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.
Author: Hovik Karapetian
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
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
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