Author: admin

5579.3 TONS OF HUMANITARIAN AID IMPORTED TO ARMENIA IN JANUARY-AUGUST

YEREVAN, October 5 (Noyan Tapan). In January-August 2004 5579.3 tons
of goods in the amount of $21.5m were imported to Armenia on the line
of humanitarian aid. To recap, in the same period of 2003 4422.2 tons
of goods in the amount of $35m, 62 thousand were imported to
Armenia. According to the data of RA National Statistical Service,
production of chemical industry and other industrial branches
connected with chemistry made 35.5% of the aid, devices and machinery
14%, textile goods 13.4%. In the same period 390.2 tons of production
of plant origin in the amount of $465.6 thousand, 95.6 tons of
ready-made foodstuffs in the amount of $357.8 thousand, 203.8 tons of
land, air and water transport means in the amount of $764.9 thousand
were imported to Armenia.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

BABIES BORN IN THE NEW YEAR

Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR)
07 Jan 05

At the republic maternity hospital we learned that no children were
born in the New Year’s night. The first baby of the year 2005 was born
on January 1. The mother of the baby is Lilia Ghukassian from
Stepanakert. On January 1 two babies were born, both boys. By January
4, 3 o’clock PM 7 babies had been born, 6 boys and a girl.

AA.
07-01-2005

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

THE ASIA QUAKE : Has this catastrophe really made us a more caring world?

Irish Independent
Jan 08, 2005

By Mary Kenny

Has the world been changed by the terrible tsunami in Asia? Has human
nature been altered by this appalling catastrophe, brought home to us
by the television cameras with more vividness than any other
catastrophe in history?

It certainly seemed like that in the two weeks following the
disaster. An unprecedented flow of global generosity poured out from
all countries, a flow led not by politicians or other leaders but
spontaneously erupting from ordinary people. Within two weeks,
worldwide pledges of donations had reached $3bn (â=82¬ 2.27bn) – a sum
of money never before collected in such a short time for a caring
cause.

And if ‘globalisation’ is a dirty word in the mouths of some – the
‘anti-globalisation’ campaigners certainly have used it thus – after
the tsunami the admirable and uplifting aspect of a global
consciousness became evident. People were not thinking in terms of
national, racial or religious relief. They were thinking globally.

Back in the 20th century, kindly and compassionate gestures were
certainly made for peoples who had suffered catastrophe, but these
were usually on some basis of kinship. The Irish-Americans helped
Ireland; the British helped those they were linked to by ‘Empire’; the
Church of England helped the Armenian peoples because they were being
persecuted by the Islamic Turks; the Catholic Church in Ireland raised
quite a lot of help for victims of the Russian famines in the 1920s,
partly because the victims were often Christians starved out by an
atheistic regime and partly because the very word ‘famine’ is always
evocative in Ireland.

But with the tsunami, it hasn’t been like that at all. This global
response was for suffering humanity, with no particular links of
kinship or other points of common cultural identity. It was pure,
globalised altruism. Indeed, some Darwinist thinkers were quite
puzzled by it, since Darwinism teaches that we are programmed to give
preference to peoples who might be related to us over those with whom
we share no gene pool.

So, yes, in one way we could conclude that the tsunami has been a
turning point for the ‘global village’. Its terrifying scale and
unpredictability has raised awareness that there must be a sustained
globalised response to catastrophes and, further, that the richer
world must be ready to help the poorer world on a continuing basis.

This is not entirely a new idea. The notion of alms-giving is explicit
in almost every religion – Judaism and Islam are particularly emphatic
about it. You are obliged to give to the poor and the needy. In
Ireland, that generosity has always been quite remarkable, and however
much bad publicity the Catholic Church has had over the past decade,
hostility never affected the caritas role of the Church. Year in, year
out, the St Vincent de Paul still attracted support and revenue.

Calvinism did not approve of charity to the same extent as older
faiths: the Calvinist strain distinguished between the ‘deserving’ and
the ‘undeserving’ poor. The deserving poor were merely unlucky; the
undeserving were the feckless and improvident who had brought it all
on themselves and would never alter their behaviour. That dilemma is
still with us each time we pass a beggar in the street. Is it kind to
give him money, knowing full well that he is likely to spend it on
drugs that will keep him where he is? Or should we simply act
charitably and not enquire where the money goes?

On a larger scale, some of the post-tsunami donors will be asking the
same question: is it right to give money where a society is corrupt?
Or should we just be charitable without a strings-attached clause?

All in all, the tsunami has pushed the world more towards the spirit
of generosity. Even where governments are corrupt, we realise that
people are needy. And we should have a worldwide consciousness of
these needs. It’s as if the tsunami has almost ushered in an idea
pledged in the Communist Manifesto of1848: “From each according to his
ability, to each according to his need”.

But if the world order has been changed by this catastrophe, it is
less likely that human nature itself has. Disasters shake us and
resolve us to show humanity, but soon enough the Old Adam
appears. There are people who immediately show great kindness and
heroism, but there are also people who quickly take advantage. Within
a week of the disaster, in Britain, there were reports that special
collections for tsunami victims had been stolen by thieves. Within 10
days, there were reliable reports coming from Unicef that gangs were
recruiting tsunami orphans to sell into the sex trade. There were
grumbles, too, from other charities that money collected for the
tsunami victims would now meanless revenue for them.

There were proclamations from Islamic clerics that the tsunami was a
punishment from God for all the sex-tourism and prostitution that has
been associated with some parts of the Far East. And the internet was
awash with other conspiracy theories: the Americans were quickly
blamed, as they so often are now. Strange, was it not, that the
island of Diego Garcia, host to an American airbase, was untouched by
the tidal wave? Actually, there is a geological explanation, but that
would spoil the conspiracy theory!

There is something frightening and extraordinary about the thought
that the tectonic plates can move beneath the surface of the ocean and
the globe itself can shift on its axis. The world has been changed by
this knowledge. And for all that we complain about the rubbishy aspect
of television, this is one great service that TV and international
communications have performed: bringing it all so close to us.

But to sustain that consciousness, and to maintain that sense of
global solidarity will require a change in human nature itself. And
that has always been somewhat more difficult to achieve.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

The Jamestown Foundation
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 — Volume 2, Issue 3
EURASIA DAILY MONITOR

IN THIS ISSUE:

*Yerevan agrees to add troops to Polish force in Iraq
*New Islamic terrorist group emerges in Tajikistan
*As tensions increase with West, Russia must look to China for allies
*New documentary implicates Russia in second attempt to murder Yushchenko

————————————————————————

ARMENIA TO DEPLOY TOKEN CONTINGENT TO IRAQ

On December 24, the Armenian parliament approved a symbolic deployment
of Armenian military personnel as part of the U.S.-led coalition in
Iraq. The vote was 91-23, with one abstention, after a seven-hour
closed session late into the night. A last-hour switch by the
opposition National Unity Party of Artashes Geghamian ensured the wide
margin for passing a deeply unpopular decision, made palatable to the
public by the token size of the troop commitment. The Armenian
Revolutionary Federation Dashnaktsutiun, a component of the governing
coalition, voted against the deployment, as did the opposition Justice
bloc.

Technically, the parliament was voting to ratify Armenia’s signature
on the Memorandum of Understanding with Poland — lead country of the
multinational force in south-central Iraq — on the deployment of
Armenian personnel with that force. Armenia is the nineteenth country
to become a party to that Memorandum.

The Defense Ministry has announced that the Armenian contingent is
ready for deployment as of January 5, but has not made public any
specific date for actual deployment. The ministry had adumbrated that
possibility with Washington as well as with the Armenian public since
late 2003, but it has taken more than a year to put it into
practice. The uncertainty and delays have inspired remarks that Poland
might withdraw from Iraq before the Armenians ever arrive, thus
rendering any Armenian deployment moot.

The parliament also approved the Defense Ministry’s concept of sending
46 personnel to Iraq for one year. The group consists of: two
officers, one signals specialist, 30 drivers, ten sappers, and three
medical doctors with civilian specialties. Armenian personnel are not
to participate in combat, but only in humanitarian activities. They
are also barred from any joint actions with Azerbaijani troops in
Iraq. The Armenian group will deploy without equipment, and Yerevan
will only pay the soldiers’ base salaries. Coalition forces in the
theater will provide the equipment, and the United States almost all
the funding for the Armenian group.

Defense Minister Serge Sarkisian is the prime mover behind this
mission, not only in the military but also in the internal political
arena. Sarkisian argues that Armenia cannot afford to stand aside and
risk forfeiting U.S. goodwill at a time when Azerbaijan and Georgia
are present with troops in Iraq (and elsewhere) to support the United
States. Sarkisian’s political statements obliquely suggest that the
Iraq deployment would raise Armenia’s standing in Washington, mitigate
what he terms “discriminatory” treatment there, and earn a title to
more favorable consideration of Armenian interests in the
region. Without publicly alluding to the Karabakh issue in this
context, Sarkisian has hinted that he expects Washington to lean on
Turkey to open the border with Armenia, as one of the possible
quid-pro-quos for the deployment to Iraq (Armenian Public Television,
December 25; Noian Tapan, December 27).

Somewhat more defensively, Prime Minister Andranik Margarian argues,
“Armenia’s presence [in Iraq] is primarily symbolic and for political
purposes” (Haiastani Hanrapetutiun, December 25). The government in
Yerevan rejects any characterization of the mission as a “military
presence,” terming it instead a “humanitarian presence.” This line
reflects concern for the group’s safety in the dangerous environment
of Iraq, as well as seeking to mitigate the domestic political fallout
from the deployment decision. Armenian public opinion surveys are
showing less than 10% approval of the mission and more than 50%
disapproval. Cutting across the political spectrum is the view that
Armenia’s presence alongside the United States would expose Iraq’s
Armenian diaspora community to reprisals from insurgents. That
community, currently estimated at nearly 30,000, is concentrated
almost entirely in the insurgency-plagued Sunni area.

(Mediamax, Armenpress, Noian Tapan, PanArmenian News, December 23-30).

–Vladimir Socor

TAJIKISTAN OFFICIALS FAIL TO APPREHEND KEY MEMBER OF BAYAT

On the night of December 25-26, 2004, law-enforcement officials in
Tajikistan attempted to apprehend a member of the Islamic terrorist
organization Bayat, Ali Aminov, in the village of Chorku, Isfara
district, Sogdy oblast (northern Tajikistan). Law-enforcement agents
had received a tip that Aminov was hiding in his sister’s house. At
approximately 1 am a police task force surrounded the house and
attempted to storm the compound to apprehend the terrorist. However,
the occupants responded with armed resistance and the standoff soon
deteriorated into full-blown armed confrontation. The police task
force retreated under heavy fire and called for backup. A special
forces regiment arrived by 4 am. Upon entering the house, the members
of the special forces team encountered resistance from Aminov’s
relatives. Aminov himself managed to escape through a secret passage
(Vecherny Bishkek, December 29).

The first indications of Bayat’s existence (“bayat” means “a vow” in
Arabic) appeared in the press in April 2004, when Tajikistan’s special
services apprehended 20 members of this organization in the Isfara
oblast of northern Tajikistan. The suspects were accused of carrying
out several aggravated criminal acts that were motivated by racial and
religious hatred. The group was charged with the January 2004
assassination of the head of the Baptist community in Isfara, Sergei
Bessarab, as well as torching several mosques that were headed by
imams, whom the terrorists believed had exhibited excessive loyalty to
the ruling regime. According to the Office of the Prosecutor-General
of Tajikistan, the suspects resisted arrest and searches of their
houses, carried out by law-enforcement officials, turned up hidden
arms caches.

Bayat is not affiliated with such outlawed organizations as
Hizb-ut-Tahrir (HUT) or the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU),
which are better known in the region. Nor does Bayat maintain any
links with the only legally functioning Islamic organization: the
Party of Islamic Revival of Tajikistan. According to some sources, the
Bayat activists are Tajik citizens who previously had fought on the
side of the Taliban movement in Afghanistan, and some of them are now
imprisoned at the American military base in Guantanamo, Cuba. A
connection between Bayat and the IMU should not be ruled out, however,
because IMU militants have been known to operate in the Fergana
Valley, and they also fought along side the Afghan Taliban members
(see EDM, May 3, 2004). Currently Bayat is trying to spread its
influence to neighboring countries. Thus, a branch of the Bayat
movement was recently opened in Osh, Kyrgyzstan (Vecherny Bishkek,
December 29).

Isfara is a very special region in Tajikistan. The population there is
more religious than in other regions of the country. In July 2002 the
President of Tajikistan, Imomali Rakhmonov, visited the city of Isfara
and stated that three citizens, who were originally from the Isfara
region and who had fought on the side of Taliban, were being held at
Guantanamo. Furthermore, the Party of Islamic Revival of Tajikistan is
particularly strong in the Isfara region. In the 2000 parliamentary
elections, the majority of this region’s population voted for the
Party of Islamic Revival. Moreover, in the main Islamist enclave —
the village of Chorku — 93% of the votes cast were for the Party of
Islamic Revival (Forum18.org, May 27, 2004). In a sense, Chorku,
albeit to a lesser degree, resembles the Islamist enclave in the
village of Karamakhi in Dagestan, which was destroyed by Russian
troops in 1999. For example, both villages strictly prohibited alcohol
consumption and required women to wear veils while in public. The
centers of public life are mosques, and the imams adjudicate and
resolve all disputes in accordance with the Sharia law.

The Islamist enclave in Isfara region is dangerous also because of its
geographic location. Isfara is located in the Fergana Valley section
of Tajikistan, only a few kilometers from the Uzbek and Kyrgyz parts
of the Fergana Valley. The Valley is widely considered to be one of
the most potentially volatile areas in Central Asia. In 1989
anti-Jewish pogroms took place in Andizhan (Uzbekistan), which led to
the exodus of the Jewish population from that city. That same year,
inter-ethnic clashes between Uzbeks and Meskhetian Turks broke out in
the Uzbek city of Fergana, which resulted in 150 casualties and the
mass exodus of Meskhetian Turks from Uzbekistan. In 1990 inter-ethnic
clashes between local Uzbeks and Kyrgyz claimed 320 lives in Osh
oblast (Kyrgyzstan). Furthermore, all the leaders and the majority of
the militants of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan are originally
from the Fergana Valley. The addition of another militant group will
hardly calm the region.

–Igor Rotar

RUSSIA AND CHINA: DO OIL AND WEAPONS MAKE A MARRIAGE?

Russo-Chinese relations in 2004 were not all sweetness and light.
Moscow’s destruction of Yukos and preference for a Japanese rather
than a Chinese pipeline in Siberia put severe pressure on Chinese oil
supplies, because Yukos was China’s main Russian oil supplier and
Chinese demand for energy is exploding. Thus shortages or supply
failures seriously injured China’s economy and led to public muttering
about Russia’s unreliability. However, as Russia’s ties to the West
worsened in late 2004, it had no choice but to turn back to China and
find a solution that entailed guaranteeing Beijing more access to
Russian energy supplies.

To overcome their bilateral tensions in energy, the two governments
have arrived at a four-part solution.

First, Russian firms will participate in joint construction of nuclear
power plants with China, and they will build a thermal power plant at
Yimin and Weijiamao (RIA-Novosti December 21).

Second, efforts are underway, apparently with Kazakhstan’s support, to
involve Russian companies in the current project of laying a pipeline
from Kazakhstan to China. There are also discussions about sharing
energy from the Kurmangazy oil field (RIA-Novosti, December 22). This
would create another avenue by which Russian energy supplies could go
to China.

Third, because no pipeline is currently available, Russian railroads
will transport up to 30 million tons of energy to China by 2007,
beginning with 10 million tons in 2005. While the railroads could
handle freight up to 50 million tons, that is their maximum, and a
pipeline would have to be built to carry annual amounts of 50 million
tons or more. This railway shipment program thus represents a
tripling of current oil shipments to China by 2007, from the existing
level of 10 million tons annually (Itar-Tass, December 24).

Finally, Russian President Vladimir Putin has indicated that the China
National Petroleum Company (CNPC) might be invited to take part in the
production of Yuganskneftgaz, which was the main production unit of
Yukos. Deputy Prime Minister Viktor Khristenko has indicated that
CNPC might gain as much as a 20% ownership of the new company that is
to be owned and managed by Gazprom. Beijing would thus be able to
recoup the energy that was going to China before Yukos was destroyed
(Kremlin.ru, December 21; Reuters, December 30).

While the Yukos affair has incurred much criticism abroad and will
reduce the efficiency of Russia’s energy companies, soliciting Chinese
participation represents an effort to mollify Beijing and give the
deal a patina of legitimacy. Ironically, it represents a major policy
reversal from 2002, when xenophobic protests derailed earlier Chinese
efforts to buy into Slavneft. Thus, this deal also signifies Russian
efforts to come to terms with the rise in Chinese economic power that
clearly fueled huge anxieties in the Kremlin.

But the rapprochement with Beijing goes beyond energy supplies to
encompass defense issues as well. Russia and China will hold
bilateral army exercises in China during 2005 that will apparently
test the new Russian weapons that are also going to China
(Nezavisimoye voyennoye obozreniye, December 17). These exercises
will be “quite large” and involve not only large numbers of ground
forces but also state-of-the-art weapons, navy, air, long-range
aviation, and submarine forces to provide interaction with Chinese
forces (Itar-Tass, December 27). These exercises, particularly on the
planned scale, are unprecedented and mark an expansion of both Russian
and Chinese military diplomacy to encompass greater interaction among
their militaries.

Russian arms sales to China faltered in 2004 because China demanded
only the most advanced weapons while Russia insisted on the extension
of existing contracts for the supply of weapons (RIA-Novosti, December
20). This dispute prompted China to press harder for the termination
of the EU embargo , but with only limited success. While the
possibility of renewed EU arms sales to China must alarm Russian arms
dealers who cannot survive without selling China weapons systems,
China still must rely on the Russian market for now because of the
strong American opposition and threats to the EU if it lifted
sanctions (Russian Business Monitor, December 22; Vedomosti, December
20; RIA-Novosti, December 20; NTV, November 8, 2004). Thus during
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov’s visit to China in December,
agreements were hammered out upgrading the scope of Russian arms sales
to China. These agreements include delivery of Su-30MK2 fighters and
licensing the assembly in China of Sukhoi-27SK aircraft for the
Chinese Navy (Itar-Tass, December 13). Thus in 2005 Russia will sell
24 more Su-30 planes to China (Itar-Tass, December 13; Russian
Business Monitor, December 22). Other big deals involving Ilyushin-76
Candid transport planes, Ilyushin-78 Midas aerial tankers, and engines
for China’s Super 7 and Super 8 planes are also being discussed
(Interfax-AVN Military News Agency, December 24).

Paradoxically, these deals reveal the existing tensions in
Sino-Russian relations as well as the efforts to overcome them. China
wants state-of-the-art weapons that Russia, for obvious reasons, is
not prepared to sell, but Beijing still cannot generate sufficient
leverage to push Moscow to sell those weapons. However, in the energy
sector Beijing can induce Russia to live up to existing contracts,
sell energy to China, and even invite it into some form of equity
ownership in Russian energy firms. This may not be the ideal solution
for China, but it shows that while Chinese economic power is clearly
growing, it still cannot compel Russia to comply with Chinese demands
in defense economics. Nor is it entirely clear that this energy deal
will eventually work out to China’s benefit, given the atavistic fears
of Chinese economic power in Moscow. While Russo-Chinese relations
may have reached “unprecedented heights,” according to Presidents
Putin and Hu Jintao, closer examination suggests that the mountain
that both sides are still climbing remains a rocky one.

–Lionel Martin

DETAILS EMERGE OF SECOND RUSSIAN PLOT TO ASSASSINATE YUSHCHENKO

As Viktor Yushchenko prepares for his inauguration as Ukraine’s third
president, he knows that Ukraine-Russia relations will be one of the
most difficult issues he faces. The Economist (December 29) advised
Yushchenko, “to kiss and make up with Russia and Vladimir Putin, who
backed Mr. Yanukovych and has thus been humiliated by his defeat.”
Such reconciliation will be far easier said than done. Russia is
reportedly behind two attempts on Yushchenko’s life, one through
poisoning and a second with a bomb. Yushchenko alluded to the latter
plot when he said, “Those who wanted to blow myself up did not
undertake it, because they came too close and could have blown
themselves up” (Ukrayinska pravda, December 16).

While details of the poisoning are better known, evidence of the bomb
threat has only just come to light in a documentary on Channel Five, a
Ukrainian television station sympathetic to Yushchenko. Details aired
in the weekly “Zakryta Zona” (Closed Zone) documentary, under the
suitable title “Terrorists” (5tv.com.ua/pr_archiv/136/0/265/).

During last year’s election campaign a still-unexplained bomb
detonated in Kyiv, killing one person and injuring dozens more. The
Kuchma government blamed the Ukrainian People’s Party (UNP), a member
of Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine bloc, for the attack. Explosives were also
planted during searches of the offices of opposition youth groups. The
Security Service (SBU) and Interior Ministry (MVS) have now admitted
that charges of “terrorism” against the UNP and youth groups were
false (Ukrayinska pravda, December 16; razom.org.ua, December 23).

According to Channel Five, the real terrorists were the authorities,
conspiring with the Russian security services (FSB). It would be naive
to believe that Russian President Vladimir Putin was unaware of the
plot. An illicitly transcribed telephone conversation, cited at length
in the “Zakryta Zona” documentary, between a Ukrainian informant and
an FSB officer showed how the Russian authorities were fully aware of
the dirty tricks being used by Russian political advisors working for
Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych. The “advisors,” such as
Gleb Pavlovsky and Marat Gelman, worked with Yanukovych’s shadow
campaign headquarters, headed by Deputy Prime Minister Andriy
Kluyev. Presidential administration head and Social Democratic United
Party (SDPUo) leader Viktor Medvedchuk served as Gelman and
Pavlovsky’s principal contact. The taped conversation reveals that
Gelman and Pavlovsky considered assassination to be a legitimate
campaign strategy. The FSB officer on the tape specifically discusses
the poisoning of Yushchenko.

The bomb attempt may have been conceived after the poison failed to
kill Yushchenko before election day. Plans for the bomb attack were
discovered when a spetsnaz unit of the State Defense Service (DSO) was
sent to investigate a burglar alarm. The alarm went off near one of
the three offices used by the Yushchenko campaign. The DSO noticed a
car with Russian license plates and asked the two occupants for their
documents. After a check of their Russian and Ukrainian passports
revealed them to be false, a search of the car’s trunk found three
kilos of plastic explosives, enough to destroy everything within a
500-meter radius.

Both passengers were arrested and a subsequent investigation unmasked
them as Mikhail M. Shugay and Marat B. Moskvitin, Russian citizens
from the Moscow region. Their only contact in Moscow had been a
certain “Surguchov” who had hired them in September for the bombing
operation against Yushchenko and his ally, Yulia Tymoshenko. The
terrorists were to receive $50,000 after the bomb plot was
completed. After smuggling the explosives through the
Russian-Ukrainian border, both FSB operatives set up a safe house in
the village of Dudarkiv, 15 kilometers from Kyiv. A search of these
premises found pistols, radio equipment, and bomb-making instructions.

The plot thickens with additional taped telephone conversations played
in the “Zakryta Zona” documentary. These conversations were made by
the SBU during the elections and handed over to Yushchenko after round
two. Kluyev is heard discussing with unknown individuals the
whereabouts of Yushchenko’s office and where the leadership of the
Yushchenko camp meets. The documentary’s producers believe that
Kluyev sought this intelligence to pass on to the Russian
assassination team, so that bombs could be placed to murder not only
Yushchenko, but also other members of his team, such as Tymoshenko.

Increasing evidence points to Russian involvement in Yushchenko’s
poisoning. In December Yushchenko’s doctors in Vienna concluded that
he had, in fact, been poisoned by TCDD, the most toxic form of
dioxin. His dioxin level was 6,000 times higher than normal and the
second highest recorded in history. Alexander V. Litvinenko, who
served in the KGB and the FSB before defecting to the United Kingdom,
has revealed that the FSB has a secret laboratory in Moscow that
specializes in poisons. A former dissident scientist now living in the
United States, Vil S. Mirzayanov, reported that this institute studied
dioxins while developing defoliants for the military. (TCDD was a
component of Agent Orange.) SBU defector Valeriy Krawchenko also
pointed to this FSB laboratory as the likely source of the dioxin that
poisoned Yushchenko (New York Times, December 15).

Yushchenko has alleged that the poisoning took place during a
September 5, 2004, dinner at the home of then-deputy SBU chairman
Volodymyr Satsyuk, a member of the SDPUo. This again reveals the
involvement of Medvedchuk and Russian political advisors working for
Yanukovych. Not surprisingly, Satsyuk and Kluyev have hurriedly
abandoned their government positions to return to parliament, where
they enjoy immunity.

Russia’s involvement in two terrorist attacks in Ukraine, a poisoning
and bombing, make a mockery of Putin’s alleged commitment to work
alongside the United States in the international war on terrorism.

–Taras Kuzio

————————————————————————

The Eurasia Daily Monitor is a publication of the Jamestown
Foundation. The opinions expressed in it are those of the individual
authors and do not necessarily represent those of the Jamestown
Foundation. If you have any questions regarding the content of EDM, or
if you think that you have received this email in error, please
respond to [email protected].

Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution of EDM is strictly
prohibited by law.

The Jamestown Foundation
4516 43rd Street, NW
Washington, DC 20016
202-483-8888 (phone)
202-483-8337 (fax)

Copyright (c) 1983-2004 The Jamestown Foundation.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

EurasiaNet Organization
Jan 7 2005

TURKISH DRIVE TOWARDS EU INCREASES POSSIBILITIES FOR CHANGE IN THE
CAUCASUS
Jon Gorvett 1/06/05

The European Union’s decision to pursue membership talks with Turkey
could have far-reaching political and economic ramifications for the
Caucasus. The accession process can stimulate democratization in the
region, experts say.

The EU decided December 17 to open what promises to be a lengthy
accession process with Turkey. Some political observers in Turkey say
the decision immediately increased pressure on Ankara to normalize
relations with neighboring Armenia. In recent months, Ankara and
Yerevan have probed a rapprochement, but they have yet to make
substantive progress in overcoming long-standing mutual hostility.
[For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

“If Turkey starts accession talks,” adds Professor Gareth Winrow of
Istanbul’s Bilgi University, “it will have to normalize relations
with all its neighbors as a condition of future EU membership. Number
one, this means opening all its borders.”

Turkey’s has kept its frontier with Armenia closed since 1993. The
closure is connected with a Turkish embargo designed to encourage
Armenia’s withdrawal from Azerbaijani territory captured during the
Nagorno-Karabkah conflict. [For additional information see the
Eurasia Insight archive]. Turkish political leaders in mid-2004
mulled re-opening the border, but the idea met fierce resistance,
both in Turkey and in Azerbaijan, and officials backed off the idea.
[For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Turkish observers say the government will have a difficult time
finessing the border issue, adding that despite the EU pressure, the
status quo may not change in the near future. “If Turkey just opened
the border because of EU pressure, there might easily be a backlash,”
warned Mustafa Sahin of the Ankara-based Eurasian think tank, AVSAM.
“Azerbaijan is a very popular cause in Turkey. Also, Armenia still
has territorial claims on Turkey that would have to be solved.”

Turkish territorial concerns stem from Armenia’s refusal to recognize
the Kars Treaty of 1921, which set the frontiers between the two
states. Armenia claims there is no need for such recognition, as
acceptance of the existing borders was implicit when both countries
joined the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
Turkey, however, continues to seek a specific guarantee of Armenian
recognition for the existing border.

Armenian President Robert Kocharian in late 2004 appealed to the EU
to place the opening of the frontier among the pre-conditions for
Turkey’s EU membership. “It is unacceptable for a country that is to
have membership talks with the EU to keep its border closed with
another country that is already in the neighborhood policy of
Europe,” Kocharian said.

The Armenian leader was referring to the EU Neighborhood Policy
(EUNP), which was formulated to provide a framework for states
bordering on the EU, such as Moldova and Ukraine. “The EUNP is
designed to give support and dialogue to those countries that have no
prospect of joining for now,” adds Winrow. “At first, Georgia,
Armenia and Azerbaijan were excluded from the EUNP, but after the
Rose Revolution in Georgia, the EU changed its mind and allowed them
in.” [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive].

If Turkey and Armenia can eventually settle their differences, some
observers believe pressure could increase on the Baku and Yerevan to
reach a Karabakh settlement. Others, however, are guarded about the
possibilities. “Accession talks won’t have any direct effect on the
Armenian issue,” suggested Ferai Tinc, a political analyst for the
Hurriyet daily. “We’ve seen many times before these moves to sort out
the border.”

Nevertheless, Tinc and others say Turkey’s move towards EU membership
cannot but have a positive impact on the Caucasus. “It will send a
message to the region that will be good for the democratization
process,” says Tinc. “Turkey’s relations with the Caucasian states
will be within a different framework – not as a big brother, but as a
member of a community.”

Sahin, the AVSAM think-tank expert, said that even though Armenia
views Turkey with suspicion, a significant number of Armenians want
to see Ankara’s accession effort succeed. “Armenia is a little split
on the issue,” Sahin said. “But even there, many argue that Turkey’s
accession process will give Armenia greater leverage for change.”

Meanwhile, others see Turkey’s European path as helping to widen EU
influence with another regional big power, Russia. “Turkey can play a
very important role here,” says Winrow. “As can an organization such
as the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC). Turkey can show its
strategic importance to Europe and get better and closer regional
relations through this.”

Editor’s Note: Jon Gorvett is a freelance journalist based in
Istanbul.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Transitions Online, Czech Republic
Jan 7 2005

Analyst on Caucasus

The International Crisis Group, an independent, non-profit,
multinational organisation, with over 100 staff members on five
continents, working through field-based analysis and high-level
advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict is looking for one or
two analysts to be based in Baku and/or Yerevan.

Crisis Group’s approach is grounded in field research. Teams of
political analysts are located within or close by countries at risk
of outbreak,
escalation or recurrence of violent conflict. Based on information
and assessments from the field, Crisis Group produces regular
analytical reports containing practical recommendations targeted at
key international decision-takers. Crisis Group also publishes
CrisisWatch, a 12-page monthly bulletin, providing a succinct regular
update on the state of play in all the most significant situations of
conflict or potential conflict around the world. Find out more at

The Caucasus Analyst(s) will be working under the supervision of the
Caucasus Project Director (located in Tbilisi) to research and
produce
reports on security, political, governance, human rights and social
issues related to Armenia/Azerbaijan and the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict. The position will be based in Yerevan and/or Baku

Responsibilities will include:

– Conducting extensive field research and providing analysis on
prevailing security, social, legal, governance and political issues;
– Proposing policy initiatives for governmental, intergovernmental,
political, and nongovernmental stakeholders to address and resolve
sources of conflict;
– Preparing detailed reports and briefing papers setting out relevant
research findings and policy recommendations.

Candidate profile:

– Deep knowledge of the Caucasus region and extensive contacts in
Armenia/Azerbaijan with governmental and non governmental officials,
media, and academia;
– 5 years of professional experience in conflict analysis,
journalism, NGO, IGO, or government work related to Azerbaijan/Armenia;
– Excellent writing and analytical skills, good in summarizing fast
amounts of written material.
– Fluency in English, Russian and knowledge of local languages;
– Masters degree in international relations, human rights, political
science, sociology or similar.

Applications should be in English and include a CV, cover letter,
research proposal, writing sample and the contact details of at least
three referees. In the cover letter the candidate should briefly
describe how he/she meets the position qualifications. In the
research proposal he/she should propose ideas on themes that he/she
could write about in relation to Nagorno-Karabakh, and briefly
describe how he or she would research them (in no more than two
pages). The writing sample must be an unedited piece on current
developments in Armenia/ Azerbaijan.

Please send applications by email to [email protected] to
the attention of Johanna van der Hoeven. The closing date for
applications is 15 January 2005.

ArmenPress
Jan 7 2005

MORE IRANIANS CHOOSE YEREVAN UNIVERSITIES AS THEIR ALMA MATER

YEREVAN, JANUARY 7, ARMENPRESS: Armenian education and science
minister Sergo Yeritsian pledged today his ministry’s assistance to
Iranian students studying in Yerevan in solving part of their
everyday problems. He was meeting with some of 920 Iranian students
who have chosen Yerevan-based universities as their alma maters.
Some 350 of them are majoring at Yerevan Medical University, 280
at Yerevan Engineering University and the rest at Yerevan State
University and some other private universities. Last year alone 456
Iranians were admitted at Armenian universities, citing their high
standard teaching and accessibility.
Ali Najaf, an aide to Iranian ambassador in Yerevan, who was also
present, said Yeritsian’s visit to Tehran, scheduled for January 15
is expected to give a new boost to cooperation in education between
the two countries.
Overall, some 6,000 foreigners are studying in Armenia. The latest
group of 13 students has arrived from China.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Up to 23 U.S. Bishops Could Retire in 2005

Catholic News Service
1/6/2005

WASHINGTON — Up to 23 U.S. bishops — including three cardinals —
could retire because of age this year.

There are only three still-active bishops who have already turned 75,
but 20 others will celebrate their 75th birthday in 2005.

Cardinal Edmund C. Szoka, 77, who has been in Vatican service since
1990, has been the oldest active U.S. cardinal since July 2003.

This year Cardinals Adam J. Maida of Detroit and Theodore E. McCarrick
of Washington will reach 75, the age at which church law says a bishop
is requested to submit his resignation to the pope.

Even if all three cardinals retire from their current posts, they will
remain eligible to enter a conclave and elect a new pope until age 80.

Cardinal Szoka, who turned 75 on Sept. 14, 2002, is a Michigan native.
He was ordained a priest in 1954 and made first bishop of Gaylord,
Mich., in 1971. He was made archbishop of Detroit in 1981, named a
cardinal in 1988 and called to Rome in 1990 to head the Prefecture for
the Economic Affairs of the Holy See. Since 1997 he has been president
of the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State.

Cardinal Maida, who turns 75 March 18, was born in Pennsylvania.
Ordained a priest of the Pittsburgh Diocese in 1956, he was made bishop
of Green Bay, Wis., in 1983 and archbishop of Detroit in 1990. He was
made a cardinal in 1994.

Cardinal McCarrick, who turns 75 July 7, was born in New York and
ordained a priest there in 1958. He was made an auxiliary bishop of New
York in 1977, first bishop of Metuchen, N.J., in 1981 and archbishop of
Newark, N.J., in 1986. Transferred to the Washington Archdiocese in
November 2000, he was installed there in January 2001 and made a
cardinal the following month.

The two other active U.S. bishops who are already 75 are both from
Eastern Catholic churches. They are:

— Ruthenian Bishop Andrew Pataki of Passaic, N.J., a priest since 1952,
bishop since 1983 and head of the Passaic Diocese since 1995. He turned
75 Aug. 30, 2002.

— Bishop Manuel Batakian of the Armenian Catholic Exarchate of U.S.A.
and Canada, a priest since 1954, bishop since 1995 and head of the
exarchate since 2001. He turned 75 Nov. 5, 2004.

Eastern church law asks a bishop to submit his resignation at age 75 to
his patriarch if he is a member of a patriarchal church or to the pope
if his church is not a patriarchate.

In addition to Cardinals Maida and McCarrick, still-active bishops who
will turn 75 in 2005 are, in chronological order:

— Jan. 21: Auxiliary Bishop John P. Boles of Boston, a priest since1955
and bishop since 1992.

— Jan. 26: Auxiliary Bishop Thomas J. Gumbleton of Detroit, a priest
since 1956 and bishop since 1968.

— Feb. 3: Bishop David E. Foley of Birmingham, Ala., a priest since
1956, bishop since 1986 and head of the Birmingham Diocese since 1994.

— Feb. 15: Bishop Robert E. Mulvee of Providence, R.I., a priest since
1957, bishop since 1977 and head of the Providence Diocese since 1997.

— March 23: Auxiliary Bishop Joseph M. Sullivan of Brooklyn, N.Y., a
priest since 1956 and bishop since 1980.

— April 1: Bishop F. Joseph Gossman of Raleigh, N.C., a priest since
1955, bishop since 1968 and head of the Raleigh Diocese since 1975.

— May 3: Bishop William E. Franklin of Davenport, Iowa, a priest since
1956, bishop since 1987 and head of the Davenport Diocese since 1994.

— May 11: Ukrainian Bishop Basil H. Losten of Stamford, Conn., a priest
since 1957, bishop since 1971 and head of the Stamford Diocese since 1977.

— May 20: Auxiliary Bishop William J. Winter of Pittsburgh, a priest
since 1955 and bishop since 1989.

— Aug. 3: Bishop Kenneth A. Angell of Burlington, Vt., a priest since
1956, bishop since 1974 and head of the Burlington Diocese since 1992.

— Aug. 8: Bishop John J. Leibrecht of Springfield-Cape Girardeau, Mo.,
a priest since 1956 and a bishop since1984.

— Aug. 15: Auxiliary Bishop Rene A. Valero of Brooklyn, N.Y., a priest
since 1956 and bishop since 1980.

— Sept. 3: Auxiliary Bishop George E. Rueger of Worcester, Mass., a
priest since 1958 and bishop since 1987.

— Also Sept. 3: Bishop Sylvester D. Ryan of Monterey, Calif., a priest
since 1957, bishop since 1990 and head of the Monterey Diocese since 1992.

— Oct. 22: Bishop Carl F. Mengeling of Lansing, Mich., a priest since
1957 and a bishop since1996.

— Oct. 23: Auxiliary Bishop Thomas J. Flanagan of San Antonio, a priest
since 1956 and bishop since 1998.

— Oct. 25: Bishop Raphael M. Fliss of Superior, Wis., a priest since
1956, bishop since 1979 and head of the Superior Diocese since 1985.

— Dec. 13: Auxiliary Bishop Dominic Carmon of New Orleans, a priest
since 1960 and bishop since1993.

Another prominent bishop who works in the United States could retire
this year as well. Colombian-born Archbishop Gabriel Montalvo, apostolic
nuncio to the United States, turns 75 Jan. 27. Ordained a priest in
1953, he entered the papal diplomatic corps in 1957 and was made a
bishop in 1974.

Archbishop Montalvo served in difficult diplomatic posts in Latin
America, North Africa and Central Europe and was head of the Pontifical
Ecclesiastical Academy, the Vatican school for diplomats, before he was
made nuncio to the United States in 1998.

Los Angeles Daily News
Jan 5 2005

Holiday tradition is kept alive

By Alex Dobuzinskis
Staff Writer

GLENDALE — In preserving the celebration of Armenian Christmas in
January, more than 60 youngsters visited the Armenian Relief
Society’s western headquarters in Glendale on Thursday to pick up a
bag of donated presents.
For many youngsters this was the second round of gift-opening this
holiday season. Ararak Apian, 12, said he finds it impossible to wait
until Jan. 6 — the day the Armenian church celebrates the birth of
Christ.

“I couldn’t wait to open them, so I just open them on (Dec.) 25th,”
said Ararak, who lives in Burbank.

Organizers hope the show of generosity will encourage
Armenian-American children to keep alive their cultural tradition.

“We remind them and we tell them that we have American Christmas, but
(they should) never forget that Armenian Christmas is Jan. 6,” said
Sona Zinzalian, director of social services for the Armenian Relief
Society.

Children sang the Armenian version of “Santa Claus is Coming to Town”
as the red-clad gift-giver entered the room to distribute bags
containing dolls, toy cars, stuffed animals and musical instruments.

Christmas celebrations are spread over nearly three weeks for many
Armenian-American families, with a Christmas Eve dinner Dec. 24 and
another one Jan. 5. Vehans Mardian, 13, said he opens his gifts as
soon as he gets them, but that it is good to wait until Jan. 6.

“People should do that; it’s showing respect,” he said.

Other orthodox churches also celebrate the birth of Christ on Jan. 6,
said the Very Reverend Father Asbed Balian of the Armenian Church of
North America Western Diocese. A Christmas reception will be held at
the Burbank headquarters of the diocese Thursday.

Although Dec. 25 might not be celebrated in Armenia, Balian said it
is good that Armenian-Americans celebrate it.

“Nothing wrong in that. That’s what life is. It’s … to fit in, you
keep your identity but also you merge in with given local traditions
as well,” he said.

Armen Carapetian, 33, of Glendale came to the United States more than
20 years ago. In keeping with the tradition of other Armenians from
Iran, Carapetian and his family would exchange gifts Jan. 1 for the
first few years they were in America.

But now he opens presents Dec. 25, along with most of his friends.

“What happens I think over time is once you have kids and their
friends, typically non-Armenian friends, are getting gifts on the
25th, it’s hard to deny a child their right to a gift,” he said.

Glendale resident Ida Arutyunyan, however, said her family often
exchanges gifts Jan. 6. Arutyunyan, 20, said fish, a symbol of the
Christian faith, rice with raisins and a wrapped meat dish are
staples of the holiday meals at her home, along with rounds of
toasts.

Her family got more traditional over the years, especially after her
grandparents moved here a few years ago.

“Keeping it more traditional for the parents is getting important,
too, because they see how some kids are getting away from tradition,”
Arutyunyan said.

“As long as we have grandparents we’re traditionalists,” she added.

Glendale News Press
LATimes.com
Jan 5 2005

Home for the holiday

In an unprecedented move, Glendale Unified School District gives
students the day off for Armenian Christmas.

By Darleene Barrientos, News-Press and Leader

GLENDALE – For the first time, Glendale’s public schools will be
closed Jan. 6 to observe Armenian Christmas.

Glendale Unified School District’s board members unanimously approved
the change in the holiday calendar last March.

Many Armenians observe Dec. 25 and Jan. 6 as crucial parts of the
Christmas season. Thursday, the Day of Epiphany, is a holiday
observed by various Christian faiths for several reasons, including
the revealing of Jesus Christ as the messiah and his baptism. It is
more colloquially referred to as Armenian Christmas.

“There were three reasons why it was done,” Glendale Supt. Michael
Escalante said. “The first one was the kids weren’t at school, so
they were losing a day of instruction. Second, as a result of the
students not being in school, there was a financial impact on the
district. Third, it was to recognize a holiday that traditionally
hadn’t been recognized.”

District officials originally discussed extending the winter break
another week to include the holiday. But after a backlash from
parents upset with the prospect of losing time for family vacations
by ending the school year a week later or earlier, the district
instead made Jan. 6 a day off for all students.

“In previous years when we didn’t have it off, a lot of teachers
would get frustrated just because they knew other students weren’t
coming to school,” Glendale High School student Harra Yoon, 17, said.
“The students didn’t mind – in classes, they could get off easy and
the teachers didn’t give out so much work. It is better that it’s off
because, that way, not so many students get off the work.”

The absence of nearly one-third of the student population – more than
10,000 of the district’s 29,000 students are of Armenian descent –
made it a financial problem. The district earns about $25 per student
per day in state Average Daily Attendance funds. Past years have cost
the district about $250,000 because many Armenian students don’t
attend school that day.

“I think it’s common sense,” Rosemont Middle School PTA President
Jane Stockly said. “It saves money. Our school district always needs
to look to the changing times and changing population by observing
their holidays.”

Other school districts observe Chinese New Year, Rosh Hashanah and
Yom Kippur for the same reasons, she said.

“It makes complete sense to me,” Stockly said. “It’s a way for the
district to be smart with its money.”

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress