Author: Nahapetian Samvel

PanARMENIAN.Net

Turkish Ambassador to U.S. recalled for consultations
12.10.2007 12:23 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Turkey on Thursday asked its Ambassador in
Washington to return to Turkey for consultations over a
U.S. congressional panel’s decision to approve the bill labeling
killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire as Genocide, an official
said.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Levent Bilman said Ambassador Nabi Sensoy
would stay in Turkey a week or 10 days for discussions regarding the
vote, which came despite warnings by Turkish officials and U.S.
President George W. Bush’s administration that the bill could harm
U.S.-Turkish relations, the AP reports.

Turkey has many times warned that recognition of the 1915 events as
Genocide will deliver a heavy blow on the Washington-Ankara
relations. However, despite all warnings, the U.S. House Committee on
Foreign Relations condemned almost century-old events.

Furthermore, the Congressmen approved the resolution at the moment
when the White House was inducing Turkey against intrusion into
Northern Iraq.

U.S. politicians say a military operation can deteriorate the
situation in Middle East. However, Turkey intends to take revenge for
killings of Turkish soldiers in southeast, RBC reports.

PETRAEUS CONCERNED OVER TURKISH TENSION
By Steven R. Hurst

The Associated Press
Oct 12 2007

BAGHDAD (AP) – The top U.S. commander in Iraq warned Thursday that
Turkey’s threatened incursion into Kurdish regions in the north of
the country could harm the flow of supplies for U.S. troops and damage
the Kurdish economy.

Iraqi Kurdistan, a haven of relative calm, could suddenly become
another fault line if Turkey makes good on threats to cross the
northern border in pursuit of Turkish Kurdish militants.

"We are concerned about that," Gen. David Petraeus told two
U.S. reporters in a dusty courtyard in Jadidah, a Shiite town about
25 miles north of Baghdad.

The Turkish government is preparing to ask parliament to authorize a
cross-border operation. Approval would allow the military to launch
an operation immediately or wait to see if the United States and its
Iraqi allies decide to crack down on the rebels.

"A lot our supplies come through Turkey. … To maintain that
commercial exchange is hugely important through the border crossing
at Habur Gate. And we hope that will continue," Petraeus said.

The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) has been fighting for autonomy in
southeast Turkey since 1984. The conflict has claimed tens of thousands
of lives. Turkey claims the rebels use Iraqi Kurdish territory as a
safe haven. Iraqi and Kurdish authorities reject the claim.

A Turkish incursion could open an delicate new front in Iraq just as
U.S. forces were seeing major gains against both Shiite and Sunni
extremists in the largely Arab sections of the county south of the
Kurdish region.

Beyond that, about 70 percent of U.S. air cargo headed for Iraq
transits Turkey, as does about one-third of the fuel used by the
U.S. military in Iraq. U.S. bases also get water and other supplies
by land from Turkish truckers who cross into the northern region of
Iraqi Kurdistan.

Iraq’s Kurdish region also is heavily dependent on trade with Turkey,
which provides the region with electricity and oil products. Annual
trade at Habur gate, the main border crossing, is more than $10
billion.

Petraeus said the United States, which lists the PKK as a terrorist
organization, understood Ankara’s concerns about the activities of
the militant group.

"The violence that has been undertaken by the PKK is an enormous
challenge. It’s really a strategic issue. So we are again very
understanding of the concern they (the Turks) have over these
terrorists who are up in the very, very high mountains that straddle
the border there," Petraeus said

Washington is walking a classic Middle Eastern tightrope.

Turkey is a longtime NATO member and played a huge role in the Cold
War, providing the United States with military bases and listening
posts on the former Soviet Union’s southern flank.

At the same time, Iraqi Kurds were Washington’s key ally in the
U.S.-led invasion to topple Saddam and the subsequent struggle to
quell sectarian fighting.

While Iraqi Kurds deny they allow PKK fighters sanctuary on their side
of the rugged border, Turkey has made several cross-border incursions
since the insurgency began nearly a quarter century ago.

Further complicating the puzzle, a U.S. House panel on Wednesday
approved a bill describing the World War I-era mass killings of
Armenians as genocide.

Historians estimate up to 1.5 million Armenians were killed by
Ottoman Turks around the time of World War I, an event widely viewed
by genocide scholars as the first genocide of the 20th century.

Turkey, however, denies the deaths constituted genocide, saying that
the toll has been inflated and that those killed were victims of
civil war and unrest.

On Thursday, Turkey ordered its ambassador in Washington to return
to Turkey for consultations, an extreme sign of diplomatic displeasure.

Petraeus was in Jadidah, a Shiite town that suffered greatly under
attacks by Sunni militants and al-Qaida in Iraq, to showcase the
decrease in violence after local people joined the police force and
U.S. troops cleared the area.

He strolled the dusty streets like a politician on the campaign trail,
hoisting toddlers, handing out a soccer ball and dropping by a small
grocery to buy cream-filled cakes.

The top general played heavily on the Ramadan theme, the holy month
when Muslims do not eat, drink, smoke or engage in sex between dawn
and sundown.

In Arabic greetings, he wished everyone a blessed Eid, the three days
of feasting that follows the fast, which ends Friday for Sunnis and
Saturday for Shiites.

The people complained to Petraeus that there was no electricity
and they had to bring water in by truck. He took careful note and
questioned his subordinate officers about projects under way to solve
the town’s problems.

In Baghdad, U.S. military authorities announced a rocket attack on
Camp Victory a day earlier had killed two members of the U.S.-led
coalition and wounded 40 other people on the sprawling base near
Baghdad’s airport. It is headquarters of American forces in Iraq.

"We know, precisely where it came from. In fact we found a number of
other rockets there. And we do have some very strong leads as well.

We believed it was 107mm rockets," Petraeus said.

A senior officer said the rockets were fired an abandoned school near
the base. The officer spoke on condition of anonymity because he was
not authorized to release the information.

Most troops stationed at the base are American but there are small
contingents from other countries.

The military said those wounded in Wednesday’s attack included two
"third country nationals," meaning they were not Americans or Iraqis.

Suicide car bombers, meanwhile, struck a market in the northern city
of Kirkuk and a cafe in eastern Baghdad as at least 30 Iraqis were
killed or found dead in attacks nationwide.

The U.S. military said a soldier died in combat Wednesday in eastern
Baghdad.

TURKEY LASHES BACK AT THE GENOCIDE VOTE
By Pelin Turgut

TIME Magazine
Oct 11 2007

Turkey’s government has denounced a resolution approved by a U.S. House
of Representatives committee that calls the 1915 massacres of Armenians
by Ottoman Turks a genocide. The measure passed on Wednesday despite
extraordinary last-minute efforts by Bush administration officials,
including the President himself, to have it shelved out of concern that
it could hurt relations with a key NATO ally and affect U.S. troops
in Iraq. Seventy percent of American air cargo and a third of the
fuel the U.S. uses in neighboring Iraq passes through the its air
base in Incirlik in southern Turkey. Prior to the bill’s passage,
Turkish politicians had warned of possible retaliation by blocking
the use of Incirlik.

Hundreds of demonstrators picketed the U.S. embassy in Ankara just
before the vote. "A Bill of Hatred," ran the banner headline on the
top-selling Turkish newspaper Hurriyet. The non-binding measure,
which passed the House Foreign Affairs Committee by a vote of 27
to 21, will now be sent on to the full House. "Unfortunately, some
politicians in the United States have once again sacrificed important
matters to petty domestic politics despite all calls to common sense,"
said Turkish President Abdullah Gul.

For the Turkish government, "the timing of the vote is catastrophic,"
says prominent political commentator and columnist for Posta newspaper
Mehmet Ali Birand. It comes as Washington tries to persuade Turkey not
to launch a military operation into north Iraq to pursue separatist
Kurdish guerrillas who are based there and who have been staging
increasingly violent attacks in southeast Turkey. The U.S. is opposed
to any such move, fearful that it could disrupt Kurdish-controlled
north Iraq, the only relatively stable area in the country.

But the government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is under huge
public pressure after several deadly attacks by Kurdish guerrillas in
the southeast that have killed 30 people in under two weeks. Members
of Turkey’s parliament are due to vote on allowing a cross-border
military incursion next week, and the military machine is already
preparing. "After the U.S. House vote, the Turkish public is going
to think tit for tat," says Birand. "This is going to strengthen the
nationalists, including the position of those people who want us to
invade north Iraq."

Despite its displeasure, however, Turkey’s government is unlikely to
make good on its threats to take retaliatory action against the U.S.

even if a resolution clears House. "The government is disinclined to
consider drastic moves like an embargo, or closing Incirlik," says
Birand. The real outcome of Wednesday’s bill may be to strengthen a
growing tide of ultra-nationalist isolationism in Turkey, fueled by
public perceptions of being unwanted by Europe (it is seeking to join
the E.U.) and ignored by the U.S. One recent victim was high-profile
Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink, who was shot to death by
a teenager with links to nationalist groups. His son, Arat Dink,
and publisher Serkis Seropyan were sentenced on Friday to one year
in jail for "insulting Turkishness" by referring to the Armenian
genocide. They will appeal the verdict.

,8599,1670399,00.html

AN IMPORTANT STEP

A1+
[04:46 pm] 11 October, 2007

"We welcome the adoption of the resolution affirming Armenian Genocide
by American House Committee on Foreign Affairs. That is an important
step to obtain justice", said Vladimir Karapetyan, Foreign Ministry
Spokesperson on the adoption of the 106 Resolution yesterday.

It is worthwhile to remind, that the US House Committee on Foreign
Affairs adopted the 106 Resolution affirming Armenian Genocide
yesterday.

International Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies
(A Division of the Zoryan Institute)
PRESS RELEASE
CONTACT: Torrey Swan
DATE: October 9, 2007
TEL: 416-250-9807

Implications of Groundbreaking World Court Ruling Analyzed
in Current Genocide Studies and Prevention Journal

Two of the foremost experts on international law concerning genocide
analyzed the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) February 2007 ruling
on Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro in Volume 2, Number 2
of Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal.

Dr. William A. Schabas, Chair in Human Rights Law and Director of the
Irish Centre for Human Rights at the National University of Ireland and
Dr. David Scheffer, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for
International Human Rights, Northwestern University and formerly United
States Ambassador for War Crimes, both contributed important articles
evaluating the ramification of the ICJ’s ruling.

The ICJ is the highest international authority dealing with inter-state
justice and is mandated to oversee the United Nations Convention on
Genocide (1948). In February 2007, it concluded its consideration of
Bosnia and Herzegovina’s claims that Serbia and Montenegro had committed
genocide during the 1994-6 Balkan War. While the court found that
genocide had not taken place, except during the Srebrenica Massacre and
even then it found Serbia not responsible, the court did establish
significant precedents for dealing with genocide.

Dr. Schabas argued that the ruling made a major pronouncement on the
duty to prevent genocide to parties of the 1948 UNCG, establishing that
this obligation requires states to take action, to the extent that they
may be able to exercise some influence, when genocide is threatened
outside their own territory. This is significant because it allows
states to act in countries where genocide looms before the genocide
actually takes place.

Dr. Scheffer highlighted that the ICJ ruling found that a state, and not
only an individuals, can be found responsible for genocide. This is an
improvement on the previous understanding that only individuals could be
held accountable, a reading that allowed many perpetrators to be
protected by collective responsibility.

Together these precedents provide powerful deterrents to potentially
genocidal regimes. Not only are third party states empowered to act
preemptively to stop genocide, but perpetrator states themselves can be
found responsible, and thus the perceived benefits of genocide may not
be enjoyed by a regime that commits this atrocious crime. Furthermore,
states can be found liable for not acting to prevent genocide or for
been complicit in the crime. The ruling thus increases the risks facing
a genocidal regime and decreases the obstacles facing an international
intervention.

"With this latest issue, GSP continues the tradition of making
significant contributions to the field of genocide studies," reflected
Chair of the International Institute for Genocide and Human Rights
Studies (A Division of the Zoryan Institute), Prof. Roger W. Smith. "To
date it has published five comprehensive issues, thirty-three
groundbreaking articles, several in-depth book reviews, and stimulating
editorials, all contributed by dozens of scholars from nine different
countries." He concluded that "equally important to the mission of the
journal is that it is being read widely and in many circles inside and
outside academia. Together, these achievements mean that an
international dialogue is being fostered between specialists,
policy-makers, and the public on the nature of genocide, its wider
ramifications and on methods for its prevention."

In addition to the articles dealing with the ICJ’s ruling, the new issue
also includes articles by Alfred de Zayas, addressing the Istanbul
Pogrom of 1955, where 100,000 Greeks were "ethnically cleansed" from
Istanbul, and Elizabeth More, exploring the 2006 International Criminal
Tribunal for Rwanda finding concerning the 1994 genocide, both bring the
relevance of their subjects to the current genocide in Darfur. The
issue also includes, in review essays, Dr. Joseph A. Kéchichian’s
deconstruction of Dr. Guenter Lewy’s denial of the Armenian Genocide and
Dr. Paul Bartrop’s assessment of recent literature on the genocide of
North American aboriginals, as well as several book reviews.

Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal was co-founded
by the International Association of Genocide Scholars and the
International Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies (A
Division of the Zoryan Institute). The journal’s mission is to
understand the phenomenon of genocide, create an awareness of it as an
ongoing scourge, and promote the necessity of preventing it, for both
pragmatic and moral reasons. It is the official journal of the
International Association of Genocide Scholars and is published three
times a year by the University of Toronto Press. For more information,
contact the IIGHRS (Zoryan Institute), [email protected], Tel:
416-250-9807.

October 10, 2007

Turkey Opposes U.S. Genocide Resolution

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 8:45 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) — Turkey is making a final direct appeal to U.S.
lawmakers to reject a resolution that would declare the World War
I-era killings of hundreds of thousands of Armenians a genocide.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee was to vote Wednesday on the
measure that is opposed by the Bush administration and which Turkey
has insisted could severely damage U.S. relations with a NATO ally
that has been a major portal for U.S. military operations in the
region.

Those threats were coming as Turkey’s government was seeking
parliamentary approval for a cross-border military operation to chase
separatist Kurdish rebels who operate from bases in northern Iraq. The
move, opposed by the United States, could open a new war front in the
most stable part of Iraq.

”I have been trying to warn the (U.S.) lawmakers not to make a
historic mistake,” said Egemen Bagis, a close foreign policy adviser
to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

A measure of the potential problem came in a warning the U.S. Embassy
in Ankara issued Tuesday to U.S. citizens in Turkey of
”demonstrations and other manifestations of anti-Americanism
throughout Turkey” if the bill passes the committee and gets to the
House floor for a vote, the embassy statement said.

On Wednesday, hundreds of Turks marched to U.S. missions in Turkey to
protest the bill. In Ankara, members of the left-wing Workers’ Party
chanted anti-American slogans in front of the embassy, the state-run
Anatolia news agency reported. A group of about 200 people staged a
similar protest in front of the U.S. Consulate in Istanbul, private
NTV television said.

Anatolia quoted a party official as saying that the ”genocide claim
was an international, imperialist and a historical lie.”

The basic dispute involves the killing of up to 1.5 million Armenians
by Ottoman Turks around the time of World War I, an event widely
viewed by genocide scholars as the first genocide of the 20th century.
Turkey denies that the deaths constituted genocide, says the toll has
been inflated, and insists that those killed were victims of civil war
and unrest.

Armenian-American interest groups also have been rallying supporters
in the large diaspora community to pressure lawmakers to make sure
that a successful committee vote leads to consideration by the full
House.

The bill seemed to have enough support on the committee for passage,
but the majority was slight and some backers said they feared that
Turkish pressure would narrow it. Most Republicans, who are a minority
on the committee, were expected to vote against the resolution.

On Tuesday, Bryan Ardouny, executive director of the Armenian Assembly
of America, sought to shore up support in letters to the committee’s
chairman, Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif., and its ranking Republican
member, Florida Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.

”We have a unique opportunity in this Congress, while there are still
survivors of the Armenian genocide living among us, to irrevocably and
unequivocally reaffirm this fact of history,” he said.

The head of the Armenian Apostolic Church, Catholicos Karekin II, was
to give the opening invocation to the House’s session ahead of the
vote Wednesday.

Erdogan adviser Bagis said the resolution would make it hard for his
government to continue close cooperation with the United States and
resist calls from the public to go after the Kurdish rebels after
deadly attacks on soldiers in recent weeks. Turkey previously has said
it would prefer that the United States and its Iraqi Kurd allies in
northern Iraq crack down on the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK.

The United States reiterated on Tuesday its warnings against an incursion.

”If they have a problem, they need to work together to resolve it,
and I’m not sure that unilateral incursions are the way to go,” State
Department spokesman Sean McCormack said.

Many in the United States also fear that a public backlash in Turkey
could lead to restrictions on crucial supply routes through Turkey to
Iraq and Afghanistan, and the closure of Incirlik, a strategic air
base in Turkey used by the U.S. Air Force.

Bagis, a member of the Turkish Parliament, underscored that possibility.

”Let us not forget that 75 percent of all supplies to your troops in
Iraq go through Turkey,” he said.

——

On the Net:

House Foreign Affairs Committee:
Source: enocide.html

THE GEOPOLITICAL WHIRLPOOL OF THE CAUCASUS
by Oleg Gorupai, translated by Elena Leonova

Source: Krasnaya Zvezda
October 8, 2007 Monday
Russia

HIGHLIGHT: Russia and the South Caucasus: resisting the West’s
encroachment; Ensuring security in the Russian Caucasus is
inconceivable without, and inseparable from, stability in Georgia,
Armenia, and Azerbaijan. This is precisely why Russia has taken on
the burden of geopolitical leadership in the South Caucasus ever
since the break-up of the USSR.

The South Caucasus never ceases to surprise the international
community, keeping it on its toes with intermittent bursts of
adrenaline. The latest events in Georgia; regular declarations
from Azeri politicians about possibly using force to sort out
the Nagorno-Karabakh problem; Armenia’s emphasis on enhancing its
defence capacities – all this certainly indicates that the region’s
military-political situation is complicated and deteriorating. The
militarization of the Caucasus has reached a critical peak. The
combined military budget of these three Trans-Caucasus countries now
amounts to over $1.5 billion a year!

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
(SIPRI) and the London Institue for War and Peace, the military budgets
of Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia are growing steadily: faster than
defense spending in most other countries, and much faster than their
GDP growth rates (up to 40 times faster). As at mid-2007, Georgia’s
military budget for this year was $303 million, Armenia’s was $264
million, and Azerbaijan’s was over $900 million. There are 75 tanks
and 85 artillery pieces per million residents of the South Caucasus:
higher than the equivalent figures for Turkey or Iran. The present-day
Caucasus has become one of the world’s most militarized regions. The
independent states of the South Caucasus possess military arsenals
comparable to those of the average European country. The Armed Forces
of Azerbaijan have 70,000 personnel, the Armenian Armed Forces have
45,000, and Georgia’s troop strength in 2006 peaked at 31,878.

Aside from the military arsenals of these three
internationally-recognized states, there are also the military
machines of three unrecognized formations – entirely comparable to
those of the recognized states. The Armed Forces of Abkhazia have
5,000 personnel, and South Ossetia has 3,000. In terms of firepower,
the armed forces of Abkhazia and South Ossetia are practically equal to
Georgia. Georgia has 80-100 tanks; Abkhazia has 100 and South Ossetia
has 87. Heavy artillery numbers (over 122 millimeters) are 117, 237,
and 95 respectively.

The Georgian government has almost doubled defense spending for 2007
recently: from 513 million lari ($303 million) to 957 million lari
($566 million); in late September, the Georgian parliament approved
the government’s proposal for a substantial increase (over 25%)
in the military budget for 2008. Tbilisi’s military spending will
rise to $723 million next year. The Georgian government has noted
that among the reasons for the additional spending is the aim of
accelerating military reforms required for Georgia to join NATO.

Azerbaijan’s military budget has grown from $146 million in 2004 to
almost $1 billion this year. Armenia’s defense spending has increased
by 350% as compared to 2000 (Armenia allocated almost $150 million
for defense in 2006 and almost $264 million this year); Azerbaijan’s
defense spending has risen eight-fold; Georgia’s defense spending has
risen ten-fold (at the start of 2006, it was only $77 million). It’s
worth noting that the Trans-Caucasus countries have seen a surge in
military spending in the course of 2006 and 2007.

These facts are inevitably a source of concern for Russia and
its partners in the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization
(CSTO), especially given the obvious imbalance of forces among the
Trans-Caucasus states (Armenia looks very modest compared to its
neighbors). The situation developing within the CSTO’s activity zone
was considered at a meeting of the CSTO secretaries in mid-September.

After the meeting, CSTO Secretary-General Nikolai Bordyuzha noted
that the meeting also considered "the militant statements made by
representatives of certain states, indicating a wish to resolve some
frozen conflicts by military means, along with escalating military
activity and the growing military budgets and troop strength in
Georgia and Azerbaijan." As Bordyuzha pointed out, all this could
become a factor of "instability and threats for CSTO member states."

Clearly, the region is witnessing a dangerous increase of activity.

Governments, defense ministries, and analysts all over the world are
paying closer attention to this region. The main reason for that is
Washington’s persistent policy course of destabilizing the situation
in the Middle East and the South Caucasus. With the Iran crisis highly
likely to escalate into an armed conflict, the Trans-Caucasus would
be in dangerous proximity to the theater of war. Most importantly,
the architects of global politics regard the Iran problem as leverage
for far-reaching long-term transformations in the so-called Greater
Middle East: in effect, the Americanization of this region. In their
view, the South Caucasus should not be an obstacle to these plans
(at least); it might even facilitate them (at most).

Washington will not abandon its plans to restructure the Caucasus.

The chief objectives of the United States and its NATO allies remain
unchanged: integrating the three Trans-Caucasus states into the
Euro-Atlantic community, and expelling Russia from the region.

However, European Union membership for the South Caucasus countries
isn’t even a hypothetical possibility; the chief instrument for their
Euro-Atlantic integration is supposed to be the NATO military bloc.

In Washington’s view, the Caucasus should be the next stage in NATO
expansion – and the best possible option is believed to be simultaneous
accession to NATO for Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia.

At NATO’s Istanbul summit in 204, the South Caucasus region was
included among NATO’s priority zones. NATO’s cooperation with
countries in this region is based on Individual Partnership Action
Plans (IPAPs). In 2004, the Armenian prime minister established an
inter-departmental commission for coordinating the implementation
of Armenia’s IPAP with NATO. Georgia’s IPAP was adopted in 2003;
Azerbaijan’s IPAP was adopted in May 2005. The United States is
using political and financial support for countries in this region to
restrict Russia’s role and gradually push Russia out of the Caucasus.

Over the past 12 years, the Americans have provided around $1.3
billion worth of aid to Georgia – including military aid. According
to Jane’s Sentinel Security Assessment for Russia and the CIS,
the Americans spent $64 million on the Train and Equip program in
2002-04. Georgia received a total of $98 million in US military
aid during that time. That sum raised Georgia to 20th place in the
ranking of Washington’s foreign partners. In the previous three
years, Georgia had received only $18 million from the United States,
ranking 41st among US aid recipients. These figures are taken from the
"Collateral Damage" report released by the Center for Public Integrity,
based on a year of investigative journalism. Another American program,
Georgia Sustainment and Stability Operations (under way since 2005),
has cost $60 million. Moreover, the United States is also providing
aid under the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) and International
Military Education and Training (IMET) programs. In 2005, the FMF and
IMET programs provided Georgia with $11.9 million and $1.4 million
respectively (funding is supposed to be maintained at 2005 levels in
2006 and 2007). Washington provided Georgia with a total of around
$74 million in military aid in 2005: more than double the American
funding Georgia received in 2004 ($30 million).

The Pentagon is also intensively arming Azerbaijan. This is indicated
in a report from the Center for Defense Information: Baku has received
$14 million worth of arms from the United States in recent years. "The
United States uses arms sales as a reward for its allies in the war on
terror," says the report. It also notes that Azerbaijan has received
over $27 million in military aid from Washington in the past five
years. The US budget for 2007 and 2008 includes further military aid
and arms sales to Azerbaijan. The draft budget presented to Congress
by the White House proposes to allocate $5.3 million worth of military
aid to Azerbaijan.

Washington isn’t neglecting Armenia either. On August 1, the United
States presented the Armenian Defense Ministry’s peacekeeping battalion
with $3 million worth of arms and equipment. This was provided as
part of the FMF program. The program intends to provide $8 million
by 2009 for the purpose of establishing an Armenian peacekeeping
battalion that will cooperate with NATO. The draft budget presented
to Congress by the White House proposes to allocate $3.3 million
worth of military aid to Armenia.

As we can see, US policy in this region is facilitating its
militarization. Washington has developed and is implementing projects
intended to weaken Russia’s influence in the Caucasus as much as
possible – in economic, political, and military terms. And the GUAM
alliance (Georgia-Ukraine-Azerbaijan-Moldova) is being strengthened
as an alternative to Russian influence. There have also been reports
of an Azerbaijan-Turkey-Georgia military bloc being formed.

The fundamental changes in the regional balance of power could become
irreversible if the South Caucasus countries are integrated into NATO,
as a "more effective" security system. NATO Secretary-General Jaap de
Hoop Scheffer visited Tbilisi recently, meeting with Georgian leaders
to discuss the prospects for Georgia’s accession to NATO (Georgia
hopes to initiate a NATO membership program in spring of 2008).

What’s more, if US plans to install missile defense elements in the
Caucasus go ahead, the Trans-Caucasus will end up on the front line –
and thus in a high risk zone.

>From the very outset of its existence as an independent state, Russia
has designated the South Caucasus as a strategic interests priority
zone. Whoever controls the Trans-Caucasus also controls the Caspian Sea
and access to Central Asia and the Middle East. From this standpoint,
the region is important for Russia’s strategic interests.

One of Moscow’s most important objectives is to restrain negative
developments in the South Caucasus, no matter how hard the
"international community" may try to push Russia out of this region.

Russian dominance in the South Caucasus is not a question of Russia
"reviving imperialism." Ensuring stability in the Trans-Caucasus
countries is a fundamental precondition for peaceful development
within Russia itself: maintaining Russia’s territorial integrity.

Russia is a Caucasus state. This assertion is not just a pretty
metaphor. Seven regions of the Russian Federation (Adygea, Ingushetia,
Dagestan, Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachaevo-Cherkesia, North Ossetia,
Chechnya) are located in the North Caucasus, and four more regions
are on the steppes adjacent to the Caucasus (Krasnodar and Stavropol
territories, the Rostov region, Kalmykia). The Black Sea coast of
the Krasnodar territory and the area around Mineralnye Vody in the
Stavropol territory are part of the Caucasus. Ensuring security in
the Russian Caucasus is inconceivable without, and inseparable from,
stability in Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. This is precisely
why Russia has taken on the burden of geopolitical leadership in the
South Caucasus ever since the break-up of the USSR.

Hence Russia’s intense interest in events around Abkhazia and South
Ossetia. Stabilizing the situation in these territories is in line
with Russia’s national interests.

Our immediate neighbors in the region have repeatedly expressed
the opinion that Moscow has no strictly-defined and coordinated
policy on the Trans-Caucasus; they are still saying this. Indeed,
Russia itself wasn’t in the best situation back in the 1990s; it
was incapable of pursuing a coherent policy in relation to Armenia,
Azerbaijan, and Georgia.

The results of this have been perceptible: Georgia is looking to
Brussels and Washington these days, while Azerbaijan is looking to
Brussels, Washington, and Ankara. Armenia, on the other hand, is
far more inclined to take Russia’s regional interests into account,
and values its relations with Russia. Thus, Moscow’s policy in the
Trans-Caucasus should by no means be regarded as a complete failure.

While Georgia considers that it has unarguable reasons for joining
NATO, Armenia has every reason to waver. Armenia doesn’t see any
particular advantage for itself in the prospect of NATO gaining
control of the region; in fact, it has justifiable apprehensions
that this could have a harmful impact on Armenian interests. Armenia
remains Russia’s real strategic partner in the South Caucasus. It is
basing its foreign policy on the principle of maintaining equilibrium
between the various military-political blocs whose interests directly
concern the Caucasus region. This policy is what best suits the state
interests of Armenia at the present stage.

Russia’s relations with Azerbaijan have also improved. On a visit
to Baku in spring of 2007, Federation Council Speaker Sergei
Mironov said that although some analysts have reported a recent
"chill" in Russian-Azeri relations, such opinions "should remain
on the conscience of the analysts themselves." In Mironov’s view,
Russian-Azeri strategic partnership is growing: in economic affairs,
humanitarian issues, and many other areas of bilateral cooperation.

Mironov said: "This has been confirmed for all to see by the
successful Year of Russia in Azerbaijan and the Year of Azerbaijan
in Russia, which became a convincing demonstration of Russian-Azeri
friendship. There is also striking evidence in the fact that bilateral
trade grew by 50% between 2005 and 2006, and now stands at over
$1.6 billion."

Of course, skeptics might object that wishful thinking should not
be portrayed as reality. But the growing influence of Russia in the
Caucasus and worldwide is being acknowledged in the West as well. A
group of American analysts involved in the Global Power Barometer
project concluded recently that "US influence is in steep decline…

other players such as Russia… are stepping into the vacuum. The US
is… already sharing the global influence stage with emerging powers
who can move global events as well or better."

If Russia’s policy in the South Caucasus continues to take a pragmatic
tone, then (given the factors of geographical proximity and cultural,
technological, and human links) Moscow’s presence and influence in
the South Caucasus will make it possible to prevent the region’s
militarization and solve all the most urgent regional problems,
including territorial problems.

TURKEY LOOKS FOR CHANNELS TO PREVENT ARMENIAN RESOLUTION IN US

The New Anatolian, Turkey
Oct 8 2007

Turkey launches last ditch effort to prevent Armenian resolution in US

While Turkey has intensified diplomatic and political efforts to
dissuade the American Congress from passing an Armenian genocide bill
Turkish leaders are telling their American counterparts that such a
move will seriously hurt relations.

On Sunday Parliament Speaker Koksal Toptan sent a letter to U.S.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi saying that "it might take decades to heal
negative effects of the bill if it passes," Toptan’s office said in
a statement.

Toptan – who is elected by the legislative body to chair parliamentary
sessions – is considered neutral toward all political parties.

The genocide bill declares the killings of Armenians between 1915
and 1917 a genocide, though it would have no binding effect on the U.S.

foreign policy. The U.S. House of Representatives’ Foreign Affairs
Committee is expected to consider the legislation late Wednesday.

Toptan’s letter said the passing of the bill would be declared by
Armenians as a confirmation of their view of the historical dispute.

"Then, it will be difficult to control the dynamics triggered by
Turkish public reaction," it said.

Toptan said Armenia did not respond positively to Turkish proposal to
establish a commission of historians to examine Turkish and Armenian
archives and to share their findings with the public.

On Friday, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told U.S. President
George W. Bush that the measure would "harm the strategic partnership"
between the two countries.

Bush reassured Erdogan that he opposes efforts by US lawmakers to
denounce the Ottoman Empire’s killings of Armenians as genocide,
the White House said.

"The president reiterated his opposition to this resolution, the
passage of which would be harmful to US relations with Turkey,"
said Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for Bush’s National Security Council.

He recalled that Bush has described the events of 1915 as a tragedy,
but believes that determining whether it was genocide is up to
historians, not lawmakers, Johndroe said in a statement.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee is due to vote on the genocide
measure Wednesday. A similar bill is pending in the US Senate, adding
to pressure on the administration to recognize the Armenian deaths
not just as "forced exile and murder" – Bush’s words in 2004 – but as
genocide. Congressional sources say the fact that the house committee
is voting for the resolution means it has the blessing of Pelosi.

Meanwhile, a Turkish parliamentary delegation comprised of top foreign
policy experts will fly to Washington today to meet congressional
members to dissuade them from voting for the resolution.

"If the United States makes a historical error and adopts a resolution
on the incidents of 1915 in the House of Representatives, this would
be a problem and scandal of the U.S.," said Egemen Bagis, Deputy
Chairman of the ruling Justice and Development (AK) Party who will
be in the delegation.

Bagis told reporters that main opposition Republican People’s Party
(CHP) Istanbul deputy Sukru Elekdag and opposition Nationalist
Movement Party (MHP) Istanbul deputy Gunduz Aktan and he will pay a
visit to the United States to hold discussions with non-governmental
organizations, senators, members of the House of Representatives,
high level bureaucrats and academicians and try to explain to all
that the adoption of a resolution on the incidents of 1915 would be
a serious blow to Turkish-U.S. relations.

"We will do everything possible to defeat the Armenian resolution
which, if adopted, can hurt Turkish-U.S. relations and the national
interests of the U.S.," Bagis said.

Bagis, Elekdag and Aktan will be in the United States until October 11.

Elekdag is a former Turkish ambassador in Washington and a former
undersecretary of foreign affairs. Aktan is also from the foreign
ministry who served as deputy undersecretary. He is a retired
ambassador.

Meanwhile, in a full-page advertisement in the Washington Post, the
Turkish embassy to the US called the pending legislation "one-sided"
and warned it would "affect relations between the United States
and Turkey."

A senior State Department official said US lawmakers risk provoking
a severe backlash from Turkey.

Applying the genocide label would harm US interests, including
"our forces deployed in Iraq which rely on passage through Turkey,"
Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried said.

He said it was a historical fact that up to 1.5 million Armenians
were killed or forced into exile from 1915 through the early 1920 –
something recognized by Bush as well as former president Bill Clinton.

"But it is true that the Turkish reaction would be extremely strong,"
Fried told reporters.

Armenians claim say more than 1.5 million Armenians were killed in
a systematic genocide in the hands of the Ottomans during the World
War I, before modern Turkey was born in 1923.

Turkey says the death toll is inflated and that the deaths occurred
at a time of civil unrest.

Public opinion polls show that the United States has become widely
unpopular in Turkey because of opposition to U.S. policy in Iraq.

After France voted last year to make denial of Armenian genocide
a crime, the Turkish government ended military ties. A similar move
with the United States could have repercussions on operations in Iraq
and Afghanistan, which rely heavily on Turkish support.

SOUTH FLORIDA ARMENIANS PREPARE FOR A PONTIFICAL VISIT
By Lois K. Solomon, [email protected]

Sun-Sentinal, FL
sfl-flparmenian1003pnoct06,0,3401303.story
Oct 5 2007

Boca church gets rare chance to host leader

He may be the spiritual leader of the world’s 7 million Armenian
Christians, but he also loves pizza.

His Holiness Karekin II, patriarch of the Armenian Apostolic Church,
will visit St. David Armenian Church in Boca Raton on Oct. 15. Among
his scheduled activities: "Pizza Party With the Pontiff" for the
congregation’s youth.

On Oct. 16 he will travel to St. Mary Armenian Church in Cooper
City, where he will participate in the Blessing of the Crosses and
a welcoming service.

Related links Sites include two South Florida churches The South
Florida stops are part of a 17-city tour of the Eastern and Midwestern
United States. Karekin was appointed in 1999 and lives in Etchmiadzin,
a holy city near Yerevan, the capital of Armenia.

"He is the equivalent of the pope for Catholics," said Dr. Rosemary
Mencia, a Fort Lauderdale dentist and St. David parish council
member. "This is a very huge event."

Mencia met the pontiff two years ago when she and other St. David
members visited Etchmiadzin.

"Immediately I could tell how compassionate and down-to-earth he was,"
Mencia said. "He does so much to help the Armenian people."

There are an estimated 15,000 Armenians in South Florida and 25,000
in the state, said Michael O’Hurley-Pitts, communications director for
the Eastern Diocese of the Armenian Church in America, which includes
Florida. While some are recent immigrants, most are second-, third-
and fourth-generation Americans whose relatives fled the Armenian
genocide by the Turks from 1915 to 1917. More than 1.5 million
Armenians are estimated to have been killed.

Rose Kazanjian of Boca Raton said her mother’s first husband, daughter
and sister were among those murdered. Kazanjian, 82, was raised in
Philadelphia, where she said the Armenian church was the center of
her family’s life.

"The church is not only the religious center but also the social
center," Kazanjian said. She helped found St. David in 1988.

There are about 1 million Armenian-Americans, with Boston and Los
Angeles having some of the biggest communities. Armenian churches
follow a liturgy that dates to the fourth century, when the Armenian
people converted to Christianity. The rites, although recited in
classical Armenian, resemble those of Roman, Anglican and Greek
churches, with incense, priestly vestments and icons of saints such
as Mary at the altar.

The church has a hierarchy similar to the Catholic Church, with
priests, bishops and archbishops. Priests are allowed to marry,
but bishops and their superiors are not, O’Hurley-Pitts said.

Religion has kept the Armenian people together through many tragic
episodes in their history. In addition to several massacres by the
Turks, the Soviet Union occupied the country from 1920 to 1990 and
closed more than 1,000 churches.

Armenian pontiffs became a beacon of hope during these hard times,
O’Hurley-Pitts said.

"They never took on a political role. They carried on the identity,"
he said.

Armenians in the diaspora also work to carry on their religion and
culture. Seta Balgadian of Boca Raton, who was born in Lebanon, said
most of her friends are Armenian. They speak Armenian and socialize,
attend church and travel together.

Balgadian is in charge of the pontiff’s South Florida visit. She said
Karekin II showed his humility even before his arrival.

"He didn’t want a big banquet," Balgadian said. "He said he will eat
whatever the kids are eating."

Anna Kazazian of Fort Lauderdale, who was born in Egypt, said she
hopes the pontiff makes an impression on the children.

"It’s very seldom we get a pontiff to visit South Florida," said
Kazazian, who attends St. Mary Church. "This is something they’ll
remember for a long time."

GENOCIDE BILL WOULD HURT TIES WITH UNITED STATES, SAYS TURK PM

China Post
Reuters
Oct 6 2007
Taiwan

ANKARA — Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan told U.S. President
George W. Bush that ties between the two countries would be hurt if the
U.S. Congress passed a bill branding the 1915 mass killing of Armenians
by Ottoman Turks "genocide," Turkish television reported on Friday.

Erdogan, who issued a similar warning earlier this year, made the
comment in a telephone call which he made to Bush, news channels CNN
Turk and NTV reported.

The Bush administration opposes the resolution on the events in
1915 as the Ottoman Empire broke apart, but the U.S. Congress is now
dominated by the Democratic Party and has become more influenced by
the Armenian diaspora.

Turkey is a key NATO ally of Washington and a moderate Muslim country
whose support it needs in the region as it fights Iraqi insurgents
and confronts Iran over its nuclear programme.

A senior Turkish lawmaker has also warned previously that Ankara could
consider restricting the U.S. military’s use of Incirlik air base,
a logistics hub for the Middle East, if the bill is passed.

Turkey has already sent delegations to the United States in a bid to
halt the resolution. Turkish media reported on Friday that the bill
would be taken up by Congress’s Foreign Relations Committee on Oct.

10. Turkey denies a systematic genocide of Armenians took place, saying
large numbers of Christian Armenians and Muslim Turks died in inter
ethnic fighting as the Ottoman Empire collapsed during World War I.