Category: News

Azer News, Azerbaijan
July 1 2004
Istanbul talks – breakthrough or not

President Aliyev and Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov, who arrived
in Istanbul, Turkey to attend the June 28-29 NATO summit, held
discussions on the settlement of a number of interstate and regional
problems. President Aliyev also held closed-door meetings with
Turkish President Ahmet Necdet
Sezer and Prime Minister Recep Tayyib Erdogan on Monday. No
statements were issued upon conclusion of the talks. “Along with
Upper Garabagh conflict, the parties discussed issues pertaining to
Turkish-Azerbaijani cooperation and the Cyprus conflict”, Turkish
President’s spokesman told journalists.
Armenia backs Turkish efforts
On Monday, the Azerbaijani, Turkish and Armenian foreign ministers,
Elmar Mammadyarov, Abdullah Gul and Vardan Oskanian held a private
trilateral meeting in Istanbul, Turkey at the NATO summit. The three
foreign ministers held a news conference following the meeting.
According to Dursun Ozden, Azernews correspondent in Turkey, the
ministers stated that their countries were interested in maintaining
peace and stability in the region. They underlined that the peaceful
settlement of the conflict over Upper Garabagh as well as ways and
means of cooperation in achieving stability were discussed during the
meeting. It was stressed that Turkey, which is a member of NATO and
has great influence in the region, could play an active role in the
resolution of the conflict. The Azerbaijani and Armenian foreign
ministers stressed that they supported Turkey’s increasing efforts to
solve the conflict. Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said that
peace and stability in the Caucasus are attracting growing attention
internationally. “NATO is promoting a new strategic shift towards
South Caucasus states. The European Union in its newly introduced
“Neighborhood Policy” has decided to implement a new strategy for the
South Caucasus. Therefore, a new strategic vision should be shaped by
the countries of the region,” he stressed. Gul also noted that the
South Caucasus countries had not yet been able to overcome the
problems which are threatening stability and discouraging economic
prosperity in the region. Underlining the need to hold further
trilateral meetings, the three ministers stated that such meetings
would promote mutual understanding. Armenian Foreign Minister
Oskanian said that the parties also touched upon the issue of opening
the Turkish-Armenian border. He added that it will take “some time”
to resolve the problem. The Armenian side was offered a new formula
for the settlement similar to the one used in resolving the Cyprus
conflict, Turkish diplomatic sources said. Prior to the trilateral
meeting, Turkish and Armenian foreign ministers Abdullah Gul and
Vardan Oskanian met in private. Along with the Garabagh conflict, the
two discussed the relations between Turkey and Armenia, Turkish media
reported. The friendly nature of the statements by both the Armenian
and Azerbaijani foreign ministers is amazing. Particularly surprising
is Mammadyarov’s statement that Armenia and Azerbaijan were
interested in Turkey’s stepping up its role in the settlement of the
conflict.
Baku ready to “soften” its position – Turkish sources
Yerevan has previously unequivocally opposed Ankara’s involvement in
the process, saying that Turkey could not be an impartial mediator.
Mammadyarov also said that the details of Turkey’s participation in
the conflict resolution would be outlined in the next 2-3 months.
Opposition sources in Ankara said a break through in the
Turkish-Armenian relations may take place soon. The parties have
allegedly agreed to open the Turkish-Armenian frontier, and it is
necessary to prepare the public in both Azerbaijan and Turkey for
this. Azerbaijan will play a special role in the public awareness
campaign. Turkey will try to convince Baku that in the changing
conditions such a step would not contradict Azerbaijan’s interests.
According to the same source, it is for this reason that Armenian
Foreign Minister Oskanian said it would take “some time” to resolve
the problem. His statement implies that in general, the problem can
be resolved, but it will take a while to work out some controversial
issues, including Baku’s disapproval of the opening of the
Turkish-Armenian frontier. It appears that Baku is ready to “soften”
its position in order to avoid damaging relations with Turkey.
However, such a step would most likely be interpreted by the
Azerbaijani public as another diplomatic defeat. Azerbaijan and
Armenia were close to a breakthrough in resolving the conflict in the
past. Former President Ter-Petrosian was close to resolving the
controversial issues between Turkey, Azerbaijan and Armenia when he
was overthrown. In 1999, when the international community urged
Kocharian to attend the Istanbul talks, the Armenian parliament
speaker and the Prime Minister were shot to death in the country’s
parliament. Armenia is therefore an unpredictable country and hopes
for the settlement of the conflict remain uncertain.

Azer News, Azerbaijan
July 1 2004
Azeri, Armenian FMs may next meet in Prague

The next meeting of the Azerbaijani and Armenian foreign ministers is
expected to be held late in August or early in September.
Yuri Merzlyakov, the Russian co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, told
Regnum information agency that the meeting may take place in Prague.
Merzlyakov said that although the third meeting of the two foreign
ministers was constructive, no progress is in store at the current
stage of talks.
He noted that work on the agenda of the forthcoming gathering was
underway but declined to say if any concrete proposals would be
discussed during the meeting.

Tehran Times, Iran
July 1 2004
Armrosgazprom To Bid on Laying of Iran-Armenia Gas Pipeline
Moscow (PIN) – The company Armrosgazprom is planning to take part in
a tender on constructing and maintaining an Iran-Armenia gas
pipeline, the press service of the company reported.
The gas pipeline customer is the Armenian government. A basic
agreement on laying the pipeline was signed in Yerevan (Armenia) on
May 13, 2004. According to the document, the gas pipeline will be
operational by January 1, 2007.
Armenia will get some 1.1bn cubic meters of gas annually through this
pipeline. Each country is to finance the laying of a pipeline on its
territory. Armenia is expected to spend about $90m to $100m and Iran
some $120m. Armrosgazprom was created in 1997 in compliance with a
Russian-Armenian government agreement and it is the exclusive
wholesale buyer and supplier of gas in Armenia. The Armenian
government and Gazprom have a 45-percent stake each in the company;
Itera has a 10-percent block of shares. Armrosgazprom owns the whole
gas distributing network in the republic. MSK/DWN
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

YEREVAN PRESS CLUB WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
JUNE 25 – JULY 1, 2004
HIGHLIGHTS:
POLITICS AND MEDIA
“YERRORD UJ” WEEKLY PUBLISHED
POLITICS AND MEDIA
On June 29 in Yerevan a seminar “Political Developments in Armenia and Their
Media Coverage” was held. The seminar was organized by Yerevan Press Club
with the assistance of Friedrich Naumann Foundation. Representatives of
media, public, also journalistic organizations of Armenia, international
structures took part in the event.
The subject matter of the seminar was pre-conditioned by the events that had
occurred over the past few months with regard to the activities of Armenian
media. These are in particular the opposition rallies, accompanied by
violence against journalists (see details in YPC Weekly Newsletter, April
2-8, 2004 and April 9-15, 2004), the change of the owner of “Kentron” TV
company, presently called “Aravot TV” (see YPC Weekly Newsletter, April
23-29, 2004), the amendments to the RA Criminal Code provisions on libel and
insult adopted by the parliament recently (see YPC Weekly Newsletter, June
4-10, 2004) and, finally, the speech that the President of Armenia Robert
Kocharian made at the PACE session in Strasbourg on June 23, where the
problems of Armenian media were touched upon too.
The seminar was opened by Asparuh Panov, the deputy head of programs of
Friedrich Naumann Foundation in Romania, Bulgaria and South Caucasus. The
presentation of the Chairman of “Asparez” Journalist’s Club of Gyumri Levon
Barseghian was devoted to the Armenian media reflection of the political
situation in 2004, and the Chairman of the Committee to Protect Freedom of
Expression Ashot Melikyan presented the cases of journalist and media rights
violations through the lens of the inner political developments.
At the seminar the joint statement of Yerevan Press Club, the Journalists
Union of Armenia, Internews Armenia public organization and the Committee to
Protect Freedom of Expression war released, adopted with regard to the June
trial of the case on the attack on journalists on April 5 (see YPC Weekly
Newsletter, June 4-10, 2004) and the lack of progress in the investigation
on other cases of violence against journalists.
“On June 10, 2004 the court of primary jurisdiction of Center and
Nork-Marash communities of Yerevan sentenced two people, who engaged in
violent actions against journalists during the rally of April 5, to a fine
of 100,000 drams each. The process became a comedy show. We cannot call it
otherwise, because both the preliminary investigation and the court
proceedings and the sentence cause doubt and frustration. The proceedings
were only instituted on Part 1 of Article 185 of the RA Criminal Code
(“Premeditated destruction or spoilage of property”), whereas the charges
should have also been introduced on Article 164 (“Obstruction of legitimate
professional activities of journalist”): the violent actions, committed on
April 5 with regard to journalists, contain the signs of crimes, stipulated
by these two Articles of the RA Criminal Code. Therefore, Article 20 of the
RA Criminal Code (“Cumulative offences”) should have been applied which was
not done by the structure implementing the preliminary investigation. The
court on its behalf did not correct the mistake of the preliminary
investigation and did not send the case to additional investigation.
Neither the bodies of preliminary investigation, nor the court displayed any
wish to protect the right of journalists to gather and disseminate
information, to say nothing of the fact that the punishment defined is not
adequate to the misdeed. Moreover, the supporters of those who committed the
crime obstructed the entry of journalists to the courtroom and exerted
pressure on the course of the trial.
We expected more disclosures and trials to come, however nothing was done to
find those guilty of other violent acts.
Up to day no measures have been taken to punish the policemen who were
impartially observing those who interfered with the work of media
representatives and broke their equipment on April 5.
The policemen who gave a beating to journalists on Baghramian Avenue in the
early morning of April 13 were not revealed and punished either. Not even a
condemnation of their actions was made. Instead from the highest power
levels statements were made that it had been impossible to tell journalists
from the demonstration participants.
We once more demand that the right of the public to receive and the right of
the journalists to impart information be respected that any attempt to
infringe these rights be prevented.
We call on all the media and journalists be more united and consistent when
it comes to professional solidarity, when the right to free gathering and
dissemination of information is violated”, the statement by four
journalistic organizations says.
The seminar participants noted the disputability of the answers that RA
President Robert Kocharian gave in Strasbourg to the questions of the PACE
deputies and journalists with regard to the media situation. In particular,
the statement of the President that the Law “On Television and Radio” was
proposed by the opposition was incorrect (apparently Kocharian meant to say
that the discontent about the work of the National Commission on Television
and Radio should be addressed by the opposition to itself). The appropriate
official draft law was developed by the present RA Minister of Education and
Science and at that time deputy Sergo Yeritsian, who has never had anything
to do with opposition. Since the draft law of Yeritsian was supported by the
specialized parliament committee, it was presented by Shavarsh Kocharian as
a disciplined Chairman of the committee. However, the circumstance that the
latter at the same time heads one of the opposition parties does not
constitute sufficient ground to ascribe the authorship of the law to the
opposition. The proposal of the President to hold a media monitoring in
Armenia and remove the problem of “A1+” TV company from the agenda, should
it reveal plurality on TV air and access of opposition to it, also has
little ground. Firstly, there are reasons to maintain that the failure to
provide a license to the TV channel has political motivation, that the
number of competitions seemingly lost by “A1+” were conducted with legal
violations and the appropriate suit is currently being considered by the
European Court of Human Rights, and it is hardly fair to link this problem
with the monitoring results. Secondly, during the presidential and
parliamentary elections of 2003 (i.e., after the loss of air by “A1+”) both
the OSCE observation mission and a number of local non-governmental
organizations held monitoring and recorded a generally inobjective coverage
of the elections by Armenian media. It is the elections and political
tensions that allow determining the existence of freedom of expression and
diversity of opinion in the country. During the periods when the political
developments are proceeding relatively calmly, the count of the air access
of certain parties cannot be illustrative enough. Monitoring can of course
be conducted – the media situation analysis and how adequate their coverage
of public and political life is, the degree of satisfaction of information
demands of the citizens are always useful. But regardless of its results,
the problem of “A1+” will remain.
As the only example of positive changes in the sphere of media recently the
seminar participants noted the mildened punishments for libel and insult in
the Criminal Code.
“YERRORD UJ” WEEKLY PUBLISHED
On June 26 the first issue of “Yerrord Uj” weekly was published. The
newspaper has 16/A3 pp. and a print run of 3,000 copies. The founder of
“Yerrord Uj” is “Mission L”, the Chief Editor is Vahram Aghajanian.
When reprinting or using the information above, reference to the Yerevan
Press Club is required.
You are welcome to send any comment and feedback about the Newsletter to:
[email protected]
Subscription for the Newsletter is free. To subscribe or unsubscribe from
this mailing list, please send a message to: [email protected]
Editor of YPC Newsletter – Elina POGHOSBEKIAN
____________________________________________
Yerevan Press Club
9B, Ghazar Parpetsi str.
375007, Yerevan, Armenia
Tel.: (+ 374 1) 53 00 67; 53 35 41; 53 76 62
Fax: (+374 1) 53 56 61
E-mail: [email protected]
Web Site:

Public debate on Turkey to come
01.07.2004 – 09:01 CET | By Honor Mahony
EUOBSERVER / THE HAGUE – The Dutch EU Presidency has pledged to be fair
on the question of whether Ankara is ready to start EU membership
negotiations amid concerns that the EU may not be ready for Turkey.
“The Netherlands feels a responsibility to make sure that our decision
is well-reasoned and rock-solid”, said Dutch prime minister Jan Peter
Balkenende on the eve of the Dutch EU Presidency.
While the European Commission will decide in the autumn whether Ankara
has met the political criteria for joining the 25-nation block, Mr
Balkenende says this is just one of two types of debate that will take
place.
The Dutch leader said that discussion on the political criteria is
“technical”.
The second discussion amongst the European public is likely to centre
around whether “an Islamic country belongs to Europe”.
However, the Dutch are insisting that this debate, as well as whether
the EU is actually ready for a country the size of Turkey, should not be
additional criteria.
“We need fair play … the rules of the game are clear”, said Mr
Balkenende referring to the fact that if the European Commission decides
that Ankara is ready, it will then be up to leaders in December to
actually decide, on the basis of the report, to open negotiations
without delay.
Late debate
With French leadership ambivalent on Turkish EU membership, the
opposition Christian Democrats in Germany actively opposing it and the
Austrians also making negative sounds, the Dutch do feel that a debate
will come – it is just later than it should have been.
Referring to 1999, when EU leaders actually decided to give Turkey
candidate status, Dutch Europe minister Atzo Nicolaï said, “that was the
time for debate”.
He added, “I think the leaders knew what they decided but the public
didn’t know”.
However, it is too late for the “principle debate” of whether Turkey
should join the EU, he concluded.
“We have to realise Turkey has to be ready and the European Union has to
be ready”.
Mr Nicolaï also conceded that there is a risk that the planned Dutch
referendum on the Constitution, which is set to happen in the same
timeframe as a decision on Turkey, may be linked to the issue.
“That is always a risk”, he said.

Azer News, Azerbaijan
July 1 2004
Armenia blames Azerbaijan for ceasefire breach

Armenian Defense Minister Serj Sarkisian has expressed his position
on the ceasefire breach on the Armenian-Azerbaijani frontier.
He said the situation on the contact line between Armenian Tavus
region’s Berkaber village and Azerbaijan’s Gazakh region’s Mazam
village is different from that on the rest of the frontline. However,
Sarkisian said Armenian military units allegedly did not launch any
attacks and breached the ceasefire only in retaliation to Azerbaijani
strikes.
He added that two Armenian military men died as a result of the
skirmish. Two Azerbaijani officers were killed and two civilians (a
child and a woman) injured as a result of ceasefire breaches by
Armenia in June.

Interfax
July 1 2004
PACE to assist in Karabakh settlement
Baku. (Interfax-Azerbaijan) – The Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe (PACE) will assist the settlement of the Nagorno-
Karabakh conflict.
The Parliamentary Assembly can and wants to assist in resolving the
conflict, although the OSCE Minsk Group is already doing so, PACE
Secretary General Bruno Haller said after Thursday negotiations with
Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammedyarov.
He said that PACE will not substitute for the OSCE in the Karabakh
settlement process.
Haller lauded his negotiations with the Azerbaijani foreign minister,
which focused on stronger inter-parliamentary cooperation between
Baku and Strasbourg and PACE’s role in the Karabakh settlement
process.
Baku lost control of Nagorno-Karabakh and seven adjoining districts
during its conflict with Armenia in the 1990s. The UN Security
Council has denounced the occupation of Azerbaijani lands and
demanded the withdrawal of Armenian military units.
The U.S., Russian and French co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group are
assisting the Karabakh settlement.

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
July 1 2004
Azeri, Armenian defense ministers expected to meet shortly
Azerbaijani and Armenian defense ministers Safar Abiyev and Serj
Sarkisian are expected to meet shortly to discuss the recently
frequent ceasefire breaches.
Russia’s RIA-Novosti news agency quoted Armenian Foreign Minister
Vardan Oskanian as saying that the meeting of the two defense
ministers might take place shortly. Oskanian said that the issue of
frequent ceasefire breaches on the frontline was discussed during his
meeting with his Azerbaijani counterpart Elmar Mammadyarov in Prague
on June 21.
The two countries’ defense ministers were sent an appeal to hold
bilateral meetings to discuss the settlement of the Upper Garabagh
conflict.
The number of the dead and injured from both conflicting sides
increased as a result of the frequent ceasefire breaches in June.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

International Herald Tribune, France
July 1 2004
Threats are not the way to influence Tehran

Kaveh L. Afrasiabi and Pirouz Mojtahedzadeh IHT
Iran’s nuclear program

TEHRAN In the aftermath of the UN atomic agency’s stinging criticism
of Iran’s nuclear program, Secretary of State Colin Powell threatened
to seek UN sanctions against Tehran in September. But if the United
States is serious about deterring Iran’s ruling clergy from going
nuclear, it must first address Iran’s national security worries.
As the crisis over Iran’s seizure of several British naval craft in
the disputed Shatt al Arab waterway demonstrates, Iran’s worries
about the spillover of the Iraqi conflict over its vast western
borders are real. To the east, Afghanistan remains a hotbed of
narcotics trafficking and warlords. Pakistan is an unstable pivot. To
the north, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan and Armenia have their own levels
of instability; to the west, Turkey faces Kurdish irredentism fueled
by the developments in Iraq. In the Gulf, an endemic Sunni militancy
led by Al Qaeda threatens Saudi Arabia and other oil sheikdoms.
But it is the Bush administration’s advocacy of regime change in
Iran, as part of the “axis of evil,” that must account for much of
Iran’s current security disquiet, nourishing its thirst for nuclear
deterrence.
Iran’s policy makers and security analysts have been weighing for
some time the benefits and risks of its nuclear program.
The U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have lifted two direct threats
to Iran. Gone for the foreseeable future is Iran’s worry over Iraq’s
weapons of mass destruction, or another round of war like the bloody
eight-year Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s.
Moreover, Iran’s ailing economy would suffer greatly under UN
economic sanctions. Iran’s clerical rulers cannot be indifferent to
the decision by Libya’s Muammar el-Qaddafi to halt his nuclear
program and admit that his country’s security and economy would
suffer if he crossed the nuclear threshold. Sanctions would exact a
heavy price on the government’s resources at a time it is already
suffering a high unemployment rate, particularly among its large and
restless youth population, and when Tehran has yet to move the
victims of the Bam earthquake from tents into homes.
Yet if Tehran continues to feel threatened by regional instability
and by Washington’s (and Israel’s) open advocacy of regime change, it
will likely veer in the direction of nuclearization.
Thus Iran’s decision whether to pursue nuclear development is a
matter of striking a balance between national interests and
legitimate security worries.
Hence the United States and its allies should do what they can to
diminish Iran’s fears and to encourage a viable security arrangement
in the Gulf region in tandem with the United Nations.
Confidence-building measures – such as guaranteeing Iran’s integrity
or acknowledging Iran’s constructive conflict-management role in the
region – would achieve a lot more toward Iranian nonproliferation
than years or even decades of sanctions.
This, in turn, requires a willingness by the United States to
recognize Iran’s important role in regional stability, as
demonstrated by its cordial relations with the government of Hamid
Karzai in Kabul and its endorsement of the interim government in
Baghdad. Another positive signal would be to support Iran’s bid to
join the World Trade Organization, where it has only observer status.
The United States could also propose to drop its objections to Iran’s
construction of a nuclear reactor in Bushehr if Iran would suspend
its uranium enrichment program, halt the construction of a heavy
water plant and submit to thorough inspections.
While there is no guarantee of success for this “soft power”
approach, the current approach of demonizing Iran and threatening
sanctions will only motivate Tehran to pursue its nuclear ambitions.
A combination of security guarantees, economic benefits, support for
Iran’s legitimate right to peaceful nuclear technology and the olive
branch of diplomatic normalization has a much better chance of
putting Iran back on the path of nonproliferation than any other
approach.
Kaveh L. Afrasiabi is an Iranian political scientist who lives in the
United States. Pirouz Mojtahedzadeh is a professor of geopolitics at
Tarbiat Modaress University in Iran and director of the Eurosevic
Foundation in London. Iran’s nuclear program

Azer News, Azerbaijan
July 1 2004
Film on Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict to be shot

Preparatory work on the shooting of a feature film “Zalozhnik”
(Hostage) is going on at the “Azerbaijanfilm” film studio after Jafar
Jabbarli.
The film deals with the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over Upper
Garabagh and brave Azerbaijani youth who are ready to sacrifice their
lives to protect native lands from invaders.
The script-writers of the movie are People’s Artist Eldar Guliyev and
writer Natig Rasulzada.