Author: Chalian Meline

Agence France Presse — English
December 12, 2004 Sunday 11:23 AM GMT
German who died in Equatorial Guinea was tortured: report
BERLIN Dec 12
A German who died in March in Equatorial Guinea’s notorious Black
Beach prison, where he was held on suspicion of involvement in a coup
plot, had been tortured, a South African who was in jail with him
said in an interview published in the Frankfurter Rundschau daily.
Officials in Equatorial Guinea said on March 18 that Gerhard Eugen
Merz, a logistics expert who worked for a German air freight company
in the Equatorial Guinea capital Malabo, had died of cerebral malaria
just over a week after being arrested along with 14 other suspected
putsch plotters.
But one of Merz’s co-accused, South African Mark Schmidt, told the
Frankfurter Rundschau in a report published on Saturday that the
German had been “beaten and burned on the soles of his feet” in the
few days he was in jail.
According to the paper, Merz’s body was repatriated to Germany in
June and the prosecutor’s office in Frankfurt had ordered a
post-mortem to be carried out to determine the cause of death.
But the prosecutor’s office has refused to say if the post-mortem
showed that Merz had been tortured, and even months after the
autopsy, has said its investigations are still ongoing, said the
paper.
“Incredible,” was Schmidt’s reaction in the paper.
“Didn’t they see the burn marks on Gerhard’s feet? The scrapes on the
tibia and the large scar on his chest?” he asked.
Schmidt dismissed reports that Merz had died of malaria.
“I’ve had malaria four times. The symptoms are completely different,”
he said.
Schmidt was released from prison last week after spending nine months
behind bars.
German-born Schmidt was one of three South Africans who were
acquitted late last month of plotting to oust President Teodoro
Obiang Nguema of Equatorial Guinea. Five South Africans and six
Armenians were given stiff jail sentences, as were an Equatorial
Guinean opposition leader and members of his government-in-exile.
During his time in jail, Schmidt said that he and his co-detainees
“all became religious and prayed four times a day.
“Otherwise, we would not have been able to stand the beatings, the
disease,” he told the paper.

PanArmenian News
Dec 11 2004
US NEEDS ARMENIA JUST WITHIN THESE BORDERS – AS A WINNER COUNTRY,
HAYKAKAN ZHAMANAK NEWSPAPER CONSIDERS
11.12.2004 15:54
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ “The US does not need at all for Armenia and
Nagorno Karabakh surrender security belt territories to Azerbaijan.
The US needs Armenia just within these borders and this status as a
winner country,” an anonymous influential representative of the
Armenian opposition told Haykakan Zhamanak newspaper. The
international activation around the Karabakh issue lately aims at
putting pressure on the Armenian authorities to change the
geo-political orientation of the country, he is sure.

Armenian leader urges Central Bank not to oppose “global change”
Mediamax news agency
10 Dec 04
YEREVAN
Armenian President Robert Kocharyan has called on the Central Bank to
act “decisively and quickly” to prevent speculation in Armenia’s
financial market caused by fluctuations in the rate of the dollar
against the national currency.
Robert Kocharyan said this at a meeting with members of the Central
Bank’s council today, Mediamax reports.
The head of state pointed to an “extremely important stage in the work
of Armenia’s Central Bank” because the world’s financial markets are
undergoing a “global change” that could not but affect the Armenian
economy.
Robert Kocharyan said it is important for the Central Bank and the
Armenian government to adapt their policies and actions to world
processes instead of trying to oppose them “because in that case, we
will only lose”. The Armenian president said “the right and flexible
policy will even enable us to win”.
“The Central Bank is the body immediately responsible for the
country’s financial and credit policy, and a lot depends on you,” the
Armenian president said.

The business of supporting Yushchenko
The Irish Times
December 8, 2004
UKRAINE: If anyone was likely to raise the hackles of the ex-KGB
man in the Kremlin, it was the burly former shipyard worker with the
walrus moustache and taste for revolution, writes Dan McLaughlin
When Lech Walesa clambered onstage alongside Viktor Yushchenko in
Kiev, he conjured both the spirit of Poland’s anti-Soviet Solidarity
movement and the centuries-old ties linking Ukraine to its Western
neighbour. Mr Walesa’s political star has long-since waned in Poland,
but he was greeted as a hero by thousands of Ukrainians for whom
he still embodies a nation’s escape from the grip of Moscow and the
heady start of its journey into the European Union and NATO.
As President Vladimir Putin’s aides in the Kremlin muttered darkly
about Western meddling in Russia’s “sphere of influence”, the
high-profile role played by Polish politicians in Ukraine was a
reminder of the country’s schizophrenic past and present.
While the Russian language and Orthodox Church prevail in industrial
south-east Ukraine, where Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich is
strongest, the largely agricultural west of the country has much
stronger links with Poland and is dominated by the Ukrainian language
and Catholicism.
Poland ruled this region until the second World War and, along with
Lithuania, controlled most of present-day Ukraine until the 17th
century, when tsarist Russia took over.
It has irked Moscow greatly that the two Baltic neighbours – both
former Soviet satellites and new EU members – have taken key roles
in talks to end the Ukrainian crisis.
Polish President Alexander Kwasniewski and his Lithuanian counterpart,
Mr Valdas Adamkus, have been ever-present at negotiations in Kiev,
with Warsaw particularly keen to become the middle man between Brussels
and the old Soviet Union.
While Russia still calls the likes of Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova and
Armenia its “near-abroad”, the EU has made its interest in them plain
by declaring them part of its own “common neighbourhood”.
After Georgia slipped Moscow’s leash last year in the so-called rose
revolution, which brought a young, West-leaning leader to power, the
“loss” of Ukraine would be a bitter blow to Mr Putin, who presents
himself as a man capable of restoring global prestige to a fallen
superpower.
He has already been humiliated by having to withdraw the
congratulations he sent to Mr Yanukovich on his “victory”, and is
seen as having badly overplayed his hand by twice visiting Ukraine
to back his favoured candidate before the vote.
“That was an unprecedented move,” said Mr Kwasniewski. “It wouldn’t
have carried any risk if the result had been clear, but in the face
of deep divisions such as those in Ukraine there should have been
greater restraint.”
Poland’s press and public have strongly backed Mr Kwasniewski’s
efforts in Ukraine, inspired equally by memories of Solidarity’s
success and the chance to give Moscow a bloody nose while enjoying
EU and US protection.
“This is a huge defeat which the Kremlin has brought upon itself,”
wrote Poland’s influential Gazeta Wyborcza newspaper after the election
results were annulled.
“There’s no stopping freedom,” the newspaper proclaimed, amid something
of a pro-Yushchenko frenzy that saw it giving away copies with free
orange ribbons, the emblem of Ukraine’s opposition movement.
Historically torn apart and parcelled out by Germany and Russia,
Poland’s only worry now lies to the east, where pro-Kremlin Belarus and
Ukraine have offered no real buffer from Russia’s perceived antipathy
since the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991.
“We have the feeling of sharing a common destiny with Ukrainians,”
said former Polish defence minister Mr Bronislaw Komorowski. “Our
past experiences show that we have every reason to fear Moscow.”
But that fear would diminish significantly should Ukraine become, as
appears possible should Mr Yushchenko win the St Stephen’s Day election
re-run, a stable democracy with a strong civil society and growing
economy boosted by Western investment. Ukraine’s 50 million-strong
consumer market would be hugely attractive to Polish business, as
would the opportunity for increased leverage in talks with Russia on
vital gas and oil imports that arrive through Ukraine’s pipelines.
A Westward shift in Ukraine would also benefit the economies of
its other EU neighbours, Hungary and Slovakia, provided it wasn’t
accompanied by violence that prompted a surge in asylum-seekers at
unprepared border crossings.
In most former Eastern Bloc states, a defeat for the Kremlin and its
allies is still often hailed as an automatic triumph for the nation.
A Yushchenko victory, therefore, would be welcomed throughout the
region, except by Moscow-backed regimes like those in Belarus and
Moldova, upon whom pressure would undoubtedly increase.
For men like Mr Walesa, addressing the orange-clad masses in Kiev,
the final battles of the Cold War are only now being decided.
“Twenty-four years ago, I was in the same situation as you are now,”
he told the cheering crowd. “I opposed the Soviet Union and I opposed
communism, and I came out victorious. Now Ukraine has a chance, too.”

Wiesel Urges Education To Combat Fanaticism
By NATALIE L. SHERMAN, Contributing Writer
Harvard Crimson, MA
Dec 7 2004
CRIMSON/ PHILIP A. ERNST
Nobel Peace Prize winner and Boston University professor Elie Wiesel
speaks at Memorial Church yesterday evening.
Article Options
Email this article to a friend
Send a letter to the editor
Print this article
Elie Wiesel, who won the 1986 Nobel Peace Prize for his writings on
the Holocaust, spoke last night about the need to combat religious
fanaticism through education to a packed crowd in Memorial Church.
“The threat to the future of the world has a name and it’s
fanaticism,” said Wiesel, who is the Mellon Professor in the
Humanities at Boston University.
In his introductory remarks, University President Lawrence H. Summers
said that it was “high time” that Wiesel spoke to the entire Harvard
community and praised the author’s writings, which Summers said help
individuals “find the courage to stand up for what is right
everywhere.”
Wiesel is the author of almost three dozen books. His first, Night,
was published in English in 1960 and is a fictional story of a young
boy suffering in a concentration camp. He has also written two
memoirs, All Rivers Run to the Sea and And the Sea is Never Full.
Wiesel condemned the rise of religious fanaticism, and said he was an
advcate of non-violence. The education of potential radicals, he
said, is the best way to fight this threat.
But in his opening remarks, Wiesel also questioned the degree to
which education alone could fight indifference.
He noted that some of his darkest days following World War Two, when
he was imprisoned in Buchenwald and Auschwitz, had come when he
learned that the majority of killers possessed college degrees.
“Wasn’t culture meant to be a shield?” he asked. “What is culture,
what is civilization? It’s meant to be a limit.”
Opting for a conversational instead of a lecture format, Wiesel only
spoke for about 10 minutes before fielding a range of questions from
the audience.
Many of the questions asked concerned current events, like the crises
in Darfur and Chechnya.
But Wiesel cautioned the audience against using controversial terms
like genocide, Holocaust or anti-Semitic lightly.
“I believe in words and not to use them just like that,” he said. “If
it’s genocide the whole world has to intervene.”
Indeed, while responding to questions about genocides in Sudan,
Armenia and Chechnya, Wiesel shied away from the term, preferring to
call it “mass murder.”
The question and answer session was cut short due to time
constraints, but no one raised questions about either the
Israel-Palestine conflict or the American occupation of Iraq.
Wiesel was questioned, however, about his ability to maintain his
faith.
“God and I have our problems,” he siad. “In Night I said some harsh
things, but I never divorced God. I was ready to be an orphan…but
not a divorce.”
Wiesel also said that he tried to include at least one element of
hope in all his writings.
When asked how the lessons of the Holocaust would be maintained in
the face of time, Wiesel said that he believed his role was “to be a
witness, not a judge, and he who listens to a witness becomes a
witness.”
After the almost 90-minute talk, Bernard Steinberg, the executive
director of Harvard Hillel, which sponsored the event, called Weisel
“one of the great moral voices of his generation.”
“He is…a man profoundly grounded in the Jewish tradition who is
interested in the well-being of the world as a whole,” he said.
President of Hillel Anna M. Solomon-Schwartz ’06 said she had been
inspired by the author’s remarks.
“I think his message of passion and political action is the most
important lesson we can learn from him,” she said.

AzerTag, Azerbaijan
Dec 3 2004
PRESIDENT OF AZERBAIJAN ILHAM ALIYEV RECEIVES DIRECTOR OF CENTER FOR
HIGH DEFENSE STUDIES (CASD) PIETRO ERCOLE AGO
[December 03, 2004, 21:39:57]
President of the Azerbaijan Republic Ilham Aliyev has received at the
Presidential Palace the director of the Center for High Defense
Studies (CASD) of the Republic of Italy, ambassador Pietro Ercole
Ago, December 3.
Warmly having welcomed the visitor, the Head of State has noted that
is pleased to see again him in Azerbaijan.
Having expressed to President Ilham Aliyev deep gratitude for warm
reception, the visitor has noted that the purpose of his visit
consists in carrying out in the country of seminars, and various
discussions connected to local conflicts. Mr. Pietro Ercole Ago has
emphasized that as the head of Ago Group of Committee of Ministers of
the Council of Europe directly watches process of the negotiations
carried out in the field of settlement of the Armenia-Azerbaijan,
Nagorny Karabakh conflict, and wishes quick peace settlement of the
said problem.
Then, informing the President of Azerbaijan about activity of
structure supervised by him, he informed that the Center being a
higher educational institution of the Armed Forces of Italy is
engaged in preparation of the local personnel in the field of policy
in military sphere. The Center carries out worldwide together with
the international organizations of conference, seminars, on these
actions are discussed ways of settlement of local conflicts. In this
context, the major task, Mr. Ago said, is settlement of one of the
heaviest for Southern Caucasus problems – the Armenia-Azerbaijan,
Nagorny Karabakh conflict. Mr. Ago has noted that the Center
supervised by him aims at studying the questions connected to the
settlement of the mentioned conflict, and wishes to promote process
of settlement.
The Head of Azerbaijan State has regarded carrying out of any
discussions, seminars directed on the resolution to conflicts, as a
positive fact. President Ilham Aliyev has recollected the meetings,
which have been carried out with Pietro Ercole Ago when he was the
head of group. Informing the visitor in connection with settlement of
the Armenia-Azerbaijan, Nagorny Karabakh conflict, President of
Azerbaijan has touched the position of Azerbaijan and has once again
emphasized, that due to carried out successful internal and foreign
policy the authority of Azerbaijan has increased, its position has
become stronger. The efforts directed on the resolution of conflict
by negotiations within the framework of norms and principles of
international law, territorial integrity of Azerbaijan also continue.
Having noted that alternatives to this are not present, President
Ilham Aliyev has stated that only destructive position of Armenia
impedes settlement of the conflict.
Pietro Ercole Ago has expressed to the President of Azerbaijan
gratitude for a resolute and concrete statement of the position and
has assured him that the resolution of conflict would constantly be
in the center of attention of the structure supervised by him.
Head of the foreign relations department of President Administration
Novruz Mammadov, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of
Italy to Azerbaijan Margarita Kosta attended the reception.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

La Policía investiga a una doctora que denunció por acoso a los ginecólogos del Vall d’Hebron agredidos
El Mundo, España
Jueves, 25 de Noviembre de 2004
BARCELONA.- La Unidad de Drogas y Crimen Organizado (UDYCO) de la
Policía investiga el entorno de una doctora que en 2002 presentó
una demanda por acoso moral en el trabajo o ‘mobbing’ contra los
ginecólogos Ángel Martínez de la Riba y Luis Cabero para tratar de
encontrar un vínculo entre las agresiones de que han sido víctima
los dos médicos, según explicaron fuentes de la investigación.
Los investigadores trabajan con la hipótesis que las agresiones no
son casuales sino que existe un vínculo entre sí, por lo que centran
sus gestiones en una demanda por acoso moral presentada por la mujer,
que demandó a los médicos cuando trabajaba en el departamento de
Ginecología y Obstetricia del centro, del que Cabero y Martínez de
la Riba eran sus máximos responsables.
La mujer empezó a trabajar en la unidad de diagnóstico prenatal
en 1983 como médico adjunto, pero desde 1993 era la responsable de
dicha unidad. Según la demanda, fue víctima de acoso laboral, falta
de respeto y abuso de autoridad por parte de sus superiores y el 1
de julio de 2002 fue trasladada a otra unidad.
El cambio de destino, según consta en la demanda, fue acordado de
manera unilateral por Cabero, sin informar a la afectada previamente y
con el argumento de que se trataba de una reestructuración organizativa
de la unidad. Sin embargo, la demanda se saldó el 4 de noviembre de
2002 con la absolución de los dos ginecólogos.
Primera agresión
Martínez de la Riba recibió una primera agresión el 17 de julio de
2003, por parte de dos individuos, pero las investigaciones policiales
no llevaron a practicar ninguna detención.
Tras recibir varias llamadas telefónicas amenazantes, en la que le
invitaban a “cogerse la baja laboral” y ser víctima de una segunda
paliza, el 29 de octubre de 2003, Martínez de la Riba solicitó otro
destino y declaró ante la policía que los ataques eran fruto de un
proceso de acoso que sufría en el hospital, en referencia a la demanda
presentada por la mujer. En la actualidad, trabaja en otro hospital
del Institut Català de la Salut (ICS).
El mismo día de la segunda agresión a Martínez de la Riba, la Guardia
Urbana detuvo a un individuo extranjero, de 26 años, que dijo llamarse
Artur Jachatrian y que se encontraba en situación irregular en el
país. Desde entonces se encuentra ingresado en la cárcel Modelo de
Barcelona, después de que ha sido condenado a dos años de prisión
por un juez.
A raíz de esta segunda agresión, la UDYCO inició una investigación
para esclarecer los hechos, a pesar de que ya se había detenido a
una persona. Los investigadores, por orden del Juzgado de Instrucción
número 8 de Barcelona, ordenaron ‘pinchar’ los teléfonos de distintas
personas relacionadas con el detenido, entre ellas la novia del
detenido, Iryna H., así como los distintos teléfonos del doctor
Martínez de la Riba.
Ataque por encargo
Este detenido no ha delatado a nadie y, según se desprende de las
escuchas, la policía cree que se limitó a ejecutar un encargo de
otra persona.
Tras ser detenido, el sospechoso quiso ponerse en contacto con un
individuo armenio que reside en Madrid, Levon, y la policía identificó
a las personas íntimamente relacionadas con él, en concreto a Juan
Carlos A. y Emma M.D. En esta actuación intervino la Brigada de
Delincuencia Especializada de Madrid, según consta en el sumario
del caso.
Tras la segunda agresión al doctor Martínez de la Riba, Levon recibió
una llamada de Juan Carlos, en la que le dijo que había “mirado la
prensa” y “no había salido más, que las cosas iban muy bien”. Levon
también recibió una llamada del detenido desde la cárcel Modelo. El
armenio le pregunta “si se ha mirado la mano” y éste contesta que
“no hay nada”, en referencia a posibles manchas de sangre que le
podían haber quedado tras la agresión.
El 8 de noviembre, Levon y Juan Carlos viajaron juntos desde Madrid
hacia Barcelona en una furgoneta alquilada y desde la capital catalana
se desplazaron a Salou (Tarragona). En su visita a esta localidad,
los dos invididuos visitan el Clubhotel la Dorada S.L. y la empresa
Jardines Paraisol Servicios S.L., en cuyos órganos de administración
aparece María N.B.
Ésta última figura en la dirección de otras compañías, entre ellas
Quadis 2000 S.A., con sede en la calle Balmes de Barcelona y dedicada
a la compraventa y arrendamiento no financiero de bienes inmuebles.
La administradora de la empresa es la doctora que ahora está bajo
sospecha.
De la investigación judicial se desprendió que Juan Carlos A., su
esposa Emma M.D. y Levon estaban en contacto con estas compañías,
por lo que se considera “muy probable” que también estén relacionados
con las personas encargadas de estas empresas, entre ellas la doctora,
según consta en las diligencias judiciales.
Más detenciones
Asimismo, todo apuntó que Juan Carlos A. era el autor de estas llamadas
amenazantes y que su esposa “estaba al tanto de lo que sucedía”,
por lo que la Policía detuvo a la pareja, pero quedaron en libertad
tras declarar ante el juez.
Con esta investigación, la policía encontró “coincidencias entre la
subordinada del perjudicado y el agresor”, pero concluyó que “no hay
indicios sólidos de participación ni de inducción”.
Tras la nueva agresión sufrida por el ginecólogo Luis Cabero, la
policía investiga de nuevo el entorno de la doctora, cuya posible
implicación en los hechos “se ha reactivado”, según fuentes de la
investigación.
–Boundary_(ID_Q6HfSVXFeinpAnxdBLEyGQ)–

COMEBACK OF ARMENIAN EX-PRESIDENT TO BIG POLITICS CONDITIONED WITH PUBLIC
DEMAND, PAN REPRESENTATIVE SAYS
YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 27. ARMINFO. “The comeback of ex-president of Armenia
Levon Ter-Petrossian to big politics is conditioned by rising public
demand,” deputy chairman of the former ruling party, Pan Armenian
National Movement, Aram Manukian told reporters today.
In his words, Levon Ter-Petrossian is the most pragmatic and realistic
politician in Armenia and will return into scene when he thinks it
necessary. “Our party is connected to him with common program and
ideology. There are three important conditions in political life:
does the party want to come to power – our answer is positive; does
it have anything to suggest to people-of course, we have; it remains
to check our rating among the public or to what level does the public
see the necessity of our comeback. In this regard, the public demand
is not high enough,” Aram Manukian said. -A-

NATO official regrets Armenian MPs’ absence from Azerbaijan-hosted seminar
Space TV, Baku
26 Nov 04
NATO has assessed the Armenians’ failure to attend the Rose-Roth
seminar [of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly] as a move which is far
from impartiality and serves other purposes.
NATO Parliamentary Assembly Secretary-General Simon Lunn regrets the
Armenian MPs’ absence from the aforesaid seminar, which is currently
under way in Baku.
He said that the NATO Parliamentary Assembly and Azerbaijan had created
all the necessary conditions for the Armenians’ participation. Their
security was guaranteed as well. Despite this, the Armenians opted
not to come.

OSCE MINSK GROUP FAVORS DISPATCHING FACT-FINDING MISSION TO KARABAGH
ArmenPress
Nov 24 2004
YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 24, ARMENPRESS: Armenia’s Permanent Representative
at the UN, Armen Martirosian, rebuked Azerbaijan for taking a draft
resolution “on the situation on occupied territories” to the UN General
Assembly’s consideration on November 23, which he said was done under
the guise of “urgency”, but was not based on any substantiation and
any factually correct information.
He said the inclusion of a new agenda item on the matter did not
enjoy the support of an overwhelming majority of the Assembly and
was opposed by the Minsk Group Co-Chairs, who have been dealing
with the conflict in and around Nagorno-Karabakh for 12 years now,
who had unequivocally stated that the move did not meet the required
criteria of urgency and importance, and was counterproductive as well.
He said that, although presenting the draft under consideration
as a balanced document that did not interfere in the Minsk Group
mediation, Azerbaijan had attempted to give one-sided answers to
almost all the elements of the negotiation package, namely the
status of Nagorno-Karabakh, the issues of Azerbaijani refugees and
internally displaced persons and the territories themselves, trying
also to present its resolution from the perspective of human rights
and humanitarian law.
“A country which has violated these laws in the first place with
meticulously planned and systematically carried out massacres of
Armenians in its capital Baku, cities of Sumgait and Kirovabad (Ganja)
from 1988 to 1990 during peacetime, tries to cloak its own actions
by selectively applying international humanitarian law”, he said of
Azerbaijan. He said the draft resolution limits the application of
the return of refugees to “the area of conflict” and to ethnic Azeris
only, conveniently leaving out the rights of over 400,000 Armenians
under the same laws, particularly those from the immediate conflict
zone from Shahumain, Getashen and northern Martakert, whose homes
were fully confiscated and populated by ethnic Azeris.
Despite its continued calls for the observance of humanitarian
law, it was Azerbaijan that consistently hindered any kind of
international involvement or operation in Nagorno-Karabakh, thus
violating those laws, as well as relevant Security Council resolutions,
he continued. Azerbaijan also spotlighted Nagorno-Karabakh as being an
alleged safe haven for all possible sorts of ills, yet when authorities
there and Armenia invited international fact-finding teams to verify
the nature of those allegations, Azerbaijan had created all kinds of
obstacles, hindering the mission’s dispatch.
Martirosian said Azerbaijan also tried to formalize its totally
baseless allegations by misrepresenting the tenor of Security Council
resolutions and selective interpretation of international laws. It
avoided mentioning one major international legal principle in the
current resolution: the right of peoples to self-determination. That,
despite the fact that the exercise of that right was at the core of
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
Further, Azerbaijan “conveniently forgets” that the Council resolutions
mentioned “local Armenian forces” and called for unimpeded access
for international relief efforts, and restoration of economic,
transport and energy links to the region. Indeed, Azerbaijan had never
implemented those particular provisions of the Council resolutions
it so frequently mentioned.
With the resolution under consideration today, Azerbaijan tried
to dissect the so-called occupied territories from the package
of negotiations, he said. However, it failed to admit that those
territories had come under the control of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians
as a result of the war unleashed by Azerbaijan in an attempt
to stifle the peaceful drive of the people of that region for
self-determination. Given the military suppression in the region in
the very recent past and the war mongering rhetoric of the Azerbaijani
leadership, the issue of those territories could not be resolved
unless there was a resolution on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh,
and security guarantees were provided.
He said that Nagorno-Karabakh had never been a part of an independent
Azerbaijan. The people of Nagorno-Karabakh had proven their right to
live freely and securely on their own territory both legally — through
a referendum conducted in 1991 — and by defending that right in a war
unleashed against them by Azerbaijan. While peace should be achieved
first and foremost between Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan
was not interested in the peaceful resolution of the conflict. It
had rejected or walked out on every single peace proposal made by
the Minsk Group. The present motion aimed at further torpedoing those
ongoing negotiations and in diverting the international community’s
efforts into parallel processes, which would allow it to maneuver
between them without committing to a final settlement of the conflict.
After introducing the relevant draft resolution Azerbaijan’s
foreign affairs minister Elmar Mamedyarov said still 11 years
ago the Assembly had considered the issue of the occupation of
the territories of his country, and had expressed support for the
efforts of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE)-led Minsk Group (Co-Chaired by France, United States and the
Russian Federation), aimed at settling the conflict in accordance
with the norms and principles of international law. Since then,
the OSCE-led negotiations had yielded both successes and failures,
and a host of Security Council resolutions adopted in response to the
occupation of Azerbaijan’s territories remained the principle basis
for settlement of the conflict with Armenia.
He said the occupation of a significant part of Azerbaijan’s
territories and the resultant heavy humanitarian burden had obviously
made Azerbaijan the country most interested in bringing about an
effective peace as soon as possible. Azerbaijan’s consistent adherence
to a ceasefire over the past decade had demonstrated that it preferred
peaceful settlement of the conflict for the benefit of the entire
region, he said.
Susan Moore of the United States, speaking on behalf of the co-Chairs
of the OSCE’s Minsk Group (United States, France and the Russian
Federation), said the issue before the Assembly was one in which
the OSCE and the Minsk Group had been actively involved in, with a
view to finding a lasting solution to the situation prevailing in
the occupied territories of Azerbaijan. She said the Minsk process
had already produced positive results. It had made proposals to the
parties and was now awaiting a response to those proposals before
proceeding to the next stage.
In that light, she welcomed the efforts of the international community,
through the Assembly, noting that any actions taken by that body
and others were helpful and, therefore, welcome. Stressing that no
efforts should be spared in the search for a peaceful resolution of
the problem, she said serious consideration should be given to the
dispatching of a fact-finding mission, and urged the parties to take
necessary steps to facilitate the OSCE’s efforts.
The Assembly was then informed that action on the draft resolution
on the situation in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan would be
taken at a later date.