Author: Vanyan Gary

EurasiaNet Organization
July 14 2005

ARMENIA: ANSWERS DEMANDED ON UES ENERGY DEAL
Samvel Martirosyan 7/14/05

Uncertainty surrounds a reported deal with Russia’s Unified Energy
Systems that would grant the company ownership of Armenia’s main
electricity company. After stating several months ago that it had
purchased the utility, the Russian energy giant on July 13 reversed
itself, claiming that it had only secured a management contract. The
transaction, shrouded in secrecy, has already sparked strong
criticism from one international financial organization, which faults
the Armenian government for refusing to answer questions on the
topic.

On June 30, the Russian energy giant Unified Energy Systems (UES)
announced that Interenergo, an offshore subsidiary of UES, had
purchased 100 percent of the shares of Armenian Electricity Network
(AEN) for $73 million. One of Armenia’s most successful companies,
AEN had been (and may still be) owned by the British-registered firm
Midland Resources Holding, Ltd. In 2004, AEN ranked as Armenia’s
fourth-largest corporate taxpayer, according to the Armenian-European
Policy and Legal Advice Center, and earned revenues of some 70.67
million drams (about $106.6 million).

If the AEN purchase by UES is confirmed, Russian companies would be
poised to take full control of Armenia’s energy industry following
more than two years of steady expansion. In 2003, within the
framework of Armenia’s assets-for-debt program with Moscow, the
Hrazdan thermal power plant, the largest such plant in Armenia, was
transferred to Russia for $31 million. [For additional information
see the Eurasia Insight archive]. UES also was named “financial
manager” of the Armenian nuclear power plant Metsamor. To pay for the
delivery of nuclear fuel to Metsamor, the Sevan-Hrazdan hydroelectric
power station cascade was transferred to Russia in 2003. The same
year, GazProm, the Russian energy conglomerate, became the chief
supplier of natural gas to Armenia. The company also holds 45 per
cent of shares of “ArmRusGasProm,” which holds a monopoly on
distribution of natural gas in Armenia.

Under existing legislation, the sale of one-quarter or more of AEN
shares requires the approval of the government and the Commission on
Regulation of Public Services. The Armenian government has declined
all comment on the issue.

Controversy over the possible sale continues to build. Radio Free
Europe/Radio Liberty quoted a UES spokesperson as saying that
Interenergo was only “the beneficiary of a management contract” that
would give the Russian energy company day-to-day control of AEN,
rather than owning the Armenian firm outright. Information in the
company’s annual report that UES had purchased AEN was not correct
and has been removed from the UES website, the company spokesperson
said.

In a July 11 statement, an AEN spokesperson, who requested not to be
named, told EurasiaNet that the company’s shares had not been
transferred to Interenergo management. The spokesperson denied that a
sale had occurred, and stated that he was not authorized to release
information about the size of the deal.

With no ready explanations from the government, the patience of one
international financial organization appears to be running thin. In a
July 8 press conference, Roger Robinson, chief of the World Bank’s
Armenia mission, said that the organization, Armenia’s largest
creditor, is dissatisfied with the government’s failure to provide
information about the deal. “The electricity distribution networks
are one of the largest and [most] profitable spheres that is of a
great strategic value for each Armenian, and I consider the regular
provision of transparent and official information on events
concerning this sphere as very important,” Robinson said. On July 13,
PanArmenian.Net reported Robinson as saying that he would meet with
members of the government if the situation was not rectified “within
several days.”

Reports about AEN’s sale first appeared in February 2005, when the
Yerevan-based newspaper Haykakan Zhamanak reported that a deal had
been brokered whereby UES would purchase the company for $80 million.
Midland Resources Holding has held AEN since 2002 when it won a
privatization tender for the then state-owned utility for $40
million.

Reaction to the report was swift. On February 22, UES Chief Executive
Officer Anatoly Chubais confirmed that an offer had been made, but
stressed that “[a]ny decision is possible only . . . when it is
coordinated with the Armenian leadership,” the Russian news agency
RIA Novosti reported. It is not known, however, whether those
consultations ever occurred and, if so, with whom.

“It is clear that the situation is not [the] best,” Robinson said.
“The Armenian government and the Commission on Regulation of Public
Services must explain to the nation and to me what is going on.”

One political analyst believes that the reason for the government’s
silence is political. “In April and May of the current year, the
leadership of Armenia was seriously concerned about the possibility
of revolution in the country and saw the only way out in the support
from the outside. That’s why Yerevan was encouraging Vladimir Putin’s
[March 24-25] visit to Armenia,” said Stepan Safarian, research
coordinator at The Armenian Center for National and International
Studies in Yerevan. The fact that news of RAO UES’ interest in
purchasing AEN immediately followed Putin’s visit led Safarian to
conclude that “[t]he transfer of shares was the price that Armenia
paid for Putin’s visit.”

Chubais, the UES chief, enjoys close ties with the Kremlin and has
made no secret of his desire for expansion in the South Caucasus and
Turkish energy markets. [For background see the Eurasia Insight
archive]. The company also controls Georgia’s electrical power grid.
[For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

A representative of the ruling party coalition says that any deal
with UES would have more to do with economics than politics. “After
the privatization of the Armenian Electricity Network, some
conversations about the possible resale of the company have
periodically [taken place]. Naturally, the state is interested in
making the possible deal the most profitable for Armenia,” said
Galust Sahakian, leader of the Republican Party parliamentary
faction, a member of Armenia’s ruling coalition. “I’d sound rather
strict, but we would not like the Electricity Network to be sold to,
for example, a Turkish company.”

Sahakian also claimed that the AEN deal remains in the negotiations
stage, with nothing finalized to date. “I am a politician and I would
have information if the sale of the company took place,” he said.

Editor’s Note: Samvel Martirosyan is a Yerevan-based journalist and
political analyst.

Cyprus Mail, Cyprus
July 14 2005

Turkey: customs union will be signed, but we won’t allow Cyprus ships

By Myria Antoniadou in Brussels

TURKEY’S Finance Minister and chief negotiator with the EU, Ali
Babacan, has reiterated the protocol extending the so-called Ankara
Agreement (customs union) to all EU member states will be signed.

Replying to questions in the European Parliament Foreign Affairs
Committee, Babacan also said his country has supported and will
support efforts for a settlement in Cyprus, recalling its position in
the Annan plan referendum.
However, Turkey’s chief negotiator did not budge one iota from well
known positions and refrained from given substantive answers on
critical questions or comments by MEPs, not only on Cyprus, but also
the Armenian question, the Kurds in the south-eastern territories of
the country, religious and other freedoms and relations with Greece.

Asked by MEP Yiannakis Matsis on the opening of Turkish ports and
airports to Cypriot vessels, the Turkish official quoted a statement
made by Foreign Minister Gul last May for the `lifting of all kinds
of restrictions imposed on both sides, at the same time’.

He also reiterated Ankara’s position that this is part of services
and not the customs union, implying it has no obligation to allow
Cypriot-flagged ships to dock at its ports or airplanes land at its
airports.

However, the Commission does not share this view, as it believes
Turkey is hindering the free movement of goods.

In his 30-minute introductory speech and over two-hour long exchange
of views with MEPs, Turkey’s chief negotiator tried to convince about
the benefits to the EU from his country’s accession. He also tried to
alleviate fears regarding the economic consequences, saying that by
the time of Turkey’s accession it would have a `strong and robust
economy’, which would be an asset to the EU and its competitiveness.

The Turkish chief negotiator also made it clear Ankara would accept
nothing less than full membership to the EU, noting that it already
had a `privileged partnership’.

PanArmenian News Network, Armenia
July 12 2005

OSCE MG STATES PROGRESS IN KARABAKH SETTLEMENT

12.07.2005 03:23

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Yesterday Azeri President I. Aliyev received OSCE Minsk
Group Co-Chairs Steven Mann (US), Yuri Merzlyakov (Russia) and Bernard
Fassier (France). As reported by AzerTAj, the parties exchanged views over
the current state and the prospects of the negotiation process for
settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. The source also reported
yesterday the Co-Chairs met with head of the Azeri community of Karabakh
Nizami Bahmanov and FM E. Mamedyarov. During the meeting details of
settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict within the «Prague process» were
discussed. After the meeting with E. Mamedyarov the Russian Co-Chair told
journalists that many questions were discussed at the meeting and indicated
the availability of positive moments in the talks. «We were in Baku just a
month and a half ago and if they have come again, then the situation is
good,» when assessing the talks stated the French Co-Chair. The Co-Chairs
will leave for Yerevan July 13 and then to Stepanakert. On the other hand
the «head of the executive of Shushi region, head of the Azeri community of
Karabakh» Nizami Bahmanov, who took part in the meeting, stated «main
discussion topic at the meeting with the co-chairs was liberation of lands
occupied by the Armed Forces of Armenia and the stepwise settlement plan was
discussed.» He said the «head executive of Lachin region took part in the
meeting for the first time.» N. Bahmanov emphasized that «the issue of
return of the population of Shushi and Lachin regions was discussed,» «The
co-chairs said Armenians are concerned over their fate after liberation of
the regions occupied by Armenia. We tried to convince the co-chairs the
concerns are not grounded and we told them that within the past 100 years
there were no Armenians in Lachin region. We pointed out the importance of
the withdrawal of the Armenian population settled in Lachin. There are no
problems left in re-settling local population in Lachin.» N. Bahmanov stated
that the issue of guarding the Aghdam-Stepanakert-Shushi-Lachin-Goris motor
road by peacekeeping forces was also clarified, «Azeris will use the road
along with Armenians. Peacekeepers will control the road in the territories
of both Azerbaijan and Armenia. The process will continue until peace is
completely achieved.» He indicated the importance of the Kazan meeting of
the two Presidents in clearing out the problems over resolution of the
conflict. He noted that some issues would be fully clarified after the
meeting.

Region: Pipeline connections

The Economist Intelligence Unit
Business Middle East
16 July 2005

Cross-border pipelines are notoriously difficult to negotiate. But two
such schemes are now making progress

The Nabucco gas pipeline project which aims to transport up to 25.5bn
cu metres/year of Caspian gas to Central and South Eastern Europe via
Turkey has taken a step closer to being realised with the signing of a
formal joint-venture agreement.

The agreement allows for the establishment of Nabucco Gas Pipeline
International, in which each of the five partners – OMV of Austria,
MOL of Hungary, Transgas of Romania, Bulgargaz of Bulgaria and
Turkey’s Botas – each hold a 20% stake. The new company will be
responsible for general development of the project including securing
necessary financing, which is expected to be in the region of 4.6bn
(US$5.5bn), negotiating transit agreements and establishing five
Nabucco subsidiaries – one in each of the participating countries.

The five subsidiaries, to be established in Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania,
Hungary and Austria, will be founded later this year with each being
responsible for acquiring necessary licences for the operation of
their section of the pipeline and for its subsequent operation. The
line itself will remain 100% owned by the parent company, which will
retain all rights for exportation and sale of gas, hence, providing a
`one-stop-shop’ for gas shippers wishing to export through the
line. Following the completion of a feasibility study for the line
late last year and the signing of the joint-venture deal, Nabucco will
now move into the development phase.

Reinhard Mitschek, managing director Nabucco Pipeline Study, told BME
that work on the first phase which involves the construction of a
56-inch line from the Turkish capital Ankara to Austria is due to
commence in 2008 and to be completed within three years. For the first
two years of operation the line will lease capacity from the existing
Botas-owned lines from Ankara to Erzurum and from Erzurum running to
Iran and Azerbaijan – construction of the latter being scheduled to
start later this year. During this two-year period Nabucco will
complete its second construction phase which will involve the laying
of new Nabucco-owned lines from Ankara to Erzurum, and from Erzurum to
Azerbaijan and Iran, to be constructed in parallel with the existing
Botas-owned lines

Once complete the line will have an initial capacity of 25.5bn cu
metres/y, which can be raised to 31bn cu metres/y by the addition of
extra compressors if demand is sufficient. Mr Mitschek said that
negotiations with gas shippers have already begun, with the aim of
putting together a portfolio of supply contracts and securing
take-or-pay agreements for an initial 6bn-8bn cu metres/y of
gas-sufficient to allow financial closure on the project by
2007. Discussions have been conducted with Azerbaijan for between
10bn-14bn cu metres/y, with Iran for 10bn-26bn cu metres/y, with Egypt
for 8bn-10bn cu metres/y and with Iraq for an undisclosed volume, he
said.

Business Middle East 16 Jul 2005, Part 6 of 35

New York Times
July 9 2005

‘A Strange Death’: Four Angry Women

By JONATHAN WILSON
Published: July 10, 2005

The dream of lost innocence recovered in a golden future always
haunts the imagination of colonial pioneers. Its premise is myopia:
F. Scott Fitzgerald conjured ”a fresh, green breast of the new
world” for his Dutch sailors, a story that began without Indians.
Golda Meir infamously insisted that there was no such thing as
Palestinians. Breaking new ground on a distant shore is easier if no
one is there when you arrive. Plan B allows that the natives are
happy to see the newcomers. But soon enough it all turns nasty (whose
fault?) and ends in tears.

A STRANGE DEATH
By Hillel Halkin.
388 pp. PublicAffairs. $26.

First Chapter: ‘A Strange Death’ (July 10, 2005)

Forum: Book News and Reviews
”A Strange Death,” Hillel Halkin’s beautifully written and wisely
confused account of the local history of the town he lives in,
Zichron Yaakov, takes us back to the earliest days of Jewish
settlement in Ottoman Palestine. His ostensible subjects are members
of the Nili spy ring operated out of Zichron during World War I by
local pioneers on behalf of the British, its ramifications among the
local populace and the betrayals and revenge that floated in its
wake. He is deeply seduced, however, by the lovely ambiguities of the
past as they arise in relationships between Arabs and Jews at a time
when both groups were under Turkish rule. Yes, there is murder just
around the corner (Jews were hacked to pieces in Hebron and Arabs
massacred in Deir Yessin) but in 1916 a man could still be known by
the horse he rode from village to village rather than the tank he
rolled through in.

The spy ring (”Nili” is a Hebrew acronym that translates as ”the
strength of Israel will not lie”), which functioned less than a year
from the winter of 1916 through the fall of 1917, was the brainchild
of Aaron Aaronsohn and Avshalom Feinberg, two Palestine-born Zionists
convinced that a British victory over the Turks would help pave the
way to a Jewish state. Aaronsohn was a charismatic figure with an
international reputation as a botanist (he discovered triticum
dioccoides, the wild ancestor of cultivated wheat). Feinberg, a local
farmer, was a swashbuckler, a superior shot and impressive horseman.
Aaronsohn brought two of his sisters into the ring: Rivka, who was
engaged to Feinberg, and the beautiful and spirited Sarah. At 24,
Sarah had abandoned her Turkish Jewish husband in Constantinople and
had witnessed, on her journey to Palestine, the Turks’ genocidal
assault on the Armenians. The network was augmented by Yosef
Lishansky, a maverick adventurer and a tough guy, and a few more
trusted relatives of the two leaders.

The likelihood of the spies living to comb gray hair wasn’t enhanced
by the anxieties of some Jews. After a successful run passing
information on Turkish troop positions to a British freighter waiting
offshore came the inevitable capture, torture and interrogation of an
operative, Naaman Belkind, and soon enough the jig was up. In October
1917, the Turks cordoned off Zichron. Aaronsohn was luckily in Cairo
at the time. Lishansky escaped only to be caught after three weeks,
and hanged by the Turks. Sarah was captured and marched through town.
Four Jewish women abused, excoriated and perhaps assaulted her, but
whether they acted out of animosity or an instinct for
self-preservation has never been clear. After being tortured by
Turkish soldiers Sarah escaped to her own home long enough to
retrieve a hidden gun and shoot herself.

What happened to the four angry women is Halkin’s quest.
Particularly, was one of them, Perl Appelbaum, murdered in revenge by
Sarah’s friends in Zichron Yaakov? As Halkin searches for an answer
nobody provides one, but his compensation is a stream of great
stories about old times. Zichron began as the fief of Baron Edmond de
Rothschild, who would blow in at odd intervals from France to bowing
and scraping. By 1970, when the Halkins move in, the village has a
cranky charm and wild flowers growing in crevices of half-abandoned
structures that seem like a playground for Joseph Beuys. Halkin, a
product of the new Israel, clearly finds it hard to let go of old
Palestine, in halcyon days when crafty Jews and wily Arabs,
farmer-scholar-horsemen all, took their disputes to the Turkish
governor for arbitration. A revealing moment comes when Halkin takes
his kids to play with Bedouin children who steal his daughters’ toys.
Halkin wants to take a liberal-romantic line on this violation, but
his wife sets him straight. The Bedouin mother ”sleeps with the
farmers’ sons. . . . Everyone knows except you. You’d know too, if it
had happened 50 years ago.”

Nothing is at it was, and perhaps it never was as Halkin supposed. In
an empty house he finds a discarded, anonymous book, ”Sarah, Flame
of the Nili.” A little research reveals that the hagiography was
written by Alexander Aaronsohn, Sarah’s younger brother, who, Halkin
also finds out, had a penchant for pubescent girls well beyond his
own adolescence. The countryside was thinly populated and the grass
grew high; there are secrets in Zichron. At the end of the book, the
town has health food stores, gift and antique shops and ice cream
parlors. But it has lost its soul.

A riot of names in ”A Strange Death” sometimes threatens to
overwhelm the reader — as if Halkin wants to honor every inhabitant.
The poet Stanley Kunitz once heard a voice telling him to ”live in
the layers.” Halkin’s book lives wonderfully in the layers but the
layers, of course — a millennium or two of who did what to whom and
when — disturb everybody in his part of the world.

Jonathan Wilson’s most recent book is ”An Ambulance Is on the Way:
Stories of Men in Trouble.”

AZG Armenian Daily #125, 08/07/2005

Armenia-Turkey

ARMENIAN NATIONAL SECURITY INTERROGATES KURDISH HISTORIAN TURKYELMAZ

Archive Study and Smuggling of Ancient Manuscripts are Different Things

Preliminary investigation into the attempt of Turkish citizen of Kurdish
origin Eftan Turkyelmaz to smuggle Armenian ancient manuscripts to Istanbul
on June 17 is carrying on, the press office of Armenian National Security
Service informed withholding from details.

Turkyelmaz, 33, student of and Duke University in North Carolina, was
detained at the Yerevan airport while trying to get on the board of a plane
bound for Istanbul with a bag of books dated 17-20 centuries.

Turkish Foreign Ministry and Duke University work to release Turkyelmaz. The
website of the University informs that Turkyelmaz was working for doctor’s
degree in cultural anthropology. The young historian who is highly spoken of
is doing his research in “Creation of Turkish, Kurdish and Armenian national
parties in Turkey in 1908-1930”. He has been studying documents at the
Armenian National Archive since May 2, and as Amatuni Virabian, head of the
Archive, told daily Azg he has visited Armenian thrice recently.

Prof. Orin Starn, Turkyelmaz’s advisor, was suspicious over “Armenian
claims” saying that the Turkish student had worked in many archives and
encountered no problems. “I am concerned that he was arrested during this
dangerous period of continuing confrontation [between Armenia and Turkey].
He is a bridge between nations”, Associated Press quoted Starn.

Amatuni Virabian said that he read Turkyilmaz’s articles before he began his
researches at the Archive and saw that “he is an impartial writer”. Head of
the National Archive said that Turkyilmaz speaks very good Armenian. “I
presented him several modern books but I did not know he buys ancient
books”, Virabian said. Turkyilmaz enjoyed privileges at the Archive as he
said that he was a student and was unable to pay big sums.

Turkyilmaz can be sentenced up to 5 years in prison according to Armenian
laws unless Armenian authorities display good will. The law reads,
“Smuggling – transportation of goods and articles of cultural value via the
border of the Armenian Republic concealing or by use of false documents is
punishable by fine or 5 years’ imprisonment”.

Turkish propaganda, which used to trumpet that Armenian archives are closed
to Turkish scholars, has changed its focus after Turkyilmaz’s arrest
declaring that the first Turkish historian to study Armenian documents was
arrested. It seems Turkish authorities do no see difference between archive
research and smuggling. Back on May 6, Turkyilmaz told Radio Liberty, “It’s
interesting that people in Turkey think that Armenian archives are closed
for Turkish citizens. That’s not true. I am here. I have had no problem till
now”. He also added that he knows no Turkish scholar who knows Armenian.

Was Turkyilmaz aware that books older than 50 years cannot be moved out
Armenia without the permission of Ministry of Culture? Supposedly, the
answer to this question will seal young scholar’s fate. If knew the law
indeed and, as a press release of National Security Service informs, tried
to conceal the books, he will be punished. It’s also uncertain where he got
the books. It should be noted that Turkyilmaz transported other Armenian
books as well during his last 3 visits and has a reach library of Armenian
books in the US.

By Tatoul Hakobian

European Report
July 6, 2005

EURO-MPS DIGEST EU/TURKEY NEGOTIATING FRAMEWORK WITH REHN

MEPs on the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee were said
to be supportive in general of the negotiating framework for the
accession talks with Turkey just proposed by the European Commission
as they held discussions with EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn
late on July 4 in Strasbourg. Nevertheless, a number of them stressed
the need for real and visible progress from Turkey in the fields of
human rights, women’s rights, religious freedom and Cyprus, as well
as for a genuine application of the criteria for joining the EU.

Presenting the framework to the MEPs, Mr Rehn described it as “the
strictest and at the same time the fairest basis” for conducting
accession talks with Turkey (see also Europe Information 2975). In
reply to questions, Mr Rehn told MEPs that priorities in the
negotiations due to start on October 3 would include respect of human
rights in general, zero tolerance of torture, and respect of the
rights of non-Muslim communities, women’s organisations and trade
unions. On religious freedom, the Commissioner signalled that a ‘law
on foundations’ currently before the Turkish parliament was deficient
and that it might be better to postpone its adoption until it had
been improved.

On Armenia, Commissioner Rehn said Turkey would have to maintain good
neighbourly relations in general and thus normalise its relations
with Armenia and open its borders. However, he indicated that
recognition of the events of 1915-1916 – the “Armenian genocide” –
was not a pre-condition for opening accession negotiations, while in
the same breath regretting the postponement of a conference of
historians on this issue at the Bosphorus University.

A1plus

| 19:21:19 | 06-07-2005 | Official |

REDUCTION

>From now on in the Republic of Armenia the elections will be held in 41
electoral districts. Today the Central Electoral Committee reduced the
number of electoral district to 41 from 56, led by the amendments to the
Electoral Code. According to the CEC decision, the number electoral
districts in Yerevan have been reduced to 13 from 18.

Let us remind you that the amendments to the Electoral Code entered into
vigor on July 1.

A1plus

| 20:41:11 | 05-07-2005 | Politics |

CONSTITUTION – NOT AN INSTRUMENT IN HANDS OF AUTHORITIES

Today the Constitution Day was celebrated in the Constitutional Court. The
presentation of Gagik Harutyunyan’s book entitled `Constitutional Culture,
Lessons of History and Modern Challenges’ also took place.

The CC Chairman delivered an hour speech dedicated to the history of
constitution of different countries of the world noting that they do not
always become better after the reformation. `For example the US Constitution
was changed 27 ties during the period of its existence’, he said. To note,
US Ambassador John Evans was the only foreign diplomat present at the
meeting and he had to listen to the reporters in the Armenian language for
two hours over the absence of a translator.

Gagik Harutyunyan pointed out to the necessity of reforming our constitution
and reminded that the constitution is not an instruments in the hands of the
authorities but a law that should be kept. Vice Speaker Tigran Torosyan in
his turn noted that the Constitution is not an museum exhibit and it should
undergo changes.

Opposition at the event was represented by Raffi K. Hovannisian, Heritage
party leader and Gurgen Arsenyan, chairman of the United Labor Party. There
were no representatives of the ARFD and Orinats Yerkir present.

To note, those celebrating the Constitution Day were less in number than
those, who gathered complaint of the violations of the Constitution at the
CC building.

Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA)
July 1 2005

Lahoud Says Lebanon Will Face its Requirements

Beirut, July 1 (SANA)

President Emil Lahoud of Lebanon said Lebanon is preparing for a new
stage of the political and national work that could enable it
overcome the recent difficult circumstances.

In a meeting with Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan Friday,
Lahoud underlined `as soon as the Lebanese government is formed there
will be a great workshop to boost the national unity and consolidate
solidarity among the Lebanese to surpass the negative climates
prevailed the parliamentary elections thereby Lebanon could face the
forthcoming regional, internal and international requirements.’

He also underlined his country’s firm principles that call for the
achievement of a just and comprehensive peace based on the
international legitimacy resolutions.

Batoul/ Ghossoun