Author: Zaminian Bedik

Tajik, Russian top brass mull upcoming collective security drills

ITAR-TASS news agency, Moscow
8 Feb 05

Dushanbe, 8 February: Tajik Defence Minister Sherali Khayrulloyev
and Commander of Volga-Urals Military District Vladimir Boldyrev
discussed today preparations for command and staff exercises within
the framework of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO)
[members are Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan
and Russia].

The Rubezh-2005 exercises of the CSTO’s rapid-deployment forces will
be held on Tajik territory in April 2005. Divisions of armed forces
of Russia, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan will participate in
the exercises, a source at the Tajik Defence Ministry’s press service
has told an ITAR-TASS correspondent.

The main aim of the upcoming exercises is “to drill interaction
and to enhance the readiness of the CSTO member states to counter
international terrorism and other threats,” the source stressed.

The two also discussed issues relating to the fitting out of the
Russian military base in Tajikistan, which is being set up on the
basis of the [Russian] 201st Motor-Rifle Division.

ARMENIA’S POLISHED PRODUCTION AND SALES DOWN 20%

TACY Ltd. Israel
Feb 8 2005

February 08, 2005

Armenia polished diamond production fell by 20 percent US$245,751
million in 2004, says Gagik Mkrtchian, the Trade and Economic
Development Ministry’s official in charge of gemstones and jewelry.
Mkrtchian says sales fell 19.8 percent, and that the dollar’s
devaluation against the local dram was to blame for the drop in both
output and sales.

Last year, Armenia imported 875,748 carats of rough gem quality
diamonds worth US$189,052 million. This year, Mkrtchian expects
polished diamond output and sales to increase by about a third.

PINR – The Power and Interest News Report
Feb 7 2005

“Moscow’s Political Tactics Alienating its Near Abroad”

Russia has seen its influence in the Caucasus — and the rest of the
former Soviet Union — wane significantly since the November 2003
Rose Revolution in Georgia. Although economics play a part in the
drive to become closer to the United States and the European Union,
Moscow largely blames post-revolution Georgia for the Orange
Revolution in the Ukraine and its perceived loss of influence there.
While Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili and Ukrainian President
Viktor Yushchenko were in Strasburg for a Council of Europe
Parliamentary Assembly (P.A.C.E.) meeting, Russian President Vladimir
Putin made no secret of meeting separatist leaders in Moscow,
including the newly elected president of Abkhazia Sergei Bagapsh and
the defeated Ukrainian presidential candidate Victor Yanukovych.
Russian policies have become increasingly anti-Georgian since
Saakashvili came to power, which regional experts feel is Moscow’s
response to Saakashvili’s decidedly Western bent. But its decision to
punish Georgia and other opposition leaders in the former republics
may be working against long-term Russian interests.

Abkhazia

The first major blow to Russia’s influence in its own background was
not the election in the Ukraine but the October elections in Abkhazia
[See: “Russia’s Slippery Foothold in Abkhazia Becomes a Slide”].
Abkhazia is officially a part of Georgia, but gained de facto
independence from Tbilisi after Georgia lost control of the republic
following a war in the mid 1990s, a fact that is largely credited to
Russian interference. The ruling regime in Abkhazia is supported by
Russia. Russian peacekeepers monitor its borders with Georgia, the
Russian ruble is the local currency and any economic development is
limited to Russian investors. Moscow also pays Abkhaz pensions and
has widely issued Russian passports throughout the Abkhaz population.

Candidate Raul Khajimba actively campaigned on a pro-Russian
platform, promising an increase in investments from Russia and
stronger relations with Moscow. Sergei Bagapsh, known in the Russian
media as the opposition candidate, also pledged to foster greater
ties with Russia. Neither candidate spoke favorably of Georgia or the
possibility of improving Abkhaz-Georgian relations. Tbilisi distanced
itself from the whole election; only Russia recognizes Abkhazian
independence and, therefore, the election. The Russian media was the
only source of international coverage. Despite support from the
Kremlin and other Russian politicians, Khajimba officially lost the
election on October 3, an event that nearly resulted in civil war
when he refused to accept the Central Election Committees final count
in favor of Bagapsh. Events came to a head in December, when Bagapsh
refused to give up plans for his inauguration.

In response to the unexpected turmoil in a republic fully dependent
on Russian support, Russia closed its borders and cut off trade with
Abkhazia, in effect squashing the main source of income for most
Abkhaz, the citrus trade. While that show of strength helped
convenience Bagapsh to bow to Russian pressures, it also underscored
what analysts say caused his victory in the first place. The only
real difference between the two candidates was Bagapsh’s calls for a
truly independent Abkhazia, recognized by the international
community. In its current state, both Tbilisi and Sukhumi refuse to
have relations and Georgia refuses to allow any trade to Abkhazia to
cross its borders, even to the extent that Saakashvili ordered
Turkish boats heading to Abkhazia bombed over the summer. That limits
Sukhumi to relations with Moscow. While it is unlikely that any
country in the international community will recognize Abkhazian
independence, Bagapsh’s strong stance in that direction was perceived
as a threat to the current status quo.

Thanks to the immediate embargo on Abkhazian goods, Moscow was able
to convenience Bagapsh to accept a compromise between the two former
rivals. Days before the planned inauguration, Bagapsh agreed to a
revote and ran with Khajimba as his vice presidential candidate.
Under the current agreement, Khajimba wields an unusually large
amount of power, including a reported 40 percent of the state budget.
Since his election on January 12, Bagapsh has stepped up rhetoric
against Georgia and made open overtures to strengthen Abkhaz-Russian
ties. Moscow was able to reel the wayside republic back in, but it
took a last ditch show of strength to do it.

The Orange Revolution

Despite a much stronger Russian effort during the Ukrainian election
in November, the Russian-backed candidate Viktor Yanukovych could not
defeat opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko. Analysts have debated on
what Yushchenko’s victory will really mean for Ukrainian-Russian
relations, but regardless of Yushchenko’s western looking policies,
Ukraine remains a major Russian trading partner. Historically,
religiously and ethnically Russia and Ukraine have close ties. The
new president’s first international trip was to Moscow, albeit
quickly followed by the address at Strasburg.

The real question remains what this growing trend of peaceful
uprisings will mean for the remaining Russian-supported presidents in
other former republics. However insulting Yushchenko’s victory is for
Moscow, in the long run it will only truly adversely affect
Russian-Ukrainian affairs if Putin decides to punish Yushchenko like
he is currently castigating Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili.
The Ukrainian vote for Yushchenko was more a vote against rampant
corruption and the questionable election than a vote against Russia.
Yushchenko has gone out of his way to pacify Russians in the eastern
part of the country, even defending the role of the Russian language
in Ukraine. His drive toward the West is less a statement of
anti-Russian sentiment than as an accepted desire to improve
conditions in his country. But that can change if Russia is not
willing to actively work with Yushchenko.

Yushchenko has roughly a year to prove to his divided country that
Ukraine will benefit from better relations with Western states. If
Russia tries to openly sabotage his effects — like it is in Abkhazia
and Georgia — Putin risks a much more serious backlash during the
upcoming parliamentary elections. By supporting Yushchenko, Russia
can help strengthen Ukraine which will result in a deeper alliance
between the two countries and increase stability in the region. Any
effort by Moscow to further antagonize the country, especially the
western half, could have the opposite effect.

New ethnic discord will only weaken Russia’s chance to increase its
influence in the region as both current leaders and opposition forces
throughout the former Soviet Union are watching Ukrainian
developments closely. If it becomes apparent that Moscow will not
tolerate any action perceived to weaken its influence in the region,
economic and military aid from the West will seem more desirable.
While existing leaders might welcome Russia’s brand of friendship,
the opposition will work more strongly to free their respective
countries from Moscow’s influence if it becomes evident Russia sees
them not as sovereign states but as internal problems.

Russia’s Special Relationship with Georgia

Moscow’s continued interference with ethnic problems within Georgia
has not strengthened its role in the Caucasus. Even before the Rose
Revolution, Russia’s efforts to destabilize the region and bring it
into submission with military force backfired. In 2002, Moscow
accused Tbilisi of harboring terrorists in the lawless Pankisi Gorge
that borders Chechnya. Instead of resulting in an increase of Russian
military personnel to Georgia, the accusations led to stronger ties
between Georgia and the United States and the U.S.-led Train and
Equip Program for the Georgian army. Since Saakashvili came to power,
Georgia has made every effort to strengthen ties with the United
States and Europe.

Russia’s continued support for separatist leaders in Abkhazia and
South Ossetia is meant to deter stability — and therefore foreign
investment — in Georgia. However, in reality Russia’s obvious
interference has helped the Georgian leadership turn to the West for
support and resolution. During his speech in Strasburg, Saakashvili
clearly stated that Russia is not capable of leading Georgia to a
peaceful resolution in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The Venetian
Commission’s decision to actively participate in the development of a
peace settlement even further decreases Russia’s influence in its own
near abroad.

Moscow’s newest tactic — vetoing the continuation of the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (O.S.C.E.) border
patrol on the Chechen, Ingushetia, and Dagestani borders — has been
more successful. Under its current policy, Russia will guarantee no
international observers will be monitoring the borders by late
spring. When the snow melts, Chechen rebels will have easy passage
into Georgia and — according to Russia — Moscow will have ample
cause to bomb the Pankisi Gorge, or force Georgia into accepting more
Russian peacekeepers inside the Georgian border. Those troops would
be in addition to the soldiers already in place along the borders of
Abkhazia and South Ossetia, as well as the two Russian army bases in
Batumi and Akhalkalaki.

But this could also backfire. Saakashvili and his administration have
actively been searching for willing replacements to the O.S.C.E.
monitoring group and the E.U. has tentatively expressed interest.
While the E.U.’s monitors are far from certain at this point, any
move to place independent international monitors would work against
Russia. Under the O.S.C.E., Russia had a say and a role in the
monitoring. If it becomes the duty of the E.U. — or a mixture of
observers from various countries — Moscow’s say would be diminished
and its claims that the Georgian government is not strong enough to
protect its own borders would be disproved.

Tbilisi and its allies are also becoming more adamant about the
remaining two Russian army bases in Georgia. In January, Saakashvili
attacked the role of Russian peacekeepers inside Georgian territory.
Georgia has proposed creating joint anti-terrorist centers with
Russia on the current army bases. So far Russia has shown no real
interest, but if it continues alienating itself from the
international community with coercive tactics, Georgia will gain more
support from the international community and could garner the
necessary support to force Russian troops out of the country all
together.

Problems in Armenia

Another potential defeat for Russian influence is waiting in Armenia.
In the past, Armenia has been a bastion of Russian support in the
Caucasus. Russia has long supported the country militarily and
economically — for example, Armenia receives all of its gas from
Russia. While only an estimated 20 percent of Armenia’s exports are
purchased in Russia, a reported two million Armenians live there and
their families at home depend on the financial support they send.

Russia supported Armenia during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict with
Azerbaijan and still stands firmly behind Yerevan during peace talks
about the contested territories. During the civil unrest in Georgia
leading up to the Rose Revolution in 2003, both Russia and Armenia
made public statements about their mutually strong and beneficial
relationship. Russia strengthened its already strong military
presence in Armenia, increased arms sales and even moved some
soldiers from bases in Georgia to Armenia during the protests in
Tbilisi.

Nevertheless, Armenia’s support for Russian influence is not as
strong as it was a year ago. While the opposition was emboldened due
to the success of the Rose Revolution, another important negative
development for Russia came in September 2004, following the
terrorist attacks at Beslan. When Russia closed its borders with
Georgia following the attack, hundreds of Armenian trucks and buses
were stranded for a month, unable to go to either Russia or back to
Armenia. While there are no concrete figures for how much Armenian
businesses lost during that month, Armenians felt slighted by their
ally and insulted at Russia’s reaction to punish them along with the
rest of the Caucasus. That added to dissatisfaction with Russia’s
continued support of President Robert Kocharian, whose victory in
2003 is widely disputed by opposition parties and the public.

Russian diplomats were slow to react to the situation, and statements
from Moscow largely consisted in recommending different routes into
Russia. The United States, however, was not slow to act. Since the
Rose Revolution, Washington has been paying more attention to
Armenia. Sensing a weakness in Russian-Armenian relations over the
past year, America has picked up the pace. A new consulate is planned
for Yerevan which reportedly will be the biggest in the region. In
addition, American-driven aid projects have been on the rise.

A third party could further weaken Russian influence in Armenia.
Yerevan and Iran have held intense talks about a proposed gas
pipeline. While there are no investors yet, the pipeline has the
potential to free Armenia from its current state of dependence on
Russian gas.

Conclusion

Due to shortsighted policies, Russia has already lost considerable
influence in Georgia. Moscow’s erroneous politics in Abkhazia and
Ukraine resulted in embarrassment and more strained relationships
within Russia’s sphere of influence. If Putin does not reverse this
trend, Russia could lose support during the next Armenian elections
and further encourage the currently weak opposition parties in
Central Asia. Although opposition presidents are well aware of the
importance of good relations with Putin, political games force them
to increasingly turn to Europe and the United States for aid and
support in an effort to balance more evenly between Russia and the
West. If Moscow does not start realizing that coercive tactics in its
near abroad are causing a loss of support from these states, it will
continue to see its interests in the region weaken.

Report Drafted By:
Molly Corso

The Power and Interest News Report (PINR) is an independent
organization that utilizes open source intelligence to provide
conflict analysis services in the context of international relations.
PINR approaches a subject based upon the powers and interests
involved, leaving the moral judgments to the reader. This report may
not be reproduced, reprinted or broadcast without the written
permission of [email protected]. All comments should be directed to
[email protected].

Azeri expert downplays Russia’s efforts to keep CIS alive

Yeni Musavat, Baku
4 Feb 05

Text of Kanan report by Azerbaijani newspaper Yeni Musavat on 4
February headlined “Putin will not manage to resurrect the CIS” and
“Rasim Musabayov: ‘Azerbaijan’s membership of the Collective Security
Treaty Organization is impossible'”

Putin’s Russia is doing its best to keep the CIS, the only alliance of
post-Soviet countries, alive. The only entity led by that country is
the CIS. But experts predict that the CIS, which is getting weaker
year by year, will no longer be used in the political language soon.

It cannot but worry our northern neighbour. Putin’s Russia is
increasingly concerned, especially after the democratic changes in
Ukraine and Georgia. The Putin administration is using every available
resource to preserve his country’s influence on the neighbouring
states. Our northern neighbour’s activity in the CIS has been
especially intensive after it suffered a setback in Ukraine.

Some observers are saying that Moscow is trying to use Azerbaijan to
compensate for its failure in Ukraine. First, Putin is trying to
incorporate the weak Azerbaijani authorities into his
military-political bloc. The recent visits to Azerbaijan by Russian
officials are said to be related to this fact. Incidentally, Russian
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov paid an official visit to Baku several
days ago, and [Azerbaijani President] Ilham Aliyev is expected to
visit Russia soon. At the same time, there are reports that Putin will
visit Azerbaijan, too. Reports also say that discussions during
Lavrov’s visit were held on the CIS and the prospects of Azerbaijan’s
entry into the Collective Security Treaty Organization [CSTO].

Commenting on these developments, political analyst Rasim Musabayov
noted that Russia is doing its utmost to preserve the exhausted
CIS. Our interviewee is confident that these efforts will be futile.

“The CIS is an entity that Russia is using to save face in the
post-Soviet countries, and therefore, it is trying to preserve it in
any form in order to use it to control the neighbouring countries. But
its efforts have been fruitless for the past five years.”

The analyst said that Azerbaijan’s entry into the CSTO is made
difficult by Armenia, which is waging a war against Azerbaijan. “On
the other side, Azerbaijan has not benefited so far from its
membership of the entity [CIS]. Third, “Azerbaijan’s historic ally,
Turkey, is not a member of the CSTO, and therefore, our membership of
this organization is impossible”.

However, the expert does not believe that any of the member states
will quit the CIS states at the moment, because formal membership of
this “toothless” entity does not hamper the policy of any
state. That’s why, member states do not think it necessary to take
this step.

“The present activity of the CIS is not a burden for member states.
Turkmenistan almost never takes part in CIS meetings. In other words,
it does not matter to any of the republics whether they are members of
this organization or not. At present, the Commonwealth has turned into
an entity whose members meet once a year and talk about this and
that.”

Musabayov believes that the CIS will continue its work for a certain
period of time, but will never become a serious and sustainable
organization. “Because neither Ukraine and Georgia, nor Moldova and
Azerbaijan want the CIS to become a strong organization. Therefore,
Russia cannot strengthen this entity. But it is possible to think up
certain formats in which the CIS can be kept alive. For example,
Great Britain unites several states in the Commonwealth of
Nations. France and Spain also keep similar entities. They meet once a
year and discuss certain issues. It cannot be ruled out that the CIS
may be preserved in that form. But as I said, Georgia, Ukraine,
Azerbaijan and Moldova will be against this. These countries see their
future in integration into Europe and NATO. I do not believe that
Russia will be able to change this reality.”

UK Newsquest Regional Press – This is Local London
February 4, 2005

Furore as advice centre staff axed

by Estelle Marais

MORE than 6 000 of Hounslow’s Armenian residents risk losing their
information and advice outlet after their community centre
temporarily closed last week and dismissed all full-time staff due to
funding and budget issues.

The Centre for Armenian Information and Advice (CAIA)in Acton closed
its doors to the community on Friday January 21 for one week after a
board of directors elected in October 2004 cited that the charity had
“inherited an unsustainable budget as a direct result of excessive
expenditure incurred by the previous board” and that there were
insufficient funds to enable CAIA to operate in its current position.

Directors dismissed the centre’s five full-time members of staff
including the qualified youth worker the information and advice
officer and the charity’s elderly lunch manager leaving over 6000 of
the borough’s Armenian community including elderly members – many of
whom do not speak English – without access to information regarding
health benefits housing and education.

The centre is currently running on a skeleton staff consisting of the
present board of directors and volunteers in an attempt to continue
some of its services.

But former CAIA employees insist that the charity was handed over to
the new board of directors in a healthy state not lacking in funding
in any way and argue that the staff dismissals are the result of an
initiative by the board to re-instate two employees who were
dismissed in March last year for gross misconduct.

Former chair and Osterley resident Manook Soghomonian said: “Five
professional staff have been dismissed with some bogus excuses that
do not tally up and as a result services and the functionality of the
centre has stopped. There was more than enough funding for the posts
and the centre was in a very healthy state. When we handed CAIA over
to the new board new grants were due to come in.

“All of the projects are running effectively and our current funders
were satisfied with the work we were doing on behalf of our members
and the community. The only reason for dismissing the staff is so
that the board can re-instate two employees who were dismissed for
gross misconduct last year but who claim they are innocent of any
wrong doing.”

Chiswick resident and former general secretary Andre Beglarian agreed
saying: “As far as I was aware there was sufficient funding to keep
the centre running as it had been all along. It was my job to monitor
the funding and it was my understanding that all five full-time
positions were fully catered for by our various funders. I have used
the centre for the last five years and it used to be a fantastic
opportunity for Armenians to mix in their own community as well as
for our children to be educated in an Armenian Ofsted-accredited
pre-school environment. The situation at the centre now is corrupt.
It is being abused by a few and as a result the masses cannot
benefit. The centre was closed when it didn’t need to be and the
community lost out and are still losing out.”

However chair of CAIA Vahe Paklayan refuted these claims saying:
“Dismissing the staff was an agonising decision and because the
charity was left to us in such a mess we are not able to build it up
brick by brick we are rebuilding it match stick by match stick. We
are not looking to blame staff our concern is just to save the
charity. All funding has been frozen and the centre is currently
being manned by our board of directors and some volunteers. Areas
which require qualified people are being manned by the proper
people.”

Replying to claims that the staff dismissals were aimed at
re-instating the two members of staff previously dismissed for gross
misconduct Mr Paklayan said: “There is no truth to that at all.”

The funders for the five full-time positions at CAIA include the
London Boroughs of Hounslow and Ealing Associated London Government
(ALG) the Big Lottery Fund City Parochial Foundation Bridge House and
Renewal SRB and with the exception of City Parochial Foundation
spokespeople for each funding company confirmed that funds were and
had been available to cater for the positions.

A spokesperson for the London Borough of Ealing said: “At the moment
we are unsure of the situation with CAIA and we have been trying to
contact the centre without any success. The council has heard along
the grapevine that staff have been dismissed and as our funds
contribute mainly to the advice work at the centre there is a
possibility that the grant may be suspended when it comes up for
discussion at the end of this month.”

Bridge House which funds the position of elderly health worker said
that funding for the post was available but had not yet been released
and City Parochial Foundation which funds the position of general
secretary said that the grant awarded in 2003 had been suspended in
the last few weeks and is currently under investigation.

CAIA is the only outlet for an estimated 20 000 Armenians living in
the UK 16 000 of whom live in London.

Its services are widely used throughout the borough of Hounslow but
in the last few years the centre has been hit with a series of
management problems.

In 2003 two employees were suspended for mismanagement and
subsequently applied to the employment tribunal for charges of unfair
dismissal and in January 2004 the Charity Commission began an
investigation into the allegations of misconduct at CAIA appointing
four new directors to the centre including Mr Soghomonian as chair to
oversee the decision of the tribunal.

Mr Soghomonian accused the Charity Commission of turning a blind eye
to the current situation saying: “CAIA won the case of gross
misconduct against the two employees at the employment tribunal and
we presented fortnightly reports to the Charity Commission on the
developments at the centre until the new board of directors took
charge in October last year. Ever since the centre has been in
turmoil. It would be wrong for CAIA to reinstate these two people
which is what I believe they want to do and the Charity Commission
seems to be oblivious to this.”

A spokesperson for the Charity Commission said: “The Commission’s
Inquiry into the charity closed in October 2004. The Inquiry was
closed upon an Annual General Meeting and elections taking place in
accordance with the charity’s governing document and with company
law. The elections provided the charity’s members with an opportunity
to elect a new Board of Directors to the charity. Since the elections
the new Board has had control of the administration of the charity.
The Commission’s report of the results of its Inquiry will be
published shortly.

The Commission has considered and will consider concerns arising
since the closure of the Inquiry in connection with this charity.”

BBC Sport, UK
Jan 30 2004

Ugly side of the beautiful game
By Tim Vickery

Not all South American fans enjoy the traditional carnival atmosphere

South American football has a serious problem with supporters
throwing objects onto the field – as highlighted last week with
incidents in two different countries.

In Colombia the home crowd staged a near-riot as their team took on
Chile in the South American Under-20 Championships.

Two goals down after six minutes, the hosts launched a comeback that
was a little too exciting for some of their supporters in the stadium
in Armenia.

If throwing bottles at the opposing bench was an Olympic event then
Colombia could be sure of increasing its medal tally.

One of Chile’s substitutes was laid out by a direct hit.

After the final whistle blew on Colombia’s 4-3 win, the Chileans had
to wait in the middle of the pitch, out of the range of the bottle
throwers, for some 15 minutes before the crowd dispersed and they
were able to make their way safely down the tunnel.

Predictably the referee was also a target, especially at half-time
when Colombia were still behind.

In many parts of South America the referee has to be escorted to the
tunnel by a group of policemen.

In Colombia the police come equiped with riot shields, which they
hold up to protect the referee like a shell protects a tortoise.

The same strategy is sometimes used to protect a player from the away
side who is taking a corner.

The wisdom of this is debatable.

It acts as an invitation for the bottle thrower to chance his arm.

But it is easier and cheaper than trying to stamp out the problem at
source.

The fans in Armenia were let off with a warning. Security measures
have been stepped up and they will be tested to the full on Wednesday
when the city stages the crunch game between Colombia and Argentina.

Meanwhile, further south in Argentina the fans’ dubious speciality is
throwing home-made “bombs” onto the pitch.

They make plenty of noise, let off smoke and could prove very
dangerous if they land on a player.

That is certainly what the River Plate team feared last Thursday.
They were up against Racing in a pre-season tournament in the
provincial city of Salta.

One bomb landed and the game carried on. But a second, just before
half time, brought an early end to proceedings.

The River Plate players refused to resume and the game was abandoned.

Some thought their stance was too rigid. But while it was a shame
that the crowd were denied the second half, the players’ protest had
one important consequence; Friday morning’s back pages were not about
which team had won and who had scored.

Instead all the attention was focused on the problem, and that,
surely, is a vital step on the way to a solution.

The most important step, of course, is making sure that those who
throw objects are caught and punished.

In this case there is good news to report.

The stadium in Salta is equiped with closed circuit television, and
the group who threw the bomb were identified and arrested.

More progress is needed, and the English Football Association could
play a key role in providing it after running courses for the South
American Federation.

Dealing effectively with problems of hooliganism is one area in which
English football is rich in experience. South America needs to take
advantage of this knowledge.

ARMENIANOW.COM
Administration Address: 26 Parpetsi St., No 9
Phone: +(374 1) 532422
Email: [email protected]
Internet:
Technical Assistance: (For technical assistance please contact to
Babken Juharyan)
Email: [email protected]
ICQ#: 97152052

—————

Reading Between the Lines in Strasbourg: PACE issues report on Nagorno
Karabakh

By Aris Ghazinyan
ArmenianNow Reporter

British parliamentarian David Atkinson’s report on the Nagorno
Karabakh issue was heard in Strasbourg Tuesday (January 25) within the
framework of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
(PACE) winter session. The report was written still in 2004 by the
then rapporteur on Nagorno Karabakh, now Council of Europe Secretary
General, Terry Davis. Unlike his predecessor, Atkinson had not visited
Nagorno Karabakh and didn’t make any basic changes in the text of
Davis’ document. As a result of the discussions of the report, the
PACE winter session adopted a resolution on Nagorno Karabakh.

In particular, the Assembly states that `significant parts of
Azerbaijan’s territory continue to remain occupied by Armenian forces,
and separatist forces still control the Nagorno-Karabakh region.’ At
the same time, it is pointed out that `the separation of a region from
the state and its sovereignty can be achieved only as a result of a
peaceful and legal process based on the democratic support of the
inhabitants of the given territory, but not by way of an armed
conflict leading to ethnic evictions and de-facto annexation of this
territory by another state.’ The PACE also states that `the
occupation of a foreign territory by a CE-member state is a gross
infringement of the obligations of this state as a member of the
СЕ and confirms the right of persons displaced from the
conflict zone to return to their homes safely and with dignity.’ The
Assembly reminds also about the resolutions on this conflict adopted
by the UN Security Council and calls for their enforcement, including
the abstention from any armed clashes and withdrawal of armed forces
from any occupied territories. If the OSCE Minsk Group-sponsored
negotiations fail to end in a success, the Assembly urges Armenia and
Azerbaijan to consider the possibility of using the International
Court for solving this `international legal dispute’. The resolution
calls on the Azeri authorities `to develop contacts with political
representatives of both communities of Nagorno Karabakh regarding the
future status of the region.’ Characterizing the events in `the
Nagorno-Karabakh region’ as something very reminiscent of `ethnic
cleansings’, the Assembly mentions the continuation of regular control
carried out by it over a peaceful settlement of the conflict and sets
the PACE winter session of next year for discussion of the issue.

During discussion of the report the Armenian delegation initiated
three amendments to the draft resolution, however only one of them was
accepted. In particular the Assembly refused to add in an appeal to
the government of Azerbaijan `to develop contacts with political
representatives of both communities of Nagorno Karabakh regarding the
future status of the region’.

The report refers to the Armenian presence in Nagorno Karabakh as
`separatist forces’, a term that rankled Armenian authorities,
including Deputy Speaker of the Armenian Parliament Tigran Torosyan.
As the REGNUM news agency reports, the definition `separatist forces’
regarding the authorities of Nagorno Karabakh also remained unchanged
in the report. The efforts of the Armenian delegation led to the
acceptance of only one change consisting in the necessity of using the
influence of Armenia in the matter of achieving a peaceful settlement
of the conflict. The Armenian `Yerkir-Media’ TV Channel quoted the
head of the Armenian delegation to the PACE Torosyan who said that the
definition `separatist forces’ not only fails to reflect the essence
of the conflict, but also is offensive to the Armenians of Nagorno
Karabakh, who made more than 90% of the area’s population during
Soviet times. `In 1991, more than 83% of the total population took
part in a referendum,’ said Tigran Torosyan. `The word calling
Karabakh people `separatists’ was used only during the Soviet times.’

Another member of the Armenian delegation to the PACE, member of the
ARF Dashnaktsutyun fraction Armen Rustamyan said that `all those
dangerous points that could be used by Azeris in the future remained
in the report.’ Still on the eve of the adoption of the resolution, a
third member of the Armenian delegation to the PACE Shavarsh Kocharyan
was not optimistic about making any changes in the report.

`Of course, we have prepared several variants, but in conditions of
the atmosphere reigning in the Council of Europe today, it will be
practically impossible to get our proposals accepted,’ said Kocharyan.

The former OSCE Minsk Group cochairman from Russia Vladimir Kazimirov
also described the report as `pro-Azeri’. In his letter addressed to
David Atkinson still on December 3, 2004, the diplomat, in particular,
writes: `Your respectful attitude towards your predecessor, Mr. Terry
Davis, and also the short term of your work over the report are quite
understandable. But the maximal closeness to the true, objective
estimation of the conflict should still be the main guidelines. The
major international documents on Nagorno Karabakh have always been
prepared on a balanced basis so as to help the sides reach
compromises. None of them has been so one-sided, with a bias in favor
of Azerbaijan, as your drafts are.’

Earlier, Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian called the report
`subjective’.

Commenting on the contents of the resolution itself, Torosyan, head of
the Armenian delegation to the PACE put a different spin on the report
and even defined some `very positive’ points for the Armenian side. In
his interview to the Public TV of Armenia he said that Nagorno
Karabakh appears in the resolution as a separate unit, and in point 2
there is a very important provision `on which the Armenian delegation
deliberately hadn’t accentuated attention since September 2004, for
fear the Azeri side would unfold serious struggle in this direction.’

`The matter concerns the fact that `the Assembly confirms that the
separation of a region from the state and its sovereignty can be
achieved only as a result of a peaceful and legal process based on the
democratic support of the inhabitants of the given territory’,’ said
Torosyan. `And this fully applies to the pre-war Nagorno Karabakh.’
Thus, the resolution objectively does not exclude the possibility of
the recognition of the right of Nagorno Karabakh’s people to political
self-determination, but excludes the possibility of resolving the
issue militarily. The latter circumstance, in Torosyan’s opinion, is
the third positive piece of the document adopted in Strasbourg.

———————

Patriot or Provacateur? Arian Order leader jailed for statements against Jews

By Julia Hakobyan
ArmeniaNow Reporter

The Armenian nationalistic party whose leader was arrested early this
week for anti-Jewish propaganda announced that the arrest was nothing
but a trumped-up charge and said their leader is a political prisoner.
Armen Avetisyan, head of Armenian Arian Order (AAO) was arrested on
Monday after numerous protests of a Jewish community in Armenia. In a
series of publications and interviews Avetisyan has blamed Jews for
Armenia’s social and economic hardship. He claims that the republic is
ruled by Masonic forces who are conspiring with similar forces
outside.

Avetisyan has appealed to patriots of Armenia to `cleanse’ the country
of Jews. Now in detention, Avetisyan is charged according to Article
226 of the Armenian Criminal Code that prohibits incitement of ethnic,
racial and religious hatred. He faces from three to six years in
prison, if found guilty. `The Armenian Arian Order officially denies
the accusation,’ said Mar Martirosyan, representing AAO at a press
conference Wednesday. `We are going to appeal the court decision and
have established a committee in defense of Avetisyan.’ The members of
AAO though confirm that Avetisyan was calling Judaic-Masons Armenia’s
enemy saying that he did not mean the Jewish nation but those who are
united in Judaic-Masonic Organization and lead the country to collapse.
(Masons is believed to be an international secret powerful
organization, which interfere in the global political processes) To
prove their claim, AAO referred to copies of interviews with Avetisyan
in which he said he had nothing against Jewish or any other nationality
living in Armenia, so long as they don’t harm the country. The Jewish
community in Armenia registered a Non Governmental Organization in
Armenia in 1991 with around 900 members. The leader of the Jewish
community in Armenia, Rimma Varzhapetyan told ArmeniaNow that despite
the community being indignant over Avetisyan’s statements, they never
applied to prosecutors to arrest him. `Instead we wrote several
letters to the country’s President and Prime-Minister. The fact that
Avetisyan is arrested proves that Armenia is a civil country,’ she
said. `We are glad he is arrested. He might think about what he was
saying.’

——————–

Union Recognition: Armenia looks to Europe to press Turkey on the Genocide

By Aris Ghazinyan
ArmenianNow Reporter

After waiting 41 years for the invitation, Turkey will begin formal
membership negotiations with the European Union in October.

No other state, especially a member of NATO, has had to stand in the
Brussels queue for so long. During this period the European Union,
originally the European Economic Community, has extended across most
of the continent. `The idea that the EU may soon have a direct land
border with countries like Syria, Iraq, Iran, Azerbaijan, Armenia and
Georgia probably does not give comfort to the European community,’
says Armen Poghosyan, a political analyst and lecturer in
social-political geography at the Armenian State University.

`Neither are they inspired by the prospect of introducing a
100-million-strong Muslim population into Europe: this is the
predicted demographic that Turkey may have in 15-20 years.’

Although Turkey’s membership could take 15 years to conclude, and is
by no means guaranteed, Armenian political and public thought is
already focused on two elements of the question: recognition of the
Armenian Genocide by official Ankara and removal of Turkey’s blockade
of its border with Armenia.

`This has an immediate relation to the interests of Armenians as it
gives an opportunity for a more frequent and louder voicing of
Armenian positions. By their importance, the two `Armenian points’
stand practically immediately after the first condition of membership
– the recognition of Cyprus’s integrity by Ankara,’ says Poghosyan.
The European Parliament adopted a resolution on 15 December, two days
before the Brussels summit that confirmed the decision to open
negotiations with Turkey. Among the list of issues raised in the
resolution, which is not binding on the negotiators, were points
relating to the recognition of the Genocide and the lifting of
blockade. Vartan Oskanian and some political analysts consider that in
time the two points could become factors to be reckoned with in the
talks.

The issue of Turkey’s possible membership in the European Union
aroused strong public reaction among Armenians. ARF Dashnaktsutyun
offices organized protest demonstrations, including one in Brussels
last month. The World Armenian Congress said in a statement: `The
World Armenian Congress thinks that Turkey’s refusal to condemn the
crime of the Genocide of Armenians, refusal to apply international
legal norms in solving disputes with Greece, refusal to submit to
numerous UN decisions condemning the intervention of Turkish
occupational forces into Cyprus and the arbitrary division of this
state, and Turkey’s negation of the rights of the Kurdish national
minority, make Turkey’s admission to the European Union impossible
today.’

————

Representatives of the Armenian clergy also spoke on this issue.

Aram I, Catholicos of the Great House of Cilicia, expressed his
bewilderment over the hastiness of a number of European countries in
the matter of Turkey’s membership in the EU. `The European community
is not a community based exclusively on economic interests and
political cooperation. There are values that ensure the identity,
integrity and unity of Europe. Where is Turkey today in terms of these
values and observance of human rights? Turkey still negates its past,
the Armenian Genocide and Europe should raise this question before
this country in all seriousness.’ The Armenian Patriarch of
Constantinople, Archbishop Mesrop Mutafian, expressed a somewhat
different opinion. He said: `The 1915 disaster is a very suitable
subject for speculation. Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that
this subject should be left for historians and I agree with
him. Turkey’s accession to the European Union will promote peace in
our region.’

Jacques Chirac, the President of France, said in Brussels on December
17 that if Ankara fails to recognize the Genocide of Armenians and the
Republic of Cyprus `Paris will boycott negotiations on Turkey’s
joining the EU’. The government of Slovakia, which earlier had
recognized the Genocide of Armenians, also urged Ankara to reconsider
its position on the issue.

Many political organizations in Armenia attach certain hopes for the
country in connection with Turkey’s EU membership. A common border
with the EU, in their opinion, would promote Armenia’s case for
integration into the European space. Only the ARF Dashnaktsutyun among
the influential parties unequivocally opposes Turkish membership.
`The optimistic position of some representatives of the Armenian
political establishment concerning Ankara’s possible accession to the
EU is not justified by modern history,’ Poghosyan says `They
completely ignore the fact that Turkey’s membership in the Council of
Europe does not prevent it from blockading 268 kilometers of the
Council of Europe’s political space along its border with Armenia.

`The same can be said also about the World Trade Organization. Turkey
openly declares that it is impossible for it to respect the WTO’s
principles of open trade in relations with Armenia, even though both
are members. It is absolutely unclear why Turkey should respect EU
values if it becomes a member of the Union.’

Official Yerevan has welcomed the resolution of the European
Parliament adopted on December 15, on the eve of the EU summit,
calling on the leaders of Europe to begin negotiations with
Turkey. This was prompted by the presence of the two Armenian points
as conditions for Ankara in the text of the resolution.

`These two provisions – the Genocide of Armenians and the lifting of
the blockade from the border, are certain to find a place in the
process of further development of the issue,’ Armenian Foreign
Minister Vardan Oskanyan stated on December 15. `I cannot say how they
will be voiced at the summit, but they will be demanded in a long term
in one way or another.’

On December 17, the Armenian points were not voiced, and negotiations
were conducted basically around of the problem of Turkey’s recognition
of Cyprus. Nevertheless, political analysts believe that they will
find reflection in the debates sooner or later, especially as the EU’s
negotiations with Turkey are opening in the year of the 90th
anniversary of the Armenian Genocide.

—————-

Kiev-Yerevan Connections: Armenia-Ukraine relations and Yuschenko’s
`third time’ success

By Suren Musayelyan and Suren Deheryan
ArmeniaNow reporters

Viktor Yuschenko was sworn in as President of Ukraine last Sunday
after winning in the `third round’ of presidential elections. During
the hotly disputed election process in Ukraine that took more than two
months, Armenia expressed its position twice. First official Yerevan,
following Russia, responded very quickly congratulating pro-Russian
Viktor Yanukovich when he was pronounced winner by the Central
Election Commission of Ukraine. Russia and Armenia became the only
members of the Council of Europe to have accepted Yanukovich’s
victory. But the second time around it congratulated Yuschenko, with
some delay, and again only after Russia. According to a number of
Armenian analysts, similar political changes may reflect on Ukraine’s
ties with Armenia. Armenian Center for National and International
Studies political analyst Stepan Safaryan thinks that the hasty
congratulations of Armenian authorities to Yanukovich and then to
Yuschenko will not be reflected in any actions on the diplomatic
level. But he adds:
`Ukraine’s attitude towards our administration will change in a
certain way, especially as it concerns GUAM (Georgia, Ukraine,
Azerbaijan, Moldova). In any case, there will arise a division between
Armenia and Ukraine because of different geopolitical approaches.’

As for the economic component of relations between the two countries,
Safaryan believes they will develop quite successfully in the
foreseeable future. `At present Ukrainian products are not competitive
on the European market and until Ukraine enters the European Union,
Ukrainian goods will be marketed in the territories of CIS countries.’
According to the data of the National Statistical Service of Armenia,
among CIS countries Ukraine is the second largest exporter of goods to
Armenia after Russia and by the volume of trade is Armenia’s third
largest partner after Russia and Georgia.

According to the State Customs Department of Armenia, in 2003 Armenia
exported goods worth about $7 million to Ukraine, while in 2004 the
export increased to more than $10 millions. And according to the data
of the State Committee of Statistics of Ukraine, since 2000 the
commodity circulation between Ukraine and Armenia has increased
fivefold, reaching about $75 million in 2004 – up by $15.3 million
over 2003.

Ukraine mainly exports building materials, chemical products,
foodstuffs, and recently the structure of trade improved with the
delivery of Ukrainian buses for the Yerevan transport system.
According to Samvel Hovakimyan, executive director of the RA Chamber
of Commerce and Industry, despite the increased commodity circulation
between the two countries, Armenia’s share still remains insignificant
in Ukrainian foreign trade.

`Armenia should be interested in developing closer economic ties with
Ukraine. However, our political vector has not yet been formed and
remains on the level of `wishes’,’ Hovakimyan said.

According to him, one of the reasons is that Armenia’s resources are
extremely limited. `From that point of view we cannot be compared and
therefore depend on the situation,’ he said. `We have problems of
blockade that directly impact our economic development.’

Hovakimyan says the Chamber is working in the direction of integrating
small and medium-sized enterprises of Armenia into the Ukrainian
economic system, such as textile industry and leather production.
According to Ukraine Ambassador to Armenia, Vladimir Tyaglo,
Armenian-Ukrainian economic ties are based on the Agreement on
Economic Cooperation for 2001-2010 signed by the presidents of the two
countries. He says that the contractual-legal base between the two
states consists of 64 agreements, of which 54 are currently in effect.

——————–

Unsure of Security: Controversy continues as Social Security card goes
into effect

By Mariam Badalyan
Editorial Assistant

A month after Armenia’s first Social Security cards have gone into
use, many citizens continue to resist them. Starting January 1, no
government-involved transactions were to take place with citizens who
do not have a card, including old-age, disability and unemployment
wages.

The card is now necessary for payment of wages, opening a bank
account, licensing, etc. The government assures the new system will
help to handle an effective and efficient social protection system by
eliminating possible fraud and improving the record keeping of social
data. It will also help to conduct an effective reform of the pension
system.

Hasmik Khachatryan, public relations officer of the Ministry of Labor
and Social Issues, assures that more people started to realize the
importance of the new system. Currently, 2.420 million people have
applied for the cards, and 1.650 million have been issued.
Khachatryan says every detail has been considered in order to minimize
the complications of the application process.

Citizens may apply for their social security cards in any social
services unit throughout the republic irrespective of his or her
registration place or whether he has a registration or not.

But while a majority of citizens have accepted the Social Security
card as a fact of life, others continue to maintain that it is an
intrusion of their privacy, a means of government control. Some even
say it is the `mark of the beast’ of biblical apocalyptic prophesy.

Hranush Kharatyan, head of the Governmental Department for National
Minorities and Religious Issues, joins the protest of hundreds of
people who believe that imposition of the cards is a violation of
religious rights.

`On the other hand, if a person refuses to take a passport for the
same reasons, can we say that his or her constitutional rights have
been breached?’ Kharatyan says.

Nevertheless, she thinks there are a few ambiguous statements and
inconsistencies in the law that should be eliminated. In particular,
she recalls that Article 5 of the law states the aim of a Social
Security card, amongst others, to be insurance of personal data
confidentiality, which she believes to be illogical. Besides, she
points out that it is not clear from the law whether the same personal
data are referred to in Articles 5 and 7.

A well know Armenian bard says no one will make him and his wife have
cards. `I will be forced to temporarily leave my country for a place
where there are no such cards. They demean my dignity and religious
feelings,’ says folk musician Ruben Hakhverdyan.

—————-

Protecting Preservation: Youth groups concerned about capital construction

By Marianna Grigoryan
ArmeniaNow Reporter

A group of young people is concerned that modern construction is
detrimental to old landmarks, and are taking action against the
destruction.

Non-governmental youth organizations, unions and other structures, as
well as students and individuals have united around an
initiative. United they hope to struggle against the last years
large-scale construction works in the capital, as a result of which
old cultural monuments, residential buildings and streets of public
value are being destroyed.

`The bloom of reconstruction in the center of Yerevan during the last
years is accompanied with the process of destroying national
historical-cultural heritage, buildings of outstanding Armenians,
urban complexes and the historical environment,’ reads the open letter
the young people have planned to address to the President, the
Prime-Minister, NA Speaker and the Mayor of Yerevan. `The young
Armenians express their strong concern and ask for your direct and
immediate mediation for preventing the situation and sustaining
all-human values of our capital.’

`We have collected signatures; all those people under 30 who are not
indifferent of the fate of our capital and history have taken part in
it,’ says Lilit Vardanyan, a young architect participating in the
initiative. `There are some people who agree with our initiative, but
don’t sign the letter because they work in state bodies and are afraid
of having problems in their workplace.’

The initiators say, although they had decided to collect 1000
signatures before, taken into account the number of those willing to
support them, they have decided to wait for a while to send the letter
to the mentioned addresses.

——————————–

Teaching Teachers: Junior Achievement initiative strengthens knowledge
of legal rights.

By Arpi Harutyunyan
ArmeniaNow Reporter

If one tries to ask passers-by whether they are aware of their rights
of citizens, the answer will be almost the same: `What rights are you
talking about? We are not aware of anything.’ Moreover they will
wonder if, for instance, they are told they have the right to demand
any information from any state structure regarding their security.

`In civilized countries awareness of human rights is an utmost
priority. But our people are unaware of the laws, we do not know our
rights, or the responsibilities as well. Even we – the specialists –
are unaware of many rights because of the lack of minimal legal
knowledge,’ says Vanadzor Pedagogical Institute professor Anna
Grigoryan.

According to the plan affirmed by the RA Ministry of Education and
Science since September 2001 `Human Rights’, `Civic Education’, `State
and Law’ have become compulsory subjects in the school program. The
initiator was Junior Achievement which, since October 2000 had
undertaken a responsible task: to achieve the inclusion of `Civic
Education’ into the school program.

`As far as Armenia is a newly independent state, there was a need for
legal training. To create a democratic state a legal consciousness is
necessary that the teachers should spread. And the teachers need
education first of all’, says Gayane Vardanyan, program coordinator of
JA.

As a result, achievements exceeded expectations. Three subjects on law
formed a part of the school program.

Junior Achievement international organization was founded in the USA
in the beginning of the 20th century. It was established in Armenia 12
years ago.

Initially the organization aimed at helping teachers learn applied
economics. But throughout time the programs grew and reached to law.

In cooperation with the Academy for Educational Development the
Armenia-based JA organized the first courses of `Civic Education’ for
Armenian teachers’ re-qualification in January 1998.

Up to now more than 3000 teachers of civic education have been trained
in the USA. In 2004 Junior Achievement initiated also
re-qualification courses for professors in Yerevan.

—————————————————————

The Art of Tax: New law makes movement of artifacts easier

By Gayane Abrahamyan
ArmeniaNow Reporter

Visitors to Armenia who have endured stringent `art’ export
regulations should be relieved to know that, since late December, the
law has been changed in favor of more liberal movement.

Until now, practically anything leaving the country that had been hand
crafted – whether a vernisage amateur’s work, or the masterpiece of an
honored artist – was subject to being certified (and taxed) before it
could be taken outside Armenia.

Whether a silver spoon or, sometimes, even a musician’s own instrument
had to be presented for inspection, with documents and photographs.

`The previous law adopted in 1994 restricted rights even in terms of
private property with some of its provisions,’ says, Shoghik Asoyan,
director of the Agency for Preserving Cultural Values under the
Ministry of Culture and Youth Issues.

But according to the new law, works of fine art not older than 50
years can be freely exported except for 12 great Armenian artists
Martiros Saryan, Sergey Parajanov, Minas, Yervand Kochar, Garzou,
Hakob Kojoyan, Vahram Gayfejyan, Harutiun Kalents, Aleksandr
Bajbeuk-Melikyan, Vahan Hatsagortsyan, Artsrun Berberyan, Nazaret
Kuyumjyan.

Previously, mass-produced souvenirs and artifacts were allowed to
export without certificates, if they were not older than 50
years. Now, the term has been extended to 75.

`For us, of course it is a big thing to have escaped from waiting for
hours in the Agency for Preserving Cultural Values to get permission
for exporting;’ says one of the artists affected by the law, Robert
Elibekyan. `People of arts should be free. If he does not take out his
works how will he show his art to the world?’ But President of the
Union of Artists Karen Aghamyan believes the law is both good and bad.

`Definitely, artists will be free of wasting of time, but smugglers
will get big opportunities to take out values of big importance for
Armenian art. If the market is liberalized, it is uncontrollable.’

Aghamyan says it now becomes easier to pass off an old artwork as a
new one. `There is threat that anything can get into the stream. We
are going to address to the government to send some of the experts
group to work in turn in the airport customs,’ says Asoyan. `Officers
cannot identify common works, for, instance, from an unsigned work by
Saryan.’

—————-

High Marks for HyeSanta: Donations ($9,270) lead to establishment of
year-round foundation

By Suren Musayelyan
ArmenianNow Reporter

Nearly doubling the total of its 2003 campaign, ArmeniaNow’s HyeSanta
charity project has concluded its holiday drive with $9,270 to
distribute to needy families featured in its December 24 and December
31 issues. (In 2003, the first HyeSanta, readers contributed about
$5,000.)

Last week, ArmeniaNow journalists began the careful but happy task of
distributing items – ranging from medicines to blankets and
mattresses, to livestock, to computers – to 13 families.

HyeSanta Project Coordinator Armine Petrosyan says each case was
evaluated on its own circumstances and the families were assisted in
the best possible way. But she emphasized that the goal of the action
is to provide people with lasting help rather than give them cash.

`Assistance given to these people has made a difference in their
lives. This would be impossible without the generosity of our
readers,’ Petrosyan said.

According to Petrosyan, the aid given to people solves their most
vital problems, and is received with gratitude.

`But the idea of the project is to provide aid that will have a
continuous nature. For example, buying a cow that will give milk and
offsprings,’ she said.

The purchase of sheep, cows and chickens is being voluntarily assisted
by the Tufenkian Foundation, which itself maintains a program that
encourages villagers to become self-sustained through livestock
production.

Tufenkian Foundation veterinary specialist Zorik Pambukhchyan says he
helps the project with great enthusiasm.

`I support any project that supports villagers and rural communities,
especially this one that targets vulnerable families in villages,’ he
said. `I am happy to be part of this project to help with advice.’

Readers from North America, from England, from Ukraine and,
significantly, from within Armenia responded to HyeSanta
2004. Locally, many were brought in by video documentaries of the
project, produced and shown by Shoghakat Television.

(Armenian Public Television H1 had promised to show the programs, but
withdrew an hour before airtime, saying it didn’t want to upset its
viewers with stories about needy people during holidays.)

`The results are satisfying, but they could be incomparably better had
H1 kept its promise,’ Petrosyan said.

According to Petrosyan, from the outset the project met with a very
friendly attitude from everyone. She says that the project would have
been impossible without the support of various organizations and
individuals, including:
The Karabakh Representation in Armenia, the Emergency Situations
Department of Karabakh, the Armenia office of World Council of
Churches and its head Karen Nazaryan, Shoghakat TV, `Orran’ benevolent
NGO, the Club, Shoghakat’s Tigran Paskevichyan and his friends, and
musicians Vahan Artsruni, Hasmik Harutyunyan, Lilit Pipoyan, Lusine
Azaryan, Armen Movsisyan, who held a concert in support of the
project.

ITAR-TASS News Agency
TASS
January 28, 2005 Friday

Armenian activities on occupied lands affect talks – diplomat

By Sevindzh Abdullayeva, Viktor Shulman

BAKU

Intensified actions of Armenia on the occupied Azerbaijani lands
“have a negative effect on the negotiations,” Deputy Foreign Minister
and special representative of the Azerbaijani president to the
Karabakh settlement negotiations Araz Azimov said at a Friday
briefing in Baku.

He said the question of illegal settlements on occupied lands, which
Azerbaijan had raised at the United Nations, was very important.
Azerbaijan “raised the question not for the sake of political
speculations but proceeding from international legal norms,” he said.

“We are ready for negotiations with Armenia but we think that
activities on the occupied lands have a negative effect on the
negotiations. So we suggest stopping these activities,” Azimov said.

He said materials on settlements and economic activities on the
occupied lands had been transferred to the OSCE mission made up of
experts of Russia, the United States, France, Germany, Sweden,
Finland and Italy.

The mission will go to the occupied lands in a day to familiarize
with the local situation, verify facts received from Azerbaijan and
draft a report. The report as such “will not solve the problem,” the
diplomat said. “Our main goal is to stop activities of the occupied
territories.”

ITAR-TASS, Russia
Jan 27 2005

Abkhazia, South Ossetia presidents meet in Moscow

MOSCOW, January 27 (Itar-Tass) – The president of the
self-proclaimed republic of Abkhazia, Sergei Bagapsh, met Eduard
Kokoity, president of the South Ossetian republic, in Moscow.

Bagapsh, currently on a working visit in Russia, said on Ekho Moskvy
radio on Thursday that they met `to make a personal acquaintance,
talk about our stances and to resume relations between our republics
that have paused during the presidential elections in Abkhazia’.

He added that he was going to keep relations with presidents of the
Dniester republic and Nagorno-Karabakh in order `to coordinate
actions and establish economic relations’ between the two
unrecognised republics.

ITAR-TASS, Russia
Jan 27 2005

Azeri soldier is reportedly killed in Nagorno-Karabakh

BAKU, January 27 (Itar-Tass) – The Defence Ministry of Azerbaijan has
confirmed the death of an Azeri soldier in a fire exchange near the
Shurabad village in a district adjacent to Nagorno-Karabakh. The fire
came from the Armenian side’s territory, the Ministry went on to say.

The Defence Ministry refuted some local media reports that military
hostilities were under way in that direction. It said that the Azeri
soldier was killed by a single shot on Thursday.

In the meantime, a spokesman for the Defence Ministry of
Nagorno-Karabakh has denied reports of a shootout on the borders of
the unrecognised republic.

Colonel Senor Asratyan, the press service chief of the Defence
Ministry of Nagorno-Karabakh, told Itar-Tass by telephone that the
situation in Nagorno-Karabakh was calm.

The authorities in Stepanakert have described reports about the Azeri
soldier’s death as `misinformation’, which Baku is disseminating
intentionally on the eve of the arrival of an OSCE monitoring group.