Category: Asia and Pacific

  • UZBEKISTAN: US OFFICIALS NEGOTIATING A RETURN TO UZBEK AIR BASE – SOURCE

    UZBEKISTAN: US OFFICIALS NEGOTIATING A RETURN TO UZBEK AIR BASE – SOURCE

    Shahin Abbasov  23/03/09

    According to a diplomatic source, the United States is reportedly conducting talks with Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan about opening up bases in the two Central Asian countries.

    After Kyrgyzstan’s decision in February to evict US forces from an air base at Manas, US officials sent out feelers to Ashgabat and Tashkent about setting up a military presence on Turkmen and Uzbek territory, the diplomatic source claimed. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]1.

    The source indicated that an agreement between US and Uzbek officials could be reached soon that would allow American forces to return to the Karshi-Khanabad (K2) air base. Uzbekistan evicted US forces from the base in late 2005 amid bilateral rancor over the Andijan events in May of that year.

    Since Kyrgyzstan formally initiated the Manas base closure process, US defense officials have maintained that a base in Central Asia is not absolutely necessary for maintaining the existing level of support for ongoing military operations in Afghanistan. While many regional analysts have said it would be logical for Washington to explore the possibility of regaining access to K2 in Uzbekistan, there has been no official confirmation either coming out of Washington or Tashkent that any such discussions have occurred.

    Indeed, US diplomats in recent weeks have publicly denied any knowledge of talks between the governments of the United States and Uzbekistan on a possible base deal. In a March 5 interview with the Russian-language newspaper Sobytiya (Events), for example, the US ambassador to Tajikistan, Tracy Ann Jacobson, stated that she “had not heard one word from my colleagues in the Pentagon about the possibility of creating a [new] base” in Central Asia, the agency Central Asian News reported.

    It would seem to be a much longer shot for the United States to secure Turkmen approval for a base in that Central Asian nation. Turkmenistan has long staked out a neutral foreign policy.

    US Defense Department officials did not immediately respond to repeated telephone and email queries made by EurasiaNet seeking comment on the supposed base negotiations.

    The diplomatic source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, indicated that US officials have also sounded out Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev’s administration about the possibility of establishing a military base there. The clear US preference, however, is to find a facility that is closer to Afghanistan. “It would be more logical and efficient for a military operation in Afghanistan to have bases in Central Asia, but not in the South Caucasus,” the source said.

    Beyond the military base matter, US officials are interested in securing wider Turkmen and Uzbek participation in a network to expand the flow of non-lethal supplies into Afghanistan. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Ashgabat and Tashkent could play important roles in building a supply route running from Turkey to the Georgian Black Sea port of Poti, then by rail to Azerbaijan (Baku), and across the Caspian Sea. Both the Turkmen port of Turkmenbashi and the Kazakhstani port of Atyrau have been mentioned for the route’s next stage. Cargo would then move on to Uzbekistan and, finally, Afghanistan. Tajikistan, which borders on Afghanistan, has also been discussed as a storage point.

    Transportation specialists, government officials and private companies from Turkey, Azerbaijan and Georgia, as well as US officials, gathered in Baku on March 9-10 for a US-sponsored conference on ways to integrate Azerbaijan into supply networks to Afghanistan. A March 9 statement from the US Embassy in Baku specified that cargo from Azerbaijan would be non-military and carried by private companies. Military personnel would not be involved in the transit, according to the embassy statement. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

    A source in the Azerbaijani government who did not want to be named termed the conference productive for Azerbaijan. “The Americans offered to set up the necessary infrastructure in Azerbaijan [for storage], as well as to contract transportation companies and local businesses which would purchase the necessary goods and products [for troops in Afghanistan],” the source told EurasiaNet.

    Former presidential foreign policy aide Vafa Guluzade, though, sees an eventual military component in the discussions as well. “Azerbaijan is situated closely to Afghanistan, Central Asia, Pakistan, Iran and Russia. Therefore, sooner or later, a US military presence in Azerbaijan is inevitable,” Guluzade said.

    Not everyone agrees. Sulhaddin Akper, head of the Azerbaijan-Atlantic Cooperation Association, a Baku-based think-tank, said a base in Azerbaijan would be an inefficient way to support operations in Afghanistan, given the distance involved.

    Whether or not a base is feasible in Azerbaijan, Baku is interested in helping to expand an Afghan supply route via the Caucasus. Azerbaijan already has 92 soldiers in Afghanistan as part of the US-led coalition that is combating the radical Islamic insurgency.

    Azerbaijan’s willingness to strengthen strategic cooperation with the United States has made two of Baku’s neighbors — Russia and Iran — nervous. But for now, there is little that either country can do about it. Akper noted that Moscow’s ability to influence Baku has been diminished by a scandal in which the Kremlin reportedly authorized the transfer of Russian arms to Armenia. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

     

    Editor’s Note: Shahin Abbasov is a freelance correspondent based in Baku. He is also a board member of the Open Society Institute-Azerbaijan.

    1 EURASIA INSIGHT

    Eurasianet

  • Turkish-Australian community speech of Senator Ferguson

    Turkish-Australian community speech of Senator Ferguson

    PLEASE JOIN US IN THANK YOU CAMPAIGN FOR SENATOR FERGUSON

    From: Nihat Canikli <ncanikli@yahoo.com>
    Subject: Turkish-Australian community speech
    To: senator.ferguson@aph.gov.au
    Date: Friday, March 20, 2009, 9:36 PM

    Dear Senator Ferguson,

    As a Turk living in Ankara, Turkey, I was informed of your Turkish-Australian community speech in the Senate on 18 March 2009. I would like to express that most of the Turks respect their enemies although Turks suffered a lot facing invading armies and their collaborators. As you may know, Turks and Muslims experienced massive death, exile and atrocities in the final period of Ottoman Empire. My grandfather fought in the World War I including Gallipoli front and later in the War of Independence against Greek army. In spite of all these wars and sufferings, we, Turks, do not feel hatred and animosity against our former enemies, their country and people.

    Unfortunately, most of the Greeks and Armenians continue anti-Turkish racist hate campaigns with the aim of gaining support from politicians and government officials in different parts of the world including Australia. They give a distorted picture of events in Turkey between 1915-1923. Armenians who collaborated with invading Russian army in eastern Anatolia in World War I caused mass killings of more than five hundred thousand Muslims and Greeks committed atrocities against Turks with the occupation of Greek army although those Christian communities enjoyed peace and prosperity in the Ottoman Empire for centuries.

    I thank you for your fair and objective position on the history of and modern-day Turkey. Your remarks will undoubtedly contribute a lot to the friendship of Australia and Turkey.

    With warmest regards,

    Nihat Canikli

    Ankara, Turkey

    0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
    From: Turkish Consulate General Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 12:21 PM To: Turkish Consulate General Subject: Duyuru (1000 adrese dagitimli) Sayi: 1247
    Tarih: 20/03/2009

    Sayi: Melburn –  1247

    E-Konsolosluk:

    Melburn,  20 Mart 2009

    Kanberra Buyukelciligimizin girisimi ile Guney Avustralya Senatoru Alan Ferguson’un 18 Mart 2009 tarihinde Avustralya Parlamentosu’nda yaptıgı konusma:

    Senator Ferguson, gundem dısı soz alarak yaptıgı konusmada, Adelaide’daki Goc Muzesi’nde 20 Aralık 2008’de acılan “Pontus” plaketi ve bu munasebetle Guney Avustralya Eyaleti Cokkulturluluk, Adalet ve Muharip Gaziler Bakanı Atkinson’un konusmasına yonelik tepkisini ortaya koymaktadır.

    Vatandaslarimiza saygi ile duyurulur.

    T.C. Melburn Baskonsoloslugu

    Level 8, 24 Albert Road, South Melbourne  VIC  3205

    Tel: 03 9696 6046

    Fax: 03 9696 6104

    email: turkcons@bigpond.com

    000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
    From: atamanatlas@hotmail.com Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 1:31 PM To: senator.ferguson@aph.gov.au Subject: RE: Your Speech on 18 March 2009 Turkish – Australian Relations
    Dear Senator Ferguson,   I have had the privilege of reading your speech in relation to the above mentioned topic in the Senate on the 18 March 2009.  I would like to convey my most heart felt gratitude to you and your family for such an inspiring speech.  One can well glean from the content, text and context of your speech that you are a man of honour and integrity, which are two very rare character traits in many politicians of the modern era.   I thank you from the bottom of my heart for putting onto the public record such important facts as you have.  I myself am a Turkish born Australian citizen and it is very rare that we as a community ever get the Australian “Fair Go” from any politician but especially the Australian Media.   I grew up in this beautiful nation of ours facing racism and continual allegations about how barbaric the Turkish race was and still is.  The political ploy employed by Pope Urban when he called on the first crusades is still alive and being used to this very date.  The most disappointing and hurtful of all is when democratically elected Politicians use the same or similar rhetoric as used by Pope Urban all those centuries ago, and the fact that the Australian Media by and large fall for it hook line and sinker.  Yet when a Turk tries to put forward their side of the story (whatever issue or topic it may be on) we are continually shut down and not heard.   This great Nation of ours needs more men and women of integrity and honour such as yourself if we are to successfully navigate through the troubled waters that lay ahead of us.  Sir I wish to mention that I was like many other Turks a committed Labor voter for many years until relatively recent times, however after your speech and dare I say the former Prime Minister Howard’s stance on the fallacious Armenian Genocide issue I will forever VOTE Liberal and I will try and convey that message to as many Turks as I can all over Australia.   Regardless of any perceived faults that Mr Howard may have had, I also admire him and his utmost honourable stance on the alleged Armenian Genocide issue which in reality cost him his seat at the last Federal Elections.  That fact has not been missed by the Australian Turkish Community.  He too could have pandered to the Armenian Voters in his former electorate like that grubby vote grabbing dishonest Maxine Mckew.  Mr Howard will always be remembered by the Australian Turkish Community as a man of principle, integrity and honour, as you will too.   The month of April is nearly upon us again, and another ANZAC Day nearing, what certain sections of the Armenian community could not achieve via acts of war, treachery, treason and terrorism, they are now trying to achieve via political means.  Like many thousands of other Australian Turks I hope that our voices will be heard one day by Australian politicians but especially the Australian Media and that we get a fair go in putting our side of the story to various issues.  Certain sections of the Armenian community are now trying to disgrace the memory of ANZAC day in this country by supposedly connecting their fallacious genocide claims with ANZAC day.  There is much that I would like to say but alas I do not wish to bore you with details.   You have provided me with great hope that my three children will grow up in an Australia that is fair and Just and that they will not face the same accusations that I faced whilst at school of coming from a barbaric race that slaughtered many millions of Armenians, Greeks and others.  We truly do live in the Luckiest Country in the world.   Sir I can not thank you enough.   My warmest regards Ataman Atlas

  • Turkey To Launch Armenian-Language Radio Station

    Turkey To Launch Armenian-Language Radio Station

    Reuters

    Turkey’s state broadcaster plans to launch an Armenian-language radio station, Anatolian state news agency said on Friday, amid tentative moves by Turkey and its neighbor Armenia towards restoring diplomatic ties.

    Relations between the two countries are haunted by the killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks during World War One, which Armenia says amounted to genocide. Ankara accepts many Armenians were killed, but denies genocide was committed. Since then large numbers of Armenian speakers have left Turkey but some 40-50,000 remain, mostly in Istanbul.

    “At this stage, we will refrain from any comments,” an Armenian Foreign Ministry spokesman said when asked about the report of the planned radio station on Friday.

    The announcement comes as some U.S. lawmakers, ahead of a visit by President Barack Obama to Turkey on April 6-7, are renewing a push to brand the 1915 massacre genocide.

    Ankara has warned that a new resolution by the U.S. Congress could seriously hurt Washington’s ties with NATO ally Turkey. It also argues such a resolution would derail the drive to mend relations with Armenia, including moves to open the border.

    Anatolian said the Armenian-language channel should go on air in “two to three months.” The official day of remembrance in Armenia is April 24.

    The genocide issue, which caused U.S.-Turkish relations to plummet in 2007, threatens to complicate Obama’s trip as Washington hopes to work closely with Turkey on Afghanistan, Iraq, the Middle East and the Caucasus. During his 2008 campaign for the White House, Obama referred to the killings of Armenians in World War One as genocide. Obama is now confronted with a choice between breaking a campaign pledge or risking defense ties with Turkey.

    Turkey and Armenia have no formal diplomatic relations but officials have held recent tentative discussions. Anatolian said state-run Turkish Radio and Television Corp (TRT), which launched a television channel in the once-banned Kurdish language in January, also planned to launch a Kurdish radio channel.

  • Sarkisian In Phone Call With Clinton

    Sarkisian In Phone Call With Clinton

     

     By Emil Danielyan

    President Serzh Sarkisian discussed a wide range of issues, including Armenia’s ongoing rapprochement with Turkey, in a phone call with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reported by his office on Wednesday.

    As they spoke, U.S. lawmakers formally introduced a fresh draft resolution that refers to the mass killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire as genocide and urges President Barack Obama to do the same. The Obama administration did not immediately react to the initiative strongly backed by the influential Armenian community in the United States.

    A short statement issued by the Armenian presidential press service said Sarkisian and Clinton discussed U.S.-Armenian relations and, in particular, the recent extension of a freeze on some of American economic assistance to Yerevan. The U.S. Millennium Challenge Corporation made the decision, citing the “status of democratic governance” in Armenia, at a March 11 meeting of its governing board chaired by Clinton.

    The statement said that Sarkisian and Clinton also touched upon international efforts to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and “the Turkish-Armenian political dialogue.” It gave no details.

    The U.S. State Department issued no statements on Clinton’s first-ever conversation with the Armenian leader. The acting department spokesman, Robert Wood, did not mention it at a daily press briefing in Washington on Tuesday.

    The current and previous U.S. administrations have welcomed the dramatic thaw in the traditionally strained Turkish-Armenian relations. After months of high-level negotiations, the two neighboring states appear to be on the verge of to establishing diplomatic relations and opening their border.

    Official Ankara has repeatedly warned that Obama will set back the long-awaited normalization of Turkish-Armenian ties if he publicly describes the 1915-1918 massacres of Armenians as genocide. “A bad step by the United States would only worsen the process,” Foreign Minister Ali Babacan said on March 8.

    Babacan’s Armenian counterpart, Eduard Nalbandian, dismissed Turkish warnings during a visit to Paris last week.

    The highly sensitive issue is expected to feature large during Obama’s trip to Turkey scheduled for April 5. Turkish leaders already raised their concerns with Clinton when she visited Ankara earlier this month.

    During the U.S. presidential race, both Obama and Clinton repeatedly called the slaughter of more than a million Ottoman Armenians a genocide and pledged to reaffirm such declarations once in office. Neither leader has publicly commented on the subject since taking office.

    “The Los Angeles Times” reported on Tuesday that the Obama administration is now considering postponing an official U.S. recognition of the genocide in view of the unprecedented Turkish-Armenian rapprochement and Turkey’s importance for the success of U.S. plans on Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq. “At this moment, our focus is on how, moving forward, the United States can help Armenia and Turkey work together to come to terms with the past,” Michael Hammer, a spokesman for the U.S. National Security Council, told the paper.

    The Armenian-American community and its allies in the U.S. Congress, meanwhile, hope that Obama will honor his campaign pledges. “We do not minimize Ankara’s threats of adverse action when you recognize the genocide, or when Congress takes action to formally recognize the genocide, but we believe that our alliance is strong enough to withstand the truth,” a group of congressmen wrote in a recent letter to the president.

    Stepping up the pressure on the White House, the lawmakers on Tuesday submitted to the House of Representatives a bill that calls on Obama to “accurately characterize the systematic and deliberate annihilation of 1,500,000 Armenians as genocide” in his statement due on April 24, the genocide remembrance day.

    Armenian-American lobbying groups, meanwhile, seem confident that Obama will not bow to the Turkish pressure. “The Armenian government has been clear that no linkage exists between normalizing relations and U.S. genocide recognition, and aside from Turkish lobbying efforts, no one seriously thinks that President Obama, Vice President Biden or Secretary Clinton will jeopardize U.S. and their own credibility in opposing genocide recognition,” Van Krikorian, a senior member of the Armenian Assembly of America, told RFE/RL. “Turkey continues to come to terms with its own past and a reversion to the policy of accommodating denial will cut that off at the knees.”

    https://www.azatutyun.am/a/1600437.html

  • Another Armenian genocide resolution

    Another Armenian genocide resolution

    By MICHAEL DOYLE

    McClatchy Newspapers

    The perennial political battle over an Armenian genocide resolution is joined again, as lawmakers Tuesday introduced a symbolic measure that puts President Barack Obama in a bind.

    The resolution backed by lawmakers who represent large numbers of Armenian-American constituents calls on Obama to “accurately characterize the systematic and deliberate annihilation of 1,500,000 Armenians as genocide.”

    The bill introduced with 77 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives largely tracks similar resolutions introduced in previous years. Its fundamental point is to apply the term “genocide” to events that occurred between 1915 and 1923 during the Ottoman Empire’s final years. The empire was based in what is now the Republic of Turkey.

    “It has never served our national interest to become complicit in the denial of genocide, and it never will,” said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. “While there are still some survivors left, we have a compelling moral obligation to speak plainly about the past.”

    But what some call a moral obligation strikes others as a diplomatic conundrum. Obama had one of the first telephone calls of his presidency with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan, with whom Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has met personally. Obama in early April will visit Turkey, where the genocide resolution is anathema.

    The biggest test for the Obama administration is what the president will say on or around April 24, the traditional date for any Armenian genocide commemoration. A Los Angeles Times story published Tuesday suggested that Obama might postpone the traditional commemorative statement. A White House spokesman could not be reached Tuesday to elaborate.

    “The resolution would be insulting to Turkey and would be very poorly received,” said James H. Holmes, a retired U.S. ambassador who is now president of the American Turkish Council. He added that “some very significant commercial opportunities” might be put at risk.

    As a presidential candidate, Obama bluntly characterized the deaths of Armenians.

    “There was a genocide that did take place against the Armenian people,” Obama said during one filmed campaign appearance. “It is one of these situations where we have seen a constant denial on the part of the Turkish government and others that this has occurred.”

    Clinton, while a senator, co-sponsored the Senate’s version of a genocide resolution. National Security Council staffer Samantha Power, a high-profile foreign policy adviser during the campaign, filmed a video specifically aimed at Armenian-American voters considering a vote for Obama.

    President Ronald Reagan in 1984 issued an Armenian genocide recognition. But other presidents, including George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, have made similar campaign attestations only to retreat from the genocide term once in office.

    State Department officials have testified that historians differ as to whether the word genocide properly applies. More generally, diplomats have warned of potential diplomatic fallout.

    “America can ill afford to lose the support of a critical ally like Turkey,” Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Fla., a leader in the Congressional Caucus on Turkey, declared at one 2007 House hearing.

    Schiff and Rep. George Radanovich, R.-Calif., have traded off as the resolution’s chief sponsor, depending upon which party controls the House. Neither, though, has yet advanced the resolution to the House floor.

    In 2007, amid intense pressure from the Pentagon, the White House and Turkey, 25 House members withdrew their support for a similar Armenian genocide resolution. At the time, military leaders warned that the resolution would undermine U.S. relations with a valued ally whose support was needed for success in Iraq.

    Seven years before, literally minutes before Radanovich was going to bring a genocide resolution to the House floor, then-Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., pulled the plug following an urgent phone call from the White House.

    Posted on Tue, Mar. 17, 2009 06:04 PM

  • Armenia and Armenians in Int’l Treaties, Ann Arbor, Mar. 19-21

    Armenia and Armenians in Int’l Treaties, Ann Arbor, Mar. 19-21

    International Conference
    Armenia and Armenians in International Treaties

    University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, March 19-21, 2009

    Day 1 – Thursday, March 19, 2009 – Michigan Union (Anderson D)

    Session I – 9:00-12:00

    Dr. Levon Avdoyan, “Unintended Consequences: Three Ancient Treaties
       and the Armenians” (63,299, 387 CE)
    Prof. Robert H. Hewsen, “Armenia in the Treaty of Nisibis of 299 CE”
    Prof. Seta B. Dadoyan,”From the ‘Medinan Oaths’ to the Shah’s
       ‘Compact’ for New Julfa-Isfahan: The Millennial Record of
       Islamic-Armenian Protocols”
    Prof. Johannes Preiser-Kapeller, “Armenian Aristocrats as Diplomatic
       Partners of Eastern Roman Emperors, 387-884/885 AD”

    Session II – 2:00-5:00

    Prof. Azat Bozoyan, “The Treaty of Deapolis (1107) as an Example of
       the Byzantine Policy of ‘Divide and Rule’”
    Prof. Claude Mutafian, “The International Treaties of the Last Kingdom
       of Armenia

    Mr. Armen Kouyoumdjian, “When Madrid Was the Capital of Armenia
    Prof. Ali Kavani, “The Treaty of 1639 and its consequences for Armenia
       and Armenians”

    Day 2 – Friday, March 20, 2009 – Michigan Union (Anderson D)

    Session III – 9:00-12:00

    Dr. Sebouh Aslanian, “Julfan Agreements with Foreign States and
       Chartered Companies: Exploring the limits of Julfan Collective
       Self-Representation in the Early Modern Age”
    Prof. Kevork Bardakjian, “The National ‘Constitution’ of 1863: A
       Dhimmi-Muslim Contract?”
    Prof. Aram Yengoyan, “No War, No Peace: The Treaty of Brest Litovsk, 1918″
    Prof. Richard Hovannisian,”The Unratified Treaty of Alexandropol as
       the Basis for Subsequent Russian-Turkish-Armenian Relations”

    Session IV – 2:00-4:00

    Dr. Fuat Dundar, “Diplomacy of Statistics: Discussing the Number of
       Armenians during Diplomatic Negotiations (1878-1914)”
    Dr. Vladimir Vardanyan, “Peace Treaties of Armenia and Relating to
       Armenia: A Legal Analysis”
    Prof. Dennis Papazian, “The Treaty of Lausanne

    Day 3 – Saturday, March 21, 2009 – Michigan Union (Wolverine ABC)

    Session V – 8:30-12:00

    Dr. Lusine Taslakyan, “Armenia in International Environmental Conventions”
    Mr. Emil Sanamyan, “The OSCE-CFE Treaty and Breaches in the
       International Legal System: Armenia’s Predicament Today”
    Mr. Rouben Shougarian, “Yielding More to Gain the Essential: The
       Russo-Armenian Treaty of 1997”
    Prof. Sevane Garibian, “From the 1915 Allied Declaration to the Treaty
       of Sevres
    : The Legacy of the Armenian Genocide in International
    Criminal Law”

    Session VI – 1:30-4:00

    Prof. Keith Watenpaugh, “The League of Nations and the Formation of
       Armenian Genocide Denial
    Pascual Ohanian, JD, “International Treaties in International Penal
       Law Concerning Crimes Against Humanity: Applicability of the Juridical
       Experience in Argentina and Chile to the Turkish-Ottoman State and
       Turkish Republic for Acts Perpetrated from 1910 to 1923 and Beyond”
    Prof. Catherine Kessedjian, “Beyond Treaties”

    Live webcast: