1928,
his family had been Anglican for two generations, converted by
19th-century missionaries. When he married Aida, a Greek Orthodox
girl from Nablus, she became Anglican, too. The couple has lived in
the United States since 1967.

Second, many Arab Christians switch churches when they come to
America. For example, when several hundred Lebanese Maronite
Christians settled in North Carolina in the early 20th century, they
found no Maronite church to attend. Instead, because the Maronite
Church is in communion with the Roman Catholic Church, the immigrants
joined Catholic congregations. Now there are two Maronite churches in
North Carolina, but many Lebanese believers choose to remain
Catholic – to the chagrin of others in their ethnic community.

Third, Middle Eastern churches that establish themselves in the
United States attract non-Arab members. The Antiochian Orthodox
Church leads this trend. Says Father Bill Caldaroni, pastor of Holy
Trinity Antiochian Orthodox Church in Warrenville, Illinois, “My
parish is made up almost entirely of converts to Orthodoxy with names
like Caldaroni, Adams, Morrison, Jager, Thiel. We have only one Arab
in our midst.” Ethnic shifts have affected other churches, too,
though not so dramatically.

Despite these complications, looking at Middle Eastern churches in
the United States is a good way to begin to understand Arab American
Christians. The investigation also opens many forgotten chapters in
church history.

Foreign names, forgotten roots
Antiochian Orthodox, Assyrian, Chaldean, Coptic, Maronite, Melkite,
Syriac Orthodox – these names sound foreign and ancient. They are.
These Middle Eastern churches all trace their origins to the earliest
years of Christianity. Copts claim that the Apostle Mark began their
church in Egypt, while Syriac Orthodox believe they possess records
of correspondence between King Abgar of Edessa and Jesus himself.
Though these traditions may sound exaggerated to Protestants, they
convey the deep sense of rootedness at the heart of Arab
Christianity.

Strong roots have enabled Arab Christians to hold fast through a
remarkably turbulent history. First came persecution under the Roman
Empire. Then came major church councils, at which some Middle Eastern
churches (notably the Assyrian, Coptic, and Syriac Orthodox) broke
with what would become the Roman and Eastern Orthodox mainstream.
Believers whose representatives sparred over doctrine at councils
sometimes fought each other afterward, usually with economic and
social pressure but sometimes with weapons.

In the seventh and eighth centuries, Islam swept across two-thirds of
what had been the Christian world. Initially, some Christians were
not concerned. Being treated like second-class citizens in Muslim
society had advantages over being treated like heretics by mainstream
overlords. Churches generally stood unmolested, and select Christians
gained prestige as physicians, scholars, and government ministers.

Eventually, though, Islam exacted a steep toll. Middle Eastern
churches grew more isolated from the Christian mainstream and from
each other. Their worship languages, mainly Coptic and Syriac, were
smothered by Arabic. Christians were not allowed to evangelize, and
their numbers dropped through conversion, attrition, and sporadic
persecution.

The 20th century, though, probably saw more disruption of the
religious balance in the Middle East than any preceding century.
Persistent violence, among Arab nations as well as between them and
Israel, has destabilized the region politically, socially,
economically, and religiously. Destabilization has hit those in the
most precarious position – Christians – hardest.

Ten to twelve million Copts remain in Egypt, where they have some
political power and legal protection. In all other Arab nations (and
the area of Palestine), far more Christians have left than have
stayed. Lebanon, for example, has retained 1.5 million of its
Christians, while 6 million Christians of Lebanese descent live
elsewhere. Even 1.5 million Christians is a larger population than
can be found in the rest of the Arab world. Of course, as late as the
1960s, Lebanon had a Christian majority.

The first wave of Arab emigration occured from 1880 to 1920. Most of
these people left their homes to find better educational or economic
opportunities. Others sought religious freedom, or to escape
persecution.

During World War I, Arab Christians in what was then known as Syria
were attacked on all sides as the Ottoman Empire crumbled. Nearby,
millions of Armenians, mostly Christians, perished in the century’s
first genocide.

Extra Scrutiny
More recently, persecution has again become the main reason for
leaving the Middle East.

Arab Christians undoubtedly enjoy more freedom and economic
opportunity in America than in the Middle East. But just as the
situation back home is not as unremittingly bad as one might expect,
the situation here is not as overwhelmingly good.

Like all immigrants, Arab Christians struggle to get all of their
paperwork in order, to find jobs and housing, to communicate in a
second language, and to establish social connections. They face extra
scrutiny because they are Arab, which for some Americans means Muslim
and potential terrorist. Yet in another sense they are invisible,
because they are not Muslim. The American Arab Anti-Defamation League
does not speak for them, and neither, it seems, does anyone else.

Occasionally Arab American churches try to speak for themselves. One
of the more vocal is the Assyrian Church of the East, which can
afford to make pronouncements because its patriarch, Mar Dinkha IV,
resides far outside the reach of Muslim authorities – in Morton Grove,
Illinois. He temporarily moved his headquarters there, from the
ancient Persian capital of Ctesiphon, in 1980.

The Assyrian Church would like to play an active role in
reconstructing its homeland, Iraq, and instituting protections for
ethnic and religious minorities. To this end, Dinkha called a meeting
of Chicago-area Assyrians on May 15, 2003. The meeting included
delegates from the Assyrian National Congress, the Assyrian
Democratic Party, the Assyrian American League, and many other
organizations, but its press release prompted no reporting.

At the opposite end of the outspokenness spectrum are American Copts.
Their leader, Pope Shenouda III, resides in Cairo, and he strongly
discourages members of his flock in the “lands of migration” from
making political statements. If Copts abroad disparage Egypt’s
Muslim-dominated government, the Copts back home might pay.

The government has cracked down before. Egyptian president Anwar
Sadat placed Shenouda under house arrest for four years in the 1980s
to quell local hostilities between Muslims and Christians. Westerners
scarcely noticed the incarceration. Shenouda has cultivated stronger
ties outside Egypt since then, but he remains anxious about conflict
with authorities.

Separation from the homeland is spiritually wrenching. The Maronites,
who are among the most acculturated Arab American Christians, feel
this tension acutely. Many Maronites today are second-, third-, or
even fourth-generation Americans. Maronite churches have been
established here long enough to develop an identity separate from the
church in Lebanon.

Rosanne Solomon, who attended the summer 2003 Maronite Patriarchal
Synod in Lebanon as a lay delegate, likens the American Maronite
church to a time capsule. She feels that Americans have kept beliefs
and practices that Christians in Lebanon have abandoned. “We’re more
Maronite than they are,” she told a November 2003 meeting of the
National Apostolate of Maronites in Durham, North Carolina.

America: Two Views
How Maronite, or Coptic, or Chaldean, or otherwise traditional Arab
American Christians remain is one question. How American they become
is another. Father Mouris raves about “this blessed country.” He
extols the freedom for Christians, clergy and lay, to participate in
government and influence society. He likewise appreciates America’s
technological and educational resources, as well as the people who
have made them possible.

Such blessings “came from the hard-working of the people,” he says.
“All of them, they work like the bees, working hard to make honey.
Now we see America is good honey.”

Father Joseph Thomas, an American-born priest of the Basilian
Salvatorian Order who is working to establish a Maronite parish in
Raleigh, North Carolina, sees America differently. He worries that
the country’s reaction to the 9/11 attacks is eroding democracy and
taking an unseen toll on Arab Americans.

“A lot of people just go along with whatever developments take place
in our legal system, but meanwhile, people who don’t look right are
really suffering from a very truncated vision of democracy,” he says.
“My [Lebanese] grandfather owned a restaurant in Richmond, Virginia.
If he were living today, he might be very much fearful of what might
be done to him or said to him. But in World War II, he used to feed
any serviceman who came in with his army uniform on the house.

“People don’t realize that when Muslims or Arabic Christians – just on
the basis of ethnicity, name, or looks – are being tagged by government
officials, even though we ourselves don’t experience it, our American
identity, everything we knew to be American, is poisoned.”

Arab Christians remain a small minority in America, but their numbers
continue to rise. The Antiochian Orthodox, Assyrian, Chaldean,
Coptic, Maronite, Melkite, and Syriac Orthodox traditions already
encompass more than 400 churches in America, spread across nearly
every state. Penetrating the American state of mind regarding all
matters Middle Eastern will take considerably more time.

Elesha Coffman is the former managing editor of Christian History and
a doctoral student at Duke University.

ARMENIA THIS WEEK
Friday, March 26, 2004

SENIOR U.S. OFFICIAL VISITS ARMENIA
President Robert Kocharian and Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian met with
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage this Friday to discuss bilateral
relations and regional concerns. Armitage was in Armenia as part of a
regional tour that also included Ukraine and Azerbaijan. At a press
conference following the meetings, Armitage stressed the continued
importance the U.S. puts on relations with Armenia and the region, which he
said were in recent years impacted by U.S. preoccupation with Afghanistan
and Iraq.

Armitage noted a “very high degree of cooperation” that already exists
between Armenia and the United States, specifically noting Armenia’s
readiness to contribute to the stabilization of post-war Iraq. The Armenian
President’s press service quoted Kocharian as also expressing satisfaction
with bilateral relations and readiness to expand areas of cooperation.

The U.S. provided significant economic assistance to Armenia, helping the
country overcome the energy and humanitarian crises in the early 1990s and
playing an important role in the ongoing economic recovery. Next month, the
two governments are expected to sign an agreement to boost security at
Armenia’s nuclear power plant in view of international terrorist threats.

Turning to regional issues, Armitage said that some progress on opening of
the Armenian-Turkish border might be made after Turkish concerns regarding
northern Iraq and Cyprus are “ameliorated.” Armitage said that “I think, to
be fair, Turkish friends have had their hands full recently.”

Ignoring U.S. and European Union calls, Turkey has refused to establish
diplomatic relations with Armenia and closed the border in 1993 to support
Azerbaijan’s effort to blockade Armenia. Following meetings between Armenian
and Turkish officials last year, it appeared that some progress could be
made. But last January, Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul denied any
plans to change Turkish policies. Pressure from Azerbaijan and its allies in
the Turkish military and political elite reportedly account for the
continuation of the blockade.

This week, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev claimed that a peaceful
resolution to the Karabakh conflict would become impossible, should Turkey
open the border. Armitage, while refusing to directly qualify Aliyev’s
comments, in effect disagreed, maintaining the U.S. line that the opening
would be mutually beneficial.

Armitage did not sound too optimistic about progress in the Karabakh peace
process, saying only that “there is a possibility eventually of a
resolution.” He noted that the sides were close to an agreement in 2001, but
the late Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev in the end had “great
difficulty with the proposal at home.” His son and successor Ilham Aliyev
has since indicated that he was not in a hurry to settle the problem. This
week, Aliyev cancelled a meeting between Oskanian and the Azeri Foreign
Minister planned by French, Russian and U.S. mediators for next Monday,
saying that the meeting’s agenda was not “precise enough.” (Sources: Armenia
This Week 1-16, 2-13; AP 3-22; Arminfo 3-26; RFE/RL Armenia Report 3-26)

U.S.-ARMENIA TRADE TIES CONTINUE TO STRENGTHEN
Trade links between Armenia and the United States, while still modest in
overall terms, continued to expand last year, the U.S. Census Bureau
reported. The bilateral turnover stood at over $140 million, slightly less
than $143 million in 2002, but more than twice as high as in 1998. Purchase
and leasing of civilian aircraft by Armenia’s private carriers from U.S.
companies amounted to $108 million in 2002-2003.

Jewelry, meanwhile, accounted for fully one-half of Armenia’s export to the
U.S., which stood at $68 million in 2002-2003. Other major Armenian exports
for the same period included textile and apparel ($20 million) and
agribusiness products ($3.4 million).

By contrast, Georgia’s exports to the U.S. were at $17 million in 2002 and
$56 million in 2003, with most of the difference accounted for by a re-sale
of $30 million worth of petroleum products. Azerbaijan’s exports were at $26
million in 2002 and under $10 million in 2003, with petroleum products
accounting for most of the value. (Source: )

“BEST” ANTI-ARMENIAN WORKS AWARDED
The Azerbaijani Ministry of National Security (MNS), a successor to the
Soviet-era KGB, this week issued awards of up to $2,000 for the “best”
propaganda works targeting Armenians. The first prize in the books category
went to the Azerbaijani National Academy of Sciences’ Human Rights Institute
for an “encyclopedia” entitled “Crimes against humanity perpetrated by
Armenian terrorist and bandit formations (19th-20th centuries).”
Incidentally, the hard-line National Security Minister Namik Abbasov was
also honored for personally funding the publication of the same book.

The MNS granted other top money prizes to films entitled “Bloody terror” and
“Plague” (in apparent references to Armenians). And a Diploma was granted to
Tomris Azeri, a New Jersey-based President of the Azerbaijani Society of
America.

Meanwhile, the campaign in support of an Azeri accused of brutally murdering
an Armenian officer during NATO-sponsored English-language courses in
Hungary, continued with fundraising, public meetings, a web site and stipend
granted to Safarov’s family for the duration of his imprisonment. (Sources:
Arm. This Week 1-30, 2-20, 27; Zerkalo 3-19, 24; Azertag.com 3-26)

A WEEKLY NEWSLETTER PUBLISHED BY THE ARMENIAN ASSEMBLY OF AMERICA
122 C Street, N.W., Suite 350, Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 393-3434 FAX
(202) 638-4904
E-Mail [email protected] WEB

RIA Novosti, Russia
March 26 2004

INTERNATIONAL HEADMASTERS’ SESSION IN MOSCOW

MOSCOW, March 26, 2004. (RIA Novosti) – The backing of compatriots
abroad is a priority trend of the Moscow government’s work, deputy
head of the Moscow education department Yuri Goryachev said on Friday
summing up the results of the international session of headmasters of
Russian-language schools.

The Moscow government closely cooperates with compatriots’
organizations abroad, he noted. “We have been annually sending
textbooks to Russian schools abroad for 10 years already and helping
to upgrade teachers’ qualification,” Mr. Goryachev added.

Over 60 delegates from Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Bulgaria,
Hungary, Germany, Georgia, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia,
Lithuania, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine and
Estonia took part in the session. They discussed information exchange
and mutual professional support for the Russian language learning and
teaching with the use of new information and educational
technologies. They also considered the complex target medium-term
program of support for compatriots abroad for 2004-2005.

RIA Novosti, Russia
March 26 2004

ARMENIAN AND AZERI FOREIGN MINISTERS NOT MEET IN PRAGUE

YEREVAN, MARCH 26, 2004. (RIA NOVOSTI). The meeting between the
Armenian and Azeri foreign ministers in Prague was postponed because
Azerbaijan was not prepared for it, said the European Union special
representative for the South Caucasus, ambassador Heikki Talvitie.

“I do not exactly know all the reasons for which the authorities of
Azerbaijan decided to postpone the meeting. But I believe that they
were simply not ready to hold it,” Talvitie said.

At the same time, the ambassador stressed that the point at issue was
the postponement of only one meeting, and this fact should not be
assessed as the termination of the negotiating process on the
settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Talvitie also said that during his meetings in Baku he became
convinced that the Azeri leaders understood there was no alternative
to the negotiating process.

RIA Novosti, Russia
March 26 2004

CATHOLICOS OF ALL ARMENIANS MEETS RUSSIAN VNESHTORGBANK PRESIDENT

YEREVAN, March 26, 2004. (RIA Novosti) – Catholicos of All Armenians
Garegin II met with President and chairman of the board of the
Russian Vneshtorgbank (Foreign Trade Bank) Andrei Kostin.

The establishment of a united bank will help to solve Armenian
economic problems, Andrei Kostin said.

Garegin II expressed satisfaction with the development of
Russian-Armenian economic relations, the Catholicos’ chancellery
said. “It will have a positive influence on Russian-Armenian
friendship,” Garegin II added.

Vneshtorgbank signed a contract on the purchase of 70 percent of
Armsberbank shares in Yerevan on March 24, 2004.

Agency WPS
What the Papers Say. Part B (Russia)
March 26, 2004, Friday

SERGEI IVANOV’S RECIPROCITY

SOURCE: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, March 26, 2004, p. 6

by Vladimir Mukhin

The “Rossia v Globalnoi Politike” (Russia in Global Politics) journal
quoted Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov as saying that NATO expansion
might cause Russia to revise its military strategy – specifically,
its plans for nuclear forces development. This sharply-worded
statement was made in response to NATO intentions to deploy four
F-16S in Lithuania for protection of Baltic aircraft (the Baltic
states are to become NATO members on April 2).

Inspecting the 32nd Air Defense Corps in Tver this Wednesday, Ivanov
announced that Russia is waiting for explanations of the potential
appearance of NATO facilities and forces near its state borders,
especially in the Baltic states. “If deployment of the NATO military
infrastructure in the Baltic states is interpreted as posing a
threat, Russia will take adequate countermeasures,” Ivanov said.

The minister did not explain what kind of measures these would be. At
the same time, it is hard to lend much credit to promises to
reorganize the Russian nuclear forces after the recent statements of
Navy Commander Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov that the Pyotr Veliky
(Peter the Great) cruiser could blow up at any moment, and that ICBMs
carries by strategic nuclear submarines are technically obsolete
(only one launch out of five tried last month was successful).

An active phase of military exercises has taken place in some Russian
regions and CIS countries. It involved several Air Force regiments,
air defense units, flotillas, almost 20,000 troops, and units from
the national armies of CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization
members.

In fact, military activity was noticed across all post-Soviet
territory where the Russian military is stationed: off the Crimean
coast, in Akhalkalaki (Georgia), Gyumri (Armenia), and Tajikistan.

Estonia has already complained that a Russian aircraft had had the
temerity to trespass. Ukraine also responded to activeness of the
Russian Air Force above the Black Sea. It ran an exercise in the
Crimea, right near the area where aircraft of the Russian Black Sea
Fleet and its own aircraft were based. Ukrainian commandos practiced
dealing with illegal armed formations at airfields. Russian units
were not invited to participate in the exercise.

Estonia made its airspace open for NATO aircraft yesterday. A week
earlier, Ukraine made its territory available to NATO contingents for
emergencies.

Tension between Russia and NATO is mounting with each passing day.
Well-informed and reliable sources say that US Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld’s visit to Uzbekistan last month resulted in an
agreement with official Tashkent on the use of military facilites in
Uzbekistan by American mobile forces. Russia promised to bolster its
Air Force unit in Kant, Kyrgyzstan, in response.

The Russian 92nd Military Base in Georgia is active these days.
Georgian special forces responded to this activeness with an exercise
of their own in Vaziani. Abkhazia is mobilizing its troops. The
situation is anything but tranquil. Neither is the situation any more
tranquil in South Ossetia and Trans-Dniester, the latter vehemently
objecting to withdrawal of Russian military hardware from the region.

All post-Soviet territory is a zone of conflicts, exercises, and
maneuvers. All this could even lead to a shooting war.

Agency WPS
What the Papers Say. Part B (Russia)
March 26, 2004, Friday

EUROPEAN UNION TAKES THE CAUCASUS UNDER ITS WING

SOURCE: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, March 26, 2004, p. 5

by Rauf Mirkadyrov

Hejki Talvitije, special envoy of the European Union in the southern
Caucasus, has been touring the region for almost a week. The visit
was scheduled to begin with Azerbaijan, but Talvitije changed his
plans and visited Georgia first, where he himself said he contributed
to the Adzharian crisis management. In fact, the envoy did not come
to the region in the first place to settle conflicts between Tbilisi
and Batumi.

Talvitije informed regional leaders that the European Union has
agreed to include them in its New Neighbors Program. The final
decision will be made before June, he said; the European Union is
currently working on new recommendations for countries of the
southern Caucasus.

Some analysts believe that renewed activity by the European Union in
the southern Caucasus means it is aiming to challenge the United
States in the region, rather than Russia. On his recent visit to
Azerbaijan, Lynn Pascoe of the US State Department said that
Washington is closely monitoring the activities of the European Union
in the region, and would not surrender the initiative.

President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan will visit Brussels, official
capital of the European Union, in late May or early June. This was
announced during Talvitije’s visit by Antonius de Vries, economic
representative of the European Union in Azerbaijan. According to de
Vries, Aliyev is going to Brussels to discuss bilateral relations and
transportation of the Caspian oil to Europe. Aliyev will meet with
Romano Prodi of the European Commission and commissars Lajola di
Palassio (transportation and energy) and Chris Paten (foreign
affairs).

Integration of countries of the southern Caucasus into European and
European-Atlantic structures may squeeze Russia from the region
altogether. Russia’s only strategic ally in the region, Armenia, will
face a difficult choice – succumbing to Moscow and stay away from
European structures or turn its back on the Kremlin. Anti-Russian
slogans could be heard in Yerevan on the eve of Talvitije’s visit.
Said Yerdjanik Abgarjan, a spokesman for Organization Armat and Party
of National Movement, “Continuation of economic and political
cooperation with Russia will cost Armenia its future.” Adbarjan is
convinced that the phrase “Armenia is a strategic ally of Russia”
should be used sparingly and cautiously, that Armenia should join
powerful international structures like the European Union or NATO, be
more pragmatic and try to have as little to do with Russia as
possible.

Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia fear that the European Union and
United States, intent on military-political expansion into the
region, will facilitate resolution of local conflicts in the manner
of the Adzharian crisis management. The latter persuaded everyone
that stability based on simply mothballing conflicts is extremely
fragile.

Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
March 26, 2004, Friday

TWO SIDES OF THE 102ND BASE

SOURCE: Nezavisimoe Voennoe Obozrenie, No 10, March 19 – 25, 2004, p.8

by Igor Plugatarev

Several hundred meters divide checkpoints of two military units in
Yerevan outskirts.Closer to the city is the Russian regiment, and the
other one is a communication regiment of the Armenian Armed Forces.
According to the military, both units are elements of the Russian
102nd military base in Armenia. It means that they comprise a single
military structure. And yet, differences are undeniable. Entrance to
the Russian checkpoint is barred by slabs of concrete making entry
more difficult. The Armenian unit does not have this fortification
against terrorists. The Armenians are surprised as well, that Russian
soldiers manning checkpoints always wear heavy bulletproof vests.
“Why bother?” the locals shrug.

Armenia does care for the military. Lieutenant Colonel Vartan
Stepanjan, 43, communication regiment commander (he became an officer
by chance, it happened during the war in Nagorno-Karabakh) claims
that officers of the Armenian army have no reasons to complain.
“Status of our officers is higher than that of an average citizen,”
he explained. “Average salary in Armenia amounts to 15,000 drams
while officers are paid three or four times that. Sometimes, they are
even paid six or seven times that, depending on the position.” The
sum is an equivalent of between $150 and $250, while average teachers
for example are paid $30-50. “Moreover, salaries in the army are
always paid on time,” Stepanjan added.

The two cantonments are divided by a concrete wall topped with barbed
wire. There is a metal door painted green with an inspection hole in
the wall.

“What about the division of functions from the point of view of
combat tasks?” this correspondent inquired. “There is no definite
division,” Stepanjan replied. “Russian servicemen and we accomplish
whatever missions are given us.” “Any problems with the language?” –
“No. All negotiations are restricted to the upper level of command.
Everybody speaks good Russian there. At the same time, almost all our
soldiers speak Russia too because it is taught at schools.” Almost
all soldiers in the regiment are Armenians.

According to Stepanjan, the regiment is a unit of permanent combat
readiness. It provides communications for Supreme Commander-in-Chief
Robert Kocharjan, Defense Minister Serzh Sarkisjan, and chief of the
General Staff. Military hardware here is of Soviet vintage or Russian
(that is so throughout the Armenian army). The regiment is between
15% and 20% men under complement which enables it to deal with the
tasks dished out by the command. The regiment was in charge of
communications of the united command post of the Russian army group
in Armenia in the past. These days, this is the task of the Russian
communication battalion withdrawn from Georgia to Gyumri (former
Leninakan).

The Armenian national army is a carbon copy of the Soviet Army. All
four battle codes are verbatim copies of codes of the Soviet Army.

Everything in old brick barracks is the way it as in the Soviet Army
too.

All soldiers come from the provinces. Under the national legislation,
a conscript cannot be assigned to an unit closer than 50 kilometers
from his home. Soldiers are drafted for two years. They are paid
1,560 drams (approximately $3 or 100 Russian rubles). According to
commanders, their subordinates do not have anything to complain
about. They do not look hungry or frightened indeed.

Neither do soldiers of the Armenian national army complain of cruelty
in the barracks. “I cannot say that we do not have it in the army at
all,” Stepanjan said. “I served in a lot of places and units and I
can tell you that we do not have cruelty in the barracks by 98%.
There is no such thing in my regiment here.” The officer ascribes it
to “commanders’ efforts, our mentality, attitude of the people toward
the army, and our traditions.” There are other problems – AWOLs and
drinking – but Stepanjan is philosophical about that. “Soldiers will
remain soldiers,” he said.

In 2003, Stepanjan’s regiment participated in the exercise of eleven
CIS and eight NATO countries. Said Stepanjan, “Watching our guys
handle the military hardware, the Americans wanted to know how they
were and how long they had already served. We informed them that some
servicemen had spent six months in service, others twelve months. The
Americans were impressed by our professionalism.”

The Armenian military does not think too much of the Americans. “They
are poor shooters. Their vaunted assault rifles misfired all too
frequently at shooting ranges. Not so our guys who hit all targets
with their AKMs and K-3s” (an Armenian automatic rifle resembling the
Israeli Uzi – Nezavisimoe Voennoe Obozrenie).

As a matter of fact, the Armenians are convinced that NATO servicemen
participating in that exercise were “mostly CIA and army
intelligence. They came to find out the state of affairs here, to
gauge our fighting spirit, and see what military hardware we
operated.”