PRIMATE OF EASTERN DIOCESE OF AMERICA CONSECRATES SURB KARAPET CHURCH OF BATON ROUGE
Noyan Tapan
Armenians Tapan
Jun 07 2006
NEW YORK, JUNE 7, NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY. May 13 and 14 were
historic days for Armenian believers of the city of Baton Rouge,
Louisiana, U.S. and its surroundings: Surb Karapet Church opened its
doors in front of them.
Archbishop Khazhak Parsamian, the primate of the Eastern Diocese
of America of the Armenian Apostolic Church, accompanied by senior
priest Nerses Jebejian, the spiritual pastor of the church, monk
Aren Jebejian, the spiritual pastor of the Chicago Saint Gregory the
Illuminator Church and Supreme Archimandrite Ararat Galtakchian from
Canada fulfilled the opening ceremony of the Surb Karapet church and
entered the church with the official procession. Then His Holliness
primate implemented consecrating of the christening font. A reception
took place after the ceremony in the hall near the church.
As Noyan Tapan was informed by the Press Services of the Eastern
Diocese Primacy, on the same day, May 14, His Holiness Khazhak
consectrated the Surb Karapet church, celebrated the Surb Liturgy
and preached. Monks of the church sang during the ceremonies,
choir-master Khoren Meikhanejian was specially invited from New York
on that occasion.
60 Armenian families live particularly in the state of Louisiana who
are mainly from Syria and Lebanon. The community parish was founded
in 1980. The parish was formed during years by efforts and untiring
work of parishioners.
The main benefactor, godfather and parish council head of the church
is Vazgen Galtakchian.

ARMENIAN FESTIVAL ORGANIZED IN U.S. CITY OF ALEXANDRIA
Noyan Tapan
Armenians Today
Jun 07 2006
WASHINGTON, JUNE 7, NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY. The 14th Armenian
festival took place on June 3 in the city of Alexandria, state of
Virginia, U.S.
The festival was organized by the commission for Alexandria-Gyumri
sister cities and the Alexandria Mayor’s Office, with the assistance
of the RA Embassy to U.S.
As Noyan Tapan was informed by the RA Foreign Ministry’s Press
and Information Department, Armenian music was performed during the
festival with participants of many thousands and the Armenian dancing
art was presented as well as Armenian national dishes were served.
According to the decision made by the Alexandria Mayor’s Office,
June 3 of the current year is announced the Day of Armenia.

AMBASSADOR OF ARMENIA TO AUSTRIA VISITS STATE OF VORARLBERG
Noyan Tapan
Armenians Today
Jun 07 2006
VIENNA, JUNE 7, NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY. Ashot Hovakimian, the RA
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Republic of Austria
paid an official visit to Vorarlberg, Austria, from May 31 to June 1.
The RA Ambassador had official meetings with Governor Herbert
Sausgruber and Vorarlberg Parliament Chairman Gebhard Halder (the
latters represent the “People’s Party of Austria” headed by Austrian
Federal Chancellor Wolfgang Schlussel).
Problems of securing continuation of the Armenia-Vorarlberg cooperation
and its development, particularly in the direction of commercial and
economic cooperation, mutual stimulation of tourism, deepening of
mutual cognition by organizing cultural events were discussed at the
May 31 conversation with Vorarlberg Governor Herbert Sausgruber. An
agreement was reached to organize Austrian and Armenian painters’
exhibitions, concert and sports events in Vorarlberg and marzes
of Armenia and to continue in future stimulating cooperation in the
health care sphere, particularly continuing the program of re-training
Armenian specialists in the Feldkirch Hospital.
Ambassador Hovakimian had a meeting on the same day with Nikolaus
Schwerzler, the 1996-2000 Chairman of the Ombudsmen’s European
Institute, an Executive Council member of the same institution at
present, who is the Chairman of the Vorarlberg Eastern Company as
well. The mentioned company was formerly engaged in cultural ties
with republics of the Soviet Union and had active relations with the
Armenian “AOKS.”
As Noyan Tapan was informed by the RA Foreign Ministry’s Press and
Information Department, long-lasting programs of cooperation with
Vorarlberg Eastern Company were discussed, particularly agreements
were reached on issues of pupils’ exchange, organization of concerts,
exhibitions in Vorarlberg and Armenia, inviting Armenian sportsmen,
school age football players in the Bregenz annual sports competition,
etc.

PEACE CORPS MARKS 45 YEARS
By Greg Cima
[email protected]
Bloomington Pantagraph, IL
June 8 2006
Jeremy Richart felt out of place as he looked out a hotel window
onto the landscape made almost entirely of concrete, wrought iron and
other metal. But the residents of that Armenian neighborhood welcomed
Richart and integrated him into their culture.
“I had to rely upon the kindness of my neighbors and host family
to just open up their door and just go, ‘We don’t know who you are;
you just got shipped to us, but we’re going to make you part of our
family,” he said.
Richart, now working toward a graduate degree at Illinois State
University, is one of about 182,000 people who have volunteered with
Peace Corps during its 45-year existence. He spent two years as a
volunteer in Armenia starting in 2002, and spent another teaching
there at a private school.
Melissa Marion, a spokeswoman for the Washington, D.C.-based
organization, said the corps’ mission and goals remain almost untouched
since 1961. The program has a 30-year high of 7,810 current volunteers.
“Americans like to give, and we’re a very idealistic society, I think,
in that sense,” Marion said. “And I think that that has always remained
a part of fulfilling American dream.”
At ISU’s Stevenson Center for Community and Economic Development,
graduate students earn degrees by mixing coursework and Peace Corps
volunteer work.
Faculty director Frank Beck said the program focuses on economic
and community development, and offers degrees in political science,
economics and sociology.
The Peace Corps’ first focus has always been on education, Marion
said, though volunteers now focus partly on HIV and AIDS and business
development. Other efforts include improvements for the environment
and agriculture and youth development.
Mike Kelleher, who directed the Stevenson Center for its first
eight years, was a Peace Corps volunteer with a community health
and development project in Sierra Leone when Peace Corps marked its
25th anniversary.
“As a high school student, I was very taken by the Peace Corps slogan
‘The toughest job you’ll ever love,’ and it was the reason I joined
as soon as I was eligible,” Kelleher said in an email from Tbilisi,
Georgia, where he is resident director for the National Democratic
Institute for International Affairs. “I haven’t found a better
description for my experience.”
ISU began its ties with the Peace Corps in 1994 with the Peace Corps
Fellows Program, an idea of now-retired professor Bob Hunt, Kelleher
said. The university created the Stevenson Center when the program
expanded to include the Masters International Program.
“I don’t ever recall talking to a returned Peace Corps volunteer who
didn’t believe that Peace Corps changed their life,” Kelleher said.
“It up-ends your assumptions about the world we live in and challenges
many to make a positive contribution to change in their communities
and their work.”
Ralph and Louise Bellas of Normal spent two years in the Fiji Islands
as volunteers starting in 1986, staying through two military coups
in 1987, Ralph Bellas said.
Both had retired from other jobs before signing up, and had one son
already volunteering with the Peace Corps, he said.
Bellas taught English and literature at the University of the South
Pacific. His wife was assigned to the Fiji School of Nursing.
Bellas said Fiji residents opened their homes and hearts to those
trying learn about their culture without being judgmental.
He and Louise went through a ceremony to become village members,
and returned to Fiji years after their volunteer work.
“Whenever you go back, you’ll be regarded as one of the villagers,”
Bellas said.
Richart worked with an organization involved in after-school programs
for children, and helped gain grants that paid for the town’s first
playground and for a furnace in the organization’s building, he said.
He has returned twice to Armenia.
“The individuals there were just amazing in accepting me and showing
me their culture and integrating me into the culture as much as they
possibly could,” Richart said.
The sense of community and openness has made him more conscious of how
he interacts with others and has helped him try new things, he said.
Kelleher said the Peace Corps is extraordinarily well-received and
remembered in by residents of the small towns and villages it serves.
It is “one of the best foreign policy investments that Americans
have made.
“And it continues to pay off in goodwill towards our nation and more
active connections to other nations of the world.”
What it is
The Peace Corps traces its roots and mission to 1960, when then-Sen.
John F. Kennedy challenged students at the University of Michigan
to serve their country in the cause of peace by living and working
in developing countries. From that inspiration grew an agency of the
federal government devoted to world peace and friendship.
SOURCE:
Peace Corps
Officially established: March 1, 1961
Total number of volunteers and trainees to date: 182,000
Total number of countries served: 138
Current number of volunteers and trainees: 7,810
Gender: 58 percent female, 42 percent male
Marital status: 91 percent single, 9 percent married
People of color: 16 percent of volunteers
Age: 28 (average), 25 (median)
Volunteers over age 50: 6 percent (oldest is 79)
Education: 96 percent, undergraduate degree; 13 percent, graduate
studies or degrees
Countries served: 69 posts serving 75 countries.
SOURCE:

WHY CITIZENS SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BEAR ARMS
>From the desk of Sean Gabb on Wed, 2006-06-07 22:57
Brussels Journal, Belgium
June 8 2006
The current debate on armed crime is depressingly predictable.
Everyone agrees something must be done. Just about everyone agrees this
something must include laws against the sale or carrying or simple
possession of weapons. More controls on weapons, the argument goes,
the fewer weapons on the street: therefore lower levels of armed crime.
Now, this whole line of thinking is nonsense. Many European nations
have strict controls on the carrying of weapons. They also have high
levels of armed crime. Indeed, we are reaching the point where we
shall need to show proof of identity before buying knives and forks.
If we want to do something about armed crime that has any chance of
working, we need to rethink our entire approach. I would suggest that,
instead of trying to remove weapons from society, the authorities
should allow us to keep weapons for defence and to use them for
defence.
I am not talking about the right to carry baseball bats or pepper
sprays, or even various kinds of knife. These have their uses for
defence – but not against a determined criminal who may be younger and
faster and more experienced in close fighting. I am talking about the
right to arm ourselves with guns – and to use these where necessary
to protect our lives and property.
This is not a new approach. It is, rather, a return to the old policy
of countries such as Britain. Until the end of the 19th century,
anyone in Britain could walk into a gun shop and, without showing
any licence or any form of identification, buy as many guns and as
much ammunition as he wanted, and could carry loaded guns in public,
and could use these for selfdefence. The law not only allowed this, but
even expected it. We were encouraged to take primary responsibility for
our own protection. The function of the police was simply to assist.
We should go back to this old approach. We should go back because it
is a question of fundamental human rights. The right to keep and bear
arms for defence is as fundamental as the rights to freedom of speech
and association. Anyone who is denied this right – to keep and bear
arms – is to some extent enslaved. That person has lost control over
his life. He is dependent on the State for protection.
The default reaction to this argument is to cry out in horror and ask
if I want a society where every criminal has a gun, and where every
domestic argument ends in a gun battle? The short answer is no. The
longer answer is to say that more guns do not inevitably mean more
killings. There is no evidence that they do. What passes for evidence
is little more than an excuse for not trusting ordinary people with
control over their own lives.
Take armed crime, both professional and domestic. Britain had no
gun controls before 1920, and very low rates of armed crime. Today,
Switzerland has few controls, and little armed crime. Those parts of
the US where guns are most common are generally the least dangerous.
There is no necessary correlation between guns and armed crime.
Focusing on professional crime, gun control is plainly a waste of
effort. Criminals will always get hold of guns if they want them. At
most, it needs a knowledge of the right pubs to visit. Plainly, the
maniacs who carried out the recent drive-by shooting in Manchester do
not seem to have read the Firearms Acts 1920-97. They do not seem to
have noticed that most guns are forbidden, and that the few that are
allowed must be licensed. All control really does is to disarm the
honest public, and let the armed criminals roam through them like a
fox through chickens.
Indeed, free ownership of guns may often reduce armed crime. The
current round of official gungrabbing began after the Hungerford
massacre back in August 1987. But the wrong lesson was learned then.
Just consider what might have happened had someone else beside
Michael Ryan been carrying a gun in Hungerford High Street. He might
have been cut down before firing more than a few shots. As it is,
he killed nearly 20 people before armed police could be brought in
to stop the shootings.
Think of the burglaries, rapes and other crimes that might never
happen if the victims were armed, and therefore able to deal with
their aggressors on equal terms. Anyone can learn to fire a gun. And
nothing beats a bullet. As the old saying goes: “God made men equal,
and Smith and Wesson make damn sure it stays that way.”
But let us move away from armed burglars and rapists and the occasional
lone psychopath. We need guns to protect us from the State. So far
from protecting us, the State is the main aggressor. A low estimate
puts the number of civilians murdered by states this century at 56
million – and millions of these were children. In all cases, genocide
was preceded by gun control. How far would the Holocaust have got if
the Jews in Nazi Germany had been able to shoot back? How about the
Armenians? The Kulaks? The Chinese bourgeoisie?
The Bosnians? In all previous societies, guns and freedom have gone
together. I doubt if our own is any different.
I conclude with our own society. Our authorities have so far done
nothing to disarm violent criminals. There is nothing they can do in
the future to disarm them. This being so, can you seriously agree with
the argument that you should be disarmed, and therefore powerless to
defend yourself and your loved ones against the armed street trash
who are beginning to turn this country upside down?
Laugh at me. Call me mad. Call me evil. But just remember me when you
or your loved ones are being raped, or mugged, or dragged off never
to be seen again.
Dr Sean Gabb is the Director of the Libertarian Alliance. It exists
to put the radical case for freedom in social, economic and political
matters. Its web address is This article was
first published on 7 June 2006 in The Birmingham Post.

4TH SPORTS FESTIVAL OF THE HANDICAPPED TO START IN ARMENIA
ArmRadio.am
08.06.2006 10:18
June 8-June11 the National Para-Olympic Committee of Armenia will
hold the 4th republican sports festival of the handicapped.

JACQUES CHIRAC PLANNING TO VISIT ARMENIA
ArmRadio.am
08.06.2006 10:42
The President of France Jacques Chirac plans to visit Armenia, Press
Service of the Elisee Palace told “Arminfo.” According to the source,
no official confirmation about the President’s visit has been received
so far, therefor the exact date and agenda are not known, either.
Nevertheless, according to the same source, French President’s visit
to Armenia is scheduled September 29th, which will overlap with the
official opening of the Year of France in Armenia. The President will
be accompanied by Charles Aznavour.

NATO’S EVIL TWIN?
By Evgeny Morozov
TCS Daily, DC
June 8 2006
“I find it passing strange to bring a leading terrorist nation in the
world into an organization that says it’s against terror”, said Donald
Rumsfeld in Singapore last week, elevating the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization (SCO) to the fore of media attention.
“OPEC with bombs”, as a commentator in one Canadian newspaper dubbed
SCO, is now the official bogeyman of the month. Ever since its
inception in 2001, SCO lingered in total media blackout, but Rumsfeld
gave its forthcoming summit in Shanghai the best PR it could hope
for. Bloggers — both liberal and conservative — have also recently
picked on the subject, mostly portraying SCO as a militaristic behemoth
aspiring to counterbalance American supremacy in Asia.
Becoming of a bogeyman, SCO is depicted in a rather bellicose manner
redolent of the Cold War era. Touted as Russia and China’s response
to NATO, SCO appears even more threatening, especially when plotted
against Pentagon’s fretting about China’s military expansion. And
now Iran — that perpetual bogeyman — aspires to join too. Global
security, if not the world order, seems to be at stake.
Are such fears justified?
The organization’s past and present do not seem to warrant all the
bad press. SCO launched to deal with security and confidence-building
issues (border conflicts, terrorism, and militant Islam), and since
then has expanded to the matters of economics, transportation,
culture, disaster relief, and law enforcement. So far, SCO sounds
short of NATO-type of tasks, doesn’t it?
A closer examination reveals that SCO aspires to be neither a new
NATO nor a new Warsaw Pact. At least, not yet and not officially. Its
charter has no reference to collective defense of its member by
others in the event of an outside attack (well, it does stipulate for
collective resistance to big armed gangs or international terrorists
if they cross the border of a member country — but NATO troops hardly
fall under that category). SCO has even developed a promising mechanism
for conflict resolution: i.e. last year when China suggested bringing
in Pakistan as an observer, Russia insisted that India be invited
too. As a result, both now cooperate within SCO’s framework.
In a move characteristic of the proposed cooperation under the SCO
auspices, China has extended loans worth of $900 million to other
SCO members so that they can buy Chinese exports. In another move,
Russia has recently agreed to help Tajikistan improve its border
security and fight drug-trafficking. SCO’s activities might not sound
extremely pacifist, but they do not sound belligerent either.
Set against the background of the rising violence in Iraq and
Afghanistan, the fact that Asian states cooperate in combating
terrorist threats is hard to reprimand. Even Rumsfeld agreed that
the increasing military cooperation between Asian countries bodes
well for the region’s stability. So, what’s all the fuss about?
Perhaps, the Pentagon hawks are fixating on the wrong organization —
they would be much wiser to look at the Collective Security Treaty
Organization, which comprises all of the SCO member states plus
Belarus and Armenia minus China. This is a true anti-NATO alliance in
the post-Soviet space, and it hardly concedes its real intentions
(which are obvious from the name). Yet how often have you seen
this organization in the press? (Perhaps, it is because Iran is not
joining it.)
Has SCO appeared threatening in the past? Partly. The only instance
when it flexed its muscles was at its Astana summit in 2005, when
members asked US troops to provide a deadline for their withdrawal
from Central Asia. However, it was an exercise in PR rather than
an exhibit of military strength. In the past, such statements would
have originated from some Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)
institution — would anybody in their right minds ever accuse CIS of
presenting a threat to the international security?
Today as SCO’s clout in the region grows, Iran feels a strong urge
to become a member. The application to join was submitted by the
President Khatami, Ahmadinejad’s predecessor. Now the latter appears
firmly committed to cement Iran’s place in the SCO. Unlike most of
Ahmadinejad’s other desires, this one is hardly outlandish.
Sandwiched between Afghanistan and Iraq and facing grave problems
with its tumultuous minorities, Iran wants to step up its efforts
in preventing potential terrorist threats. The recent unrest of its
Azeri minority over a cartoon published in a local newspaper was an
alarming sign of how unruly things might soon become (four people
were killed and 70 injured, while the whole Azeri community in the
region was watching the evens with great uneasiness).
Acquiring membership in SCO would be a logical way to alleviate
Tehran’s concerns and ensure “collective resistance to big armed
gangs”. No matter whether it is Ahmadinejad or any other more
democratically elected leader ruling the country, reining in Iran’s
minorities is a top priority for the US, and Iraq is not the last
reason for that (Iran’s Kurds and Sunni Arabs might yet play their
own card in Baghdad). As an extra tool to prevent ethnic tensions in
the region, SCO might not be that bad.
So, why not capitalize on Iran’s vulnerability, and factor in
Ahmadinejad’s fears and SCO ambitious in all policy calculations?
Well, that’s easier said than done; Moscow and Beijing have tasted the
lucre of horse-trading and, depending on which official you talk to,
are sending mixed signals about their eagerness to embrace Iran in SCO.
Their stance is changing symmetrically in response to the US
position. The more vocally US oppose Iran’s membership in SCO, the
more strongly Russians and Chinese appear to want it. However, in the
rare moments that the White House skirts the issue, the Russians and
the Chinese oppose Iran’s membership themselves.
Thus, in early April Zhang Deguang, the Secretary General of SCO stated
that the organization would consider application for full membership
from observers. Just a few weeks later, Sergey Ivanov, Russia’s
minister of defense, expressed skepticism about any forthcoming
enlargements of the SCO. A few weeks later Gleb Pavlvosky, the
Kremlin’s spin doctor, said that “the consideration of this issue
was planned a year ago, and if Iran is still interested and if no
insurmountable obstacles are put by the SCO member-states or Iran
itself, this might well happen”.
Approximately at the same time, Russian foreign minister Sergey
Lavrov stated that the SCO is in the process of negotiating a possible
membership with Tehran.
To add to the controversy, on May 29 the Secretary General changed
his mind, saying that the organization’s charter does not provide
for the inclusion of new members (he obviously did not know when he
spoke in April). Nevertheless, an invitation to attend SCO’s 2006
summit was sent to Ahmadinejad; he agreed to come.
Seen through the prism of international relations, the opposition by
the two of SCO’s founding and dominating members to Iran’s membership
does not square well with their rhetoric of geopolitics. If Beijing
and Moscow believe in their own stories about the multipolar world,
they should jump at the opportunity to handle Iran’s crisis; having
it in the SCO will only strengthen the multipolarity they crave. Up
till now, however, their support for Iran’s bid to join SCO has been
rather “muted”.
To see why, suppose the US lifts its opposition to Iran’s membership
in SCO. Will it be the end of the unipolar world and the US military
supremacy? Or rather the end to Russia and China’s horse-trading with
the West? The second option is much more likely, so Iran’s ambition
to SCO should be used as an opportunity rather than a threat by the US.
The moment Iran joins SCO — if Russia and China ever allow that to
happen — both Moscow and Beijing will start panicking: none of them
wants to be responsible for Iran’s loony statements about Israel or
its nuclear program. They would also need to stop naysaying at the
UN Security Council and engage in direct diplomacy with Tehran,
something they’ve started forgetting how to do. They would also
become more involved in joint negotiations with the EU and the US,
since they would have their international credibility to lose should
Iran go nuclear while member of their warm club.
But since the US has already expressed its condemnation of Iran’s
membership in SCO both Russia and China stand to benefit more from the
current stand-off than from having Iran in SCO. Any further escalation
of the situation around Tehran’s nuclear plans only increases the price
that the US and EU would have to pay for Russia’s and China’s eventual
capitulation at the UN. And both of them have a lot to ask from the
West. Just ask Russia about the prospects of its membership in WTO.
What do the US and EU gain if they seize the initiative and green-light
Iran’s membership in SCO?
First of all, such would disarm SCO of whatever evil intentions —
if any — it has harbored. With Iran on board, the block would hardly
dare voicing any belligerent rhetoric. It would be a very awkward
conglomeration, which might actually focus on subjects like border
cooperation, in the absence of any other spicier topics. Neither
Russia nor China is silly enough to discuss alternatives to the US
domination in the region with Ahmadinejad present in the room; it
would be a total media disaster.
Secondly, Iran’s membership in SCO could finally put the burden of
global leadership on Russia and China who have largely shunned away
from their responsibilities as members of the Security Council. Iran
presents them with a good opportunity to prove that they are mature
actors on the international scene and deserve their global status
(this is especially relevant for Russia, which chair G8 this year).
Through SCO they will have to be extra cautious guarding Iran’s
nuclear ambitions, because, indirectly, they might be implicated in
the consequences too. It would be much easier to take both Beijing
and Moscow to task if they have some leverage and connection with
Iran in SCO. That either of them will instigate, not deter, Iran from
developing its nuclear potential is nonsense; both countries are too
dependent on the US and EU to engage in such dangerous schemes.
Therefore, the policy of the US and the EU regarding Iran’s membership
in SCO should focus not on blocking it, but rather on persuading China
and Russia to use SCO as a carrot to obtain certain concessions from
Iran. In order to incentivize them, the US and EU might, indeed,
require more and more carrots. But, perhaps, it is better to waste
a few carrots on China and Russia than waste all of the Middle East
with one stick.
0806A

NEW ENGLAND’S YOUNG PROFESSIONALS MEET IN MASSACHUSETTS
ArmRadio.am
08.06.2006 12:05
AAA Board of Trustees Member Lu Ann Ohanian and her husband, Bruce
Ohanian, hosted an event for Armenian-American young professionals
at their home in Belmont, Massachusetts. Young professionals from
Massachusetts and Rhode Island gathered together to meet one another
and share their ideas for future events of the Armenian Assembly
of America.
The group welcomed Harout Semerdjian, Director of Public Relations
and Communications for KNOW GENOCIDE, a multi-ethnic coalition united
against genocide denial, founded by the Assembly. Semerdjian discussed
the pending federal lawsuit filed by the Assembly of Turkish American
Associations and others against the Massachusetts Board of Education to
insert materials in the State Curriculum Guide that deny the Armenian
Genocide. Attendees also discussed potential ideas for fundraising
events in the New England area. Bruce Ohanian encouraged the group
to be goal and mission oriented when planning such events.
“We are pleased to once again host such a committed group of young
professionals,” said Lu Ann Ohanian. “We encourage their continued
participation in the Assembly and look forward to future gatherings
to discuss Armenian-American concerns.”
“We thank the Ohanian’s and the young professionals for their
activism,” said Executive Director Bryan Ardouny. “Their dedication
ensures a promising future for the Assembly and Armenia.”

THE “ISLAMIC CONFERENCE” SUPPORTS AZERI POSITION ON KARABAKH CONFLICT SETTLEMENT
ArmRadio.am
08.06.2006 12:20
“We back Azerbaijan in its aspiration to return its lands,” declared
Ekmeletdin Ikhsanoghlu, Secretary General of the “Islamic conference”
organization, at a news conference in Moscow yesterday.
According to “Trand” Agency, he declared that their organization
supports any peace talks between the sides.
“We support Azerbaijan and call on Armenia to cooperate with all
those on the international arena, who aspire for the settlement of the
conflict, be it within the OSCE Minsk Group, UN or other international
structures,” Secretary General of the organization said.