Interfax
June 23 2004
Armenian officers attending NATO conference in Baku
YEREVAN. June 23 (Interfax) – Two Armenian Defense Ministry officers
are taking part in the NATO conference in Baku, following
Azerbaijan’s promises to ensure their security, the Armenian Defense
Ministry’s press service told Interfax.
“The country hosting [the NATO conference] has pledged to ensure the
security of the two Armenian officers in Baku,” the press service
said.
Armenia’s concerns were sparked by a Tuesday rally by the
Organization for the Liberation of Karabakh. Some 40 members of the
group, protesting the presence of the Armenian military men in Baku,
tried to break through the police cordon to enter the Europe Hotel,
the venue for the NATO conference.
Delegations from NATO’s 24 member-nations are taking part in the
conference, which is aimed at preparing the Cooperative Best Effort
04 exercises. These military exercises will be held in Azerbaijan in
September.

ASBAREZ ONLINE
TOP STORIES
06/23/2004
TO ACCESS PREVIOUS ASBAREZ ONLINE EDITIONS PLEASE VISIT OUR
WEBSITE AT <;HTTP:// 1. Opposition, Reforms, and Karabagh, All in A Day's Address to PACE 2. KLO Activists Face Criminal Charges 3. Armenia Won't Abandon Cooperation with NATO 4. European Court Condemns Turkey 5. Azeri Sniper Kills Armenian Soldier 6. Council of Europe Ends Monitoring of Turkey 1. Opposition, Reforms, and Karabagh, All in A Day's Address to PACE STRASBOURG (RFE/RL)--In his speech to the Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) on Wednesday, President Robert Kocharian said that the Strasbourg-based body should not have had to discuss the political confrontation in Armenia last April, and defended his administration's response to the opposition calls for resignation. "I regret that some of our deputies drew the PACE into that discussion," he said. "I am convinced that the Council of Europe is not the best place to settle scores between the government and the opposition. All of that must be done in our own parliament." Kocharian described the Armenian opposition's push for power as an awkward attempt to replicate neighboring Georgia's November "Rose Revolution" that was welcomed in the West. "The Armenian opposition failed to take into account the fact that Armenia's economy, unlike Georgia's, is developing dynamically; its government is quite efficient and its democratic achievements are propped up by institutional structures, including police, which are able to maintain public order," he said. In its April 28 resolution on Armenia, PACE said that the Kocharian government's reaction to the opposition protests was "contrary to the letter and the spirit" of its values, and threatened to impose sanctions unless reforms were undertaken by the September PACE session. The Armenian leader, making his second appearance at the Council of Europe since Armenia joined it in January 2001 emphasized the opposition's rejection of calls for political dialogue by the parties of the governing coalition. "Those proposals remain in force, but they must be discussed in parliament, not in the street," he said. The Armenian authorities' compliance with the resolution was discussed earlier this week by the PACE's Monitoring Committee. Its rapporteur on Armenia Jerzy Jaskiernia, is due to submit a final report on that in time for the assembly's next session in September. The committee has also been monitoring the fulfillment of Armenia's broader membership commitments to the Council of Europe. "Armenia has already fulfilled the vast majority of obligations assumed in connection with its accession to the Council of Europe," Kocharian declared, adding that the remaining ones will be honored "by the end of this year." Armenia is going through "an active process of the formation of civil society," he said. The 20-minute speech was followed by a question-and-answer session. The two PACE parliamentarians representing the Armenian opposition boycotted the speech and were not on hand to pose questions. Azeri and Turkish lawmakers, however, grilled the president. Asked by one of the Azeri parliamentarian whether he had any role in the war over Mountainous Karabagh, Kocharian replied, "Yes, I took part in the war. My children were hiding in a basement for three years and had no childhood. I am proud of my participation in the war." Kocharian told another Azeri that his country would have regained most of its territories around Karabagh had it accepted two international peace plans put forward in 1998 and 2001, and stressed that Karabagh has never been apart of an independent Azerbaijan state and should remain outside of Baku's control. 2. KLO Activists Face Criminal Charges BAKU (ANS/Baku Today)Azeri law-enforcement authorities have charged five members of the Karabagh Liberation Organization (KLO) with hooliganism after their arrest on Tuesday for disrupting a NATO planning conference being held in Baku. The group was protesting the participation of Armenian officers Colonel Murad Isakhanian and Senior Lieutenant Aram Hovannisian. KLO leader Akif Naghi is reportedly among those arrested after the group slipped away from police guarding the conference site, and succeeding in smashing a glass wall of the conference hall. KLO deputy chairman Barat Imani told the Turan news agency its protests were not limited to the above disruption, but that a KLO member succeeded in entering the conference site after the NATO session was in progress, and announced: "You are sharing this hall with Armenian officers--aggressors, terrorists, and occupiers. The participation of representatives of aggressor-states in a NATO event conflicts with NATO policies. No one had the right to invite them to Baku, and if they have dignity, they must leave Azerbaijan." KLO had warned authorities earlier that they would take drastic measures if the Armenian officers were allowed to attend the meeting to discuss the NATO-led military exercise to be held in Azerbaijan this September. Azerbaijan's foreign affairs ministry meanwhile dismissed a statement by parliamentary speaker Murtuz Aleskerov, that the Armenian officers had arrived in Baku secretly. A statement by foreign ministry said the arrival of Armenian officers had been officially announced by deputy foreign minister Araz Azimov. 3. Armenia Won't Abandon Cooperation with NATO YEREVAN (AFP/Armenpress)--Responding to whether Tuesday's attack by the Karabagh Liberation Organization, in protest of Armenia's participation at a NATO planning conference Baku, affects Armenia's participation in upcoming NATO events, Armenia's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hamlet Gasparian said that though the act justly caused concern, Armenia will participate in the June 28 NATO summit in Istanbul. Gasparian stressed the incident was the logical consequence of the Azeri leadership's position and policy [on Armenians], that affects all facets of Azeri society and hinders Armenian-Azeri dialogue. "Despite these obstacles, Armenia is resolute to continue its cooperation with NATO and participate in NATO-organized joint military exercises and other events--including the Istanbul Summit." Meanwhile, Turkey is on high alert to ward off any threat to next week's NATO summit in the country's biggest city that has long been a playground for Al-Qaeda-linked Islamist militants, far-left guerrillas, and armed Kurdish rebels. Massive security measures are in place for the June 28-29 summit and Turkish authorities say they have received no serious threat of a terrorist attack against the meeting which will be attended by US President George W. Bush and other Western leaders. There have been a number of small bomb attacks in Istanbul in recent weeks, and other cities, similar to those carried out in the past by left-wing militants. In the run-up to the NATO summit, Turkish security forces have detained dozens in security sweeps against several outlawed groups. 4. European Court Condemns Turkey (VOA NEWS)The European Court of Human Rights has condemned Turkey for its treatment of two men detained in 1995 for their alleged ties to a Kurdish rebel group. The court announced its decision in the case of Abdulrezzak Aydin and Abdullah Yunus on Tuesday. Doctors found the two men were physically abused while in Turkish police custody after a police raid against the Kurdistan Workers Party. The European court ruled that Turkey had failed to fulfill its obligation to protect individuals while in the custody of police officers. It awarded each of the men approximately 27,000 dollars for damages and legal fees. 5. Azeri Sniper Kills Armenian Soldier YEREVAN (Noyan Tapan)--A forty-seven-year-old Colonel from Armenia's armed forces Radik Avetissian was shot and killed by sniper fire in Armenia's northeastern Tavush region that borders the Republic of Azerbaijan. Breaches of the cease-fire agreement are registered periodically in the area, which is a contact line between Armenian and Azeri armed forces. An escalation of tensions on the border was discussed at the recent Prague meeting between the foreign ministers of the two countries. 6. Council of Europe Ends Monitoring of Turkey STRASBOURG (ARMENPRESS)The Parliamentary Assembly decided on June 22 to end the monitoring of Turkey, declaring that the country had "achieved more reform in a little over two years than in the previous decade," and had clearly demonstrated its commitment and ability to fulfill its statutory obligations as a member state of the Council of Europe. However, the Assembly resolved to continue "post-monitoring dialogue" with the authorities on a twelve-point list of outstanding issues. In a resolution adopted by 141 votes to 8, the parliamentarians welcomed the adoption of important changes to the Constitution in October 2001 and May 2004, as well as abolition of the death penalty, "zero tolerance" towards torture and impunity, the lifting of many restrictions on freedom of expression, association and religion, the abolition of the state security courts, and the granting of certain cultural rights to Turkish citizens of Kurdish origin. Presenting the report, co-rapporteur Mady Delvaux-Stehres said, "This decision is a mark of our trust in the Turkish authorities that they will continue to make progress. It is also a mark of trust in Turkey itself." In a separate vote, the Assembly also welcomed the "significant progress" made by Turkey in implementing decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, including payment in the Loizidou case, but cautioned that some of the cases outstanding were still not settled or only partly so. In its resolution, the Assembly urged Turkey to take eight further steps to help prevent fresh violations of the European Convention on Human Rights. All subscription inquiries and changes must be made through the proper carrier and not Asbarez Online. ASBAREZ ONLINE does not transmit address changes and subscription requests. (c) 2004 ASBAREZ ONLINE. All Rights Reserved. ASBAREZ provides this news service to ARMENIAN NEWS NETWORK members for academic research or personal use only and may not be reproduced in or through mass media outlets.

June 23, 2004 07:38 PM US Eastern Timezone
Armenian-American Committee for a Just Settlement Criticizes Proposed
Settlement in Armenian Genocide Insurance Case
LOS ANGELES–(BUSINESS WIRE)–June 23, 2004–When a proposed
settlement of a class action lawsuit against New York Life by heirs of
unpaid Armenian Genocide insurance claims was announced recently,
attorney Mark Geragos was quoted in news reports as saying “(New York
Life) really stepped up to the plate and did what was right.” After
analyzing the proposed settlement, Ben Nutley, a Beverly Hills
attorney specializing in class actions, commented: “The only plate
that New York Life may have stepped up to is the dinner plate of
Geragos and the other plaintiff lawyers involved in the case.”
Geragos and the other three attorneys in the case will earn $4 million
— $1 million for each of their firms — while each family of a
policyholder stands to receive about $3,000, on average. “This is
probably the largest single fee of their careers for a civil matter of
this type, yet there remain substantial questions about whether they
have handled this case properly, and whether they should be entitled
to that fee,” said Nutley.
Nutley’s law firm, Kendrick & Nutley, has appeared on behalf of
several heirs of policyholders, and has challenged the adequacy of
notice in the case. In papers filed May 13, 2004, the firm pointed out
several problems with the notices that, by law, the parties must
disseminate in order to notify heirs of the proposed settlement. Among
other things, the filing charges that the notice program was
inadequate because it did not comply with federal law, omitted large
segments of the Armenian community from notice, and failed even to use
the term “Armenian Genocide” in the title and text of the notice. The
Honorable Christina Snyder, the United States District Court Judge who
is in charge of the case, is presently considering that motion.
But in legal documents filed in response to the motion, Geragos, who
is an Armenian-American, defended New York Life’s omission of the term
“Armenian Genocide” from the proposed settlement. Geragos stated that
including the word “Genocide” in the notice would be “confusing” and
“misleading” to class members. Nutley countered that the explanation
does not make sense. “The members of this class-action suit are full
or part Armenian. I’ve yet to meet anyone with a drop of Armenian
blood who didn’t understand the significance of that term. To say that
they would be confused is insulting. On the contrary, it would have
attracted the attention of far more potential class members.”
Judge Snyder will also decide whether to approve the terms of the
proposed settlement itself in a hearing presently set for July 30,
2004. Nutley’s firm filed a formal objection to the settlement, and is
planning to appear at the hearing to urge the court not to approve
it. Under the terms of the proposed settlement, New York Life has
agreed to pay $20 million: $4 million will go to the attorneys; $3
million will go to Armenian charities; between $2 million and $6
million will go to administrative costs; and depending on how much is
spent in administration, between $11 million and $7 million will go
the families of policyholders. If New York Life’s predictions are
accurate, the heirs of the 2,400 actual policyholders will share in
the balance ($7 million) depending on the face value of their original
policy.
Under this scheme, depending on the size of a policyholder’s surviving
family, the value of the policy, and the number of heirs who claim, a
typical heir will receive a little more than a few hundred dollars. By
comparison, Geragos and the other plaintiff lawyers have agreed to
give Martin Marootian, one of the named representative plaintiffs in
the case, $250,000. Nutley said that strongly suggests that the
plaintiff lawyers tried to buy Marootian’s approval of the proposed
settlement. Nutley added that federal case law will not sanction such
a “supersized” award to a named plaintiff, and that Judge Snyder has
already indicated that she is not bound to approve the award of money
to Marootian or the other named plaintiffs.
According to Nutley, the settling parties have not adequately
explained why the amount going to the heirs is so small. After filing
the case, the plaintiffs’ lawyers had claimed that the case was worth
nearly $3 billion in today’s dollars. Nutley said the lawyers should
explain that discrepancy, and have not yet done so. “After 90 years,
and 1.5 million lives lost, is this it for the Armenians? I don’t see
how any Armenian can feel either vindicated by this result or
confident that justice has been done,” said Nutley, who is not
Armenian but whose firm has argued for transparency and accountability
in class actions. “Putting aside the technical, financial and legal
defects in this settlement, this case is also unique in its symbolic
importance to Armenians generally. For them, justice should not just
be done, but be seen to be done.”
For further information, go to or call
626-240-0247.

Persian Journal
Iran News
Iran, Armenia Call for Expansion of Mutual Ties
Jun 24, 2004, 04:32
Head of Armenian presidential office Artash Tumanyan and his entourage
conferred here Tuesday with Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi on issues
of mutual interest, IRNA reported.
According to the Information and Press Bureau of the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, Armenian minister of energy along with the country’s
deputy minister of transportation and telecommunication were also
present in the meeting. At the meeting, the two sides reviewed
expansion of economic and commercial cooperation. Describing the
current level of political relations as satisfactory, Kharrazi voiced
satisfaction over the outcome of Iran-Armenia Economic Commission
meeting and hoped to witness further expansion of economic and
commercial cooperation to a desirable level.
Calling the two sides relations as very significant, he expressed the
hope that both sides would take more firm steps to broaden economic
cooperation. He said the two sides’ economic cooperation would help
restore regional security. The Armenian envoy, for his part, described
bilateral economic activities as `fruitful’ and said the already
reached agreements between the sides would have positive impacts on
mutual relations.
Implementing macro-economic plans will have positive results on ties
between the two countries as well as those in the region through the
restoration of security and stability in the region, he said adding
that the countries in the region through a sincere cooperation can
prevent the interference of foreigners and their influence on regional
developments. The Islamic Republic of Iran is a stabilizing force in
the region, he noted. North-Corridor is a strategic project in which
Iran plays a very significant role, he concluded.

The Georgian Messenger
Wednesday, June 23, 2004, #115 (0639)
Connecting Georgia with Turkey
By M. Alkhazashvili
The possible construction of a railway connecting Georgia and Turkey
creates new prospects for the two countries as well as for the transit
function of the South Caucasus as a whole. If the project goals of an
inexpensive, efficient, international transit route are achieved, the
turnover of goods on Georgia’s railways will sharply increase. But
before any of this can happen, Georgia needs to mobilize a vast sum of
money.
President Mikheil Saakashvili discussed the issue of constructing a
Georgia-Turkey railway during his May visit to Turkey. When he
traveled to Tbilisi on June 14-15, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliev
also expressed his support for the project.
Two possible routes for the Georgia-Turkey railway are under
discussion: Kars-Akhalkalaki, which has been on the drawing board
since the Shevardnadze administration, and Rize-Batumi, which
Saakashvili was able to propose following the fall of Aslan
Abashidze’s regime in Adjara. Although the Kars-Akhalkalaki plan is
more familiar and well studied, its construction faces numerous
challenges due to the jagged mountainous terrain of the region. This
project requires not only the construction of a 35km stretch from
Akhalkalaki to Kurtkale on the Georgian-Turkish border and a further
92km line from there to Kars, but also the upgrade of the existing 160
km single line branch from Akhalkalaki to Tbilisi. The Rize-Batumi
option may thus prove the more viable.
If a railway connecting Georgia and Turkey is created, the South
Caucasus’ role as a transit corridor between Europe and Asia will
greatly increase and bring tremendous profits. But given the $700-800
million cost of the project, finding the financing necessary for this
project will be a stiff challenge for the government, even if
Azerbaijan and Turkey allot significant sums towards the project.
The idea of constructing a Georgia-Turkey railway has caused great
concern in Armenia, which feels itself even further isolated from
regional transit projects. It should be pointed out that in the Soviet
period, there existed a railway connecting Turkey with the South
Caucasus – the Kars Gyumri line – but owing to the Karabakh conflict
and the less than cordial relations between Armenia and Turkey, it has
been out of operation for more than a decade. A few days ago reports
surfaced that Turkey may open its border with Armenia and restore
Kars-Gyumri. Clearly, if this is true, the issue of constructing a
Georgia-Turkey line will all but be removed from the agenda. But it
remains to be seen whether there is any real prospect for the
restoration of Kars-Gyumri or whether this report was merely a
reaction to the Georgia-Turkey railway idea.

Israel National News
They Already Got Their “Right of Return”
by Steven Plaut
Jun 23, ’04 / 4 Tammuz 5764
Try to imagine what the world would be like if Israel had granted the
“Palestinian refugees” who fled from Israel in 1948-49 the right to return
to Israel. Not to the West Bank. Not to the Gaza Strip. But to Israel within
its pre-1967 borders.
Imagine a situation in which Israel agreed to allow tens of thousands of
Arabs who fled from the battle zones of the Israeli War of Independence the
possibility of returning to Israel, in many cases to the very homes they had
abandoned during the fighting. Imagine how the same world, currently
obsessed with achieving a “right of return” for “Palestinian refugees” were
forced to acknowledge that Israel had already granted the possibility for
tens of thousands of these refugees to return to Israel, in many cases
decades ago. What would the world then have left to bash Israel about? What
would the anti-Semites have left to scream about, or the crowd claiming to
be “anti-Zionists but not anti-Semites”, who only enjoy seeing “Zionist”
children mass murdered, or the self-hating leftist Jewish anti-Semites?
Well, hold on to your shtreimel, because I have a whopper of a revelation to
make to you. Israel did grant the “Palestinian refugees” the right to return
to Israel!
Let us back up a bit. In 1947-48, the United Nations proposed partitioning
“Palestine” into a Jewish and an Arab state of approximately equal sizes.
The Jews accepted the plan, and the Arabs rejected it. When the British
Mandate over “Palestine” was ended under the UN decision, the Arab states
attacked the newborn state of Israel, tried to annihilate it and its
population, and at the same time gobbled up most of the territory that the
UN had allotted to become a Palestinian Arab state.
The territory that became Israel had never been a Palestinian Arab state,
ever. Most of the Arabs in “Palestine” had migrated in from neighboring Arab
countries after the 19th-Century start of the Zionist Jewish immigration,
taking advantage of the influx of capital, the availability of jobs and of
services, like hospitals. In other words, the Arabs of “Palestine” in 1948,
exactly like the Jews, were by and large people from families who had been
in the country for three generations or less.
During the fighting in the 1948-49 war, thousands of Arabs living in the
territory that became Israel fled. The main reason they fled was that they
understandably wanted to put some distance between their families and the
battle zones. At the same time, they were ordered by the Arab political
leadership to leave the territory of Israel. Why take my word on this?
Listen to Arab sources:
“The Arab States encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes
temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies.”-
Falastin (Jordanian newspaper), February 19, 1949
“The Arab governments told us: Get out so that we can get in. So we got out,
but they did not get in.” – from the Jordanian daily A-Difaa, September 6,
1954
“The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the
Zionist tyranny, but instead, they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate
and to leave their homeland.” (emphasis added) – Abu Mazen, erstwhile “Prime
Minister” of the Palestinian Authority, in “What We Have Learned and What We
Should Do”, published in Falastin Al-Thawra, the official journal of the
PLO, in Beirut, March 1976.
And there are scores of other Arab sources confirming this.
So, how many Arabs fled? The number has become enormously distorted over
time by the Bash-Israel Lobby and by Arab propagandists and their
apologists, who usually claim between 500,000 and a million. A more
realistic estimate is between 300,000 and 450,000, based in part on Arab and
UNRWA sources themselves
(). Most of these refugees
ended up in some of the twenty-two sovereign Arab states, including those
Arab countries from which they had migrated into “Palestine” in the late
19th and early 20th centuries in the first place. In other words, the
“refugees” went back to their earlier homelands in Lebanon, Syria and
Jordan. It was a sort of “right of return.”
At the same time, the Arab states carried out a near-total ethnic cleansing
of around a million Jews, who had been living in those lands since Biblical
days, in many cases, before these states had Arab populations
(). The Jews from Arab countries
left behind far more property than did the Palestinian Arab refugees
(). Most of these Jewish
refugees were resettled in Israel.
In the years immediately after World War II, there were more than 50 million
refugees: Poles, Germans, Indians, Pakistanis, Hungarians, Chinese,
Japanese, Koreans, etc., etc. They were all long ago resettled and
forgotten, all except for the “Palestinian refugees”. How come?
Because for decades, the Arab aggressor states found it convenient to
utilize the “refugees” as a political and military weapon against Israel,
not only of propaganda and spin, but of terrorism
(). “Palestinians”
inside Arab states were trained as terrorists and sent out to murder. At the
same time, there was enormous incentive for the Arab locals in the countries
into which the refugees had entered to pretend also to be “Palestinian
refugees” ().
After all, the UN and other agencies were handing out free food and perks to
anyone pretending to be a refugee from “Palestine”. (For further information
and documentation, see )
Unlike all those many millions of other people considered refugees in the
late 1940s, the “Palestinians” were the only ones for whom the “right of
return” to their previous homes was considered an entitlement. The reason
was not a selective affection for Palestinians, but a selective hostility
towards Israel and Jews. Those demanding the wholesale “return” to Israel of
Palestinian “refugees”, including the countless thousands of
non-Palestinians pretending to be Palestinian refugees, had one goal in
mind, the eradication of Israel.
Israel would have been insane to allow itself to be inundated with real and
make-pretend Palestinian “refugees”, this in a tiny sliver of land the size
of Maryland, at the same time that the 22 Arab states have territory-galore
stretching from the Atlantic Ocean all the way to Central Asia. The
Palestinian Arabs and their sponsors had tried to annihilate Israel and
failed. Just like the infant United States, which refused to allow any of
the tens of thousands of Tory Loyalists expelled by the patriots to “return”
to the United States after the War of Independence, Israel was entirely in
its rights to refuse to allow the “return” of masses of “Palestinians”,
whose migration was being demanded by those seeking to liquidate Israel via
a demographic flooding.
There is just one little wrinkle though.
Israel did let the Palestinian refugees return. Tens of thousands of them
were quietly allowed to return to Israel, in many cases to their original
homes, once the fighting in 1949 subsided. Many continue to be admitted
today within the framework of “family reunification” agreements.
>From 1948 until 2001, Israel allowed about 184,000 “Palestinian refugees” or
their families to “return” to Israel proper (Jerusalem Post, January 2,
2001; see also Ha’aretz, December 28, 2000). These are in addition to about
57,000 Palestinians from Jordan illegally in Israel, towards whom the
authorities are turning a blind eye (Ha’aretz, April 4, 2001). They are not
migrating to the West Bank, not to Gaza, but to Israel inside its pre-1967
“Green Line” borders. In the Camp David II meetings in 2000, Israeli leftist
Prime Minister Ehud Barak rather insanely offered to allow another 150,000
“refugees” to enter Israel as part of a peace accord. The PLO’s response was
to launch pogroms and four years of atrocities, because the number was
finite. (See also )
The demand for a “right of return” by Palestinians to Israel is no doubt the
most absurd political demand floating anywhere around the planet. There is
already an Arab state in two thirds of Mandatory Palestine, named Jordan,
and most of its population is Palestinian Arab. The Oslo Accords and
Israel’s Camp David II offer would have created a second Arab state in
Palestine, in the West Bank and Gaza, as part of a comprehensive peace
settlement. Any “Palestinian” from anywhere could have moved to “Palestine”
or to Jordan, within the framework of such a peace, the same way any Jew who
wishes to may immigrate to Israel, or any Armenian may immigrate to Armenia,
and Greeks from the Greek Diaspora are automatically welcomed in Greece.
The PLO and the Islamofascist states backing it demand that in addition to
establishing a second Arab state in Palestine within the framework of any
peace settlement, Israel itself must also be converted into a third Arab
Palestinian state, via unlimited massive immigration of people claiming to
be Palestinians. Benjamin Franklin, who opposed granting even a dime in
compensation to the Tory refugees expelled from the United States during the
War of Independence, would be splitting his sides laughing.
But the most Orwellian absurdity of all is that Israel long ago did grant
the right to “return” to Israel itself to tens of thousands of “Palestinian
refugees”. Did this earn Israel the world’s gratitude for its uniquely
generous gesture? Did the world denounce the Arab fascist states who ignored
this generosity, and continued to seek Israel’s destruction militarily and
the genocide of its population? Do today’s bleeding hearts and recreational
compassion posturers, pretending to feel uncontrollable pain and caring for
Palestinian refugees, even know about the limited “right of return” granted
by Israel over the past decades?
Hindus have never been returned to Pakistan, Moslems from Pakistan have not
been returned to India, ethnic Germans were not returned to their pre-war
homes in Czechoslovakia, Poland, Russia or Romania, Japanese have not been
returned to Manchuria, Greeks have not been returned to Anatolia, Jews have
not been compensated for the billions they left behind when ethnic cleansing
of Jews in Moslem countries took place, and Tory Loyalists were never
returned to New England. But tens of thousands of “Palestinian refugees”
were granted by Israel what none of these others received.
It is time to say enough is enough. The only remaining reasonable plan
regarding those still claiming to be “Palestinian refugees” is simply –
“Foggedaboutit.”

Azat Artsakh – Republic of Nagorno Karabakh (NKR)
June 23 2004
OFFICIALS OF ARMENIA AND NKR DENIED
Top officials of Armenia and Nagorni Karabakh denied the news that the
American co-chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group Stephen Mann during his
latestvisit to Yerevan (June 3) unofficially discussed with the
president of Armenia the question of returning three regions
controlled by the Karabakh armed forcesto Azerbaijan as a manifestation
of good will. In particular, in the interviews to the radio station
`Liberty’ this news was denied by the prime minister of Armenia
Andranik Margarian and foreign minister Vardan Oskanian, as well asthe
speaker of the National Assembly of Nagorni Karabakh Oleg Yessayan. ‘I
do not think that such discussions ever took place,’ stated Oleg
Yessayan and added that `if Karabakh did not agree to return five
regions for opening the railroad Yerevan-Baku, it would be naiv to
think that Karabakh would agree to return the three regions’.
PANARMENIAN.
23-06-2004

Azat Artsakh – Republic of Nagorno Karabakh (NKR)
June 23 2004
NEW CENTRAL OFFICE OF `ARTSAKHBANK’
On June 20 the official opening of the new office of `Artsakhbank’
took place in Stepanakert. At the ceremony were present the president
of NKR Arkady Ghukassian, prime minister Anoushavan Danielian, high
officials, members of parliament, members of the government, guests
from Armenia and abroad, representatives of the world of business.
Among the honourable guests were the president of the Central Bank of
the Republic of Armenia Tigran Sarghissian, representative of the
principal shareholders of `Artsakhbank’ CJSC, member of theboard
Arden Selefian. The president of the administration of `Artsakhbank’
Kamo Nersissian thanked the principal shareholders Vardan Simakesh
and Hrach Kaprielian for providing excellent conditions for the
personnel of the bank, the NKR authorities for their constant
assistance, and the Central Bank of Armenia for effective
cooperation. He presented the activity of the company in the recent
years. Being one of the main financial links in the NKR economy and
the only Armenian resident trade bank functioning in all the regions
of NKR `Artsakhbank’ greatly contributes to the implementation of the
main strategic economic programs, fulfills certain functions of the
central bank the first of which is serving the budget. Through the
bank also foreign investments are involved in the economy of Artsakh
promoting the general development of different spheres of industry
and enabling to create new jobs. The rising fiscal rates are the
evidence to the effective activity of the bank in the recent years.
Revenues grow year by year, this year by the data of May 1 the assets
of the bank totaled 16.3 billion drams against 2.9 billion drams in
2000, banking capital 2 billion drams against 1 billion drams in
2000. Only in 2003 the bank issued 11 billion drams of loans to legal
and natural persons and in the last three years the circulation of
loans surpassed 27 billion drams. Issuing of consumer and mortgage
loans tends to develop. Being a shareholder of the company `Armenian
Card’ `Artsakhbank’ has started a wide-scope activity directed at the
organization of service by international plastic cards. In the
nearest future the bank will enter the international market `Forex’
through the system of `Reiter’.Â
NIKOLAY BAGHDASSARIAN
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Azat Artsakh – Republic of Nagorno Karabakh (NKR)
June 23 2004
REPAIRS OF DADIVANK VESTIBULE
On June 17 the scientific council of the NKR agency for study of
historical environment and preservation of monuments discussed the
project of reconstruction of the vestibule of the monastery of
Dadivank. The head of the agency S. Sarghissian informed that the
project was accepted which means that the reconstruction works will
start this year as there is already a benefactor ready to fund the
reconstruction of the vestibule. The author of the projects of
reconstruction of the small domed church, the cathedral and the
church vestibule of Dadivank monastery architect Samvel Ayvazian said
the reconstruction of the cathedral started last year and will be
completed at the end of the current year. As to the small domed
church, its reconstruction will start only after the removal of the
frescoes which the former director of reconstruction works, painter
Armen Mnatsakanian willfully did himself in the church. There is
already the decision of the scientific council and the permission of
the head of the Artsakh diocese of the Armenian Apostolic Church
Parghev Martirossian for the removal of the fresco.
SUSANNA BALAYAN

Kazakh lower house approves CIS antiterror document
Interfax-Kazakhstan news agency, Almaty
23 Jun 04
ASTANA
The Majlis (the lower house) of the Kazakh parliament approved at a
plenary sitting today the ratification of the protocol approving the
provision on the procedure for organizing and holding joint antiterror
exercises in CIS member states.
The document was sent to the parliament’s Senate (the upper chamber)
for further consideration.
Presenting a relevant draft law to the Majlis deputies, the first
deputy chairman of the Kazakh National Security Committee, Vladimir
Bozhko, noted that Kazakhstan would ratify the document “without
reservation”, although four of the 10 CIS states that signed the
document earlier had ratified the document with reservations.
The provision on the procedure for organizing and holding joint
antiterror exercises in the CIS member states was signed in Chisinau
by Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan and Ukraine on 7 October 2002.
The provision “provides for joint efforts from the sides to thwart
terrorist activities, as well as to secure the release of hostages, to
render explosive devices harmless and to wipe out terrorist groups and
so on”, the Majlis’s committee for international affairs, defence and
security stated in conclusion at the plenary sitting.
The document also provides for the joint training of special
antiterror formations during exercises.
In accordance with the provision, the antiterror centre, which was set
up under a decision from the CIS heads of state in 2000, will
coordinate the issue of organizing and holding antiterror exercises.
In order to control directly the special antiterror formations during
joint exercises the interested side will set up a supervising body to
define the procedure for holding the exercises, including the use of
forces and special means.
The document also mentions that interference with the holding of joint
exercises is allowed only by instruction from the head of the
interested state.