Turkish press: Why is Kamala Harris’ vice presidential candidacy important?

Joe Biden (L), U.S. Democratic presidential candidate and former vice president, and Kamala Harris, U.S. senator and Democratic candidate for vice president, celebrate after Biden accepted the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination during the final night of the Democratic National Convention, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, U.S., Aug. 20, 2020. (Reuters Photo)

U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden accepted his party’s nomination last week with one of the most powerful speeches of his career. It was different from previous conventions because of the COVID-19 concerns. It was a virtual Democratic convention that unified around Biden and U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris. Former presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders and even some Republicans made speeches during the convention.

Obviously, after Biden introduced Harris as his vice presidential candidate, everyone responded differently to the decision. Capping the joyful response from the Democratic Party, the Biden-Harris campaign announced that they had raised $26 million in the 24 hours after declaring his vice presidential pick – the latest development revealing that his own campaign and the reaction campaign against U.S. President Donald Trump have converged. As far as I can see, Harris is a threat to the Trump campaign, as the president started targeting Harris on Day One. It will be interesting to watch Vice President Mike Pence and Harris debate during a televised face-off on Oct. 7.

The 55-year-old senator is the daughter of an Indian mother and a Jamaican father. In 2003, she served as the district attorney in San Francisco and then as the attorney general of California. Known for her sensitivity to civil rights and her identity as a lawyer, Harris’s announcement on Martin Luther King Jr. Day regarding her presidential candidacy attracted notice. After ending her presidential bid, she kept good relations with Biden and his team. In fact, Harris’s candidacy as vice president is unsurprising, for she had been seen as the No. 1 candidate for the last three months.

Biden’s subsequent statements in March 2020 were significant: “The most important thing is that it has to be someone who, the day after they’re picked, is prepared to be president of the United States of America if something happened.” In four years, Biden will turn 81 years old. Many in the U.S. believe that Biden will take office for one term and leave the office to Harris. Of course, Biden and Harris’s first term and their level of success will become clearer when the time comes.

What I mean is that Biden did not introduce Harris as his vice presidential candidate for nothing. He has chosen a vice presidential candidate who will support him and help defeat Trump. We can clearly see that Harris is a long-term investment. Why not? At one time, Obama was not even given a chance because he was African American, but he ended up leading the country for eight years. It wouldn’t be surprising if Harris became the first African American and Indian American woman to lead the country one day.

Harris’ foreign, Turkey policy

Harris was one of the members of the Intelligence and Homeland Security Committee in the U.S. Senate and in particular, one of the prominent senators in the congressional Russia investigation sessions. She voted against increasing the defense budget and stated that she did not want the American Army to be involved in many places abroad. Stating that she cannot be silent about what has been done to the Uighur Turks in China, she also asserted that Trump’s heavy quotas for China are wrong.

She has stated, as Biden has, that arms sales to Saudi Arabia should be blocked, and she reacted to Saudi dissident and journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s murder. She also stated that Israel is an important ally and that she sides with the two-state solution on the matter of Israel and Palestine.

The only conspicuous statement by Harris on Turkey was about the alleged Armenian genocide. It should not come as a surprise, given that she is a politician representing California. Since a powerful Armenian diaspora lives in California, many politicians in the state have made statements against Turkey. Harris has said that it is wrong of Trump to decide to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria and was heavily critical of this. It is important to remember that Biden and Harris would support PKK/YPG terrorists in Syria.

We have seen many discrepancies between what is being said during presidential campaigns and what happens after the candidate takes office. If Trump gets reelected, there will not be any changes to bilateral relations. If Biden and Harris get elected, it will not be an easy process for Turkish-American relations; however, I believe that sincere communication and open diplomacy are always a solution to problems.

In 2011, Trump donated $6,000 to Harris to support her campaign, and now he is slamming her. While she was criticizing Biden harshly for racism last year, she now works for Biden.

This is what’s called politics. You never know what tomorrow holds.

Soon, we will see Harris in the spotlight more than Biden. She is ambitious and has a lot of supporters due to her powerful speeches at the podium. If the elections go as the Democrats wish, it could be said that Biden has even paved the way for Harris’s future presidency.

*Senior foreign policy expert, a 2019 Ellis Island Medal of Honor recipient

Will Turkey establish a military base in Azerbaijan?

Daily Sabah
By Basel Haj Jasem
Aug 21, 2020
The political and media circles in the former Soviet countries
continually discuss the issue of establishing a Turkish military base
in the Republic of Azerbaijan in the South Caucasus. The discussion of
the Turkish military presence in Azerbaijan is always linked to the
coldness or warmth of relations between Moscow and Ankara, especially
when the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict flares up.
Russia is Turkey's biggest competitor in the region. If we take into
account Turkey’s membership in NATO, the establishment of a Turkish
military base in Azerbaijan to ensure military and political balance
would create a counterweight to the Russian military base in Armenia.
When a Turkish military base is established, it directly complicates
the bilateral relations of Russia and Azerbaijan and would also become
a source of concern to Iran.
The bilateral defense cooperation between Turkey and Azerbaijan
defines two legal frameworks. The first one, which was established in
the early 1990s, enables military training for Azerbaijani personnel
in Turkish military institutions. The second framework is the
"strategic partnership" agreement, which explicitly states that the
two countries will help each other if one of them demanded its right
to self-defense under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.
Although the nature of this "assistance" was subject to bilateral
consultations, the agreement clearly affirmed the possibility of using
military means in emergency circumstances.
On Aug. 13, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev met with Turkish
Defense Minister Hulusi Akar, Chief of Staff Gen. Yaşar Güler,
commanders of the Turkish land, air and naval forces, and other
members of the high-level Turkish military delegation in Azerbaijan.
On the visit, both sides attended part of a large-scale
Turkish-Azerbaijani joint military maneuver in the Azerbaijani regions
of Baku, Nakhchivan, Kajah, Kordimer and Yulakh. Those exercises began
on July 29 and continued until mid-August.
In mid-July, a high-level Azerbaijani military delegation had visited
Turkey and met with the Turkish defense minister and most of the
military leaders in the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK).
According to Azerbaijani media, very important documents were prepared
between Baku and Ankara, as the two sides discussed the issue of
establishing a Turkish military base in Nakhchivan, Azerbaijan's
exclave bordering Turkey.
The Azerbaijani news site Menfal said that if relations between
Azerbaijan and Turkey are not yet able to move toward a deep alliance
due to the absence of certain legal steps, the current documents will
raise the level of the alliance between the two parties to the highest
level. As a result, the relations between Turkey and Azerbaijan will
become very close and will not only include military cooperation but
also political cooperation.
Azerbaijani political expert Gabel Husayn Ali said that during the
return visit of the high Turkish military delegation, issues of
establishing a Turkish military base in Nakhchivan (likely to have
reached a joint conclusion), and of establishing another military base
in Absheron Peninsula were discussed in detail.
In light of the close cooperation between Armenia and Iran, Armenians
fear this scenario. Tehran’s relations with Yerevan are stronger than
those with many neighboring Muslim countries. There is a concern in
Armenia about the possibility of Turkey’s participation in the
negotiation process over the Armenian-occupied Nagorno-Karabakh
region.
Ankara declares its position clearly by fully standing by its
"brother" Azerbaijan to regain its "occupied lands," where the two
republics, Azerbaijan and Armenia, have been witnessing a conflict
since the last century, over the Azerbaijani territory of
Nagorno-Karabakh, which is an Azerbaijani enclave occupied by an
Armenian majority.
In 1993, after five years of war, the Armenians controlled areas
within the territory of Azerbaijan, located between Nagorno-Karabakh
and Armenia, with an area of about 8,000 square kilometers (3,088
square miles), or about 20% of the area of Azerbaijan.
Whether Turkey will establish a base in Azerbaijan or not, it should
be noted that, even a few years ago, Turkey did not have military
bases outside its territory, except for its military presence in the
Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) in 1974, and today Turkey
has military bases in Somalia, Qatar, Iraq and Syria.
 

Armenian government to support grape growers, winemakers and brandy makers

Panorama, Armenia
Aug 13 2020

Economy 14:57 13/08/2020Armenia

The Armenian government on Thursday announced a measure to support grape growers, winemakers and brandy producers, who are among the hardest hit in the coronavirus pandemic.

According to the official figures, both the home sales and exports of the products have dropped by more than 30 percent due to the coronavirus crisis.

“All this has affected the companies in two ways: first, they have seen a decrease in monetary income due to a drop in sales, and second, due to the deterioration of the conditions in this area, banks are more cautious and reluctant to provide loans,” Minister of Economy Tigran Khachatryan told a weekly cabinet meeting, presenting the support program.

Under the support program, subsidized loans will be provided to grape suppliers, brandy and wine companies, while the government will fully subsidize the interests on the loans.

This is the 24th measure announced by the government to mitigate the economic impact of the pandemic.

Interference in scientific research on COVID-19 in Turkey

The Lancet
Multiple authors
Aug. 15, 2020
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), as it
was later named, was first identified in Wuhan, China, on Jan 7,
2020.1
Over the following months, the virus rapidly spread throughout the
world. The disease, COVID-19, was characterised as a pandemic by WHO
on March 11, 2020. On the same day, the Turkish Ministry of Health
reported the first case in Turkey.2
According to the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data
platform, which analyses the genomic epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2, the
disease reached Turkey mainly through Iran, with whom Turkey has
strong commercial and touristic ties, and Saudi Arabia, where
thousands of Turkish citizens travelled to visit the holy places until
mid-March, 2020.3
2 months after the first case, on May 11, 2020, the Turkish Ministry
of Health declared that the number of COVID-19 cases had reached 139
771, with 3841 deaths.2
However, the excess mortality for Istanbul alone during this period
was 4209 deaths. From 2016–19, the average number of deaths that
occurred in Istanbul was 23 232 for the period of March 11 to July 5.4
In 2020, this figure went up to 27 955 deaths. The excess mortality
found between March 11 and July 5, 2020, in Istanbul was 4723 deaths.4
There were at least 1952 unexplained deaths. However, the officially
reported COVID-19 mortality in the same period was 2771 deaths.5
Because no other serious mass health events were recorded at that
time, this discrepancy could be explained by non-compliance with WHO
codes from the International Classification of Diseases (tenth
edition).6
The official reporting system of Turkey only covered PCR-positive
cases. As of July 27, 2020, Turkey ranks fourth in the European region
for cases of COVID-19, with a total number of 225 173 patients and
5596 COVID-19 deaths,7
as reported by the Ministry of Health on the basis of PCR-positive cases alone.8
The establishment of a scientific board and full coverage of
treatment, and the encouragement of research by the Ministry of Health
and funding bodies such as the Scientific and Technological Research
Council of Turkey and the Health Institutes of Turkey were admirable
steps taken by the authorities in the beginning of the pandemic.
However, tension soon started building among the public sector and
medical and scientific organisations due to the Ministry of Health's
lack of transparency, its reluctance to share basic data, and its
refusal to collaborate. There were also concerns about the shortage of
personal protective equipment for health-care workers.8
The final stroke came with the control of COVID-19 research by the
Ministry of Health. Despite the great interest in research on COVID-19
in Turkey by researchers and physicians, the Turkish Ministry of
Health announced a mandatory application for permission for research
on COVID-19, before any application is made to ethics committees.9
This unprecedented decision was against the Constitution10
and laws regulating research activities in Turkey. It appears that
most submitted projects have been approved by the Ministry of Health,
but some projects, including a large, multicentre observational study
by the Turkish Thoracic Society, have been rejected without any clear
explanation.
The regular procedure for research activities in Turkey is well
defined. In keeping with the international regulations, researchers
must get approval from the independent ethics committee. The Turkish
Constitution clearly states that “everyone can learn science and art
freely and has the right to teach, explain, disseminate and research
in these areas”.10
The Science Academy, a member of the International Science Council,
has highlighted this fact.11
The Turkish Medical Association and other professional medical
organisations made a declaration through a press conference and urged
the Ministry of Health to cancel their decision.
In conclusion, we, as respiratory physicians and scientists, are
worried about the restrictions imposed by the Turkish Ministry of
Health on independent research about the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey,
and we sincerely hope that the Ministry of Health's decision will be
taken back in compliance with the Turkish Constitution.
We declare no competing interests. All authors are affiliated with the
Turkish Thoracic Society: HB is the President, NK is the Foreign
Relations Chair, and OE is the Head of the Working Group on Health
Policies, OK is the Co-Editor in Chief of the Turkish Thoracic
Journal, AS is a member of the Auditing Board, and ED is a member.
1-11. References [see article]
(20)31691-3/fulltext__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!-xqZ0F6if17peEE7N_MH-BdRSgECqNIYzcNikLeIRaOoyrqEFMcQW8XOkRWUzw$
 

Armenians in NK face existential threat – PM addresses ruling out military solution

Save

Share

 13:13,

YEREVAN, AUGUST 14, ARMENPRESS. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan rules out any military solution to the Nagorno Karabakh conflict.

He mentioned his proposed formula for the resolution during an interview on BBC’s HARDtalk.

“Peace can’t be achieved through the unilateral actions of Armenia because we will be able to have real peace if Azerbaijan will reciprocate Armenia’s efforts. Becoming Prime Minister of Armenia, I proposed a new formula for peace and the formula is the following: Any solution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict should be acceptable for people of Armenia, for people of Nagorno Karabakh and for people of Azerbaijan, and I am first Armenian leader ever saying that any solution of Nagorno Karabakh conflict should be acceptable for the Azerbaijani people too, but unfortunately the Azerbaijani president didn’t reciprocate to my proposal,” PM Nikol Pashinyan said.

Speaking about his “Artsakh is Armenia, period” statement, Pashinyan noted that for many millennia Nagorno Karabakh has been populated with indigenous Armenian people.

“Artsakh name is aged for several thousand years. The document of UNSC didn’t mention Republic of Armenia or Armed Forces of Armenia, there is written about Nagorno Karabakh Armenians Self Defense forces. The reality is in the moment of this conflict 80-90 percent of population of Nagorno Karabakh was Armenian and Azerbaijan tried to clean this land from Armenians and conflict started from this moment”.

Pashinyan disagreed with host Stephen Sackur’s description of Armenia’s stance to be “nationalistic”, saying that Armenians in Nagorno Karabakh are facing an existential threat.

“Azerbaijan is exercising the policy of isolation and blockade of Nagorno Karabakh, and for Armenia too. Armenians of Nagorno Karabakh are under existential threat, and we are proposing Azerbaijan to renounce any possibility of use of force for Nagorno Karabakh conflict solution we should agree on very simple formula that there is no military solution for Nagorno Karabakh conflict.

Any war is a chain of tragedies, that’s why we say let’s refuse any possibility of using force for solution of Nagorno Karabakh conflict, and any peace is comprise, and Armenia was and is ready for compromise”, he said.

The Armenian PM also reminded about the Armenian victims of the Sumgait and Baku pogroms, noting that these tragedies had a key role in the NK conflict issue.

“The European Court has a catalogue on Azerbaijani atrocities against Armenians. We should mention the Sumgait events that happened in late 1980s, when the Azerbaijani government and Azerbaijanis initiated pogroms against Armenians of Sumgait city of Azerbaijan and in the capital”, he said.

Editing by Stepan Kocharyan

CivilNet: Major bank investment in disputed Armenian gold mine to end

CIVILNET.AM

15:57

The article was published by Opendemocracy.net 

For over two years, the Amulsar gold mine in Armenia has been under blockade. Now, as part of the mining company’s restructuring process, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development says its investment in the flagship project is finished. 

A European Bank for Reconstruction and Development investment in a controversial $400m gold mine in Armenia is to end, a new assessment by the bank’s complaint body states.

For the past two years, Lydian International’s Amulsar gold mining project in southern Armenia has been under blockade by local people and environmental activists, who blocked access to the mine in the wake of the country’s 2018 ‘Velvet Revolution’. News that the EBRD’s investment is due to end comes as protests have been renewed at the Amulsar site in recent weeks, after the Lydian group hired a new private security firm and removed a trailer belonging to activists.

The London-based development bank has funded exploration, drilling and feasibility studies and environmental and social mitigation measures by Lydian since 2009, and has been targeted with criticism by civil society groups over its support for the company.

“The EBRD owes the public a proper statement expressing its position on the project and current developments,” said Fidanka McGrath, EBRD policy officer at CEE Bankwatch Network. “The recent despicable provocation by Lydian’s security company [at Amulsar] is only a sign of the reputational damage that this investment will continue to inflict on the EBRD, even after its shareholdings in Lydian International are wound up.”

The Amulsar blockade has led to a complex standoff between Armenia’s government, headed by former protest leader Nikol Pashinyan, Anglo-Canadian mining company Lydian International and protest participants themselves. The standoff has also drawn in the mine’s international backers, including the EBRD, as well as the UK and US governments. 

The ongoing blockade and a government-ordered environmental audit have prevented Lydian, Armenia’s largest foreign investor, from completing work at the mine, as well as causing it financial difficulties. An assessment report by the EBRD’s Independent Project Assessment Mechanism (IPAM), published on 7 August, states that the bank’s investment will be “terminated” as part of Lydian’s corporate restructuring process.

After Lydian’s lenders revoked their agreement to suspend the company’s interest and principal payments, which had been initiated as a result of the Amulsar blockade, the group is now owned by its three senior lenders, resource investment firms Orion Resource Partners, Osisko Mining and Resource Capital Funds. Lydian’s existing parent company in Jersey, in which EBRD held a 5% shareholding, is being liquidated as part of this restructuring. The IPAM report states that EBRD “has no financial interest” in restructured Lydian’s new parent company, which is incorporated in Canada, and the completion of the Jersey proceedings “will result in the termination of EBRD’s shareholding”.

“The EBRD can still redeem itself by speaking up in support of democracy and by working with the Armenian government to remedy the environmental harm and social conflicts caused by the project,” said Fidanka McGrath. “Either way the bank will have to answer for its failure to ensure proper consultations with affected communities.”

Disagreements over the potential environmental and social harm of the Amulsar mine, which is 75% complete, have animated much of the public tension over the flagship mining project. Campaigners have cited concerns over the mine’s potential impact on environmental damage, local tourism and social change, and a petition signed by 26,000 people has called on the mine’s financial backers, including the EBRD, to divest. In 2017, the International Finance Corporation, the World Bank’s development arm, withdrew its funding from Lydian International, stating that its investment was no longer necessary.

Lydian calls the mine blockade illegal, and has accused the Armenian government of “inaction” over the situation. In March 2019, Lydian notified Armenia of a potential international arbitration dispute under British and Canadian bilateral investment treaties over what it calls an “ongoing campaign by the Armenian Government targeting Lydian’s investments in Armenia”.

Lydian, originally based in Jersey, states it has followed the highest international standards on environmental mitigation and protection for the proposed mine – as required by EBRD, which has been invested in the company since 2009.

“There is no environmental issue here, it has grown into a political issue,” Lydian Armenia director Hayk Aloyan said in a recent interview. “The entire world follows the situation in Armenia, where the most environmentally-sound mining investment project has become hostage to political games.”

The unfinished mine was set to employ 750 people once it came online, Lydian states, with another 3,000 jobs created by local companies linked to the mining operation. Company projections put the number of its tax and royalty contributions to the Armenian state budget at €432 million through the ten-year operation of the mine.

The EBRD IPAM report comes in response to a complaint by residents of the local tourist town of Jermuk, as well as five non-governmental organisations in May this year. They claim that Lydian had “failed to ensure that the project complies with the requirements of the bank’s Environmental and Social Policy”, and that they had “already experienced serious environmental harm from the project, resulting from pollution of water, air and land”.

The EBRD stated in response to the complaint that “environmental and social due diligence on the Project was undertaken and that the issues presented in the Request had been adequately addressed by the Company”. The report did not state Lydian’s position on the specifics of the complaint, but that the company “had indicated their willingness… to move discussions with stakeholders forward and with the intent of resolving issues”.

In its summation, IPAM stated that “Problem Solving would offer limited potential for a constructive dialogue… due to the lack of trust between the Parties”, and that the “Parties share irreconcilable differences in their own principles”.

Artsakh President receives Armenia Chief of General Staff

Save

Share

 15:25,

YEREVAN, AUGUST 11, ARMENPRESS. President of Artsakh Arayik Harutyunyan received on August 11 Lt. General Onik Gasparyan, the Chief of General Staff of the Armenian Armed Forces.

Minister of Defense of Artsakh Jalal Harutyunyan participated in the meeting.

The meeting discussed issues concerning army building and the Artsakh-Armenia partnership in the defense sector, President Harutyunyan’s Office said in a news release.

Editing and Translating by Stepan Kocharyan

Vendetta not ruled out in densely-Armenian populated town in Georgia?

News.am, Armenia
Aug 10 2020

16:31, 10.08.2020
                  

We sell weapons to Armenia and Azerbaijan to save military industry, Serbian president says

Vestnik Kavkaza
Aug 1 2020
1 Aug in 21:05

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic said today that Serbia is selling arms to both Azerbaijan and Armenia, since it needs to maintain its military industry in an efficient state.

“Both Azerbaijan and Armenia are our friends. In recent years, we have sold ten times more weapons to Azerbaijan [than to Armenia], ”he noted first of all.

“The military industry employs 17,000 people who must keep their places,” Aleksandr Vučić said explaining the sale of weapons to both sides of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Serbian RTV informs.

Azerbaijani press: Jordan senator strongly condemns recent provocation of Armenian armed forces

BAKU, Azerbaijan, July 21

Trend:

The Head of Jordan-Azerbaijan Inter-parliamentary Friendship Group, Senator Marvan Abdulhalim an-Namr Al-Hamud has sharply condemned the recent provocations of the Armenian armed forces in the direction of the Tovuz district of Azerbaijan on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, Trend reports on July 21 referring to Azerbaijan’s State Committee on Work with the Diaspora.

According to Zumrud Dadasheva, chairperson of the Jordan-Azerbaijan Friendship Society, the senator in his appeal strongly condemned the artillery strikes of the Armenian armed forces on Azerbaijan’s military facilities and residential settlements near the state border with Armenia, which resulted in the death of Azerbaijani army officials and a civilian.

Expressing his deepest condolences to the families of martyrs and the Azerbaijani people, the senator wished the wounded people soonest recovery.

He stressed once again that the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan supports the territorial integrity of independent Azerbaijan and recognizes Nagorno Karabakh as the ancestral territory and integral part of Azerbaijan.

The senator also added that the group headed by him will always support Azerbaijan’s position. He called on the occupying country Armenia to stop military aggression and not to aggravate the situation in the region.

The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988 when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan. As a result of the ensuing war, Armenian armed forces occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan, including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and seven surrounding districts.

The 1994 ceasefire agreement was followed by peace negotiations. Armenia has not yet implemented four UN Security Council resolutions on the withdrawal of its armed forces from Nagorno Karabakh and the surrounding districts.