KARABAKH FOREIGN MINISTRY ON MONTENEGRO REFERENDUM
Regnum, Russia
May 26 2006
Respect for the right of nations to self-determination will provide
for security in the region
The Nagorno Karabakh Foreign Ministry has released a statement in
connection with a referendum on Montenegro independence. REGNUM
publishes English translation of the text.
“Referendum on Montenegro independence and readiness of the
international community to recognize its outcome are a positive fact
on the whole. We are sure that respect for the right of a nation to
self-determination realized by means if a nation-wide referendum is a
corner stone in settling such situations and an effective instrument
for establishing political stability in the conflict region.
“In this connection it is worth reminding that disrespect for the
right of the Nagorno Karabakh people, who voted at a referendum for
its independence on December 10, 1991, was taken as basis for further
direct military aggression by Azerbaijan against the Republic of
Nagorno Karabakh that brought about numerous human deaths and damage.
“Further ignoring of the NKR people right for self-determination in the
Azerbaijani-Karabakh conflict and achieving conditions, under which its
political independence, economic and military safety is secured, would
put off the prospect of finding a mutually admissible decision and
establishment of lasting peace and mutual understanding in the region.”

YEREVAN, WASHINGTON, MOSCOW AND PARIS DISCUSSED PRINCIPLES AND WAYS OF NK CONFLICT SETTLEMENT
Regnum, Russia
May 26 2006
On May 25, Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan received
representatives of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair countries – US
Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Daniel
Fried, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin and spokesman
for the French Foreign Ministry, Ambassador Pierre Morel.
Mediators in the conflict settlement, Yuri Merzlyakov (Russia),
Steven Mann (US) and Bernard Fassier (France), as well as personal
representative of the OSCE chairman-in-office Andrzej Kasprzyk, also
participated in the meeting, REGNUM is told at the Armenian foreign
ministry press office.
The parties pointed out significance of the high-rank visit, discussed
principles and ways of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict settlement. After
paying attention to issues that are unsettled yet, the parties
exchanged opinions concerning prospects for settlement of the conflict.

LAWMAKERS QUESTION REMOVAL OF U.S. ENVOY IN ARMENIA
By Jocelyne Zablit, AFP
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
May 26 2006
U.S. lawmakers are questioning the apparent dismissal of the US
ambassador to Armenia over a statement he made in which he recognized
the 1915 massacre of Armenians as genocide.
Sixty members of Congress on Monday sent a letter to Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice to express concern about ambassador John
Evans’s early departure from Yerevan in coming weeks.
The White House on Tuesday nominated Richard Hoagland, the current
ambassador to Tajikistan, to replace Evans. His nomination requires
confirmation by the Senate.
The lawmakers said in their letter to Rice that recent information
indicates Evans was sacked for declaring in February 2005 that “the
Armenian genocide was the first genocide of the 20th century”. He
made the statement in meetings with Armenian-American communities.
Evans later corrected his remarks, as Washington does not officially
recognize as genocide the massacre of up to 1.5 million Armenians in
the final years of the Ottoman Empire.
“I am seriously concerned at the early departure of Ambassador Evans,”
Congressman Ed Markey, a Democrat, said Wednesday in a statement. “I
hope that this sudden action by the State Department is not related
to comments made by Ambassador Evans about the Armenian genocide.”
The State Department had no immediate comment but a spokesman
underlined that all ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the president.
The 60 congressmen who signed the letter to Rice defended his use of
the word “genocide”, saying it was a proper interpretation of the
“cataclysmic events of 1915”. “By employing the proper term last
year, the ambassador was only building on previous statements by
our leaders in government, as well as the repeated declarations of
numerous world-renowned scholars,” the letter states, referring to
comments made by then-president Ronald Reagan in 1981 in which he
specifically used the word genocide in describing massacres.
“In effect, Ambassador Evans did nothing more than succinctly repeat
the conclusions enunciated by those before him,” the lawmakers said.
They also questioned whether Turkey had played a part in Evans’s
departure from Armenia.
“Were the United States to allow the views or beliefs of a third
country to interfere with our diplomatic postings to the Republic of
Armenia, it would establish a dangerous precedent and be injurious to
the long-standing relationship built on trust and friendship between
the two countries,” the letter said.
Evans, a career diplomat, was appointed ambassador to Armenia in
August 2004. Ambassadors typically serve overseas for an average of
three years.
The U.S. administration has consistently stopped short of calling the
World War I massacres of Armenians a genocide. However several other
countries, including France, Canada and Switzerland, recognize them
as such.
Turkey has lobbied hard against the “genocide” label, arguing that
300,000 Armenians and as many Turks were killed in civil strife
in the final years of the Ottoman Empire when the Armenians rose
up for independence in eastern Anatolia and sided with invading
Russian troops.

MEDIATORS URGE FINAL PUSH FOR KARABAKH PEACE
By Emil Danielyan and Ruzanna Stepanian
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
May 26 2006
International mediators urged Armenia and Azerbaijan on Thursday
to take the final step towards a resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict, saying that a framework peace accord is now within their
reach.
High-level diplomats from France, Russia and the United States made
the appeal as they wrapped up an extraordinary joint visit to Baku
and Yerevan which produced agreement on the next Armenian-Azerbaijani
summit on Karabakh. A spokesman for President Robert Kocharian told
RFE/RL that the Armenian leader and his Azerbaijani counterpart, Ilham
Aliev, will meet on the sidelines of a summit of Black Sea nations
which is scheduled to take place in Romania’s capital Bucharest on
June 5.
In a joint statement read out to the media after their talks with
Kocharian, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried, Russian
Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin and a top French diplomat,
Pierre Morel, indicated that they expect that meeting to yield a
breakthrough in the prolonged peace process. They stressed that “now
is the time for the sides to reach agreement on the basic principles
of a settlement.”
The decision by the three men to accompany lower-level American,
French and Russian diplomats co-chairing the OSCE Minsk Group on
their latest round of shuttle diplomacy is quite significant in
itself. The three mediating powers seem to be making a last-ditch
attempt to secure a Karabakh peace deal before the end of this year.
They have warned that their failure to do so would delay a settlement
until after presidential elections due in Azerbaijan and Armenia in
2007 and 2008.
“A joint mission such as this one is a special event,” Fried,
Karasin and Morel said in their statement. “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 up be up
to Armenia and Azerbaijan.”
“We leave with hopes and expectations of progress,” they added.
The three officials, who refused to answer any questions from
journalists, described as “constructive” their meetings with Kocharian
and Aliev which took place on Thursday and Wednesday respectively. But
they as well as the press services of the Armenian and Azerbaijani
did not divulge any details of the talks.
The mediators had hoped that Aliev and Kocharian will cut a framework
agreement during their last meeting at the Rambouillet castle near
Paris in February. However, the two leaders failed to live up to those
expectations despite indications that the conflicting parties agreed
in principle to a deal that would enable Karabakh’s predominantly
Armenian population to decide the disputed region’s status in a
referendum. The vote would reportedly take place within 10 to 15
years from the start of Armenian withdrawal from six of the seven
Azerbaijani districts surrounding Karabakh.
Following the Rambouillet summit the mediators presented the parties
with what they described as new peace proposals designed to end the
impasse. But as Azerbaijan’s Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov
implied on Wednesday, the peace formula that was discussed at
Rambouillet essentially remains on the table. The Azerbaijani news
agency Trend quoted him as saying that the ideas suggested by the
Minsk Group co-chairs are not quite new.
“With such statements the co-chairs simply want to increase the
significance of their activities in the eyes of the public,” Azimov
said.

DIPLOMATS OF OSCE MG CO-CHAIRING STATES MAKE JOINT STATEMENT ON VISIT TO ARMENIA
Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
May 25 2006
The diplomats of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairing states today made
a joint statement on the conclusions of their visit to Armenia (APA).
The statement reads: “We have visited the region to support peaceful
way of settlement of the Nagorno Garabagh. It is high time for both
parties to reach an agreement on main principles for the settlement
of the conflict.”

SAFAR ABIYEV: “OUR AIM IS TO RESTORE TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF AZERBAIJAN”
Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
May 25 2006
Today Ukraine Armed Forces Main Headquarter chief general colonel
Sergey Kirichenko has paid an official visit to Baku.
Azerbaijan Defense Ministry press service has told APA that delegation
headed by Kirichenko today have visited late president Heydar
Aliyev’s grave in Honorary Avenue, Martyrs’ Alley. Defense minister
of Azerbaijan, general-colonel Safar Abiyev has received delegation
headed by Kirichenko. After gaining independence Azerbaijan and Ukraine
cooperated in all fields, especially in military field, Azerbaijani
defense minister informed the guest of existed military-political
situation in the South Caucasus, Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict. He
stated that Armenia has destructive position in the settlement of the
conflict and tries to legalize the occupation of Azerbaijani lands: “We
will not give way to it. Our aim is to restore territorial integrity
of Azerbaijan.” Kirienko said that he attaches great importance to
cooperation between Ukraine and Azerbaijan.

WHO DOES HISTORY BELONG TO IF NOT THE HISTORIANS?
By Semih Idiz
Turkish Press
May 25 2006
MILLIYET- I said earlier that the bill to criminalize denial of the
so-called Armenian genocide would be passed by France’s Parliament.
We can’t say that it didn’t pass. In other words, we can’t say that
common sense won. Observers believe that the bill will pass if it comes
to a vote. Now people say the bill will be brought to the agenda by
the end of this year.
The French Armenians aren’t satisfied with the situation either. They
would prefer for the bill to be passed in the General Assembly and
stay in legal procedures even if it’s not accepted. Armenian Deputy
Partick Deveciyan lashed out at French Foreign Minister Philippe
Douste-Blazy. In his speech in Parliament, Balazy pointed to France’s
important political and economic interests in its relations with Turkey
and said the bill should be rejected. Deveciyan branded Blazy’s request
“unethical.”
However, the French are concerned about their economy. Smart observers
know that foreign trade and foreign investment are very important
in their economy. In other word, they are aware that Blazy’s words
aren’t empty. If we come to ‘ethical’ Deveciyan, in light of the
French approach to Algeria, he is also aware that the bill isn’t at
all ethical. He’s already stated his views on history.
After being reminded how at least one leading French historian is
opposed to the bill, he said meaninglessly: ‘History isn’t the private
property of historians.’
Judging from the comments of French Armenians, this problem is
a political problem rather than a historical one. That’s why the
Armenians are against Turkey’ proposal for a commission of historians
which was also supported by Douste-Blazy. They try to base the problem
on demagogy. That’s why Turkey hast to stick to its proposal.
But Ankara isn’t doing much about this.
The fact that the Armenians didn’t reach their goals this time doesn’t
change the situation much, because there are third parties who want
to use this issue for their own interests.

JOINT STATEMENT OF OSCE MG CO-CHAIR STATES WAS RED OUT IN YEREVAN
Author: A.Mammadov
TREND Information, Azerbaijan
May 25 2006
Today, the Russian deputy foreign minister Grigori Karasin, the USA
state secretary assistant Daniel Freed and advisor of the French
Foreign Ministry Pyer Morel red out the joint statement of the OSCE
Minsk Group co-chair states in Yerevan as a result of their visit
to Armenia.
According to information of Medimaks, it was stated in the statement:
“We, deputy foreign ministers of Russian Federation, the United States
of America and France, together with the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk
Group and the special representative of the present chairman of OSCE,
arrived in Yerevan to assist in resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
peacefully and therefore, it is high time for both sides to reach an
agreement on the basic solution principles,” told in the statement.
It is necessary to note that practically the text is similar with
the previous statement of the representatives of the OSCE Minsk group
co-chair states.

ENERGY INSECURITY, FROZEN CONFLICTS PREOCCUPY GUAM SUMMIT
By Vladimir Socor
Eurasia Daily Monitor, DC
May 25 2006
The GUAM summit in Kyiv on May 23 called international attention
to the challenges and threats posed to the four member countries by
energy insecurity and secessionist conflicts. Furthermore, Moldova
and Georgia are the targets of politically motivated Russian embargoes
on agricultural products and wine, their main exports.
The founding Declaration of the new GUAM Organization for Democracy and
Economic Development asserts that economic pressures and monopolization
of energy markets are unacceptable. The document commits the member
countries to work together to promote the security of energy supplies.
In their speeches at the summit, Presidents Mikheil Saakashvili
and Vladimir Voronin cited Azerbaijan’s and Ukraine’s emergency
deliveries of gas to Georgia and Moldova, respectively, when Russia
stopped supplies in January of this year. Although the emergency
deliveries were small, they were vital at that time and a mark of
political solidarity (Channel 5 TV [Kyiv], May 23). However, GUAM
Organization member countries have yet to begin discussions toward a
common energy-security policy. Voronin’s chief adviser, Mark Tkachuk,
told the media during the summit that such a policy would require a
two-fold focus: attracting investments to create alternative routes
of supply and concluding agreements on the free flow of supplies
through member countries’ territories (Kommersant, May 23).
For his part, Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko urged the president
of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, to consider the possibility of setting
up a network of gasoline and fuel supply stations in Ukraine.
Yushchenko would order a Ukrainian working group to deal with this
issue “within three days,” he stated. Furthermore, he sought Azeri
commitments to: supply crude oil to the Odessa-Brody pipeline in the
northward direction; co-invest in expanding the terminal capacity at
Odessa to take Azeri and Kazakh oil; co-invest in building a refinery
in Brody to refine that oil; and support extending the pipeline
to Gdansk — a project that the European Union may help finance
(Interfax-Ukraine, 1 + 1 TV [Kyiv], Interfax-Ukraine, May 23).
Kyiv has submitted such proposals to Baku repeatedly during the
last year and Yushchenko has aired them internationally. They seem
unrealistic, because the great bulk of Azerbaijan’s crude oil output
is pre-committed to the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline. Building a refinery
at Brody seems incompatible with extending the pipeline to Gdansk,
inasmuch as the Odessa-Brody line’s annual throughput (projected at 8
million tons, potentially up to 14 million) can hardly sustain both the
refinery and the extension. In any case, the Odessa-Brody pipeline’s
future depends almost entirely on the availability of Kazakh oil,
but Russia stands in the way.
The summit’s Declaration expresses a shared concern in pointing out,
“Occupation of a country’s territory through military force or threats
of force is unacceptable. Territorial annexations and the creation of
enclaves can never become legal. No country may intervene into another
country’s affairs through military, political, or economic pressures.”
Yushchenko referenced the controversial plan that carries his name
regarding settlement in Transnistria, which he claimed was “supported
by both the Moldovan and the Transnistrian side.” Moreover, he advised,
“A plan along the same lines should be developed for Karabakh and one
along the same lines for Abkhazia.” But he seemed to change thought
immediately: “The solution to each conflict, however, requires an
individual plan and there can be no recipe on resolving the Karabakh
problem along with the problem of Transnistria or Abkhazia. It takes
an individual approach” (Interfax-Ukraine, May 23). Voronin chose
to focus on the positive side, expressing gratitude for Ukraine’s
recent cooperation with Moldova and the EU in curbing Transnistria’s
contraband trade.
Aliyev and Voronin called for better coordination among GUAM member
countries in international organizations regarding the secessionist
conflicts and foreign troops (Moldpres, 1 + 1 TV [Kyiv], May 23). The
unspoken reason behind that call is that Ukrainian representatives
have stopped subscribing to joint GUAM positions on those issues in
some meetings of the OSCE’s Permanent Council and Joint Consultative
Group in recent months.
That joint stand was GUAM’s primordial raison d’etre. The group emerged
during debates at the OSCE in 1996 on the Treaty on Conventional Forces
in Europe in order to seek Russian compliance with force limitations,
specifically on GUAM countries’ territories.
The four countries’ joint stand, authorizing one of them to speak for
the four, had become its hallmark in international organizations and
one of the few tangible manifestations of GUAM’s viability. Kyiv’s
recent tendency to stand aside from the GUAM position at the OSCE
has become a matter of concern to some NATO diplomats as well. This
situation might now be corrected after the presidents’ private
discussions at the Kyiv summit.

ARMENIA NOT PARTICIPATING IN THE MEETING OF CIS DEFENSE MINISTERS IN BAKU
Author: E. Javadova
TREND, Azerbaijan
May 25 2006
Chief of Armenian Defense Ministry is not participating in the 31
May meeting of CI Defense Ministers in Baku, Trend reports quoting
Ilgar Verdiyev, acting head of press service of Azeri Defense Ministry.
Verdiyev said Defense Ministers of 10 countries are participating in
the meeting.
The meeting agenda is still unclear. Also, specific issues to
be discussed are in the air, although the meeting in total aims
at boosting military cooperation and exchanging experience among
defense ministries.