Author: Vorskanian Yeghisabet

Independent Online, South Africa
June 6 2005

Equatorial Guinea pardons coup plot pilots

Yerevan – Equatorial Guinea has pardoned six Armenian flight crew
members convicted last year of plotting to overthrow the president of
the tiny West African country, Armenia’s Foreign Ministry said on
Monday.

The Armenians were among dozens of foreigners jailed in Equatorial
Guinea and Zimbabwe over the aborted coup, which Mark Thatcher, son
of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, has been accused
of helping to finance.

The pardon was issued by Equatorial Guinea’s President Teodoro Obiang
Nguema Mbasogo, Hamlet Gasparyan, spokesperson for the Armenian
Foreign Ministry, said.

The six have been held in the notorious Black Beach prison in
Equatorial Guinea’s capital, Malabo. Rights group Amnesty
International said in April they risked starving to death.

Mark Thatcher has denied any role in the coup plot.

The Armenians were employed by an aircraft leasing company to fly
cargo around Africa. They have denied being involved in the plot and
Amnesty said their trial was “grossly unfair”.

AZG Armenian Daily #102, 04/06/2005

Turkey

TRIAL OVER LAWYER AYHAN TO LAUNCH IN ANKARA

He is Charged With Uttering ‘Armenian Massacres’

Daily Azg has informed the readers about the new Turkish penal
code which prosecutes for recalling the Armenian Genocide. In an
article titled “Lawsuit for Uttering Armenian Massacres” on June 3
Milliyet newspaper confirmed our information. The person to stand
the trial was lawyer Medeni Ayhan who made a speech at the session
of the Union of Lawyers of Ankara on October 17 2004 where he said,
“As a representative of Kurdish nation and a citizen of Kurdistan I
defend Kurds’ right for an independent state”.

Basing on these words of Ayhan, the Prosecutor’s Office of Ankara
filed a lawsuit against him in February applying the 312d article
of the old penal code as the new one was not yet in force. Following
the new penal code the same Prosecutor’s Office accused Ayhan for the
following sentence: “The Ottoman Empire carried out the massacre of
one and a half million Armenians by the hands of Hamidian horsemen
and Ittihat Party members. I sympathize with the Armenian people and
bow my head in homage to the victims”.

The statement about the “Armenian massacres” gave the Ankara
prosecutor’s Office a cause for the second lawsuit against Ayhan
this time applying the 216th article of the new penal code, which
is the replication of the 312d article, Milliyet claims. Though the
chairman of Ankara’s Union of Lawyers, Vedat A. Josar, said concerning
Ayhan’s speech that “even astonishing ideas may have adherents”, the
Supreme Headquarters of Turkish armed forces brought a suit against
the defendant applying the 305th article of the penal code.

This means that along with the expression “Armenian genocide” the
“Armenian massacres” is also viewed as a penal action prosecuted by two
— 216 and 305 — articles. The trial of lawyer Medeni Ayhan launched
yesterday and is proceeding in accordance with the new penal code.

Milliyet points out that it was in the first time in the country that
“opining for the fact of Armenian massacres” is considered a crime. “If
Ayhan is condemned for his views then the 216th article of the new
penal code can be applied for those putting forward views opposing
the state thesis. Thus, many intellectuals holding to different views
than the official one will face trial as Ayhan”.

By Hakob Chakrian

Graduating Senior: Mechanical engineering
By Chirag Desai
Published: Friday, June 3, 2005

The Triangle, Student Newsletter at Drexel University
June 3 2005

At a school like Drexel, one of the hardest things to find is a
smiling engineering student – a smiling engineering student during
week 10 of the term is even harder.

To Nora Ayanian, who will be graduating with the rest of this year’s
College of Engineering class June 11, talking about control systems
and teaching brings more than just a smile to her face. As she puts it,
taking her first control systems class was her most memorable event at
Drexel. As a mechanical engineering major, headed to graduate school,
Ayanian is determined that she will not stop until she finishes a
doctorate which will also enable her to teach at a college level.

“One thing that stands out about Nora is her never-ending ability
to laugh and smile,” says fellow mechanical engineering student
Jonathan Smith. “I only met Nora nine months ago and we instantly
became good friends.”

Ayanian’s college experience didn’t take off very well. Having been
a commuter throughout her student career made things a little harder
for her. At the same time, she feels that her professors made the
experience better for her as time went on. “I really feel that the
professors at the University, that I have experienced, really care
for their students,” she claims.

She was particularly grateful to Professor Harry Kwatny, her senior
design and research professor, and Department Head of the Mechanical
Engineering and Mechanics Department Mun Choi, who reciprocates
Ayanian’s feelings.

“Nora is an outstanding student,” Choi says.

Ayanian was appointed as a teaching assistant for her ME 255 class
based on her academic performance.

“Working closely with [her] instructor, she has developed new teaching
modules using MATLAB, Mathematica, and Simulink to assist students
with their analysis,” Choi adds.

Ayanian’s experience as a teaching assistant turned her direction
towards teaching.

During their senior year, all engineers are required to perform a
senior design project, an integral part of an engineering student’s
curricula that spans three terms. Starting in the fall, students form
teams of four to six students and attempt to pick an area of interest
and present a design proposal to a faculty assigned. At the end of
the spring term, teams then submit a formal report presented at the
annual Senior Project Design Competition.

“My senior project was inspired from the Defense Advances Research
Project Agency’s Grand Challenge for autonomous off-road vehicles,”
Ayanian explains. DARPA’s challenge involves completing an obstacle
course. The vehicle that does this in the least amount of time wins
$1 million.

“We have to go from point A to point B in a desert,” she describes.
“The actual distance is about 200 miles…We decided on a single
problem that a lot of the cars were having – local obstacle avoidance.”

Ayanains’ team of four attempted to build a car and programmed it to
avoid the obstacles and remember its original path when doing so.

She felt that the experience “was definitely enjoyable and
challenging.”

She is also extremely appreciative of her senior design advisor.

“[Kwatny] helped me a lot over the last year,” Ayanian says. “He’s
just really a great guy…he really cares for his students.”

Ayanian has received a scholarship from the National Science
Foundation and will be attending graduate school at the University of
Pennsylvania, which will further continue her experience as a commuter,
the fact that she can continue to live in the Philadelphia area. Her
experience with SEPTA has been less than marvelous, however, but she
hopes that the service improves as she continues to ride the trolley.

In addition, Ayanian is an active member of the Armenian Youth
Foundation and has also completed an internship in Armenia in summer
2001, working for the Armenian Red Cross Society as a translator.

“As a student, Nora is the smartest and hardest working person I
know,” Smith adds. “As a friend, she is always around to talk and
occasionally come out when she’s not traveling, working or studying.”

It’s all about enjoying the experience, and for Ayanian, her college
experience has continued to improve. In a nutshell, Choi stated it
best when he said, “Nora is one of the top undergraduate students
that I’ve encountered.”

“LUFTHANSA” NOT FRIGHTENED BY ARMENIAN POVERTY

A1plus

| 16:22:32 | 03-06-2005 | Social |

“The Armenian Government has allowed us to realize 3 flights a week”,
said Gunten Ott, regional director of the aviacompany “Lufthansa”
in Russia and CIS countries in today’s press conference. Let us
remind you that the head of the RA Civic aviation has announce that
“Lufthansa” has the right to realize only two flights. Today with the
flight “Munchen-Yerevan” “Lufthansa” started its activity in Armenia.

The company which has existed since 1925 realizes flights in Armenia
after certain investigations. “According to our investigations Armenia
is not so rich, I could even say it is one of the poor countries
of the world”, says Gunter Ott. But he hopes that they will have
passengers. “We are concerned not to transport passengers from Armenia,
but also to bring tourists to Armenia”, he mentioned. “Lufthansa” has
also established discounts for the Armenian passengers up to June 30 –
$299 to Germany, $349 to Europe, and $599 to North America and Africa.

By the way, the company which was founded in Germany gets
65% of its profit abroad. In Armenia they will cooperate with
“Armavia”. “Lufthansa” realizes flights in more than 375 directions
in 93 countries and 2003 it was recognized as the largest aviacompany
by the number of the passengers.

Georgian, Russian officials begin handover of tank repair plant

Rustavi-2 TV, Tbilisi
2 Jun 05

[Presenter] The Russian Defence Ministry wants to remove some equipment
from the [Tbilisi] tank repair plant. The process of handing the plant
over to Georgia officially began today. Only Russian and Armenian
equipment is repaired at the plant. The handover process should be
completed by 15 June. Deputy Defence Minister Davit Sikharulidze went
to the plant with journalists today, although Georgian journalists were
only allowed to look at the plant from the outside. Sopo Kvintradze
joins us live. What do the Russians want to remove from the plant?

[Correspondent] The main problem during the discussion today was
the removal of vehicles from the plant. Russia says this equipment
consists of cars and several portable generators which belong to the
Russian Group of Forces in the Transcaucasus and not the plant itself
and therefore they want to remove them. [Passage omitted]

Both sides say the talks process is proceeding normally. A special
commission has been formed and a delegation has arrived from the
Russian Defence Ministry. This joint commission is examining and
conducting an inventory of equipment currently at the plant such as
the machine tools necessary to repair tanks. The Russians say they
will certainly meet the deadline and the inventory process will be
completed by 15 June.

[Aleksandr Popov, commander of the Group of Russian Forces in the
Transcaucasus; our files give name of commander as Aleksandr Bespalov]
We all know the text of the joint declaration signed by our two
foreign ministers, in which it is written that the plant should be
handed over by 15 June. I think we will be able to do it by 12 or
13 June. There is a commission of specialists from Moscow, there is
a protocol we signed back in November, there is the will and a plan
of action. The work is continuing, with the exception of the small
problem which suddenly appeared today, but the Georgian side agreed
to decide the issue on Monday [6 June].

[Correspondent] This plant has not been functioning for two years
now. It has been closed, but workers say that the Defence Ministry
intends to reopen it once it becomes Georgian property. Once it
has been equipped, the plant can effect major repairs to 45 tanks
each month.

US Senator concerned over Russia’s arms transfer

Baku, June 1, AssA-Irada

Russia’s move to transfer weaponry from Georgia to Armenia raises
concerns and poses threats, United States Senator, member of the US
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Charles Hagel said.

“Azerbaijan and Armenia are independent countries and stationing any
foreign troops here is unacceptable”, he told a news conference in
Baku on Wednesday.

Hagel said that the US government welcomes the agreement reached by
Russia and Georgia to pull Russian bases out of this country.*

SOME IN GEORGIA WORRY THAT THE RUSSIAN BASE WITHDRAWAL DEAL COMES WITH A CATCH

EurasiaNet Organization
June 1 2005

Molly Corso 6/01/05

Georgian leaders have hailed a deal on the withdrawal of Russian troops
from two military bases in Georgia as an “historic event” that clears
the way for the normalization of bilateral relations. Some political
analysts and opposition politicians in Tbilisi are concerned, however,
that President Mikheil Saakashvili’s administration paid too high a
price to secure Moscow’s commitment to take its troops out of Georgia.

Georgian Foreign Minister Salome Zourabichvili and her Russian
counterpart Sergei Lavrov signed the base accord on May 31, committing
Russia to complete the withdrawal process by the end of 2008. According
to the agreement text posted on the Russian Foreign Ministry’s web
site, Moscow will begin closing its base at Akhalkalaki immediately,
with at least 40 armored vehicles and 20 tanks to be withdrawn by
September 1. Russia is also expected to transfer a tank repair facility
to Georgia by September 1. The withdrawal from the Akhalkalaki base
is to be completed by the end of 2007. The closure of Russia’s other
base, in Batumi, will occur at an unspecified point in 2008. Russia’s
command and control personnel in Georgia will also cease operations in
2008. Both bases are to be delivered to Georgia in “as is” condition.

In addition, the document calls for both Georgia and Russia to seek
“additional external sources of financing for the transportation costs”
connected with the Russian withdrawal. The accord also contains vague
language concerning the creation of a Georgian-Russian Anti-Terrorist
Center, to be “formalized by a separate document,” as well as a
bilateral commitment to conclude a pact regulating joint border issues
“as soon as possible.”

Tbilisi and Moscow had haggled over the Russian troop withdrawal
since the 1999 OSCE summit in Istanbul. [For background see the
Eurasia Insight archive]. At a May 30 news conference, Saakashvili
said the bilateral accord will end “the 200-year presence of Russian
troops in Georgia.” He went on to say that one of the most “painful”
issues hampering Tbilisi’s ties with Moscow – Russia’s two remaining
bases in Georgia — had now been cleared away, raising hopes for
“close, friendly relations.” Saakashvili also sought to reassure the
ethnic Armenian community concentrated near the Akhalkalaki base,
which has been the main source of employment for area residents. [For
additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. “We have
already launched the rehabilitation of roads, schools and launched
social programs,” Saakashvili said. “We are also ready to recruit
[local] personnel … for the Georgian army.”

It was what Saakashvili didn’t mention about the pact — specifically
the creation of the joint anti-terrorism center — that had some
observers and politicians in Georgia feeling uneasy. Before the text of
the accord had been made public, Tina Gogueliani, a political analyst
with the International Center for Conflict and Negotiations, said that
some people worried that the accord contained loopholes potentially
enabling Russia to maintain a military presence in Georgia. “[You
can’t] exclude the possibility that there is something the public
will not like in this document,” Gogueliani said.

The English language daily, The Georgian Messenger, published an
article June 1 in which seven of the nine people interviewed said
they were suspicious about the center’s intentions. “There is no
difference whether the bases will be withdrawn from the country
or not if there will be an anti-terrorist center,” said Tea Todua,
a lawyer who was quoted in the Messenger story.

The text of the agreement states that an “agreed upon portion of
[Russian] military personnel and material-technical facilities and
infrastructure from [the Batumi base] would be used in the interest”
of the joint anti-terrorism center. Tiko Mzhavanadze, a press secretary
for the New Right opposition group, voiced concern that the status quo
could end up being preserved. “If the [anti-terrorism] center will be
Russian, we have traded the old bases for new [military] equipment,”
she said in a phone interview with EurasiaNet. “And that will be
even worse.”

Irakli Menagarishvili, a former foreign minister who now is the
director of the Strategic Research Center, cautioned that it is too
soon to jump to any conclusions. “It is hard to say anything concrete
at this time,” he said in a phone interview. “There is nothing
decided, or we don’t know anything yet, about the center except for
the title.” He added that the center could assume a variety of forms,
ranging from an analytical-research think tank to an armed unit.
“Those are two different things-and actually any number of variations
could exist between them,” he said. “If it is the first version,
it could be acceptable for Georgia. But the second is completely
unacceptable. That is like exchanging the bases for the same thing
with a different name.”

Zourabichvili, speaking at a May 31 news conference, sought to dispel
fears that the deal would allow Russian to retain a significant
military presence in Georgia. “The anti-terrorist center will not
represent a new base. It will be a joint center, which will accept
all decisions jointly, with the participation of the Georgian side,”
Zourabichvili said, adding that “the existence of this anti-terrorism
center is in Georgia’s interests as well.”

The opposition party spokeswoman, Mzhavanadze, said that to ensure
Russia does not wield undue influence in the planned anti-terrorism
center, participation should be expanded. “If there is going to
be an anti-terrorism center in Georgia, [it] should be three-,
or four-sided; not just Georgian and Russian [members], but also
American and possibly European.”

Zourabichvili said on May 31 that substantive negotiations concerning
the anti-terrorism center have not commenced. “As far as I know,
Russia adopted one document that we have not received yet,” she said.
“We have enough time for negotiations and there is no reason to
hurry. We should think together about what we want and how we want
[to receive it].”

Georgia’s National Security Council will be the lead agency
responsible for guiding Georgian negotiators on the creation of the
anti-terrorism center. Davit Gunashvili, the press officer for the
NSC, said very little has been decided to date. “I can only tell you
that the Georgian side will only support an analytical-information
gathering [center],” he said. “As we know no weapons or large armies
can defeat terrorism.” He added that while there is no date set for
the negotiations, both the NSC and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
will be involved.

Editor’s Note: Molly Corso is a freelance journalist and photographer
based in Tbilisi.

Armenian prosecutor, international experts discuss corruption

Noyan Tapan news agency
1 Jun 05

Yerevan, 1 June: The fight against corruption involves joint efforts
of all the appropriate bodies and the public. This must be based on
improved legislation and carried out in a coordinated and continuous
manner, Armenian Prosecutor-General Agvan Ovsepyan, has told a meeting
with experts of GRECO [the Group of States against corruption], who are
visiting Armenia within the framework of the anti-corruption campaign.

The prosecutor-general informed the visitors of the work done, crime
figures and judicial practice. The sides discussed transnational
crime and noted the need to speed up cooperation of law-enforcement
agencies in different countries in the fight against money laundering,
a source in the Prosecutor’s Office told Noyan Tapan.

Visiting US senator opposed to re-deployment of Russian troops in Armenia

Trend news agency
1 Jun 05

Baku, 1 June: The visiting US senator, Chuck Hagel, welcomes the news
that Russia has decided to withdraw its military bases from Georgia.

“But if the arms are moved from Georgia to Armenia, this will cause
a serious concern. Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia are independent
countries. There should be no foreign bases in any independent country
because it creates tension in the region,” he said.

Touching on the Karabakh settlement, the senator said the USA
supports a negotiated settlement. He welcomed the dialogue between
the Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents held on the sidelines of the
Council of Europe summit on 15 May.

“A dialogue is important to reach a consensus,” Hagel said.

Kocharian Conceals Occupation with So-Called Genocide
By ERHAN BASYURT

Zaman, Turkey
June 1 2005

I don’t know why, opening the Armenian border gate has become a
“blind love” in Turkey. Lastly, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s
government has fell in this “blind love”. While no conditions have
been changed on the Armenian side, Ankara has carried on building
diplomatic relations and opening the border gate to the issue.

Armenian President Robert Kocharian; however, showed once again that
they do not seek dialogue or a solution at the Summit of the Council
of Europe in Warsaw.

Kocharian repeated to the top-level representatives of 46 European
countries that “recognition of 1915 events as genocide is our main
policy.” While it was highly expected that Prime Minister Erdogan and
Kocharian would come together at that summit, Kocharian’s statements
had a cold effect on the Turkish side.

Kocharian has become Armenian President thanks to the effective
“Karabagh Clan” when he was one of the Armenian rebel leaders
carrying out an armed conflict in Azerbaijan’s Nagorno-Karabagh
region. Kocharian’s biggest supporter is the Dashnak Party, which
has destroyed the democratic structure in the country. What brought
Kocharian up to power is not the Armenian people’s support but
financial and political support provided by the Armenian Diaspora,
who seek the dream of “Greater Armenia”. If Kocharian gives up his
so-called genocide allegations, he will lose the Armenian Diaspora’s
support that has been constructed on “Turcophobic Animosity”. Under
these circumstances, it would be naive to expect Kocharian to give
up his so-called genocide allegations and to withdraw from 20 percent
of Azerbaijani territory.

Certainly, this is not the only reason for Kocharian’s insistence
on a so-called genocide. If it is noticed, campaigns of so-called
genocide have accelerated after 1990. The end of the Cold War has
facilitated the international pressure over Turkey and this has
played a crucial role in it. The main reason; however, is that the
so-called genocide barking conceals Armenian’s occupation and massacre
in Azerbaijan. Adapting the role of the oppressed and the aggrieved,
Armenians, who constantly carry the so-called genocide allegations
on the agenda at European and US parliaments, conceal the Karabagh
massacres and the occupation of Azerbaijan in this way. They describe
the immigration of 413,000 Armenians from the Ottoman territories as
“genocide”; however, show their exile of 800,000 Azerbaijanis from
their homelands and committing ethnic cleansing, primarily in Hocali,
as just.

Kocharian’s speech at the Council of Europe is very thought provoking
from this point of view as well. The Council of Europe’s Assembly
of Parliamentarians has accepted Armenia as a country occupying
Azerbaijani territory on January 25th 2005, that is to say four months
ago. It also accepted a comprehensive report envisioning a peaceful
withdrawal from it. Kocharian, who is the architect of the occupation
that blocked four different resolutions by the United Nations (UN) and
solutions projects by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe’s (OSCE), now plays the role of the “oppressed” by carrying the
so-called genocide allegations on agenda at the Council of Europe. He,
therefore, keeps the international community and the Council of Europe
from undertaking an active role in the solution of the problem.

Turkey should speak with Kocharian in the language that he understands
at this stage. That is to say, it should push Armenia into corner at
international platforms and take initiatives to allow it to end the
occupation and to establish peaceful relations with its neighbors. The
Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) might easily carry the
Karabagh problem to the agenda. Turkey should use all its opportunities
in the Council of Europe, the OSCE, the UN and the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization (NATO). It is naturally not possible that these
policies can be successful only with Turkey’s efforts. Turkey and
Azerbaijan should set up a very close dialogue and co-operation
mechanism at this stage. They should direct their lobby opportunities
to the same point. Armenia should be put under international pressure
by gaining the support of friendly countries as well.

If these are achieved, not only the so-called genocide allegations
will occupy the agenda as such, but also Armenia will seek ways to
approach Turkey as a solution to get rid of international pressure.
Turkey-Armenia relations will mostly benefit Armenia, so the “blind
love” of opening the border gates and establishing bridges should
be theirs.