Month: June 2005

Armenian foreign minister upbeat about Karabakh talks
Noyan Tapan news agency
20 Jun 05
YEREVAN
The next visit by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs to the region is
expected in mid-June, Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan told a
press conference on 20 June.
The minister said that the latest meeting between Armenian and
Azerbaijani presidents in Warsaw was a step forward in settling the
Karabakh conflict. The presidents instructed their foreign ministers
to build on that, however, “we have not managed to do it in Paris but
we found commonalties”. Oskanyan does not doubt that “the talks
between the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan will go in a
positive direction”.
The minister reiterated that a series of issues, including the issues
of refugees and Nagornyy Karabakh’s security, were on the agenda of
the negotiations. In the meantime, Oskanyan said that the issue of
Nagornyy Karabakh’s political status was the most important one to
Armenia. As for the deployment of peacekeepers in the conflict region,
the minister said: “It is too early to speak about the deployment of
foreign peacekeepers, there are more pressing issues to deal with.”
[Passage omitted: repeat of earlier items and hails parliamentary
polls in Karabakh]

PROGRAMME OF REVIVAL MUST BE SUCCESS
Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
17 June 05
After the construction of the highway road `North – South’ the
All-Armenian foundation `Hayastan’ will launch a new large-scale
programme in Karabakh `Revival of Artsakh’. Fundraising for the
programme will begin with the telethon to be held in coming
November. Other programmes are being implemented in parallel as well,
which are also directed at the revival of Artsakh. With the support of
the American Armenian and the foundation the city will soon have a new
building of the polyclinic, corresponding to the European standards.
The NKR representative of the foundation Michel Tancrez told us that
the total cost of the policlinic is 700 thousand US dollars. About 600
thousand was provided by the American Armenian benefactor for buying
equipment. Two years ago the programme of reconstruction of houses in
Haterk, Vaghuhas and other villages of Martakert region was completed.
With the support of Armenian benefactors from Argentina and the
foundation a new school building was built in the village of Vaghuhas.
Now the foundation supports reconstruction works in the village. In
the current year the school buildings of the village of Drmbon and
Shosh were built and operated. M. Tancrez said the foundation is
implementing a programme of support to nursery schools as well.
Recently new furniture was ordered for 10 nursery schools. Later it
will be decided to which nursery schools the furniture will be
distributed. M. Tancrez mentioned that it is the first time that the
foundation orders furniture here. Michel Tancrez explained the record
sum raised during the previous telethon by the contribution of big
sponsors and good organization. M. Tancrez has great expectations from
the upcoming telethon: `The programme of revival of Artsakh must be a
success. The first stage of the programme will include the region of
Martakert. Later funds will be raised for the reconstruction of Hadrut
and Martuni, and then the other regions of the republic.’ M. Tancrez
said the funds raised during the telethons of 2007 and 2008 will be
spent on the reconstruction of the water system and roads in the
republic.
SRBUHI VANIAN.
17-06-2005

ARFD-MOVEMENT 88 BLOC CALLS PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS IN NKR NOT FREE
STEPANAKERT, JUNE 20. ARMINFO. Te bloc ARFD-Movement 88 does not think
the parliamentary elections of June 19 in NKR free and transparent.
Representatives of the bloc Gegham Baghdasaryan (Movement-88) and
Armen Sargsyan (ARFD) said at a press conference today.
According to ARMINFO’s special correspondent to Stepanakert,
Baghdasaryan and Sargsyan pointed out the use of all the
administrative resources by the authorities both during the
pre-election campaign and the elections. They say the bloc sent a
letter to President of NKR Arkady Ghoukasyan and Prime Minister
Anushavan Danielyan, but has not received any reply. The bloc’s
representatives are surprised with the fact that occupying the 3rd
place in the elections on the proportional system, the bloc did not
receive any single-mandate seat. They expressed regret for failing to
repeat the success in 2004 municipal elections, adding that it was
time to analyze omissions. They pointed out the bloc’s adherence to
its principles to support stability in the country.
In response to ARMINFO’s question on the position of the Armenian wing
of ARFD party in the elections, Armen Sargsyan said that the Karabakh
office of the party was a decentralized structure, but its position
would not contradict to that of ARFD of Armenia. “We aspired for an
honest struggle, without use of the party’s resources,” he said. He
said he would make a statement shortly to reflect all the violations
in the course of the elections.
To note, according to preliminary data, ARFD-Movement-88 bloc received
only 3 ticket seats.

PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF NKR PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS FOR PARTIES KNOWN
STEPANAKERT, JUNE 20. ARMINFO. The Central Electoral Commission of the
Nagorno Karabakh Republic has promulgated the preliminary results for
parties of the Sunday elections into the NKR 4th parliament.
Democratic Party of Artsakh has polled 37.6% of the votes, Free
Fatherland 26.7% ARFD – Movement 88 24.4%, Communist Party 4%, For
Moral Revival 3.6%, Our Home Armenia 2.1% and Social Justice 1.3%. The
final results will be known in 5-6 days.-
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

INTERVIEW WITH NKR FOREIGN MINISTER
Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
17 June 05
H 2: `Mr. Minister, the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan
meet in Paris On June 17th. This is their first meeting after the
meeting Kocharian ` Aliev in Warsaw. What does Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic anticipate from this meeting? What standpoint would you like
to confirm once again before this meeting?’ Arman Melikian: `We do not
have a problem of confirming once again any standpoints because we
have already expressed our standpoint. As to the meeting, we do not
expect anything special from one meeting, which is natural. Today the
process of negotiations is flowing by its usual course. We must follow
to see what the results of the meeting are. Perhaps, it is not the
moment to have any special anticipation.’
H 2: `Mr. Minister, the Azerbaijani parliamentarians have recently
been declaring at different organizations that Armenia agrees to
returning the so-called occupied territories. What is the standpoint
of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic toward this issue and are there
principal changes in your standpoint?’
A.M.: `There are no principal changes in our standpoint. As to the
statements of the Azerbaijanis, this is not the first time they try to
make psychological pressure on all of us and persuade us to return the
territories. At any rate, I have not heard similar statements from the
Armenian side. Instead I have heard them deny the statements of the
Azerbaijanis.’
H 2: `In the past two or three years Azerbaijani journalists and
representatives of public organizations have visited Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic. In Azerbaijan their information is always met with
discontent. What is your attitude towards the mutual visits of
Armenian, including Armenians of NKR, and Azerbaijani journalists and
representatives of NGOs?’
A.M.: `We approve mutual visits because we consider that due interest
should be paid to the life in the neighbouring state. So far this
country has had a hostile attitude toward us, and we need to know
possibly much about the moods within the society for everything
offered to us through the Azerbaijani press and other mass media
emanates from the interests of the political elite of that country. In
fact, the Azerbaijani authorities are trying to keep away the truth
about Nagorno-Karabakh Republic from the Azerbaijani society. We must
try to make this truth reach the Azerbaijanis; the Azerbaijanis have
the right to know what is going on in Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. We
are willing to give the chance to the Azerbaijani journalists and
people. Not once or twice have they visited Nagorno-Karabakh Republic,
met with people from all classes, both authorities and common people
in villages, regions and got a clear impression of the present day of
NKR, the expectations of people from the future day, and their vision
of the future in general. And when they get convinced that an ordinary
Karabakh man envisages Nagorno-Karabakh Republic to be independent and
only at this condition is he ready to set up relationships with
Azerbaijan, this is, I think, an important fact for both peoples. The
people that does not want to see the truth and evaluate the reality
objectively, the people, government, country is doomed to failure.’
H 2: `Soon the parliamentary election will be held in Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic. Have you invited foreign observers, and have they agreed to
come? There is an opinion that this election is going to be the most
fair and transparent election ever held in our region. What is your
opinion on this?’
A.M.: `Elections in Nagorno-Karabakh Republic are first of all to
improve life in our country. Let others make comparisons in this
regard. It is not our aim to be commended by the international
community for holding exemplary elections. We need to hold such
elections, and if they correspond to the international standards, and
I am sure they do, it is all the best. But again I want to underline
that this is an issue of improving our life and, therefore,
successful, transparent and democratic elections are important. As to
the observers, we have, of course, invited observers. We in vited a
large number of international organizations, individuals,
NGOs. Hundreds of people have agreed to come and monitor the upcoming
election to the National Assembly of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. The
geography of the observers is very wide. There will be observers from
the CIS, Europe, the USA, as well as the Islamic countries.’
H 2: `Mr. Minister, the Azerbaijanis keep declaring in international
organizations about the issue of returning of 1 million refugees. In
fact, the number must be about 400 thousand. Why do I tell this
number? Because almost as many Armenians have been expelled from Baku
and the areas adjacent to the Autonomous Region of Nagorno Karabakh
(in 1988). Why is the issue of these people returning to their homes
not raised? Who will do this? Why can the Azerbaijanis claim redress
and the Armenians cannot?’
A.M.: `This is a very important issue. I do not agree that the issue
has not been raised. We have raised the issue in Nagorno Karabakh. I
consider the issue of the Armenians refugees from Azerbaijan one of
the most important components of the resolution of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. We must also emphasize the difference
between the Armenian and Azerbaijani refugees. The Armenians were
expelled from Soviet Azerbaijan due to the efforts of the Azerbaijani
authorities. This was ethnic cleansing. These people left the
territory of the Azerbaijan and are now scattered all over the
CIS. Part of them is living in Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, others in
Armenia, but the majority is in Russian Federation and other
places. As to the Azerbaijani refugees, in the long run they cannot be
considered as refugees because they are internally displaced
persons. The status of refugee supposes passing internationally
recognized border. A person can be considered as a refugee if the
latter fact has taken place. Today, if these people are regarded as
refugees, the fact of Nagorno Karabakh not being part of Azerbaijan
and being an independent state is recognized indirectly. Otherwise,
those people were to be recognized as internally displaced persons,
and the government of Azerbaijan was to take care of them and not the
international organizations, which usually aid refugees. There is
another problem as well. The Azerbaijanis left these territories
forced by the war waged by Azerbaijan. Not recognizing the
independence of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Azerbaijan tried to force
the Armenians of Nagorno Karabakh to admit the fact that they would
continue being part of Azerbaijan. The war began. As a result of the
military actions people were forced to leave their homes and move from
one place to another within Azerbaijan. In this respect I believe that
the Azerbaijani government should be responsible for the future of the
internally displaced persons, recovery of their material losses. The
issue of recovery of the losses of the Armenian refugees also should
be solved on the resources of Azerbaijan. We must view the problem of
resolution from the point of view of interests of all the people
involved in the conflict who suffered losses. The rights of the
Armenian refugees should be protected both in terms of the lost
property and return to their homes. When we consider the territories,
we say this issue cannot be solved separately. If, on the one hand,
these territories are viewed as a buffer zone for Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic, on the other hand they must also be viewed as a security for
recovering the rights of the Armenian refugees, and as such be
included in the negotiation process. I think this is the obligation of
every one of us.’
H 2: `Today promoting Euro integration is widely discussed in the
South Caucasus, as well as in terms of resolution of conflicts. Do you
think Nagorno-Karabakh Republic with its present-day status can be
involved in Euro integration? In other words, does the involvement of
the recognized republics of the South Caucasus in the EU New
Neighbourhood Policy mean that Nagorno-Karabakh Republic can also be
involved in it?’
A.M.: `It would, perhaps, be pointless to make forecasts on the
process. One thing is clear. In Europe and Nagorno Karabakh the same
system of values works, and there is cultural ground and similar
worldview for getting closer to Europe. But we must recognize that the
European Union is not a charity organization. When speaking about Euro
integration they do not mean that in the upcoming 10 ` 15 years the
countries of the South Caucasus will become members of the EU. The
process has not even started for Turkey. It is foreseen that EU must
start negotiating with Turkey on the issue of membership. Currently,
even the possibility for starting negotiations is at stake. You know
that France and Holland said `no’ to the Euro constitution. This means
that the process of European integration encounters problems in
Europe. I think it will be more reasonable to provide prerequisites
for Euro integration so that when the time comes we are ready to be
involved in the process actively. Today it is early to make optimistic
forecasts.’
H 2: `The advisor to the prime minister of Turkey R. Erdoghan visited
Yerevan with a delegation of parliamentarians and journalists. They
made use of every opportunity to state that they had come to begin
negotiations anew and to open a new page in the Turkish-Armenian
dialogue. What is your attitude toward the factor of Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic in the settlement of problems between Turkey and Armenia?’
A.M.: `First, as to the factor of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic in Turkish
`Armenian relationships, both Azerbaijanis and Turks often say that as
long as the issue of Nagorno Karabakh is not solved, and there are
Armenian troops in the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, the
prospect of opening of the Turkish ` Armenian border and the
improvement of Turkish ` Armenian relationships is vague. I think this
argument is aimed to disguise absolutely different political
interests. I believe that Turkey uses the issue of keeping the Turkish
` Armenian border closed for gaining advantages in the negotiations
with the EU members. The EU members in their turn raise the issue of
recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Turkey. That is two say, two
issues important for Armenians have become an object of talks and
trade between Turkey and the European Union. The Armenian side should
try to view the issue from this standpoint. Getting rid of illusions,
let us try to use the opportunities to create a favourable situation
for us.
AA.
17-06-2005

OBJECTIVE AND OVERALL INFORMATION
Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
20 June 05
The Central Election Committee does not have a permanent press centre.
The head of the newly established press centre of the Central Election
Committee Mikael Hajyan said the newly-established press centre will
serve as a basis for later establishing the press centre of the
Central Election Committee. The press centre is for the journalists,
as well as the observers. M. Hajyan informed that the centre has 12
computers, ten for the journalists, one for coordinating the work of
the centre and one is placed in the hall for providing information.
The computers are connected to the Internet. The software includes
information about Nagorno Karabakh, the election system, all the
elections on different levels held in Karabakh, including the June
19th election to the parliament. The centre is provided with foreign
telephone communication. On the monitor placed in the hall the centre
provides the latest information. In the hall the centre will hold
briefings and press conferences. Besides, through the media kit which
includes information on the whole process in Armenian, English and
Russian the centre will be able to provide objective and compact
information. Besides, the centre will provide information about the
services available in the city of Stepanakert, telephone numbers and
transport. The centre will work till evening of June 20th. The
telephone number of the centre is 7 18 55.
NVARD OHANJANIAN.
20-06-2005

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON GENOCIDES
Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
20 June 05
Stated the foreign minister of Armenia Vardan Oskanian in his speech
on the Armenian Genocide at the House of Lords. On June 15th the
minister of foreign affairs of Armenia Vardan Oskanian, who was in the
UK on an official visit, took part in the international conference on
genocides at the House of Lords, organized by the British – Armenian
Friendship Group. The press centre of the State Committee on the 90th
Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide informed that the foreign
minister of Armenia invited as the main spokesman of the conference
arrived in London in the evening of June 14th from Peking where he was
on an official visit. The conference was opened by the chairman of the
friendship group Baroness Caroline Cox and the ambassador of Armenia
to the United Kingdom Vaheh Gabrielian. The foreign minister of
Armenia presented a report. The former Canadian parliamentarian, chief
advisor to the prime minister of Canada Sarkis Assadourian, the head
of the French – Armenian friendship group of the National Assembly of
France Francois Rochebloine, the executive director of the Beth Shalom
Holocaust Commemoration Fund James Smith addressed the conference as
well. The topic of the conference was the issues of prevention and
condemnation of genocide which is still a threat for the humanity, as
well as the unacceptability of the Turkish policy of denial. The issue
of the Armenian Genocide was also discussed in the context of Turkey’s
membership to the European Union. It was mentioned that Turkey has to
recognize it and set up normal relationships with Yerevan before
that. According to the same source, V. Oskanan pointed out the
contradiction between the actions and words of the Turkish government.
On the one hand, it tries to look like an advocate of reconciliation,
on the other hand, criminalizes the term `genocide’, forbids public
discussions on this topic and claims that the British government
should re-write the history by the diplomat James Brice and the
historian Arnold Toynbee. Nevertheless, the foreign minister of
Armenia expressed the commitment of Armenia to reconciliation and
establishment of normal relationships with Turkey without any
preconditions. Among the participants of the conference there were
British politicians, representatives of the local authorities, foreign
guests, diplomats, representatives of the university, British and
foreign press. A similar event was held in 2000, in the year of the
85th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. After the conference dinner
was given at the House of Lords. In the afternoon the British –
Armenian parliamentary group extended a formal request with 3000
signatures to the British Parliament to recognize the Armenian
Genocide perpetrated in the Ottoman Empire in 1915 and promote the
Turkish – Armenian reconciliation. On the same day Anglican and
Apostolic mess was held at Westminster Abbey, in St. Margaret Church
to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. At the
mess were present Minister Oskanian, Ambassador Gabrielian, Baroness
Cox, Duke Shannon, the founder of the British – Armenian friendship
group, Member of Parliament Paddy Tipping, one of the authoritative
members of the Labour Party, Abbot Rice, clergymen, foreign guests,
representatives of the Armenian community. The events in London were
organized with the support of the Armenian General Benevolent Union
and owing to the efforts of the honorary secretary of the British –
Armenian Friendship Group Odette Basil. On the same evening Minister
Oskanian left for Brussels to present the Individual Partnership
Action Plan at the meeting of NATO. On June 18th the minister left for
Paris to meet with the minister of foreign affairs of Azerbaijan
E. Mamedyarov. The meeting was organized by OSCE Minsk Group
co-chairs.
CHRISTINE MNATSAKANIAN.
20-06-2005

HOW TO RETURN KARABAKH?
Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
20 June 05
For over 17 years the Azerbaijani politicians and political scientists,
journalists, the military and defenders of rights have been racking
their brains over this question. At different times power was taken
away from five leaders of Soviet and post-Soviet Azerbaijan – Kyamran
Baghirov, Abdurrahman Vezirov, Ayaz Mutalibov, Yaghub Mamedov and
Abulfaz Elchibey – for failure in solving the Karabakh issue by Baku’s
scenario. Heydar Aliev left this world and joined Kyamran Baghirov and
Abulfaz Elchibey without undoing the Karabakh knot. Now Aliev Junior
has taken up the job, promising his fellow countrymen, like his
predecessors, to return Karabakh to Azerbaijan. Each of these leaders
of Azerbaijan had their own plan of getting over the `insurgent’
people of Karabakh. Under Kyamran Baghirov they tried to scare us
through assaults of the Azerbaijani mob in Askeran, massacres were
perpetrated in Sumgait, our compatriots were forced to leave
Shushi. These did not work. Abdurrahman Vezirov, who succeeded him,
intended to assuage the Armenians (as well as the Azerbaijanis)
through political clownery until a convenient occasion occurred to
take revenge on the people of Karabakh. However, the Azerbaijanis, and
especially the Popular Front of Azerbaijan were not in the way of
joking. The Azerbaijanis would have hung Abdurahman Vezirov at the
home of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan if
the former USSR troops did not save him. After the famous events in
Baku in January 1990 Ayaz Mutalibov, who came to replace Vezirov,
looking quite respectable, not only did not apologize to more than 250
thousand Armenians for having displaced them through medieval methods,
but also persuaded Mikhail Gorbachov to hold the military operation
`Koltso’ in the Autonomous Region of Nagorno Karabakh to force out the
Armenian population from Nagorno Karabakh. However, the quick
succession of events in Soviet Union in agony prevented the
realization of this idea Yaghub Mamedov who assumed the duties of the
leader of Azerbaijan for a short period after the dissolution of the
USSR and resignation of Ayaz Mutalibov again `failed’ in the Karabakh
issue, signing armistice with the president of Armenia then Levon
Ter-Petrossian in Tehran a day before the offensive of Shushi. Abulfaz
Elchibey adopted a military method of solving the issue. He was
mistaken in his estimations as well. Then Heydar Aliev took up the
work of saving the nation through military ways. As a result
Azerbaijan lost several more regions, adjacent to Nagorno Karabakh.
The `Father of the Nation’ had to alter his tactics manipulating the
factor of oil and hoping to push the third countries to put military,
political and economic pressure on Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh. Once
again failure. Finally, Ilham Aliev came to power. He seems to have
decided not to occupy with the Karabakh issue at all and leave the
whole burden of settlement with the international mediators. This
tactics has not produced sought-after results either. Meanwhile, after
the dissolution of the USSR various NGOs and human rights
organizations appeared in Azerbaijan which no more believe the
government could solve the Karabakh issue and propose their own
prescriptions. The prescriptions come to any liking, ranging from
apparently `constructive’ (by Azerbaijani standards, of course) to
naive and even exotic ones. The head of the Azerbaijani National
Committee of the Helsinki Citizens Assembly, Arzu Abdulayeva has been
raving about the Aland model of resolution for many years now. The
Aland Islands where ethnic Swedish people live belong to
Finland. Aland people have a president, a parliament and a prime
minister, that is to say, also a government. They all meet under their
own flag. Besides, the Aland Islands are considered a completely
demilitarized zone, which supposes the absence of military service. If
I am not mistaken, in 1993 the NKR delegation visited the Aland
Islands for studying the experience of reconciliation and co-existence
of nations. It is notable that the speak er of the parliament of NKR
then Karen Baburian who headed our delegation, was asked what his
attitude toward the Aland model was. He unbuttoned his collar
jokingly: `Karabakh is absolutely for it, but on condition that it is
part of Finland and borders with friendly Sweden.’ Thereby Karen
Baburian let the international organizers of the visit know that Asian
Azerbaijan infected with the militaristic germ is far from being
civilized European Finland. However, Arzu Abdulayeva, apparently, has
a different opinion. `We need to shift from abstract, non-concrete
judgements about the independence of Karabakh and the territorial
integrity of Azerbaijan to the discussion of opportunities of the
South Caucasians to leave at peace, like the Europeans, securing
economic, political and civil liberties,’ she writes in one of her
newspaper articles. Therefore, Arzu khanum goes on, it is worth
considering whether the model of Aland Islands can serve as a ground
for national (i.e. Azerbaijani – A.G.) agreement. Any government
would have to take it into consideration. `Instead of judging about
some highest form of sovereignty (i.e. Azerbaijani – A.G.) the
authorities will have to recognize that our people accept this model,’
concludes Arzu Abdulayeva. Is this naive? Certainly. It is naive
because Arzu Abdulayeva presents the desirable for the real. Or she
lies consciously when she states that the frenzy of nationalism in
Azerbaijan has gone, and during the years of the cease-fire the
Armenians of Karabakh have become convinced that the traditional
standpoint `unification with Armenia or independence’ is fruitless.
Whereas, it is not possible to build real peace based on a lie. The
representative of the political party `New Greens’, political
scientist Oktay Sadekhzade presented an absolutely `constructive’
model of resolution for Azerbaijan last year. Fairly insisting that
further development of Azerbaijan and Armenia and the fates of the two
nations depend on the resolution of the conflict, Oktay Sadekhzade
proposes a three-stage plan of resolution of the conflict. In the
first stage the liberation of the occupied Azerbaijani territories
except Nagorno Karabakh and Lachin, the return of the displaced
persons and stationing of international peacemaking forces in the
region is proposed. The ratio of the international peacemaking forces
stationed in the conflict area must be the following: USA 25 %, France
25%, Russia 25 % and Turkey 25 %. According to the plan of the
Azerbaijani `Green’, the second stage should be launched only after a
public opinion poll is conducted in Azerbaijan and Armenia. In this
stage the status of Nagorno Karabakh will be determined. Oktay
Sadekhzade provides a vertical – horizontal subordination of our
region to official Baku, which is difficult to understand. For the
Armenian population of Nagorno Karabakh he plans double citizenship of
Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan. For this aim an exclusive amendment
is to be made to the Constitution of Azerbaijan. At the end of the
second stage Baku and Yerevan are to sign an intergovernmental
agreement by which the Lachin corridor will be rented by Armenia for
99 years and the Meghri corridor will be rented by Azerbaijan for 99
years. And finally, in the third stage, election to the local
governments will be held in Nagorno Karabakh, in which `both
communities’ of the republic will take part. The republic will not
have a president, and NKR will be a parliamentary republic within
Azerbaijan. In other words, Oktay Sadekhzade proposes a rather long
process of returning the Karabakh Armenians to Azerbaijan and in the
future they will be free to leave the Armenian land for whatever place
they wish. Another project on resolution was presented to the
Azerbaijani public by one of the independent newspapers of Baku.
According to their project, the territory of the former Autonomous
Region of Nagorno Karabakh should be given the status of Free Economic
Zone for 50 years. The zone should be run by the board of directors
set up from the representatives of Nagorno Karabakh, Azerbaijan,
Armenia, as well as the members of the OSCE Minsk Group. The OSCE
Minsk Group will act as guarantor of the new status of Nagorno
Karabakh. The project provides for several other `privileges’ as well,
but the passports of the NKR residents will be Azerbaijani with an
appendix of `Free Economic Zone’. The official languages of the Free
Economic Zone will be Armenian and Azerbaijani. The procedure of
legalization of the new status of NK will be carried out in parallel
with `the liberation of the occupied areas of Azerbaijan’. Well, we
have a more `delicate’ plan of returning Karabakh to Azerbaijan, with
all the famous consequences for the Armenians of Karabakh, i.e. you
can leave your motherland for whatever place you like. Here are the
fresh ideas about the ways of resolution of the Karabakh issue, which
fully correspond to the modern trends. One of the authors of these is
the executive director of the National Centre for Strategic Research,
Farhad Mamedov. According to him, only democratic and powerful
Azerbaijan is able to make the West return Karabakh. One has to admit
that this is already serious. This is what we the Armenians say,
seeking for the international recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic. For this aim Farhad Mamedov points out the necessity for
holding fair parliamentary election in Azerbaijan this November. We
seek for the same in Karabakh. But this is not the real essence. In
all the models of resolution of the Karabakh conflict mentioned above
and many others not mentioned here there is not a single word about
the right of the NK Armenians for self-determination. That is to say,
the Nagorno-Karabakh issue is completely denied. Then the question
occurs: `How is it possible to solve a problem without recognizing
it?’ Therefore, the Azerbaijani inventors of various formulae to
return Nagorno Karabakh to the constitutional environment of
Azerbaijan and other `kind intentions’ will remain kind intentions,
not more. Although, among our neighbours there are such who doubt that
the Azerbaijani government wants to return Karabakh. Among them is the
well-known political scientist from Azerbaijan, Rasim Aghaev.
According to him, Azerbaijan had quite a lot of time to Azerbaijanize
Karabakh (about 70 years of the Soviet rule). `It was the only
reliable way of eliminating the so-called Karabakh issue,’ he states
in one of his articles on the Karabakh conflict. Long live Rasim-Bey!
At least you are frank. Although, on the other hand, the leadership of
Soviet Azerbaijan was guided by the principle of Rasim Aghaev for 70
years, which gave rise to the Karabakh issue as it is now. Anyway, how
could the Azerbaijanis return Karabakh¦?
ALEXANDER GRIGORIAN.
20-06-2005

Radio Free Europe, Czech Republic
June 20 2005
Opposition Criticizes Vote In Nagorno-Karabakh

(RFE/RL)
20 June 2005 (RFE/RL) — The opposition bloc in the disputed
territory of Nagorno-Karabakh is criticizing the region’s 19 June
parliamentary elections as unfair, RFE/RL’s Armenian and Azerbaijani
services reported.
Gegam Bagdasaryan, a representative of the opposition bloc, said on
20 June that the opposition accuses authorities of abusing their
administrative resources to influence the outcome of the election.
Early vote results show that the opposition took only three out of
the 33 seats in parliament in the voting.
Nagorno-Karabakh is a self-proclaimed republic, but it is not
recognized by the international community.
Armenia and Azerbaijan fought a war over the territory in the early
1990’s in which an estimated 25,000 people were killed and hundreds
of thousands of Azeris were driven from the territory.
Azerbaijan still claims the territory, which is under Armenian
control.
Azeri officials say said any vote in the region will remain illegal
until hundreds of thousands of Azeris banished from Nagorno-Karabakh
and seven surrounding regions are allowed to return.

Preliminary results of NKR parliamentary election announced
20.06.2005 15:52
YEREVAN (YERKIR) – According to the preliminary results made public by
the Central Election Commission of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic
(NKR), 78 percent or 66,774 voters cast their ballots in the June 19
parliamentary election, Armenpress reported.
In the proportional-system, constituencies Artsakh Democratic Party
received 22, 939 votes, (5 seats) followed by Azat Hayrenik (Free
Homeland) with 15, 931 votes (3 seats) and ARF-Movement 88, with 14,
535 votes (3 seats).
Under the single-mandate system, the following individuals were
elected to the parliament: Armen Abgarian, Zhanna Galstian, Valery
Harutiunian, Araik Harutiunian, Maxim Mirzoyan, Ararat Danielian,
Sergey Seyranian, Gagik Petrosian, Samvel Hakobian, Benik Bakhshiyan,
Ivan Avanesian, Armen Ohanian, Rudik Usunts, Rudik Martirosian, Seyran
Ohanian, Grigiry Gasparian, Garnik Mirzabekian, Artur Tovmasian, Oleg
Grigorian, Vahram Atanesian, Artsvik Sargsian and Karen Grigorian.
Seven of them were nominated by the Artsakh Democratic Party, seven
others from Azat Hayrenik. The final results will be reported in 5 or
6 days.