Zell’s Zeal and Kerry’s ‘Defenselessness’
By Paul M. Weyrich

CNSNews.com

CNSNews.com Commentary
September 10, 2004

Senator Zell Miller (D-GA), an ex Marine, is angry that the party he
spent a lifetime helping to build has gone so far to the left that it
is barely recognizable. Miller attacked the Democratic nominee, Senator
John Kerry (D-MA), in terms that no Republican would dare to do.

He gave a litany of the weapons systems that Kerry voted against in
his two decades in the United States Senate.

The Kerry apologists, who were all over the media the morning after
the Miller speech, tried to suggest that when a Senator votes against
a bill containing a weapons system it may be because he has some other
problem with the bill that has nothing to do with the weapons system.

Therefore, you see, Senator Kerry really isn’t against all of those
weapons after all. You have to understand these votes in context,
so they told us.

Nice try. However, my Internet angel Alex Mulkern unearthed a campaign
flyer from Lt. Governor John Kerry’s campaign for the United States
Senate in 1984. It is priceless. In this flyer, Kerry says of the
Reagan defense buildup “the biggest defense buildup since World War
II has not given us a better defense. Americans feel threatened by
the prospect of war.”

Kerry goes on to say, ldblquote…our national priorities become more
and more distorted as the share of our country’s resources devoted
to human needs diminishes.”

Then Kerry suggests there is a better alternative. He lists weapons
system after weapons system that he would cancel and the amount of
money that would be “saved” by canceling them. Among those which
would have been put on the chopping block back in 1984 are as follows:

The MX Missile. Cancel. Savings: $5 Billion. The
B-1 Bomber. Cancel. Savings: $8 Billion Anti-satellite
system. Cancel. Savings: $99 Million Star Wars. Cancel. Savings:
$1.3 Billion Tomahawk Missile. Reduce by 50%. Savings: $294
Million AH-64 Helicopter. Cancel. Savings: $1.4 Billion
Division Air Defense. Cancel. Savings: $638 Million The
Patriot Air Defense Missile. Cancel. Savings: $1.1 Billion
Aegis Air Defense. Cancel. Savings: $400 Million Battleship
reactivation. Cancel. Savings: $453 Million AV 88 vertical
take off and landing plane. Cancel. Savings: $1.0 Billion
F-15 fighter aircraft. Cancel. Savings: $2.3 Billion F-14A
fighter aircraft. Cancel. Savings: $1.0 Billion F-14B fighter
aircraft. Cancel. Savings: $286 Million Phoenix air-to-air
missile. Cancel: Savings: $431 Million Sparrow air-to-air
missile. Cancel. Savings: $264 Million

So there you have it. Did Zell Miller exaggerate? Before John Kerry
was even elected Senator he was calling for the elimination of some
of the most effective weapons systems we have.

Kerry said in this flyer: “If we don’t need the MX and the B-1 or these
other weapons systems, there is no excuse for casting even one vote for
unnecessary weapons of destruction and as your Senator I never will”

He got that right. This was back in 1984. Mikhail Gorbachev had just
come to power. It was Gorbachev and his generals who concluded that
they could not keep up with weapons development in the USA, especially
the Strategic Defense Initiative (Star Wars), and that is one of the
reasons that the Soviets threw in the towel.

Imagine, 20 years later, if the Kerry view had prevailed, we would
still be facing a menacing super power known as the Soviet Union. If
the Soviets didn’t have to compete with all of those sophisticated
weapons systems, they would be fighting on to this day. The Baltics
would still be Soviet Republics, as would Ukraine, Armenia and
Georgia. The Berlin Wall would likely still be up. Poland and the
satellite nations would not be free. Get the picture?

Zell Miller, in his litany of weapons systems which Senator Kerry
voted against, said he did by no means exhaust the list. He said
the list went on and on. True enough because in the past couple of
decades we have developed many more systems which Senator Kerry could
be against — weapons systems which have made this nation the only
remaining super power.

I am not one who believes in giving the Pentagon everything it
wishes. The Pentagon is a bureaucratic structure just as much as
Health and Human Services is. There is as much waste and abuse in
the Pentagon as there is in other areas of government.

Had Senator Kerry gone after waste and duplication and other areas
of misfeasance in the Pentagon he might well have served his nation
well. But in opposing every weapons system we have produced since
the middle 1980s, Senator Kerry displays a glaring weakness — one
which is fair game as we get into the serious part of the campaign.

No wonder the Democrats are now trying to say that Senator Miller
is mentally unbalanced. They can’t have voters examine what Kerry
said. If they do they will find the weakness Zell Miller spoke about
and they may well come to the same conclusion the Senator has come to,
namely the protection of his family comes before his political party.

(Paul M. Weyrich is chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.)

Copyright 2004, Free Congress Foundation

Population Explosion!
By ClickZ Stats staff

internetnews.com
September 10, 2004

There are countless sources for the number of Internet users in any
given country. ClickZ Stats tries to maintain an updated list of the
latest statistics on Internet users we’ve seen for countries around
the world. Often, there are widely differing counts. We do our best
to check on the accuracy of counts by comparing them to regional
growth patterns and other projections.

Many of the population statistics, number of Internet users, and
the number of ISPs come from the CIA’s World Factbook, but we’ve
included data from other sources where specified. Computer Industry
Almanac Inc. has also contributed Internet user data for more than
50 countries, and their detailed methodology can be found here.

Nielsen//NetRatings tracks the number of active users for approximately
20 nations, which account for more than 90 percent of the world’s
Internet users. The number of active users is an estimate of the
number of people that actually go online in a given month, rather
than the number of people with access.

If you know of a study that tracks the number of Internet users for
a country that is not on this list, send it to the ClickZ Stats Staff
so we can examine the study and possibly add it to this chart.

Global Online Populations
Worldwide Internet Population 2004: 934 million (Computer Industry Almanac)
Projection for 2005: 1.07 billion
(Computer Industry Almanac) Projection for 2006: 1.21 billion
(Computer Industry Almanac) Projection for 2007: 1.35 billion
(Computer Industry Almanac)
Nation Population
(CIA’s World
Factbook) Internet Users
(CIA’s World
Factbook) Active Users
(Nielsen//NetRatings) ISPs
(CIA’s World
Factbook) More Info.
Afghanistan 28.71 million NA NA 1 Read more
Albania 3.58 million 12,000 NA 10
Algeria 32.81 million 180,000 NA 2
Andorra 69,150 24,500 NA 1
Angola 10.76 million 60,000 NA 1
Anguilla 12,738 919 NA 16
Antigua and Barbuda 67,897 5,000 NA 16
Argentina 38.74 million 4.65 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 33 Read more
Armenia 3.32 million 30,000 NA 9
Aruba 70,844 24,000 NA NA Read more
Australia 19.73 million 13.01 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 8.79 million
(July 2004, at home) 571 Read more
Austria 8.18 million 4.65 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 1.3 million 37 Read more
Azerbaijan 7.83 million 25,000 NA 2 Read more
The Bahamas 297,477 16,900 NA 19 Read more
Bahrain 667,238 140,200 NA 1 Read more
Bangladesh 138.44 million 150,000 NA 10

Barbados 277,264 6,000 NA 19

Belarus 10.33 million 422,000 NA 23 Read more
Belgium 10.28 million 4.87 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 1.6 million 61 Read more
Belize 266,440 18,000 NA 2 Read more
Benin 7.04 million 25,000 NA 4

Bhutan 2.13 million 2,500 NA NA

Bolivia 8.58 million 78,000 NA 9 Read more
Bosnia and Herzegovian 3.98 million 45,000 NA 3

Botswana 1.57 million 33,000 NA 11

Brazil 182.03 million 22.32 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 11.61 million
(July 2004, at home) 50 Read more
Brunei 358,098 35,000 NA 2

Bulgaria 7.53 million 1.61 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 200 Read more
Burkina Faso 13.22 million 25,000 NA 1

Burma 42.51 million 10,000 NA 1

Burundi 6.09 million 6,000 NA 1

Cambodia 13.12 million 10,000 NA 2

Cameroon 15.74 million 45,000 NA 1

Canada 32.20 million 20.45 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 8.8 million 760 Read more
Cape Verde 412,137 12,000 NA 1

Cayman Islands 41,934 NA NA 16

Central African Republic 3.68 million 2,000 NA 1

Chad 9.25 million 4,000 NA 1

Chile 15.66 million 5.04 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 7 Read more
China 1.28 billion 99.80 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 3 Read more
Colombia 41.66 million 1.87 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 18 Read more
Comoros 632,948 2,500 NA 1

Congo, Democratic
Republic of the 56.62 million 6,000 NA 1

Congo, Republic 2.95 million 500 NA 1

Cook Islands 21,008 NA NA 3

Costa Rica 3.89 million 384,000 NA 3 Read more
Cote d’Ivoire 16.96 million 70,000 NA 5

Croatia 4.42 million 480,000 NA 9 Read more
Cuba 11.26 million 120,000 NA 5 Read more
Cyprus 771,657 150,000 NA 6

Czech Republic 10.24 million 3.53 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 300 Read more
Denmark 5.38 million 3.72 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 13 Read more
Djibouti 457,130 3,300 NA 1

Dominica 69,655 2,000 NA 16

Dominican Republic 8.71 million 186,000 NA 24

East Timor 977,853 NA NA NA
Ecuador 13.71 million 328,000 NA 31 Read more
Egypt 74.71 million 2.42 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 50 Read more
El Salvador 6.47 million 40,000 NA 4 Read more
Equatorial Guinea 510,473 900 NA 1

Eritrea 4.36 million 10,000 NA 5

Estonia 1.40 million 620,000 NA 38 Read more
Ethiopia 66.55 million 20,000 NA 1

Faroe Islands 46,345 3,000 NA 2

Fiji 856,300 15,000 NA 2

Finland 5.19 million 3.27 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 3 Read more
France 60.18 million 25.47 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 14.29 million
(July 2004, at home) 62 Read more
French Guiana 182,917 2,000 NA 2

French Polynesia 262,125 16,000 NA 2

Gabon 1.32 million 18,000 NA 1

Gambia 1.5 million 5,000 NA 2

Georgia 4.93 million 25,000 NA 6

Germany 82.39 million 41.88 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 29.74 million
(July 2004, at home) 200 Read more
Ghana 20.46 million 200,000 NA 12

Gilbraltar 27,776 NA NA 2

Greece 10.66 million 2.71 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 27

Greenland 56,385 20,000 NA 1

Grenada 89,258 5,200 NA 14

Guadeloupe 440,189 4,000 NA 3

Guam 163,941 5,000 NA 20

Guatemala 13.90 million 200,000 NA 5 Read more
Guernsey 64,818 NA NA NA

Guinea 9.03 million 15,000 NA 4

Guinea-Bissau 1.36 million 4,000 NA 2

Guyana 702,100 95,000 NA 3 Read more
Haiti 7.52 million 30,000 NA 3

Honduras 6.66 million 40,000 NA 8 Read more
Hong Kong 7.39 million 4.58 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 2.73 million
(July 2004, at home) 17 Read more
Hungary 10.04 million 2.94 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 16 Read more
Iceland 200,000 198,000
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 20 Read more
India 1.04 billion 36.97 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 43 Read more
Indonesia 234.89 million 12.86 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 24 Read more
Iran 68.27 million 420,000 NA 8

Iraq 24.68 million 12,500 NA 1

Ireland 3.92 million 1.81 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 22 Read more
Isle of Man 74,261 NA NA NA

Islas Malvinas (Falkland Islands) 2,967 NA NA 2

Israel 6.11 million 3.13 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 976,000 21 Read more
Italy 57.99 million 25.53 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 15.70 million
(July 2004, at home) 93 Read more
Jamaica 2.69 million 100,000 NA 21

Japan 127.21 million 78.05 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 34.71 million
(July 2004, at home) 73 Read more
Jersey 90,156 NA NA NA

Jordan 5.46 million 212,000 NA 5 Read more
Kazakhstan 16.76 million 100,000 NA 10 Read more
Kenya 31.63 million 500,000 NA 65

Kiribati 98,549 1,000 NA 1

Kuwait 2.18 million 200,000 NA 3 Read more
Kyrgyzstan 4.89 million 51,600 NA NA

Laos 5.92 million 10,000 NA 1

Latvia 2.34 million 455,000 NA 41

Lebanon 3.72 million 300,000 NA 22

Lesotho 1.86 million 5,000 NA 1

Liberia 3.31 million 500 NA 2

Libya 5.49 million 20,000 NA 1

Liechtenstein 33,14 NA NA NA

Lithuania 3.59 million 480,000 NA 32

Luxembourg 454,157 100,000 NA 8

Macau 469,903 101,000 NA 1

Macedonia 2.06 million 100,000 NA 6

Madagascar 16.97 million 35,000 NA 2

Malawi 11.65 million 35,000 NA 7

Malaysia 23.09 million 10.04 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 7 Read more
Maldives 329,684 6,000 NA 1

Mali 11.62 million 30,000 NA 13

Malta 400,420 59,000 NA 6

Marshall Islands 56,429 900 NA 1

Martinique 425,966 5,000 NA 2

Mauritania 2.91 million 7,500 NA 5

Mauritius 1.21 million 158,000 NA 2

Mexico 104.90 million 13.88 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 51 Read more
Micronesia 108,143 2,000 NA 1

Moldova 4.43 million 15,000 NA 2

Monaco 32,130 NA NA 2

Mongolia 2.71 million 40,000 NA 5

Montserrat 8,995 NA NA 17

Morocco 31.68 million 400,000 NA 8 Read more
Mozambique 17,47 million 22,500 NA 11

Namibia 1.92 million 45,000 NA 2

Nauru 12,570 NA NA 1

Nepal 26.46 million 60,000 NA 6

The Netherlands 16.15 million 9.79 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 7.78 million
(June 2004, at home) 52 Read more
Netherlands Antilles 216,226 2,000 NA 6
New Caledonia 210,798 24,000 NA 1
New Zealand 3.95 million 2.34 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 36
Nicaragua 5.12 million 20,000 NA 3 Read more
Niger 10.05 million 12,000 NA 1

Nigeria 133.88 million 100,000 NA 11

Niue 2,145 NA NA 1

Norfolk Island 1,853 NA NA 2

North Korea 22.46 million NA NA 1

Northern Mariana Islar 80,006 NA NA 1

Norway 4.54 million 3.03 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 13 Read more
Oman 2.80 million 120,000 NA 1 Read more
Pakistan 150.69 million 1.2 million NA 30

Palau 19,717 NA NA 1

Panama 2.96 million 45,000 NA 6 Read more
Papua New Guinea 5.29 million 135,000 NA 3

Paraguay 6.03 million 20,000 NA 4

Peru 28.40 million 4.57 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 10 Read more
Philippines 84.61 million 5.96 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 33 Read more
Pitcairn Islands 47 NA NA NA

Poland 38.62 million 10.4 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 19

Portugal 10.10 million 6.09 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 16 Read more
Puerto Rico 3.88 million 600,000 NA 76 Read more
Qatar 817,052 75,000 NA 1

Reunion 755,171 10,000 NA 1

Romania 22.27 million 4.94 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 38

Russia 144.52 million 21.23 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 35 Read more
Rwanda 7.81 million 20,000 NA 2

St. Kitts and Nevis 38,763 2,000 NA 16

St. Lucia 162,157 3,000 NA 15

St. Vincent and the Grenadines 116,812 3,500 NA 15

Samoa 178,173 3,000 NA 2

San Marino 28,119 NA NA 2

Sao Tome and Principe 175,883 9,000 NA 2

Saudi Arabia 24.29 million 2.54 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 42

Senegal 10.58 million 100,000 NA 1

Seychelles 80,469 9,000 NA 1

Sierra Leone 5.73 million 20,000 NA 1

Singapore 4.60 million 2.75 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 956,000 9

Slovakia 5.43 million 1.61 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 6

Slovenia 1.93 million 930,000 NA 11

Solomon Islands 509,190 8,400 NA 1

Somalia 8.02 million 200 NA 3

South Africa 43.6 million 4.78 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 150 Read more
South Korea 42.76 million 31.67 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 11 Read more
Spain 40.21 million 13.44 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 7.99 million
(July 2004, at home) 56

Sri Lanka 19.74 million 121,500 NA 5

Sudan 38.11 million 56,000 NA 2

Suriname 435,449 14,500 NA 2

Svalbard 2,811 NA NA NA

Swaziland 1.16 million 14,000 NA 6

Sweden 8.87 million 6.12 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 4.41 million
(July 2004, at home) 29 Read more
Switzerland 7.31 million 4.60 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 3.00 million
(July 2004, at home) 44 Read more
Syria 17.58 million 60,000 NA 1 Read more
Taiwan 22.60 million 9.52 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 5.0 million 8

Tajilistan 6.86 million 5,000 NA 4

Tanzania 35.92 million 300,000 NA 6

Thailand 64.26 million 7.57 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 15

Togo 5.42 million 50,000 NA 3

Tokelau 1,418 NA NA 1

Tonga 108,141 1,000 NA 2

Trinidad and Tobago 1.10 million 120,000 NA 17

Tunisia 9.92 million 400,000 NA 1

Turkey 68.10 million 7.27 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 50 Read more
Turkmenistan 4.77 million 2,000 NA NA
Turks and Caicos 19,350 NA NA 14
Tuvalu 11,305 NA NA 1
Uganda 25.63 million 60,000 NA 2

Ukraine 48.05 million 5.2781 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 260

United Arab Emirates 2.48 million 900,000 NA 1 Read more
United Kingdom 60.09 million 33.11 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 22.41 million
(July 2004, at home) <400 Read more
United States 290.34 million 185.55 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) 136.60 million
(July 2004, at home) 7,000 Read more
Uruguay 3.41 million 600,000
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 14 Read more
Uzbekistan 25.98 million 100,000 NA 42

Vanuatu 199,414 3,000 NA 1

Venezuela 24.65 million 2.31 million
(Computer Industry Almanac) NA 16 Read more
Vietnam 81.62 million 400,000 NA 5

Virgin Islands 124,778 12,000 NA 50

Wallis and Futuna 15,734 NA NA 1

Western Sahara 261,794 NA NA 1

Yemen 19.34 million 17,000 NA 1 Read more
Zambia 10.30 million 25,000 NA 5

Zimbabwe 12.57 million 100,000 NA 6

Second official visit to France
by Jahan Aliyeva (Sun Staff Writer)

Baku Sun, Azerbaijan
Sept 10 2004

French President Jacques Chirac, right,
talks with his Azerbaijan’s counterpart
Ilham Aliyev at the start of their
meeting at the Elysee palace in Paris,
Tuesday. Aliyev started Tuesday
a three-day working visit to France
to discuss bilateral relations, the development
of economic cooperation and the attraction
of French investments. (AP)

Baku — On September 8, President Ilham Aliyev met with his French
counterpart, Jacques Chirac during the Azerbaijan leader’s second
official visit to France since becoming inaugurated in October last
year.

The two presidents discussed international issues, their perspectives
on bilateral economical relations, as well as the increase in the
investment of French companies to Azerbaijan’s economy.

During the meeting, Chirac stressed that the relationship between
both nations are at an “excellent” level, Turan news agency reported.
Chirac added that, “France places third in Azerbaijan’s foreign
trade.”

The presidents also discussed the Nagorno (Dagligh) Karabakh
conflict. Chirac stated that Paris supports the continuation of
negotiations on a peaceful settlement to the conflict, Turan
reported.

“As co-chairman of the Minsk group of OSCE, France will do its best
towards settling this issue,” Chirac said. Meanwhile, in Azerbaijan,
observers made different comments about the effects of France’s
visits to Nagorno (Dagligh) Karabakh and the peace talks.

Novruz Mammadov, head of the International Relations department of
the Presidential Apparatus in Azerbaijan said in light of the
upcoming meeting between the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia in
Astana, Kazakhstan, this current meeting with Chirac has substantial
significance.

“Negotiations between Azerbaijan and Armenia are becoming intensive,”
Mammadov told journalists last week.

However, Col. Sulhaddin Akbar, the former deputy minister of the
National Security Ministry, thinks that there will be no development
regarding the Nagorno (Dagligh) Karabakh settlement in the near
future.

“I think the political approach in this conflict should be completely
changed,” Akbar told Baku Sun.

Akbar stressed that, after the Iraq crisis, the United States has
cold relations with the member nations of the European Union and
Russia. By visiting European countries, the Azerbaijani government is
trying to benefit from this situation.

“Since Ilham Aliyev became the president, he has visited France,
Russia, Germany, and now again he is in France. He has still not been
invited to the United States. So, by visiting the European countries,
he wants to compensate this on one hand, but on the other hand to
pressure the U.S. in some way,” said Akbar.

Within his visit to France, Ilham Aliyev met with the French co-chair
at the OSCE’s Minsk Group, Henry Jacqueline, and Christian Ponsle,
chairman of French Senate. He also attended an exhibition of
Azerbaijani artists at the French Senate.

During the visit to France, Azerbaijan’s First Lady, Mehriban Aliyeva
accompanied her husband where UNESCO’s Director-General Koichiro
Matsuura appointed Aliyeva as a UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador for
Folklore and Musical Traditions for her “actions to promote
traditional music, literature and poetry, her role in the promotion
of musical education and international cultural exchanges, and her
dedication to the Organization’s ideals.”

Aliyeva is a chairperson of the cultural foundation “Friends of
Azerbaijan”.

In the role as UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador, Aliyeva will support the
Organization’s activities for the safeguarding of cultural heritage.

Caballe Montserrat, Pierre Cardin, Princess of Hannover, Pele Edson
Arantes are among the Goodwill Ambassadors.

Azerbaijan has been a member of UNESCO since 1992.

THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS IN THE PROCESS OF ARMENIA’S
COMPLIANCE WITH COMMITMENTS TO THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE

ARKA News Agency – Interview
Sept 9 2004

Tigran TOROSYAN’s Exclusive interview of RA NA Deputy Chairman,
the Head of the Armenian delegation in PACE to ARKA News Agency.

ARKA – As it’s known, the new draft on constitutional amendments is
supposed to be included into the agenda of the Parliament. Which are
the main new provisions in it compared to the present Constitution,
and how do they defer from the old package of amendments turned down
at the referendum of 2003?

T. Torosyan – At present there are two draft laws on constitutional
amendments (the draft submitted by the political coalition and that
by the opposition – ARKA), and the commission to consider them is
chosen to be the temporary commission on European integration. The
issue of including both draft laws into the agenda of the session
will be discussed during next session on September 8. Taking into
consideration the importance of the draft laws, I think that there
will be no problem in case they are included into the agenda. I
think that the coming discussions will be quite broad, as it was in
the case with the first package of the constitutional amendments,
submitted to a referendum in 2003. Of course, nobody initially can
guess the future of the draft laws, as the final decision is to be
made by the public. However, two aspects should be clearly marked off:
the answer received after the referendum; and the work done before
it. Scrupulousness of the work will determine the extent of perception
of by the society. Simultaneously, during the work of the commission
and the discussions in the Parliament the draft of amendments should
be improved as much as possible. Thus, about 70 suggestions were made
during the discussion of the previous draft law and the majority
of them were reflected in the document. In regard with this, one
should not consider the shortcomings in the draft law as something
extraordinary, since the gist of the draft is in enabling Deputies
submit as perfectly developed document as possible to the final voting
after having developed it. In both the new and the previous draft laws
on constitutional amendments the main provisions remained unchanged,
namely: the draft law must improve the constitutional mechanisms for
a man to exercise rights and the principle freedoms, and provide for
a complex of counterpoises for the system of governance as well as
full constitutional guarantees for the creation of an independent
and impartial judicial system and full-fledged institutions of local
governing. These aspects proceed from our experience of applying
constitution and tendencies considered in the constitutional processes
of the European countries. As compared to the previous draft law,
the amendments concern the system of governance, judicial system
and that of institutions of local governing. In particular, if the
previous draft law provided for a system by which the president could
twice submit the state program to the Parliament and, in case it was
turned down by the latter for the third time, the Parliament would
form the Government by itself, then the last provision was amended
in the new draft law. Thus, if the state program submitted by the
president is turned down by the parliament for the third time, then
the President has the right to dismiss the Parliament. I think that
this system has certain shortcomings, which we will try to correct
during the discussion around it. An extremely important amendment
refers to the activity of the Council of Justice. Thus, according to
the amendment, the Ministry of Justice directly submits suggestions
regarding the judicial system to the President. In the previous
version it was done at the initiative of the Minister of Justice,
meanwhile the judicial system must be separated from the executive
power. The new draft on constitutional amendments differs from the
previous one by its status as well: it’s a deputy draft law, which
will be considered in three readings and in case it is a success,
it will initiate a referendum, while the first one provided for such
an initiative on the part of the President.

ARKA – The opposition finds the amendments to the Constitution mainly
as negative, aimed at strengthening the presidential authority and
undermining the power of the parliament. What is your opinion about
it? As to you, which are the main shortcomings of the provision on
approval of a state program?

T. Torosyan – Such a position of the opposition pursues political
goals. I would like to remind that during the discussion of the
previous draft law they again criticized it. Of course, Deputies have
full right to make political statements, but their main duty is to
work in Parliamentary commissions and at the sessions of NA. If they
notice such shortcomings, they can make corresponding amendments and
not having done it it’s early to speak of the shortcomings of the draft
law. With regard to the authority, for some reasons the authorities
exercised by the president, the Government and NA are considered in
a numerical correlation, but the goal is not in entitling anyone with
more authority at the expense of the others. The goal is more serious,
namely, to ensure such a complex of authorities that would allow
creating a full system of counterpoises for normal work of each branch
of power and restraining the attempts of the other branch to abuse its
authorities. I have already mentioned that there are shortcomings in
the draft law on the approval of the state program and they refer to
the point stipulating dismissal of the Parliament. New elections will
be held after the dismissal of the NA, hence, almost the same staff
may be elected to the Parliament. So, a way out should be tried to
be found. However, I would like to note that the principle of the
formation of the Government and the dismissal of the Parliament,
which is the base of this and the previous draft laws, significantly
differs from the principle of the acting Constitution, according to
which the President may dismiss the Parliament any moment. And now
dismissal of the Parliament is stipulated for certain cases, i.e. when
the legislative body doesn’t function for a long period of time. This
makes the Parliament more independent and increases its role.

ARKA – There are rumors in the society that the issue of holding
presidential office for the third term is being discussed within the
frames of the Constitution. How grounded are such talks?

T. Torosyan – I would like to remind that such kind of absurd
talks spread in 2003 during the work at the previous draft law on
constitutional amendment as well. But the time showed that nothing
of the kind was stipulated by the draft law. The new version also
lacks such a provision. If someone wants to consider himself as an
extrasensory individual and guesses someone’s thoughts, then this
already refers to parapsychology field, but not to legislative work.
However, I can assure that no considerations or suggestions about it
have been made during 4 years.

ARKA – The main reason because of which the first package of
constitutional amendments was not approved when submitted to the
referendum was considered to be the society’s unawareness. Do you
manage to avoid the problems this time?

T.Torosyan – There is really such a goal as to increase the awareness
and understanding of the importance of the constitutional amendments in
the society. At that, I think that it should be achieved not by means
of mere publication of the amendments to be made so that each citizen
could read and participate in the referendum, as our colleagues from
the opposition suggested. Of course, the amendments are necessary
to be published in large circulation, and no other opinion can be
here. But on the other hand, I think that it’s a rather populist
measure, as it’s obvious that the Constitution is a quite complex legal
document, and the society, as a rule, never studies such documents in
details. So, the duty of the political powers and NGOs called to work
at such documents is to introduce what these amendments provide for,
what new changes they will bring in the lives of each family and the
country on the whole. Besides, if we speak of the last referendum, we
shouldn’t forget that it was held simultaneously with the parliamentary
elections and it’s quite possible that the parties were first of all
concerned about the quantity of the seats occupied in the parliament
and they almost didn’t get back to the issue of the Constitution.

ARKA – It was supposed that the report on Nagorno-Karabakh by Terry
Davis would be introduced at the autumn session in PACE, but since
September 1 Davis holds a new position of a Secretary General of
the Council of Europe, and the new reporter, the name of which is
not known yet, will hardly have the time to study the problem. What
solution may be found in this case?

T.Torosyan – The report on Nagorno-Karabakh by Terry Davis is already
in PACE and will be included into the agenda of the session of the PACE
political commission to be held on September 14. However, in regard
with T. Davis’s being Secretary General of the Council of Europe,
but not the Deputy of PACE, a new reporter must be appointed for the
introduction of the report. I think that the report itself will be
preserved, but on the other hand it’s obvious that such documents
undergo a lot of changes in the curse of discussions, so the new
reporter must study the issue thoroughly. I suppose that for this
purpose it would be better to postpone the discussion of the report
and not to consider it at the session of PACE on October 4. This would
allow the new reporter to study the issue better. It would be also
very useful if he visited the region. I think that the commission
would approve such a suggestion. With regard to a new reporter,
he will be elected from the members of the political commission.

ARKA – You suggested to organize a round -table discussion on
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in PACE. What stage is your suggestion at?

T. Torosyan -The PACE Chairman on political issues suggested
considering this issue during the session of the commission on
September 14. I hope that the decision of the commission will be
positive. Simple logic implies it, as it’s impossible to expect the
settlement of the conflict when one of the parties in the conflict
(Nagorno-Karabakh – ARKA) is kept away from everything. It’s not a
realistic approach. Besides, there are traditions in PACE that give
hopes: parties in the conflict are even invited to the session of
the commission, as it was in the case of the discussion of the Cyprus
conflict, when the representatives of the Turkish community of Cyprus
were present at the session.

ARKA – How ready is the report on Armenia by the member of the PACE
monitoring commission Jerzy Jaskernia? Will it be considered at the
autumn session of PACE, taking into account that the last term for
Armenia to comply with the main commitments is the end of 2004?

T.Torosyan – The session of the PACE commission on monitoring will
be held on September 15, and the agenda of the session contains the
report by Jaskernia. It is formulated as follows: compliance of RA
with the commitments in the frames of April and January resolutions.
>>From my perspective it would be more expedient to introduce the
report during PACE January session in 2005, since January resolution
1361 on Armenia contains some points that determine the term to comply
with the commitments – the end of the year, so the discussion of them
till the end of the term is not logical. We will suggest discussing the
issue in January, especially if no emergencies happened in Armenian
after April. At that I will note that a significant progress in the
process of Armenia’s compliance with the commitments to the Council of
Europe is recorded. In particular, with respect to January resolution,
we actually guide by the fixed schedule. We leg a little behind of
the intervening terms for making amendments to the Constitution and
the Election Code, and the reason is that for a month and a half we
were waiting for the opposition to take part in the work, whereas it
refused to do so. However I think that we will manage to accelerate
the process and catch up with the fixed terms. Almost all points of
April resolution 1374 are complied with. Since we have a progress,
I think it would be possible to postpone the discussion of the issue
of commitments and do it with more details.

ARKA – What expectations do you have from the autumn session of the
Parliament? Will the Parliament manage to start the work with its
full staff? What political decision is the Council of RA NA going to
make in this connection?

T.Torosyan – The events of the recent months make an erroneous
impression that the return of the opposition to the Parliament will
be a gift to the authorities or the majority of the parliamentary.
Parliament is the place of our work and each of us has its liabilities
rather to the society on the whole than to one another. I am sure
that if the opposition doesn’t take part in the work, it will have
to make its explanations to the society. The excuses brought by
the opposition about the boycott cannot be considered as grounded.
Taking into account the fact that quite important documents for Armenia
will be discussed at the autumn session, I see no logical excuse for
why the Deputies should not participate in them. On the contrary,
if they have suggestions how to improve the welfare in the country,
then it’s a good reason for them to come and introduce their positions
and prove their rightfulness. The society should have the chance in
the Parliament to compare what the majority of the parliament offers
and what’s offered by the opposition. Moreover, the opposition suffers
from some inferiority complex because of the failure of the autumn
rallies of protest. In regard with this, it doesn’t want to return
to the Parliament, though it’s a good chance for it to continue
the political struggle by means of legislative work. Anyway, I hope
that the Deputies from the opposition will not be deprived of their
mandates, and there will be no need to replenish their seats with new
deputies. However, we should not forget that the law is the same for
everyone and everybody is obliged to follow it. A.H. -0–

Former Russian cosmonaut from Caucasus beaten up by police

Agence France Presse — English
September 10, 2004 Friday 2:18 PM GMT

MOSCOW Sept 10 — A former cosmonaut from the Caucasus republic of
Dagestan was beaten up in Moscow by police in an apparently racially
motivated attack, Moscow Echo radio reported on Friday.

The incident happened when police checked the papers of Magomed
Tolboyev, who holds the title of a Hero of Russia, in the subway in
the southwest of the city.

Taking offence at his appearance and Chechen-sounding name, the two
police proceeded to beat up the one-time test pilot and verbally
abuse him.

“Get out of here, darky, and tell this to your countrymen or else
we shall do them in in the same way,” the officers said. Police have
opened an inquiry.

Tolboyev, who was a cosmonaut in the 1990s but never made it into
space, was not able to defend himself and suffered injuries to
his spine.

The incident raises further concerns about the risk of
racially-motivated attacks in the Russian capital after the school
hostage tragedy in the southern Russian town of Beslan, which was
blamed on rebels from the Caucasus republics of Ingushetia and
Chechnya.

Earlier this week one person was killed and two injured when a group of
young skinheads set fire to and gutted Armenian and Azeri restaurants
in the Urals city of Ykaterinburg.

ARMENIA WILL SEND ITS SERVICEMEN TO IRAQ

Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
September 10, 2004, Friday

Armenia will be the second CIS country (after Ukraine) to send
its servicemen to Iraq. Armenian servicemen will be assigned to
the Polish contingent, presidents Robert Kocharjan (Armenia) and
Alexander Kwasniewski (Poland) decided on Kocharjan visit to Poland
this Monday. All 50 servicemen of the Armenian contingent will be sent
to Iraq within the framework of the security cooperation accord the
presidents signed in Warsaw. To quote Defense Minister of Armenia Serzh
Sarkisjan who accompanied Kocharjan on the visit, Yerevan is sending
its soldiers to Iraq because “size of our country and the distance
to Europe notwithstanding, Armenia regards itself as a part of Europe.”

Sarkisjan has always promoted a pro-Western course for Armenia and
its integration into Euro-Atlantic structures. It is Sarkisjan who
lobbies Armenia’s involvement in NATO programs. Yerevan has aspired
for participation in the Western peacekeeping operation in Iraq for a
long time now, and the latest developments are Sarkisjan’s achievement
to a considerable degree. There is a considerable Armenian diaspora
in Iraq – up to 25,000 people. Armenia counts on post-war restoration
contracts in Iraq, afterwards.

There is no saying at this point if Armenia’s involvement in the
Iraqi operation (following Ukraine’s involvement) may aggravate the
relations between Christian countries of the Commonwealth and the
Arab world. Religious discord in the world is deepening, and CIS
countries are undoubtedly a part of the process.

Source: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, September 8, 2004, p. 5

Armenian officers to take part in NATO drill in Baku
By Tigran Liloyan

ITAR-TASS News Agency
September 10, 2004 Friday

YEREVAN, September 10 — Five officers of the Armenian Armed Forces
will take part in the Cooperative Best Effort 2004 exercises in
Azerbaijan on September 14-26 under the NATO Partnership for Peace
program, press secretary of the Armenian defense minister Col. Seiran
Shakhsuvaryan told Itar-Tass on Friday.

“Our position is invariable. We will take part in the drill,” he
said. He noted that the exercises organizer – NATO – has not made any
changes in the program. “In addition, Yerevan does not have official
information about refusal of the Azerbaijani embassy in Tbilisi to
grant entry visas for the Armenian servicemen going to the drill in
Baku,” he said.

Armenian Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Khachaturov said that Baku
protests against the participation of Armenian servicemen in the
exercises are formal.

“If Armenian officers are given permission to visit Baku, Azerbaijan
will have to provide for their security,” he said.

Meanwhile, Azerbaijani Defense Minister Safar Abiyev said that
Armenia should abstain from participation in the Cooperative Best
Effort 2004 exercises.

“Baku is perplexed with the insistent wish of Armenia, which
occupied some of Azerbaijani lands, to take part in the exercises,”
Abiyev said. “Armenia does not recognize territorial integrity of
Azerbaijan. There are no diplomatic relations between our countries.
Is the participation of Armenian officers in the exercises in Baku
expedient?”

He said the Azerbaijani public objects to the visit of Armenian
servicemen.

“The insistence of Armenia may build up bilateral tension shortly
before the CIS summit in Astana,” where Azerbaijani President Ilham
Aliyev and Armenian President Robert Kocharyan are expected to meet
with the Russian mediation, he said.

The news of Armenian servicemen’s visit agitated the Azerbaijani
public. A number of opposition parties, public and non-governmental
organizations will hold protests the day before the drill and on
the drill’s opening day. The Baku City Hall has authorized some of
the protests.
From: Baghdasarian

Several thousands attend Beslan remembrance ceremony in Yerevan
By Tigran Liloyan

ITAR-TASS News Agency
September 10, 2004 Friday

YEREVAN, September 10 – Several thousands of people attended a
remembrance ceremony for victims of the Beslan terrorist act in the
St. Grigory the Educator Cathedral in Yerevan on Friday.

Public organizations and the Russian-Armenian (Slavic) State University
organized the ceremony with the assistance of the Armenian Apostolic
Church and the Armenian Foreign Ministry.

Head of the Armenian Apostolic Church, Catholicos Garegin II prayed
for the Beslan dead. He presented condolences to Russian President
Vladimir Putin, Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia Alexy II and the
whole people of Russia on behalf of the people of Armenia.

“The Armenian people, whole Armenia are shaken by the monstrous crime,”
Parliament Speaker Artur Bagdasaryan said. “International terrorism
is acquiring a new, even more intricate face, and we must unite to
combat this evil,” he said.

Russian Ambassador to Armenia Anatoly Dryukov thanked every citizen
of Armenia for compassion and support. “Sorrow and ordeals have united
us again,” he said.

After the ceremony, people marched to the Russian embassy building
to light candles in the memory of Beslan victims.

Armenia should abstain from NATO drill in Baku – minister
By Sevindzh Abdullayeva, Viktor Shulman

ITAR-TASS News Agency
September 10, 2004 Friday

BAKU, September 10 — Armenia should abstain from participation
in the Cooperative Best Effort 2004 exercises due in Azerbaijan
on September 14-26 under the NATO Partnership for Peace program,
Azerbaijani Defense Minister Safar Abiyev said.

“Baku is perplexed with the insistent wish of Armenia, which
occupied some of Azerbaijani lands, to take part in the exercises,”
Abiyev said. “Armenia does not recognize territorial integrity of
Azerbaijan. There are no diplomatic relations between our countries.
Is the participation of Armenian officers in the exercises in Baku
expedient?”

He said the Azerbaijani public objects to the visit of Armenian
servicemen.

“The insistence of Armenia may build up bilateral tension shortly
before the CIS summit in Astana,” where Azerbaijani President Ilham
Aliyev and Armenian President Robert Kocharyan are expected to meet
with the Russian mediation, he said.

Meanwhile, the Armenian defense minister’s press secretary Seiran
Shakhsuvaryan said that five Armenian officers would take part in
the NATO exercises in Azerbaijan.

“Our position is invariable. We will take part in the drill,” he
said. He noted that the exercises organizer – NATO – has not made any
changes in the program. “In addition, Yerevan does not have official
information about refusal of the Azerbaijani embassy in Tbilisi to
grant entry visas for the Armenian servicemen going to the drill in
Baku,” he said.

The news of Armenian servicemen’s visit agitated the Azerbaijani
public. A number of opposition parties, public and non-governmental
organizations will hold protests the day before the drill and on
the drill’s opening day. The Baku City Hall has authorized some of
the protests.

Conference on Black Sea security opens in Georgia
By Eka Mekhuzla

ITAR-TASS News Agency
September 10, 2004 Friday

TBILISI, September 10 — A regional conference on security of the
Black Sea region opened in Chakva, near Batumi, on Friday. It is being
held under the aegis of Harvard University. Taking part in its work
are fifty-eight military experts from Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia,
Bulgaria, Romania, USA, and Turkey.

The experts, “whose views are heeded by the presidents of many
countries of the world”, Georgian Defence Minister Georgy Baramidze
stated, will discuss some problems of regional security in order to
“provide objective information to the world community, which is very
important for Georgia”. Present at the conference is Deputy Commander
of U.S. Forces in Europe Charles World, who is known to be among the
authors of the U.S. “Training and Equipment Program”. Four battalions
of Georgian commandos were trained in accordance with it.

This is the third conference on Black Sea security that is being
held by Harvard University. The first one took place in Yalta in
2002 and the second one – in Baku in 2003. “Its main purpose is to
promote contacts among the participants of the Harvard Program and
to draw American generals and politicians into the dialogue on Black
Sea security,” officials of the Georgian Defence Ministry pointed out.

Russia, they told Itar-Tass, is not taking part in the conference.