3730 Unemployed Registered In Nagorno-Karabakh

3730 UNEMPLOYED REGISTERED IN NAGORNO-KARABAKH

De Facto
Dec 9, 2008

STEPANAKERT, 09.12.08. DE FACTO. 3730 people looking for a job were
registered at the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic employment services by
October 1, 2008.

According to the information DE FACTO received at the NKR Ministry
of Social Security, as compared with the same period of 2007 the
number of the unemployed had increased by 555 people, 491 of which
were from Stepanakert.

Over 90% of the unemployed are women. Most of the unemployed – 2708 –
were registered in capital Stepanakert.

93, 7% of those looking for a job have the status of the
unemployed. 733 people receive an unemployment relief, the amount of
which is 15, 000 AMD.

According to the Ministry’s officials, 161 people were provided
employment by November 1, which is twice more than the same period
of last year.

Armenian Folk Tale Spells Out The Terms Of Gratitude

ARMENIAN FOLK TALE SPELLS OUT THE TERMS OF GRATITUDE
by Amy Friedman

Cape Cod Times
rticle?AID=/20081209/LIFE/812090335/-1/NEWS
Dec 9 2008
MA

Editor’s note: This is the fifth in a series of six folk tales,
myths and legends drawn from the farthest reaches of the globe.

Long ago there was a man who heaved a carpet bag over his shoulder
and set off on a journey. He had been feeling weak and ill, and he
thought travel would be good for him. As he trudged along, he came to
a spring and saw water bubbling to the surface. He longed for a drink.

A group of women was gathered around the spring, filling their buckets,
and the traveler asked, "Would one of you spare some of that sweet
water to quench a man’s thirst?"

"Go away," one of the women cried, and another echoed her words until
all of the women were shooing him away. All but one.

"Why, shall we not share our water?" she asked her friends, and she
filled her bucket and handed it to the man.

He drank with pleasure, and then he looked at the women again and
asked, "Does anyone have a place for a weary traveler to sleep?"

Again it was the generous woman who offered a corner of her house. She
led the stranger home, and when she introduced him to her husband,
he too welcomed the man. "Our home is yours."

Now the couple was poor, but when they sat down to eat, the man asked
for a big bowl of rice. When he finished the bowl, he asked for more
food — he was very hungry. The woman fed him bowl after bowl, until at
last she had nothing else to feed him. "I’m sorry," she told the man,
"I cannot offer you another bite. We have nothing left."

They all went to sleep, but when the couple awoke the next morning,
the man was gone. When they opened their cupboards, they saw that
they were filled with sacks of rice and flour and beans, along with
buckets of berries and baskets of fruit.

The couple realized they had fed a special traveler. "Our visitor
was a wizard," they said, and they were grateful.

Meanwhile, the wizard continued on his journey. Soon, he passed a
man carrying a bundle of wood. "What are you doing?" the wizard asked.

"Eking out a living," said the poor woodsman. "There’s nothing
more I can do." So the wizard turned the wood into a big, thriving
vineyard. "Tend your vines and prosper!" he cried, and went on his way.

Before long, he came to a man sitting in a grove of dying trees. "What
a fine orchard you have!" he said, and a moment later those dying
trees were thick and leafy and filled with fine, juicy apples.

The wizard cried, "Work and prosper, and long life to you!" Then he
walked on.

Before long, he saw a man carrying a sack of rocks on his back, sweat
pouring down his face. The wizard called out, "Brother, what a fine
flock of sheep you have," and sure enough, that bag of rocks turned
into a flock of fat sheep. "May you prosper," the wizard called as
he journeyed on.

Now the man with the vineyard and the man with the orchard and the
man with the flock of sheep were amazed, but they never gave a second
thought to the stranger.

A year passed, and the wizard, after walking through the land and
offering his gifts to many, decided it was time to return to where
he began his journey. He was well again.

So he turned around and started to retrace his steps. After a few days
he came across the shepherd he had helped, who sat by a fire. He was
roasting a lamb over the coals.

"Could you spare a taste for me?" the wizard asked the shepherd,
but the shepherd squinted up at him and said, "Have you helped me to
tend my flocks? Only those who work deserve to be paid."

The wizard walked on, whispering as he did, and behind him that flock
of sheep turned into a big bag of rocks.

A day later, the wizard came to the orchard, where many men were
picking apples. "Would you spare a bag of apples for a poor man?" he
asked the owner.

"I pay my men and offer no charity to the lazy," the orchard owner
said, and so the wizard walked on, but behind his back that orchard
turned into a field of barren trees.

Now he came to the vineyard, and seeing the field filled with workers,
he stopped to ask if he might pick a bag full of grapes.

The workers shook their heads. "Our master gives nothing away,"
they said sorrowfully, and so the wizard walked on, empty-handed,
but behind him the orchard vanished and in its place the workers saw
only a pile of wood.

And then the wizard reached the house where he had passed a pleasant
night a year before, and when he knocked on the door, the couple
opened it and smiled with delight. "Welcome," they cried, "we are so
glad you have returned. Please, come in and let us treat you. Whatever
you wish!"

The wizard smiled. "You are good people," he said, "and from this
moment on, each night you will find a sack of gold coins in your
cupboard. You will use them well, and you will always be happy."

And with those words the wizard bowed and departed.

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a

The Settlement Process Yet Far From Finish-Line

THE SETTLEMENT PROCESS YET FAR FROM FINISH-LINE
Lilit Poghosyan

Azat Artsakh Daily
06 Dec 08
Republic of Nagorno Karabakh [NKR]

So, the session of the Council of the Foreign Ministers of
OSCE member states launched on December 4 in Helsinki and the
"optimistic" predictions to make the regular meeting in Minsk Group
Co-Chairmen-Nalbandyan-Mamedyarov format previewed in the before
mentioned framework historical and crucial, didn’t go beyond "kind
wishes".

Though OSCE Chairman in office Alexander Strub hurried (or maybe hoped
to preview to coming events), to announce that the Helsinki meeting
of the Foreign Ministers of OSCE member states will most probably
be marked by the adoption of the declaration on Nagorno Karabakh,
nothing fatal happened in Helsinki.

The "political and politological" circles that take at face value the
announcements made by Azerbaijani and western officials over again
became confident that not to appear in ridiculous situation it would
be helpful to trust our local authorities as well. In this special case
the conversation is about Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandyan,
who, in the person of the Spokesman for the Foreign Ministry have
unequivocally refuted the rumors about the adoption of the declaration.

With their joint announcement the representatives of Minsk Group
Co-Chairmen countries, the Russian, French Foreign Ministers and
the US Deputy Secret ary of State one more time enshrined that
"Karabakh Conflict can’t have military settlement and they called
the two parties to make efforts during the coming months "to finish
their work around the main principles of the settlement and later
to set about the elaboration of the bill of a universal peace treaty
based on those principles" they reiterated their loyalty towards the
peaceful settlement of the conflict.

Nothing more.

Thus the Minsk Group reiterated something that was clear, at least
after the last visit of the Co-Chairman: that is to say it is not
possible to record any "breakthrough" in the settlement process, at
least at this refuge. The American Co-Chairman Mathew Brize, by the
way, quite realistically stated this. He said that the regular meeting
in the framework of Minsk Group was far not extraordinary. "It happened
because we all were here and we were expecting a breakthrough".

Of course, this time as well Brize remained loyal to the creation
of a public livelihood around him. Firstly he made the Azerbaijani
journalists happy, by saying that "the peace treaty must start
from territorial integrity because that principle works all over
the world. But the treaty can’t exist without the points about
self-determination."

To which Nalbandyan responded in a very rude manner: "I would like
to think that Brize hasn’t made similar ann ouncement, because it
doesn’t seem to be an announcement made on the level of a Co-Chairman,
but rather a person who is not interested in the right course of
the negotiations, who doesn’t want the negotiations to continue. I
hope he hasn’t made similar announcement, maybe he wanted to say
something else.

The American diplomat "justified" the hopes of the RA Foreign
Minister, as a rule over again refuted himself, saying that he
hasn’t said such a thing. What he really wanted to do was to make
the Azerbaijani journalists understand that while Ilham Aliev insists
on the principle of territorial integrity, Serge Sargsyan insists on
the right of self-determination. And that in this case the settlement
must be based on all the 3 Helsinki principles: territorial integrity,
nations’ right to self-determination and not using force.

It is noteworthy that only one of the before mentioned principals:
territorial integrity matches with Azerbaijan’s aspirations, the
other two: self-determination and not using force comply with the
stance of the Armenian party.

Thus the Helsinki process gave nothing new to the two parties or to
the Co-Chairmen.

The only new thing expressed by the joint announcement made by the
Foreign Ministers of the Co-Chairman countries was the exhortation
addressed to the parties to withdraw the snipers from the conflict zone
as a manifestation of mutual trust, to save the lives of the innocent
people and the soldiers and to establish stable cease-fire regime."

We must underscore that this clause is addressed to Azerbaijan –
if not absolutely at least mainly. Because it is Azerbaijan that
time after time makes provocative actions in Armenian-Azerbaijani
contact line. It is Azerbaijan that stubbornly hinders the efforts
of the international community to hold monitoring linked with the
breaching of the ceasefire. It is Azerbaijan’s President that makes
bellicose announcements recording with pride that Moscow declaration
is far not an obstacle for re-starting military actions.

If we add to all the before mentioned the "autonomous" announcement
made by RF Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov saying that the Moscow
declaration gave a powerful signal to the settlement process of
Karabakh conflict, then it becomes clear that the Foreign Ministers
of OSCE member states and the Minsk Group Co-Chairmen confessed their
powerlessness in Helsinki to bring closer the diametrically different
approaches of the two sides, around the document enshrining the main
principles, which will be acceptable for the Co-Chairmen as well.

For the simple reason that besides Karabakh status and Azerbaijan’s
territorial integrity they are mainly interested in deploying
peacekeeping forces, the before mentioned is simply insolvable because
of Russia-USA rivalry.

And the fact that Karabakh is estranged from Minsk Group process and
as Brize underscored it is not yet known when it will be "formally"
involved in the negotiation format proves that the negotiations are
far from the finish line.

BAKU: Azeri, Armenian Foreign Ministers Meet In Helsinki

AZERI, ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTERS MEET IN HELSINKI

Turan News Agency
Dec 3 2008
Azerbaijan

Baku, 3 December: The foreign ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia met
the co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group – Matthew Bryza (US), Bernard
Fassier (France), and Yuriy Merzlyakov (Russia) – in Helsinki today.

The meeting started in the [Armenian Foreign Minister Edvard]
Nalbandyan – co-chairmen format. Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar
Mammadyarov joined the meeting 20 minutes later.

No statements were made after the meeting ended.

Prime Minister Of Armenia To Pay Official Visit To Georgia Shortly

PRIME MINISTER OF ARMENIA TO PAY OFFICIAL VISIT TO GEORGIA SHORTLY

ArmInfo
2008-12-07 19:57:00

ArmInfo. Prime Minister of Armenia Tigran Sargsyan is expected to
pay an official visit to Georgia shortly. The premier told media of
his visit while in Spitak on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of
Spitak earthquake, Monday.

He also added development of Armenian-Georgian relations is in the
focus of the government’s attention. The prime minister is expected to
discuss the prospects of the bilateral cooperation in all the spheres
in Georgia. ‘We cooperate and we are interested in development and
extension of ties in any sphere’, Tigran Sargsyan said.

Trans-Atlantic security group debates conflicts

PR-Inside.com (Pressemitteilung), Austria
Dec 3 2008

Trans-Atlantic security group debates conflicts

2008-12-03 22:31:55 –

HELSINKI, Finland (AP) – Some 50 foreign ministers from a leading
trans-Atlantic security group are meeting to discuss ways of avoiding
conflicts, like the one in Georgia, Finnish officials said Wednesday.
Apart from the Caucasus, new security proposals by Russian President
Dmitry Medvedev will be discussed by the foreign ministers at the
two-day meeting that
opens Thursday, said Alexander Stubb, chairman of the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe.
Stubb, who is the Finnish foreign minister and currently holds the
rotating chair of the OSCE, gave few details, but said the proposals
contain «lots of elements that are already in the OSCE, or in NATO or
the European Union,» and would be presented by Russian Foreign
Minister Sergey Lavrov.
«They include the mention of regional integrity, refraining from the
use of violence, democracy and human rights,» Stubb said. «People will
be listening very carefully to Lavrov on Thursday.
Stubb said the United States was also «cautiously open» to the Russian
proposals.
«In other words, … we should listen with open ears and interest to
what sort of security proposals the Russian are suggesting,» Stubb
said. He met U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Tuesday
before flying to Helsinki.
Rice canceled her scheduled Thursday attendance at the OSCE meeting to
travel to India.

In Helsinki, the ministers will also discuss Nagorno-Karabakh, the
disputed enclave in Azerbaijani territory but occupied by Armenia,
Stubb said.
Stubb said he was optimistic the talks would improve ties between the
56 member states in a region that stretches from Vancouver in Canada
to Vladivostok, Russia.
«It’s already a success that … for the first in the history of the
OSCE we have 50 foreign ministers sitting and discussing regional
issues,» Stubb said.

Bob Wade: New Zealand-born chess master

Bob Wade: New Zealand-born chess master

The Times
December 2, 2008

Wade: he was an authority on Soviet chess and training techniques
Bob Wade made his mark as a successful chess player ‘ he was twice
British chess champion ‘ as an author and as chief chess coach to the
British Chess Federation (now the English Chess Federation).

Robert Graham Wade was born in Dunedin, New Zealand, in 1921 and began
a career in the scientific civil service. He won the national
championship of New Zealand in 1944. A second victory in 1945 led to an
invitation as a Commonwealth champion to the British championships of
1946. He had a poor result but felt he could do better with more
application and took a break from his job to travel and play chess in
international tournaments.

After a brief return to work in New Zealand, winning the New Zealand
chess championship for the third time in 1948, he settled in England.
In the developing but meagre chess scene of the 1950s and 1960s he was
undoubtedly Britain’s most active international player. He represented
his adopted country in no fewer than six Chess Olympiads (Amsterdam
1954, Moscow 1956, Munich 1958, Leipzig 1960, Varna 1962 and Skopje
1972). He also represented New Zealand in the 1970 Chess Olympiad at
Siegen in West Germany.

His best results in international chess were fifth prize at Venice in
1950 and again fifth prize a quarter of
a century later in the masters’
section of the Capablanca memorial at Cienfuegos, Cuba, in 1975.

Wade established something of a reputation as a giantkiller, taking the
scalps of such grandmasters and world title contenders as Viktor
Korchnoi, Pal Benkö, Lajos Portisch, Wolfgang Uhlmann and Fridrik
Olafsson.

In match play his most notable performance was a drawn 1950 contest
against the West German grandmaster-to-be Lothar Schmid. The run of
play was remarkable in that, although the final outcome was a tie, no
single game in the match ended as a draw.

He won the British championship for the first time at Chester in 1952
and repeated the feat at Coventry 18 years later, in the days when all
the leading players would still turn out for the championship,
including Keene, Hartston, Penrose, Botterill and the visiting
Australian Max Fuller.

Still an active player in his eighties, Wade was able to play at a high
level, as evidenced by his draw against grandmaster Murray Chandler in
the Queenstown Chess International 2006.

However, it is an organiser and coach that Wade is best remembered.
Active in the world chess federation, Fide, he was a member of the
committee that drew up the first official rules of the game and he sat
on the committee that decided on the original holders of the
International Master and Grandmaster titles (his own IM title was
awarded in 1950). He also helped to dec
ide the arrangements for the
first world championship interzonals and the candidates’ tournament
held at Budapest in 1950. He attended the first Fide world championship
match between the incumbent Botvinnik and the challenger Bronstein
(obituary December 7, 2006) held at Moscow in 1951, deputising for the
Fide president, Folke Rogard, of Sweden, whenever he could not be
present.

This championship inspired Wade to write his first important book, an
account of the championship games co-written with the British champion
and international master William Winter ‘ the book is still in print.

He wrote several more classic books, including an authoritative volume
on Soviet chess and an account of the 1963 world championship clash
between Botvinnik and his latest challenger, the Armenian Tigran
Petrosian. Wade served on various Fide committees to the end of his
life.

Struck by the phenomenal ability of Soviet training methodology to
produce legions of grandmasters, Wade took it upon himself to distil
its essence and to implement what he could in the UK environment. As
part of this strategy, he developed a TV format to promote chess with
the popular magician David Nixon. He also persuaded the publishing firm
Batsford to inaugurate its longstanding programme of chess
publications, many concentrating on mainstream theory which had been
ignored by previous generations of British chess talents. He instituted
regular adult chess
classes at Morley College in London, tirelessly
visited schools around the UK and also participated in numerous
training tournaments where his experience could be imparted first hand
to up-and-coming British players.

He cemented his growing reputation as a chess coach and author by
helping Bobby Fischer (obituary January 19, 2008) to prepare for his
1972 World Championship match with Boris Spassky by collating a special
book of Spassky’s games.

When Wade settled in the UK, the chess scene was composed of cheerful
amateurs. Within two decades an explosion in chess strength was
apparent: England’s first grandmasters qualified in the 1970s and the
English team came second to the Soviet Union in two chess Olympiads of
the 1980s ‘ this progress was due in no small part to Wade’s vision and
efforts. He was appointed OBE for his services to chess in 1979. He did
not marry.

Bob Wade, OBE, International Master, chess writer, coach and
administrator, was born on April 10, 1921. He died on November 29,
2008, aged 87

Iranian Vector In Russia’s International Economic Strategy

IRANIAN VECTOR IN RUSSIA’S INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC STRATEGY
Ajdar Kurtov

en.fondsk.ru
30.11.2008

Russia faces new challenges in the XXI century as it is trying to
regain the positions in global politics which it used to hold for
centuries. Moscow managed to break out of the disastrous situation
into which it had been driven by its geopolitical rivals, enemies,
and their agents within Russia that mushroomed thanks to various
foreign grants under Gorbachev and Eltsin.

In the meantime the entire landscape of the international politics has
changed. China has become one of the global leaders after two decades
of 10% annual growth. Europe remains Russia’s number one trade partner
but has not dropped its outdated anti-Kremlin phobias which some of
the EU novices from the former Eastern bloc are deliberately fueling.

Some of the decisions made by our European partners can only
be explained by these phobias. What sense does it make to host
infrastructures of the US missile defense in the interests of the
American global primacy if, quite clearly, Europe faces no threat
whatsoever from any Iranian or North Korean missiles? What is the point
of the endless efforts to bar Russian energy companies from marketing
hydrocarbon fuels to European customers? It has to be understood in
European capitals that such steps make Russia respond adequately. This
is what we are currently witnessing: recently Russian President
D. 0AMedvedev cancelled the plan to take the strategic missiles
sited in Kozelsk off duty. If not for the anti-Russian escapades,
the Iskander missiles would have never been deployed in Russia’s
Kaliningrad region. Perhaps under more favorable circumstances Russia
would not be investing heavily in new oil and gas pipelines like
East-Siberia – Pacific Ocean. Moscow is compelled to resort to the
measures it is currently taking by those who cannot accept that –
as many times in the past – Russia is reviving and staging a global
political comeback.

The list of Russia’s potential partners is by no means limited to the
EU and the US. While Gazprom faces the attempts – disguised as a quest
for the diversification of Europe’s energy supplies – to prevent it
from competing in the European market, Russia can turn to numerous
alternative partners, with many of whom it has traditionally close
ties. Iran is one of such partners.

*** Historically Persia has been among Russia’s main trade partners,
and the economic relations with it have been on the list of Kremlin’s
priorities for centuries. Russia and Persia exchanged diplomatic
missions already in the XV century. In the late XIX – early XX
centuries marked by the rise of capitalism in Russia, it implemented a
whole range of economic projects in Iran. For example, Russians built
the Anzali seaport at the Caspian Sea and the Tabriz-Jolfa railroad,
the f irst one in Iran.

Later the above and many other infrastructures were handed over to
Iran for free in the framework of the treaty signed by Iran and Russia
on February 26, 1921. It should be noted that it was a truly generous
gift – the cost of the property transferred to Iran totaled 582 mln
golden rubles, plus Iran’s debt to the Imperial Russia in the amount
of 62 mln golden rubles was waived.

The USSR cooperated with Iran actively in the economic sphere. It
helped that the two countries signed a treaty on guarantees and
neutrality and a trade agreement in 1927. On March 25, 1940 they
signed a trade and navigation treaty by which they extended maximally
favorable regimes to each other. The latter treaty also set the
principle of trade relations and ensured free transit across the
partner territories to other countries. This part of the provisions
of the 1940 treaty currently remains in effect, and this is a highly
positive circumstance as other elements of the legal framework for the
use of the Caspian Sea have been revised without sufficient grounds
by Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan in the post-Soviet epoch.

The USSR constructed a number of major infrastructures in Iran
in the 1960ies and 1970ies including the Isfahan steelworks, the
machinery plant in Arak, and the Aras River hydro-power plant. These
days we see the global media preoccupied with the struggle over the
world’s hydrocarbon resources,20but it seems to be forgotten that
in 1970 the USSR has helped Iran reach the international gas market
when the trans-Iranian Gachsaran-Astara pipeline constructed with
the assistance from Soviet specialists was launched. Iran exported
natural gas via the pipeline to the Transcaucasia in return for
machinery and equipment. The situation was not marred by talks of
"the Grand Game". When the political interests of the US and Western
Europe did not affect the process, Moscow had no problem organizing
the economic cooperation with Tehran.

By the way, currently not only Russia but also Azerbaijan uses the
Soviet-era inheritance. Largely due to the US pressure, Azerbaijan has
to stick to a fairly unprofitable system of natural gas export. For
example 5.5 bn of the 11.5 bn cu m of gas produced in the country
in 2007 (nearly 50 %) were pumped back to sustain the acceptable
level of oil output. Only 1.78 bn cu m of natural gas was exported,
and also without serious gains as 1.2 bn cu m of gas was supplied
to Turkey at only $120 per 1,000 cu m. Georgia paid even less –
only $63 per 1,000 cu m for 300 mln cu m and $120 per 1,000 cu m
for 280 mln cu m – for Azerbaijan’s gas. At the same time Iran paid
$300 per 1,000 cu m for 30 mln cu m – a relatively small amount –
supplied via the Soviet-era pipeline.

The USSR and Iran signed their first 5-year trade agreement in
1967. A brief chill in the bilateral relations began after the 1979
Islamic revolution in Iran. Iran stopped supplying natural gas to
the USSR in 1980 though in the past decade the supplies reached 72
bn cu m. Nevertheless, already in 1985 the new Iranian leadership
realized the benefits of the cooperation with the USSR and the process
resumed on a long-term basis. A permanent bilateral commission was
re-established. A new trade turnover agreement was signed in 1988 and
the sales of gas from Iran resumed. However, at that time the USSR
was plagued by the chaos organized by the Yakovlev-Gorbachev group and
known as the Perestroika. The country neglected its infrastructures,
and clashes instigated by nationalist forces began in Azerbaijan. As a
result the gas pipeline linking Iran and the USSR was left in need of
repair and could transit only some 3 bn cu m of natural gas annually.

Nevertheless, the cooperation between the USSR and Iran intensified
in other spheres. The war between Iran and Iraq which began in 1980
and took at least 1,000,000 lives ended in 1988, and Iran needed to
strengthen its defense capabilities. Naturally, the US, formerly
the supplier of weapons to Shakh’s regime, denied supplies to the
new Iranian regime which openly referred to Washington as the "Grand
Satan". Under the circumstances Iran had to turn to the USSR, China,
and North Korea for weapons supplies. Weapons contracts were signed in
1991 and Iran started buying massive quantities of artillery, armored
vehicles, and munitions. In 1991, the last year of the existence of
the USSR, its trade turnover with Iran reached over $1,374 bn, the
USSR having a considerable positive balance of trade with Iran. The
USSR export to Iran was at the level of $1 bn, while its import was
only $374 mln.

The demise of the USSR immediately told on the bilateral economic
relations.

The shift from clearing to dollar transactions and the economic
collapse in Russia caused by the radical reforms made the trade volume
shrink. Already in 1992 the trade turnover between Russia and Iran
sank to $450 mln, though again Russia had a positive balance of trade
($401 mln vs. $48.6 mln). In just a year, a certain level of recovery
was ensured – in 1993 the trade turnover rose to $1.091 bn (Russia’s
exports to Iran totaled $1.004 bn and imports from the country – $87
mln). The recovery, however, was largely owed to the supplies in the
framework of old contracts and thus could not be sustained. In 1994
the trade turnover plummeted approximately by a factor of five.

A new avenue for cooperation between Russia and Iran emerged somewhat
later.

When Germany refused to complete the construction of the Bushehr
Nuclear Power Plant, the job was taken over by Russia. In the late
1990ies, Russia’s export to Iran totaled $3.378 bn. Most of it –
47.8% – was complex equipment. Weapons accounted for 31.1%, fuel and
commodities – for 14.9%, and machinery – for 6.2%. Some major Russian
companies survived only thanks to the Iranian market. For example,
Russia sold to Iran subway train cars worth $90 mln, aircrafts worth
$21 mln, and well-drilling equipment worth $12 mln. The supplies
related to the construction in Bushehr over the period of time brought
Russia $1.01 bn. Iran also bought from Russia $220 worth of fuel
oil. The latter fact should not come as a surprise – being a major
oil producer, Iran nevertheless has a fairly underdeveloped refining
industry. Iranian refineries cannot supply the domestic demand and
the country has to import fuel.

In 2001-2005 the Russian export to Iran rose to $6.8 bn. In 2006 the
total turnover was $2.144 bn, and in 2007 – $3.3 bn. A comparable
figure is expected in 2008, since already over the first 6 months
the trade turnover made $1.65 bn. Russia continues to export a factor
of several more to Iran than it imports from the country ($1,445 bn
vs. $204 mln over the first half of 2008). Though Iran is not among
Russia’s top trade partners in terms of the financial indicators
(Iran’s share in Russia’s foreign trade is 0.5%, in Russia’s export –
0.6%, and in import – 0.2%), it is important that Russia is able to
cooperate successfully even with a country that appears to be i ts
rival in the global energy business.

The structure of the Russian export to Iran is evolving. Black metals
account for most of it (73.5% in 2007). Machinery and equipment
now account for only 7%, timber – 4.3%, paper- 2.1%, fuel – 3%,
and fertilizers – 2.4%. Russia mostly imports Iranian vegetables and
produce as well as the products of their processing such as juices and
preserves. They account for 2/3 of Russia’s import from Iran. On the
other hand, Russia also imports $90.7 mln worth of Iranian cars (25.9%
of the import). Naturally, gas is no longer imported from Iran as the
pipeline links the country to the now independent Azerbaijan. Gazprom
is negotiating swap operations with Iran.

Russia is to supply gas to the northern regions of the country where it
is traditionally in short supply, whereas Gazprom is to get the same
amount from Iran in its southern regions, tentatively in the form of
liquefied gas to be supplied to India or South East Asia. Tehran is
inviting Russia to join the project aimed at constructing pipelines
to link it to Pakistan and India.

The North-South Transport Corridor project is gradually
materializing. The corresponding deal was penned by Russia,
Iran, and India in 2000. Later the project was also supported by
Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Oman, Tajikistan, Turkey, Armenia,
and Azerbaijan. All of these countries will benefit from the
intensification of shipments v ia the Corridor using which is going
to both expedite deliveries and reduce transit costs. For example,
transit industry representatives say that the delivery of a 40-feet
container from Mumbai (India) to St. Petersburg via the Suez Canal
currently takes 30 days, while the North-South route will help reduce
the time by a factor of 2 and the costs – by 20%. The estimates do
ignore a significant circumstance – eventually containers have to be
returned to the supplier sites. Preferably, they must be loaded with
products on the way back, but the flow of cargo from Russia to India
is not particularly intense.

Russia and Iran even organized a jointly operated transit route across
the Caspian Sea. The new Olya seaport was constructed in the framework
of the project as its location is more convenient than that of the
traditionally used port in Astrakhan. A railroad is also linked to
the Olya port, and the cargo flow via it is increasing rapidly: in
2003 its throughput was 57,800 tons, but in 2007 it reached 661,500
tons. The capacity of the seaport is actually much higher and by 2010
its throughput is expected to pass the 4,000,000 tons mark. Recently
Russia, Iran, and Azerbaijan agreed to construct a railroad to link
the three countries (Qazvin-Rasht-Astara in Iran-Astara in Azerbaijan)
which is to be integrated into the North-South Corridor.

Obviously, so far the Corridor is operating below the target capa
city. Up to 90% of the cargo it transits consists of the Russian
black metals exported to Iran. The project failed to attract cargo
flows from the EU. In 2005 the EU passed a document defining the
European transit strategy which does not even mention the North-South
Corridor. One of the reasons is the underperformance of the Russian
transit industry. Its services do not meet the demands of cargo
suppliers. Cargo remains stored at intermediate locations too long
and the transit infrastructures including the Caspian seaports are in
many cases below the XXI century standards. There are uncertainties
in customs regulations along the route. All of the above impedes
the intensification of transit, though, no doubt, the problems are
solvable.

*** The more pressure Russia’s Western geopolitical rivals and enemies
exert on the country, the more efforts it will be making to reconfigure
its trade with the West and the East (the Third World comprising
Asia, Africa, and Latin America). The Iranian vector in Russia’s
international economic activity is an important element of the process.

Rally On Their Own?

RALLY ON THEIR OWN?

A1+
[02:32 pm] 04 December, 2008

"Bjni" mineral water factory workers wish to organize a rally to
raise their voices against the problems caused by Armenian authorities.

They submitted a notice to the Yerevan city council with the request
to hol a rally on December 12.

Although they have not received permission to hold a rally several
times, this time workers have declared that from now on, they will
not pay attention to any rejection and will hold a rally on their own.

Let us recall that worker of "Bjni" mineral water factory Valerik
Gevorgyan has received a notice from the Yerevan city council with
the request to hold a peaceful rally and march.

Based on the results of the notice presented on October 30, the Yerevan
city council sent Valerik Grigoryan a reply in written form stating:

"The route you stated in your notice are the highways and streets of
Yerevan with the most traffic and your march will cause traffic jams
in Yerevan and problems for drivers and pedestrians."

The appeal presented on November 13 had also been rejected.

Armenia To Develop Nuclear Power Production

ARMENIA TO DEVELOP NUCLEAR POWER PRODUCTION

ARKA
Dec 2, 2008

YEREVAN, December 2. /ARKA/. Armenia intends to use nuclear power for
peaceful purposes, modernize its thermal capacities and construct new
hydro-power plants, RA President Serge Sargsyan stated at his meeting
with Adolph Birchover, Chairman of the RA Presidential Council for
Nuclear Power Safety.

The RA presidential press service reports that President Sargsyan
briefed Mr. Birchover on the situation in Armenia’s energy sector.

"The problems of energy safety and, particularly, nuclear power safety
problems, are of special importance. They are in the highlight of
the Armenian President and Government, S. Sargsyan said.

The RA President appreciated Mr. Birchover’s efforts to enhance
the safety of the Armenian NPP. He stressed Mr. Birchover’s 12-year
experience in carrying out this most important work.

Mr. Birchover pointed out a high safety level at the Armenian NPP. He
stressed the RA Government’s efforts, as well as a high professional
level of specialists, which ensured a high safety level at the
Armenian NPP.

He said that the Armenian NPP is has been maintained better in contrast
to its counterparts in other countries.

The sides also discussed issues of further operation of the Armenian
NPP and construction of a new nuclear power unit.