Author: Khondkarian Raffi

ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTER TO PARTICIPATE IN UN SPECIAL SESSION
DEDICATED TO 60TH ANNIVERSARY OF WORLD WAR II PRISONERS LIBERATION
YEREVAN, January 21 (Noyan Tapan). The RA Foreign Minister Vardan
Oskanian will depart for New York on January 24 in order to
participate in the UN special session held on the occasion of the 60th
anniversary of the liberation of World War II concentration camps’
prisoners. It is envisaged the Armenian Foreign Minister will make a
speech at the session. According to the RA Foreign Ministry’s Press
and Information Department, the minister Oskanian will depart New York
for Rome to accompany the RA President during his official visit to
Italy.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

DRAFT OF PACE RESOLUTION ON KARABAKH DOES NOT PRESENT REAL ESSENCE OF
CONFLICT: ARMEN ROUSTAMYAN
YEREVAN, JANUARY 21. ARMINFO. PACE’s draft resolution on Nagorny
Karabakh in its present form is unacceptable for Armenian side, Armen
Roustamyan, Head of the commission on foreign affairs of Armenia’s
Parliament, member of ARF Dashnaktsutyun Supreme body, told ARMINFO.
According to him, this document does not present the real essence of
Karabakh conflict, but its transformed version, thus, cannot assist
relieving the tension of the situation around Karabakh conflict and
exclude the possibility to solve it by military operations. Quite the
contrary, such a document could have a counter effect and make the
situation more strained, taking into account the militarist spirit of
Azerbaijan in this issue, he said.
Roustamyan also stressed that the discussion of the document in PACE
has passed incorrectly as representatives of Nagorny Karabakh, which
is a party of the conflict, were absent during the discussion.
“These discussions and the document itself cannot be considered full
without the participation of representatives of Nagorny Karabakh”, the
parliament member said. Of course, the Armenian delegation will try
make its proposals and amendments when the discussion of the
document. The Armenian delegation elaborated 7 proposals to give the
document more objective nature. Roustamyan noted that he has little
optimistic disposition about possibility of accepting of proposals of
Armenian side as the most of European parliamentarians are not
acquainted with the real essence of Karabakh conflict and it would be
difficult for them to orientate correctly. Armenian parliamentarians
meet with their European colleagues only a few times in a year and it
is difficult to change entirely conception of that great structure
concerning one or another issue in that short time, Roustamyan stated.
To note, the draft resolution on Nagorny Karabakh will be discussed at
PACE session on January 25. -R-

Portland Press Herald, ME
Jan 19 2005
The ‘g’ word loses its meaning when no real action follows it
by Nikki Kallio
It was almost shocking when top government leaders dared to utter the
“g” word – “genocide” – when referring to the violence in Sudan’s
Darfur region, because by all accounts that meant the United States
would have to do something to stop it.
As a signatory to the United Nations’ 1948 Genocide Convention, we’re
now bound to “undertake to prevent and to punish” the crime.
At least, that’s the way it’s supposed to work.
The law started with Raphael Lemkin, a Polish Jew who studied the
Turkish destruction of Christian Armenians during World War I and
escaped Poland a week after the Nazis invaded.
In her Pulitzer prize-winning book, “A Problem from Hell,” Samantha
Power describes Lemkin’s efforts to set up an international law that
was meant to forever eliminate such atrocities.
He’d seen in Hitler’s writings what the madman had in mind and tried
to warn his family and friends, who didn’t believe such a heinous
plan could be executed. His parents were among those to perish.
First, these crimes against humanity needed a name. Lemkin, an
attorney and a trained linguist, knew what had happened was worse
than mass murder, it was worse than an atrocity and it was worse than
a crime against humanity. It needed a name that would transcend all
others and compel the world to prevent it from ever happening again,
Power wrote.
Lemkin’s new word, “genocide,” finally gained the acceptance of
Webster’s Dictionary in 1944. The next step then was to establish an
international law that would force the world to act to prevent it.
If there were no such law, Lemkin knew genocide would continue to be
regarded as an “internal” problem and that the world would continue
to hesitate to intervene, Power wrote.
Lemkin’s vision of future genocide compelled him to take on the
personal responsibility of preventing the slaughter of millions of
people, and it consumed his life.
The new international law was all he talked about, and he would talk
about it with anyone who would listen and many who didn’t, Power
wrote. Day and night, he hammered at leaders and journalists, and,
after an exhaustive campaign, the United Nations finally adopted the
Genocide Convention in 1948. The United States, however, didn’t
ratify it until 1988.
The Convention defines genocide as actions “committed with intent to
destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious
group.”
It compels signatories to act when genocide is occurring.
For that reason, past leaders have been excruciatingly reluctant to
speak the word, avoiding it like poison, believing that its utterance
would behold them to action.
The painful footage of State Department officials discussing in 1994
why what had occurred in Rwanda wasn’t “genocide” – despite the
slaughter of 800,000 Rwandans in 100 days – demonstrated how much
weight leaders thought the word carried.
That’s why pundits and editorialists – including me – called on
leaders to use the word in discussing the crisis in Sudan. At least
70,000 black Africans have been killed since last year and close to 2
million more have been displaced from their homes by the
government-backed Arab Janjaweed militiamen in an apparent attempt to
gain control of the resource-rich Darfur region.
Surprisingly, Congress, Secretary of State Colin Powell and President
Bush responded. They’ve all taken the extraordinary step of using the
powerful word. Much to Darfur’s dismay, little has happened.
Only weak resolutions that allude to economic sanctions have been
passed (barely), and they’ve been given little teeth, even after
Darfur’s situation had been officially called “genocide.”
Scott Straus, an assistant professor of political science at the
University of Wisconsin-Madison, wrote in the January/February issue
of Foreign Affairs that “Darfur has shown that the energy spent
fighting over whether to call the events there ‘genocide’ was
misplaced, overshadowing difficult but more important questions about
how to craft an effective response to mass violence against civilians
in Sudan.”
Apparently, he’s right.
So, has the word lost its power?
Should we start over? Rewrite the law? Talk about it some more? Wait
and see?
It took the United States 40 years to ratify the Genocide Convention
in the first place, and now we find out that it has about as much
strength as a paper towel.
“Never again,” indeed.
Nikki Kallio is an editorial writer at the Portland Press
Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram. She can be contacted at 791-6481 or at:

THE “BLACK JANUARY” OF 1990
Pogroms of Armenian Population in Multinational Baku
Azg/arm
19 Jan 05
These days 15 years ago, on January 13-19 of 1990, when Azerbaijan was
still soviet, the People’s Front nationalistic party instigated
pogroms of Armenians in multinational Baku. The Armenian population
numbering 200 thousand was massacred, persecuted and send out of the
country by the admission of Mikhail Garbachov and the soviet army.
But this fact was no obstacle to give Garbachov a Nobel Prize for
Peace few months later. Few years later the first and the last
president of the USSR confessed that the fact that he declared
emergency and sent troops to Baku was the most serious mistake in his
political biography. This was, in fact, an apology to Azeris who had
taken few tolls on January 19-20 in Baku. But Garbachov never repented
for the death of dozens of Armenians killed by the Azeri throng on
January 13-19. Instead, he hailed the pogroms of Sumgait as
hooliganism.
Tom de Waal, British journalist and eyewitness of the events, wrote in
his “The Black Garden” that the Armenian borough of Baku and Sumgait
turned into a slaughterhouse. Armenians were thrown down from their
flats of many-storied buildings; the throng was beating Armenians to
death. Thousands of Armenians found refuge at the police stations or
the “Shafag” cinema; thousands of terrorized and tortured Armenians
reached Krasnovodsk harbor of Turkmenistan. Some of them died aboard
ships on the Caspian Sea or at Yerevan hospitals.
Rufat Ahmedov, an Azeri journalist wrote: “There is no doubt that the
Armenians underwent massacres. Few dozens out of the 200 thousand
Armeniansof Baku were killed, others fled. Many of them hid at the
Azeris’ homes. All in all, the soviet inner forces billeted on Baku
and numbering more than 11 thousand were able to prevent the pogroms”.
Undoubtedly, the pogroms were carried out by a direct order from Azeri
authorities. Let’s turn to the chronicle. Neymed Panahov and Rahim
Ghaziev from the People’s Front stated in a televised appearance on
January 12 that Baku is full of homeless refugees whereas there are
still thousands of Armenians inthe town. Abdurahman Vezirov, leader of
Azerbaijan appealed to the nation to take active measures against the
Armenians. “We hold he Center (Moscow) in our hands”, he said.
According to Zardusht Alizade, a famous Azeri political analyst, the
posters on the People’s Front office were indicating to the homes of
Armenians. According to Arif Yunusov, an independent analyst, the
death toll of Armenians was 86.
Interestingly, Yevgeny Primakov and Dmitri Yazov were in Baku when the
pogroms were carrying out. Only on January 19, when the massacres
stopped as there was no Armenian left, the soviet inner forces took to
task of settling the Azeris down. At least 130 Azeris died and
hundreds got wounded. There were innocent victims as well. The soviet
forces took a toll of 21 dead during the two-day “operation”.
Heydar Aliyev held a press conference at the Azeri diplomatic
representatives on January 20 of 1990 and condemned the “Azeri” part
of Baku pogroms. The “black January” of 1990 was the start of Aliyev’s
new political activity. Ayaz Mutalibov changed Vezirov as the head of
the country on January the 20th.
By Tatoul Hakobian
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Armenian opposition party leader tenders resignation
Noyan Tapan news agency
18 Jan 05
YEREVAN
The chairman of the political council of the Republic [Anrapetutyun]
Party, Albert Bazeyan, indeed tendered his resignation on 14
January. However, there is no talk about political or ideological
disagreements, a member of the political council and press secretary
of the party, Suren Surenyants, has said commenting on some media
reports that Bazeyan and a member of the political council and former
defence minister, Vagarshak Arutyunyan, have tendered their
resignation over political and ideological disagreements with the
former Armenian prime minister [and a member of the party’s political
council], Aram Sarkisyan.
“A sitting will be convened soon and we will discuss Bazeyan’s
resignation. The political council is not inclined to accept his
resignation,” Surenyants said. As for Vagarshak Arutyunyan, the press
secretary said that he was not in the town at the moment.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ArmenPress
Jan 18 2005
ARMENIAN LAWMAKER ANGRY AT US DIPLOMAT’S REMARKS
YEREVAN, JANUARY 18, ARMENPRESS: A member of the Armenian
parliament lashed today out at a senior outgoing US diplomat saying
her latest remarks jeopardize what has been done so far by the OSCE
Minsk group in an effort to help Azerbaijan and Armenia to come to a
mutually acceptable peace formula over Nagorno Karabagh.
Hamlet Harutunian, who is also chairman of Artsakh (Karabagh)
union, meant the remarks by Elizabeth Jones, a US State Department
Undersecretary that the US president George W. Bush is concerned that
Russian president Vladimir Putin’s does not exert strong enough
pressure for resolution of post-Soviet conflicts in Transdniester,
South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Nagorno Karabagh.
Speaking to a news conference the Armenian lawmaker went on to
argue that the remarks could harm the ongoing meetings of Armenian
and Azeri officials, especially with reported progress in the talks.
He said his union would ask the US State Department for explanations.
“It is in the interest of Russia that these four regions be
stable, clean of corruption and their corrupt separatist authorities
removed,” Elizabeth Jones was quoted as saying.

Armenian Defence Ministry discusses results for 2004
Arminfo
14 Jan 05
YEREVAN
The board of the Armenian Defence Ministry discussed at a sitting
today the results for 2004 under the chairmanship of the secretary of
the Armenian president’s Security Council and defence minister, Serzh
Sarkisyan.
The issues of military training, the results of staff and military
tactical and strategic training, problems of the observance of
military discipline, as well as training tasks for 2005 were included
in the agenda, the Armenian defence minister’s press secretary, Col
Seyran Shakhsuvaryan, has told Arminfo news agency.
Chief of the General Staff Col-Gen Mikael Arutyunyan gave the report
at the sitting. Deputies of the Armenian Defence Minister and
commanders of military units spokes as well. The issues and tasks
which will be carried out in the current year by the Defence Ministry
were identified at the sitting.
Armenian Defence Minister Serzh Sarkisyan, spoke about the tasks which
stand before Defence Ministry in 2005, especially stressing the
importance of the personal responsibility every commander and officer
in raising military battle readiness and reinforcing military
discipline.

Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
Jan 12 2005
Erdogan’s Moscow Visit: Turkey’s Return to Russia
EU’s decision to start membership talks with Turkey is not enough for
Turkey. After the December 17 Summit, Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip
Erdogan and his ministers visited first Syria, Israel and Palestine.
Turkey increased its role in the Middle East. Then Ankara moved on
its northern Black Sea neigbour Russian Federation. Turkish experts
say Turkey aims to be a European, Middle Eastern and Black Sean power
instead of a ‘small European power”. Dr. Sedat Laciner from
International Strategic Research Organization, Ankara-based think
tank, says “All these efforts could be seen as Turkey’s return to the
region. Developments in Turkey EU relations boost Turkey’s
credibility in the region”. According to Laciner “Russia is one of
the important steps in Turkey’s return to Middle east, Balkans,
caucasus and the Black Sea”. “The latest step will be Central Asia
and the Turkic world” added Dr. Laciner.
Turkey and Russia Celebrate Boom in Economic Relations
Trade between Russia and Turkey could more than double to $25 billion
by 2007 from $10 billion in 2004, Russian President Vladimir Putin
said after talks with Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan on
Tuesday.
“I agree with the forecast that bilateral trade volume could reach
$15 billion in 2005 and $25 billion in 2007. I think we can achieve
this,” Putin told a Moscow gathering with Erdogan and accompanying
Turkish businessmen, attended by reporters.
Putin said talks would focus on improving cooperation in energy,
transport, social welfare, and arms.
Erdogan, accompanied by a swarm of 600 businessmen, was paying a
return visit to Moscow after Putin in December became the first
Moscow leader to appear to great fanfare in Turkey in 32 years. “Our
most optimistic forecasts about economic cooperation have come true,”
Putin told Erdogan as the two sat around a small table with their
translators in the Kremlin’s gilded oval reception hall.
“There should be opportunities to widen our military-technological
cooperation internationally and in the region,” Erdogan said.
Russia is Turkey’s second-largest foreign trade partner, with
bilateral trade now standing at $10 billion. Compared with the first
half of 2003, bilateral trade rose by 60 percent in the first half of
2004, reaching $4.6 billion. Turkish companies are active in Russia’s
booming construction, retail and brewing industries. Turkey’s
southern coasts (especially Antalya) are a favorite among Russians,
whose visits have fostered familiarity between the traditional foes.
Thousands of Russians prefer to live in Turkish cities.
Erdogan Opened Turkish Center in Moscow
Some 600 Turkish business executives accompanied him to Moscow,
Turkish PM Tayyip Erdogan also opened Turkish business center in
Moscow.
Putin: Isolation of Turkish Cypriots is not Fair
A surprising support came from Russian leader Vladimir Putin on
Cyprus Issue. ”We do not think that the economic isolation of
northern Cypriots is fair,” Putin told visiting Turkish Prime
Minister Tayyip Erdogan at a gathering in Moscow attended by
reporters.
Putin declared that Russian federation would support a UN settlement
in Cyprus. `Cyprus was a sensitive issue and therefore must be
treated carefully’ added Putin. Putin and Erdogan answered questions
of the press in President Hotel.
”With regard to our future position, we will support the plan of
U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan to find a solution to the Cyprus
dispute,” Putin said in reply to a question.
”We will support any resolution that comes out of the implementation
of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan’s plan.”
Turkish PM Erdogan expressed Turkey’s vivid support for UN Peace Plan
in Moscow and said Russian contribution in Cyprus issue will be
valuable:
“We support the plan of UN Secretary General Annan about Cyprus. We
talked with Putin a while ago. We are supporting his plan about
Cyprus. This includes continuing economic relations and removing the
isolation.
A TRNC (Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus) business delegation came
to Moscow with Turkish PM Erdogan. Salih Tunar, the President of the
Industry Association of Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, was
among the delegation. Tunar said “As Turkish Cypriots and Turkey, it
may be effective to tell that we want a solution.”
Commenting on Russia’s choice in the voting on the UN Security
Council resolution ahead of the referendum on Cyprus, Putin remarked
that Russia voted “against” and had in advance informed the Turkish
side of it.
“We did this deliberately not to block decision-making, but to
preclude any outside influence on the referendum’s results,” the head
of state explained.
When Turkish journalists asked him how Russia would vote in the UN
Security Council on this issue in the future, the Russian president
answered that it would depend on the kind of document to be submitted
for the vote.
At the referendum of April 24 last year, more than three quarters of
the 88% of Greek Cypriots who took part in the referendum voted down
the plan for reunification advanced by the UN and supported by
leading Western countries. Among the Northern Turks, 64.9% voted for
it, with the 87% turnout.
Cyprus was divided after an illegal Greek military coup attempt in
1974. Turkish Cypriots with the help of Turkey’s military support
established Turkish side on the Northern Cyprus. Now there are two
state on the island: Greek and Turkish Cyprus. However the Greek
Cyprus claims sovereignty on whole of the island. The EU, with
Southern Greek Cyprus and Greece’s great efforts, imposes a
political, cultural, social and economic embargo on Turkish Republic
of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). TRNC is now the only European country
under such an embargo which is worse than the embargo imposed on
Saddam Husein’s Iraq. The TRNC has no army and has to rely on
Turkey’s assistance while the Greek side has a strong army with
long-range missiles.
Putin: Russia Favors Turkey’s EU Membership
During Putin’s trip to Turkey, a first in modern Russia’s history, a
bilateral conversation built the foundations of a “multi dimensional
partnership” for military, strategic and economic cooperation.
However Putin had doubts about Turkey-EU relations: During his Ankara
visit, Russian President Vladimir Putin told PM Erdogan that “If you
enter EU we can not meet frequently.” In response, Erdogan told him
that “To the contrary, we shall intensify our relations.” After the
EU accepted Turkey’s bid for membership talks, just ten days after
Putin’s visit, Russian papers ran the headline, “Bye-Bye Turkey”.
Contrary to Russian reports that “Turkey gives up its partnership
with us,” Erdogan came Moscow with a message stating that this fear
is unnecessary. Erdogan told the Russian political elite, businessmen
and Russian citizens that Turkey is “a good friend”. The idea that
Turkey’s accession to the EU will not harm its relations with Moscow
is also strong in Russia.
Similarly Russian Leader Putin said Russia was in favor of Turkey’s
EU membership, as it promised to open up new trading opportunities
for Russia. Turkey’s integration into the EU is expected to open up
fresh opportunities for Russian-Turkish business cooperation, said
Vladimir Putin.
Speaking on Tuesday in Moscow at a meeting with Turkish businessmen,
the Russian president Putin recalled that Russia was also developing
strategic partnership with the EU. ”We welcome Turkey’s success at
the EU Brussels summit,” Putin said. ”I hope that Turkey’s
integration in the European Union will open up a new horizon for
Russian-Turkish business cooperation.”
Ankara Seeks Russian Co-operation in Armenian Issue
Turkish PM Erdogan in his Moscow visit sought Russian support in
solving Armenian problem. Erdogan said `Armenia must take step in
Karabakh issue. When Armenians do something in Karabakh Turkey will
find opportunity to consider opening the territorial border gates’.
Answering a question posed by the Turkish media, the Russian
President announced that during the meeting the sides did not discuss
the Karabakh problem. “We touched upon general issues of relations
between countries in the region – Russia and Armenia, Armenia and
Turkey,” Mr. Putin said.
Both sides, he stated, expressed the desire to establish friendly
relations among neighbors.
“Russia will do everything possible to settle the conflicts remaining
on the post-Soviet space, including the long-lasting Karabakh
conflict,” Mr. Putin announced. “However, we will do it only as an
intermediary and guarantor of agreements which are going to be
reached by conflicting sides.”
Tayyip Erdogan Government is one of the most enthusiastic Turkish
governments in Republican history in developing good relations with
Armenia.
Armenian forces have occupied about 20 per cent of Azerbaijani
territories, and Constitution of Armenian Republice does not
recognise Turkey’s national borders.

Azeri, Armenian foreign ministers discuss Karabakh in Prague
ANS TV, Baku
11 Jan 05
[Presenter] The Azerbaijani and Armenian foreign ministers have
finished their meeting in Prague a short while ago. Zaur Hasanov, a
correspondent with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, has the
details. Hello, Zaur, we can hear you.
[Hasanov, over the phone] The meeting between the Armenian and
Azerbaijani foreign ministers, Vardan Oskanyan and Elmar Mammadyarov,
started at 1000 local time today. They met in an area near the Czech
president’s office. The OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs from the USA and
Russia, Steven Mann and Yuriy Merzlyakov, and also the OSCE
representative, Andrzej Kasprzyk, also attended the meeting.
After the meeting, Elmar Mammadyarov told Radio Liberty that although
the talks were difficult, they were being continued. After the Prague
talks, the foreign ministers will meet again in one of the European
capitals in late February or early March.
Azerbaijan’s foreign minister clarified official Baku’s position as
follows: The internally displaced persons must go back to their homes
and the Armenian army must pull out of Nagornyy Karabakh. Mammadyarov
reiterated that official Baku would not make concessions on
fundamental issues. He said that Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity
and an exchange of territories was not a subject of the talks.
Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan said he could not assess the
Prague meeting as bad on the whole. He said open discussions were
being held on the Karabakh settlement. He said the sides had held an
open discussion. At this meeting, we attempted to consolidate the
principles we had agreed on during our previous meetings, end quote.

AFX European Focus
January 3, 2005 Monday 09:48 AM Eastern Time
Greece’s Emporiki Bank to pull out of Armenia, Georgia
ATHENS
Emporiki Bank, 11 pct owned by Frances Credit Agricole, intends to
sell its subsidiaries in Armenia and Georgia, a senior bank source
said.
The source added this is part of the group’s broader
restructuring process and that Emporiki plans to strengthen its
presence in south eastern European markets.
Emporiki also has subsidiaries in Albania, Bulgaria, Romania and
Cyprus.