Author: Emil Lazarian

TREND Information, Azerbaijan
June 30 2006

Head of PACE Sub-commission on Nagorno-Karabakh to pay visit to
region in October

Source: Trend
Author: J.Shahverdiyev

30.06.2006

The members of the provisional commission of Sub-commission on
Nagorno-Karabakh created in PACE will arrive in region in October,
Ganira Pashayeva, the member of Azeri delegation in PACE, told Trend.

The agreement on this visit was reached on June 28 at the meeting
between the heads of Azeri and Armenian delegations Samad Seyidov and
Tirgan Torasyan within the summer session of PACE. The meeting was
also attended by the chairman of Sub-commission Lord Russell Johnson.

The members of the Sub-commission will visit Azerbaijan, Armenia and
Nagorno-Karabakh. `May be Johnson himself pay a visit to the region,’
Pashayeva added.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Organization for Security and Co-Operation in Europe (OSCE)

June 30 2006

OSCE Yerevan Office presents its views on human rights to secondary
school teachers

YEREVAN, 30 June 2006 – An OSCE human rights expert shared her
knowledge today with 55 secondary school teachers who are taking a
year-long class on human rights.

Silvia Pogolsa, a Human Rights Officer at the OSCE Office in Yerevan,
delivered a lecture as part of the course, organized annually by the
non-governmental organization Armenian Constitutional
Right-Protective Centre.

That centre has organized a Human Rights School since 1996, and 405
participants, mainly secondary school teachers, have so far taken
part in the programme, which includes 11 months of distance learning
and one month of intensive education.

"OSCE considers human rights and democracy explicit elements of the
overall security framework, assigning them the same level of
importance as politico-military and economic security issues,"
Pogolsa said. "We believe education in and for human rights is one of
the effective means of creating peaceful and stable societies."

The Office donated the latest OSCE publications on human rights and
good governance to the NGO’s Human Rights Library, which consists of
six libraries in different Armenian towns.

The lecture was part of the Office’s human rights education and
public awareness raising programme, which started in 2001. The Office
also has produced documentary movies on human rights issues and
organized public screenings of those movies. It is preparing a series
of Public Service Announcements on torture, tolerance and
non-discrimination and other human rights issues to be broadcast on
national TV-stations starting in September 2006.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

TREND Information, Azerbaijan
June 30 2006

Withdrawal of Armenian armed forces from conflict zone would relax
tension in region – US Amb at OSCE Minsk Group

Source: Trend
Author: R.Abdullayev

30.06.2006

The Co-chairs of OSCE Minsk Group have led the peaceful dialogue to a
certain stage after which the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia
should make a decision, Mathew Bryza, the USA state secretary advisor
on Europe and Eurasia, co-chair of OSCE Minsk Group, told in his
interview with Radio Liberty, Trend reports.

`My words may urge people to create a condition for healthy debates
in the region,’ told Brysa.

`I am surprised not at the debates, but at the issue that several
persons who are not familiar with the recent statement of co-chairs
of Minsk group in Vienna gave a rapid reaction to the meeting. In the
statement of co-chair, everything was stated obviously, but my
statement was shorter and common,’ Bryza added.

Bryza answered the question `May you peaceful plan statement be
considered part of the strategy on beginning of debates?’ that `May
be yes or may be no. I only gave information on happening events. The
document offered to the Permanent Council of OSCE is open for
society.’

`Co-chairs of Minsk Group used all their abilities and energy to
prepare a `framework agreement’ where the main principles of
settlement found their reflections. The president need time to make a
decision on the agreement,’ stressed Bryza. I’m very energetic and
familiar with the leaders enough. We will continue working with them
and don’t state that the process has been ceased forever. However, we
want to note that the dialogue was held till the definite level,
after which the heads of the conflict countries should themselves
take a resolution.

Touching on the contradictory statements on the conducting of
referendum on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh, American co-chair noted
that the sides couldn’t come to an agreement on main principles of
the solution. Therefore, both presidents take responsibility that no
agreement was reached up to now. `I cannot say which president takes
greater responsibility. The presidents may declare that an agreement
was reached on the main principles or may announce that the agreement
was made changes and a packet plan will be prepared,’ told new
co-chair.

At the same time Bryza noted that he withdrawal of the Armenian armed
forces from the conflict zone, undoubtedly, increase the tension in
the region. `Therefore, the issue is important element of the major
principles of resolution. However, stating to Armenians that withdraw
the arms from the region and it will relax the tension in the region
and we will achieve the desired. The Armenians will go to it, if they
will receive anything in exchange. That is the major principle. The
experts are right -the withdrawal of the Armenian armed forces will
relax the tension. But they should receive something in exchange.
Therefore, the heads of state ought to take a difficult resolution.

Bryza noted that the demilitarization of the region will be
accompanied with national voting or referendum on future status of
Nagorno-Karabakh.

The problem is linked with coordination of the time parameters for
withdrawal or re-dislocation of Armenian forces with the status of
Karabakh. That’s the major problem complicating the process.

In the end Bryza voiced his hope that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
will be included in the agenda of the meeting of G8 in St-Petersburg.
The Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that the issue will
be under discussion. `We’d like the issue to be included in the
agenda of the meeting,’ the adviser to the US Secretary of State in
Europe and Eurasia, said.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Arka News Agency, Armenia
June 30 2006

RECEPTION IN HONOR OF NKR DELEGATION HELD AT CAPITOL, USA

YEREVAN, June 30. /ARKA/. A reception in the honor of the
Nagorno-Karabakh delegation was held at the Capitol. The reception
was attended by US Congressmen, RA Ambassador to the USA Tatul
Margaryan, NKR Permanent Representative to the USA Vardan Barseghyan,
top officials of the Armenian Assembly of America (AAA) and Armenian
National Committee of America, US Congress staff members, journalists
and representatives of the Armenian community.
The US Congress members Frank Pallone, Joe Nolenberg, Edward Royce,
Caroline Malone, Adam Shiff and Brad Sherman made speeches at the
reception. They warmly welcomed Speaker of the NKR National Assembly
Ashot Ghulyan and NKR Foreign Minister Georgy Petrosyan.
Condemning Azerbaijan’s aggressive policy, the US Congressmen
reaffirmed their readiness to contribute to the development of the
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR).
In their turn, the NKR officials conveyed the NKR’s people’s
gratitude the US Congress and to the American people for their
commitment to such eternal values as freedom and democracy as well as
for the humanitarian aid provided to the NKR.
Artsakh knowingly chose the way of freedom and democracy and no
obstacles will make it turn aside from this way, Ghulyan said.
Following the reception the NKR delegation held a meeting with the
Co-Chairmen of the US Congressional Armenia Caucus Frank Pallone and
Joe Nolenberg.
The sides discussed issues related to the current socio-economic
situation in the NKR, the country’s democratic development, US aid to
the NKR and Nagorno-Karabakh peace process. P.T. -0–

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

The New Anatolian, Turkey
June 30 2006

Incoming US ambassador to Yerevan doesn’t use word ‘genocide’

TNA with AP / Washington

U.S. senators failed to persuade the nominee for U.S. ambassador to
Yerevan to use word ‘genocide’ while describing events of 1915 at his
confirmation hearings Wednesday in the Senate.

"I have not received any kind of written instruction about this,"
Ambassador-designate Richard E. Hoagland said. "I simply have studied
the president’s policy. I’ve studied the background papers on the
policy. And my responsibility is to support the president."

While declining to say the word "genocide," Hoagland, who is
currently the ambassador to Tajikistan, said, "I fully agree that the
events that occurred in 1915 and following were of historic
proportions, as I said, well-documented, horrific, horrifying."

He quoted Maryland democrat Senator Paul Sarbanes, who read a
statement about the situation, that "hundreds of valleys (were)
devastated, no family untouched. It was historic. It was a tragedy
and everyone fully agrees with that, sir."

U.S. President George W. Bush, in a presidential message on the 91st
anniversary of April 24, called the events "a terrible chapter of
history" that "remains a source of pain for people in Armenia and for
all those who believe in freedom, tolerance and the dignity and value
of every human life."

Bush is ordering home their current ambassador in Yerevan, John
Evans, two years into the normally three-year diplomatic term. In
announcing his recall last month, the White House gave no reason and
praised Evans for his service. Last Sunday was his second anniversary
in the Armenian capital. In February 2005 Evans told
Armenian-Americans, "The Armenian genocide was the first genocide of
the 20th century."

Sixty members of the House of Representatives sent a letter to
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice protesting that Evans was being
punished for his reference to "genocide." In a separate letter,
Democratic Senators Edward Kennedy and John Kerry of Massachusetts
demanded an explanation from Rice for Evans’ recall.

The events occurred during the expulsion of ethnic Armenians from
eastern Turkey into Syria in 1915 and 1916. Turkish officials have
traditionally maintained that 300,000 people died. Armenian
terrorists, mainly members of the Armenian Secret Army for the
Liberation of Armenia (ASALA), roamed through Europe and the U.S. in
the 1970s and 1980s and claimed more than 60 attacks against Turkish
targets. The army claimed the campaign killed 30 Turkish diplomats
and dependents.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Opinions
Patrimony of cultural artifacts
Recep Guvelioglu
[email protected]
26 June 2006

The matter of stolen artifacts and looted historical treasures has
been one of the most important and ongoing issues in Turkey. When I
visited the Ephesus Museum in Vienna and the Pergamum (Bergama) Museum
in Berlin, and saw many artifacts from Anatolia at the Louvre, the
British Museum and Dumbarton Oaks, my first reaction was to curse at
the looters and the international system that gives an opportunity to
looters and thieves. But when I learned that the Germans dug an
enormous shelter for the Pergamum Altar during World War II to protect
it from bombings and all the other museums took similar measures, my
view changed quickly. Even though Turkey lost those unique historical
treasures, at least humanity possessed them. Today many people from
all around the world can visit these museums. In addition, what
happened to some of the historical treasures in Turkey is well
known. The Greek columns of Side, for instance, were burned just to
get lime to build brick houses.

We have made many mistakes regarding historical artifacts, and there
are many reasons for our cultural loss. It would take at least five of
these weekly columns to discuss them all. The primary reason is our
legal system: Our laws and judicial practices. Turkey holds a treasure
trove of antiquities to protect, which is why many laws and codes were
adopted.

Yet time has proven that that system does not work.

The most famous law to preserve our cultural heritage is the "Kultur
ve Tabiat Varliklarini Koruma Yasasi" (Code of Protection of Cultural
and Natural Property, or the code of antiquities). Under this law any
ruin, artifact or cultural finding discovered falls under the state’s
patrimony and it needs to be reported to the authorities, such as
museum directors. Afterwards you have several options:
The director might be corrupt and want to have the artifacts for
himself. He might offer you one percent of its real value and threaten
to throw you in jail for illegal excavation if you don’t comply.

Let’s say the director is decent, yet he might still threaten to give
it to "the state," in which case you will receive a paltry
compensation. In either case, you’re in trouble¦ If you decide not to
inform the authorities, you have to find a middle man to sell this
merchandise. The middle man would certainly deceive you, and if the
artifact is quite valuable you might even be murdered.

The last option is to try selling the artifact abroad, which leads to
the same problem.

The bottom line of the matter is the issue of the patrimony of
humanity’s past. Robbers destroy and loot temples and tombs. In the
eyes of ordinary people, they are cursed criminals. Some people
purchase mankind’s oldest and most exquisite creations and are proud
of their efforts; these private collectors, commercial dealers, and
museum curators view themselves as temporary caretakers of treasures.

However, collectors’ demands for these objects have created incentives
for looters to pillage archaeological sites.

"Cultural patrimony" is the question of who has the right to own and
exhibit humanity’s aesthetic and archaeological treasures.

It’s a three-sided debate. On one side, there are "internationalists":
Academics, dealers and collectors who advocate the regulated market as
the best way to protect antiquities. The second group believes that
cultural patrimony is linked to a group of people’s identity. "Our
cultural heritage tells us who we are." These "nationalists" generally
call for a trade that is limited, heavily regulated and open to public
scrutiny. The third party consists of archaeologists and scholars who
say that trading uproots cultural artifacts from their original place,
rendering them useless for scientific study.

The nationalists’ and archaeologists’ non-liberal amalgam of
nationalism and anti-capitalist mentality goes back to the United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO)
1970 Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit
Import, Export, and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property. It is
the first major international agreement to protect cultural property
from thieves and smugglers.

Actually it’s hard to say who’s right in the debate. In Turkey’s case,
with the current judicial system, which doesn’t give Turkish citizens
any right to buy any artifacts, and with the problems of museums which
have became like unprotected storage houses, the nationalistic
approach seems to have lost the game.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Genocide tribunal brings Cambodia hope of elusive reconciliation

Published on June 30, 2006

Phnom Penh – Chum Mey turns cold when he thinks of testifying against
his one-time torturers at Cambodia’s upcoming Khmer Rouge tribunal.

As one of only seven survivors of the notorious Tuol Sleng torture
camp, he knows he is likely to be called as a witness to speak out
against the leaders of the 1975-1979 regime that killed up to two
million Cambodians.

But the 76-year-old said the tribunal, whose judges will be sworn in
on Monday, may offer the only chance for Cambodia to learn all the
facts about the genocidal regime and to help the still-shattered
country heal.

"It’s time, they must not hide anything. I need them to tell the
truth. Why did they kill innocent people?" said Chum Mey.

"Otherwise, their victims will never be able to let go of the pain
they suffered," he said.

"After the trial, the pain will not go away immediately. But at least
it’s a starting point to get rid of the pain we bear and to
reconcile."

But reconciliation is a difficult goal in a country where up to one
third of the population was killed, starved or worked to death in one
of the most hideously effective genocides of the 20th century.

Most of the 17 Cambodian and 13 international judges will be sworn in
on Monday, marking a symbolic start to the tribunal that has been
delayed by years of wrangling between Cambodia and the United Nations
over its format and funding.

Prosecutors are expected to begin their work just a week later, but
trials are not likely to start until next year.

Even if Chum Mey is called to the stand, he is not likely to face the
men who actually tortured him in Tuol Sleng, a one-time high school
where 17,000 people — men, women and children — were interrogated,
tortured and then killed in a field outside Phnom Penh.

The tribunal is expected only to bring the few surviving leaders of
the Khmer Rouge to the dock.

Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot died in 1998. Only two of the roughly six
surviving leaders expected to stand trial are in custody, with the
rest living freely in Cambodia.

But most of the killing was done by ordinary Cambodians who followed
their leaders’ commands in pursuit of building an agrarian utopia —
guided by an ultra-Maoist ideology that, among other things, tried to
destroy the family unit and abolished education, religion and
currency.

Van Nath, another survivor of Tuol Sleng, said he too was prepared to
testify but he was unsure if reconciliation was possible when people
who actually performed the killings still walked the streets.

"For me, there is no reconciliation with people we once knew as
murderers," Van Nath said.

"I believe the trial is needed. But as for reconciliation, I believe
none of us has the ability to reconcile because of the gravity of what
happened," he said.

"What could ease our minds is if the people who committed these crimes
stand up to describe publicly about the reasons behind the killings,"
Van Nath said.

Van Nath survived the torture centre when his guards discovered his
talent for painting. He was then forced to do portraits of Pol Pot
until the Khmer Rouge were driven from power by Vietnamese invaders
who seized Phnom Penh in January 1979.

He is not convinced the tribunal can bring justice to a country that
was turned into a wasteland by a regime that emptied the cities and
forced the population onto vast collective farms.

"Right now, I dare not think that the tribunal can bring us justice
yet," he said.

"If it does, justice will not be found in the court’s decision. It
will be justice if the people agree with its decisions," he said.

Youk Chhang, director of the Documentation Center of Cambodia which
has been compiling evidence of Khmer Rouge atrocities, said
reconciliation is a personal matter.

"It has to start from individuals. If many individuals benefit from
the trial, then this will also have an effect at a national level," he
said.

So far, few of the remaining Khmer Rouge leaders have shown any
concern about the trials, much less about national reconciliation.

Most of them lead quiet lives around the former Khmer Rouge stronghold
of Pailin in northwestern Cambodia, refusing to give interviews and
staying out of the spotlight.

"I never think of the court," said Sor Socheat, the 55-year-old wife
of the Khmer Rouge’s former head of state Khieu Samphan.

"My husband never thinks of any work that he had done," she told AFP
by telephone, saying Khieu Samphan refused to take the call.

"At that time, he had no rights or power. He was only chairman in name
but he knew nothing. He never made any decisions," she said.

"It is up to others to form this tribunal," she added.

As for national reconciliation, she refused to talk about it.

Agence France Presse

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Democratic Azerbaijan
Ïðàî ûáîðà, Azerbaijan
June 30 2006

Andreas Gross Denied To Be Co-Rapporteur For Azerbaijan
30.06.2006

29 June the session of the Monitoring Committee of the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe was held. Andreas Gross stated that
he denied being co-rapporteur for Azerbaijan. He explained that he
had been working for a long time in this field and he’d to be
co-rapporteur for other country.
Committee Members accepted his request and freed him from the duties
of co-rapporteur for Azerbaijan. Tony Lloyd, a MP from England was
elected to his position.
Chief of Armenian delegation to PACE, Tigran Torosian tried to
present A. Gross’s denial of being co-rapporteur for Azerbaijan as a
result of pressure of Swiss MP by our Government.
But Azerbaijani delegation stressed that A. Gross took this step
voluntarily and there were not any talks of pressure. A. Gross was
co-rapporteur for Azerbaijan for ten years. He could not approach to
Azerbaijan from the point of new view and to see progressing changes.

EU STATES HAVE NOT FULL INFORMATION CONCERNING NAGORNO-GARABAGH

Ïðaâî Âûaîða, Azerbaijan
Democratic Azerbaijan
June 29 2006

EU prefers not to interest with conflicts Recently the Public
Unity of Civilization & Research held the ’round table’ entitled
European security strategy and Azerbaijan. Chairman of the mentioned
organization, Surkhay Latifov informed that the East- the East Project
being realized within the framework of the Open Society Institute
Programme will last three months. Within the framework of the programme
the various arrangements and ’round tables’ were held in Baku, Guba,
etc. regions of Azerbaijan.

According to him, the Project I is due to particularly the European
neighborhood policy. It implies to inform about the European security
strategy.

Then the Director of the European Political Institute of Czech
Republic, Devid Kraal spoke and said that the European security
strategy under leadership of Havier Solona was set up in December
2003. D. Kraal said that this strategy has a great importance,
resulting in development of the common security strategy for Europe.

At the same time, the document made close the European Union
countries. The expert added that the Strategy protects the interests
of the Member States of the European Union as well as secure other
countries’ security. According to D. Kraal, the Strategy aims at fight
counterterrorism and weapons of mass destruction. The document also
recalls the regional conflicts subdivided into "cold" and "hot".

For instance, the conflict between Israel and Palestine is called as
"hot", but the conflicts existing in the Caucasus – "cold", including
Abkhazia, Ossetia and Nagorno-Garabagh. As D. Kraal informed,
the Strategy implies the ways of solution of these problems: "Such
kind of conflicts can have a number of solutions. EU Member States
consider that all countries should make efforts for prevention of
such problems. Moreover, the conflicts are withdrawn very often in
the states with strong government." As D. Kraal thinks, the majority
of EU Member States have not detailed information concerning the
Nagorno-Garabagh: "At the same time, EU prefers not to go into details
of such conflicts, as the more important issue is economic affairs."

Regarding the opinion of the Director of the Institute concerning the
Nagorno-Garabagh conflict, he stated that he did not know this problem
in detailed, that’s why he was not ready to express his opinion on
this occasion.

–Boundary_(ID_Cj9nxIxJSTp7GQkbFHchvQ)- –

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

AMBASSADOR-TO-BE DODGES ARMENIAN GENOCIDE QUESTION
By Michael Doyle
McClatchy Newspapers

Scripps Howard News Service, DC
June 29 2006

WASHINGTON — America’s next ambassador to Armenia is a verbal
gymnast. He has to be, to keep his job.

On Wednesday, career Foreign Service officer Richard E. Hoagland
tread prudently through his confirmation hearing.

He picked his way around the word "genocide" in describing the
mass slaughter of Armenians between 1915 and 1923. The events were
"horrific" and "well-documented" and "historic," Hoagland told the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, but the genocide word did not
cross his lips.

"It’s a tragedy; everybody agrees with that," Hoagland said, but
"instead of getting stuck in the past and vocabulary, I would like
to see what we can do to bring different sides together."

While the highly decorated Hoagland appears a shoo-in for the Armenia
post, his reticence did not sit well with the three senators who
showed up for his confirmation hearing.

"It’s almost absurd to sit here, and you can’t utter the word
‘genocide,’ " said Republican Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota. "We
have ambassadors who can’t use a word, just a word."

In regions like the California’s San Joaquin Valley, southern
California, New Jersey and Michigan, well-established Armenian-American
populations maintain both a tangible and symbolic stake in U.S.-Armenia
relations.

"The local community follows with great interest events in Armenia
and also U.S. government policy," noted Barlow Der Mugrdechian,
lecturer in Armenian Studies at California State University at Fresno.

In particular, Der Mugrdechian said, activists have been tracking
the fate of Hoagland’s predecessor, Ambassador John Evans. The
Yale-educated Evans ran afoul of his State Department superiors when
he acknowledged the accuracy of the phrase "Armenian genocide."

"I informed myself in depth about it," Evans told an Armenian-American
audience in Berkeley, Calif., in February 2005. "I think we, the
U.S. government, owe you, our fellow citizens, a more frank and honest
way of discussing this problem. I think it is unbecoming of us, as
Americans, to play word games here. I believe in calling things by
their name."

That was contrary to the Bush administration’s policy of avoiding
the term, out of deference to Turkey’s sensibilities. Within a week,
the State Department issued a statement from Evans in which he called
his remarks "inappropriate" and said he "deeply" regretted them.

State Department officials have declined to characterize Evans as
having been fired, but his Armenian tenure was clearly cut short. He
became ambassador in September 2004, and Hoagland was announced as
his replacement in May 2006. By contrast, his predecessors served
three-year terms.

Hoagland previously served as U.S. ambassador to Tajikistan. He has
considerable experience with some dicey parts of the world, including
service as the lead Afghanistan analyst with the State Department’s
Bureau of Intelligence and Research. While in Pakistan in the late
1980s, he worked with the Afghan resistance.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress