Explosion On Construction Site Of Covered Market In Yerevan

EXPLOSION ON CONSTRUCTION SITE OF COVERED MARKET IN YEREVAN

arminfo
Thursday, June 14, 13:54

Explosion broke out on the construction site of the Covered Market
in Yerevan overnight, a Yerevan-based daily Haykakan Zhamanak writes.

The paper writes that the explosion might be connected with
construction and demolition process. “They dig a huge hole there and
there could be need for explosion as well,” the paper writes. In
the meanwhile the joint commission set up by the Municipality of
Yerevan and the Culture Ministry has given a resolution on the partial
demolition of the Covered Market’s arch roof on May 27. Late in the
evening on May 27 the major arcs and related structures of the covered
market collapsed following demolition of some inter-storey coverage.

Although the construction was suspended, liquidation of debris has
even deteriorated the situation.

To note, the Covered Market is included in the list of the historical
monuments of Yerevan. It was built in 1952 by Armenian architect
Grigory Aghababyan’s project and has been considered one of the symbols
of the Armenian capital since then. Earlier the mass media reported
that Armenian MP Samvel Alexanyan had bought the Covered Market from
the Leader of Prosperous Armenia Party Gagik Tsarukyan and was going
to turn it into a Yerevan City supermarket.

Armenia’s Tourism Industry Lacks Professionals – Public Figure

ARMENIA’S TOURISM INDUSTRY LACKS PROFESSIONALS – PUBLIC FIGURE

PanARMENIAN.Net
June 14, 2012 – 13:55 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – Armenia’s tourism sector is in need of professionals,
head of Association of Tour Operators of and Tourism Institute’s
rector said.

“Armenia lacks cooks, waiters and other service industry
professionals,” Robert Minasyan said, stressing the need to choose
target countries and groups to foster development of tourism in
the country.

“Russia tops the list of target countries for Armenia. We must also
try to attract tourists from Italy and Germany,” Tourism Institute
rector said, noting Iran as another good source of income.

Mr. Minasyan undercoated the necessity to create a brand for Armenia
to raise better awareness on the country.

“Mount Ararat may serve as a wonderful brand, for instance,” he said.

For ‘Decent’ Public Transport: NGOs Want Rights Of Bus Drivers, Pass

FOR ‘DECENT’ PUBLIC TRANSPORT: NGOS WANT RIGHTS OF BUS DRIVERS, PASSENGERS RESPECTED
By Gohar Abrahamyan

ArmeniaNow
14.06.12 | 13:11

Problems within Armenia’s public transportation system have once
again become a widely discussed topic after a recent killing of a
bus driver by his colleague in a fight related to their work.

In the deadly dispute in question that happened in Yerevan’s Avan
district last week one of the drivers operating minibus route N5
hit another one in the temple, which caused the death. According to
reports, the two men had an argument over the so-called “stealing
of passengers” and in that particular incident it was about just one
passenger fare of 100 drams (about 25 cents).

A number of non-governmental organizations disseminated a statement
on Wednesday, saying that what happened to the two drivers was “the
consequence of the illegalities that exist in the sphere of public
transportation.”

According to the NGOs (the Consumer Association of Armenia,
the Achilles Center for the Protection of Drivers’ Rights, the
Center of Social Inclusion and Support for Equality, the Ecological
Public Alliance, the Decent Transportation Civil Initiative), bus
drivers in Armenia are excessively exploited by the route owners,
are deprived of elementary human rights, have no labor contracts,
nor any rights related to recreation and health, and are vulnerable
to the arbitrariness of their bosses.

“Drivers do not receive a fixed salary, while paying to the bus route
owner 15,000-25,000 drams (about $36-$60) from their daily proceeds.

This is in the case when, according to our information, bus route
owners pay a monthly fixed payment of 30,000 drams (about $72) to
the budget, which is a ridiculously low rate of payment that ensures
excessive profits for the bus route owners,” the NGOs said. “Besides,
today there are no effective mechanisms of exercising civil control
in this sector and corruption in it has reached the scope that puts
the security of the state at risk.”

According to Consumers Union Chairman Armen Poghosyan, the poor
technical condition of many vehicles serving as means of public
transportation in Yerevan and Armenia today is also the result of
the lack of proper legislation that would regulate it.

“Some $25,000, which are unaccountable and untaxed, circulate in this
sector every day,” Poghosyan said at a press conference on Wednesday.

Poghosyan said that at present 115 minibus routes operate in capital
Yerevan, while under the new concept of the sector their number is
to be reduced to 76 (in recent years the share of minibuses, known
as marshrutkas, in the public transportation of Yerevan has decreased
from 90 to 70 percent).

“Today, there are some positive changes in the sphere of public
transportation. The number of minibuses decreases, while the number
of buses grows, but the schedule of the work of public transportation
still remains a problem,” said Poghosyan.

Decent Transportation Civil Initiative activist Arman Gharibyan says
that their pressure group has a clear strategy of action to be carried
out by a working group that also includes lawyers.

“We demand decent transportation, we demand that corresponding state
bodies punish the owners of bus routes that provide poor services, we
demand that public transportation be available also in late evening
and night hours, that the driver work within the limits of the law,
refraining from smoking and listening to [mostly loud and low-culture]
music and so on,” says the activist.

Most bus drivers do not speak about their problems out loud, but
in private conversations they confess that they are face lots of
difficulties in their stressful work and literally have to fight for
their daily bread.

Baku Rejects Sniper Withdrawal

BAKU REJECTS SNIPER WITHDRAWAL

Asbarez
Thursday, June 14th, 2012

Azeri foreign minister Elmar Mammadyarov (right) with OSCE chairman
Eamon Gilmore in Baku

BAKU (RFE/RL)-Azerbaijan effectively rejected on Thursday renewed
international calls for the parties to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
to unconditionally withdraw snipers from “the line of contact” and
agree to joint investigations of growing truce violations there.

Irish Foreign Minister Eamon Gilmore, the chairman-in-office of the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, voiced such calls
when visited Yerevan and Baku this week. He reportedly insisted on
the need for a concrete mechanism for such investigations after talks
with his Azerbaijani counterpart Elmar Mammadyarov on Thursday.

News reports quoted Mammadyarov as saying that Baku agrees with the
idea, advanced by international mediators, in principle. “But that
mechanism could work only when Armenian troops start withdrawing from
Azerbaijan’s occupied territories,” he said, according to the APA
news agency. “Only in that case can the mechanism be put into action.”

“If we start applying that mechanism now, that will only mean
reinforcing the status quo, which is unacceptable,” Mammadyarov told
a joint news conference with Gilmore.

“If Armenia does not want its soldiers to die, then it must liberate
Azerbaijan’s lands. If this happens, there will be no need for
snipers,” added the Azerbaijani foreign minister.

The Armenian side has voiced support for both sniper withdrawal and
joint investigations. Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian reaffirmed
this stance after his meeting with Gilmore on Tuesday.

Armenia’s Foreign Minister Had A Phone Conversation With Gregory Kar

ARMENIA’S FOREIGN MINISTER HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH GREGORY KARASIN

ARMENPRESS
14 June, 2012
YEREVAN

YEREVAN, JUNE 14, ARMENPRESS: Armenia’s Foreign Minister Edward
Nalbandyan had a phone conversation with Russian Deputy Foreign
Minister Gregory Karasin. Issues related to Armenian-Russian bilateral
cooperation were discussed, Armenia’s Foreign Affairs Ministry press
service told Armenpress.

The interlocutors also referred to cooperation of Armenia and Russia
within the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

CIS was founded on 8 December 1991 by the Republic of Belarus,
the Russian Federation, and Ukraine, when the leaders of the three
countries met in the Belovezhskaya Pushcha Natural Reserve, about 50 km
(30 miles) north of Brest in Belarus and signed a Creation Agreement
on the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the creation of CIS as a
successor entity to the USSR.

At the same time they announced that the new alliance would be open
to all republics of the former Soviet Union, as well as other nations
sharing the same goals. The CIS charter stated that all the members
were sovereign and independent nations and thereby effectively
abolished the Soviet Union.

On 21 December 1991, the leaders of eight additional former Soviet
Republics – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova,
Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan – signed the Alma-Ata Protocol
and joined the CIS, thus bringing the number of participating countries
to 11.

Armenia Ready To Contribute To Establishing Peace And Normalizing Si

ARMENIA READY TO CONTRIBUTE TO ESTABLISHING PEACE AND NORMALIZING SITUATION IN CONFLICT ZONES (INTERVIEW)
By Mariam Levina

news.am
June 14, 2012 | 00:51

Interview of the head of Arms Control and International Security
Department at the Armenian MFA Samvel Lazarian to Armenian
News-NEWS.am.

How do you assess Armenia’s participation in international peacekeeping
activities?

It is definitely a positive development. Politically, involvement in
peacekeeping is improving the international image of our country. This
means that we care about international security problems and Armenia
is ready to contribute to establishing peace and ensuring the success
of those political processes which lead to the normalization of the
situation in conflict zones.

Another advantage is that our servicemen have a great opportunity
not only to improve their skills but often serve as an example,
to establish the necessary contacts to represent our country. I was
witnessing it when I met our soldiers in Kosovo a few years ago.

Armenia has serious plans for involvement in the UN peacekeeping
activities. CSTO may provide such an opportunity as well.

Presently the Armenian troops are participating in two missions –
in Kosovo and Afghanistan. Do you expect to change the format of
participation in the near future?

In December 2011 Armenian peacekeepers were withdrawn from Kosovo
after seven years of service due to reasons not depending on us. This
was due to financial difficulties in Greece. Our troops have been
deployed and served within the Greek battalion. At the moment we are
actively holding talks to return to KFOR mission in the partnership
with one of the NATO states.

As to Afghanistan, the first deployment of the Armenian troops in
Kunduz was carried out in early 2010. A year later, the number of
our military continent tripled reaching 126. As you know, NATO has
already made a decision to withdraw the main military forces by the
end of 2014. Our position, which was recently announced by Foreign
Minister Edward Nalbandian at the Chicago summit, is that we will
stay in the country until the end of this period, and after 2014 will
continue to provide all possible assistance to the Afghan authorities.

How do you assess the work of the Armenian side within the framework
of the CSTO, and specifically in the development of CollectiveRapid
Reaction Force ?

Armenia is a very active member of the Collective Security Treaty
Organization. We not only adopted and ratified the majority of
new agreements within the framework of the Organization, but are
also putting forward proposals and initiatives to strengthen and
raise the efficiency of the CSTO. This is particularly related to
structural changes, steps aimed at a higher level of integration and
the deepening of military and military-technical cooperation. The
activities of the Armenian side were highly appreciated. Secretary
General of CSTO Nikolay Bordyuzha noted that during its presidency
in 2008-2009 Armenia, a number of complex documents were adopted with
the support of the Armenian leadership.

The Ministry of Defense, National Security Council, the Ministries
of Economy and Finance and other institutions are actively involved
in the CSTO activities.

The efforts to coordinate positions in the international agencies
have been recently intensified.

The meetings were held and joint statements were approved on various
topics, including on the issues of UN General Assembly agenda.

This year, a separate diplomatic mission in Armenia at the Organization
opened under the decree of President Serzh Sargsyan. Ara Badalyan was
appointed a permanent representative to the CSTO. Our representatives
are actively involved in the work of the secretariat as well.

Can you tell a bit more about the upcoming collectiverapid reaction
force exercise?

The exercise titled “Interaction 2012” will be held this September.

During the exercise the servicemen will work out actions in a crisis
situation. It’s actually a large anti-terrorist operation with the
involvement of civil services, police and other agencies.

What is the direction of developing cooperation with NATO, noting
that Armenia repeatedly stated it does not set a goal of membership
in the Alliance?

Our relations with NATO can be characterized as a partnership. We
established relations in early 90s with the involvement in the
activities of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC),
later within the Partnership for Peace program and Euro-Atlantic
Partnership Council. It is necessary to stress that these relations
were developing progressively toward expanding areas of cooperation,
enhancing mutual trust in the political dialogue at various levels.

Since 2006, we have a solid basis for bilateral cooperation. As the
Alliance was undergoing reforms and expanding the forms of cooperation
with partners, it became necessary to develop individual formats
that are best matched to the needs of each partner country. For
this purpose, n Armenia and NATO agreed on Individual Partnership
Action Plan (IPAP). We have recently started the implementation of
the third stage of IPAP, a document that covers political issues,
defense, emergency situations and science.

Armenia has strong, efficient, highly organized Armed Forces. However,
many things are changing around us, it is necessary to carry out
reforms to preserve what we have achieved and to raise it to a
new level. To make the reforms effective, we need to learn the best
practices, learn about recent achievements in building the armed forces
and adapt them to our needs. This is particularly urgent for military
training, reorganization of the structures in the field of defense.

We collaborated with the International Secretariat of NATO for several
years to work on the concept of crisis management and creation of
the Situation Centre at Armenia’s Ministry of Emergency Situations.

Cooperation in elimination of obsolete pesticides proved to be
efficient as well, the program continues to monitor the seismic
activity. So, there is a multi-faceted cooperation.

Is membership in the CSTO and cooperation with NATO providing the
country’s security?

The concept of security in our time is broader. Success in ensuring
security depends on effective correlation and balance of its
components. Armenia adheres to the principle of cooperative security.

We are full members of the CSTO and, definitively the Organization
is the main guarantor of our security. On the other hand, we are an
active partner of the North-Atlantic Alliance.

We have partner relations with Russia as well as friendly and
confidential cooperation with the United States.

Our historically good relations with the northern and southern
neighbors are crucial for a number of parameters of our security,
among them communications, energy supplies.

The times of confrontation of various military-political alliances
has passed. We must build a common platform, which would bring closer
the positions of the countries with different visions of security,
at the same time trying to rule out the danger of mutually exclusive
approaches and confrontation.

What is Armenia’s involvement in the struggle against weapons of mass
destruction? Can we call it effective?

Armenia is a party to almost all international treaties and conventions
in this area, for instance the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons, Convention on the Prohibition of the Development,
Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their
Destruction, Convention on the Prohibition of the Development,
Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin
Weapons and on Their Destruction. These international mechanisms
stipulate certain procedures to provide relevant information on
implementation which the Armenian side exactly following.

In fact, we have done significant work in the struggle against
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction since 2009. Amendments
were made to the Arms Act and the licensing of the Penal Code.

In 2010, a new law on export control on dual-use items and their
transit transportation through the territory of Armenia, as well as
information transfer and intellectual activity. Government of Armenia
adopted a number of relevant decisions of the licensing procedure for
determining the export and import of military goods and their transit
and brokering activities in this area, as well as those confirming
the national list of military goods.

We started the cooperation with other international organizations,
such as Federal Office of Economics and Export Control (BAFA),with
the United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute
(UNICRI). Active work is underway to implement the 1540 UN Security
Council resolution as of 2004, which says “all States shall refrain
from providing any form of support to non-State actors that attempt
to develop, acquire, manufacture, possess, transport, transfer or use
nuclear, chemical or biological weapons and their means of delivery”.

We are presenting the relevant reports at the UN and OSCE.

To what extent does Armenia adhere to the Treaty on Conventional
Armed Forces in Europe (CFE)? Does Armenia consider this treaty viable?

Since joining the CFE Treaty in May 1992, Armenia has been fully
implementing the legal requirements of the document. We carried
out reduction of the conventional weapons. The Armenian side
regularly provides information and receives inspection as part of
its international obligations.

Unfortunately, during the recent we experienced some difficulties with
the full implementation of the agreement. But it is encouraging that
are active consultations. I represented Armenia during the last year’s
four-round talks on modernization of the treaty framework held in
Vienna. This work has not yielded concrete results yet. Armenia stands
for the preservation, restoration of the viability of the CFE Treaty.

Termination of the contract and vacuum in the field of conventional
arms control is fraught with serious negative consequences.

On the other hand, Azerbaijan is permanently violating CEF Treaty. Is
there any information on precise figures?

Absolutely right, Azerbaijan violates the provisions of the
CFE Treaty. According to official information on Azerbaijan’s
implementation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, as
of January 1, 2012 Azerbaijan exceeds the set rates in two out of five
categories of the conventional arms: 381 battle tanks instead of 220
set by the Treaty and 516 artillery pieces instead of permitted 285.

In 2011 Azerbaijan significantly increased the number of its weapons:
by 47 pieces of artillery, by 5 helicopters and by 106 pieces of
armored fighting vehicle (AFV).

Thus, Azerbaijan has officially exceeded its set levels and categories
of AFV: 287 armored vehicles, instead of 220, deliberately refraining
from the reflection of this fact in the annual exchange of information
under the CFE Treaty. Azerbaijan repeatedly increased its military
budget over recent years (the military budget for 2012 makes $
3.47 billion).

We continually attract the attention of our partner countries,
various international on the issue and call for an adequate response.

Ankara: Book Reveals Former Commander’s Alleged Illegal Activities

BOOK REVEALS FORMER COMMANDER’S ALLEGED ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES

Today’s Zaman
June 12 2012
Turkey

A new book reveals that Mehmet Ulger, who served as the Malatya
Provincial Gendarmerie Brigade commander in 2007, had allegedly
wiretapped many public officials in Malatya based on false reasons
given in official documents.

Ulger, who was arrested last year when a major operation was carried
out as part of the Ergenekon probe on suspected links with the 2007
Zirve Publishing House murders in Malatya in which three people who
sold Christian literature were killed, was allegedly instrumental
in creating false documents to have many people wiretapped in the
province.

One of those was noncommissioned officer Huseyin Aslanpencesi, who
was wiretapped on the basis that he was smuggling historical artifacts.

And Pator Behnan Konutgan, who was allegedly on the list of Christians
to be assassinated, was wiretapped on the basis that he belonged to
radical religious groups. Gokhan Talas, a Christian who called the
police when no one answered the door at the Zirve Publishing House
on the day of the murder on April 18, 2007, was also wiretapped on
the basis of belonging to radical religious groups.

Huseyin Yelki, who was working at the publishing house, was also
wiretapped on the same grounds. In addition, Suzanna Geske, the wife
of German national Tilmann Ekkehart Geske, who was killed at the
publishing house, was also wiretapped on the same grounds.

Ulger also fabricated documents to have Malatya prosecutors and judges
wiretapped on the basis that they belonged to the terrorist Kurdistan
Workers’ Party (PKK) or Hizbullah. Ulger allegedly blackmailed some
of these prosecutors.

These details were revealed by journalist Adem Yavuz Arslan in his
book, “Ergenekon’un Zirvesi: Dink’ten Malatya’ya Azýnlýklar Nasýl
Hedef Oldu?” (Ergenekon’s Peak: How were minorities targeted from
Dink to Malatya?).

Another detail emerging from the book is that chief suspect Emre
Gunaydýn’s father, Mustafa Gunaydýn, might have been involved in the
planning of the murders as he called the Malatya gendarmerie from
his phone prior to the murders.

In May 2008, a letter sent by an individual identified as Ali Arslan
to the Malatya 3rd High Criminal Court, currently hearing the 2007
murder case, claimed that Emre Gunaydýn was provoked by Ulger.

The case, related to Ergenekon, a clandestine criminal network charged
with plotting to topple the government by creating large-scale chaos
in the country, is ongoing.

The Malatya murders are thought to be part of the Cage Action Plan,
a subversive plot allegedly devised by military officers that sought
to undermine the government through the assassination of non-Muslims
and other acts of terror. The Cage plan was allegedly drawn up
at the order of Ergenekon. Cage plan documents specifically call
the killings of Armenian-Turkish journalist Hrant Dink, Catholic
priest Father Andrea Santoro and the three Christians in Malatya an
“operation.” An anti-democratic group within the Naval Forces Command
behind the Cage plan had intended to foment chaos in society with
those killings, but complained that the plan had failed when large
segments of society protested the killings in mass demonstrations.

Baku: Turkish Ambassador To Azerbaijan Comments On Armenian Foreign

TURKISH AMBASSADOR TO AZERBAIJAN COMMENTS ON ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTER’S SPEECH

APA
June 13 2012
Azerbaijan

“Armenia must withdraw troops from occupied areas before comparing
itself with Azerbaijan”

Baku. Elnur Huseynguluyev – APA. Turkish Ambassador to Azerbaijan
Hulusi Kilic commented on Armenian foreign minister Edward Nalbandyan’s
speech dealing with the Turkey’s condolences to Azerbaijani martyrs.

According to APA, Kilic said that it was inappropriate to compare
Armenia with Azerbaijan: “There are 4 UN resolutions which condemn the
occupation of Azerbaijani territories. Armenia must withdraw to its
internationally recognized borders first of all and then it can give
such kind of explanations. I don’t want to say more. Azerbaijani
territories are under the occupation and the struggle for its
liberation and retrieval will continue”.

Ambassador also mentioned that Turkey doesn’t want any human losses
from Azerbaijani or Armenian side: “We support the peaceful solution
to the conflict”.

E. Nalbandyan touched upon the Turkish condolence to Azerbaijan due to
death of 5 soldiers during the prevention of the Armenian provocation
in the frontline. He said that there were elements of racism in that
statement and Turkey didn’t make such steps towards Armenia when it
lost its soldiers.

The invader country’s minister said that Turkey was not objective
and neutral in the problem of Nagorno Karabakh and it also damaged
the solution process.

BAKU: Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry Investigates Information On Visit

AZERBAIJANI FOREIGN MINISTRY INVESTIGATES INFORMATION ON VISIT OF NAGORNO KARABAKH SEPARATISTS TO UK

APA
June 13 2012
Azerbaijan

Baku. Victoria Dementieva – APA. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of
Azerbaijan investigates the information spread in Armenian mass media
about the visit of so-called “Nagorno Karabakh Republic” delegation
to London, spokesman for the ministry Elman Abdullayev told APA.

According to him, Azerbaijani Embassy in UK has been tasked to
investigate this information.

Armenian press issued statement on the visit of so-called “Nagorno
Karabakh Republic” delegation to London, their meeting in House
of Lords and participation in the annual meeting of the UK-Armenia
friendship group.

Clinton Visits Baku, Yerevan As Frontline Clashes Persist

CLINTON VISITS BAKU, YEREVAN AS FRONTLINE CLASHES PERSIST
By Jasur Sumerenli, Naira Melkumyan

Ground Report
June 13 2012

Each side blames the other for spate of cross-border shooting
incidents.

Clashes along the front lines separating Armenian and Azerbaijani
forces last week resulted in deaths on both sides, but that does not
mean the Nagorny Karabakh conflict is in danger of reigniting after
a two-decade-long truce, experts say.

As is often the case, accounts of the shootings from June 4 to 7 – and
of who was to blame – differed sharply on both sides. The Armenians
said the Azerbaijani military suffered 25 dead and killed four of
their soldiers. Azerbaijan said Armenian troops killed five of its
men at a cost of 40 of theirs.

The end of full-scale hostilities in 1994 left an Armenian
administration in control of Nagorny Karabakh and adjoining regions,
but without international recognition. The ceasefire agreement
has held over the years, despite sporadic gunfire both across the
“line of control” that rings Karabakh, and along the border between
Armenia and Azerbaijan. Years of negotiations have not produced a
formal peace agreement.

Officials in Yerevan said the violence started on June 4 with an
Azerbaijani incursion into Armenia’s Tavush region, which left three
Armenian soldiers dead. A fourth was killed overnight on June 5-6 on
the front line around Karabakh.

Azerbaijan’s defence ministry described one clash on June 5 as an
Armenian attack on its forces’ positions in the Qazakh region, which
was repulsed. Apparently referring to the same incident, Armenian
sources said Azerbaijani troops made an incursion into Tavush region
– which borders on Qazakh – and lost five men in the process without
causing any fatalities.

The one point on which Armenian and Azerbaijani commentators agree
is that this spate of skirmishes was connected with a visit to the
region by United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that took
place at the same time – June 4-7. Each side accused the other of
deliberately provoking an outbreak of violence timed to coincide with
the Secretary of State’s arrival.

“I think it’s no coincidence that these aggressive actions occurred
during Hillary Clinton’s visit,” David Jamalyan, a defence expert in
Armenia, said. “Azerbaijan wanted to check to see what the reaction
from the United States and other world powers would be.”

At a joint news conference with Clinton, Armenian foreign minister
Eduard Nalbandyan pressed home his government’s position.

“Not satisfied with violating the ceasefire regime in the Nagorny
Karabakh conflict zone on a daily basis, Baku is trying to raise
tensions on the border with Armenia,” he said.

In Azerbaijan, reserve lieutenant-colonel Oqtay Kerimov said it was
Armenia that was responsible, and suggested that it was planned long
in advance as a tactic for focusing US attention on Karabakh.

At the same time, Kerimov blamed the general recurrence of ceasefire
violations on an Armenian policy of bolstering military positions,
for example by gaining control of hilltop vantage points and buildings
near the conflict lines.

Sergei Minasyan, head of political studies at the Caucasus Institute
in Yerevan, said tensions – caused by Azerbaijan – had reached
unprecedented levels, and it was not clear which way things were
heading.

“Azerbaijan has not been so active on the border for a long time,”
he said.

In Yerevan, Clinton stressed that the Karabakh conflict must be
resolved via the ongoing peace process.

“I am very concerned by these incidents and have called on all parties,
all actors, to refrain from the use or threat of force, because there
is no military solution to this conflict,” she said. “It can only be
resolved at the negotiating table. And of course there is a danger
that it could escalate into a much broader conflict that would be
very tragic for everyone concerned.”

Clinton took precisely the same message to Baku, where she met
Azerbaijani foreign minister Elmar Mammadyarov on June 6.

“I am deeply concerned about the danger of escalating tension, which
could have unpredictable and disastrous consequences. This cycle of
violence and retaliation must end, and everyone should work to keep
the peace and comply with the obligations under the 1994 ceasefire
agreement,” she said. “I have asked the president, as I have asked
the president of Armenia, to work together to exercise restraint and
to take the steps necessary for peace, not conflict.”

Elnur Aslanov, a spokesman for Azerbaijan president Ilham Aliyev,
said Armenia was attempting to undermine the talks.

“This most recent act of sabotage by Armenia is an example of the
unconstructive position which that country has taken for a number of
years,” he said. “Armenia is trying to maintain the status quo.

Instead of taking steps towards peace, stability and security, it is
increasing militaristic rhetoric, instability and provocations. That
shows Armenia is not interested in achieving peace.”

Ilhar Mammadov, a political analyst from the Republican Alternative
Movement, argued that Clinton’s comments supported the Azerbaijani
position – if peaceful negotiation was the only route for resolving
the Karabakh, Armenian control of Karabakh could not be legitimate.

“Clinton’s remarks don’t mean that at one point, there was a military
solution to the conflict, and that Armenia achieved it. If there is no
military solution, that means there never was and never will be one,”
he said, noting that this logic meant that “Armenia must withdraw
its armed forces from the occupied territories.”

Despite the violence on the ground and the political recriminations,
analysts in Yerevan are not predicting that things will really get
out of hand.

“This sabotage [of the ceasefire] is more or less constant,” Artsrun
Hovhannisyan of Armenia’s Institute for Political Studies said. “It
isn’t worth deliberating whether such incidents genuinely make it
more or less likely that the ceasefire will break down.”

Jasur Sumerinli is editor-in-chief of the MilAz defence news agency
in Azerbaijan. Naira Melkumyan is a freelance journalist in Armenia.