A1plus

| 19:26:37 | 13-04-2005 | Social |

THE PROBLEM OF ARMENIAN ROADS SOLVED IN RUSSIA

Today NA President Arthur Baghdasaryan met the members of the CIS Affairs
Committee of the State Duma.

The issue of the reopening of the railway was discussed. An arrangement was
made to organize a discussion with the participation of the Parliamentarians
of the concerned countries with the request to reopen the railway, which has
crucial importance for the political and economical life of the region and
of Armenia.

During the discussions a reference was made to the further work of the road
Caucasus-Poti which has special importance for Armenia. The necessity to
reconstruct the Abkhaz railway the work of which is of regional importance
was also mentioned.

Igor Levitin, the RF Transport Minister said that on April 15 in Krasnodar
he has a meeting with the experts of the field during which the above
mentioned two problems will be discussed. What is important is that the
legislative

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

GOAL OF “BEKUM” NEWLY-FOUNDED CIVIL FORUM IS TO SOLVE A NUMBER OF
IMPORTANT PROBLEMS BY MEANS OF NATIONAL MOVEMENT

YEREVAN, APRIL 12, NOYAN TAPAN. “We are really independent and aren’t
devoted to the service of any home or foreign interests, we deny any
violence,” Natalia Martirosian, a representative of the “Bekum”
(“Turning Point”) newly-founded civil forum, Co-chairwoman of the
Helsinki Committee of Armenia, declared during the April 12 forum’s
presentation. She mentioned that the forum already including a number
of NGOs “isn’t a closed elite club” and any NGOs and individuals may
join it. During the presentation it was mentioned that the intention
of founding the forum was caused by the events that happened early in
the April 13 morning of the previous year. “The very night became a
turning point for us, we understood that we have no right to avoid
civil activity,” Sona Hovhannisian, forum’s representative,
declared. The event participants called on all interested individuals
and organizations to form a civil union inspiring confidence and
uniting the society, the goal of which will be to achieve solution of
a number of problems, including formation of a Constitution providing
progress and a state system serving the people, by means of a national
movement. The event participants thanked RA NA Speaker Artur
Baghdasarian for rendering financial assistance.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

A1plus

| 19:18:29 | 13-04-2005 | Politics |

WE NEED SUPPORT FROM ABROAD

«The authorities are like an empty tree – it will collapse if you push it»,
said Hovhannes Hovhannisyan, head of the Armenian Liberal Progressive Party.
The latter asked a question the answer if which was not given – why was the
bloc gathered in the hall? Then referring to the interference from abroad,
Mr. Hovhannisyan announced, `Yes, the international community must support
us’.

He clearly saw the wave of revolutions coming to Armenia from the CIS
countries. `But are we ready to take the power?’ he asked. This question was
not answered either. After several speeches the meeting ended.

By the way, the leaders of the Republican party with Aram Sargsyan and
Albert Bazeyan were present at the meeting. But they did not make speech.

“ARMENIAN CAUSE” BOOK PUBLISHED IN ESTONIA ON OCASSION OF 90TH
ANNIVERSARY OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

TALLINN, APRIL 12, NOYAN TAPAN. Professor Lembo Tanning’s “Armenian
Cause” 365-pages work dedicated to the 90th anniversary of the
Armenian Great Genocide was published in Estonia. As Noyan Tapan was
informed from the Press Office of the Committe on organizing events of
the 90th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, the book was presented
at the National Library of Estonia. Cultural workers, MPs of Estonia,
members of the Estonian Churches’ Council, members of the Council of
Europe and representatives of the Armenian community were present at
the presentation of the book.

A1plus

19:12:36 | 13-04-2005 | Politics |

VIKTOR DALLAKYAN BRINGS CRIMINAL CHARGE AGAINST KOCHARYAN

«Kocharyan has committed crime against the Armenian nation, and he will not
be forgiven», said NA delegate Viktor Dallakyan at the beginning of his
speech. The latter is aware that the nation demanding change of authorities
is now interested in two questions: when and how? «When – as soon as
possible, how – with your help – the help of the nation», said Mr.
Dallakyan.

Afterwards Mr. Dallakyan charged the person who is head of the country since
1998 with the crime of getting the power by means of the terrorist act of
October 27. Viktor Dallakyan outlined the possibilities to achieve change of
authorities in Armenia – 2003 elections, confidence referendum, Karabakh
conflict, Constitutional referendum, and elections of local governing
bodies. «We will pay special attention», said Viktor Dallakyan.

NA delegate Shavarsh Kocharyan had found it strange that after the change of
authorities in Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan from the 46 European
countries only two have thought that they are too strong and no change of
authorities is possible. And these are Armenia and Azerbaijan.

A1plus

| 19:03:38 | 13-04-2005 | Politics |

CONFIDENCE REFERENDUM STILL IN VIGOR

Today’s meeting of the «Justice» bloc again demanded from the authorities to
organize a «Confidence referendum». The bloc has adopted an announcement
which considers the quick change of the `criminal authorities’ the demand of
the day, finding at the same time the organization of the confidence
referendum important.

Nevertheless, in connection with the events of April 12, 2004, Stepan
Demirchyan, the leader of the People’s Party of Armenia, referred to several
ideas of Robert Kocharyan expressed in the Yerevan State University
Economical Faculty, `They cynically announce that the opposition does not
succeed because the authorities are good, they work well… When it comes to
the forgeries and violations of people’s rights, of course they do work
well’, commented Stepan Demirchayn.

They he announced, `I want to reconfirm our decisiveness to bring legal
authorities to power in the country’. How? `We cannot speak about
cooperation until the forgers are punished for their deeds’, he said
referring to the calls for cooperation. Stepan Demirchyan did not like
Kocharyan’s remark about the firmness of the position of the authorities.
`No matter how they show that their position is firm, they are doomed’, he
announced.

EastSide Boxing
April 13 2005

Soviet Legends: The Tale of Vyacheslav Lemeshev – Part 1

13.04.05 – By Izyaslav `Slava’ Koza and Andrei `The Shark’ Nikolaev:
Unfortunately, human memory cannot compete with a good photograph or
video on which we record the most wonderful moments of our lives.
That is why when we read about some obscure Olympic boxer or athlete,
we open our mouth and say `Yeah, he was some guy……,’ and move on with
our business and our lives. Today, we ask everybody to take a moment
and think and read about a 20 year old boxer, with a funny looking
mustache, seen in photographs in so many Russian and Soviet
newspapers, who although gone from our lives, unquestionably deserves
a moment of your time.

Vyacheslav Ivanovich Lemeshev

It is sad to think that we cannot ask the hero of this article
anything about his career anymore. Vyacheslav Lemeshev, Olympic
champion of the 1972 Munich games, left us nine years ago on January
27, 1996. However, we still have the thoughts and memories of his
friends, former teammates, and his wife Zinaida, as well as articles
from newspapers, aiding us in remembering who he was and what he
meant to the world of boxing. His four gold medals, claimed on the
Olympic, European and Soviet rings, as well as endless numbers of
trophies, prizes, and awards for boxing, remind us what he was able
to accomplish in his abruptly shortened life. There is a hope among
his fans, boxing writers and other boxers themselves, that somewhere
in an old dusty archive room, there exists a collection of videos
that have captured his most memorable victories at the Olympics, the
European championships, as well as boxing meets between the United
States and the Soviet Union. Tapes that show his dominance over
future professional champions like Marvin Johnson and the legendary
Micheal Spinks.

It would mean so much to so many to one day turn on the TV and see a
boxing documentary about V. Lemeshev with footage of his bouts.

However, until such a day, the only things we have to go on in
remembering the youngest Soviet Olympic champion, and two time
European champion, are old newspaper cutouts, interviews with people
who knew him, and information from books that don’t know whether they
want to talk about Vyacheslav or some other unrelated and unimportant
topic.

Vyacheslav’s friend, and first Soviet champion of the World (1974),
lightweight Vasili Anatolivich Solomin (now deceased):

“Lemeshev’s manner of fighting was impossible to compare to anybody
else’s. None of his opponents could understand anything. Everyone
knew he would finish with his right, and still nobody could avoid
getting hit by it.”

This was not surprising. Vyacheslav’s second trainer, Armenian, Yuri
Radonyak, remembers that on the Senior National team, there was
constant testing done on the initial speed of a punch. Lemeshev’s
punch was always the fastest. That is why the speed and strength of
Lemeshev’s right hand allowed him to overcome any attack his opponent
threw at him, often sending the hapless victim to the ring apron in
short order.

In 1966, at the Moscow city championships, 14 year old Slava Lemeshev
didn’t only win the tournament in his section, taking the prize for
best technical boxer, but gained the attention of Wladimir Kon’kov,
Internationational referee, and trainer of the legendary European
champ Victor Ageev. Even before the result was announced, Kon’kov
nodded towards Slava, and said to his future trainer Lev Segalovich:
`That is a future Olympic champion.’

Nikolai Puchkov, candidate of Master of sports in boxing,
International judge, and Sports commentator, remembers:

“Slava almost never jabbed. He was not really powerful; Just tall and
lean, and often worked on countering. He didn’t like to train
seriously and that is why he didn’t have enough stamina, it seemed.
Often, he is losing a fight, time is running out, his opponent,
feeling victory at his fingertips, relaxes a bit, lowers his hands a
bit, and BAM! He used to estimate distance flawlessly! His opponent
confused, tries again, and this time its over! What always amazed me
was that after his counter right landed, Slavik never even looked to
see what happened, and walked away to his corner. He was always sure
of the result.”

After two years, 16 year old Lemeshev again takes first place and
prize for the best technicals skills at the Spartak Junior
Championships in Yerevan (Armenia). In 1970, at the European Junior
Championships, the great 3 time Olympic champion Laslo Papp, speaking
about Lemeshev after his protégé was defeated by him, stated, `This
kid has a bright future.’ At that time, Vycheslav was the first
winner of the Emil Gremo Cup (formerly the European cup), named after
the former president of the International Assocation of Amateur
boxing, and awarded to the best boxer of the tournament. Lemeshev
captured this honor a second time in 1972 in Belgrade, before
stepping up to go to the Olympics. In April of 1972, he was only 20
years old and in August he was already at the Olympics.

Try to imagine yourself at the age of 20 and already among the
greatest amateur fighters in the world, and right before your first
match you have a high fever. These obstacles had little affect on the
young Lemeshev, who dismissed the idea of being taken out of the
competition, and they also didn’t save an Indonesian kid by the name
of Gomez from being knocked out in the first round. In dealing with
his limited victim, it was as if Slava was dispatching with the fever
that was preventing him from attaining this, the highest of amateur
successes. The rest of the tournament went like this: The German,
Brauske was able to withstand all three rounds and was sent home with
the score of 60-54. While the Turk, Kuran and old friend Marvin
Johnson, were each taken out in the second. In the final, Finn Reima
Virtanen was knocked out after two minutes and 17 seconds of the
first round. Vyacheslav Lemeshev was now an Olympic Gold medallist.

Puchkov: “Slava had many serious opponents. For instance the Finn
Virtanen was tough, nobody even pretended Slava could win, but he
went ahead and did it anway.’

For Slava this was a triumph. Just imagine what is to win an Olympic
gold medal at 20?

In June of 1973, competing in the European championships in Belgrade,
Slava seriously damaged his powerful right hand. A few years later,
he remembered the ordeal with a smile on his face: “I couldn’t just
get used to the pain, but hey, different things like that happen.
Somehow, I fought with the broken hand. They jabbed at it with
needles from all angles, and I went for the check up before the
fight. So the official is examining me and carefully pressing on my
bones and wrist. Just imagine me standing there with a mallet instead
of a fist. I had no clue as to how I will force it into the glove. So
the official is telling me `You can’t go out like that.’ I say `Don’t
worry about it, I’m fine, its nothing,’ and smile from ear to ear. So
he starts to examine the mallet, and from one of the places where
they gave me a shot, a stream of liquid hits him straight in the
face. All I could do was smile again. He gently lowers my arm, and
says “It’s ok,” but doesn’t look me in the face.’

So Slava had to defend his hand until the final, and practically
fight with only his left,against the previous year’s silver medallist
and future Olympic bronze medallist at the Montreal games, Romanian,
Alex Nestak. However, if he was able to get to the final without any
real hardships, the fight with the Romanian changed all that, and
forced Vycheslav to show his true character. After getting knocked
down in the first, Vycheslav didn’t let himself falter, and found his
wits, timed his opponent and let loose with a single, crowning,
signature counter, with his broken hand. He didn’t have to do more-
it was a knockout.

In March of 1974, in Izhevsk at the USSR championships, Vycheslav
competed in the category under 81 kilograms and took the gold, but
after jumping back down to his original weight, took on a very
awkward opponent in Rufat Riskiev from Tashkent (Uzbekistan).
Lemeshev lost to him in the final, but nevertheless, it was him and
not Risakev who would be competing at the world championships in
Katovtzi, Poland. There, 23 year old, Vycheslav took another gold
medal, in the final defeating a German by the name of Vittenburg.
However, regardless of this victory, this is about the time where he
started to decline as a boxer. In the internal boxing tournaments of
the USSR, Vycheslav could not get past Riskiev, who won the
Tournament of Nations in the USSR, and was basically champion from
1971 onwards, even though he was the one, and not the junior
Lemeshev, who the soviet trainers did not take to the Olympics. Now
was Riskiev’s time, two years in a row, winning at the USSR
championships in 1975 and 1976, and with them a place on the National
team, knocking out the European champ Lemeshev.

Aleksander Vasushkin: `You know what kind of sparring sessions he was
having at the time? Sometimes he was dragged out of the ring by his
hands and feet. When he and Riskiev sparred, Rufat used to knock him
around so hard they used to drag him out unconscious. He was getting
hit with a lot of punches at that time.’

Nevertheless, as with every great fighter, there was one great fight
left deep down within him. In the USSR-USA Match Meet, Vycheslav beat
American Micheal Spinks, thus claiming his final real achievement. He
lost the USSR championships in March of that year, only taking third,
and in June, Riskiev was the one flying to Montreal. He fought
magnificently, but fate is inescapable, as the same Micheal Spinks,
denied Riskiev the gold in the final. What could have been is a long
debate and one without a single answer, but the truth is Vycheslav
could not find his way back to the national team. It was then, at 24,
that Vycheslav is rumored to have started drinking, but who knows
which rumors are true and which story tellers have it right?

In 1978 at the USSR championships in Tbilisi (Georgia), Vycheslav
lost his very first fight.

Vasili Solomin: `I lived in the same room with him, and I knew that
before that tournament he was sick or poisoned. Usually before a
tournament, he would have to drop some weight, but this time there
was no need, he weighed only 72 kg. Instead of the 75 kg. I told
Radonyak, the trainer, `Take him out,’ and he went and asked Slava if
he should remove him, but Slava didn’t want to hear of it. We
wouldn’t have even asked another boxer; we would just take him out
and that’s it. Vycheslav was an Olympic champion, however, a European
champ, and the trainers believed in him. What if everything turns out
fine, and he forces his way out of this situation? However, that all
evaporated, when his opponent hit him so hard that he spun around
like a top. He was not even a shadow of his former self, green, and
weak. They stopped it in the second round. It was a hard thing to
watch. It was painful to look at Slava.’

TO Be Concluded………….

Transitions on Line, Czeck Republic
April 13 2005

The Withering of the Rose?

by Jaba Devdariani
13 April 2005

Georgia’s revolution has lost its bloom. Does Saakashvili’s
government have the nerve to continue pushing through vital reforms
and the wisdom to pick the right battles?

For the past week, observers, both Georgian and foreign, have been
musing on opinion polls that show that, in the space of just six
months, Georgia’s President Mikheil Saakashvili has lost at least a
quarter of his supporters.

These figures may be disconcerting, but on one level there is little
for the government to worry about. First, Saakashvili’s party has
retained the support of around 38 percent of Georgians, close to the
support it had garnered by the eve of the Rose Revolution in November
2003. And secondly, the opposition looks as feeble as ever, with most
of the opposition parties’ ratings falling within the margin of
statistical error (3 percent). So the polls paint no doomsday picture
for Saakashvili and his National Movement.

But even a single glance at the latest newswires paints a picture of
a country under stress. Of late, people have been protesting
frequently, very frequently in Georgia. Some have taken to the
streets with purely social demands: a lack of electricity in most
provinces, social hardships in Armenian-populated Javakheti, and
disruptions to the water supply in Imereti. Also linked to social
issues are the “bazaar protests” by traders in Georgia’s
near-ubiquitous open-air markets. They are up in arms at the prospect
of being relocated from the center of Tbilisi and other cities to
newly allocated suburban plots, a move that will, they fear, lose
them customers.

Then there are the protests against reforms: Traders are refusing to
comply with better-enforced safety, sanitary, and licensing
requirements. Medical students have launched a hunger strike against
new national examinations intended to replace university entry exams,
a breeding ground for corruption that allegedly generates a $3
million market per year in bribes and kickbacks.

But how disturbing, how destabilizing is this stress? Most of the
socially motivated protests were inherited from Shevardnadze’s
administration. In fact, this is the very same wave of social
discontent that propelled the Rose Revolution and brought down
President Eduard Shevardnadze. So, seen against that backdrop, the
government should worry lest this unrest turn into an explosion. But
it may be that what we are hearing now is simply the bursting of a
bubble that was bound to burst sooner or later, since the
post-revolutionary hopes invested in Saakashvili’s new government
were grossly inflated. And as for the protest against reforms, what
reforms were ever pushed through without squeals?

Mother Nature also helps explain the current unrest. The government
was lucky to have a rather warm winter in 2004, which reduced the
impact of the power shortages that have been a commonplace of
Georgian winters for the past 12 years. But its luck ran out in March
2005, when unprecedented snowfalls brought down the high-power
transmission lines linking the country with Russia – and, with them,
toppled the illusion that Georgia is solving its power problems.

Added to the feeling that things are not going right are the frequent
government reshuffles, bickering between ministers and, lastly, the
shock left by the death in February of Prime Minister Zurab Zhvania.

AN OVERLY RATIONAL REVOLUTIONARY?

But a difficult legacy, the pain of reform, and bad luck cannot
entirely account for the general sense of disappointment. Has
something gone wrong with Georgia’s revolutionary government?

On one level, the answer is no. Georgians wanted nothing short of
miracles, and Saakashvili and his government have indeed delivered
some. Only a seriously deranged person would have argued in November
2003 that only several months later, Georgians would come to respect
the country’s notoriously corrupt traffic policemen. Today, while the
brutality of some police investigations is still a major problem, the
completely re-shaped traffic police force without doubt rates as a
success story. It would also have required an immense leap of faith
to believe in a 64 percent increase in tax collection in just one
year.

But on another level the answer is yes. The reason can be found in
the evolution of Saakashvili himself. He grabbed, and then
consolidated power as a politician of passion and conviction. He was
a revolutionary, so much so that some, if not most, foreign observers
feared that `Misha’ (as he was lovingly referred to on the streets)
would rock the political boat too much once he assumed power.

That did not happen. Saakashvili has proved himself much more
rational than one might have assumed. His fiery rhetoric is reserved
for those policy areas where he is sure to score political points,
such as cracking down on privileged Shevardnadze cronies or
castigating Russia. And he claims political credit for ridding Ajaria
of Aslan Abashidze’s authoritarian rule, for increased budgetary
revenues, and even for the new roads under construction in Tbilisi.

But, strangely, he has failed personally and vocally to back the most
significant, if socially controversial systemic reforms that his
government has launched, in education, the criminal justice system,
and the Justice Ministry, reforms needed to fulfill many of the hopes
placed in the revolution.

Why? There can be only one answer: Saakashvili acts like a politician
who is running for re-election. After assuming the presidency, he
steered to the middle of the political spectrum, to gather momentum
for a second term. And when the anti-corruption drive trickled down
to ordinary traders and ordinary students, he passed the buck to his
cabinet, in an effort to preserve his own popularity.

Prudent as that might look, the policy is no longer sustainable. The
government can no longer be separated so conveniently from the
president. When Zhvania died, the government lost its center of
gravity – and the center of gravity now lies squarely with the
presidency. The new prime minister, Zurab Nogaideli, may be perceived
as competent, but he lacks Zhvania’s gravitas.

Secondly, as Saakashvili’s honeymoon with the public wears off and
the government’s moves no longer seem self-evident to Georgians,
Saakashvili needs a style that depends less on populism. In the
honeymoon period his failure to explain the government’s policies
looked like determination; now it comes across as arrogance and
deafness to the needs of ordinary citizens. His populism is turning
into a liability.

Could it be, in fact, that Saakashvili is too rational for his own
good? Could it be that, in becoming a party-political populist, he
has lost too much of his revolutionary passion?

It may be that he would do better if he were to put the national
agenda front and center, and back the reforms that really are crucial
to success of the country’s agenda.

Recent polls show that more than 40 percent of the voters are
undecided. To transform uncommitted voters into committed supporters,
it would be better if he provided committed support to clear
policies. Such a stance would perhaps also create passionate
opponents, but, for Georgia, an issue-based opposition would be much
better than the rather pathetic collection of Saakashvili-bashers
that now claim the space across the chamber from the National
Movement.

AN AGENDA FOR A POPULIST REFORMER

Saakashvili should consider throwing his political weight behind two
specific policies: meaningful reform of local government, and reform
of the judiciary. Both are reforms with a popular spin and both would
also help to address the root causes of the public protests.

Saakashvili’s administration inherited a fundamental problem: an
over-centralized political system that places responsibility
exclusively on the president. In his first days and weeks in power,
Saakashvili even strengthened the presidency.

But while people may be happy with the government’s policies, they
are sometimes unhappy at how those policies are implemented. It is in
lower-level public services and government departments in the
provinces that officials “go wrong.” For as long as these officials
continue to be appointees, the president will continue to be held
personally responsible. In keeping with post-Soviet tradition,
Georgians continue to go over the top of local officials and ask
“Misha” to help them repair their road and fix their water supply.
This is politically damaging, and saps support from both
Saakashvili’s reforms and his administration.

This problem could be solved – without sacrificing control – by
handing greater responsibility to local government. Local leaders
should have both the power and the money to tackle infrastructure
problems. Yes, many of them would become corrupt. There would be
protests and maybe even recalls and re-elections in the provinces,
but the central authorities would have their hands free to arbitrate
the disputes. Over the years, a core government elite would emerge in
the regions, something that Georgia desperately lacks. And, to avoid
a meltdown in governance (as happened when Abashidze carved out a
little fiefdom for himself in Ajaria), the courts need to be reformed
to create a judiciary that is above local political haggles.

A NATION IN NEED OF A LEADER

What the Georgian government currently faces is, in short, a
transition from its passionate adolescence towards political
maturity. The government and ordinary Georgians must come to realize
that the revolution they backed back in November 2003 is not an
event, but a process of gradual, institutional change.

It takes political maturity for Georgians to give Saakashvili’s
government credit where it is due but, at the same time, to argue for
policy alternatives where changes have been slow to show through.

Maturity also requires a change of attitude from Saakashvili, some
re-thinking of the presidency itself, and some modification of his
revolutionary spirit so that he replaces populism with the moral
leadership that he currently shies away from.

Saakashvili now comes across not enough as a leader of the nation,
and too much as a party leader. This locks him into relatively
insignificant political skirmishes with his opponents. That is not
how to lead Georgia forward. The Georgian nation remains divided
along ethnic lines, but it is also more and more divided between the
haves and have-nots. It is hard but necessary to lead a nation like
that towards painful change, and simultaneously to keep its
confidence. Without confidence, Georgian society will return to
apathy, and apathy tolerates and breeds corruption.

As the adrenalin of the revolution wears off, the new Georgian
administration now has to wake up to the challenges of political
maturity: good governance and sustainable social change.

Jaba Devdariani is a long-time TOL contributor and founder of the
United Nations Association of Georgia. He is currently working in
Bosnia with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

Dawn, Pakistan
April 13 2005

Accord to boost political ties with Azerbaijan: Common stand on UNSC
expansion

Dawn.com 13/04/2005 20:40

ISLAMABAD, April 12: Pakistan and Azerbaijan on Tuesday voiced a
common stand on the UN Security Council expansion while President
Ilham Aliyev supported Islamabad’s efforts aimed at resolving the
Kashmir dispute with New Delhi for durable peace and security in the
region.

In formal talks, the two sides vowed to build on their ‘excellent’
political ties and develop sound bilateral trade and economic
cooperation through increased interaction between their private
sectors.

President Gen Pervez Musharraf and the visiting Azeri leader also
renewed a call for peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh
dispute between Azerbaijan and Armenia. “We share views on the
expansion of UN Security Council,” Gen Musharraf remarked in
post-talks interaction with reporters.

Pakistan has been advocating against creation of new centres of
privilege at the Security Council. Mr Aliyev stressed the need for
resolving both the Kashmir and Nagorno-Karabakh disputes.

“Both the Kashmir and Nagorno-Karabakh disputes need to be addressed
and the international community owes a role in regard with
achievement of that end for sustainable peace and progress of the
region,” he emphasized.

President Musharraf expressed gratitude for Baku’s continuous support
on the Kashmir dispute and reaffirmed Pakistan’s unequivocal and
unstinting support for Azerbaijan on the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh.

“Justice must be done and justice, we feel, is on the side of
Azerbaijan,” he said and added that Pakistan would support Baku on
all international fora. Mr Aliyev also backed Pakistan’s crucial role
in the fight against terrorism and underscored the need for the world
community to forge a common stand on addressing the menace of
extremism.

“Undoubtedly, Pakistan’s role in the counter-terror drive has been
crucial, but the entire international community should contribute to
these efforts as only by united efforts, can the world combat
terror,” he asserted.

He called for doing away with a contrasting international approach to
defining terrorism. “There should be a uniform criterion to define
terrorism.” Answering a question, the two leaders called for a
peaceful and negotiated settlement of Iran’s nuclear issue.

President Musharraf identified tourism, science and technology and
education as areas promising wider bilateral cooperation. “We have a
desire to strengthen our political relations and make them
broad-based, covering economic, education, tourism, trade and
culture. Pakistan looks forward to strong ties with brothers in
Azerbaijan.”

The private sectors of the two countries, he said, should identify
areas of collaboration and have increased bilateral interaction.
President Musharraf also said that Pakistan was open to cooperation
in defence training and production.

President Aliyev said Pakistan and Azerbaijan were brotherly
countries, which sincerely desired improved relations to the mutual
benefit of both peoples. He said Azerbaijan considered it important
to forge closer ties with Pakistan which, he added, had great
regional and international importance.

He said President Musharraf’s visit to Azerbaijan last year had
imparted a new strength to the bilateral ties. The two countries are
expected to sign agreements on Wednesday on communication,
information technology and education.

ROBERT KOCHARIAN: “NO REVOLUTION THREATENS ARMENIA”

YEREVAN, APRIL 12, NOYAN TAPAN. “The power shift in all of the 3
countries – Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrghyzstan, has much in common, none
of which coincides with the political and economic situation in
Armenia, which won’t let the rumours about revolution spread for a
long time realize in the nearest future,” RA President Robert
Kocharian declared during his April 11 meeting with economics faculty
students of Yerevan State University. In R.Kocharian’s opinion, in all
of the 3 above-mentioned countries the revolutions were carried out in
the period of elections, all of the 3 countries had weak authorities,
a change of generations took place, high-ranking officials who
formerly worked in power structures came to power in these countries.

None of these 4 communities, in RA President’s opinion, threatens
Armenia as we have strong authorities in the country, change of
generations took place twice in Armenia: in 1991 and 1998, there are
no former officials relieved of their posts among the Armenian
opposition and, at last, the nearest elections will be held in two
years in Armenia. The Armenian President called on the opposition “not
to have complexes” that they are weak and failed to do what they
planned: “They failed as the country and authorities are better.”