The White House

President George W. Bush

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
January 7, 2005

Presidential Proclamation: To Extend Nondiscriminatory Trade Treatment to
the Products of Armenia

1. Since declaring its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, Armenia
has made considerable progress in enacting market reforms and on February 5,
2003, Armenia acceded to the World Trade Organization (WTO). The extension
of unconditional normal trade relations treatment to the products of Armenia
will permit the United States to avail itself of all rights under the WTO
with respect to Armenia. Armenia has demonstrated a strong desire to build a
friendly and cooperative relationship with the United States and has been
found to be in full compliance with the freedom of emigration requirements
under title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 (the “1974 Act”) (19 U.S.C. 2431 et
seq.).

2. Pursuant to section 2001(b) of Public Law 108-429, 118 Stat. 2588, and
having due regard for the findings of the Congress in section 2001(a) of
said law, I hereby determine that chapter 1 of title IV of the 1974 Act (19
U.S.C. 2431-2439) should no longer apply to Armenia.

3. Section 604 of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2483), as amended, authorizes the
President to embody in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
the substance of relevant provisions of that Act, or other acts affecting
import treatment, and of actions taken thereunder.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of
America, acting under the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the
laws of the United States, including but not limited to section 2001(b) of
Public Law 108-429, and section 604 of the 1974 Act, do proclaim that:

(1) Nondiscriminatory trade treatment (normal trade relations treatment)
shall be extended to the products of Armenia, which shall no longer be
subject to chapter 1 of title IV of the 1974 Act.

(2) The extension of nondiscriminatory treatment to products of Armenia
shall be effective as of the date of signature of this proclamation.

(3) All provisions of previous proclamations and executive orders that are
inconsistent with the actions taken in this proclamation are superseded to
the extent of such inconsistency.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this seventh day of January,
in the year of our Lord two thousand five, and of the Independence of the
United States of America the two hundred and twenty-ninth.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE ASIA QUAKE : Has this catastrophe really made us a more caring world?

Irish Independent
Jan 08, 2005

By Mary Kenny

Has the world been changed by the terrible tsunami in Asia? Has human
nature been altered by this appalling catastrophe, brought home to us
by the television cameras with more vividness than any other
catastrophe in history?

It certainly seemed like that in the two weeks following the
disaster. An unprecedented flow of global generosity poured out from
all countries, a flow led not by politicians or other leaders but
spontaneously erupting from ordinary people. Within two weeks,
worldwide pledges of donations had reached $3bn (â=82¬ 2.27bn) – a sum
of money never before collected in such a short time for a caring
cause.

And if ‘globalisation’ is a dirty word in the mouths of some – the
‘anti-globalisation’ campaigners certainly have used it thus – after
the tsunami the admirable and uplifting aspect of a global
consciousness became evident. People were not thinking in terms of
national, racial or religious relief. They were thinking globally.

Back in the 20th century, kindly and compassionate gestures were
certainly made for peoples who had suffered catastrophe, but these
were usually on some basis of kinship. The Irish-Americans helped
Ireland; the British helped those they were linked to by ‘Empire’; the
Church of England helped the Armenian peoples because they were being
persecuted by the Islamic Turks; the Catholic Church in Ireland raised
quite a lot of help for victims of the Russian famines in the 1920s,
partly because the victims were often Christians starved out by an
atheistic regime and partly because the very word ‘famine’ is always
evocative in Ireland.

But with the tsunami, it hasn’t been like that at all. This global
response was for suffering humanity, with no particular links of
kinship or other points of common cultural identity. It was pure,
globalised altruism. Indeed, some Darwinist thinkers were quite
puzzled by it, since Darwinism teaches that we are programmed to give
preference to peoples who might be related to us over those with whom
we share no gene pool.

So, yes, in one way we could conclude that the tsunami has been a
turning point for the ‘global village’. Its terrifying scale and
unpredictability has raised awareness that there must be a sustained
globalised response to catastrophes and, further, that the richer
world must be ready to help the poorer world on a continuing basis.

This is not entirely a new idea. The notion of alms-giving is explicit
in almost every religion – Judaism and Islam are particularly emphatic
about it. You are obliged to give to the poor and the needy. In
Ireland, that generosity has always been quite remarkable, and however
much bad publicity the Catholic Church has had over the past decade,
hostility never affected the caritas role of the Church. Year in, year
out, the St Vincent de Paul still attracted support and revenue.

Calvinism did not approve of charity to the same extent as older
faiths: the Calvinist strain distinguished between the ‘deserving’ and
the ‘undeserving’ poor. The deserving poor were merely unlucky; the
undeserving were the feckless and improvident who had brought it all
on themselves and would never alter their behaviour. That dilemma is
still with us each time we pass a beggar in the street. Is it kind to
give him money, knowing full well that he is likely to spend it on
drugs that will keep him where he is? Or should we simply act
charitably and not enquire where the money goes?

On a larger scale, some of the post-tsunami donors will be asking the
same question: is it right to give money where a society is corrupt?
Or should we just be charitable without a strings-attached clause?

All in all, the tsunami has pushed the world more towards the spirit
of generosity. Even where governments are corrupt, we realise that
people are needy. And we should have a worldwide consciousness of
these needs. It’s as if the tsunami has almost ushered in an idea
pledged in the Communist Manifesto of1848: “From each according to his
ability, to each according to his need”.

But if the world order has been changed by this catastrophe, it is
less likely that human nature itself has. Disasters shake us and
resolve us to show humanity, but soon enough the Old Adam
appears. There are people who immediately show great kindness and
heroism, but there are also people who quickly take advantage. Within
a week of the disaster, in Britain, there were reports that special
collections for tsunami victims had been stolen by thieves. Within 10
days, there were reliable reports coming from Unicef that gangs were
recruiting tsunami orphans to sell into the sex trade. There were
grumbles, too, from other charities that money collected for the
tsunami victims would now meanless revenue for them.

There were proclamations from Islamic clerics that the tsunami was a
punishment from God for all the sex-tourism and prostitution that has
been associated with some parts of the Far East. And the internet was
awash with other conspiracy theories: the Americans were quickly
blamed, as they so often are now. Strange, was it not, that the
island of Diego Garcia, host to an American airbase, was untouched by
the tidal wave? Actually, there is a geological explanation, but that
would spoil the conspiracy theory!

There is something frightening and extraordinary about the thought
that the tectonic plates can move beneath the surface of the ocean and
the globe itself can shift on its axis. The world has been changed by
this knowledge. And for all that we complain about the rubbishy aspect
of television, this is one great service that TV and international
communications have performed: bringing it all so close to us.

But to sustain that consciousness, and to maintain that sense of
global solidarity will require a change in human nature itself. And
that has always been somewhat more difficult to achieve.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Armenian National Committee of America-Western Region
104 North Belmont Street, Suite 200
Glendale, California 91206
Phone: 818.500.1918 Fax: 818.246.7353
[email protected]

PRESS RELEASE
Friday, January 07, 2005

Contact: Armen Carapetian
Tel: (818) 500-1918

Armenian & Greek Leaders Discuss EU Issues with Congressman Robert Andrews
during California Visit

(Glendale, CA – December 27, 2004) Members of the Board of Directors
of the Armenian National Committee of America – Western Region
(ANCA-WR) along with members of the Board of Directors of the American
Hellenic Council (AHC) met with Congressman Robert Andrews (D-NJ) at
the ANCA-WR headquarters in Glendale, California during the
Congressman’s visit to Southern California on December 27, 2004.
Representatives of the ANCA-WR and the AHC voiced their concerns
regarding the Republic of Turkey’s attempts to join the European Union
amongst other issues related to American foreign policy in regard to
Armenia, Greece and Cyprus.

ANCA-WR Executive Director Ardashes Kassakhian thanked the Congressman
for his support of the Greek and Armenian communities. Kassakhian
explained that the Greek and Armenian communities were very concerned
with the United States ‘ active role in advancing Turkey’s ambitions
for EU membership. During the briefing, Kassakhian pointed out that
Turkey has to conform to and adopt the basic standards of human rights
by which the E.U. nations and the United States abide. In addition to
pointing out Turkey’s overall abysmal record on human rights,
Kassakhian told Congressman Andrews of the importance of including
recognition of the Armenian Genocide as a precondition to Turkey’s
entry into the E.U.

AHC President Dinos Andrianos expressed the concerns of the Greek
American community regarding the tacit U.S. support of the
controversial Annan Plan for Cyprus which favors Turkey’s
position. The plan proposed by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan would
require that the Turkish occupying force vacate most of northern
Cyprus yet allows Turkey to retain control of key areas on the island
nation. Cypriots have overwhelmingly rejected the Annan Plan as have
Armenian Cypriots.

Congressman Andrews urged the ANC and AHC to continue their
bi-partisan outreach to members of Congress. The Congressman added
that the public awareness campaign is working within the halls of
Congress where most of the members are supportive of Armenian and
Greek issues. Congressman Andrews commendedthe ANC and AHC for the
work that they do in keeping their respective communities informed and
involved in the political process.

Congressman Andrews is a member of the Congressional Caucus on
Armenian Issues. Congressman Andrews represents New Jersey’s 1st
Congressional District which is comprised of Burlington, Camden and
Gloucester Counties. Congre ssman Andrews sits on the House of
Representatives Select Committee on Homeland Security and the
Education and Workforce Committee. He has consistently supported
Armenian issues and during the last two election cycles has earned an
A or better on the ANCA Congressional Report Card.

The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) is the largest and
most influential Armenian American grassroots political
organization. Working in coordination with a network of offices,
chapters, and supporters throughout the United States and affiliated
organizations around the world, the ANCA actively advances the
concerns of the Armenian American community on a broad range of
issues.

The American Hellenic Council (AHC) is a non-partisan political
advocacy organization based in California. The purpose of AHC is to
lobby and inform the U.S. Congress for the protection and promotion of
Greek American interests and issues. Photo Caption: ANCA-WR and AHC
Leadership Meet with Congressman Robert Andrews at the ANCA-WR
Headquarters in Glendale.

The Jamestown Foundation
Wednesday, January 5, 2005 — Volume 2, Issue 3
EURASIA DAILY MONITOR

IN THIS ISSUE:

*Yerevan agrees to add troops to Polish force in Iraq
*New Islamic terrorist group emerges in Tajikistan
*As tensions increase with West, Russia must look to China for allies
*New documentary implicates Russia in second attempt to murder Yushchenko

————————————————————————

ARMENIA TO DEPLOY TOKEN CONTINGENT TO IRAQ

On December 24, the Armenian parliament approved a symbolic deployment
of Armenian military personnel as part of the U.S.-led coalition in
Iraq. The vote was 91-23, with one abstention, after a seven-hour
closed session late into the night. A last-hour switch by the
opposition National Unity Party of Artashes Geghamian ensured the wide
margin for passing a deeply unpopular decision, made palatable to the
public by the token size of the troop commitment. The Armenian
Revolutionary Federation Dashnaktsutiun, a component of the governing
coalition, voted against the deployment, as did the opposition Justice
bloc.

Technically, the parliament was voting to ratify Armenia’s signature
on the Memorandum of Understanding with Poland — lead country of the
multinational force in south-central Iraq — on the deployment of
Armenian personnel with that force. Armenia is the nineteenth country
to become a party to that Memorandum.

The Defense Ministry has announced that the Armenian contingent is
ready for deployment as of January 5, but has not made public any
specific date for actual deployment. The ministry had adumbrated that
possibility with Washington as well as with the Armenian public since
late 2003, but it has taken more than a year to put it into
practice. The uncertainty and delays have inspired remarks that Poland
might withdraw from Iraq before the Armenians ever arrive, thus
rendering any Armenian deployment moot.

The parliament also approved the Defense Ministry’s concept of sending
46 personnel to Iraq for one year. The group consists of: two
officers, one signals specialist, 30 drivers, ten sappers, and three
medical doctors with civilian specialties. Armenian personnel are not
to participate in combat, but only in humanitarian activities. They
are also barred from any joint actions with Azerbaijani troops in
Iraq. The Armenian group will deploy without equipment, and Yerevan
will only pay the soldiers’ base salaries. Coalition forces in the
theater will provide the equipment, and the United States almost all
the funding for the Armenian group.

Defense Minister Serge Sarkisian is the prime mover behind this
mission, not only in the military but also in the internal political
arena. Sarkisian argues that Armenia cannot afford to stand aside and
risk forfeiting U.S. goodwill at a time when Azerbaijan and Georgia
are present with troops in Iraq (and elsewhere) to support the United
States. Sarkisian’s political statements obliquely suggest that the
Iraq deployment would raise Armenia’s standing in Washington, mitigate
what he terms “discriminatory” treatment there, and earn a title to
more favorable consideration of Armenian interests in the
region. Without publicly alluding to the Karabakh issue in this
context, Sarkisian has hinted that he expects Washington to lean on
Turkey to open the border with Armenia, as one of the possible
quid-pro-quos for the deployment to Iraq (Armenian Public Television,
December 25; Noian Tapan, December 27).

Somewhat more defensively, Prime Minister Andranik Margarian argues,
“Armenia’s presence [in Iraq] is primarily symbolic and for political
purposes” (Haiastani Hanrapetutiun, December 25). The government in
Yerevan rejects any characterization of the mission as a “military
presence,” terming it instead a “humanitarian presence.” This line
reflects concern for the group’s safety in the dangerous environment
of Iraq, as well as seeking to mitigate the domestic political fallout
from the deployment decision. Armenian public opinion surveys are
showing less than 10% approval of the mission and more than 50%
disapproval. Cutting across the political spectrum is the view that
Armenia’s presence alongside the United States would expose Iraq’s
Armenian diaspora community to reprisals from insurgents. That
community, currently estimated at nearly 30,000, is concentrated
almost entirely in the insurgency-plagued Sunni area.

(Mediamax, Armenpress, Noian Tapan, PanArmenian News, December 23-30).

–Vladimir Socor

TAJIKISTAN OFFICIALS FAIL TO APPREHEND KEY MEMBER OF BAYAT

On the night of December 25-26, 2004, law-enforcement officials in
Tajikistan attempted to apprehend a member of the Islamic terrorist
organization Bayat, Ali Aminov, in the village of Chorku, Isfara
district, Sogdy oblast (northern Tajikistan). Law-enforcement agents
had received a tip that Aminov was hiding in his sister’s house. At
approximately 1 am a police task force surrounded the house and
attempted to storm the compound to apprehend the terrorist. However,
the occupants responded with armed resistance and the standoff soon
deteriorated into full-blown armed confrontation. The police task
force retreated under heavy fire and called for backup. A special
forces regiment arrived by 4 am. Upon entering the house, the members
of the special forces team encountered resistance from Aminov’s
relatives. Aminov himself managed to escape through a secret passage
(Vecherny Bishkek, December 29).

The first indications of Bayat’s existence (“bayat” means “a vow” in
Arabic) appeared in the press in April 2004, when Tajikistan’s special
services apprehended 20 members of this organization in the Isfara
oblast of northern Tajikistan. The suspects were accused of carrying
out several aggravated criminal acts that were motivated by racial and
religious hatred. The group was charged with the January 2004
assassination of the head of the Baptist community in Isfara, Sergei
Bessarab, as well as torching several mosques that were headed by
imams, whom the terrorists believed had exhibited excessive loyalty to
the ruling regime. According to the Office of the Prosecutor-General
of Tajikistan, the suspects resisted arrest and searches of their
houses, carried out by law-enforcement officials, turned up hidden
arms caches.

Bayat is not affiliated with such outlawed organizations as
Hizb-ut-Tahrir (HUT) or the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU),
which are better known in the region. Nor does Bayat maintain any
links with the only legally functioning Islamic organization: the
Party of Islamic Revival of Tajikistan. According to some sources, the
Bayat activists are Tajik citizens who previously had fought on the
side of the Taliban movement in Afghanistan, and some of them are now
imprisoned at the American military base in Guantanamo, Cuba. A
connection between Bayat and the IMU should not be ruled out, however,
because IMU militants have been known to operate in the Fergana
Valley, and they also fought along side the Afghan Taliban members
(see EDM, May 3, 2004). Currently Bayat is trying to spread its
influence to neighboring countries. Thus, a branch of the Bayat
movement was recently opened in Osh, Kyrgyzstan (Vecherny Bishkek,
December 29).

Isfara is a very special region in Tajikistan. The population there is
more religious than in other regions of the country. In July 2002 the
President of Tajikistan, Imomali Rakhmonov, visited the city of Isfara
and stated that three citizens, who were originally from the Isfara
region and who had fought on the side of Taliban, were being held at
Guantanamo. Furthermore, the Party of Islamic Revival of Tajikistan is
particularly strong in the Isfara region. In the 2000 parliamentary
elections, the majority of this region’s population voted for the
Party of Islamic Revival. Moreover, in the main Islamist enclave —
the village of Chorku — 93% of the votes cast were for the Party of
Islamic Revival (Forum18.org, May 27, 2004). In a sense, Chorku,
albeit to a lesser degree, resembles the Islamist enclave in the
village of Karamakhi in Dagestan, which was destroyed by Russian
troops in 1999. For example, both villages strictly prohibited alcohol
consumption and required women to wear veils while in public. The
centers of public life are mosques, and the imams adjudicate and
resolve all disputes in accordance with the Sharia law.

The Islamist enclave in Isfara region is dangerous also because of its
geographic location. Isfara is located in the Fergana Valley section
of Tajikistan, only a few kilometers from the Uzbek and Kyrgyz parts
of the Fergana Valley. The Valley is widely considered to be one of
the most potentially volatile areas in Central Asia. In 1989
anti-Jewish pogroms took place in Andizhan (Uzbekistan), which led to
the exodus of the Jewish population from that city. That same year,
inter-ethnic clashes between Uzbeks and Meskhetian Turks broke out in
the Uzbek city of Fergana, which resulted in 150 casualties and the
mass exodus of Meskhetian Turks from Uzbekistan. In 1990 inter-ethnic
clashes between local Uzbeks and Kyrgyz claimed 320 lives in Osh
oblast (Kyrgyzstan). Furthermore, all the leaders and the majority of
the militants of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan are originally
from the Fergana Valley. The addition of another militant group will
hardly calm the region.

–Igor Rotar

RUSSIA AND CHINA: DO OIL AND WEAPONS MAKE A MARRIAGE?

Russo-Chinese relations in 2004 were not all sweetness and light.
Moscow’s destruction of Yukos and preference for a Japanese rather
than a Chinese pipeline in Siberia put severe pressure on Chinese oil
supplies, because Yukos was China’s main Russian oil supplier and
Chinese demand for energy is exploding. Thus shortages or supply
failures seriously injured China’s economy and led to public muttering
about Russia’s unreliability. However, as Russia’s ties to the West
worsened in late 2004, it had no choice but to turn back to China and
find a solution that entailed guaranteeing Beijing more access to
Russian energy supplies.

To overcome their bilateral tensions in energy, the two governments
have arrived at a four-part solution.

First, Russian firms will participate in joint construction of nuclear
power plants with China, and they will build a thermal power plant at
Yimin and Weijiamao (RIA-Novosti December 21).

Second, efforts are underway, apparently with Kazakhstan’s support, to
involve Russian companies in the current project of laying a pipeline
from Kazakhstan to China. There are also discussions about sharing
energy from the Kurmangazy oil field (RIA-Novosti, December 22). This
would create another avenue by which Russian energy supplies could go
to China.

Third, because no pipeline is currently available, Russian railroads
will transport up to 30 million tons of energy to China by 2007,
beginning with 10 million tons in 2005. While the railroads could
handle freight up to 50 million tons, that is their maximum, and a
pipeline would have to be built to carry annual amounts of 50 million
tons or more. This railway shipment program thus represents a
tripling of current oil shipments to China by 2007, from the existing
level of 10 million tons annually (Itar-Tass, December 24).

Finally, Russian President Vladimir Putin has indicated that the China
National Petroleum Company (CNPC) might be invited to take part in the
production of Yuganskneftgaz, which was the main production unit of
Yukos. Deputy Prime Minister Viktor Khristenko has indicated that
CNPC might gain as much as a 20% ownership of the new company that is
to be owned and managed by Gazprom. Beijing would thus be able to
recoup the energy that was going to China before Yukos was destroyed
(Kremlin.ru, December 21; Reuters, December 30).

While the Yukos affair has incurred much criticism abroad and will
reduce the efficiency of Russia’s energy companies, soliciting Chinese
participation represents an effort to mollify Beijing and give the
deal a patina of legitimacy. Ironically, it represents a major policy
reversal from 2002, when xenophobic protests derailed earlier Chinese
efforts to buy into Slavneft. Thus, this deal also signifies Russian
efforts to come to terms with the rise in Chinese economic power that
clearly fueled huge anxieties in the Kremlin.

But the rapprochement with Beijing goes beyond energy supplies to
encompass defense issues as well. Russia and China will hold
bilateral army exercises in China during 2005 that will apparently
test the new Russian weapons that are also going to China
(Nezavisimoye voyennoye obozreniye, December 17). These exercises
will be “quite large” and involve not only large numbers of ground
forces but also state-of-the-art weapons, navy, air, long-range
aviation, and submarine forces to provide interaction with Chinese
forces (Itar-Tass, December 27). These exercises, particularly on the
planned scale, are unprecedented and mark an expansion of both Russian
and Chinese military diplomacy to encompass greater interaction among
their militaries.

Russian arms sales to China faltered in 2004 because China demanded
only the most advanced weapons while Russia insisted on the extension
of existing contracts for the supply of weapons (RIA-Novosti, December
20). This dispute prompted China to press harder for the termination
of the EU embargo , but with only limited success. While the
possibility of renewed EU arms sales to China must alarm Russian arms
dealers who cannot survive without selling China weapons systems,
China still must rely on the Russian market for now because of the
strong American opposition and threats to the EU if it lifted
sanctions (Russian Business Monitor, December 22; Vedomosti, December
20; RIA-Novosti, December 20; NTV, November 8, 2004). Thus during
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov’s visit to China in December,
agreements were hammered out upgrading the scope of Russian arms sales
to China. These agreements include delivery of Su-30MK2 fighters and
licensing the assembly in China of Sukhoi-27SK aircraft for the
Chinese Navy (Itar-Tass, December 13). Thus in 2005 Russia will sell
24 more Su-30 planes to China (Itar-Tass, December 13; Russian
Business Monitor, December 22). Other big deals involving Ilyushin-76
Candid transport planes, Ilyushin-78 Midas aerial tankers, and engines
for China’s Super 7 and Super 8 planes are also being discussed
(Interfax-AVN Military News Agency, December 24).

Paradoxically, these deals reveal the existing tensions in
Sino-Russian relations as well as the efforts to overcome them. China
wants state-of-the-art weapons that Russia, for obvious reasons, is
not prepared to sell, but Beijing still cannot generate sufficient
leverage to push Moscow to sell those weapons. However, in the energy
sector Beijing can induce Russia to live up to existing contracts,
sell energy to China, and even invite it into some form of equity
ownership in Russian energy firms. This may not be the ideal solution
for China, but it shows that while Chinese economic power is clearly
growing, it still cannot compel Russia to comply with Chinese demands
in defense economics. Nor is it entirely clear that this energy deal
will eventually work out to China’s benefit, given the atavistic fears
of Chinese economic power in Moscow. While Russo-Chinese relations
may have reached “unprecedented heights,” according to Presidents
Putin and Hu Jintao, closer examination suggests that the mountain
that both sides are still climbing remains a rocky one.

–Lionel Martin

DETAILS EMERGE OF SECOND RUSSIAN PLOT TO ASSASSINATE YUSHCHENKO

As Viktor Yushchenko prepares for his inauguration as Ukraine’s third
president, he knows that Ukraine-Russia relations will be one of the
most difficult issues he faces. The Economist (December 29) advised
Yushchenko, “to kiss and make up with Russia and Vladimir Putin, who
backed Mr. Yanukovych and has thus been humiliated by his defeat.”
Such reconciliation will be far easier said than done. Russia is
reportedly behind two attempts on Yushchenko’s life, one through
poisoning and a second with a bomb. Yushchenko alluded to the latter
plot when he said, “Those who wanted to blow myself up did not
undertake it, because they came too close and could have blown
themselves up” (Ukrayinska pravda, December 16).

While details of the poisoning are better known, evidence of the bomb
threat has only just come to light in a documentary on Channel Five, a
Ukrainian television station sympathetic to Yushchenko. Details aired
in the weekly “Zakryta Zona” (Closed Zone) documentary, under the
suitable title “Terrorists” (5tv.com.ua/pr_archiv/136/0/265/).

During last year’s election campaign a still-unexplained bomb
detonated in Kyiv, killing one person and injuring dozens more. The
Kuchma government blamed the Ukrainian People’s Party (UNP), a member
of Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine bloc, for the attack. Explosives were also
planted during searches of the offices of opposition youth groups. The
Security Service (SBU) and Interior Ministry (MVS) have now admitted
that charges of “terrorism” against the UNP and youth groups were
false (Ukrayinska pravda, December 16; razom.org.ua, December 23).

According to Channel Five, the real terrorists were the authorities,
conspiring with the Russian security services (FSB). It would be naive
to believe that Russian President Vladimir Putin was unaware of the
plot. An illicitly transcribed telephone conversation, cited at length
in the “Zakryta Zona” documentary, between a Ukrainian informant and
an FSB officer showed how the Russian authorities were fully aware of
the dirty tricks being used by Russian political advisors working for
Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych. The “advisors,” such as
Gleb Pavlovsky and Marat Gelman, worked with Yanukovych’s shadow
campaign headquarters, headed by Deputy Prime Minister Andriy
Kluyev. Presidential administration head and Social Democratic United
Party (SDPUo) leader Viktor Medvedchuk served as Gelman and
Pavlovsky’s principal contact. The taped conversation reveals that
Gelman and Pavlovsky considered assassination to be a legitimate
campaign strategy. The FSB officer on the tape specifically discusses
the poisoning of Yushchenko.

The bomb attempt may have been conceived after the poison failed to
kill Yushchenko before election day. Plans for the bomb attack were
discovered when a spetsnaz unit of the State Defense Service (DSO) was
sent to investigate a burglar alarm. The alarm went off near one of
the three offices used by the Yushchenko campaign. The DSO noticed a
car with Russian license plates and asked the two occupants for their
documents. After a check of their Russian and Ukrainian passports
revealed them to be false, a search of the car’s trunk found three
kilos of plastic explosives, enough to destroy everything within a
500-meter radius.

Both passengers were arrested and a subsequent investigation unmasked
them as Mikhail M. Shugay and Marat B. Moskvitin, Russian citizens
from the Moscow region. Their only contact in Moscow had been a
certain “Surguchov” who had hired them in September for the bombing
operation against Yushchenko and his ally, Yulia Tymoshenko. The
terrorists were to receive $50,000 after the bomb plot was
completed. After smuggling the explosives through the
Russian-Ukrainian border, both FSB operatives set up a safe house in
the village of Dudarkiv, 15 kilometers from Kyiv. A search of these
premises found pistols, radio equipment, and bomb-making instructions.

The plot thickens with additional taped telephone conversations played
in the “Zakryta Zona” documentary. These conversations were made by
the SBU during the elections and handed over to Yushchenko after round
two. Kluyev is heard discussing with unknown individuals the
whereabouts of Yushchenko’s office and where the leadership of the
Yushchenko camp meets. The documentary’s producers believe that
Kluyev sought this intelligence to pass on to the Russian
assassination team, so that bombs could be placed to murder not only
Yushchenko, but also other members of his team, such as Tymoshenko.

Increasing evidence points to Russian involvement in Yushchenko’s
poisoning. In December Yushchenko’s doctors in Vienna concluded that
he had, in fact, been poisoned by TCDD, the most toxic form of
dioxin. His dioxin level was 6,000 times higher than normal and the
second highest recorded in history. Alexander V. Litvinenko, who
served in the KGB and the FSB before defecting to the United Kingdom,
has revealed that the FSB has a secret laboratory in Moscow that
specializes in poisons. A former dissident scientist now living in the
United States, Vil S. Mirzayanov, reported that this institute studied
dioxins while developing defoliants for the military. (TCDD was a
component of Agent Orange.) SBU defector Valeriy Krawchenko also
pointed to this FSB laboratory as the likely source of the dioxin that
poisoned Yushchenko (New York Times, December 15).

Yushchenko has alleged that the poisoning took place during a
September 5, 2004, dinner at the home of then-deputy SBU chairman
Volodymyr Satsyuk, a member of the SDPUo. This again reveals the
involvement of Medvedchuk and Russian political advisors working for
Yanukovych. Not surprisingly, Satsyuk and Kluyev have hurriedly
abandoned their government positions to return to parliament, where
they enjoy immunity.

Russia’s involvement in two terrorist attacks in Ukraine, a poisoning
and bombing, make a mockery of Putin’s alleged commitment to work
alongside the United States in the international war on terrorism.

–Taras Kuzio

————————————————————————

The Eurasia Daily Monitor is a publication of the Jamestown
Foundation. The opinions expressed in it are those of the individual
authors and do not necessarily represent those of the Jamestown
Foundation. If you have any questions regarding the content of EDM, or
if you think that you have received this email in error, please
respond to [email protected].

Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution of EDM is strictly
prohibited by law.

The Jamestown Foundation
4516 43rd Street, NW
Washington, DC 20016
202-483-8888 (phone)
202-483-8337 (fax)

Copyright (c) 1983-2004 The Jamestown Foundation.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Glendale News Press
LATimes.com
Jan 7 2005

Candidates take their first steps

On the first day of filing for school and college boards, five pull
papers, with many more expected to follow suit.

By Darleene Barrientos, News-Press and Leader

GLENDALE – Five candidates drew papers for the Glendale Unified
School District board and Glendale Community College trustee board
elections, including one candidate who home schooled her four
children.

Linda Sheffield, 52, the home school parent, said she decided to run
because she wanted to get involved with the college. Sheffield’s four
children all attended Glendale Community College before they were 18.

“There are some things I really like about the school and some things
I don’t like,” Sheffield said.

Candidates were able to take out their election petition forms with
the City Clerk’s office Thursday. The filing period is open until
Jan. 27, and the election is April 5.

College board president Victor King, and board member Armine Hacopian
also pulled papers for their election runs. Board Vice President
Anita Quinonez Gabrielian said she dropped off her candidate
declaration statement on Wednesday and would pick up her petition
sheets today.

“I’m absolutely very interested and looking forward to being
reelected to the board of trustees for the college,” Gabrielian said.

Only two candidates for the Glendale Unified School District board
retrieved their candidate petition forms Thursday. Board member Chuck
Sambar was told he was one of the first to show up, even though he
said he was “expecting a mob.” Sambar said he had no plans yet for
fundraising.

Nyiri Nahabedian, a Cal State L.A. and UCLA professor, also filed her
paperwork Thursday.

Lina Harper, who serves as the school board’s clerk, decided against
a reelection bid.

“I’m very excited,” Nahabedian said. “I’m looking forward to the
campaign and I’m looking forward to bringing in my contribution to
[the district].”

Two candidates who announced their candidacy for the school board –
board President Greg Krikorian and former board member Louise Foote –
were unable to request paperwork Thursday. Both said they would do it
today.

“It’s Christmas,” Krikorian said, referring to the observance of
Armenian Christmas, or the Day of Epiphany. “I am going to church and
having a big family dinner. It’s hard for me today.”

Foote was elected to the board in 1997, but lost a reelection bid in
2001.

“I’m planning to run for the board because I have extensive
experience, which can be used to improve student achievement in a
safe, secure learning environment,” she said.

Prospective candidate Naira Khachatrian said Wednesday she had not
decided whether she would run. Other potential candidates, including
Armond Agakhani, former field representative for Assemblyman Dario
Frommer and chairman of the city’s parks, recreation and community
services commission, and Hoover alumnus Larry Miller did not return
calls for comment.

Los Angeles Daily News
Jan 7 2005

13 take out papers for council race

At least four others intend to run as field gets crowded

By Naush Boghossian, Staff Writer

GLENDALE — Thirteen people took out papers Thursday to run for City
Council, in what is gearing up to be one of the most crowded fields
of candidates in city history.
The list of names does not yet include four people who have already
declared their intent to run in the April 5 election, including
incumbents Bob Yousefian and Frank Quintero — both of whom chose to
avoid the first-day crowds.

Interested candidates still have three weeks to pick up and return
the nomination papers for the City Council, City Clerk, Glendale
Community College board and the Glendale Unified School District
board posts.

The deadline to return the forms with the required number of
signatures — 100 for all positions except the school board, which
requires 20 — is Jan. 27.

Glynda Gomez, wife of former City Councilman Gus Gomez, picked up her
forms after work Thursday, saying that she was looking forward to
campaigning. The councilman left his seat before the end of his term
when he was elected Superior Court judge. He was sworn in Monday.

“I think it’s going to be a lot of fun and a lot of hard work,” said
Gomez, 40, a prosecutor with the California Department of Justice.
“I’m actually one of the few people who think campaigning is fun.
I’ve run four for my husband.

“I have a history in the community. I know the issues and how the
City Council works, so I’m going in with my eyes open.”

Others who picked up papers Thursday for City Council were Aram
Barsoumian; eligibility worker Hovik Gabikian, 35; Vro George; former
Disney executive Steve Hedrick, 52; former Glendale police spokesman
Chahe Keuroghelian; Joe Mandoky; college board member Ara Najarian,
44; Richard Seeley; Pauline Field, 56, a member of the Commission on
the Status of Women; businessman Garry Sinanian; attorney Anahid
Oshagan; and Councilman Dave Weaver.

Other than city council incumbents Weaver, Quintero and Yousefian,
the only other active Glendale elected official is Najarian.

The Glendale Community College board member said the campaigns would
be similar in that he’ll be reaching out to the same Glendale
residents he did as when he ran for the board, but he’ll be
addressing different issues.

“But the part of getting elected is going to be a little more
trickier because there’s such a vast number of candidates, and if
every candidate has a particular core group behind them, it’s going
to be interesting how it turns out,” he said. “I think successful
candidates are those who reach out and gain wide support from the
community, and that’s the way I think it should be.”

Yousefian said the election reminds him of when he ran — and lost —
in the 1993 elections, which had 17 candidates and three open seats.

The biggest difference this time is the large number of Armenian
candidates.

Six of the 13 who picked up papers are of Armenian descent.

“So far, from what we’ve heard, the number of candidates are not as
large as when I ran in 1992, but the only difference is there’s a
much larger contingency of Armenians,” said Yousefian, who was one of
two Armenian candidates in 1992.

Five people picked up papers for the City Clerk race: Stephanie
Landregan, Paulette Mardikian, Stephen Ropfogel, Kathryn Van Houten
and Lorna Vartanian.

Armine Hacopian, Victor King and Linda Sheffield pulled papers for
the college board race.

EurasiaNet Organization
Jan 7 2005

TURKISH DRIVE TOWARDS EU INCREASES POSSIBILITIES FOR CHANGE IN THE
CAUCASUS
Jon Gorvett 1/06/05

The European Union’s decision to pursue membership talks with Turkey
could have far-reaching political and economic ramifications for the
Caucasus. The accession process can stimulate democratization in the
region, experts say.

The EU decided December 17 to open what promises to be a lengthy
accession process with Turkey. Some political observers in Turkey say
the decision immediately increased pressure on Ankara to normalize
relations with neighboring Armenia. In recent months, Ankara and
Yerevan have probed a rapprochement, but they have yet to make
substantive progress in overcoming long-standing mutual hostility.
[For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

“If Turkey starts accession talks,” adds Professor Gareth Winrow of
Istanbul’s Bilgi University, “it will have to normalize relations
with all its neighbors as a condition of future EU membership. Number
one, this means opening all its borders.”

Turkey’s has kept its frontier with Armenia closed since 1993. The
closure is connected with a Turkish embargo designed to encourage
Armenia’s withdrawal from Azerbaijani territory captured during the
Nagorno-Karabkah conflict. [For additional information see the
Eurasia Insight archive]. Turkish political leaders in mid-2004
mulled re-opening the border, but the idea met fierce resistance,
both in Turkey and in Azerbaijan, and officials backed off the idea.
[For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Turkish observers say the government will have a difficult time
finessing the border issue, adding that despite the EU pressure, the
status quo may not change in the near future. “If Turkey just opened
the border because of EU pressure, there might easily be a backlash,”
warned Mustafa Sahin of the Ankara-based Eurasian think tank, AVSAM.
“Azerbaijan is a very popular cause in Turkey. Also, Armenia still
has territorial claims on Turkey that would have to be solved.”

Turkish territorial concerns stem from Armenia’s refusal to recognize
the Kars Treaty of 1921, which set the frontiers between the two
states. Armenia claims there is no need for such recognition, as
acceptance of the existing borders was implicit when both countries
joined the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
Turkey, however, continues to seek a specific guarantee of Armenian
recognition for the existing border.

Armenian President Robert Kocharian in late 2004 appealed to the EU
to place the opening of the frontier among the pre-conditions for
Turkey’s EU membership. “It is unacceptable for a country that is to
have membership talks with the EU to keep its border closed with
another country that is already in the neighborhood policy of
Europe,” Kocharian said.

The Armenian leader was referring to the EU Neighborhood Policy
(EUNP), which was formulated to provide a framework for states
bordering on the EU, such as Moldova and Ukraine. “The EUNP is
designed to give support and dialogue to those countries that have no
prospect of joining for now,” adds Winrow. “At first, Georgia,
Armenia and Azerbaijan were excluded from the EUNP, but after the
Rose Revolution in Georgia, the EU changed its mind and allowed them
in.” [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive].

If Turkey and Armenia can eventually settle their differences, some
observers believe pressure could increase on the Baku and Yerevan to
reach a Karabakh settlement. Others, however, are guarded about the
possibilities. “Accession talks won’t have any direct effect on the
Armenian issue,” suggested Ferai Tinc, a political analyst for the
Hurriyet daily. “We’ve seen many times before these moves to sort out
the border.”

Nevertheless, Tinc and others say Turkey’s move towards EU membership
cannot but have a positive impact on the Caucasus. “It will send a
message to the region that will be good for the democratization
process,” says Tinc. “Turkey’s relations with the Caucasian states
will be within a different framework – not as a big brother, but as a
member of a community.”

Sahin, the AVSAM think-tank expert, said that even though Armenia
views Turkey with suspicion, a significant number of Armenians want
to see Ankara’s accession effort succeed. “Armenia is a little split
on the issue,” Sahin said. “But even there, many argue that Turkey’s
accession process will give Armenia greater leverage for change.”

Meanwhile, others see Turkey’s European path as helping to widen EU
influence with another regional big power, Russia. “Turkey can play a
very important role here,” says Winrow. “As can an organization such
as the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC). Turkey can show its
strategic importance to Europe and get better and closer regional
relations through this.”

Editor’s Note: Jon Gorvett is a freelance journalist based in
Istanbul.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Kommersant, Russia
Jan 7 2005

Reporters Without Borders are Dissatisfied with Freedom of Speech in
Russia

January 7, Reporters Without Borders have issued a worldwide press
freedom index, in which they express concerns about the situation in
Russia and the entire world, BBC reports.

Reporters Without Borders rank Russia among the worst countries
(121st out of 139), where `press freedom is a dead letter and
independent newspapers do not exist.’ The organization notes that in
Russia `the only voice heard is of media tightly controlled or
monitored by the government. The very few independent journalists are
constantly harassed, imprisoned or forced into exile by the
authorities. The foreign media is banned or allowed in very small
doses, always closely monitored.’

The independent organization believes it is still difficult to work
as a journalist in Russia and several have been murdered or
imprisoned. It gives the example of Grigory Pasko, `jailed since
December 2001 in the Vladivostok region of Russia, was given a
four-year sentence for publishing pictures of the Russian Navy
pouring liquid radioactive waste into the Sea of Japan.’

However, Russia is not the worst among other CIS members. In Belarus
(124th), the referendum on President Lukashenko’s third term was
preceded by closing a number of independent editions. Moreover, the
investigation of murdered journalist Dmitry Zavadsky’s case was
stopped despite or due to the signs of high-ranking officials being
involved in it.

Uzbekistan (120th) is also conducting a purposive policy to suppress
independent press. A journalist was imprisoned for a far-fetched
accusation of homosexuality.

An attack on freedom of press is taking place in Azerbaijan (101st),
especially after October 2003 presidential election. Journalists have
no adequate working conditions in the country, an opposition
journalist was imprisoned for five years. No freedom of the press can
be observed in Turkmenistan (136th).

Despite the violations during the presidential election, the
situation in Ukraine (112th) is considered better than in Russia.

According to the report, the worst situation has developed in eastern
Asia, North Korea, Burma, China, Vietnam, Nepal, Bangladesh and Laos
– these countries suffer the most from censorship and pressure of
authorities. A little better is the situation in the Middle East,
however, Syria and Saudi Arabia simply do not presuppose the
existence of independent mass-media. Self-censorship is widely-spread
in the region.

On the whole, as many as 53 journalists were killed in 2004, which is
highest since 1995. At least 907 journalists were arrested, over
1,000 were threatened or assaulted. In 2004, the organization
registered 622 cases of censorship. As of January 1, 2005, 107
journalists and 70 authors of nonconformist materials were in jail.

The most dangerous country, as last year, was Iraq. Over the past 12
months, 31 mass media workers were killed in the country. Most
frequently, journalists fell victims of terror attacks or guerrilla’s
military activities, but the death of four journalists is the
responsibility of the Command of U.S. Armed Forces: On March 18 in
Baghdad, U.S. soldiers shot mistakenly a camera team of Al-Arabiya
TV-channel. A month later, the same lot fell upon journalists of
Al-Iraqiya TV channel.

In October last year, the organization published a similar rating.
Russia was 140th out of 167 countries on the list. Worst-ranked CIS
countries were Turkmenia (164th), Belarus (144th), Uzbekistan
(142nd), Ukraine (139th), Azerbaijan (136th), Kazakhstan (131st),
Kyrghizia (107th), Tajikistan (95th), Georgia (94th), Armenia (83rd),
Moldova (78th).

Armenian president attends Christmas service

Public Television of Armenia, Yerevan
6 Jan 05

[Presenter] All of the world’s Orthodox churches celebrated
Christmas. The Holy See of Echmiadzin is the centre of the Christmas
celebrations.

Thousands of believers from all over Armenia and other parts of the
world arrived here to take part in the Christmas service at the Holy
See of Echmiadzin led by Catholicos of All Armenians Garegin II.

The president (Robert Kocharyan), top officials and foreign
ambassadors accredited to Armenia also attended the service. The
Christmas service finished with the traditional giving of the Blessed
Water to the believers, which symbolizes the baptism of Jesus Christ
in the river of Jordan.

[Correspondent over video of church service] The Christmas service,
according to the tradition, is gathering many believers at the Holy
See of Echmiadzin. Catholicos of all Armenians Garegin II led the
Christmas service. President Robert Kocharyan with his wife, top
government officials and foreign ambassadors and many Armenian
believers attended the Christmas service.

Unlike the Roman Catholic Church which celebrates Christmas on 25
December, to override a pagan winter solstice festival on the same
day, the Armenian Apostolic Church which is faithful to the Christian
law, left Christmas where it was and celebrates Christmas on 6 January
everlasting.

Garegin II also conducted a rite known as the Blessing of the Water,
after which he gave the Blessed Water to the believers.

Christ is born and risen!

Lusine Lazarian and Akop Sarkisyan, “Aylur”.

Azeri parties ignore pressure group’s war plan – agency

MPA news agency
7 Jan 05

Baku, 7 January: “The political organizations have not responded to
the package of proposals by the Karabakh Liberation Organization (KLO)
to liberate the Azerbaijani territories from the Armenian occupation
militarily,” KLO chairman Akif Nagi has told MPA news agency.

“In most cases the political parties which received the package of
proposals did not pay attention to it. Some expressed their attitude
to the proposals through the media, diplomatically avoiding the main
issue,” Nagi said.

“The reason is that politicians, like the authorities, want the
international organizations to like them, which runs counter to
Azerbaijan’s national interests. Despite everything, the KLO plans to
present the package of proposals to the judgment of the public. Round
tables, conferences and other events have been scheduled,” Nagi said.