LEVON MELIK-SHAHNAZARYAN: ARMENIAN GENOCIDE COMMITTED NOT BY MUSLIMS BUT TURKS
PanARMENIAN.Net
29.06.2006 18:25 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Islam is really a great religion and like other
world religions it does not accept the term “genocide”, political
scientist Levon Melik-Shahnazaryan told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter,
when commenting on a statement of Turkish PM that there is no concept
of genocide in Islam. “However, being an experienced politician,
Erdogan deliberately shifts accents. Not Muslims, but Turks committed
the Armenian Genocide, and not Muslims, but Turks will have to answer
for those murderous deeds. Erdogan’s attempt to charge the whole Muslim
world for the Armenian Genocide is futile. The political scientist
reminded that Armenian remember well “how Muslims: Iranians and Arabs
saved the remaining populations of unprotected Armenian villages from
Turkish yataghans.”

OSKANIAN: “WE HOPE AZERBAIJANI WILL REALIZE THAT WE HAVE A CHANCE TO RESOLVE CONFLICT AND ACHIEVE LASTING PEACE”
Armenpress
Jun 30 2006
YEREVAN, JUNE 30, ARMENPRESS: In an interview to Armenpress news
agency Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian commented on the
OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs’ statement made June 22.
– The co-chairs in their statement say that “our 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.” What does this mean?
– 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, “in 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.” In other words,
the agreement on principles will be comprehensive. The final agreement
may envision implementation over time.
– In their report, the co-chairs say “the principles include the
phased redeployment of Armenian troops from Azerbaijani territories
around Nagorno Karabakh, with special modalities for Kelbajar and
Lachin districts.” What are these special modalities?
– 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 “a corridor linking Nagorno Karabakh to Armenia.” For
Armenia, it’s 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. Azerbaijan’s position is
different on Kelbajar. That’s the disagreement that the co-chairs
are addressing in their statement. The co-chairs’ language in the
actual negotiating text, with regard to this issue, is generally in
line with our approach.
– The co-chairs say that there will be a referendum “to determine
the final legal status of Nagorno Karabakh,” but they don’t say who
will vote.
– The actual negotiating text on principles clearly specifies that
“the final legal status will be determined through a referendum by
the population of Nagorno Karabakh.”
– The co-chairs also say “certain interim arrangements for Nagorno
Karabakh would allow for interaction with providers of international
assistance.” What does this mean?
– 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 that’s 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.
– What is Armenia’s overall assessment of the content of the document
as it stands today?
– This 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 today’s
context, Azerbaijan’s 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.

ZVARTNOTS AIRPORT RESUMES 24-HOUR FLIGHTS HANDLING
Armenpress
Jun 30 2006
YEREVAN, JUNE 30, ARMENPRESS: Armenia’s main Zvartnots airport resumes
from July 1 the 24 hour handling of flights that was reduced to late
evening and early morning hours since April 29 to allow a major repair
of its runway.
Gevorg Abrahamian, head of the airport’s press office, said the
3,850 meter-long runway underwent a complete repair concurrently with
replacement of its outdated infrastructure.

GAZPROM SETS EYES ON IRAN-ARMENIA PIPELINE
Armenpress
Jun 30 2006
MOSCOW, JUNE 30, ARMENPRESS: Russian Gazprom plans to buy an
Iran-Armenia pipeline currently under construction, RIA news agency
said quoting a deputy chairman of the Russian energy giant as saying
Friday.
“Indeed, we intend to acquire this gas pipeline,” Alexander Ryazanov
told an annual shareholders’ meeting.
He said the pipeline, with a projected annual capacity of 1.2 billion
cubic meters, would be commissioned in 2007. Ryazanov said putting
the new facility on stream would help provide more reliable supplies
of natural gas to Armenia, which presently receives its gas through
Georgia. “There are problems with the transit of gas to Armenia via
Georgia, as Georgia taps some of the gas,” he said.
Gazprom also said it would produce natural gas only under
contracts. “We will only meet the demand of partners who have signed
long-term deals. We will not produce gas until we have sold it,”
chief executive Alexei Miller told an annual shareholders meeting.
Miller said that demand was outstripping supply on the natural gas
market, which meant that the seller was free to choose partners and
the most favorable outlets, as well as cooperate exclusively under
long-term deals. He said Gazprom covered 25% of Europe’s natural-gas
needs, whereas its share was only 10% on Asian-Pacific markets.

WILL REPUBLICANS HAVE DECIDING ROLE IN ELECTION 2008?
Lragir.am
30 June 06
Unfortunately, I have to say that no political developments are
reported in Armenia now, Galust Sahakyan, head of the Republican
faction, stated June 30 at the National Press Club. According to him,
the political sphere is “taking a nap”, therefore the focus is on
the Republicans and their assembly. “It is extraordinary but not
emergency,” says the leader of the Republican faction.
According to him, the ideology and principles of the Republican will
not change. As for moving the focus onto the Republican Party through
the media, it is encouraging for Galust Sahakyan and is political
capital.
Besides the assembly, the Republican Party began admitting teachers
and businessmen in preparations for the upcoming elections. Does
this artificial “loading” of the political party make think about
the Orinats Yerkir Party? Galust Sahakyan said the Republican Party
and the Orinats Yerkir differ greatly in their activities and paths.
“The political parties, which get this load through struggle, cannot
encounter such problems.” Galust Sahakyan says the businessmen, who are
joining the party, passed a political way with the Republican Party
at some period. The established Republican thinks the businessmen,
who fled from the Orinats Yerkir will hardly join the Republican.
According to Galust Sahakyan, the majority of parliament forces
will not be elected to the parliament in 2007. “The opposition will
hardly get 30 seats. If the forces outside the parliament are wise
enough to ally, a new faction may appear in the National Assembly,”
says Galust Sahakyan.
He denies that an early election is possible, and insists that the
Republican will have a deciding role in the presidential election
in 2008.
From: Baghdasarian

CONSEQUENCE OF IMPERFECTION OF POLITICAL SPHERE
Lragir.am
30 June 06
There is no danger in the solo statement of the OSCE Minsk Group
Co-Chair Mathew Bryza and the joint statement of the three co-chairs.
“The aim of these statements is to create a new atmosphere, to find
out how these processes will be accepted in Armenia and Azerbaijan,”
said Galust Sahakyan, the leader of the Republican faction on June
30 at the National Press Club.
“Especially that first the co-chair announces, then the co-chairs
make a statement, and I can see serious problems here, which do
not counterbalance one another,” analyses Galust Sahakyan, adding
that the United States is not making a statement about the Karabakh
issue. Proceeding from its economic interests, “it is definitely
aspiring to create an atmosphere for Azerbaijan.” This process will
become more distinct in 15-20 days, stated the republican member
of parliament, adding that for a deeper analysis all the documents
regarding the talks need to be declassified.
The speaker noted that if the foreign minister of Armenia states that
the proposals were discussed, it does not mean that the proposals were
accepted. “If they had been accepted, we would have said it.” The
opinion of the Republican Party regarding the settlement of the
Karabakh conflict did not change. The question of status is primary,
the other problems are secondary.
Galust Sahakyan thinks that the peculiarities of the home political
sphere are the reason for unusual reaction. There are forces, which
are up for manipulations. “The opposition seems to be discerning a
gleam of hope to come to power using Karabakh. The pro-government
forces simply decline to answer the questions they are asked.”
This state of things is a consequence of an imperfect political sphere,
says Galust Sahakyan, a representative of pro-government forces, who
thinks that there will not be essential developments in the settlement
of the Karabakh conflict in 2006. “Certain processes will take place
beyond diplomatic ties.”
Galust Sahakyan thinks the political forces should keep together
with regard to the Karabakh issue, and believes that problems in this
sphere would not be helpful for us, and people would again rise.

SERGE SARGSYAN’S JOINING REPUBLICAN WOULD BE NORMAL
Lragir.am
30 June 06
Serge Sargsyan is said to be likely to join the Republican Party,
said Galust Sahakyan, the leader of the Republican faction, June
30. According to him, it will not be strange if it happens because “in
2003 Serge Sargsyan was elected to the parliament on our party ticket,
and cooperation continues.” Today they have to make this cooperation
closer, but the choice is to be made by the minister, he says. The
member of parliament announces that they will join their efforts,
and the Republican will get a higher result.
In the meantime, Serge Sargsyan has not made up his mind on becoming
Republican. With this regard, Galust Sahakyan says, “Independent
from cooperation, Serge Sargsyan is a public official and politician,
who had a deciding role in and contribution to the modern history of
Armenia.” Galust Sahakyan does not think that the society will not
appreciate it.
In the meantime, the political parties should not be jealous if Serge
Sargsyan becomes Republican, because “they analyze and the political
sphere is such that the strong are always welcome.”
Galust Sahakyan announces that the Republican Party has never aspired
to capture the entire political sphere. Moreover, “It has always
managed to help realize the programs of other political parties
to sustain internal political stability in 1999 and now.” As for
the decision on having or not having an absolute majority in the
parliament in 2007, they will make this decision proceeding from the
political situation.
The decision of the Republican to ally with other forces, namely
Union for Armenia and Bargavach Hayastan (Prosperous Armenia)
will be determined by the home political situation, stated Galust
Sahakyan. “Cooperation is not an end in itself; it is determined by
the political reality.” Currently the Republican is attending to the
problems of the party and organizational questions, and it is not
likely to enter cooperation yet.
Galust Sahakyan believes that the political activities of the
Republican Party will be more effective, and like the “salary debts
and teachers’ small salaries”, the current problems will also become
memory.

TALK ABOUT RECAPTURING KARABAKH BY FORCE NOT HELPFUL
Yerkir
30.06.2006 17:01
YEREVAN (YERKIR) – “I was not surprised it caused a stir to tell you
the truth, because we knew — the co-chairs knew — and my predecessor
Steven Mann, the co-chair before I assumed responsibility on the very
day of that interview, knew that what they had just announced at the
OSCE was significant and would, well, make people think twice, and
would spark, as we like to put it, a robust debate in the region. I
was simply in the unenviable position of having been on this newest
assignment for an hour and I was the guy that got to explain the
decision that others had made before me.
No, I wasn’t surprised that a robust debate was sparked. What did
surprise me though was that people spoke so quickly in reacting to
the interview without reading the publicly available document that
the co-chairs issued at the OSCE in Austria, which laid out in much
greater detail everything,” the U.S. diplomat said.
“Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan and their Foreign Ministers
did not agree on the core principles that were developed over the
course of two years by the co-chairs,” Bryza said. However, in his
words, talk about recapturing Karabakh by force or any use of force
by any party is simply not helpful. “My predecessor, Steven Mann, and
my current fellow co-chairs, have exerted all of the creativity and
all the negotiating energy that they could and they have gotten this
framework of core principles as honed as possible in their judgment,
such that the presidents, in their mind, need a little time to think
things over and decide whether or not they can accept or adjust
this framework.
But what we’re saying in the statement is that there is no more room
for diplomatic creativity to make this piece of metal shine a little
bit more brightly. It’s honed and you have to decide whether you
want it or not, or the trade-offs that would have to be made are so
significant politically that it requires the head of state to make
the trade-off. So we’re saying OK, it’s yours now,” Bryza said.
“Even though I didn’t have a hand in drafting the statement, I
can say particularly because I didn’t, I think it’s an excellent
statement. It’s very clear, and lays out in a lot of detail what
exactly the overall set of trade-offs would be.
Demilitarization is the phrase used for troop pull-back, and that, as
the framework indicates, should be, or could be, accompanied by some
sort of process that would lead to a population vote, or a referendum
vote on the future status of Karabakh.
I think that’s, in the Armenian mindset, extremely important, so
that’s what the Azerbaijani side would have to offer the Armenians,
along with the other things within this statement to which I refer you.
On the Azerbaijani side, I think that they are willing to consider the
possibility of some type of a vote on the status of Nagorno Karabakh
if many other elements of this overall package are present. What gets
difficult is how you correlate the withdrawal, or the redeployment,
of Armenian troops with the timing of a vote on the future status of
Karabakh,” Mr Bryza resumed.

G-8 FOREIGN MINISTERS CALL FOR PROMPT RESOLUTION OF REGIONAL CONFLICTS IN EX-SOVIET UNION, BALKANS
AP Worldstream
Jun 29, 2006
Foreign ministers from the Group of Eight major industrialized nations
on Thursday called for a prompt resolution to regional conflicts that
continue to plague some ex-Soviet territories and Balkan countries.
In a joint statement, diplomats called for the ex-Soviet South Caucasus
states of Armenia and Azerbaijan to reach an agreement this year on
the long and bitterly disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh.
“We call on Azerbaijan and Armenia to show political will with the
aim to reach an agreement this year and prepare their peoples for
peace and not for war,” the document said.
Nagorno-Karabakh is inside Azerbaijan, but is populated mostly by
ethnic Armenians, who have run it and seven contiguous districts since
an uneasy 1994 cease-fire ended six years of full-scale war. Sporadic
border clashes regularly break out. The unresolved conflict has held
up development in the strategic region.
The ministers also urged a solution for the Serbian province,
Kosovo. The ethnic Albanian majority want to become independent,
but the Serb minority wants it to remain part of Serbia.
“We welcomed the launch of direct Belgrade-Pristina talks and in this
regard we urge the parties, including the Kosovo Serbs, to negotiate
in good faith and make every effort to reach a negotiated agreement,”
the ministers said.
“We underline that Kosovo must remain multiethnic. The Kosovo
leadership should pay particular attention to implementing the
standards for national minorities defined by the international
community,” the statement said.

ARMENIA AND UKRAINE ARE THE BEST
Hindu, India
June 29 2006
The chess Olympiad, the biggest congregation of talent in the game
with well over 1000 players from around 150 nations, provides the
platform for the super powers to test their strengths once every two
years, writes Rakesh Rao.
There is surely a change of guard in world chess. Russia may continue
to have the services of the most trusted masters of the game, but
when it comes to performing as a team, some of the other nations are
proving better. The Chess Olympiad, the biggest congregation of talent
in the game with well over 1000 players from around 150 nations,
provides the platform for the super powers to test their strengths
once every two years.
If in 2004, Ukraine snatched the gold from Russia, this time the
performances of the eventual champion Armenia, China and USA knocked
the top-seed out of the medal bracket in the men’s section. In fact,
Russia slipped to the sixth spot behind the fourth-placed Israel and
Hungary. Even in the women’s section, Russia and defending champion
China had to make way for Ukraine at the top of the podium.
The only bright spot for Russia was the performance of Vladimir
Kramnik, who returned to competitive chess after over six months and
walked away with the best performer’s trophy among the male players.
Not that chess in Russia is on the wane, but it is clear that some
of the other leading countries are quietly growing confident of their
own abilities.
However, the second-seeded Indian men did not inspire much confidence
with their spiritless and somewhat spineless campaign. After a
path-breaking performance in 2004, when the team finish sixth, the
Indian men fared poorly to take the 30th place.
Seeded to win a medal for the first time, this was India’s most
disappointing performance in the Olympiad considering that much was
expected of the country’s strongest ever combination.
The ladies, too, could not improve upon their ninth-place finish
in 2004 and occupied the 12th spot. Considering the composition of
the team, not as strong as it was last time, it was a reasonably
good result.
China proves a super power
Today, India is considered a super power of chess in Asia but at the
Olympiad in Turin, it was China, which took that honour by winning
medals in both sections. The Chinese men finished second best to
Armenia, collecting their first ever medal in the Open section.
Wang Yue, on the third and fourth boards, scored 10 points from 12
games, to help his team make the medals bracket. On the top board
Bu Xiangzhi, who came close to beating Anand in the fifth round,
was unbeaten with eight points while Ni Hua, the first reserve,
scored 5.5 points from nine undefeated games.
Aronian shows the way
The talking point of the event was the worthy performances of the
Armenian men. Led by World Cup winner Levon Aronian on the top board,
Armenia was the only unbeaten team in the competition and looked like
a champion side even before it formally won the trophy. Aronian may
have scored only seven points from 11 rounds but he was a source of
confidence on the top board for his teammates. Vladimir Akopian,
unbeaten on the second board with nine points from 12 rounds, was
another key performer. But the man who made the difference was Gabriel
Sargissian, the first reserve who ended up playing all 13 rounds and
contributed 10 points to Armenia’s winning tally of 36 points.
Sargissian, too, was unbeaten and won seven of the first nine rounds
to keep his nation in front. When it comes to a team event like the
Olympiad, it is often said that medals are won and lost on the fourth
board. If last time Sergey Karjakin was the star turn for Ukraine on
the fourth board, it was Sargissian this time for Armenia.
On the other hand, a team like Russia had to sweat it out on the
fourth board with the experienced Evgeny Bareev struggling to cope
with the pressure and his lack of energy cost Russia a medal.
Kramnik’s consistency at the top did not prove good enough for Russia
to win a medal.
USA, headed by Gata Kamsky who finished a creditable second behind
Veselin Topalov in Sofia before rushing to Turin, enjoyed its best
moment in the history of the Olympiad. On its way to the bronze
medal, USA even defeated Russia 2.5-1.5 in the 11th round with Hikaru
Nakamura, the only non-Russian involved in the match, winning against
Alexander Grischuk on the third board. USA’s lone loss came against
Israel in the 12th round.
Maiden title for Ukraine
Like the Armenian men, the ladies from Ukraine remained undefeated
for their maiden triumph in the Olympiad.
Ukraine won the first 12 matches to emerge as the most successful
team in the 13-round contest. Ukraine agreed to draw the final round
against Armenia only after it became clear that a win was not required
for the gold. So dominating were the performances of Natalia Zhukova
(7.5/10), Katerina Lahno (8/10), Inna Yanovska-Gaponenko (7/9) and Anna
Usshenina (7/10). Significantly, Ukraine defeated Russia and China by
identical 2-1 margins to underline its rightful claim over the title.
Former champion Russia’s trio of Alexendra Konteniuk, Tatiana
Kosinsteva, Nadezhda Kosintseva played most of the matches, with
Ekaterina Kovalevskaya stepping in as a reserve. The top seed was held
by USA and China in successive rounds before France did the same in
the penultimate round. Overall, a consistent performance saw Russia
take the silver.
China may have failed to defend the title but took the bronze after
former World junior champion Zhao Xue and Hou Yifan emerged as the
first and third-best individual performers in the event.
China could have finished second if India had managed to take a game
off Russia on the final day. But China had reasons to be pleased
with its performance considering the fact that Wang Yu and Shen Yang,
on boards two and three, were woefully out of form.
Zhao Xue’s score of 10 points from 13 games and Hou Yifan’s tally of
11 points after playing all the games ensured China’s presence among
the medal winners.
FINAL STANDINGS
Men: 1. Armenia 36.0 points, 2. China 34.0, 3. USA 33.0, 4. Israel
33.0, 5. Hungary 32.5, 6. Russia 32.0, 7. France 32.0, 8. Ukraine 32.0,
9. Bulgaria 32.0, 10. Spain 32.0, 30. India 29.5.
Women: 1. Ukraine 29.5 points, 2. Russia 28.0, 3. China 27.5, 4. USA
24.5, 5. Hungary 24.5, 6. Georgia 24.5, 7. The Netherlands 24.5, 8.
Armenia 24.0, 9. Slovenia 24.0, 10. Czech Republic 24.0, 12. India
23.0.