Author: Karagyozian Lena

Armenian president calls on Turkey to open border
Die Welt, Hamburg
19 Nov 04
Armenian President Robert Kocharyan has called on Turkey to resume
bilateral relations with Armenia. Interviewed by German newspaper Die
Welt, Kocharyan said that Turkey’s closure of the border with Armenia
could only be described as “harassment”. Kocharyan said that Turkey’s
recognition of the Armenian genocide was very important but not a
condition for developing bilateral relations. The following is the
text of Dietrich Alexander’s interview with Kocharyan in Die Welt on
19 November, headlined “You can only call that harassment”;
subheadings inserted editorially:
Armenian-European cooperation
[Alexander] What do you expect from Germany and the EU?
[Kocharyan] Germany has helped include the southern Caucasus into
Europe’s New Neighbourhood programme. We now expect this programme to
be filled with concrete substance to make it interesting for the
entire region.
[Alexander] So the EU should become a stabilizing factor in the
southern Caucasus?
[Kocharyan] Yes, the partnership with the EU would have a stabilizing
effect, speed up reform processes in the region and promote
cooperation between the Caucasus states, since everybody would share
the same objectives.
[Alexander] Is your country’s objective to become an EU member?
[Kocharyan] We regard ourselves as part of Europe, are a member of the
Council of Europe and cooperate with the European nations in the
OSCE. Our reforms aim at achieving European standards. At one point
this question will become an issue.
[Alexander] And NATO membership…?
[Kocharyan] … is not on our agenda [ellipses as published].
Armenian-Turkish relations should resume without conditions
[Alexander] The border between Turkey and your country has been closed
for 11 years. How problematic are relations?
[Kocharyan] Actually, we have no relations, not even at the diplomatic
level. The border does not work, there is no trade. Turkey is
virtually putting a blockade on Armenia. One can only describe it as
harassment. We are of the opinion that we should assume bilateral
relations without any conditions. The current situation is anything
but normal.
[Alexander] So you do not expect Ankara to apologize for the arrest,
deportation and murder of hundreds of thousands of Armenians, which
the Young Turks’ movement started in 1915?
[Kocharyan] For us the recognition of the genocide of the Armenians is
very important, but it will never be a condition for developing
bilateral relations.
[Alexander] At the end of a possible normalization of your
relationship with Turkey there would have to be some sort of
admittance of guilt on the part of Turkey, wouldn’t there?
[Kocharyan] It would significantly change the atmosphere. The crime is
a fact that cannot be denied. If Ankara were to recognize this fact,
it would mean a major step toward normalization.
[Alexander] What is your explanation for Turkey’s blockade? The
closeness with your other neighbour, Turkmen [as published]
Azerbaijan, or because the Armenians are something like Turkey’s
personalized bad conscience?
[Kocharyan] The bad conscience may play a role in Turkey’s
consciousness. Yet, Ankara is now trying to link the blockade of
Armenia to the settlement of the problem concerning the enclave
[German: die Enklave] of Nagornyy Karabakh in Azerbaijan. We think
that the relationship between our country and Turkey should in no way
be dictated by relations with a third country. After all, we are not
making our relations with Turkey dependent on the solution of the
Cyprus problem.
[Alexander] Then you would have to welcome Turkey’s EU entry, which
would give the Armenians a “normal” border.
[Kocharyan] Turkey would naturally be more predictable if it were in
the EU. And Armenia would have a direct border with the EU. Yet, we
think that a country with which entry talks are opened must not block
one of its neighbours. If negotiations were started under such
conditions, it would somehow accept the current state. So far
negotiations have never been opened with any other country under such
conditions. This is what we fear and are concerned about. It is unfair
to base one’s own luck on somebody else’s misfortune.

AzerNews, Azerbaijan
Nov 18 2004
Armenian delegation attends energy conference in Baku

An international conference dedicated to energy cooperation among the
Caspian basin countries was held at the Hyatt Regency Hotel of Baku
on Saturday on the initiative of the European Union.

Issues related to prospects for energy collaboration among regional
states were discussed at the event attended by delegations from
Azerbaijan, Georgia, Belarus, Iran, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Russia,
Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan, as well as an Armenian
delegation led by a head of the Energy Ministry department Levan
Vardanian.
Deputy Prime Minister Abid Sharifov said at the conference that the
Armenian representatives’ participation in the event does not imply
Azerbaijan’s cooperation with Yerevan.
Vardanian told journalists that he did not face any difficulty in
coming to Baku. He also thanked the Azerbaijani side for ‘organizing
the visit properly’.
Although the Azerbaijani government has kept the Armenians’ planned
participation in the conference confidential, their arrival in Baku
has drawn fire from the public and political organizations in the
country.
The Garabagh Liberation Organization held a picket outside the Hyatt
Regency Hotel on the same day in protest against the Armenian
delegates’ visit. The opposition Whole Azerbaijan Popular Front party
of Azerbaijan, in turn, issued a statement condemning the position of
the government, which has offered facilities for the Armenians’
participation in the conference and concealed it from the public.
In the statement, the party urges the government to voice a decisive
stance on the issues related to Azerbaijan’s national interests and
take urgent steps to oust the Armenian delegates from Baku.
The Armenian representatives also participated in a conference on
cooperation in the area of transport in Baku on Sunday.

Baltic News Service
November 16, 2004
ESTONIAN PRESIDENT GIVES OVERVIEW OF EU NEIGHBORHOOD POLICY TO
ARMENIAN LEADERS
TALLINN
Estonian President Arnold Ruutel on Monday met in the course of an
official visit to Armenia with the prime minister of the country,
Andranik Margaryan.
The Estonian head of state gave in the meeting an overview of the
principles of the European Union’s neighbourhood policy which would
be applied also in relations with South Caucasian countries, the
president’s office reports.
The prime minister gave recognition to the regional cooperation of
the Baltic states and spoke about the specifics of Armenia’s
relations with its neighbors.
Ruutel stressed the importance of mutual understanding in this
context and pointed out the possibilities arising from the Minsk
Process for Southern Caucasus countries.
Talking about participation in international Partnership for Peace
programs, Margaryan said Armenia is ready for cooperation with all
NATO member countries.
The president gave an interview to Armenian television speaking about
the possibilities to promote bilateral relations in various areas.
The Armenian head of state, Robert Kocharyan and his wife, Bella,
hosted a dinner in honour of the Estonian presidential couple. In his
speech at dinner, Ruutel said the Estonian society has by now reached
a level that makes it possible to share with others general
conclusions drawn from the reform process. “We also know that Armenia
is a country where the opinion of Estonia is trusted and expected,”
he added.
Kocharyan said it is important for Armenia to establish
goodneighborly relations with all its neighbors. The conflicts taking
place in Southern Caucasus hinder the natural development of the
region, he observed. “Mutually beneficial regional cooperation
facilitates the resolving of conflicts and stable development of the
region, and creates significant potential for further progress. The
best example of this is the cooperation between the countries of the
Baltic region,” he said.
The Estonian president will continue his visit on Tuesday, delivering
a lecture at the University of Yerevan and meeting with the Supreme
Patriarch and Catholicos of All Armenians Karegin II. Ruutel will
arrive back in Estonia on Tuesday evening.

Los Angeles Daily News, CA
Nov 15 2004
Immigrant parents rely on kids’ English
By Rachel Uranga, Staff Writer
Maribel Palafox was just 11 when she stood in a medical office,
translating the doctor’s news that her mother was pregnant.
At 17, Maribel was called on again to serve as a go-between for a
doctor and a parent — this time telling her father that he had
cancer.
Like tens of thousands of bilingual children in Los Angeles County,
Maribel has spent much of her life translating for
non-English-speaking relatives — a high-stress role that has put her
in delicate situations where no youngster should be.
Academics call them cultural brokers. Some policy makers call them
exploited. Parents say they are a lifeline to the English-speaking
world.
“I have been doing this ever since I can remember,” said Maribel, the
oldest of seven children born to Mexican immigrants. “I stutter when
I can’t find the words. It’s sad — but that’s the way it is.”
Publicly funded hospitals and clinics are prohibited from
discriminating against those who speak limited or no English, and
federal regulations require that translators be provided if patients
request them.
But in reality, few of these patients request translators, and they
often wait hours for care or do not understand what kind of care they
are getting. Even when medical centers provide interpreters,
advocates say services are often inadequate. The result is that
bilingual children are pressed into service.
In Los Angeles County, where more than one-third of the residents are
foreign-born and more than 90 percent of those speak a language other
than English, it has become a way of life. Children explain utility
bills to their parents or become the de facto interpreters on
parent-teacher night.
“Who else would I trust?” asked Katherine Pinchuk, a 46-year-old
Ukrainian immigrant. Pinchuk relies on her 8-year-old daughter,
Mariya, for basic translations at school, at the dermatologist and
even returning clothes at the mall.
“It’s the American way. It’s acculturation,” said Gregory Rodriguez,
a New American Fellow who studies assimilation. “It’s unfortunate,
but international migration is a cataclysmic process and sometimes
tragic.”
Maria Perez, 17, who suffers from chronic eye problems, must act as a
translator as doctors talk to her parents about her numerous
surgeries and treatments.
“Sometimes I go to the doctor and the words are so difficult I cannot
understand,” said Perez, who had to translate her doctor’s gloomy
prognosis for her condition.
“There are times I feel nervous. I don’t know if I am going to be
OK.”
Advocates say one of the biggest problems is that most immigrants do
not realize they have a right to an interpreter, or they are afraid
to speak up and ask for one.
The problem became so acute in Los Angeles County’s welfare offices
that it became the subject of a federal probe. Under a federal
agreement, similar to a consent decree, the offices were ordered to
post signs in all county-run facilities informing clients of
interpreter services and to make a greater effort to hire more
bilingual employees.
Several years ago, a similar agreement was imposed on the county
Department of Health Services, which operates five hospitals and more
than a dozen clinics.
Without more money to hire in-house translators, the department has
had to rely on staff members — most of whom have no formal cultural
or linguistic training.
“These are unfunded mandates,” said Mya Iwataki, director of
diversity programs for the agency. “It’s tough. Everyone here has to
do multitasking.”
Still, the financially strapped department has made strides and is
working to expand its third-party translating programs in its
hospitals and larger outpatient centers.
Heng Foong, director of PALS for Help — an organization that
provides free interpretation in health-care settings and was formerly
called Pacific-Asian Language Services — has heard all sorts of
horror stories.
One involved an Armenian man who sought treatment at a county
hospital for fluid in his spine. With no translator available,
doctors enlisted the help of an Armenian-speaking painter working at
the facility to explain consent forms for surgery.
It’s no wonder, experts say, that many parents rely on their children
to translate what doctors, creditors and neighbors say.
“It’s practical for both me and my daughter,” said Josefina Lopez,
31, who relies on her 9-year-old daughter, Monica Aguas, to help her
communicate with her English-speaking boss.
Monica, a bubbly and talkative fourth-grader, says she’s happy to
help.
“If I help my mom and my dad, it makes me feel special. I am happy to
show them what people are saying.”
But for others, like North Hills resident Martha Ugarte, 22, who has
translated for her mother for as long as she can remember, the work
can strain their relationship.
“To her, it’s my job. … A lot of parents … say it’s your job as a
son or daughter. I have no choice.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

DefenceTalk.com
Nov 13 2004
Defence & Strategic
The Division of the Balkans and the Black Sea Region
Willard Payne
Nov 12, 2004, 15:45 |
An Invitation to Invasion
With the decision, led by the Organization of Security and
Cooperation in Europe, headquartered in Vienna, to recognize the
division of Yugoslavia and the newly independent states and the
creation of Moldova with the break-up of the Soviet Union, all done
in the name of the “New World Order”, it set in motion a chain
reaction which will lead to further instability and conflict beyond
what the world has seen already. One of the few dissenting voices was
that of the then US Secretary of State James Baker, who stated
publicly in 1991, that he refused to recognize the independence of
Slovenia, “under any circumstances”. There was also the Belgian who
was Secretary- General of NATO in 1990 I believe his name was Willy
Claes, who mentioned that the threat to the West and to international
security was Islam. Within a year he was removed by a scandal never
to be mentioned again, as if he never existed. I always suspected it
was arranged by those in the OSCE who wanted the staged crisis in the
Balkans as a showcase for the New World Order which I assume they
thought could be solved by a diplomatic show, something Vienna loves
to orchestrate. And there was a British expert who observed, with the
willful division of Czechoslovakia, that Eastern and Central Europe
are in danger of descending into tribalism. There is no greater abyss
to march into.
There was another interested party in these proceedings, Islam. In
the first half of the 1990’s, the initial phase of the Balkan front,
during one of the winters when there was a pause in the fighting due
to the weather, an article mentioned Serbia having the best weapon
contacts in the region. This is the factor Vienna failed to take into
consideration, being so caught up in the illusion of their grand
design. The impact of weapon dealers and outside influences and in
this instance representing a region which also has long festering
disputes with the West and would immediately realize the convenience
of using the Balkans and Black Sea region to keep the West busy which
in turn would reduce the West’s military presence in the
Mediterranean not to mention Central Asia, the main front. An article
stated Serbia was receiving weapon support from Libya. Iran also
evinced an interest by establishing formal relations with Croatia in
1992 and announcing since then that Croatia was their entry into
Central Europe. Some in the West realized the hidden meaning. Germany
has since sent to Poland Leopard tanks and the US helped Poland to
upgrade her air force. Iran has also established a very busy embassy
in downtown Sarajevo, which puts them in an extremely strategic
position to monitor and assist the Islamic fighters, who have arrived
there to do more than just help Bosnia and to assist in coordinating
the Islamic war effort with nationalistic forces. A few months ago
Iran’s, extremely eager Defense Minister Adm. Ali Shamkani paid a
call on Warsaw most likely to look over Poland’s new equipment. His
visit is an indication Iran views everything from Macedonia to
Moldova and beyond as up for grabs and that a lot of groups,
nationalists, are readily available, from any religious ritual, to
express their hatred not only of Vienna but also those who support
Vienna. This may partly explain Iran and Saudi Arabia’s reason for
using Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups in their current threats
against Rome.
Unfortunately Europe has a long Imperial history of promoting wars in
the Balkans to use as a military playground, a display of
international prominence. This has kept the entire region in a cross
fire of conflicting spheres of influence and now is showing signs of
alienating the people the OSCE attempted to impress and manipulate.
When NATO decided to use Pres. Slobodan Milosevic once again, as they
did in 1994, when Milosevic’s support of the Bosnian Serbs helped
justify the NATO bombing campaign that year, the year I believe World
War III began, NATO marched further into the abyss with the bombing
of Serbia/Kosovo in 1999. NATO simply ignored the UN which gave a
further indication this was not the same organization that was
established 50 years previously to convince nations in and around the
north Atlantic to no longer go to war with each other, as Europe had
been doing for the 1,000 years since the death of Charlemagne.
The bombing alienated Greece, which for centuries had close relations
with Serbia since the two follow the same Orthodox ritual. There is
also regional identity, which may explain why a year or two later,
Greece and Turkey conducted a joint peace mission to the Middle East.
It was now Southeastern Europe as opposed to the rest of Europe
welcoming the invitation from Islam under Persian direction.
It was either late in 2000 or early 2001when the news mention Turkey
and Iran were comparing intelligence information but the announcement
did not say about where. During February a six-month ethnic Albanian
rebellion began and nearly defeated the Macedonian government. It was
admitted in the news the Macedonian military was little more than
well-armed policemen who were no stranger to corrupt privileges. The
head of state was actually on the phone, in a panic, to the head of
the European Union. During the fighting, the former British
negotiator Lord David Owen stated publicly NATO should leave the
region. What was so significant about his statement is that he used
to be one of Britain’s lead negotiators in the early 1990’s during
the first part of the Balkan crisis and now he seemed to realize the
trap NATO and the West had fallen into. The US dispatched its new
National Security Advisor Dr. Condoleezza Rice to the Ukraine on a
non-agenda crisis trip because the Ukraine was eager to arm Skopje
with virtually anything, which could have widened the conflict.
Articles admitted Ukraine was actually controlled by a weapons mafia.
Though mountainous and poor, with only two million people and an
average monthly salary of $155.00 per person, Macedonia sits astride
a strategic crossroads on the Balkans peninsula encompassed by
neighbors on all sides who ruled it in the past or coveted its
territory. Throughout its history it was occupied by Greeks, Romans,
Bulgarians, Byzantines, Serbs and Islamic Ottoman Turks, who ruled
for 500 years, but never eradicated Christianity. Its disintegration
along the ethnic fault lines, that are only to clear on the map
today, could trigger a new carve-up of the Balkans, propelling the
one-third Albanian majority towards union with Albania to the west or
Kosovo to the north.
The Macedonia majority, a family of southern Slavs, would be tempted
to seek shelter for their abbreviated state in the protection of
Serbia or Bulgaria, larger societies whose language and religion they
share. As “domino” theory predicts, the ethnic Albanian majority of
Kosovo and reluctant Serbs in Bosnia would see any failure to knit
together a multi-ethnic society in Macedonia as justification to
seize their own destinies back from the hands of Western powers.
Such a chain reaction, the European fears, would mean a reversion to
the Balkan cauldron of the early 20th century, an unstable
nationalist jigsaw of disputed borders and latent conflict, a recipe
for seething anarchy requiring permanent supervision. Preserving
territorial integrity has been the foundation of Western foreign
policy since Yugoslavia began its violent breakup in 1991, but a
policy often in retreat. This is why Iran and Turkey decided to help
the West find reasons to remain committed because it is a drain on
military resources.
When Macedonia declared independence its choice of name so angered
EU-member Greece, whose northern province carries the same ancient
label, European recognition, was held up for three years. A Greek
blockade of petroleum and other supplies showed how easy it was to
bring the dependent, landlocked country to its knees. Recent violence
and demonstrations have shown that the issue of stability is far from
settled and no one stands to benefit more from further instability
than Iran and the Jihad.
Moldova, formed in 1992, with the collapse of the Soviet Union into
15 nations, Moldova was part of the second group of Soviet successor
states. It comprised the nine that formed part of non-NATO Europe.
This also included four Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS),
Armenia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova. Do not be ashamed to be
confused, they are in a constant state of flux and they are by no
means by themselves though I suspect that is what they preferred.
Individual international recognition controlling what was left of the
state economy and a thriving undeclared underground black economy.
This is basically what virtually every nation that has surfaced after
the Soviet Union became and in Moldova’s case history Russia had to
establish regional peacekeeping forces, the 14th Army under Lt. Gen.
Alexandre Lebed to limit the fighting between Moldova and the
breakaway trans-Dnestr region, mostly inhabited by ethnic Russians
and Ukrainians. Russia provided arms and troops to the insurgents,
helping them to defeat the Moldovan army in several battles, notably
that for Bendery in June 1992. A cease-fire was signed the following
month by Pres. Boris Yeltsin of Russia and Moldova’s Pres. Mircea
Snegur.
For the next 12 years international efforts to resolve the crisis
have failed with the current controversy revolving around a language
and now energy dispute with the usual cycle of regional interest.
What has enlarged the conflict is the greater war against terror in
other words Islam. The US and other nations adjacent to Moldova have
provided military facilities for operations in the Middle East so
stability is obviously of paramount importance while at the same time
Iran has been signing substantial economic agreements, memorandums of
understanding, with every nation in the Black Sea region. The
economic dimension of the Jihad will be felt very heavily here. If
Iran has enough military successes in the region the entire economic
dialogue will be dictated by Tehran.
International initiatives have encountered withering criticism from a
range of international and local analysts and Moldovan
nongovernmental organizations fearful that the OSCE plan would turn
Moldova into a satellite of Russia. Prospects for a breakthrough
appear slim. The Transnistrian authorities are reluctant to lift
their authoritarian controls or abandon lucrative smuggling
activities that have left Transnistria isolated but for its lifeline
to Russia and its leaders banned from traveling to Western countries.
Meanwhile, a significant exodus of adult Moldovans is taking place
owing to endemic corruption at the elite level and the contraction of
the economy. The country’s population is a scant 39.5% of the size it
was in 1990. Many people swapped professional jobs at home for menial
ones in Western Europe in order to earn enough to support their
families.
With the corruption at the top and the serious regional rivalry
around them the chances for these countries surviving from Macedonia
to Moldova, under their current boundaries, or any other, is
virtually non-existent. Moscow probably concluded a long time ago
that peaceful solutions to the arrogant, self-contained nationalities
exist only in a dream world. The nightmarish consequences, which will
become more apparent before the end of the year, will result in the
re-establishment of the Russian hegemony whose hard currency of
financing comes from, as always the West, principally Berlin. The
Berlin-Moscow spectrum and the serious industrial concern behind it,
realizes this crescent of crisis can only be solved militarily.
During the war reliable local leaders will assert themselves and if
they have enough local military support will survive to represent
their provinces in the post-World War III climate.
Of course the post-war climate will not be one of universal peace but
one of militaristic stability. The Jihad would have run its course. I
cannot see more than two years of all out fighting starting with this
one. When Tehran realizes it cannot defeat Moscow they will make a
deal which will end at least most of the fighting. They will probably
call it a new partnership with Moscow being the most prominent.
About the author: Willard Payne is a consultant and analyst in
international affairs, specializing in extreme situations. He is a
member of US Naval Institute and President’s Circle of Chicago
Council on Foreign Relations. Willard holds a degree in history from
Western Illinois University and currently he is running Night Watch
Information Service, a broad range news-analysis service.
URL of this article:
–Boundary_(ID_de1synzvgIZ0uPBSzbJAvA)–

Richmond Times Dispatch, VA
Nov 13 2004
Diplomats discuss efforts to end terrorism
Envoys from 5 Eastern European nations speak at VSU event
BY OSITA IROEGBU
TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER Nov 13, 2004
ETTRICK – One student at an international conference on terrorism at
Virginia State University yesterday wanted to know why certain acts
are considered terrorism and others are not.
“Why is it that any mention of terrorism involves focusing on bombs
being strapped to someone’s body who wants to blow something up but
someone going in a room and shooting at a whole family or school
isn’t?” the VSU senior asked a group of foreign diplomats.
The auditorium thundered with applause as the student urged the
speakers to treat any act of violence as a threat.
Five ambassadors from newly formed Eastern European nations didn’t
answer the student’s question directly, but the panelists discussed
their resolve to end terrorism.
Ambassadors from Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Moldova
all addressed their countries’ diplomatic and military efforts to
fight terrorism during an international conference at Virginia State
University yesterday.
This was the first time VSU had hosted such a discussion on global
affairs and terrorism. University officials said it is important to
inform the student body about what some call “an unfamiliar part of
Eastern Europe” and the global war on terror.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the region struggled to
form independent democracies and enact economic and political reform.
Fifteen newly independent countries that emerged from the Soviet
Union’s dissolution are now fighting to end international terrorism.
Some ambassadors said factors such as high-density population and
high unemployment rates could serve as a breeding ground for radical
thoughts and separatist groups.
“In order to stop terrorism, we have to get to the root of the
problem,” said Hafiz M. Pashayev, ambassador from the Republic of
Azerbaijan to the United States. “Radicalism may lead to groups and
factions to achieve terrorism goals.”
Pashayev said issues such as economic strife could lead to increased
terrorists acts and weapons-trafficking throughout Eastern Europe.
“We are striving to eliminate unemployment and keep the inflation
rate low,” he said.
The diplomats called for more diplomatic attention from international
groups such as the United Nations, NATO and the European Union to
curb the formation of terrorist groups in the new nations.
“There is a strong fight against aggression in my country but the
international community must turn their attention to international
aggression,” Pashayev said.
Arman Kirakossian, Armenian ambassador to the United States, said
the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the terrorists attacks that
followed a decade later in the United States created a new situation
in his region.
“The events of Sept. 11 dramatically reformed our direction,”
Kirakossian said. “We must develop an action plan” to fight terrorism.
The ambassadors said they hope to continue partnerships with the
United States to combat terrorism. For instance, some of the countries,
such as Georgia and Armenia, have deployed troops to Iraq, they said.
Levan Mikeladze, Georgian ambassador to the United States, said
that region wants to help fight the threat of terrorism and the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
“We must build a political system and government that is based on the
grass roots of democracy,” he said. “The U.S. has played a critical
role in strengthening Georgia’s security and we will continue to
fight corruption.”
Panelists, including former U.S. Ambassador to Moldova Pamela Hyde
Smith, urged Russia to help with the fight.
“One key is Russia’s engagement as part of the solution instead of
part of the problem,” Smith said, calling the formation of the new
independent countries “one of the most important areas of interest
in the post Cold-War period.”
Ceslav Ciobanu, a VSU scholar and professor, served as ambassador
to the United States from Moldova. Ciobanu and other officials urged
students to increase their interest in foreign and world affairs.
Calling the conference a “milestone” event at VSU, Weldon Hill, dean
of VSU’s School of Liberal Arts and Education, said “It is absolutely
necessary for our students to be globally astute, particularly during
this era of substantive shifts in world affairs, including the war
on terror and political change.”

PRESS RELEASE
November 11, 2004
Embassy of the Republic of Armenia
2225 R Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20008
Tel: 202-319-1976, x. 348; Fax: 202-319-2982
Email: [email protected] ; Web:
Armenia Re-Qualified for Millennium Challenge Account for FY 2005
On November 10, 2004, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell hosted a ceremony
at the State Department to mark the selection of 16 countries, including
Armenia, as potential recipients of Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) funds
for Fiscal Year 2005. Armenia, together with 15 other nations, was already
selected as potential recipient of the MCA for Fiscal Year 2004. The
Millennium Challenge Account is a foreign aid distribution mechanism
introduced by the Bush administration, with a mandate to fund programs
submitted by eligible countries to promote the goals of poverty reduction
and economic development. In order to remain eligible for MCA funds, the
selected nations have to meet rigorous requirements in three categories of
indicators, namely economic freedom and reforms; governance practices; and
commitment to human and social development.
Ambassadors from 16 countries, including Armenian Ambassador to the U.S.,
Dr. Arman Kirakossian were present at the ceremony on behalf of their
countries, and had the opportunity to greet Secretary of State Colin L.
Powell who hosted the ceremony in his capacity as the ex-officio Chairman of
the Board of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, which administers the MCA
funds. Also present were the CEO of the Millennium Challenge Corporation,
Paul V. Applegarth, members of the Board, officials from State Department
and other executive agencies, Members of Congress and Congressional staff,
as well as representatives of NGO’s and private sector.
Welcoming and congratulating the official representatives of the 16 nations,
Secretary Powell said in his remarks that the Millennium Challenge
Corporation “.selected 16 countries which have demonstrated through their
policies and practices that they rule justly, invest in their people, and
that they encourage economic freedom.” Quoting President George W. Bush,
Secretary Powell noted “that the Millennium Challenge Account was born of
the idea that we should provide greater resources to countries that are
taking greater responsibility for their own development and all of the
countries we have selected are doing just that.” He added that selection, in
and of itself, does not guarantee funding since each Millennium Challenge
Account country must first develop its own proposal to promote growth and
reduce poverty, setting clear goals and measurable benchmarks.
**************************************************
For more information on the MCC, please visit
For the text of Secretary Powell’s remarks, visit

Azerbaijani president repeats demand that ethnic Armenian forces withdraw from disputed enclave
by AIDA SULTANOVA; Associated Press Writer
Associated Press Worldstream
November 9, 2004 Tuesday
BAKU, Azerbaijan — Ethnic Armenian forces must withdraw from the
disputed enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh before Azerbaijan signs a peace
agreement with Armenia to resolve nearly a decade of tense relations,
Azerbaijan’s president said Tuesday.
Ilham Aliev also said he would not cancel an upcoming NATO-sponsored
seminar to which Armenian lawmakers have been invited, telling
journalists that Azerbaijan must not isolate itself from the
international community. Some veterans of the early 1990s war over
Nagorno-Karabakh, an ethnic Armenian enclave within Azerbaijan, have
protested the participation of Armenian lawmakers in the Nov. 26-28
seminar in Baku.
The status of Nagorno-Karabakh has kept the two South Caucasus nations
from reaching a peace agreement since the end of open hostilities
in 1993, in which 30,000 people were killed and about one million
left homeless. The enclave has been controlled by ethnic Armenian
forces since a 1994 cease-fire and incursions and shooting breaks
out regularly, despite a buffer zone separating the two sides.
Negotiators under the auspices of the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe are trying to work out a final agreement on
the enclave, but no visible progress has been made in recent years.
Speaking during a visit to Astara, south of the capital, Baku, Aliev
again hinted at military action if no negotiated solution is reached.
“We demand with justification that the seized territory be freed and
the occupation forces withdraw,” Aliev said.
Later, Aliev told residents of another southern Azeri town: “If we see
that talks and negotiations conducted within international structures
don’t give any results, then we will have to resort to other methods.”
The leader of Nagorno-Karabakh, meanwhile, said in an interview on
Armenian television Tuesday that Azerbaijan had no other option except
to negotiate a final agreement on the enclave’s status.
“As far as Azerbaijan’s readiness to negotiate over Nagorno-Karabakh
is concerned, I am convinced that it has no other option, because
the question of Nagorno-Karabakh cannot be resolved without the
participation of Karabakh residents,” Arkady Gukasyan said.
Aliev also told journalists at a later stop that he would not give
in to what he called an “uproar” over the participation of Armenia
lawmakers in the NATO seminar.
“We can’t isolate ourselves from the ongoing peace process, “Aliev
said. “We want diverse international activities to be conducted in
Azerbaijan – conferences, seminars, including those conducted by
international organizations.”
Officials at NATO’s parliamentary assembly secretariat in Brussels
have said if no Armenian delegation is allowed to attend, the seminar
will be called off.

NATO leader visits South Caucasus
ISN, Switzerland
Oct 9 2004
NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer visited the three South
Caucasus countries in early November to signal the alliance’s
commitment to the region and to encourage leaders to take advantage
of Individual Partnership Plans (IPAPs).
By Vladimir Socor for The Jamestown Foundation (09/11/04)
On 3-5 November, NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer
visited, for the first time in this capacity, the three South
Caucasus countries. He conferred with the head of state, the defense
minister, the military leadership, and other top officials in each of
the three capitals. The visit’s goal was twofold: to signal that
NATO’s Partnership program is rapidly moving its focus towards this
region, as decided at the alliance’s summit in Istanbul in June; and
to encourage the three countries to take advantage of Individual
Partnership Plans (IPAPs). Ambassador Robert Simmons, newly appointed
as the NATO Secretary-General’s Special Representative for the South
Caucasus and Central Asia, accompanied de Hoop Scheffer on the visit.
NATO views IPAPs as the instrument that allows willing partners to
develop individualized relationships with NATO, focusing on military
reform, establishment of effective state institutions, and certain
basic democratization goals. IPAPs are two-year programs, with their
implementation assessed at periodic review conferences. IPAP can
potentially serve as an avenue towards membership for countries that
aspire to that status; the alliance’s motto in this regard being that
it would go as far as the country chooses to go, subject to IPAP
performance.
Georgia’s NATO hopes
Georgia became the first South Caucasus country to have its IPAP
approved by NATO. Originally submitted ahead of the Istanbul summit
for promulgation there, the document was ultimately accepted by the
North Atlantic Council in Brussels on 29 October. In the joint news
conference with de Hoop Scheffer in Tbilisi, President Mikhail
Saakashvili reaffirmed Georgia’s goal to join NATO as a full member
before the end of Saakashvili’s second and final presidential term –
a goal he had first announced during his recent visit to the Baltic
states. Without dampening Saakashvili’s optimism, de Hoop Scheffer
tempered it with realism by remarking that a long winding road leads
towards full membership. He stated openly for the first time that
Georgian membership was possible, and noted “an enormous drive on the
part of the Georgian government and people to fulfill that ambition”.
Remarks by both sides during the visit indicated that NATO’s liaison
officer for the South Caucasus would be stationed at the Defense
Ministry in Tbilisi. The NATO leader chose a cautious, non-specific
wording to remind Russia of its obligations to fulfill the 1999
Istanbul Commitments regarding Georgia. He expressed his “hope” in a
bilateral Russian-Georgian “solution” to the problem of Russian
troops and bases, rather than calling for an internationally assisted
withdrawal of those forces from Georgia. Georgia is already behaving
as a de facto ally, with platoon-size units serving under NATO
command in Kosovo and Afghanistan, and company-size units with the
US-led coalition in Iraq, where Georgia is now augmenting its
contingent to 300 troops and has offered to increase it further to
850. Georgia is balancing its security consumer’s role with that of a
security provider in both the NATO and the ad hoc coalition context.
In Azerbaijan
In Azerbaijan, final preparations for NATO approval of that country’s
IPAP topped the agenda of de Hoop Scheffer’s visit. Deputy Foreign
Minister Araz Azimov, who handles Azerbaijan-NATO relations, noted
that procedural issues had held up IPAP’s promulgation since the
Istanbul summit. The document also includes a concept for developing
Azerbaijani rapid-deployment units for service with NATO’s Response
Force. As could be expected, de Hoop Scheffer faced persistent public
questioning in Baku about NATO’s position on the Armenia-Azerbaijan
conflict and a possible NATO role in conflict-settlement. His answers
indirectly confirmed NATO’s reluctance to take a position or play a
role. He advised Azerbaijan that it was perhaps time to “turn a page”
in its approach to Karabakh conflict-settlement. For his part, Azimov
held out the possibility of NATO contributing peacekeeping troops to
an international contingent, if one were deployed in the conflict
zone under an international organization’s mandate. The familiar
small group of Karabakh Liberation Organization militants staged a
vociferous picket during de Hoop Scheffer’s visit, protesting
preventively against Armenian participation in an upcoming NATO
Parliamentary Assembly seminar in Baku. The police rounded up a few
of the protestors only after they had finished their demonstration.
Milli Majlis Chairman Murtuz Aleskerov declared that Armenians could
be allowed to participate in this seminar because they are civilian,
rather than military. In September, Azerbaijan’s leaders, including
Aleskerov, had ruled out the participation of a few Armenian military
officers in NATO’s Cooperative Best Effort 2004 large-scale staff
exercise in Baku, thereby leaving NATO no choice but to cancel this
annual event. Azerbaijan’s NATO aspirations suffered an unnecessary
setback as a result of political advisers overruling the foreign
policy professionals on this matter and giving in to a handful of
militants. Inclusiveness is a bedrock principle of NATO’s Partnership
programs. Further setbacks may ensue if political advisers insist
that Azerbaijan, rather than NATO, should determine what kind of
personnel may or may not participate in NATO exercises in Azerbaijan.
In Armenia
In Armenia, de Hoop Scheffer underscored the significance of that
country’s recent decision to draft an IPAP with NATO and to appoint
an envoy to the alliance. Implicitly acknowledging the national
tradition of close links with Russia, he noted in an address to
Yerevan University faculty and students that Armenia may develop its
NATO partnership without damaging its relations with Russia, and that
any residual mistrust towards NATO was a Soviet propaganda legacy.
Armenia could prove that a country can maintain close relations with
Russia while becoming an active NATO Partner, he concluded. One
pro-NATO politician, Hovhanes Hovhanissian of the Liberal Progressive
Party, commented that good relations with Russia need not mean being
“Russia’s vassal”, local media reported. At every stop during the
visit, de Hoop Scheffer made the point that NATO does not compete
with any country or organization (that is, Russia and the CIS
Collective Security Treaty Organization, of which Armenia is a
member) in the region. He underscored that NATO has no intentions,
plans, or interest in establishing military bases in the South
Caucasus, nor would this meet the interests of the region’s
countries.
–Boundary_(ID_g+hc6ziAuWMrT89+dHrn2g)–

Marten Yorgants Gives Concert In His Native City Of Istanbul
ISTANBUL, November 8 (Noyan Tapan). A concert of singer Marten Yorgants
was organized in Gyunay park of Shishli upon the initiative of the
“Shishli” sport and cultural club on November 6 evening.
M. Yorgants, being originally an Armenian from Constantinople, hadn’t
an opportunity to give concerts in Istanbul for over 37 years. This
time he came to his native city at the invitation of dwellers of
Shishli.
According to the “Marmara” daily newspaper of Istanbul, Marten Yorgants
thanked the organizers of the concert, he invited participants to dance
during his songs. Marten Yorgats preferred to song more in Italian,
French and English songs regardless of the fact that participants would
more prefer to listen to his Armenian songs. But M. Yorgants created
fine atmosphere, and the invited people enjoyed the concert a lot.