US AMBASSADOR VISITS SYUNIK
ArmenPress
June 9 2004
KAPAN, JUNE 9, ARMENPRESS: US ambassador to Armenia, John Ordway,
paid a two-day working visit to the southern province of Syunik on
June 8-9 to get a first-hand information on the ground about the pace
of implementation of an array of projects, funded and supported by
his government.
The first leg of his visit was to Meghri, home to one of the biggest
copper and molybdenum plant, that was privatized by a US-based company
recently. The same day the ambassador met with representatives of local
non-governmental organizations and community leaders in Meghri and then
in Kapan to introduce them to the projects, implemented in the region
with the support of the US government and hear also their opinions.
On the second day of the visit John Ordway visited a local kindergarten
being repaired by Save the Children Organization on USAID funds and
then attended a ceremony marking the end of a major repair of the
local mental clinic, funded also by Save the Children.

MAP BUILDS MODERN BUTCHERY
ArmenPress
June 9 2004
YEGHEGNADZOR, JUNE 9, ARMENPRESS: A butchery that will comply with
US and European standards is being built in Yeghegnadzor, in the
vicinity of ARID Goat Breeding and Research Center with the support
of USDA Marketing Assistance Project (MAP).
According to Sos Avetisian, a public affairs officer of the MAP,
the refrigerating room and other auxiliary facilities, also two
shops, one for processing the hide and the other for butchering are
ready. There is also a special window for visitors who can watch the
entire production process of the butchery. A US experts is invited to
teach local specialists European methods of operating a butchery. The
butchery’s capacity will be around 3,000 goats a year. MAP is planning
to build another five such butcheries.
The ARID Center houses imported purebred goats from the United
States. These purebred goats are crossed with native Armenian goats
to obtain a crossbred animal with increased milk production. This
improved milk production increases village farmers’ financial incomes
and provides the milk necessary for goat cheese factories to make
exotic goat cheeses that are exported abroad.

ONE COMPANY BIDS FOR ZANGEZOUR PLANT
ArmenPress
June 9 2004
YEREVAN, JUNE 9, ARMENPRESS: Trade and development minister Karen
Chshmaritian told a news conference on Tuesday that only one German
company has made a bid for participation in a tender for privatization
of Zangezour metallurgical plant in southern Armenia.
The deadline for filing bids is June 26. Chshmaritian said the shares
of the plant are estimated $130 million. The minister said the plant
works with profits, which last year amounted to $20 million.

KOCHARIAN CONFERS DECORATIONS ON 40 REPRESENTATIVES OF VARIOUS SECTORS
ArmenPress
June 9 2004
YEREVAN, JUNE 9, ARMENPRESS: On the occasion of Republic Day president
Kocharian conferred today Armenian medals, orders and other decorations
on a group of police and national security officers, prosecutors,
employees of local self-management bodies and health and education
communities.
President Kocharian was quoted by his press office as saying that
it is a good tradition to confer national decorations on people
from different branches for their merits on the occasion of national
holidays. He said: “You too have earned this distinction by your hard
work. This means that the progress of our country is contingent on
every of us and a breakthrough is possible only given a harmonized
cooperation between all branches.”
Kocharian said their appearance on the list was an evidence of their
good name and high professionalism that cannot be earned in one day
and without hard and enduring work.
Kocharian also said that a simple comparison of crime rates in Armenia
and other developed countries, or in countries with the same level of
living standards is enough to commend Armenian police and appreciate
its work. Kocharian said the difference is significant, an evidence
of good work of the police.
“It is at this moment that we have to be more optimistic about our own
forces, we have to believe that hard work and initiative help surmount
all obstacles,” the president said. The recipients of the awards in
turn thanked the president for his warm attitude and conferring state
orders on them, adding it was a boost to their further activity.

GYUMRI-KARS: HISTORICAL CULTURAL TOURISM SYMPOSIUM
ArmenPress
June 9 2004
YEREVAN, JUNE 9, ARMENPRESS: The Yerevan office of Academy for
Education Development (AED) in cooperation with several organizations
and interested individual and with the financial support of USAID
has initiated a project, called “Gyumri-Kars: Historical Cultural
Tourism Symposium”. The Symposium is supposed to be held on June 15-18-
the first two days in Gyumri and the last two in Turkish Kars, lying
across the border.
Local government officials, experts on preservation of historical
cultural monuments, specialists in architecture and tourism and
businessmen form Armenia and Turkey were invited to participate and
discuss the present challenges of preservation of historical and
natural objects and development of tourism.
During the symposium the participants are expected to observe the
current state of historical and natural monuments in Kars and Shirak.
They will confer necessary steps to be taken to prevent the monuments
from further destruction. The participants will also discuss prospects
for developing tourism.
A strategy on developing tourism and preservation of historical
monuments in Gyumri and Kars is expected to be developed . The
strategy will be submitted to the interest of state bodies, donor
and international organizations, other interested parties.
According to Academy of Education Development Yerevan office,
preparatory works are almost complete. All the details are conferred
and agreed upon with the Turkish side. However, according to our
sources, there is a concern among Turkish participants that the
symposium will fail. They recall Ankara where the respective bodies
have not authorized the visit to Gyumri.
In case of such development, this will be not the first case when
bilateral initiations fail because of ‘lack of willingness’ from
Ankara at the last moment.

NATIONALIST FROM MOSCOW SUBURB ALL BUT WINS LOCAL ELECTION
by Anna Rudnitskaya
Moscow News (Russia)
June 9, 2004
While old democrats argue with new liberals, young elements have moved
into politics under “Russia for Russians” slogans and, confusingly,
to incantations that “fascism in Russia will not come to pass”
Vladimir Yermolaev is young, well educated, and well pleased with
himself. He has good reason for this: At 27, this past May he ran
in municipal elections for the first time, garnering 34% of the vote
outright -without any “administrative resources” either, or any other
resources for that matter. His resources are his slogans. “Russia
for Russians, Moscow for Muscovites” just about sums them up.
Candidate
“I’ve been reading Izvestia since seven,” Yermolaev told me. “My
parents were avowed anti-Communists and I was brought up in a dissident
spirit, thinking: The Communists will be driven out, and everything
will be just fine. In 1995, I voted for Gaidar and in 1999 for the
Union of Right Forces (SPS). But then I began to have my doubts. Not
surprisingly, I particularly resented the appearance of hundreds of
thousands of people from other states, above all from former Union
republics, in Moscow and in Russia in general. So when I saw leaflets
of the Movement Against Illegal Immigrants on the metro, I realized
that I had found ideological soul-mates. I remember that day: I was
simply happy to hear something that was in harmony with my own mood,
and I very much liked the people – all of them my age or younger. So
I joined.”
For the benefit of those who do not know, it was the Movement Against
Illegal Immigrants that, in the wake of the bomb attack on the Moscow
metro, organized a sanctioned rally under the slogan: “How much longer
must we tolerate Chechen crime against Russian citizens?!” It was
the Movement Against Illegal Immigrants that, two years ago, after
an Armenian pogrom in the town of Krasnoarmeisk, outside Moscow,
demanded the release of its organizers.
For all that, when I cited Yermev’s election campaign leaflet,
mentioning “black occupants,” he was hurt:
“It didn’t say ‘black’. After all, we are civilized people.”
Are you not worried by the presence of skinheads at your civilized
rally?
“Quite the contrary, I find these people far more likable than the
indifferent slaves of the consumer society. People such as skinhead
leaders will eventually constitute the elite of this country.”
You are similarly complacent about the fact that it was under your
slogans that ethnic Armenian houses were raided, and men and women
beaten?
“Well, you can say that ethnic Armenian houses were raided, or you can
say that there was a conflict between the indigenous population and
Armenian immigrants. There are thousands of inva-ders in the country,
and it is increasingly difficult to drive them out.”
What was written in the leaflet you saw in the metro?
“Let me see… Something to the effect that there are 1.5 million
Azeris living in Moscow and that Moscow is the capital of Azerbaijan.”
What does it take for an advocate of liberal values from an
intellectual family to become an activist of a Nazilike movement? It
is enough to tell him that 1.5 million Azeris are to blame for his
country’s woes and that to make life better, they must be kicked out.
Voters
The district of Orekhovo-Borisovo Yuzhnoye is a typical Moscow bedroom
suburb. It was its residents that, in a municipal election this past
May, gave Yermolaev, a candidate sponsored by the Movement Against
Illegal Immigrants, 34% of the vote.
They say that United Russia candidate Irina Dmitrieva, a school
principal (in the end, she won by a narrow margin, with just a few
hundred votes more than Yermolaev), campaigned with food parcels that
were handed to war veterans purportedly on the occasion of V-Day. Her
rival gave as good as he got, distributing door to door leaflets
with quotations from Mayor Luzhkov: “Moscow is a Rus-sian city!”
(Moskovsky Komsomolets daily, Sept. 22, 2003) and President Putin:
“The problem of illegal migration is becoming a serious threat to
national security” (from a statement at an RF Security Council session,
Nov. 29, 2000), thus probably utterly baffling the voters who until
recently have traditionally been voting for Putin and Luzhkov.
On the whole, even though he lost, Vladimir Yermolaev is satisfied
with the election:
“I was greatly excited; I constantly felt the support of the people.
We had a meeting at a housing maintenance and repair administration
office, attended by some 25 senior citizens, whereupon a woman from
the veterans’ council came up to me and said: ‘Well done, Vladimir,
we are with you!’ We are still in touch and we’ve agreed to work
together. Generally speaking, the result was very good.”
A week later, the only indication of the past election at School #986
where Vladimir Yermolaev had been a student and that served as one
of the two polling stations where he got the most votes, is scraps
of leaflets on the doors. The school principal’s secretary could
not remember a student named Yermolaev, but his platform raised no
objections with her.
“So what? What he is saying is absolutely right. There are so many of
these Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Azeris that we just don’t hear any Russian
spoken here.”
True, she voted for Dmitrieva all the same: “After all, she is a
school principal.”
A Common Future
Incidentally, this is an idee fixe with all new right and old
left elements: As long as they are kept off the air and have the
formidable administrative resource brought against them, they can
for a time forget about the federal parliament, focusing instead on
local, municipal elections – on the assumption that people on the
ground are more concerned with heating or local amenities than with
abstract discussions about the destiny of Motherland. Yet while the
new right and old left are only pondering action, Vladimir Yermolaev
has already all but won. What is especially important is that his
voters were swayed by his pledge to drive all “invaders” from the
neighborhood far more than by his promise to landscape the area.
Inspired by his first success, Yermolaev is determined to pursue a
political career.
“See, Anna,” the young sociologist smiles almost condescendingly.
“All parties are phantoms really, while we are a real movement of
people who are working to uphold their idea, and that’s our strength.”
At parting he said: “We have a great future.”
There is no reason to doubt this. MN

Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
June 9, 2004, Wednesday
NATO CHALLENGES RUSSIA’S INFLUENCE IN THE CIS
SOURCE: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, June 8, 2004, p. 5
by Yuri Simonjan, Tatiana Ivzhenko
In Warsaw and Brussels yesterday, NATO structures held important
talks with representatives of the defense ministries of Ukraine and
Georgia. These two countries are expected to receive invitations
to the NATO Istanbul summit by the end of this month, and they will
attend the summit with the status of NATO’s special partners. NATO
has been making active advances to the Defense Ministry of Azerbaijan
since late May. It is reasonable to assume that NATO is interested in
consolidating some key GUUAM members around the idea of integration
into Western structures.
As Russia becomes more active in establishing and consolidating
economic blocs in the CIS, NATO’s operations in this area are
growing more intensive as well. The West must fear that Moscow’s
initiatives and efforts might lead to the rise of a new and fairly
powerful international alliance, with relations between its members
not restricted to economic contacts alone. This could even deprive the
West of its ability to influence key areas of post-Soviet territory.
That is why NATO countries, those which criticized their CIS partners
only recently, are now changing their tune and promoting closer
relations with the CIS. Off the record, some NATO representatives
speak of the possibility of granting Ukraine and Georgia permission
to join NATO as soon as 2007 – even though it’s obvious that neither
country is ready for it in economic, political, or military terms.
Douglas Bereteur, president of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly,
spoke of NATO membership prospects for Ukraine during a recent visit
to Kiev. But NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer told a
correspondent of Day that although NATO’s doors are open to Ukraine,
it’s too early as yet to talk of any exact dates. Commenting on
speculations by some Ukrainian analysts about the negative impact
of Russia on NATO-Ukraine relations, Scheffer said: “Russian Foreign
Minister Sergei Lavrov said recently that any decision Ukraine makes
will be its own sovereign decision. I don’t think Ukraine’s intentions
can have any effect on relations between NATO and Russia.”
Judging by certain statements of NATO officials, the Alliance is more
concerned about Ukraine’s present undemocratic system and problems with
its military reforms. But despite all its misgivings, NATO has signed
a mutual understanding memorandum with Kiev. Under this agreement, NATO
will use Ukrainian AN-124 Ruslan transport planes in its operations.
Expanding Ukraine’s participation in joint operations with NATO
was also discussed at a conference organized by NATO and the Polish
Institute of Foreign Affairs. Ukrainian analysts, however, attach
considerably more importance to NATO’s consent to arrange a meeting of
the NATO-Ukraine commission in Istanbul on June 28 and 29. A previous
meeting of this commission was to take place in Prague in autumn 2002,
but it was cancelled because of the scandal over alleged unlawful
deliveries of Kolchuga Chain Mail systems to Iraq. NATO didn’t even
invite President Leonid Kuchma to the meeting last year. Ukraine was
represented by its foreign minister there.
These days, NATO considers it necessary to reestablish relations with
the Ukrainian leader, who keeps saying that Ukraine is not going to
knock at the doors of Western structures if those doors are closed to
it – instead, it will turn to more loyal foreign partners. Ukrainian
Foreign Minister Konstantin Grischenko said the other day that Kiev
has not yet made up its mind concerning the format of participation
in the Ukraine-NATO meeting in Istanbul. This might mean that NATO
will find it necessary to exert more effort (and perhaps even made
some concessions) to change the pro-Russian direction of Ukrainian
foreign policy.
In its relations with pro-Western Georgia, NATO doesn’t have the sort
of problems it has with Ukraine. A team of experts from the Defense
Ministry of Georgia has been in Brussels since June 1, working with
their NATO counterparts on a draft development program for the Georgain
miliary. This plan may be signed today. Tbilisi is represented at
the talks by Defense Minister Gela Bezhuashvili. Bezhuashvili is
currently in Brussels, but his time has run out. Fulfilling the plans
will probably be the prerogative of Georgy Baramidze, Bezhuashvili’s
successor, who will soon be endorsed by the parliament of Georgia.
Bezhuashvili told journalists that he was going to Brussels with a
detailed plan specifying all Georgia’s commitments to NATO, the dates
of their implementation, and a program for developing and restructuring
the Armed Forces. The Georgian military’s troop strength will be cut
from 14,000 to 10,000, and a transition to contract service will
be made eventually. In line with NATO standards, 85% of employees
at the central staff of the Defense Ministry will be civilians. The
functions of the Defense Ministry and General Staff will be divided.
All the same, Georgia will have to solve a lot of problems if it’s
really aiming for full membership of NATO. Withdrawal of Russian
military bases from its territory appears to be the most difficult
of these. Moscow still insists on 11 years it claims to require for
the withdrawal, but Tbilisi insistes that three years will suffice.
Georgian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Nato Chikovani told us: “Russia
hasn’t even appointed a head of the expert team, despite our requests.”
Georgian experts hope that some way of dealing with the problem will
be found during the talks in Brussels, even though Scheffer never
misses a chance to emphasize that NATO has no intention of spoiling
its relations with Russia. “I take care of these relations and value
them,” he said the other day.
Azerbaijan is also active on its path to NATO. Azerbaijani officers
have attended the NATO Peacekeeping Operations courses. The exercise
took place in Oberammergau, a town in Georgia, within the framework
of NATO’s Partnership for Peace Program. The Best Effort exercise
will be organized in Azerbaijan this summer under NATO’s aegis.
Still, Azerbaijan is several steps behind Ukraine and Georgia on
its path to NATO, and membership is out of the question for the
time being. Judging by the West’s efforts, however, the situation
may change soon. A special agreement on closer contacts between NATO
and the government of Azerbaijan will be signed during the Istanbul
summit. Observers in Azerbaijan are apprehensive that this may have
a negative impact on Azerbaijan’s relations with Moscow. They point
out that the declaration signed by the governments of Russia and
Azerbaijan during President Ilham Aliyev’s recent visit to Moscow
states that cooperation between Russia and Azerbaijan must not
be directed against any other country. If things sour, however,
official Baku could use its most convincing argument in the dialogue
with Moscow. Azerbaijan itself is annoyed by the presence of Russian
military bases in Armenia, just like Moscow may be frustrated by the
activization of Baku’s relations with NATO.

ANSA
ANSA English Media Service
June 8, 2004
ART: CRYING ARMENIAN STONES IN VENICE
VENICE
(ANSA) – VENICE, June 8 – A documentary exhibition offering a journey
among the crying stones of Armenia, as poet Osip Mandelstam (1891-1938)
put it, will be held in the UNESCO Zorzi Palace in Venice between
June 8 and July 2, 2004.
The event was organised by the Centre for Documentary Research of
Armenian Culture CSDCA, the Unesco Venice-based Regional Bureau for
Science in Europe ROSTE and the Department for Eurasian Studies at
the Ca Foscari University.
The suggestive images shown in the exhibition illustrate in detail
a number of projects aimed at preserving and restoring Armenian
cultural heritage which have been already completed or are underway
in the country.
“The Armenian heritage is not only architectural, it is representative
of the Armenian culture in the broad sense of the term,” said Francis
Childe, Chief of the Asia/Pacific and Europe Section of UNESCO’s
Cultural Heritage Division.
The restoration works were carried out by Italian experts using
ancient techniques which also helped revive the local crafts sector.
The exhibition is divided into six sections which reconstruct the
historic and geographic context of the Armenian culture, show some of
the most famous examples of Armenian architecture, focus on important
construction techniques and preservation problems and deal with the
country’s efforts to document and preserve its cultural heritage and
also to encourage the development of local communities.
The last section is dedicated to the Armenian community in Venice,
present from 1715 onwards. Contacts between Venetians and Armenians
date back to the establishment of Venice. (ANSA). (BZ/krc)

CENN — JUNE 9, 2004 DAILY DIGEST
Table of Contents:
1. Technip Expects to Get Contract for Shah Deniz Platform
2. Japan to Invest in Yerevan Power Plant
3. Yerevan Adamant In Delaying Metsamor Closure
4. Armenia Undecided on Closure of Nuclear Plant – Minister
5. With A Visit To Armenia’s Largest Dump, UNDP and The Ministry Of
Nature Protection Launch Environment Week
6. NGO Letter Protests Against Weakening of WB Standards fyi
7. EIA Report of the Project on “Processing of the Sand Deposit in
Khashuri Region” by “Progress-2″ Ltd
8. EIA Report of the Project on ” Project on Capture and Bottling of the
mineral spring in Tbilisi ” by “Progress-2” Ltd
9. The Internet Conference
1. TECHNIP EXPECTS TO GET CONTRACT FOR SHAH DENIZ PLATFORM
Source: Interfax, June 8, 2004
France’s Technip-Coflexip expects to win a contract to build a second
production platform under Stage-2 of the Shah Deniz gas field project,
stated company manager for the project Sterling Marshal.
“We hope to get the contract for the construction of the second
platform, but that all depends on the speed and quality of work on the
first platform. So far the work is on schedule. We expect the first
shipment of blocks for the platform in September from Singapore. All
construction work will be completed in January 2006,” he said.
Technip-Coflexip has signed two contracts worth $300 million under
Stage-1 of the Shah Deniz project. Once contract includes the design of
a TPG-500 offshore platform to be installed at the field, supply of
materials and equipment, the transport and set up of the platform at
sea, and the other is for the assembly of the platforms at a
construction site in Baku.
Keppel Fells is building the platform in Singapore. The platform will be
delivered in sections to Baku for assembly by Technip.
The contract to develop Shah Deniz field was signed in Baku in June 1996
and ratified by parliament in October of that year. BP is the operator
with a 25.5% share in the project, Statoil holds 25.5%, the State Oil
Company of the Azerbaijani Republic (SOCAR) has a 10% share, LukAgip has
a 10% share, NICO holds 10%, TotalFinaElf holds 10%, and Turkey’s TPAO
holds 9%.
The field holds an estimated 625 billion cubic meters of gas and 101
million tonnes of condensate.
Stage-1 includes the production of 178 billion cubic meters of gas and
34 million tonnes of condensate. Production in later stages is planned
at about 16 billion cubic meters of gas a year.
2. JAPAN TO INVEST IN YEREVAN POWER PLANT
Source: Interfax, June 8, 2004
The Japanese government plans to invest $4.5 million in the construction
of a thermal power plant in Yerevan with a capacity of 1.5 megawatts
based on a waste incineration plant, Armenian Natural Resource Minister
Vardan Aivazyan told journalists on Monday.
He said that the ministry has approved the construction of the plant and
thermal power plant at the Nurabshen dump, which covers an area of over
60 hectares. Talks are currently underway between a potential
subcontractor for the project – Japan’s Shimizu – and the Yerevan
Mayor’s Office.
Aivazyan said that the project would involve the use of up to 800 – 900
cubic meters of rubbish per day to produce methane to be used in
electricity production.
The minister said that recently Armenia set an output tariff for
electricity produced from burning biogas of $0.08 per 1 kWh. The
investor is happy with this tariff.
He said that the talks should be completed by September 10, after which
construction should begin.
Diana Arutyunyan, the national coordinator of the project, told Interfax
that the Japanese state company New Energy and Industrial Technology
Organization plans to finance the project.
She said that Shimizu has already completed the first stage of work on
an audit and preparation of a feasibility study. She also said that the
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development is interested in this
project.
Electricity production in Armenia fell 0.29% to 5.5 billion kWh in 2003.
3. YEREVAN ADAMANT IN DELAYING METSAMOR CLOSURE
Source: Radio Free Europe, June 8, 2004
The Armenian government remains determined not to close the Metsamor
nuclear power plant in the near future and reaffirmed this position
during talks with senior officials from the European Union last week,
Industry Minister Karen Chshmaritian said on Tuesday.
Chshmaritian headed a delegation of government officials who represented
Yerevan at a regular meeting of an Armenia-EU “cooperation committee”
which took place in Brussels on Friday. The issue of Metsamor’s future
was high on its agenda. “The European side wants Armenia to set a date
[for Metsamor’s closure],” Chshmaritian told a news conference.
“However, Armenia can not set a date without having financing resources
[to replace the facility] and clarifying the entire procedure for the
closure.”
The EU has long been arguing that the plant is located in a seismically
active area and that its Soviet-built nuclear reactor does not meet
modern safety standards. The bloc’s executive European Commission has
offered to grant Armenia 100 million euros ($123 million) in return for
the decommissioning of the plant which generates about 40 percent of the
country’s electricity.
Chshmaritian reiterated Yerevan’s rejection of the offer, saying that as
much as $1 billion is needed for safely shutting down Metsamor safely
and putting in place an alternative source of inexpensive energy. “The
Energy Ministry presented its calculations [to the EU], according to
which the total cost of the work would be worth that much,” he said. He
added the Armenia-EU body decided to set up a working group that will
look into the issue in detail and present its findings by the end of
this year.
The government wants to keep Metsamor operational for at least another
decade despite its past promise to the EU to decommission the plant in
2004. The European Commission now seems to be stepping up pressure on
Yerevan to do that as soon as possible in line with its policy of
phasing out all Soviet-designed reactors remaining in Eastern Europe.
Still, an EU spokeswoman in Brussels told RFE/RL last week that the bloc
will continue to finance further measures to improve Metsamor’s
operational safety “up to its closure.”
4. ARMENIA UNDECIDED ON CLOSURE OF NUCLEAR PLANT – MINISTER
Source: Mediamax News Agency, June 8, 2004
Armenia will not name the precise date for the closure of the Armenian
Nuclear Power Station until all technical and financial issues are
clarified, Armenian Minister of Trade and Economic Development Karen
Chshmarityan said in Yerevan today.
He said this issue was discussed during the fifth session of the
Armenia-EU cooperation committee in Brussels on 4 June. The minister
stressed that representatives of the European Union expressed their
readiness again to allocate 100m euros to Armenia if a decision is made
to close down the Nuclear Power Station.
Karen Chshmarityan stated that the closure of the Nuclear Power Station
is a complicated process linked to technical difficulties. The minister
pointed out that according to preliminary estimations, 1bn dollars will
be required for providing Armenia with alternative sources of energy.
5. WITH A VISIT TO ARMENIA’S LARGEST DUMP, UNDP AND THE MINISTRY OF
NATURE PROTECTION LAUNCH ENVIRONMENT WEEK
United Nations Development Programme Country Office in Armenia
14, Karl Liebknecht Street, Yerevan 375010, Armenia
Contact: Aramazd Ghalamkaryan
Tel: (374 1) 56 60 73
Fax: (374 1) 54 38 11
E-mail: [email protected]
Web:
UNDP COUNTRY OFFICE IN ARMENIA
June 7, 2004
Yerevan, Armenia
Today, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Ministry
of Nature Protection officially marked World Environment Day by
organizing a media event in the country’s largest waste disposal site in
Nubarashen, near Yerevan. In close cooperation with UN Agencies and
local and international organizations, UNDP and the Ministry of Nature
Protection jointly initiated Environment Week, an advocacy campaign
aimed at raising public awareness on environmental issues. Mr. Vardan
Ayvazyan, Minister of Nature Protection, Ms. Lise Grande, UN Resident
Coordinator and UNDP Resident Representative, representatives of the
Government, civil society and the mass media participated in the event.
Nubarashen waste disposal site receives almost all the solid waste
produced in Yerevan city and suburbs. As much as 340 tones per day, or
102,000 tones per year, is deposited in the site. Most of the waste in
Nubarashen is domestically produced by the approximately 1,280,000 who
live in these areas. Industrial waste accounts for only a small
proportion. Large quantities of landfill gas, mainly methane gas, are
produced by the waste and discharged into the atmosphere without being
fully utilized.
According to Ms. Grande: “It is very fortunate that Armenia has achieved
high rates of economic growth in the last decade. At this stage in the
country’s transition, is it critically important to focus on the
environmental aspects of economic growth. The sustainable management of
natural resources and a clean environment are key to the country’s
medium and long-term development. If the environment is destroyed or
damaged, the country will suffer. UNDP is currently one of the major
donors in the area of nature protection and we are confident that our
partnership with Government authorities and the civil society will help
to ensure a healthy environment for a healthy people.”
Background: Armenia has acceded to a number of international treaties
and conventions focused on the environment. UNDP’s National Capacities
Self-Assessment (NCSA) project aims to support the Government in
identifying gaps in meeting the requirements of these global
conventions. The goal of Environment Week, a joint advocacy initiative
of UNDP Armenia and the Ministry of Nature Protection, is to: promote
environmental activities at the community level; raise public awareness
of ongoing initiatives in the area of nature protection; highlight
existing environmental issues; and initiate a public debate on the
linkages between human development and nature protection. Environment
Week also aims to bring together major actors in nature protection and
help find solutions to very urgent and important environmental problems
facing the country and the whole Transcaucasian region.
UNDP is the UN’s global development network. It advocates for change and
connects countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people
build a better life. We are on the ground in 166 countries, working with
them on their own solutions to global and national development
challenges. As they develop local capacity, they draw on the people of
UNDP and our wide range of partners.
Aramazd Ghalamkaryan
Information and Resource Mobilisation Associate/
Support to UN Resident Coordinator
UNDP/UN Armenia
14 Karl Liebknecht St., Yerevan, 375010, Armenia
Tel: +3741 56 60 73 + 121
Mob: +3749 43 63 12
Fax: +3741 54 38 11
URLs: ;
6. NGO LETTER PROTESTS AGAINST WEAKENING OF WB STANDARDS FYI
The following letter was sent to the World Bank’s Board of Directors
today. It protests against the weakening of social and environmental
standards through the Bank’s proposed middle-income country strategy,
and requests that a Mexican pilot project for the new strategy not be
approved as long as there is no agreement about the overall strategy.
The letter was endorsed by 186 NGOs from 60 countries at short notice. A
clear majority of the signatories is from borrowing countries.
Peter Bosshard, IRN
International NGO letter to the World Bank Board of Directors:
International Rivers Network (USA)
Centro de Investigaciones EconÑmicas yPolÌticas de AcciÑn (Mexico)
Manthan Adhyayan Kendra (India)
CEE Bankwatch Network (Georgia)
Kalpavriksh (India)
African Network for Environmental and Economic Justice (Nigeria)
June 7, 2004
International civil society letter regarding the World Bank’s safeguard
policies
International Standards for International Projects
Dear Executive Director,
Civil society groups in the South and North are concerned about proposed
measures that would weaken the social and environmental standards
applied in World Bank projects. The following letter expresses concerns
of 186 organizations from 60 countries. A clear majority of the
signatories are NGOs from borrowing countries.
Our letter responds to the Bank’s proposed new middle-income country
strategy (MIC strategy), and the pilot project in Mexico that has been
submitted to the Board. The MIC strategy proposes that future World Bank
projects in many countries rely on national social and environmental
standards rather than the Bank’s own safeguard policies. The strategy
also proposes that in such projects, the role of the Inspection Panel
will be linked to national standards rather than the Bank’s safeguard
policies. The World Bank argues that these measures would “remove
obstacles to timely quality lending”. (For a detailed critique of the
proposed MIC strategy, see International Rivers Network, The World
Bank’s Safeguard Policies Under Pressure, May 2004, available at:
<;; Civil society groups express the following concerns regarding the proposed changes: § Compliance with national and World Bank standards: It is self-evident that all World Bank projects should comply with the national standards of borrowing countries. We support a strengthening of national social and environmental standards and capacities. But being an international institution with a development mandate, the World Bank must also comply with its own safeguard policies. Ultimately, we believe that all policies of the World Bank, other international financial institutions and governments should reflect the international environmental and human rights standards that governments - i.e., the members of the World Bank - have established through the framework of the United Nations. § Confusion about applicable standards: The World Bank expects national standards to be 'equivalent' to its own safeguard policies. It is not at all clear what this means in practice. The Bank is currently preparing the Decentralized Infrastructure Reform and Development Project (DIRD project) in the state of Guanajuato/Mexico as a first pilot project for the reliance on national standards. The project would bring about a significant weakening of applicable standards. Its components may cause involuntary resettlement. Yet neither Mexico nor the state of Guanajuato have resettlement laws. The World Bank and the borrower have instead prepared an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) that is supposed to reflect the 'spirit of Bank safeguard policies'. What can affected communities do if the DIRD project violates the World Bank's Resettlement Policy (OP 4.12), but not Mexican laws and the ESMF? § Access to information: Several safeguard policies require the World Bank to provide civil society with timely access to important project documents. Examples are Environmental Assessments under OP 4.01, and instruments such as the Resettlement Plans under OP 4.12. It is unclear where civil society could get access to such documents when future projects rely on national standards rather than the Bank's safeguard policies. § Role of the Inspection Panel: In most countries, governments can be legally and politically held accountable for the projects that they implement through the judicial system and through elections. The only mechanism through which affected people can hold the World Bank accountable is the Inspection Panel. The Panel was created to investigate the role of the World Bank, and not governments, in projects that harm local communities. It is questionable whether national governments would indeed allow their actions to be investigated by an international body such as the Inspection Panel. The role of the Panel would be significantly weakened in the proposed Mexico pilot project. For the Panel to remain effective, it must continue to hold the World Bank accountable, and its point of reference must continue to be the World Bank's safeguard policies, not national standards and procedures. § Need for strengthening social and environmental standards: The experience of affected communities, World Bank evaluations and Inspection Panel investigations all document that the World Bank's safeguard policies must be strengthened and more strictly supervised and complied with. This has been confirmed by the report of the Extractive Industries Review. It will also be important to strengthen the role of the Inspection Panel in the follow-up to its investigations. We welcome the recommendations of the EIR, and the measures that private banks and export credit agencies have recently taken to strengthen their own standards. Many of these standards are still inadequate, and are often not implemented in practice. The process of strengthening the social and environmental standards of financial institutions must therefore continue. It is worrying that the World Bank management intends to undermine this trend by shying away from complying with international standards in Bank projects. § Administrative burden: The administrative inconsistencies of the procedures of international financial institutions create an unnecessary cost and burden for borrowing governments. The MIC strategy does not resolve this problem. It proposes that national standards be analyzed and certified regarding their equivalence with World Bank standards. Subjecting national standards to international certification could create additional costs and delays. In the case of the Mexico pilot project, the borrower for example had to prepare, and will need to comply with, a new Environmental and Social Management Framework, in addition to national laws and state regulations. While we support an administrative harmonization of lending procedures, we are opposed to any 'harmonization' process that will weaken social and environmental standards but will not create any real administrative benefits for borrowers. In conclusion, we support a strengthening of national social and environmental standards and capacities, but will oppose any measures that will weaken the World Bank's safeguard policies, and the accountability of the Bank regarding compliance with these policies. We strongly recommend that the Board of Directors postpone a discussion of the Mexico pilot project until it has had the opportunity to discuss a revised version of the MIC strategy. The existing safeguard policies have been adopted based on extensive consultation with international civil society. Any proposed changes that affect these policies should therefore be made public for meaningful discussions by civil society before they are presented to the Board of Directors. Thank you for your attention to these concerns. Yours sincerely, Peter Bosshard, International Rivers Network, USA Gustavo Castro Soto, Centro de Investigaciones EconÑmicas y PolÌticas de AcciÑn Comunitaria (CIEPAC), Mexico Shripad Dharmadhikary, Manthan Adhyayan Kendra, India Manana Kochladze, CEE Bankwatch Network, Georgia Ashish Kothari, Kalpavriksh, India David Ugulor, African Network for Environmental and Economic Justice (ANEEJ), Nigeria cc. James D. Wolfensohn, President, The World Bank This letter has been endorsed by the following groups and individuals: Endorsements from national and international NGOs: Jorge Carpio, Foro de Participacion Ciudadana (FOCO), Argentina Elba Stancich, Taller Ecologista, Argentina Kate Walsh, AidWatch, Australia Paul Bourke, Australia Tibet Council, Australia Cam Walker, Friends of the Earth Australia Elfriede Schachner, AGEZ - Arbeitsgemeinschaft Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, Austria Hildegard Wipfel, Koordinierungsstelle der Oesterreichischen Bischofskonferenz fuer internationale Entwicklung und Mission (KOO), Austria Zakir Kibria, BanglaPraxis, Bangladesh Arup Rahee, LOKOJ, Bangladesh Saskia Ozinga, FERN, Belgium Elisangela Paim, Amigos da Terra, Friends of the Earth Brazil Marcus Faro de Castro, Rede Brasil sobre Instituicoes Financeiras Multilaterais, Brazil Alcides Faria, Rios Vivos Coalition, Brazil Petko Kovatchec, Center for Environmental Information and Education (CEIE), Bulgaria Anelia Stefanova, Za Zemiata, Bulgaria Akong Charles Ndika, Global Village Cameroon Graham Saul, Friends of the Earth Canada Ian Baird, Global Association for People and Environment, Canada Michael Bassett, Halifax Initiative, Canada Juan Pablo Orrego, Alianza AysÈn Reserva de Vida, Chile Jenia Jofre, CODEFF (Comite Nacional pro Defensa de la Folra y Fauna), Chile Peter Hartmann, Comite Ciudadano por la Defensa de Aisen Reserva de Vida,Chile Cristian Opaso, Grupo de Accion por el Biobio (GABB), Chile Yu Xiaogang, Green Watershed, China Margarita FlÑrez, Instituto Latinoamericano de Servicios Legales (ILSA), Colombia Maria Cristina Umbarila, Fundacion Nueva Republica, Colombia Betsy Mayelis Romaßa BlandÑn, Red Nacional de Mujeres Afrocolombianas KambirÌ, olombia MarÌa Elena Unigarro Coral, Taller Abierto Cali, Colombia Manuel LÑpez & Isaac Rojas, COECOCEIBA - Amigos de la Tierra Costa Rica Klara Sutlovicova, Center for Transport and Energy, Czech Republic Pavel Pribyl, Hnuti Duha, Czech Republic Carlos Zorrilla, DECOIN, Ecuador Ricardo Navarro, CESTA - Friends of the Earth El Salvador Peep Mardiste, Friends of the Earth Estonia Tove Selin, Finnish ECA Reform Campaign, Finland SÈbastien Fourmy, Agir ici, France SÈbastien Godinot, Les Amis de la Terre, Friends of the Earth France Sharon Courtoux, Survie, France Annie Girard, RÈseau Foi & Justice Afrique-Europe, France Sophiko Akhobadze, Black Sea EcoAcademy, Georgia Nino Gujaraidze, Green Alternative, Georgia Keti Dgebuadze, International Information Center of Social Reforms, Georgia Kakha Nadiradze, World Youth Bank Network Georgia Dorothy-Grace Guerrero, Asienhaus, Germany Martin Gueck, KAIROS Europa, Germany Tsewang Norbu, Tibet Initiative Deutschland, Germany Knud Voecking, Urgewald, Germany Carole Werner, World Economy, Ecology and Development (WEED), Germany Richard Koranteng Twum Barimah, Volta Basin Development Foundation, Ghana uefa fifa Arni Finsson, Iceland Nature Conservation Association, Iceland Birsingh Sinku, B.I.R.S.A. Human Rights & Training Center, India Justin Imam, B.I.R.S.A. Mines Monitoring Center, India Bina Stanis, Chotanagpur Adivasi Sewa Samiti, India Roy Laifungbam, CORE (Centre for Organisation Research & Education), India Ramamurthi Sreedhar, Environics Trust, India Leo Saldanha, Environment Support Group, India Bulu Imam, INTACH, India Alok Agarwal, Jan Sangharsh Morcha, India Sushil Barla, Jharkhand Mines Area Coordination Committee (JMACC), India Smitu Kothari, Lokayan, India Ravi Rebbapragada & Xavier Dias, mines,minerals & PEOPLE, India Medha Patkar & Chittaroopa Palit, Narmada Bachao Andolan, India Ajita Susan George, Oman Mahila Samiti, India Sanjai Bhatt, Pairvi, India A. Latha, River Research Centre, Chalakudy River Protection Council, India Himanshu Thakkar, South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People, India Malavika Vartak, South Asia Regional Programme, Habitat International Coalition, India Shanti Sawaiyan, Women & Mining Network, India Anggara, Bandung Legal Aid Institute, Indonesia Binny Buchori, International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development (INFID), Indonesia Gita Meidita, NADI - Natural Resource And Development Initiatives, Indonesia Laura Radiconcini, Amici della Terra, Friends of the Earth Italy Jaroslava Colajacomo, Reform the World Bank Campaign, Italy Yoshihito Miyakoshi, A SEED Japan Ikuko Matsumoto, Friends of the Earth Japan Yuki Tanabe, JACSES, Japan Satoru Matsumoto, Mekong Watch, Japan Kalia Moldogazieva, Tree of Life, Kyrgyz Republic Alda Ozola, Friends of the Earth Latvia Saulius Piksrys, Community Atgaja, Lithuania Ana Golovic, Ecosens, Macedonia Wong Meng Chuo, IDEAL (Institute for Development of Alternative Living), Malaysia Julian Manduca, Moviment ghall-Ambjent, Friends of the Earth Malta Arturo Morales Tirado, Sociedad Audubon de MÈxico, Guanajuato, MÈxico Jose Manuel Arias Rodriguez, AsociaciÑn Ecologica Santo TomÀs A.C., Mexico Susana Cruickshank, Equipo Pueblo, Mexico Rodolfo Chavez Galindo, Frente por los Derechos Economicos Socio-Ambientales yCulturales de los Pueblos, Mexico Fernando Melo, Trasparencia Sociedad Civil, Mexico Anabela Lemos, JustiÃa Ambiental, MoÃambique Daniel Ribeiro, Livaningo, MoÃambique Bertchen Kohrs, Earthlife Namibia Prabin Man Singh, Arun Concerned Group, Nepal Bed Prakash Bhattarai, Kali Gandaki A Affected Concerned Committee, Nepal Arun Kumar Shrestha, National Concerns Society, Nepal Nepal Forum of Environmental Journalists (NEFEJ), Nepal Arjun Dhakal, Nepal Network for Sustaininable Development (NNSD), Nepal Roy Laifungbam, South Asian Solidarity for Rivers and Peoples (SARP), Nepal Gopal Siwakoti 'Chintan', Water and Energy Users' Federation-Nepal (WAFED), Nepal Filka Sekulova, A SEED Europe, Netherlands Johan Frijns, BankTrack, Netherlands Henneke Brink, Both Ends, Netherlands Ricardo Navarro & Janneke Bruil, Friends of the Earth International, Netherlands Donald Pols, Friends of the Earth Netherlands Gordon Abiama, Africa Centre for Geoclassical Economics, Nigeria George-Hill Anthony, Commonwealth of Niger Delta Youths, Nigeria Uche Igwe, Community Level Environmental Action Network (CLEAN Nigeria), Nigeria Aliyu Noma Usman, Dam Communities Coalition, Nigeria Bassey Ekpenyong, Initiative Development Network (IDN), Nigeria, Akpan Anthony Johnson, Pan African Vision for the Environment (PAVE), Nigeria Chibuzo Ekwekwuo, Public & Private Rights Watch, Nigeria Mimidoo Achakpa, womens right to education programme education programme, Nigeria Tonje Folkestad, FIVAS (Association for International Water and Forest Studies), Norway Muhammad Nauman, Creed Alliance, Pakistan Sarah Siddiqi, Karachi Administration Women Welfare Society (KAWWS), Pakistan Damien Ase, Center for Environmental Law and Community Rights/Friends of the Earth Papua New Guinea Jorge Urusoff, Coordinadora de Barrios Afectados por la Entidad Binacional YacyretÀ, Paraguay ElÌas DÌaz Peßa, Sobrevivencia, Friends of the Earth Paraguay Carlos Abanto, Asociacion Civil Labor - Amigos de la Tierra Peru Nilton Deza, Ecovida, Peru Joan Carling, Cordillera Peoples Alliance, Philippines Lidy B. Nacpil, Freedom from Debt Coalition, Philippines Clemente Bautista, Kalikasan-People's Network for the Environment,Philippines Leonor Briones, Social Watch Philippines Joji Carino, Tebtebba Foundation, Philippines/United Kingdom Andrzej Gula, Institute for Environmental Tax Reform, Poland Robert Cyglicki, Polish Green Net, Poland Piotr Dynowski, Polish-Tibetan Friendship Association, Poland Renato Roldao, EURONATURA - Centre for Environmental Law and Sustainable Development, Portugal Aboubacry Mbodj, Co-ordination for Senegal River Basin (CODESEN), Senegal Demba Moussa Dembele, Forum for African Alternatives, Senegal Rencontre Africaine pour la DÈfense des Droits de l'Homme (RADDHO), Senegal Peter Mihok, Center for Environmental Public Advocacy (CEPA), Slovak Republic Liane Greeff, Environmental Monitoring Group, South Africa Philip Owen, Geasphere, South Africa Gillian Addison, groundwork, South Africa Rosa Sala, Intermon Oxfam, Spain Hemantha Withanage, Centre for Environmental Justice, Sri Lanka Sri Lankan Working Group on Trade and IFIs, Sri Lanka Penny Davies, Diakonia, Sweden GÆran Ek, Swedish Society for Nature Conservation, Sweden Christine Eberlein, Berne Declaration, Switzerland Sonja Ribi, Pro Natura - Friends of the Earth Switzerland Peter Niggli, Swiss Coalition of Development Organizations, Switzerland Caroline Morel, Swissaid, Switzerland Benedict Chacha Peter, Foundation HELP, Tanzania Prasittiporn Kan-onsri (Noi), Community University, Assembly of the Poor, Thailand Chana Maung & Carol Ransley, EarthRights International (Southeast Asia), Thailand Shalmali Guttal, Focus on the Global South, Thailand/India Chainarong Sretthachau, Southeast Asia Rivers, Thailand Sena Adessou, Jeunes Volontaires pour l'Environnement, Togo Frank Muramuzi, National Association of Professional Environmentalists, Uganda O.C Afunaduula, Save Bujagali Crusade, Uganda Francis Kidega, Uganda Youth Network, Uganda Hannah Ellis, Friends of the Earth England, Wales & Northern Ireland Najib Afsar, Anti Mangla Dam Extension Action Committee, United Kingdom/Jammu Kashmir Jeff Powell, Bretton Woods Project, United Kingdom Nicholas Hildyard, Corner House, United Kingdom Marcus Colchester, Forest Peoples Programme, United Kingdom Geoff Nettleton, Indigenous Peoples Links, United Kingdom Richard Harkinson, Minewatch, United Kingdom Clare Joy, World Development Movement, United Kingdom Rick Rowden, ActionAid USA Bruce Jenkins, Bank Information Center, USA Beverly Bell, Center for Economic Justice, USA Nancy Alexander, Citizens' Network on Essential Services, USA Stephen Hellinger, The Development GAP, USA Payal Sampat, Earthworks/Mineral Policy Center, USA Bruce Rich, Environmental Defense, USA Jon Sohn, Friends of the Earth USA Paula Palmer, Global Response, USA Douglas Norlen, Pacific Environment, USA Wenonah Hauter, Public Citizen, USA Michael Brune, Rainforest Action Network, USA Douglas Hellinger, Structural Adjustment Participatory Review International Network (SAPRIN), USA Lhadon Thetong, Students for a Free Tibet, USA Daphne Wysham, Sustainable Energy & Economy Network, USA Robert Jacobs, Tibet Committee of Fairbanks, USA Tashi Tsering, Tibet Justice Center, USA Sonam Wangdu, U.S. Tibet Committee, USA Mark Dubois, WorldWise, USA Individual endorsements: Jeannie Martin, University of Western Sydney, Australia Geraldo Browne Ribeiro Filho, Brazil Prof. Jan Andersson, WestfÄlische Wilhelms-UniversitÄt MÝnster, Germany Susan George, Author and Associate Director, Transnational Institute, France Heidi Hawkins, University of Cape Town, South Africa John Riggs, South Africa Prof. Angana Chatterji, California Institute of Integral Studies, USA Prof. Jonathan Fox, University of California, USA Arif Gamal, USA/Sudan Rafael Friedmann, USA 7. EIA REPORT OF THE PROJECT ON "PROCESSING OF THE SAND DEPOSIT IN KHASHURI REGION" BY "PROGRESS-2" LTD Source: "Sakartvelos Respublica" ("Republic of Georgia"), June 3, 2004 In accordance with the Georgian legislation, "Progress-2" Ltd. submitted EIA report to the Ministry of Environment of Georgia to obtain an environmental permit for the activity of second category – Processing of the Sand Deposit in Khashuri Region. EIA report is available at the press-center of the Ministry of Environment (68, Kostava str., VI floor) and at the Department of Environmental Permits and State Ecological Expertise (87, Paliashvili Str., Tel: 25 02 19). Interested stakeholders can analyze the document and present their comments and considerations until July 27, 2004. Public hearing will be held on July 27, 2004 at 12:00, at the conference hall of the Ministry of Environment. 8. EIA REPORT OF THE PROJECT ON " PROJECT ON CAPTURE AND BOTTLING OF THE MINERAL SPRING IN TBILISI " BY "PROGRESS-2" LTD Source: "Sakartvelos Respublica" ("Republic of Georgia"), June 3, 2004 In accordance with the Georgian legislation, entrepreneur Bagrat Mezurnishvili – Black Georgia submitted EIA report to the Ministry of Environment of Georgia to obtain an environmental permit for the activity of second category – Project on Capture and Bottling of the Mineral Spring in Tbilisi. EIA report is available at the press-center of the Ministry of Environment (68, Kostava str., VI floor) and at the Department of Environmental Permits and State Ecological Expertise (87, Paliashvili Str., Tel: 25 02 19). Interested stakeholders can analyze the document and present their comments and considerations until July 27, 2004. Public hearing will be held on July 27, 2004 at 12:00, at the conference hall of the Ministry of Environment. 9. THE INTERNET CONFERENCE Dear colleague, As you might know the development of the "Georgian Business Code of Conduct" within the Business Ethics Program is coming to an end. On June 7 2004, under the same program we started up the web conference on the topic: "Georgian Business Code of Conduct Implementation" on The Internet Conference will discuss the issues of the implementation of Georgian Business Code of Conduct in Georgia. The program of seminars will be announced for the businesses. Those organizations and/or individuals who have websites can provide information support of the web conference. More detailed information you can find here: ;act=ST&f=7&t=56. Please note, we have now 32 supporters. So you and your colleagues can visit the website, register and take part in the discussions. With respect, Tariel Zivzivadze Business Ethics Program Director - AmCham Georgia Tel: +995 77 73 79 64; Mail: [email protected]; Web: -- ******************************************* CENN INFO Caucasus Environmental NGO Network (CENN) Tel: ++995 32 92 39 46 Fax: ++995 32 92 39 47 E-mail: [email protected] URL:

Armenia cannot rival Azerbaijan in economy – Azeri leader
MPA news agency
9 Jun 04
Baku, 9 June: “The world considers Armenia to be an aggressor. Having
such a title in the 21st century does not do anyone credit,”
Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev said during his meeting on
8 June with refugees and displaced people in Mingacevir western
Azerbaijan. Armenia is unable to rival Azerbaijan in the economic or
other spheres, he said.
“The resolution of the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict is possible only
within the framework of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity. If the
peace negotiations fail, Baku will resort to other means to liberate
its lands,” Aliyev said.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress