GALA Gyumri TV Channel Broadcast Equipment Not Dismantled

GALA GYUMRI TV CHANNEL BROADCAST EQUIPMENT NOT DISMANTLED

PanARMENIAN.Net
17.04.2008 13:56 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ RA Chief Officer of Justice denies dismantling GALA
Gyumri TV channel broadcast equipment.

Armenia’s Chief Officer of Justice Gagik Ayvazian refuted hearsay
that yesterday his employees dismantled the broadcast equipment of
GALA Gyumri TV channel.

Commenting on the situation, Gagik Ayvazian said, "On receipt of an
enforcement order from the Court of General Jurisdiction of Shirak
region, officers of justice are empowered to dismantle the antenna.

However, they confined themselves to a warning disconnection."

"GALA’s antenna is still on the television tower of Gyumri and the
TV channel will again be able to legally start broadcasting in case
the legal procedure initiated against it is dropped.

Earlier this month, the Court of Appeal of Armenia upheld the decision
of Gyumri Court of First Instance, which obliged GALA TV channel to
clear its equipment from the old television tower, which belongs to
Gyumri city administration, Mediamax reports.

ANC of Illinois Hosts Successful 11th Annual Fundraiser

PRESS RELEASE
Date: April 16, 2008
Armenian National Committee of Illinois
1701 N. Greenwood, Glenview, IL 60026
Contact: Nairee Hagopian
Tel: 312-615-7698

ANC of Illinois Hosts Successful 11th Annual Fundraiser

Ivanhoe, IL ` Sunday, April 6, 2008 marked the 11th Annual Armenian
National Committee of Illinois (ANC of IL) fundraiser which was
hosted by Ms. Sirarpy Seferian at her home in Ivanhoe, Illinois.
Seventy Chicago-area supporters attended the event, which featured
Congressman Mark Kirk (R-IL-10), ANCA National Chairman Kenneth
Hachikian, and ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian.

ANC of IL Chairman, Ari Killian, welcomed local activists and
supporters. The program began by presenting an "Award of
Appreciation" to Seferian in gratitude for her continued support of
the ANC of IL. The annual fundraiser also served as a forum to
advise local supporters and activists on the year’s activities.

Killian updated the group on key issues and discussed reaching out
to other local Armenian American communities. He also reiterated
the need for increased interaction with congressional staff.
Killian told the group "Our goal this year was to broaden our base
of activists. We have continued our relationship with the Pontian
Greek community and hosted successful functions. Our Armenian
Activist Workshop at the Armenian Evangelical Church in Mt.Prospec
tand the community update at Sts. Joachim and Anne Church in Palos
Heights allowed others an opportunity to become familiar with the
grassroots network in Illinois."

ANCA National Chairman Ken Hachikian thanked Illinois activists and
supporters for their hard work over the year. Aram Hamparian, ANCA
Executive Director, added the importance of everyone doing their
part to help advance our issues. The event’s keynote speaker,
Cong, Mark Kirk (R-IL-10) congratulated the ANC of Illinois for its
activist work. Kirk encouraged attendees to continue contacting
their representatives for passage of H. Res. 106, the Armenian
Genocide Resolution, and other pertinent issues.

Cong. Kirk is a Naval Reserve intelligence officer who served
during conflicts with Iraq, Haiti, and Bosnia. He served four
tours at sea and three in Panama. The U.S. Navy named Kirk
"Intelligence Officer of the Year" in 1999 for his combat service
in Kosovo. Kirk flew on missions over Iraq, and continues to serve
one weekend a month in the Pentagon. Kirk is the only member of
Congress to serve stateside during Operation Iraqi Freedom, and was
an air crewman over Iraq during Operation Northern Watch.

The Armenian National Committee of Illinois is part of the largest
and most influential Armenian American grassroots political
organization. Working in coordination with a network of offices,
chapters, and supporters throughout the United States and
affiliated organizations around the world, the ANCA actively
advances the concerns of the Armenian American community on a broad
range of issues.
####

Photo Caption #1: Cong.. Mark Kirk, ANCA of IL Chairman Ari
Killian, and ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian

Photo Caption #2: Dedicated members of the ARS Zabelle Chapter Mrs.
Silva Bedian, Mrs. Anahid Sarrafian, Mrs. Berjouhi Aivazian, Mrs.
Arpy Killian, and Mrs. Ani Alexanian

Photo Caption #3: Cong. Mark Kirk with host Ms. Sirarpy Seferian
and Ms. Silvia Maranian

On The Strategy Of Recognizing The Republic Of Nagorno Karabakh In T

ON THE STRATEGY OF RECOGNIZING THE REPUBLIC OF NAGORNO KARABAKH IN THE CONTEXT OF PRINCIPLES AND NORMS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

;LangID =1
08.04.08

After recognition of Kosovo’s independence and adoption of the UN
Resolution on the Karabakh settlement proposals were made on the
possibility of recognizing the Nagorno Karabakh Republic by the
Republic of Armenia.

Today the Press Center of the Defense Ministry of the Republic of
Armenia (RA), took an interview on the subject from the Head of the
Institute of National Strategic Studies of MoD, RA, Major General,
Doctor of Political Sciences Hayk S. Kotanjian.

How does the UN Resolution on the Karabakh problem correlate with the
imperatives of the United Nations Charter and the threat of resumption
of war?

As is known, Russia, the USA and France, as Co-chairs of the Minsk
Group, voted against the UN General Assembly’s Resolution on Nagorno
Karabakh.

The three countries were backed by 4 other UN members and there
were 100 abstentions. This fact confirms that, while adopting
UN resolutions, the prevailing majority of the UN members do not
endorse transgressions against systemic implementation of fundamental
principles and norms of International law.

Azerbaijan and other 38 states that supported the resolution were
taught a lesson on inadmissibility in pushing through documents in
the UN contradicting the latter’s fundamental goals and principles
which, as a whole, define the international legal-contractual entity
of the United Nations. By this voting, the United Nations confirmed
that the unilateral approach in the Azerbaijani resolution on the
Karabakh conflict, which reflected Azerbaijan’s interpretation of the
principle of territorial integrity and thereof ignored the principle
of equal rights of peoples and their right to self-determination,
was inadmissible. The General Assembly brought forward to the authors
of the resolution the fact that Azerbaijan violated her commitments
vis-a-vis the UN Charter.

Azerbaijan had been virtually pinpointed to her commitments in relation
to the definition of "equal rights of peoples and their right to
self-determination", which is registered in the UN Charter as one of
its fundamental goals.

What are the key messages of voting results in the UN?

The voting results, in a larger sense, include an important political
message about the harmfulness of such resolutions for the UN, which
violate the very Charter of the United Nations Organization because
they ignore its main goal – to maintain global peace and international
security. The voting showed that most UN members recognize the legal
shortcomings of Azerbaijan’s stance on the Karabakh settlement. By
imposing a counter-productive model of the Karabakh conflict resolution
exclusively within the framework of "territorial integrity" – as
coined by Azerbaijan – put the UN itself in an awkward situation. Such
influential actors in the world community as Russia, the USA, France,
and India (the first three are the UN Security Council’s permanent
members) which voted against the resolution, as well as those 100 UN
member states which abstained, confirmed the major and imperative
mission of the UN for all the states: maintenance of international
peace.

By exceeding ceilings for armaments established by the Treaty
on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) and by pushing war
propaganda, Azerbaijan shows its disregard of the UN Charter’s key
principle of promoting peace. This position of official Baku is a
real threat to the stability in such a geostrategically important
area as the Black Sea Region is. In this respect, by voting against
the resolution, Russia, the USA and France, as UN Security Council
members, officially declared to the international community their
concern about Baku’s preparations for unleashing a new war in the
South Caucasus. The denial of the belligerent behavior of Azerbaijan
is the other key message of the United Nations.

How would you evaluate the chances of reaching a compromise between
the Armenian side and Azerbaijan?

In defiance of the norms of International law, Baku doesn’t recognize
the Nagorno Karabagh Republic (NKR) as subject of International
law. At present the Azerbaijani side declares that its compromise is
limited merely to its consent of continuing consultations with Armenia
on the Karabakh problem. Disturbingly, the Republic of Azerbaijan
rejects the possibility of a direct dialogue with the authorities of
the NKR. In its public policy not only does Azerbaijan undermine the
intermediary mission of the Minsk Group but it also doesn’t respond to
the recommendations of the Council of Europe to establish a dialogue
with Nagorno Karabakh, in spite of the NKR’s declared preparedness to
negotiate with the AzR (see the PACE resolution # 1416, of January 25,
2005). Azerbaijan’s recent activities directed to undermine the status
of Russia, the USA and France within the Minsk Group and its attempt
to impose on the United Nations a resolution that contradicted the
UN Charter, testified about the counter-productivity of the Baku’s
position in the Karabakh peace process.

Azerbaijan’s "compromise", as only Baku understands it, is a world away
from compromises the Armenian side is prepared to make. In essence,
this position is pointless and empty. If Baku doesn’t change its
blatantly revanchist position, the chances of reaching a compromise
among the parties of the Karabakh conflict are not great.

What would you say about the offer to sign an agreement between the
Republic of Armenia and the NKR as subjects of International law in
response to the UN resolution on Karabakh?

The UN member states in their majority couldn’t ignore the fact that
in the United Nations’ system peoples struggling for independence
are recognized as primary subjects of International law. This
viewpoint is based on principles of International law which consider
a people struggling for liberation as a legal party. For instance,
the People’s League of the Eastern Pakistan, which represented the
part of Bengali people residing in Pakistan and unilaterally declared
the Republic of Bangladesh, was such a body taken under the protection
of International law.

The international legal-entity of the part of the Armenian people
residing in Karabakh is consolidated by the political and legal fact
of uninterrupted and efficient functioning of the legitimate and
democratically elected NKR authorities in a period of more than 16
years. These authorities were formed as a result of a referendum held
in the period when the Law on the USSR from 1990 to December 21, 1991
was still in force before the proclamation of the Alma-Ata Declaration
on the disintegration of the USSR. Thereby, an international-legal
basis for concluding international agreements between the RA and the
NKR undoubtedly exists.

In case Azerbaijan continues rejecting counter-compromises commensurate
with the compromises of the Armenian side, the NKR will have the right,
taking into consideration the lessons of the history, principles
and norms of International law, the OSCE recommendations, to conduct
negotiations with the RA on choosing more effective means to maintain
regional peace and a model of stable and secure development. To my
mind, in this stage, while maintaining the practical interaction in
the sphere of defense, it is reasonable not to limit the full-scale
cooperation between the NKR and the RA within the frames of any
separate sphere.

What is your take on a possibility of recognition of the NKR by
Armenia?

Because of the lack of counter-compromises from Azerbaijan, relatively
commensurate with the Armenian proposals, the fact of recognition of
the NKR’s independence by the Republic of Armenia seems a logical and
a justified component in the process of international recognition of
the NKR.

In my opinion, at this stage it will be more pragmatic if the process
of recognition comes after the development of a cooperation strategy
between the NKR and the RA on the questions of maintaining peace,
stability and security in the South Caucasus. The main priority of the
mentioned Strategy and the policy of its implementation should be a
guaranteed exclusion of recurrence of genocide against the Armenians,
as well as, secure and democratic development of both sovereign
Armenian states in the context of their progressive international
integration. If Armenia, Artsakh (Nagorno Karabagh) and the Diaspora
in allied cooperation possess an agreed strategy on issues of national
priorities, a possibility will arise to develop a mid- and long-term
policy, as well as design its effective provision.

How do you picture the process of recognition of the NKR?

Adhering to the universally-recognized principles and norms
of International law the Nagorno Karabakh and Armenia could
institutionalize their interstate cooperation. I mean founding a joint
Interstate Commission on elaboration and implementation of strategy on
cooperation between the NKR and Armenia on questions of maintaining
peace and their sustainable and secured development. The Secretariat
of the mentioned Interstate Commission on strategic partnership,
headed by the presidents of the two countries, could be composed of
plenipotentiary representatives of presidents, legislatures, as well
as governments of the NKR and the RA.

Particular political-legal products of the Interstate Commission’s
pursuit, as well as projects of agreements could be presented for
reviewing not only to the state institutions of the parties, but
also, if necessary, to the respected organizations of the Diaspora
and international community.

The interests of strengthening and progressive development of the
tandem of the Armenian statehood personalized by the RA and the NKR
should be placed in the center of the Strategy and systems of planning,
accumulation, coordination and targeted implementation of political,
economic, defensive and informational resources. I don’t exclude that
with time the Interstate Commission will transform the strategic
partnership between the RA and the NKR into a loose confederative
cooperation between the two fraternal sovereign states.

What do you think of the perspectives of the Minsk Group?

I think the Minsk Group has accumulated a huge experience in mediating
between the parties of the Karabakh conflict and surely has not
exhausted its constructive potential.

http://www.nt.am/news.php?banner=0&amp

BAKU: Official Baku very keen on who will be next US president

Azerbaycan Newspaper, Azerbaijan
April 1 2008

Official Baku said to be very keen on who will be next US president

by Rustam Qaraxanli

"A team of traditions" and subheaded "There are many people with
close ties with Azerbaijan around presidential candidate Hillary
Clinton"

Today the USA has become such a superpower where the presidential
elections or the balance of forces in the Congress hardly go without
effect on any state. To put it differently, not a single state
remains indifferent to the election race that will determine who will
be the next in the White House in the USA.

Azerbaijan, whose relations have reached the level of strategic
partnership over the recent 10 years, is also no exception. It is not
only exception but on many parameters, power change in the USA is of
paramount significance for Azerbaijan. First, they are the Nagornyy
Karabakh conflict, the energy cooperation, a joint fight against
global terrorism, the Armenian Diaspora and lobbyism and a
partnership in the democratic reforms. From these standpoints, it is
also of great importance for an ordinary Azerbaijani citizen who will
be the next president of the world’s superpower.

At present there are three contenders for the post of president:
Republican John McCain and Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton
although the primaries have become a process hard to predict its
outcome. One should not forget that Ronald Reagan’s popularity rate
was two per cent when he kicked off his election campaign.
Nevertheless, this did not hinder him to become one of the most
successful presidents in the US history. Now everything is obvious in
the Republican camp with a single presidential contender McCain who
defeated his rivals in the party primaries with overwhelming majority
and gained President George Bush’s official backing. However, not
everything is clear with the choice of the Democrats: Mrs Clinton and
Obama are in a fierce competition in the primaries with no quarter
given to each other.

It is likelihood that the matter will be resolved in April.
Obviously, the party congress will have to have a final say. Guided
by the interests of its readers, the newspaper of Azarbaycan has
decided to familiarize its readers with the US presidential
contenders. We referred to foreign media and other sources while
preparing this article. First, we want to start with Hillary Clinton.

Like-minded persons

According to western media, Mrs Clinton is very conservative with
respect to her retinue. She has known many of her friends for 10
years. Amongst them are mainly people she has been known since her
husband’s time as the governor of Arkansas. Women are without
exception her closest people. Her group made up of 14 aides is
formally called Hillaryland. This is somehow a political brand of Mrs
Clinton’s election campaign. The ongoing election campaign is also
being supervised from the Hillaryland. Her campaign manager Maggie
Williams is also among them. But the author of the brand is Patty
Soli Doyle who recently quitted from this post.

Reports claim that members of the Hillaryland will hold responsible
posts in the Cabinet if Clinton wins the vote. The government for
sure will be formed by the Mrs Clinton’s advisers. These men on many
occasions are former officials who used to work with Bill Clinton
during his second term in office when exactly Mrs Clinton’s influence
on policies of the White House grew. People of different ages are in
the retinue of Hillary Clinton, 60. She is very considerate of her
friends and has never left anyone in the lurch even when she herself
was in trouble.

"Grey cardinals" of Mrs Clinton

Hillary Clinton’s closest aide on foreign policy issues is former
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. There are reports that she was
offered the post of the state secretary in 1996 thanks to her
personal friendship with Mrs Clinton. Albright’s coming to the State
Department made fundamental changes to the US foreign policy. As Bill
Clinton was engaged in domestic problems during his first term in
office, the focus in the foreign policy was mainly on conciliatory
measures.

After she took the post with the support of Hillary Clinton, Albright
made the American diplomacy more aggressive and pro-active. Another
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell recalls that while trying to
persuade Bill Clinton to bomb the former Yugoslavia, Albright said:
"Why do we need our military capacity of we are unable to use it?"
Mrs Albright’s another saying is as followings: "We resort to force
because we are America!"

Madeleine Albright has always been for tough relations with Iraq. On
her last day in the post, she phoned to [now former] UN
Secretary-General Kofi Annan to say that the next US administration
would be tougher in the issue of Iraq. However, as the military
intervention approached, she came outright against the military
operations. Over the recent period Albright is head of the National
Democratic Institute for International Affairs. Ms Albright visited
Azerbaijan, in general, her relations with Baku is at the highest
level and had meetings with the national leader Heydar Aliyev.

Incidentally, there are people with direct and indirect ties with
Azerbaijan in Mrs Clinton’s team. They preserve their ties with
official Baku even now and we should say that some of those people
have played fundamental roles in the building of the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline and, as a whole, in the
implementation of Azerbaijan’s oil strategy.

We hope our readers remember their names. The reason I highlight this
point is that Mrs Clinton is being presented the most active
pro-Armenian presidential candidate among the current contenders.
Although, US Armenians have officially voiced their support for
Barack Obama. However, the fact is that like Mrs Clinton, who now
recognizes the "Armenian genocide", her husband and later Bush gave
similar pledges to Armenians but took a different line in real
politics.

The second important aide is Sandy Berger. He has been on friendly
terms with the Clintons since their years in Arkansas. Sandy was
national security adviser during the second term in office of Bill
Clinton. Berger is a stockholder of Amoco Oil Company, which is very
active in Azerbaijan. While in the post, he paid much attention to
oil problems and played an exclusive role in lobbying the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline. However, neither Albright nor
Berger seems persuasive to occupy posts. Albright is 70 years old
while Berger’s name was mentioned in a scandal connected with theft
of documents from the National Archive. Nevertheless, they both are
irreplaceable aides of Mrs Hillary.

Who will be in charge of foreign policy

The most likely candidate to the post of the Secretary of State is
considered to be a prominent diplomat Richard Holbrook. He started
his professional activities in Vietnam, however, he achieved his
greatest successes under the presidency of Clinton. He is considered
to be the architect of the Dayton Peace Accord. Holbrook once
described [former] Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic the guarantor
of peace in the Balkans. During 1999-2001, in his capacity as the US
permanent representative in the UN, Holbrook said Iraq was a key
source of danger.

He is known as one of the "falcons" of the Democrats, or a..k.a. "An
ox of the American diplomacy", "the Democratic analogue of
Kissinger", "a Republican in the camp of the Democrats". Unlike
Albright, he justified the intervention into Iraq. However, after
five months, he described the war as "a major US tragedy after the
Vietnam". Holbrook considers that the next US president has to throw
into a dustbin many elements of President Bush’s team and his
policies, the Guantanamo prison should be closed and preventive wars
must be abandoned.

He believes the most dangerous threat for the United States is posed
by Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinezhad. Holbrook has been recently
contributing to Washington Post and propagates the idea of tough
relations with Russia, supporting Tbilisi and speeding up Kiev’s
accession to NATO.

President’s "right hand"

Gen Wesley Clark, who is considered the most prospective running mate
for Clinton, is also in her retinue. In 1999, he commanded the
military operations against Yugoslavia. Clark had to formally be
subordinate to then US Defence Secretary William Cohen. However,
taking advantage of his relations with Clinton and Albright, he was
acting wilfully which annoyed the Pentagon. He was discharged from
the army as soon as the war was over, however, the general has always
been considered a closest man for the Clintons.

During the Yugoslav operation Clark got angered at the seizure of the
Pristina airport by the Russian contingent and demanded that the
Russians leave the facility. A clash was almost there and only words
of British general Michael Jackson that "I do not want to start the
third world war for you" ended the confrontation.

Clark is few military who condemned the US intervention into Iraq. In
his opinion, this war has nothing in common with the fight against
terror. In 2003, Clark decided to run for the presidency. Bill
Clinton said that the Democrats have two stars now Hillary and Gen
Clark.

Although he was also having a good chance to nominate his candidacy
this time again, he made up his mind to support Mrs Clinton. In all
his speeches, he says that "Bush’s foreign policy is nonsense and
rubbish". Bearing in mind his prominence, military experience and
most of all being a native of southern states (where democrats are
traditionally weak author), he may be considered a key running mate
for Clinton.

Cabinet

Lee Feinstein’s name is often mentioned for the post of the national
security adviser. Before Clinton’s presidency, he used to work for
the Pentagon and then at the State Department and was a closest ally
of M. Albright. Feinstein blames Bush for inconsistent foreign
policy. For instance, he blames Washington for unwillingness to
prevent the humanitarian crisis in Sudan.

There are reports that namely he persuaded Mrs Clinton to vote for
the Kyl-Lieberman amendment. This document recognized the Iranian
Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps as a terrorist organization. At
the same time, Feinstein does not support a military intervention
into Iran.

If Mrs Clinton wins the election, it is expected that Richard
Morningstar would occupy one of the leading posts (may be the post of
the energy secretary) in the government. Morningstar is a well-known
man in Azerbaijan and has close businesslike relations with the
Azerbaijani authorities. Morningstar can also be assessed as an
active member of our lobby in the USA.

Morningstar was Clinton’s special envoy for the Caspian region and
played an exceptional role in lobbying the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil
pipeline. During his years at the Department, he was assigned to deal
with the issue of realization of the Transcaspian gas pipeline. The
project is designed to deliver Central Asian gas to Europe via
Azerbaijan. In his capacity as the special envoy, he visited
Azerbaijan time and again and had meetings with the national leader
Heydar Aliyev.

Names of the former Secretary of Navy John Dalton and the former
deputy chief of the Pentagon, Rudy de Leon, are mentioned for the
post of the defence secretary. They both have serious backings from
the business circles. Another candidate is Lt-Gen Claudia Kennedy,
the highest-ranking woman ever in the US army.

Ideology

According to American experts, Mrs Clinton’s ideology does not differ
much from Bush’s political course. If she is elected, she would
pursue her husband’s policies implemented in 1996-2000.
Interestingly, it is claimed that Bush also continued policies
pursued under the second term of office of Bill Clinton. However, in
a resolute and radical way. Although Clinton bombed Afghanistan and
Iraq during his second term in office, he avoided ground operations.
However, Bush further developed his ideas and decided to intervene in
militarily in both countries. Therefore, if Mrs Clinton is elected
president, she would actually continue George Bush’s policies by
going back to 1990s, but in a cautious way.

[translated from Azeri]

Gabriel Sargsian Takes Second Place In International Chess Festival

GABRIEL SARGSIAN TAKES SECOND PLACE IN INTERNATIONAL CHESS FESTIVAL HELD IN SPAIN

Noyan Tapan
April 11, 2008

MERIDA, APRIL 11, NOYAN TAPAN. The great International Chess Festival
is continuing in the city of Merida, Spain. Gabriel Sargsian defeated
Fabiano Karuana (Italy) in the fifth stage of the main tournament,
which was held on April 9 and receiving 3.5 points takes second
place. The leader of the tournament is Michael Adams (England) with
4 points.

National Assembly Discusses The Draft Statement On Karabakh Conflict

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY DISCUSSES THE DRAFT STATEMENT ON KARABAKH CONFLICT RESOLUTION

armradio.am
10.04.2008 16:48

On April 10 the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia undertook
to discuss the draft statement of the NA on the Karabakh conflict
resolution.

The National Assembly suggests the President and the Government to
intensify the efforts and opportunities of working out and implementing
the arrangements directed at providing complete information to
the international community regarding the Nagorno Karabakh issue,
to give more initiative nature to the policy directed towards the
resolution of the Karabakh conflict, formulate the legal bases within
the framework of international law that will enable Armenia to ensure
the full security and defense of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic in
case of Azerbaijan’s military aggression.

The author of the draft, NA Speaker Tigran Torosyan noted that
the process of resolution of the issue does not inspire optimism:
the militant statements of Azerbaijan and the propaganda of hatred
towards Armenians are deepening more and more, and it does not receive
an equivalent reaction in international structures. According to him,
primarily due to the flow of oil revenues a false illusion is created
in Azerbaijan that it is possible to solve the issue via war, thus
misleading their own people.

Tigran Torosyan noted that it is necessary to make efforts for the
internationally recognized Nagorno Karabakh Republic to get involved
in the negotiations as a party to the conflict. According to him,
although Armenia can recognize NKR at any moment, it will be much more
effective if the efforts are focused on the international recognition
of Nagorno Karabakh.

Tigran Torosyan informed that the National Assembly of Karabakh is
informed about the initiative, and the question will be thoroughly
discussed during the sitting of the interparliamentary cooperation
commission of the two countries to be held in Stepanakert next week.

Biblical Mountain Presented Under Name Of Ararat In Turkish School T

BIBLICAL MOUNTAIN PRESENTED UNDER NAME OF ARARAT IN TURKISH SCHOOL TEXTBOOKS

Noyan Tapan
April 8, 2008

ANKARA, APRIL 8, NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY. The Turkish ministry of
education in 2007 prepared and published geography textbooks intended
for senior school pupils, in which the biblical mountain is presented
not as Agri Dagi but as Ararat (the official name of Mount Ararat in
Turkey is Agri Dagi).

According to Cihan news agency, the trade union of Turkish employees
of education and science expressed its concern over the "inexusable
mistake" of the ministry of education: "This error in geography
textbooks approved by the ministry in 2007 is inexusable because the
name "Ararat" has become a symbol of the so-called Armenian Genocide
today," the chairman of the trade union Ismail Koncuk stated, adding
that such activities of the Turkish ministry of education "contribute
to Armenian propaganda".

Arman Melikyan: There Is Nothing Horrible In Extra Parliamentary Ele

ARMAN MELIKYAN: THERE IS NOTHING HORRIBLE IN EXTRA PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION

PanARMENIAN.Net
08.04.2008 15:20 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ There is nothing horrible in conduction of extra
parliamentary election but it should not be an end in itself, former
presidential hopeful Arman Melikyan told a news conference today.

All political forces should engage in organization of extra elections,
according to him.

Characterizing the political coalition and government as transitional,
he said the most important task for them will be establishment of
atmosphere of trust and consent within the society.

Earlier, Armenia’s outgoing President Robert Kocharian said there
will be no pre-term parliamentary election in Armenia. "Demanding
extra parliamentary election is absurd," he said.

BAKU: No Need for Talks on NNK with all Political Orgs, believes YAP

TREND News Agency, Azerbaijan
April 5 2008

No Need for Talks on Nagorno-Karabakh with all Political
Organizations, believes YAP
05.04.08 10:52

Azerbaijan, Baku, 4 April / corr. TrendNews I. Alizade/ The ruling
party of Azerbaijan does not support the forum and adoption of a
unified document with the participation of all the political parties
on the settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

`The position of all the political parties on Nagorno-Karabakh is
similar. There are also opportunities to bring this position in the
notice of society and international organizations. Therefore, there
is no need to hold a forum for participation of all the parties,’ Ali
Ahmadov, the executive secretary of the ruling Yeni Azerbaijan party,
said to media.

The oppositional Democratic Party of Azerbaijan believes there are
similar opinions on Nagorno-Karabakh in both government and
opposition, and dialogue should be held in this regard.

The Resolution on `Situation in Occupied Lands of Azerbaijan’ was
adopted by UN in March. The co-chair countries of OSCE Minsk group
voted against the document, which was strongly condemned by the
Azerbaijani government and opposition.

According to Ahmadov, as the parties have common interests and
positions on Nagorno-Karabakh, therefore, there is no need for
getting together to inform of the respective positions, once again.
`The positions of the parties on Nagorno-Karabakh coincide with the
national interests,’ he said.

The conflict between the two countries of the South Caucasus began in
1988 due to Armenian territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Since
1992, Armenian Armed Forces have occupied 20% of Azerbaijan including
the Nagorno-Karabakh region and its seven surrounding districts. In
1994, Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a ceasefire agreement at which
time the active hostilities ended. The Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk
Group ( Russia, France, and the US) are currently holding peaceful
negotiations.

Starting From January 2009 It Is Envisaged To Make 3 Million Dram Ex

STARTING FROM JANUARY 2009 IT IS ENVISAGED TO MAKE 3 MILLION DRAM EXCEEDING DEALS IN CASHLESS WAY

Noyan Tapan
April 4, 2008

YEREVAN, APRIL 4, NOYAN TAPAN. At the April 4 sitting, the Armenian
government approved the bill on restriction of cash deals. The member
of the Central Bank of Armenia (CBA) Board Vatche Gabrielian told
reporters after the sitting that the bill stipulates which deals and
operations shall be made in a cashless way. In his words, the bill
is obviously aimed at fighting the shadow economy.

According to V. Gabrielian, it is envisaged making deals on sale
and use of goods, implemenation of work and provision of services
in a cashless way if the amount of such a deal exceeds a particular
sum. In particular, this amount will be fixed at 3 mln drams (about
9.7 thousand USD) from January 1, 2009, at 2 mln drams from 2010,
and starting from 2011 all deals exceeding 1 mln drams will have to
be made in a cashless way. Besides, salaries exceeeding 60 thousand
drams will be paid in a cashless way in Yerevan starting from January
2009, in regional centers from 2010 and in other settlements from
2011. V. Gabrielian said that there are also some restrictions on
pensions, education fees, and payments for medical services.