Category: Asia and Pacific

  • Rector kicks out Israel ambassador

    Rector kicks out Israel ambassador

    ANKARA – Istanbul University’s rector, Mesut Parlak, drove away two Israeli officials from his office due to the presence of their armed bodyguards, daily Haaretz reported yesterday.

    The Israeli ambassador to Turkey, Gabby Levy, and Consul General Mordechai Amichai visited Parlak in his office Friday and he became annoyed by the bodyguards who entered his office without permission. “This is a university and we cannot hold a meeting under these circumstances. There is no such protocol here. I am responsible for your security and these bodyguards cannot stay,” Parlak told the officials who insisted on keeping the bodyguards with them. Parlak then canceled the meeting and saw them to the door.

    Israeli sources confirmed the incident saying they did not want to leave the ambassador alone at the meeting after protests by Palestinian students at Bahçeşehir University earlier in the week.

    Israeli diplomats in Turkey are provided with “Shin Bet protection,” but it is customary to keep the presence of police and security personnel to a minimum on university campuses. The altercation erupted when the two diplomats failed to adhere to this unwritten rule.

    Source: www.hurriyet.com.tr, 23 Nov 2008

  • Armenia: Army Targets Students

    Armenia: Army Targets Students

    Alarm about demographic slump leads to proposed enlistment on army-age students.

    By Sara Khojoian in Yerevan (CRS No. 470 27-Nov-08)

    The Armenian government is working on amendments to legislation which would force more students to do military service, thereby overcoming a potential shortfall in recruits.

    The defence and education ministries are drawing up the changes to three existing laws, but have not yet presented them to parliament.

    “They foresee removing the right to academic leave during military call-up and setting certain benefits for students [for the duration of their army service],” said Mary Harutiunian, government spokeswoman.

    Currently post-graduate students doing a master’s or doctorate are entitled to “academic leave” which exempts them from having to serve in the military so they can concentrate on their studies.

    While the final details of the proposed changes are not yet clear, there has already been an outcry against the overall plan.

    The government says that it needs to act now to tackle a lack of conscripts for the armed forces. Beginning from this year and over the next decade, conscripts will be young men born in the 1990s, the number of whom is constantly declining, as the year 1991, when the Soviet Union broke up and Armenia became independent, marked a fall in the birth-rate.

    According to national statistics, in 1990-92 the birth-rate (for both boys and girls) was 70,000 but it has declined sharply since then to 48,000 in 1995 and 37,000 in 2006, after which it began a modest recovery.

    These trends are considered to be a threat to the country in two official documents, the National Security Strategy and the Military Doctrine.

    However, some experts say that the answer to Armenia’s military needs is to move away from conscription altogether.

    Former deputy defence minister Artur Aghabekian – currently a deputy and head of the Armenian parliament’s committee on defence, internal affairs and national security – told IWPR, “There is really a demographic problem in our country but I personally believe that general conscription is not the solution.”

    Aghabekian said it had been a mistake to close military departments in colleges and universities, which train students in army-related subjects during their studies and which he said were an important institution for preparing youngster for careers in the armed forces.

    Aghabekian said that Armenia needed to form a professional army by giving out temporary contracts to professional soldiers.

    The military currently do have units staffed by soldiers on contracts, amongst them Armenia’s international peacekeeping battalion, but there are no plans to expand this practice.

    Another former deputy defence minister Vahan Shirkhanian also believes the army needs to move away from full reliance on conscription, particularly since emigration was becoming a big problem. “From 2001 to 2006, 27,000 school-children left Armenia and, this year, from January to August alone, 83,000 people left Armenia. People who leave the country take their sons with them,” he said.

    “So just imagine how many [potential recruits] we are losing every day, which is why our eyes are always turned to universities, to call up 18-year-olds. But that’s not how the problem gets solved.

    “This plan could cause a lot of problems for education and science and also hurt the relationship between the public and the army. All the more so when problem number one for our military security is the restoration of trust between army and the public.”

    Research shows that young men do not want to serve in the army and parents are reluctant to send their children there because they consider it corrupt.

    Surveys carried out by the anti-corruption organisation Transparency International in 2002 and 2006 reveal that attitudes towards the army had not changed in those four years. In the first poll, 46.6 per cent of those surveyed said they considered the army extremely corrupt, four years later the figure was 40.4 per cent. The corresponding numbers of people who said the army was merely corrupt were 16 and 25.1 per cent.

    A major reason for public distrust of the army is the high death-rate amongst conscripts, with frequent reports of young men dying in unexplained circumstances.

    Armenia’s human rights ombudsman Armen Harutyunian has sent an official letter to the head of the government administration Davit Sargsian, saying that Armenian law was currently in line with the Europe-wide Bologna Declaration on higher education and that the rights of students to continuous study risked being abused under the new legislation.

    The chairman of parliament’s education committee Armen Ashotian said that every effort should be made to soften the impact of the new law on students – through new benefits paid to them while they serve – but insisted it was necessary.

    “We all understand that the age of conscription is approaching the ‘demographic pit’, that starts with the years 1990-1992 ,” said Ashotian. “Men born at that time should soon be called up into the army and everyone understands that the most important task is increasing the efficiency of the army.”

    But many young people are opposed to the proposed changes.

    Twenty-six-year-old Alexander Chilingirian, who has gained a doctorate in physics, said that he would never have completed his studies if he had to serve in the army.

    “The army breaks a person,” said Chilingiran. “And it doesn’t matter if you join the army at 18 and come out at 20 or if you join at 21 and come out at 23, you don’t have the will to carry anything on. In two years in the army the brain doesn’t just switch off, it degrades.”

    Sixteen-year-old Mikael Sandrosian, a second-year geology and metallurgy student in Yerevan, takes a similar view.

    “If I go into the army that it will definitely have a bad effect on my studies,” he said. “In the first place if I join up, I will forget everything I know in two years and when I return it will be hard and I won’t have the will to carry on learning.”

    Government spokesperson Mary Harutiunian said that the draft changes were now being studied by experts, then discussed in government before being presented to parliament. She said there was no time-frame for their approval.

    She said Prime Minister Tigran Sargsian had promised wide discussion of the issue to ensure that the eventual changes had public support.

    Sara Khojoian is a correspondent with Armenianow.com in Yerevan.

  • Kurds underwent deportation and genocide by Armenians several times

    Kurds underwent deportation and genocide by Armenians several times

    Baku. Lachin Sultanova – APA. Kurds face no problems in getting national rights in Azerbaijan, member of Stockholm-based Kurdish Intellectuals Union Cheto Omari said in his interview to Etnoglobus agency while commenting on his visit to Azerbaijan.
    “I am glad to visit Azerbaijan. Unfortunately, the Kurds living in the west have completely wrong information about the developments in Azerbaijan. We thought that Azerbaijanis deported and killed Kurds during Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict. I saw quite a different view in Azerbaijan. It turned out that Kurds had undergone deportation and genocide by Armenians several times. During the Soviet period Kurds were deported from Armenia, and later when the Armenians occupied Azerbaijani territories the Kurds were deported again. Azerbaijani government and people received the Kurds, defended them and gave ethnic rights to them,” he said.

    Cheto Omari said the Kurds had all democratic rights in Azerbaijan and added that the Kurds had cultural centers and a radio program.
    “I hope Azerbaijani Kurds will achieve more progress. These two nations lived together for centuries. I assure you that none of the Kurds living here had a negative opinion of Azerbaijan. They regard the Azerbaijanis as their brothers. In Azerbaijan Kurds obtained the rights they had been deprived of in Armenia,” he said.

    Touching on the relations with Azerbaijani Diaspora in Sweden Cheto Omari said the relations were not close.
    “Azerbaijan has gained its independence recently, formation of Diaspora takes time. Unfortunately, we had information about joint struggle of Kurds with Armenians. I will speak about everything I saw in Azerbaijan to the Kurdish Diaspora. We will soon come to Azerbaijan with larger delegation,” he said.

  • Refusing the hand of friendship

    Refusing the hand of friendship

    High on a hill overlooking the city of Kars, there is a vast column of concrete obscured by wooden scaffolding.  

    The hand of friendship has yet to be proffered, let alone accepted

    What is inside was meant as a 32m (100ft) peace gesture from Turkey to Armenia.

    “It’s an image of two human figures, facing one another with a hand of friendship held out between them,” explains the security guard, emerging from the portable building at the statue’s feet.

    But on the day the finished project should have been unveiled its giant hand stands severed on the hillside.

    This friendship statue has enemies, and they have forced construction to stop.

    BBC NEWS | Europe | Refusing the hand of friendship

  • Georgia cedes its natural gas network to Azerbaijan

    Georgia cedes its natural gas network to Azerbaijan

    by Emil Sanamyan
    The Armenian Reporter
    Nov 21, 2008

    WASHINGTON, – Georgia agreed to hand over the ownership of its natural gas network, which includes the transit gas pipeline from Russia to Armenia, to the Azerbaijani government, news agencies reported.

    Under the November 14 deal, announced by Georgian leader Mikheil Saakashvili the next day, Azerbaijan would satisfy the bulk of Georgia’s natural gas needs in 2009-13 at below-market prices.

    The deal was finalized during an energy summit in Baku that brought together a number of central and eastern European heads and senior officials of states interested in Caspian energy.

    Also at the summit, Kazakhstan agreed to expand its oil shipments via Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey through the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline built with U.S. support.

    “Property for debt”
    Georgia’s deal with Azerbaijan is similar to Armenia’s deal with Russia, exchanging formal ownership of the gas network – that could potentially serve as political leverage – for a temporary reprieve in prices.

    Until this year, like Armenia, Georgia bought most of its natural gas from Russia. Moscow reportedly came close to buying the Georgian gas network, but the offer was declined by Tbilisi on the U.S. government’s insistence, which was concerned with integrity of non-Russian gas supplies.

    Although the Georgian-Russian border is closed and official relations are suspended, Russia continues to supply Georgia, and by extension Armenia, with natural gas. The biggest gas consumers in Georgia – the Tbilisi electricity network and a chemical plant – are owned by Russian companies.

    While Russian-Georgian talks on South Ossetia and Abkhazia resume in Geneva this week, no normalization in relations is anticipated any time soon.

    Speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington on November 15, President Dmitry Medvedev said that Russia was “ready to build relations with Georgia.”

    “But not with the current [Saakashvili] regime,” Mr. Medvedev said. “That is a red line, which we cannot cross.”

    Armenia impact
    Azerbaijan has now promised to cover more than 60 percent of Georgia’s overall gas needs – estimated at 1.8 billion cubic meters of gas a year – at below-market prices. The rest of the supplies to Georgia would still need to come at market prices from Azerbaijan, Russia, or Iran.

    Armenia imported more than 2 billion cubic meters of gas from Russia last year. In addition to the now Azerbaijani-owned Georgian transit pipeline, Armenia can now potentially import natural gas from Iran – an important safeguard should new problems arise in supplies via Georgia. The Iran option also becomes more attractive as Russia will begin to raise prices for its supplies starting next year.

    Consequences for Armenia of the Georgia deal may become apparent soon. Azerbaijan and Turkey had previously used a promise of lower gas prices to Georgia as leverage against Armenia in the form of Georgian support for the Kars-Akhalkalaki rail bypass and other projects.

    The Russian-Georgian war already disrupted air and other traffic between Russia and Armenia. Media reports suggested that Georgia was trying to prevent Russian military cargo, including those resupplying its military base in Gyumri, from reaching Armenia.

    Considering the continued importance of Georgia transit to Armenia, it is not surprising that both President Serge Sargsian and Defense Minister Seyran Ohanian have visited Georgia since the August war, and Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian is expected to go soon.

    URL:

  • TURKEY PUSHES FOR CLOSER POLITICAL TIES WITHIN THE TURKIC-SPEAKING WORLD

    TURKEY PUSHES FOR CLOSER POLITICAL TIES WITHIN THE TURKIC-SPEAKING WORLD

    TURKEY PUSHES FOR CLOSER POLITICAL TIES WITHIN THE TURKIC-SPEAKING WORLD

    By Saban Kardas

    Monday, November 24, 2008

     

    The speakers and delegates of the parliaments of the Turkish-speaking countries—Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, and Turkey—met in Istanbul on November 20 and 21 for a Conference of Turkic-Speaking Countries’ Parliamentary Speakers. Turkish Speaker of Parliament Koksal Toptan, Azerbaijani Speaker of Parliament Oktay Seidov, Kyrgyz Speaker of Parliament Aytibay Tagayev, and Vice-president of the Kazakh Senate Mukhammet Kopeyev signed a declaration for the establishment of a Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-Speaking Countries (TURKPA) (Anadolu Ajansi, November 21). The body is open to admitting other countries in the future.

    Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev proposed launching the TURKPA at the summit meeting of the Turkic leaders in 2006. At the time, given Turkey’s more extensive experience in parliamentary democracy, Nazarbayev requested the Turkish Parliament to coordinate efforts toward establishing the proposed assembly. In February the parliamentary deputy speakers met in Antalya to prepare the groundwork for the assembly. A second meeting in Astana in March produced a draft declaration, which was expanded during the conference in Istanbul (www.tbmm.gov.tr, November 21).

    Turkish President Abdullah Gul and Speaker Toptan addressed the conference. Referring to the shared historical, cultural, and linguistic ties among the founding members, Toptan called the declaration a historic step toward expanding cooperation. He noted that if these countries could manage to act together in a spirit of solidarity, they could bring peace, stability, and prosperity to Eurasia (Cihan Haber Ajansi, November 21). Gul also stressed that “our brotherhood [of Turkish countries] does not target anyone. Instead, it represents a union of hearts and minds [that has been created] to promote the peace, stability, and welfare of the region” (Zaman, November 22).

    Kyrgyz Speaker Tagayev emphasized that closer cooperation among the legislative bodies of these countries could lead to the creation of necessary legal regulations and could also facilitate cooperation in financial, scientific, and cultural cooperation (Cihan Haber Ajansi, November 21). In particular, Gul emphasized that parliamentary cooperation could facilitate the realization of joint projects in economics, transportation, and communications, as well as in the fight against common security threats, such as terrorism and radical movements, drug smuggling, and illegal weapons trafficking (Ortadogu, November 21).

    The primary goal of the new assembly is to boost relations among the parliaments of the participating countries, provide a platform for exchanging views, and explore joint projects. Although details about its exact institutional structure, rules of procedure, and committees are unavailable, it was suggested that it might resemble the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (www.assembly.coe.int/; ANS Press, November 22). Gul also referred to similar initiatives in other regions as possible models to follow (www.cankaya.gov.tr, November 21). Sayyad Aran, the Azerbaijani consul general in Istanbul, told reporters that the assembly would meet annually. He also noted that the next meeting, which is scheduled to take place in Baku in 2009, would lay out the assembly’s working procedures (APA, November 22).

    Turkey’s leading role in the creation of the assembly is no surprise, given its interest in promoting cooperation with Turkic-speaking countries. Shortly after the dissolution of the East bloc, Turkey initiated several projects to deepen ties with its cousins in the ex-Soviet space. Both the state and private entrepreneurs played a major role in developing extensive relations in economics, culture, and education. Although successive Turkish governments have refrained from promoting a pan-Turkic agenda toward the region, which was advocated by nationalist circles within Turkey, the idea for closer political integration between Turkey and Turkic-speaking countries has always guided Ankara’s policies in one form or another. The Turkish state has institutionalized several mechanisms to facilitate political cooperation among these countries.

    The major such multilateral platform has been the summit of the heads of state of Turkic-Speaking Countries, bringing together Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. After the first gathering in Ankara in 1992, seven subsequent meetings have been held at irregular intervals. During the seventh meeting in Istanbul in 2001, internal friction about establishing closer ties among the Turkic states surfaced. Despite Turkey’s expectations to the contrary, the presidents of Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, the two countries that are also absent from the TURKPA conference, declined to attend the summit.

    The failure of high-level summits to institutionalize concrete projects and their ineffectiveness in resolving bilateral and regional problems were reportedly behind Turkmenistan’s decision to opt out in 2001. Publicly, Turkmenistan’s official policy of positive neutrality was given as the reason for its reluctance to maintain closer political ties with the rest of the Turkic world. The lukewarm relationship between Turkey and Uzbekistan largely explains Tashkent’s negative attitude toward the summit (www.tusam.net, December 2, 2006). It was recently reported that Baku would host the ninth summit in the first quarter of 2009 (Trend News Agency, November 11).

    The establishment of TURKPA was among the ambitious goals announced at the eighth summit and represents a successful step toward realizing common aims. President Gul, in his address to the TURKPA conference, said that the organization’s meeting after the Baku summit would be held in Bishkek. He also noted that other goals set at the eighth summit would soon be realized. By the Bishkek summit, the legal framework for setting up a Permanent Secretariat in Turkey to streamline the activities of the summits of Turkish-speaking countries would be finalized. Gul also expressed Turkey’s support for the idea of creating a committee of experts (Aksakallar Kurulu), as proposed by Kazakh President Nazarbayev (www.cankaya.gov.tr, November 21).

    It remains to be seen whether the members of TURKPA will be able to turn rhetoric into mutually beneficial cooperation and convince the two opt-outs to join their ranks by the time the leaders of the Baku summit in 2009.