Month: November 2006

ARMENIAN NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY: METHODS OF FORMULATION
by Colonel Seyran Shahsuvarjan, Press Attache of the Defense Ministry of Armenia
Translated by A. Ignatkin
Source: Novye Vremya (Yerevan), November 9, 2006, EV
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
November 15, 2006 Wednesday
ARMENIA IS ABOUT TO COMPLETE WORK ON THE NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY;
An interview with Major General Gaik Kotandjan.
Interdepartmental Commission for the National Security Strategy had
the draft document examined in the leading professional centers
of Washington, Moscow, and Brussels. Colonel Shahsuvarjan of the
republican Defense Ministry met with Commission Secretary Major
General Gaik Kotandjan who graciously agreed to answer some questions
concerning the methods of formulation of the document.
Project leader Kotandjan, advisor to the Defense Minister of the
Republic of Armenia, studied at the leading scientific centers of
Russia, United States, and West Europe. Kotandjan is a specialist
in the sphere of political science of national security whose
authority is recognized by the Russian Academy of Management, Center
of International Relations Studies of the Diplomatic Academy of the
Russian Foreign Ministry, and Department of Military and Political
Sciences of the Military Academy of the Russian General Staff.
Kotandjan teaches counter-terrorism at the National Security School of
the US University of National Defense. He finished the senior officer
training courses of the G. Marshall European Center of Security and
RAND Defense and Security Analysis Program (United States).
Question: Could you please explain exactly how the strategy was
formulated?
Gaik Kotandjan: The Defense Ministry of Armenia has been working
on it since 1992, since inception of the Armed Forces of independent
Armenia. I’d like to make an emphasis on close contacts and cooperation
in the course of the work with progressive experts who studied the
strategy of transition processes in the post-perestroika democratic
Russia. We appreciate help from our colleagues from the Center of
International Relations Studies of the Diplomatic Academy of the
Russian Foreign Ministry and Russian Academy of Management who stayed
in touch with colleagues from the Harvard and Yale specializing
in political sciences of transition periods. Their cooperation was
extremely beneficial. As a matter of fact, also helpful were contacts
with experts from the Russian Foundation of National and International
Security and Russian Academy of Military Sciences.
Revision of “Fundamentals of military policy of the Republic of
Armenia: military-political aspect of national security,” a guiding
document of the Defense Ministry, began in 2000, when Serj Sarkisjan
became defense minister again.
Knowing the methods used in composition of the Russian national
strategy concept, Sarkisjan decided to push back the horizons of
theoretic knowledge of our Defense Ministry in the sphere of national
security through an appeal to the leading research centers of the
United States and Europe. A specialist of the Armenian Defense
Ministry was dispatched to study programs of the US University of
National Defense, RAND Corporation, and Marshall Center (“Formulation
of National Security Strategy”, “New Techniques of Defense and Security
Analysis in the 21st Century”, and “Asymmetric Threats in the National
Security Framework”). Aware of the changes taking place around Armenia,
our specialists also mastered the “Strategy of NATO Transformation
in International Security Framework” NATO Staff Officer Program.
Question: Does it mean that the Armenian document is a carbon copy
of the American or Russian original?
Gaik Kotandjan: Armenian military-political leadership is aware of
the difficulties a certain Central European country encountered when
it all but copied the American document. We know for a fact that some
post-Soviet countries contracted foreign specialists to draft their
national security concepts. They merely had the documents translated
into national languages and went through the motions of having their
own specialists involved in the process.
We know better than that. We drafted the document ourselves, just
using experience and expertise of the best professional schools of
Russia and the West.
Question: Is there anything unique that distinguishes the end product
perhaps?
Gaik Kotandjan: From the standpoint of content, the strategy stipulates
a multifold balance of security bearing points and transformation of
society through democratization and integration into the international
community. There is one other distinctive feature. The Commission was
working on two mutually complementary documents at once: the National
Security Strategy itself and a package of departmental programs that
will see to its implementation.
Question: There were reports that the draft document would be submitted
to the leading centers abroad to get their opinion…
Gaik Kotandjan: US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Russian
Secretary of the Security Council Igor Ivanov, and NATO leaders
responded to Commission Chairman Sarkisjan’s request and studied
the document.
Question: What will you do now to promote the National Security
Strategy?
Gaik Kotandjan: Enlarged meetings of the Science Councils of the
Yerevan State University and presidium of the Armenian Academy of
Sciences will discuss the document in November. Experts from scientific
circles and non-governmental organizations will also be invited.
The document is to be discussed by parliament at an open meeting in
November, as well. Once that is done, the Interdepartmental Commission
will forward the document to the government.

KARABAKH FOR GEORGIA: RUSSIA OFFERS ARMENIA A DIPLOMATIC DEAL
by Igor Dmitriyev
Source: Versiya, No 43, November 6 – 12, 2006, p. 9
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
November 15, 2006 Wednesday
MOSCOW PROMISED YEREVAN ASSISTANCE IN KARABAKH CONFLICT RESOLUTION
IN ARMENIA’S FAVOR IN RETURN FOR ITS SUPPORT IN THE RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN
CONFLICT; Russian-Armenian relations: mutually beneficial improvement.
Negotiations between the presidents of Russia and Armenia that took
place in Moscow last week marked a turn for a dramatic improvement
of the bilateral relations between the two countries.
According to official reports alone, Russia is expected to deliver
$26 million worth of munitions, weapons, and military hardware to
Armenia before the year is over.
According to what information this newspaper has compiled, Russia
promised Armenia assistance in the Karabakh conflict resolution
in a manner that will benefit Yerevan. President of Armenia Robert
Kocharjan is asked in return to support Russia in its deteriorating
conflict with Georgia. After all, the latter includes a whole region
with the predominantly Armenian population – Samtskhe-Javakheti. Mass
anti-government actions there (with highways cut off, for example)
will become a formidable element of political blackmail the Kremlin
is applying on Mikhail Saakashvili.
The Kremlin even suggested a solution to the main problem – that
of the transport corridor bypassing Georgia that is located between
Russia and Armenia. Moscow suggests a roundabout way across Iran and
the Black Sea. To secure its hold on Yerevan, Russia bought a part
of the gas pipeline (141 km long) between Iran and Armenia that is
to be turned on in late 2006. Russia already owns 90% of the Armenian
energy framework. Acquisition of the Armenian railroads and Armentel
(the only telecommunications company in the republic) is speculated
over. Along with everything else, the Kremlin can blackmail Yerevan
with the threat to start advancing the Russian-Azerbaijani relations.
After all, President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev is expected in Moscow
soon now.
It seems that the position of the Kremlin becomes decisive for the
future of Nagorno-Karabakh.

NATO DOES NOT HAVE A UNIFORM APPROACH TO PROBLEMATIC ZONES OF THE CIS
Translated by Pavel Pushkin
Source: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, November 13, 2006, p. 16
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
November 15, 2006 Wednesday
NATO WILL NOT HELP;
by Sergei Markedonov, deputy director of the department of inter-ethnic
relations department of the Institute of Political and Military
Analysis
RUSSIA IS SCARED BY NATO EXPANSION ON ACCOUNT OF CIS COUNTRIES BUT
NATO DOES NOT HAVE A UNIFORM APPROACH TO THIS PROBLEM; A new round
of Russian-Georgian confrontation highlighted the role of NATO in
post-Soviet geopolitics and in resolving the “frozen conflicts”
in the CIS.
A new round of Russian-Georgian confrontation highlighted the role
of NATO in post-Soviet geopolitics and in resolving the “frozen
conflicts” in the CIS. On the one hand, it is alarming that countries
that announce entrance into NATO as their strategic prospect view
Russia as a “potential opponent” and view its role in resolving the
“frozen conflicts” only negatively. There is also the other side.
There is a question, “What does NATO to do with this?”
NATO is not a branch of the US Department of State. Overall, it is
wrong to identify NATO and the US. NATO is an organization established
on the basis of a treaty among separate national states having their
own interests often different from each other including such interests
in post-Soviet space. NATO includes Bulgaria and Romania that wish
to internationalize the Black Sea, whereas Turkey is interested in
preserving “Black Sea Ltd” where the principal shareholders are
Turkey and Russia (that is not a NATO member at all)! Such NATO
members as Poland and Romania have different views on post-Soviet
space too. Poland does its best to maintain territorial integrity of
Ukraine and acts as its patron on the path to NATO and the European
Union. Romania has a difficult and controversial history of border
relations with Ukraine. Although the problem of North Bukovina
has remained in the past, Romania is still disputing belonging of
Zmeiny Island to Ukraine. Besides, Romania is a patron of Moldova in
NATO. Hence there is difference in the views of Warsaw and Bucharest on
the Trans-Dniester regulation. It is possible to recall that France is
a co-chair of the Minsk OSCE group for the Nagorno-Karabakh regulation
and Turkey has had economic blockage of Armenia (because of occupation
of a part of Azerbaijani territory by this republic) since 1993.
Thus, NATO is a complex institution that makes all decisions
(including those on attitude to the “frozen conflicts”) on the basis
of consensus. This circumstance turns NATO (especially after its
expansion) into an insufficiently mobile and efficient institution.
Besides the policy of NATO in the CIS (as an institution) there is
also policy of separate NATO members in the Caucasus or in other
regions of the CIS. Whereas the US views the Caucasus as a rear line
of its Middle Eastern front, the European Union countries view it as
a testing ground for trial of the “good neighborhood policy.”
So, what is the challenge of NATO to Russia? In our opinion, one of the
main problems of Russia’s diplomacy is inability to clearly formulate
the essence of “NATO fears.” Most likely, Russia is afraid of not
NATO itself that experiences bad times. Russia is rather afraid of
NATO expansion on account of the states being, to put this mildly,
unfriendly to our country, which may change the Russian vector of
NATO policy. In this aspect the biggest apprehensions are caused by
the “special conditions” stated by Brussels for NATO neophytes. The
NATO establishment is insufficiently demanding to the former Soviet
republics.
To date, one of the most important conditions for entrance into NATO
was an internal consensus in the political elite and in the population
of a candidate country. It is obvious that there is no such consensus
in Ukraine or in Georgia. If we speak about Georgia in the borders of
the former Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic (with Abkhazia and South
Ossetia), it is clear that such consensus is impossible. This idea is
rejected in Tskhinvali and Sokhumi. However, it seems that nobody hears
this. At any rate, after passing the resolution of the UN Security
Council on Georgia opinion of official NATO representatives was
corrected noticeably. In one of the latest interviews NATO Secretary
General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer admitted conduction of “intensive dialog”
with Georgia but said, “This does not mean that Georgia will soon
enter NATO. Although Tbilisi has been obviously striving for this,
further steps will depend on the extent to which Georgia is adherent
to the basic principles of NATO like peaceful resolving of internal
and external contradictions. The matter is about resolving conflicts
with Abkhazia and South Ossetia.”
That is why it is logical to ask: is it worth encouraging potential
members with prospects of their soonest entrance into NATO or is this
a long and drawn out process? Would it be more honest to hint that
NATO is not a political resource in their struggle against Russia?
Moreover so that their own ethnocratic and authoritarian trends are
often disguised as the struggle against “empire ambitions.”

LAW PASSED TO ALLOW CHURCHES RECLAIM LAND
The Irish Times
November 15, 2006 Wednesday
TURKEY: Charitable foundations can apply for restitution of property,
writes Nicholas Birch in Istanbul
The reasons courts gave for confiscating eight properties belonging to
an Istanbul Armenian church between 1987 and 1993 were always the same.
According to the deeds, the buildings belonged to St John and the
Archangel Gabriel. But who were these people? Judges sent inspectors
out to find them, but they came back empty-handed.
Now a new EU-backed law on charitable foundations is due to set the
record straight. Passed last Thursday by parliament and awaiting
presidential approval, the legislation gives foundations 18 months
to apply for the restitution of state-confiscated property. It also
foresees the appointment of a non-Muslim member to the state department
that oversees foundations.
“These are positive steps towards wiping out the effects of 1974,”
says Diran Bakar, a Turkish-Armenian lawyer, referring to a Turkish
Appeal Court decision to cancel real estate acquisitions made by
non-Muslim foundations since 1936. Coinciding with war on Cyprus,
the ruling led to the confiscation of at least 4,000 properties
belonging to Turkish Greeks, Jews and Armenians.
“Its aim was to dry up the minority communities’ economic resources,”
explains political scientist Elcin Macar, who believes that the
“founding philosophy of the Turkish Republic never had any space
for non-Muslims”.
Brussels has long-warned discrimination will have to stop if Turkey’s
EU bid is to succeed.
In its annual report on Turkey released last Wednesday, it criticised
Ankara for ongoing limitations to religious freedom, and recommended
the adoption of minority legislation in line with European Court of
Human Rights case law.
Yet, despite it providing the impulse behind the new law, few expect
Brussels to be satisfied with the end result. The law not only fails
to provide compensation for foundations whose confiscated property
has been sold on by the state, analysts point out, it also maintains
the distinction between Muslim and non-Muslim foundations.
“This is my country, I see my future here,” says Lakis Vingas,
businessman and member of Turkey’s 3,000-strong Greek community. “Yet
when I turn on the TV, it’s immediately clear that I’m seen as a
foreigner.” He is referring to the furious rows that surrounded
parliament’s discussion of the foundation bill.
Some deputies insisted the legislation would enable the Greek Orthodox
Patriarch – a parish priest for Ankara, first among equals for the
world’s Orthodox church – to build an Orthodox Vatican in central
Istanbul. Others worried it would involve handing Istanbul’s famed Agia
Sophia – once a church, then a mosque, now a museum – over to Greece.
In the case of opposition deputy Bayram Meral, prejudice took a less
whimsical form. “What’s this law about? It’s about giving Agop his
property back,” he railed, using a common Armenian name.
“Congratulations to the government! You ignore the villagers, the
workers and the farmers to worry yourself with Agop’s business.”
Baskin Oran, an expert on Turkish minorities, thinks such sentiments
are worryingly representative of an increasingly nationalistic
parliament. “Not only will this law not satisfy Europe, it’s highly
likely to damage relations further, as just another example of the
half-hearted reform process Turkey was criticised for in the report.”

ARMENIA’S NUCLEAR POWER PLANT RE-LAUNCHED AFTER MAINTENANCE
Prime-Tass English-language Business Newswire
November 15, 2006 Wednesday 2:02 PM EET
The Armenian Nuclear Power Plant has been re-launched after maintenance
and refueling, Lusine Arutyunyan, a representative of Armenia’s Energy
Ministry, told ITAR-TASS Wednesday.
The maintenance was finished three days ahead of the 45-day schedule,
Arutyunyan said.
The 440-megawatt power plant accounts for 40% of all electric power
produced in Armenia.
In 2003, Russia’s electric power monopoly UES took over financial
management of the power plant.
The E.U. has requested the closure of the power plant. However,
Armenia’s government says that is only possible if the country has
alternative electric power sources.
The country is considering building a new nuclear power plant but
lacks the U.S. $800 million necessary for the project, Armenia’s
Energy Minister Armen Movsesyan said.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

IRAQ CONVOY ATTACKERS CAUGHT BY POLISH FORCES – POLISH PREMIER
Polish Radio 1, Poland
Nov 14 2006
[Announcer] Perpetrators of the attack on a convoy in Iraq, in which
a Polish soldier died, have been caught. This has been reported by
Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski. Sergeant Tomasz Murkowski, 30,
died on Friday to Saturday night in an attack near the locality of
Al-Kut. A Slovak soldier also died. Another Pole and an Armenian were
wounded. The perpetrators fired at the vehicle which was taking the
soldiers back to base.
The prime minister said all of the attackers were now in Polish
servicemen’s hands.
[Kaczynski] Four are being questioned. One has pleaded guilty. The
work of our services which deal with the Polish units’ security in
Iraq is good.
[Announcer] The head of government reported that pensions would be
paid to the families of soldiers killed in Iraq. Defence Minister
Radoslaw Sikorski added that injured soldiers would have priority in
medical care. They will also be exempted from paying for medicines.
President Lech Kaczynski and the head of MON [Ministry of National
Defence] will take part in Sergeant Murkowski’s funeral tomorrow.

TURKISH, LUXEMBOURGIAN MINISTERS VIEW REFORMS, CYPRUS PROBLEM
Anatolia News Agency, Turkey
Nov 14 2006
Brussels, 14 November: “Criticisms that Turkey’s reforms on its way to
European Union (EU) membership slowed down stemmed from the inadequacy
in implementation rather than the willingness of the government,”
the Turkish state minister and chief negotiator for EU said on Tuesday
[14 November].
Speaking at a joint news conference after meeting Luxembourg’s minister
for EU affairs, Nicolas Schmit, [Ali] Babacan said he informed
executives from Luxembourg about Turkey’s efforts on reforms and
developments about Cyprus.
“Ninth Reform Package will be concluded soon. We make a very rapid
progress on human rights and freedom of speech,” Babacan noted.
He said reforms continue in economy, as well as in politics, stating
that Turkey maintained a rapid growth.
“The approach of the EU (which is) against enlargement causes
difficulty,” Babacan argued.
Turkish state minister emphasized that the process regarding Turkey’s
EU membership could be concluded within 3-4 years, stating that Turkey
would be ready for membership in 2014.
Replying to a question, Babacan said the fall-back in Turkish public
opinion’s support to the EU did not stem from the reform process but
from the statements of some European politicians against Turkey,
adoption by the French National Assembly of a bill making a crime
the denial of so-called Armenian genocide and injustice that Turkey
has to face on Cyprus.
Mentioning efforts of EU rotating president Finland on Cyprus,
Babacan said, “There is nothing submitted to the parties. There are
some ideas.” He said Turkey would open its ports to the Greek Cypriot
party in case the blockade on [self-declared] TRNC [Turkish Republic
of Northern Cyprus] is lifted.
Nicolas Schmit
On the other hand, Schmit said they were pleased over statements of
Turkey that it was open to dialogue on Cyprus.
“Turkey’s accession to the EU is a long process. Such a process is
necessary to make the societies understand each other better and
to believe that this process is in their own interest. Schmit said
the EU does not apply any sanction against the Turkish Republic of
Northern Cyprus (TRNC) and noted that lack of direct trade hampers
TRNC’s economic development.

TURKEY: GUL RULES OUT IRAQ’S FRAGMENTATION AS SOLUTION, COMMENTS ON TIES WITH US
Anatolia News Agency, Turkey
Nov 14 2006
[“FRAGMENTATION OF IRAQ CANNOT BE A WAY OUT, GUL” – AA headline]
ANKARA (A.A) -14.11.2006 -“Some circles try to show fragmentation
of Iraq as a way out. Such an approach, which will certainly drag
Iraq into a chaos, cannot be Turkey’s policy. The mistake that were
made at the beginning of Iraq war cannot be repeated,” Turkish FM &
Deputy PM Abdullah Gul said on Tuesday.
Commenting on Turkish-US relations, Gul said, “our relations with the
USA cover a wide range and are directed towards similar targets.” He
said fight against terrorism was the main concern of Turkey and
the USA.
Briefing MPs at the parliament about recent developments in Iraq, Gul
said Turkey, from the very beginning, did its best for a democratic and
well-administered Iraq, which also preserve its territorial integrity
and political unity.
“Unfortunately, we are sorry to see that sectarian acts of violence
escalated in Iraq and the security, generally speaking,is worsened,”
Gul noted.
“Another issue on which Turkey feels uneasy is the future status of
Kirkuk,” Gul indicated, and noted that the ambitious policies carried
out on this matter were very dangerous.
-PKK/KONGRA-GEL-Pointing to the presence of members of PKK/KONGRA-GEL
terrorist organization in (northern) Iraq, Gul said fight against
terrorism can only succeed in case all support coming from abroad
is stopped.
-MIDDLE EAST-Underscoring that Palestine-Israel conflict was on the
basis of the problems in the Middle East, Gul said Turkey believed
that the only way out was through (the establishment of) two-states
(Palestine and Israel) living side by side.
Commenting on sending of Turkish peacekeepers to Lebanon, Gul
added, “not only military but also members of NGOs and humanitarian
organizations were sent to this country. This proves that Turkey is
a reliable partner as regards preventing clashes and human tragedies
in its region.”
-IRAN-“Turkey closely monitors the developments regarding Iran’s
nuclear programme.
Turkey exerts efforts to solve this problem through diplomatic means”
Gul said.
“Turkey supports the right of all countries to take advantage from the
nuclear technology for civilian purposes,” Gul said, indicating that,
“Turkey deems proliferation of nuclear weapons as a serious security
threat.”
-ARMENIA-Touching on relations with Armenia, Gul said, “Turkey
expressed its willingness to normalize relations with Armenia within
the framework of good neighbourhood, mutual interest and respect
to territorial integrity. Armenia has not yet displayed a similar
approach.”
-RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA-Gul said Turkey considered relations with
Russia from a positive point of view, noting that recent reciprocal
high ranking visits strengthened mutual confidence.
Turkish FM indicated that Turkey has become Russia’s second biggest
trade partner last year with a trade volume of 15-billion USD . “We
hope to raise this figure to 20 billion by the end of this year and
to 25 billion USD in 2008,” he said.
-GREECE-Gul said Turkey deployed efforts to solve problems with Greece
through dialogue and underlined that Turkey’s objective is to raise
the bilateral trade volume with this country to 5 billion USD.

ARMENIA, EU SIGN ACTION PLAN ON COOPERATION
Mediamax News Agency, Armenia
Nov 14 2006
Yerevan, 14 November: Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan and
Minister of Trade and Development Paula Lehtomaeki of Finland, which
holds the EU presidency, signed the Action Plan of Armenia within
the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy in Brussels today.
The signing of the document preceded the session of the Armenia-EU
cooperation council, in which Germany’s Deputy Foreign Minister
Guenter Gloser, EU envoy for the South Caucasus Peter Semneby,
and representatives of the European Commission took part, the press
service of the Armenian Foreign Ministry told Mediamax today.
In her speech, Paula Lehtomaeki highly praised the Action Plan which
was developed jointly between Armenia and the EU. She said that the
EU was ready to help with the realization of the document.
The issue of maintaining Armenia’s energy security was also discussed
at the session.

ARMENIA REPLACES PEACEKEEPERS IN KOSOVO
Public TV, Armenia
Nov 14 2006
[Presenter] A sixth detachment of Armenian peacekeepers left for
Kosovo this morning to replace their colleagues who have to return
to Armenia today. The Armenian peacekeeping battalion has already
been manned by 75 per cent.
Armenian Deputy Defence Minister Lt -Gen Artur Agabekyan said that
Armenia has promised to keep its peacekeeping battalion [in Kosovo]
until 2010.
The Armenian Defence Ministry plans to start establishing a second
peacekeeping battalion.
[Armenian Deputy Defence Minister Artur Agabekyan, captioned] Young
Armenians express their intention to serve in a professional special
peacekeeping battalion. We have 60 applications today. If we continue
the conscription, we shall have a 100-per-cent full battalion by the
first quarter of 2007.