Hartford Courant
March 25 2006
`Till Eulenspiegels’ Highlights London Philharmonic Concert
March 25, 2006
By MATTHEW ERIKSON, Courant Staff Writer Disappointing many music
lovers, the 78-year-old maestro Kurt Masur canceled his scheduled
American tour with the London Philharmonic due to illness.
Yet to the credit of the orchestra’s organization (and some lucky
breaks in conductors’ schedules), the LPO located some stellar talent
to take Masur’s place. The Finnish conductor Osmo Vänskä, music
director of the Minnesota Orchestra, led for the California part of
the tour. Neeme Järvi and Yan Pascal Tortelier substituted for many
of the orchestra’s Northeast engagements.
Thursday evening at the University of Connecticut’s Jorgensen Center
for the Performing Arts, the spotlight was on Tortelier. The French
conductor is part of a troika of conductors announced in 2004 to
succeed Mariss Jansons at the Pittsburgh Symphony. Tortelier’s
strength is considered to be the French repertoire, but in a
tell-tale sign of his versatility, he left Masur’s original program
alone. What’s more, his incisive conducting made a strongly positive
impression.
Still, Thursday’s program was oddly lopsided, particularly as a
showcase for one of Europe’s finest orchestras. Youthful works by
Britten and Mozart occupied the evening’s first half. It was mere
appetizer. The musical meat came after intermission with
Khachaturian’s Violin Concerto and Strauss’ ebullient tone poem “Till
Eulenspiegels lustige Streiche.” Youth remained the concert’s theme.
Twenty-year-old Armenian violinist Sergey Khachatryan created
something of a sensation in the concerto. The soloist’s white-hot
virtuosity turned the audience on to a work they likely hadn’t heard
before. The composer Khachaturian may have lacked the biting wit of
his contemporaries Shostakovich and Prokofiev, but his 1940 concerto,
written for the great violinist David Oistrakh, has an emotional
immediacy and makes appealing use of folk-like melodies and colorful
orchestration. In one delicious passage in the opening movement,
Khachatryan’s violin melted seamlessly into a duet with clarinet. The
concerto’s slow movement had the seducing contours of an Erik Satie
Gymnopédie. The propulsive finale provided ample opportunity for the
violinist to shine. Khachatryan’s future is surely one to follow.
Elsewhere, the orchestra’s tonal brilliance projected beautifully in
the dull acoustics of Jorgensen. The first half of the program,
mainly featuring the London Phil’s strings, performed Britten’s
“Simple Symphony” and Mozart’s Symphony No. 29 with X-ray
transparency. Tortelier sculpted phrases with élan and finely
calibrated dynamics.
The evening’s singular highlight came in the Strauss. With the
orchestra fully represented on stage, Tortelier milked every comic
gag in the tone poem, which is based on the heroic trickster of
German folklore. Aside from some overeager brass, the musicians
played it to perfection.

World War 4 Report, NY
March 25 2006
Multicultural Iraq: possible?
Submitted by Bill Weinberg on Sat, 03/25/2006 – 03:34.
A March 23 commentary from Lebanon’s Daily Star:
A foolish new attraction to oppressive Arab nationalism
By Rayyan al-Shawaf
We are at a critical juncture in the history of the Middle East and
North Africa. The continuing and oftentimes violent debate over
Iraq’s national and religious identity has revived the fortunes of
diehard Arab nationalists, who are now clamoring for a return to the
old formula where Iraq was identified as a purely Arab country.
The irony of this is the obvious unsuitability of any ethnic-based
ideology for the multiethnic societies of the Middle East and North
Africa. If Islam under the Ottoman Empire proved unviable as a
political bond because not all the subjects were Muslim, and not all
Muslims were religious, how can Arab nationalism be any good for the
non-Arab citizens of the region, or even for Arabs who do not
identify strongly with their ethnicity?
Fully 20 percent of Iraqis are not Arab, as is the case with a
similar percentage of Algerians, half the Sudanese population, and a
majority of Moroccans. Syria and Egypt also are home to significant
minorities – Kurds and Copts respectively. Yet all these peoples are
officially relegated to second-class status in their societies. The
solution to such systemic discrimination is abandoning the idea that
the state must be Arab or Islamic or anything else. After all,
coloring the state with an ethnic or religious hue serves to create
one or more social underclasses.
Though the problem is to a large extent the marginalization of
non-Arabs and non-Muslims in a predominantly Arab and Muslim region,
this is not the whole story. Even minorities that are both Arab and
Muslim, for example Shiites in Saudi Arabia and in other Gulf
countries, have been oppressed for decades in countries that derive
their legitimacy from Sunni Islam. Similarly, certain Arab
nationalist regimes have oppressed not only non-Arabs, but fellow
Arabs of a different sectarian persuasion. The Shiite Arab majority
in Iraq was disenfranchised under the former, Sunni-led Baath regime,
despite the latter’s Arab nationalist orientation. In Syria, which is
run by a Baath regime under Alawite authority, participation by the
Sunni Arab majority remains controlled.
Non-Arab countries like Israel, Turkey and Iran, where the state
often identifies itself with a specific ethnic or religious group,
are no better. Israel discriminates not only against the Palestinians
of the Occupied Territories, but even against its own Arab citizens,
who make up 20 percent of the Israeli population.
Modern Turkey emerged following the widespread massacre of the
Armenian community, and has in the name of Turkish nationalism sought
to erase the cultural identity of Kurds, who constitute 25 percent of
the population. Alevis, a heterodox Muslim sect, make up 20 percent
of the Turkish population, and like Kurds have traditionally gone
unrecognized.
Islamic Iran not only assigns an inferior status to its Christian and
Jewish citizens, it also discriminates against non-Shiite Muslims.
There is not a single Sunni mosque in all of Tehran, despite the
presence of a large Sunni Muslim minority in the Iranian capital.
As for Arab nationalism, it began as an attempt to forge an
alternative socio-political bond to that represented by Islam, the
ideological underpinning of the Ottoman Empire. Many of its earliest
proponents were Christians, who as subjects of the empire had two
principal reasons for being disaffected: they were neither Muslim nor
Turkish. Though Arab nationalism itself ended up undergoing a process
of “Islamization,” this was but one of many self-defeating
characteristics ingrained in an ideology based entirely on ethnic
affiliation. For while Arabism may have theoretically succeeded in
placing Muslim and Christian Arabs on an equal footing, and can be
credited with making possible the rise of individual Christians to
positions of prominence in countries such as Syria or Iraq, it also
proved a disaster for non-Arabs.
Non-Arab Muslim minorities such as the Amazigh, or Berbers, Kurds,
and Turkmen found themselves officially out of favor. They faced the
prospect of becoming “Arabized” or of being denied political and even
civil rights. Groups that identified themselves as neither Arab nor
Muslim had it even worse: Southern Sudanese, Copts, Jews, and
Assyrians were plunged into a protracted nightmare that saw their
communities ground into anonymity, forcing many to emigrate
permanently. Even Maronites, whose retention of political power in
Lebanon immunized them from utter marginalization, watched with alarm
as Arab nationalist propaganda increasingly portrayed them as a
foreign and sinister element in the heart of the Arab nation.
So Arab nationalism, but also Syrian nationalism and communism (which
were no less destructive), proved to be just as tyrannical and
intolerant as the political Islam of the Ottoman Empire. Despite this
reality, many Arabs continue to cling to these supposedly secular
ideologies as the only buffer against resurgent Islam. Indeed, too
often Christian Arabs and secular Muslims have gravitated toward
nationalism and communism as an attempt to banish the terrifying
specter of an Islamic state.
After all, when democracy is allowed to flourish, they argue, it
results in successes for intolerant Islamic parties, whether in Iraq,
Palestine, or Egypt.
Are Arabs forever doomed, then, to fight one totalitarianism with
another? Will they always be obliged to choose between the lesser of
two evils? Not necessarily. Though it is unwise to ban political
parties with clear religious and ethnic biases, societies can ensure
that the state remains above the fray. They can make it
unconstitutional for any party, regardless of popularity and election
results, to associate the state with a particular religion or
ethnicity. Indeed, states should avoid identifying themselves with
Arab or Turkish or Jewish ethnicity, and Islam or any other religion.
Only then will Arabs and non-Arabs in Middle Eastern societies,
regardless of ethnic and religious affiliation, attain freedom and
equality. Only then will states become states for all their citizens.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Regnum, Russia
March 25 2006
Expert: models of settlement of military issues without Karabakh are absurd
`Nagorno Karabakh must participate in providing security in the
conflict zone,’ said independent Nagorno Karabakh political expert
David Karabekyan to a REGNUM correspondent. He noted that such
participation, even presumed by the UN Security Council, is blocked
by official Baku, because it can be the ground of Karabakh
independence recognition. The expert noted that in the same time,
Azerbaijan demands from Armenia to obey to UN Security Council
decisions.
He reminded that during negotiations on Nagorno Karabakh settlement,
main criteria of participation in providing security in the region
was regular army structure, and Nagorno Karabakh fully answered this
criteria, while Azerbaijan formed regular army only in 1994, 3 years
after gaining its independence and 2 years after the beginning of
negotiations with Nagorno Karabakh.
The expert noted that in 1994, even after cease-fire agreement in the
conflict zone, Azerbaijan remained unstable, while Nagorno Karabakh
has a stable state structure. It helped Nagorno Karabakh to stop
Azerbaijani forces and launch a successful counter-attack against
more powerful enemy. He reminded that all violation of cease-fire
with Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh were from the Azerbaijani side. It
demonstrates that Azerbaijan authorities are unable to provide
security in the region. So Stepanakert has no reason to trust Baku
and states that it can be more trustworthy guarantor of security
obligations.
Karabekyan stressed that models of settlement of military issues and
events in the framework of regional agreements are absurd without
Karabakh. For example, if Armenia is granted the right to provide
defense of Nagorno Karabakh in the framework of the regional
agreements, but it makes absurd all accusations against Armenia in
annexation of Azerbaijani territory. In such case, Armenia becomes
guilty in all the victims, because it had not moved the troops in
Nagorno Karabakh fast enough and assumed control over it.
The expert thinks that use of multi-national peacekeepers in the
regions will only lead to increase of number of victims, because they
have no responsibility to participate in most important aspects of
the conflict settlement. He reminded about Kosovo events, when
peacekeepers provided security of 60 thousand Albanians by moving
away 200 thousand of native Kosovo Serbians.
He also said that the idea to make Azerbaijan guarantor of Nagorno
Karabakh independence or demilitarize the conflict zone was even more
useless, because it would lead to vacuum of security, and violation
of military parity between conflict sides.
The only way to settle the conflict, according to the expert, is to
adapt regional agreements in defense sphere. The sides must guarantee
mutual control in arms race control, provide security of air
communication with CIS and other countries, and establish
international humanitarian mission in the conflict zone, concluded
Karabekyan.

ARKA News Agency, Armenia
March 25 2006
INTERVIEW
FINANCIAL COMMUNITY SHOULD BE INFORMED OF ARMENIAN BANKS’ ADVANCED
EXPERIENCE
Below is an exclusive interview of Chairman of the Union of Banks of
Armenia (UBA) Stepan Gishyan to the ARKA News Agency
– Mr. Gishyan, Your appointment as Chairman of the Union of Banks of
Armenia implies certain innovations and specific steps in this
direction
– True, this appointment imposes a high responsibility. First of all,
it is the responsibility for all 14 members of the association. These
are rather stable banks, and we all have to closely cooperate. I
would like to note that a number of amendments to the UBA Regulations
have been made. It particularly concerns the rotation principle of
electing the UBA Chairman and Board members. A decision has also been
made to increase the number of the Board members from six to nine,
who will yearly be elected by the rotation principle, which will
allow the banks to intensify their work as UBA members and afford an
opportunity for considering all the members’ opinions in the
decision-making process. In fact, we have always had an unwritten
law, namely, making collective decisions. Now this unwritten law will
become an official one. All the banks are willing for active work.
The UBA’s concept is in ensuring the involvement of all banks in the
Board. Our idea is that not only the Board Chairman, but also the
Board members work more actively. In principle, the Chairman is
supposed to perform the representative functions to a greater extent,
and all the most important issues are to be dealt with by the UBA
members.
-Chairman of the Central Bank of Armenia (CBA) Tigran Sargsyan
recently mentioned 2-3 problematic banks. As far as we know, these
problems resulted from disagreements over corporate management.
– I think that all Armenian banks accept the principle of corporate
management. As regards the UBA members, I can state with confidence
that all of them accept this principle. By the way, it has always
been in effect in Armenia. The CBA’s concept just made it more
specific, which is normal. After all, it is a law, and we must
observe it. Banks were actively involved in discussing this law with
the CBA. Agreements were reached on almost all points. Another
question is the existence of different opinions on individual aspects
of this principle, which need attention. And this is a subject of
discussions. We will take an active part in discussions in future as
well, promptly responding to the CBA’s decisions and initiatives.
This is, in fact, our role.
– What is Your appraisal of Armenian banks’ activities?
– I think everybody will share my opinion that we have never had such
a healthy banking system as now. Banking indicators are indisputable
evidence of positive trends in all directions, positive dynamics. All
the banks record increase in their advances portfolios,
simultaneously recording a very small amount of overdue credits,
which is evidence of higher quality of banks’ advances portfolios.
Increasing healthy competition plays a great role as well, which is
certainly a positive fact.
– What is Your assessment of the UBA’s policy of international
contacts?
– We are a member of the International Banking Federation and intend
to intensify our ties both with this structure and with other
international organizations. We have all preconditions for this. I
think that Armenia’s banking system may set an example to many
countries, particularly to the CIS member-countries. We have left the
banks of many countries, even Russia, behind as to quality,
organization and transparency. We have serious achievements in this
field – both by the CBA and by commercial banks. All this taken
together, as well as some geopolitical developments, gives us a
chance to become a regional financial center. Therefore, we should
take certain steps in this direction, and I see a field of activities
for the UBA jointly with the CBA.
– What specific steps are in question?
– One of them is making ourselves better known, informing the
financial community of our experience. We do have achievements.
Although relatively small, our banking system is an advanced one, our
Central Bank is a member of the Basel Committee, and the CBA Chairman
has been Chairman of this structure. We are ahead of our neighbors,
and they admit this fact. We also have to increase the capitalization
of Armenia’s banking system, involving foreign banks as well. In this
context, I can only welcome the EBRD’s intensified activities in
Armenia. The appearance of any international structure is of great
benefit to our country, though some fear competition. But this is a
necessity, and we must be ready for that. P.T. -0–

Today, Azerbaijan
March 25 2006
Novruz Mammadov: “Co-chairs do not have any suggestions to
conflicting sides at present”

25 March 2006 [09:59] – Today.Az

“The Minsk Group co-chairs usually exchange views on the negotiating
process over the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, and
inform the conflicting sides about their conclusions only in the
meeting with either FM or with President,” the Head of the
President’s Office Department of International Relations, Novruz
Mammadov stated.

According to APA, after 20 March meeting in Washington, the co-chairs
have not initiated organizing meeting of the Foreign Ministers.
“It seems, there is nothing to inform about,” Mr.Mammadov said.
Commenting on American co-chair Steven Mann’s recent statement “2006
represents a chance to solve the conflict. It is desirable to reach a
peace agreement in this year,” Mr.Mamamdov said, “Of course, it would
be great if a peace agreement is reached, there is a good opportunity
for that. We also want to achieve this agreement. However,
Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity should be ensured, and the
conflict should be settled in compliance with international juridical
norms and principles. We know that it is impossible to solve the
conflict in a way that will satisfy both sides. Therefore, if our
proposals concerning the settlement are accepted, we would welcome
it. As coming to what Armenia thinks concerning this issue, it is
quite another matter,” Mammadov said.
Referring to the objective of Steven Mann’s visit to Baku last week,
Mammadov said, “The co-chair came to meet the President again,
familiarize with his stance, and express that the US is concerned in
settling of conflict as soon as possible,” he reported.
Russian co-chair Yuri Merzlyakov refusing to inform journalists about
the talks in Rambouillet, participation of another Russian diplomat
in Istanbul talks instead of him caused hearsays that the co-chair
will be substituted. Referring to these hearsays, Mammadov said that
Russia is responcible to substitute the co-chair.
“As coming to his refusing to give briefings, I shall remind you that
various statements were voiced before the talks in Rambouillet. So,
probably, Mr.Merzlyakov acts in a diplomatic way refusing to issue
unnecessary statements,” Mammadov said.

URL:

Daily Nation , Kenya
March 25 2006
Armenians in fresh dispute over company
Story by NATION Correspondent
Publication Date: 3/26/2006
The case of the alleged mercenaries has taken another turn.
A Nairobi businessman has written to the Registrar of Societies
protesting that a company allegedly owned by the two Armenian men at
the centre of the mercenary saga is using a name identical to that
used by his firm.
In a letter to the Registar-General last Friday, lawyer Harith Sheth
complains that his clients are the registered shareholders of
Kensington Holdings Ltd.
It reads: “Arising from recent reports in the press our clients have
learnt with great surprise that there is yet another company being
called Kensington Holdings, apparently registered on January 8, 2005
… we demand an explanation from yourselves as to why a second
company was allowed to be registered with a name identical to that of
our client company. Our clients have nothing to do with the
controversy mentioned in the press. We therefore demand an apology
from yourselves for permitting a second company with an identical
name to our client company to be registered. We require you to either
strike off the second company or have its name changed to a different
name.”
Press reports have named the controversial brothers, Artur Margaryan
and Artur Sargasyan, as partners with Ms Winfred Wangui, the daughter
of prominent Narc activist Mary Wambui, as partners in a company
called Kensington Holdings Ltd.
Mr Sheth is representing Mr Karim Gulamhussein Bhanji and Mr Amirali
Gulamhussein Bhanji.
According to documents made available to the Sunday Nation,
Kensington Holdings was first registered in February 13, 2004 by a
Nairobi lawyer, Mr Mohammed Madhani, and his wife, Mrs Shemin
Madhani.
Mr Madhani explained that on May 19 the same year, he and his wife
resigned as directors and handed over their interests in the company
to Karim and Amirali Bhanji, who to date remain the shareholders and
directors.
The Registrar was duly notified of the change of ownership. According
to Mr Sheth, his clients have not sold the company or invited other
persons to be shareholders and directors.

Jerusalem Post
March 25 2006
Snap Judgement: Home is where the vote is
By CALEV BEN-DAVID

Here’s an interesting trivia question: Name at least one other
country besides Israel that does not allow absentee balloting (voting
from abroad, except for diplomatic officials) in national elections?
Need a hint? It’s another relatively small nation (population three
million) with a large diaspora community and a storied history,
bordered by hostile states in a volatile part of the world.
The answer can be found lower down. But before we get there, let’s
talk about why absentee balloting is still a bad idea for this
country, despite a recent Jerusalem Post editorial arguing otherwise.
There are indeed, as the editorial pointed out, arguments to be made
to change a policy that has existed since the founding of the state.
In the global communications age it is no longer a daunting task to
conduct an absentee ballot vote; far bigger countries than Israel,
including the US, do so without major problems. It is also true that
“as with most other developed democracies, Israel has thousands of
loyal citizens legitimately abroad for various periods of time, in
the wake of their admirably productive work in a rapidly globalizing
world.”
And yes, while once allowing absentee ballots had the stigma of
legitimizing yerida (emigration from Israel), it can be reasonably
argued that “Israel has become sufficiently established, both
demographically and economically, to not fear that an absentee ballot
would be misinterpreted as a prize for leaving.”
However that doesn’t mitigate the fact that an estimated 600,000
Israelis – roughly 10 percent of the electorate – now make their home
more-or-less permanently abroad. I’m hardly comfortable with the
notion that these expatriate Israelis could be such a decisive factor
in elections that, for example, could determine the state’s permanent
borders, and I can imagine many other resident Israelis who feel the
same.
Personally, when I moved from the US to Israel 20 years ago, I made a
decision to stop voting in American elections. In this globalized
world, it is indeed increasingly common for people to have
citizenship in more than one country; my own children hold three
different passports.
But voting is not a right of citizenship, it’s a privilege. In many
democratic societies, voter registration is not automatic (although
in this one it is) and can be limited under certain conditions (such
as for convicted prisoners). It certainly seems to me a reasonable
proposition that if one holds citizenship in a certain nation, but
has no intention of making permanent residence there, choosing not to
take part in its elections is the proper decision.
Of course, it’s not always so easy to determine whether someone is
really intending to reside permanently abroad; many Israelis
themselves don’t honestly know the answer to that question, even
after years of living away from home. At least one way then, of
testing the civic commitment of expatriates, is by demanding they
return home at least once every few years to vote in a national
election. This is presumably why countries with large diaspora
communities, such as Armenia – the answer to the above question –
have no absentee ballot.
YET EVEN if one rejects this argument, there’s another good reason
why absentee balloting is specifically a bad idea for Israel. The
problem is connected to the Law of Return, which makes it easier for
foreign Jews to obtain Israeli citizenship than immigrants to most
other countries. The Israeli expatriate community already includes
many immigrants who, for various reasons, returned to their countries
of origin, some after living here for a relatively short period of
time. In recent years there has even been growing concern that some
of these short-term olim basically exploited the Law of Return simply
to obtain the assistance given to new immigrants, before they
returned home or moved on elsewhere. If absentee balloting were
approved, it’s possible that the right to vote would be similarly
abused by Jews abroad looking to influence the ideological direction
of Israel without any intention to actually live here on a permanent
basis.
Sound far-fetched? I don’t think so. I personally know many such
people in the American Jewish community, on both the Right and Left,
who would like nothing better than having the privilege of voting in
Israeli elections, without the inconvenience of actually having to
pay Israeli taxes, serve (or have their children serve) in the IDF,
learn Hebrew, or risk getting on the same roads as Israeli drivers.
Nor can I say I blame them. Especially since there have been some
serious proposals – in one case from no less than Natan Sharansky –
suggesting that some kind of system be set up that would allow world
Jewry to take part in Israeli elections.
Even the recent PR effort “IsraelVotes,” in which American college
students took part via the Web in mock Israeli elections, seems to
suggest that it might be OK to cast a ballot here without actually
being here. “This is a chance to leverage the Israeli elections, to
use them as a way of showing off Israel’s democracy,” said one of its
promoters.
Actually, I find something profoundly anti-democratic in the notion
of foreign citizens, Jewish or otherwise, even pretending to vote in
another nation’s elections. What’s more, if voting by itself were a
mark of true democracy, the Palestinian Authority, Iraq, Syria and
Iran would all be in far better shape today.
While there may well be a way to answer all these concerns and still
allow absentee balloting, it’s probably best to just continue with
the present voting policy. I don’t relish the thought, under any
circumstances, of heated arguments over disengagement or settlements
at polling stations in Brooklyn, Los Angeles or Amsterdam. If it
really means so much to Israelis living abroad, they’ll find the
airfare to come home to cast their ballots. To quote an old saying in
a different context, “All politics is local” – so let votes about
Israel’s future borders at least be cast within the present ones.
The writer is director of The Israel Project’s Jerusalem Media
Resource Center.

Tree Planting of Unity started in Yerevan

ArmRadio.am
25.03.2006 13:16
The Tree planting of Unity to be held all over the territory of Armenia
continued today in Yerevan. About 300 thousand trees were planted in
Kanaker-Zeitun community of Yerevan.

President of the `Nig Aparan’ Patriotic Union, Prosecutor General Aghvan
Vardanyan, Mayor of Yerevan Yervand Zakharyan and Head of Community Arayik
Kotanjyan participated in the tree planting.
The tree planting started from the `Victory’ Park. A wreath of flowers was
laid at the memorial to the Unknown Soldier.

Conference on initial planning of the `Joint target ` 07′ military
exercises will be held in Yerevan

ArmRadio.am
25.03.2006 14:06
The `Best joint effort’ and `Joint partner’ military exercises held
under the NATO’s partnership for peace project have been united under
the `Joint bow’ name. The conferences on initial and general planning
of the exercises were held in Moldova. Two Staff Officers of the Armed
Forces of the Republic of Armenia participated in each of the
conferences.
Representatives of RA Armed Forces will participate also in the final
conference, the place of which has not been set so far.
Press Service of the Ministry of Defense informs that the exercises
will be held September 11-29 in Moldova.
The conference on initial planning of the `Joint target ` 07′ military
exercises will be held September 11-15 in Yerevan.

Regular misinformation of the Azeri media on the violation of the cease-fire
regime

ArmRadio.am
25.03.2006 14:30
The information spread by Azerbaijani media, according to which fire
was opened this morning in the direction of Azeri positions from
Shihlar village in Aghdam region, does not correspond to reality; the
Armenian forces are maintaining the cease-fire regime.
Head of the Information Department of the NKR Defense Army Senor
Hasratyan informs that this morning fire was opened by Azeri Armed
Forces in the direction of the Armenian Defense Army at the Northern
part of the contact line. No victims were registered.