Author: Nalbandian Eduard

DRY CLIMATE CAN SAVE ARMENIA FROM H1N1 VIRUS

PanARMENIAN.Net
04.05.2009 14:44 GMT+04:00

Armenia’s dry climate is not favorable for H1N1 virus, RA Healthcare
Ministry official said.

"There are no reasons to worry but a medical checkup is advisable
if some symptoms persist," said Gayane Sahakyan, chief specialist of
epidemiology department, told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter.

"A quarantine station is functioning in Zvartnots Airport. All
passengers arriving from countries where swine flu cases were
registered as well as from developing countries are being examined,"
she said.

Doctors have confirmed 898 cases of the H1N1 flu virus in 18 countries.

As common knowledge, the swine flu can be passed on from pigs to
pigs, from pigs to humans, and then humans to humans too. Therefore,
making the chances of catching the disease quiet possible in our
day-to-day living.

Mexican officials said on Sunday the outbreak there appears to be
waning, although officials will not have a clear picture for some
days or weeks because of the time-consuming task of screening people
with common respiratory symptoms.

Vaccine may be produced within several months.

Abso lute power corrupts absolutely: Azerbaijan lifts term limits

Farid Guliyev, Ph.D. candidate – 5/4/2009

`Absolute power corrupts absolutely.’ This famous dictum of Baron
Acton sounds so true today in the former Soviet republic of
Azerbaijan. Here the referendum this Wednesday (March 18) lifted term
limits on the presidency granting approval to President Ilham Aliyev
to serve as many times as he wishes after his second term finishes in
2013. The poll approved more than 40 amendments to the constitution
removing some of the restraints on the presidency. Ilham Aliyev, 47,
succeeded his ailing father Heydar Aliyev in the presidential election
in 2003 and voted to continue in office for the second five-year term
in October 2008.

Nowhere in the post-communist area is power so much personalized as in
Azerbaijan. Even in Turkmenistan, notorious for its megalomaniacal
ruler Saparmurat Turkmenbashi, the presidential office was not, after
the death of Turkmenbashi, inherited by a family member but conferred
on an elite insider. In Belarus, where President Lukashenko has been
in power for more than 14 years, there is no comparable nepotism
either. Perhaps, it would be more insightful to draw parallels (and
learn lessons from) with Sub-Saharan Africa where the nascent state
institutions were largely `privatized’ serving the interests of the
post-colonial elites. For example, Pesident Omar Bongo of Gabon has
been in power since 1967.

To the surprise of democracy optimists, the breakup of Communist rule
saw the emergence of authoritarian or semi-authoritarian regimes.
These regimes have all adopted Western-style institutional and legal
setups but the state was typically exploited for private gain. Keeping
this mind, it makes little sense to continue to frame events in the
region as steps towards or away from democratization or consolidation
of democracy. It is not that the removal of term limits would be a
setback to consolidating an Azerbaijani democracy as the Council of
Europe’s Venice Commission opinioned about the constitutional
amendments in Azerbaijan. Rather, it is a move towards the
consolidation of an authoritarian regime.

The Aliyevs have run the country by employing both carrots and sticks.
Control of media has also been instrumental. A stream of oil revenues
has enabled the government to keep the police force and other `power’
ministries well-paid and fit. A brutal clampdown of a protest campaign
in Baku in the aftermath of the controversial parliamentary vote in
2005 is just one example.

If sticks were used to instill fear and gain mass acquiescence,
carrots went mostly to the ruler’s cronies, friends and family members
but were also dispersed on public goods. In this country, planned
economy was not replaced by a fully-fledged market with a flourishing
private sector. A partial economic reform that was implemented meant
handing some of the Communist-era state enterprises over to regime
cronies. Most important, the state has remained in control of the
economy dominated by petroleum sector. Loyalty was compensated with
access to state resources. Not only oil and gas industry but also
other lucrative sectors like transportation, fishery, international
trade and tariffs have been in service of various rent-seeking groups.
Patronage was also used: government jobs were given as a means of
cooptation (a more thorough discussion of what has kept the system
working can be found in my article in the Harvard International
Review, Feb 28, 2009: ).

These were enough to maintain a support base and manipulate public
opinion. Added to this was international neglect and Western
self-interest as regards setting priorities in the Caspian region. Oil
means large investments which require stable environment and
predictability. Western governments’ interest in Caspian oil meant
they would support whoever ensures that precious stability. While the
West has been balancing its energy interests and democracy rhetoric,
Russia has used its model of `managed democracy’ as an alternative to
a more demanding Western model of liberal democracy. Under Putin and
now Medvedev, Russia has become more assertive and authoritarian. It
has served as a role model for neighboring post-Soviet leaders. In a
certain sense, Russia can be said to be promoting authoritarianism in
the former Soviet states by sending its election monitoring missions
which confirm the results of usually manipulated elections and thus
provide external legitimation for undemocratic regimes. The same can
be said about a handful of researchers and research institutions (e.g.
the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute) as well as some European
politicians (for instance, British MP Michael Hancock saying that
scraping term limits is democratic), lobbyists and some state-backed
NGO’s who have all endorsed the strongmen’s grip on power in this
Caspian nation (Ken Silverstein has had a series of articles on this
in Harper’s Magazine).

While it seems that the Obama administration takes a `quieter’
approach to promoting democracy abroad, it cannot — assuming this is
an issue of domestic affairs — keep silent about the developments in
Azerbaijan. Neither can it abandon democracy promotion from its
foreign policy agenda altogether. Instead, this is an ample
opportunity for the US to stand for democracy. Itself a model of
presidentialist government the U.S. could urge the government of
Azerbaijan to create a truly presidential system based on the
separation-of-powers and a fixed term in the office for president.

Farid Guliyev is a Ph.D. Candidate in Political Science at the School
of Humanities and Social Sciences in Jacobs University – Bremen.

Vremya Novostey , Russia
April 24 2009

Road Maps. Russia Risks ‘Leaving’ the South Caucasus Forever

by Ivan Sukhov:

Russia responded quite good-naturedly to the news that a "road map"
had been signed for an Armenian-Turkish settlement. However, if one
considers this English diplomatic term in its literal sense, i.e., as
an actual map of the Caucasus’s roads, it gives one pause for thought.

In the fall of last year, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan and his
Azerbaijani counterpart Ilham Aliyev signed a special declaration on
Nagornyy Karabakh at [Russian President] Dmitriy Medvedev’s residence
outside Moscow. Ever since then, Russia has been trying to regain its
status as the main "sponsor" of a Karabakh settlement, which it lost
over the past several years, as well as its image as a peacemaker.
This is important in light of the unfavourable impression that was
made on the international community by last year’s military actions in
Georgia. Moscow tends to present any movement towards an agreement on
Karabakh as its own achievement. But it is hard not to notice that the
"defrosting" of Armenian-Turkish relations that was announced
yesterday [23 April] could ultimately reduce Russia’s influence in the
South Caucasus to a minimum.

Karabakh is the oldest "frozen conflict" in the South Caucasus. It is
a blockage on the path to normal international communications. Armenia
and Azerbaijan are in a de facto state of war. In this war,
fortunately, they do not shoot at each other all that often. But the
longest of Armenia’s borders – its border with Azerbaijan – looks like
a front line. Nor is its border with Turkey, a country that has seen
Azerbaijan as its main partner in the Caucasus throughout the
post-Soviet period and has supported its demand for the restoration of
its territorial integrity, much more open. Apart from a very narrow
"window" into Iran, Armenia’s only open border is its border with
Georgia. But Georgia has problems with Russia, so it turns out that
this border, too, is only half open.

A year ago it seemed that Russia had fairly good prospects of
developing its links with Armenia, which it has always positioned as
its main ally in the South Caucasus. This includes transport links.
Russian Railways even took Armenia’s railway network under
concessionary management. A railway on an "island," limited by closed
borders, does not make any sense. But by connecting it to the rail
network in Georgia and restoring railway communications via Abkhazia,
which were disrupted 15 years ago, it would be possible to turn this
railway into a powerful economic tool. This would not only
dramatically increase the volume of cargo between Russian and Armenia,
which are currently only linked by air, but would also strengthen
Russia’s real economic presence both in Armenia and in Georgia. A road
link, once again via Abkhazia, and two border crossings between
Georgia and Ossetia – at Verkhniy Lars and on the Trans-Caucasus
Highway – could also "emerge." These highways would bring money and
development to the cities and provinces situated along the restored
roads. And where there is money and development, there is usually no
place for war.

Excluding the seasonal trails that are only accessible to smugglers
and Chechen militants, there are only six roads through the Caucasus
mountain range, i.e., real threads connecting Russia economically with
Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia. There are two railways: one along
the coast of the Caspian Sea to Baku, and the other along the Black
Sea via Sukhumi to Georgia and on to Armenia. Due to the
Georgian-Abkhazian war, however, the railway been dismantled in
Abkhazia. Now, following the war between Russia and Georgia, it is
hard to expect that it will be restored anytime soon. And it is
impossible to reach Armenia by train via Baku due to the conflict in
Karabakh.

The same goes for the highways. There are four of them. The road
through Abkhazia is blocked at the Inguri River on the border with
Georgia. The Trans-Caucasus Highway that runs through South Ossetia
fell into decline back in 2004 through the efforts of Tbilisi, which
was overzealously guarding its customs sov ereignty. Since the August
2008 war, this road has also run into a dead end at the
border. Verkhniy Lars, a crossing on the historical Georgian military
highway that was long being overhauled by Russia, was also closed for
several years. About a week ago it was reported that the repairs had
been completed. But in order to open the road, which would make
Armenian businessmen and consumers very happy, Russia and Georgia
would have to reach a special agreement. This looks problematic so
far. Thus, three of the four roads from the North Caucasus to the
South are closed by blockages that arose, or at least were reinforced,
as a result of the August war. The only functioning road leads to
Azerbaijan and, for obvious reasons, remains inaccessible to Armenia.

The "Road Map" does not yet mean that the border will be opened. There
is a whole range of difficult conflicts between Turkey and
Armenia. Within Turkey and its ally Azerbaijan, there are influential
political forces that are displeased with Ankara’s rapprochement with
Yerevan. They condition the resumption of bilateral relations on
resolving the Karabakh problem in favour of Azerbaijan. But Karabakh
is a separate and very complicated issue, for which a solution might
be found more easily if Armenia could get out of its current
semi-blocked position. Within Armenia itself, there are also
opposition members who are inclined to blame Serzh Sargsyan for the
rapprochement with Turkey, which, they say, insults the memory of the
Armenian genocide of 1915.

But even Levon Ter-Petrosyan, the leader of the opposition in last
year’s presidential elections and the first president of Armenia, has
repeatedly emphasized that assessing the genocide, which is very
difficult and traumatic for both Armenia and Turkey, remains primarily
an ethical issue. Pragmatically, meanwhile, rapprochement with Turkey
is inevitable for Armenia, no matter who is president. The Road Map is
an absolutely sure sign that such rapprochement is possible. For the
first time in the entire post-Soviet period, the opening of the border
between Turkey and Armenia has moved out of the realm of fantasy into
the sphere of seeking technical solutions.

If this border is opened, Russia’s main ally in the South Caucasus
will inevitably turn towards Turkey. The economy will help heal old
wounds. In any case, getting outside by climbing over two of your
neighbours’ fences is far less convenient than using the open gates of
your own back yard. If a ground transportation link with Turkey is
opened, and if Armenia is included in the Eurasian transport corridor
that leads through the South Caucasus to Turkey, then Russian money
and air links between Yerevan and Moscow may very well play a
constructive role, but it will be a purely auxiliary one in Armenia’s
development.

The possibility of opening the border is a bonus that Turkey can offer
Armenia in the great haggling over Karabakh, thereby forcing Russia
out of its position as the main "sponsor" of the Karabakh
settlement. Moscow has no such bonus to offer. It might have had one,
however, if not for the August war. After which, incidentally, Russia
is now openly feared in Baku, Yerevan, and Ankara, despite the large
number of formulaic lines about eternal mutual respect.

In this context, Dmitriy Medvedev’s meetings with Ilham Aliyev and
Serzh Sargsyan look like an attempt to seize the initiative and hop on
the back of the train heading for Ankara. But Karabakh, which Moscow
has grown accustomed to viewing as a tool for keeping both Armenia and
Azerbaijan in the wake of its own foreign policy, has so far not
enabled the Kremlin to formulate a position that would satisfy both of
the South Caucasus countries. Turkey, meanwhile, is actively seeking
such a position. And if it finds one, then the territories of Abkhazia
and South Ossetia, which Russia has taken under its wing, will long
remain the limits of Russian influence in the South Caucasus.

[translated from Russian]

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE "INFLUENCE OF THE GLOBAL ECONOMIC CRISIS ON ARMENIA’S ECONOMY" TO BE HELD IN YEREVAN IN JULY

Noyan Tapan
Apr 30, 2009

Yerevan, April 30, Noyan Tapan, To explore the impact of the global
economic crisis on Armenia, the Armenian International Policy Research
Group (AIPRG) with support of the RA Government will organize
a conference entitled "Impact of the Global Financial Crisis on
Armenia’s economy: Short- and long-run perspectives," on July 7 to 8
in Yerevan. As the Minister of Economy of Armenia, Nerses Yeritsian
told at a press conference on April 29, the conference is aimed at
analyzing the influence of the global economic and financial crisis
on Armenia’s economy , elaborating scenarios The conference aims
to develop scenarios for coping with consequences of the crisis
and provide policy recommendations to mitigate the impact of the
crisis. According to the minister, presentation of experience of
developing countries and countries in transition during conference
will enable to reveal those shortcomings of the economic policy of
Armenia, elimination of which would help to increase the pace of
Armenia’s further economic growth.

As N.. Eritsian mentioned, the conference is open for all
researchers. The minister called up opposition representatives to
participate in the conference and present surveys and analysis related
to weakening the impact of the crisis consequences. According to the
chief executive of AIPRG Arman Gabrielian, during two-day conference
presentations of cross-country experiences of emerging economies
will provide comparative venues for discussion regarding how to move
towards economic policies in Armenia which will propel the Armenian
economy into a higher growth trajectory. The conference will address
the outcomes of the world economic crisis and lessons for Armenia,
the impact of the crisis on Armenia and a policy response, prospects
of improving Armenia’s economic growth and increasing competitiveness,
as well as economic consequences of the open border with Turkey and
Armenia’s new regional positioning. Professionals and high-ranking
officials from various international structures of Armenia and
Diaspora are expected to participate, told A.Gabrielian. Scientific
report and surveys presented at the conference will be published
in "Armenian Journal of Public Policy" issued by AIPRG. AIPRG is a
non-governmental organization, which supports scientific researches
in Armenia and Diaspora on matters regarding Armenia’s economic
development and growth with the purpose to unite existing knowledge
and experience. AIPRG is an academic bridge between Diasporan and
native Armenian scholars in the areas of economy, policy, law and
management. Author: Hakobian Hasmik

ALIYEV: BAKU WILL ALIGN POLICY TO REGION’S NEW REALITIES

Today’s Zaman
April 30 2009
Turkey

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev has said Azerbaijan will adapt its
policy to the new realities of the region that will be established as a
result of the ongoing normalization efforts between Turkey and Armenia.

Aliyev met with European Commission President José Manuel
Barroso on Tuesday in Brussels, after which the two held a joint
press conference. Aliyev also gave a speech in a conference titled
"Azerbaijan: An increasingly important partner for the European Union,"
organized by the European Policy Centre (EPC), a Brussels-based
think tank.

Asked about his country’s position regarding the Turkish-Armenian
rapprochement, he indicated that it was up to Turkey and Armenia to
decide on their bilateral relations but that Azerbaijan will adapt
its policy according to the changing realities of the region, with
particular reference to the possible border opening. "If I am to talk
about the issue’s historical roots, the Turkish border with Armenia was
closed because of the Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territories,
which is still continuing," he said, reiterating that Azerbaijan is
not in a position to prevent bilateral relations between the two but
that they do have the right to align their steps to a potential future
situation in the region.

Aliyev also pointed out his expectations for a clear answer if the
settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis is linked to the agreement
between Armenia and Turkey. "We are hearing contradictory statements
about whether the resolution of the regional crisis is a precondition
in the ongoing process between Armenia and Turkey. It is indeed a
simple question and requires a simple answer," said Aliyev. Armenia
and Turkey earlier announced that they had agreed on a road map to
normalize their relations.

Barroso stated that he understands how sensitive the issue is for
Azerbaijan. "But you should also understand that the European Union
will be happy with any reduction in tension," he noted, adding that
this does not mean that Azerbaijan doesn’t want the Nagorno-Karabakh
crisis to be resolved. "We also urge Azerbaijan and Armenia to look
for a solution and hope their efforts deliver one," he concluded.

‘Gas price needs to be recalculated’ In his speech at the EPC,
Aliyev said the price of natural gas from the Caspian Sea that Turkey
buys from Azerbaijan, which is transported through the Å~^ahdeniz
pipeline, needs to be recalculated according to the market price and
the provisions of the agreement between the two.

Reminded of the speculation that Azerbaijan will increase natural
gas prices for Turkey because of the talks the country is holding
with Armenia, Aliyev said the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan
Republic (SOCAR) is not the only company involved in the Å~^ahdeniz
project. "The validity of the ceiling price for 1,000 cubic meters
of natural gas [$120] expired in April 2008, so the price needs to
be recalculated, but it is hard to tell if it will be a higher or
lower price. Petroleum prices are diminishing so natural gas may be
cheaper, too, but it has to be the market price," the Azerbaijani
president explained.

Aliyev highlighted that Turkey was buying natural gas from
Russia and Algeria for a much higher price than it was paying to
Azerbaijan. "Those who follow it know very well that Turkey has bought
natural gas from Russia for $400-500 and from Algeria for $300 and
more. When we were selling it for $120, the market price was about
$400-500. You can now calculate how much loss we bore last year,"
stated Aliyev. He added that everything needs to be done in line with
the agreements signed.

GUL SATISFIED WITH CZECH SUPPORT FOR EU

Hurriyet
April 30 2009
Turkey

ISTANBUL – After meeting with his Czech Republic counterpart in Prague
yesterday, President Abdullah Gul expressed his satisfaction with
the support extended by President Vaclav Klaus to Turkey’s European
Union membership process.

"Turkey is determined to further improve its political, economic
and commercial relations with the Czech Republic," Gul said at the
meeting of the Turkish-Czech Business Council.

"Both Turkey and the Czech Republic have made significant economic
progress recently and are among the countries least affected by
the global crisis," Gul added. "Trade volume between Turkey and the
Czech Republic increased to $2 billion in 2008, from $260 million
in 2000. There have been especially encouraging investments in the
sectors of energy, medicine, tourism and construction."

For his part, Czech Republic President Klaus said he very selfishly
favored Turkey becoming a member of the EU because Turkey’s accession
would further strengthen both the EU and its economy.

Normalization with Armenia

President Gul meanwhile said a possible accord to normalize ties
between Turkey and Armenia would benefit Azerbaijan and stabilize
the entire Caucasus region, reported the Associated Press.

Turkey announced last week that the two countries, bitterly divided
over Ottoman-era killings of ethnic Armenians, had agreed on a road
map for normalizing relations and reaching reconciliation.

TURKISH CAPITAL WILL BOOST ARMENIAN ECONOMY
Messenger Staff

The Messenger
April 28 2009
Georgia

Leader of the Armenian Union in Russia Ara Abramian has stated that
Armenia should not be scared by the entry of Turkish business into
Armenia after the opening of the Turkish-Armenian border. According
to him, Turkish business will facilitate the integration of Armenian
business into the world economy and increase economic growth.

Abramian suggests that today Armenia depends on Georgia a lot but after
the opening of the Turkish border its business culture will develop
better. Currently Armenia is blockaded and its economic development
has practically stopped, and Armenia should not be afraid of changing
the situation by opening the Turkish border, thinks Abramian.

NALBANDIAN HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH CLINTON

AZG DAILY
29-04-2009

On April 27, on the initiative of the US side, Armenian Foreign
Minister Edward Nalbandian had a phone conversation with the US
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, RA Foreign Ministry press service
reported.

Normalization process of Armenian-Turkish relations and Karabakh issue
settlement negotiations were touched upon during the conversation.

Hillary Clinton expressed her support for the negotiation process of
Karabakh issue within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group.

EDWARD NALBANDYAN "OUR STRIVE IS FRANK AND RESOLUTE: ARMENIA SEEKS ESTABLISHMENT OF FULL RELATIONS WITH TURKEY WITHOUT PRECONDITIONS"

ARMENPRESS
APRIL 27, 2009
YEREVAN

Armenian Foreign Affairs Minister Edward Nalbandyan gave interview
to the director of Armenpress news agency Hrayr Zoryan.

– Mr. Minister, first of all I would like to thank You for accepting
my request for interview. Headed by You Armenia’s foreign policy has
become quite active.

– I would like to point out that our foreign policy is headed by the
President of the country and I am heading the Foreign Affairs Ministry
the main mission of which is to carry out the issues forwarded by
the President of the Republic.

– Being a chairman-in-office in different international organizations
You receive numerous guests, pay different visits. One of distinguished
diplomats said if foreign minister of a country does not pay visits,
the country does not have foreign policy. The geography of Your visits
is wide, it even includes Turkey, which seems to be a new thing for us.

– I do not think that it is a new thing, because for years after
the independence of Armenia there have always been contacts between
Armenia and Turkey, various visits of high-ranked officials took place
and Armenia has always been seeking normalization of relations with
Turkey without preconditions.

– How will You assess the current round of the Armenian-Turkish
relations, especially taking into consideration the opinions that
our relations have never gone so far?

– I would say have never been so close, really because on the
initiative of the President of Armenia when the President of Turkey
Abdullah Gul was invited to visit Armenia to watch football match a
qualitatively new round launched in the process of normalization of
relations. Very important meetings took place between Armenian and
Turkish presidents, besides an important meeting took place in Davos
between Armenian President and Turkish Prime Minister, at about ten
meetings took place on the level of foreign ministers of the two
countries, and today we came to the statement made April 22 which
registers progress in negotiation process.

– There are opinions that this statement was a surprise and there
are even opinions on being deceived.

– But how can it be spoken about a surprise or about being
deceived? You know, for months the President of the country and
the foreign minister have stated many times that Armenia is seeking
establishment of full relations with Turkey, normalization of relations
with Turkey without preconditions and today with that statement we
again note that we are going towards the normalization of relations,
opening of the borders without any preconditions. In this case how
it can be spoken about being deceived.

– You say that there are no preconditions, but still different comments
and opinions are voiced from Turkey and in Armenia there are opinions
that we are making concessions.

– You know, there is such an impression as if we do not believe
ourselves, we have lack of trust towards our strength, our
opportunities, we do not believe that Armenia, really, may register
a progress, we always think that if we have reached something good
it means that a bad thing is hidden under it. That is to say, if
we have climbed the tree, we must by all means fall on a stone,
or we think that we must be cheated by all means. Who will cheat
us? If it is Turkey, first of all it will cheat itself, international
community, United States, Russia, EU. Our strive is frank and resolute:
Armenia seeks establishment of full relations with Turkey without
preconditions. I think that we have an impression that the leadership
of Turkey wishes to go forward and normalize relations between the
two countries too. – The statement was publicized April 22, on the
eve of 94th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, which also gave
way to different comments. How will You comment on it?

– When we say normalization of relations without preconditions,
we mean that there are no preconditions connected with the Nagorno
Karabakh conflict regulation and no preconditions on recognition of
the genocide and the normalization of relations does not put under
question the fact of the genocide and the President of the country,
foreign minister have many times stated about it. You know, I hope
that when we improve, normalize our relations, not only leadership
of our country will put flowers in Tsitsernakaberd but the Turkish
leadership will join us. Why cannot we do what Charles de Gaulle
and Adenauer did? I am sure that such a day will come and Armenian
and Turkish leaderships will make that step. And when will it be
convenient to make such step if we reach that day? May be in very
April? I think there may be some symbol in it. And may be there is
a symbol in making the statement April 22.

– Nevertheless why at night of April 22?

– You mean why at night? You know in diplomacy there is neither
afternoon, nor night, nor morning, nor evening conception. In general,
negotiations have their logic, which bring to some haven, corresponding
progress about which public is being informed. I remember in France in
the process of recognition of genocide, when the law on recognition
of the genocide was being adopted in the Senate the discussions were
going on in midnight and the decision was made at 04.00 am and no
one was surprised and no one asked "why the discussions were at night
and the decision made in the morning?".

– There is an opinion that Armenia is going to the establishment of
relations with Turkey because the events which took place in Georgia
last year and the global economic crisis did not leave any other
choice to Armenia and it has to find common language with Turkey.

– You know quite well that the initiative of the President of the
Republic of Armenia was made months ago, months before what happened
in Ossetia and when Armenia’s economy was registering double-digit
development just like during the previous 7-8 years. Thus, it is not
so: this decision was made with full sense that we must normalize
our relations with Turkey.

– Road map concept caused a certain confusion. What does this document
present from itself? What points, principles does it have?

– It is a very clear agreement: the road map – is a time guide for the
steps which the sides must undertake so that the achieved arrangements
enter into force and start being implemented and there are no points
and principles in that map. Points and principles will be in the
agreement or agreements which must be signed between the sides.

– How will You comment on international responses to the
Armenian-Turkish relations?

– You know, if we were living in Soviet, USSR days, we would say that
all the progressive humanity welcomes Armenia’s steps. But today,
we really may say that many countries, EU, United States, Russia,
Switzerland, which was a mediator, not only welcome but assist in the
process. May be there is one country which has some restraints and
may be not small: it is Azerbaijan. This I think is a wrong approach
as normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations may have only positive
impact on our whole region and Azerbaijan is part of that region.

– How will You comment on the usage of the "Meds Yeghern" phrase by
Barack Obama in his address to the Armenian people?

– First of all I would like to say that the statement of Obama
is a step forward as compared with the statements made by other
presidents of the United States. There are very strong points
in this statement. President Obama said that he has many times
expressed his approach towards what happened in 1915 and he has not
changed his opinion. President Obama used "Meds Yeghern" phrase, we –
Armenians – use either "genocide" or "Meds Yeghern" concepts. But of
course, all Armenians were waiting from the US President to utter
the word "genocide". As far as we are speaking about the President
of the United States, I would also like to point out the important
personal assistance the US President displays for the normalization
of Armenian-Turkish relations.

– During the recent period the negotiation process within the
frameworks of the OSCE Minsk group has activated. Once in a month
the co-chairs are visiting the region: Yerevan, Stepanakert, Baku,
they also pay visits separately. Nevertheless there is an impression
as if the process stamps in the place. Do You agree with that opinion?

– Yes, the co-chairs are in Yerevan today as well, the process
continues and you know that for months Azerbaijan was refusing
to conduct negotiations on the basis of Madrid principles and
was trying to impose the resolution which was adopted by the UN
General Assembly with the suggestion of Azerbaijan. But You know
as well that the co-chairing countries voted against it and neither
of the EU countries backed the resolution and only 39 of 192 member
countries voted for it. Azerbaijan for months was trying to impose this
resolution as a basis of negotiations. Azerbaijan was speaking only
about one point: territorial integrity, military rhetoric was voiced in
Azerbaijan. During the recent period many statements have been approved
by international organizations, in different instances which correspond
to our approaches. During the recent months no resolution has been
adopted over Karabakh which would not correspond to our positions:
be it the Moscow declaration, under which are the signatures of the
President of the Republic of Armenia, President of Azerbaijan and
President of Russia: in spite of it in a few days Azerbaijan put under
question several points of the declaration. Three declarations have
been adopted in Helsinki in early December, by the 56 OSCE foreign
ministers, foreign ministers of the Minsk group co-chairing countries
and the EU. And these three statements, declarations correspond
to our positions and we fully share the opinions expressed in that
statements and support them and find that if we move according to
these documents, maybe we will have a progress. At the beginning of
the year Azerbaijan tried to make certain steps in UN, unconstructive
steps, started disseminating memorandums – four memorandums, which in
fact created another serious obstacle in the negotiation process. The
Minsk group co-chairing countries condemned that step. Today there
is a certain positive tendency in the Karabakh process as the same
president of Azerbaijan states already about the regulation of the
Karabakh issue on the basis of international right. And it is really
an important positive tendency. Three meetings have been held between
the Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents – in Saint Petersburg, Moscow
and Zurich and in near future another one will take place. We hope
that the coming meeting will be positive and constructive and will
give an opportunity to activate the negotiations, move forward and
make the positions of the conflicting parties closer.

– Different comments, analyses are voiced on Armenian-Turkish
relations, Karabakh conflict regulation process causing confusion:
I hope that our interview made many issues clear.

– I would like to say that I pay great attention to all the opinions
voiced by analysts, and I am trying to use positive suggestions and
ideas existing in the analyses. But there are also such analyses which
say – we don’t know what you are doing, but what you are doing you are
doing it wrong. You do it wrong because it is not we who are doing
it, and what we would have done we will not tell you – it is like
the person says I will not enter into water until I learn swimming,
and so not learning swimming he gives advises, or makes remarks about
the dangers of drowning. The leadership of the state must have courage
to take responsibility and make important decisions and implement
them. Today the international community treats Armenia with respect. I
say with respect and not use exciting words like "they love us" or
"they do not love us": they treat us with respect and it is natural
in respect that we are a state, we have our interests, our issues,
and we are also trying to understand issues of other countries. And
we are trying by combing these interests find such solutions which
will be good for all. And first of all for us, the important thing
is that those solutions be effective and favorable for the sake of
our people and the state.

UNSERIOUS APPROACH TO SERIOUS ISSUES

ArmInfo
2009-04-24 12:01:00

ArmInfo. ‘Turkey’s child Prime Minister says borders with Armenia
will not be opened’, Baku-based APA agency published an item with
such a strange title on April 23.

Thus, the Turkish authorities gave their chairs symbolically to
the children on the occasion of April 23, the National Sovereignty
and Children Holiday in Turkey. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan
met with a group of children and gave his chair to a little girl,
Gulce Ecem Ucar. Sitting in the Erdogan’s chair, the "Prime Minister"
expressed her opinion about the various problems. She told journalists
that the borders with Armenia will not be opened. "We will not do
anything to aggrieve our Azeri friends". This item once more shows the
wishful thinking of the Azeri press. Even the child ‘prime minister’
is prescribed the words that she did not say.