Author: Karakhanian Suren

We have to solve our problems on our own
Editorial
Yerkir/am
October 08, 2004
If you can remember any instances when the Azeri, Georgian or Turkish
media used publications in the Armenian press, statements made by
the Armani politicians or research works of the Armenian analysts in
order to criticize their countriesâ^À^Ù policies or leadership then
you can stop reading this article.
We want to speak about those Armenian â^À^Üanalystsâ^À^Ý, politicians,
journalists and media that suffer from excessive inclination towards
foreign sources, those who like referring to such sources in order to
ground their â^À^Üanalysisâ^À^Ý of the political processes in Armenia.
Not all the countries can boast that any hostile statements
(hostile and not critical) about the country and its politics can
immediately appear in the media of that country that are so obsessed
with freedom of speech. It is really absurd to see that Armenian
media refer to Azeri newspapers in their articles on the Armenian
opposition. Naturally, journalists who write such articles had to
address a Georgianâ^À^Ùs statement on the legitimacy of the Armenian
president.
We say this is natural because some of our political leaders tend
to use the foreign analystsâ^À^Ù opinions to back up their own
assessments of the political situation in the country. They are simply
not able to understand one reality that is clear for any person who
has self-respect and dignity â^À^Ó whether our state, our political
leadership or our opposition are good or bad, this is our job and
the foreigners are not in a position to teach us on this issue. If
democracy in Armenia is not on an adequate level, Azerbaijani Mili
Mejlis deputy is not the proper person to improve the situation.
And before agreeing with him, the Armenian National Assembly deputy
should realize that Armeniaâ^À^Ùs democratization is hardly the main
concern for Azerbaijan, doubtlessly an â^À^Üexemplarâ^À^Ý democratic
country. With the same logic, legitimacy in our country is not the
main concern of our other neighbor.
Let us repeat â^À^Ó this does not mean that everything in Armenia is
going smoothly in terms of democracy or that there are no reasons
for criticism. But this is our job, these are our problems and our
drawbacks, and we have to solve them ourselves.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Armenian premier, Norwegian foreign minister discuss political, economic ties
Public Television of Armenia, Yerevan
11 Oct 04
Armenian Prime Minister Andranik Markaryan today received Jan Petersen
[chairman of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Norway].
At the meeting, the Norwegian foreign minister noted the importance
of expanding bilateral political dialogue. In turn, Markaryan spoke
about securing a legal basis for bringing mutual economic cooperation
closer together. The Armenian prime minister noted the prospects
for cooperation in the area of information technologies, agriculture
and hydroelectricity.

Reviews
Irish Times
Oct 11, 2004
A review of what is happening in the world of the arts.
Kazazyan, Finucane, RTE NSO/Brophy
NCH, Dublin
Borodin – Prince Igor Overture
Tchaikovsky – Violin Concerto
Stravinsky – Three Pieces for solo clarinet
Stravinsky – Symphony in E flat
Although the young Igor Stravinsky didn’t pursue a course at the St
Petersburg Conservatory, his private studies under Rimsky-Korsakov followed the
conservatory pattern.
At the beginning he wrote a piano sonata, which late in life he described as
having been “fortunately lost,” although it had in fact survived, and was
published in 1973, just two years after his death.
At the end was a symphony, the formal Op. 1, in which he followed the models
laid down by his teacher and showed a clear mastery of a style of Russian
music that he was very rapidly going to put behind him. Yet he clearly retained a
fondness for it, and in 1966, at the age of 83, he made a commercial recording
of it.
For modern listeners the symphony’s most remarkable aspect is how little it
heralds the Stravinsky we have come to know and love.
It’s the evocations of Glazunov and Tchaikovsky that stand out, and only the
fleet Scherzo is at all suggestive of the deftness that the young composer
would soon be showing.
Yet though the piece is clearly derivative (Stravinsky was assiduous in
meeting the demands of a teacher he described as being “like an adopted parent”),
it also has a brio that’s not to be taken for granted in the academic models it
was following, let alone in student exercises.
David Brophy’s performance in the RTE National Symphony Orchestra’s ongoing
Stravinsky survey at the NCH on Friday took the work very much at face value.
The playing was robust and often full-blooded, although some of the tempos
sounded a bit cautious, and the finale was certainly taken too slowly to convey
the spirit of a two-in-a-bar Allegro molto.
There were no such tempo issues in Tchaikovsky’s Violin Concerto, where the
young Armenian violinist Haik Kazazyan (born 1982) kept things moving nicely
and mastered the virtuoso challenges with ease, and sometimes with dazzling
polish.
Yet at the same time this was a rather cool account, more calculated to
inspire admiration than stir the passions.
There was a sense of reserve also in the evening’s remaining performances.
NSO principal clarinettist had the stage to himself for a studied account of
Stravinsky’s Three Pieces for solo clarinet, and David Brophy dispensed a
clean-limbed reading of Borodin’s tuneful Prince Igor Overture.
Michael Dervan
Martin, RTECO/Wagner
Mahony Hall, The Helix, Dublin
Blacher – Paganini Variations
Rachmaninov – Paganini Rhapsody
Beethoven – Symphony No 4
The chemistry of conductors and orchestras are every bit as mysterious as
those of relationships and marriages.
One thing, however, that’s sure at the moment is that Laurent Wagner and the
RTE Concert Orchestra’s concerts at The Helix are setting new standards in
Dublin.
The programming of these concerts is mostly cautious, and the marketing of
them is bland in the extreme.
Themed series sold as “A Tale of Four Cities,” “Tales from Vienna” and
“Beethoven PLUS” are unlikely to identify themselves as exciting or essential
musical adventures either to audiences new to classical music or to listeners long
familiar with it.
That’s not to say that Wagner hasn’t been doing his bit to step, albeit
gingerly, a little bit outside RTE norms of repertoire, especially as they have
applied to the RTECO.
The inclusion of Boris Blacher’s Paganini Variations in last Saturday’s
programme, and Henri Dutilleux’s Le loup the week before make this clear.
His major contribution, however, has been quite simply the freshness of his
music-making.
And, if Saturday’s performance of Beethoven’s Fourth Symphony is anything to
go by, he is leap-frogging the RTECO right over the RTE NSO in terms of one of
the most remarkable developments of recent years, the mainstreaming of
period-performance practices in the music of the Viennese classical period.
Thierry Fischer has already taken the Ulster Orchestra well down this road,
and in Beethoven’s Fourth Symphony Wagner took a similarly refreshing approach.
He coaxed from the RTECO such a lithe, taut responsiveness that was so lean
in tone, alert in interplay, and often infectiously high-spirited, that the
orchestra was hardly recognisable as the same group that had been heard at the
NCH the previous Tuesday.
To be fair, the acoustic in the Mahony Hall at The Helix is a great help.
It’s much fuller in the bass than the NCH, and seems altogether more
accommodating of extremes of dynamic.
I’m not yet convinced, however, that it is as readily accommodating of pianos
as of the orchestra as a whole.
Philip Martin’s glittering fluency in Rachmaninov’s Paganini Rhapsody often
blended a little too fully into the orchestral texture for my taste.
Yet, apart from Martin’s reluctance to accommodate to the orchestra having
the tune in the famous 18th variation, this was a performance which traded
successfully on a kind of runaway exuberance.
It was good also to hear a representative work by Boris Blacher, one of a
group of now largely neglected generation of German composers born in the first
decade of the 20th century.
His Paganini Variations are written in a sly, witty, deftly showy style that
would make an upbeat introduction to any programme.
This they certainly did on Saturday.
Michael Dervan

ArmenPress
Oct 6 2004
US-ARMENIA TASK FORCE HOLDS 9-TH MEETING IN WASHINGTON
YEREVAN, OCTOBER 6, ARMENPRESS: Armenian foreign ministry said a
government delegation, headed by finance and economy minister Vartan
Khachatrian, participated on October 5 in the 9-th meeting of the
US-Armenia Task Force in Washington. The ministry said the agenda of
the meeting was topped by issues related to coordination of
implementation of US-funded projects in view of Armenia’s plan of
actions for poverty reduction. Other issues on the agenda encompassed
economic development, banking system reform, energy, agriculture, the
process of elaboration of projects which are to be submitted to
Millennium Challenges Account (MCA) program and the fight against
terrorism.
An October 3 reception at the Armenian embassy was attended by
Paul AppleGarth, the chairman of MCA foundation, US ambassador to
Armenia, John Evans, other senior US and Armenian officials.
On October 2-3 the Armenian delegation participated in the annual
meetings of World Bank and IMF.

ArmenPress
Oct 6 2004
ARMENPRESS AND BTA SIGN COOPERATION AGREEMENT
YEREVAN, OCTOBER 6, ARMENPRESS: Armenpress news agency and
Bulgarian state news agency, BTA signed on October 5 a cooperation
agreement. It was signed by BTA executive director Maxim Minchev and
Armenpress executive director Hrayr Zoryan. Minchev is in a Bulgarian
delegation, headed by president Georgy Parvanov who is on an official
visit in Armenia.
Maxim Minchev met Tuesday with Armenpress staff and spoke about
his agency. He said the agreement will allow both parties to get
first-hand information, exchange experience and carry out joint
projects.
BTA was founded in 1898 by Bulgarian Prince Ferdinand and
cooperates with around 30 news agencies worldwide.

Austrian defense expert argues against Turkey’s EU membership
Kurier, Vienna
5 Oct 04
The issue of Turkey’s EU membership has now entered the intensive
phase of the debate. Irrespective of any arguments for or against, it
is somehow regarded as a fact that Turkey joining the EU will be of
considerable advantage in security-policy and strategic terms.
Turkey’s geostrategic position and large armed forces, the argument
goes, give the European Union greater influence and security
benefits. This argument is entirely inappropriate. The opposite is
true. A NATO member, Turkey is firmly integrated in the Euro-Atlantic
security system. There is no need to act out of security policy
concerns.
Let us look at Turkey’s geostrategic position. Turkey shares borders
with Georgia, Armenia, Iran, Iraq, and Syria, among others. Relations
with these countries may be called problematic. Turkey has no respect
for minority rights, although it is a country with considerable
minorities. Because of its strategic partnership with Israel and/or
the strategic triangle with the United States and Israel, Turkey is
not only a player in the Middle East, but it is directly and
indirectly involved in Mideast problems. The European Union would have
external borders with Iraq and Iran, thus becoming a frontline state
in the largest crisis region in the world.
As a result, the European Union would not, as it hopes, reach the
status of objective mediator in the Middle East as a result of
Turkey’s membership, but become itself part of the Middle East
problems. Turkey is confronted to a great extent with problems of
transnational terrorism and organized crime and would bring these
problems into the EU. On top of this, Turkey is a kind of “natural”
competitor of Russia when it comes to influencing the Caucasus and, in
particular, Central Asia. Its accession would contribute nothing at
all to the EU in security policy terms, if the European Union wants to
develop its own security policy profile alongside NATO.
[Passage omitted]

HIGH FEST INTERNATIONAL THEATER FESTIVAL KICKS OFF IN YEREVAN
YEREVAN, OCTOBER 5, ARMENPRESS: The second High Fest
internationaltheater festival started in Yerevan on October 2. The
first was held in 2003 The festival is organized by the Union of
Armenian Actors, SCF/BCCP-Armenia (Stichting Caucasus Foundation-The
Netherlands/Bureau for Caucasian Cultural Programs) and “ALFAEL”
Productions. The main goal of the festival is to present the World
Theatrical Art in Armenia and to promote the Armenian Theatre in other
countries.
The festival offers the audience a unique opportunity to see the
highly artistic samples of multi-genre theatrical art, such as drama
and comedy, musicals and dance performances, marionette and puppetry,
plastic and verbal, mime and street performances.
Theatre companies (more than 120 participants) from 18 countries
(UK, France, Russia, Germany, Switzerland, Korea, Sweden, Spain,
Serbia, Israel, Georgia, Czech Republic, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Romania
etc.) are participating. On the sidelines of the festival playwriting
workshop with world famous writer Paulo Coelho will be held.
Performances are being held on 14 venues of Yerevan. Besides the
main program of the festival other events, such as seminars, master
classes willbe organized to create a favorable atmosphere for exchange
of ideas and experience. The VIP experts will lead a number of
seminars aimed at increasing the awareness of Armenian students and
artists on Arts and Cultural Management, International Cooperation in
Arts, Cultural Policy issues. The master classes led will concentrate
on new trends and methods of contemporary theatrical art and will
present the new approaches in different spheres of theatre.

Armenian leader, outgoing Israeli envoy discuss bilateral ties
Arminfo
4 Oct 04
Yerevan
Armenian President Robert Kocharyan and Israeli ambassador Rivka Cohen
today discussed the possibilities of developing bilateral relations.
At the meeting, Rivka Cohen, who is completing her diplomatic mission
in Armenia, thanked the Armenian president for his support during her
three-year tenure, the presidential press service told our agency
today. According to the source, Cohen informed Kocharyan of the
developments in the Middle East.

Transitions Online
‘Easy-Cards’ Made Hard
by Emil Danielyan
30 September 2004
You might be able to buy it from any newspaper kiosk in Moscow, but in
Armenia buying an activation card for your cellphone either takes months or
costs up to $200.
YEREVAN, Armenia–Felix Sahradian looked frustrated after scanning the
numbers on a notice board outside the Yerevan office of Armenia’s only
telephone company. Again, he was not among the lucky ones whose number had
come up, a number that would have granted him the right to one of the most
coveted goods in Armenia: a prepaid SIM card to activate a mobile phone.
Prepaid SIM cards may be cheap and readily available for sale around the
world, but, in Armenia, you have to register with ArmenTel, the deeply
unpopular national telecommunications operator, and wait for at least a year
in order to be able to buy one at a reasonable price.
Sahradian signed up in January and is one of tens of thousands of people who
remain on ArmenTel’s waiting list. “They say I’ll get a card in the near
future,” he said skeptically. “But why should I wait for months and years?
You can buy them in any newspaper kiosk in Moscow.”
The 51-year-old civil servant could buy this tiny chip without any wait, by
turning to speculative traders. But few people in this impoverished nation
can afford the black-market price, normally $120 but, this summer, as much
as $200. ArmenTel charges only $24 apiece. That includes 27 minutes of free
local phone calls.
HAVE MOBILE, WON’T PHONE
This Soviet-style rationing underscores the underdeveloped state of mobile
telephony in Armenia. The problem is a key bone of contention in the
Armenian government’s long-running dispute with Greece’s Hellenic
Telecommunications Organization (OTE) which purchased ArmenTel in 1998.
Exclusive rights to all telecom services were a key clause of the $200
million deal. ArmenTel is now on course to lose its monopoly rights to
mobile-phone services.
The Greeks pledged to modernize Armenia’s obsolete telecom infrastructure
and claim to have already invested $200 million. The authorities in Yerevan,
however, say that figure is grossly inflated. They also accuse ArmenTel of
abusing its monopoly. The dispute intensified early this year, when the
government deciding to unilaterally revoke the company’s exclusive rights to
provide cellphone and international internet services.
ArmenTel and its parent company denounced the move as illegal, filing two
separate lawsuits with the International Court of Economic Arbitration in
London. The Greeks accused the government of breaching its contractual
obligation to allow a steep increase in fixed-line phone charges in Armenia.
The two sides agreed in June to try to reach an out-of-court settlement,
with the government agreeing to delay the termination of ArmenTel’s monopoly
until 29 September-and now, by another two weeks. No details of the talks
they have held since have been made public. Armenian officials have made it
clear that the market will be liberalized regardless of their outcome. The
only question, they say, is whether the country will have one or two more
mobile-phone operators. One Russian-based firm is already lobbying for a
license, promising to invest $75 million in its own network.
Whatever the arguments, one thing is clear: ArmenTel and its owner, a
telecom giant with an annual turnover worth billions of dollars, have failed
to meet Armenian demand for a service that has developing rapidly in most
parts of the world. In mid-August there were just 140,000 mobile-phone users
in Armenia. Local analysts believe that number will at least double once
supply matches demand.
Most subscribers prefer to pay in advance for their phone calls, first
buying a SIM card package and then buying top-up cards at newspaper kiosks
whenever their credit runs out. ArmenTel dubbed the enabling SIM card an
“easy-card” when it was introduced a few years ago. The choice of the name
could have hardly been more ironic. In late August the operator began
distributing a new batch of “easy-cards” for the first time in over a year.
That, of course, was far too little to meet demand (though, at $0.36 per
minute, calling on a mobile phone is not cheap in Armenia). In Yerevan’s
central administrative district, for example, only one-third of the 12,000
registered applicants were able to lay hands on them.
The situation is not much better even for contract customers, who pay a
monthly fee of $18 and a per-minute charge of 15 cents. SIM cards for their
phones have been available only in small numbers for years. Their unlimited
sales resumed a month ago.
Another problem has been the poor quality of wireless communication network.
Making phone calls in peak hours in the afternoon is often a nightmare,
suggesting that the network’s capacity is inadequate even for the current
very modest number of users. The network still covers less than half this
mountainous country.
Westerners living in Yerevan, the Armenian capital, find the situation
particularly shocking. “To pay $120 to use a prepaid mobile card is
absolutely ridiculous, particularly given the quality of the service one
receives,” said Audrey Selian, a Swiss doctoral candidate researching the
use of information technology by Armenian government agencies. “It is
appalling what a shortage there is of them.”
A MARKET (AND ECONOMY) STUNTED
ArmenTel’s failure to achieve market saturation in the six years (and more)
since its takeover by OTE has still not been clearly explained. Its Greek
executives rarely speak with local journalists. Their spokeswoman, Hasmik
Chutilian, blamed the “weak network” on the ongoing row with the Armenian
authorities, saying that the government has scuttled some of the investments
ArmenTel was planning. She also said that the company committed a “marketing
mistake” six years ago when it decided to concentrate on fixed-line
telephony.
The landline network was in dire straits at the time. In this area at least,
ArmenTel can claim some success. Its investment has improved the service
markedly, especially in the Armenian capital, where 68 percent of phone
lines are now connected to digital exchanges. There are now more than
530,000 fixed-line phone users in this country of 3 million, the company
says, making its “teledensity” rate relatively high by ex-Soviet standards.
But Serge Sargsian, the government’s representative on the ArmenTel board,
counters that the improvement has largely been confined to Yerevan, which
now accounts for just over half of subscribers. Only 12 percent of regional
exchanges have been digitalized and phone access in rural areas has
“declined terribly,” he says.
Ian Beeby, a representative of the California-based WFI Consulting firm that
audited ArmenTel, made a similar point last year. “We have seen a number of
villages where exchange capacity did exist and now no longer exists,” he
said.
Another source of discontent has been ArmenTel’s grip on internet traffic to
internet service providers abroad. This has led to high prices without any
corresponding increase in quality. Local internet service providers and
other business executives believe that ArmenTel’s monopoly has been stifled
the development of information technology, one of the promising sectors of
the Armenian economy. “The kind of communication for which we pay tens of
thousands of dollars each month would cost just $100 in America,” Hovannes
Avoyan, head of the Lycos Armenia firm, complained recently.
The Armenian government seems to share these concerns. But it still remains
to be seen how far it is prepared to go in liberalizing the telecom market.
—
Emil Danielyan is a journalist based in Yerevan and a long-time contributor
to TOL, and to its print predecessor, Transitions.

Abkhaz presidential race in final lap
By Zaal Anjaparidze for The Jamestown Foundation (30/09/04)
Georgia has watched the unfolding of the presidential race in its breakaway
republic of Abkhazia with a strangely Olympian calm.
On 3 October, voters in Abkhazia will choose a successor to their
ailing president. Vladislav Ardzinba led the region in its fight for
independence from Georgia in 1992 and 1993 before becoming president
of the self-declared republic in 1994. The new president of Abkhazia
will win a five-year term, subject to a two-term limit. The Georgian
government has watched the unfolding campaign with an Olympian
calm. As recently as 21 September, Georgian President Mikhail
Saakashvili described plans to re-incorporate Abkhazia into Georgia
at the 59th session of the UN General Assembly. No comments on the
election were made at the traditional commemoration of 27 September,
the day the Abkhaz capital, Sukhumi, fell 11 years ago, effecting the
secession of the region. Earlier, Saakashvili dismissed the elections
as illegitimate and Nino Burjanadze, chair of the Georgian parliament,
warned Russia against conferring any recognition or legitimacy on
the elections.
Favored candidate, radically anti-GeorgianA number of candidates have
registered, although several refused to comply with a controversial
new law passed on 3 August that requires candidates to pass an
Abkhaz-language test and to have been resident in Abkhazia for the past
five years. Alexander Ankvab, a popular former Abkhaz interior minister
now living in Russia, and Nodar Khashba, a former mayor of Sukhumi
and now a high-ranking official in the Russian Civil Defense and
Emergencies Ministry, were denied registration by the Central Election
Commission (CEC) after they refused to sit the Abkhaz language test and
failed to meet residency criteria. Among the registered candidates,
the front-runner is Raul Khadzhimba, a former prime minister. His
running mate is Vitaly Smyr, the Abkhaz minister of agriculture and
food. Khadzhimba has a KGB background and the endorsement of President
Ardzinba plus rumored backing from Moscow. He also is supported by
many divisions and bureaucrats in Abkhaz state agencies. Georgian
commentators depict Khadzhimba as the most radically anti-Georgian
of the candidates. Khadzhimba has already made it clear that he plans
to make major changes to the constitution if elected. The amendments
include giving the president the power to dissolve parliament and
introducing parliamentary confirmation of new governments.
United AbkhaziaSergei Bagapsh, director-general of the Chernomorenergo
electricity company, trails Khadzhimba. Bagapsh served as prime
minister from 1997 to 2001. He is standing as a candidate for the
recently merged United Abkhazia movement and the Amtsakhara veterans’
organization and is regarded as the main opposition candidate. His
chances are thought to have increased after the disqualification
of Aytayra movement candidate Alexander Ankvab, who, in return for
urging Aytayra supporters to back Bagapsh, has been promised the
post of prime minister in the event of a Bagapsh victory. Both the
Georgian and Abkhaz media have made a point of the fact that Bagapsh
has a Georgian wife, but remain divided over how this will affect his
policies and popularity. Analysts speculate that a united opposition
would decrease the chances of a Khadzhimba victory. Bagapsh’s running
mate is the historian Stanislav Lakoba. Sergei Shamba, former foreign
minister, is running third with a platform urging “greater political,
economic, and humanitarian” integration with Russia. Shamba has angrily
denied rumors that he intends to pull out of the presidential race at
the last minute and throw his support to another candidate. Shamba’s
running mate is Vladimir Arshba, head of the Ministry of Defense
General Staff. The other two candidates concede they have slim chances
for victory. Anri Jergenia is also a former prime minister (running
with Ruslan Kishmaria, chairman of the Gali district administration),
while Yakub Lakoba is leader of the Abkhaz People’s Party (running
with Fatima Kvitsinia, arbitration court judge).
Fairness increasingly doubtfulThe fairness of the elections is
increasingly doubtful. The CEC denied requests from the League of
Voters for Fair Elections to serve as monitors. This NGO had severely
criticized the CEC’s performance. The CEC claimed that the election
law contained no provision for NGOs to act as observers unless they
have been invited to do so by the Abkhaz authorities. The UN and
OSCE do not consider the elections legitimate and therefore will
not send monitoring teams. Instead, members of the Russian State
Duma and representatives from Russia’s North Caucasus republics,
South Ossetia, and Karabakh are expected to act as election
observers. Although the Abkhaz CEC lists 165â^À^Ù 248 eligible
voters, down from 216â^À^Ù000 in the 2002 parliamentary elections,
Georgian sources further lower this figure to 70â^À^Ù000, due to
widespread population shifts before and after the war. Additionally,
most voters in Abkhazia are believed to hold Russian citizenship, and
therefore may not be able to prove their eligibility to vote. Abkhazia
has yet to introduce internal passports and officials are issuing
special forms as an interim measure. Bagapsh shared his surprise that
the CEC still did not have the exact number for Abkhazia’s population
and the number of voters. “How can you hold fair elections without
these data?” he asked.
Abkhazia not mentally prepared for pollMore critically minded
commentators are pessimistic regarding the elections. Oleg Damenia,
an Abkhaz analyst, argues that the Abkhaz electorate is not mentally
prepared for a fair election, as its psychological makeup still
bears Soviet-era habits. “The pre-election campaign has overstepped
all permissible limits, and thus it’s difficult to forecast whether
the electorate would behave within the licit framework,” he said.
According to Damenia, losers will likely protest after election
day. Candidate Shamba has warned that vote rigging would only play
into the hands of external forces, and Abkhazia might see a replay
of the Georgian or Yugoslav revolutions. Recently, representatives
of the Sukhumi-based branch of Soros Foundation have dismissed some
media allegations that the Foundation might financially support a
“pro-Georgian” candidate. Some analysts still consider that Ardzinba’s
departure creates an opportunity to change the relationship between
Georgia and the Abkhaz leadership. They argue that Tbilisi could take
advantage of the struggle between the Moscow-backed Khadzhimba and
his opponents. But the Abkhaz separatists have resolutely rejected
any plans for reintegrating Abkhazia with Georgia. On 29 September,
the Abkhaz Ministry of State Security claimed that Georgian task
forces and weaponry are concentrating along the Abkhaz border,
and it called on residents of Abkhazia to exercise vigilance. The
ministry’s special statement also claims that President Saakashvili
directed Georgian special services to step up subversive activities
in Abkhazia, particularly in the Georgian -populated Gali district, in
order to provoke conflict among supporters of the Abkhaz presidential
candidates. Tbilisi has not responded to these statements.
This article originally appeared in Eurasia Daily Monitor,
published by The Jamestown Foundation in Washington, DC., at
(). Foundation is an independent, nonpartisan
organization supported by tax-deductible contributions from
corporations, foundations, and individuals.