LARGE SCALE WAR LEVIES?
Aravot.am
18 July 06
Interview by Tigran Avetisian
The orientalist David Hovhannisian considers the involvement of other
countries in the Arabic-Israeli conflict in this phase less possible.
Arabic-Israeli conflict has turned into a real war in the latest
period. In your opinion how do you explain this extreme situation in
the Middle East region? It is known that this conflict in contrast to
other conflicts is the most difficult with its crux and structure. It
goes to the ancient times and has a mythological pretext. All attempts
of schemes of armistice have been failed during the last decades. The
so-called ”road map” also was failed. As regards your mentioned
latest events there have always been such situations and in most
probability will be in the future. Why it is just now: the answer
of this question must be found in the context of the current world
political events. There are some factors. Let me give an example: when
the head of the family loses his head and doesn’t fulfill his family
obligations that family members behave outrageously. Saying the head
of the family I mean the U.S., which has got into difficulties together
with this region by its Iraqi adventures, noise, made round the nuclear
project of Iran, provoking civilization conflicts. As a result, it
has lost control over the processes, and nowadays we have what we
have. The difficulty of the situation is described by combining some
elements. One of it is the problem of Iran: as you know the Iranian
dossier will be discussed in the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday,
which means the possibility of demonstration of new approaches,
consequently the strong situations. That means you see a certain
connection between the Iranian dossier and Israeli-Lebanese latest
developments. Of course, I see, and I can explain it by Tel-Aviv’s
assumption that the current intricate situation of the region gives
it the opportunity to strike its two hostile organizations that
threaten its security: these are “Hamas” in Palestine and “Hzbollah”
in Lebanon. I should also mention that this behavior of Israel will
stir up other regional factors, in particularly I don’t exclude that
replying to the actions of Israel, Iran will strengthen the situation
in Iraq. By the way, returning to your first question, I must stress
that the factor of rising oil price has its essential role almost
in all Middle East developments. It is difficult to answer at once
for whom it is profitable but we may analyze it. Is this situation
very profitable for Russia? For some oil-producing Gulf countries,
too. I can say, that circumstance isn’ t profitable for the U.S.,
which uses its country’s reserving funds for its energy needs. The
U.S. has lost the control over the processes as nowadays Israel acts
without U.S. obvious support and approval. Do you see any connection
between the withdrawal of Syrian forces from Lebanon by the West’s
pressure and nowadays ”Lebanese” campaign of Israel? There is no
direct connection. It seems Syria-West discrepancies came round when
Damask yielded the U.N. demands. But if the Syrian troops weren’t
withdrawn from Lebanon whether Israel would act in the same way.
Certainly, no. Because it would mean the involvement of Syria into
the conflict. It would also mean the involvement of other countries,
which have signed intergovernmental, military agreements with Syria. As
a result a destructive, large-scale war would levy in the region. At
the same time I should mention that I don’t consider possible the
U.S., Iran and Syria involvement into this war. There are interesting
versions in the foreign press According to one of them, all it is
done for that reason. That is there is a problem to involve Iran
into the war making it strikes Israel after which the U.S. military
forces will strike Iran. Do you know, the adherents of the theory
of conspiracies can publish any version they want? As I have already
said, there have been such situations in the region but Iran has never
struck Israel. Why should it strike when it always has possibilities
of non-symmetric answers? For example destabilization of the situation
in Iraq, in general, in the Persian Gulf, and if you want, in Caspian
Sea, in case of some developments. Do these processes have their
influence on Armenia? They have their influence on the whole world,
consequently on Armenia, too. But at least in case of two factors the
influence on Armenia is more essential. One of the factors is Diaspora:
Armenians in Lebanon and Jerusalem. The second factor refers just to
Armenia as a state. Being geographically near the hostilities it is
threatened to all negative influences coming from the neighbor region.
–Boundary_(ID_8r8qHpkvGNRJW7u0Olr5SQ)–

A Lebanese-Armenian applied the Migration Agency to receive temporary asylum
ArmRadio.am
19.07.2006 13:51
A Lebanese citizen Armenian in origin, who migrated from Lebanon
because of the military actions in the country, submitted a written
application to the Migration Agency of RA Ministry of Territorial
Administration to receive temporary asylum in Armenia.
Head of the Agency Gagik Yeganyan informs that another Lebanese
citizen applied for advice.
It should be noted that the emigrants can receive temporary asylum
in Armenia, which will enable them to launch social, economic and
cultural activity. The asylum is provided for one year with the
possibility of extension. Those who wish may reside in dwellings
under the supervision of the Agency.

Varuzhan Sukiasyan appointed chief trainer of “Ararat” football club
ArmRadio.am
19.07.2006 14:46
Varuzhan Sukiasyan has been appointed chief trainer of “Ararat,” one
of the leading football clubs of Armenia. Before Varuzhan Sukiasyan
trained the national football team of Armenia, as well as a number
of other clubs.

Plane of the Syian airlines to land in Yerevan tonight
ArmRadio.am
19.07.2006 15:11
Currently names of 200 RA citizens and Armenians willing to leave
Lebanon are included in the list of RA Embassy in Beirut, acting
Press Secretary of RA Ministry of Foreign Affairs Vladimir Karapetyan
informed, noting that the number is not final.
According to him, up to now 160 people have arrived in Yerevan
from Lebanon. “Today the plane of the Syrian airlines will arrive
in Yerevan. Armenian citizens may be among the passengers,” Vladimir
Karapetyan noted.
The Press Secretary informed that the Armenian side intends to organize
one or two charter flights to Aleppo tomorrow.

New US envoy to Armenia may fail to win confirmation
Turkish Daily News; Jul 19, 2006
A controversy over the firing of the U.S. ambassador to Yerevan,
who has classified the Armenian killings of World War I as genocide,
may lead to a blockade of the new envoy’s appointment in the Senate,
analysts said
U.S. President George W. Bush dismissed John Evans as ambassador to
Armenia in May after the latter, in violation of an official American
policy on the Armenian killings, accused Ottoman Turks of conducting
genocide
But since then powerful Armenian American groups have been protesting
against Evans’ firing, urging the Senate to delay the confirmation
of Richard Hoagland, who has been nominated by Bush to replace the
outgoing ambassador
In the latest development, under apparent influence of the Armenian
groups, the Los Angeles Times called on the Senate to block Hoagland’s
confirmation.
“They [members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee] should block
the nomination altogether until the ambassador-to-be dares to utter
the g-word,” the newspaper said in an editorial on Sunday. During
his confirmation hearing at the committee, Hoagland declined to use
the word “genocide” despite pressure by pro-Armenian senators.
Hoagland tried to eschew insistent questions over how he would qualify
the Armenian killings during his planned tenure in Yerevan. Recalling
that in his latest April 24 statement Bush referred to the Armenian
killings as “a tragedy
the world must not forget,” Hoagland said, “I represent the
president.”
“Instead of getting stuck in the past, and vocabulary, I would like
to move forward,” he said.
Under the U.S. constitution, all senior U.S. government officials,
including ambassadors, need to be confirmed by the Senate.
But nearly half of the committee’s 18 members back the Armenian
cause against Turkey, and have sent written questions to the State
Department, seeking an official statement on why Evans has been
dismissed.
“Hoagland’s appointment could hang in the balance,” said the Los
Angeles Times, and some analysts said he may fail to win the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee’s final approval.
The fact that this is an election year for Congress has been boosting
the influence of ethnic and other lobbies in congressional decisions,
the analysts said. One third of the Senate and the whole of the House
of Representatives will be renewed in the November elections
Presently Bush’s Republican Party is in control of both houses,
but the polls could provide the opposition Democrats with a majority
in at least one of the chambers. So even one single seat carries an
enormous importance for both parties
“The Bush administration should have the courage and explain
forthrightly — not just to Armenian Americans but to all Americans who
believe in calling evil by its proper name — why U.S. policy is being
dictated by Ankara nationalists,” the Los Angeles Times editorial said.
Los Angeles is in California, the United States’ largest state and
home to up to one million Armenian Americans
Addressing an Armenian audience in the United States in February
2005, Evans said that the World War I killing of Armenians in the
Ottoman Empire amounted to genocide. Warned by his superiors at
the State Department, he then issued a “clarification” where he
said his remarks reflected his own views. Still pressed by the State
Department, Evans later issued a further “correction,” admitting that
his statement misrepresented the U.S. policy. But Bush fired Evans
in May after the latter continued to deviate from the official U.S.
policy, according to administration sources.
“Ambassadors serve the president and they are obliged to follow his
policy. President Bush’s policy as it regards the mass killings of
Armenians is precise and he mentions it in his annual statement,”
said recently Matt Bryza, U.S. deputy assistant secretary of state
for European and Eurasian affairs.

Armenian, Bosnian Foreign Ministers Discuss Ties
Arminfo
18 Jul 06
Yerevan, 18 July: Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan, who
is in Bosnia-Hercegovina on a three-day visit, has met B-H Foreign
Minister Mladen Ivanic.
The two ministers noted that bilateral relations were developing,
the press service of the Armenian Foreign Ministry has told Arminfo.
The sides expressed their interest in deepening economic relations,
stressing that absence of political problems between Armenia and
Bosnia-Hercegovina created favourable conditions for implementing
this task.
The ministers noted the importance of creating a legal framework
for signing bilateral agreements. B-H Foreign Minister Ivanic talked
about the obstacles which Bosnia-Hercegovina had to overcome after
the collapse of Yugoslavia and about the peace process established
by the Dayton Agreement.
The ministers put forward the European aspect of their countries’
foreign policy, peculiarities of relations with international
structures, in particular, with NATO and the European Union.
It was suggested that the B-H and Armenian governments organize a
visit of cultural figures and keep informed the people of Armenia
and Bosnia-Hercegovina.
The sides discussed regional developments and relations with
neighbours. Oskanyan briefed Ivanic on the current stage of the
Nagornyy Karabakh settlement process and invited his Bosnian
counterpart to pay an official visit to Armenia.

USA, France, Russia in Secret Talks on Karabakh – Azeri Daily
Ayna Baku
19 Jul 06
Ekspress, Baku
19 Jul 06
Washington, Moscow and Paris are in secret talks on expanding the OSCE
Minsk Group which is mediating peace negotiations between Azerbaijan
and Armenia, Baku-based daily Ayna reported on 19 July.
“Washington has already started secret talks on this with Moscow and
Paris. The conflicting sides and the public in the two countries will
be informed of the talks if its results are positive… The USA wants
to see the UK, Turkey and Germany among the co-chairs [of the OSCE
Minsk Group],” Ayna quoted a diplomatic source as saying.
The source explained the secrecy of the talks with possible protests
from the conflicting sides, especially from Armenia. Ayna said that
Azerbaijani political analysts and experts supported the idea of
involving more countries in the mediation mission but it doubted that
this would be made possible soon because of Yerevan’s objections.
In an interview with Azadinform news agency, carried by Ekspress
newspaper on 19 July, the head of the foreign relations department
at the Azerbaijani presidential administration, Novruz Mammadov, said
that the international community should not be critical of Azerbaijan’s
desire to liberate its lands from Armenian occupation through war.
Mammadov added that the international community should spare no
effort in resolving the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict since this was
important for the regional security. Commenting on reports that the
problem could not be resolved militarily due to the launch of the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, he said that Azerbaijan had the
right to independently liberate its lands from Armenia’s occupation
and that it could use this right any time.

A GROUP OF ARMENIAN DIPLOMATS GO TO BEIRUT TO HELP EMPLOYEES OF LOCAL ARMENIAN EMBASSY
Yerevan, July 18. ArmInfo. A group of Armenian FM officials are going
to Beirut to help the employees of the Armenian Embassy in lebanon,
reports the acting spokesman of the Armenian FM Vladimir Karapetyan.
In the morning the group visited the Armenian Consulate General in
Aleppo (Syria) and will shortly arrive in Beirut.
70 people have already come to Armenia from Lebanon via Aleppo. They

Another trainload of Russian military hardware leaves Georgia
Interfax-AVN military news agency website, Moscow
18 Jul 06
Tbilisi, 18 July: Another trainload of military hardware from the
Russian military bases that are being withdrawn from Georgia left
for Russia on Tuesday morning [18 July], Col Vladimir Kuparadze,
deputy commander of the Russian Force in the Transcaucasus [RFT],
has told Interfax-AVN.
“The train is carrying 12 transport vehicles for surface-to-air
missiles, two Shilka self-propelled artillery systems, as well as
Strela portable surface-to-air missile systems from the 62nd base in
Akhalkalaki,” Kuparadze said.
The RFT deputy commander added that this was the 16th trainload of
Russian military hardware [to leave Georgia] this year.
“Ten trainloads of hardware, armaments and other equipment of the 12th
(Batumi) and 62nd Russian bases left for Russia earlier, and another
five went from Batumi to the town of Gyumri (Armenia) to continue
the equipment the 102nd Russian base there,” he said.
According to the RFT headquarters, a total of 19 trainloads are to be
dispatched from Georgia in 2006, bringing some 400 pieces of military
hardware and over 1,500 tones of other military equipment to Russia.
The RFT deputy commander also said that two lorry convoys with
equipment and ammunition were to leave Akhalkalaki for Gyumri within
a week.
Under Georgian-Russian agreements, Russian military bases are to be
removed from Georgia in 2008.

Iran Press: Columnist praises Iran’s “constructive interaction” foreign policy
Siyasat-e Ruz, Tehran
9 Jul 06
Text of commentary by Ali Sharafpur entitled “Constructive interaction
and the nuclear case” by Iranian newspaper Siyasat-e Ruz on 9 July
After the ninth administration took the helm of foreign policy,
Iranian foreign policy experienced pleasant changes that were based on
authentic principles and ideals of the Islamic Revolution. Generally,
it can be concluded that Iranian foreign policy is moving from an
approach based on removing tensions to another based on constructive
interaction, i.e., a shift from a policy focused on trust-building
and detente to a dynamic and proactive policy based on constructive
interaction has occurred.
The doctrine of constructive interaction is based on the fact that
playing as a powerful actor on the international stage requires
adopting a proactive, dynamic, effective and partisan policy that in
turn must be based on a precise knowledge of political equations. Based
on this, the doctrine of constructive interaction is one step ahead
of the detente policy and an advanced phase of this policy.
There is no doubt that the Islamic Republic of Iran is the biggest
threat to illegitimate interests of America and the bullyism of this
imperialist state. These interests have accumulated in the Middle
East region and the Persian Gulf, as the geopolitical and strategic
point of the region. For the same reason, in the 27 years after the
glorious Islamic Revolution leaders of world imperialism have sought
to limit the role of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the region, have
ceaselessly tried to weaken it in all fields, and have employed all
political and economic measures to achieve this goal. The expansion
of the military presence of America in post-revolutionary years and
the military occupation of two neighbouring countries – Afghanistan
and Iraq – in recent years prove the comment that all these decisions
have been aimed at putting Iran in a state of siege and using military
invasion when required. Of course, it is obvious these measures have
led to diametrically opposite results and have plunged America into
serious problems and crises. Fortunately, as America faces serious
challenges in the region, Iran’s power and influence in the region
has strengthened so that former American Secretary of State Madeleine
Albright stated that ignoring the role of the region in Iraq was the
biggest mistake made by the American foreign policy.
Regarding the above facts and existing opportunities (the challenges
facing America in the region and Iran’s growing influence and position
in Iraq) and with respect to the constructive interaction policy,
we can mange the situation to put America face to face with numerous
and increasing crises in the region and on the other hand strengthen
and improve our position in the region.
In this connection, in order to neutralize America’s measures
especially concerning the settlement of the nuclear dispute which is
nowadays used by the West as a tool to control Iran it is inevitable to
adopt the policy of constructive interaction. So, as we have already
witnessed, political, military, security and specially economic
relations with countries in five regions as follows must be improved:
1 – South (Sheikhdoms of the Persian Gulf), 2 – East (Pakistan and
Afghanistan), 3 – Central Asia (China and Russia), 4 – The Caucasus
(Azerbaijan and Armenia) and 5 – Turkey and Iraq.
The final important fact is that Iran must not only pursue the policy
of constructive interaction in its relations with its neighbours but
towards other countries, preferentially the countries of the region
and then the countries located beyond the region, in order to get the
desired result. Developing relations with Latin American countries,
the African Union, and neighbours of Iraq that have presently gathered
in Tehran, and continuing recent contacts between Iranian officials
(Larijani and Mottaki) with their European and Asian counterparts can
be good instances for constructive interactions. These initiatives
at the present time can improve Iran’s position in the face of
extravagant demands of the West in the course of the nuclear dispute
and finally strengthen Iran’s position in regional and international
equations. Of course, it must be noted that bilateral interaction does
not mean making concessions and abandoning principles and ideals of
our foreign policy because this may lead to the isolation of Iran from
free countries and liberation movements that will not be in accordance
with our national interests and defined objectives of our country.