[poll id=”2″]

A trial starting soon in New York is set to throw light on whether a Turkish bank helped Iran circumvent sanctions. And how much President Erdoğan knew about it.

By Sebnem Arsu, Maximilian Popp und Alexander Sarovic,

The corner office with a view out over the Bosporus is located in the Istanbul financial quarter of Maslak. It belongs to the man who the United States judiciary accuses of having played a vital role in one of the largest international criminal cases of the last several decades.

Mehmet Hakan Atilla, 50, is wearing a dark suit and narrow tie, his graying beard is neatly trimmed. As he speaks, stock prices flash across the screen on the wall.

After finishing his economics degree in Ankara, Atilla got a job at Halkbank, a state-owned financial institution in Turkey. And within two decades, he rose through the ranks to become deputy head of the bank, in charge of a portfolio that included international financial transactions. Atilla lived a rather secluded life in Ankara with his wife and son – one of those men who ensure that the apparatus keeps running smoothly.

But his life changed abruptly on March 27, 2017, when he was arrested at JFK Airport in New York airport by agents from the FBI. A video of the arrest shows him addressing the police: “Do your best, I’m a government officer,” he says. “Most probably the Turkish government would like to follow this case.” Since then, Atilla has been the best-known financial manager in Turkey.

U.S. justice officials believe there is solid evidence that Atilla assisted Iran in large-scale circumvention of sanctions. A court in New York sentenced him in 2018 to two years and eight months in prison. Atilla has since returned to Turkey.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, for his part, sees Atilla as a hero because during his trial in New York, the manager did not incriminate his government. Erdoğan even appointed Atilla as head of the Istanbul stock exchange, Borsa Istanbul.

Atilla, for his part, avoids publicly discussing his past legal woes and claims to believe that the accusations leveled against him were politically motivated. “I was innocent,” he told DER SPIEGEL. “I am simply trying to forget the time that I unjustly spent in prison.”

For Atilla, the case came to an end as soon as he set foot back on Turkish soil. But for Halkbank and the Turkish government, it is only just now starting to take off. The trial against the bank is set to start in a federal court in New York in the coming weeks. And it’s no longer just Atilla standing in the docket, but Halkbank in its entirety.

In the worst-case scenario, say observers, if Halkbank is found guilty it could be facing a fine of up to $20 billion or exclusion from the international banking system SWIFT. That would mean that one of Turkey’s largest banks would no longer be able to participate in international financial transactions. And that would likely mean the end of the bank.

With the Turkish economy already mired in crisis, Halkbank’s bankruptcy would likely be something of a death blow. Hundreds of thousands of investors in Turkey would lose their savings and the lira would plunge even further. Economists warn that the entire Turkish financial industry could collapse, just as it did in 2001, when hundreds of thousands of people were essentially plunged into poverty overnight.

The trial also has a geopolitical dimension: The Manhattan federal court may delve into the question as to whether Turkish politicians, all the way up to President Erdoğan himself, were involved in the sanctions violations, as a witness at Atilla’s trial claimed.

For this story, DER SPIEGEL examined hundreds of pages of court documents in addition to speaking with officials in Turkey and the U.S. Most of those with whom we spoke did so on the condition of anonymity due to the ongoing legal proceedings.

The case United States vs. Halkbank is nothing less than an economic detective story stretching across several continents. It has the potential to destroy political careers and to further erode already fragile ties between the U.S. and Turkey. It is a story that got its start in Iran in 2010.

The Golden Boy: How a Turkish-Iranian businessman discovers an almost perfect smuggling system

By 2010, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had been president of Iran for five years and had demonstrated his authority by crushing anti-regime protests. But he had a sizeable problem: In order to put a stop to the Iranian nuclear program, the European Union and the U.S. had slapped an oil embargo on Iran and cut the country off from the international banking system. Iran was running out of money.

It was at this moment that Reza Zarrab stepped into the spotlight, a gold trader with excellent ties to political leaders in both Iran and Turkey. Just 29-years-old at the time, he promised to solve Ahmadinejad’s problem – and to help the regime in Tehran secretly access capital by way of oil and gas deals with Turkey.

Zarrab was born in Tabriz, a city of 1.5 million in northwestern Iran, but he had been living in Turkey since the 1980s. Starting in 2010, he apparently began playing the role of middleman for the presumably illegal business dealings between Iran and Turkey – according to the court documents.

Zarrab’s system initially involved Turkey – which possesses very few of its own energy sources – continuing to take delivery of relatively affordable oil and natural gas from Iran. Payment apparently ended up in an Iranian account at Halkbank, but was seemingly never directly withdrawn. Had Tehran accessed the money, it would only have been able to spend it for humanitarian purposes, such as for the purchase of medical and food supplies, due to the sanctions in place.

Instead, the money apparently passed through a number of intermediate steps on its way to Zarrab, who used it to purchase gold, among other commodities. Zarrab then used that gold to pay outstanding Iranian bills overseas. In total, U.S. investigators believe that Zarrab and Halkbank laundered around $20 billion on behalf of the Iranian regime over the years.

The hustle brought Zarrab immense wealth within an extremely short period of time. He moved into a villa in Istanbul worth $72 million and he owned a half-dozen yachts, a weapons collection and a private jet. He was married to well-known Turkish popstar Ebru Gündeş and had unhindered access to Turkish ministries. He also had close personal ties to President Erdoğan.

To keep the system afloat, he apparently handed out million-dollar bribes to several Turkish officials, allegedly including then-Economics Minister Zafer Çağlayan and then-Halkbank head Süleyman Aslan, as Zarrab later confessed to U.S. investigators. The alleged bribe recipients deny the accusation.

The system continued quite successfully for many years, until Erdoğan, who was still prime minister at the time, had a falling out with Islamist cleric Fethullah Gülen and his followers. Erdoğan and Gülen had worked together informally for quite some time, with Erdoğan appointing Gülen followers to key government positions. In return, the religious community rounded up voters for Erdoğan and went after his critics.

But then, Gülen became too powerful for Erdoğan. In fall 2013, the prime minister ordered the closure of schools and other educational facilities operated by the movement. In response, state officials allied with Gülen launched corruption investigations against Halkbank head Aslan and several sons of government ministers.

Gülen adherents in the police and judiciary had spent years systematically monitoring the telephone conversations of Turkish politicians, through which they apparently also learned of Zarrab’s system of circumventing the Iran sanctions. Now, the time had come to make it public. In one of the intercepted telephone conversations, Erdoğan can be heard telling his son to remove several million dollars from the house. In Aslan’s villa, meanwhile, investigators found $4.5 million packed away in shoeboxes.

The corruption affair dealt a significant blow to the Erdoğan system and the prime minister was forced to shuffle his cabinet. Zarrab, meanwhile, spent around two months in pre-trial detention.

Ultimately, though, Erdoğan was successful in portraying the investigations as a disguised coup d’état. Zarrab was rehabilitated and, at Erdoğan’s behest, according to the U.S. court files, he resumed trading with Iran. In 2015, he even received a prize as “Top Exporter” thanks to a word from Erdoğan.

Apparently, though, Erdoğan and Zarrab didn’t appreciate the degree to which the U.S. had taken an interest in the covert dealings with Iran. President Barack Obama had identified the prevention of an Iranian atomic bomb as a top foreign policy priority, and he couldn’t stand by and do nothing as Turkey, a NATO ally, continued to help Iran get around sanctions.

When Zarrab traveled with his family to the U.S. in March 2016 on the way to a visit to Disney World, he was arrested at the airport in Miami and transferred to a high-security prison in New York, where he would later provide FBI investigators with detailed testimony. Zarrab’s deposition also included serious accusations against Erdoğan. As prime minister, Zarrab said, Erdoğan had approved of the sanctions violations from the very beginning.

Halkbank deputy head Mehmet Hakan Atilla was arrested during his own U.S. trip one year later. The court in New York ruled that he knew about the system, but had not directly profited from it, in contrast to bank CEO Aslan. As such, his prison sentence was relatively lenient.

An Alliance of Alpha-Males: How Erdoğan tried to prevent the U.S. trial against Halkbank

Erdoğan was alarmed when he learned of the investigation in the United States. And it must have been clear to him that legal proceedings against Halkbank wouldn’t just be a drag on the Turkish economy. It would also expose him to the global public. His claims that the accusations were merely the product of Gülen propaganda suddenly no longer looked particularly credible.

Together with Halkbank, his government launched a lobbying campaign that cost them almost $5 million between 2017 and 2019. It also cost Erdoğan almost all of his political capital.

Even before Halkbank manager Atilla was arrested in New York, Erdoğan approached Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, hoping he could get the U.S. authorities to drop the case. But Obama and Biden declined, noting that the division of powers in the U.S. left them with no influence over the judiciary.

Erdoğan’s hopes were revived when Donald Trump moved into the White House in January 2017. Just a few weeks after Trump’s inauguration, Rudy Giuliani – who was an adviser to the president at the time – flew to Ankara to discuss the Halkbank case with Erdoğan. A short time later, Trump fired Preet Bharara, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York who had been leading the proceedings.

In the months that followed, “it would be a rare conversation in person or on the phone where it (Halkbank) didn’t come up” in discussions with the U.S. president, Trump’s former national security adviser, John Bolton, told DER SPIEGEL.

According to reporting by the New York Times, the U.S. lobbying firm Ballard received at least $4.6 million from the Turkish government for lobbying on behalf of Halkbank. Turkey allegedly even offered another of Trump’s former national security advisers, Michael Flynn, $15 million to have the cleric Fethullah Gülen, who is in exile in the U.S., extradited to Turkey. That claim is to be found in the report compiled by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who investigated foreign interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections. Flynn denies that such an offer was made.

On the sidelines of the G-20 summit in Buenos Aires in December 2018, Erdoğan presented his U.S. counterpart with a memo from the law firm King & Spalding, which worked for Halkbank. Bolton says that Trump leafed through the memo without really reading it. Nevertheless, says Bolton, the president ensured Erdoğan that he believed in Halkbank’s innocence. According to Bolton, Trump told Erdoğan he would “take care of it.”

In April 2019, the U.S. president allegedly told Erdoğan that he had personally entrusted Attorney General William Barr and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin with the matter. “We were getting very close to a resolution on Halkbank,” he allegedly told Erdoğan on the phone.

According to people familiar with the issue, Attorney General Barr allegedly pressured Geoffrey Berman, Bharara’s successor in the Southern District of New York, telling him to refrain from charging the bank. Berman apparently declined to comply. Barr could not be reached for comment.

Many in Trump’s orbit are still unsure why the president sought to help Erdoğan. Some believe that Trump was pursuing business interests in Turkey. Former National Security Adviser Bolton, though, thinks that the reasons are much less juicy. Trump, he says, was fascinated by authoritarian leaders like Erdoğan and Putin. “He was trying to show Erdoğan he was gonna do him a favor,” says Bolton.

According to Bolton, the ongoing exchange between the two presidents was ultimately quite damaging to Halkbank. The financial institution, he says, was so certain that Trump would put an end to the legal proceedings that it refused to engage in any sort of compromise with U.S. officials.

The Consequences: What the Halkbank affair means for Erdoğan’s rule

The District Court in southern Manhattan is well known for handling politically sensitive cases. Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen was tried here for perjury and other misdeeds, while sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein also faced justice at the court. But there is hardly a legal case to be found with the potentially far-reaching consequences of United States of America vs. Halkbank.

Other banks, to be sure, have also violated sanctions in the past, including Deutsche Bank and BNP Paribas. But their violations were far smaller. Deutsche Bank, for example, was able to reach a settlement with the authorities. In the case of Halkbank, however, such a settlement no longer seems possible. And the Biden administration will not seek to intervene, according to a source close to the administration.

Initially, the trial had been set to begin on March 1. But an appellate court granted a temporary stay to allow for a panel of judges to hear bank requests on an expedited basis. First and foremost, it must be determined whether a court in New York even has jurisdiction over a Turkish financial institution. Experts, however, view that determination as little more than a formality.

The evidence incriminating Halkbank appears to be overwhelming. Gold trader Zarrab has issued a sweeping confession and investigators also have access to documents that a Turkish police officer secretly turned over to the U.S. in 2017.

Officially, the Erdoğan government continues to insist that Halkbank consistently adhered to the letter of the law. Ankara did not respond to a request for comment submitted by DER SPIEGEL. Halkbank likewise declined to comment with reference to the ongoing legal proceedings. In confidential conversations, however, Turkish officials admit that it is likely no longer possible to protect Halkbank from legal consequences.

Erdoğan, of course, cannot be made legally liable in the U.S. because of the immunity he enjoys as a head of state. But the damage to his reputation from the Halkbank proceedings is already considerable.

The affair appears to confirm everything that the opposition has been accusing Erdoğan of for years: that he has a flexible approach to the law and that he abuses his position to enrich himself and his family. “It was my conclusion that the reason that Erdoğan was taking such a persistent interest in this matter was he was worried about what would emerge or be revealed of his own involvement in this as well as in other things,” former U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told the magazine Foreign Policy.

The investigation by the U.S. authorities has shaken the faith of investors in the Turkish finance industry – at a time when Turkey is more dependent than ever on foreign capital due to the coronavirus pandemic and the country’s weak currency.

The trial in New York could also just be the beginning of a long series of court proceedings against Halkbank. “We’ve heard a lot about potential corruption involving Halkbank,” says Bolton. “If Halkbank treats the laws of other countries as it was with our Iran sanctions, it’s possible others could get involved in looking into its conduct as well.”

Source: https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/erdogans-bad-bank-on-trial-shedding-light-on-an-alleged-plot-to-evade-iran-sanctions-a-bd705f81-bfcd-42fc-b3b1-55bdbe2c8339

by GUEST BLOGGER,

Azerbaijan deployed thousands of mercenaries in last year’s 44-day war that it and Turkey waged against Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) and Armenia.

Azerbaijan thereby flagrantly violated the UN’s International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries (UNMERC) which it signed in 1997.

Forty-six countries have signed UNMERC including Belgium, Cyprus, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, and Poland.

These mercenaries are not clean-cut military men. They’re terrorists, thugs, jihadis, and fanatics.

The Evidence: They include former ISIS commander Sayf Balud, and members of the Hamza Division, Sultan Murad Brigade, Al-Amshat Militia, Free Syrian Army (FSA/SNA), and other factions.

Many were brought into Azerbaijan before the war began on September 27, 2020.

Unknown numbers remain there despite the November 9 armistice.

Armenian forces captured two mercenaries who came from Syria’s Hama and Idlib provinces.

The independent, UK-based, Syrian Observatory for Human Rights confirmed Azerbaijan’s employing mercenaries.

In October, it numbered them at over 2,050 with 145 dead.

Columbia University’s Institute for the Study of Human Rights has named the chief mercenary commanders, such as Fehim Isa of the Sultan Murad Brigade, and their organizations.

Video and audio recordings have identified many of the mercenaries.

Azeri soldiers have forced some of them into battle at gunpoint and lied about the combat conditions.

“Haji … don’t come,” warned one mercenary. “We have been deceived … this is a meat grinder.”

Earlier Mercenaries 

Azerbaijan’s importing mercenaries/jihadis is nothing new. Nor is its involvement in terrorism.

• In the 1990s, Azerbaijan hired Afghan Mujahedin, Chechens, Pakistanis, and Turkey’s terrorist Grey Wolves to fight Armenians.
• Al-Qaeda cells in Baku facilitated the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
• Over 900 Azerbaijanis have joined ISIS.
• Azerbaijan’s Silk Way Airlines has transported weapons to terrorist organizations.

Azerbaijan’s political and military cultures are clearly deranged, as are Turkey’s.

Turkey is a shameless, longtime ISIS supporter, which the U.S. Treasury Department just identified as a “logistical hub” for ISIS.

Turkey and Azerbaijan’s Guilt

Most of the mercenaries used by Azerbaijan were flown in by Turkey. They often came from the ranks of Turkey’s proxy jihadist organizations (named above) in Syria who had reportedly committed atrocities and war crimes there.

Turkey typically recruits jihadis/mercenaries through SADAT, a quasi-official Turkish military contracting company.

Led by former Brigadier General Adnan Tanrıverdi and other Turkish officers, SADAT is loyal to Turkish President Erdogan. Turkey’s use of SADAT contravenes the UN’s Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

Turkey has also been sending terrorists and jihadis to fight in Libya’s civil war.

Azerbaijan may also have recruited mercenaries from elsewhere, such as Pakistan, according to some reports.

Regardless of the source of the mercenaries, Azerbaijan has brazenly violated UNMERC.

Charges against Turkey and Azerbaijan

A bi-partisan letter to the State and Defense Departments by one hundred U.S. House members has criticized “Turkish backed foreign mercenaries [in Azerbaijan], many alleged to have ties to internationally recognized terrorist groups.”

A European Parliament resolution has deplored “the transfer of foreign terrorist fighters by Turkey from Syria and elsewhere to Nagorno-Karabakh, as confirmed by international actors, including the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair countries.”

On November 6, 2020, the UN’s Working Group on the use of mercenaries and two Special Rapporteurs sent a strongly worded, eight-page letter to Turkey and Azerbaijan that detailed the charges against them.

The way “Syrian fighters are allegedly being recruited, transported and used in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict appears consistent with the definition of a mercenary, as set out by relevant international legal instruments.

Furthermore, their deployment appears to have contributed to the rapid escalation and intensification of hostilities, in turn resulting in civilian harm and suffering.”

Seventy-six days later — in a short, vacuous, and predictably arrogant reply — Turkey called the Working Group’s charges “fake news.” Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev has similarly denied using mercenaries.

UNMERC signatory Georgia is also culpable. It has knowingly permitted Turkey to use Georgian airspace to transport the terrorists to Azerbaijan.

Next Moves

Armenia has just filed war crimes lawsuits against Azerbaijan in the European Court of Human Rights.

Armenia, a member of the UN Human Rights Council, should also petition that organization to promptly sanction Azerbaijan, Turkey, and Georgia.

The case against the three countries could not be clearer. A lengthy investigation would be superfluous and counterproductive.

UNMERC signatories are especially obligated to hold the guilty parties accountable.

Human rights organizations worldwide must demand action, not mere words, from their respective governments and the UN.

The views of the author do not necessarily reflect those of Greek City Times.

David Boyajian is an independent writer who focuses on commentary and investigative reports regarding the Caucasus. His work can be found at Armeniapedia. 

Source: https://greekcitytimes.com/2021/02/26/axis-of-mercenary-turkey/

The recent statement released by the General Headquarters of the Armed Forces of Armenia must be a wake-up call for the prime minister himself to push him to prompt action to handle the political crisis in Armenia, military expert Tigran Abrahamyan said on Facebook today, stressing the importance also of proper reactions by former defense officials.

In his public post shared on Saturday afternoon, Abrahamyan said he expects opinionated statements especially by two high-ranking servicemen: Artak Davtyan, a former chief of the General Headquarters (in the context of the recent war in Karabakh) and Jalal Harutyunyan, a former commander of the Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh) Defense Army (for comments on the developments in the military between 2018-2020).

“The General Headquarters’ statement is not an attitude against a specific individual or individuals; it has nothing to do with personal sympathy. In an in-depth sense, it underscores, first of all, the attempt to cause the collapse of the public administration sector, the disintegration of government institutions and the alarm-causing threats in [national] security.

“And last but not least, that statement by the General Headquarters was a wake-up call – warning of the inability of the incumbent prime minister and his government to undertake the necessary changes, transformations and solutions under conditions of this hard reality – and that, to put it in plain words, is fraught with the total overthrow of statehood,” he added.

New Research on Three Incidents from 2020 Conflict

Hugh Williamson

Director, Europe and Central Asia Division

Three unlawful attacks on medical facilities by Azerbaijani forces during the six-week armed conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh have come to light in recent Human Rights Watch research in the region.

Human Rights Watch documented multiple unlawful strikes on a public hospital in Martakert in September through November 2020, and an unlawful strike on a military hospital in the town’s outskirts in October. The hospitals were very close to the front lines at the time.

The weapon used by Azerbaijani forces against the military hospital – a satellite-guided variant of an Israeli-supplied rocket artillery system called LAR-160 – suggests that the strike was intentional. The strikes on the public hospital, including with Grad rockets and cluster munitions, appeared indiscriminate.

The attacks damaged both hospitals and impeded medical work, but no one was wounded or killed in the attacks.

On-site observations, analysis of videos, most of which were on social media, and satellite imagery analysis enabled Human Rights Watch to identify numerous legitimate military targets in Martakert, some of them close to the two hospitals. By locating military facilities, equipment, or personnel inside the city, and near the two hospitals, Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenian authorities endangered civilians and put medical workers and their patients at risk.

Human Rights Watch also documented a deliberate attack on September 28, apparently by Azerbaijani forces, on an Armenian military ambulance, in which assailants shot and killed a military doctor.  

Human Rights Watch previously documented damage to two hospitals in Stepanakert, (also referred to as Khankendi in Azerbaijan), the capital city of Nagorno-Karabakh, due to Azerbaijan’s indiscriminate strikes in October, and documented damage to a health clinic in the Azerbaijani city of Barda, in an indiscriminate attack by Armenian forces.

Medical facilities and personnel are civilian objects with special protections under the laws of war. They include hospitals, clinics, medical centers, and ambulances and other medical transportation, whether military or civilian. Parties to a conflict are obligated to ensure that they do not endanger or harm medical personnel, and do not attack or damage hospitals and ambulances.

The analysis of these unlawful attacks is not intended to be a comprehensive account of all damage to medical facilities during the armed conflict. The Azerbaijani government alleged, as of October 13, that six medical facilities had been damaged. Armenian authorities told Human Watch that at least nine medical facilities were damaged in Stepanakert, and in the Martakert, Martuni, and Askeran districts of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Possible Targeted Attack on Martakert Military Hospital

Azerbaijani rocket artillery hit a military hospital in Aghabekalanj, a village just southwest of Martakert city, along the main road, in an apparently deliberate strike on October 14, 2020.

Before being hit, the hospital had been providing first aid to the wounded – as many as 130 a day, hospital staff told Human Rights Watch – some of whom were then transported to Stepanakert for further treatment.

The nearest military installation is 1.5 kilometers to the south, along the main road. Satellite imagery taken on October 8 shows that one of the installation’s buildings had been hit, damaging its roof. The satellite imagery also shows military positions that pre-date the outbreak of hostilities, fewer than 350 meters southwest of the hospital. Earthen berms are also visible about 150 meters north of the hospital.

As Azerbaijani forces frequently shelled Martakert and surrounding areas during the conflict, patients were treated in the two-story hospital’s reinforced basement, where medical staff also slept.

Human Rights Watch visited the hospital in November and found that the attack had caused significant damage. A small structure by the gate was largely destroyed, and the medical workers’ housing in the back was severely damaged. The outer walls of the main building showed blast and fragmentation damage, and the windows were shattered.

In the yard, there were remnants of several burned vehicles, too charred to identify. The staff said that most were military ambulances.

Sasha Baghiryan, a 63-year-old hospital maintenance worker, and Hayk Aghajanyan, a 20-year-old military serviceman who had been assigned to the hospital to help carry the wounded and run errands for medical workers, said the attack took place between 4:00 and 4:30 p.m. Satellite imagery shows that the attack took place between 11:48 a.m. local time, on October 14, and 11:54 a.m. local time, on October 15. At the time of the attack, both men were in the basement, where medical workers were performing surgery on three wounded servicemen.

Before and after satellite imagery shows that the attack on the military hospital located south west of Martakert took place between October 14, 2020 at 11:48 a.m. to October 15, 2020 at 11:54 a.m., local time. Satellite image courtesy of Planet Labs Inc. 2021. Analysis and Graphic: © 2021 Human Rights Watch.

Baghiryan and Aghajanyan said that they heard four separate explosions as the rockets hit one after the other. Aghajanyan showed Human Rights Watch four impact craters: two in the yard close to the fence, several meters apart; one on the road near the gate; and one outside the rear of the hospital, near the medical workers’ housing. Human Rights Watch found numerous munition fragments at the impact sites.

An examination of the impact sites, weapon remnants, and the proximity of the four points of impact suggest that the strike was carried out by the satellite-guided variant of an Israeli-supplied rocket artillery system called LAR-160, using EXTRA rockets. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute lists the transfer of LAR-160 launchers and EXTRA rockets from Israel to Azerbaijan in 2005-2006. An EXTRA rocket is equipped with a unitary warhead containing 120 kilograms of explosives, and its manufacturer claims that accuracy of less than 10-meters (circular-error-probable) can be achieved by the rocket’s satellite guidance capability.

Remnant of a rocket body found on the grounds of the Martakert military hospital, Martakert, Nagorno-Karabakh. Human Right Watch’s examination of the impact sites, weapon remnants, and the proximity of the four points of impact indicate that the October 14, 2020 strike was carried out by the satellite-guided variant of an Israeli-supplied rocket artillery system called LAR-160, using EXTRA rockets. © 2020 Tanya Lokshina/Human Rights Watch

In light of the preexisting military positions that were about 350 meters from the hospital, and the constant, heavy shelling of the area near the hospital, the October 14 strike may have been indiscriminate. However, the accuracy of the LAR-160 gives a basis to conclude that the strike may have been deliberate.

The hospital roof was not marked with a red cross to signify that it was a medical facility, but the then-ombudsperson for Nagorno-Karabakh told Human Rights Watch that the facility was well known as a hospital, had never been used for any other purposes, and that the International Committee of the Red Cross had the hospital’s coordinates. The front of the admissions building was marked with a large Bowl of Hygieia, a cup with a snake, a pharmacy and medical symbol. According to hospital staff, ambulances were coming and going around the clock.

A hospital staff member showed Human Rights Watch a small, one-story building about 100 meters behind the hospital, which he said had served as a warehouse for landmines. He said that “all the landmines were picked up by the military and moved elsewhere when the fighting began in September.” The warehouse as such likely represented a legitimate military target, and by storing landmines so close to the hospital Armenian forces put the hospital, its staff, and patients at risk. However, the warehouse was empty at the time of the attack and there were no military positions on the hospital grounds, the staff member said.

Indiscriminate Strikes on Martakert Public Hospital

Martakert’s public hospital, the R. Bazyan District Medical Association, is on the northern end of Sakharov Street, which suffered extensive shelling damage during the six-week war.

At the southern end of Sakharov Street, 800 meters from the hospital, there is a military installation, with military positions and military vehicles. A local resident said that he and his battalion were based there throughout the hostilities. When a Human Rights Watch researcher examined the site in November, it had been clearly damaged by shelling.

Another military installation that, as of October 8, had visible activity, is about 250 meters from the hospital. A satellite image taken at 11:54 a.m. local time on September 27, 2020, shows new damage to at least five buildings on the north edge of this base, indicating that the site was struck several times hours after the hostilities began.

Dozens of military positions and earthen berms, which were there before the start of hostilities on September 27, some as close as 350 meters from the hospital, are visible on satellite imagery. These positions are especially concentrated in the eastern part of the town and oriented in the direction of the line of contact. As of October 8, there were large vehicles at some of these positions, suggesting that they may have been in use.

A video recorded on October 6 that credible local sources gave Human Rights Watch shows military personnel and a transport vehicle driving along Sakharov Street, approximately 100 meters south of the hospital entrance. 

Due to intense shelling in the area from the first day of hostilities, on October 4 the hospital staff were evacuated to a village some thirty km away and the hospital became a military medical triage center for wounded Armenian forces.

A hospital custodian who regularly checked the facilities after the civilian evacuation said the hospital was hit several times on various days during the six weeks of fighting.

In the October 8 satellite imagery, several impact craters are also visible in the immediate vicinity of the military installation that is 250 meters from the hospital. The October 6 video also shows a large impact crater on the main road, approximately 210 meters west of the hospital. 

Three witnesses said most of the damage to the hospital was inflicted on November 9, when shelling in the area was particularly heavy. Satellite imagery shows that the military installation 250 meters from the hospital was also struck sometime between the early afternoon on November 9 and the morning of November 10.

Human Rights Watch visited the hospital on November 24 and noted significant blast and fragmentation damage to the hospital and the adjacent outpatient clinic. Numerous munition fragments were seen at impact sites in the hospital yard, in particular fragments of Grads and cluster munitions carried by LAR-160 rockets. A staff surgeon at the hospital, Dr. Tigran Arzumanyan, and a staff pediatrician, Dr. Khachatur Melikyan, said that the hospital’s roof was also damaged in several places.

The two doctors said that when the shelling began on September 27, staff moved all 39 patients, including children and mothers with newborn babies, to the basement. Those whose health allowed it were discharged that day, and the rest were promptly evacuated to Stepanakert, 46 kilometers away.

They said that during the first day of hostilities the hospital also provided first aid to 80 wounded military servicemen, 78 of them with fragmentation wounds, and several wounded civilians.

“We lost electricity, so we had to use flashlights while working on the wounded,” said Dr. Melikyan. “When the first munition landed here, it was such a big bang that the tiles in the basement flew up.”

Several days into the hostilities, the hospital staff were evacuated to Chdlran village, where they worked as a triage brigade for the wounded.

Due to the sheer number of strikes on the hospital, Human Rights Watch was not in a position to match particular strikes with specific damage. But neither of the explosive weapons that Azerbaijani forces used in these strikes – Grads and cluster munitions – can be targeted with enough accuracy to have avoided damaging civilian structures in the area.

Explosive weapons with wide-area effects may have a large destructive radius, be inherently inaccurate, or deliver multiple munitions at the same time, causing high civilian loss if used in populated areas. Often a single weapon will fall into two of these categories. 

Grads are unguided rockets that cannot be targeted accurately and are often fired in salvos from multi-barrel rocket launchers to saturate a wide area. Based on the examination of the fragments and the impact points, Human Rights Watch concluded that Azerbaijani forces used “enhanced fragmentation” Grads, which have a layer of steel spheres imbedded between the explosive substance and the skin of the rocket to maximize casualty-producing effect.

Grad rockets cannot be targeted with sufficient precision to differentiate military targets, which may be attacked, from civilians and civilian structures, such as homes and schools not being used for military purposes, which are protected from attack. So, their use in populated areas violates the laws-of-war prohibition against indiscriminate attacks.

Cluster munitions, in this case carried by LAR-160 rockets – Human Rights Watch found two rocket bodies in the yard, close to one of the impact points – are an inherently indiscriminate weapon banned by an international treaty. They typically open in the air, dispersing multiple bomblets or submunitions over a wide area, putting anyone in the area at the time of attack, whether combatants or civilians, at risk of death or injury. Many of the submunitions do not explode on contact, but remain armed, becoming de facto landmines.

Locations contaminated by unexploded submunitions remain dangerous until the remnants are cleared and destroyed. Both Azerbaijan and Armenia used them extensively during the six-week conflict. Use of cluster munitions shows blatant disregard for civilian life and both countries should join the Convention on Cluster Munitions, which bans them, ratified by 110 countries. They should also make an immediate commitment not to use indiscriminate weapons, like Grads, in populated areas.

Deliberate Attack on a Military Ambulance

On September 28, a group of five apparent Azerbaijani servicemen attacked an ambulance on the road in Kalbajar district of Azerbaijan, killing a military doctor, Sasha Rustamyan, 26, and injuring the driver and the accompanying Armenian army sergeant.

At the time, Kalbajar district, now under Azerbaijani control, was still held by Armenian forces. The driver, 26, and the sergeant, 41, interviewed separately, said that the attack took place between 1 and 2 p.m. by the Omar mountain pass, which is very close to the then-line of contact. The ambulance was heading to pick up the wounded at a frontline position, and the sergeant rode in the ambulance to provide directions.

Suddenly, they saw five servicemen, in fatigues and armed with assault rifles, possibly a patrol, blocking the road. The ambulance stopped some 25 to 30 meters away. Dr. Rustamyan jumped out, apparently intending to speak to the servicemen, but they opened fire on the vehicle.

“[Dr. Rustamyan] must have thought they were our [forces]… and then everything happened so quickly,” said the sergeant. Dr. Rustamyan’s relatives showed Human Rights Watch his death certificate stating that he had died of multiple bullet wounds. He was a recent graduate of the Armenian State Medical University.

“The windshield was riddled with bullets,” the driver said. He recalled touching his head and feeling blood on his hand. He executed a protective maneuver by putting the car in reverse, and then turning it over on its left side, by a gorge. He saw Dr. Rustamyan turning back towards the ambulance. Ten meters away from it, he was shot in the back and fell to the ground. “I knew he was dead,” the driver said. “I pushed what remained of the windshield out with my hand, crawled out, shut my eyes, then threw myself into the gorge… While I was rolling down, I heard an explosion.”

The sergeant, who received a lower arm bullet wound, said that he crawled out of the back door of the vehicle. He also rolled into the gorge, stopping on a flat spot a few meters below. From there he saw the servicemen approach the vehicle, search it, and then blow it up. When they left, the sergeant crawled back up and walked some four kilometers until he saw an Armenian military truck. Вased on his directions, the military also found the driver. Another group of soldiers picked up Dr. Rustamyan’s body later that day.

The driver, diagnosed with a concussion and mild injuries, and severe shock spent a month in a hospital recovering. The sergeant was at a hospital undergoing treatment for his arm wound when Human Rights Watch interviewed him in December.

The ambulance was a regular UAZ-3962 medical service vehicle. Although painted khaki, it cannot be confused with any other type of military vehicle because of the prominent red-cross markings, including just above the windshield, and the “medical service” sign on the side. At the time of the attack, the driver, the sergeant, and the doctor were dressed in Armenian military fatigues, but the doctor wore a medical insignia on his sleeve. The driver had an assault rifle, which the doctor held while riding but left in the vehicle when he got out of the car to speak to the gunmen.

Carrying firearms for self-defense does not constitute an act “harmful to the enemy,” and the vehicle retains its status as a medical unit.

Neither the driver nor the sergeant could see identifying insignia on the fatigues of the servicemen nor heard them speak. The overall context strongly suggests that the attackers were Azerbaijani forces.

Ambulances have protected status under international humanitarian law, and the presence of military servicemen and firearms in an ambulance does not remove the protection unless there are grounds to suggest that it is being used for purposes harmful to the enemy, such as conveying soldiers to the front line or carrying out attacks. There is no evidence to suggest either was the case on September 28.

The servicemen on the road should have taken all feasible precautions to ensure that the vehicle and its occupants were valid military targets before carrying out an attack. The attack on the marked ambulance and the subsequent killing of Dr. Rustamyan appear to have been carried out deliberately and may constitute a war crime.

Source: https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/02/26/unlawful-attacks-medical-facilities-and-personnel-nagorno-karabakh

Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias participated today in an online conference hosted by the Hellenic Society of International Law and International Relations on “Greek Foreign Policy.”

The minister during his online participation referred to the values ​​and principles that govern Greek foreign policy, emphasising that respect for international law is its cornerstone.

He stressed the importance of Greece’s participation in European and Euro-Atlantic institutions, as well as the strengthening of the country’s bilateral relations both in the Balkans and in the wider Eastern Mediterranean and Asia.

The Minister also made special reference to provocative Turkish behavior against Greece and Cyprus.

The head of Greek diplomacy in his speech stressed the following:

• Greek foreign policy is based on solid principles and values.
• Through the strategic dialogue we have upgraded relations with the U.S. The latter do not hesitate, for the first time, to publicly denounce Turkish provocation in the Eastern Mediterranean.
• The U.S. more broadly supports the Southern Energy Corridor that we aspire to use to  transport natural gas from the Eastern Mediterranean, through Greece, to the rest of Europe.
• We attach particular importance to our bilateral relations with EU Member States and the wider region.
• This is in addition to the multilateral cooperation schemes that we have developed, together with Cyprus, with Eastern Mediterranean countries.
• The Philia Forum, which we successfully organized on February 11, is tangible proof.
• These are based on adherence to international legality, including the Law of the Sea.
• We consider our relations with homogenous countries to be extremely important in addressing regional challenges.
• These challenges include the chronic conflicts in Syria and Libya, but also the strong intervention of Turkey in the region.
• We are also stepping up our cooperation on horizontal issues, such as immigration and terrorism.
• I am talking about Egypt, Israel, but also Gulf countries, such as the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia.

Did the Greek Foreign Minister refer extensively to the Turkish Question, to Turkey’s provocation and aggression?

“Let me remind you of the escalating and sometimes overlapping crises faced by the Mitsotakis government,” he said.

“Based on contempt for international law, the escalating Turkish provocation began, from November 2019, on the basis of the ideology of the Blue Homeland, with:

• the submission of coordinates of illegal maritime zones in the Eastern Mediterranean, the infamous Turkish-Libyan Zone of demarcation of zones,
• the commencement of a TPAO1 licensing process for exploration/exploitation of submarine resources in areas covering the Greek continental shelf, and
• the culmination of the actions of the Oruç Reis, between August and November 2020, in the Eastern Mediterranean, in an area that covers the Greek continental shelf, accompanied by a number of warships.”

“As you know, Turkey has shown even greater delinquency in the Cypriot maritime zones, from much earlier,” Dendias highlighted.

“I should add that Turkish violations of the National Airspace and the Greek Territorial Waters surpassed all previous ones in 2020, amounting to 4,605 ​​and 3,106, respectively,” he revealed.

“The Turkish provocation was manifested with the unprecedented incitement of an attempt of mass violation of the Greek borders, with the instrumentalisation of civilians in Evros in February/March 2020,” the foreign minister continued.

“Greece did not hesitate, for the first time, to stand tall and protect its European borders, earning the gratitude of our partners as well,” Dendias said.

Dendias then stressed the difficult situation Greece has by having such an aggressive neighbour.

“Greece has the misfortune to have a systematically delinquent neighbor and the good fortune to be in the European Union, which is a lure and a threat to Turkey, creating a kind of protection zone,” he said.

The foreign minister then took aim at the European Union for member states prioritising their unilateral interests rather than those of the entire bloc.

“If you ask me if we are satisfied, I will tell you that we would like the European Union to take a tougher line on Turkey,” Dendias continued.

“But the European Union is a union of 27 countries and works, fortunately, with unanimity. Sometimes, the national interest prevails over the European,” he said.

U.S. Department of State spokesman Ned Price reacted to latest developments in Armenia at a press briefing on Thursday.

Asked what his assessment of ongoing developments in the country is, whether he believes, as the Armenian prime minister said, that there was an attempted military coup and whether he supports Nikol Pashinyan as prime minister, Price said the U.S. is following the situation very closely.

“We urge all parties to exercise restraint and to avoid any escalatory or violent actions. We remind all parties of the bedrock democratic principle that states’ armed forces should not intervene in domestic politics. The United States has been a steadfast supporter of the development of democratic processes and institutions in Armenia. We continue to support Armenia’s democracy and its sovereignty, and we urge its leaders to resolve their differences peacefully while respecting the rule of law, Armenia’s democracy, and its institutions,” the spokesman said.

Asked whether he would consider the statement from the General Staff of the Armenia Armed Forces calling on Pashinyan’s and his cabinet’s resignation an incitement or a coup attempt, Price said the Department of State has a process to determine whether a coup has transpired.

“We talked about that process in the context of a very different setting, and that was Burma and the coup determination that we arrived at in the aftermath of the military’s overthrow of Burma’s democratic civilian leadership on February 1st. I think I said at the time that there are three criteria that this department looks for in making that determination. Of course, there has been no such determination in this case. We continue to support Armenia’s democracy and its sovereignty, and we’ll continue to watch developments very closely as they unfold,” he said. 

Armenia’s top chess player Levon Aronian has issued a statement and confirmed the reports that he is leaving the country.

“Last year was very difficult for all of us—a pandemic, a war, in my case also a personal tragedy [i.e., the death of his wife] and the absolute indifference of the state to Armenian chess. I was faced with a choice: quitting the work of my life, or moving to a place where I was valued.

After waiting for more than a year for the promises of the current government to be fulfilled, I realized that I had to make a breakthrough decision and leave my native country. Obviously, every year of expecting change is a waste of year in terms of my sporting career.

I am sincerely proud that I had the honor of making a significant contribution to the greatest achievements of Armenian chess (…). I believe it is clear that it is impossible to reach world heights in chess without a lot of hard work and targeted state support for a long time. It is important to note that the personal attention and important support for many years by the third President of Armenia, Serzh Sargsyan, was a significant factor in our chess successes.

After the 2018 revolution, the new government promised to continue that line; but the promise was limited to just a year of partial support, after which it stopped, too. Meanwhile, new statesmen completely unaware of the sport entered the chess arena, who, attributing our successes to themselves, began to establish themselves—even through blackmail. (…). I have tried many times to present my concern about the situation (…) also to RA [Republic of Armenia] Prime Minister [Nikol Pashinyan] during the only meeting with him during these 3 years, for which he strictly had set 15 minutes.

All my attempts to stop the destructive decisions being made in the field of [Armenian] chess have failed. I did not manage to explain to the new government that chess is a great legacy in our country and that our success in this field is probably one of the greatest achievements of our country.

I was not able to convey to them the simple truth that I ask for state support not for myself, but for the opportunity to serve the homeland and bring glory through our success (…).

The answer was: ‘Our experts find that Levon Aronian no longer has potential.’

Over the years, I have received many appealing offers to represent various countries. Including by the great American philanthropist and chess lover, Rex Sinquefield (…).

I want to express my gratitude to respected Rex Sinquefield for continuing to believe in me today. I thank also to Fabiano Caruana, who, being America’s strongest [chess] player, supports me and shares my decision to be teammates.

I am connected to my homeland by all strings, and I will continue to do the possible and the impossible for my country even from afar,” Aronian’s statement reads in part.

Earlier, rumors were circulating that Levon Aronian no longer wished to represent Armenia in chess and was going to move to the US for permanent residence and to represent that country in chess.

YEREVAN. – There is no evidence base as such in the statement of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Armenia. Former Minister of Justice Arpine Hovhannisyan said this Friday to reporters at Marshal Baghramyan Avenue in the capital Yerevan.

“That is, it is a statement under which one can already see the readiness of the Armed Forces staff and command staff to provide that evidence. In that case, yes, the Prosecutor General is obliged to take measures prescribed by law and initiate a criminal case against the traitor on the universal scale in Armenia’s history,” she said, referring to PM Nikol Pashinyan.

To the question whether the statement of the General Staff is an occasion for the Prosecutor General to contact Onik Gasparyan—Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces, Hovhannisyan said: “It is definitely an occasion to get in touch; he must take that action. If I rely on his behavior for [the past] three years, he will not get in touch. [But] if I rely on remnant memory, dignity and being concerned for the fate of the country, then he must, he must do it, and I hope he will do it.”

Referring to Pashinyan’s words that he will not allow the army to come out against the people, Hovhannisyan responded: “He has no potential to allow or not to allow. I said that without the army, the prime minister is a ‘headless horseman.’ As a lawyer, I say that there was not even an insinuation of an armed coup in that statement [by the army general staff]. Therefore, the prime minister must be very careful in his statements, as it may turn out that it is not the Armed Forces, but himself who will be outlawed.”

And when asked what will happen if President Armen Sarkissian does not sign Pashinyan’s petition submitted to him to sack Onik Gasparyan, Arpine Hovhannisyan said that there are two ways to resolve the issue. “If Armen Sarkissian does not sign within three days and does not take any action, then Onik Gasparyan will be considered dismissed by force of law.

Under the Constitution, there is a second option that if the President returns—with his observations—to the person who gave the proposal—the prime minister—and notes his observations—and there are clear manifestations of unconstitutionality there—, the prime minister can send it back, in which case the President has two options: either signs or sends [it] to the Constitutional Court. As I confidently say that it is a decision that contradicts the Constitution, Armen Sarkissian shall send that petition back; if it comes back, he [shall] send it to the Constitutional Court,” she said.

$ 11 million have disappeared which were donated to the Hayastan All-Armenian Fund.

“We have already written that during the war, when Armenians all over the world transferred money to the Hayastan All-Armenian Fund, these funds were subsequently used not purposefully, and in some cases evaporated. We also wrote that in addition to money laundering during the process of purchasing bulletproof vests at inflated prices, $ 11 million simply disappeared,” Deja Vu Telegram channel reported sharing two documents.

The first one indicates a one-time cash withdrawal of EUR 285,143 (as an advance payment), the other shows that the goods were allegedly purchased in the amount of 519,750,000 AMD (over EUR 800,000).

“These documents exist, but the problem is that both during the war and after it, these goods were not delivered, and the cashed amount is in the possession of several people who did not return the fund’s funds to the budget,” the channel added.

According to Dejavu, these transactions were coordinated by four people, MP Hayk Sargsyan, former head of the government staff Eduard Aghajanyan, MP Andranik Kocharyan, and Minister Hakob Arshakyan.