Category: News

PRESS RELEASE
March 19, 2004
Embassy of the Republic of Armenia
2225 R Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20008
Tel: 202-319-1976, x. 348; Fax: 202-319-2982
Web:

Armenian Parliamentarian Hranush Hakobian Participates In An Event To
Benefit The Armenian American Wellness Center In Armenia

On the evening of February 28, approximately hundred and fifty people
gathered at the Embassy of the Republic of Armenia to hear from Hranush
Hakobian Ph.D., member of the Armenian Parliament and chair of the Standing
Committee on Science, Education, Culture and Youth Issues of the National
Assembly of Armenia, in a tribute to the Mothers of Gyumri.

The event was sponsored by The Embassy of the Republic of Armenia, H. E.
Amb. Arman Kirakossian, and the Armenian American Cultural Association, Inc.
(AACA) in support of the life-saving work of the Armenian American Wellness
Center (AAWC) in Armenia in its mission to save, prolong and improve the
lives of women in Armenia through early detection and treatment of their
breast and cervical cancer.

Since Armenia’s independence in 1990, Hranush Hakobian has served four terms
as a member of the National Assembly of Armenia. Ms. Hakobian holds a Ph.D.
in Law, a Master’s Degree in Mathematics from the Yerevan State University,
and a Master’s Degree in Political Science from the Academy of Political
Sciences in Moscow. She has also briefly studied International Law in the
United States. She has served Armenia in several capacities, including
Minister of Social Security (1996- 1998) and Chair of the Standing Committee
on Health, Social Services, and Ecology of the National Assembly
(1994-1996). She has authored 85 laws on issues concerning women, children,
health, privatization and human rights in the Armenian Parliament.

M.P. Hakobian is in the United States as the official guest of the Armenian
American Cultural Association, Inc., the US sponsoring organization of the
Armenian American Wellness Center, which is a humanitarian health project in
Armenia. As a volunteer, she serves as Co-President of the Wellness Center,
along with Rita Balian, and together they are responsible for the
operations, development and expansion plans of the Center.

Sonia Crow, the vice president of AACA, served as emcee for the evening.
“This event is being held as a tribute to the Mothers of Gyumri. Gyumri is a
city which is still struggling to overcome the devastating effects of the
1988 earthquake. AAWC’s Monthly Medical Missions have been extended to
encompass the women and mothers of Gyumri. Living in a high health care risk
zone, the women of Gyumri are subjugated to severe stresses and diseases,
among which are breast and cervical cancer. The children of Gyumri (ages 6
to 13) have joined forces with us at the AACA/AAWC by producing these
paintings displayed on the walls which are for sale today. The proceeds will
go towards continuing to provide life-saving medical services to their
mothers during AAWC’s monthly missions.” She also announced that an
anonymous donor would match all the funds raised on that day. Then she
invited the Ambassador to the podium.

In his opening remarks, Ambassador Arman Kirakossian introduced M.P. Hranush
Hakobyan saying, “From the very first days of Armenia’s independence,
Hranush Hakobian has committed herself to improving the Armenian State
through her capacity as a member of the National Assembly. Apart from her
active public service, Hranush Hakobian finds time to help Armenian women
through her work with the Armenian American Wellness Center.” Ambassador
Kirakossian closed his remarks by expressing the Embassy’s and his personal
appreciation of Hranush Hakobian and Rita Balian for their tireless work on
behalf of the women of Armenia and wished them further success in their
future endeavors in helping saving lives of mothers.

M.P. Hranush Hakobian then took the podium. “The most serious problem facing
Armenian women today is poverty and the polarization between the rich and
the poor,” said Ms. Hakobian, “yet one of the ways we can fight poverty is
by providing women with access to modern health care facilities, and this is
the reason why we founded the Armenian American Wellness Center.”

“The Armenian people are held up by four pillars: the first pillar is the
Armenian language; the second is the Armenian Church; the third is the
Armenian culture; and the fourth pillar is the Armenian family, of which the
mother plays the predominant role. Therefore it is of vital importance that
we, as Armenians, ensure the health and well-being of our mothers and
sisters in Armenia in order to guarantee a productive future for Armenia.”
Hakobian concluded her remarks by saying, “I believe that when Armenians are
healthy, Armenians are wealthy and happy, and this will lead to a strong and
secure Armenia.”

The event also included a musical program organized and coordinated by Leon
Khoja-Eynatyan, faculty member at the prestigious Levine School of Music in
Washington, DC. The program consisted of three musical pieces, the first of
which was from Armenian American composer Alan Hovhaness and was performed
by Nayiri Poochikian on violin, Virginia Lum on piano, and Leon
Khoja-Eynatyan on percussion (marimba). This was followed by a piece from
Czech composer Bohuslav Martinu and performed by Mrs. Poochikian and her
daughter Hoorig on violin with Ms. Lum on piano. The final piece of the
program was from Japanese composer Keiko Abe and was performed as a solo by
Mr. Khoja-Eynatyan, along with the performer’s own improvisation. The
musical program, especially the final piece, was received with great
enthusiasm.

AACA President and Co-founder Rita Balian then gave closing remarks,
commenting on AACA’s vision for the future of the AAWC. “I began this
project seven years ago with the goal of taking one mammography unit over to
Armenia to aid in the prevention of breast cancer. With the help of Hranush
and as a result of the hard work and dedication of everyone associated with
the AAWC/AACA, we have since seen our goal of one mammography unit evolve
into a state of the art Wellness Center for diagnostic and preventative
health care with two satellite clinics. As we look to the future and begin
our renovations of the building donated to us by the Armenian government, we
envision a modern health care center that focuses not only on the health of
our mothers and sisters in Armenia, but a health care center that will help
to improve and prolong the lives of the entire family. I would like to thank
everyone who has ever donated a “gift of hope” or volunteered his or her
time to our noble cause. I would also like to thank all of out committee
members who have helped to make this event benefiting the mothers of Gyumri
such a great success.”

The guests were then invited to participate in a raffle by giving a “gift of
hope,” a donation which will be used to provide free mammograms and pap
smears to women at the Wellness Center. The winners received boxes of
chocolate which were specially created with the AAWC logo through a business
and philanthropic partnership between the AAWC and the Grand Candy Company
of Armenia. One raffle winner also went home with a very special painting
from one of the children of Gyumri.

In attendance at the event were Armenian Ambassador to the U.S, H.E. Arman
Kirakossian and his wife, Susanna; former U.S. Ambassador to Armenia H.E.
Michael Lemmon and his wife Michele; Donna Dowsett-Coirolo, Armenian Country
Director from the World Bank; USAID Team Leader for the Caucuses, James
Watson and his wife Susan; Joseph Simone, the Founder of the International
Spirit of Life Foundation, along with his wife Osa; Gerald Hill, Director of
Global Outreach for Disease Management from Capital Technology Information
Services, Inc.; Barbara Brocker and Suzanne Grinnan from the American
International Health Alliance; from International Relief and Development,
President and CEO Arthur Keys and his wife, Jasna Basaric-Keys, Director of
Public Health for IRD; and many members of Washington’s Armenian American
community.

The Armenian American Wellness Center, previously known as the Armenian
American Mammography University Center, was established in April 1997 by
Founding President and CVO (Chief Volunteer Officer), Rita Balian, with the
overwhelming contributions and assistance of hundreds of donors, volunteers,
U.S. medical teams, corporations, institutions, and the U.S. and Armenian
Governments and their respective embassies. The AAWC has screened over
53,000 women, and has helped to save, improve and prolong the lives of over
1,200 women through early detection and treatment of their breast and
cervical cancer. The Center was initially established in Armenia as a
response to the alarming increase of breast cancer cases and the critical
need for accurate and early detection of the disease. In January 2002, with
the addition of gynecology and pathology departments, the Mammography Center
was renamed the Armenian American Wellness Center to better reflect the
range of services it now provides.

A satellite clinic was opened in the suburbs of Yerevan in April 2000.
Among the recent achievements of the Wellness Center is the opening of a
second satellite clinic on July 6th, 2003, in the town of Gavar located in
the Gegharkunik Province of the Lake Sevan Region. In addition to
mammography and basic gynecological services, the Gavar Clinic will also
provide American style primary health care services for the entire family.
The AAWC, with its Yerevan Clinic and two Satellite Clinics, now has a total
staff of 36 people, most of who have received additional training in US
medical institutions and provide high quality clinical services to their
patients. Since the establishment of the AACA, its overhead expenses have
not exceeded 3% of its total grassroots fundraising.

For more information on the Armenian American Wellness Center, interested
persons should contact AACA, Tel: 703-416-2555 or e-mail: [email protected]

PRESS RELEASE
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia
Contact: Information Desk
Tel: (374-1) 52-35-31
Email: [email protected]
Web:

Armenia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Vartan Oskanian, participated in a
conference on Wider Europe – The New Agenda, in Bratislava, Slovakian, on
March 19. The conference, attended by presidents, prime ministers and
foreign ministers from Europe, North America and the CIS, focused on
Europe’s Wider Europe Initiative. In a panel on Europe’s Black Sea and
Caucasus Neighborhood, the Prime Minister of Romania and the Foreign
Minister of Bulgaria joined the presidents of Azerbaijan and Georgia, and
Armenian’s Foreign Minister Oskanian to speak about the prospects for the
Caucasus in a future, wider Europe. Following statements by President
Saakashvili, who recounted recent events in Georgia and their implications
for Georgia’s European future, and by President Aliyev on Azerbaijan’s
economic and political prospects, Minister Oskanian spoke about Armenia’s
expectations of Europe, and responded to Azerbaijan’s standard accusations
which were repeated by President Aliyev in his statement.

In the margins of the meeting, Minister Oskanian met with NATO Secretary
General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer and they discussed the recent murder of an
Armenian officer at a NATO Language Training program, in Budapest, Hungary,
by an Azeri officer. They also discussed Armenia-NATO relations.

Minister Oskanian also met with the co-chair of the Minsk Group who were in
Bratislava to attend the conference. The Minister will meet with them in
Prague later this month.

Minister Oskanian was interviewed by Azerbaijani, Slovak and Armenian
journalists, about the Conference.

Below is the entire text of Minister Oskanian¹s extemporaneous comments on a
panel on Europe¹s Black Sea and Caucasus Neighborhood
At a Conference on
Wider Europe: The New Agenda
Bratislava, Slovakia Friday March 19, 2004

First let me say that I¹m honored to be present here, in this distinguished
gathering, and let me also say that the government and the people of Armenia
appreciate this initiative. The Wider Europe initiative, and the Caucasus
inclusion in it, is an important initiative. It is a clear signal from
Europe to our region, to the 3 Caucasus republics, that indeed there are
prospects for these three countries to be integrated in European structures
and especially to become part of the European family. And the fact that two
presidents of Caucasus republics and I (representing my own president who
could not attend for reasons beyond his control) are here is testimony of
the fact that the European direction is high on the agenda of all three
countries.

I recall in the early 90s, there was a debate within the Council of Europe
about whether the Caucasus belonged to Europe and to that organization. The
debate ended with a resolution that indeed the three Caucasus republics do
belong to Europe. And the membership accession process began at that time.
That was 1992. Before 10 years were over, Georgia first, then Armenia and
Azerbaijan also joined as members of the Council of Europe. But those years
of the accession process were extremely useful in advancing democracy, human
rights and rule of law in each of our three countries. In other words,
Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia became the beneficiaries ­ not just of
membership itself, but of the process.

A month ago, in Brussels, the Council of Ministers asked the Commission to
make a recommendation before the end of the term of the Irish presidency
back to the Council of Ministers on the issue of including the Caucasus in
the Wider Europe ­ New Neighborhood Initiative. I want to draw a parallel
between this and the 1992 decision by the Council of Europe to consider the
Caucasus as part of Europe. We ourselves as leaders, and historians, will
look back at that date as marking the beginning of the process of accession
of the three Caucasus republics into the European Union. I have no doubt
that this road, too, will be difficult and tortuous, but I also have no
doubt that we will get there. Because we got the signal from the European
Union that yes, indeed,, the three Caucasus republics, if they meet the
criteria, someday, down the road, can be considered for membership in that
organization.

This is extremely important. It gives new hope, new prospects to the
Caucasus and the three republics. But we have to make a clear distinction,
so we do not have any false illusions. The European Union offers us the
prospect, not the promise. We have to make a clear distinction. What we are
getting today, and what we will hopefully get before the Irish presidency is
concluded, is a prospect, but not the promise. This is clearly understood by
Armenia, and I have no doubt that it is understood by our neighbors. But it
is we in the Caucasus who will turn that prospect into a promise. The sooner
we do that, the better it will be for the region and for the countries that
comprise that region. That¹s why putting not just our own houses, but the
whole region in order, is extremely important. President Saakashvili was in
Yerevan and in Baku recently. He was visiting the two neighbors. Both in
Azerbaijan and in Armenia, he spoke about the common Caucasus, a free trade
zone, deeper integration. We share that vision President Saakashvili, and we
would like to work towards that end. We would like to see Azerbaijan also
join in, not just through Georgia, but to accept that the three of us must
move in that direction.

Let me not underestimate the true problem that we face. There are indeed
obstacles which stand in the way of Armenia and Azerbaijan fully engaging in
regional cooperation and integration.

That problem is the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. But we have to be realistic.
We have to look at this conflict from the perspective of the future, not
from the perspective of what we have on the ground at this moment. That¹s
not to say we can ignore the past or ignore history. Nor can we ignore what
we have now, but we must look to the future. That¹s why the European
prospect gives us a better context not only to advance democracy, human
rights and rule of law in our countries, but also to try to put regional
conflicts, ethnic conflicts within that global process. If we can do that,
we can succeed in resolving even the most problematic, the most contentious
problems, and among them, the Nagorno Karabakh conflict.

I must say frankly, I was disappointed to hear President Aliyev¹s statement
today and the way he approached the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. At least in
this forum, he should have put a different light on this issue and should
have looked to the future.

President Aliyev, Armenia is not an aggressor. Armenians are not aggressors.
You¹re not the vanquished, we¹re not the victors. At this moment, we are
both victims. We have to work so that in the future, we both become victors.
This phase of the conflict is only one frame in a much longer sequence of
frames. We can not just look at this one frame and make a judgement. This is
not the end. The conflict is not over, and we¹ve never claimed anything
beyond what we think we deserve — that the international community look at
this from the point of view of the rights of the people who live on those
territories.

Yes, there are refugees. But on both sides. We¹re tired of hearing the
number one million. Yes, there are one million refugees ­ but that¹s a
cumulative number. There were 400,000 Armenians living in Azerbaijan before
this conflict began. President Aliyev, where are those people? Aren¹t they
refugees? If they are not living under tents as a showcase to the world,
that does not mean that they do not exist. They do exist. There are refugees
from both sides just as there is suffering on both sides. Both sides have
certain rights that need to be addressed. I understand that you want to
recover the territorial integrity of your state, but we want to see the
people of Nagorno Karabakh and their right to self-determination respected.
They don¹t want anything beyond a normal, peaceful life. They want to join
their brothers and sisters in Armenia, as people throughout the world have
done throughout history. They want to belong where they do belong. That¹s
what they want and what Armenians want in the region.

Let me tell you this: we have no claim to anything beyond the right of the
people of Nagorno Karabakh to self-determination to be recognized. We have
to look to the future, put this conflict within the context of integration
into the European Union. We still think that we can begin cooperating in our
region. We can work together on a second track, parallel to the Nagorno
Karabakh conflict negotiations and try to make the two complementary. We can
work to create a better environment within which we can address and resolve
the Nagorno Karabakh conflict for the betterment of our two countries and
our two peoples.

NT Highlights #11(513)
22 March 2004

Moscow and Kars Treaties on Regional Agenda
By Haikaram Nahapetyan

During the recent week the international agreements signed 83 years ago,
which determined the present borders of the Armenian state came into agenda
twice. On March 13, on the 83 universary of Moscow agreement, Armenian
historians, clergyman, intelectuals met in Academy of Sciences and discussed
the historical document. They insisted the document has no juridicial bases
(see the details on page 2). The participants called for denouncing the
document, hence claiming that Armenia has the right to demand territories
from Turkey (Ardahan, Kars) and the Nakhichevan district from Azerbaijan.

By the Moscow agreement between Russia and Turkey Lenin and the founder of
the modern Turkish state, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk became allies. Two
historically confronting states became allies against imperialist Entant
states, a new North-Eastern border line of Turkey was established and some
provinces (Kars, Ardahan, Surmalu) which were under the Russian rule since
1877-1878 Russian-Turkish war also were passed to the newborn Turkish
Republic. Under the October 13 Kars agreements, the Soviet Russia forced the
Soviet Caucasian states to sign simmilar documents with Turkish
representatives, so Armenia was forced to sign its “caputulation” and to
leave the mentioned territories within Turkey’s borders and Nakhichevan
within Azerbaijan.

The efforts to denonunce this document stretch back to the Soviet era. Right
after the WW2, Vyacheslav Molotov, the Soviet FM declared “The Turkish state
made use of the temporary weakness of the Soviets and captured Armenian
territories of Kars and Ardahan. Armenians feel themselves hurt and the
Soviet governemnt rises the matter of returning territories”. Moscow and
Ankara were on the edge of war, but emerging American-Turkish alliance
prevented the Soviet invasion. West made clear: the war between USSR and
Turkey will turn into USSR’s war against US. Stalin stepped back.

The issue was discussed several times in Armenia after it re-gained
independance, the Diaspora was involved as well. On May 1st, 2002, the “Azg”
daily wrote that during the Levon Ter-Petrosyan era several MPs were eager
to denounce the document. In March 2001, Paruyr Hayrikyan, the former
Chairman of The Human Rights Commision at the President staff, leader of the
Self-Determination unit declared the neccasity of denounsing the agreement.
Russian ambassador to Ankara Lebedev told to “Turkish Daily News” on 18
March: “Kars teraty cannot be denounced”.

The question if the Moscow treaty is valid still or not any more, was
discussed last week not only by Armenians. During the crisis in Ajaria Mr
Unal Chevikoz, Turkish ambassador to Azerbaijan, declared that Ankara has
the right to intervene to Ajaria, according to that treaty. Obviously he
meant that Ankara might protect Muslim Ajarians from possible Georgian
invasion.

Georgian ambassador to Moscow Konstantin Kemularia responsed Ajarians should
not rely on Ankara’s help. “The treaty has expired its’ validaty. That
treaty was made in a quite other terms, radically other kind of relations
exist between Turkey and Russia, Georgia and Turkey, Georgia and Russia
now”, the Ambassador told Interfax.

Why do Turkish state reppresentitve recall Kars? It’s hard to belive Ankara
can move troops into Ajaria, against US and NATOs’ ally Saakashvili, which
has fine realtions with Ankara as well (Saakashvili is to visit Turkey next
month). How would Turkish troops deal with the situation while the Russian
base is still in Batumi? While Moscow is as “jelous” when 3-rd parties enter
former USSR territory, would it tolerate a Turkish invasion? Moreover,
European structures would either deeply dislike such a step Ankara, the
mutual relations with EU would get a new huge problem, similar to the Cyprus
issue.

>From the other side, the Turkish ambassador could not have made such a
announcement without the consent of his governement in Ankara.

Really the logic of announcmenet for this part was non-realistic. But let’s
return to the top of our analysis. At the beginning of the week the
historical documents were discussed in Yerevan. Turkish ambassadors’ message
can be just a reply to Armenians. Ankara shows its goes on taking seriously
the Moscow and Kars treaties. Ankara hints Armenians that entirely defends
the treaties of Moscow and Kars, which concern to Turkey’s Eastern borders,
and also the Nakhichevan region.

Hence the Turks hint to Armenians not to rise any discussions over the
historical and juridicial aspects of those documents. If Ankara sees itself
competent for intervening Ajaria, it should see its right for doing the same
in Nakhichevan either, and much more easily. No Russian troops are based in
Nakhichevan. And Baku should be very glad for such an anti-Armenian step
from Turkey.

This can be the most essential in Mr Chevikoz’es announcment.

—

Russian deputy reminds Georgia of its legal obligations to Ajaria

ITAR-TASS news agency
22 Mar 04

Moscow, 22 March: Chairman of the State Duma Committee on
International Affairs Konstantin Kosachev expressed satisfaction today
that the conflict between Georgia and Ajaria “is returning from the
hot phase to, at least, cold phase and is possibly even moving towards
a peaceful settlement.”

At the same time, the deputy stressed that the only regulatory
statute, the Kars Treaty of 1921, which stipulates Ajaria as being an
autonomous republic within Georgia, is still in force and its
provisions must be honoured. The treaty on friendship between Turkey,
on the one hand, and Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan, on the other,
with the participation of Russia, was signed in 1921.

Kosachev expressed concern over the treaty’s various interpretations
of late, “starting from statements by several official representatives
that it [treaty] is no longer in force down to statements by Turkish
representatives that it gives Turkey the right to use military force
if the legal status of Ajaria is violated”. All these statements are
legally wrong, the deputy reckons.

The Kars Treaty, he stressed, continues to be in force since it was
concluded indefinitely. Moreover, the Potsdam Conference documents,
establishing the principle of the world’s post-war arrangement, make
references to it. And, finally, there is the definitive position of
the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which stipulates
that if a treaty regulates borders, there can be no references to
changed international circumstances [presumably: as reasons for
varying the treaty provisions].

Kosachev also recalled that under the Kars Treaty, Turkey renounced
its claims on Ajaria; Ajaria reappeared within Georgia as an autonomy
on two conditions. Firstly, Georgia commits itself to provide Ajaria
with full-scale autonomy – cultural, religious, national – up to the
granting of the right to adopt its own laws. Secondly, Georgia commits
itself to ensure unimpeded transit through the seaport of
Batumi. These two conditions, Kosachev emphasized, continue to be in
force along with the Treaty as a whole.

“Thus, the steps recently taken by Georgia to resolve the conflict
with Ajaria through the use of force, and in particular through
blockading the seaport of Batumi, are in direct conflict with the
law”, he concluded.

EU envoy urges caution at Karabakh talks with Azeri leader

Azad Azarbaycan TV, Baku
22 Mar 04

[Presenter] Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and the special
representative of the EU for the South Caucasus, Heikki Talvitie,
discussed the Karabakh conflict today. The head of state said that
international organizations, which have already started to acknowledge
Armenia’s occupying nature, should take serious steps against it.

Heikki Talvitie said that he would not be passive, but at the same
time would be cautious on the issue.

[Correspondent] President Heydar Aliyev, who received the special
representative of the EU for the South Caucasus, Heikki Talvitie,
recalled their previous meetings and said that the EU and Baku are
developing cooperation. Integration into European structures is our
strategic choice and we will remain faithful to this policy, end of
quote.

The president hailed the EU for its interest in the problem of
Nagornyy Karabakh. He explained the protracted conflict by Armenia’s
destructive position.

[Aliyev] Unfortunately, the Armenian armed forces do not want to
withdraw from the occupied territory and the resolution of the issue
is under threat.

[Correspondent] The head of state said that the international norms of
settling conflicts coincide with Baku’s position on the issue. The
president described as inadmissible Armenia’s unwillingness to give up
its occupying policy. He called on the international community to be
more active following Yerevan’s official confession in Bratislava
[international conference].

[Aliyev] One country has occupied the territory of another country. It
itself admitted that it was not planning to withdraw from the
territory which did not belong to it. Every country should respect
international organizations. I hope that the international community
will express its fair position on that and the conflict will be
resolved.

[Correspondent] This is the requirement of the time. Under this
requirement, conflicts between peoples should be resolved in line with
international laws, end of quote.

For his part, Heikki Talvitie said that his organization was ready to
render assistance in resolving the conflict.

[Talvitie in English with Azeri voice-over] I am ready to do
everything in my power to resolve the Karabakh conflict. I can assure
you that I will not be passive. But I will also be careful. I think
that positive results can be achieved.

[Correspondent] The guest also talked about the state programme on the
socio-economic development. He said that the programme is being widely
discussed in Europe and by major organizations and highly praised the
reforms.

Aliyev spoke highly of the role of energy projects in the development
of relations between Azerbaijan and the European Union and stressed
the importance of dialogue. The fact that the conflict has not yet
been resolved is an obstacle to stepping up cooperation, end of quote.

The president expressed the hope that joint measures will yield
results.

Farida Agaverdiyeva and Mirtofiq Miralioglu, Son Xabar.

Russian politician urges Armenia, Azerbaijan to make deal

Mediamax news agency, Yerevan
22 Mar 04

The Russian president’s former special representative for the Nagornyy
Karabakh settlement has called on Armenia and Azerbaijan to “weed out
the harmful seeds of propaganda”. In an article, headlined “Opium for
its own people” and published by Mediamax on 22 March, Vladimir
Kazimirov called on the mediators to help the conflicting parties make
compromises. Mediamax quoted the envoy as saying that “manipulation of
public opinion deepens mutual distrust” which hinders the settlement
of the conflict. The following is the text of the report in English by
the Armenian news agency Mediamax headlined “Armenia-Azerbaijan:
Former mediator’s view on the sides’ propaganda”; subheadings have
been inserted editorially:

A month has passed since Armenian officer Gurgen Margaryan’s brutal
murder committed by Azerbaijani serviceman Ramil Safarov in Budapest
on 19 February.

This crime has not only aroused a new wave of mutual hostility in
Armenia and Azerbaijan but has also become a motive for discussing the
role of propaganda in the settlement of the Nagornyy Karabakh
conflict.

In this connection, we find it expedient to present in our regular
Weekly Review excerpts from the article entitled “Opium for its own
people” by the Russian president’s former special representative for
the Karabakh conflict settlement and deputy chairman of the Russian
Diplomats’ Association Council, Ambassador Vladimir Kazimirov. The
article was presented to Mediamax by Vladimir Kazimirov personally.

Weed out harmful seeds of propaganda

There is a direct link between talks on the settlement of a conflict
and propaganda around it. The less is the progress in the negotiating
process, the more the sides need verbal cover-up “to compensate”
it. But, as a matter of fact, there is a lack not only of progress but
also of negotiations. Shifts in them would demand from the authorities
and professional propagandists quite another approach to the public.

One of the main tasks of the settlement is to prepare the sides’
public opinion for inevitable mutual compromises. And it is necessary
to weed out the harmful seeds of propaganda right where they spring
up: to expose the Azerbaijani propaganda in Azerbaijan and the
Armenian in Armenia and Nagornyy Karabakh. Each side is not at all
impeccable in this conflict, that is why the parties to the conflict
must be shown that they should make compromises, suffer some
inevitable losses in order to achieve a peace agreement.

The role of the media and international mediators is also of great
importance here. But for the fear of going “against the current” the
media could greatly contribute to the settlement [sentence as
published]. The power of inertia is great, but after destroying false
theses not every propagandist will dare to again sow the same
seeds. The mediators can help the sides take a more realistic approach
to vexed issues, help them get rid of the illusions that their
propaganda creates and is about to give dividends. A common reader
should know as well that he is being brainwashed by their authorities
and their subordinate propagandists. Let us look at some concrete
examples.

Propaganda in Armenia and Nagornyy Karabakh

1. Armenia and Nagornyy Karabakh take great pains to hush up a
widely-known secret – the Armenian regular army participated in the
hostilities of 1991-94, and they are still stationed in Nagornyy
Karabakh and the territories occupied outside it. The result is the
derivative propaganda cliche, as for instance in the very name of the
conflict and in the description of Armenia’s role in the conflict and
its settlement.

2. The name of the conflict has for years been a matter of dispute. In
purely ethnic sense, the words “Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict” would
be correct. But this way Baku is trying to turn the conflict into a
matter between two states – Armenia and Azerbaijan, making Nagornyy
Karabakh just a subject of controversy, removing the Nagornyy Karabakh
problem as such and ousting the Karabakh people from the
talks. International organizations, particularly the UN and the OSCE,
prefer the most correct and natural name “Nagornyy Karabakh conflict”.

Yerevan and Stepanakert [Xankandi] have been trying recently to rename
it “Karabakh-Azerbaijan [conflict]”, obscuring Armenia’s role and
saying that it is not a party to the conflict but only a guarantor of
Nagornyy Karabakh’s security. The Russian diplomacy tried its best to
persuade Yerevan not to hide behind Stepanakert’s back but to
recognize itself a party to the conflict. Propaganda tricks cannot
mislead the mediators and international organizations, they are
obliged to proceed from the realities of life and not from artificial
schemes.

3. Zealously and even obsessively, Armenians call “liberated” the
Azerbaijani territories occupied by them outside Nagornyy Karabakh. If
the word “occupied” grates, let us call them seized. These territories
were captured by Armenian troops during the hostilities of
1992-94. The occupation was the result of the war, its severe
logic. However, Armenians alter the term not only because they are
ashamed to be called occupants. This is a claim to represent these
territories as originally Armenian, which were earlier annexed to
Azerbaijan. Even if there is some truth in this, there is no need to
revive the dispute of old ages in the 21st century, to give the
impression of the desire to rebuild Greater Armenia, which is often
used by Azerbaijani propaganda.

4. The common quirk of propaganda has become an attempt to present the
territorial claims to Azerbaijan as punishment for its attempts to
settle the conflict by force (like the territorial losses of Germany
and Japan as a result of aggression in the World War II). It is very
naive to expect that these arguments will be taken into account during
the settlement and will help gain territories. The real result of such
propaganda is increased tension and further difficulties in settling
the conflict.

Propaganda in Azerbaijan

1. Everybody is being convinced that 20 per cent of Azerbaijani
territory have been occupied, that the country has a million
refugees. But let us make some calculations: the Nagornyy Karabakh
Autonomous Region occupied about 5 per cent of the Azerbaijani Soviet
Socialist Republic, but it is not fully under the Armenians’
control. Outside it, Armenians have occupied only 9 per cent of
Azerbaijani territory. Thus, even if we take Nagornyy Karabakh into
account we cannot get 14 per cent (even in round figures, 15 per cent
and even 10 per cent is closer to the truth than 20 per
cent). However, Nagornyy Karabakh’s “occupation” is not at all
indisputable.

There are indeed many displaced people, 750,000 to 800,000, because of
the conflict in Azerbaijan. But in order to be more persuasive, these
figures are rounded to a million – to all appearances, counting upon
compassion and sympathy for the victim party in the conflict. But they
do not understand that by regularly overstating those already
impressive figures, they undermine confidence and everything happening
in Baku will be considered as exaggeration.

2. Baku often insists on the fulfillment of UN Security Council
resolutions with the aim to liberate the occupied territories. This is
an important demand of four resolutions, but only one of them
[sentence as published]. How can one expect others to fulfil
resolutions, if he did not fulfil them himself? The main demand of all
the resolutions adopted in the heat of the hostilities in 1993 was a
cease-fire. And who violated it, not once or twice? We must not forget
that Azerbaijani leaders either rejected a cease-fire or violated it
hoping to achieve a turning point in the war. Those who did not stop
the hostilities are also to blame for the expansion of occupation and
displacement of civilians. Very few people know the truth about the
end of 1993 and the beginning of 1994. I know for sure that there were
chances to achieve a truce earlier, thus reducing losses of all the
sides. That is why the fuss around the UN Security Council resolutions
can “persuade” only those who do not have more complete and true
information, i.e. “own people” inside the country.

3. Baku insists that international organizations declare Armenia an
aggressor. Moreover, it intentionally “confuses” occupation with
aggression though these are not the same thing. (Germany’s occupation
lasted for many years, and was the USSR an aggressor?) The Karabakh
conflict is a complicated problem, Armenia is its direct participant,
as well as Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Karabakh. Curiosity would suggest
searching for precedents: how many countries has the UN Security
Council accused of aggression? The OSCE and other international bodies
do not count here at all. There are hardly one or two such
cases. Sanctions were imposed on Iraq not depending on the percentage
of Kuwait territories it occupied and the duration of occupation but
because it assaulted it. The things are more complicated in
Karabakh. Such distorted propaganda only causes disappointment and an
inferiority complex inside the country: like, everybody is unfair
towards us, the Azerbaijanis.

4. Finding itself in an uncomfortable situation, Baku has practically
disposed itself to a “cold war” against Armenians. Both economic
“shock-absorbers” and any contacts with Armenians (even public ones)
are denied; those who support these contacts are persecuted. In the
civilized society, someone would be glad to implant something like
fundamentalism, revanchism and Armenophobia, which prevent the
elimination of both the reasons and consequences of the conflict.
There are more and more manifestations of fanaticism and extremism
even at the level of public organizations.

5. But the biggest “achievement” of the Azerbaijani propaganda is the
bluff of military revenge. The threats do not have even a real
material basis, not to mention legal and moral ones. Azerbaijan has
assumed commitments to solve disputes peacefully without resorting to
force and threats to use force when joining the OSCE. When joining the
Council of Europe, Azerbaijan (like Armenia) assumed an obligation to
settle the Karabakh conflict peacefully. The truce treaty is of
unlimited duration. And who has miscounted the consequences of
resuming hostilities, their outcome for the parties, losses suffered
by the people, international reaction, etc? Irrational hysteria
undermines the young state’s authority, puts it in a disadvantageous
and inconvenient position, and when uttered by officials in a position
that is ridiculous and humiliating for their country.

Conclusion

The result is doubtless: manipulation of public opinion deepens mutual
distrust, which has already become the main obstacle on the path of
settling the Karabakh conflict. In order to move the conflict
settlement from the deadlock, it is very important to show the
falseness of these manipulators from every side, their detrimental
role.

Armenia says Azerbaijan acknowledges existence of Paris, Key West Karabakh
deal

Arminfo
22 Mar 04

YEREVAN

“We are glad that Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Vilayat Quliyev has at
last admitted the existence of a document, albeit not signed, on
agreements reached in Key-West and Paris [on Nagornyy Karabakh
conflict],” Gamlet Gasparyan, spokesman for the Armenian Foreign
Ministry, has said. He was asked by journalists to comment on
Quliyev’s statement that his Armenian counterpart, Vardan Oskanyan,
should produce a document on the Key-West and Paris agreements.
Quliyev said that “there is nothing to discuss since no agreements
have been signed”.

“We have repeatedly stated that such a document exists, and that it
has been drafted by the co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group on
resolving the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict, on the basis of talks
between the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan. Therefore, we
consider this episode – on whether the document exists or not – to be
over.

“As for Quliyev’s remarks that there was nothing to discuss since no
agreements had been signed, I have to say that had it been signed, the
Nagornyy Karabakh conflict would be settled by now. Nevertheless,
since Azerbaijan acknowledges the fact that there were some
agreements, we hope that the talks will continue in the future from
where they left.”

Japan grants 1.8m dollars to Armenian farmers

Mediamax news agency
22 Mar 04

YEREVAN

Japanese government will grant 1.8m dollars to Armenia to purchase
harvesters and seeds for farmers at prices lower than the market ones.

Armenian Minister of Agriculture David Lokyan and the adviser of the
economic department of the Japanese embassy in Russia, Matasaka
Yoshizawa, signed an appropriate agreement in Yerevan today, Mediamax
reports.

80 UNSECURED FAMILIES OF ARMENIA TO BE RESETTLED IN ARTSAKH WITHIN
CURRENT YEAR

YEREVAN, MARCH 19. ARMINFO. Within the 2004, some 80 unsecured
families from Armenia will be resettled in the Nagorny Karabakh
Republic, Executive Director of the Union of Public Organizations for
Repatriation and Settlement “Yerkir” (“Country”) Sevak Artsruni made
this statement at a press-conference in the House of Journalists
today.

He said that within the coming two months, some 35 families from
Armenia will settle in NKR. They will be provided with cottages and
household plots (1,500-2,000 sq/m). Besides, Artsruni said that the
migrants will receive definite privileges on legal basis, for example,
exemption of taxes. It should be noted that the Union “Yerkir”
(consisting of 5 public organizations of Armenia and Artsakh) operates
from November of 2002. Artsruni said that development of bordering
zones is important for Armenia like any other developing country.
Thus, in 2003 in the NKR regions of New Shahumyan and Hadrout, several
schools, kindergartens and hospitals were built due to the Union. The
total cost of the program was $186,356 and 22,732 EUR. “Yerkir”
representative said that in 2004 construction works will be carried
out in Mardakert, Hadrout and New Shahumyan regions of Artsakh as well
as in the Armenian regions of Tavush and Gegharkunik (in more than 30
populated areas). The program for 2004 will total more than
$400,000. The programs are financed by charitable funds of France,
Canada, USA: “France-Karabakh”, “Armenia”, “Monte Melkonyan” and
Armenian foreign charitable-families.

Sevak Artsruni said that at present the Union “Yerkir” registers
families residing in Russia and other CIS signatory-countries, who
want to return to their historical Motherland and have no such
possibility.

Azeri president, NATO chief discuss ties, Karabakh

Xalq Qazeti, Baku
20 Mar 04

Text of unattributed report by Azerbaijani newspaper Xalq Qazeti on 20
March headlined “Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev has met the NATO
secretary-general”

A special correspondent of Azartac news agency reports from Bratislava
that Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev met NATO Secretary-General
Jaap de Hoop Scheffer within the framework of his visit to Slovakia on
19 March.

The meeting, which was held in an atmosphere of sincerity, discussed
existing ties between NATO and Azerbaijan, out country’s integration
into the Euroatlantic structures and preparations for a NATO summit to
be held in Istanbul this June.

Having emphasized that he attaches major importance to cooperation
with NATO, Aliyev said that Azerbaijan’s partnership with this
organization has a progressive nature. Speaking about the importance
of integration into the Euroatlantic structures, Aliyev added that
Azerbaijan would continue its policy in this field.

Scheffer stressed that NATO was paying major attention to the South
Caucasus and described Azerbaijan as an important partner of this
organization.

The meeting discussed a number of issues regarding Azerbaijan-NATO
cooperation, especially an action plan on military cooperation with
NATO prepared in Azerbaijan.

The meeting also discussed the situation in the South Caucasus and
prospects for the settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagornyy
Karabakh conflict. Scheffer emphasized that NATO was in favour of a
swift peaceful settlement to the conflict, which is of special
importance to NATO.