Author: Andres-Papazian

‘RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN WAR CHANGED BALANCE OF POWER IN SOUTH CAUCASIA’
Aliyah Fridman

news.az
May 31 2010
Azerbaijan

Ronald Grigor Suny News.Az interviews Ronald Grigor Suny, Charles
Tilly Collegiate Professor of Social and Political History.

There is an opinion that that the war between Russia and Georgia in
2008 had a huge influence on the further developments in the South
Caucasus. What the Russian-Georgian war changed in our region?

The Russian-Georgian War of August 2008 changed the balance of power
in South Caucasia. Russia essentially used the opportunity offered by
Saakashvili’s attack on South Ossetia to show that it was ready to
use force to re-establish its dominant position in the Near Abroad,
at least when actively threatened. The Russian military effort,
however, was somewhat clumsy, and Moscow is well aware of its limited
military resources and the need for reform. But what is clear is that
no solution of either the Georgian conflicts or the Karabakh conflict
will occur without Russian will and agreement. This does not mean that
the South Caucasian republics cannot act and change the situation in
a constructive way.

Do you think that Russia is really interested in the Karabakh
settlement?

Armenia demonstrated that it could attempt to improve relations with
Turkey by first gaining Russian agreement for its initiative and
then pursuing it. Russia may have been reluctant about that move, but
eventually came around. Russia has so many problems that it does not
need more troubles in Caucasia. North Caucasia is its most vulnerable
frontier, and a strategically rational Russia should move cautiously
but deliberately to resolve some of its South Caucasian problems.

Karabakh would be a good place to start.

Because many actors in Armenia and Azerbaijan are content with the
status quo, local initiative may not be forthcoming. Russian, Turkish,
Iranian, and American efforts could push the belligerents to come to
some agreement.

And what about possible influence of Russian-Turkish rapprochement?

Russia-Turkish rapprochement is good for everyone. Turkey is changing
more rapidly than any other country in the region. Its civil society
is opening up; the country is on a trajectory toward greater democracy;
the government is making overtures to non-Turkish citizens, allowing a
broad discussion of the Armenian Genocide, even demonstrations. These
are extraordinarily positive developments, and should be encouraged
by everyone.

May be NATO somehow assist stability in the region?

NATO is a dead letter in South Caucasia. It is not going to happen
for the foreseeable future. Of course, if the Great Powers thought
creatively, then there could be plans to bring Russia as well as
other former Soviet countries into a new collective security structure
under NATO.

Iran as well is trying to play its role in the Karabakh settlement?

Bringing Iran into the picture would be even better, though the
Americans have a real blind spot vis-a-vis Iran. They have constructed
it as an existential danger to peace in the Middle East, and given the
fear of the Obama administration of criticism from the Republicans
that they are weak and indecisive in security issues, it is hard to
make the kind of agreements or concessions that would bring Iran into
a larger Middle East settlement.

And finally what do you think about regional policy of US?

As for the United States, sadly it does not really have a coherent and
consistent policy toward South Caucasia. First they were interested
primarily in energy and pipelines; then they staked their hopes on
Georgia; they always have to pay some attention to Armenia because of
the large Armenian population in certain key states. But the USA has
many interests in the region that do not all run in the same direction:
placate the Armenian lobby (but don’t give it too much, e.g., Genocide
recognition); democracy building (which does not seem as much of a
priority as stability of existing governments even though they are not
democratic); energy and pipelines; thwarting Iranian influence; not
antagonizing Russia. These various ambitions are hard to reconcile,
but the Obama administration, unlike the previous administration,
has cut back somewhat on the Busheviks’ grandest plans for global
hegemony. This opens some space for better relations with Russia and
potential cooperation in solving the long-running conflicts in South
Caucasia before another war in a region often forgotten by the West
surprises the world.

Ronald Grigor Suny is Charles Tilly Collegiate Professor of Social
and Political History, Director, Eisenberg Institute for Historical
Studies, The University of Michigan, Emeritus Professor of Political
Science and History, The University of Chicago.

From: A. Papazian

ERDOGAN ON CANCELLATION OF HIS VISIT TO ARGENTINA

Today’s Zaman
May 31 2010
Turkey

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said, “we had to do what
suit to Turkey’s honor and we believe we did it,” while commenting
on cancellation of his visit to Argentina.

Addressing the businessmen who joined his tour of South America,
Erdogan said, “visit to Argentina was planned before. Related
ministries of the two countries agreed to build a bust of Mustafa
Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the modern Republic of Turkey, in Buenos
Aires. There were serious efforts by Armenian lobby in Buenos Aires
in the past 2-3 days and it was stated that there was around 200,000
Armenian population. The Armenians put an intensive pressure. There
is an autonomous administration there. The incident does not depend
on the central administration.”

He said, “Argentine president called me and said they could not
change the situation there. We told her that it was impossible for
us to pay a visit to Argentina. They have offered us alternatives. We
made assessments and removed Argentina from the program.”

Erdogan was scheduled to pay a two-day visit to Argentina on May 30
and 31. The bust of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, founder of Turkey, would
be inaugurated at Jorge Newbury park during Erdogan’s visit.

From: A. Papazian

TURKISH PM CANCELS TRIP TO ARGENTINA AFTER ARMENIAN MOVE

news.az
May 31 2010
Azerbaijan

Recep Tayyip Erdogan Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan cancelled
his scheduled visit to Argentina due in May 30 and 31 within the
context of his South America tour.

A statement by the Foreign Ministry said the cancellation resulted
from Buenos Aires Autonomous Administration’s avoiding the opening
of a previously scheduled Ataturk Monument upon the reactions from
Armenian lobby.

Upon the developments, Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu had talks
with his Argentinean counterpart in the Alliance of Civilizations
Forum and asked Argentinean government to stick by their pledge on
the opening of the monument.

Argentinean President called Erdogan and said they justified
Turkey’s reaction but could not exceed authority of the Autonomous
administration in accordance with the Argentinean constitution.

Prime Minister Erdogan, even though, cancelled his visit to this
country noting that he did not find the attitude acceptable whatever
the reason is.

The statement further said Argentinean authorities are expected to
take required steps to compensate the situation, which was shadowed
by a wrong decision by anti-Turkey circles-led Buenos Aires Autonomous
Administration, in the shortest time.

From: A. Papazian

US DELAY IN APPOINTING AN AMBASSADOR WAS NOT RELATED TO AZERBAIJAN PER CE
Lala B.

news.az
May 31 2010
Azerbaijan

Tabib Huseynov News.Az interviews Tabib Huseynov, analyst of the
International Crisis Group.

How do you assess Bryza’s appointed as ambassador in Azerbaijan?

The obvious advantage of Matthew Bryza’s candidacy as the US ambassador
is that he knows Azerbaijan and the South Caucasus region very well and
has an already well-established relations with Azerbaijan’s political
leadership and to some degree, the civil society. Therefore, if his
nomination is approved by the Senate, it will take Bryza a much less
effort and a relatively shorter period of time to assume effectively
his responsibilities as an ambassador. In this sense, his nomination
reflects a pragmatic choice by the Obama administration.

Will this appointment cause the enlivening of the US-Azerbaijani ties
that have long been stalled?

Of course, almost a year-long absence of a functioning US ambassador
is one of the factors which impedes more effective communication
between the two countries. However, without underestimating the role
of ambassadors in mitigating and improving the bilateral diplomatic
relations, I doubt the relations between official Baku and Washington
would develop very differently if we had a US ambassador sitting
in Baku. There are objective factors which put some uneasiness in
the bilateral relations regardless of the presence or absence of an
ambassador. Broadly speaking, these are related to the recurrent US
criticisms of the situation with political freedoms in Azerbaijan
and Azerbaijan’s grievances related to the US prioritization of the
Turkish-Armenian normalization over the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
resolution.

Do you think the long-term failure of Washington to appoint its
ambassador to Azerbaijan really had a political context?

I think the US delay in appointing an ambassador was not related
to Azerbaijan per ce. It has more to do with the workings of the US
internal bureaucracy and perhaps, with some criticisms over Bryza’s
handling of the situation prior to the Georgia-Russia war of August
2008.

Can the appointment of Matthew Bryza as the ambassador have any
influence on the promotion of the Karabakh process considering his
great experience in this problem?

If approved, Bryza will be the first US Ambassador to Azerbaijan
who served as a Nagorno-Karabakh mediator. This is a good thing,
as it would imply that Bryza, as one of the few US diplomats with
first-hand experience in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, would continue
to be involved, albeit indirectly, in shaping of the US policy towards
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement.

What can you say about the negative reaction of the Armenian National
Committee of America to the possible appointment of Matthew Bryza as
the US ambassador to Azerbaijan?

The negative reaction of the ANCA to Bryza’s nomination should
come as no surprise. ANCA, which is effectively a US extension
of the pan-Armenian nationalist Dashnaksutiun party, opposes the
internationally-supported compromise solution between Armenia and
Azerbaijan based on the Madrid proposals. Their opposition to a
proposed compromise solution automatically translates to their
opposition to anyone who directly or indirectly is associated with
the ongoing talks. And Bryza, who is remembered with his activism and
talkativeness when he was a Karabakh mediator, is a natural target
for them.

From: A. Papazian

SITTING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY OF THE COLLECTIVE SECURITY TREATY ORGANISATION TO BE HELD IN YEREVAN

National Assembly
parliament.am
May 31 2010
Armenia

On May 31 the first outgoing sitting of the Council of the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation
(CSTO PA) will be held in RA National Assembly. The Speaker of the
RF State Duma, the Chairman of the CSTO PA Boris Gryzlov will preside
over the sitting. The parliamentary delegations of Armenia, Belarus,
Kazakhstan, Russia and Tajikstan will take part at the sitting.

The RA President Serzh Sargsyan, RA NA Speaker Hovik Abrahamyan,
the Defense Minister Seyran Ohanyan will receive the participants of
the CSTO PA Council sitting.

The participants of the sitting will visit Tsisternakaberd Complex
of the Armenian Genocide victims.

From: A. Papazian

ARMENIA DRAGGING OUT REPLY – BELGIAN DEPUTY
Leyla Tagiyeva News.Az

news.az
May 31 2010
Azerbaijan

Paul Wille News.Az interviews Paul Wille, member of the Belgian
parliament and chairman of the PACE committee on economic issues.

Do you think that the upcoming parliamentary elections in Azerbaijan
will be better than previous ones?

The free and transparent elections that are a target for any
member-state of the Council of Europe are a dynamic process. I think
Azerbaijan will achieve a significant progress this time. I do not
approve the actions of the Venice Commission that has given its
recommendations before their coordination with authorities and public.

They could not have acted like this, I think the actions of the Venice
commission do not deserve approval. I still hope that the decisions
allowing to hold well organized elections will be adopted at the
preliminary stage.

Official Baku condemns the CE stating the presence of political
prisoners in Azerbaijan of the biased attitude to the country. Do
you think the discriminative approach is really applied here?

Discrimination is possible, but on the other hand possible problems
in the election process cannot be perceived doubly as applied to
Azerbaijan and other countries. Thus, double standards undermine
trust to the CE institutions. I was one of those who have sharply
criticized such a biased attitude of some people. No one can make me
say what I have never seen by my own eyes. Especially if what I saw
during the election process was normal. I am not here to reform the
country. I am here just to observe elections and that is all.

As is known, Azerbaijan is a Muslim State. Is it correct to inflict
all values common for Christian Europe on such a country with its
specific features?

Azerbaijan is a secular country where most people practice Islam.

Religion has never been a hindrance for country’s development and it
is necessary to respect feelings. I think there must not be problems
in the country where interregional dialogue is developing.

You often visit Azerbaijan which is called a bridge between East and
West. Do you think Azerbaijan has more of east or west?

Your question can be related to what took place in the Balkans in the
past, when people spared no effort to demonstrate a difference between
the Balkan states. The slogan of the future must be “What unites us”,
rather than “What separates us”. Therefore, I would not say that
Azerbaijanis are more eastern or western people compared to others.

Azerbaijan is a member of the Council of Europea which means that you
are ready to accept criteria meeting the spirit of this organization.

I think this is a very good choice in terms of protection of human
rights, provision and legality and combat with corruption. The
ongoing events prove that Azerbaijan is a modern state regardless of
its inclination.

Do you think that the international community, in particular, Council
of Europe, is well familiar with the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict
over Karabakh?

There are several international organizations that have taken a clear
position on Karabakh. The negotiations within the framework of the
Minsk Group have shown that Azerbaijan has accepted the proposals
that are also approved by a greater part of the world community and we
expect response from Armenia. Occupation has delayed because Armenia
is dragging out the response. We may only hope that the common sense
will prevail.

I assure you that the world community, at least the Council of Europe,
are quite well informed about the situation around Karabakh and we
would really like to see the development of the situation with this
problem, since its solution will promote development and prosperity
of the entire South Caucasus.

From: A. Papazian

ZATULIN CAN CLAIM FOR BEING CALLED POLITICAL CLOWN AS ZHIRINOVSKI

news.az
May 31 2010
Azerbaijan

Aydin Mirzazade News.Az interviews Aydin Mirzazade, deputy of Milli
Medjlis (Azerbaijani parliament), political scientist.

What can you say about the actions of several Russian State Duma
Deputies who visited elections in the Armenian-occupied lands of the
unrecognized so-called “Nagorno Karabakh Republic”?

This is an erroneous policy contradicting to the official position
of Russia that recognizes the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan
and does not recognize the separatist self-formation called “Nagorno
Karabakh”. This position of a group of Russian State Duma that decided
to take part in a show called “parliamentary elections in ‘NKR'”
is harmful in terms of the national interests of Russia as it often
sounds appeals for separatism in which the supporters of separation
of Russia have repeatedly committed terror acts. Now let’s imagine a
situation when a separatism self-formation within Russia decides to
hold “elections”. Which will be the reaction of official Moscow if
the deputies of the parliament or any other country decide to attend
this show? Naturally, it will be negative. However, in a moment
when Russia declares its official position on this issue, it can be
recalled that its own deputies had visited the elections organized by
the separatists. In other words, a group of deputies in the Russian
State Duma is weakening the argumentation basis of Russia, which is
the direct neglect of the national interests of a state. In addition,
this group of deputies naturally relies on its own interests, its own
understanding of culture and respect for justice and international
law and serves the powers that are not interested in the resolution
of the Karabakh conflict but interested in existence of the atmosphere
of hatred between the two neighbor peoples.

Do you think these deputies that demonstrate their disrespect toward
the official position of Russia which recognizes the territorial
integrity will be brought to responsibility in Russia?

Considering the fact that a deputy is a person who is free in
visiting any points, it is difficult to expect the punishment of
those Russian parliamentarians who have visited the theatrical show
called “elections of Karabakh separatists”. They have not spoken on
behalf of the Russian state which has already voiced its position
on this issue stating the recognition of the territorial integrity
of Azerbaijan and nonrecognition of independence of the so-called
“NKR”. Yes, the discussed deputies are representatives of definite
circles in Russia but these circles and not dominating in this country.

If exactly, what is behind the repeatedly demonstrated open
pro-Armenian position of such State Duma deputy as Mr.Konstantin
Zatulin?

We have no exact information about the sources of financing Konstantin
Zatulin. But on the other hand, his behavior shows that he is an open
supporter of Karabakh separatists and a person for which a personal
benefit is more important than the state interests which brings some
ideas considering the grafting of different political figures by
Armenians. In addition, he seems to be jealous about the “laurels”
of another Russian deputy-Vladimir Zhirinovski who has gained a fame
of a political jester. And it should be admitted that Zatulin can
claim for being called the same political clown in policy as the
leader of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia.

From: A. Papazian

‘ARMENIA CANNOT DO A STEP AGAINST WHOLE WORLD’

news.az
May 31 2010
Azerbaijan

Rasim Musabeyov Though strange Serzh Sargsyan benefits from pressure
of international community.

Political scientist Rasim Musabeyov has commented on the current
situation around the updated Madrid principles developed by the
OSCE Minsk Group to continue negotiations on the resolution of the
Karabakh conflict.

Musabeyov noted that official Yerevan has no other way out and Armenian
authorities will have to accept the updated Madrid principles as a
document in the negotiation process.

‘The fact that the EU has recently adopted a resolution demanding
to withdraw Armenian troops from the occupied Azerbaijani lands has
become a serious sign for Yerevan. Though strange, Armenian authorities
benefit from the pressure put on Armenia by the United States, Russia
and Europe regarding the resolution of the Karabakh conflict’, said
the political scientist.

‘The matter is that such pressure allows Serzh Sargsyan to explain
to his team and opposition that Armenia cannot do a step against the
whole world and whoever comes to power in Armenia will have to take
into account the established realities and the opinion of the leading
powers related to the Karabakh conflict. Thus the pressure of the
world community helps Sargsyan substantiate his possible agreement
to continue negotiations on the basis of updated Madrid principles’,
Musabeyov said.

From: A. Papazian

GRYZLOV, OHANIAN TO HOLD A MEETING MONDAY

Aysor
May 31 2010
Armenia

A Russian delegation with Speaker of the State Duma of Russia,
chairman o the Parliamentary Assembly of the CSTO Council Boris
Gryzlov on the head has arrived in Armenia.

A spokesperson to the Defense Ministry of Armenia said that Armenian
Defense Minister Sehran Ohanian and Boris Gryzlov will meet Monday.

From: A. Papazian

TURKISH EXPERT ON POSSIBLE TURKEY-RUSSIA-ARMENIA MEETING ON NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT

Today

May 31 2010
Azerbaijan

“Negotiations between Prime Ministers of Russia and Turkey Vladimir
Putin and Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan
on the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh is still possible,” Director of the
Turkey-based Center for International Relations and Strategic Analysis
(TURKSAM) Sinan Ogan said.

“At present, preparations for this meeting are underway. But they
have not been able yet to persuade Serzh Sargsyan to participate in
this meeting,” he said.

“In recent days, Sargsyan has made sharper statements and threats. It
is no accidental. Sargsyan does not want to attend this meeting,
because in this case Turkey’s linkage of the Karabakh conflict
settlement with will become more visible. In this regard, Ankara has
put pressure on Moscow and, Moscow, in turn, on Yerevan,” the TURKSAM
Director explained.

“I never said that the meeting will certainly be held. Besides, this
is a diplomatic process. It is likely to take place. But lately,
Sargsyan has been trying to stall this process by harsh statements
because Armenia wants world parliaments to take decisions against
Turkey until 2015, one hundred years after the resettlement of
Armenians,” Ogan noted.

According to the Turkish expert, if the Karabakh conflict is resolved,
Armenian-Turkish border will reopen.

“If this happens, the century-old strategy of Armenia will be failure
and the parliaments of Western countries will no longer adopt bills
on the far-fetched “Armenian genocide “against Turkey. Armenia
does not want this happen. For this reason, it does not want to any
serious steps towards resolving the Karabakh conflict till 2015,”
Ogan pointed out.

From: A. Papazian