AZERI OFFICIAL DOWNPLAYS ARMENIA’S THREATS TO QUIT PEACE TALKS
Bilik Dunyasi news agency, Baku, in Russian
16 Sep 05
Baku, 16 September: The latest statement of the press secretary of the
Armenian Foreign Ministry, Gamlet Gasparyan, on the Nagornyy Karabakh
process is nothing but a diplomatic trick and manoeuvring, the head
of the foreign relations department of the Azerbaijani presidential
administration, Novruz Mammadov, has said.
Gasparyan said that “our position remains unchanged. If Azerbaijan
raises any issue with the UN, Armenia will quit the Nagornyy Karabakh
peace talks and Baku will have to negotiate directly” with Xankandi
[Stepanakert].
Mammadov was commenting on the inclusion of the issue “On the situation
in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan” on the agenda of the 60th
session of the UN General Assembly.
“Behind this message is Armenia’s great anxiety. The matter is that
Azerbaijan’s position on the settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani
Nagornyy Karabakh conflict has become very strong and is supported by
international organizations and states. The inclusion of the issue
‘On the situation in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan’ on the
agenda of the 60th session is a logical consequence of this. There
is nothing unusual here. This is our right,” Mammadov said.
Armenia sees that Azerbaijan’s stand on the Nagornyy Karabakh
settlement is getting more support from the international community and
is trying to threaten Azerbaijan that they will stop the negotiations,
step aside and involve the Armenians of Nagornyy Karabakh in direct
talks.
“First, it is not so easy to avoid the talks. The territories are
under occupation and negotiations are continuing. Armenia is in
a desperate position and may be looking for an excuse. Second,
if Armenia indeed wants to quit the talks and Yerevan officially
declares its withdrawal from the Nagornyy Karabakh issue, we will
find a chance to talk to the Armenians of Nagornyy Karabakh. We can
do it and there is no problem about that,” Mammadov added.

KOCHARYAN SOFTENED AFTER RICE CALLED HIM BUT STILL NOT ENOUGH TO AGREE FOR PEACE, ILHAM ALIYEV TOLD TURKISH “HURRIYET”
Azerbaijan News Service
Sept 3 2005
“Azerbaijan is very strong and Armenia will not withstand its
pressure. Nevertheless, we do not want war, as a great number of
people may die. I believe, earlier or later we will return our lands.
Let nobody has doubts in this respect”, the interview of the President
of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev with the Turkish “Hurriet” newspaper,
published on 2 September. “Each Azerbaijani is deeply confident, the
day will come, when the occupied lands will be freed, and the banner of
Azerbaijan will flutter again over Karabakh”, President Ilham Aliyev
emphasized, having also commented on the results of the meeting with
the Armenian President Kocharyan in Kazan. “There are no results so
far. The Armenians expect we will give them independence. However,
it is impossible. The first priority for us is to preserve the
territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. I told Kocharyan, we are ready
to guarantee the security of the Armenian community of Karabakh. I
stressed, Baku will not allow the community to face any danger”, Ilham
Aliyev said and added, “however, they (the Armed Forces of Armenia)
do not want to free our lands”. At the same time President Ilham
Aliyev noted, that during the recent telephone talk the US State
Secretary Condoleezza Rice stated, Washington wants the sides to
come to the conflict settlement. “I do not understand, why Armenia,
being an occupier country is not punished, although, undoubtedly,
I also understand, the Armenian lobby is rather strong.
The present situation is extremely unfair”, Aliyev said. He noted,
after this conversation I felt some softening in the position of
Kocharyan, although it is not sufficient for the problem settlement.
“We took all possible moves. However, Armenia did not take heed
of the world public opinion. Over 1 million citizens of Azerbaijan
remained homeless. The West stands for the soonest settlement of the
conflict. We will do our utmost for that”, Aliyev summarized. The
Turkish “Hurriet” newspaper’s issue of 2 September placed an
interview of the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev with the
newspaper’s director on the informational matters, a journalist Tufan
Turenc. According to Trend, the interview notes, that President of
Azerbaijan put aside without opening a letter of the President of
the Greek Cyprus Papadopulos, in which there was a sharp criticism
of actions of the official Baku in regard to setting up the economic
relations with the Northern Cyprus. Furthermore, the author cites
the President of Azerbaijan: “The first moves towards Azerbaijan
were taken by the leadership of Greece, which called our Ambassador
to the Foreign Ministry and handed in the note to him. However, we
did not pay attention to it. Then came the letter from the Cypriot
Republic, which I put aside without opening. Nobody is entitled to
exert pressure on Azerbaijan”. President Ilham Aliyev underlined,
he ignores the international pressure in this issue. The head of the
state reminded, many people did not believe his statements to disrupt
the isolation regime of the Northen Cyprus. “There were many critical
articles to my address. But I kept my word. The time came for other
Turkish states to support the position of Azerbaijan on this issue.
“Now it is their turn to take similar steps’, Aliyev said. Responding
the question, whether new initiatives from Azerbaijan follow in
this direction Ilham Aliyev replied “We will do everything possible,
as we believe, the isolation of the Northern Cyprus must be eliminated.
There must be an end to injustice. Why is the side, which supported
the UNO plan on the island’s unification punished? It is not possible
either understand or accept”.

ICG REVEALS REPORT ON DAGHLIG GARABAGH
Azerbaijan News Service
Sept 15 2005
All sides in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict need to prepare their people
for peace much better if the seeds of their high-level negotiations
are to bear fruit. Nagorno-Karabakh: Viewing the Conflict from the
Ground,* the latest report from the International Crisis Group,
explores how the Armenians and Azeris from Nagorno-Karabakh and
the surrounding districts live and how they view the resolution of
the conflict. Despite signs of progress at internationally mediated
negotiations (to be discussed in a subsequent report), rising military
expenditures and increasing ceasefire violations are ominous signs
that time for a peaceful settlement may be running out. The brutal war
over Nagorno-Karabakh killed some 18,500 people and displaced over a
million before settling into a shaky cease-fire in 1994. Eleven years
on, life in Nagorno-Karabakh has regained some sense of normality with
a developing economy and elected institutions. Yet nothing has been
done to restore rights of war victims. The creation of mono-ethnic
institutions in Nagorno-Karabakh, the destruction of Azeri property,
and the privatisation of land and businesses pose significant obstacles
to Azeri return and reintegration. Many displaced persons have become
highly dependent on the Azerbaijani state, with few opportunities
to participate fully in political life and determine their own
future. Refusing to allow dialogue and demonising Armenians through
the state-sponsored media and schools, Baku has hardened anti-Armenian
feeling among average citizens. The Azerbaijanis and Armenians are
as separated as they have ever been. “There is need to counter the
hate propaganda and unlock the potential for confidence building and
dialogue between average Azeris and Armenians”, says Sabine Freizer,
Director of Crisis Group’s Caucasus Project. “This has to happen
before the memories of cohabitation fade and the divide becomes
unbridgeable”. Neither community appears prepared to agree to the
kind of settlement being considered by the Armenian and Azerbaijani
foreign ministers in the negotiations sponsored by the Organisation
for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). “The vast majority
of those affected by the conflict have been kept in the dark about
the details of the negotiations”, says Alain Deletroz, Crisis Group’s
Vice President for Europe. “But there is no way for any peace process
to succeed unless leaders from all sides start actively selling the
idea to their people”.

THE ICG WANTS ARMENIAN TROOPS TO WITHDRAW FROM KARABAKH
Azerbaijan News Service
Sept 9 2005
“Armenian troops must leave occupied territories around Daghlig
Garabagh.” The International Crisis Group will give this commendation
to Armenian Government on September 11 in Yerevan. Alain Deletros,
Vice-President of the International Crisis Group: Armenian troops
must leave 7 occupied regions and refugees from the territories must
return to their homes. After that the status issue of Daglig Garabagh
must be discussed. And I think the negotiations will continue
15-20 years. According to Alain Deletros these recommendations
were reflected in the reports which will be released on September
14 by the Organization. One of the reports will contain the present
situation of Daglig Garabagh. The second report is about the Conflict
settlement. The Vice-President of the International Crisis Group said
that they also gave commendations to Azerbaijan Government during
their visit to Baku. The main commendation was to stop creating
among Azerbaijanis the enemy mode against Armenians and to normalize
relations between two sides. The International Crisis Group also met
with Mazahir Panahov, the Chairman of Central Election Commission.
The International Crisis Group was appealed on receiving the List
of Azerbaijan citizens of Armenian origin under the 122 Khankandi
election Constituency. But Sabina Freizer, representative of the Group
on Southern Caucasus considers that to be very difficult. We very
highly appreciate this offer. But this offer was put forward in the
last stage. The registration is over yet. The negotiations must have
been held between Khankandi residents and Azerbaijani community of
Daglig Garabagh. Sabina Freizer said that in the Report Armenian and
Azerbaijani communities of Daglig Garabagh are advised to start talks.

SWISS POLICE WARN TURKISH PARTY LEADER NOT TO DENY ARMENIAN GENOCIDE
Anatolia news agency, Ankara
19 Sep 05
Lausanne, 18 September: “Switzerland accused Turkey of committing
genocide without verifying historical facts and in a biased way,”
Labour Party (IP) leader Dogu Perincek said on Sunday [18 September].
Perincek took the floor at a conference on the issue of the so-called
Armenian genocide in Switzerland, where he arrived to give evidence
to Lausanne prosecutor.
It was learned that prior to his arrival to the hall to address the
conference, Swiss police warned Perincek not to deny the “so-called”
Armenian genocide. They told Perincek not to speak on so-called
Armenian genocide. The police also warned that in case Perincek speaks
on Armenian problem and in case this includes an element of crime, this
would be added to the ongoing investigation . In July, Perincek was
interrogated as he said that the so-called Armenian genocide had never
been happened. Lausanne Prosecutor’s Office called on Perincek to come
to the office on 20 September to interrogate him for a second time.
At the conference, Perincek called on Switzerland to make a serious
investigation about the Armenian issue. He said it was unjust to
declare a nation “committing genocide” without thoroughly examining
the events that had happened 90 years ago.
Perincek said Turks never committed genocide, on the contrary Armenians
– under the command of Russians – had committed genocide on Turks
who were trying to defend their country.
Swiss police covered Perincek’s speech and videotaped it to add it
to prosecutor’s investigation.
Perincek will hold a press conference in Zurich on Tuesday and give
his testimony in Lausanne Prosecutor’s Office on 20 September.
Perincek earlier had been detained in Winterthur city of Switzerland
as he said: “Armenian genocide is nothing but an international lie”
at a news conference, but he was released after being interrogated.
A legal procedure was also opened in Switzerland against Prof Dr Yusuf
Halacoglu, the Chairman of the Turkish Historical Society, because
of his statement refuting the so-called Armenian genocide allegations.

ELMAR MAMMADYAROV: “AZERBAIJAN WILL NEVER AGREE WITH TERRITORIAL LOSES”
Azerbaijan News Service
Sept 19 2005
Azerbaijan will never agree with territorial loses. And any confidence
to Armenia can be regained after returning occupied regions. Foreign
Minister Elmar Mammadyarov reported in the common discussions of
60-th session of UN General Assembly. He said that UN launched active
works to liberate occupied territories after Azerbaijan joined to
this organization. He added that Azerbaijan backs the settlement of
the problem by peaceful means in accordance with International rights,
UN Security Council and Council of Europe resolutions. Azerbaijan will
be in constructive position and won’t miss advantage opportunity. These
steps can create good conditions for settling of the problem. Foreign
Minister said that Azerbaijan is ready to secure Armenian community in
Daglig Garabagh. Giving any status to Daglig Garabagh may be possible
only after returning refugees to occupied territories and creating
normal life conditions.
Elmar Mammadyarov added that it is important to give juridical and
politic guarantee to realize agreement if any agreement is reached.
For that it is important to send peacemaking forces to the region,
clear territories from mines, reconstruct communications and create
local police forces. “The next variant of regulating conflict is
creating connections between Armenia and Armenian community of Daglig
Garabagh and between Naxichevan Autonomy Republic and other regions
of Azerbaijan” said Elmar Mammadyarov. Foreign Minister talked about
final results of Kazan talks between Azerbaijani and Armenia presidents
and added that there is still chance regulate the conflict by peaceful
means and negotiations should be continued over Prague agreements.

ARMENIA GOES ON SPEAKING UP FOR THE PEACEFUL SETTLEMENT OF THE KARABAKH CONFLICT
DeFacto News, Armenia
Sept 19 2005
Peaceful settlement of the conflicts in the South Caucasus is one
of the guarantees of security and stability in the region, RA Prime
Minister Andranik Margaryan said while speaking at the UN 60th General
Assembly on September 17.
“Armenia goes on speaking up for the peaceful settlement of the
conflicts in the South Caucasus. The Nagorno Karabakh people have
made use of their right to self – determination provided by the
principles of international law the way other countries represented
here have done. We are sure peaceful and neighborly coexistence in
our region can be achieved only under conditions of mutual respect,
atmosphere of tolerance and will necessary for the recognition of
historical truth”, noted the Prime Minister.
Andranik Margaryan added Armenia attached great importance to
cooperation at the regional level for the strengthening of mutual
confidence in the South Caucasus. However, he noted with regret that
blockade of Armenia hampered the process.
He also said Armenia promoted the efforts aimed at the reformation of
the UN. “We are sure the reformed UN can manage to withstand growing
challenges”, said RA Prime Minister.

THE POLL BY THE ORDER OF THE US GOVERNMENT: THE NUMBER OF OPPONENTS OF NATO IS GROWING IN ARMENIA
DeFacto News, Armenia
Sept 19 2005
In the first half of 2005, by the order of the US government Armenian
Sociological Association conducted a poll aimed at the clarification
of the Republic’s inhabitants’ public and political precedence. 2000
men were interviewed during the poll.
According to Regnum, by the results of the poll the most readable
printed editions in Armenia are (by decrease) – Eter, TV Alik,
Aravot, Iravunk, 02, Hayastani Hanrapetutuyn, Azg, Hayots Ashkharh,
Haykakan Jamanak.
71, 5% of the respondents believe Armenia is in need of a strict
leader, 71,3% agreed that the US biased Armenia, 79,5% of those asked
said Russia’s influence on Armenia “is too great”, 30,1% think Armenia
should affiliate with NATO, while 35,3% were against it. 62, 8% are
of the opinion that Armenia should affiliate with the European Union,
9, 5% are against it. 10, 3% believe Armenia should withdraw from
the CIS, 70, 2% are against it.
As for the politicians, the respondents gave the following answers:
Robert Kocharyan – 24, 0%, Artashes Geghamyan – 15,7%, Arthur
Baghdasaryan – 8,8%, Stepan Demirchyan – 8,2%, Vazgen Manoukyan –
4,6% , Vahan Hovhannisyan – 2,3%, Aram Z. Sargsyan – 1,9%, Serge
Sargsyan – 1,8%, Levon Ter – Petrosyan – 1,7%, Tigran Karapetyan –
1,5%, Aram Karapetyan – 1,4%.

REMEMBERING 9/11 BY EXAMINING ITS POLITICAL FALLOUT
Metropolis Magazine, NY
Sept 19 2005
The Lower Manhattan Community Council’s history is intimately tied
to the rise and fall-and now the future-of the World Trade Center.
Before September 11, the community arts organization founded by David
Rockefeller had its offices and studios on the 92nd floor of the WTC’s
North tower. When the building collapsed, it took with it one of the
LMCC’s own: resident artist Michael Richards, who was in his studio
working on a sculpture dedicated to the Tuskegee Airmen.
The LMCC drew upon its Downtown history and authority for What Comes
After: Cities, Art, and Recovery, a series of cultural events held
September 8-11 in Manhattan. The programming and discussions-and a
concurrent month-long series of exhibitions- focused on remembering
and rebuilding after tragedy. They also were the city’s first genuinely
challenging arts events examining the WTC attacks and their political
aftermath.
It was inevitable that official remembrance ceremonies for 9/11’s
victims would cede ground to a more vigorous examination of the
attacks’ implications and consequences, and a more thoughtful
consideration of the future. For the LMCC, this meant, among other
things, confronting the reality that in this new climate of fear,
some artists’ work is labeled unpatriotic. For example, “A Knock at
the Door…,” an exhibition that opened the series and runs through
October 1 at the Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and
Art and the South Street Seaport’s Melville Gallery, assembles a
collection of works that test the limits of free expression to the
point of running afoul not only of political pieties, but also the law.
The most celebrated example is the work of Steve Kurtz of the Critical
Art Ensemble, who was detained by the FBI and the Joint Terrorism
Task Force in May and charged with bioterrorism for his research on
genetically modified organisms. His case is represented in a video
screen showing news footage about his arrest along with a selection
of materials confiscated by the FBI. Others, like Hackett of the
Madagascar Institute–who manufactured a bomb for the exhibition that
can be set off with his cell phone–stretch the limits to the point
of being scary.
Diamonda Galas’s Defixiones, Orders from the Dead, an operatic mass
performed twice over the weekend at Pace University’s Schimmel
Auditorium, indirectly placed the attacks in the context of the
massacre of Armenians, Assyrians, Anatolians, and Greeks in Turkey
from 1914 to 1923. Her incantations, sung in a half-dozen tongues,
were like a vision of multiculturalism gone to hell, refusing to
assume a common language for the expression of grief. At one point
Galas, shrouded with scarves and holding a microphone in each hand,
raised her arms to cast a shadow that eerily recalled the image of
the Abu Ghraib prisoner that was wired with electrodes. The gesture
forced one to acknowledge that the war in Iraq is also part of the
legacy of 9/11, whether you agree or disagree with its legitimacy or
role in the struggle against Islamic extremism.
Not all of the series’ events were full of sound and fury, however.
Korean-born artist Chang-Jin Lee achieved a more soothing note in
her Homeland Security Garden installation, where she displayed in
plexiglass cases on Astroturf-covered pedestals a collection of objects
associated with safety. Ranging from the humorous–a package of Plan
B birth control pills–to the poetic–a Bible turned to Genesis with
all of the instances of the word “garden” highlighted–and accompanied
by Arabic music, the installation managed to produce a sense of peace
and harmony.
Yet there was little consolation to be found in “Design of Recovery,”
one of a half-dozen roundtable discussions examining arts and culture
after catastrophe. Israeli architect Eyal Weizman, former World
Monuments Fund manager Jon Calame, Lebanese architect Jad Tabet,
and former director of Manhattan’s City Planning office Vishaan
Chakrabarti discussed strategies for transforming buildings that
served as tools of colonial occupation, historic bridges destroyed by
bombs, and districts decimated by civil war into functional symbols of
renewal. But the examples of perfectly good housing torn down in Gaza;
the Old Bridge in Mostar, Bosnia-Herzegovina rebuilt in the-still
divided city; and the Beirut neighborhoods razed to make way for
ill-conceived redevelopment suggested that no matter how much one
rebuilds, the catastrophe remains.
For all of the bureaucratic drama surrounding the future plans for
the World Trade Center site, the LMCC’s success in claiming space
in Lower Manhattan for politically challenging cultural events could
be regarded as a signal: an indicator that the city is finally ready
to start thinking seriously about what kind of monument to erect in
9/11’s memory. If not for the ongoing presence of New York Governor
George Pataki, who serves as a sort of feudal landlord over the site,
perhaps we could scrap rebuilding plans and start all over–again.

A “PARALLEL CIS” IN DEMOCRATIC PACKAGING
By Vladimir Socor
Eurasia Daily Monitor, DC
Jamestown Foundation
Sept 19 2005
Representatives of Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Karabakh
held a conference on “A Parallel CIS” on September 15-16 in Moscow. The
gathering differed from previous ones in that it was overtly sponsored
by officials of Russia’s executive branch of power.
Modest Kolerov, head of the Russian Presidential Administration’s
Directorate for Interregional and External Ties (mainly responsible
for liaison with pro-Moscow groups in Eurasia) and Konstantin Zatulin,
Director of Russia’s government-sponsored CIS Affairs Institute,
were the hosts and keynote speakers.
Perhaps because the unprecedented official involvement could be seen
as provocative enough, the organizers chose to invite low-profile
secessionist personages this time. Participants included a “deputy
minister of foreign affairs” of Transnistria, a counselor to Karabakh’s
president and one to its “ministry of foreign affairs,” the rectors of
“state universities” from all the four territories, and heads of these
territories’ resident missions in Moscow. Several “ministerial”-rank
officials were also listed initially as participants. Abkhazia’s
leader, Sergei Bagapsh, was officially reported as being in Moscow
during the conference, although he was not listed among conference
participants. Conferees also included elements of Kolerov’s usual
clientele of pan-Slavist and pan-Orthodox groups from ex-Soviet-ruled
countries, the Balkans, and the Near East. Some of these were supposed
to provide illustrative examples of unrecognized enclaves striving
for international recognition.
Kolerov’s and Zatulin’s keynote addresses both introduced a novel
theme to Russian policy on conflict resolution. They portrayed
the secessionist territories as well on their way toward becoming
functioning democracies, with representative institutions and
regularly held elections. Kolerov and Zatulin argued that international
recognition would help complete that purported development and would
correspond with “democratically expressed” aspirations in these
territories. The thesis, in a nutshell, is that stabilization through
recognition would promote democracy and guarantee human rights. This
argument seeks to exclude the issue of Russian troops from discussion
at this stage, reserving the Russian “military guarantees” to be
discussed as part of the political settlements. “First democratization,
then negotiations toward political settlement,” Kolerov said. For
his part, Zatulin suggested that the “parallel CIS” of unrecognized
territories was already more effective than the officially existing
CIS and could lay a groundwork for international recognition.
This line of argument corresponds with the Russian Ministry of
Foreign Affairs’ new tactic to seek international recognition of the
secessionist authorities in two stages. The first stage would involve
international monitoring and recognition of elections to secessionist
territories’ legislative bodies as democratically valid. The next
stage would see recognition of the executive authorities that issued
from those elections. Political settlements of the conflicts would
then be negotiated on that basis with Russia’s clients in a far
stronger position than they had been. Moldova and Transnistria are,
at the moment, the first object of this experiment in which Russian
diplomacy seeks Western acquiescence. In a message to the participants
in the conference, Transnistria’s leader, Igor Smirnov, optimistically
stated, “We are drawing closer to recognition with every passing day.”
Kolerov cautioned the secessionist leaderships against the “tactical
mistake” of overemphasizing “historical connections with Russia”
when addressing international public opinion. “Of course, you can
continue to mention that, but it is no longer important for the West.”
Instead, they should use human-rights and democracy arguments in
the quest for recognition, as “no one can ignore such arguments,”
Kolerov advised. At the same time, Kolerov offered a catch-all
definition of “Russia’s compatriots (sootechestvenniki) on either
side of post-Soviet conflicts,” whose rights and interests Russia
“has an obligation to guarantee.” Those compatriots include “all
persons born on the territory of the former Soviet Union or the
Russian Empire,” irrespective of ethnicity, in the recognized states
or the unrecognized ones. This sweeping definition reflects Moscow’s
goal to act as “guarantor” of conflict-settlement and post-conflict
arrangements, overseeing the constitutional setups in what are now
the unrecognized states and the recognized ones as well. Again (and
as usual), Moldova is the first target of this new Russian policy.
The Abkhaz and South Ossetian representatives indicated that the
goal of international recognition is, to them, an intermediate stage
toward accession of these territories to Russia. Transnistria’s
representatives (evidently taking geography into account) spoke more
vaguely of becoming part of some “community” around Russia. Karabakh
representatives only spoke of achieving independence from Azerbaijan.
The leader of Armenia’s Democratic Party, Aram Sarkisian (not to be
confused with the identically named ex-prime minister who is now an
opposition leader) criticized Armenia’s leadership for “distancing
itself from Russia” and defended the population of Armenia and Karabakh
against any such imputations.
Representatives of the Inter-Parliamentary Assembly of Orthodoxy also
led a discussion on the role of the “national dimension” of Orthodox
churches in consolidating “national identity” in these territories.
This may presage a more active role than has hitherto been the case
for Russian Orthodox clergymen and the Moscow Patriarchy in supporting
secessionist authorities.
(Regnum, Interfax, RIA, September 12-16; Kommersant Daily, September
16)