Author: Baghdasarian Karlen

Azer Tag, Azerbaijan State Info Agency
April 3 2004
OMBUDSMAN OF AZERBAIJAN RECEIVES RETURN MAIL FROM HUNGARY
Commissioner on Human Rights in Azerbaijan Republic Elmira
Suleymanova has recently sent a letter to Ombudsman of Hungarian
Republic to ask the latter to ensure rights of Azerbaijan military
officer Ramil Sarfarov detained in Budapest for murder of the
Armenian servicemen on February 19, promote unbiased investigation
and keep the issue under control. The letter also clued up on the
roots of Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, and infamous actions of the
Armenian aggressors including the Statement issued on the occasion of
the 12th anniversary of Hojali genocide resulted in mass annihilation
of innocent people.
In his return mail, Ombudsman of Hungarian Republic Albert Takashin’s
has expressed gratitude for the confidence to his office, and noted
in particular that the information provided in the letter had made
him think. `This detailed information will facilitate investigating
authorities to take fair decision,’ the letter said. Mr. Albert
Takashin pointed out that although the Hungarian law on Ombudsman did
not empower him to directly interfere the investigation, however, he
had sent all the documents to Prosecutor General, who had invited him
to monitor the process, receive information on the facts established,
and hear out the complaints from the suspect.
The Ombudsman of the Hungarian Republic assured his Azerbaijan
colleague that representatives of his office would regularly visit
Ramil Safarov to keep him informed of the efforts being taken by his
country to help him, and to learn of his needs and problems.
From: Baghdasarian

Transitions Online, Week in Review
23 – 29 March 2004
ARMENIA: A GATHERING STORM?
As the opposition prepares to challenge the president, Kocharian and his
government play the good cop/bad cop routine.
YEREVAN, Armenia–An increasingly defiant, more unified opposition, a
government out on the road meeting the people, and a president changing
senior figures in law-enforcement agencies: these three recent developments
are being taken as signs that, a year after deeply flawed presidential
elections, Armenia may be on the cusp of a fresh, large-scale political
battle.
The battle will become a little clearer on 31 March, when the opposition is
expected to announce that it will hold a rally in mid-April with the aim of
forcing President Robert Kocharian to step down.
This will be days after a demonstration on 2 April to mark the second
anniversary of Armenia’s leading independent TV channel A1 Plus. Despite its
popularity and international calls for greater media plurality, A1 Plus has
repeatedly been refused a TV license, with the government-appointed
commission usually opting to give licenses instead to new or inexperienced
producers. A1 Plus has said it may hold rolling demonstrations unless the
government meets its demands for the license tenders to be re-opened, with
civil-society members on the selection commission.
The demonstrations represent a gamble by the opposition. It has a record of
disunity and question marks hang over the size of the crowds that it will
draw. While the A1 Plus issue has angered many and while the station was
very popular, demonstrations two years ago garnered between 5,000 and
10,000. Crowds of up to 40,000 protesters gathered after the presidential
elections in 2003.
The opposition, however, is showing more unity than in the past. The joint
organizers of the mid-April demonstration, Artarutyun and National Unity,
have in the past accused each other of working with the government and were
widely seen as rivals. Both parties are big players on the political scene:
the rally will bring together the supporters of the man who came second in
the presidential elections, Artarutyun’s Stepan Demirchian, and the man who
came third, National Unity’s Artashes Geghamian.
Moreover, since the presidential elections in 2003, there has been a potent
demonstration of street power in Georgia in the form of the “rose
revolution,” which toppled the country’s long-time president, Eduard
Shevardnadze. In the immediate aftermath of Georgia’s revolution, there was
speculation about whether Armenia might follow Georgia’s lead, but there
were no major demonstrations. That may largely have been due to the wintry
weather, which is a factor in the timing of the new wave of protests.
National Unity had initially been thinking of holding off on demonstrations
until the arrival of warm weather in May.
A FRIENDLIER FACE, BUT A STRONGER HAND
The opposition also are taking hope from the actions of the government and
the president.
In recent weeks, senior ministers have been going out into the provinces and
countryside in a move interpreted as a bid to bolster public support for the
government. It also may be a direct response to ongoing nationwide tours by
members of the opposition.
There also has been some signs of a slightly milder tone by some members of
the governing coalition. In a joint statement on 26 March, representatives
of the three coalition parties–the Republican Party of Armenia, Orinats
Erkir (Country of Law), and the Armenian Revolutionary Federation
(Dashnaktsutyun)–poured some ash on their heads by acknowledging the
existence of many problems (though mainly social) and indicated that 2004
would be a crucial year for the government to deliver on its promises.
The appointment to senior posts of relatives of members of the coalition
might also suggest a rebalancing of power within the coalition.
However, Kocharian himself has struck a harsher tone, attacking the
opposition for having “a tramp’s mentality.” He also has showed a strong
hand. In a move that seems designed to show the opposition that he is firmly
in command of the security services, he fired four district prosecutors on
22 March. The clear-out affected seven of Yerevan’s 11 districts.
On 17 March, he had dismissed Armenia’s prosecutor-general, and sacked or
moved over a dozen senior police officials.
The country’s new prosecutor-general, Aghvan Hovsepian, is a Kocharian
loyalist.
Moreover, the government is not relenting to criticism about its policies
toward the opposition. During the week, the government also presented a
revised draft law to parliament that would in some instances enable the
police to arrest the organizers of mass rallies and would limit the right to
hold demonstrations. The government says the bill matches Council of Europe
standards. However, according to a 26 March report in the opposition daily,
an Armenian delegate to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
(PACE), which Armenia joined in 2001, says that the bill falls short of
European standards.
Armenia has a poor record on political tolerance. After unsanctioned
opposition demonstrations over alleged electoral fraud in 2003, according to
RFE figures, police rounded about 400 supporters of the Artarutyun leader,
Stepan Demirchian. Many were sentenced to 15 days in prison, and reports
suggest that many were denied access to lawyers and their trials were held
behind closed doors.
Armenia’s current criminal code allows the security forces to jail people
briefly without a particular reason.
Fears that similar measures could be taken after the A1 Plus and opposition
demonstrations were heightened on 25 March when a leading member of the
opposition, Victor Dallakian, claimed to have been attacked on 23 March by
three men.
The police have already called the planned 2 April rally illegal.
THE UNDERCURRENT OF VIOLENCE
Kocharian also has demonstrated that he is unconcerned about allegations
regarding the violent nature of some of his appointees, choosing as governor
of the southern Syunik region a man who is accused of being the head of a
criminal gang.
Two nephews of Surik Khachatrian, a leading veteran of the war in
Nagorno-Karabakh, are currently being investigated for murder. RFE reported
that Khachatrian denied any role in the killing, though he did not deny the
guilt of his nephews.
Khachatrian’s appointment is just one of several recent examples of a
violent undercurrent in Armenian politics and among its political elite.
That was shown most explosively on 12 March. Kocharian and his Georgian
counterpart, Mikheil Saakashvili, were having dinner together when a
gunfight erupted in the next-door café. Five men were taken to the hospital.
Among them was the son of the minister for urban development, Ara Aramian.
The minister confirmed that his son had been involved.
Unconfirmed reports suggest that the son of the minister for local
government, Hovik Abrahamian, also was involved.
–by Anna Hakobyan
From: Baghdasarian

Los Angeles Daily News
March 28 2004
Vote set on school holiday
Proposal would give students day off on Armenian Christmas
By Naush Boghossian
Staff Writer
GLENDALE — The school board will vote Tuesday on two new student
attendance calendars, both of which include having Jan. 6, Armenian
Christmas, as a day off.
The financially strapped district lost about $250,000 in state
funding this year because so many Armenian students stayed home on
Jan. 6 to celebrate their culture’s Christmas holiday. About 10,000
of the district’s 29,200 students are of Armenian descent.
“If students are not in attendance, then that disrupts their
opportunity to have the continuity of instruction,” said Cathy
McMullen, the district’s assistant superintendent of human resources.
“We need to do everything to maximize instructional opportunities,
our financial resources and to be respectful of our community’s
needs.”
Under both calendars — the product of several meetings with parents
and the teachers’ association — students on a traditional school
year would receive the mandated 180 days of instruction between Sept.
8 and June 23, but would have Jan. 6 and the day before Thanksgiving
off.
The district originally was considering starting the school year a
week early and adding a week to its winter break to incorporate
Armenian Christmas as a school holiday, but the idea was thrown out
after complaints from parents.
School board member Greg Krikorian said it is unlikely they will be
able to please everyone in the community but the calendars that have
been settled on will allow the district to save a great deal of money
and be respectful of a holiday.
“We are steadfast in incorporating Jan. 6 as a day off in our school
district for students and staff because it helps us address the
budget challenge, it gives us a better opportunity to educate more
children on that day, and finally, it helps us be more culturally
sensitive to our large Armenian population,” Krikorian said.
Nearby school districts have made accommodations for days they
experience high student and staff absenteeism in order to avoid
losing average daily attendance revenues.
The Las Virgenes Unified School District, which has a large Jewish
student population, has a staff development day on Sept. 17 to
coincide with Yom Kippur.
The Los Angeles Unified School District has tried to build its
calendars around days when a large number of students and staff are
absent — including Good Friday and Yom Kippur.
Naush Boghossian, (818) 546-3306 [email protected]
IF YOU GO: The Glendale Unified School District board will meet at
3:30 p.m. Tuesday in the board room of the school administration
center at 223 N. Jackson St. For more information, call (818)
241-3311.
From: Baghdasarian

Envoy pledges EU support in resolving Karabakh issue
Arminfo
26 Mar 04
YEREVAN
The European Union is ready to facilitate the Minsk Group process and
the efforts of Armenia and Azerbaijan to resolve the Nagornyy Karabakh
conflict, the special representative of the EU for the South Caucasus,
Heikki Talvitie, said in a news conference in Yerevan today.
According to the special representative, the OSCE Minsk Group is the
body that must help Armenia and Azerbaijan resolve this
issue. However, Heikki Talvitie said that he would personally try to
help and build an atmosphere of mutual confidence. As an example, he
cited his forthcoming visit to Abkhazia next Monday 29 March
. According to him, the settlement of the Abkhaz conflict is under the
jurisdiction of the UN, but he will try to contribute to building an
atmosphere of mutual trust.
Asked about the current situation in the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict in
view of the fact that Heikki Talvitie himself used to be a co-chairman
of the Minsk conference, the special representative said that
officially “the process is at the same point as it was 12 years ago”.
“However, a lot has changed from within. Now that we are trying to
resume the talks and the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen are working hard
to find ways of resolving the conflict, the processes that unfolded
within affect the conflict. Therefore, positive and negative aspects
affect the possibility of resuming the talks, not the talks process
itself,” the special representative said.
As for the possibility of him visiting Nagornyy Karabakh, Heikki
Talvitie said he would certainly do that during his next visit if his
mandate is extended.
Speaking about the fact that the Azerbaijani side has effectively
disrupted the Prague meeting which was scheduled for 29 March, the
special representative said “one meeting, not the whole process, has
been postponed”.
Asked whether it was possible to conclude that the Azerbaijani side
was not prepared not only for one meeting, but also for the conflict
settlement in general, the EU’s special representative said he would
not like to make such far-reaching conclusions.
From: Baghdasarian

Armenian university wants British envoy to be declared persona non grata
Yerkir web site
26 Mar 04
YEREVAN
The History Department of Yerevan State University released a
statement on Thursday [25 March] condemning the British ambassador’s
statement over the Armenian genocide [killing of Armenians in Ottoman
Turkey in 1915].
“The ambassador has crudely offended the dignity of the Armenian
people,” the statement says. By her statement, the ambassador has
insulted the memory of the 1.5m Armenians who were victimized in the
genocide, the statement goes on.
“She should apologize, and the Armenian Foreign Ministry should
declare her persona non grata, because failure to punish those
responsible for the Armenian genocide made the Jewish Holocaust
possible, and failure to recognize the Armenian genocide today is
likely to lead to new acts of genocide,” the statement says.
We hope, however, that the opinion expressed in the ambassador’s
statement is only hers and is not the official position of Britain,
the statement concludes.
From: Baghdasarian

Books: Tangled roots of genocide
The Independent – United Kingdom
Mar 26, 2004
Mark Mazower

In the summer of 1915, Leslie Davis was American consul in Harput, a
remote town in the central Anatolian highlands, three weeks’ ride on
horseback from Constantinople. About a third of the population in the
region were Armenians – villagers, farmers, merchants and teachers –
who had always got along with their Turkish neighbours. But, a few
months into the Great War, the government ordered Armenian schools to
close, and arrested leading men. In July, town criers publicised their
imminent deportation, street by street; and homes and properties were
pillaged. A couple of months later, after the deportations, Davis rode
out into the surrounding countryside, leaving early so as not to be
noticed.
By the side of the road shallow graves betrayed human remains, and
villages once inhabited by Armenians lay in ruins. As he reached the
side of a local lake, he peered down from the path above and saw
hundreds of bodies in its waters. Neighbouring ravines contained
thousands more. On a remote part of the lake shore, he came across
hundreds of corpses piled in rows. It was, he wrote, as if “the world
were coming to an end”.
Although successive Turkish governments have tried to deny what was
done to the Armenians, the killing was a messy business and there were
no top- secret extermination sites such as were built by the Nazis in
Poland. The genocide was a relatively public affair, and US
missionaries, German businessmen, railway engineers and even foreign
soldiers in Ottoman service all sent graphic despatches home. The
atrocities were outlined in newspaper headlines, and the old
Gladstonian, Lord Bryce, compiled a still-useful report for the
British government. We will never know for sure, but probably between
800,000 and one million people were killed or starved to death.
The horror of it all emanates vividly from the pages of Peter
Balakian’s new history. The sheer scale of the massacres has an
overwhelming impact and his access to the accounts of survivors and
diplomats, and his understanding of Armenian culture and society, help
bring to life the world that was lost with the victims. It quickly
becomes clear that the Holocaust was not the first such onslaught on
an entire community; indeed, the parallels with that event are
frequently underlined.
Like other commentators, Balakian believes genocide can offer
lessons. He stresses the ethical challenge state-sponsored violence on
such a scale poses to bystanders and foreign powers, and underlines
the heroic response of those who tried to end the killing – activists,
relief workers and idealists who mobilised local funds of sympathy and
did what they could.
A sub-theme of the book – a parable for the present? – is how these
events resonated in the US. Calls for the country to live up to its
“duty to civilisation” by intervening led to the usual tussle between
realpolitik and the politics of compassion. President Woodrow Wilson
never declared war on the Ottoman Empire but did support the idea of
an American mandate for an independent Armenia; it failed to get
through Congress.
Balakian does not bother to hide where his sympathies lie – with those
who cared, against the isolationists and hard-nosed men who believed
national interest trumped moral imperatives. But his sympathies run
deeper than that, for the way he tells it this was a story of good and
evil, of Armenians against Turks, Christians attacked by Muslims,
blameless victims against malevolent perpetrators led by psychopaths
such as Sultan Abdul Hamid.
He describes a tradition of state-sponsored violence in Turkey that
starts with the massacres of the mid-1890s (which themselves killed
more than 100,000 people) and 1909 (about 15,000), and continues, in a
sense, to this day through the denial itself.
Only it was a bit more complicated that that. Reading Balakian, one
would not know that in 1912 the Sultan’s foreign minister had been an
Armenian, nor that the Young Turks, who instigated the genocide,
co-operated with Armenian parties up to the start of the First World
War. There was a centuries- old policy of co-operation between the
Porte and the Armenian community which only the rise of nationalism –
Armenian and Turkish – eroded.
In Constantinople, the Armenian Patriarch preached loyalty to the
sultan. But Armenian revolutionaries sought autonomy for the Armenian
provinces of Anatolia by forcing Great Power intervention, and were
even willing to provoke Ottoman repression to get there. Call it the
Kosovo strategy: it had worked for Christian nationalists in the
Balkans, and it looked to some it might work for the Armenians, too.
Balakian cannot bring himself to criticise these activists. The most
he will say is that they were naive. Russian diplomats did indeed
force the empire to accept foreign oversight of the Armenian provinces
in early 1914. Bitterly opposed in Constantinople as the first step to
secession, the agreement, abandoned when war broke out, encouraged the
Ottomans to see the Armenians as a Russian fifth-column.
Nor had Christians always been the victims, Muslims the
perpetrators. Bal- akian’s heroic American Protestant missionaries
were not neutral observers but agents of radical social and cultural
change trying to transform the Ottoman empire. Meanwhile, largely
unnoticed by the Western humanitarian conscience, a tidal wave of
Muslim refugees, well over one million, fled into Anatolia from Russia
and the Balkans after 1860: a reminder of the human consequences of
Ottoman decline.
After 1908, Bosnia, Crete, Albania and Macedonia were all lost,
too. By spring 1915, Russian troops threatened Anatolia from the east,
and the British seemed about to seize Constantinople: the empire faced
dismemberment. None of this in any way justifies what happened to the
Armenians, but it underlines the existential crisis that faced the
empire’s young and arrogant leadership, humiliated on the battlefield,
their grand strategy in ruins.
In 1919, under Allied pressure, a postwar Ottoman government set up
tribunals to investigate the Armenian murders. But in the East the war
was not really over: Armenian fighters were trying to set up an
independent state – from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean, ran the
dream – while Mustafa Kemal formed an association to stop them. The
Armenians gambled on foreign support they did not have, while
Kemalists built an army against them. Having neutered the Russian
threat by alliance with the Bolsheviks, Kemal’s men routed the
Armenians, expelled the Greeks from Asia Minor, and got rid of the
ruling family, too.
The tribunals were abandoned, a Turkish republic arose from the ashes
of empire, and ever after, Ataturk’s heirs insisted that the Armenians
had brought their misfortunes on themselves. The Burning Tigris
remains, understandably enough, a work of denunciation. Even so, more
than denunciation will be needed to help us make sense of what
happened.
Mark Mazower, professor of history at Birkbeck College London, will
publish `Salonica, City of Ghosts’ (HarperCollins) this summer
From: Baghdasarian

Ministers’ meeting cancelled at Azeri initiative, says Armenian source
Mediamax news agency
25 Mar 04
YEREVAN
The meeting of the Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign ministers, planned
for 29 March, will not take place.
This was announced on 24 March by the Russian co-chairman of the OSCE
Minsk Group, Yuriy Merzlyakov, in an interview with Azerbaijani TV
channel ATV, Mediamax news agency reports. The mediator said that the
decision to cancel the meeting was taken as a result of the “wish of
one side”.
“Those who accuse the mediators of inactivity should pay attention to
the efforts of the conflicting sides themselves to settle the
conflict,” Yuriy Merzlyakov said.
An informed source in the Armenian Foreign Ministry today said in an
interview with Mediamax that the Armenian side did not ask the
mediators to cancel the Prague meeting.
On 17 March Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan said that the OSCE Minsk
Group co-chairmen and the Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign ministers
would hold consultations in Prague on 29 March. Vardan Oskanyan
expressed the hope that “this meeting will help us understand how
exactly Azerbaijan wants to continue the negotiations”.
From: Baghdasarian

Times Union, Albany, NY
March 20 2004
Ex-pastor admits he committed tax fraud
Albany — Former Troy priest who stole church funds and failed to
report income on his taxes takes a plea deal

By MICHELE MORGAN BOLTON, Staff reports

A priest who embezzled thousands of dollars from his congregation’s
collection plate pleaded guilty to tax fraud Friday in federal
district court after admitting that he failed to report the stolen
money to the Internal Revenue Service.
Megerdich Megerdichian, 47, the former pastor of Troy’s Holy Cross
Armenian Apostolic Church, could be sentenced to three years in
prison, a year of supervised release and fined $250,000 when he is
sentenced on June 14. He is currently living in Cranston, R.I. No
further information was available Friday night.

Megerdichian took the plea deal offered by federal prosecutor Steven
A. Tyrrell during an appearance before U.S. District Judge Lawrence
E. Kahn.
The priest led the Troy parish for 16 years, according to information
provided by U.S. Attorney Glenn Suddaby and IRS Special Agent in
Charge Anne Marie Coons.
Church finances were controlled by a four-member board during
Megerdichian’s tenure at the church, officials said. They were
signatories on all church accounts and were required to approve
church expenditures.
But from at least May 1995 until sometime in late 1997, those board
members had no idea that the priest had established a private account
at a Fleet Bank in Troy in which he deposited thousands of dollars in
checks made out to the church.
Board members were unaware the account existed, Suddaby and Coons
said.
Megerdichian used some of the money for personal expenses and then
“knowingly and willfully” failed to declare the income on his federal
tax returns, they said: “This resulted in an underpayment … of
$9,442.”‘
Megerdichian was removed from ministry in 1998 and required in 2000
to repay the parish in full. As part of Friday’s plea deal, he also
must pay restitution to the IRS.
From: Baghdasarian

Official Kremlin Int’l News Broadcast
March 16, 2004 Tuesday
REMARKS ON GEORGIAN-ADZHARIAN CONFLICT BY STATE DUMA COMMITTEE FOR
FOREIGN AFFAIRS CHAIR KONSTANTIN KOSACHEV AND FORMER DEFENSE MINISTER
OF GEORGIA TENGIZ KITOVANI
Anchor: I am Ksenia Larina. Our guests are State Duma Committee for
Foreign Affairs Chairman Konstantin Kosachev. Good day, Konstantin.
Kosachev: Good day.
Anchor: And Tengiz Kitovani, a former Defense Minister of Georgia.
Good day, Tengiz.
Kitovani: Good day.
Anchor: I guess you all understand what issue we are going to discuss
now. It certainly is the conflict between Georgia — shall I say,
between official Georgia and its autonomous region that is called
Adzharia. Many experts say that this confrontation may develop into a
real civil war. So, let us discuss this today.
To begin with, I would like to ask our guests to express their views
on these developments, the main causes and how natural this conflict
is for you. Tengiz, you will begin.
Kitovani: This dates back to the times of Gamsakhurdia and his
appointment of Aslan Abashidze. The whole of Georgia was against
that. But Gamsakhurdia made a decision to appoint him chairman of the
Council of Ministers in Adzharia. And he also appointed Ardzinba. So,
the separatist movement goes a long way back into the times when
Gamsakhurdia made these appointments.
So apparently the separatist movement evolved with the support of
some separatist-minded politicians. As a result, we have today what
we have. The appointment of Saakashvili, it became immediately
obvious after this appointment that separatists ran away to Moscow in
search of asylum, from South Ossetia, Adzharia and Abkhazia. Aslan
Abashidze was among them. So apparently this scenario had been
prepared here.
Anchor: Do you mean here in Russia?
Kitovani: Of course, because that’s how things are developing now.
Russia supports Aslan Abashidze, and the Americans support
Saakashvili. Aslan Abashidze must not have been supported because
presidential politicians consider him a criminal. Under Gamsakhurdia
he shot in his own office a man who was in power at that time. I want
you to know this. He killed a man and remained in his office for 10
more years unpunished.
Anchor: He killed a person in his own office?
Kitovani: He did. He shot him dead in his own office. The man’s name
was Imnadze. I can tell you a lot of things.
Anchor: I want to turn the floor over to Konstantin Kosachev, who has
been smiling all this time.
Kosachev: Well, no, I haven’t been smiling because the situation is
developing in a tragic way and, God forbid, may come to a bloodshed.
There is nothing to laugh about.
But I cannot agree with such a one-sided assessment of the situation.
First of all, I think that not only and not so much Gamsakhurdia is
responsible for this situation. On the one hand, it has deep
historical roots. On the other hand, it existed and was not resolved
during Shevardnadze’s rule.
Second, I am absolutely convinced that if Russia were interested in
disintegrating Georgia and separating ethnic regions from it, it
would have done so a long time ago. Believe me, Russia can do that,
given the current sentiments in these ethnic regions. However,
Russia’s consistent position in favor of Georgia’s territorial
integrity, which we have repeatedly emphasized, has allowed Georgia
to remain as an integral state and not fall into feudal
principalities.
Third, when contacts with Russian officials take place in these
capitals, and I know what I am saying and I know what is discussed at
such negotiations, the only goal that Russia pursues in the context
of such negotiations is to convince the leadership of the concerned
ethnic regions to continue the political dialogue with Tbilisi,
refrain from unilateral radical actions based on force, and look for
compromises that can help Georgia remain as an integral state for
years and even centuries.
That is our main national interest for Russia — preserving Georgia
as an integral state, because Georgia’s disintegration into small
components will have an immediate and most negative impact on the
situation in the Caucasus where unfortunately we have enough problems
as it is.
Anchor: Is the President empowered to use force if at stake is a part
of the country that he is running or he isn’t?
Kosachev: Theoretically, he is empowered because this is part of
Georgia. As far as I understand, the leadership of Adzharia is not
saying that Adzharia is not part of Georgia. It has recognized that,
thank God. By the way, the parliamentary elections due to be held in
Georgia on March 28 will also be held on the territory of Adzharia,
which is a sign of the position of the present leadership of
Adzharia.
It is another question that any president — and I am sure that Mr.
Saakashvili is a wise President — should look for, if not the
shortest, the optimal ways toward this or that goal. And I am sure
that the use of force in conflicts of this kind will not bring the
coveted goal of a compromise any nearer, on the contrary, it will
make it more remote. This is what we are witnessing now. What is
happening before our eyes has again provoked emotions on both sides.
Let us think back to February 25 the day of inauguration of the
Georgian President when they stood shoulder to shoulder with the
President or, properly speaking, the Chairman of Adzharia, Mr.
Abashidze. They were standing together reviewing the military parade.
And I am sure that a Russian heart rejoices at such a picture. And
now, just three weeks on, we see the absolute opposite.
Why is it happening? I suspect that it should all be traced to the
March 28 elections. President Saakashvili is up against daunting
problems that face Georgia. First of all, problems of economic
character — rampant corruption and an industry that is at a
standstill. I am afraid that no miracles will happen in the Georgian
economy by March 28, much as we would all like it to happen.
And that generates the temptation of a small victorious military
operation that will enable the President of the whole of Georgia to
look like a credible national leader. I think such actions are
extremely dangerous and undesirable.
Anchor: Tengiz, to pick up where Konstantin Kosachev left off, a
question to you. Is military force the only solution at present?
Kitovani: I agree that the question cannot be solved by military
force. That would mean civil war. This is not an option. The parties
should agree peacefully. But at the same time I must be critical of
those who are setting up a blockade inside their own country. This is
not the way to act. Naturally, it will lead to a military
confrontation. You know that both Armenia and Georgia get cargoes
from Batumi. Everybody knows that. And the Armenians will get angry
because the cargoes delivered to Batumi are destined for Armenia.
Armenia will demand the opening of ports. And that becomes a vicious
circle. So, I am against any confrontations on the territory of
Georgia.
Anchor: Let us recall that Mr. Abashidze had turned for help to
Russia and to President Bush. And I would like Tengiz to answer my
question: How do you assess these remarks by the Adzharian leader?
And my second question: Should Russia interfere in this conflict to
some degree?
Kitovani: I think Russia should interfere if a conflict situation
arises. Russia should defuse the situation that obtains in Georgia
which is at war with its own people. Russia cannot do it as it could
be done when the arrival of Ivanov defused the situation during the
presidential election. So, I would be glad to welcome Russian
representatives who would follow this path.
Anchor: Should Russia support one or the other side in this conflict?
Kitovani: Russian policy must play this main role — and I have
always spoken about it — Russia should defuse the situation that is
becoming more and more tense in Georgia. The Russian President can do
it, he can do it.
Anchor: And the fact that Luzhkov has gone there, what does it mean?
Kitovani: Well, Luzhkov went to see his friend. They have long been
friends.
Anchor: So, you consider it to be a private visit?
Kitovani: Yes, a private visit, I think. Luzhkov cannot resolve this
issue, he went to see Abashidze as his friend.
Anchor: Well, I for one, find it rather strange: the mayor of Moscow,
the mayor of the capital of the Russian state, pays a private visit
to Adzharia at the peak of the conflict between two opposing forces.
Do you really think it is just a private visit?
Kitovani: Well, Luzhkov does have an interest because Luzhkov is
building some kind of dachas in Adzharia for Moscow. That much I
know. And of course, Luzhkov wouldn’t like the money to be lost,
Moscow’s money with which he is building something in the outskirts
of Batumi.
Anchor: The same question to Konstantin Kosachev, regarding Russian
participation in this conflict. How do you see Russian participation
in this?
Kosachev: First, I know exactly what Russia must not do in this
situation. We must not use our military capability in the shape of
our base in Batumi, on no account. Secondly, we must not use economic
levers, whether with regard to Tbilisi or Batumi in order to induce
the conflicting parties to strike a compromise. And thirdly, we must
not tap the potential of our own diaspora, and there are a lot of
people in Adzharia with Russian passports, to influence the
situation. And as to what we must do, and here I absolutely agree
with Mr. Kitovani, we must made maximum use of the political resource
which Russia has and which in my opinion is unique compared to the
resources of the United States or of the European Union.
We are equally reliable partners and allies now for Tbilisi and
Batumi. We enjoy the trust of both sides. I think it is hardly
feasible to line-up a certain living shield on the administrative
frontier and to send our politicians there or our heads of Russian
regions, and I think that indeed Mr. Luzhkov in this case is acting
on his own initiative rather than upon someone’s instruction from
above.
Incidentally, in Adzharia now, according to media reports, there
already are appearing some State Duma deputies. Here I would like to
stress…
Anchor: Alksnis is there and Savelyev.
Kosachev: I will stress that it is their private trips and again
there are no decisions of the State Duma taken to send its
representatives there. So, the deputies are there on their own
initiative as physical persons and citizens of Russia and not as Duma
deputies. Of course, it is impossible for Russia to stay away from
the conflict. I suspect that if the blockade of Adzharia continues,
Russia will have to organize some activities to simply help the
people…
Anchor: To provide humanitarian aid.
Kosachev: Humanitarian assistance will have to be provided as we are
doing it in the case of Abkhazia and in some of the episodes — with
South Ossetia. That is why I constantly say that now any radical
actions of either side are equally harmful. When the cortege
accompanying Mr. Saakashvili, was stopped at the administrative
border, this was also a radical action on the part of the Adzharian
leadership which also added a spark to ignite the fire. It is
probably possible to find some more flexible variants of actions, to
let in the official part of the cortege and to cut off the armed
guards. So, it was wrong to say that no matter who you are, president
or no president, the road is closed. Now it is also wrong to close
the air space, the port of Batumi and to threaten the closure of the
checkpoint in Sarpi on the border with Turkey. All these actions are
kind of links being added to one chain that may close and form a
vicious circle and of course Tbilisi and Batumi will not be able to
break that vicious circle. And here arises the role to be played by
Russia and I am positive that it will be constructive.
Anchor: And if Abashidze asks for military assistance?
Kosachev: Categorically no, I am profoundly convinced.
Anchor: Tengiz, and what does the head of Adzharia have today and I
am asking you about some military structures that he has?
Kitovani: Naturally, he places hopes on the Russian division which is
stationed there. But will the Russians comply with the request? Now,
Abashidze is asking assistance from those divisions that are
stationed in Batumi. This is the main role and incidentally, this is
the talk that Abashidze is using about seeking assistance from the
division stationed in Batumi.
Anchor: But does he have his own army?
Kitovani: Allegedly, there is the division manned by Georgian
soldiers — but this is nonsense, fairy-tales and the talk of the
child. But the only danger is coming from the side and it is correct
to close the Turkish borders because the Turks may take advantage of
the conflict. Under the agreements of 1920s, it is clearly stated
that Turkey has the right to enter the territory of Adzharia.
Kosachev: But the agreement is not valid, it no longer has any
effect.
Kitovani: It is valid. But if they enter, it will be late. Now all
the documents are being studied because it is necessary to take a
look at the agreement and so on. Then they will raise what was signed
at the Istanbul summit. The withdrawal of Russian troops from Georgia
is not being complied with either. But it was written on paper and it
remains on paper.
Kosachev: Just a minute…
Kitowani: I will finish my thought. It stays on paper and those who
write, they execute.
Kosachev: I will take issue with that. It is because the Istanbul
accords contain a bilateral protocol between Russia and Georgia on
withdrawing by 2002 two bases — Vaziani and Gudauty — and it is to
be executed by 2002 and in regard to the bases in Akhalkalaki and
Batumi, agreement was registered to the effect that the parties will
decide on the format of the functioning of the bases on Georgia’s
territory. I ask you to refresh these documents in your memory.
As long as these bases are undesirable for Georgia, and now they are
definitely undesirable for Georgia, they are subject to withdrawal.
Russia does not challenge this and these bases will be taken away
from the territory of Georgia, including the base in Batumi, within
deadlines to be agreed by the parties.
Anchor: We don’t have much time left. Of course, we want to talk a
little about your forecasts — the worst case scenario and the best
scenario. If it is the worst case scenario, how will the events
develop. Konstantin, what do you think?
Kosachev: The worst-case scenario is the replay of Abkhasian variant
of 1992-1993 when armed units clash and these clashes quickly
develops into a civil war that involves pensioners and children.
Given the short temper of the confronting factions, and as far as I
understand, and if I am wrong, please correct me, mainly Georgians
live in Adzharia, at least they say that they are Georgians but of a
somewhat different type — so, given the short- tempered Georgian
character on both sides, neither will concede, and all this will go
on, resulting in flows of blood and heavy casualties only to end the
same way as the conflict in Abkhazia ended where the sides had
realized the pointlessness of using force any further and returned to
their places on different sides of the barricade. That’s the most
terrible scenario that may happen. It is absolutely senseless and it
will only inflict a new deep wound upon the efforts to resolve the
conflict by political means and preserve Georgia’s territorial
integrity.
Anchor: Tengiz.
Kitovani: I want all this to end peacefully. And I think it will. I
will travel to Tbilisi shortly to convince the sides to resolve the
whole thing peacefully with the help of Russia and America. The only
way out of this is to end this peacefully.
Mr. Saakashvili will have to make some concessions to Abashidze at
this point because otherwise Georgians will have to pay a dear price
and face grave consequences.
Kosachev: I hope and I am convinced that Mr. Saakashvili will have
enough political wisdom, restraint and strategic vision to try to
solve all of Georgia’s problems, including the Adzharian problem, at
one strike for a certain political or historical occasion.
Anchor: Tengiz, you said in the beginning that Abashidze is a
criminal. Then why don’t authorities simply arrest him and get it
over and done with?
Kitovani: You know, that’s exactly what he is afraid of. He is afraid
of this because it has been said several times on Tbilisi’s
television that he killed Imnadze in the 1990s under Gamsakhurdia.
So, he is simply afraid of all of this because he is a very careful
person. I know him very well. Tbilisi considers him a criminal for
killing Imnadze. Perhaps Muscovites do not know about this, but
Tbilisi’s television carries a lot of reports about this murder.
Imnadze’s daughter also often appears on television and she actually
witnessed the murder of her father.
Kosachev: If Mr. Saakashvili is aware of this fact, it’s very strange
that during the inauguration ceremony in Batumi on February 25 he was
standing shoulder to shoulder with this man. So, I think that the
situation is not as simple as that.
Kitovani: It’s a fact and it occurred in 1991. The daughter and
mother were arrested in Kutaisi and I liberated them because the
roads were blocked as they were seeking to get rid of the witnesses.
I got them out of there and took them to Tbilisi with a police escort
to make sure they didn’t get killed on the way. That’s what happened.
Anchor: Unfortunately we have run out of time. Obviously this topic
will be among the main news for a long time. We all want the
situation to be resolved peacefully. Our guests, Tengiz Kitovani and
Konstantin Kosachev, wish that too. I thank you for coming here
today.
From: Baghdasarian

Karabakh Premier Slams Azeri “Rumpus” About Chess Tournament
Mediamax news agency
18 Mar 04
YEREVAN
The prime minister of the Nagornyy Karabakh Republic (NKR), Anushavan
Daniyelyan, said today that “all the actions of Azerbaijan resemble
the times of the medieval Inquisition”.
According to our Mediamax correspondent, the prime minister said this
while commenting on the reaction of the Azerbaijani authorities to the
international chess tournament that came to an end in Stepanakert on
17 March.
“Azerbaijan has shown its true colours to the world again. The
authorities of this republic, protecting their serviceman who hacked
to death a sleeping Armenian officer with Stone Age brutality, have
now turned all the might of their state propaganda machine to an
innocent sporting and cultural event, causing a rumpus about the chess
tournament in Stepanakert.
In connection with the aforesaid, there is a question – how can one
talk with a state whose actions resemble the times of the Inquisition?
The further we move, the more Azerbaijan antagonizes us, irrevocably
distancing itself from us. Although we are de facto destined to live
side by side with Azerbaijan, we are morally very far from each
other,” Daniyelyan said.
From: Baghdasarian