BAKU: Turkish speaker says Russia may play major role in conflictset

Assa-Irada
Feb 10 2005

Turkish speaker says Russia may play major role in conflict
settlement

Baku, February 9, AssA-Irada
Ankara is interested in developing relations with neighboring states,
Turkish parliament speaker, Bulent Arinc, told a news conference
prior to leaving Baku on Wednesday. The strengthening of Azerbaijan,
a Turkic nation, is a result of the proper policy pursued by its
government, he said.
Speaking of Armenia’s policy of aggression, Arinc said that this
country, which is adhering to a non-constructive stance, is not
interested in the conflict resolution. He added that with the
developing Turkey-Russia relations, Kremlin may play a major role in
settling the conflict in the future.*

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Democracy rising in ex-Soviet states

Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA)
February 10, 2005, Thursday

Democracy rising in ex-Soviet states

By Fred Weir Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

Aftershocks of Ukraine and Georgia are stirring up rallies in Central
Asia.

The peaceful street revolts that recently brought democratic change
to Georgia and Ukraine could spawn copy-cat upheavals against
authoritarian regimes across the former Soviet Union, experts say.

Waving orange scarves and banners – the colors of Ukraine’s
revolution – dozens of Uzbeks demonstrated in the capital Tashkent
last week over the demolition of their homes to make way for border
fencing.

According to the Institute for War and Peace Reporting, the protest
compelled the autocratic government of Islam Karimov, widely
condemned for human rights abuses, to pay compensation.

In Bishkek, capital of Kyrgyzstan, hundreds of pro-democracy
activists rallied on Saturday to demand that upcoming parliamentary
elections be free and fair.

>>From Kyrgyzstan on the Chinese border to Moldova, where Europe’s only
ruling Communist Party faces elections next month, opposition parties
are eagerly studying Georgia’s “Rose Revolution” and Ukraine’s
“Orange Revolution,” which led to the triumph of pro-democracy
forces. Opposition groups are even selecting symbols for their
banners when the moment arrives – tulips for the Kyrgyz opposition,
grapes for Moldova’s anticommunists.

“The recent events in Ukraine have made people everywhere understand
that taking to the streets gets the authorities’ attention,” says
Tatiana Poloskova, deputy director of the independent Institute of
Modern Diaspora, which studies Russian minorities in former Soviet
countries.

Georgian President Mikhael Saakashvili and newly inaugurated
Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko were clearly addressing their
former Soviet colleagues last month when they hailed their revolts as
the leading edge of “a new wave of liberation that will lead to the
final victory of freedom and democracy on the continent of Europe.”

The prospect has sent shudders through the Kremlin, still smarting
from the “loss” of pro-Moscow regimes in Georgia and Ukraine, and
reeling in the face of its own grass-roots revolt by pensioners
protesting cuts in social services. For Russia, where authoritarian
methods have been taking root under President Vladimir Putin, the
prospect of pro-democracy rebellions sweeping the former Soviet Union
seems to threaten the underpinnings of domestic stability. The
pro-Western bent of the new regimes in Ukraine and Georgia may also
threaten the economic ties Russia has built with post-Soviet regimes
from Armenia to Uzbekistan.

First in line could be Kyrgyzstan, where any official attempt to rig
parliamentary elections slated for Feb. 27 could trigger Ukrainian
popular action. Strongman Askar Akayev, who’s ruled the tiny central
Asian state for the past 15 years, has already faced street
demonstrations over a failed attempt to ban his chief opponent from
the parliamentary race. Mr. Akayev has pledged to step down in
October, and appears to be grooming his daughter, Bermet, to succeed
him. After a recent Moscow visit with Vladimir Putin, Akayev warned
that if the opposition takes to the streets, “it would lead to civil
war.”

But some Russian experts see a “Tulip Revolution” in the near future
for Kyrgyzstan, which hosts both Russian and US military bases.
“Akayev is lost,” says Alexei Malashenko, an expert with the Carnegie
Center in Moscow. “The opposition is strong, well-organized, and has
international as well as domestic backing.”

The Kremlin may fear that political ferment in Kyrgyzstan could
spread to more important allies in central Asia. The long-time leader
of oil-rich Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, who has fixed elections
and changed the Constitution to extend his rule, last month dissolved
the leading opposition party after it sent a delegation to Ukraine to
study the Orange Revolution. He also moved to close down a local
institute funded by global financier George Soros, who has backed
pro-democracy movements in Ukraine and elsewhere.

In Uzbekistan, which also hosts a key US military base, President
Karimov, a former Soviet politburo member, has ruled with an iron
fist since the demise of the USSR. Karimov recently jeered publicly
at those “who are dying to see that the way the elites in Georgia and
Ukraine changed becomes a model to be emulated in other countries.”
He warned bluntly: “We have the necessary force for that.”

Some experts argue that, while velvet revolution may be possible in
semi-authoritarian Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, it is a very distant
prospect in Uzbekistan because democracy and civil society are barely
developed there. Last week’s protests in Tashkent, though based on a
narrow economic issue, hint that instability may lie just beneath the
regime’s tough and orderly surface.

Uzbekistan’s gas-rich neighbor, Turkmenistan, is run by a North
Korean-style dictatorship that permits no dissent of any kind. “In
absolutely authoritarian regimes like [Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan]
the threat of ‘Orange Revolution’ is just used by the leaders to
crack down harder,” says Masha Lipman, an expert with the Carnegie
Center in Moscow. “There is no chance for the opposition to actually
organize anything, much less a revolution.”

That paradox may help to explain why Georgians were able to rally
successfully against the lethargic regime of Eduard Shevardnadze,
when it attempted to rig the 2003 parliamentary polls, while
protesters in neighboring Azerbaijan were put down when the much more
efficient dictatorship of Gaidar Aliyev imposed the succession of his
son, Ilham, through fraudulent elections just a month earlier.

Ukrainians were able to successfully mobilize against vote-rigging
late last year in part because Ukraine had relatively free
institutions, including a parliament and Supreme Court that the
president was not able to control. In next-door Belarus, which US
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has labeled “the last outpost of
tyranny in Europe,” dictator Alexander Lukashenko has crushed the
opposition and banished nongovernmental organizations, and looks set
to be handily reelected in showpiece elections later this year.

But an upsurge looks increasingly likely in ex-Soviet Moldova, where
Communist President Vladimir Voronin has lost Moscow support. He
faces a strong challenge in next month’s parliamentary elections from
the pro-Western Christian Democrats, who reportedly are sporting
orange scarves and flags in the capital.

“The Kremlin suddenly finds itself severely challenged to change its
strategies, both at home and in former Soviet countries,” says Sergei
Kazyonnov, an expert with the independent Institute for National
Security and Strategic Research in Moscow. “It can go on depending on
political manipulations and under-the-carpet deals with local elites.
But it is already becoming obvious that there are just too many
different realities here, and an unworkable multiplicity of carpets.”

Russian foreign minister to visit Armenia

Russian foreign minister to visit Armenia

RosBusinessConsulting Database
February 10, 2005 Thursday 2:04 am, EST

Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov will discuss the duration of
President Vladimir Putin’s visit to Armenia in the course of his visit
to this republic. According to the ARKA news agency, Armenian foreign
minister Vartan Oskanian said Putin had accepted Armenian leader Robert
Kocharian’s invitation and would visit the republic in the near future.

As reported earlier, Lavrov’s visit to Armenia is scheduled for
February 17.

Armenia left without allies

Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
February 9, 2005, Wednesday

ARMENIA LEFT WITHOUT ALLIES

SOURCE: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, February 7, 2005, p. 11

by Viktoria Panfilova

RESOLUTION OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY ON KARABAKH IS PUTTING
ARMENIA IN A TIGHT CORNER

Foreign ministers of Armenia (Vardan Oskanjan) and Azerbaijan (Elmar
Mamedjarov) will meet in Prague to discuss the Nagorno-Karabakh
problem on March 2. Most observers believe that the meeting of the
diplomats representing warring parties will take place in the
situation favoring Azerbaijan. Meeting of the Parliamentary Assembly
a week ago passed a resolution on Nagorno-Karabakh, putting official
Yerevan in a difficult position.

The Strasbourg Resolution based on the report made by David Atkinson
(Great Britain) upset Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh but elated
Azerbaijan. To quote President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, “Baku did
it, the report to the Parliamentary Assembly recognizes the fact of
occupation of a part of Azerbaijani lands by Armenia.” Indeed, this
is the first official international document to call Armenia an
aggressor. Moreover, Atkinson in his comments denied Nagorno-Karabakh
the right to self-determination. “If Azerbaijan agreed to give
Nagorno-Karabakh sovereignty, the European Union will not object,” he
said. “It is clear, however, that the authorities of Azerbaijan will
never give their consent to it.”

A better gift to Azerbaijan cannot be imagined. No wonder official
Yerevan immediately said that, “Atkinson’s report reeks of oil”,
clearly hinting at the interest of the West in the Caspian energy
resources.

Atkinson’s report gives Armenia something to ponder. The failure of
the Armenian diplomacy is clear even though official Yerevan is
speaking of “diplomatic triumph” to muffle it.

Armenian experts are convinced that the fiasco is a corollary of the
faulty concept defining Yerevan’s stand on the matter in the last
several years. Between 1988, when the confrontation began and the
late 1990’s, the problem of Karabakh was viewed on all levels as the
struggle of local Armenians for self-determination and the
self-proclaimed Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh was a fully fledged
participant of all negotiations. Armenia was always an “involved
party” but not a warring party. This state of affairs was specified
by an OSCE document in 1992.

Everything changed when ex-leader of Karabakh Robert Kocharjan became
president of Armenia. Yerevan assumed the role of a participant in
the confrontation, and Karabakh was ousted from the process of
negotiations with Yerevan’s consent. As a result, the entire problem
shifted to the plane of a territorial dispute. Needless to say, all
of that weakened Armenia’s position in the international arena.
Restoration of this position is not going to be easy now.

A certain role was also played by official Baku’s dissatisfaction
with the OSCE Minsk Group, which in Azerbaijan’s opinion had not done
anything at all in its 10 years of existence. In fact, this is not
so. The OSCE Minsk Group and its chairmen (Russia, the United States,
and France) offered variants of settlement more than once, but either
Baku turned them down or other intermediaries objected to a too high
level of Karabakh’s involvement in the talks. It was precisely the
“pro-Armenian” bias of the OSCE Minsk Group that irked Azerbaijan and
fortified it in the conviction that the format of the talks should be
changed, and the intermediaries too.

In other words, the Parliamentary Assembly and its decision benefits
Azerbaijan enormously. With this backing, Baku will certainly try to
minimize the role of the OSCE Minsk Group and insist on the transfer
of the debates to the UN (where it can count on the unequivocal
support from most Arab countries) and to the International Court.
Moreover, some specialists fear that the latest diplomatic triumph
may provoke Azerbaijan into trying to settle the problem by sheer
strength of arms again. Atkinson said in his report that there were
three solutions to the problem, including a military solution where
Azerbaijan would send its army to liberate its own territories.

The chance of the use of force is slim, dealing the Karabakh and much
less the Armenian army will be difficult indeed, but official Yerevan
does not rule out this possibility all the same. In any case,
Armenian Defense Minister Serzh Sarkisjan warned Azerbaijan the other
day that should it decide to settle the matter by force, it would
have to lament “40% of the territory, not 20%.”

Resolutions of the Parliamentary Assembly are essentially
recommendations but Baku, Yerevan, and Stepanakert understand the
moral significance of the document. That is probably why
Nagorno-Karabakh TV went to the trouble of finding an interview with
Atkinson dated 1993 when he was chairman of the commission for
non-CIS countries. Atkinson said after a visit to Nagorno-Karabakh
then that, “Azerbaijan began this war and the European Commission
will not accept it as a member unless the war is stopped.” He said in
the same interview that, “residents of Nagorno-Karabakh have the
right to decide their lot… Our Organization and I myself will do
everything possible to make sure that the Karabakh Armenians live on
their land without duress…” All of that shows that Atkinson’s view
has changed diametrically. Even Western experts ascribe the
Europeans’ eagerness to interfere with the longest conflict in Europe
to economic interests as well as political. The words of Bernard
Fasiet, the new French chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group, confirm it.
On a visit to Baku last week he said that, “the unresolved
Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict affects stability of the region and
interferes with economic projects on a broader scale including
Central Asia.” It should be noted that Western representatives and
the Russian delegation backed the anti-Armenian resolution of the
Parliamentary Assembly. It means that Armenia does not have allies it
can rely on at this point. References to “oil”, “transport”, and
other interests do no apply. It will be much better to think why the
once unquestionable sympathies with Armenia in Europe and Russia are
gradually giving way to disinterest in the Armenian interests…

Translated by A. Ignatkin

BAKU: President meets EU envoy on South Caucasus

President meets EU envoy on South Caucasus

Assa-Irada
Feb 10 2005

Baku, February 9, AssA-Irada
The Upper Garabagh conflict was in focus at a meeting of President
Ilham Aliyev
with the European Union special envoy on South Caucasus, Heikki
Talvitie, on Wednesday.
“Azerbaijan’s position on the Upper Garabagh conflict settlement is
based on the principles of territorial integrity and inviolability of
borders”, President Ilham Aliyev said. He emphasized that the
conflicts in the former Soviet Union, accompanied by aggression and
separatism, are a serious obstacle for peace and security in regions.
>>From this standpoint, the unbiased position of the Council of Europe
and other international organizations, which condemn Armenian
separatism and this country’s aggression against Azerbaijan,
expressed in their documents, is of great importance, Aliyev said.
Talvitie gave a high assessment to the level of current relations
between the EU and Azerbaijan and voiced confidence that they will
continue to strengthen.*

–Boundary_(ID_wc4xK50pGsgL4yjUZl4Dtw)–

BAKU: Russian vice-speaker lays out his view on Garabagh conflictset

Russian vice-speaker lays out his view on Garabagh conflict settlement

Assa-Irada
Feb 10 2005

Baku, February 9, AssA-Irada
The Russian Duma (parliament) vice-speaker Vladimir Zhirinovsky says
that the most appropriate solution for the problem over Upper
Garabagh would be its entering the Commonwealth of Independent States
(CIS). He said that Moscow is afraid of taking either side in the
conflict settlement to avoid hurting their interests.
Zhirinovsky added that neither Azerbaijan nor Armenia will ever
accept losing Upper Garabagh.
Commenting on the statement, the Milli Majlis first deputy chairman
Arif Rahimzada regarded it as nonsense. He did not rule out that this
statement may be put on discussion in the Azerbaijani parliament,
since it was made by the second top official of the Russian
parliament.*

Armenians claim capture of spy

Armenians claim capture of spy

Arminfo
9 Feb 05

Yerevan, 9 February: The Armenian law-enforcement bodies have arrested
an Azerbaijani spy.

The Armenian National Security Service arrested an Armenian citizen and
agent for the Azerbaijani special services as a result of operational
and intelligence measures, the press service of the National Security
Service told Arminfo news agency.

The source said the citizen, whose name has not been divulged so as
not to prejudice the investigation, was arrested this month.

An investigation has been launched under Article 229 of the Armenian
Criminal Code (high treason, espionage). The investigation department
of the Armenian National Security Service is carrying out the
investigation.

Diplomatic Mission Of Russian Ambassador To Armenia Nearing Completi

DIPLOMATIC MISSION OF RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR TO ARMENIA NEARING
COMPLETION

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 9. ARMINFO. The diplomatic mission of Russian
Ambassador to Armenia Anatoliy Dryukov is nearing completion. The
Ambassador himself made this statement talking to ARMINFO.

He said that his departure was fixed for the second half of March.
The new Ambassador Nikolay Pavlov will arrive in Yerevan also in
March. In response to the question about his next appointment, the
Ambassador answered that he intended to educate his grandchildren.

Trial On Senior Lieutenant Ramil Safarov, Killer Of Armenian Officer

TRIAL ON SENIOR LIEUTENANT RAMIL SAFAROV, KILLER OF ARMENIAN OFFICER, RESUMED
IN BUDAPEST

BUDAPEST, FEBRUARY 8. ARMINFO. The trial of Ramil Safarov, Azeri officer
axing his Armenian counterpart Gurgen Margaryan in Hungary Feb 19 2004, resumed in
Budapest today.

The defense of the Azerbaijani officer tried to bring the judicial process to
the political field, but the judge prevented her attempts. The defense also
disagreed with the resolution of judicial medics insisting that an Azerbaijani
specialist examine Safarov, which was also rejected. The verdict will be
announced after another two sittings on 10 May and 27 September. The verdict’s
announcement was postponed because of the absence of a witness, a Latvian officer,
who lived in the same room with Margaryan and avoided Safarov’s axe by
chance. The second witness in the case was also absent from the trial because of
illness, it was another Azerbaijani officer who knew about the intentions of
Safarov but did not informed anyone of them before the crime.

Vandals Replace Armenian Gravestones With Georgian Ones OutsideArmen

VANDALS REPLACE ARMENIAN GRAVESTONES WITH GEORGIAN ONES OUTSIDE ARMENIAN
CHURCH IN TBILISI

AKHALKALAKI, FEBRUARY 9. ARMINFO. Unknown vandals attacked one of
the Armenian cultural monuments in Tbilisi.

According to A-INFO, last night, Armenian gravestones were stolen
from the courtyard of the Armenian St.Virgin Church and replaced with
Georgian ones. Leader of the Armenian Apostolic Church Georgian
Diocese, bishop Vazgen Mirzakhanyan is concerned that the next
victim will be the church itself and all the Armenian churches
in Georgia. Bishop Mirzakhanyan intends to apply to the Georgian
President Mihkeil Sahakashvili for help.