Yerevan Press Club presents web site, featuring
the most interesting publications from the press of Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey on issues of mutual concern. The latest
updates on the site are weekly delivered to the subscribers.
************************************ ***************************************
THE BORDER REMAINS CLOSED
| “Khvalindeli Dghe” newspaper (Georgia) | 31-Aug-2006 |
Regardless of assurances, Russia has not fully restored the functioning of
“Upper Lars” checkpoint on the Russian-Georgian border. The “surrogate”
option for checkpoint activity, suggested by the Russians and allowing to
cross the border from August 31 to September 3 only on foot or by passenger
cars, is not acceptable by the Georgian side, still demanding full activity
of “Upper Lars” pass. “We are against temporary opening of the pass and
insist that the Russians restore the functions of the only legal post on the
Russian-Georgian border in full, so that the citizens of our state and other
countries might cross the border on legal ground”, First Deputy Minister of
Foreign Affairs of Georgia Valeri Chechelashvili stated at the briefing. He
also informed that despite many addresses and requests, the Georgian side
did not receive from the Russian colleagues a clear explanation of the
reasons for closing the checkpoint. The necessity for repair works, a month
and a half ago qualified by the Russians as the reason for closing the
“Upper Lars”, is obviously far-fetched, to take into consideration the
temporary “liberalization” suggested by the Russians themselves.
Temporary and partial opening of the checkpoint came after the address by
President of North Ossetia Taymuraz Mamsurov to MFA of the Russian
Federation, with reference to the starting school year. “I applied to MFA
with the request to at least temporarily open the pass so that the children,
who spent their holidays with the relatives in Kazbeg region of Georgia,
might return home by the beginning of the school year”, Mamsurov stated to
the journalists.
The checkpoint was closed, as the Russian side explained once, through the
necessity of conducting repair works; the suggested alternative was using
the Rock tunnel not controlled by the Georgian side and linking the
self-proclaimed Republic of South Ossetia to Russia. However, Tbilisi
repeatedly emphasized that caused by lack of control it does not view this
route as “legal”. Having sorted out the people already using this route, the
representatives of the Georgian authorities warned them against using it
again. Moreover, they were understood by even neighboring Armenia, having
sustained serious economic losses through closure of Upper Lars” pass, it is
through this path that Yerevan exports agricultural produce in the direction
of Russia. The Armenian authorities addressed the population to wait for the
opening of the checkpoint, not to create problems either to themselves or
others and not to use the tunnel. Having thus hit the strategic partner in
the first place, as the embargo on the Georgian produce did not bring losses
to Tbilisi, the Russian side announced during negotiations that the
checkpoint will be open in mid August. However, autumn has come already and
“Upper Lars” is still inactive. A few “humanitarian” days mentioned above
are not counted.
PEACE CONTINGENT IN LEBANON
| “Milliyet” newspaper (Turkey) | Hursit Gunes | 30-Aug-2006 |
Turkey discusses the issue of possible participation in UN peacekeeping
mission in Lebanon. Even President of the country expressed negative
attitude to it. What political and economic benefits will our presence in
Lebanon bring? Let us analyze the economic component of the problem.
There is an opinion that after peace is established, Turkey will have a
chance to participate in restoration of Lebanon. Moreover, many experts hold
that Turkey cannot be indifferent to the future of this country, being a
legal successor of the Ottoman Empire. The opponents of this position state
that the functions of the peace contingent in Lebanon are not clear, so
instead of wasting efforts for other countries it is essential to resolve
the problem of terrorism inside the home country.
Economically inefficient
Let us consider the issue from economic aspect. First, participation in such
operation will not become a serious economic burden for the country’s
budget. The Turkish contingent will not be numerous and will not immediately
participate in military operations. It is 1000-1500 people that are meant to
be largely involved in social projects, at least initially.
However, those thinking that the destructions caused by Israel’s
bombardments of Lebanon will become subject to large-scale restoration are
mistaken. One should not forget the example of Afghanistan. Restoration
works are not very active in Iraq as well, with the oil dollars available.
Thus, Turkey’s participation in the peacekeeping mission in Lebanon does not
assume any economic expenditure nor will it bring economic profit. The
important part of it is the relations of Turkey with USA and Israel.
For Turkey to take part in the UN peacekeeping mission in Lebanon, the
country’s government should work out a draft decree to be ratified by
parliament.
Three years ago, the parliament did not ratify the draft prepared by the
government.
We Will Not Tolerate Another March 1
Do you remember how the right-wing parties voted in 1974 when the coalition
government was getting ready for deployment in Cyprus? We do remember. They
went against the interests of Turkey. I do not know how many journalists
prefer forgetting it. In 2003, many pro-American analysts wrote that in case
of ratification of the draft Turkey will get 50 milliard of dollars (!).
This sum was supposed to aid Turkey in achieving head-spinning success in
development and paying off the debts. Some even thought that USA will give
us a share of Iranian pie, while US does not even spare a piece for Britain.
Fortunately, we have no such expectations in Lebanon’s case. On the eve of
March 1, 2003 there was a boom at the stock exchange and other financial
markets. After failure of the draft in Parliament, the market dropped. So
the market in the country went down following a decision of not getting into
war. This situation may well become an example for the manuals of world
economics as a symbol of absurdity. Indeed, we cannot be indifferent to the
region. Sending the military to Lebanon, we will help our allies. However,
at the same time we should not spoil relations with the Muslim world.
SUPERPOWERS INTERESTED IN DEPLOYMENT OF TURKISH CONTINGENT IN LEBANON
| “Azg” newspaper (Armenia) | Hakob Chakrian | 29-Aug-2006 |
Any initiative of the Diaspora for Impeding this Deployment is Doomed to
Failure
On August 24, editor of “California Courier” newspaper Harut Sasunian
referred to the article by chief editor of “Hurriyet” Ertugrul Ozkok,
stating that even Armenian minister in the government of Prime Minister
Siniora wants deployment of Turkish peace contingent in southern Lebanon.
He particularly meant Jean Oghasapian. Sasunian contacted the Lebanese
minister of Armenian origin; finding out that Ozkok spread false rumors, he
concluded, “Such articles have a clear purpose: first to create the
impression that Turkish presence in Lebanon is commonly approved, and
second, to introduce discord in the Armenian community”.
The August 18 issue of “Azg” wrote with reference to another article of
Ertugrul Ozkok that his intention is not telling the truth but discrediting
Prime Minister Erdogan’s government. At the same time reminding of the
permanent attempts of “Wall Street Journal”, spokesman of the “New
Conservatives”, for discrediting the latter, we emphasized that “Hurriyet”
is campaigning in Turkey for both the policy and regional programmes of
official Washington.
It is not the libel of “Hurriyet” editor-in-chief that is important to UN
multinational peace forces as regards Turkish participation but the
approaches of the sides interested in the deployment of Turkish contingent
in southern Lebanon, also the intentions of the western powers, headed by
UN, and the rights and obligations of the peacekeepers.
During the visit of Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gull to Beirut,
Jerusalem, Ramallah and Damascus, Lebanese government and Prime Minister
Siniora in particular welcomed Turkey’s participation in the peace forces.
Israel made an official claim for participation; Palestinian government
encouraged it, while Syria expressed willingness to participate.
Presence of the Turkish contingent in the peacekeeping forces is welcomed by
the Siniora government in the sense that Turkey, as regional ally of US and
Israel in the region, has established friendly relations with Syria and
Iran. Nor does it avoid contacts with “Hamas” and “Hezbollah”. Consequently,
it is more acceptable than other European countries.
The objective of Israel demanding a peace contingent of Turkey is, through
the latter, creating a semblance of the presence of regional Muslim
countries within international forces, so that the “Hezbollah”
neutralization mission is not conditioned solely by the intentions of Israel
and the West. As Israel opposes the involvement of such Muslim countries as
Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan in the peacekeeping forces, so to justify the
confrontation, moreover to ease the opposition of the Muslim countries
towards “Hezbollah” neutralization plans, it demands that Turkey makes a
part of these forces.
Obviously, in case of conflict with “Hezbollah”, Turkey’s relations with
Syria and Iran will grow tense. The Arab countries of the region will treat
it with suspicion as a Muslim state encouraging Israel’s intentions. So it
will be totally discredited in the Muslim world. Isolated in the region and
marginalized from the Muslim world, Turkey will have no other alternative as
to serve official Washington and the political programs meeting the national
interests of Israel. In this case, USA will have the opportunity for
starting the shiah-suni conflict throughout the region.
It is for this reason that the Turkish government, ignoring Israel’s demand,
US pressure, enthusiasm of the Lebanese government and approval of the
countries like Syria and Iran, is careful about joining the international
peace forces. Prior to taking a decision, it demands for clarifying the
conditions of the ceasefire announced in Lebanon, and singling out the
peacekeepers’ rights and obligations.
In this context, not accidental are Ankara’s hot negotiations with Israel,
US and European countries, its consultations with Lebanon, Syria, Iran,
Saudi Arabia, Egypt, contacts with “Hezbollah”, moreover, the statements of
Prime Minister Erdogan addressed to international forces: “Turkey will join
the international forces only if these forces are deployed in southern
Lebanon exclusively for peacekeeping purposes, without the additional
mission of disarming “Hezbollah”. We do not intend involving in the armed
conflict with ethnic or political groups and especially “Hezbollah”.
If any international issue, like Turkey’s participation in UN peacekeeping
forces, is largely discussed in US, Israel or regional and European
countries, its resolution is conditioned by the interests of international
forces, the abilities of the regional countries to respond these interests
as well as the negotiations of bargaining type between the latter, and not
the distorted statements of some Turkish newspaper.
As for the Lebanon Armenians, through three traditional parties they already
rejected deployment of the Turkish troops in the country. If it is a
headache for Turkey, as mentioned by Sasunian, then we should let it drop
the intention of sending troops to Lebanon and not hint at the
unacceptability of Turkey’s presence by a letter to US President George
Bush, as hinted by the Hay Dat committee of America, or following the
delegation of Armenian Revolutionary Federation, also notify the ambassador
of Great Britain amongst others.
Prior to such initiatives, one should keep in mind the unrestrained
interests of US and Great Britain as to Turkey’s involvement in
international peacekeeping forces. As regards involvement, they not only
exert political pressure on Turkey but also use for bargaining purpose the
trump card of intensifying PKK activity. If the initiative is originally
doomed to failure, there is no sense in pushing it forward, since failed
initiatives not just fail to promote problem solution but are totally
ignored.
“BABY BIRD OF SAHAKASHVILI” REFUSED TO SPEAK TO “ZERKALO”
| “Zerkalo” newspaper (Azerbaijan) | R. Mirkadirov, J. Bayramova |
26-Aug-2006 |
The issue of violating the rights of Azerbaijanis in Georgia is of no
interest to ombudsman Sozar Subari
Recently, the human rights defender of Georgia Sozar Subari accused
gamghebeli (head of the executive) of Sarachlo village of Bolnisi region,
Ramiz Safiev of exceeding his commission. He also insists on criminal
responsibility for the latter. Subari has already filed this claim to the
general prosecutor’s office. According to the ombudsman office, on August 14
Safiev took away the documents, the children birth certificates included,
from the Georgians temporarily residing in Sarachlo village. He did not
specify the reasons for confiscating the identity documents and, threatening
use of force, he urged the Georgians to leave the village.
Later Safiev inflicted physical insult on Huseyn Kanjaliev, Azerbaijani
providing temporary housing to the Georgians.
According to Subari, gamghebeli by his actions grossly violated the
Constitution of Georgia and the law on registration. “Zerkalo” tried to
inquire Mr. Subari himself if the human rights defender of Georgia shows
same eagerness in case of Azerbaijanis, who are by the way citizens of
Georgia, residing in this country.
– How do you assess the human rights situation in Georgia, particularly
Kvemo Kartli region, populated by Azerbaijanis? – In principle, the human
rights situation is similar throughout the country. Therefore, it would not
be quite right to comment on the situation as to separate regions. I may
only note that after the revolution, it obviously improved in many spheres
and areas. For example, it concerns the sphere of respecting the rights of
religious minorities that were exposed to certain pressure previously.
Almost every day their representatives were beaten, their religious
literature was burnt. However, it is not the case now. Further on, certain
progress was achieved in the issue of preventing torture. Monitorings in
police stations considerably reduced the cases of torture. Thus, in the
human rights sphere the situation is most desperate in the prisons. It
particularly refers to the living conditions of the inmates. Imagine that
2-3 people have to share one bed. The prisons are so overcrowded that over
3,500 people are fit into 1,500 places for inmates.
– However, let us return to Kvemo Kartly region. For some reason it has the
largest number of complaints on human rights violations. As ombudsman, do
you follow the processes developing there? – We closely follow all the
processes underway in the region. Our representatives regularly visit Kvemo
Kartly; on my behalf, I am also a frequent visitor there. Therefore, I can
hardly state your words are true. There may be separate cases of human
rights violations in this region but they are not of ethnic type. Thus,
several months ago local Azerbaijanis blocked the highway during a protest
action. As a result, the law and order bodies arrested 15-16 people. We
addressed the issue right away and opposed the detention of these locals.
Initiating criminal proceedings against such a large number of people is
illegal in my opinion. Immediately after our intervention, a large number of
the detainees were released, while the rest had to serve their term. I
should admit that the actions of the protesters were illegal, since they
blocked the traffic. However, I think that the measures taken towards them
were also inadequate.
– Did you ever try to look into the reasons driving these people on the
highway and their motives for blocking the traffic? Probably, the residents
of that region had no other alternative for calling the attention of the
Georgian government to the urgent problems of land shortage and quality of
education? – First, there was no mention of the education problems. The
people simply asked for a meeting with the person responsible for settling
their land problems. In any case, two things should not be confused. What
they claimed for is one thing and the fact that they violated the law is
another. There are many legal forms and methods of expressing protest. No
one is deprived of the right to hold rallies and pickets. On the other hand,
nobody is allowed to infringe on the law and block the traffic. The law
applies not only to Azerbaijanis; all the citizens of Georgia should comply
with it.
– However, these people have long protested and demanded solution of the
land problem that is open for over a decade. Moreover, they never retreated
from those protest methods you mentioned. The same rallies, pickets in front
of various government structures for solution of the land issue were
repeated almost on daily basis but even at such rallies there were cases of
beating and detention of the protesters, while the video cameras of
Azerbaijani journalists were shattered to pieces. What do you think the
people should do for calling the attention of the government to their open
problems that the Georgian authorities have long promised to resolve, if all
the mentioned protest methods fail? – It was probably the only case of
beating and arrest. Due to our intervention, the culprits were punished. No
more cases of this type were registered. As for the land issue, it is quite
a mixed and complicated problem. Though, already after revolution lands were
taken away from some of the tenants and given to the population of Kvemo
Kartli. Still, it was not sufficient for solving the land problem, but it is
all the state can do. The state has no right to confiscate the land from the
legal owners and to give them to other persons. I would say the majority of
these landowners were Azerbaijanis themselves. Back in Shevarnadze times,
they purchased these lands from the governors for bribes or…
– (interrupting) However, the issue is different. You are an ombudsman and
should defend the rights of the citizens irrespective of nationality. If the
government gave the lands illegally to some tenants, it is a problem for the
Georgian state to resolve. However, what have you done as ombudsman for
resolving these problems of the Azerbaijani population of Kvemo Kartli? – I
am Georgian ombudsman. I am ombudsman of all the Georgian citizens
irrespective of their nationality. If you are interested in the details of
my activity, come to our office.
– Why not answering now? – You are asking the question in a discouraging
manner. Come to the office, we will talk about the Azerbaijanis whose rights
I defended. Thank you very much, good bye … (break off). During his time
in office, Head of the Russian Provisional Government Alexander Kerenski
announced large amnesty and released many desperate criminals. They were
named “Kerenski’s baby birds”.
In Georgia today there seems to emerge a whole set of young and ambitious
state officials and politicians who can justly be named “Sahakashvili’s baby
birds”. No, these are not the people that just left the prison plank-beds.
It is the “golden youth” of Georgia, educated in the best colleges of Europe
and America. However, “Sahakashvili’s baby birds” do not stand any
criticism, they are always right and ready to justify any crime not only
against the local Azerbaijani population but the Georgian as well, under the
cover of democratic slogans. It is for this reason that our conversation
with Mr. Subari failed.
Mr. Subari recollects only one case when the Azerbaijanis were beaten for
their audacity to claim that the Georgian authorities respect their
constitutional rights. If the office of the Georgian Human Rights Defender
works so poorly, we advise Mr. Subari to read newspapers more frequently, at
least “Zerkalo” newspaper. In that case, he will be able to get more
objective information about the human rights situation, to be more precise –
about the absence of such in Kvemo Kartli region. Good is that this “baby
bird of Sahakashvili”, like the rest, is an educated person and seems to be
aware of using Internet. We will note that if the claims of the human rights
defender of Georgia to the gamghebeli of Sarachlo village of Bolnisi region,
Ramiz Safiev have ground, we fully support him. No one is entitled to abuse
power and deprive the citizens of identity documents even temporarily.
However, we would like to see Mr. Subari showing same zeal while defending
the constitutional rights of Azerbaijanis, residing in Georgia. While he had
many opportunities to show this eagerness in plenty of such cases:
unsanctioned and spontaneous night police raids to Azerbaijani villages,
people in masks turning the houses upside down, insulting even women, cases
of torture and murder in police stations, detention of the old woman of
seventy for participation in the protest action and so on. This list can be
continued endlessly.
As for the position of the human rights defender for settling the problem of
land for the Kvemo Kartli population, it is totally cynical. He even tries
to put the blame on Azerbaijanis themselves. Probably Mr. Subari, at his
office’s fault, has no information about the incident with the lands given
for rent to the owner of the horse farm – not Azerbaijani but Georgian by
nationality. During that incident, elderly Azerbaijani Khilal Idrisova was
shot before hundreds of witnesses. The crime is not disclosed yet.
In principle, it is not so important if an Azerbaijani or a Georgian got the
lands originally belonging to Kvemo Kartli population for rent or ownership.
In any case, these actions by the authorities, depriving the endemic
population of the right for land, are illegal. Therefore, stating that these
lands are the property of their new owners on legal basis is utmost
hypocrisy. In civilized countries, for whose status Georgia aspires as well,
such problems are easily resolved. Illegal solutions are cancelled. In this
concrete case, the land is taken away from the new owners and returned to
the legal ones. If in this case a concrete entity of this economic dispute
sustained losses as a result of previous illegal government decision, the
state compensates the damage.
A few more words about expressing protest in the form of blocking the
traffic. How is that? During the “rose revolution”, mentioned by Mr. Subari,
people blocked the roads and it was considered their legal right, but when
the Azerbaijanis did the same demanding not power but simply restoring their
legal right for land, they committed, as the ombudsman qualified it, a
criminal offense. After this, Mr. Subari states that he is ombudsman of all
Georgian citizens, irrespective of nationality…
Finally, the human rights defender did not even notice that he violated the
right of media for getting information. Therefore, we think the Georgians
have a bad luck for ombudsman…
*********************************************** ****************************
You can subscribe or unsubscribe to this newsletter either at
or by sending a message to the Editor: [email protected].
For comments or questions please contact the Editor: [email protected].
www.mediadialogue.org
www.mediadialogue.org