Category: News

Azat Artsakh – Republic of Nagorno Karabakh (NKR)
March 30, 2004

GERMANY AND TURKEY’S MEMBERSHIP TO EU

EUROPEAN ORIENTATION: The idea of “integration with the West” of this
Near East country on the shore of Bosphorus Strait is not new; it is
about 80 years old and belongs to the founder of the republic of
Turkey Kemal Ataturk. In the following years the loyal supporters of
this idea achieved turning integration into a problem of membership to
the European Union. The history of the latter problem counts four
decades and is the main foreign political line of Ankara. Membership
to EU is important first of all from the point of view of acquiring
stable economic interests. Besides, entering Europe has become a
matter of national dignity, the rating of the nation. And of course,
Turks have great hopes concerning significant modernization of the
country, as well as a firm position in the European family. Today
almost all the political forces presented in the parliament of Ankara,
as well as 75 percent of the population are for membership to
EU.

THREE DIFFERENT TENDENCIES: At the same time in Turkey there are
forces which not only argue on the problem of orientation but also
have serious internal disagreements. Today the country is divided by
three influential public-political streams: conservatives, democrats
and reactionaries. The first of these are for returning to the Eastern
and first of all Islamic roots in the public and political spheres.
The democratic forces are scared of the idea that the country is
slowly going to Islamization, and they see the public and political
future of the country only within the “European family” as a
full-right member. The reactionary forces are of the opinion that
through military ways (as it was in the past) it is possible to have
influence on both the inward and foreign orientation.

TURKEY’S ACHIEVEMENT: More than 40 years ago Ankara signed with the
European Union an agreement about associative membership which was
then called European Economic Cooperation. It is true, the agreement
assures that Turkey will later become a full-right member of the
European Economic Cooperation but no dates are mentioned. And since
1963 in both geographic and political aspects Turkey has been standing
on the threshold of Europe and so far no progress has been made. In
the next decade the European Economic Cooperation was reconstituted
into European Union, and in 1999 at last Turkey became a candidate for
member. In the election in 2002 the government was headed by the
Islamist-reformists of the political party “Justice and Development”,
with prime minister Redjep Teyup Erdoghan. After this the discussions
about the membership of Turkey livened up within the European Union
because the member-countries of the EU were hopeful with the new
government in the question of reforms.

THE ARGUMENTS OF THE OPPOSITION: The problem of Turkey’s membership to
the European Union has special reaction in Germany where 2.5 million
Turks live currently. The question has become a topic of debates
between the country’s different political parties, even their separate
members who do not express a common approach to the problem. Some of
them think that in the elections to the European Parliament on June
13, 2004 the question of Turkey’s membership to the EU not may but
must become an issue for election campaign, as it is very important
for the Europeans. Whereas the leader of the most influential German
oppositionist party “Christian Democratic Union” Angela Merkel’s visit
to Turkey in February showed that the opposition in Germany is against
the membership of Turkey to the EU. In Ankara, in front of the
mausoleum of Ataturk Merkel announced, “Taking into account the
economic differences, as well as other state and political differences,
there is still a long way to pass.” At the same time the CDU admits
that there is progress in the country and would not like to close the
doors of the EU before this country. However, for the moment Merkel
presented a series of quite realistic arguments. According to her,
Turkey with its 70 million population and 23 percent of economic
productivity will sap the integration forces and the financial
abilities of the European Union. Moreover, the European Union is
presently facing difficulties caused by the upcoming spring
enlargement. As distinct from the federative government of Germany,
A. Merkel proposes an intermediate solution of the problem, which
presupposes wide integration with Turkey, a privileged partnership.
The leader of the CDU mentioned that they must have a respectful
attitude towards one another, for which there is a third way. Once
again stating that she has no intention to make the question a subject
of discussions in the upcoming election, at the same time emphasized
that taking into account the 2.5 million inhabitants of Germany of
Turkish origin they will approach the matter with delicacy and
responsibility. The leader of another significant political force, the
Christian Socialist Union Edmund Stober, distinct from the leader of
the Christian Democratic Union, announced that during the election
campaign they will offer the question of membership of Turkey for
debates. It can not be tabooed for it has core importance for the
EU. It is notable that one of the leaders of the CSU Michael Gloss
made a strict statement, “Turkey has never been part of Europe.” He
also warned that the membership of this country would require
overloaded efforts for integration from the EU member-countries and
would become a financial load for the budget of the EU. There is also
anxiety that the European membership of Turkey with free move of
people will cause a flow of labour force from Anatolia to the West and
first of all to Germany. In answer to the behaviour of the opposition
the ambassador of Turkey in Germany Mehmed Ali Irtemjelik demands from
the German politicians to keep from uttering accusations in address to
Ankara during the election campaign. “It would be proper to think how
offensive it would be for my country and the people of Turkish origin
living in Germany,” said the ambassador. “Especially that the question
of membership to the EU is not included in the agenda. We are
acquainted with the rules of the negotiation process and we know that
years are required for membership. It also takes time for the EU
member-countries to get accustomed to the idea of membership of
Turkey,” said the Turkish diplomat.

OFFICIAL OPINION: Let us see what is the approach of official Germany
to t he problem. Literally a few days after the visit of the CDU
leader the federal chancellor Gerhard Shroder, who has a positive
attitude towards the postponed membership of Turkey to the EU, left
for Turkey. When during her visit Merkel tried to attract Turks with
privileged partnership instead of membership to the EU, she received
an adequate counterattack. “This problem has not yet been discussed
here. We do not at all think in this direction, the question is
closed,” stressed the prime minister of Turkey Redjep Teyup
Erdoghan. However, in any case there could be left time for thinking
about the choice for granting the right, the prime minister was
advised from aside. Here there is an opinion that taking into account
the difficulties caused by the spring enlargement of the EU (May 1,
2004), the Turks would remain outside, however their efforts for
reforms would be compensated for by special narrow cooperation with
the EU. Whereas, the official circles in Turkey think this kind of
payment would be like a small consolation prize. The chancellor of
Germany Gerhard Shroder knows about this, and the government headed by
him is for giving serious chances to Ankara, which he pointed out
during his visit. The promises given to Turkey must be fulfilled, said
Shroder and added, “Turkey must behave well and well means keeping its
word.” As distinct from the conservative European politicians, the
federative government of Germany has never mentioned the Islamic
essence of the Turkish nation as an obstruction to the membership to
the EU. Moreover, it considers the membership of Turkey as a chance to
start a dialogue between the two cultures and a successful precedent
of democratization of a country belonging to the Islamic
world. “Although the settlement of the problem of Turkish membership
to the EU may take years, if Ankara manages to correspond to political
standards, then the European Union should keep its word and start
negotiations for membership,” said Shroder. “For more than 40 years,
that is since signing the agreement for associative membership in 1963
all the federative governments kept telling Turkey that the process of
integration contains the prospect for membership to the EU. The
anticipations cannot and should not be frustrated,” said the
chancellor implying that Turkey can rely on him. During his Turkish
visit in his interview to the newspaper “Hyuriet” Shroder
characterized the approach of the German opposition towards to
question of Turkey’s membership to the EU as “populism” that may
offend about 2.5 people of Turkish origin and Turks living in Germany
and stir up the political atmosphere in the country. Again
traditionally Turkey views Germany in the role of opener of the doors
of the EU for membership. On the one hand, because of the involvement
of foreign labour force since 1960 today there are 2.5 million Turks
in Germany. On the other hand, despite interruptions Germany remains
the most important trade partner of Turkey. To this can be also added
the relationships confirmed historically between the two countries.
During the World War I they were military allies, as well as during
the Nazi dictatorship Ankara sheltered a great number of repressed
German scientists. The latter helped to establish a temporary
university system in Turkey. However, during the visit of the
chancellor the prime minister of the country did not need to remind
about the common past. Instead he had better arguments for convincing
Shroder to stand for starting negotiations with Ankara for Turkey’s
membership to the EU at the end of 2004. Because it was
Islamist-reformer Erdoghan who carried out such reforms as the
elimination of the capital punishment which up today was considered
the reason of failure of all the pro-West prime ministers of Ankara.
Even the international organization for protection of human rights
“Amnesty International” mentions about the progress in the sphere of
human rights in Turkey whereas the course of implementation of reforms
is not satisfactory. However, Erdoghan could go farther; he has put
all his political weight on the scales to make the settlement of the
problem of Cyprus easier. And he let Shroder know that he wants to be
paid for his efforts made for the settlement of the problem of the
Mediterranean island divided into Greek and Turkish parts since
1945. The Turkish visit of Shroder aroused a new wave of debates among
the Germany opposition.

CONCLUSION: The 40-year study of the problem of membership of Turkey
to the European Union shows that the EU member-countries are facing a
difficult choice. Particularly for Germany the problem has acquired
actual importance and deals with its own interests. On the one hand,
for the attracting labour market of such a powerful country
recruitment of Turks considered as cheap labour force is
profitable. On the other hand, it is the result of this line that
presently 2.5 million of the population of Germany are Turks. If we
take into account the fast rates of the natural growth of the latter,
which is a characteristic feature of the Turks, the demographic danger
for the Germans having 1 or 2 children in the family outlines
clearly. It is also a fact that in the course of time Turks invite to
the new place of living their relatives and friends and their families
in their motherland. However, as distinct from the government, the
German society has a hostile attitude towards the immigrant Turks and
raises protest time to time in different manifestations (up to
self-burning, massacres). Indeed, both the chancellor of Germany
Gerhard Shroder and the leaders of the EU countries are well-aware of
the consequences of the admittance of the Turkish element to Europe,
and this is the reason of postponing the settlement of the membership
of Turkey, and the end is not seen. The wish of the chancellor and the
others to have a country in the Asian Islamic world loyal to the
European values and standards can be compared to the undertaking of
Lenin to export the October 1917 revolution to Turkey, which ended in
utter frustration. We think the EU declines Turkey’s membership
taking into account the nature of the Turkish nation which would
disturb the calmness in the European family. For already 40 years
Turkey is at the threshold of Europe, and the hosts dare neither turn
him out, nor invite in. No one assumed responsibility for possible
consequences, and no one takes the risk of saying how long the Turks
are going to knock at the door of the European Union. Feeding with
promises is safer. By the way, in November 2003 the question was again
discussed in Brussels and refused. The commissar of the Commission on
Enlargement of Europe Gunter Ferheugen, in his interview to the German
periodical “Spiegel” (November 4, 2003), speaking about the numerous
reasons for refusing membership, mentioned also the lack of culture of
Turks to conduct public debates (the problem of Kurds, the Armenian
genocide). When a Turk mentions about this, he tells him he has a lot
to learn, said the European politician. At the same time he mentioned
that a country with political prisoners cannot be member of the
European Union.

KAREN MIHRANIAN.

CHECHEN WEB SITE SAYS ARMENIAN ARMY “ABSORBED INTO” RUSSIAN ARMY BASE

Chechenpress web site, Tbilisi
30 Mar 04

Chechenpress correspondent Muslim Mamedov: The Armenian armed forces
have now been fully absorbed into a strong military group “codenamed”
the 102nd military base of Russia in Armenia. I have discovered
another confirmation of this in a Nezavisimoye Voyennoye Obozreniye
(No 10, 2004) report entitled “Two sides of the 102nd military base”.

But, in fact, there are no two sides, but there is a close merger. I
quote the aforesaid report: “There are several hundred metres between
the two military units on Yerevan’s outskirts. The Russian regiment is
nearer to the town, the communications regiment of the Armenian armed
forces is away from it. The two units are part of Russia’s 102nd
military base on Armenian territory, i.e. somewhat this is one
Armenian structure”. Second, when asked by a Nezavisimoye Voyennoye
Obozreniye correspondent: “What about the division of duties from the
viewpoint of solving military tasks?”, the commander of the
communications regiment of the Armenian armed forces, Lt-Col
Stepanyan, said: “There is no precise division. Both our and Russian
signallers fulfil any tasks set by the command”.

The command is naturally Russian.

Is it possible to speak about Armenia’s independence, if its army is
completely subordinate to Russian generals?

It is known that the 426th aircraft group, which is part of Russia’s
102nd military base, is involved in attacks in Chechnya. One can
naturally assume that Armenia is involved in these attacks as well.

The second important point: the 772nd separate reconnaissance
battalion of the Russian base in Armenia has been actively involved in
acts of sabotage throughout the South Caucasus. It means the
involvement of the Armenian armed forces’ reconnaissance in these
sabotage activities as it is part of the 772nd separate battalion of
the Russian base.

(Passage omitted: Armenians face problems in Russia’s Krasnodar
Territory and other regions)

I would like to ask Russia’s 2m Armenians: do they approve of
Armenia’s decision to allow the Russian colonisers to establish full
control over the Armenian army?

SOROS CONFERENCE GOES AHEAD IN UKRAINE’S CRIMEA AFTER PRESIDENT INTERVENES

UNIAN news agency, Kiev
30 Mar 04

An international conference attended by financier George Soros has
opened in Crimea as planned a day after it was reported that the
proposed venue had withdrawn permission for the event. President
Leonid Kuchma reportedly issued an order for the conference to go
ahead in the Livadiya palace. On his arrival in Crimea on 29 March,
Soros said that Kuchma’s administration was behind the problems with
the venue. His comments came after allegations that the Ukrainian
government is waging a smear campaign in the media against Soros, a
prominent critic of the Ukrainian government. The following is the
text of a report by Ukrainian news agency UNIAN:

Simferopol, 30 March: An international conference on human rights has
opened in the Livadiya palace (in Yalta) with the well-known US
financier and philanthropist George Soros in attendance, the director
of the programme “Integration of deported Crimean Tatars, Armenians,
Greeks and Germans into Ukrainian society” (which is funded by Soros’s
Renaissance Foundation), Oleh Smyrnov, has told journalists. He said
that in the early hours of 30 March President Leonid Kuchma issued an
order on making the palace available to hold the conference.

More than 100 people are taking part including representatives of the
authorities, the deputy heads of the Crimean Council of Ministers,
Edip Hafarov and Volomymyr Kazarin, as well as representatives of
NGOs.

The schedule for Soros’s visit to Crimea today includes working
meetings with representatives of NGOs and of Crimea’s ethnic groups,
including Crimean Tatars at the Hasprynskyy library in Simferopol.

Soros will talk to journalists before flying to Kiev today.

(Smyrnov said on 29 March that the administration of the Livadiya
palace had withdrawn permission to hold the conference on a
“ridiculous pretext” even though the venue had already been paid
for. He said that a civil-defence exercise was held at the palace on
29 March, after which civil-defence services closed the palace to the
public until 1 April.)

ARMENIAN MPS CONDEMN 28 MARCH OPPOSITION RALLY

Public Television of Armenia, Yerevan
29 Mar 04

(Presenter) Armenia’s political forces have expressed their attitude
towards the recent events in Gyumri (opposition rally on 28
March). Members of the ruling political coalition demand that the
leadership ensure law and order and prevent actions which pose a
threat to political stability and the constitution.

(Correspondent over video of parliament session) Meetings, rallies and
marches – all the political forces represented in the Armenian
National Assembly believe that these forms of political events are
acceptable in the world policy. The parliamentarians are concerned
over the Armenian version of these events. The opposition’s struggle
is understandable when constitutional law and order are preserved in
the country. But the opposition’s recent actions brought about
undesirable results. (Vaan Ovanesyan, deputy speaker of the Armenian
parliament, captioned) We learned that disorder had taken place in
Gyumri. The people who ensured the security of the organizers of the
rally attacked people. They broke posters and expressed their
dissatisfaction with those who did not share their political
views. This is an impermissible action and I think that police should
ensure that similar actions are not repeated in the future.

We also held various rallies and meetings. Not all the people agreed
with us, with our views. But nobody issued orders to attack those who
did not agree with us. This is impermissible. Negotiations, relations
and discussions – we are always ready to resolve problems by these
means.

(Correspondent) Armenia’s pressing problems must be discussed and
resolved in the hall of the National Assembly, during sessions, and
they must not become a subject of rallies. Given the conditions when
Azerbaijan has started anti-Armenian hysteria, the events in Gyumri,
the opposition’s calls are threatening the country’s stability and
security.

(Mger Shakhgeldyan, chairman of the standing parliamentary commission
on defence and security, representative of the Orinats Yerkir
parliamentary faction, captioned) The Azerbaijani leadership’s
bellicose statements, its rejection of the Key West and Paris
agreements (on Nagornyy Karabakh), dissatisfaction with the work of
the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen and also growing financial assistance
to the army make it clear that Azerbaijan is attempting to preserve
today’s peace by any means, using force (as heard). These
(Azerbaijan’s) statements confirm this. Armenia’s domestic stability
and security are extremely important in this connection.

(Correspondent) MPs confirm that domestic political problems have to
be resolved with a concerted effort, taking into consideration
national interests.

Nune Aleksanyan, Aylur.

ARMENIAN PRESIDENT’S RESIGNATION INEVITABLE – OPPOSITION LEADER

Mediamax news agency
30 Mar 04

YEREVAN

“The overthrow of the regime of Armenia’s illegitimate president
Robert Kocharyan is inevitable,” Albert Bazeyan, the chairman of the
Republic Party and leader of the radical opposition, said in Yerevan
today.

Addressing a briefing at the Armenian National Assembly today, Bazeyan
stated the opposition’s resolve to obtain the holding of early “free
and fair” presidential election.

“Although the power will formally go to the speaker of parliament or
the head of the government after the president leaves, diarchy will be
established in the country until the new election is held and the main
levers will be in the opposition’s hands,” he said.

ARMENIA, UN BODY SIGN MEMO ON FIGHT AGAINST TRAFFICKING

Mediamax news agency
30 Mar 04

YEREVAN

Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan and the permanent
representative of the UNDP, Lise Grande, signed a programme of
cooperation to combat trafficking in Yerevan today.

The programme envisages measures aimed at developing the institutional
capacity of national bodies, stepping up control on the borders,
bringing back victims of trafficking and reintegrating them into
society and so on, the Armenian Foreign Ministry press service told
Mediamax news agency.

Azat Artsakh – Republic of Nagorno Karabakh (NKR)
March 30, 2004

NK AGAIN CONFIRMS

The NK authorities confirm their willingness to receive the
international monitoring group and prove the falsehood of the
accusations on the part of Azerbaijan whose representatives keep
insisting that the territory of the region serves for illegal transit
of narcotics. NKR vice foreign minister of Masis Mayilian told the
Stepanakert reporter of the news agency “Regnum” that the government
of the republic is willing to provide necessary conditions for the
international monitoring group to work in all the parts of the
republic. “The members of the group must be truly independent
international experts who will be ready for conducting an unbiased
survey,” mentioned M. Mayilian. The vice minister denied the claims of
official Baku that Nagorni Karabakh and the nearby areas under the
control of the Karabakh party have been turned into a transit area of
which the drug dealers of the southern route make successful use.
Masis Mayilian reminded that in spite of the wishes of Baku, in the
strategic account of the US State Department on drugs control Nagorni
Karabakh is not mentioned at all, whereas it is stated once again that
the territory of Azerbaijan is one of the main international transit
routes of narcotics. “The NKR authorities are greatly responsible for
the situation in the republic and the nearby territories under its
control. For preventing the groundless and openly hostile accusations
of Baku the NKR authorities have for a great number of times in the
recent years applied to the UN, PACE, OSCE and other influential
international organizations, as well as the corresponding body of the
US State Department with the request to send an independent monitoring
group to Nagorni Karabakh to get acquainted with the situation on the
spot,” mentioned Mayilian. By the way, during the meeting of the UN
Office on Drugs and Crime Control held in Vienna one of the
suggestions discussed was the necessity of inviting a group of experts
of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, as well as experts of the
Interpol and other international organizations to study the situation
in a number of countries, including Nagorni Karabakh in relation with
narcotics. According to the UNODC, the claims of Azerbaijan that the
territory of Nagorni Karabakh is allegedly used for transit of drugs
were not confirmed by the UN. In answer to the question whether Baku
has proofs to this, the UN department on drugs and crimes gave a
negative answer.

AA

TAJIKISTAN URGES UNITED EFFORTS AGAINST TERRORISM

ITAR-TASS news agency, Moscow
30 Mar 04

DUSHANBE

Confronted with increasing threats of terrorism, countries of the
Central Asian region should unite efforts and work out a clear action
programme in line with both bilateral and regional agreements, the
secretary of the Security Council of Tajikistan, Amirqul Azimov, said
in an interview with an ITAR-TASS correspondent commenting on the
latest events in neighbouring Uzbekistan today.

“We are deeply shocked at the actions of the terrorists who
jeopardized peace and stability in the region. We sympathize with the
innocent victims of those madmen. We also realize that if neighbours
have troubles we cannot sleep (peacefully) in our house (either),”
Azimov said.

“We cannot consider that if this happened in Uzbekistan, then
Uzbekistan itself has to tackle the problem,” he added.

At the same time, Azimov says the latest terrorist acts showed that we
are becoming “the clamp” (Russian: fiksator) of these kind of
events. (In fact), efficient proactive measures are needed, (he says).

It is necessary to use more effectively the mechanisms of such
regional structures as the CSTO (Collective Security Treaty
Organization of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan
and Russia) and the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) and
others.

Azimov says it is time to proceed from the tactics of combating
terrorists to the destruction of terrorism itself, and for this it is
necessary to identify its (terrorism’s) nature and the reason for
(its) emergence.

ARMENIAN PAPER LOOKS AT REASONS FOR US OFFICIAL’S VISIT TO REGION

Golos Armenii, Yerevan
30 Mar 04

The US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage arrived in Baku on
26 March after his visit to Yerevan. But although it may seem strange,
until 29 March there was little information from Baku about a visit by
a top official of the White House. By the way we think that the main
goal of his visit to the CIS three capitals (Kiev, Yerevan, Baku) was
Baku. Let us note that a visit by such a senior official as Richard
Armitage to the region is quite an exceptional case. As a rule it
means that the White House wants to see firsthand what is happening
here rather than rely on information given to the Washington
administration by the American embassies in these countries. The last
visit by the US Deputy Secretary of State to Armenia was in October
1999. It was by Strobe Talbott. The visit was connected with prospects
for the Karabakh conflict settlement.

We think that the current situation is slightly different. The US
assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs,
Elizabeth Jones, said on the eve of the visit that the Karabakh issue
would be one of the main topics at talks. But then she made a small,
but significant point: “Washington wants to find out about the
priorities of a new head of Azerbaijani state and its government.” An
interesting statement. “What are Ilham Aliyev’s plans?”, in all
probability this question is on the White House agenda.

Probably Ilham Aliyev’s aggressive statements made recently caused
certain anxiety in Washington. Let us remind you of the Azerbaijani
president’s statements. He said that he does not intend to settle the
Karabakh problem, he does not want to make compromises, he is
displeased with the Minsk Group activities, Turkey must not open its
border to Armenia, and finally, in spite of the obligation, taken by
Azerbaijan when it joined the European Union, about an exclusively
peaceful settlement of the problem, “peaceful talks may not continue
forever”.

All this could not but prick up White House administration’s ears,
which is hoping to gain progress in Armenian-Turkish relations and
find a solution to the Karabakh conflict during this year. In all
probability in the White House they are displeased with Ilham Aliyev’s
statements which shock the world community to some extent.

(Passage omitted: Armenian servicemen barred from attending
Baku-hosted Nato conference, Armenian officer killed in Budapest and
recap of recent remarks by Azeri officials and of an interview given
to the Azerbaijani newspaper Ekho by the leader of the Helsinki
Association, Mikael Daniyelyan)

KYRGYZ PRESIDENT, CIS SECURITY CHIEF DISCUSS COLLABORATION

AKIpress news agency web site
30 Mar 04

BISHKEK

Kyrgyz President Askar Akayev met Nikolay Bordyuzha, the
secretary-general of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO
of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Russia),
in Bishkek today.

The secretary-general informed the Kyrgyz president of the work done
by the organization and of the process of preparations for a regular
session of the Collective Security Council. An exchange of views on
the Kyrgyz Republic’s ideas about the CSTO’s practical activities was
held during the talks.

The Kyrgyz president said the CSTO began its first practical
activities in Kyrgyzstan in 1999-2000, proving to everybody that
collaboration within this organization is a must.

Kyrgyzstan is accurately honouring all its commitments before this
organization, the president said. The fully-fledged aviation component
of the CSTO’s rapid-reaction forces (Russian air base in Kant), which
is now operating, is a glaring example of this.

The president praised efforts by the CSTO to boost collaboration with
such organizations as the Eurasian Economic Community (members are
Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan) and the
Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

(Passage to end omitted: Nikolay Bordyuzha met Kyrgyz Speaker Abdygany
Erkebayev yesterday)