BAKU: Ethnographic Investigation Of All Ancient AzerbaijaniTerritori

ETHNOGRAPHIC INVESTIGATION OF ALL ANCIENT AZERBAIJANI TERRITORIES WILL BE HELD

Azeri Press Agency
May 19 2006

“It is high time that Azerbaijan to lose in information war. Our not
responding to their propaganda has led to hard results. How long will
we pursue a policy on responding Armenians attacks?

It is already time that we begin to wage on war against their attacks
and be the side that attacks”, Director of History Institute of
Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences, parliamentarian Yagub
Mahmudov has told a press conference held today.(APA) Saying the
former leadership of the institute was not busy with this work
quite enough, Yagub Mahmudov said the institute will do its utmost
to expose Armenians real face to world community. “Of course, world
community will not believe to our opinions at first as we are late in
this matter. But we have to do it. We put theory of lost territories
forward.” According to scientist, recently Armenian State Committee
for Real Property, Manuk Vardanian has made a statement that the first
national atlas of Armenia will be published. In that atlas 40 thousand
geographical names will be registered, 7-8 thousand geographical names
characteristic to different nations will be changed and be substituted
in Armenian names. “7-8 thousand geographical names mentioned by
Vardanian, belong to Azerbaijan who were deported from the mentioned
territories. It is known to science that Armenians are not aborigine
population of South Caucasus, they have come there. Tribes considered
to be ancestors of Armenians approximately appeared in the middle I
millennium of BC in upper parts of Efrat river. They have moved here
from Balkan Peninsula. ” Yagub Mammadov said that “Garabagh History”
book which was published some months ago will be translated into
German and French languages.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

BAKU: Working Group To Defend Azerbaijani Army Officer Ramil Safarov

WORKING GROUP TO DEFEND AZERBAIJANI ARMY OFFICER RAMIL SAFAROV SET UP IN MOSCOW

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
May 19 2006

The Azerbaijan Youth Parliament in Moscow has set up a working group
to raise public awareness on trial of Azerbaijani army officer Ramil
Safarov, who was jailed to life in prison by Budapest court.

Head of the working group Rufet Azizov told APA that the working
group members met with the lawyer for Safarov, got court documents,
analyzed the Hungarian legislation and investigated youth strategy
on this issue. The working group is going to appeal Hungary’s state
bodies, media and common people.

“Our strategy is to achieve in the Court of Appeal passing a fair
decision, holding of objective information campaign on this issue
and expose Armenians real nature,” Azizov said.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

BAKU: Yerevan Appraises Meeting Of Azeri, Armenian FMs In Strasbourg

YEREVAN APPRAISES MEETING OF AZERI, ARMENIAN FMS IN STRASBOURG
Author: À.Mammadov

TREND Information, Azerbaijan
May 19 2006

Yerevan appraises the meeting of the Armenian and Azerbaijani Foreign
Ministers held in Strasburg on 18 May, the Armenian Foreign Ministry
announced. Armenia positively estimates the meeting though there
are still unsettled and uncoordinated issues, Trend reports citing
Mediamax.

The key objective of the meeting in Strasbourg was to set up
preparations for the forthcoming visit of the senior diplomats of
the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairing countries – Russia, France and the
United States to the region.

The meeting between Vardan Oskanian and Elmar Mammadyarov started in
presence of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs, while after hey continued
the talks on one-to-one.

“The meeting centered on principles and approaches to the resolution
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict laid on the table of talks,” the
Armenian Foreign Ministry announced.

During the visit to Armenia and Azerbaijan on 24-25 May the OSCE
Minsk Group co-chairs will be accompanied by Russian Deputy Foreign
Minister Grigoriy Karasin, US Assistant Secretary of State, Daniel
Fried, and the Director of Department for Political Issues of the
French Foreign Ministry, Stanislav D’Labule.

–Boundary_(ID_fSND7ErS+Y9sWwaGEafDqA)- –

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Montenegro: The Independence Referendum’s Regional Repercussions

MONTENEGRO: THE INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM’S REGIONAL REPERCUSSIONS

Stratfor
May 19 2006

Summary

Montenegro holds its independence referendum May 21. The result,
which will give the European Union a growing headache, will have
widespread repercussions. And the impact will resonate more strongly
the further from Montenegro one goes.

Analysis

Montenegro will finally vote on its referendum for independence from
Serbia on May 21. Serbia and Montenegro is the last component of the
five provinces once comprising Yugoslavia, though Montenegro has acted
as a de facto independent entity since 1997. Its tiny population of
612,000 — made up of a mix religions and ethnicities with no one
group forming a majority — is dwarfed by Serbia’s 11 million. A vote
for independence would mean that Serbia and Montenegro would exist
separately for the first time since 1918.

With tensions in Montenegro rising, the population is almost evenly
split on how it will vote. Recent polls show that from 46 percent
to 49 percent of voters support independence while 40 percent to 45
percent oppose independence.

The split has led to outbreaks of violence, though only within
Montenegro. Fights have broken out at rallies for both sides. For
example, hundreds of police were deployed to a May 15 rally in the
central town of Niksic where pro-independence activists wearing
shirts emblazoned with the word “da,” Serbo-Croatian for “yes,”
were attacked by pro-unionists.

The final decision on independence, however, belongs not exactly to
Montenegrins, but to the European Union, the power that exercises de
facto control over Montenegro’s future after intervening repeatedly in
the past to prevent the Balkan republic from seceding. The European
Union set a rule that Montenegro can have its vote of independence,
but that a simple majority is insufficient, and a pro-independence vote
must have above 55 percent. This condition has been blasted repeatedly
by pro-independence forces, which have asked what the European Union
will decide if the vote falls somewhere between 50-55 percent. Such
a result is precisely what is likely to happen, meaning Montenegro
will remain politically polarized in the post-referendum period —
and the problem of what to do will be left squarely in the European
Union’s lap.

A clear vote for independence means Montenegro will become an
EU protectorate on a possible route to EU membership. A vote
against independence or a vote failing to hit 55 percent will mean
Montenegro will become an EU protectorate existing under a painful
legal fiction. Though this status might include a possible route to
EU membership, Montenegro would still officially be linked to Serbia.

Either way, EU intervention has ensured Montenegro will continue to
be an EU problem.

The most obvious beneficiary of Montenegrin independence is Kosovo,
Serbia’s other secessionist region. Kosovo is already in talks — also
with the European Union — to win its own independence referendum. The
European Union, however, is stalling on a final decision, just like
it did with Montenegro. But while Montenegro’s vote is in question,
Kosovo’s is not. As the province’s population is 90 percent Albanian
Muslim, independence there is a certainty, with only the specific
terms left to be worked out. Kosovo’s identity, unlike Montenegro,
is thus not torn over the issue.

If Montenegro gains independence, loud cries for secession can be
anticipated as far away as the Caucasus, with the disputed territories
of Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia being the most likely
to initiate this clamor. All broke away from their parent states —
Azerbaijan in the case of Nagorno-Karabakh, Georgia for the other
two — in the early days of the post-Soviet period, and all three
have enjoyed de facto independence for over a decade. Bear in mind
that all three already claim independence; at issue is whether they
will seek to use international institutions to formalize this claim.

Nagorno-Karabakh is the most likely to move in this direction, in
that it holds easily defensible mountainous territory affording more
direct access to its most important ally, Armenia, than to its foe,
Azerbaijan. The second-most-likely territory to follow this path
is Abkhazia, which has soundly defeated the Georgian military on
multiple occasions. Abkhazia’s reputation for fielding fierce and
competent fighters is as strong as the Georgian military’s reputation
for ineffectiveness.

South Ossetia, however, is unlikely to prove as successful. It lacks
Nagorno-Karabakh’s geography and the martial skills of Abkhazia. Its
biggest advantage used to be the assistance it could count on from
its cousins in North Ossetia, who formerly could be expected to swarm
across the border to help in the event of Georgian-South Ossetian
hostilities. But since the atrocity at Beslan, the North Ossetians are
more concerned with protecting their own at home than with helping
relatives abroad fight a secessionist struggle. Only Russia could
help South Ossetia win its struggle, but such aid could well cost
Russia dearly in its own international relations.

Other secessionist regions and groups potentially seeking to take
advantage of any Montenegrin precedent include the Transdniestria
region of Moldova and the Bosnian Serbs or the Albanians of
Macedonia, but none of these three are likely to get much traction
from Montenegro’s potential split. Unlike Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia
and South Ossetia, Transdniestria is sandwiched between Moldova,
which wants the territory back, and Ukraine, which wants Moldova to
get the territory back. Both states bear hostility to Russia, the
one state which indirectly backs Transdniestria’s independence drive.

Without at least tacit approval from Ukraine, Transdniestria’s days
as a quasi-state are numbered.

The Serbs of Bosnia and Albanians of Macedonia face even more
obstacles. Both regions have European forces stationed on their
territory, specifically tasked with preventing any secessionist efforts
from manifesting. Moreover, Serbia, the entity most likely to lend
the Bosnian Serbs a hand, is emotionally, financially and militarily
exhausted — and certainly does not want to risk another military
confrontation with NATO, the power enforcing the peace in Bosnia.

for maps check:
ad_article.php?id=266430

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

http://www.stratfor.com/products/premium/re

Tanks Rolling North: Withdrawal Of Troops From Georgia: ScandalsCont

TANKS ROLLING NORTH: WITHDRAWAL OF TROOPS FROM GEORGIA: SCANDALS CONTINUE
Albert Yeremjan, Mikhail Moshkin

Source: Gazeta, May 16, 2006
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
May 19, 2006 Friday

Twenty-One Echelon With Military Hardware, Armaments And Material
Will Leave The Russian Base In Akhalkalaki (Georgia) Before October;
An update on the withdrawal from Georgia.

Russia is pulling out. The accords signed in Sochi this March, give
Russia until 2008, to withdraw from Georgia completely. The matter
concerns Russian military bases in Batumi and Akhalkalaki.

It took the military two days to load all armored vehicles of
the 62nd Base (Akhalkalaki) on flatcars at Tsalka station in East
Georgia. The process began on Saturday. Carrying seven T-72 tanks,
eight armored battle vehicles, two armored personnel carriers, and
four communications vehicles, the echelon departed for Russia via
Azerbaijan, yesterday.

“Running echelons across Azerbaijan will simplify matters, because it
will do away with the necessity to unload the military hardware from
flatcars and load it again to a different transport means,” Russian
Army Group in the Caucasus Second-in-Command Vladimir Kuparadze told
this correspondent. “The military hardware loaded in Tsalka will ride
the flatcars right to the destination in Russia.” Kuparadze did not
say what units of the Russian army were under orders to receive and
store the military hardware. Tactical and auxiliary teams made it to
Tsalka last week.

Departure of the second echelon is scheduled for May 23.

Twenty-one echelon with military hardware, armaments, and material
of the Akhalkalaki base will leave Tsalka before October, 2006.

The locals, mostly Armenians, are vexed to see the Russians pull out.

It is hardly surprising because the Russian base provided them with
jobs. Special forces of the Georgian Interior Ministry were moved to
Akhalkalaki on the night of May 13, to deal with all and any potential
disturbances. Defense Minister Irakly Okruashvili had said not long
before that Russia was orchestrating “provocations” in Akhalkalaki
“to be able to claim that it was the indigenous population that was
interfering with the withdrawal.”

Along with everything else, official Tbilisi accuses Moscow of
dereliction of its commitments with regard to the Gudauta base on the
territory of the unrecognized Republic of Abkhazia. The Georgians
demand international monitoring while Moscow replies that the base
is closed. The NATO delegation on a visit to Georgia last week was
not permitted to see the base. NATO representatives said that had had
Russia’s consent to a visit the base but the permit was annulled at
the last moment.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Un Debat Tronque Sur Le Genocide Armenien

UN DEBAT TRONQUE SUR LE GENOCIDE ARMENIEN
GORCE Bernard

La Croix , France
19 mai 2006

ASSEMBLEE. Les deputes PS et UMP se sont rejete la responsabilite
d’un debat inabouti sur le genocide armenien.

Les lois memorielles ne reussissent decidement pas aux
parlementaires. Après l’article polemique sur le rôle “positif”
de la colonisation, le genocide armenien de 1915 a provoque hier de
serieux remous dans l’hemicycle. A 13 heures, après que le president de
l’Assemblee nationale Jean-Louis Debre eut leve la seance, des dizaines
de partisans de la cause armenienne qui avaient pris place dans les
tribunes ont scande “le vote, le vote” et chante la Marseillaise. Les
deputes ont quitte leurs rangs dans la confusion.

“Comedien!”, lancait le depute UMP Eric Raoult a Francois Hollande venu
a la rescousse de ses troupes qui criaient au scandale. La confusion
allait durer un quart d’heure jusqu’a ce que les gendarmes evacuent
dans le calme les tribunes.

L’Assemblee nationale venait de consacrer une heure de debats a une
proposition de loi deposee par les socialistes visant a penaliser la
negation du genocide armenien reconnu officiellement par la France
en 2001. Le texte veut etendre au genocide armenien les peines
prevues par la loi Gayssot de 1990 qui permet de sanctionner de cinq
ans de prison et 45 000 Euro d’amende les auteurs de publications
contestant la realite de la Shoah. Sur le fond, cette proposition de
loi divise les deputes aussi bien a droite qu’a gauche. Le depute UMP
du Maine-et-Loire Marc Laffineur s’est fait l’echo du recent mouvement
de protestation des historiens contre les menaces qui pèsent sur la
liberte de la recherche. “Ce n’est pas a la loi d’ecrire l’histoire”,
a-t-il rappele.

Plusieurs parlementaires ont, a l’inverse, denonce l’actuelle
montee des entreprises negationnistes des reseaux turcs en France
pour justifier le vote du texte. Elue socialiste du Rhône, Martine
David a rappele les recentes manifestations contre l’edification d’un
memorial armenien a Lyon. Au nom des relations avec la Turquie, le
ministre des affaires etrangères Philippe Douste-Blazy a, quant a lui,
mis en garde les deputes sur les consequences que le vote du texte
pourrait avoir sur “les interets de la France”. Mais c’est moins la
bataille des arguments qui est a l’origine du derapage d’hier que le
contexte dans lequel a ete amene le debat. La proposition de loi a
ete inscrite a l’ordre du jour des seances de mardi et jeudi reserve
aux socialistes. Au total, le groupe PS avait depose trois textes
et, très tôt, il est apparu que le temps imparti a la discussion
de la proposition de loi sur le genocide armenien serait largement
insuffisant pour aboutir a un vote. Dès lors, socialistes et deputes
de l’UMP n’ont cesse de s’accuser de manoeuvres dilatoires.

Le president de l’Assemblee, Jean-Louis Debre, a tente de sauver les
apparences avec les presidents de groupe. Avec l’acceleration du vote
d’une proposition de loi sur… les pouvoirs du Parlement! “On est
ridicule”, s’est emporte le depute UMP Jerôme Charrier qui a prefere
quitter l’hemicycle. À midi, quand le genocide armenien est enfin
aborde, le temps de parole est finalement ramene a cinq minutes par
personne pour deux orateurs par groupe. “C’est du sabotage”, lance des
tribunes une femme. Une petite heure plus tard, l’examen du texte est
suspendu, et renvoye a une seance ulterieure. Les milieux armeniens
risquent d’attendre longtemps.

–Boundary_(ID_gMM/nyO0izxbPfs8yR6Cug) —

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Patrick Devedjian : “Un Desastre Pour Le Parlement”

PATRICK DEVEDJIAN : “UN DESASTRE POUR LE PARLEMENT”

Le Figaro, France
19 mai 2006

LE FIGARO.- Etes-vous surpris par l’issue du debat de ce matin ?

PATRICK DEVEDJIAN.- Je ne pensais pas qu’on oserait aller jusque-la.

La comedie que nous venons de vivre consistait a faire traîner les
debats en longueur pour eviter un vote sur la proposition de loi. La
manoeuvre a ete organisee de concert par le president du groupe
socialiste et une partie de la droite, manifestement en service
commande. C’est un desastre pour le Parlement, qui devient le seul
lieu où il semble interdit de debattre des preoccupations des Francais.

Le gouvernement a lui aussi avance des arguments de fond pour justifier
son hostilite… Le gouvernement etait represente par le ministre
des Affaires etrangères, qui a explique qu’il ne fallait pas faire
de la peine a la Turquie en adoptant cette proposition de loi.

Je suis choque qu’il ait utilise l’argument des relations commerciales,
qui est non seulement immoral, mais faux. Dois-je rappeler que le
genocide armenien a fait environ un million et demi de victimes ? De
surcroît, l’economie de marche n’obeit pas aux ordres d’Ankara :
en 2001, le Parlement francais a adopte une loi reconnaissant le
genocide armenien, et la Turquie a menace d’adopter des mesures de
retorsion. Or, l’annee suivante, nos exportations vers la Turquie ont
fait un bond de 32% Et que repondez-vous aux historiens, qui ont eux
aussi fait part de leur opposition au texte ?

L’histoire n’est pas la propriete privee des historiens. Le genocide
n’est pas seulement un fait historique, c’est aussi un concept
juridique defini par le Code penal francais. Le Parlement est a sa
place en disant le droit. Pour autant, je suis favorable a ce que la
recherche historique reste a l’abri de toute poursuite. Le problème que
nous devons affronter, c’est celui du negationnisme turc qui s’exprime
aujourd’hui sans pudeur en France. L’intervention du legislateur est
indispensable pour eviter des affrontements communautaires.

–Boundary_(ID_KKyusVNxyVf1in6Teh zIYg)–

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Genocide Armenien : La Proposition De Loi Attendra

GENOCIDE ARMENIEN : LA PROPOSITION DE LOI ATTENDRA
Guillaume Perrault

Le Figaro, France
19 mai 2006

“J’AI HONTE d’etre francaise ! C’est une mascarade indigne.” La jeune
etudiante d’origine armenienne, venue de Marseille pour assister au
vote des deputes sur la proposition de loi PS sanctionnant la negation
du genocide armenien, doit reprimer ses larmes. Le president de
l’Assemblee, Jean-Louis Debre, a leve la seance vers 13 h 5, alors que
l’examen du texte n’etait pas acheve et pouvait encore se poursuivre
pendant au moins une demi-heure. Les quarante deputes de tous bords
presents dans l’hemicycle – en majorite acquis a la proposition de
loi controversee – n’ont donc pu se prononcer par un vote.

Et Jean-Louis Debre a ensuite confirme que l’examen du texte
ne devrait pas reprendre avant le mois de novembre, date de
la prochaine seance reservee aux propositions de loi PS. Dès
que le president de l’Assemblee eut leve la seance, deux cents
Francais d’origine armenienne, presents dans les tribunes, ont
crie a pleins poumons dans l’hemicycle : “le vote !, le vote !”,
avant d’entonner la Marseillaise et d’etre peu a peu evacues sans
brutalite. Ainsi s’est achevee une seance confuse et penible pendant
laquelle les deputes PS, leurs homologues UMP, Jean-Louis Debre et
le gouvernement se sont accuses mutuellement de “jouer la montre”
pour que l’Assemblee n’ait pas a assumer un vote sur cette delicate
question. La matinee avait mal commence. L’examen de deux textes
inscrits a l’ordre du jour d’une autre seance reservee au groupe
socialiste, mardi dernier, avait pris beaucoup de retard. La fin de
ces debats a donc eu lieu hier de 9 h 30 a midi, empietant sur le
temps initialement imparti au texte sur le genocide armenien. Après
plusieurs incidents de seance, Jean-Marc Ayrault a mis les pieds dans
le plat a 11 h 30 : “je demande que l’on reporte le debat sur le
genocide armenien a la prochaine niche parlementaire, en novembre,
faute de temps suffisant pour l’examiner”. “Quelle hypocrisie !,
retorque Philippe Pemezec (UMP, Hauts-de-Seine). Vous avez inscrit
trois textes a l’ordre du jour que vous maîtrisez pour etre sûr que
le troisième ne puisse aboutir”. Francois Rochebloine (UDF, Loire)
accuse alors le gouvernement de faire traîner les debats en longueur :
“le garde des Sceaux, qui d’habitude parle vite, semblait ce matin
determine a prendre tout son temps”. Jean-Marc Ayrault change ensuite
soudain d’avis et – après s’etre entretenu avec Jean-Louis Debre –
“demande que la proposition de loi sur le genocide armenien soit
bien examinee”. Protestations de tous bancs La discussion tant
attendue s’engage enfin a midi. Le ministre des Affaires etrangères,
Philippe Douste-Blazy, engage les hostilites avec les deputes : “le
texte qui vous est soumis serait considere, qu’on le veuille ou non,
comme un geste inamical par la très grande majorite du peuple turc,
assure l’hôte du Quai d’Orsay. Cela ne pourrait manquer d’avoir des
consequences politiques serieuses et d’affaiblir notre influence
non seulement en Turquie, mais dans l’ensemble de la region”. Les
protestations fusent sur tous les bancs. “Nous voulons dire aux Turcs,
sans porter le moindre jugement, qu’une nation ne s’affaiblit pas en
reconnaissant son passe”, repond Didier Migaud (PS, Drôme).

“En 2005, la faculte de medecine d’Istanbul a demande le rapatriement
de la depouille du docteur Behaeddine Chakir, ideologue du genocide,
pour lui faire des obsèques officielles !”, rencherit Roland Blum
(UMP, Bouches-du-Rhône). Alors que la discussion parlementaire bat
son plein, Jean-Louis Debre lève brutalement la seance et quitte
l’hemicycle avec une rare celerite.

–Boundary_(ID_MMsXhDEXeMJlm1qomtxjfA)- –

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Armenian To Play In Germany For Iran’s Soccer Squad

ARMENIAN TO PLAY IN GERMANY FOR IRAN’S SOCCER SQUAD

Armenpress
May 19 2006

YEREVAN, MAY 19, ARMENPRESS: Iran football boss Branko Ivankovic has
picked up ethnic Armenian Andranik Teymourian as the only Christian
player of his 23-man squad for this summer’s World Cu in Germany.

The Armenian language newspaper ‘Alik,’ published in Tehran< said
in a series of recent games of Iran’s national squad Teymourian has
displayed himself as an excellent player. Ivankovic described him as
‘new and exceptional phenomenon in the Iranian football.”

Teymourian began his soccer carrier at 17 playing first for Ararat
Armenian team of Tehran, then he moved to Abumoslem FC.

The Iranians have been drawn in Group D to face Mexico, Portugal and
Angola. Ivankovic’s squad features also veteran striker Ali Daei, who
will be playing in his second World Cup after appearing in France eight
years ago, while there are also five Europe-based players selected,
including Bayern Munich’s former Asian Player of the Year Ali Karimi

Andranik Mihranian: Settlement Of Nagorno Karabakh Issue DependsNeit

ANDRANIK MIHRANIAN: SETTLEMENT OF NAGORNO KARABAKH ISSUE DEPENDS NEITHER ON YEREVAN NOR ON BAKU

AZG Armenian Daily
20/05/2006

The sooner Nagorno Karabakh conflict is settled, the better it is
for Armenia. Andranik Mihranian, political expert, said at a press
conference yesterday. At the same time, he stated that the settlement
of the conflict depends neither on Armenia, nor on Azerbaijan. “The
super powers settle it,” he said. He said that the speeding up of
the settlement process will follow from the interests of USA in the
region. He added that Baku will never agree with the independence of
NKR, while Armenia and NKR will not agree to see NKR in the structure
of Azerbaijan.That’s why the experts should find a solution that will
make Yerevan and Baku agree with a certain formulae.

Passing on to other regional issues Andranik Mihranian said the
Georgian-Russian relations add tension in the South Caucasus. He
stated that the Armenian authorities should figure out how can the
Georgian-Russian relations, as well as Georgia-Azerbaijan-Turkey circle
influence Armenia and how to avert isolation. He stated that Armenia’s
future is in cooperation with Russia and USA. At the same time he
emphasized the naivety of Georgian president Mikheil Saakashvili who
thinks that they may use Washington against Moscow. He said that
hysteria in Georgia in the last months is directed to drawing the
attention of USA to the fact that Georgia “is a small innocent victim
in the hands of a wild bear.”

Moreover, Mihranian thinks that the current Georgian authorities are
“the biggest enemy of the Georgian people.”

Mihranian stated that the American-Iranian relations are also
tense. He emphasized that the probable confrontation in Iran may have
great impact on Armenia, taking into account the fact that the only
trustworthy path for Armenia to the outer world stretches through
Iran. As for the path through Georgia, Mihranian emphasized that “the
neighbor of Armenia is not trustworthy. Besides, destabilization in
Iran may have negative impact on the construction of Iran-Armenia gas
pipeline, moreover cause destabilization in Azerbaijan, as well. The
construction of Kars-Akhalkalaki-Tbilisi railway may isolate Armenia
and the Armenian authorities should talk over Washington to exert
pressure on Turkey to hinder the construction.

Mihranian stated that he doesn’t think that the cold war between
USA and Russia will resume. In particular, he pointed out that
these countries compete for influence in the former Soviet republics
(Ukraine, Georgia, and the Central Asian countries). Mihranian said
that Russia’s position has changed and it wants to become a partner
country. But, being accustomed to the lack of competition, it doesn’t
want to quit its leading role. Mihranian said that in connection with
this, there can occur some clashes and local competition. As for
Armenia’s relations with super powers, Mihranian said that Yerevan
managed to preserve normal relations both with Russia and USA. He
conditioned this in some respect by the activities of the Armenian
lobby and well as by the coinciding interests. At the same time,
he pointed out the growth of the Azeri lobby in USA.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress