BAKU: Armenia Doesn’t Expect Turning Point In Negotiations Over Solu

ARMENIA DOESN’T EXPECT TURNING POINT IN NEGOTIATIONS OVER SOLUTION TO NAGORNO KARABAKH CONFLICT

APA
Jan 22 2010
Azerbaijan

Baku – APA. Armenian foreign minister Edward Nalbandian said he didn’t
expect turning point in the negotiations over the solution to Nagorno
Karabakh conflict in 2010. nalbandian said in a press conference in
Yerevan that if Azerbaijan showed constructiveness in the negotiations,
there would be certain progresses, APA reports quoting New Armenia.

"I don’t consider that there will be turning point in the negotiations
in 2010".

The minister also reminded about the meeting of Russian, Armenian
and Azerbaijani presidents in Sochi on January 25. "We are thankful
to the Russian president for his efforts for the solution to Nagorno
Karabakh conflict".

Armenia Emerges As Consistent And Reliable Partner

ARMENIA EMERGES AS CONSISTENT AND RELIABLE PARTNER

PanARMENIAN.Net
22.01.2010 18:17 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Today, Armenia emerges as consistent and reliable
partner, Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian said, summarizing
2009 activity results.

"World powers demonstrate respectful attitude towards Armenia, which
proved its reliability both on regional and international levels,"
the Foreign Minister told a news conference in Yerevan. According to
him, international community’s position on crucial regional issues
coincides with that of Yerevan.

As Edward Nalbandian stated, 2009’s activities of Armenian Foreign
Ministry were aimed at strengthening external security, provision
of favorable development conditions, increasing effectiveness of
Armenians’ human rights defense abroad and RA’s involvement in
international organizations.

"About 100 international agreements were concluded in 2009, serving
as a firm basis for strengthening of multilateral relations," Edward
Nalbandian stressed.

BAKU: Russia’s Federation Council Advisor To Chairman: Azerbaijan Sh

RUSSIA’S FEDERATION COUNCIL ADVISOR TO CHAIRMAN: AZERBAIJAN SHOULD NOT PAY MUCH ATTENTION TO ZHIRINOVSKY’S STATEMENT

Trend
Jan 22 2010
Azerbaijan

Adviser to Chairmen of Federation Council in Russia Gennady Burbulis
called Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s statement unreasonable and inconsistent
with the official position of Russia.

"This statement is unreasonable and inconsistent with Russia’s official
position and common sense of a politician," Adviser to Chairmen of
Federation Council in Russia Gennady Burbulis told Trend News on
Friday, commenting on Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s recent statement on the
need for Russia to recognize the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh.

It is an incredible test to comment Zhirinovsky, Burbulis said.

"I would not like Azerbaijan to attach great importance to this
statement," Burbulis said.

Vladimir Zhirinovsky said in an interview with the Latvian newspaper
Neatkarigas Rita Avize that if Nagorno-Karabakh itself proclaims its
independence, Russia must recognize it.

In this regard, the Azerbaijani Embassy in Russia sent a note to
Russia’s Foreign Ministry.

The Embassy expects for a formal response of Russian organizations,
Azerbaijani Ambassador to Russia Polad Bulbuloglu told Trend News
today.

The note expresses a protest against such appeals of Russian
parliamentary vice-speaker. It indicates that such remarks of Russia’s
State Duma representatives do not correspond with the spirit of
relations between the two countries.

The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988
when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Armenian
armed forces have occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan since 1992,
including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and 7 surrounding districts.

Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a ceasefire agreement in 1994.

The co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group – Russia, France, and the U.S. –
are currently holding the peace negotiations.

Armenia has not yet implemented the U.N. General Assembly’s resolutions
on the liberation of the Nagorno-Karabakh region and the occupied
territories.

Tripartite Meeting Of Presidents Of Armenia, Russia And Azerbaijan T

TRIPARTITE MEETING OF PRESIDENTS OF ARMENIA, RUSSIA AND AZERBAIJAN TO BE HELD ON JANUARY 25 IN SOCHI

Noyan Tapan
Jan 21, 2010

YEREVAN, JANUARY 21, NOYAN TAPAN. A tripartite meeting of RA President
Serzh Sargsyan, RF President Dmitry Medvedev and Azeri President
Ilham Aliyev dedicated to the Nagorno Karabakh settlement will be
held on January 25 in Sochi. Noyan Tapan was informed about it by RA
President’s Press Office.

Freedom House Assessments Can Be Viewed As Pressure On Armenia

FREEDOM HOUSE ASSESSMENTS CAN BE VIEWED AS PRESSURE ON ARMENIA

PanARMENIAN.Net
20.01.2010 12:58 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Heritage party secretary Larisa Alaverdyan said
she can’t approve Freedom House Country Report on Armenia, since the
organization displays a politicized approach to the problem.

"Freedom House’s assessments can be viewed as pressure on Armenia,
possibly conditioned by the Armenian-Turkish relations or the Karabakh
conflict settlement process. If Armenia were more flexible in the
Karabakh issue, the language of the report would have been milder,"
she said.

Freedom House is an independent watchdog organization that supports
the expansion of freedom around the world. Freedom House supports
democratic change, monitors freedom, and advocates for democracy and
human rights.

The organization was founded by Wendell Willkie and Eleanor Roosevelt
in 1941, and describes itself as "a clear voice for democracy and
freedom around the world." The group states "American leadership in
international affairs is essential to the cause of human rights and
freedom" and that this can primarily be achieved through the group’s
"analysis, advocacy, and action". Freedom House receives about 66% of
its budget from the U.S. government and is criticized for furthering
the latter’s interests.

Founded in 2002, Heritage , a National Liberal Party, is national by
its roots, liberal in its economic principle, and an advocate of the
democratic system of governance and due process for its citizens. The
party’s objective is the development of Armenia as a democratic,
lawful, and rights-based country that anchors its domestic and foreign
policies in the nation’s sovereign interest. During the party’s Third
Congress on May 30, 2005, Raffi K. Hovannisian was elected chairman.

The other eight members of the party board were elected by secret vote.

It’s Impossible To Force Armenia To Make One-Sided Concession

IT’S IMPOSSIBLE TO FORCE ARMENIA TO MAKE ONE-SIDED CONCESSION

Aysor
Jan 20 2010
Armenia

Turkey’s position to impose conditions in the process of normalisation
of relations with Armenia lets Armenia tighten its position in the
process of settlement of the Karabakh conflict, said a spokesperson for
Prosperous Armenia Party’s leader Gagik Tsarukian, Khachik Galstian.

"Turkey has chosen a wrong strategy. History shows that such steps
cannot bring success. In 1994, when the process of settlement of the
Karabakh conflict stepped up after Azerbaijan signed an agreement
on cessation of hostilities, Turkey then showed an unprecedented
destructivity. As a result, the process failed. Now Turkey implements
the same policy.

"Neither power, no one can force Armenia to make one-sided concession
in the Karabakh talks and on Karabakh which is at the great national
and state importance to Armenia," said Khachik Galstian.

Wide Armenian Current-Account Gap Narrows Y/Y In Q3 2009

WIDE ARMENIAN CURRENT-ACCOUNT GAP NARROWS Y/Y IN Q3 2009
by Venla Sipila

World Markets Research Centre
Global Insight
January 18, 2010

According to the latest balance-of-payments figures from the country’s
National Statistics Service, the Armenian current-account deficit in
the first nine months of the year amounted to US$795.2 million, ARKA
News reports. This level marks narrowing of 8.5%, or US$74 million,
from the same period in 2008. As expected, current-account developments
were largely determined by merchandise trade trends.

Indeed, the trade deficit on a balance of payments basis for the first
three quarters of the year came in at US$1.392 billion, which marks
a narrowing of US$403 million in annual comparison, as a result of
exports falling by some 41% year-on-year (y/y) and imports easing by
around 28%. The deficit on the service balance narrowed to US$166.8
million, while the surplus on the income account also decreased and
stood at US$219.8 million.

Meanwhile, the balance on the current transfers account registered
a surplus of US$555.3 million, also narrowing in y/y terms. The
reported external balance for the January-September period implies a
current-account deficit of US$287.4 million for the third quarter of
2009. This result marks a narrowing of 17% y/y, after annual comparison
had shown deterioration in the second quarter. In quarter-on-quarter
(q/q) terms, the deficit increased by 7.1%, after deepening by 12.2%
q/q in the second quarter and decreasing by over 53% q/q in the
first quarter.

Significance:While the current-account deficit is easing in nominal
terms, ratio of the shortfall to the GDP widened, reaching some
13.3% of estimated GDP for the January-September period, against
10.2% of GDP in the same period in 2008. Thus, Armenian external
imbalance continues to present a major source of risk financial
risk, and financing it has necessitated rapid growth in government’s
external borrowing (seeArmenia: 1 December 2009: ). Reflecting the
severity of the economic downturn and the financial pressures, the
International Monetary Fund (IMF) has even allowed for a modification
in payment schedules of its stand-by programme with the country,
bringing instalments forward, while also accepting revisions to
performance criteria (seeArmenia: 3 November 2009:). Good relations
with multilateral lenders should just keep Armenia’s external finances
manageable, as long as Armenia adheres to IMF conditionality and shows
continued motivation to fulfil its reform targets and development
goals.

‘Heritage’ Sends A Thanksgiving Letter To Turkmenistan’s Embassy

‘HERITAGE’ SENDS A THANKSGIVING LETTER TO TURKMENISTAN’S EMBASSY

Aysor
Jan 19 2010
Armenia

Heritage party of Armenia has attended the memorial to victims
of Massacres in Azerbaijan of 1988-1990s, a spokesperson told
journalists. After prayers, Heritage’s members laid flowers and
wreaths. Besides, the party has written a thanksgiving letter to the
Embassy of Turkmenistan in Armenia.

"Dear friends, 20 years have passed after the genocide against
Armenian population of Azerbaijan. Dozens of thousands of Armenians
have been saved when passage-boats shipped them via the Caspian Sea to
Turkmenistan. People and government of Turkmenistan made every effort
to help Armenian refugees. Turkmenistan became a mother country for
these homeless people.

"The Heritage Party of Armenia thanks Turkmenistan and its people
for sincere helping Armenian people those days in January 1990s. We
will remember all these acts of good will handing the memory to
descendants," said in the letter.

Turkey vs. Israel: Emerging Conflict of Strategic Interest

Hellenic News of America
Jan 17 2010

Turkey vs. Israel: Emerging Conflict of Strategic Interest

The mass media in Israel, Turkey and the Arab world, have been
preoccupied in the last few days by another sudden and rather serious
diplomatic crisis in the Turkish-Israeli relations. This time the
insult was initiated by the Israelis intentionally, and apparently
orchestrated by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It came at the
anniversary of last year�s diplomatic scuffle that embarrassed many
Turks and Israelis, who believed that the two countries were strategic
partners with common interests in the Middle East.

As you may recall, it was about a year ago when the charismatic and
rhetorical Prime Minister of Turkey, Mr. Tayyip Erdogan, criticized
Israel publicly, in an International forum, for its brutal attack on
Gaza a few months earlier, which had thousands of innocent victims.
The Israeli President, Mr. Peres, who was present at the Davos
International Meeting, apparently took offense by it, but Erdogan
scored political points among peoples in the Middle East and beyond.
He became a kind of hero for the Muslim masses for having the courage
to say publically what other Muslim leaders would whisper only
privately.

Since then the situation has not improved, in spite of Israeli efforts
to patch up the conflict. The recent incident will make a bad
situation even worse diplomatically, with unforeseen consequences for
the future of the Turkish-Israeli relations and possible political
re-alignments in the Middle East. Indeed, the rudeness of this episode
was rather unusual for the diplomatic chronicles, even with ME
standards. The Turkish Ambassador, Mr. Celikkol, was invited by the
Israeli Undersecretary of State, Mr. Ayalon, to a meeting ostensibly
to receive the official expression of the displeasure of the Israeli
Government for a Turkish TV serial, which portrayed Israeli agents,
and Israeli people in general, in a negative light.

Mr. Ayalon arranged so that his displeasure would be visible as well
as audible to Turks and Israelis. In front of the rolling cameras he
refused to shake hands with the Ambassador of Turkey; he had the
Turkish flag removed from the table in the meeting room; he placed the
visitor in a law couch, while he and his assistants were sited on high
armchairs looking down on the Turkish diplomat, who looked
uncomfortable in this strange and undiplomatic arrangement. But the
Turks got the message he meant to send them, and not surprisingly
reacted furiously, as befits men when they are insulted.

The President of Turkey, Mr. Gul, issued an ultimatum demanding a
formal apology by the Israeli Government, which found itself in an
embarrassing situation by the rude acts of its diplomats. It took the
intervention of the President of Israel, Mr. Peres, to persuade the
Netanyahu Government, which had supported Ayalon�s actions, to provide
Turkey with the apology which it demanded and deserved in this case.
At the end, the Israeli Deputy Minister made a `diplomatic statement’
stating that he `had no intention to personally humiliate’ the Turkish
Ambassador. This could only mean, in this context, that the Israelis�
intention was to insult and humiliate the State of Turkey itself,
through its Ambassador.

If so, this does not add up to an `apology’ to Turkey; but it has been
accepted as such by Mr. Erdogan himself, apparently in an effort to
de-escalate this diplomatic crisis between the allies, in light of the
expected visit to Turkey, this weekend, of the Israeli Minister of
Defense, Mr. Ehud Barak.

This situation would have been unthinkable a few years ago, before the
Islamist Party of Mr. Erdogan (the Party of Justice and Development),
came to power in 2002. This Islamist Party has capable and gifted
party members, such as Mr. Gul, who has become President of Turkey,
and Mr. Davutoglu, who was initially Erdogan�s political adviser and
has become now the Secretary of State. Working together as a team with
clear political goals, this `Turkish Triumvirate’ has brought many
democratic changes in Turkey and, above all, has transformed its
foreign policy. Turkey�s openings toward Armenia, the Kurds, Syria,
Iraq, and even Greece (but not yet Cyprus), are real achievements and
to their credit.

This one thing, therefore, is clear for political observers of the
Middle East: Under Erdogan�s charismatic leadership, Turkey is moving
fast in many diplomatic fronts and is increasingly recognized as a
growing regional power that is capable of affecting the politics of
the Middle East in fundamental ways.

This political fact is not good news for the State of Israel, which
was used to having a monopoly of power in the region due to its
favorable connection to the Pentagon and the US Government, via the
Jewish Lobby in Washington. Traditionally, Israel has thus controlled
or manipulated arms sales to the Turkish Governments, since the time
of its establishment, and continuously during the Cold War years.
Because the threat of Communism was `the real enemy’ all those years,
democratic considerations and human rights violations had to be
covered up or brutally crushed by a series of military interventions.
So, having good relations with the State of Israel was perceived in
Turkey as indispensible for the Military establishment, no matter how
the Israelis behaved toward the Palestinians and other Arabs and
Muslims in the Middle East. The Turkish Triumvirate came to change
this convenient arrangement.

The first great political victory of the newly elected Erdogan
Government came in the spring of 2003, when George W. Bush decided to
attack Iraq and needed help from Turkey, our NATO ally. To facilitate
the war effort, the American Government at that time needed to open a
second front in the North of Iraq. Bush thought that he could persuade
the Turks to go along with the NATO plan, or buy them out. But Erdogan
proved him wrong. Turkey would not allow NATO forces to enter Iraq
from its soil. This sounds unbelievable, but it did happen. It is a
historical fact: Turkey humiliated America!

Now is the turn of Israel to be humiliated by apologizing to Turkey
for the mistreatment of its diplomat, instead of Turkey apologizing to
Israel for the way its public media portray the State of Israel and
its citizens! Apparently the Turkish Triumvirate does not think that
it needs Israeli cooperation for the procurement of American arms, if
it can buy them from Russia which is closer and needs the cash.

Things are changing indeed in Turkey and in the Middle East, thanks to
Mr. Davutoglu, Mr. Gul, and especially Mr. Erdogan. He has been lucky
so far, but if his good luck continues for another year or two, he may
become a great Turkish leader, much greater than Kemal Ataturk. The
later established a nominally `secular’ Republic at the end of World
War I, about the same time when Lenin and Stalin were trying
desperately to establish the first Communist Government and the
`Socialist Society’ in the Soviet Union. It is significant that the
Kemal�s `secularism’ has lasted longer than the Leninist-Stalinist
experiment. Its success might have had something to do with the
Israeli connection and its unwavering support over the years. In all
probability the Kemalist era in Turkey is coming to an end finally and
we will be witnessing its demise in the near future, if the luck of
Erdogan lasts a little longer and the Military does not react soon in
its usual and brutal way.

Anyway, one of the great achievements of Erdogan and his Government so
far has been the dexterous way that they have handled the process of
accession to the European Union. They have used it masterfully to
weaken the Military�s chocking hold on political power and
developments in Turkey. Thus, they keep knocking on the door of the
EU, although they (at least the Triumvirate) realize that the outcome
is uncertain and, in all probability, will be negative at the end of a
long process. Being smart men and shrewd political leaders, they have
started preparing the ground for an alternative solution to the
Turkish Problem. If they cannot be part of the EU, hanging on its
economic tail, like Greece and other poor Mediterranean members, then
why not try to be the leading power of the Muslim world in the Middle
East and beyond? Why not hope for a revival of the `Ottoman Empire’ by
other means?

This being the case, it would not be surprising if the Erdogan
Government came up with some new proposals for the reunification of
Cyprus and for the reopening of the Halki Theological School. Both
these political moves can help them regarding their European
aspirations and regional designs.

The Erdogan Government cannot be serious when it claims to care for
the Roma minority, while ignoring the Ecumenical Patriarchate and His
All Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew. If Mr. Davutoglu finds
inappropriate the `crucifixion’ metaphor, he could and should do
something to alleviate the burden that his Holiness caries having to
operate under the oppressive conditions established by the Kemalist
regime almost a century ago. It is time for change in this front too,
and good will may follow indeed.

BAKU: Opposition MPs plan to appeal to president on Karabakh

news.az, Azerbaijan
Jan 16 2010

Opposition MPs plan to appeal to president on Karabakh
Sat 16 January 2010 | 08:01 GMT Text size:

Panah Huseyn News.Az interviews Panah Huseyn, head of Azerbaijan’s
opposition Musavat Party group of deputies in parliament.

As a member of the parliamentary opposition, you are part of the
minority in the Milli Majlis (Azerbaijani parliament). What
legislative initiatives has your group proposed?

The Musavat deputies’ group has presented 11 bills and draft decisions
to the Milli Majlis as legislative initiatives. Unfortunately, the
bills that we submitted have hardly been considered in the Milli
Majlis. However, in line with the internal procedures of the Milli
Majlis, bills must be considered within six months of submission. The
documents we have submitted are based on the public interest: they
include bills `On the work of the opposition", "On recognition of the
PKK as a terrorist organization’, `On recognition of the Khojaly
genocide’ and `On citizenship’, as well as a bill on the introduction
of amendments and alterations to the Electoral Code.

Practice shows that the Milli Majlis views our group’s legislative
initiatives as a formality. The draft documents that we submit are not
discussed by the parliamentary committees. During this period the
parliamentary committees have considered only three draft documents
submitted by the opposition deputies’ group to the Milli Majlis. These
are the draft laws `On freedom of religion’ and `On 1 May’ and
amendments to the Electoral Code. However, the parliamentary
committees took verbal decisions on alleged recommendations of these
bills for consideration in the Milli Majlis but then this procedure
was said to have been suspended and no reason was given.

What legislative plans does the Musavat deputies’ group have for the
upcoming session of parliament?

This is the last session of the third convocation of the Milli Majlis.
Another session will be held in the autumn but only two or three
sittings will be held because of the parliamentary elections in
November. Therefore during the spring session we will insist on the
discussion of our bill on amendments and alterations to the Electoral
Code. During the spring session of the Milli Majlis we will submit an
bill on a pardon for consideration. The opposition deputies’ group
will also submit for consideration to the Majlis a draft appeal by
parliament to the head of state on the situation on the Karabakh
conflict settlement. Earlier we submitted the text of such an appeal
to the parliamentary leadership but this issue was not put up for
discussion. We can of course draw up and submit for consideration in
parliament bills that are relevant to the changing situation.

But as we have just six months of legislative work left, it is
unlikely that our bills will be considered. After all, bills submitted
by our group to the Milli Majlis two or three years ago have not been
put up for discussion yet.

What should be done to change this situation?

There is now a serious need for reform to improve the work of the
Milli Majlis and for bills to improve the effective functioning of the
legislature. Unfortunately, most breaches of legislation occur during
the execution of laws regulating the work of the Milli Majlis. This is
also a sign of legal nihilism in the country.

Does the Musavat Party make good use of opportunities during visits to
foreign countries and at international events?

The Musavat Party has the largest opposition group of deputies in
parliament. Yet, despite numerous appeals to the Milli Majlis
leadership, this group is not widely represented in the parliamentary
committees or the revision commission and the commission on ethics.
Moreover, our deputies’ group is not represented in Azerbaijani
parliamentary delegations to international organizations. This shows
the lack of parliamentary culture. Other countries create the right
conditions for opposition deputies to participate in international
events. We even lack the appropriate legislation regulating these
issues. In our country these issues are regulated by the Milli Majlis
chairman. Azerbaijani legislation lacks laws regulating the
participation of deputies in national parliamentary delegations to
international organizations.

In 2005 the Milli Majlis leadership included a member of the Musavat
deputies’ group, Iltizam Akberli, in the Azerbaijani delegation to the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) when it was
formed a second time but without coordinating this issue with us.
Akberli was included in the delegation as a secondary member and in
this capacity he has no opportunity to take part in PACE sessions.
Meanwhile, as Akberli’s candidacy was not coordinated with our group,
we rejected his participation in PACE events as a sign of protest.
Azerbaijan’s parliamentary delegations to international organizations
are, therefore, composed only of deputies from the ruling and
pro-government parties. Opposition representatives are not included in
the national delegations at all.

What issues is your deputies’ group going to tackle in light of the
parliamentary elections in Azerbaijan due in November?

Our initiative on amendments to the Electoral Code seeks to achieve
our goals. Our proposed amendments envisage changing the principle
behind the formation of election commissions. We think these
amendments may become a stimulus for the democratization of the
election process. In addition, each of us is a party member and in
this capacity we will all take an active part in the election
campaign.

Namik Guseynov
News.Az