Russia Denies Accusations of Inaction Over Post-Soviet Conflicts

Baku Today

Politics

02/02/2005 21:18

BAKU, Feb 2, (AFP) – Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov of Russia denied
Wednesday that Moscow was turning a blind eye to ethnic conflicts in
the former Soviet Union.

“It is strange for me to hear that Russia is passive in making
efforts to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and the same goes
for other conflicts in the post-Soviet area,” Lavrov told reporters in
the Azeri capital, Baku. Azerbaijan and Armenia have been stalemated
over Karabakh, an ethnic Armenian enclave in Azerbaijan, since Armenia
took control of the region in 1994.

Lavrov said Russia has supported the implementation of all agreements
reached between Georgia and its two separatist republics, Abkhazia
and South Ossetia, and is more active than others in pushing for
the settlement of the conflict between Moldova and the breakaway
Transdniestr region. “There is no lack of initiative steps from our
side,” Lavrov said. “What there is, is a deficit of good will between
the conflicting parties.”

Russia has come under fire from western governments and from nations
that lost territory during secessionist conflicts after the break
up of the Soviet Union, for tacitly supporting separatist regimes in
former Soviet republics.

Russia is plagued by its own separatist conflict with rebels in
Chechnya, which has raged intermittently since 1993.

Copyright AFP

BBC News
Last Updated: Thursday, 3 February, 2005, 11:55 GMT

Burning body suspect due in court

One man has already been charged with murdering Mr Amirian
A man is due to appear before magistrates charged with the murder of a man
whose burning body was found on the Cambs/Northants border.
Armenian Havhannes Amirian’s remains were found at Upton in December 2002.
Misha Chatsjatrjan, from Oldenzaal in the Netherlands, was arrested by Dutch
police on 12 January.

He is due before Peterborough Magistrates’ Court. Police worked on the case
for more than a year before identifying the dead man as Mr Amirian.

‘Unknown male’

At one stage it was feared the body, which was found in a wood, might never
be identified.

It led to Peterborough coroner Gordon Ryall taking the unusual step of
allowing the man to be buried in a grave marked “Unknown Male”.

However after the police made a breakthrough in the case the inquest was
briefly resumed for Mr Amirian’s identity to be announced, more than a year
after his death.

The inquest heard that Mr Amirian was born in Armenia and had family
connections in the Ukraine. However, most recently he had lived in Belgium
and England.

A Strong Parallel Between Lincoln and Bush is Shown in a New Documentary

Emediawire (press release), WA
March 1 2005

The Wounded Warrior, a documentary produced by X-Back Pictures
relates President Abraham Lincoln’s Vision of Freedom to the actions
promoting freedom by current U.S. President George W. Bush.

(PRWEB) March 1, 2005 — The Wounded Warrior, a documentary produced
by X-Back Pictures relates President Abraham Lincoln’s Vision of
Freedom to the actions promoting freedom by current U.S. President
George W. Bush.

The film factually proves that Lincoln was the first President to lay
down the doctrine of spreading freedom throughout the world as a
means for our national defense. The doctrine known and revived today
as the ‘Bush Doctrine.’ By a strange twist of destiny, Lincoln
expressed this thought on September 11th, 1858. The docu-drama also
shows that Lincoln was one of the most despised presidents, falsely
accused of stealing elections, dividing and dragging the country in a
war over economy and tariffs and proclaimed a social tyrant who
violated the Constitution and civil liberties.

Director Yervand Kochar, the grandson of the highly-acclaimed, yet
persecuted (by Communist regime), Armenian artist, Yervand Kochar Sr.
was disappointed at his documentary being denied an audience at the
Big Muddy Film Festival sponsored in part by the Illinois Arts
Council and the Department of Cinema and Photography of Southern
Illinois University and taking place throughout Carbondale, Illinois,
and Western Kentucky.

The director believes that it was the message of the movie that
caused the rejection of the film by the festival and not its artistic
merit.

“I feel the real issue is that the majority of film festivals that
are supposed to create an environment for young talent to blossom are
in reality creating repressive constraints, says Mr. Kochar. They put
themselves in a position to evaluate an art form; yet, they dismiss
anything that doesn’t suit their ideology. Since festivals are pretty
much the only venue for many young filmmakers to launch their
careers, filmmakers conform their movies to topics, which they know
will be accepted by the festival organizers.”

Artistically, this movie is the first time that the director’s
grandfather’s revolutionary ‘painting in space’ style, so admired by
Picasso, has been translated into film and as such the movie is
already generating buzz for its innovative style.

Mr. Kochar finishes by stating, “I encourage any organization in
Carbondale, Illinois, or in the vicinity to screen The Wounded
Warrior. A movie like The Wounded Warrior is a truthful film that has
to be seen. Take the initiative of building your culture and do not
yield it to people who speak of freedom but mean slavery.”

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Does Turkey Belong In the European Union?
By Antero Leitzinger

The Journal of Turkish weekly
2 February 2005.

Turkey applied for membership in the EEC as early as in 1970s, when she had
been indisputably and for a long time a democratic market economy, one of
the founding members of the Council of Europe, and a country with a decent
record on human rights, compared with the military dictatorships of Greece,
Spain and Portugal, let alone the countries of Eastern Europe. The upheavals
of Southern Europe in the mid-1970s, the intensified internal political
situation of Turkey, and the military regime of early 1980s, as well as the
surprising membership of Greece in the Western European community sidelined
Turkey for two extra decades to wait for acceptance.

Finally during Finland’s chairman period in 1999, Turkey was finally
accepted as an applicant country for the European Union. This encouraged
Turkey to make legal reforms, which have been carried out for three years
now, despite the hard economic crisis. Guerrilla war in the Kurdish
districts is past now, and on 30th Nov. 2002, even the last province was
officially returned to normalcy. The PKK has abolished itself, and the death
penalty of the PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan has been changed into life
imprisonment. Turkey’s prisons have been reformed according to the EU norms,
lots of inmates have been amnestied, and previously used parts of the
criminal law have been overruled. In allowing media and school teaching in
Kurdish languages, Turkey has exceeded France and Sweden in the progression
of her minority policy.

However, Turkey has traditionally had dedicated enemies in Europe. As early
as in 1800s, conservative Christian and idealist liberal civil movements,
acting on behalf of the Christian minorities of the Balkans, were organising
lecture and newspaper campaigns and demonstrations against Turkey. The
ancient Greece was adored under the banners of philhellenism (1821), and
medieval myths were revived by telling horror stories of the “Bulgarian
atrocities” (1876). The propaganda war culminated in the after-play of the
First World War in 1920s, but was again revived from 1965 onwards, on the
initiative of third generation Armenian emigrants of France and America, who
were inspired and directed by Soviet Armenia.

Nowadays it is hard to believe that Turkey could anyhow get released from
the constant criticism by human rights organisations, since criticising
Turkey has become the lifeline of many of them. For many international human
rights organisations, regular campaigns against Turkey have become the most
successful kind of activity, and Turkish illegal immigrants willingly
participate them in order to base their asylum applications. International
organisations, researchers and media outlets are using Turkish extremist
groups as their sources, but the credibility and relevance of the
information they provide is very low. For this reason, the criticism against
Turkey often repeats echoes from years away. In its latest issue, Der
Spiegel (50/9th Dec. 2002) added to its article on Turkey a picture of a
Kurdish demonstration from 1992.

Turkish asylum seekers still refer to the destruction and evacuation of
frontier villages in mid-1990s. Although repatriation of these villages has
been started, the Human Rights Watch report predicts the return to fail,
because it would be too late without EU support (i.e. many who have moved to
cities, are reluctant to return to the periphery).

Neue Zürcher Zeitung (28th Nov. 2002) tells that torture became more common
in Turkey during the short military reign of 1980s. After that the
government tried to get rid of the phenomenon by sending the cruel policemen
from cities to the countryside, which, however, spread the problem
especially to the Kurdish districts. Accusing the policemen was made
difficult by a law that demanded acceptance of the superior to rise a court
case. The fact that many trials were taking more than five years caused that
many accusations became obsolete. The new government has suggested a legal
reform that would correct these problems, and enable overruling existing
verdicts on political crimes.

Against this background we have to understand the interest of the Turks in
the question, whether they are Europeans in the others’ eyes, or if they
fall outside Europe already in principle. When the Westernisation that has
prevailed in Turkey for 80 years becomes questioned by other Europeans, the
nationalist and pan-Islamic alternatives become stronger. Same kind of
development was experienced already in early 1900s, when the originally
liberal Young Turks changed into ferocious nationalists and rushed into the
First World War. In today’s Turkey, many people think that if the EU will
turn her back to Turkey, Turkey must turn towards Arab countries, Iran, the
Caucasus, and Central Asia. In co-operation with Pakistan, Turkey could
develop her own nuclear weapon. The successful military co-operation between
Turkey and Israel would be endangered. The 300-year rivalry between Turkey
and Russia over the borderlands would intensify.

Turkey is a bit poorer than Romania, when the GNP per capita is compared,
but the reason is the very rapid growth of Turkish population. It is
estimated that after 10 years there will be 90 million inhabitants in
Turkey, more than in Germany. In one way or another, that will compensate
the shrinking population of Europe and Russia. Chronic inflation plagues the
Turkish economy, but economic growth has been strong for a long time, and
there is plenty of potential. Unemployment (8,5 %) is lower than in most of
the countries of Eastern Europe, and industrialisation is more developed
than in Bulgaria and Romania. (Der Spiegel, 50/9th Dec. 2002)

Political Islamisation of Turkey would influence Europe especially through
the 2,5 million Turkish-originating immigrants residing in Germany. It is
hard to imagine how the EU could isolate herself from Turkey and the Middle
East. The EU can, however, choose, whether she will passively surrender to
be a side theatre of the problems of the Middle East and the whole Islamic
world, or whether it takes an active initiative to support moderate Muslims
and Turkey in her relations to her neighbours.

It is expected that the attitude towards Turkey, the Turks, Muslims and
foreigners in general, will become a hot election issue in the election of
the German state of Hessen in February. Both radical right and radical left
oppose the EU membership of Turkey. The present red-green government has
tried to balance between the views and the former Bundeskanzler Helmut Kohl
had a Turkish daughter-in-law. Compared to these, future seems more
controversial. Already half million of the German Turks have German
citizenship, and their votes for the left and for the Greens was decisive in
favour of the present government in last national election.

Antero Leitzinger is a political historian and a researcher for the Finnish
Directorate of Immigration. He wrote several books on Turkey, the Middle
East and the Caucasus.

Source: Global Politician, 2 February 2005.

–Boundary_(ID_tLINLbk2/Mdr1FRBq8CJig)–

AzerNews
03/02/2005 11:40

PACE resolution sparks differing reactions

The approval of Atkinson’s report on Upper Garabagh by the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) has drawn differing opinions from
the parties interested in settling the conflict. President

Ilham Aliyev gave a positive assessment of the PACE resolution on Upper
Garabagh, regarding it as a victory of Azerbaijan’s diplomacy. The
opposition also welcomed the document in general.
Yuri Merzlyakov, Russian co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group (MG), told Radio
Liberty that he disagrees with a provision of the resolution criticizing the
lack of activity on the part of the MG.
“They call on us to step up activity, although we are often more active than
the parties to the conflict. However, we are not responsible for resolving
the problem instead of the conflicting sides”.

The PACE resolution also says that if the OSCE MG-mediated talks are
unsuccessful, Azerbaijan and Armenia may take the matter to the
International Court of Justice. Merzlyakov pointed out that this action
would probably be avoided as both countries are aware that the issue may be
interpreted differently by the court. “Therefore, the conflict should be
resolved not through legal but political means,” he said.
The Russian co-chair continued that the problem will not be resolved this
year and only a certain amount of progress is likely to be achieved.
“The parties are interested in resolving the problem, but no agreements have
been reached thus far.”
Merzlyakov also expressed some unpalatable views for Azerbaijan. “I believe
that Upper Garabagh is a party to the conflict, as the ceasefire, concluded
by Azerbaijan and Armenia in 1994, along with the two countries, was signed
by the ‘defense minister’ of Upper Garabagh.”
The United States has also criticized the reproach voiced against the OSCE
MG co-chairs.
The US ambassador to Azerbaijan Reno Harnish said that the OSCE MG has
carried out extensive work this year.
“Several meetings were held between the Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents,
as well as the two countries’ foreign ministers, illustrating the efficiency
of the OSCE MG activity”, he said.
Touching upon the passed PACE resolution on Garabagh, the ambassador
commented that in his opinion it is of a “declarative” nature.
In reply to a question as to whether the US will continue to provide aid to
Armenia, which was recognized as the aggressor by PACE, Harnish said that
Washington has always pursued a consistent policy.
“From this standpoint, the aid being provided is aimed at achieving peace in
the region.”
“We have not and will not recognize the self-proclaimed Upper Garabagh
republic. The US recognizes Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity. We welcome
the attempts by the parties to settle the conflict in peace and are
witnessing progress in this area.”
The ambassador stated that Russia is playing both a negative and a positive
role with regards to the resolution of the Upper Garabagh conflict, along
with many other conflicts in the former Soviet Union. Russia’s role in the
Garabagh conflict is undeniable, he said. Harnish added that the conflict
settlement is not dependent only on the US and Russia.
“The Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents need to step up efforts in this
area”, he said.
The French co-chair of the OSCE MG, Bernard Fassier, said that the PACE
resolution on Garabagh states the stance of this organization, which is one
of the beacons of democracy in Europe. Fassier said that other international
organizations should state their position on the Garabagh conflict as well.
The co-chair added that statements implying that the OSCE Minsk Group is not
engaged in any serious work are erroneous.

Conflicting views
Political forces in Armenia have issued conflicting opinions on the issue.
The Armenian Foreign Ministry, via its spokesman, Hamlet Kasparian, said
that the PACE rapporteur David Atkinson’s report on the Garabagh conflict,
although it included some positive parts, was generally incomplete.
Kasparian said the PACE resolution covers the results of the conflict but
not the reasons behind it.
“Yerevan believes that changes were made to the resolution in a biased
manner. On the initiative of the Turkish representative at the PACE
Political Committee, one of Armenia’s proposals, which was earlier agreed
upon with Atkinson, was not approved. The resolution is not mandatory but
advisory and declarative,” Kasparian said. He said that peace talks will
continue within the OSCE Minsk Group and the positive and negative
provisions of the resolution are unlikely to affect the negotiating process.
Chairman of the Armenian parliament commission on foreign relations, Armen
Rustamian said the PACE resolution includes all the ‘dangerous’ provisions
that Azerbaijan can take advantage of in the future.
“The resolution contains such terms as ‘occupied territories’ and
‘separatists’, and Azerbaijan will certainly take the opportunity of using
them against Armenia.”
Rustamian expressed confidence that Azerbaijan will start imposing an
ultimatum not only on Armenia, but also on the international community soon,
as adopting the mentioned resolution gives Azerbaijan a legal right to
retrieve its territories.
Head of the Armenian delegation at PACE, Tigran Tarasian, stated that
Armenia is satisfied with the PACE resolution. He viewed favourably the fact
that certain parliamentary members brought up the issue of
self-determination of Upper Garabagh.
Nonetheless, Armenian opposition termed the document as an absolute
diplomatic defeat of Yerevan, and essentially as an ultimatum put forth to
Armenia by the international community.

Macedonian Press Agency, Greece
March 1 2005

THE ACTING GOV’T SPOKESMAN ON THE HOLY LIGHT CEREMONY IN JERUSALEM
Athens, 1 March 2005 (16:20 UTC+2)

Acting government spokesman Vangelis Antonaros was asked to comment
on the information according to which, the Orthodox Armenians want
to be the ones to get the Holy Light from the Holy Sepulchre.

Mr. Antonaros stated that he has no information on the issue and
stressed that he is certain that what was observed for many years
will continue to be observed.

ARMENIAN MONASTERIAL COMPLEX NORAVANK TO BE INCLUDED IN UNESCO WORLD LEGACY LIST

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 28. ARMINFO. In the next few days the Armenian
monasterial complex Noravank will be included in the UNESCO world
legacy list, says the secretary general of the UNESCO national
commission of Armenia’s foreign ministry Karine Danielyan.

This is the 4th Armenian monument on the list after Hakhpat (II-IV),
Echmiadzin Cathedral and Zvartnots ruins (II-III) and Gegard Monastery.

Noravank is one of the best known monuments of medieval Armenia. It is
located on a gorge of Arpa 122 km of Yerevan. The complex was built
in XII-XIV and was the residence of Sunik bishops. Its most ancient
part St Karapet Monastery dates back to IX-X.

UNION OF ARMENIAN ARYANS APPLIES TO APPEAL COURT

AZG Armenian Daily #019, 04/02/2005

Home

It is known that Aram Grigorian, Inspector-in~Vchief, rejected the
mediation represented by Victor Dallaqian and Manouk Gasparian, MPs,
for changing the preventive punishment sentenced for Armen Avetisian,
head of the Union of the Armenian Aryans.

The Union of the Armenian Aryans also applied to the prosecutor of
Yerevan city with the same aim. If the prosecutor of Yerevan city
rejects their appeal too, the organization will apply to RA Public
Prosecutor.

The organization has applied to RA Appeal Court against the decision
of the first instance court. Mar Martirosian, member of the union’s
supreme board, informed that the hearing of the case is envisaged on
February 4.

It is known that Larisa Alaverdian, RA Ombudswoman, applied to RA
President with the same purpose. According to PR Department of RA
Ombudswoman’s Office, Larisa Alaverdian hasn’t received any answer yet.

By Karine Danielian

Azeri pundit snipes at US envoy for pro-Armenian stance

Sarq, Baku
1 Mar 05

Text of Vusala Rafiqqizi’s report by Azerbaijani newspaper Sarq on 1
March headlined “All US ambassadors to Armenia have been speaking as
though they are Armenians, not Americans” and subheaded “Vafa Quluzada:
This is due to Armenian propaganda and the factor of Christianity”

While the parties are preparing for the next round of talks on Nagornyy
Karabakh, Armenian President Robert Kocharyan, who has long been silent
on the topic, made a statement immediately after the US ambassador to
Armenia, John Evans, who said that the issue of Nagornyy Karabakh’s
status cannot be resolved in favour of Azerbaijan since this could
lead to a tragedy in the region.

[Passage omitted: reported details]

Political analyst Vafa Quluzada said Evans’s statement came as no
surprise. The new US ambassador to Armenia is no different from his
predecessors, Quluzada said.

“All US ambassadors to Armenia have been speaking the way as though
they are Armenians, not Americans,” Quluzada said, adding that the
former US ambassador to Armenia, John Ordway, also used to make
similar statements.

What is most interesting is that all US diplomats sent to Armenia
so far have been Armenianized in this country, Quluzada said. The
political analyst explained this with Armenian propaganda and also
with the factor of Christianity.

Commenting on the context of Evans’s statement, Quluzada said:
“The ambassador has no idea that the US State Department has recently
stated that it recognizes Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity and that
Nagornyy Karabakh is part of Azerbaijan.”

Armenian Speaker complains of campaign against his party

Iravunk, Yerevan
1 Mar 05

Text of Tagui Tovmasyan’s report by Armenian newspaper Iravunk on 1
March headlined “‘An organized campaign is being carried out against
me by the opposition as well as some government officials'”

Rumours have been disseminated recently that National Assembly Chairman
Artur Bagdasaryan received an official invitation directly from the
chairman of the Austrian parliament bypassing the Foreign Ministry,
as the latter made an attempt to foil that visit. Are these rumours
true? Artur Bagdasaryan answers this and other questions.

[Artur Bagdasaryan] Indeed I received an invitation from the chairman
of the Austrian parliament, but I do not think that the Foreign
Ministry tried to foil the visit, because after receiving the official
invitation I applied to the ministry so that the Austrian embassy in
Armenia deals with the organization of the visit.

[Iravunk correspondent] Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov did
not meet you during his visit to Armenia. Why?

[Bagdasaryan] In general, foreign ministers of other countries
visit the National Assembly within the framework of their visit to
Armenia. I do not know why Mr Lavrov did not visit our parliament,
although meetings in the parliament were not included in his
schedule. [Sentence as given]

[Correspondent] What are the reasons for disagreements within the
authorities?

[Bagdasaryan] The reason for disagreements within the authorities
is that the coalition forces have different positions on many
issues. This is natural because there is a difference between the
mechanism of proposed solutions and conducted reforms. Naturally,
different views on different issues cause gossips.

The Law-Governed Country [Orinats Yerkir] Party, as a political
force, has never been guided by the principle the worse the better,
that is to say by a policy that discredits others. The public know
all of us. I think that disagreements should not prevent us from
acting together and settling the problems of the country. Finally,
we work for the sake of, but not against, changing something in the
country for the better, but not for the sake of hampering positive
developments or discrediting somebody.

In 2005 the parliament will become 15 years old, and I have
declared this year the year of accord and tolerance. It would be
better if political forces, including those within the coalition,
were tolerant. We should neither underestimate nor overestimate
disagreements within the authorities. Politics is fight. I understand
that someone is irritated by the kind deeds of the National Assembly
or Artur Bagdasaryan. We are acting according to our programmes.

There is a saying – “No good work remains unpunished”. But I do not
want this principle to rule in our society. Very often I see that an
organized campaign is being conducted by the opposition, as well as
some officials within the authorities, against the Law-Governed Country
Party and me, because there are people who are not satisfied with
their success. They are happy only when not only they are successful
but when others are unsuccessful. I reiterate that I have become
immune and I do not think this is the best way to settle problems.
People know all of us very well, they know who is who. Finally,
he who mischief hatches, mischief catches.