Author: Andres-Papazian

RUSSIA RATIFIES REGIONAL SECURITY FORCE AGREEMENT

RIA Novosti
December 8, 2010
MOSCOW

The State Duma, the lower house of the Russian parliament, on Wednesday
ratified an agreement establishing a rapid reaction force for the
regional security group.

The Collective Security Treaty Organization’s (CSTO) rapid reaction
force is designed to improve the security of the CSTO member
states against existing and potential threats, including terrorism,
extremism, drug trafficking, and natural disasters, and to enhance
the organization’s role in ensuring international security.

The CSTO is comprised of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Russia, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. Iran, India, Mongolia and Pakistan
have observer status.

The Collective Rapid Reaction Force (CRRF) staged a two-week military
exercise in southern Kazakhstan in October 2009 with more than 7,000
troops from Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan
taking part.

From: A. Papazian

UNTIL MURDER PLOT IS INVESTIGATED
By Harut Sassounian

Lragir.am
08 Dec 2010

Armenians Should Stay Away from Turkey Until Assassination Plot
is Investigated

The Turkish Cihan wire service made a sensational revelation last
week — a Turkish hit squad had planned to assassinate a visiting
Armenian Parliamentarian on March 22, 2009.

Based on information obtained from Turkish security services, Cihan
disclosed that Mutlu Erdogan and Selcuk Onur Ozyilmaz, members of
the Turkish Unity Revenge Squad (Turk Intikam Birligi Teshkilati),
were plotting to kill an unnamed ARF (Tashnag Party) leader. They
were tipped off about his presence in Turkey, after he had acquired
a Turkish cell phone.

The Armenian Weekly, a Boston-based ARF publication, speculated
that the target of the Turkish hit men may have been Ara Nranyan,
an ARF Parliamentarian from Armenia, who was in Turkey to attend a
Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) conference as Chairman of the
Audit Committee of BSEC’s Parliamentary Assembly.

During a phone conversation, the hit squad members discussed their
plan to assassinate Nranyan, but decided to postpone their intended
action, having learned that the security forces were trailing them.

‘Let a few months pass and we will slowly begin to conduct operations.

We won’t stand idly by,’ the conspirators told each other on a phone
call which was monitored by Turkish authorities.

The ARF Bureau press office expressed concern that ‘information
about Nranyan’s entry to Turkey was made available to a terrorist
organization,’ noting that ‘such information could have only been
provided by the Turkish state.’

Meanwhile, a Turkish police report established a link between the
hit squad and Ergenikon, a covert group of military and intelligence
officials who carried out terrorist operations, including political
assassinations, in order to create mayhem and instability in Turkey
with the aim of toppling the elected government.

‘Nranyan’s visit was not secret, but it was not a high profile visit
either. So, it is possible that the information the alleged plotters
had was from a source within the Turkish government,’ ARF Bureau
political affairs director Giro Manoyan told the Armenian Weekly. ‘We
are taking the issue seriously and looking into it, trying to find
out as much information as possible,’ he added. ‘The information is
disturbing because it corresponds with certain facts,’ said Manoyan.

‘In a country where someone like Hrant Dink who was considered a ‘dove’
was gunned down in broad daylight, we wouldn’t be surprised that a
member of the ARF, generally viewed in Turkey as ‘hawks,’ would be
targeted,’ Manoyan noted. Indeed, it was revealed that the Ergenikon
group had even planned to assassinate the Armenian Patriarch of Turkey!

It is surprising that ever since this most serious revelation, no
Armenian government official has bothered to make a statement or issue
a condemnation. Not even the Chairman of the Armenian Parliament has
raised his voice at the news that a member of his legislative body
had been targeted for assassination.

One would have expected that the Armenian government would have
pressed Ankara to disclose how a hit squad was alerted about the
upcoming visit of an Armenian Parliamentarian to Turkey — was it
through a phone company insider, a Turkish visa officer or a state
official who knew of Nranyan’s plan to attend the BSEC conference?

Armenia should demand that Turkey conduct a thorough investigation
of this ugly incident and disclose the steps taken to ensure that
such leaks to terrorists about visiting Armenian dignitaries do not
take place in the future. Until Yerevan becomes satisfied that the
Turkish government is doing everything possible to guarantee the
safety and security of Armenian visitors, no Armenian official or
tourist should step foot on Turkish soil, and no Armenian athlete or
sports team should participate in any tournament in Turkey. No more
soccer diplomacy! Also, until further notice, no Armenian from the
Diaspora should visit Turkey.

Strangely, some naïve Armenians do not seem to realize that when
they go to Turkey on vacation, they are not simply visiting another
country, but going into enemy territory. Since there are no diplomatic
relations between Armenia and Turkey, no Armenian consular official
can come to the assistance of an Armenian citizen in trouble, as was
the case in the killing of a pregnant Armenian woman near Ankara,
and the beating of an Armenian family vacationing in Antalya.

Armenians should raise this assassination plot at every opportunity
through the global media and international meetings, particularly
the Black Sea Economic Cooperation conference, demanding that Turkish
officials bring severe charges against the accused hit men, disclose
the findings of their investigation, and take preventive steps before
Armenia agrees to send another official delegation to Turkey.

From: A. Papazian

OPERATION “VAGABOND”
HAKOB BADALYAN

Lragir.am
08 Dec 2010

or New requirements of the time

New content has been recently noticed in the official propaganda. The
propaganda is now filled of Russian businessmen of Armenian origin,
who have achieved success in Russia and formed large-scale business
systems. The power, appears to be trying to follow the principle of
“tell me who your friend is and I will say who you are” trying to
prove to the society that its friends are not only the semi-literate
Armenian oligarchs but also Russian intellectual-businessmen.

In this case the natural question occurs: who the local oligarchs for
the power are. It is unjust: local oligarchs keep the power ensuring
the operation of mechanism of electoral breaches, providing material
and human resources for this goal, then, they guarantee the daily
activities of the reproduced power, if necessary they pay taxes
to the budget, implement various charity orders for social tension
and propaganda reasons, etc. and then the power presents as if its
friend-businessmen are coming from Russia.

It turns out that domestic oligarchs perform the “dirty work”, and the
government then tries to clean off the soot with the help of Russian
businessmen of Armenian origin, leaving the local oligarchs at the
mercy of the society. True, the local oligarchs have chosen their
destiny themselves. They accepted the rules of the game that the
government forced. In order to use numerous unwritten privileges,
the oligarchy, in fact, refused its written rights. And thus they
strengthened the power so much that now in a couple of days, it can
turn any oligarch into a “vagabond” as the first president Levon
Ter-Petrosyan would say.

In moral and moral-psychological senses, it is already happening.

Against the background of businessmen-intellectuals coming from
Russia, local oligarchs already look like intellectual and cultural
“vagabonds”. Well, here the process of material vagabondism begins.

First, the Russian business will dominate in the description field,
and then, the transition of moral-psychological dominance into the
material field will become a matter of technique. And let the local
oligarchs do not think that the government does this in order to
create a much more civilized Russian business culture it tries to
“veil” the triumph of the Armenian “culture”, that is, the shared
“dirty work” for the reproduction of power.

Not at all. It is a well-designed and quite far-sighted policy. The
government already knows that the local oligarchy has lost relevance
as a tool to maintain the power. In the end, after 2008, the situation
and public perceptions have changed significantly, requirements for
domestic and foreign policy are changed too. Oligarchs no longer
correspond to these claims, and hopes for their modernization are
negligible. Power too knows the possibilities of the oligarchy and
its ability to modernize.

That is why the emphasis is now on the Russian businessmen of Armenian
origin, who already have a more modern image. True, those are not
quite compatible with the new requirements. But they are much more
adequate, both in terms of image and perception and behavior and know
how to keep the power under new world vision, at least in Armenia.

So, apparently, the new partnership between the government of Armenia
and Russian businessmen is probably not a propaganda ploy and nor
an attempt to conceal the mischief of local companies. Everything
is much more “serious”, and the intention is to start a long-term
“living together”. And the main issue here is not how the current
partner of the authorities – the local oligarchy will feel, but how
the government’s life with its new “spouse” will change the country
life of its citizens, the quality of the public life.

In this sense, there is some reason for optimism, since it is obvious
that the bet is placed on the form rather than content. In terms
of content, everything is still based on the values and priorities
reigning within the ruling “elite”. In other words, these developments
in terms of culture and meaningful life of the Armenian power can
be a maximum provincial layout of the Russian authorities. The real
change is possible only in case the power is based not on oligarchs
and yard bosses, but real democratic and liberal values, and priority
will be the real governmental modernization.

From: A. Papazian

WILL WE BECOME A NATION?
Interview by SIRANUYSH PAPYAN

Lragir.am
08 Dec 2010

Our interlocutor is political scientist, publicist Edgar Vardanyan

Edgar, what do you think about nationalists and liberalists?

Nationalism, in terms of an idea of formation of the nation, is a
normal idea. But, in practice, nationalism appeared as a resistance to
old aristocrat regimes and had the goal to create public and political
unions of a new type. Nation is a new notion of European origin.

Nation is first of all a union of people gathered with the intention
to form a nation, who are self-determined and have sovereignty,
who have power in this or that territory. The notion of the “nation”
was formed in 17-18 centuries, when new political unions in the face
of modern European nations appeared. In this sense, nationalism is
a quite new, progressive, modern social-political conception, which
promotes the self-determination of a nation.

Can we assert that those, who say that we are not formed as a nation,
mean that the politics on which it is based failed?

The process that was happening in Europe in 17-18 centuries, has
started in a territory called Armenia only recently, and it is still
an issue whether we will manage to be formed as a nation.

Do you think we are late?

It is clear that we are, since, we have not participated in world
processes in practice.

Now, nationalism is perceived in the world in negative colors.

Nationalism as a nation-forming idea lost its actuality in Europe and
is now observed as an antagonism to liberalism. Nationalism is viewed
as a threat to the individual freedom, as a dominance of national
interests to individual ones. The forces, which proclaim themselves
nationalists, are seen in Europe as those encroaching on the freedom
of individuals and stating about the uniqueness and superiority of
their nations. Such nationalism is seen as an extremist, racist and
fascist concept, antagonistic to democratic ideology.

If we use nationalism as a nation-forming idea, just like it was once
used in Europe, everything will be all right in Armenia, and here
there cannot be contradictions with liberalism. The whole issue is
that nationalism does not contain the aforementioned idea.

Those forces which consider themselves nationalists do not support
democracy and Constitutional ideas. They see nationalism as something
above individuality. This nationalism identifies the two notions of
“nation and ethnos”.

What is the difference?

Nation is a political, voluntary union based on free will. A nation
can be composed of representatives of various ethnic groups. Ethnos
means genetic generality based on some myths. We put no difference
between these two concepts, and nationalists are considered those,
who argue that ethnic interest prevails over individual rights and
the rights of other ethnic groups. And after that, our nationalists
do not consider themselves racists and anti-democrats.

Is there any connection between religion and nationalism?

Judging by the speeches of our clerics, they see the apostolic doctrine
as a religion of purely Armenian ethnics. They believe that Armenians
should be followers of the Armenian Apostolic Church. In the modern
world, such approaches are unacceptable. This is at odds not only
with the secular democratic foundations, but also the constitutional
principle of separation of church and state.

Can a nation be formed through civil union?

This is a very serious condition. Since, expression of civil protest
can be of imitation character. I am sure for example that the demands
of the Armenian academicians to free Nikol Pashinyan are ordered from
“above”.

Is there political will for such changes in Armenia?

I would like to believe so.

From: A. Papazian

STEPANAKERT- SARAJEVO?
NAIRA HAYRUMYAN

Lragir.am
08 Dec 2010

The Karabakh issue settlement, after the OSCE Summit in Astana,
turned into a process of trying to hold back Azerbaijan from war. All
kind of statements in this connection underline the necessity of
a peace settlement. Some experts, on the contrary, affirm that the
international community, insisting on peace settlement, is pushing
persistently Azerbaijan to war – “the only way to solve the NKR
dispute”.

Equalization of the principles of territorial integrity (x) and right
to self-determination (y) brought about the fact that legal arguments
lost their significance in the settlement. No legal arguments are
heard in the negotiations. If x=y, so x-y=0. This means that the
issue settlement cannot be viewed at the plane of international right.

Azerbaijan does not hide that it is no longer going to lose time on
quarrels about the principles of the Helsinki Final Act, which even
according to the assessments of experts, are expired. Baku prefers
medieval methods – military revenge. The other day it was reported
that Baku is getting ready for a “counter-terrorist operation” in
Nagorno-Karabakh. Yesterday in Armenia the first reading of a law
allowing Armenia to sign military and political agreements with the
unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh was held. This means that if Azerbaijan
encroaches on the security of Karabakh, Armenia will intervene in
the war.

The whole issue is what the reaction of the international community
to such a course of events will be. Many experts think that the
co-chairs of the Minsk group in fact opened a way to hostilities
fixing the failure of the Minsk group activities in Astana.

There are opinions that the international community, which recognized
the “wear” of the principle of territorial integrity and current world
order, decided to make a regular redrawing of borders in the world.

Karabakh is the best “hotbed” for inspiring global military action
as a result of which it is possible to fix new boundaries, since it
lies at the junction of the countries, “subject to redrawing”. It
is obvious that if Azerbaijan starts a war, Armenia will intervene,
which will entail the placement of Russian “peacekeeper-border
guards”. Iran will not stand by, who has a long border with Karabakh,
and then a NATO “mission” will unexpectedly land on this border. This
course of events, on a plan, should cause a reaction in Turkey which,
in case of intervention, may be dismembered – and then the issue of
Kurdistan will be resolved.

This scenario, despite many parts of it are just hypotheses, is more
than realistic. But, no one asked the opinion of Karabakh, whether it
wants to become a new Sarajevo, from which the First World War stared.

The Russian mass media means are lauding about the soonest possible
war, as if war preparations are to be held in Moscow.

From: A. Papazian

WIKILEAKS’ ONLINE SUPPORTERS FIGHTING BACK AFTER NEWS OF JULIAN ASSANGE’S ARREST HIT THE WIRES

PanARMENIAN.Net
December 8, 2010 – 19:37 AMT 15:37 GMT

Online supporters of whistleblowing website Wikileaks are fighting
back after news of Julian Assange’s arrest hit the wires.

Online activists known as “Anonymous” have initiated what they called
Operation:Payback, a call to action to bring down the websites
of companies that have publicly removed services once used by the
Wikileaks website.

Anoymous has already targetedthe Swiss bank PostFinance, a bank that
froze all payments to thecontroversialwebsite, after it promised to
take down PayPal, the online payment company that cancelled Wikileaks’
account that it used to solicit donations.

Its current target is Mastercard. The website is currently down for
a large number of users after a DDOS attack.

All of the groups actions have beenpubliclyposted to the Anon_Operation
Twitter account; the Paypal attack was posted to Twitter on December 6,
declaring “target: is YOYOing.

Keep firing your lazors!”,the PostFinace attack was declared 17 hours
ago and just minutes ago it was confirmed by the group that Mastercard
had been taken offline as a result of its online assault.

Anonymous is a collection of online activists formed from popular
online message boards, attacks are not for profit but are in most
cases to demonstrate a show of force to promote unfair practises or
highlightsensitivepolitical issues. The three attacks here could just
be the start of an uncomfortable few hours for the companies involved,
thenextweb.com reported.

From: A. Papazian

ARMEN AZARYAN: TRADITIONAL MEDIA SHOULD NOT BEWARE OF CLOSER INTEGRATION WITH SOCIAL NETWORKS

PanARMENIAN.Net
December 8, 2010 – 19:38 AMT 15:38 GMT

Executive Director of PanARMENIAN Media LLC Armen Azaryan said that
general availability, inability to limit dissemination (e.g. WikiLeaks
publications) and clonability are among main peculiarities of
information in Internet.

A short report with spelling and syntactical mistakes, which is
placed on some social service, may have greater number of readers,
than an article on a huge and expensive news resource, Azaryan said
during Forum of European and Asian Media (FEAM) in Kyiv.

At the same time, Azaryan believes that traditional media should not
beware of closer integration with social networks.

From: A. Papazian

URANIUM RESERVES REVEALED IN ARMENIA?

PanARMENIAN.Net
December 8, 2010 – 19:58 AMT 15:58 GMT

Member of the Armenian parliament Zaruhi Postanjyan said that,
according to information provided to her by the RA Ministry of Energy
and Natural Resources, uranium reserves have been revealed in Armenia.

The volume of uranium reserves is also mentioned in information,
Postanjyan said in the Armenian parliament.

Commenting on it, Armenian Minister of Nature Protection Aram
Harutyunyan said that currently exploration works are carried out
for revelation of uranium deposits.

From: A. Papazian

09ANKARA1472: SCENESETTER: YOUR VISIT TO TURKEY
Go back to CableSearch.org
This is not the original Wikileaks document! It’s a cache, made on
2010-11-28 18:06:00. For the original document check the original
source: http://213.251.145.96/cable/2009/10/09ANKARA1472.html
ID 09ANKARA1472
SUBJECT SCENESETTER: YOUR VISIT TO TURKEY
DATE 2009-10-13 08:08:00
CLASSIFICATION SECRET//NOFORN
ORIGIN Embassy Ankara
TEXT S E C R E T ANKARA 001472

NOFORN
SIPDIS

OSD FOR ASD VERSHBOW FROM AMBASSADOR JEFFREY

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/07/2019
TAGS: PREL PARM PTER TU
SUBJECT: SCENESETTER: YOUR VISIT TO TURKEY

Classified By: Ambassador James F. Jeffrey reasons 1.4 (b) and (d)

¶1. (S) Sandy, Glad you’ll be able to visit Turkey at this key
time. Your short visit will give you an opportunity to engage
with key Turkish leaders on, first and foremost in their
minds, missile defense. The Turks are keen to learn more
about U.S. plans, in particular what role the U.S.
wants/expects Turkey and others in Europe to play. The
Turkish General Staff (TGS) will be interested in our ideas
for HLDG reform, even if they may be slow to accept them.

¶2. (S) You know how broad our agenda is with Turkey. As you
will have a short time in country, I suggest you focus on a
few key issues.

Be sure to raise:
——————
– Missile Defense, with emphasis on how the U.S. will look to
several Allies – not just Turkey – for help (para 3)
– Repeat our commitment to our intel and other support for
strikes against the PKK (para 5-6)
– Appreciation for Turkey’s efforts on Afghanistan/Pakistan
(para 13)
– Float the idea of HLDG reform and ensure Guner knows we
expect him in Washington (para 4)
– Press for a realistic assessment of Turkey’s view of the
threat assessment from Iran (para 10)

Watch Out For:
—————
– Pressure for direct U.S. milops against the PKK (paras
11-12)
– Conflation of Turkey’s exploration of air defense
capabilities with our Missile Defense needs (para 3)

Missile Defense
—————-

¶3. (S) The Turks will appreciate your update on U.S. missile
defense plans and in particular will expect you to have
specific ideas on how Turkey would contribute to the PAA.
While the top-level bureaucrats with whom you will meet will
understand the rationale for the PAA and will be ready to
explore ways Turkey can help, the political environment for a
request to base assets in Turkey is mixed, and Turkey’s
perception of the Iranian threat to its territory differs
from ours. The GOT continues to tread a fine line in
managing its strong relationship with the U.S. and its ties
with both the Islamic world and Russia. The government must
be able to demonstrate that any missile defense program is
not specifically anti-Iran, nor blatantly pro-Israel.

¶4. (S) Likewise, it will want to ensure that Russia is not
opposed to Turkey’s role. Also important will be clarity on
the degree to which this system is a NATO one, under NATO
Command and Control (C2). The PAA would presumably
complement Turkey’s effort to establish a domestic missile
defense capability that would protect Turkey’s major
population centers. The PAC-3 has been offered in response
to Turkey’s air defense tender and you should highlight the
system’s ability to be interoperable with any future NATO
command and control architecture.

HLDG
—–

¶5. (C) You will need to outline U.S. views to streamline and
alter the current HLDG format to make it into a more
substantive discussion. The Turks are shy to stray from the
status quo; you should emphasize why we feel this change is
necessary while underscoring that it is vitally important the
DCHOD Guner attend the upcoming HLDG in December, when
decisions about future dialogues will be agreed upon. (We
have learned that the new position of TGS number three, a
four-star slot held by General Balanli (with a focus on
hardware), might get the nod for the HLDG representative.
We’ve told Guner it should be his.) You should also be
prepared for the Turkish General Staff to raise the Shared
Defense Vision document, as they await a response to their
latest proposed text.

PKK
—-

¶6. (C) Turkey’s counter-terrorist efforts against the PKK
have evolved in the past year and have expanded beyond
military action alone. Although the government’s Democratic
(i.e., Kurdish) Initiative is not yet fully developed, the
government has increased social and economic support to
ethnic Kurds in southeast Turkey, has dramatically broadened
the rights of Kurds to use their own language, and increased
educational opportunities as well. It is our view that the
TGS military success against the PKK, supported by our
intelligence–sharing operation, has given the civilians the
political space to explore this “opening.” Turkish military
operations against the PKK continue, however, and on October
6 Parliament extended the government’s mandate to conduct
cross-border operations against the PKK in Iraq for another
year.

¶7. (C) Our 2007 decision to share operational intelligence
was a turning point for the bilateral relationship, and
President Obama’s declaration before the Turkish Parliament
of our continuing commitment to support Turkey’s fight
against the PKK was warmly welcomed. This cooperation has
helped to improve our bilateral relationship across the
board. Turkey’s military leaders value this intelligence and
the advice our military leaders give them. Our work has made
it difficult for PKK terrorists to use northern Iraq as a
safe haven. Turkish causalities are still occurring,
however, and an increasing proportion are from IEDs. Due to
pressure on Chief of Staff General Basbug and the Turkish
General Staff (TGS) to “finish off” the PKK this year, the
government wants and has requested direct U.S. kinetic action
against the PKK; we have refused this request to date due to
our own rules of engagement. The GOT has also requested the
sale of armed MQ-9/Reaper UAVs, which will be a challenge to
fulfill (see para 10).

Northern Iraq
————–

¶8. (C) Turkey will not consider any alternative to the
political unity and territorial integrity of Iraq, but has
become more flexible on how it engages “the local authorities
of northern Iraq” (how Turkey refers officially to the
Kurdish Regional Government (KRG)). Turkey’s policy remains
focused on the government in Baghdad, but its outreach to the
KRG is expanding. This outreach is reinforced by the
continued dominance of Turkish products and investments in
the KRG’s healthy economy. It is also tied to turkey’s new
opening to its own Kurds, by far the biggest and most
controversial domestic political issue here.

¶9. (S) The U.S.-Turkey-Iraq Tripartite Security talks
continue regularly and a new Tripartite operational office in
Erbil, established to share counter-PKK intelligence was
established over the summer. The Turks remain shy to share
data; they are not convinced that they can trust
Iraqi/Kurdish individuals to keep information concerning
operations secret. Nevertheless, it is a step in the right
direction. Turkish military officials have become more
strident in their calls for KRG officials to take action
against the PKK.

U.S. Drawdown through Turkey
—————————–

¶10. (S) Habur Gate and the Incirlik Cargo Hub — vital to our
sustainment operations — could be helpful in our drawdown if
other options prove too difficult. Minister of National
Defense Vedci Gonul suggested to Secretary Gates in June that
Turkey was ready to agree to the increased use of Incirlik
for this purpose. Using the surface route from Habur Gate to
Mediterranean ports (Iskenderun, Mersin) is also worth
exploring, and we may be able to involve Turkish commercial
shippers in support of the Northern Distribution Network. We
caution that the rough terrain, security environment, and the
cantankerous nature of the Turkish government bureaucracy
will challenge any U.S. operation. Nevertheless, we are
evaluating these options in cooperation with CENTCOM and
EUCOM partners.

Iran
——

¶11. (C) Turkey understands and partially shares U.S. and
international concerns about Iran’s nuclear ambitions, but is
hesitant to use harsh language in public statements, in part
due to its dependence on Iran as an energy supplier and as a
trade route to Central Asian markets. PM Erdogan himself is
a particularly vocal skeptic of the U.S. position. Turkey
believes international pressure against Iran only helps to
strengthen Ahmadinejad and the hard-liners. However, it
continues to press Iran quietly to accept the P5 plus 1
offer. The GOT is a strong partner in our non-proliferation
efforts, with several significant results. Politically,
Turkey will try to position itself on Iran between wherever
we are and where Russia is. In a pinch or if pressed, the
Turks will slant to us.

UAVs and Attack Helicopters
—————————-

¶12. (C) Turkey seeks to acquire, on an urgent basis, its own
UAV capability. The administration has made clear at high
levels that we support this goal, and Turkey has pending
request to acquire armed Reaper UAVs. Ultimate approval for
armed Reapers is complicated due to MTCR obligations and Hill
concerns. However, even if those could be overcome, the
delivery pipeline for these systems is long, and Turkey’s
leaders have sought reassurance that we will not pull our
intelligence support until they can replace it. We have not
made this commitment to date.

¶13. (C) Additionally, bad procurement decisions led Turkey to
a severe shortage of attack helicopters, desperately needed
for its fight against the PKK Turkey has looked to us to
help them bridge the capability gap, asking to purchase
additional AH-1W Super Cobra aircraft. These aircraft are in
short supply in our own inventory, but Secretary Gates and
VCJCS Cartwright have promised to try to support with request
within a few years (four each in 2011, 2012, and 2013). The
Turks took this as an affirmative, and recently started
pressing for delivery in 2010 instead of 2011.

Afghanistan/Pakistan
———————-

¶14. (C) Turkey has commanded ISAF twice since its inception
and will take command of RC-Capital this November. Turkey
leads PRT Wardak and plans to open a second PRT in Jawzjan in
early 2010. Turkey has sponsored the “Ankara Process”
dialogue, one of several efforts to encourage constructive
communications between Kabul and Islamabad and is a leading
participant in the Friends of Democratic Pakistan. Turkey
pledged significant aid to both countries: USD 200 million
to Afghanistan and USD 100 million to Pakistan. Because of
its culture, history and religious orientation, as well as
Foreign Minister Davutoglu’s strategic ambition, Turkey is
well disposed to act as an agent of the international
community’s goals in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Constraining
Turkey’s potential is a lack of resources. Our conversations
with Turkish interlocutors have helped us identify several
areas in which Turkey can be of particular help: education
and health, military training and support, economics,
counter-narcotics, and trilateral engagement. (Note: Turkey
will not support any CT operations in Afghanistan. They do
not believe there is a NATO/ISAF mandate to engage in these
operations, and they additionally have national caveats
preventing them from participating in NATO/ISAF CT
operations. The GOT also believes that ISAF should not/not
be engaged in the counter-narcotics fight, believing that
foreign fighters who engage in this fight just produces
antipathy against foreign forces in the local population. I
do, however, believe the GOT are willing to engage the
training of Afghan security forces.)

Caucasus
——–

¶15. (C) Turkey seeks to develop itself as a regional power
and recognizes that the Caucasus region, stymied in its
growth by frozen conflicts, could turn to Turkey for develop.
The signing of the Protocol document in Zurich on October 10
was a landmark for the region, and should serve as a starting
point for establishing bilateral relations and, ultimately,
the opening of its closed border. Nevertheless, future
relations will still be heavily linked to the 1915 “genocide”
issue and the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
between ARMENIA and Azerbaijan. Turkey consistently warns
that any U.S. determination of the events of 1915 as
“genocide” would set off a political firestorm in Turkey, and
the devastating effect on our bilateral relationship —
including political, military, and commercial aspects —
would be unavoidable.

Political Environment
———————-

¶16. (C) PM Erdogan’s Islamist-leaning Justice and Development
(AK) Party is squarely in the driver’s seat, but fears an
erosion of its political base from more conservative/Islamist
parties. Civilian-military relations remain complex. Chief
of Staff General Basbug has worked out a modus vivendi with
PM Erdogan, but the long-running struggle between Turkey’s
secularists (with the Army as its champion) and Islamists
(represented by the government) naturally puts them at odds.
Erdogan has the clear upper hand, a fact with which Basbug
has seemingly learned to live. Alleged past military
involvement in coup contingency planning or even deliberate
generation of internal chaos remains political theme number
one and preoccupies both Erdogan and Basbug and their
respective underlings.

Israel
——-

¶17. (C) While the Foreign Ministry and the Turkish General
Staff agree with us that a strong Turkey-Israel relationship
is essential for regional stability, PM Erdogan has sought to
shore up his domestic right political flank at the expense of
this relationship. His outburst at Davos was the first in a
series of events the results of which we and his staff have
sought to contain. The latest of these was Exercise
Anatolian Eagle. Erdogan canceled Israel’s participation
hours before the exercise was to begin. With an Israeli
strike – across Turkish airspace – against targets in Iran a
possibility, Erdogan decided he could not afford the
political risk of being accused of training the forces which
would carry out such a raid. Through some remarkable work
with Allies and with the inter-agency, we engineered a public
“postponement” of the international portion of the exercise,
but the relationship has begun to sour.

JEFFREY

“Visit Ankara’s Classified Web Site at http://www.intelink.s
gov.gov/wiki/Portal:Turkey”
HEADER VZCZCXYZ0000
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHAK #1472/01 2860830
ZNY SSSSS ZZH
P 130830Z OCT 09
FM AMEMBASSY ANKARA
TO RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
INFO RUEHWR/AMEMBASSY WARSAW PRIORITY 0267
RUEUITH/ODC ANKARA TU//TCH// PRIORITY
RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0936

XTAGS: XTAGPREL, XTAGPARM, XTAGPTER, XTAGTU
ADDED 2010-11-28 18:06:00
STAMP 0000-00-00 00:00:00
VOTE_POINTS 0
VOTE_COUNT 0
VOTE_RATING 0
PRIORITY PP
TWEETS 0

From: A. Papazian

FORUM OF EUROPEAN AND ASIAN MEDIA KICKS OFF IN KYIV

PanARMENIAN.Net
December 8, 2010 – 17:03 AMT 13:03 GMT

On December 8, annual Forum of European and Asian Media – FEAM –
kicked off in Kyiv.

The forum, organized by RIA Novosti, has brought together 300 leading
journalists and media executives from the CIS, Baltic states and
Georgia, as well as international experts.

Representatives of media communities will discuss problems of
information cooperation in the European-Asian region for two days:
development of multimedia technologies, transfer to digital media,
media convergence, competition between traditional media and owners
of new platforms, social networks phenomenon.

Besides, the forum participants will also discuss whether Internet
access should become another right of a modern person.

Sto Storon (One Hundred Parties) online paper, which is common for
media of the CIS, Baltic states and Georgia, will be presented at the
forum as a huge integrated project. Each media outlet, a participant
of the project, is provided with the opportunity to freely publish
own materials and use the common content.

Traditionally, informal communication of the event participants with
the host country’s leadership is envisaged as part of the forum.

This year, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was expected to
participate in the event, however, it was reported that he will
be unable to meet with the forum participants due to tight working
schedule.

Executive Director of PanARMENIAN Media LLC Armen Azaryan is among
the forum participants.

From: A. Papazian