Author: Emil Lazarian

Georgian Parliament Adopted Resolution on Withdrawal of All Russian Peacekeepers from Georgia
PanARMENIAN.Net
18.07.2006 17:04 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The Georgian Parliament today adopted a Resolution
on withdrawal of all Russian peacekeeping forces from Georgia
by 144 votes for. According to Georgian Speaker Nino Burjanadze,
it is a historical document and in compliance with it the Georgian
Government is charged to launch procedures necessary for withdrawal
of all Russian peacekeeping forces from the country. The Resolution
notes the Government is charged “to launch procedures necessary for
stopping peacekeeping operations in Abkhazia and former autonomous
district of South Ossetia, immediately start work to change the
peacekeeping format, activate works on proper informing of the
population of Abkhazia and former autonomous district of South
Ossetia, to restore confidence maximally, establishment of standards
of peaceful, democratic life on the territory of Georgia.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

New Investigation Opened Against Hrant Dink for ‘Insulting Turkish
Identity’
By Cihan News Agency
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
zaman.com
The chief public prosecutor of the Sisli district of Istanbul has
initiated an investigation into ethnic Armenian journalist and writer
Hrant Dink for allegedly insulting and denigrating the Turkish identity
in a statement he made to Reuters news agency on July 14.
Hrant Dink, editor of the Agos newspaper which serves Turkey’s Armenian
community, told Reuters on July 14, “Of course I call this a genocide
because the result defines itself and gives itself the name. You can
see for yourself that a people that have lived on this land for 4000
years no longer exists in that region due to these events.”
The fate of the Armenians under the Ottoman Empire during WW1 and
after remains a sensitive issue in Turkey.
Armenians claim that 1.5 million Armenians living in the Ottoman
Empire were killed as part of an intentional and systematic campaign
of genocide during World War I.
Turkey denies the allegations claiming that 200,000 Armenians
died during the forced migrations due to cold weather and poor
transportation conditions.
Last week, the Turkish Appeals Court upheld a suspended verdict
against ethnic Armenian editor Hrant Dink. In October last year,
Sisli Court in Istanbul had given Dink a 6-month suspended sentence
on charges of insulting the Turkish identity.
In his column for the Turkish Armenian daily Agos dated February 13,
2004, Dink had likened Turkish nationalism to carcinogenic tumors
and poisoned blood in its responsibility for genocide.
Today’s Appeals Court statement said that there was no doubt that
Dink’s statement ridiculed and insulted ‘Turkishness’.
For further information please visit
–Boundary_(ID_qUO16Bnfw pvx25CoKQ40Iw)
Content-type: message/rfc822; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-description:
From: “Katia M. Peltekian”
Subject: ANKARA: New Investigation Opened Against Hrant Dink for ‘Insulting
Turkish Identity’
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT
Zaman, Turkey
July 18 2006
New Investigation Opened Against Hrant Dink for ‘Insulting Turkish
Identity’
By Cihan News Agency
Published: Tuesday, July 18, 2006
zaman.com
The chief public prosecutor of the Sisli district of Istanbul has
initiated an investigation into ethnic Armenian journalist and writer
Hrant Dink for allegedly insulting and denigrating the Turkish
identity in a statement he made to Reuters news agency on July 14.
Hrant Dink, editor of the Agos newspaper which serves Turkey’s
Armenian community, told Reuters on July 14, “Of course I call this a
genocide because the result defines itself and gives itself the name.
You can see for yourself that a people that have lived on this land
for 4000 years no longer exists in that region due to these events.”
The fate of the Armenians under the Ottoman Empire during WW1 and
after remains a sensitive issue in Turkey.
Armenians claim that 1.5 million Armenians living in the Ottoman
Empire were killed as part of an intentional and systematic campaign
of genocide during World War I.
Turkey denies the allegations claiming that 200,000 Armenians died
during the forced migrations due to cold weather and poor
transportation conditions.
Last week, the Turkish Appeals Court upheld a suspended verdict
against ethnic Armenian editor Hrant Dink. In October last year,
Sisli Court in Istanbul had given Dink a 6-month suspended sentence
on charges of insulting the Turkish identity.
In his column for the Turkish Armenian daily Agos dated February 13,
2004, Dink had likened Turkish nationalism to carcinogenic tumors and
poisoned blood in its responsibility for genocide.
Today’s Appeals Court statement said that there was no doubt that
Dink’s statement ridiculed and insulted ?Turkishness?.
For further information please visit
______________________________________________ ____
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

–Boundary_(ID_qUO16Bnfwpvx25CoKQ40Iw)–
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Vladimir Kazimirov: Conformism to whims and “creeping” concessions
resulted in a deadlock in Karabakh peace process
Regnum, Russia
July 18 2006
The report on Karabakh presented by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs
to the OSCE Permanent Council and their recent statements have shed
some light on the content of the private consultations between the
Azeri and Armenian presidents and FMs on the sensitive points of the
Nagorno-Karabakh (NK) conflict settlement.
The objective of the co-chairs was not only to report on their work and
to press on the leaders of the conflicting parties, but also to start
“making their people ready for peace” instead of them. Now they are
discussing the pluses and minuses of the peace process for each side,
but if they actually want to ensure peace, they should better give
this problem a wider approach.
Some media have presented the texts of the report and the statements
with lots of inaccuracies in translation, which is giving rise to
false rumors. For as long as more Armenians and Azeris know Russian
better than English, such documents should be made in Russian. They
in Vienna translate into English more expertly than they in the South
Caucasus – from English.
I would like to start with seemingly formal cavil at the co-chairs’
texts. They should better abstain from using in vain such significant
terms as “principles” and “agreement.” Here the question is hardly
about “basic principles,” let alone “framework agreement.” The
co-chairs have given just general contours rather than specific –
and by no means new – principles.
True, they are trying to apply two real principles in Karabakh:
non-application of force and threats of force and peaceful resolution
of disputes. Here they must be given all-out support!
It is very early to speak about “framework agreement” yet. Even if the
parties agreed on specific “principles,” it would be just political
arrangement between the two parties rather than final agreement. It
would take a long time to negotiate each element into a full-value
legally-binding agreement.
Another problem is the circle of agreeing parties. It doesn’t befit
the co-chairs to hope that Armenia will talk Karabakh into agreement.
How can one hope to oblige the Karabakh Armenians to withdraw their
troops from the five districts outside NK unless they also sign the
agreement? And what a line they should be withdrawn to? Full agreement
requires consent of all conflicting parties (like was the case during
the May 12, 1994 truce). There is no other way, like it or not.
In this light, it is surprising to see the careless mention of
“two parties,” “both parties” in the Vienna text. Three parties to
the Karabakh conflict is something that has long been recognized in
OSCE documents and by the OSCE MG co-chairs. Who and when has changed
this approach? Where is the decision? Conformism to somebody’s whims,
“creeping” concessions just for continuing, at least, some kind of
talks leads to deadlocks and failures. And we can see the result.
The co-chairs say they are successors just to what has been done in the
last nine years. Strange dating, isn’t it! The US and France joined
in 1997, but Russia had already been both co-chair and independent
mediator by that time. There had been other chairs and co-chairs in
the OSCE MG too. A whole range of settlement ideas was worked out long
ago. And the whole work of the mediators is based on the cease-fire
agreement attained through Russia’ mediation in 1994.
Let’s proceed to the main point – to the gist of the problems. One
can’t start from peace settlement (from withdrawing troops from
occupied territories) and then … come what may. Peace process
sustainability and guarantees are mentioned just casually as
something closing the primary measures, while the first and foremost
“unconditional condition” (sine qua non) must be the absolute refusal
by all the conflicting parties to use force and to make any attempts
to resume war. This may require international affirmation – perhaps,
by the UN Security Council. This must not be left just outlined but
unfinished. This is a kind of “zero cycle” – something to be finished
before the beginning of the “first stage.”
The key source of threat to the Karabakh peace process is Azerbaijan,
who can’t put up with its failures during that war. This is generally
known and can be seen with the naked eye: bellicose statements, calls
for arms race and revenge, encouraged hostility towards Armenians,
breach of contacts with them. In fact, Baku rejects the co-chairs’
proposals more frequently and strongly. That’s why the co-chairs
should closely follow Azerbaijan’s positions and arguments to see
and to show what and why is unacceptable and inappropriate in them.
What the co-chairs propose now is “most of the territories in exchange
for promise of referendum on NK’s status (without saying exactly when
and how). This proposal specifies only the withdrawal of Armenians
from five districts, leaving almost everything substantial from the
rest in total uncertainty. It is naive to expect that the parties
will agree on the referendum later. So, it means there will be no
referendum at all. This would leave unsettled the key problem of the
conflict, the status of NK, the problems of Qalbajar and Lachin and
the selfsame potential danger of new war – but this is exactly what is
inadmissible. The co-chairs should move farther than that in the very
first agreement (by both ensuring the “zero cycle” and elaborating,
at least, some ground terms of the referendum).
This must not be left until later. People’s will is decisive for
determining the status of NK. In a sensitive and conflict-prone region
like the South Caucasus, the international community must discourage
any attempts to settle problems by threats or blood. This is equally
applicable to the recent past – the military success of Armenians in
1992-1994 – and, especially, to the future – the absurd revenge dreams
of some Azeris – even though we know the results of both the pre-war
referendum and the “bullet voting.” This problem needs civilized
approach with no military confrontation. One must not regard Karabakh
as just somebody’s territory and ignore the opinion of its people.
Law rather than force must decide here.
Baku refers to its Constitution saying that referendum in Azerbaijan
is possible only on a nationwide scale. However, they forget that
they adopted this constitution in late 1995 exactly to prevent people
in Karabakh and other regions from expressing their will. The use
of basic law as just a weapon for political propaganda may recoil
in irreversible change of it, particularly, in this point. In fact,
any outcome of the dispute over NK will require drastic changes in
the Azeri Constitution.
If Baku is actually so zealous in observing its Constitution,
then it should also more often remind its people about Article 9 of
the same Constitution saying that war must not be a way to resolve
international conflicts.
One more inaccuracy is the neglect of the succession from the
Azeri SSR – something that is now preventing Baku from asserting its
“legacy.” The authors of the Constitution 1995 were so eager to avoid
any mention of the Azeri SSR that when abrogating the Constitution 1978
they even failed to give their new republic a legally correct name. So,
the trick with the Constitution is not working out. Today, voting on
their own status are only those whom it concerns directly rather than
indirectly (Quebec rather than Canada; Catalonia rather than Spain).
Concerning the referendum itself. Why put off the date of referendum
for as many as 10-15 years (i.e. for the period after the second term
of the Azeri president). Why can’t they hold the referendum 4-5 years
after they start implementing the cherished agreement? Of course,
the Azeris who lived in Karabakh before the war and their children
born there should also be allowed to vote. They should be allowed
to go back to their homes, but also to know under what authorities
they are going back. They may as well vote from distance (the way
they did during the last parliamentary elections) lest there might
be any incidents leading to escalating tensions and failing referendum.
The co-chairs should not avoid these issues (nor keep them secret, or
leave them until later). The remaining problems are not so disputable
even though they too will require persistence from both the parties
and the mediators.
The right to voluntary return of displaced persons and refugees to
their former homes is one of the axioms of settlement, but – only
for all sides. If those people refuse to return they should have the
right to compensation. All districts should be deeply demilitarized
before the finalization of NK’s status. The security of the returnees
should be ensured by peacekeepers from outside and sufficient civil
police forces from inside.
In order to make their peacekeeping operation effective and compact,
the mediators should deploy international observers along two lines
(the present contact line and the external line of withdrawal) and 2-3
mobile shock groups in between. The key task of those groups would
be to prevent any attempts to wreck the demilitarization process by
any of the parties and to react to “spontaneous” actions by civilians
(this mechanism is not new). By the time of the agreement signing,
the parties will have to determine the national composition of the
observers and peacekeepers.
By their slyness the parties to the Karabakh conflict hinder the
co-chairs in their search for solutions, but the latter are so tactful
that they are sometimes “ashamed” to call “a spade a spade.” For the
former co-chairs, things are much easier. The parties have created
lots of myths and propaganda tricks about the conflict.
Some people like showing the exterior and hiding the interior: they
cry about occupation but are silent about its origin. Today Azeris
are giving a humanitarian overtone to their demands for eliminating
occupation and repatriating refugees. They are blaming Armenians
for occupation but are covering their own sins: their persistent
reluctance to stop war in 1992-1994 (they broke cease fire agreements
for four times! and shirked peace initiatives) (Armenians also dodged
but never avoided such agreements). Now they face the music: loss of
seven districts and hundreds of thousands of refugees. How it all
began is a taboo subject in Azerbaijan as it casts a big shadow on
Elchibey and an even bigger shadow on the all-national leader.
Today Azerbaijan appeals to the four UN SC resolutions 1993 and
demands their observance, but neither Armenians nor Azeris themselves
have so far observed any single requirement from these resolutions
(except for the cease-fire). It was exactly Baku who for a whole year
ignored the key requirement of all the resolutions by trying to take
upper hand by force (and it was then that the UN SC stopped making
resolutions on Karabakh at all). A few days ago the former advisor of
the Azeri presidents Vafa Guluzade said: “The UN SC resolutions must
be observed, full stop!” Did he advise this to Elchibey and Heydar
Aliyev in 1993-1994? Or, probably, they refused to listen to him?
If it was actually a matter of humanity – the way they in Baku say –
they would have long liberated some of the districts and taken back
hundreds of thousands of refugees, in the meantime, considering the
return of the others, including of 45,000 residents of NK. It might
seem that the gaping discrepancy in figures would urge Baku to show
flexibility.
Nothing of the sort! So, it turns out that their point is not solely
the sufferings of the refugees. In fact, the co-chairs have failed to
get the conflicting parties to directly admit that the status of NK
is the key disputed problem. Everybody in the world understands this,
but not everybody concerned admits: each side says that Karabakh
is “indisputably” its own territory – something only its present
and former residents can say. If they recognized the key subject of
their dispute, this would make a civilized democratic resolution much
easier. Today everybody cares for democracy, don’t they?
Putting the blame for the loss of Karabakh on the People’s Front of
Azerbaijan Heydar Aliyev perfectly understood that he could not get
it back and was close to swapping it for the occupied territories. He
just sought some compensation (like corridor via Meghri) and a decent
way to formalize the deal. He stopped when he saw that his supporters
were leaving him.
For the present Azeri president concessions (something that is really
indispensable for resolution) are even more dangerous. Insuring
himself against agreements, Ilham Aliyev is raising the demands: now
he refuses “to yield” even Karabakh but, at the same time, he avoids
normal ways to settle the related dispute. He contradicts his own
self: he first says that his patience is not limitless and then calls
for patience in order to gain strength and to force Armenians into
capitulation. He is also contradictory on peace and war (not mentioning
that war is absolutely incompatible with the Azeri Constitution and
that the relapse of violence may have extremely negative consequences
for both sides). There is also an obvious reluctance to understand
the specificity of the tectonic epoch of collapse of the USSR and
other states in Europe and no less obvious preference of general
wordings about justice, international law and territorial integrity
(something more like spells) to specific discussions and concrete
arguments. Hardly any leader of nation can feed his domestic public
opinion with such products, not mentioning exporting them abroad.
This all makes peace agreement impossible and condemns the co-chairs
to a forced pause and half-truth – and the displaced persons (“over
million”!) to further vegetation.
With all my respect for my co-chair-colleagues, I dare say that
they should more actively engraft the commitment to peace and
non-application of force in the conflicting parties – something they
really should do instead of ramming settlement recipes. Azerbaijan and
Armenia have repeatedly undertaken these commitments – particularly,
before the OSCE – and how are they honoring them? In fact, they are
breaking them directly and repeatedly by continuing mutual threats.
That’s what the mediators should give not only the rest of 2006 but
also the following two years too, if they really want to come as close
as possible to real peace agreement. And this does not obligatorily
require consideration by G8 now and even by UN SC for the time being.
Vladimir Kazimirov – Ambassador; in 1992-1996 head of Russia’s
mediatory mission; plenipotentiary representative of the Russian
President on Nagorno Karabakh; member and co-chair of the OSCE Minsk
Group from Russia; presently, deputy chairman of the Association of
Russian Diplomats.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

CHOCOLATE PARADISE; MEET A REAL-LIFE WILLY WONKA
Calgary Sun (Alberta)
July 18, 2006 Tuesday
FINAL EDITION
BY RITA DEMONTIS, SUN MEDIA
Toronto
There’s a real-life Willy Wonka in Canada. Her name is Stella
Zhamkochian and she’s at the helm of Gourmet Square, a manufacturer,
wholesaler and distributor of chocolates.
We think her middle initial is C for chocolate — or it should be,
as this Markham, Ont., mother of two’s life is one of recreating this
sweet treat on all levels.
Her company creates an array of sweets prepared in the most innovative
ways. Everything from blueberry-inspired bon-bons to chocolate pizzas
to chocolate-drizzled popcorn, Zhamkochian admits her mind is always
on the go to find a new winner, a new flavour, a new idea.
Her goods are recognizable in some of Canada’s finest hotels and
shops, and she prepares for dozens of companies under their own
private labels.
She even has a tiny retail shop open to the public when she’s not too
busy on the wholesale side of life — “just phone and see if we’re
open that day,” she offers.
A recent visit to her Toronto plant sees Zhamkochian — “I was born in
Armenia and came to Canada at the age of 12” — multi-tasking at an
alarming rate, hairnet sternly in place, white smock neatly pressed,
sending out rapid-fire directions to her tiny staff and making sure
her chocolate operation flows as smoothly as the decadent product
she works with.
Her company’s considered one of the tiniest players in the
confectionary field, yet her volume of work is large, and the plant
is a beehive of activity — add to that the constant, heavenly aroma
that permeates the place, and you might as well be in chocolate heaven.
“I’m always thinking of a different flavour, or taking a standard
flavour to a new level,” says Zhamkochian, who, although the middle of
summer, has Christmas carols playing in her head, as she’s currently
working on a Yuletide line that includes a delicate eggnog-inspired
treat, a mincemeat-laced chocolate, as well as a killer orange
creme brulee.
“I find inspiration in everything, and at the weirdest hours, including
the middle of the night,” says Zhamkochian.
How did she decide on a career in chocolate — especially as she’s
a florist by nature?
“I worked in retail fashion for many years, and then I quit to
have my son,” says Zamkochian, mother of Matthew, 12 and Grace 7,
who incidentally gave their names to her Grace-Matthews Collection,
a new packaging line.
“When Matthew was three, I opened a florist shop and it was quite a
success. I started dabbling in chocolate to offer as an extra, and
when that proved to be more successful, my husband Mario and I took a
gamble and went into the chocolate business full-time seven years ago.”
On any given week, she’s using more than 1,100 kg of chocolate,
sometimes as much as 2,000 kg.
One more thing: How does she stay so slim?
“You work your butt off!” she grins. “Plus, all you really need is
just a taste.”
GRAPHIC: 2 photos by David Lucas, Sun Media 1. DELICATE TOUCH …
Anna Panosian and Flor Abdyan create hand-painted chocolate pears
at Toronto’s Gourmet Square for a wedding. 2. Packed and ready to go
for a private label are blueberry bon-bons.

Howe Islander braves road to Damascus
Kingston Whig-Standard (Ontario)
July 18, 2006 Tuesday
By: Brock Harrison
A 20-year-old Howe Island resident is on her way back home this
morning after a dramatic escape from the war-ravaged nation of Lebanon.
Carmen Abrajian, along with her 23-year-old brother Mark and his
girlfriend, Tala el-Bakri, made a daring broad-daylight getaway from
the eastern Lebanese village of Anjar yesterday afternoon, crossing
the Syrian border to Damascus, where they were expected to board a
plane headed for Toronto.
“They’ve had quite an adventure,” said their stepfather, Stuart
Renfrew, who lives with Carmen and wife Janet Abrajian on Howe
Island. Mark lives in Toronto. “The bombs were dropping way too close
to them. They had to get out.”
The trio had been stranded in Lebanon since Israeli bombs crippled
Beirut’s international airport last Thursday.
The Abrajians, along with el-Bakri and a fourth travel companion,
were in Beirut at the time of Israel’s first strikes, visiting their
grandparents in a nursing home.
They immediately fled to their aunt’s house in Anjar, the mostly
Armenian town of about about 2,500 people roughly 60 kilometres east
of the Lebanese capital, but were separated from their other friend.
It appeared as though Anjar would be a safe haven for the trio until
they could get a flight from Syria.
But as Israeli attacks intensified, bombs began dropping on the
outlying areas of Anjar. Roads going from the popular mountain tourist
town had been taken out, including the main highway to Damascus.
They were stuck playing cards in a dark basement, with a dwindling
supply of food, while falling bombs crept closer to their hideout.
“They were good and scared,” said Renfrew, who communicated with his
stepchildren through e-mail and occasional phone calls.
Being half-Armenian, the Abrajian kids have visited relatives in
Lebanon nearly every summer. As Renfrew put it, “it was just like
sending the kids to granny’s cottage.”
Renfrew and Janet Abrajian, Mark and Carmen’s mother, had exchanged
daily e-mails with the pair prior to the attacks on Beirut, sending
greetings and sharing stories.
“Then we got one from them that said, ‘Turn on the news, this is
getting bad,’ ” Renfrew said.
Prices for commodities like milk and eggs first doubled, then tripled
in Anjar after supply routes were cut off by bombs. Renfrew wired
some money to Mark and Carmen, but they were too far away from a bank
machine to use it.
“The relatives were stuck with three extra mouths to feed,” he said.
Renfrew registered his stranded stepchildren with the department of
foreign affairs so the government would at least know they were in
Lebanon but he said he never heard anything back.
Phone calls to the department were not returned yesterday.
By early yesterday morning, the news that the federal government
was sending ships from Cyprus to Lebanon’s west coast to evacuate
Canadian citizens had not yet reached the Abrajians and would still
not have guaranteed a safe passage out; Damascus is closer to Anjar
than the Mediterranean coast.
Renfrew said this presented his stepchildren with, essentially,
a do-or-die decision – either stay in Anjar and risk death or make
a break for Damascus.
According to Renfrew, the trio were contemplating making the 30-
kilometre trek to Damascus overnight by foot, since the main road to
the Syrian capital had been destroyed, until they secured the services
of a driver who knew the way through mountain back roads.
He and his wife were “on pins and needles” until they got a brief
phone call from Carmen yesterday afternoon, late evening in Syria,
telling him her troupe had made it to the Damascus airport. They
weren’t available by phone yesterday for comment.
“It hasn’t been easy on us these past few days,” Renfrew said.
The violence in Lebanon continues to escalate after Israel began
retaliation attacks last week in response to Hezbollah’s kidnapping
and killing of Israeli soldiers.
The day the Abrajians and el-Bakri made their escape, another 40
people were killed by Israeli strikes.
[email protected]
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Armenian politician criticizes defence minister for joining ruling party
Regnum, Moscow
18 Jul 06
An attempt to monopolize power in the hands of one party is being
made in Armenia, the former Armenian prime minister and leader
of the Armenian Democratic Union, Vazgen Manukyan, said at a news
conference on 18 July. He said that this is proved by the decision
of the secretary of the National Security Council under the Armenian
president, Defence Minister Serzh Sarkisyan, to join the Republican
Party of Armenia.
“Serzh Sarkisyan controls one part of financial flows, while the prime
minister and leader of the Republican Party of Armenia, Andranik
Markaryan, controls the other. The integration of these financial
flows will create a party of monsters,” the former prime minister
said. He added that the concentration of power in the hands of one
party will be dangerous for the country.
Vazgen Manukyan said that the Armenian opposition cannot oppose this
event as it does not have sufficient financial means, our Regnum
correspondent reports. “I and some opposition leaders, particularly,
the former foreign minister, Raffi Ovannesyan, have come up with an
initiative to set up a civil movement,” the MP said. He added that
this movement is being set up not for the 2007 parliamentary election,
but for returning power to the people.
“We have to try if not to come to power, then at least to have a
considerable presence in the government,” Manukyan said.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Lebanon: the world looks on
· EU criticism of Israel removed
· Statement diluted following British pressure
· Death toll passes 200
Ewen MacAskill and Rory McCarthy in Nahariya, and Patrick Wintour in
St Petersburg
Tuesday July 18, 2006
The Guardian
Western leaders remained paralysed yesterday as Lebanon suffered one
of its bloodiest days since Israel began its bombardment a week ago.
For the second time in 48 hours western governments declined to
intervene as Israeli forces, on the sixth day of aerial attacks,
killed 47 people and wounded at least 53. Hizbullah, the Iranian-backed
militia, also stepped up its attacks, launching 50 rockets against
Israel, the highest number in a single day. The death toll since
Israel began its attack has risen to 210 in Lebanon and 29 in Israel.
Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister, dismissed hopes of a quick
resolution to the conflict last night, vowing his military would
continue operating at full intensity. He said Israel would not stop
until two of its captured soldiers were freed, the Lebanese army
deployed to protect Israel’s northern border and Hizbullah forced
to disarm.
He said both Hizbollah and Hamas, the Palestinian group, were working
with the support of “the axis of evil that stretches from Tehran to
Damascus. When missiles rain on our cities, our response will be to
wage war with greater determination, courage and sacrifice,” he said.
“We don’t seek war or head-on confrontation but if necessary we shall
not flinch from them.”
After the failure of the G8 meeting in St Petersburg at the weekend
to step in, EU foreign ministers meeting in Brussels yesterday also
settled for a bland joint statement that exposed divisions between
European governments.
EU foreign ministers called on Israel not to resort to
“disproportionate action” but criticism of Israel in an original
draft was diluted after pressure from Britain and Germany, Israel’s
closest EU allies.
In southern Lebanon, an Israeli strike yesterday afternoon on a
bridge in the port city of Sidon left 10 civilians dead, including
two children. Three Israeli tanks briefly crossed into Lebanon and
Israeli Army Radio, quoting a senior officer, said Israel would
enforce a half-mile “free-fire” zone to bar Hizbullah from the border.
For the second straight day, Hizbullah rockets landed in the
coastal city of Haifa where officials closed the port. A rocket
hit and demolished part of a house, leaving two people injured,
one seriously. Other rockets reached even further south into Israel,
as far as the town of Afula, just above the West Bank.
The British government airlifted 41 Britons stranded in Lebanon
and promised to evacuate others by sea if necessary. The US sent an
aircraft carrier in preparation for an evacuation of thousands of
its 25,000 citizens in Lebanon.
The US and Britain insisted on Sunday at the G8 summit in St Petersburg
that criticism of Israel be removed from a joint communique. Both
appear ready to allow Israel a further few days in which to target
Hizbullah, after which there will be a ceasefire.
A Foreign Office source said: “Everyone is grappling with this but
no one is entirely sure how to deal with it.”
John Bolton, the US ambassador to the UN, insisted that the UN security
council should delay any action until the UN envoy now in the Middle
East, Vijay Nambiar, returns this week to New York. Mr Nambiar said:
“We hope that we will be able to see our way toward …
a de-escalation of the crisis.”
Tony Blair and Kofi Annan, the UN secretary general, called yesterday
for the 2,000-strong UN observer force on the Israel-Lebanon border
to be expanded. Mr Blair said: “The only way we’re going to get
a cessation of hostilities is if we have the deployment of an
international force into that area, that can stop the bombardment
over into Israel, and therefore give Israel a reason to stop its
attacks on Hizbullah.” But the US is lukewarm and Israel described
the proposal as premature.
The French prime minister, Dominique de Villepin, flew to Beirut,
the highest-level international presence since the crisis began. He
called on Israel and Hizbollah to implement an immediate ceasefire
on humanitarian grounds and for the release of the Israeli soldiers.
The Iranian foreign minister, Manoucher Mottaki, said yesterday that
end to the fighting and an exchange of hostages would be acceptable
and fair. Iran is the main backer of Hizbullah, which is holding
the two Israeli soldiers prisoner. After meeting Syrian officials in
Damascus, he said: “A reasonable and just solution must be found to
end this crisis. A ceasefire and then a swap is achievable.”
Exasperation with the international response was expressed last night
by Fouad Siniora, the Lebanese prime minister. In an interview with
Channel 4 News he said: “Until now I am very disappointed, but I can
tell you there is still time to make a real decision in the UN. Stop
this massacre that is happening in Lebanon because the more they
inflict casualties the worse it becomes.”
In the wind-up of the St Petersburg summit, Mr Bush and Mr Blair blamed
Iran and Syria for encouraging Hizbullah. In a private conversation
picked up by a microphone, the two men singled out Bashir Assad, the
Syrian president, as the figure stoking violence in the Palestinian
territories and Iraq as well as in Lebanon. They claimed that Mr
Assad was trying to destabilise the region and block the introduction
of democracy.
Parts of the conversation were almost inaudible but a senior British
diplomat confirmed that the two leaders had identified Mr Assad as
the prime culprit and described him sarcastically as a real sweetie
and honey.
–Boundary_(ID_o54eo8rnFKkbT9bI3LrBRg)–
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Akashas facilitated Armenians activities
By MAXWELL MASAVA, EMMANUEL ONYANGO
Kenya Times, Kenya
July 19 2006
THE name of the Akasha family yesterday featured prominently at the
Kiruki Commission of Inquiry as a witness recounted how its member
helped the Armenian brothers acquire Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA)
pin numbers.
Sammy Mutinda, an accountant who helped the Arturs acquire pin
numbers narrated that it was a member of the Akashas who went to his
office in Westlands on behalf of the Artur brothers to request for
the processing of their pin numbers. The request is claimed to have
been lodged sometime in October last year.
He told the Commission that he served the family of Ibrahim Akasha
as an accountant for many years and he had no reason to doubt their
foreign friends who were interested in investing in the country.
According to his testimony, he never met the Arturs and they requested
for the application forms in absentia.
The Akasha family is prominently linked to drug trafficking. The elder
Akasha, Ibrahim, was shot dead in the Netherlands in what was suspected
to be hitmen probably hired by people linked to drug trafficking
deals. His son Kamaldin was also murdered in Mombasa a few years later.
According to the testimony, Akasha went to Mutinda~Rs office situated
in Westlands and introduced the two–Artur Margaryan and Artur
Sargasyan–as his friends and business partners in vehicle spare
parts. He provided two application forms to the Akasha which were
returned after two weeks.
The witness narrated to the commission that it was Akasha who paid
for the application forms after they were returned. The forms had
been fully filled by the applicants.
But surprisingly, the two-week period was not explained as officials
at the Kenya Revenue Authority later narrated that the issuance of
the pin numbers was done in a day. The applications which were done
in October 2005 also indicated that the two brothers had signed the
forms personally, contradicting earlier evidence that they had arrived
in the country in November of the same year.
Before they were deported last month, Artur Margaryan often referred
to one of the Akasha sons as ~Sa big boy with baby brain~T during
press conferences. Some of the vehicles found within the Arturs Runda
residence were said to belong to the Akashas.
Mukinda in his evidence told the commission that he had come to trust
the Akashas and would be invited by the family to advise them on
financial matters and guide their accountant on book keeping. That
was when the family had a garage in Ruaraka.
~SMy lords I never handed the pin numbers to them (Arturs) but to
Akasha who was to forward them,~T said the witness who was being
guided by his lawyer, Jackson Omwenga. He also exonerated himself
from the blame saying KRA must be held responsible for the issuance
of pin numbers.
Mutinda who gave out the forms without seeing the purported investors
said he expected the applicants to fill in details before returning.
He told the commission that he was acting as an agent and would assist
clients acquire pin numbers from any part of the world. The witness
even provided his office address to be used by the Artur brothers at
that time.
~SMy lords am happy to recruit tax payers for the government,~T he
justified his role when pressed by a lawyer, Jane Ondieki, appearing
for the suspended CID Director Joseph Kamau. The lawyer had accused
the witness of being the cause of all problems behind Arturs~R presence
in the country.
However, duplicate application forms which were brought to the
Commission by assisting counsel indicated that the two brothers were
given pin numbers as civil servants. The application forms which
were denounced by Mutinda and KRA officials were said to have been
processed and worked on within a day.
Mutinda claimed that the pin numbers which he assisted the Arturs to
acquire were genuine and denied having seen the duplicate forms that
enabled the deported brothers to have two more fake pin numbers.
Benard Mukenya, an assistant revenue officer in charge of pin number
issuance said the application forms from the Arturs were presented
without proper identification as required. They were said to have
presented two varying applications and in return managed to get two
sets of pin numbers. In the application forwarded by Mutinda, the
Arturs ticked themselves as employees of undislosed companies while
in the fake application, they presented themselves as civil servants.
The Commission was told that the officer who was in charge of issuing
the pin numbers to the Arturs has since resigned from service. Tom
Mboya, the officer who issued the numbers resigned from mid May this
year, according to testimonies.
David Mala, an assistant revenue commissioner at the Domestic Tax
Department told the commission that the numbers they had originally
given to the Artur brothers were not the same as the other two which
had been presented before the commission. However, both forms were
signed by a senior revenue official identified as Andrew Okello.
~SMy lords the forms with civil service numbers do not exist in our
records,~T said Mala as he maintained that KRA records only reflect
a set of pin numbers defining the two brothers as employees.
The brothers had also managed to register double pin numbers for
their companies including Brotherlink International Limited and the
Kensington Holdings Limited.
It also emerged from other witnesses of the day that the Armenian
brothers had lied when they registered companies associated with
them. The two brothers evaded paying stamp duty according to three
witnesses who testified yesterday afternoon.
Ahmed Omar, a chief cashier with National Bank of Kenya disowned a
stamp duty receipt purported to have been paid and received by teller
number 11 at the bank~Rs Hill Branch. Omar said the alleged branch has
no teller number 11 and there was no cashier on that particular day.
The receipt had no signature as required.
Another witness, Mr. Joseph Mwangi, an operations manager at Kenya
Commercial Bank, Moi Avenue branch, said stamp duty for Kensington
Holdings Limited was never paid through the bank as it had been
purported.
In fact City Bank which was portrayed as having received the money
had been closed a month earlier as opposed to the date on KCB receipts.
The bank was closed on December 19, 2005 while the payment was
indicated as having taken place on January 12, 2006.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

TREND Information, Azerbaijan
July 17 2006
G8 called Armenia, Azerbaijan to show political will and reach
agreement on Nagorno-Karabakh yet in 2006
Source: Trend
Author: À.Mammadov
17.07.2006
G8 called Armenia and Azerbaijan to show political will and reach
agreement on Nagorno-Karabakh, says the statement of G8 group chairman,
Trend reports with reference to ITAR-TASS.
“During the discussion, Nagorno-Karabakh issue was raised”, says
the document. “We confirmed that G8 upholds OSCE Minsk Group
co-chairmen arbitrating efforts and underlined the necessity in
soonest coordination of the basic principles of the conflict peaceful
settlement ye in 2006”, it says.
“We call Armenia and Azerbaijan to show political will and reach
agreement on Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as prepare national to peace,
not war”, the statement says.
–Boundary_(ID_cIb55x/OH/BWuJFBYZozsw)–
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Today, Azerbaijan
July 17 2006
Azeri analyst says NATO execs ‘were aware’ of Armenian arsons
17 July 2006 [14:18] – Today.Az
An Azeri political analyst has said NATO generals were aware
beforehand that Armenians would set fire to the occupied territories
of Azerbaijan.
“About two months prior to the outbreak of the fire, Armenian general
Arzumanian openly stated at an event in NATO’s press-center that
they would burn Azerbaijani territories. The alliance officials did
not react to this in any way,” Rovshan Novruzoghlu said. He explained
this by what he called NATO’s intention to station its military bases
in the Aghdam, Fuzuli and Khojavand Districts.
“Superpowers are planning to set up both Russian and NATO bases in
the occupied areas of Azerbaijan, just like in Kyrgyzstan.”
The analyst added that Russia’s non-interference with the developments
is due to a previously-reached agreement, AssA-Irada reports.
/AzerNEWS/
URL:
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress