Author: Jalatian Sonya

ARMENIA, TURKEY WAIT WHILE US CONSIDERS RECOGNIZING GENOCIDE
By Jason Motlagh

United Press International
March 19 2007

YEREVAN, Armenia (UPI) — Inside the tomb-like confines of the Armenian
genocide museum, a haunting narrative of images and words unfolds. A
list is posted at tour’s end of Western nations that have officially
recognized the tragedy, minus one major endorsement: the United States.

U.S. lawmakers have recently introduced non-binding resolutions that
would declare up to 1.5 million Armenians victims of genocide at the
hands of Turkish forces almost a century ago. Support is reported
to be strong enough in the House to pass the measure if it goes to
a vote; the Senate introduced a similar resolution last Wednesday
with 21co-sponsors.

Historians and analysts here say recognition from Washington is long
overdue since evidence validating the case for genocide is "clear-cut,
more than factual, and very obvious." But Turkey’s priority status
as a vital strategic ally in a troublesome region stands in the way.

"Although Turkey needs the U.S. more, the U.S also needs Turkey right
now . . . so it’s not realistic to think the government will formally
acknowledge [the genocide]," Hagop Avedikian, editor of Azg newspaper,
said. He noted that every April 24, a day of observance, President Bush
"highlights the genocide and explains it without using the word."

In the past month, Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, Chief of
the General Staff Gen. Yasar Buyukanit and a parliamentary delegation
have met with congressmen and administration officials to derail the
resolution. Gul was quoted as saying the delivery of a U.S. genocide
resolution would inflict "lasting damage" on bilateral relations.

Such statements were not lost on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who last week wrote a joint letter
to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other senior members
warning against a measure they said would harm national security
interests. Articles on this Issue

Passage of the House resolution "could harm American troops in
the field, constrain our ability to supply our troops in Iraq
and Afghanistan and significantly damage our efforts to promote
reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey," the letter said according
to the Associated Press.

Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried has said Turkey might respond
by closing Incirlik Air Base, used for operations in nearby Iraq and
Afghanistan. Rice and Gates pointed out how the Turkish military
severed all ties with the French military and terminated defense
contracts after the French National Assembly voted last October to
criminalize denial of the genocide.

The Israeli Knesset killed a motion to discuss possible recognition
earlier this month, fearing a political crisis with Ankara.

Failure to pass the resolution would be "too bad because it could
be a very catalytic moment for rapid recognition by other states,"
Hayk Demoyan, director of the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute, said.

U.S. backing could give Armenians leverage to press for compensation
and possible territorial claims, he added.

However, a raft of Western countries have already recognized the
genocide and made denial a punishable offense. An ethnic Turkish
politician, Dogu Perincek, received a $2,500 fine and a suspended
prison sentence from a Swiss court last Friday for calling the genocide
an "international lie" at a political rally two years ago.

The dispute is over whether hundreds of thousands of Armenians who
died between 1915-23 were part of systematic eradication campaign by
Ottoman Turkey. Armenians contend mass killings and forced deportations
amount to genocide, while the Turkish government insists the deaths
were the result of chaos amid the breakdown of the former empire.

Critics say the Turkish state’s reluctance to confront the Armenian
issue is but one facet of a broader identity crisis that is starting
to show ugly symptoms.

"Textbooks [in Turkey] have for decades placed taboos on certain
issues. To confront them would be catastrophic for the national
identity," Demoyan said.

The latest schism followed the Jan. 19 killing of Turkish-Armenian
journalist Hrant Dink in broad daylight on a heavily trafficked
Istanbul street. An unprecedented number of people, estimated at more
than 100,000, turned out in protest, chanting: "We are all Armenians."

The 17-year-old killer claimed to have shot him because "he had
insulted the Turks" and said he felt no remorse. Photographs surfaced
soon after his arrest showing the teenager posing with smiling police
officers beneath a Turkish flag.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan reportedly said the protesters
went "too far."

There are renewed fears in Armenia that the backlash from the
military-dominated state will be felt by Armenians and other ethnic
minorities in the near future. After he saw the demonstrations on TV
after Dink’s murder, Avedikian said he was afraid, along with many
of his Armenian friends in Istanbul and elsewhere, who are "convinced
Turkey will become even more radical."

Avedikian asserted that the softer line that has prevailed in recent
years may change in light of now-suspended EU accession talks.

Appeals to nationalist sentiment may also be a tactic to secure votes
in the run-up to November parliamentary elections.

"I have a lot of faith in Turkish intellectuals, but not in the army
and those connected with it," he said.

Leftist intellectuals have been hounded by Turkish prosecutors over the
past two years for alleged violations of Article 301 of the Turkish
penal code, which holds that "insulting Turkishness" is a criminal
offense. They include Dink and Nobel prize-winning author Orhan Pamuk,
who was put on trial for recognizing the genocide, though his case
was later dropped.

Pamuk emigrated to the United States after continued harassment and
death threats.

ARKA News Agency, Armenia
March 16 2007

ARMENIAN FOREIGN OFFICE READY HELP BUSINESSMEN

YEREVAN, March 15. /ARKA/. Armenia’s Foreign Office is ready to help
Armenian businessmen in resolving problems with getting entry visas,
Tigran Seyranyan, Head of the Consular Department, RA Foreign Office,
stated at a meeting with between members of the Union of
Manufacturers and Businessmen of Armenia (UMBA) and representatives
of foreign diplomatic missions to Armenia.
"The Foreign Office is ready to receive businessmen’s complaints and
resend them to the corresponding Embassies and Consular Services,"
Seyranyan said. He pointed out a number of reasons for the problems
with visas.
"The first reason is illegal migration, which acquired a large scale
especially in the 1990s," he said. Seyramyan pointed out that this
made a number of countries to take necessary preventive measures,
which improved the situation. However, some countries are still
facing this problem. "In particular, 300-400 Armenian citizens
applied for asylum in France every quarter," Seyranyan said.
According to him, the situation has improved in Germany, Switzerland
and Scandinavian countries. "For example, only one person has applied
for citizenship in Switzerland in 2007," he said.
According to Seyranyan, the question of issuing visas in a simplified
regime to businessmen and art workers was discussed at negotiations
with the European Union as part of the New Neighborhood policy. "The
Armenian sides put forward a proposal for the issue of long-term
visas to businessmen and representatives of some other groups that
are not prospective illegal migrants. However, Brussels did not
welcome the idea. In the document this issue was linked with further
readmission agreements," Seyranyan said. He added that many countries
practice this.
Seyranyan also said that the applicants sometimes have problems
because they fail to submit all the necessary documents and provide
inaccurate information.
In his turn, RA Deputy Foreign Minister Arman Kirakosyan expressed
hope that the meeting will contribute to the development of bilateral
relations. "We have positive trade and economic relations with the
countries whose representatives are present at the meeting, but we
should not be contented with the current level," Kirakosyan said. He
pointed out that the RA Foreign Office will assist in organizing
meetings like this.
Among UMBA members are the managers of about 500 Armenian companies,
which ensure about 75% of budget revenues in Armenia. UMBA Chairman
Arsen Ghazaryan said that UMBA sees a potential for expanding its
foreign economic relations with a number of countries, particularly
with Greece and Egypt. P.T. -0–

IN NIKOL PASHINIAN’S WORDS, UNDER ROBERT KOCHARIAN ARMENIA CONSTANTLY
SUFFERS DEFEATS IN NAGORNO KARABAKH SETTLEMENT

YEREVAN, MARCH 16, NOYAN TAPAN. Since 1998 when Robert Kocharian
started to attend to Nagorno Karabakh problem Armenia constantly
suffers defeats. Nikol Pashinian, member of Alternative
public-political initiative, editor of Haykakan Zhamanak newspaper,
stated this at the March 16 rally. In his words, as s result of RA
President’s wrong policy on Nagorno Karabakh conflict today Karabakh
is perceived as an "occupied territory" by the international
community.

N. Pashinian said that until 1998 NKR was a "full-value negotiations
side and NKR representative as equal sat at negotiations table with
representatives of U.S., France, Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan." And
R. Kocharian, as Alternative’s member emphasized, "forced out"
representatives of NKR from this table as soon as he came to power.

N. Pashinian said that in 2005 the Council of Europe adopted a
resolution, in which for the first time the Armenian side was accused
of making ethnic cleansings in Karabakh and it was registered that
Armenia – member of CE, "occupied" territories of Azerbaijan, which is
also a member of CE. N. Pashinian reminded that the author of that
anti-Armenian resolution is the very David Atkinson who after his
visit to Stepanakert in 1992 made a report in CE, which "was
completely a pro-Armenian document." So, in the words of Haykakan
Zhamanak’s editor, in consequence of RA authorities’ incompetent
policy, D. Atkinson’s position to Nagorno Karabakh conflict also
changed for the worse.

ISSUE OF ARMENIAN DELEGATION’S DEPARTURE FOR TAKING PART IN REOPENING
CEREMONY OF SURB KHACH CHURCH BEING DUSCUSSED

YEREVAN, MARCH 16, NOYAN TAPAN. The issue of Armenian delegation’s
departure for taking part in the reopening ceremony of Van’s Akhtamar
Island’s Surb Khach Church on March 29 is being currently discussed by
RA Ministry of Culture and Youth Affairs. As RA Minister of Culture
and Youth Affairs Hasmik Poghosian stated at the March 16 press
conference, the final decision will be made only after these
discussions.

The Minister mentioned that she has received a personal invitation by
Turkish Minister of Culture and in all probability, will personally
leave for Turkey.

TURKISH DEPUTIES MEET WITH US UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE BURNS

Turkiye
Turkish Press
March 15 2007

Turkish members of Parliament, currently in Washington to work
against the resolution on the so-called Armenian genocide before
the US House of Representatives, yesterday attended a meeting of
the Turkish-American Council and met with representatives of Jewish
groups. The delegation was also received by the US Secretary of State
for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns, and they urged Washington to
beware of the Armenian lies. During the meeting, Burns told Turkish
parliamentarians that the Bush administration would do everything it
can to prevent passage of the resolution. The parliamentarians also
met with former US Ambassador to Ankara Mark Parris, and will hold
talks at the US Congress today.

"BANK KING" IS LEADER WITH 4 POINTS IN CHAMPIONSHIP OF MEN’S CHESS CLUB TEAMS OF ARMENIA

Noyan Tapan
Mar 15 2007

YEREVAN, MARCH 15, NOYAN TAPAN. The 2nd stage meetings took place
at the championship of men’s chess club teams of Armenia being held
at the Chess House after Tigran Petrosian. The "Bank King" (Bankayin
Arqa) won the team of the State Agrarian University of Armenia with
a score of 5:1, and the FIMA won "Hrazdan" with a score of 4:2.

The "Bank King" team with 4 points, the FIMA and "Hrazdan" team with
2 points each are the first three of the tournament table.

AMBASSADOR OF RUSSIA TO ARMENIA REFUTES OPINIONS ON PASSIVITY OF HIS COUNTRY IN ISSUE OF NAGORNO KARABAKH SETTLEMENT

Noyan Tapan
Mar 14 2007

YEREVAN, MARCH 14, NOYAN TAPAN. Russia continues working actively
in the OSCE Minsk Group aimed at settlement of Nagorno Karabakh
conflict. Ambassador of Russia to Armenia Nikolay Pavlov stated this
on March 14. In his words, the fact that Russian Co-chair of OSCE
Minsk Group Yuri Merzliakov did not take part in the recent visit to
the region says nothing. "I hope there will be some advancement in the
settlement of this problem and it will be in the foreseeable future,"
the Ambassador said.

"NO CONSENSUS IN EUROPE AS TO WHAT SHOULD BE DONE WITH EU’S EASTERN NEIGHBORS," – NICU POPESCU
Nona Abazyan

Daily Georgian Times, Georgia
March 14 2007

Armenian foreign policy "complementarity," which in essence may be
identified as a partial granting of state sovereignty to Russia for
the sake of national security, inevitably becomes a driving force for
EU-Russia bargaining in Armenia, and the South Caucasus. Thus, this
"complementarity" makes EU-Armenia relations dependent on Russia’s
polices towards Armenia.

The Russian government, and currently ruling political party "Edinaya
Rosia" (United Russia) view Western (US and EU) penetration into
post-Soviet space as "squeezing" out Russian influence.

In fact, while the EU brings social welfare, democracy, rule of law,
etc. Russia guarantees energy security and military cooperation
for the South Caucasus. This is the optimal path. However, regional
politics do not only depend on Armenia’s balanced interrelation with
the West and Russia. Meanwhile, the starting point in Armenia might
have reflective impact on the region

Nicu Popescu is the OSI Research Fellow at the Center for European
Policy Studies, a PhD candidate at Central European University in
Budapest.

Q: What are EU interests in the South Caucasus and in general, in
Post-Soviet states?

A: All any of us wants is decent and quiet neighbors. It is the
same in international politics. The EU wants stable and peaceful
neighbors, because otherwise if neighbors have a problem, the EU will
be affected. The EU does not want to control these countries. It just
wants to help them "Europeanize" because the EU sees from its own
post-World war II history that "Europeanization" is a good recipe for
peace and stability. That’s the EU’s main interest in its neighborhood.

But the EU also has energy interests in the region, and Georgia is
a key country for any transit of gas and oil from Central Asia and
the Caspian to Europe. A Commission memo on energy policy for the
enlarged EU and its neighbors stated that "secure and safe export
routes for Caspian oil and gas will be important for the EU’s security
of energy supply as well as crucial for the development (economic,
but also social and political) of the Caspian region."

Georgia is a key state in the transit of oil and gas.

Q: How have the EU-Russian relations been for the last 5 years?

A: They have been marked by a great lack of trust, but also by an
understanding that cooperation must continue. Thus both are forced
to cooperate, while both would in many respects prefer to be less
dependent on each other.

Q: What has changed in EU foreign policy towards Russia after the
energy crisis in Europe?

A: The energy crises just highlighted many trends visible before in
Russia. They are another alarm bell for Europe that Russia is far
from positive progression.

Q: Considering the experience of Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia, what
challenges will the Armenian Government encounter from Russia while
integrating into European institutions and NATO?

A: The first problem is real democratization. No significant progress
towards NATO and the EU can happen without building democracy. A
second crucial issue is gaining the ability to withstand Russian
pressure aimed at harassing those willing to engage more with the
West. Such harassment is extremely damaging for the economy and
democracy of Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova. The biggest challenge for
Armenia though is Nagorno-Karabakh.

But Armenia’s smaller dependence on Russian gas can be a positive
factor. Another positive factor is that Armenia has better functioning
institutions than Georgia had before the Rose Revolution.

If Armenia moves toward the West it will not have to be as engaged
in state building as Georgia is. Another advantage is Armenia’s
homogeneity. It is not as divided as Ukraine.

Q: How does EU view the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh? And what is the
EU position on this frozen conflict and its resolution?

A: The EU is ready to help if there is an agreement on settlement.

This is another reason to solve the conflict. The EU cannot get
involved the way the conflict looks now.

Q: What is the official view of Moscow on EU enlargement programs
and EU policies in the post-Soviet space? Is it viewed as intrusion?

A: Yes. Russia sees the EU as if the EU has the same domination motives
as Russia. This is not true. EU and Russia are simply different
actors. Russia wants control of its neighbors. The EU wants stable
and peaceful neighbors.

Q: Who in Russia is primarily against further EU integration for the
post-Soviet states?

A: Almost everybody who has decision-making abilities. But the issue
of integration of former Soviet states in the EU is not primarily
a Russian problem. The first problem is a lack of economic and
political and democratic reforms in these countries. The second is EU’s
reluctance to engage with them. And only third is Russian opposition.

Q: If a CIS member state applies for EU membership, should it leave
CIS or may remain in both Unions?

A: EU accession comes through real reforms. CIS is a virtual
organization. It does not really exist. It cannot hamper EU accession
if reforming states are firm in their democratization.

Q: What structures and mechanisms function in the EU under the
Common Foreign and Security Policy for the security-guarantee of
its member-states?

A: Mainly soft security guarantees, and instruments for peace support
operations. Unlike NATO the EU does not have a solidarity clause where
an attack against one state is considered an attack on all states.

Q: Do you see the possibility of EU integration for the three South
Caucasus states?

A: Not in the next 15-20 years. It took 18 years for Romania and
Bulgaria to integrate into the EU-from 1990 to 2007. The South Caucasus
states are at the beginning of a VERY long road. But the faster they
start moving towards this goal, the better for them.

Q: Why do some EU representatives refer to ENP as a kind of initial
step for membership, while others reject the idea of membership and
state that this region would remain as the "near Europe"?

A: Because there is no consensus in Europe as to what should be done
with EU’s Eastern neighbors. When there is no consensus, the issue is
usually deferred in the EU. It has to be tackled at a later stage when
the situation is clearer. We all like to postpone important decision
until the last moment

Q: Do you think that the EU sometimes has a mismatch of policies? If
yes, please specify.

A: [The EU is] full of mismatches. The EU is constrained by internal
contradictions, inconsistencies and competing priorities. That’s how
the EU works. That is normal. It works slowly.

Q: If EU was for the self-determination of people living in the former
Yugoslavia, then, self-determination was a priority over territorial
integrity. May we conclude that this model may be applied for the
resolution of frozen conflicts in the South Caucasus? If no, why?

A: Self-determination does not mean necessarily separation. It means
the right of people to have their cultural, political, etc. rights
respected. This can be done inside existing states, through power
sharing arrangements.

In the Balkans there are three big precedents: 1) Bosnia – a weak
federation close to confederation. 2) Macedonia where the conflict
has been solved through decentralization and devolution of power to
Albanians. 3) Kosovo – which will probably get independence.

All three are cases of self-determination. So far each of them is
discussing power sharing, instead of secession.

Q: Armenia’s last referendum for constitutional amendments according
to local observers and opposition was held with a great amount of
fraud and irregularities. Why do you think the EU observers kept
their eyes closed to these falsified results of the referendum?

A: Of course they did. And the Council of Europe did criticize the
way it was conducted.

Q: What might be common interests of Russia and EU in the South
Caucasus that may cause confrontation while both of them are active
in the region?

A: There are many potential issues for conflict and for cooperation.

Tension can arise on the de facto annexation of Abkhazia and South
Ossetia, and attempts to hamper EU and US access to the Caspian
basin’s gas and oil. Cooperation is necessary on solving conflicts,
including Karabakh.

Q: Do you believe that peaceful co-existence of the EU and Russia is
possible? Can there be a clear division of lines and limitations on
their roles and interests in the South Caucasus, especially Armenia?

A: Peaceful coexistence happens between rivals. EU and Russia will
have peaceful relations. That’s clear.

Q: Do you think Armenia will succeed with its "complementarity"
in the next 5-10 years, balancing cooperation with EU and Russia,
without hitting the economic, military, energy, communication and
political cooperation between Armenia and Russia?

A: Armenia has to make reforms. Many in Armenia understand that
exclusive reliance on Russia is not in its best interests. And that
Russia is less and less ready to listen to its allies – Armenia,
but also Belarus etc. And that Russia often wants concessions from
allies without giving anything in exchange. But it’s Armenia’s choice
what kind of foreign policy it wants to pursue. The problem is that
time is running out, and the corridor of complementarity is narrowing.

Solving Nagorno-Karabakh will greatly help Armenia diversify its
foreign policy options.

Nona Abazyan is a graduate of OSI-Funded MA program Transformation
in South Caucasus administered by Center for Social Sciences (CSS).

CHIRAC’S ‘FRIENDSHIP WITH TURKEY’: ALL TALK AND NO ACTION
AlÝ Ýhsan Aydin Paris

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
March 14 2007

With French President Jacques Chirac’s recent announcement that he
would not be standing for a third term as president it appears that
the friendship with Turkey of which he spoke so frequently will remain
as words rather than deeds.

French President Jacques Chirac with Turkish Prime Minister R. Tayyip
Erdoðan.

Chirac, who was described as a "supporter of Turkey" in the
international arena and in his own country, has faced many difficult
periods during his 12-year tenure as France’s president.

He entered the French political scene in 1965, with one of his most
memorable features being his ability to swing through 180 degrees on
a variety of subjects, including those he had defended with great
energy. It was due to this flexibility that he quickly earned the
nickname "girouette," which means "pinwheel."

Chirac’s career has even seen a brief foray into communism, though
he started as a conservative before switching to liberalism in
the late 1970s. Despite being responsible for France’s nuclear
testing in the Pacific Ocean, Chirac later went on to become a
staunch environmentalist. Though he is known today as being among
the "most European" of European leaders, he was in fact opposed to
the European Union during much of the 1990s. As mayor of Paris for
eight years, prime minister for two terms and president of France
since 1995, Chirac’s stance towards Turkey has not been immune to
his pinwheel-like behavior.

EU membership: At the 1997 EU summit in Luxembourg, Chirac openly
expressed his sadness at Turkey not being granted candidate status.

Two years later, when it was announced at the Helsinki summit that
Turkey had been granted this status, Chirac allowed Javier Solana
to take his private plane to bring the news in person to Ankara. In
speeches over the following years, Chirac expressed frequent support
for Turkish membership of the EU. Chirac continued to publicly defend
Turkey’s "European" status, even in 2004 when the ruling Union for
Popular Movement (UMP) and the public opposition was against Turkish
EU membership.

Despite Chirac’s "positive" actions on the above-mentioned fronts,
the leader approved the taking of a referendum on Turkish membership
and registered this condition in the French Constitution. This stance
by Chirac opened the path to similar demands from other EU countries.

Chirac was also among the names at the 2002 Copenhagen summit pushing
to block a date being given to Turkey for the start of accession talks.

Armenian genocide claims: All the developments that took place in
France in relation to the so-called Armenian genocide law took place
under Chirac’s term; the draft came up for discussion in the French
Parliament in 1998 and was officially turned into a bill in 2001.

Despite warnings from various French legal experts that the law was
in direct opposition to the French Constitution, and despite the fact
that the president himself had admitted he was against it, Chirac
decided to bypass the Constitutional Council and approved it himself.

The Armenian bill opened the path to a deep crisis between Turkey
and France that still affects relations. Chirac took a stance of
"opposition" to the bill, accepted last year in the French Parliament,
which calls for penalties for those who publicly deny the claims of
an Armenian genocide. He noted that history could not be determined
via laws. But then on his official visit to the Armenian capital
Yerevan, Chirac did not only utter the word "genocide" but also
stated publicly that in order for Turkey to become an EU member,
it would have to accept the Armenian claims.

Demirel’s visit to Paris never reciprocated: Despite the fact that
Turkey has remained on the French public agenda since he first became
president, Chirac has never made an official visit to Turkey. In 1998,
then Turkish President Suleyman Demirel visited Paris as the guest
of Chirac, the first trip of its level from Ankara since 1967.

After Demirel visited Paris, Turkey awaited a reciprocal visit from
France, but it never occurred and was instead constantly postponed
for political reasons. Chirac, who was "unable to go to Turkey,"
chose instead to visit Armenia last year.

As the first French President to visit Yerevan, Chirac declared
2007 the "the Year of Armenia" in France. In the face of the many
diplomatic problems experienced with Turkey, Chirac still managed to
oversee the sales of Airbus airplanes from France to Turkey. However,
another French ambition, to participate in the bidding for contracts
in Turkey’s nuclear power plant plans, was waylaid by the Armenian
genocide bill.

Popularity at its lowest: Chirac’s announcement that he would not
be running again for the presidency was greeted with pleasure by
other presidential candidates. There is now great curiosity as to
who exactly Chirac will support in the race to become the next French
president and, in particular, what his stance is with regard to the
conservative candidate, Nikolas Sarkozy. Chirac has said that he will
reveal whom he supports after March 19.

Extreme-right-wing leader Jean Marie Le Pen reacted to Chirac’s
departure with the comment, "I am losing my greatest enemy." More
than 22 million people watched Chirac’s departure speech, and it is
notable that the president’s latest popularity standings had touched
bottom, according to recent polls, and that he was characterized in
both the French press and by the public as "unsuccessful." Chirac
has been repeatedly criticized for his part in the failure of the
European Constitution after he brought it to a referendum in France.

–Boundary_(ID_FFR8ZWC6ntF1pumJQlgPDQ)–

CSTO GEN-SEC TO ARRIVE IN YEREVAN FOR 3-DAY VISIT

ITAR-TASS News Agency, Russia
March 13, 2007 Tuesday 03:16 AM EST

General Secretary of the Collective Security Treaty Organization
(CSTO) Nikolai Bordyuzha is arriving in Yerevan for a three-day visit
on Tuesday evening.

As Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister Armen Kirakosyan told Itar-Tass,
the general secretary will come "to continue a dialogue with
the republic’s leadership and hold meetings with the public." In
particular, Bordyuzha will address students and teachers of the
Yerevan State University and speak at the Military Institute of the
Defence Ministry of the republic.

"Armenia is and continues to be a CSTO member," confirmed
Kirakosyan. According to him, "cooperation of the republic with NATO
cannot be considered as rivalry with cooperation in CSTO." "In one
case, we are a member of CSTO, and in another – – we cooperate with
NATO," the diplomat explained.

"With Russia we have large-scale relations in the sphere of security,
are a member of CSTO and simultaneously develop cooperation with NATO
within the plan of individual partnership," Armenian Foreign Minister
Vartan Oskanyan stressed. "Cooperation of many years has shown that
there is no contradiction in these issues," the minister believes. By
means of this cooperation will be able to make a contribution to the
consolidation of security in the region," Oskanyan thinks.

"Armenia considers CSTO as one of the most important factors of
ensuring its security," Secretary of the National Security Council,
Defence Minister of the republic Serzh Sarkisyan said. According to
him, "Armenian-Russian cooperation within the framework of CSTO is
one of the most important guarantees of ensuring military security
of Armenia."

The minister recalled that within the CSTO framework,
a Russian-Armenian group of troops, which includes units of the
Russian military base in Armenia and the Armenian Armed Forces, was
formed and successfully operating in the Caucasian direction within
the framework of CSTO.