Wednesday’s European Cups Scores

Wednesday’s European Cups Scores

KDKA TV
© MMIV, CBS Broadcasting Inc

Wednesday’s European Cups Scores
Thursday August 05, 2004

FC Copenhagen (Denmark) 0, Nova Gorica (Slovenia) 5

(Nova Gorica advanced 6-2 aggregate)

CSKA Moscow (Russia) 2, Neftchi (Azerbaijan) 0

(CSKA Moscow advanced on 2-0 aggregate)

Dinamo Bucharest (Hungary) 1, MSK Zilina (Slovakia) 0

(Dinamo Bucharest advanced on 2-0 aggregate)

Maccabi Tel-Aviv (Israel) 1, HJK Helsinki (Finland) 0

(Maccabi Tel-Aviv advanced 1-0 on aggregate)

Ferencvaros (Hungary) 0, KF Tirana (Albania) 1

(3-3 aggregate; Ferencvaros advanced 3-2 on away goals)

Kaunas (Lithuania) 0, Djurgarden (Sweden) 2

(Djurgarden advanced on 2-0 aggregate)

Lokomotiv Plovdiv (Bulgaria) 0, Club Brugge (Belgium) 4

(Club Brugge advanced 6-0 on aggregate)

Red Star Belgrade (Serbia-Montenegro) 3, Young Boys Bern (Switzerland) 0

(Red Star Belgrade advanced on 5-2 aggregate)

Shakhtar Donetsk (Ukraine) 1, Pyunik (Armenia) 0

(Shakhtar Donetsk advanced 4-1 on aggregate)

Shelbourne (Ireland) 2, Hajduk Split (Croatia) 0

(Shelbourne advanced on 4-3 aggregate)

Sheriff Tiraspol (Moldova) 0, Rosenborg (Norway) 2

(Rosenborg advanced on 4-1 aggregate)

Sparta Prague (Czech Republic) 2, Apoel Nicosia (Cyprus) 1

(Sparta Prague advanced 4-3 on aggregate)

Trabzonspor (Turkey) 3, Skonto Riga (Latvia) 0

(Trabzonspor advanced on 4-1 aggregate)

Wisla Krakow (Poland) 3, WIT Georgia Tbilisi (Georgia) 0

(Wisla Krakow advanced on 11-2 aggregate)

(Copyright 2004 by The Associated Press

Iraqis decry attacks on Christians

The Christian Science Monitor
August 03, 2004

Iraqis decry attacks on Christians

By Scott Baldauf and Dan Murphy | Staff writers of The Christian Science
Monitor

BAGHDAD – A rare display of violence against Christians here may signal that
Sunni insurgents are broadening their effort to destabilize Iraq and stir up
differences between Islam and other faiths.

Bombing attacks against churches in Baghdad and Mosul Sunday night killed at
least 11 and injured dozens more. The explosions were a strong show of force
and coordination by jihadi elements that the interim government has called
the biggest threat to Iraq’s stability.

Many Iraqis reject these wedge efforts and express frustration with civilian
attacks. But there are few signs that terrorist cells have been disrupted.
In fact, as the Iraqi government shores up security at police stations and
other high-visibility locations, insurgents are increasingly attacking
vulnerable targets, like churches and truck drivers.

After graphic video of a Turkish hostage being killed by militants was
posted on the Internet, the Turkish truckers’ association announced Monday
that it will no longer transport goods bound for US forces in Iraq,
according to the Associated Press.

The detritus of calamity is evident outside the St. Peter and Paul Chaldean
Catholic Church in Baghdad’s Al Doura district.

The Rev. Faris Toma, pastor of St. Peter and Paul, spent the night
comforting bereaved parishioners. Ten churchgoers were killed Sunday evening
by a remote-control car bomb that went off just as church members headed out
to the parking lot.

“Why do they kill all the Iraqi people?” he asks in exasperation. “Why don’t
they kill the Americans? They are the occupiers. We are innocent.”

Attacks against Iraqi Christians have been rare up until now. While
Christians have been targeted by kidnap-for-ransom gangs, and
Christian-owned liquor stores have been destroyed by Shiite militias, these
attacks were probably not sectarian.

The vast majority of Iraqis are comfortable with the country’s Christian
minority. Representatives of both Moqtada al-Sadr’s militant Shiite group
and Sunni political organizations condemned the attacks. “This is a cowardly
act,” Sadr spokesman Abdul Hadi al-Daraji told Al Jazeera television.

Iraq’s most revered Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, also gave
a rare response, calling the church bombings a “hideous crime.”

Analysts say that Sunni militants with an ideology similar to Al Qaeda’s
were almost certainly behind the church bombings. Al Qaeda-linked groups,
intolerant not just of Christians but of Muslim sects that don’t share their
views, have targeted churches in the Philippines, Indonesia, and Pakistan.

While Iraq has armed Shiite groups that have participated in attacks on US
forces and been involved in the assassinations of political opponents, they
haven’t been known to use terrorist attacks on civilian targets.

Iraqi officials say they believe the attack was carried out by a cell
connected to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian militant with Al Qaeda ties
who has taken responsibility for a number of car-bombings inside Iraq.

Since the apparent immediate aim of the Zarqawi group and others that share
its methods is to embarrass the US-installed interim government, the actual
nature of the target is less important to them than simply carrying out
successful attacks.

During the rule of Saddam Hussein, the Christian community largely stayed
out of the major conflicts and divisions in Iraqi politics. Though some
Christians were elevated to senior positions – Tariq Aziz, a Christian, was
a longtime foreign minister and one of Mr. Hussein’s closest allies – most
quietly went about their lives as small businessmen and shopkeepers.

Since the fall of Hussein, and amid a rise in militant Islamic movements,
Christian leaders have worried that they would be targeted.

At St. Peter and Paul church, witnesses are busy putting their house of God
back in order.

But while church members are clinging to one another, and to sympathetic
Muslims and others in the surrounding community, they recognize that their
fears may take a long time to overcome.

Bashar Badri, a guard and a church member, knew some of the church members
who died in the blast. One of his friends, Firas Benjamin, and his fiancée,
were planning to get married at this church on Thursday. Both were burned to
death in their car.

But while this attack has shaken many church members, he says Iraqi
Christians will not be intimidated.

“I think the people of this community will not leave Iraq, they will not
leave the church,” says Mr. Shamon. “We have been through many wars, so I
think we can carry on our lives.”

At the Armenian Catholic Church in the prosperous Tahrir Square
neighborhood, witnesses heard a smaller series of blasts, which brought them
outside for a larger explosion. It’s a common tactic, police say, to
maximize the number of casualties.

The tactic failed. A massive concrete wall, forming a grotto, served as a
bunker to protect the curious parishioners.

Across the street, a brick wall has collapsed into a pile of rubble. But it
was strong enough to protect Samir Matti’s sister and her two children, who
had been sitting in the front room of their home, watching television, when
the car bomb exploded just 15 feet away.

Mr. Matti says he has no confidence that either the Iraqi government or the
US can stop insurgents who use car bombs. “The enemy, he’s a hidden person,”
says Matti. “He could be in that car, or in this car. I don’t know how you
can find him.”

“Islamic fundamentalists did this, probably,” says Adel Mansour, a neighbor
who attends a Syrian Catholic church elsewhere. “They have support, money,
they are organized, and they did this for political reasons. They want
people to turn against the local government.”

BAKU: Azerbaijan Condemns Armenia’s Military Exercises in Karabakh

AZERBAIJAN CONDEMNS ARMENIA’S MILITARY EXERCISES IN KARABAKH

ANS TV, Baku
3 Aug 04

The heads of the Armenian community of Karabakh and the Armenian armed
forces started joint military exercises in Nagornyy Karabakh
today. Reserve officers are also taking part in the exercises which
will continue until 12 August.

(Passage omitted: Russian news agency RIA is quoted)

We condemn these exercises as the aggressor country is staging them on
the occupied territory. We know the level of the Armenian armed
forces, and therefore, we know that the exercises will not be
successful, the Azerbaijani Defence Ministry press service has said.

Cafesjian Museum of Modern Art Will Be Constructed in 2007 in ROA

GERARD L.GAFESCHYAN MUSEUM OF MODERN ART WILL BE CONSTRUCTED IN
ARMENIA IN 2007

YEREVAN, JULY 27. ARMINFO. Some $25 mln will be used for construction
of Gerard L.Gafeschyan Museum of Modern Art included in the Cascade
architectural complex. The construction is supposed to be started in
the autumn of the current year.

Talking to ARMINFO, PR-Coordinator of the Fund of Gasfeschyan Museum
Sirvard Karapetyan said that the construction of the upper area of the
Cascade, which is just partially repaired also depends on selection of
a definite type of architectural project of the museum. She said that
many design-orgnaizations have responded to the tender announced by
the fund, presenting their project of construction. The final results
of the tender will be announced in autumn, before beginning of the
construction works. It should be noted that one of the tender
participants, a Viennese COOP HIMMELBLAU, proposed that the museum be
constructed on the upper space of the complex. Two other companies
from the USA and Holland will complete with this company at the final
stage of the tender. The construction is supposed to be completed by
2006-2007.

A collection of the treasures of a prominent billionaire, Armenian by
origin, Gerard L.Gafeschyan (Glass Art), the glass works by such
artists as Stanislav Libenskiy and Yaroslava Brikhtova will be
exhibited at the Museum. The billionaire will present part of his
collections of the works of a famous Brazilian sculptor Fernando
Botero, whose work “Cat” made from black bronze decorates the lower
area of the Cascade.

It should be noted that Gafeschyan allocated $30 mln for constriction
of the Museum and exploitation of the whole complex Cascade, part of
these funds will be used to replace 20 escalators with new ones.

Israel reconsiders barrier’s route

United Press International
July 27, 2004 Tuesday 18:28 PM Eastern Time

Israel reconsiders barrier’s route

By JOSHUA BRILLIANT

JERUSALEM, July 27 (UPI)

The crossing point between Jerusalem and Abu Dis seemed very busy. A
Palestinian woman approached it holding her little boy’s hand, a man
using a cane went over slowly, while in the other direction a
Palestinian waiter carried a tray with small cups of coffee and
another man carried pipes on his shoulder.

It would be a normal crossing point at the end of a short East
Jerusalem street except that it ended with a gray concrete wall
forcing people to climb over it.

A green Border Police jeep was parked at the intersection, a few feet
away. Armed policemen milled around, one of them holding a fat gray
canister — a stun grenade. No one seemed to stop and check the
Palestinians who came across and boarded taxis.

Retired Col. Shaul Arieli, who devised an alternative separation
line, said the guards usually know the people.

Down the road a 9-meter-high (30-foot-high) gray wall cuts across the
old Jerusalem-Jericho road. Its sheer height prevents people from
jumping over it. And that area, indeed, looks like a dead end would,
the road to it covered with dust and garbage.

The wall is part of the barrier Israel is building in and around the
West Bank, which the government says will prevent militants from
crossing. The defense establishment opted for a wall inside Jerusalem
because it takes up much less space than the system of triple fences
and patrol roads that Israel has been building elsewhere in the West
Bank.

Eventually the wall will cover 3 percent of the barrier and most of
it will be in Jerusalem, Ariel said.

Graffiti already covers part of it, and it seems as though all sides
have had their say there.

“All the respect to the Border Police,” someone scribbled in Hebrew.

“From the Warsaw Ghetto to the Abu Dis Ghetto,” someone wrote in
English, alluding to the Palestinians who find themselves fenced in.
A visiting Scotsman painted his blue flag with a white X adding,
“Scotland supports Palestine.” The lower part of two of the wall’s
slabs was painted white, and Arieli said the Defense Ministry was
testing a type of paint that would make it easy to erase graffiti.

Meanwhile in Tel Aviv, Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz approved proposed
amendments to the barrier’s route.

The barrier, which Palestinians charge is a land grab, has drawn much
criticism from international and Israeli human rights groups. In a
non-binding advisory opinion, the International Court of Justice at
The Hague on July 9 ruled the barrier illegal and said that it should
be torn down and compensation given to Palestinians for any damage
caused by its construction.

Last Wednesday, a non-binding resolution passed by the U.N. General
Assembly after a 150-6 vote with 10 abstentions demanded that Israel
destroy the barrier in accordance with the ICJ’s ruling.

Last month, Israel’s High Court of Justice ordered the government to
reconsider the a portion of the route and take into account not only
Israel’s security needs but also the effect the barrier would have on
the lives — and livelihood — of the Palestinians living there.

Deputy Defense Minister Zeev Boim told United Press International the
newly approve route “accords more weight” to Palestinian access to
work and agricultural fields and the way of life. In some places, the
barrier will now run closer to the pre-1967 war lines.

Now the Justice Ministry will consider the plan to assess whether it
fits the criteria the judges have set and whether the state stands a
good chance of defending its actions should the Palestinians appeal
again.

No decision was taken with regard to 10 sections, including the
village of Azun Atmeh, at the western edge of the West Bank, near
several settlements. Mofaz would like to hold on to Beit Iksa, north
of Jerusalem, but other officials recommended not to.

Nor has there been a decision on the area surrounding Jerusalem
itself and the southern West Bank, the Defense Ministry said.

Israeli officials maintained parts of the barrier already built led
to a dramatic drop in the number of suicide bombing attacks,
casualties and even car thefts.

However, Israeli doves are advocating more changes in the barrier’s
route.

Arieli, who helped draw the Geneva Initiative’s maps, Tuesday took
reporters to a roof at Nebi Samuel, north of Jerusalem.

That vantage point overlooks the entire area between Jerusalem and
Ramallah, the Arab villages there, the settlement towns Israel has
built, the highway linking Israel’s coastal plain to Jerusalem, and
Camp Ofer where Palestinian detainees are held.

Ariel showed the barrier’s route could be redrawn to surround the
Jewish settlements, link them to Jerusalem on an existing four lane
highway that would be part of a 250-meter-wide (1/2-mile) corridor
and thus leave the Palestinian villages and fields outside Israeli
control.

Jerusalem, too, should be divided so that Israel would control only
the Jewish neighborhoods, he said.

If that were done, Israel would keep only 7,120 acres of East
Jerusalem’s area compared with almost 15,000 acres under the
government’s original plan.

Instead of having to rule over 230,000 Palestinians, it would have no
Palestinians. Its area would encompass the homes of 195,000 Israelis
who have built their several East Jerusalem neighborhoods.

The Geneva Initiative proposes a land swap in which Israel would keep
some West Bank areas in exchange for an equal amount of land near the
Gaza Strip.

The alternative of pulling all the 400,000 Jews out of the West Bank
and East Jerusalem is “almost impossible to do,” Arieli said. Nor
would it be possible to keep all the occupied territories and leave
the settlers everywhere, he added.

According to the Geneva Initiative the Old City of Jerusalem would be
divided so that the Christian, Muslim and half the Armenian Quarter
would come under Palestinian sovereignty, the Jewish Quarter and the
other half of the Armenian Quarter where Jews live would come under
Israeli sovereignty.

The Temple Mount would be Palestinian, the Western Wall Israeli and
there would be no physical boundary lines within the walled area.

A force of Israelis, Palestinians and international troops would be
headquartered near the Jaffa Gate, at a building which has served
successive police forces of the powers that ruled in Jerusalem, Ariel
said.

Anne needs help to free musical spirit of azerbaijani youngsters

Aberdeen Press and Journal
July 23, 2004

Anne needs help to free musical spirit of azerbaijani youngsters

Impoverished and deprived children whose musical talents have lain
undiscovered in Azerbaijan schools are being given the chance to
shine. Ballater woman Anne Jack, 48, a music teacher and honorary
member of the London College of Music, has been teaching about 50
children at schools in the city of Sumgayit.

After moving to Azerbaijan because of her husband Bill’s work, Mrs
Jack found many children were taught traditional instruments by their
fathers but had no knowledge of theory.

“I found it very, very interesting, because these children are
extremely talented,” she said. “They are beautiful players, but they
don’t have a clue what they’re doing – it’s just natural talent. I
think their lives have been so repressed they haven’t had time for
anything else.” The country regained its independence after the
collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and, for the next three years,
was in armed conflict with Armenia.

Unemployment in Sumgayit is about 80%, while corruption is rife and
the promise of widespread wealth from Azerbaijan’s petroleum
resources remains largely unfulfilled.

Classrooms have no pianos or keyboards and musical instruments are
not readily available.

Mrs Jack started off by taking 100 recorders and moved on to the
guitar and woodwind instruments.

She is now hoping to receive donations of instruments “in any form”
to further the children’s education, but would particularly like a
drum kit.

Music even helps pupils with their arithmetic, Mrs Jack says, as they
count the beats.

Anyone wishing to donate an instrument or money should e-mail Mrs
Jack at annejack100 @hotmail.com Instruments can also be dropped off
at the Aberdeen offices of KCA Deutag, Minto Drive, Altens, Aberdeen.

Iran begins building 140 km gas pipeline to Armenia: report

Payvand, Iran from IRNA
July 22 2004

Iran begins building 140 km gas pipeline to Armenia: report

Tehran, July 22, IRNA — Iran has begun building a 140-km-long gas
pipeline to Armenia, said the Itar-Tass news agency monitored here
Thursday.
The two countries signed an agreement on the project worth around 120
million US dollars in May, when Iranian Oil Minister Bijan Namdar
Zanganeh visited Yerevan.

Under its provisions, Iran will be supplying 36 billion cubic meters
of natural gas to Armenia annually from 2007 through to 2027.

Itar-Tass, citing OPEC sources in Vienna, said that the pipeline
might be used to ship Iranian gas to Georgia, Ukraine and farther on
to Europe in the future.

The news agency said the sources had got the news from Armenian
ambassador to Tehran, Gegam Garibjian.

To make the whole scheme possible, a 550-kilometer-long section of
the pipeline will be laid at the floor of the Black Sea, stretching
from the Georgian port of Supsa to Feodosiya in the Crimea, it said.

According to the same sources, the project is estimated to cost about
five billion US dollars.

Forecasts suggest that once the project is implemented, the Iranian
gas supplies to Europe may reach 60 billion cubic meters a year, of
which Ukrainian imports will likely account for 10 billion cubic
meters.

Tehran has already a multi-billion-dollar contract with neighboring
Turkey to supply gas for 25 years.

The gas flow was launched in December 2001 via a 2,577-kilometer
pipeline, running from the northeastern city of Tabriz to Ankara,
which supplies gas from southern Iran near the Persian Gulf.

The contract has been a boon to Iran’s bid to become a sustainable
gas supplier to Turkey and Europe.

Looking for alternative markets, Tehran has also held talks with the
Persian Gulf littoral states and the Central Asian nations for the
sale of gas.

The country sits on the second largest proven gas reserves of the
world after Russia, which has been a headache for Iran by getting
into, what is feared to be, an unnecessary and costly competition.

The Iron Grip

The Moscow Times
Arts & Ideas
July 23 – 29, 2004

The Iron Grip

Even Stalin’s most fearsome henchmen were putty in the dictator’s hands, a
new study by Yoram Gorlizki and Oleg Khlevniuk maintains.

By Sam Thorne
Published: July 23, 2004

Of the numerous books that have been written about Josef Stalin, relatively
few have focused on the twilight years of his dictatorship, from the end of
World War II to his death in March 1953. Those works that do address this
period tend to depict Stalin as an increasingly paranoid figure, struggling
to cling to health and power as his deputies jockey for position to succeed
him. In “Cold Peace: Stalin and the Soviet Ruling Circle, 1945-1953,”
historians Yoram Gorlizki and Oleg Khlevniuk challenge the prevailing
version, using formerly unavailable archive material to shed light on the
internal workings of the top Soviet leadership during Stalin’s final years.
They attempt to show a clear political logic to Stalin’s behavior, however
irrational it may seem, and dispel the notion that there were ever any
serious contenders to usurp him (or even conspirators to kill him).

Following the war, Gorlizki and Khlevniuk contend, Stalin’s consistent aim
was to consolidate the Soviet Union’s status as a superpower, and, in the
face of growing decrepitude, to maintain his hold as leader of that power.
The authors describe how Stalin created a dual political order: informal and
personalized in some spheres, orderly and institutionalized in others.
Realizing, for example, that he no longer had the energy to oversee many
aspects of government, Stalin initiated key organizational changes, setting
up a Council of Ministers to manage the economy, while he and his inner
circle in the Politburo concentrated on a smaller set of policy issues,
among them state security, ideology and foreign affairs. Unlike the
Politburo, the Council of Ministers met regularly, worked to deadlines on
individual assignments with a clear division of labor and suffered minimal
interference from Stalin — except when economic issues touched on matters
of state.

The other side of this arrangement was a Politburo entirely obedient to
Stalin’s whims, comprising five members in 1945 and 10 by 1953, including
Stalin himself, two long-standing colleagues in Vyacheslav Molotov and
Anastas Mikoyan, and younger members, such as Lavrenty Beria and Nikita
Khrushchev. In contrast to the Council of Ministers, Stalin personally
selected the Politburo’s membership, set its agendas, fashioned its
procedures and organized the locations and timings of its meetings to suit
himself. Often, meetings would take place in the dining room of Stalin’s
dacha in the early hours of the morning — and when not dining with the
leader, Politburo members were often phoned by Stalin’s secretary as late as
4 or 5 a.m. to be told that Stalin had gone to bed and that they, too, could
leave their desks and go home. A Yugoslav envoy who visited Stalin during
this period described how a significant part of Soviet policy was shaped at
these dinners. “It all resembled,” he wrote, “a patriarchal family with a
crotchety head who made his kinsfolk apprehensive.” Gorlizki and Khlevniuk
term Stalin’s style of leadership “neo-patrimonial” in that he attempted to
combine a modern, committee-based system of administration with a more
primitive method of rule based on personal fealty.

After World War II, Stalin moved quickly to reassert his authority over his
deputies, who had come to enjoy a measure of autonomy in their respective
fields as the war took its toll on the dictator’s health and stamina. Within
a year, Stalin launched a series of savage attacks on every member of the
Politburo, using a variety of methods to intimidate them, including
face-to-face confrontations, demotions, assaults on allies and the threat of
physical repression. In each case, the victim was required to apologize
speedily and abjectly, usually in writing. Mikoyan, for example, after being
blamed by Stalin for grain shortages that crippled the country in 1946,
issued this cringing statement: “Of course, neither I nor others can frame
questions quite like you [Stalin]. I shall devote all my energy so that I
may learn from you how to work correctly. I shall do all I can to draw the
lessons from your stern criticism, so that it is turned to good use in my
further work under your fatherly guidance.”

In the years that followed, Stalin continued to exert fierce psychological
pressure on his deputies. Whenever they showed signs of independence, he
slapped them down ruthlessly. Molotov was even forced to divorce his wife,
who was subsequently arrested on trumped-up charges that she was linked to
“Jewish nationalists.” The lesson was that nobody, not even a spouse, could
get in the way of a Politburo member’s primary allegiance to Stalin. More
important still was the demand that personal devotion to Stalin should
supersede any loyalty to an “office.” At the drop of a hat, Stalin could
create or destroy institutional positions and all the personal incentives
and authority that came with them.

AP
Stalin established a dual political order — part informal, part unyielding
— to maintain a hold over his subordinates.

Although Stalin sought to inspire in the last years of his dictatorship the
submissive attitude that the Politburo had displayed toward him immediately
after the Great Terror, he did not plumb the same depths of brutality to
achieve it. There were none of the large-scale purges of the political elite
seen in the 1930s; instead, Stalin appeared to value order and continuity
within his entourage. When he denounced his closest colleagues, the ensuing
charade of repentance and chastisement was usually played out in front of
only a small audience. If the victim was less important, Stalin’s criticism
might leak out into wider circles or appear in the papers.

At the same time, members of the Politburo learned not to rock the boat,
knowing that any advantage they might gain from having a rival removed could
not make up for the lethal climate of uncertainty and suspicion that
inevitably followed. If they needed reminding of this, it came in 1950 when
Stalin executed the head of the state planning agency, Nikolai Voznesensky,
for allowing a trade fair to go ahead in Leningrad without permission from a
high enough authority: As ever, Stalin hated any sign of autonomy in others.

Gorlizki and Khlevniuk write persuasively of how fear of Stalin’s
unpredictable behavior united members of the Politburo in a tacit alliance,
and how their experience of working together laid the foundations of
collective leadership after Stalin’s death. Whereas earlier historians of
this period have relied largely on newspaper articles, leaked reports and
memoirs — many colored to show Khrushchev, Stalin’s eventual successor, in
a positive light — Gorlizki and Khlevniuk have trawled through piles of
newly available Central Committee paperwork and personal correspondence to
create an admirably objective and balanced account of Stalin’s relationship
with his ruling circle, backed up with copious notes.

For the lay reader there is, if anything, too much detail, and the book
sometimes becomes bogged down in tracking the constant reorganizations and
personnel changes that Stalin made to keep his subordinates on their toes.
Even the personalities of the main actors become submerged eventually in
this morass of intrigue, although perhaps this is how things really were:
Certainly the underlying banality of Stalin’s dying regime comes through
strongly. Ultimately, the “cold peace” alluded to in the title is perhaps a
bit too glacial to appeal to a popular readership, but for scholars seeking
a hard-nosed analysis of high-level Soviet politics after the war, this book
could hardly be bettered.

A former editor at The Moscow Times, Sam Thorne now free-lances from
Britain.

Copyright © 2004 The Moscow Times. All rights reserved

BAKU: Russian Azerbaijanis Protest Armenian Occupation

Baku Today
July 22 2004

Russian Azerbaijanis Protest Armenian Occupation

Nearly 50 Azerbaijanis staged an authorized picket in front of the
Armenian embassy in Moscow Wednesday, demanding that Yerevan withdraw
from Azerbaijan’s occupied territories.

The protest marked the 11th anniversary of the occupation of
Azerbaijan’s Aghdam District by Armenia.

The picketers urged international organizations to give up double
standards in their approach to the occupation of the Azerbaijani
territories, chanting anti-Armenian slogans, such as `There is no
Azerbaijan without Karabakh,’ `Take your hands out of Karabakh,’
among others.

Ilqar Qasimov, head of the coordination council of the Movement for
Azerbaijan and also a General of the Russian army, told a news
briefing following the picket that although more Azerbaijanis had a
desire to attend the action, the Moscow authorities did not give
permission for a larger action.

Armenian troops occupied Aghdam and six other administrative
districts along with Nagorno-Karabakh – Azerbaijan’s western region
that was home to nearly 100,000 ethnic-Armenians in 1989 – during
1991-94 war.

A cease-fire agreement reached between the two countries in May 1994
is frequently violated by exchange of fire while peace talks mediated
by the Minsk group of the Organization for Security and Cooperation
of Europe since 1992 have yielded no result.

Romania: Minorities MPs ask for minority law

Romania

Divers Bulletin no. 26 (109) / July 19, 2004

News

ETHNIC MINORITIES MPs ASK FOR A MINORITY LAW

BUCHAREST – Representatives of national minorities in the Romanian
Chamber of Deputies last week proposed the enactment of a special law on
the national minorities, which clearly defines their statute, according
to Varujan Pambuccian, representative of the Armenian minority. “I did
not ground upon the idea a law must solve everything. Simple elements
are missing – the definition of ethnic minorities, the recognized
national minorities, the meaning of the Council of National Minorities.
On the basis of years ahead experience, we proposed the establishment of
a National Authority for Ethnic Minorities that confers us continuity
and stability. This law would give a clear statute to our organization”,
stated Varujan Pambuccian. Altogether, parliamentarians drew an alarm
signal for the education in the mother tongue, stressing out upon the
necessity of ensuring teachers of for the schools with a reduced number
of children. In Romania, there are 19 ethnic minorities who are
officially recognized, and 18 of them with one representative in the
Parliament.
Author: DIVERS

DIVERS – News bulletin about ethnic minorities living in Romania is
edited every week by MEDIAFAX, with the financial support of
Ethnocultural Diversity Resource Center. Partial or full reproduction of
the information contained in DIVERS is allowed only if the source is
mentioned. You can send messages and suggestions regarding the content
of DIVERS bulletin at MEDIAFAX, Str. Tudor Arghezi, Nr. 3B, Sector 2 –
Bucharest, tel: 021/ 305.31.91 or at the e-mail address:
[email protected]