PRESS RELEASE
Shahumyan-Getashen Patriotic Benevelont Association
Address: Yerevan, Armenia, Koriun Street 19/a
Contact: Eduard Balayan
Tel: (374-1) 560154
E-mail: [email protected]
23 November, 2004

Meeting with UN Resident Coordinator

Mr. Eduard Balayan, President of the Shahumyan-Getashen Benevolent
Association, met with United Nations Resident Coordinator in Armenia,
Ms. Lise Grande.

At the meeting, on November 19, Mr. Balayan, whose organization
represents the tens of thousands of Armenians who were forcibly
removed from the Shahumyan and Getashen regions of Northern Karabakh,
explained the problems and challenges facing these refugees. He
spoke specifically about the continuing uncertainty of their status
given Azerbaijan’s continuing delaying tactics in trying to achieve
a resolution of the conflict.

Mr. Balayan asked that the concerns of the refugees be transmitted
to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Mr. Ruud Lubbers who was
in Yerevan for a brief visit.

YOUTH MEETING OVER

Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR)
24 Nov 04

On November 15-19 the representatives of youth organizations of
Armenia, as well as 11 representatives from 9 foreign countries
were visiting Artsakh. The visit was organized by the foundation
“All-Armenian Youth International Center”. The members of the
delegation met with several top officials of the republic, as
well as representatives of public organizations, journalists and
students. KARABAKH CANNOT OBEY AZERBAIJAN. The guests offered
questions on the official position of the government concerning
the Karabakh problem, talks, relationships between Karabakh and
Russia to the foreign minister of NKR Ashot Ghulian. Dwelling
upon the Artsakh movement, the situation and developments in the
country the minister emphasized that economically developed Karabakh
cannot obey the Republic of Azerbaijan where even the rights of the
citizens of Azerbaijan are violated. The representative of Serbia
was interested in Russia’s influence on the Karabakh settlement. The
foreign minister mentioned particularly that Russian influence is
present in Nagorni Karabakh like in the other countries of the South
Caucasus. “This question may be related to Azerbaijani propaganda
also, and if proceed from its statements, there are no Armenians
here and Russians fought in the Karabakh war instead of the people
of Karabakh. I think that at least your impressions must confirm that
this was not and is not the case.” According to the minister, Russia
behaved adequately in the years of the Karabakh confrontation. At that
time when our region was a so-called undiscovered point on the map for
the international community, Russia assumed the main difficulty as a
mediator in the settlement of the Karabakh conflict. It was through
its direct mediation that the cease-fire was maintained in 1994. The
minister emphasized that there are wide-scale public relations
between the people of Karabakh and Russia but at the political level
the attitude of Russia towards Karabakh does not differ from that
of other countries. In answer to the question on the steps taken
towards activating the negotiation process, the minister said,
â~@~There are no enough resources for activating the negotiation
process. Generally, independent of the Karabakh conflict, the talks
cannot be the result of unilateral efforts and actions. Activation of
negotiations requires the interest of both Azerbaijan and us. Today
there is no interest on Azerbaijan’s part, and the attempts of the
past year show the settlement of the Karabakh issue is not a priority
for Azerbaijan. Instead, through propaganda and different means an
attempt is made to create the impression that Azerbaijan is really
interested. The neighbour state keeps complaining of the activity of
mediators, and on the other hand, tries to make separate points of
the problem package subject of discussion at different international
organizations. Recently an attempt was being made to discuss a similar
question at the General Assembly of the UN. Of course, we do not mind
the discussion of the problems of territories or refugees but these
cannot be considered outside the general context.” FIRST TO PREPARE
FOR FURTHER COOPERATION. During the round tables
held in
the framework of the visit an important topic of discussion was the
protests of the neighbour state against the international programs
implemented in Artsakh. This undertaking was not an exception either;
the Azerbaijanis had tried to prevent the program and the visit of
the young people to Karabakh. Foreign minister Ashot Ghulian assured
that in Karabakh no political context is attached to the visits and
meetings with guests adding that Karabakh is, indeed, interested in
the visit of young people from different countries. They will see the
developments, success and drawbacks in our republic themselves and
they will have an objective opinion on the region and our country. Of
course, the Armenian side would like Azerbaijani representatives be
included in the group as after the visit they would certainly return
home with different ideas. The foreigners were surprised at the fact
that despite the Artsakh war and the Armenian genocide the Armenian
young people still wish to cooperate with the Azerbaijanis. By
the way, before the visit the foundation “All-Armenian Youth
International Center” conducted a public opinion poll among the
youth organizations in Karabakh on cooperation between Karabakh
and Azerbaijani youth. About 40 per cent were against cooperation
with Azerbaijanis for the reason that during visits in Azerbaijan
there is no confidence for the security of visitors. The fact that
Karabakh is not recognized may, in fact, have a negative effect upon
cooperation between Karabakh and European youth organizations. As the
representative of Italy mentioned during the round table, the European
organizations will not sponsor a program where Karabakh participates as
one of the sides. In this respect it is easier to cooperate with the
youth organizations of Moldavia, Georgia, Ukraine, for instance. In
answer to the question what results this visit produced in terms of
cooperation the representative of Italy said that before speaking about
cooperation it is necessary to think on how to start it. Cooperation
is possible only through a youth organization of Armenia. During the
visit the representatives of youth organizations of Artsakh came to the
conclusion that it is, first of all, necessary to undertake courses
for preparation of programs, ways of cooperation. Representatives of
certain organizations of Armenia promised to cooperate with them.

AA.
24-11-2004

–Boundary_(ID_Tqlq3dxd4McbY/Uoxbb1YQ)–

NKR President’s Meetings In California

Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR)
24 Nov 04

The Armenian community of California supported the aspiration of
their compatriots of the eastern states of the USA to increase aid
to Nagorni Karabakh.

Like the Armenians of Boston, New York, Detroit and other cities of
the USA the Armenians of California are eager to take part actively in
the November 25 telethon aimed to raise money for the construction
of the road “North-South” which has a strategic importance for
NKR. The evidence to this is the results of the meeting of the NKR
president Arkady Ghukassian with the representatives of the Armenian
community of California where he arrived on November 19. During the
meeting with a group of Armenian businessmen and benefactors at the
town of New Port Beech, among them Levon and Zara Ghukassian, Ralf
and Savy Tufenkian, Costy and Maryann, as well as Hakob and Maria
Shirvanian told their intention of making their own contribution to
the development of Artsakh. At the same time they pointed out that the
activity of the Armenian community of the USA is directly related to
the increasing confidence in the NKR president and the democratic and
economic reforms undertaken by him. This idea was highlighted during
all the meetings of Arkady Ghukassian in America, especially during
the receptions organized by the board of chairmen of the Armenian
General Benevolent Union and the California branch of the AGBU. In
his address the director of the branch Vahe Imastunian stressed the
importance of the NKR president’s visit to the USA in promoting the
relationships between Artsakh and the Armenian community. In his
turn Ghukassian thanked them for their frank wish to help Artsakh,
and this means that hopefully this year the necessary financial
means will be obtained for finishing the construction of the road,
and next year it will be possible to start the implementation of
other important programs for the overall development of Artsakh. At
the same time he emphasized that during the upcoming telethon the
active participation of the Diaspora will show to the world once again
that they are not apart from the fate of Artsakh. Arkady and Irina
Hovhannissian also promised to participate in the telethon during
the meeting with the NKR president. During the press conference with
local Armenian journalists Arkady Ghukassian again touched upon the
social and economic development of Artsakh and the settlement of the
Karabakh conflict. “Artsakh won the war imposed on it owing to the
support of Armenia and the Diaspora,” stated the NKR president. “I am
sure that together we will achieve similar results in the economic
confrontation.” Speaking about the prospects of settlement of the
Karabakh conflict Arkady Ghukassian emphasized that it goes without
saying that Nagorni Karabakh cannot be within Azerbaijan. “We aim
to achieve the de jure recognition of Nagorni Karabakh,” stated
the NKR president. He gave a negative evaluation of the actions of
Baku authorities trying to set forth the question of the so-called
“occupied territories” for discussion at the UN and characterized
these actions as provocative steps. According to him, such steps of
Baku aggravate the already complicated Karabakh issue. The president
of NKR mentioned that the problems of territory and refugees were the
consequences of the military aggression of Azerbaijan against Nagorni
Karabakh. “The main issue of the conflict is the status of Nagorni
Karabakh,” stated Arkady Ghukassian and added that neglecting the
question of Nagorni Karabakh status renders meaningless the discussion
of all the other questions related to overcoming the consequences of
the military confrontation. On November 22 Arkady Ghukassian attended
the Sunday service at the church Saint Karapet in Hollywood served by
the archbishop of the Artsakh Diocese of the Armenian Apostolic Church
Parghev Martirossian. The meetings of the NKR president are continuing.

AA.
24-11-2004

SERGEY BALASANYAN DIED

A1 Plus | 13:52:35 | 24-11-2004 | Social |

Yesterday Sergey Balasanyan, Chair of “Association for Seismology and
Geophysics of Armenia” died in “Armenia” Medical Centre. On November
19 his “BMW” crashed on Ashtarak-Yerevan highway. Sergey Balasanyan
was taken to “Armenia” Medical Centre in a grave condition but doctors
didn’t manage to save his life.

We present our condolences to the relatives and friends of Sergey
Balasanyan with his tragic death.

Act on ‘never again’
By Lee Bycel

Los Angeles Daily News
Nov 24 2004

The Rwandan genocide, the Armenian genocide, the Holocaust – in the
wake of these and other catastrophes of the 20th century, we have
vowed, “Never again.” The phrase is resolute and absolute.

But it can also be empty. It prescribes nothing. In terms of action
and commitment, it is silent. And silence – to say nothing and do
nothing while the innocent perish – is genocide’s prescription.

The term “genocide” was coined exactly 60 years ago by Raphael Lemkin,
in “Axis Rule in Occupied Europe,” published in November 1944 with the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He defined the term as
“a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction
of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the
aim of annihilating the groups themselves.”

Whether the ongoing catastrophe in Darfur, Sudan, will rise (or sink)
to that definition, history will judge. It will judge our silence
as well.

I recently returned from a humanitarian mission to three refugee camps
in Chad, on the border of Darfur. These camps teem with people who have
somehow survived unfathomable suffering: husbands and fathers murdered;
wives and daughters raped; death from malaria, cholera and dysentery;
villages and lives burned to ashes. Life in the refugee camps is its
own hell, thick with the trauma and travail of those whose living eyes
can still see the dead. The camps bear witness to the darkest regions
of human degradation. There, the words “Never again” are a tragic,
empty echo.

The refugees in Chad and Darfur are abstractions when you see them
in the newspaper, but they are quite real in person, and not much
different from you and me. They happen to be victims of ethnic
cleansing and terror. They happen to have no resources. But they
yearn, as we do, for the warmth of a smile, for the touch of a caring
hand. What we consider the requirements of life are unimaginable
luxuries to them. They are desperate for our help. If only we were
as desperate to help them.

Unless the words “never again” are translated into action, their
echo is painfully hollow. Action on this scale can seem hopeless,
but we are not helpless: writing letters, making contributions,
getting involved in advocacy groups – these activities are near to
hand, and they multiply powerfully. Not everyone can give their whole
lives to such work, like the remarkable volunteers from around the
world I was privileged to meet in Chad. But that does not prevent a
more personal transformation on the part of each of us.

When we recognize that our humanity is inextricably linked to theirs,
the refugees of Darfur are no longer an abstraction that fades from
view. Awareness of their existence fosters an examination of our own.
It changes our approach to life, what we consume, what we think we
need and deserve. “Never again” is ultimately a personal challenge:
What can I do to erase Lemkin’s “genocide” from the dictionary?

Nor should we forget that “Never again” speaks to our self-interest.
Neglect of the dispossessed and disenfranchised can have devastating
consequences: political instability, deepening ethnic conflicts,
devastating famines and wars – any of which can rapidly darken our
own skies. All of humanity, the most and least fortunate alike, sleep
under the same sky, wake to the same sun, and cherish the same hopes
for their children.

“Never again” is an urgent call to each of us. Will we answer?

— Rabbi Lee Bycel, a Tarzana resident, is former dean of Hebrew
Union College – Jewish Institute of Religion. He moderates leadership
seminars at The Aspen Institute.

UN General Assembly discussed situation in occupied territories of Azerbaijan

Kazinform, Kazakhstan
Nov 24 2004

Astana – Baku. November 24. KAZINFORM – In New York November 23 at
60th plenary sitting of 59th session of UN General Assembly within
the Article 163 of the agenda discussed was the “Situation in the
occupied territories of Azerbaijan”.

With a statement at session On behalf of the Azerbaijan Republic,
the Minister of Foreign Affairs Elmar Mammadyarov made a statement,
Kazinform quotes AzerTaj.

Having expressed to General Assembly gratitude for support of the
initiative of the Azerbaijan side on inclusion of the question in
the agenda, he has noted that the UN Security Council has adopted in
1993 four Resolutions (#822, 853, 874 and 884), which are the basis
for settlement of the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict.

The Resolution adopted by General Assembly (#48/114) titled “Urgent
international aid to the population of the Azerbaijan which have
become refugees and IDPs” promoted simplification of heavy humanitarian
condition in the country.

The Minister has emphasized, that Azerbaijan already more than 10 years
remains devoted to ceasefire regime that testifies to its aspiration
to peace settlement of the conflict.

The recent meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Armenia
and Azerbaijan held in Prague with mediation the OSCE Minsk Group
co-chairs has instilled in us certain hopes.

During the meeting, the sides could discuss the basic questions
around of settlement of the conflict, including liberation of all
the occupied Azerbaijan territories, returning of the refugees to
the native lands, restoration of transport and other communications
between Armenia and Azerbaijan and gradual solution of the political
aspect of the conflict.

However, the messages when negotiations are carried out, on mass
resettlement of the population on the occupied territories, cause
concern of Azerbaijan.

If earlier the information on it had casual character, recently as
a result of organized efforts of the Republic of Armenia, the said
fact has acquired wide scale.

The said campaign, “Returning to Karabakh”, is carried out by the
department of the government of Armenia on questions of refugees and
IDPs, and is financed from the special budget allocated by official
Yerevan to separatist regime of Nagorny Karabakh.

Elmar Mammadyarov has told: “The greatest concern is caused by the
occupied region of Lachin.

As a result of the carried out Armenian program, here, now live 13
thousand Armenians.

Names of the Azerbaijan villages and settlements have been made
Armenian.

The organizations of the Armenian Diaspora, also taking direct
participation in the mentioned program, do not hide the purposes
directed on “creation of infrastructure in Nagorny Karabakh and
settling here its Armenian refugees”.

For creation of new settlements, the government of Armenia also uses
the armed forces on the occupied territories.

So, with their participation have been created two new settlements
in Kalbajar region of Azerbaijan.

The representative of Azerbaijan, stating that from Iran, Russia,
Lebanon and other countries, is carried out resettlement of hundreds
Armenians, has noted that in exchange of it, the government of Armenia
gives numerous privileges.

For example, for restoration belonging in the past to ! Azerbaijanis
of houses, the government renders material aid, allocates long-term
credits, exempts from taxes and so forth.

As a result of the carried out program, the government of Armenia
is going by 2010 to reach number of the Armenian population in the
occupied Azerbaijan territories, which before made up 20 thousand,
to 300 thousand people.

Elmar Mammadyarov has emphasized, that these and other facts have
found reflection in the report of the US State Department and in a
number of foreign media.

The policy of resettlement conducted by Armenia contradicts
corresponding resolutions of Security Council of the United Nations,
the international humanitarian law and, in particular, Geneva Treaty
1949, and confirms claim of Armenia on annexation of the Azerbaijan
lands to its territory.

Minister of Foreign Affairs has informed participants of session,
that on behalf of our country the draft resolution number ?/59/L.32
has been submitted to General Assembly.

By this offer, Azerbaijan is not going to include settlement of the
conflict on the agenda of the United Nations.

However, if the questions, interfering peace talks, will not be
eliminated, it will lead to humanitarian disaster.

Elmar Mammadyarov has emphasized that the international community has
in due time expressed its attitude to this question at such important
stage of negotiations that plays important role.

The Armenian side should remove the population from the occupied
territories and guarantee that this policy would not be continued.
Representatives of Turkey and Pakistan supported the position of
Azerbaijan at the session of General Assembly.

They have stated that settlement of the conflict is probably possible
only on the basis of respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity
of the countries and norms of international law.

The representative of Armenia, having taken the floor, tried to deny
the facts submitted by the Azerbaijan side.

He has told that there is no necessity for intervention of General
Assembly of the United Nations for the given question.

The Armenian diplomat has stated that Nagorny Karabakh never was and
will not be a component of Azerbaijan.

The representative of the USA, speaking on behalf of the OSCE
co-chairs, has told, that concern of the Azerbaijan side could be
addressed in frameworks of OSCE.

He has supported the offer of our country on creation within the
framework of OSCE of the expert group to investigate the facts.

The representative of the USA has called Armenia and Azerbaijan
for continuation of peace talks jointly with co-chairs of the OSCE
Minsk Group.

Then, Chairman of General Assembly, having noted that discussions on
the text of the Resolution still continues, has stated that voting
and continuation would take place the other day.

Making comments on the said discussions on November 23, Minister of
Foreign Affairs Elmar Mammadyarov has told correspondent of AzerTAj:
“Beginning of discussions in the United Nations connected to situation
in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan, is an important question.

It is difficult process.

To speak about results beforehand is not possible.

However, the Azerbaijan side could bring from the high tribune to
the international community the truth about policy of resettlement
pursued by Armenia.

We have stated that the position of Azerbaijan in the said question
remains constant – all our occupied territories should be liberated,
the people who have become IDPs, should return to the native lands”.

Huge protests over a “stolen” election

The Economist, UK
Nov 23 2004

Nov 23rd 2004
>>From The Economist Global Agenda

Up to 200,000 Ukrainians have protested outside an emergency session
of their parliament, at which the expected winner of the country’s
presidential election, Viktor Yushchenko, said he was robbed of
victory by ballot fraud. The country is now on the brink of a
conflict, he says.

HUGE columns of protesters, perhaps 200,000-strong in all, marched on
the parliament in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev, on Tuesday November
23rd, as it held an emergency session to debate the deeply suspect
official results of the presidential election, whose final round was
held two days earlier. Leading the protest was Ukraine’s pro-western
opposition leader, Viktor Yushchenko, for whom exit polls had
predicted a comfortable win. Instead, the country’s electoral
commission announced that the winner, by a margin of three percentage
points, was Viktor Yanukovich, currently Ukraine’s prime minister,
who was backed by both the outgoing president, Leonid Kuchma, and
Russia’s leader, Vladimir Putin. America, the European Union and
other international observers have denounced the election as a fraud,
while an official Russian observer said it was “legitimate”.

The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe reports from
its independent electoral observation mission in Ukraine. The Kremlin
publishes press releases from President Putin.The EU issues
statements on the elections and gives information on foreign
relations. See also the US State Department. “Governments on the WWW”
provides a comprehensive resource on the government and politics of
Ukraine, including previous election results.

Inside the chamber, Mr Yushchenko accused Mr Yanukovich and Mr Kuchma
of electoral fraud and warned them that, as a result, the country was
now “on the brink of civil conflict”. Asserting that he was the
rightful election winner, he declared the presidential oath, with his
hand on a bible, before opening a window to address the crowds.
Outside, among the sea of blue-and-yellow Ukrainian flags, and
banners in Mr Yushchenko’s campaign colour, orange, were a few in the
red-and-white colours of Georgia, another former Soviet republic.
This was the protesters’ reminder that Tuesday was the first
anniversary of Georgia’s non-violent “rose revolution”, when huge
popular demonstrations forced the country’s then president, Edward
Shevardnadze, to resign following dubious parliamentary elections.

Could Ukraine be about to undergo its own, peaceful “orange”
revolution, rather like Georgia’s–or one stained blood-red? Mr
Kuchma, having kept silent since polling day, issued a statement on
Tuesday night urging talks between the two candidates and warning
that criticisms by western countries risked worsening the situation.
Mr Putin, who had earlier congratulated Mr Yanukovich on his
“victory”, called on both candidates to act within the law. The
parliament’s emergency session ended inconclusively, after Mr
Yanukovich’s supporters boycotted the debate to ensure there was no
quorum for any binding decisions.

What happens now depends on several factors. First, the magnitude of
Ukrainians’ reaction to the dubious election result. As the protest
began to gather strength on Monday, Mr Yushchenko warned: “Our action
is only beginning.” There has been talk of a general strike and the
local authorities in Kiev and several other large cities have
declared their refusal to recognise the official results. Around 20
middle-ranking Ukrainian diplomats, in missions in America, Germany
and other countries, have signed a document denouncing the results.

A second important factor is how Ukraine’s security forces react to
the protests. On Monday, they issued a statement promising that any
lawlessness would be put down “quickly and firmly”. But in Georgia’s
revolution last year, Mr Shevardnadze bowed to the inevitable and
stepped down after it had begun to look doubtful if his security
forces would obey any order to crush the rising pro-democracy
protests.

International pressure may also have a significant effect on the
outcome. Senator Richard Lugar, a Republican sent by President George
Bush to monitor voting, accused the Ukrainian government of
supporting a “concerted and forceful programme of election-day fraud
and abuse”. The White House has talked of punitive measures against
Ukraine if the irregularities are not investigated. The EU has said
all 25 member countries would summon their Ukrainian ambassadors to
register formal protests. Russia’s attitude will be at least as
important: towards the climax of the Georgian revolution, Mr Putin
seemed to lose patience with Mr Shevardnadze, perhaps contributing to
his downfall. Does the Russian leader’s even-handed call for both
candidates to obey the law suggest he is already hedging his bets?

All along, both Russia and the West have been taking a close interest
in Ukraine’s election, not just because it is one of eastern Europe’s
largest countries, with 49m people, but because the outcome could
have important consequences for the whole region. Mr Yushchenko
presented himself as a pro-western, free-market reformer who would
seek membership of the EU and the American-led NATO defence alliance,
while cleaning up corruption and enforcing the rule of law. Mr
Yanukovich, in contrast, stood for deepening Ukraine’s close links
with Russia. If Mr Yushchenko had gained the presidency and led
Ukraine towards becoming a westernised democracy with European-style
prosperity, voters in Russia and elsewhere in eastern Europe might
have begun to demand the same.

Thus a win by Mr Yushchenko would have been a huge blow to Mr Putin,
who twice visited Ukraine during the election campaign to back Mr
Yanukovich. The Russian president’s attempts to exert control over
former Soviet states would be greatly diminished if the
second-largest of them were to escape from his grip and join the
West.

Though Mr Yushchenko is now hoping for a Georgian-style bloodless
revolution to deliver him the presidency, there are also some less
promising precedents among the former Soviet states: only two months
ago, Belarus’s president, Alexander Lukashenka, “won” a rigged
referendum to allow him to run for re-election. The EU decided this
week to tighten its sanctions against those in his government it
blames for the “fraudulent” ballot. But so far there is no sign that
Mr Lukashenka will be dislodged from power.

Azerbaijan and Armenia also held flawed elections last year: in
Azerbaijan, there were riots after the son of the incumbent president
won amid widespread intimidation and bribery, but these were
violently put down; and in Armenia, voters reacted with quiet despair
at the re-election of their president amid reports of
ballot-stuffing. If Ukraine follows these precedents, hopes for
change there, and in other parts of the former Soviet Union, may be
dashed.

Nagorno-Karabakh: UN General Assembly To Discuss Occupation Of Azerbaijani Land
By Robert McMahon

Radio Free Europe, Czech Republic
Nov 23 2004

Azerbaijan is hoping a proposed UN General Assembly resolution on its
occupied territory will help resolve a key impediment to peace talks
with Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh. The resolution, to be discussed
today (eds: 1600 Prague time), calls for reaffirming Azerbaijan’s
territorial integrity and seeks an investigation into Azerbaijani
claims Armenia is promoting a settlement policy in the occupied
lands. Armenia denies this and has said such a resolution could
undermine the peace process.

United Nations, 23 November 2004 (RFE/RL) – The UN General Assembly
was expected to open discussion today on a resolution seeking to
address Azerbaijan’s concerns about its occupied territories and
sluggish peace process with Armenia.

The resolution calls for a reaffirmation of Azerbaijan’s sovereignty
and territorial integrity 10 years after ethnic Armenian forces won
control over Nagorno-Karabakh and occupied several districts adjacent
to the enclave.

It expresses “alarm and grave concern” at the situation in the area
occupied by Armenian forces, alleging the violation of international
humanitarian laws. The measure also raises concern about reports of
Armenian settlers being transferred to the territories.

Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov told reporters
yesterday that the persistence of such reports, from international
and Armenian sources, was a main factor driving the initiative in
the assembly. The resolution invites the Organization for Security
and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which is directing peace talks,
to send a fact-finding mission to lands occupied by ethnic Armenian
forces to report on the situation.

“We get greatly concerned that the Armenian government is conducting
a settlers’ policy in the occupied territories, which we consider
as a pure violation of international humanitarian law, including the
Geneva conventions of 1949,” Mammadyarov said.

Diplomats at Armenia’s UN mission did not respond to repeated requests
for comment yesterday. When the issue was placed on the assembly’s
agenda in October, Armenian officials said there were no settlements
in the territories outside the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh and denied
there was any policy to settle those lands.

Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian recently warned that
Azerbaijan’s initiative in the assembly threatened to undermine
mediation efforts under the OSCE’s Minsk Group. A French diplomat
speaking on behalf of the group told the General Assembly in October
that the group did not believe UN was the proper forum to discuss
the matter.

Mammadyarov said yesterday that his government remained committed to
the Minsk process but was looking to spur progress on issues related
to its large number of displaced persons. The resolution, though
nonbinding, would seek to expand international pressure for a solution.

“We do not agree that [the resolution] can create bad consequences
for the peace process,” Mammadyarov said. “We consider that even it
will support the peace process because otherwise you cannot conduct
sincere peace negotiations, and simultaneously behind the scenes [the]
Armenian side [is] conducting negotiations providing the so-called
settlement process.”

The initiative follows strong comments by Azerbaijani President Ilham
Aliyev at the General Assembly debate in September. Aliyev faulted
the UN for neglecting the situation in and around Nagorno-Karabakh,
citing UN Security Council resolutions in 1993 that called for the
withdrawal of ethnic Armenian forces from Azerbaijani territory.

Mammadyarov said he also wants to see countries in the Minsk Group,
especially the United States, become more active in pressing for a
negotiated solution to the conflict.

“The conflict is very, very difficult. Of course, the settlement of
the conflict is not very easy,” Mammadyarov said. “What we’re calling
[for] is that it should be solved only by the efforts of [the whole]
international community.”

The war over Nagorno-Karabakh has driven an estimated 800,000
Azerbaijanis from their homes, about a tenth of the country’s
population. Azerbaijan’s internally displaced people cannot return to
Armenian-occupied territories, and many have been living in wretched
conditions for the past 10 years.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

‘Azerbaijan could solve problems if it deals only with Upper Garabagh’ – President

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Nov 23 2004

Baku, November 22, AssA-Irada — Azerbaijan supports adoption of
a new United Nations resolution on the Upper Garabagh conflict,
President Aliyev told journalists on Monday.

“We do not intend to confine ourselves to discussions at the UN and
want a new resolution to be passed.”

The wording of a resolution that Azerbaijan insisted on during the
discussions at the UN session is ready, the President said.

The Foreign Ministry of Azerbaijan is engaged in intense consultations
on the issue and talks with some countries. It is for this reason that
Armenia is trying to impede adoption of the resolution by all means,
he said.

Aliyev pointed out that such statements by Armenia as “if the
resolution is passed, Azerbaijan will have to negotiate with Upper
Garabagh” are laughable.

“Azerbaijan could solve problems differently if it negotiates only
with Upper Garabagh”, Aliyev said.

“If Azerbaijan deals only with Upper Garabagh, it could solve problems
differently and faster. If Armenia wants the negotiations to be held
with Upper Garabagh, it must abandon the issue, withdraw its forces
from the occupied lands and stop financing Upper Garabagh from its
budget.”

40 Armenian nationals ousted from Russian province

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Nov 23 2004

Forty Armenians have recently been evicted from Russia’s Krasnodar
province, Russian press reports said on Monday.

Officials of the province explain Armenians’ banishment with their
illegal migration and living in the region without any official
registration. However, the move was due to the fact that local
Armenians demand autonomy and claim that Krasnodar is a “historical
Armenian land”, a reliable source told AssA-Irada.

The leadership of Krasnodar, which is densely populated by Armenians,
began to oust Armenians from the province several months ago after
considering the increasing discontent of the local residents.*

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress