LE PROMENEUR DU CHAMP-DE-MARS: LE FILM
Par Skorecki Louis
Liberation
16 juin 2006
Guediguian est celui qui separe le mauvais cinema (le cinema
naturaliste) du “bon”, le cinema antinaturaliste. Pourquoi bon,
pourquoi mauvais? C’est comme ca. Bresson est bon, Renoir est
mauvais. Le resume est rapide (Renoir a aussi ete antinaturaliste),
mais c’est un resume. Guegiguian? Il est la où on ne l’attend pas,
la où etait Renoir, dans la belle chaleur irrealiste du naturalisme
le plus radical. Il est la, c’est tout.
Je tiens le Promeneur du Champ-de-Mars pour le film le plus important
de ces dix dernières annees. Repeter la phrase, juste pour voir.
Guediguian echappe a la petitesse francaise, tout en etant l’honneur du
cinema francais. Le Promeneur… est a mi-chemin de la Dernière Fanfare
(Ford), dont c’est le remake detourne, et de la Bete humaine, dont il
a le naturalisme possede. Que Guediguian n’ait pas ete selectionne
a Cannes n’etonnera que ceux qui croient encore a ce non-evènement
repetitif. Du temps où le cinema etait plus vif, Cannes etait deja la
facade pompeuse des Parisiens en goguette. Repeter que Guediguian a
permis a Jalil Lespert de surpasser Jeffrey Hunter, et a Michel Bouquet
de rivaliser avec Spencer Tracy. Respirer un grand coup. Attendre le
Voyage en Armenie. Fermer les yeux. Respirer encore.
CANAL + DecaLe, 2H40.
–Boundary_(ID_26s0k+6cy8TsQLt50bi3jw)–

AN ORGY OF INHUMANITY
by Joanna Bourke
New Statesman
June 19, 2006
On the evening of Sunday 30 October 1938, six million Americans sitting
around their wireless sets heard some terrifying news: humanity
was on the brink of annihilation. According to the CBS broadcast,
the vanguard of an invading army had landed in the farmlands of New
Jersey and was moving steadily across the continent.
More than one million Americans panicked. Friends and relatives were
telephoned and warned of the impending calamity. Bread, blankets
and babies were thrown into cars, which then sped westwards. Other
listeners were too stunned to move. Women and men fainted; children
and dogs howled. As one student admitted shortly afterwards: “I didn’t
have any idea exactly what I was fleeing from, and that made me all
the more afraid.” America was not being attacked by the Germans or
the Japanese. The invading hordes came from the planet Mars.
It was a hoax, of course, and the millions of terrified listeners
were furious at being fooled. They accused CBS of causing them
“grievous bodily or mental injury” and demanded compensation for their
pain. Orson Welles, the young broadcaster and actor responsible for
the radio play, was forced to issue an abject apology.
Welles’s play was an adaptation of H G Wells’s 1898 novel War of the
Worlds. He had simply modernised the story by moving the action to
the 1930s. No wonder listeners found it convincing. In that uncertain
decade, many Americans easily believed that aliens could destroy the
world as they knew it. Wasn’t there talk of an approaching world war?
Unemployment was rocketing. Only a few months earlier President
Roosevelt had warned: “Nothing is so much to be feared as fear
itself.” Welles’s radio adaptation of War of the Worlds scored a
direct hit on a seam of political alarm underpinning American culture
in the 1930s.
Niall Ferguson’s new book, The War of the World, also seeks to tap
into an underlying sense of apprehension. Why was the 20th century
marked by massacres, genocides and war on an unprecedented scale,
and how could the carnage have been avoided? Today, weapons of mass
destruction seem to be proliferating. Confidence in the ability of
politicians to exercise restraint has waned. Faith in human reason
is fading. What is going to prevent the 21st century descending into
worldwide war?
Ferguson provides a potted account of the way the west was torn apart
by tumultuous storms of hatred. As the west declined, the east was
on the rise, driven by economic robustness. Although Ferguson admits
that it is not difficult to imagine a future in which west and east
clash in war, he remains cautiously optimistic about the chances of
21st-century nation states avoiding full-scale conflict. He argues
that the unrivalled superiority of the US in the 1990s was a force
for good. Uncontested American supremacy enabled violence elsewhere in
the world to be contained. As a result, global warfare is now at its
lowest level since the late 1950s. Ferguson seems to believe in the
ability of strong nations (the US and, in the future, perhaps China)
to control the passions of more volatile ones.
Although Ferguson’s story is daunting in its detail (the book has
to be propped up against a table to be read comfortably), it does
not claim to be a history of the entire century. The focus is on the
years between 1904, when Japan became the first Asian power in modern
times to defeat a European power, and 1953, the year the Korean war
ended. Ferguson is most assured when dealing with the terrible years
between 1914 and 1918. It is important, he tells us, to remember that
the years before 1914 were relatively peaceful. In Europe, at least,
there were only 21 major wars in the hundred years up to this point.
In that context, the inability of many British elites to forecast the
start of hostilities in 1914 is understandable, especially when tied
to their (misplaced) confidence in Britain’s imperial might. Surely,
these elites believed, the world’s largest empire possessed sufficient
power to avert a global crisis.
They were proved wrong. Rather than preventing war, empires fuelled
them. To carry out the dirty task of slaughter, all major powers
were dependent on recruits, conscripts and forced labour drawn from
territories far from their national heartlands. In the end, the war
ground to a halt largely as a result of a dramatic slump in the morale
of German soldiers, who began surrendering in droves. By that stage,
however, a generation had been slaughtered.
Although the Great War casts a long shadow over the 20th century,
Ferguson acknowledges that the war which followed was even more
decisive. The Second World War propelled the notion of “total war”
to horrifying heights. Civi-lians became the victims-of-choice. While
only 5 per cent of deaths in the 1914-18 conflict were civilian,
in the 1939-45 war that figure was 66 per cent. Many more civilians
than military personnel were killed in Belgium, China, France,
Greece, Hungary, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, the Soviet Union
and Yugoslavia. Innocence was butchered.
According to Ferguson, peace brought only a “tainted victory”.
Western powers had allied themselves with Stalin, a “despot who
was every bit as brutal a tyrant as Hitler”. Unrestrained submarine
warfare and the terror-bombing of Dresden, Hamburg and Hiroshima (to
name just a few) had contaminated British and American honour. It is
alleged that when Winston Churchill heard the news about the death
sentences passed on the Nazi leaders at Nuremberg, he turned to his
chief of staff and commented: “Nuremberg shows that it’s supremely
important to win. You and I would be in a pretty pickle if we had not.”
The two world wars had reduced humanity to rubble; the Holocaust
had stripped even that rubble of meaning. It was followed by the
threat of nuclear annihilation. Humanity had fashioned a world of
suffering which dwarfed anything that went before. How could this
have happened? The subtitle to Ferguson’s book provides his answer:
the 20th century was an “age of hatred”. Throughout the world,
people turned on their neighbours with ferocity. De-humanisation
became common: the suddenness with which people could be cast as
“aliens” was alarming. During the Armenian genocide of 1912-13,
the Turks coined a description for the Armenians: “dog food”. When
Japanese soldiers entered Nanking in 1938, the 20,000 Chinese women
they raped were considered less than human. As one soldier explained:
“We felt no shame about it. No guilt.” Through the classi- fication
of the enemy as inhuman, they all became fair game.
This orgy of inhumanity is thoroughly probed by Ferguson. And when
he sticks to history, it is a credible account, even if it doesn’t
tell us much that is new. The problem is that he seems to have been
seduced by evolutionary psychology. He gives much analytical weight
to the concept of “hatred”, yet never really tells us what it is.
Instead, he relies on the vague idea that hatred is one of humanity’s
innate instincts. The “twin urge to rape and murder remains repressed
in a civilised society”, he argues, but it wreaks havoc when unleashed
upon the world. Economic volatility is one important trigger.
Ferguson’s thesis is most disturbingly addressed in the context of
sexualised violence. He suggests that the destructive instinct is
intrinsically tied to the sexual impulse. Sexual violence directed
against enemies was inspired by “erotic, albeit sadistic, fantasies
as much as by ‘eliminationist’ racism”, he asserts. Bloodlust and rape
went together. This just isn’t good enough. The simple logic and aura
of scientific certitude represented by the appeal to instincts mask
the fact that “instincts” don’t actually explain anything.
At best, all Ferguson is doing is sticking a label on complex
historical processes. To assume an inherent connection between hate and
love does nothing to clarify why some genocides (hate) have involved
rape (which Ferguson bizarrely wants to put in the “eros” category)
while others have not. Neither the “repression” of hatred nor its
“eruption” explains anything in historical terms. It is unclear, for
instance, how the “volatile ambivalence” of “aversion and attraction”
can help us understand the history of violence “which has for so long
characterised relations between white Americans and African Americans”.
By emphasising the primordial connection with our primate ancestors,
Ferguson reduces the complexity of human society and fails to account
for individual motivations or cultural trends in violence. It
is an unfortunate lapse. Ferguson should leave psychology to the
psychologists and stick to what he is really good at: writing history.
Joanna Bourke is professor of history at Birkbeck, University of
London, and the author of “Fear: a cultural history” (Virago, 2006).
She is currently writing a book about rapists.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

DEPORTED BROTHERS ENJOYED CLOSE TIES WITH PATTNI AND OTHERS IN THE LIMELIGHT
By Tony Kago And Patrick Mayoyo
The Nation, Kenya
June 19 2006
Mr Kamlesh Pattni of the Goldenberg scandal. The sons of slain drug
baron Ibrahim Akasha. Narc activist Mary Wambui and her daughter
Winnie. Real estate tycoon Raju Sanghani. And Mombasa brothers Hassan
and Abu Joho. These are the some of names that crop up as some of the
associates of the deported Artur brothers. While the Wambui and Winnie
link has been exhaustively analysed, not much has been mentioned on
some of the even more controversial characters who mingled with Artur
Margaryan and Artur Sargsyan.
Mr Kamlesh Pattni
His name is synonymous with the most sensational scandal to ever hit
Kenya – Goldenberg.
His fortunes seemed to have changed dramatically when Kanu was
voted out of power in 2002, and the Narc Government set up a Judicial
Commission of Inquiry to investigate Goldenberg and associated scandals
afresh. Mr Pattni was eager to reveal all and heap the blame on former
President Moi.
He has also tried to cultivate links with leading figures in Kibaki’s
government and the President’s informal circle of advisers and
power-brokers.
His links to the Armenian brothers have been an open secret. He was a
frequent visitor to their Runda residence and had hosted them severally
at the Grand Regency Hotel.
However, the managers of a casino recently established at the Grand
Regency have denied reports that the Artur brothers were its owners.
Mr Pattni was described by the Justice Samuel Bosire’s commission of
inquiry as the chief architect of the Goldenberg scandal where Kenya
lost Sh20 billion under the guise of a gold and diamonds trade. The
scheme involved fictitious exports that were used to claim the billions
in export compensation.
According to the findings of the Bosire commission, Mr Pattni escaped
arrest for many years because he was shielded by influential people
in the Kanu government.
Mr Pattni and five other former government officials were charged
with plotting to steal Sh5.8 billion from the Treasury.
He denied the four counts of conspiring to steal the money in 1993
jointly with the then spy chief James Kanyotu, Treasury permanent
secretary Wilfred Koinange, Central Bank governor Eric Kotut and his
deputy Eliphaz Riungu. The case is still in court.
Mr Raju Sanghani
When the Artur brothers saga started in March amid claims that they
were mercenaries, real estate agent Rajendra Rajilal Sanghani –
who was known for his connections during the Moi era – was among
those interviewed by police.
His firm, Real Management Services, was the agent for the Runda house
let by Mr Sammy Mutinda Musyoki.
Mr Sanghani admitted that he facilitated the business activities of
the brothers and had introduced them to top business and security
officials and politicians, including Mwingi North MP Kalonzo Musyoka.
In March, Mr Musyoka said that he would sever the links until the row
over the Armenians is resolved. Mr Sanghani showed journalists a copy
of the design of the proposed 5,000 low cost houses project which
the brothers were alleged to have been keen to develop in Athi River.
The brothers were also keen to buy some houses Mr Sanghani had built
in Karen, but the deal failed when they failed to agree on the price.
Mr Sanghani was in the news recently contesting the seizure five
years ago of a Mercedes Benz 500 SEL by the Kenya Revenue Authority.
He said he had bought the Sh8 million car from retired President
Moi’s son, Philip Moi, only for the taxman to seize the vehicle for
non-payment of duty.
His lawyer asked appellate judges R.S.C. Omolo, Philip Waki and
William Deverell to give the car back to his client.
He wondered why KRA was denying his client the car when it could
demand duty and storage charges from Mr Philip Moi. The court heard
that although Mr Sanghani bought the car from Mr Moi in 1994, Mr Moi
did not hand over the logbook but promised to do so later.
The Akashas
Mr Baktash Akasha is another Artur associate who was questioned during
the first police investigation into the saga of the brothers.
Mr Margaryan had said that one of the Akasha daughters was married
to one of his business managers.
When the Nation reported that a blue Mercedes Benz used by Mr Margaryan
was registered in Baktash’s name, Baktash said he wanted to sell it
and that it was Mr Sanghani who gave it to Mr Margaryan.
The Benz was one of the 15 cars police found parked at the Arturs’
compound during a recent raid.
Mr Baktash was also a frequent visitor to the Runda home and has
been present at some of the parties the brothers used to throw for
pressmen and entertainment celebrities.
The head of the Akasha family – Mr Ibrahim Abdalla Akasha –
was shot dead in a gangland-style execution in Amsterdam’s Bloedstrat
(Blood Street) in May 2000 as he hurried for an appointment with an
underground drugs agent.
He died in the hands of his second wife, Mrs Gazi Hayat, as two
other people who had accompanied the couple, Ms Zainabu Hassan and
Mr Mohammed Ali Musa watched.
Reports indicated that he met his death after a long-standing feud
over non-payment of a Sh200 million heroine consignment he delivered
to the Netherlands in 1999.
Mr Akasha, who had vast business interests at the Coast and in Nairobi,
was an international drug trafficker, but escaped prosecution because
of his strong links with influential people in the Kanu government.
The family was hit by another tragedy when on March 28, 2003, a lone
gunman shot Mr Kamaldin seven times in the head in a Mombasa street
killing him instantly. Three people were arrested and charged with
murder. The case is still pending.
Abubakar and Hassan Joho
Among those whose names featured prominently as the Armenian brothers
business associates in Mombasa were the Joho brothers, Hassan and
Abubakar. The two are also said to be longtime business associates
of Narc activist Mary Wambui.
Abubakar is a director of Chelamed (K) Ltd, one of the companies
recently mentioned in connection with airport security passes dished
out freely to individuals and companies associated with the Artur
brothers.
Mr Hassan Joho is also a politician, and attracted Ms Wambui’s support
during the Kisauni by-election in 2004.
Narc nomination
With support from the Liberal Democratic Party, he won the Narc
nomination but was rejected by other Mombasa politicians who instead
teamed up to support Mr Ananiah Mwaboza who vied on a Labour Party
ticket.
Ms Wambui has in the past attended public functions involving Hassan
Joho and one such occasion is when she presided over a fundraiser
in Kisauni constituency on Mr Joho’s invitation. Immediately
after the deportation of the Artur brothers, detectives from the
Coast provincial CID headquarters are said to have raided a house in
Tudor estate, Mombasa. The owner of the house is said to be a close
business associated of the Artur brothers and was also involved in
motor vehicle importation.
In Mombasa, the Artur brothers are also said to have had close
links with a number of leading commodity dealers, particularly sugar
importers.

ARMENIA CAUSES PRICE OF WHEAT IN KARABAKH TO DECLINE
Lragir.am
19 June 06
Ararat Hayriyan, the executive director of the Karabakh-based Alraghats
(Mill) and Bread Factory, gave a news conference June 17 to announce
that buyers of wheat from Armenia artificially decrease the price of
wheat in Karabakh.
In Karabakh production of wheat is the most profitable business.
Besides, it is the only production, which involves local resources,
and there is no problem of market. In a “neither peace, nor war”
economy it is the most convenient form of business, for its does not
require long-term investments. Therefore, they produce a lot of wheat
in Karabakh. One third of the production supplies the local demand. The
rest is exported to Armenia, which imports wheat from Russia.
In this period of time the price of the Russian wheat is not clear
yet, whereas harvest in Karabakh has already started. The Armenian
producers arrive in Karabakh to buy wheat in the field. By the way,
the price is artificially reduced to 65-70 drams per kg. Most farmers
have nowhere to store and no cars to transport grain, so they have to
sell their wheat for this price. Ararat Hayriyan says, however, that
in 1 or 2 months the price of wheat may grow up to 100 drams. Since
the annual income of the Karabakh farmers comes from wheat, even
several drams are very important. Considering this, Mill announced
that they will buy wheat for 85 drams per kg, and will pay 25 percent
on the same day. Mill can buy 15-20 thousand tons of wheat.
The executive director of Mill advises farmers not to sell wheat
on these days. Mill is supposed to be interested in a low price,
but apparently the factory thinks about the producers of wheat.
Especially that according to Ararat Hayriyan, not only the buyers
from Armenia press farmers but also the Karabakh government.
“Many of them took a loan or rented land in fall. Visit the house of
any farmer, there is a notification of Procuracy on the table.
Loan conditions are so hard that the farmers start repaying debts
before starting to sell the grain. Therefore they have to sell the
grain cheaply to repay the debts,” said Ararat Hayriyan.

MANAGING DIRECTOR OF ICF RODRIGO DE RATO: ARMENIA MOVES FORWARD BY CONFIDENT STEPS IN RIGHT DIRECTION
Yerevan, June 19. ArmInfo. RA Prime Minister Andranik Margaryan has
met with Rodrigo de Rato, the Managing Director of the International
Currency Fund.
During the meeting, Andranik Margaryan highly appreciated the level of
RA cooperation with ICF and the World Bank just after the Armenia’s
gaining independence. The reforms in a number of spheres, carried
out by these organizations, allowed to achieve sufficient results in
economy and to fix a progress, to start implementation of the strategic
program for poverty-fight, to fix an economic growth, etc. A. Margaryan
called RA joining the World Trade Organization in 2003 one of the
examples of such a cooperation, which became a serious stimulus for
activation of trade relations and attraction of foreign investments.
According to Margaryan, a sufficient growth of export volume has been
already fixed in 2005 as a result of successive increase of export,
compared to the previous years. Moreover, as a result of cooperation
with international organizations, Armenia is recognized a country with
average level of income per head, according to the WB’s classification,
and it took the 27th place in 2005 among 157 countries of the world
on liberalization of economy and is recognized a “free country, in
general”. A. Margaryan noted the significance of ICF assistance to
the policy of inflation mitigation, carried out by the RA Central Bank.
In his turn, Rodrigo de Rato assured A. Margaryan that the annual
meeting of ICF and WB representatives, being held these days in
Yerevan, is conducted efficiently and in a constructive situation. He
also positively evaluated the results of Armenia-ICF cooperation for
the past years, the level of economic growth in Armenia, reduction
of the foreign debt volume and decrease of the poverty level in the
country. According to him, Armenia moves forward wit confident steps
in aright direction. He also highly appreciated the level of economic
reforms, implemented in Armenia. The meeting participants noted the
importance of such meetings for both the assessment of the work done
and for specification of the following steps.

WELCOME UPWARD?
Hakob Badalyan
Lragir.am
19 June 06
The great American maneuvers are gathering momentum. While the Armenian
community was speaking about the recall of John Evans, the United
States took up the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs, and replaced Stephen
Mann by Mathew Bryza. At first the rotation of the co-chair seems
to be determined by the aspiration of the United States to reach a
breakthrough in the settlement. It is interesting, however, why the
United States trusts the settlement of the conflict over Karabakh to
a State Department official, who deals with the energy sector. Either
Bryza’s profile changed, or the United States is changing the profile
of the settlement of the conflict over Karabakh.
The latter seems to fit the political strategies of the United States
better, which is based on the energy infrastructures of the region.
And it is not surprising or strange. After all, what is the most
powerful weapon of Russia in the South Caucasus? Of course, the
“switch.” Consequently, in order to undermine Russian influence the
United States needs to seize the switch from Russia or supply the
region from another switch. The United States has probably chosen
the second. It was not accidental that the United States was highly
interested in eliminating or relieving consequences, when the Russian
gas pipeline was blown up in January.
Even there was information that the United States mediated Azerbaijan
to supply gas not only to Georgia but also Armenia. This information,
by the way, was not refuted officially. Besides it is important that
during Ilham Aliyev’s visit to the United States neither Iran nor
Karabakh was the primary issue. Bush’s announcements during Aliyev’s
visit were mostly on partnership in the sphere of energy. Hence, it is
not unexpected that an official specializing in energy is engaged in
the settlement of an ethnic confrontation. By the way, the “evolution”
of the OSCE Minsk Group American co-chairs displays the dominance of
energy-based moods of the United States in this process.
Rudolf Perina was replaced by Stephen Mann, the special envoy of
the U.S. President to the Caspian region and the “godfather” of
Baku-Ceyhan. Mann’s specialization is further developed by Bryza.
Therefore, for the United States the conflict over Karabakh as such
does not need a settlement any more. It does not damage the energy
interests of this country.
On the contrary, every effort for settlement may become a serious
obstacle or threat for the energy policies of the Unites States.
Hence, in the framework of the settlement of the Karabakh conflict
the Unites States is regulating other processes. It was not accidental
that Bryza’s appointment to Armenia aroused a rather nervous reaction
of the government.
Everything looked differently, however. The minister of defense
had an unprecedented visit to Brussels, where he smiled a wider
and longer smile shaking hands with NATO officials than even his
smile at Azatutiun Square on the occasion of the victory on the chess
olympiad. Perhaps only Mathew Bryza had smiled a wider smile in Yerevan
when he announced on March 7 that the United States started building
upward democracy, which was perceived as a call for revolution. Maybe
it was worthwhile to smile a wider smile than Bryza’s in Brussels to
have the West believe that his smile was frank, and to announce in
Yerevan that there is no demand for revolution, for the community to
be convinced that the smile was not frank.
However, it is certainly very difficult to smile in Brussels and make
a statement in Yerevan at the same time. However, a friend in need is
a friend indeed. On June 16 Artashes Geghamyan announced in Yerevan
that the results of a poll conducted by Gelap suggest that 70 percent
of the population of Armenia is against revolution. In other words,
why are you coming, Bryza? However, lo and behold, Bryza is not coming
alone, and the new ambassador to Armenia is coming along. More exactly,
the former is leaving. As well as new representatives of American
organizations are coming. And it is at least strange that the leader
of an opposition party announces at this moment that the public does
not want a revolution. But who said that the new Americans are coming
for a revolution? Maybe they are just replacing the old ones. Why are
our old ones anxious and smiling “downward”? They say they laugh in
the end. But how did they know that it is the end?
From: Baghdasarian

RA FOREIGN MINISTER OFF TO UKRAINE
ArmRadio.am
19.06.2006 10:26
RA Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan will start on an official visit
to Ukraine today. During the visit the Foreign Minister is scheduled
to meet the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko, Prime Minister
Yuri Yekhanurov and Foreign Minister Boris Tarasyuk.

CONSULTATIONS TO BE HELD AT THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
ArmRadio.am
19.06.2006 10:55
Groups and factions of the National Assembly will hold consultations
today to decide the future steps over the draft law on “Implementing
amendments in the Electoral Code.”
The Venice Commission of the Council of Europe has already drawn
its conclusions about the bill. It is expected that during summer
months the Parliamentary groups and factions will adjust the draft
of amendments to the Electoral Code, considering the conclusion of
European experts.

FIVE SPORTSMEN OF ARMENIA TO PARTICIPATE IN THE WORLD YOUTH GYMNASTICS CHAMPIONSHIP
ArmRadio.am
19.06.2006 11:05
Five sportsmen of Armenia will participate in the World Youth
Gymnastics Championship to start today in Portugal.
The Armenian team comprises Rudik Balasanyan, Armen Baldryan, Hripsime
Hovhannisyan, Nune Arevshatyan and Ani Kosakyan.

BAKU SUGGESTS SHORT TERMS OF RESOLVING THE KARABAKH CONFLICT
ArmRadio.am
19.06.2006 12:27
“Baku is ready to provide the highest level of autonomy to
Nagorno-Karabakh, including the status equal to the one of Tatarstan
within the Russian Federation,” the Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan
Elmar Mammadyarov said, Day.az. informs.
“The Constitution of Tatarstan, for instance, allows opening
representation of the republic in a foreign country,” Elmar Mammadyarov
noted, adding that the issue of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh
should be resolved earlier or later, and Baku suggests settling
the question within short terms. For this, however, it is important
to create necessary conditions to allow Azerbaijanis residing here
participate in the process. Mammadyarov declared that in the course
of time Azerbaijan will get even more powerful, therefore “Karabakh
Armenians should realize that for their own prosperity they had better
stay Azeri citizens.”