Category: Regions

  • Karabakh Leader Defends Current Negotiations Format

    Karabakh Leader Defends Current Negotiations Format

     

     

     

     

     

    Bako Sahakian, the head of the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, has called for preserving the current format of negotiations over the protracted conflict with Azerbaijan, with the United States, France and Russia continuing to lead international efforts to resolve the dispute.

    At the same time, Sahakian stressed the need for restoring Nagorno-Karabakh’s status as a full party to the negotiating process.

    The Karabakh leader made the remarks while receiving the French negotiator in Stepanakert Tuesday evening.

    Bernard Fassier, the French cochairman of the Minsk Group of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), was in the Karabakh capital to discuss the recent developments in the region and their impact on the negotiating process around Nagorno-Karabakh.

    According to the Nagorno-Karabakh president’s press office, during the meeting, Sahakian and Fassier also pointed out the need for taking concrete steps towards forming an atmosphere of trust between the parties to the conflict.

    Fassier’s visit followed his U.S. counterpart’s regional tour, including a trip to Stepanakert late last week. The intensified diplomatic efforts of the international negotiators proceed against the background of a thaw in Armenian-Turkish relations following Turkish leader Abdullah Gul’s visit to Armenian capital Yerevan on September 6.

    The Armenian president last Friday publicly appreciated Turkey’s offer of assistance in the normalization of Armenian-Azerbaijani relations. But Serzh Sarkisian told media that he differentiated between ‘assistance’ and ‘mediation’.

    However, the statement was construed by some observers as an approval of Turkey’s plans to increase its role in the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which is viewed by many as a threat to the current format of the peace process.

    Sarkisian’s most vocal political opponent in Armenia, ex-President Levon Ter-Petrosian later voiced his concerns over intensified efforts of Turkey to supplant the Minsk Group, which he implied would bolster Azerbaijan’s stance in the long-running dispute with Armenia.

    “The Minsk Group format is the most correct format, because it has provided the balance of superpowers and allowed us to ensure the Nagorno-Karabakh problem is not solved due to unilateral efforts of any of the superpowers,” Ter-Petrosian told an opposition rally in Yerevan Monday.

    At a news briefing following his meeting with Karabakh leadership on Tuesday, Fassier hailed the efforts of Armenia and Turkey to improve their historically strained relations.

    “Armenia’s president acted wisely by inviting Turkish President Abdullah Gul to Yerevan, although many in Azerbaijan and Turkey had thought such a meeting was impossible,” Fassier said, as quoted by the Russian news agency Regnum.

    “Any efforts of goodwill that could prove useful for the negotiating process should be welcomed,” the French mediator added. “Turkey is a significant member of the OSCE Minsk Group. As a member of the Minsk Group it has long supported the process and the efforts of the cochairmen… All these efforts, if concentrated, may prove useful.”

    On Wednesday, Fassier was in Yerevan where he was received by President Serzh Sarkisian.

    In a brief statement the presidential press service reported that the main subject on the meeting agenda was “the peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and the latest developments in the region.”

    The French diplomat was scheduled to give a press conference in Yerevan later on Wednesday.

  • Georgia on Our Mind

    Georgia on Our Mind

    by Morton Abramowitz

    09.16.2008

    Whether provoked or entrapped, President Saakashvili’s folly cost the United States $1 billion and counting. But that is only money. He has changed the world in ways neither he nor the West ever dreamed. If any compensation is found to tame Putin’s Russia, it will not likely be by the actions of Western governments, but by capital fleeing from Russia and the price of energy continuing its precipitous decline. The Bush administration is a spent force with little credibility. Only a new administration might pursue a policy that has coherence, purpose, and international support. A number of issues emanating from the Georgian conflict will face the next president, including energy policy in Central Asia and power politics in NATO.

    Following the conflict in the Caucuses, the energy equation of the region has radically changed. In Georgia, even if Saakashvili survives—that appears to be in doubt and will require huge Western help—he will face unremitting enmity from Moscow. Moscow was previously too weak to prevent the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline—the East-West energy corridor—to be built. But the notion that investors will put billions of dollars into a new pipeline for gas from Central Asia through the Caucasus before Georgia’s relations with Russia are restored defies the imagination.

    In any event, gas from Turkmenistan and other Central Asian countries is unlikely to be transmitted through Georgia on its way west. Georgia may be too bitter a lesson for these states. Pressure from Moscow makes it more likely that gas will continue to go through Russia onto the West or to Turkey.

    In addition to this shifting energy landscape, NATO has suffered a serious setback: Expansion of the alliance has reached a dangerous fork. Giving membership prospects to Georgia and Ukraine later this year is more likely to endanger, not strengthen them. The two countries would be under constant pressure from Russia, damaging or destroying Ukraine’s unity and Georgia’s stability. Besides, it is unlikely that consensus could be achieved on the membership issue. Turkey, for example, has few illusions about Putin’s Russia. But the Georgian war has cast doubt on Turkey’s full cooperation with the United States on Russian issues and NATO expansion. Turkey does not like Russia’s egregious intervention in the Caucasus, but is not particularly sympathetic to Shaakashvili’s Georgia either. Increasingly, the Turks are skeptical of American foreign policy management, and are not interested in getting into a hassle with Russia. Russia is Turkey’s leading trade partner and the supplier of the vast bulk of its imported energy (some $50 billion this year). The United States has expressed displeasure with Turkey’s choice of energy suppliers—Iran and Russia—but has yet to tell Ankara how they realistically propose to make up for them. Turkey can make money whether energy comes through Georgia or Russia. The Turks remain committed to NATO, but the Russian relationship is a matter of realism for Ankara—not an alliance matter—unless the Russians were to attack a NATO member. Most likely, Turkey, along with several others, will seek to postpone any potential membership offer to Georgia and Ukraine.

    Another international institution, the European Union, has also been impacted by the Georgian conflict. Although the EU is under attack in many quarters in the United States and Europe for its pusillanimous reaction to Russia’s brazen behavior in Georgia, it has the real ability to do something important for Ukraine and Georgia—namely beginning a serious process to admit these countries to the EU. One must be skeptical that the EU is actually prepared to do that. The EU also has the practical ability to do something about Russian behavior. Whether they will seriously try to or not remains to be seen. The Russians have skillfully created tensions between the “old” Europe and the “new” one.

    As for America, the Bush administration will continue to pay for Saakashvili’s battle with the Russians and give Georgia strong moral support. But with a financial system in disaster, the administration’s writ on controversial matters during their last months in office does not extend far.

    Although the next president will have many foreign-policy challenges, cleaning up after the Georgian war needs early attention. Most importantly, the United States and its allies must create an effective Russian policy. They have to sort out their relations with an angry and internationally disruptive Russia, while ensuring Russian cooperation on pressing issues, such as stopping Iran’s nuclear weapons program and energy security. Slogans and fulminations won’t do the trick.

     

    Morton Abramowitz is a former president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and senior fellow at The Century Foundation.

  • Invoking Both Kosovo and Abkhazia, Tatar Independence Movement Steps Up Its Campaign

    Invoking Both Kosovo and Abkhazia, Tatar Independence Movement Steps Up Its Campaign

    Paul Goble

    Vienna, September 16 – In advance of commemorations of the 456th anniversary of the Russian defeat and occupation of Kazan, the Tatar Ittifaq Party of National Independence this week has launched a website to ensure that its declarations and those of other Idel-Ural nations will reach a larger audience.
    The site, which is located at azatlyk-vatan.blogspot.com/, consists of three sections: current news, including a declaration posted online today concerning the upcoming anniversary; a file of earlier posts in Tatar, Russian and English; and an extensive listing of Tatar and Muslim resources on the Internet.
    In her lead post for yesterday, Fauziya Bayramova, Ittifaq’s leader and a member of the executive committee of the World Congress of Tatars, argues that the fall of Kazan to the forces of Ivan the Terrible was “the greatest tragedy in the history of the Tatars, not only extinguishing their independent statehood but opening “centuries’ long slavery” for them.
    Let no one be fooled by statements about the “sovereignty” of Tatarstan,” she writes. “Tatarstan is not an independent state and Kazan is not a Tatar city because [there] Russian laws rule. To say nothing about such historically Tatar lands as Astrakhan, Siberia and Crimea, which long ago were hopelessly russified.”
    But the Tatars of Kazan must not give up, Bayramova continues. “If we cease to struggle for independence and the right to our own bright future, the same fate awaits us, the Tatars of Idel-Ural, because Russian laws prohibit instruction in [Tatar], courses on Orthodoxy are included in the curriculum in many regions, and there is ongoing talk about the destruction of national republics and the unitarization of the Russian state.”
    “After the occupation of Kazan, the Russian empire set itself a single goal – to russify and baptize all the peoples of the empire, in the first instance the Tatars. But the empire was never able to subordinate the Tatars all the way. Even having destroyed [the Tatar] state, it could not destroy the language and religion of the Tatars or the spirit of resistance which helped the Tatars to survive as a nation.”
    The situation has continued to get worse in recent decades, the Ittifaq leader insists, and “in such conditions, we have only two ways out – to struggle for independence and having build our own Tatar state, to begin to live by our own laws or to cease to exist as an independent nation.”
    “We Tatars must choose the first path, the path of life, struggle and victory! Right is on our side!” she says. And she points to one new reason for her hopeful conclusion: shifts in the position of the West and of the Russian Federation itself concerning the recognition of the right of nations to self-determination.
    “The international community having recognizing the state independence of Kosovo, and the Russian Federation having recognized Abkhazia and South Ossetia,” Bayramova says, “must recognize the independence of the Republic of Tatarstan! The Tatar nation has every right to live in its own independent state!”

  • Turkey, Europe, The military, and the secularists.

    Turkey, Europe, The military, and the secularists.

    Turkey and Greece were invited at the same time to join the Common Market, which later became the European Union (EU). Greece accepted the invitation and is now one of the states of the EU. Bulent Ecevit, a Social Democrat, was the Turkish Prime minister at that time. He declined, saying that “Turkey is not yet ready”. In more recent times other Turkish governments thought that they were ready and applied for membership. This time EU set unbelievable stumbling blocks before Turkey, conditions that were not asked from the other applicants. It was obvious that Europe had changed its mind about inviting Turkey. But for some inexplicable reason, Turkish governments did not want to see that.

    E u r o p e´ s V i e w s:

    Most of the EU states leaders have been officially supportive of Turkey´s membership application. Only Germany´s conservative Chancellor Angela Merkel wants that a partial membership be offered to Turkey. France´s Nicolas Sarkozy is also against granting full membership. But the European populations are generally opposed to full membership. Unofficially, Europe is dead set against Turkish membership but could not say so openly, diplomatically. In stead of saying “no” they put such conditions, so that Turkey says “no”.

    Here are statements of top EU leaders, after they retired:

    American Chronicle | Turkey, Europe, The military, and the secularists..

  • Spanish prime minister arrives in Istanbul

    Spanish prime minister arrives in Istanbul

    Spain’s Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero arrived Monday in Turkey at the official request of his Turkish counterpart Tayyip Erdogan. Zapatero will attend a fast-breaking dinner, “iftar” in Istanbul. 

    The co-chairman of the U.N.-led Alliance of Civilizations initiative, Zapatero and Erdogan will meet in Istanbul and discuss bilateral, regional and international issues.

    This year marks the 225th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic ties between Turkey and Spain, said a statement released by the Prime Ministry’s press office.

    The Alliance of Civilizations aims to bridge the existing divide among differing civilizations by strengthening mechanisms of dialogue and mutual understanding, as well as implementation of practical projects toward this aim.

    Photo: AFP
    Source : Hurriyet

  • Turkey will never recognize Armenian Genocide to improve relations with Yerevan, AKP member says

    Turkey will never recognize Armenian Genocide to improve relations with Yerevan, AKP member says

    /PanARMENIAN.Net/ Turkey will never recognize the Armenian Genocide to improve its relations with Yerevan, said an executive of the ruling Justice & Development (AK) Party.

    Speaking at the panel discussion “Whither Turkey” hosted by the Eastern Institute during the Krynica Economic Forum, one of the most prestigious forums in Eastern Europe, in Polish capital city of Warsaw, Egemen Bagis, deputy chairman of the AK Party, said, “Turkish

    Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan proposed Armenia to establish a joint commission with the participation of the third countries and to open archives. Armenia has not yet given a response to Turkey’s proposal.”

    “Turkish President Abdullah Gul’s paying a visit to Armenia upon invitation of Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan is the most concrete sign of Turkey’s good-will. On the other hand, more than one million documents examined upon directives of Turkey proved that those bitter events were not genocide, but a civil war during a world war,” he said, the Anatoly news agency reports.

    Armenian News – PanARMENIAN.Net | Armenian News Agency – Turkey will never recognize Armenian Genocide to improve relations with Yerevan, AKP member says.