Month: July 2007

AZERI CITIZEN ARRESTED AT THE CONTACT LINE

armradio.am
02.07.2007 13:57

June 30 a citizen of Azerbaijan was arrested on the direction of Aghdam
of the contact line of the armed forces of Karabakh and Azerbaijan,
Mediamax reports.

The detainee had no ID documents. In his words, his name is Samandar
Guliyev. He was born in Shushi in 1972 and currently resides in Uch
Oghlan village of Aghdam region. The relevant bodies of the Nagorno
Karabakh Republic are investigating the causes of his passage to the
Armenian side.

The NKR State Commission has informed the Offices of the OSCE and
the International Committee for the Red Cross in Karabakh.

FARHAD BADALBEYLI: AZERBAIJAN SHOULD TREAT KARABAKH ARMENIANS AS ITS CITIZENS

arminfo
2007-07-02 13:22:00

Rector of the Baku Musical Academy, USSR People’s Artist, Professor
Farhad Badalbeyli positively assessed the results of his visit
to Nagorno Karabakh and Yerevan together with the delegation of
Azerbaijani intellectuals.

"I assess the results as positive. It is pleasant that the US State
Department, Russian Foreign Ministry, the presidents themselves
responded in the same way. Despite complexity of the relations, they
approved this idea, from all the sensible, pragmatic people who do
not work for sensation, for their political image, they just argue
soberly: what shall we do to get out of this situation. Of course,
this is a very important moment and we should work with the people
whom we consider the Azerbaijani citizens", Badalbeyli said, the
Day.az reports. He thinks that if Azerbaijan wishes to see Karabakh
in its structure, it should treat the people living there as the
citizens of Azerbaijan. Otherwise, quite another decision should
be made. In this case, one will have to think of seriousness of
this step, as neither the big countries nor the European Union will
approve this step. As for the Armenian party’s mood, Badalbeyli said:
" I felt their tiredness as well, as the results of their Pyrrhic
victory are apparent. Today, Shusha is a beautiful city, this is a
pearl which turned into a plantom-city". "Fifteen years have passed,
and if the people were sure of their power, over these years, they
would move there and develop construction, and they would be given
credits like the Jewish settlements in Gaza.

However, it did not happen. It means that the people are not sure
of tomorrow, they think they would give up their lands sooner or
later", F.

Badalbeyli said.

As for cooperation with the Armenians before the conflict settlement,
Badalbeyli said "they also have a desire but the situation is
different. I am not a politician and I cannot make terms. However,
after the talk with Robert Kocharyan, an idea was heard that such
contacts may take place only after the steps of good will". It means
that the Armenians have to liberate the seven regions for refugees
to return there, after which the contact may become real.

"Such meetings are necessary, they are so-called cerebric attacks,
as the Armenian delegation comprised serious people: Director of
Conservatory, President of the Academy, etc. We should contact
and persuade as they also have definite complexes. The Armenians,
as pragmatic people, cannot but understand the hopelessness of
their policy, especially after the visit to Baku, which, I think,
made a deafening impression on representatives of the Armenian
intellectuals", F. Badalbeyli said. Touching upon the response of
Azerbaijani party to the delegation’s visit and the issue how much
the Azerbaijani public is ready for such contacts, F. Badalbeyli said
that the public is ready by 40% as yet, while 60-70% of people will
condemn such initiatives. "However, this meeting, evidently, was so
much important that even the Department of State responded to it", F.

Badalbeyli said. "We must show that the people can live with each
other, that two peoples will live in Nagorno Karabakh, first, being
guarded by international forces. Afterwards, everything will pass in
normal way. However, this process must be started and someone had to
take the first step. We have made this fist step and were attacked
by the press.

However, it is typical. I think, we are wrecked by the emotional
approach to the problem solution, and we have to become the Norwegians
in this sense", F. Badalbeyli said.

KHACHKAR IN MEMORY OF SPECIAL REGIMENT OFFICERS KILLED IN FIGHT FOR LACHIN CORRIDOR ERECTED IN BERDZOR

arminfo
2007-07-02 13:04:00

A khachkar (Armenian national cross-stone) was ceremonially opened
in the town of Berdzor (Lachin) in memory for the special regiment
officers killed in the fight for Lachin corridor in 1992-1994.

The monument was erected with the support of the Union of Special
Regiment Veterans public organization headed by Deputy Defence Minister
of Armenia Lt. General Gurgen Melkonyan. Veterans of the special
regiment throughout Armenia and NKR attended the ceremony. Names of
62 killed officers are engraved on the cross stone that was erected
in the area of Memorial Complex for the Killed in Karabakh War. "We
have fulfilled our duty to the killed compatriots. It is not only a
monument, but also a lesson for young generation. No one is forgotten
and nothing is forgotten," Gurgen Melkonyan said. The Union of Special
Regiment Veterans intends to erect similar khachkars in all the areas
were their colleagues were killed. In Omar Gorge, Kubatli. "On this
gala day I want to wish patience to the relatives and the friends of
the killed. We will not allow a new war. The borders of our motherland
are protected. We will never give the enemy the areas were your
kindred were killed," Lt. General Melkonyan said.

TURKEY: JUSTICE FOR HRANT DINK

ewsID=17403
Posted: 02 July 2007

Amnesty International today (2 July) called for all the evidence and
circumstances to be considered as the trial of 18 people accused of
involvement in the killing of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink
begins in Istanbul. Hrant Dink was shot on 19 January 2007. The case
will be heard in closed session at Besiktas Heavy Penal Court No.14,
because one of the defendants is under 18 years of age.

Andrew Gardner, Amnesty International’s researcher on Turkey, said:

"The Turkish authorities must ensure that, in examining the case,
no stone is left unturned. All those involved in the killing of Hrant
Dink – those actively involved in planning and carrying out the fatal
attack and those who failed to prevent it – must be brought to justice.

"Hrant Dink’s killing took place in the context of an increasing
pattern of deadly intolerance of freedom of expression."

Amnesty International considers that Hrant Dink was targeted because
of his work as a journalist who championed freedom of expression and
promoted the universality of human rights. He had been repeatedly
prosecuted under Article 301 of the Penal Code that criminalises
‘denigrating Turkishness’.

The suspected gunman is alleged to have stated that he killed
Hrant Dink after seeing him on television making statements which
"denigrated Turkishness".

Hrant Dink had been receiving death threats for several months prior
to his death. He had reported these to the Sisli public prosecutor
in Istanbul.

Reportedly one of those on trial in connection with his death had
also acted as a police informer and had repeatedly told police of
the plan to assassinate Hrant Dink in the months leading up to his
death. Nevertheless, the authorities failed to take the necessary
steps to ensure protection for him.

Before the investigation into Hrant Dink’s death started, the Istanbul
Police Chief made a statement to the effect that Hrant Dink’s murder
was not politically motivated or organised but rather the act of a lone
gunman on the basis of nationalist sentiments. Amnesty International is
concerned that such a statement, coming so quickly after the incident,
not only could have jeopardised the impartiality of the subsequent
investigation but also illustrated an official reluctance to examine
the full scope of the case.

Amnesty International is also concerned about footage that appeared
in the media of law enforcement officers posing with the suspected
gunman in front of a Turkish flag as if he was a ‘hero’. Such footage
contributes to the perception that some sections of law enforcement
agencies may be biased.

While a number of officials have already been removed from office on
grounds of negligence or failure of duty, Amnesty International is
not aware of any proceedings taken against them to date.

Amnesty International is sending a representative to Istanbul for
the first day of the hearing in the criminal case. Interviews with
him can be arranged through the Amnesty International UK press office.
From: Baghdasarian

SOVIET-GEORGIAN WAR AND SOVIETIZATION OF GEORGIA, II-III. 1921
By Andrew Andersen, George Partskhaladze

w/332/63/
Monday, 02 July 2007

In the year 1918, Georgia restored her independence from Russia. This
became possible as a result of World War I and disintegration of the
Russian Empire due to its failure to withstand a tremendous pressure
endorsed by the war effort. During its three years of independence,
Georgia’s moderate socialist leadership was rather successful in the
establishment of a democracy-track society. However, the development of
democratic processes in the First Republic faced a number of challenges
that included involvement in military conflicts with Turkey, Armenia,
as well as the "Reds" and the "Whites" of Southern Russia, economic
blockade by Western powers, delay of international recognition,
internal conflicts and subversive activities of local Bolsheviks
encouraged by the Bolshevik regime in Moscow.

By the end of February, 1920, an alliance was formed between the
Kemalist government of Turkey and the Soviet leadership of Russia. The
new allies required a stable land-bridge between the two countries. In
order to achieve that goal, the three independent states of the South
Caucasus – namely Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia – were to be taken
over and partitioned between Soviet Russia and Turkey. By 31.05.1920,
Azerbaijan was invaded and Sovietized by Russia’s 11th Red Army. Four
months later, Armenia was invaded by the Kemalist Army of Karabekir
Pasa and partitioned between Turkey and Russia. The last independent
country believing to be a bastion of the West squeezed between the
Kemalists and the Soviets was Georgia, and it was to fall as well in
order to finalize Soviet-Turkish project in the Caucasus.

This paper provides comprehensive coverage of the Soviet military
campaign against Georgia that was launched on February 11th, 1921, in
breach of a non-aggression treaty. It contains a detailed analysis of
the major military operations of the campaign as well as a comparison
of military might of both conflicting parties. This paper is one
of the first attempts to cover the above-mentioned historical event
which can be found especially interesting nowadays when Georgia and
Russia are once again balancing at the brink of military conflict.

The paper is accompanied by 4 full-color maps and 2 color diagrams.

AGAIN THE ROLE OF RESPONDENT
Hakob Badalyan

Lragir.am
KarabakhOpen
02-07-2007 13:50:30

Recently there has been an unnoticed but in fact a breakthrough in
the settlement of the Karabakh issue. The visit of the Azerbaijani
ambassador to Russia to Karabakh and the meeting with the president
of Karabakh Arkady Ghukasyan can be considered as some format of the
Azerbaijan-Karabakh relation which might not have been accidental or
related to the negotiations, but it was a fact which is difficult to
ignore. This event sparked debate in both Armenia and Azerbaijan. In
Azerbaijan it met strong a backlash, namely the nationalists led by
Akif Nagi described the move of the ambassador as treason. The Armenian
propaganda presented it as some diplomatic victory of the Armenian
diplomacy in the sense that the visit of the Azerbaijani ambassador
to Karabakh means recognition of the sovereignty of Karabakh.

In reality, however, it is the victory of the Azerbaijani diplomacy
rather than the Armenian diplomacy. And the reason for this suggestion
is not my desire to use every opportunity to criticize the Armenian
diplomacy.

Generally, it is difficult to criticize the Armenian diplomacy
for the simple reason that there is no such thing yet. Meanwhile,
we almost constantly face the fact of existence of the Azerbaijani
diplomacy, especially over the past few years when statements on the
settlement of the Karabakh issue and Karabakh as a "disputable area"
are made at the international rostrums. Certainly these issues do not
presuppose a resolution which is not in our interests, but obviously
they express the tendencies of the international politics.

Meanwhile, the visit of the Azerbaijani ambassador is a move towards
choosing a tactics that matches these tendencies that Azerbaijan
makes considering the situation. And the situation is that the
countries which mediate the talks wish to involve Karabakh in the
talks because they realize there is no other way of resolution,
especially that the resolution is viewed on the basis of the principle
of self-determination, although the order and borders of this
self-determination is not clear. This is the reason why the Armenian
side has recently started to state more frequently and resolutely that
Karabakh must be a party in the talks. However, unlike the statements
of the Armenian side, Azerbaijan tries to fit into the international
political tendencies not only through statements but also through
moves. No doubt the Azerbaijani ambassador to Russia had the approval
of the Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev to visit Karabakh and meet
with Arkady Ghukasyan. Hence, Azerbaijan makes the first step towards
direct relations. It appears that Armenia and Karabakh which made
statements on the necessity of participation of Nagorno-Karabakh in
the talks are now respondents. In fact, Azerbaijan again took the
initiative, showing that it has a constructive stance on Karabakh,
and it is not Azerbaijan’s fault that Karabakh is not participating
in the negotiations.

The Armenian side will have difficulty responding because over these
years its tactics was built on the idea that Azerbaijan will say no,
consequently they could speak about anything, knowing that Azerbaijan
would reject. Now it is clear that Azerbaijan may sometimes make
other moves besides no. in other words, Aliyev says to the government
of Karabakh as well as Armenia: "So, you wanted me to negotiate with
Karabakh. I am here now. My conditions are the same. I want all. Now
I am listening to you." In this context, it is obvious that the
statements on becoming a party in the talks are groundless unless
they are based on clear tactical and strategic moves.

If the issues are going to be the same, if the proposals are going
to be the same, in the long run, the participation of Karabakh will
make no difference. The participation of Karabakh must bring not
only a new party but also new, fresh approaches into the process of
negotiations. Therefore, Karabakh should have offered new proposals,
new approaches of settlement over these years, and it should do
now. Otherwise, nothing will change.

LETTER FROM CALIFORNIA
Dr. and Mrs. Ishkhan and Anahit Babajanian

California,USA
KarabakhOpen
02-07-2007 13:06:29

Dear compatriots,

We are quite pleased to hear that Mr. Masis Mayilian is running
for presidency in Karabakh. We support him wholeheartedly for the
following reasons:

1. We found him to be intelligent and educated who upholds high
traditional Armenian values. He is honest, humble, patriotic, and
devoted to his country and people.

2. We are confident that he would supercede Karabakh’s people interests
ahead of his or any other political party or group.

3. He will strive against poverty, corruption, and injustice. He
believes on democracy and human rights He expressed such goals and
idea’s to us during our volunteer work in Karabakh.

4. He is committed to protect the country against neighboring threats.

5.His intention is to resettle Armenians from all over the world in
Artsakh allowing and assisting them to prosper.

We support his candidacy for president for above reasons. We are
enthusiastic to have him run for the position and would be pleased
have him succeed as we (and other diaspora Armenians) apply for dual
citizenship in Armenia in the upcoming months.

HERITAGE MET EUROPEAN AMBASSADORS

Lragir.am
02-07-2007 14:35:25

On July 2 Raffi K. Hovannisian, Larissa Alaverdyan and Styopa Safaryan
represented the Heritage Party’s faction to the meeting with the
delegation of ambassadors of countries of the CoE, the press service
of the party reported. They discussed issues related to promotion of
democracy in Armenia, as well as the challenges to the regional world
security. After presenting his stance on these problems, Hovannisian
regretted that the tradition and national obligations assumed by
Armenia were broken, and the members of parliament of the Heritage
Party and other opposition parties were not included in the Armenian
delegation to the current session of the PACE.

The official delegation of Strasburg included seven permanent
representatives to the CoE: Wendelin Ettmayer from Austria, Bruno
Gene from France, Eberhard Kolsch from Germany, Peteris Elfers from
Latvia, Stelian Stojan from Romania, Alexander Alekseev from Russia
and Per Sjogren from Sweden.
From: Baghdasarian

HILDA TCHOBOYAN: REGIONAL PEACE AND STABILITY GREATLY DEPEND ON TEH PROCESS OF GENOCIDE RECOGNITION

armradio.am
02.07.2007 15:06

The discussions of the bill on punishment for the Armenian Genocide
denial will enter the Senate agenda in October-November. Chairwoman
of the European Armenian Federation Hilda Tchoboyan told Armenpress
that the issue cannot be excluded from the agenda of the French
Council of Elders, although there were fluctuations as a result of
the presidential and parliamentary elections, and the interested
political forces were unable to have their say." According to her,
the issue will be on the country’s political agenda in the fall.

Let us remind that that in October, 2006 with 106 pro and 19 con
votes the French Parliament adopted a bill criminalizing the denial
of the Armenian Genocide, which envisages a punishment from one
year imprisonment to a fine of 45 thousand Euros. The bill has been
submitted to the Senate confirmation.

Hilda Tchoboyan welcomed the decision of the EU Council, according
to which genocide denial should be punishable. "It is a principles
position, which was not noticeable up to now. It remains only
to clarify how this genocide is characterized. Genocide denial
is punishable, and those countries, the parliaments of which have
recognized the Armenian Genocide, can include some bill deriving from
recognition in their legislation, which will make the negation of the
Armenian Genocide punishable in their countries," Hilda Tchoboyan said.

"Regional stability and peace greatly depend on the process of the
Armenian Genocide recognition by European states and Turkey," Hilda
Tchoboyan concluded.

TIGRAN L.PETROSYAN ACHIEVES CHAMPION’S TITLE IN SUDAN

armradio.am
02.07.2007 15:15

Playing within the chess club of Cairo – the capital of Egypt,
Armenian Grand master Tigran L.Petrosyan achieved the champion’s
title in the tournament of clubs of Arab states held in the capital
of Sudan. Tigran Petrosyan achieved 7 points from 9 possible.