TURKISH ENVOY TO GEORGIA TO ATTEND ARMENIAN PREMIER’S FUNERAL
Anatolia News Agency, Turkey
March 28 2007
Tbilisi, 28 March: The Turkish ambassador to Georgia, Ertan Tezgor,
left for Armenian capital city of Yerevan on Wednesday [28 March].
Tezgor will attend the funeral of late Prime Minister Andranik
Margaryan of Armenia on behalf of Turkey.
Armenian Prime Minister Margaryan, 55, died suddenly of a heart attack
at home last Sunday.
ARMENIAN DELEGATIONS ARRIVES FOR OPENING OF RESTORED CHURCH IN TURKEY
Anatolia News Agency, Turkey
March 28 2007
Van, 28 March: An Armenian delegation including senior state officials,
historians and architectural experts arrived in the eastern city of
Van to attend the inauguration of a 10th century Armenian church on
the small island of Akdamar, 3 kilometres off coast in Lake Van.
The delegation included Gagik Gyurdzhyan, deputy minister of culture,
and Avel Avedisyan, chairman of the Ethnographic Sciences at the
National Academy of Sciences of Armenia.
Built during the years 915-921 of pink sandstone, the Akdamar Church
underwent a restoration by the Turkish government between May 2005
and October 2006, and is set to open on Thursday [29 March].
ARMENIA IN THE GREAT GAME: THE UNITED STATES WANTS AN ORANGE REVOLUTION IN ARMENIA
by Avtandil Tsuladze, political scientist
Translated by Elena Leonova
Source: Izvestia, March 27, 2007, p. 6
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
March 28, 2007 Wednesday
The Armenian opposition might try to implement an Orange Revolution
scenario in the upcoming elections. Artur Bagdasarian is trying to
make himself the chief candidate for Orange leader. There are a number
of indications that the United States is keeping a close eye on him.
Armenia is one of Russia’s most important CIS partners, and its most
consistent ally. Will it retain its pro-Russian orientation in the
medium-term future?
Armenia’s presidential election in 2008 could be a political
watershed. President Robert Kocharian will not seek re-election,
and the successor problem is becoming increasingly pressing. A
parliamentary election is scheduled for May 12, 2007, and this will
largely determine the configuration of forces in the lead-up to the
presidential race. (…)
The suspense in this election focuses on which of the pro-government
parties will score more points. That’s if the election goes calmly,
within constitutional channels. But there’s no ruling out the
possibility that the opposition might try to implement an Orange
Revolution scenario. Artur Bagdasarian is trying to make himself the
chief candidate for Orange leader. There are a number of indications
that the United States is keeping a close eye on him. Bagdasarian’s
articles have been published frequently in the American media, and
during a recent visit to the USA he said a great deal about the need to
"build democracy" in Armenia. Bagdasarian’s main arguments retransmit
America’s political interests in the region. When he calls on Armenians
not to be "imprisoned by the past," he means the genocide of 1915;
he proposes normalizing relations with Turkey, de-emphasizing the
genocide. He also calls for normalizing relations with Azerbaijan and
"resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict on the basis of reciprocal
concession." Bagdasarian says: "Improving relations with Azerbaijan
is essential for our long-term energy stability, which can only
be achieved by diversifying our energy policy." That reference to
"diversification" is aimed against Russia.
So far, Bagdasarian is keeping quiet about how far the concessions
may extend.
Where do American interests come into this? The United States is
interested in the trade routes linking this region to the Middle
East and Asia. The frozen conflicts in the Trans-Caucasus are an
obstacle to establishing transit channels. On the one hand, Armenia
is effectively in a blockade: no communications with Azerbaijan,
a closed border with Turkey, and Georgia closed off since Russia
imposed anti-Georgian sanctions. On the other hand, Armenia may be
regarded as the territory that obstructs many communications in the
region. The American objective is to turn the Trans-Caucasus into an
integrated region controlled by the United States. That’s the point
of the Orange project in Armenia. That’s why Bagdasarian is portraying
himself as a "peacemaker."
It would be naive to think that the Armenian authorities and Armenian
society aren’t concerned about the blockade around their country. The
problem is the price to be paid for lifting it. Former president Levon
Ter-Petrosian was forced to resign after arguing for substantial
concessions on Nagorno-Karabakh and facing resistance from public
opinion and the political establishment. The present administration,
with the help of international mediators, is striving to find a
solution that doesn’t compromise Armenia’s national interests.
Another sign pointing to the possibility of an Orange Revolution
scenario in Armenia is the fact that the opposition is pedalling the
issue of election fraud. But the configuration of political forces in
Armenia is such that the authorities simply have no objective motives
to rig elections; the pro-government forces are already certain
to win by a large margin. The opposition’s only chance of turning
the situation around in its favor is to claim election fraud. The
examples of Georgia and Ukraine have shown us how this technique can
work. In Georgia, the key factor was Eduard Shevardnadze’s unpopularity
(but Kocharian is the most popular politician in Armenia); in Ukraine
there was a split between the Western and Eastern regions (but Armenia
is a unified country). The opposition’s only hope lies in the dirty
techniques of an Orange Revolution project.
Experts don’t rule out the possibility that the West (certain circles
in the West) may assist the Armenian opposition by organizing
appropriate media coverage, sending an impressive contingent of
election observers, and so on. A brigade from the BBC will arrive
in Armenia a week before the election. The forces being drawn
into this are substantial. Will they suffice to cause a social
explosion in Armenia? There is no sign of that as yet. But Russia,
with an interest in its stragegic ally’s stable development, needs to
monitor this situation closely. It should also provide Armenia with
media support and send election observers, facilitating legitimate
democratic processes. Armenia will also need our political support.
NIKOLAI OGANESJAN: NATO IS ACTIVELY COURTING ARMENIA
by Nora Kananova
Translated by A. Ignatkin
Source: Novoye Vremya (Yeveran), March 20, 2007, EV
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
March 28, 2007 Wednesday
NIKOLAI OGANESJAN, PRESIDENT OF THE ARMENIAN ATLANTIC ASSOCIATION:
TIME TO START THINKING ABOUT THE ADVANCEMENT OF OUR RELATIONS WITH
NATO; An interview with Nikolai Oganesjan, President of the Armenian
Atlantic Association.
NATO Week in Armenia is over. What Armenia means for NATO and vice
versa is the question with which Novoye Vremya approached Nikolai
Oganesjan, an outstanding scientist and President of the Armenian
Atlantic Association. Oganesjan met with NATO leaders on many occasions
in this capacity and that makes him an authority on the finer points
of the not exactly simple Armenian-NATO relations.
Question: The NATO Week in Armenia should probably be regarded as
an expansion of cooperation. Why is the Alliance so interested in
our country?
Nikolai Oganesjan: The NATO Week was a planned action or
representatives of the upper echelons of the Alliance would not have
come. I mean NATO Deputy General Secretary Jean Fournet and George
Katsirdakis of the NATO Defense Policy and Planning Division.
Acknowledging that Armenia is not going to join the Alliance in the
near future, NATO is determined to do whatever it takes to bring
Armenia as close as possible so as to use it to its own benefit.
Armenia is an integral part of the geopolitical region comprising
the Middle East and the Caucasus which is currently in the focus
of interests of the Alliance and its leader, the United States. The
southern part of the Caucasus interests NATO and the United States as
an integral region, and not by parts. That is why they are courting
Armenia so actively now.
However, there is more to it. Armenia is Russia’s strategic partner.
It interests the Alliance in this capacity as well. NATO may use
its cordial relations with Armenia to advance its own relations with
Russia. Should its relations with Russia plummet, the Alliance may
use Armenia to mend them and avoid a collision. Hence the recently
unthinkable claims on the part of spokesmen for NATO that the
advancement of Armenia’s relations with the bloc must not jeopardize
its friendly relations with its old friends and partners. Katsirdakis
emphasized this when NATO Week in Armenia was ending. "NATO does
not demand that Armenia abandon its old friends and allies. Close
relations with Russia and membership in the CIS Collective Security
Treaty Organization are not supposed to interfere with the close
cooperation between Armenia and NATO," he said.
And here is another point. Relations between NATO and the CIS
Collective Security Treaty Organization are not clear at this point,
but that is going to change sooner or later. The two blocs will have
to define themselves sooner or late. It is safe to assume, therefore,
that NATO leaders hope to use their relations with Armenia to span
the gap between the Alliance and the CIS Collective Security Treaty
Organization. In other words, Armenia may become an important link
in the chain of development of relation between NATO on the one hand
and Russia and the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization on
the other.
Contacts between Armenia and NATO are varying. NATO specialists
assist the Armenians in mastering new military hardware and new
standards. NATO provides equipment and teaches our military. Contacts
in the fields of education and science were established as well.
Fournet and Katsirdakis never missed a chance to emphasize how
pleased NATO was with the degree and intensiveness of its relations
with Armenia.
Armenia is a member of the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization,
a structure which is pretty much amorphous at this point. No effort
is spared to make it a serious organization but who can guarantee
that it won’t end up the way the Warsaw Pact did?
Moreover, the Organization includes certain states (say, Kazakhstan)
that promote the interests of Azerbaijan in the Karabakh conflict.
Since there are no guarantees that the Organization will back Armenia
and not Muslim states, it will be prudent for Yerevan to at least
start thinking about the advancement of relations with NATO.
Question: Can we say NATO has been involved in the Karabakh conflict
resolution?
Nikolai Oganesjan: Not as an organization, it hasn’t. On the other
hand, France and the United States are leading NATO countries, and
their stand on the Karabakh issue should be regarded as the position
of the Alliance itself. Neither the United States nor France have
ever put pressure on us. Neither has ever demanded that we turn these
territories over to Azerbaijan.
Question: What do you think of Georgia’s chances of becoming a NATO
country in the near future?
Nikolai Oganesjan: According to Katsirdakis, this particular issue
is still in the initial phase of discussion now. I do not think that
Georgia’s entry into NATO will set up a new dividing line because
the United States and NATO are interested in an integral framework of
relations spanning all the entire southern part of the Caucasus. The
fact that Armenia does not aspire to NATO membership and that the
Alliance does not insist that it do so may actually ease tension in
the relations between Russia and NATO should it escalate over the
matter. Nothing prevents cooperation between Russia and the Alliance
in this part of the world. Why is there the notion that someone must
drive the other out? If Moscow and Washington promote a well-balanced
and farsighted policy in the region, a more flexible policy, then both
will be able to remain here and serve the interests of the countries
of the region. We should find out exactly what Russia and the United
States want here and do whatever it takes to make sure that their
own interests do not take precedence over ours. The southern part of
the Caucasus will then cease being a battlefield and become a bridge
between East and West, North and South.
Question: If Georgia is accepted into NATO, despite the unresolved
conflicts, does it mean that Abkhazia and South Ossetia will be
eventually returned to Tbilisi’s jurisdiction with help from the
Alliance?
Nikolai Oganesjan: It depends on exactly what NATO wants to
accomplish. If it wants to defend Georgia from Russia, then the
runaway provinces may be reacquired even before Georgia formally
joins NATO. On the other hand, Georgia may be pursuing false hope
concerning its ability to secure NATO’s help in conflict resolution
once it is a NATO member. Article Five of the North Atlantic Treaty
states that an aggression against a NATO member is regarded as an
aggression against all and that other NATO countries must come to its
help only if the member in question was not the one to provoke the
aggression. I do not really expect that NATO will want to be drawn
into the hostilities over an age-old conflict.
THOUSANDS OF ARMENIANS TURN OUT FOR PM’S FUNERAL
Agence France Presse — English
March 28, 2007 Wednesday 5:45 PM GMT
Thousands of people paid tribute Wednesday to Armenian prime minister
Andranik Margarian as his funeral procession passed through the
streets of Erevan.
Braving driving rain, Armenians milled around the Yerevan Opera House
in central Erevan as the cortege passed by on its way to the Pantheon,
where Margarian, who died of a heart attack on Sunday, was buried
alongside some of Armenia’s greatest historical figures.
Delegations from a number of countries were present at the funeral for
the 56-year-old leader of the ruling Republican party and the former
Soviet republic’s 10th prime minister since independence in 1991.
Georgian Prime Minister Zurab Nogaideli, the most high-level official
present, was flanked by government ministers, members of parliament
and other officials from countries including Canada, France, Greece,
Ukraine and the United States, as well as NATO’s special representative
for the Caucasus and Central Asia.
Turkey, which does not have diplomatic ties with Armenia, was
nonetheless represented at the funeral by its ambassador to Georgia,
and the Turkish prime minister and foreign minister sent a telegram
expressing their condolences.
A national day of mourning was declared on Wednesday, with flags
flying at half mast across the country and all entertainment programs
and events were cancelled.
Margarian, who died just weeks before legislative elections on May 12,
had been in office since 2000.
Previously he was a parliamentary deputy in the 1990s and served in
different government departments during the Soviet era.
Trained as an engineer, Margarian was arrested for anti-Soviet
dissident activity in 1974 and sentenced to two years in prison,
according to his official biography.
As laid down by the Armenian constitution, the entire government
resigned following the prime minister’s death.
Government sources have indicated that Margarian was likely to be
succeeded by Defence Minister Serge Sarksian.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
LEVITIN LEADS DELEGATION TO ATTEND FUNERAL OF ARMENIAN PREMIER
ITAR-TASS News Agency
March 28, 2007 Wednesday 03:10 AM EST
Russian Transport Minister Igor Levitin leads the delegation to
attend the funeral of Armenian Prime Minister Andranik Margarian,
who died of cardiac arrest on March 25.
"According to the instruction by Russian Prime Minister Mikhail
Fradkov, the Russian delegation is led by the transport minister,
Igor Levitin, chairman of the intergovernmental commission for
economic cooperation with Armenia," the government’s press service
told Itar-Tass.
PRESIDENT, VP CONDOLE ARMENIAN LEADER
Emirates News Agency
March 27, 2007 Tuesday 10:02 AM EST
President, VP condole Armenian leader Abu Dhabi, March 27th, 2007
(WAM)–President H.H. Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan has sent a
cable of condolences to Robert Kocharian, President of the Republic of
Armenia on the death of the Armenian Prime Minister Andranik Margrayan.
H.H Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Vice President, Prime
Minister and Ruler of Dubai, has sent a similar cable to the Armenian
President.
POLES AXE ARMENIA
Australian FourFourTwo, Australia
March 29 2007
Poland 1 Armenia 0
Poland extended their lead at the top of Group A despite making hard
work of a poor Armenia side.
A home win always seemed the most likely result with top playing
bottom and the gulf in class told in the 26th minute when man-of-
the-match Maciej Zurawski scored the decisive goal to give the Poles
a five-point lead after Portugal’s draw with Serbia.
The striker looked lively from the off and tested Roman Berezovsky
within three minutes with a right-footed effort from 12 yards.
Soon after Poland defender Dariusz Dudka was inches away from giving
the home side the lead when he headed Lukasz Gargula’s eighth-minute
corner over the bar.
Armenia took 21 minutes to call Polish number one Artur Boruc into
action, but the Celtic goalkeeper had little trouble taking Levon
Pachajyan’s inswinging corner from the left.
Boruc’s Hoops team-mate Zurawski continued to look a danger and was
again denied by Berezovsky with a vicious right-footer from the edge
of the area.
But soon the Celtic striker got the goal his efforts deserved when he
coolly steered Michal Zewlakow left-wing cross into the bottom-right
corner from 12 yards.
It was Zurawski who continued to take the game to the Armenians and
twice in the space of a minute he almost registered his second of
the game.
First Berezovsky came to the rescue with a smart save to deny the
striker from 20 yards before Armenian defender Karen Dokhoyan did
well to get in the way of his effort from similar range.
Berezovsky continued to be the busiest player on the field and
in the 40th minute he was again called into action to deny Jakub
Blaszczykowski’s shot from the left channel.
Pachajyan registered a shot for the home side in the 51st minute
but his 30-yard strike was always rising and finished well above
the crossbar.
But it was the Poles who always looked the more likely to double
the advantage.
Przemyslaw Kazmierczak’s well struck shot was just over Berezovsky’s
bar and a minute later Blaszczykowski’s fierce drive from 20 yards
fizzed just wide of the left post.
SENATE PANEL CONDEMNS MURDER OF TURKISH-ARMENIAN
Reuters
Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:07PM EDT
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A U.S. Senate panel condemned on Wednesday
the murder earlier this year of a prominent Turkish-Armenian editor,
Hrant Dink, who had urged Turks to acknowledge the mass killings of
Armenians on Turkish soil in 1915.
The largely symbolic resolution approved by the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee reopened the question of whether Congress should
weigh in on the debate over whether the killings were genocide —
a sensitive issue in Turkey, a key NATO ally.
Armenia says some 1.5 million Armenians suffered genocide at Ottoman
Turkish hands, but Turkey denies a systematic genocide of Armenians
took place, saying large numbers of Christian Armenians and Muslim
Turks died in inter-ethnic fighting during World War One.
The Senate resolution that passed the committee on a voice vote does
not explicitly refer to the killings as genocide, but observes that
Dink, before his death, was subjected to legal action in Turkey for
doing so.
It condemns Dink’s murder and urges the people of Turkey to "honor
his legacy of tolerance." Dink was murdered by a Turkish nationalist
gunman outside his Istanbul office in January; his funeral drew
100,000 mourners.
Turkish diplomats do not look favorably on the Senate proposal, which
can now go to the floor for a vote. "We don’t see the benefit of such
a resolution," said Tuluy Tanc, the minister-counselor at the Turkish
Embassy in Washington.
But the author of the Senate resolution, Foreign Relations Committee
Chairman Joseph Biden, a Delaware Democrat, said he was not deterred
by Turkish sensitivities.
"A relationship that rests on a requirement of a denial of an
historical event, is not a sound basis for a relationship," Biden
told Reuters.
Continued…
Turkish officials, as well as members of the Bush administration, have
expressed more concern about other resolutions pending in Congress,
but it is unclear how quickly they may advance.
Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan warned last month that Congress
would harm bilateral ties if it backs a resolution recognizing the
1915 mass killings of Armenians by Turks as genocide.
Such a resolution has been introduced in the House by Rep. Adam Schiff,
a California Democrat, and in the Senate by Assistant Majority Leader
Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat. Schiff told Reuters that with
Democrats now in charge of Congress, he believed his resolution had
its "best chance in a decade" of passage.
U.S. SENATE VOTES FOR WITHDRAWAL OF TROOPS FROM IRAQ TILL MARCH 31, 2008
PanARMENIAN.Net
28.03.2007 16:03 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ In the Senate, Democrats affirm a measure setting
a timetable of next spring for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from
Iraq. The deadline is attached to a $122 billion spending bill funding
the war in Iraq and Afghanistan for the rest of the fiscal year.
By a vote of 50-48, the Senate voted to keep in the funding bill a
provision requiring that troops be out of Iraq by March 31, 2008,
with the withdrawal beginning within 4 months of the bill’s enactment.
Last week, the House approved a similar measure, which sets a timeline
of Aug. 31, 2008, for a withdrawal.
The White House is threatening to veto either bill, and it’s looking
likely that President Bush will get a chance to carry out that threat.
The key vote is over whether to strip from the Senate bill language
that sets a U.S. troop withdrawal goal of March 31, 2008, and calls for
that withdrawal to begin within four months of the bill’s enactment.
Republican critics trying to remove the deadlines from the bill
accused Democrats of micromanaging the war.
But Republicans have also decided not to filibuster the bill.
Senate Republican leaders have decided to let the process move
forward because it is likely that a negotiated compromise between the
Senate and House will result in a bill that includes a timetable for
withdrawal, and it is just as likely that the bill will ultimately
be vetoed by President Bush.
Final passage of the complete spending measure is expected later this
week, reports the NPR.