Author: Chakhmakhchian Vatche

ARMENIAN PREMIER IN POLAND TO MARK AUSCHWITZ LIBERATION ANNIVERSARY
Arminfo
26 Jan 05
YEREVAN
An Armenian government delegation led by Prime Minister Andranik
Markaryan today arrived in Poland (Krakow) on a three-day official
visit, the Armenian government’s press service has told Arminfo.
According to the source, on 27 January the Armenian delegation will
take part in a ceremony to mark the 60th anniversary of the liberation
of the Auschwitz concentration camp prisoners.
(Passage omitted: Other details of the visit)

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Jan 26 2005
PACE passes resolution condemning Armenian aggression

The draft resolution on Upper Garabagh, based on the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe rapporteur David Atkinson’s report,
was unanimously passed at the PACE winter session after heated debate
on Tuesday.
Atkinson stated during the discussions that if a nationwide poll was
held in Upper Garabagh today, most of the population would
undoubtedly vote for independence. However, in this case Azerbaijani
residents in Upper Garabagh would not be able to cast their votes, as
they do not currently live in their native land and were subject to
ethnic cleansing as a result of Armenia’s aggression.
Atkinson indicated three ways for settling the conflict. One of them
is military action by Azerbaijan, which implies that the country will
no longer be a member of the Council of Europe. Another alternative
is granting full independence to Upper Garabagh, which will
jeopardize security in the region. The third option is a peace
settlement, which is the only way to ensure co-existence of the two
peoples.
A representative of Armenia Armen Rustamian stated that adopting the
resolution would complicate the conflict resolution. He said that the
fact the `occupation’ and `separatism’ concepts were used in the
document will allow Azerbaijan to put forth an ultimatum to Armenia.
Following heated discussions accompanied by mutual accusations, PACE
considered the proposed changes to the draft resolution. The entity
rejected the Armenian MPs’ proposal on amending the section that says
`considerable parts of the territory of Azerbaijan are still occupied
by Armenian forces’, by the overwhelming majority of votes.
Only two amendments were introduced to the resolution. One of these
changes stipulated that Azerbaijan is to hold talks with both the
Azerbaijani and Armenian communities of Upper Garabagh without
preconditions, while the other one envisioned making technical
changes to the document.
The resolution was further placed on voting and passed by 123 votes,
with only 7 voting against it.
Head of the Azerbaijani delegation at PACE Samad Seyidov says the
resolution passed is of great importance for Azerbaijan.
`This shows that European countries have confirmed that Armenia is an
aggressor and that Upper Garabagh is controlled by separatist
forces.’
The resolution also says that both sides should refrain from military
action and consider using the UN International Court of Justice if a
conflict resolution fails.
So far most international organizations have exercised a double
standard approach to the Garabagh conflict. The Council of Europe is
therefore the only entity that passed a document reflecting a fair
and impartial position on the issue.
Analysts regard the fact that the resolution was adopted in this
composition as a victory of Azerbaijan’s diplomacy.*

Recommendation 1690 (2005)[1]
A1+
25-01-2005
The conflict over the Nagorno-Karabakh region dealt with by the OSCE
Minsk Conference
1. The Parliamentary Assembly refers to its Resolution 1416 (2005) on
the conflict dealt with by the OSCE Minsk Conference and recommends
that the Committee of Ministers:
i. urge the parties concerned to comply with the United Nations
Security Council Resolutions 822 (1993), 853 (1993), 874 (1993) and
884 (1993), in particular by refraining from any armed hostilities and
by withdrawing military forces from all occupied territories of
Azerbaijan;
ii. monitor the compliance by Armenia and Azerbaijan with the United
Nations Security Council Resolutions and the decisions of the OSCE
Council of Ministers on this conflict and to report to the Assembly on
the outcomes of this monitoring;
iii. report to the Assembly on the efforts undertaken by member states
for the peaceful settlement of the conflict in accordance with the
Resolutions of the United Nations Security Council including whether
member states refrain from the supply of any weapons and munitions
which might lead to an intensification of the conflict or the
continued occupation of territory in violation of Resolution 853
(1993) of the United Nations Security Council;
iv. recalling its Recommendation 1251 (1994) on the conflict in
Nagorno-Karabakh, place experts at the disposal of Armenia and
Azerbaijan who could help draw up a political status for
Nagorno-Karabakh, if they so wish;
v. allocate resources for an action plan of specific
confidence-building measures for Armenia and Azerbaijan;
vi. allocate resources for specific training programmes for teachers
and journalists from both countries aimed at better mutual
understanding, tolerance and reconciliation;
vii. allocate resources for specific action by the European Commission
against Racism and Intolerance concerning both countries, in
particular with regard to educational institutions and the public
media;
viii. instruct its competent steering committee to analyse how far the
European Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes reflects
the current requirements of conflict settlement among member states of
the Council of Europe and where it should be revised in order to
provide an adequate instrument for the peaceful settlement of disputes
between the member states of the Council of Europe;
ix. take Resolution 1416 (2005) into account when deciding on action
concerning both countries;
x. forward Resolution 1416 (2005) and this Recommendation to the
governments of member states with a view to supporting them
nationally, bilaterally and internationally.
[1] Assembly debate on 25 January 2005 (2nd Sitting) (see Doc.10364,
report of the Political Affairs Committee, rapporteur: Mr
Atkinson). Text adopted by the Assembly on 25 January 2005 (2nd
Sitting).
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Le Monde, France
25 janvier 2005
De la barbarie hitlérienne est née la notion de « crime contre l’humanité »
1945 – 2005
par Nathalie Guibert,
À QUELLES valeurs renvoie la notion d’humanité ? Parce que la
question est immense, les juristes peinent encore à définir les
crimes contre l’humanité.
Cette incrimination pénale a émergé, en 1945, de la barbarie
hitlérienne. Depuis, elle n’a cessé d’évoluer. Récemment, le
terrorisme, le clonage humain, sont venus à nouveau la bousculer. «
On essaie, avec cette notion, de définir des valeurs, que l’on a du
mal à écrire dans des mots de juristes », résume Michel Massé,
professeur de droit à l’université de Poitiers.
Avant la seconde guerre mondiale, les actes inhumains, commis
collectivement contre des populations civiles au nom d’un projet
politique, étaient sanctionnés sous l’incrimination de « crimes de
guerre ». Seuls quelques diplomates avaient utilisé l’expression de «
crime contre l’humanité » après le génocide des Arméniens de 1915.
Les crimes contre l’humanité sont inscrits le 8 août 1945 dans
l’accord de Londres instaurant le tribunal militaire international
siégeant à Nuremberg. Ils sont alors définis comme « l’assassinat,
l’extermination, la réduction en esclavage, la déportation, et tout
autre acte inhumain commis contre toute population civile, avant ou
pendant la guerre, ou bien les persécutions pour des motifs
politiques, raciaux ou religieux ».
Mais, en 1945, la priorité est de punir les crimes contre la paix et
les crimes de guerre ; les victimes civiles sont négligées. Au procès
de Nuremberg, « les crimes contre l’humanité, que l’on vient pourtant
de créer, sont absents », rappelle Denis Salas, secrétaire général de
l’Association pour l’histoire de la justice. Dans le jugement des
responsables nazis, ces crimes « ne sont retenus que comme une
catégorie interstitielle destinée à combler les manques des autres
infractions, explique M. Salas. Les acteurs du procès de Nuremberg
ont du mal à penser un mal radical qui excède les bornes du droit ».
En 1948, l’ONU ajoute le génocide au crime contre l’humanité. En
1973, c’est le cas de l’apartheid. Des criminels sont jugés sous la
nouvelle qualification, par des tribunaux nationaux, comme ce fut le
cas pour Adolf Eichmann en Israël, ou des juridictions
internationales ad hoc, tel le tribunal pénal pour l’ex-Yougoslavie.
En France, il faut attendre le code pénal de 1994 pour voir ces
crimes sortir du contexte de la seconde guerre mondiale et s’inscrire
dans le droit national. Mais le texte de 1994 n’a jamais servi. Paul
Touvier, Klaus Barbie et Maurice Papon ont été condamnés en référence
au texte de Nuremberg et au nom de l’imprescriptibilité de ces
crimes, reconnue par la France en 1964.
Des plaintes ont certes été déposées contre des criminels étrangers
recherchés en France, tel Augusto Pinochet. Mais les juges ont retenu
la qualification de « torture », plus efficace pour les poursuivre
bien que ce crime ne soit pas imprescriptible. En la matière, la
Convention de l’ONU autorise, en effet, la compétence universelle. En
outre, les deux lois de 2001 relatives à la reconnaissance du
génocide arménien et à l’esclavage ne peuvent être utilisées pour
poursuivre des responsables, en raison du principe de
non-rétroactivité.
Mais « le plus important, c’est que le droit français a été
verrouillé par la Cour de cassation pour que le crime contre
l’humanité ne puisse pas s’appliquer à la guerre d’Algérie, souligne
M. Massé. La France reconnaît ce crime pour des faits anciens, et
pour les actes nouveaux, à partir de 1994. Entre les deux, il y a un
trou, dans la mémoire et dans le droit ».
Les attentats du 11 septembre 2001 à New York ont, de nouveau,
bousculé l’incrimination née il y a cinquante ans. Pour Robert
Badinter, il convient d’assimiler ces actes aux crimes contre
l’humanité. « Des actes semant la terreur, visant aveuglément des
populations civiles, et commis au nom d’un projet et de motivations
idéologiques entrent tout à fait dans le cadre des crimes contre
l’humanité », estime l’ancien ministre de la justice.
Et ce d’autant que les statuts de la Cour pénale internationale,
installée en 2002, définissent les crimes contre l’humanité comme les
actes de meurtre, d’extermination, de persécution ou de déportation «
commis dans le cadre d’une attaque généralisée ou systématique lancée
contre toute population civile ».
Mais la question divise les juristes. Jusqu’à présent, ces deux
droits ont évolué parallèlement, explique M. Massé, car « la nature
du terrorisme est différente : il s’en prend à n’importe qui, et non
à un groupe précis ; ses auteurs n’ont pas, à la différence des
autres criminels, le contrôle d’un territoire ; enfin, ils subissent
une réprobation morale relative : des années après les faits,
certains terroristes ont acquis une légitimité, un pouvoir ».
Les biotechnologies provoquent également des interrogations. En
France, la loi du 6 août 2004 a ainsi modifié le code pénal, plaçant
en tête du chapitre consacré aux crimes contre les personnes, les «
crimes contre l’humanité et contre l’espèce humaine ». Ces derniers
venus recouvrent l’eugénisme et le clonage humain, punis de trente
ans de réclusion. « Le crime contre l’humanité peut se définir comme
le fait d’avoir éliminé massivement des personnes qu’on estime
différentes. Le clonage pourrait être l’inverse, le fait de créer des
personnes en maîtrisant leurs caractéristiques. D’où ce rapprochement
des deux notions, même si le droit, ttonnant, ne les assimile pas
encore », indique M. Massé.
L’installation de la CPI rend désormais possible le jugement de tous
les « crimes les plus graves touchant l’ensemble de la communauté
internationale ». « C’est un progrès, souligne M. Badinter, mais
toutes les leçons d’Auschwitz n’ont pas été tirées par la justice. De
longs silences pèsent sur les génocides ultérieurs, comme celui du
Cambodge. »

RA PRESIDENT DISCUSSES DETAILS OF UPCOMING OFFICIAL VISIT TO ITALY
WITH AMBASSADOR MARCO KLEMENTE
YEREVAN, January 20 (Noyan Tapan). RA President Robert Kocharian
discussed the details of the upcoming official visit of the RA
President to Italy with Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary
of Italy to Armenia Marco Klemente during the January 20 meeting.
According to the RA presidential press service, Robert Kocharian
stressed the importance of this visit and mentioned that the
traditional friendly relations have been established between Italy and
Armenia, and good prospective is evident in the sphere of economic
cooperation, in particular, in the sphere of the small and medium
enterprises.

Dunya Gazetesi, Turkey
Jan 19 2005
VAT meetin cancelled, Russia wants to act as a mediator between
Turkey and Armenia
19/01/2005 10:47:58 Geri dön gönder yazýcý
The Viennese Armenian-Turkish Platform (VAT) yesterday announced that
it would not carry through its starting initiative “The First
Viennese Armenian-Turkish Round Table” originally planned for spring
2005.
The reason is that the Armenian side has failed to provide the
platform with the necessary confirmation as agreed in August 2004.
The Turkish side accepted to participate in the dialogue, in which
each part was supposed to present 180 documents on the year 1915
showing their understanding of the so-called Armenian genocide. In
July 2004, the first 100 documents each from the Armenian and Turkish
side were exchanged to get the dialogue started.
The VAT was founded by four Austrian historians as a neutral platform
serving as an intermediary for Turkish and Armenian researchers
scientifically investigating the Armenian-Turkish Question. In
related news, the Moscow radio yesterday announced that the Russian
Federation is ready to act as a mediator between Turkey and Armenia
as well as the guarantor of any possible agreement to be signed
between the two countries.

Glendale News Press
LATimes.com
Jan 20 2005
Bridging cultures at Edison
Elementary school students, staff learn about each other’s heritages
during Culture Week.
By Darleene Barrientos, News-Press and Leader
SOUTHWEST GLENDALE – Studying a vibrant red “han bok,” or traditional
Korean dress, 5-year-old Rebeca Olmedo pointed it out and gestured to
a pendant on it.
“I like the color and that thing right here,” Rebeca said, referring
to the black “norigae,” or Korean knot pendant hanging down the
center of the dress.
The dress was one of dozens of items from several countries and
cultures displayed Wednesday in a classroom at Edison Elementary
School. The room was the school’s makeshift Culture Museum this week,
housing dolls, fabrics, flags, clothes, knick knacks, currency,
pictures and other items from countries like Korea, Armenia, Iran,
Mexico, the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Laos. The school is
celebrating Culture Week, a celebration of the diversity among the
school’s staff and students.
Culture Week at Edison began last year and was a success, Principal
Linda Conover said. It allowed the student body and the teachers to
celebrate and embrace their cultures. The student population at
Edison is about 47% Armenian descent, 35% Latino with the remainder
made up of students of Russian, El Salvadoran, Filipino, Korean, Thai
and East Indian ancestry.
“I’d say we’re diverse, and I think our staff is pretty diverse,
too,” Conover said.
The events at Edison began Tuesday with an opening ceremony,
featuring parents, teachers and students dressed in traditional
clothing that represents their culture or background.
Sixth-grade student Ashini Patel, 11, who is of Indian descent,
wanted to wear a pair of bright yellow pants that flare out and a top
designed with embroidery.
“But I missed my chance,” Ashini said. “I thought I could wear it any
day this week.”
The school is also learning about different cultures through
workshops, including arts and crafts, luncheons and parent
presentations.
Culture Week is an event that has made an impression on the student
body, Conover said.
“I saw the effects of the one last year,” she said. “Students would
come up and talk about the activities they were involved in during
culture week and would make sure we knew how much they enjoyed it. It
was wonderful for them to see their parents come in and talk to their
class or share food from their cultures. It gave students a sense of
pride about where they came from.”

Institute for War and Peace Reporting
Jan 19 2005
ARMENIA BUSINESSMAN DIGS FOR PROFIT
All eyes are on a diaspora investor who is trying his luck with
investing in Armenia’s unpredictable agriculture.
By Naira Melkumian in Yerevan
For the first time, a major investor is putting his money into
Armenia’s undeveloped agriculture sector – an experiment in an
unpredictable area, which both farmers and economists are watching
with keen interest.
Up until now, agriculture – which employs around 40 per cent of the
working population of Armenia but makes a much more modest
contribution to the national budget – has had to rely solely on
government and international grants and loans for financing.
Eduardo Ernekian, an Argentinean-based entrepreneur of Armenian
extraction who manages Armenia’s Zvartnots airport, has signed an
agreement with the local Max Group, pledging to invest 25 million US
dollars in fruit orchard and grapevine plantings on an area of 3,000
hectares. The project also envisages a processing plant, an advanced
irrigation system, supply of modern agricultural machinery and
equipment and a quality control laboratory.
Ernekian, who is a major landowner in southern Argentina, plans to
plant apricot, peach and plum orchards and vineyards in the Bagramian
district of the Armavir Region of western Armenia over the next five
years.
Parliamentary deputy Hachik Manukian, who is chairman of the board of
Max Group, told IWPR the project would build the capacity to process
up to 50,000 tons of high quality fruit. “The fruit will be sorted by
look, size and colour according to a set of standards, and then
exported,” he said.
While some see Ernekian’s investment as a harbinger of growth in
Armenia’s agriculture, others say that is a risky venture to put
money into something as unpredictable and undeveloped as fruit
farming.
Samvel Avetisian, Armenia’s deputy agriculture minister, said the
project was practical and promising, because it relied on new
technology and promoted higher competition among fruit processors.
In 2004, the agriculture ministry reported a 12 per cent growth in
agriculture production from the previous two years, when the sector
grew at no more than four per cent annually. Avetisian said he
expected other foreign investors to follow Ernekian’s lead.
He also believes Ernekian is doing the right thing by starting an
agricultural business to set up export flows and keep his airport
busy. “He went into agriculture out of practical necessity, and
that’s a good thing,” the deputy minister said.
But Grachia Berberian, chairman of the Agrarian Union of Farmers, is
not so optimistic and says that Armenia’s agriculture is developing
very slowly despite its huge potential. “If the state treated and
managed agriculture right, the sector could start generating a profit
in two to three years,” he said.
Berberian believes investing directly in farming cooperatives would
be a better idea. “As matters stand, entrepreneurs exploit farmers to
maximize their own profits, while the processing plants stifle
farmers by imposing their own prices,” he said.
According to official figures, agriculture accounts for one fifth of
Armenia’s GDP, but employs half a million people or 40 per cent of
the workforce. Lise Grande, representative for the United Nations
Development Programme in Armenia, points to these figures as proof of
the low productivity of Armenian agriculture.
“Armenia’s agriculture needs intellectual, legislative and financial
investment to make it less dependent on external factors and more
stable in the long term,” Grande said.
External factors can all too often be disastrous. Berberian listed
the problems that farmers face, saying, “These include water
shortages, bad roads and lack of other infrastructure, but the main
challenge is to give farmers a firm guarantee of good harvest and
income.”
Avetisian added that the country’s agriculture loses some 30 million
dollars annually due to the weather. Last year, he said, 90 per cent
of Armenia’s apricot harvest, 30 per cent of the peaches and a tenth
of its vineyards were damaged by the weather.
But Manukian, the head of Max Group, argues that agriculture’s low
investor appeal is due to long payback periods because the majority
of Armenian businessmen want quick profits, and engage in businesses
that pay off immediately.
“As a farming country, we are still in our infancy, and nowhere near
to being an exporter,” Manukian said.
“Armenia exports only two types of agricultural product – apricots
and tomatoes – and all the other potentially exportable products are
yet to find their markets,” Manukian added, blaming this state of
affairs on the lack of a consistent government policy for
agriculture.
“Every farmer is his own manager,” he said. “No one really knows what
the market needs, and how much of it. Grapes sell well at the moment,
so everyone is planting vineyards. Pretty soon we may end up with
more grapes than we know what to do with.”
The agriculture ministry reports that 1,500 ha of new vineyards and a
thousand ha of new fruit orchards had been planted in 2004.
Garik Sardarian, marketing manager for the Marketing Assistance
Programme of the US Department of Agriculture, believes Armenia’s
agricultural products are marketed well enough. In his opinion, what
Armenian farmers lack is a practice of producing quality and assuring
the high sanitary level and safety of their products, which make them
attractive to overseas buyers.
Economic analyst Armen Grigorian said that the vast majority of
Armenian agriculture’s gross output comes from family farms – around
335,000 of which are in the country – and pointed out that improving
access to affordable credit resources might solve many problems for
such outfits.
Ashot Voskanian, head of the Republican Centre for Assistance to
Agriculture, said banks charge a prohibitive 15 – 18 per cent
interest rates on their loans, which are only issued on a short-term
basis. “Armenia’s agriculture financing system needs to be entirely
reformed – we need better laws and regulations in the field,” he told
IWPR.
In addition, farmers complain that the last piece of legislation
passed to defend their rights was back in 1990, leaving them all the
more unprotected against the daily challenges that everyday life in
Armenia throws them.
Naira Melkumian is an independent journalist in Yerevan

Annual economic balance
By Mher Ohanian
Yerkir/arm
January 14, 2005
The economic index of 2004 was almost similar to the previous year. It
was again composed of double digits – 10 (previous – 13). The passed
year also had 3 per cent of inflation and an approximately same size
of investments, which is noteworthy, given that the year 2004 did not
get significant funding from Lincy foundation.
Industry, energy, communications
In a way, the year was unfavorable for industrial development, namely
in jewelry and gold spheres. Nevertheless, the overall export of
Armenia increased by 25 per cent.
An evident success of 2004 was the start of the Iran-Armenia gas pipe
construction. This will on the one hand raise the energetic
independence ofthe country and will create competitive prices on gas
(in competition with Russian gas). In addition, it will also become
possible to import cheap gas from Turkmenistan.
Another milestone of 2004 was the eventual agreement with ArmenTel,
which yielded at least one sphere of monopoly – cell phone
communication.A new operator is expected to enter the market. It is
Kharabagh-originated company called K-Telecom. We shall witness its
activities in the coming six months.
Investment balance
The main progress in this respect was the sale of control package of
shares of the Zangezur factory of copper-molybdenum to the German
Chronimed company.
The overall cost of the deal peaks 132 million dollars. In fact, there
are 4 shareholders of the factory: Chronimed (60% shares), `Clean
iron’ factory of Yerevan (15% shares), `Armenian Molybdenum
Production’ cjsc(12.5% shares) and `Zangezur mining’ cjsc (12.5%
shares). During 5 primaryyears, there will be 150 million dollars
invested in the branch.
Note that the copper-molybdenum factory was sold during the world
crisis of copper and molybdenum, which probably accounts for the high
price of the sale.
In addition, the success of the deal is about the investment prospects
and creation of jobs, which are expected to rise from current 3000 to
4500.
Another successful investment during 2004 was the purchase of 100 per
cent share of the Armenian Leda Systems and Arsed companies by the
famous international Sinopsys company, involved in high-tech. It shows
the big potential of Armenia in this field.
Preliminary estimations show 300 million dollars of total private
investments in Armenia during 2004. However, given the size of shadow
economy, the real number is likely to be way bigger.

ITAR-TASS News Agency
TASS
January 18, 2005 Tuesday 4:34 AM Eastern Time
Russia among countries vulnerable to earthquakes – UN report
By Sergei Mingazhev
KOBE (Japan), January 18 – Russia is among countries with a high
relative vulnerability to earthquakes, said the UN’s report “Disaster
Risk Reduction: A Development Task” that was circulated at an
international conference on disaster reduction opening the Japanese
city of Kobe on Tuesday.
About 6.5 thousand people died in a strong earthquake in Kobe ten
years ago.
The report cites results of different studies that had been conducted
under the UN’s programmes on the basis of information about natural
disasters over the past two decades.
One of the studies sought to develop models of risk for different
categories of countries with consideration for their geographic
peculiarities and economic factors.
The countries with a middle level of development and a significant
percent of the urban population such as Turkey and Russia have been
categorised as group with a high relative vulnerability, along with
the countries like Armenia and Guinea, in which earthquakes of an
exceptional magnitude occurred during the study period, the report
says.
Iran, Afghanistan and India have been put in this category too.
The term high relative vulnerability means not so much a high seismic
danger in some area of a country as poor preparedness for
earthquakes, because of which relatively mild tremors can cause
numerous victims and large-scale destruction.
Russia’s most dangers place for life in terms of seaquakes and
tsunamis are the whole Kurile Range and Kamchatka, said deputy
director of the Russian Hydrometeorology Centre Alexander Frolov, who
attends the conference in Kobe.
He told Itar-Tass that if the epicentre of December’s 9-magnitude
seaquake was located not near Sumatra but offshore of Kamchatka, the
height of the tsunami would have reached 20 meters, or two times more
than in Indonesia, because of the configuration pattern of its
coasts.
“If it is taken into account that our warning system works within
10-15 minutes after an earthquake, 30-35 minutes would have been left
for the evacuation of people,” Frolov said.
He stressed the need for additional measures in the field of rapid
reaction to catastrophic events.