Category: News

Libération
8 juin 2004
La Turquie, chance de l’Europe;
Poser les prémices de l’adhésion de la Turquie dans l’Europe c’est
déjà penser un XXIe siècle pacifique et aider à la reconnaissance du
génocide arménien.
AUTEUR: KEHAYAN Jean; JEAN KEHAYAN, journaliste et écrivain
Si la Turquie refusait d’entamer son processus pour entrer dans
l’Union européenne, il serait indispensable que les nations
fondatrices de l’Europe déploient des trésors de diplomatie pour
convaincre Ankara d’effectuer cette démarche. Au moment où le débat
franco-français labellise le “Non à la Turquie dans l’Europe”, on est
frappé par l’absence de clairvoyance. Et, à la timide exception de
Jacques Chirac, aucun homme d’Etat ne prend de position courageuse,
estimant que ce serait suicidaire dans le climat d’hystérie
anti-islamique actuel de faire de la géopolitique intelligente. Il
suffit pourtant de regarder une carte pour se persuader que la
démocratisation de “l’homme malade de l’Europe” serait une chance
pour la stabilisation de cette région volcanique aux pays riverains
qui ne donnent aucun signe de mouvement.
Naturellement, le pari est d’envergure : dix années seront-elles
suffisantes pour que la Turquie montre ses capacités à vouloir une
adhésion sincère ? Ce n’est pas une mince affaire que d’imaginer son
conseil de sécurité militaire abandonner un pouvoir absolu en
laissant la société civile décider du destin politique du pays. Pas
une mince affaire non plus d’humaniser des prisons moyenâgeuses et, à
l’instar de la défunte Union soviétique, ne pas utiliser la
psychiatrie pour briser les esprits libres du pays. Les militaires
dans les casernes, cela doit signifier une garantie contre la
création de sanctuaires terroristes, le maintien de la laïcité
kémaliste et la garantie d’être à l’abri de tout coup d’état.
Mes amis turcs, kurdes et arméniens de l’intérieur ont la certitude
que seule la démocratisation à marche forcée peut pousser les
autorités à mettre à plat leur histoire sanglante du début du siècle
lorsque, dans une tradition qui remonte aux croisades, les infidèles
grecs et kurdes furent impitoyablement massacrés et chassés de leurs
lieux de vie ancestraux. Le paroxysme de cette politique barbare
étant le génocide des Arméniens d’Anatolie de plus en plus reconnu
par les nations raisonnables et de plus en plus nié par des autorités
qui croient suffisant d’occulter un problème pour le résoudre. Pire,
et pour ne citer qu’eux, les musées d’Erzeroum et de Van ont une
section sur le génocide, mais c’est celui des Turcs par les Arméniens
qui ont résisté !
Il faut relire les Quarante Jours du Mussa Dagh de Franz Werfel pour
se convaincre que la résistance face à la pulsion génocidaire des
militaires ottomans en déliquescence relevait de l’évidence. Dans le
processus de démocratisation, la révision de l’histoire du siècle
écoulé n’est évidemment pas négociable et fort heureusement il existe
en Turquie suffisamment d’intellectuels courageux capables de
remettre les livres d’histoire dans le bon sens. Le pari est de
taille, à la hauteur des enjeux et des avantages.
Pour en rester au problème arménien, il est évident que la petite
république du Caucase aurait tout à gagner, comme la Géorgie, à avoir
des frontières européennes. Elle pourrait ainsi sortir de son
enclavement étouffant et d’une tutelle russe qui n’est pas sans
arrière-pensée. Comme gage de bonne volonté et pour en finir avec la
crainte de restitution de terres, la Turquie pourrait rendre à
l’Arménie sa capitale historique d’Ani dont la restauration par la
communauté mondiale redonnerait tout son sens à une histoire vieille
d’une bonne quinzaine de siècles et enlèverait aux Arméniens
éparpillés sur la planète un ressentiment légitime. Un lieu où mille
églises se dressaient au Xe siècle, une nouvelle Jérusalem
pluriethnique, multiconfessionnelle et pluriculturelle. Elle pourrait
dans sa lancée trouver un statut inédit à la montagne de l’Ararat
pour qu’elle redevienne symbole de paix entre les deux pays. Une
restitution de terres sans guerre serait la première grande avancée
de l’Europe.
Concessions impossibles ? Mais que serait l’Europe si des hommes
d’Etat tels que de Gaulle et Adenauer n’avaient un beau jour décidé
d’en finir avec la “séculaire haine entre Allemands et Français” ? Si
Willy Brandt ne s’était pas agenouillé à Auschwitz, nous serions bien
loin de ce continent composé de vingt-cinq nations admises à la hâte
à la table du festin pacifique.
Nos politiques n’ont pas été très regardants sur les garanties
qu’offrait la Pologne dans cette lutte titanesque qu’est le combat
contre l’antisémitisme de ce pays désormais sans Juifs, un pays
ignorant des Lumières qui rêve de faire entrer la notion de
chrétienté dans la Constitution ! Ils ont aussi fermé les yeux sur le
racisme et la corruption endémique et déstabilisante des ex-pays du
bloc soviétique tombés de la façon la plus sauvage dans un
libéralisme qui laisse des couches entières de la population dans la
misère, qui bafoue les droits des Tsiganes et des minorités avec des
desseins et des méthodes proches d’un nouvel apartheid.
La démocratie gage de paix et de lutte contre les extrémismes. On a
vu et compris maintenant que la politique de la canonnière des
Américains en Irak conduisait à des impasses sans aucune solution
lisible dans le court terme. A l’inverse, on imagine aisément le
pouvoir de contagion d’une Turquie démocratique sur ses voisins
immédiats, comme la Syrie ou la Jordanie, régis par un parti unique
qui enlève tout espoir de progrès. N’oublions pas que le monde arabe
au faîte de la civilisation a commencé à décliner au XVIe siècle avec
la prise du pouvoir ottoman : il est temps de renverser cette
histoire. Car, à trop traîner pour amorcer les négociations d’entrée,
la Turquie pourrait être tentée de fédérer les ex-Républiques
soviétiques turcophones et imaginer un axe Ankara-Bakou-Téhéran
capable de bipolariser à nouveau notre monde. C’en serait alors
définitivement fini de voir reconnu le génocide et résolu le problème
du Haut-Karabagh, créé de toutes pièces par les diaboliques
cartographes de Staline.
Les hommes politiques français n’osent pas dire clairement que le mot
musulman est un repoussoir, alors que l’islam est la deuxième
religion dans notre propre pays. N’était une levée de boucliers, le
terme réducteur de chrétien aurait bien vu sa place dans la
Constitution européenne.
Un beau matin, fort d’une subtile révélation, M. Valéry Giscard
d’Estaing a cru trouver l’argument imparable de la géographie. D’un
côté on se fait les chantres d’une mondialisation qui abolit les
frontières, mais pour les seuls capitaux, et de l’autre on ressuscite
l’Asie mineure pour opposer une fin de non-recevoir
(1). Quelle insulte à tous les Arméniens éparpillés de par le monde
d’apprendre que leurs efforts à devenir Français, Européens,
Américains et autres en une seule génération étaient aussi évidents.
Personne n’aurait donc la hauteur de vue historique pour envisager
que la Turquie soit la chance d’une Europe vieillissante et fatiguée
sur le plan des idées et de la démographie.
Enfin, notre classe politique donneuse de leçons ne devrait pas
oublier qu’elle sera jugée pour s’être tue sinon rendue complice du
génocide rwandais ; qu’elle fait des courbettes devant Vladimir
Poutine, génocideur du peuple tchétchène qui n’a pas attendu le 11
septembre pour vouloir s’affranchir de la tutelle russe, tsariste et
communiste. Ces mêmes hommes qui déroulent le tapis rouge devant les
dirigeants chinois à la tête du plus grand Etat totalitaire de la
planète. Enfin, et puisque la religion semble être un atout maître,
comment ne pas reprocher à certains de nos leaders d’obéir à l’Opus
Dei dont la caractéristique n’est pas précisément de cultiver la
tolérance.
Certes, l’adhésion de la Turquie ne sera pas résolue en quelques
années mais en poser les prémices, c’est déjà penser un XXIe siècle
pacifique et donner des chances à l’Europe au Proche et Moyen-Orient.
C’est aussi sortir l’Arménie de l’impasse dans laquelle elle se
trouve, à condition qu’elle quitte son vieux costume soviétique,
qu’elle libère la presse et qu’elle entre dans le processus
démocratique ouvert par Lévon Ter Pétrossian, en se débarrassant de
ses mafias et de la mendicité auprès de la Banque mondiale. En somme,
il serait temps de rêver à une Europe de toutes les utopies et de
toutes les libertés. Le oui de l’Europe à la Turquie procède de cet
espoir.
(1) L’ancien président de la Convention européenne, lors de son
audition par la Commission des Affaires étrangères de l’Assemblée
nationale, le 27 novembre 2002, s’était déclaré contre l’adhésion de
la Turquie soulignant : “Il suffit d’ouvrir un dictionnaire pour
constater que l’Asie mineure, ce n’est pas l’Europe”.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

JUDGE COLLABORATES WITH SKINHEADS
A1 Plus | 14:40:40 | 10-06-2004 | Social |
The first instance court of Center, Nork-Marash began considering
case on assault on journalists on Thursday.
The case has been instigated into the incident occurred at the rally
staged by National Unity leader Artashes Geghamyan on April 2, when
skinheads beat media representatives and broke their cameras.
As many as 50 skinheads were present at Thursday’s court session. About
20 of them stood on foyer barring journalists from entering the
courtroom and insulting them. They made insulting remarks toward
Noyan Tapan news agency correspondent Sona Mashouryan and widely
smiling promised “to smash her head”.
Before letting Aykakan Zhamanak newspaper’s editor-in-chief Nikol
Pashinyan and the same newspaper’s correspondent Hayk Grigoryan enter,
the skinheads questioned them who they are and why came here.
When the newspaper representatives passed the first barrier and
eventually entered the courtroom, one skinhead start questioning them
here and asked the judge whether to let them sit down or not.
Nikol Pashinyan said he has nothing to do in the court where skinheads
decide everything and went out.
Many journalists failed to get in session room to hear the case on
the assault on their colleagues and remained outdoors.

ASBAREZ ONLINE
TOP STORIES
06/09/2004
TO ACCESS PREVIOUS ASBAREZ ONLINE EDITIONS PLEASE VISIT OUR
WEBSITE AT <;HTTP:// 1) Turkish Court Frees Pro-Kurdish Lawmakers 2) Turkish Police Raid Pro-Kurdish Media, Detain 23 3) Turkey's Kurds Welcome Broadcasts in Kurdish, with Broken Hearts 4) French Armenians Call on Chirac to Take Stance 5) Zepure Shant Dies 1) Turkish Court Frees Pro-Kurdish Lawmakers ANKARA (Reuters)--Turkey's appeals court ordered the release of former Nobel peace prize nominee Leyla Zana and three other Kurdish former lawmakers on Wednesday in a landmark decision certain to please the European Union it seeks to join. The ruling, freeing them pending appeal, coincided with historic first Kurdish-language broadcasts on state television, and the start of an appeal at the European Court of Human Rights on the fate of jailed Kurdish rebel chief Abdullah Ocalan. "Turkey's 80-year ban on the Kurds is over today," Sirri Sakik, another former pro-Kurdish lawmaker, told Reuters outside Ankara's Ulucanlar prison as supporters waited for the four to walk free. "It shows Turkey recognizes the Kurdish reality." Turkish financial markets bounced on news the four would be freed, seeing it as highlighting improved human rights and promoting a drive for EU membership. Zana, campaigning for Kurdish rights, had taken on a great symbolic importance for supporters and those who saw her as threatening Turkish unity. Turkey had denied the very existence of its Kurdish minority for decades, terming them "mountain Turks." Courts came down hard on public expressions of Kurdish identity, especially after the outbreak of armed separatism in 1984. Kurds form an estimated 12 million of Turkey's 70 million population. The EU and international human rights groups consider Zana, Hatip Dicle, Selim Sadak, and Orhan Dogan prisoners of conscience. They were jailed in 1994 after being stripped of their parliamentary mandates and convicted of maintaining ties to Kurdish separatist guerrillas. "Their verdict has not been overturned. But taking into account their long imprisonment, a decision was made for their release pending the end of the investigation," a court official told Reuters. The 1994 conviction was upheld by a state security court in April after a retrial ordered by the European Court of Human Rights, which said Zana and the others were denied a fair trial. April's ruling brought sharp criticism from the EU. The Ankara government is working flat-out on political and human rights reforms and hoping to wind a firm start date for accession talks when EU leaders meet in December. A state prosecutor called this week for the annulment of their sentences, and the court official said an appeal court would start hearing the case from July 8. "This will make things easier for us politically, both domestically and abroad," Justice Minister Cemil Cicek said. "The Turkish justice system did what it needed to do." Cicek told reporters the court had correctly interpreted recent legal reforms aimed at meeting EU criteria. The government last month abolished the controversial state security courts under which the four were tried, and is working to set up new civilian structures to replace them. 2) Turkish Police Raid Pro-Kurdish Media, Detain 23 ISTANBUL (AFP)--Anti-terror police raided on Tuesday a pro-Kurdish news agency and two magazines and detained at least 23 employees on suspicion of links with armed Kurdish rebels, Kurdish sources said. Police obtained court permission to search the Istanbul office of the Dicle news agency and said the operation was part of security measures ahead of the NATO summit in the city on June 28-29, the secretary of the agency told AFP by telephone. "They also said that people here are suspected of being linked to the PKK," she said, referring to the separatist Kurdistan Workers' Party, which this month announced the end to a five-year unilateral cease-fire with the government. The pro-Kurdish Democratic People's Party (DEHAP) said police also searched the offices of two small pro-Kurdish monthly magazines, Ozgur Halk and Genc Bakis. They were also suspected of having links with the PKK, DEHAP spokesman Kemal Avci told AFP. DEHAP issued a statement condemning the raids and accusing the government of insincerity in democratization efforts aimed at bringing Turkey closer to the European Union. 3) Turkey's Kurds Welcome Broadcasts in Kurdish, with Broken Hearts YOLBOYU (AFP)--Glued to the television set in a squalid coffee shop, residents of this Kurdish village on Wednesday welcomed the first-ever Kurdish broadcast in Turkey but also voiced resentment that it took so long to come about and only through EU pressure. Haunted by memories of the days when their mother tongue was banned in the country, villagers gathered in the shop ahead of the broadcast on TRT state television, visibly eager and excited. As the presenter announced the beginning of the taboo-breaking program in Kurmanci, the most widespread Kurdish dialect in Turkey, complete silence fell and the crowd watched the 30-minute program attentively. "This is what we have been waiting for since the 1970s. It has finally come true," said 32-year-old worker Abdurrahman Demir, referring to the period when Kurds first raised their demands for cultural rights. "My mother is old. She does not speak Turkish. Now she will also be able to understand," exclaimed Selahattin Cimen, 37. Turkey launched daily television and radio broadcasts in non-Turkish languages on Monday, under pressure from the European Union, which will decide in December whether the country is ready to start accession talks. The program, called "Our Cultural Riches," started with news and continued with a bizarre mix of Kurdish music and brief documentaries on nature, the development of civilization, and technology. In a sign of the haste with which the program was put together, the "news" material was taped earlier in the week. "Even though the content was poor, even though it was short, even though it was undertaken because of EU pressure, we are still happy to watch a broadcast in our own language on our national television," Demir said. Worker Zeki Karakas added: "We are both happy and sad. We are happy to watch television in our mother tongue and we are sad because we wished that those programs had started not because the EU wanted them, but because we wanted them." For years, Ankara had rejected Kurdish demands for cultural freedoms, fearing that such rights could fuel nationalist sentiment among the minority and constitute a reward for Kurdish rebels waging a bloody campaign for self-rule in the country's southeast. Several Kurdish channels, broadcasting either from Europe or the Kurdish enclave in neighboring northern Iraq, are already widely watched in Turkey's southeast, where satellite dishes have become an inseparable part of the landscape. Also as part of EU-sought reforms, private courses began teaching the Kurdish language earlier this year. The restive region has enjoyed a period of relative calm since 1999 when the separatist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) announced an end to its 15-year armed campaign and the government loosened its grip on locals. But the PKK, now known as KONGRA-GEL, said last week that it was ending the unilateral truce as of June 1, raising fears of renewed bloodshed in the area. The Kurdish conflict has claimed some 37,000 lives, most of them rebels. 4) French Armenians Call on Chirac to Take Stance PARIS (Yerkir)--A public rally will take place in Paris on June 12, demanding that French President Jacques Chirac take a final stance on Turkey's European Union membership. Organized by the Hai Tahd Committee of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation of France, the gathering will take place around the monument to the victims of the Armenian Genocide, which includes a statue of Gomidas Vartabed, erected in April 2003 in a park between the Armenian Cathedral on Jean-Goujon, and Champs Elysee, near the Seine River. French Armenians are appealing to the French government to honor the 1987 and 2004 resolutions of the European Parliament, stipulating that before starting accession talks on its EU membership, Turkey withdraw its troops from northern Cyprus invaded in 1974, release political prisoners, guarantee rights of Kurdish and religious minorities, recognize the Armenian Genocide perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire, and lift the blockade of Armenia imposed in 1991. 5) Zepure Shant Dies Folllowing a lengthy illness, Zepure Shant, one of the founding members of the Hamazkayin Kaspar Ipegian theatrical group died in Glendale, California on Monday, June 7. She was 92. Born in the European Turkish town of Rodosto, Shant eventually moved to Lebanon. In 1941, during the formation of the Kaspar Ipegian theatrical group, she actively participated, taking on both major and smaller roles in almost all performances. Besides her love for the theater, Shant's fondness for singing landed her in the Parsegh Ganachian Kousan choir. She was married to Levon Shant's son Souren. They had one child, Levon. Throughout the years, Zepure Shant maintained a profound connection to the Kaspar Ipegian theatrical group, with the sole objective of serving Armenian theater. With the outbreak of Lebanon's civil war, she settled in Los Angeles, and continued to support Armenian theater, specifically collaborating with director Jean Nshanian. Funeral services for Zepure Shant will take place on Friday, June 11, 11 AM at St. Mary's Armenian Apostolic Church in Glendale, California. Burial services will be conducted at the Hollywood Hills Forest Lawn Cemetery. All subscription inquiries and changes must be made through the proper carrier and not Asbarez Online. ASBAREZ ONLINE does not transmit address changes and subscription requests. (c) 2004 ASBAREZ ONLINE. All Rights Reserved. ASBAREZ provides this news service to ARMENIAN NEWS NETWORK members for academic research or personal use only and may not be reproduced in or through mass media outlets.

Immigrants from former Soviet Union mourn Reagan
By GILLIAN FLACCUS, Associated Press Writer
Fresno Bee
June 9, 2004
LOS ANGELES (AP) – Rabbi Velvel Tsikman remembers a time when the only
link he had to his Jewish heritage was a line in his Soviet passport
that read: “Nationality: Jewish.”
Now, Tsikman – who in the former Soviet Union was forbidden to wear
a yarmulke – watches over a vibrant Russian Jewish community in West
Hollywood from his office at the Chabad Russian Jewish Community
Center.
Tsikman says he credits his spiritual freedom to the late Ronald
Reagan, whose anti-missile program drew the Soviets into a costly
arms race, helping lead to the collapse of what Reagan called the
“evil empire.” His 1987 demand to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev
at the Berlin Wall – “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall” – was the
ultimate challenge of the Cold War.
Tsikman recalled with emotion the first time a Jewish synagogue opened
in the Ukraine after years of religious oppression. He began to wear
a yarmulke openly and grow his beard; he soon veered from a career
in computers to the spiritual life of a rabbi.
“It was like going from the basement to the street and seeing the
light,” Tsikman said. “(Reagan’s) doctrine, what he did, was very
helpful to destroy the monster that was there in Europe.” Those
sentiments were echoed across Southern California, home to large
Russian and Eastern European immigrant communities. They were also
reflected in poignant signs and flags placed outside the Santa Monica
mortuary where Reagan’s body was taken after his death Saturday at
age 93.
Lithuanian and Polish flags sprouted from the grass. Posters paying
homage to Reagan – some decorated with pieces of the Berlin Wall –
sat propped against a fountain alongside flowers and balloons.
“Sir – You told Gorbachev to ‘Take down this wall.’ We helped. Thanks
for your courage and leadership,” read one sign that was affixed with
two quarter-sized bits of the Berlin Wall.
Another sign, accompanied by a Lithuanian flag, read: “President
Reagan, Thank you for Lithuanian freedom.” Still another said:
“Solidarnosc! With love from Poland,” a reference to Reagan’s efforts
to promote the Solidarity labor movement in Poland in the 1980s.
Pope John Paul II sent a message Tuesday to Nancy Reagan, expressing
“deep gratitude” for her late husband’s commitment to the cause of
freedom in the world and his work to help end the Soviet grip on
eastern Europe.
In West Hollywood, Tsikman has for 12 years watched over the Russian
Jewish community center, an anchor for up to 50,000 Soviet bloc
immigrants in greater Los Angeles. The neighborhood is dotted with
Russian, Ukranian and Armenian groceries, pharmacies and video stores,
and people speak more Russian than English.
Dozens of seniors chatted Tuesday about the impact Reagan had on
their lives.
“This is a guy who changed the world. It wasn’t only his speeches – it
was his actions,” said Aleksandr Shakhnovich, 57, a former shipbuilder
for the Soviet navy.
“He cut down the economy of the USSR and it was one of the main reasons
the country just shut down. He did something that not only changed
my life, but changed the lives of everyone in the former Soviet Union.”
Down the street, Armenian grocer Paul Khostikyan paused from unloading
fresh fruit to remember the man he called “the best president in
U.S. history.”
Khostikyan, 54, who immigrated in 1990, said he remembered Reagan’s
famous speech at the Berlin Wall – and recalled being moved by his
bold words.
“I liked how he talked about freedom,” said Khostikyan, now a
U.S. citizen. “He really meant it, not like other presidents. He will
be in history much more than Clinton or Bush.”
At the community center, Tsikman brushed his finger against his
yarmulke and watched contentedly as dozens of elderly people ate at
long tables, laughing and chatting in Russian.
“They are living in a paradise here. It’s like God is paying them for
a terrible life in Russia,” Tsikman said. “These people were sitting
home waiting to die. When they came here, they came alive again.”

Gil Spencer: At 51, it’s off to Armenia with Peace Corps
The Delaware County Times, PA
June 9 2004
You ask businessman John Tease what, at the age of 51, he’s thinking
— joining the Peace Corps and going to Armenia to live in a rural
village for two years — and he’ll throw it back at you as if it’s
the most natural thing in the world to do.
“You probably had the same thought in your mind 35 years ago,”
he’ll say.
And when you reply, “No, I didn’t,” he’ll smile acceptingly and try
to explain himself.
It turns out that, early on, Tease was your conventional American
high school kid.
He graduated from Penncrest High School in 1971. But he wanted to do
something a little different from his peers, who were mostly going
off to white-bread colleges.
“The thought of going to Penn State left me uninspired,” he explained.
So, even though he spoke barely a word of Spanish, he went to the
University of the Americas, south of Mexico City, where he majored
in anthropology and met his future wife.
She was from Denver. So, after spending four years in school, he
went back to Colorado with her. They got married and he went into
her family’s business.
Some 30 years and two daughters later, they got amicably divorced.
It was the divorce and a certain level of financial independence
that left Tease free enough to pursue the daydream he had back in
high school.
It was his Penncrest social studies teacher, Emerson Tjart, who got
him thinking about other cultures, other countries and the people who
live in them. Tjart had done his own hitch in the Peace Corps in the
mid-’60s, serving in Iran before the ayatollahs took over.
“Why Armenia?” I asked Tease.
“Actually, I was looking for an African assignment,” he said,
explaining he was almost set to go there when he was injured while
racing his quarter horse in Denver.
After he was cleared medically, he got a call from the Corps.
“They said Armenia,” and that was that.
So, he began to read up on it.
“It’s a tiny country, the oldest Christian nation in the world,” having
declared it the state religion in the 4th century. The literacy rate
is 99 percent, but under Soviet domination it was kept a relatively
poor nation, he said.
Now that the Soviet Union no longer exists, Armenians are trying to
make the painful transition to a market economy. The country is still
recovering from the 1988 earthquake that destroyed almost a quarter
of all the buildings in the north. Still, it’s a country rich in
culture with a strong intellectual tradition and a population with
a gift for commerce.
Tease will start out in a 90-day training program, learning the
language (East Armenian) and getting a feel for the do’s and don’ts
of the culture. Then, depending on the needs of the community, he’ll
be assigned.
Since his own experience is in business, he hopes he’ll be put to
work helping the locals improve their economy: from finding investment
sources to setting up computers systems to just teaching high school
students what’s really involved in a free-market system.
Tease comes by his adventuresome streak honestly.
His father, Sam, who still lives in Upper Providence with his bride
Gin, has traveled the world on his motorcycle. At 82, the retired
Marine is planning a jaunt up through New England later this summer.
As for John’s daughters, they’re no slouches, either. They’re Western
girls.
“They ride horses well and they shoot straight,” he says proudly.
His youngest, Allison, fought forest fires with the U.S. Forestry
Service right out of high school before going into nanotechnology,
while the older one, Meredith, is the chief operating officer of a
hedge fund.
High-spiritedness apparently runs in the family.
So his cars are sold, as is one of his horses. The other, his beloved
Sugar, has been put out to pasture.
He leaves this week. He can bring with him 100 pounds of personal
belongings, which will include a laptop, a short-wave radio and a
sleeping bag rated for sub-zero temperatures. The climate is a lot
like Denver’s: dry but with cold winters.
The pay?
“It’s enough to feed yourself” with a little left over for “some
level of entertainment.”
The housing? Adequate, safe and secure.
He’s been told that “a good sleeping bag, flexibility and a sense
of humor will enable one to survive.” He’s got the sleeping bag
for sure. He’ll find out how much of the other two he has after he
gets there.
“I only hope I can give back as much as I’m going to get out of this,”
he says. “I like to think I have much to offer, but it worries me.”
He doesn’t look worried. He looks happy.
“I’m so exited,” he says, sounding like a kid. “I’m ready for this.”
Gil Spencer’s column appears Sunday, Wednesday and Friday.
E-mail: [email protected].
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Azer Tag, Azerbaijan State Info Agency
June 9 2004
DEMOCRATIC REFORMS PLAY IMPORTANT ROLE IN DEVELOPMENT OF AZERBAIJAN
[June 09, 2004, 16:41:32]
On June 8, the deputy foreign minister of Azerbaijan Republic Vagif
Sadigov has met with the delegation led by the president of Assembly
of the Turkish Associations of America (ÀÒÀÀ), Erjument Kilinj.
As was informed to AzerTAj from the press center of the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, deputy minister Vagif Sadygov, hospitably having
welcomed visitors, highly has estimated activity of Assembly of the
Turkish Associations of America and has emphasized continuation of
the said work in the same spirit.
Speaking of the Armenia-Azerbaijan, Nagorny Karabakh conflict, the
work done in the field of its settlement, both refugees and the IDPs
as a result of the conflict, the deputy minister has noted importance
of activation of efforts by the international community for quick
settlement of the said problem on the basis of principles and norms
of international law.
Having noted, that due to the activity which is carried out by the
State Committee on Work with Azerbaijanis Living Abroad, in the
USA were generated the organizations of the Azerbaijan Diaspora,
the deputy minister has emphasized necessity of support of ÀÒÀÀ and
developments of joint cooperation in this business.
Having told that democratic reforms carried out in Azerbaijan play
important role in development of our country, president of ÀÒÀÀ
Erjument Kilinj has emphasized, that serious steps connected to human
rights are undertaken, and has expressed hope for continuation and
henceforth successful internal and foreign policy.
Erjument Kilinj has presented detailed information on activity of the
organization supervised by him, having noted, that is ready to assist
in solution of many questions, including probation of the Azerbaijani
students at the US Congress.
He also highly estimated the attention shown by the Azerbaijan state
to problems of our compatriots, living abroad.
At the meeting, also were exchanged views on a number of other
questions representing mutual interest.

DECISION ON NEW BSTDB MEMBERS IN 2005
Tirana, 9 June 2004 (16:55 UTC+2)
Macedonian Press Agency, Greece
June 9 2004
A decision on the accession of one or two new members into the Black
Sea Trade and Development Bank, BSTDB, is expected to be reached
in the first half of 2005, according to statements made to MPA by
Armenia’s deputy Minister of Finance and Economy David Avetissian,
the bank’s new Board of Directors President.
The Armenian official, who was elected to the post in the
bank’s general assembly meeting in Tirana, did not reveal the new
members of the bank. However, well-informed sources mentioned that
Serbia-Montenegro will be the 12th state that will participate in
the bank’s share capital followed by FYROM.
Also, the urgent issue of the capital review will be discussed in the
next BSTDB general assembly meeting in Yerevan, Armenia in June 2005
given the fact that certain member-states have a hard time contributing
their share in the bank’s capital.
In a press conference in the Albanian capital, BSTDB president Mustafa
Gurtin stated that Armenia, Georgia and Moldavia requested to cut down
their participation in the share capital of the bank from 2% to 1%.
Mr. Avetissian clarified to MPA that one of the priorities during his
term until June 2005 will be the financing of regional projects and
activities in the sectors of energy and transportation infrastructure.
The BSTDB general assembly in its 6th annual general assembly meeting
in Tirana also elected the representatives of Moldavia and Russia
as assistant presidents for the period until the 7th annual general
assembly to be held in Yerevan, Armenia on June 5, 2005.

Good Governance and Human Security in the Caspian Region
By Hooshang Amirahmadi, Rutgers University
Source: AIC Insight, American Iranian Council
Payvand, Iran
June 9 2004
Lecture Presented at the Conference on:
Caucus, Caspian and Central Asia: Maritime Dimensions of Security May
14-16, 2004. Center for Foreign Policy Studies, Dalhousie University
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Good morning! Let me begin by saying how honored I am to have been
invited to speak at this distinguished gathering of experts on
Caspian security. I want to thank David Griffths of the Center for
Foreign Policy Studies (of Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova
Scotia, Canada) and Amir Mohagheghi of the Cooperative Monitoring
Center (of the Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, USA) for
the invitation and joint sponsorship of this rather timely
conference. After the tragic events of September 11, 2001, the
Caspian region has taken a back seat to the Middle East, where the
United States has focused its war against terrorism, the former Iraqi
regime, and now the religious and nationalist Iraqi rebels. Yet the
Caspian region and its security are no less important to global
peace, regional stability, and American security.
Equally important is the security of the Caspian region for its own
people, particularly if viewed from a multidimensional perspective,
involving human-social, military-strategic, resource-economic,
marine-environment, geopolitics-boundaries, and emergency-management
security issues. In this lecture, however, I wish to focus my talk on
“good governance and human security in the Caspian region,” covering
the five littoral states: Iran, Russian Federation, Kazakhstan,
Turkmenistan, and Azerbaijan. I shall begin with an outline of my
conceptual thinking on the subject and then apply the framework to
the real situation in the countries. Except as otherwise specified,
the statistics I refer to in the lecture are for 2001 and taken from
the Human Development Report 2003 of the United Nation Development
Programs (HUR 2003, UNDP).
For centuries, the Caspian region was the strategic crossroads for
the empires of Europe, Asia, and Africa. Control of its vital land
and water routes, particularly for the spice trade, assured great
power and wealth; it also invited rivalry – “the Great Game.” During
the Cold War, ideological confrontations were added to the
geopolitical allure of the area, causing the region to serve as a
fault line in the East-West struggle. Now that technological changes
have diminished the significance of its trade routes and the Cold War
has ended, the control of the region’s rich hydrocarbon resources has
become the focus of international business and political players —
the region has once again become a pivotal frontier.
However, it is a frontier vastly different from that of the past.
History teaches us that while new frontiers bring significant
dangers, they also generate opportunities for progress. The
disappearance of the Soviet Union prompted regional and outside
players to expand their influence in the region – a game
characterized by gross shortsightedness with respect to the people in
the region and their needs for good governance and human security.
Governance – the way society collectively solves its problems and
meets its needs, and human security – human rights and human capacity
development, are the most critical challenges that the littoral
states must meet in order to advance their societies in the global
community.
Governance and Security Requirements of the New World
Till the end of the Cold War, security was understood in largely
political and military terms as it was defined by the state for the
protection of its national territory and control of its people. As
such, neither human security nor governance were central to the
security debates. Both were submerged under the rubric of national
sovereignty and territorial integrity – the two most sacred defensive
functions of the nation-state in the Cold War era. This political
concept of security was partly influenced by the American experience,
where early theories of international security were developed.
Emergence of a democratic-imperial capitalist America, in parallel
with the emergence of the Soviet Union as another world power of a
“social-imperialist” dictatorial nature, was the key factor.
But the bi-polar, state-centric world, which gave birth to this
concept of security, has largely disappeared: the ambitious tightly
knit USSR has been partially replaced with a loose and largely timid
Commonwealth of Independent Countries (CIS), and Western Europe has
gained relative political autonomy from the United States in
international relations. Even Japan now has become politically
assertive in global matters. One consequence of this is that a new
world has emerged where the state is no more the only player and
security is no longer only the state’s business. Specifically, in the
current tri-centric world where the state is challenged by
multinational corporations and civil society groups, a new concept of
security is emerging where governance and human security are the key
concepts alongside the old concept of state security.
Prior to World War II, the concept of security was dominated by
liberal ideas, which gave prominence to legal arguments and state
preference, as opposed to capabilities, and tended to view
international relations in optimistic terms. In the post-World War
II, that is in the Cold War environment, realists, and then
neo-realists, took over the security field and placed state power in
the center of their new constructs as a means of regulating an
otherwise anarchic international system. Security then emerged as a
field preoccupied with constraining the power of other sovereign
states and non-state actors through military deterrence and
containment. But pre-emption, a concept central to the current Bush
doctrine, was not allowed. The current United States defense strategy
has gone even beyond pre-emption, in practice becoming a prevention
strategy.
The Vietnam War helped to weaken the realists and increase the
predominance of critical theories in security and international
relations. The road was then opened to new ideas, some of which, like
deconstructionism and post-modernism, begin to question the
ideological basis and assumptions of political security as a means of
state domination. The state was also rejected as the only unit of
world security. It was argued that the Hobbsian view of the
individual as inherently ruthless and self-driven is contrary to
human experience and must thus be rejected. This cultural approach
was complemented by the globalization debate, arguing that it has
empowered the transnational corporations in international relations.
Humanizing the individual, recognizing the corporate players, and
limiting the sovereign privilege of the state meant that the old
state-centric security concepts were no longer valid in the emerging
post-Cold War world.
The international system is now viewed as having three groups of
stakeholders: the state, the multinational corporation, and the
individual. This latter in turn was considered as having a
three-dimensional existence: member of the human race, self, and
citizen (civil society actor as well). Only this last dimension was
recognized by the old state-centric security concept: that state
security also meant in a sense the security of its citizens, who were
considered anarchical and assumed to have contradictory (national)
interests to those of citizens in other states. Here, citizens are
territorially bound within a sovereign entity – the nation-state.
Individual as a member of the human race or as self was considered
irrelevant and in fact anti-security.
Expanding the rights of the individual beyond citizenship rights and
accounting for the corporate players meant that a new approach was
also needed to conceptualize the way societies were governed, namely
a governance model. The old concept held that citizens have governing
rights but have, under democracies, bestowed that right to their
state. In dictatorships, it was held that such rights are usurped by
the state. But as far as security was concerned, the state
represented its respective citizens in both cases, and the
representation was legitimate to the extent that the state did indeed
provide the required strategic security. In other words, the
protective state, democratic or otherwise, had an inalienable
sovereign right to security.
Governance, the way society collectively solves its problems and
meets its needs, requires public participation, decentralization and
partnership among the state, the civil society and the corporate
sector. The key concept of partnership in turn involves or enhances
consultation, cooperation and coordination across functional
(sectoral) and territorial (spatial) units of the nation-state.
Governance is, thus, a more integrated approach to decision-making,
development planning, and societal management. It improves
transparency, accountability and social inclusion, and thus results
in societal cohesiveness. More importantly, the model fits the
tri-centric world of the state, the civil society and the corporate
sector.
The governance model is, thus, only possible under a democratic state
or at the least a state that is prepared to recognize the rights of
its citizens beyond the ordinary citizenship rights to include rights
they are entitled to as individuals and members of the human race.
These rights include human rights as defined in the UN Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, and human development as outlined in the
UN Millennium Development Goals. Included in these documents are
political, economic, social, cultural, territorial, institutional,
spiritual, ideological, and informational needs and aspirations. From
this perspective, states are classified as high, medium, and low
human development achievers.
Besides these changes, globalization has also resulted in a number of
significant developments, the most important of which are the
emergence of issues that are both threats and panaceas to the
security concerns of the state, the individual, and the corporation.
These include terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, HIV/AIDS, drug
trafficking and addiction, environmental degradation, poverty,
corruption, and heightened trans-border traffic of people and
commodities. For example, the Afghan opium trade is a major security
concern for Iran but a security panacea for Afghan cultivators; and
corruption in Caspian states is a major means of wealth accumulation
but threatens the social fabric of the nations. The emergence of
issues as security factors adds the concern of dealing with non-state
actors, who are often not bound to any particular territory.
Terrorism is, evidently, a case in point.
Globalization, by making peoples and states more interdependent has
increased poverty and income inequality though it had the potential
to reduce them. Globalization has particularly endangered the
security of the smaller developing countries whose governments are
slow to adapt to technological and societal changes, and who have
more difficulty seeing beyond short-term financial interests toward
the long-term health of their peoples. Competing for international
resources can be a dangerous proposition for the poorer states, as
they already are facing tremendous challenges in managing their debts
and fueling sustainable growth. More critically, their relative
poverty in the absence of appropriate governance makes them highly
exploitable by multinational corporations. In addition, competition
among nations to attract foreign investment leads to a lack of
taxation, labor law, and environmental protection.
Another critical feature of the new tri-centric world system is a
built-in tension in its drive for simultaneous stability and chaos, a
development that has followed the emergence of a global civil society
of global actors and constituencies, and thus global accountability
and common vulnerability. In particular, the system is caught between
two diametrically opposing tendencies, one calling for integration
and cooperation and the other creating conditions for disintegration
and conflict. Let us call these influences world-integrating forces
and world-disintegrating forces. Broadly speaking, world-integrating
forces include the corporate sector and technological forces, while
disintegrative forces are comprised of interventionist states and
certain non-state fundamentalist actors such as terrorist
organizations and ethnic separatist movements.
There are many ramifications of the contradictory tendencies for
integration and disintegration; the one I believe is most pivotal for
a new paradigm of global security and coexistence is the diminishing
utility of illegitimate power and offensive force, including
militarism and violence, the so-called “hard power,” in gaining
societal hegemony or maintaining a popularly undesirable status quo.
As the power of offensive force has diminished, particularly when
used unilaterally and preventively, economic force and information
technologies, along with other components of so-called “soft power,”
have become the most effective means of influence and domination.
Indeed, Japan and Germany have grown into powerful international
forces almost entirely because of their economic strength and
information-processing capabilities. In the absence of an expansive
“soft power,” no amount of “hard power” may be exercised to gain
dominance, legitimacy, or democracy.
In the tri-centric world, military power is not the most effective
way of providing security for a country. The United Nations
Development Forum says “the world can never be at peace unless people
have security in their daily lives. Future conflicts may often be
within nations rather than between them—with their origins buried
deep in growing socio-economic deprivation and disparities. The
search for security in such a milieu lies in development, not in
arms.” It will be impossible for a developing nation to make progress
towards such goals as peace, development, environmental protection,
human rights, and democratization without attending first to the
sustainable development of its people’s capacities. The lack of human
security, a universal issue now, is one of the causes of national
discord, and can lead to multinational military conflicts. These
conflicts can be prevented by meeting threats to human security
before they become larger and more violent problems.
With the growing recognition of economics and information
technologies as fields of force, and thus means of security, the
state has come under increasing pressure to show performance in these
areas. This demand is particularly significant in the context of the
increasing rights of individuals and corporations. Significantly,
under the new condition, totalitarian and authoritarian regimes are
increasingly forced to accept the legitimate rights of their human
and corporate elements, and become accountable to national and global
societies. Indeed, the state is viewed as legitimate only to the
extent that it is acceptably developmental and democratic. Otherwise,
they are considered failed states; such states are increasingly
barred from claiming sovereignty, a concept that has increasingly
become people-centered.
Experience and Challenges of the Littoral Caspian States
How have the littoral Caspian states fared in the tri-centric world,
and what challenges do they face in security and governance? The
answer to this question must naturally recognize the significant
differences that exist among them in relation to their geography,
population, resources endowment, historic and cultural significance,
and regional and international relations and standing. Iran and the
Russian Federation, for example, have bigger economies and larger
populations, and are far more developed, wealthier, and better placed
strategically than Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan.
Nevertheless, they suffer from common problems and enjoy similar
advantages.
Iran and Russia should have been major regional integrationist forces
given their vast and strategic geographies and populations. In
reality, however, they are only marginally influential in their
region and are often seen as siding with disintegrative forces.
Iran-US conflict and US- Russia competition are key obstacles to the
potentials these countries have to assume a more active and effective
role in various regional matters. For example, Iran and Russia only
play peripheral roles in mediating regional conflicts, such as that
between Azerbaijan and Armenia, as they themselves have unresolved
conflicts with some states or ethnic groups at home or in the region.
And, more significantly, the states still need to find a solution to
the problem of the Caspian Sea legal regime.
Iran’s international political challenges include allegations
regarding state terrorism and nuclear proliferation. Both these
allegations are directed at the Iranian state, while terrorism in
most nations is a non-state phenomenon. Russia, on the other hand, is
a nuclear state and likes to view itself as a victim of Chechen
terrorism. Yet, Russia refuses to actively engage itself in the
so-called American war against terrorism, viewing the fighting in
Afghanistan and Iraq as largely rooted in the American desire to
dominate the region. The other Caspian states are largely viewed as
irrelevant to the terrorism and nuclear issues, but also have their
own international challenges. For example, the dispute over
Nagorno-Karabakh between Azerbaijan and Armenia remains a time bomb,
and Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan need to settle claims over fields in
the Caspian Sea.
Domestic politics are almost equally problematic in all five Caspian
states. Iran and Russia are authoritarian states that allow dissent
but also repress opposition selectively. They divide the population
into conformists and nonconformists, allowing freedom to the former
while restricting the rights of the latter in significant ways.
Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, on the other hands, are
totalitarian states where elections are disallowed or allowed only as
an international public relations ploy. In all these states
candidates for public offices are vetted, overtly or covertly, and
elections are rigged. Kazakhstan is not a signatory to the
International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (1966) and the
International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
(1966), while Iran has refused to sign the UN Convention Against
Torture and Other Cruel and Inhumane or Degrading Treatment and
Punishment (1984), and the UN Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979). Ideological rigidity
and power monopoly continue to remain major obstacles to the
development of a democratic polity in the Caspian states.
Economically, too, the Caspian states do not fare well in the new
world. While relatively wealthy because of oil and gas resources,
their GDP per capita (PPP US$) is below the world average of about
$7,376. More importantly, their per capita GDP has declined in the
last two decades or so, while income inequality has increased as has
regional and sectoral disparities. The littoral states are also only
partially integrated into the global economy through the extractive
oil and gas sector, though Russia has the added advantage of being a
big exporter of armaments. Their share of the total imports of
industrialized countries (including oil) is very low, under 0.5
percent, with the exception of Russia, whose share is comparable to
the major Western European economies. Statistics for their share of
the total exports from the same countries is similarly low. With the
exception of Russia again, some 70 to 80 percent of imports are
consumer goods; only 1 to 2 percent is capital goods.
Foreign investment remains miniscule in Iran, Azerbaijan,
Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, and the little capital that has been
attracted concentrate in the oil and gas sector. In Iran, for
example, only $400 million in foreign capital has been invested in
non-oil sectors since the revolution. Iran’s manufacturing value
added per capita in 2001 was only $285 (1990 US dollars) compared to
$876 for the developing countries (See IMF 2003 report on Iran’s
economy). Except for Russia, the other Caspian states have no better
position with respect to non-oil foreign investment or the value
added in manufacturing sector. In Azerbaijan, the manufacturing
sector has all but vanished. The fact is that the Caspian states
remain undeveloped and largely isolated from the international
non-oil markets. Of all the Caspian states, only Russia can claim to
be sufficiently engaged and developed.
The Caspian states are decades behind in technological development,
despite the fact that in countries like Iran and Russia, the people
could have created a powerful competitive economy. Russia is again
relatively advanced in technological fields but all the other states
are decades behind in the seven or eight key industries of our age:
electronics, telecommunications, computer hardware and software, new
materials, biotechnology, civil aviation, and genetic engineering.
The high-technology sector makes up 8 percent of Russia’s
manufacturing exports. For Iran the figure is 2 percent and for
Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan 4 percent and 5 percent respectively.
Russia spends 1 percent of its GDP (Purchasing Power Parity – PPP
$US) on research and development, other littoral states much less.
For Iran the figure stands at 0.1 percent, for Azerbaijan at 0.2
percent, for Kazakhstan at about 0.3 percent, and for Turkmenistan at
close to zero. Compare these figures to the figure for South Korea at
2.7 percent. Figures for internet users are similarly low: for every
1,000 people, 29.3 Russian citizens are internet users, for Iran
15.6, for Kazakhstan 9.3, for Turkmenistan 1.7, and for Azerbaijan
3.7. Compare these figures to the figure for South Korea at 521.1.
The Caspian states continues to mismanage their economies, which have
declined relative to the years immediately preceding the Soviet era
and pre-revolution in Iran. Managers are appointed on ideological and
relational bases, not on the basis of expertise or merit. Corruption
and rent seeking is rampant, and the governments dominate and lead
the economies at the expense of the private sectors, except for a few
well-connected, often corrupt, wealthy businessmen. It will take
years before these states can turn their economies and
information-processing capabilities into fields of force for security
purposes. Yet unless they mange to do so in the foreseeable future,
the Caspian states will increasingly have to resort to military
expenditures and thus further drain themselves of resources for
economic and technological developments. At present, they spent
almost as much on military as on health care or education. The
Caspian states spend between 3.5 and 4.4 percent of their GDP on
education and between 0.6 and 3.6 percent on health care, while
spending between 1 and 4.9 percent on military expenditures.
Socially, too, there are disturbing developments in these countries
when compared to developments globally. Income inequality is widest
in Russia and Iran, where the share of the richest 10 percent is
between 10 to 20 times larger than the share of the bottom 10 percent
poor. In Azerbaijan, where poverty is a more serious problem, almost
10 percent of the population earns less than $2 a day, and the GDP
per capita shrinks 1.3 percent every year. Between 30 to 45 percent
of the people in the littoral states live below the poverty line, and
the female share of the total earned income is between 10 and 15
percent. Women are economically more exploited than men across the
states, and in Iran they are also socially oppressed. The youth
unemployment stands at between 20 to 30 percent, and the annual rate
of “brain drain” ranges between 2 and 5 for every 1000 people, Iran
suffering the most. The young populations, about 60 percent of whom
are below the age of 30, also suffer from the lack of social
recreations. Many are addicted to drugs, particularly in Iran
according to official statistics. Ethnic groups remain restless and
some are plotting with foreign forces for separatist movements. In
Kazakhstan, regional disparity is extreme.
The Caspian states predominantly view their national strength and
defense in military terms, and thus pour a large percentage of their
resources into their military and police sectors. This tendency is
partly imposed on them, as they live in a dangerous neighborhood, but
some officials of the governments actually believe in the use of
offensive force and in the liberating power of violence. While Frantz
Fanon, the Martinican/French revolutionary political thinker, is no
longer widely read, his influence continues: “Violence is a cleansing
force,” he wrote in his The Wretched of the Earth, and it “restores
self-respect.” More specifically, the Caspian states continue to view
their security through the old state-centric lenses. The state
remains dominant and unanswerable to civil society and to private
businesses, and individuals are viewed as mere citizens with rights
determined by the state. The rights of the individual or citizen as
self or as members of the human race are peripheral at best.
Significant governance problems exist in the Caspian states. While
parliaments exist, they are often made null and void by decrees or
institutional mechanisms. Public participation in decision-making,
particularly in strategic areas, is even institutionally absent.
Almost no partnership exists between the state, civil society and the
business firms, and public policies often lead to social exclusion
rather than inclusion. The lack of participation and partnership
means that little cooperation and coordination exists across
functions and territories at almost every administrative level. No
wonder the Caspian states suffer from social incoherence and
political tension. The tragedy of September 11 has indeed exacerbated
the governance problem in the region as the states have often used
the security pretext to further limit freedoms, and abuse the human
rights and human development of their citizens. Political dissidents
are often labeled and dealt with as “terrorists.”
Not a single Caspian state is among the high human development
category of the UN report on Human Development. Of 175 countries
included in the UN ranking of nations with regard to their
achievements in human development, the Human Development Index (HDI)
rank for Russia is 63 and for Iran 106, with other nations in between
these two figures: Kazakhstan 76, Turkmenistan 87, and Azerbaijan 89.
Iran’s situation is particularly problematic as it is the only
Caspian littoral state with a negative GDP per capita (PPP $US) rank
minus HDI rank figure. At –29, Iran is only better than 7 countries
in the 175 countries included. The data is a good indication of state
efficiency in managing its resources. A higher positive figure will
indicate a more efficient bureaucracy, while a lower figure shows
exact the reverse. In terms of human rights, too, the Caspian states
fare badly compared to many in the world, with Iran, Kazakhstan and
Turkmenistan topping the list in the region with the most negative
records.
There is also some good news. The countries’ political cultures are
changing. Foreign policy is increasingly based on national interest,
away from ideological considerations, and increasingly thicker lines
are drawn between the states and disintegrative forces. It is now
recognized that new nuclear proliferators will not be tolerated, and
that identification with terrorists is dangerous. An increasing
number of the political elite now sees offensive force as
counterproductive, though the states continue to have a hard time
grasping the value of defensive forces such as economics and
technology or human rights and human developments. The role of
government is increasingly being challenged by a growing number of
NGOs and business firms throughout the region, and humanitarian
causes are receiving significant attention. A clear break is
developing between the state and NGOs, and this change demonstrates
the fact that the legitimacy of the state in the region has sharply
declined due to its inefficiency and the lack of transparency and
accountability.
There are positive developments in the economic sphere too. The
states have set up an “oil fund” to better manage their budgets and
allocate resources for future development, and their economies are
growing while their macroeconomic environment is stable. With the
exception of Russia, Caspian littoral states as yet have no
multinational corporations, but the business communities are
increasingly asserting their relative autonomy from the states. This
is particularly true of the small industrial entrepreneurs in the
forefront of the struggle for modernization of the economies. A few
Iranian companies now operate internationally, and an expatriate
counterpart has also emerged in the West. The internationalization of
these companies will help Iran’s economic integration, technology
transfer, capital flow, and foreign partnership. It will take a while
before firms in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan can hope to
achieve international prominence.
There is some good news socially as well. The middle class continues
to remain assertive and demand liberalism and democracy. Compared to
the past, their numbers are large and their quality high in Russia
and Iran. They now have better connections with both the working
people and the modern sections of the upper classes. In other
littoral states, however, they remain less significant but growing as
well. It is particularly important to note the progress that women
are making in private and public domains. Their literacy rate and
economic independence has improved significantly in recent years,
though their relative wellbeing is much lower than that achieved by
men. In Iran, there are many great women artists and poets, powerful
political voices, a Nobel laureate, an Oscar nominee, a best-selling
author, and a beauty queen. Women’s achievements have been even more
notable in the Russian Federation.
Ultimately, the main source of the Caspian states’ wealth today and
tomorrow is their people. Here too there is good news. Their level of
education and professionalism is fast improving, as is their global
reach and awareness. The literacy rate is well over 75 percent in
every state, and, according to the World Bank, 20 percent of the
relevant age group in the Caspian states participates in some form of
tertiary education. There are now millions of university graduates in
these countries, and their size is particularly expanding in science
and technology fields as well as in key social science disciplines.
These achievements notwithstanding, the Caspian states continue to
fail to generate visionary leaders among themselves. Why? In a
nutshell, the problem is rooted in the undeveloped nature of their
polity, and largely in the absence of well-developed political
parties.
To conclude this discussion, let me say that the Caspian littoral
states face a multiple of political, economic, social, cultural,
spatial, institutional and international challenges in order to
develop their countries. Among them, and from a security perspective,
governance and human development need to receive the highest
priority. The key to achieving success in these areas is to
intelligently mobilize and utilize available resources. Given that
these states are oil and gas rich, their attention must particularly
focus on a more transparent and accountable management of the revenue
from these natural resources. They must translate the finite
resources provided by nature into sustainable development, and this
needs to be done as quickly as possible, since for most states in the
Caspian region, oil provides a very short window of opportunity – in
Azerbaijan, e.g., less that 20 years.
It is often the case that a sound fiscal policy, like creation of an
“oil fund,” is viewed as the only proper policy. Yet, transparency,
accountability, a vibrant civil society, and genuine democracy play
an even more important role. It is indeed due to misunderstanding of
this aspect of natural resource management that most, if not all
natural-resources rich countries have less developed societies than
nations lacking significant natural resources: they have greater
poverty, income inequality and regional disparity, higher
international debt and dependency, more dictatorship and human rights
abuses, worse governance and legal procedures, and higher military
and nonproductive expenditures. While oil revenue is an additional
source of income and disruptive of traditional authority, it has also
led to declining per capita income and authoritarianism, raising the
likelihood for domestic conflicts.
To be sure, there is a political dimension to “resource curse.”
Revenues from the natural resources flow to the state, making it
relatively autonomous from the citizens and the private businesses.
They then often pay no taxes, or pay only negligibly, in such rentier
states, and thus these states receive little clamor for
representation from their citizens. The leaders here find no reason
to share power and often refuse to account for the revenues. When
transparency becomes a victim as a free press is suppressed, a host
of negative consequences will follow, including dictatorship and
human rights abuses. The absence of democracy then distorts economic
policy and national priorities. Thus, instead of seeking legitimacy
through the electoral process, the rulers seek it through
inappropriate spending. Rent seeking, corruption, debt accumulation,
and inflation can result, leading to political instability and
conflict, which is how the regime of the former Shah of Iran
collapsed. A recreation of the past then becomes a desirable
alternative and the future fails to come to life.

Armenian president appoints minister of town planning
Mediamax news agency
9 Jun 04
Yerevan, 9 June: Armenian President Robert Kocharyan has signed
a decree appointing Aram Arutyunyan as Minister of Town Planning,
the presidential press service has told Mediamax news agency.
Before his appointment Aram Arutyunyan was an MP of the Armenian
National Assembly and member of the Orinats Yerkir [Law-Governed
Country] faction.
Member of the Orinats Yerkir Party Ara Aramyan resigned his post as
Minister of Town Planning on 9 April this year after the arrest of
his son, Ayk Aramyan.
Ayk Aramyan was arrested in connection with the shoot-out at Yerevan’s
Triumph cafe on 12 March as a result of which five people were
wounded. He was charged under three articles of the Armenian Criminal
Code: attempt on life, illegal possession of weapons and hooliganism.

Armenia unsure about getting visas for Azeri-hosted NATO conference
Public Television of Armenia, Yerevan
8 Jun 04
Armenian servicemen will visit the Azerbaijani embassy in Georgia
where they will be granted entry visas to Baku. The spokesman for
the Armenian Defence Ministry, Seyran Shakhsuvaryan, has said that
NATO representatives have informed the Armenian side about this.
It is strange that information about the visas has been received not
from Azerbaijan, but from Brussels. Shakhsuvaryan also noted that
it is not yet clear whether Armenian officers will be granted visas
or whether they will return from Tbilisi to Yerevan empty-handed,
as has been the case before.