More on significant Armenia political developments
Also have a look at the latest CNN tourism advert from Armenia by clicking on the attachment.
Note how the Turkish side demand a flexible attitude from Armenia while remaining unchanged in their stance.
Armenia, Turkey `In Secret Talks'
By Armen Koloyan in Prague and Emil Danielyan
Armenia and Turkey have held confidential negotiations to discuss a new opening for the normalization of their strained relations, a leading Turkish newspaper reported on Friday.
A senior U.S. official, meanwhile, expressed hope that Turkish President Abdullah Gul will accept his Armenian counterpart Serzh Sarkisian's invitation to arrive in Yerevan on September 6 for a World Cup qualifier match between the two countries' national football teams.
The mass-circulation daily `Hurriyet' said senior diplomats from the two countries met in the Swiss capital Berne on July 8 and and held talks for several days. It quoted the unnamed head of the Turkish delegation in the talks as saying that `the meeting took place in a positive atmosphere.' No details were reported.
Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan did not deny the report, saying the two countries have contacts "from time to time" and stressing that Ankara favours dialogue with its northeastern neighbour. "We have contacts with Armenian colleagues from time to time," Babacan told reporters, according to AFP news agency. "It is important to discuss how relations between the two countries can be normalised through dialogue."
The Armenian Foreign Ministry could not be reached for comment on Friday.
According to `Hurriyet,' the reported talks were made possible by Sarkisian's recent overtures to Ankara, including the invitation extended to Gul. In an article published by `The Wall Street Journal' on July 9, Sarkisian said Armenia is ready to engage in `a new phase of dialogue with the government and people of Turkey.'
Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan told the private NTV television on Wednesday that Gul has not yet decided whether to accept the extraordinary invitation. "Such a participation would depend on the developments ahead of the match," he said.
Babacan also said that the onus is on the Armenian side to normalize Turkish-Armenian relations. `Armenia should decide: Should the problems continue or should we open a new chapter in relations?' he said, according to `The Turkish Daily News.'
Gul was one of the first foreign leaders to congratulate Sarkisian on his victory in Armenia's recent presidential election. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Babacan sent similar messages to their newly appointed Armenian counterparts in April. They both said Ankara wants to start `dialogue' with Yerevan to address problems hampering the normalization of Turkish-Armenian ties.
U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza described these developments as `quite encouraging' and urged both sides to step up the search for a rapprochement. `I think they have a real chance to do so,' he said.
`President Gul is a courageous leader, and we very much hope that he will be able to accept that generous invitation from President Sarkisian, which would transform this modest football match into what could be a real ground-breaking moment,' Bryza told RFE/RL.
Bryza also praised Sarkisian for stating last month that Yerevan is ready to accept, in principle, the Erdogan government's proposal to set up a Turkish-Armenian commission of historians who would examine the 1915 mass killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire.
The apparent policy change was condemned by the Armenian opposition led by former President Levon Ter-Petrosian and prompted concern from the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun), a junior partner in the governing coalition. Dashnaktsutyun leaders say Sarkisian has clarified that the would-be commission should study `details of the genocide,' rather that determine whether the mass killings constituted a genocide.
Writing in `The Wall Street Journal,' Sarkisian appeared to further backpedal on his June statement and revert to his predecessor Robert Kocharian's belief that the 1915 massacres and other issues of mutual concern should be discussed by a Turkish-Armenian inter-governmental
body.
`It is odd to us that some people have decided to criticize President Sarkisian for taking those courageous steps when in fact some of those same people used to propose those very same steps,' Bryza said, in an apparent reference to Ter-Petrosian, who is known for his otherwise
conciliatory line on Turkish-Armenian relations.
Bryza also made clear that the United States has no plans to offer to act as a mediator in a Turkish-Armenian dialogue. `The parties need to talk to themselves and figure out what they want,' he said. `If they ask us to do that, we would consider it. But we are not mediators of Armenia's relations with Turkey.'
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~
AGGRESSIVE AZERBAJAN; TALK OF WAR FROM AZERBAJAN, OVER NAGORNO-KARABAKH
Economist.Com
July 17, 2008 Thursday
THE ECONOMIST INTELLIGENCE UNIT
Having spent heavily on its military, Azerbaijan has raised the possibility of recovering Nagorno-Karabakh and its other occupied territories by force. Although the forthcoming presidential election is a factor, this more aggressive stance is not mere bluster. Azerbaijan is frustrated at the failure of 14 years of negotiation and has concluded that a credible military threat might be the best way to force the Karabakh Armenians to make concessions--or, if that fails, to drive them out.
Talk of war
OSCE observers carried out an unscheduled monitoring of one sectionof the ceasefire line by Nagorno-Karabakh on July 16th, following allegations from both sides of violations. The atmosphere has been tense ever since Azerbaijan's president, Ilham Aliyev, said in early
June that although Azerbaijan would continue to take political steps to recover Karabakh and neighbouring territories under Armenian control, "we should be ready to liberate our lands in a military way at any time." He added that Azerbaijan's army was the strongest in the region.
In the wake of Mr Aliyev's remarks there has been considerable debate in Azerbaijan's press regarding a military solution to the Karabakh problem. Armenian politicians have been deeply critical, seeking to draw international attention to Mr Aliyev's remarks and to generate support for their position. Within Karabakh itself, the response has been less diplomatic. On July 16th the entity's defence minister claimed that he had sufficient military capability to repel any Azerbaijani attack.
As the exchanges of gunfire across the ceasefire line in recent weeks attest, Karabakh is not really a frozen conflict--nor has it been for much of the time since the 1994 ceasefire. For Azerbaijan, moreover, the stakes are enormous: some 15% of its territory is under occupation. In addition to Karabakh, seven other regions within Azerbaijan's internationally recognised borders are being held by the Karabakh Armenians, only two of which are needed to maintain a land
connection to Armenia. The occupation of the seven regions arguably arouses more ire within Azerbaijan than the occupation of Karabakh itself, because there is no political justification for it.
The major change in the situation in recent years has been on the Azerbaijani side: the army that lost the war is undergoing a transformation funded by the country's oil windfall. Mr Aliyev said
recently that defence spending had risen tenfold since 2003 and now stood at $2USbn annually. Already this is far in excess of Armenia's defence budget and it is set to rise still further. The military hardware that Azerbaijan has acquired is not on its own regarded as sufficient to recover the occupied territories, but it is a statement of intent. The crucial element is understood to be the quality of Azerbaijan's troops. Pointedly, Mr Aliyev said in early June that their professionalism is increasing daily.
Welling frustration
The more bellicose tone adopted by Azerbaijan's government is probably connected in part to the presidential election due later this year, which Mr Aliyev is all but certain to win. However it is wrong simply to ascribe the increase in war talk to electoral factors.
Azerbaijan is deeply dissatisfied with the work of the OSCE's Minsk Group, which comprises the US, Russia and France and is charged with seeking a solution to the conflict. Since 1994, the Minsk Group has achieved little or nothing. In Azerbaijani eyes, Russia prefers to
keep the conflict frozen in order to preserve its own influence in the Caucasus. France is regarded as passive and biased in favour of Armenia because of the Armenian diaspora among its citizenry. Most hope is invested in the US, but it is viewed as having failed to overcome Russian obstructionism (and the US too has an influential Armenian diaspora).
Muscular diplomacy
The frustration with the Minsk Group is understandable, but perhaps misses the point. The conflict has remained frozen not because the mechanisms are wrong, but because there is insufficient political will on both sides to compromise. The conflict is deadlocked because, while the status quo is unacceptable to Azerbaijan, the Karabakh Armenians
are broadly satisfied with it--or rather, they prefer the status quo to a compromise that would involve the loss of a land-bridge to Armenia or the acceptance of substantial autonomy in Azerbaijan. Hence the failure to reach a negotiated solution.
Until recently, the threat of Azerbaijani military action was not sufficiently serious to sway Karabakh Armenian calculations. Baku seems to have concluded that the best way forward is to change the other side's calculations by posing a more credible military threat.
It is therefore wrong to dismiss Azerbaijan's re-armament and more aggressive stance merely as pre-election bluster. It is a response to the failure of conflict resolution, and it betrays a belief that a change the balance of power in the region is one way to force the Armenian side to be more flexible in negotiations. For Azerbaijan's leadership, this course of action has the added attraction of creating
an option to seek to recover the territories by force if its more muscular diplomacy fails.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Economist.Com
July 17, 2008 Thursday
THE ECONOMIST INTELLIGENCE UNIT
Having spent heavily on its military, Azerbaijan has raised the possibility of recovering Nagorno-Karabakh and its other occupied territories by force. Although the forthcoming presidential election is a factor, this more aggressive stance is not mere bluster. Azerbaijan is frustrated at the failure of 14 years of negotiation and has concluded that a credible military threat might be the best way to force the Karabakh Armenians to make concessions--or, if that fails, to drive them out.
Talk of war
OSCE observers carried out an unscheduled monitoring of one sectionof the ceasefire line by Nagorno-Karabakh on July 16th, following allegations from both sides of violations. The atmosphere has been tense ever since Azerbaijan's president, Ilham Aliyev, said in early
June that although Azerbaijan would continue to take political steps to recover Karabakh and neighbouring territories under Armenian control, "we should be ready to liberate our lands in a military way at any time." He added that Azerbaijan's army was the strongest in the region.
In the wake of Mr Aliyev's remarks there has been considerable debate in Azerbaijan's press regarding a military solution to the Karabakh problem. Armenian politicians have been deeply critical, seeking to draw international attention to Mr Aliyev's remarks and to generate support for their position. Within Karabakh itself, the response has been less diplomatic. On July 16th the entity's defence minister claimed that he had sufficient military capability to repel any Azerbaijani attack.
As the exchanges of gunfire across the ceasefire line in recent weeks attest, Karabakh is not really a frozen conflict--nor has it been for much of the time since the 1994 ceasefire. For Azerbaijan, moreover, the stakes are enormous: some 15% of its territory is under occupation. In addition to Karabakh, seven other regions within Azerbaijan's internationally recognised borders are being held by the Karabakh Armenians, only two of which are needed to maintain a land
connection to Armenia. The occupation of the seven regions arguably arouses more ire within Azerbaijan than the occupation of Karabakh itself, because there is no political justification for it.
The major change in the situation in recent years has been on the Azerbaijani side: the army that lost the war is undergoing a transformation funded by the country's oil windfall. Mr Aliyev said
recently that defence spending had risen tenfold since 2003 and now stood at $2USbn annually. Already this is far in excess of Armenia's defence budget and it is set to rise still further. The military hardware that Azerbaijan has acquired is not on its own regarded as sufficient to recover the occupied territories, but it is a statement of intent. The crucial element is understood to be the quality of Azerbaijan's troops. Pointedly, Mr Aliyev said in early June that their professionalism is increasing daily.
Welling frustration
The more bellicose tone adopted by Azerbaijan's government is probably connected in part to the presidential election due later this year, which Mr Aliyev is all but certain to win. However it is wrong simply to ascribe the increase in war talk to electoral factors.
Azerbaijan is deeply dissatisfied with the work of the OSCE's Minsk Group, which comprises the US, Russia and France and is charged with seeking a solution to the conflict. Since 1994, the Minsk Group has achieved little or nothing. In Azerbaijani eyes, Russia prefers to
keep the conflict frozen in order to preserve its own influence in the Caucasus. France is regarded as passive and biased in favour of Armenia because of the Armenian diaspora among its citizenry. Most hope is invested in the US, but it is viewed as having failed to overcome Russian obstructionism (and the US too has an influential Armenian diaspora).
Muscular diplomacy
The frustration with the Minsk Group is understandable, but perhaps misses the point. The conflict has remained frozen not because the mechanisms are wrong, but because there is insufficient political will on both sides to compromise. The conflict is deadlocked because, while the status quo is unacceptable to Azerbaijan, the Karabakh Armenians
are broadly satisfied with it--or rather, they prefer the status quo to a compromise that would involve the loss of a land-bridge to Armenia or the acceptance of substantial autonomy in Azerbaijan. Hence the failure to reach a negotiated solution.
Until recently, the threat of Azerbaijani military action was not sufficiently serious to sway Karabakh Armenian calculations. Baku seems to have concluded that the best way forward is to change the other side's calculations by posing a more credible military threat.
It is therefore wrong to dismiss Azerbaijan's re-armament and more aggressive stance merely as pre-election bluster. It is a response to the failure of conflict resolution, and it betrays a belief that a change the balance of power in the region is one way to force the Armenian side to be more flexible in negotiations. For Azerbaijan's leadership, this course of action has the added attraction of creating
an option to seek to recover the territories by force if its more muscular diplomacy fails.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
U.S. Assessment Of Sarkisian Presidency Mixed
By Emil Danielyan
A senior U.S. official offered on Friday a mixed assessment of President Serzh Sarkisian's track record in power, welcoming his `positive steps' to end Armenia's post-election political crisis but expressing concern about the continuing government crackdown on the opposition.
`There have been some positive steps by the government recently to heal damage from the tragedy of March 1-2,' Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza told RFE/RL in an interview.
`But we still have concerns about some people that were detained for political accusations or supposed crimes,' he said. `We have lingering concerns about freedom of assembly not being restored fully and we still worry about the divide between the government and opposition.'
Ever since he took office on April 9, Sarkisian has been under pressure from the United States and other Western powers to end the crackdown that involved mass arrests and the use of lethal force against opposition demonstrators demanding a re-run of the February 19 presidential election. U.S. officials have repeatedly urged the newArmenian administrations to release all political prisoners, abolish severe restrictions on freedom of assembly and engage in dialogue with the opposition led by former President Levon Ter-Petrosian.
Bryza said earlier that such `dramatic' steps are essential for repairing damage caused to U.S.-Armenian relations by what Washington considers a `significantly flawed' election and the Armenian government's handling of the ensued opposition protests in Yerevan. The political situation in Armenia was on the agenda of Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian's talks in Washington this week with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Bryza and other U.S. officials.
`I don't think we are at a `dramatic' phase yet, but we are seeing some positive momentum,' Bryza said. `The direction has shifted and is much better.'
`It seems that President Sarkisian understands the challenges that face the country and what issues need some work,' he said, speaking from Washington. `We have seen some leadership from him on a number fronts and we appreciate that.'
The U.S. official argued that the Ter-Petrosian-led opposition has now better access to Armenia's government-controlled TV stations and more freedom to hold rallies and pointed to the launch of a parliamentary inquiry into the deadly March 1-2 clashes in Yerevan. `It would be even better if the opposition were participating in the inquiry and we hope that the government can convince the opposition to join,' he said.
Bryza went on to heap praise on Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian for his stated efforts to combat corruption, ensure equal government treatment of all businesses and reform Armenia's tax and customs services. `The prime minister is setting a good example as he takes on tough issues and is advancing a reform agenda,' he said.
Bryza at the same time reiterated U.S. concerns about the continuing imprisonment of dozens of opposition members and supporters on charges which he said are often `unpersuasive.' `Those are issues that make it impossible to say that the democratic momentum has been fully restored,'he said, adding that that is the reason why Washington is in no rush to unblock the release of additional economic assistance to Armenia under the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) program.
The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), which administers the scheme, pointedly declined last month to disburse a fresh installment of the $236 million aid package designed to upgrade Armenia's rural infrastructure. The MCC board said it will `continue to monitor the situation' and will again discuss the matter at its next meeting due in September.
`It's too early to tell now whether the MCC board will decide to continue or end the program in September,' said Bryza.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
By Emil Danielyan
A senior U.S. official offered on Friday a mixed assessment of President Serzh Sarkisian's track record in power, welcoming his `positive steps' to end Armenia's post-election political crisis but expressing concern about the continuing government crackdown on the opposition.
`There have been some positive steps by the government recently to heal damage from the tragedy of March 1-2,' Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza told RFE/RL in an interview.
`But we still have concerns about some people that were detained for political accusations or supposed crimes,' he said. `We have lingering concerns about freedom of assembly not being restored fully and we still worry about the divide between the government and opposition.'
Ever since he took office on April 9, Sarkisian has been under pressure from the United States and other Western powers to end the crackdown that involved mass arrests and the use of lethal force against opposition demonstrators demanding a re-run of the February 19 presidential election. U.S. officials have repeatedly urged the newArmenian administrations to release all political prisoners, abolish severe restrictions on freedom of assembly and engage in dialogue with the opposition led by former President Levon Ter-Petrosian.
Bryza said earlier that such `dramatic' steps are essential for repairing damage caused to U.S.-Armenian relations by what Washington considers a `significantly flawed' election and the Armenian government's handling of the ensued opposition protests in Yerevan. The political situation in Armenia was on the agenda of Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian's talks in Washington this week with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Bryza and other U.S. officials.
`I don't think we are at a `dramatic' phase yet, but we are seeing some positive momentum,' Bryza said. `The direction has shifted and is much better.'
`It seems that President Sarkisian understands the challenges that face the country and what issues need some work,' he said, speaking from Washington. `We have seen some leadership from him on a number fronts and we appreciate that.'
The U.S. official argued that the Ter-Petrosian-led opposition has now better access to Armenia's government-controlled TV stations and more freedom to hold rallies and pointed to the launch of a parliamentary inquiry into the deadly March 1-2 clashes in Yerevan. `It would be even better if the opposition were participating in the inquiry and we hope that the government can convince the opposition to join,' he said.
Bryza went on to heap praise on Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian for his stated efforts to combat corruption, ensure equal government treatment of all businesses and reform Armenia's tax and customs services. `The prime minister is setting a good example as he takes on tough issues and is advancing a reform agenda,' he said.
Bryza at the same time reiterated U.S. concerns about the continuing imprisonment of dozens of opposition members and supporters on charges which he said are often `unpersuasive.' `Those are issues that make it impossible to say that the democratic momentum has been fully restored,'he said, adding that that is the reason why Washington is in no rush to unblock the release of additional economic assistance to Armenia under the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) program.
The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), which administers the scheme, pointedly declined last month to disburse a fresh installment of the $236 million aid package designed to upgrade Armenia's rural infrastructure. The MCC board said it will `continue to monitor the situation' and will again discuss the matter at its next meeting due in September.
`It's too early to tell now whether the MCC board will decide to continue or end the program in September,' said Bryza.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No comments:
Post a Comment