Month: June 2005

Azerbaijan to hamper Armenia’s GUAM admission
Baku, May 30, AssA-Irada
Chairman of Ukrainian Supreme Rada (parliament) Vladimir Litvin
has said that Armenia’s admission to GUAM, a regional organization
comprising Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova, is possible.
Commenting on the statement, Azerbaijani parliament speaker Murtuz
Alasgarov said that Azerbaijan will hamper Armenia’s admission to
the organization by all means.
Alasgarov told journalists at Baku airport on Sunday upon returning
from the 2nd meeting of the GUAM Parliamentary Assembly held in Yalta
that the possibility of admission of not only European countries but
also several Central Asian countries to GUAM is acceptable.
Armenian Foreign Minister has said that Armenia has not received such
proposal. Official Yerevan will consider the proposal if it is made,
Armenia media quoted Vardan Oskanian as saying.
“However, entering an organization would primarily entail believing
its principles and goals. GUAM is reconsidering its objectives at
this point, as there are a lot of uncertainties”, said Oskanian.*

RFE/RL Caucasus: Is The BTC Oil Pipeline Saving Europe
>>From Russia Or From OPEC?
Tuesday, 31 May 2005
According to a 9 April 2002 report by the U.S. Congressional Research
Service (CRS), the Caspian region holds oil reserves of 18-34 billion
barrels, or roughly 1.8-3.3 percent of the world’s proven reserves.
These figures are based in part on estimates provided by the
U.S. Energy International Administration, which breaks down the
reserves on the following country-by-country basis:
Azerbaijan — 4-13 billion barrels (bbl)
Iran — 0.1
Kazakhstan — 10-18 bbl
Russia — 2.7 bbl
Turkmenistan — 0.6 bbl
Uzbekistan — 0.6 bbl
Some industry estimates, however, are lower. The CRS report also
cites figures from British Petroleum/Amoco indicating smaller proven
reserves in Azerbaijan (7 bbl) and Kazakhstan (8 bbl) and projecting
a regional total of about 16 bbl. (BP/Amoco’s figures do not include
estimates for Russia and Iran.)
These figures are roughly comparable to U.S. oil reserves of 22
billion barrels. But while the Caspian is an important source of oil
for Europe, it may not be a long-term strategy for energy independence
from Russia or OPEC — the original goal behind the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan
(BTC) pipeline.
The 1,770-kilometer (1,010 mile) BTC pipeline — built at a cost
of $3.6 billion and capable of pumping 1 million barrels a day —
went into operation on 25 May. Regional leaders put on a brave face,
hoping to convince the rest of the world that from here on out, Europe
would no longer be dependent on Russia and its export routes. BTC,
it was hoped, could save the continent from the potential threat of
a Moscow energy monopoly.
Vafa Guluzade, a former foreign affairs adviser to the Azerbaijani
government, told “The Wall Street Journal” on 25 May that BTC will
neutralize any Russian attempts to use economic levers to bring former
Soviet republics back under its wing.
THE CPC
Russia’s stance on Caspian export routes became clear in 1995, with
the forming of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC) — of which the
U.S. Chevron Texaco corporation was one of the largest shareholders.
Russia itself owned a 24-percent stake in the CPC and lobbied actively
for the construction of a pipeline from Kazakhstan’s Tengiz oil field
to Russia’s Black Sea terminal at the port of Novorossiisk.
A majority of the route crosses through Russian territory, but Chevron
Texaco did not appear to share concerns in Washington that Moscow
would move to control the flow of oil across Russia.
Chevron Texaco established itself as a player in the Kazakh oil
industry in April 1993, when it signed an agreement to set up the
company TengizChevrOil on an equal partnership basis with the Kazakh
government.
Since the completion of the CPC in 2001, Kazakhstan has steadily
increased the volume of crude it ships via this route. According to
a 13 January 2005 article in “The Moscow Times,” some 350,000 barrels
of Kazakh oil passed through the CPC daily in 2004.
At present, almost all of Kazakhstan’s oil exports cross Russia and
are then shipped by tanker through the Bosporus. But it is uncertain
how long this will continue. Turkey, citing ecological risks, is
set to limit tanker traffic through the straits. It is reasonable to
assume that as Kazakh oil production increases, some of its exports
may be routed through the newly opened BTC line, in order to avoid
political problems with Ankara.
THE BTC OPENS
At the BTC’s 25 May opening ceremonies, Russian President Vladimir
Putin’s special envoy for energy cooperation, Igor Yusufov, failed to
make a scheduled appearance. The Interfax news agency reported that
Yusufov had fallen ill and had sent his regrets. No other high-ranking
Russian official was apparently available to act in his stead.
Russia’s “Kommersant Daily” on 25 May suggested that the BTC, rather
than being a purely economic venture, was more of a “political” project
meant to isolate Iran and Russia. The paper went on to speculate the
United States would also use the BTC for added advantage, by bringing
in troops for pipeline security and thus bolstering its presence and
influence in the region.
Pipeline security was also in the thoughts of Mikhail Margelov, the
chairman of the Russian Federation Council’s International Affairs
Committee. Interfax on 25 May cited Margelov as saying, “First and
foremost, it is a question of [Russia’s] national security and the
expediency of a foreign military presence in the region, which would
look especially strange against the background of the pullout of
Russian bases from Georgia,” he said.
“Russia has had enormous experience with maintaining a [military]
presence in the region. We all are partners in the antiterrorist
coalition, and it makes attempts to use the new pipeline as a pretext
for enhancing a foreign military presence in the region doubly
outrageous,” he said.
The British press, by contrast, suggests the BTC is not about
bolstering Washington’s regional profile. The “Independent” daily
wrote on 25 May the BTC was built in order to “ease the reliance of
the West on OPEC and bring cheaper fuel to our filling stations.”
The “Times” daily added that the BTC “is crucial in lessening Western
dependence on oil from the Middle East.” Left unexplained was how the
Caspian, with its 34-billion-barrel potential, could prove a formidable
rival to OPEC, with its proven reserves of over 800 billion barrels.
Britain’s anti-OPEC tendencies can perhaps be explained by the fact
that British Petroleum (BP) is the main partner in the international
consortium that built the BTC. BP is optimistic the pipeline will
meet all expectations. Tony Hayward, BP’s head of exploration and
production told “The Wall Street Journal” on 25 May the pipeline
“is opening up a new hydrocarbon province.”
BP, however, is also a partner of the Russian oil company TNK, and as
such is working to supply Europe with Russian oil as well. It seems
fair to say that BP is playing both sides of the coin: ensuring that
Russia has a large market for its oil in England and elsewhere in
Europe — and thus increasing the risk of monopoly — while at the same
time leading the forces opposed to a Russian energy blackmail scheme.
It was BP-TNK which, with the support of the Putin government, insisted
in 2004 that the Odesa-Brody pipeline built in Ukraine to transport
Caspian oil to Europe be used in the reverse direction, to transport
BP-TNK oil to a terminal outside Odesa for tanker transport through
the Bosporus — thereby going against Western desires to limit tanker
traffic through the straits.
Writing in “The Wall Street Journal” European edition on 10 October
2003, Robert McFarlane, who served as national security adviser to
U.S. President Ronald Reagan, noted: “When Ukrainian Prime Minister
Viktor Yanukovych was in Washington this week, certainly one issue
for discussion was last week’s decision by Ukraine’s state pipeline
company to move forward toward reversing the use of the Odesa-Brody
oil pipeline in Russia’s favor…. Russian oligarchic interests,
however — with Britain’s BP unfortunately in tow — wish to use that
pipeline themselves, in the opposite direction…. This would cancel
all the hopes that had been vested in the Ukrainian pipeline.”
The new Ukrainian government is attempting to once again reverse the
flow of the Odesa-Brody pipeline to its original south-north direction,
but is finding few suppliers from the Caspian to fill the pipeline.
The fate of the BTC pipeline will be determined to some degree by
Kazakhstan’s willingness, or need, to allocate more oil for delivery
into the pipeline. And while Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbaev
publicly agreed to provide some oil for BTC, he specified neither
how much nor when. Astana is also seeking to supply China and will
largely maintain its current deliveries to Novorossiisk. Whether it
will need to send a significant quantity of additional oil through
the BTC is uncertain. But the success of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan
pipeline depends in large part on that question.

DISCUSSIONS ON “PUBLIC RELATIONS IN IT SPHERE IN ARMENIA” WILL TAKE PLACE IN TSAGHKADSOR ON JUNE 3-5
YEREVAN, May 31. /ARKA/. Discussions on “Public Relations in IT sphere
in Armenia” will take place in Tsaghkadsor on June 3-5. According
to P.aRt Company, such issues will be discussed in the course of
the meeting as perception by the public of the fact of IT ‘s being
a priority in Armenia. Participants of the meeting will touch upon
the principles of covering the IT industry, and will discuss the
steps for wide application of IT as a guarantee of progress for the
development of society.
The discussions are organized by Enterprises Incubator Foundation
jointly with P.aRt. A.H.–0–

US president “highly assesses” relations with Armenia
Public Television of Armenia, Yerevan
30 May 05
Armenian ambassador to the USA Tatul Markaryan has presented his
credentials to US President George Bush.
The traditional exchange of messages took place during the
ceremony. Ambassador Markaryan highly assessed the current level of
Armenian-American relations, noting that the Armenian-US cooperation
is based on common interests and values, as well as friendship between
the two nations. The ambassador thanked the United States for the
assistance to Armenia during the independence years. He emphasized
the Armenian-US cooperation in political, military, trade and economic
spheres and expressed the Armenian authorities’ readiness to continue
partnership relations with the USA.
President Bush highly assessed the level of the Armenian-US relations,
saying that the two countries have historical ties. Beginning from
1991when Armenia declared its independence, we have been working
together to establish democratic institutes and economic basis so that
Armenia can overcome the consequences of the destructive earthquake
of 1988, the collapse of the USSR and war with Azerbaijan for Nagornyy
Karabakh, the US president said in his message.
The US president also stressed that owing to great progress registered
in Armenia during the past 15 years the republic had been involved
in the Millennium Challenge programme.
The US president praised Armenia for its contribution to the struggle
against international terrorism and for sending peacekeepers to
Iraq. The US president’s message once again confirmed his country’s
readiness to assist the peaceful resolution of the Karabakh conflict
and normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations.

Karabakh leader rules out return of territories to Azerbaijan
Aykakan Zhamanak, Yerevan
31 May 05
Text of Naira Zograbyan report by Armenian newspaper Aykakan Zhamanak
on 31 May headlined “Only mutual compromises”
On 28 May, the president of the NKR , Arkadiy Gukasyan, took part in a
“round dance of unity”. He later answered journalists’ questions.
[Aykakan Zhamanak correspondent] Mr Gukasyan, the Armenian and
Azerbaijani presidents are to meet in June. Is that possible that a
document with new elements will be put forward for negotiations?
[Gukasyan] No, it is not. All the possible options were put forward
long ago and I do not think there is something new to say.
[Correspondent] If the parties have discussed all the possible options
and have accepted none of them, is there any point in continuing the
negotiating process?
[Gukasyan] The process is continuing and I think the parties have to
mellow and this is relevant to Azerbaijan in the first place.
[Correspondent] What can you say about rumours that the liberated
territories [seven districts around Nagornyy Karabakh under Armenian
control] will be returned to Azerbaijan?
[Gukasyan] This is a careless approach because the problem of the
districts should be discussed only within the general context. We
raise the problem of status [of Nagornyy Karabakh] and Azerbaijan
raises the problem of the districts, I mean there are no points of
contiguity between our and their problems.
[Correspondent] Can this contiguity appear?
[Gukasyan] I am sure we will come to common ground some day. We do not
have an alternative, we should settle this problem at the negotiating
table. But I cannot say when this will be possible.
[Correspondent] Mr Gukasyan, did the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen
set a deadline for solving the problem?
[Gukasyan] I do not think that they can give us time, time is always
ours and we ourselves are interested in settling the problem as soon
as possible.
[Correspondent] What are the compromises you can accept?
[Gukasyan] If Azerbaijan does not want to talk about compromises
at all, in that case it is senseless for us to talk about mutual
compromises.

Lebanese papers praise first round of parliamentary elections in Beirut
BBC Monitoring Service – United Kingdom
May 31, 2005
The Lebanese press on 30 May gave a mainly positive reaction to the
first round of polls in the 2005 Lebanese parliamentary elections,
held in the three electoral districts of the capital Beirut on
29 May. One commented that in what it called the “first free
parliamentary elections for 30 years”, the results had “produced
national accord”. Some said that Beirut had given a ringing endorsement
to the Al-Hariri family – father and son – with one saying that Rafiq
al-Hariri had received more support in death than he had while he
was alive. Others bemoaned the low turnout, in contrast with the
“hundreds of thousands” who took to the streets in the weeks after
Al-Hariri’s assassination.
Lebanese newspaper Al-Anwar website carried a commentary by Al-Anwar’s
political analyst entitled “It could have been better”. The commentary
said: “The spectre of the late martyr Premier Rafiq al-Hariri
was present at the polling stations, which had already determined
the battle and did not require any attempts to pressure [voters] or
falsify [results] as has occurred in the past. Today, there is no need
for all these attempts, because no matter how big they are, they are
incapable of changing the course of the results.” The commentary added:
“This election could have been better if the law had been better and
if it had made every voter feel that their vote made a difference;
if that is not achieved, the battle will remain without the desired
level of participation. The first task of the new parliament should
be to wage a new electoral battle that makes every citizen feel a
partner [in the elections] and not feel he is prejudiced against or
that his voice is stifled, and only then can we really say that we
have entered the era of democracy.”
“First day of free elections produced national accord”
Al-Mustaqbal newspaper website published a report entitled “Rafiq
al-Hariri’s vote unites Beirut; the martyr premier’s lists sweep
the three districts and the capital dresses Sa’d in his father’s
cloak”. The report said: “In the first free parliamentary elections
for 30 years, and following the collapse of the Syrian tutelage
regime in Lebanon, the capital voted yesterday for the entire
national partnership lists drafted by the Christian-Islamic alliance
forces as an embodiment of the significance of 14 March [date of
large-scale opposition rally in Beirut to commemorate 30 days since
the assassination of former Prime Minister Al-Hariri]. These lists won
completely and with major differences, and thus Lebanon has achieved
the first part of its parliamentary elections extending until 19
June, and the capital Beirut has dressed Sa’d al-Hariri in his martyr
father’s cloak, as he won 39,500 votes out of 43,000. Thus, it can
remembered that the first day of free elections produced national
accord embodied in lists of unity, and this took place without any
intelligence pressure either in forming the lists or against the voting
forces. Beirut has become the legal ‘midwife’ for the new Lebanon and
will be dispatching deputies to parliament who will raise its voice
and combine their efforts to [implement] the process of change.”
In an analytical report entitled “Victory of the Christian-Islamic
alliance in Beirut is a beginning for its triumph in all Lebanon,”
Nasir al-As’ad wrote: “Beirut, the capital, has had its say. Beirut
has voted for the course with which Sa’d al-Hariri has opened his
political career, the course of national partnership in the lists that
he will pursue after the elections. This is the same course that the
martyr former Premier Rafiq al-Hariri decided to pursue prior to his
assassination, and that could very well have been the main reason for
his assassination. In these elections, the first after the end of the
era of Syrian tutelage, the capital confirmed that it is conscious of
the political pluralism and sectarian diversification present within
it, as Muslims voted for Christians and Christians voted for Muslims,
and the lists that were formed by the political alliances were more
powerful than the electoral law. When the citizens of Beirut wake up
today after the results are declared, they will keep in their mind
the scene of national political partnership that has unified Beirut in
spite of its electoral divisions, and when Sa’d al-Hariri awakes after
a long electoral day, he will be pleased that the victory achieved is
the victory of Christian-Islamic continuity that was forbidden during
the era of the Syrian-Lebanese intelligence and security regime,
and is a victory of lists without ‘custodies’ or penetrations.”
Beirut endorses “Rafiq al-Hariri the Second”
Al-Safir newspaper website carried an editorial by Talal Salman
entitled “Beirut and Second Al-Hariri,” in which he wrote: “Rafiq
al-Hariri as a martyr determined the results of the parliamentary
elections in Beirut more than he did when he was in the ‘opposition’
five years ago. Today, Beirut gave more to Rafiq al-Hariri the martyr
than it had given him during his life. Beirut gave its vote to Rafiq
al-Hariri the Second to confirm that it has accepted him as a leader
by its will. In the year 2000, Rafiq al-Hariri was unable to employ
his electoral victory in his political project. He triumphed over the
regime and compelled it to accept him as a partner from his position
in the ‘opposition’, and the regime succumbed and entered into a
partnership with him, but in turn obstructed his project. With Sa’d
al-Hariri, the matter is different. He is coming from the position
of an adversary and is besieging the regime, represented by its top
symbol, through accusation and even conviction. It is impossible to
cooperate with him and it will not be easy to depose him. Rather,
the regime is almost non-existent and without trace in the electoral
process; it has no candidates or voters. The regime is not neutral,
but is incapacitated and rejected. The regime has paid a heavy price
for its mistakes, before and after the mandate extension; it is no
longer an essential part of the rule and has become a negative element,
and it could in future turn into an obstructive element.”
Salman concluded: “In yesterday’s elections, winning implies preparing
to challenge the difficult conditions that the winner will have
to face with correct decisions and taking into consideration that
there are major partners in this decision. It is no secret that many
view these elections as having taken place by order of international
operations. It is also no secret that the US ambassador in Beirut was
not content with his public and open role in managing the political
game, but personally arrived at several polling stations to ‘reassure
his heart’ that all was proceeding according to the set plan, even
if he did seem as though he was violating protocol and exceeding his
duties as a foreign ambassador!”
International observers show “solidarity” with Lebanese
In a commentary by Sati Nur-al-Din published under the “Last Station”
column, the commentator wrote: “The international observers positioned
throughout Beirut were not carrying out a traditional monitoring
task. They were performing an exceptional mission of guardianship
over the first election process witnessed by Lebanon since the Syrian
military departed from its territories. However, the message did not
reach the voters or the candidates, inasmuch as it reached across the
Lebanese borders. The international community’s interest in attending
now, more than any other time, is a form of solidarity with the
Lebanese in confronting the major absentee from this battle, Syria.”
Al-Diyar newspaper website published a report entitled “Wakim: We are
running an election in confrontation with the US project.” The report
cited candidate Najah Wakim sharply criticizing the interior minister
and accusing him of being “an employee of the Al-Hariri family”. Wakim
added that “the electoral battle today is between the list of former
Premier Rafiq al-Hariri that was formed at the US embassy, and the
list of the Lebanese people of which he is a part.” Wakim stressed:
“We do not believe that these elections represent a referendum for
the [political] agenda of former Premier Rafiq al-Hariri, but rather
that it is primarily a referendum for the United States’ policies in
Lebanon” and he questioned whether “the people are with the blood of
the martyrs who liberated Lebanon or with the US embassy?”
Only real competition said to be in second district
Another Lebanese newspaper, Sada al-Balad website, carried a
report by Ali al-Amin entitled “Hezbollah proved its commitment to
Al-Hariri and Wakim lost”. The report said: “The electoral battle
in Beirut was confined to the second district in terms of electoral
and political competition; it was confined to winning by default in
the first district; and it was marked by the Christian boycott in
all districts.” Al-Amin added: “What was significant in the second
district was Hezbollah’s full commitment to supporting the complete
list of Al-Hariri in spite of fears by some of the supporters of
the Al-Mustaqbal Movement that Hezbollah would not commit itself
to casting ballots for the complete list. The party was sincere in
not voting for the president of the Peoples’ Movement, Najah Wakim,
and obliged Hezbollah supporters not to vote for Wakim; in addition,
high level contacts were made with the Amal Movement to make sure that
Amal also supported Al-Hariri’s complete list. Hezbollah succeeded
in confirming its political alliance with the Al-Mustaqbal Movement
after it had confirmed its electoral alliance and demonstrated that
what linked the party to Sa’d al-Hariri and the alliances in the
three districts surpassed any link with Wakim. Thus, Hezbollah and
the Al-Mustaqbal Movement were successful in preventing Wakim from
receiving the votes that would qualify him to enter parliament.”
“All eyes on Syria” to confirm that “it abstained from voting”
In a commentary by Tony Francis entitled “Observers,” Francis wrote:
“There is no significance to the presence of international and European
observers except that Lebanon has reconciled itself with the world and
the world has placed Lebanon under observation since the issuance of
[UN] Resolution 1559. International observers entered the door of the
Lebanese elections not to seek better laws for popular representation
or to guarantee better voting under better opportunities, but to
confirm that the international resolution to perform elections on
schedule and without Syrian interference would be executed.” Francis
concluded: “The observers’ eyes are not on the ballot boxes, or on
the voters, or on the candidates, or on the law that prompted one
third of Beirut’s residents not to participate in yesterday’s polls,
but all eyes are on Syria since it is the ‘absent voter’ and [all wish]
to confirm that it abstained from voting this time.”
Election result “marred” by low turnout
English-language newspaper The Daily Star website carried a report by
Nayla Assaf entitled “Al-Hariri makes clean sweep in Beirut polls but
victory marred by lowest election turnout in years.” The report said:
“Sa’d al-Hariri made a clean sweep in the first stage of the country’s
elections, but the start of Lebanon’s first free elections in more than
30 years was marred by a very low voter turnout of just 28 per cent,
the smallest participation in an election in 13 years.” The report
added: “Yesterday’s voter apathy is in stark contrast to the euphoric
scenes earlier this year when hundreds of thousands of Lebanese
took to the streets following the assassination of [former Premier]
Rafiq al-Hariri in a show of unity to oppose Syria and Lebanon’s
pro-Damascus government. The Beirut polls have still to be followed
by other districts and it remains to be seen if yesterday’s turnout
represents a blip because Al-Hariri was virtually assured of victory,
or whether it will be repeated across the country. In Christian areas,
turnout was even less, hitting a low of 10 and 11 per cent in some
areas. Prior to the election, Christian opposition politicians had
criticized the legal framework for the polls, insisting it failed to
properly represent Christian voters.”
In an editorial in the same paper entitled “From euphoria to apathy:
Lebanese no longer care who stays or goes,” the paper said: “Given
all the excitement with which the international community has watched
to see the start of Lebanon’s ‘free and fair’ elections, how can one
explain the terrible lack of enthusiasm for voting among the Lebanese,
as demonstrated by low voter turnout in the first round of polls
in Beirut? Two phenomena can explain the lack of euphoria. First,
the public has rejected an attempt on the part of politicians to
create a conditioned sense of loyalty to slain former Premier Rafiq
al-Hariri. By not going to the polls, the people were saying that they
did not need to be reminded to do what they have already accomplished
on the streets. The second reason for the low turnout is the alliance
of bad bedfellows that saw Hezbollah join an electoral list with the
Lebanese Forces and Speaker Nabih Birri’s Amal movement. Hezbollah
Secretary-General Hasan Nasrallah said that the alliance was formed to
thwart US interference and [US] attempts to disarm the resistance. In
doing so, Nasrallah disconnected politics from the issues that the
people were championing on the streets.”
In an analytical report by Adnan al-Ghul entitled “First round of
voting exposes Al-Hariri’s weakness,” the writer said: “Dashing the
Al-Hariri’s camp’s hopes for a high voter turnout, the Armenian Tashnag
Party and General Michel Awn’s Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) actively
promoted boycotting Beirut’s elections, effectively ensuring deserted
polling stations in the capital’s Christian-dominated areas. The low
Christian turnout and relatively active Muslim participation was
sufficient to expose the Al-Hariri-led coalition’s true weakness,
regardless of whether Al-Hariri achieves the expected sweep of the
capital’s 19 seats.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Armenian leader urges diplomats to be keen on protecting national interests
A1+ web site
31 May 05
31 May: President Robert Kocharyan today met Armenian ambassadors
accredited to foreign countries. The ambassadors have arrived in
Yerevan for their annual conference.
The meeting discussed the issues of Armenian foreign policy, possible
options for solving them and other organizational matters.
Kocharyan said that embassies should co-ordinate their work to ensure
maximum protection of the country’s interests in the international
arena.

Armenian leader, political coalition discuss constitutional reforms
A1+ web site
31 May 05
Armenian President Robert Kocharyan held a working meeting with members
of the political coalition council today. The constitutional reforms
was discussed.
To recap, [the Council of Europe’s] Venice Commission has recently
given a negative opinion of the package of constitutional reforms
adopted by the National Assembly in the first reading. The commission
warned that without radical changes, Armenia will lag behind the
European integration process.

Azeri soldier killed by Armenian sniper – TV
Space TV, Baku
31 May 05
[Presenter] An Azerbaijani soldier has been killed by Armenian sniper
fire in Tartar’s Qapanli village, Space TV’s Karabakh correspondent
has reported. Our regional correspondent has more.
[Correspondent by phone] Armenians violated the cease-fire in the
Agdam and Tartar sections of the front-line earlier today.
[Passage omitted: minor details]
Junior Sergeant Xalilov Cafar, 20, was martyred at 1145 [0645]
near the Qapanli village of Tartar District. He was drafted into the
army by the Massalli District military enlistment office. He will be
buried tomorrow.

Armenian opposition MPs call for “no” vote on constitutional referendum
Mediamax news agency
31 May 05
Yerevan, 31 May: The parliamentary factions of the opposition Justice
bloc and the National Unity Party issued a statement today. They called
on the Armenian citizens to vote against the draft constitutional
amendments put forward by the ruling political coalition.
The leaders of the Justice bloc and the National Unity Party, Stepan
Demirchyan and Artashes Gegamyan, signed the statement.
“Genuinely democratic constitutional reforms have no alternative and
they will be implemented once a legitimate government is established
in Armenia,” the statement said.
The coalition’s draft, which the Armenian parliament adopted in the
first reading on 11 May, “is directed at perpetuating the authoritarian
system”, the opposition’s statement said.
It is expected that the referendum on amending the constitution will
be held in Armenia at the end of the summer or at the beginning of
the autumn.