AZERBAIJAN BECOMES RUSSIA’S NATURAL ALLY
Lragir.am, Armenia
Oct 25 2006
The current Russian and Georgian relations show that Georgia is
escaping the Russian influence and this is inevitable. In this
situation, Azerbaijan becomes Russia’s natural ally in the Caucasus,
stated the leader of the Christian Democratic Union Khosrov Harutiunyan
at the Hayeli Club. He supports his opinion by an analysis which
starts with an explanation of the importance of the Caucasus for
Russia. According to Khosrov Harutiunyan, the Caucasus is important
for Russia for it is a bridge connecting with other regions. In this
context, if it loses Georgia, Azerbaijan becomes the shortest and the
most logical way, concludes the leader of the Christian Democratic
Union.
In this connection he reminds the construction of the North-South
railroad, openly negotiated by Russia, Azerbaijan and Iran. In
addition, it does not occur to any Russian official to invite Armenia,
their strategic partner to these negotiations, Khosrov Harutiunyan
says. “If we continue to refer to Russia as our strategic ally, the
strategic importance of Armenia will not increase. This is the reality,
and we have to accept it and plan our short-term and long-term moves
in this context,” says the leader of the Christian Democratic Union.
He thinks that Armenia should move from complementarism to a clear
policy of European integration. “It is impossible to determine the
security of the country by setting up ties with a separate power,
and in this context the European Union, the family of the European
nations is the best environment for the collective security, and the
process of European integration should become a priority for Armenia.
I want to emphasize that instead of complementarism, today there
is every possibility to move from complementarism to Europe without
offending anyone, without encroaching on anyone’s strategic interest,”
says Khosrov Harutiunyan, adding that if he were not convinced that
it is possible, he would not have said that. According to him, it is
only necessary to choose the right tactical stages.

CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATS OF ARMENIA SYMPATHIZE WITH GEORGIA
Lragir.am, Armenia
Oct 25 2006
The leader of the Christian Democratic Party of Armenia Khosrov
Harutiunyan stated October 25 at the Hayeli Club that in the current
state of Russian and Georgian relations their sympathy is with
Georgia. “Any sovereign country is free to choose its geopolitical
line if this choice, I repeat, does not threaten the security or
strategic interests of the third country or countries. If there is a
threat, it should have been negotiated instead of barring the import
of Borjomi or wines,” says Khosrov Harutiunyan.
He says Georgia does not benefit from this situation and the action
of President Sahakashvili, whereas Russia suffers from the methods of
its reaction, says Khosrov Harutiunyan. According to him, however,
nobody or no country is supposed to judge the actions concerning
the relation of other states, and not judging Georgia and Russia
the leader of the Christian Democratic Party judges Armenia, the
Armenian parliament saying that the parliamentary diplomacy can act
as a mediator because there are restrictions on the activities of
the executive. For instance, Khosrov Harutiunyan says Armenia could
accuse Georgia of creating demarcation lines in the Caucasus by its
policy. “Meanwhile, our parliament didn’t even make a statement on
the existing situation although the new Constitution empowers it,”
says Khosrov Harutiunyan, noting that this shows that the parliament
is a political impotent.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

FRANCE MANEUVERS AND GIVES ARMENIA SOME TIME TO PREPARE
Hakob Badalyan
Lragir.am, Armenia
Oct 25 2006
A strange similarity can be noticed in the actions of the foreign
legacies in Armenia. The ambassadors do not make that significant
steps over the years of their work than when they prepare to leave.
The reason perhaps is that since they are diplomats, representatives
of other countries, their actions are restricted by the “imperative
mandate” and they beware evaluations and comments, meanwhile as they
are about to leave, they are more free, at least with regard to the
given country. The evidence to this is that the ambassadors of two
great states to Armenia the United States and France left with a noise
although they worked quite tacitly. We should not forget that after
John Evans had left, the U.S. embassy announced about extending facts
on corruption to the Armenian government. Meanwhile, they had insisted
on the contrary before Evans left. Henry Cuny outdid Evans with his
“post-diplomatic ease”. His five years in Armenia were so unnoticed
that some people were even surprised to hear that Cuny was ambassador
to Armenia for five years. And it is possible that for this reason
he decided to leave slamming the door behind him. And the slam was so
hard because it concerned the recent delight of the Armenian foreign
policy: the law passed by the French parliament and its influence on
the Turkish and Armenian relations. Ambassador Cuny literally stated
that our relations with Turkey is our business. This was but an overt
answer to the Armenian diplomacy with Commander Vardan Oskanyan and
“Commander-in-Chief” Robert Kocharyan, who used their entire arsenal
to present to the public from early morning till late at night what
a diplomatic victory Armenia celebrated by the decision of the French
parliament. Meanwhile, Cuny hints that it was not the goal of France
to interfere with the Turkish-Armenian relation and solve a problem
for Armenia but France solved its own problems, and the ambassador
naturally did not speak about these problems because unlike Armenia
in France they usually keep and solve their problems inside their
own circle.
I wish Cuny had stated that the relation with Turkey is our business.
He also advised to listen not only to the opinion of people who hurry
to thank France but also the young people who, besides gratefulness,
say that their future, if they want to live in Armenia, depends on
the dialogue with the neighbors rather than confrontation. In other
words, the ambassador of France conveyed to the Armenians that before
the delight and celebration of a decision made by another country
it is first of all necessary to realize the effect of this decision
on the future of their own country. Of course, Cuny cannot imagine
that moral victories are of more value in Armenia because these do
not require special intellect and efforts, all they take is some PR.
Moreover, he cannot imagine that the people who deal with the foreign
policies and who should have calculated and analyzed for the people
what practical use the bill adopted by the French parliament would have
for the future of the country are in reality busy analyzing their own
future, not the future of the country and people. And they concluded
from their analysis that the decision of the French parliament is
what they need to stir emotions and turn into a means of praising
themselves. And while anyone in Armenia who would speak against this
public psychosis propagated by the government would immediately be
characterized as a betrayor, a false Armenian or a foreign agent,
it is impossible to say the same about the French ambassador. He
cannot be a betrayor, a false Armenian and especially a foreign
agent. Consequently, he did not have any motivation stemming from the
logic of the Armenian government to announce what he announced only
five days before leaving Armenia. In other words, the motivation is
quite different, and the ploughmen of the Armenian foreign policies
should at least now make an effort to analyze and get the meaning of
Cuny’s words.
It appears that by hinting that the bill on the genocide has nothing
to do with the Turkish-Armenian relation and the future of Armenia
Cuny definitely opposed to the parliamentarians of his own country,
who asserted that they adopted the bill out of moral standards and
support to the Armenian people. This may be true, and it may even
appear that like in Armenia in France too the right had does not know
what the left hand is doing. But again this is what the logic of the
Armenian elite suggests. In reality, it is highly probable that Cuny
is preparing the failure of the bill on the genocide in the Senate or
at the Palais d’Elisees, where Jacques Chirac may simply decline to
sign the law. We should not forget that Chirac will retire soon and
he may agree to accept the blow, namely the dissatisfaction of the
Armenian voters in France. In other words, it is more expedient that
the French Senate adopts the law not to arouse dissatisfaction among
the Armenian voters, meanwhile Chirac is the most convenient way of
preventing the triumph of this bill. France did what it needed to do
and now it does not need to go forward. The bill will prove useful
in their relations with Turkey, therefore it is not necessary to
adopt it right now. It may appear that only several days ago Chirac
spoke about the friendship of Armenia and France in Yerevan and he
would never agree not to sign the law. Meanwhile, Cuny’s words, who
is announcing, in fact, that the bill is against the interests of
Armenia, may serve this purpose. Hence, already an effort is made to
justify the possible move by Chirac, presenting it in the light of
the pursuit of the Armenian interest. Therefore, though it may seem
that the Armenian government should be offended by Cuny revelations,
it had better thank him for outlining so early the possible moves
of the French policy. The point is that the French ambassador simply
tried to help the Armenian government to take its time and work out
an action plan not to be given a surprise when the Senate rejects or
Chiract declines to sign the bill to include this move immediately
into the national liberation propaganda and present it as another
diplomatic victory of Armenia.

ARMENIAN-TURKISH EXHIBITION OPENED IN “MOSCOW” CINEMA
Public Radio, Armenia
Oct 25 2006
“Merhabarev” photo-exhibition opened in the “Moscow” cinema today.
The exhibition is the first joint project of Armenian and Turkish
photographers. Coordinator and participant of the program
Ruben Mangasaryan said that during the mutual visits in 2006
photo-correspondents of the Armenian “Patkerphoto” and Turkish “Nar”
agencies had taken the photos of Yerevan and Istanbul, and now 130
photos will be exhibited in Yerevan.
“This exhibition will familiarize the two, which, being immediate
neighbors, have isolated themselves with closed borders,” said Turkish
photographer Osjan Yurdalan, adding that in the photos they tries to
present the everyday reality.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

MEDIATORS CHARACTERIZE OSKANIAN-MAMMADYAROV MEETING AS CONSTRUCTIVE
Public Radio, Armenia
Oct 25 2006
The OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs have declared that yesterday’s meeting
of the Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan was constructive.
“The two Ministers held a constructive meeting in a very sincere
and earnest atmosphere,” says the statement issued by the Russian,
French and American Co-Chairs after the meeting. Vartan Oskanian and
Elmar Mammadyarov discussed the suggestions on the status of Nagorno
Karabakh, the mediators had presented earlier in Moscow.
The two Ministers have arranged to meet again on November 14.

72 FAMILIES OF A-320 CRASH VICTIMS RECEIVED INSURANCE PAYMENTS
Public Radio, Armenia
Oct 25 2006
Up to now “Grand” insurance company has paid the insurance payments
to 72 families of victims of the A-320 Armavia jet that crashed May
3 near Sochi. “Armenpress” was told at the insurance company that
payments have been given mainly to families of the passengers, who
were citizens of the Republic of Armenia.
Let us remind, that 113 people died as a result of the crash on May
3. Both Armenian and Russian citizens can apply the “Grand” company
for receiving the insurance payments within two years.

HIS HOLINESS GAREGIN II RECEIVED THE AMBASSADOR OF SWEDEN
Public Radio, Armenia
Oct 25 2006
October 25 in the Mother See of Holy Echmiadzin the Catholicos of
All Armenians Garegin II received the newly appointed Ambassador
Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Sweden to Armenia Hans Gunar
Aden and the Honorary Council of Sweden to Armenia Edith Khachatryan.
Welcoming the visit of the Swedish Ambassador to the Mother See
of Holy Echmiadzin, His Holiness expressed appreciation for the
deepening of diplomatic relations between the two countries. During
the meeting the Patriarch turned to the Armenian community of Sweden
and the organization of its spiritual life. He expressed gratitude
to the authorities of Sweden for providing assistance to the newly
founded community.
In his turn, the Ambassador thanked for warm reception and expressed
the hope that the diplomatic relations between the two countries
will promote the development of Armenian-Swedish cooperation in
different spheres.
At the end of the meeting the Catholicos of All Armenians Garegin II
wished success to the Ambassador in his mission.

AWAOC MONTHLY LITERARY MEETING TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 2
Public Radio, Armenia
Oct 25 2006
Monthly literary meeting of the Armenian Writers Association
of California (AWAOC) will take place at 7-9 p.m. on Thursday,
November 2, 2006 at the Auditorium of the library, with cooperation
of Hay Kiank, Hay Life Publishing. There will be presentation of “Srti
Akhbyur” (Spring of Heart) book of poems by Eskandar Eskandarian. The
event will be presided over by writer and veteran journalist Hrant
Simonian. Managing Editor of Hay Kiank Armenian Weekly Appo Jabarian,
and writer Kima Kirakosian will present literary treatises. Mr. Bill
Paparian, former Mayor of Pasadena, CA, three-term councilman
(1987-1999) and currently Candidate for the CA-29th District of US
Congress will be guest of honor.

THE GUIDE OF ISTANBUL ACCUSES FRENCH POLITICIANS AND JOURNALISTS
Public Radio, Armenia
Oct 25 2006
The French version of the official website of Turkish tourism of
Istanbul currently posts a banner to protest against the bill (October
12, 2006) voted by the French members of Parliament, penalizing
the negation of the Armenian Genocide. While clicking on the red
banner on which it is written “Turkey never perpetrated genocide in
its history,” one can see an addressed to the French politicians
and to the journalists. In the second passage of the message, the
writer does not hesitate affirming only the people about whom he
says “those who do not know a minimum of the History of Our European
Continent”. Obviously, each European knows that Turkey is located in
Asia, except Istanbul. Further, the precision is brought: “Turkey was
born in 1923, therefore there was no Turkish army in 1915.” Then,
the French members of Parliament are remedied about the Madagascan
“genocide” carried out by France “which has so much blood on the
hands and so many skeletons in the cupboards.

BLOGS – THE NEW DIPLOMACY?
By Paul Reynolds
Story from BBC NEWS:
africa/6083632.stm
Published: 2006/10/25 17:57:05 GMT
The attack on the government of Sudan by the UN’s envoy Jan Pronk
has perhaps pointed the way to a new kind of direct diplomacy –
the diplomat’s blog.
Mr Pronk was expelled from Sudan after government anger at comments
he made on his personal website. The government accused him of
“psychological warfare” after he wrote that government forces had
suffered two defeats in Darfur and that it had broken Security
Council resolutions.
The former Dutch cabinet minister is no stranger to controversy but
his use of the internet to publicise his views is new and daring in
diplomacy, which traditionally favours discretion.
His blog was startlingly detailed, the kind of information that is
normally sent back, encoded, only to national capitals. Sometimes in a
one-on-one talk, a journalist can get something similar from a lively
envoy, but to get it in the raw on the internet is an innovation.
For example, Mr Pronk wrote of Darfur: “The morale in the government
army in North Darfur has gone down. Some generals have been sacked;
soldiers have refused to fight… Security Council resolutions which
forbid armed mobilisation are being violated.”
He is given to public pronouncements on foreign policy. He once
called for an “Iraq-style” intervention in Bosnia (Iraq-style as in
the 1991 war to expel Iraq from Kuwait) long before the outside world
took action.
When the Serbs massacred Bosnian Muslims following the fall of
Srebrenica, he was a cabinet minister. He immediately and publicly
accused the Serbs of genocide. He then criticised the performance of
the Dutch troops who were supposed to defend the town and resigned
himself, followed by the whole government the next day.
Uzbek example
Another turbulent diplomat who would have loved a blog when he was
trying to get his message over was Craig Murray, the British ambassador
to Uzbekistan between 2002 and 2004. He eventually fell out with the
Foreign Office over his public criticism of the Uzbek government’s
human rights record.
You should be able to say more of what you really think – you can’t
have a cocktail party relationship with a fascist regime Craig Murray
Former UK ambassador in Uzbekistan He is now a private citizen but
still campaigns and uses a blog to do so.
“I would have loved a blog when I was an ambassador, but they were
not really invented then and I doubt even now if the Foreign Office
knows what they are,” he told me.
“I did get permission for a speech I made making my views public but
I was told that approval had been given at too low a level, so I got
into trouble.
“A diplomat’s blog is a great idea. You should be able to say more of
what you really think. You can’t have a cocktail party relationship
with a fascist regime.”
Such diplomats break the traditional mould. I know that Mr Murray’s
actions upset many of his colleagues who feel that vigorous reporting
should be confined to private messages back to base. It is then up
to governments to act.
Update: I have had two e-mails pointing me to a blog by the British
ambassador to Tunisia Alan Goulty! So the Foreign Office does know
what a blog is.
One of the e-mails was from Luke Cholerton-Bozier, a consultant for the
British Council and the embassy at the time of the World Information
Summit in Tunisia. He says that it was his idea and he mentioned it
to an embassy official. The blog is the result.
It is a mixture of politics and diplomatic life – and nothing
controversial. The ambassador remarks on the Middle East peace process
as well as issues like animal welfare. He invites comments which is a
good part of any blog, leading in one posting to his rueful remark:
“A correspondent in Gabes chides me for paying more attention to
animal welfare in La Marsa than to poor people in the South. ” He adds:
“of course, both need help.”
But what happens when, as in Mr Pronk’s case, the diplomat feels that
nobody is listening on a matter of great importance?
Armenian agony
There was a famous case during World War I when the US ambassador to
the Ottoman Empire, Henry Morgenthau, started reporting his conclusion
that Armenians were the subject of genocide by the Turks.
“It appears that a campaign of race extermination is in progress
under a pretext of reprisal against rebellion,” he wrote to the
State Department.
His cables to Washington did not have much effect so he began to talk
to the New York Times and other papers.
The modern equivalent might be to set up a personal website and talk
directly to the world instead of to journalists.
Vibbi’s verbosity
There was, on the other hand, the example of the young Croatian
diplomat which governments are keen to avoid.
Known online as “Vibbi,” 25 year old Vibor Kalodjera blogged from
Washington during the 2004 presidential campaign. He dismissed the
Democratic candidate John Kerry as “no better” than George Bush,
whom he in turn accused of being interested “in oil only”.
His opinion of diplomatic life in general came through when he
commented on his attendance at a conference. “What a privilege! I’d
rather have been at a concert.”
“Vibbi” was suspended.
One example of a current diplomat’s blog I came across was one run
by the Syrian ambassador in Washington Imad Moustapha.
His site is not exactly like Mr Pronk’s. It has a picture of the
ambassador sitting on a sofa and there is plenty of jolly talk about
how wonderful Syria is. Perhaps the ambassador has to resort to this
method of communication because he has little contact with the State
Department these days. Syria is currently still part of the “axis
of evil”.
At least he tries. A quick inspection suggests that most embassy
websites are woefully dull.
Embassy efforts
The British embassy site in Dublin, for example, where you might
think that an informal approach would be appreciated, looks as if it
has been downloaded from a 1950s pamphlet. There is no personal word
from the ambassador, just a long CV and a passport-style photo.
Yet one might have thought that his travels around Ireland would
produce an interesting commentary on the state of relations with
Britain’s important neighbour.
On the other hand, the Irish Embassy’s website in London is not much
better and has misspelt the word “contact”.
The US embassy in London, whose ambassador Mr Holmes Tuttle is not,
despite his status, one of the more visible diplomats in London,
does not reveal much on its website about his activities. There are
some pictures of the envoy in full white tie and tail, a garb somewhat
distant from that of most Londoners.
The internet does seem to be a foreign thing to most diplomats.
[email protected]