Author: nina hovnanian

AZERBAIJAN OWES ITS INDEPENDENCE TO ARTSAKH – EXPERT

Aysor.am
Friday,September 02

The two Armenian states will sign a declaration of unification in the
21st century, according to Deputy Director of the National Archives
of Armenia Edgar Hovhannisyan.

Azerbaijan owes its independence to the Artsakh liberation movement
and to Nagorno-Karabakh, because it had never before fought for
independence and for coming out of USSR, Hovhannisyan told reporters
in Yerevan.

In return, Deputy Director of the Caucasus Institute Sergey Minasyan
noted that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is not only legal but also
ethnopolitical and international.

“In the legal aspect, Nagorno-Karabakh’s base is stronger than many
semi-recognized or even recognized states, be it Kosovo, Abkhazia or
South Ossetia,” the expert said.

THE DYNAMICS AND TENDENCY OF THE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA AND THE US: CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS
Sergey Minasyan

01.09.2011

The Head of the Department of the Political Studies at the Caucasus
Institute, Political Scientist, Candidate of Historical Sciences

Foreign-policy relations with the key actors of the global politics
constantly demand conceptual reconsideration and adjustment depending
on the emerging regional conjuncture and global processes. The
relations of Armenia and the US, with all their many-sidedness and
deep involvement of the political elite and Diaspora organizations,
are not the exclusion. This article is an attempt of a brief conceptual
analysis of the main trends and dynamics of the relations between
two countries in different areas in order to outline their development.

The relations with the United States are important dimension of the
Armenian foreign policy, which has undergone serious transformations
for the recent two decades. The relations of two countries eagerly
develop particularly in the following directions:

Political cooperation (also in the context of the relations of Armenia
with Russia, China and Iran); Involvement of the US in the processes
of the state formation, reforming and promotion of the processes of
democratization in Armenia (including the role of the US in mending
contacts between the authorities and oppositional political powers in
Armenia). Economics connections (especially taking into consideration
the economic and humanitarian aid delivered by the US), Humanitarian
contacts (the factor of numerous Armenian Diaspora in the US),
Cooperation in the sphere of security and military and political
relations (including military and technical support to the armed
forces of the Republic of Armenia and participation of the Armenian
peacekeepers in the international operations under aegis of the US),
~URegional cooperation and involvement in the settlement of the
conflicts (taking into consideration the mediatory role of the US
as co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group on Karabakh conflict settlement
and considerable contribution of Washington into the process of the
Armenian-Turkish rapprochement). Dynamics of bilateral relations Back
in the late 1980s the US actively supported future leaders of Armenia
in their struggle against the USSR authorities. The struggle of the
Armenians from Karabakh for separation from the Soviet Azerbaijan also
received unconditional support of the United States which considered it
as a part of “the struggle of the Soviet peoples against the communist
regime”. The Congress even passed several resolutions supporting the
Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh. In October 1992 the US Congress passed
Amendment #907 to “Freedom Support Act” which prohibited the government
of the US to deliver military or any other support to Azerbaijan until
the later took measures to raising off all the blockades and stop
using any offensive actions in regard to Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

But in the second half of the 1990s the US adjusted its approaches
to the region of the South Caucasus, which was also connected with
the growing interest of the US in Azerbaijan after conclusion of
the agreements on participation of the western oil companies in the
development of the Caspian energy resources. After the terrorist attack
on 9/11 the 907 Amendment was suspended within the framework of the
war on international terrorism and the US initiated eager military
cooperation with Azerbaijan.

However, despite the growing interest of Washington towards energy
resources and geographic location of Azerbaijan, the US policy towards
Armenia and Azerbaijan still remains asymmetrical. Per head Armenia
is currently one of the biggest recipients of direct American support
which has constituted about $2 billion for recent two decades. The US
annually allot financial means to Nagorno-Karabakh too (till 2011 the
Congress has allotted about $10 million) thus being the only state in
the world (besides Armenia) which renders direct financial assistance
to Karabakh. The US was also the main sponsor of the Armenian-Turkish
“football diplomacy” which was called to normalize the relations
between Yerevan and Ankara and to help Armenia to overcome partial
communication blockade by Azerbaijan and Turkey. Besides, being one
of the OSCE Minsk group co-chairs, the US is actively involved in
the negotiation process on Nagorno-Karabakh.

Very often pro-Armenian policy of Washington in the South Caucasus
is explained by the activity of the influential pro-Armenian lobby
in the US. This lobby is strong in terms both of its organization
and experience as well as by the fact the US citizens of the Armenian
decent constitute a considerable percentage of the population of some
states and can vote consolidated thus influencing the US policy in our
region. This factor will actualize especially taking into consideration
upcoming presidential elections in the US in 2012. But predictability
of the Armenian foreign policy in the eyes of the US, especially as
compared with other regional actors, is also a crucial factor which
makes Armenia a convenient and long-term partner for Washington.

Tendency of development In the near terms the main prospects of
development of the relations of Armenia with the US, as it seems, will
be connected with the domestic political processes in Armenia, regional
problems and settlement of the conflicts, military and political
cooperation and programmes of assistance and economic cooperation.

Influence of the US on domestic political processes. The United States
will continue influencing the organization of the dialogue between the
government and oppositional forces, and first of all with the Armenian
National Congress, headed by the first president Levon Ter-Petrosyan,
by asserting moderate pressure on both the government and opposition.

At the same time the American factor will be rather important within
the context of the upcoming parliamentary elections in Armenia in 2012
in order to hold them as open as possible. But under any circumstances
there will be no undisguised involvement of the US in the domestic
political processes in Armenia, such as “coloured revolutions” in
the spirit of the republican administrations of Bush.

By the way, it is already known that the incumbent US ambassador to
Armenia Mary Jovanovich who was the ambassador to Kirgizstan before
her appointment in Yerevan (also during the well known events and
change of the authorities in that Central Asian republic) will soon
leave her post. In due time the radical circles in Armenia connected
with her name carrying out new “colour revolution”. As it is supposed
John Heffern – Deputy Chief of Mission at USNATO, specialist on
South-East Asia, China and Japan – will be appointed to the post
of the ambassador. This also proves to some extent that Armenia has
shifted on the scale of the priorities of the American administration
from the category of the countries, which are potential subjects for
various “colour revolutions” to the category of states with which the
US intends to develop its relations based on the pragmatic coincidence
of the balance of the interests.

Armenian-American relations in the regional context. As for the
regional policy issues the Armenian-American relations will, at
least, preserve current format of mutual cooperation. The role of
Armenia in the American regional policy is greatly explained by the
pragmatic priorities of Washington in the relations with Russia,
Iran and Turkey, i.e. with the countries for which the Armenian
factor is rather important. After the drop of the interest towards
the South Caucasus by the Obama democrat administration and “reload”
of the Russian-American relations in 2009-2010, now it is much easier
for Armenia to carry out balanced policy in its relations with Russia
and US. The US takes the fact of the Armenian-Russian military and
political partnership and the fact of the dislocation of the Russian
military base in Armenia rather calmly. The American leadership most
probably realize that Armenia can efficiently cooperate with the US
in its regional policy, including military and political sphere and
security issues, even taking into consideration the presence of the
Russian military base on the Armenian territory.

A similar situation is with the approach of the US to the cooperation
between Armenia and Iran on different issues. At the same time
Washington follows rather attentively and alerted after the development
of the Armenian-Iranian relations in the sphere of security in order
not to allow transit of the weapons and critical materials through the
territory of Armenia to Iran. But the US understands the importance
of Iran as the second after Georgia communication and transit partner
of Armenia which is under blockade by Turkey and Azerbaijan. That is
the reason why the development of economic and energy projects between
Yerevan and Tehran does not cause serious concern of the US. On this
account no serious changes or negative steps in regard to Armenia
in the light of the Armenian-Iranian relations is expected in the
foreseeable future.

Armenian-American relations and the settlement of the regional
conflicts. In the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict the
US will continue its eager activity within the format of the OSCE
Minsk group in a close dialogue with two other co-chairs – Russia
and France. There are no special or accelerated initiatives by
Washington in the given direction expected in the foreseeable future;
all the actions by the US will be directed to maintaining armistice
and not allowing restoration of the military actions in the zone
of the Karabakh conflict by Azerbaijan. The current situation in
the conflict zone meets interests of both US and Russia and France
(which also represents in the OSCE MG the EU).

At the same time the US may promote the Armenian-Turkish process which,
though being frozen at given moment, has a potential for resuming. No
progress can be expected till the parliamentary elections in Turkey in
June, but in autumn 2011 possibly some shifts in the Armenian-Turkish
dialogue may take place, including with the assistance of Washington.

Cooperation in the sphere of security and military and political
relations. Some kind of activization in military and political contacts
and cooperation in the sphere of security is expected. After 9/11
the US Congress raised a ban on granting military assistance and
cooperation to Armenia and Azerbaijan. After that the US annually
allots means to Armenia (on average from $3 to $5 million annually)
on military purposes. The means are allotted within the framework
of the American IMET (International Military Education and Training)
programme.

Those means are mostly spent on programmes of military education
(including preparation of the Armenian militaries for the participation
in peacemaking operations in Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan), creation of
the Mine Cleaning Center, language and medical courses and etc. The
exclusion is the procurement of the American communication means
for using them in the Armed Forces of the RA. In the months to come,
i.e. in the autumn 2011, Armenia plans to enlarge its peacekeepers’
contingent in Afghanistan (from 45 to 130 people, with the possibility
to increase the number of the Armenian peacekeepers up to 260 people).

Programmes of economic cooperation and financial aid. The programmes
of financial and economic support to Armenia by the US will also be
continued though this support has been considerably cut off after the
domestic political processes in Armenia in March 2008, especially in
the line of “Millennium Challenge – Armenia” programme. This programme
will last till September 30, 2011 and by that time the investments of
the fund into the agriculture of Armenia and irrigation programme will
be about $180 million. The programmes of the financial assistance are
also implemented within the frameworks of other American programmes
as well.

At the same time the incumbent US ambassador stated that the funding
(including “Millennium Challenges” programme) will probably be
resumed, “if the authorities of Armenia work on the correction of the
shortcomings”. Most probably, here they mean the expectations of the
US on the arrangement of the parliamentary elections in Armenia in
spring 2012 on a decent level. In case of holding successful elections
which would receive a good rating of the international structures,
funding by the US, most probably, will be increased.

“GLOBUS Energy and Regional Security”, Issue 4, 2011

——————————————————————————–
Another materials of author

~UPOSSIBILITIES OF INTERNATIONAL PEACEKEEPING IN NAGORNO-KARABAKH
CONFLICT: MYTHS AND REALITIES[14.02.2011] ~UARMENIAN – GEORGIAN
RELATIONS AFTER “FIVE DAYS” WAR[15.10.2009] ~UARMENIA-TURKEY: NEW
POLITICAL PHASE? [14.05.2009] ~USPECIAL PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS ON
JANUARY 5, 2008 IN GEORGIA: A VIEW FROM JAVAKHQ[07.02.2008]

POLITICAL ANALYST: PROGRESS IN KARABAKH SETTLEMENT UNLIKELY IN NEAR FUTURE

/ARKA/
September 2, 2011
YEREVAN

Alexander Iskandaryan, political analyst and director of Caucasus
Institute, find significant progress in Karabakh conflict settlement
very unlikely within the next few years.

“I see no room for settling this conflict today,” he said Thursday at
a news conference. “If we view the settlement as official recognition
of Nagorno-Karabakh republic’s independence by Baku, I see no reasons
and grounds for Azerbaijan to do this. It doesn’t mean that this will
never happen, but at least now, in the near future such a thing is
very unlikely.”

Iskandaryan thinks that the current situation very long will remain
the same, since stances taken by Baku and Yerevan on the mater are
too far from each other. This distance gives no room for negotiations.

The political analyst said that talks would continue under Russia’s
mediation, but they would hardly produce any result.

“Even of Azerbaijan signs any document, this will be a document with
nothing written on it,” he said.

Iskandaryan said that the talks have two aims – to retain contacts
between Armenia and Azerbaijan and to internationalize Karabakh
problem.

“OSCE Minsk Group is successfully fulfilling its mission in terms of
these objectives” he said.

The expert also added that he doesn’t take talk about Azerbaijani
refugees’ return to Karabakh seriously.

“This talk will remain talk unless there are no political decisions,”
he said.

Karabakh conflict broke out in 1988 when Karabakh, mainly populated
by Armenians, declared its independence from Azerbaijan.

On December 10, 1991, a few days after the collapse of the Soviet
Union, a referendum took place in Nagorno-Karabakh, and the majority
of the population (99.89%) voted for secession from Azerbaijan.

Afterwards, large-scale military operations began. As a result,
Azerbaijan lost control over Nagorno-Karabakh and the seven regions
adjacent to it.

Some 30,000 people were killed in this war and about one million
people fled their homes.

On May 12, 1994, the Bishkek cease-fire agreement put an end to the
military operations.

Since 1992, talks brokered by OSCE Minsk Group are being held over
peaceful settlement of the conflict. The group is co-chaired by USA,
Russia and France.

POLITICAL SCIENTIST: EDWARD NALBANDIAN DECEIVES ARMENIAN PEOPLE

Trend
Sept 1 2011
Azerbaijan

Edward Nalbandian deceives Armenian people, Azerbaijani political
scientist Vafa Guluzade told Trend, commenting on the Armenian foreign
minister’s statement during his meeting with Armenian students.

“The word that Nalbandian said to the Armenian students is an old
song that Armenia has been singing for a long time. Nalbandian is
trying to deceive the public opinion in Armenia. But the Armenians
are not fools, they perfectly understand everything,” said Guluzade.

During a meeting with the students of Yerevan State University,
Armenian foreign minister Edward Nalbandian said that Azerbaijan
impedes the peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Such a statement is not accidental at a time when a meeting is
expected between the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia, Guluzade
believes. “With this behavior, they want to pester the Azerbaijani
side. They want Azerbaijan to repeatedly refuse to meeting in order
to show that Azerbaijan is a country that does not want to resolve
the issue peacefully,” said Guluzade.

“The Azerbaijani government, pursuing an active policy, must
demonstrate that Armenia does not want to come to any agreement that
is based on international law. Armenia acts from a position of an
aggressor and wants Azerbaijan to agree with this position,” he said.

Azerbaijan and Armenia were twice close to signing a peace agreement,
said Guluzade.

“In one case, the Armenian parliament was shot, in another one –
Levon Ter-Petrosyan was forced to resign,” he said

The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988
when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Armenian
armed forces have occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan since 1992,
including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and 7 surrounding districts.

Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a ceasefire agreement in 1994. The
co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group – Russia, France, and the U.S. –
are currently holding the peace negotiations.

Armenia has not yet implemented the U.N. Security Council’s four
resolutions on the liberation of the Nagorno-Karabakh and the
surrounding regions.

ROBERT KOCHARYAN GIVES AN INTERVIEW ABOUT THE INDEPENDENCE OF ARTSAKH, MOVING TO ARMENIA AND THE FUTURE OF TWO ARMENIAN REPUBLICS

Mediamax
Aug 31 2011
Armenia

Yerevan/Mediamax/. Armenian second President Robert Kocharyan gave
an interview to Public TV of Artsakh in connection with the 20th
anniversary of NKR independence to be celebrated on September 2.

Here is the main content of the interview.

About the proclamation of NKR independence on September 2, 1991

– It was obvious that the Soviet Union was collapsing and the
appropriate moment for the proclamation of independence was
approaching. If you remember the movement began under the slogans of
unification with Armenia. Why independence? It created more serious
legal grounds for the future existence of Artsakh. There are two
circumstances. First, it was more in tune with the laws of the
time, and secondly-it meant an actual realization of the right for
self-determination, and the right for self-determination is one of
the fundamental principles of the international law. This was the
reason: the formation of serious legal grounds for the existence of
the future republic.

It was a right step in a right moment. I was not alone. A big team had
worked over the preparation and the legal basis of the declaration-
Karen Baburyan and others, there were two specialists from the
Institute of Philosophy and Law of the National Academy of Sciences
of Armenia. It was, of course, a very serious political document.

About the responsibility to generations

– In such cases the responsibility is always very great. But at that
time we didn’t think about our responsibility to the generations. We
were simply doing our job, defended our families and our land,
ensured the safety of the people.

Casting a retrospective glance, one can give all this some elements
of pathos. But at that time we had a definite task and everyone was
trying to do his best to keep the land, feed the people and ensure
security. But the responsibility was big of course. Can you imagine
what labels people would pin on me (laughingly) in case we have
failed to succeed then. We have taken on that big responsibility at
that moment, and not only me but the others too.

The State Defense Committee of NKR

– There was a big need to centralize the power and all human and
material resources to withstand the challenges of that time. The
State Defense Committee was the highest level of governance of
Nagorno Karabakh then. It was not me who had invented that name. Such
structures existed still during the World War II. However, I had
defined the whole structure of authorities and I received authorities
from the parliament as a chairman of that Committee. It allowed
to significantly change the situation several months after the
establishment of the Committee.

About the formation of the NKR Defense Army

– The first task was to form an army and to unite various detachments
into one army system. It was the demand of the time. If we hadn’t
done it then, we would have lost everything. It was very hard. It
required strong will. We worked in that direction very consistently
and hard, making very harsh steps, but we had no other variants to
change the situation.

There were certainly problems, but they were not that urgent. Finally,
the Armenians in the Soviet Army used to serve in combat units and
many of them were with us, also the officers who had passed a serious
path in the Soviet Army. There was a problem, of course, but the rival
had had even more serious problems. We started from a scratch. There
was a need to direct all capabilities of these structures to one
point- provision of security. It was task number one on the agenda
at that time. There was a physiological aspect too: to make people
believe. Yes, Armenia was behind us, but there was little Karabakh, and
big Azerbaijan in front of us, there was a lack of arms, ammunition,
a blockade, etc.

Artsakh today

– Karabakh undoubtedly marks big progress from year to year. But the
challenges Artsakh faces today don’t give us the right to say that we
are satisfied with the situation. I think the moment when we start
saying that we are pleased with the situation is very dangerous. We
have to reckon with the reality, a very complicated situation and
we have to understand that we need to work day and night to achieve
our goals and demonstrate our endurance and will. I have no doubts
that everything will be all right, but I should repeat that we have
no right to be pleased with the today’s situation.

About moving to Armenia

– It was very difficult, of course. My family experienced the biggest
difficulties. My family couldn’t put up with this idea. There was a
feeling of responsibility. I was elected NKR President and several
months later I received that proposal, that request… The situation
in Armenia was very complicated then both in economic and political
sense. It was clear that Karabakh would have the most serious problems
alone, without strong Armenia behind it. It was the major reason
they used trying to persuade me to agree to move to Armenia. I should
admit that these reasons were very serious. I agreed and everything
began to develop the way we know. Surely, it was very hard…

About ideals, achievements and failures during 20 years

– We didn’t think about ideals during first years. There were such
issues on the agenda that there was neither time nor desire to think
about ideals. There was a primary task to protect the lands and the
people and everything was concentrated on solving these issues. Then,
years after, we gained more experience and during international
contacts we learned to better understand the developments in the state
construction, began to better understand what kind of state we had to
build, what kind of state could ensure prosperous life for our citizens
and allow to preserve our national system of values without weakening
our capabilities to withstand today’s challenges. We faced the task
to balance these extremely important circumstances. And today this
task is still urgent. This is the reason why the word “ideal” is not
appropriate. There should be a pragmatic approach through which we
can find a better model for the development of Armenia and Karabakh
today, which, I repeat, will enable us to withstand all challenges,
get integrated into international community and preserve our national
values, because the threat of losing all this still exists, especially
in conditions of globalizing world.

The future of two Armenian states 20 years after

– Everything depends on how we are going to work and what kind of
brave decisions we are ready to make today to advance our national
interests. I have big hopes that everything will be all right,
but I can’t just say that we will have a bright future. I believe
that prosperous life is not granted, it is earned by hard work,
by determined and complex decisions. There are no simply other options.

And independence too. When you ask about whether it will be recognized
or not…. Independence is achieved, it is not granted.

RED CROSS REPS. VISIT ARMENIANS IN AZERBAIJANI CAPTIVITY

news.am
Sept 1 2011
Armenia

YEREVAN. – Representatives of the International Committee of the Red
Cross (ICRC) visited on Thursday three Armenian POWs and five civilians
kept in Azerbaijani captivity, representative of ICRC Yerevan office
told Armenian News-NEWS.am.

Earlier on Thursday Azerbaijani press reported ICRC members visited
the captives and handed over a letter to one of them.

Presently three Armenian POWs and five members of the Armenian family
are kept in Azerbaijani captivity, while one Azerbaijani POW remains
in Armenia.

WHO TAKES ARMENIANS AWAY? ARMENIANS LEAVE FOR RUSSIA ON THEIR OWN – RUSSIAN ENVOY

news.am
Sept 1 2011
Armenia

YEREVAN. – Some people speculate on the fact of Armenian citizen’s
emigration to Russia, argues Russian Ambassador in Armenia Vyacheslav
Kovalenko in his interview to Radio Liberty.

Reflecting on the Compatriots program, which helps foreigners to move
to Russia, implemented by Russian Migration Service, Kovalenko said
that Armenians decide to move to Russia on their own.

“Who takes Armenian away? If an Armenian [citizen] would not want
to leave the county, would he leave? If he lives good enough in his
country, why should he leave? Nobody takes people away. People decide
to go on their own,” said Kovalenko.

The Compatriots program aims to resettle people who found themselves
outside of Russia after the collapse of Soviet Union. It provides
them with citizenship and employment. The program is designed to run
from 2006 to 2012. Registration for process began on January 1, 2007.

As the head of Armenian Migration Service Gagik Yeganyan said to a
press conference on July 29, 780 families or 1890 people left Armenia
between 2007 and June 15, 2011. A total of 29,500 people applied to
program office.

AZERBAIJANI OFFICIAL SAYS SARKISIAN STATEMENTS ‘NONSENSICAL’

RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty
Sept 1 2011

BAKU — A top adviser to Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev says recent
statements by Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian about the disputed
Nagorno-Karabakh territory are “nonsensical” and “unpresidential,”
RFE/RL’s Azerbaijani Service reports.

Novruz Mammedov, head of the Foreign Affairs Department in Aliyev’s
administration, told RFE/RL in an exclusive interview on August 31
that Sarkisian’s attempt to compare the situation in the breakaway
Azerbaijani region of Nagorno-Karabakh to the recognition of
South Sudan as the world’s newest country “does not correspond to
international law or a realistic understanding of the political
situation.”

Sarkisian said at an annual meeting of Armenian ambassadors in Yerevan
on August 30 that “this year we have witnessed South Sudan obtain
independence after decades of struggle, making another successful
precedent of self-determination in world history.”

South Sudan gained independence from Sudan on July 9 in a process
determined by the signing of a peace agreement and a referendum on
statehood that was supported by the United Nations.

Sarkisian added that the “same solution” for Karabakh was “inevitable,
although today I cannot speak of any softening of Azerbaijan’s position
in the negotiation process.”

Mammedov said that “on one side Sarkisian is conducting negotiations,
but on the other he is making this kind of nonsensical statement.

Lately he has been making a lot of unpresidential statements. This
is his tragedy and sooner or later Sarkisian will get an adequate
response to his behavior.”

Mammedov also responded to Sarkisian’s statement that in case of a
military conflict over Karabakh, Armenia would “not hesitate to force
the enemy to ask for peace.”

“This is Armenia’s biggest worry,” Mammedov said. “Because [the
Armenians] know sooner or later Azerbaijan will get its territory
back. Under the current geopolitical conditions Armenia is not going
to be able to preserve its [military] advantage over the long term.”

Mammedov also rejected Yerevan’s claim, reiterated by Sarkisian on
August 30, that Azerbaijan is blocking the negotiation process over
Karabakh. He said such talk is “a product of Armenian propoganda.”

“Everybody can see that Azerbaijan is engaged in negotiations with the
aim of liberating its territories,” Mammedov said. “Armenia is using
its diaspora and some other supporters to put the blame on Azerbaijan.

What can Azerbaijan do [against that]?”

Sarkisian said on August 30 that “despite Azerbaijan’s destructive
position, Armenia will continue its efforts toward an exclusively
peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that would comply
with international law and be based on principles recognized by the
United Nations.”

He also said Armenia hoped to see a “a shift” in Turkey’s approach to
relations with Yerevan and its stance on Karabakh after the upcoming
parliamentary elections in Turkey.

But he added, “To be honest, the last two months have not given any
reason for optimism.”

Armenian forces fought a bloody war with Azerbaijan from 1991-94 for
control over Nagorno-Karabakh, which had a mainly ethnic Armenian
population. Armenian forces also control large Azerbaijani territories
adjoining Karabakh.

“MAGIC AUTUMN” WITH KARABAKH TELECOM CONTINUES

Noyan Tapan
01.09.2011

Karabakh Telecom on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of Nagorno
Karabakh Republic grants its subscribers another autumn gift – 15%
tariff decrease for on-net calls. Now you can call from Karabakh
Telecom postpaid numbers to KT numbers at 28.99 AMD per minute
instead of 33 AMD, and from prepaid numbers – 34.99 AMD/min instead
of 39.99 AMD/min. Calls from PSTN and WLL numbers cost only 28.99
AMD per minute.

Another surprise Karabakh Telecom has prepared for WLL new
subscribers. In September for all new customers the subscription
to WLL service will be free of charge, instead of 12500 AMD, and no
monthly fee during the whole autumn.

EDWARD NALBANDIAN SAYS AZERBAIJAN IMPEDES ACHIEVEMENT OF AGREEMENT

ARMENPRESS
14:53, 1 September, 2011

According to the set up traditions, Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian
visited September 1 Yerevan State University and delivered a speech
for the first course students and professor staff of the university.

MFA press office reported that Nalbandian congratulated the students
on entering the YSU and wished them fruitful studies and knowledge.

The minister presented the main directions of Armenia’s foreign policy,
the priorities, recent developments over Nagorno Karabakh conflict
settlement process.

In response to a question of a student Minister Nalbandian pointed
out that we have reached a point when mediators, the international
community and Armenia find that the basic principles presented by the
mediators at the Kazan meeting may serve as a ground for NK conflict
settlement. As a result of the unconstructive position of Azerbaijan
it became impossible to register a progress.

The same thing happened in Sochi in March 2011, in October 2010 in
Astrakhan, in June 2010 in St. Petersburg where Azerbaijan, in fact,
impeded the achievement of an agreement.