Yerevan counts trees
news.am
February 12, 2012 | 02:24
YEREVAN. – A commission is established under Yerevan City Mayor Taron
Margaryan’s assignment organizing the registration of trees in the
capital, head of the city hall PR department Arthur Gevorgyan told
Armenian News-NEWS.am.
Yerevan will have the map of green zones in the frameworks of the
works. Besides, Grigoryan said that construction works will not be
conducted in those green zones.
From: Baghdasarian
REVUE DE PRESSE
Loi pénalisant la négation du génocide arménien : le débat oppose
(aussi) les juristes
`Doit-on pénaliser la négation des génocides ?` À l’heure où le
Conseil constitutionnel examine la loi réprimant la négation du
génocide arménien, un débat organisé par l’Institut de droit pénal du
barreau de Paris le 6 février 2012 s’est penché sur l’opportunité
d’une telle loi qui, si elle est validée par les Sages, punira d’un an
de prison et de 45 000 euros d’amende le fait de contester ou de
minimiser de façon outrancière les crimes de génocide reconnus par la
loi française et notamment celle votée en 2001 reconnaissant
l’existence d’un génocide des Arméniens entre 1915 et 1917. 77
sénateurs et 65 députés ont déposé le 31 janvier un recours devant le
Conseil constitutionnel. Ils font valoir que le texte serait contraire
à la liberté d’expression et mettent en cause la légitimité du
Parlement à légiférer sur l’histoire.
La vérité du jugement `En dehors de sa fonction thérapeutique
d’apaiser les blessures morales des descendants des victimes, je pense
que cette loi n’apportera que des déboires, y compris à la communauté
arménienne elle-même`, assure Robert Badinter. Pour l’ancien garde des
Sceaux qui a présidé le Conseil constitutionnel pendant neuf ans, le
Parlement n’a pas compétence pour dire l’histoire à l’instar d’une
juridiction internationalement reconnue. Ce réquisitoire contre les
lois mémorielles ne date pas d’hier, il s’est largement exprimé par la
voix de l’association Liberté pour l’histoire. `La France avait choisi
l’option de ne reconnaître que les crimes contre l’humanité, génocides
et crimes de guerre déclarés tels par une juridiction internationale`,
souligne l’historien Pierre Nora. Ainsi, le génocide juif a été jugé
par le tribunal de Nuremberg, lui-même issu des Accords de Londres de
1944 signés par la France. Les crimes contre l’humanité sont également
jugés par des juridictions pénales internationales pour
l’ex-Yougoslavie et le Rwanda. `Or rien de tel n’existe pour le
génocide arménien de 1915 commis avant que conscience soit prise par
la communauté internationale de l’impératif moral que les bourreaux de
l’humanité ne demeurent pas impunis. Mais cette mission relève des
juridictions internationales et en premier lieu de la Cour pénale
internationale`, affirme Robert Badinter.
Loi avant-gardiste `Faux argument ! riposte Sévag Torossian, avocat et
écrivain. Il ne faut pas confondre vérité et autorité de la chose
jugée d’un tribunal. Et d’expliquer que la France vient de voter un
texte avant-gardiste conforme à la philosophie de la Convention de
1948 sur la prévention des crimes contre l’humanité. `La loi Gayssot
et la loi Boyer n’ont pas du tout le même sens, explique-t-il. La
première est un texte post-reconnaissance (l’Allemagne a reconnu la
Shoah) lié à un mal irrationnel, l’antisémitisme. La seconde est un
texte pré-reconnaissance d’un négationnisme d’État (la Turquie n’a pas
reconnu le génocide arménien), qui constitue un rempart contre la
propagande d’un État étranger sur le territoire national. Elle nous
demande de protéger le territoire français des agressions extérieures,
ce dont, en soixante ans de paix apparente, nous avons oublié
l’importance`.
Baliser la liberté de pensée La liberté d’expression autorise-t-elle
pour autant à inscrire dans une loi la négation d’un génocide, quel
qu’il soit ? `Le verbe peut-il être le prolongement d’un crime ?`
interroge l’ancien vice-btonnier Jean-Yves Le Borgne. Non, assure le
célèbre pénaliste Henri Leclerc. `Le délit de blasphème a été supprimé
par les articles 10 et 11 de la Déclaration des droits de l’homme, il
n’y a donc plus de vérité officielle, souligne-t-il. Or transformer
une vérité de raison en vérité officielle, c’est affaiblir la vérité`,
une vérité d’autant plus cruelle qu’elle est niée par un État, insiste
Me Leclerc. `Cela conduit à faire partager au peuple turc le poids de
ce mensonge, lui qui ne porte aucune responsabilité à l’égard du
génocide`, déplore l’avocat.
Mais à l’inverse, la loi n’a-t-elle pas valeur de rempart contre les
abus de langage et les propos qui, selon l’expression de plusieurs
historiens, tendent à nier la mémoire du crime ? `Sans une loi qui
consacre l’évidence historique, la haine et l’aveuglement continueront
d’inspirer aux négationnistes leur volonté de causer de la douleur aux
victimes, a fortiori de celles qui n’ont pas bénéficié de la justice
des hommes et de leurs descendants`, augure l’ancien btonnier
Christian Charrière-Bournazel. Pour preuve, `les délits posés par la
loi de 1972 contre les diffamations, injures et discriminations
raciales, ou même celui d’apologie de crime contre l’humanité n’ont
pas permis de poursuivre utilement la diffusion publique des thèses
révisionnistes notamment soutenues par le professeur Faurisson`,
souligne Basile Ader. Ce qui a conduit le législateur à incriminer la
diffusion des thèses révisionnistes en tant que telles, par
l’adoption, le 13 juillet 1990, de la loi Gayssot, qui vise toute
forme de `contestation` publique liée aux crimes contre l’humanité
commis durant la Seconde Guerre mondiale`. C’est en effet sur le
fondement du délit de contestation de crimes contre l’humanité que
Roger Garaudy a pu être condamné à plusieurs reprises pour avoir
notamment minoré le nombre de victimes et contesté la solution finale.
Enfin, note Me Vincent Nioré, `depuis la loi Gayssot, aucun historien
n’a été inquiété pour ses propos négationnistes`. D’où l’intérêt,
selon lui, de légiférer pour éviter de `réhabiliter les criminels`.
Par Laurence Neuer
dimanche 12 février 2012,
Stéphane ©armenews.com
From: Baghdasarian
HAUT KARABAGH
La chasse aux loups est l’une des priorités du gouvernement du Haut Karabagh
Le gouvernement de la République du Haut Karabagh va prendre des
mesures importantes en 2012 pour lutter contre la présence des loups
qui menacent nombre de localités du territoire. Stepanakert a alloué
un budget de 18 millions de drams pour cette chasse aux loups. Lors de
la dernière réunion gouvernementale du 8 février, il fut décidé de
centrer une grande partie de cette lutte à Stepanakert où dans les
quartiers aux périphéries de la capitale, des loups et chiens-loups
sont régulièrement signalés. Face aux écologistes et protecteurs de la
nature, le Premier ministre Ara Haroutiounian a demandé de considérer
Stepanakert dans la zone de lutte contre les loups.
Krikor Amirzayan
dimanche 12 février 2012,
Krikor Amirzayan ©armenews.com
From: Baghdasarian
Karen Nazaryan: Azerbaijan uses the membership in the UN SC to spread
one-sided information
armradio.am
11.02.2012 12:27
Armenia’s Permanent Representative at the UN Karen Nazaryan circulated
a letter at the UN Security Council, in which he expressed regret that
Azerbaijan – a newly elected non-permanent member of the Security
Council, uses this opportunity to disseminate one-sided information
about the Karabakh conflict, which contradicts the core of the
conflict and the spirit of negotiations within the framework of the
OSCE Minsk Group.
He called on Azerbaijan to respect the activity of the Security
Council and refrain from making provocative steps and statements. The
letter was circulated in response to the statement of the Azerbaijani
representative following the briefing of the OSCE
Chairperson-in-Office, Foreign Minister of Ireland Eamon Gilmore, who
welcomed the OSCE Minsk Group efforts towards settlement of the
Karabakh conflict.
`The statement of Azerbaijan is in stark contrast with the spirit of
the Joint Declaration of the Presidents of Armenia, Russia and
Azerbaijan made just last month in Sochi, underlining the readiness of
the parties to speed up agreement on the Basic Principles offered by
the mediators.
What is the sense of the Azerbaijani attempt to open discussions on
the Nagorno-Karabakh issue in the Security Council or to change the
terminology accepted by OSCE and used for a long time in the documents
and statements of the OSCE? Using correct terminology to address the
root causes of the conflict is one thing, but using terminology to
change facts and distort the reality is a completely different
matter,’ Karen Nazaryan wrote in the letter.
`Unfortunately, such behavior of Azerbaijan confirms that the only
guiding line of this country was and remains the use of this
distinguished tribune to distribute false facts, to misinform and
misrepresent the process of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement.
Despite its pledge before the UN Security Council `to the maintenance
of international peace’, Azerbaijan is continuously threatening to use
force against Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia along with unprovoked daily
war-mongering by its leadership and is dramatically increasing its
military budget, is continuing ceasefire violations on the line of
contact between Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan, systematically is
employing acts of vandalism towards the Armenian historical and
cultural heritage and this list goes on.
In response to the calls of the last two years by the UN
Secretary-General, the OSCE and the Minsk Group Co-Chairs, Armenia and
Nagorno-Karabakh responded positively to the proposals of withdrawing
the snipers from the line of contact, to the consolidation of the
ceasefire, to the creation of a mechanism for investigating incidents
along the line of contact. However, Azerbaijan continues to reject the
proposals of withdrawal of snipers and consolidation of ceasefire and
continues to hinder the creation of investigation mechanism.
After the Joint Statements on the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict by the
Presidents of Russia, the USA and France at the G8 Summits in L’Aquila
(2009), Muskoka (2010) and Deauville (2011) Armenia welcomed them and
stated that we are ready to move forward on the basis of the
principles and elements made in those statements. This proves that the
approaches of the international community are in line with the
approaches of Armenia.
Why does not the Permanent Representative of Azerbaijan recall those
statements in his presentation? Simply because Azerbaijan refuses to
accept them.
Perhaps it behooves Azerbaijan, in its newly elected role in the
Security Council, to respect the work of that body and its members by
refraining from provocative actions and statement,’ the letter reads.
From: Baghdasarian
Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey
Feb 11 2012
Democracy of Turkey crucial asset: Ex-US envoy
Barçın Yinanç
ISTANBUL – Hürriyet Daily News
Turkey has strategic importance because it is a secular democracy with
a majority Muslim population, says a former member of the US
administration, adding that any regression in democracy would end
Ankara’s strategic importance. The US is also paying attention to the
plight of arrested Turkish journalists, Matt Bryza adds
The cornerstone of what makes Turkey so important to the United States
strategically is that it remains a secular democracy with a Muslim
majority population, said a former US diplomat.
The Turkish-US strategic partnership would become unsustainable if
there were no sustained progress on democracy, said Matt Bryza, a
career diplomat who was the U.S. ambassador to Baku until recently.
Following the failure of the Senate to endorse his nomination due to
pressure from the Armenian lobby, he left Baku last month to settle in
Istanbul. `Washington should focus on a breakthrough in the
Nagorno-Karabakh [NK] conflict, which will be followed by
Turkey-Armenia reconciliation as a consequence,’ he said in his first
interview since leaving the U.S. foreign service.
Q: Does the failure of the Senate to endorse your nomination to Baku
tell us that the Armenian issue will always hijack the United States’
ties with Ankara and Baku?
A: Most definitely not. Look what President [Barack] Obama did last
year; he used his constitutional powers to go around that blockage. He
understood the strategic interest of Azerbaijan and pressed ahead.
This time, his decision may be based on factors that go beyond factors
related to Baku. Obviously we are in an electoral year.
Q: What are we to expect this year in Washington on April 24 [the day
Armenians commemorate the `genocide’]?
A: I was deeply involved with this issue every single year as I was in
[President George W.] Bush’s staff. We can expect every year that
there will be a lot of tension surrounding this issue, especially as
2015 comes close and especially in an election year. The [Armenian]
organization that blocked me will keep bringing up this issue forever.
But it’s not up to governments but to people to make their own
determination on how to characterize it. The comfortable prediction
would be to say that the current trend will continue.
Q: What is Turkey to expect as 2015 approaches?
A: [Centennial] anniversaries are a milestone. But Turkey has the
ability to influence that debate in a significant way. It can have a
genuine open discussion with credible participants from all elements
of Turkish society to examine the historical records. The radicals
that blocked me hate that, they don’t want to have an open debate; an
open dialogue is their enemy.
Also, I think it’s a huge mistake to explicitly say there is no
connection at all between Turkish-Armenian normalization and a
settlement to the NK problem. I always believed that the two issues
will help each other; as there is progress on the Turkish-Armenian
front, that will help create progress on NK and progress on NK will
help normalize relations between Turkey and Armenia. But if we
artificially say that there is no such relationship, we end up dooming
the prospect for a settlement in NK because we make it impossible for
Armenian leaders to compromise because they are given a huge benefit
[opening the border with Turkey] without making any compromise. So we
need to manage the two processes together at the same time. We saw
that if Azerbaijan feels Turkey is not supporting it with regard to
Armenia, Azerbaijani politicians have a way to make normalization with
Armenia impossible.
Q: Do you believe there has been an evolution in Turkey’s approach to
the Armenian `genocide?’
A: There has been a progression. [There is more acceptance of] an open
discussion of what happened. I think the Hrant Dink murder was a huge
awakening for millions of Turks. It’s not just the government, it’s
society that has moved forward to consider that terrible killings were
committed by Ottoman troops. But what has not changed at all for
legitimate reasons is the firm Turkish view that this should not be
recognized politically as genocide; it’s not the business of any
politician in any country to characterize these events as genocide or
not as genocide. It has to be up to societies, not to others, to have
a decision taken based on a political calendar. To me that’s dishonest
[otherwise].
Q: How Turkey should tackle the Armenian lobby’s efforts?
A: Truth is on everyone side, especially on Turkey’s side. The debate
about this issue is really one-sided right now. Anybody who voices a
different view is attacked as a genocide-denier, which immediately
means you are against human rights. If you believe there was a
genocide committed, you can equally argue looking from a narrow
definition of the word that genocide was committed to many others,
against Turks or Muslims, in eastern Anatolia. Let’s have a dialogue
of the multiple atrocities that [were committed against] many groups.
Let’s talk about it all. Let’s be fair and not forget the suffering of
others.
Q: What has failed in Turkish-Armenian reconciliation? Is it because
the NK dimension was neglected in the protocols?
A: The Turkish leadership realized that by opening the border with
Armenia totally outside the context of NK, Turkey was moving in a new
direction because Turkey closed the border in the context of the NK
conflict. Azerbaijanis will never forget that. Azerbaijanis have
significant political influence in Turkey.
In Azerbaijan there is no country that is as loved as Turkey. It is
overwhelmingly the most popular country in Azerbaijan. It was always
painful for me to see [the U.S.’] approval rating in the 20s and 30s
while Turkey was well into the 90s. So if anybody takes a step that
Azerbaijan is extremely uncomfortable with, that step will never
succeed in Turkish politics. It’s impossible.
Q: What’s the way to move forward based on past experience? It seems
like it’s a case of putting the cart before the horse.
A: That’s the point. Keep the horse in front of the cart. Sequencing
matters but the sequencing was out of order. The most important issue
for both Yerevan and Baku is NK, not reconciliation. For Armenia it is
much more important to eliminate the risk of war and have a fair and
sustainable settlement in NK than have direct trading relations with
Turkey. What I advocated is to focus on getting that breakthrough on
NK. If you do that, Turkish-Armenian reconciliation comes as a
consequence.
Q: What will your advice be to Washington on the
Armenia-Azerbaijan-Turkey triangle?
A: As I said to the secretary of state, focus on getting a
breakthrough on NK, it’s achievable, the breakthrough would not be on
the final peace agreement but on the framework agreement for the peace
agreement. Once you work hard to get the framework agreement, make
clear you will do everything possible to make sure the framework
becomes a final peace agreement. And then with that process moving
forward, go back to Turkey-Armenia negotiations.
Q: As 2015 approaches, won’t it be difficult to convince Armenia?
A: I think Armenia will come to understand that if our president and
state secretary are personally involved, and if they make clear that
the drafting of the agreement will be truly trilateral ` and not only
be driven by one side, the Russian side, but by the equal
participation of the two other countries, the U.S. and France ` I
think there will be a chance for a breakthrough. What is on the table
is fair and reasonable.
There has been huge progress. The sides are extremely close to a
breakthrough. There are a couple of core, key details that can only be
agreed upon if the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan make a very
difficult and risky political decision. They would not do that until
they feel they receive political support from the U.S. and France.
Q: Will the U.S. step in?
A: Based on my conversation with Clinton, I believe the willingness is
there. But it is a busy time in foreign policy. I can’t predict
whether our top-level leaders will sustain this interest but I know
it’s there now. I just had conversations in Washington two weeks ago.
Q: Where do you think Turkey has come in fulfilling its aspirations on
energy policies?
A: Turkey has succeeded in becoming a hub. It has gas coming from
Iraq, Azerbaijan and Russia [and will] eventually [get it] from
northern Iraq. Previously, Turkey’s aspiration was to be a link for
its strategic brothers in Azerbaijan and Central Asia with Europe. It
can be both. A hub is a link. The question is for Turkey to decide how
much it wants to play a strategic role as a link or how much it wants
to be at the centerpiece. My hope is that Turkey will think first and
foremost about the importance to Europe ¦ to have a diversified flow
of gas from Central Asia and think of its partners that look to Turkey
as their strategic link to Europe ¦ If Turkey is seen as overplaying
its hand trying to extract too much revenue out of its geographic
position, then it risks losing its status with Europe and Azerbaijan
and other countries. But if it finds the right balance, it will
elevate its strategic position. Make your primary objective be that of
connecting Caspian gas to Europe even as you use the rest of your
position to [attain] the economic benefits of being a hub. Be a
statesman rather than a salesman.
Q: How do you see the evolution of Turkish-U.S. ties?
A: It was shocking to me to see in the 2000s the low approval ratings.
It was the lowest on the globe except for Palestine. It was
mind-boggling because we have such deep ties. Look at me, I am married
to a Turkish woman. [But now] something has changed. It has to do with
Turkey’s own sense of where it stands in the world. It wants to be
recognized as a global player and it is [beginning] to be recognized
as such, and I hope that is what is going to improve Turkey’s
relations with the U.S. Relations are much better now as Turkey
becomes more confident, it will be more confident in its ties with the
U.S. Turkey for years was punching under its weight. It was not
punching hard enough for its weight class. It should punch harder now.
Q: How do you see the level of relations now?
A: They’re very good, especially because of Syria. Regardless of the
political party in government, Turkey can serve as an inspiration to
all those people in all those lands where Ottoman reforms took hold
whether in Damascus or Cairo. [It can become] a modernizing state
providing the same political and economic freedoms that Turks have
achieved to those who seek them in Arab countries. Turkey’s experience
is unique but can inspire and Turkey has fully realized that potential
and is using this card extremely skillfully in the Middle East.
Turkey and the U.S. have a partnership that is equal and focused on
shared strategic interests.
We don’t have identical interests but have many common ones. The
cornerstone of what makes Turkey so important to the U.S.
strategically is that it remains a secular democracy with a Muslim
majority population and a legacy of 170 years of modernizing reforms
that helped to modernize key parts of the Middle East.
Q: The U.S. is criticized for underestimating the democratic deficit in Turkey.
A: If you are in foreign policy-making, your job is to promote
stability in the Middle East. Turkey in this case has proven to be a
great partner. That sort of partnership is unsustainable if there is
no sustained progress on democracy. Turkey’s strategic importance is
because it is a secular democracy with a majority Muslim population.
Were that no longer the case, then the strategic importance would go
away. It will still be relevant and important to the U.S. in working
on a set of issues, but Turkey itself is such a vital spot on the map
¦ Like everywhere else, democracy in Turkey is a work in progress. In
Washington great attention is paid to the plight of arrested
journalists.
Who is Matt Bryza?
DAILY NEWS PHOTO, Emrah GÃ`REL
In the early stages of his career in the United States Foreign
Service, Matt Bryza participated in U.S. diplomatic missions in Poland
and Russia. He began focusing on the Caucasus, Central Asia and the
energy issue in Eurasia in the second half of the 1990s. Throughout
the 2000s he developed U.S. policies on Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, South
Caucasus and Central Asia in the National Security Council as well as
in the State Department as deputy assistant secretary of state.
In 2010 President Barack Obama nominated Bryza as ambassador to Baku.
As a result of the campaign of the Armenian National Committee of
America (ANCA), two democratic senators put a hold on his nomination,
preventing a Senate vote. Obama sent Bryza to Baku as a recess
appointment but did not push for him when he re-nominated him as the
two senators continued their blockage.
Arguments against him have included his opposition to U.S. recognition
of genocide claims, failure to speak out forcefully against
`Azerbaijani aggression’ and supposed conflicts involving his
Turkish-born American citizen wife. He recently left the Foreign
Service.
February/11/2012
From: Baghdasarian
Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Feb 11 2012
Azerbaijan might assist in reconstructing ancient appearance of Yerevan
Baku is ready to provide maps and drawings of ancient Yerevan to
recreate the historic appearance of the capital of Armenia,
administration official Fuad Akhundov told Interfax-Azerbaijan.
Earlier, the Armenian authorities informed of their intention to
restore the historic center of their capital.
“If Yerevan really wants to restore the historic character of the
city, we can provide the Armenian side with paintings and drawings,”
the chief of department of social and political department of the
presidential administration of Azerbaijan, Faud Akhundov said.
“In addition, there are pictures of famous European artists such as
Tavernier, Chardin, in particular, Russian artists depicting in detail
the Yerevani fortress of the XIX century,” he said. In addition, a
large number of drawings and plans of old Yerevan are stored in
Russian archives, Akhundov said.
“I heard about a project called “Old Yerevan,” which is talked about
in the Armenian media. But curiously enough, instead of the real
medieval center of Yerevan, which was gradually destroyed by the
authorities during the Soviet era and now in a period of independence
of Armenia, an architectural complex from the late 19th to the early
20th centuries will be reconstructed,” Akhundov mused.
According to Akhundov, it is an attempt to distort the historic image
of Yerevan.
He also recalled that, at the Palace of Sardar in the fortress of
Erivan, Alexander Griboyedov wrote his comedy “Woe from Wit” in 1827.
February 11, the day of Alexander Griboyedov “provides an occasion to
reflect on the preservation of its heritage, including the memorable
places connected with his life and work,” said Akhundov.
He also proposed to open a museum in the palace and put a memorable
plate. In order to do this, Yerevani authorities will have to restore
the palace since in 1964 is has been destroyed.
“Yerevan, claiming the name of the ancient city, has no historical
part. Those who destroyed the Erivan fortress of the XVI century,
together with all the buildings, just because it was a masterpiece of
Azerbaijani architecture are the ones to be blamed,” – said the
representative of the presidential administration of Azerbaijan.
.
From: Baghdasarian
The Times (London), UK
February 11, 2012 Saturday
Spy vs spy: the secret wars waged in new spooks’ playground: Azerbaijan
This small country is used to being a listening post, but its position
at the centre of activity in the present climate is a big cause for
concern.
by Sheera Frenkel reports from Baku
In a warm café in central Baku, Shimon sips his Persian tea and
grimaces at the unusually large snowdrifts outside. Near by is the
building that houses the Israeli Embassy – and Shimon’s unofficial
place of work. In all the years he has worked in Azerbaijan, he has
only been to the building once.
Shimon is one of dozens of Israeli Mossad agents who work in
Azerbaijan at any given time. His familiarity and comfort in the
country are obvious as he speaks about various towns and cities that
he has come to know.
“This is ground zero for intelligence work,” he said, having agreed to
talk on condition of anonymity. “Our presence here is quiet, but
substantial. We have increased our presence in the past year, and it
gets us very close to Iran. This is a wonderfully porous country.”
Nestled between Iran and Russia, Azerbaijan has long been a listening
post. But the recent tensions over Iran’s alleged nuclear ambitions
have brought the small country of Azerbaijan to the forefront and
established it as a pivotal hub for the spy wars being conducted
between Iran and the West.
According to Arastun Orujlu, a former Azeri counter-intelligence
officer and director of the East-West Research Centre, the capital,
Baku, is like Norway during the First World War. “Or like Casablanca
was during the Second World War. Yes, exactly like this – it is at the
centre of the spying.”
A few hours south of Baku is the border with Iran, which Shimon calls
“the grey zone” for intelligence operatives. “There is a great deal of
information there from people who regularly and freely travel across
the borders. It is unregulated – almost. Except for the Iranians who
are watching us watch them,” he said.
Dr Orujlu said that thousands of Iranian Revolutionary Guard members
were operating in Azerbaijan. He estimated that there were fewer
agents from Israel’s Mossad agency, but that they operated in a “more
effective” way. “The Iranians act in the open, they want everyone to
know that they are here. The Israelis are more subtle, like the
Americans. But in the end everyone knows they are here too.”
In his previous work in counter-intelligence, Dr Orujlu tried to keep
tabs on who was in the country and what they were working on. “But
there are so many of them and we are a small country.They play above
us,” he said.
Zazdusht Aleizada, who met The Times in the newspaper offices he runs,
said the spy networks were an “open secret” in Baku. “We all know that
they are here. The only secret is how much money they paid the
Azerbaijani Government in bribes.”
It was a sentiment echoed by half a dozen officials. Many point to the
Gabala mission defence complex in the north of the country, on the
Russian-Azerbaijani border, as a hub for intelligence work. It is here
that Russia, and increasingly the US and Europe, use advanced
surveillance equipment and radio networks to monitor Iran. It was
originally built during the Soviet era, but Dr Orujlu said that its
equipment was now “lent out” to other agencies.
The US also built two massive installations in Azerbaijan: one in the
south to monitor Iran, and another in the north to monitor Russia,
officials in Baku said.
“There is a natural relationship between Azerbaijan and Iran.
Azerbaijan is a gateway to Iran,” said Kamil Salimov, a law professor
at Baku University with former ties to the Government.
About 16 per cent of Iranians are native Azeris, many of whom live in
the northern part of Iran and enjoy visa-free travel between the two
countries.
But tensions between the two countries have recently been on the rise,
with the state-run Azerbaijani news service increasingly reporting the
mistreatment of Azeris in Iran.
“There is anger over perceived Iranian arrogance, and the fact that
Iran continues to support and grow ties with Armenia, with which
Azerbaijan has a territorial dispute,” said Mehman Aliyev, director of
the independent news agency Turan.
Israel has capitalised on such discontent and an open market in
Azerbaijan, forging business and military links over the past two
decades. Israel buys 30 per cent of its oil from Azerbaijan, and
recently awarded a lucrative gas-drilling contract off the coast of
southern Israel to an Azerbaijani company. Israel has also recently
set up a factory outside Baku, which makes approximately one third of
the parts for its drones. The unmanned aerial vehicles, which are used
to gather intelligence, are also being sold to Azerbaijan amid
speculation that a base is being constructed for a permanent mission
over Iran.
“The Azerbaijani military force is already completed in sync with the
Israeli and American systems,” Dr Orujlu said. “Largely because the
Americans have been using Azerbaijan for medevacs from Afghanistan for
years.” Shimon confirmed that the Israeli and Azerbaijani militaries
were “well acquainted” with one another.
But for residents of Azerbaijan who maintain ties to Iran, the
newfound closeness with Isreal is a subject of distress.A recent plot
to attack the Israeli Embassy in Baku is being attributed to two young
Azeris with ties to Iran. Their families said that their sons’ cases
were being blown out of proportion to set an example.
“Azebaijan is increasingly speaking up against Iran,” Mr Aleizada
said. He pointed to statements made by Azerbaijan’s ruling Yeni Party
this month that suggested changing the name of the country to “North
Azerbaijan”, arguing that “South Azerbaijan” was under the control of
Iran.
Tehran was worried by the statements, wondering how large a role
Azerbaijan could play if the West chose to launch a military strike on
Iran, Mr Aleizada said. “They sense that there is a growing distance
between their country and ours. They have responded with threats,
saying that they will start a war against their neighbouring states,
including us, if they felt threatened by Israel. This is dangerous for
us because we cannot stand against them alone and we are not sure how
much the West will help us.”
Few believe that Azerbaijani soil would be used to host large standing
armies or to launch an attack, but the nation’s role in intelligence
gathering could be invaluable.
Dr Orujlu said: “If an airstrike is launched against Iran, or Iran
should fire missiles from its own soil, the early detection system in
Gabala would be the first to know it. And so would Israel and their
friends in the West.”
From: Baghdasarian
ARMENIAN PARTIES BECOME OBSERVERS AT EUROPEAN PEOPLE’S PARTY
Vestnik Kavkaza
Feb 10 2012
Russia
The Republican Party of Armenia, Orinats Yerkir and Heritage have
become observers at the European People’s Party (EPP), News Armenia
reports.
Armenian Minister for Education and Science Armen Ashotyan said in
Brussels that such status is the only option for non-members of
the EPP. Becoming observers demonstrates the parties’ commitment
to European values and readiness for reforms in all spheres, the
official says.
The Republican Party and Orinats Yerkir are part of the ruling
coalition in Armenia, while Heritage is an opposition party.
From: Baghdasarian
ARMENIAN KILLED IN SYRIA
news.am
February 10, 2012 | 22:48
ALEPPO. – Due to double explosions in Aleppo, Syria, on Friday an
Armenian man died, the spokesperson of the Armenian MFA Tigran Balayan
told Armenian News-NEWS.am.
“As the Armenian Consulate in Aleppo has been informed, Armenian
Vigen Hayrapetyan died because of explosions in Aleppo,” he said.
As Armenian News-NEWS.am informed earlier, two explosions occurred
in Aleppo, Syria, on Friday because of which 28 people died and 175
got injured.
The terror acts were against the military investigation office,
but civilians also died, including children, who were playing in a
nearby park.
Later opposition Syrian Free Army took the responsibility for the
explosions.
From: Baghdasarian
COULD YOU IMAGINE WHAT RULING COALITION MPS DO SECRETLY? – ARMENIAN OPPOSITION
news.am
February 10, 2012 | 15:05
YEREVAN. – If Armenian ruling coalition member parties falsify voting
results unhidden, then one can imagine what they can do secretly,
parliamentary opposition Heritage group MP Larisa Alaverdyan said at
parliamentary briefings on Friday.
To note, several MPs from the ruling Republican Party of Armenia (RPA)
voted on Thursday in place of their Party colleagues who were at the
parliament halls at the time. The RPA MPs’ conduct was criticized
by their opposition colleagues. Opposition Heritage group MP Larisa
Alaverdyan responded saying whether there are MPs with two heads as
they voted on behalf of other MPs as well.
“We are advised not to politicize, however, on the contrary we must do
so. Parliament is a political body and should care for its political
image,” Alaverdyan added.
From: Baghdasarian