Connect with us

Eastern Europe

Will Pashinyan punish the perpetrators of the Khojaly Massacre?

Published

on

On October 16 th the Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan announced his resignation, paving the way for a snap parliamentary elections to be held on December 10th. The move is seen as a manoeuvre to return to Prime Minister’s Office with his party having the majority in the parliament, thus acquiring even more dominant position in the political life of Armenia.

While the support of the ordinary people was instrumental in Pashinyan’s becoming the prime minister, he did not achieve to gain full political control in the country as his government has been at logger heads with the majority of lawmakers in the parliament, most of whom are representing the Republican Party. Thus, during the five-months period of his term, Pashinyan’s main objective was to reduce the influence of the Nagorno-Karabakh`s Armenian clan, which has had for years controlling positions in the Republican Party and Armenian politics. Despite their prevalent status in all the areas in the country including politics, military and business during the last 20 years, the representatives of the Nagorno Karabakh`s Armenian clan gradually lost their credibility among the population because of the wrong policies conducted during recent years. The popular uprising in April, therefore, was not only against Serzh Sargsyan`s personality,but also against the entire Nagorno Karabakh`s Armenian clan, which had put doubt on the future of Armenia. Realizing the clan’s influence in the country has been rapidly exhausted among the population, Pashinyan became determined to fight them.

Pashinyan came to power by overthrowing the former President Serzh Sargsyan, one of the most important representatives of the Nagorno Karabakh`s Armenian clan. Samvel Babayan, one of the important representatives of the aforementioned clan and of the military dictatorship in Armenia, was imprisoned during Pashinyan’s five-month period because of having illegally brought Igla missiles to Armenia. During Pashinian’s term, Robert Kocharian, who ruled Armenia between 1998 and 2008, was arrested within the campaign to fight against corruption and bribery. According to Pashinyan, these figures are the main culprits of the situation in Armenia. Indeed, those who closely follow up Armenia are well aware that the current state of grievances of the citizens of the Republic of Armeniais is the result of the state capture by the Karabakh clan, which has led to serious problems between the Armenians of Armenia and the Armenians of Karabakh.

The important point here is that Nagorno Karabakh`s Armenian clan not only conducted poor internal policies, but also followed policies which caused Armenia to be isolated in the region, establishing belligerent relations with the neighboring states. In 1998, representatives of Karabakh`s Armenian clan, Robert Kocharian and Serzh Sargsyan, seized power by forcing president Levon Ter-Petrosyan to resign, who believed that there would be no promising future for Armenia without the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh problem. During the last 20 years, the Karabakh clan played to nationalist and populist expectations in Armenia and systematically marginalized the politicians who attempted to give positive messages in the direction of solving the problem, essentially preventing any ways for the Armenian society to lean towards supporting the peace agreement. The group defined as the Nagorno Karabakh`s Armenian clan under the leadership of Sarkisian and Kocharian did not only substantially damage the future of the citizens of Armenia through poor internal policies, but also committed a genocide against Nagorno-Karabakh`s Azerbaijani population during the Nagorno-Karabakh war. Through the brutal massacres and genocides against the civilian population residing in the region between 1988-1994, the Karabakh clan seriously damaged peace prospects by encouraging hatred and enmity among the peoples of the region.

During his interview with the British journalist Thomas de Wall, the former president of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan described what he had done against the civilian population in the region during the Nagorno-Karabakh War, emphasizing that:”Before Khojaly, the Azerbaijanis thought that … the Armenians were people who could not raise their hand against the civilian population. We were able to break that [stereotype].”Referring to the question of why Armenians killed civilians, Svante Cornell, an American expert in the region, clarified the following: “The Armenian side had two important objectives: firstly, to force the civilian population to abandon its territory in a way that it would never come back; and to break the resistance of civilians against the Armenian occupation”. As a result, the remaining population of Nagorno Karabakh and of the surrounding seven districts left their homes because of the the fear that similar atrocities would be repeated.

Human Rights Organization “Memorial” prepared a report on the incident immediately after the events in Khojaly in 1992 and accused the armed Armenian clan of Karabakh in the calamities of the night of 25-26th of February signified by the killings of 613 civilians. The newspapers of the period shared the same view. In 1997, the president of the UN Human Rights Organization Holy Cartner confirmed this statement to Armenia`s Minister of Foreign Affairs. In his official letter to Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, Cartner emphasized: “We hold Karabakh Armenians responsible for the death of civilians in Khojaly.” Until now 15 US States, parliaments of the seven states in the world and one international organization have recognized Khojaly as genocide.

In fact, it is not a secret to anyone who perpetuated the massacre in Khojaly. Dmitri Saveliev, representative of the Duma of the Russian Federation, said in his opening speech of the Khojaly genocide memorial: “Those who did the Khojaly genocide were still not punished. We should all work together to punish those responsible for the genocide”. Of course Saveliev was right. Right after the Second World War, the Nuremberg Trials were set up to punish those who committed genocide against the Jewish people. Similar measures were also taken against those who committed atrocities in Srebrenica. Unfortunately, perpetrators of Khojaly are still unpunished despite the fact that 26 years have passed since then.

Continue Reading
Comments

Eastern Europe

Trump buys Lithuania, EU cannot stop it

Published

on

The US President Donald Trump is no doubt a successful businessman who rules his country as if it is a huge enterprise. And this kind of management, to his mind, should lead to success. And very often it really works. As a wise leader he uses different tools to reach his goals. Thus, the most cunning one, which the US exploits in Europe – is indirect influence on the EU countries to gain the desired aim. The EU just becomes a tool in “capable hands” of the US.

Let us give the simple example. Last week the Ministry of National Defence of Lithuania announced that the Lithuanian Air Force Base in Šiauliai would get de-icing equipment for the aircraft. It would be acquired according to an agreement signed by the Ministry of National Defence and the AF Security Assistance and Cooperation Directorate (AFSACD) on behalf of the Government of the United States of America.

It is known that the new equipment is capable of removing ice from aircraft at the necessary height which allows the Šiauliai Air Base to support bigger aircraft of the Alliance, such as C-17 – one of the largest transport aircraft capable of moving a large number of soldiers and large amounts of cargo.

It is said that “the procurement for the Lithuanian Air Force Base will fill a critical capability gap and allow the Base personnel to carry out cold weather operations, as well as support the NATO Air Policing Mission. The equipment will also be used for providing servicing for the aircraft of the NATO enhanced Forward Presence Battalion Battle Group-contributing countries and other NATO allies at the Air Base.”

But according to data, only three C-17s belongs to NATO. The US, in its turn, has 222 C-17s in service as of Jan. 2018. Among EU member states the only country that has C-17A ERs is the United Kingdom with 8 C-17A ERs in use. But The United Kingdom is in the process of leaving the organization. So, it is logical to assume that the most interested country in deploying C-17 in Lithuania is the US, not the EU or even NATO. And of course Lithuania cannot even dream of having such planes.

The second issue which is even more important is the fact that the agreement of approximate value of USD 1.03 million is financed from the European Security Assistance Fund (ESAF). Lithuania is not able to share the burden.

So, nothing depends on Lithuania in this issue. It only gives permission.

In the recent years Lithuania’s procurement from the US has grown significantly. The ministry of National Defence is currently in negotiations with the US department of Defence for procuring JLTV all-terrain vehicles.

Unfortunately, being a member of the EU, Lithuania so hardly depends on the US in military and security spheres that it often mixes up its real needs, responsibilities to the EU with the US interests in the region. Such approach could seriously complicate the relations with neighbouring Russia and Belarus which Lithuania borders. These two countries are interested in Lithuania as an economic partner. But if Lithuania will pose military threat to them, deploying US military equipment, these states could terminate any economic cooperation.

Is it a cooperation or manipulation and who will benefit?

Continue Reading

Eastern Europe

Georgia & Silk Roads: Belt & Road Initiative

Published

on

The ancient Silk Road, or as it is more often called nowadays silk roads, was an ancient trade route from eastern China to various major markets of the ancient and medieval periods (Roman/Byzantine empires, Sasanian Iran, the Arab Caliphate, etc). An important aspect to those trade routes was their changeability over time. This depended mostly on the political situation in the Middle East and this necessitated the seeking out of alternative routes to get important products from Central Asia and western China.

Contrary to widespread arguments, Georgia appeared on those trade routes only from time to time as a result of political disturbances (invasions, economic problems, etc.) in the region. The trade route across Georgia passed from North to South, from Georgia itself further south to Armenia and Iran as well as from East to West. Thus it is difficult to say that Georgia was either totally absent or dominated ancient and medieval trade routes. The Russians at times opened the Georgian transit route for European products to reach Iran in the 19th century. But the success of this commercial road ultimately depended on Russian political decisions. As is also well known that in Soviet times, virtually no international trade routes ran through Georgia as the Union was a closed-border one.

Thus, for the first time in many centuries, Georgia now has the chance to become a transit corridor for trade and energy from the Caspian area, Central Asia and even from western China. Refocusing on Georgia’s transit potential is linked to China’s economic and military rise which is arguably one of the central themes in 21st century geopolitics. Like many other rising powers throughout history, China has strategic imperatives that clash with those of the US. Beijing needs to secure its procurement of oil and gas resources, which are currently most available through the Malacca Strait. In an age of US naval dominance, the Chinese imperative is to redirect its economy’s dependence, as well as its supply routes, elsewhere.

This is how it comes to the almost trillion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which is intended to reconnect the Asia-Pacific with Europe through Russia, the Middle East, and Central Asia. There are several major corridors pinpointed by the Chinese:

  1. China to Europe through the New Eurasian Land Bridge;
  2. The China-Mongolia-Russian Corridor;
  3. Central and West Asian countries.
  4. The China-Indochina Peninsula Corridor linking China with the South Pacific Ocean through the South China Sea;
  5. The China-Pakistan trade corridor;
  6. The Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar trade route.

As seen, neither Georgia nor the South Caucasus feature on the list and many analysts think that this is proof that China will unlikely be interested in the South Caucasian route. Yet, the nature of the BRI is not static; it undergoes constant changes and it is likely that Beijing will always adjust its trade routes to rising challenges and new opportunities, trying to operate through difficult geographic terrain as well as politically unstable regions. These are Beijing’s major enemies which make any routes vulnerable and susceptible to re-routing. And this is very much similar to how transcontinental trade routes operated in ancient and medieval periods.

Thus China has and is likely to have in future, an individual approach to each country, which makes the fact that Georgia does not feature on the above-mentioned list of trade routes not an obstacle per se. China is responding to rising opportunities and in that sense Georgia’s ability to develop its Black Sea ports, internal railway and highway networks will facilitate China’s decisions on the active inclusion of the South Caucasian route in its BRI or any future commercial undertakings.

Surely the Chinese also look at the security of the South Caucasus and it is difficult to imagine that Beijing will not take into account Russian moves in the region. Mitigating the Russian challenge together with opening the Georgian market to other powerful players in Eurasia is arguably a modus vivendi for the region’s successful development.

Author’s note: First published in Georgia Today

Continue Reading

Eastern Europe

Azerbaijan: Human Capital Forum Helps the Country Orient Itself for the Future

MD Staff

Published

on

Panelists and high-level participants discuss human capital investments at the forum in Baku, Azerbaijan. Photo Credit: Zaur Rzayev / World Bank

Recognizing the key role of human capital in growth and competitiveness, the Government of Azerbaijan and World Bank Group organized a three-day, high-level Human Capital Forum in Baku from December 19 to 21, 2018. Each day, approximately 150 participants including government ministers, top policy experts, academics, development and business community leaders, and media representatives gathered to discuss how best to support the Government of Azerbaijan in accelerating the development of its people.

Why now?

Over the past two decades, oil wealth has helped Azerbaijan achieve high growth rates, significant poverty reduction, and a middle-income status. However, Azerbaijan is facing new and emerging challenges such as how to achieve broad-based, private sector-led growth and make key public services and economic opportunities accessible to all citizens across the country.

Further, on the recently released Human Capital Index, Azerbaijan ranks 69th out of 157 countries. A child born in Azerbaijan today will be 60 percent as productive when she grows up as she could be if she enjoyed complete education and full health. Already, the country’s development strategy documents—the Azerbaijan 2020: Vision for the Future and the Strategic Roadmaps for Economic Reforms —envision human capital development and its effective engagement in the development of Azerbaijan.

The Forum provided a way to explore a “whole-of-government” approach to nurturing human capital by engaging ministers and officials from education, health, tax, labor and other fields.

Forum Highlights

On Day 1, with the focus on jobs, Sahil Babayev, Minister of Labor and Social Protection of Population, emphasized the country’s commitment to the formation of human capital and measures to stimulate the labor market. He particularly appreciated that human capital development is looked at through the prism of economic growth and social cohesion.

The World Bank presented the World Development Report 2019 The Changing Nature of Work, a study on how the nature of work is changing as a result of advances in technology today and how governments can best respond to these changes by investing in human capital and offering social protections to all people. Sahil Babayev was joined by Khagani Abdullayev, Adviser to the Minister of Taxes, Kestutis Jankauskas, Head of the EU delegation, and Maleyka Abbaszadeh, Chairperson of the State Examination Center of Azerbaijan, as panelists.

While discussing how investing in human capital must be a priority for governments for workers to build in-demand skills, Mr. Abdullayev said, “Experience shows that properly implemented tax policies contribute to the implementation of a mechanism for encouraging investment in human capital; in this context, Azerbaijan is paying attention to areas which require unique skills.

This year, it was proposed to introduce tax incentives for a period of ten years for investments in such areas as education, science, sports and culture. At present, educational institutions where people with disabilities study are exempted from income tax in 2019.”

Day 2 focused on education. Setting the stage for discussion, Naveed Naqvi, World Bank Country Manager for Azerbaijan, stressed that the people of Azerbaijan were the country’s only true resource and for them to fully utilize their potential, increased investment in education and skills was needed.

Jeyhun Bayramov, Minister of Education of Azerbaijan, confirmed this in his opening remarks, stating,  “Our world requires well-educated, skills-equipped graduates from our schools who will shape our today and tomorrow. And achieving this is a shared responsibility of education, business and government leaders.”The topic was further elaborated in the WB presentation on the 2018 World Development Report: Learning to Recognize Education’s Promise.

In the discussion following the presentations, Jeyhun Bayramov was joined by William Gill, U.S. Chargé d’Affaires; Edward Carwardine, UNICEF Country Coordinator; Fariz Ismailzade, Vice Rector of ADA, Maleyka Abbaszadeh (mentioned above), and Cem Mete, Social Protection and Jobs Global Practice Manager, Europe & Central Asia, World Bank, as panelists. Participants debated measures to ensure that schooling and learning went hand in hand, how to act on evidence to maximize learning outcomes, and how to align various actors in the system to make it work for learning. Mrs. Abbaszadeh said, “It is necessary to change the nature of education to make it career-oriented.”

A presentation on the changing nature of wealth and a discussion centered around The Human Capital Index and Human Capital Project set the agenda for Day 3. Panelists for the latter included Vusal Gasimli, Head of the Center for Analysis and Communication of Economic Reforms, Hijran Huseynova, Chairperson of the State Committee for Family, Women and Children Affairs, Zakiya Mustafayeva, Head of Apparatus, Ministry of Health, Zaur Aliyev, State Agency for Mandatory Health Insurance, Dr. Hande Harmanci, WHO Representative, Garay Garaybayli, Rector of Azerbaijan Medical University, and Ghulam M. Isaczai, UN Resident Coordinator.

Issues for discussion included: Why should countries invest in human capital? Can early health care and education prepare children to succeed and prosper as adults in a rapidly changing world? What are the barriers to nurturing human capital and how can countries overcome them?

Additional forum sessions included the World Bank’s analytical work on employment, higher education, health financing, and early childhood development in Azerbaijan.

Finally, at the end of the three-day forum, the main presentations, key messages and recommendations from the event were presented at the National Parliament of Azerbaijan (Milli Mejlis). Mr. Ziyad Samadzade, Chairman of the Economic Policy Committee, led an engaging discussion on the state of human development in Azerbaijan and ways to accelerate the transformation of Azerbaijan’s oil wealth into human capital.

Communications

Extensive communication, both before and during the event, helped achieve broader public conversation around the themes of the Forum. A dedicated event webpage detailed the agenda and included links to key World Bank publications and the Human Capital Project page. One-to-one meetings with key government officials ensured their participation and contribution. The event had impressive media coverage. In the run-up to the event, World Bank officials gave numerous media interviews to promote interest in it. During the Forum, presenters and experts talked extensively to the media.

What next?

One of the main conclusions of the 3-day event was that Azerbaijan needs to invest more and better to harness the potential of its human capital, and that its current human capital index is not commensurate with its income level. “With the confluence of rapid technical change and globalization and the need to engage in the global knowledge economy, Azerbaijan’s investments in human capital will be key to its ability to collaborate and compete with other nations,” said Lire Ersado, Program Leader, World Bank.

By championing human capital formation through a whole-of-government approach, Azerbaijan can prepare its citizens for the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. With this in mind, the WBG is making a strategic shift to focus its support more on human development in Azerbaijan.

World Bank

Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2019 Modern Diplomacy