Fried tours region; Western aid to Georgia, Turkey wins UN bid

First published in October 25, 2008 Armenian Reporter

Washington Briefing
by Emil Sanamyan and Lusine Sarkisyan

Active U.S. diplomacy continues in Eurasia

The Navy's U.S.S. Barry arrived in Georgia's port of Poti as State Department's Dan Fried touched down in the country's capital of Tbilisi.

Assistant Secretary of State Dan Fried was in Armenia (Oct. 17), Georgia (Oct.18-20), and Turkey (Oct. 21) to discuss regional conflicts and bilateral relations, local news media reported. United States regional diplomacy has been stepped up significantly since Russian-Georgian fighting in August.

In meetings with Armenian leaders, Mr. Fried reportedly focused on the Karabakh peace process (see this week's top story) and Armenia's recent talks with Turkey. Mr. Fried said that a "strong, sovereign, democratic Armenia is important not just to the U.S., but to the region as well."

(In a similarly worded message, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev who was in Yerevan on October 21, said Russia wants "the Armenian people to live in a strong, flourishing and stable state.")

Mr. Fried arrived in Georgia simultaneously with the U.S. Navy's guided missile destroyer U.S.S. Barry, which made a "routine, friendly visit" to Georgia's Black Sea port of Poti from October 18 to 20. (Officials in Abkhazia, meanwhile, confirmed plans for a new Russian naval base at Ochamchir, just forty miles up the Black Sea coast from Poti.)

On his visit to Ankara, Mr. Fried was received with Ertu?rul Apakan, the Turkish Foreign Ministry's number-two, and at a subsequent meeting with media, the U.S. diplomat encouraged continued dialogue between Turkish and Armenian leaders.

According to the Turkish Daily News, Mr. Fried called Armenian President Serge Sargsian "courageous" for extending an invitation to his Turkish counterpart, and Turkish President Abdullah Gül "wise" for accepting the offer. "Sometimes taking risks is the highest realism," he said.

Mr. Fried also pledged continued U.S. intelligence help for Turkey's fight against Kurdish rebels, while urging more Turkish cooperation with Iraqi Kurdish leaders. Turkish forces have suffered numerous casualties in recent Kurdish attacks (see this page in the October 11 Armenian Reporter.)

Meanwhile, the top U.S. military officer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen, assured the three Baltic republics, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania ­- which have been NATO members since 2004 - that they could count on U.S. military help should they ever come under a military attack.

Days earlier, Admiral Mullen met with Russia's General Staff Chairman General Nikolay Makarov in Finland, for what was described as "fence-mending talks."

Abkhazia, South Ossetia status talks stall; more aid pledged to Georgia

European, Georgian, Russian, and U.S. officials met in Geneva on October 15 to start discussions, in the words of the French President Nicolas Sarkozy, on the "future status" of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and quickly adjourned until November, Civil.ge and others reported.

The parties reportedly disagreed on the format of talks, with breakaway republics insisting they should participate in the talks on their future, and Georgia objecting.

The cease-fire agreement negotiated between Russia and Georgia continued to largely hold, although several Russian and Georgian personnel were reported killed in various incidents.

Georgia also demanded a Russian withdrawal from parts of South Ossetia and Abkhazia that Georgia held prior to the August war. That position was supported by Dan Fried of the U.S. State Department, although he conceded that that situation could not be resolved "very easily" or "very soon." Russian officials said areas in question are parts of breakaway republics and would not be turned over.

At a "donors' conference" in Brussels on October 22, the United States confirmed it would be allocating $1 billion in aid to Georgia. Last month, the U.S. Congress appropriated about one-third of that amount for Fiscal Year 2009.

In all, pledges of $4.55 billion in grants and loans over three years were made, with bulk of the funds coming from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, as well as the European Union (about $1 billion in grants and loans) and Japan ($200 million).

Transparency International (TI), a Berlin-based anticorruption organization, called for publication of the World Bank's needs assessment report on Georgia prepared in advance of the conference.

"Despite the centrality of the Joint Needs Assessment to the future of Georgia, its contents remain secret at the request of the Georgian government," TI Georgia said in a statement, adding that it was unclear how the money was intended to be spent.

151 countries vote Turkey into the UN Security Council

Turkey successfully concluded its five-year $50 million campaign for a two-year nonrenewable term on the United Nations Security Council, as it was voted in by 151 countries on October 17, Turkish and international news agencies reported.

There are a total of 192 countries with United Nations membership. Countries voted in secret, and because Turkey was competing against Austria (which also won a seat, with 132 votes) and Iceland (which did not, with 87 votes), few countries have made their votes public. But Turkey lobbied heavily around the world from Latin America to Africa to Pacific Island nations.

President Abdullah Gül described the vote as "a significant success that should be a source of joy to every citizen. The support given to Turkey is a reflection of the feelings of love and friendship that are felt for our nation and the trust the international community has in our state," the Jamestown Foundation Eurasia Daily Monitor (EDM) reported citing Turkish media on October 18.

Turkey's Permanent Representative to the United Nations Ambassador Baki Ilkin reportedly broke down in tears of joy during a television interview following the vote.

Professor Ahmet Davutoglu, the Turkish government's leading foreign policy advisor, said the outcome as "neither chance, nor bribery," even though Turkey spent $20 million paying off the debts of smaller nations to the United Nations.

Media watchdog: peace is good for press freedom

"It is not economic prosperity but peace that guarantees press freedom," Paris-based Reporters without Borders argues in its annual report released on October 22.

The report notes post-election setbacks in media freedom in Armenia (now ranked 102nd in the world, on par with Turkey), war-related media censorship in Georgia (now ranked 120th), as well as general malaise in Russia (141), Azerbaijan (150), and Iran (166).

Iceland, Norway, and Luxembourg are ranked as having the most liberal media environments. For the full report: http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=29031

Armenia objects to Cheney rhetoric on NK

First published in October 18, 2008 Armenian Reporter.

Armenia takes issue with Bush administration’s rhetoric on Karabakh
Recently modified language prioritizes “territorial integrity”
by Emil Sanamyan

U.S. vice president Dick Cheney with Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian of Armenia with translators in Washington on October 10, 2008. Armenian government photo

Washington - In a meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney in Washington on October 10, Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian raised concerns on behalf of Armenia over the recently modified rhetoric of U.S. officials on Nagorno-Karabakh, the prime minister's office reported.

It is "extremely dangerous" to emphasize the principle of territorial integrity at the expense of self-determination when it comes to Karabakh, Mr. Sarkisian told Mr. Cheney in what amounted to the first publicly reported criticism of the revised U.S. policy language by Armenia.

The prime minister was referring, in particular, to remarks delivered in Baku by Mr. Cheney that a Karabakh settlement "must proceed" from the principle of Azerbaijan's territorial integrity and only then "take into account other principles." The remarks were apparently drafted by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matt Bryza, the U.S. co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, which mediates in the Karabakh negotiations.

"If territorial integrity is prioritized, the peace process - all of the work the mediators have done - becomes meaningless," Prime Minister Sarkisian told the Armenian Reporter on October 14. "And this also provokes [Azerbaijan] toward war."

According to Mr. Sarkisian, Mr. Cheney in response reiterated U.S. support for the peace process.

Evolution of the peace process

According to sources familiar with the details of the peace process, since 1999 its focus has been on ways that would formalize Karabakh's separation from Azerbaijan and reunification with Armenia.

But with Azerbaijan increasingly belligerent, the Karabakh talks in recent years have shifted toward a "postponed status" for Karabakh, with an increasingly vague definition of a mechanism for determination of this status.

Still, while the United States has always voiced support for the principle of territorial integrity with regard to former Soviet republics, including Azerbaijan, it has also mentioned the need to reconcile that principle with other principles.

For example in an August 6, 2007, interview with Russia's Vremya Novostei newspaper, Mr. Bryza noted, "There are three main principles that influence our talks [on Karabakh]: refusal to apply force, recognition of the territorial integrity of the states, and the right for self-determination.

"A compromise should be found among these principles," he said, and added, "I represent [the United States,] a country founded by separatists."

In the case of Georgia, a close U.S. ally, the United States has spoken openly in support of Tbilisi's claims on Abkhazia and South Ossetia. But U.S. officials - up until recently - have been careful not to use language that could be deemed to be prejudging the outcome of the talks on Karabakh's status.

As Azerbaijan continues to lobby for international support for its claim on Karabakh, Azerbaijani officials have become increasingly wary about international developments.

In February, the Azerbaijani government called the U.S. recognition of Kosovo "illegal" and pulled its troops from the NATO peacekeeping mission there.

Azerbaijanis were outraged by the U.S. vote against the UN General Assembly resolution on Karabakh proposed by Azerbaijan last March. Mr. Bryza told Azerbaijani media that the decision to oppose the resolution was one he "agonized and lost sleep over."

Adding to Azerbaijan's worries is the pledge of presidential candidate Barack Obama to work toward a Karabakh settlement "based upon America's founding commitment to the principles of democracy and self determination."

The Russian-Georgian military clash in August has also made the threat of Azerbaijani attack in Karabakh - its biggest leverage in talks - less credible.

The latest upset came with the decision of Turkey's president to visit Armenia last month; a number of current and former Azerbaijani officials portrayed this move as a "betrayal" of Azerbaijan.

Azerbaijan's "endangerment" and permutations of U.S. rhetoric

President Ilham Aliyev rushed to Moscow to pledge his loyalty soon after the Georgia war and the visit of the president of Turkey to Armenia.

Intimidated by Russia's military operations in Georgia, Azerbaijani officials began to suggest that they may reroute their energy exports, particularly natural gas, via Russia.

It has been a longstanding U.S. goal to challenge Russia's dominance of gas supplies to Europe. Azerbaijan, along with Georgia, provides a key transit corridor for that effort.

"If Azerbaijan tilts to Russia there goes 15 years of U.S. energy diplomacy," a Western diplomat based in Baku told Britain's Daily Telegraph on September 2.

In response, the United States appears to have sought to encourage Azerbaijan, which, in the words of Assistant Secretary of State Dan Fried, was "endangered" in the wake of the Russian-Georgian war.

The first signs that U.S. officials were reconsidering their Karabakh policy language came on August 19. In a State Department press conference, Mr. Bryza said, "the principle of territorial integrity occupies the highest priority when we begin the process of conflict resolution, separatist conflict resolution. It simply is the fact of international law."

But, he quickly added, "If the two sides decide that they can reach a compromise that incorporates other elements of international diplomatic practice or international law like self-determination of peoples, terrific.

"That is what we want to do in the case of Karabakh: have a negotiated political settlement that takes into account both of these principles," he said.

New rhetoric unveiled

The new language was annunciated by Vice President Cheney during his visit to Baku on September 3, in which he sought to shore up Azerbaijan's confidence in Western support.

In comments during that reportedly less-than-successful trip, Mr. Cheney went beyond the usual endorsement of Azerbaijan's territorial integrity by saying that the United States is "committed to achieving a negotiated solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict - a solution that starts with the principle of territorial integrity, and takes into account other international principles." Mr. Cheney and other U.S. officials since have not spelled what these other principles are.

Mr. Bryza then repeated this new language to Armenia's Mediamax news agency on September 5 and at the congressional Commission for Security and Cooperation in Europe on September 10.

In written testimony submitted for that hearing, Mr. Bryza spoke of "a just and lasting settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that proceeds from the principle of our support for Azerbaijan's territorial integrity, and ultimately incorporates other elements of international law and diplomatic practice."

Armenian officials did not react publicly at that time. Nor did Congress. During a subsequent trip to Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh in mid-September, Mr. Bryza encountered no public rebuke.

Then, on October 9, Mr. Bryza took an additional rhetorical step. In an interview with the BBC's Russian-language service, he went so far as to suggest that Armenia should first recognize Azerbaijan's territorial integrity before a settlement on the Karabakh conflict is finalized.

Prime Minister Sarkisian delivered a public rebuff of U.S. policy the next day.

On October 13, Mr. Bryza's latest remarks were also blasted by Ken Hachikian, chairperson of the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA), as a "retreat from principle" in U.S. policy and "absolutely wrong."

Ross Vartian, executive director of the U.S.-Armenia Public Affairs Committee (USAPAC), told the Armenian Reporter, "United States emphasis of territorial integrity over self-determination does not serve the cause of a peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

"Instead of confronting Azerbaijan's war preparation and threats, the United States appeases," Mr. Vartian charged.

N.B. During his visit to Yerevan on October 17, Mr. Fried was asked about Mr. Cheney's remarks and Armenian reaction by the Armenian Reporter's Armen Hakobyan (transcript follows):

Hakobyan: During his meeting with Vice President Cheney the prime minister referred to the vice president's statement about the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan being the basic principle, and said that statement was dangerous; focusing on this principle, other principles are not taken into consideration. Having in mind that the statement had come from the American co-chair, Matthew Bryza, as a representative of a co-chair country, what are you doing about that danger and about making room for another important principle, self-determination?

Dan Fried in Yerevan on Oct. 17

Fried: Well, I'm happy to tell you that some of the media reports of what my friend and colleague Matt Bryza said were not entirely accurate. We have always believed and we believe now that territorial integrity is an important principle. We even say that we start with this principle. We have not ever said it is the only principle, and indeed it is not. Territorial integrity is a recognized principle of international law. There are other principles, such as self-determination.

Now, we all know what we're talking about here. Bringing these principles together, reconciling these principles is extremely difficult and complicated. The Minsk Group process has been working on these issues for some time. The process has made some real progress. We are going to build on that process – on that progress if we can. We will work with the governments [sic] of Azerbaijan, with the government of Armenia, and the co-chairs are prepared to work together.

It is important to actually find a settlement. Scoring debating points, one side, the other, advantage here, advantage there, well that's fine, but it doesn't take us where we need to go. We need to try to solve these regional problems and not debate them. This is serious business. We cannot continue to live with this situation of tension and occasional incidents of shooting.

The people of Azerbaijan, the people of Armenia, the people of the occupied territories, the people of Nagorno-Karabakh all deserve better. And I look forward to working with the Minsk Group and trying to push forward a solution as soon as we can.

N.B.-2 While Mr. Fried and others at the State Department have implied that Mr. Bryza's comments to BBC Russian were misconstrued, the remarks were made in Russian and their recording is available here http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/russian/international/newsid_7661000/7661150.stm
Mr. Bryza was interviewed by BBC's Mark Grigorian whose own comment on the issue is available here: http://markgrigorian.livejournal.com/249429.html?thread=8577877#t8577877

Briefly: Senate to consider Ambassadors for Armenia, Turkey; U.S.' 1951 doc. on Armenian Genocide

First published in June 14, 2008 Armenian Reporter

Washington Briefing
by Emil Sanamyan

Senate Committee to consider nominee for Ambassador to Armenia…

The Bush Administration’s nominee for the next U.S. ambassador to Armenia, Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, will meet members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for a formal hearing on June 19. The committee’s approval and that of the full Senate is necessary for ambassadorial appointments.

The post of the U.S. Ambassador to Armenia has remained vacant since the controversial recall in September 1996 of Ambassador John Evans after his remarks on the Armenian Genocide angered the Turkish government. The recall, in turn, angered the Armenian community.

Nominated to replace Mr. Evans in 2006, Ambassador Richard Hoagland found his candidacy blocked by Sen. John Menendez (D.-N.J.) following Mr. Hoagland’s remarks in the process of his nomination hearings questioning the veracity of the Genocide.

In a congressional commemoration on April 24, Sen. Menendez promised to “ask the same questions of the new nominee and would not hesitate to place a hold” on her candidacy if he was dissatisfied with her responses.

The new nomination comes at a difficult period in U.S.-Armenian relations stemming from U.S. criticism of the Armenian government’s handling of the February 2008 election and its aftermath.

Senior Armenian officials have said that they would like to see the new U.S. ambassador approved as soon as possible. In a commentary published in the Armenian Reporter on May 24, 2008, Armenia’s ambassador to the United States, Tatoul Markarian, reiterated the “hope that the nominee will be confirmed successfully and arrive in Armenia shortly.”

The nominee is a 22-year veteran of the Foreign Service who just concluded a three year assignment as U.S. ambassador to Kyrgyzstan. Ms. Yovanovitch’s service has been marked by tensions over the current President Kurmanbek Bakiyev’s policies, particularly with regard to the status of the U.S. air base in the country.

Prior to that appointment, from August 2004 to May 2005 Ms. Yovanovitch was senior advisor to the then–Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Marc Grossman.

From August 2001 to June 2004, Ms. Yovanovitch was deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine. Her term there coincided with souring of U.S. relations with the then–President Leonid Kuchma, particularly over allegations of Ukrainian arms sales to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

From May 1998 to May 2000, Ms. Yovanovitch was deputy director of the State Department’s Russia Desk and had been posted with embassies in Canada, Russia, United Kingdom, and Somalia.

Her educational background includes a bachelor’s degree in history and Russian studies from Princeton University in 1980 and a master’s from the National War College in 2001.

Born in Canada to parents of Serbian and Russian descent, she grew up in Connecticut and is fluent in Russian and French.

…and to Turkey

On June 5, President Bush nominated one his aides for national security affairs, James Jeffrey, to be the next U.S. ambassador to Turkey. The Turkish Daily News first reported the intention to nominate Mr. Jeffrey last November.

A former Army officer and diplomat, Mr. Jeffrey is fluent in Turkish, having served in the country on three occasions in the past. He was deputy chief of mission at the Embassy in Turkey between 1999 and 2002 under ambassadors Mark Parris and Robert Pearson; and previously served at the Embassy in Ankara between 1985 and 1987 and earlier at the U.S. Consulate in Adana.

Before becoming President Bush’s assistant and deputy national security advisor last August, Mr. Jeffrey was a principal deputy assistant secretary of state for the Near East, heading the Iran Policy Team since 2006. From 2004 to 2006, he was one of the senior coordinators of the U.S. Iraq policy.

Report: U.S. recognized Armenian Genocide in 1951

According to a 1951 U.S. document recently discovered and made public by an Irish researcher, the U.S. government had at the time no qualms about using the term genocide shortly after it was coined by Raphael Lemkin to describe the Armenian experience in the early 20th century Ottoman Empire.

On June 4, Professor William Schabas of the Irish Center for Human Rights blogged about stumbling upon a statement filed by the U.S. government at the International Court of Justice, in 1951. It said in part “The Roman persecution of the Christians, the Turkish massacres of Armenians, the extermination of millions of Jews and Poles by the Nazis are outstanding examples of the crime of genocide.”

The blog entry was further made public by the Armenian Assembly of America on June 6. The document is available online http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/12/11767.pdf

Armenia democracy activists visit Europe, U.S.

A delegation of three representatives of the Armenian nongovernmental sector was in Washington on June 10–11 as a part of tour that also included stops in Strasbourg and Brussels. The aim was raising awareness of challenges to democracy in Armenia.

Larisa Minasyan of the Open Society Institute (OSI)’s Armenia affiliate told the Armenian Reporter in a conversation on June 11 that they are on a mission to provide full and complete information from the viewpoint of the Armenian public and share their assessment of the post-election situation with their foreign colleagues and European and U.S. officials.

Amalia Kostanyan of Transparency International Armenia, suggested “at least half” of the foreign aid to Armenia is ineffective, as “it did not save the country from a deep crisis” following the February election. She commended the Armenian government’s willingness to resolve the ensuing problems, adding, however, that current actions are inadequate and will not yield the intended results.

Ms. Kostanyan said that they were advocating for a comprehensive fulfillment of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE)’s resolution on Armenia passed in April.

President of the Gyumri-based Asparez Journalists’ Club Levon Barseghyan said that “democracy is a resource for better life [and …] a system for national security” and should be a shared concerned for Armenians in homeland and diaspora.

He said Armenia was not successful in achieving this goal since independence, and called on the diaspora to have a more active role in this process.

U.S. diplomat to discuss Armenia, Caucasus in House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing

The U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee will on June 18 hear the testimony of the Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia Daniel Fried titled “The Caucasus: Frozen Conflicts and Closed Borders.”

The testimony is expected to focus on U.S. efforts to address the Karabakh conflict and resolve outstanding issues between Armenia and Turkey. The committee’s Subcommittee for Europe previously held a hearing focusing on the region in October 2001.

—Yelena Osipova contributed to this week’s briefing.

FWIB: Rice-Gates letter, Azeri FM in DC

Published in March 24, Armenian Reporter

From Washington, in Brief
by Emil Sanamyan

* Bush Administration relays Turkey’s threats in a letter and testimonies to Congress



A joint letter sent to the Congressional leadership on March 7 and signed by Secretaries of State and Defense Condoleezza Rice and Robert Gates expressed the administration’s opposition to the passage of the proposed resolution affirming the Armenia Genocide. The House Resolution 106 (H. Res. 106) is currently backed by 182 congressmen.

In identical letters addressed to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Republican Minority leader John Boehner (R-OH), and made public last week, the secretaries argued that passage would “harm … U.S. efforts to promote reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia and to advance recognition by Turkey of the tragic events that occurred to ethnic Armenians under the Ottoman Empire. It would also significantly endanger U.S. national security interests…”

Ross Vartian of the U.S.-Armenia Public Affairs Committee described this position as “capitulation to Turkish threats. The United States should instead reject such threats, call upon Turkey to face history, and re-affirm Armenian and American history.… We are confident that the Speaker Pelosi will schedule a vote on H. Res. 106 despite Turkish threats and the Bush Administration’s objections.”

“The Bush Administration is today loudly and aggressively seeking, on behalf of the Turkish government, to prevent members of the U.S. Congress from exercising their constitutional right to cast their votes on the Armenian Genocide Resolution,” said Aram Hamparian of the Armenian National Committee of America. “In this unfortunate situation, it is left to us, as Armenian-Americans, to defend America’s core values.”

The Armenian Assembly of America repeated in a March 21 press release that it has “a fundamental policy disagreement with the administration” but would not qualify its position.

During March 21 House Foreign Operations Subcommittee hearing, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the principal sponsor of H. Res. 106, grilled Secretary Rice about the administration’s reluctance to talk straight about the Genocide. Schiff asked if Rice, as an academic, had any doubts that the Ottoman Armenian experience constituted Genocide. Rice, as Secretary of State, dodged the question, saying that the issue is for Armenians and Turks, not the U.S., to deal with.

According to those in the room, the hearing ended with a bit of a ruckus created by activists from the pro-peace group CODEPINK (www.codepink4peace.org ), who shouted against the war in Iraq, and that “Rice lies about the Armenian Holocaust!”

* * *
Little has changed since a similar letter was sent by the Clinton Administration to former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) in October 2000, the last time Congress came close to voting on a measure affirming the Genocide. At the time, Secretaries of State and Defense Madeleine Albright and William Cohen also focused on Turkey’s threats to cut off cooperation with the U.S. against Iraq and terrorist threats as reason for Congress “not to go forward.”

In these intervening seven years, the only appreciable difference in the U.S. position is greater rhetorical “sensitivity” to the event of the Genocide itself. The Yerevan-based Mediamax news agency noted that the State Department began to stress this “non-denial” of the Genocide after forcing its Ambassador in Armenia John Evans to retract his by now well-known statements of two years ago.

But affirmation’s opponents in and outside the administration continue to legitimize Turkey’s arguments against the congressional resolution that essentially amount to threats of retaliation against the U.S., Armenia, and Turkish Armenians.

* * *
On March 15, Assistant Secretary of State Dan Fried, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Dan Fata and Special Envoy to Turkey Gen. (ret.) Joe Ralston aired the administration’s opposition before the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe.

(Incidentally Ralston is also a vice chair of a Washington-based consultancy, the Cohen Group (www.cohengroup.net), chaired by none other than ex-Secretary Cohen. Another vice chair is former Undersecretary of State and former Ambassador to Turkey Mark Grossman. The Cohen Group has a longstanding business alliance with the law and lobby group DLA Piper, which is currently in talks with the Turkish government about representing its interests in Washington.)

Fried introduced somewhat of a novelty into his testimony, referring to the Armenian Genocide as “ethnic cleansing” – a new term in the administration’s vocabulary that has just about exhausted alternatives as it seeks to avoid the term “genocide,” which is opposed by the Turkish government. A colleague also noted a stark difference between Secretary Fried’s prepared remarks, as posted on the Subcommittee website, and the remarks as they were actually delivered.

The prepared testimony claimed that according to unnamed Turkish Armenians, the resolution’s passage would “threaten their personal security.” But in his testimony as delivered, Fried claimed much more innocuously that the resolution “would stifle the dialogue [Turkish Armenians] seek and would … threaten the progress they have made in Turkey.”

A spokesperson for the State Department said that the change was merely editorial.

There were other oddities in Fried’s speech. Strained to find examples of Turkish-Armenian “dialogue” that could be “undermined” by the resolution, the State Department pointed to the fact that Armenia’s Deputy Foreign Minister was invited to Hrant Dink’s funeral and that USAID funded a conference on the potential benefits of border-opening, held in Yerevan last January. (The Reporter carried two stories on the conference, in its Jan. 20 and Feb. 10, 2007 editions.)

The hearing, broadly titled “U.S.-Turkish Relations and the Challenges Ahead,” was co-chaired by two long-time opponents of affirmation Representatives Robert Wexler (D-FL) and Dan Burton (R-IN).

None of the 23 House Foreign Affairs Committee members that have co-sponsored H. Res. 106 were available to speak in favor of the resolution, but several congressional offices said they have or will submit written questions to Secretary Fried.

* * *
Meanwhile, on March 14, the Associated Press referred to an unidentified Democratic congressional aide as saying that Speaker “Pelosi, who controls the House agenda, has no plan to bring the proposal before the House soon.” It added, however, that “final plans have not been approved.”

The AP also referred to a congressional staff aide who related that “it is understood that [Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom] Lantos, whose committee would deal with the resolution, was awaiting word from Pelosi.”

* Azeri official complains of Armenian diaspora on U.S. visit



Azerbaijan’s Foreign Minister Elmar Mamedyarov was in New York and Washington this week to call on the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and the U.S. government.

Speaking at Johns Hopkins University on March 21, he touted Azerbaijan’s growing “role in the region and the world” based on moneys generated from peaking hydrocarbon production. The event was moderated by Svante Cornell, the honorary doctor of Azerbaijan’s National Academy of Sciences, and the research director of the DC-based university’s Central Asia and Caucasus Institute.

Speaking of Azerbaijan’s decade-long efforts to achieve unilateral Armenian compromises over Karabakh, Mamedyarov said that this has been his overarching priority. He conceded that the parties are currently not close to an agreement.

“There are a few elements which [are] unfortunately playing a negative role – one of which is the Armenian diaspora,” Mamedyarov said without listing others. The remarks echoed those by his President Ilham Aliyev who has, incredibly, identified the diaspora as Azerbaijan’s main opponent in the conflict. The recent high-level Azeri-Turkish forum held in Baku (see the Reporter’s Mar. 17 edition) focused on ways to deal with the “powerful Armenian lobby.”

Asked by the Reporter to provide an estimate on the amount of money Azerbaijan is spending on countering the Armenian diaspora, Mamedyarov would not give a figure, but suggested that Azerbaijan’s efforts to “promote” itself will grow. Mamedyarov went on to encourage Armenians in the U.S. to be “more responsible” and not [sic!] help Armenian causes financially.

Later in the discussion one of Azerbaijan’s paid lobbyists in the audience, Bob Lawrence (www.bl-a.com/clients.htm), complained that Azerbaijan’s spending was small compared to that of Armenian-American advocacy groups. Lawrence, however, is possibly the least paid lobbyist on Azerbaijan’s employ at this time.