Author: Torgomian Varazdat

EUROPE’S CAUCASIAN MOMENT
By Borut Grgic And Alexandros Petersen

Wall Street Journal
19011381.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Aug 5 2008

The European Union is getting closer to the security concerns of
the Eurasian landmass, in particular the "frozen conflicts" in
Moldova, Georgia and Azerbaijan. And it’s not just due to the EU’s
expansion to the Black Sea. If Europe wants to reduce its dependency
on Russian energy, it will need alternative oil and gas supplies from
the Caspian region. But those strategic pipelines are only kilometers
away from hotspots like Nagorno-Karabakh, Transnistria, South Ossetia
and Abkhazia.

Over the weekend, six people were killed in firefights between
separatist South Ossetian militia and Georgian forces. This new
outbreak of violence threatens to further complicate peace efforts
in nearby Abkhazia. After years of neglect, EU heavyweights are
finally taking action there. Last month, German Foreign Minister
Frank-Walter Steinmeier developed a three-step strategy to resolve
the Abkhazia dispute.

This statelet in northwestern Georgia is run by an ethnically distinct
minority that demands formal independence from Georgia. Lacking
international recognition, the Abkhaz — just like the South Ossetians
— won de facto independence with Russian support through a chaotic
conflagration amid the breakup of the Soviet Union. During a 1992-1993
war, the secessionists defeated the Georgian army and forced the
majority ethnic Georgian population to leave. The enclave’s isolated
economy is fueled by Russian business interests, which sit comfortably
behind a shield of so-called Russian peacekeepers that divide the
territory from the rest of Georgia.

So it is no surprise that the conflict plays out in confrontations
between Tbilisi and Moscow. A Russian aircraft was recently filmed
shooting down a Georgian surveillance drone. Moscow’s "peacekeepers"
frequently harass ethnic Georgians in the breakaway region, demanding
protection money or, like last year, forcing them to vote in separatist
elections. These provocations serve a greater strategic agenda:
keeping Georgia out of NATO. The unresolved conflicts of the two
breakaway regions are the greatest obstacles to Georgia’s ambitions
to join the alliance. Moscow holds the trump card.

Mr. Steinmeier’s plan was ambitious but realistic. It envisioned a
stage of confidence-building measures leading to a gradual return
of displaced peoples, followed by economic revitalization with
European help. Abkhazia’s final status was to be determined in the
last stage. In a nod to Moscow, Mr. Steinmeier’s plan did not demand
the internationalization of the peacekeeping force.

Russia gave the plan a green light in private meetings, only to
reject it when the German foreign minister made it public. Prime
Minister Vladimir Putin and his successor as Russian president,
Dmitry Medvedev, see it as in Moscow’s interest to preserve the
simmering status quo. By publicly ambushing the plan, Moscow hopes
to put an end to what it considers as European meddling in its own
backyard. Russia wants to sow confusion about its true intentions,
thus delaying any resolution of the conflict.

While the first attempt of the German peace plan failed, it nonetheless
indicates a growing realization among the EU’s power brokers that
it is time to get serious about resolving festering conflicts in
the union’s new neighborhood. Berlin’s leadership is particularly
notable as Germany is closest to Russia among the EU’s major member
states. And yet Berlin’s peace initiative showed that it considers
its diversified investments and diplomatic interests in the Caspian
region important enough to strengthen Europe’s relations with Georgia.

There is now no time to lose to draft an improved plan that will
better provide for Abkhaz demands to shape their own destiny, without
jeopardizing Georgia’s sovereignty, democratization and Western
integration. Any stepped-up effort must include the separatist Abkhaz
leadership. Isolated and increasingly overshadowed by Moscow, the
leaders in Sukhumi are no more enthusiastic about Russian dominance
than the Georgians are. True, the Abkhaz depend on Moscow’s support in
their fight against Tbilisi. But they are worried that in the process
of getting independence from Georgia, they are being integrated
into Russia. That’s why they have quietly reached out to Western
capitals. An EU high representative, with a significant staff and
peacekeeping contingent, would likely be welcomed by the Abkhaz.

By seeking a resolution to the conflicts, Europe is facilitating
stability and prosperity in its neighborhood. Reducing tensions
in the region also benefits Russia. Violence in Abkhazia has been
linked to unrest in Russia’s North Caucasus republics of Chechnya,
Dagestan and Ingushetia. If Russia got bogged down in a confrontation
in Abkhazia, violent separatists in the North Caucasus would step up
their own rebellions.

Therefore, achieving peace may not be an insurmountable task. The key
to a resolution in Abkhazia is to convince Russia that stability on its
southern border is more important than a violent veto over Georgia’s,
and possibly Abkhazia’s, Western integration.

Mr. Grgic is director, and Mr. Petersen policy adviser, at the
Institute for Strategic Studies in Brussels.

NKR DEFENSE MINISTRY’S PRESS OFFICE INFORMATION

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
2008-07-30 08:24
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic

Recently, the Azeri armed forces have displayed noticeable activity
along the whole contact- line, as a result of which the ceasefire
regime was violated, the Nagorno Karabakh Republic Defense Ministry’s
press office stated.

In particular, on the night of March 28-29 and during the whole day,
the enemy fired sporadically with small-caliber automatic arms and
machineguns in the direction of the Karabakhi positions located in the
southeastern, northwestern and northern areas. After the Karabakhi
side undertook adequate measures, the enemy stopped firing. The NKR
Defense Army suffered no losses.

NKR REPRESENTATIVES ABROAD CONTRIBUTE TO THE INVESTMENT ATTRACTION

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
2008-07-25 09:51
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic

The NKR permanent representatives of Armenia, Germany and France
met in Stepanakert with Head of the Artsakh Investment Fund Karen
Yesayan, within the events dedicated to the 15th anniversary of the
NKR MFA establishment.

The meeting aimed at the examination of the fund’s projects for
further establishment of mutually profitable cooperation by means of
the republic’s representations.

Having presented the fund’s programs, Karen Yesayan noted that
he expected the NKR representatives’ assistance abroad in their
realization. He also underlined that they would guarantee the mutually
advantageous cooperation with the investors.

Heads of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic permanent representations noted
that the fact that the NKR is not in need of humanitarian aid any more,
but in cooperation is the best evidence of its viability. At the same
time they spoke about the necessity of purposeful activities on gaining
the potential investors’ confidence, of the NKR’s participation in
international exhibitions, etc.

The meeting participants promised to render every assistance to the
fund in attracting foreign investments into the NKR economy.

TURKEY DOESN’T NEED IRAN’S MEDIATION FOR NORMALIZATION OF TIES WITH ARMENIA

PanARMENIAN.Net
02.08.2008 15:47 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Ankara said Friday it is already in direct contact
with Yerevan to normalize bilateral ties, implying that the involvement
of any third countries is not necessary.

"We would only be pleased with the efforts of third parties for
the improvement of Turkey’s ties with Armenia, but we are already
meeting with Armenia directly toward the normalization of relations,"
Foreign Ministry spokesman Burak Ozugergin told reporters at a weekly
press conference.

Asked if the Turkish president would go to Yerevan to watch the
Turkish-Armenian football match in September, he said the Foreign
Ministry is awaiting instruction from Abdullah Gul. In response to
another question, Ozugergin said Armenia’s invitation has been extended
to Turkey through official channels, Turkish Daily News reports.

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki offered his country’s
mediation for Armenia-Turkey reconciliation during a phone conversation
with RA FM Edward Nalbandian.

Turkey severed its ties and closed its border with Armenia in 1993
as a token of solidarity with Azerbaijan in the Nagorno Karabakh issue.

Ankara also says the normalization of ties depends on Armenia’s formal
recognition of the current borders with Turkey and changing its policy
of calling for worldwide recognition of the Armenian Genocide at the
hands of the Ottoman Empire.

In a sign of readiness to normalize ties, Armenian President
Serzh Sargsyan proposed "a fresh start" in relations with Turkey
in an article published in The Wall Street Journal earlier this
month. Sargsyan also invited Gul to a World Cup qualifying match
between Armenian and Turkish teams on September 6.

"ARMENIAN-AZERBAIJANI NEGOTIATIONS BASED ON LONG-TERM EFFORTS OF BOTH SIDES" – ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTER

Trend News Agency
Aug 2 2008
Azerbaijan

Russia, Moscow, 2 August / Trend News corr. R.Agayev / The
Armenian-Azerbaijani negotiations to regulate the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict are based on the long-term efforts of both sides rather than
on the proposals made by the mediators in Madrid, Edward Nalbandyan,
Armenian Foreign Minister, said.

"The matter does not concern the Madrid proposals. If the matter
concerned Madrid proposals we would not meet today," Nalbandyan
said in the briefing answering to the questions of Trend News and
commenting the recent meeting with the Azerbaijani Foreign Minister
Elmar Mammadyarov.

The proposals made by the OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairs in Madrid
in November 2007, lay on the negotiations table. The Armenian and
Azerbaijani Presidents proposed both foreign ministers to continue
discussions within the framework of the proposals. "These proposals
are the results of long-term efforts through co-chairs’ assistance. We
have been working over these proposals," the Armenian Minister said.

The Madrid proposals, according to Mammadyarov, mean a complex of
issues gathered in Prague several years ago. As a result of the Prague
process we came to a conclusion to solve the issues stage by stage.

The conflict between the two countries of the South Caucasus began
in 1988 due to Armenian territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Since
1992, Armenian Armed Forces have occupied 20% of Azerbaijan including
the Nagorno-Karabakh region and its seven surrounding districts. In
1994, Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a ceasefire agreement at which
time the active hostilities ended. The Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk
Group ( Russia, France, and the US) are currently holding peaceful
negotiations.

AGAINST THE BLACK AND WHITE BACKGROUND

Hayots Ashkhar Daily
Published on July 30, 2008
Armenia

According to ROUBEN HAKOBYAN, "The formation of the pro-Government
coalition did not bring use; it led to the polarization of society. If
the ARFD and ‘Rule of Law’ had remained inside the pro-opposition camp,
the internal political developments might have been more peaceful,
and there might be possibilities for some maneuver.

This kind of struggle against the black and white background is
very harsh.

The sooner the coalition quits the pro-government camp the more the
developments will become dynamic."

FOREIGN MINISTERS OF ARMENIA AND AZERBAIJAN TO DISCUSS WAYS OF RESOLUTION OF NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT IN MOSCOW: ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY

Trend News Agency
July 30 2008
Azerbaijan

The foreign minister of Armenia and Azerbaijan Edward Nalbandyan and
Elmar Mammadyarov will meet on 1 August in Moscow, Edward Nalbandyan,
the Armenian foreign minister said during the press conference on
30 July, Novosti-Armenia reported. "The meeting is organized by
the co-chairmen of OSCE Minsk Group. The ministers will meet both
tet-a-tet and with all three co-chairmen," minister said.

According to Nalbandyan, the parties will discuss Madrid proposals
of the co-chairmen on the basis of which the presidents of Armenia
and Azerbaijan stated their determination to continue the talks on
the resolution of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

In November 2007, co-chairmen of OSCE Minsk Group presented basic
principles of the peaceful resolution of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
to the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan. The co-chairmen believe
that the "Madrid proposals" are fair and balanced.

Nalbandyan said that Armenia is ready to continue talks further on
the basis of Madrid proposals.

"This is the way which will help us resolve the conflict," the Armenian
diplomat said.

The previous meeting of the two ministers took place on 6 June during
the informal summit of CIS head of states in St Petersburg.

DOES THE NEW UN COMMISSIONER HAVE ANY RIGHTS?

RIA Novosti
July 30, 2008

30/07/2008 20:41 MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Andrei
Fedyashin) – The appointment of Navanethem Pillay, a Tamil judge from
South Africa, as the United Nation’s new High Commissioner for Human
Rights, was unanimously endorsed on July 29.

On September 1, she will take up a post that many in the United Nations
consider cursed. It evokes many conflicting opinions, criticisms,
grievances, and fury because the person who occupies it has to deal
with violations of human rights, freedom of speech and assembly,
rights of women, seniors, teenagers, children, journalists and
incapacitated people – all in the motley company of 191 people.

Not a single commissar for human rights has left the position without
angry words, with the possible exception of Sergio Vieira de Mello,
who died in an explosion in Baghdad’s Canal Hotel in 2003 (aut bene aut
nihil). But he was in the job for less than a year. The overwhelming
majority of his predecessors and successors left office in a state
of gloom.

Former Irish President Mary Robinson left the post in 2002. Although
she did not resign (indeed, she extended her full term), she complained
that the position allowed her to do practically nothing – everything
involving rights was politicized to the utmost. She was particularly
critical of the Bush Administration.

Pillay’s predecessor, Louise Arbour from Canada, sincerely tried
to defend human rights, but her own country was the only one not
to thank her for her tireless efforts on this position. Even her
resignation was completely ignored. They say that the Canadian
government itself insisted that she should not prolong her term for
another four years. The story goes that Canada was under pressure from
the United States, which did not like Arbour’s criticism of Israel’s
conduct in the occupied territories. She once said that though the
death of Israelis from rocket fire was a tragedy, the shooting of
Israeli villages with primitive Palestinian weapons was not the same
as attacks on Palestinian lands by the Israeli army with tanks. After
this statement, the Canadian government made it clear to Arbour that
her own country would not support her nomination. A couple of months
ago she told the UN Secretary-General that she intended to quit.

Arbour had previously served as Carla Del Ponte’s predecessor as
chief prosecutor for the Hague Tribunal, where she presented official
charges to Slobodan Milosevic and other major Serbian defendants.

Pillay takes up her new position at a time when the entire structure
of the UN human rights agency is undergoing reform. Nobody knows
what will come of it (maybe not much, considering the past disputes,
clashes, and scandals over human rights). In 2006, the UN finally got
rid of the Human Rights Commission, which had existed since 1946, and
replaced it with the UN Human Rights Council. The commission’s 60th
anniversary was so miserable and shallow that Amnesty International
criticized UN members for giving it such a chilly farewell. After all,
the commission did make at least some contribution to the cause of
human rights.

The commission’s reorganization was long overdue. It was hard to
understand how it could defend human rights with such members. I
do not even want to mention them. The new Human Rights Council will
include 47 countries instead of the commission’s 53. The UN General
Assembly will elect the council’s members by a simple majority vote.

Before, the commission was elected by the UN Economic and Social
Council (ECOSOC), which always pushed it in the wrong direction and
eventually doomed it by choosing Libya as its chairman in 2003.

In this regard the new council is not very lucky, either. The
United States, the U.S. administered Marshal Islands and Palau,
and Israel all voted against its formation. Washington is still
boycotting the new agency, and without its involvement it will not
be that effective. Publicly the United States objects that there is
no guarantee that the council will not admit nations which regularly
violate human rights. In fact, it does not want to adopt commitments
to a body that would inevitably criticize it for torture and illegal
detention of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay and the CIA’s secret prisons
for "special rendition", as well as fight against terrorism without
respect for human rights all over the world.

Russia has become a member of the council. Some 137 of the 191 UN
member states voted for it. Azerbaijan and Ukraine have also been
admitted, while other post-Soviet republics – Armenia, Georgia,
Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, and Lithuania were not elected, despite their
ardent desire to join the council. Moscow has already said that
it will use its membership of the council to raise the issues of
violations of the human rights of the Russian-speaking population in
Latvia and Estonia, glorification of Nazism, and harassment of war
veterans. However, it will continue to strongly oppose any debates
on human rights in Chechnya. Although the human rights situation
in Chechnya is satisfactory, it should be noted that almost all UN
members have this in common – they are ready to discuss human rights
violations everywhere but not at home.

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is the Council’s
executive body.

Even before Pillay’s official appointment, quite a few skeptics were
arguing that her service record is not befitting of this position.

First, her entire career has been in criminal law, not human rights.

Initially, she was a judge, and later on chaired the International
Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR); in 2003 she was a member of
the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. Crimes are
very different from human rights. Perhaps more importantly, even
in her work as a criminal lawyer Pillay has never been seen as an
enthusiastic champion of human rights. As Kenneth Roth, executive
director of Human Rights Watch, said, let us see "how Pillay will
stand up to big powers when they violate human rights."

She faces a very difficult task, even with a budget of $150 million
a year.

ARMENIAN PRESIDENT MEETS WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN CRIMEA

ARMENPRESS JULY 29

Armenian President Serzh Sargsian who is in Crimea, Ukraine,
accompanied with the Catholicos of All Armenians Karekin II, visited
July 28 Yalta’s St. Hripsime church where the president and Catholicos
met with the hundreds of representatives of the Armenian community the
major part of which came to participate in the event dedicated to the
650th anniversary of the St. Cross monastery complex and consecration
ceremony of St. Cross Church.

After the greeting speech of the Catholicos, President Serzh Sargsian
expressed his joy over visiting St. Hripsime and meeting compatriots.

PREVENTING NUCLEAR SMUGGLING

Voice of America
July 28 2008

In the post-Cold War era, the global black market for nuclear
technology has proliferated at alarming rates, and the international
community is taking action. According to the International Atomic
Energy Agency, there were more than one thousand confirmed cases of
illicit nuclear trafficking or incidents of such materials outside
legitimate control between 1993 and 2006.

Armenia has become the latest country to help fight nuclear
proliferation. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Armenian
Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian finalized an anti-nuclear
smuggling agreement in Washington on July 14. The plan — outlined in
twenty-eight steps — presents a detailed approach for the Armenian
government to prevent, detect and respond to the illegal trading
of nuclear materials. Ten of the twenty-eight steps involve ongoing
efforts that need completion, while the remaining eighteen represent
new initiatives.

This marks the fifth joint action plan carried out by the Nuclear
Smuggling Outreach Initiative, the NSOI. The NSOI is a U.S. program
that assists countries with a high smuggling threat to counter
underground nuclear trafficking. It has previously partnered with
Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Georgia, and the Kyrgyz Republic. And it seeks
to conduct similar bilateral agreements with twenty additional at-risk
countries. More information on the NSOI is available at nsoi-state.net.

Detecting the smuggling of nuclear materials is a complicated
task. According to a 2002 study by Harvard University, for example,
about four kilograms of plutonium – roughly the size of a soda can
– can potentially be enough material for a bomb. With millions of
trucks, trains, ships, and planes crossing international borders
daily, discovering pirated nuclear materials requires extensive and
cooperative efforts. Due to the vast scope of nuclear proliferation,
the NSOI is just one of many programs launched by the U.S. and other
countries to combat the problem.

In 2003, authorities in Georgia — Armenia’s neighbor to the north
— arrested an individual attempting to smuggle six ounces of highly
enriched uranium into Armenia. The new anti-nuclear smuggling agreement
will help the U.S. and Armenia prevent nuclear materials from falling
in the hands of those who would use them for harm.