NKR FOREIGN MINISTER LAYS EMPHASIS ON FULL ENGAGEMENT OF KARABAKH
Lragir.am
08 April 06
On April 7 Georgy Petrosyan, Minister of Foreign Affairs of NKR, met
with the newly-appointed EU Special Representative for the South
Caucasus Peter Semneby.
Congratulating Peter Semneby on his appointment, Georgy Petrosyan
emphasized the role of the European Union in promoting democracy and
maintaining stability in the region.
Peter Semneby informed that the mandate of the EU Special
Representative had been expanded and now includes prevention and
settlement of conflicts.
On the request of the EU Special Representative the foreign minister
of NKR briefed Peter Semneby on democratization in NKR, as well as the
stance of official Stepanakert on the settlement of the conflict,
underlining the necessity of full engagement of Nagorno Karabakh in
the talks.
Expressing concern about recently frequent cases of violation of the
ceasefire at the front line between the armed forces of Nagorno
Karabakh Republic and Azerbaijan, Georgy Petrosyan extended the text
of the statement of the NKR Foreign Ministry, calling Azerbaijan and
Armenia for confirming their willingness to achieve a peace settlement
of the Karabakh conflict.
NKR Special Representation to RA
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

VIVA CELL NOT READY TO PURCHASE 90% OF “ARMENTEL” SHARES
Yerevan, April 7. ArmInfo. VIVA Cell, second mobile connection
operator in Armenia, is not ready to purchase 90% of “ArmenTel” shares
from OTE, Greek company. Ralph Yirikian, general director of VIVA
Cell, informed ArmInfo. “We have just entered the Armenian market of
mobile connection,” he said. At the same time, he added that such an
opportunity isn’t excluded in the future. It’s worth mentioning that
OTE anounced about its decision to sell 90% Of “ArmenTel” shares,
after the consultations with RA Government, recently.
RA Government sold 90% of “ArmenTel” shares to OTE at $142,5 millions
in 1997. The rest 10% of the shares still belong to RA
Government. While VIVA Cell company became second mobile connection
operator in Armenia since June 1, 2005

THE SERVICES OF AMBULATORY-POLYCLINIC SYSTEM WILL ALWAYS BE FREE
Yerevan, April 7, ArmInfo. The services of the ambulatory-polyclinic
system of Armenia will always be free for all categories of citizens,
said Minister for Healthcare Norayr Davidian.
Over the last 15 years the healthcare services were chargeable for
everybody except the indigent. Since the beginning of 2006 these
services have become free. In order to provide free ambulatory
treatment at the polyclinics additional AMD 7 billion (about $14
million) was granted by Government. Minister Norayr Davidian also
informed that last year the polyclinics of Armenia were visited 6,635
million times by the citizens.
The state budget 2006 assigns AMD 39,1 billion to healthcare against
32,9 in 2005. The polyclinics receive the major part – AMD 14,3 billon
of all the financing, 24,7% more than last year.

Armenian opposition MP says gas deal with Russia “economic sabotage”
Arminfo, Yerevan
7 Apr 06
“The agreement between the Armenian government and Russia’s Gazprom is
an act of economic sabotage against the people,” the deputy chairman
of the National Unity Party, Agasi Arshakyan, has told Arminfo news
agency.
He said he was certain that Armenia will spend the funds received for
the fifth unit of the Razdan thermal power plant on containing the
rise of tariffs for the Armenian consumers, and that the 140m dollars
of investments envisaged by the project will be allocated from the
profits of the Russian side.
“Armenia will pay 110 dollars for each 1,000 cu.m. of gas, which means
that Russia will return the 243m dollars it paid,” the MP said. Soon
the price for the Armenian consumers will be set at 68 drams per one
cu.m., but “this price will not last more than a year”, he said.
Arshakyan noted that Armenia discussed an Iranian offer of barter
supplies of gas in exchange for electricity from the fifth unit of
Razdan at the rate of 3 kW per one cu.m. of gas in December
2005. “Iranian gas is 20 per cent more efficient than Russia’s and for
one cu.m. of Iranian gas Armenia could obtain no fewer than 5
kW. Hence, Armenia could leave itself around 2.5 kW from each cu.m. of
Iranian gas,” Arshakyan said. He assured that the fifth unit of the
Razdan power station could work without significant investments for
around ten years at the capacity of 445 MW.
“I do not believe that Iran gave up the project,” Arshakyan said and
added that “Russia does have influence over Iran, but we should be
able to demonstrate independence in something at least”.

Armenian premier, EU envoy discuss ties, Karabakh
Arminfo
6 Apr 06
Yerevan, 6 April: Armenian Prime Minister Andranik Markaryan and EU
envoy for the South Caucasus Peter Semneby discussed the issues of
Armenia-EU cooperation in Yerevan today.
Markaryan expressed his hope that Semneby would continue the
productive activity of his predecessor Heikki Talvitie in the South
Caucasus, the governmental press service told Arminfo. He stressed
that Armenia is interested in opening of the European Commission
office in Yerevan, taking into consideration the implementation of the
action plan within the European Neighbourhood Policy.
He also expressed hope that the approval of Armenia’s action plan
would not be dragged out in case of the successful Armenia-EU talks in
May 2006. Markaryan welcomed the extension of the EU special
representative’s mandate for the settlement of frozen conflicts,
stressing that all efforts of international structures are aimed at
achieving speedy and peaceful resolution of the Karabakh conflict. The
prime minister also expressed concern about Azerbaijan’s bellicose
statements and frequent violations of the cease-fire regime.
For his part, Peter Semneby said that he intended to visit the region
more frequently because relations between the EU and the South
Caucasus have reached a new quality. He stressed that the EU is
interested in speedy resolution of regional conflicts. Peter Semneby
said that he would arrive in Armenia again together with the OSCE
Minsk Group co-chairmen.
He said that in his activity he would focus on the Karabakh
settlement, the establishment of supremacy of law in Armenia and
reforms in juridical system.
The sides also stressed the importance of conducting elections in
Armenia in full compliance with international standards. They also
discussed Armenian-Russian cooperation and Armenia’s energy policy.

Armenia and World Bank signs energy project

Arminfo
7 Apr 06
Yerevan, 7 April: Armenian Minister of Finance and Economy, Vardan
Khachatryan, and the head of the World Bank’s representative office in
Yerevan, Roger Robinson, signed a renewable energy project in Yerevan
today. The total cost of the project is 8m dollars, including a
5m-dollar loan from the International Development Association, and a
3m-dollar grant from the Global Environment Facility.
The programme will assist the Armenian government in increasing energy
capacities through the use of renewable energy sources and in reducing
the carbon dioxide emission, the Finance Ministry press service told
Arminfo.
[Passage omitted: minor detail]

Silent for too long, the witnesses to evil

The Independent – United Kingdom; Apr 08, 2006
ROBERT FISK
X-Sender: Asbed Bedrossian
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 — ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
A quote from the cops. I was in Oslo when I received the SMS on my
Lebanese mobile phone from the country’s Internal Security Forces,
Lebanon’s paramilitary ISF. “Dear citizen,” it began – and I have to
admit, I liked the assumption of Lebanese citizenship. “Starting March
15th, the Internal Security Forces will be dealing strictly with
traffic contraventions. Be co-operative for your safety. The ISF.”
Now I’m sure the “for your safety” bit was just a figure of speech’ I
would be safer in my car if I wore my seatbelt, wouldn’t I? Was that
why my driver Abed met me at Beirut airport strapped into his seatbelt
for the first time? Or was there a threat? That in order to be “safe”
I should be “‘co-operative”?
All the same, I like cops. They know what we journalists want to know
(along, I suppose, with criminals whose own mentality, I suspect, has
a lot in common with policemen and reporters). But in Lebanon these
past few days, we’ve been learning quite a lot about what the cops
know – or knew – about the past: like who killed the Lebanese Druze
leader Kemal Jumblatt.
Jumblatt Senior – as opposed to his mercifully still living son Walid
who is under constant threat of Syrian assassination – was murdered on
16 March 1977, shot dead in his car as he drove near his home in the
Chouf mountains. We all suspected at the time that the Syrians were
involved’ Kemal had turned down an invitation to visit the late
President Hafez el-Assad of Syria in Damascus to discuss the Lebanese
civil war – the equivalent at that time, of refusing Henry VIII a
divorce.
But now along comes my old friend General Issam Abu Zaki, former head
of the Lebanese judicial police, to spill the beans. For General Abu
Zaki – a man so generous he once gave away his much-loved worry beads
because a female friend of mine was rash enough to admire them – turns
out to have been the cop in charge of the Jumblatt murder case.
In 1977, an American car containing drugs had been discovered at
Beirut port, the general has revealed in the Beirut daily AnNahar
newspaper. But outside the gates of the port, the vehicle was stopped
at a Syrian military checkpoint. The Lebanese judicial police later
confirmed that a Syrian intelligence officer based in the Beirut
suburb of Sin el-Fil – a major in rank – stated in writing that he was
in possession of the car.
“A short time later,” Abu Zaki writes, “the car made an appearance in
the Chouf, lying in wait for Kemal Jumblatt as he headed … to
attend a party political meeting. As Jumblatt’s car passed the
American car, the latter pulled out and tailed the Druze leader’s
vehicle. The pursuing car had four people in it, two in civilian
clothes, the other two in military uniforms. Upon leaving the town of
Baaqleen, the suspect American vehicle intercepted Jumblatt’s car.
“Kemal Jumblatt’s bodyguards were bundled into the American vehicle,
and two of the pursuers replaced them… the two cars had barely
travelled 900 metres when something happened that evidently took the
abductors by surprise, for they braked suddenly, as evidenced by the
tyre skid marks on the road left by Jumblatt’ s car. The sudden stop
led to the American car crashing into the back of Jumblatt’ s car. At
this moment the heinous crime took place.”
Jumblatt was murdered with a shot in the head – his brains splashed
over the morning news-paperhehadbeen reading when he was ambushed –
and the killers made their escape. From the knives found in Jumblatt’s
car, Abu Zaki and his cops suspected the attackers intended to take
the Druze leader to a neighbouring Christian village where they would
have cut his throat and thus provoked further atrocities in Lebanon’s
already two-year-old civil war. But Jumblatt struggled with the
Syrians who were forced to shoot him on the spot.
Or so Abu Zaki surmises. Jumblatt’s son Walid told me this week he
believes this story to be true – just as did a Beirut flower seller
called Abu Talib who reported to Abu Zaki back in 1977 that the Syrian
killers had later stopped at a Hamra Street hotel in the city. So too,
apparently, did the Lebanese judicial investigative judge, Hassan
Qawass, who survived an abduction attempt and a missile attack on his
Beirut home when he refused to drop the case.
Alas, a “highly placed legal authority” in Lebanon was later suborned
to close the Jumblatt file.
But now we know a little more about that 1977 murder and so Abu Zaki
wonders whether we will also know the truth about the assassination
last year of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri whose death
is being investigated, in ever more lacklustre a fashion, it seems, by
the UN. Yet it raises other, bigger questions.
Why, for example, don’t cops and diplomats and statesmen come out with
the facts at the time? Why do they wait till their retirement to blurt
out the truth? Why did we only know the truth from the top about
Vietnam after Robert McNamara had become a Grand Old Man of Letters?
Why did we have to wait for decades to know that General Sir Douglas
Haig lied in 1916? Why do we have to wait until 2006 to learn that we
tortured Germans in 1946?
Well, just look at what has happened to John Evans, the US ambassador
to Armenia who – while in office – told the truth about the Armenian
holocaust, the genocide by the Ottoman Turks which killed one and a
half million Armenian Christians in 1915. Before he was elected
president, George W Bush promised the Armenians of America that he
would acknowledge this genocide. Once in office, however, he caved in,
gutlessly calling it a “tragedy” so that he wouldn’t get his fingers
burned by that wonderful democratic Nato ally – and would-be EU member
– called Turkey.
But there was Ambassador Evans on 19 February this year telling
Armenians in the Bay area of San Francisco that “as someone who has
studied it, there’s no doubt in my mind what happened. I think it is
unbecoming of us, as Americans, to play word games here. I believe in
calling things by their name. I will today call it the Armenian
genocide”.
The luckless but over-truthful ambassador has since been constrained
by the State Department to remark that “although I told my audience
that United States policy on the Armenian tragedy (sic) has not
changed, I used the term ‘genocide’, speaking in what I characterised
as my personal capacity”.
Phew! But I think I get it. If you want to spill the beans while in
office, you have to tell the truth only in “a personal capacity”. The
mass rape and slaughter of tens of thousands of Armenian girls in 1915
can only be acknowledged in a “personal capacity”. The mass murder of
Turkish Armenia’s manhood in 1915 can only be conceded in a “personal
capacity”. And even then you are liable to get fired.
Well, I have a little nudge of the arm to make here. In October, I
shall be lecturing in Turkey on the Armenian genocide. I shall be
doing so as Middle East correspondent of The Independent as well as
author of a book whose Turkish edition will carry a whole chapter on
the Armenian holocaust. I don’t have to talk in a “personal capacity”
although I might like to have General Abu Zaki at my side. For what
the Lebanese ISF would no doubt call my “safety”.
If you want to spill the beans while in office, you have to do it in
‘a personal capacity’
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

RAW CONCEPTION

Aravot.am
07 April 06
The jurist Vardan Poghosian marks in this way the conception of the
project of the law about «Granting dual citizenship in the RA
the Armenians of abroad’ .
Examining the text of conception, which was published yesterday in the
` Republic Armenia’ newspaper and replaced in yerkir.am site Vardan
Poghosian has found out contradictions. And the most important of it
are different formulations about grounds of granting dual
citizenship. According to «Yerkir» «a person of
Armenian nationality besides citizenship of other state is granted by
the RA citizenship by by evincing facts.’ While some conditions are
mentioned in the `RA’ for being granted by dual citizenship. `An
Armenian person is granted by the RA citizenship besides the
citizenship of other country in the following cases; After living in
the RA, according to evincing facts of his Armenian origin, the person
must pay a certain percent of his three year income to the RA tax
service as a national tribute.’
According to Vardan Poghosian the division of these two projects shows
that the authors of the conception don’t have entire and exact
apprehension how they want to solve the problem of granting the RA
citizenship to the Armenians from Diaspora’.
But he affirmed that both published documents are `rather raw, full of
discrepant positions and don’t settle the main problem which had been
risen after constitutional amendments’. He also mentioned that it is
mentioned in the project of the conception that they should adopt a
law `About dual citizenship’ or to make some changes in the law `About
Citizenship’. Vardan Poghosian mentioned as the most important
omission of the conception; `It is foreseen to settle such positions
by the law which are impossible to settle by the law.
It is spoken of military service and tax obligations. These are such
positions, which can be settled by international bilateral
agreements. Even if we adopt such positions in our law they want act
towards the opposite state. And if an international agreement is
signed, its positions can be different from the RA law and in that
case, according to our Constitution, the positions of international
agreement will be valid.’
According to Mr. Poghosian the conception has remained unclear one of
the core problems, the settlement of the problem of electoral right;
`I think if you ask questions the authors of the conception whether
the dual citizen can become the RA President or NA deputy they will
give discrepant answers’.
We reminded that we had asked the ARF leaders, one of them said that
the dual citizen can become the RA President and deputy, another said
that they can determine the list of posts which only the RA citizen
have right to fill. ` Someone says a thing, the other says just the
opposite, but it isn’t important.
The important thing is that the government can’t settle any problem, –
Vardan Poghosian noticed. And the problem of public service and
filling state important posts isn’t also settled. Human rights will be
infringed if this problem isn’t settled by law’.
Anna Israelian

NEWS RELEASE

Azat Artsakh, Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
07 April 2006
Several days ago NKR Foreign Minister Georgy Petrossian met with the
delegation of the U.S. – Russian Dartmouth Conference Regional
Conflicts Task Force, headed by co-chairs Vitaly Naumkin (Russia) and
Harold Saunders (United States), visiting NKR. During the talk they
discussed the framework agreement on the peace settlement prepared
over the nine meetings of dialogue between the representatives of
Azerbaijan, Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh societies, mediated by the
Dartmouth Conference. During the meeting the co-chairs presented the
basic principles of the document, pointing out the underlying
principle of compromise. According to them, this framework agreement
does not offer resolutions; it is aimed to establish conditions for a
sustainable dialogue between the conflict parties. For his part, the
foreign minister of NKR appreciated the efforts of the task force in
seeking for a mutually acceptable settlement, and pointed out the
participation of the representatives of Nagorno Karabakh Republic
society in the dialogue mediated by the Dartmouth Conference. At the
same time, Georgy Petrossian appreciated the sense of moral duty of
all the mediators and international organizations for the observation
of the cease-fire and the prevention of applying force or coercion in
the zone of the Karabakh conflict.
AA.
07-04-2006

A `TACIT’ STEP BY STEP SETTLEMENT

Azat Artsakh, Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
07 April 2006
Recently debates and events connected with the Karabakh issue have
acquired a new quality and course. The offered solutions are so many
and so different that it seems impossible to offer a fundamentally new
solution. However, the relationships of the conflict parties have not
changed and still lack confidence. Hence, `bridges’ are needed rather
to bring into being one of the existing solutions. This first of all
requires mutual confidence or at least a constructive dialogue on good
faith. The official bilateral and mediated meetings of the
representatives of Armenia and Azerbaijan apparently cannot foster the
establishment of this atmosphere. As a result the role of the
non-governmental sector increases, and recently it has been quite
active. In this context the Dartmouth Conference is a significant
step. This is an American initiative since 2001. The delegations of
Azerbaijan, Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh participate in the activity
of the Dartmouth Conference Regional Conflicts Task Force. The task
force has effective relations with both NGOs and official
bodies. After the meetings in Baku and Armenia the task force arrived
in Stepanakert on April 1. The US co-chairman Harold Saunders, the
Russian co-chairman Vitaly Naumkin, as well as Phil Steward and Irina
Zvyagelskaya met with the representatives of non-governmental and
political organizations at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The core
question discussed at the meeting was the draft of the framework
agreement on the peace settlement of the Karabakh issue, worked out in
2005, during the ninth meeting of the Dartmouth Conference. Harold
Saunders briefed the main principles of the document. According to
him, none of the sides wants a deadlocked negotiation for the peace
settlement of the Karabakh conflict. However, he also pointed out that
it is impossible to lay bridges of agreement between the logically
opposite views that the sides have today. By the way, Harold Saunders
meant Nagorno Karabakh as a conflict side. For the role of the
framework agreement in establishing this bridge, Harold Saunders
thinks if applied it would establish serious progress in the talks. He
characterized it as a peace-building plan, in which every next step is
possible after the fulfilment of the previous one, rather than a
document that would establish peace at once. Accordingly, the process
is divided into two parts. In the first one it is foreseen to
establish an atmosphere, take actions and create conditions for the
second stage, when a final resolution of the issue will be
reached. The Russian co-chairman Vitaly Naumkin pointed out the fact
that the representatives of the United States and Russia, which have
considerable controversies with regard to conflict settlement, act
together in the peace settlement of the conflict over Karabakh. It is
interesting to know the status, however. According to him, it is
impossible to settle the Karabakh issue at once. First it is necessary
to create an atmosphere. With regard to this Vitaly Naumkin said it is
impossible to achieve results at once. Therefore, it is preferable to
take a tiny step than not to do anything at all. And the engagement
of Karabakh in the talks will, according to him, have only positive
results for it. Nagorno Karabakh will be recognized in international
relations, and will have the right to sign certain agreements and make
commitments. The representatives of the NKR NGOs and political
organizations disagreed to certain principles and terms used in the
document with regard to the step-by-step resolution of the conflict
and the status of Nagorno Karabakh. Margarita Karapetyan, Official of
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of NKR, said: `The document does not
state clearly the legal status of Nagorno Karabakh, which is of utter
importance for the Karabakh side. Here a de-facto, an ` intermediate’
status is mentioned only. On the other hand, the step-by-step
settlement underlies this document, determining the peace settlement
by the return of certain territories, the problem of refugees, etc. It
is very important that it is done through successive steps, the first,
then the second, etc. Practically, in accordance with the document,
the conflict over Karabakh and its settlement is viewed from the
aspect of elimination of the consequences rather than the cause of the
conflict ` the status of NKR.’
NORAYR HOVSEPIAN.
07-04-2006
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress