Greek community of Cyprus threatens Azerbaijan with direct flight to

GREEK COMMUNITY OF CYPRUS THREATENS AZERBAIJAN WITH DIRECT FLIGHT TO
NAGORNO KARABAKH

PanArmenian News Network
July 18 2005

18.07.2005 06:13

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The Greek community of Cyprus threatens Azerbaijan
with a direct flight to Nagorno Karabakh but they will not succeed,
Mehmed Ali Talaat, the president of the unrecognized Northern Cyprus
has told the Turkish newspaper Hurriyet, according to the Azeri news
agency Trend. He said Azerbaijan’s rapprochement with Northern Cyprus
would help offset the international isolation of the Turkish Cyprus.
On the eve of his recent trip to Russia, Turkish Prime Minister
Erdogan has said that the latest steps of Baku represent Azerbaijan’s
factual recognition of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.
“Hopefully, Azerbaijan’s steps towards it would continue~T, he said,
Yerkir Online reports.

ANKARA: Erdogan’s Adviser Bagis Sends Letter To U.S. Legislators

Erdogan’s Adviser Bagis Sends Letter To U.S. Legislators

Turkish Press
July 17 2005

ANKARA – Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s foreign policy
adviser Egemen Bagis has sent a letter to members of the U.S. House
of Representatives.

In his letter, Bagis stressed that good relations with the United
States constituted as a basic principle of Turkey’s foreign policy.

Noting that as allies and partners, Turkey and the United States had a
long-standing and robust strategic cooperation on regional and global
issues, Bagis wrote, “our cooperation is driven by our shared vision
and by our joint interests, based on deep-rooted common values.”

Bagis indicated, “given the current regional and global challenges,
Turkish-US relations are more important than ever. Our relations are
based on strong foundations and we are mutually determined against
multi-dimensional threats.”

The letter continues, “as Chairman of the Turkish-U.S. Inter
Parliamentarian Friendship Caucus of the Turkish Grand National
Assembly, it is my duty to uphold the strong ties between our
countries. Similarly, it is my responsibility to act against threats
that may hurt our relations, disrupt our friendly ties and that may
unnecessarily enrage the Turkish public opinion against our good
ally, the USA. It is with this sense of duty that I am addressing
this letter to you on a matter which is of great sensitivity to the
Turkish people and of importance to our relations.”

“We understand some members of the U.S. Congress have submitted
two similar draft resolutions. (H. Res. 316 introduced on June 14,
2005 and H. Res. 195 introduced on June 29, 2005) This has caused
great disappointment and concern in Turkey. The draft resolutions as
they stand contain misinformation, baseless allegations, and false
accusations against my country,” wrote Bagis in his letter.

-“TERRIBLE POLITICAL MISCALCULATIONS”

Bagis indicated, “it also misrepresents a controversial chapter
of Turkish-Armenian relations at a time when our government, led by
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is taking positive steps towards
our neighbor Armenia. Tragic events of 1915 were triggered by a
terrible political miscalculation of the Armenian citizens of the
Ottoman Empire. Encouraged by the Czarist Russia’s imperial policy of
capturing Anatolia and reaching the warm waters of the Mediterranean,
Ottoman Armenians allowed themselves to serve as the fifth column
of Russia in Turkey. As a result they rebelled against the central
government, triggered a civil war and paid a terrible price.”

-BUSH ALSO SUPPORTS ERDOGAN’S PROPOSAL”

Bagis went on saying, “the events of 1915 cannot be labeled as
‘genocide’. Primarily, such a liberal usage of this terrible word is
an insult to Holocaust, which is the gravest crime against humanity.
Turkey has always maintained that parliaments and other political
fora are the most inappropriate venues to discuss and pass judgments
on controversial historic periods. History is a discipline that
should be left to the historians. In order to shed light on this
controversial historic issue, the Turkish Government has opened
all its archives to researchers. Furthermore, Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan has proposed the establishment of a study group of
Turkish and Armenian historians to work study together on the events
of 1915. The proposal not only covers the archives of Turkey and
Armenia but also requires unbiased research in the archives of all
relevant countries, including Russia. Then the plan is to share the
conclusions with the international public. Prime Minister Erdogan’s
proposal was much appreciated and supported by President Bush.”

“Genocide is the most vicious crime against humanity. Accusing a
nation with genocide is a very serious act. Any such act comes with a
responsibility to prove such an accusation and rest it on historical
facts and international legality. We do not wish the U.S. Congress
running a judgment based on one-sided allegations,” stated Bagis.

-HISTORIANS SHOULD ANALYSE-

Bagis went on saying, “Turks and Armenians have lived in peace for
over eight centuries in Anatolia. The Armenian community, dispersed
throughout the Ottoman territories lived as loyal and, in certain
aspects, as privileged citizens of the Ottoman Empire. They served
as ministers, generals, ambassadors, governors, commercial envoys and
in similar other capacities. They were not subject to discrimination
in any shape or form.”

The letter continued, “towards the end of the 19th century, the ‘Great
Powers’ of the time began regarding the Armenians as an important tool
of manipulation against the Ottomans. Their aim was to accelerate the
destruction of the Ottoman Empire. These powers promised the Armenians
a state in Eastern Anatolia where paradoxically the Armenian citizens
were only a minority. As a result of the provocations of ‘Great
Powers’, various Armenian bands began to organize from the 1880s and
onwards. These armed militia staged rebellions in various provinces
and launched an ethnic cleansing campaign. They were trying to force
mass immigration of the local population and to alter the demographic
structure these regions. Their methods were massacres and harassment
of the Turks and other Muslims. The start of World War I and the
entry of the Ottoman state into the War against the Allied Powers
was seen as a great opportunity by the extremist Armenians. They
revolted and collaborated with the invading Russian army and
other foreign forces. As a fifth column of the Russian occupation,
Armenian bandits attacked the Ottoman troops and disrupted the supply
routes. Under these circumstances, the Ottoman government informed
the Armenian Patriarch, Armenian Members of Parliament and other
prominent Armenians that if these activities were to continue, the
government would have to take defensive measures. Armenian activities,
however, continued unabated. In the face of these enormous internal
and external threats, the Ottoman Government, in May 1915 resorted
to a defensive internal security measure, which any country facing
a similar situation would take. Again, the Ottoman government was
facing an armed rebellion by its own citizens who happened to be
members of a certain ethnic group and they were collaborating with
a foreign belligerent. The Ottoman government adopted the Relocation
Law to transfer its Armenian citizens living in the war zone to the
southern territories of the Empire. The Armenian citizens had been
informed well advance about this decision and their transfer started
after necessary preparations. Meanwhile, Armenian citizens living
outside the war zone were excluded from this resettlement process.
Thus, some 200,000 Armenian citizens living in Istanbul, Edirne,
Kutahya, Aydin and Izmir were not affected. The law in question
envisaged every precaution to ensure the security of the Armenian
citizens during the transfer, first and foremost, the safety of their
lives and protection of their assets. The Ottoman central government
instructed the local authorities to take the necessary security and
other measures for the orderly relocation of the Armenian citizens.”

“Relevant documents about these circulars are available in the Ottoman
archives. Despite these measures, war conditions, and local ethnic
animosities prompted attacks against the Armenian convoys during the
transfer process. Due to the limitations of the ongoing World War I,
lack of food supplies and other relief material, as well as harsh
climate and epidemics took their toll on the population. The relocation
was suspended in November 1915. In early 1916 it was brought to an
end. After the war the Ottoman Government issued a decree, allowing
the previously relocated Armenian citizens return to their places of
origin. According to a report prepared by the Armenian Patriarchate,
-and this document is the U.S. archives- 644,900 Armenians returned
to their places of origin, as a result. In the meantime, some 1,390
people were tried in Ottoman courts for attacking the Armenian convoys
and for related criminal acts. Many were convicted, some with death
penalty. At this point, we need to ask: If the Ottoman government had
intended to annihilate its Armenian citizens, why would it prosecute
civilians and officials for mistreatment of Armenian convoys and why
would it later allow the Armenians to return to their towns?”

“According to 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of
the Crime of Genocide only a competent tribunal can determine whether
genocide is committed or not. As underlined by the same Convention,
the tribunal in charge is either the tribunal of the State in the
territories of which the act was committed or an international penal
tribunal as may have jurisdiction with respect to those Contracting
Parties which have accepted its jurisdiction. 1948 UN Convention does
not grant any competence to national or international parliaments
for the recognition or affirmation of the crime of genocide. Since
so far Armenian genocide claims have never been ascertained in any
competent court ruling it would be highly erroneous to talk about an
international recognition of the so-called Armenian genocide. Again,
the abovementioned attributions to the UN documents are a poor attempt
to add some air of legitimacy to the unfounded, biased and one-sided
allegations. Again, if a tragedy took place in Eastern Anatolia in
1915, it was due to a tragic political miscalculation by a certain
ethnic group against the central government. The result was a civil
war which should be analyzed by historians and not by legislators,”
wrote Bagis.

Bagis added, “I hope my letter will create another opportunity for
you to reexamine the content of the draft resolution H. Res. 316 from
a wider perspective. That perspective is the Turkish-US relations.
The adoption of these resolutions would not facilitate our efforts
to improve Turkish-Armenian relations since the Armenian Government
and Diaspora will feel further encouraged in pursing the policy of
making political gains on this disputed period of history.”

Issue Of Liberation Of Seven Regions Is Discussed At Negotiations:El

ISSUE OF LIBERATION OF SEVEN REGIONS IS DISCUSSED AT NEGOTIATIONS: ELMAR MAMEDYAROV

YEREVAN, JULY 16. ARMINFO. Azeri Foreign Minister Elmar Mamedyarov
lifted once again the veil from the matter of negotiations on Nagorno
Karabakh conflict peaceful settlement.

According to Baku mass media, he stated in an interview to journalists
that at the first stage of negotiations the matter concerned the
liberation of not five but seven regions controlled by NKR. The issue
on quartering peacemaking forces in the region (after returning Azeri
people to their permanent residence in NKR) will be discussed when
the agreement on principle issues is to be reached. Mamedyarov said
that this decision was made at the OSCE Budapest summit.

“It is necessary to keep the confidentiality principle to reach any
developments. I only may say that the principle of maintenance of
territorial integrity of Azerbaijan is the basis of negotiation process
conducting in accordance with country’s Constitution”, Mamedyarov
stated. He also named groundless rumors in mass media that “a
referendum will be conducted in NKR after signing a peaceful agreement
10-15 years ago”. “The internal political situation in Armenia and
the fact that the information may have provocative nature, and, most
likely, it is directed to the study of response of the opposite party
may be the reasons for such information”, Mamedyarov supposed.

Fixtures confirmed for U19 finals

Fixtures confirmed for U19 finals
Wednesday, 8 June 2005
The match schedule and television coverage for the
fourth UEFA European Under-19 Championship final
tournament – one of the highlights of the UEFA
calendar, which will be played in Northern Ireland
between 18 and 29 July – has been confirmed.

Two groups
The seven qualifiers from the Elite round, plus the
hosts Northern Ireland, were drawn into two groups of
eight at the finals draw, which was held at Belfast
City Hall on 3 June and conducted by UEFA Executive
Committee member Michel Platini and Northern Ireland
national team manager Lawrie Sanchez. Northern Ireland
are joined in Group A by Greece, Serbia and Montenegro
and Germany, while Norway, Armenia, France and England
will contest Group B.

Television coverage
The top two teams in each section progress to the
semi-finals, which will be held on Tuesday 26 July,
with the winners meeting in the final three days
later. Eurosport, UEFA’s television partner for youth
competitions, will broadcast nine of the 15 final
round matches, including both semi-finals and the
final.

Five venues
The tournament will be staged in five venues in and
around Belfast: Windsor Park (Belfast), The
Showgrounds (Ballymena), The Oval (Belfast),
Mourneview Park (Lurgan) and The Showgrounds (Newry).

Accreditation procedure
Media representatives wishing to cover the final
tournament should apply for accreditation on UEFA’s
website:
The online media accreditation procedure will be
closed on 13 July.

UEFA EUROPEAN UNDER-19 CHAMPIONSHIP
Final Tournament fixtures

Date Group Match Location Kick-off
Mon 18 July B FRA v ENG The Oval, Belfast 18.00
Mon 18 July A SCG v GER Showgrounds, Newry 20.00
Mon 18 July B NOR v ARM Mourneview Park,
Lurgan 20.00
Mon 18 July A NIR v GRE Windsor Park, Belfast 20.30
Wed 20 July A GRE v GER Mourneview Park, Lurgan 18.00
Wed 20 July A NIR v SCG Showgrounds, Newry 20.00
Wed 20 July B ARM v ENG Showgrounds, Ballymena 20.00
Wed 20 July B NOR v FRA Windsor Park, Belfast 21.00
Sat 23 July A GRE v SCG The Oval, Belfast 18.00
Sat 23 July A GER v NIR Showgrounds, Ballymena 18.00
Sat 23 July B ARM v FRA Mourneview Park, Lurgan 20.00
Sat 23 July B ENG v NOR Showgrounds, Newry 20.00
Tue 26 July Semi-final 1 Mourneview Park, Lurgan
17.30
Tue 26 July Semi-final 2 Showgrounds, Ballymena 20.30

Fri 29 July Final Windsor Park, Belfast 20.00

All kick-off times CET (local time one hour behind)
Matches in bold shown on Eurosport

www.uefa.com/uefa/MediaServices/Accreditation

Chief Historian denies the Armenian Genocide (in German)

Frankfurter Rundschau
15 Juli 2005

Chief Historian denies the Armenian Genocide

Chefhistoriker leugnet Genozid an Armeniern.

Berlin · 15. Juli · epd · Der Leiter der türkischen
Historiker-Kommission zur Untersuchung des Völkermords an den Armeniern
1915/16, Hikmet Özdemir, hat den Genozid geleugnet. Das Gegenteil sei
richtig, sagte Özdemir der Zeitung Die Welt. Die Armenier hätten gegen
die Türken gekämpft und eine halbe Million Türken umgebracht. Wenn
es ein Dokument gebe, aus dem hervorgehe, dass die Regierung des
Osmanischen Reiches die Vernichtung der Armenier beabsichtigt habe,
dann werde er das akzeptieren, so der Leiter der Kommission, die die
türkische Regierung einsetzte. Özdemir sagte, die Deportationen der
Armenier seien aus militärischen Gründen notwendig gewesen. Dass viele
gestorben seien, sei Folge der Kriegswirren und der Witterung gewesen.

Für Historiker ist unumstritten, dass die damalige Regierung
die Vertreibung und Ausrottung der Armenier im Osmanischen Reich
anordnete. Mehr als eine Million Armenier wurden Opfer des Genozids
während des Ersten Weltkriegs. Dokumente belegen die Ereignisse. Der
Bundestag verurteilte kürzlich den Völkermord.

–Boundary_(ID_wW7v43iSxhsYkOOis6n9/A)–

Criminal Confession Of The Chief Architect

CRIMINAL CONFESSION OF THE CHIEF ARCHITECT

A1+
13-07-2005

«In which street do you live, Mr. Architect?» asked the
correspondent of `Haylur’ to the guest of the National Press Club
Yerevan chief Architect Samvel Danielyan. `I do not live in a street,
I live in a yard near the school N71′, informed the latter.

He informed that construction work is also being done in the yard
where he lives, but the yard of the school N 71 will be preserved. The
correspondent of `Armenian Times’ asked what is the aim of building
18-storeyed building in the center of Yerevan. The answer was
sensational, `Maybe from the architectural point of view they are not
justified, but there is the issue of efficient investments’.

Does it mean that if you have money you can do whatever you want?
«You can do whatever you want if it corresponds to the urban
development normative acts».

And as far as the city mayor Yervand Zakharyan is the chief official
recommending the construction of buildings, we asked if he has an
understanding of architecture. `He is one of the unique mayors who
takes part in all the sessions of the urban development council and is
aware of all the issued’, concluded Samvel Danielyan.

BAKU: Mediator’s visit raises hopes

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
July 13 2005

Mediators’ visit raises hopes

Baku, July 12, AssA-Irada
Another visit by the OSCE mediators to Baku raised hopes for settling
the long-standing Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over Upper Garabagh.
The co-chairs of the mediating OSCE Minsk Group did not cite an exact
timeframe for the conflict resolution but said a peace accord between
the conflicting sides may be signed soon.
Russian co-chair Yuri Merzlyakov told a news conference on the
results of the mediators’ two-day visit to Azerbaijan on Tuesday that
the talks held over the past year have been more beneficial than
before. He said that developing the wording of a peace agreement may
take several months.
`We would certainly like for this to happen sooner. As you know, the
Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents will meet in Kazan [Russia] in
August. But developing a draft peace agreement in the same timeframe
is not feasible.’
Radio Liberty quoted a high-ranking diplomatic source as saying that
most issues on the conflict settlement `have already been agreed
upon’ and the parties are working `on several remaining provisions’
of the peace accord. The Garabagh conflict may be settled as early as
this year or early in 2006 and the parties are likely to reach an
agreement at the Presidents’ meeting in Kazan.
US co-chair Steven Mann said the timing for the conflict resolution
is uncertain and will depend `on the will of the sides’.
`The peace accord may be signed in the coming months or in 100 years.
The issue depends on the heads of state as well as the two peoples. I
believe that both presidents deserve the international community’s
assistance in solving the problem.’
The co-chair said no new proposals were discussed in Baku. `We held
broader discussions and received more comprehensive explanations this
time’, he said.
Touching upon the possibility of restoring the road connecting
Azerbaijan with Armenia through Upper Garabagh, Mann said he
discussed this with the head of the Azerbaijani community of Garabagh
Nizami Bahmanov as well as Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov. He
noted, however, that it is inappropriate `to add the issue to the
range of matters being discussed at this point’.
Commenting on some assumptions that Russia may apply pressure on
Armenia, the Russian co-chair said this contradicts reality.
`Russia cannot rule Armenia. In general, I do not consider this
wording appropriate as Armenians may be offended by it. Russian State
Duma (parliament) chairman Boris Gryzlov did call Armenia a forepost
of Russia a while ago. But we should keep in mind that everyone makes
mistakes and Gryzlov is not an exception.’
Merzlyakov noted that Russia has no `separatist peace plans’ on the
Garabagh conflict resolution. `Moscow has shown its unequivocal
approach on this issue. President Putin laid out these principles
several years ago’, he said.
French co-chair Bernard Fassier said the mediators support continuing
the peace process, recalling the Warsaw meeting of Azerbaijani and
Armenian Presidents.
`They realize that an end should be put to war, the occupied land
liberated and refugees returned home. The two Presidents said in our
meetings that the primary goals are to ensure the prosperity of the
two peoples. They understand that this is possible only after peace
is restored in the region.’
`If we take major steps in this direction, the people will start
understanding the benefit of regional peace prospects. We hope the
cities will be restored and lands returned. The people will see the
importance of this and contribute to the process.’
In reply to a statement that a referendum is scheduled in Upper
Garabagh in 10-15 years to determine its status at a news briefing,
Russian co-chair Merzlyakov declined to comment, citing the
confidentiality of the talks. He somewhat clarified the issue
currently being discussed, saying that the parties continue working
to establish framework for the agreements reached during the Paris
talks.
`These elements may be vital for the conflict resolution and envision
the demands of the sides. There is no need to disclose them.’
The French co-chair Fassier disagreed with the statements accusing
the Minsk Group of the lack of activity, saying that the co-chairs
have carried out extensive work on the conflict resolution.
`If no progress has been achieved, we are not to blame. We will be
able to revitalize the process. But we cannot ensure that the parties
will show political will [to resolve the problem].
With regard to some statements that the democratic processes in the
region will greatly affect the conflict resolution, Fassier said this
`will have a certain impact’ on the negotiations. He also voiced a
hope that the November parliamentary election in Azerbaijan will be
democratic.
As for the involvement of neighboring states in the negotiations, the
French co-chair said he does object to this `in principle’. He did
not rule out that Iran, Turkey and Georgia may join the process.
The US co-chair generally approved of the suggestion but came out
against Iran’s involvement in the talks. `As an American, I do not
want to be involved in discussions with Iran’, he said.
The MG co-chairs will leave for Yerevan on Wednesday. They are
further expected to visit Upper Garabagh.*

WB urges to clarify situation with Armenian distribution networks

PanArmenian News
July 13 2005

WB URGES TO CLARIFY SITUATION WITH ARMENIAN DISTRIBUTION NETWORKS

13.07.2005 04:45

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The World Bank is still demanding precise
information on the new owner of the Armenian Distribution Networks,
Mediamax agency reported. Armenia Country Manager Roger Robinson
noted that according to the data available the State Committee
regulating the public services in Armenia requested Midland Resources
Company, the owner of the Distribution Networks, to clarify the
situation. `If the issue is not clarified within several days I am
going to meet with the members of the Armenian government’, Roger
Robinson stated. To remind, June 30 RAO UES of Russia announced of
the intention to purchase the Armenian Distribution Networks via its
branch with $73 million. Meanwhile the Press Secretary of the
Distribution Networks assures that the company was conveyed to the
trust management of the RAO UES.

Antelias: “Khatcher Kaloustian” Center for Pedagogical Development

PRESS RELEASE
Catholicosate of Cilicia
Communication and Information Department
Contact: V.Rev.Fr. Krikor Chiftjian, Communications Officer
Tel: (04) 410001, 410003
Fax: (04) 419724
E- mail: [email protected]
Web:

PO Box 70 317
Antelias-Lebanon

Armenian version:

THE “KHATCHER KALOUSTIAN”
CENTER FOR PEDAGOGICAL DEVELOPMENT
COMPLETES ITS ACADEMIC YEAR
The “Khatcher Kaloustian” Center for Pedagogical Development, which
functions under the patronage of the Catholicosate of Cilicia, concluded its
academic year under the leadership of the Center’s director, Krikor
Shahinian.

The Center had 21 students during the last academic year. 10 of these
students followed the BT program and 11 followed the TS program. Six of the
students sat for their corresponding exams.

The pedagogical school plans to introduce distance learning (LT) next year.
The extracurricular socio-cultural life in the institute is in itself a
pedagogy project and is carried out to its fullest by the director of the
Center and his assistants.

Established in 1986, the Center functions under the patronage of His
Holiness Aram I. The Center has its unique role in the context of
pan-Diaspora educational projects initiated by His Holiness Aram I. The
Center has a special committee that works hand in hand with the Center’s
director.

##

The Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia is one of the two Catholicosates of
the Armenian Orthodox Church. For detailed information about “Khatcher
Kalousdian” Center for Pedagogical Development, you may refer to the web
page of the Catholicosate, The Cilician
Catholicosate, the administrative center of the church is located in
Antelias, Lebanon.

http://www.cathcil.org/
http://www.cathcil.org/v04/doc/Armenian.htm
http://www.cathcil.org/

To Conduct Referendum In Karabakh Means Its Loss

TO CONDUCT REFERENDUM IN KARABAKH MEANS ITS LOSS

BAKU, JULY 12. ARMINFO-TURAN. The statement of high-ranking
diplomatic source in Yerevan of radio “Liberty” on the possibility of
conducting a referendum in Nagorno Karabakh within the coming 15
years would means its loss for Azerbaijan.

This is the opinion of most of politicians and independent political
experts in Baku. According to the Armenian sources, referendum in
Karabakh is one of the elements

Of the future peaceful agreement which can be signed this year.
According to some information, the Protocol on Intentions can be
signed during the meeting of the president of Armenia and Azerbaijan
in Kazan, on August 27 of this year. Official Baku understands quite
well all negative perspectives of referendum, but the West wants
peaceful agreement. If I. Aliyev contrary to the national interests
makes such step he will get support by the West on the eve of
parliamentary elections. Then, the West will again close eyes to the
violation of human rights, jusT like in October 2003. In this case I.
Aliyev will have the parliament controlled by him and the threat
against his regime will weaken. However, explosion of indignation may
take place and then nothing will save the ruling regime.

Commenting on the situation to Turan agency Vafa Guluzade, political
expert, said that the government of Azerbaijan should not agree to
referendum. “The Armenian made it in Yerevan and there is no doubt
that they will again vote for independence,” he said.

It is difficult to believe that the authorities of Azerbaijan can
agree to such proposal, said former Ambassador of Azerbaijan to
Russia Hikmet Hacizade stated.

Conducting of referendum runs counter the international law, as the
referendum must be held in the whole country, and not in some of its
regions. If Baku agrees to such variant it will mean betrayal of
national interests and explosion of indignation. “It will be
impossible to realize such agreements,” he said.

Political expert Eldar Namazov noted that such variant of settlement
is lobbied by the Armenians for many years ands ruins counter the
interests of Azerbaijan and health sense. “To conduct a referendum in
the occupied territories is impossible and the attempts to make this
variant are doomed to failure,” Namazov said.