Author: Tavakalian Edgar

NEW PROGRAM TO CONTRIBUTE TO DEVELOPMENT OF ARMENIAN-IRANIAN CULTURAL COOPERATION

NOYAN TAPAN
FEBRUARY 10, 2010
YEREVAN

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 10, NOYAN TAPAN. RA Prime Minister Tigran Sargsian
receiving Adviser to IRI President, Chairman of IRI Organization for
Cultural and Islamic Contacts Mehdi Mostafavi on February 10, highly
assessed strengthening of cultural contacts between RA and IRI. He
said that the key of solution of many of the problems of the modern
world is in the spiritual, cultural sphere.

According to the RA government Information and Public Relations
Department, the interlocutors touched upon the ARMEX-2010 economic
forum being organized in these days in Tehran with the participation
of Armenian and Iranian businessmen. Speaking about the current level
of Armenia-Iran cultural cooperation they gave assurance that the
signing of the practical program On Cultural Cooperation between RA
Ministry of Culture and Organization for Islamic Contacts in 2010-2012
will be a new stimulus for further development of cooperation.

T. Sargsian expressed satisfaction with IRI proper bodies’ activity
in preservation of Armenian historic and spiritual centers in the
territory of Iran. He also highly assessed Iran’s attitude to the
Armenian people and taking the opportunity congratulated the Iranian
delegation on the occasion of the 31rd anniversary of victory in the
Islamic Revolution.

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 10, NOYAN TAPAN. RA Prime Minister Tigran Sargsian
receiving Adviser to IRI President, Chairman of IRI Organization for
Cultural and Islamic Contacts Mehdi Mostafavi on February 10, highly
assessed strengthening of cultural contacts between RA and IRI. He
said that the key of solution of many of the problems of the modern
world is in the spiritual, cultural sphere.

According to the RA government Information and Public Relations
Department, the interlocutors touched upon the ARMEX-2010 economic
forum being organized in these days in Tehran with the participation
of Armenian and Iranian businessmen. Speaking about the current level
of Armenia-Iran cultural cooperation they gave assurance that the
signing of the practical program On Cultural Cooperation between RA
Ministry of Culture and Organization for Islamic Contacts in 2010-2012
will be a new stimulus for further development of cooperation.

T. Sargsian expressed satisfaction with IRI proper bodies’ activity
in preservation of Armenian historic and spiritual centers in the
territory of Iran. He also highly assessed Iran’s attitude to the
Armenian people and taking the opportunity congratulated the Iranian
delegation on the occasion of the 31rd anniversary of victory in the
Islamic Revolution.

TURKISH DIPLOMAT SAYS TIES WITH AZERBAIJAN LOST

Panorama.am
11:50 10/02/2010

Turkish politician and long-time leader of the Republican People’s
Party Deniz Baykal released a speech at party’s meeting and talked
about the normalization of Armenian-Turkish ties. CNN Turk cited the
oppositional leader saying that Turkish strategy to have zero problems
with neighbors has been failed. "It’s hopeless. We haven’t got any
advancement. I say no advancement but we’ve got deep fails. We’ve lost
Azerbaijan’s relation. Now Azerbaijan has announced about increasing
gas price. Don’t think that the diplomats are going to pay them. Wrong
policies of our authorities harms our people," he said.

ENTER TURKEY

Russia Profile
Feb 9 2010

Parties to the Nagorno-Karabakh Negotiating Process Will Now Have to
Take Turkey’s Opinion into Account

At first glance there have been no significant changes this year in
the process of settling the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The framework
of this discussion is well-known: arguments over the timeframe in
which the five districts surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh are to be
demilitarized; repatriating the refugees; the status of the disputed
territory and various possible mechanisms that would ensure the non-use
of force. However, a closer look at the dynamics of the peace process
in Nagorno-Karabakh reveals a number of important shifts, and these
should be noted in order to get a better picture of the prospects
of settling one of the oldest and most complex conflicts on former
Soviet territory.

Negotiations in the three-way format (the presidents of Russia,
Azerbaijan and Armenia) tested out back in 2008 also continue. On
January 25 the city of Sochi hosted the fifth meeting of the three
countries’ leaders, which resulted in agreement over the preamble to
the renewed Madrid Principles. Meanwhile, the negotiations themselves
are held in an atmosphere of utter secrecy, since the text of the
preamble has not been made available to journalists and experts.

For a long time, the regulation of the Karabakh conflict developed
within the framework of the status quo that was established in
the Southern Caucasus after 1991. This time was characterized
by a "freezing" of conflicts and the creation of republics with
a questionable status and questionable borders. Yet neither the
instigators of the conflict nor the parties dragged into it possessed
the necessary resources to drastically change the status quo. The
"winds of change" began blowing in Georgia. Those same winds led to
the five-day war and a change in the old rules of the Caucasian game.

What did Yerevan and Baku derive from this war? Baku most likely
realized that the "Serbian Krajina" scenario cannot be applied to
the Caucasus. The West is too far away, and while the Caucasus does
matter, this region is not a territory of "vital interests" for the
EU and especially for the United States. Thus it was no accident
that following the five-day war, Azerbaijan abstained from conducting
militarist propaganda for a few months. In turn, Yerevan realized an
unfortunate fact: for Armenia, Russia’s victory over Georgia created
many new problems (given the fact that all of the logistics between
the two allies were conducted through Georgia). Having realized that
the "Western factor" should not be overestimated (here Armenian and
Azerbaijani diplomacy intersect), Yerevan began looking for ways to
find compromises with neighboring Turkey, whose claims to involvement
not just in Azerbaijani affairs but in all of Caucasian geopolitics
became evident following the short-lived August war.

Thus shaping up a new status quo in the Caucasus is not limited to the
recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the severance of diplomatic
relations between Russia and Georgia, Ankara’s increased role in the
region and the beginning of an Armenian-Turkish dialog. The latter
became a serious factor influencing the Karabakh settlement process.

The absolute majority of those who root for normal Armenian-Turkish
relations keep saying that the two problems, the peace process in the
Karabakh and the reconciliation between Yerevan and Ankara, should be
dealt with separately. But in reality, these two processes have merged.

With pressure coming from different directions (especially on behalf
of the United States) it was possible to convince Turkey to sign two
protocols on normalizing relations with Armenia without mentioning
Karabakh or the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict in general. Professional
optimists have already called these protocols "historic" and
"revolutionary." Certainly, the two protocols establishing diplomatic
relations and opening a land border became the first legally binding
documents signed by Yerevan and Ankara simultaneously. However, if the
Parliaments don’t ratify them, they will remain a formality. Realizing
this, the Turkish side once again broached the issue of grouping
together the reconciliation with the Armenian side and the "progress"
on the "Karabakh question." But this is not just an achievement of
Turkish diplomacy. We also have to acknowledge the effectiveness of
the Azerbaijani president (and his diplomatic ministry), who managed
not to let the Karabakh problem "drift away" from the process of the
Armenian-Turkish normalization. For this, Baku used militaristic
rhetoric as well (at the end of last year it even surpassed its
general level, with Ilham Aliyev threatening to launch a military
attack if the negotiations were delayed).

Thus during its negotiations with Washington and Moscow, Ankara can
refer to Baku’s stance, as well as to the factor of Turkish unity,
which it would like to ignore but cannot. As for the United States
and Russia, both of these countries have their own reasons to take
Turkey’s opinion into account. For the United States, Turkey’s
military-political significance has not diminished, despite all over
their disagreements over Iraq in particular and over the Near East in
general (given the current administration’s plans in Afghanistan, the
significance of the Indzherlik base should not be underestimated). For
Russia, Turkey is turning into a primary economic partner. Last year,
trade between the two countries grew by 49 percent and reached the
record high of $33.8 billion. Thus it is hardly accidental that the
"escalation" in peacekeeping activities in the Karabakh on behalf of
both Russian and American politicians came soon after their meetings
with the Turkish leaders (in December of 2009 for the Americans and
in January of 2010 for the Russians).

On the one hand, neither Russia nor the United States have an
obvious desire (as was the case with Georgia) to radically alter the
Karabakh game. Both Moscow and Washington are rather satisfied with
the negotiation process, with inevitably optimistic commentary about
the "coming peace." However, from now on the Turkish factor plays an
incomparably greater role. It is further amplified by the fact that
Turkey is simultaneously playing its own, independent game in the Near
East on the Israeli-Palestinian, Syrian and Iranian fields, as well
as in the Balkans. And although both Moscow and Washington insist on
sticking to the thesis that the Karabakh process and Armenian-Turkish
reconciliation cannot happen at the same time, they both quietly
acknowledge a simple fact: in order to speed up the Armenian-Turkish
reconciliation, the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem should
be pushed forward as well.

In the end, there should be a negotiated document (this can be a
protocol or a communiqué that is legally binding for both sides),
which Recep Tayyip Erdogan or Abdullah Gul can present as a strategic
victory and as a result of establishing normal relations with Yerevan.

This document would also help in their dialogue with the opposition
and the political community of the country at large, because it would
state the fact that the "fraternal Azerbaijani people" remain in the
care of Ankara, while the reconciliation with Armenia did not come
at a high political price.

Thus, the diplomatic bargaining continues. The only difference is
that before it went on without an eye being kept on Ankara. In today’s
expert circles, Turkey is already being called the fourth unofficial
"co-chair of the Minsk Group."

Sergey Markedonov is an independent political analyst and expert on
the Caucasus.

ISRAELI MINISTER CRITICIZES FOREIGN ORGANIZATIONS OVER KARABAKH

news.az
Feb 8 2010
Azerbaijan

Avigdor Lieberman Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has
given an interview to Azerbaijan’s Lider TV ahead of his visit to
Baku on Tuesday.

"On the whole, the 21st century has started as a century of a great
many conflicts and terror acts. The Karabakh conflict is a very
sensitive problem which cannot be discussed in public and the mass
media," Lieberman told Lider TV.

"Certainly, we respect the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. These
conflicts exist in most countries, but none of them have been settled.

The international organizations show an inadequate and two-faced
position in this regard. Unfortunately, the world community prefers
sweet lies," the minister said.

As for negotiations on the resolution of protracted conflicts,
Lieberman said, "We do not support ineffective talks. If there is no
effect, why continue these negotiations?"

Lieberman said that Azerbaijan is a serious and reliable partner
of Israel. He said these countries have many similar features and
bilateral relations between them are developing rapidly.

"The Azerbaijani diaspora is working on a high level in Israel and
the Jewish community is active in Azerbaijan. This proves the normal
level of relations between our peoples. There are good opportunities
for the development of political ties," the Israeli minister said.

He said that the main purpose of his visit to Azerbaijan on 9-11
February is the development of political and economic ties. The
talks in Baku will cover the creation of an intergovernmental economic
cooperation commission. Lieberman said that there are different spheres
for the development of Azerbaijani-Israeli relations. Israel also
intends to boost cooperation in the energy sector, the minister said.

DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER OF ARMENIA ARMAN KIRAKOSIAN TO VISIT SYRIA ON FEBRUARY 9-10

Noyan Tapan
Feb 8, 2010

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 8, NOYAN TAPAN. A delegation headed by Deputy Foreign
Minister of Armenia Arman Kirakosian will pay a visit to Syria on
February 9-11 in order to hold regular political consultations between
the foreign ministries of Armenia and Syria and to participate in
the opening ceremony of Armenia’s honorary consulate in Deyr Dzor,
the RA MFA Press and Information Department reports.

news.az, Azerbaijan
Feb 6 2010

Armenia planning to cooperate with Azerbaijani, Turkish tourism operators
Sat 06 February 2010 | 05:15 GMT Text size:

Mehak Apresyan Armenia is planning to cooperate with tourism operators
of Azerbaijan and Turkey.

Mehak Apresyan, chief of department and tourism and territorial
economic development under the Economy Ministry, told reporters that
Armenia is developing a new tourism product- "Spirit of Caucasus".

He said this will be a regional touristic package to involve all the
South Caucasus countries, in particular, Armenia, Georgia and
Azerbaijan. Turkey’s involvement is also possible. He considers that
this proposal will be in demand because it will help tourists cut
expenses and visit the whole region. In addition, this will help raise
the tourists’ flow and the interest in the region.

He noted that due works with the private sector have already been
held and they are working at a touristic package. In this regard,
there is a plan to establish cooperation with the tourism operators of
Azerbaijan and Turkey. Apresyan said the opening of the
Armenian-Turkish border will have a positive influence on tourism.

Source: ARMENIA Today

Armenian National Committee of America
1711 N Street, NW Washington, DC 20036
Tel. (202) 775-1918
Fax. (202) 775-5648
Email. [email protected]
Internet

PRESS RELEASE
February 5, 2010
Contact: Elizabeth S. Chouldjian
Tel: (202) 775-1918

CHAIRMAN BERMAN SETS COMMITTEE VOTE ON ARMENIAN GENOCIDE RESOLUTION
FOR MARCH 4TH

WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman,
Howard Berman (D-CA), a leading Congressional supporter of human
rights and a longstanding friend of the Armenian American
community, has scheduled a vote of his panel on the Armenian
Genocide Resolution, H.Res.252, for Thursday, March 4th, reported
the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA).

"We want to thank Chairman Berman for his vision and strength in
taking this bold step to send the clear message to Turkey that the
United States Congress will not be complicit in their immoral
efforts to deny truth and justice for the Armenian Genocide," said
Ken Hachikian, Chairman of the ANCA, following his meeting
yesterday in Washington, DC with the senior California legislator.
"We look forward to working with the Chairman and all our friends
on the Committee from both parties to facilitate passage of this
critical piece of human rights legislation by both this panel and
the full House of Representatives. Our grassroots activists are
mobilized to help achieve the success of this effort."

Hachikian also consulted yesterday with several other
Representatives, most notably, Congressional Armenian Genocide
Resolution author Adam Schiff (D-CA), Congressional Armenian Caucus
Co-Chair Frank Pallone (D-NJ), and senior House Foreign Affairs
Committee Members Brad Sherman (D-CA), and Ed Royce (R-CA).

The House Foreign Affairs Committee adopted legislation similar to
H.Res.252, on a bipartisan basis, in 2000, 2005, and 2007. These
past measures, despite their broad-based support, did not reach the
House floor for an up or down vote, largely due to strident
opposition from the Clinton and Bush administrations fearful of
Ankara’s threats of retaliation. President Obama, during his
campaign for office, pledged to recognize the Armenian Genocide and
specifically voiced his strong support for this exact legislation;
his Vice President, Joe Biden, and Secretary of State, Hillary
Clinton, both cosponsored this measure. Since taking office, the
Obama Administration has yet to make any comments, either favorably
or unfavorably, on the Armenian Genocide Resolution currently
before Congress.

Scheduled Vote Culminates Year-Long Grassroots Campaign:

Chairman Berman’s announcement to hold a vote on H.Res.252 comes in
the wake of a year-long mobilization of ANCA and Armenian American
grassroots activists in support of the measure. These efforts have
ranged from local phone banks staffed by ANCA, Armenian Youth
Federation, and community volunteers to Washington DC advocacy days
– including an ongoing Capitol Hill effort this week focusing on
Committee Members and their colleagues from California, New York,
Michigan and Wisconsin.

Efforts to recognize the Armenian Genocide have been welcomed by a
broad range of coalition partners from the Greek, Jewish, Christian
and genocide-prevention constituencies. Earlier this week, the ANC
of Massachusetts teamed up with Greater Boston area Jewish American
groups, Investors Against Genocide and ARAMAC – Massachusetts in
launching an online petition – hosted on – calling
for Presidential and Congressional recognition of the Armenian
Genocide.
armeniangenocide/actions/view/tell_congress_to_rec ognize_the_armenian_genocide

H.Res.252, introduced in March of 2009 by lead sponsors Adam Schiff
and George Radanovich (R-CA), and Congressional Armenian Caucus Co-
chairs Frank Pallone (D-NJ) and Mark Kirk (R-IL), currently has
over 135 cosponsors. A parallel Senate measure, spearheaded by
Senators Bob Menendez (D-NJ) and John Ensign (R-NV), has 13
cosponsors.

#####

For more information regarding the Armenian Genocide Resolution,
please review the following links:

The text of the Armenian Genocide Resolution
/getdoc.cgi?dbname=3D111_cong_bills&docid=3Df: hr252ih.txt.pdf

The current list of cosponsors of the Armenian Genocide Resolution
(H.Res.252)
in/bdquery/z?d111:HE00252:@@@P

ANCA Talking Points on H the Armenian Genocide Resolution
s252_talkingpoints.pdf

PRESS RELEASE
Armenian Assembly of America
122 C Street, NW, Suite 350
Washington, DC 20001
Contact: John De Trana
Tel: (202) 393-3434
Fax: (202) 638-4904
E-mail: [email protected]
Web:

ARMENIAN GENOCIDE RESOLUTION TO BE CONSIDERED BY HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS
COMMITTEE ON 95TH ANNIVERSARY YEAR

Assembly Applauds Chairman Howard Berman’s Official February 5th Announcement

Washington, DC – The Armenian Assembly of America applauded the
official announcement today of House Foreign Affairs Committee
Chairman Howard Berman (D-CA) to mark-up the Armenian Genocide
resolution, H.Res. 252, in early March.

In the Assembly’s letter to Chairman Berman regarding consideration of
H.Res. 252, the Assembly thanked him on behalf of the entire community
for his strong support during his tenure in Congress, and recalled his
eloquent remarks that "Genocide is a very powerful word, and should
be reserved for only the most horrific examples of mass killing
motivated by a desire to destroy an entire people. Without a doubt,
this term is appropriate to describe the unimaginable atrocities
suffered by the Armenian people from 1915-1918."

Given the continued campaign to deny this crime against humanity, the
Assembly’s letter urged consideration by the House Committee on
Foreign Affairs, and noted that the legislation boasted more than 130
cosponsors, including more than a dozen that serve on the Committee
itself.

As part of its ongoing effort to secure U.S. reaffirmation of the
Armenian Genocide, the Assembly secured this week the support of a
major American coalition, the Central and East European Coalition
(CEEC), which comprises 18 national organizations representing more
than 22 million Americans who trace their heritage to Central and
Eastern Europe. Founded in 1994, the CEEC has offered a critical voice
in helping to shape U.S. foreign policy.

In addition, at a Capital Hill meeting earlier this week with key
congressional supporters of the legislation, which was jointly
attended by the Armenian Assembly of America and the Armenian National
Committee of America, the prospects and timing for Committee
consideration of H.Res. 252 were discussed.

"On behalf of the entire Armenian-American community, we welcome
Chairman Berman’s announcement. We appreciate the Chairman’s
continued commitment to this important human rights legislation,"
stated Executive Director, Bryan Ardouny. "We also applaud the
dedication and tenacity of the resolution’s sponsors, Congressmen
Schiff, Radanovich, Pallone and Kirk, along with the continued efforts
of Congresswomen Eshoo and Speier and Congressman Sherman," continued
Ardouny.

Established in 1972, the Armenian Assembly of America is the largest
Washington-based nationwide organization promoting public
understanding and awareness of Armenian issues. The Assembly is a
501(c)(3) tax-exempt membership organization.

DASHNAKTSUTYUN PREPARES TO SAY ADIEU TO HERITAGE PARTY

Tert.am
14:49 ~U 05.02.10

"It wouldn’t be tragic, if each went his separate way," said Armenian
Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun) party secretary Artashes
Shahbazyan, referring to future cooperation with Heritage Party.

According to Shahbazyan, the issue hasn’t yet been discussed with
Heritage, but Dashnaktsutyun is prepared to say "so long," particularly
since, in his opinion, "we hadn’t even done anything big."

Asked whether the governing authorities are involved in the party’s
decision, Shahbazyan said decisions to separate are conditioned not
only by the governing authorities: "the temptation to separate also
has other forces."

UNRESOLVED STATUS OF KARABAKH CONFLICT – HARD BURDEN FOR INTRAREGIONAL RELATIONS
Leyla Tagiyeva

news.az
Feb 5 2010
Azerbaijan

Uwe Halbach News.Az interviews Dr. Uwe Halbach, researcher of German
Institute for International Affairs and Security in Berlin.

President of Azerbaijan is in Germany now. How do you estimate the
relations between the two countries?

Within the last five years relations between Azerbaijan and EU
as well as the bilateral relations with Germany have become more
intensive as before – due to Azerbaijan’s rapid economic growth and an
increased European and German interest in the diversification of energy
supply and attention for a Southern Transport Corridor with the South
Caucasus as its key region. Though Germany is not the main investor in
Azerbaijan, some 45 German enterprises are active in Baku. There are
special historical relations between both countries going back to the
beginning of 19th century with German settlers in Azerbaijan. This
history which was known only to a small community of experts in
Germany is now becoming more prominent in the German public. In 2008
the cultural, political and economic bilateral relations were presented
in a "year of Azerbaijan" in Germany. Thus, knowledge about Azerbaijan,
until recently a rather unknown partner for Germany, is growing.

President Aliyev during his visit going to participate in the Munich
conference on security issues. What kind of role can play Germany
and EU in stabilization situation in the Sought Caucasus?

Stabilization of the South Caucasus has mainly to do with working
on unresolved conflicts from Abkhazia to Nagorno-Karabakh. On
this field of action Germany is more part of the EU as an actor
on its own. Until recently EU’s role in conflict managing in the
South Caucasus was limited. It was more a "working around conflict"
with some rehabilitation projects in conflict damaged regions like
South Ossetia than a "working on conflict" by active mediation or
peacekeeping. EU’s main argument for this reserved position was that
other international actors like OSCE and UN were engaged in conflict
mediation in this region since many years. The "August war" in Georgia
2008 was a certain turning point in this regard. EU became the main
mediator of the ceasefire agreements between Russia and Georgia and
sent a monitoring mission to Georgia (EUMM). Thus, EU become more
engaged in "working on conflict" as before.

Why the EU is so passive in the settlement of Karabagh conflict,
despite of huge economic interests of Europe in Azerbaijan?

Among all unresolved conflicts in its Eastern Neighborhood EU is,
indeed, least engaged in the conflict on Nagorno-Karabakh though this
conflict is perceived as the historical key conflict in the South
Caucasus and its unresolved status is a hard burden for intraregional
relations. Again Brussels main argument was that other international
actors are engaged in conflict resolution, in this case the co-chairs
of the Minsk OSCE-group United States, Russia and France. Especially
Russia has become very active in "peace diplomacy" in this conflict
after the August war 2008.

Do you think that efforts of Russia and Turkey to stabilize relations
between Azerbaijan and Armenia will be successful?

I think that Russia is seriously interested in a stabilization of
the relations between Azerbaijan and Armenia as it is looking for
increased economic and political relations with both sides. With regard
to Turkey’s role in the region I see that at first the unresolved
Karabakh-conflict is blocking the Turkish-Armenian rapproachement
process and the ratification of the Zurich protocols.

It makes out of the bilateral diplomatic process between Ankara
and Yerevan a tricky trilateral relationship with Azerbaijan being
strongly against the opening of Turkey’s border with Armenia without
a preceeding withdrawal of Armenian troops from its own territory.

Is there a threat of new war for Karabakh and what it will be for
Europe ant its interests in the region?

A new war on Karabakh would be against the interests of all sides. If
all sides are acting rationally the threat of a new war should be
minimal. For Azerbaijan the military variant of conflict resolution, as
mentioned by President Aliyev before the meeting in Munich in November
2009, would be the end of its "energy honeymoon" and its prosperous
development of international relations. For Europe it would be a
lasting and heavy interruption of its Southern Transport Corridor,
which is just in the making, for Russia it would be a challenge of
its security relationship with Armenia.

Dr. Uwe Halbach, is researcher for the Russian Federation/CIS
department of the German Institute for International Affairs and
Security in Berlin.