American Author Studied Relations Of Turks, Kurds And Armenians At T

THE AMERICAN AUTHOR STUDIED RELATIONS OF TURKS, KURDS AND ARMENIANS AT THE TURN OF 20TH CENTURY

Mediamax

Aug 2, 2011
Armenia

Yerevan/Mediamax/. Stanford University Press issued a book by American
historian Janet Klein “The Margins of Empire. Kurdish Militias in
the Ottoman Tribal Zone” which addresses the Ottoman authorities’
policy aimed at using Kurds against Armenian population.

The author touches upon Turkish-Kurdish relations at the turn of the
twentieth century in his almost 300-page research, Mediamax reports.

The official description of the book particularly says:

“At the turn of the twentieth century, the Ottoman state identified
multiple threats in its eastern regions. In an attempt to control
remote Kurdish populations, Ottoman authorities organized them into
a tribal militia and gave them the task of subduing a perceived
Armenian threat”.

More detailed information on the book is available here:

From: Baghdasarian

http://www.mediamax.am/en/news/region/1950/
http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=20175.

BAKU: Azerbaijan In Pursuit Of American Weapons

AZERBAIJAN IN PURSUIT OF AMERICAN WEAPONS

AzeriReport

Aug 3, 2011

WASHINGTON DC. August 3, 2011: The US has never been a supplier of
weapons to Azerbaijan. What the Pentagon has done is set up a number
of military training programs with this Caspian country, which focus
on the country’s self-defense on the Caspian, border security, as well
as preparing the Azeris for deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan. TURAN
has learned from Washington DC-based sources, the idea of buying
American weapons was always a red line of the US-Azeri relations.

Recently Azerbaijan again began a serious push to get the US provide
it with “defense weapons,” in particular, air defense and anti-tank
systems.

“Azeri lobbyists and their allies in the US capital received a new
assignment from Baku – target getting American weapons for Azerbaijan”,
the source said.

“Several years ago, this issue almost defined the US-Azeri
relationship, but back then, Baku

stepped down after understanding that they couldn’t afford American
weaponry on their own”, one of Azerbaijan’s former lobbyists told
TURAN’s correspondent, adding, now, Azeri supporters in Washington
are arguing that the oil-reach country doesn’t need the US to give
them the weapons as aid, they can buy the weaponry.

Meanwhile, E. Wayne Merry, senior fellow for Europe and Eurasia
at the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington DC, says that
the US has a long-standing policy — extending over the past three
Administrations — not to introduce lethal equipment into the regional
conflicts in the Caucasus.

“For that reason, the US does not sell weaponry to either Azerbaijan,
or Armenia. The US does work with both countries in a range of
non-lethal aspects of military-to-military cooperation, either of a
bilateral character or within the Partnership for Peace program of
NATO”, Merry, who served in the State and Defense Departments for
many years, told TURAN’s Washington DC correspondent.

“Military sales to foreign countries are governed by US law and must
receive approval from the State and Defense Departments so that they
will be consistent with US policies and interests. In the case of
Azerbaijan, as equally with Armenia, the governing policy is not to
contribute to an ongoing conflict through military sales, but to
contribute to a diplomatic solution. What those countries do with
other states is, of course, a matter for them to decide”, he added.

Jon Chicky is a military member of the faculty of the National War
College in Washington, DC.

In an interview with TURAN’s correspondent, Mr. Chicky explains
more details.

Question: Oil-rich Azerbaijan complains that the US doesn’t sell it
weapons and military equipment, although there is high-level security
cooperation between the two countries. In one of his latest statements
president Aliyev mentioned that when it comes to Azerbaijan, the
military cooperation is only formal, and US military weapons, such as
helicopters, airplanes (F-16), Patriot etc. are out of Azerbaijan’s
reach. What are the reasons here? Are there any restrictions in the
US laws in terms of selling weapons to countries like Azerbaijan?

Answer: First, I would like to state that views presented in this
interview are my own and do not reflect those of the National Defense
University, the Department of Defense, or the US Government. There
is essentially one reason why Azerbaijan has been unable to acquire
weapon systems from the United States. It is Section 907 of the
FREEDOM Support Act (Public Law 102-511). Section 907 was enacted in
1992 and restricts Azerbaijan from acquiring weapon systems from the
United States. While this piece of legislation has been and remains
controversial, it is the law and can only be repealed by the Congress.

In 2002, Section 907 was amended to where the President of the United
States can waive (both President Bush and Obama have used this waiver
every year since 2002) the restrictions in the original legislation
under the following conditions: “The President may waive section
907 of the FREEDOM Support Act if he determines and certifies to
the Committees on Appropriations that to do so–(A) is necessary to
support United States efforts to counter international terrorism; or
(B) is necessary to support the operational readiness of United States
Armed Forces or coalition partners to counter international terrorism;
or (C) is important to Azerbaijan’s border security; and (D) will not

undermine or hamper ongoing efforts to negotiate a peaceful settlement
between Armenia and Azerbaijan or be used for offensive purposes
against Armenia.” Because of the United States’ interest in a peaceful
resolution to the Mountainous Karabakh conflict, US officials keep this
final criterion in mind regarding defense cooperation with Armenia
as well, and apply an even-handed approach in their work with the
two countries.

What are the criteria for Azerbaijan to be able to buy the US weapons?

Can any country that has money buy weapons from the US?

There are a myriad of laws, regulations, and provisions that
govern what weapons can be sold and/or provided. The Department
of State’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs oversees the
government-to-government and commercial company-to-government
transactions. Beyond the legal/legislative aspects of which country
can or cannot acquire US weapons technology, there are other factors
of whether U.S. weapon systems are the right fit for a particular
country. Issues such as purchase costs, compatibility with other
(communication) systems, maintenance costs, etc. For example, if a
country already possessing Soviet-era weapons were to acquire US small
arms (e.g. automatic rifles) then this purchase would necessitate a
large scale purchase of ammunition as US ammunition is of a different
size than what is used in Soviet/Russian weapons. Ammunition is
expensive and given training and operational needs, the ammunition
required for these weapons can be large and thus costly.

When looking at the Caucasus situation, US diplomacy has always
been against weaponisation. Does the US prioritize any of the South
Caucasus countries in terms of military cooperation? Also, what do
you think about the fact that Azerbaijan is buying military weapons
that we’ve mentioned above from Russia and Iran?

Not surprisingly, much of US security assistance efforts worldwide
are focused on assisting countries who have forces with the NATO
ISAF mission in Afghanistan. All three South Caucasus countries have
contingents in Afghanistan. Given Georgia has the largest contingent
in Afghanistan of the three South Caucasus states it receives the
largest share of the regional defense-military assistance from the US.

This assistance is focused on defense institution building and
coalition operations. As to Azerbaijan’s purchase of military equipment
from other countries, Azerbaijan is a sovereign state and it has to
decide what defense systems it needs and from whom. That being said,
Azerbaijan should be cognizant of its Conventional Armed Forces in
Europe (CFE) limits when contemplating future equipment purchases as
well as other international norms and practices.

Although the US doesn’t sell weapons to Azerbaijan, American soldiers
have helped Azerbaijan in military modernization. What are the
conditions to enlarge this cooperation?

Essentially, the conditions lie within the defense leadership of
both countries. While the United States may not presently be in a
position to provide major weapons/defense articles to Azerbaijan given
existing US laws, there are other areas where our defense-military
cooperation can exist. As has been reported, there have been
several meetings over the past year seeking ways to expand the
defense-military relationship. One aspect of US defense cooperation
over the past years has been to assist Azerbaijan in achieving its
NATO Individual Partnership Action Plan (IPAP) goals. Another aspect
is to have Azerbaijan send military officers and defense ministry
civilians to US military academic institutions. This is one area
that Azerbaijan could use its own financial resources to acquire
additional student positions in these institutions. A strong command
of English is a major requirement for attendance in our military
colleges and universities. The US and Azerbaijan are also cooperating
in Azerbaijan’s efforts to increase its capacity to protect critical
energy infrastructure (Turan).

From: Baghdasarian

http://azerireport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2872&Itemid=53

Amid US Budget Cuts, How Much Will Be Left For Armenia And Azerbaija

AMID US BUDGET CUTS, HOW MUCH WILL BE LEFT FOR ARMENIA AND AZERBAIJAN?
Giorgi Lomsadze

EurasiaNet.org
Aug 3, 2011

Now that the US debt ceiling drama has ended, can Washington start
mulling the truly pressing economic question; i.e. how much money
to dish out in aid to the Caucasus’ legendary foes, Armenia and
Azerbaijan?

Colossal foreign debt may be encouraging congressional parsimony, but
one big Armenian Diaspora lobbyist, the Armenian National Committee
of America (ANCA), still hopes to cut as large a slice as possible
for Armenia from a trimmed-down 2012 foreign aid package. The ANCA
recently called on Armenian-Americans to lobby for approval of $60
million in economic aid instead of the recently approved $40 million
and for “at least” $10 million in military assistance.

Rival Azerbaijan should get nada in economic aid, the organization
argued, because, first off, it is rich anyway, spoilt by hydrocarbon
wealth, and, secondly, because it (allegedly) threatens Armenia and
the Armenia-dependent breakaway Nagorno-Karabakh region.

Azerbaijan, for its part, does not often display the Diaspora lobbying
muscle which its rival enjoys (Azerbaijan’s strategic location and
energy resources tend to be active lobbyists by themselves), but it
has praised a congressional panel for not including Nagorno Karabakh
among the recipients of American foreign aid for the prospective 2012
foreign aid bill.

Both countries, however, have been more than equally matched in their
latest assessments of each other. Commenting on Armenian President
Serzh Sargsyan’s recent controversial statement about the prospects
for reclaiming Mount Ararat from Turkey, Azerbaijani President Ilham
Aliyev noted that something may be missing in the Armenian leader’s
brain. Sargsyan retorted promptly that Aliyev’s words were the words
of a madman.

US foreign aid for both Azerbaijan and Armenia comes with conditions
attached; maybe it’s time to make a presidential anger management
course one of them?

From: Baghdasarian

Menendez Reiterates Importance Of U.S. Affirmation Of The Armenian G

MENENDEZ REITERATES IMPORTANCE OF U.S. AFFIRMATION OF THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

Panorama
Aug 3, 2011
Armenia

During today’s confirmation hearing in the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) asked Ambassador-Designate
Francis J. Ricciardone a series of questions regarding U.S.

affirmation of the Armenian Genocide, reported the Armenian Assembly
of America (Assembly).

Ambassador-Designate Francis J. Ricciardone, is the Administration’s
nominee to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Turkey
and has been serving in Ankara since January on the basis of a recess
appointment by President Obama. When asked by Senator Menendez if the
United States have ever denied the Armenian Genocide, Ricciardone
responded that he stands behind President Obama’s characterization
and used the Armenian term: Meds Yeghern.

“As Senator Menendez has repeatedly indicated, affirmation of the
Armenian Genocide is critical to our diplomatic relations with Armenia
and Turkey,” stated Assembly Grassroots Director Taniel Koushakjian.

“We strongly concur with Senator Menendez that if you cannot recognize
the historical fact of the Armenian Genocide, then you cannot move
forward,” added Koushakjian.

Senator Menendez also asked if Ricciardone disagreed with President
Barack Obama’s position on the Armenian Genocide during Obama’s
tenure as a Senator, as well as that of Vice President Joseph Biden
and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, during their tenures
as Senators. In each instance, Ricciardone indicated that he did not
disagree with his superiors.

“On behalf of the Armenian Assembly’s 2011 Terjenian-Thomas Internship
Class, we express our sincere appreciation to Senator Menendez for
his continued leadership on Armenian issues,” stated Raffi Nersessian,
Assembly Government Affairs intern who attended today’s hearing.

Ricciardone also fielded questions about religious freedom, especially
in relation to the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and the
Halki Seminary, as well as with respect to the Armenian, Assyrian,
and Jewish communities.

Senate Foreign Relations Europe Subcommittee Chair Jeanne Shaheen
(D-NH) presided over today’s hearing and was joined by Ranking Member
Richard Lugar (R-IN), along with Senators Robert Casey, Jr. (D-PA),
Chris Coons (D-DE), and Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) who was on hand
to introduce one of the nominees. Additional questions for the record
will be submitted for response by the nominees and will be reviewed
before the Committee acts on the nomination. The next opportunity
for consideration by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will be
in September.

From: Baghdasarian

Haykakan Zhamanak: Robert Kocharyan Vs Suren Harutyunyan

HAYKAKAN ZHAMANAK: ROBERT KOCHARYAN VS SUREN HARUTYUNYAN

Tert.am
02.08.11

The lawyers of Armenia’s ex-president Robert Kocharyan will probably
have to lodge another claim – this time against one of the former
leaders of Soviet Armenia Suren Harutyunyan.

The newly published Armenian version of Mr. Harutyunyan’s book
“The past and the present” contains rather unfavorable references to
Armenia’s ex-president. Here is an excerpt from the book: “No doubt,
Robert Kocharyan committed numerous blunders and, as some say,
even crimes.

The bloody end of his presidency – in March 2008 – was not at all a
wonder. Of importance now is how his role in Armenian history will be
assessed. On behalf of Armenians I dare say that, due to the ‘finale’
to his presidency, Robert Kocharyan will, as Americans say, remain a
‘lame duck’ in the Armenian people’s history – no matter what position
he will be able to obtain in the future.”

From: Baghdasarian

National Chess Team Of Armenia To Leave For Europe Championship With

NATIONAL CHESS TEAM OF ARMENIA TO LEAVE FOR EUROPE CHAMPIONSHIP WITH THE “GOLD” COMPOSITION

Mediamax
July 29, 2011
Armenia

Yerevan/Mediamax/. Chief Coach of National Chess Team of Armenia Arshak
Petrosyan said today that the team gained a victory at the strongest
World Championship in the history of chess as to its composition.

Mediamax reports that Arshak Petrosyan explained that 9 out of 10
participant teams of the World Championship in China enter the list of
top ten strongest teams in the world. The coach and the players named
as the main component of success the team spirit, which creates a
“family” atmosphere in the national team.

Gabriel Sargsian noted that he started believing 90% in the victory
of our Team at the tournament after the 5th round, when Armenia left
the team of China behind.

Vladimir Hakobyan spoke about his set with the representative of
Azerbaijan Rauf Mamedov in the one but final round, in which the fate
of the first place was in many respects decided upon. According to
the Armenian grand master, the Azeri player could have yielded at
least 20 steps before that, however he did not do that, since this
game was very important for both teams.

The coach of the Armenian National Teams said that the next tournament
is the Europe Team Championship, which is launching on November 2
in Greece. The Armenian Team will leave for it with the same “gold”
composition.

Answering the question on introducing chess in the mandatory school
program in Armenia, Arshak Petrosyan welcomed this decision, noting
that the fact will allow children developing logic and will provide
a big stimulus for development of chess.

From: Baghdasarian

ALROSA Quota On Diamond Sale To Armenian Might Increase

ALROSA QUOTA ON DIAMOND SALE TO ARMENIAN MIGHT INCREASE

news.am
Aug 1, 2011
Armenia

YEREVAN. – The $30 million ALROSA quota for diamond sale to Armenian
businessmen might be increased, the head of Domestic Market Regulation
Department of Armenian Ministry of Economy Gagik Kocharyan told
Armenian News-NEWS.am.

According to him, at present four Armenian jewelry companies purchase
rough diamonds from ALROSA.

“ALROSA is constantly monitoring our companies for compliance with
their criteria. Over the past few years they have made four visits,”
said Kocharyan.

According to him, the Ministry of Economy holds negotiations
with the Russian company to increase the quota and the number of
purchaser-companies. Currently, Armenia has 10-12 operating diamond
companies, the volume of the jewelry industry between January – June
2011 amounted to AMD 4.75 billion (about $ 13 million). Recently
Armenia signed agreements with other suppliers of raw materials –
a memorandum on cooperation in the diamond industry was signed with
South Africa in 2010.

ALROSA is world’s largest diamond mining company. During the first
half of 2011 the company produced 19 million carats of diamonds.

From: Baghdasarian

BAKU: Moscow Not Obliged To Take Yerevan’s Side In Military Actions

MOSCOW NOT OBLIGED TO TAKE YEREVAN’S SIDE IN MILITARY ACTIONS

news.az
Aug 1, 2011
Azerbaijan

News.Az interviews Pavel Salin, an expert at the think-tank, the
Russian Centre of Political Conjuncture.

At the talks in Baku on last week, Russian Defense Minister Anatoliy
Serdyukov agreed to development of a new agreement on the rent of the
radar station in the Azerbaijani city of Gabala by Russia. Though
Serdyukov announced the plans to modernize this station, most even
in Russia say that it is outdated. In addition, Russia is building a
modern radar station in the North Caucasus. What has caused Moscow’s
interest to preserving control over Gabala?

Indeed, for many tactical and technical parameters, the radar station
in Gabala is lagging behind a more updated radar station in Russia
under Armavir, especially after the second sector will be launched
there by the end of 2012-approximately to the moment of expiration
of the agreement of 2002 on Gabala. Certainly, the radar station
in Gabala can be modernized but it is a separate issue and separate
money. Russia needs military presence in Azerbaijan, which is caused
by two main reasons. First is to balance US presence in Azerbaijan.

Official Baku does not flaunts it too widely but in 2005 the country
launched two mobile US radar stations of TRML-3D type with the radius
of 200-300 km. They must pursue Iran’s activeness and ensure security
of the oil and gas transit via Azerbaijan. The second reason which
is also not flaunted is that a military base can always be used as
a tool in political trading. For example, by some data, a Russian
division guarding the radar station played a certain stabilizing role
during Musavatists’ attempt to create a mass riot after presidential
elections in autumn of 2003.

Do you think that Americans will ultimately accept the Gabala radar
station as a part of Euroatlantic security system?

The difference in positions of Russian and American sides is that
Moscow positions Gabala as an alternative to US radars in Europe,
while the United States are ready to allow the use of the radar
station in addition to its radar stations located in Europe. Russia
insists that it takes part in decision-making on the use of missile
defense equally to the United States, while Washington does not want
to accept even its European allies as its equals. The basic problem
is that Moscow considers that it concluded a reconciliation in Cold
War with the United States, while Washington believes that it has won.

This difference in interpretation is also applied to the missile
defense problem-how can Americans accept those whom they consider
they have beaten as equal to themselves?

How justified are Azerbaijan’s concerns that the Russian base in
Armenia can be used against Azerbaijan?

It depends on what you understand saying against Azerbaijan. If you
mean Nagorno Karabakh, the situation is quite complicated here. Under
the new Russian-Armenian treaty, Russia is bound to secure the
territorial integrity of Armenia, but Moscow officially does not
recognize Nagorno Karabakh as an independent state or part of Armenia.

In case of escalation of the military conflict in Karabakh, Moscow
will not be bound to take part in military operations on Yerevan’s side
but as a mediator it will likely try to reconcile the hostile parties
for which it may use the troops from the Armenian base. If during
the conflict Azerbaijani troops will invade in the internationally
recognized territory of Armenia, Russia will be obliged to interfere
on Yerevan’s side under the treaty.

Russia is further growing comprehensive cooperation with Turkey.

Can this circumstance, alongside the future improvement of mutual
trust between Russia and NATO, result in Russia’s rejection of troops
on the Armenian-Turkish border? Or this military presence has a
different sense?

As they say, capacities are more important than intentions in policy.

Clearly, under no guarantees Russia will reject its base in Armenia
or entrust anyone to protect its interests in the region regardless of
goods relations with any country. Meanwhile, importance of the region
and Turkey in it will further grow. Thus, in order to keep up with the
regional power-Turkey, Russia will just have to hold military base in
the region. Now, for the reason of political conjuncture, it turned
out that Armenia is the only one among the internationally recognized
South Caucasus countries where Russia can have its military base (we
do not take account the guard in Gabala). If the situation changes,
the base from Armenia can shift to a different country but Russia
will not leave the region on a goodwill basis in the near future.

F.H.

From: Baghdasarian

Armenians Of Abkhazia Mobilized In Support Of Shamba

ARMENIANS OF ABKHAZIA MOBILIZED IN SUPPORT OF SHAMBA

Experts’ club

Aug 1, 2011
Georgia

Armenian population of occupied Abkhazia are urged to vote for
Abkhazian “prime minister” Sergei Shamba in the upcoming “elections” of
a new head of the puppet regime on August 26th. One of the influential
representatives of local Armenian community Galust Trapizonyan who,
as chairman of the Armenian (Gagra) association “Krunk” in 1992-1993
was engaged in mobilization of Armenian population of Abkhazia to
participate in the war against Georgia, came out in support of Shamba.

Trapizonyan made a statement in support of Shamba at public meeting
on July 27th and, presumably, most of the Armenians of Abkhazia will
vote for Sergei Shamba if its rivals Ankvab and Khajimba will fail
to attract other influential members of the Armenian community to
their side.

It should be noted that these votes could be decisive, since Armenians
are the second largest community in the occupied region. Full data
of the Census conducted by Abkhazian authorities this year are not
yet known. However, according to the 2003 data Armenians made up of
about 45 thousand and showed a steady trend to increase their number
since then.

This time it is Georgians of the Gali district that remain
“overboard”. And it was their voices that decided the Abkhazian
“elections” in 2004. According to the census this year, their number
is about 30 thousand (the third largest community), but according
to official figures from Sukhumi, only 8 thousand of inhabitants
of this area almost entirely populated by Georgians were given
Abkhazian “passports” which this time is the only document which
allows participation in the vote.

From: Baghdasarian

http://eng.expertclub.ge/portal/cnid__9390/alias__Expertclub/lang__en/tabid__2546/default.aspx

Armenia Wins Judo Junior European Cup Gold In Czech Republic

ARMENIA WINS JUDO JUNIOR EUROPEAN CUP GOLD IN CZECH REPUBLIC

news.am
August 1, 2011
Armenia

YEREVAN. – Armenia won one gold and two bronze medals at Judo Junior
European Cup in Prague, Czech Republic.

Armenia’s Andranik Chaparyan (73 kg) won gold, whereas Garik
Harutyunyan (55 kg) and Gor Harutyunyan (60 kg) took bronze medals.

The Armenian team led by head coach Tigran Babayan will attend a
tournament in Berlin on August 6-7, Armenian Judo Federation reports.

From: Baghdasarian