NOVRUZ MAMMADOV: “ANDRZEJ KASPRZYK DOES NOT TAKE A FAIR STANCE ON ARMENIAN ARSONS IN NK”
Today, Azerbaijan
Aug. 16, 2006
“Personal representative of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office Andrzej
Kasprzyk does not take a fair stance regarding the Armenian-committed
arsons in the occupied Azerbaijani lands.”
“You can never see such a stance related to such kind of issues in
any other country,” APA reports quoting Azerbaijani President’s Office
international relations department chief Novruz Mammadov.
The official said the fires in the occupied Azerbaijani territories
should be investigated adding that Andrzej Kasprzyk takes a biased
position with regard to Armenian arsons in Azerbaijani lands.
Vice-president of parliament, chief of parliamentary permanent
commission for security and defense affairs Ziyafet Asgarov said he
could not understand what Kasprzyk meant when saying “a cooperation
of the parties related to the arsons”.
“What cooperation does he mean? Since Kasprzyk wants to give advice,
why he does not prevent Armenians’ barbarian actions,” he underlined.
URL:
From: Baghdasarian

AZERBAIJAN APPEALED TO UNESCO FOR PROTECTION OF HISTORIC MONUMENTS IN ITS ARMENIAN-OCCUPIED TERRITORY
Author: A.Ismayilova
TREND Information, Azerbaijan
Aug. 16, 2006
Azerbaijan has appealed to UNESCO for the protection of its historic
monuments in its Armenian-occupied territory and the areas destroyed
in fires by the Armenians, Azerbaijani Ambassador at UNESCO Elionora
Huseynova told Trend.
Huseynova stated that the issue of inclusion of Hirkan and Gobustan
reserves to the list of UNESCO’s World Heritage was delayed due to
technical reasons.
She noted that in future other monuments of the Azerbaijani culture
would be included in this list. The issue will be considered in the
next Committees Meeting.

NOVRUZ MAMMADOV: OSCE MINSK GROUP CO-CHAIRS FAIL TO DEMONSTRATE A NEUTRAL STANCE
Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Aug. 16, 2006
The co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group are planning to organize a
meeting of Azerbaijani and Armenian Foreign Ministers, APA reports
quoting Azerbaijani President’s Office international relations
department chief Novruz Mammadov.
“We cannot say the negotiating process for the settlement of the
Nagorno Garabagh conflict is not held. Azerbaijan advocates peaceful
solution of the conflict. This option meets Armenia’s interests at
the same time,” the department chief said.
Mr.Mammadov called on the Minsk Group co-chairs to take a fair stance.
“Regrettably, the co-chairs fail to demonstrate a neutral stance and
compliance with international law principles. This will neither give
an impetus to the settlement of the conflict nor increase confidence of
world states in big international organizations,” Mammadov said.

EURASIAN LEADERS RELAXED IN SOCHI
Kommersant, Russia
Aug. 16, 2006
Russian President Vladimir Putin met with the presidents of Armenia
and Kazakhstan at his residence in Sochi yesterday as part of the
informal summit of Eurasian Economic Community leaders, which began
on Monday. Armenian President Robert Kocharyan, who recently received
news of the steep price increase Russia is imposing on natural gas
to his country, missed the horse races in Moscow two weeks ago due
to an illness.
In the public part of the meeting, Putin had a slip of the tongue,
telling Kocharyan that “we are very glad that the year of Azerbaijan is
going on in Russia.” The Russian president looked genuinely shocked
by his error. The rest of the public part of their meeting, which
lasted about 20 minutes, was devoted to trade turnover between the
two countries.
Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbaev spoke about his participation
in the G8 summit in St. Petersburg and the agreement with Russia on
freight transit between the two countries and concluded by telling
Putin “I am very grateful to you for the possibility of visiting
this lovely place at this lovely time. And I very much hope that this
meeting will be productive for all of the states of the CIS… that
is EvrAzES [the Russian acronym of the Eurasian Economic Community].”
The two presidents derived a good deal of amusement from their slips
of the tongue of the day.
The Russian president spoke briefly with Belarusian President Alexander
Lukashenko and Uzbek President Islam Karimov before dinner.
The menu consisted of lobster salad, baked fig with homemade cheese,
monkfish with pineapple sauce, marbled beef with cabernet sauvignon
sauce, mousse with fruit sorbet and Mouton-Cadet Baron Philippe de
Rothschild 2004 and Blayac Medoc 2003. The six presidents present
walked on the beach together after dinner, where they met Russian
Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov walking with Ukrainian Prime Minister
Viktor Yanukovich.

IRAN’S CAUCASUS STRATEGY
by Sergei Markedonov, Political and Military Analysis Institute
Translated by Elena Leonova
Source: Izvestia, August 15, 2006, p. 6
Agency WPS
What the Papers Say Part A (Russia)
August 16, 2006 Wednesday
Iran, Russia, and the Caucasus region: past and present; The radical
Islamist groups that Iran supports all over the world regard Chechnya
as part of their global jihad, and portray religious extremists in
the North Caucasus as fighting for their faith. This is the fact that
makes Tehran-Moscow strategic cooperation problematic.
Politicians and experts worldwide are now focusing their attention
on Iran. The second war in Lebanon has demonstrated Iran’s increased
capacities as a participant in the Great Game in the Middle East. As
Russian Orientalist Georgy Mirsky puts it, “Iran is the only state
in the world that can be completely satisfied with the current
situation.” Firstly, the war in Lebanon has pushed Iran’s nuclear
program into the background. Secondly, it has demonstrated Tehran’s
ability to use others against its chief geopolitical opponents.
Meanwhile, Iran’s strategy in the Caucasus isn’t receiving due
attention. Iran, like Turkey, is among the oldest participants in the
Great Game in the Caucasus. In ancient and medieval times, various
territories of what is now called the Caucasus were controlled by
Persian monarchs. Between the 16th and 18th centuries, Turkey and Iran
continually fought for dominance in the Caucasus region. But Iran’s
expulsion from the South and North Caucasus resulted from the Russian
Empire’s policies. Following a series of Russian-Persian wars in the
late 18th and early 19th centuries, Russia established control over
Southern Dagestan, Eastern Armenia, and Northern Azerbaijan.
Even after losing its former influence, however, Iran remained –
and still remains – an important participant in Caucasus political
processes.
Since the break-up of the USSR, Iran has had common borders
with the new state formations of the South Caucasus, Armenia
and Azerbaijan, as well as a border sector with the unrecognized
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. But the problem of Iran’s presence in
the Caucasus isn’t restricted to geography. To a significant extent,
the American-Iranian confrontation has been continuing in the South
Caucasus. The post-Soviet elite in Azerbaijan looks to Turkey (an
established ally of the Americans and Israel) and the United States.
Iranian influence in Azerbaijan is not very great. Moreover, relations
between Azerbaijan and Iran in the 1990s and the present decade have
been notably conflict-plagued. Azeri leaders have regularly criticized
Iran for supporting radical Islamists in Azerbaijan and attempting to
replace the secular system of government with an Islamic state. Another
sore point in relations between post-Soviet Azerbaijan and Iran is
the problem of Southern (Iranian) Azerbaijan. All the same, Iran was
one of the first countries to recognize Azerbaijan’s independence as
a state. Iranian politicians spoke of the need for such a move even
before the collapse of the USSR.
In the 1990s, the Iranian Foreign Ministry assisted to some extent in
establishing Azerbaijan’s diplomatic service, as well as Azerbaijan’s
membership of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. Both
countries took part in establishing the Organization of Caspian
States. Iran is now one of Azerbaijan’s leading economic partners.
Over the past few years, the escalating American-Iranian confrontation
has led Baku to take a more balanced position with regard to
Iran. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has made a visit to Baku
in 2006.
Iran’s relations with Armenia are developing more successfully.
Iran’s Armenian diaspora (which also has some influence in Yerevan)
has a significant positive influence on this relationship. Iranian
Armenians are a loyalist ethnic minority, traditionally enjoying the
patronage of the Iranian authorities. Despite the Islamic nature of
its statehood and continual calls for solidarity among all Muslims on
the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, Iran has shown goodwill to the Armenian
(Christian) side. Iran declared that it would not take sides in the
conflict, and expressed commitment to political regulation of the
Nagorno-Karabakh problem. In 1992-94, Iran played a significant role
as a mediator in regulating the Armenian-Azeri armed conflict. With
Iran’s help, Armenia essentially gained a corridor to the outside world
during a blockade on the part of Azerbaijan and Turkey. The Iranian
media reported the destruction of Armenian khachkars (“cross-stones,”
medieval carved memorial stones) on the territory of Azerbaijan’s
Nakhichevan (Old Julfa).
Russian-Iranian relations in the Caucasus region are, as a rule,
restricted to the Caspian format. Russia, Iran, Azerbaijan,
Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan agreed in 1997 to establish a new
legal regimen for the Caspian Sea, accepted by all five states. As
for the Chechnya problem and the situation in Dagestan, Tehran’s
representatives have made every effort to emphasize that religious
extremism in the Russian North Causaus is linked not to Shiite Islam,
but to Salafite (Wahhabi) Islam. In the Islamic world, Iran is regarded
as a religious and political opponent of Salafite Saudi Arabia. All
the same, the radical Islamist groups (such as Hezbollah) that Iran
supports all over the world regard Chechnya as part of their global
jihad, and portray religious extremists in the North Caucasus as
fighting for their faith. This is the fact that makes Tehran-Moscow
strategic cooperation problematic.
Politicians and experts in South Caucasus countries are now considering
whether the conflagration of the Middle East conflict will spread to
the Caucasus region. At present, this prospect seems unlikely. Firstly,
Iran itself would probably prefer to fight Israel via Hezbollah’s
terrorist network, rather than directly. Secondly, given the chill
in Israeli-Turkish relations following the Iraq campaign of 2003,
It’s hard to imagine the situation surrounding Israel and Lebanon
somehow being extended to Armenia and the entire South Caucasus.

STRATEGIC INDIFFERENCE WITH CONSEQUENCES
by Aram Karapetian
Translated by Elena Leonova
Source: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, No. 171, August 16, 2006, EV
Agency WPS
What the Papers Say Part A (Russia)
August 16, 2006 Wednesday
Political processes in Armenia could distance it from Russia; The
impression is that having gained all it wanted from Yerevan, Moscow
has now lost all interest in Armenia. And if there’s no interest,
there’s also no understanding of what is happening in Armenia. The
situation can be summed up as follows: strategic indifference instead
of strategic partnership.
The way things are going, Armenian-Russian relations may soon be
ruptured so severely as to make any prospect of strategic alliance
impossible. The impression is that having gained all it wanted from
Yerevan, Moscow has now lost all interest in Armenia. Indeed, Yerevan
is firmly tied into the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization;
Russian companies have bought and are still buying everything Armenia
has to offer – factories, profitable construction contracts… And
if there’s no interest, there’s also no understanding of what is
happening in Armenia. The situation can be summed up as follows:
strategic indifference instead of strategic partnership.
Full-fledged, fully-engaged relations have now been reduced to
infrequent contacts at the level of ruling elites. No one in Moscow
seems to care that in Armenia – as in many other CIS countries – the
ruling elite is seriously corrupt, at the very least, if not actually
criminalized. With the approval of its current authorities, Armenia
is gradually turning into a clan-corruption state, divided between
the Karabakh clan and the Yerevan clan, who share spheres of influence.
How is Russia reacting to this? Not at all, mostly; it’s keeping
silent. That amounts to tacit support for Armenian President Robert
Kocharian and his team. Russia is turning a blind eye to the fact
that for the sake of retaining power, those people are gradually
steering Armenia away from Russia. Very soon, the Americans may gain a
footing in Armania – not American investment, but the Pentagon’s radar
stations. The Kocharian administration preferred not to publicize
the details of a recent visit to Yerevan by US State Department
representative Matthew Bryza, the new American co-chairman of the
OSCE’s Minsk Group. While promoting a new conflict regulation plan
for Nagorno-Karabakh, Bryza was also testing the waters for the
possibility of basing two American radars in Armenia. These may not
be very significant from the military standpoint, but Washington
considers it important to establish a presence in Armenia, as it has
in Georgia – with all the consequences this implies.
Apart from lackluster contacts with the Armenian ruling elite, Moscow
seems to have no other effective levers of influence in Yerevan. And
this is all because at some point in the past, somebody in Moscow
declared a principle: we won’t work with opposition groups in CIS
countries, we’ll only work with the incumbent governments – whatever
they may be like. This principle led Russia to make mistakes in
relations with Georgia, followed by further mistakes in relations with
Ukraine. Mistakes in relations with Armenia seem to be just around the
corner. The Americans, in contrast, show no reluctance to make contact
with opposition groups – and profit from doing so, as their experience
in Georgia shows. Russia’s priorities seem to lie elsewhere: outward
stability, and the predictability of existing regimes in CIS countries.
In the case of Armenia, however, there is no predictability. Here’s an
obvious example: in July, President Kocharian did not go to Moscow for
the CIS summit – he said he had a cold. It could happen to anyone, at
all. But while the summit was under way, Kocharian was seen swimming
in the cold waters of Lake Sevan. His demarche worked – but Moscow
chose not to “escalate” the incident.
Escalation will happen anyway. Armenia’s calm is all on the surface.
Only outside observers can believe that last spring’s unrest over the
referendum on constitutional amendments has died down, and President
Kocharian and his team have everything under control. Elections
are coming up in Armenia: a parliamentary election in 2007 and a
presidential election in 2008. The political processes starting
in Armenia this autumn will shatter the illusion that all is
well. One important detail should be noted: Armenia now has hardly
any pro-Russian opposition parties. And the opposition is determined
to win.

PORTERFIELD NAMED ARMENIA’S NEW HEAD COACH
Agence France Presse — English
August 16, 2006 Wednesday 8:42 AM GMT
Former Chelsea, Sheffield Wednesday and Aberdeen manager Ian
Porterfield on Wednesday was appointed as Armenia’s new national coach,
the country’s football federation said.
The 60-year-old Scot, who played with Sunderland and Sheffield
Wednesday during his career on the field, signed a contract with the
Armenian federation until the end of 2007.
No financial details of the contract were disclosed.
“I’m optimistic about my and my new team’s future,” Porterfield said
after signing the contract. “I believe my experience will allow me
to enjoy success with the Armenian team.”
The Dunfermline-born Porterfield started his career with Raith Rovers
in Scotland before he moved south in 1967 to play for Sunderland.
His greatest moment during a lengthy playing career came when he
scored the winner in a FA Cup final upset over a dominant Leeds at
Wembley in 1973. He stayed at Sunderland for 10 years before moving
on to Sheffield Wednesday where he became player-coach.
Porterfield went on to manage Aberdeen (1986-88), Reading (1988-91)
and Chelsea (1991-93) before he ventured overseas to take charge of
the national teams of Zambia, Saudi Arabia and Zimbabwe.
He returned to British football in 1996 as assistant manager of Bolton
Wanderers but he departed again to manage both Oman and Trinidad
and Tobago.
More recently he coached in South Korea with club side Busan I’Park.

ARMENIA, IRAN TO BUILD THIRD POWER LINE IN 2006-08
Interfax News Agency
Russia & CIS Business and Financial Newswire
August 16, 2006 Wednesday 4:28 PM MSK
Armenia and Iran plan to implement a project in 2006-2008 to build a
third power line between the two countries at a cost of $90 million,
Saak Abramian, general director of ZAO High-voltage Power Line,
told Interfax.
It is expected that construction work will begin in 2006. At the
moment experts are working on a project for a new two-circuit power
line, which will stretch 300 km on Armenian territory and 100 km
on Iranian territory. The capacity of the power cable will be 400
megawatts, with voltage in Armenia of 220 kilovolts, and in Iran –
230 kilovolts. The Armenian side will finance 15% of the project.
Armenia will pay back the Iranian investment with supplies of
electricity.
Armenia and Iran signed a financing agreement in Teheran in May
2006 for $90 million to build the third power line between the two
countries.
Iran and Armenia are currently connected by two power lines with a
capacity of 200 megawatts each.
From: Baghdasarian

ARMENIAN GAS IMPORTS FROM RUSSIA FLAT IN H1
Interfax News Agency
Russia & CIS Energy Newswire
August 16, 2006 Wednesday 1:58 PM MSK
Armenia bought 834.6 million cubic meters of gas from Russia in the
first half of 2006, as much as in the same period of last year,
ArmRosGazprom, Armenia’s exclusive wholesale gas distributor,
told Interfax.
But sales of Russian gas in Armenia fell 2.9% to 742.2 million cubic
meters from 763.7 million cubic meters.
The power industry was the biggest consumer with 224 million cubic
meters, followed by households with 220 million cubic meters and
industrial plants with 151 million cubic meters.

CBA APPROVES SKETCH OF SILVER COMMEMORATIVE COIN WITHIN FRAMEWORK OF CAUCASUS FAUNA INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM
ARKA News Agency, Armenia
Aug. 16, 2006
YEREVAN, August 16. /ARKA/. At August 16 meeting the Council of
the Central Bank of Armenia (CBA) approved sketches of the silver
commemorative coin, which is intended to be emitted within the
framework of “Caucasian Fauna” international program, press service
of the CBA reports. The above-mentioned coin is envisaged in the
program of emission of commemorative coins for 2006-2007.
During the meeting the Council also approved sketches of a gold
commemorative coin “Dedicated to the Victory of Armenian Chess Team
of Men in 37th Chess Olympiad”.
The Council also decided to publish another issue of “Bamber”
periodical for Q II, 2006.