RUSSIA INVESTIGATES ATTACKS ON MINORITIES
By Anton Troianovski, Associated Press Writer
Hinesberg Journal, Canada
July 3 2006
MOSCOW – Prosecutors said Monday that they are investigating the
weekend stabbings of five ethnic minorities as hate crimes.
Russia has seen a wave of hate crimes in recent years, with hundreds
of attacks reported, including many on dark-skinned immigrants from
former Soviet Central Asia and the Caucasus Mountains region.
Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian condemned the attacks
and urged Russia to do more to head off a rising tide of violent
xenophobia.
Meanwhile, three suspects in the Saturday stabbing of a Kazakh
citizen were arrested for a racially motivated crime, the Interfax
news agency reported.
Alexander Brod, who heads the Moscow Bureau for Human Rights, said
the surge in attacks might be tied to two high-profile conferences
that opened in the capital on Monday before a summit of the Group of
Eight major industrialized nations that begins next week in St.
Petersburg.
Interfax quoted an Armenian community leader, Ara Abramian, as saying
the attacks were “a direct provocation before the G-8 meeting,”
and sharply criticized Moscow law enforcement for failing to prevent
such assaults.

UK REPORTER BARRED FROM RUSSIA BECAUSE OF CHECHNYA
Kavkaz Center, Turkey
July 3 2006
Russia has refused a visa to a British journalist well-known for his
coverage of Chechnya and the turbulent Caucasus, citing the needs of
“state security”.
Thomas de Waal, who has previously worked in Moscow for the
English-language Moscow Times, the BBC and the Times, said on Monday
he had been due to attend the presentation of a Russian version of
his book on the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh.
But the Federal Migration Service refused him a visa.
The service was not available for comment on Monday but in its letter
refusing the application, which was obtained by Reuters, it cited
a 1996 law that says a visa can be refused “in the aims of securing
state security”.
De Waal said he had cooperated with Russian officials in the past
on Nagorno-Karabakh, a South Caucasus region officially part of
Azerbaijan but ruled by Armenians, and did not believe they would
bar him for his views on the conflict.
“This clearly has to be because of the other main thing that I write
about, which is Chechnya,” de Waal, 39, told Reuters by telephone
from London.
Russian officials have been very sensitive about Western criticism of
the war in Chechnya, where they have struggled to crush separatism
for more than a decade, and local journalists have been prosecuted
for sympathising with the rebels.
President Vladimir Putin in 2002 said a foreign journalist critical
of Russia’s policy in the region become a Muslim and be circumcised
“in such a way that nothing grows back”.
Russia barred U.S. channel ABC news from Russia after it ran an
interview with Chechen rebel leader Shamil Basayev.
Press freedom groups say Russia tries to intimidate journalists into
only reporting the Kremlin view on Chechnya. A Russian journalist in
February was convicted of provoking racial hatred after he printed
articles by rebel leaders.
De Waal is best known in Russia for appearing as an expert witness for
the defence at the extradition trial of rebel leader Akhmed Zakayev
in London. He said this could be behind his failure to get a visa.
The British court in 2003 declined to extradite Zakayev, giving him
political asylum instead — a move that infuriated Moscow, which
calls Zakayev a terrorist.
“It is possible that the wheels turn rather slowly, or that this is
a cumulative account of things I have done over the last 10 years,”
de Waal said. He last visited Russia in January 2005.

IGOR MURADYAN: ABKHAZIAN-OSSETIAN-NAGORNO KARABAKH PROBLEM: THE US’ POLITICAL FIASCO
Regnum, Russia
July 3 2006
Three subjects of the ethnic politics, three unrecognized South
Caucasian states, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno-Karabakh,
are different in many parameters. Each of them has its own peculiar
problems, its own unique fate, but also some things in common; and
now we are witnessing one more quite special common factor looming
large for all: the reality of war – not just minor demonstrative
clashes on border but real war.
The South Caucasus is facing a new Abkhaz-Ossetian-Nagorno Karabakh
problem – a problem of war that can lead to total fiasco of the policy
of the Western community and, first of all, of the US.
Obviously, in Georgia the wars will not last for long: from several
weeks to several months, with several time-outs. Georgia may well
manage to gain control over some new positions in South Ossetia and
low-lands in Eastern Abkhazia, but it may also be crushed, with all the
three sides sustaining large-scale losses. This may lead to disastrous
human casualties in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, who will, therefore,
get more yielding in political issues. Depending on the scale and
scenario of the war, Georgia may either win – or lose so much that
further war will have no sense. Most probably, Georgia’s enemies will
manage to retain control over bigger part of their territories. Given
more political will, the Georgian army could successfully start war
even today. The only factor that might keep the Georgian authorities
back is human casualties. However, if Georgia continues building up
its army as actively as it is doing now it will shortly have no other
decent way as to start new war. The availability of strong forces
and growing internal political and social problems will be decisive
in the matter.
Azerbaijan is also eager to fight. Azeri generals keep calling for
war, thereby, encouraging arms race and military spendings. Now its
arms supplier is not only traditional Ukraine but also CSTO member
Belarus. The general staffs of two western powers say that in case
of active military actions in Karabakh, the Azerbaijani army may
well lose their offensive capacity in just three weeks. They say
that position war is very inconvenient for Armenia and, therefore,
that country will try to knock out Azerbaijan with just one-two
heavy blows. Azerbaijan will try to strike the nuclear power plant
in Metsamor and some other vital centers in Armenia, in response,
Armenia will destroy sea and other oil and gas facilities and oil and
gas pipelines in Azerbaijan. In a couple of hours the West will lose
$14bln-$16bln and any hope for Caspian oil import in the following
5-7 years. The Caspian Sea will face an ecological disaster. There
will be no need for the Armenians to get very close to oil pipelines,
they have enough people knowing how to carry out such operations.
Unless supported by Turkey, Azerbaijan may either lose its statehood
at all or be given new borders and name – something the Iranians will
be really happy to see. With military experts giving advantage to the
side who will start the war the first, Armenia has no reason to wait
for Azerbaijan’s “victorious march” but will have to start the war
itself – at least, three days before the enemy’s planned attack. It
is better to have advantage at the front than in the findings of
international experts as a victim to aggression. Azerbaijan will lose
25,000-35,000 soldiers and up to 100,000 civilians, Armenia will lose
10-12 times less.
After some delay, the international community will try to stop the
war – of course, only when it sees that Azerbaijan is on the verge of
a military and national disaster. If the Armenians try to destroy the
west-sponsored oil-gas complex, the US and NATO will, most probably,
decide to strike a counter-blow on the Armenian positions. This will
not lead to Russia’s interference. Russia will interfere only if the
Armenian territory is attacked, while the US will interfere if Turkey
meddles in or if Armenia gets into an extremely hard situation. In
this case, the US will put an end to the war irrespective of its
results. Will it be able to? Can the war be avoided at all? – idle
question and vain supposition.
All the three problems could never and can never be solved in the
format the western community suggests. “Territorial integrity” can be
restored only by war. The very thesis and principle of territorial
integrity means a war that goes beyond the conventional idea of war
and implies genocide and mass deportation as obligatory addendum to
military actions. The US has never planned to solve these problems
in this way, i.e. to restore the territorial integrity of Georgia
and Azerbaijan at any price. The US has already got all it wanted
in the South Caucasus, namely, it has already ensured successful
oil transportation from the region. The last trifling thing the US
had to do was just to gain control – together with the UK – over the
“Caucasian Panama Canal.” For this purpose, it carried out a consistent
policy from Arytau to Batumi. All the other tasks were either
subservient or – if going beyond those tasks – were either ruled out
or stifled by feigned political games and endless negotiations. What
kind of policy is this? Anti-Georgian, anti-Armenian, anti-Azeri,
anti-Russian or anti-Iranian? This policy is purely American. The
US is absolutely unwilling to see war in the region. War means the
failure of its tremendous efforts to ensure the safe operation of the
Caucasian-Caspian, or, more correctly, American-British energy complex
in the region. The Americans may want some political tension in some
parts of the region but only provided they have full control over them.
Can we assert or deny that by expanding into the South Caucasus the
US has been and is partly or fully preventing military actions in
the local conflict zones? In the last 15 years the US has failed
its policy in a number of regions. Even disorganized, bankrupt
and capitulated Iraqi society has proved to be a hard nut to crack
for the US. With all its might and power, the US has no sufficient
military force for active suppression in even one – not very big –
country, and has, in fact, failed to guarantee peace and security in
any single country or region it held a military campaign in. Let’s
not dwell on the ideological and stylistic differences between the
relevant policies of the Republicans and the Democrats.
War is at the door. Despite their strategic interests, the Americans
has been led by their partner-opponent Europeans into absolutizing
the principle of territorial integrity – something they regard quite
cynically. By their political-propaganda games, they have convinced the
“victims” that they have the right to use military force to restore
sovereignty over their lost territories. The US has come up with
dubious initiatives to encourage arms race for ensuring the safety
of energy communications – initiatives that have resulted in extreme
militarization in the region. We can’t deny the influence of both
complex and individual factors on the military-political situation in
the region. The positions and interests of the western and eastern
great powers are certainly complex factors. However, the region’s
countries are becoming a loomingly large source of concern for the
US in terms of their plans to resolve their conflicts by war.
It couldn’t be otherwise.
By implementing its policy, the US has contributed to the collapse of
the CAFE Treaty and, together with its Western and Eastern European
allies, has launched an arms race in the South Caucasus. The only
question is what they are training national armed units for. The US has
“guaranteed” that they will not be used in ethnic conflicts. At the
same time, the US and NATO are actively stimulating the militarization
of the region. No doubt, this is part of the US’ policy to ensure
the safety of its oil complex. However, all these efforts are not
augmenting the US’ sway or diminishing Russia’s presence in the region,
but are, on the contrary, undermining the US’ policy and ruining the
oil complex together with the whole “Eurasian corridor” (“corridor”
is always something vulnerable, something that leads to war).
This spring the author questioned 88 British and US experts as to
security problems in the South Caucasus and the possibility of new
wars in Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno-Karabakh. None of them
has denied that the US cannot guarantee non-resumption of war. At
the same time, they clearly differentiated two questions: are there
enough factors proving that new war is possible and is the US able
to prevent this possibility. This refers to all the three conflicts.
Pacifist Europe will react to war stoically. Their conservative
media will call for interference and protection of oil facilities and
pipelines, but no single European soldier will set foot in the region
or will come here just to keep peace when the fight is already over.
It will be for the US and Russia to react, of course, if Turkey is
kept away and Iran is not very active.
Igor Muradyan – expert of Caucasus analytical center.

FM OF AZERBAIJAN MEETS NATO ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL JEAN FOURNET
AzerTag, Azerbaijan
July 3 2006
Foreign minister of Azerbaijan Elmar Mammadyarov on 3 July met with
the NATO Assistant Secretary General Jean Fournet.
Noting that the NATO Public Diplomacy Division closely cooperates with
Azerbaijan, J. Fournet produced as evidence the NATO Week in Baku,
inauguration of Euro-Atlantic Information Center.
Mr. Mammadyarov said Azerbaijan pays special attention to cooperation
with NATO.
‘Expansion of cooperation with the Euro-Atlantic structures is one
of the priorities of our foreign policy’, he stressed. He underlined
the role of the public organizations in this field.
Stability on the South Caucasus is the major factor of this
cooperation, Elmar Mammadyarov noted, underlining that the
Armenia-Azerbaijan, Nagorno Karabakh conflict impedes cooperation in
region. The conflict also hampers the realization of global energy
and other projects, he added.
The Minister also informed on the would-be-created Academy of Diplomacy
in the Republic. Jean Fournet appreciated creation of the Academy
and expressed readiness to render any assistance needed.
In the meeting, also exchanged were views on a number of other issues
of mutual interest.

AZERBAIJAN OF GREAT IMPORTANCE IN THE QUESTION OF GLOBAL ENERGY SAFETY
AzerTag, Azerbaijan
July 3 2006
Foreign minister of Azerbaijan Elmar Mammadyarov met with the newly
appointed ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary of the United
States to the country Ms. Anne Derse, 3 July.
The Minister congratulated her on the new appointment, noting that
she begins her diplomatic mission in the Republic in an important
period. He also reminded President Aliyev’s recent visit to the United
States, underlining that the coming ceremony of inauguration of the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline would open wider prospects for close
cooperation between two countries.
Ambassador Anne Derse especially noted the role of Azerbaijan in
the question of global energy safety. She welcomed the becoming
of Azerbaijan an influential center of region and appraised the
role of the country as the key player in the large-scale energy
projects. She stressed the necessity of expansion of economic links
between Azerbaijan and the United States of America also in the
non-oil sectors.
Noting that Azerbaijan’s integration will influence on development of
institutional infrastructure in the country, Mr. Anne Derse emphasized
necessity of development of the non-oil sector, in particular,
agriculture, information technology, agribusiness.
Azerbaijan gives great importance to integration to the Euro-Atlantic
structures, and this process will give impulse to reforms and
development in numerous fields, including political, economic,
humanitarian spheres.
Ms. Anne Derse highly assessed the role of Azerbaijan in combat against
terrorism and in peacemaking operation in Iraq and Afghanistan. At
the same time, she stressed necessity of expansion of cooperation
between Azerbaijan and USA in the security field.
Touching upon the negations on settlement of the Armenia-Azerbaijan,
Nagorno Karabakh conflicts, Ms. Derse stressed necessity of settlement
of the conflict stage by stage. According to her, prior to definition
of the status of Nagorno Karabakh, the occupied areas should be
released, and also the refugees and IDPs return to their homelands.
Minister Mammadyarov received a copy of her credentials and wished
success in activity.

CO-CHAIRS OF OSCE MINSK GROUP AGAIN MADE STATEMENT
Author: E.Huseynov
TREND, Azerbaijan
July 3 2006
The Co-Chairs continue to believe that the proposals developed
through the past two years of negotiations hold the best potential for
achieving a just and lasting settlement of the conflict, Trend reports
with reference to the July 3 statement of the co-chairs of OSCE Minsk
Group on regulation of Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
Co-chairs confirmed that it is time for Azerbaijani and Armenians
Presidents to make initiative for reaching a comprehensive agreement
in the process of regulation, and the co-chairs are ready to make
contribution to the sides to conclude the agreement if the Presidents
indicate they are prepared to do so. Although no additional meetings
between the sides under the auspices of the co-chairs are planned for
the immediate future, they will be ready to reengage if the parties
decide to pursue the talks with the political will that has thus far
been lacking.
It was stated in the statement that the proposals presented to the
Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents may lead to a long-term settlement
of the conflict. The principles are based on the redeployment of
Armenian troops from Azerbaijani territories around Nagorno-Karabakh,
with special modalities for Kelbajar and Lachin districts (including
a corridor between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh), demilitarization
of those territories, and a referendum or population vote — at a
date and in a manner to be decided through further negotiations — to
determine the final legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh. Then, deployment
of an international peacekeeping force and a joint commission for
implementation of the agreement would be established, and international
assistance would be made available for demining, reconstruction,
and resettlement of internally displaced persons in the formerly
occupied territories and the war-affected regions of Nagorno-Karabakh.

“MR. SEZER, DO NOT RATIFY THE TERROR LAW”
Tolga Korkut
BÝA, Turkey
July 3 2006
Representatives of 15 organizations send letter to President Sezer
asking him not to ratify amendment in Turkey’s Anti-Terror Law:
“The law surrenders personal rights and freedoms to the conscience
of security forces; eliminates all basic human rights”.
BÝA (Istanbul) – Representatives of 15 organisation including political
parties and democratic mass organisations have sent a joint letter
to President Ahmet Necdet Sezer requesting him not to ratify the
amendments in Turkey’s Anti-Terror Law (TMY).
Referring to last week’s Parliament General Assembly approval of the
controversial draft, the letter said the new TMY “surrenders personal
rights and freedoms to the conscience of the security forces and
eliminates basic human rights”. The bill will go into force only if
the President ratifies it.
The letter stressed that the law had dangers to democracy and human
rights by listing a number of serious drawbacks and possibilities:
Disappearances under detention could be revived: “The law severely
restricts the right to defence. Personal safety is endangered with
the republic prosecutor being authorised to order for a suspect not
to be allowed to contact relatives or receive the assistance of an
attorney as of the moment of detention. This situation raises concern
that ‘disappearance under detention’ incidents could be revived.
Those thinking differently cannot express their opinion, organise:
“It is known that the whole of the society does not think in the
same way on issues such as the ‘Armenian Genocide, Cyprus Question,
Kurdish Problem’ which are the red points of the state. The law totally
abolishes the right of persons, intellectuals and institutions that
think differently [on these] to share their views with the public. Any
individual who expresses their opinion, organises according to their
opinion, can be put on trial for a terrorism offence under this law”.
Gangs, killers encouraged: “Article 15 of the law rules that even
if an arrest is required, anti-terrorism officials on trial for
killing people, evacuating villages, torture, can be tried without
being remanded in custody. This article is an arrangement intending
to encourage the killers and gangs”.
Tax pays for cost of offending officials: “The state will meet the
legal defence costs of security officials who commit an offence. The
limit of this payment has not been determined. It is disturbing that
the crimes of these officials will be paid for with our taxes”.
Prof. Dr. Ibrahim Kaboglu told bianet in an exclusive interview
last week that due to articles in violation of the constitution,
he expected President Sezer to return the law to Parliament rather
than ratify it in its current form.
The organisations that have undersigned the letter to Sezer are:
Human Rights Association Ýstanbul Branch, Labout Party Istanbul
Provincial Organisation, Freedom and Solidarity Party Istanbul
Organisation, Democratic Society Party Istanbul Provincial
Organisation, Socialist Democracy Party Istanbul Provincial
Organisation, Initiatives of 78’s, Labour Movement Party, Peace
Mothers, Initiative Against Thought Crime, Socialist Platform of
the Oppressed, Young Civilians, Halkevleri Istanbul Branch, Kurdish
Institute, Socialist Solidarity Platform, Association to Assist
Prisoner Families.
–Boundary_(ID_86+boKChzSDQXDrFgXgCDA)- –

UK REPORTER BARRED FROM RUSSIA ON SECURITY GROUNDS
Reuters, UK
July 3 2006
MOSCOW, July 3 (Reuters) – Russia has refused a visa to a British
journalist well-known for his coverage of Chechnya and the turbulent
Caucasus, citing the needs of “state security”.
Thomas de Waal, who has previously worked in Moscow for the
English-language Moscow Times, the BBC and the Times, said on Monday
he had been due to attend the presentation of a Russian version of
his book on the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh.
But the Federal Migration Service refused him a visa.
The service was not available for comment on Monday but in its letter
refusing the application, which was obtained by Reuters, it cited
a 1996 law that says a visa can be refused “in the aims of securing
state security”.
De Waal said he had cooperated with Russian officials in the past
on Nagorno-Karabakh, a South Caucasus region officially part of
Azerbaijan but ruled by Armenians, and did not believe they would
bar him for his views on the conflict.
“This clearly has to be because of the other main thing that I write
about, which is Chechnya,” de Waal, 39, told Reuters by telephone
from London.
Russian officials have been very sensitive about Western criticism of
the war in Chechnya, where they have struggled to crush separatism
for more than a decade, and local journalists have been prosecuted
for sympathising with the rebels.
President Vladimir Putin in 2002 said a foreign journalist critical
of Russia’s policy in the region become a Muslim and be circumcised
“in such a way that nothing grows back”.
Russia barred U.S. channel ABC news from Russia after it ran an
interview with Chechen rebel leader Shamil Basayev.
Press freedom groups say Russia tries to intimidate journalists into
only reporting the Kremlin view on Chechnya. A Russian journalist in
February was convicted of provoking racial hatred after he printed
articles by rebel leaders.
De Waal is best known in Russia for appearing as an expert witness for
the defence at the extradition trial of rebel leader Akhmed Zakayev
in London. He said this could be behind his failure to get a visa.
The British court in 2003 declined to extradite Zakayev, giving him
political asylum instead — a move that infuriated Moscow, which
calls Zakayev a terrorist.
“It is possible that the wheels turn rather slowly, or that this is
a cumulative account of things I have done over the last 10 years,”
de Waal said. He last visited Russia in January 2005.

AZERBAIJAN ‘AGAINST REFERENDUM IN KARABAKH’
By Emil Danielyan
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
July 3 2006
A senior Azerbaijani official said on Monday that Azerbaijan has
never accepted a solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that would
culminate in a referendum in the disputed territory, despite Armenian
claims to the contrary.
Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov was quoted by the Turan news
agency as saying that Baku believes such a vote should instead take
place on Azerbaijan’s entire internationally recognized territory.
“That is reflected in the [Azerbaijani] constitution and the country’s
leadership does not intend to revise its opinion,” he said.
In a statement last week, Armenia’s Foreign Ministry said at the
heart of a peaceful settlement proposed by the American, French and
Russian mediators is the idea of enabling Karabakh’s predominantly
Armenian population to determine its status in a referendum after
the liberation of most Armenian-occupied lands in Azerbaijan proper.
The ministry asserted that Presidents Ilham Aliev and Robert
Kocharian agreed on this formula during their recent face-to-face
negotiations. “The area of disagreement between the presidents has
to do with the sequence in which the consequences of the military
conflict are removed,” it said.
A separate statement by the mediators made public two days later
likewise said that Karabakh’s status would be decided in a “referendum
or population vote.” But it did not specify where that vote would
take place and who would be eligible to participate in it.
Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian insisted on Thursday that
the framework peace accord put forward by the mediators makes it
clear that the decision on the status is to be made by the “population
of Nagorno-Karabakh.”
Azimov was reported to have denied this, accusing Yerevan of
“distorting the content of the talks” and interpreting the referendum
idea “in a manner advantageous to them.” He also indicated Baku’s
discontent with the mediators’ statement, saying that the French,
Russian and U.S. co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group disclosed and
“took out of context” only some key points of the proposed peace deal.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ARMENIAN COMMODITY TURNOVER WITH RUSSIA INCREASED BY 12.4%
Regnum, Russia
July 3 2006
Armenian commodity turnover has increased by 9.7% and totaled $1.1bn
for the first 5 months of 2006, compared with the same period of
2005. Of the total, exports amounted to $339.1mln (decrease by 4.6%)
and imports – to $768.3mln (increase by 17.4%). As REGNUM was informed
at the Armenian National Statistical Service, credit balance deficit
totaled $429.3mln and $415.4mln without humanitarian aid.
Commodity turnover with the CIS countries amounted to $318mln, or
28.7% of the total, a 22-percent increase compared to January-May,
2005. Commodity turnover with Russia amounted to $137.7mln (12.4%
increase), with the EU countries – $406.8mln (17.7% increase), with
the USA – $49.5mln (8.5% decrease). Within the accounting period,
Armenia exported to the CIS countries goods $60.3mln worth, of which
to Russia – $29.4mln worth.
$278.7mln worth produce was exported to other countries, of which
$184.2mln worth to the EU countries and $19.9% worth into the USA.
For the first 5 months of the period, goods $257.5mln worth were
imported to Armenia from the CIS countries, of which $108.3mln worth
from Russia, $222.6mln worth from the EU, and $29.6 worth from the USA.