Author: Tavakalian Edgar

ARMENIAN, IRANIAN PRESIDENTS SEEK WIDE-RANGING COOPERATION BETWEEN TWO COUNTRIES

ARKA News Agency, Armenia
July 6 2006

YEREVAN, July 6. /ARKA/. Armenian and Iranian Presidents, Robert
Kocharyan and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seek a wide-ranging cooperation
between the two countries.

IRNA, Iranian state news agency, reports referring to presidential
press service that the Presidents said it in Iran on Wednesday during
the first round of talks between Armenian and Iranian delegations
headed by the Presidents.

Kocharyan said that over 90 documents on cooperation are signed
between Iran and Armenia. He thinks the programs outlined in the
documents should be put into reality as soon as possible.

He also expressed Armenia’s interest in widening mutually beneficial
cooperation with Iran in energy, electric energy and transport areas.

Armenian President invited his Iranian counterpart to Armenia and
the invitation was accepted with gratitude.

Ahmadinejad, in his turn, expressed appreciation of Iranian-Armenian
partnership and stressed the necessity of deepening relationship and
using both countries’ capacity to its full extent.

He expressed Teheran’s interest in cooperating with Armenia in
transport, culture, sport, tourism and other areas putting a special
emphasis on partnership in energy sector.

The news agency says the Presidents are expected to sign a number
of documents on cooperation as part of Kocharyan’s two-day visit to
Iran. M.V. -0–

AZERI OFFICIAL DENIES REPORTS ON BAKU’S CONSENT TO HOLD REFERENDUM IN KARABAKH

Turan news agency
3 Jul 06

Baku, 3 July: Speculations that Azerbaijan has agreed to hold a
referendum in Nagornyy Karabakh on its status is a lie, Azerbaijani
Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov has told reporters commenting on
relevant statements by Armenian officials.

He said that the Azerbaijani side had repeatedly spoken about the
possibility of holding only a nation-wide referendum on the country’s
entire territory.

That is reflected in the constitution and the country’s leadership
does not intend to revise its opinion.

As to a statement by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen on the Karabakh
peace talks, Azimov said that it was "premature" to make final
assessment until the end of the talks. Probably, the co-chairmen’s
statement was aimed at "checking public opinion". However, the
statement was not comprehensive. "Separate passages taken out of
context cannot form an objective idea on the content of the talks,"
Azimov said.

In addition, the Armenian side distorts the content of the talks and
interprets the referendum subject in a manner advantageous to them.

Azerbaijan’s position is clear: political issues can be settled
only when military consequences of the conflict are eliminated. "The
Azerbaijani population should return to Nagornyy Karabakh. For this
purpose, a peaceful atmosphere should be created and the occupied
territories should be liberated. The Armenian side has accepted this
logic," Azimov said.

He denied Armenian reports about a special status of [occupied]
Lacin and Kalbacar districts. Both sides are interested in the secure
functioning of the Lacin corridor via which Azerbaijan has transport
communication with [Azerbaijani exclave of] Naxcivan and Armenia with
Nagornyy Karabakh.

As to Kalbacar, the issue of [ensuring] security of Nagornyy Karabakh
can be solved through the deployment of international observers
or peacekeepers.

Therefore, Armenians’ attempts to preserve control over Lacin and
Kalbacar are groundless.

Azimov also spoke about the impossibility of one-sided demilitarization
of the region. Commenting on the course of the talks, he said that
the effectiveness of the talks depended on political will of "the
opposite" side.

ARMENIA’S PROGRESS BOUND WITH APPLIANCE OF CONSTITUTION

PanARMENIAN.Net
04.07.2006 18:00 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenian President Robert Kocharian congratulated
the citizens of the republic on the Day of Constitution, reported the
RA leader’s press office. The congratulatory address says in part,
"Dear compatriots, I congratulate you on the Day of Constitution. The
Organic Law of our state is the choice of our people and expression
of their aims. It is especially important for the construction of
democratic, social and legal state. Our progress is immediately bound
with the appliance of the Constitution.

In 2005 serious amendments were introduced into the RA
Constitution. They open new prospects for multilateral development of
our state and people, ensure balanced activities of the power branches
and strengthen the system of human rights protection. I am convinced
that the Armenian Constitution will serve to our future generations
for a long time."

Eurasia Daily Monitor — The Jamestown Foundation
Wednesday, May 10, 2006 — Volume 3, Issue 91

IN THIS ISSUE:
*Moscow presses for better Caspian oil deal
*Abkhazia formulates own solution to conflict with Tbilisi
*Analysts suggest "Camp David" approach to Karabakh resolution

AGREEMENT AT HAND ON OIL TRANSPORT FROM KAZAKHSTAN TO AZERBAIJAN

Following Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev’s late April visit to
Washington and U.S. Vice President Richard Cheney’s early May visit to
Kazakhstan, a breakthrough seems imminent on the project to connect
Kazakhstan with the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline. Officials in
Kazakhstan now anticipate that Presidents Nursultan Nazarbayev and
Aliyev will sign a framework agreement on that project by late June.

Kazakhstan’s Prime Minister Daniyal Akhmetov and KazMunayGaz Managing
Director for Transport and Infrastructure Karygeldi Kabyldin have just
discussed this issue in Baku with Aliyev and Azerbaijan’s State Oil
Company management. According to officials on both sides, no political
or commercial differences arise between them regarding this project.
Remaining technical issues, such as the mode and schedules of
transportation, can be ironed out in time for the agreement’s signing.

According to these Kazakh officials, oil deliveries into the BTC
pipeline are to originate in the super-giant Kashagan offshore field.
Oil transportation to Baku is to start in late 2008-early 2009 by
tankers. Commercial production at Kashagan is expected to start in 2008
at an annual rate of 7 million tons ("early oil"), rising to 13 million
tons annually by 2010 and reaching 50 million to 60 million tons per
year by 2015. Developed by a consortium of Western companies with
Italy’s Agip as project operator, the field holds estimated recoverable
commercial reserves of at least 1.2 billion tons of oil.

Following his Baku visit, Akhmetov expressed confident hope that the
agreement to be signed by the two presidents would include a pipeline on
the Caspian seabed from Aktau in Kazakhstan to Baku. Thus far, Russia’s
opposition (in tandem with Iran) has intimidated Astana into withholding
its signature on the pipeline project. Cheney’s visit to Kazakhstan
seems to have encouraged Astana that it is Kazakhstan’s national
interests to join the project.

Transport to Baku by tankers, as has been proposed, is only viable as a
short-term option. Once Kashagan comes fully on stream with its massive
volumes, the existing fleet of small-capacity tankers would be neither
sufficient nor cost-effective. On-site construction of medium-capacity
tankers would involve prohibitively high investments, as well as
expensive operations. Moreover, westbound transport solutions other than
by pipeline would only ensure that the lion’s share of Kashagan oil is
ultimately routed toward Russia, as is the bulk of Kazakhstan’s overall
output at present.

According to estimates made in 2004, a trans-Caspian pipeline should
become commercially profitable above an annual volume of 20 million tons
of oil transported. However, oil price dynamics since then and into the
foreseeable future suggest that the profitability threshold has
descended below 20 million tons for a seabed pipeline.

During the Economic Cooperation Organization’s presidential-level summit
just held in Baku, Kazakhstan’s delegation felt that Iran is softening
its opposition to the proposed trans-Caspian pipelines. Astana intends
to explore that issue further with Tehran. In addition, Kazakh officials
are willing to discuss Iranian proposals to expand the existing swap
operations. By this method, Kazakhstan delivers small volumes of oil to
northern Iran by Caspian tankers, while Iran exports oil of equivalent
value from the Persian Gulf on Kazakhstan’s behalf. The oil volumes
swapped by Kazakhstan with Iran have been very small in recent years,
despite Iran’s oft-expressed wish to increase them.

At this juncture, Astana seems to be considering an increase in those
modest volumes as a means to induce Iran to lift its objections to a
trans-Caspian pipeline. With Kazakhstan’s oil output due to grow
spectacularly in the next few years, volumes swapped with Iran would in
any case remain only a small fraction of Kazakhstan’s overall exports.

Meanwhile, Moscow is pressuring Western companies in the Caspian
Pipeline Consortium (CPC), which owns and operates the Tengiz
(Kazakhstan) — Novorossiysk (Russia) pipeline. Those companies depend
on Russia’s consent to expand the pipeline’s capacity of 28 million tons
annually in the first stage to the planned second-stage capacity of 67
million tons annually by the next decade, plus an additional mooring
system for tankers at the port of Novorossiysk.

The Russian government, however, demands "corrections" in its favor to
the 1996 contract, higher transit tariffs, and a high share of
management posts for Russia in CPC, including the Director General’s
post for a nominee of the Russian government. The Western companies
involved are urgently in need of an export outlet for their rapidly
growing output at Tengiz and elsewhere, and therefore are vulnerable to
Moscow’s pressure on the CPC. They seem prepared to accept most of those
conditions because they do not have a trans-Caspian option immediately
available.

(Interfax, Trend, May 5-8)

–Vladimir Socor

ABKHAZIA SLIDES TOWARD RUSSIA, BUT GEORGIA HOLDS ONTO ITS CLAIMS

May 6 marked the second anniversary of the restoration of Georgia’s full
jurisdiction over the Ajarian Autonomous Republic. Georgian President
Mikheil Saakashvili, attending the celebration in Batumi, Ajaria’s main
city, stated that this process "should surely be completed" in breakaway
Abkhazia (TV-Imedi, Regnum, May 6).

Tbilisi likely is encouraged by hopeful messages on separatist movements
from its Western allies. U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney evidently
alluded to Russia during the May 3-4 Vilnius conference on "Common
Vision for a Common Neighborhood" when he said, "No one can justify
actions that undermine the territorial integrity of a neighbor" (see
EDM, May 5). Whether this statement becomes a prelude to more proactive
policies by Georgia’s Western allies regarding Abkhazia and South
Ossetia will likely be clarified at the July G-8 summit, where the
frozen conflicts in the post-Soviet space are likely to be discussed.

Although the Georgian parliament passed a resolution in October 2005
that instructed the government to submit a peace plan on Abkhazia by May
1, 2006, no formal document has been made public. But as early as March
it was apparent that the structure of the Abkhaz plan would be largely
similar to the one designed for South Ossetia — demilitarization and
economic rehabilitation followed by wide autonomy within the Georgian
state.

However, the South Ossetian framework is not reproducible in the more
independence-oriented Abkhazia, which even dared to anger Moscow in
October 2004 by electing a president of its own choice. Predictably,
Abkhaz leaders flatly rejected the peace plan. Sergei Shamba, the
purported Abkhaz foreign minister, said that Abkhazia would not disarm
while Georgia strengthens its military potential and plans to join NATO
(Interfax, March 7).

The Abkhaz establishment has long raised the specter of an imminent
Georgian military invasion to keep the Abkhaz establishment on a
constant state of alert. The separatist government steadfastly claims to
be able to rebuff any aggression from Georgia. "Almost each Abkhaz
household can arm a platoon," boasted Abkhaz "prime minister" Alexander
Ankvab (Vremya novostei, March 6). In an interview with the Abkhaz
newspaper Forum, Anatoly Zaitsev, a Russian lieutenant general serving
as Abkhazia’s chief of the general staff, stated that the Abkhaz army
has the capacity to successfully retaliate against a Georgian military
invasion (Forum, February 17). Abkhaz forces held their third round of
military exercises this year on April 24-27; 5,000 servicemen
participated (Apsnypress, April 25).

With no Georgian peace plan on the table, the Abkhaz separatists have
submitted their own. On May 7, the Abkhaz parliament approved a
"Comprehensive Resolution of the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict," submitted
three days earlier by Abkhaz "president" Sergei Bagapsh. The parliament
particularly emphasized that the Abkhaz side was the first to propose a
peace plan. The Abkhaz document, "Key to the Future," seeks to the
"development of fundamentally new, neighborly relations" between Georgia
and Abkhazia as two independent states. According to Abkhaz news agency
Apsnypress, the plan proposes confidence-building measures, mutual good
will, ending military rhetoric, and practical implementation of peace
measures. The plan particularly underlines the possibility of conflict
settlement in the framework of regional economic cooperation among the
Black Sea countries (Apsnypress, May 5; Regnum May 6).
Undoubtedly, Abkhazia’s peace plan seeks international recognition, as
Tbilisi will not recognize Abkhazia as an independent state.

The Abkhaz peace initiative resembles the peace plan proposed by South
Ossetia last December, which asked Georgia to consider South Ossetia as
an independent state (EDM, December 15, 2005). Symptomatically, before
proposing the peace plan, Bagapsh had held closed-door talks with Sergei
Baburin, deputy chair of the Russian State Duma, in Sukhumi on May 2. It
appears that both the Abkhazian and Ossetian "peace plans" have been
written in Moscow, which fully controls both separatist regimes.

The Abkhaz separatists reaffirmed their secessionist agenda during a
meeting with a delegation from the NATO parliamentary assembly in
Sukhumi on May 6. Bagapsh noted, "The conversation started smoothly, but
continued in a tense atmosphere." The Abkhaz party leaves "little
opportunities for talks with Georgia," Pier Lelush, head of the
assembly, stated after the talks with the separatists leaders.
Commenting on this statement Shamba said that the Abkhaz leadership has
ruled out both federative and confederative forms of coexistence with
Georgia. Bagapsh stressed that "Abkhazia will develop relations with
Russia whether the international community likes it or not" (rian.ru,
May 7; Apsnypress, Regnum, Interfax, May 6).

Although Bagapsh brushed away allegations of Russia’s annexation of
Abkhazia at the meeting with the NATO delegation, this process
nevertheless is progressing at full speed. About 50 Russian banks now
operate in Abkhazia despite numerous protests by Tbilisi. On May 5,
Bagapsh stated that Abkhazia wants to join Commonwealth of Independent
States, which Georgia plans to leave. He reaffirmed that Abkhazia still
seeks associated membership in the Russian Federation. "The main thing
is to bring Abkhazia closer to Russia politically and economically,"
Bagapsh stressed (Interfax, May 5).

As tensions increase between Georgia and Russia, Georgia’s former
President Eduard Shevardnadze, interviewed by Imedi-TV on May 8, advised
Saakashvili to restrain his anti-Moscow ardor and arrange a meeting with
Russian President Vladimir Putin. Georgia’s territorial integrity will
not be resolved if Russia stays away from this process, he said.
"Improving relations with Russia will facilitate a peaceful solution of
the conflicts in Georgia," he stressed (TV-Imedi, May 8).

–Zaal Anjaparidze

WILL WASHINGTON LEAD THE KARABAKH PEACE PROCESS?

After a failed February attempt to break the deadlock in negotiations
between Armenian President Robert Kocharian and Azerbaijani President
Ilham Aliyev, observers thought the Karabakh peace process was dead. But
following a few quick fixes in the current proposal, international
mediators have come to believe that the peace process is not "dead" but
rather "comatose," and could be revived if only given the "right
medicine."

In the wake of President Aliyev’s successful April 25-28 visit to the
United States, the Azerbaijani press, analysts, and scholars have began
guessing whether Washington could provide the proper prescription for
Karabakh, as it did to negotiate a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel
at Camp David in 1978.

In his speech at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington on April
26, President Aliyev remarked, "We hope that the current framework of
negotiations will create opportunities for a just [and] long-lasting
peace based on the principles of international law. And of course we
hope that the United States, as a superpower, as a country [which is] a
co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, will contribute to the resolution of
[this] conflict" (, April 26).

Commenting on the outcome of President Aliyev’s visit, Novruz Mammadov,
head of the Foreign Relations Department at the Executive Office of the
President, declared that there will be "certain changes in the U.S.
position on the peace talks" and that Washington will make some
"positive steps to resolve the conflict." According to Mammadov, from
now on, the U.S. will "provide Azerbaijan with strategic support in all
areas" (BakuToday.Net, May 2).

While in Washington, President Aliyev also reiterated his previous
statements that the Karabakh conflict could only be resolved within the
framework of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity, implying that Baku will
reject calls for holding a referendum inside Karabakh.

Baku and Yerevan have already agreed on most of the outstanding issues,
but two remain. One is the timetable to remove Armenian troops from two
occupied regions of Azerbaijan (Kalbajar and Lachin). Second, how will
the parties determine the final status of the Karabakh enclave, which is
by law part of Azerbaijan, but has been controlled by Armenian forces
since 1994?

For more than a decade, Armenia has adeptly managed to defy
international criticism over its occupation of Azerbaijani lands thanks
to existing geopolitical arrangements in the South Caucasus. Neither
Europe, which has been absent in the region until recently, nor the
United States, which has strong Armenian lobbying groups, were seriously
interested in resolving a remote territorial dispute.

But the troublesome situation around the Iranian nuclear program, the
growing importance of Caspian oil and gas for Europe, and the rising
potential that another war will erupt in the region have contributed to
the need for speedy resolution of the Karabakh conflict.

Even Moscow, which as a status quo mediator has kept all three South
Caucasus conflicts in limbo for years, may be willing to be accommodate
the U.S.-supported initiative to resolve the conflict this year.

Russia’s security dilemma in the region has been the major impediment in
its ability to propel Baku and Yerevan forward in the peace process.
Moscow remains concerned that the resolution of this conflict will
diminish Russian influence in the South Caucasus while increasing U.S.
influence. Moreover, Moscow’s unwillingness to pressure its closest ally
in the region (Armenia), while at the same time trying to keep
Azerbaijan on board have raised questions on how far Russia is willing
to push the envelope. Many in Azerbaijan believe that Moscow is
determined to push the resolution process only to a certain level — a
level that is a step short from resolving the Karabakh conflict
permanently.

Nonetheless, Russia came to realize that its desire to maintain the
status quo is backfiring. In fact, during all these years the regional
processes in the South Caucasus have developed in a direction that
Moscow had hoped they would not. Thus, the Kremlin can no longer rely on
its traditional strategy that so long as the Karabakh conflict is
unresolved, Armenia and Azerbaijan will be dependent on Moscow’s active
involvement in regional affairs.

It is clear, however, that without U.S. assurances and international
pressure, Armenia will be reluctant to consider proposals that call for
the resolution of the conflict while preserving Azerbaijan’s territorial
integrity. Baku hopes that Washington could convince Yerevan that the
resolution of the conflict within the framework of territorial integrity
will benefit not only Armenia and Azerbaijan, but also the entire South
Caucasus region. It will allow the parties to open communication links,
engage in regional cooperation, and more importantly begin the
reconciliation process.

Sabine Freizer, Caucasus Project director for the International Crisis
Group, recently indicated, "If the U.S. wants to ensure Azerbaijan’s
long-term support [for U.S.] policies towards Iran, and overall regional
security, [Washington’s] best bet is to first focus on securing a
peaceful resolution of the existing Nagorno-Karabakh conflict"
(Crisisgroup.org). "While the [Karabakh] conflict remains unresolved,
Azerbaijan can ill afford to undermine its improving relations with
Tehran," she added.

Unlike the Key West summit in 2001, where the late Azerbaijani President
Heydar Aliyev and President Kocharian tried to negotiate a peace deal
without a clear framework, today the situation is diffident. The parties
have already agreed on major issues and need one final push. Washington
seems willing to take the lead in facilitating the negotiations and
aiding the parties to reach a historical breakthrough in 2006. Hence, it
could sponsor a new "Camp David Accord" for President Aliyev and
President Kocharian and offer some carrots to both leaders. This would
demonstrate a serious U.S. commitment to stability and security in the
region and help to prevent another war in the South Caucasus.

–Taleh Ziyadov

The Eurasia Daily Monitor, a publication of the Jamestown Foundation, is
edited by Ann E. Robertson. The opinions expressed in it are those of
the individual authors and do not necessarily represent those of the
Jamestown Foundation. If you have any questions regarding the content of
EDM, or if you think that you have received this email in error, please
respond to [email protected].

Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution of EDM is strictly
prohibited by law.

The Jamestown Foundation
4516 43rd Street, NW
Washington, DC 20016
202-483-8888 (phone)
202-483-8337 (fax)

Copyright (c) 1983-2006 The Jamestown Foundation.

>From today on RA citizens can apply the Constitutional Court

ArmRadio.am
01.07.2006 11:44

From today on RA citizens have the right to apply the Constitutional
Court, as it was envisaged by the Constitutional changes. In case all
the means of judicial defense have been exhausted, every citizen is
eligible to use the right to question the correspondence of the
provisions of the Law executed against him to the Constitution.

MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA
—————————————— —-
PRESS AND INFORMATION DEPARTMENT
Government House # 2, Republic Square
Yerevan 0010, Republic of Armenia
Telephone: +37410. 544041 ext 202
Fax: +37410. 562543
Email: [email protected]
<;

PRESS RELEASE

29-06-2006

Vartan Oskanian Comments on the Statement of the Co-Chairs of the
OSCE Minsk Group in an Interview to Armenpress

ARMENPRESS: The co-chairs in their statement say that ³our approach has been
a modified one: we have not tried to solve all aspects of the conflict in
one phase. Instead our principles seek to achieve a major degree of progress
but defer some very difficult issues to the future and envision further
negotiations.² What does this mean?

OSKANIAN: The actual negotiating document on the principles that is on the
table today is all-encompassing. It covers all the principles affecting the
resolution of the conflict. It includes the core issue of status of Nagorno
Karabakh, territories, refugees, security issues, peacekeeping and every
other conceivable issue that is necessary in order to arrive at a lasting
resolution of the conflict. Only after full agreement on all these basic
principles would the parties, as the actual negotiating text says, ³in
cooperation with the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk group to begin work on the
elaboration of an agreement on the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh
conflict.² In other words, the agreement on principles will be
comprehensive. The final agreement may envision implementation over time.

ARMENPRESS: In their report, the co-chairs say ³the principles include the
phased redeployment of Armenian troops from Azerbaijani territories around
Nagorno Karabakh, with special modalities for Kelbajar and Lachin
districts.² What are these special modalities?

OSKANIAN: This formulation is indeed very broad, and for a reason. This
issue has two layers. One is the issue of Lachin, where the actual
negotiating text on principles provides clear language stating that there
will be ³a corridor linking Nagorno Karabakh to Armenia.² For Armenia, it¹s
very clear that this corridor must have the same status as Nagorno Karabakh.
The second layer is the issue of Kelbajar. For Armenia, this also is clear:
based on security concerns, Kelbajar can be returned only after the
referendum is conducted and the final status of NK is determined.
Azerbaijan¹s position is different on Kelbajar. That¹s the disagreement that
the co-chairs are addressing in their statement. The co-chairs¹ language in
the actual negotiating text, with regard to this issue, is generally in line
with our approach.

ARMENPRESS: The co-chairs say that there will be a referendum / popular vote
³to determine the final legal status of Nagorno Karabakh,² but they don¹t
say who will vote.

OSKANIAN: The actual negotiating text on principles clearly specifies that
³the final legal status will be determined through a referendum / population
vote by the population of Nagorno Karabakh.²

ARMENPRESS: The co-chairs also say ³certain interim arrangements for Nagorno
Karabakh would allow for interaction with providers of international
assistance.² What does this mean?

OSKANIAN: This is only one element of a much more detailed section in the
actual negotiating text which addresses interim status for Nagorno Karabakh.
We think the co-chairs have emphasized international engagement, because
that¹s a major problem for the people of Nagorno Karabakh. Their current,
unrecognized, de-facto status, has not allowed them to benefit from the
generosity of international organizations. In the actual negotiating text,
the provisions address such rights as control over their political and
economic viability and security, upholding their personal privileges and
freedoms, the right to democratically elect officials to govern Nagorno
Karabakh, the authority to effectively legislate and administer the internal
affairs of Nagorno Karabakh.

ARMENPRESS: What is Armenia¹s overall assessment of the content of the
document as it stands today?

OSKANIAN: This is not a perfect document. For anyone. However, there are
enough solid and balanced provisions, with the right trade-offs on the main
issues – status, territories and security – that we are prepared to
continue to negotiate on the basis of these principles. In today¹s context,
Azerbaijan¹s rhetoric about autonomy and desperate calls for militarization
surprise us. We have at hand a real opportunity to resolve all issues,
including the much-maligned issue of refugees. But Azerbaijan must revert to
real situations and real opportunities, rather than illusory maximalist
hopes. Today, we hope that Azerbaijan will realize that we have a chance to
resolve the conflict and achieve a lasting peace.

Armenian Catholicos Karekin Investigated
By Cihan News Agency
Published: Thursday, June 29, 2006
zaman.com

;alt=&trh 060629&hn=34365

An investigation has been launched by the Istanbul Chief Public
Prosecution Office into the world leader of the Armenian Apostolic
Church, Catholicos Karekin II, following claims that he ‘denigrated
Turkishness’ in remarks made during his recent visit to Istanbul. A
complaint was lodged at the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecution Office
by both Recep Akkus and the strongly-nationalist Turkish Lawyers
Union. The Istanbul Prosecution Office has opened an investigation
into the matter. Catholicos Karekin-II stated last Sunday evening at
a press conference at the Turkish Armenian Patriarchate in the Kumkapi
quarter in Istanbul that Turkey must recognize the Armenian claims of
genocide during the final years of the Ottoman Empire. In his remarks
Sunday, the Armenian Catholicos expressed his wishes for more progress
in Turkish-Armenian relations. Remarking that the issue of genocide
had been debated by researchers for 90 years, Karekin-II said: "For
our people it is not a subject for research. It is an event that took
place and it must be recognized." He said that the genocide issue was
one of the problems that had to be solved for the normalization of
relations between the two countries. Armenian Catholicos Karekin
arrived in Istanbul on Tuesday of last week as the guest of Turkey’s
Armenian Patriarchate Mesrob II and the Fener Greek Orthodox
Partriarchate Bartholomeos. He has since left Turkey for Armenia. The
fate of Armenians under the Ottoman Empire during WWI and after is
still a sensitive issue in Turkey. Armenians claim that 1.5 million
Armenians living under the Ottoman Empire were killed as part of an
intentional and systematic genocide campaign during World War I.
Turkey denies the allegations that 200,000 Armenians died during
forced migrations due to cold weather and bad transportation
conditions. For further information please visit

ARAM SARGSYAN STATED STATUS QUO SHOULD BE MAINTAINED IN NK SETTLEMEN’S PRESENT PHASE

DeFacto Agency, Armenia
June 28 2006

The Armenian party is in pitiful position in the Karabakh conflict
settlement process, RA Democratic Party leader, RA NA deputy Aram G.
Sargsyan stated in the course of a press conference held today.

While commenting on the OSCE Minsk group U.S. Co-Chair Matthew Bryza’s
interview and RA MFA statement following it, Aram G. Sargsyan stated
the U. S. Co-Chair had again reaffirmed what had been repeatedly
said. According to the politician, RA leadership has actually agreed to
a treacherous, in the deputy’s opinion, conflict settlement option. In
part, in the deputy’s words, the matter obviously concerns surrender
of five and a half regions (five regions + Kelbajar) forming the NKR
security belt and peacemaking forces’ dislocation in the conflict
zone. We are offered to hold a nation-wide referendum in Karabakh
to determine the region’s status instead. However, according to Aram
G. Sargsyan, to surrender the territories in exchange for the conduct
of the referendum in uncertain future is inadmissible.

In the Armenian politician’s opinion, Matthew Bryza’s statement can be
explained by the US’s desire to settle the issue of NATO’s involvement
in the South Caucasus region and resolve the Iranian issue as soon as
possible. According to the politician, a map with signs of the sites
of the peacemakers’ dislocation has already been drawn up. However, in
case we agree to the peacemaking forces’ dislocation in the conflict
zone, which, in the politician’s words, will be the NATO forces,
Armenia will become Iran’s enemy number one.

Answering the question why the Azeri party does not assent to such
a profitable option, Aram Sargsyan answered: "Appetite comes with
eating. Seeing Armenia’s compromise stand, Azerbaijan sets up more
claims".

According to Aram G. Sargsyan, the NKR authorities will never
consent to this settlement option. In this connection he expressed
perplexity over lack of the NKR leadership’s response to RA MFA
statement. In its turn, RA leadership’s agreement can result in
the aggravation of internal political situation and repetition of
events of 1998. In the opposition politician’s opinion, in such a
situation RA President will soon face the choice: either to resign
or go to unprecedented repressions. According to the politician, the
only settlement option favorable for the Armenian party at present is
maintenance of status quo, which will enable to gain time and attempt
to change the negotiation process in our favor.

Aram G. Sargsyan stated all the options being discussed in the course
of the Karabakh talks should be declassified. Moreover, the politician
requested that the public should be enlisted to the discussion of the
present option of the settlement’s basic principles. He is convinced
that the RA public should respond to the present situation in the
Karabakh talks.

COOPERATION BETWEEN ARMENIA AND ASTRAKHAN REGION TO DEVELOP

Noyan Tapan
Jun 28 2006

ASTRAKHAN, JUNE 28, NOYAN TAPAN. The Armenian official delegation
headed by the governor of Ararat marz Alik Sargsian has been on a
visit to the Astrakhan region (Russia) on June 26-28. Within the
framework of the visit, an agreement between the Armenian government
and the government of Astrakhan region on trade, economic, scientific,
technical and cultural cooperation was signed on June 27. In the
words of A. Sargsian, the signing of this agreement will give a fresh
impetus to further development of mutually beneficial cooperation
between the sides in various spheres.

According to a press release of the RA MFA Press and Information
Department, an agreement on cooperation between the RA Chamber of
Commerce and Industry and the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of
Astrakhan region was signed on the same day.

On June 28 the delegation met with representatives of the Armenian
community of Astrakhan region. During the visit, the Armenian
delegation members participated in the festivities to mark the 300th
anniversary of establishment of Astrakhan’s Armenian community.

NAGHDALYAN WILL MAKE A REPORT ABOUT POVERTY OF WOMEN
Karine Asatryan

A1+
[01:33 pm] 28 June, 2006

The issue about the situation of women in Armenia will probably
be heard in the next PACE session. But it will be represented not
separately, but as part of the report discussing the situation of
women in South Caucasus. According to Hermine Naghdalyan, member of
the Armenian delegation to PACE, in this connection the situation is
not very different in the three South Caucasian countries.

Slight progress can be noted in Georgia. As for Armenia and Azerbaijan,
few women participate in making decisions and few women are engaged
in small and medium business. Mrs. Naghdalyan finds it important
that there is a national program about the situation of women in
Armenia. This is important in the context of the PACE report on the
poverty of women in the CoE member-countries which is to be made soon.

Hermine Naghdalyan has been appointed reporter on the theme.

By the way, on the initiative of the PACE Committee on gender equality,
a day is dedicated to women in the CoE. On this day the members of the
Committee meet women who have launched successful activity in social
and political life and "try to understand the secret of their success
in order to advocate the experience so that more women can follow the
same path", Hermine Naghdalyan says. The third meeting of women within
the framework of the PACE took place late in the evening yesterday.