Author: Chakhmakhchian Vatche

Canberra rings with international music, colour

Canberra Times – Australasia
Feb 12, 2005

Artists from overseas began pouring into Canberra yesterday for the
showcase concert held last night at the Canberra Theatre and the week
of international performers’ events to follow.

Meeting outside the Canberra Theatre for the first time yesterday
were musicians from Senegal- Gambia, Nigeria, Egypt, Tibet and Turkey.

Jali Buba Kuyateh, a hereditary musician known for his skills in
playing the kora, a West African harp, has been performing since the
age of five.

He was joined by Bintou Kandeh, who dances, but also plays the hand
drum to accompany Kuyateh. She has been performing for 15 years.

The Ebonyi State Nigerian Troupe combines dance and drumming
skills. They will also be performing today at the Food and Dance
Spectacular and tonight at Club Mombassa.

The Tawadros brothers, Joseph and James, originally came from
Egypt. Joseph, 21, plays the oud and was nominated for an award at
the 2004 Arias for his first album Storyteller. They will play tonight
at Tilley’s in Lyneham.

Nyima Tashi and Dawa Dolma play music rarely heard outside
Tibet. Trained at the Tibetan Institute of Performing Arts in
Dharamsala, the Dalai Lama takes a personal interest in their
music. They have lived and worked in Australia since 2000.

The Samsun State Classical Turkish Music Choir, which also performed
at the Peace Concert on Thursday was founded in 1991.

Conducted by Murat Salim Tokac, the choir performs music by composers
with Ottoman, Greek, Armenian and Jewish origins.

The showcase concert has always been one of the National Multicultural
Festival’s most popular events. With the addition of Canberran Moya
Simpson, who compered last night’s concert, and Peter J. Casey, who
performed at his piano, it was a good example of Canberra reaching
to the wider world.

For festival information, phone 62070162 or visit the web site,

Azeri president, EU envoy praise ties

Azartac news agency, Baku
9 Feb 05

[No dateline as received] Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev received a
delegation led by the special envoy of the European Union in the South
Caucasus, Heikki Talvitie, at the Presidential Palace on 9 February.

The head of state expressed his satisfaction with the rapid development
of cooperation between Azerbaijan and the European Union and our
country’s participation in the EU’s New Neighbourhood policy.

Touching on the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagornyy Karabakh conflict,
Ilham Aliyev noted that Azerbaijan’s position on the settlement
of this conflict is in line with international legal norms and
principles – the territorial integrity of countries and inviolability
of borders. He said that the conflicts in the former Soviet Union,
which are accompanied by aggressive separatism, inflict great damage
on the cause of establishing peace and security in regions. From this
point of view, the objective position expressed in the documents of
the Council of Europe and other international organizations condemning
Armenian separatism and Armenia’s aggression against our country is
of great importance.

The head of state expressed his confidence that cooperation between
Azerbaijan and the European Union would continue to develop.

Mr Talvitie highly assessed the expansion of relations between the
European Union and Azerbaijan and expressed his confidence that these
relations will continue to strengthen.

The meeting also discussed various spheres of cooperation between
Azerbaijan and the European Union, regional problems and other issues
of mutual interest.

Agence France Presse
4 février 2005 vendredi 4:51 PM GMT

Dialogue “sans tabou” entre parlementaires français et dirigeants
turcs (PAPIER GENERAL)

Par Sylvie MALIGORNE

ANKARA 4 fév 2005

Des discussions “sans tabou” entre parlementaires français et des
dirigeants et membres de la société civile turcs se sont déroulées
jeudi et vendredi à Ankara, lors du déplacement du président de
l’Assemblée nationale française Jean-Louis Debré et des chefs des
groupes politiques au palais Bourbon.

Jeudi au premier jour de cette visite, inédite de par la composition
de la délégation française, les échanges ont été “libres” et
“francs”. Tant du côté français que du côté turc, les mots ont été
les mêmes, alors que les relations entre les deux pays sont tendues.

Depuis avril 1992, date de la visite de François Mitterrand dans ce
pays, aucun chef d’Etat français ou de Premier ministre n’a fait le
déplacement.

Le contentieux est lourd depuis la reconnaissance du génocide
arménien par l’Assemblée nationale en 2001, puis avec les débats
passionnés en France suscités par l’éventuelle adhésion d’Ankara à
l’Union européenne.

Dans ce contexte, la venue de M. Debré et des présidents de groupe,
Bernard Accoyer (UMP), Jean-Marc Ayrault (PS), Alain Bocquet (PCF) et
Hervé Morin (UDF), tous avec des approches différentes, a été
qualifiée jeudi de “très importante” par le président de la grande
assemblée nationale turque Bulent Arinc.

Il s’agissait d'”écouter et comprendre, de se dire la vérité”, selon
les termes de M. Debré, et de répondre “avec sincérité” aux
questions, selon M. Arinc.

De fait, les entretiens avec le Premier ministre Recep Tayyip Erdogan
ou avec les parlementaires turcs ont portés sur tous les sujets de
friction. Selon un membre de la délégation, M. Erdogan s’est étonné
que le problème arménien puisse mettre en péril le référendum en
France sur la Turquie, qui n’aurait pas lieu avant une dizaine
d’année: “Je ne savais pas que 400.000 Arméniens pouvaient faire
échouer un référendum”.

“évolution”

Pour autant, M. Erdogan est apparu ouvert, selon M. Ayrault, donnant
“le sentiment d’avoir pris conscience de la réalité du problème”
arménien et d’être disposé à évoluer pour “apaiser ces questions”.
“Il a parlé de travail d’historiens sur les archives. C’est une
évolution”, a-t-il dit.

Jeudi, lors d’une conférence de presse avec M. Arinc, M. Debré a
énuméré sans ambage les points d’achoppement: “Chypre, les droits de
l’Homme, le problème des Arméniens”, provoquant des réactions vives
de la presse turque.

De son côté, Arinc a regretté que le débat en France sur l’adhésion
de son pays se fasse “sur un terrain plein de malentendus”. “La
Turquie de l’opinion publique française est très différente de la
Turquie réelle”, a-t-il dit. En ligne de mire notamment les
déclarations du président de l’UMP Nicolas Sarkozy -“si la Turquie
était en Europe, ça se saurait”- ou l’attitude de celle de Philippe
de Villiers, très hostile à l’adhésion d’Ankara.

Les Turcs “croient que nous sommes opposés parce qu’ils sont turcs.
Or la question est celle de la possibilité de faire une Europe
puissance”, a confié M. Morin, opposé à l’entrée de la Turquie.

Partisan d’un partenariat privilégié, M. Accoyer a noté “le souhait
très fort” d’Ankara d’adhérer, tout en estimant que “le chemin était
encore long” avant que l’adhésion ne soit possible.

Vendredi, avant de se rendre à Istanbul, face aux représentants
d’associations des droits de l’Homme, les parlementaires ont mesuré
les efforts à faire. Néanmoins, M. Debré a jugé que le processus
d’adhésion était “une très grande chance” pour ce pays, contraint
ainsi à des réformes.

Conflicts Cited in Iraq Oil Program

The Washington Post
Friday February 4, 2005

By Colum Lynch, Washington Post Staff Writer

UNITED NATIONS, Feb. 3 — The former director of the U.N. oil-for-food
program had serious conflicts of interest that violated the integrity of
the world body and helped undermine economic sanctions against Iraq,
U.N.-appointed investigators reported Thursday.

Benon Sevan repeatedly sought — and received — from Iraqi officials
the rights to purchase millions of barrels of discounted oil while he
was running the program, and then misled investigators about his
relationship with an Egyptian national who sold those rights for $1.5
million in profits, the inquiry found.

The findings are the first to come from a panel appointed by U.N.
Secretary General Kofi Annan to investigate allegations that the $64
billion oil-for-food program was corrupt and mismanaged. Those
allegations have led to calls for Annan’s resignation by some members of
Congress and have spurred probes by five congressional committees.
Those, like the probe by the United Nations, are continuing.

In its preliminary report Thursday, the U.N.-appointed panel, led by
former Federal Reserve chairman Paul A. Volcker, also said that former
secretary general Boutros Boutros-Ghali was one of a few U.N. officials
who improperly helped steer contracts related to the program to selected
companies, and that two of his relatives were involved in the sale of
the oil allocated to Sevan.

Annan announced that he will pursue “disciplinary proceedings” against
Sevan and another U.N. official, Joseph Stephanides, who allegedly
helped the British government circumvent the United Nations’ competitive
bidding process to steer a contract to a British company. Stephanides
did not respond to a request for comment.

Annan said Volcker’s report contains “extremely troubling evidence of
wrongdoing” by Sevan.

“Should any of the findings of the inquiry give rise to criminal
charges, the United Nations will cooperate with national law enforcement
authorities pursuing those charges, and in the interests of justice I
will waive the diplomatic immunity of the staff member concerned,” Annan
said.

Annan noted that he is awaiting a report by Volcker probing possible
wrongdoing by Annan’s son, Kojo, who received $150,000 over a five-year
period from a Swiss company while it profited from the oil-for-food
program. The company maintains that Kojo Annan, who had been an
employee, had nothing to do with its work in Iraq and that the payments
were part of a standard agreement that would bar him from working for a
competitor.

Sevan’s attorney, Eric L. Lewis, said that “Mr. Sevan never took a
penny” from the program. Volcker’s commission has “succumbed to massive
political pressure and now seeks to scapegoat” Sevan, Lewis said.

“Mr. Sevan’s goal throughout the life of the program was to expedite the
pumping of oil in order to pay for urgently needed humanitarian
supplies” in Iraq, he said.

Some in Congress viewed Volcker’s report as vindication of their
criticism of the organization. Rep. Henry J. Hyde (news, bio, voting
record) (R-Ill.), chairman of the House International Relations
Committee, said the findings “reinforce evidence we have developed
detailing lapses in program oversight, management, fiscal controls and
an absence of even the most rudimentary standards of accountability.”

Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), chairman of the Foreign Relations
Committee, said that “part of the blame for the current imbroglio lies
with the U.N.” but that “we must recognize that those nations who sat on
the Security Council . . . another during the life of the program — and
this includes the United States — must also answer questions as to why
they, too, did not pay greater scrutiny to this program.”

The United Nations established the program in December 1996 to allow
Iraq, which had been put under U.N. sanctions after its 1990 invasion of
Kuwait, to buy food, medicine and other humanitarian goods.

The program helped ease the plight of millions of undernourished Iraqis,
but it also provided the Iraqi government with at least $2 billion in
illicit kickbacks and payoffs, according to a report last year by CIA
adviser Charles A. Duelfer. Volcker said that the government received
far more in illicit funds from unauthorized oil sales outside the
oil-for-food program to Jordan, Turkey, Syria and Egypt.

Volcker’s report also said U.N. auditors had “inadequate” resources and
staff to conduct a proper investigation of the program, and it charged
that the United Nations violated its own competitive bidding practices
in 1996 when it selected three companies — BNP Paribas of France,
Saybolt Eastern Hemisphere BV of the Netherlands and Lloyd’s Register
Inspection Ltd. of Britain — to monitor Iraq’s trade.

Boutros-Ghali, of Egypt, acting on the instructions of the Iraqi
government, helped steer a banking contract to hold Iraqi’s oil revenues
to BNP, the report said. “When provided with the short list, he
contacted the government of Iraq and asked for its choice,” the report
said. “Apparently the Government of Iraq indicated a preference for BNP,
and the secretary general acquiesced.”

Boutros-Ghali could not be reached at a number in Paris provided by the
United Nations.

Volcker said the “most disturbing finding” is that Sevan solicited oil
for a small company headed by an Egyptian relative of Boutros-Ghali’s. A
brother-in-law of Boutros-Ghali “was a likely intermediary” between the
two men, the report said.

Shortly after he was appointed to run the oil-for-food program in
October 1997, Sevan championed an Iraqi initiative to allow Iraq to use
its oil profits to buy $300 million worth of spare parts to repair its
oil infrastructure. Two days after the U.N. Security Council adopted the
proposal in June 1998, Sevan traveled to Baghdad and asked Iraq’s oil
minister, Amir Rashid, to grant an associate rights to buy discounted
oil, the report said.

The Iraqi government granted the oil company headed by the Boutros-Ghali
relative rights to buy 1.8 million barrels of oil, which were sold for a
profit of $300,000.

The report continued with the following account:

Sevan subsequently made a similar request, but the Iraqis cut the oil
allocation to 1 million barrels to express disappointment with his
failure to counter U.S. efforts to block the export of some spare parts.

Sevan returned to Iraq in the summer of 1999 with a fresh proposal to
expand the spare-parts arrangement. Within five days of his departure,
Iraq approved the rights to buy 2 million barrels of oil, which the oil
company sold for $500,000 in profits.

Volcker’s team has not proved that Sevan received money from the
company’s oil deals. Volcker is examining cash payments Sevan received
between 1999 and 2003 amounting to $160,000. Sevan has filed U.N.
financial disclosure forms saying the money came from his aunt, who died
last year after falling into an elevator shaft.

“Her lifestyle did not suggest this to be so,” the report said. “She was
a retired Cyprus government photographer living on a modest pension.”

“Mr. Sevan placed himself in a grave and continuing conflict of interest
situation,” the report concluded. “The Iraqi government, in providing
such allocations, certainly thought they were buying influence.”

;cid=1802&e=15&u=/washpost/20050204/ts_washpost/a60911_2005feb3

OSCE MISSION DOES NOT KNOW WHOM IT WILL MEET, AND WHAT ESTIMATION WILL
IT GIVE TO SITUATION IN “THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES”

YEREVAN, JANUARY 29. ARMINFO. To establish facts of creation of
Armenian settlement in the occupied Azerbaijani territories round
Nagorny Karabakh, the OSCE Mission intends to ascertain whether there
are people in the mentioned territories, where are they from, when and
in what connection, on their initiative or not. Russian Cochairman of
th OSCE Minsk Group Yuri Merzlyakov informed journalists in Yerevan on
behalf of the cochairmen of the OSCE MG.

According to him, the routes of the visit have been worked out, and
Sunday morning members of the delegation will leave for Stepanakert,
and from there within a week they will visit all the districts every
day. Commenting on the aforementioned terminology, in particular,
answering the question on the status of the territories was formulated
as “occupied” Merzlyakov mentioned it’s a translation from English. At
the same time he mentioned he does not know other Russian word.

Answering the question on how will be the estimation of the mission in
the case if Armenians, former citizens of Azerbaijan, were found, who
left their residences forcedly, Merzlyakov mentioned he is not a
supporter to forecast, “whom we shall meet there, and what the
estimation will be”. In this connection he also reminded that the
cochairmen are not a member of the group and the issue concerns the
members of the mission, and the cochairmen lead them. As regards the
visit to the districts of Aghdam and Fizuli, occupied by Karabakh
forces, Merzlyakov said that the mission has planned to visit these
districts, and the information on that the Azerbaijani side does not
insist on their visit, was not true. “Later Azerbaijani party made a
statement, I think, it was Deputy Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan
Mr. Araz Azimov, saying that “we had no materials concerning these two
districts, now we possess them and we shall hand over it to the leader
of the group”. There were such plans, that’s why we did not change our
plans – 7 districts, Merzlyakov said.

Answering the question on whether the mission’s members plan to visit
also the North Karabakh, Merzlyakov noted that, in his opinion, it is
an absolutely separate question. He also informed that during the
meetings in Baku the members of OSCE delegation were given documents
and photos. Merzlyakov reminded that this co-chairs’ visit to the
region is not usual and regular. The OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs are in
the region not to discuss the issues on settlement of Nagorny Karabakh
conflict. He refused to comment on the PACE resolution adopted
recently. Merzlyakov introduced journalists with new French
co-chairman of OSCE MG Bernar Fassier and the Head of OSCE mission
Emily Haber, the Director of OSCE Department of Foreign Ministry of
Federal Republic of Germany.

OSCE fact-finding mission visits Azeri Foreign Ministry

ANS Radio, Baku
28 Jan 05

The OSCE’s fact-finding mission, which is to investigate claims that
Armenia is illegally settling the occupied Azerbaijani territories,
and the OSCE Minsk Group cochairmen started their meetings at the
Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry half an hour ago. The Baku government
will submit to the mission its information about the settlement of
Armenians in Azerbaijan’s occupied lands at the meeting. The briefing
to be held today with the cochairmen and the mission’s members will
clarify whether the mission is going to conduct monitoring in Agdam
and Fuzuli Districts.

The OSCE’s fact-finding mission will leave Baku for Yerevan and
Yerevan for the occupied territories tomorrow.

[Passage omitted: minor details]

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Jan 28 2005

Council of Europe cannot recognize independence of Upper Garabagh’

The principle of self-determination of nations is not applicable to
Upper Garabagh, the PACE rapporteur on the Garabagh conflict David
Atkinson said in an interview with BBC. He said that upon
Azerbaijan’s admission to the CE the latter recognized the country’s
territorial integrity. If Azerbaijan agrees to meet the demand of
Armenians in Garabagh by granting independence to the region, the
Council of Europe may approve this step. However, it is clear that
Azerbaijan will never accept Upper Garabagh’s independence.
`Just like other international organizations, the CE cannot recognize
the independence of Upper Garabagh’, Atkinson added.*

PRESS RELEASE

UN Department of Public Information, Yerevan Office
2 Petros Adamyan str., First Floor
Yerevan 375010, Armenia
Contact: Armine Halajyan, UN DPI Information Assistant
Tel.: (374 1) 560 212
Fax/Tel.: (374 1) 561 406

PRESS CONFERENCE BY PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF GEORGIA

The Security Council should not become an exclusive club of privileged
nations — its decisions should be transparent and clear to the
international community, Georgia’s Permanent Representative to the United
Nations, Revaz Adamia, told correspondents at a Headquarters press
conference this afternoon.

Mr. Adamia called the press conference following yesterday’s closed
consultations of the Council on the situation in Abkhazia, Georgia. On
Friday, 28 January, the Council was expected to act on a resolution to
extend for another six months the mandate of the United Nations Observer
Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG).

As a country on whose territory the conflict took place, Georgia had
requested the Council to call a private meeting and to invite the country’s
delegation, and to allow it an opportunity to make a statement, Mr. Adamia
said. The rationale had been that Council members should be interested in
the position of the Government of Georgia, especially in light of recent
changes in the country. The Council, however, had preferred to conduct
closed consultations, without the presence of the general public, the media,
and representatives of Georgia. A possible reason for such a lack of
transparency was a lack of progress in the conflict-resolution process. He
would argue, however, that there had been no progress in resolving the
conflict because there was no transparency in the process.

Behind such a practice was the position of the Russian Federation, he said.
It was not the first time that that country had blocked Georgia’s
representative from speaking at a Council meeting. The truth was that,
despite officially proclaiming support for the territorial integrity of
Georgia, Russia still backed the secessionist regime there. By providing
Russian citizenship, interfering unceremoniously, dictating conditions and
sending its envoys without consulting the Georgian authorities, Russia had
stepped on the path of indirect annexation of Abkhazia.

Russia, he continued, was also illegally acquiring property and land in
Abkhazia through its physical and legal entities; Russian military schools
were still preparing military personnel for the separatist regime; and its
military base was still illegally operating in Gudauta in Abkhazia, Georgia.
The peacekeeping force of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was
covering Abkhaz paramilitaries when they threatened, abducted or even killed
the Georgian population.

In such a situation, one could not expect Abkhaz leaders to take a
constructive position in the peace negotiations, he said, adding “We already
witness statements from their side claiming full independence, associated
membership in the Russian Federation and, most recently, inadmissibility of
the return of refugees and IDPs (internally displaced persons)”.

The President of Georgia had stated on numerous occasions that his country
was for a peaceful solution to the conflict, he continued. Just today, in
Strasbourg, President Saakashvili had come up with a new initiative with
respect to the peaceful resolution of the conflict in South Ossetia. Any
peaceful resolution, however, would be the result of a two-way movement, if
not of a multiplayer process. That required clear, courageous and
transparent decisions from everybody involved.

Elaborating on President Saakashvili’s initiative, Mr. Adamia said that it
was connected to the regulation of the process in South Ossetia. One of its
main points related to the rights to be granted to South Ossetia, which
would far exceed those of the North Ossetian Republic within the Russian
Federation. The initiative covered not only the elections within South
Ossetia, but also the relationship between local authorities and the central
Government in Tbilisi. All the rights of the people of South Ossetia would
be guaranteed, as well as their representation in central bodies.

Such initiatives did not cover the conflict in Abkhazia, he added, exactly
for the reasons he had been speaking about. The position of the new
leadership of Abkhazia needed to be clearer, first of all regarding refugees
and internally displaced persons. Without that, it would be very difficult
for the authorities of Georgia to speak about any kind of peaceful
resolution.

ARMENIAN PREMIER IN POLAND TO MARK AUSCHWITZ LIBERATION ANNIVERSARY

Arminfo
26 Jan 05

YEREVAN

An Armenian government delegation led by Prime Minister Andranik
Markaryan today arrived in Poland (Krakow) on a three-day official
visit, the Armenian government’s press service has told Arminfo.

According to the source, on 27 January the Armenian delegation will
take part in a ceremony to mark the 60th anniversary of the liberation
of the Auschwitz concentration camp prisoners.

(Passage omitted: Other details of the visit)

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Jan 26 2005

PACE passes resolution condemning Armenian aggression

The draft resolution on Upper Garabagh, based on the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe rapporteur David Atkinson’s report,
was unanimously passed at the PACE winter session after heated debate
on Tuesday.
Atkinson stated during the discussions that if a nationwide poll was
held in Upper Garabagh today, most of the population would
undoubtedly vote for independence. However, in this case Azerbaijani
residents in Upper Garabagh would not be able to cast their votes, as
they do not currently live in their native land and were subject to
ethnic cleansing as a result of Armenia’s aggression.
Atkinson indicated three ways for settling the conflict. One of them
is military action by Azerbaijan, which implies that the country will
no longer be a member of the Council of Europe. Another alternative
is granting full independence to Upper Garabagh, which will
jeopardize security in the region. The third option is a peace
settlement, which is the only way to ensure co-existence of the two
peoples.
A representative of Armenia Armen Rustamian stated that adopting the
resolution would complicate the conflict resolution. He said that the
fact the `occupation’ and `separatism’ concepts were used in the
document will allow Azerbaijan to put forth an ultimatum to Armenia.
Following heated discussions accompanied by mutual accusations, PACE
considered the proposed changes to the draft resolution. The entity
rejected the Armenian MPs’ proposal on amending the section that says
`considerable parts of the territory of Azerbaijan are still occupied
by Armenian forces’, by the overwhelming majority of votes.
Only two amendments were introduced to the resolution. One of these
changes stipulated that Azerbaijan is to hold talks with both the
Azerbaijani and Armenian communities of Upper Garabagh without
preconditions, while the other one envisioned making technical
changes to the document.
The resolution was further placed on voting and passed by 123 votes,
with only 7 voting against it.
Head of the Azerbaijani delegation at PACE Samad Seyidov says the
resolution passed is of great importance for Azerbaijan.
`This shows that European countries have confirmed that Armenia is an
aggressor and that Upper Garabagh is controlled by separatist
forces.’
The resolution also says that both sides should refrain from military
action and consider using the UN International Court of Justice if a
conflict resolution fails.
So far most international organizations have exercised a double
standard approach to the Garabagh conflict. The Council of Europe is
therefore the only entity that passed a document reflecting a fair
and impartial position on the issue.
Analysts regard the fact that the resolution was adopted in this
composition as a victory of Azerbaijan’s diplomacy.*