Author: Antonian Lara

The Messenger, Georgia
Feb 4 2005
Baku ready for dialogue with Armenia on Karabakh issue
According to the Azeri newspaper Zerkalo.Baku, Deputy Minister of
Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan Araz Azimov states that Baku is ready
to hold talks with Yerevan regarding the Nagorno-Karabakh issue only
after Armenian troops leave occupied areas of Azerbaijan.
The paper reports that evidence gathered by the Azerbaijani
government were presented at an official meeting of the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs. “We got acquainted with the materials and plan to
investigate them now, ” stated the Russian co-chairman of the OSCE
Minsk group Yuri Merzliakov. According to an agreement between the
OSCE mission and Baku, experts will visit all 7 occupied regions
around Nagorno-Karabakh.
Merzliakov said that the mission would be accompanied by no one from
the Azerbaijani side. According to co-chairman of the MG of OSCE
Bernard Fassie, the mission will work on the occupied territories for
more than a week. “Then experts will prepare a technical report and
present it to the co-chairmen,” he said.
Establishing settlements in the occupied Azeri territories is being
implemented by the direct participation of Armenia, the paper writes.
The Azerbaijani side presented documents that proved the settlement
of the occupied territories. Azimov said that about 23,000 Armenians
are living illegally on the occupied territories.
The documents also provide information regarding the use of occupied
territories for illegal trade of drugs and organized criminal
activities. Azimov also expressed his attitude toward the PACE
resolution regarding Nagorno-Karabakh.
The president of Azerbaijan also hosted the co-chairmen of the Minsk
Group and the mission that is studying issues of possible illegal
settlements in occupied Azeri territories. He said that the illegal
settlement of these territories by the Armenian side is a serious
obstacle for the achievement of long-term peace.

UN Official Solicited Oil Deal from Iraq -Report
Thu Feb 3, 4:44 PM ET World – Reuters

By Evelyn Leopold and Irwin Arieff
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – A senior U.N. official solicited and
received allocations of oil from Iraq (news – web sites) for a trading
company while he was directing the U.N. oil-for-food program, a key
investigative report said on Thursday.
The official, Benon Sevan of Cyprus, engaged in conduct that was
“ethically improper and seriously undermined the integrity of the
United Nations (news – web sites),” said the report by Paul Volcker,
the former U.S. Federal Reserve (news – web sites) chairman.
Volcker was appointed by the United Nations to lead a probe of the
now-defunct $67 billion program and on Thursday gave an interim
report. The final analysis is expected in June.
The report did not say that Sevan received bribes but mentioned that
he got $160,000 in cash from 1999 to 2003 from his aunt in Cyprus, who
has now died. The report said the aunt’s lifestyle did not suggest
wealth.
But Volcker said Sevan solicited and received allocations of oil on
behalf of the African Middle East Petroleum Company, a small trading
firm, registered in Panama with offices in Switzerland, Monaco and
elsewhere. It was run by Egyptian Fahkry, a cousin of former
U.N. Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, who left office at the
end of 1996.
It was “highly unlikely” that such a company would have been allowed
to buy oil unless someone lobbied Baghdad. In return for the
allocations, Sevan was expected to make a case for Iraq receiving cash
to upgrade its deteriorating oil facilities, which he and several
Security Council members did.
“Mr. Sevan repeatedly solicited allocations of oil under the program,”
the report said. Iraqi officials in return expected Sevan’s support on
such issues as funds for repairing Iraq’s crumbling oil facilities, it
said.
The oil-for-food program, which began in December 1996 and ended in
November 2003, allowed Saddam Hussein (news – web sites)’s government
to sell oil in order to buy humanitarian goods. It was intended to
ease the life of ordinary Iraqis under 1990 U.N. sanctions.
But in his report of more than 200 pages, Volcker told a news
conference that “we have not found a systematic misuse of funds
dedicated to the administration of the oil-for-food program.” He said
the investigation was continuing.
Since the U.S. invasion of Iraq, documents have emerged that show
Saddam Hussein skimming funds from the program, selling oil illegally
outside the program, often with the knowledge of big powers on the
Security Council, and bribing a variety of officials around the world.
Volcker also said that U.N. officials ignored procurement procedures
and safeguards from the very start of the program.
Investigators found “convincing and uncontested evidence” that the
selection process was tainted by irregularities for each of the first
three contractors selected — the French bank Banque Nationale de
Paris, the Dutch firm Saybolt Eastern Hemisphere BV and the British
Lloyd’s Register Inspection Ltd, the report said.
A CIA (news – web sites) investigation last September found Saddam
earned $1.7 billion through kickbacks and illegal surcharges on the
program from 1996 to 2003. He got an additional $8 billion in illegal
oil sales to Jordan, Turkey and Syria, which were known to the
Security Council, including the United States, in its supervision of
the program.
Volcker said it was a matter of record that the United States, among
others, have given Jordan and Turkey a waiver to receive Iraq oil
outside of the U.N. program because they suffered hardships from the
sanctions.
Volcker said allegations of conflict of interest by Annan would be
handled in a later report. Annan’s son Kojo, had once worked in West
Africa for a firm under contract to the United Nations in Iraq. Annan,
who only became secretary-general in 1997, has said he had no hand in
assigning contracts.
The report also said that another senior official, Joseph Stephanides,
who was involved in the program in 1996 and before Sevan took over the
operation, intervened in procuring major contracts for large firms.
“The evidence amply demonstrates that a tainted procurement process
took place in 1996, when the program was just getting under way,”
Volcker said, adding that political considerations came into play.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Useless-Knowledge.com
Feb 1, 2005
A Citizen Of The World
By Alexander Antonarakis
Feb. 1, 2005
A recent article was written agreeing with the toughts of an Austrian
Ethnologist in the 19th Century that modern greeks are not greeks, or
as the ethnologist put it “not a drop of blood of the ancient greeks
runs in the modern greek nation”. I thought it wold be more
appropriate to provide a response to Thomas Keyes.
Greek History is very large (4700 years), and it is impossible for
there not to have been mixing of populations. If you spoke to any
greek nowadays, they have the knowledge that they are not 100% pure
descendants of the ancients. They have the acceptance of the
procession of events throughout history. Yet it is quite naive to
think that all the nations in which greeks prevailed contributed
largely to the bloodline. The largest change in greek bloodline was
the Dorian Invasion which provided new ideas and architechture to the
Minoan and Mycenaean civilizations, creating a new hellenic heritage
which sread all over the agean initially. There were different city
states or kingdoms such as
Athens/Sparta/Thebes/Macedonia/Ionia/Crete/Byzanti um/Pontus, etc.
Later, after the colonization periods of the east and west
Mediterranean, Alexander spread the hellenic heritage until the
Indus. Yes, here there was large mixing of populations of Sogdians,
Bactrians, Persians, etc…but how many of these made their way back
to the Aegean? These greeks have become the bloodlines of modern
Iran, Pakistan, Afganistan, etc. In Egypt also there was some mixing,
but at the time of Mark Anthony, and later during the Golden Age of
Monastisism in Egypt, the copts and greeks lived comfotably with each
other, YET retained a heritage during the arab and ottoman invasions.
Over 100,000 and more greeks were expelled by Naser in 1955 from
Alexandria.
Now for the Slavic invasions into the Pindud mountains, yes we all
know that happened, but we do not know how much. Also, the greek
speaking Byzantium was definately not centered around modern day
greece. All of asia minor was crawling with hellenes. 2 million of
these finally made their way back to the Agaean in 1922. We all know
that we have some slavic blood, as the slavs know that they have
greek blood. The fact always remains that on the whole, tha greek
population was largely always greek with small additions here and
there.
As for Turks and Jews, we know that the Jews do not mix well with any
race. For the turks, it is also known that a convert to islam could
not turn back to christianity…the penalty was death. Many
christians such as greeks, slavs, and armenians retained their
religion as their genetic heritage. There is a huge amount of
christian blood in modern day turks, yet not nearly as significant in
the balkans and armenia/georgia.
Italians affected our bloodline slighlty in the cycladic islands,
corfu, and crete. But if you think, much of italy, especially the
south was part of byzantium until the 10th century, so much of their
bloodline is also hellenic or byzantine roman. Germans during the
world war definately did not affect our bloodline in anyway! And
black africans such as ethiopians did come to the Aegean in small
numbers.
The conclusion of this article is that the modern day Hellenes have
the most genetic heritahge than any other peoples in Europe and the
middle east (except maybe the jews in israel). We do not have direct
100% heritage of course from Homer and Socrates to Justinian and the
Comnenus family, but we do carry a large part of their body, be it
physical or mental. We are the closest peoples to the ancient and
byzantine hellens. Yet as Socrates said, “I am not an athenian, not a
greek, but a citizen of the world”…we should not fight on who
represents who, we should be proud of what we are, and of what we can
achieve in the future for our race, and for Europe in the World.

Glendale NewsPress
LATimes.com
Jan 29 2005
Glendale man will serve 16 months
Ara Gabrielyan sentenced in stalking case after following
ex-girlfriend with tracking device he attached to her car.
By Jackson Bell, News-Press and Leader
GLENDALE – A Glendale man was sentenced Friday to 16 months in prison
for following his ex-girlfriend using a Global Positioning
System-enabled cell phone attached to her car, one of the first
stalking cases of its kind in L.A. County, officials said.
Ara Gabrielyan, 33, pleaded no contest to one count of stalking and
two counts of making criminal threats, officials said. Gabrielyan
faces deportation to Armenia, his home country, upon completing his
prison term, prosecutors said.

Gabrielyan was arrested Aug. 29 after his former girlfriend, Gayanne
Indezhan, reported to Glendale Police that she allegedly spotted him
trying to change the cell phone’s battery under her car, authorities
said. He was accused of following Indezhan, a 35-year-old Glendale
woman, for six months leading up to the arrest.
Andrew Flier, Gabrielyan’s defense attorney, believes that he will
only serve up to four months of his sentence since he has nearly
eight months in credit for time already served in jail. Flier also
said Gabrielyan’s family wants him to return to his home country.
“We are happy about this because he is a nice man, and the more we
would have fought the case, I think the worse it would have been for
him,” he said.
Gabrielyan was reportedly using the phone as a tracking device, and
would unexpectedly turn up while she was at a bookstore or traveling
to Los Angeles International Airport, police said.
During a preliminary hearing earlier this month, Indezhan testified
that Gabrielyan could not accept that their relationship of two years
was over and would call her continually throughout the day.
Gabrielyan never physically attacked her, but she feared for the
safety of herself and her children the month leading up to his
arrest, Indezhan testified. She said he threatened to kidnap and
impregnate her as well as kill both of them so they could be together
“in eternity.”
“He told me that he was going to crash my car, then did it,” she
said. “He told me he was going to break into my house, and did it.
Then he said he was going to kill me. Did I have that guarantee? No,
but I was afraid he would do what he was going to say.”

.html
Nuclear Awareness Project
Media Backgrounder
June 1998
[email protected]
The Threat of Nuclear Weapons Proliferation from Turkey
——————————————————————–
The dark underside of nuclear power has always been its potential for
nuclear weapons proliferation, either through the reprocessing of spent fuel
to produce plutonium – – an inevitable byproduct of reactor operation – – or
through the transfer of sensitive nuclear information, technology and
materials.
Canadian nuclear cooperation with India and Pakistan provides a chilling
example of how the transfer of so-called “civilian” nuclear technology can
contribute directly and indirectly to the development of nuclear weapons.
Canada provided the technology at the foundation of the Indian and Pakistani
nuclear programs and continues to provide vital information and assistance
to maintain those programs through the CANDU Owners Group (COG).
The Turkish Electricity Generation and Transmission Company (TEAS – – a
state-owned utility) is expected to soon make a long-awaited announcement
about the winner of a bidding process to build a nuclear power station at
Akkuyu Bay on the Mediterranean. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) is
bidding to sell two 700 MW CANDU reactors to Turkey at a cost of about $4
billion (CDN). It is bidding against a German/French consortium (Nuclear
Power International – NPI – is a cooperative venture between Siemens/KWU and
the French national nuclear company Framatome). The third consortium bidding
is a partnership of Westinghouse and Mitsubishi.
Three items providing background on the possible nuclear weapons
proliferation threat from nuclear power development in Turkey follow.
The first item is an article from the Turkish daily newspaper “Radical” on
June 1, 1998. The article is entitled Pakistan’s offer for cooperation.
Radical is a major daily paper of an intellectual nature (it is NOT
particularly left-wing, as the name might suggest). We have investigated the
report and have confidence in its reliability. The reported offer from
Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to Turkish President Suleyman Demirel
took place on May 11, 1998 – – the day after India exploded its first three
nuclear bombs on May 10.
The second item is a report on a former Turkish NATO General making a thinly
veiled statement in support of a nuclear weapons program for Turkey. This
report indicates that there is at least some support in the Turkish military
for nuclear weapons development. Although Turkey is a nominal democracy,
nobody has any doubts that the military really runs the country. For
example, it was the military that forced the government of Necmettin Erbakan
to step down in June 1997, and replaced it with the government of Mesut
Yilmaz.
The third item is an excerpt from a report called “The CANDU Syndrome” that
I wrote in 1997. It provides some historical background with evidence of
Turkey being used to ship nuclear weapons technology to Pakistan; and an
attempt to purchase a reactor from Argentina, likely for plutonium
production. The purchase was stopped by pressure from the USA.
It is very likely that nuclear-armed confrontation is in the future of the
middle east if nuclear development is allowed to continue unchecked. Israel
already has a well developed nuclear weapons program. Iran has two reactors
under construction by the German company KWU, with two more to be built
there by China. Iraq’s nuclear program was destroyed only during the Gulf
War.
For more information, please refer to “The CANDU Syndrome” on ,
or , or contact:
Dave Martin
Nuclear Awareness Project
Box 104
Uxbridge, Ontario
Canada
L9P 1M6
tel/fax 905-852-0571
E-mail: [email protected]
————————————————————–
1.
Radical
June 1, 1998
Pakistan’s offer for cooperation
It is declared that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has offered Turkey
cooperation for Nuclear Weapons. Being surrounded by countries with nuclear
programs pushes Turkey to take the necessary measures even while it
continues disarmament efforts.
By Deniz Zeyrek
Ankara — India and Pakistan’s nuclear tests, which sparked international
opposition, have resulted in action in Turkey, which is surrounded by
countries with nuclear programs, including Iran, Iraq, Syria and Israel, and
the former USSR. Turkey is anxious about the latest developments. On the
other hand, according to the information received, Pakistan Prime Minister
Nawaz Sharif has said to Turkey `Let’s work together on nuclear weapons’. It
is reported that Nawaz Sharif made this offer personally to [Turkish]
President Suleyman Demirel and to the Minister with him.
According to the information we received, during the May 11-12 Economic
Cooperation Organisation (ECO) Summit at Almati, Kazakhstan, President
Suleyman Demirel met with Nawaz Sharif. During the discussions Demirel put
the India-Pakistan conflict onto the agenda. Nawaz Sharif explained that a
large part of the conflict was caused by India’s nuclear tests, and said
that Pakistan is also conducting nuclear research for defense purposes.
Foreign threats
Border disagreements between Pakistan and India, and their declaration of
themselves as nuclear states, prompted Turkey to put nuclear weapons on the
agenda as a national security issue. The record of Turkey’s neighbours on
nuclear and chemical weapons, also led Ankara to undertake an initiative in
this direction. One cabinet member spoke about the anxiety of Turkey because
of the danger with which it is confronted, and said: “We must also acquire
these technologies in the next ten years. The necessary investments are
unavoidable.”
Because the efforts of the UN Security Council and the international
campaign for the reduction of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons could
fail, Turkey’s defense plans were put onto the political agenda of the
Government. Some of the members of the government continue to insist that
these initiatives should be taken, and they defend the use of nuclear
technology for military purposes. Ankara, however, is demanding that a
“regional forum” should be constituted and that nuclear and chemical weapons
should be removed from the arsenals of countries in the region. [Turkish]
Foreign Minister Ismail Cem forwarded this proposal to all countries of the
region except Israel. Turkey also continues efforts for conventional
disarmament and is trying to revive the Agreement for the Reduction of
European Conventional Forces. However, the lack of response >from countries
in the region, and the failure of disarmament efforts, leads Turkey to take
the necessary measures.
——————————————————————————–
2.
On May 18, 1998, the Turkish TV news channel NTV re-broadcast a program
called “Pasaport” which was originally broadcast from Ankara on May 17,
interviewing the retired Turkish Lieutenant-General Erdogan Oznal, who was
formerly in charge of the Balikesir Nato Air Base. He was responsible for
NATO fighter/bomber aircraft in Turkey armed with nuclear warheads during
the cold-war.
The moderator reported on the recent nuclear weapons tests in India and
Pakistan, and asked the General what his feelings were while he was in
charge at the Balekesir Base, waiting for a possible command to launch and
fire nuclear weapons. He spoke cooly about waiting over the years for the
possible command.
General Oznal described the nuclear threats around Turkey’s borders, such as
Israel and Iran, which have their own nuclear programs. General Oznal
repeatedly emphasized the nuclear threat from Israel, India, Pakistan and
Iran, and said: “TURKEY MUST NOW DEVELOP ITS OWN NUCLEAR POLICY”. It is
clear that Oznal was referring to the development of a nuclear weapons
program.
——————————————————————————–
3.
Turkey and Nuclear Weapons Proliferation
This is an excerpt from “The CANDU Syndrome: Canada’s Bid to Export Nuclear
Reactors to Turkey”, by David H. Martin, September 1997. The entire report
is posted on the web page of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear
Responsibility,
Turkey ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)
on April 17, 1980, and the safeguards agreement went into force on September
1, 1981.[1] At the controversial “Extension Conference” of the NPT in April
1995, the five nuclear weapons states sought, and despite strong opposition,
obtained indefinite extension of the treaty. Turkey demonstrated its loyalty
to the international nuclear status quo by supporting the “indefinite and
unconditional extension” of the treaty.[2]
Despite Turkey’s observation of the non-proliferation proprieties, there
have been past concerns about alleged nuclear proliferation connections with
Pakistan. Signing the NPT does not necessarily mean much. Article X of the
NPT allows any party to withdraw with only three months notice if
“extraordinary events… have jeopardized the supreme interests of its
country”.[3] Alternately, states such as Iraq and the Peoples Republic of
China have simply ignored the strictures of the Treaty, despite their
continued adherence. Pakistan has actively pursued nuclear weapons
capability for many years, and has refused to sign the NPT. Pakistan is in
an unofficial sub-continental nuclear arms race with India – and both
countries are considered undeclared nuclear weapons states. Connections with
such states may have serious implications – Chinese nuclear dealings with
Pakistan have been the main cause of an American nuclear trade boycott of
China.
The first allegation of a Turkey/Pakistan nuclear connection was in 1981.
The current Turkish ambassador to Canada, Omer Ersun (then Chief of Policy
Planning at the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs under the military
junta) has confirmed that the US administration protested a $30,000 shipment
of “inverters” from a Turkish textiles firm to Pakistan, allegedly for use
in the Pakistani uranium enrichment program.[4]
Relations between Turkey and Pakistan became increasingly close after the
military coup in Turkey on September 12, 1980. The respective military
leaders of Turkey and Pakistan, President/General Kenan Evren, and
President/General Zia ul-Haq exchanged a series of official visits that only
ended with Zia’s 1988 death in a plane crash. In the early 1980s, Greek
Prime Minister Papandreou charged that “Pakistan expected Turkey to act as a
transshipper of material for a nuclear bomb and would reciprocate by proudly
sharing the nuclear bomb technology with Turkey”.[5]
It has also been reported that Canada withdrew its bid to supply CANDU
reactors to Turkey in the mid-1980s, partly “in response to pressure from
Western countries which [are] concerned that Turkey may build a nuclear bomb
based on CANDU technology”.[6]
Concerns about Turkey’s potential involvement in nuclear weapons
proliferation have continued in the 1990s. As noted above, international
pressure was required in 1990-91 to force an end to joint plans by Argentina
and Turkey to build the CAREM-25, a 25 MW reactor in their respective
countries. As noted above, Yalcin Sanalan, a former Director of TAEA stated
that the CAREM- 25 was “…too small for electricity generation and too big
for research or training, however, very suitable for plutonium
production”[7] Furthermore, in 1992, Senator John Glenn and other US
congressmen accused Turkey of supplying sensitive technology to Pakistan in
order to aid in that country’s acquisition of uranium enrichment
technology.[8]
In 1995, a Greek foreign ministry official, Thanos Dokos repeated concerns
about “nuclear cooperation between Ankara and Islamabad… and reports that
Turkey might try to acquire nuclear weapons material and technology and
recruit nuclear scientists from the Muslim republics of the former Soviet
Union.”[9]
It has been suggested that the American government does not have serious
concerns about the nuclear proliferation potential of Turkey.[10] However,
the potential for nuclear weapons proliferation through the sale of CANDU
reactors to Turkey remains a valid concern. It can be assumed that the
American government is pleased with the ouster of Erbakan’s Islamist
Refahyol government, and its replacement by the more pro-western government
of Mesut Yilmaz in June 1997. However, two issues must be raised in
response. One is that Erbakan may be returned to power in the near future if
the military allows a democratic election to take place. Second, continued
military domination of Turkey should not really give any reassurance. As
noted above, the military has also had strong ties to Pakistan, and may
favour the creation of `Islamic’ nuclear weapons.
Notes
1. United Nations, The United Nations and Nuclear Non-Proliferation, UN
Department of Public Information, 1995, Document 46, p. 183.
2. Kibaroglu, ibid., p. 33.
3. United Nations, ibid., p. 62.
4. Kibaroglu, ibid., p. 35.
5. “Turkey’s role in Pakistan’s nuclear program”, Worldwide Report, March
20, 1987, pp. 14. Cited in: Kibaroglu, ibid., p. 35.
6. “Canadian firm drops bid to build nuclear plant”, Nuclear Developments,
February 25, 1988, p. 39. Cited in: Kibaroglu, ibid., p. 36.
7. Cited in: Kibaroglu, ibid., p. 38.
8. Kibaroglu, ibid., p. 39.
9. Thanos Dokos in “Greece”, in Harald Muller, ed., Nuclear Export Controls
in Europe, Brussels, European Interuniversity Press, 1995, p. 208. Cited in:
Kibaroglu, ibid., p. 39.
10. Mark Hibbs, ibid., September 4, 1997, p. 8.
——————————————————————————–
Nuclear Awareness Project
P.O. Box 104
Uxbridge, Ontario
Canada
L9P 1M6
Tel/Fax 905-852-0571
E-mail: [email protected]
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ARTUR BAGHDASARIAN AWARDS MEDAL OF HONOR TO DEFENCE MINISTER AND NA
DIPLOMAS TO A NUMBER OF HIGH-RANKING SERVICEMEN
YEREVAN, January 28 (Noyan Tapan). On January 28, on the occasion of
the 13 anniversary of the formation of the Armenian Army, the RA
National Assembly Chairman Artur Baghdasarian awarded the Medal of
Honor to the RA Defence Minister Serge Sargsian, as well as NA
diplomas the RA President Advisor, Chief Military Inspector of the RA
Armed Forces Colonel General Gurgen Dalibaltayan, the Deputy Minister
of Defence Lieutenant General Alik Mirzabekian, the Deputy Minister of
Defence on Rear, Chief of the RA Armed Forces Rear Lieutenant General
Gurgen Melkonian, Head of the Defence Ministry’s Military Police
Department Major General Vladimir Gasparian, as well as a miltary unit
commander Major General Garegin Gabrielian. Noting that a new
tradition was initiated at the National Assembly, Artur Baghdasarian
congratulated, on behalf of the parliament, the servicemen awarded and
wished them good health, will and determination in implementing
reforms in the army and ensuring defence potential. The NA Chairman
expressed satisfaction with the efforts put by the Armenian people,
officers and soldiers into the establishment of the Armenian army, and
expressed hope that they will not spare effort and energy for further
strengthening of the Armenian army. According to the National
Assembly’s PR Department, the RA Defence Minister Serge Sargsian
expressed gratitude to Chairman of the National Assembly and the
parliament for showing a warm and considerate attitude to the army. He
pointed out that the 28 of January has started to enter the public
life as a holiday and it will become a national holiday in 3-4
years. The Defence Minister also expressed gratitude for the attention
to army-related laws and assured the Armenian Army is efficient and
ready to honorably defend the borders of the country.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

3 POLITICAL FIGURES MAKE JOINT STATEMENT CONDEMNING ARMENIA’S FOREIGN
POLICY
YEREVAN, January 28 (Noyan Tapan). Armenia has no strategy (national
ideas and goals) in the sphere of foreign policy and it “plays
complementarism.” The January 28 joint statement of Vazgen Manukian,
Chairman of the National-Democratic Union, Ashot Manucharian,
Political Secretary of the Union of Socialist Forces, and Paruyr
Hayrikian, Chairman of the National Self-Determination Union, said
this. The statement was publicized by Paruyr Hayrikian at the press
conference held the same day. According to the statement, “yielding to
the provocation of one of the numerous levers of systematized foreign
policy of Turkey, representative of Turkish press (correspondent of
the Zaman newspaper: NT), Vardan Oskanian, RA Foreign Minister,
declared that the Republic of Armenia has nothing against the Kars
treaty.” According to P.Hayrikian, Turkish Prime Minister Erdoghan is
sure that no sensible Armenian should accept the Kars treaty of 1921
legalizing the Armenian Genocide but “instead of accepting and
continuing the thought of the Turkish Prime Minister our Minister
commits mistakes, which are difficult to understand.” In Hayrikian’s
opinion, today’s Armenia may be considered as Armenia of “outpost”
period, and the statesmen as “little members of Komsomol” looking
towards Moscow who only strive for preserving their power. According
to him, the pan-Armenian interests are ignored on the international
arena and everything is moved to the Karabakh (“not Artsakh”) plane,
as a result of which Artsakh itself will gain nothing. Hayrikian
declared that the Turkish diplomacy managed to lead the
Armenian-Turkish relations to Turkey’s demanding lands from
Armenia. In his estimation, today the state committing a Genocide and
seizing the historical lands of Armenia puts forward a condition to
Armenia, again to surrender the territories if not in favor of Turkey
by the example of the Moscow-Kars treaty of 1921 then in favor nof
Azerbaijan as it was done in case of Nakhichevan. According to
Hayrikian, today they also demand Artsakh and Armenia has no power
resisting this. “We only defend ourselves.” According to the
statement, “not only every pupil” but the President of Armenia and his
supporters should know that “the Genocide was summed up and fixed by
the Moscow treaty of 1921 and its copy, Kars treaty.”

Agence France Presse — English
January 26, 2005 Wednesday 3:37 AM GMT
List of officials confirmed for Auschwitz commemoration
WARSAW Jan 26
Survivors of the Auschwitz death camp and Red Army soldiers who
prised the camp from the Nazis will gather Thursday at the site in
southern Poland, along with officials from around the world, to mark
the 60th anniversary of the camp’s liberation.
There follows a list of officials the Polish presidency has confirmed
will attend the commemorative events at the camp on January 27:
Albania: Prime Minister Fatos Nano
Armenia: Prime Minister Andranik Margaryan
Austria: President Heinz Fischer
Azerbaijan: Parliamentary Speaker Murtuz Alasgarov
Belgium: King Albert II, Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt
Belarus: Council of the Republic Chairman Gennady Novitsky
Bosnia-Hercegovina: Chairman of the Presidency Borislav Paravac
Britain: Foreign Minister Jack Straw, Prince Edward
Bulgaria: President Georgy Parvanov
Canada: Governor General Adrienne Clarkson
Cyprus: President Tassos Papadopoulos
Croatia: President Stipe Mesic
Denmark: Prince Joachim
Estonia: President Arnold Ruutel
Finland: Parliamentary Speaker Paavo Lipponen
France: President Jacques Chirac, Foreign Minister Michel Barnier
Germany: President Horst Koehler
Greece: President Konstantinos Stefanopoulos
Spain: Senate President Francisco Javier Rojo Garcia
Hungary: President Ferenc Madl
Ireland: President Mary McAleese
Israel: President Moshe Katzav
Italy: Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi
Kazakhstan: Senate Chairman Nourtay Abikayev
Lithuania: Prime Minister Algirdas Brazauskas
Luxemburg: Grand Duke Henri
Latvia: President Vaira Vike-Freiberga
Macedonia: Deputy Foreign Minister Fuad Hasanovic
Netherlands: Queen Beatrix, Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende
Norway: Crown Prince Haakon, Prime Minister Kjell Magne Bondevik
Portugal: Prime Minister Pedro Santana Lopes
Czech Republic: President Vaclav Klaus
Romania: President Traian Basescu
Russia: President Vladimir Putin
Serbia and Montenegro: President Svetozar Marovic
Slovakia: President Ivan Gasparovic
Slovenia: President Janez Drnovsek
Sweden: Crown Princess Viktoria, Parliamentary Speaker Bjorn von
Sydow
Switzerland: President Samuel Schmid
Turkey: Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul
Ukraine: President Viktor Yushchenko
United States: Vice President Dick Cheney
Vatican: Mgr Jean-Marie Lustiger
European Union: Commission President Manuel Barroso, Parliamentary
President Joseph Borell Fontelles

PRESS RELEASE
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia
Contact: Information Desk
Tel: (374-1) 52-35-31
Email: [email protected]
Web:
Question by Armenpress:
Yesterday the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe heard the
³Atkinson Report² on the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, and passed a resolution.
What is your assessment?

Answer by Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Hamlet Gasparian:
At the outset, it must be said that we value highly the Council of Europe¹s
efforts aimed at the South Caucasus, and in particular, at establishing
stability and long-term peace in the region. At the same time,
notwithstanding its positive points, the Atkinson Report was, in our view,
generally faulty, since it focused on the consequences of the conflict,
without delving into its causes. Further, we believe that the process of
amending the report was not an objective one. One of our amendments, which
even had the support of the Rapporteur himself, did not pass because of the
Turkish chairman of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
Political Affairs Committee.

Nevertheless, we welcome the various principles which are reaffirmed in the
document by PACE. Specifically, that Resolution reaffirms that independence
and secession of a regional territory ³may only be achieved through a lawful
and peaceful process based on democratic support by the inhabitants of such
territory² as well as that ³the problem cannot be resolved by use of
military force, that the status and future of a population must be
determined by that population.²

We also consider important the amendment (which was our proposal) where PACE
recalled the obligation which Armenia assumed upon Council of Europe
membership – to use its influence with the Armenians of Nagorno Karabakh in
order to achieve a resolution to the conflict. This effectively reinforces
the understanding that the conflict is between Azerbaijan and Nagorno
Karabakh.

Still, this document is not a binding document. It is of an advisory and
declarative nature. The negotiations will continue within the Minsk Group
framework, and we believe that the positive and negative aspects of the
Resolution cannot have a specific affect on the actual negotiations.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Macedonia to take part in NATO Crisis Management Exercise
Makfax news agency, Skopje
26 Jan 05
Macedonia will take part in the regular annual NATO Crisis Management
Exercise (CMX 2005), from 26 January to 1 February 2005.
In addition to the 26 NATO nations, nine partner nations have been
involved in the planning and execution of this NATO CMX as Troop
Contributing Nations. This has provided them with an opportunity to
familiarize themselves with crisis management procedures and will
strengthen cooperation between NATO and its partners in the
Political-Military Framework for NATO-led Partnership for Peace (PfP)
operations.
Other countries included in CMX 2005 are Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan,
Finland, Ireland, Croatia, Sweden and Switzerland.
Participants in CMX 2005 will include civil and military staffs in
national capitals, at NATO Headquarters, and in both Strategic
Commands. Representatives from the UN, EU and OSCE will be invited as
observers.
No troops will be deployed in the exercise.
The scenario will depict an UN-mandated and NATO-led crisis response
operation deployment outside the Euro-Atlantic area in order to reduce
tension between two fictitious states. The environment includes the
risk of conventional conflict and an asymmetric dimension such as the
threat of terrorism and the use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD)
against deployed NATO-led forces and in troop contributing nations.
CMX 2005 will last one week, involving a total of 1,250 personnel.