The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

China says U.S. missile shield threatens global stability


(The foreign ministers of China, Russia and India - Yang jiechi,
Sergei Lavrov and Pranab Mukherjee - present a united fron[t] at
a trilateral meeting Wednesday in Harbin)

The placement of U.S. missile defenses in Europe will not ease global security concerns but will undermine the global strategic balance, the Chinese foreign minister said Wednesday. Washington insists that the deployment of a radar in the Czech Republic and a missile interceptor base in Poland will protect the U.S. and its NATO allies from potential missile attacks coming from Iran or North Korea, despite Russia's objections. Speaking at a news conference after a meeting between foreign ministers of China, Russia and India, Yang Jiechi expressed hope that a new concept of global security, characterized by mutual trust and equal rights, could be established in the future. The Harbin meeting is the third stand-alone meeting of the foreign ministers from the three countries. New Delhi hosted the previous two meetings, which some experts and media said could be aimed at setting up a military-political alliance to counter the influence of the United States in the region. Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said at the news conference in Harbin that Russia has no plans to form a military union with India and China. He said Moscow is developing dialogue with the two Asian countries through bilateral as well as trilateral formats, within the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and other structures. "We are striving to jointly resolve key issues of security through multilateral dialogue, primarily by political and diplomatic means," Lavrov said. "There is no alternative to a multi-polar and equal-rights cooperation in the world if we want to respond effectively to the existing threats," he said.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/world/20071024/85324695.html

In related news:

Trilateral meeting focuses on co-op

HARBIN: The foreign ministers of China, Russia and India Wednesday reached broad consensus on "practical cooperation" among the three countries - and reaffirmed that the trilateral partnership is not targeted at any other country or organization. The ministers agreed the development of their countries is a major contribution to peace and development in the region and the world, and is beneficial to the process of global multi-polarity, according to a joint communiqu. The document was released after Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi held two hours of talks with Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov and Indian counterpart Pranab Mukherjee in the capital city of Heilongjiang Province. It emphasized that "multilateralism and collective action should be promoted in addressing urgent issues and meeting new challenges and threats".

The ministers said their countries attach great importance to the issue ofclimate change and reiterated the principles and provisions of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and its Kyoto Protocol, including the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities". They also agreed the three countries will engage in pragmatic cooperation in anti-terrorism, agriculture, disaster prevention and control, and medicine and health; and encourage and facilitate closer collaboration between enterprises.

"The trilateral cooperation is open and transparent, and is not targeted at any other party. It does not draw lines on the grounds of ideologies and values," Yang said at a joint news conference with Lavrov and Mukherjee. Lavrov, who said Russia has no plans to enter into a military alliance with China and India, added: "We advance cooperation in the bilateral format, in the trilateral format, within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization framework and in other structures. We also seek to resolve key security issues through multilateral discussions by politicians," he said.

Myanmar issue

The ministers urged all parties in Myanmar to engage in dialogue to resolve the conflict and support efforts made by UN special envoy Ibrahim Gambari, but said they opposed UN sanctions against the country. "The special envoy of the UN secretary-general, the initiatives he has taken, should be encouraged (but) there should not be any sanctions at this stage," Mukherjee told reporters. Yang repeated China's stance that the issue was ultimately up to Myanmar's government and people to resolve. Lavrov warned that sanctions, threats or other forms of pressure on the Myanmar government risked "aggravating the situation and generating a new crisis".

Missile system

Responding to a question about US plans for a missile system based in Europe, Lavrov said the issue was "discussed at length and in great detail" during a recent visit to Moscow by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. He said Russia was awaiting written proposals that the US side had promised to submit. He said the matter was not discussed at yesterday's meeting. "That's because there are other ways and means of addressing risks that ensue from the deployment of a missile defense system," he said. Yang said China's position on the issue was "consistent and clear". "Not only will the missile defense program fail to meet the security concerns of related countries, but it may also possibly damage the global strategic balance and stability, nor is it conducive to enhancing mutual trust among the countries," Yang said. Mukherjee denied speculation that India will join the US missile defense system, saying such assertions are "groundless".

Source: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2...nt_6205163.htm

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

The Coming U.S.-Russian Train Wreck - Is Israel Caught in the Middle?



* Russia is in the midst of two overlapping political games: the Duma and presidential election cycle of December 2007-March 2008, and a real power struggle between competing pro-Putin factions over the architecture of the next Russian regime. Every move the Putin Administration makes today is dictated by the desire to shape Russia's future internal power structure.

* For the last four years, the Kremlin has steadfastly allowed its once-close ties with Washington to decay. Keeping the relationship with Washington in a simmering crisis and inventing an imaginary "American enemy" is creating much needed legitimacy for the current Russian leadership.

* Many foreign policy initiatives undertaken by former presidents Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin are often viewed today in Moscow as treasonous or at least as harmful to Russia's vital interests. Current Bush Administration policies, such as democracy promotion, are viewed as part of a sinister plot to undermine the Russian government through a series of "orange revolutions."

* The current elites define Russia's strategic goals as being in opposition to the United States and its policies; and in de-facto alliance with the Muslim world, particularly Iran and Syria, as well as with China. The Kremlin is reaching out to anti-status quo players such as Hugo Chavez, and is convinced that Russia is culturally distinct from "the West."

* The Moscow propaganda machine is only a step away from putting Israel on the "short list" of designated enemies. After all, the memory of fighting Zionism and promoting official anti-Semitism is fresh in the minds of the post-Soviet elites, and relations with the rich and fanatically anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli ayatollahs are cozy for many.

* Israel is located on the fault line between the secular West and the Muslim East. In addition to confrontation with the Palestinians, the wider Sunni Arab world, and the Iranians, Jerusalem's relationship with Moscow may deteriorate if Russia continues to treat Israel as an American satellite state.

The Failed U.S.-Russian Talks

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was in Moscow last week to convince President Vladimir Putin of the dangers of a nuclear-armed Iran. Putin's visit to Teheran was billed as a success by both the Russian and Iranian sides. The Russian president stressed dialogue and diplomacy with the ayatollahs' regime, and opposed a new round of UN Security Council sanctions promoted by the United States. Olmert's task in Moscow, however, is almost insurmountable. Israel is seeking to exercise diplomatic influence on a Russia that is going through the beginning of an internal upheaval which makes it a far less cooperative partner on sensitive foreign policy issues, including the challenge of proliferation. When Secretary of State Rice and Secretary of Defense Gates visited Moscow on October 12-13, 2007, the U.S. discovered the same problem.

Russia today is in the midst of two overlapping political games: the Duma and presidential election cycle of December 2007-March 2008, and a real power struggle between competing pro-Putin factions over the architecture of the next Russian regime. Every move the Putin Administration makes is dictated by the desire to shape Russia's future internal power structure and to set the course for the country's foreign and security affairs in general, and its relationship with the United States in particular. Even before the U.S.-Russian talks started, President Putin made Rice and Gates wait for him for 40 minutes - a deliberate diplomatic slight. Greeting the two senior U.S. cabinet members, Putin made a mockery of the U.S. missile defense plan, saying that the U.S. may one day put such an ABM system on the Moon.

He came out adamantly against U.S. deployment of the European component of the global ballistic missile defense. "The one thing on which I would like to focus attention is that in the process of these difficult negotiations we hope that you will not force through previous agreements with eastern European countries," the ITAR-TASS news agency quoted him as telling Rice and Gates. Putin has threatened to pull Russia out of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty which was signed by Reagan and Gorbachev in 1987, eliminating the Russian SS-20 missiles and U.S. Pershing-2 missiles deployed in Europe. Russia is also threatening to pull out of the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty which limits its military posture from the Baltic to the Black Sea.

Keeping the relationship with Washington in a simmering crisis and inventing an imaginary "American enemy" is creating much needed legitimacy for the current Russian leadership, which now has only Putin's personal popularity as its political base. The image of Russia surrounded by enemies is absolutely necessary for today's Russian ruling class, composed of senior secret police officers, as it positions itself in the eyes of the people as the saviors and defenders of Mother Russia. This approach has venerable roots in Russian history, harking back to the Romanov police state of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Then, the monarchy busily promoted the fight against "the enemies within," including the xxxs, and "the enemies without," such as the British Empire, the superpower of the day. This was done in order to delay democratic reforms and justify the outrageous privileges of the nobility and the court.

One hundred years later, little has changed. Senator xxxx Lugar (R-IN), the well-respected former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has warned that time may be running out for the two nuclear powers to put their diplomatic house in order: "This visit provides the last best opportunity to lay the foundation for bold initiatives and to seize the high ground by establishing a legacy for Presidents Bush and Putin. I strongly recommend that the Secretaries and their Russian counterparts introduce a new package of initiatives. These initiatives relate to three bold security challenges: (1) nonproliferation and nuclear energy partnership; (2) progress in arms control; and (3) missile defense cooperation." Unfortunately, Lugar's pragmatic rationalism may not be heeded in Moscow. For the last four years, the Kremlin has steadfastly allowed its once-close ties with Washington to decay. Putin set the tone in a February 2007 Munich speech, which at times eerily resembled a mirror image of Winston Churchill's Fulton, Missouri, 1946 Cold War oratory.

The Roots of Russian Foreign Policy

Moscow's chilling rhetoric has quickly acquired specific military target sets. Before the June 2007 G-8 summit in Heiligendamm, Germany, Putin issued an unprecedented threat to retarget Russia's nuclear missiles at Europe in response to U.S. plans to deploy elements of its global missile defense in Poland and the Czech Republic. In doing so, Putin was returning to the Soviet strategic posture that predated the efforts of Amerixcan President Ronald Reagan and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev to finally end the Cold War. At the St. Petersburg Economic Summit in June 2007, Putin suddenly called for revising the global economic architecture, including the World Trade Organizaxtion (WTO). This unprecedented and dangerous initiative reflects the current anti-status quo mindset in Moscow. The old Soviet obsession - that Russia's fate, its cosmic goal, is to fight "American imperialism" - remains undiluted, even fifteen years after the collapse of communism, a tragic position for Russia, Europe, and the rest of the world.

Russia's foreign strategy is driven by military and security elites who view their country as the direct heir to the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, and understand its role as America's principal counterbalance on the world scene. Тhere was no significant changing of the guard in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union when it comes to Russia's foreign and defense policy-makers, in sharp contrast to the turnover that occurred in the fields of business and economics. To a great degree, contemporary Russian rhetoric has come full circle and resembles that which permeated the Soviet agenda before former president Mikhail Gorbachev's perestroika (restructuring) and glasnost (openness) began to transform the USSR.

In fact, many foreign policy initiatives undertaken by Gorbachev and Russian President Boris Yeltsin - such as ending the occupation of Eastern Europe, signing the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) arms control treaty and the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty, recognizing the former Soviet republics as independent states, and acquiescing to NATO enlargement - are often viewed today in Moscow as treasonous or at least as harmful to Russia's vital interests. Current Bush Administration policies, such as democracy promotion, are viewed as part of a sinister plot to undermine the Russian government through a series of "orange revolutions."

Despite the fact that tens of thousands of Russians have been killed by Muslim extremists in Afghanistan and in Chechnya, as well as in terror attacks in Russia's cities, the U.S. remains Russia's obsession, its "principal adversary."

The current elites define Russia's strategic goals as being in opposition to the United States and its policies; and in de-facto alliance with the Muslim world, particularly Iran and Syria, as well as with China. The Kremlin is reaching out to anti-status quo players such as Hugo Chavez, and is convinced that Russia is culturally distinct from "the West."

Missile Defense, Proliferation, Treaties

On the table in Moscow were a number of vital security issues. According to Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Daniel Fried, Russian and U.S. experts have met twice to discuss the post-START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) regime which must be in place by 2009, when the current START Treaty expires. Russia wants to make the post-START regime, which will limit the number of deliverable strategic nuclear weapons on each side to a 1,700-2,200 ceiling, a binding international treaty. The U.S. for a while exhibited reluctance to commit through treaties and preferred a political memorandum instead. The Russians, not trusting the U.S. enough to go this route, have refused.

[...]

Conclusions

My recent participation in a four-hour discussion with President Putin in Sochi as part of the Valday Club annual meeting made me more pessimistic than ever as to whether U.S.-Russian relations can be mended. "What can be done to move relations between Russia and the U.S. away from hysterical rhetoric and back to a pragmatic discussion of disagreements?" I asked the Russian leader. "Just recognize that our position is just," was the answer. At another meeting, a well-known Russian foreign policy hand asked how American xxxish organizations view Moscow's increasing arms sales to Iran and Syria. "Very negatively," I replied. "Do they understand that this is only..." "What?" I interrupted, "Nothing personal? Only business?" "Exactly," he responded, apparently oblivious to the Godfather cultural reference.

Arms sales are but one item in Moscow's full array of modern international relations tools: from public diplomacy, to weapons sales backed up by the ample credit lines of an energy superpower; from putting former and possibly current political leaders on the petrodollar payroll, to strategic information operations (SIOs) aimed at depicting America as an out-of-control hyper-power and a threat to the international community, to coddling terrorist organizations. In the words of one incisive observer, "Russia has left the West."

The United States should take steps to send Russia a message that it will not be bullied, and it will robustly defend its vital national security interests. The U.S. should clarify that it would prefer seeing Russia as an ally, but will not shrink from a confrontation if Moscow imposes one. There are a number of important steps Washington needs to take. First, the U.S. should geographically diversify its sources of energy. It should take steps to diminish dependence on oil by boosting alternative sources of liquid transportation fuels. These include oil sands and shale from North America, sugar cane ethanol, and other competitive fuels.

Second, the U.S. should maintain its dominant position in the Persian Gulf while bolstering relations with pro-Western regimes there. The U.S. should cooperatively enhance the security of the Arab oil-producing states in the Gulf against both Iran and jihadi extremists. Тhird, the U.S. should build bridges to potential Russian allies to prevent the emergence of anti-American blocs, expanding to the former Soviet Union states of Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and Armenia. Fourth, the U.S. should create a global coalition of energy consumers to oppose oil and gas cartels and to apply market principles to the natural gas industry.

Fifth, the U.S. should continue dialogue and cooperation with Russia to demonstrate to the Russian elites that the United States has much to offer Russia - in health care, business and economic relations, science, and education. Finally, the U.S. must reach over the heads of the Russian leadership to the people of Russia through a comprehensive public diplomacy strategy via the Internet, international broadcasters, visitor programs, and exchanges, to debunk the myth that the U.S. is hostile to Russia. The U.S. may reach out to the Russian-language talent which is currently available in Israel to get help in broadcasting and communications. History and geography have condemned Israel to live on the frontlines.

Israel is located on the fault line between the secular West and the Muslim East. In addition to confrontation with the Palestinians, the wider Sunni Arab world, and the Iranians, Jerusalem's relationship with Moscow may deteriorate if Russia continues to treat Israel as an American satellite state. If things go wrong, Russia may amplify existing threats to Israeli security. However, if Israel devises and practices a foreign policy that serves Israeli national interests and relies on Israel's ample security and defense capabilities, the survival of the country and the people can be ensured for the long term.

Source: http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/S..._in_the_Middle

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Armenia is the bridge linking Moscow and Tehran



Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to Armenia will add nothing new to the geopolitical alignment in the region. It will merely restate the obvious. The strategic partnership between Armenia and Iran is an established fact, and this visit is unlikely to be seen as anything of a landmark. Nor will it affect relations between Armenia and the United States. Armenia is effectively under a blockade, and America knows this. One of the indirect agents of the blockade is Georgia - America's closest ally in the region. More direct participants are other U.S. partners - Azerbaijan and Turkey. In this context, friendly relations between Iran and Armenia are only natural. Whether one likes it or not, Armenia will be friendly with neighbors with which circumstances, history and common cultural background force it to be friends.

Until recently the U.S. has displayed some understanding of this fact. True, Anthony Godfrey, the U.S. Charge d'Affaires in Armenia, has occasionally expressed dissatisfaction with expanding Armenian-Iranian relations and growing economic ties between Armenia and Iran, although the U.S. is well aware of Armenia's plight, and it would be most unethical to demand that it go into self-imposed isolation. Armenia therefore looks for understanding not only from America, but also from any other country that has sour relations with Iran. In this sense, an aggravation of American-Iranian relations and, as a result, a possible toughening of the U.S. position would be most unwelcome.

It is to be hoped that there will be no further deterioration of relations between Tehran and Washington, and even if there is, the U.S. has no right and is unlikely to demand anything "extra" from Armenia in its relationship with Iran. It would be a different thing if hostilities were to break out - Armenia's border with Iran would automatically be sealed. That could lead to serious consequences for the Armenian economy. As regards Baku's likely response to the visit, Azerbaijan is in the habit of reacting negatively to any progress in Armenia's relations with any country, let alone Iran.

Azerbaijan has been an active participant in many regional projects with a manifest anti-Iranian and anti-Russian bias. They include communications projects, oil pipelines, gas pipelines, and Caspian oil production. In other words even today Azerbaijan continues to pursue Elchibey's policies of tearing up all possible friendly bonds with a country that has a multi-millennium civilization and culture. Azerbaijan is seeking to integrate into Europe via the Turkic world. Such a policy cannot appeal to Iran and runs contrary to Iran's political and geopolitical ambitions. Therefore, the envy with which Baku eyes Armenia's friendly and allied relations with Iran, is both understandable and incomprehensible.

It is incomprehensible because Azerbaijan itself has done a great deal to antagonize Iran. In turn, Armenia's relations with Iran are a fine example of the fact that Christianity and Islam can co-exist peacefully, and that the religious factor in inter-ethnic and inter-state relations needn't play a decisive role. In any case, the Iranian side will continue to stick to its long considered position on the Karabakh issue. Iran, like China, is happy to wait, and as far as possible safeguard its borders against potential inter-ethnic or inter-state clashes. This centuries-tested policy is unlikely to be subject to change for short-term considerations.

Iran has always had ethnic, cultural and purely strategic interests in the Southern Caucasus. When the Turkic peoples destroyed Caucasian Albania, Armenia was Iran's only remaining ally in the region. An absolute loss of the Southern Caucasus would be a tragedy both for Iran and for Russia. Equally, the preservation of the Southern Caucasus as a friendly region is very important for both Tehran and Moscow. Both countries have historical interests and traditional contacts with the peoples of the region. But today only Armenia and Nagorny Karabakh continue the tradition of Caucasian friendship with Iran and Russia. And while Iran acts as the corridor giving Armenia "access to the wider world", Armenia serves as the bridge linking Tehran and Moscow. This is a worthy role, and Armenia plays it without fault. A Moscow-Yerevan-Tehran axis appears to be crystallizing. It looks as though Iran projects Russia's geopolitical ambitions in this region and vice versa.

Both Iran and Russia are being ostracized from European politics, and in these conditions they have no other option but to seek closer contact with each other and align a geopolitical, energy and economic axis capable of helping them to withstand pressure from Europe. Although the East-West division is nowadays somewhat artificial, classical Oriental countries carry on the ancient traditions of wise and considered inter-state policy. India, China and Iran, for that matter, are all countries with which alliance could only benefit Russia.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20071024/85342413.html

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Canadian Forces keep eye on Russian exercise, deny airspace incident



The Canadian Forces say they transferred a number of CF-18 fighter jets based in Quebec to Goose Bay, N.L. for maintenance reasons, but add they're also keeping an eye on a Russian military exercise in the Arctic. "It still keeps us in a rapid position to respond to any unidentified aircraft approaching our airspace, but this hasn't been the case," said Capt. Steve Neta, from Canadian Norad regional headquarters in Winnipeg. Last week, Russia's military announced that up to 10 of its strategic bombers would carry out patrols over the Atlantic, Arctic and Pacific Oceans and the Black Sea.

"From the Norad_perspective the mission hasn't changed," Neta said about the Russians flights. They have been "conducted in a professional way, it's all been done in international waters and airways and obeying international flight rules, so it's been done in a very professional exchange up to this point."

"Up to 10 long-range aircraft, Tupolev 160s and 22M3s are taking part in these exercises, with inflight refuelling," Air Force spokesman Col. Alexander Drobyshevsky told Russian news agencies. He added that the flights were for training purposes and conformed with international regulations on the use of airspace. Neta denied reports a Russian plane had flown into Labrador air space without permission on Aug. 17.

"There is no information supporting this event although we are double-checking to see if there are any flights that may have been misinterpreted," he said. "One thing we can say with absolute certainty is that (at) no time did any aircraft, unidentified or without permission, enter sovereign airspace, at no time at all."

But the president of the civilian workers union at CFB Goose Bay says he expected the denial but insisted that multiple sources, some "well-placed," tell him otherwise.

"(The plane) was asked several times to identify himself and wouldn't, so they called in three CF-18s from Bagotville to escort him out," said Howard Bishop. "By the time they got here from Bagotville, (the Russians) were over Goose Bay. If that plane was equipped to do any damage he would have been able to (do so)."

Bishop said he has seen at least four CF-18s at CFB Goose Bay, which arrived for an unscheduled two-week training period. Russian President Vladimir Putin announced the resumption of long-range flights in international air space on Aug. 17. In the past year Russia has been flexing its military muscle, reviving strategic bomber flights to probe western air defences, investing in new strategic weapons and using the windfall from high oil prices to rebuild its weakened military, but NATO officials aren't alarmed yet.

"We watch it, as we always do," Gen. Bantz Craddock, the supreme NATO commander told reporters earlier this month, referring to the resumption of Russian strategic bomber flights. "At this point, I don't see it as threatening at all."

Beginning in 1985 Goose Bay supported allied military training but the memorandum of understanding expired in March 2006, putting an end to what used to be a permanent allied detachment. There is no permanent CF-18 presence at the base, which serves as a forward operating location for CFB_Bagotville, providing support for that base. Many countries have faced the same budget restrictions seen in Canada, explains Capt. Tom Burkhart, and have been doing alternative training elsewhere. The base remains a permanent establishment for allied training but none are presently at Goose Bay, he said.

Source: http://www.canada.com/topics/news/st...3d8f42&k=24352

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Armenia In Talks With Russia Over New Nuclear Plant



Russia is ready to help Armenia build a new nuclear plan and is currently discussing the ambitious idea with its government, a top executive of a Russian atomic energy firm said on Thursday.

“We are discussing the issue of building a new 100 Megawatt unit in the territory of the Armenian nuclear plant [at Metsamor,]” Aleksandr Glukhov, vice-chairman of the state-owned Atomstroyexport company, told the Itar-Tass news agency.

“Armenia has unique legislation which allows foreign companies to acquire shares in [local] nuclear plants, which creates new opportunities for them,” he said. The Armenian parliament enacted the government-drafted legislation early last year in what was widely seen as the first step toward the eventual construction of the new plant estimated to cost at least $1 billion. The authorities in Yerevan hopes to raise the sum from foreign governments or companies interested in financing the project.

President Robert Kocharian reaffirmed in late April Armenia’s intention to replace Metsamor’s sole Soviet-era reactor, which is due to be decommissioned by 2016, by a new, modern facility meeting Western safety standards. “I think that as early as in 2012-2013 active work will be implemented for a new nuclear power plant,” he told university students in Yerevan. Sergey Kirienko, head of Russia’s Federal Agency on Atomic Energy (Rosatom), visited Yerevan around that time and discussed the matter with Kocharian and other Armenian officials. Deputy Energy Minister Areg Galstian said afterwards that the Russian-Armenian inter-governmental commission on economic cooperation has set up a working group tasked with looking into the project.

A senior American diplomat said in June that the United States is also ready in principle to help Yerevan put the project into practice. "We are working with the Armenian Ministry of Energy to develop a feasibility study as to just what would be the best replacement for this capacity," Anthony Godfrey, then U.S. charge d’affaires in Armenia, said. The Armenian authorities have said all along that Metsamor, which meets about 40 percent of the country’s electricity needs, will be shut down only they find an alternative source of cheap energy.

Source: http://www.armenialiberty.org/armeni...7FD232E2F0.ASP

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Attack Iran and you attack Russia



The barely reported highlight of Russian President Vladimir Putin's visit to Tehran for the Caspian Sea summit last week was a key face-to-face meeting with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. A high-level diplomatic source in Tehran tells Asia Times Online that essentially Putin and the Supreme Leader have agreed on a plan to nullify the George W Bush administration's relentless drive towards launching a preemptive attack, perhaps a tactical nuclear strike, against Iran. An American attack on Iran will be viewed by Moscow as an attack on Russia.

But then, as if this were not enough of a political bombshell, came the abrupt resignation of Ali Larijani as top Iranian nuclear negotiator. Early this week in Rome, Larijani told the IRNA news agency that "Iran's nuclear policies are stable and will not change with the replacement of the secretary of the Supreme National Security Council [SNSC]." Larijani will keep attending SNSC meetings, now as a representative of the Supreme Leader. He even took time to remind the West that in the Islamic Republic all key decisions regarding the civilian nuclear program are made by the Supreme Leader. Larijani actually went to Rome to meet with the European Union's Javier Solana alongside Iran's new negotiator, Saeed Jalili, a former member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), just like President Mahmud Ahmadinejad.

In itself, the Putin-Khamenei meeting was extraordinary, because the Supreme Leader rarely receives foreign statesmen for closed talks, even one as crucial as Putin. The Russian president, according to the diplomatic source, told the Supreme Leader he may hold the ultimate solution regarding the endlessly controversial Iranian nuclear dossier. According to IRNA, the Supreme Leader, after stressing that the Iranian civilian nuclear program will continue unabated, said. "We will ponder your words and proposal." Larijani himself had told the Iranian media that Putin had a "special plan" and the Supreme Leader observed that the plan was "ponderable". The problem is that Ahmadinejad publicly denied the Russians had volunteered a new plan.

Iranian hawks close to Ahmadinejad are spinning that Putin's proposal involves Iran temporarily suspending uranium enrichment in exchange for no more United Nations sanctions. That's essentially what International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohammad ElBaradei has been working on all along. The key issue is what - in practical terms - will Iran get in return. Obviously it's not the EU's Solana who will have the answer. But as far as Russia is concerned, strategically nothing will appease it except a political/diplomatic solution for the Iranian nuclear dossier. US Vice President xxxx Cheney - who even Senator Hillary Clinton now refers to as Darth Vader - must be foaming at the mouth; but the fact is that after the Caspian summit, Iran and Russia are officially entangled in a strategic partnership. World War III, for them, is definitely not on the cards.

Let's read from the same script

The apparent internal controversy on how exactly Putin and the Supreme Leader are on the same wavelength belies a serious rift in the higher spheres of the Islamic Republic. The replacement of Larijani, a realist hawk, by Jalili, an unknown quantity with an even more hawkish background, might spell an Ahmadinejad victory. It's not that simple.

The powerful Ali Akbar Velayati, the diplomatic adviser to the Supreme Leader, said he didn't like the replacement one bit. Even worse: regarding the appalling record of the Ahmadinejad presidency when it comes to the economy, all-out criticism is now the norm. Another former nuclear negotiator, Hassan Rowhani, told the Etemad-e Melli newspaper, "The effects of the [UN] sanctions are visible. Our situation gets worse day by day."

Ahmadinejad for the past two months has been placing his former IRGC brothers-in-arms in key posts, like the presidency of the central bank and the Oil, Industry and Interior ministries. Internal repression is rife. On Sunday, hundreds of students protested at the Amir-Kabir University in Tehran, calling for "Death to the dictator". The wily, ultimate pragmatist Hashemi Rafsanjani, now leader of the Council of Experts and in practice a much more powerful figure than Ahmadinejad, took no time to publicly reflect that "we can't bend people's thoughts with dictatorial regimes".

This week, the Supreme Leader himself intervened, saying, "I approve of this government, but this does not mean that I approve of everything they do." Under the currently explosive circumstances, this also amounts to a political bombshell. As if anyone needed to be reminded, the buck - or rial - stops with the Supreme Leader, whose last wish on earth is to furnish a pretext for the Bush administration to launch World War III. If Ahmadinejad now deviates from a carefully crafted strategic script, the Supreme Leader may simply get rid of him.

Source: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IJ26Ak06.html

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Putin calls for restraint over Iran and Kosovo



Russia's President Vladimir Putin on Thursday called on the West to show restraint over both Iran's nuclear programme and the future status of Kosovo, ahead of an EU-Russia summit here. Putin, in Lisbon for Friday's meeting, warned that the threat of fresh sanctions or even military action against Iran over its nuclear programme would only make the situation worse. And he called for "patience" on the question of the future status of Serbia's province of Kosovo, where the mainly ethnic Albanian population is seeking independence. After the United States on Thursday ratcheted up tensions over Iran's nuclear drive with a raft of new sanctions targeting the Islamic republic's military and banks, Putin warned against making a bad situation worse.

"You can run like crazy carrying razors -- it is not the best way to resolve the problem," he said. Taking a peaceful approach towards North Korea in the controversy over their nuclear progamme had brought the international community closer to a solution, he said. Tehran insists it is developing a civil programme to produce nuclear energy, but the United States, Israel and other Western powers suspect it could be masking efforts to develop a nuclear military capability. On the issue of Kosovo, Putin said that Russia was respecting international law by opposing UN envoy Martti Ahtisaari's recommendation to give internationally supervised independence to the Serbian province.

"Why upset the principles of international law by encouraging separatism in Europe," he asked. "Don't you have enough problems in Spain, in Belgium?" In Spain, the central government is facing renewed violence from regional Basque separatist group ETA. In Belgium, there is increasing pressure in some sections of the relatively wealthy mainly Flemish speaking north for greater autonomy, or even independence, from the mainly Francophone south. Putin's comments came ahead of Friday's talks with EU leaders at Mafra, 40 kilometres (25 miles) from the capital Portuguese Lisbon, hosted by Prime Minister Jose Socrates whose country currently holds the EU presidency.

The EU wants the talks with Putin to start to put relations back on track after a stormy summit in Russia in May. EU-Russia relations have been strained over a range of issue, including the status of Kosovo, sanctions against Iran, Russia's energy policy and an US anti-missile shield -- parts of which Washington wants to build in Poland and the Czech Republic. But with the victory of Poland's main opposition liberal, pro-European party in last weekend's elections, it looks likely that Warsaw's veto of closer links between the EU and Moscow might be lifted.

Source: http://www.africasia.com/services/ne...8.dpz21z8l.php

In related news:

Putin Finds an Ally in Portugal

Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Socrates warned against preaching to Russia about democracy, and President Vladimir Putin promised not to preach to the European Union about Polish meat at a summit next week. Then Putin sternly told a Portuguese reporter that Russia was not the devil. The two leaders spoke at a joint news conference in the Kremlin's Malachite Foyer that capped a two-day visit by Socrates, whose country takes over the revolving EU presidency in July. In sharp contrast to a recent Russian-EU summit outside Samara, the atmosphere at Tuesday's news conference was warm and friendly. "The task is to arrive at a common strategic agreement that would unite our historic missions," Socrates said after 2 1/2 hours of talks with Putin. "With that idea, Portugal will embark on its EU presidency." Putin, who has been trying to win over individual EU members after running into a brick wall with the EU leadership, could barely contain his glee.

"We highly appreciate the attitude of the Portuguese prime minister with an eye to strengthening relations between Russia and the EU," Putin said. Putin failed to win over Germany, which holds the EU's presidency until July 1, in its disputes with East European countries. Socrates' visit came at the Kremlin's invitation. Putin said he had told Socrates about Russia's concerns about U.S. plans to set up a missile defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic and about Moscow's decision to suspend its commitments to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. They also spoke about Poland's refusal to sign off on a new Russian-EU partnership agreement until Russia lifted a ban on Polish meat. "Because of separate problems, one can't see the forest for the trees," Putin said.

Putin reiterated his position that the Polish meat was substandard, noting that Berlin had recently seized a shipment of the meat. Germany has backed Poland in its dispute with Russia. Putin said the seizure spoke louder than words and he would not preach to Merkel when he travels to Germany for a Group of Eight summit next week. "Of course I won't tell her, 'You don't want to eat this meat yourself but want to feed it to me.' I won't say that," he said. Socrates lavished praise on Putin and warned against moralizing over common values, human rights and democracy. When a journalist with Publico, a major Portuguese newspaper, asked whether Russia shared the bloc's common values, Socrates said Portugal and Russia shared values that stemmed from a long history together. He said protecting human rights and democracy was important, but "these values need to be developed without preaching." Socrates added that no country was a paragon of democracy. "There's nothing worse than one country trying to lecture another country," he said.

Putin has many times accused the West of preaching to Russia about human rights and democracy, including at the Russian-EU summit when Merkel accused Putin of silencing his critics. Putin grew agitated when it was his turn to respond to the Publico journalist's question. He said Moscow should not be likened to a "monster that has just come out of the forest and has horns and hooves instead of feet." "Let's talk without conceit, like partners," he said. Socrates said he also had come to Moscow to urge Russians to invest more in Portugal, and he praised Russian plans to build an ethylene plant in the Portuguese port of Sines. Portugal intends to ease visas for Russians, Socrates said.

Russia has reciprocated Portugal's goodwill by paying off its Soviet debt to the country ahead of schedule, Putin said. During his visit, Socrates attended the opening of an exhibition of several high-tech companies from Portugal and a first Russian-Portuguese economic forum. The two countries signed several export agreements. "I am wrapping up my visit with a feeling of satisfaction," Socrates told reporters in comments translated into Russian. "During the past two days, our relations have received an amazing impulse." The volume of bilateral trade increased by 13 percent to nearly $1.4 billion last year, the Kremlin said. Socrates' friendly rhetoric will not help bring about a breakthrough in EU relations unless Poland decides to lift its veto and Russia improves relations with Estonia and Lithuania, political analysts said.

"Alas, nothing will come of it," said Vyacheslav Nikonov, head of the Politika Fund, a think tank. Boris Makarenko, analyst with the Center for Political Technologies, said Socrates was keen to set the agenda for his upcoming EU presidency. "And the largest sticking point is Russia," he said. The next Russian-EU summit will take place in Lisbon in October. The Publico journalist said after the news conference that she had not heard anything new from Putin. "It's always the same," she said.

Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1842035/posts

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

'Inspired' by Israel, Georgia's FM seeks closer strategic ties



"We are interested in a strategic partnership with Israel at the same level as our strategic partnership with the United States," Foreign Minister Gela Bezhuashvili of Georgia told Haaretz yesterday. Bezhuashvili, who in the past served as his country's defense minister, would not elaborate on what he means by "strategic cooperation." However the phrase is understood as a code for arms and other security-related purchases, such as upgrading of planes, tanks, artillery, and border monitoring equipment.

Such cooperation existed without fanfare until the beginning of 2005, and included a deal with Elbit defense electronics to upgrade 25 of Georgia's MIG fighter jets, communications equipment, and brief military advisors. But under pressure from Russia, Israel has since limited itself to selling Georgia only defensive weapons. Bezhuashvili, 40, studied law at the University of Kiev and in Texas, and furthered his education at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government. As Georgia's foreign minister for the past two years, he guiding a pro-Western foreign policy toward European Union and NATO membership.

Troubling ties

But troubled relations with Russia are casting a pall over these efforts. Since Georgia declared its independence in 1991, Russia has supported two separatist groups in Georgia, from the regions of Avkhazia and South Ossetia. Numerous flare-ups between the Georgian army and the separatists have occured, in which the casualties occasionally include Russian officers. "Since 2001, we are part of the struggle against global terrorism," Bezhuashvili said. "Our soldiers are in Iraq, the Balkans and Afghanistan, and we don't harbor terrorists. However to my regret, relations with Russia are deteriorating." According to Bezhuashvili, Russia wants relations with Georgia to be those of "client-patron."

Russia has also raised the cost of gas and oil to Georgia, and has banned the import of wine and mineral water from Georgia. To improve its economic situation, Georgia wants to encourage Israeli investments to raise the trade balance beyond its present rate, which according to Georgia's ambassador to Israel, Lasha Zhvania, is an unsatisfactory $20 million annually. "We admire the spirit and commitment of the people of Israel to their country," Bezhuashvili said. "We are inspired by it." During his visit, Bezhuashvili met with President Shimon Peres and Knesset Speaker Dalia Itzik, and will meet today with Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni.

Source: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/915881.html

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Russia tests long-range missile



Russia announced the successful test firing of an inter-continental ballistic missile from the northwestern Arkhangelsk region to a target on the other side of the country today, news agencies reported. The RS-12M Topol missile, which has the Nato codename SS-25 Sickle, was launched from the Plesetsk cosmodrome and hit its test target in the far eastern region of Kamchatka on Russia’s Pacific coast, the Interfax and ITAR-TASS news agencies reported. "The test warhead of the rocket destroyed the hypothetical target with required accuracy at the firing range on the Kamchatka peninsula," the Strategic Missile Forces press service was quoted as saying. "Thus, the stability of the main technical flight characteristics of the missile complex were confirmed," it added. The RS-12M Topol is a three-stage missile fired from a mobile launcher and is similar in size to the US Minuteman ICBM. The first launch was made in 1981. The test launch came amid growing East-West tensions and a dispute between Moscow and Washington over US plans to install a limited anti-missile defence shield in central Europe.

Source: http://www.thetimes.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=590276

Russia set to launch 5 ballistic missiles by year end

Russia's Strategic Missile Forces will conduct five launches of intercontinental ballistic missiles by the end of 2007, the SMF commander said Friday. "By the end of this year, we will test launch another five missiles, including a RS-18 (SS-19 Stiletto), a RS-12M (SS-25 Sickle), a missile interceptor and a heavy RS-20 (SS-18 Satan)," Colonel General Nikolai Solovtsov told a news conference. He said that seven ICBM launches had been conducted so far in 2007 to test the performance of a new RS-24 missile with multiple warheads, extend the service life of RS-18 and RS-25 missiles and lift payloads into orbit. He also said five regiments of an SMF division in the Saratov Region have been equipped with silo-based Topol-M (SS-27) systems and put on combat duty. A complete regiment of silo-based Topol-M comprises ten missiles. The advanced Topol-M missile is considered by many experts as the best ICBM in the world at present. "Therefore, Russia already possesses weapons that can penetrate any modern missile defenses," Solovtsov said. The deployment of silo-based Topol-M systems in the Saratov Region and road-mobile systems in the Ivanovo Region (central Russia) would be completed in 2010.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071026/85578539.html

Russia plans to test fire 2 ballistic missiles - Ground Forces



A missile brigade from the Siberian military district will test fire two SS-21 Scarab short-range ballistic missiles during Nov. 13-17 exercise at a test site in south Russia, a Ground Forces spokesman said Thursday. The SS-21, or Tochka, is a road-mobile single-warhead ballistic missile designed for tactical deployment. It has been in service with missile units of the Russian Ground Forces since 1976 and has a range of 70 km (45 miles). "The missile units will conduct missile firing practices [at the Kapustin Yar testing site in the Astrakhan Region] and will test launch two Tochka tactical missiles," Colonel Igor Konashenkov said. The spokesman said the Ground Forces have conducted a total of 12 successful test launches of Tochka missiles since the beginning of this year. He also said that the Tochka (SS-21 Scarab A) and Tochka-U (SS-21 Scarab B) missiles would be gradually replaced with new Iskander-M (NATO reporting name SS-26 Stone) theater missiles, capable of carrying multiple warheads.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071025/85512464.html

Russia could quickly resume missile output

Russia is capable of quickly resuming production of short and medium-range nuclear missiles, the commander of Russia's rocket forces said on Friday. "If there is a political decision to make such a class of missile, then it is obvious that they will be made in Russia in the near future because we have everything we need," Colonel- General Nikolai Solovtsov was quoted by RIA news agency as saying. "Today we are in (arms control) agreements so we act strictly within those agreements." President Vladimir Putin told U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice this month that Russia would find it difficult to stay in the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), signed by Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan in December 1987. That treaty, a milestone in arms control, bound Washington and Moscow to destroy all ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with a range of between 500 and 5,500 km (300 to 3,300 miles). It led to the scrapping of 2,692 missiles in total. Russian military officials and politicians now describe the INF treaty as a Cold War relic because it began life as a bilateral treaty limiting only the United States and Russia, plus most of the successor countries to the Soviet Union. Other countries such as North Korea, Iran, Israel, India and Pakistan have since started building arsenals of intermediate-range missiles. Although some possess nuclear weapons, none of them is constrained by the INF treaty. Solovtsov also said that by the end of the year, Russia would deploy seven more of its new Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missile complexes and test at least five more intercontinental ballistic missiles. Putin has hiked arms spending to restore Russia's military capability after years of neglect during the chaotic 1990s. He says Moscow plans new types of nuclear weapons as part of its wider plan to strengthen its defences against emerging threats. Putin says the West has taken advantage of Russia's willingness to strike arms deals in the 1990s to strengthen its defences in subsequent years at Moscow's expense. He has also opposed U.S. plans for a missile defence shield in Europe and announced plans to pull out of the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty (CFE).

Source: http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldN...68736920071026


Russian Bear bombers conduct cruise missile practice



Two Russian Tu-95 Bear strategic bombers will practice on Friday launches of cruise missiles at a testing site in southern Russia, an Air Force spokesman said. Russian strategic bombers began on October 16 a series of long-range training flights over the Arctic region, the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, and the Black Sea with simulated bomber raids and missile launches missiles at testing grounds in northern and southern Russia. The exercises will continue until October 30. Colonel Alexander Drobyshevsky also said up to 10 Tu-95MS bombers and two Il-78 aerial tankers flew scheduled flight patrols on Thursday in neutral airspace, and were accompanied for at least five hours by NATO F-16 and Tornado fighters. Russia has stepped up practice runs of its strategic bombers ever since President Vladimir Putin announced the resumption of strategic patrol flights on August 17. The president said at the time that although the country halted long-distance strategic flights to remote regions in 1992, other nations had continued the practice, compromising Russian national security. Although NATO countries expressed concern over possible violations of their airspace and scramble their fighters as a "routine response" when Russian bombers fly close to their borders, Moscow says all the latest flights are within air patrolling corridors permitted by international regulations.

Source: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071026/85599710.html

US interceptors in Europe fast enough to hit Russian ICBMs: researcher



Interceptor missiles deployed in Poland as part of a US missile defense shield would be fast enough to target Russian intercontinental missiles, contrary to US assurances, a US researcher said Thursday. Ted Postol, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a long time critic of the US missile defense system, said the US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) is understating the speed of the interceptor and overstating the speed of Russian long range missiles. MDA spokesman Rick Lehner said Postol had no access to missile test data and his assertions were "totally false." The United States is negotiating to station 10 interceptor missiles in Poland and a high powered targeting radar in the Czech Republic to counter what it says is a growing missile threat from Iran. Russia has objected vehemently to the plan on grounds that the European site could be used against its missiles, despite repeated denials from Washington. Postol said the Americans "were probably concerned the Europeans wouldn't accept (the plan) so they came up with the false argument that the interceptors won't be fast enough to engage Russians' ICBMs." He argued that the interceptor missiles would have to be faster than acknowledged by the Missile Defense Agency to be effective against missiles from Iran. "The MDA claims the interceptors have a rather slow burnout speed, because you have to have a low burnout speed in order to not overtake Russian ICBMs," he said at a press conference. "They claim a 6.3 kilometers per second speed. At this speed, the interceptor wouldn't be able to engage an ICBM from Russia," he said. "But in fact, the burnout speed of this interceptor is closer to nine kilometers per second, which tends to fit to claims of the MDA that the system can protect from an Iran attack," he said. "If the speed is inferior, then they can't defend places that they said they could defend earlier," he said. Lehner insisted, however, that the US interceptors are not fast enough to catch a Russian ICBM. "These missiles are more like six kilometers per second or a little more and it is certainly not sufficient to intercept a Russian missile, even coming out of a western part of Russia," he said.

Source: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...G2iZm7ysGZokTw

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Whether it's Armenians supporting the Armenian Assembly in the United States or Armenians in Armenia supporting individuals like Levon Ter-Petrosian, the Armenian people have in general revealed that they do not comprehend international politics, they do not understand the region in which the Armenian Republic is located, nor can they be trusted to make right decisions concerning Armenia's future. As a result I am sad to say that the only way to maintain Armenia's current state of political stability and gradual economic growth is to maintain the current administration in power regardless of their domestic sins. The reality of the matter is Armenians have not had political independence for nearly a thousand years. Armenians of the diaspora fall under the influences of whichever region of the world they reside. A large number of Armenians in Armenia are impoverished and perhaps a majority are clueless about the complex and volatile world that they live in. Individuals that support men like Levon Ter Petrosian, Paruyr Hayrikian, Raffi Hovanesian or Arthur Baghdasarian are glaring examples of how immature Armenians are politically and how careless they can be towards the geopolitical future of the Armenian Republic. In my opinion, we will need several generations before we as a people can fine tune our political skills and better understanding the geopolitical world around us. Until then, I wish to see a totalitarian nationalist form of government in power in Yerevan, one that concerns itself with protecting Armenian borders from foreign incursions and develops better economic and political relations with the Russian Federation and the Islamic State of Iran.

Armenian

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

ELECTION CONDUCTED



“I shall run for presidency. This is not a mere announcement. All kinds of pressure exerted on my proponents and terror unleashed by the tax service will be deemed as a violation of citizens’ right. I assure you that they will be presented to the society and international structures,” RA first President Levon Ter-Petrossian said at the October 26 rally. According to the first president his nomination is determined by the pressure exerted on his proponents. “I warn Armenia’s high-ranking officials and policemen that any violence or encroachment upon citizens’ rights is a crime and sooner or later they will stand trial for their misdeeds.” “We have started listing wrongdoers. The list is headed by Alexander Afian, Ararat Mahtessian and Nerses Nazarian.” Levon Ter-Petrossian did not divulge two district heads and promised to give their names at the next meeting. “The acting authorities are in deep agony. Their nervous breakdowns testify to their fear,” Ter-Petrossian said. By the way, the first president uttered no words of repentance. “We shall still have a chance. I have always relied on people’s common sense. No matter how bitter the truth was, I have never concealed it from people. I have never repudiated promises or given empty promises. I have never suffered from populism or demagogy. I have always stuck to my principles. This kind of personality I am, believe me or not,” Ter-Petrossian said. “Struggle till the end!” the crowd vociferated and applauded. To note, over 35-40 thousand people participated at the rally.

First Meeting?

The presentees of Azatutiun Square welcomed Hanrapetutiun Party member Aram Sargsian's speech with warm applauses. The latter was a little excited as he escorted RA first President Levon Ter-Petrossian. “This is the first meeting of the third president,” he said. Sargsian compared Ter-Petrossian with one of Dante’s characters “who lightens people’s way with a torch holding in the back.” “We have chosen Ter-Petrossian as the commander of the triumphant march, as he is the winner." “It is a tragedy for the whole nation,” Aram Sargsian said while recalling the October 27 events. After the terrorist act he wished the Armenian people to regain consciousness quicker. The only outcome of the current situation is the right choice of a president, Sargsian concluded.

Source: http://www.a1plus.am/en/

Armenia: Azerbaijani Politicians Mull Implications Of Ter-Petrossian Comeback

The possibility that Levon Ter-Petrossian, who served as Armenian president from the fall of 1991 until his forced resignation in February 1998, may announce his candidacy for the Armenian presidential ballot due in early 2008 has not only sent waves of shock and alarm through the incumbent Armenian leadership. It has also triggered speculation in Azerbaijan that the United States may back a presidential bid by Ter-Petrossian in the hope that he would adopt an unequivocally pro-Western position and help to undercut Russia's influence in the South Caucasus. Asked to comment on the possibility that Washington may seek to return Ter-Petrossian to power by means of a new "colored revolution" such as catapulted Viktor Yushchenko into the presidency of Ukraine, analyst Rauf Radjabov told day.az on October 24 that Washington would have to secure, first, the agreement of Ter-Petrossian -- who won a convincing and overwhelming victory in the 1991 presidential ballot -- to return to power by means of a revolution, and then to the complicity of Armenia's security services, which are currently under the firm control of Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian. Incumbent President Robert Kocharian has already identified Sarkisian as his preferred successor, and few doubt that he will be elected. The Armenian Constitution bars Kocharian from seeking a third consecutive presidential term.

The 'Karabakh Clan'

Radjabov suggested that what he branded the "Karabakh clan" is determined to cling to power, and would only admit defeat if given cast-iron guarantees of immunity from prosecution and that its members would not be stripped of the fortunes they amassed while in office. Moreover, Radjabov noted, Russia would be unlikely to condone any move by Washington that would call into question the future of its military base in Armenia. Radjabov did highlight one perceived dangerous consequence for Azerbaijan in the event that Washington does manage to engineer Ter-Petrossian's return to power, namely that the United States might exert pressure on Baku to accept a solution to the Karabakh conflict that is damaging to its interests. Asim Molla-zade, who heads the Party for Democratic Reforms, similarly stressed that it is unlikely that the "Karabakh clan" would voluntarily cede power. He went on to argue that it is to Azerbaijan's advantage that they should not do so, given the favorable comparison between the present Azerbaijani leadership and a clan that he described as accustomed to resorting to "terror, bestial murders, and the harsh suppression of dissent" to retain power.

(Eldaniz Quliyev of the Movement of Intelligentsia of Azerbaijan similarly reasoned on October 3 that Ter-Petrossian's chances of being elected president are "minimal," and that it would be to Azerbaijan's advantage if Sarkisian, whom Quliyev described as "leading Armenia toward the precipice at a Stakhanovite pace," were to succeed Kocharian. Quliyev also dismissed the argument that Ter-Petrossian might adopt a more conciliatory stance on resolving the Karabakh conflict than Sarkisian.) At the same time, Molla-zade cautioned against speculation about a possible colored revolution, noting that Ter-Petrossian has still not formally announced his intention of running for president, and it remains unclear how much popular support he enjoys. Molla-zade also questioned the perception that Ter-Petrossian is pro-U.S., recalling the close military and economic ties with Russia cemented while Ter-Petrossian was president.

To date, the only Azerbaijani official to have commented on the possibility of a colored revolution in Armenia is Foreign Ministry spokesman Xazar Ibragim. In an October 24 interview with day.az, Ibragim noted that any discussion of such a revolution only serves to highlight the weakness of the Armenian state and its leaders' inability to implement an independent policy. That weakness, he continued, is the fault of the incumbent leadership, and can be overcome only by a shift in foreign policy, liberating the districts of Azerbaijan currently occupied by Armenian forces, and seeking peaceful coexistence with all the states of the region. Ibragim further cautioned against focusing on specific political figures, including Ter-Petrossian, reasoning that "for Armenia, much depends not on who is elected president but on what position he adopts with regard to foreign policy." But he did not rule out the "hypothetical possibility" that a pro-U.S. politician could come to power in Armenia, resulting in "a certain degree of support" for Armenia in resolving the Karabakh conflict. Ibragim warned, however, that unlike Armenia, Azerbaijan is "immune" to any such pressure from world powers.

Source: http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle...43E1AE46E.html

An interesting report dated 1998 by a western "watch" group regarding Levon Ter-Petrosian:

Militia Group That Forces Resignation Of Armenian President Has Record Of Human Rights Abuses

A conservative veterans' organization is posing a serious threat to the rule of law in Armenia, Human Rights Watch charged today. An organization of veterans of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, known as the Yerkrapah Battalion, played a role in the February 3 resignation of President Levon Ter-Petrossian. The Yerkrapah Battalion's growing faction in parliament had recently joined Armenian defense minister Vasken Sarkissiyan's calls for President Ter-Petrossian's resignation. On February 2, forty members of the national assembly reportedly quit the ruling coalition in order to join the Yerkrapah parliamentary faction.

In 1995, the Yerkrapah Battalion was linked to violent attacks on non-apostolic religious groups -- mostly Christian sects other than the Armenian Orthodox Church. Defense Minister Sarkissiyan was a leader of the Yerkrapah Battalion at that time. "Militia groups like the Yerkrapah Battalion are a threat to Armenia's nascent civil society," said Holly Cartner, executive director of Human Rights Watch's Europe and Central Division. "The Clinton Administration should lead the international community in sending a clear message to the Armenian Defense Ministry: human rights abuses by vigilante groups will not be tolerated." Cartner urged the Armenian government and its defense ministry to bring to justice those Yerkrapah members who are guilty of human rights abuses.

"Yerkrapah members should not be allowed into government security forces or other official positions without a thorough review of each applicant's record," Cartner said. "Those who participated in the 1995 attacks on religious groups should be excluded." Over the past three years the Armenian government failed to bring to justice any of the perpetrators of violent attacks on members of twelve non-apostolic religious groups in April 1995. The U.S. State Department Armenia Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 1996 noted that paramilitary troops wielding iron pipes and guns broke up religious groups' services, severely beat and kidnaped adherents and pastors, and ransacked offices. The report adds that several victims were rushed to the hospital, and that twenty adherents were held for several days or weeks at an Armenian military police facility. Credible accounts attribute the attacks to members of the Yerkrapah organization.

Source: http://hrw.org/english/docs/1998/02/03/armeni1066.htm