Author: Chakhmakhchian Vatche

NA CHAIRMAN TIGRAN TOROSYAN RECEIVED COE COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
Public Radio, Armenia
Oct 14 2006
October 14 RA National Assembly Speaker Tigran Torosyan received
Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Tomas Hammarberg. The
meeting was attended by the Special Representative of CoE Secretary
General Bojana Urumova and Armenia’s Permanent Representative
to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Christian
Ter-Stepanyan.
NA Speaker Tigran Torosyan informed the guest about the activity of
the Parliament. It was noted that the Electoral Code will be amended
by the end of the year, which will serve as a good legal basis for
holding the elections in compliance with democratic standards. In
this regard importance was attached to the tolerance and cooperation
of political forces. Reference was made to the new opportunities
for human rights defense, reforms in the court and legal and local
self-governance systems, creation of balance between branches of
power provided by the Constitutional amendments.
Mr. Hammarberg noted that during the several days spent in Yerevan
he had the chance to see the great progress Armenia has achieved on
its way from a Soviet republic to an independent state. Turning to
the upcoming elections, CoE Commissioner characterized these as an
opportunity to continue the democratic developments.

GENOCIDE IS NOT JUST A WORD
by Brian Brivati
The Guardian, UK
Oct 12 2006
While the French and Turkish governments rake over the past, mass
murder and mass rape continues in Darfur.
The French parliament votes today on a bill which will make it an
offence to deny that genocide took place in Armenia.
In response the Turkish parliament is drafting a bill to make it
illegal to deny that the French committed genocide in Algeria.
Another committee is proposing to make May 8 Algeria genocide memorial
day in Turkey. If universal jurisdiction is to be rejuvenated as
a concept after the Belgian laws on genocide were reversed then of
course anyone can get in on the act. The Turkish response is natural
enough. What is interesting is that many Turkish dissenters, including
people arrested for telling the truth about the Armenia genocide,
have come out strongly against the bill. The French government has also
opposed the passage of the legislation. The Algerians, enjoying French
discomfort, have welcomed the proposed Turkish legislation. There
are many issues wrapped up in this storm.
The positive aspect is that the Armenian genocide, often the forgotten
genocide of the 20th century, is being debated across Europe. If
that was the intention of the bill’s sponsors then they have achieved
their objective. In turn the Turkish response forced the French onto
the defensive about their colonial past.
The negative aspect of all this is the ever greater politicisation
of the word “genocide” and its reduction in impact. Genocide is only
a word, of course, and whether or not we use it to describe crimes
against humanity should not really matter in terms of our response
to events. However, because of the genocide convention, it does
matter if we call something by this term rather another term. The
case of Darfur shows this. When the UN report on the first phase of
the Sudanese government’s campaign against its African population in
Darfur was published it concluded that terrible violations of human
rights, including mass murder, has taken place, but that the events
fell short of the definition in the convention.
This has happened in every case of genocide since the convention
was passed. Remember the linguistic games during Rwanda, the lengths
to which officials would go not to use the word. So we live in this
strange world in which politicians and activists rush to label things
genocide so that they can wrap their particular suffering in the most
extreme form of human suffering – the US and UK are committing genocide
in Iraq, apparently – while the UN contorts itself in order to avoid
calling Darfur or Rwanda genocide. The author of that UN report has
recently said that it does not matter what word you use to describe
what happened in Darfur, but something had to be done about it. As it
happens again in Darfur the debate is reopened about how to describe
what is taking place. It is a looking glass world in which scale and
intent do not matter as much as the political case to be made at any
one time.
As a historian, I welcome all debate about the past and it is important
that we analyse Turkish guilt in Armenia and French guilt in Algeria,
but perhaps, just at the moment, the French and Turkish parliaments
should be spending their time a little more usefully by debating
how to stop the mass murder and mass rape which is currently being
perpetrated by the Sudanese government in Darfur.

NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR SETTLEMENT OF KARABAKH CONFLICT MAY ORIGINATE ONLY IN 2009-2010: RPA MEMBER
ARMINFO News Agency
October 11, 2006 Wednesday
New opportunities for settlement of Karabakh conflict many originate
only in 2009-2010. Everything depends on the forces to come to power
in Armenia, Nagorny Karabakh and Azerbaijan in that period of time,
said Armen Ashotyan, MP representing the Republican Party of Armenia.
The party is in the ruling parliamentary coalition.
He said that the international community, at least they in the
Council of Europe, are aware that the possibilities of the conflict’s
settlement in the current year have been exhausted. Any progress in
the period of pre-election campaigns in Armenia and Azerbaijan are
not expected either.
Armen Ashotyan thinks that if South Ossetia or Abkhazia are returned
under protectorate of Georgia, they in Azerbaijan may fall into
a regular hysteria regarding Nagorny Karabakh. In the case with
Kosovo, the world community does not think it a precedent for other
conflicts. However, if Georgia returns one of its former autonomous
regions, we may face an application of dual standards with respect
to Karabakh by international community.
Armen Ashotyan said the new Constitution of NKR can become a
good calling card for Karabakh as it testifies to higher level of
democracy than that in Azerbaijan. He added that if NKR President
Arkady Ghouakssyan runs for a third term, it will not be a violation
of democratic norms given the problem of security of NKR.
As regards the issue of frozen conflicts put on the agenda of UN
General Assembly, Armen Ashotyan said it was not a defeat of Armenia’s
foreign policy. “The voting was not against Armenia but Russia as a
serious player in the region. Our only omission was that we failed
to separate the Karabakh problem from others,” he said.
“Given the last curtsy of Azerbaijan to Russia, I’d like to warn the
public of the danger of statements by a number of political figures,
who think it necessary orientating at the West in the settlement of
Karabakh conflict,” A. Ashotyan said for conclusion.

AZERBAIJAN`S SPEAKER: ALIYEV NEVER AGREE ANY MATTER CONTRADICTING TO NATION`S AND STATE`S INTERESTS
Author: J. Shakhverdiyev
TREND, Azerbaijan
Oct 10 2006
Azerbaijan`s President will never agree any matter contradicting
to the interests of the nation and state, Ogtay Asadov, Speaker
of Azerbaijan`s Parliament (Milli Majlis) told during the sitting
of the Parliament expressing his attitute toward the proposal of MP
Igbal Aghazadeh, Chairman of the party “Umid” (“Hope”) to commence the
alternatives of the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement proposed to Azerbaijan,
Trend reports.
The Azerbaijani Speaker stressed that the negotiations have been
restored and this issue is under the control of the Head of the
Azerbaijani State.
Notably, the MP pointed out that a signing of a certain document
in connection with the EU Neighbourhood Policy is expected to be
held in Brussels on November 11-12, 2006. The document points out
that Azerbaijan should take obligations upon itself to not carry
hostilities within 5 years. The MP expressed intention to organize
parliamentary debates in this connection. At the same time, he insisted
that the Foreign office should provide the MPs with all the necessary
information. He also told that these debates should be held behind
closed doors.

TURKEY FIGHTS GENOCIDE CLAIM
By Benjamin Harvey
Baltimore Sun
The Associated Press
Oct 10 2006
Prime minister says ‘systematic lie machine’ at work in debate with
France Originally published October 10, 2006, 10:09 AM EDT
ISTANBUL, TURKEY // Turkey’s prime minister vowed today to fight
against what he called a “systematic lie machine” pushing to label
Turkey’s World War I-era killings of Armenians as genocide.
The remarks were made in reaction to a proposed French law that would
make it a crime to deny that the killings of as many as 1.5 million
Armenians amounted to genocide.
The proposed law has sparked outrage in Turkey against France and the
European Union, both of which have sharply criticized Turkey for not
permitting freedom of expression, particularly on the highly emotional
Armenian issue.
“Let no one doubt that the Turkish Republic state and its people are
capable of breaking this systematic lie machine and of dispersing
these clouds of disinformation,” Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan
said in an address to his party.
“There can be no legal justification for making it a crime to say a
lie is a lie.”
Turkey’s official policy is to acknowledge that large numbers of
Armenians were killed by Turks, but to reject the overall figure
of 1.5 million as inflated and to say the deaths occurred in civil
unrest during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.
Saying otherwise in Turkey can lead to criminal prosecution.
Erdogan repeated his past calls to Armenia to jointly research the
killings by opening the historical archives of both countries to
historians, complaining that Armenia had not responded to his requests
to do so.
He said the proposed French law was inconsistent with the principle
of freedom of expression, and accused France of ignoring its own
history while trying to legislate the facts of Turkey’s.
“Let the lie and slander machines look at their own history,” he said,
listing 11 African countries in which France has a colonial past.
France’s lower house of parliament is to debate the bill on Thursday.
Under the bill, people who contest that there was an Armenian genocide
would risk up to a year in prison and fines of up to $57,000.
Some Turkish legislators have proposed tit-for-tat measures such as
erecting statues to an “Algerian genocide” committed by France and
to passing a reciprocal law that would make denying it a crime.
Turkey’s foremost Armenian journalist, Hrant Dink, who has been tried
repeatedly in Turkey for saying Turks committed genocide against
Armenians, said passing the French law would be a mistake.
“Even if it appears that the Armenian genocide denial law acts in
the principle of universal human rights and responsibilities like the
struggle against genocide, we believe it erases the basic principle
that makes human rights possible, the principle of free expression,”
he said in a statement issued in both French and Turkish.
“Moreover, we think there is no need to support with laws the
historical truths of what the Armenian people have lived through in
the past. Because looking correctly at history does not require a law,
but conscience and morality.”
Dink’s letter was signed by two other journalists at Agos, an
Istanbul-based bilingual Armenian-Turkish newspaper.
Some 100 Turks representing two different political parties gathered
in front of the French Embassy in Ankara today, calling for a boycott
against French goods.
Erdogan had previously called on French companies with interests in
Turkey to lobby against the proposed genocide bill.

TURKEY WARNS FRANCE OVER ARMENIAN GENOCIDE BILL
Angelique Chrisafis in Paris
The Guardian
Wednesday October 11, 2006
The French parliament has been warned it could undermine relations
between the EU and Turkey if it passes a law tomorrow making it a
crime to deny Armenians suffered genocide at the hands of Ottoman
Turks during the first world war.
The draft bill, which is to be debated by the national assembly, was
put forward by France’s opposition Socialist party, and recommends
that anyone who denies the mass-murder of Armenians between 1915
and 1917 was genocide should face a year in prison and a â~B¬45,000
(£30,500) fine.
Olli Rehn, the commissioner in charge of Turkey’s EU membership
negotiations, warned this week the law could have “serious
consequences” for EU relations with Turkey. He said it would jeopardise
efforts by Turkish intellectuals to develop an open debate on the
Armenian question.
Ankara has deemed it ironic that France is preparing to punish those
who express a particular view of history at a time when Turkey is under
heavy EU pressure to change some of its own laws which are viewed
as restricting freedom of expression. The Turkish prime minister,
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, yesterday referred to the proposed law as a
“systematic lie machine”. Turkey recalled its ambassador to France in
May after the Socialist party first presented the bill in parliament.
Turkish politicians have since warned that French-Turkish trade links
will suffer if the bill is adopted, and some are discussing possible
retaliatory measures, including criminalising the denial of genocide in
Algeria which France ruled from 1830 to 1962. One Turkish MP suggested
expelling all illegal Armenian immigrants if the bill was passed.
Mr Erdogan said he would not engage in tit-for-tat measures but
said France should reexamine its colonial past before pronouncing on
history elsewhere.
He repeated calls to Armenia to jointly research the killings by
opening the historical archives of both countries to historians.
Turkey’s official policy is to acknowledge that large numbers of
Armenians were killed by Turks, but to reject the overall estimate
of 1.5 million deaths as inflated. It maintains that deaths occurred
as part of civil unrest during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and
thousands of Turks also died. Saying otherwise in Turkey can lead to
criminal prosecution.
Yesterday Turkey’s foremost Armenian journalist, Hrant Dink, who has
been repeatedly tried for “insulting Turkishness” by urging Turkey
to come clean on its part in the massacres, said passing the French
law would be a mistake. “I will go to France to protest against this
madness and violate the [new] law if I see it necessary. And I will
commit the crime to be prosecuted there so that these two irrational
mentalities can race to put me into jail,” he told Reuters. He said
the French draft law and the Armenian issue was being exploited by
those in France and the EU opposed to Turkey’s EU entry.
Other Turkish writers criticised the French bill, including Elif
Shafak, who was acquitted last month after she was charged with
“insulting Turkishness” over one of her fictitious characters who
referred to the Armenian “genocide”.
–Boundary_(ID_jiZE6ezgOoYr EPxgL6OByA)–

REPRESENTATIVE OF NATO TO ARRIVE IN ARMENIA
A1+
[12:35 pm] 11 October, 2006
On October 11-13 Ambassador Robert Simmons, NATO Deputy Assistant
Secretary General for Security Cooperation and Partnership and
Special Representative for the Caucasus and Central Asia will arrive
in Armenia within the framework of his regional visit.
During the visit Mr. Simmons will meet President Kocharyan, Defense
Minister Serge Sargsyan and Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan.

TURKEY GOING TO ADOPT BILL SAYING “FRANCE COMMITTED GENOCIDE IN ALGERIA”
PanARMENIAN.Net
09.10.2006 15:29 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ A rally with a slogan “Stop, France!
Armenian Genocide is a lie” was held in Turkey.
Although the rally in front of the French Consulate General in Istanbul
was authorized, policemen did not let the protesters come up to the
Consulate. Labor Party Chairman Dogu Perincek accused Prime Minister
Erdogan of deploying Turkish policemen on “French barricades.” “France
lost 5 thousand soldiers when fighting against us. If the bill on
Genocide is passed by the French parliament October 12 the selling of
French products will be boycotted from October 13,” he said. Yesterday
Prime Minister Erdogan said that France’s involvement in the Genocide
issue will be harmful for it and extreme measures will be taken
in case the bill is adopted. Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul
during a phone conversation with his French counterpart stated that
the adoption of the bill will badly damage the relations between the
two states. Abdullah Gul said that French companies will be forbidden
to participate in all international tenders scheduled in Turkey for
the construction of a nuclear power plant and helicopters selling.
The justice committee of the Turkish Grand National Assembly October
11 will discuss a bill condemning the killing of 250 thousand peaceful
Muslims during a military operation conducted by France in 1960-ies
as genocide. If the French parliament passes the bill on the Armenian
Genocide, the Turkish parliament will officially approve the bill
on genocide committed by France against Algerians. According to the
bill, anyone who denies that the French committed genocide against
the Algerians could be put in jail for 3 years.

DEVELOPMENT TIED TO SOVEREIGNTY, SAYS SEZER
Turkish Daily News
Oct 10 2006
President Ahmet Necdet Sezer said on Monday that the only way to
properly exploit the country’s resources fully is by preserving
national unity and sovereignty.
Speaking at the conference “Strategic Foresight: The World and
Turkey in the 100th Anniversary of the Republic in 2023,” organized
by the Eurasia Strategic Studies Center in Ankara (ASAM), Sezer said:
“Such studies should be carried out by non-governmental organizations
on the basis of scientific and academic criteria. Such initiatives
will have positive impacts on the development of democratic culture
in our country.”
“Strategic foresight entails that states develop the ability of
planning and using their own capabilities and resources. If we preserve
our national unity and sovereignty, we can succeed in benefiting
from our national and natural resources as well as technological
opportunities in the most influential way. Therefore, our republic
is based on the principle of national unity and sovereignty,” he said.
“Strategic foresight studies revealed that Turkey is expected to
become one of the 10 biggest economies in the world in the next
two decades. In order to reach this target, we should generalize
prosperity, speed up the development of technologic progress and
avoid the destructive impact of globalization,” he said.
Sezer stressed: “Turkey’s contributions to regional and international
security and stability cannot be ignored. Today’s regional and global
conditions show that the world will need Turkey’s contributions in
the future.”
“The issue of energy is an indispensable part of strategic foresight
and designs. In our age, energy security has become synonymous with
national security. Turkey’s position in the East-West and North-South
energy corridors constitutes an important dimension in strategic
equations. Turkey aims at creating a zone of cooperation in its
region. Therefore, our country is trying to do everything in its
power to contribute efforts to find peaceful solutions to disputes
in the Middle East, Balkans and Caucasus,” he added.
Meanwhile, ASAM Chairman Faruk Loðoðlu said that democracy, rule
of law, human rights and especially secularism were the main values
of contemporary civilization, and he highlighted the importance of
preserving those values for a better future.
Bahceþehir University Rector Suheyl Batum stressed that political
decision-making mechanisms in Turkey cannot produce the desired
strategy, adding: “Turkey will inevitably face major problems, such
as the recent developments in Iraq and Iran, besides the EU-sponsored
Cyprus and Armenia issues. Political actors in Turkey cannot produce
strategies. In fact, we have to develop long-term strategies instead
of daily ones.”
–Boundary_(ID_U6GgsJWFCNoISILvBCfqKA )–

AMERICAN RADAR SYSTEMS, RUSSIAN BASES AND NATIONAL ARMED FORCES: THE STATE OF MILITARY AFFAIRS IN THE SOUTHERN CAUCASUS
By Celia Chauffour
Today, Azerbaijan
Oct 9 2006
143%. That is the number held by the Stockholm International Peace
Research Institute (SIPRI) in a report made public on June 12th to
evaluate the increase in Georgia’s military expenditures in 2005. In
this military roster, the neighboring Southern Caucasian republics of
Azerbaijan and Armenia show increases in their armament expenditures
of 51% and 23% respectively.
What must one see behind this dizzying rise in military expenditures
by the Georgians? The Georgian authorities claim that it is linked to
the reforms the country is undertaking to integrate into NATO. Some
international capitals, particularly Moscow, object that Tbilisi’s
intention is to launch an armed reconquest of the secessionist regions
of Abkhazia and Southern Ossetia. One day after the publication
of SIPRI’s report, the Russian minister of defense, Sergei Ivanov,
in no way failed to highlight that the significant augmentation of
Georgian military expenditures elicited an “incontestable worry.”
Today, the Georgian defense budget totals 397.4 million laris (178
million euros), approximately 3% of the GDP. Georgia’s defense budget
also receives important aid from the United States and NATO.
Reforming Georgian Defense
In terms of defense, it is with a loud voice that the Georgian
government formulates itsthree main objectives. The first is to
facilitate the process of integration with NATO. “Our ultimate goal is
to equip the country with permanent armed forces and forces which are
interoperable with the Alliance’s other units in order to contribute
to international peace-keeping operations,” said Mamuka Kudava,
the Georgian vice-minister of defense, recalling immediately that 8%
of the Georgian armed forces are currently mobilized in peacekeeping
operations.
A second target in the Georgian ministry of defense’s line of sight
is the reformation of its system of management. For Mr. Kudava,
this means “using our logistical, financial and human resources
efficiently, and rendering the decision making and implementation
process more effective.” One example of the reforms underway is that
the Georgian defense ministry is giving its officer corps a face
lift. The actual command structure, inherited from the Soviet era,
will be progressively remodeled in order to equip the country with
an officer corps interarmed to NATO standards.
Trained and Equipped
The third and final declared objective of the ministry is to improve
the combat capacities of its armed forces. Any question of equipment
and training cannot fail to remind one that from May 2002 to April
2004, Georgia benefited from the Georgia Train and Equip Program
(GTEP), a program financed by the United States and led by American
instructors, which sought to form battalions of Georgian soldiers
for the ‘War on Terror.’
“Contrary to what some people were able to write, the goal of the
program was not simply to form a small group of Georgian soldiers
capable of assuring the protection of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC)
and the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzerum (BTE) pipelines and their maritime
approaches. The arrangement undertaken by the United States goes
well beyond that. It is very much a heavy rearrangement of all of
the components of the Georgian army including transforming infantry
troops into special forces, made up by armored units as well as
police, customs and security services,” explains Cyrille Gloaguen,
a specialist in military issues and Russian security at l’Institut
Fransais de Geopolitique and a former collaborator with the United
Nations Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG) from 1998 to 2000.
A New Military Base in Senaki
As the crowning event of 2006 and the ultimate pride of the Georgian
defense, the inauguration of the military base at Senaki in western
Georgia will have made some noise. Begun in 2005, the construction
of this new base conforming to NATO standards will not be completed
until the end of 2006. The total cost? According to the figures given
by the Georgian authorities, the cost will reach 35 million laris
(15.6 million euros).
Following its launch, the Saakashvili administration plans to open
a similar building site in the coming months at Gori in central
Georgia. “The construction of this base will be launched in 2006,”
confirms Mr. Kudava.
In the eyes of numerous international observers, the location of
these bases is not insignificant. At a minimum, it raises questions
and doubts because the Senaki base is situated only 40 kilometers
from the border with separatist Abkhazia. The base in Gori will be
separated from Tskhinvali, the capital of the secessionist republic
of Southern Ossetia, by only some thirty kilometers.
Even if Tbilisi pleads for a peaceful resolution to these separatist
conflicts, it is an undeniable fact that these two bases are as many
negative signals for the two unrecognized republics of Abkhazia and
Southern Ossetia. Although the construction of these bases does not
fit into a military project of restoring the integrity of Georgian
territory, Abkhazians and Southern Ossetians give little credit to
the declared intentions of the Georgian government.
Abkhazian and Southern Ossetian Defense
Southern Ossetia and Abkhazia are equipped with de facto ministers
of defense, armed forces and police forces. These structures are
not recognized by the international community and are consequently
categorized as paramilitaries. In addition, in these two separatist
regions actual armed paramilitary groups are evolving which are not,
or practically are not, under the control of the local authorities.
Finally, both Tskhinvali and Sukhumi have the ability to mobilize
a large portion of the male population in case of a threat or for
exercises.
But it is difficult to evaluate the latter group with precision. For
Southern Ossetia, estimates range between 2,000 and 6,000 men.
Concerning Abkhazia, one can retain that the last two military
exercises conducted in March and April 2006 mobilized 4,000 and 5,000
men respectively, including reservists.
The Russian peacekeeping forces deployed in Abkhazia are comprised of
1,300 men. In Southern Ossetia, the battalions of joint peacekeeping
forces are made up by 500 Russian soldiers to which 500 Northern
Ossetians and 300 Georgians are adjoined.
The Departure of Russian Soldiers from Georgia
Back to Georgia. Although it was largely publicized, the two building
sites at Senaki and Gori, one nearly completed and the other in the
planning stage, will not have stolen the thunder from the national
military agenda’s major push: the retreat of Russian troops from
Georgia.
In Moscow in 2005, the then Georgian minister of foreign affairs,
Salome Zurabishvili, demanded the closure of the two Russian bases on
Georgian territory (in Batumi and Akhalkalaki) and the process is under
way today. The Russian base at Akhalkalaki which will definitively
close its doors at the end of 2007 will be completely emptied of its
heavy equipment and weapons between now and the end of 2006.
In mid-June, ten infantry combat vehicles (BMP), a reconnaissance
vehicle (BRDM) as well as a light armored troop transport vehicle
(MT-LB) left the Akhalkalaki base in order to be put into use in
Russia via Azerbaijani territory. Five Kamaz armed with 100mm canons
also left the base in the direction of Armenia where the arms will be
stocked on the Russian military base at Gioumri (in western Armenia).
>>From Conscripts to Professionals
Another thread to follow is the professionalization of the Georgian
army. Today 60% of the country’s armed forces, which totaled
17,500 men in 2005, are comprised of volunteers. According to the
Georgian minister of defense, Irakli Okruashvili, conscripts will
be completely replaced with professionals by 2009. This will be a
heavy and expensive reform and it will see the light of day only if
the ministry in question undertakes the difficult task of rapidly
and completely introducing reforms which will improve the management
of the armed forces. This includes, notably, playing the budgetary
transparency card.
For now, Georgian observers maintain that projects like the opening
of the base at Senaki are necessary to follow the road which leads
to NATO membership. But a strong army starts with well nourished
soldiers. As expected, the ministry categorically rejects this type
of accusation, arguing mainly that salaries have been “augmented in
a significant way since 2004”, brandishing even “an average raise
of 250%.” Critics of the living conditions of Georgian conscripts in
barracks regularly dismiss this argument.
Russian Bases in Armenia
In the neighboring republic of Armenia which the frozen Nagorno
Karabakh conflict has pitted against Azerbaijan for more than ten
years, Pavel Safarian, the vice-minister of the economy and finances,
recently announced a sensible increase in the defense budget for
2007. 34% of the state budget will be earmarked for defense, totaling
approximately 90 billion drams (172 million euros). In 2004, the
defense budget in Armenia was 78 million euros, as opposed to 108
million euros in 2005 and 131 million euros in 2006.
Members of the Armenian armed forces totaled 45,000 men in 2005,
of which 41,500 were ground troops. On the other hand, nobody can
ignore the presence of Russian troops from the Southern division of
the Group of Russian forces in the Transcaucasus (GRVZ; approximately
4,500 men) which assures the protection of the country’s borders
under the auspices of the CIS’s collective security agreement.
American Radar Systems
On the Azerbaijani side, the authorities shy away from communicating
about the sensible subject of defense. Figures vary and Baku cultivates
the imprecision. The country’s armed forces will mobilize 67,000
people, of which 57,000 are for the sole ground army.
According to figures from the International Institute for Strategic
Studies in London, the defense budget will reach 470 million euros
this year, as opposed to 247 million euros in 2005 and 195 million
euros in 2004. And oil revenues could allow for a considerable
augmentation of the military portfolio for 2007. But once again,
it is hazardous to give exact figures about Azerbaijan. According to
the numbers published by the Institut de Relations Internationales
et Strategiques (IRIS) in its Annee Strategique 2006, the military
budget of Azerbaijan reached 124 million Euros in 2005.
Outside of these military expenditures, Azerbaijan has attracted
international attention for the agreement which links it to the
United States. The agreement concerns the installation of American
radar systems on its soil, one 20 kilometers north of the Iranian
border in southern Azerbaijan and the other north of Baku, near the
Russian border.
For Oksana Antonenko, director of the Russia-Eurasia program at the
International Institute for Strategic Studies, these radar systems
“have the official objective of controlling contraband, including
the likely traffic of weapons of mass destruction via the Caspian sea.”
“However, it is clear that the technical characteristics and the
location of these radar systems near the Iranian and Russian borders
could allow them to assemble information and monitor northern Iran and
the eastern portion of the Russian North Caucasus – two particularly
unstable regions,” insists Ms. Antonenko. “These radar systems could
also control other activities in the Caspian sea, such as activities
of a military type, which have increased considerably with the steady
militarization of the Caspian.”
A Reinforced Cooperation Between Baku and Washington
It seems that in this affair, the American interests are evident. But
why has the Ilham Aliev regime accepted this military agreement? “I
believe that the agreement must be considered in the larger context
of Baku’s projects which aim to reinforce military relations with
Washington~Z- which partially explains the need to counterbalance the
developing Russian military presence in Armenia~Z- and in terms of the
more pressing need of the Azerbaijanis to pull a profit from their
partnership with the Americans,” maintains the expert. “The policy
of balance which Azerbaijan is judiciously playing in developing good
relations with the United States, Russia and Iran guarantee that its
military cooperation with Washington will not undermine its relations
with its two important neighbors. One must note however that Russia
is less preoccupied by military links, potential and real alike,
tying Baku to Washington than by the military cooperation displayed
between Georgia and the United States.”
Although it is less visible, the military cooperation between
Washington and Baku is developing. A revealing sign was in Baku where,
at Washington’s initiative, a conference of non-proliferation in
the Black and Caspian seas was held in the autumn of 2005. For the
occasion, marine officers from the coastal countries of the two seas
were reunited under the auspices of a fictional exercise to oppose a
fictional state baptized “The Purple Republic”, suspected of terrorist
activities and of detonating a nuclear weapon. No particular state
was targeted. The only certainty is the callous one following: Of the
coastal states convened to participate in the exercise, only Russia
and Iran were absent.