Author: Kajoyan Gevork

ARMENIAN GOVERNMENT DOES NOT WANT TO INVEST MONEY IN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES: SOCIOLOGIST

ARMINFO
Tuesday, June 17, 10:56

The Government of Armenia does not want to invest money in alternative
energy sources, Head of Sociometer Center Aharon Adibekyan told
journalists on Monday when asked to comment on the planned rise in
the electricity price.

“In the 1990s when electricity in Yerevan was supplied for just 2-3
hours a day, we put solar batteries on the roof of our office and
had light round the clock. Unfortunately, our present-day authorities
are reluctant to invest money in alternative energy sources as they
think that they are too expensive,” Adibekyan said.

He believes that the rise will be a new burden for many families in
Armenia. “As many as 1/3 of our families are already unable to pay
their bills,” he said.

According to Armenia’s Energy and Natural Resources Minister Yervand
Zakharyan, the country’s energy companies need additional 18bln AMD
($44mln) to ensure stable supplies, and so, they have asked for a 10%
rise in their tariff. The tariff may be raised on Aug 1 2014.

ILLEGAL LOGGING IN DILIJAN NATIONAL PARK

12:20 | June 17,2014 | Social

Employees of the Police Dilijan Department recently detained a young
man for illegal logging and timber sale.

The man, Senik G., turned out to have cut four hornbeams in the
Dilijan National Park SNCO and stored in the courtyard of his house.

The size of the damage is being clarified.

Investigation is underway.

PENSION TAX?: GOVERNMENT-PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CONTROVERSIAL LAW DRAW RENEWED CRITICISM

PENSIONS | 17.06.14 | 10:53

By SARA KHOJOYAN
ArmeniaNow reporter

While citizens not wishing to remain in the new pension system
continue submitting withdrawal applications to their employers,
the government is already discussing the issue of introducing the
so-called targeted social payments as a replacement of the current
pension contributions. This payment will be a tax and in case of
evading it people will face responsibility.

The government is thus trying to save the pension reform, which
has almost been brought down under the pressure of the Dem.am civil
movement and four non-governing parties.

As part of their struggle the forces opposing the reform applied to the
Constitutional Court, which on April 2 decided that portions of the
Law on Funded Pensions were unconstitutional, giving the government
until the end of September to bring the legislation in conformity to
the country’s basic law.

The group working on amendments last weekend suggested replacing the
mandatory payments with targeted social payments.

In particular, the proposed tax will be charged from employees’
salaries. It will not exceed 25,000 drams (about $60) for employees
getting more than 500,000 drams’ salaries, even if the salary is
higher, the state’s contribution will be 25,000 drams. The working
group recommends that the employer should cover the social payment
of those who receive the minimum wage, due to which the rights of
people getting the minimum wage will not be violated.

CivilNet economic analyst Armenak Chatinyan says these approaches
are not new as he still in March predicted that the government would
consider such an alternative.

“The government document on amendments drafted in March and kept top
secret presented almost all the mechanisms that are currently being
offered by the working group,” he says.

Thus, according to Chatinyan, the working group, in fact, suggests
“cosmetic” changes to the law, as employees will still be required
to make pension-related contributions.

“But while under the system recognized as unconstitutional the funds
transferred to the individual accounts of employees were considered
to be their property, under the system proposed by the government
today these sums will no longer be employees’ property.”

“The problem is that the planned targeted social payment by its
nature is a type of tax and will be entered into the state budget,
and only after that will the state transfer the sum to the account
of an individual citizen. At any moment the state may withdraw the
funds from the citizen’s account and the citizen will have no grounds
to complain,” says the analyst, according to CivilNet.

After becoming prime minister in April Hovik Abrahamyan has
continuously promised to carry out the pension reform that would meet
the interests of all layers of society. In response to complaints
from employees, especially those involved in the public sector, that
they are compelled to remain within the system, Deputy Prime Minister
Armen Gevorgyan said at a recent National Assembly session that they
would be consistent in ensuring proper investigation of all claims.

Meanwhile, Dem.am does not regard the government promises as credible.

Activist of the pressure group David Manukyan told ArmeniaNow that
after the latest initiative of the government their campaign will
gain momentum and continue with fresh vigor.

“Because this has nothing to do with what we have demanded,” the
activist explained.

AZERBAIJANI SOLDIER KILLED BY ARMENIAN GUNFIRE

Daily Sabah, Turkey
June 16 2014

AA

BAKU — An Azerbaijani soldier has been killed by Armenian troops
in a border incident, the Azerbaijan Ministry of Defense announced
on Monday.

The ministry said Private Fazil Kerimov, 20, was killed and extended
its condolences to his family and relatives.

Azerbaijan and Armenia, two former Soviet republics, fought a war
over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh between 1988 and 1994.

Efforts to resolve to the dispute have so far failed and there have
been several border clashes since a ceasefire was signed. The two
countries have no diplomatic relations.

IRAN AND TURKEY: UNLIKELY DUO AMID REGIONAL TURMOIL

Al-Jazeera, Qatar
June 16 2014

Cooperation between Turkey and Iran is critical for the resolution
of persisting conflicts in the Middle East.

Last updated: 16 Jun 2014 14:06 Vartan Oskanian

On every continent, there is a pair of neighbouring countries that are
very similar, yet different. And throughout history, their rivalry or
cooperation has made all the difference between turmoil and stability,
between war and peace. Take France and Germany in Europe, China and
India, Japan and South Korea in Asia, or Argentina and Brazil in
South America.

On the Eurasian landmass, one such pair is Iran and Turkey. Ever since
the fall of the shah in 1979, Iran has held an unfavourable view of
Turkey. Leaders of the Islamic revolution have always perceived the
founder of the Turkish Republic, Kemal Ataturk, as an ally of Reza
Shah, who founded the Pahlavi dynasty in the same period, and both
were considered enemies of Islam. Also, Turkey, a member of NATO, was
viewed as a close ally of the West, serving the interests of the United
States and Israel. Furthermore, Turkey’s effort to rise to the European
model and join the EU was seen as a rejection of its Islamic heritage.

Today’s Turkey is very different from the Turkey of the early 1980s
and even from the Turkey of the early period of the ruling Justice
and Development Party (AKP) in the mid-2000s.

For one thing, there is creeping Islamism eating at the fabric
of secular Islam. Turkey today is deeply divided over its Muslim,
secular and national identities and this schism is reflected in its
foreign policy.

Rouhani’s visit

Relations with Israel have soured, with the US shaken, and the
EU ambivalent at best. Neither Turkey nor the West value Turkey’s
NATO membership as they had before. Hence today, Iran views Turkey
differently than it did in the early days of the Islamic revolution.

Last week, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani visited Turkey – the first
president to have done so since 2008. Previous to this visit, Turkish
Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu had attended Rouhani’s inauguration
and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan had been to Tehran. Clearly,
there is a warming of relations between the two.

A possible nuclear deal between Iran and the West opens up entirely
new cooperation opportunities for Iran and Turkey in the areas of
security, economy and energy.

There are three factors that need to be considered in assessing and
understanding the motives behind the Turkish-Iranian rapprochement
and possible cooperation: the deepening divide between Shia and Sunni
in the greater Middle East, the optimistic chatter about a possible
nuclear deal between Iran and the West, and the alarming developments
in Syria and Iraq.

And since Rouhani’s visit to Ankara, a fourth factor has emerged which
is more urgent than the other three: the recent and very consequential
successes of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Iraq.

Throughout history, Ottoman Turkey and Persia were locked in a
religious struggle for the soul of Islam, as well as ideological
influence and power in the region. In the 1920s, the emergence of
nationalism in both countries wiped away the intense ideological
confrontation between the centres of Shia and Sunni global power.

After the Islamic revolution, Iran found no space for ideological
confrontation with a secular Turkey. Since then, both sides have
abandoned their extreme positions at the two poles, and have come
to understand that the exploitation of Islam by fringe groups and
terrorist organisations for quasi-political and sectarian aims could
jeopardise the national and security interest of both countries. And
it is up to the two states to begin to close the divide. Iran’s recent
overtures towards Saudi Arabia also had the same aim.

Turkey does not want to be faced with a nuclear Iran, fearing the
emergence of an asymmetric power relationship with the Islamic Republic
after centuries of balanced ties. Thus, a possible nuclear deal between
Iran and the West opens up entirely new cooperation opportunities
for Iran and Turkey in the areas of security, economy and energy.

Divided roles in Syria

Turkey and Iran haven’t seen eye to eye on Syria either. But now,
they have to. The issue is no longer one of Syrian President Bashar
al-Assad’s departure. Nor is it even about Syria. It is about the
spread of al-Qaeda and its affiliates, and their reach, influence
and possible penetration of other borders. The conflict now is about
preventing changes in the map of the region.

Ironically, one may argue that today’s situation in Iraq is also
partly the extension of Turkey and Iran’s opposing positions on Syria.

While Iran helped sustain the Assad regime, Turkey helped the rebels
and enabled their penetration into Syria. Now the conflict has extended
to Iraq and evolved in such a way that ISIL successes have come to
haunt both countries.

The new emboldening in Iraq directly affects the interests of
both Turkey and Iran. The swift incursion made by ISIL fighters in
northwestern Iraq last week, and the threat that they now present to
the capital Baghdad, made everyone shiver.

If ISIL can hold Mosul and consolidate its presence there, it will
have taken a giant step towards the break-up of Iraq along sectarian
lines and the creation of an Islamist emirate that straddles Iraq
and Syria. It could also lead to other changes to the borders that
Britain and France imposed on the Middle East a century ago.

Turkey is increasingly concerned about the growing reach of ISIL and
has already clashed with militants on its border with Syria. Turkey
is especially wary of the potential for attacks by ISIL – attacks that
would exploit the long border that runs from the Mediterranean to Iran.

Iran has long supported the regime in Syria, as well as, indirectly,
Iraq’s Nouri al-Maliki-led government in its fight against Sunni
fighters. The growing reach of ISIL, and its ever-closer presence to
Iran, has raised considerable anxiety in Tehran who has also hinted
at assisting the United States in case of ground engagement in Iraq.

Today more than ever, the understanding and cooperation between Turkey
and Iran is critical for the resolution of the persisting conflicts
and the long-term peace and stability in the larger Middle East.

And finally there are the unpredictable developments in the Kurdish
issue that could pit Turkey and Iran against each other. Both Iran
and Turkey are influenced by each other’s policies towards the Kurds.

Kurdish tensions build

In more recent history, Turkey and Iran have successfully kept the
Kurdish problem out of their disagreements and tensions. Neither side
used the Kurds on the other side of the border to incite instability
and conflict. More than ever, they would like to keep it that way
but that requires deeper cooperation on other issues of broader
implications.

If the ISIL successes continue and the Baghdad government falls, there
is no doubt that the Kurdish leadership will use this opportunity to
achieve their long-sought independence. This clearly will change the
entire nature and landscape, which will be at this stage, neither in
Iran’s nor Turkey’s interest.

If there ever was a time in the last three decades, where there was
a confluence of interests between them, it’s now. Indeed, today more
than ever, the understanding and cooperation between Turkey and Iran
is critical for the resolution of the persisting conflicts and the
long-term peace and stability in the larger Middle East. And it seems
they both know it.

Vartan Oskanian is a member of Armenia’s National Assembly, a former
foreign minister and the founder of Yerevan’s Civilitas Foundation.

1449

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not
necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.

WHAT MAKES US DIPLOMATS TALK OF CAUCASUS CRISIS-2014?

The Voice of Russia
June 16 2014

US experts and diplomats have been warning of a new security crisis
that could break out in the South Caucasus in autumn of 2014. How good
is the forecast and is there any evidence the region is really headed
for a new war? Or is it rather a threat aimed at disrupting these
countries’ ties with Russia? We are discussing the issue with Razi
Nurullayev, Azerbaijani political analyst and the head of “Region”
International Analytical Centre, and Sevak Sarukhanyan, deputy head
of the Noravank think tank in Yerevan.

On October 5, 2012, Ambassador Edward P. Djerejian presented a lecture
in Los Angeles titled “Arab Awakening, The Turkish Role in The Region
and The Future of Armenians in the Middle East”. According to the ‘USA
Armenian Life’ reporting, he claimed that “2014 is a potentially deadly
deadline for Armenia and Armenians worldwide imposed by Azerbaijan.” He
sternly cautioned Diaspora Armenians about the so-called “Azerbaijan
deadline” for political settlement of the Artsakh (Karabagh) conflict
by 2014… He tersely warned that a formidable military buildup by
Azerbaijan spelled trouble for Armenia.

This year Ambassador Richard Morningstar, the US envoy to Azerbaijan,
issued a similarly stern warning to Baku, promising it a “Maidan”
if the government doesn’t loosen its grip on the opposition.

In both cases, the Ambassadors suggested that Armenia and Azerbaijan
had to adopt more “open” policies towards the West and scale down
their contacts with Russia. Or face the consequences?

Razi Nurullayev, Azerbaijani political analyst and the head of “Region”
International Analytical Centre:

I would say the Caucasian explosion is always pending. The Caucasus
is a very sensitive area, both geopolitically and economically. And
that is why I think it is not only the matter of autumn, but that is
a matter of all the time.

We remember the case of war between Georgia and Russia in 2008, in
August. And after that a lot of things happened in the Caucasus. And
the Caucasus has been the point of interest not only for Russia that
comes from the fact that it is its political, but also for the West,
including the US and the EU country.

And of course, we cannot forget about the issue of Turkey. Turkey also
is very bound to the Caucasus region historically and it also has
its own interests. And Turkey’s interests in the Caucasus are being
implemented with the help of Azerbaijan, both brotherly countries.

So, in autumn the Caucasian explosion may happen, but I can’t say on
what perspective Mr. Ambassador has said that. Georgia is going to
conclude the association agreement with the EU this month, Ukraine
does the same and Armenia is going to join the Eurasian Union. So,
this tangles this paradox of the developments in the Caucasus and
really creates such an environment in which an explosion might happen.

Another point, Azerbaijan is also invited to the Eurasian Union and,
on the other hand, the EU has a big pressure on Azerbaijan to sign
an association agreement with the EU. So, in this context I think
the interests have collided between Russia and the West.

So, it may depend on the further developments and I would actually
put more focus on the Ukrainian events. It depends on how Ukraine
is going to get out of the situation which it found itself in. And
depending on that situation the fate of Caucasus may also be cleared.

Actually, with the Ukrainian events the eastern partnership initiated
by the EU has been severely damaged. The other countries of the
eastern partnership, including Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus
feel that the EU is more of an economic union and when it comes to
conflicts and the collision of interests with Russia, the EU cannot
defend either of the countries, which has now produced a radical
change in the minds of the countries, in their policies.

The Azerbaijan President said in last December that Azerbaijan would
not in any way sign an association agreement with the EU and Azerbaijan
would prefer an equal strategic partnership between the two sides,
in which the EU is not interested.

So, here the connection is – if Russia is more confident and keeps the
status quo as it is now in Ukraine, then it would somehow pursue the
successful policy in the Caucasus as well. If the West – the US and
the EU countries – are successful in Ukraine (which I can’t believe
can ensure its territorial integrity and bring peace to its eastern
provinces), then it might give a motivation to the other eastern
partnership countries to pursue the European integration policy,
which I believe is a hard task for now.

So, Ukraine in this context is a point where all the other countries
look at and draw the lessons from there.

Of course, we know that Caucasus is an extremely important region, and
at the same time, it is a very delicate region in terms of balances
that are now kept, but could so easily be tipped. Who of all players
could really be interested in creating a stir in that region, in
destabilizing it?

Actually, it is a very hard question and it is not very easy to just
simply answer it. I think the Caucasus is now a place of the war of
interests between Russia and the West. That is why at the moment,
it is my personal view, Russia would be interested in the Caucasus
to be peaceful, to be economically and geopolitically stable unless
it answers its interests.

So, if Russia has an influence over the Caucasus and Russia’s
interests are pursued and ensured in the Caucasus, then Russia would
be interested in bringing the stability to Caucasus, and would also
be interested in the resolution of the frozen conflicts.

As far as the EU is concerned, broadly speaking the EU and the US,
until now they did not seem to be active and very interested in peace
in the Caucasus. It was out of their very close point of interest.

They wanted peace, but never did anything for peace in the region.

But now, after the Ukrainian events the West thinks that the unstable
and conflict-fledged Caucasus solely serves the Russian interests. In
this context the West, and in particular the US have mobilized their
efforts for peace in the Caucasus.

In particular, I remember some high-ranking officials’ statements
from the US about Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. So, they now have become
more active and try to bring the sides to the round table and find
the solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which I think is not
possible without the Russia’s consent and participation.”

Sevak Sarukhanyan, deputy head of the Noravank think tank in Yerevan:

“To my mind, just now I don’t see any reasons for a sudden blast,
because the world and the region is quite busy with the things which
are going on in Ukraine. And now every country in the region and also
the international actors, they cannot provide any kind of forecast
for what will happen in the Caucasus if anything happens. That’s why
there are no international actors who are interested in any kind of
instability here.

And in 2014 I don’t see any kind of reasons for that, if we talk
about countries, Georgia is quite stable after the presidential and
parliamentary elections. Armenia is on its route of integration into
the Eurasian Union and Azerbaijan is trying to find its new place
in the European and American market out of the Ukrainian crisis,
because Azerbaijan is becoming part of the total European interest
in the non-Russian natural gas and oil. From this point of view each
country in the region is not interested in such kind of a blast.

But of course the processes which are going on in the wider region,
I mean, for example, Syria, Iran, somehow Turkey, they can also
influence and bring something sudden, which cannot be forecasted just
now, at this moment.”

In one of his recent interviews US Ambassador to Baku Richard
Morningstar was warning of a possible ‘Maidan’ scenario in Baku….

Actually, I must say that for example Azerbaijan has a lot of
differences in comparison with Ukraine, because Azerbaijan is a
more eastern country with more government control over political
and economic processes in the country. And from this point of view,
of course, Aliev is better controlling the situation than Yanukovych
did in Ukraine, which limits the possibilities of the opposition to
organize something.

And from the other point of view the opposition doesn’t have the
freedom of action, because the political process is not democratic, as
in many countries in the former Soviet Union. To my mind the American
approach is dictated by the Baku’s policy, which is that Aliev doesn’t
want to chose any kind of geopolitical side, because his policy is
quite pro-Western, but it is not an anti-Russian, actually.

And Azerbaijan’s decision now is a decisive one for Caspian region
new energy project. For example, if the West needs Turkmen gas or gas
from Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, oil from Kazakhstan passing not through
the territory of Russia, Azerbaijan’s decisions must be considered
as the most important ones, because Azerbaijan is the main transit
route for the Caspian energy resources.

>From this point of view I think the American embassy’s approach is
somehow dictated by the fact that Azerbaijan now doesn’t want to take
any kind of direct anti-Russian steps, which means that Azerbaijan
doesn’t want to make the process of construction of pipelines through
this territory in a fast way.

So, I think Azerbaijan, if it keeps its policy of tossing between
powers, will get more critics from Washington and from the West. But,
at the same time, Azerbaijan is a reliable partner of the West in
energy resources export and import. The whole situation is that the
West wants from Baku more than Baku can give.

And from this point of view I think that the critics over Azerbaijan’s
democracy and human rights processes in this country will become more
and more from the Western side. But actually I don’t see any reasons
for the Maidan movement, because, I must repeat, the Government of
Azerbaijan is controlling the situation.

Of course, there is a small part of processes which are out of control,
but they have no connection with the West. I’m speaking, first of
all, about the new Islamic movements which are now Azerbaijan. Mostly
Iran was supporting the Shia resistance and the renaissance of Shia
Islam in Azerbaijan. And some Islamic groups are out of control of
the Azerbaijani Government.

Of course, they have a lot of other religious organizations which
are supported from Saudi Arabia, the Wahhabi groups. And we see a
lot of people fighting in Syria. And these groups also are in some
kind of opposition to the Government, which is a secular one. But
to talk about them in terms of Maidan is not correct, because they
are living in other kind of political ideology. And their opposition
can be wilder than what was in Kiev, but in Kiev we also had a lot
of victims of the protests.

It is interesting that you’ve just mentioned the presence of the
Islamist factor. Do I get you right that it has been growing over
the past years?

It is growing and it is a logical process for these countries, because
these things like Islamism and radicalism, they are becoming more
competitive in the areas where the level of education and the level
of society is going down. Of course, the socio economic situation
and the conditions for the majority of the population are creating
relevant grounds for the renaissance of such kinds of movements.

And the post-Soviet Union territory is somehow a new territory for
Islamic radicalism. Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan,
Uzbekistan and all the other states are somehow suffering from that. I
think that the only tool to provide secularism in these counties is
to promote real democratic institutions, because if you are closing
officially secular political parties because they are in opposition
to you, you are creating a good fundament for the radicals who can
take the place of these secular oppositionists.

The thing which happened in Iran, before the revolution the last
Iranian Shah was arresting the oppositionists – the liberals,
the democrats – and in the 1970 the people who were against the
government, they found that the only secure places for meetings
were mosques. And that is why the political Islam became the main
instrument of protesting the government and creating any kind of base
for the opposition.

So, I think that the Islamic fundamentalists are getting more positions
in the region because of two reasons – bad socio-economic conditions
of the population and the non-democratic character of the governance.

And in that sense I cannot help asking you a question about another
huge Islamic country with an increasingly Islamist government, which
is Turkey. If we have been talking about the Shia groups present in
Azerbaijan, Turkey has got a huge Sunni influence. Is it active in
the region too?

Actually, it is active. But the Turkish political Islam is an
interesting one because it is part of a political process. We should
say that not the people of religion are doing politics in Turkey, but
the politicians who are religious are creating the political process.

That is a very big difference of Turkey when we compare this country
with Iran.

>From this point of view, it has some advantages and disadvantages. For
example, for the Iranians it is quite easy to enter the region
through the religious organizations. But for the Turks, for example,
the official political institutions and economic activities, they
are the most effective tools for entering the region.

The Turks in that sense, for example, in Georgia are huge, especially
in the Adjara region. They have a very high level of cooperation
with Azerbaijan. But at the same time, we should say that for
example the Azeri investments in Turkey are higher than the Turkish
investments are in Azerbaijan. The construction of the TANAP pipeline,
the Trans-Anatolian pipeline, which is going to be constructed for
Azeri investments. The level of Azerbaijani investments in Turkey
will become higher.

So, at this moment we cannot say that Turkey has some kind of decisive
influence on the Azerbaijani Government, because Azerbaijan has its own
share of influence in Turkey. And also the Turks have some limitation
of entering the region, because the closed Armenian-Turkish border,
it is a closed border for the Turkish entrance to the region.

You can invest a lot, you can be active in Azerbaijan, in Georgia,
but if your border is closed with Armenia, it makes you not a regional
country. You are partly a part of the region, because Armenia is
a quite important country from the geographic point of view. And
for Turkey, from the economic point of view, Armenia is much more
important than Georgia, because Armenia and Turkey are now connected
with railways, they are connected with high voltage transmission lines.

So, if we compare Turkey, for example, with Iran, Iran is more
effective in the region as a region, because Iran has investments both
in Armenia, Azerbaijan, in Georgia. But in the case of Turkey there is
only a triangle – Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan. Somehow it is also
a geopolitical alliance which does not let us to talk that Turkey has
a joint or a common south Caucasian strategy. The south Caucasus for
Turkey is only Georgia and Azerbaijan, which is also limiting the
Turkish possibilities and instruments of influence in the region.”

Ekaterina Kudashkina

Syria recaptures border crossing

Sunday 15 June 2014

Women react at a damaged site in what activists said was caused by a
suicide bomber in the middle of a market last night in Tirbespiye
village, east Qamishli, June 15, 2014. Activists claim that 14 people
died due to the explosion, seven of them are Arab and the other seven
are Kurds, while 25 were injured. REUTERS/Massoud Mohammed

Government forces flushed opposition fighters from their last redoubts
in north western Syria near the Turkish frontier today, capturing two
villages and restoring government control over the border crossing,
activists and state media said.

The military’s advances fully reversed the gains rebels had made
during their three-month campaign in Latakia province, the rugged
coastal region that is the ancestral heartland of President Bashar
Assad.

The counter-offensive’s success is the latest blow to the rebels, who
have suffered a string of bitter recent setbacks in Syria’s more than
three-year-old civil war.

Islamic rebel factions launched their surprise assault in Latakia in
March, pushing south from the Turkish border to seize a string of
villages in the lush, mountainous terrain. The military, nervous about
an incursion in a bastion of government support, dispatched
reinforcements to blunt the rebel advance and eventually turn the
tide.

Today, after months of bloody clashes, army troops backed by fighters
from the Lebanese Shiite military group Hezbollah seized the seaside
hamlet of Samra before also taking the village of Kassab and its
adjacent border crossing, said Rami Abdurrahman, the director of the
Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

He said there were minor clashes still taking place west of Kassab, a
predominantly Armenian village whose residents fled after the rebels
seized control.

The Syrian army command issued a statement saying that it “restored
security and stability to Kassab”. It also said the operation “smashes
the illusions” of the rebels securing a sea port in Samra or a buffer
zone along the border to use as “a base for launching terrorist acts
against the Syrian people”.

Lebanon-based Al-Mayadeen TV, which has a reporter embedded with
Syrian troops, broadcast live footage from Kassab that showed a
blown-out stone building with a smouldering wooden staircase. Soldiers
in camouflage uniforms milled in the streets, and the rocky hills
typical of the area could be seen in the background.

Engineering units were clearing mines and dismantling booby traps in
Kassab, Syria’s pro-government Al-Ikhbariya TV said.

The government made dislodging rebels from Latakia a priority for
strategic as well as symbolic areas. The coastal province is a
stronghold of the Alawite minority to which Mr Assad belongs, which is
an offshoot of Shiite Islam, and losing control of even a portion of
it was an embarrassment to the government.

Also today, the state news agency said that some 230 prisoners were
freed under a general amnesty declared by Mr Assad following his
re-election in Syria’s June 3 vote. Sana said the prisoners were
released from lock-ups in the central cities of Homs and Hama, as well
as the north eastern province of Hassakeh.

The Observatory confirmed that detainees were released today, although
it could not provide exact numbers. The group said that more than
1,500 people – a mix of anti-government activists and common criminals
– have been freed under the presidential amnesty since it was
announced on June 9.

International rights groups say there are tens of thousands of
anti-government activists, protesters, opposition supporters
imprisoned in the country. It is not clear how many of them will be
covered by the pardon.

– See more at:

Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey
June 15 2014

Syrian government retakes strategic town of Kassab on Turkish border: Army

DAMASCUS – Agence France-Presse

Syria’s army said on June 15 it had recaptured the strategic town of
Kassab, near the only border crossing with Turkey in Latakia province,
after it fell to rebels almost three months ago.

“After crushing many members of the mercenary terrorist gangs… units
of our armed troops in collaboration with the (paramilitary) National
Defence Force returned safety and security to Kassab this morning,” an
army statement said.

Kassab, an Armenian town, is important because it is located near the
only border crossing with Turkey in sensitive Latakia province, the
heartland of the Alawite sect from which President Bashar al-Assad
hails.

Rebel fighters including members of Syrian al-Qaeda affiliate al-Nusra
Front withdrew without a fight from the town on June 14, the Syrian
Observatory for Human Rights said, leaving only a small number of men
behind.

As they pulled back, Assad’s troops backed by other pro-regime groups,
among them Lebanon’s powerful Hezbollah, advanced on the nearby
village of Nabaein.

By June 15, the Britain-based Observatory said, pro-regime forces were
back in control of Kassab – the first time since they lost it to
rebels on March 21.

Aside from Hezbollah fighters, the government forces, led by members
of Syria’s elite Republican Guard, had been boosted by Iranian troops.

Rebels were short on supplies and experienced Hezbollah fighters and
Syrian special forces were able to advance, Observatory director Rami
Abdel Rahman said.

Under frequent bombardment by government forces, Kassab was important
for rebels who used it as a staging post to transport their wounded to
Turkey, which backs the opposition.

The Syrian government had accused Ankara of helping rebel groups seize Kasab.

June/15/2014

Syrian army, backed by Hezbollah, recaptures northwestern border town
By staff & agencies

On Line: 15 June 2014 16:27
In Print: Monday 16 June 2014

Syrian government forces on Sunday recaptured the strategic town of
Kessab, near the only border crossing with Turkey in the northwestern
province of Latakia, state television reported.

“Units from the army are reestablishing security in the province of
Latakia after killing a large number of terrorists and destroying
their weapons,” the television said, referring to rebels who had been
in control of the town for more than two months.

Kessab, an Armenian town, is strategically important because it is
located near the only border crossing with Turkey in sensitive Latakia
province.

Terrorists, including members of Syrian Al-Qaeda affiliate Al-Nusra
Front, withdrew from the town on Saturday, the Britain-based Syrian
Observatory for Human Rights said, leaving only a small number of men
behind.

As they pulled back, Assad’s troops backed by other pro-government
groups, among them Hezbollah, advanced on the village of Nabaein near
to Kessab.

Sunday morning, Syrian state television said government forces had
“restored stability and security” to Kassab and engineering teams were
removing mines and explosives planted by “terrorist gangs”, the
government’s customary term for rebels.

Kessab was vital for rebels who used it as a staging post to transport
their wounded to Turkey, which backs the opposition.

The Syrian government had accused Ankara of helping rebel groups seize Kessab.

Over the past months, Syrian army has achieved major victories in its
battle against takfiri groups across the Arab country, particularly in
the western region of Qalamoun near the Lebanese border.

BAKU DECLARATION OF TURKPA PASSED

Trend, Azerbaijan
June 13 2014

Baku, Azerbaijan, June 13

By Ilkin Izzet – Trend:

The Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-speaking countries (TURKPA) passed
the Baku Declaration. Along with other provisions, the organization’s
support for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Azerbaijan
was reflected there.

The declaration passed in Baku on June 13 following a TURKPA session
also reflects the inviolability of borders, non-interference in the
internal affairs of other countries.

The document emphasizes the need for rapid settlement of the
Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Its settlement will
restore peace and stability throughout the region.

In the Baku declaration TURKPA member-states also condemned the attack
on the Turkish Consulate General in Mosul.

The declaration was signed by the parliament speakers of Azerbaijan,
Turkey, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan.

TURKPA meeting was held in Baku on June 12-13.