Author: Babajanian Karo

BEHIND TURKEY’S HUMILIATING FAILURE TO WIN A UN SECURITY COUNCIL SEAT

Business Insider
Oct 29 2014

James Smart, The Press Project International

It all seemed to be going so well.

Turkey was, it appeared, in the driving seat to be one of five new
non-permanent members of the UN Security Council.

“We believe, God permitting, that we will get the result of the work
we put in” asserted Turkey’s new Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu,
speaking from Turkey’s pre-election gala at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel
in New York.

Although the delegation had loosely been assured of around 140 votes
from the UN General Assembly, what transpired seemed to take everybody
by surprise with Turkey departing the race in the third round with
a mere 60, some distance short of the 129 required to triumph.

In its stead New Zealand and Spain took the two available places,
and will from January 1st enjoy the prestige of being members of the
Security Council for two years. Back in Turkey, for a government
unacquainted with losing hard-fought elections, soul-searching is
required.

The Security Council is the UN’s most powerful body, focusing on
worldwide peace and security. Five countries hold permanent seats,
while ten seats are given to other countries on a rotational, elected
basis. While the US, UK, France, China and Russia hold continual
positions with full powers plus veto rights, ten other countries with
temporary positions are able to make proposals, lobby other members,
and vote.

This year five countries – Angola, Venezuela, Malaysia, and Turkey’s
victors New Zealand and Spain – will replace the previous incumbents
in a little over two months. Some of these countries that ended up
winning have similar or worse human rights records and anti-democratic
records to Turkey, and before the vote it appeared that the Turkish
delegation was going to get its way.

The delegation had been verbally stipulated of around 140 votes, but
from a total of 191 available votes it certainly seemed surprising
when Spain too had around 150 agreed upon. In an anonymous voting
contest, promises are easy to make — but why were these ones so
difficult to keep?

Ahmet Davutoglu, Turkey’s new Prime Minister, seemed bullish prior to
the vote. “If we are elected, and we believe it’s a great possibility,
we will be the first country in the world to be elected for a second
time, after a five-year break. This shows Turkey’s importance.” Turkey
won 151 votes in the same contest in 2009, and Davutoglu had some
strong reasons for believing in a similar success this time around.

Pivotal geo-politically, encompassing a number of new oil and gas
pipelines, a founding member of the UN and a member of G20, Turkey has
generally won plaudits for its recent building of relatively humane
refugee camps that house an estimated 1.6 million Syrian refugees.

The world’s 17th highest GDP has emerged from the past five years of
global economic crisis quite unscathed, and has been trying to take
a much more pro-active stance in the region since 2010.

Newly inaugurated President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, as Prime Minister
was consistently a vocal opponent of Syria’s dictator Bashar al-Assad,
and until quite recently this mirrored prevalent world opinion. But
as this opinion evolved, Turkey’s unchanging stance was landing it
in hot water.

As the situation in Syria has unearthed new power dynamics, Erdogan’s
stubborn anti-Assad and anti-Kurdish position has started to irk
those who recognize a differing political landscape painted by the
newly empowered Islamic State (IS).

Although Turkey has finally started making some concessions to the
US, and is now somewhat ostensibly assisting the Kurds in the fight
against IS, its overall mixed response to the situation has drawn
worldwide indignation.

Erdogan has at times seemed more interested in overseeing the
destruction of the Kurds, and state border guards have been allowing
IS fighters into Turkey for medical treatment while not allowing Kurds
from Turkey across the border to assist their brethren in the battle
against IS at Kobane. While the General Assembly vote was underway,
Turkish fighter jets were bombing a Kurdish village.

It appears that Erdogan’s obstinacy and pro-Sunni position has
prevented him from realizing that Assad needn’t be the main target for
the moment – and worldwide opinion seems to suggest that the growth
of the openly barbaric and power-hungry IS is of greater concern.

The Spanish daily newspaper El Pais said that “what is important in
the UN is not so much about having friends as having fewer enemies”
– and Turkey has been busy making enemies all over the region and
beyond. While an anti-Turkey campaign can always be counted on from
Armenia, Cyprus and Greece, due to historical wounds that were never
healed, and while they haven’t been able to count on the vote and
lobbying influence of Israel since a falling-out in 2010, other
countries in the region have started to pile on the pressure.

An Embarrassing Loss

Middle Eastern countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia lobbied
hard against Turkey for its pro-Muslim Brotherhood stance,
while Shia-dominated countries are concerned with how Erdogan is
rabble-rousing to focus minds on Sunni-Shia sectarian divides. Erdogan
has professed support in the past for Sunni militants such as IS
and Al-Nusra.

Beyond Turkey’s immediate neighborhood yet more influence is being
lost. A bitter quarrel between Erdogan and his former ally, the
popular preacher Fetullah Gulen put paid to much of the African vote.

Gulen has a powerful following worldwide, particularly in Africa,
with a lot of schools, charities and influence.

TURKEY-GULEN/ REUTERS/Selahattin Sevi/Zaman Daily via Cihan News
AgencyIslamic preacher Fethullah Gulen is pictured at his residence
in Saylorsburg, Pennsylvania in this December 28, 2004 file photo.

In 2009, Turkey’s previous fruitful attempt to join the security
council was partly thanks to Gulen’s “Hizmet” Organisation campaigning
in that part of the world.

For the past 18 months he and Erdogan have been at war, with Erdogan
trying to shift his supporters out of the public domain and otherwise
diminish his capabilities inside and outside of Turkey. By way of
vengeance it seems that the Hizmet organization has triumphantly
campaigned against Turkey this time around.

Losing clout in these regions might not have dealt the Turkish
delegation a mortal blow, had other aspects of Erdogan’s governance
been popular worldwide. But the way the country is being managed
is causing concern, with well-documented evidence of increased
anti-democratic behaviour.

While this hasn’t prevented Venezuela or Angola from entering the
Security Council, it seems to have helped tip the balance for a lot
of General Assembly members.

Turkey always had a difficult hand to play, as it is rather unusual
to be voted onto the Security Council twice in four terms, and needed
a watertight campaign. A change of tactics regarding Syria, a less
bellicose voice in the region, and some sort of truce with Gulen,
would have helped matters tremendously.

“We will not abandon this stance for the sake of votes. We will
continue to be the voice and conscience of countries that expect
this from us” said Cavusoglu, odd considering the money and efforts
invested in victory.

But Turkey ought to relish the election in 2018 against Israel,
Germany and Belgium, and perhaps now would be an opportune moment
for rumination.

Erdogan was very keen on this victory, and needs to examine the
reasons for defeat. The question is, are the characters involved
capable of the kind of soul-searching needed to understand and deal
with their mistakes?

Blaming meddling outsiders, protesters, Israel, journalists, or even
the “Interest Rates Lobby”, seems to suffice to his own supporters.

But as we learned this week, the rest of the world isn’t so easily
duped.

TURKISH DIASPORA FIGHTING SO-CALLED “ARMENIAN GENOCIDE” CLAIMS

AzerNews, Azerbaijan
Oct 29 2014

29 October 2014, 18:00 (GMT+04:00)
By Mushvig Mehdiyev

The Turkish diaspora is entrusted with great tasks to combat the
claims about the so-called “Armenian genocide”, Turkish ambassador
to Azerbaijan Ismail Alper Coshkun said.

“One of the main reasons behind the historical misinterpretation of
both Turkey and Azerbaijan is the power of diasporas acting against
Azerbaijan and the Turkic world mainly in the Western countries,”
he noted.

Coshkun said the claims about the so-called “genocide” enounced by
Armenia and the Armenian lobby against Turkey were not something new.

The Armenian lobby plans to work efficiently to attract more supporters
for the “genocide” in 2015.

“The campaign on demonizing Turkey and its history will not end in
2015,” he said. “Armenians will not stop to come up with their claims.”

Coshkun added that Armenia and the Armenian lobby are on the wrong
way. “They are trying to convince the entire world of the real events
of 1915,” he said. “This is not corresponding to reality and prevents
the creation of a common future in the region.”

The ambassador noted that the Armenian government and the Armenian
lobby use the so-called “genocide” issue to defend themselves. “The
Armenian government is trying to focus on the centenary of the
so-called “Armenian genocide”, instead of providing its population
with jobs,” he noted.

The diplomat added that despite Armenia’s attempts, there are no events
in the history of Turkey and Azerbaijan that may defile the countries’
past and cast a shadow on their future.

The ambassador urged Armenians to read Turkish President Recep Tayyip
Erdogan’s statement on the events of 1915 he made during his rule as
prime minister.

“Turkey will not allow falsification of any historical fact. Our
archives are open for the investigation of the events of 1915. There
are people who are influenced by the parliaments of several countries.

They have never been to Turkey. They do not know our history. However,
they are ready to support Armenia’s claims linked to the so-called
“genocide”. We will expand the joint work with Azerbaijan to
investigate the historical facts,” he added.

Armenia and the Armenian lobby claim that Turkey’s predecessor the
Ottoman Empire has allegedly carried out a “genocide” against Armenians
living in Anatolia in 1915. Armenia could achieve its recognition by
the parliaments of some countries simultaneously with strengthening
its efforts to promote the so-called “genocide” worldwide.

PETER TASE: “THE UNITED STATES MUST TAKE A LEADERSHIP ROLE TOWARDS SOLVING THE ARMENIA-AZERBAIJAN CONFLICT”

The Azerbaijan State Telegraph Agency
Oct 29 2014

29.10.2014 [22:03]

Washington, October 29, AzerTAc.

Peter Tase, International Programs Assistant of Marquette University
(WI) and International Relations expert gave an interview to Washington
Bureau of AzerTAc following her recent visit to Azerbaijan.

– You recently attended Baku Humanitarian Forum. What are your general
impressions about the forum itself and the capital of Azerbaijan?

-Azerbaijan is not only the birthplace of fire but also is the
foundation of genuine patriotism, hardworking people, consolidated
democratic government and has emerged as a nation with avant-garde
architecture in Eurasia. Azerbaijan is a dynamic young nation with
a vibrant capital city. Over the last two decades Baku has become a
genuine metropolitan city at the heart of Eurasia, which rivals some
of the best western European capitals; it has also adopted its own
urban landmarks similar to the Michigan Avenue in downtown Chicago,
with exclusive shops and restaurants just like the wind city. I am
honored to be part of this prestigious Global Forum in which more than
600 former heads of state, politicians, Nobel laureates, scholars,
journalists and diplomats attended from over 60 countries around the
world. Azerbaijan is currently playing a vital role towards fostering
intercultural dialogue, religious tolerance and promotion of peace
and democratic values worldwide. There is no other country in the
world like Azerbaijan that invests so much time and energy towards
preserving global peace and stability by organizing such strategic
forums which help us in resolving today’s most pressing issues. Over
the last decade, the government of President Ilham Aliyev has always
emphasized the religious tolerance and peaceful solution of current
regional and global disputes and pending disagreements.

– Metaphorically speaking, what puts Azerbaijan on the map for you? In
other words, what is, in your opinion, significant about Azerbaijan
that will draw attention of an American to the Land of Fire?

-Azerbaijan, is home of the Paleolithic period, Azykh Cave is located
in the territory of the Fuzuli district, which is considered to
be the site of one of the most ancient proto-human habitations in
Eurasia. In 2007 another ancient monument southwest of Baku, Gobustan
was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site and is considered to be an
“outstanding universal value” for the quality and density of its rock
art engravings.

The Government of President Aliyev has made great efforts to make
Azerbaijan one of the most developed countries in Eurasia and has
pursued a dynamic foreign policy that serves well to the economic and
social development of the Caspian region. I must emphasize that the
positive reforms set by the government of President Ilham Aliyev should
serve as a perfect example and success story to those underdeveloped
countries that aspire to reach high levels of economic development and
eradicate poverty. My deep gratitude and appreciation goes to Mr. Aslan
Aslanov, the Director General of the Azerbaijan State Telegraph Agency
(AzerTAc). This information agency has always played an important
role towards the promotion of history, culture and government reforms
of Azerbaijan. Quite frankly, my introduction to the Republic of
Azerbaijan was through the employees and the website of AzerTAc.

– Azerbaijan is a fast developing economy. Although oil and gas is a
driving force, it’s also developing its non-oil sector. What is your
outlook for Azerbaijan in a decade? What areas of economy, in your
opinion, can or should develop and make it a regional hub?

-In 2006-2008, Azerbaijan was the fastest growing economy in the
world. Contemporary architecture and cutting edge urban development
nationwide will increase the development of tourism sector. Ancient and
archeological sites, religious centers that are used for pilgrimages
as well as beautiful landscape give Azerbaijan unparalleled advantages
in order to further develop its tourism industry.

Research in Information Technology, satellite design and launching
technology, defense industry, renewable energy projects and sustainable
public works projects will continue to make Azerbaijan a leading nation
towards the socio-economic development in the Caucasus region. In the
next three years Azerbaijan is expected to inaugurate public works
such as paved roads in every district and village nationwide. High
quality food industry will also take a major focus in the next years.

– What should be done to enhance educational and cultural exchange
between Azerbaijan and the United States?

-Washington is lagging behind towards fostering the university to
university partnerships with Baku. In order to better understand
the culture and society of Azerbaijan it is essential that
universities establish centers of Azerbaijani Studies across the
United States, just like we have well established academic centers
that focus on Latin America and the Caribbean. The economic and
attractive government reforms of Azerbaijan have received less to
none international attention. We live in a multi-polar world and as
result our universities must adapt to these new geopolitical trends
and educate their students no only about the Americas but also about
highly important countries such as Azerbaijan. The United States
must adopt and encourage a National Policy of International Branch
Campuses for its public and private universities in Azerbaijan.

Currently the United States has 76 Branch Campuses and their majority
is located in the United Arab Emirates.

In the same vein, the implementation of Azerbaijani language and
history programs in the US Universities, hosting guest professors from
Baku is greatly needed in the US Universities. It is imperative for
America’s young generations to understand that Azerbaijan has more
than one million refugees and internally displaced people (IDP),
including 250,000 Azerbaijanis who were expelled from Armenia,
700,000 Azerbaijanis who were expelled from Nagorno-Karabakh and seven
districts of Azerbaijan, and refugees from wars in other countries.

Currently Azerbaijan has been doing its best to improve the living
standards of these people. Every year the administration of Azerbaijan
resettles more than 20,000 IDPs, they have built 82 settlements and
40,000 families have been provided with flats or houses. The main
stream media in the US never pays attention to the Caucasus and
establishing various centers of Azerbaijani Studies in our country
would greatly help foster bilateral cultural ties.

– Finally, U.S. and Azerbaijan are recognized as allies. How should
Washington and Baku develop their ties to draw both nations’ closer?

-In 1992, the United States established its diplomatic relations with
Azerbaijan, following its independence from the Soviet Union. Over
the years Washington, has been committed to strengthening democracy
and formation of an open market economy in Azerbaijan. The United
States and Azerbaijan have promoted regional security, enhanced energy
security, socio-economic development and strengthen political reforms.

However, it is unfortunate that Secretary John Kerry has not yet
conducted his first official visit as Secretary of State in Baku even
though U.S. Ambassador Richard Morningstar announced his possible
trip since March 19, 2014. Although Hillary Clinton paid an official
visit to Baku in June 2012, it is important that Washington continues
to have high level visits to Baku. Moreover, the United States must
take a leadership role towards solving the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict
to ensure full integrity and bring peace on the sovereign territory
of Azerbaijan.

Nagorno-Karabakh, a region of Azerbaijan occupied by Armenian forces
since the end of the war in 1994 and has been suffering from protracted
warfare or sporadic armed clashes since that time.

The United States government must condemn the crimes against humanity
such as Khojaly Massacre and honor its victims with a resolution in
the U.S. Congress. The U.S. Department of State must call upon the
community of nations to condemn the atrocities committed by the
Armenian armed forces. Security partnership and energy security
cooperation should further be enhanced between the two countries,
and commercial ties must reach new levels every year.

Yusif Babanli Special Correspondent

EU MINISTER UNDERSCORES EUROPE’S UNFAIRNESS TO TURKEY ON KOBANI ISSUE

Daily Sabah, Turkey
Oct 29 2014

Daily Sabah

PARIS — EU Minister and Chief Negotiator Volkan Bozkır believes
that Europe is being unfair to Turkey regarding the Kobani issue.

Speaking at the French National Parliament’s EU Commission during
his visit to Paris, Bozkır claimed that an image of Turkey as a
mere spectator to the incidents in Kobani has been built by some
in Europe, before bringing up the fact that millions in the region,
including 200,000 Syrian Kurds from the besieged Kobani, have found
shelter within Turkey’s borders.

Syria’s northern town of Kobani has been under siege for a month with
fierce clashes between the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS)
and Syrian Kurdish groups, such as the outlawed PKK’s Syrian wing,
the PYD, and its armed wing, the YPG, defending Kobani. U.S.-led
coalition forces have resupplied Syrian Kurdish fighters by airdrops,
Turkey, which is accused by some of not doing enough to help, has
allowed Iraqi Peshmerga forces to enter Kobani through Turkey.

“Turkey faces many accusations on the Kobani issue. The first thing
people ask me in Europe is Kobani. There is a misunderstanding,” said
Bozkır, adding that ISIS also poses a danger to Irbil and Baghdad,
not just Kobani.

The EU minister said that Turkey will only take part in military
action in the region if the coalition members are prepared to agree to
certain demands, but added that none of the members have any intention
of giving in to Turkey’s demands.

“I suggest that Europe sends experts to train Kurdish groups [trained
and equipped in Turkey to defend Kobani] instead of accusing Turkey,”
said Bozkır.

Speaking over the bilateral relations between Turkey and France,
the EU minister touched upon France’s role in Turkey’s EU accession
period and thanked French President Francois Hollande for his support
in the opening of the 22nd chapter.

Reminding that there are four more chapters blocked by France,
Bozkır said he believed France does not want to continue its stance
and could open chapters in the future.

Responding to journalists’ questions after his speech, Bozkır touched
on the 1915 Armenian incidents and said that the decision over the
1915 incidents should not be made by politicians, but a research
commission to be established by historians and academics.

PARIS MEETING, POSITIVE MOVE IN RESOLVING NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT

AzerNews, Azerbaijan
Oct 28 2014

28 October 2014, 16:54 (GMT+04:00)
By Sara Rajabova

The meeting of Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents in Paris to settle
the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict can be considered
as a positive move.

Fikrat Sadikhov, a political scientist and professor of Western
University, made the remark in an interview with Trend news agency
commenting on the recent meeting of Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev
and Armenian President Serzh Sargsan.

“In any case, the meeting was a positive development. It demonstrated
the effectiveness of Azerbaijani diplomacy and its desire to resolve
this long-lasting conflict peacefully,” Sadikhov said.

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian President Serzh
Sargsyan held a meeting on October 27 with participation of the
OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen to discuss the settlement process of
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The two presidents held a face to face
meeting, which followed by another joint meeting with the OSCE Minsk
Group co-chairs.

Afterwards, a joint meeting of President Hollande, President Aliyev,
and President Sargsyan with the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen was held.

“As for the meeting of the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia,
I think that those pragmatically assessing and making predictions
did not expect any radical changes at this meeting. The problem is
too complex and it was impossible to bring together a variety of
geopolitical interests in one meeting,” Sadikhov said.

Sadikhov noted that the agreement reached between the two sides on
the exchange of information on missing persons, hostages and prisoners
of war was a progress by itself- though little.

He noted that the French president has expressed hope to begin works
on a comprehensive peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia.

Sadikhov went on to say that the revealed details of the Paris meeting
showed that it was a positive development.

“The meeting created an opportunity for Azerbaijan to express its
stance on the conflict, to pass through the most painful points of
conflict and to recall the occupation of Azerbaijani territories. And
in this aspect, I think, in general, the meeting can be considered
as a successful step towards the next stage of search for further
ways to resolve the issue,” Sadikhov said.

The precarious cease-fire between Azerbaijan and Armenia was reached
after a lengthy war that displaced over a million Azerbaijanis and
has been in place between the two South Caucasus countries since 1994.

Since the hostilities, Armenian armed forces have occupied over
20 percent of Azerbaijan’s internationally recognized territory,
including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and seven surrounding districts.

The UN Security Council has adopted four resolutions on Armenia’s
withdrawal from the Azerbaijani territory, but they have not been
enforced to this day.

THE ‘ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM’: AZERBAIJAN’S WAR AND TURKEY

Journal of Turkish Weekly
Oct 28 2014

By Handan Kazanci
AA

In the final part of our reports from Armenia, Anadolu Agency examines
the role of the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict in stalling normalization
between Yerevan and Ankara.

As the bitter Armenia and Azerbaijan conflict casts its shadow over
stalled relations between Ankara and Yerevan, one American-Armenian
expert tells Anadolu Agency that Baku needs to be part of
Turkish-Armenian normalization.

Richard Giragosian, director of the Yerevan-based Regional Studies
Center, says that Turkey and Armenia should correct “the mistakes of
the past by normalizing relations more gradually so that Azerbaijan
would be pressured to accept.”

The conflict between Turkey’s two eastern neighbors over the
disputed Nagorno-Karabakh territory has dragged on for decades. The
often-violent conflict eventually saw Turkey close its border with
Armenia in 1993.

Ankara has maintained relations with Azerbaijan ever since. Indeed,
successive Turkish leaders have been at pains to emphasize the close
cultural links between the two countries.

Turks and Azerbaijanis are mostly Muslim, speak a closely related
language and have a common Turkic identity, all of which have —
at times — put them at odds with their Armenian neighbors.

This closeness was articulated by the late Azerbaijani president
Heydar Aliyev who described the relationship with Turkey as “one
nation, two states.”

An attempt was made to implement a protocol agreement between Ankara
and Yerevan in October 2009 in Zurich, but this eventually failed. The
deal would have begun moves to open the border between Turkey and
Armenia and establish official relations.

Giragosian, whose grandfather was born in Turkey’s eastern province
of Elazig, believes that “Turkey could contact with Azerbaijan as
negotiations happen, not after.”

Speaking to a group of Turkish and Armenian journalists who were
in Yerevan in October, Giragosian said: “The Armenian/Turkish
normalization process is one of the few issues where I support the
Armenian government.”

The need for normalization is partly found in the enduring disagreement
between Turkey and Armenia over WWI-era accusations and counter-claims.

Events in 1915 — which the Armenian diaspora and government describe
as ‘genocide’ — have severely damaged relations between the neighbors.

Turkey strongly rejects the Armenian allegation and says Armenians died
in intercommunal fighting and starvation during their relocation in
1915. Turkey says many Turks also lost their lives in attacks carried
out by Armenian gangs in Anatolia.

Giragosian is optimistic about normalization; “It was never supposed
to be easy,” he says, believing that the real obstacle to normalization
is not in Ankara or Yerevan but in Baku.

“Azerbaijan is the number-one foreign investor in Turkey. And there
was one important mistake from the [2009] protocol process; it was
Turkey’s arrogance in underestimating the Azerbaijani reaction and
overestimating its ability to persuade Baku,” he says.

Nevertheless, Turkey and Azerbaijan have still developed strong
cooperation in the energy and transport sectors. The Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan
Crude Oil Pipeline, Baku-Tbilisi Erzurum Natural Gas Pipeline and
Baku-Tbilisi-Kars Railway Project are only some of the regional
enterprises where the two countries have worked together.

“My vision of normalization is an open border, diplomatic relations as
the first step to reconciliation and that’s when the genocide comes
up. What this also means is a way to deal with our shared history,”
Giragosian says.

Giragosian says that there is a much more open space within Turkey
on normalizing Turkey and Armenian relations, saying that he has
been in Turkey for the past three years for 1915 commemorations with
Turkish colleagues.

He recalls Turkey’s then-prime minister – now president – Recep
Tayyip Erdogan’s April statement which offered condolences over the
Armenian deaths.

“This was an important and symbolic statement and I welcomed it,”
Giragosian says.

“It reached those in the audience of [Turkey’s ruling] AKP supporters
that previously were not comfortable with talking about the issue.

“The statement by Erdogan now made it possible to engage a new level
of Turkish society, the hardcore of pro-Erdogan supporters,” he says.

He says that although Armenia and Turkey have no official diplomatic
relations, Turkey’s last three foreign ministers have visited Yerevan.

Despite the closed border and frosty diplomatic tensions, trade –
albeit small-scale – between Turkey and Armenia stubbornly refuses
to disappear.

Economist and executive director of the Yerevan-based Caucasus Research
Center, Heghine Manasyan, says that Turkey was the sixth major partner
in terms of imports for Armenia after the E.U.

countries, Russia and Georgia.

Manasyan also claims that there are a lot of Armenians traveling to
Turkey and sending goods by plane or trucks back across the border
to sell.

In 2008 Turkey had no exports to Armenia, according to Turkstat,
Turkey’s statistics institution. This has since increased, if only
marginally.

In 2009, the year the Zurich protocols were signed, exports were
$2,000 but in 2012 they reached a high point of $241,000, according
to Turkstat.

Speaking on Armenia’s becoming part of a Russia-led customs union –
an alternative to the E.U. for Moscow and former Soviet countries –
Manasyan says: “Most of the population here is surprised that we
turned from the E.U. to Russia. For many experts it is the past,
it is not the future.”

“It will be easier for Armenian businesses to sell goods or import
things from these countries because of the common language – Russian –
and a common culture,” she says.

Manasyan adds that the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union requires
fewer qualifications than E.U. regulations.

Nevertheless, for reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey, Azerbaijan
remains the elephant in the corner of the room and it seems that Baku
will continue to shape the Turkish-Armenian normalization process in
the future.

CRIMEA-ARMENIA FLIGHT HANGS IN THE AIR

EurasiaNet.org
Oct 28 2014

October 28, 2014 – 7:51am, by Giorgi Lomsadze

An airline out of the rambunctious Russian republic of Chechnya
was planning to launch flights from Crimea to Armenia next month,
but Yerevan, ever image-conscious, now seems hesitant to be the
only direct, regular international destination for trips from the
Russian-annexed peninsula.

Armenia’s aviation regulators late last week refused to authorize
flights run by Grozny Avia between the Crimean capital of Simferopol
to Yerevan.

International airlines are avoiding Russian-occupied skies over
Crimea. Russia’s Aeroflot operates direct flights to Crimea from
Moscow, with most flights for this month largely sold out.

Armenia’s Civil Aviation Agency cited unspecified errors in Grozny
Avia’s application as the reason for its refusal to allow the flights,
RFE/RL reported. The refusal is not conclusive and Grozny Avia can
technically reapply, but some believe that Armenia is trying to avoid
further miffing Ukraine, already upset over Yerevan’s backing the
right to self-determination of the Crimean people.

The former head of the Civil Aviation Agency, Shagen Petrosian, said
that allowing such flights would also significantly damage Armenia’s
reputation and could possibly lead to international sanctions,
epress.am reported.

On the other hand, Armenia risks also to anger its big brother, Russia,
by refusing access to this flight. Yerevan just recently finalized a
2015 kickoff-date for its long-awaited membership in the Russian-led
Eurasian Economic Union.

Perhaps counting on Moscow to put pressure on Yerevan, Grozny Avia
continues to sell tickets from Simferopol to Yerevan on its website.

ARMENIA TO FORM CYBER FORCES

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Oct 28 2014

28 October 2014 – 11:39am

The Armenian Defense Ministry plans to create cyber forces using world
experience. The Defense Ministry, the Yerevan Factory of Mathematical
Machines and the Incubator of Enterprises Fund will form a training
center for young people below conscription age. The center will train
specialists for information security, News.am reports.

People trained within the framework of the program will be
highly-skilled IT specialists who will join the cyber forces.

ARMENIANS OF CRIMEA WANT AUTONOMY

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Oct 27 2014

27 October 2014 – 7:18pm

The national congress of the Crimean Armenian Society (CAS) the decided
to create a regional national and cultural autonomy in the Crimea.

“Regional ethnic and cultural autonomy according to acts of the
Russian Federation will be registered on December 13 in the Ministry of
Justice,” the head of the CAS, Vagarshak Melkonyan, told RIA Novosti.

Melkonyan said that as a part of the new association there will
be 17 local national and cultural autonomies. Such a structure,
Melkonyan believes, will allow Armenians to apply for financing from
the republican and state budget for programs preserving their culture,
national language, uniqueness and historical heritage.

RIPPLE EFFECT: UKRAINE AND THE SOUTH CAUCASUS

The Moscow Times
Oct 27 2014

By Maxim Suchkov

As the Ukraine crisis continues, at least three obvious and critical
facts can be ascertained. The crisis has proven the existing European
security system to be ineffective; has severely damaged relations
between Russia and the West and left diplomacy in a gridlock; and made
many international agreements obsolete, particularly the Belavezha
Accords, which established the Commonwealth of Independent States
after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Echoes of these consequences
will be long felt across Eurasia.

Certain shockwaves from the crisis in Ukraine have already reached
the South Caucasus, one of the regions most susceptible to changing
dynamics between Russia and the West.

First, a great deal of skepticism about the capability of European
institutions to resolve conflicts in the post-Soviet space now prevails
among South Caucasus elites. Ironically, this understanding serves
to prevent violence in the region to a certain extent: Responsible
stakeholders in Tbilisi, Yerevan and Baku have realized that if
there should be serious warfare in the region, there will be no
international institutions powerful enough to stop it, or any great
European powers ready for a head-on military collision to defend
their clients’ interests.

At the same time, the South Caucasus states have found themselves
in an unenviable position: The Ukrainian crisis has shown that
deciding between European and Eurasian integration comes at a high
price, but that indecision is an even worse path. Thus the startling
developments in Ukraine have triggered two processes: On the one hand,
they have accelerated Georgia and Moldova’s efforts to integrate into
Euro-Atlantic institutions. On the other hand, the Ukraine crisis has
pushed Armenia to seek full membership in the Russian-led Eurasian
Union and encouraged Georgia’s breakaway regions of Abkhazia and
South Ossetia to forge closer ties with Russia.

The domestic support for Eurasian integration in Armenia, South Ossetia
and Abkhazia seems to have been spurred by a resurgence of national
identity. All three have a common cause: historical reunification,
an idea that has re-energized by the “Crimea precedent.”

Armenian supporters of Eurasian integration have projected
“re-incorporation of Crimea into Russia” onto the disputed territory
of Nagorno-Karabakh, suggesting it is a precedent for reunification of
Armenia’s historical lands. Supporters of integration in South Ossetia
might use the same logic to reincorporate their territory into Russia.

When power politics are at play, smaller states often scramble to side
with great powers. But those who expect the tit-for-tat game between
Russia and the West to continue have opted to maneuver between the
two. Azerbaijan has chosen this path, floating between the East and
West in its stance toward the crisis in Ukraine, and reaffirming its
commitment to multivector diplomacy. Yet the time may come for Baku
to make hard choices as well.

Finally, the crisis in Ukraine has had a remarkable impact on the
South Caucasus. Although it may not yet be fully recognized, the
transformed realities of Eurasian geopolitics have surely revived
the idea that there are distinct geopolitical zones — fodder for
political and academic hard-liners who love to ponder what this might
mean for the Caucasus.

They say that when the going gets tough, the tough get going. Russia
may look like it has gone through the tough part of the Ukraine crisis,
but whatever further moves it makes in this diplomatic chess game, it
should understand the impact on its policy in Eurasia. The consequences
are already looming on the horizon.

Maxim A. Suchkov, Ph.D., a former Fulbright visiting fellow at
Georgetown University (2010-11), is currently a fellow at the Institute
for Strategic Studies (Pyatigorsk).