Author: Badalian Vardan

RECOGNITION OF UNRECOGNIZED: NAGORNO KARABAKH PRESS DIGEST
Regnum, Russia
Sept 27 2006
Will the talks be continued?
“Vardan Oskanyan’s refusal to meet with the Azeri FM means that he is
afraid that his arguments might be weak,” 525th Daily (Baku) reports
the Spokesman of the Azeri Foreign Ministry Tair Tagizade as saying.
Tagizade says that the main point is that the talks must be
continued. “All Oskanyan’s statements about Azerbaijan’s activities at
the UN show the real extent of Armenia’s commitment in the regional and
world politics,” says Tagizade. He notes that the OSCE MG co-chairs
still believe that the next meeting should be between the Armenian
and Azeri FMs.
The press office of the Armenian Foreign Ministry has published the
response of the acting spokesman of the FM Vladimir Karapetyan to
Public Radio’s question:
“In their last few days’ comments some Azeri officials have used
quite new diplomatic vocabulary. Particularly, the spokesman of the
Azeri Foreign Ministry has appeared with a very strange statement
that the Armenian side is “avoiding” the FM meeting because of “the
weakness of its arguments.” Do we actually have nothing to say during
the forthcoming meeting?
I am trying to understand what psychic complexes might have forced
my Azeri colleague to make such unbecoming statements about the FMs
meeting. Perhaps, the only thing left for a diplomat of a country who
has lost the war it started itself is to cover his impotence with
senseless arrogance and idle talk. I am really surprised to hear
such a bunch of words from Azeri officials. I say “bunch of words”
because what they are saying makes absolutely no sense, no logic,
nothing one could call a thought. I see absolutely no responsibility
and sense of the moment in their words.
The Armenian side takes the talks very seriously and expects the same
from the opposite side. We have repeatedly said that we approve of the
last proposals of the OSCE MG co-chairs and hope that the talks will
be continued. In the last years Azerbaijan has shown increasingly
strong negation towards the peace talks: in 1998 they rejected the
“common state” scenario, in 2000 they dismissed the Key-West proposals
and, today, they are drawing back from the agreements produced by the
Minsk Group. We would like to say once again that the Minsk Group is
the best format for the Armenian side at the moment.
The transfer of the problem to other instances necessitates the
involvement of Nagorno Karabakh in the talks. Talks are not an end in
itself for us: we are not going to take part in the Azeri games. If
Azerbaijan has no more arguments to give to the MG and hopes to get
some dim profits in a structure where members are not well aware of
the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, it is playing a dangerous game. If
Azerbaijan got into this game against its will only because it tried
to capitalize on the agendas of other participants, it should have
well estimated the possible consequences of such a policy. Azerbaijan
must realize that we will not solve the problem by imposing scenarios
on each other. We must find the solution ourselves however hard it
might be.
On the other hand, the Azeri authorities may well be trying to use
the “card” of Nagorno Karabakh for their own domestic needs. If
so, this is not a political question. In any case, the Azeri side
will not be able to mislead anybody. They will not be able to deny
that it was they who carried out the first ethnic cleansing in the
former Soviet Union, it was they who first started a large-scale war
against people they consider to be their own citizens, it is they
who are destroying Armenian cultural heritage, it is they who are
showing absolute negation of any contacts with the Armenian side –
contacts that could pave the way for cooperation and could alleviate
the tensions (Noyan Tapan).
“One could expect such a position from Armenia. Armenia believes
that it has won the war, and Azerbaijan must concede during the
talks, but Azerbaijan will not deign to do it,” Azeri political
expert Rasim Musabekov says in an interview to APA news agency while
commenting on Armenia’s attempts to evade the talks. Musabekov says
that there is only one way to solve the Nagorno-Karabakh problem:
“The hegemonic states must bring Yerevan to reason, otherwise, the
talks will give no results, and Armenia will continue pushing forward
its non-constructive position.”
Azeri political expert Zardusht Alizade says that, in fact, there
is no negotiating process, it’s just a show: “Neither side wants
to drastically change its position. There is no real ground for
concessions. Armenia says that Nagorno-Karabakh must become independent
and join it, Azerbaijan says that it will not give Armenia a single
inch of its land. Nobody is searching for concessions outside these
principles and appeals to the public and the international law. Both
the sides and the co-chairs approach the problem superficially and
are trying to find a solution that would bring closer the interests
of the sides, but the interests are not coming closer. For the
problem to be resolved, one of the sides must renounce its basic
principles.” Alizade says that some powerful forces are trying to
freeze and to prolong the conflict. Now, the sides are in a stalemate
and are just feigning talks.
Meanwhile, political expert Vafa Guluzade calls the Karabakh peace
process “just a nonsense.”
168 Zham daily asks Spokesman of the Armenian Foreign Ministry Vladimir
Karapetyan: “A few months ago Armenian President Robert Kocharyan said
that, if the Karabakh talks reach a deadlock, Armenia will recognize
the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. Will Armenia actually
do it?”
Karapetyan responds: “You have said yourself – ‘if the talks reach
a deadlock.’ The present situation is not a deadlock.”
168 Zham asks: “And what about Armenia’s statements that if Azerbaijan
continues its attempts to transfer the Karabakh problem to the UN,
it will have to negotiate with Nagorno-Karabakh – something Azerbaijan
will never agree to. Isn’t it a deadlock?”
Karapetyan answers: “You can’t be 100% sure it will not, more
precisely, we will learn this during the forthcoming processes.” “One
thing is sure, Armenia wants the talks to be continued in one or
another form. The Armenian side will in no way lead the process into
a deadlock.”
“The present deadlock in the Karabakh peace process is the result of
Azerbaijan’s illegal territorial claims, the removal of Karabakh – the
most interested party – from the talks and the excessive stupidity and
historical-legal ignorance of various mediators,” the first Russian
Ambassador to Armenia Vladimir Stupishin says in an interview to
PanARMENIAN.Net. He says that for the same reasons one should not
expect progress in 2007 and 2008. “That’s exactly why it is hard to
say when Karabakh will come back into the process.”
As regards the possibility of military solution, Baku is not calling
for application of force, in fact, it is threatening Armenia
with war. This is inadmissible, even if this is just a bluff,”
says Stupishin. He says that the optimal way now is to preserve the
status quo in all parameters lest the Armenians might be charged with
wrecking the talks: “Talks – however long they might be – are always
better than war.” “During the 15 years of their independence the
Republic of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh Republic have strengthened
their statehoods, have tried to overcome the problems of blockade
existence, have successfully resisted the aggression of Azeri revenge
seekers. Armenia have preserved friendly, allied relations with
Russia and has cooperated with Moscow in the framework of the CIS,
CSTO and other organizations,” says Stupishin.
“Though not recognized formally by any government, Karabakh’s
continued march to secure lasting independence is irreversible,”
says Nagorno-Karabakh’s Representative to the United States, Vardan
Barseghyan.
Referring to DiplomaticTraffic.com, PanARMENIAN.Net reports Barseghyan
as saying: “There is no going back for us.” “Just because Stalin gave
Karabakh to Azerbaijan does not mean that the international community
has to reinforce what Stalin did.” “What Stalin did at the beginning
of the last century was against the will of our people. And now we
are at the beginning of the 21st Century.”
So far, negotiations among the key players since the 1994 ceasefire,
notably through the OSCE’s Minsk Group, have produced a lot of
statements and occasional glimmers of hope, but no concrete progress
on a lasting political solution.
But, clearly, Karabakh is not waiting for others to decide its
future. It has been working to shore up its defenses while steadily
improving its economy and the lot of its 145,000 people. Barseghyan
notes that GDP doubled from 2001 to 2005 (increasing to $114 million
from $53 million), and economic growth last year was 14 percent.
Although Karabakh is still a very poor country in a seemingly
precarious political situation, its people are evidently working hard
to improve their economy and prospects for the future.
Asked about possible recognition of their republic, Barseghyan
says: “There are positive tendencies” in that direction. He said
“governments recognize the fact that the Nagorno Karabakh Republic
has been established and functioning as a country, and more and more
contacts look like regular government-to-government contacts.”
“However, Washington closely watches the developments in Karabakh
including economic progress and democratization though the US
government tries not to portray these as regular contacts, for obvious
reasons,” says Barseghyan.
“I believe the world recognizes that we deserve to be free,
and as a minimum we should avoid another disaster. International
recognition of Karabakh’s independence will discourage another
attack by Azerbaijan. The ceasefire has lasted for 12 years already,
and we believe this is due to the natural balance of forces,” says
Barseghyan. He notes that Azerbaijan’s oil revenue has been used in
part to strengthen its armed forces, and Karabakh (and Armenia) stress
to the US Congress and administration that a military balance should
be maintained to prevent a new attack by Azerbaijan,” says Barseghyan.
Recognition of unrecognized
Nagorno Karabakh welcomes the conduct of referendums in Transdnestr
and South Ossetia, Nagorno Karabakh President Arkady Gukasyan says
in an interview with Novosti Armenia news agency. “I believe that
the peoples of Transdnestr and South Ossetia have the right to hold
referendums and to once again confirm the will they expressed long
before,” says Gukasyan. “I think it is always wrong and bad to ignore
a nation’s will. Such problems must be solved on the basis of the
right of a nation to self-determination and, naturally, we welcome
these referendums,” says Gukasyan.
On Sept 18 Abkhazian Foreign Minister Sergey Shamba received Vice
Chairman of the Commission on International Cooperation and Public
Diplomacy of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation Sergey
Markov and Director of the Russian and Asian Programs of International
Security Institute (Washington) NikolaiZlobin.
Caucasian Knot news agency reports the sides to discuss the political
results of the referendum in Transdnestr and to express their support
for the political rights and sovereignty of the Transdnestr people.
The sides also discussed some practical steps to raise the
international authority of the Republic of Abkhazia and security in
the region. If Kosovo’s independence is recognized, the world community
will universally apply this principle in Abkhazia, Transdnestr, South
Ossetia and Nagorno Karabakh, Markov said after the meeting. He said
that this principle will generate a new wave of independences in the
post-Soviet area.
“We must respect the wish of the residents of Transdnestr to get
independence,” Vice Speaker of the Russian State Duma Vladimir
Zhirinovsky said on Sept 20. He said that a hundred of new independent
states will appear on the world map soon and mentioned Karabakh and
other unrecognized states. Zhirinovsky proposed opening a Russian
consulate in Transdnestr. (Analitika.az).
The European Union does not recognize the results of the September
17 referendum in Transdnestr. Before the referendum, EU and OSCE
officials had repeatedly said that it was inexpedient to hold a
referendum in Transdnestr. OSCE President Karel de Gucht said that
the Transdnestr referendum would make the situation in the region
even more complicated, PanARMENIAN.Net reports with reference to the
official representative of the European Commission Pietro Petrucci.
Concerning the referendum in Transdnestr, Deputy Chief Editor of
Kommersant daily (Russia) Azer Mursaliyev says that referendum is a way
to pressure the other conflicting party. “This referendum will have no
legal consequences. It was declared illegal from the very beginning
by all big international organizations. In fact, it was just a way
for Transdnestr to remind of itself. The referendum in South Ossetia
will have the same scenario and outcome,” says Mursaliyev. Concerning
Nagorno Karabakh, Mursaliyev says that they have already held several
referendums: “But all this is simply miserable from the legal point of
view. Any referendum is considered recognized if its very conduct is
recognized, if it is observed by experts from specific organizations –
from the UN to the CE; while several foreigners coming to unrecognized
units on their own will or on somebody’s request are not a guarantee
of serious legal consequences” (525th Daily).
The separatist units existing in the post-Soviet area have picked
up the habit of holding referendums. Thereby, they are trying to
“Balcanize” the post-Soviet area and to acquire the Serbian-Montenegrin
and Kosovan experience of ethnic-national self-determination. They
are doing it in different ways: electing “presidents,” voting for
“constitutions,” imitating “independence referendums.” And all
those “countries” forget that the US and the EU have recognized the
Montenegrin and Kosovan cases as unique and not subject to blind
political imitation. (Zerkalo).
The head of the Inter-Ethnic Relations Department of the Institute
of Political and Military Analysis of Russia Sergey Markedonov says
that Azerbaijan’s attempt to transfer the Karabakh peace process to
the UN is not just a coincidence. “Nagorno Karabakh Republic will
shortly join the ‘parade of referendums’ of unrecognized post-Soviet
republics – on December 10 2006 the Karabakh people will vote on draft
Constitution. The key point of the NKR Constitution is not division
of government or distribution of powers among the president, the
parliament and the Cabinet, but the territorial problem: the key
question of the political debates over the draft Constitution is
where the homeland starts and where it ends for the Karabakh people.
They in Stepanakert are sure that in three months they will
institutionalize their republic both territorially and politically.
The last attribute of a fully-fledged state is Constitution and the
adoption of own Constitution will bring NKR closer to international
recognition,” says Markedonov.

UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY SCHEDULED TO DISCUSS THE CONFLICTS ON GUAM TERRITORY ON NOVEMBER 6
Public Radio of Armenia
Sept 26 2006
Discussion of the conflicts over GUAM territory in the 61st session
of the UN General Assembly is scheduled November 6, “Trend” agency
was told at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan.
Preceding this the Council of Foreign Ministers of GUAM countries
will continue preparing for the discussions. This decision was taken
by Foreign Ministers of GUAM countries (Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan
and Moldova), who held their recurrent meeting in the framework of
their participation in the UN General Assembly session.

CLASH BETWEEN GEORGIAN SOLDIERS AND JAVAKHK ARMENIANS
Public Radio of Armenia
Sept 25 2006
A clash occurred between young Armenians of Samtskhe-Javakh and
Georgian soldiers at the road to Bakuriani. Six soldiers guiding
the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline stopped an Opel belonging to
22-year-old Vladimir Muradyan.
Checking the documents and finding out that those in the car are
Armenians and do not speak Georgian, the soldiers began teasing and
insulting the young people, Javakhk-Info reports. A quarrel burst out
between the soldiers and 23-year-old Artyusha Iritsyan and Hambartsum
Hovakimyan, following which the Georgians started threatening with
weapons. Seeing that it is senseless to make the soldiers understand
why they do not speak Georgian, the young people drove back.

PRESS RELEASE
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia
Contact: Information Desk
Tel: (374-10) 52-35-31
Email: [email protected]
Web:
Statement by H. E. Vartan Oskanian
Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia
61st Session of the UN General Assembly
New York
September 25, 2007

Madame President,

It is a pleasure to congratulate you and to wish you a year that is
relatively free of crises and catastrophes. In other words, a year not like
the one we¹ve just had during which my good friend Ian Eliasson successfully
navigated through troubled waters.

The year of turmoil, as he called it, included conflicts, as well as
man-made and natural disasters that required our collective response. These
challenges to our united will are becoming more numerous, more dangerous and
more complex.

Of all the events last year, the one which stood out most tragically was the
war in Lebanon. There I believe we lost a great deal of credibility in the
eyes of the peoples of the world who had a right to expect that political
expediency would not prevail. We watched with great disappointment and
dismay the political bickering within the Security Council and the
reluctance to bring about an immediate ceasefire, even as the bombs were
being dropped indiscriminately. When any world body or power loses moral
authority, the effectiveness to undertake challenges which require
collective response is undermined.

In other areas, a united international community has succeeded. It has
played a supportive role in the civilized process which brought Montenegro
to this day and this body. Together, we created and empowered the
Peacebuilding Commission and the Human Rights Council – two bodies which
hold great promise in delivering deeper and more purposeful engagement by a
world community committed to building peace and protecting human rights.

The most insipid and threatening challenges in the world remain those of
poverty and hopelessness. When the world¹s leaders met six years ago, they
decided that the UN was the ideal mechanism to confront the social ills
facing our societies, they publicly accepted their combined responsibility
in achieving accelerated and more even social and economic development. They
said to the world that, together, we will channel international processes
and multinational resources to tackle the most basic human needs. Thus, they
placed the principle and potential of united action on the judgment block.
Six years later, the world continues to watch in earnest to see if
individual and regional interests can be rallied in striving for the common
good.

Madame President,

We are faced with the same challenges, locally. In Armenia, we are
encouraged and rewarded by our extensive reforms. These reforms are
irreversible and already showing remarkable results. We are going to move
now to second generation reforms in order to continue to register the
successes of the last half decade: legislative and administrative strides
forward, an open, liberal economy, double-digit growth.

Encouraged by our own successes, this year we have determined to build on
our course of economic recovery and target rural poverty. We are reminded of
the remarkable promise made to the victims of global poverty in 2000: ³To
free our fellow men, women and children from the abject and dehumanizing
conditions of extreme poverty.² To do this at home, we will leverage the
philanthropy of international organizations and friendly governments with
the traditional generosity of our Diaspora to build and repair
infrastructure, which is essential to facilitate and enable economic
development.

But infrastructure alone does not reduce poverty and remove unjust
inequalities. Creating economic opportunities, teaching the necessary skills
– these are essential to erase the deep development disparities that exist
today between cities and rural areas.

Madame President, we will begin in our border communities, because unlike
other countries, where borders are points of interaction and activity,
Armenia¹s borders to the east and the west remain closed. As a result,
regional economic development suffers.

But with Turkey, it is more than our economies that suffer. It is the
dialogue between our two peoples that suffers. Turkey¹s insistence on
keeping the border closed, on continuing to prevent direct contact and
communication, freezes the memories of yesterday instead of creating new
experiences to forge the memories of tomorrow. We continue to remain hopeful
that Turkey will see that blocking relations until there is harmony and
reciprocal understanding is really not a policy. On the contrary, it¹s an
avoidance of a responsible policy to forge forward with regional cooperation
at a time and in a region with growing global significance.

Madame President, let me take a minute to reflect on Kosovo, as so many have
done. We follow the Kosovo self-determination process very closely. We
ourselves strongly support the process of self-determination for the
population of Nagorno Karabakh. Yet, we don¹t draw parallels between these
two or with any other conflicts. We believe that conflicts are all different
and each must be decided on its own merits. While we do not look at the
outcome of Kosovo as a precedent, on the other hand, a Kosovo decision
cannot and should not result in the creation of obstacles to
self-determination for others in order to pre-empt the accusation of
precedence. Such a reverse reaction – to prevent or pre-empt others from
achieving well-earned self-determination – is unacceptable.

Efforts to do just that – by elevating territorial integrity above all other
principles – are already underway, especially in this chamber. But this
contradicts the lessons of history. There is a reason that the Helsinki
Final Act enshrines self-determination as an equal principle. In
international relations, just as in human relations, there are no absolute
rights. There are also responsibilities. A state must earn the right to lead
and govern. States have the responsibility to protect their citizens. A
people choose the government which represents them.

The people of Nagorno Karabakh chose long ago not to be represented by the
government of Azerbaijan. They were the victims of state violence, they
defended themselves, and succeeded against great odds, only to hear the
state cry foul and claim sovereignty and territorial integrity.

But the government of Azerbaijan has lost the moral right to even suggest
providing for their security and their future, let alone to talk of custody
of the people of Nagorno Karabakh.

Azerbaijan did not behave responsibly or morally with the people of Nagorno
Karabakh, who it considered to be its own citizens. They sanctioned
massacres in urban areas, far from Nagorno Karabakh; they bombed and
displaced more than 300,000 Armenians; they unleashed the military; and
after they lost the war and accepted a ceasefire, they proceeded to destroy
all traces of Armenians on their territories.

In the most cynical expression of such irresponsibility, this last December,
a decade after the fighting had stopped, they completed the final
destruction and removal of thousands of massive hand-sculpted cross-stones –
medieval Armenian tombstones elaborately carved and decorated.

Such destruction, in an area with no Armenians, at a distance from Nagorno
Karabakh and any conflict areas, is a callous demonstration that
Azerbaijan’s attitude toward tolerance, human values, cultural treasures,
cooperation or even peace, has not changed.

One cannot blame us for thinking that Azerbaijan is not ready or interested
in a negotiated peace. Yet, having rejected the other two compromise
solutions that have been proposed over the last 8 years, they do not want to
be accused of rejecting the peace plan on the table today. Therefore, they
are using every means available – from state violence to international
maneuvers – to try to bring the Armenians to do the rejecting.

But Armenia is on record: we have agreed to each of the basic principles in
the document that¹s on the table today. Yet, in order to give this or any
document a chance, Azerbaijan can¹t think, or pretend to think, that there
is still a military option. There isn¹t. The military option is a tried and
failed option. Compromise and realism are the only real options.

The path that Nagorno Karabakh has chosen for itself over these two decades
is irreversible. It succeeded in ensuring its self-defense, it proceeded to
set up self-governance mechanisms, and it controls its borders and its
economy. Formalizing this process is a necessary step toward stability in
our region. Dismissing, as Azerbaijan does, all that¹s happened in the last
20 years and petulantly insisting that things must return to the way they
were, is not just unrealistic, but disingenuous.

Madame President, Nagorno Karabakh is not a cause. It is a place, an ancient
place, a beautiful garden, with people who have earned the right to live in
peace and without fear. We ask for nothing more. We expect nothing less.

KUWAIT LIKELY TO ASSIST ARMENIA WITH RESTORATION OF RURAL COMMUNITIES’ INFRASTRUCTURES
Noyan Tapan News Agency, Armenia
Sept 22 2006
YEREVAN, SEPTEMBER 22, NOYAN TAPAN. During the September 22 meeting,
the RA Minister of Territorial Administration Hovik Abrahamian and
Kuwait’s Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Armenia Majd
Aldafiri (residence – Tehran) discussed a number of issues related
to the further development of bilateral relations, NT was informed
from the RA Government Information and PR Department.
In particular, H. Abrahamian and M. Aldafiri discussed the
opportunities of Kuwaits’ assistance for the restoration and
construction of infrastructures in Armenian rural communities,
including water-supply networks and community roads, as well as the
opportunities for involving resources of various funds operating
in Kuwait.

TREND, Azerbaijan
Sept 22 2006
Armenian Foreign Minister will leave for Berlin to participate in the
international forum
Source: “Trend”
Author: À.Mammadov
22.09.2006
(A1plus.am) – Today RA Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan will leave
for Berlin to participate in the international forum “Bertelsmann”.
Minister Oskanyan will leave Berlin for New York in order to
participate in the session of the UN 61st Assembly General. On
September 25 the Foreign Minister will make a speech, reports Trend.
In New York Minister Oskanyan will meet a number of officials, as
well as the OSCE Minsk group co-chairs.
Oskanyan will return to Armenia on September 27.
–Boundary_(ID_01fch0zvMbygaYQkh1joDg)–

British Church Hierarchs Question Whether Turkey Should Join EU
PanARMENIAN.Net
22.09.2006 18:35 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The Catholic archbishop of England and Wales
on Thursday questioned whether Turkey, a predominantly Muslim and
secular country, should join the European Union. Cardinal Cormac
Murphy O’Connor, the archbishop of Westminster, is disputing Prime
Minister Tony Blair’s strong advocacy of Turkey’s membership. “There
may be another view that the mixture of cultures is not a good idea,”
Cardinal O’Connor said in an interview with BBC radio. Cardinal
O’Connor questioned whether “a continent that, fundamentally, is
Christian” would benefit from admitting a large predominantly Muslim
country to the Union. “I speak also in a sense for the people of this
country,” 70 percent of whom say they are Christian, he said.
In related news, former Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury George
Carey also expressed reservations about Turkey joining the EU. “I
think the jury is still out on Turkey at the moment. I look at its
record on freedom of speech and so on, what it is doing to writers
in Turkey who want to speak out, and some of them are in jail,”
the Anglican leader said, reported AP.

Armenia Joined Two UN Optional Protocols
PanARMENIAN.Net
23.09.2006 13:43 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenia joined two UN optional protocols – the
Convention against Torture and the Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. Deputy Minister of
Territorial Administration Gagik Yeganyan handed the documents in
deposit to the UN Secretary General.
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
against Women adopted in 1979 by the UN General Assembly, is often
described as an international bill of rights for women. Consisting of
a preamble and 30 articles, it defines what constitutes discrimination
against women and sets up an agenda for national action to end such
discrimination. The Convention defines discrimination against women as
“…any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of
sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the
recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their
marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human
rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social,
cultural, civil or any other field.”
“Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative,
judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory
under its jurisdiction…No exceptional circumstances whatsoever,
whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political
instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a
justification of torture,” says the Convention against Torture.
The optional protocol to Convention against Tortures was approves in
late 2002 and came into force in June 2006. It allows the UN experts
attend the jails of the Convention member states and calls for
creation of national mechanisms targeted at prevention of tortures,
reports the UN communication unit.

CHRISTINE M. FLOWERS | THE WORLD ACCORDING TO ORIANA
Philadelphia Daily News, PA
Posted on Fri, Sep. 22,
WHEREVER SHE is now, Oriana Fallaci must appreciate the irony.
The brash and bombastic journalist, feared and revered in equal
measure, died last week after a long battle with cancer. But the
illness didn’t dim her prodigious intellect, or stop her from
launching the literary firebombs that made her the most celebrated
female journalist of the last half-century. Splitting her final years
between post-9/11 Manhattan and her native Florence, Fallaci produced
three books that detailed her disgust with an increasingly violent
strain of Islam that threatens to destroy the west.
In the first of the trilogy, “The Rage and the Pride,” she wrote that
“there are moments in life when keeping silent becomes a fault, and
speaking an obligation. A civic duty, a moral challenge, a categorical
imperative from which we cannot escape.”
Fallaci wrote those words as prologue to her tirade against a religion
that she felt preached death and violence and the destruction of
innocents. She was a modern Cassandra, and radical Islam was her Trojan
Horse. She received death threats for speaking out, and was charged
with the crime of “vilifying religion” in Italy and Switzerland.
And that’s why she must be winking at us from that place where atheists
go when their earthly days are done. Nothing escaped her notice,
so she must be aware of the furor caused by Pope Benedict’s remarks
in Germany last week, where he quoted an obscure and politically
incorrect emperor from the 14th century to prove that reason, not
violence, would save the world from ultimate destruction.
As if on cue, the violent protests began. Benedict was burned in effigy
in Pakistan. Christian churches were firebombed in Palestine. Turkey,
that bastion of human rights (just ask the Armenians who escaped the
genocide), compared the pope to Hitler and Mussolini.
Honestly, you’d think the cartoonists were at it again.
But the pope, like Fallaci, had attacked the inclination of so many
followers of Islam to try to impose their worldview on the rest of
us. It’s the same spirit that motivated the kidnappers of a Fox news
reporter and his cameraman, forcing them to convert to Islam at the
point of a gun. It animated the men who beheaded Nicholas Berg and
Daniel Pearl, who murdered aid worker Margaret Hassan, who firebombed
churches and synagogues.
It’s the same poison that ran in the veins of the Somalian monsters
who shot a Catholic nun in the back three times in retaliation for
the pope’s speech. They killed in the name of their god; she forgave
them in the name of hers.
Which brings us back to Fallaci. Her courage was both physical and
emotional.
As a younger woman in Mexico City, she was shot three times during
a protest and left for dead. She covered wars in Vietnam and South
America, and defied the Ayatollah Khomeini by ripping off the veil
she’d been forced to wear in front of him.
She may not have believed in God, but she saw his stamp on human
beings and fought for their dignity.
And that’s why she criticized the evil that she saw in radical Islam.
The world is diminished because she’s left it. At a time when people
are so worried about giving offense, we need to hear her unvarnished
truths.
It may not be diplomatic to say that Islamofascism is an evil that
crosses borders and threatens the security of Christians and Jews, and
those Muslims who reject the fanaticism of their wild-eyed brothers.
It may not even be safe to say these things. But it is necessary,
unless we decide that placating one religion is more important than
protecting the welfare of all people, believers and atheists alike.
Fallaci understood this, and was vilified for it in, of all places,
Italy. But she didn’t hold a grudge.
In fact, she went home to die in her beloved Tuscany, where she had
been, as a child of 10, a lookout for the antifascist resistance
during World War II.
She knew what it was like to live in a state of fear and repression,
and saw no difference between the secular fascism of her youth and
the religious fascism of the present.
We shouldn’t, either. Rest in peace, Oriana.
Christine M. Flowers is a lawyer. E-mail [email protected].

Mediamax news agency, Yerevan, in Russian
14 Sep 06
ARMENIAN MINISTER AGAINST REFERRING KARABAKH ISSUE TO UN
Yerevan, 14 September: The extension of the Karabakh settlement
process outside the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group is
unacceptable, Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan said in
Yerevan today.
The minister said that “there are serious proposals on the
negotiating table and opportunities to make progress”. He called on
Azerbaijan to concentrate on this, Mediamax reports.
“If Azerbaijan pursues other aims and wants to refer the process to
the UN, Armenia will not take part in these games,” Oskanyan said.