AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL ANNUAL REPORT 2004

REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA

Head of state: Robert Kocharian
Head of government Andranik Markarian
Death penalty: abolitionist for ordinary crimes
UN Women’s Convention: ratified
Optional Protocol to UN Women’s Convention: not signed

Covering events from January – December 2003

In line with its human rights commitments to the Council of Europe,
Armenia abolished capital punishment in peacetime. However, it failed
to meet its commitments to the Council of Europe on conscientious
objectors to compulsory military service, who continued to be
imprisoned. The authorities detained hundreds of protesters who took
part in peaceful opposition rallies to contest the outcome of the
presidential elections.

Background

In March incumbent President Kocharian won presidential elections that
were marred by widespread voting irregularities, including ballot
box stuffing, and intimidation and violence towards independent and
opposition election monitors. Mass opposition rallies protested at
illegal election practices. Following international criticism, the
President acknowledged that the elections had not met international
standards and set up a commission of inquiry to investigate reported
irregularities. Nevertheless, parliamentary elections in May were
likewise flawed by reported ballot box stuffing and intimidation of
international observers. Parties that supported the President won a
large majority in parliament.

Administrative arrests

Some 100 protesters who participated in peaceful demonstrations after
the presidential elections were reportedly sentenced to short prison
terms after being convicted of disrupting public order. Reportedly
denied access to lawyers, they were sentenced in closed trials without
legal representation. In April the Armenian Constitutional Court
declared the arrests unlawful.

Prisoner of conscience Artur Sakunts, Chairman of the Vanadzor
branch of the Helsinki Citizens Assembly (HCA), was released from
prison on 25 March after serving a 10-day sentence. He was arrested
after he attempted to organize a public meeting on 15 March on the
findings of HCA election monitoring. He was tried the same day and
convicted of “disobeying the authorities” (Article 182 of the Armenian
Administrative Code). He was not permitted access to a lawyer before
or during his trial. His arrest and the firebombing of the Vanadzor
HCA office in the early hours of 14 March raised fears of a campaign
to prevent the HCA from carrying out legitimate human rights work.

Unfair trial concerns

In December Nairi Unanyan and five co-accused were sentenced to life
imprisonment by a court in Yerevan for their part in the October
1999 attack on the Armenian parliament in which eight deputies and
government officials, including Prime Minister Vazgen Sarkisian
and parliamentary Speaker Karen Demirchian, were killed. There were
concerns about the fairness of the trial and the widespread support
for imposing the death penalty in the case.

Proceedings in the case had been accompanied since the 1999 arrests
by concerns about due process and the detention conditions of those
detained in connection with the arrests. These included allegations of
torture and ill-treatment, difficulties in access to defence lawyers,
lack of access to families, and denial of access to independent
medical practitioners. Widespread public and political support
for the death penalty in this case had led to the Council of Europe
warning Armenia that it would face suspension from the organization
if any of the defendants were executed.

Death penalty

In May parliament adopted a new criminal code, which abolished the
death penalty in peacetime but contained a provision that could have
allowed use of the death penalty in the parliamentary shootings
trial. In July President Kocharian commuted all outstanding death
sentences to life in prison.

In September the newly elected parliament voted to abolish the death
penalty in peacetime and to ratify Protocol No. 6 to the European
Convention on Human Rights, one of the commitments Armenia undertook
when it joined the Council of Europe in 2001. However, in November
deputies voted unanimously to amend the new criminal code to deny the
right of parole to prisoners serving life sentences for grave crimes
including murder and assassination of a state or public figure. It was
widely believed that the amendment was intended to ensure that those
convicted in the parliamentary shootings case were never released.

Conscientious objection

Parliament adopted a law in December that provided for unarmed military
service of three years or alternative civilian service under the
Ministry of Defence for three and a half years – almost double the
length of ordinary military service.

Conscientious objectors continued to be sentenced to prison terms
despite Council of Europe requirements that all those imprisoned for
conscientious objection should be freed. By December, prison sentences
of between one and two years had been imposed on at least 27 men,
all Jehovah’s Witnesses, for conscientious objection. Five more had
been arrested and were awaiting trial. A further two had been released
on parole.

—

GOOD DEEDS NEVER FORGOTTEN

A1 Plus | 20:58:49 | 27-05-2004 | Official |

On Thursday, President Kocharyan gave Armenian National Hero title
and awarded Motherland Medal to prominent benefactor Kirk Krkoryan
for his great contribution to Armenia’s development.

The same title and award were given to Charles Aznavour, who turned
80, for his devotion to Armenia.

PRESS RELEASE
Armenian Center for National and International Studies
75 Yerznkian Street
Yerevan 375033, Armenia
Tel: (+374 – 1) 52.87.80 or 27.48.18
Fax: (+374 – 1) 52.48.46
E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]
Website:

May 27, 2004

ACNIS Releases Expert Poll Results, Focus on Armenia in the World

YEREVAN – The Armenian Center for National and International Studies
(ACNIS) today convened a public roundtable to issue the results of
its first two expert opinion surveys. Entitled “My View of Armenia’s
Future” and “Armenia’ s Foreign Policy, Orientation, and Attitude
toward Power Centers of the World,” they embraced vital issues of
concern for both the Republic of Armenia and Armenians worldwide. The
seminar brought together policy and academic circles, leaders of
the NGO community, representatives of the mass media, politicians,
public figures, and human rights advocates in order to consider
specific trends and patterns in the specialized domain.

ACNIS founder Raffi Hovannisian greeted the audience with opening
remarks. “Currently concluding its first decade of public service,
the Center’s research agenda this year will seek out the applied
setting and the public pulse, expanding its field of observation
to include the entire spectrum of society. In this manner we will
develop the foundations required to compare today’s expert viewpoints
with prevailing public opinions, for a better and more comprehensive
understanding of key issues facing the nation,” Hovannisian said.

ACNIS legal and political affairs analyst Stepan Safarian then
presented the results of the Expert Opinion Poll on “My View of
Armenia’s Future.” In the foreseeable future, regional cooperation will
be a priority issue for Armenia, assert 18% of the respondents. Almost
an equal percentage prioritize establishment of democracy, of
which 2% emphasize the restoration of constitutional order. 16% of
the respondents attach primary importance to the settlement of the
Karabagh matter. 10% prefer a reassessment of foreign policy, and 10%
law and order in domestic life. For 8% of respondents, strengthening
of the army and maintenance of internal stability each are ranked
as the most urgent issue. 6% note the campaign against corruption,
and 4% the creation of jobs, as the question of paramount importance.

In another connection, 68% of respondents believe the elimination
of emigration to be plausible in the near future, while 56% find
possible the regulation of the Karabagh conflict, 52% international
recognition of the Armenian Genocide, and 52% poverty reduction. Only
6% have an optimistic view about the return of historical Armenian
lands. An equal percentage share a hope to succeed in the struggle
against corruption. In the opinion of 80% of respondents, Armenia’s
prospects for sovereign democracy are endangered in the short
run. This notwithstanding, 74% still believe that all challenges
currently faced will be overcome.

ACNIS international affairs associate and Yerevan State University
professor Aram Harutiunian presented the results of the Expert Opinion
Poll on “Armenia’s Foreign Policy, Orientation, and Attitude toward
Power Centers of the World.” In his report, 56% of all respondents
attach high significance to protection of human rights as the leading
requirement to which the Council of Europe holds the Republic of
Armenia, 34% to constitutional reforms, and 6% to judicial reforms. 82%
are not satisfied with the level of Armenia’s fulfillment of Council
of Europe commitments, whereas 72% believe that it is the Council of
Europe, together with the European Union, which promotes Armenia’s
independence. As for the states or international organizations
circumscribing Armenia’s independence, 56% of the respondents note
the Russian Federation, 6% the United States and the World Bank,
respectively, 4% Turkey, and so on. It is noteworthy that 12% cite
the Armenian government as an obstacle to establishment of independent
statehood. 66% of the specialists surveyed think that Armenia should
join NATO within 10-12 years, and 6% of the remainder have difficulty
in answering. 18% consider the present deployment of Russian bases
in Armenia the main guarantee for regional stability. 76% do not view
the Russian military presence in Armenia as such a guarantee, and 6%
encounter difficulty in responding to the question.

Fifty experts of various ages and both genders took part in the expert
opinion poll. 30% of them work at state-run and 70% in non-governmental
institutions; 72% are male, and 28% female. 18% are 20-30 years old,
40% 31-40, 32% 41-50, 6% 51-60, and 4% 61-70 years of age. 98% of
the responding specialists have received higher education. 32% are
candidates of science (PhD), 2% of whom are full professors, 60% hold
a Master’s degree, while 6% have earned solely a Bachelor’s degree.

The presentations were followed by contributions by Yerevan State
University sociology professor Zinaida Tokmajian; “Yerkir” weekly’s
editor-in-chief Spartak Seiranian; American University international
relations professor Khachik Derghoukassian; European Union Chamber
of Commerce executive director Hovhannes Igityan; Armenian European
Policy and Legal Advice Center executive director Tigran Jrbashian;
Avetik Ishkhanian of the Armenian Helsinki Committee; Sevak Lalayan
of the International Center for Human Development; Armen Aghayan
of the “Protection of Liberated Territories” public initiative;
and many others.

Founded in 1994 by Armenia’s first Minister of Foreign Affairs Raffi K.
Hovannisian and supported by a global network of contributors, ACNIS
serves as a link between innovative scholarship and the public policy
challenges facing Armenia and the Armenian people in the post-Soviet
world. It also aspires to be a catalyst for creative, strategic
thinking and a wider understanding of the new global environment. In
2004, the Center focuses primarily on public outreach, civic education,
and applied research on critical domestic and foreign policy issues
for the state and the nation. For further information on the Center or
the full polling results, call (3741) 52-87-80 or 27-48-18; fax (3741)
52-48-46; e-mail [email protected] or [email protected]; or visit ,
,

U.S. Does Not Support Investments in Karabakh, Ambassador Says

Baku Today, Azerbaijan
May 27 2004

Baku Today 27/05/2004 12:35

U.S. ambassador to Azerbaijan, Reno Harnish, on Wednesday said his
government does not support investments in Azerbaijan’s occupied
Nagorno-Karabakh (NK) region and that there are no U.S. companies
operating in the self-proclaimed republic, Turan reported.

While meeting students at Baku State University, Harnish denied
accusations that a U.S. company called Telekom-2 is operating in NK.

“Such a company does not exist at all,” Turan quoted the ambassador
Harnish as saying.

Members of the Azerbaijani parliament on Tuesday raised the issue
on alleged U.S. investments in NK. Zahid Oruc, an MP from the
pro-government Motherland party, called upon the parliament to appeal
U.S. administration and voice dissatisfaction over reports of U.S.
companies’ operating in the occupied territory of Azerbaijan.

Armenia sees no need for EU mediation in Karabakh settlement

Interfax
May 27 2004

Yerevan. (Interfax) – Armenia does not think it is necessary for
the European Union to act as mediator in the settlement of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian
told reporters on Wednesday.

He said talks on Nagorno-Karabakh are being held in the framework of
the OSCE Minsk group which fully suits the Armenian side.

“The European Union has always promoted the efforts of the Minsk
Group and I hope it will continue to do so. But there is currently
no need to involve the EU in the negotiations as a mediator,” he said.

Oskanian also denied reports of new proposals on Karabakh from
Minsk group co-chairmen. “New ideas should not be confused with new
proposals,” he said.

Azer Tag, Azerbaijan
May 27 2004

FINLAND KEEN IN DEVELOPMENT OF RELATIONS WITH AZERBAIJAN
[May 27, 2004, 11:03:35]

On May 26, Minister of foreign affairs of Azerbaijan Republic Elmar
Mammadyarov has met the ambassador of Finland accredited in Helsinki
in Azerbaijan Timo Lahelma.

As informed to AzerTAj from the press center of the Ministry of
foreign affairs, ambassador Timo Lahelma, having informed that for
the first time has visited Baku in 1995, has with satisfaction noted,
that for last years in Azerbaijan radical reforms have been lead
conducted. Having emphasized interest of his country in development
of relations with Azerbaijan in various areas, the ambassador has
expressed hope, that madam Terhi Hakala who since September 2004 will
substitute him on this post, also will continue this line. Having noted
importance of realization by our countries of visits at high level
for steady development of links, the ambassador has expressed sincere
gratitude for the support rendered by our country of Finland within
the framework of the international organizations within these years.

Having stopped then on prospects of connections, ambassador Timo
Lahelma informed the Minister about intention of Finland to open
honorable consulate in our country, sign Memorandum on mutual
understanding of equipment of branches of reanimation in hospitals of
Azerbaijan with new technique and expand connections in the field of
culture. Having touched the further activity, the ambassador informed,
that would continue mission to Lithuania.

Minister for Foreign Affairs Elmar Mammadyarov, highly having estimated
interest of Finland in further steady development of relations,
has noted importance of continuation of joint efforts in the said
area. The head of foreign policy department Elmar Mammadyarov has
noted, that counts realization of activity of constant embassy of
Finland in Azerbaijan necessary for adjustment in the future of links
between our countries on stronger basis. Having touched the connections
between our countries in sphere of culture, the Minister has noted,
that the question of development of links and in the field of science
and education, and also participation of diplomats in the advance
courses of experience has great value.

Having informed the ambassador about integration of our country into
the European institutes, the Minister, showing as an example working
visit of the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev to the Kingdom of
Belgium, has noted, that the said visit has brought in the positive
contribution to development of relations of our Republic with the
European Union within the framework of new policy of neighborhood.
Having informed then the ambassador about the work done in the field
of settlement of the Armenia-Azerbaijan, Nagorny Karabakh conflict,
Mr. Elmar Mammadyarov has especially emphasized activity of the
European Union connected to resolution to the conflict.

At the meeting, also discussed were other issues of mutual interest.
From: Baghdasarian

Full Frame Jihad
By Cinnamon Stillwell
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 27, 2004

Frontpagemag.com
May 27 2004

It is no secret that people with left-leaning political perspectives
dominate film festivals, and thus they tend to promote films that
reflect their worldview, while shunning those that contradict it.
This is certainly the case when it comes to films about Islam, one of
the Left’s pet subjects in the post-9/11 world. If a film does not
portray Muslims in a positive light (or as victims), it will
inevitably be labeled “propaganda” instead of “art.” Yet strangely
enough, actual propaganda is often lauded as “art.”

Mohammed Bakri’s Jenin Jenin, for instance, advances the myth that
Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) “massacred” Palestinians during
Operation Defensive Shield in 2002. [1] Despite being widely
discredited, this so-called documentary played at the Big Sky
Documentary Film Festival in Montana this year, [2] as well as
various “Palestinian Film Festivals” on college campuses across the
country, and it won Best Film at the Carthage International Film
Festival. [3] In contrast, Pierre Rehov’s Road to Jenin, an expose
about how the Palestinians perpetrated a media fraud in Jenin, has
played at very few film festivals. [4]

This year the Islam documentary making the rounds is Noble Sacrifice
(Thabh-ul-Azim) by Vatche Boulghourjian, an ethnic Armenian born in
Kuwait and educated in the United States and Britain. Shot in
southern Lebanon, this controversial film, which draws a connection
between the Shiite ritual of Ashura (self-flagellation) and the
popular mythology of “martyrdom” throughout the Islamic world,
recently screened (April 2, 2004) at the Full Frame Documentary Film
Festival in North Carolina. [5] The film description at the Full
Frame website demonstrates a typical moral ambiguity towards Islamic
terrorism, saying:

“Noble Sacrifice examines the historical and philosophical
implications of Ashura on current socio-political conditions and
military theaters. More importantly, it challenges audiences to
contemplate the rationality underlying the act and discourse of what
has become one of the most controversial topics in contemporary
history – suicide bombing – recognized locally as martyrdom
operations. [6]”

Unsurprisingly, the documentary’s bloody imagery and glorification of
suicide bombings were the subject of a heated debate after the
screening. What film festival promoters had billed as a “provocative
discussion,” turned out to be a revealing experience. Boulghourjian
vowed never to show the film “in the United States again,” after a
Muslim woman in the audience called it “irresponsible for connecting
violence to Islam” and someone else labeled it “propaganda”. [7]
Tellingly, no one commented on the film’s celebration of terrorism,
only its politically incorrect depiction of Islam.

The Noble Sacrifice panel discussion also shed light on the
intersection of film festivals and universities. Panelists included
two Duke University professors, Negar Mottahedeh and Miriam Cooke.
Both Mottahedeh, a professor of Literature and Film, and Cooke, a
professor of Modern Arabic Literature and Culture, have a long
history of promoting leftist politics through their work at Duke
University. Professor Cooke has also been very active in Duke
University’s Islamic Studies Department. She is co-director of the
university’s Center for the Study of Muslim Networks (CSMN), [8] as
well as being involved in the 2003-2004 Carolina Seminar on
Comparative Islamic Studies. [9] And it turns out that Cooke had
crossed paths with Boulghourjian’s film once before.

Noble Sacrifice had been set to screen at Full Frame in 2003 (during
the liberation of Iraq) but was canceled at the last minute due to
“wartime sensitivities.” [10] Nancy Buirski, the festival’s founder
and executive director, was uncomfortable with the film’s negative
portrayal of Muslims and pulled it in what she called, “the spirit of
reconciliation and tolerance.” In making her decision, Buirski
deferred to Professor Cooke, who was to introduce the documentary.
But after viewing it at home the night before, Cooke refused,
describing it as “a sensationalistic film that was treating people
not as devotees but as fanatics.” She labeled the filmmaker “biased”
and called his linking of Ashura and suicide bombings
“reprehensible.” Cooke maintained that the rituals portrayed in the
film represented only a “local, cultish version” of Ashura, and
worried that they might “inflame anti-Arab sentiments.” [11] In other
words, Islam’s reputation as a “religion of peace” was at stake and
Cooke was not about to aid in its destruction.

In an interview in April of 2003, filmmaker Vatche Boulghourjian,
[12] disputed Cooke’s assertions, pointing out that self-flagellation
occurs in South Lebanon, “whether Miriam Cooke and other scholars of
Islamic or Asian studies like it or not.” And he stood by his
decision to associate Ashura with suicide bombings. Boulghourjian
cited Sayyid Hasan Nasrallah, the secretary-general of the Lebanese
terrorist group Hezbollah, for making “the connection between Ashura,
politics, resistance and self-sacrifice very clear.”

The documentary relies on archival footage obtained from Hezbollah
officials and includes scenes of suicide bombings, as well as a
videotaped “pre-martyrdom message” from Salah Ghandour, the Lebanese
suicide bomber who blew himself up near an Israeli base in southern
Lebanon in 1993.
Considering all this, Cooke’s assertions of bias seem a tad bit
misdirected.

The Full Frame Festival was by no means professor Cooke’s first brush
with notoriety. She gained attention in 2003 for co-organizing Duke
University’s “Axis of Evil” film festival, along with professor
Mottahedeh. [13] The series was dubbed “Reel Evil” and featured films
from Iran, Iraq and North Korea, as well as rogue states Syria,
Libya, and Cuba. The timing of the festival coincided with the advent
of the war in Iraq, which made it essentially a platform for anti-war
sentiment. Considering Cooke and several of her students attended an
anti-war rally in Washington D.C. the same year, this was hardly
surprising. [14]

Of course, the real target of the festival was President Bush and his
famous “axis of evil” phrase in the 2002 State of the Union address.
As Cooke said at the time, the festival was an “opportunity to see
the kind of work, cultural work, that people are doing in the
countries that our government has labeled evil.” [15] The fact that
the film from North Korea, Pulgasari, was produced by Dictator Kim
Jung Il and featured an actress and director who had been kidnapped
from South Korea and forced to work on the project, didn’t seem to
factor into Cooke’s reasoning.

Why professor Cooke, Buirski, and the Full Frame Documentary Film
Festival brought Noble Sacrifice back a year later remains something
of a mystery. Buirski had promised the film would resurface and with
the war in Iraq no longer a new development, she may have considered
the timing better. [16] Or it could be that organizers decided to
take the film festival’s motto to heart: “How much reality can you
handle?” How much indeed.
Notes:

[1] Lee Kaplan, “PLO Propaganda Film ‘Jenin, Jenin,'” February 20,
2004. FrontPageMagazine.com:

[2] Big Sky Documentary Film Festival, 2004 Official Selections,
HighPlainsFilms.org:
http://highplainsf ilms.org/festival/selections.htm

[3] Eric J. Greenberg, “Mapping a Controversy,” The Jewish Week,
January 31,
2003:
;print=yes

[4] Greg Myre, “Battle for Jenin camp flares anew on TV,” New York
Times,
April 3, 2004. SunSentinal.com:
,0,610 3335.
story?coll=sfla-features-headlines

[5] Full Frame Documentary Film Festival:

[6] Full Frame Documentary Film Festival, Panels:

[7] Holly Hickman, “Full Frame airs ‘Noble Sacrifice,’ pulled from
2003
festival,” Associated Press, April 2, 2004. NewsObserver.com:

[8] Holly Hickman, “Full Frame airs ‘Noble Sacrifice,’ pulled from
2003
festival,” Associated Press, April 2, 2004. NewsObserver.com:

[9] Center for the Study of Muslim Networks, Duke University:
n_about.html

[9] Carolina Seminar on Comparative Islamic Studies, Upcoming Events
on the
Middle East and Muslim Civilizations, 2003-2004:

[10] David Fellerath, “Confronting Reality From Home and Abroad; the
2003
Full Frame Doc Fest,” Independent Weekly, On the Scene:

[11] David Fellerath, “Nausea on a sea of blood: Why did the Full
Frame
Festival yank Noble Sacrifice?” Independent Weekly, April 23, 2003.
IndyWeek.com:

[12] David Fellerath, “Confronting Reality From Home and Abroad; the
2003
Full Frame Doc Fest,”Independent Weekly, On the Scene, April. 2003:

[13] David M. Lewkowict, “Staff, Students ‘Duke’ It Out Over Film
Festival,”
FoxNews.com, March 12, 2003:
,2933,80849,00.html

[14] Arts & Sciences and Trinity College News, Miriam Cooke:

[15] David M. Lewkowict, “Staff, Students ‘Duke’ It Out Over Film
Festival,”
FoxNews.com, March 12, 2003:
,2933,80849,00.html

[16] David Fellerath, “Noble Sacrifice,” The Independent Weekly,
March 31,
2004. IndyWeek.com:

.asp?ID=13546

Melkonian teachers to go on strike in increasingly bitter battle for school
By Jean Christou

Cyprus Mail, Cyprus
May 27 2004

STAFF at the Melkonian Educational Institute (MEI) in Nicosia will
strike today and announced they would also refuse to give year-end
grades in protest over the school’s governing body’s insinuations
that education standards are not up to scratch.

“We are left with no other option than to bring the above grievances
to public attention,” a statement from the teachers said yesterday.

The loss making MEI, which is sitting on £40 million worth of real
estate in the capital’s commercial district, has been slated to close
in June 2005 by the foundation that governs it, the New York based
Armenian General Benevolent Union (AGBU), which oversees 22 Armenian
schools worldwide.

The teachers claimed that during the past few days, members of the
administrative staff, had on instructions from the AGBU quietly
been ringing students’ parents to discourage them from sending their
children to the MEI next year.

“This is in total contradiction to the fact that last April the AGBU
published an advertisement in the press for new enrolments for the
academic year 2004-2005,” a staff statement said.

Among the reasons cited by the AGBU for the closure of the 78-year
old boarding school were claims that teaching standards were not up
to scratch. In their statement, MEI staff said they would refuse to
give year-end grades or engage in writing any end-of-year reports
“until the AGBU retracted its unfounded and damaging assertions about
the quality of teaching and learning that goes on in our school.”

“If the AGBU considers us, the teaching staff of MEI, as incompetent
teachers it cannot expect us to function as competent assessors. The
AGBU cannot have it both ways,” the statement added.

Last November, the AGBU said the school was not for sale, but then
changed tack and announced the closure. The schools alumni are
convinced the foundation’s only aim is to “take the money and run”.
“Since the announcement of the AGBU’s declared intention to close
the Melkonian… in the year 2005, we the teaching staff have shown
tremendous restraint and patience towards the AGBU’s insulting and
unfounded assertions,” the staff statement went on.

Since then, it said, staff had been told by Gordon Anderson, the
AGBU’s representative on site, that the AGBU did not intend to close
the school – only the dormitories which host over 75 per cent of
the students.

“This is an insult to our intelligence,” said the staff statement.
“How can anybody expect a school to be run when its student population
is reduced from 210 students to just over 50.” It added that last
year the school’s population was reduced from 260 to 210 after the
AGBU unilaterally decided to reduce scholarships to underprivileged
children from the Armenian Diaspora. “Closing the dormitories amounts
to closing the school,” it said.

“In the meantime, our polite request for the AGBU to retract the
ridiculous assertions mentioned above to this day remains unanswered.”

Staff say there is no doubt that the AGBU is trying to use the teaching
staff as a scapegoat for their decision to close the school in order
to sell the land on which it stands and claim they are using devious
methods to reduce the student population of the school in order to
turn it into a non-viable school and ultimately close it down.

“The AGBU is implementing a preconceived plan. These actions by
the AGBU are coming at a time when the school has been attracting
an increasing number of students from the Greek Cypriot and other
communities in Cyprus,” the statement said “We are the ones that
genuinely care for the young people in our charge and, unfortunately,
must come to the conclusion that open, honest and reasonable behaviour
is simply taken advantage of, while others deal contemptuously with
students’ and teachers’ lives and careers.”

The staff are calling on the parents of existing students not to fall
victim to the AGBU’s attempts to discourage them from sending their
children to the MEI next year and to join their campaign to keep the
school open for future generations.

Last month the government slapped a preservation order on the
Melkonian, giving the school, slated to close next year, a temporary
reprieve, but so far there are no assurances about the school’s
continuation beyond June 2005.

Defense Minister Ivanov denies Russian, US plan to use radar station

AzerNews, Azerbaijan
May 27 2004

On Friday at a news conference in Yerevan, Russian Defense Minister
Sergey Ivanov refuted the reports that Russia and the United States are
planning to use the Gabala radar station. An agreement on the status,
principles and terms of use of the Gabala station was concluded by
Russia and Azerbaijan

in Moscow on January 25, 2002. In compliance with the agreement,
the station is owned by Azerbaijan, and Russia leases the property
for 10 years. The agreement also stipulates that the station will
be used by Russia only for information and analytical purposes. The
use of the Gabala station “will not be used directly or indirectly
against the sovereignty and security of the Azerbaijan Republic”,
the document reads.

Commenting on the recent Azerbaijani media reports on Russian military
personnel of Armenian descent serving at the Gabala station, Ivanov
said Russia is a multi-national country and that the Russian army
includes officers of various nationalities, including Azerbaijanis.

Parliament to reconsider Russian use of Gabala radar station Opposition
MP Mais Safarli recently brought up the issue of Armenian officers
being involved at the Gabala radar station and stressed the importance
of taking measures in this respect. Safarli said the issue will be
reconsidered at the next Milli Majlis (parliament) session and the
parliament administration demanded that a decisive stand be taken on
the matter. “I raised the issue in a recent Milli Majlis session. As
far as I know, there are currently over 30 Armenian military personnel
at the station, which jeopardizes Azerbaijan’s national interests”,
he said. Safarli stated that Baku should demand the withdrawal
of Armenian military personnel from the Gabala station. He said
that Azerbaijan reserves the right to reconsider the terms of the
inter-governmental agreement envisioning the use of the facility by
Russia. Political scholar Zardusht Alizada stated that according to
the existing agreement between Russia and Azerbaijan, both Russian
soldiers and civilians work at the station. “Under the inter-state
protocol, Azerbaijan must guarantee their safety. The agreement
does not exclude service by Armenian military personnel at the
station, as this would contradict international legal norms”, Alizada
said. From this standpoint, Azerbaijan should not oppose the service
of Armenian officers at the Gabala station, he concluded. The Gabala
radar station was built in 1984 to monitor launch of inter-continental
ballistic missiles and flights on almost all types of aviation in the
Southern hemisphere. The station was actively used for radio-technical
intelligence during the Iran-Iraq war in 1980s, the Persian Gulf
War, and during anti-terrorism operations in Afghanistan. The Gabala
station is an important part of Russia’s missile defense system.

US trade with Upper Garabagh creates storm

Azer News, Azerbaijan
May 27 2004

The reports on the signing of a deal between two US companies with
“Garabagh Telecom”, an entity operating in the Azerbaijani lands
occupied by Armenian and Russian military units, have caused serious
concerns in some news media and the Milli Majlis (parliament).

Some opposition and independent newspapers as well as individuals
even blame Reno Harnish, the US Ambassador to Azerbaijan, for
justifying his country’s attempts to establish economic relations
with the separatist leadership of Upper Garabagh. The reason is due
to the opinions expressed by Harnish during his talk with journalists
following the 8th meeting of the US-Azerbaijani working group on
economic cooperation held in Baku last week.

The fact that the US Ambassador called Upper Garabagh ‘a country’ in
passing, as well as his saying that the US doesn’t impose commercial
restrictions against any country was called sensational by most
newspapers. In particular, the opposition-minded “Yeni Musavat”
newspaper, a publication of the Musavat Party, issued a critical
article about Harnish, urging him to give an explanation on the
matter. The newspaper even compared him with the former US Ambassador
Stanley Escudero, who Yeni Musavat says didn’t have such a good image
in Azerbaijan. The public seems to have found a reason for expressing
displeasure with the US government with regard to the Garabagh
conflict. And what is the reason for the public dissatisfaction and
negative attitude towards the US government? Why do people who
considered the United States the most reliable and powerful ally of
Azerbaijan in the 1990s, today doubt it? The main reason is that the
United States shows double standards towards Armenia and Azerbaijan,
it has failed to observe ‘a principle of justice’ in the settlement
of the Garabagh conflict and that it doesn’t differentiate between an
aggressor and a sufferer. People think that the United States is
taking advantage of the slogans of human rights, democracy,
territorial inviolability of states as well as combating terrorism
and the drug business, only for its political goals. The United
States indirectly supports Armenian separatists, who are involved in
drug business and terror attacks in the occupied territory of
Garabagh, but has imposed sanctions on Azerbaijan for about ten
years. Don’t the US intelligence agencies know that Armenian and
Arabian terrorists have been cooperating since the beginning of the
20th century? Azerbaijani MPs didn’t remain indifferent to the issue
either.

MPs’ protest

At a Tuesday session of the Milli Majlis (parliament), MPs protested
strongly against some US companies’ attempts to make investments in
the occupied lands of Azerbaijan, particularly in Upper Garabagh.
According to MPs, the business relations between the companies of the
US, which is a co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, and separatist
forces in Upper Garabagh contradict the national interests of
Azerbaijan. MPs proposed that the issue be discussed at the
parliament and the US Ambassador to Azerbaijan be informed about it.
They also decided to address the US government in connection with the
issue. Speaker Murtuz Alasgarov said that the US companies’ activity
doesn’t express the standpoint of the US government. He noted that
however, the issue should be considered seriously. Alasgarov
underlined that he would appeal to the Foreign Ministry in order to
clear up the matter and ask it to bring the issue to the notice of
the US Ambassador.

Ambassador denies trade ties

US Ambassador to Azerbaijan Reno Harnish, told a news conference
after a meeting held at Baku State University (BSU) on Wednesday that
the US has not made any investments in ‘Upper Garabagh’ and that
Washington does not support trade relations with the self-proclaimed
republic. He pointed out that negotiations are the only fair
alternative in settling the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over Upper
Garabagh. The latest statement of the US Ambassador eased the heated
debates but did not put an end to them. While pursuing its policy in
the region, the United States should take into account the national
interests of its partners as well. For this, it should be a fair
judge and put an end to its double standards.