Author: Hunanian Jack

CASPIAN ENERGY AND TRANSPORT ISSUES EXPAND INTO MILITARY-POLITICAL CONFRONTATION

Source: Nezavisimoe Voennoe Obozrenie, May 18, 2007
Agency WPS
The Russian Oil and Gas Report (Russia)
May 23, 2007 Wednesday

The presidents of Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan
have agreed to build a joint gas pipeline to Europe along the Caspian
Sea shore. The leaders of Poland, Ukraine, Georgia, Lithuania,
and Azerbaijan have attempted to create their own energy alliance,
independent of Moscow. These developments have drawn the international
community’s attention to the world’s largest lake, which is turning
into a geopolitical apple of discord. New states have been established
in Central Asia and the South Caucasus; promising hydrocarbon deposits
have been discovered; new pipelines are operating; the region has a
number of frozen and active armed conflicts; the United States, NATO,
Iran, and Turkey are striving to expand their political, economic, and
military hardware influence in a strategically important region. All
this is intertwined in the Caspian.

According to Russian specialists, the West’s estimates of the Caspian’s
explored oil and gas reserves exceed the actual data several-fold. This
primarily applies to hydrocarbon reserves in Azerbaijan’s sector of the
Caspian Sea. For example, American estimates of Azerbaijan’s energy
resources are four times greater than Russia’s estimates. The reason
for the discrepancy is clear. The Caspian countries are exaggerating
their reserves in order to attract foreign investors. But this is
also advantageous for Russia’s geopolitical rivals, since it enables
them to influence policy in the Caspian countries.

All the same, there is good reason to call the Caspian the second
Persian Gulf. Oil production volumes here are comparable to the
combined output of Iraq and Kuwait, but far smaller than the combined
output of OPEC. Caspian production levels are expected to reach 4
million barrels a day by 2015. OPEC produced 45 million barrels a
day in 2006.

Russian companies control 10% of oil production in the Caspian and
about 8% of gas production. The largest oil deposits, and the three
largest oil projects, are in Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan. Western
oil majors have stakes in each of these projects. Turkmenistan’s
potential offshore oil reserves in the Caspian Sea have not yet been
explored, and cannot be developed due to disputes between Turkmenistan,
Azerbaijan, and Iran about border demarcation in the southern part
of the sea.

By 2012, Kazakhstan is expected to take the lead in oil output volumes
(about 55%), followed by Azerbaijan with 32%; Russia and Turkmenistan
will produce around 13% between them. It is hardly surprising that
Washington intends to implement the Bush-Nazarbayev Houston initiative
by investing the huge sum of $200 billion in Kazakhstan’s raw materials
sector over the next decade.

For the Caspian region countries, the local oil and gas reserves
are strategic riches; for Moscow, they are of interest only at the
strategic level so far. The main consumers of Russian oil and gas are
in Europe, and as yet there are no Caspian hydrocarbons mixed in with
the resources exported to Europe from Eastern Siberia and Russia’s
Arctic regions. Hence our efforts to build the Baltic Pipeline System
and expand deliveries in the south – to Turkey and via Bulgaria and
Greece. But the Caspian Shore Pipeline construction agreement is
already inspiring hope that the Kremlin will pay more attention to
the Caspian.

Russia could not only maintain its positions here, but even enhance
them. The Kremlin’s strategic interest in developing new fields
coincides with national interests in developing stable, friendly
relations with states in the South Caucasus (Azerbaijan, Armenia,
Georgia) and Central Asia (Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan), as well
as Iran.

At the end of the 20th Century, the Caspian map changed from two
states – the USSR and Iran – to five independent countries: Russia,
Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, and Iran. This confronted them
all with the problem of defining the status of the lake-sea. Until
the Soviet Union’s disintegration, the legal regimen here was based
on two treaties between the USSR and Iran (the RSFSR-Persia treaty of
1921 and the USSR-Iran Trade and Navigation treaty of 1940). These
treaties defined the Caspian as off limits to the vessels of other
states. Negotiations aimed at changing this regimen began in the 1990s,
but they are still at an impasse.

To date, a sea floor demarcation agreement has been signed by
three countries: Russia, Kazakhstan, and Azerbaijan. The trilateral
agreement concluded by these countries in May 2003 divided 64% of
the Caspian Sea floor: 27% to Kazakhstan, 19% to Russia, and 18%
to Azerbaijan. The northern agreement participants are prepared to
give Iran no more than what it had before the USSR broke up: 14% of
the shelf. But Iran wants 20%, and insists on moving the border 80
kilometers to the north of the former Soviet border. Then Iran could
claim the Alov, Araz, and Sharg oil fields, which an international
consortium is developing by agreement with Azerbaijan.

Iran’s stance has been supported by Turkmenistan, which was ignored by
the three northern coalition countries when they signed their separate
agreement. Turkmenistan is challenging Azerbaijan’s rights to the
Sharg, Chirag, and Azeri fields. At the same time, Turkmenistan is also
apprehensive about Iran’s claims to its gas reserves. It has taken a
provisional stance, supporting Iran, but seeking to establish a 15-mile
coastal zone under national sovereignty and a 35-mile fishing zone.

Although Azerbaijan’s position on sea floor demarcation is close to the
positions of Russia and Kazakhstan, it still proposes to distinguish
between water and airspace, which should be entirely under national
sovereignty. Baku also maintains that laying pipelines along the sea
floor should be the sole prerogative of the country that owns the
territory crossed by the pipeline.

Iran is proposing to allocate 20% of the Caspian to each of the
region’s five countries, then using the sea in common, on the
condominium basis, and establishing an Organization of Caspian Shore
States to develop the sea’s resources and distribute profits equally.

The Caspian demarcation problem now depends on whether Azerbaijan
and Iran can find a common language with Turkmenistan’s new leader,
Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov, and whether he will accept a compromise
with them, and what kind of terms he would require to sign a
demarcation agreement.

Development of the Caspian’s energy capacities and energy resource
exports depends on more than developing oil and gas fields and
establishing the sea borders. The associated problems of hydrocarbon
transport and security have become particularly significant.

Caspian oil is exported via several pipelines. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan
system has a capacity of over a million barrels a day; according
to some Russian experts, this pipeline owes its existence to
political rather than economic considerations, and the outlook for
it is uncertain. The same applies to the Northern oil pipeline
(Baku-Novorossiysk) and the Western oil pipeline (Baku-Supsa),
with throughput capacities of 100,000 and 115,000 barrels a day
respectively. Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan recently signed an agreement
to transport 10 million tons (733 million barrels) of Kazakhstan’s oil
to Baku by barge each year. There is also the Russian Atyrau-Samara
pipeline, starting in Kazakhstan and ending on the Volga. Its
throughput capacity is 300,000 barrels a day, but Russia has promised
to increase this to 500,000 barrels.

A Kazakh-Chinese pipeline is being built to deliver oil to China; its
first part links Kazakhstan’s Aktube oil fields with the Atyptau oil
center, already complete. The second part, still under construction,
will run from Atasu (north-western Kazakhstan) to Alashkanou (Xinjiang,
China) and cost around $850 million. Initial throughput will be
200,000 barrels a day, with a maximum of 400,000 barrels.

In December 2002, the governments of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan,
and Pakistan signed a memorandum of intent to build a Central Asian
pipeline that will supply oil from Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan to
Gvadar, Pakistan’s port on the Arabian Sea. This project has been
postponed due to continuing instability in Afghanistan.

Overall, most pipeline systems being built from the Caspian either
bypass Russia or run south outside Russia. So it is no coincidence
that the agreement reached by Russia, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and
Uzbekistan – on building a Caspian shore pipeline system leading to
Europe via Russia – has caused such a furor abroad. Efforts to cut
off Russia from the Caspian Sea’s hydrocarbon riches have failed. And
many do not like this at all.

Presumably, the foreign policy of the United States in the Caspian
region over the next few years will be aimed at achieving several
objectives, including creating conditions that prevent Russia from
controlling and directing the development of various processes to the
detriment of Washington’s interests. Those interests include ensuring
guaranteed access for American corporations to the Caspian region’s
fuel and energy resources and other resources – especially in light of
uncertainty about the stability of Middle East hydrocarbon resources.

The United States will strive to take advantage of the favorable
military-political conjuncture shaping up in the course of the
anti-terrorist operation in Afghanistan, and to expand its presence
in Central Asia, and to secure additional defense infrastructure
facilities for deploying missile defense elements in Azerbaijan and
Georgia. In addition to the United States, Britain, and Turkey, some
other countries are also developing an increasingly visible presence
in the Caspian region: Germany, China, Saudi Arabia, the United
Arab Emirates, and Japan. It should also be noted that international
corporations control 27% of oil reserves and 40% of gas reserves in
the Caspian – and they do not intend to stop there.

The Georgian-Ossetian conflict (1991-92) and the Georgian-Abkhazian
conflict (1992-93), the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over
Nagorno-Karabakh, the terrorist wars in the North Caucasus, the
tension in relations between the USA and Iran, the proximity of Iraq –
all this, in addition to the energy interests of various countries,
draws the Caspian region to the attention of the powerful, including
NATO, the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization, and other
military-political alliances and organizations.

Washington’s determination to build up its influence in this
region is understandable. It is seeking to ensure security for the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, increase its military presence in the
Caspian, and establish rear bases in the event of a military solution
to the Iran problem. True, Washington is trying not to mention that
option – but it was stated plainly by Reno Harnish, US Ambassador to
Azerbaijan, who told the AFP news agency that Washington has already
spent $30 million on improving Azerbaijan’s coastal defenses, and
now intends to spend $135 million on the Caspian Guard Initiative,
aimed at improving the navies of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan.

According to AFP, the Pentagon has already built headquarters and
two radar stations in Azerbaijan. Moreover, the partnership plan
between Baku and Brussels includes measures to supply Azerbaijan’s
Navy and Border Guard Service with modern military hardware. This
was mentioned in a report to the US Congress by General James Jones
from the United States European Command, who said that "the USA has
made great progress with the Caspian Guard Initiative: this program
entails establishing an integrated airspace, maritime, and border
control regime for Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, and rapid reaction
to any emergencies, including the threat of terrorist attacks on
oil industry infrastructure." In fact, Washington is attempting to
surround Iran with military infrastructure – just in case.

Naturally, Russia wishes to restrain US influence in an area that is
directly adjacent to some of Russia’s central regions – the Urals and
the lower Volga. Moscow has well-founded suspicions that the Caspian
Guard Initiative is not aimed against Iran alone, but also against
Russia’s national interests. If America’s plans are realized, they will
pose a danger to Russia’s defense capacities. As an internal lake, the
Caspian Sea has always been Russia’s territory and influence zone. The
presence of US military structures on the "internal lake" belonging
to the Caspian shore states is a direct threat to their security
and sovereignty. Apparently, this is why President Vladimir Putin
spoke as he did at the International Conference on Caspian Security
in Astrakhan; he said that "by uniting their efforts, the Caspian
states can resolve all these questions effectively on their own."

AZERBAIJAN: JOURNALISTS, BEWARE

ISN, Switzerland
May 25 2007

A series of arrests and prison sentences for charges that include
terrorism have journalists in Azerbaijan wondering if there is any
sort of future for a free press.

Increasingly bad news for freedom of expression has recently come
out of Azerbaijan, the US’ oil-rich ally in the Caspian Sea region,
where five journalists have been sentenced to harsh prison sentences
in the last few weeks in what critics say is a government campaign
to stifle free speech.

Rafiq Tagi, a journalist with the independent newspaper Senet was
sentenced on 3 May in Baku, the capital, to a four-year term for
"inciting religious hatred," while his editor Samir Sadagatoglu
received a three-year sentence.

The prison terms and prosecution came as a result of a commentary
written last November by Tagi entitled "Europe and Us," which according
to press reports compared Muslim societies such as Azerbaijan with
historically Christian Europe and concluded that Islam had, on the
whole, hindered social and political development.

While this sort of reflective social commentary might be the norm in
the West, the outcry from some quarters in secular, Shi’ite Azerbaijan
was shrill, with ultra-conservative Muslims in the village of Nadaran
calling for the two men’s deaths and the public prosecutor bringing
criminal charges against them.

In neighboring Iran, Grand Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani has issued a
fatwa calling for the execution of Tagi and his editor, saying on his
website that "it is necessary for every individual who has an access
to him to kill him. The person in charge of the […] newspaper,
who published such thoughts and beliefs consciously and knowingly,
should be dealt with in the same manner." Another cleric who lives
in the city of Tabriz has reportedly offered his house as a reward
for anyone who kills the two men.

The sentence was handed down despite protests from Azerbaijan’s
embattled journalistic community, a number of non-governmental
organizations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe (OSCE).

What emerges from the trials, convictions and physical attacks over
the years is an apparent pattern of coordinated assaults against
freedom of speech in Azerbaijan. On 27 April, independent journalist
Eynulla Fatullayev was convicted of "criminal libel" and "insult"
and sentenced to 30 months in prison for allegations he purportedly
made having to do with events surrounding the massacre of civilians in
the Azerbaijani town of Khojaly during the 1992-1994 Nagorno-Karabakh
war. Fatullayev’s original article evidently attached some blame for
the tragedy to the failure of Azerbaijani military forces to protect
the town. But in the furor that followed the article, Fatullayev was
charged with libeling the residents of Khojaly.

Fatullayev, perhaps Azerbaijan’s best-known opposition journalist,
denies having made libelous comments, but his conviction – and the
physical attack on the same day against his colleague Uzeir Jafarov
– reminds critics of the government of the price they may be forced
to pay when they stray too far from what is acceptable, to both the
government and the conservative Shi’ite establishment.

Journalism in Azerbaijan was a high-risk endeavor even before the 2005
murder of Elmar Huseynov, editor of the independent Monitor newspaper,
and a friend of Fatullayev’s. It clearly remains a high-risk endeavor.

In October last year, well-known poet and opposition journalist
Sakit Zahidov was convicted on charges of illegal possession and
use of drugs. The charges were widely believed to be politically
oriented, with the arrest coming only three days after Ali Akhmedov,
the executive secretary of Azerbaijan’s ruling New Azerbaijan Party,
called for Zahidov’s arrest for his alleged "slanders" against
government officials.

Zahidov’s brother Ganimat happens to be the chief editor of the
opposition newspaper Azadlig, which has been a thorn in the side of
the government for years and was ejected from its office space in
2006 along with the Turan News Agency and the Popular Front Party.

Last week, Rovshan Karbili – the editor of opposition newspaper
Mukhalifat – and reporter Yashar Agazade were sentenced to two and
a half years in prison (identical to Fatulayev’s sentence) for libel
in connection with an article that accused Jalal Aliyev, an uncle of
President Ilham Aliyev, of corruption.

OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Miklos Haraszti expressed
"shock" over the sentence in a statement to the press.

"Azerbaijan’s relentless persecution of journalists annihilates the
security of journalism, a major OSCE commitment," said Haraszti.

The conviction and sentence came less than three weeks after a
meeting between Haraszti and President Aliyev, during which the
OSCE representative asked the president to halt the persecution of
journalists, reminding Aliyev that "Azerbaijan today is the country in
the OSCE region with the highest number of journalists in prison […]"

The US embassy in Baku issued a statement after the most recent
convictions, saying that the imprisonment of seven journalists in toto
in Azerbaijan "is part of a trend of pressure – including violence,
threats and libel cases – that runs counter to Azerbaijan’s stated
commitment to media freedom. Journalists in democratic countries
are not imprisoned for exercising freedom of expression. We urge the
Azerbaijani government to remove libel from the criminal code and to
take steps to create the necessary conditions for media freedom."

In 2005, Freedom House, a non-governmental organization that monitors
democratic development, downgraded Azerbaijan from "partly free" to
"not free."

Finally, on 21 May, authorities closed down the offices of Fatullayev’s
newspaper Real Azerbaijan as well as another opposition paper,
the Azerbaijan Daily, two of the most popular newspapers in the
country. While the government says the closure was due to maintenance
and fire safety issues, no other tenants in the building were
evicted. And as of 23 May, Fatullayev faces additional charges of
"making a terrorist threat," a development that could extend his
prison term for many years.

The independent media are being all but shut down in Azerbaijan. The
terrorism charges against Fatullayev and the stiff sentences handed out
for a harmless editorial and criticism of a member of the president’s
family send a message to the press that the confines for freedom of
expression in Azerbaijan are becoming more circumscribed.

It is hard to imagine that the remaining opposition newspapers
such as Azadlig will tone down their editorial coverage, although
independent television network ANS is perceived by many to have done
just that since it was allowed back on the air last year after a brief
closure. The atmosphere in the country has certainly chilled in over
the course of the past couple of weeks, and the government now will
have to decide if it has communicated the new rules with sufficient
clarity or whether more arrests are in the offing.

Karl Rahder has taught US foreign policy and international history
at colleges and universities in the US and Azerbaijan. In 2004, he
was a Visiting Faculty Fellow in Azerbaijan with the Civic Education
Project, an academic program funded by the Soros Foundations and the
US Department of State. He is currently based in Chicago.

The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author only,
not the International Relations and Security Network (ISN).

LADY COX MEETS AND ADDRESSES MONTREAL COMMUNITY AFTER DIVINE LITURGY

armradio.am
23.05.2007 10:44

Baroness Cox from England’s House of Lords addressed the Armenian
community after Divine Liturgy, which was held under the Auspices
of His Eminence Archbishop Khajag Hagopian, Prelate of the Armenian
Prelacy of Canada, at Sourp Hagop Armenian Apostolic Cathedral on
the afternoon of May 20, 2007.

Prior to Lady Cox’s arrival, His Eminence, Archbishop Hagopian, noted
in His sermon the extensive and significant humanitarian contributions
she has made over the years, namely during the Nagorno Karabakh war.

After a brief biography presentation by Toros Babikian, Sourp Hagop
Sunday School principal, Baroness Cox, who was appointed to the House
of Lords by then-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in 1983, recalled
some of the events she witnessed during her many travels to Karabakh
during the height of the war and noted that "the spirit of Armenians,
like the phoenix rising from the flames, always rises from destruction
with an even greater light."

Lady Cox has visited Karabakh more than 50 times and even has a
price on her head in Azerbaijan amounting to millions. She is a
humanitarian worker, the UK president of human rights organization
Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW), the chief executive of HART
(Humanitarian Aid Relief Trust), has published several books, and
was the deputy speaker of the House of Lords from 1986 to 2005,
to name only a few.

After Divine Liturgy, Archbishop Hagopian attended Baroness Cox’s
latest book publication signing ceremony at the Montreal Armenian
community centre.

The book signing was organized by the Armenian National Committee of
Canada (ANCC), where Mr. Raffy Boudjikanian presented the life and
literary work of Lady Cox.

ALEKSANDER ISKANDARIAN: ASSESSMENT OF THE ELECTIONS IS OF GREAT IMPORTANCE FOR THE POSITIVE IMAGE OF THE COUNTRY

ArmRadio.am
22.05.2007 18:00

Political scientist, Director of the Caucasian Media Institute
Aleksander Iskandarian stated today that from the point of view of
the international community, the parliamentary elections in Armenia
were "a serious step in the direction of electoral development,"
Mediamax reports.

The political scientist noted that the international observers gave
a quite high assessment to the elections in Armenia, and this is
of serious importance for the formation of a positive image of the
country. Aleksander Iskandarian noted that the given assessment was
"especially jealously perceived by Azerbaijan."

According to the political scientist, "it would be possible to cheat
the international observers if they were assessing the political
culture of Armenia, but they were assessing the technologies of the
electoral process, and they were not cheated from this point of view."

Aleksander Iskandarian also stressed that "a serious step in the
direction of development of the political system became the fact that
the voting process of Armenian electors for the first time was not
of mass emotional character, but of a rational one."

DEPARTMENT HEAD OF AZERBAIJANI PRESIDENT’S ADMINISTRATION URGES NOT TO EXPECT REVOLUTIONARY CHANGES FROM NEW FRENCH PRESIDENT (VIDEO)

Trend News Agency, Azerbaijan
May 21 2007

Extract from Trend’s interview with the head of the Foreign Relations
Department at the Executive Administration of Azerbaijani President,
Novruz Mammadov.

– A new President has recently been elected in France, which is
a co-chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group on peaceful settlement of
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. How do you view the cooperation prospects
between Azerbaijan and France under Nicola Sarcozy rule?

– I believe the current and future relationships between Azerbaijan and
France have been built on a fundamental basis. Different viewpoints
and forecasts are voiced now as it was on the eve of the elections,
but the main line of the relationships between two countries and
nations will remain unchanged. The new administration of Sarcozy
proves the fact another time. Moreover, we should not expect any
revolutionary changes from Sarcozy as well.

video at
wsId=929089&lang=EN

FORMATION OF PROPER DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM IN ARMENIA POSSIBLE UNDER ECONOMIC STABILITY ONLY

Arka News Agency, Armenia
May 21 2007

YEREVAN. May 21. /ARKA/. Formation of a proper democratic system in the
country is possible under economic stability only, Armen Ashotyan,
member of the Republican Party of Armenia faction reported at a
press-conference on Monday.

"Emergence of a really functioning democratic system is possible
provided that a favorable economic situation is established, that is,
a minimal economic well-being. This is the primary factor of democracy,
because democratic principles work where the electorate has resolved
its economic problems," he said.

Ashotyan added that the unprecedented economic growth, recorded in
Armenia over the last 4-5 years, logically leads to the fact that
economic prerequisites have already been created for emergence of a
really working democratic system.

TOROSYAN PINPOINTS TO OPPOSITION’S FAILURE TO UNITE

Panorama.am
20:37 18/05/2007

Tigran Torosyan, vice chairman of the Armenian Republican Party,
believes it is not a big tragedy that some political parties
will not be present at the 4th parliament. "I think, if they
come up with conclusions, they will enter the next parliament,"
Torosyan told a press conference at Tesaket Club. The vice chairman
believes the elections were conducted "freely and fairly" but with
some breaches. Torosyan said the protests of the opposition are
"justifications" and not "fair assessment."

The vice chairman pinpointed to the inability of the opposition to
unite as a reason for their failure at the elections. Asked if some
of the opposition may be represented in the government, Torosyan
said, "Those having representatives in the government, cannot be an
opposition." Torosyan asked to wait 10 days and see which political
forces will be represented in the government.

RA CEC SUMMARIZES RESULTS OF ELECTIONS TO RA NATIONAL ASSEMBLY BY
PROPORTIONAL ELECTORAL SYSTEM: SMALL DIFFERENCE AS COMPARED WITH
PRELIMINARY DATA

YEREVAN, MAY 19, NOYAN TAPAN. By the protocol of the May 19 sitting,
the RA Central Electoral Commission (CEC) ratified the results of the
May 12 elections to the RA National Assembly. 3 out of 9 members of
the commission refused to sign the protocol – Felix Khachatrian
("Justice" bloc), Zaven Pluzian ("National Unity" party) and Sona
Sargsian ("Orinats Yerkir" party). F. Khachatrian said about the
protocol: "This is a monument at the grave of the Armenian democracy."
At the beginning of the sitting, he expressed his discontent regarding
the essential difference between the preliminary and final data, as
well as the corrections made in the protocols of several precinct
electoral commissions (PEC) and their stamping by the respective
district electoral commissions (DEC), which, in his words, is a
violation of the law. CEC deputy chairman Abram Bakhchagulian
explained that corrections are related to the number of ballots given
by DECs to PECs, and they were brought into line with the receipts of
the ballots given.

According to the protocol of the CEC, 1,391,540 out of the 2,319,722
voters included in the lists participated in the voting in 1,923
polling stations. 38,002 ballots were recognized as invalid. The
total number of valid ballots and ballots with votes in favor of all
23 parties and one bloc makes 1,351,423, the number of inaccuracies –
14,665.

Republican Party of Armenia received 458,258 votes,

"Prosperous Armenia" party – 204,483 votes,

ARF – 177,907 votes,

"Orinats Yerkir" party – 95,324 votes,

"Heritage" party – 81,048 votes,

United Labor Party – 59,271 votes,

"National Unity" party – 49,864 votes,

"New Times" party – 47,060 votes,

People’s party – 37, 044 votes,

"Alliance" party – 32,943 votes,

People’s Party of Armenia – 22,762 votes,

"Republic" party – 22,288 votes,

"Impeachment" bloc – 17,475 votes,

Communist Party of Armenia – 8,792 votes,

National Democratic Party – 8,556 votes,

"Democratic Way" party – 8,351 votes,

"National Concord" party – 4,199 votes,

Democratic Party of Armenia – 3,686 votes,

"Christian People’s Rebirth" party – 3,433 votes,

United Liberal National Party – 2,739 votes,

Marxist Party of Armenia – 2,660 votes,

Youth Party of Armenia – 2,291 votes,

Social-Democratic Hunchak Party – 989 votes.

The RA CEC made a decision on election of the RA NA deputies by the
proportional electoral system with 6 votes in favor, 2 against and one
abstention. Based on this, 41 deputies have been elected from the
Republican Party of Armenia, 18 – from "Prosperous Armenia", 16 – from
ARF, 8 – from "Orinats Yerkir" and 7 – from "Heritage".

NEW PUBLIC CENTERS ON NATURE PROTECTION INFORMATION TO FUNCTION SOON IN GYUMRI, HRAZDAN AND GAVAR

Noyan Tapan
May 17 2007

YEREVAN, MAY 17, NOYAN TAPAN. A memorandum on mutual understanding was
sined on May 16 among the representatives of the OSCE Yerevan Office,
RA Ministry of Nature Protection and Governor’s Offices of Kotayk,
Shirak and Gegharkunik. According to this memorandum, new public
centers on nature protection information (Aarhus) will open in Gyumri,
Hrazdan and Gavar. To recap, centers of the mentioned organization
function in the cities of Yerevan, Varadzor, Goris, Kapan, Dilijan,
Ijevan still since 2002.

The goal of activity of the Aarhus centers is to stimulate
accessibility of the nature protection information, public
participation in the nature protection issues and accessibility of
justice. The society will be given at the centers free consultation
concerning their rights, obligations and corresponding legislation.

RA Minister of Nature Protection Vardan Ayvazian attached importance to
the initiative of opening centers, mentioning that "according to the
Aarhus programs, great attention will be paid to problems of nature
protection security as well, particularly, decomposition of lands,
saltation and water resources." Head of the OSCE Yerevan Office,
Ambassador Vladimir Pryakhin mentioned: "Armenia is now the leader
of the Aarhus movement quickly developing in the OSCE territory."

The triglot (Armenian, English, Russian) web site of the
Aarhus centers was also opened during the event. Its address is

EDUARD SHARMAZANOV: "MAY 12 ELECTIONS ARE BEST ARMENIAN ELECTIONS IN 21ST CENTURY"

Noyan Tapan
May 15 2007

YEREVAN, MAY 15, NOYAN TAPAN. The May 12 parliamentary elections are
the best Armenian elections in the 21st century. Eduard Sharmazanov,
the Public Relations Responsible of the Republic Party of Armenia
expressed this opinion at the Urbat club on May 15. In his words,
naturally, there were defects as well what is proved by the 9
criminal actions brought on those case. He at the same time expressed
a confidence that "those defects will be checked in future, and
Armenia will more enter the era of developed democracy from elections
to elections."

According to E. Sharmazanov’s observation, in these elections the
citizens of Armenia "pay a tribute not to the electoral bribe but to
the ideological struggle, programs as well as propaganda mission." In
his words, its bright evidence is entrance of the Zharangutiun
(Heritage) party to the parliament.

In his words, the RPA will become a "force making more serious and
weighty decisions." E. Sharmazanov refused making foresights concerning
possible formation of the political coalition, only mentioning that
the RPA will present its position concerning that issue after official
publication of the final results of the elections. In his words,
formation of a coalition will greatly be provided by results of the
discussions at the RPA Council as well as with other parties. "The RPA
is theoretically ready for cooperation with all the forces, but the
cooperation can not be an end in itself: it must have strong edges
and bases," E. Sharmazanov said.