Russian-Armenian Relations

[Armenian]

Re: Russian-Armenian Relations

Vladimir Putin Tries to Keep Armenia as the Last Ally of Russia

The official part of a visit of the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin, to Armenia has begun. The formal pretext for the visit was the opening of the Year of Russia in Armenia. In actual fact, the agenda goes beyond the framework of protocol and cultural functions: it will include the Karabakh problem, cooperation in the gas sphere, and the use of Armenian territory for the deployment of Russian military bases which will be withdrawn from Georgia within the next few years. The President of Russia, together with his Armenian colleague, Robert Kocharyan, will take part in the official opening of the Year of Russia in Armenia and attend a gala concert. The pompous protocol functions serve as a smokescreen for a very important dialogue on the burning issues of the day. Alarmed by a whole series of “Rose”, “Orange” and other revolutions, Russia is afraid of losing one of the last of its bulwarks in the area of the former USSR.

In the context of the deepening of their strategic partnership the presidents of the two countries will discuss the problems of resolving the Karabakh conflict, as well as the prospects of deploying the Russian military bases on Armenian territory, which should be withdrawn from Georgia within the next few years. As regards the first problem, Moscow tries to soften the position of Yerevan in order to avoid the exacerbation of the relations with Baku. The Kremlin hoped to bring the President of Armenia, Robert Kocharyan, and the President of Azerbaijan, Ilkham Aliyev, to negotiations during the celebration of the 60th anniversary of Victory in the last war in Moscow in May. However, judging by information coming in from Baku, President Aliyev will hardly come to Moscow for the occasion.

The question of the withdrawal of Russian troops and arms from Georgia has been solved, in the main, as a result of negotiations with the Georgian leadership, although the deadlines have not been fixed. The most probable time will be 2007. After that Russia hopes to deploy its military units on Armenian territory, in the vicinity of the Russian base No 102. Yerevan agrees to it, but puts forward a number of conditions. The main one is a solution to the problem of the transport blockade of Armenia. This is why both Moscow and Yerevan hope to work out a concerted policy aimed at obtaining Georgia's consent to a free transport corridor by commissioning the Novorossiisk – Poti sea ferry, and also resuming the railway connection through the territory of Abkhazia.

Naturally, the questions of military cooperation will also be discussed. Armenia receives arms and ammunition from Russia at preferential prices. To date more than 500 Armenian army officers study in Russia free of charge, that is, at the expense of the Russian budget. This figure can be bigger. A range of problems to be discussed deal with the relations between Russia, Armenia and Iran. Teheran remains an important regional partner of Moscow, but it views rather cautiously the plans to build a gas pipeline between Iran and Armenia, which will later be one of the channels of supplying Iranian gas to Ukraine and Europe. But the deputy foreign minister of Armenia, Gegam Garibjanyan, has said that Russia should take part in the negotiations on the matter. President Putin will, no doubt, raise the question of “Gazprom” taking part in the implementation of this project.
Boris Volkhonsky

Source: http://www.kommersant.com/page.asp?id=557608[/QUOTE]

Russian deputy speaker: “Russia has every reason to recognize Artsakh, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Transdnestr”

“The international situation has given us a positive example – if Albanians receive the right to establish their own independent state in the foreign territory, so ancient Armenian people must perhaps receive the right to restore the territory;” leader of the Russian Liberal Democratic Party, Deputy Speaker of Russian State Duma Vladimir Zhirinovsky is quoted by a REGNUM correspondent as stating in Moscow, speaking at the third Russia’s Armenian Union (RAU) Congress.

“Yes, we pity Serbs, but it is a positive signal for the international community – it is a positive signal for Artsakh (Nagorno Karabakh – REGNUM), for Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Transdnestr,” Zhirinovsky continued. According to him, if the international community recognizes Kosovo and Montenegro, Russia will have every reason to recognize analogous territories, especially as it has more rights for that, because these republics were parts of the Russian Empire, and now they pretend to restore their legal personalities. “It may not be denied – it is the international law,” he stated.

As Vladimir Zhirinovsky stressed, addressing to the Russian Armenians Union (RAU) Congress deputies and guests, “the Armenian people have already been suffering for 100 years, and it is necessary to achieve adoption of at least one international organization’s resolution on returning territories to Armenian state by 2015, the 100th anniversary of those awful events.” “It is not enough to recognize the Genocide; the territories should be returned. Those ones, who are living there now, should be returned to Ashgabat and Tashkent — what does one people need two states for? And territories should be returned to Armenia and Kurdistan. Kurds are betrayed people too – they have been expecting for 100 years,” the LDPR leader said.

Also, he called the RAU to be more active in the Russian provinces and to cooperate with Russian political and non-governmental organizations in order to explain to young generation of Russians that “Armenians are our brothers; they are Christians, and they have been living side by side with Russians for hundreds of years.” Zhirinovsky called on the RAU to cooperate for realization of other socially vital initiatives.

Russia Intends to Revise Policy towards Armenia

Administration of the Russian President intends to revise its policy line in relations with Armenia, said professor Mikhail Meyer, the Director of the Institute of Asian and African Studies of Moscow State University. In his words, relations with a strategic partner as Armenia is for Russia, should be closer. «Absence of scientific and cultural ties between our countries in latest 10-15 years have had a negative impact on the relations. After the collapse of the USSR a situation that is very unfavorable for Russia was formed: it does not have specialists on CIS countries. Now the state of affairs started improving, however there is a lack of Armenian teachers, especially grabar (ancient Armenian),» the professor noted. He also remarked that certain progress is available on the way of Armenia and Russia becoming closer. «Academician Mikhail Piotrovsky was in Yerevan lately, my colleague Vitaly Naumkin is in Yerevan now, specialist on Arab countries Dmitry Frolov is soon expected to arrive. We almost do not know the works of contemporary Armenian historians, however I hope the gap will be filled,» Mikhail Meyer remarked. Professor Mikhail Meyer is in Yerevan on the invitation of the South Caucasian branch of the Caucasus Democracy Institute development foundation.

Source: http://panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=17147

Allied Relations with Russia Vitally Important for Armenia

Russia, in the person of the reasonable part of its leadership, is trying to maintain its presence and influence in the Caucasus. It’s important for Russia to prevent destabilization in the North Caucasus, deployment of NATO military bases and projection of military force inland, first vice-president of the Academy of Geopolitical Studies, Colonel General Leonid Ivashov stated in an interview with PanARMENIAN.Net reporter. In his words, Armenia is Russia’s monument point in the South Caucasus. “At the same time it’s vitally important for Armenia to have allied relations with Russia. If Armenia relies on promises made by the West it will lose its state system and independence,” Ivashov said. He remarked that Armenia has the right to establish relations with whom it wishes. “But if it conflicts with Russia’s interests it can transform cooperation into the level of mutually beneficial relations without any political or economic preferences. However such situation will conflict with Armenia’s national interests and result in the isolation of the republic and even in its collapse,” the Russian scientist said. Leonid Ivashov reminded that numerous Armenian Diaspora lives in Russia. “I think it could make a great contribution to the development of the Russian-Armenian allied relations,” he noted.

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/print/?nid=17440

Cooperation with Russia and Iran Neutralizes Military Threat from Turkey

Armenia's relations with both Russia and Iran help to neutralize threats to Armenia and preserve military and political balance in the region stated Armenian National Security Secretary and Defense Minister Serge Sarkisian in a report titled "Directions of National Security Strategy of Armenian Republic." "Armenian-Russian military cooperation, especially the presence of the Russian military in Armenia, neutralizes the military threat coming from Turkey," says the report. The document notes that the Armenian-Russian strategic partnership is developing in three important directions, these being the formation of coalition groups, anti-aircraft defense, and cooperation within the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO).

The report also highlights Armenian and Russian cooperation in the multilateral sphere. "For example, the unified anti-aircraft defense system along with the joint Armenian-Russian patrol solves one of the most important problems of the national security, while the Armenian-Russian military bloc within the CSTO maintains the military-political balance in the South Caucasus region," the report says. At the same time the report says Armenian-Russian relations never posed obstacles for the development of Armenia's foreign policy in other directions, such as European integration. "Russia has also adopted the European way of development and the increasing cooperation between Russia and the European Union creates a favorable environment for the harmonization of Armenia's two priority directions for the development of state and national security," the document says.

The document also describes the importance of Armenian-Iranian relations in preserving military and political balance in the region. The document states, that Iran, along with Turkey, is a crucial country for regional military and political balance in the region. And since Turkey is a member of NATO and allied with the US and Israel, it is regarded by Iran as a possible enemy. Their rivalry provides Armenia with the ability to neutralize the Azerbaijan-Turkey coalition against Armenia. The report also mentions cooperation with Iran in the energy sector, which is aimed at finding alternative energy sources for Armenia. According to the report, Iran is very important to Armenia for transportation and because of the economic blockade of Armenia. Iran is a strategic route to Asia and the Middle East, and also an alternate route to Russia. Iran is also geographically close to Karabagh, and maintains a balanced position regarding the conflict.

The report pays special attention to the pressure that Azerbaijan puts on Iran, as an Islamic country. Azerbaijan frames the Karabagh conflict as a religious conflict and speculates that there are over "one million Muslim refugees." It also points out that Azerbaijan is threatening to expand cooperation with the US that rivals Iran. Armenia, on the other hand, maintains balanced relations so cooperation between the US and Armenia does not go against Iranian interests.

[Armenian]

Re: Russian-Armenian Relations

One does not even have to read between the lines anymore to see the pro-Armenian stance Russian officials have been taking regarding Artsakh. Recent comments made by Vladimir Kazimirov, the former Russian co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, clearly reveals Moscow's interest in keeping the status-quo in the south Caucasus. Moscow is clearly signaling that it does not want to see an armed clash between Armenia and Azerbaijan. And if such a situation does occur Moscow is clearly forecasting the defeat of the Azeri military. Under this scenario the Armenian Republic along with Artsakh will ultimately come out as the victorious side. This will also ultimately vindicate the oft criticized "soft" approach of the Sargsyan/Kocharyan administration in Yerevan with regards to the Artsakh problem. The complimentary comments by the Russian diplomat towards the Armenian authorities is a vivid example of how well official Yerevan has been carrying out its diplomatic obligations internationally and playing the pro-Russian card regionally. In other words, by loudly stating that they are ready for compromises with Azerbaijan, knowing full well that Azerbaijan is not willing to compromise the fate of Artskah, Yerevan is expressing its commitment to peace and stability in the region and Baku is looking like the aggressor. And Yerevan's more than close relations with the region's only superpower, Russia, and Baku's less than ideal relations with Moscow is obviously yet another factor that is fundamentally helping the Armenian side. I only wish more Armenians were able to understand these nuances in international diplomacy and the realities of living the the Caucasus.

Armenian

*************************************

Russian Diplomat says Baku's Resumption of War to be Devastating

"Resumption of hostilities in Nagorno-Karabakh would cause more damage than in 1992-1994, since collisions would take place between well-equipped armies not guerilla troops," said Vladimir Kazimirov, the former Russian co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group. If war resumes, he said, neither side would manage a victorious blitzkrieg. Hostilities will linger for the next 4-5 years and the consequences will be destructive for the initiator first and foremost. This is a fact that demands very thorough consideration by the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan, he said.

According to Kazimorov, the war is a threat for the entire international community as well. "The South Caucasus is not a region deserving indifference," he said, noting that it won't be easy to justify new carnage or an occupation of Armenia, since everyone sees Yerevan and Stepanakert as insisting on a compromise solution, while Baku stubbornly threatens war if Armenians don't relinquish all territorial claims, including Nagorno-Karabakh. The Repetition of hostilities will be perceived as a great anomaly," the Russian diplomat said.

"The side that dares to violate the armistice will immediately draw universal condemnation for breaking from the principles of the OSCE and the commitments to the CoE," he stated. "World powers and influential international organizations, which have worked for a peaceful resolution of the conflict will severely condemn the aggressor," he added.

Although Article 9 of the Azerbaijani constitution rejects war as a means of settling international conflicts, Azeri leaders have already undermined the authority of their Laws by making repeated bellicose statements, Kazimorov noted. They don't fail to cite the Constitution when commenting on the referendum on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh but they completely ignore the above-mentioned article, he added. Baku's role in exacerbating the situation in the Caucasus is becoming more apparent, Kazimorov stated. Baku has been intensifying the arms race in the Caucasus by drastically boosting its defense budget year after year. While President Heydar Aliyev has completely neglected the agreement with Armenia and Karabakh on the suppression of border incidents, he noted.

Every day the Azeri Defense Ministry reports a violation of the ceasefire by Armenians. However, if Baku truly wanted to suppress such incidents, why doesn't it follow the agreement officially signed under the aegis of the OSCE? Meanwhile, Yerevan and Stepanakert have time and again stated their support of the agreement. If Baku thinks this agreement imperfect, it could be amended or replaced by another one. However, it is clear that Azerbaijan prefers the mounting casualties so as to aggravate tensions and pursue their hysterical propaganda. According to Daniel Fried, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs armed revenge will entail grave consequences and ruin Azerbaijan's future.

Source: http://www.huliq.com/40008/russian-d...be-devastating

Russian expert: Military settlement of Nagorno Karabakh conflict is an affair that will result in collapse of Azerbaijan

National consensus has been reached in Nagorno Karabakh regarding the fact that “the republic must be an independent state,” so victory of one or another candidate at the presidential election will not radically change on the general situation, head of the Caucasus department at the Institute for CIS Studies Mikhail Alexandrov said. “The matter concerns nuances. For instance, Bako Saakyan is quite moderate and is orientated towards connection with Armenia and talks with Azerbaijan. Masis Mailyan is tougher, he opposes returning of seven occupied areas to Azerbaijan and speaks for a more autonomous from Yerevan negotiation stance,” Alexandrov said adding that in any case, the key direction in Stepanakert will be dialog. At the same time, he noted that Ilham Aliev’s hopes for returning Karabakh through dialog are naďve.

“A military settlement is an affair that will result in collapse of Azerbaijan as a state. It is unreal for Baku to win over Armenia and the NKR, no matter how strongly they increase their military spending,” the expert believes. The matter concerns not only money, but efficiency of the Army. “Besides, Armenia is connected with Russia by military agreements; the most up-to-date military equipment is supplied there at lower prices. Some types of weapons are impossible for Azerbaijan to acquire in foreign markets; nobody will sell them to it. So, it will be ungrounded to hope for superiority and a Blitzkrieg,”

the analyst stressed adding that “this form of being looped” can result in Azerbaijan losing the seven areas of the Nagorno Karabakh security belt. Now, he believes, there is still an opportunity to implement the formula “peace for territories”: Azerbaijan recognizes Nagorno Karabakh independence and the latter returns the territories. “However, now, the time is not serving Baku. The Kosovo precedent that, most probably, will end with a one-sided recognition of the territory’s independence by the West will only encourage Karabakh in its intentions. ‘The Fifth Column’ and a coup in Stepanakert are ruled out, because there is no single Azerbaijani there,” Mikhail Alexandrov is quoted as saying by PanARMENIAN.Net.

Source: http://www.regnum.ru/english/860576.html

[Armenian]

Re: Russian-Armenian Relations

Sargsyan Wins Putin's Seal of Approval

President Vladimir Putin and Serzh Sargsyan on Monday pledged continuity in bilateral relations, as the Armenian president-elect made Moscow his first destination after being declared the winner in a controversial election last month. "I know that political processes in Armenia are not developing easily, but we very much hope that everything we have built up in bilateral relations in recent years will remain and develop further in the future, regardless of events inside Armenia," Putin said at the start of the talks in the Kremlin. Sargsyan was elected in a Feb. 19 vote that the opposition says was rigged. The growing protests that followed were then violently dispersed by police and a 20-day state of emergency was imposed. The state of emergency ended last week. Sargsyan thanked Putin for Russia's support, including its backing in the run-up to the Armenian vote. "Both [Armenian President Robert Kocharyan] and our ambassador passed your personal messages on to me, and I will be honest: Never before have we witnessed such an unambiguous approach," he said. Sargsyan's trip comes on the heels of a visit by Kocharyan, who came to Moscow for an informal Commonwealth of Independent States summit on Feb. 22.

Putin congratulated Sargsyan, currently prime minister, on his victory, while Sargsyan said the election of First Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev as Putin's replacement in March instilled hope that the bilateral relations would continue to develop positively. Sargsyan met Medvedev earlier on Monday. Sargsyan is to be inaugurated on April 9, while the ceremony for Medvedev will take place on May 7. The talks between Putin and Sargsyan were to focus on expanding trade and economic relations, including nuclear cooperation, the Kremlin said in a statement on Monday. Armenia has been invited to join Russia's international uranium enrichment center in Angarsk and is expected to finalize its commitment in the near future.

Azhdar Kurtov, an analyst with the Russian Institute of Strategic Studies, said continuity in relations with Yerevan was important for Moscow, as Armenia remains virtually its only ally in the South Caucasus. "Armenia has been successful so far in keeping the Caucasus from drifting toward the West or, rather, the south," said Kurtov, who focuses on the CIS. Landlocked Armenia borders Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran and Turkey, in a region that is becoming a key transit route for oil exports to European and world markets. Georgia and Azerbaijan have both said they are interested in NATO membership.

The difference between Moscow's relations with Armenia and its relationship with Georgia was evident, Kurtov said, from the Russian media coverage of postelection riots in Yerevan and of the earlier riots in Tbilisi. The disturbances and the police reaction in Armenia have received much less coverage than did the events in Georgia, he said. Armenia, which hosts a Russian military base, is part of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization, a regional body aimed at strengthening military and political ties. Armenia will take over the chairmanship of the organization this fall.

Russian investment in Armenia totaled about $1 billion at the end of 2007, a year that saw trade between the countries top $800 million, the Kremlin said, adding that a figure of $1 billion was a realistic forecast for the near future. In a standard indication of good relations between the countries, the Kremlin said Armenia would host a series of Russian cultural events this year, while Russia would host a "Season of Armenian Culture" in 2009. Despite the pledges of continued friendship, however, Gazprom is soon likely to significantly hike the prices that Armenia pays it for gas, analysts have said. Armenia currently pays a mere $110 per thousand cubic meters.

Source: http://www.themoscowtimes.com/storie...03/25/003.html

Armenia only strategic ally for Russia in South Caucasus

A significant breakthrough occurred in the Russian-Armenian relations during past eight years, said Nikolay Ryzhkov, member of the RF Federation Council, co-chair of the Russian-Armenian commission for interparliamentary cooperation. “Frequent presidential visits as well as conduction of the Year of Russia in Armenia and the Year of Armenia in Russia helped the relationship, he said. “Russia and Armenia enjoy good political relations. Undoubtedly, the atmosphere is created by our leaders. There are possibilities to fortify our military base in Gyumri, to develop economic and humanitarian contacts,” Mr Ryzhkov said. “At the moment we are all awaiting the February 19 presidential election. The shift of power in our countries will take place almost simultaneously and I am hopeful that the policy of past eight years formed owing to activities of Presidents Kocharian and Putin will undergo no changes,” he went on. “When I was Prime Minister I treated all of three South Caucasian republics equally. Now, the situation is different. Armenia is Russia’s only strategic ally in the South Caucasus. I am confident that the RF leadership will not allow losing such a partner,” Mr Ryzhkov said in an interview with RIA Novosti.

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=24844

TV REPORTS ON AIR DEFENCE EXERCISE AT RUSSIAN AIR BASE IN ARMENIA

MiG-29 "Fulcrum" Erebuni AFB: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjdlRvYWpHI

Zvezda TV, Russia, Ministry of Defense May 4 2008

[Presenter] The country's southern shield is being tested for robustness: alert signals were sounded again at the Russian air base in Armenia. Fighter aircraft are scrambled into the air. A few minutes into the flight it becomes clear that it was a practice alert. The air defence forces on the ground also tested their readiness to repel attacks. Our special correspondent Andrey Kovtunenko followed the military exercise in Armenia's peaceful skies.

[Correspondent] [Passage omitted] It is battle quarters at the Russian air base of Erebuni. [Passage omitted] While the pilot is getting ready for the flight, the technicians, having run 100 metres [to the aircraft], are removing covers from a MiG-29. A few minutes later, the pilot jumps into the xxxxpit and is ready to take off. [Passage omitted] The border with Turkey is only 14 km away - for a MiG, it is just a couple of minutes. Therefore, depending on the combat mission, [the pilot] has to turn one way or the other and fly back. In 1998, the air group revamped its fleet: MiG-29s went on combat training duty at the CIS combined air defence system. It is now 10 years since the MiG-29 started protecting the skies over Armenia. The aircraft has acquitted itself well in hot conditions and in the mountains. Experienced pilots treat this aircraft with respect: it is easy to run and reliable in combat. One can only speak to the pilot after he has accomplished his combat mission: traditionally, they do not give interviews before the flight.

[Yevgeniy Yakimov, captioned as an aviation regiment commander; in the xxxxpit after landing] We perform air defence tasks in the CIS combined air defence system. We are performing our tasks successfully. On 22 [presumably April] there was a major large-scale exercise at the CIS combined air defence system. We achieved our objective in full.

[Correspondent] Only a few years ago, Turkish pilots often staged aerial tests for ours. Nowadays, this is a rare occurrence.

[Pavel Maratkanov, captioned as deputy commander of the air base for educational work] It is not often that we are scrambled into action but it happens. Sometimes they make sorties to test us - but not often. The most recent incident was last year.

[Correspondent] While pilots polish their aerial skills, the missile defence system is on permanent combat duty. Russian and Armenian officers track all aerial targets together. At the air defence base near Gyumri [also in Armenia], meanwhile, the S-300 and Kub-3M missile defence systems are on alert. Servicemen from this regiment recently took part in an exercise in Ashuluk [in southern Russia]. Their performance was marked as excellent.

[Aleksandr Surinkin, captioned as anti-aircraft regiment commander] At the 2008 tactical exercise with live firing, the regiment fired on evading low-flying aerial target. The target was destroyed at the maximum range. The mark was excellent.

[Correspondent] It is no secret to anyone here that Armenia regards the 102nd Russian military base deployed in the republic as an element of it national security. In this country, they value friendly relations.

Source: http://groong.usc.edu/news/msg230966.html

Putin: Russian-Armenian relations entering new level

“Despite the hard times in the political process in Armenia, Armenian-Russian are going to develop at a new level,” president of Russia Vladimir Putin said at a meeting with Armenia's president-elect Serzh Sargsyan in Kremlin. Vladimir Putin said at the meeting that he is informed of complicated internal political processes in Armenia. Nevertheless, he observed, Russia hopes that, regardless the course of internal political events in Armenia, “everything that has been created in the preceding years, is preserved and developed in the future.” Sargsyan, for his part, said that Armenia needs to further develop relations with Russia. “We have always appreciated your help to Armenia,” Sargsyan noticed. To remind, Sargsyan has already met on March 24 with Russia's president-elect Dmitry Medvedev. He is also expected to meet with prime minister Viktor Zubkov and Moscow mayor Yuri Luzhkov.

Source: http://www.regnum.ru/english/975875.html

Yuri Luzhkov: Moscow among Armenia’s major partners

Last year the commodity turnover between Moscow and Armenia increased by 65 per cent, Moscow’s Mayor Yuri Luzhkov said at a meeting with Armenia’s President-elect Serzh Sargsyan. “In the initial half of 2007 the turnover amounted to $70,5 million, increasing by 65 per cent during the year,” he said, adding that Moscow is one of Armenia’s major partners. “We opened the House of Moscow in Yerevan where entrepreneurs can get all necessary information for establishing their business in Armenia. A new wholesale center will open in Moscow soon. A new Armenian Church will be built,” the Mayor said. He also congratulated Serzh Sargsyan on election President of Armenia, wished him every success at the post and voiced hope for further development of the Armenian-Russian strategic partnership, Novosti Armenia reports.

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=25477

V. ZUBKOV: “ARMENIA CAN ALWAYS RELY ON RUSSIA”

The labor visit of the president-elect Prime Minister of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan in the Russian Federation is over. Yesterday in the evening he returned back to Yerevan. Before his return he had a meeting with the Prime Minister of the RF Viktor Zubkov. According to the Government public relations department, Zubkov congratulated Serzh Sargsyan for his victory in the presidential elections. He said that he was sure Sargsyan’s experience and skills in the state governing sphere will contribute to the salvation of the problems. “We sincerely wish our friend and relative Armenia to be developed. And Armenia can always rely on Russia’s support,” mentioned Zubkov. The Prime Minister of the RF highly evaluated the activities carried out by Serz Sargsyan in the development and improvement of the Armenia-Russian inter-governmental committee. Note that Serzh Sargsyan had meetings with the president of Russia Vladimir Putin, the new president Dmitry Medvedev, and the mayor of Moscow Yuri Luzjkov.

Source: http://www.panorama.am/en/politics/2008/03/25/gov/

Russia and Armenia are to move on in strategic partnership

The newly elected Armenian president made Russia its first official visit. The two countries are to deepen relations. Yesterday the new Armenian president Serge Sarkisian visited Moscow. The Russian and Armenian presidents discussed the wide range of bilateral cooperation in political, military and other spheres. The two countries share the same opinions in lots of international problems. Yesterday in the focus of attention was Nagorno-Karabakh issue and trade-economic relations, strengthening on the gas cooperation. Russia and Armenia are bound with strategic partnership relations. Russia satisfies all Armenian gas needs and has one third of all investments in Armenia. Russia is keeping a military base in Armenia.

Source: http://www.russia-ic.com/news/show/6023/

[Armenian]

Re: Russian-Armenian Relations

Russo-Armenian relations according to a US based Think Tank.

********************

Armenia: Russia's Strengthening Hand

Summary

Armenia’s Feb. 19 presidential election pitted two pro-Russian candidates against each other. Armenia is crucial to Russian strategy in the Caucasus, and Russian political and economic influence there has been on the rise.

Analysis

The presidential election held Feb. 19 in Armenia is over, and Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisyan has emerged as the clear victor. His main opponent was former President Levon Ter-Petrosyan. Both candidates are pro-Russian, and each recently paid political “tribute” to Moscow: Ter-Petrosyan met with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Feb. 11, and Sarkisyan hosted Russian Prime Minister Viktor Zubkov in Yerevan on Feb. 6. Of the two candidates, Moscow prefers Sarkisyan. As a war hero and a native of the contested Nagorno-Karabakh region, he is not looking to give an inch of ground in Armenia’s dispute with Azerbaijan over the territory. Russia wants to keep its options open regarding Nagorno-Karabakh, especially now that it is deciding how to respond to Kosovo’s independence declaration — and, therefore, Ter-Petrosyan, who has a history of attempting to resolve the conflict, is not the best man for the job, in Moscow’s opinion. Armenia is a crucial piece of Moscow’s geopolitical puzzle in the region: It is a Russian “advance post” in the South Caucasus and the central cog of Iranian-Russian cooperation. Indeed, Russia’s influence is on the rise in Armenia, with both political and economic trends pointing to an ever-tighter alignment between the two.

No matter who won Armenia’s election, it would not have changed Yerevan’s geopolitical imperatives. Armenia is flanked by a hostile Azerbaijan and an equally hostile Turkey, and thus has to develop close relations with its powerful neighbors Iran and Russia. Considering the recent and ongoing Azeri military buildup, neither presidential candidate had any intention of abandoning the alliance with Russia. Armenia has rejected NATO membership as a goal and has strained relations with the United States over its own close economic relationship with Iran. (However, the strong Armenian lobby in Washington has thus far prevented any substantial cuts in U.S. military and economic aid, something the Bush administration has pushing for since March 2007.) In addition to political affinities, the strong geopolitical pull between Moscow and Yerevan has produced a considerable increase in Russian economic influence in Armenia, through both infrastructural investments and business ventures:

* Russia now controls ArmRosGazprom, operator of a pipeline that transports Iranian natural gas to Armenia to operate Armenian power plants — which produce electricity on which Iran depends.
* Gazprom oil subsidiary Gazpromneft is planning to construct an oil refinery near the municipality of Megri, in southern Armenia, that also will supply Iran with much-needed gasoline and oil derivatives.
* Russian state-owned nuclear energy company Rosatom has proposed its services for the construction of a new nuclear power station in Armenia to replace or supplement the aging Metzamor plant.
* Russia and Armenia signed a deal Feb. 6 to create a joint uranium exploration venture.
* Through Rusal, one of the world’s largest aluminum producers, Russia also controls Armenal, an aluminum foil mill in Yerevan that accounts for 40 percent of total Armenian annual exports.
* Russian state railway monopoly Russian Railways has a 30-year contract to run Armenia’s national railway network — which, crucially, extends into Iran.
* Russian mobile telephony operators Vimpelcom and Mobile TeleSystems essentially own Armenia’s entire cellular network.

It should be noted that many of the larger investments (such as the proposed nuclear power plant) could run into funding problems; Armenia is practically broke, and Russia has a poor track record of financing infrastructure projects. Furthermore, Moscow has in the past rarely invested money directly in Armenia, choosing instead to use Armenia’s debt to Russia as a way to foreclose on Armenian national assets. That is still the case, but now there also is an increase in Russian businesses and state-owned enterprises investing directly in the country. Russia sinking actual money into Armenia is notable and signifies that Yerevan is being further locked into Moscow’s sphere of influence.

Source: http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/arm...ngthening_hand

Armenia, Azerbaijan: Russia, the West and Nagorno-Karabakh

Summary

Azerbaijan accused Armenia of stoking unrest in the disputed enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh after a gunbattle that killed 15 people March 5. Azerbaijan is using its petroleum wealth to arm itself for a potential conflict with Armenia over the separatist region, which on paper belongs to Azerbaijan but in reality is controlled by Armenia. The West does not want to see this conflict re-emerge, but Russia does — to a point.

Analysis

Following a gunbattle in the breakaway region of Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan said 15 soldiers were killed and it accused its neighbor Armenia on March 5 of deliberately stoking unrest in the breakaway region. If true, 15 dead would mark the worst clash in recent years between Muslim Azerbaijan and Orthodox Christian Armenia, which technically remain at war. Renewed conflict in the disputed enclave would displease the West, but would suit Russia just fine unless Azerbaijan scores a decisive win — something becoming increasingly likely, however, as Azerbaijan converts its petroleum wealth into armaments. Pro-Armenian forces seized the ethnic Armenian enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh in a war in the 1990s. The two sides have remained in a tense deadlock over the territory ever since, but the conflict has been relatively dormant since a 1994 cease-fire. Technically, Nagorno-Karabakh is still part of Azerbaijan, even though Armenia controls it. International pressure, lack of support from every nation but Russia and Iran, and fear of Azeri retaliation have kept Armenia from annexing the territory. Azerbaijan has been held back from retaking the land due to pressure from the West and the Azeri military’s relative weakness.

But the situation slowly has been changing as Azerbaijan has grown stronger and richer following the 2006 completion of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline, which Western companies developed to feed oil to Europe. The BTC led to a more pro-Western Azerbaijan, and the tremendous new wealth it generated has helped the country increase its defense spending from $175 million in 2004 to more than $1 billion at the start of 2008. This, of course, has Armenia more than nervous, but the much poorer country can barely increase its spending to follow Azerbaijan’s lead. In the past year, Armenia has increased its defense spending by 20 percent, from $125 million to $150 million — almost all of which was spent on boosting its defensive capabilities. The Azeris constantly speak about wanting to take Nagorno-Karabakh back by force, and now actually are closing in on the ability to do so. And there is another force pushing for a conflict: Russia.

Following the 2004 eviction from its military bases in nearby Georgia after the Rose Revolution, Russia has been slowly withdrawing its vast military equipment from Azerbaijan’s and Armenia’s fellow country in the Caucasus. Officially, Russia said the last of its equipment was removed from Georgia in the summer of 2007 and much of the hardware was shipped back to Russia. But quite a bit of it was relocated to Russia’s large base in Gyumri, Armenia. Uncertainty remains about the relocation of 40 armored vehicles and 20 tanks; Russia says they are back home, but Azerbaijan suspects they are in Armenia. Armenia has accused Moscow of helping fuel Azerbaijan’s military buildup. It alleges that quite a bit of the military equipment from Georgia found its way to Azerbaijan. Russia has myriad reasons to fuel another conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. First, the Kremlin is still smarting after the West recognized Kosovar independence from Serbia despite Russia’s and Serbia’s vigorous objections. In the run-up to Kosovar secession, Russia insisted that the breakaway province’s independence would cause flare-ups in other separatist regions. A renewed scuffle over Nagorno-Karabakh would represent a major told-you-so for Moscow.

Second, Russia is very interested in destabilizing Azerbaijan and in having the West become displeased with Azerbaijan. The United States and Europe have warned Azerbaijan not to restart conflict with Armenia — especially the United States, which has a very large Armenian diaspora with a great deal of clout in Washington. During an election year, U.S. politicians cannot afford to offend constituencies, so they are liable not to ignore pressure from Armenian-Americans. The West worries that renewed conflict could destabilize their investments in Azeri energy infrastructure. Third and last, Russia would just relish the opportunity that renewed conflict would create for it to sweep in as the great mediator. Moscow repeatedly has said it wants to send troops, perhaps as part of a peacekeeping force, into Nagorno-Karabakh. More fighting would give it the perfect opportunity to do so. Ultimately, having the southern Caucasus in flames greatly increases Russia’s leverage with every player previously mentioned. However, Moscow does have one concern: what if Azerbaijan actually wins the fight against Armenia? A victory by Baku would be a palpable blow against Russian power, allowing Azerbaijan to continue on its Westward push without fear of Moscow.

Source: http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/arm...ngthening_hand

[Armenian]

Re: Russian-Armenian Relations

DMITRY MEDVEDEV INVITED SERZH SARGSIAN TO PAY OFFICIAL CALL TO MOSCOW

On June 4 the RA President Serzh Sargsian held a meeting with Russia’s Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Armenia Nikolay Pavlov. According to the information DE FACTO received at the RA President’s Press Office, in the course of the meeting the Russian Ambassador delivered RF President Dmitry Medvedev’s invitation to pay official call to Moscow in mid June to Serzh Sargsian.

Source: http://www.defacto.am/index.php?OP=71335757

‘Talks’ before Talks: Russia buoys up Armenia stand ahead of first Sargsyan-Aliyev meeting

Russia reaffirmed late last week that it wants to see a resumed Karabakh peace process based on direct negotiations between the parties and proceeding within a Minsk Group-supported format. “There is no military solution to the Karabakh problem,” Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said following a meeting with his Armenian counterpart Eduard Nalbandyan in Moscow late last week. “It is possible to reach agreement only in direct negotiations between the parties with the support of the OSCE Minsk Group cochairmen.” “It is important to make the region stable and secure,” Nalbandyan said for his part. “Armenia is ready to continue negotiations with Azerbaijan on the basis of proposals of the Minsk Group cochairmen.” Another meeting of the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan is expected to be held on the sidelines of an international economic forum in Saint-Petersburg, Russia, at the end of this week.

While the presidents of the two states have met more than 20 times since 1998, the upcoming meeting tentatively scheduled for June 6 will be the first one between Serzh Sargsyan, who was sworn in as Armenia’s new president less than two months ago, and his Azerbaijani counterpart Ilham Aliyev. “We wait for Azerbaijani proposals, which may help resolve the Karabakh conflict,” Nalbandyan reportedly said, voicing optimism ahead of the planned meeting of the two countries’ leaders. “Proposals of Russia, the United States and France [the countries co-chairing the Minsk Group] must not be ignored.” Few analysts, however, expect the meeting to produce any fundamentally new results. In particular, Nagorno-Karabakh President Bako Sahakyan recently said in Yerevan that he did not consider the upcoming meeting to be “a great achievement”.

And Baku’s fundamental position of seeking “to restore control over the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh” was recently reaffirmed by Azerbaijan’s deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov. He said that Azerbaijan’s compromise might be “providing the communities that will live in Nagorno-Karabakh with a self-governing status.” Meanwhile, representatives of third countries and structures have shown far greater activity on the threshold of the Sargsyan-Aliyev meeting. Thus, Council of Europe Secretary-General Terry Davis reiterated that when acceding to the Council of Europe both Armenia and Azerbaijan pledged to resolve the conflict peacefully. “I feel very alarmed when I hear that peaceful means of settlement have been exhausted,” Davis said, adding that the obligations to the CE will be broken if hostilities resume.

Source: http://armenianow.com/?action=viewAr...g=eng&IID=1189

Mubariz Ahmedoghlu: "Armenia is Russia's break lever in the development of Azerbaijan and Georgia"

Russia controls the South Caucasus region by means of Armenia, said chief of the center for political innovations and technologies Mubariz Ahmedoghlu at a press conference today.

He noted that such comments are made by heads of leading mass medias of Russia and there can be nothing more humiliating for any state, in this case for Armenia. "It means that Armenia is a break lever for Russia in the development of the South Caucasus region-Azerbaijan and Georgia. If Russia's relations with Georgia are worsening, the relations between Armenia and Georgia are becoming tense as well", said Ahmedoghlu. According to the political scientist, Azerbaijan should be more attentive about the events, ongoing between Georgia and Russia as the latter has already initiated execution of plans of annexation of Georgian territories-Abkhazia and South Ossetia. "Russia does not intend to recognize independence of separatist republics Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Official Moscow has already started implementation of a plan for annexation of these lands to Russia. How else can we explain the deployment of Russia railway troops in Abkhazia. This is made in the framework of the preparations for Olympic games in Sochi, Russia will hold. In other words, Russia perceives Abkhazia as its territory and uses these territory as it wills", said Ahmedoghlu.

Source: http://www.today.az/news/politics/45476.html

Sergey Markedonov: "We will not make it up with Armenians for you"

Day.Az interview with Sergey Markedonov, famous Russian political scientist, chief of department for international relations of the Institute for Political and Military Analysis.

- What do you think about the meeting of Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan to be held in Saint-Petersburg?

The forthcoming meeting of the two president will be of psychological nature. Serzh Sarkissyan has just won the presidential elections. The meeting was also prepared by newly appointed Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandyan. It should be taken into account that the meeting of the two Presidents will be held on the background of the recent undesired events, evidencing, sharp worsening of bilateral relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Here, we can recall the large armed clash of March 5 of 2008 on the contact front line, fixed since the moment of ceasefire agreement signing, discussion of the Karabakh problem in the UN General Assembly, declaration of the Armenian parliament about the need for closer cooperation between Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh, which means a period of tough counteraction between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

- What is expected from the meeting of the presidents?

Perhaps, there are expectations that "a new leader may turn out to be more compliant"? Each new leader also wants to attain a breakthrough. This can also be applied to Dmitri Medvedev in Russia and Serzh Sarkissyan in Armenia. At the same time, both Medvedev and Sarkissyan are only formal newcomers. Armenian President has serious political experience. He has been the defense Minister and the Prime Minister. Sarkissyan is biographically connected with Nagorno Karabakh, where he started his career. As for the Russian President, he is a member of Vladimir Putin's team, who has not left the politics and continues to influence the Kremlin's external policy. I do not think that a breakthrough will be attained during the meeting in Saint Petersburg. The meeting is more likely to be accompanied by information war, high expectations and similarly high disappoinment. The circle of positions will be repeated.

- Why?

Because the positions of the parties are mutually exclusive. For Azerbaijan this is primarily Armenia's aggression and for Armenia is the fight of Nagorno Karabakh people for self-determination. These factors do not give hope for any serious breakthrough in the negotiation process. Anyway, a meeting of the presidents is better than hostilities. But one should not expect a breathrough during the meeting.

- Doesn't the newly elected president of Russia, who undertook to arrange the meeting of the two Presidents of the conflicting countries, attempt to demonstrate Moscow's role to settle frozen conflicts on the post-Soviet area.

Kremlin's role in the Caucasus region has not been defined by the election of Dmitri Medvedev as president. Russia's role in this region started to grow under Yeltsin. Ceasefire in Nagorno Karabakh conflict was attained owing to the Russian diplomacy. Vladimir Putin has also been active in this direction. Former Defense Minister Sergey Ivanov, being in Baku twice, spoke of deployment of Russian peacekeeping forces in the conflict area. Last year the meeting of Presidents Ilham Aliyev and Robert Kocharyan was held in Saint Petersbug on the same day during the informal summit of the CIS. As is seen, Moscow's active participation in the settlement of Nagorno Karabakh conflict started long before Medvedev was elected a Presidemt. Russia is also partially a Caucasus state. Most processes, related to Nagorno Karabakh, may affect the security of Moscow itself. Both Armenians and Azerbaijanis are among top ten large ethnic communities of Russia. Therefore, Moscow's interest is understandable. The Kremlin, as a USSR successor, also bears responsibility for political security on the post-Soviet area. I do not think that this is exclusively Dmitri Medvedev's PR campaign. Russian can not limit its activity by the OSCE Minsk Group framework. Moscow tries to take the peacekeeping position.

- Do you agree that the key to the Nagorno Karabakh conflict settlement is in the Kremlin?

No, I do not. The key to it is in Washington, Brussels, the United Nations and in Nagorno Karabakh, like in Transdniestria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Until the sides are ready for minimal compromise, external attempts will not be successful. External attempts could be more active and effective. Anyway, everything depends on the sides. We will not make it up with Armenians for you.

Source: http://www.today.az/news/politics/45460.html

[Armenian]

Re: Russian-Armenian Relations

Step-by-step Moscow is setting up its infrastructure within the southern Caucasus. The announced repair of the region's main railroad has great strategic significance (economically and militarily) not only for the Russian Federation and Abkhazia but also for the Armenian Republic. This action by Moscow is a severe counter-blow to the western funded railroad project in the south Caucasus which seeks to connect Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan, bypassing Russia and Armenia.

Armenian

****************************************

Railroad Landing

Russia deployed its railroad construction troops in Abkhazia. Moscow referred to the necessity to repair a railroad that’ll link the breakaway republic to Russia and its Olympic facilities of Sochi. In its turn, Tbilisi regards Russia’s maneuvers as “plotting a military invasion.” The USA immediately sided with Georgia. Nonetheless, according to the information of Kommersant, the deployment of Russia’s units in Abkhazia may be a part of Moscow’s preparation for a meeting of Presidents Dmitry Medvedev and Mikhail Saakashvili planned for this week.

Road to war

“With the pretext of restoring a trunk-railway in Abkhazia, Russia conceals its preparation for a large-scale military operation aiming at annexation and occupation of Georgia,” stated Deputy Defense Minister of Georgia Batu Kutelia. “We consider the activity of Russia as another act of aggression directed against the territorial integrity of Georgia. No doubt, the Russian party is consolidating the military infrastructure to start a military intervention,” Deputy Foreign Minister of Georgia Grigol Vashadze echoed Mr Kutelia. “No one deploys railroad construction troops on the territory of another state unless a military intervention is plotted.” Mr Vashadze reported that due to the recent activity of Russia a 59th note of protest will be handed over to Russia’s ambassador to Georgia Vyacheslav Kovalenko. “In spite of the fact that it’s hard to find the Russian ambassador on occasions like this, we’ll find him, bring to the MFA and hand over the note,” Mr Vashadze added with irritation.

It is Russia’s deployment of its railroad construction troops in Abkhazia, which Russia’s Defense Minister announced Saturday, that aroused the indignation of the Georgian government. “According to the order of the President of the Russian Federation on rendering assistance to the republic of Abkhazia, work on restoring railroad lines and infrastructure has been started, where unarmed units and machines of the Railroad Construction Troops of the Russian Federation are engaged,” reported the Ministry’s Press-Service. In other words, the military justified their activity with the orders that Vladimir Putin gave to the government in April. By the way, Thursday Commander-in-Chief of the Railroad Construction Troops of the Russian Federation Lieutenant General Sergey Klimets stated that his subordinates are ready to provide aid to Abkhazia “in case a corresponding political decision is made.” It means that the decision to send Russian troops to Abkhazia was taken at the top level.

Yesterday Foreign Office Chief of the breakaway republic Sergey Shamba told Kommersant that some 400 Russian military were deployed in Abkhazia. However, Saturday Batu Kutelia stated that, apart from the railroad construction soldiers, 500 Russian commandos landed in Abkhazia. Curiously, on that day Russia’s Defense Ministry reported that a routine rotation of its peace-keepers was carried out in Abkhazia from May 25 to May 30, with “the total number of those replaced amounting to 500 people,” which equals to the figure given by the Georgian Defense Ministry’s experts. Tbilisi has already promised to rebuff “the Russian railroad landing.” “If Russia keeps on with that sort of activity, we’ll respond harshly to it,” Batu Kutelia threatened and promised that the international community will side with Georgia. A few hours later State Department Spokesman Sean McCormack said, “The United States is dismayed by Russia’s Defense Ministry announcement on May 31 that it intends to send more military forces into the Georgian region of Abkhazia without the consent of the Georgian Government. We have expressed our concerns to the Russian government and are in touch with the Georgian government about this latest announcement of a Russian military buildup,” emphasized the American diplomat.

Road to the South Caucasus

For all that, the restoration of the railroad on the territory of Abkhazia will allow Russia to gain much more than just a cheap transportation route for shipping Abkhazian gravel and sand to Sochi. Moscow has been repeatedly trying to repair the railroad linking it with Georgia via Abkhazia: It will enable Moscow to have a direct railroad communication with its key ally in the South Caucasus – Armenia. As far back as March, 2003 Moscow made its first attempt to do it – the question of restoring the railroad became one of the key points during the talks of Vladimir Putin and Georgia’s president Eduard Shevardnadze in Sochi. That time Russia and Georgia negotiated a bargain: Tbilisi provided for a smooth transit between Russia and Armenia, and Moscow promised to thrash out with Sukhumi the matter of Georgian refugees’ returning to Abkhazia. These negotiations didn’t stop even after the Rose Revolution broke out, and May, 2006 the authorities of Russia, Georgia, Armenia and Abkhazia even set up a consortium to restore the railroad. But the escalation of tensions between Moscow and Tbilisi in the autumn of 2006 prevented the plan from being realized.

[...]

Source: http://www.kommersant.com/p898706/r_...ian_railroads/

RUSSIA AND IRAN MAY RESTORE RAIL CORRIDOR THROUGH ARMENIA

Russia and Iran are restoring their direct rail connection via Armenia through projects that would enable bypassing two fragments of the former USSR-Iran corridor now blocked due to ethnic conflict. One is the already functioning Port Kavkaz-Poti ferry link, and the second is a combination of several planned projects in southern Armenia which will require the construction of a new railroad bypassing the blocked enclave of Nakhichevan. In this sense, Armenia is increasingly developing its role in North-South transportation and trade.

BACKGROUND: In recent months, several events have taken place relevant to the perspectives of strengthening of the Russia-Armenia-Iran axis. The first was the launching of the Port Kavkaz-Poti railcar-carrying ferry route between Russia and Georgia, a route designed specially for connecting Russia to Armenia. This route enables direct rail car circulation between Armenia and Russia, which has so far taken place through the Ukrainian port of Ilichevsk. It is expected to reduce the current time of transportation of cargoes between Armenia and Central Russia by half, from 20-25 days to 10-12 days, and to make it cheaper by 20 percent. This will to some extent end the severance of rail communication between Armenia and its largest trade partner, Russia, which resulted from the Georgian-Abkhazian conflict in August 1992. Although the ferry belongs to Reserve Capital Enterprising Corporation, a Swiss private company, the governments of Armenia and Russia have undertaken significant efforts to have this route opened. Moreover, the construction of a second ferry is underway, showing that the investor envisages intensifying traffic between Armenia and Russia, and, in perspective, with Central Asia as well.

Secondly, there are declared plans to explore and subsequently extract Armenian uranium reserves by the joint efforts of Russia and Armenia. A preliminary agreement was signed on April 23 during the visit of Sergei Kirienko, the head of the Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency, to Armenia. According to initial assessments made in Soviet times, Armenia possesses deposits of uranium amounting at least 30,000 tons. They will be extracted and, most likely, transported to Russia, as Armenia has no facilities of uranium enrichment, and has declared that it has no intention to start uranium enrichment on its own.

The third element is the plan to construct an oil refinery near the Armenian town of Meghri, located in southern Armenia near the Iranian border. As reported after a Russian-Armenian summit in Sochi last January, this refinery was expected to have a capacity to process up to 7 million tons of Iranian oil annually, which would be pumped into Armenia through a special pipeline from the Iranian city if Tabriz, 100 km south of Meghri. Refinery products are expected to be shipped back to Iran by rail. The cost of the whole project, including the factory, the railroad and the pipeline, is reported to be US$ 1-2 billion. Gazprom-Nafta, a subsidiary of Russia’s state-run Gazprom gas monopoly, has said it is considering investing in this refinery, and Iran will also, most likely, invest in this politically motivated project.

Finally, the last few years have witnessed expanding cooperation between Armenia and Iran in the energy sphere. The Iran-Armenia gas pipeline officially inaugurated last March, is to supply gas to Armenia in return for supplies of electric power from Armenia. To this end, a power transition line between Armenia and Iran is to be constructed in addition to the two existing lines, and two hydropower plants on the border river of Araxes are to be constructed in the near future.

IMPLICATIONS: These events can combine to lead to the formation of a new North-South railroad corridor between Russia and Iran, to replace the Novorossiysk-Tbilisi-Yerevan-Nakhichevan-Julfa route, which was active in the Soviet times but is now interrupted at two places, one being Abkhazia and the other being the Nakhichevan-Armenia border, due to the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. The Abkhazian sector is bypassed through the above-mentioned Port-Kavkaz-Poti ferry link, but the Nakhichevan sector is more difficult to bypass. A railroad connecting Meghri to some part of the existing Julfa-Tabriz railroad may be constructed rather easily, as the construction needed may be as little as fifty kilometers. Nevertheless, the problem of connecting Meghri with the rest of the Armenian railways (and hence, with Russia) is a more complicated task. A railroad from Meghri to any other railroad segment in Armenia (bypassing Nakhichevan) will require installing at least 200 kilometers of new rail through a mostly mountainous territory, an undertaking that will be difficult technically and expensive.

However, there are factors which may make its prospects feasible. The first is the uranium issue, as most of the Armenian uranium deposits are reported to be located in the southern Armenian province of Syunik, in which Meghri is also located. As such, Russia (and probably other investors interested in Armenian uranium) may be interested in providing funding for the project of constructing a railroad from central Armenia to the future uranium mine of the Syunik marz and eventually, to Meghri. Preliminary reports about the intention of the state-owned company Russian Railways to make large investments in Armenia may be relevant in this sense. Tehran may also be interested in constructing this link, as it will help Iran to implement its plans of developing the country’s depressed north-western region, in particular, the so-called Aras Free Trade Zone which is adjacent to the Nakhichevan and Meghri sectors of the Iranian border and has its center in Julfa.

Besides an important role in restoring the Iran-Russia railroad route, Armenia is becoming an important partner for both from the energy viewpoint as well. Russia has important energy assets in Armenia, and has pledged to help it in building a new nuclear power station. The current station at Medzamor is expected to be closed in 2016, and according to a recent statement of President Robert Kocharian, construction of a new plant could start in 2012. The prospects for exporting Armenian uranium to Russia make such ties even tighter. As for Iran, it is set to increase its import of electricity from Armenia as seen from the above-mentioned joint plans.

CONCLUSIONS: Armenia is developing several large projects in transportation and trade with Russia on the one hand, and with Iran on the other. This may eventually result in the reopening of an important railroad corridor connecting Russia with the Gulf region. Armenia may be an important partner to both regional powers partly as a linking point in that corridor, and because of its involvement in different energy projects within the interest sphere of both powers.

Source: http://www.cacianalyst.org/?q=node/4614

Construction Of Turkey Section Of Baku - Tbilisi - Kars Railway To Start In July

Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, right, Turkish President Abdullah Gul, center, and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliev, left, are seen at a ceremony marking the start of construction of a railroad that will link ex-Soviet republics in the Caucasus and Central Asia with Europe bypassing Russia, near Tbilisi, Georgia, Wednesday, Nov. 21, 2007. The US$600 million rail line will connect the eastern Turkish city of Kars with the Azerbaijani capital, Baku, on the Caspian Sea, via Georgia and its capital, Tbilisi.

ANKARA - The construction of the 76km long section of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars (BTK) railway project in Turkey will start in July. Ministry of Transportation officials said on Thursday that the ground breaking ceremony for the construction of Turkey section of the BTK railway project would be held in June with the participation of presidents of Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. Georgia will build 29 km part of the railway from its border with Turkey to Akhalkalaki and will finish the renovation of an existing line that stretches from there to Tbilisi. The ground breaking ceremony for the construction of the part of the project in Georgia was held in November 2007. Turkey has allocated 380 million YTL for BTK railway project, which is qualified as "iron silk road". The railway will connect Turkey with Azerbaijan and other Turkic republics in Central Asia. The railway is expected to be operational in 2010 and carry about 30 million tons of freight a year.

Source: http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp..._Start_In_July

[Armenian]

Re: Russian-Armenian Relations

Hope for Rails: Russian initiative for Abkhazian section raises optimism for Armenian railroad

Yerevan hails Russia’s plans to seek the restoration of a major part of what used to be a Trans-Caucasian railroad in the Soviet times, which potentially may lead to resumed transportation along the whole Abkhazian section of the railroad – an important gateway for Armenia that has been unavailable because of a regional conflict since the early ‘90s. A Russian company, “South-Caucasus Railroads”, assumed the management of the Armenian railroad on June 1, two weeks earlier than it was originally planned. In the Soviet times Armenia’s railroad networks was part of the Trans-Caucasian railroad linking the Soviet republics of Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan not only with all the other regions of the former USSR, but also with Iran (via Azerbaijan) and Turkey (via Armenia).

With the start of the Karabakh movement in 1988-1989, Turkey and Azerbaijan fully blocked all railroad gateways from Armenia and the Abkhazian section of the Trans-Caucasian railroad was blocked in consequence of the Georgian-Abkhazian conflict. Thus, Armenia found itself in a total ‘railroad isolation’ from the outside world. Only one train plies between Yerevan and Tbilisi today. The main purpose of transferring the Armenian railroad under Russian management is considered in the context of Moscow’s efforts to de-block the Abkhazian section of the railroad, i.e. to ensure an immediate railroad link between Sochi, Sukhumi, Tbilisi and Yerevan. Recently, the Russian side introduced railroad troops to Abkhazia in order restore traffic along the Sochi-Sukhumi section, which elicited an angry reaction from official Tbilisi, which accused Moscow of introducing military personnel not engaged in peacekeeping missions into Georgian soil. “The problem of the idling Sochi-Sukhumi-Tbilisi railroad, no doubt, is a political problem,” Armenia’s Minister of Transport and Communications Gurgen Sargsyan said at a press conference in Yerevan. He also pointed out that the intention of the Russian side to restore the Sochi-Sukhumi connection will have a positive effect on a possible restoration of traffic along this section in the future.

According to the Armenian minister, the Russian side has already started to ship new electric locomotives and carriages for passenger conveyance to Armenia. The concessionaire, i.e. the Russian side, has pledged to invest up to $600 million in the development of the Armenian railroad, with a third of this investment to be made already in the first five years of operation. The Armenian minister also emphasized that Armenia attaches great importance to the construction of a railroad in the direction of Iran, as its importance will grow if traffic resumes along the Sochi-Sukhumi-Tbilisi railroad. “It will take Armenia seven years to build a railroad to Iran,” said Sargsyan, adding that both the Russian and Iranian sides show interest in the construction of the Armenia-Iran railroad.

Source: http://www.armenianow.com/?action=vi...g=eng&IID=1189

NATO chief urges withdrawal of Russian rail troops from Abkhazia

NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said on Tuesday Russia should pull its unarmed railroad troops out of Georgia's breakaway region of Abkhazia. "These forces should be withdrawn, and both Russia and Georgia should engage quickly in a high-level and open dialogue to de-escalate tensions," he said in a statement on Tuesday. The unarmed troops were deployed to the region on May 31 to repair rail tracks "fully in line with Russian-Georgian agreements," the Russian Foreign Ministry said. "This deployment is clearly in contravention of Georgia's sovereignty and territorial integrity," said the NATO head however. The presidents of Russia and Georgia discussed the issue over the telephone earlier Tuesday. "Russia's aid in repairing railroad tracks in Abkhazia using its railroad troops was discussed. The necessary clarifications were provided on the issue," the Kremlin press service said, adding that Dmitry Medvedev and Mikheil Saakashvili had agreed to resume discussions on the sidelines of an economic forum in St. Petersburg due on June 6-8. Tensions between Russia and Georgia have been consistently strained since Western-leaning President Mikheil Saakashvili came to power in the South Caucasus country in early 2004. The long-running row over Georgian breakaway regions, along with Tbilisi's plans to join NATO, have been major factors behind the dispute.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/world/20080603/109175875.html

[Armenian]

Re: Russian-Armenian Relations

Arif Yunusov: "Pro-Russian moods in Armenia will be preserved until the Karabakh conflict is settled and there is a genetic fear of Turkey"

How would you comment on results of the Gallup sociological service survey, which revealed attitude to the state policy of Russian on the post-Soviet area?

Social polls are held to get answers to questions in the political or socioeconomic spheres of life. It is necessary to reveal the attitude of the population to any service or goods. Someone needs to know how population will vote for any candidate or how it treats the policy of any country. Everything depends on the purposes of the poll, set by the customer. If the Gallup sociological service is implied, this is one of the influential organizations in the world. The results of its polls are always treated seriously, especially in the United States. But at the same time, one fact should be taken into account: the value of each poll depends on its concreteness. I do not take the polls, which are conducted throughout the world and in the result we are announced that any drink is treated like that in the country and so on. This is all conditions things and the results of such kind of world polls are not always realistic. On the whole, the polls should be treated carefully, Here, methodological criteria (number of respondents, categories of population covered, age and place of residence, living conditions and political and other views, whom it was conducted by, at which time) are important and it is also necessary to take into account the openness of the population. Most sociological services conduct regular polls and I also conduct such polls and therefore I know it for sure how difficult it is to trust to the data here. People may answer one way and may think or react in the elections differently. Polls are a normal event in the United States and in the West and they have no problems with getting objective information as people are not afraid of answering. People on the post-Soviet area are too insincere in their questions. Polls have not become a part of our everyday life. Especially if they are related to political aspects of life, not speaking of the engagement of those, who conduct the polls. Let's recall the polls, conducted due to the elections and the reaction they have caused.

Then is the information stating that 66% of Azerbaijani population positively assess Russian policy true?

I am afraid that the results of the poll have not been presented to use correcticely. For example, in Azerbaijan we see one and the same picture. When country residents are asked to pointthree most friendly and unfriendly states for Azerbaijan, we see that Russia is in the top three most friendly and unfriendly states for Azerbaijan. It takes the second place among the most friendly ones (following Turkey) outstripping others dramatically. At the same time, in these polls Russia is regularly on the top list of three unfriendly countries following Armenia and Iran. While in 2002-2004 it was the third among unfriendly countries, in 2005-2007 it became the second, leaving Iran behind. In other words, if not taking into account positive attittute to Turkey and negative to Armenia, Russia is leading both as friendly and unfriendly to Azerbaijan. I had the same result when I conducted the poll in 2006. moreover, the respondents were asked an additional question about their attitude to the Russian policy and made it clear that 49% were negative on the policy and only 15% positive. These gaps in figures is explained by the fact that today two Russias exist for Azerbaijan: one is friendly, or at least neutral, it is a close trade and economic partner. "Another" Russia takes a negative position in such issue important for Azerbaijan as the Karabakh conflict and is not interested in its resolution, being a strategic ally of enemy Armenia. Therefore, I think 66% Azerbaijanis treat positively not Russian policy in the region but Russia itself as a country and Russians

How do you explain the fact that by this poll 62% of Armenian population is quite negative about the state policy of Russia?

I also do not trust this figure. It is too false and differs from what Armenian sociologists get during their polls. Even if we admit that the polls conducted by Armenian sociologist have falsified, different should not be so sharp. Not speaking of it should be substantiated. Sharp and cardinal events should have occurred in Armenia regarding Russia. It is true that there have been changed in Armenia regarding Russia. A new generation, which is more oriented for the West and western values has appeared in Armenian society. They prefer to study in Western Universities and are not conservative as the old generation. But, I repeat, these are two different things. Loving to live in a western country is one thing and not loving Russia is another. There is such a concept as Armenian mentality, which formed not for even one century and nothing changes so rapidly within some ten years. At least, for Armenians. Therefore, when I compare these figures with those presented by Armenian sociological services, I see a great difference. I would repeat once more that figures in the polls, conducted in Armenia, also differ but they do not differ much on such important problems or issues as Nagorno Karabakh or attitude to Russia and Turkey and the dynamics is observed. For example, Russia is constantly leading as the most friendly country in Armenia, even more so the gap between it and the second one on the list (as a rule, this is France) is too significant. Anyway, almost 75-85% of Armenian population considers Russian friendly and suddenly we are informed that only 38% treat Russia positively or neutral. The gap is great. What has happedn in Armenia, which led to such figures? I would repeat that I do not trust this figure, of course, if the information is true.

But can not it be proposed that such figures are a result of good work of the United States in Armenia and indicate that most Armenian society did not vote for the Kremlin successor Serzh Sarkissyan at the presidential elections in this country?

We do not know when this poll was conducted- before or after the elections. The plus is that we do not know in which settlements of Armenia, which is also important. For example, pro-Western moods are strong in the capital of Armenia and weaker in its provinces. Therefore, we should speak not on the result of a sociological poll, which has too fragmentary scanty information and not concretely presented but about the overall situation in Armenia and policy of external forces. Certainly, Americans held a very active and thorough policy in Armenia and among local population. In this sense Russia is losing. Its external policy in our region is on the whole too aggressive and ineffective and at the same time not thoroughly analyzed. Russia holds alienating policy even towards Armenians which are its allies. The rapid growth of pro-western moods in Armenia can be explained only by this. Moreover, they began to realize that they are in the deadlock. Of course, when speaking to Azerbaijanis Armenians do not admit that (with rare exceptions). But they realize that Russia's support led Armenia to a deadlock and Armenia does not win from the one-sided orientation on Russia and sees changes in Georgia and Azerbaijan with their orientation on the west.

Doesn't this poll prove the striving of the Armenian society for radical changing its vector towards the United States?

Here I would recommend not to have such radical views aboutsituation in Armenia. Yes, the striving for strengthening of West's role in Armenia is evident. But at the same time, we should understand that the ground for preservation of pro-Russian moods among Armenians is very strong. We should make it clear that pro-Russian moods in Armenia are not unsubstantiated, but were a result of a more than two centuries of policy and propaganda of Russia among Armenians. These moods will be preserved until the Karabakh conflict is settled and until there is a genetic fear of Turkey. As soon as the Karabakh issue is settled, the pro-Russian moods in Armenia will melt away. But today, these two factors are a basis for preservation of pro-Russian moods. In other words, Armenians can be dissatisfied with Russia's policy, even not love it or voice resentment about it (especially about rise in prices on energy sources or murder of Armenians in Russia) but if they put direct question they would look in the direction of Russia, no matter how strong the scent of western democracy is.

Does it mean that you rule out possible changes in external policy of Armenia and its ability to turn into US satellite?

Open confrontation between the West (especially the United States) and Russia is obvious in our region. And struggle is for the moods of population in our region. It will be reflected primarily during the conflicts (if hostilities are renewed) as well as during the presidential and parliamentary elections. But in the near future I do not believe that Armenia will take US side and will be anti-Russia. Let's not exaggerate the results of these polls. We should speak of Armenians intention to use this confrontation between Russia and the United States for its own interests. They can do it effectively. Moreover, this is taking place at present. Armenia is considered the ally of Russia and Iran and even gets financial and other aid from the United States and other Western countries. We are far behind them in this issue.

Source: http://www.today.az/news/politics/45495.html

[Armenian]

Re: Russian-Armenian Relations

“We are not transferring weapons to the Georgians” — interview with US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza

REGNUM: The tension in the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict has been increasing every day. Georgia has reportedly become the most militarized country in the region with the help of other powers, including the United States. Do you find it appropriate that a conflict party in two ethnic conflicts is being supplied with weapons and at the same time a stir is generated about deployment of unarmed railway troops in Abkhazia?

We believe there is no military solution to the Abkhazia conflict. I want to make that clear. We urge our Georgian friends not to consider a military resolution, because we think that would be a disaster for everybody. The only way forward is through a peace plan that is agreed by both parties – by both the Georgians and the Abkhaz – and that becomes a plan that we all can guarantee in the international community, especially, but not only, Russia and the United States. There is no military solution. In response to the specific question about arming parties to a conflict — if people are asking that question in Russia, then I wonder what the [Russians] are doing with the Armenians and others in the area who have benefited from large transfers of weaponry including the relocation of Russian military forces from Georgia, when the bases closed, to Guimry and elsewhere in Armenia. I’m not complaining about the relocation of Russian forces or the arms transfers to Armenia, I’m just saying that Russia sees the need to help one of its friends, Armenia, strengthen its military forces. From our perspective, there is nothing illegitimate in that, nor is there anything illegitimate in our helping the Georgians develop a professional military, because that’s what we’ve done.

We are not transferring weapons to the Georgians. We had a very limited training and equipping program that began back in 2001 to create a professional force that was capable to do what? To clean up the Pankisi Gorge. That’s how that whole program began back in 2001 – 02. We thought we were responding to a legitimate Russian desire/ request/ demand that the problem in the Pankisi Gorge be cleaned up, and that Georgia restore its authority and rule of law. That’s what happened and we are proud of that. We helped train these forces, and they have been serving with us in Iraq, but we never intended that they would be used for any military operation in Abkhazia, and we’ve made that clear repeatedly to our Georgian colleagues and Georgians friends. In terms of arms transfers, it happens pretty extensively from Russia, including to other countries in the region. I just want to make clear as well – Armenia is a friend too, Armenia is a party to a conflict, and Azerbaijan is a friend, and Azerbaijan is re-arming itself — I am not criticizing Russia for helping Armenia develop its armed forces, and we think it’s important that Azerbaijan has a professional military, as does Georgia. I just wanted to be clear about that. On the railways troops, our concern is not that railroads are being rebuilt. It’s good to restore communication, help the Abkhaz gain access to markets in Georgia, and help build economic cooperation. Our complaint is that there was no consultation. Why did the step just happen without somebody in the Russian government picking up the phone and saying to the Georgian leadership, “beware this is going to happen; we’ve talked about developing railroad together; let’s do it together.” Doing it unilaterally raised tension, and that’s just not necessary. In fact, it’s counterproductive at a point that we need to decrease the tension between the parties.

REGNUM: There is an assumption that in their aspiration to force Russia out of the negotiation and the peacekeeping formats in Abkhazia, the European Union and the United States can propose some kind of initiatives of a draft status to Abkhazia and this can be including even independence. Do the EU and the USA have any ready-to-use initiatives for Abkhazia that can bring the conflict out of the deadlock?

I don’t agree with the first thing you said, that the EU and United States are trying to move Russia out of the negotiation and peacekeeping format. Not at all. There is no way to resolve any of these conflicts in the Caucasus without Russia, it’s impossible. Russia has to play a role, a decisive role, a constructive role, or there will never be a solution. Everything we do ought to be developed in partnership in conjunction with Russian government to make sure that we all are pushing in the same direction. The United States and the EU don’t have any ready made plan. What we do have is the sense that there needs to be a process – a new process – that allows the Georgians and Abkhaz together to figure out whatever the plan should be. All we can propose is a process; we do not have ready made ideas.

In discussions with my friends and colleagues in Georgia, I suggested elements that I think could be useful in a peace plan to make it attractive to the Abkhaz so that the Abkhaz want to move forward. But that’s not a ready made plan, that’s just ideas out there that we develop after we talk to the Abkhaz to see what their needs are for security: physical security, political security, and cultural security. It’s a consultative process that must involve Russia, must involve the Abkhaz, and must involve the Georgians. If we as outsiders, but concerned outsiders, can help then we want to do everything we can.

REGNUM: Why does the West believe that the Kosovo conflict can be settled only by granting independence to the Kosovars, but rejects the same solution to the conflicts in the South Caucasus – especially for Nagorno-Karabakh? Is there any reason to believe that Karabakh can someday be returned to Azerbaijan?

I wonder why in Russia people sometimes say that Kosovo has to be a universal precedent. That would mean there would have to be independence not just of Abkhazia, but of many regions in the North Caucasus. I don’t believe people in Russia who talk about universal precedent want any of that to happen. My country is the country that began with separatism, and after we get gained our independence, many separatists appealed to us for support; sometimes we supported them, sometimes we didn’t. The same in the case of Russia. There is an international legal principle of territorial integrity, and that has developed in recent years since the early days of my country. It’s a principle we have to support, we are obligated to by law. It’s only on an exceptional basis when we can deviate from that principle. Kosovo was an exception; there was a series of Security Council Resolutions, and direct UN action, in the case of Kosovo that made that situation different, made it unique in terms of international law, because it is the UN and its Security Council that are the highest purveyors of international law. So there is a fundamental difference there. I know that the Russian government and my government certainly do not want Kosovo to become a precedent for other separatist movements all over the world.

On Nagorno-Karabakh, it doesn’t matter whether I am as individual American diplomat believe Karabakh will or will not return to Azerbaijan, it legally is part of Azerbaijan, let’s start with that. It happens to be under the political and military control of others, of separatists, who are ethnically Armenian. What matters is simply whether we succeed in developing an agreement or formula that would allow the two sides here – Armenia and Azerbaijanis – to agree on the status of Karabakh. I do not know what their agreement will be. All I know is that we need to try to get two sides to get to an agreement on status and that’s going to take a long, long time. In the meantime, while the mood changes and evolves, while people alter their views about status, because there is no way to move on status if Armenia says one thing and Azerbaijan says another, there is a lot we can do to reduce the risk of war and make the situation much better on the ground for all the people there. We can get the seven Azerbaijani territories around the Azerbaijani territory of Karabakh returned to Azerbaijan, and we can bring the Armenians and Azeris back to living together. The hope is as they live together and work together and trade together, the issue of status will become less acute. Eventually the parties can reach their own agreement on the status of Karabakh.

REGNUM: In what time limits it possible that Armenia returns the Azeri territories around Nagorno Karabakh to Azerbaijan? What will the influence of it upon the situation in the region in general and the political situation in Armenia?

Good question. I should underscore at the outset that the views I’m expressing I think are absolutely shared by the Russian government, at least my colleague Yuriy Nikolayevich Merzlyakov, who has helped me understand this conflict in much greater depth, as has our French colleague. The impact in Armenia of the return, I hope would be positive. I hope there would be greater sense of security for our Armenian friends knowing that the risk of war has deescalated significantly. Again, once the territories go back to Azerbaijan they will be demilitarized, there will be international peace keepers there, the Armenian troops will pull back; they won’t be in this tense situation they’re in now, where the Armenian troops are staring at Azerbaijani troops and vice versa, across, in some cases, a hundred meters of mine fields. That’s obviously a very dangerous situation. People are killed every month by sniping, landmines. So I would hope that our friends in Armenia would feel a heightened sense of security once those territories go back to Azerbaijan. I hope that that echoes throughout the political system in Armenia in very positive way.

REGNUM: I think this question is a bargaining point inside Armenia’s political system. Do you think that this will not affect the current authorities?

It depends on what sort of an overall package can be pulled together. There will not be the return of Azerbaijani territories unless the Armenian side feels it has gotten something in return that of sufficient value. Your question will actually answer itself. The agreement won’t be there unless it’s agreeable to the Armenians, but I take your point that for an Armenian leader there is a risk to agreeing to give the territories back to Azerbaijan. I accept that point. Similarly on the Azerbaijani side there is a political risk to giving to Armenia what Armenia needs to agree to give back the territories. That’s why tomorrow’s meeting is so important between Presidents Aliyev and Sargsyan. They need to have a chance to get to know each other and build a certain level of trust so they each can take those difficult decisions to make return of the territories acceptable. I want to make clear too that there are many elements of this peace plan that are attractive to Armenia: there will be a corridor connecting Karabakh to Armenia, there are question about procedure to determine the status of Karabakh. That is a possibility that should say should be appealing to the Armenian side as well. So again I just want to emphasize that this agreement must be acceptable to Armenia as well.

REGNUM: Let’s talk about Azerbaijan where the presidential election is to be held this fall. In the context of recent developments in Tbilisi and Yerevan when people took to the streets to protest against current authorities, do you expect the same thing to happen in Baku? Is the Azeri opposition capable of taking people to the streets?

During the last round of elections there were street demonstrations. I understand – I have not had a chance to look at it – that there is a new package of electoral reforms just passed that allow for freedom of assembly, however, as I understand it, not in the center of Baku. You can argue over where the demonstrations are to take place. We are not in favor of democracy or political change through street protest. We are in favor of political change through voting and through democratic institutions and processes. It’s not accurate to say we somehow encouraged any revolution, the Rose Revolution, Orange Revolution, Tulip Revolution. We did not to step in to try to block them, nor did we encourage them. In this current case in Azerbaijan, what we want to see is that the Azerbaijani voters determine their country’s political future. We have made our own statements about difficulties, problems with limitations on freedom of the press.

We’ve also commented on the importance of the press being professional and adhering to professional ethical standards in Azerbaijan, as in many countries. The raw material is there for an election that could be the freest and fairest that Azerbaijan has ever had. Demonstrations will be part of that, but the real element of this moment in Azerbaijan’s democracy will be how free and how fair the election is both in the campaign period and then in the immediate aftermath of the election when the vote counting happens. I feel that the leadership of Azerbaijan understands what an important moment this is, but I can’t predict how it’s going to play out. I do not have a clear feeling about what is going to happen. The last thing I’ll say is that Russia has to be a part of the process, or there will never be any progress towards settlement. That’s why I’m here, to explore how we can work together to develop such a viable peace plan.

Source: http://www.regnum.ru/english/armenia/1011080.html

[Armenian]

Re: Russian-Armenian Relations

Russian Gazprom to invest 200m dollars in Iran-Armenia gas pipeline

Armenia’s Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Armen Movsisyan has said that by the end of 2009, the Russian gas giant Gazprom will invest more than 200m US dollars in the construction of the Iran-Armenia gas pipeline, the Armenian news agency Arminfo reported. After the completion of construction work, Armenia will have access to another alternative gas pipeline along with the current one from Russia and based on the prices that are offered, will decide which of them it should use. Currently, Armenia pays Russian Gazprom 110 US dollars per 1,000 cu.m. of gas, however, the price will change from 1 January 2009, the agency quoted Movsisyan as saying. During his press conference, Armen Movsisyan also touched on the construction of an oil refinery outside Yerevan which will cost two or three billion US dollars. The plant, which will be able to process 7.5m tons of Iranian crude oil per year, will produce petrol and diesel, the agency said. Speaking about energy projects with Iran, the minister mentioned that a joint hydroelectric power station will be constructed on the border river Araz. The construction of the station with a capacity of about 140 MW will be financed by Iran and will cost 240-250m US dollars. The construction work may commence in 2008, the minister said. The minister went on to say that the USA and the EU have allocated 10-12m US dollars to update the security of the Armenian nuclear power plant, Arminfo said. Up to now, technical assistance worth 90m US dollars has been allocated to update the security of the plant, the agency quoted the minister as saying. Armen Movsisyan added that it is planned to build a new nuclear block in Armenia in 2016 when the existing energy block of the nuclear plant expires. Even though Armenian legislation allows foreign investors to own 100 per cent of stocks, the government intends to control half of the project stocks, the minister said. “If the government does not take part in the project, then this project has no real significance for us,” Arminfo quoted Movsisyan as saying. However, the operation of the current nuclear block will not be suspended until the new one is built, the minister said. He noted that the technical feasibility of the new plant will be completed by September, the agency said.

Source: http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=170176