Author: Antonian Lara

Base withdrawal negotiations drag on
The Messenger.
Thursday, May 19, 2005, #090 (0864)
Despite the frequent top-level meetings between Georgian and Russian
officials, no agreement has yet been reached on the withdrawal of
Russia’s military bases in Georgia, although there are signs that a
deal is close.
Georgia has been boosted in its efforts to have Russia remove its bases
by statements of support from Western countries and organizations,
most notably U.S. President Bush, but it is clear that it is up to
Georgia and Russia to reach an agreement. The question for Georgia
is how this should best be achieved.
Following six years of Russian dallying after Moscow agreed to
withdraw its bases back in 1999, the Georgian government earlier this
year called for a period of intense negotiations to finally reach
an agreement on the timeframe and terms of withdrawal. Parliament
followed up on this on March 10 by adopting a resolution charging
the government with declaring the Russian bases illegal and taking
measures to unilaterally force their withdrawal should a bilateral
agreement not be reached by May 15.
This resolution was supported at the time by neither government
ministers nor Speaker of Parliament Nino Burjanadze, all of whom
sought to distance themselves from a resolution unlikely to lead to
warmer Russian-Georgian relations. The resolution was criticized by
the Russian ministry of foreign affairs, which is representing the
Russian Federation at negotiations, as hindering the negotiations
process by forcing an artificial deadline on both sides. There may be
some truth in this, but on the other hand it is clear that a great
deal has been achieved in the two months or so since it was adopted
than in the six years prior.
May 15 has now passed, and the resolution has come into force. But
the government has backed away from acting on its recommendations.
The Russian bases have not been declared illegal; visas for Russian
soldiers have not been withheld; the bases have not had their
electricity switched off. The only Russian military installation
suffering is the central Russian military office in Tbilisi who,
according to Kommersant, had its water service cut of this week because
of debts to the Tbilisi water system. Presidential spokesperson Gela
Charkviani said on Saturday that progress had been made in the talks,
and that it was important to give negotiators more time to reach
an agreement.
In Russia, however, both the media and government officials have
played up the significance of the resolution, stating that the
livelihood of the Russian soldiers may be endangered by Georgia’s
actions. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Monday that that
Russia is doing all it can “to ensure that nothing threaten the
normal life, property, armament as well as military equipment of
those Russian citizens who are on Georgian territory and who work in
these military bases as well as the bases itself.” The Russian Duma,
meanwhile, is preparing to adopt a counter-resolution calling on the
government to take anti-Georgian measures such as raising the price of
electricity exported to Georgia, refusing to give visas to Georgians,
and deporting many of those Georgians currently living in Russia.
Meanwhile, the leaders of Abkhazia and South Ossetia Sergei Bagapsh
and Eduard Kokoiti have offered to host the Russian bases being
withdrawn from Georgia. In Russia, Vice President of the Russian
Academy for Geopolitical Problems Leonid Ivashov suggests that the
bases could be relocated to Abkhazia and Armenia. It will, of course,
be impossible for Georgia to accept the relocation of one of the bases
to Abkhazia. Nor is the government willing to agree to the bases in
Batumi and Akhalkalaki becoming anti-terrorist centers as this would
involve little more than a name change.
Back in Georgia, opposition parties have called on the government
to take a stronger line and act on the recommendations in the
parliamentary resolution. They also believe that Georgia should
insist that Russia’s peacekeepers also withdraw from South Ossetia
and Abkhazia, and further, that Georgia should withdraw from the CIS.
The government should be wary of taking too hard a line, however. It
seems certain that at some point soon an agreement will be reached and
the Russian bases eventually withdrawn: it is not necessary to further
irritate Moscow in forcing this through. The Georgian government has
linked the withdrawal of the bases with new, friendlier relations
with Moscow, and it is important that this remains a foreign policy
priority.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

RUSSIAN BUSINESSMEN ARE BEWARE OF UNFAIR COMPETITION AND MONOPOLIZATION OF ARMENIAN ECONOMY
YEREVAN, May 17. /ARKA/. Russian businessmen are beware of unfair
competition and monopolization of Armenian economy, stated Vahan
Hovhannisyan, the Vice-Speaker of the Armenian Parliament at today’s
press conference upon the results of 9th session of Armenian-Russian
Interparliamentary Committee. According to him, this factor has a
negative impact on the Russian business in Armenia. He said that
the Armenian side promised to discuss this situation with the RA
Antimonopoly Commission.
Armenian-Russian Interparliamentary Committee 9th session closed today
in Yerevan. The Co-chairs of the Committee are Vahan Hovhannisyan,
Vice -Speaker of the Armenian Parliament and Nikolay Ryzhkov, member
of RF Federation Council. Today, the session of Russian-Armenian
Business Cooperation Association starts in Yerevan, organized by the
Association and General Consulate of RA in Rostov-on-Don. The event
will be attended by about 50 businessmen and bankers from Southern
Federal okrug of RF. L. V. -0–

‘Ministers Committee cannot Change EHRC Verdict’
By Selcuk Gutasli, Ali Ihsan Aydin
Saturday 14, 2005
zaman.com
Opposition rises from Brussels to the comments that The European Court
of Human Rights (ECHR) left the conclusive verdict on the re-trial of
terrorist leader Abdullah Ocalan to the European Council Ministers
Committee.
According to diplomatic sources talking to Zaman, the Court wanted a
re-trial for Ocalan. The same sources, who said that the duty of the
Ministers Committee is not to comment on EHCR verdicts, warned: “the
EHCR Grand Chamber advised Turkey to re-try him or re-open the
case. This does not mean that the end result will differ in the case
of a re-trial.” But it is noted that Turkey can extend the process at
the Ministers Committee as it did before in the Titina Loizidou case,
and if the verdict is not applied, the European Council willexert
pressure on Turkey. The diplomatic sources in Brussels agree that the
best scenario for Turkey at this point is to re-try the PKK leader as
soon as possible. Reportedly, there have been comments such as ‘if
Turkey lobbies at the Ministers Committee and avoids trying him again
this will empower those opposed to in Europe’. Amanda Akcakoca, a
Turkey specialist at the European Policy Center (EPC), a highly
esteemed think tank in Brussels, claims that the best choice for
Turkey is to try Ocalan again as soon as possible It is disadvantageous
to even attempt to make the Ministers Committee make a different
decision. Akcakoca said that Turkey’s interpreting the EHCR verdict
as “not to try him again” or trying to make the Committee decide in
this way will lead people to think that “Turkey does not want to judge
anyone fairly.” She also said that Turkey has already lost prestige
over the Armenian Genocide and Cyprus issues. Akcakoca says there is
nothing to be afraid of since the verdict will not change even if
Ocalan is tried again and added that not retrying him will suggest
that nationalism is increasing in Turkey, and that it will not be seen
favorably European public opinion. She used Croatia as an example. The
EU delayed negotiations with Croatia because it did not surrender war
criminal GeneralGotovina and did give weight Zagreb’s claims that
surrendering him would increase nationalist sentiment in Croatia and
decrease support for EU membership. Diplomatic sources in Brussels say
that the best choice for Turkey is to try Ocalan as soon as
possible. A diplomat hinted that it is rather difficult for the
Ministers Committee to make a decision different from the EHCR and
that if Turkey tried for a different decision it would definitely not
work.
Two possibilities appeared in the process
1- Applying to the High Criminal Court in accordance with the decision
of ECHR, Ocalan’s lawyers demand continuation of the case (restitution
of the trial). The authority to decide (excluding some exceptions)
belongs to the court given the previous decision. Hereupon the High
Criminal Court decides if the restitution of the trial is admissible
or not “without a court hearing”. Ifthe Court decides to overrule the
claim, the terrorist leaders’ lawyers can give a “fast bill of
exception”. The method is provided in the Turkish Code of Criminal
Procedure (CMUK). Therefore, it will be sent to one of the Ankara High
Criminal Courts. The decisions arrived upon the rejection are
irrevocable. (In other words, in such a case Ocalan will be able to go
to the ECHR because he has used up the domestic legal options. If the
court decides the admission of the verdict, the case will be opened
then. The trial will restart and the decisions reached after the
trial, the aspects of which the ECHR mentioned will be taken into
consideration, will pass the regular process; its appeal will be
possible. Among these technical methods, there is one more possible
situation: If the demand for the restitution of the trial because of
ECHR’s verdict is rejected in the High Criminal Court due to the
exception item of CMUK and this rejection is approved in the court,
which will discuss this rejection of objection, Ocalan will then be
able to go to ECHR directly.
2- If the local court or the other high criminal court, which will
discuss the overruling the objection, brings the suit in the
Constitutional Court by claiming violation of article 90, this process
will be held to end. If the Constitutional Court approves the claim,
since the subject CMUK decision will be cancelled, the path to retrial
will be opened. In this case the trial will be operated in the frame
of the items in the first section. If the Constitutional Court decides
that there was no violation, the demand to continue the case will be
overruled by the local court, and in accordance with this verdict,
Ocalan’s lawyers will be able to go to the ECHR again.
International law expert Professor Rusen Ergec from ULB University in
Brussels warned the officials not to make statements like “he is
guilty anyway” about Ocalan while a possible retrial is a current
issue. Noting that no legal problem will occur if Ocalan is re-tried
by eliminating the procedural mistakes determined by the ECHR, found
guilty and given the same punishment, Ergec said: “If the authorities
state that about the person to be re-tried is guilty, this may give
rise to the claim of the violation of the second paragraph of article
6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Then in the case
thatOcalan receives the same sentence again, it may be rejected
concerning this article.”
Brussels, Strasbourg
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

The Messenger, Georgia
May 13 2005
Celebrating Europe Day
By Anna Arzanova
Head of the European Commission Delegation to Armenia and Georgia
Torben Holtze hosted a reception at the Courtyard Marriott on May 5
on the occasion of Europe Day. The whole government as well as other
important guests were invited to the event.
In an interview with The Messenger, Holtze stated that they celebrate
Europe Day every year as a sign of solidarity. “Last year, we
celebrated the expansion of the EU from fifteen to twenty-five member
states and this year we are also celebrating, because Romania and
Bulgaria have been accepted. We all expect they will become members
in 2007,” he stated.
He expressed hope for ever closer integration with Georgia and
Ukraine and all countries on the periphery of Europe.
“Georgia is a European country, so it can apply for membership, but I
don’t think it should focus on this for the moment, because what is
more important is economic development. It is mainly up to the
Georgian people – with support from the outside – to achieve this
progress,” he concluded.
Attending the event, State Minister for European Integration Giorgi
Baramidze said that Europe Day is rather important “and its
celebration also is very important.”
In the interview with The Messenger, he said that Georgia will make
every effort to become a member of the European Union. He believes
this will take about 10 years, “but we will do our best that this
process go forward in a timely manner.”
“Georgia is Europe,” he said, and membership will come sooner than we
hope.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

World Socialist Web Site, MI
May 11 2005
Victory Day celebration in Russia reveals deepening political and
social tensions
By Andrea Peters
While Russia’s President Vladimir Putin had intended the 60th
anniversary of the Soviet defeat of Nazi Germany as an occasion to
boost Russia’s standing in world affairs, the day’s events largely
served to reveal the depth of the political and social tensions
wracking the country.
In the week leading up to the Victory Day celebrations, the capital
was transformed into an armed camp, with the center of Moscow placed
under virtual lockdown. Foot and automobile traffic was banned except
by special pass, major subway stations were closed, and roads leading
to the city were cleared of private vehicles.
Those working in downtown office buildings were told to stay off
balconies lest they become targets for the hundreds of snipers placed
on nearby rooftops. According to one report, government officials
promised to expel the homeless and anyone found without a Moscow
residence permit from the city.
This extraordinary security was publicly justified by the attendance
of 50 foreign heads of state and the threat posed by Chechen
terrorists. Last year’s Victory Day celebrations in Grozny were
bombed, killing 32 people, including the pro-Moscow president of the
Caucasian republic, Akhmad Kadyrov.
Moscow’s residents were encouraged not to venture out of their homes,
and if possible, to leave the city. Attendance at the festivities in
Red Square – which included a military parade replete with marching
bands from various countries, Soviet-era tanks, and an air show – was
by special invitation only.
The Moscow public, which usually celebrates the holiday on the city’s
central streets, was relegated to marking the anniversary in the
parks and fairgrounds on the outskirts of the city. This geographic
separation served as a telling reflection of the growth of social
inequality and the vast gulf separating working people from the new
ruling elite.
While the official ceremony included the participation of dozens of
veterans, many survivors of the hostilities were denied access to Red
Square even to observe the event. `I didn’t need an invitation to go
to the front,’ said one 79-year old veteran in disgust after being
turned away from the parade area because he lacked the necessary
document.
The Putin administration is widely disliked by pensioners and those
who served in World War II because of recent changes in social
welfare policy implemented by his government. Earlier this year,
thousands of pensioners took to the streets of Moscow, St.
Petersburg, and other cities across the country to protest the
drastic cuts in welfare payments resulting from a new law that
transformed social benefits-in-kind – such as free public
transportation – into monetary compensation of a significantly lower
value.
The celebration of the USSR’s victory in the Great Patriotic War (as
World War II is known in Russia) has a different significance for the
millions of ordinary people whose families made tremendous sacrifices
to defeat the Nazis than it does for the section of Russian
capitalists and ex-bureaucrats grouped around Putin.
The Putin Administration carefully choreographed the Victory Day
events to pay homage to the Soviet Union and the Russian nation. The
May 9 ceremony was replete with hammer and sickle flags, displays of
Soviet military machinery, portraits of Lenin, and veterans waving
red flowers.
While ordinary people may have viewed these symbols as a
commemoration of the efforts made by the Soviet people to defeat
Hitler, for the Putin administration they are a vehicle for promoting
Russian nationalism. An opponent of the socialist traditions of the
1917 revolution and an outspoken anti-communist, Putin correctly
understands the Soviet patriotism of the Stalinist bureaucracy as a
form of Russian nationalism.
This was the spirit embodied in Stalin’s policy of building
`socialism in one country.’ The Kremlin designed the May 9
celebrations to pay tribute to these traditions, while at the same
time tapping into the pride and nostalgia that many ordinary Russians
feel for the accomplishments of the Soviet period.
Although not on display at the Victory Day celebrations in Red
Square, the lead-up to the anniversary was accompanied by a
government-backed attempt to resurrect the image of Stalin. In the
weeks prior to May 9, commemorative posters appeared with his
picture. The `Victory Train’ that arrived in Moscow’s Belarussky
train station, which retraced the route traveled by victorious Soviet
soldiers returning from the front, was outfitted with a giant
portrait of the dictator on its engine. A statue of Stalin,
Roosevelt, and Churchill had been set for unveiling in time for the
May 9 celebrations in Moscow, but, concerned over the opposition it
might unleash, city officials decided to scrap the plans.
The city of Volgograd, previously known as Stalingrad, had a new
statue of the three signatories of the Yalta agreement created to
mark this week’s anniversary. The local Communist Party has proposed
changing the city’s name back to Stalingrad. In Mirny, a city in the
eastern Siberian republic of Yakutia-Sakha, a new Stalin statue was
one of the centerpieces of the day’s festivities. Leaders of the city
of Oryol, a few hundred miles outside of Moscow, recently called for
the restoration of Stalin memorials previously removed from the city
and the return of Stalin’s name to streets that had been renamed
after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
Putin himself has been careful not to praise Stalin too directly,
most recently describing him as a `tyrant’ in an interview with a
German newspaper. An open move by the Kremlin itself to resurrect
Stalin would only provide ammunition for the Bush Administration’s
attacks on the Putin administration, which it regularly criticizes
for eroding Russia’s limited democratic institutions.
These efforts to rehabilitate Stalin in conjunction with the 60th
anniversary of the defeat of the Nazis are based on a complete
falsification of the role the dictator played in World War II. The
Soviet Union triumphed over fascism in spite of Stalin’s crimes. His
extermination campaign against those most closely identified with the
October 1917 revolution – including the murder of the Soviet Union’s
best military generals – his betrayals of the German and Spanish
working class in the period leading up the war, and his efforts to
reach an accommodation with Nazi Germany, left the USSR completely
unprepared for Hitler’s assault.
Putin speaks in the interests of that section of the Russia’s ruling
oligarchy that feels the pro-US orientation of the Kremlin during the
1990s undermined the country’s national interests and their own power
and privileges. The evocation of Soviet imagery surrounding the Great
Patriotic War and the resurrection of Stalin are aimed at cultivating
nationalism within the population and convincing people that the
social collapse that Russia has experienced over the past 15 years is
a result of the loss of the country’s great power status, rather than
the restoration of capitalism.
Despite the Kremlin’s best efforts, the 60th anniversary celebrations
revealed the increasingly precarious position of Putin’s government,
both at home and abroad.
They were partially upstaged by Bush’s stop in the Latvian capital,
where he delivered a speech repudiating the entire post-war agreement
hammered out by Stalin, Roosevelt, and Churchill at Yalta in 1945 as
an appeasement of tyranny.
Coming on the heels of months of criticism by the US administration
of the anti-democratic character of Putin’s regime, Bush’s comments
were an open provocation. The Russian president responded by
defending the actions of the Soviet army in the Baltic region. `Our
people not only defended their homeland, they liberated 11 countries
in Europe,’ said Putin. The same day, in an interview with the
Russian president aired on the CBS weekly news program 60 Minutes,
Putin rebuffed American criticisms of his regime by pointing to the
anti-democratic character of the US electoral college system and the
way in which Bush was installed in office by the Supreme Court in
2000.
In another affront to the Putin administration, after the May 9
ceremonies and prior to leaving Russia for a visit with the
pro-American government of Mikhail Saakashvili of Georgia, Bush met
with so-called democracy advocates and opponents of the Kremlin
regime.
The 60th anniversary was also marred by a series of diplomatic
failures for the Russian government, pointing to the political
fracturing of Moscow’s post-Soviet sphere of influence. The
Presidents of Estonia and Lithuania boycotted the festivities in
order to demonstrate their orientation to the West and to promote
anti-Russian nationalism at home.
Georgian President Saakashvili likewise declined the Kremlin’s
invitation in protest over Moscow’s failure to set a deadline for the
agreed-upon closure of Russian military bases on Georgian territory.
The leader of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, also failed to show up, as a
result of his country’s ongoing dispute with Armenia over control of
the Nagorno-Karabakh region.
The troubled state of political relations in Russia’s traditional
sphere of influence found clearest expression in the summit held May
8 between the leaders of the countries of the Commonwealth of
Independent States (CIS), the political bloc created out of the
former Soviet countries in the aftermath of the collapse of the USSR.
The fate of the organization has been thrown into question by the
growth of American influence over the countries on Russia’s western
border and in Central Asia.
On Sunday, Viktor Yushchenko, the pro-US president of Ukraine, who
recently rose to power as the result of the US-backed `Orange
Revolution,’ described the CIS as being of `little use’ without
significant reforms reflecting the divergent political trajectories
of the organization’s member countries. The Ukraine, as well as CIS
member states Georgia and Moldova, are seeking entry into NATO and
the European Union. While Moscow has indicated that it is willing to
take the lead in crafting changes to the CIS in an attempt to boost
the economic integration of the region, the bloc is increasingly
regarded as a largely decorative institution.

PRESS RELEASE
Catholicosate of Cilicia
Communication and Information Department
Contact: V. Rev. Fr. Krikor Chiftjian, Communications Officer
Tel: (04) 410001, 410003
Fax: (04) 419724
E- mail: [email protected]
Web:
PO Box 70 317
Antelias-Lebanon
Armenian version:
HIS HOLINESS MEETS WITH A DELEGATION FROM THE COPTIC CHURCH
His Holiness Aram I received a delegation from the Coptic Orthodox Church
headed by the primate of the Coptic Community of Lebanon on May 9.
The delegation inquired Aram I about his views concerning the recent
political developments unfolding in Lebanon. The delegation also conveyed to
His Holiness the greetings of Patriarch Shnouda, the spiritual leader of the
Coptic Orthodox Church.
His Holiness expressed his wish for the strengthening the cooperation
between the Coptic and Armenian Churches. The Catholicos evaluated the
overall political situation prevalent in Lebanon and outlined the importance
of inter-Christian and Christian-Moslem dialogue.
Aram I emphasized the necessity of avoiding attempts that would trigger
confessional tensions and advised to strengthen the country’s political
stability through mutual trust. His Holiness added that in the novel
situation created in Lebanon, it is important that the leadership represent
the people’s will.
##
Picture here:
*****
The Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia is one of the two Catholicosates of
the Armenian Orthodox Church. For detailed information about the Ecumenical
activities of the Cilician Catholicosate, you may refer to the web page of
the Catholicosate, The Cilician Catholicosate, the
administrative center of the church is located in Antelias, Lebanon.

Mustafa Kemal and Armenian Allegations
Journal of Turkish Weekly
May 8 2005
Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkish republic said
“International society cannot accuse for anything us about the
decision of Armenian relocation which we had to took” according to
Turkish historical documents, Turkish Anatolian News Agency reports.
“Contrary to the forgeries against us, all who were forced to
re-settle are alive and if the Allied State did not force them to
make war against us, most of them could return their home now”.
Mustafa Ataturk told Clanence K. Streit, American journalist, on 26
February 1921 that Armenians exaggerated the events: “When the Russian
Armies started a great attack against us, Armenian Tashnak Committee
which was under the Tsarist service, encouraged the Armenian people
who were behind the Turkish troops to riot. We always felt ourselves
that we were between two fires. Our supply, logistic and medical
convoys were attacked and massacred with no mercy, the bridges and
roads were damaged and there was a terror campaign against the Turkish
villages. The bandits lured all Armenians who could combat. Thanks to
the capitulations, the weapons were stocked in the Armenian villages.”
“The international community who simply ignored the English attitude
towards Ireland during the war and peace times, cannot justly accuse
us for the decision of Armenian relocation which we had to took.
Contrary to the accusations and forgeries, most of those who were
relocated are still alive. And most of those who were relocated could
return their homes now if the Allies States had not forced them to
join the war against us.”
8 May 2005

MP proposes to set up new body on Garabagh conflict
Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
May 7 2005
Baku, May 6, AssA-Irada – MP Sabir Rustamkhanly, chairman of the
opposition Civil Solidarity Party, has proposed to set up a special
government agency to deal with the Upper Garabagh conflict.
Rustamkhanly said in parliament on Friday that the new entity is to
coordinate all the important activities on the conflict settlement
both in and outside the country.
According to the MP, the new agency should employ specialists on the
Armenian language who will be responsible for following the ongoing
processes in Armenia.
“The Foreign Ministry has to carry out these activities. It is not
possible to do systematic work related to the Upper Garabagh conflict
as the Ministry has a lot to do,” Rustamkhanly added.*

Turkish Press
May 7 2005
Press Scan
CUMHURIYET (LEFT)
—————–
MEETING PLAN WITH KOCHARIAN
Turkish Premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Armenian President Robert
Kocharian who have been exchanging letters may meet during Council
of Europe Summit in Warsaw. Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul
also confirmed such a meeting. He said, “they can meet but there is
no scheduled meeting.”

ARMENIAN PRESIDENT CONGRATULATION ON VICTORY DAY
Pan Armenian News
07.05.2005 06:25
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenian President Robert Kocharian today addressed
the Armenian people a congratulation message on the Victory Day in the
Great Patriotic War. The message specifically notes, Dear Compatriots,
I wholeheartedly congratulate you on the Victory and Peace Day. We
mark a glorious jubilee – the 60-th anniversary of the Victory in the
Great Patriotic War. This victory and peace conditioned the further
development of Armenia. In the ranks of the Soviet Army Armenians
were an exclusive example of self-sacrifice and courage. Armenians
have made a large contribution within the armies of the allies,
the guerilla bands and resistance movement, and in the rear. With
special cordiality I congratulate veterans who passed the ordeal with
dignity and defended the country from fascism. In 1992 a new victory
joined the historical May victories – the liberation of Shushi town.
In the war imposed on us we again proved that we are always ready to
protect our people’s right for peaceful life. Again congratulating all
of us on the great date I wish peace. Our devotion to the fatherland
should be displayed in the raising of the new generation and the
building of a new state.