Author: Chakrian Hovsep

PRESS OFFICE
Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern)
630 Second Avenue, New York, NY 10016
Contact: Chris Zakian
Tel: (212) 686-0710; Fax: (212) 779-3558
E-mail: [email protected]
Website:

March 15, 2010
___________________

HOLY WEEK AT ST. VARTAN CATHEDRAL WILL BE OBSERVED MARCH 28 THROUGH
APRIL 4, EASTER SUNDAY

St. Vartan Armenian Cathedral will observe Holy Week, March 28 through
April 4, with a series of special services, culminating in the Easter
Sunday celebration on April 4, 2010.

Holy Week is the sacred commemoration of the dramatic events leading
to the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, His victory over death and the
redemption of humanity and the fallen world. The Armenian Church
re-enacts these episodes in the days leading up to Easter. What
follows is a brief schedule of Holy Week events:

PALM SUNDAY–the commemoration of Jesus’ triumphal entry into
Jerusalem–falls on March 28. Fr. Mardiros Chevian (dean of
St. Vartan Cathedral) will be the celebrant for the services, which
will begin with a Morning Service at 9:30 a.m., and will continue with
the Divine Liturgy at 10:30 a.m. The Turun-patzek or `Door-Opening’
Service will be held after the Divine
Liturgy.

The cathedral is also holding a special Children’s Day on Palm Sunday,
which begins at 10:00 a.m. in Guild Hall of the Diocesan Center.
Children will learn about Armenian faith and culture, do seasonal
crafts, and participate in the badarak. The Children’s Day will end
with lunch for the participants. (To register for the Palm Sunday
Children’s Day at St. Vartan Cathedral, call (212) 686-0710,
ext. 141.)

April 1 is GREAT AND HOLY THURSDAY, and the day’s services
memori-alize the Last Supper, Jesus’ vigil in the Garden of
Gethsemane, His arrest and trial. Two separate services will be
celebrated on this day. In the morning, the Divine Liturgy, beginning
at 11:00 a.m. This will be followed by a luncheon.

In the evening, the `Washing of the Feet’ ceremony will start at 7:00
p.m., with the Khavaroom or Vigil Service following at 8:30 p.m.
Archbishop Khajag Barsamian, Primate of the Diocese, will officiate.
During the Washing of Feet ceremony, twelve individuals will serve as
surrogates for the apostles. This year, in recognition of the
Diocese’s `Year of Vocations, the twelve will be selected from the
ordained clergy, including priests and deacons.

The crucifixion and death of Christ will be observed on April 2–GREAT
AND HOLY FRIDAY–and again two services will occur. The Order of the
Cruci-fixion of Christ will begin at 12:00 noon. This will be a short
service enabling working people in Manhattan to attend, and it will be
followed by a luncheon in the Diocesan Complex’s Yerevan Room.

That same evening, at 7:30 p.m., the Order of the Entombment of the
Lord, or Taghoom Service, will take place.

On GREAT AND HOLY SATURDAY, April 3, the Divine Liturgy will be
preceded by a scripture-reading ceremony at 6:30 p.m. Easter Eve
Liturgy will begin at 7:00 p.m., celebrated by Archbishop Yeghishe
Gizirian. The St. Vartan Cathedral Adult and Youth Choir, under the
direction of Maestro Khoren Mekanejian, will sing the liturgy. (The
St. Vartan Cathedral Youth Choir is made up of students from the
Diocesan Khrimian Lyceum, and Diocesan Armenian Saturday schools of
New York and New Jersey.) Students of the Diocesan Khrimian Lyceum
will also provide the Scripture readings. A reception will follow the
services.

The drama of Holy Week will culminate on EASTER SUNDAY, April 4.
Easter is the central holy day of the Christian calendar, and
commemorates the discovery of Christ’s empty tomb and the news of His
glorious Resur-rection. Matins will begin at 9:30 a.m. The Divine
Liturgy will begin at 10:30 a.m. Archbishop Khajag Barsamian, Primate
of the Diocese of the Armenian Church of America, will celebrate the
liturgy and deliver the homily. The St. Vartan Cathedral Choirs will
sing the Divine Liturgy under the direction of Maestro Khoren
Mekanejian. Florence Avakian will accompany on the organ.

Immediately following the service, the traditional Antasdan ceremony,
or `Blessing of the Fields,’ will be conducted on the cathedral plaza.
This will be followed by the release of doves ceremony on the
cathedral plaza, where Mr. Hratch Toufayan, of New Jersey, will serve
as `godfather.’

Please note that an Easter reception and program will follow the
services, in Haik and Alice Kavookjian Auditorium. The reception will
include a home-blessing service, and the recognition of the various
names associated with the holiday. The reception is free and open to
the public.

For information on these observances, call the Diocese of the Armenian
Church at (212) 686-0710. St. Vartan Armenian Cathedral is located at
630 Second Avenue (corner of 34th Street) in New York City.

–3/8/10

SERGEY KAPINOS’ PREDICTION ON ARMENIAN-TURKISH PROCESS PESSIMISTIC

Noyan Tapan
March 15, 2010

YEREVAN, MARCH 15, NOYAN TAPAN. The OSCE Parliamentary Assembly is not
engaged in the issue of Nagorno Karabakh settlement, it is the OSCE
Minsk Group that is engaged in it. Head of the OSCE Yerevan Office,
Ambassador Sergey Kapinos said at a March 15 meeting with journalists
commenting upon the statement made by OSCE PA representative lately
in Yerevan, according to which, the two RA Presidents were from
Karabakh therefore they simultaneously protected the interests
of Armenia and Karabakh. S. Kapinos emphasized that Karabakh was
a conflict side at the initial stages of the conflict settlement:
in particular, in 1994 Karabakh’s representative signed an agreement
on ceasefire. However, later the RA President being from Karabakh by
origin also protected Karabakh’s interests, and Karabakh ceased to
be a side in the negotiations process. Nevertheless the Ambassador
considers that the final stage of problem’s settlement cannot take
place without Karabakh’s participation.

S. Kapinos considers improbable change of the format of the structure
engaged in the Nagorno Karabakh settlement. The Minsk Group format
is balanced and optimal and breaking the already established format
would be dangerous, which can result in unpredictable changes in the
negotiations process.

In response to a journalist’s question of how he treats Bako Sahakian’s
recent statement to settle the conflict on the basis of legal documents
S. Kapinos stated that they had better "use old and tested means
of settlement."

S. Kapinos’ prediction on the Armenian-Turkish process is pessimistic
because of the developments that emerged in Turkey in consequence of
the well-known decisions of U.S. House of Representatives Committee
on Foreign Affairs and parliament of Sweden. Nevertheless, according
to him, it does not mean that no events will take place that will
give a positive spirit to the process.

AZERBAIJANI EXPERT: STATUS OF NAGORNY KARABAKH WILL NOT BE LEGITIMATE WITHOUT RETURN OF AZERBAIJANI IDPS

ArmInfo
2010-03-15 14:28:00

ArmInfo. Return of the Azerbaijani and Armenian refugees differs from
the issue of return of IDPs to Nagorny Karabakh, says Tabib Huseynov,
Azerbaijani analyst of the international Crisis Group, in an interview
with ArmInfo.

He says that all the refugees have a right to return to the places
of their previous residence. This issue must be practically settled
in future. "Nevertheless, return of the displaced persons to Nagorny
Karabakh and the nearby territories is quite different than the issue
of the Armenian and Azerbaijani refugees. Speaking of the status
of Nagorny Karabakh, we must understand that it will be legitimate
only if Azerbaijanis return there and peacefully co-exist with the
Armenians in the status they would agree with. Otherwise, no political
decision is possible," he says.

Anadolu Agency, Turkey
March 12 2010

Turkish PM cancels visit, recalls ambassador over Armenia vote

Ankara, 11 March: Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s
scheduled visit to Sweden was cancelled following approval of the
resolution on Armenian allegations in Swedish Parliament.

Prime Ministry Press Centre issued a "government statement" and said
Erdogan was to attend Turkey-Sweden Summit on March 17, 2010.

The Centre also said Turkish Ambassador to Stockholm Zergun Koruturk
was recalled to Ankara for consultations.

The government statement said, "Turkish government expresses regret
and strongly condemns approval of a resolution in the Swedish
Parliament which alleged that some peoples were committed to genocide
during the last period of the Ottoman Empire."

"Turkish government rejects this decision lacking basis. It is obvious
that the decision was made taking into consideration some political
interests for the elections that would take place in Sweden in
September 2010," the statement said.

The statement noted, "the resolution does not correspond to the close
friendship of our two nations," Erdogan said in a statement on his
website.

"Indeed it is Turkey making a call to face with the history honestly.
Those refraining from facing with history are actually afraid of
discussing their claims reciprocally and revealing the facts working
with scientific methods. Those who live with this fear exploit the
foreign parliamentarians who are after small political interests, and
exploited by them. Inclusion of the allegations regarding the last
period of the Ottoman Empire to the agenda of the Swedish Parliament
is a consequence of such an exploitation," it said.

The statement said the duty of the parliaments and politicians are not
to make judgements on history but to construct the future by drawing
lessons from the past, "those who think that historical facts and
views of Turkey for its own past will change with the decisions that
were made on the basis of political interests of foreign parliaments,
are in a serious delusion."

Swedish Parliament on Thursday approved a resolution on Armenian
allegations regarding 1915 incidents.

The resolution including recognition of Armenian allegations was
approved with 131 votes against 130.

Turkey strongly rejects the genocide allegations and regards the
events as civil strife in wartime which claimed lives of many Turks
and Armenians.

Turkey and Armenia signed two protocols on October 10, 2009 to
normalize relations between the two countries. The protocols envisage
the two countries to establish diplomatic ties and open the border
that has been close since 1993. Turkey and Armenia also agreed to take
steps to operate a sub-commission on impartial scientific examination
of the historical records and archive to define existing problems and
formulate recommendations, in which Armenian, Turkish as well as Swiss
and other international experts would take part. However, on January
12, 2010, the Constitutional Court of Armenia declared a decision of
constitutional conformity on the protocols. Turkey thought the fifth
article of Armenian Constitutional Court’s verdict regarding the
protocols was against the target and basis of the protocols.

ARFD accuses Armenian Foreign Minister of `inability to negotiate’

13.03.2010 17:26 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Improper statements don’t do credit to Mr.
Hovhannesyan, RPA member Gagik Melikyan stated.
`Dashnaktsutyun was closely connected with Young Turks, it had The
Treaty of Alexandropol on its conscience and I don’t believe Armenian
nation agrees with Mr. Hovhannesyan,’ he emphasized.

At March 13 news conference in Yerevan, ARF Dashnaktsutyun
parliamentary faction leader Vahan Hovhannesyan accused Armenian
Foreign Minister of `inability to negotiate’, specifically on issues
regarding Armenia-Turkey relations.

Today, Azerbaijan
March 13 2010

Michael Gunter: Given Armenia’s geographical isolation, the long run
favors Azerbaijan

13 March 2010 [12:34] – Today.Az

Today.Az interview with Professor of political science of Tenesse
Technological University, Michael Gunter.

You, along with others, attended the Khojaly related conference, held
in Hinckley Institute, in Utah. How, in your opinion, is the informing
of Americans on this Azerbaijani tragedy going on?

The American public never even heard of Khojaly, let alone the
massacre that occurred there in 1992. Azeri authorities should
continue to try to inform world public opinion on this issue,
especially when Armenians engage in anti-Azeri propaganda.

At present, the negotiations for the Nagorno-Karabakh problem still go
on, although without any big steps forward. Baku doesn’t exclude the
possibility of military solution of this problem. Do you yourself see
the problem solved via the military actions?

Although the military option is always there, Azerbaijan would be best
served by continuing to try to solve the problem peacefully. Azeris
should continue to emphasize the principle of territorial integrity
when arguing their case as this principle is supported in their own
interests by practically every other state in the world that does not
want to be partitioned or suffer from secession. Turkey remains a
strong ally of Azerbaijan, so the Azeris should not alienate Turkey
over this issue as Turkey pursues its rapprochement with Armenia.
Given Armenia’s geographical isolation, the long run favors
Azerbaijan.

The OSCE Minsk Group has been working on the Armenian-Armenian
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict for many years. Many analysts and experts
agree on one thing ` the Minsk Group has done very little to actually
progress the resolution of the conflict. Do you agree with that?

Many deep problems in international politics take years to solve or
are never solved. The Arab-Israeli, Kashmiri, and Cypriot issue come
readily to mind. It is not surprising that the OSCE Minsk Group has
made little progress. However, Azerbaijan should continue to pursue
the Minsk process, but do not ignore other opportunities. Problems
like Nagorno-Karabakh sometimes just gradually are solved by time and
the changing international situation.

As you already know, the US House Committee of Foreign Affairs adopted
23 votes to 22 the resolution on `Armenian Genocide’ on March 4.
What, in your opinion should be expected next? Will it go any further?

I do not think the `Genocide Resolution’ will go any further as it is
clearly a one-sided attempt to legislate history as well as being
against U.S. foreign policy interests. I expect President Obama to use
his influence to block any further progress. Actually the Committee
vote was more favorable to Turkey this time (23-22) compared to the
previous most recent attempt to pass such a resolution on October 10,
2007 when the House Committee on International Affairs passed an
almost identical resolution 27-21, only to see it then blocked by
President Bush.

How do you see the U.S.-Turkish relations after this resolution was adopted?

The `Genocide Resolution’ momentarily set US-Turkish relations back,
but if the Resolution proceeds no further as I expect, the entire
matter will be but a brief bump on the road of US-Turkish relations
which have so many more important aspects with which to deal.

Can we assume, that, this adoption will badly affect the
Turkish-Armenian border opening?

In the short run yes, but in the long run it is in the interest of all
parties to reach an agreement on the two protocols Turkey and Armenian
signed last October to establish diplomatic relations, establish an
historical commission to examine the events of 1915, and open the
Turkish-Armenian border.

T. Teymur

URL:

APA, Azerbaijan
March 13 2010

US Secretary of State has phone conversation with Armenian president

[ 13 Mar 2010 12:17 ]

Baku. Victoria Dementieva ` APA. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
had phone conversation with Armenian president Serzh Sargsyan.

They discussed the process of settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh
conflict and normalization of the Turkish-Armenian relations as well,
APA reports quoting the press service of the US State Department.
Hillary Clinton invited Sargsyan to attend the nuclear security summit
in Washington.

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
March 14 2010

Turkey blames everybody but itself

AMANDA PAUL [email protected] Columnists

If there was an award for passing the buck and blaming others, Turkey
would surely be near the top of the nominee list. It really never
ceases to amaze just how often Turkey does this. These days, US
President Barack Obama has been on the receiving end of Turkey’s
wrath, with Ankara accusing Washington of having no strategic vision
and of failing to take the necessary steps to prevent the approval of
the Armenian `genocide’ resolution by the US House Foreign Relations
Committee last week. I sometimes wonder who is the superpower, the US
or Turkey? In any case, between now and April 24, when Obama delivers
his annual message, Turkey will be obsessed. It is really sad that we
have to witness this scene over and over again. Turkey’s criticism has
been ever harsher this year, and Ankara seems to be expecting Obama to
resolve this issue once and for all. If he does not, well, as Foreign
Minister DavutoÄ?lu has threatened, strategic ties may go adrift —
meaning that Turkey will develop even closer ties with the Russians,
Iranians, Africans, South Americans, etc., with Turkey possibly
becoming an increasingly unreliable partner for the West. With the
ambassador already recalled and State Minister Zafer Ã?aÄ?layan’s visit
cancelled, Turkey is really piling on the pressure. Ã?aÄ?layan’s visit
was supposed to develop further economic ties with the US under a
model partnership framework suggested by Obama. With Prime Minister
ErdoÄ?an due to visit Washington in April, what will happen next is
anybody’s guess, but I would expect once we get into May the rocky sea
will calm down again.
I don’t believe Obama can make the genocide issue disappear as Turkey
requests. In fact, the genocide issue is not going to go away in the
US or anywhere else, with the Swedish parliament narrowly approving a
resolution last Thursday recognizing the 1915 mass killing of
Armenians in Turkey as genocide and prompting the Turkish government
to recall its ambassador there, too, in protest. While Foreign
Minister Carl Bildt said he regretted the decision because it would
serve as another blow to Turkey’s reconciliation with Armenia, the
fact is that Turkey could have moved the process forward months ago
but preferred not to. So now they blame the US, the Swedes and the
Armenians. In fact, anybody but themselves. If Turkey believed
reconciliation with Armenia would make the genocide issue go away,
then they were and are fooling themselves. As long as there is an
Armenian diaspora on this planet, they will continue to push
everywhere they can for recognition of the genocide, no matter how
many historic commissions or rapprochements there are. The genocide
issue is their life’s cause.

In addition, the Jan. 12 ruling by the Armenian Constitutional Court
resulted in Turkey questioning whether Armenia remains committed to
their promise to ratify the two protocols for the normalization of
relations with Turkey. Perhaps Ankara would do well to take a good
look in the mirror. It is Turkey more than any other entity that is
responsible for the difficulty in the current reconciliation. Turkey
has crippled the process by insisting on a parallel process on the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which is clearly not going to happen any
time soon. And here again Turkey blames Armenia for the lack of
progress when in fact Armenia is no more to blame than Azerbaijan.

Turkey is well aware that the process is in danger of failing and is
looking everywhere it can to find others to blame. Probably it would
please Ankara no end if Armenia were to announce that it was fed up
with Turkey’s imposed Karabakh preconditions and withdraw its
signature from the protocols — as they have threatened to do. This
would give Turkey the perfect scapegoat for the failure of the
process. If I were sitting in Yerevan, I would do precisely the
opposite. I would not withdraw the signature; rather, I would take the
initiative and have the protocols ratified in the Armenian parliament
as soon as possible.

And of course the blame game is not simply limited to this issue; it
is alive and kicking on many others, too. On Cyprus Turkey always
claims to be driving forward a solution and continues to deny any
wrongdoing in the past rather continuing to state that its role in the
Cyprus conflict was to bring peace to the island and placing the blame
elsewhere for the continued division. It is the same when it comes to
the membership negotiations with the EU. Blame for the stagnation of
the talks always lies at the feet of the EU. But this approach should
come as no big surprise given the fact that many Turks are simply
unable to accept or acknowledged that their country, and the Ottoman
Empire before it, has ever behaved in a way that was less than
perfect. They are unable to deal with the past and have trouble
acknowledging that sometimes Turkey does make mistakes. Rather they
prefer to point the finger at others.

RUSSIAN ANALYST: U.S. GOVERNMENT WILL MAKE EFFORTS TO BLOCK "ARMENIAN GENOCIDE" RESOLUTION AT THE LEVEL OF HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
R. Mehdiyev

Today
63905.html
March 12 2010
Azerbaijan

Day.Az interview with Russian political analyst Sergey Markedonov.

What are your comments on the decision by the U.S. Congress House
of Representatives Committee on Foreign Relations to recognize the
"Armenian genocide"?

This is not the first attempt by the House of Representatives Committee
on Foreign Relations to raise the Armenian issue. The latest attempt
to adopt similar draft resolution was made in October 2007.

If you take look at the history of Armenian issue inside the U.S.,
all kinds of resolutions on this matter have been adopted since 1916.

Until 1945 they had mostly civil character. But later they assumed a
political nature. There is constant debate in the U.S. how to label
these events – whether as "massacre", or "genocide".

I recall that during the election campaign, both President Obama and
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton proposed to recognize those events
as "genocide". So, there is nothing surprising about what has happened.

Worthy of note is that the discussions over the Armenian issue showed
presence of two vectors in American foreign policy which often balance
each other. There is a group of politicians who advocate rejection of
all such documents, resolutions and maintaining good relations with
Turkey while others call on the House of Representatives to adopt
the resolution discussed in the Committee on Foreign Relations.

I think that these two vectors will further exist in American
politics. Some of them will periodically reinforce some – weaken, and
vice versa. But now, I see no willingness in the U.S. administration
to go further than that done in the committees.

Can the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict still be considered frozen
following the U.S. Congress committee’s recent move and Turkey’s
strong reaction? Do you think the risk of renewed hostilities between
Azerbaijan and Armenia has significantly increased?

I do not think that we should expect a serious break-down of relations
between the U.S. and Turkey. There are certain limits defined by the
red line beyond which the parties do not move. I think that the Turks,
of course, unhappy with U.S. policy not only on the Armenian issue,
but also on Iraq. However, this has not yet resulted in any dramatic
consequences such as, for example, withdrawal from NATO and closure
of Incirlik airbase through which bulk of goods is delivered to Iraq
from America.

Relations between the two countries could change radically if President
Obama personally admits this point and if the administration at
the federal level accedes to the position which even the House of
Representatives did not adhere. Even the Foreign Relations Committee
vote was difficult enough – 23 votes to 22.

As for the Karabakh conflict, I do not see prerequisite for its
military solution. To make such a solution possible, one side needs
to have sharp military superiority over another. In addition, modern
war is not a purely military action, this is also picture made of
information.

In the event of renewed hostilities in Karabakh, there will be no
"two-color" approach which we witnessed in the case of Russia and
Georgia. Neither Armenia nor Azerbaijan will be perceived as an agent
of the West. The views of different countries will be strongly divided
and their lobbyists will work with both sides. And Azerbaijan will
not have serious information advantage.

Unlike South Ossetia, it is not a closed space, but nearly
200-kilometer long front line. I think military escalation is less
to happen. Besides, war rhetoric will be used as an instrument of
pressure, for example, on Turkey to slow down the Armenian-Turkish
normalization.

Do you mean Turkey will make efforts towards rapprochement with Russia
following the recent move by the U.S.?

I would not dramatize what has happened in only one Committee. Of
course, this is important event, but not dramatic.

What will be the situation in the region? Will it be difficult for
Moscow to handle the mediation role in the region on its own in case
the U.S. leaves the region?

Azerbaijan has its great interests in the West. "Contract of the
Century" remains in force. Both Ankara and Baku can make some
friendly demonstrative steps for Russia. However, it does not mean
that things will change radically, for example, Turkey will leave
the North Atlantic Alliance and support the idea of a Eurasian Union.

In addition, Hillary Clinton has already stated unequivocally that
the U.S. administration would not support further advance of the
Armenian resolution. That is, the ruling forces of America will take
administrative effort to block such initiatives at the level of the
House of Representatives.

MINSK GROUP CO-CHAIR URGES INTERIM STATUS FOR NAGORNY KARABAKH

RIA Novosti
March 12, 2010
YEREVAN

Any solution to the Nagorny Karabakh conflict must ensure interim
status for the disputed region, France’s OSCE Minsk Group co-chair
said on Friday.

Speaking during the 73rd Rose Roth seminar of the NATO Parliamentary
Assembly in Yerevan, Bernard Fassier did not elaborate on what the
"interim status" meant.

Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister Shavarsh Kocharyan earlier suggested
that the international community should start with legitimizing the
current status of Karabakh and acknowledge that the region is no
longer controlled by Azerbaijan.

A long-standing dispute over Nagorny Karabakh, a breakaway region
inside Azerbaijan with a predominantly ethnic Armenian population,
has been a sticking point in relations between the two South Caucasus
states.

A fragile ceasefire has been in place in the region since a brutal war
between the two countries over the disputed enclave in early 1990s,
which claimed lives of more than 30,000 people on both sides. Nagorny
Karabakh has since then remained under Armenian control.

Baku has fiercely opposed any decision on Karabakh that could be
interpreted as giving the region independence from Azerbaijan.

Despite the mediators in the dispute – the United States, Russia and
France – reporting some important progress after the Azerbaijani and
Armenian leaders met in Munich late last year, tensions remain high
as both ex-Soviet Caucasus states continue to trade allegations of
ceasefire violations.

Fassier said the Minsk Group co-chairs held six meetings between the
two countries’ presidents in 2009, and three more meetings were held
at the initiative of the Russian president.

"The Madrid principles are on the table and the Minsk Group co-chairing
countries adhere to the principles which is demonstrated by the
Meindorf declaration and the statement of the heads of the Minsk
Group co-chair states in L"Aquila", the French mediator said, adding
it was a good time to activate negotiations on the issue.

He also said any decision taken by the mediators should ensure the
security of Karabakh and the return of internally displaced persons.

The OSCE Madrid principles, adopted in November 2007, envisage a
stage-by-stage resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict that
should start with the gradual liberation of parts of Azerbaijan
bordering Karabakh that were partly or fully occupied by Karabakh
Armenian forces during the 1991-94 war. In return, Karabakh should
retain a corridor to Armenia and be able to determine its final status
in a future referendum.

In January, Armenia and Azerbaijan agreed a preamble to an agreement
on Nagorny Karabakh, revising and updating the Madrid principles.

However, in late February, Azerbaijan renewed threats of military
action to retake the disputed region over a lack of progress at talks
with Armenia.