Author: Andres-Papazian

NO URANIUM RESERVES FOUND IN ARMENIA YET, MINISTER SAYS

news.am
Oct 27 2010
Armenia

No uranium deposits have been discovered in Armenia yet, Armenian
Energy and Natural Resources Minister Armen Movsisyan stated in the
Armenian National Assembly on October 27.

Meanwhile, the minister noted all the geographical researches are
conducted under Armenian legislation and RA Government holds regular
monitoring on the ongoing activities. He stressed Armenian government
provides information on explorations of uranium reserves to the public.

In her turn, MP from “Heritage” parliamentary faction Zaruhi Postanjyan
said all the geographical researches and road constructions near the
supposed mines are carried out without relevant documents.

From: A. Papazian

NEW HOSTILITIES IN NAGORNO-KARABAKH UNACCEPTABLE

news.am
Oct 27 2010
Armenia

“I do not expect any impressive results from the trilateral
presidential meeting. On the other hand, the Armenian and Azerbaijani
Presidents must meet and discuss issues. Such meetings are an
alternative to unilateral meetings, growing tension and conflicts in
the region,” Konstantin Zatulin, First Vice-Chairman of the Committee
for the CIS and Relations with Russian Nationals Abroad, RF State Duma,
and Vice-Chairman of the Armenian-Russian Commission for Parliamentary
Cooperation, told NEWS.am.

It is difficult to imagine discussions along with preparations
for military operations or provocations. “Unfortunately, since the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict broke out we have seen such behavior. This
year has seen incident which claimed human lives in the conflict zone,”
Zatulin said.

“In organizing such meetings, including the ones in Russia, Russian
President Dmitry Medvedev pursues a certain goal. Russia feels somewhat
uncomfortable – two of the CIS member-countries, Azerbaijan, which has
a common border with Russia, and Armenia which is Russia’s ally, are
in a permanent conflict. Russia is trying to bring the sides’ closer
and find a solution to the conflict. Of course, it is up to Armenia,
Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh to arrive at a final decision. Russia
is a mediator, unwilling to appear to be on either side. Russia seeks
good relations with both Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Russia wants to build up normal relations in the region. Another
matter is that each side has its own recipe and understanding of the
essence of the conflict and of its consequences. I think Russia’s
behavior shows it desire for an agreement, whereas an agreement
largely remains unachievable,” Zatulin said.

His is concerned that the political intrigue by Turkey – when it
thwarted the rapprochement with Armenia, pleading Nagorno-Karabakh
problem, thereby showing its solidarity with Azerbaijan – may have
been interpreted by Azerbaijan as its victory. “Azerbaijan got a
swelled head. This year that country has been much more aggressive
than before. I have the impression Azerbaijan is deviating from the
former mutual understanding behind closed doors,” Zatulin said.

The statement made by the Russian, U.S. and French Presidents implies
that Nagorno-Karabakh will gain its independence status sooner or later
provided an agreement is reached. The statement also says about the
regions surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh which, according to the mediators,
must be returned. “The point is that at least the Lachin corridor
is not among the three regions. That is, it means that the fate of
the corridor, as well as of entire Karabakh, is quite different than
that intended for the Azeri regions surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh,
which are currently under Nagorno-Karabakh troops’ control. That is,
the mediators see the difference Azerbaijan does not see. Azerbaijan
is officially stating they all are Azerbaijani territories, sovereign
Azerbaijan – nothing else. However, it is not pragmatic, as, in this
case, the only way is war and victory,” Zatulin said.

However, resuming hostilities has so far been an unacceptable way
for both Armenia and mediators, and, which is the most important,
for Azerbaijan. Another war will certainly be a tremendous shock for
the country. Azerbaijan underwent a number of upheavals during the
Karabakh war, the country’s economic situation worsened. Reverting
to the idea of resuming hostilities would be tantamount to running
the risk of losing power for the Azerbaijani authorities. On the
other hand, they hope the international community will be impressed
by their militant rhetoric and border incidents.

“After the trilateral presidential meeting, the Azerbaijani media –
in the context of the forthcoming parliamentary elections – will make
comments. First, it has been an effective and promising meeting:
on the threshold of elections it is supposed to attract public
attention to the ruling forces’ activities and improve their chances
for victory. Second, arousing nationalistic sentiments by aggressive
statements on Armenia’s being unready for anything and the need for
Azerbaijan to prepare for victories at any cost. This is a move the
ruling forces might make in their election campaign,” Zatulin said.

From: A. Papazian

YEREVAN, BAKU MAY AGREE ON SETTLEMENT PRINCIPLES IN DECEMBER

news.am
Oct 27 2010
Armenia

Armenia and Azerbaijani can come to an agreed decision concerning
principles of Karabakh conflict~Rs resolution by the time of OSCE
summit scheduled for early December, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev
said at a press conference following the meeting with his Armenian
and Azerbaijani counterparts.

There are still unsolved issues regarding settlement principles that
are to become a basis for a peaceful agreement. ~SNevertheless, we
have done some work inspiring hope that if the sides work hard during
forthcoming month — we have already instructed our foreign ministers
— we can come to agreed decision concerning general principles
of conflict resolution by OSCE summit in Kazakhstan scheduled for
December 1-2,~T the president said, RIA Novosti reported.

As NEWS.am reported earlier, meeting of the Armenian, Russian and
Azerbaijani leaders took place in Astrakhan. It is the sixth meeting
held in such format.

From: A. Papazian

LOWER EMIGRATION RATES IN ARMENIA

news.am
Oct 27 2010
Armenia

Lower rates of emigration from Armenia have lately been registered,
RA Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan stated in Parliament.

One of the objectives of the national security concept being developed
in Armenia is to reduce emigration and ensure immigration of Armenians
from the Diaspora. ~SArmenians from Central Asia are immigrating,~T the
Premier said. He pointed out the need for financial assistance to the
Armenian immigrants to enable their full integration into Armenia~Rs
social and economic life. ~SThe Armenian community in Iran has raised
funds for assisting the Iranian Armenians that return to the Homeland.

We also expect other organizations~R financial assistance,~T the
Premier said.

The MP Viktor Dallakyan remarked that Armenia is in the list of ageing
countries, and more than 50% of emigrants are aged 20-30. Many children
emigrate from the country as well.

From: A. Papazian

AZERBAIJANI, ARMENIAN AND RUSSIAN PRESIDENTS SIGN JOINT DECLARATION

APA
Oct 27 2010
Azerbaijan

The document considers exchange of POWs and bodies of the dead

Baku. Lachin Sultanova – APA. Trilateral meeting between Russian
President Dmitry Medvedev, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and
Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan has been held in Astrakhan city
of Russian Federation, APA reports quoting ITAR TASS agency. The
presidents signed the joint declaration at the meeting.

Medvedev said that the Declaration has humanitarian character: “This
decision is very important for elimination of existing different
difficulties related to Nagorno Karabakh problem between Armenia and
Azerbaijan. We speak about the Declaration directed to exchanging of
POWs and increasing confidence for returning of bodies of the dead”.

From: A. Papazian

NAGORNO-KARABAKH DESERVES MORE ATTENTION FROM US & EU

RIA Novosti
27/10/2010

RIA Novosti interview with Alexei Vlasov

The presidents of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan

The presidents of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan will meet on October
27 to discuss the unresolved conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, an enclave
inside Azerbaijan with an ethnic Armenian majority. Russia has long
acted as the principal mediator in the dispute. When will the deadlock
be broken? What role is played by outside parties, mainly the United
States the EU? What are their interests in the conflict? Alexei Vlasov,
editor-in-chief of Vestnik Kavkaza, a news and analysis website devoted
to the Caucasus, shares his views with RIA Novosti’s Samir Shakhbaz.

There is a lot of pessimism about the prospects for a settlement of
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Are you also pessimistic?

There is certainly cause for pessimism. But the fact that the
presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan will be meeting for the third
time in one year, with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev mediating,
suggests that a compromise is possible. Even if it is not reached at
the two upcoming meetings — the one in Astrakhan or at the December
OSCE summit in Astana — these events will probably lay the foundation
for agreements reached in 2011. The Karabakh issue has to be resolved
sooner or later.

Have the sides made any other tangible progress, apart from these
meetings between the three presidents?

The most positive change is that Armenia and Azerbaijan have clearly
articulated their positions. This is a very important step; they have
created an agenda, which allows mediators to start working on the
two main problems. On the one hand, Azerbaijan is opposed to signing
any documents stipulating that they will not use military force
against Nagorno-Karabakh; Armenia, in turn, is reluctant to set any
timeframe, even a very tentative one, for the liberation of at least
those areas classified as adjacent territories, which were never part
of Nagorno-Karabakh. I believe these two issues will be the focus of
negotiations for the next six months, as both Armenia and Azerbaijan
agree that the breakaway region’s status should be determined through
a referendum in accordance with the Madrid Principles, and that it
should not be delayed.

But do you think the Astana summit will produce any constructive
decisions? If it doesn’t, what steps should be taken?

Regarding the summit, let me be clear that I do not expect any
concrete decisions will be made or any documents will be signed. The
best they can do is adopt a general declaration stating that they
are willing to negotiate a peaceful settlement of the conflict. The
South Caucasus mission of Kazakhstan’s Secretary of State and
Foreign Minister Kanat Saudabayev was not very successful. So what
alternative do we have if the conflict is not resolved soon? Another
war? No one wants war. Regardless of the statements they make to the
media, neither Moscow, Brussels, Azerbaijan or Armenia want to fight,
although Azerbaijan’s military budget has reached 3 billion $, while
Armenia’s stands at 400 million$. They are engaged in a small-scale
arms race, which, considering the region’s strategic location close to
the Caspian Sea, should raise concerns not only in Russia and Europe,
but also in the United States, which has commercial interests in the
region. Admittedly, no one wants to fight, but no one wants to pressure
Azerbaijan and Armenia either. The mediators want to maintain balance
and avoid acting being seen as partial to one side. What options are
there? I believe Russia has struck the right note. Russia is providing
consistent support for the negotiations and trying to come up with
different ways to resolve the dispute. For example, it has proposed
public diplomacy and the gradual return of refugees – in other words,
anything that could move the process past this deadlock.

I don’t see any other options. The recent protocols signed by Armenia
and Turkey has shown that Hillary Clinton and Sergei Lavrov can exert
pressure, but ultimately the public will have the final say. And the
public does not see any possibility for an open, honest and transparent
reconciliation at this point, but let’s hope it will some day.

When we talk about the international community playing a more active
role in the process, we are really talking about the United States
and the EU. Do you think the fact that the U.S. and the EU have been
dragging their feet creates space for Turkey and Iran to play greater
roles in the region?

Absolutely. The United States has taken a timeout. Its motives have
to do more with the Iranian problem rather than the Karabakh conflict.

America’s current priority is to have a clear understanding with its
potential partners in case decisions are made about Iran, possibly
even to use of military force. That is why the Nagorno-Karabakh issue
has been pushed to the background. Clinton has not made any specific
proposals, just general declarations. You are certainly right about
Iran’s growing role in Armenia, which Iran views as an important
partner. Turkey is beginning to play a similar role in Azerbaijan.

However, I don’t think negotiations will be successful without
Russian participation. Moscow has been the core of the negotiating
process since the Maydorf Declaration was signed. Turkey and Iran can
play as large or small a role as they want in the process. Although
Turkey shares Russia’s position, neither Turkey nor Iran is able to
independently propose a roadmap for resolving the Karabakh conflict
without Russia’s involvement.

So it is fair to say that no settlement in Nagorno-Karabakh will be
possible until the United States resolves its problems with Iran?

This is only one of the factors affecting the prospects for a
settlement. There are many others. The United States would be
perfectly satisfied to remain in a stalemate at this point, like the
“no war, no peace” formula Trotsky proposed to Germany in 1918. But if
President Obama is defeated in the next presidential elections, which
is possible, a new Republican administration will have to deal with a
host of hot spots in the former Soviet Union and the Middle East. In
other words, Iran is not the only important factor here and domestic
issues in the U.S., for example, also play a role here, as they affect
the country’s foreign policy. Brussels, unlike Washington, wants to
help make progress in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process, because
Europe has felt for a long time now that it needs to demonstrate
that the EU’s policies, political tools and principles for conflict
resolution can be successfully applied in post-Soviet republics. It
has not had much success in Transnistria, Abkhazia or South Ossetia.

That is why they are determined to make a concerted effort in
Nagorno-Karabakh.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us.

From: A. Papazian

TURKEY: ANKARA SUSPICIOUS THAT ISRAEL’S SECURITY BEHIND U.S. PUSH FOR REGIONAL MISSILE SHIELD

October 25, 2010

Is the United States using NATO to protect its special friend in the
Middle East: Israel?

That’s what Turkey suspects may be behind a U.S.-led push for an
anti-missile defense system in Turkey, intended to ward off an
Iranian attack.

According to a report published Monday in the Turkish newspaper Today’s
Zaman, Ankara has sought and reportedly received explicit assurances
from the U.S. that intelligence gathered using the missile shield’s
sensors will not be shared with Israel.

American officials have not been shy about fingering Israel’s enemy,
Iran, as the major reason for deploying the system, citing Iranian
threats to Europe. But the article in Today’s Zaman was rife with
skepticism, pointing out that as a non-member, Israel is not eligible
for protection from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

“In fact, given the unpredictability of the security situation across
the globe, it is possible that the missile defense system could even
be used against Israel some day in the future,” the article said.

“NATO is an organization that operates on the principle of collective
defense and an attack on an ally is considered an attack on the
entire alliance.”

It wouldn’t be the first time that the U.Ss. was torn between its
allegiance to NATO and its historic friendship with Israel. When
Israeli forces stormed a Turkish aid ship off Gaza in June, resulting
in the death of nine Turkish activists, Turkey threatened to invoke
the NATO Treaty, which could have obligated the U.S. to become
involved militarily.

A recent United Nations report found that several of the Turks
aboard the aid ship had been killed “execution-style” at close range,
further souring Turkey on Israel just before the scheduled Nov. 19
NATO summit in Lisbon, during which Turkey is expected to make a
decision on whether to allow elements of the the missile system to
be deployed on its territory.

Steven Pifer, a senior fellow specializing in security at the Brooking
Institution in Washington, said that any benefit to Israel from such
a system was likely incidental.

“Certainly a radar site that looks from Turkey toward Iran would
benefit Israel, but the Israelis are advanced in terms of their own
missile defense system,” Pifer told Babylon and Beyond. “I think
that because of their position in the region, [the Turks] are nervous
about singling out the Iranians as a threat.”

In the recent past, Turkey has pursued an independent policy in the
Middle East, maintaining good relations with Israel, its Arab neighbors
and Iran. That position has come under strain as Turkish-Israeli
relations deteriorate and Ankara strengthens its ties with Syria and
Iran. Turkey has come under fire recently for continuing its booming
trade with Iran despite sanctions that should be binding for all
U.N. member states.

The proposed ballistic missile defense system would be rolled out
in two phases. The first would entail the deployment of U.S. Navy
ships equipped with Standard Missile-3 interceptors in the eastern
Mediterranean sometime in the next two years. The second would see
the erection of a land-based radar site in Turkey by 2015.

Turkey initially objected to the new missile shield on grounds that
the wording of the agreement singled out Iran as a threat. Not only
does Turkey wish to maintain its friendship with Iran, but Iranian
hostilities toward the West are increasingly seen as having roots in
American and European support for Israel.

An editorial in the Turkish newspaper Hurriyet Daily News slammed
both the Turkish and American sides for being disingenuous in
their political games, accusing Turkey of trying to gloss over
the “inconvenient truth” about Iran while the U.S. plays the
Armenian-genocide card in an effort to pressure Ankara.

“Multi-billion dollar missile defense systems may be much loved by
military planners, engineers and defense contractors … but as a
defense in the age of terrorism, these technologically dubious designs
are worthless,” the article concluded. “We need a believable defense
against 21st-century threats.”

From: A. Papazian

MEDVEDEV TO MEET WITH AZERBAIJANI, ARMENIAN LEADERS

RIA Novosti
October 26, 2010
ASTRAKHAN

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has arrived in the city of Astrakhan
in south European Russia, where on Wednesday he will meet with the
Azerbaijani and Armenian leaders.

Medvedev, Ilham Aliyev and Serzh Sargsyan are to discuss the Nagorny
Karabakh peace process.

The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorny Karabakh,
a predominantly ethnic Armenian region, first erupted in 1988, when
the region claimed independence from Azerbaijan to join Armenia.

Over 30,000 people are estimated to have died on both sides between
1988 and 1994, when a ceasefire was agreed. Nagorny Karabakh has
remained in Armenian control and tensions between Azerbaijan and
Armenia have persisted.

In May, the region elected a 33-seat parliament with a voter turnout
of almost 68%. Azerbaijani officials called the elections “illegal,”
saying they could seriously harm peace efforts.

The OSCE Minsk Group, comprising the United States, Russia and France,
was created in 1992 to encourage a peaceful, negotiated resolution
to the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorny Karabakh.

From: A. Papazian

DINK’S LAWYERS SEEK REVERSAL IN DECISION TO TRY MURDER SUSPECT IN JUVENILE COURT

Asbarez
Tuesday, October 26th, 2010

ISTANBUL (Hurriyet)-Lawyers for assassinated journalist Hrant Dink
objected Tuesday to an Istanbul court’s decision to try the main
murder suspect in a juvenile court, calling for his case to be
re-merged with those of other suspects.

Alleged killer Ogun Samast’s dossier was removed from the Istanbul
court Monday based on revisions to the law affecting minors’ legal
status in adult courts. Samast was under the age of 18 at the time
of the murder in 2007.

According to Fethiye Cetin, a lawyer for the Dink family, the law
enables the cases to be merged again, something he said the lawyers
would demand.

The impact of the court’s decision Monday continues to be debated,
with lawyers and family members saying the real problem with the
trial is its lack of scope.

Though separating Samast from the other case will likely extend
the already prolonged legal process, it would not be that big of an
issue if the court revised its focus to address the “true responsible
parties,” Arzu Becerik, another lawyer in the murder case, told the
Hurriyet Daily News & Economic Review on Tuesday prior to Cetin’s
statement. She said the lawyers’ intention is to move the process in
that direction.

The defense also demanded that the European Court of Human Rights
decision that Turkey had failed to protect Dink be accepted as solid
evidence in the domestic case. The court has been criticized for
not investigating or bringing to trial high-level civil servants and
security personnel who made have played a role in Dink’s death.

“Ogun is a detail in this case,” Becerik said. “He is a part of the
case for sure, but not the defining part.”

Dink, a Turkish journalist of Armenian descent and the editor-in-chief
of Agos, was murdered in front of his newspaper’s office in Istanbul
in January 2007.

According to Becerik, the lawyers’ demand for the European court’s
decision to play a role in an ongoing trial would be a first both in
Turkey and Europe, with the exception of prolonged arrest periods. She
claimed it would not have been possible for the current suspects to
have planned a political murder so professionally, and that the case
would not be settled even if they were given the strictest possible
sentences.

She said if their demand is not met, then the lawyers will take the
case to the European court again.

The European court decision will be final Dec. 14, following a
three-month period during which it is open to objections. The Istanbul
court dealing with the Dink case has decided to wait for this period
to end before making a ruling, although both Turkish authorities and
the Dink family have stated they will not object.

Samast’s actual age was a matter of question in the first years of
the trial, but Becerik said the issue has since been settled. “We did
the research when he was first captured. He was born in a hospital
and has a brother younger than him. It is not possible for his age
to have been lowered,” she said, adding that the necessary tests and
x-rays have been done to block legal ways to question his age on the
day of the murder.

Speaking about the case Tuesday, State Minister Cemil Cicek said,
“Everybody under 18 is a minor.” He added that laws are not written for
specific persons or cases and that the application of recently changed
Law No. 6008, commonly known as the “stone-throwing children’s law,”
was not inconsistent with its aim of easing the plight of juveniles
charged under Turkey’s anti-terrorism laws.

Culture Minister Ertugrul Gunay took a different approach Tuesday,
saying he “met the development with regret.”

Main opposition Republican People’s Party, or CHP, leader Kemal
Kilicdaroglu said children who throw stones at security forces should
not be treated the same as those who fire guns.

From: A. Papazian

ARMENIA REDUCES GAS IMPORTS 18% IN 9 MTHS

interfax
Oct 25 2010
Russia

Russian-Armenian Armrosgazprom, the exclusive importer of gas to
Armenia, reduced gas deliveries in January-September 2010 17.8%
year-on-year to 987.8 million cubic meters, the company said in
a statement.

Gas sales declined 13.3% to 988 mcm.

Gas consumption declined 15.3% to 339.4 mcm for households, 51.5%
to 103.1 mcm for the power generation sector and rose 2.8% to 230.9
mcm for natural gas automotive filling stations. Gas consumption in
industry also increased, by 4.7% to 188.6 mcm.

Natural gas deliveries to Armenia declined 19.7% to 1.809 bcm in 2009.

Armenia buys most of its gas from Russia, at a price of $180 per
1,000 cubic meters. Since mid-2009 Armenia has swapped electricity
for small volumes of gas from Iran.

Gazprom (RTS: GAZP) owns 80% of Armrosgazprom and the Armenian
government has 20%.

From: A. Papazian