SPECIAL EVENT IN WALES FOR THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE & JEWISH HOLOCAUST

Wales Commemorates the Armenian Genocide & Jewish Holocaust in Cardiff
as part of Holocaust Memorial Day on Wednesday, 26 January 2005, at
7:00 pm.

CRAG has actively supported this open public event at the Temple of
Peace in Cathays Park in Cardiff, Wales. Attending are the Chair of
CRAG as well as other Board Members, Father Shnork Baghdassarian and
other Church representatives as well as participants from different
communities. The key speaker is Mike Joseph, with contributions from
other speakers that represent Welsh political parties as well as
Armenian and Jewish participants.

Hereunder is the Press Release from Wales-Armenia Solidarity, an
associate of CRAG, on this important event that will address both the
Armenian Genoicde and Jewish Holocaust in the presence of political
and religious dignitaries: “On the Eve of Holocaust Memorial Day,The
Political, Cultural, and Religious Elite of Wales once more gather in
Solidarity with the Armenian and Jewish victims of Turkish and Nazi
Crimes against Humanity At The Temple of Peace, Cardiff, capital of
Wales, a nation emerging from 700 years of English misrule, on 26th
January, representatives of all Religious denominations, the
Presidentof the National Cultural Festival and the leaders all
political parties, including the First Minister of the National
Assembly Rhodri Morgan gather to commemmorate the Armenian victims of
genocide perpetrated by the Turkish State in 1894-96, 1909, and
1915-23 and the Jewish victims of the1939-45 Holocaust.

On this issue unanimity of opinion has been reached and this
establishes a moral challenge to the U.K. government’s position of
conniving to aid Turkey’s accesion into the European Union without any
pre-condition of Recognition of its past crimes against the Armenian
nation.

The main speaker will be Mike Joseph, the authority on the close
connection between the Armenian Genocide and the Jewish
Holocaust. Welsh and Armenian choirs will participate at this
occassion. I It was the Welshman David Lloyd George, who was Prime
minister of Britain from 1916-22, who recognised Britain’s guilt in
the matter. He wrote in 1932 in “The Truth about Peace Treaties”: ” It
was the actions of the British government that led to the massacres of
1894-96, 1909 and worst of all, thethe Holocaust of 1915″.

True to tradition today’s British government continue to turn a blind
eye to Turkey’s genocidal policies towards Armenia.”

You can also read the announcement for this event on the weblink for
the Welsh Centre for International Affairs at and
referenceis made to it as well on the official governmental weblink
on:

Campaign for Recognition of the
Armenian Genocide (CRAG)

w3.crag.org.uk / w3.accc.org.uk
[email protected]

28 January 2005

** London Mayor Ken Livingstone on the Armenian Genocide **

Yesterday, as part of the weekly BBC1 television programme ‘Question
Time’ (10:35 pm-11:35 pm), David Dimbleby as Chair of the programme
invited a studio audience in Croydon to put their questions to a panel
that also comprised the Mayor of London Ken Livingstone.

During a discussion of the Jewish Holocaust, Mayor Ken Livingston
addressed the issue of the importance of history and declared how
Hitler, embarking upon the Holocaust, had stated, “Who now remembers
the Armenians”. The Mayor also added that Armenians were victims of
the 20th Century’s first genocide.

CRAG will make the necessary contacts, but for those who watched the
programme, you can also respond to the Audience question of the
programme: ‘What are the lessons for us when we remember Auschwitz?’
by writing to the BBC. Simply log on the BBC web-link and take it from
there:

ARMENIAN PRESIDENT, ITALIAN PREMIER DISCUSS TIES, RELATIONS WITH TURKEY

Mediamax news agency
28 Jan 05

YEREVAN

Armenian President Robert Kocharyan met Italian Prime Minister Silvio
Berlusconi in Rome today.

Kocharyan and Berlusconi discussed issues of bilateral relations,
putting special accent on the necessity to extend and boost trade and
economic relations, Mediamax’s special correspondent reports from
Rome.

The sides also considered political issues, noting good contacts
between the Armenian and Italian Foreign Ministries.

The Armenian president and the Italian prime minister also exchanged
opinions on regional and international problems and discussed the
process of Armenia’s European integration. Robert Kocharyan and Silvio
Berlusconi touched upon the issue of normalization of Armenian-Turkish
relations, viewing it in the context of the forthcoming beginning of
talks on Turkey’s accession to the European Union (EU).

–Boundary_(ID_fV9PW9LPau7LBK1hxtXVIg)
Content-typ e: message/rfc822

From: Vladimir Socor <[email protected]>
Subject: The Eurasia Daily Monitor – 01/20/2005

The Jamestown Foundation
Thursday, January 20, 2005 — Volume 2, Issue 14
The Eurasia Daily Monitor

IN THIS ISSUE:
*Uzbeks need reassurance of national military preparation
*Yukos predicament affecting Lithuania
*Tbilisi proposes new autonomy for Abkhazia within Georgian federation
*Is Moscow planning to influence Azerbaijan ‘s coming elections?

————————————————————————

KARIMOV TELLS ARMY TO PREPARE FOR PRE-EMPTIVE CAPABILITIES

President Islam Karimov, delivering a key speech on the eve of Army
Day in Uzbekistan , declared that the Uzbek army must be prepared to
launch pre-emptive strikes against international terrorists and the
centers that direct them. Alluding to the attacks within Uzbekistan in
2004, Karimov used the opportunity of addressing the military to focus
on the country’s security threats and pointedly raised the prospect of
taking pre-emptive action (Uzbek Television First Channel, January
13).

President Islam Karimov, delivering a key speech on the eve of Army
Day in Uzbekistan , declared that the Uzbek army must be prepared to
launch pre-emptive strikes against international terrorists and the
centers that direct them. Alluding to the attacks within Uzbekistan in
2004, Karimov used the opportunity of addressing the military to focus
on the country’s security threats and pointedly raised the prospect of
taking pre-emptive action . Yet underlying Karimov’s public stance on
the issue of using force against Tashkent ‘s radical adversaries are
attempts to talk up military and intelligence capabilities to detect
and carry out such operations. Moreover, growing unease over the
rivalry of the United States and Russia in the region facilitates a
political imperative to convince a domestic audience that he can
adequately deal with the terrorist threat.

First, Karimov has been regarded by Washington as a stalwart supporter
of U.S. deployment into Central Asia in the aftermath of 9/11. He sees
the potential rivalry between these powers as a negative factor in the
region, highlighting the existence of American and Russian military
deployments in Kyrgyzstan , within 30 kilometers of each other, as
“unnatural.” Conscious of the controversy surrounding the
U.S. military presence in Uzbekistan, vehemently opposed as a
long-term option by Moscow, the Uzbek leader believes the
U.S. military will leave after Afghanistan has stabilized; leaving
open the thorny question of future U.S. Air Force basing
rights. Karimov told Nezavisimaya gazeta, “Regrettably, under the
guise of fighting international terrorism, the main geostrategic
players in the world are engaged in a struggle for influence in
Central Asia , an all-important part of the world. As a consequence,
the true fight against terrorism may find itself outside the framework
of real processes” (Interfax, Moscow , January 14). Such publicly
voiced suspicion about whether Washington and Moscow prefer to pursue
self-interests rather than engage in genuine efforts to enhance
regional security serve to convince Karimov that Uzbekistan must seek
security independently, while continuing to receive international
assistance from these powers.

Next, raising the prospect of an Uzbek army tasked with such
pre-emptive missions entails assessing the current military
capabilities to execute such plans. One indication of improvements in
the course of continued military reform has appeared in the army’s
rations. The outdated Soviet rations, introduced in the early 1980s
and offering only low nutritional value, have given way to the
appearance of elements of the national cuisine, meat, vegetables,
fruit juices, milk, honey, and vitamin supplements; all geared towards
the good health of military personnel and thus raising morale and
combat capabilities (Uzbek Television First Channel, January
9). Uzbekistan ‘s Defense Minister, Qodir Gulomov, inspected the
Tashkent Higher Combined-Arms Command School on January 1 specifically
to oversee the implementation of these rations plans. Though such
alterations are evidently long overdue and a clear improvement in the
lifestyle of the ordinary soldier, Uzbekistan suffers from other
problems associated with a Soviet legacy force; low-technology
equipment, lack of adequate intelligence assets needed to fix and
locate enemy targets, and Special Forces units resembling more closely
Western-style infantry units. In short, there is a long way to go in
Uzbekistan ‘s efforts to develop armed forces capable of meeting the
challenges of responding to the threats posed by international
terrorism.

There is no evidence to suggest that the Uzbek authorities had any
real understanding of exactly who was responsible for the attacks in
Tashkent in 2004, let alone being able to discover the intentions of
those responsible beforehand. Instead, the familiar suspect groups,
including Hizb-ut-Tahrir came under official scrutiny, and it is
possible that the Uzbek army, were it to be used in a pre-emptive
manner, would attack political targets instead of identifying actual
terrorists. In simple terms the army and intelligence services do not
currently posses the capability to act pre-emptively against
terrorists with any degree of precision. It is in this sense that
Karimov’s adoption of the language of pre-emption marks a dangerous
moment in the development of counter-terrorist policies in Central
Asia .

Karimov’s adoption of the language of pre-emption can clearly unsettle
his immediate neighbors, who are entitled to ask where these centers
of terrorism are located and on whose territory. Yet, the successful
development of such military capabilities seems inextricably linked to
pursuing closer relations with Western militaries and governments able
to plug the technology gaps in the Uzbek military. However, echoing
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recent talk about pre-emptive
strikes against terrorists, Karimov may have calibrated his remarks to
a domestic audience and more significantly towards the armed forces
themselves. The population needs reassurance that there are options at
Karimov’s disposal that can offer a level of security from future acts
of terrorism not guaranteed by the U.S. military presence within the
country. Genuine pre-emption, aimed against genuine terrorist targets,
does not equate with Karimov’s understanding of what is politically
expedient.

–Roger N. McDermott

LITHUANIA BRACES FOR RUSSIAN MOVE ON MAZEIKIAI OIL COMPLEX

The Russian government’s ongoing seizure of the private Yukos oil
company threatens to extend into Lithuania . There, a Yukos subsidiary
is the majority-owner and operator of the oil-processing and
oil-transport industry, Lithuania ‘s largest industrial asset. The
country seeks to prevent, or limit the adverse consequences of, a
takeover by the Russian government or government-connected companies.

President Islam Karimov, delivering a key speech on the eve of Army
Day in Uzbekistan , declared that the Uzbek army must be prepared to
launch pre-emptive strikes against international terrorists and the
centers that direct them. Alluding to the attacks within Uzbekistan in
2004, Karimov used the opportunity of addressing the military to focus
on the country’s security threats and pointedly raised the prospect of
taking pre-emptive action .

The Dutch-registered Yukos Finance holds a 53.7% stake and operating
rights in Lithuania ‘s Mazeikiu Nafta complex. This consists of the
eponymous oil refinery, a supply pipeline, the Butinge oil-loading
maritime terminal, and some distribution outlets. Yukos is the main
supplier of crude oil from its Russian extractive operations to the
Lithuanian refinery and terminal. The Lithuanian government holds a
40.66% stake in the complex.

Mazeikiai is the only refinery in the three Baltic states , and the
only major non-Russian refinery in the eastern Baltic basin. It
processed almost 9 million tons of crude oil in 2004, up 21% on 2003,
earning record profits of more than $200 million (by GAAP criteria) in
2004. The Butinge terminal exported more than 7 million tons of crude
oil in 2004 (almost the same amount as in 2003 when the rival Primorsk
terminal became operational in Russia ).

Yukos acquired the majority stake and operating rights in 2002. Within
one year it upgraded the refinery’s equipment and product quality,
enabling it to meet European Union standards and compete in EU
markets. It also expanded the operation of the maritime terminal,
originally built by the American company Williams International in the
late 1990s. The Butinge terminal possesses both export and import
capability, thus giving Lithuania the option to import North Sea or
other non-Russian oil, as a hedge against possible disruptions in
Russian supply.

Yukos came to Lithuania during the heyday of the company’s overall
performance as a model for Russia ‘s energy industry. The privately
owned Yukos rescued Mazeikiai from the stranglehold of the Russian
government-connected company Lukoil. Using its government-awarded
position as coordinator of Russian oil supplies to Lithuania , Lukoil
reduced those supplies to a trickle, pushing Mazeikiai toward
bankruptcy, in order to force Williams out and acquire the majority
stake at a fraction of its value. It was at that point that Lithuania
made the agreement with the privately owned Yukos, which then turned
Mazeikiai into a thriving enterprise as well as top taxpayer to the
country’s budget. Yukos guaranteed stable supplies of crude oil — the
key to that success.

The destruction of Yukos in Russia is now forcing the Lithuanian
government to consider precautionary measures, in anticipation of
possible takeover attempts by Russian government-connected
companies. One precautionary step is to ensure a Lithuanian majority
stake and operating rights in Mazeikiai and the associated
enterprises. Under arrangements dating back to the 1999 Williams
contract, Yukos has a preemptive right to increase its stake by 9.72%
to 63.4%, for a price of $75 million. Should it decline to exercise
that option — or should it be prevented by the Russian
government-organized bankruptcy — Lithuania can acquire that
additional stake, thus raising the total Lithuanian stake to 50.48%
and obtaining the operating rights.

Economics Minister Viktor Uspaskikh has initiated that move, and he
discussed it in early January in Israel with senior Yukos managers who
had found refuge in that country. According to Lithuanian press
reports, Uspaskikh did not clear this initiative with Prime Minister
Algirdas Brazauskas. The latter agrees in principle with the proposal,
on the strict condition that Lithuania should not pay for that
additional stake in cash, but rather through capitalization of
debt. Under the 1999 Williams contract, Lithuania had loaned $288
million to Mazeikiai. The $75 million price of the 9.72% stake can
come off that debt.

However, Brazauskas argues that ensuring stable supplies of crude oil
is more important than acquiring a majority stake and operating
rights. Brazauskas says that he would favor — if necessary — selling
Lithuania ‘s shares, “even at half-price,” to any [i.e., most probably
Russian] oil company that would guarantee the long-term continuity of
supplies. Ensuring that Mazeikiai operates at capacity and profitably,
without disruption of fuel supplies on the market, is the overriding
consideration.

How much longer Yukos and its Russian subsidiaries, primarily
Samaraneftegaz, may be able to continue supplying Mazeikiai with crude
oil is far from certain. Local analysts suggest that the predicament
of Yukos will open the way for an as-yet-unidentified Russian oil
company to take over a large ownership stake in Mazeikiai; and that
Lithuania should retain a substantial stake as well as bringing in a
major Western investor. Such a three-sided arrangement could guarantee
crude oil supplies, ensure product access to markets, and avoid any
disproportionate Russian influence.

(BNS, ELTA, delfi.lt, January 10-18).

–Vladimir Socor

WILL ASYMMETRICAL FEDERALISM WORK FOR ABKHAZIA?

The Georgian government has crafted a new framework to facilitate the
reintegration of Abkhazia and South Ossetia into the Georgian state. A
special blueprint drafted by the National Security Council reportedly
proposes an asymmetric federation with an unprecedented degree of
sovereignty for Abkhazia.

Giorgi Khaindrava, Georgian State Minister for Conflict Resolution,
said on January 3 that the government is developing a new statement on
the status for breakaway Abkhazia and South Ossetia . He said that
that the section regarding Abkhazia is actually based on an existing
concept. Prior to the Rose Revolution, five liberal Georgian experts
had developed a model at the initiative of several members of the
National Security Council and with technical support provided by
Conciliation Resources, a British NGO. The current National Security
Council planned to consider the blueprint by January 10, the deadline
that Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili had set for the Georgian
think tanks and national Security Council for elaborating a
blueprint. As predicted by many think tanks, the time allotted was not
sufficient to work out a sound, mutually acceptable document (Imedi
TV, January 3).

The pre-2004 model creating a special status for Abkhazia within the
Georgian state first came to light last summer (24 Saati, June 30,
2004), and Khaindrava announced it would serve as his main guideline.

Kote Kublashvili, a lawyer and co-author of the project, admits that
the concept is leading Georgia toward a federal state where Abkhazia
must have all the rights of a sovereign state except of the right of
internationally recognized independence. He refers to the structures
of the United States , Spain , Germany , and Switzerland and
conclusions of foreign experts about the model, which, they argue,
would not give Abkhazia any legal leverage to secede. However,
Kublashvili allowed that Abkhazia could still violate any federal
agreement (24 Saati, January 12).

Georgian Minister of Justice Giorgi Papuashvili said, “Not everyone
will be satisfied with this blueprint.” As he explained, “Everyone
should understand that the Abkhaz have their own legitimate
interests.” Papuashvili forecast “resistance from various political
groups” but said the authorities should overcome this obstacle by
using the mandate of the people’s trust. He also implied that a
referendum might be called on the matter (24 Saati, December 29).

The comments and actions by some Georgian officials and
representatives of civil society indicate that some Georgians are
becoming less rigid in their views regarding the Abkhaz conflict.

On January 6, 16 Georgian NGOs and several individuals who have been
long engaged in “public diplomacy” with the Abkhaz sent an open letter
to Saakashvili containing four preconditions that they believe Tbilisi
must follow to regain Abkhazia. The letter called on the government to
abandon military rhetoric and recognize peaceful means as the sole
method of conflict settlement; provide an unbiased and comprehensive
assessment of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict; treat the Abkhaz side as
an equal partner in the talks; and lift economic sanctions on
Abkhazia, including restoration of railway links and investments to
the region’s economy.

Pro-governmental and Western-leaning analysts argue that, for the sake
of reconciliation, Georgia must bow before the Abkhaz and publicly
acknowledge that the military campaign against Abkhazia in 1992 was a
grave mistake. Moreover, these analysts emphasize the absolute
necessity of recognizing the legitimacy of the Abkhazians’ right of
self-determination. “We [Georgians] have found ourselves captives of
our own truth and didn’t think about the Abkhaz truth,” one analyst
argued. These analysts advocate, apart from granting Abkhazia a high
degree of sovereignty and symbols of respect, the creation of special
economic zones in the trans-border areas of Abkhazia and Georgia under
joint Georgian-Abkhaz administration and financial support and
security guarantees from international organizations. They also
suggest supplanting Russia as mediator (24 Hours, January 12-13;
Resonance, January 12).

Abkhaz leaders have responded cautiously to the proposal. Alexander
Ankvab, the anticipated nominee as prime minister in the new Bagapsh
government, supports peace talks but is worried about the bellicose
statements that sometimes emanate from Tbilisi . “Yes, we certainly
support peace initiatives. However, we have recently been hearing
Mr. Saakashvili and his ministers make threats against us,” he said in
a phone interview with Imedi TV on January 3.

There are also reports that part of the Abkhaz establishment is ready
to make peace with the Georgians so long as the Georgian government
publicly apologizes to the Abkhaz for the 1992 military invasion
(Asaval Dasavali, January 17).

Meanwhile Tbilisi ‘s liberal model incurred sharp criticism from
Abkhaz refugee organizations at an Institute of Political Science
roundtable discussion on January 5. Malkhaz Pataraya, chair of the
public movement Dabruneba (“Return”) said, “It’s not difficult to
understand where the idea of federalization is coming from” alluding
to Russia . Some representatives of the Abkhaz government-in-exile
dismissed the model as “discriminative for Georgians” and paving the
way for a “velvet,” and this time legitimate, secession of Abkhazia.

Georgian hardliners advocate a tough policy. The editorial “What will
the President choose, ‘political fancies’ or real politics?” (24
Saati, January 11) says the peace concept ignores vital interests of
ethnic Georgians. It calls on the government to triple the Georgian
army and intelligence budgets instead of flirting with unrealistic
peace initiatives.

The newly created “Unitary Georgia” movement argues that
federalization of Georgia is a Russian scheme and “national suicide”
that will lead to the further fragmentation of the country (24 Saati,
January 11).

The Union of Georgian Veterans of the Abkhaz War said that if the
government accepts the NGO’s concept, the Union would oppose it “by
all legal means (Akhali Taoba, January 15).

The Georgian government likely prefers to remain on good terms with
both sides. Saber rattling by the hawkish Defense Minister Irakli
Okruashvili alternates with conciliatory gestures to the
separatists. An ethnic Ossetian, Alana Gagloyeva, has become
Saakashvili’s spokesperson and an ethnic Abkhaz, Leila Avidzba, has
been appointed as government spokesperson (Prime News, Rustavi-2,
January 11).

–Zaal Anjaparidze

NEW ELECTION COALITIONS IN AZERBAIJAN PROMISE HEATED PARLIAMENTARY
ELECTIONS

Two newly formed election coalitions have awakened Azerbaijan ‘s
seemingly indifferent political scene, promising heated parliamentary
elections later this year. On January 10, 26 NGOs and representatives
from various political parties formed a new election coalition,
“Solidarity and Trust.” Ilgar Gasimov, chairman of the public movement
” Alliance in the Name of Azerbaijan ” was elected head of this
alliance. Interestingly, the alliance also includes several prominent
Azerbaijani oppositionists, coalition can be portrayed as one crossing
party lines. For example, the deputy chairman of the Azerbaijan
National Independence Party, Maharram Zulfugarly, and the
editor-in-chief of the Baki Xeber newspaper and ideological secretary
of the Azerbaijan Democratic Party, Aydin Guliyev, both signed up for
the new coalition, as did the Amal intelligentsia movement (which is
closely linked to Musavat, another opposition party), the Agridag NGO,
and the Institute of Peace and Democracy (Turan News Agency, January
10).

Turan quoted Gasimov as saying that the alliance “would contest all
125 seats in the Parliament, but that he had no intentions to run for
Parliament himself.” Alliance members pledged to strive for free and
fair elections in the country and declared the alliance open to all
interested parties. “We already have many members of YAP [the ruling
New Azerbaijan Party] and opposition parties who have joined us,
especially in the rural areas,” said Gasimov.

Local media and political analysts rushed to label the new coalition
as pro-Russian. The independent daily Zerkalo, in its lead article on
January 12, described the situation as “The shadow of the Russian
eagle hanging over the Azerbaijani parliament.” Gasimov, who worked
in Russian Ministry of Justice until his retirement, is somewhat of a
“dark horse” in Azerbaijani politics. His organization has been
increasingly vocal in the past few years on the issue of Karabakh, and
it has organized numerous street rallies in Azerbaijan , Russia , and
various European countries, protesting the Armenian occupation. This
new move to strengthen his position prior to the parliamentary
elections was interpreted by some as the establishment of a new
opposition or a sign of Russia ‘s increasing influence in the
country. Zerkalo, in the same article, linked the creation of the
alliance to the recent events in Ukraine in which the political battle
between the two political forces was very much perceived as part of
the battle between the West and Russia .

Yet there are also those who scoff at a link between Gasimov and
Russia . One opposition member, who knows Gasimov very closely but
preferred to stay anonymous, told EDM that Gasimov “is a puppet in the
hands of the [Azerbaijani] authorities and that Russia will never put
its bets on him.”

Meanwhile, leaders of ADP, Musavat, and the Popular Front met on
January 12 to discuss the possibility of forming a joint coalition
prior the parliamentary elections and came out of the meeting saying,
“In principle, an agreement has been reached” (Echo, January 12). The
Azerbaijani opposition has long been known for its inability to unite,
which has caused them serious defeats in previous elections, most
lately in presidential elections in 2003. Yet, the recent success
stories from Georgia and Ukraine seem to have changed the attitude of
opposition leaders in the country. “As a result of negotiations
[between the Popular Front, Musavat, and ADP parties] it has been
agreed to consolidate the opposition and submit unified candidates”
Zerkalo quoted Ali Kerimli, chairman of the Popular Front, on January
14.

It is likely that several more coalitions, willing to run for
Parliament, will emerge in the next months. Jumshud Nuriyev, a former
member of the opposition, has also stated that in March he plans to
announce the creation of broad-based political alliance. In this
situation, the ability of the ruling party, also known for its
internal rivalries, to unite and form a common list of candidates will
matter considerably. In any case, the upcoming elections in November
promise much life in the once near-dead Azerbaijani political scene.

–Fariz Ismailzade

————————————————————————

The Eurasia Daily Monitor is a publication of the Jamestown
Foundation. The opinions expressed in it are those of the individual
authors and do not necessarily represent those of the Jamestown
Foundation. If you have any questions regarding the content of EDM, or
if you think that you have received this email in error, please
respond to [email protected].

Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution of EDM is strictly
prohibited by law.

The Jamestown Foundation
4516 43rd Street, NW
Washington, DC 20016
202-483-8888 (phone)
202-483-8337 (fax)

Copyright (c) 1983-2004 The Jamestown Foundation.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

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
&#1057;&#1045; 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.

Armenian Assembly of America
122 C Street, NW, Suite 350
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: 202-393-3434
Fax: 202-638-4904
Email: [email protected]
Web:

PRESS RELEASE
January 28, 2005
CONTACT: Christine Kojoian
Email: [email protected]

RE: Rep. Hyde Announces IR Subcommittee Chairs

Congressman Elton Gallegly (R-CA), an active member of the Armenian
Caucus who has repeatedly championed Armenian-American issues, has
been named by Hyde as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Europe. Hyde
also tapped Armenian issues supporter Congresswoman Ileana
Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) as chair of the Subcommittee on the Middle East
and Central Asia.

The Armenian Assembly of America is the largest Washington-based
nationwide organization promoting public understanding and awareness
of Armenian issues. It is a 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt membership
organization.

NR#2005-009

***********************************************************************

NEWS RELEASE
Committee on International Relations
U.S. House of Representatives
Henry J. Hyde, Chairman
CONTACT: Sam Stratman (202) 226-7875

January 27, 2005

For IMMEDIATE Release

Hyde Announces Subcommittee Chairs

Panel on Oversight and Investigations Formed

(WASHINGTON) – U.S. Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-IL), chairman of the House
International Relations Committee, announced a reorganization of the
Committee on Thursday, including creation of a Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations.

Hyde also announced that the committee will convene on Wednesday,
February 2, for its formal organizational meeting to adopt Committee
rules for the 109th Congress and approve a two-year oversight plan.

Among the Committee’s priorities in the 109th will be its continuing
investigation of the growing corruption scandal engulfing the United
Nations and proposals to reform U.S. participation in the world
forum. Hyde said today that the subcommittee will be led by
U.S. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA).

Hyde also named U.S. Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA) chairman of the
Subcommittee on Europe with an expanded jurisdiction that includes
tracking of emerging threats in the world. “Mr. Gallegly’s experience
on this Committee and his membership on the House Judiciary and
Intelligence committees make him a key player in spearheading this
Committee’s relationship with some of America’s most vital strategic
allies and the challenges that we face together in a dangerous world,”
Hyde said.

Hyde also tapped U.S. Rep. Christopher Smith (R-NJ) to chair the
Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International
Operations. “Under Chris Smith’s leadership, the former Human Rights
and International Operations Subcommittee was a powerhouse
subcommittee producing major legislative initiatives including the
first ever anti-trafficking legislation, embassy security upgrades and
critical reforms to the State Department. Joining these comprehensive
jurisdictions with authority for the important continent of Africa
gives this subcommittee significant latitude to chart, reform and
reshape foreign policy initiatives,” Hyde said.

Hyde also announced the reappointment of U.S. Rep. Jim Leach (R-IA) as
chair of the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific and U.S. Rep. Ileana
Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) as chair of the Subcommittee on the Middle East
and Central Asia.

Also on Thursday, Hyde named U.S. Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN), chairman of
the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere; and U.S. Rep. Ed Royce
(R-CA), chairman of the Subcommittee on International Terrorism and
Nonproliferation.

##30##

OSCE fact-finding mission set to visit Azerbaijan’s seven occupied districts

Lider TV, Baku
28 Jan 05

[Presenter] The OSCE’s fact-finding mission has arrived in Baku. They
will visit the occupied territories of Azerbaijan. The head of the
mission and the co-chairmen [of the OSCE Minsk Group that mediates
talks between Azerbaijan and Armenia] had a meeting at the Azerbaijani
Foreign Ministry. Russian co-chairman Yuriy Merzlyakov has talked
about the visit:

[Merzlyakov speaking to journalists in Russian] We, the co-chairmen of
the OSCE Minsk Group, and the head of the mission to investigate cases
of settlement in territories around Nagornyy Karabakh, the head of the
OSCE Division at the German Federal Foreign Office, Ms Emily Haber,
have just met deputy ministers and deputy heads of several Azerbaijani
state committees at the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry. They gave us
very detailed and interesting information on all the questions we were
interested in. We have familiarized ourselves with this
information. But we still need to look into it once again. I can say
now that the briefing was very efficient and useful for us. The
mission can start working. This is my statement.

In response to your questions now, I can say that as planned, the
mission will visit all the seven districts around Nagornyy
Karabakh. This was planned by the mission and the co-chairmen, by both
sides. Thanks.

VATICAN INFORMATION SERVICE
HOLY SEE PRESS OFFICE

01.28.2005
Fifteenth Year  – N.19

ARMENIA: BUILD A SOLID AND LASTING PEACE

VATICAN CITY, JAN 28, 2005 (VIS) – This morning John Paul II received the
president of the Republic of Armenia, Robert Kocharian, recalling other
meetings they had held, in the Vatican in 1999 and later in Yerevan in 2001,
during the Pope’s apostolic visit to Armenia.

  The Pope told the president of his “sincere appreciation for the good
relations between the Holy See and the government of your country. I know
that the Catholic community is welcomed and respected, and that its various
activities contribute to the wellbeing of the entire nation.”

  He went on: “Everyone earnestly hopes that the collaboration between the
Holy See and the Armenian government will continue to grow and, where the
situation calls for it, that eventual improvements to the status of the
Catholic Church will be made.”

  The Holy Father also gave assurances of the “friendly and respectful
relations between the Catholic Church and the Armenian Apostolic Church.
This understanding, which is even more active thanks to the initiative of
the Catholicos Karekin II, will certainly have positive repercussions for
the peaceful coexistence of the entire Armenian people, who are called to
face no small number of social and economic challenges.”

  “I also hope,” said the Pope, “that true and lasting peace comes to the
region of Nagorno-Karabagh where you, President Kocharian, come from. This
will come about by a decisive refusal of violence and a patient dialogue
between the parties, thanks also to active international mediation.”

  The Pope concluded by recalling that the Holy See, “which over the
centuries has not failed to denounce violence and defend the rights of the
weak, will continue to support all efforts aimed at building a solid and
lasting peace.”

AC/VISIT PRESIDENT/ARMENIA:KOCHARIAN           VIS 050128 (300)

The news items contained in the Vatican Information Service may be used, in
part or in their entirety, by quoting the source:
V.I.S. -Vatican Information Service.

Copyright © Vatican Information Service 00120 Vatican City

Pope tells Armenian leader he hopes for lasting peace in Karabakh

Mediamax news agency
28 Jan 05

YEREVAN

Armenian President Robert Kocharyan met the head of the Roman Catholic
Church, John Paul II, in the Vatican today.

Greeting the Armenian president, John Paul II recalled with warmth his
visit to Armenia in September 2001 on the occasion of the 1700th
anniversary of proclamation of Christianity as the state religion in
Armenia, Mediamax’s special correspondent reports from the Vatican.

“I would like to take the opportunity to express my hearty greetings
to all the people in Armenia as well as millions of Armenians who are
dispersed all over the world but who have not lost links with its
culture and Christian traditions,” John Paul II said.

“With all my heart I want to express my best wishes as regards the
establishment of a real lasting peace in your, Mr President, smaller
homeland, in Nagornyy Karabakh. This may lead to the final rejection
of violence and to the establishment of a dialogue between the
interested parties based on tolerance assisted by active international
mediation,” the head of the Roman Catholic Church said.

John Paul II stressed that “relations based on mutual respect and
friendship have been established between the Catholic and Armenian
Apostolic churches”.

“I think that our mutual desire is the development of a closer
cooperation between the Holy See and the Armenian government within
the framework of which it will become possible to decide on necessary
changes aimed at improving the status of the Catholic Church,” John
Paul II said.

Azerbaijan hands over four POWs to Armenia

ANS TV, Baku
28 Jan 05

Four servicemen of the Armenian army, Martirosyan, Azadyan, Gunyan and
Filiganyan, who crossed the front line at different times in 2004, are
being handed over to Armenia in the village of Bala Cafarli of
[Azerbaijan’s] Qazax District at the moment.

ANS’s correspondent in Ganca Sahla Abdinova, who is watching the
process, has quoted Azerbaijani servicemen as saying that three of the
soldiers of the Armenian army were detained in Nagornyy Karabakh where
they were serving and the other one was detained while crossing the
Armenian-Azerbaijani border. All four soldiers are residents of
Armenia.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress