Month: April 2007

Russian expert views Armenian election cycle, relations with Russia

Rossiyskaya Gazeta, Moscow
27 Mar 07

Text of report by Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta on 27 March
[Interview with Vyacheslav Nikonov, political scientist, by Avtandil
Tsuladze, time and place not indicated: "The Elections in Armenia – A
Russian View" – taken from HTML version of source provided by ISP]

In a few weeks the electoral cycle that will end with the election of
a new president will begin in Armenia. Will the change of government
have an impact on the relations between our two countries? Well-known
political scientist Vyacheslav Nikonov answers this and other
questions of our Rossiyskaya Gazeta reporter.

[Tsuladze] Vyacheslav Alekseyevich, parliamentary elections will be
held in May in Armenia. What importance do they hold for Russia?

[Nikonov] The elections in Armenia are among the most important
elections, if not the most important elections, that are taking place
in post-Soviet space. The May elections open an election cycle that
will end with the replacement of the president of Armenia. This
country is Russia’s most important strategic partner in the
Transcaucasus. Armenia – Russia’s ally in the CIS, YevrAzES [Eurasian
Economic Community], and the Collective Security Treaty – is a core
member of our community. The nature of Russia’s relations with its
strategic partner and Russia’s position in this strategically
important region, which has been an object of serious geopolitical
competition in recent times, depend on the outcome of the
parliamentary and presidential elections in the republic.

[Tsuladze] If we hypothetically divide Armenian political forces into
"ours" and "not ours," what is the ratio of forces?

[Nikonov] Anti-Russian attitudes are the exception, not the rule in
Armenia.

The pro-government forces in Armenia and the Armenian government
itself are oriented to expanding cooperation with Russia. The same
thing can be said about the leaders in the election race – the
Republican party of Armenia and Flourishing Armenia. As for those
parties that are on the point of getting into parliament, there are
among them, of course, those who are not disposed to cooperation with
Russia, although they do not mention this directly in their rhetoric.

It is political suicide in Armenia to say that relations with Russia
should be cut off. Nonetheless, in practice that is exactly what the
party called Country of Law, which is headed by former speaker of
parliament Artur Bagdasaryan, is doing. He is betting on the West and
playing the "Armenian Yushchenko" card with all the obligatory
"orange" trappings. That means posing the goal of Armenia’s possible
admission to NATO, solving the Karabakh problem on terms that suit the
West, and a general strategic reorientation of Armenia towards the
West. Obviously, this kind of rhetoric and politics enjoys sympathy in
the West and in countries allied with it, in particular Turkey.

[Tsuladze] Is there an interdependence between political processes in
Russia and in Armenia? After all, both countries have entered a period
of change in government.

[Nikonov] The election cycles coincide. In both Russia and Armenia
parliamentary elections will take place first, then the presidential
election. And in both countries the president cannot run for a third
term, so the question of succession of power arises. The difference in
the situation is that the Kremlin is more confident from an electoral
point of view than the top leadership of Armenia.

The situation is more complex in Armenia. While the republic has
enjoyed rapid economic growth in recent years, the economic situation
is not simple.

Paradoxical as it may seem, cooperation with Russia is also a
complicating factor for the Armenian leadership, above all because
there is a certain disillusionment with the results of this
cooperation. Certain complaints about Russia have built up, and to a
degree they are justified.

In my view, Russia could have done more for Armenia and can do more in
the future, taking account of the concerns that our Armenian friends
have. I am referring to the position of Armenians in the Russian
Federation, protecting their rights and the opportunity for them to
live and work normally here. I am referring to the fate of those
Armenian enterprises that were turned over to Russian legal persons
for debts. It is obvious that these enterprises should function; we
should invest in them.

It is also important that the Armenian people not feel hurt by the
change in Gazprom policy – we could talk about giving direct economic
assistance, which would compensate for their losses. Money is being
appropriated for foreign aid programmes today for the first time in
the history of the Russian Federation, and Armenia, as a Russian
partner, should expect a certain share of this aid.

[Tsuladze] Great concern is being seen in Armenia in connection with
the killing of Armenians in Moscow. Some are inclined to consider
these murders politically motivated. Is that true?

[Nikonov] There is no anti-Armenian campaign in Russia. Unfortunately,
like any European country and like the United States, we have
nationalists and skinheads. We see what is happening in the suburbs of
Paris, in Texas, and in Germany. Such attitudes are, unfortunately,
widespread in Russia too. People of the most diverse nationalities
become victims of this unmotivated ethnic cruelty. It also happens to
Russians, Chechens, Tajiks, Uzbeks, and so on. Firm steps are being
taken against this by the RF president and law enforcement organs. The
Public Chamber is also getting into the fight.

[Tsuladze] Returning to the subject of elections, what are the
probable scenarios for the change of government in Armenia with the
departure of Kocharyan?

[Nikonov] First we have to wait for the parliamentary elections. It
seems to me that the political force that turns up as the leader in
the parliamentary elections will have a good chance of victory in the
presidential election as well. At the same time, I think that
businessman Gagik Tsarukyan, who heads the Flourishing Armenia Party,
is a man who entered politics recently and would hardly set such a
goal for himself. Most likely the "successor" will come from the ranks
of the Republican Party, which current Armenian President Robert
Kocharyan took part in creating.

Judging by the sociological surveys, public opinion sees Serge
Sarkisyan, who is now the minister of defence and heads the country’s
Security Council, as the likely "successor." He is a man who received
a philological education but by the will of fate became one of the
commanding officers of the Karabakh Army. He is a major figure in the
law enforcement and security structures of Armenia today. He is a team
player who has pretty good relations with the Russian leadership and
is unquestionably a supporter of strengthening cooperation between
Russia and Armenia. He enjoys obvious support in Moscow. It is
important to emphasize that Sarkisyan does not arouse any antipathy in
the West either.

As for other candidates for the presidency, they can only hope for
something if they have serious outside support and only if there is a
destabilization, which is absolutely unacceptable for Armenia.

[Tsuladze] Is it possible that "orange" techniques could be used in
Armenia?

Is the West involved in any games there?

[Nikonov] Obviously a game is underway. This is seen by the
publications of certain candidates in the Western media, which is
always evidence that Western consultants have been brought in to
work. The "orange" techniques were never put away in the archives
anywhere. There have been attempts to use them in all past elections
in post-Soviet space, including in states where these techniques did
not work. I absolutely do not rule out the possibility that an
"orange" scenario has been planned as a back-up for Armenia. The
procedures for realizing this scenario are quite well known.

[Tsuladze] What is your prediction for development of the situation in
Armenia and the further fate of Russian-Armenian relations?

[Nikonov] As for the election campaign in Armenia, for now the
dynamics of the election ratings tell us that the Republican Party,
which has been increasing its electorate from poll to poll, should
take first place. The Flourishing Armenia Party’s growth has slowed
down a little. But in any case, it is obvious that these two parties
will be a majority in the future Armenian parliament. Inasmuch as both
parties cooperate with the government, Robert Kocharyan and his team
will have a parliamentary majority.

Three or four political forces that are now on the brink of passing
the five-per cent barrier will also get into parliament. With some
degree of likelihood we can say that National Unification and Stepan
Demirchyan’s People’s Party of Armenia will get in, and the Dashnaks,
the oldest party in Armenia, have their core electorate. But the
future of Country of Law and Artur Bagdasaryan personally will depend
on how much outside forces invest in him.

As for Russian-Armenian relations, their nature will depend on who
comes to power in Yerevan. A strengthening of the political groups
that are oriented to distancing from Russia could cause a certain
destabilization in the Transcaucasus. At the same time, it is obvious
that keeping the current team in power and a victory by Serge
Sarkisyan in the presidential election would give a positive charge to
Russian-Armenian relations and make it possible to move to a higher
level of mutually advantageous cooperation.

Azerbaijan’s military reform a matter of priority – expert

Day.az website, Baku
5 Apr 07

Despite the current tension in the Persian Gulf region, Iran will not
strike against Azerbaijan, an Azeri military expert believes. In an
interview published on a website, Rauf Racabov said that,
nevertheless, the radical reform of the Azerbaijani armed forces was a
matter of priority. This is not so much because of the tension in the
Gulf but relations with Armenia and the need to resolve the Karabakh
conflict. The transition to a professional army should be carried out
as soon as possible, he said. The following is the text of report by
Azerbaijani website Day.az on 5 April headlined: "Rauf Racabov: ‘Iran
will not make any missile or bomb strikes against Azerbaijan’";
subheadings have been inserted editorially:
The world’s media has been talking more and more frequently of late
about the inevitability of US bomb strikes against Iran’s nuclear
facilities, pointing out in particular the possibility of retaliatory
strikes by Iran, including on Azerbaijan’s oil and gas pipelines. The
timescale for the start of these hostilities has also been named from
6 April to the beginning of summer. The present situation worries the
Azerbaijani public and they are particularly concerned that the
country might be dragged into a war and how prepared our army is for
action at the present time. A Day.az correspondent asked the military
expert Rauf Racabov to answer these and other questions.

Iran won’t strike at Azerbaijan

[Correspondent] Has the Azerbaijani army been updated to the stage
where missile strikes on the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan, Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum
pipelines and other strategic targets in our country can be protected?

[Racabov] I can put your mind at rest: Iran will not be making any
missile or bomb strikes on Azerbaijan. In the first place, the head
of the country has said more than once that Azerbaijani territory
cannot be used against Iran.

Secondly, the statement by the co-chairman of the Minsk OSCE group,
Matthew Bryza, about the possible use by US aircraft of one of
Azerbaijan’s military airfields for flights to Iran has been denied by
our Defence Ministry.

As far as a timetable for hostilities is concerned, I would point out
that the US would not start them before the beginning of the summer
because the time given to Iran to stop uranium enrichment and nuclear
research programme runs out at the end of May. And the date of 6 April
is nothing more than an attempt to put psychological pressure on the
Iranian leaders.

Updating armed forces a priority

As regards modernization, on the one hand the results of the war in
Afghanistan and Iraq make it necessary to treat the radical reform of
the Azerbaijani armed forces as a matter of priority. On the other
hand, let us not forget that the war in Iraq provided arguments not
only for the supporters of radical military reform but also its
opponents. Therefore, the next important question is to what extent
will the latest military and anti-terrorist operations and the
experience acquired affect military reform? In order to answer this
question one need to make it clear what is understood by military
reform in Azerbaijan and what are its tasks and objectives. The
differences in understanding the essence, tasks and objectives of
military reform are made conditional, first and foremost, on the
differences in approaches to the evaluation of Azerbaijan’s
military-political position in the region and in the world.

[Correspondent] It is no secret that of paramount importance in
carrying out reforms in our army is its utmost conformity to
Azerbaijan’s main objective the liberation of Nagornyy Karabakh and
other Armenian-occupied territories.

But life doesn’t end there…

[Racabov] One can pinpoint two approaches. According to the first and
traditional approach, despite all the changes in the
military-political situation in the region and the world, the main
military threat to Azerbaijan comes from Armenia. There is an
objective reason for this conclusion – the Karabakh conflict. But what
if the conflict is resolved in the short-term perspective?

The fact that the theoretical justification for this approach is based
on a number of the geopolitical theories of the end of the 20th
century does not change the essence of it. Accordingly, advocates of
this approach think that the structure and tasks of the armed forces
are similar to those the Azerbaijani armed forces faced at the end of
the last century. This approach, identifying the enemy, gives no
precise guidelines of Azerbaijan’s regional partnership, and thus
burdens our country with an even greater weight of military
preparations, The supporters of the second approach, on the other
hand, believe that the main threats come from the south. These are
threats linked with border problems and a whole number of
non-traditional threats and international terrorism.

This approach requires the radical restructuring of the armed
forces. The second approach presumes both regional partnership and
Azerbaijan’s European integration and its participation in the
coalition’s military operations (Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq). This
creates a more specific framework for the reform of the armed
forces. Today Azerbaijan finds itself in unique historical conditions
where in the long-term perspective it has no enemy-states and in the
fight against the other threat, namely international terrorism,
limited forces are required.

Both Azerbaijan’s main partners and its enemies may be defined within
the framework of these approaches. The general conclusions of recent
wars have once again confirmed what has long been known: Azerbaijan
does not need large, but well-trained armed forces, equipped with the
latest high-precision weapons.

[Correspondent] What should the tasks be in the reform of Azerbaijan’s
armed forces?

Tasks of military reform
[Racabov] The tasks of military reform are well known: firstly, to
eliminate the discrepancy between the structural characteristics of
the armed forces and those tasks which they should realistically be
solving. Secondly, to radically alter military construction which in
its present form does not accord with the real threats to Azerbaijan’s
security.

The armed forces’ priority tasks may be formulated only on the basis
of a realistic appraisal of the country’s military-political
situation. Apart from political-ideological factors, the particular
interests of the various types of armed forces play a very big part in
military planning and construction and in military reform. Of great
significance in the reform of the Azerbaijani armed forces is the
creation of units of permanent combat readiness which should comprise
no less than 25 per cent of the overall strength of ground troops.

And, of course, there is the transition to a professional
army. Sergeants and sergeant-majors in all units should be transferred
to contract-based service as soon as possible. However, there are
doubts about the way to implement the idea of transition to
contract-based military service. The experience of the military
operation in Iraq has confirmed the trend which emerged during World
War II, i.e. the increasing effectiveness of multi-service
operations. For a long time it has been not service components, not
individual arms of the service, but groups of various forces and means
which have been waging wars.

The lack in the Defence Ministry of a joint staff command and arms of
the service which have not been engaged in various actions has
prevented the enhancement of the combat potential of combined armed
forces which are able to carry out present-day military operations.

[Correspondent] What areas of the modernization of the Azerbaijani army
should be made priority?

High-precision weapons needed
[Racabov] Let’s begin by saying that all international experience
shows that the armed forces themselves are not capable of serious
transformation, and only the supreme legislative bodies or the
political will of the president of the country are capable of
conducting major reforms. One of the most important tasks in the
reform of the Azerbaijani army is choosing the priority directions of
the functioning of military organization. As the experience of recent
wars has once again conclusively proved, such a priority must be
high-precision weapons and integration with reconnaissance systems and
control and communications systems.

Azerbaijan does have some experience. There are still industrial
enterprises which can resolve this technological task. By maintaining
the army at its current strength, it is impossible to create modern
combat-ready and technologically equipped armed forces. The currently
accepted tactic of updating military equipment, which does not require
considerable funds, but continues to maintain the military potential
of the armed forces, cannot be justified. A priority task is to create
a high-tech embryo of the future armed forces which may be obtained in
2010-2015 in a perceived form, and then to build up forces in order to
counter as yet unpredictable threats to Azerbaijan’s security.

[Correspondent] Could you specify what precisely you mean by
Azerbaijani armed forces of a 2010-2015 model?

[Racabov] It seems to me these should be armed forces, the nucleus of
which will be mobile rapid reaction forces operating together with
transport aircraft and naval, rail and land transport led by an
operational joint command of strategic projection. Such rapid reaction
forces could become the embryo of the future army. They are vital for
taking part in coalition military operations, because in the
foreseeable future combat-ready armed forces and a high-tech army will
be vital not for parity in a confrontation with one’s neighbours, but
so that Azerbaijan can take part on equal terms in coalition
operations, including more complex ones than the war in Iraq.

Eurasia Daily Monitor

April 3, 2007 — Volume 4, Issue 65

READING AND MISREADING MOSCOW’S POSITIONS ON KOSOVO

by Vladimir Socor

On March 30 in Brussels, the meeting of Ministers of Foreign Affairs
of the European Union’s 27 member countries showed for the first time some
cracks in the EU’s common front regarding conflict resolution in Kosovo. The
EU collectively, as well as the United States and NATO, seek to finalize
Kosovo’s transition to Western-supervised independence.

Brussels also offers Serbia the prospect of European integration if
Belgrade overcomes the archaic Greater-Serbia nationalist quest to somehow
regain Kosovo with its 90% Albanian majority. However, Russia supports
Belgrade’s hardliners in order to control Serbia’s foreign policy and
separate the country from the EU. Serbian leaders such as Prime Minister
Vojislav Kostunica are rising to the bait: `Russia’s support to Serbia [on
Kosovo] is of historic importance. Russia’s support in the U.N. Security
Council will help maintain Serbia’s sovereignty’ (Interfax, April 1).

Moscow is trying to unnerve certain European countries by warning that
recognition of Kosovo’s independence without Serbian and Russian consent
would set a `dangerous precedent’ that could work against these countries’
territorial integrity. This Russian argument seems to be having an effect on
several European governments.

Thus, Spanish diplomacy seems concerned that a Kosovo `precedent’
could become an argument for Basque nationalists to demand secession from
Spain. Such a linkage and scenario seem, however, so far fetched as to raise
the question of whether the Spanish Socialist government’s bilateral
relationship with Russia might not partly explain Madrid’s sudden nod to
Moscow’s position.

Greece and Cyprus also show some sympathy for Russia’s position, their
concern being that recognition of Kosovo’s independence would encourage
certain countries to recognize the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus. In the
case of Greece, moreover, a legacy of pan-Orthodox solidarity with Serbia
and even with Russia sometimes influences the position of Athens on Balkan
issues. Even so, some spokesmen for Russian policy seek to unnerve the
Greeks by suggesting that a Kosovo `precedent’ might prompt some Muslim
countries to recognize Turkish Cyprus (National Interest Online, March 21).

In Slovakia, the existing coalition government includes some
nationalist parties harboring irrational fears of Hungarian irredentism
within the country and in neighboring Hungary. Thus the Slovak government
wants the Kosovo settlement to strengthen, not weaken, the principles of
territorial integrity of states and inviolability of existing international
borders. Slovakia carries special weight as a member of the current UN
Security Council, which is expected to debate a resolution on Kosovo’s
status next month.

For similar reasons, the Romanian presidency and government seem
concerned by the possible implications of Kosovo’s recognition for
Romanian-Hungarian relations in Transylvania. Thus, Romania backs `Serbia’s
territorial integrity.’ Moreover, Serbia enjoys some traditional sympathies
among Romania’s populace and governing class alike. Ukrainian diplomacy also
has expressed all along serious misgivings about Kosovo’s independence, out
of concern for its possible impact on the Crimea.

These views seem to misread Moscow’s position in a number of ways.
First, while opposing secession in Kosovo’s case, ostensibly on the basis of
international law, Russia is sponsoring territorial secession and de facto
annexation in the post-Soviet conflicts in defiance of international law.
Thus, the notion of enlisting Russia to uphold international law through
`single-standard’ conflict-resolution, in ways that would `set positive
precedents,’ seems illusory. It also recalls former Georgian president
Eduard Shevardnadze’s futile efforts to commit Russia to the principle of
territorial integrity in the case of Georgia, hoping that Russia would have
to demonstrate consistency while it was fighting for that same principle in
Chechnya. However, Russia persisted with its dual approach to this issue
even during the Chechen war; and it is even more cynical about such dualism
now, when no longer encumbered by the Chechen problem.

In Kosovo’s case, Russia professes to uphold first and foremost the
notion that any settlement terms must be accepted by both parties to the
conflict (not imposed on one of them) and approved by decision of the U.N.
Security Council. This implies a double veto by Serbia and Russia and a deep
freeze on settlement, leaving Moscow with plenty of bargaining chips to play
through open-ended linkages with other conflicts and other issues.

On one hand, Russia poses as a responsible power by warning that
recognition of Kosovo’s independence could destabilize certain European
countries through the `precedent’ thus created. On the other hand, Russia
threatens to exploit itself such a `precedent’ by recognizing the
post-Soviet secessionist territories — a move that could multiply the
selfsame destabilizing potential that Russia claims it wants to defuse.

Thus, insecure or wavering governments that accept the logic of
linking Kosovo with other existing or potential conflict situations, hoping
thereby for a `model’ or `precedent’ that could operate in their favor, do
so at their peril. Their most effective protection would be to rally behind
the U.S., EU, and NATO position that each conflict has its individual
characteristics requiring a case-by-case resolution and ruling out any
linkages with other conflicts.

Moscow and the post-Soviet secessionist leaderships are indirectly
admitting to the unsustainability of their own conflict-resolution proposals
based on a Kosovo `precedent.’ For example, one of their favorite recent
arguments holds that international recognition of an autonomous unit
(Kosovo) that existed within a republic (Serbia) that formed a subject of a
federation (former Yugoslavia) should open the way for `analogous’
recognition of Transnistria, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia. However, the
analogy does not hold up because Moldova and Georgia were never federations;
Transnistria never formed any kind of unit within Moldova; the three
secessionist territories are treated internationally as integral parts of
Moldova and Georgia, respectively, from 1991 onward; and both countries
effectively hold portions of the secessionist territories.

Moreover, the leaderships of Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia,
and Karabakh openly speak of the possibility or probability of their
territories’ accession to the Russian Federation or Armenia, respectively;
whereas the Western-endorsed status of Kosovo explicitly rules out any
merger of Kosovo with another country (i.e. Albania). Furthermore, the
ethnic cleansing of Georgians from Abkhazia and of Azeris from a large part
of Azerbaijan has yet to be reversed; whereas international intervention has
successfully reversed the ethnic cleansing of the Albanian majority from
Kosovo.

Ultimately, Moscow is making clear that it would hold on to Abkhazia,
South Ossetia, and Transnistria irrespective of any outcome in Kosovo. As
Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov told the Duma on March 21, Russia
would in any case retain its `responsibility’ for its citizens or
`compatriots’ that populate those three territories (Interfax, March 21).
Moldova, Georgia, and Azerbaijan quite appropriately refuse to argue with
Russia over `precedent’-setting or linkages. The great majority of Western
countries similarly decline being drawn into any such discussion with
Moscow.

While Spain and Greece seem to lend an ear to Moscow for reasons of
their own, it would be risky and naïve for Romania, Slovakia, and Ukraine to
become entangled in fine-tuning the `right’ kind of `precedent’ or `model’
in Kosovo, instead of adhering to the joint position of the EU, NATO, and
the U.S., ruling out any linkage to other situations.

(EUObserver [Brussels], March 26; ATA, March 29; Interfax, March
26-April 2; Rossiiskaya gazeta, March 29; see EDM, March 23, April 2)

–Vladimir Socor

New Armenian party stands chance of winning majority in poll – politician

A1+, Yerevan
7 Apr 07

"If the Prosperous Armenia Party takes part in the [12 May
parliamentary] election as a serious and independent political force,
it can gain the majority of seats in parliament," Viktor Dallakyan, a
parliamentary candidate in the constituency No 30, told a press
conference in the Pastark club today.

Asked by our correspondent if he considered Prosperous Armenia an
opposition party or a coalition, Mr Dallakyan said: "Prosperous
Armenia is a newly established political force. It has never stood in
elections, and its orientation will be clear only after the election."

Dallakyan does not believe that the chairman of the party has been
involved in the falsification of elections in favour of the
authorities.

Asked if [President] Robert Kocharyan is going to set up a new party,
which has never participated in elections like Prosperous Armenia and,
therefore, has never rigged any votes, Mr Dallakyan did not answer.

Kocharyan goes as a reformer Speaking about elections, Mr Dallakyan
said that an exceptional situation had emerged to show strong
political will to hold a fair election. The parliamentary vote comes
before the presidential election. Compared to 1996, when [former
president] Levon Ter-Petrosyan could have been re-elected, Kocharyan
has no right to a third term under the constitution.

Dallakyan believes that Robert Kocharyan has the chance of going from
politics as a reformer. Therefore, his desire to look like a
great-hearted man comes true. Kocharyan’s motive for not falsifying
the election might also be [the prediction] that the people would
adequately respond to this like in Georgia. Mr Dallakyan thinks that
public opinion is important to the president.

"Maybe Kocharyan will be guided by patriotism. If he misses the
chance, the opposition will take advantage of it, as 70-80 per cent of
the population are not happy with the current authorities, and the
opposition will have to lead the people," he said.

Dallakyan is confident that there are the opposition forces which
could lead the people. All parties in the Justice bloc [led by]
Artashes Geghamyan, Artur Bagdasaryan, Raffi Hovhannisyan or Aram
Karapetyan could play the role.

Kocharyan goes but Serzh cannot come

Mr Dallakyan does not rule out the following scenario: "Robert
Kocharyan will go but Serzh Sargsyan will not be able to come [to
power]." Dallakyan believes that Serzh Sargsyan’s appointment as prime
minister could be interpreted in different ways. First, Sargsyan could
use his position during elections.

Second, "his appointment could be viewed as a gift of Danae. In other
words, all opposition electorate and parties could point the finger at
the re-elected prime minister and blame him," he said.

Dallakyan believes that Serzh Sargsyan has little chances of being
elected president.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

DefenseNews.com
April 8 2007

Strains Remain
Iraq, Kurd Differences Keep Turk-U.S. Rift From Healing

By UMIT ENGINSOY, WASHINGTON And BURAK EGE BEKDIL, ANKARA

Uncertainty over Iraq’s future and major differences regarding the
war-torn country’s Kurdish population imperil a close, 60-year
alliance between Turkey and the United States, key officials from
both sides warned.
Turkey’s relationship with its NATO ally began to unravel four years
ago, when its parliament refused to assist in the U.S. invasion of
Iraq. Since then, the ties have only partly recovered. Iraq remains
the main stumbling block.
`Iraq’s future is the largest issue in our relationship with the
United States,’ Edip Baser, a retired Army general, now Turkey’s
special envoy for countering terrorism, told Defense News during a
late March visit to Washington.
`Iraq today is what it is – messy, conflict-ridden, undermined by
terrorists and facing an uncertain future,’ the U.S. ambassador to
Ankara, Ross Wilson, told a March 27 conference of U.S. and Turkish
business groups in Washington. `It has been and, in many respects,
remains the single most complicated problem in U.S.-Turkish
relations.’
A major deterioration of U.S.-Turkish ties would hurt American
national interests, particularly in the Middle East, officials and
analysts say. Turkey borders Iraq, Iran and Syria.
Turkey is deeply worried over the independence aspirations of Iraqi
Kurds, Washington’s closest allies in Iraq. It fears that the
emergence of an independent Kurdish state with vast oil resources in
neighboring northern Iraq also may prompt its own restive Kurdish
population to seek secession.
While the United States says it is committed to Iraq’s territorial
integrity, it urges Turkey to acknowledge the Kurdish reality and
reconcile with the Kurdistan Regional Government, a semi-autonomous
part of Iraq.
Further deepening the rift: The separatist Kurdistan Workers Party
(PKK), a Turkish Kurdish group viewed by Turkey, the United States
and the European Union as a terrorist organization, attacks Turkish
targets from bases inside Iraq. PKK attacks last year killed more
than 600 people, many of them Turkish soldiers, according to U.S.
figures. Under strong public pressure, Turkey has warned that its
Army could move into Iraq to root out PKK bases there.
In an effort to address the problem caused by the group’s presence in
northern Iraq, Baser and Joseph Ralston, a retired U.S. Air Force
general and former NATO supreme commander, were appointed last year
by their respective governments as special envoys for countering the
PKK.
`Unfortunately, we have not reached a point where the United States
could use its influence more effectively, but we are working on it,’
Baser said.
Ralston on March 29 briefed U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates;
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice; Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace,
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and National Security Adviser
Stephen Hadley on the latest PKK-related developments.
Baser said that under international law, Turkey reserved its right to
intervene in northern Iraq militarily to fight the PKK there.
`If the United States sends its military to places more than 10,000
kilometers away from its soil to protect its national security
interests, we also have rights,’ Baser said.
But with U.S. forces struggling in a relentless war in Iraq, Turkish
military action inside Iraqi territory is the last thing Washington
wants to see, and Ralston and other U.S. officials are working to
dissuade Ankara from going down that path. Iraqi Kurds also are
vehemently against Turkish intervention, which they tend to see as an
act against their autonomy.
Since Ralston took office last year, U.S. moves on the PKK issue
largely have been confined to pressing Iraqi Kurdish leaders to urge
the militants to refrain from violence. PKK attacks have diminished
since October, when the group declared a cease-fire, partly imposed
by harsh winter conditions in areas where it operates.
But temporary PKK inaction is not an acceptable solution for Turkey.
`We don’t want the PKK threat to continue to hover over us like the
sword of Damocles,’ Baser said. `We want the problem of the PKK’s
presence in northern Iraq to be resolved once and for all.’
How To Move Forward?
The United States says it does not have sufficient troops in Iraq to
take on the PKK physically.
Another reason for Washington to opt for a less risky PKK strategy is
that there are differences within the U.S. administration over how to
handle the issue, two U.S. diplomats said privately.
The State Department’s Europe bureau and the U.S. European Command,
which has decades of experience working with the Turkish military,
call for more radical moves against the PKK, while the State
Department’s Near East bureau and the U.S. Central Command, which are
responsible for Iraq and the Middle East, tend to disregard some of
Ankara’s worries because of their own Iraq concerns, the diplomats
said.
Thirdly, the United States views its cooperation with Iraqi Kurds as
indispensable. Iraqi Kurdish leaders rule out armed action against
the PKK, saying the group is Turkey’s problem. They say Turkey should
conduct democratic reforms to please its own Kurdish population.
Turkey’s civilian government and the powerful military also are
divided over Iraqi Kurds.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is seen as closer to cooperating
with the Kurds, but the military views Iraqi Kurdish leaders as PKK
sponsors.
Resolutions: More Trouble Ahead
The United States and Turkey also have other imminent problems. Two
nonbinding resolutions pending in the U.S. House of Representatives
and in the Senate call for official recognition of World War I-era
killings of Armenians in the Turkish Ottoman Empire as genocide.
Armenians and many U.S. lawmakers say that a forced exodus and
killings of 1.5 million Armenians between 1915 and 1923 amounted to
an organized genocide. Turkey denies it was genocide, disputes
casualty figures and says the Armenians were victims of widespread
chaos and governmental breakdown as the 600-year-old Ottoman Empire
collapsed in the years before the modern Turkish Republic was born in
1923.
Ankara has warned that congressional endorsement of the genocide
resolutions would prompt it to limit defense and military cooperation
with the United States, including the use of Turkey’s Incirlik air
base. Incirlik serves as a logistics hub for U.S. operations in Iraq
and Afghanistan.
President George W. Bush’s administration also opposes the
resolutions on grounds of U.S. national security. But a majority of
lawmakers in the Democrat-controlled Congress are believed to back
the genocide measures’ passage. It is not clear if or when the
resolutions would be brought to a vote in either chamber.
U.S. and Turkish officials and analysts agree that the Iraq issue has
the capacity to disrupt the countries’ relationship in a more lasting
way. –

amp;C=mideast

Voice of America
April 8 2007

Christians Celebrate Easter in Jerusalem

By voanews

Christians celebrated Easter Sunday in Jerusalem with services in
Jerusalem’s Church of the Holy Sepulcher and at other sites in the
Holy Land. VOA’s Jim Teeple reports that for the first time in four
years, five different Christian sects celebrated Easter on the same
day.

Jerusalem’s Armenian Patriarch led a solemn procession of Armenian
monks into the basilica of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, the site
where Christians believe Jesus Christ was crucified and buried. The
Armenian procession was just one of several that celebrated Easter
Services in one of Christianity’s holiest sites on Sunday.

This year for the first time in four years, five different Christian
sects celebrated Easter at the same time.

Father Jerome Murphy-O’Conner is an Irish Dominican priest who has
lived in Jerusalem for more than 50 years, teaching New Testament
studies at Jerusalem’s Ecole Biblique, a graduate school of theology.

Father Jerry, as he is known, says with the convergence of the
Orthodox and the Western calendars this year, space is at a premium
in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher.

`This year, it happens every five or six years, the Orthodox and the
Western church all celebrate Easter on the same day,’ he said. ‘What
it means in practice is that schedules have to be kept very tight.
People cannot hang around after a service. They have to leave to make
room for the others, and of course if they are in a state of
spiritual exaltation and delay then there can be trouble
unfortunately.’

Unlike previous years, there were no clashes reported between
followers of different Christian sects. Tobias Raschke, from Munich,
who attended Easter Services at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher,
said he was impressed by how all the different sects and
nationalities mixed together.

`We got up at three in the morning to hold a German Easter liturgy
and now we have come to the Church to see what is happening here,’
said Raschke. ‘This is a crazy place because somehow now they have an
Armenian service and then after one hour they have a Catholic
service. It is fascinating to see the key to the church is in the
hands of a Moslem and the Israeli police making sure that nothing
happens. I think it is great the job Israel is doing here, making it
safe so people can come here from different faiths and denominations
and pray here and everything is safe.’

With an easing of security fears this year, the convergence of the
Western and Orthodox Christian calendars and weeklong Jewish Passover
observances occurring at the same time, Jerusalem hotels reported
full occupancy rates for the first time in years.

Father Jerome Murphy-O’Conner says with thousands of Jewish and
Christian visitors in Jerusalem this year some will probably leave
the city disappointed.

`The city is really crowded with pilgrims. The basic meaning of
pilgrimage is to go pray at a place,’ he said. ‘You go because you
believe somehow that prayer there is will be somehow easier or real
because a holy person has sanctified it. People who have that
unconscious expectation then find themselves in a huge crowd being
pushed and shoved and they feel they are being robbed of space to
recollect themselves.’

Israeli security forces sealed off the occupied West Bank at the
beginning of Jewish Passover observances last week, preventing most
Palestinians, except those granted special visitors passes, from
visiting Jerusalem.

Thousands of Palestinian Christians, mostly from the nearby city of
Bethlehem are granted the passes but security restrictions exclude
many, especially young men from visiting.

Israeli authorities say the restrictions are necessary to prevent
suicide bombings against targets in Israel.

Cultural Heritage News, Iran
April 8 2007

Initial File of St. Thaddeus Church Accepted by UNESCO

St. Thaddeus Church The file of St. Thaddeus Cathedral, also known
as Qara Kelisa which was submitted to UNESCO has attracted the
approval of the experts of this international organization its
initial phase.

Tehran, 8 April 2007 (CHN Foreign Desk) — The dossier of the Church
of Saint Thaddeus, locally known as Qara Kelisa in the Iranian
northwestern province of West Azarbaijan, which was prepared by
experts of Iran’s Cultural Heritage and Tourism Organization (ICHTO)
in an attempt to inscribe this ancient monument in UNESCO’s list of
World Heritage Sites in 2008 has been accepted by experts of UNESCO
in the initial phase.

Qara Kelisa had previously been put up by Iran for UNESCO world
registration in 2007, however due to lack of substantial documents
including those pertaining to the value of the building and maps of
its precincts, the Organization turned down the application

Announcing this news, Mohammad Hassan Khademzadeh, head of research
centers of Iran’s Cultural Heritage and Tourism Organization in all
Iranian provinces told CHN that the representatives of the
International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) will pay a
visit to this historic church to study its situation in two weeks and
then a team of UNESCO’s experts will come to Iran within a few months
in order to see the condition of Qara Kelisa and the other historical
churches in the province such as St. Stepanous Cathedral in Khoy and
Zoorzoor Church in Chaldoran as annexes to St. Thaddeus Cathedral for
being registered in list of UNESCO’s world heritage sites.

Khademzadeh believes that Iran has made a lot of effort to prepare
all required conditions for St. Thaddeus world registrations and
expressed hope that if nothing extraordinary happens, this ancient
church to be registered as the 9th Iranian historical site in list of
UNESCO’s World Heritage sites.

The Thaddeus Church, locally known as Qara Kelisa or the Black Church
is considered one of the oldest churches in the world, whose
construction began 1700 years ago. Historians believe that the Church
is the tomb of Thaddeus who is said to have been one of Christ’s
disciples who traveled to Armenia, then part of the Persian Empire,
for preaching the teachings of Christ.

Today the church is known as Qara Kelisa and belongs to the Armenian
community of Iran. It has an international reputation and hosts
annual meetings of world Armenians each year in July-August. Enjoying
special features such as antiquity, its unique architectural style,
as well as its religious importance among the world Armenians and the
rituals which are held annually in this church has made Qara Kelisa
worthy for being inscribed in list of UNESCO’s World Heritage Sites.

Soudabeh Sadigh

;id=70 70

Khaleej Times, United Arab Emirates
April 8 2007

Illicit booze kills 10 in Iran holy city: report
(AFP)

8 April 2007

TEHERAN – Ten people have died after drinking homemade hooch in a
holy city in Iran, where the consumption of all alcohol is banned,
the Kayhan newspaper reported on Sunday.

`On April 2, a large quantity of bootlegged alcohol was distributed
in Qom,’ Iran’s clerical capital and the home of many religious
seminaries, south of Teheran, it said.

`A number of the drinkers were hospitalised and according to the
inhabitants of Qom, 10 people have died,’ the ultra-conservative
daily added.

It said that local officials had yet to confirm the death toll.

It is not the first time that toxic moonshine has claimed lives in
Iran, an Islamic country where the production and consumption of
alcohol is generally strictly prohibited.

In May 2006, 15 people died from alcohol poisoning in the southern
city of Sirjan, while in June 2004 it was reported that 22 Iranians
died of the same cause in the southern city of Shiraz.

Only recognised Christian minorities in Iran, such as the Armenians,
are allowed to produce and consume alcohol, discreetly and behind
closed doors so as not to offend Islamic sensibilities.

Production, sale or consumption of alcohol are otherwise punishable
by jail or the lash, although this has not stopped significant
smuggling from neighbouring countries.

Newspapers reported on Sunday that 46,000 cans of beer had been
seized and destroyed in the capital in recent months.

Home distilled spirits sell for far less than smuggled foreign brands
and are the tipple of choice in poorer neighbourhoods, but the use of
industrial chemicals in their production sometimes poses serious
health risks.

Los Angeles Times, CA
April 8 2007

Out of Rwanda’s horror, abiding bonds of love emerge
A Southland couple have become like parents to orphans of the 1994
genocide.

By K. Connie Kang, Times Staff Writer
April 8, 2007

This love story – and to its central characters it is indeed a love
story – began when experts and victims from around the world gathered
in Rwanda to discuss genocide.

Donald and Lorna Miller had traveled from California to the capital
city of Kigali to share the story of her father – an Armenian
genocide survivor – at a gathering of more than 200 scholars and
survivors in the historic Hotel des Mille Collines, where 1,200
people survived the 1994 Rwandan massacres because of the heroic
intervention of a manager who bribed the militia by passing out
liquor.

Donald Miller is a professor of religion at USC; Lorna Miller directs
a community outreach ministry at All Saints Episcopal Church in
Pasadena. The Altadena couple had been invited to the 2001 conference
because they had written extensively about the Armenian genocide,
including a book based on Lorna Miller’s interviews with 100
survivors. She had interviewed her father, now deceased, who was 16
when he lost both parents and six siblings in 1915.

Members of a group of young Rwandans called the Assn. of Orphan Heads
of Households approached the Millers after her presentation. The
parents of the young Rwandans were among the 800,000 Tutsis and
moderate Hutus slaughtered by Hutu extremists.

"I kept thinking, ‘It’s my father all over again,’ " Lorna recalled.

She is convinced that their encounter was a divine appointment, a way
for her to repay the care her father received from missionaries when
he was orphaned – and his eventual arrival in Pasadena to pastor an
Armenian church in 1956.

The Rwandan genocide started 13 years ago this month. Through the
Millers, the orphans have made connections with prominent clergy,
scholars, business executives and philanthropists in America. The
1,800-member group, which goes by the French acronym AOCM, also began
to collaborate on projects to preserve the historical record of the
genocide. And along the way, parental bonds began to grow.

Naphtal Ahishakiye, who lost both parents and all of his siblings in
the mass killings, wrote in an e-mail that after the group’s members
"observed their love day by day," the Millers essentially became
parents.

Naphtal, past president of AOCM, noted that except for his wife’s
doctor and himself, the Millers were the only ones who saw his
newborn daughter in the hospital to share in his happiness after she
was born.

Many e-mails the Millers receive from Rwanda begin with "Dear Father
and Mother" and relate goings-on big and small. In Rwanda, the
Millers struggle with their rusty French and the Rwandans’ limited
English. But it’s all English on the Internet.

In a recent "Dear Parents" e-mail explaining a long silence, Jean
Muyaneza said he had been sick: "I’m now in the new house, but under
construction, and I think that it was the source of the illness,
because we enter in it without glasses [panes] in the windows, so the
wind was too much."

"It’s wonderful to hear from you," Donald Miller replied. "We have
been worried! I will be in Rwanda from March 22 to April 3. I am
hoping to spend some time with you."

Miller’s recent trip was his tenth to Rwanda. His wife has traveled
there eight times. One expression of their ties is a course USC is
offering this semester: "What Can I Do? Personal Responses to World
Traumas/Crises." It is taught by Rabbi Susan Laemmle, dean of
religious life, and the Rev. Cecil "Chip" Murray, retired pastor of
First AME Church in L.A. Both have visited Rwanda with the Millers.

Another effort was a photo exhibit, "Rwanda: Portraits of Survival
and Hope," at the California African American Museum in Exposition
Park that ran from September through March. The museum and AOCM split
the proceeds.

Bob and Beverly Bingham, family friends of the Millers and owners of
NorQuest Seafoods in Alaska, donated $100,000 after visiting Rwanda
with the couple. The money funds various projects, such as providing
tuition and books for orphans attending college and putting a roof on
a building housing Solace Ministries, a Christian outreach to
genocide survivors.

Donald Miller called the outreach program vital, because many
Rwandans, the vast majority of whom are Christians, found their faith
tested in the genocide. Miller wrote in a report to the John
Templeton Foundation, which is funding his research into
spirituality, that "when God-loving people affirm their humanity,
survivors interpret these acts of kindness as emanating from God
himself."

He added that survivors need hope, which is "the special province of
religion, that subtle, sometimes miraculous engagement with the
divine."

The drive to exterminate the ethnic minority Tutsis began April 7,
1994, the day after the plane carrying Rwanda’s President Juvenal
Habyarimana, a Hutu, was shot down as it approached the Kigali
airport. Ethnic tensions that went back decades erupted. By July, a
rebel group had defeated the Hutu regime, ending the 100 days of
terror.

The Millers visited sites of atrocities, including churches and
schools, and heard story after story of horror.

One woman at a weekly Solace meeting said all the men in her village
knew her body because, as Lorna Miller quoted her, "I was raped by
everybody in the village."

Naphtal, now 32, told how he survived by first hiding in a river,
clinging to roots. Later he hid in the forest, drinking rainwater and
coming out at night to eat bananas from people’s gardens.

After the Millers returned to Los Angeles from their first visit,
they kept asking themselves how they should respond. They came up
with the idea of an oral history project. The Millers would provide
equipment and training, and orphans would do the interviews. AOCM
went for it.

Seed money for the project came from a $25,000 gift from the Binghams
on the occasion of the wedding of the Millers’ son Shont a year
earlier. After funding projects to build latrines and stoves for the
poor in Guatemala, the Millers still had $12,000.

Donald Miller, executive director of USC’s Center for Religion and
Civic Culture, suggested that orphan leaders write a proposal for the
oral history project. They came up with a $7,500 budget to conduct
100 interviews.

In 2002, the Millers returned to Rwanda with tape recorders and spent
10 days training the interviewers. The AOCM members practiced by
interviewing each other and at first spoke so softly that the
recorders weren’t picking up what they said. When the Millers left
Kigali, the couple doubted the project would work.

But to their "incredible surprise," the AOCM team completed 100
interviews, Donald Miller said. They needed more funds. The Millers
raised the budget to $11,000. The team then had the interviews typed
on a computer and translated from Kinyarwanda into English.

"We thought the world should hear their stories," Lorna Miller said.

Donald Miller wrote philanthropists Howard and Roberta Ahmanson, whom
he knew from another project, and asked if they would be interested
in funding a book that would combine photos with excerpts of the
interviews. The Ahmansons donated $50,000.

Teaming up with Paris-based photographer Jerry Berndt, the Millers
published "Orphans of the Rwanda Genocide." The book gives full
credit to AOCM as partners.

One copy reached a person in Sweden who contacted Miller and
suggested that he nominate AOCM for the World’s Children’s Prize for
the Rights of the Child, sponsored by Children’s World magazine.
Although Miller thought the likelihood of winning the prize was
remote, he spent a day working on the nomination.

More than 3.2 million readers of the magazine, based in Sweden and
published in seven languages, voted for AOCM.

Last April, the queen of Sweden presented the prize, which comes with
$40,000, to AOCM leaders in Stockholm. The "AOCM kids," as the
Millers call them, are using the money to build housing for group
members. A two-room house costs $3,000.

The Millers traveled to Stockholm for the ceremony and celebrated
with five AOCM representatives, including Naphtal, who looked elegant
in a dark suit.

His daughter, whose birth the Millers had shared in, is named Arpi,
which in Armenian means early rays of sunshine. It is also the name
of the Millers’ daughter.

United Press International
April 8 2007

Religious feud holds up toilet rebuilding

JERUSALEM, April 8 (UPI) — Religious feuding at the Church of the
Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem is delaying badly needed renovations to
the public toilets.

The church marks the site where Jesus Christ was entombed after the
crucifixion. Catholic, Armenian Orthodox and Coptic Christians are
all involved in its management.

The toilet block, originally built to serve monks at the church, is
122 years old. A blockage in a drain has made the toilets
odoriferous, The Independent reports.

But the Armenians have not been willing to sign on to plans to
rebuild the toilets because of a dispute with the Coptic Christians
over precedence at the Holy Fire Ceremony, held every year on Holy
Saturday, the day before Easter.