PALLONE: Critical of U.S. Decision to abstain from UN vote on contro

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Jennifer Cannata
October 27, 2004
Andrew Souvall

(202) 225-4671

PALLONE CRITICAL OF U.S. DECISION TO ABSTAIN FROM UNITED NATIONS COMMITTEE
VOTE ON CONTROVERSIAL AZERI RESOLUTION

Organizing Armenian Caucus letter to President Bush

Washington, D.C. — U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone, co-chair of the Congressional
Caucus on Armenian Issues, today criticized the Bush Administration’s
decision to abstain from a United Nations committee vote on a controversial
Azeri resolution calling for the removal of Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh.
The resolution was approved today by the U.N. General Committee and is now
able to be brought before the U.N. General Assembly.

“I am deeply disappointed in the United States’ decision to abstain from
this vote,” Pallone said. “This mean-spirited resolution by the Azeri
government threatens to destabilize peace talks in the region. If we are
truly committed to finding a lasting solution to the NKR conflict then we
need to take a stronger stance.”

In a letter written yesterday, prior to the committee vote, to U.N.
Ambassador John Danforth, Pallone urged the U.S. to vote against the
resolution and to condemn the Azeri government for threatening peace and
stability in the region.

“I can’t stress enough, the crucial role that the United States plays in the
negotiations over Nagorno-Karabakh, to help the people of this region find a
lasting and equitable peace,” Pallone wrote in the letter to Ambassador
Danforth. “A failure on our part to forcefully and publicly confront the
Azerbaijani government over these destabilizing maneuvers would, in my view,
send extremely dangerous signals to Azerbaijan. These desperate tactics by
Azerbaijan undermine our efforts and seriously complicate our diplomacy in
the region. ”

The New Jersey congressman is now working to gain support for an Armenian
Caucus letter to President Bush urging that the United States oppose the
resolution if it is brought before the U.N. General Assembly.

Text of Pallone’s letter to Ambassador Danforth follows.

October 26, 2004

United States Mission to the United Nations
140 East 45th Street
New York, NY 10017

Dear Ambassador Danforth,

I write to you today to urge your immediate action against a troubling move
by the government of Azerbaijan, which threatens the stability of the
Transcaucuses region, and jeopardizes the cease fire that was established in
the Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan conflict nearly a decade ago. Recently,
the Azeri representative to the United Nations, Yashar Aliyev, sent a
request to the U.N General Committee asking for the consideration of a
disturbing resolution regarding the “situation in the occupied territories
of Azerbaijan.” If the United States does not act swiftly to stop the
adoption of this resolution, the measure can negatively affect the
Nagorno-Karabakh peace process.

I can’t stress enough, the crucial role that the United States plays in the
negotiations over Nagorno-Karabakh, to help the people of this region find a
lasting and equitable peace. A failure on our part to forcefully and
publicly confront the Azerbaijani government over these destabilizing
maneuvers would, in my view, send extremely dangerous signals to Azerbaijan.
These desperate tactics by Azerbaijan undermine our efforts and seriously
complicate our diplomacy in the region.

I hope that the United States will vote against this resolution when it is
considered in the U.N. General Committee, and by doing so, condemn such
actions by Azerbaijan, further ensuring that all parties involved in this
conflict make a genuine commitment towards peace and stability.

Sincerely,
FRANK PALLONE, JR.
Member of Congress

cc: Ambassador Steve Mann

-30-

Jennifer Karch Cannata
Press Secretary
Office of U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr.
420 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-4671 office
(202) 225-9665 fax

Doubts Not Dispelled

DOUBTS NOT DISPELLED

A1 Plus | 18:38:48 | 27-10-2004 | Social |

“There are questions and doubts, which are not yet answered. In
general, always there are obscure points left after such crimes. And
time casts light on them and not investigation”, Prime Minister
Andranik Margaryan said in Erablur. He is often posed a question:
“Was October 27 crime masterminded by home terrorists or was it
instigated from abroad?”

“It’s not obligatory that anyone would order for it. The climate
prevailing in the world might have made them doing it”, he says.

PM finds our state became backward for a few years because of October
27. He stated though the inner stability in Armenia split, Armenia
could stand in honor of Armenian people and the political powers.

Defense Minister wasn’t in Erablur. He is not in Armenia.

Manvel Grigoryan, Chair of “Volunteer Union of Country Protectors”
and members in Army visited Erablur together with Government members.
Grigoryan refused to contact with journalists.

Other wing of country protectors – the non-governmental, came to
Erablur separately. Wounded war fighters and country protectors
discontented with the activity of Authorities were there.

“Everything possible is done now to halt disclosure of October 27
crime. And those occupied with the investigation on the separated
part of “October 27 case” and interested do that”, ex MP, VUCP member
Myasnik Malkhasyan said.

According to him, people appraise deeply contribution of Vazgen
Sargssyan to establishment of Army and statehood in Armenia. He also
said that people pined great hopes on Vazgen Sargssyan-Karen Demirchyan
couple. “People will never forget their heroes”, he says.

“Republican” Party visited Erablur separately, headed by Galust
Sahakyan and Tigran Torosyan. “I think the investigation over the
separated part of “October 27 case” must be finished thus putting an
end to all doubts. I don’t consider it right to address accusations”,
Tigran Torosyan said.

There were wreaths laid on behalf of Parliament, Defense Ministry,
Robert Kocharyan and Constitutional Court.
From: Baghdasarian

Samvel Babayan Visited Erablur

SAMVEL BABAYAN VISITED ERABLUR

A1+
27-10-2004

General Samvel Babayan, ex Commander of Defense Army of Nagorno
Karabakh visited Erablur. He came alone, put a garland on the grave
of Vazgen Sargssyan and flowers to tomb stones of all the victims.

General Babayan was excited and refused to talk with
journalists. “Today I am not in the mood to talk. But I have something
to tell all of you and we will meet during 5-10 coming days”,
he promised.

Artcakh War fighters in Erablur greeted Samvel Babayan cordially and
embraced him calling him “Hope and Faith”.

Armenia: Blood and Bile

Armenia: Blood and Bile
by Emil Danielyan

Transitions Online
27 October 2004

Five years on, the slaughter of Armenia’s prime minister and seven
other politicians is still a mystery. And so the political bloodletting
continues.

YEREVAN, Armenia — When a crime is committed in front of television
cameras and dozens of eyewitnesses, and its perpetrators are arrested
less than 24 hours later, few would expect it not to be solved. And
few Armenians did so when five gunmen turned themselves in after
seizing their parliament and spraying it with bullets exactly five
years ago. It seemed that there was so much factual evidence that even
the most incompetent law-enforcement official would quickly establish
the truth about a shocking attack that killed eight senior officials,
including Armenia’s then-prime minister, Vazgen Sarkisian and the
speaker of parliament, Karen Demirchian.

Yet precisely what happened inside and outside the parliament building
in Yerevan on 27 October 1999 is still a mystery and may never be
known. Increasingly, the case resembles the 1963 assassination of
U.S. President John Kennedy, many circumstances of which remain
unknown to this day. The most important unanswered question in both
high-profile killings is who masterminded them. That mystery is
particularly acute in Armenia, where President Robert Kocharian is
still dogged by allegations that he was personally involved in the
shootings despite the absence of compelling evidence against him.

MURDER AND THE PRESIDENT

The perceived high-level cover-up of the crime has been a key rallying
point for Kocharian’s most bitter political opponents. Incidentally,
two of them are Sarkisian’s brother Aram and Demirchian’s son
Stepan. These men lead Armenia’s biggest opposition alliance,
Artarutyun (Justice). The younger Demirchian was Kocharian’s main
challenger in last year’s presidential election, which international
monitors heavily criticized for widespread fraud. Artarutyun insists
that he was the rightful winner of a vote that was officially won by
the incumbent.

The relatives of the two assassinated leaders are convinced that
ringleader Nairi Hunanian and his four henchmen were acting on
somebody’s orders when they burst into the National Assembly during
its regular question-and-answer session with cabinet members. The
gunmen, among them Hunanian’s brother Karen and uncle Vram Galstian,
had no trouble smuggling Kalashnikov rifles into the chamber, where
they shot Prime Minister Sarkisian and speaker Demirchian and his two
deputies from almost point-blank range. Four other parliamentarians and
government ministers also died in a hail of automatic gunfire. Dozens
of their colleagues were held hostage until the assailants surrendered
to police the next morning.

Hunanian declared immediately after the bloodbath that he wanted to
rid Armenia of a corrupt government that had for years been “sucking
the people’s blood.” He specifically blamed Sarkisian, seen at the
time as Armenia’s most powerful man, for the country’s post-Soviet
economic woes, rigged elections, and abuse of power. All five gunmen
were sentenced to life imprisonment in December 2003 after a nearly
three-year trial.

Some of Hunanian’s accusations were not unfounded. Indeed, Sarkisian,
formerly a defense minister and one of the founders of the Armenian
army, did play a pivotal role in presidential elections held in 1996
and 1998, both of which were reportedly falsified. It was a role that
led many Armenians to loathe him. However, the public mood seems to
have changed dramatically in early 1999 when Sarkisian decided to team
up with Karen Demirchian, Armenia’s hugely popular Soviet-era ruler.

The two men were murdered almost five months after a parliamentary
election in which an alliance co-headed by them swept to a landslide
victory. The May 1999 vote is still seen by many experts as the sole
relatively clean Armenian election held since independence. The
Sarkisian-Demirchian duo formed a new cabinet as a result and was
gradually weakening the grip on power that Kocharian had enjoyed
since becoming president in 1998.

That is why fingers were immediately pointed at Kocharian. Powerful
government factions and army generals loyal to the former defense chief
were close to forcing him into resignation later in 1999. Kocharian
eventually prevailed in the bitter power struggle, reinforcing his
reputation as a canny and shrewd politician. But his skills have so
far failed to put an end to the nagging suspicion about his possible
involvement in the shootings.

JUSTICE BLINDFOLDED?

“I accuse the authorities of doing nothing to prevent the 27 October
crime from happening and doing everything to prevent it from being
solved,” Aram Sarkisian, the late premier’s brother, has said. But
both Stepan Demirchian and he are careful not to accuse Kocharian
explicitly of masterminding the conspiracy. They instead point to the
many apparent flaws in the more-than-yearlong criminal investigation
into the parliament shootings and particularly to the authorities’
handling of the ensuing trial of the gunmen.

Throughout the marathon trial Hunanian insisted that he had made the
decision to storm the National Assembly without anybody’s orders. But
his concluding remarks in the court in November 2003 were more
ambiguous. He stated bluntly that he “restored the constitutional
order” by helping Kocharian become “the sole power center” in the
country. “The president began exercising his authority in full only
after that,” he said.

The 38-year-old former student activist and journalist was not allowed
to finish his speech three days later just as he was about to reveal
“new circumstances” of the case. The presiding judge, Samvel Uzunian,
interrupted him to end the proceedings, arguing that the question of
who had engineered the massacre is the subject of a separate inquiry
conducted by prosecutors.

Uzunian had already sparked controversy in August 2003 when he cut
short the trial by not hearing testimony from more than a hundred
witnesses. The judge accepted prosecutors’ argument that 29 other
witnesses cross-examined during the hearings had already provided
sufficient information about the crime. The Sarkisian and Demirchian
families portrayed that as another proof of a cover-up.

The trial was effectively suspended for six months in the first half
of last year ostensibly due to health problems suffered by Uzunian
and Galstian, who was also a defendant. The hiatus coincided with
presidential elections in February and March 2003 and parliamentary
elections in May. Relatives and supporters of the assassinated leaders
say Kocharian and his allies wanted to avoid negative publicity
associated with the politically sensitive case.

When the court hearings resumed in June 2003, Galstian, Hunanian’s
uncle, denied that he had been suffering from ill health (adding
that prison guards had forcibly injected him with unidentified
drugs). This April, he was found dead in his prison cell under
still-murky circumstances. The authorities said he was suffering from
a mental illness and committed suicide a few days after being placed
in solitary confinement at his own request.

But according to Avetik Ishkhanian of the Armenian Helsinki Committee,
a prison psychologist visited Galstian shortly before his death and
found no signs of “agitation.” Ishkhanian and two other human rights
activists were allowed to see Galstian’s body hanging from a bed sheet
at Yerevan’s maximum-security Nubarashen jail. “They did not let us
see if there are any traces of violence, saying that an investigation
is underway,” he said afterward.

The official investigation into the 27 October case was also marred
by a scandal over the alleged editing of the harrowing video of
the shootings. The Russian attorney for the Sarkisian family, Oleg
Yunoshev, has repeatedly charged that it was doctored by the state-run
Armenian Public Television before being broadcast worldwide. Even
Hunanian has backed the claim, which has been strongly denied by
the authorities.

“I myself ordered [a state television] cameraman to shoot everything
and never understood why just over eight minutes of the film was left
from a shooting that lasted between 15 and 20 minutes,” the ringleader
of the killings told the court.

Yunoshev has linked the scandal to the murder, in December 2002,
of the state television chief, Tigran Naghdalian, suggesting that
the authorities eliminated a key witness to the alleged editing of
the tape. But according to the official version of the crime, the
first murder of a journalist in Armenia was commissioned by the late
Sarkisian’s second brother, Armen, because he felt that Naghdalian
was also involved in the parliament attack.

Armen Sarkisian was sentenced to 15 years in prison early this year
after pleading not guilty to the charges. His family denounced the
imprisonment as politically motivated.

Five years later, the killings in parliament thus continue to shape
Armenia’s political life, raising the stakes for Kocharian in his
bitter standoff with the two opposition leaders. Finding out the
truth about the massacre is a key motivation for Stepan Demirchian
and Aram Sarkisian in their fight for regime change.

Some, especially supporters of the Armenian president, see a penchant
for revenge. Sarkisian, a firebrand speaker increasingly resembling his
assassinated brother, does not deny that. “Yes, I do have a personal
feud toward Robert Kocharian,” he said. “Who wouldn’t in my place?”

Emil Danielyan is a journalist based in Yerevan and a longtime
contributor to TOL and its print predecessor, Transitions.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

“Robert Kocharian Cannot Resolve Karabakh Issue,” US PoliticalScient

“ROBERT KOCHARIAN CANNOT RESOLVE KARABAKH ISSUE,” US POLITICAL SCIENTIST CONSIDERS

27.10.2004 15:40

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Political scientist, University of Chicago Professor
Ronald Suny considers that Armenian President Robert Kocharian “cannot
resolve the Karabakh issue.” The scientist stated it when commenting on
the act of terrorism taken place in the Armenian Parliament in 1999.
“These events were a tragedy for Armenia, the entire Caucasus and
even the former Soviet Union, – the political scientist noted. –
Without those people kind of a stagnation touched the region and the
solution of the important problems.” Answering the BBC question on who
could have organized the crime, Suny said: “It seems to me that it was
an action by a plotter group. There were people who became stronger
after it, but this was the consequence, not the cause of the crime.”

BAKU: Ilham Aliyev Ends Checkered Year As President

RFE/RL Azerbaijan: Ilham Aliyev Ends Checkered Year As President Wednesday, 27 October 2004
By Jean-Christophe Peuch

On 31 October 2003, 41-year-old Ilham Aliyev formally succeeded
his ailing father as president of the oil-rich Caspian republic of
Azerbaijan. While taking the oath on the Koran and Azerbaijan’s
Constitution, Aliyev pledged to bring his country “peace, order,
progress, stability, and economic prosperity” and to pursue a path
toward democratic reforms. While Aliyev’s first year in power has
brought some positive changes, he seems unable — or unwilling —
to make a clean break with his father’s controversial legacy.

Prague, 27 October 2004 (RFE/RL) — To be sure, Ilham Aliyev’s mandate
started under unfavorable circumstances.

The day following his election on 15 October 2003, tens of thousands
of opposition supporters took to the streets of Baku to protest the
outcome. The protesters called the vote fraudulent and claimed that
their candidate — Musavat Party leader Isa Qambar — had garnered
more votes than any other contender.

At least one person was killed in clashes with police.

In the following weeks, authorities arrested hundreds of opposition
activists, closed Musavat headquarters, and imposed a ban on
antigovernment newspapers.

Restrictions were subsequently eased. The vast majority of detainees
were released after spending a few weeks in jail, where they reportedly
endured ill treatment.

Seven opposition leaders, however, went on trial for allegedly
inciting Baku residents to revolt. On 22 October, Azerbaijan’s Court
for Serious Crimes sentenced them to jail terms of up to five years.

International organizations and human rights groups have condemned
the ruling and criticized the Azerbaijani authorities for failing to
grant the defendants a fair trial.

For Baku-based political expert Rasim Musabeyov, last week’s ruling
is characteristic of the new regime.

“In this respect, [one sees] little difference between Azerbaijan,
Russia, or Armenia. Yet what is even worse is that [Azerbaijan] starts
looking like [some] Central [Asian countries]. This is certainly not
an innovation brought by the younger Aliyev,” Musabeyov said. “The
existing system largely owes to the elder Aliyev. Yet, the big
difference [between the two men] is that the elder Aliyev felt strong
and confident enough to put up with a regime of semi-freedom. But
when the younger Aliyev assumed power, the ruling elite became,
if not afraid, at least wary and less prone to tolerate that regime
of semi-freedom.” Critics generally blame Aliyev for not addressing
corruption and for failing to bring new blood into Azerbaijan’s
political elite.

As evidence, Musabeyov cites conclusions made by the Freedom House
nongovernmental organization. In its 2004 report on civil liberties
worldwide, the Washington-based group downgraded Azerbaijan to its list
of “not free” nations, down from its previous status of “partly free.”

Not everyone in Azerbaijan believes Aliyev’s human rights record is
poorer than that of his father, however.

Independent expert Sahin Rzayev of the Moscow-based Center for
Journalism in Extreme Situations, told RFE/RL that, despite last
week’s court ruling, the past year has brought some improvements in
Azerbaijan’s human rights record.

Rzayev in particular cites Aliyev’s decision to pardon four prominent
political prisoners. Iskander Hamidov, Suret Huseynov, Ilqar Safihanov,
and Alikram Hummatov had been sentenced to between 14 years and life
imprisonment under the elder Aliyev, and the Council of Europe had
long pressed for their release.

“One has to note that Azerbaijan has fulfilled nearly all
its obligations before the Council of Europe with regard to
political prisoners,” Rzayev said. “Some 923 prisoners have been
amnestied. Aliyev signed four pardon decrees and, with a few
exceptions, nearly all the political prisoners listed as such by
human rights groups have been released by now. Some have remained in
Azerbaijan, others have left the country.”

Rzayev also disagrees with the widespread view that Aliyev is less
shrewd and astute than his father. He argues that even after his
father’s death last December, Aliyev has shown enough political clout
to survive infighting among the ruling elite.

“[Aliyev] is surrounded by people with whom he can work and whom
he trusts. Yet, one can feels frictions and disagreements among the
ruling elite,” Rzayev said. “Conventionally speaking, one could say
the infighting pits ‘young reformers’ against ‘old conservatives.’ But
it is very difficult to figure out what is really going on because
these things are not debated publicly. These frictions started already
during Heidar Aliyev’s illness, when nobody really knew what would
happen next, and they are more acute now.”

Critics generally blame Aliyev for not addressing corruption and for
failing to bring new blood into Azerbaijan’s political elite. With a
few exceptions, most of Heidar Aliyev’s cabinet ministers have retained
their jobs, and corruption remains rampant among state officials.

Political analyst Musabeyov argues that this is evidence that Aliyev’s
government differs little from that of his father.

“I would say this is a stagnation in Azerbaijan’s life,” Musabeyov
said. “The inertia that used to characterize the final years of the
elder Aliyev’s rule is continuing under the younger Aliyev.”

Confronted with such criticism, the government has responded by noting
economic improvements over the past year. It claims gross domestic
product has increased in recent months, while inflation has been
curbed and thousands of new jobs created.

But analysts question official figures and say increased national
revenues stem largely from favorable circumstances on the world energy
market, not from real economic growth. Rzayev says that although
hydrocarbons account for some 85 percent of Azerbaijan’s export
revenues, the recent hike in world oil prices has not benefited the
country’s impoverished population.

“Unfortunately, this [cash flow] does not reach the population. The
authorities are placing it on a special stabilization fund,” Rzayev
said. “Starting from 1 January, retail prices such as that of gas
and other energy products will increase. I would say that, for the
population, things have deteriorated [compared to the times of Heidar
Aliyev]. Life has become even harder, and people have the right to
ask why.”

The government says its oil stabilization fund may be used in the
future to finance social projects and improve the country’s depleted
infrastructure. But with an annual inflation rate estimated at around
20 percent, few in Azerbaijan pay attention to the government’s
promises.

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2004/10/fbdee52f-bdab-42bb-9176-2d5d668eb9e6.html

Armenian president, US visitors discuss Karabakh conflict

Armenian president, US visitors discuss Karabakh conflict

Public Television of Armenia, Yerevan
26 Oct 04

[Presenter] Armenian President Robert Kocharyan received members of a
joint mission of the German Marshall Fund of the USA and the Project
on Transitional Democracies today.

[Correspondent] Kocharyan described the situation in the South
Caucasus as peaceful and stable. He said that the situation is in
the centre of attention of the international public. The visit by
the joint mission to the region proves this.

Noting that a settlement of the Karabakh conflict is very important
both to Armenia and the whole region, Kocharyan said that different
centres and persons focused on the Karabakh issue at the expert level
and that they are interested in studying the problem more deeply and
familiarizing themselves with the details on the spot.

The Armenian president briefed the quests on the history of the
Karabakh conflict settlement and the status quo.

[Video showed the meeting]

–Boundary_(ID_dWk8pujSMMsWh2CosdxyLg)–

Both Azerbaijan and Armenia decided to suspend Karabakh talks,spokes

Both Azerbaijan and Armenia decided to suspend Karabakh talks, spokesman says

Mediamax news agency
27 Oct 04

Yerevan, 27 October: “No matter what statements Azerbaijan issues,
we have repeatedly announced and confirmed that Nagornyy Karabakh’s
status is a high priority for Armenia,” the press secretary of the
Armenian Foreign Ministry, Gamlet Gasparyan, said in Yerevan today.

Gasparyan said this commenting on Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar
Mammadyarov’s statement that the latest talks had discussed Armenia’s
withdrawal from seven occupied districts around Nagornyy Karabakh.

“All other issues derive from the problem of status, and Armenia
regards them exclusively in the context of the future status of
Nagornyy Karabakh,” Gasparyan said. He added that Armenia had an
interest only in the final settlement of the Nagornyy Karabakh problem
and this approach determined its involvement in the talks.

Commenting on Mammadyarov’s another utterance that in Astana [in
September 2004] Armenian President Robert Kocharyan had taken time-out
“to analyse the results of the meetings”, Gasparyan said that the
Azerbaijani and Armenian leaders had made a joint decision to suspend
the talks.

“We have not yet received a reply from Azerbaijan on the issues of
interest to Armenia,” Gasparyan said.

BAKU: Azeri official sees Armenians’ possible visit as”act of sabota

Azeri official sees Armenians’ possible visit as “act of sabotage”

Bilik Dunyasi news agency
27 Oct 04

Baku, 27 October: The wish of Armenian MPs to attend a NATO
Parliamentary Assembly seminar in Baku is nothing but another act of
sabotage. According to Azerbaijani Deputy Speaker Ziyafat Asgarov,
the Armenians want to come to Azerbaijan not because they would like
to attend the NATO seminar – they refused to attend the previous 57th
seminar in Macedonia. Also, Yerevan has repeatedly stated that it is
not interested in strengthening NATO’s positions in the Caucasus.

The NATO administration, in turn, understands this and intends to
improve relations with Yerevan.

According to Asgarov, despite this, it is impossible to prevent the
visit of Armenian MPs because a NATO Parliamentary Assembly rapporteur
on the South Caucasus is expected to point to the Armenian occupation
of Azerbaijani territories at the organization’s autumn session
in Italy. And if Azerbaijan blocks the arrival of Armenians again,
relations with NATO may acquire a negative undertone. As a result,
the report by the German rapporteur may be withdrawn from the session
agenda, which is not in Azerbaijan’s interests.

BAKU: Azeri Foreign Ministry protests at British MPs’ Karabakh visit

Azeri Foreign Ministry protests at British MPs’ Karabakh visit

Ekspress, Baku
27 Oct 04

Text of Alakbar Raufoglu’s report by Azerbaijani newspaper Ekspress
on 27 October headlined “Baku sends a note to London” and subheaded
“Baroness Cox makes Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry sick and tired”

The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry has sent a note of protest to
Britain over a visit to Nagornyy Karabakh by Deputy Speaker of the
British House of Lords Baroness Caroline Cox, Foreign Minister Elmar
Mammadyarov has told Ekspress newspaper.

“We have given special instructions to our embassy in London in
connection with the issue and have voiced our protest to the British
side. This was done by means of a note and at individual meetings. We
think that official London should voice its attitude to the incident,”
Mammadyarov said.

In its note, the Foreign Ministry noted British MPs’ illegal visit to
Karabakh and demanded an end to such visits. It also voiced regret
over Baroness Cox’s continuous visits to the occupied territories
of Azerbaijan.

“She has never appealed to us over her visits to Karabakh. She has
been travelling to the occupied territories for more than 10 years but
we have not been informed about this. This runs counter to official
London’s relations with Azerbaijan and its position on the Karabakh
conflict,” Mammadyarov said.

Despite the baroness’ disrespect, Azerbaijan has repeatedly asked
her to revise the route of her trips to Karabakh. “We have always
suggested that they travel [to Karabakh] from here. We are ready to
do our best for this,” Mammadyarov said.

As for the impossibility of travelling to Karabakh from Azerbaijan,
Mammadyarov said that not Azerbaijan but the Karabakh separatists are
to blame for that as it is “the occupying side which makes these trips
impossible”. “They have planted mines on the occupied territories,
thus creating dangerous conditions,” he said.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress