Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Sept 1 2006

Council of Europe Director of Culture and Cultural and Natural
Heritage to visit Azerbaijan
[ 01 Sen. 2006 19:10 ]
The second consultation within the Kyiv Initiative program attended
by all of the three Caucasus states as well as representatives of
Ukrainian and Moldovan Culture Ministries and Robert Palmer, Director
of Culture and Cultural and Natural Heritage of the Council of Europe
held at the Council of Europe yesterday.
APA’s Europe bureau reports, Yashar Huseynli, director of cooperation
with international organizations and programs sector of Culture and
Tourism Ministry represented Azerbaijan at the meeting.
The Kyiv Initiative is based on the experience of the project
“Support for Transition in the Arts and Culture in Greater Europe”
(STAGE), carried out between 2000 and 2005. It is a comprehensive
follow-up of the STAGE project which ended in 2005 – intends to
contribute through action and policies in culture and heritage to
democratic development and dialogue in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia,
Moldova and Ukraine.
Mr.Husyenli told the APA bureau that the STAGE project intends to
contribute to cultural tourism, cinematography, legislative,
financial and managing support in these fields.
`This project will enable Azerbaijan to have multiple and bilateral
cooperation with the Council of Europe and the participant countries,
except Armenia. Azerbaijan’s has voiced its official position in the
framework of this program. Thus Azerbaijan will not cooperate with
Armenia until it withdraws from the occupied Azerbaijani lands. The
importance of the Kyiv Initiative and Azerbaijan’s official position
there were uttered during Minister Abulfas Garayev’s visit to the
Council of Europe in April this year,’ he said.
Husyenli also said Azerbaijan has started the implementation of the
Kyiv Initiative, and the Alexander Duma in the Caucasus project,
which is accepted as the COE project at the initiative of the
Ministry is being implemented successfully.
`At yesterday’s meeting, we also discussed strategic framework and
action plan and also budget issues for 2006-2009 related to the Kyiv
Initiative,’ Huseynli said.
The sector director also said Robert Palmer, Director of Culture and
Cultural and Natural Heritage of the Council of Europe is expected to
visit Azerbaijan related to this project in late September and early
October.
Official inauguration of the Kyiv Initiative will be held in Romania
in autumn this year./APA/

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Sept 1 2006

Next court hearing on Azerbaijani army officer Ramil Safarov held in
Hungary
[ 01 Sen. 2006 20:46 ]
Today, Hungarian court held court hearings on jailers’ claim against
Ramil Safarov, Azerbaijani army officer, who was sentenced to life in
prison for murdering Armenian lieutenant Gurgen Markarian in Hungary.
Azerbaijani Embassy in Hungary told the APA .
Five witnesses-three jailors, one prison doctor and Hungarian
prisoner testified. Two jailers, parties of the incident put their
versions. Another jailor, who witnessed the incident positively
characterized Azerbaijani officer. He said Ramil always obeyed
discipline.
The Hungarian prisoner said the incident was due to Ramil’s poor
knowledge of Hungarian, which confirms our officer’s testimony.
The court hearing will continue with witnesses’ testimonies on 5
September.
Azerbaijani Embassy officers also attended the trial.
While being held in Hungarian prison in 2004, jailers wanted
telephone card from Ramil. But Ramil could not understand Hungarian
which led an incident between them. Eight police officers tied his
hands and used force. Though lawyers for the Azerbaijani lieutenant
appealed to court related to this matter, the court dismissed the
appeal saying there was no evidence. Then the opposite side claimed
that Ramil resisted officials.
Clara Fisher, new Hungarian lawyer for Ramil defends him on this
case./APA/

Stratfor
Sept 1 2006

Azerbaijan, Armenia: Foreign Ministers To Meet
September 01, 2006 15 07 GMT
Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mamedyarov said Sept. 1 that he
will meet with Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan either Sept.
12-13 in Paris or Sept. 14-15 in London to discuss the disputed
territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, a region in Azerbaijan with a largely
Armenian population that entered into conflict when it claimed
independence in 1988 from Azerbaijan to join Armenia.

Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
Sept 1 2006

OSKANIAN-MAMEDYAROV MEETING UNDER DISCUSSION

Azerbaijan’s Foreign Minister Elmar Mamedyarov has announced about
his telephone conversation with OSCE Minsk Group cochairman from
France Bernard Fassier who suggested holding a meeting between the
foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan as part of the `Prague
process’ on September 12-13 in Paris or 14-15 in London.
`I agreed to hold that meeting. Now the format of the meeting is
being discussed. Some time later we will again get in touch with him
and will specify the day and venue for the meeting,’ the Trend news
agency quoted Mamedyarov as saying.
Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry also confirmed that a meeting between
the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan may take place until the end
of the year. `The possibility of the meeting of the presidents
depends on the negotiations between the foreign ministers of the two
countries,’ Mamedyarov said.
Earlier this week it was also confirmed by Armenian President Robert
Kocharian’s press secretary Viktor Soghomonian. `This meeting may
take place if the presidents have enough material to discuss,’ he
said during a press briefing in Yerevan on Wednesday.

Mehr News Agency, Iran
Sept 1 2006

Armenian Sports Olympiad to start in Tehran Sept. 6
TEHRAN, Sept. 1 (MNA) – The 39th edition of Iranian Armenians’ Sports
Olympiad will kick off here on Sept. 6.
Ararat Cultural-Sports Club is to host the annual event that will run
until Sept. 16.
The organizing committee head Armen Khachikian said 10 teams from
Tehran, 10 non-Tehrani sides, and a track-and-field from Republic of
Armenia will compete in the event.
According to him, the competitions include football, volleyball,
basketball, table tennis, athletics, swimming, tennis, and Chess.

Baku Sun, Azerbaijan
Sept 1 2006
EU sends warning to Baku
By Ahto Lobajaks

BRUSSELS – European Commission officials have confirmed that European
Neighborhood Policy `action plans’ have been successfully negotiated
with Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia and now await member-state
approval.
The `action plans’ establish the priorities the EU and the South
Caucasus countries involved want to jointly tackle in the course of
the next five years.
However, the announcement of the completion of the action plans was
overshadowed by a stark warning from the commission to Georgia and
Azerbaijan to stop increasing their military budgets.
Strong sentiments
In an unusually strongly worded speech, delivered at a conference in
Slovenia on August 28, the EU’s external relations commissioner,
Benita Ferrero-Waldner, observed that `defense expenditure in the
region is going through the roof.’ A commission official who asked
not to be identified said the particular objects of EU concern are
Georgia and Azerbaijan. Ferrero-Waldner noted in her speech that
increases in defense expenditure send a negative message in terms of
resolving the region’s conflicts. The commissioner also says such
increases are unjustifiable in countries that are `in desperate need
of investment in education, health, and small businesses.’ The
commissioner also criticized leaders in the region for their
`inflammatory rhetoric.’ She also noted there has been `little or no
progress’ toward settling the conflicts in Abkhazia, South Ossetia,
and Nagorno-Karabakh.
EU on the way
Ferrero-Waldner, together with representatives of the EU’s current
Finnish presidency, will visit the Caucasus in early October to mark
the adoption of the `action plans.’
A commission official said the delivery of the plans would not in
itself be conditional on defense cuts.
But the official underlined Ferrero-Waldner’s concerns, noting her
speech also says `resolving or at least de-escalating the conflicts
must be the first priority’ for the EU’s European Neighborhood
Policy.

Zaman Online, Turkey
Sept 1 2006

I am not Comfortable with . . .
ALI H. ASLAN
Who supports sending Turkish troops to Lebanon in Washington and who
opposes it? And on what grounds? This week, let’s try to find out
some answers to these questions.
American officials say they would be happy to see Turkish troops in
Lebanon, pointing to our military’s success in UN and NATO
peacekeeping operations. It’s not that they are not troubled by
Ankara’s getting too cordial with Syria and Iran lately, and
directing harsh criticisms at Israel and the United States, last but
not the least during the Lebanon war. Nonetheless, they find it
useful that similarly skeptical Israel does not and can not do
without Turkey.
U.S diplomats are guided by one other important motive, that is to
protect Condoleezza Rice from the neocon lobby’s wrath, who push hard
to make her a scapegoat over the failures in Lebanon and Iran’s
nuclear program. Dr. Rice is the chief architect of UN Resolution
1071. She and her State Department will score points at every step
taken in that direction.
Neocons? I am sure they are praying for minimum troop contribution to
the peacekeeping force, just to see Rice embarrassed and to make sure
UN, which they dislike, don’t be an obstacle to Israel in Lebanon!
Why should neocons be content with deployment of a force which
refrains from disarming Hezbollah and operates under the command of
`Old Europe’? Especially if that force includes Turkish forces as
well under the directions of JDP (Justice and Development Party)
administration, which they have categorized as `Islamofascists’
aligned with Syria, Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas and the Ihvan (Muslim
Brotherhood) movement?
Thankfully, director of the Turkey Research Program at the Washington
Institute (WINEP), Soner Cagaptay, who has recently been doing
immensely shooting at the JDP administration, helps us understand the
neocon and the Israeli lobby lines. In articles published by the
Daily Star and the Jerusalem Post, Cagaptay characterized sending
Turkish troops to Lebanon as `dangerous’. Here is his basic line in
short: `Islamist JDP can’t be trusted. Should there be another
skirmish in Lebanon, they would favor Syria-Iran-Hezbollah axis”.
I asked Robert Satloff, Executive Director of WINEP, whether
Cagaptay’s views reflected their institution’s official position.
Satloff said they don’t have an institutional view on the issue, but
he respected Cagaptay’s article. `If Syrians are welcoming it
(Turkish troops deployment .A.H.A.), I think we should have serious
questions about the wisdom of it.’ he added. Looks like positive
statements by the Syrian government about the Turkish troops
deployment raised serious doubts among some
more-pro-Israel-than-Israel Americans . They oppose Turkey’s troop
contribution even though Israel has officially asked for it.
As for the Pentagon, likewise, one cannot say the leadership of that
institution is in love with Ankara. Israel’s friends at the Pentagon
and civilian neocon officials must have as many questions in their
minds as those working at WINEP. Thus, The Pentagon does not exert so
much pressure on the Turkish General staff as it did during the March
1 parliamentary motion process, when they requested Turkey to open up
a Northern front against Iraq in the war.. So, if Turkish commanders
have some reservations about sending troops to Lebanon and they
convey them to the civilian government, Pentagon won’t be too much
surprised or offended.
Among the most ardent opponents of the deployment of Turkish troops
in Lebanon are The Armenian and Greek lobbies. The Armenian National
Committee of America (ANCA) and the American Hellenic Institute (AHI)
sent separate letters to U.S President George W. Bush to express
their objections. The Kurdish lobby also supports Armenian and Greek
lobbies, silently but surely, because every thing which makes U.S.
grateful for Turkey would not only narrow the scope of Armenian and
Greek lobbies but also make the realization of Kurdist ambitions in
both Northern Iraq and Southeastern Turkey more difficult.
Why are some people (in Turkey), seemingly worried about the fate of
Turkish troops in Lebanon, opposing an attempt that might help
enhance US support to the fight against PKK, which is still killing
many sons of this land? I sense that once again national interests
are being abandoned in favor of domestic politics. At the expense of
the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which secured some of Turkey’s
vital interests, power brokers in the state establishment who dislike
religious people distanced themselves from the March 1 motion just to
make sure U.S writes off the ruling JDP. Now the same groups are
opposing possible deployment of Turkish troops in Lebanon.. Those who
do not want to see Erdogan as the president, are eager to weaken his
hand prior to meeting with President Bush. They don’t care about
Turkey’s strategic losses in the Middle East or the tactical losses
with the fight against PKK.
Don’t get me wrong, I do not question the aims and sincerity of
everyone who disapproves of Turkish troop deployment in southern
Lebanon. For instance, a retired American ambassador, whom I have
great respect for his views, expressed his concerns to me, regarding
this issue. People with good intentions both in Turkey and in the U.S
are might be coming up with different interpretations. A former
senior US government official, on the other hand, told me that he
favors sending Turkish troops to Lebanon.
Frankly, on this particular subject, I wouldn’t be comfortable with
being on the same side with Armenian, Greek, Kurdish, neocon lobbies,
Israeli right, and President Ahmet Necdet Sezer. But if you want to
do that, I can’t say anything, that’s your choice…
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Transitions on Line, Czech Rep.
Sept 1 2006

OSCE Karabakh Troubleshooter Under Fire

by Shahin Abbasov and Khadija Ismailova
1 September 2006
Hopes for a breakthrough in the Karabakh peace process any time soon
appear to be thoroughly dashed. From EurasiaNet.
Azerbaijan’s patience is wearing thin over the lack of movement
toward a Nagorno-Karabakh peace settlement, and officials in Baku are
taking out their frustration on the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) trouble-shooter responsible for
monitoring the cease-fire.
Hopes for a breakthrough in the Karabakh peace process, so high at
the outset of 2006, now appear to be thoroughly dashed. In a
mid-August speech to Azeri diplomats, President Ilham Aliev indicated
that Baku’s position is hardening. “Azerbaijan will not tolerate the
creation of a second Armenian state on its territory,” the president
said.
Another sign that trouble may be looming on the horizon is the
vehement criticism coming from Baku aimed at Andrzej Kasprzyk, the
special representative of the OSCE chairman-in-office on
Karabakh-related issues. Recent statements by Azeri officials, backed
by media reports, have portrayed Kasprzyk as incompetent, biased in
favor of Armenia, and possibly involved in nefarious business
dealings.
Having held the special representative designation for nearly a
decade, Kasprzyk’s responsibilities include managing existing
cease-fire monitoring mechanisms and promoting confidence-building
measures between Armenia and Azerbaijan. He also supports the OSCE’s
Minsk Group in promoting a lasting peace settlement for Karabakh.
Now it appears that Kasprzyk no longer enjoys the confidence of
Aliev’s administration. Dissatisfaction with Kasprzyk’s handling of a
recent inquiry into a series of fires in areas of Azerbaijan under
occupation by Armenian forces triggered Baku’s attacks against him.
The fires began breaking out in June. Convinced that the blazes had
been deliberately set by Armenians, Azeri officials pressed Kasprzyk
to look into the matter, and quickly started to criticize him for not
pursuing the investigation vigorously.
Azeri officials reportedly became enraged when Kasprzyk’s report went
into specific detail about the damage done by the fires, but shied
away from examining how they started. The closest the report got to
taking a stand was a suggestion that, given the arid conditions
prevailing in the area during the summer, fire was a perennial
threat.
“I am not an investigator,” the Arminfo news agency quoted Kasprzyk
as saying. “I could not find any evidence about what caused the
fires.” He indicated that international efforts to monitor the fires
were hampered by gunfire exchanges between Armenian and Azeri forces
deployed along the so-called contact line.
On 17 August, the Turan news agency quoted Novruz Mamedov, the head
of the Azeri presidential administration’s international department,
as complaining that Kasprzyk and the Minsk Group co-chairs had
“displayed a belated reaction” to Baku’s request for an
investigation, thus “showing their one-sided position.”
The same day, Azeri Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov stated that
“the non-prevention of Armenian-instigated blazes in the occupied
territories may lead to an ecological catastrophe.” Other Azeri
officials assailed Yerevan, accusing Armenian authorities of taking
no action to fight the fires. Azeri authorities at the same time
appealed to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and
UNESCO for help in containing the fires. Armenian officials have
generally maintained a low profile in the controversy.
>From Baku’s viewpoint, the fires are politically motivated, designed
to prevent the resettlement of Azeri internally displaced persons.
“If the fires continue, it will create problems for people who will
move to these areas; people will not be able to use this land for at
least the next five-10 years,” Araz Azimov, Azerbaijan’s deputy
foreign minister, told reporters.
Azimov went on to ridicule Kasprzyk’s assessment on the fires.
“Kasprzyk himself admitted that he is not an ecologist,” Azimov said.
“Therefore, his [inference] that natural causes were behind the fires
in the occupied territories is completely groundless,” Azimov said.
Despite their clear dissatisfaction with Kasprzyk’s performance,
Azeri officials have not taken formal action to prompt the special
representative’s replacement. Without such action, Kasprzyk said he
intends to keep performing his duties. “I will not resign,” the Turan
news agency quoted him as saying on 26 August.

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Sept 1 2006

Elmar Mammadyarov: Some of the `road map’ principles for the Garabagh
conflict settlement have been agreed on
[ 01 Sen. 2006 12:51 ]
Azerbaijan’s Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov commented on the
`road map’ offered by Matthew Bryza, U.S co-chair of the OSCE Minsk
Group, which mediates for the settlement of the Nagorno Garabagh
conflict, APA reports.
The Minister said the `road map’ is the phases of core principles of
an agreement.
`The `road map’ defines the stages leading to an agreement. It offers
eight or nine principles for the settlement of the Nagorno Garabagh
conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Some of these principles
have been agreed on,’ the Minister said./APA/

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Sept 1 2006

Vasili Istratov: Armenia is responsible for the fires in Azerbaijani
lands
[ 01 Sen. 2006 12:24 ]
`Armenia is responsible for the fires that broke out in Nagorno
Garabagh and around it. Because, Armenia controls these territories,’
Russian ambassador to Azerbaijan Vasili Istratov told journalists,
APA reports.
Responding to the question whether Russia can help remove the damage
inflicted to the ecology by the fires, Mr.Istratov said ecological
problems should be addressed by joint efforts.
`Russia is ready to help if international aid is needed,’ the
ambassador underlined./APA/