Author: Nahapetian Zhanna

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Feb. 25, 2008

Ariel Cohen: Kosovo’s independence may push Moscow toward Armenia in
supporting Nagorno-Karabakh

[ 25 Feb 2008 13:49 ]

Washington. Husniyya Hasanova – APA. Ariel Cohen, Ph.D., Senior
Research Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, commented on the
recognition of Kosovo’s independence and its influence on Nagorno
Karabakh conflict to APA’s US bureau.

`Russia has made Kosovo a major issue in its relations with the West.
President Vladimir Putin and other Russia policy makers, anxious to
find points of confrontation with Europe and US, have demanded that
the Kosovo issue would be decided in the UN Security Council, where
Russia (and China) has a veto power. Russia may retaliate by
recognizing independence of Abkhazia, which is part of Georgia, and
of South Ossetia. It may also tilt toward Armenia in supporting
Nagorno-Karabakh. If that will be the case, the tension between
Azerbaijan and Armenia may drastically rise. The West should clarify
to the authorities of Russia, Armenia, South Ossetia, Abkhazia and
Karabakh, that declarations of independence will remain unrecognized,
and that steps to the contrary will meet with counter- actions. For
example, countries which recognize these enclaves may have their
diplomatic representations reduced and economic aid reviewed.
Russia’s position has three roots. First, it Russia views itself as a
historic ally of Serbia. After all, it was because of this
relationship the czarist Russia has declared war on Austro-Hungarian
Empire in World War I, and ended up in collapse.
Secondly, Russia would like to be an "indispensable power" in
deciding major issues in Europe and in the world. Therefore, any
solution that does not meet with Moscow’s approval is to be opposed.
Thirdly, there is the issue of international law. Moscow claims that
only the UN Security Council should be allowed to recognize new
states, as the UN Charter claims. Moreover, Russia, which is the host
country to a number of secessionist and separatist movements,
predominantly Muslim, does not want to see this successful precedent
on its doorstep. Moscow does not want the criteria applied to Kosovo,
to be applied to Chechnya and other Islamic lands in North Caucasus.
Russia is suspicious that Kosovo independence is recognized based on
intimidation and armed struggle of the Kosovars and on Europe’s fears
that it must capitulate to their threats. Dozens of separatist
movements in the world, from the Abkhaz to the Kurds, from Karen in
Burma to Uyghurs in China, would be encouraged by the example of
Kosovars. Albanians, Russia points out, already have one state which
is a UN member. Now they will have two, and with the future success
of Albanians in Macedonia, they may end up with three. Finally, both
Belgrade and Moscow say that the West should support a democratic
Serbia, not criminalized and militaristic Kosovars.
Repercussions over the Kosovo conflict will surely poison relations
between Russia and the West for years to come,’ Ariel Cohen said.

Interfax, Russia
Russia & CIS Military Newswire
February 22, 2008 Friday 2:46 PM MSK

Police in Armenia detain suspect in presidential election fraud

YEREVAN Feb 22

The Armenian Special Investigative Service has arrested head of
Polling Station N9/31 in Yerevan Eduard Agajanian, the Armenian
Prosecutor General’s Office spokesperson told Interfax.

"The Armenian Central Election Commission reported to the Special
Investigative Service that the results of the presidential election
on February 19 were falsified by the chairman, his deputy and members
of Polling Station N9/31 in Yerevan," Sona Truzian, a spokeswoman for
the Prosecutor General, said.

The inquiry revealed that these officials entered and signed
"obviously false and misleading information, thereby falsifying the
results of the vote," the spokeswoman said.

The Special Investigative Service has launched a criminal case. The
investigation is under way.

Interfax, Russia
Russia & CIS General Newswire
February 22, 2008 Friday 8:48 PM MSK

Armenian opposition continuing rally in central Yerevan

YEREVAN Feb 22

The Armenian opposition is continuing a protest rally on Freedom
Square in Yerevan on Friday, to demand that the officially announced
outcomes of recent presidential elections be invalidated.

Police have estimated the number of demonstrators at reaching 10,000
people, and the protesters themselves insist there are at least
200,000 of them, while in fact there are about 25,000 protesters on
the square now.

"We are the masters of Freedom Square today, and tomorrow we will
become the masters of this country," opposition leader and first
Armenian President Levon Ter-Petrosian said at the rally.

He welcomed students who joined the demonstrators on Friday.

Ter-Petrosian also said Deputy Defense Minister Manvel Grigorian also
supported the protesters. "His civic position is our main victory.

He sided with us yesterday," he said.

Seven members of the parliament representing the Republican Party and
the Prospering Armenia party also supported the protest, according to
opposition leaders.

Special investigator Samvel Ovannisian insisted in his speech at the
rally that an investigation into a terrorist attack on the Armenian
parliament on October 27, 1999, in which the prime minister, the
speaker, two deputy speakers, and several parliamentarians were shot
and killed, needs to be continued. "After that, you will learn what
you have been waiting for ten years," Ovannisian said.

Armenia held presidential elections on February 19, in which Prime
Minister Serzh Sargsyan won by garnering 52.86% of the vote. Ter-
Petrosian received support from 21.5% of the voters.

Xinhua, China
Feb 21 2008

Stable domestic environment, divided opposition bring Sargsyan
victory in presidential election

2008-02-21 18:54:01
by Liu Yifang

YEREVAN, Feb. 21 (Xinhua) — Armenian Prime Minister Serzh
Sargsyan has won 52.86 percent of vote in a presidential race
according to figures released by the elections commission and ensured
his victory by passing the required 50-percent of vote threshold to
be elected president.

The relatively stable domestic environment, the promise to boost
social welfare and divided opposition have benefited Sargsyan in the
election, analysts said.

According to official statistics, the gross domestic product of
Armenia has kept a double-digit growth in the past seven years. The
average income and pension are 170 and 67 U.S. dollars a month.
Though the ordinary people are not rich, many of them are satisfied
with the present conditions.

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Feb. 22, 2008

Analytics – From Georgia to Armenia: Levan and Levon – similar names,
similar fates – Analysis

[ 22 Feb 2008 16:10 ]

Similar names of Ter-Petrosyan and Gachechiladze seem to bring
similar political fate

Baku. Vugar Masimoglu-APA. The presidential elections in Armenia gave
expected results. Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian was elected
president for a five-year term and this laid the foundation of
political inheritance of the power in the country. Protest actions of
Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s supporters after the elections, statements
rejecting to recognize the results of the elections, units of
Interior Troops in the streets resemble the recent happenings in
Georgia. May the results of the post-election happenings in Armenia
differ from those in Georgia?

Foreign support plays one of the main roles in the elections,
particularly in the elections in democracy transition countries. It
is not accidental that almost all, who tried to forecast the results
of the elections in Armenia, said `the candidate having stronger
foreign support will win the elections.’ Armenia is probably the only
country so dependent on the factor of foreign influence while
determining even the smallest details of its domestic policy. That’s
why, it is possible to analyze the declared results of the elections
and forecasts about post-election period basing on the factor of
foreign support. And in these terms it is obvious that Serzh
Sarkisian, who was declared the winner of the elections, has more
advantages over his rival. It is not realistic that the opposition’s
rally will deprive Serzh Sarkisian of this advantage.

It is not convincing that Levon Ter-Petrosyan and his supporters can
do anything against Serzh Sarkisian, who receives strong foreign
support of Russia and the US, support of Armenian Diaspora and is
backed by such a strong political institution as army. The state of
ex-president does not differ from the state of Levan Gachechiladze,
the single candidate of Georgian opposition. Georgian opposition
claimed that Levan Gachechiladze won the elections, but they could
not officialize their claims, as they had no foreign support.

Actually, Levan Gachechiladze had more advantages compared with Levon
Ter-Petrosyan. He was the single candidate of the opposition,
besides, arrests on charges of coup before the elections, closure of
Imedi TV channel, violent suppression of rallies increased Levan
Gachechiladze’s chances of winning. And there was a foreign force,
which was interested in Mikhail Saakashvili’s leaving the power, it
was Russia. But even such positive factors did not allow Georgian
opposition to officialize its victory.

Levon Ter-Petrosyan has not such superiorities unlike Georgian
counterpart and there is a candidate in front of him who is supported
by West and Russia. Presidential elections in Georgia and Armenia
have similarities on votes and technologies which chosen by
opposition for post election period. May be, election process will
end in squares not in central Election Commission as in Georgia and
Armenian opposition will agree with defeat in the elections .It means
that, the presidential election which its results have been known
beforehand and adopted by many interested sides such as West, Russia,
church, army etc. was held in Armenia. Opposition can not change the
result by holding meetings. It seems that, fortunes of Ter-Petrosyan
and Gachechiladze will be like as their names.

How declaration of Serzh Sarkisyan as a win of elections influence to
the settlement of Nagorno Karabakh? Serzh Sarkisyan answered to it:
`Armenia will not change his policy on the settlement of Nagorno
Karabakh, irrespective of results of elections,’ he said. There are
many realities in the statement. OSCE MG co-chairs also said that
they will not change course on the settlement of Nagorno Karabakh
conflict .Kosovo problem can more influence to the settlement process
than declaration of Serzh Sarkisyan as a win of elections. Election
of Serzh Sarkisyan as a President and Kosovo problem can freeze the
settlement process of the conflict for a short time.
Whether elections in Armenia will influence to political process or
not, we can say that, the situation will be differed from Georgia for
its features. After presidential elections, there may be
confrontation between Armenians and Nagorno Karabakh Armenians who
want to hold the power for a long time .There can be separation in
the society. Armenian opposition hopes for it. If resistance of
Ter-Petrosyan and his supporters does not decrease, we will witness
separation, confrontation and collision which will engrave February
20 on the history.

RA presidential contender Levon Ter-Petrosyan intends to appeal to
Constitutional Court on February 25

2008-02-25 00:12:00

ArmInfo. RA presidential contender Levon Ter-Petrosyan intends to
appeal to the Constitutional Court on February 25 and protest the final
results of the presidential election, announced today by RA Central
Election Commission, Levon Ter- Petrosyan said at the continuing rally
of his supporters at Liberty Square in Yerevan.

He said that the appeal to the Constitutional Court will give 10-15
days, at least, to the people’s movement for achievement of the final
goal, that is, return of the power to the people. L. Ter-Petrosyan
called today’s decision of RA CEC on proclamation of Serzh Sargsyan a
winner of the presidential election the "next stupidity". "The robber’s
state considers that it has won, but this is a Pyrrhic victory". I do
not imagine how Serzh Sargsyan intends to govern our proud people,
which does not want to recognize him", the presidential contender said.
L. Ter-Petrosyan criticized again the international observers’ actions.
He said that they differ from Armenia’s residents by the fact that they
gained the democracy by inheritance, meanwhile the Armenian citizens
obtained democracy with their own hands. "Yes, we claim of our
adherence to the western values, however, this is not a political but
rather a philosophic category and we do this not to please somebody. In
politics, the western politicians strive to keep stability, however,
this stability sometimes bears Saddam Husseins. Saddam Hussein was born
today in Armenia. Do not so for you to establish democracy in Armenia
later by means of tanks", L. Ter- Petrosyan said. He expressed hope
that the world community will show sanity regarding recognition of the
presidential election results.

As for the further steps, L. Ter-Petrosyan asked his supporters not to
break up and the students to continue boycotting the lessons.

S. SARGSYAN: "REFORMATIONS SHOULD BE ACCELERATED"

Panorama.am
15:26 22/02/2008

Today the government held its general session which was headed by
Serzh Sargsyan. Before starting the discussion, the Prime Minister
thanked to all the officials and people as well for contributing to
hold elections in line with the OSCE and EU standards.

According to Serzh Sargsyan, it is important to conduct in deep
examination on the election violations. Then He said that "we have
projects which need to be held as soon as possible, that people could
feel the improvements and development every month."

RECOGNIZING KOSOVO’S INDEPENDENCE WILL MEAN "TRYING TO FISH ARTSAKH’S INDEPENDENCE IN TROUBLED WATERS"

armradio.am
22.02.2008 15:02

The historic past of Kosovo, having nothing in common with the Karabakh
issue, is much more like the history of Nakhijevan, when the world
powers decided to artificially annex territories to the country they
considered convenient, political scientist Levon Melik-Shahnazaryan
declared at a press conference today.

According to him, Armenia must not recognize the independence of
Kosovo, because it will mean "trying to fish Artsakh’s independence
in troubled waters." According to Levon Melik-Shahnazaryan, the
self-determination of Kosovo counters the historic ethics; this
independence has been acquired in an unfair way and can be viewed as
an expression of separatism.

"Listening to the explanations of the 15 countries that recognized
the independence of Kosovo, I understood that the world is not guided
by law: state make decisions, deriving from their own interests,"
the political scientist said. He quoted the representative of France
as saying that Kosovo should be independent from Serbia because the
peoples of the two states have different cultures and because people
in Kosovo suffered hardship during ex-President Slobodan Milosevic’s
rule. According to Levon Melik-Shahnazaryan, both explanations are
characteristic of the Karabakh conflict. "If after all this, the world
fails to recognize the independence of Artsakh, it will be immoral."

IF KOSOVO, WHY NOT PALESTINE?

Al-Ahram Weekly
21 -27 February 2008

It is time for the Ramallah-based Palestinian leadership to challenge
the international community on Palestinian independence, writes
John Whitbeck*

As expected, Kosovo has issued its unilateral declaration of
independence, the United States and most European Union countries, with
whom this declaration was coordinated, rushing to extend diplomatic
recognition to this "new country". This course of action should strike
anyone with an attachment to either international law or common sense
as breathtakingly reckless.

The potentially destabilising consequences of this precedent
(which the US and the EU insist, bizarrely, should not be viewed
as a precedent) have been much discussed with reference to other
internationally recognised sovereign states with strong separatist
movements practising precarious but effective self-rule, such as
Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Transniestria, Ngorno-Karabakh, Bosnia’s
Republika Srpska, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and Iraqi
Kurdistan, as well as to discontented minorities elsewhere. One
potentially constructive consequence has not yet been discussed.

American and EU impatience to sever a portion of a UN member state
(universally recognised, even by them, to constitute a portion of
that state’s sovereign territory), ostensibly because 90 per cent of
those living in that portion support separation, contrasts starkly
with the unlimited patience of the US and the EU when it comes to
ending the 40-year-long belligerent Israeli occupation of the West
Bank and the Gaza Strip (no portion of which any country recognises as
Israel’s sovereign territory and as to which Israel has only asserted
sovereignty over a tiny portion, occupied East Jerusalem). Virtually
every legal resident of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip seeks freedom,
and has for over 40 years. For doing so, they are punished, sanctioned,
besieged, humiliated and, day after endless day, killed by those who
claim to stand on the moral high ground.

In American and EU eyes, a Kosovar declaration of independence from
Serbian sovereignty should be recognised, even if Serbia does not
agree. However, their attitude was radically different when Palestine
declared independence from Israeli occupation on 15 November 1988. Then
the US and EU countries (which, in their own eyes, constitute the
"international community", to the exclusion of most of mankind) were
conspicuously absent as over 100 countries recognised the new State
of Palestine, and their non-recognition made this declaration of
independence "symbolic", unfortunately for most Palestinians as well.

For the US and the EU, Palestinian independence, to be recognised and
effective, must be directly negotiated on a wildly unequal bilateral
basis between the occupying power and the occupied people with emphasis
laid on attaining the final agreement of the occupying power. For
the US and the EU, the rights and desires of a long-suffering
and brutalised occupied people, as well as international law, are
irrelevant. For the same US and the EU, Kosovar Albanians, having
enjoyed almost nine years of UN administration and NATO protection,
cannot be expected to wait any longer for their freedom, while the
Palestinians, having endured over 40 years of Israeli occupation,
can wait forever.

With the "Annapolis process" going nowhere, as was clearly the
Israeli and American intention from the start, the Kosovo precedent
offers the Ramallah-based Palestinian leadership — accepted as such
by the "international community" because it is perceived as serving
Israeli and American interests — a golden opportunity to seize the
initiative, reset the agenda and restore its tarnished reputation
in the eyes of its own people. If this leadership truly believes,
despite all evidence to the contrary, that a decent "two-state
solution" is still possible, now is an ideal moment to reaffirm the
legal existence (albeit under continuing belligerent occupation)
of the State of Palestine, explicitly in the entire 22 per cent of
Mandatory Palestine that was not conquered and occupied by the state
of Israel until 1967, and to call on all those countries that did not
extend diplomatic recognition to the State of Palestine in 1988 —
and particularly the US and the EU states — to do so now.

The Kosovar Albanian leadership has promised protection for Kosovo’s
Serb minority, which is now expected to flee in fear. The Palestinian
leadership could promise to accord a generous period of time for
Israeli colonists living illegally in the State of Palestine, and
Israeli occupation forces, to withdraw, as well as to consider an
economic union with Israel, open borders and permanent resident
status for those illegal colonists willing to live in peace under
Palestinian rule.

Of course, to prevent the US and the EU from treating such
an initiative as a joke, there would have to be a significant and
explicit consequence if they were to do so. The consequence would
be the end of the "two-state" illusion. The Palestinian leadership
would make clear that if the US and the EU, having just recognised
a second Albanian state on the sovereign territory of a UN member
state, will not now recognise a Palestinian state on a tiny portion of
the occupied Palestinian homeland, it will dissolve the Palestinian
Authority (which, legally, should have ceased to exist in 1999, at
the end of the five-year "interim period" under the Oslo Accords)
and the Palestinian people will thereafter seek justice and freedom
through democracy, through the persistent, non-violent pursuit of full
rights of citizenship in a single state in all of Israel/Palestine,
free of any discrimination based on race and religion and with equal
rights for all who reside there.

Palestinian leaderships have tolerated Western hypocrisy and racism
and played the role of gullible fools for far too long. It is time to
kick over the table, constructively, and to shock the international
community into taking notice of the fact that the Palestinian people
simply will not tolerate unbearable injustice and abuse any longer.

If not now, when?

Published on Thursday, February 21, 2008 by the Atlantic Free Press
Why Bush Wants to Legalize the Nuke Trade With Turkey
by Joshua Frank
According to FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, there is a vast black
market for nukes, and certain U.S. officials have been supplying
sensitive nuclear technology information to Turkish and Israeli
interests through its conduits. It’s a scathing allegation which was
first published by the London Times two weeks ago, and Edmonds’ charge
seems to be on the verge of vindication.

In likely reaction to the London Times report, the Bush Administration
quietly announced on January 22 that the president would like Congress
to approve the sale of nuclear secrets to Turkey. As with most stories
of this magnitude, the U.S. media has put on blinders, opting to not
report either Edmonds’ story or Bush’s recent announcement.

The White House Press Release claims that President Clinton signed off
on the Turkey deal way back in 2000:

`However, immediately after signature, U.S. agencies received
information that called into question the conclusions that had
been drawn in the required NPAS (Nuclear Proliferation
Assessment Statement) and the original classified annex,
specifically, information implicating Turkish private entities
in certain activities directly relating to nuclear
proliferation. Consequently, the Agreement was not submitted to
the Congress and the executive branch undertook a review of the
NPAS evaluation ¦ My Administration has completed the NPAS
review as well as an evaluation of actions taken by the Turkish
government to address the proliferation activities of certain
Turkish entities (once officials of the U.S. Government brought
them to the Turkish government’s attention).’

What `private entities’ the press release refers to is not clear, but it
could well include the American Turkish Council, the `entity’ revealed
in the Times article. The Bushites seem to be covering their own exposed
backsides, for the timing of Bush’s call to sell nuke secrets to Turkey
is certainly suspicious, if not overtly conspicuous.

It appears the White House has been spooked by Edmonds and hopes to
absolve the U.S. officials allegedly involved in the illegal sale of
nuclear technology to private Turkish `entities’. One of those officials
is likely Marc Grossman, the former ambassador to Turkey during the
Clinton Administration who also served in the State Department from
2001-2005. Grossman has been named by Edmonds who claims he was directly
involved in the nuclear smuggling ring that she says has allowed the
intelligence agencies of Pakistan, Israel and Turkey to operate in the
U.S. with impunity. Totally complicit in the nuke trade, the U.S.
government, according to Edmonds, has known of the vast criminal
activities of these foreign nations’ presence in the States, which has
included all sorts of illegal activities like drug trafficking,
espionage and money laundering.

Edmonds says `several arms of the government were shielding what was
going on’ which included an entire national security apparatus
associated with the neoconservaties who have profited by representing
Turkish interests in Washington. As Justin Raimondo recently reported in
Antiwar.com:

`¦this group includes not only Grossman, but also Paul
Wolfowitz, chief intellectual architect of the Iraq war and
ex-World Bank president; former deputy defense secretary for
policy Douglas J. Feith; Feith’s successor, Eric Edelman; and
Richard Perle, the notorious uber-neocon whose unique ability to
mix profiteering and warmongering forced him to resign his
official capacity as a key administration adviser ¦ Edmonds
draws a picture of a three-sided alliance consisting of Turkish,
Pakistani, and Israeli agents who coordinated efforts to milk
U.S. nuclear secrets and technology, funneling the intelligence
stream to the black market nuclear network set up by the
Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan. The multi-millionaire Pakistani
nuclear scientist then turned around and sold his nuclear assets
to North Korea, Libya, and Iran.’

Is the Bush Administration seeking to exonerate these `officials’ with
its plea to allow Turkey to obtain U.S. nuclear secrets? Besides
Grossman, who else was involved in Edmonds’ grim tale of the
nuke-for-profit underground? As the news that U.S. officials have
allegedly been supplying Turkey with nuclear technology begins to creep
in to the mainstream media, the Bush team appears to be moving to
legalize the whole shady operation.

If Congress does not block or amend Bush’s legislation to sell nukes to
Turkey in less than 90 days, it will become law automatically, likely
acting retroactively to clear the alleged crimes of Marc Grossman and
his neocon, nuke-trading friends.

Joshua Frank is co-editor of Dissident Voice and author of Left Out! How
Liberals Helped Reelect George W. Bush (Common Courage Press, 2005), and
along with Jeffrey St. Clair, the editor of the forthcoming Red State
Rebels, to be published by AK Press in July 2008.

© 2008 Atlantic Free Press

/21/7204/