Author: Ekmekjian Janet

ARMENIA’S OMBUDSMAN PRESENTS STATISTICAL DATA ON ACTIVITIES OF HER
OFFICE
YEREVAN, JULY 6. ARMINFO. Ombudsman of the Republic of Armenia
presented Wednesday the statistical data of the activities of her
office for 6 months of the current year.
ARMINFO was informed in the department on information and public
relations of the administration of the human rights campaigner, over
1,450 complaints were addressed to Larisa Alaverdian, out of which 849
– in written form.
110 of the written complaints concerned the police, 103 – ministry of
labour and social affairs, 95 – courts, 73 – municipality of Yerevan,
65 – local self-government bodies, 55 – prosecutor’s office, 46 –
ministry of justice, 44 – ministry of defence, 36 – regional
administrations, 34 – cadastre of real estate, 22 – department on
migration and refugees, 16 – state social security fund, state
committee of water economy – 12, ministry of education and science –
9, ministry of trade and economic development – 9, ministry of health
– 8, ministry of transport and communication – 7, ministry of
town-planning – 6, government – 3, ministry of energy – 3, ministry of
finances and economy – 2, others – 47.

A1plus
| 13:49:39 | 06-07-2005 | Politics |
IN A WEEK
On July 11 the OSCE Minsk group co-chairs will arrive in Baku. The meeting
of the Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan depends on that visit.
The Azeri Foreign Minister Elmar Mamedyarov informed about it, day.az
reports. {BT}
`If after the discussions with the OSCE Minsk group co-chairs with the
conflict sides there is a necessity of meeting of the two Ministers, the day
of the meeting will be decided. If there is no necessity, there will be no
meeting’, said Mamedyarov.
On July 13 the co-chairs will leave Baku for Yerevan.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Federal Information and News Dispatch, Inc.
State Department
June 30, 2005
Weekly Review of Developments in Human Rights and Democracy;
President Bush on Victims of Torture Day, Dewey on torture and
refugees, funding for refugees, Patterson on U.N. Human Rights
Council, NGOs on U.N. human rights reform, Azerbaijan, electronic
journals
TEXT: Following are some of the most significant recent U.S.
government policy pronouncements, hearings and reports on human
rights and democracy, as well as some noteworthy materials released
by international organizations and nongovernmental organizations on
these topics:
[parts omitted]
UNITED STATES FUNDS PROGRAMS FOR REFUGEES
The State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration
releases a fact sheet periodically on U.S. funding provided to
programs for refugees administered by international organizations.
U.S. refugee policy is based on the premise that the care of refugees
and other conflict victims and the pursuit of permanent solutions for
refugee crises are shared international responsibilities.
The most recent fact sheet, released June 13,shows funding actions
completed in May with international and nongovernmental organizations
and includes, for example, funding for U.N. Development Program
activities in Russia’s North Caucasus region and funding for the
construction of houses and schools for refugees in Armenia.

WHY AZERIS DISLIKE ARMENIANS
Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
30 June 05
Azeri-Armenian relationships are one of the fundamental factors,
directly affecting the formation of a new geopolitical architecture
in the post-Soviet South Caucasus. The martial law lasting in Armenia
and Azerbaijan for 13 years now because of the unresolved issue of
Karabakh, on the one hand, does not allow these countries to use
their full potential for economic and social development, and on the
other hand, enables the world and regional powers to manipulate this
factor to solve their geopolitical, economic and strategic issues.
With the current confrontation the concerns of Armenia and Azerbaijan
about security make them look for foreign allies. As a result Armenia
and Azerbaijan have been involved in such military and political
alliances, the front line of confrontation between which directly
passes across the South Caucasus. Thus, Armenia joined the CIS
Collective Security Treaty, while Azerbaijan aspires to enter NATO,
being a member of the overtly pro-Atlantic GUAM alliance which is
a rather military and political than economic alliance. The content
of the Azeri-Armenian relationships is one of the chief reasons for
the absence of diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey, which
aggravates the vague military, political and economic situation in the
region. These actualities directly impact the implementation of any
economic project, making them too politicized. This was particularly
the case with the project of pumping Caspian oil to the world markets
via Turkey. Although economically it seems to be more favourable
if the pipeline passed through Armenia, it was decided to build the
pipeline through Georgia. The implementation of the project TRASECA
runs into serious hindrances again because of being politicized. The
Iranian-Armenian, Azeri-Iranian, Armenian-Georgian, Azeri-Georgian,
Russian-Armenian, Azeri-Russian, Azeri-Turkish, Armenian-American,
Azeri-American and even Turkish-American relationships depend to some
extent on the Azeri-Armenian relationships. Several years ago proposals
were made in Baku to form a new alliance by Azerbaijan, Turkey and
Israel, which was to be targeted at the Iranian policy in relation
to the legal status of the Caspian Sea and Armenia. In response,
staring military cooperation with Moscow, Iran set out to establish
“the alliance of three” with Greece and Armenia in counterbalance
to GUAM. All this comes to prove that the rehabilitation of the
Azeri-Armenian relationships through resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict based on compromise is one of the chief preconditions for
establishment of lasting peace and stability in the region. But is
this likely to happen in the near future? In order to forecast the
development of the Azeri-Armenian relationships it is necessary
to define the chief components underlying the foreign policies of
Baku and Yerevan. These components bear both positive and negative
charges. And the future content of the Azeri-Armenian relationships
will be greatly determined by the fact which component, positive or
negative, will prevail in the “Azerbaijani” policy of Yerevan and the
“Armenian” policy of Baku. Unfortunately, Baku’s political line on
Armenia is currently based mainly on the negative component. Thus,
Armenia is perceived by Azerbaijan as a country which: claims to the
territory of Azerbaijan; implements a policy of usurping Azerbaijani
territories by artificially causing the issue of Nagorno Karabakh;
is interested in dividing Azerbaijan on the basis of ethnic and
territorial features and supports the separatist aspirations of the
ethnic minorities living in the country, particularly the Talish and
the Lezgi peoples; “annexed” the “historical lands of Azerbaijan”,
Zangezour and the basin of Sevan; is hostile to the natural strategic
ally of Azerbaijan – Turkey; is an obstructing factor against the
implementation of the strategic issue of Turkey and Azerbaijan to
bring together and unite the Turkish-speaking states and peoples of
the post-Soviet space; has “artificially divided” the territory into
“continental” and “exclave” (Autonomous Republic of Nakhichevan)
parts; is highly interested in setting up and developing cooperation
(including military cooperation) with “undesirable” countries
for Azerbaijan and Turkey, such as Russia, Iran, Greece, Syria,
Turkmenistan, and others to form “anti-Turkish and anti-Azerbaijani”
alliances; “caused” the death of tens of thousands and deportation of
hundreds of thousands of ethnic Azerbaijanis (from Armenia as well).
This is the incomplete list of the negative components that determine
the Azerbaijani foreign political line on Armenia. Combined with this,
the “Armenian” policy of Azerbaijan is based on the recognition of a
set of circumstances by the Azerbaijani authorities, which comprise
the positive component of the “Armenian” policy of Baku. Among these
are: the recognition of Armenia by the international community
as a country which aspires to adopt the rules and values of the
Western democratic society; the perception of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict by the West as an issue of the political status of Nagorno
Karabakh and the security of its Armenian population; the interest
of the West represented by the OSCE to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict on the basis of compromise in the framework of the OSCE;
improving relationships between Armenia and the countries in the
neighbourhood of Azerbaijan – Russia, Iran, Georgia, Turkmenistan;
the interest of the US and Europe in establishing lasting peace through
an acceptable resolution of the ethnic and political conflicts in the
South Caucasus; the aspiration of the US to establish relationships
and cooperation between Turkey and Armenia, dictated by the strategic
plans of Washington in the South Caucasus; Armenia as the country
with the most effective army in the South Caucasus. Because the
set of the negative components of the “Armenian” policy of Baku
shows that having such a country in its neighbourhood as Armenia is
“a threat to the security” of Azerbaijan, Baku authorities have to
seek for ways of eliminating this threat. There are three possible
ways: increasing the military capacity of Azerbaijan to use force
against Armenia; conducting a policy of provoking the international
community to use international isolation against Armenia and using
force against Armenia without the direct participation of Azerbaijan;
a foreign policy of improvement of relationships and cooperation with
Armenia from the position of the “economic capacity” of Azerbaijan.
It is true that there exists the fourth way as well. It is the
blocking of the resolution of the Karabakh issue, which means a
“cold war”. However, it is not thought to be promising since it
does not lead to the isolation of Armenia as a factor of threat to
the security of Azerbaijan. The “Azerbaijani” policy of Yerevan too,
is chiefly based on the negative components. Thus, Armenia perceives
Azerbaijan as a country which: claims to the territory of Armenia; had
annexed the historical Armenian territory – Nakhichevan and Karabakh;
seeks to launch a policy of ethnic cleansing of Armenians; is actively
involved in the fulfillment of the idea of Pan-Turkism by Turkey, that
is the unification of Turkish-speaking nations under Turkey; does not
wish to have in its neighbourhood an Armenian state, therefore provokes
the international community to place economic, military and political
pressure on Armenia; rejects the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh
issue by the principle of self-determination; is ready to resume
military actions against Nagorno Karabakh and Armenia at any time
favourable for it and resolve the conflict through force. The main
positive components of the “Azerbaijani policy” of Armenia are: the
interests of the US, Europe and Russia in Azerbaijan as a country
which has an important geo-strategic position in the region, rich in
energy resources; the aspiration of the US and Europe to conciliate
Armenia and Azerbaijan on the issue of Nagorno Karabakh on the basis
of compromise achieved through mediation. It is important to notice
that the negative components determine the attitude of Armenia and
Azerbaijan towards one another, whereas the positive components
are mainly determined by external factors which are to be taken into
consideration both by Baku and Yerevan. This means that if Armenia and
Azerbaijan were not under external influence, the armed conflict would
be inevitable. The evidence to this is the military actions started by
Azerbaijan against Nagorno Karabakh immediately after the dissolution
of the USSR. The conclusion is outlining already: the prospects of
improvement of relationships between the two countries will be vague
unless at least some of the positive components of the “Armenian”
policy of Azerbaijan and the “Azerbaijani” policy of Armenia come true.
ALEXANDER GRIGORIAN.
30-06-2005

Senior MP says Georgian police, locals get along fine in multiethnic district
Kavkasia-Press news agency
30 Jun 05
Tbilisi, 30 June: The chairwoman of the Parliamentary Human Rights and
Civic Integration Committee, Elene Tevdoradze, has reported to MPs on
her yesterday’s visit to Tsalka District [in southern Georgia with a
large ethnic Armenian population]. Tevdoradze went to Tsalka because
of the recent [shooting] incident [followed by protest rallies]. She
said that she had met all the parties concerned, including MP for
Tsalka District, Ayk Meltonyan.
According to Tevdoradze, “there was a clash between two Armenian
villages in Tsalka, after which Meltonyan himself called the [Georgian
Interior Ministry’s] special-purpose detachment and the situation
calmed down”. As regards the shooting incident, Tevdoradze said that
the prosecutor’s office was investigating the case. Elene Tevdoradze
noted that the special-purpose detachment was working very well. “The
local population is pleased and they want the special detachment to
stay,” she said.
“Local residents told me that members of the special detachment do
not walk around drunk or fire guns without reason as it was alleged
by [opposition] New Right MP Manana Nachqebia at a recent meeting of
the parliament’s bureau,” Tevdoradze said. She thanked the Interior
Ministry for “adequately providing the lads with food, uniforms and
all necessary equipment”.

ARMENIAN AMBASSADOR TO ITALY PRESENTS CREDENTIALS TO ITALIAN PRESIDENT
YEREVAN, June 28. /ARKA/. RA Ambassador to Italy Ruben Shugaryan has
presented his credentials to Italian President Adzelio Champi. The
press and information department, RA Foreign Office, reports that
the sides discussed the execution of agreements reached during
RA President Robert Kocharyan’s visit to Italy this January. The
sides also discussed Armenia’s European integration under the New
Neighborhood program, as well as the present stage of negotiations
over Armenian-Turkish relations and Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The
sides also pointed out the importance of Days of Armenian-Italian
friendship that are to be held in Armenia this autumn. P.T. -0–

Armenian Youth Federation-YOARF Eastern US
80 Bigelow Ave
Watertown, MA 02472
Tel. (617) 923-1933
Fax (617) 924-1933

Press Release
For Immediate Release ~ June 26, 2005
Contact: Sossi Essajanian
(617) 923-1933
Chicago AYF Member Discusses Armenian Genocide at School’s Social Studies Day
NORTHFIELD, IL?On May 3, Armenian Youth Federation (AYF) member
Karine Birazian lectured to over 60 eighth grade students from Sunset
Ridge School on the Armenian genocide during the Social Studies Day,
held at the school.
The day was filled with various activities as well as educational
topics. During her presentation, Birazian focused on the Genocide and
the importance of education. Students were shocked and disturbed; not
only by the Genocide but by the Turkish government?s refusal to admit
that it even took place. Such manipulation of history, said Birazian,
is a dangerous practice, antithetical to democratic values and human
rights.
The State of Illinois requires that students be taught about the
Holocaust, but social studies teacher Ron Levitsky, who organized the
Social Studies Day, said that a Holocaust curriculum is incomplete
without first studying the Armenian genocide. ?Because of this
catastrophe, Rafael Lemkin warned the world of what he termed
‘genocide’ and the danger of Hitler. Failure to listen to his pleas
helped cause the Holocaust. Subsequently, cases of genocide erupted
in places like Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia, and Darfur,” said Levitsky.
Recently, the Illinois state legislature passed legislation extending
the study of the Holocaust to a broader curriculum on genocide,
including what happened to the Armenian people from 1915-1923.
Levitsky believes that such a requirement is more important than
ever. And after listening to Birazian, many of Levitsky?s students
enthusiastically agreed.
“It is always inspiring and an honor to educate others about the
Armenian genocide. I am very passionate about our cause and about
educating people about the Genocide. It is something so
deeply embedded within me; I cannot imagine not being proactive for
this cause,” said Birazian.
She has also been working closely with members of the state senate in
getting a resolution passed that will mandate the teaching of the
Armenian genocide and other genocides in the Illinois curriculum.
“It is great to know that people care about this cause and want
to help educate others about it. Although we have a lot of work to
do, the Armenian National Committee (ANC) of Illinois is prepared to
undertake this challenge and help to incorporate genocide curriculum
in Illinois schools,? said Birazian.
PHOTO CAPTIONS:
ayfer at social studies day3.bmp: Chicago AYF member Karine Birazian
recently presented a lecture on the Armenian Genocide to 60 students
at the Sunset Ridge School

Int’l organizations, gov’t in dispute over refugees’ integration
Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
June 27 2005
Baku, June 24, AssA-Irada — The State Committee on Refugees and
international organizations have different views on the issue of
displaced persons’ integration into society.
“Although we are trying to prevent these people’s integration into the
local population, international organizations, on the contrary, apply
pressure on us to do this”, the Committee chairman Ali Hasanov told
a news conference at the ruling Yeni Azerbaijan Party office on Friday.
“We have not and will not do this, as in all conflict zones around
the world, serious problems arise over the return of these people
after the problem is solved.”
Hasanov did not rule out that the ‘Armenian factor’ may play a role
in the pressure on the part of international organizations.
“Armenia has been aspiring to this from the first day. They have
always been concerned over the densely-populated Azerbaijanis, so
that there will not be anyone left to return to their homes after the
[Armenia-Azerbaijan] conflict is settled.”

Armenian president, Norwegian speaker discuss boosting parliamentary ties
Public Television of Armenia, Yerevan
24 Jun 05
[Presenter] Armenian President Robert Kocharyan has met a delegation
of the Norwegian parliament.
The Armenian president described the visit of the president of the
Norwegian parliament, Joergen Kosmo, as important and pledged that
this visit will facilitate the development of interparliamentary ties
between the two countries.
Norway will continue rendering any political, economic and
humanitarian assistance to Armenia, the president of the Norwegian
parliament said.

AZERBAIJAN NEEDS ROAD OF COMMON USE MORE THAN ARMENIA DOES
YEREVAN, JUNE 25. ARMINFO. The Azerbaijan-proposed project to lay a
road of common use between Azerbaijan and Armenia via Karabakh and
Nakhichevan is more necessary to Baku than Yerevan, says Armenia’s
Transport and Communication Minister Andranik Manukyan.
Manukyan advocates the development of transport infrastructures by
neighbor countries for people to be able to freely move. But
Azerbaijan’s proposal is of political nature while there are no
appropriate conditions for its fulfillment yet.
To remind, while commenting on the Armenian-Azeri presidential
meeting in Paris June 17 Azeri Deputy FM Araz Azimov said that
Azerbaijan was waiting for Armenia’s response to its proposal for
opening an Azeri-Armenian road via Karabakh and Nakhichevan. Azimov
said that communications are one of the key issues in the Karabakh
peace process and is crucial for the restoration of normal life in
the region. Armenia’s FM responded that there is no such issue on the
agenda of the Karabakh peace talks for the time being.