Author: Maghakian Mike

Armenian minister says Azerbaijan not ready for Karabakh war
Arminfo, Yerevan
11 Mar 06
Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan has said that Azerbaijan is
not ready for war over Nagornyy Karabakh.
In an interview to Armenian TV channel Shant, carried by Arminfo news
agency on 11 March, Sarkisyan said that the Azerbaijani leadership
will not risk starting war against Armenia. “The military resolution
of the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict is simply ruled out. They cannot
daunt the Armenian side, nor can they change our position by this,” he
said.
Oskanyan said that Azerbaijan can achieve a lot through
negotiations. “If today the Azerbaijani side is not ready to or cannot
take the risk of achieving the settlement of the issue by way of a
simple compromise, it will never risk finding a military solution to
the issue,” he said.
The Azerbaijani leadership is not ready for any risk today, especially
considering the clear pressure from the international community
regarding this matter, Oskanyan said. Investment worth billions in
that country will be the first victim of new war, should it start.
“Nobody will allow Azerbaijan to unleash war against Armenia,” he
stressed.
Oskanyan said that Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev’s statement that
“Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity is not subject to discussion” is
for “domestic use”. He said that the key issue in the peace process is
the right of the people of Nagornyy Karabakh to
self-determination. “This has now become irreversible,” he stressed,
adding that Azerbaijan will have to address this issue regardless of
whether it wants to or not. He said that major pressure is being
exerted on Azerbaijan with regard to this issue. He stressed that now
the essence of the matter is in the connection between the usage of
the right to self-determination and the resolution of all other
issues. “If we manage to correctly formulate this connection and come
to a compromise decision on this issue, I think it will make it
possible to push the process,” he said.
Otherwise, it will mean that Azerbaijan remains on its maximalist
positions and the process still remains where it has been, he added.
The minister said that now it is Azerbaijan’s turn to make
compromises. “We have made our share of compromises… I think what we
have given agreement on is the utmost line beyond which Armenia really
cannot go. At the same time, Azerbaijan has not yet reached that
line. So, really a lot depends on Azerbaijan today,” he
stressed. “There is a balanced option on the negotiating table which
can be painful for both sides and at the same time provide great
opportunities. This chance cannot be missed. Azerbaijan must introduce
its share of compromises into the talks,” he said. The minister added
that it is no coincidence that the US mediator in the Nagornyy
Karabakh peace process is going to visit the region. The mediator is
visiting in order to “take some promises from the Azerbaijani
president so that we can continue the process,” Oskanyan said.
If the Karabakh peace talks between the Armenian and Azerbaijani
presidents held at Rambouillet in France on 10-11 February had been
successful, Nagornyy Karabakh would have been involved in the
negotiating process, Oskanyan said.
“Armenia must continue to be involved in the negotiating process. But
Karabakh must become a participant in the negotiating process at some
stage, and if progress had been achieved at Rambouillet, I think that
stage would have arrived, and Nagornyy Karabakh would have been
involved in the process,” he said, adding that without Nagornyy
Karabakh’s participation at this stage “we simply cannot imagine the
definitive settlement of the issue”.
He said that Armenian Robert Kocharyan’s statement on the possibility
of recognition of the independence of Nagornyy Karabakh was a message
to Azerbaijan which should have a think about it. “Azerbaijan must
understand that we eventually may see for ourselves… that they are
not ready to hold talks on what is on the negotiating table and that
they aspire to remain on their maximalist positions,” he said. This
may also lead us to believe that “this position will not change and
that they, not reaching the maximum, may go for military action. This
must dictate some other steps on our side,” the minister added.
Oskanyan said he does not believe that the Armenian side is losing the
propagandist warfare. “Although Turkey and Azerbaijan have more
possibilities today, nonetheless, Armenia is not in a bad position in
this regard either,” he said. “The struggle is difficult, we are
making great efforts, but I believe that basically we are managing to
maintain the balance,” he said. At the same time, he agreed that the
propagandist warfare intensified following the Rambouillet talks.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

MILITARY OMBUDSMAN INSTITUTION TO BE ESTABLISHED IN ARMENIA
PanARMENIAN.Net/
13.03.2006 20:04 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenia plans to establish institution of Military
Ombudsman, Deputy MOD Head, lieutenant general Artur Aghabekyan
stated during a seminar in Yerevan within Starlink Program. “Reforms
of defense legislation provide for introduction of the institution
of the Military Ombudsman. These are planned to start in 2008 and
to be finished by 2010,” Aghabekyan said. In his words, the Military
Ombudsman will deal with problems and complaints of the personnel of
the Armed Forces.
Besides, as the Deputy Minister remarked, amendments are to be
made on the Law on Defense, that will specify the functions of the
Defense Ministry and General Staff, while legal reforms are planned,
including social protection of the military and civil personnel of
the army. “New Law on Civil Officers in Defense is to be elaborated
to regulate activities of civil representatives in the Armed Forces
of Armenia,” Aghabekyan said, reports RIA Novosti.

MERCENARY PUZZLE
By Vincent Musumba
Kenya Times, Kenya
March 14 2006
THE alleged mysterious presence of mercenaries in the country took
a new twist yesterday when two men claiming to be the ones named as
being the hitmen on hire presented themselves and instead accused
two senior politicians of blackmail.
The two, claiming to be the Armenians, Artur Sargsyan and Artur
Margaryan, said Langata MP Raila Odinga and his Mwingi North
counterpart Kalonzo Musyoka had approached them seeking Sh 3 billion
to finance a vote of no confidence in the government.
Sargsyan and Margaryan also claimed that Kalonzo, who introduced them
to Raila, had requested for bullet-proof cars to use in their alleged
anti-government activities.
Addressing a press conference at the Jomo Kenyatta Interbnational
Airport’s VIP lounge in the company of their lawyer Fred Ngatia,
Sargsyan also claimed that Raila had separately requested for a loan
of Sh 108 million (US$ 1.5 m) which he advanced him on condition that
he would repay it by mid January this year although by yesterday he
had not repaid the money.
But in a swift rejoinder, Raila denied ever having met the two
brothers. Kalonzo, however, confessed having encountered them at “an
informal meeting” at the Grand Regency hotel’s Summit Club sometimes
last year.
Raila described Sargsyan and Margaryan’s statements as completely
unfounded, baseless, nefarious and maliciously concocted to scandalise
and malign his name.
Kalonzo protested his innocence and disclosed that he was introduced
to the two in his capacity as a former Foreign Affairs Minister. “It
is a clear government plot to malign our names and it falls right in
their face. I am a very simple person who cannot handle such a huge
sum of money,” said Kalonzo.
Two weeks ago, Liberal Democratic Party defacto leader, Raila revealed
about the existence of mercenaries in the country allegedly hired
by the government to kill some leading Orange Democratic Movement
(ODM) luminaries
Earlier, Raila had met Police Commissioner Brig Hussein Ali to record a
statement on the matter after he was requested to do so and thereafter
proceeded to record a statement with the police .
The mercenaries for the first time surfaced yesterday and addressed
a press conference to respond to the mercenary allegations.
The two Armenian brothers Sargsyan and Margaryan, the alleged
mercenaries, arrived at the JKIA airport from Dubai yesterday in the
morning and were ushered into the VIP lounge by government agents
where they addressed the Press and claimed they had met Raila and
Musyoka last year.
It was not immediately clear who authorised the two to use the VIP
lounge, which is normally reserved for presidents, senior government
officials, diplomats and other high ranking dignitaries recognised
by the state.
Government spokesman Dr Alfred Mutua denied knowledge of the issue
and refused to be drawn into it.
And soon after the press conference, that was organised by Ngatia,
Sargsyan was reported to have immediately returned to Dubai where he
had come from specifically for the media briefing. He is believed to
have arrived at around 7 in the morning and left at 11 am aboard a
Kenya Airways plane. Astonishingly, his name was missing on the two
KQ manifest that arrived and left for Dubai yesterday.
While copies of passports given by Raila last week indicated the two
businessmen aged 33 and 36 years, who resurfaced yesterday looked
much older.
The two brothers claimed to have business investments portfolio
worth US $ 5 million in Nairobi’s Karen area. They, however, refused
to give names of their Kenyan business associates or the names of
their companies.
Besides, the two also claimed to have vast business ventures all over
the world and Dubai, where they “ordinarily reside”, and that they
were first introduced to Raila and Kalonzo late last year while on a
tour of Kenya to seek business investment in the hotel industry and
general trade.
Consequently, they say, the two politicians requested from them Sh
3 billion allegedly to finance an anticipated vote of no confidence
against the government, but they declined to assist since “we do
not engage in local politics in all the countries where we have
investments”.
However, Raila and Kalonzo hurriedly convened a press conference
at Parliament Buildings during the lunch hour where they defended
themselves and pledged ignorance of the two men. Raila said he had
never met the two men and had never received the said money from them.
Interestingly, Kalonzo appeared to contradict him when he confessed
to having been introduced to one of them, as Armenian Foreign Affairs
Minister at the Summit of the Grand Regency hotel. The introduction
he said, was done casually and there were many people at the same
place at that time. Since then, he said, he had never met him.
“I may have met some people at the Summit of the Grand Regency although
that was the end of it. I dismiss their claims with the contempt they
deserve. I do not know their identities”, said the former minister.
Interestingly, Kalonzo confessed that he took some photographs with
the two Armenians during their encounter at the hotel.
Sargsyan, who asserts that he is the nephew of the Armenian President,
Robert Kocharian, says he is appalled by the “baseless accusations”
in Kenya’s Press and wants Raila to pay him back the money he owes him
or take him to court. The country’s Prime Minister as per Internet
sources is called Andranik Margaryan (since May 12, 2000). His name
resembles the surnames of the two brothers.
“Your political leaders should not be peddlers of falsehoods and the
press should not merely publish sensational but senseless stories
which can damage the reputation of persons whose only interest in your
country is to invest in legitimate trade”, he said in the statement.
Efforts to confirm the nationality of the two businessmen were
fruitless as Armenia does not have a an embassy in the country.
Raila and Kalonzo, who were accompanied by LDP MPs, Kenneth Marende,
Gor Sungu, Otieno Kajwang’, Ayiecho Olweny, Philip Okundi, Peter
Odoyo, Andrew Ligale, Kiema Kilonzo and Odhiambo Omamba, termed the
content of the press statement as “the most ridiculous and a phantom
of great imagination”.
He denied ever meeting the two brothers or holding a meeting with them
and accused the government of orchestrating a plot to mudslinging
them. He alluded to an interview the previous night on one of the
local TV channels where Mwea MP, Alfred Nderitu made claims similar
to those in Atur’s press statement.
He said the figures mentioned by the two were “large in any language
and cannot possibly be transacted in the air” and that nobody could
carry the Sh 3b as alleged without fearing for his security.
Said Raila: “Their claims are untrue. What empirical evidence or any
even a scintilla of it has been offered to sustain the contention
that the transaction took place?”, and added, “I therefore find the
claims made completely unfounded, baseless, nefarious and maliciously
concocted to scandalise and malign my name”.
He claimed their lawyer Ngatia was the man who had written the
statement on behalf of the two foreigners and described it as an
amateurish attempt by the government to divert the attention of the
public from corruption scandals facing it.
The LDP leader wondered why CID Director, Joseph Kamau had not disowned
the statement he had written on the existence of the mercenaries,
or why t hey were allowed to enter State House and who informed the
media that the two were expected at the airport in the morning.
The call, he said, had been placed to media houses by a Narc activist
from Othaya.

SABINE FREIZER: THE PEACE PLAN PROPOSED BY INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP IS GOOD BECAUSE IT IS REALISTIC
Haroutiun Khachatrian
Noyan Tapan
Armenians Today
Mar 13 2006
YEREVAN, MARCH 13, NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY. The International
Crisis Group, a respected organization involved in efforts of
conflict resolution, has recently proposed its suggestions about a
possible way of regulation of the Nagorno Karabakh problem. These
suggestions have had controversial echoes both among Armenians and
Azeris. Sabine Freizer, the Caucasus Project Director of the ICG,
presents the details in an exclusive interview with Noyan Tapan.
“NOYAN TAPAN”: Please remind us briefly the pre-history and current
activities of your organization. Whose was the idea of its creation,
who is involved in its activities, who provides funding?
SABINE FREIZER: The International Crisis Group is an international not
for profit organization based in Brussels, Belgium. The organization
was created in 1995 as an independent body that could combine detailed
field assessment and analysis with political advocacy to try to
resolve or prevent conflict. Its founders were leading international
decision-makers who were shocked by their own governments’ inability
to respond effectively to the conflicts in former-Yugoslavia, Somalia,
Rwanda and other situations that had spiralled out of control in the
early 1990s. They wanted to create an organization that could provide
comprehensive, quick and neutral analysis on conflicts, and recommend
means to respond to them.
Crisis Group receives funding from a variety of sources. The goal is to
have a diverse funding base to insure independence and credibility. In
2004 40% of Crisis Group’s funds came from governments, 43% from
foundations, and 16% from private individuals and corporations. In
2004 the organization raised some million to cover operating costs.
“NT”: You are an organization of experts, which means that your
recommendations should be addressed to policymakers rather than to
the public opinion.
Meanwhile, you often address to wider society, including political
parties and NGOs. Isn’t there a controversy present here?
S.F.: Our recommendations are mainly addressed to policy makers
especially in Washington, New York, Brussels, London, Moscow and
other major capitals. We try to influence their decision-making and
the activities of state and international actors. However especially
in the South Caucasus where international attention is weaker then in
other parts of the globe, we also take the time to share our reports
and recommendations with local policymakers, political actors, NGOs
and others. We believe that it’s important to do this to increase
public knowledge and understanding about conflict in the region from
a relatively neutral standpoint.
“NT”: Continuing the above question, your comments about the Nagorno
Karabakh conflict go beyond the conflict per se to include the
issues of domestic politics such as the problems of elections or
referendum. Why do you think it is proper?
S.F.: We think that its important to look at domestic political
developments in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia because they of course
also affect the potential for conflict resolution. Our focus is on
analysing the conflicts but we sometimes report on local political
issues such as the Fall Azerbaijani parliamentary elections and the
Armenian referendum. We were quite critical in both cases.
“NT”: In recent months, some Armenian media have argued that your
organization is influenced by pro-Turkish lobby. Can you deny these
allegations? And, if so, what is, in your opinion, the reason that
such publications appeared in the Armenian media?
S.F.: We have been accused of being pro-Turkish in Armenia and
pro-Armenian in Azerbaijan. This is very frequent in our work. People
who don’t like what we have to say try to discredit us by linking
us with outside political forces. But Crisis Group is a truly
international organization with staff and funding from across the
globe. We are fully independent and are not politically influenced
by anyone.
Of course I can deny that we are influenced by any kind of pro-Turkish
lobby. In our report in Armenia in 2004 we several times mention
the Genocide including in the Introduction. We also make tough
recommendations to Turkey to open its border with Armenia. It would
be hard for me to imagine a Turkish lobby group who would come out
with these kinds of statements.
“NT”: What are the benefits of the peace plan proposed by ICG for
the Armenian side, including Nagorno Karabakh?
S.F.: The peace plan proposed by ICG is good because it is realistic
in the current situation and meets a significant part of the both
sides key demands.
For the Armenian side it provides security guarantees and the right
to self-determination for the people of Nagorno-Karabakh. For
the Azerbaijani side it offers the return of all internally
displaced persons and return of all its occupied lands around
Nagorno-Karabakh. The plan also calls for assurances of free movement
of people and goods, including the lifting of all blockades and the
reopening of all transport and trade routes closed as a result of the
conflict. For Armenia this would mean the end of its regional isolation
and the opening of its border with Turkey. The plan also grants
Nagorno-Karabakh with an internationally recognized interim status.
“NT”: As for the proposals of your organization about the Nagorno
Karabakh conflict, they are criticized by Armenian politicians for
several reasons:
First: The proposal to hold another referendum in Nagorno Karabakh
whereas a referendum meeting all democracy standards was held there
in 1991.
S.F: A referendum on statehood is not worth much — even if it meets
democratic standards — if its not internationally recognized. For
the past 15 years no state has recognized the 1991 referendum. The
internationally community is not going to recognize the referendum
now. Instead if Nagorno-Karabakh wants to receive international
recognition, and be accepted as an equal amongst other states, it must
hold a referendum, which meets international standards and is observed
by international organizations, first and foremost by the OSCE.
“NT”: Second: Many in Armenia express concern that withdrawal from the
territories around the former NKAO may disrupt the existing balance
(I do not speak about those who prefer to use the term “liberated”
rather than “occupied” for these territories).
S.F.: The Armenian side has a stark choice — to withdraw from the
occupied territories around Nagorno-Karabakh or to remain stationed
on land, which does not belong to it. If it chooses the latter,
Azerbaijan is much more likely to resort to the use of military force
to try to retake control of its land.
Should that happen the international community is unlikely to react
very strongly as UN Security Council Resolutions urge the withdrawal of
occupied territories. Today control of the land is NK’s only security
guarantee. We are proposing that it replaces this guarantee with
much stronger ones: a renunciation of the threat of the use of force
to settle disputes by Azerbaijan, the deployment of international
peacekeeping troops, and the creation of a joint commission including
Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh to address security problems. According
to this formula Azerbaijan will be more much constrained and will
have little ability to strike Nagorno-Karabakh. If it does choose to
do so it will become an international pariah state.
“NT”: Third: Peacekeeping forces (if any) in the Karabakh region
may present a threat to Iran, hence, Teheran will oppose their
installation.
S.F: If the sides — including the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair countries
— agree to the deployment of international peacekeepers I don’t think
that Iran will have much political weight to oppose them. Of course it
will be important to talk to Iran to explain to them the mission and
mandate of any peacekeepers. But I do not think that Iran’s political
concerns should override a compromise decision made by Russia, the US,
the EU, the Armenian and Azerbaijani sides, to deploy peacekeepers.
“NT”: According to your proposals, an intermediate status for
Nagorno Karabakh is to be established before is the final status is
defined. What elements this status can involve?
S.F.: An interim status for NK would provide NK with an internationally
recognized status — not as a state but as an interim entity. It
would be allowed to hold elections, which would be internationally
supervised. Based on this elected officials would be recognized
as representing the people of NK. Other interim measures could be
envisioned such as the granting of the right to have representatives
in international organizations, the right to trade, to issue travel
documents, receive international assistance etc…
After NK obtains interim status it should also accept the return
of displaced Azeris who should have the right to participate in all
elements of political, economic, social and cultural life.
“NT”: This question may look naive, but can you indicate a most
important factor hindering the progress in the settlement of the
Karabakh conflict?
S.F.: Distrust — between the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan, and
the people of the two countries. Once there is confidence and trust, as
I believe there is between the Foreign Ministers of the two countries,
it is much easier to come to a compromise. The other lacking factor
is absence of understanding for the need to accept compromises. The
sides maintain a maximalist approach. They rather demand all but get
no deal, then demand a bit less but come to an agreement.
“NT”: What future actions can your organization undertake in the
observable future concerning the Nagorno Karabakh conflict?
S.F.: We will continue monitoring and reporting on Nagorno-Karabakh. I
personally will be travelling to Washington DC and New York in
the coming months to meet with decision-makers and make public
presentations on Nagorno-Karabakh.
“NT”: Is the ICG involved in the settlement efforts of other conflicts
in the South Caucasus?
S.F.: Yes, we are also working closely on the South Ossetian and
Abkhaz conflicts.

ARMENIAN HISTORIANS NOT TO ATTEND FORUM ON ALLEGED GENOCIDE
NTV MSNBC, Turkey
March 14 2006
More than 50 experts from Turkey and abroad are expected to attend
the conference organised by the Istanbul University.
NTV-MSNBC Guncelleme: 13:31 TSÝ 14 Mart 2006 SalýISTANBUL – The Dean
of Istanbul University, Profesor Mesut Parlak, on Monday held a press
conference to discuss the forthcoming conference on the so-called
Armenian genocide.
Parlak said that Armenian historians who had been invited to
participate in the conference have rejected the invitations, with
just one responding in a written form.
“In the foreign press they made statement that had the aim of hurting
our university,” Parlak said.
Parlak said that the conference, to be held between March 15 and
17, would be the first such gatherings with a wide participation in
Turkey. He said the conference would open up a new page on the issue.
The meeting would bring to light many issues that were not made
public before.
Those who refused to take part in the conference from Turkey included
prominent writer Orhan Pamuk, Baskýn Oran, Selim Deringil and the
chief correspondent of the Armenian paper Agos Hrant Dink.
–Boundary_(ID_InUaq8CYr2GGDv52u6kPmw)–

TURKISH FOREIGN MINISTER DEFENDS JUDICIAL INTEGRITY
By Vincent Boland in Ankara
The Financial Times
Oct 17 2005
Updated: 2:41 p.m. ET Oct. 17, 2005
A charge of treason against Orhan Pamuk, the Turkish novelist, was
almost certain to be dismissed by the courts when his trial begins
in December but was damaging to Turkey’s image abroad regardless of
the outcome, the country’s foreign minister said.
Abdullah Gul said the publicity given to Mr Pamuk’s forthcoming trial
for “public denigration of Turkish identity” had overshadowed what he
insisted were notable efforts to modernise Turkey’s judicial system
and to enhance freedom of expression and civil rights.
“I have confidence that the judge will dismiss this case,” Mr Gul
said in an interview last week with the Financial Times.
Mr Gul said the government could not intervene because the judiciary
and the criminal justice system in Turkey were independent of
political control.
“I am not a judge, but I don’t think he will go to jail,” Mr Gul
said. If convicted, Mr Gul said, Mr Pamuk can appeal.
Two recent incidents raise doubts about Mr Gul’s optimism, however.
Recent sentencings of a newspaper editor on a similar charge, and of a
Kurdish politician for speaking in Kurdish, have added to discomfort
among Turkish reformers that penal and civil code reforms are being
wilfully ignored by some prosecutors and judges.
Mr Gul said the Turkish judiciary was “conservative” and that
“prosecutors were even more conservative, but there are higher courts
where the correct decisions are made”.
He insisted that the cases of Mr Pamuk and the others were “individual
cases” that should not deflect from the reforms the government has
passed to boost civil and human rights protection.
“We believe in freedom of expression and religion, and we are very
proud of the changes this government has introduced,” Mr Gul said. “I
know [Mr Pamuk’s case] is damaging and does not help us, but there
are many things happening that are more important.”
Mr Pamuk, who is better known and more widely read abroad than in
Turkey, has been charged with “public denigration of Turkish identity”
for remarks he made to a magazine about Turkey’s stance on the mass
killing of Armenians during the first world war.
Mr Pamuk is due to go on trial on December 16.
Turkey began accession negotiations with the European Union two weeks
ago but already Mr Pamuk’s plight is being cited as a reason why it
should not be allowed to join the union.
The man who brought the charges against Mr Pamuk is the prosecutor
for the Istanbul district of Sisli. He also pursued Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister and former mayor of Istanbul,
in the late 1990s.

ARKA News Agency
Oct 14 2005
ARMENIA TO REPRESENT CE MINISTERS’ COMMITTEE AT CULTURAL DIALOGUE
CONFERENCE
YEREVAN, October 14. /ARKA/. Armenia’s representative Christian
Ter-Stepanyan will represent the CE Ministers’ Committee at the
“Cultural Dialogue” conference in Faro, Portugal, on October 27-28,
as part of the 50th anniversary of the European cultural convention.
The goal of the conference is forming political approaches that will
serve as a basis for the CE’s strategy of developing cultural
dialogue within the European community and between Europe and the
rest of the world. The conference participants are to specify the
directions of implementing the strategy by means of intergovernmental
cooperation between the signatories to the European cultural
convention. The CE is for the first time elaborating clear mechanisms
of cultural dialogues. A number of documents are to be signed at the
conference. Also, the CE Ministers’ Committee decided to open a
framework convention “On values of cultural heritage” in Faro.
Christian Ter-Stepanyan is the RA permanent Representative to CE and
Head of the CE reporter group for education, culture, sport, youth
affairs and ecology. P.T. -0–

MURDER VICTIM ‘A MEMBER OF MAFIA’
Christine Cunningham
Norfolk Eastern Daily Press, UK
Oct 13 2005
A man who was shot and stabbed at a Norfolk factory before his body
was doused with petrol and set alight was said to belong to the
mafia and was wanted for questioning about a murder in Belgium,
a jury heard yesterday.
Detectives spent almost a year trying to identify the body of
42-year-old Armenian Hovanhannes Amirian, whose burning body was
found dumped in a field at Upton, near Peterborough in December 2002.
Armenians Nishan Bakunts, 28, and his father-in-law Misha Chatsjatrjan,
44, allegedly killed their countryman Amirian over a ‘family quarrel’,
then sought to destroy evidence linking them to the crime, Norwich
Crown Court heard.
Bakunts of Lichfield Road, Yarmouth, and Chatsjatrjan, who was living
in Holland, have both denied murdering Mr Amiran, also known as Sako,
who was the godfather of Bakunts and his wife Arpine Karapetian, 24.
A statement read to the jury yesterday revealed that Mr Amirian was
wanted for questioning about the murder of Pogosian Ernait, who was
killed on November 30, 2000 at Ostend, in Belgium.
Belgian police suspected Mr Amirian was the culprit and he was
described as a “self-confessed mafia man”.
Clare Matthews, junior barrister for the prosecution, said: “It was
known that he was involved in organised crime.
“He had a number of known associates and used a number of different
aliases.”
The jury also heard from Bakunts’s sister, Irina Aroustamian, who
said she had spoken to Chatsjatrjan and that he had confessed to
putting eight bullets into Mr Amirian’s head.
Speaking through an interpreter, she said that Chatsjatrjan told
her Mr Amirian had gone on his knees and said “don’t kill me, I
have children”.
The trial continues.
;category=News&tBrand=edponline&tCategory=news&itemid=NOED13%20Oct%202005%2009%3A09%3A10%3A537

L.A. Times names two new managing editors
Reuters
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
The Los Angeles Times on Tuesday named two new managing editors, one to
oversee newsgathering and the other to help attract more readers to the
newspaper.
One of its new managing editors, Leo Wolinsky, who is currently deputy
managing editor, will be responsible for gaining more circulation as
well as overseeing budget and staffing for the newsroom.
His appointment comes as the L.A. Times and the rest of the industry
struggles with declining readership, due to the loss of younger readers
and competition from new media like the Internet.
Doug Frantz, an investigative reporter currently based in Istanbul, will
become the other managing editor. Frantz will be in charge of news
operations, including foreign, metro, national, Washington, business,
sports, science and obituaries.
Both managing editors will report to L.A. Times Editor Dean Baquet, the
Tribune Co. newspaper said in a release.
“I wanted an aggressive way to address the issue of declining
readership, to have someone focus on it,” Baquet said. “And I wanted
someone to run the newsroom day-to-day. For a newspaper of our scope and
complexity, this would be enough work for more than one person.”
Baquet previously served as the newspaper’s managing editor, and was
promoted to editor in August.

USAID CELEBRATES COMPLETION OF ITS SEVAN HOSPITAL RENOVATION PROJECT
Armenpress
Oct 12 2005
SEVAN, OCTOBER 12, ARMENPRESS: On October 12, the United States
Agency for International Development (USAID) celebrated the
completion of the installation of a central heating system at Sevan
Hospital. USAID Mission Deputy Director Karl Fickenscher, the governor
of Gegharkunik marz, the city mayor as well as city officials,
hospital representatives, Thermoservice energy service company, and
members of Advanced Engineering Associates International participated
in the ceremony.
As a result of this project, which was funded by the U.S. Government
and implemented by Advanced Engineering Associates International within
March – August 2005, Sevan hospital now has a modern and efficient
gas heating system. The total cost of the project was $86,773, with
approximately 70% of the funding having been provided by USAID and 30%
by the hospital itself.