AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: TURKEY: JOURNALIST TARGETED YET AGAIN
Amnesty International USA
Sept 26 2006
Public Statement
AI Index: EUR 44/017/2006 (Public)
News Service No: 252
26 September 2006
Amnesty International is dismayed at today’s news that yet another
case has been opened against journalist Hrant Dink on charges of
“denigrating Turkishness” under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal
Code. The organization considers that this prosecution is part of an
emerging pattern of harassment against the journalist exercising his
right to freedom of expression — a right which Turkey, as a State
Party to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights
and Fundamental Freedoms and the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, has a legal obligation to uphold.
The latest charge against Hrant Dink was brought following a statement
he made to Reuters news agency, in which he reportedly said of
massacres of Armenians during the Ottoman Empire, “Of course I’m
saying it’s a genocide, because its consequences show it to be true
and label it so. We see that people who had lived on this soil for
4000 years were exterminated by these events.” Amnesty International
is particularly concerned at this latest prosecution, the third
against Hrant Dink on charges under Article 301, because it seems to
constitute a pattern of judicial harassment against the writer for
peacefully expressing his dissenting opinion. Furthermore, he has
already been given a six-month suspended prison sentence following
an October 2005 conviction on charges of “denigrating Turkishness”
(upheld by the Court of Appeal in July 2006), and therefore if found
guilty again on the same charge would be imprisoned. Should he be,
Amnesty International would consider him a prisoner of conscience.
Amnesty International considers this latest prosecution to be
particularly disappointing following the welcome acquittal four
days ago of another writer, novelist Elif Safak, on charges under
Article 301 relating to statements made by characters in her novel
The Bastard of Istanbul. The organization had seen this as a positive
step for freedom of expression in Turkey but fears this acquittal
may prove to be the exception rather than the rule and demonstrates
yet again the failure of certain members of the Turkish judiciary and
prosecution to internalize international law, as required by Article
90 of the Turkish constitution. The organization reiterates its call
for Article 301 to be abolished in its entirety, thereby putting an
end to arbitrary implementation of this ill-defined law.
Finally, Amnesty International notes that this prosecution reportedly
arises from a complaint lodged by elements of civil society opposed to
the abolition of Article 301, who have lodged similar complaints in
the past seeking to secure such prosecutions and who have repeatedly
staged provocative and sometimes violent protests at trials, creating
a threatening atmosphere in the courtroom. The organization calls
on the Turkish authorities to ensure that all necessary measures are
taken to ensure the protection both of the defendants, their lawyers
and supporters in such cases, and of the course of justice itself.
For further information about Amnesty International’s concerns
regarding Article 301 please see Turkey: Article 301: How the law on
“denigrating Turkishness” is an insult to free expression (AI Index:
EUR 44/003/2006).

AZERBAIJAN FOREIGN MINISTER URGES GLOBAL COMMUNITY TO ENHANCE DIALOGUE AMONG CULTURES AND RELIGIONS
AzerTag, Azerbaijan
Sept 26 2006
Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan Elmar Mammadyarov called for undertaking
“concrete measures to enhance dialogue and broaden understanding
among nations, cultures and religions” at the general debate of
the 61st Session of the UN General Assembly, AzerTAc’s personal
correspondent reports.
The Minister pointed out the necessity to stop the growing tendency
towards Islamophobia in the world, adding that as Chairman of the
Ministerial Council of the Organization of the Islamic Conference
Azerbaijan considers it very important to increase public awareness
of Islam worldwide including in the Muslim societies.
“To this end, we plan to host in Baku in 2007 under the OIC an
international conference on the role of mass media in developing
tolerance and mutual understanding,” he said.
Elmar Mammadyarov stated while condemning all forms of terrorism
Azerbaijan is seriously concerned over attempts to associate terrorism
with Islam and Muslim nations.
Touching upon the situation concerning the massive fires in the
occupied territories of Azerbaijan as a subject of urgent consideration
by the General Assembly, the Foreign Minister said the resolution it
had adopted is aiming to assess the short- and long-term impact of
the fire on the environment, involve conflicting parties, Azerbaijan
and Armenia parties, in joint environmental operation, and thus,
promoting establishment of atmosphere of trust between them, to give
an impetus to the peace process.
“Sadly, this is the only positive development so far,” he however,
added.
Minister Mammadyarov noted “although no substantial progress has been
witnessed so far, the parties accepted the stage-by-stage approach in
the settlement.” “Basically, there are two main issues on which parties
disagree – definition of status of self-rule for the population of
the occupied Nagorno-Karabakh region and withdrawal of the Armenian
forces from all the occupied territories of Azerbaijan,” he said.
Describing Azerbaijan’s position on the issue the Minister said the
status can be defined only through democratic and legal process with
direct involvement of both Armenian and Azerbaijani communities of
Nagorno-Karabakh.
“Our position based on relevant resolutions of the Security Council
and OSCE decisions, which unequivocally demand unconditional withdrawal
of the occupying forces from all occupied territories of the Republic
of Azerbaijan,” he said.
“It is difficult to hope for breakthrough in the negotiations
when Armenia rejects face-to-face meetings and refuses to take a
constructive approach to solve existing problems, the Minister said.”
>From the UN rostrum, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan
also spoke of the economic progress achieved in the country for the
past years. He described creation of “favorable environment to attract
investments into the non-oil sector and diversify the export potential
of the country” as key challenge of its Government.
“The year 2006 has marked a historic event for the region and beyond,
which is the official inauguration of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan main oil
export pipeline. Currently, we are looking forward to completion of
the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum gas pipeline this fall and remain commitment
to contribute to global energy security,” he said.

TURKEY SAYS REFORMS ON TRACK
By Gareth Jones
Reuters, UK
Sept 26 2006
ANKARA (Reuters) – Turkey’s prime minister insisted on Tuesday
that European Union reforms were fully on track, but the EU’s top
enlargement official said he was tired of telling Ankara to change
laws that restrict free speech.
In a move underlining the EU’s human rights concerns, dozens of Kurdish
mayors in Turkey’s troubled southeast went on trial for opposing the
closure of a Kurdish broadcaster.
“The reform process is continuing at full speed and without us losing
any of our enthusiasm,” Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan told lawmakers
from his ruling centre-right AK Party.
“We are doing these reforms not because the EU wants them but because
Turkey needs them,” he said.
Erdogan was speaking as members of the European Parliament in
Strasbourg, France, debated a report critical of Ankara’s reform
record over the past 12 months.
Parliamentary sources said the report by Dutch MEP Camiel Eurlings
was likely to be adopted on Wednesday in an amended form, deleting a
clause which urges Ankara to recognise the mass killings of Armenians
in Ottoman Turkey as “genocide”.
EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn told the Strasbourg assembly
Turkey must implement more reforms before the Commission’s own annual
report, due to be published on November 8.
Rehn said he was tired of pressing Turkey to abolish or reform
an article of its penal code that makes it a criminal offence to
“insult Turkishness”, and which has been used to prosecute a number
of intellectuals.
“Despite the acquittal of the novelist (Elif) Shafak, freedom of
expression remains under threat in Turkey,” he said, arguing that the
mere existence of such judicial proceedings had “a chilling effect”
on journalists, writers and activists.
CHANGING MENTALITY
Erdogan gave no indication on Tuesday that his government might be
ready to scrap or modify the controversial article 301.
“It is not enough just to change laws to entrench human rights
and freedoms. You also need to change the mentality…. We must be
patient,” Erdogan said.
Justice Minister Cemil Cicek, an opponent of change, said Shafak’s
acquittal last week showed the law was working well.
Opposition leader Deniz Baykal, whose nominally centre-left Republican
People’s Party has taken an increasingly nationalist stance ahead
of national elections due next year, made clear he did not back any
change to the present law.
“(Erdogan) is seeking a partner to share the shame of making it
possible to insult the Turkish identity. He should knock at another
door… We will not support him,” he said.
Against similarly loud nationalist opposition, Erdogan defended plans
to ease property restrictions for non-Muslim minorities, another key
EU demand.
A pious Muslim, Erdogan ridiculed suggestions that the plans would
bolster the influence of Orthodox Christian Patriarch Bartholomew,
based in Istanbul, and pave the way for the creation of a
“mini-Vatican” in Turkey’s biggest city.
Parliament, where the AK Party has a big majority, is now debating
the ‘religious foundations’ law, though EU diplomats say the current
draft does not go far enough in restoring confiscated properties to
non-Muslim religious minorities.
In Diyarbakir, biggest city of Turkey’s mainly Kurdish southeast,
56 mayors faced charges of “knowingly and willingly” helping Kurdish
rebels by writing to Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen
earlier this year urging him not to close Denmark-based Roj TV.
Ankara views Roj TV as a mouthpiece for “terrorists” and has urged
Copenhagen to shut it down. Rasmussen has refused, citing freedom of
expression. He has also criticised the trial of the mayors, who face
up to 15 years in jail if convicted.
The criminal court judge adjourned the trial until November 21.
Turkey blames rebels of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK)
for the deaths of more than 30,000 people since it began its armed
campaign for a homeland in the southeast in 1984.

WHAT ELSE REMAINED TO BE PUT IN TURKEY REPORT OF THE EP?
Fatma Yilmaz
ISRO, Centre for European Union Studies
Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
Sept 26 2006
The membership aspect of the EU is shaped in terms of the criteria
determined by the Union. The Copenhagen and Maastricht criteria are
the well-known ones among them to be carried out by the candidate
countries which are willing to join the EU. A negotiation process,
whose duration depends mostly on the capacity of the candidate
country to adopt the EU acquis, is also performed in order to pave
the way for the full membership. Even tough the process is named as
the ‘negotiation’ one; it is actually far from being a bargaining
process. Instead, it is more one-sided course of action undertaken by
the candidate country. This is mainly because it is not the EU who
invites the countries to be involved in the Union. On the contrary,
those who ask for membership status are the countries outside the
Union. This is then why the EU unilaterally determines the reforms
given under the responsibility of the candidates to be adopted and
has opportunity to monitor their progression progress.
One of the ways to monitor and evaluate the negotiation process
is the ‘Progression Reports’ published by the EU Commission and
Parliament periodically. Considering the EU membership criteria, these
reports determine the points on which the candidates make important
progress and the points on which they are lack of realization of the
progress. In fact, the reports in theory carry the importance for the
candidates to observe how they are close to the membership aspect
and how far they are from the realization of the implementation of
the EU reforms. In short, the EU criteria are a chain of ‘musts’ to
be implemented unilaterally. However, they are also expected to apply
for every candidate in same manner since they are common imperatives
for all. More importantly, it does not give the right to the EU to
adjust the criteria arbitrarily – at least expected to do so.
When Turkey’s membership aspect is on the case, the process
interestingly goes on in different manner. The ‘well-structured’
criteria of the EU of which they are proud show flexible features.
In this sense, adding the ‘good-neighborliness’ policy, the EU firstly
set forth the solution of the Cyprus problem and the problems about
the Aegean Sea with Greece implicitly in front of Turkey to be member –
although ‘good-neighborliness’ criterion was not applied for the Greek
Cyprus. Then, the ‘absorption capacity’ of the EU became the major
issue under discussion. Absorbing, in a short while, ten countries
some of which were in slower progress than Turkey, the EU began to
question its capacity to take in Turkey which has been waiting for
50 years in the EU queue. In order not to offend completely, the EU
opened negotiation process with Turkey but this time it began to
mention the possibility of permanent derogations which have never
been the case for other candidates. It is the fact that there have
been temporary derogations applied for the others in order that the
candidates manage to undertake a smooth transitional period. However,
the EU has never put forward any derogation permanently in front
of its members before. In such case, it would mean creation of
different status rather than the full membership prospect since the
candidate could not be allowed to get benefit from some parts of EU
regulations. In fact, this is possibly the way to give an implicit
partnership status to Turkey under the name of full membership.
What is more, the most striking issue on the agenda of the EU
is opening the Turkish ports to the Greek Cypriot ships for the
continuation of the negotiation process. It seems that the Cyprus
issue would become a constant benchmark for both opening and closure
of each negotiation title. Making connection between the port issue
and negotiation titles relevant to freedom of the movements of goods
can be regarded as reasonable to some extent, but the other way around
can not comply with common sense of the criteria of the Union.
The forthcoming European Parliament (EP) report about Turkey, which is
planned to be approved on 27 September, evaluates the reform process in
Turkey and lists on which subjects Turkey has still things to do. Not
surprisingly, it includes several issues which are mentioned in none
of the criteria of the EU membership. The EP has brought critics for
not only realization of the reforms but also for the issues that are
not relevant to the EU affairs in reality. For instance, it took the
so-called Armenian genocide issue in its agenda. What the most striking
point here is that together with the so-called Armenian genocide issue,
the EP also discussed a made-up genocide about Pontic Greeks. In that
sense, in the report, it reminded Turkey that “the denial of historic
facts such as the genocide of the Armenians and Pontic Greeks and the
infringement of the rights of the many minorities within its territory
can not be reconciled with its European prospects and direction”. This
expression was put in the report as an amendment by the proposal
of Greek member of the EP. Actually, recently whoever wants to put
something in the report got an opportunity to do this wish. The latest
one became the insertion of the planned Pope visit to Turkey.
Instead of making evaluations within the perspective of standard
membership criteria, the EP is making up new assessments in accordance
with the orders of the EP members. Accordingly, the amendment about
the Pope visit was inserted in the report, expressing its expectation
about the contribution of the Pope Benedict XVI to Turkey to the
improvement of the intercultural and religious dialogue between
the Muslims and Christians. Thus, the religious affairs suddenly
attracted the interest of the EU’s official documents surprisingly –
actually this is my fault maybe to surprise because Turkey has to be
accustomed to the EU innovations about Turkey’s membership process.
If the EU can find more new issues to put into its official documents
about Turkey until the approval of the report in order to give
its final status at the end of September, I guess it will be its
creativeness and achievements. This is because I could never ever be
such kind of imaginative when there are enough issues to put pressure
such as implementation of reforms, attack to the Council of State,
the PKK terror, threshold of the election, human rights, minority and
the Alevi issues, relations with Armenia, the Cyprus issue…. What
else remained to be put in the EP report about Turkey? Maybe the
latest Greek claim about the Gagavuz Turks about which Greece claim
that they are originally the Greek Christian Orthodox and they are
oppressed under the Turkish propaganda(!) … .

INTERIOR TROOPS’ SPECIAL FORCES SUITABLE FOR MILITARY OPERATIONS IN KARABAKH
Today, Azerbaijan
URL:
Sept 26 2006
Commander of Interior Troops Zakir Hasanov: “I advocate public and
democratic control on the Army.”
The APA interviewed Commander of Interior Troops, General Lieutenant
Zakir Hasanov.
Azerbaijan has professional Interior Troops who are ready to fulfill
errands given by the Supreme Commander-in-Chief. The main thing is that
our military personnel know their duties very well and ready to fulfill
them. The Interior Troops’ officers are mastering experiences of both
military body and law enforcement bodies. We are working on this issue.
What countries and international organizations do the Interior Troops
cooperate with?
We have been closely cooperating with Turkey’s Gendarmerie since
1997. Under the protocol, Turkey supports equipping, training of
personnel of the Interior Troops. Our Troops meet modern standards by
the assistance of the Turkish Gendarmerie. We are also cooperating
with China, Italy, Russia, U.S., Germany, Romania as well as with
NATO and FIEP. We conduct joint trainings. Our main task is to conform
the Interior Troops to European standards.
The assessment mission from the Association of the European and
Mediterranean Police Forces and Gendarmeries with Military Status
(FIEP) has visited Azerbaijan recently. What do you expect from the
talks. When do you think the Interior Troops will become FIEP member?
The FIEP assessment group familiarized with the service,
professionalism and social condition of the Interior Troops. They
get a certain idea of the Troops. The assessment group is preparing
a report for the member countries. This report will be discussed at
the FIEP secretariat and the decision on membership will be discussed
at the meeting of FIEP authorities.
Are there any plans on increase of defense expenditure?
The logistics of the Interior Troops is in high level. Great majority
of social problems have been solved in the past two years thanks to
the head of state’s and Interior Minister Ramil Usubov’s care. The
personnel, in particular soldiers of the Troops have been ensured
wide opportunities today. All the military units and military camps
meet modern standards. We opened a hostel for officers in Baku in the
past one year. The construction of hostels in Sheki and Guba is about
to be completed. We also established a holiday-resort for officers
in Nabran. 136 billion manats (AZM) have been allocated for us from
the budget. Our budget is increasing every year. We are planning to
implement social programs in 2007-2008.
Some countries benefit from the opportunities of Interior Troops and
similar bodies in solving problems like the Nagorno Karabakh problem.
How do you assess the Interior Troops’ preparation for operation
against the separatist forces in Karabakh?
Besides, the separatist regime, there are Armenian Armed Forces in
Nagorno Karabakh. If there were only separatist forces, the Nagorno
Karabakh conflict could have been solved in a short period of time.
It is not so difficult to neutralize a small gangster. We had to
resist large-scale forces of Armenia and their supporters. They have
been supplied with heavy weapons and therefore, they can be defeated
by large-scale military operations. However, the Interior Troops
are prepared to interfere in this armed conflict any time. We have
high professionalism, equipment and first of all high spirit in our
military personnel. We will also undertake responsibilities if the war
starts. These responsibilities can be neutralization and disarmament of
gangsters in the liberated territories, patrol services or organizing
diversions behind the enemy to support our army’s attack in mountainous
areas and so on. Our operation regiments can be involved in the
battles together with the Army. The special forces of Interior Troops
are being trained to be suitable for military operations in Karabakh.
However, the special forces are said to be used as riot squads to
suppress rallies and unrests most of all.
These forces are used to fight both armed crimes and preserve public
order. Their professionalism is always on focus. Our special forces are
cooperating with Turkish Gendarmerie. Our officers attend training
courses in Turkey. As coming to rallies, The Interior Troops do
not engage in politics, their function is to defend our state from
criminal and outlaw attempts. We participate only in preventing mass
unrests. The practice shows some outlaw forces organize mass unrests.
We are ready to fulfill our duty. I am convinced that no outlaw force
can violate stability in Azerbaijan today.
The Military Prosecutor’s Office says there is a high level corruption
in the Armed Forces. Is there such a problem in the Interior Troops?
I am not informed of the processes in other bodies. There should be
a strong control to prevent corruption. No officer or ensign of the
Interior Troops has been called to account for corruption or bribery
since 2002. The Troops are being overseen by the Interior Ministry
and several other bodies. The officers of the Prosecutor’s Office
regularly visit our military units. Corruption is unacceptable in a
military body.
The Council of Europe is also concerned over events contrary to
the Regulations of Armed Forces. What actions are taken to remove
such events?
Legal framework prevents contrary to the Army’s Regulations. If there
is a right behavior to a soldier, there will be no problem. We need
to cooperate with parents. Our body is open to parents. We invite
parents of soldier to the military units every weekend, and I attend
these meetings too. We advocate public and democratic control on the
Army. Then the problems will be removed. Since, we are integrating
into Europe, this control is necessary.
Do the parents complain of something?
The complaints are due to leave and permission of soldiers to go
home for a short-term. Taking into account possible events, we cannot
allow soldiers to the city as they do not know the city well. They are
from province. We allow them in groups and take leave in accordance
with legislation. We rarely receive complaints on relationships
among soldiers.
What about the establishment of the peacekeeping party in the Interior
Troops?
A peacekeeping party is to be established in the Interior Troops in the
framework of the cooperation program with NATO. Preliminary measures
have been implemented for this. The officers have been trained,
staff meeting NATO standards has been established. The party has been
supplied with weapons and equipment. There remains some measures to
be implemented regarding purchasing of communication facilities that
are used in NATO forces. This problem will be addressed in the context
of mutual relations, and the peacekeeping party will be ready early
in 2007.

EU DEBATES ‘FAIR BUT TOUGH’ TURKEY REPORT
EUPolitix.com, Belgium
Sept 26 2006
The European parliament insists controversial conclusions on Turkey’s
EU membership bid are “fair but tough”.
In a heated Strasbourg debate on Tuesday rapporteur Camiel Eurlings
hit back at his critics, saying his hard-hitting findings are all
based on facts.
“Unfortunately there is reason for criticism,” he declared. “We
regret the slow down in reforms and our criticism centres on the main
political reforms we wish to see in place.”
This sentiment was echoed by the Finnish EU presidency during the
plenary debate.
“We share the concerns over reforms,” Paula Lehtomaki, Finnish Europe
minister said. “Turkey needs to give fresh impetus to reforms.”
Eurlings used the debate to pressure Turkey to amend its penal code
and afford full freedom of expression to its citizens.
Article 301 of the Turkish penal code has come under attack in Brussels
– the subsection makes it a crime to insult “Turkishness.”
“Journalists still face trial on vague grounds of insulting Turkey
according to the notorious article 301,” EU enlargement commissioner
told MEPs.
“I cannot imagine an EU member state that doe not respect freedom of
expression,” he added.
The Eurlings report also calls on Ankara to improve freedom of
religion.
“Properties are still be taken away,” Eurlings declared. “Let this
stop. Give properties back to the religious minorities.”
On Cyprus, his report calls for a normalisation of relations and full
implementation of the Ankara protocol.
But Turkish MPs have slammed the report as “nasty” and unfair.
And in an attempt to appease his Turkish critics, Eurlings stressed
that he would be personally seeking to tone down controversial
conclusions on Armenia.
“Certain things were added to my report during the vote in the foreign
affairs committee,” he said.
Eurlings insists it was never his intention to force the Turks to
formally recognise this chapter of their history.
“This amendment was added when my report was being debated in the
parliament’s foreign affairs committee, and it is an amendment I
regret,” the Dutch MEP said.
“I said that formal recognition of the past is important but not a
criterion. I do hope for Turkish accession and I hope my tough but
fair report will be seen as an encouragement for Turkey.”

GEORGIA ‘HINDERING TURKISH-AZERI RAIL LINK’
By Emil Danielyan
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
Sept 26 2006
Georgia is unexpectedly obstructing plans to build a controversial
regional railway that would connect Turkey to Azerbaijan and bypass
Armenian, reports from Ankara claimed on Tuesday.
“Georgia is deliberately delaying the start of work on the
Kars-Akhalkalaki-Tbilisi-Baku railway,” an unnamed senior official
from the Turkish Foreign Ministry said in remarks reported by the
Baku daily “Zerkalo.”
“Georgia is one of the countries that will draw great benefits from
this project,” the official was quoted as saying. “Despite that,
Tbilisi is creating all kinds of bureaucratic obstacles to delay the
railway’s construction. This is absolutely incomprehensible.”
The Turkish, Georgian and Azerbaijani governments have for years been
discussing the project estimated to cost $400 million, saying that
it will promote regional stability and economic integration.
The Armenian government is fiercely opposed to its implementation
and says its main purpose to deepen Armenia’s economic isolation.
Official Yerevan says Turkey already has a rail rink with the South
Caucasus running through Armenia. The Kars-Gyumri railroad has stood
idle for more than a decade as part of the continuing Turkish economic
blockade of Armenia.
Armenian-American organizations have successfully lobbied the U.S.
Congress to ban any U.S. government assistance to the project. The
Senate’s Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee approved an
appropriate bill late last week. The U.S. administration has not
objected to the ban.
Turkish and Azerbaijani officials have dismissed the congressional
restrictions, saying that Ankara and Baku have sufficient resources
of their own to finance the project. According to the unidentified
Turkish official, Ankara is ready to spend $220 million for that
purpose. The head of Georgia’s state rail company announced earlier
this month that work on the 192-kilometer-long Georgian section of
the planned railway will be financed by an Azerbaijani government loan.

RUSSIANS COMPLETE TAKEOVER OF ARMENIAN POWER GRID
By Astghik Bedevian
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
Sept 26 2006
After months of negotiations Russia’s national electricity company
completed late Tuesday its controversial purchase of Armenia’s power
distribution network that will boost the already strong Russian
presence in the Armenian energy sector.
The shares in the Electricity Networks of Armenia (ENA) were
formally transferred to an offshore-registered subsidiary of the
state-controlled RAO Unified Energy Systems (UES) in the presence of
Defense Minister Serzh Sarkisian and other senior Armenian officials.
The high-profile ceremony took place in Yerevan one year after the
announcement of the $73 million deal. The Armenian government agreed
to ENA’s sale in September 2005 on the condition that the Russians
assume the investment commitments and liabilities of the network’s
previous owner, the British-registered Midland Resources Holding.
Alexei Rapoport, the UES vice-chairman present at the ceremony, said
the Russian giant will invest $20 million in ENA during the first
year of its operations. He said the deal was initiated by the Armenian
government and emphasized Sarkisian’s personal role in the process.
It is still not clear why the transfer of shares has taken so long.
The Russians were reportedly having second thoughts about the takeover
after a former Armenian Energy Ministry official implicated the ENA
management in large-scale fraud. In a bombshell February interview
with two Armenian newspapers, Felix Tadevosian, alleged that an
official audit of ENA found that Midland has grossly inflated its
capital investments in the network and ran up more debts than was
previously thought. ENA strongly denied the allegations.
The Russian takeover of ENA was first made public and presented in
June 2005 as a “management contract” signed by UES and Midland. The
legality of the deal was seriously questioned by the World Bank
and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). But the
Western donors acquiesced when Midland and UES decided two months
later to formalize the sale of ENA and seek the Armenian authorities’
formal approval of the deal.
UES already controls, in one way or another, several major power
plants that provide 80 percent of Armenia’s electricity, including
the nuclear power station at Metsamor.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ARMENIA, AZERBAIJAN TRADE MORE ACCUSATIONS AT UN
By Emil Danielyan
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
Sept 26 2006
Armenia and Azerbaijan have failed to hold potentially crucial
peace talks in New York, accusing each other instead of hampering
international efforts to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
The foreign ministers of the two South Caucasus foes sounded
pessimistic about a near-term solution to the dispute as they
addressed the ongoing 61st session of the UN General Assembly late
Monday. Armenia’s Vartan Oskanian said Azerbaijan is reluctant to
accept international mediators’ most recent peace proposals, while
his Azerbaijani counterpart Elmar Mammadyarov accused Yerevan of
avoiding further direct negotiations with Baku.
Oskanian and Mammadyarov were expected to meet on the sidelines of the
Assembly session and try to kickstart the peace process that ran into
trouble earlier this year. Officials have said that the talks could
pave the way for another, potentially decisive Armenian-Azerbaijani
summit on Karabakh.
However, the two men failed to come face to face on Monday and were
not scheduled to do so on Tuesday. Oskanian was only due to meet
separately with the American, French and Russian co-chairs of the
OSCE Minsk Group in New York.
Oskanian and other Armenian officials have said that the planned
meeting of the foreign ministers was called into question by the
General Assembly’s decision earlier this month to discuss the conflicts
in Karabakh and elsewhere in the former Soviet Union. The issue was
included on the assembly agenda at the urging of Azerbaijan, Georgia,
Moldova and Ukraine. Armenia has long resisted UN involvement in the
Karabakh peace process, insisting that the Minsk Group remain the
sole mediating body.
“It is difficult to hope for the breakthrough in the negotiations
when Armenia rejects face-to-face meetings and refuses to take a
constructive approach to solve existing problems,” Mammadyarov said in
his speech. He charged that the Armenians are defying international
norms by insisting on international recognition of the Karabakh
Armenians’ right to self-determination.
Oskanian strongly denied this, arguing that Yerevan has largely
accepted the Minsk Group’s current peace plan that would allow the
predominantly Armenian population of Karabakh to determine the disputed
region’s status in a referendum. “One cannot blame us for thinking
that Azerbaijan is not ready or interested in a negotiated peace,”
he said. “Yet having rejected the other two compromise solutions
that have been proposed over the last 8 years, they do not want to
be accused of rejecting the peace plan on the table today.
“Therefore, they are using every means available – from state violence
to international maneuvers – to try to bring the Armenians to do
the rejecting. But Armenia is on record: we have agreed to each of
the basic principles in the document that’s on the table today,”
added Oskanian.
Azerbaijan’s position on the Minsk Group plan remains unclear, with
top aides to President Ilham Aliev regularly lambasting the mediators
for their refusal to push for a restoration of Azerbaijani control
over Karabakh. Mammadyarov noted in that regard that agreement on
Karabakh’s status requires the “consent of both the Azerbaijani
and Armenian communities of Nagorno-Karabakh,” but made it clear
that Baku is ready to consider only ways of ensuring its “self-rule
within Azerbaijan.” He also demanded Armenian withdrawal from “all
the occupied territories of Azerbaijan.”
Armenian officials insist that under the proposed peace deal, residents
of Karabakh will be asked to vote for the region’s independence,
reunification with Armenia or return under Azerbaijani rule. The
mediators have stopped short of publicly confirming this, saying
only that practical modalities of the referendum would be decided
“through further negotiations.”

MEDIA GROUPS SEE CONTINUED GOVERNMENT GRIP ON BROADCASTING
By Ruzanna Khachatrian
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
Sept 26 2006
Armenia’s leading media associations brushed aside on Tuesday a
government bill which is designed to make a powerful body regulating
broadcasting more independent of President Robert Kocharian.
The bill stems from one of the recently enacted amendments to the
Armenian constitution which stipulates that the Armenian television
and radio stations must be regulated by an “independent” state body.
The existing National Commission on Television and Radio (HRAH),
which has the exclusive authority to issue and revoke broadcasting
licenses, has until now been single-handedly formed by Kocharian and
is widely believed to be controlled by him. Under the government bill
in question, the Armenian parliament and president would each appoint
four of its eight members for a six-year term. The current members
of the HRAH would be allowed to complete their tenures defined by
the existing Armenian law on television and radio.
The commission would also be required to “substantiate in a proper
manner” the distribution and withdrawal of television and radio
frequencies.
Justice Minister David Harutiunian, who presented the draft law to the
National Assembly, said these changes would help to reduce government
influence on to private broadcasters. Virtually all of them are loyal
to Armenia’s leadership at present.
The only TV channel that frequently broadcast criticism of the
government, A1+, was controversially pulled off the air by the HRAH
in April 2002. Its repeated attempts to resume broadcasts have since
been blocked by the regulatory body headed by a former senior member
of the presidential administration. Domestic and international media
watchdogs view this as a vivid indication of the government’s tight
grip on the Armenian electronic media.
In a joint statement, the Yerevan Press Club, the Armenian Union of
Journalists and three other groups said the proposed changes do not
ensure the HRAH’s independence and therefore “cause serious concerns
regarding freedom of speech and a fair and objective regulation of
the market for television and radio broadcasting.” They argued in
particular that it would take years before the composition of the HRAH
changes significantly. They suggested that the new commission have
16 members, half of whom would be appointed by the parliament at once.
The signatories complained that the legal amendments were drafted
by the government “hastily” and without consultation with local
journalists and organizations defending their interests. They urged the
parliament to delay the debate on the bill pending “public hearings”
on the issue.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress