PAINTER TOOK HIS ART AROUND GLOBE
John Goddard, Toronto Star
The Toronto Star
November 15, 2006 Wednesday
Nubar Sabag left a trail of paintings across the world “like a comet,”
his son says.
After a long career as a painter, photographer and lover of the arts,
Sabag died Oct. 30 following a severe stroke at 85.
“He left a band of paintings across different places, in homes
and galleries, from Armenia, across the Mediterranean, to North
America,” says his son and only child Shahe Sabag, president and CEO
of Toronto-based Dumont Nickel Inc.
Sabag, who also signed his name variously as Sabbaghian, Sabbagh and
N.U. Barr, was born of Christian Armenian descent in the desert town
of Aleppo in northern Syria.
His father Fares was from Aleppo. His mother Arousiak arrived there on
foot during World War I fleeing the Armenian genocide by the Turkish
army. When they married, the couple was poor.
“He started playing violin and mandolin when he was very young,
and sang in choirs,” his son says, adding that he would also tutor
others on what he had learned. “Obviously he was driven to learn – a
self-taught, Renaissance person continually absorbing knowledge.” By
the time Sabag was 14, his father had died, prompting the boy to
seek work as a photographer’s assistant to help support his mother
and brothers. He continued the trade in Aleppo as an adult.
“When I was a kid,” his son recalls, “he had a studio and was the
semi-official photographer for dignitaries and visiting heads of
state. I remember these big two-foot-by-three-foot photographs all
over the place.”
Sabag also painted. Exhibitions in Alexandria, Damascus and Leningrad
displayed his work, mostly landscapes, and in some cases awarded him
prizes. Armenian monasteries continue to hang his work in Florence.
His highest accolade came in 1963, at the age of 42, when he was
featured among six prize-winners at the Sao Paulo,Brazil, biennial
art expo.
That same year, he spent time as a guest of Kuwait’s royal family
painting a series of works for an exhibition on the country. The
day before the show was to open, U.S. President John Kennedy was
assassinated in Dallas, Texas.
“All the top dignitaries ended up having to go to special services
elsewhere,” Shahe Sabag recalls of that shocking day. “But the show
opened and it was a success.”
Soon afterward, the family left Syria, increasingly uncomfortable as
Christians in a Muslim country. Sabag, his wife Ida, and their young
son moved to Beirut as a stepping stone to somewhere else. When Canada
granted them immigration papers in 1968, the three came to Toronto.
“We arrived with $300 or $400, and a big crate with a couple of large
carpets and some paintings,” the son recalls.
Within a month or two, Sabag landed a job in the camera department
at Eaton’s department store. For a couple of years, he also taught
art classes at the then Ontario College of Art and for 20 years at
Northern Secondary School.And he continued painting.
“He would paint anywhere,” the son says of Sabag’s lifelong vocation.
“He never had a formal studio.”
Shahe Sabag says he did not inherit his father’s artistic gift but
that art enriched the whole family’s life. His father’s love of the
arts infected others, too, he says.
One day, his parents were having the apartment repainted, the son
recalls. Sabag was working on a canvas in one room. An Italian-born
house painter was working on one of the walls. Both were listening
to opera.
“And at the end of the day, the painter asked if, instead of cash
payment, he could take the painting?
“I love that image,” the son says: Two men working with their
respective paints, and when their jobs were done, bartering their
finished products.
GRAPHIC: Nubar Sabag was awarded many medallions for various
exhibitions from all around the world. His highest accolade came in
1963, at the age of 42, when he was featured among six prizewinners
at the Sao Paulo,Brazil, biennial art expo. Along with a passion
for photography, he specialized in painting landscapes. He left his
artwork in homes and galleries, from Armenia to North America.
Armenian painter Nubar Sabag loved the arts. He died Oct. 30.Along with
a passion for photography, he specialized in painting landscapes. He
left his artwork in homes and galleries, from Armenia to North
America.Armenian painter Nubar Sabag loved the arts. He died Oct. 30.

TURKEY’S GUL GOES TO CYPRUS, CALLS FOR ‘COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTION UNDER UN ROOF’
Anatolia News Agency, Turkey
Nov 15 2006
ANKARA (A.A) -15.11.2006 -“The EU cannot be neutral on Cyprus issue
even if it wants because the Greek Cypriot administration becomes
a part of the union,” Turkish FM and Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah
Gul said on Wednesday.
Prior to his departure for Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus
(TRNC) to attend the 23rd anniversary celebrations of its foundation,
Gul told reporters that the UN should find a comprehensive solution
(to Cyprus question).
When he was reminded of some news reports which said that Turkey has
been getting prepared to apply to the international law on so-called
Armenian genocide, Gul indicated, “a meticulous work is under way on
this matter.”
“Embargo and restrictions (imposed on Turkish Republic of Northern
Cyprus) which don’t have a legal ground must be ended as soon as
possible,” Turkish FM and Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Gul said
on Wednesday.
Prior to his departure for Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC)
to attend the 23rd anniversary celebrations of its foundation, Gul
told reporters that he would meet TRNC President Mehmet Ali Talat
and other authorities during his visit.
Recalling that PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited TRNC last July and
significant decisions were made to boost TRNC economy during this
visit, Gul indicated, “we are exerting great efforts for Turkish
Cypriot people to live in prosperity and tranquillity.”
“Although TRNC has been experiencing some difficulties in the
international platform, the point that TRNC reached is praiseworthy,”
he underlined.
Replying to a question, Gul noted, “if Finnish authorities have the
capability of finding a comprehensive solution (to Cyprus issue),
we can discuss it. But we always said that a comprehensive solution
should be found under the roof of UN.”

TURKEY’S GUL ON WAR ON TERRORISM, SEPARATISM; ARMENIAN CLAIMS
Anatolia News Agency, Turkey
Nov 14 2006
[“FM Gul: ‘One of the Most Important Problems and Threats Is
Separatism'” – AA Headline]
ANKARA (A.A) -14.11.2006 -“One of the most important problems and
threats against Turkey is separatism. The fight against terrorism
is our priority duty,” said Turkish Foreign Minister & Deputy Prime
Minister Abdullah Gul on Tuesday.
Speaking at the Parliamentary Planning & Budget Commission over the
budget of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the year 2007, Gul said,
“since we predicted current situation in Iraq, we held the meeting
of neighbouring countries with Iraq. The world should appreciate
Turkey’s initiatives to this end. We attach great importance to Iraq’s
territorial integrity and political unity.
Protection of these are of vital importance for Iraqi people. If Iraq
is separated, it will lead to a new unbelievable dark era.”
Recalling that the Iraqi prime minister would pay a visit to Turkey
in the coming days, Gul said that all those issues would be taken up
in detail during the visit.
Referring to the issue of PKK terrorism, Gul said, “one of the most
important problems and threats against Turkey is separatism. Our
government has been doing everything in its power in the fight
against terrorism. Unfortunately, the northern part of Iraq has become
shelter for the terrorist organization. Our government has displayed
a determined attitude against it. We attach great importance to the
United States’ appointing a special envoy. We consider the fight
against terrorism our priority duty. Therefore, we do not need a
coordinator. However, we have appointed Edip Baser to head the Turkish
delegation and to attend the meetings among Turkey, the United States
and Iraq.”
Upon a question about presence of several maps separating Turkey,
Gul said, “these are nothing but worthless rags.”
Describing the Armenian issue as one of the most important problems
of Turkey in the next decade, Gul said that they would launch all
necessary initiatives.
Later, budget of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was approved.

GRAND MUFTI OF TURKEY SEES POPE’S UPCOMING VISIT AS ‘STEP TOWARD DIALOGUE’
La Stampa, Itali
Nov 15 2006
[Interview With Grand Mufti Ali Bardakoglu by Claudio Gallo: “Grand
Mufti: ‘Pope Runs No Risk, He Is Welcome Guest'” – first paragraph
is La Stampa introduction]
Istanbul – Apart from a handshake with the president of the republic,
he will be the first person the pope will see on his arrival in
Turkey on 28 November: the chairman of the Diyanet, Professor Ali
Bardakoglu. He is often referred to in Italy as the grand mufti,
but one has the impression that the title is rather an honorary one,
some sort of a label for the secular guide at the Ministry of Religious
Affairs. Professor, are you the grand mufti? To answer this question
he offers a book of his, Religion and Society, with the subtitle:
“Turkey’s New Prospects,” which he has just autographed, saying:
“Here you will find the answer, especially in the chapter on the
ministry chairmanship.” We are beginning rather well.
The seat of the Diyanet – the word means clemency, compassion – is just
out of Ankara’s centre, a square palace with wide, clear-cut spaces,
reminiscent of the architecture of the Twenties. The office is large,
with a big desk at the end, paintings, and carpets. He sits on a big
armchair, wearing the “sarik,” the headgear of religious leaders,
and a pearl-coloured robe with floral motifs and maroon cuffs. Tall,
whiskered, the father of three sons, there he sits with crossed hands,
he does not gesticulate, only now and then he moves his brown eyes. On
his left there is the linen cloth that covered the Qa’aba, Mecca’s
black stone, with the two names of God imprinted on it. He talks
without changing his tone; at times he smiles. A student of Islam,
he blends the religious with the secular component – as is inevitable
after Ataturk – with the skill of a Christian Democrat.
[Gallo] You were among the first to ask the pope to apologize for
his Regensburg speech. Will you ask him to do so again?
[Bardakoglu] I will not waste my time talking about the past. It does
not matter whether the person who says something unacceptable about
Islam is a layman, a priest, or an important person: our duty is to
correct him. But these things belong to the past, let us look ahead.
Religious leaders must respect the feelings of other believers. As an
Islamic community, we are open to criticism and discussion of religious
experience, but not of the fundamental principles of our faith: God,
the Prophet, and the Koran.
[Gallo] The pontiff’s quotation of the Byzantine Emperor Manuel II
was only a small part of a broad discourse about God and reason. Is
the God of the Koran beyond reason?
[Bardakoglu] It was a very intellectual discourse and the quotation
made by the pope leads to a wrong academic interpretation. Besides,
many Western intellectuals, even Christian ones, have criticized those
words on the political and philosophical plane. The Islamic faith
does not rule out rationalism. In the Koran there are indications
that logic is not extraneous to God. We are open to a discussion on
the relationship between God and reason, it is a great pleasure for
us to talk these questions over with other religions.
[Gallo] People often oppose Islam and Christianity like East and
West. Christianity, however, took shape and developed in Asia Minor,
more or less in the area of today’s Turkey: so people forget that it
too is an Eastern religion.
[Bardakoglu] The Middle East is the cradle of religions. We recognize
a continuity – from Adam, Moses, and Jesus, down to Muhammad. In
these lands one can at every step find traces of all faiths, which
lived peacefully one beside the other. In the Balkans too there are
Christian monuments, which were preserved under Ottoman rule. Unlike
Spain, where, with the exception of the Alhambra, the traces of the
Islamic presence have been erased. And while the Jews were being
massacred in Spain, they found hospitality and protection with us.
One of Istanbul’s synagogues goes back to that time.
[Gallo] Are you concerned about the pope’s security?
[Bardakoglu] Religious and political leaders of all countries come to
Turkey every day without problems. We are a democratic state, there
is freedom: precisely for this reason there are people who do not
want this visit and who say so. This, however, will not affect our
traditional hospitality. Tolerance and hospitality are two different
entities that can coexist. No, I am not concerned at all. This trip
will not solve all the problems, but will be a good step towards
dialogue. Peace can be destroyed in a moment, but it takes time,
it is a long process, to build it.
[Gallo] At times the word jihad is, in the Western media, synonymous
with terrorism: can you explain its true meaning?
[Bardakoglu] We condemn all kinds of terrorism, there is no cause
that can justify it. The word jihad, which is often exalted in the
Koran, cannot justify violence. The whole of the Islamic world must
be aware of that. Islam is the way to peace and love. In Islam, the
main meaning of jihad is that of interior struggle against the evil
inclinations of human nature. Our faith wants to conquer hearts by
the truth, not by force. God does not approve of forced conversions,
religions spring from the heart.
[Gallo] Do Turkish Muslims really want to join an apparently Christian
European Union?
[Bardakoglu] My role has nothing to do with the question of Turkey’s
accession to the EU. I do not believe that Europe is a Christian
club. A common way must be found: if we start with religion, we will
be divided on everything else.
[Gallo] Will the Roman Catholic Church be legally recognized in
your country?
[Bardakoglu] All religions are recognized here. Turkey is a secular
country, the problem does not exist. The task of the state is to give
a space to religions and guarantee their freedom.
[Gallo] Still, while the Orthodox and Armenian Churches enjoy
juridical status, the Roman Catholic apostolic nuncio is like any
private person. For example, the Vatican cannot own a church.
[Bardakoglu] I do not know all the hierarchies and relationships
among the various confessions. In numerical terms, the Orthodox
Armenians come first, followed by the Orthodox Greeks and all the
rest. The Roman Catholics are a small minority. George Marovich
(spokesman for the Episcopal Conference – editor’s note) is a very
popular person with us. And nobody can say that he is considered
a minor religious leader. We have met frequently over these years,
and also recently. We do not discriminate.
[Gallo] What do you say to Paris, which wants to adopt a law against
those who deny the Armenian genocide?
[Bardakoglu] It is up to the politicians to answer this question.
Anyhow, whether something is true or not cannot be laid down by law.

STEP BY STEP IN NATO’S DIRECTION; FOREIGN MINISTRY OF AZERBAIJAN REFRAINS FROM POLITICALLY STIRRING STATEMENTS
by Jasur Mamedov
Source: Voenno-Promyshlenny Kuryer, No 43, November 8 – 14, 2006, p. 3
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
November 15, 2006 Wednesday
Tahir Tagizade, Chief Of The Directorate Of Politics, Press, And
Information Of The Foreign Ministry Of Azerbaijan: We Are Not Saying
We Will Be In NATO Tomorrow;
An interview with Tahir Tagizade, Chief of the Directorate of Politics,
Press, and Information of the Foreign Ministry of Azerbaijan.
Two NATO delegations visited Azerbaijan in October. One of them was
headed by Robert Simmons, Special Envoy of the NATO General Secretary
for the Caucasus and Central Asia, the other by NATO Parliamentary
Assembly Vice President Vahit Erdem. As a matter of fact, a great
deal of NATO functionaries visited Baku in September and October.
What for? This correspondent met with Tahir Tagizade, Chief of the
Directorate of Politics, Press, and Information of the Foreign Ministry
of Azerbaijan.
Question: As far as experts are concerned, frequent visits of NATO
representatives to Azerbaijan indicate that it is its turn now to
follow in Georgia’s steps and establish intensive contacts with the
Alliance. Would you care to comment?
Tahir Tagizade: We do not make politically stirring statements.
That’s our position. We are not saying that we will be in NATO
tomorrow, a week or a month from now. We believe that the existing
framework of partnership offers us an adequate opportunity for
development of cooperation and relations of partnership.
All countries of the southern part of the Caucasus promote different
objectives nowadays. It does not take a genius to see by the way
that Armenia’s practical deeds do not concur with its proclaimed
determination to integrate into Euroatlantic structures. NATO sets
political frontiers for countries of this part of the Caucasus within
whose framework they are welcome to aspire for their objectives. That
is why I believe that the Alliance will take resolution of regional
conflicts as progress, a step forward, a positive factor in the
process of Euroatlantic integration.
As for the Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh,
Azerbaijan keeps trying to attract the attention of international
organizations to the problem. I know for a fact that the Alliance too,
would like to play a political part in conflict resolution.
Azerbaijan welcomes this determination.
Question: Some reports indicate that IPAP compels Azerbaijan to stick
to a non-violent resolution of the Karabakh conflict. Does it?
Tahir Tagizade: To tell you the truth, I have no information
pertaining to any such obligations within the framework of this
particular document or any other international documents that bear
Azerbaijan’s signature. I can only say that Azerbaijan views peace
talks and diplomatic efforts in conflict resolution as a priority. On
the other hand, as I’ve said more than once already, Azerbaijan finds
it unacceptable when identical demands are put forth to the aggressor
and the victim.
Being a victim of aggression, Azerbaijan cannot afford talks just
for the fun of it. Neither do we maintain in the meantime that the
potential of diplomatic contacts is expended. We will contemplate
every acceptable proposal. Nobody can accuse Azerbaijan of being
resolved to restore its territorial integrity regardless of the cost.
Question: The Gabala Radar is the only Russian military object in
Azerbaijan. Do you think it may eventually create problems with NATO?
Tahir Tagizade: Firstly, it is not a military base. Secondly, the
object in question is property of Azerbaijan on lease to the Russian
Federation. Purposes and terms of the lease are known. That is why
this object cannot be regarded as an obstacle impeding Azerbaijan’s
integration in NATO.
Question: The lease expires in 2012. Do you think there is a
possibility of prolongation?
Tahir Tagizade: Why make guesses? When 2012 comes, we will make the
decision with the current regional, political, and military situation
analyzed.
Question: Do you perceive Azerbaijan in NATO at some future date?
Tahir Tagizade: I know that Azerbaijan perceives advantages of regional
integration into European and Euroatlantic structures. What counts is
that this integration will certainly bring about regional stability,
that it will facilitate normalization of the situation.

ARMENIAN NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY: METHODS OF FORMULATION
by Colonel Seyran Shahsuvarjan, Press Attache of the Defense Ministry of Armenia
Translated by A. Ignatkin
Source: Novye Vremya (Yerevan), November 9, 2006, EV
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
November 15, 2006 Wednesday
ARMENIA IS ABOUT TO COMPLETE WORK ON THE NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY;
An interview with Major General Gaik Kotandjan.
Interdepartmental Commission for the National Security Strategy had
the draft document examined in the leading professional centers
of Washington, Moscow, and Brussels. Colonel Shahsuvarjan of the
republican Defense Ministry met with Commission Secretary Major
General Gaik Kotandjan who graciously agreed to answer some questions
concerning the methods of formulation of the document.
Project leader Kotandjan, advisor to the Defense Minister of the
Republic of Armenia, studied at the leading scientific centers of
Russia, United States, and West Europe. Kotandjan is a specialist
in the sphere of political science of national security whose
authority is recognized by the Russian Academy of Management, Center
of International Relations Studies of the Diplomatic Academy of the
Russian Foreign Ministry, and Department of Military and Political
Sciences of the Military Academy of the Russian General Staff.
Kotandjan teaches counter-terrorism at the National Security School of
the US University of National Defense. He finished the senior officer
training courses of the G. Marshall European Center of Security and
RAND Defense and Security Analysis Program (United States).
Question: Could you please explain exactly how the strategy was
formulated?
Gaik Kotandjan: The Defense Ministry of Armenia has been working
on it since 1992, since inception of the Armed Forces of independent
Armenia. I’d like to make an emphasis on close contacts and cooperation
in the course of the work with progressive experts who studied the
strategy of transition processes in the post-perestroika democratic
Russia. We appreciate help from our colleagues from the Center of
International Relations Studies of the Diplomatic Academy of the
Russian Foreign Ministry and Russian Academy of Management who stayed
in touch with colleagues from the Harvard and Yale specializing
in political sciences of transition periods. Their cooperation was
extremely beneficial. As a matter of fact, also helpful were contacts
with experts from the Russian Foundation of National and International
Security and Russian Academy of Military Sciences.
Revision of “Fundamentals of military policy of the Republic of
Armenia: military-political aspect of national security,” a guiding
document of the Defense Ministry, began in 2000, when Serj Sarkisjan
became defense minister again.
Knowing the methods used in composition of the Russian national
strategy concept, Sarkisjan decided to push back the horizons of
theoretic knowledge of our Defense Ministry in the sphere of national
security through an appeal to the leading research centers of the
United States and Europe. A specialist of the Armenian Defense
Ministry was dispatched to study programs of the US University of
National Defense, RAND Corporation, and Marshall Center (“Formulation
of National Security Strategy”, “New Techniques of Defense and Security
Analysis in the 21st Century”, and “Asymmetric Threats in the National
Security Framework”). Aware of the changes taking place around Armenia,
our specialists also mastered the “Strategy of NATO Transformation
in International Security Framework” NATO Staff Officer Program.
Question: Does it mean that the Armenian document is a carbon copy
of the American or Russian original?
Gaik Kotandjan: Armenian military-political leadership is aware of
the difficulties a certain Central European country encountered when
it all but copied the American document. We know for a fact that some
post-Soviet countries contracted foreign specialists to draft their
national security concepts. They merely had the documents translated
into national languages and went through the motions of having their
own specialists involved in the process.
We know better than that. We drafted the document ourselves, just
using experience and expertise of the best professional schools of
Russia and the West.
Question: Is there anything unique that distinguishes the end product
perhaps?
Gaik Kotandjan: From the standpoint of content, the strategy stipulates
a multifold balance of security bearing points and transformation of
society through democratization and integration into the international
community. There is one other distinctive feature. The Commission was
working on two mutually complementary documents at once: the National
Security Strategy itself and a package of departmental programs that
will see to its implementation.
Question: There were reports that the draft document would be submitted
to the leading centers abroad to get their opinion…
Gaik Kotandjan: US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Russian
Secretary of the Security Council Igor Ivanov, and NATO leaders
responded to Commission Chairman Sarkisjan’s request and studied
the document.
Question: What will you do now to promote the National Security
Strategy?
Gaik Kotandjan: Enlarged meetings of the Science Councils of the
Yerevan State University and presidium of the Armenian Academy of
Sciences will discuss the document in November. Experts from scientific
circles and non-governmental organizations will also be invited.
The document is to be discussed by parliament at an open meeting in
November, as well. Once that is done, the Interdepartmental Commission
will forward the document to the government.

KARABAKH FOR GEORGIA: RUSSIA OFFERS ARMENIA A DIPLOMATIC DEAL
by Igor Dmitriyev
Source: Versiya, No 43, November 6 – 12, 2006, p. 9
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
November 15, 2006 Wednesday
MOSCOW PROMISED YEREVAN ASSISTANCE IN KARABAKH CONFLICT RESOLUTION
IN ARMENIA’S FAVOR IN RETURN FOR ITS SUPPORT IN THE RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN
CONFLICT; Russian-Armenian relations: mutually beneficial improvement.
Negotiations between the presidents of Russia and Armenia that took
place in Moscow last week marked a turn for a dramatic improvement
of the bilateral relations between the two countries.
According to official reports alone, Russia is expected to deliver
$26 million worth of munitions, weapons, and military hardware to
Armenia before the year is over.
According to what information this newspaper has compiled, Russia
promised Armenia assistance in the Karabakh conflict resolution
in a manner that will benefit Yerevan. President of Armenia Robert
Kocharjan is asked in return to support Russia in its deteriorating
conflict with Georgia. After all, the latter includes a whole region
with the predominantly Armenian population – Samtskhe-Javakheti. Mass
anti-government actions there (with highways cut off, for example)
will become a formidable element of political blackmail the Kremlin
is applying on Mikhail Saakashvili.
The Kremlin even suggested a solution to the main problem – that
of the transport corridor bypassing Georgia that is located between
Russia and Armenia. Moscow suggests a roundabout way across Iran and
the Black Sea. To secure its hold on Yerevan, Russia bought a part
of the gas pipeline (141 km long) between Iran and Armenia that is
to be turned on in late 2006. Russia already owns 90% of the Armenian
energy framework. Acquisition of the Armenian railroads and Armentel
(the only telecommunications company in the republic) is speculated
over. Along with everything else, the Kremlin can blackmail Yerevan
with the threat to start advancing the Russian-Azerbaijani relations.
After all, President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev is expected in Moscow
soon now.
It seems that the position of the Kremlin becomes decisive for the
future of Nagorno-Karabakh.

NATO DOES NOT HAVE A UNIFORM APPROACH TO PROBLEMATIC ZONES OF THE CIS
Translated by Pavel Pushkin
Source: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, November 13, 2006, p. 16
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
November 15, 2006 Wednesday
NATO WILL NOT HELP;
by Sergei Markedonov, deputy director of the department of inter-ethnic
relations department of the Institute of Political and Military
Analysis
RUSSIA IS SCARED BY NATO EXPANSION ON ACCOUNT OF CIS COUNTRIES BUT
NATO DOES NOT HAVE A UNIFORM APPROACH TO THIS PROBLEM; A new round
of Russian-Georgian confrontation highlighted the role of NATO in
post-Soviet geopolitics and in resolving the “frozen conflicts”
in the CIS.
A new round of Russian-Georgian confrontation highlighted the role
of NATO in post-Soviet geopolitics and in resolving the “frozen
conflicts” in the CIS. On the one hand, it is alarming that countries
that announce entrance into NATO as their strategic prospect view
Russia as a “potential opponent” and view its role in resolving the
“frozen conflicts” only negatively. There is also the other side.
There is a question, “What does NATO to do with this?”
NATO is not a branch of the US Department of State. Overall, it is
wrong to identify NATO and the US. NATO is an organization established
on the basis of a treaty among separate national states having their
own interests often different from each other including such interests
in post-Soviet space. NATO includes Bulgaria and Romania that wish
to internationalize the Black Sea, whereas Turkey is interested in
preserving “Black Sea Ltd” where the principal shareholders are
Turkey and Russia (that is not a NATO member at all)! Such NATO
members as Poland and Romania have different views on post-Soviet
space too. Poland does its best to maintain territorial integrity of
Ukraine and acts as its patron on the path to NATO and the European
Union. Romania has a difficult and controversial history of border
relations with Ukraine. Although the problem of North Bukovina
has remained in the past, Romania is still disputing belonging of
Zmeiny Island to Ukraine. Besides, Romania is a patron of Moldova in
NATO. Hence there is difference in the views of Warsaw and Bucharest on
the Trans-Dniester regulation. It is possible to recall that France is
a co-chair of the Minsk OSCE group for the Nagorno-Karabakh regulation
and Turkey has had economic blockage of Armenia (because of occupation
of a part of Azerbaijani territory by this republic) since 1993.
Thus, NATO is a complex institution that makes all decisions
(including those on attitude to the “frozen conflicts”) on the basis
of consensus. This circumstance turns NATO (especially after its
expansion) into an insufficiently mobile and efficient institution.
Besides the policy of NATO in the CIS (as an institution) there is
also policy of separate NATO members in the Caucasus or in other
regions of the CIS. Whereas the US views the Caucasus as a rear line
of its Middle Eastern front, the European Union countries view it as
a testing ground for trial of the “good neighborhood policy.”
So, what is the challenge of NATO to Russia? In our opinion, one of the
main problems of Russia’s diplomacy is inability to clearly formulate
the essence of “NATO fears.” Most likely, Russia is afraid of not
NATO itself that experiences bad times. Russia is rather afraid of
NATO expansion on account of the states being, to put this mildly,
unfriendly to our country, which may change the Russian vector of
NATO policy. In this aspect the biggest apprehensions are caused by
the “special conditions” stated by Brussels for NATO neophytes. The
NATO establishment is insufficiently demanding to the former Soviet
republics.
To date, one of the most important conditions for entrance into NATO
was an internal consensus in the political elite and in the population
of a candidate country. It is obvious that there is no such consensus
in Ukraine or in Georgia. If we speak about Georgia in the borders of
the former Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic (with Abkhazia and South
Ossetia), it is clear that such consensus is impossible. This idea is
rejected in Tskhinvali and Sokhumi. However, it seems that nobody hears
this. At any rate, after passing the resolution of the UN Security
Council on Georgia opinion of official NATO representatives was
corrected noticeably. In one of the latest interviews NATO Secretary
General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer admitted conduction of “intensive dialog”
with Georgia but said, “This does not mean that Georgia will soon
enter NATO. Although Tbilisi has been obviously striving for this,
further steps will depend on the extent to which Georgia is adherent
to the basic principles of NATO like peaceful resolving of internal
and external contradictions. The matter is about resolving conflicts
with Abkhazia and South Ossetia.”
That is why it is logical to ask: is it worth encouraging potential
members with prospects of their soonest entrance into NATO or is this
a long and drawn out process? Would it be more honest to hint that
NATO is not a political resource in their struggle against Russia?
Moreover so that their own ethnocratic and authoritarian trends are
often disguised as the struggle against “empire ambitions.”

LAW PASSED TO ALLOW CHURCHES RECLAIM LAND
The Irish Times
November 15, 2006 Wednesday
TURKEY: Charitable foundations can apply for restitution of property,
writes Nicholas Birch in Istanbul
The reasons courts gave for confiscating eight properties belonging to
an Istanbul Armenian church between 1987 and 1993 were always the same.
According to the deeds, the buildings belonged to St John and the
Archangel Gabriel. But who were these people? Judges sent inspectors
out to find them, but they came back empty-handed.
Now a new EU-backed law on charitable foundations is due to set the
record straight. Passed last Thursday by parliament and awaiting
presidential approval, the legislation gives foundations 18 months
to apply for the restitution of state-confiscated property. It also
foresees the appointment of a non-Muslim member to the state department
that oversees foundations.
“These are positive steps towards wiping out the effects of 1974,”
says Diran Bakar, a Turkish-Armenian lawyer, referring to a Turkish
Appeal Court decision to cancel real estate acquisitions made by
non-Muslim foundations since 1936. Coinciding with war on Cyprus,
the ruling led to the confiscation of at least 4,000 properties
belonging to Turkish Greeks, Jews and Armenians.
“Its aim was to dry up the minority communities’ economic resources,”
explains political scientist Elcin Macar, who believes that the
“founding philosophy of the Turkish Republic never had any space
for non-Muslims”.
Brussels has long-warned discrimination will have to stop if Turkey’s
EU bid is to succeed.
In its annual report on Turkey released last Wednesday, it criticised
Ankara for ongoing limitations to religious freedom, and recommended
the adoption of minority legislation in line with European Court of
Human Rights case law.
Yet, despite it providing the impulse behind the new law, few expect
Brussels to be satisfied with the end result. The law not only fails
to provide compensation for foundations whose confiscated property
has been sold on by the state, analysts point out, it also maintains
the distinction between Muslim and non-Muslim foundations.
“This is my country, I see my future here,” says Lakis Vingas,
businessman and member of Turkey’s 3,000-strong Greek community. “Yet
when I turn on the TV, it’s immediately clear that I’m seen as a
foreigner.” He is referring to the furious rows that surrounded
parliament’s discussion of the foundation bill.
Some deputies insisted the legislation would enable the Greek Orthodox
Patriarch – a parish priest for Ankara, first among equals for the
world’s Orthodox church – to build an Orthodox Vatican in central
Istanbul. Others worried it would involve handing Istanbul’s famed Agia
Sophia – once a church, then a mosque, now a museum – over to Greece.
In the case of opposition deputy Bayram Meral, prejudice took a less
whimsical form. “What’s this law about? It’s about giving Agop his
property back,” he railed, using a common Armenian name.
“Congratulations to the government! You ignore the villagers, the
workers and the farmers to worry yourself with Agop’s business.”
Baskin Oran, an expert on Turkish minorities, thinks such sentiments
are worryingly representative of an increasingly nationalistic
parliament. “Not only will this law not satisfy Europe, it’s highly
likely to damage relations further, as just another example of the
half-hearted reform process Turkey was criticised for in the report.”

ARMENIA’S NUCLEAR POWER PLANT RE-LAUNCHED AFTER MAINTENANCE
Prime-Tass English-language Business Newswire
November 15, 2006 Wednesday 2:02 PM EET
The Armenian Nuclear Power Plant has been re-launched after maintenance
and refueling, Lusine Arutyunyan, a representative of Armenia’s Energy
Ministry, told ITAR-TASS Wednesday.
The maintenance was finished three days ahead of the 45-day schedule,
Arutyunyan said.
The 440-megawatt power plant accounts for 40% of all electric power
produced in Armenia.
In 2003, Russia’s electric power monopoly UES took over financial
management of the power plant.
The E.U. has requested the closure of the power plant. However,
Armenia’s government says that is only possible if the country has
alternative electric power sources.
The country is considering building a new nuclear power plant but
lacks the U.S. $800 million necessary for the project, Armenia’s
Energy Minister Armen Movsesyan said.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress