Armenia Says Its Gas Price Stays Fixed
BusinessWeek
Nov 4 2006
All Associated Press News
YEREVAN (AP) – Armenia said Saturday that the price it is paying for
Russian gas of US$110 (euro86) will stay fixed until the end of 2008,
an announcement certain to rile neighboring Georgia which has been
told to pay more than double that from next year.
Armenian Finance and Economy Minister Vardan Khachatrian said that
Russia’s Gazprom state monopoly had agreed to freeze the price
until Jan. 1, 2009, in return for Armenia transferring control
of an electricity power generating unit for almost US$250 million
(euro197 million).
Related newsMortgage rates dipInvestors Look to Weigh Economic Data He
also said that Yerevan was in talks with OAO Gazprom over the sale of
ownership rights to the Armenian segment of a planned pipeline bringing
Iranian gas to the country, which is due to open later this year.
Gazprom this week said it plans to charge Tbilisi US$230 (euro180)
per 1,000 cubic meters of gas, compared with the US$110 that it
pays now, ratcheting up economic pressure against Moscow’s small,
pro-Western southern neighbor.
Georgian Prime Minister Zurab Nogaideli said that the sharp price
rise was obviously political because other ex-Soviet nations were
paying far less.
On Saturday, Nogaideli said that Georgia would not agree to pay such
a high rate because it was not commercially justified. “We are not
going to pay an non-market price,” he said.
Energy Minister Nika Gilauri said Friday that talks were taking place
with Azerbaijan, Iran and Turkey to secure alternative supplies of
gas. Analysts in Georgia warned of a repeat of the gas war between
Russia and Ukraine at the start of this year when Gazprom cut off
supplies.
That stoppage, amid fierce negotiations over a higher price
demanded by Gazprom, was seen as punishment for Ukraine’s pro-Western
policies. Ukraine, which finally agreed to pay almost double at US$95
per 1,000 cubic meters, has since managed to limit the increase for
2007 to US$130 after Russian-leaning Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych
took over as head of government in the wake of his party’s success
in March polls.
Neighboring Belarus faces a fourfold rise in gas prices to US$200,
although Gazprom is believed to be willing to compromise if the
country hands over 50 percent of the state pipeline through which
Russian gas transits to western Europe.

Armenian bishop makes first visit to North Andover
By Yadira Betances , Staff Writer
Eagle-Tribune
Eagle Tribune, MA
Nov 4 2006
St. Gregory Armenian Apostolic, 158 Main St. North Andover: Bishop
Anoushavan Tanielian celebrates the divine liturgy tomorrow at 10
a.m. to celebrate the Feast of All Saints and the church’s 36th
anniversary. Anoushavan is vicar general of the Eastern Prelacy of
the Armenian Apostolic Church of America. This is the first time the
bishop will visit St. Gregory since his consecration as bishop in
June. Reception follows.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

BIA, Turkey
Nov 4 2006
Independent Media Forum Starts
The Istanbul “International Independent Media Forum” has been
introduced to participants and observers at a meeting held at Hill
Hotel. Savio, Casagrande, Ferguson, Iskandaryan, Alankus, Kurkcu,
Mater, Sinar, Jaura and many others attend press conference.
BIA News Center
03/11/2006 Ayca ORER
BÝA (Istanbul) – The Istanbul “International Independent Media
Forum”, bringing together activists, specialists, workers, students,
analysts and initiatives striving for an independent and democratic
communication environment from across the world and Turkey, has been
introduced to participants and observers on Friday in a press
conference and meeting held at the city’s Taksim Hill hotel.
Making the opening speech of the 3-day event held under the framework
of the “Establishing a Countrywide Network for Monitoring and
Covering for Media Freedom and Independent Journalism”-BÝA² project,
bianet Project Coordinator Ertugrul Kurkcu said the goal of the forum
was to debate how media workers could guard the interests of the
society while conducting their work.
Kurkcu said the forum taking place at the Bilgi University Dolapdere
Campus between November 4-5 had been organized jointly by the IPS
Communication Foundation and the Inter Press Service.
The central theme of the forum is “Another world is possible” with
participants discussing a variety of media related issues with
special emphasis on alternative media.
Kurkcu told Friday’s introduction meeting that among the forum
discussions, social gender and media would be looking at the
wide-spread discrimination against women in media while a debate on
peace and independent media would hear experiences of news coverage
discouraging conflicts. Developments in Iraq and Beirut are among the
issues to be looked into, alongside the role of the local media in
Turkey which is expected to increase in the coming years, Kurkcu
explained.
The forum will look into many issues concerning the media from
examples of efforts to create an independent, alternative, media to
creating a more open, democratic, transparent and accessible media
through civic journalism. Ways to create global, regional and local
alternative networks is also among the discussion topics.
A total of 90 participants from various countries and Turkey are
attending the event. Organizers have said 58 of the participants are
men, 32 women. 71 come from Turkey while 19 are from other countries.
Participants are made up of 16 academics, 49 journalists from the
Turkish local media, 15 professional journalists, 2 NGO
representatives and 5 students.
World issues to be discussed
Speaking at Friday’s meeting that was held before a scheduled evening
reception that formally launches the forum, a number of participants
addressed current issues facing the media.
Savio: Lack of explicating journalism
Internationally renowned expert in communications issues and IPS
Executive Board Chair Dr. Roberto Savio told the audience that there
were two reasons that influenced the independence of the media. The
first, he explained, was the threat from economic circles while the
second was the gap between the mainstream and local media.
Savio, who founded numerous news and information projects, always
with an emphasis on the developing world: Inter Press Service (IPS)
news agency, the Latin American features service ALASEI and the
Women’s Feature Service, also referred to the world-wide increase in
intern users while newspaper sales figures declined. He stressed that
there was a changing readership.
Savio said that at current reporting was primarily limited to
observing incidents without explicating them, adding that what
journalists needed to ask themselves was “can the journalism we are
doing now last for a long time?”
Sinar: War shouldn’t be reduced to figures
Dov Sinar of the Netanya Academic College said for his part that 20
to 25 yers ago it was believed that alternative media was required
only for totalitarian regimes but that over time democratic regimes
had also started to need an alternative media.
Underlining that the media had to be extremely careful in relaying
events, Sinar said the question of “what happens in war or peace
conditions” should never be forgotten.
Sinar said that in the occupations of Iraq and Gazza, humans were
being reduced to being figures only and that this situation further
emphasized the importance of the alternative media.
Ferguson: Biggest enemy is money
Robert Ferguson of London University told the meetings that after the
collapse of the Soviet Repubic it could be observed that the problem
previously described as being totalitarian regimes was in fact a
problem of money for the media.
“When the big enemy went” he explained, “the economic relations of
the media surfaced.” Furguson said there were still newspapers in
Britain that were distributed for free and noted that it had to be
understood under which conditions these newspapers served.
Alankus: Alternative media debate world-wide
East Mediterranean University lecturer Dr. Sevda Alankus, told the
meeting that next week they would be holding a peace journalism
meeting in North Cyprus were participants from both sides of the
divided island would be discussing peace.
Alankus noted that alternative media was now being debated throughout
the world and described alternative media as a necessity.
Rights Reporting Awards to be Granted
Following the opening ceremony of the forum, “BIA2 Rights Reporting
Awards” dedicated to a journalist from the mainstream media and local
media will be granted alongside an award to communication students.
The awards will go to Yuksekova Haber newspaper reporter Necip Capraz
from the local media; Radikal newspaper reporter Timur Soykan from
the mainstream media and students Aycin Gelir and Eylem Tuna from the
Anadolu Universty Communication Facility.
About the forum
The Forum is to be launched by speeches delivered by Le Monde
Diplomatique newspaper editor-in-chief Ignacio Ramonet’nin and IPS
General Director Mario Lubetkin’in .
The first day, Saturday, sees two panels taking place in the Forum:
“New Global Mainstream Media Environment Limits and Challenges” and
“Independent Media Environment and Prospects for non-Mainstream”.
A panel on the second day, meanwhile, focuses on communication
education: “Education for Communication: Critical or Mainstream?”.
Two important group discussions will take part on the second day of
the forum. “Social Gender and Independent Media” moderated by
journalist and writer Ipek Calislar is to bring together women rights
activist and journalist Angella Castellanos from Colombia, bianet’s
Nadire Mater, Kaos GL’s Ugur Yuksel, Media Monitoring Group’s Dr.
Hulya Ugur Tanriover, Pazartesi magazine’s Beyhan Demir and Ucan
Supurge’s Oya Ozden Saner.
Later, the “Independent Media for Peace” discussion moderated by
Birgun newspaper editor-in-chief Murat Celikkkan is to bring together
Alexander Iskendaryan from the Armenian Caucasus Media Institute,
Acik Radio’s Avi Haligua, bianet’s Erol Onderoglu, Yucel Gokturk,
Merve Erol, Erdir Zat and Siren Idemen from Express, Cyprus Turkish
Union of Press Workers’ Huseyin Yalyali, Georgia Social Researches
Center’s Marina Muskhelishvili, Azerbaijan Zerkalo newspaper’s Murad
Huseynov, Agos’s Nuran Agan, Israel Peace Journalism Center’s Prof.
Dr. Dov Sinar, Rustem Batum, Sevgul Uludag and Cyprus East
Mediterranean University’s Tony Angastiniotis.
Local, independent media and civic journalism in Turkey
One of the important events on November 5 is the “Civic, Local and
Alternative Media in Turkey” forum which will bring together
academics and local journalists.
Moderated by journalist Ragip Duran, the forum will start with Dr.
Sevda Alankus’s question “Do the local media and civic media give
opportunities for a pluralism and independence?”
While Dr. Incilay Cangoz discussed local and independent media in the
context of “civic journalism” Coskun Efendioglu from the Milas Onder
newspaper will raise questions on how the media could be local and
independent.
Manavgat Venus Radio’s Dogan Sonmez will look at the issue
approaching journalists as the “human capitals of independence” while
Diyarbakir Gun TV’s Cemal Dogan will share his experiences on news
reporting and broadcasting in a mother-tongue. Mehmet Can Toprak from
the Mersin Radio Ses and Izmir Demokrat Radio’s Nadiye Gurbuz will
explain “local radio broadcasting in metropolitan cities”.
The goals
The International Independent Media Forum which is open to everyone
has set the following goals:
· Bring together activists, specialists, workers and analysts from
across the globe, who strives for “another media”.
· Share experiences in bringing out independent media and analyze
significant practices.
· Help develop more open, democratic, transparent and accessible
media environments.
· Provide and contribute in cooperation among global, regional and
local alternative media networks.
· Encourage individuals and institutions to support independent media
initiatives
· Increase the quality and quantity of independent media practices in
Turkey (AO/EO/II/YE)
–Boundary_(ID_c3Mj72uWHYQVDs7z9lZZ IA)–

Broken bridges in Turkey’s southeast
By Kirsty Hughes in Van
Aljazeera.net, Qatar
Nov 4 2006
Saturday 04 November 2006, 16:04 Makka Time, 13:04 GMT
On a sparkling autumn day, a few tourists and locals are visiting
the half-restored, 2nd-century Armenian church on Akdamar island in
eastern Turkey’s Lake Van. But there are no Armenians here.
And tourists are a rare breed in this conflict-ridden region too. It
was in this region of Turkey that Armenians say they were massacred
by Turkish forces 90 years ago.
While the best lakeside houses and flats are occupied by military and
police families, the run-down streets of Van are now thronged with
mostly unemployed Kurdish men and boys (women in this conservative
town mostly stay at home). It is a region steeped in poverty.
Van’s population has more than doubled since the early 1990s due
to displaced villagers fleeing the conflict between the Kurdistan
Worker’s Party (PKK) and the Turkish military – and not least due
to the destruction by the military of thousands of Kurdish villages
especially in 1993-94.
For Turkey, the EU and US the PKK is a terrorist organisation.
But local Kurds reject that label. They say few families have been
untouched by the Turkish military’s retribution in the past 22 years
of conflict.
Many have a son, daughter, cousin, uncle or brother either in the
mountains with the PKK, in jail, or dead from the conflict.
Limits on freedoms
Cuneyit Canis, head of the Van Human Rights Association, explains
that neither they, nor other human rights NGO, will use the label:
“Of course, we are against violence wherever it comes from, but we
never say terrorist – if we use the same language as the state or
government, then how do we differ from them?”
Limits on freedom of speech worry Cunis: “If you say Turks and Kurds
don’t have equal rights in society, even if you are talking in a
political party, you could be accused of being a separatist. The DTP
[the Kurdish Democratic Society Party] is a legal political party …
but they often get mixed up [by the police] with the PKK, so it’s
easy to charge DTP members to be PKK.”
Ibrahim Sunkur, the head of the Van branch of the DTP, agrees: “To
be a political party, you need to have meetings, to express ideas,
to have freedom of speech, but we are not completely free as all our
activities are followed by the police and they are going to open a
court case even if we say simple and basic things.”
Sunkur has been president of the local DTP for less than a year –
all previous presidents have been arrested sooner or later. After he
took part in a local TV debate two weeks ago, the military came to the
TV station and demanded copies of the tapes to analyse what he said.
EU impact
Turkey’s membership talks with the EU have had some positive but
limited impact on Kurdish rights in recent years. As one retired
intellectual in Van puts it: “There were very good steps during the
EU process but not enough. If it wasn’t scared of the EU and US,
Turkey would take back all the rights it has given very easily.”
For Ayhan Cabuk, head of the Van Bar Association, these steps
are the merest tokens: “Many people here are living and speaking
Kurdish and under pressure of the EU you give them half an hour a
week broadcasting but not by yourself. That’s nothing. How can that
be an answer to the problem? The limit of half an hour shows their
mentality and their hearts.”
And this month, the military found a way to jam the frequency through
which Kurdish TV is beamed into homes from abroad.
Speak their language
Yet today the central demand of many Kurds is not for the separate
state that the Turks so fear, and not even for a federation (publicly
calling for a federation itself could lead to separatist and so
terrorist charges) but for the use of their mother tongue in education
and in the media.
Even though there are between 15 to 20 million Kurds in Turkey, and
many in the southeast speak Kurdish as their first or only language,
children start primary school understanding only Kurdish, but are
spoken to and taught in Turkish.
One teacher quotes a now-dead Kurdish writer from Diyarbakir who
described this as: “cats barking like dogs”.
Sunkur insists cultural rights are now their main demand: “We aren’t
looking for an independent state, and we’ve taken back a step on the
federal goal – even though big countries like the US, Germany and
Russia have federations and it’s normal and they are thinking of it
in Iraq now.
“But we do not want to damage the unity of the state. We want to
use our language freely and to have education in their mother tongue
for all our children at all levels… We’ve a right to broadcast our
language in radio and TV too.”
Unilateral ceasefire
At the start of October, the PKK declared a unilateral ceasefire
raising hopes in the southeast that a new breakthrough may be possible,
including a general amnesty for PKK fighters.
But General Buyukanit, the new military chief of staff, ignoring more
subtle and positive responses from various politicians, responded
aggressively saying the army would fight till every last PKK fighter
was dead.
Abdulbasit Bildirici, the head of the local branch of an Islamic
human rights NGO Mazlumder, is pessimistic: “There was a group in
government and in the military supporting this ceasefire but then the
‘deep state’ won and shut up the others, and there have been four
or five big military operations in and around the region recently so
they are not responding to the ceasefire.”
Army lorries and police checks can be seen in and around Van.
Bildirici thinks this ceasefire is a “last chance for Turkey” since
if the government doesn’t respond: “It makes ceasefires meaningless
to people’s minds… this feeling is very strong.”
He worries that divisions between Turks and Kurds have become deepened:
“There is a broken bridge between the state and people here.”
A local businessman puts it even more strongly: “You [the Turkish
state] accuse people of not loving you, but you broke all their lives
and stole their windows, took their property, and took everything,
and now they are in an indescribable, inhuman situation and you ask
them to love you and be grateful.”
Solution sought
The ending of the last PKK ceasefire two years ago, accompanied by
renewed violence, and the Iraq conflict, has not made the Turkish
public, government or military more open to a peaceful solution. “Of
course,” says Bildirici “the northern Iraq and Kurdish situation
increased the nationalist movement in Turkey.”
He adds that for Kurds in Turkey, seeing Kurds in northern Iraq run
their own affairs is a boost to self-confidence after the “humiliation”
of being second-class citizens in Turkey. But he insists that “apart
from a few small radical groups, most Kurds in Turkey have no idea
of having an independent state here”.
But though many Kurds here are clear on their two main aims of a
general amnesty and full cultural rights, there is an absence of
a political strategy for persuading their Turkish counterparts to
accept those goals.
Instead, a sense of political as much as geographic isolation and
impasse hangs over Van.
Turkey is now in the run-up to presidential and parliamentary elections
next year – and parties of all colours are turning up their nationalist
rhetoric. Whether the glimmer of hope provided by the new PKK ceasefire
can take the two sides past the elections and into a constructive
new political dynamic remains to be seen.
CE86-9BBA-42EC-87AF-C91ED11F3A7B.htm

Seeing Everything as a Conspiracy
by ETYEN MAHCUPYAN
Zaman, Turkey
Nov 4 2006
11.04.2006 Saturday – ISTANBUL 22:12
The most important pillar of the doctrine produced during the period
of the Turkish Republic’s foundation was certainly the backward-facing
historical discourse which never had much of a connection to the truth.
This approach, which aimed to cut itself from reality and idealize
what we had lived through, tied the Anatolian people to Central Asia,
and history was constructed on a migration map that had no basis.
Meanwhile, the historical continuity of the Ottomans was concealed
as much as possible. Consequently, history became a field where
we could only feel the past and internalize it by establishing an
emotional connection. Due to the vital function of nationalism in
the official ideology, the emotionalism at issue became molded into
national patriotism. The result was a society that neither knew what
history was nor its own history. Even today, what historians pass on
as “history” is mostly a form of a story. Anecdotes based on certain
people’s strength of character and moral stories, which are meant
to be taken as examples, still comprise the essence of perception in
this field.
While the past is turned into a story like this, history’s natural
complexity, contradictions and inconsistencies grow paler; the will
that is drawn by perfectly consistent molded characters appears
before us as a series of events. Thus, on the one hand, with the
inner richness and human weakness of the characters removed, history
is reduced to a struggle between good and evil. On the other hand,
social and political events are understood not as an extension of
a state with multiple determinants, but as the implementation of a
willful plan which had been made beforehand. This unreal world, because
it doesn’t permit real action, frequently makes things difficult for
us. For example, to write that Mustafa Kemal put on a woman’s dress and
left the house through the back door can be perceived as “insulting,”
because we can’t comprehend that the Mustafa Kemal of our imagination
could do such a thing. As a result, putting the real Mustafa Kemal
aside, the official ideology produces an imaginary Mustafa Kemal
based on already established patterns and we call this history.
Likewise, we have difficulty perceiving situations that appear
to be the result of coincidence, variables and multi-actors who
surround social and political events, as if we are uncomfortable
with the complexity accompanying the truth. Consequently, it’s in
our interest to see everything as a conspiracy, and we prefer the
assumption that conspiracy begets reality. We are not aware that this
approach consolidates an authoritative mentality to the degree that
it exaggerates the will of the powerful and distances us from the
consciousness of being a citizen and that we also degrade ourselves
when we perceive groups as impersonal gangs that pledge allegiance
to the state.
While diluting topics that are extremely important factors of Anatolian
history, like the Armenian issue to the treachery of “internal powers”
cooperating with “foreign powers,” within a conspiracy mentality,
we think the artificial dialectic that has been produced is the
truth. Of course, great European powers of that period were determined
to protect the Ottoman minorities and, of course, a group of Armenians
got involved in partisan politics.
However, if we don’t ask why this happened, why these people behaved
this way, what the approach was of those who didn’t behave this way
and what the government was during while this was happening, we can’t
understand this issue within its real historical connection. Then we
will have to produce some dialectic to prove the government right,
we’ll make a whole community traitorous, we’ll say they all rebelled
and committed murder, and, by mixing events from different historical
times, we’ll attempt to produce an imaginary “balance.”
Unfortunately, the only thing that emerges from such approach is a
tale or lullaby, not history.

EU urges Ankara to rethink stance on Hamas
The New Anatolian, Turkey
Nov 4 2006
Describing Hamas as a “terrorist group” in its upcoming progress
report on Turkey, the European Union indirectly criticizes Ankara,
urging it to conform with the common position of the Union.
According to the draft progress report obtained by The New Anatolian
before the text is released by the EU next Wednesday, although
the Union states that “Turkey has broadly continued to align its
foreign and security policy with that of the EU…and has continued
to support the Middle East peace process,” it continues by saying,
“Turkey declared in February 2006 to share the objectives EU Common
Position on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism
and ensure that its national policies would conform to that Common
Position. Hamas is on the list included in this Common Position.”
On other issues about foreign, security and defense policy, while the
Union praises Turkey’s participation in the EU-led police missions
including Bosnia-Herzegovina (EUPM), former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia (Proxima) and in Congo (EUROPOL KINSHASA) and UN and NATO
peace missions for the development of European Security and Defense
Policy (ESDP), it criticized Turkey’s resistance to including Greek
Cyprus and Malta in the EU-NATO strategic cooperation based on the
“Berlin Plus” agreement. The reports also notes that Turkey continues,
for political reasons, to block Greek Cyprus’ membership in certain
suppliers’ groups, such as the Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls
for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies.
Touching on Turkey’s relations with the Middle East, while the
report says that Turkey’s relations with Syria continued to develop
positively, it also praises Ankara’s efforts and concrete initiatives
to promote stability in Iraq by facilitating dialogue between U.S.
authorities and Sunni Arabs. “Turkey argues that there is a direct
link between the recent escalation of violence in the southeast of
Turkey and increased clashes between Turkish Armed Forces and the
PKK and ‘infiltration of PKK members’ from the Iraqi border,” it was
said in the report, saying that a significant number of troops were
deployed along the Iraqi border in order to prevent infiltration by
PKK terrorists from northern Iraq.
The report also praised Turkish efforts to encourage Iran to
comply with the demands of the international community and the
country’s support to EU efforts to obtain long-term guarantees for
the implementation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and its
Nuclear Safeguards Agreement with the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) by Iran.
The continued strong support of Turkey for the “Bonn process”
concerning the reconstruction of Afghanistan was also praised in
the report.
Brussels urges Turkey to open its border with Armenia
The Union in the progress report also urges Turkey to open its border
with Armenia, stressing that this would be an important step forward
in the establishment of good neighborly relations between the two
countries and would boost trade relations.
While urging Turkey to open its border with Armenia, the EU cites
the lack of significant developments in relations between Turkey and
Armenia since the official exchange of letters between Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Armenian President Robert Kocharian
in April 2005.
However the EU notes a closer alignment of Turkey’s official position
with EU positions in relation with the Southern Caucasus and Central
Asia. “Turkey has reiterated its support for the European Neighborhood
Policy. Turkey participates in the regional initiative GUAM (Georgia,
Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova) with observer status.
Turkey followed closely the elections in Azerbaijan. It aligned itself
with the EU Presidency statement on the elections in Azerbaijan on
10 November 2005,” said the report.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Regnum, Russia
Nov 4 2006
“Russian authorities are doing all possible for not being loved, but
Americans do it better”: Azeri press digest
Azerbaijan-Russia
Excerpts from the interview of political expert Arif Yunusov to
Day.Az:
“How big is Russia’s influence on Azerbaijan, today?”
I think that, today, the Americans have a bit bigger influence in
Azerbaijan. True, in the first two years of Ilham Aliyev’s rule,
their influence was much bigger, but in the last months Russia has
become much more active.
The local media were right when they said that the Oct 2005 arrest of
the pro-western economic development minister Farhad Aliyev – who was
seen by many as Azeri Yushchenko or Saakashvili – was, undoubtedly,
the work of Russia, more precisely, its special services. It was
Russia’s biggest victory over the US in Azerbaijan in the last years.
Besides, there are pro-Russian men in Ilham Aliyev’s team. Many of
them have businesses in Russia and can be used for pressure on
Azerbaijan. There are also Azeri emigrants. They also suffered from
the Russian-Georgian crisis, and, if there is a Russian-Azeri crisis,
their factor may play an even more serious role.
There is one more trump in Russia’s hands: growing disappointment
with the US’ policy in Azerbaijan. The anti-American moods are
getting so strong that even the Americans are beginning to notice it.
And what do our citizens say most often? What they say, in general,
is: “Russia never says that it wants to build democracy here. It
admits that it has its own interests in the region and wants to
restore its influence in Azerbaijan. Russia is not hypocritical. As
regards the Americans, they keep saying that the only thing they are
thinking about is to build democracy in Azerbaijan, but, in fact, the
only thing they are thinking about is how to get our oil and how to
use our territory against Muslims.”
That’s why Russia’s authority in Azerbaijan is growing despite its
policy in the country. By their clumsy actions in the region, the
Russian authorities are doing all possible for not being loved, but
there are Americans who do it better. (Day.Az)
The Azeri office of the Russian Caucasian Institute of Democracy has
organized in Baku a roundtable “Energy Security of Azerbaijan: Pluses
and Minuses of Cooperation with Russia.” Independent energy expert
Ilya Zaslavsky, oil and gas expert Georgy Nozadze and employee of the
Center for CIS Studies of Moscow State University Alexander Karavayev
took part in the event. Karavayev stressed the priority of politics
in the Russian-Azeri energy cooperation. He also spoke about the rise
in the Russian gas prices. He believes that “the gas weapon Russia is
trying to use is not giving it the expected results.” Azerbaijan is
equal to Russia as it has its own energy resources and means of their
transportation. “I don’t think that Russia can pressure Azerbaijan by
means of energy as Azerbaijan’s energy security is beyond any
pressures and threats. Georgia and Armenia are a different story –
they seriously depend on Russia’s energy,” Karavayev said.
In his turn, the chairman of the Azeri National Public Committee on
Integration Ilgar Mamedov noted that Azerbaijan will gain from a new
rise in the Russian gas prices. “The point is that, after the first
rise, some partners, particularly, they in Armenia were strongly
displeased, and some local forces have already turned their eyes
westwards. If Russia does it again, Armenia will get even farther
from it, and this will serve our interests in the Nagorno-Karabakh
problem. In any case, new rise will not affect Azerbaijan’s energy
security,” Mamedov said. The director of the Center for Political
Innovation and Technologies Mubariz Ahmedoglu noted that if Russia
continues its energy blockade of Georgia, Azerbaijan will support its
neighbor and will partly cover Georgia’s gas demand. “In terms of
energy security, it would be better for us if Russia more tightly
cooperated with Turkey.”
Political expert Arif Yunusov agreed that the Azeri-Russian energy
cooperation is more dependent on politics than on economy. “It seems
to me that Russia has no clear energy policy. Yes, after the rise in
the gas prices, they in Russia were in some kind of euphoria over
Ukraine. However, the rise has also affected their strategic partners
– Belarus and Armenia – and this factor should make them anxious.
Russia has no clear energy policy, while we would like to clearly
know the energy priorities and goals of our neighbor, as energy
security depends on a complex of geo-political factors.” (Echo)
Zerkalo says: “The strengthening of Russian-Armenian relations cannot
but influence the foreign policy of Azerbaijan. Until recently, there
has been a kind of status quo – a basic level – in Azeri-Russian
relations. But now that Moscow and Yerevan are coming increasingly
closer, Baku may turn its face towards the West, especially as all
this is happening before Ilham Aliyev’s visit to the NATO
headquarters in Brussels.
It should also be noted that NATO Special Representative for the
South Caucasus Robert Simmons visited Baku quite recently. He openly
asked the Azeri leadership to clearly formulate their foreign policy
but received no answer. During the final press-conference he said
that in early Nov they in Brussels will give answers to all the
questions Azerbaijan is worried about.
If these answers are given and satisfy Baku, a new balance of forces
may take shape in the region in the near future – a pro-western
US-backed Azerbaijan-Georgia tandem that will oppose Russia-Armenia.
If this happens, Azerbaijan may change its present position
concerning the application of sanctions against Iran.
But there is one more scenario. In early Nov Ilham Aliyev is to go to
Moscow. Against the background of strengthening Russian-Armenian
relations, Vladimir Putin will have to offer Azerbaijan something
that would keep Baku away from NATO. This offer should not be
categorical and will hardly concern the Nagorno-Karabakh peace
process. Russia has proved that Armenia is closer to it; so, it will
hardly offer Azerbaijan anything profitable on Nagorno-Karabakh.
(Zerkalo)
Geo-politics
” They in Moscow and Washington think it possible that, in order to
dot all i’s in their big geo-political game in the South Caucasus,
they will have to play for a government change during the coming
elections in Armenia and Azerbaijan. This is almost a foul play – a
play where they may lose much if not all – at least, for some time.
And this loss will endanger the geo-political interests of both the
West and Russia. So, the sides are trying to agree and to start
rivaling in “a more civilized manner.” In fact, this second scenario
may result in agreements on the Armenian-Azeri conflict,” says
Zerkalo.
“First, it will allow to avoid serious geo-political confrontation in
the region – which is good for both the West and Russia. They in the
Kremlin perfectly realize that, even with its huge oil export
incomes, Russia will not be able to confront the West and, first of
all, the US. If it tries to, it will have to become a fully “close
society,” like it was in the Soviet times. This may result in an
“all-national default.” And so, we can see that the Russian officials
are beginning to change their tone concerning Georgia.
Heavily dependent on Russian fuel, the West too would not like to use
“stick” against Russia.
Second, if Russia guarantees peace agreements in Nagorno-Karabakh, it
will gain, at least, temporary political influence in the region.
Geo-politically, Russia does not care much for who Nagorno-Karabakh
will belong to, but this will be a good chance for it to “show its
adherence” to the peaceful resolution of territorial-ethnic conflicts
in the CIS and, thereby, to gain wider room for maneuver when it is
time to settle the conflicts in Abkhazia or South Ossetia – the
conflicts Russia does care for.
Third, via Azerbaijan Russia will get something it has lost after its
crisis with Georgia – a stable land corridor to Armenia, Iran and
farther Turkey. Besides, Russia will be able to preserve its big
military contingent in Armenia (which is now in almost total
blockade) and to argue that it is expedient from military-political
point of view.
For the West, the resolution of the Armenian-Azeri conflict will be a
chance to launch a massive political-economic intervention into all
the South Caucasian countries, first of all, into Armenia, which has
dropped out of the regional integration because of being rope-tied
with Russia. Western analysts say that 3-5 years of massive
political-economic intervention will be enough for irreversibly
turning all the South Caucasian states in Euro-Atlantic direction.
That is, Russia will still have to leave the South Caucasus, but it
will do it gradually, will get some political-economic preferences
for that and, most importantly, will avoid serious cataclysms and
will save its face. Some Western experts believe that Russia’s
involvement in serious internal political cataclysms in the South
Caucasus may seriously impede the region’s Euro-Atlantic integration.
So, what we are witnessing, today, may well be a sophisticated
diplomatic game leading to a “conspiracy” between Russia and the West
for resolving the Armenian-Azeri conflict and for preserving the
present internal political status quo in both Armenia and Azerbaijan.
That’s why the western co-chairs of the OSCE MG have repeatedly
hinted that it would be much easier for the Armenian and Azeri
authorities if they resolved the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict before the
elections in their countries. (Zerkalo)
Azerbaijan-Armenia. Nagorno-Karabakh problem
Zerkalo
says: “As regards the discussion of frozen conflicts at the UN
General Assembly, Azerbaijan seems not to be in a hurry. Unlike the
Georgian and Moldavian conflicts, the resolution of the
Armenian-Azeri conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh is in the center of the
international mediators’ attention. In their public statements the
sides openly say that they may reach some agreements by the end of
this year or, perhaps, in early 2007. That’s why, Baku should not
insist on the UN GA’s discussing this problem before the current
stage is over.
Especially now that Azeri FM Elmar Mamedyarov has said that the new
proposals of the OSCE MG are acceptable for Azerbaijan, in principle.
Mamedyarov’s words suggest that the co-chairs are waiting for
Armenia’s official reaction to their proposals. If the sides agree,
the discussion at the UN GA will become unnecessary. If they don’t.
Baku may demand it almost throughout next year – till Sept inclusive.
Besides, if the current round of the peace talks fails, Baku may
insist that the UN GA adopt very tough formulas against Armenia –
which is quite in line with Ilham Aliyev’s recent statements about
possible revision of the settlement strategy.
Political expert Ilgar Mamedov comments on the last developments in
the Nagorno-Karabakh negotiating process in an interview to Echo:
“If the position of the Azeri leadership remains unchanged – i.e. the
position formulated and repeatedly expressed by the Azeri President:
Azerbaijan will never accept a scenario for alienating
Nagorno-Karabakh from its territory – all scenarios for resolving the
Armenian-Azerbaijan conflict are acceptable and possible. All those
package, phased, package-phased scenarios are just setting. The main
question is who Nagorno-Karabakh will belong to after final
resolution.
However, for many years already Baku has been insisting on phased
scenario, while Yerevan says the conflict can be resolved only in
package…
You may as well find some package agreement that will be acceptable
for Azerbaijan and quite unacceptable for Armenia. All this talk
about package or phased resolution is just a propaganda wave for
know-nothings. The opinion that for Azerbaijan any phased scenario is
better than any package one is nonsense. For example, a package
agreement may say that Nagorno-Karabakh is a sovereign territory.
Isn’t it good for us?!
The Armenian FM says that Yerevan will discuss the question of
territories only after the status of Nagorno-Karabakh is specified?
It is just a new version of the well-known Armenian position. Still,
it seems a bit softer than the previous one. To wait for the status
to be specified is one thing and to insist that Nagorno-Karabakh
cannot be part of Azerbaijan is a quite another thing. It seems the
Armenians have slightly softened their position. They may be doing
this for getting dividends during their coming parliamentary
elections.
Recently the Armenian and Azeri FMs have been intensively meeting
even though earlier the Armenian FM refused to meet pointblank. Why
are they meeting so intensively?
I am inclined to think that the sides are being pressured into
meeting. However, there is also the factor of the next year’s
parliamentary elections in Armenia. These are decisive elections, and
the Armenian leaders would like to get support and indulgence from
those who are pressuring and urging them on in the negotiating
process. This offers interesting possibilities to Azerbaijan. We’ll
see how practicable they are.
By the way, much has recently been talked about the military budget
of Azerbaijan for 2007, which will be almost $1 billion and will be
bigger than the whole budget of Armenia. At the same time, they in
Yerevan and some local experts point to high corruption and other
factors that will prevent Baku from really changing the situation in
this direction…
Even if they “eat” half of the allocations, the constantly growing
remainder will create excellent conditions for Azerbaijan’s military
superiority. And this superiority will become a political factor.
(Echo)
Armenian Defense Minister Serzh Sargsyan believes that his Azeri
counterpart also wants cease-fire. “He also wants the cease-fire
regime not to be broken,” Sargsyan told journalists, while commenting
on his meeting with the Azeri DM. “Simply, we should realize that, if
there are tens of thousands of armed people on both sides, some of
them may shoot under certain circumstances. But we should see that
those shoots not be deliberate and cause no big incidents,” Sargsyan
said. (Trend)
Excerpts from the interview of Azeri FM Elmar Mamedyarov to Day.Az:
“What can you say about the results of your meeting with the Armenian
FM in France? What do you expect from the forthcoming meeting in
Brussels?
The meeting in Paris is already history. As you already know, the
next meeting will take place in Brussels on Nov 14. On that day
Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia are to sign with the EU their New
European Policy action plans. We are going to meet before the signing
to discuss the new proposals and ideas put forward by the OSCE MG
co-chairs in Moscow.
Can you tell what those proposals are about?
It is early to do it yet. Shortly speaking, we touched on 1-2 moments
from the existing 8-9 elements and found it really hard to say if
there was any progress. During the last meeting in Moscow the
co-chairs presented some new ideas. We considered them and saw that
there might be some chance for us to work in this direction.
Presently, we are analyzing them and it seems we can work on them.
However, this is not a one-way process. We are also considering the
opinion of the opposite camp. As a result, we should decide in what
direction we should continue our work.”

TREND Information, Azerbaijan
Nov 4 2006
Karabakh Liberation Organization Accuses Law-Defenders of Being
Indifference towards Destiny of Karabakh Partisans
Source: Trend
Author: S.Ilhamgizi
04.11.2006
Karabakh Liberation Organization (KLO) expressed its protest against
several law-defenders in relation with the absence of the names of
the Karabakh partisans in the list of political prisoners submitted
to the Council of Europe, Trend reports with reference to the KLO.
It should be mentioned that a number of young people had formed an
armed team to protest against the occupation of the Azerbaijani
territories by Armenian Armed Forces. One of them has been sentenced
to the prison for term of life and other from 5 to 14 years.
KLO considers that the court has passed an unfair resolution. In
addition, during the investigation, the court procedures have been
repeatedly violated.
It was mentioned in the KLO resolution that each of these arguments
is enough to include them into the list of the political prisoners.
“But the position of several law-defenders coincides with the unfair
decision of the court. We demand these law-defenders to change their
position,” was stated in the resolution.

Thursday, November 02, 2006
*******************************************
ON WISDOM, LOVE, AND
RELATED ATROCITIES
*******************************************
Men say they value knowledge over ignorance but live as though they loved ignorance more.
*
Since our ignorance far exceeds our knowledge, in whatever we say about the visible and the invisible world (the universe and god) there will be more uncertainty than certainty. Unless mankind comes to terms with this gray area of uncertainty, we shall have wars, revolutions, and massacres.
*
There is a difference between being right and being wise. Our revolutionaries at the turn of the last century were right, but were they wise?
*
Either we de-Ottomanize and de-Sovietize ourselves or we go on confusing a dehumanized existence with survival.
*
I am afraid all this talk of Turks and massacres has turned us into pillars of salt.
*
Indians believe verbal communication is not the only way to transfer wisdom, and that being in the presence of a wise man is enough to absorb wisdom by spiritual osmosis. Perhaps our problems stem from the fact that for six hundred years we kept the wrong company.
*
One doesn’t fall in love with a person, one falls in love with an image, an abstraction, a projection, a lie, a symbol…and symbols don’t fart.
*
If I am nice in person and nasty in my writings it may be because in my dealings with my fellow men I may respect their limitations and ignorance, but in my writings I am merciless.
#
Friday, November 03, 2006
****************************************
FROM MY NOTEBOOKS
**************************************************
No one, not even bosses, bishops, and benefactors, is in a position to say his definition of Armenianism is the only valid one.
*
Like war, genocide is such a colossal blunder that it must be handled very carefully, even if it means attending it “by a bodyguard of lies” (Churchill).
*
Literature and big money don’t mix. I feel ill at ease in the presence of benefactors who are constitutionally incapable of respecting anyone they can hire and fire; and I can sense this contempt even in the presence of their flunkies who are, as a rule, less diplomatic in their dealings with “honorable beggars” (Baronian).
*
You may have noticed that smart Armenian operators hide their political loyalties. I remember once when I asked a friend to which party he belonged, he replied, “I am with the good guys.” No one believes me when I say I am not just non-partisan but anti-partisan. Shaw is right. The trouble with crooks is that they assume everyone is a crook.
*
Hating the enemy is easy. Trying to understand him much more difficult. I admire people who choose understanding. But I see something inconsistent in someone who pretends to understand his enemy but hates his own brother.
#
Saturday, November 04, 2006
*******************************************
VARIATIONS ON A FAVORITE THEME
************************************************
Literature is neither glorified gossip nor entertainment. Literature is more like a guerrilla campaign against a minority of cynical manipulators and a majority of unthinking underdogs who have a fatal admiration for all top dogs, including serial killers like Hitler and Stalin.
*
The greatest and most dangerous illusions are the infallibility of faith and the nobility of patriotism. To me, the statements “I am a man of faith, therefore I am wrong,” and “I am willing to die for my country, therefore I am a potential murderer,” are as valid as “I think, therefore I am.”
*
The source of wars and massacres is neither greed nor evil but love of God and Country.
*
Armenians who believe what their pundits and academics tell them resent it when Turks do the same thing.
*
Do your utmost to agree with those who disagree with you. Even if you learn nothing from them, you may learn tolerance, and tolerance is a far better means of acquiring wisdom than intolerance.
*
In time of war, fathers bury their sons. Under fascism, criminals jail law-abiding citizens.
#

Armenian Assembly of America
1140 19th Street, NW, Suite 600
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-393-3434
Fax: 202-638-4904
Email: [email protected]
Web:
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 2, 2006
CONTACT: Christine Kojoian
E-mail: [email protected]
ARMENIAN ASSEMBLY ANNOUNCES DEVELOPMENT & MEMBERSHIP TEAM
Goal: Expand Membership, Increase Outreach
Washington, DC – Armenian Assembly Board of Trustees Members Lu Ann
Ohanian and Peter Vosbikian, Co-Chairs of the Development and Membership
Committee, are pleased to announce the recent addition of Andrew T.
Zovko and Peter Toto to the Assembly staff in Washington, DC.
Zovko, a professional fundraiser who has raised over $80 million for
Washington area non-profits, has joined the Assembly as Director of
Development. A native of Pittsburg, PA, Zovko has over 16 years
experience in a wide range of areas including direct marketing,
fundraising and grassroots activism. Prior to joining the Assembly,
Zovko led successful fundraising programs for the National Law Center on
Homelessness & Poverty, the National Family Caregivers Association,
Environmental Defense, the Wilderness Society, and Catholic Charities of
Washington, DC.
Zovko earned a master’s degree in Syriac Studies from Oxford University
in England and a bachelor’s degree in Near East Studies from Princeton
University in New Jersey. In his new role at the Assembly, he will
oversee Development efforts which have also been strengthened by the
appointment of Peter Toto as Development Associate.
Toto comes to the Assembly from Dominion Aquatics, where he served as
Director of Development. Prior to that, he spent two years as the
Development Services Coordinator with Judicial Watch, a non-partisan,
non-profit foundation established to serve as an ethical and legal
“watchdog” over U.S. government and judicial systems to promote needed
political and legal reform. He has also worked at the American Cancer
Society as a development consultant.
Toto is a 2003 graduate of Catholic University of America, where he
majored in Political Science.
“We are pleased to welcome Andrew and Peter to the Armenian Assembly and
look forward to working with them,” said Ohanian and Vosbikian. “Their
creativity, leadership and experience will prove extremely beneficial as
we promote the Armenian Assembly in communities across the country.”
“As the Assembly prepares to celebrate 35 years of serving the
Armenian-American community, I look forward to meeting and working with
our nationwide network of members and volunteers,” said Zovko. “With
their hard work and support the Assembly will continue to grow and
expand to meet the challenges ahead.”
Ohanian and Vosbikian are both longtime Assembly supporters and
previously served on the Assembly’s Board of Directors. Vosbikian also
served as Chairman of the Board of Directors from 2002 to 2004. Earlier
this year, Assembly Trustees approved the merger of the Board of
Trustees and the Board of Directors into one governing body. The merger
was part of the Assembly’s efforts to streamline the effectiveness of
the organization and hire new personnel including, Research and Analysis
Director Armen Kharazian, Finance Director Ellen Gordon, Public Affairs
Assistant Karoon Panosyan and Intern Coordinator Joseph Piatt.
The Armenian Assembly of America is the largest Washington-based
nationwide organization promoting public understanding and awareness of
Armenian issues. It is a 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt membership organization.
###
NR#2006-092
Editor’s Note: Photograph available on the Assembly Web site at the
following links:
2/2006-092-1.JPG
Caption: L to R: Intern Coordinator Joseph Piatt, Director of Research
and Analysis Armen Kharazian, Development Director Andy Zovko,
Executive Director Bryan Ardouny, Finance Director Ellen Gordon,
Development Associate Peter Toto and Public Affairs Assistant Karoon
Panosyan.