Author: Chalian Meline

CHIRAC POUR LA RECONNAISSANCE DU GENOCIDE ARMENIEN
par Damien Roustel

L’Humanite, France
2 octobre 2006

Armenie . À Erevan, le president francais a presente cette demarche
comme la condition de l’integration europeenne de la Turquie.

La visite d’Etat de Jacques Chirac en Armenie samedi et dimanche, la
première d’un president francais dans ce pays independant depuis 1991,
fera date pour les Armeniens. Le chef d’Etat francais a clairement
pris parti pour ses hôtes en conditionnant l’entree de la Turquie dans
l’Union europeenne a la reconnaissance du genocide armenien de 1915.

À la question "Faut-il que la Turquie reconnaisse le genocide armenien
pour entrer dans l’Union ? ", posee par un journaliste lors d’une
conference de presse, Jacques Chirac a repondu : " Honnetement, je
le crois ". "Tout pays se grandit en reconnaissant ses drames et ses
erreurs ", a-t-il ajoute, prenant l’exemple de l’Allemagne et de la
Shoah. " Quand de surcroît il s’agit de s’integrer dans un ensemble qui
revendique l’appartenance a une meme societe et la croyance en de memes
valeurs, je pense qu’effectivement la Turquie serait bien inspiree,
au regard de son histoire, de sa tradition profonde, de sa culture
qui est aussi une culture humaniste, d’en tirer les consequences ",
a-t-il poursuivi.

C’est la première fois que la France, le seul pays au monde a avoir
vote une loi reconnaissant le genocide armenien, etablit un lien
aussi direct entre le genocide armenien et la candidature turque.

L’Union europeenne n’a jamais voulu en faire une condition prealable.

Le gouvernement turc refuse le terme de " genocide " et conteste le
nombre des victimes massacres par les Ottomans entre 1915 et 1917.

Selon les Armeniens, près d’un million et demi des leurs aurait
ete tue.

Par ailleurs, Jacques Chirac a juge que l’amendement socialiste visant
a sanctionner la negation du genocide armenien n’etait pas utile dans
la mesure où la loi condamne deja la discrimination et les appels a
la haine ou a la violence raciale. Cet amendement doit etre examine
par l’Assemblee nationale le 12 octobre. Il a egalement evoque avec
son homologue armenien l’epineuse question du Haut-Karabakh, cette
enclave armenienne situee sur le territoire de l’Azerbaïdjan. Les deux
presidents ont renouvele leur confiance au groupe de Minsk (France,
Etats-Unis, Russie) pour trouver une solution.

–Boundary_(ID_1sM2M1DaFfGRlpUSbFPL5Q)- –

LA RECONNAISSANCE FRANCAISE DU GENOCIDE ARMENIEN: LES PRINCIPALES ETAPES

Agence France Presse
30 septembre 2006 samedi

La reconnaissance par la France du genocide armenien, depuis le debut
du processus en avril 1996 jusqu’a l’adoption d’une loi en ce sens
le 18 janvier 2001 par le Parlement, ne cesse de diviser la classe
politique au dela du clivage gauche droite.

Cette question sensible a connu une nouvelle etape en mai dernier avec
le debat a l’Assemblee nationale d’une proposition de loi socialiste
completant la loi de janvier 2001 par un volet penal.

Dans une atmosphère passionnee, le debat n’avait pu etre mene jusqu’a
son terme et la proposition soumise au vote des deputes.

Ce texte, qui sera examine de nouveau par les deputes le 12 octobre
prochain, suscite des reserves tant au sein de l’UMP que du PS,
au motif que le Parlement n’a pas a ecrire l’histoire, et n’a guère
l’approbation du gouvernement qui, en mai dernier, y voyait "un geste
inamical" envers la Turquie.

Mais a gauche comme a droite, de nombreux elus, sensibles aux
revendications de la communaute armenienne francaise, y sont
favorables.

– 24 avril 1996: Le PS fait part a la communaute armenienne de France
de "sa sympathie et de son soutien", a l’occasion du jour anniversaire
du "genocide des Armeniens".

– 22 avril 1998: Le ministre des Affaires etrangères Hubert Vedrine
affirme que la Turquie doit "aller beaucoup plus loin" sur la question
de l’extermination des Armeniens au debut du siècle.

"Il faut que ce travail soit fait", ajoute M. Vedrine rappelant qu’"une
partie importante de la population armenienne dans la Turquie d’alors
(…) a ete a l’epoque exterminee".

– 26 mai 1998: La commission des Affaires etrangères de l’Assemblee
nationale adopte une proposition de loi du groupe socialiste pour la
reconnaissance du "genocide armenien".

– 29 mai 1998: l’Assemblee nationale adopte, a l’unanimite, une
proposition de loi du groupe socialiste stipulant dans son article
unique : "La France reconnaît publiquement le genocide armenien
de 1915".

Le gouvernement socialiste de Lionel Jospin en a "pris acte".

– 10 mars 1999: Le gouvernement refuse d’inscrire cette proposition
de loi a l’ordre du jour du Senat, entendant ainsi "participer a la
reconciliation entre les peuples et les Etats de la region", allusion
a la Turquie et a l’Armenie.

– 22 fevrier 2000: Le Senat decide de ne pas debattre de la proposition
de loi, la chambre haute du Parlement estimant que "la Constitution
n’autorisait pas le Parlement a qualifier l’histoire".

– 24 avril 2000: Les autorites francaises expriment dans un communique
emanant du ministère des Affaires etrangères, "leur sympathie profonde
envers leurs compatriotes d’origine armenienne rassembles dans le
souvenir des evenements tragiques survenus il y a 85 ans".

– 8 novembre 2000: Le Senat reconnaît le genocide armenien de 1915.

– 18 janvier 2001: le Parlement adopte après un ultime vote unanime
de l’Assemblee nationale un texte sur le genocide armenien de 1915.

Celui-ci affirme que "la France reconnaît publiquement le genocide
armenien de 1915" sans designer explicitement les Turcs comme
responsables des massacres commis sous l’empire ottoman.

– 30 janvier 2001 : Le president de la Republique Jacques Chirac
promulgue la loi reconnaissant le genocide armenien.

– 18 mai 2006 : L’Assemblee nationale debat d’une proposition de loi
PS completant la loi du 29 janvier 2001 par un volet penal condamnant
la negation du genocide. Le texte n’est pas soumis au vote. Il sera
de nouveau examine par les deputes le 12 octobre.

–Boundary_(ID_rg3T3BUDomI/dYoXMHhmgA)–

IS BUSH A REVOLUTIONARY?
By Lee P. Ruddin

History News Network, WA
Oct 1 2006

Mr. Ruddin holds an LL.B; MRes (International Security) and a PgCert
(History: Imperialism and Culture).

Many detractors have berated President George W. Bush, condemning
him for jettisoning two centuries of custom. Lafayette History
Professor Arnold Offner was just one who asserted that Bush’s
new policy (the ‘Bush Doctrine’) was an extremely radical–indeed
revolutionary–departure from American practice. National Security
Tsar Stephen Hadley has even weighed in (though not intending to
disparage his chief) underlining the revolutionary ethos of his boss’s
doctrine. Across the pond too, commentators have drained their pen
cartridges accentuating the steroid-driven American exceptionalism
reigning over contemporary US foreign policy.

Undergirding such ‘knowledgeable ignorance’ lay in the cavalier
dismissal of ‘Dubya’ as brainless or as non-compos mentis as King
George III. Put simply, this apocalyptic tsunami of ink projects that
Bush is a Czarina Alexandra-like vacant vassal hijacked by a baleful
neo-conservative cabal-anguished by the worst case of Stockholm
syndrome-who are executing their revolutionary manifesto.

The magnetism of employing history to resolve foreign dilemmas
remains a subject of ongoing contestation. Ernest May has carried
out the most sustained exploration of the phenomenon. In Lessons of
the Past: The Use and Misuse of History in American Foreign Policy,
May effectively argues that to a large extent, America’s Cold War
strategy was supported by analogies to the appeasement policies of
the 1930s and the necessity of avoiding a repeat of history.

Inspired by the British-born Harvard don Niall Ferguson, I illumine the
telestorian’s (my word) affirmation, whereby "the terrorist attacks
of September 11 and the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq-in their
long-run historical context, suggest … that they represent less
of a break with the past than is commonly believed." Unlike former
Secretary of State Dean Acheson, I do not seek precedents to refute
any allegations of wrongdoing; rather I refute the revolutionary brand.

"The [9/11] terrorist attacks influenced Bush the way Pearl Harbour
affected Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) and the way the advance of
the Communists in Greece and Turkey after World War II affected Harry
Truman." So stated Fred Barnes, author of the recent dazzling book
entitled Rebel-in-Chief: Inside the Bold and Controversial Presidency
of George W. Bush. From FDR to Truman, a novel policy backing the
use of military force seeking to substitute tyranny was executed.

However, on national security, the executive editor of the Weekly
Standard professed that "Bush is indisputably Reagan’s successor.

Like Reagan, Bush is a moralist and an idealist" (on steroids)
vigorously tackling the gravest threat to US security in his respective
time.

However, is Reagan the most fitting suitor for Bush? By the time Reagan
became President, the US had been fighting World War III (Cold War)
for 33 years; by contrast, World War IV (as named by Norman Podhoretz)
started only after Bush entered the White House. "In this respect,"
Podhoretz states "it is not Reagan to whom Bush should be compared,
but Harry Truman." In 1947, at a time when countless commentators
pooh-poohed the Soviet menace, Truman believed it was an aggressive
totalitarian force, which was plunging the world into a disparate world
war. Of similar ilk, Bush understood that (Islamo) Bolshevism was "the
heir of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century." However,
such scholarly analogies can be rapidly dismissed when just simply
quoting the President. It would appear that Bush does not seem to be
concerned about his place in history. "History.

We won’t know," he told the journalist Bob Woodward in 2003. "We’ll all
be dead." The philosophy of John Buchan is apposite at this juncture:
"If the past to a man is nothing but a dead hand, then in common
honesty he must be an advocate of revolution."

Actually, the scaffolding of President Bush’s National Security
Strategy (NSS) was constructed by another president, President
Eisenhower, practically five decades previously. The liaison is
all too evident. Both Presidents announced their doctrine before
a joint session of congress. Together they stressed that Middle
Easterners could no longer remain on the sidelines-they had to
declare themselves in the contest between freedom and Bolshevism
(both conventional and Ferguson’s ‘Islamo’)–"to stand up and be
counted," and "you are either with us or against us." Furthermore,
both doctrines were borne by the catalysing events orchestrated by
quasi-Caliphs: Gamal Abdel Nasser and Osama Bin Laden.

In the wake of the (initial) astoundingly clear-cut victory in
Afghanistan, Bush, Cheney and Pentagon officials experienced an
indistinguishable rush of national power and corresponding illusion
of omnipotence that the McKinley administration had experienced
after the "splendid little war" against Spain. In 1899, the McKinley
administration set aside qualms regarding overseas expansion and
annexed the Philippines. In 2002, the Bush administration sidetracked
objections to invade Iraq. Niall Ferguson cites Mark Twain who
described McKinley as the man, "who had sent US troops to fight with
a disgraced musket under a polluted flag and suggested that the flag
in question should have the white stripes painted black and the stars
and stripes replaced by the skull and bones."

Despite the vast repertoire of historical continuity in US foreign
policy-both venerable and ominous-history does not always bequeath
laudable precedents. However, when overruled is this revolutionary? I
would concede that the fundamental departure of the Bush Doctrine
was not so much the theory as the practice. When Bush stated that he
was "prepared to fight for freedom in every corner of the world," he
actually meant it-bizarrely enough. This is conflicting with Woodrow
Wilson’s empty universal rhetoric. The 28th President was unwilling
to intervene in the Middle Eastern expanse to prevent the Armenian
genocide at the hand of the Ottoman Turks. Moreover, Bush’s 2002 State
of the Union address cast aside the 70 year-old American policy of
supporting stable but friendly dictatorships in the Arab world.

The 43rd President confirmed that, "for decades, free nations have
tolerated oppression in the Middle East for the sake of stability. In
practice, this approach has brought little stability and much
oppression. I have changed this policy." Readers must comprehend that
advancing national interests by overturning a deteriorating status
quo is not revolutionary-or nihil novi.

As Frederick Jackson Turner spoke upon Woodrow Wilson’s death,
"fate has dealt hardly with him, but time, the great restorer, and
let us believe, history, will do him justice." Conversely, history may
illuminate that the Iraq war is comparable to Germany’s annexation of
Alsace-Lorraine in 1871, as an event that set the world on a downward
trajectory. So far as the implementation of Bush’s strategy goes,
it is still, according to Podhoretz, "early days-roughly comparable
to 1952 in the history of the Truman Doctrine. As with the Truman
Doctrine then, the Bush Doctrine has thus far acted only in the first
few scenes" of the morality play on the global stage.

"George W. Bush’s presidency appears headed for colossal historical
disgrace." These were the opening words in Sean Wilentz’s article in
a recent edition of Rolling Stone. The Princeton historian further
questioned whether Bush "will be remembered as the very worst president
in all of American history." Well, there have been presidents-Harry
Truman was indeed one-who have left the Oval office in ostensible
ignominy, only to rebound in the estimates of later academics. Let
us trust Bush is next in line.

NAASR CELEBRATES 50TH ANNIVERSARY

Belmont Citizen-Herald, MA
Sept 28 2006

The National Association for Armenian Studies and Research will host a
gala anniversary banquet, "NAASR Celebrates 50!" on Saturday evening,
Sept. 30, at the Royal Sonesta Hotel in Cambridge.

The evening will begin at 5:30 with a reception and dinner, with a
keynote address by Dr. Gregory H. Adamian, chancellor and president
emeritus of Bentley College in Waltham, remarks by Paul R. Ignatius,
former secretary of the Navy and assistant secretary of defense,
renowned actress and author Nora Armani, a retrospective video, and
will conclude with music and dancing with the Leon Janikian Ensemble.

The banquet is open to NAASR members and non-members alike.

Adamian is a Charter and Life Member of NAASR and a member of
its Board of Directors since 1956. During more than two decades
as president of Bentley College, the school experienced dramatic
academic, financial and physical growth. His service to the Armenian
community was recognized by Karekin I, Catholicos of All Armenians,
when Adamian was awarded the St. Sahag and St. Mesrob medal in 1998.

He is also the recipient of an Honorary Doctor of Law degree from
Boston University.

The NAASR celebratory events of Sept. 30 will commence with a morning
symposium at the Royal Sonesta on "Armenian-Turkish Dialogue and the
Direction of Armenian Studies." The symposium will take place from
9 a.m. until 1 p.m., and is open to the public at no charge.

The symposium will feature Dr. Taner AkíË of the University of
Minnesota, Rachel Goshgarian, Ph.D. candidate at Harvard University,
Dr. Richard G. Hovannisian of the University of California, Los
Angeles, Dr. Gerard J. Libaridian of the University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, and Dr. Christina Maranci of the University of Wisconsin,
Milwaukee. Dr. Kevork Bardakjian of the University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor, will serve as panel respondent. Following the presentations of
the panelists, there will be a discussion and question-and-answer
period. Marc A. Mamigonian, NAASR’s director of programs and
publications, will serve as moderator and NAASR Chairman Emeritus
Manoog S. Young will be the honorary chairman of the symposium.

For more information about the event, call 617-489-1610, e-mail
[email protected], or write to NAASR, 395 Concord Ave., Belmont, MA 02478.

e/view.bg?articleid=583318

–Boundary_(ID_6p5IuU5 kH3xvzuFxchy+NQ)–

NEW EFFORTS TO FIND KARABAKH MISSING
By Ashot Beglarian in Stepanakert

Institute for War and Peace Reporting, UK
Sept 28 2006

Council of Europe joins in search for those who disappeared during
the Karabakh war.

Efforts to establish the fate of thousands of people still listed as
missing-in-action in the 1991-4 Nagorny Karabakh conflict have been
given a much-needed boost.

The new impetus came from a visit to the region last week by Dutch
senator Leo Platvoet, rapporteur for the Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe, or PACE, on the issue. He visited Nagorny Karabakh
itself as well as Yerevan and Baku and Tbilisi, where he is engaged
in similar work with regard to the Abkhazia conflict.

In Karabakh, Platvoet said he was planning to present a report on
missing-in-action at the winter session of PACE, "In writing the
report we will focus our attention only on the humanitarian aspect
of the problem."

He met officials from the de facto Karabakh government, who promised
support. "We hold the opinion that some issues, including the issue
of missing-in-action can be resolved before the signing of a peace
agreement," said deputy foreign minister Masis Mailian.

Platvoet was appointed to his position by the parliamentary assembly
last December. Collaboration on the issue has decreased in the last
few years, although the tri-partite International Working Group –
led by Bernhard Clasen of Germany, Russia’s Svetlana Gannushkina and
Paata Zakareishvili of Georgia – continues to investigate the problem.

Albert Voskanian, who is coordinator in Karabakh of the International
Working Group, welcomed the parliamentary assembly’s new-found interest
in the issue.

"Work on this problem at such a high level can extend the possibilities
of looking for missing- in-action, systematise the efforts of people
who work on this problem to improve the technology of identification
of remains that have been found," said Voskanian.

"Moreover PACE can compel the parties to cooperate on this humanitarian
issue and develop concrete mechanisms for all sides in the conflict
to work together."

Several thousand people are still listed as missing, more than 12
years after the ceasefire that halted the Nagorny Karabakh war in
1994. Many of them are believed to be dead and most of the work on
the issue concentrates on checking lists, searching for burial sites
and working on identifying remains.

Platvoet told journalists he was hopeful that the issue could be
de-politicised and methods elaborated by the Red Cross to search
lists and check the remains of the dead could be deployed successfully.

However, many relatives of those who have disappeared complain that
very little has actually been done to trace their missing loved ones.

"What can we expect from them?" said 80-year-old Garasim, whose son
went missing 14 years ago during the war. "Nothing. How many years
have I been crossing the thresholds of all possible offices and
without result."

Vera Grigorian, head of the Union of Relatives of Warriors Missing
in Action in the Nagorny Karabakh Republic, says that journalists
should be more active in covering the problem.

"We have to use all levers and any possibilities to discover the fates
of people, to find and extract our compatriots from captivity," she
said. "But unfortunately I can feel there is an information vacuum
in this sphere."

There are recurring reports on both sides of missing soldiers
apparently still being held in captivity but these are almost never
confirmed as true.

"The search for missing-in-action is an exclusively humanitarian,
complex and delicate problem," said Karen Ohanjanian of the human
rights organisation Helsinki Initiative-92. "It is very important to
check all rumours very scrupulously and without emotion, we must not
agitate the wounded souls of the relatives of the missing."

Voskanian says that all Azerbaijani prisoners-of-war were returned
home in the two years that followed the 1994 ceasefire. "Personally,
in collaboration with the Azerbaijani state commission of that time,
several hundred captives, dozens of corpses and remains were exchanged
or handed over to the Azerbaijani side."

The Red Cross has lists of the disappeared, numbering 4,132 people.

Karabakh Armenians argue that many of the latter were Azerbaijani
deserters or that they are now migrants in Russia.

In July this year, an international conference was held in Karabakh
to come up with new initiatives on locating the missing, whether
living or dead. Afterwards, Karen Ohanjanian, one of the organisers,
said, "The parliaments of the region ought to adopt legislation on
missing-in-action to force the state to begin serious work on solving
this problem."

Arzu Abdullayeva, coordinator of the Helsinki Citizens Assembly in
Azerbaijan, said, "We have developed a good working relationship
with Mr Platvoet, whom we met in Holland. He is interested in a
whole range of issues in the sphere of missing-in-action and that is
encouraging. On the other hand, we are working to combine the efforts
of the relatives of the missing so they can help people from both
sides. We have to understand both the positions and the desires of
each other to come to an agreement that suits both sides."

Ashot Beglarian is a freelance journalist and IWPR contributor in
Stepanakert, Nagorny Karabakh.

ITAR-TASS News Agency, Russia
September 27, 2006 Wednesday

Unsettled social, political conflicts pose terror threat -official

by Vladimir Zainetdinov, Tigran Liloyan

The threat of new large-scale terrorist attacks will exist till
social and political conflicts remain unsettled, the head of the CIS
anti-terror center, Boris Melnikov, said in his opening remarks at a
meeting of the anti-terror departments of the CIS specials services.

The meeting is held within the framework of the Atom-Anti-terror-2006
exercise.

Servicemen will drill their attacks on terrorists at nuclear power
plants.

“Such exercises at nuclear power facilities will be held in the CIS
for the first time,” Melnikov said.

The military units of the Armenian Armed Force from the CSTO’s
collective rapid deployment forces will master their skills in such
an exercise for the first time.

Special services of Azerbaijan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan will not
take part.

Armenia invited observers from special services of the G8, the
anti-terror department of the OSCE secretariat, UN Security Council
counter-terrorism committee, the UN office on Drugs and Crime and
regional anti-terror structure of the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization.

The United States, Greece, France, China and the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe have confirmed their
participation.

The anti-terror exercise in the CIS has been held for the sixth time.
Last time Kazakhstan’s Aktau on the Caspian Sea hosted the exercise.

ITAR-TASS News Agency, Russia
September 28, 2006 Thursday

CIS security services hold antiterror exercises in Armenia

by Vladimir Zainetdinov, Tigran Liloyan

Security services of the CIS and Collective Security Treaty
Organisation (CSTO) countries began on Thursday an active phase of
operative-strategic command and staff exercises Atom –
Antiterrror-2006 at the Armyanskaya nuclear power plant on Thursday.

The exercises are the sixth over six years of existence of the CIS
Antioterrorist Centre (ATC).

ATC chief Colonel-General Boris Mylnikov told ITAR-TASS that Atom –
Antiterror-2006 operative-strategic exercises were a drill of
planning and conducting the search to reveal and destroy sabotage
groups that infiltrated the territory of Armenia and seized a nuclear
power plant in the settlement of Metsamor located 40 kilometres from
the capital Yerevan.

Workers of the Armenian National Security Service and the Russian
Federal Security Service’s Special Task Centre will act as a
16-member terrorist group that secretly moves in Armenia. They are
searched for in different parts of the country, but still manage to
infiltrate the grounds of the nuclear power plant and seize a train
that moves its personnel.

Personnel are not just hostages to the terrorists, who want to force
the plant’s workers to act to criminal orders.

“These are the first exercises of this scale of anti-terrorist units
of CIS security services that are being held jointly with the allied
headquarters of the CSTO and Armenian army units that are a part of
the CSTO Collective Rapid Deployment Forces,” Mylnikov said.

The Armenian National Security Service and antiterrorist units of the
FSB Special Task Centre will play a main role in the exercises. When
“terrorists” are spotted, the Armenian army’s motorised infantry
battalion of the Collective Rapid Deployment Forces in the
Trans-Caucasus and two companies of special forces will go into
action. The exercises will also involve Mi-8 helicopter gunships and
Su-25 assault planes, Mylnikov said.

Special task units of the Armenian National Security Service and the
Russian Federal Security Service’s crack groups Vympel will free the
imaginary hostages.

Security services of the CIS countries except for Azerbaijan,
Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan take part in the exercises.

"CAN YOU WIN?"

Haykakan Zhamanak, Yerevan, in Armenian
23 Sep 06

Armenian Paper Reports Rift Within Ruling Coalition Over Succession

Reliable sources have said that Armenian President Robert Kocharyan
has advised senior officials to compete ahead of the 2008 presidential
election. Kocharyan’s idea is that all officials who aspire to become
Armenia’s next president should launch an election campaign in order
to become the candidate of the authorities by early 2008 and in order
to have the most chances to win the election. Many officials were
inspired on hearing this, but some were angry.

Kocharyan is not going to make [Defence Minister] Serzh Sarkisyan
his direct successor. He suggests that Sarkisyan compete with other
presidential contenders on equal terms. This means that after all
Kocharyan may opt for another candidate. But the most important
result is that the Republican Party of Armenia [RPA] is angry with
Kocharyan’s ideas on a transitional candidate. According to the RPA,
Robert Kocharyan would not be nominated as a presidential candidate
in 1998 and 2003 if they were to apply the same logic back then. But
talks held behind closed doors have failed to change the formula
suggested by Kocharyan.

WEST INTERESTED IN AZERBAIJANI OIL BUT NOT ITS TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY

PanARMENIAN.Net
25.09.2006 14:37 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Russia will not make any changes in its stand on
the Karabakh issue, Russian political scientist Grigory Trofimchuk
said. According to him, if the NKR authorities decide to hold a
referendum on independence, this will be a decision beyond the sphere
of Russia’s influence. "No one will ask Russia whether to hold the
referendum or not. If determined, it will be conducted on the fixed
date and Russia will support it. Unlike the Transnistrian or Abkhazian
issues, Russia will not engage into a political confrontation and
its line on Karabakh has undergone no changes," the Russian political
scientist said.

Trofimchuk considers that the situation with Nagorno Karabakh differs
from the situation in Transnistria and South Ossetia. "In case with
Karabakh Russia will support the position of the EU and U.S. Azerbaijan
will anyway come off the loser, since the West is interested in its
oil but not its territorial integrity," he said, reported Day.az.

UNICEF, GOVERNMENT OF ARMENIA PROMOTE EDUCATION FOR MINORITY CHILDREN

Panorama.am
17:25 01/09/06

UNICEF and the Ministry of Education & Sciences of Armenia joined
their efforts Friday in promoting education for ethnic minority groups,
living in Armenia.

"The right to quality basic education is fundamental right of all
children in all communities," UNICEF Representative, Sheldon Yett
said in a ceremony marking the start of a new academic year in a
Kurdish-populated community of Alagyaz, 50km north of Armenia’s
capital. "Investing in the education of all its citizens is one of
the best investments a country can make. It is the lever with which
children can lift themselves out of poverty and participate fully in
their communities."

The UNICEF Representative noted that the Ministry of Education &
Sciences has promoted basic education for minority groups through
the distribution of textbooks in minority languages and through the
training of teachers in minority schools.

The event organized jointly with the Ministry of Education & Sciences
is part of the "Welcome, School!"

project under which UNICEF provided school and recreation supplies
to schools in Yezidi and Kurdish communities of Aragatsotn region.

A UNICEF-commissioned survey on the status of education among ethnic
minority groups of Armenia showed that children from vulnerable
communities, including those from ethnic minority groups, face serious
problems related to education. The school attendance rates for these
children are significantly lower than the national average with a
higher level of drop out after grade 8.

"In many instances, this situation is linked to attitudes and beliefs
that prevail in those communities," Yett said, adding that "parents
sometimes prefer that their child works to help earn family income
rather than allow the child to stay in the classroom." Girls are
particularly vulnerable in that situation. The survey revealed that
the majority of those children who do not continue studies after the
grade 8 are girls.

Traditional attitude held by the minority groups towards education is,
however, not the only barrier.

UNICEF and the Government of Armenia understand that for parents to
be willing to send their children to school, the latter must have
proper conditions and well-trained teaching staff, Yett said.

"Unfortunately, many schools today lack basic supplies and equipment
as well as professional teachers. Many children, particularly those
in rural areas, have to share textbooks which also are often outdated
and worn out."

The UNICEF Representative emphasized that "getting all children into
school and giving them appropriate quality education today will pay
enormous dividends for next generation."

Jointly with the Armenian Government UNICEF is trying to address
these problems through the provision of school supplies in vulnerable
communities, training teachers, promoting interactive teaching methods
at schools and actively participating in education and child welfare
reform.

"The Government of Armenia has always paid special attention to the
needs of ethnic minority groups. With support from international
organizations such as UNICEF the Ministry of Education & Sciences
has been trying to find solutions to education problems of minority
children. We have been able to meet some of our commitments
already this year by funding the reconstruction of schools in 3
minority-populated communities," Deputy Minister of Education &
Sciences Bagrat Yesayan noted, adding that "the support to minority
communities will continue."

By promoting education and encouraging every child to attend school,
UNICEF is trying to accelerate progress towards the achievement of
the Millennium Development Goals, that Armenia together with the rest
of international community pledged to meet by 2015.

UNICEF established its presence in Armenia in 1994.

UNICEF is mandated by the United Nations General Assembly to advocate
for the protection of children’s rights, to help meet their basic
needs and to expand their opportunities to meet their full potential.