Head of Armenian reporters’ union accuses authorities of controlling media
Mediamax news agency
29 Jun 04
YEREVAN
The chairman of the Gyumri-based Asparez journalists’ club, Levon
Barsegyan, has accused the Armenian authorities of violating freedom
of speech and of the desire to control the media.
Addressing a seminar organized by the Yerevan Press Club and the
Friedrich Naumann Fund in Yerevan today, Levon Barsegyan said that
“Armenian TV companies have the right to criticize the work of the
country’s legislative and executive branches but not the president of
the country”.
According to him, at present Armenia seriously lacks independent
media, like A1+ which was deprived of the right to broadcast two years
ago. At the same time, Barsegyan noted that “the major part of
Armenia’s mass media is controlled by the president’s administration”.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Armenian servicemen pleased with visit to Baku-hosted NATO conference
Public Television of Armenia, Yerevan
26 Jun 04

[Presenter] Armenian military officers who returned from Azerbaijan
announced today that the incident which took place during NATO’s
Cooperative Best Effort-2004 planning conference in Baku was directed
not against Armenia but against Azerbaijan’s international
image. Azerbaijan also understood that if the Armenian officers were
not allowed to Baku or something happened to them, the international
community would not forgive it this time. The incident that took place
during the conference was not unexpected for the Armenian officers.
[Correspondent over video of press conference and Azerbaijani entry
visas in the Armenian officers’ passports] This is the historic
document which allowed the Armenian officers to arrive in the
Azerbaijani capital. Col Murad Isakhanyan and senior Lt Aram Ovanesyan
crossed the Georgian-Azerbaijani border without any problems in
accordance with an agreement reached in Kiev. Representatives of the
Azerbaijani Defence Ministry met the Armenian officers at Heydar
Aliyev airport and suggested taking them on an excursion.
[Col Murad Isakhanyan, captioned] They showed us the same day all the
changes which they had made.
[Correspondent] The Armenian delegation was accommodated at Hotel
Europe where the NATO member-countries’ delegations were staying. That
was the end of the peaceful life. Activists of the Karabakh Liberation
Organization led by Akif Nagi managed to get into the hotel’s security
area and entered the conference hall.
[Murad Isakhanyan] This disturbance was directed against us. We were
quiet. We had been aware of this possibility since 22 December. Our
security service officers collected everything from the table and put
into my bag. Our Mr Ovanesyan jumped up immediately and grabbed our
flag and hid it under his clothes. They were looking for Armenians.
[Correspondent over video of protest in Baku] The incident was not
unexpected for the Armenian officers. This is understandable. Before
leaving for Baku they were ready for everything. The Armenian Defence
Ministry immediately recalled its delegation from Baku. A
representative of the NATO Command, Charles Lee, said that everyone
who wished could leave Baku immediately. Representatives of some
member-countries also said that they were ready to leave Baku in case
the Armenian delegation left Baku.
[Murad Isakhanyan] This incident, i.e. when the leadership and
representatives of NATO’s 19 member-countries were sitting in the
conference room and they burst into it and smashed everything in their
way, damaged Azerbaijan’s international image in the first place. I
told them that I expected this when I came here and knew that this
could happen.
[Corespondent] The Armenian officers did not leave Baku. The
conference completed its three working days. The Armenian officers
used this opportunity to speak to not only high-ranking military
officials of Azerbaijan but also ordinary people.
[Murad Isakhanyan] Everyone shook hands and spoke to us. Nobody
reminded us of Karabakh or land problems.
[Correspondent] The incident has not affected the Armenian officers’
intention to participate in future programmes, especially in the
exercises which will be held [in Azerbaijan] in September. The NATO
Command has announced that they will not limit the number of Armenian
officers who can take part in the forthcoming NATO exercises.
Tereza Kasyan, “Aylur”.

Azeri ombudsman asks for “lenient punishment” for jailed Karabakh activists
Turan news agency
29 Jun 04

BAKU
Ombudsman Elmira Suleymanova has appealed to the Prosecutor-General’s
Office in connection with the protest staged by members of the
Karabakh Liberation Organization [KLO] outside Hotel Europe on 21
June.
She said in the appeal that the picket was not an act of hooliganism,
but a protest against Armenian servicemen’s arrival in Baku. Many
members of the KLO fought in Karabakh, lost their relatives and
friends, and suffered a severe psychological shock.
In this connection, the ombudsman asked the prosecutor-general to take
into account the mitigating circumstances and regard the deeds of the
detainees under articles stipulating lenient punishment.
Six members of the KLO have been arrested and criminal proceedings
have been instituted against them on charges of hooliganism and
violation of public order. They are accused of attempting to disrupt a
NATO conference at Hotel Europe.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Armenia expresses interest in post-conflict Iraqi operations role
Mediamax news agency
29 Jun 04

YEREVAN
Armenia is ready to play an active role in the post-conflict
humanitarian operations in Iraq, Deputy Foreign Minister Ruben
Shugaryan announced in Yerevan today.
Mediamax news agency quoted the diplomat as explaining Yerevan’s
position both by the presence of 30,000 Armenians in Iraq and
Armenia’s state interests.
Talks on the dispatch of Armenian military doctors, drivers and
sappers to Iraq by and large have now been completed and at present
they are discussing the logistics, the Armenian deputy foreign
minister said.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

New proposal on Karabakh based on Cyprus blueprint – Azeri paper
Ayna, Baku
29 Jun 04

Text of X. Afqani report by Azerbaijani newspaper Ayna on 29 June
headlined “Cyprus blueprint for Karabakh” and subheaded “Turkey’s
involvement in the Nagornyy Karabakh talks agreed”
The foreign ministers of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Turkey met yesterday
[28 June] on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Istanbul. The
gathering was held behind closed doors.
The ministers told journalists after the meeting that they had
discussed the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict but did not disclose the
details. In their brief speeches the ministers said that both
Azerbaijan and Armenia support a greater involvement of Turkey in
resolving the conflict. The mechanism for this will be ready in one or
two months, [Azerbaijani Foreign Minister] Elmar Mammadyarov said.
In turn, [Armenian Foreign Minister] Vardan Oskanyan said that the
sides also discussed the opening of the Turkish-Armenian
border. Resolving this issue may take some time, Oskanyan said. The
foremost objective of the talks was to work out a new approach to
resolving the problem.
According to Turkish diplomatic sources, Armenia received a new
formula to settle the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict during the trilateral
meeting. The formula is similar to the blueprint for resolving the
Cyprus problem. In essence, the new proposal is to pay greater
attention to the interests of both the Armenian and Azeri communities
in Nagornyy Karabakh.
Before the trilateral meeting, [Turkish Foreign Minister] Abdullah Gul
received Oskanyan. The Turkish mass media reported that this meeting
discussed the Nagornyy Karabakh problem and relations between Turkey
and Armenia. The two countries have yet to establish diplomatic
relations.

Tehran Times
June 29 2004
Armenian President Keen On Expansion Of Tehran-Yerevan Ties
MOSCOW (IRNA) — Armenian President Robert Kocharian in the meeting
with Iranian Ambassador Mohammad Farhad Koleini on Monday called for
expansion of Tehran-Yerevan ties.
During the meeting which took place at the end of Koleini’s tenure,
the two sides discussed mutual cooperation in political, security and
economic fields aiming to restore stability to the region.
Kocharian called for further Tehran-Yerevan cooperation compared to
the past and stressed the necessity of steady development of the
region.
He assessed the upcoming visit of President Mohammad Khatami to
Armenia as a “turning point” in bilateral ties and a step towards
bolstering mutual relations. He hoped that Khatami’s visit would bear
fruitful results.
President Khatami is schedule to pay an official visit to Armenia in
September.

PRESS RELEASE
June 29, 2004
CONTACT: MFA PRESS
Phone: +3741.544041
Fax: +3741.543925
E-mail: [email protected]
web:

Foreign Minister Oskanian Addresses NATO – EAPC Summit in Istanbul

Armenia’s Foreign Minister led Armenia’s delegation to the NATO-EAPC Summit
in Istanbul, on June 28-29. This year’s annual meeting was attended by
nearly 50 heads of state. The agenda focused on Afghanistan, the Balkans,
and included a discussion of a strategic shift by the North Atlantic
Alliance to focus on the Caucasus and Central Asia.

In the margins of the meeting, the Minister held a bilateral meeting with
Turkey’s Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul. This was the fourth meeting between
the two over two years. They discussed the steps necessary to move towards
normalizing relations. In addition, Armenia’s, Turkey’s and Azerbaijan’s
foreign ministers met to discuss various regional issues.

Following the meeting, Minister Oskanian reiterated his position on such
trilateral meetings. He explained that they are useful because are held
among equals, among neighbors who have many matters to discuss or resolve.
The three ministers agreed to consider meeting again in the margins of an
international organization meeting.

Below is the transcript of the Minister’s spoken remarks.

Statement by H. E. Mr. Vartan Oskanian
Minister of Foreign Affairs of
the Republic of Armenia
at the EAPC Summit
29 June 2004, Istanbul

Mr. Secretary General,
Distinguished delegates,
Ladies and Gentlemen.

History is moving so quickly that nearly each one of these summits can,
without great exaggeration, be said to be a meeting which will appear in the
annals of history as a most important one for the development of the
Euro-Atlantic Partnership. This summit marks the 10th anniversary of the
Partnership for Peace program. We can, in hindsight, congratulate ourselves
on a well-designed, well-thought out, useful, successful program.

Within this program, and in response to the Alliance’s policy shift towards
our region, Armenia has undertaken a number of steps aimed at enhancing and
deepening our relations. Today we can surely state that Armenia is actively
engaged with NATO in all spheres of cooperation considered by the Allies as
main priorities and objectives of the Partnership.

First, let’s speak of the future. Armenia has officially presented its
intention to continue and deepen relations within the framework of the
Individual Partnership Action Plan. Armenia has also offered to host NATO
PfP Exercise Cooperative Associate 05.

As for what we have accomplished: First, political consultations with the
NATO leadership are held on a regular basis, and are considered by both
sides as important components of Armenia-NATO relations. Second, Armenia
actively participates in the PfP programmes on developing interoperability
and undertakes appropriate steps aimed at the reforming of its defense
system. Third, Armenia is a member of NATO-led peacekeeping operations. The
positive experience that we have gained from this encourages us today to
examine new ways and possibilities of increasing the overall volume of our
engagement in international peacekeeping. Fourth, Armenia successfully
hosted the `Cooperative Best Effort 2003′ NATO/PfP exercise, and also
greatly benefited from improved peacekeeping capabilities. This Cooperation
also made it possible for Turkish troops to participate in that exercise.
Ten years ago who would have thought such a thing possible? That Turkish
troops would take part in NATO exercises on Armenian soil, and the Turkish
flag would fly in Armenia.

Mr. Secretary-General,
The benefits of our participation in the EAPC, which is really a unique
forum unifying all states of the Euro-Atlantic region, continue. That we are
here, today, with a large delegation, is evidence. That we are here, today,
at all, in Istanbul, is evidence of our further belief that Turkey has a
role to play in that integration path, not just for Armenia, but for the
entire South Caucasus.

Turkey’s choice of a logo for the NATO Istanbul summit is a bridge, probably
signifying the link between East and West. This bridge could and should also
signify the link that Turkey can be between the Caucasus and Europe. Turkey,
by geography, is the bridge between the Caucasus and Europe. Turkey is the
only NATO member with which the three countries of the Caucasus share a
border. Further, now that the Caucasus is part of the European Union’s New
Neighborhood initiative, our links with Europe go through Turkey. With
Turkey itself on a path toward Europe, ahead of the Caucasus, this whole
area is truly on its way to becoming neighbors of Europe, and eventually a
European neighborhood. Armenians believe that just as Turkey has normal
relations with Azerbaijan and Georgia, it must have ties with Armenia as
well, in order to draw the whole region together into a real neighborhood.

Such a move would have an immeasurable impact on the Nagorno Karabakh
conflict as well. Nothing can compensate for our people’s deep feelings of
insecurity so long as neighbors are not a source of comfort, but a reminder
of recent and old grievances. In this new era, with new challenges, and new
alliances, Turkey’s even-handed regional policies would go a long way to
convincing the Armenian public that a Nagorno Karabakh resolution – which we
all want – must be fashioned for a region at peace, and not for neighbors at
war. Turkey is a neighbor whose words, actions, relations – or absence of
relations – influence the environment in which security concerns must be
addressed.

It goes without saying that Nagorno Karabakh is a serious security problem.
The President of Azerbaijan, however, addressed this issue from a purely
narrow, ethnocentric perspective. The conflict is deeper, broader than the
simple terms in which it was presented here. The allegation of terrorism in
Nagorno Karabakh is so absurd that I won’t even bother to try to respond.
But, I will speak about the other issues he raised: territories, refugees
and the status of Nagorno Karabakh. These are serious problems that we do
need to confront. The fact of the matter is that territories and refugees
are the consequences of a serious core issue: the status, the future status,
of Nagorno Karabakh.

This conflict started peacefully when the people of Nagorno Karabakh opted
for self-determination. Azerbaijan rejected that decision, and resorted to
military operations to suppress that right to self-determination. So, what
we have today are the consequences of Azerbaijani aggression against the
people of Nagorno Karabakh. In addition, and as my president said recently,
Nagorno Karabakh has never ever been part of independent Azerbaijan. These
realities need to be factored into our future negotiations. As President
Aliyev made his perspective known, let me say, too, that we have long been
ready and willing to make the necessary compromises to reach a peaceful
solution to achieve long-lasting peace and stability.

Thank you.

Turkey Offers To Help Solve Armenia, Azerbaijan Dispute
DefenseNews.com
29 June, 2004
BY BURAK EGE BEKDIL
ANKARA — Turkey seeks to assume the role of mediator between Armenia
and Azerbaijan in an effort to resolve the dispute over the
Nagorno-Karabakh region,
Turkish officials here said.
Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul met June 28 with his Armenian
counterpart, Vartan Oskanian, on the sidelines of the NATO summit in
Istanbul. Oskanian told reporters that Yerevan is serious in its efforts
to improve relations with Ankara, and Gul said Turkey is willing to
reciprocate.
A senior Turkish diplomat told DefenseNews.com on June 29 that Turkey’s
initiative for mediation between Armenia and Azerbaijan had been
welcomed by both countries.
“It will take time, but this is a good start,” he said. “Both the
initial Azeri and Armenian reaction were positive to our initiative.”
NATO has been discussing a project for launching a Caucasus Stability
Pact, but the continued tension between Azerbaijan and Armenia over the
disputed territory has blocked progress.
Turkey says normalization of its ties with Armenia – its only neighbor
with which Ankara has no diplomatic relations – depends on Armenia’s
withdrawal of troops from Nagorno-Karabakh, an enclave in Azerbaijan
under Armenian occupation for the last decade.

Dissident Voice, CA
June 29 2004
A Fantastic Tale
Turkey, Drugs, Faustian Alliances & Sibel Edmonds
by John Stanton
June 29, 2004

Taking Turkey as the focal point and with a start date of 1998, it
is easy to speculate why Sibel Edmonds indicated that there was a
convergence of US and foreign counter-narcotics, counter-terrorism
and US national security and economic interests all of which were too
preoccupied to surface critical information warning Americans of the
attacks of September 11, 2001. After all, who would have believed
drug runners operating in Central Asia? And besides, President
Clinton was promoting Turkey, one of the world’s top drug transit
points, as a model for Muslim-Western cooperation and a country
necessary to reshape the Middle East.
The FBI’s Office of International Operations, in conjunction with the
CIA and the US State Department counter-narcotics section, the United
Kingdom’s MI6, Israel’s Mossad, Pakistan’s ISI, the US DEA, Turkey’s
MIT, and the governments and intelligence agencies of dozens of
nations, were in one way or another involved in the illicit drug
trade either trying to stop it or benefit from it. What can be
surmised from the public record is that from 1998 to September 10,
2001, the War on Drugs kept bumping into the nascent War on Terror
and new directions in US foreign policy.
It’s easy to imagine the thousands of drug couriers, middlemen,
financiers and lab technicians moving back and forth between Pakistan
and Turkey, and over to Western Europe and the United States, and the
tidbits of information they gleaned from their sponsors as they
traveled. As information gathering assets for the intelligence
agencies of the world, they must have been invaluable. And given the
dozens of foreign intelligence services working the in the
counter-narcotics/terrorism fields, the `chatter’ that just dozens of
well-placed operatives may have overheard about attacks against
Western targets must have found its way into the US intelligence
apparatus. But, again, who could believe the audacity of non-state
actors organizing a domestic attack against the supreme power of the
day, the USA? Implementing a new strategic direction and business
deals may have overcome the wacky warnings from the counter-narcotics
folks.
Back in the late 1990’s and early 2000, who would have believed the
rants of a drug courier from Afghanistan saying that some guy named
Bin Laden was going to attack America, particularly if it involved
America’s newest friend, Turkey? Or that a grand design to reshape
Central Asia and the Middle East with Turkey and Israel as pivot
points was being pushed by the Clinton Administration as a matter of
national policy.
The historical record shows that the US War on Drugs and the nascent
War on Terror kept colliding with not only within the US
intelligence, policy and business apparatus, but also with European
strategic and business interests. Turkey continues its push for entry
into the European Union and the USA wants that to happen as the June
2004 meeting of NATO, and President Bush’s attendance under dangerous
circumstances, in Turkey demonstrates. Turkey is one of the USA’s and
Europe’s top arms buyers and is located near what could be some of
the biggest oil and natural gas fields in the world. At this point
it’s worth noting that the one of the FBI’s tasks is to counter
industrial espionage and to engage in it. Where big arms sales pit
the US against its European competitors–as is the case in Turkey
(particularly starting in 1998)–the FBI is busy making sure the US
gets the edge over its competition. Allies are friends only so far.
Did warnings foretelling of an attack on American soil by Bin Laden’s
crew get lost in the War on Drugs or the US national and economic
interest in troublesome Turkey? It seems only Ms Edmonds knows.
Turkey Cold to UK and USA Concerns
In 1998, the US Department of State (DOS) was finally forced to admit
that Turkey was a major refining and transit point for the flow of
heroin from Southwest Asia to Western Europe, with small quantities
of the stuff finding its way to the streets of the USA. In that same
year, Kendal Nezan, writing for Le Monde Diplomatique, reported that
MIT, and the Turkish National Police force were actively supporting
the trade in illicit drugs not only for fun and profit, but out of
desperation.
`After the Gulf War in 1991, Turkey found itself deprived of the
all-important Iraqi market and, since it lacked significant oil
reserves of its own, it decided to make up for the loss by turning
more massively to drugs. The trafficking increased in intensity with
the arrival of the hawks in power, after the death in suspicious
circumstances of President Turgut Özal in April 1993. According to
the minister of interior, the war in Kurdistan had cost the Turkish
exchequer upwards of $12.5 billion. According to the daily Hürriyet,
Turkey’s heroin trafficking brought in $25 billion in 1995 and $37.5
billion in 1996…Only criminal networks working in close cooperation
with the police and the army could possibly organize trafficking on
such a scale. Drug barons have stated publicly, on Turkish television
and in the West, that they have been working under the protection of
the Turkish government and to its financial benefit. The traffickers
themselves travel on diplomatic passports…the drugs are even
transported by military helicopter from the Iranian border.’
Nowhere is the pain of Turkey’s role in the heroin trade felt more
horribly than in the United Kingdom. According to London’s Letter
written by a Member of Parliament, `The war against drugs and drug
trafficking in Britain is huge. Turkish heroin in particular is a top
priority for the MI6 and the Foreign Ministry. During his visit to
the British Embassy in Ankara, the head of the Foreign Office’s
Turkey Department was clear about this. He reassured an English
journalist that the heroin trade was more important than billions of
pounds worth off trade capacity and weapons selling. When the
journalist in question told me about this, I was reminded of my
teacher’s words at university in Ankara ten years ago. He was also
working for the Turkish Foreign Ministry. The topic of a lecture
discussion was about Turkey’s Economy and I still remember his words
today,
`50 billion dollars worth of foreign debt is nothing, it is two lorry
loads of heroin…’
Afghanistan: Top Opiate Producer and America’s Friend
Both the DOS and the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) described in
detail the transit routes and countries involved in getting the goods
to Turkey. Intelligence organizations here and abroad must have
sanctioned the role that they, and Turkey and Afghanistan, played in
the process. `Afghanistan is the original source of most of the
opiates reaching Turkey. Afghan opiates, and also hashish, are
stockpiled at storage and staging areas in Pakistan, from where a ton
or larger quantities are smuggled by overland vehicles to Turkey via
Iran. Multi-ton quantities of opiates and hashish also are moved to
coastal areas of Pakistan and Iran, where the drugs are loaded on
ships waiting off-shore, which then smuggle the contraband to points
in Turkey along the Mediterranean, Aegean, and/or Marmara seas.
Opiates and hashish also are smuggled overland from Afghanistan via
Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, and Georgia to Turkey.
Turkish-based traffickers and brokers operate directly and in
conjunction with narcotic suppliers, smugglers, transporters,
laboratory operators, drug distributors, money collectors, and money
launderers in and outside Turkey. Traffickers in Turkey illegally
acquire the precursor chemical acetic anhydride, which is used in the
production of heroin, from sources in Western Europe, the Balkans,
and Russia. During the 27-month period from July 1, 1999 to September
30, 2001, over 56 metric tons of illicit acetic anhydride were seized
in or destined for Turkey.’
The Ankara Pact
The Middle East Report concluded in 1998 that probably the greatest
strategic move in the Clinton post-Cold War years is what could be
called “The Ankara Pact” — an alliance between the U.S., Turkey, and
Israel that essentially circumvents and bottles up the Arab
countries. Earlier in 1997, Turkish Prime Minister Yilmaz visited
with Bill Clinton to ensure him that Turkey would attempt to improve
its human rights record by slaughtering less Kurds, but also
mentioned that if the US pushed too hard on that subject or if the US
Congress adopted an Armenian Genocide Resolution, Turkey might award
a billion dollar contract for attack helicopters to a Europe or maybe
even Russia.
During this timeframe, and with approval from the USA, Turkey began
to let contracts to Israel to upgrade its F-4, F-5 and F-16 aircraft.
Pemra Hazbay, writing in the May 2004 issue of Peace Watch, reported
that total Israeli arms sales to Turkey had exceeded $1 billion since
2000. `In December 1996, Israel won a deal worth $630 million to
upgrade Turkey’s fleet of fifty-four F-4 Phantom fighter jets. In
1998, Turkey awarded a $75 million contract to upgrade its fleet of
48 F-5 fighter jets to Israel Aircraft Industries’ Lahav division,
beating out strong French competition. In 2002, Turkey ratified its
largest military deal with Israel, a $700 million contract for the
renovation of Turkish tanks.’ But that pales in comparison to the $20
billion in US arms exports and military aid dealt to Turkey over the
last 24 years.
Then in 1999 came a news item from a publication known as the Foreign
Report based in the United Kingdom. That publication indicated that
`Israeli intelligence, the Mossad, had expanded its base in Turkey
and opened branches in Turkey for other two departments stationed in
Tel Aviv. The Mossad carried out several spy operations and plans
through its elements stationed in Istanbul and Ankara, where it
received support and full cooperation from the Turkish government.
According to the military cooperation agreement between the Mossad
and its Turkish counterpart, the MIT, signed by former Turkish
Foreign Minister Hekmet Citen during his visit to Israel in 1993, the
Mossad had provided Turkey with plans aiding it in closing its border
with Iraq, as well as being involved in the arrest the chairman of
the PKK, Abdullah Ocalan.’ That agreement also included help with
counter-narcotics.
Earlier in 1998, Israeli, Turkish and American military forces
engaged in exercises in the Mediterranean, according to Reuters and
Agencie France Press. “[These exercises] signal to the radical
states in the region that there is a strong alliance between Israel,
Turkey and the United States which they must fear, Israeli political
scientist Efraim Inbar said. Defense officials said during last
month’s visit to Ankara that they hoped the Jewish lobby in
Washington would help Turkey offset Greek and Armenian influence on
Capitol Hill. That’s certainly part of this. They expect us to help
them and we do help them a bit, said David Ivri, an adviser who
directs biannual strategy talks with Turkey.’ Reports also indicated
that the CIA and Pentagon intelligence organizations had regularly
chaired meetings of Turkish and Israeli officers in Tel Aviv for
years.
DEA & FBI
Prior to the US invasion of Afghanistan, the DEA monitored the
Afghanistan drug trade from its two offices in Pakistan: The
Islamabad Country Office and the Peshawar Resident Office. In
addition to Pakistan and Afghanistan, the DEA Islamabad Country
Office also includes in its area of responsibility Uzbekistan,
Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, the United Arab Emirates, and
Oman. Asa Hutchinson, the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement
Administration, testified in October 2001 that DEA intelligence
confirmed the presence of a linkage between Afghanistan’s ruling
Taliban and international terrorist Osama Bin Laden.
He went on to say that although DEA had no direct evidence to confirm
that Bin Laden is involved in the drug trade, the relationship
between the Taliban and Bin Laden is believed to have flourished in
large part due to the Taliban’s substantial reliance on the opium
trade as a source of organizational revenue. `While the activities of
the two entities do not always follow the same trajectory, we know
that drugs and terror frequently share the common ground of
geography, money, and violence. In this respect, the very sanctuary
enjoyed by Bin Laden is based on the existence of the Taliban’s
support for the drug trade. This connection defines the deadly,
symbiotic relationship between the illicit drug trade and
international terrorism.’
Meanwhile, back at the FBI, the Office of International Operations
oversees the Legal Attaché Program operating at 46 locations around
the world. The operation maintains contact with Interpol, other US
federal agencies such as the CIA and military agencies such as the
Defense Intelligence Agency, and foreign police and security
officers. Its job is to investigate or counter threats from foreign
intelligence, terrorists and criminal enterprises that threaten the
national or economic security of the USA. It coordinates its
activities with all US and foreign intelligence operations. In 2000,
it opened offices in Ankara, Turkey and Almaty, Kazhakstan. Since
1996, it has had offices in Islamabad, Pakistan and Tele Aviv,
Israel. In 1997 it opened one in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Combined,
these offices monitor the entire Middle East, Persian Gulf and
Central Asian threat areas developing thousands of `investigative
leads’.
Ms Edmonds has given the American people leads that show that they
are easily sacrificed for a perceived greater good.
John Stanton is a Virginia-based writer specializing in national
security and political matters. He is author of the forthcoming book,
America 2004: A Power, But Not Super. He can be reached at:
[email protected].

AzerTag, Azerbaijan State Info Agency
June 29 2004
PRESIDENT OF AZERBAIJAN ILHAM ALIYEV MET US PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH
[June 29, 2004, 17:06:19]
In the frame of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council Summit in
Istanbul, on 29 June, President of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ilham
Aliyev met President of the United States Mr. George Bush.
During the meeting, discussed were current state of the dynamically
developing strategic partnership relations between Azerbaijan and the
United States of America and prospects of these relations.
Noting the intensification of the conducted reforms in the Republic
the last times, the US President highly assessed these processes.
Touching upon construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil MEP, Mr.
Bush expressed his confidence that the pipeline would serve the
Republic of Azerbaijan and ensure economic development, peace and
stability in the entire region.
President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev expressed his gratitude to
President George Bush for support of realization of the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan by the US government.
In the meeting, also was focused the peaceful settlement of the
Armenia-Azerbaijan, Nagorny Karabakh conflict.
The parties also exchanged views on a number of other issues of
mutual interest.