Armenian minister vows to get guarantees for Karabakh’s “self-determination”

Public Television of Armenia, Yerevan
1 Dec 04

Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan has spoken about the
government’s policy on Karabakh in his interview with Armenian Public
TV. Oskanyan rejected any settlement option without a “full guarantee
for Karabakh’s self-determination” and called to end “speculations”
about the government’s unwillingness to resolve the problem. He
described his recent visit to Burkina Faso for the Francophone summit
as a move to counter Azerbaijan’s policy of cooperation “with all
possible organizations to belittle our successes”. Oskanyan also said
that the Equatorial Guinea court’s verdict with regard to six Armenian
pilots accused of the involvement in the coup attempt was “unfair”.
Hailing Slovakia’s recognition of “the Armenian genocide”, he hoped
that the upcoming EU summit would raise an issue of Turkey’s
“blockade” of Armenia. The following is an excerpt from report by
Armenian Public TV on 1 December; subheadings have been inserted
editorially:

[Presenter] Good evening, Mr [Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan]
Oskanyan. You have just flown in Armenia from the Francophone summit
[in Burkina Faso]. Armenia has got an observer status. What is your
comment on this issue?

Armenia trying to counter Azerbaijan’s “aggressive policy”

[Oskanyan] Yes, I have just returned from the meeting in Burkina
Faso. This was my first visit to Africa and, that was why, it was very
interesting.

As of today, the International Francophone Organization is an
important organization for us. Its popularity grows on a daily basis
and various states want to become members of it. Over 50 countries are
members of this organization and dozens of countries enjoy the
observer status there. Armenia, Georgia, Sweden and Croatia have the
observer status, and I think we shall become full members of the
organization.

The organization debated the poverty reduction, development during the
age of globalization, protection of cultural heritage and other
issues. Similar organizations are interesting for us because we can
establish ties with other regional organizations and their members
with which we have not established relations. I think, it is important
to cooperate with African states in such organizations. This is
significant due to the fact that, at the moment Azerbaijan, we will
detail this later, is pursuing very aggressive policy in various
international organizations and, therefore, our cooperation with those
bodies is of great importance.

Verdict of Equatorial Guinea court on Armenian pilots “unfair”

[Presenter] A decision on the fate of six Armenian pilots has been
made in another African state. The court in Equatorial Guinea already
passed its verdict. Given this fact, what can the Armenian Foreign
Ministry do?

[Oskanyan] You know, our delegation was there during the trial. The
Armenian ambassador telephoned me immediately after the verdict. I was
in Burkina Faso at that time. Of course, this was a bad news and it
worried us. We believe that the verdict was unfair as our pilots had
nothing in common with the events there.

[Passage omitted: Oskanyan commiserated with families of the pilots]

Turkey must realize that closed borders with Armenia to hamper its EU
accession

[Presenter] The campaign for the recognition of the Armenian genocide
is under way in Europe. The latest country to recognize the genocide
is Slovakia and its parliament recognized the genocide yesterday [30
November]. Could you comment on this?

[Oskanyan] First, I hail the Slovakian parliament’s decision. It was a
very important decision. At the moment, the Armenian genocide is not a
purely Armenian issue, as we believe it is a global issue.

[Passage omitted: this decision coincides with Turkey’s bid for EU
membership]

[Presenter] The EU summit scheduled for 17 December is to discuss
Turkey’s EU membership. Is it possible that the summit will issue
serious requirements regarding Ankara’s blockade of Armenia?

[Oskanyan] Yes, I would like to stress that, indeed, closed borders
are unacceptable for Europe today. They realize this very well. We do
not know whether they want to make this issue one of the conditions
[for Turkey]. We feel that it would be very difficult to add it to the
Copenhagen criteria as a precondition for Turkey’s accession.

But we are expecting that this issue will be raised at the summit. We
are conducting serious work in this connection. The Armenian president
has sent a letter to all the leaders of the EU member countries. Today
I also invited all the ambassadors of the EU member countries
accredited to Armenia and discussed the issue with them. We hope that
our continuous work will yield positive results at the summit. It is
very important to raise this issue as Turkey must know that it is
important and necessary for the EU member countries to have opened
borders. It is generally unacceptable that one country has the closed
borders with the country involved in the EU’s New Neighbourhood
Policy.

Karabakh topic for “speculations”

[Presenter] Mr Oskanyan, the last major topic is the
Azerbaijan-initiated discussion of the Karabakh issue at the UN
General Assembly. The opposition claims that the postponement of the
discussion is the last warning to Armenia. The Armat [Armenian: Root –
centre for civil and democratic developments] stated today that
Armenia should either accept a suggested secret plan or will face the
fact that a decision will be adopted by the General Assembly. What is
your comments on these statements?

[Oskanyan] First, I want to regrettably say that the issue of Nagornyy
Karabakh is also a subject for speculations. Unfortunately, these
speculations, regardless of our wishes, have a negative impact on the
settlement process and this is against the will of the Armenian
people, not talking about the authorities. Everyone speculates about
this issue today. This should not be so. We should take it in the
context of whether it is useful for the settlement of the problem.

I believe that the Nagornyy Karabakh problem should not be a cause of
contention. If you pay attention to the opposition’s statements,
interviews and comments on this issue, you will see that they view the
only way out of the situation in the government’s departure from
power. This leads to a conclusion that the opposition is trying to
benefit from the Karabakh problem for their political ends. I think
that this approach is a great mistake and it has a major impact on
Armenia’s rather substantiated position. At present, I want to assure
our people that our position is very good and I can prove this.
However, the speculations are indeed irrelevant and they are not only
against the authorities, but also Armenia and its people.

What is happening now? While reading the opposition’s statements and
opinions, I come across three major inaccuracies.

Armenia not to return territories under its control without guarantee
for Karabakh’s self-determination

First, the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen in Astana [in September 2004]
have allegedly provided Armenia and Azerbaijan with proposals, which
you also mentioned. As Armenia has allegedly turned down the proposals,
the co-chairmen want to put pressure on Armenia to accept these
proposals through the UN. Denying all this, I want to state that the
presidents in Astana discussed what the foreign ministers of the two
states had drawn up. Prior to the Astana meeting, I and my opposite
number from Azerbaijan had four meetings. We drew up a package of
proposals at these meetings and submitted to the presidents of the two
states. In turn, the presidents discussed those proposals in Astana
and reached agreements on certain issues and wanted extra time for the
discussion of other issues.

Over that period Azerbaijan has wanted the UN to have the discussion
of this issue, while Armenia has informed the OSCE Minsk Group
co-chairmen of our readiness to start the second stage of talks in
Prague.

The second mistake is that the UN allegedly supports the
pro-Azerbaijani initiative. Actually, the co-chairmen are fully
against this. They have repeatedly spoken about this. The reason for
the postponement of the voting on Azerbaijan’s initiative is that the
co-chairmen are consistently exerting pressure on Azerbaijan to
abandon its demand because they believe that this might inflict a
serious blow on the whole process. The foreign ministers will have a
meeting in the near future.

I will leave for Sofia on Sunday [5 December] as an annual meeting of
[OSCE] foreign ministers will start there on Monday [6 December]. The
OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen and the Azerbaijani foreign minister will
attend the meeting as well. A meeting of the foreign ministers with
the co-chairmen in attendance has been scheduled. We will again return
to the issue of resuming the talks.

The third mistake is that Armenia has allegedly no interest in
resolving the problem and is pursuing a policy of delaying the
settlement of the Nagornyy Karabakh problem. I want to ask them, what
do they understand when speaking about the resolution of the issue? If
they want the resolution of the issue as we want, I accept their
criticism that the process is being delayed. Our approach to the
settlement of the issue fully differ from their [presumably
Azerbaijan’s] options. If there is no full guarantee for Karabakh’s
self-determination, we will not return an inch of the territories
under our control.

Unless Karabakh’s international recognition by international community
is envisaged in a possible document, we will not give our consent to
the liberation of the territories. We will not opt for mutual
compromises for the imminent settlement of the problem without
reaching our aims. This is ruled out. Armenia will not agree that
Karabakh to be a de jure part of Azerbaijan. If some people believe
that Armenia will agree to the settlement of the problem under these
conditions, let them criticize us saying that we delay the resolution
of the problem. The delay is unavoidable until the resolution of the
issue meets the interests of the Armenian Republic and its people. We
are working hard to this effect.

However, the opposite side has intensified its aggressiveness. My
interpretation of aggressiveness is that this is not the result of our
aggressive policy as claimed by our opposition. On the contrary,
Azerbaijan is aggressive because we achieved serious successes some
5-6 years ago. For now, Azerbaijan’s new president is trying to
cooperate with all possible organizations to belittle our successes.
They are working with new states which are not familiar with this
issue. Our diplomacy is facing serious difficulties. At present the
issue is rather tough.

[Passage omitted: Azerbaijan intensifies aggressive policy in all
spheres]

PanArmenian News
Dec 3 2004

SLOVAKIAIS THE 16TH COUNTRY TO RECOGNIZE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

The Parliament of Slovakia adopted the “Armenian resolution”
unanimously

On Tuesday the National Assembly of Slovakia passed a resolution
adopting Armenian genocide. According to Ashot Grigoryan – the leader
of Armenian community in Slovakia, the chairman of Slovakian
parliament Pavel Rushovski is going to make an official statement
urging not to allow Turkey’s acceptance to European Union.

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenian organizations lobbied the “Armenian
resolution” with the aid of deputies from Christian-Democratic party.
As for the government, it has repeatedly appealed to abstain from the
issue because according to the leaders of Slovakian foreign ministry
the resolution might have a negative impact on the relations between
Bratislava and Ankara. Nevertheless, the parliament speaker did not
hinder the consideration of the issue and the decision was made
unanimously. 70 deputies voted for and no one voted against passing
the resolution. It is important to mention that the Slovakian
parliament intends to appeal to parliaments of European countries to
put forward the adoption of Armenian genocide as a necessary
requirement for acceptance of Turkey to European Union.

In Slovakian parliament the “Armenian resolution” was passed much
easier than in other countries. But it doesn’t mean that Ankara has
accepted the inevitable international recognition of Armenian
genocide and doesn’t put any obstacles in the way of its
internationalization. The thing is that Turkey has very few ways to
pressure Bratislava. Slovakia is one of the most “modest” and “non
pretentious” countries of Europe. Little depends on Slovakia and
Slovakia in its turn depends little of others. In the current case it
was difficult for Turkey to find ways to affect the decision making
process in contrast to Canada where many major corporations that had
interests in Turkey were involved in the campaign against passing the
resolution. The Montreal “S & C Lavilan” company received an order to
build a subway in Ankara. “Bombardier” company won the tender for
laying railways in Anatolia. The both mentioned companies actively
lobbied the interests of Turkey in the Canadian parliament. Slovakian
companies do not have any interests in Turkey, so that’s why the
Turks had very little lobby resources in this case.

Slovakia became the 16th country to recognize Armenian genocide
together with France, Russia, Italy, Vatican, Switzerland, Cyprus,
Belgium, Greece, Canada Australia, Uruguay, Argentina, Lebanon and
Iran. The Armenian genocide is also recognized by municipal
committees of 36 Italian cities, 26 French cities, two cantons of
Switzerland and the Welsh parliament. More and more achievable
becomes the perspective of recognition of Armenian genocide by the
United States of America. Resolutions have already been passed in 35
states. 167 members from 425 of the House of Representatives and 30
senators have already qualified the events of 1915 as genocide. Even
the US administration often threatens Ankara with recognizing the
genocide. It was just like that last week when the White House hinted
that it will stop hindering the “Armenian resolution” if they go on
telling in Ankara about the genocide as if organized in Iraq by
Americans. On Monday the Turkish foreign minister Abdula Gyul
approved that such talks have really taken place in Turkey. Thus, it
is quite obvious that a very favorable situation is being formed in
Washington for returning the “Armenian resolution” on the congress
agenda. Maybe the United States will become the 17th country,
recognizing Armenian genocide.

RIA Novosti, Russia
Dec 3 2004

IRAN PROMOTES ALL-ROUND CONTACTS WITH ARMENIA

YEREVAN, December 3 (RIA Novosti) – Armenia’s stability and economic
development are highly important for Iran, Iranian ambassador to
Armenia Ali Reza Haqiqyan said on Friday at the meeting with Armenian
Defence Minister Serzh Sarkisyan, Secretary of the National Security
Council under the president.

A serious progress was reached within the framework of
Iranian-Armenian economic cooperation, particularly just-begun
construction of the Iran-Armenia gas pipeline and commissioning of
the second high-power transmission line, the minister’s press
secretary Seiran Shakhsuvaryan said.

The ambassador noted that the latest meetings at the official level
have generated new ideas for economic cooperation, such as the
building of a railway between Iran and Armenia, as well as the supply
of Iranian oil products (it is crucial for Armenia in view of its no
simple relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey).

The Iranian ambassador has promised assistance in arranging Farsi
classes at Armenia’s Vazgen Sarkisyan Military Institute.

The Armenian defence minister noted that, if this project would be
implemented, the Military Institute would be Armenia’s second
advanced-Farsi centre after the Yerevan State University.

As regards programmes intended under the Armenia-NATO partnership,
Sarkisyan reiterated that membership in the North Atlantic Alliance
is not on the foreign policy agenda of Armenia.

The sides also discussed matters of regional security, peaceful
settlement of the Nagorny-Karabakh conflict.

The Australian, Australia
Dec 4 2004

Too close for comfort

Peter Wilson in Kiev
December 04, 2004

IT was not what you would call a great public relations coup. Leonid
Kuchma, the former manager of a Soviet missile factory, who has been
one of Russia’s most loyal allies during his decade as President of
Ukraine, flew from the political crisis in his country early
yesterday to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin at an airport near
Moscow, in what looked like an anxious visit to report to head office
for new instructions.

The Russians have loomed as the shadowy but ominous presence behind
Kuchma’s regime during the past two weeks of confrontation on the
streets of Kiev and other Ukrainian cities, with housewives,
shop-owners and young anti-government activists all convinced that
Russian special forces were already hiding in the city, or would soon
appear if Kuchma’s regime began to fall.

But as the orange-clad protesters continued to rally in the streets,
dancing to rock music as they celebrated the momentum of their
campaign for fair elections, Kuchma decided he needed to huddle with
Putin even if the television broadcasts of their meeting cast him as
Moscow’s puppet.

Opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko rubbed in the humiliating fact
that Kuchma could get an audience with Putin easier than he could get
into his own office – which has been blockaded by opposition
activists. “The source of power is located in Ukraine – it’s the
Ukrainian people”, not the Kremlin, chided Yushchenko.

The visit reminded Ukrainians that while the anti-government campaign
has mainly been a backlash against domestic corruption and economic
mismanagement, it has also become a new fault line in East-West
relations and will determine whether their 48 million-strong nation
will look more to the West in the future or drift into a closer
embrace of Russia.

The worried look on Putin’s face as he commiserated with Kuchma about
the precarious situation in Ukraine testified that the unprecedented
dispute there is also a turning point for Russia and his own
international ambitions.

Putin has reason to be worried. He has been embarrassed at home and
abroad after rushing to congratulate Kuchma’s hand-picked successor,
Viktor Yanukovych, for “winning” an election that has been declared
rigged by observers, Western governments, Ukraine’s parliament and
many of the Government’s own backers.

Putin now has the potential discomfort of having a real democracy on
his doorstep as an uncomfortably relevant example of the sort of
civil rights that his citizens are losing as he strengthens his
already tight hold on Russia’s media, business, political parties and
regional governments.

Growing in confidence at home and abroad, Putin has openly mourned
the passing of the Soviet Union 13 years ago as “a national tragedy”
for Russia and launched a new bid to reconstitute a “joint economic
space” on the ashes of the USSR, taking in Russia, Ukraine,
Kazahkstan and Belarus.

He has already interfered in Georgia and Moldova by supporting
ethnically Russian separatist movements, has smiled on rigged
elections in Belarus, Azerbaijan and Armenia, and has reasserted
Moscow’s role in Central Asia’s Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and
Uzbekistan, where there is solid evidence the Government has boiled
at least one dissident alive.

But of all the countries in Russia’s “near abroad”, Ukraine is easily
the most important. It is the largest, having taken one-fifth of the
USSR’s population when it declared independence in 1991. It has the
best farmland in Europe, it is a vital transit point for the
pipelines that supply one-third of the European Union’s oil and gas
imports, and culturally it is more Russian than any of Moscow’s
neighbours. In fact Ukraine is the cradle of Russia’s Orthodox Church
and Slavic culture.

Soviet leaders Leonid Brezhnev and Nikita Krushchev were Ukrainians,
and Ukraine built the nation’s heavy industries, staffed largely by
Russians. Even today, manufacturing production lines straddle their
border, as do thousands of extended families. The family ties are so
strong that Ukraine surrendered its nuclear weapons to Russia after
independence and allows Russia’s Black Sea fleet into its port of
Sevastopol.

Russian is still the language that most Ukrainians speak at home, and
if Yanukovych had become president he would have made it the second
official language and introduced dual citizenship for millions, while
rejecting Opposition calls for EU and NATO membership.

“We have been brothers and cousins for three centuries,” says Alla
Sokolovskaya, a 30-year-old teacher from Kiev with a Russian mother
and Ukrainian father.

“We are one. Putin supports us because we are all Slavs, and we have
to stand together against NATO, which looks more and more
aggressive,” she says as she stands in the snow at a pro-Yanukovych
rally drowned out by the Yushchenko protests that crippled the
capital.

Until now, western Europe and the US have accepted Russia’s role in
Ukraine. The EU has never offered it membership, even though Ukraine
is plainly more European than long-term aspirant Turkey.

In 1991 US president George Herbert Bush visited Kiev and tried to
persuade its leaders not to seek independence from the Soviet Union,
in what was derided as his “Chicken Kiev” speech.

One of the main drafters of that speech was a little-known expert on
Soviet affairs named Condoleezza Rice, but as GeorgeW. Bush’s next
secretary of state, she is sure to take a rather different attitude
on the need to maintain Ukrainian independence.

It is not surprising that Russian leaders have been so sensitive
about the sophisticated and well-funded US campaign of recent years
to fund and train democracy activists prepared to take on
authoritarian regimes in elections across eastern Europe.

It is certainly not paranoia when the Russians claim Washington has
been funding activists and election campaigns against Moscow’s
friends in places such as Serbia, Georgia, Belarus and Ukraine.

Direct US funding of pro-Yushchenko campaigners is estimated to be
more than $US10million ($12.9 million), and more money and skills
have been provided by democracy foundations run by the main US
political parties and donors such as billionaire George Soros.

In one of their most provocative moves, the US and other Western
embassies bankrolled the exit polls that provided a standard to judge
the officially declared results.

Putin was more open in his support for Yanukovych, twice visiting to
campaign for him and sending his chief spin doctor to work in Kiev,
where Yushchenko, whose American wife Katherine used to work for the
State Department, was portrayed as a US puppet.

The truth is that although Yushchenko is a pro-Western liberal
economist and reformer, he has more in common with his rival than it
appears. He served for two years in the job Yanukovych now holds,
prime minister under Kuchma, before breaking away to oppose him. He
is known as an opponent of corruption but, like Yanukovych, he has
his own tight circle of wealthy business backers.

There is little doubt the Government and its business allies, who
have grown rich on the privatisation of state assets, stuffed ballot
boxes, abused their control of most TV stations and even put
invisible ink in pens used to mark ballots in some Opposition areas.
Few observers doubt that Yushchenko would have won a fair vote.

But while international attention has focused on the dubious turnout
of 97 per cent in Yanukovych’s home region, Russian-speaking Donetsk,
where many booths somehow registered turnouts of more than 100 per
cent, the rorts were not all one way.

Yanukovych’s implausible 96 per cent of the vote in Donetsk was
almost matched in some regions in the west of the country by supposed
votes of up to 94 per cent for his opponent.

The explosive threat by the leaders of some Russian-speaking regions
to break away from the nation if Yanukovych was not installed as
president was backed by Moscow mayor Yuri Luzkhov, who attended a
meeting of eastern Ukrainian leaders and denounced the Opposition as
a “sabbath of witches” pretending to “represent the whole of the
nation”.

That separatist threat soon melted in the face of a nationalist
backlash across Ukraine and because of the realisation by the tycoons
close to Kuchma, whose fortunes are largely based in the east, that
it would not help their businesses if a reconstituted Iron Curtain
was placed through the centre of Ukraine rather than the middle of
Germany.

Neither side went into the election campaign wanting to turn totally
away from either Russia or the West, and the conflict in Iraq shows
the complexity of the diplomatic balancing act that Ukraine has at
times achieved.

It was the usually pro-Moscow Kuchma who sent a solid contingent of
troops to Iraq to improve his standing in Washington, with his
protege Yanukovych vowing to extend their tour of duty while
Yushchenko has promised to pull them out.

The danger for Putin is that his high-profile and apparently
unsuccessful intervention in Ukraine’s political problems may have
tipped its balance of opinion much further towards the West,
especially if Yushchenko emerges as president – a prospect that is
not yet guaranteed, but is increasingly likely.

Moscow mayor pleased with Armenia’s cooperation

Noyan Tapan news agency
3 Dec 04

Yerevan, 3 December: Armenian Prime Minister Andranik Markaryan
received Moscow Mayor Yuriy Luzhkov and his delegation on 3
December. Noting the high level of relations between Armenia and
Russia, the parties also stressed the need for the further development
of cooperation between the Armenian government and other
administrative parts of the Russian Federation, particularly the
government of Moscow.

The governments of Armenia and Moscow have already approved the
composition of a working commission for cooperation in the commercial,
economic, scientific, technical, humanitarian and cultural areas,
Markaryan said. A draft programme on cooperation is being
prepared. The first meeting of the commission is scheduled for the
spring of 2005.

The Armenian premier suggested that major Moscow companies take more
active steps to enter and invest in the Armenian market. Markaryan
noted that Armenia is particularly interested in setting up joint
ventures processing fruit and vegetables.

Luzhkov promised to help resolve the mentioned issues. He expressed
satisfaction with the negotiations with the Armenian government, the
mayor’s office of Yerevan and the development and implementation of
joint programmes. The programme of cooperation for 2005-2007, which
was signed between Moscow and Yerevan on 3 December, is an important
step in this direction, he said.

The sides also touched upon cooperation in the banking system, health,
transport, communications, education and culture, the press service of
the [Armenian] government said.

Presidential adviser expects no “apricot revolution” in Armenia

Ayots Ashkar, Yerevan
2 Dec 04

There will be no “apricot revolution” in Armenia, as there is no real
alternative to the incumbent authorities, the president’s security
adviser has said. Garnik Isagulyan said that the former ruling party,
the Armenian Pan-National Movement, was the real opposition and was
gradually trying to move out of the shadows. “The tragedy of the APNM
is that it does not have a leader accepted by the people,” Isagulyan
said, adding that society did not support the APNM’s Levon
Ter-Petrosyan, Armenia’s former president. The following is the text
of Vahan Vardanyan’s interview with Isagulyan published in Armenian
newspaper Ayots Ashkar on 2 December and headlined “There will be no
revolution”; subheadings inserted editorially:

An interview with the Armenian president’s adviser on security issues,
Garnik Isagulyan.

[Ayots Ashkar correspondent] The opposition thinks that the Karabakh
issue will soon become a centre of confrontation. Do you agree with
this view?

[Garnik Isagulyan] Armenia is multipolar and multilayered in its
foreign policy. We do not have the objective of being an appendage of
one superpower against another and it is senseless to search for
external signals of a power change. As for the Karabakh issue, the
policy of today’s authorities cannot be seen as anything but positive
by any Armenian who worries about the national interests.

Victory of “orange revolution” would divide Ukraine

[Correspondent] Mr Isagulyan, against the background of the events
taking place in Ukraine views are expressed in Armenia that Yerevan
will be the next refuge of the “orange revolution”. How possible is
this?

[Isagulyan] Indeed, it seems to become a tradition immediately to
compare the processes of any post-Soviet country with Armenia. That
happened in the case of the Georgian “rose revolution”, now it is
happening with Ukraine. The Ukrainian events showed that the fight is
not in the name of democracy, but between the superpowers and, because
of these actions, the country is divided into two parts. Incidentally,
the majority of the country’s industry, the entire coastline with
ports, that is 80 per cent of the economy, is centred in the
southeastern regions that have a pro-Russian orientation and where
millions of Russians live. For this reason the victory of the “orange
revolution” in Ukraine will at best lead to the gradual separation of
the country and at worst to civil war, which we should not be happy
about or use as a model.

Armenian authorities and people not at loggerheads

[Correspondent] Nevertheless against this background the opposition
has stepped up its activity to a certain degree in Armenia.

[Isagulyan] We saw them step up their activity more seriously in the
2003 elections as well as in the first part of this year. We also know
the slogans on which the opposition tried to base the need for a power
change and they failed. This does not mean that there are no problems
in the country, the authorities are trying to resolve them
gradually. Simply in its turn the opposition did not put forward an
alternative programme. On the other hand, Armenia is a monoethnic
country. Unlike Ukraine and Georgia, power at the top and the state
structures are strong enough. And finally, there is no urgent problem
over which the authorities and the public are taking opposing
positions.

Ter-Petrosyan not accepted by public

[Correspondent] The fact that [ex-President] Levon Ter-Petrosyan broke
his long silence is viewed as an external, western signal. By the way,
he mentioned in his interview that the stage-by-stage option for a
Karabakh settlement, put forward in 1997, was the best and that in
future we will not gain anything more.

[Isagulyan] It would be surprising if the former president said
anything different, because that would mean abandoning his positions
expressed in the well-known “War or Peace” article. As for the option
of 1997, it foresaw the unconditional capitulation of the liberated
territories to Azerbaijan without specification of Karabakh’s
status. It was clear from different statements of the president that
they expected to leave Karabakh within Azerbaijan. Let nobody dispute
that we can reach this worst scenario at any moment and without Levon
Ter-Petrosyan. Today if we suggest the same to Azerbaijan, they will
agree with pleasure. Who will not agree without any effort to get what
he lost forever? I see no trend in the former president’s
interview. His meetings with the political elite of different
countries do not at all mean that the West foresees any action to
return him to politics.

[Correspondent] In that case how do you explain the trend of the
opposition stepping up its activity? Maybe with the help of new
slogans, new ideas and a new composition they hope that the people
will follow them.

[Isagulyan] I have mentioned many times that in Armenia the Armenian
Pan-National Movement [APNM] is the real opposition, it rules all the
other developments from the shadows. Today the APNM is trying to leave
the shadows gradually, as it sees no other force that can take the
flag of the opposition. Simply the tragedy of the APNM is that it does
not have a leader accepted by the people. On the whole it has nobody
except Ter-Petrosyan. Our society’s attitude towards Ter-Petrosyan is
known. Nobody has forgotten the cold and dark years.

No “apricot revolution” in Armenia

One of the leaders of the opposition said once that, as the apricot is
the most Armenian fruit, our revolution will be the “apricot
revolution”. I think that there is no ground for an “apricot
revolution”, as there is no real alternative to the present
authorities that has a programme, the people’s trust and has not been
already compromised.

Georgia initiates economic union of Caucasus republics – Armenian report

Arminfo
2 Dec 04

YEREVAN

“At present, there are certain business relations between the
Armenian, Azerbaijani and Turkish sides, and Armenia, on its side,
agrees to consolidate these relations within the framework of an
economic organization,” Armenian Prime Minister Andranik Markaryan
told reporters after the first sitting of the Armenian-Georgian
business association in Yerevan today.

The prime minister spoke highly about the level of the
Armenian-Georgian economic relations. He particularly said that
Georgia had submitted to Armenia a list of its enterprises which could
be privatized with Armenian investments.

The establishment of a similar Georgian-Azerbaijani business
association will be the next phase to form a single Caucasian business
space, Georgian MP Beso Jugheli told the sitting. After that, Georgia
is planning to set up a tripartite Armenia-Georgia-Azerbaijan
association on the basis of the two associations.

The Georgian MP thinks that this will allow to form a single economic
space and a single consumer market with 15m residents in the
Caucasus. “This is our major dream, and business circles should be one
jump ahead of politicians,” Jugheli said.

[Passage omitted: Georgian president’s message to the sitting; other
details]

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

NATO admission not on agenda, Armenian minister tells Iranian envoy

Mediamax news agency
3 Dec 04

YEREVAN

“An issue of NATO admission is not on the agenda of the republic’s
foreign policy,” Armenian Defence Minister Serzh Sarkisyan has said at
a meeting with Iranian ambassador to Armenia Ali Reza Haqiqian.

The Armenian defence minister’s press secretary, Col Seyran
Shakhsuvaryan, has told Mediamax news agency that “Serzh Sarkisyan
said this commenting on Armenia’s intention to sign the Individual
Partnership Action Plan (IPAP) with NATO”.

During the meeting, the sides discussed the issues related to the
Armenian defence minister’s forthcoming visit to Tehran, the problems
of regional security and the settlement of the Nagornyy Karabakh
conflict.

The Iranian ambassador suggested to open the Persian language courses
in the Vazgen Sarkisyan Military Institute. Serzh Sarkisyan welcomed
this proposal saying that the military institute could be the second
centre for deepening study of the Persian language in Armenia after
Yerevan State University.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Reuters
Dec 3 2004

The Caucasus at a Crossroads
03 Dec 2004 14:34:00 GMT

Source: NGO latest
Elaine Baker

Oxfam GB – UK
Website:
The Caucasus at a Crossroads

Governments across the Southern Caucasus must take firm steps towards
improving the lives of poor people in the region, according to the
international aid agency Oxfam.

On Monday 6 December, the organisation is launching a campaign,
called the Caucasus at a Crossroads, to mark its 10th anniversary of
working in Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan.

The campaign aims to highlight the needs for governments to work with
civil-society organisations and the international community to help
tackle poverty levels of more than 50 per cent in Armenia, Georgia
and Azerbaijan.

In 2000, the three countries signed up to the United Nations’
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) – international targets for
reducing global poverty by the year 2015. The aid agency says that
now is a crucial moment for governments across the region to take
action in order for the delivery of the MDGs by the 2015 deadline.

Oxfam is organising a top-level conference to look at the future of
the Southern Caucasus. The event, to be held on 6 December, will be
opened by the Georgian First Lady Sandra Roelofs, at the Marriott
Hotel, in Tblisi.

Representatives from the three governments as well as members of
civil society organisations will be attending the event, due to take
place at the Marriott Hotel, in Tblisi.

Regional Director for the Commonwealth of Independent States Adam
Leach says: `The people of the Southern Caucasus are coming to a
Crossroads and a moment for choices.

`Thirteen years after gaining independence from the Soviet Union,
nearly half of the population of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia is
still living below national poverty lines but the clock is now
ticking in the race to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by
2015.

`Oxfam is calling on national governments, the international
community, and civil-society organisations to work together to make
the best decisions and choices in order to improve the lives of poor
and vulnerable people in the region.’

Oxfam has been working in the Southern Caucasus for 10 years, helping
provide basic primary healthcare to poor people in rural areas and
also improve economic opportunities for poor people by helping them
set up their own businesses. The organisation also works with local
organisations to monitor government spending and make institutions
more accountable.

The aid agency is marking its anniversary by holding a string of
events across the Southern Caucasus looking forward to the next 10
years and the achievement of the United Nations MDGs.

Notes to editors:

1. For more information about the Caucasus at a Crossroads campaign
or if you would like to register to attend the conference on December
6 call 00 995 32 252 881 (Oxfam Georgia office) or call Media Officer
Zahra Akkerhuys on +44 7974 313566.

2. Oxfam’s new briefing note, called Taking Stock for the Future: the
southern Caucasus at a Crossroads, is available (embargoed until
00:01am UK-time, on December 6).

3. Video News Releases in Armenian, Azeri and Georgian are available
with footage of Oxfam programmes in each of the three countries.

4. Oxfam’s Regional Director for the Commonwealth of Independent
States Adam Leach will be available for interview at the conference.
Interview times will be arranged on the day.

5. Also available for interview will be Oxfam’s Georgian Country
Programme Managers Keti Getiashvili; Azeri Country Programme Manager
Shovcat Alizadeh; and Armenian Country Programme Manager Margarita
Hakobyan.

6. Oxfam’s partners in the Southern Caucasus include:

Armenia: Future Generation; Kamk and Korov; Bridge of Hope; NGO’s
Union of Shirak region; Support to Communities; Hask-96; Kapan
Entrepreneurship Development Centre; Economic Development Research
Centre; Institute of Democracy and Human Rights; Fund Against
Violation of Law; Centre for Regional Development/ Transparency
International Armenia; Democracy Today.

Azerbaijan: Aran; Expert Economic Magazine; Analytic Information and
Research Centre; Blind People’s Association; Healthy World; Finance
for Development.

Georgia: Small Business Development Foundation; Green Alternative;
Strategic Research Institute; Association of Young Economists of
Georgia; Sakhli; Georgian Health Law and Bioethics society; Civil
Society Institute; Grassroots Support Centre; The Welfare Foundation;
International Telecommunications and Information Centre; Georgian
Association of Young Lawyers; Association of Disabled Women and
Mothers of Disabled Children.

[ Any views expressed in this article are those of the writer and not
of Reuters. ]

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

AzerTag, Azerbaijan
Dec 3 2004

PRESIDENT OF AZERBAIJAN ILHAM ALIYEV RECEIVES DIRECTOR OF CENTER FOR
HIGH DEFENSE STUDIES (CASD) PIETRO ERCOLE AGO
[December 03, 2004, 21:39:57]

President of the Azerbaijan Republic Ilham Aliyev has received at the
Presidential Palace the director of the Center for High Defense
Studies (CASD) of the Republic of Italy, ambassador Pietro Ercole
Ago, December 3.

Warmly having welcomed the visitor, the Head of State has noted that
is pleased to see again him in Azerbaijan.

Having expressed to President Ilham Aliyev deep gratitude for warm
reception, the visitor has noted that the purpose of his visit
consists in carrying out in the country of seminars, and various
discussions connected to local conflicts. Mr. Pietro Ercole Ago has
emphasized that as the head of Ago Group of Committee of Ministers of
the Council of Europe directly watches process of the negotiations
carried out in the field of settlement of the Armenia-Azerbaijan,
Nagorny Karabakh conflict, and wishes quick peace settlement of the
said problem.

Then, informing the President of Azerbaijan about activity of
structure supervised by him, he informed that the Center being a
higher educational institution of the Armed Forces of Italy is
engaged in preparation of the local personnel in the field of policy
in military sphere. The Center carries out worldwide together with
the international organizations of conference, seminars, on these
actions are discussed ways of settlement of local conflicts. In this
context, the major task, Mr. Ago said, is settlement of one of the
heaviest for Southern Caucasus problems – the Armenia-Azerbaijan,
Nagorny Karabakh conflict. Mr. Ago has noted that the Center
supervised by him aims at studying the questions connected to the
settlement of the mentioned conflict, and wishes to promote process
of settlement.

The Head of Azerbaijan State has regarded carrying out of any
discussions, seminars directed on the resolution to conflicts, as a
positive fact. President Ilham Aliyev has recollected the meetings,
which have been carried out with Pietro Ercole Ago when he was the
head of group. Informing the visitor in connection with settlement of
the Armenia-Azerbaijan, Nagorny Karabakh conflict, President of
Azerbaijan has touched the position of Azerbaijan and has once again
emphasized, that due to carried out successful internal and foreign
policy the authority of Azerbaijan has increased, its position has
become stronger. The efforts directed on the resolution of conflict
by negotiations within the framework of norms and principles of
international law, territorial integrity of Azerbaijan also continue.
Having noted that alternatives to this are not present, President
Ilham Aliyev has stated that only destructive position of Armenia
impedes settlement of the conflict.

Pietro Ercole Ago has expressed to the President of Azerbaijan
gratitude for a resolute and concrete statement of the position and
has assured him that the resolution of conflict would constantly be
in the center of attention of the structure supervised by him.

Head of the foreign relations department of President Administration
Novruz Mammadov, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of
Italy to Azerbaijan Margarita Kosta attended the reception.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress