WARRANT DETAILS PATTERN
By: Francine Maglione, Herald Staff
New Britain Herald, CT
May 25 2006
NEW BRITAIN – Details of the accusations Armenian priest Krikoris
Keshishian is facing came to light on Wednesday when the court
officially unsealed the arrest warrant charging Keshishian with
charges of sexual assault on a minor.
According to the warrant, the St. Stephen’s Armenian Apostolic Church
priest is accused of touching the 12-year-old victim’s posterior while
hugging her, and inappropriately touching a friend of the victim,
among other accusations.
Keshishian, 53, of 21 Garry Drive, was arrested May 9 after being
charged with fourth-degree sexual assault and injury or risk of injury
to or impairing the morals of children by sexual contact. He is free
on $5,000 bond.
Parishioners of the church have defended the embattled priest’s
reputation, stating the alleged touching occurred when the victim
slipped and fell off a table she was playing on and Keshishian tried
to catch her. However, the victim claimed this was a lie.
“The victim looked appalled when told this,” the warrant stated. “She
stated that that never happened.”
The warrant also stated that a friend of the victim’s also claimed
this was a lie.
According to the warrant, on May 22, 2005, the victim was
inappropriately touched by Keshishian in church while he was giving her
a hug. His hand dropped down to her buttocks and he began rubbing her
there, the warrant stated. Keshishian also asked the victim why she
was not wearing earrings and volunteered to take her to the mall to
buy new ones, but she declined, the warrant stated. He instead took
her friend to the mall with him. Keshishian also told the victim he
would take her and her friend to Paris with him, the warrant stated.
The friend of the victim accused the priest of touching her leg
while kissing her on the cheek. She also claimed that Keshishian
never invited boys to go anywhere with him, the warrant stated.
While shopping in the mall with the priest, the victim’s friend claimed
that Keshishian asked her what color underwear she was wearing,
the warrant stated. However, the victim’s friend later changed her
story and said she “must have been wearing something ‘see though’
that day,” the warrant stated.
The warrant also states that when questioned about Keshishian’s wife,
police believe the victim’s friend appeared to have a look of jealousy.
The victim claimed that two Sundays prior to the incident, Keshishian
approached her friend and began tickling her, but then “moved his
hand over her breast quickly and came back up,” the warrant stated.
The victim also claimed that Keshishian gave her a stuffed rabbit and
gold necklace in the past for no apparent reason, the warrant stated.
Keshishian’s next court date is schedule for June 1.

OSCE CO-CHAIR COUNTRIES REPRESENTATIVES DISCUSS NK CONFLICT SETTLEMENT ASPECTS
ARKA News Agency, Armenia
May 25 2006
YEREVAN, May 25. /ARKA/. OSCE Co-Chair countries representatives are
satisfied with their visit to Armenia and leave Yerevan with hopes
and expectations of progress.
“We, the representatives at the Deputy Minister level of the Russian
Federation, the United States and France, together with the Co-Chairs
and the Personal Representative of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office, have
come together in this joint diplomatic mission because of the need
to promote a peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and
because now is the time for the sides to reach agreement on the basic
principles of the settlement”, OSCE Co-Chair countries representatives
said in their statement read up Thursday in Yerevan for press.
“We were received by President Kocharyan and met earlier with Foreign
Minister Oskanyan. As we did yesterday in Baku, we have discussed
important aspects of a future settlement. We have worked to create
the conditions for a meeting of the two presidents in the near
future. We have stressed the belief of our nations and, more widely,
of the international community that the conflict can be solved in
no other way than a peaceful one. Both countries should, moreover,
prepare their publics for peace and not for war.
Our discussions, both today in Yerevan and yesterday in Baku, were
constructive. We met yesterday with President Aliev and Foreign
Minister Mammadyarov. Tomorrow we will return to our capitals to
brief our leaders. The Co-Chairs will, as well, brief theOSCE and
international community.
A joint mission such as this one is a special event. It must be taken
as a sign of the seriousness with which we approach the issue and,
in particular, a belief that we are at the point where a mutually
beneficial agreement is achievable. What happens now will be up
to Armenia and Azerbaijan. We leave with hopes and expectations of
the progress. We are pleased to be in Yerevan and wish to express
our gratitude to President Kocharyan and the people of Armenia for
receiving us”, the statement says.
The joint statement was read up by the Adviser to the U.S. Secretary
of State Daniel Fried, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Grigori
Karasin and Ambassador Pier Morel, French Foreign Ministry
Representative.

TV COMMERCIALS ABOUT ARMENIA CAN APPEAR ON CNN IN SEPTEMBER 2006
ARKA News Agency, Armenia
May 25 2006
YEREVAN, May 25. /ARKA/. Two 30-60 seconds-long TV commercials about
Armenia can appear on CNN as early as September 2006, RA Minister of
Trade and Economic Development Ara Petrosyan told reporters at the
opening of the 6th international tourism exhibition “The Country of
Speaking Stones 2006”.
According to him, “Armenia” and “Second Armenian Channel” TV channels
that won in the contest have already started shooting these trailers.
He also pointed out that according to the contract with CNN, the TV
commercials about Armenia will periodically be broadcast approximately
seven times a week.
Petrosyan reported that the value of one showing of a trailer will
cost about $800-1000 and that the Armenian party holds negotiations
with CNN representatives to get a rebate.
According to him, trailers about Armenia on CNN are very important
for the country, especially for the tourism development.
In 2006 the Armenian government allocated AMD 215mln (about $445,000)
for advertising the Armenian tourism industry.
The share of tourism in Armenia’s GDP structure according to the
results of 2005 reached 6-8% against 5-6% in 2004. Tourists come to
Armenia mainly from Russia, USA, EU countries; however, there are
tourists from Singapore, Malaysia and Middle East.

EU COULD ASSUME PEACEKEEPING ROLE
By Thomas de Waal in London
Institute for War & Peace Reporting (IWPR), UK
May 25 2006
The European Union’s new special representative for the South Caucasus
sees an enhanced role for the EU in conflict resolution.
The new European Union special representative for the Caucasus, Peter
Semneby, has suggested that the EU could in future lead a peacekeeping
mission if a solution to the Nagorny Karabakh dispute is found.
Semneby, a Swedish diplomat who has just taken up the post, said in
an interview with IWPR in London last week that he wants to use his
mandate to work on the region’s unresolved conflicts.
“It’s no surprise that the main priority of my work is to engage as
far as possible with conflict resolution,” he said.
Semneby emphasised that the European Union has no formal role in the
detailed negotiations over Abkhazia – where the United Nations plays
a mediating role – and in South Ossetia and Nagorny Karabakh, where
that role is played by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation
in Europe, OSCE.
However, the idea of an international peacekeeping force is known to
be under discussion in the current Karabakh talks, and should there
be a breakthrough, an international body will be asked to lead it.
This is where the EU could step in.
“We will be expected to make a major contribution when a solution
is found, and we are looking into the possibilities we have, both in
terms of post-conflict rehabilitation and also – if the parties should
so desire – in terms of contributing peacekeepers. And possibly even
leading a peacekeeping operation,” said Semneby. “I should mention
that this is very hypothetical at this stage. This is only one of
several options, but it’s one that is being considered.”
A recent report by the International Crisis Group entitled “Conflict
Resolution in the South Caucasus: The EU’s Role” was scathing about
the low profile the European Union has adopted on conflict resolution
in the Caucasus until now.
“[The EU] does not participate directly in negotiations on Nagorny
Karabakh, Abkhazia or South Ossetia,” said the report, published in
March. “In and around Nagorny Karabakh, it has done little for conflict
resolution. It has rarely raised the South Caucasus conflicts in its
high-level discussions with partners and has employed few sanctions
or incentives to advance peace.”
A subtle change in language in the mandate assigned to Semneby,
compared with that of his predecessor Heikki Talvitie, means the EU
special representative is no longer asked to “assist the resolution
of conflicts” but to “contribute to the resolution of conflicts”.
Semneby said this linguistic change was small but important, calling it
“a political signal that the conflicts are very high on the agenda”.
The post of special representative was established in 2003 and has
a broad mandate -but a small budget. Acknowledging that it would
be impossible to “engage across the board”, Semneby identified his
major priorities as contributing to peace processes and supporting
state-building in the region, through initiatives such as judicial
reform.
Semneby, 46, has spent most of his career in Eastern Europe. As a
Swedish diplomat he visited the Armenian earthquake zone in 1988,
and he was a member of the first OSCE mission in Georgia in 1992. He
also served as the last OSCE ambassador to Latvia and more recently was
the organisation’s ambassador in Croatia – another post he says gives
him the right experience to engage with the conflict-riven Caucasus.
He confessed to a feeling of “deja vu” in returning to the region
after a long gap, “This is the most disappointing aspect of coming
back to the Caucasus after so many years. Of course there have been
changes for the better as well. But the conflicts are such an obstacle
to the normal development of societies in the Caucasus.”
Semneby will be called upon to tackle the image problem the EU has
in the region, with lower visibility than the United States.
The special representative has to talk on behalf of 25 countries,
many of which have their own individual interests in the region. He
acknowledged that the failure to adopt an EU Union constitution,
which would have led to the development of a more coherent foreign
policy, had made his job harder.
However, with Bulgaria and Romania set to join the EU next year and
Turkey beginning membership talks, the South Caucasus will inevitably
begin to figure larger in Brussels.
Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia are all members of the EU’s European
Neighbourhood Policy, a development that Semneby said was deepening
their relationship with Brussels and would also entitle them to
increased aid. “We’re talking about hundreds of millions of euros
for each country. The EU will also step up its representation in the
countries, which will mean there will be a larger degree of visibility
in the South Caucasus.”
“I will also spend some time trying to explain to the public in the
South Caucasus what the EU is about. There is not a whole lot of
knowledge to begin with. To the extent that the EU is known, there
are still a lot of misunderstandings about what [it] is about.”
“I think there is also lack of knowledge in the EU about the south
Caucasus and its particular problems and about the importance of this
region for the EU, and if possible this is something I would like to
engage on.”
Asked about the hopes of many people in the region who dream of
joining the EU one day, the special representative was careful to
reiterate that the European Neighbourhood Policy “does not contain
a membership perspective”.
“It does mean that the countries can achieve a lot of the benefits
of EU membership by working on the implementation of the European
Neighbourhood Policy,” he went on.
“There is a problem – and I am the first to admit that – that since the
membership perspective is not there as a big carrot at the end, this
deprives us of one of the most powerful levers we had in encouraging
the countries of Central Europe to carry out painful reforms.”
Thomas de Waal is IWPR’s Caucasus Editor.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

UKRAINE’S BRITNEY VS. TURKEY’S KYLIE
by Wall Street Journal
National Post, (Canada)
May 25, 2006 Thursday
National Edition
This editorial appeared in Tuesday’s edition of the Wall Street
Journal.
Forget bureaucratic Brussels, seat of the European Union. The real
face of European unity was on display Saturday night in Athens,
this year’s host of the Eurovision Song Contest.
It’s the EU through a looking glass. For starters, Eurovision is
relaxed about who gets in. No need to prove democratic or regulatory
bona fides or meet geographic litmus tests. Armenia and Belarus take
part, as does Turkey, which won in 2003. Morocco once competed, and
Israel does every year, this year fielding a gospel group fronted by
Eddie Butler, the Israel-born son of black Jews from Chicago.
Unlike Brussels, the song contest is also a model of democracy and
transparency. Winners are chosen by country-by-country call-in votes,
in which listeners may cast their preference with any nation’s
band except their own. Ukrainian voters gave their highest rating
to Russia, having apparently forgiven the Kremlin’s gas-pricing
policy that threatened to leave millions of Ukrainians without heat
in January. Russian voters returned the affection, giving their
second-highest rating to Tina Karol, Ukraine’s answer to Britney
Spears.
The Turks, remarkably, gave their second-highest score to a historical
antagonist, Armenia. The countries have no diplomatic relations. But
what goes around evidently comes around: Turkey won top marks from both
France and the Netherlands, whose “no” votes to the EU constitution
last year were partly motivated by fears of future Turkish membership
in the bloc. While most bands chose to sing in English, Sibel Tuzun
belted out disco in her native tongue. Call her Turkey’s Kylie Minogue.
Europeans united in particular behind the winning Finnish band Lordi,
which performed, as it always does, in elaborately gruesome monster
costumes. Europeans may not be able to agree on much these days,
but horns and scales, a lead singer with a sonic growl, and lyrics
announcing the “arockalypse” have brought a troubled Continent
together.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

MONTENEGRO BREAKS AWAY: WILL ABKHAZIA FOLLOW?
by Maksim Yusin
Translated by Pavel Pushkin
Source: Izvestia, May 25, 2006, pp. 1-2 EV
Agency WPS
What the Papers Say Part A (Russia)
May 25, 2006 Thursday
Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Trans-Dniester are watching Montenegro;
Montenegro’s independence is sure to inspire all those who are striving
for a revision of internationally-recognized borders. This primarily
applies to the regions where interethnic bloodshed has flared already,
with conflicts being “frozen” at some stage. Frozen, but not resolved.
Will Montenegro’s separation from Serbia trigger a chain reaction?
That might well be the most pressing question in European politics
today. The continent has at least ten other territories striving for
separation from the states to which they “belong” at present.
All of Europe’s potential separatists have been paying close attention
to developments in Montenegro. It’s hardly surprising that the leaders
of Abkhazia and the Trans-Dniester region were among the first foreign
politicians to respond to the referendum results. They welcomed the
“free expression of the people’s will” in Montenegro, and stated that
they would also like to hold independence referendums. But who would
recognize the outcomes of those referendums?
The Europeans and Americans are prepared to recognize Montenegro’s
independence, but say it’s a special case and any analogies with
other separatist regions would be inappropriate. There’s a certain
amount of logic behind those words.
Three federative states broke up after the communist system collapsed:
the USSR, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia. The international community
was faced with a tough decision: what kind of criteria it would use
for recognizing or not recognizing new countries.
Eventually, it was decided that recognition would be extended to
territories that possessed something akin to sovereignty within
their former states (in the case of the USSR, that meant the 15 union
republics). But autonomous formations within those republics could
not aspire to independence.
This criterion isn’t incontestable, but at least it’s clear and
definite. It has been used to redraw the map of the world. Fifteen
new state arose to replace the Soviet Union, and two states replaced
Czechoslovakia. Only the case of Yugoslavia produced a glitch:
Montenegro declined to separate from Serbia. This situation continued
for 15 years. But now the Montenegrins have changed their minds and
decided to make use of their “postponed” right to sovereignty.
This doesn’t seem to disrupt the logic of the process – but just try
explaining it to the residents of “autonomous formations” in Georgia,
Moldova, or Bosnia. They don’t care about the subtleties of diplomatic
formulations. They simply can’t understand why the Montenegrins are
allowed to do this, but they are not. Why the double standards?
So Montenegro’s independence is sure to inspire all those who are
striving for a revision of internationally-recognized borders. This
primarily applies to the regions where interethnic bloodshed has
flared already, with conflicts being “frozen” at some stage. Frozen,
but not resolved.
* * *
Abkhazia and South Ossetia (want to separate from Georgia)
1. Conflict History
After Georgia declared independence in 1991, Abkhazia (holding
autonomous republic status) and South Ossetia (an autonomous region)
declared their wish to secede from Georgia and become part of Russia.
Matters reached the point of war with Tbilisi in both cases. Russia
sided with the autonomies. The Georgians were defeated in both South
Ossetia and Abkhazia, and at present they don’t control either of
the self-proclaimed republics.
2. Russia’s position
Officially, Moscow recognizes Georgia’s territorial integrity and
refuses repeated requests from Sukhumi and Tskhinvali for “admittance
into the Russian Federation.” All the same, Russia provides various
forms of aid to the governments of both unrecognized republics;
most of their residents have been granted Russian citizenship, and
the ruble is used as currency on their territories. Tbilisi accuses
Moscow of “creeping annexation.”
3. The West’s position
The United States and Europe are in full solidarity with Georgia,
recognizing its territorial integrity and calling for both conflicts
to be resolved via peaceful negotiations. Last year, when Georgian
President Mikhail Saakashvili seemed on the verge of launching a
military operation against South Ossetia, the Americans pressured
him to exercising restraint. A war was averted. However, the West
has been arming and training the Georgian military.
4. Prospects
In Tbilisi, many believe that the fate of both territories is sealed:
sooner or later, Russia will annex them. At the official level,
Moscow tries not to provide the slightest reason to suspect it of
harboring such intentions. Unofficially, Moscow makes it clear to
the Georgians that if Tbilisi attempts to use force to settle the
question of Abkhazia or South Ossetia, Russia is unlikely to stand
aside. So it’s better to negotiate, not fight. But the negotiations
have been deadlocked for years.
* * *
The Trans-Dniester region (wants to separate from Moldova)
1. Conflict History
In many respects, the Trans-Dniester scenario is reminiscent of
Abkhazia or South Ossetia. The residents of the Dniester River’s left
bank didn’t want to be part of independent Moldova, and declared that
they wanted to join Russia. The result was a brief but bloody war,
stopped only after Russia intervened, sending in troops commanded by
General Alexander Lebed. There hasn’t been any more fighting since
then, but negotiations haven’t made any progress either.
2. Russia’s position
The Russian authorities probably haven’t ever given any serious
consideration to annexing Trans-Dniester. The practical aspects would
be too difficult: Russia doesn’t share a border with the unrecognized
republic – they are separted by Ukraine. Moscow hoped to resolve the
conflict with the Kozak Plan, drawn up by Dmitri Kozak when he was
the senior deputy director of the presidential administration. But
Chisinau rejected the Kozak Plan, following unprecedented pressure
from EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana.
3. The West’s position
The Europeans and Americans were strongly opposed to the Kozak Plan.
They were particularly annoyed by the point specifying a continued
Russian military presence on Trans-Dniester territory. When Viktor
Yushchenko’s orange team came to power in Ukraine, the West decided
to use economic measures of influence on the “separatists” in
Tiraspol. The Ukrainian authorities blocked access to Trans-Dniester
for goods that didn’t go through Moldovan customs. Tiraspol called
it a blockade. Russia sent humanitarian aid to Trans-Dniester. The
West expressed full support for Kiev.
4. Prospects
The West won’t accept the Trans-Dniester region’s separation from
Moldova under any circumstances. The European Union’s activity with
regard to Trans-Dniester is likely to increase, especially after
Romania joins the EU, since it’s the major force lobbying for Moldova’s
interests. A military solution to the conflict is unlikely, especially
since Russian peacekeepers are still present in Trans-Dniester.
* * *
Nagorno-Karabakh (wants to separate from Azerbaijan)
1. Conflict History
The Nagorno-Karabakh autonomous region, part of the Azerbaijan
Soviet Socialist Republic, had a mostly Armenian population. In the
late 1980s, they started making demands to join Armenia. The first
inter-ethnic clashes flared up even before the USSR collapsed, and
the bloodiest fighting happened in 1992-93. With Armenia’s support,
the Armenians of Karabakh won the war – capturing all the disputed
districts, as well as some adjacent regions of Azerbaijan. The conflict
has been frozen ever since.
2. Russia’s position
Moscow officially recognizes Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan,
and acts as a mediator. All the same, many Azeris suspect Russia of
siding with the Armenians and lobbying for their interests. The Azeris
claim that the Armenians wouldn’t have won the war for Nagorno-Karabakh
without help from Russian Armed Forces units stationed in the region.
3. The West’s position
The United States maintains close relations with Azerbaijan,
encouraging it to pursue “a foreign policy independent of Russia.”
Relations with Armenia are more complicated, since Washington considers
that the Armenian government looks to Moscow too much.
However, there are influential Armenian diasporas in the United
States and in Europe. They prevent the West from siding entirely with
Azerbaijan in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
4. Prospects
The Nagorno-Karabakh status negotiations are deadlocked. Armenia
insists that Nagorno-Karabakh should be independent, while Azerbaijan
refuses to consider the idea. Baku occasionally threatens to resolve
the problem by force, while pointing out that time is on Azerbaijan’s
side: it’s an oil-rich country that can spend far more on its military
needs than Armenia, which has essentially been existing in blockade
conditions for the past 15 years. All the same, the Azeri military
isn’t ready to challenge Armenia as yet.

RUSSIAN MILITARY VEHICLES WITHDRAW FROM GEORGIA TO ARMENIA
Agence France Presse — English
May 25, 2006 Thursday 7:44 AM GMT
Russia has transferred a batch of military equipment to its base
in Armenia from neighbouring Georgia as part of a planned troop
withdrawal, a senior officer said.
“A first column arrived at Gyumri, home to the 102nd Russian Base.
There will be many more columns,” said the head of the Armenian
military’s general staff, Mikael Arutiunian, on Wednesday.
The equipment being transferred from Russia’s Akhalkalaki base in
southern Georgia consists mainly of communications equipment and
non-armoured vehicles, he said.
“Under the terms of an agreement with the Russian side, tanks and
other armoured vehicles will not be transferred to Armenia. They will
be sent to Russia,” Arutiunian said.
Under a May 2005 agreement, Russia is to complete the closure of two
military bases in Georgia by the end of 2008. Withdrawals of tanks
and other heavy weapons are ongoing, with trainloads of materiel
heading through Azerbaijan and across the border into Russia.
Armenia maintains close military and economic links with Russia.

RUSSIA UNION OF ARMENIANS FOR PEACEFUL KARABAKH SETTLEMENT
by Syuzanna Adamyants, Tamara Frolkina
ITAR-TASS News Agency
May 25, 2006 Thursday 10:44 AM EST
The Union of Armenians of Russia calls for peaceful settlement of
the Karabakh problem, Ara Abramyan reelected president of this public
organization told Itar-Tass in an exclusive interview.
He said, “The Karabakh problem was one of the main problems discussed
at the organization’s third congress in Moscow”. “We must be friends
with the Azerbaijani diaspora and must try to settle the problem
peacefully,” Abramyan said. “There are no problems between the Armenian
and the Azerbaijani diasporas.”
Abramyan pointed out the main trends of the organization’s work,
among them work with the youth, with law enforcement bodies, contacts
with the country’s top leaders, promotion of the social and economic
development of Armenia, recognition of the Armenian genocide, work
with the Armenian diasporas broad and in Russia and with all other
national associations. He believes it is essential to attack xenophobia
and racial discrimination and to inculcate tolerance.
The Armenian diaspora, Abramyan said, “will actively participate in
the parliamentary and presidential elections in Russia.” “The Union
of Armenians of Russia will actively participate in the parliamentary
elections through the lobbying of the interests of Russian citizens
of the Armenian origin.”
“The Union of Armenians of Russia will support in every way all the
parties that will take ethnic diversity of Russia into account in
their programmes,” Abramyan said.

ARMENIANS OF RUSSIA CONTRIBUTE TO STRONGER BILATERAL COOP – PRES
by Susanna Adamyants, Tamara Frolkina
ITAR-TASS News Agency
May 25, 2006 Thursday
Russian-Armenian relations have been developing in the spirit of
partnership and mutual respect, Armenian President Robert Kocharian
said in his greeting message to participants in the congress of the
Union of Armenians of Russia.
“Representatives of the Armenian and Russian diasporas always played an
important role in the two countries’ relations. The Armenian diaspora
fully integrated into the Russian society contributing to all areas
of its activities,” he said.
The Union of Armenians of Russia made a considerable contribution
“to keeping good traditions of cooperation between the two countries,”
Kocharian said.
He expressed the hope that this organization would help translate
into reality projects involving all Armenians of Russia into multiple
activities both in Armenia and Russia.

KOSOVO INDEPENDENCE WOULD SET PRECEDENT FOR EX-SOVIET REPUBLICS – ZHIRINOVSKY
Interfax
Ukraine General Newswire
May 25, 2006 Thursday 8:31 PM MSK
If Kosovo is granted independence, the self-proclaimed republics
in the territory of the former USSR could also claim independence,
Russian State Duma Deputy Chairman Vladimir Zhirinovsky of the Liberal
Democratic Party has said.
“If Kosovo gains independence this year, which is likely to happen,
such republics as Transdniestria, Abkhazia and Nagorno-Karabakh
will also have a legitimate right to independence,” Zhirinovsky told
journalists Thursday.
“Kosovo is seeking self-determination on a territory that does not
belong to it, while the populations of those republics live on their
territories fro the most part,” Zhirinovsky said.
“Transdniestria has never been a Moldovan territory: Moldova is
historically Bessarabia, but Transdniestria is what [Russian military
leader Alexander] Suvorov won from the Turks. Abkhazia joined the
Russian Empire earlier than Georgia. As for Nagorno-Karabakh, I would
not like to offend Baku, but it should gain absolute independence
and maintain strategic relations with Armenia,” he said.
Zhirinovsky suggested that these republics might in the future join
the CIS.
Zhirinovsky is attending the 3rd congress of the Union of Armenians
of Russia as a guest. The congress opened in Moscow on Thursday.