A1 Plus | 19:10:29 | 22-03-2004 | Social |

PARENT AWARENESS PROGRAM

Parents’ awareness program worked out by a group created by on UNICEF
initiative is now being put into reality in Armenia’s province of
Gegharkunik. The project’s aim is to provide the parents whose children don’
t attend kindergartens.

Education Ministry official Robert Stepanyan says 80 percent of the republic
children don’t get preschool education.

One of causes is unemployment – most jobless parents prefer to educate their
kids themselves.

Besides, there are regions in Armenia having no preschool facilities. 338
kindergartens have been closed in the republic over the last decade.

Education Minister Sergo Yeritsyan says the ministry intends to reach
considerable results by taking proper measures.

—
http://www.a1plus.a,

CENN — MARCH 22, 2004 DAILY DIGEST
Table of Contents:
1. 3rd Georgia International Oil, Gas, Energy and Infrastructure
Conference and Showcase
2. Invitation to Comment on the Country Strategy for Georgia
3. Registration for Healthy Planet Forum
4. Call for proposals for the European Initiative for Democracy and
Human Rights Micro Projects program
5. International Perspectives in Environmental Education

1. 3RD GEORGIA INTERNATIONAL OIL, GAS, ENERGY AND INFRASTRUCTURE
CONFERENCE AND SHOWCASE
GIOGIE 2004

A two-day 3rd Georgia International Oil, Gas, Energy and Infrastructure
2004 Conference kicked off at the Sheraton Metechi palace Hotel Thursday
supported by Ministry of Fuel and Energy of Georgia, and Georgian
International Oil Corporation (GIOC). 180 delegates from 15 countries
are participating in the conference. Development of BTC pipeline and
South Caucasian gas pipeline Shah-Deniz-Tbilisi-Erzerum was discussed at
the conference. Participants include BP, BTC Co., GIOC, Georgian Oil,
Socar, Botas, Kazmunaigaz, Statoil, Ukransnafta, IFC, EBRD, RAO UES,
Gazprom, ChevronTexaco, Spie-Petrofac, Marsh, Ernst & Young, AON,
McConnell Dowell, USAID and many others.

GIOGIE 2004 sponsors include: GIOC, Batumi Oil Terminal, BP, Statoil,
Spie-Petrofac, Marsh, Ernst & Young, ENR Russia Invest, Channel Enery,
BCI, Sercel.

Prime Minister Zurab Zhvania was expected to open the conference but the
political standoff between Tbilisi and Batumi has promoted him to stay
in a Black Sea town Poti, near Batumi to head an anti-crisis center. As
the entire cabinet of ministers was in Poti Nika Gilauri, Minister of
Fuel and Energy failed to attend the 3rd International Conference.
Deputy Minister of Fuel and Energy Aleko Khetaguri participated on his
behalf.

The construction of the Shah-Deniz-Tbilisi-Erzerum pipeline is scheduled
to start shortly after the BTC pipeline building is complete. Georgia’s
participation in the projects bears critical importance as it serves a
kind of transport corridor between Asia and Europe.

At the conference Commercial Director of BTC Co Andrew McAuslan noted
that the BTC pipeline energy corridor expands over 700 000 kms.

The BTC Co representative spoke about the importance of social and
public projects implemented within the frames of the BTC oil pipeline.
The projects aimed at improvement of social conditions of the people
living in the BTC pipeline vicinities. Andrew McAuslan said that the
population of the villages crossed by the pipeline would be favored when
hiring personnel for the pipeline. He added that 15 international
commercial banks are participating in the pipeline project. BTC Co. is
planning to carry out large-scale infrastructure projects within the
frames of the project and pledges to care for integration of
infrastructure.

Archil Magalashvili, technical manager of GIOC, said that the BTC oil
pipeline would be under tight monitoring. High security measures have
been taken to ensure security of Georgian stretch of the pipeline and
avoid environment pollution or other accidents.

Since Georgia is situated in high seismological and landslide risk zone
the project envisages additional security measures. Archil Magalashvili
says that additional geological field works have been performed
alongside with the construction of the pipeline.

Manager of Statiol Turkey, Kietil Tanlend focused on the
Shah-Deniz-Tbilisi-Erzerum gas pipeline. He said Statiol, which is a
shareholder of BTC pipeline project was established in 1972. The company
produces 1 million barrel oil a day, making the company the third
biggest oil operator in the world. Statiol is a Norwegian company and is
one of the leading oil operators in Norway and Scandinavian countries.

Statoil holds 5.5 shares in BTC oil pipeline and 25.5 percent in
Shah-Deniz-Tbilisi-Erzerum gas pipeline. Kietil Tanlend pointed out that
the preparatory work for the South Caucasian pipeline project was
underway. He said Shah-Deniz-Tbilisi-Erzerum gas pipeline would become
operational in 2006.

He spoke about the Georgia as an important and strategic partner in the
gas pipeline project. The well-developed system will help to implement
the project in complaisance with European standards.

The conference was wrapped on March 19, 2004. Organizers of the
conference were content with the results and say they have worked
productively in these two days. At the 2nd international conference the
course of the pipeline project implementation was discussed and the gas
pipeline project was only theoretically considered. At the March 18-19,
2004 conference participants spoke about the details of the project and
dwelled on profits the project willing bring to participating states.

The next day of the 3rd international conference Viachwslan Axenov,
advisor to Russia’s Energy Council said that Russia honored the request
of the Georgian Ministry of Fuel Energy and would play an active role in
the development of Georgia’ s energy sector. He added that the Russian
Energy Council is planning to hold a press conference on the hydro
energy issue in the near future and proposed the Georgian Ministry of
Fuel and Energy to participate in the conference. Mr. Axenov believes
that the rehabilitation of Inguri hydropower station is important for
country and if the ministry representative attends the conference this
issue will be also discussed there.

Viachwslan Axenov did not specify whether or not Russia would contribute
to the rehabilitation of Inguri station but his appeal to Georgia to
participate in this conference does hold an answer to the question.

Russian United Energy Company Rau UES holds 75 percent of Tbilisi power
distribution facility Telasi shares. Rau UES also owns Gardabani 9 and
10 energy facilities and two hydropower stations of Kvemo Kartli region
“Khrami 1” and “Khrami 2”.

Viachwslan Axenov says that the Russian Energy Council ‘s strategy is to
develop Georgia’s energy sector, and Rao UES’ strategy is to create a
common energy corridor throughout the Commonwealth of Independent States
(CIS). Georgian experts well understand the quite clear “Russian”
accents but as one of the experts said despite the monopoly of the
Russian companies at the Georgian energy system, the Georgian-Russian
political relations promises to be less aggressive BTC and
Shah-Deniz-Tbilisi-Erzerum gas pipelines are not threatened by Russia.

Experts unanimously exclude Russia’s participation in the gas pipeline
project. Although the shortest route for Russian power export crosses
Georgia but Russia does not have any claims for
Shah-Deniz-Tbilisi-Erzerum project, As for Viachwslan Axenov, he
withheld comments on this comment.
The Georgian Times, March 22, 2004

2. INVITATION TO COMMENT ON THE COUNTRY STRATEGY FOR GEORGIA

In light of recent political developments in Georgia, the EBRD is
advancing the preparation of its next Strategy for Georgia in order to
be better able to support the efforts of the new authorities in
addressing the main challenges in the country. Comments are invited to
help the Bank in revising its Strategy.

Comments should refer to the current Strategy for Georgia available at:

To help in the preparation of the forthcoming Strategy for Georgia, it
would be useful for the Bank to receive comments on the investment and
economic environment as it relates to the Bank’s operational priorities
and activities, in particular in the following areas:

1. Issues related to the investment climate

This would include issues concerning: (i) the implementation and
enforcement of laws; (ii) progress in the fight against corruption –
implementation of the national anti-corruption strategy; (iii) corporate
governance; and (iv) in particular the investment climate as it relates
to the development of SMEs/MSEs. We seek your views on how serious these
issues are for the development of the private sector, priority areas
which should be addressed by the authorities, and the ways in which the
EBRD could assist the authorities in improving the
investment climate.

2. Issues related to infrastructure development

This would include efficiency and payment discipline in the power sector
and issues related to development of the transport sector, with
particular attention to issues relating to tariff reform, restructuring,
and privatization/private sector involvement. Comments are invited on
priority issues and the role, which the EBRD should play in further
support for the development of these sectors.

3. Issues related to access to capital

Comments are invited on the ease of access to funding by private sector
enterprises, in particular by micro-, small- and medium-sized
enterprises, given the current state of development of the banking
sector, the level of financial intermediation, and the availability of
funding under various donor and IFI programs. Comments would also be
welcome on issues related to the early stage of development of
non-banking financial sector (leasing, mortgages, pensions, insurance).
What are the main obstacles, what measures should be taken to strengthen
the banking and non-banking financial sectors, and what type of projects
should be supported by the EBRD to help alleviate identified gaps?

The Strategy provides guidance for EBRD activities in a country,
identifying the main challenges which the Bank is best placed to
confront. As such, the Strategy cannot address all of the development
issues a country faces and necessarily must be selective in identifying
issues where the Bank has the experience and ability to play a
constructive role.

The Bank will take into account all comments received. A summary of
these, with staff responses, will be posted on the Web site following
the Board approval of the revised Strategy. The Country Strategy is,
however, a Bank document and the responsibility for its contents remains
with the Bank.

Please send your comments to the Bank at [email protected] no
later than 18 May 2004.

You may also like to send this message to other interested
organisations.

Outreach and NGO Relations team, European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development

3. REGISTRATION FOR HEALTHY PLANET FORUM

The Healthy Planet Forum is a civil society event conducted in Budapest
on 22-25 June 2004 in parallel with the forthcoming 4th Ministerial
Conference on Environment and Health ‘The Future for Our Children’. The
organizers of the Healthy Planet Forum opened two types of registration:

A) Registration for attending the Forum (personal registration)

The registration will allow you to be admitted to the Forum’s
facilities. The organizers will assist you with booking a place to stay
in Budapest and getting an invitation for visa purposes.
As of early March 2004, the Healthy Planet Forum steering committee
cannot subsidies or sponsor individuals. Efforts have been made to keep
organizational costs to a minimum, and the host organizations are
continuing to seek funding toward the costs of attendance and other
expenditure connected to the Forum. If you would like to be considered
for this please complete your application for assistance at the end of
the form. Your application will form part of a funding search and will
register you as a potential recipient of funding if successful.

B) Event registration

If you plan to organize a parallel event or a side-event, a workshop or
a seminar in Budapest, fill in the Event Registration form. Rooms and
equipment are kindly provided free of charge by the Hungarian Ministry
of Health. All other expenses are to be covered by the participants
(food, drinks, handouts, invitations, representation, etc.). Event
timing and provided free equipment are subject to availability.

Both forms are available at

For more information contact:
Laszlo Perneczky
REC, “Environment and Health Working Group”
E-mail: [email protected]

4. CALL FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE EUROPEAN INITIATIVE FOR DEMOCRACY AND
HUMAN RIGHTS MICRO PROJECTS PROGRAM

EUROPEAN COMMISSION DELEGATION TO GEORGIA AND ARMENIA
Call for proposals for the European Initiative for Democracy and Human
Rights Micro projects program
Call reference: EuropeAid/ 119-571/L/G/GE

The European Commission Delegation to Georgia is seeking proposals for
micro projects in Georgia with financial assistance from the European
Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) program of the
European Communities. The global indicative amount available for this
Call for Proposals is ˆ1,000,000.

The general objective of the EIDHR micro projects program is to respond
rapidly to requests from Nongovernmental organizations that are designed
to promote democracy and human rights. Proposals for microprojects
should be in the following priority areas:

Priority A: Support to the rule of law and the fight against corruption
Priority B: The fight against torture
Priority C: Combating discrimination against religious and ethnic
minorities.

Grants may cover a maximum of 80% of project costs. Grants will finance
projects with activities
lasting up to 18 months.

Grants range from a minimum of ˆ10,000 to a maximum of ˆ100,000.

Applicants must be non-profit-making and be a non-governmental
organization. Profit making media organizations may also apply provided
that the proposed action is non-profit making. They must have their
headquarters in Georgia, or be a local independent division of an NGO
with its headquarters in another country. Activities must take place in
Georgia. Applicants may apply singly or as part of a consortium.

Detailed information on this Call for Proposals is contained in the
“Guidelines for Grant Applicants”, which are published together with
this notice on the Internet Web site of the European Commission
Delegation to Georgia:

The full Guidelines for Applicants are also available for consultation
at the:
European Commission Delegation
38 Nino Chkheidze Str., Tbilisi 0102, Georgia
Telephone +995 (8)32 943 763

The deadline for submission of proposals is 14 June 2004 at 16.00
Georgian times. Any application received by the European Commission
Delegation to Georgia after this time will not be considered.

Any questions regarding this Call for Proposals should be sent, clearly
indicating the reference number, by fax to +995 (8)32 943 768 or by
email to [email protected] .

All applicants are encouraged to consult the Internet website above
regularly before the deadline for applications, where the EC Delegation
will publish the most frequently asked questions and the corresponding
replies.

Priorities for the EIDHR Microprojects Call for Proposals, March 2004:

Generally the submission of project proposals from NGOs whose
headquarters are outside Tbilisi, or whose work focuses on internally
displaced persons (IDPs), is particularly encouraged. The following
cross cutting issues will be considered as additional assets during the
evaluation of the proposals:

1) Strengthening of the participation of youth in civil society
activities 2) civil society capacity building in the regions of Georgia
(inter alia Adjara, Kvemo Kartli and Samtskhe-Javakheti) Please note
that these cross cutting issues are not priorities in themselves.

Priority A: Support to the rule of law and the fight against corruption:

Including but not limited to actions resulting in:

§ Promotion, awareness rising on and/or monitoring/analyzing of the
reform of the criminal justice system (inter alia: procuracy reform,
police reform; reform of the criminal procedural code, reform of the
investigation);
§ promotion of human rights and/or access to justice of disadvantaged
groups;
§ capacity building for effective and high quality monitoring and
reporting on corruption;
§ anti-corruption activities within specific regions and within specific
sectors (e.g. judiciary, education, urban planning, environment);
§ promotion of accountability of local self-governance structures in the
regions of Georgia.

Priority B: The fight against torture:

Including but not limited to actions resulting in:

§ Promotion of and support to a humane penal and penitentiary system in
Georgia by piloting new ways of cooperation between civil society and
the respective state bodies in the penal sector;
§ Promotion of and support to alternatives to custodial sentences;
§ Public control and civil monitoring of places of detention, including
capacity building in the field of monitoring and reporting on torture
according to international standards;
§ Public awareness on penal reform in Georgia;
§ Awareness raising and capacity building in the fight against torture
in the regions of Georgia;
§ Improved access of victims of torture to justice.

Priority C: Combating discrimination against religious and ethnic
minorities:

Including but not limited to actions resulting in:

§ Promotion of religious, cultural, political and economic rights of
ethnic and religious minorities;
§ Capacity-building in the legal field for representatives of ethnic
minorities;
§ Promotion of professional media reporting on religious and/or cultural
minority issues and capacity building in the media field for
representatives of ethnic minorities.

5. INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES IN ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

This book is one of the outcomes of the First World Environmental
Education Congress (FWEEC) held in Espinho, Portugal on May 20-24, 2003.
FWEEC gathered 282 participants from 38 countries, offering an
international platform for educators, scientists, researchers, scholars,
politicians, technicians, activists, media and teachers to present and
debate key issues in environmental education worldwide. It includes many
of the papers delivered in the Congress and a few additional ones, in an
attempt to both document international experiences and promote them to a
wide audience. The scope of this publication is comprehensive and it
approaches a wide range of issues such as:

§ Environmental education through interactive means
§ Environmental education and fieldwork
§ Environmental education in formal education
§ Environmental education and information technologies
§ Environmental education in waste management
§ Environmental education and partnerships
§ Environmental education and fauna awareness
§ Environmental education society and conservation units
§ Environmental education in higher education
§ Environmental education and citizenship
§ Environmental education and adult education
§ Environmental education and teacher education
§ Environmental education and Agenda 21

Similar to its predecessor book (World Trends in Environmental
Education) also published in the book series Environmental Education,
Communication and Sustainability, this publication is meant to pave the
ground for the UN International Decade of Education for Sustainable
Development (2005 Ö 2014) by addressing one of the oldest and yet one of
the most pressing needs in environmental education today: the need to
document experiences and promote good practice.

Edited by Walter Leal Filho (Hamburg) & Michael
Littledyke (Gloucester)
Peter Lang Scientific Publishers, Bern, Brussels,
Frankfurt, New York,
Oxford, Vienna
Volume 16 of the series ÓEnvironmental Education,
Communication and SustainabilityÔ
ISBN: 3-631-52296-7 Ö US ISBN: 0-8204-6583-6,
Paperback, 340pp., À
49.80 / US$ 55.95
On-line orders from: or from:
[email protected]

—
*******************************************
CENN INFO
Caucasus Environmental NGO Network (CENN)

Tel: ++995 32 92 39 46
Fax: ++995 32 92 39 47
E-mail: [email protected]
URL:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A1 Plus | 22:12:41 | 22-03-2004 | Official |

ABOUT KEY WEST AGREEMENTS

On Monday, Armenian Foreign Ministry’s Press Secretary Hamlet Gasparyan,
answering De Facto news agency journalists’ questions, expressed hope the
talks on Nagorno Karabakh would continue from the point they were
interrupted.{BR}

Upon his returning from international conference in Bratislava Azeri Foreign
Minister Vilayat Guliev said in Bratislava he had demanded his Armenian
counterpart Vardan Oskanyan to show him a document on Key West agreements
and added if the documents isn’t signed there can be not a word about any
agreements.

“We are happy that Azeri Foreign Minister admitted the fact that there is a
written document on some accord reached in Key West though it isn’t signed.
We have repeatedly said there is a document made up by OSCE Minsk Group’s
co-chairs and grounded on negotiation between the two countries presidents.
We are summing up that the issue on whether the document exists or not is
closed”, Gasparyan concluded.

Signed it or not – the document exists, said the Press Secretary and added
as Azerbaijan admits the fact of agreements reached, we hope the talks will
resume from the very point they was interrupted.

—

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NT Highlights #11(513)
22 March 2004

Moscow and Kars Treaties on Regional Agenda
By Haikaram Nahapetyan

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

—

Russian deputy reminds Georgia of its legal obligations to Ajaria

ITAR-TASS news agency
22 Mar 04

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

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

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

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

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

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

EU envoy urges caution at Karabakh talks with Azeri leader

Azad Azarbaycan TV, Baku
22 Mar 04

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Farida Agaverdiyeva and Mirtofiq Miralioglu, Son Xabar.

Russian politician urges Armenia, Azerbaijan to make deal

Mediamax news agency, Yerevan
22 Mar 04

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

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

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

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

Weed out harmful seeds of propaganda

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

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

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

Propaganda in Armenia and Nagornyy Karabakh

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

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

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

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

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

Propaganda in Azerbaijan

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusion

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

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

Arminfo
22 Mar 04

YEREVAN

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

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

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