updated
AZERBAIJAN NEWSLETTER
The Massacre of Khojaly: Armenia's Crime Against Humanity
Nine years ago, the name of the Azerbaijani town of Khojaly (Xocali),
previously virtually unknown, became a symbol of unprecedented brutality
against peaceful civilians and crimes against humanity. On February 26,
1992, Armenian armed forces backed by Russia's 366-th Infantry Regiment
massacred more than 700 civilians and destroyed the town in what the Human
Rights Watch called "the largest massacre to date in the conflict."
The extent of the cruelty of this massacre against women, children and
elderly is shocking. Nine years after, for people of Azerbaijan, the word
Khojaly is synonymous with pain and sorrow.
Memorial, a Russian human rights group, reported that "scores of the corpses
bore traces of profanation. Doctors on a hospital train in Agdam noted no
less than four corpses that had been scalped and one that had been beheaded.
... and one case of live scalping:"
Various other witnesses reported horrifying details of the massacre. The
late Azerbaijani journalist Chingiz Mustafayev was first to film the
aftermath of what happened in Khojaly. "Some children were found with
severed ears; the skin had been cut from the left side of an elderly woman's
face; and men had been scalped," wrote Mustafayev.
The massacre of Khojaly set a pattern of destruction and ethnic cleansing
methodically carried out by the Armenian armed forces. On November 29, 1993,
Newsweek quoted a senior US Government official as saying: 'What we see now
is a systematic destruction of every village in their way. It's vandalism."
The massacre of Khojaly revealed to the world the essence of Armenian ethnic
expansionism and the true goals of the war waged against the people of
Azerbaijan. According to Azerbaijan's President Heydar Aliyev, "the policy
of genocide has become an integral part of the Armenian aggression against
Azerbaijan."
In his address to the nation, President Aliyev said: "Khojaly saw
unprecedented atrocities and brutal massacre of civilians. To prevent such
atrocities from happening anywhere in the world, we should work hard to tell
the international community the truth about Khojaly, and all the injustice
and hardship suffered by the people of Azerbaijan in the course of the
Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict. The international community should voice its
clear and unambiguous judgement."
Every year religious leaders of Azerbaijan's Christian, Jewish, and Muslim
communities issue appeals on the eve of commemoration of the massacre of
Khojaly. They urge the international community to condemn the February
26,1992 bloodshed, facilitate liberation of the occupied territories and
repatriation of the displaced communities.
"We appeal to the international community with pain and hope," said a
statement by survivors of Khojaly. Years later, those residents of Khojaly,
who survived the massacre, are appealing to hold Armenia responsible for
this crime.
"The ignorance of the international community allows Armenia to avoid its
responsibility for aggression," said Azerbaijan's Ambassador Pashayev. "It
seems hypocritical that the world's media is now focused on the events at
the end of World War I in the region, while at the same time ignoring the
massacre by Armenians of Azerbaijanis in Khojaly."
The tragedy of Khojaly stands as the most vivid reminder of the consequences
of Armenian aggression and policy of ethnic cleansing. Its survivors are
still scattered among one million refugees and displaced persons in camps
around Azerbaijan, and Armenia still occupies 20% of our country.
The world should know about Khojaly!
Azerbaijan Newsletter is published by
The Embassy of the Republic of Azerbaijan
927 15th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005
Tel: (202) 842-0001 Fax: (202) 842-0004
Www.azembassy.com
Contact: Elin Suleymanov
Azeri president says no peace deal to be
signed in Paris
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Feb 24, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan
Baku, 24 February: Former state foreign policy advisor Vafa Quluzada
delivered a speech today at the Milli Maclis [Azerbaijani parliament] debate
on the settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. He said that all the
settlement proposals by the OSCE Minsk Group were unacceptable.
At the same time, he believes that this is a favourable moment to settle the
problem peacefully. Quluzada substantiated his position by the fact that
Russia had changed its attitude towards Azerbaijan for the better after
Vladimir Putin came to power.
As for a military option, Quluzada believes that "it is possible to liberate
the territory through war, but this will be difficult". In addition, the USA
and European countries will take a tough position if combat operations are
brought to Nagornyy Karabakh and a threat is posed to the security of the
Armenian population.
Quluzada asked the president whether a peace agreement would be signed
during the forthcoming meeting between [Azerbaijani President Heydar] Aliyev
and [Armenian President Robert] Kocharyan in Paris, and Heydar Aliyev
replied "no".
Source: Turan news agency, Baku, in Russian 1400 gmt 24 Feb 01
OSCE KARABAKH PEACE PROPOSALS LEAKED
The Azerbaijani official press on 21 February published in Russian and
Azerbaijani what it claims is the text of the three successive draft
proposals for resolving the Karabakh conflict offered by the OSCE Minsk
Group in July 1997, December 1997 and November 1998, RFE/RL's Baku bureau
reported. Also on 21 February, RFE/RL's Yerevan bureau reported that it
and several other Armenian media outlets have received an Armenian
translation of the five-page November 1998 OSCE proposal that Azerbaijan
and the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic form a "common state." Baku
rejected that proposal. The leaked document confirms that the proposal
gives the unrecognized republic de facto independent status, with the
right to its own constitution and armed forces and to veto any legislation
enacted by the central parliament in Baku. The document contains a
separate provision on the withdrawal of Armenian forces from occupied
Azerbaijani territories contiguous to Nagorno-Karabakh. A senior Armenian
diplomatic source confirmed the authenticity of the document, while a
Karabakh official noted that the Armenian translation contains minor
inaccuracies. LF
Azeri daily rejects Minsk Group proposals,
calls for an Azeri plan
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Feb 23, 2001
[subhead] Three proposals of the Minsk Group
On 21 February 2001, the newspaper Azarbaycan, which is the main organ of
the Azerbaijani government, published the texts of three plans for the
settlement of the armed conflict in Nagornyy Karabakh, which were proposed
by the cochairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group.
[Passage omitted: details of the proposals]
It should be noted that we have not actually covered all the plans, which
can be described as an open mockery of Azerbaijan and the trampling on its
laws and sovereignty.
[subhead] Why have they been silent so far?
As can be seen, all the three proposals contradict not only the accepted
norms of international law, but the Azerbaijani Constitution. It has been
said that the Minsk Group has not presented anything new, because all the
three options are an attempt to formulate the same idea in different ways.
If option one [comprehensive settlement option] is to be described as the
acceptable one, then the option two [stage-by-stage option] and option three
[common stage option] owing to the vague and generalized nature of their
context, can be described as mere contempt.
After the publication of the cochairmen's proposals, it became clear that we
should not expect any new ideas from the Minsk Group. It cannot be ruled out
that new talks will only lead to further modification of the same proposals
and they will not change in essence.
Why were the Minsk Group proposals published today? It could be said that
the pressure was exerted on Azerbaijan compelled the authorities to enlist
the public support and show that they disagree with the plans which is
against our national interests.
It cannot be ruled out that the renewed activities of France and Russia are
directly connected with the increasing pressure exerted on Azerbaijan.
Telephone conversations between Chirac and Putin, Chirac and Kocharyan,
Putin and Kocharyan, and Putin and Aliyev concerning the settlement of the
Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict defnitely point to the exertion of pressure on
Baku.
[subhead] Four years lost
Now, we can see the real reasons behind the resignation of the former
foreign minister, Tofiq Zulfuqarov; the former state adviser, Vafa Quluzada;
and the former head of the presidential secretariat, Eldar Namazov. Having
given the green light for the publication of the three options proposed by
the Minsk Group, the head of state is now paying meticulous attention to the
details of the proposals.
The resignation of the former officials, for the first time, has fully
clarified the negotiating process and, as it turned out, we find ourselves
in a position not better than the one on the battle filed.
[Passage omitted: Armenian, Karabakh reactions to the publication of
proposals in Azerbaijani]
[subhead] What to be gained by publishing the proposals?
One can see what made Heydar Aliyev to take this step. One thing is clear.
The authorities have finally come to appreciate the need for gaining, or
even leaning on, public support. In addition, the officials would like to
demonstrate to the world that Azerbaijanis will never agree to the options
and the shameful proposals.
On the other hand, the head of state openly, as [Nagornyy Karabakh Republic
Foreign Minister Naira] Melkumyan said, exposed the Minsk Group and made
them to understand that the time has come for them to look for a new
direction and a new proposal which can be accepted by both sides within the
framework of the Minsk Group - a group which has discredited itself and its
destructive activities can lead to instability in the region.
We can be sure about one thing: attempts to insist on the current proposals,
even on modified version of the proposals, are tantamount to exerting
deliberate pressure on Azerbaijan which runs counter to our national
interests and the current norms of international law. The publication of the
proposals proved to some extent that the activities of the OSCE Minsk Groups
do not correspond to the activities of international organizations,
including the UN. The cochairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group clearly ignored
four resolutions of the UN Security Council and the decision of 53 states
made at the Lisbon summit.
The time has come for Azerbaijan to independently draw up its own proposal
for the settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. We have to put
forward a solid proposal and not be afraid if it is rejected. No-one can
prevent Azerbaijan from taking decisive steps to restore its territorial
integrity, which is in line with all norms of international law.
Source: Zerkalo, Baku, in Russian 23 Feb 01 pp1,2
Caucasus: Azerbaijan And Armenia Detail
Karabakh Peace Plan
By Emil Danielyan/Jean-Christophe Peuch
The details of an international peace plan for Nagorno-Karabakh have been
made public in both Azerbaijan and Armenia. Until now the plan has been
treated as a classified document, and it is not clear why it has abruptly
emerged. But RFE/RL correspondents Emil Danielyan and Jean-Christophe
Peuch report that the plan comes to light at a time when momentum for
solving the 13-year-old conflict appears to be gaining speed.
Prague, 22 February 2001 (RFE/RL) -- Media outlets in Baku yesterday
released for the first time details of a proposed international plan to
settle the 13-year-old territorial dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan
over the Nagorno-Karabakh enclave.
The plan is the latest of three peace proposals drafted since 1997 by the
so-called "Minsk Group" of the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe, or OSCE. It provides for the creation of a "common state"
between Azerbaijan and Karabakh. The idea of a common state had previously
been rejected by Azerbaijan as unacceptable.
Armenian and Karabakh officials familiar with the peace process confirmed
the authenticity of the document, which was published along with the two
earlier peace proposals. Those plans were rejected by Armenia.
The common-state plan was also published yesterday by Armenia's "Aravot"
newspaper.
Under the common-state plan, the enclave would be placed under a loose
confederation with Azerbaijan, but would have de facto independence. In
addition, Karabakh would enjoy the internationally recognized status of a
republic, with its own constitution, armed forces, and power to veto any
legislation passed in Baku.
It's not clear why the plan, which until now has been treated as a highly
secret document, was made public. But its publication comes at a time when
efforts to resolve the conflict appear to be gaining momentum.
Analysts say President Heidar Aliev may have ordered that the plan be made
public in order to test his population's reaction to it.
Rustam Mamedov, an official with the presidential administration's social
and political affairs department, tells RFE/RL that Azerbaijanis should be
made aware of contents of the OSCE peace proposals for the enclave:
"The OSCE has so far drafted three proposals: the so-called package plan,
the so-called step-by-step plan, and the so-called common-state version.
The Azerbaijani population must broadly debate this. The concrete results
of talks between [Azerbaijani] President Aliev and [Armenian President
Robert] Kocharian will be presented to the public, and the organic links
that exist between this debate and [the] results [of the Aliev-Kocharian
talks] will become clear. Everything must proceed through the heart and
will of our people."
The Azerbaijani parliament is scheduled to hold a debate on the peace
proposals tomorrow (23 February). But after a meeting today in Baku to
discuss the three existing peace proposals, representatives of more than
40 political parties and social organizations concluded that all three
plans are unacceptable for Azerbaijan.
The Karabakh dispute broke out in 1988 when the mainly ethnic Armenian
enclave decided to secede from Azerbaijan. The conflict that followed has
killed thousands on each side and has turned 800,000 Azerbaijanis into
refugees. Despite a 1994 cease-fire, the two countries are still
officially at war.
Aliev and Armenian President Kocharian were said to be very close to an
agreement in 1999. But the murder of Armenian Prime Minister Vazgen
Sargsian and several other officials in October of that year brought the
process to a dead end. Some analysts have even speculated that the
killings may have been masterminded by people opposed to a peace agreement
with Azerbaijan.
Speaking to reporters at the Council of Europe in Strasbourg recently (25
January), both Aliev and Kocharian hinted at recent progress that could
lead them closer to what they called "mutually acceptable compromises."
These unspecified compromises, the two presidents said, could in turn
serve as a basis for a future settlement of the dispute.
Asked at the time whether his country would agree to the creation of a
common state between Azerbaijan and Karabakh, Aliev declined to comment.
A Western diplomat close to the peace talks told RFE/RL that none of the
existing three proposals drafted by the Minsk Group is likely to be
endorsed by the negotiating parties.
The diplomat, who asked not to be named, said: "If there is an agreement,
it is unlikely it will be one of the three proposals as they are. It will
be something different that will perhaps include new elements."
Aliev's former diplomatic adviser, Vafa Guluzade, told the Azerbaijani
news agency Turan yesterday that a fourth plan -- details of which are
still unknown -- might appear in the near future.
The agency also quoted unidentified diplomats as saying that Aliev and
Kocharian agreed on some basic principles that could serve as a basis for
a new peace proposal when they met in Paris last month (26 January) with
French President Jacques Chirac. France co-chairs the Minsk Group along
with the United States and Russia.
Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian said last week that Chirac had
suggested general principles for solving the conflict and that agreement
on them will place a solution within reach.
Kocharian and Aliev are due to travel to Paris next month for their 15th
face-to-face meeting in two years.
Officials close to the negotiations told RFE/RL that the last round of
talks in Paris have renewed hopes for a decisive breakthrough in the peace
process. These officials also note that both Aliev and Kocharian are
committed to reaching a peace agreement before their presidential mandates
expire in 2003.
Chirac discussed the Karabakh issue by telephone with his Russian
counterpart, Vladimir Putin, on 19 February. Putin and Aliev also reviewed
the latest developments in the peace process during a telephone
conversation on Tuesday.
"The New York Times" reported earlier this week that Chirac was what it
described as "guardedly optimistic about a possible settlement" in a
lengthy phone conversation with U.S. President George W. Bush early this
month (1 February). The paper said relief agencies are already putting
together an aid package that would be part of a future peace treaty.
Armenian officials have repeatedly said they will not agree to any major
concessions, apart from those envisaged by the common-state plan.
Kocharian told reporters last month in Strasbourg that the common-state
plan should serve as a basis for future negotiations.
"How could we find a balance between territorial integrity and
self-determination of people, between these two principles that are
equally important in terms of international law? We think that the right
to self-determination has been legally confirmed in Nagorno-Karabakh. But,
nonetheless, we're looking for the possibility of finding a compromise
between those two principles. And we believe that the idea of a common
state is precisely a way to find a just compromise."
Article 1 of the published peace proposals stipulates that Karabakh and
Azerbaijan shall form a common state to be governed by a joint commission
comprised of representatives of the two entities. Neither of them can
unilaterally change the provisions regarding the common state. The
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic would itself form its own executive,
legislative, and judicial branches as well as a national guard and police.
The document states that "the Azerbaijani army, security and police forces
will not be allowed to enter the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh without the
consent of the Nagorno-Karabakh authorities."
Furthermore, under the plan, "Azerbaijani laws, regulations and executive
directives shall have a legal force in Nagorno-Karabakh so long as they do
not contradict the latter's constitution and laws."
Karabakh residents could travel abroad with specially marked Azerbaijani
passports. Only the government in Stepanakert would be empowered to grant
such passports and residency permits. Armenian would be the new Karabakh
republic's main official language.
The package of proposals includes a separate agreement on military
disengagement. Armenian and Azerbaijani forces would retreat from their
current positions north and east of Karabakh to create a buffer zone
controlled by a multi-national peacekeeping force under the OSCE. Karabakh
Armenian forces would then gradually withdraw from six districts in
Azerbaijan which they seized during the 1991-1994 war.
Overall responsibility for peace implementation would rest with a
permanent mixed commission headed by a representative of the Minsk Group.
France, Russia, and the U.S. would act as guarantors of the proposed
settlement, while the OSCE or the UN Security Council would be given a
mandate to take military action to ensure the parties' compliance with
their obligations.
(RFE/RL Azerbaijani Service contributed to this report)
Copyright 2001 RFE/RL
Azerbaijan:
DISAPPOINTMENT WITH PEACE NEGOTIATIONS
By Farhad Mammadov
Azerbaijani community is concerned by the results of bilateral
negotiations between Heidar Aliev and Robert Kocharian.
The negotiations for the regulation of Armenian-Azerbaijani
conflict that activated since the beginning of this year with the
initiative of Russia and France still continue. Recently a
representative of the U.S. Department of State has given
information that the next meeting of Aliev and Kocharian will be
held at the Armenian-Azerbaijani borders. But the Azerbaijani side
has denied this information and later the Armenian side has stated
that the next meeting will be held in Paris with the moderation of
the French president Jack Sherack, as well.
On February 20 2001, there was a telephone conversation
between the Russian president Vladimir Putin and presidents of
France, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. The official statement says that
the main subject of discussion was the Karabakh conflict. It is
interesting that there are not seen the role of the third
co-chairman- the U.S. at the diplomatic activation held around the
Karabakh conflict. According to the newspaper "The New York
Times", "Jack Sherack gave information to the American president"
about the negotiations held in France.
Azerbaijani community is observing the negotiations with great
concern. For several days the local newspapers are stressing that
Heidar Aliev has given his agreement to concessions that do not
correspond to Azerbaijan's interests in Paris. Concretely, it is
stated that Heidar Aliev has agreed with accepting the "common
state" suggestions proposed by the OSCE Minsk Group in 1998 with
small changes. That suggestion was rejected by the Azerbaijani
side, but Armenia agrees to sign it.
Informations at the local press and concerns of the community
have made the government leadership to give explanation. Chairman
of the parliament Murtuz Alasgerov has stated that "Nobody has
hold confidential talks in Paris and recently the president Aliev
will present the main point of the negotiations held in France to
the parliament discussion".
On February 21 2001, the official newspapers have,
unexpectedly, published the text of both three proposals of the
Minsk group until now. Nevertheless, these proposals were not
given to public discussion completely until now. Let's remember
that the first two proposals of the Minsk Group were rejected by
Armenia. From this viewpoint it is expected that the last
negotiations be held just around the third suggestion. According
to that suggestion, Upper Karabakh should be given a state status
and formed a common state with it within Azerbaijan's
internationally recognized borders. And there is nothing about
releasing Azerbaijan's regions- Shusha and Lachin from Armenian
occupation in the suggestion.
Putting on the media the suggestions of the Minsk Group
following to the telephone conversation among the president of
Russia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and France on the 20th of February
does not seem by chance. Perhaps, Aliev is interested in learning
the reaction of society to the "common state" suggestion before
the next negotiation. And there is not still stated the date of
the next talks between Aliev and Kocharian. If the efforts of
Russian-French pairs give any results and are got concrete results
in the settlement of Upper Karabakh conflict, the role of the
third co-chairman- the U.S. in the region will weaken.
It is notable that during his visit to Baku the Russian
president Vladimir Putin had stated that he is ready to be "a
guarantor of the agreement that the sides will get". And it means
that if the conflict is settled with the moderation of Russia and
France, the Russian soldiers will realize the role of a peace
guarantor at the conflict zone. And France has promised a
financial support of the European Union to the both sides.
STINA news agency
The Network of Independent Journalists
for Central and Eastern Europe - Weekly service
Issue No. 212 - February 23 , 2001.
OSCE's "common state" proposal for Karabakh,
as published in Azeri paper
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Feb 23, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani newspaper Bakinskiy Rabochiy entitled "On the
principles for a comprehensive settlement of the Nagornyy Karabakh armed
conflict"
Armenia, Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Karabakh, having firmly resolved to bring
about a peaceful settlement of the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict in line with
the norms and principles of international laws, including the principles of
the territorial integrity of states and self-determination of peoples, agree
on the following:
I. Agreement on the status of Nagornyy Karabakh
The sides will conclude an agreement on the status of Nagornyy Karabakh
which will include the following provisions:
Nagornyy Karabakh is a state and territorial entity in the form of a
republic and forms a common state with Azerbaijan within its internationally
recognized borders.
Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Karabakh will sign an agreement on delimitation of
the subjects under their jurisdiction and the mutual delegation of
responsibilities between the relevant bodies of state power which will have
the force of constitutional law.
Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Karabakh will form a joint committee, which will
include representatives of the presidents, prime ministers and parliamentary
chairmen, to determine policy and their activities in the sphere where there
is joint jurisdiction.
The appropriate missions of Nagornyy Karabakh and Azerbaijan are set up in
Baku and Stepanakert to maintain contacts and for the coordination of joint
actions.
Nagornyy Karabakh will have the right to have direct foreign ties in the
economic, trade, scientific, cultural, sporting and humanitarian fields with
foreign states and with regional and international organizations connected
with these problems, with the corresponding missions abroad. Political
parties and public organizations in Nagornyy Karabakh will have the right to
establish ties with the political parties and public organizations of
foreign states.
Nagornyy Karabakh takes part in implementing Azerbaijan's foreign policy on
issues which have a bearing on its interests. Decisions cannot be taken on
such issues without the agreement of the two sides.
The Nagornyy Karabakh government can have its representatives in
Azerbaijan's embassies or consular establishments in foreign states in which
they have special interests, and can also send their experts as part of
Azerbaijani delegations taking part in international talks if they concern
Nagornyy Karabakh's interests.
The borders of Nagornyy Karabakh will correspond to the borders of the
former Nagornyy Karabakh Autonomous Region. Any possible clarifications or
changes in them would be the subject of special mutual agreements between
Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Karabakh.
The borders between Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Karabakh will be mutually open
for the free movement of unarmed citizens. People travelling or having
business links will not be liable to pay customs or other duties. The
granting of the right to permanent residence will fall within the competence
of the appropriate governments.
Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Karabakh will not use force or the threat of force
to settle disagreements.
Should quarrels or disagreements arise which cannot be overcome within the
framework of the joint committee, the sides may ask the OSCE
chairman-in-office to give a consultative opinion which will be taken into
account when a final decision is adopted.
The status of Nagornyy Karabakh will also include the rights and privileges
listed below, how they will be formulated in the agreement on the status of
Nagornyy Karabakh approved by the Minsk Conference.
1. Nagornyy Karabakh will have its own constitution, adopted by the people
of Nagornyy Karabakh at a referendum. This constitution will incorporate
articles of the agreement on the status of Nagornyy Karabakh. Azerbaijan
will amend its constitution accordingly to incorporate this agreement.
The provisions of this agreement, or those parts of the Nagornyy Karabakh
and Azerbaijan constitutions which incorporate it, cannot be changed without
the agreement of all three sides.
2. The constitution and laws of Nagornyy Karabakh operate on the territory
of Nagornyy Karabakh. The laws, regulations and executive decisions of
Azerbaijan apply to the territory of Nagornyy Karabakh if they do not
contradict the latter's constitution and laws.
3. Nagornyy Karabakh will have its own flag, coat of arms and anthem.
4. In accordance with its constitution, Nagornyy Karabakh will form its own
legislative, executive and judicial bodies.
5. Citizens of Nagornyy Karabakh will have an Azerbaijani passport with a
special "Nagornyy Karabakh" stamp as their proof of identity. Only the
government of Nagornyy Karabakh will have the right to issue such passports.
Citizens of Nagornyy Karabakh who are of Armenian extraction will be able to
emigrate to Armenia and, should they move there permanently, to obtain
Armenian citizenship in accordance with the laws of this country.
6. The population of Nagornyy Karabakh has the right to elect
representatives to the Azerbaijani parliament and to participate in the
election of an Azerbaijani president.
7. Nagornyy Karabakh will be a free economic zone, it will have the right to
issue its own currency, which will be in circulation along with the
Azerbaijani currency, and also to issue its own stamps.
8. Nagornyy Karabakh will have the right to free and unimpeded transport
links and communications with Armenia and Azerbaijan.
9. Nagornyy Karabakh will have a national guard (security forces) and police
forces, formed on a volunteer basis. These forces cannot operate outside
Nagornyy Karabakh without the agreement of the Azerbaijani government.
10. The army, security forces and police of Azerbaijan will not have the
right to enter Nagornyy Karabakh territory without the agreement of the
Nagornyy Karabakh authorities.
11. Armenian is the main official language in Nagornyy Karabakh and the
second official language is Azeri. Its citizens can also use other native
languages in all official and unofficial instances.
12. The Nagornyy Karabakh budget will consist of funds received from its own
sources. The Nagornyy Karabakh government will encourage and guarantee
capital investment by Azerbaijani and foreign firms and individuals.
II. Concerning the Lacin [Lachin] corridor
The issue of use of the Lacin corridor by Nagornyy Karabakh to ensure
unimpeded links between Nagornyy Karabakh and Armenia will be the subject of
a separate agreement if other decisions concerning a special regime for
Lacin District are not adopted with the agreement of Azerbaijan and Nagornyy
Karabakh. Lacin District should permanently remain a completely
demilitarized zone.
III. Concerning the town of Susa [Shusha] and Shaumyan [Asagi Agcakand]
The sides agree that all Azerbaijani refugees will be able to return to
their places of permanent residence in the town of Susa. Their security will
be guaranteed by the appropriate authorities of Nagornyy Karabakh. They will
have the same rights as all the citizens of Nagornyy Karabakh, including the
right to establish political parties, to take part in elections at all
levels, to be elected to state legislative bodies and local self-government
bodies and to be accepted into state service, including service in
law-enforcement bodies.
Armenian refugees will also receive the same rights when they return to
Shaumyan.
Residents of Susa and the town of Shaumyan will have completely unimpeded
access by roads, communications and other links to the rest of Azerbaijan
and Nagornyy Karabakh.
The authorities of Nagornyy Karabakh and Azerbaijan will cooperate in
accommodating an OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights
representative office in the town of Susa and the town of Shaumyan and will
cooperate in their work.
The agreement on the status of Nagornyy Karabakh will be signed by the three
sides and will enter into force after it is endorsed by the Minsk
Conference.
IV. Agreement on cessation of the armed conflict
The sides agree that the agreement on cessation of the armed conflict will
include the following provisions:
I. The sides repudiate the threat of force and the use of force to settle
disputes among themselves. They resolve all such disputes, including those
which might arise in connection with implementation of the agreement on
cessation of the armed conflict, using peaceful means, primarily, through
direct talks or within the framework of the OSCE Minsk process.
II. The sides withdraw their armed forces in accordance with the following
provisions and as is laid out in detail in Appendix 1 [no appendices are
published in this issue of the newspaper]:
A. At the first stage the forces along the current contact line east and
south of Nagornyy Karabakh will be withdrawn to the lines indicated in
Appendix 1 and in line with the timetable published there, taking proper
account of the recommendations of the high-level planning group with the aim
of creating the possibility for the initial deployment of a vanguard
detachment of multinational OSCE forces in a militarily justified buffer
zone, to separate the sides along this line and ensure security during the
second stage of the withdrawal.
B. At the second stage the forces are withdrawn simultaneously and in line
with the timetable contained in Appendix 1 in the following way:
(1) Any Armenian forces deployed on the borders of the Republic of Armenia
are withdrawn to within the confines of these borders.
(2) Nagornyy Karabakh forces are withdrawn to within the confines of the
1988 borders of the Nagornyy Karabakh Autonomous Region (NKAR), with the
exception of Lacin District, until agreement is reached on unimpeded links
between Nagornyy Karabakh and Armenia.
(3) Azerbaijani forces are withdrawn beyond the line indicated in Appendix 1
on the basis of the recommendations of the high-level planning group, and
are withdrawn from any Armenian territory.
(4) Heavy weapons are withdrawn from the places indicated in Appendix 1 on
the basis of the recommendations of the high-level planning group. This is
to be observed by the OSCE peacekeeping operation and in a way which
respects the demands for transparency and accountability laid out in this
appendix.
III Territory liberated as a result of this withdrawal of forces forms a
buffer zone and dividing zone in accordance with the following provisions
and as is laid out in detail in Appendix 2:
A. On completion of the withdrawal of forces the buffer zone will be located
along the 1988 borders of the NKAR. Should an additional agreement be
reached, it could also follow the borders of Lacin District. The buffer zone
remains unpopulated and completely demilitarized, except for elements of the
OSCE peacekeeping operation.
B. The dividing zone is demilitarized except for forces authorized to be
there for the activities of the peacekeeping operation in cooperation with
the permanent combined commission, as is laid out in detail in Appendix 2,
including:
(1) Elements of the peacekeeping operation,
(2) Azerbaijani subunits to patrol the borders and clear mines,
(3) Azerbaijani civilian police, the number of whom is laid out in Appendix
2, along with the weapons they are authorized to bear.
C. A no-fly zone is created in the buffer zone and dividing zone under the
control of the OSCE peacekeeping operation, in which no military flights are
allowed, as laid out in Appendix 2.
D. Security in all the districts controlled by the Nagornyy Karabakh
authorities after the withdrawal of forces in line with Article II will be
ensured by the appropriate Nagornyy Karabakh security structures.
IV. In line with the resolutions of the 1994 Budapest OSCE summit, the sides
invite and assist with the deployment of the multinational OSCE peacekeeping
operation, which will work in cooperation with the permanent combined
commission and the Armenian-Azerbaijani intergovernmental commission. The
peacekeeping operation observes the withdrawal of forces and heavy weapons,
the ban on military flights, maintains the demilitarized regime and the
position on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, as laid out in Appendix 2.
The peacekeeping operation is established according to the corresponding UN
Security Council resolution for an initial period of no more than a year and
is extended as required on recommendation 7 of the OSCE chairman-in-office.
The sides agree that the overall length of the multinational peacekeeping
operation will be the minimum necessary, depending on the situation in the
region and the speed with which the comprehensive settlement of the conflict
is achieved. The sides will cooperate fully with the peacekeeping operation,
to ensure implementation of this agreement and to prevent any disruption or
cessation of the peacekeeping operation.
V. The sides cooperate to ensure the safe and voluntary return of refugees
and displaced persons to their places of permanent residence in the dividing
zone, as laid out in Appendix 2. The peacekeeping operation, in conjunction
with the permanent combined commission, observes the security of the
returning population to give all sides confidence in observation of the
regime of demilitarization in this zone. The sides hold talks to implement
the safe and voluntary return of all other people, other than those covered
by this agreement, who are refugees or who were displaced as a result of the
conflict and tension between Armenia and Azerbaijan from 1987 onwards.
VI. At the same time as withdrawing their forces, the sides immediately take
measures to open roads, railways, power lines and communications, trade and
other ties, including all the actions required to achieve this in the
shortest possible time, in line with the timetable and specific provisions
laid out in Appendix 3. The sides will ensure that these links can be used
by all, including ethnic minorities, ensuring that the latter have unimpeded
access to their ethnic communities in other places in the region. Every side
is obliged to lift all blockades and ensure the delivery of cargoes and
people to all other sides without impediment. The sides will guarantee free
and safe railway links between them.
VII. The sides fully cooperate with the International Committee of the Red
Cross, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and other international
organizations to ensure the rapid and safe return of all those detained in
connection with the conflict, an investigation into the fate of those
missing in action, the repatriation of all human remains and the delivery,
without discrimination, across territory controlled by them of humanitarian
aid and rehabilitation assistance to the districts that suffered during the
conflict.
VIII. The sides immediately found a permanent combined commission to observe
implementation of the provisions of the current agreement in connection with
problems affecting Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Karabakh. The chairman of the
permanent combined commission is a representative of the OSCE
chairman-in-office with one Azerbaijani deputy chairman and one Nagornyy
Karabakh deputy chairman. The main duty of the permanent combined commission
is observation of implementation of the agreement; the OSCE chairman's
duties include both mediation, should disagreements arise, and the
sanctioning of the adoption of measures in emergency situations, such as
natural disasters. The permanent combined commission has military, economic,
humanitarian and cultural subcommissions and a subcommission for
communications. The structure, functions and other details of the permanent
combined commission are set out in Appendix 4.
IX. The sides immediately create an Armenian-Azerbaijani intergovernmental
commission to cooperate in averting border incidents between Armenia and
Azerbaijan, to provide a link between border forces and other relevant
security forces of both countries and to observe and cooperate in measures
to open roads, railways, communications, pipelines, trade and other
relations. The Armenian-Azerbaijani intergovernmental commission has two
cochairmen: one from Armenia and one from Azerbaijan. The commission
includes a representative appointed by the OSCE cochairman-in-office. The
structure, functions and other details concerning the Armenian-Azerbaijani
intergovernmental commission are laid out in Appendix 5.
X. The Azerbaijani Republic and the Republic of Armenia enter into talks,
bilateral and multilateral talks in the appropriate international and
regional forums with the aim of raising security in the region, including
military transparency and full observation of the OSCE treaty.
XI. Every side fully respects the security of the other sides and their
populations. The sides pledge to develop neighbourly relations between their
peoples, cooperate in trade and normal interaction between them and refrain
from statements or actions which could disrupt the current agreement or good
relations.
XII. In addition to the specific provisions concerning keeping the peace and
observing the withdrawal laid out above, and recalling the corresponding
principles and undertakings before the OSCE, including those which were
reflected in the Helsinki document of 1992 and the Budapest document of
1994, the OSCE, by means of the appropriate mechanisms, observes the full
implementation of all aspects of the current agreement and undertakes the
appropriate steps, according to these principles and decisions, to avert
violations of the conditions of the current agreement and opposition to it.
XIII. The agreement on cessation of the armed conflict will be signed by the
three sides and will enter into force after it is endorsed by the Minsk
Conference and ratified by the parliaments of the three sides.
XIV. The Azerbaijani Republic and Republic of Armenia establish full
diplomatic relations with permanent diplomatic missions at the level of
ambassadors after the signing of agreements and their endorsement by the
Minsk Conference.
V. On guarantees
1. The sides undertake mutual obligations to ensure observation of the
aforementioned agreements, including guarantees of the security of Nagornyy
Karabakh, its population and the refugees and displaced persons returning to
their places of permanent residence.
2. The UN Security Council will monitor implementation of the comprehensive
agreement.
3. The agreement on the status of Nagornyy Karabakh and the agreement on
cessation of the armed conflict can be witnessed by the Minsk Conference
cochairmen. The presidents of Russia, the USA and France confirm the
intention of these three countries to work jointly with the aim of carefully
observing the progress of implementation of the agreements and adoption of
appropriate measures to implement this agreement. The OSCE or the UN
Security Council can undertake measures of a diplomatic, economic, or, in an
extreme case, military character in line with the UN Charter should the need
arise.
7 November 1998
Source: Bakinskiy Rabochiy, Baku, in Russian 21 Feb 01 p 3
Armenian paper publishes document on Azeri-Karabakh "common state"
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Feb 21, 2001
Text of report by Armenian newspaper Aravot on 21 February entitled "What
does `common state' mean?" by Margarit Yesayan
"Nagornyy Karabakh is a state and territorial entity with the status of a
republic and forms a common state with Azerbaijan within its internationally
recognized borders. In order to promote relations and coordinate joint
activity, representations of Nagornyy Karabakh and Azerbaijan will be opened
in Baku and Stepanakert [Xankandi]. Nagornyy Karabakh will participate in
the implementation of Azerbaijan's foreign policy on issues of interest to
it. Decisions with regards to such issues may be adopted without the
agreement of both sides.
"The borders of Nagornyy Karabakh will correspond to the boundaries of the
former Nagornyy Karabakh Autonomous Region. Their corrections or alterations
may become a subject of special mutual agreements between Azerbaijan and
Nagornyy Karabakh. Borders between Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Karabakh will be
bilaterally open for the free movement of unarmed citizens.
"Force or threats of use of force shall not be applied in the settlement of
disputes between Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Karabakh. In the event of
unresolved disputes or disagreements within the framework of the joint
commission, the sides may ask for the opinion of the OSCE
chairman-in-office, which will be taken into account during the adoption of
a final decision.
"Nagornyy Karabakh will have its own constitution adopted in a referendum by
the people of Nagornyy Karabakh. Citizens of Nagornyy Karabakh will have
Azerbaijani passports with the special designation Nagornyy Karabakh. Only
the government of Nagornyy Karabakh will have the right to issue such
passports. Nagornyy Karabakh will have a National Guard (security force)
formed on a voluntary basis and a police force. These forces may not act
outside of Nagornyy Karabakh without the consent of Azerbaijan's government.
"Armenian is the main state language of Nagornyy Karabakh and Azerbaijani is
the second official language.
[Subhead] About the Lachin [Lacin] corridor
"The use of the Lachin corridor for free communication between Nagornyy
Karabakh and Armenia will become a subject of agreement if according to the
agreement between Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Karabakh no other decisions are
adopted on the special regime of the Lachin region. The Lachin area must
remain a demilitarized zone.
[Subhead] About Shushi [Susa] and Shaumyan [Agdara]
"The sides agree that all Azeri refugees may return to their homes in
Shushi. The relevant authorities of Nagornyy Karabakh will guarantee their
security. They will have equal rights with all other citizens of Nagornyy
Karabakh, including the right to create political parties, participate in
elections at all levels, elect and be elected in state and legislative
bodies and in local and juridical bodies, and work in state services,
including law enforcement agencies. Such rights will also be granted to
Armenian refugees returning to the town of Shaumyan.
[Subhead] Agreement on cessation of armed hostilities
"Any Armenian forces deployed outside the borders of the Republic of Armenia
must return to within its borders. Nagornyy Karabakh forces must withdraw to
the borders of the Nagornyy Karabakh Autonomous Region of 1988, except for
the Lachin area, until the adoption of an agreement on free communication
between Nagornyy Karabakh and Armenia. The territory vacated as a result of
this withdrawal will become a buffer zone and a separation zone. After the
withdrawal of forces a buffer zone will be created around the boundaries of
the Nagornyy Karabakh Autonomous Region. In the event of an additional
arrangement, it can also pass along the boundaries of the Lachin area. The
buffer zone shall be unpopulated and must be fully demilitarized, excluding
OSCE peacekeeping forces".
10 November 1998
The National Security Ministry responded to our query: "Since 1998 till
today no changes have been made to the document. Armenia and Karabakh
adopted the document as grounds for the resumption of negotiations, while
Azerbaijan did not".
Source: Aravot, Yerevan, in Armenian 21 Feb 01 p3
RFE/RL Transcaucasia Newsline, February 21, 2001
AZERBAIJANI OPPOSITION WARNS AGAINST 'DEFEATIST' KARABAKH PEACE
At least three Azerbaijani opposition party leaders have rejected the OSCE
Minsk Group's draft Karabakh peace proposals, which were published for the
first time in the Azerbaijani press on 21 February (see "RFE/RL Newsline,"
21 February 2001). Their publication has been widely construed in
Azerbaijan as indicating that Presidents Aliev and Kocharian will sign a
peace agreement at their upcoming meeting in Paris, Turan reported on 21
February. Liberal Party chairwoman Lala-Shovket Gadjieva said all three
published Minsk Group proposals require "an unconditional surrender" by
Azerbaijan, while Musavat Party chairman Isa Gambar said at least one of
those proposals violates the Azerbaijani Constitution. Ali Kerimov, the
chairman of the reformist wing of the divided Azerbaijan Popular Front
Party, said all three drafts run counter to Azerbaijan's national
interests. LF
[RFE/RL] Transcaucasia Newsline, February 22, 2001
Azeri opposition leader rejects all three
OSCE plans for Karabakh
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Feb 21, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Bilik Dunyasi
Baku, 21 February: "All three plans offered by the OSCE Minsk Group are
unacceptable for us," Isa Qambar, chairman of the Musavat Party, told a
press conference today. He said that the first and third proposals did not
guarantee Azerbaijan's sovereignty over the territory. Many aspects run
counter to the Azerbaijani constitution. The second proposal, he stressed,
is also unacceptable, but this project is more related to the consolidation
of the cease-fire regime and to military aspects of the issue. There are
also concrete proposals, to which we do not object as they meet Azerbaijan's
interests. But this does not mean that the plans should be accepted.
We should first find out what the public thinks about these proposals. The
Democratic Congress intends to study new projects. Isa Qambar pointed out
that if the government had published these proposals by the Minsk Group
earlier, we would have had time to determine what was acceptable or
unacceptable for Azerbaijan. But unfortunately, the government kept these
proposals secret from the people and in doing so limited its possibilities
for participating in the negotiating process.
"We shall wait for the government's decision. We are interested in seeing
that these proposals meet Azerbaijan's international interests. Because
Azerbaijan's security is at stake here. The most important thing for us is
to liberate the occupied territories and settle the conflict in line with
international norms," the party chairman said.
Source: Bilik Dunyasi, Baku, in Russian 1545 gmt 21 Feb 01
Milli Mejlis to start considering the Upper
Karabakh conflict's resolution shortly
Baku 02.19.01. /AzadInform/. The national parliament is to start
discussions on the Upper Karabakh conflict's settlement within the peace
frames, MM speaker Murtuz Aleskerov stated. The Azerbaijani society will
be informed about the Azeri president Heydar Aliyev's proposals and talks
results regarding the Upper Karabakh conflict's resolution. Stands of
people's deputies of the republic on matter will also be declared during
the discussions.
AzadInform #30 (630) 02/21/01
Azeri speaker pledges no secrecy about
Karabakh talks in Paris
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan
Baku, 20 February: Speaker of the Milli Maclis [Azerbaijani
parliament] Murtuz Alasgarov said at today's session of parliament that
the Milli Maclis would in the near future consider the issue of finding
ways to peacefully resolve the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict.
He said that the proposals made by the president to peacefully resolve
the problem would also be presented to the Azerbaijani public.
The Speaker noted that nobody had conducted secret talks in Paris, and
the full sense of the talks would be brought to the notice of the people.
Turan in Russian 1205 GMT 20 Feb 01
MINSK GROUP TO INCREASE ACTIVITY, SAYS U.S. CO-CHAIR
An activity will be observed in the activities of the OSCEs Minsk Group in
the nearest time. This was announced by the groups U.S. co-chair Cary
Cavanaugh. The latter said he had come to this conclusion after his recent
trips to Paris and Moscow. Mr Cavanaugh said he and his two colleagues
were going to conduct consultations with Azeri and Armenian foreign
ministers to discuss some matters. France, being one of three co-chairs in
the Minsk Group, has recognized the so-called Armenian genocide. After
that move, Azerbaijans leading opposition parties laid down demands to
leave France beyond the Minsk Group. But the U.S. co-chair doesnt accept
such a stance. According to him, the United States, France and Russia are
powers which play decisive roles in the world processes. He refused
however to comment on Frances recognition of the so-called genocide. Mr
Cavanaugh also expressed his dissent with the idea to appoint Turkey as
one of Minsk Group co-chairs to create a balance.
By Ganira Pashayeva
ANS] News Digest, February 21, 2001
February 20, 2001
Armenia and Azerbaijan Signal Progress in Talks on Enclave
By DOUGLAS FRANTZ
The New York Times
ISTANBUL, Feb. 19 After seven years of an uneasy truce and stalled peace
talks, signs of progress have emerged in the dispute between Armenia and
Azerbaijan over the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh.
Diplomats said recent events had indicated movement toward solving a
problem that has created at least a million refugees in the two countries
and threatened stability in the Caucasus and neighboring Turkey.
President Robert Kocharian of Armenia and President Heydar Aliyev of
Azerbaijan met last month in Paris. Western diplomats said the two were
expected to meet again within the next month for further talks.
President Jacques Chirac of France met them in Paris and telephoned
President Bush on Feb. 1 to brief him. The call was confirmed by a
spokeswoman for Mr. Chirac.
Western diplomats said that Mr. Chirac and Mr. Bush had discussed
Nagorno-Karabakh at length and that the French president was guardedly
optimistic about a possible settlement. With municipal elections
approaching in France, Mr. Chirac would like to have a settlement to offer
the 400,000 ethnic Armenians in France.
The State Department special negotiator for Nagorno-Karabakh, Carey
Cavanaugh, refused to confirm the call, but said in an interview here that
France, the United States and Russia were involved in intense talks on a
possible solution.
The three countries form the Minsk group, which is trying to negotiate a
settlement under the sponsorship of the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe.
A flurry of other diplomatic activities is widely expected in the coming
weeks. The Swedish foreign minister is scheduled to visit Armenia and
Azerbaijan as part of that country's presidency of the European Union.
Officials from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
plan a three-day swing through the Caucasus next week.
Relief organizations are also beginning to assemble a multibillion- dollar
regional aid package in the event of a settlement. As many as one million
refugees were displaced by six years of fighting, and the basic
installations of Nagorno-Karabakh have suffered severe damage.
Details of the talks between Mr. Kocharian and Mr. Aliyev have been
closely guarded. Both leaders face opposition at home if they are seen as
giving away too much. Diplomats said the two wanted to work out a complete
package of aid to go along with any settlement.
Along with Mr. Chirac's involvement, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia
visited Azerbaijan last month and told Mr. Aliyev that Russia was ready to
guarantee installing a peace settlement.
The fighting began in 1988, when the ethnic Armenians in the enclave
declared independence from Azerbaijan. About 35,000 people died before a
truce in 1994 that left the region under the control of separatist ethnic
Armenians supported by Yerevan.
There have been sporadic clashes along the border, though the Azerbaijan
and Armenia defense ministers agreed in December to improve communications
in an attempt to avoid violence.
On Saturday, Turkey proposed a high-level meeting with Azerbaijan and
Armenia to discuss a settlement. Turkey is an ally of Azerbaijan, but does
not have diplomatic relations with Armenia. "Officials of both countries
and Turkey in a trilateral setting would be a serious contribution to
finding a solution," Foreign Minister Ismail Cem told a conference on
stability in the Caucasus.
An Armenian foreign ministry official attending the conference, Samuel
Mkrtchian, played down prospects for a trilateral meeting.
Copyright 2001 The New York Times
Armenia: Turkey can not be a mediator in Azeri-Armenain conflict
Armenian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Dzyunik Agadzhanyan finds
Turkish Foreign Minister Ismail Cem's proposal regarding mediating
unacceptable and says the proposal 'does not have an official character'
Ankara - Turkish Daily News
The Armenian Foreign Ministry gave the cold shoulder to the Turkish
foreign minister's proposal to hold a meeting with Armenia and Azerbaijan
on resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict by saying that Turkey can not
be a mediator in the Azeri-Armenian conflict.
Turkish Foreign Minister Ismail Cem on Saturday invited Azerbaijan
and Armenia to take part in a trilateral meeting, calling such a hopeful meeting
a "serious contribution to finding a solution."
But Armenian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Dzyunik Agadzhanyan said
the proposal "does not have official jurisdiction," the ITAR-Tass news
agency reported from Yerevan, the Armenian capital.
After Cem made the proposal at a conference in Istanbul, an Armenian
foreign ministry official at the conference balked at the idea, noting
that Armenia and Turkey do not have diplomatic relations.
Turkey's policy over Azeri-Armenian conflict is that initially
Armenian occupation of Azeri territories must be ended and Armenian forces
should be withdrawn from Nagorno-Karabakh before it agrees to relations.
Nagorno-Karabakh, a territory located inside Azerbaijan but populated
largely by ethnic Armenians, declared independence in early 1988. In the
six-year war that followed, separatists backed by Armenia drove out
Azerbaijani troops and occupied parts of Azerbaijan proper.
A 1994 truce ended the war, which killed 15,000 people and turned
about 1 million Azeris into refugees, but talks on a final settlement have
stalled and sporadic clashes still occur on the border.
Copyright 2001 Turkish Daily News
Italian parliament can put the Armenians' human rights violation
in Upper Karabakh into agenda
Baku 02.19.01. /AzadInform/. Four Azerbaijani parliamentarians leaded by
the MM deputy speaker Jashar Aliyev are sojourning in Moscow with official
visit. The delgation will meet with the Russian State Duma's head G
Seleznyov, chairman of the Federation Council Y. Stroyev, members of the
Azerbaijani-Russian parliamnetary group and etc. officials on the visit
time, the MM speaker Murtuz Aleskerov said. The sides will discuss
prevention of the so-called Armenian genocide issue's putting for the Duma
agenda.
Speaker laid stress on MM intends to widen propaganda campaign over this
direction. However, if the acting chairman of the Italian Senate chamber
of deputies is elected for the next term he will do his best to involve
Armenians' human rights violation item on agenda, M. Aleskerov said.
AzadInform #30 (630) 02/21/01
Armenian nationalist party demands genocide compensation from Turkey
Text of report by Armenian news agency Noyan Tapan
Yerevan, 14 February: The central board of the Social Democratic Party
Gnchak (SDPG) is upset about the fact that in an interview to the
CNN-Turk channel, Armenian President Robert Kocharyan said that
recognition of the Armenian genocide had no legal connection with the
Armenia's territorial claims.
A statement by the central board of the SDPG of 13 February notes that
"recognition of the Armenian genocide is only the first step in a just
resolution of Ay Dat (Armenian cause) and the Armenian people both at
home and in the diaspora expect compensation which should be solid, just
and satisfactory".
Noyan Tapan in Russian 1515 GMT 14 Feb 01
Norwegian organization increases aid to Azeri refugees
[Excerpt from report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan]
Baku, 19 February: Compared with last year, the Norwegian union for
refugees (NUR) has doubled the amount of its humanitarian aid to
Azerbaijan in 2001. The budget for Azerbaijan in 2001 is about 1.7m
dollars, the director of the NUR representative office in Azerbaijan,
Nils A. Silvesrtsen, told Turan. [passage omitted: details of
programmes].
Turan in Russian 1212 GMT 19 Feb 01
Turkish parliament committee adopts bill on Armenian genocide claims
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Feb 20, 2001
Text of report in English by Turkish news agency Anatolia
Ankara, 20 February: The Parliamentary Foreign Affairs Commission adopted on
Tuesday [20 February] the draft law against "International claims,
accusations and distortions."
The draft law prepared by Kamran Inan, the Parliamentary Foreign Affairs
Commission chairman, foresees any imposition regarded with claims of
so-called genocide on Armenians, which the history did not assess and
accept, to be considered as "hostile acts".
The articles of the draft law against "international claims, accusations and
distortions" are as follows:
1. Turkey denies the claims of so-called genocide on Armenians, which the
history did not confirm and accept, and considers any imposition on the
issue as "hostile attitude".
2. Turkey condemns the attitude of France and other forces who used the
Armenians for their interests during the World War I and their attitude in
causing loss of lives by inciting them (Armenians) to rebel.
3. Turkey harshly condemns the support and protection given to ASALA
terrorism.
4. Turkey condemns occupation of Nagornyy Karabakh and Azeri territories and
forcing people to immigrate [as received]. Turkey also refuses broadening of
territories by using force.
5. Turkey condemns those who remain as spectators to the massacre of more
than 200,000 people in Bosnia-Hercegovina because of their religion, and
declares that France and other European forces have moral responsibility.
6. The history, which concerns all humanity, can not be changed, rewritten
and distorted with political decisions. The judgment belongs to history.
7. The government takes required measures for opening the reasons mentioned
in the above articles, to the discussions of the world public opinion.
Stating that the allegations of Armenian genocide are also brought onto the
agenda of some countries other than France, Inan said Armenia is insistent
on its policy to use its own minority against Turkey.
"They will pay the damage. Those who make out accounts for others should not
forget that they will also have to account for themselves. I hope the things
would not go that far."
The draft law is expected to be submitted to the office of parliament
Speaker on Tuesday.
Source: Anatolia news agency, Ankara, in English 0957 gmt 20 Feb 01
JAVAKHETI NEED NOT BE TURNED INTO ANOTHER "HOT SPOT".
Leaders of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF)-Dashnaksutiun and
representatives of the Communist Party of Armenia are publicly demanding that
Georgia confer a higher level of autonomy on the province of Javakheti. That
Georgian province, bordering on Armenia, consists of four districts, two of
which--Akhalkalaki and Ninotsminda--have ethnic Armenian majorities. The
Soviet authorities moved some of Javakheti's Armenians there after the
Meskhetian Turks had been deported. Akhalkalaki is the location of a large
Russian military base which both Moscow and Yerevan value as a logistical
link via Georgia between Russia and the Russian military bases in Armenia.
The ARF is both a worldwide diaspora organization and a component of
Armenia's governing coalition. ARF's top leaders Hrant Margarian and Armen
Rustamian began airing demands regarding Javakheti earlier this month, and
were seconded publicly by the Dashnak-affiliated Deputy Foreign Affairs
Minister Levon Mkrtchian. Without seriously criticizing Tbilisi's policy in
Javakheti, they called on Georgia to amend the country's constitution so as
to create a Javakh-Armenian "national-territorial unit" along the lines of
Georgia's other "autonomies"--a reference to the present status of Ajaria
and the past status of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, both of which have in
the meantime seceded de facto.
The Dashnak leaders invoked the "right of national self-determination" for
Javakheti's Armenians and placed that issue in the wider context of the
"Dashnaksutiun's struggle as ideological champions of the unification of
our Homeland." Equating Javakheti symbolically with Karabakh as "another
fragment of our Homeland, our heart and soul," they insisted that it "must
not fall victim to [interstate] relations between Armenia and Georgia,
however important those relations may be." Yet they took the position that
the issue of Javakh-Armenian self-determination "must be raised not in
Armenia, but in Javakh[eti] itself"--a call seemingly intended to be heard
across the state border.
These and similar recent statements in Yerevan expressed concern over
dismal economic and social conditions in Javakheti and the possibility of
an exodus of Armenians from the area. They also criticized the Georgian
authorities for refusing to register the Virk Party of Armenians in that
province. The first of those complaints, however, would seem to ignore the
massive population exodus from Armenia herself, and the second overlooks
Georgia's legislation which precludes legal registration of regional or
ethnically based political parties.
On February 9, President Robert Kocharian's spokesman, Vahe Gabrielian,
disavowed those statements, which, he said, express only the position of
certain parties and their representatives, not the government's. That
position can be made, Gabrielian said, only by the president and the
Foreign Affairs Ministry. Decisions on Georgia's administrative-territorial
organization are a Georgian internal matter, although--he went on to
say--the problems of Armenians in Georgia are a topic of interstate
discussions during official meetings. Gabrielian failed to distance the
presidency from the substance of ARF's statements, however, or to disavow
the deputy foreign affairs minister.
Gabrielian's statement was described as inadequate in a declaration the
Armenian Pan-National Movement made on February 16. That movement was the
governing party from 1990 to 1998, long an adversary of the ARF and now
opposes Kocharian. The declaration pointed out that the ARF is Kocharian's
close political ally and is generally seen as reflecting the president's
views. The APNM criticized both the president and the ARF for a policy of
"freezing conflicts instead of solving them"--a reference to the conflict
with Azerbaijan. By the same token, "lighting a spark" in Javakheti is
fraught with the risk of "starting another conflict in the South Caucasus
and gravely damaging Armenian-Georgian relations," the APNM warned. But its
stand will not make much difference because the party's influence is at an
all-time ebb while that of the diaspora-based Dashnaksutiun is in the
ascendancy in Yerevan.
Tbilisi is responding cautiously and constructively. On February 17,
Georgia's Minister of State (equivalent to prime minister) Giorgi
Arsenishvili headed a delegation to Yerevan for prescheduled discussions on
bilateral economic cooperation, including crossborder projects reflecting
the Javakheti population's interests. The main project involves supplying
Javakheti with electricity from Armenia through a new transmission link
which is due to become operational next month. Meanwhile, Javakheti's
Armenian-language schools are being supplied with textbooks from the
Education Ministry in Yerevan. The Georgian delegation included two ethnic
Armenian deputies from the Georgian parliament and the ethnic Armenian
heads of administration of the Akhalkalaki and Ninotsminda districts.
Troublemaking in Javakheti is clearly subsumed to a far wider set of
problems. First, the ARF's move seems timed to the decisive
Russian-Georgian negotiating rounds on the future of the Russian military
base at Akhalkalaki, which Georgia wants closed down--along with the Batumi
base--within the next few years. Russian hardliners, however, hope to cling
on to those bases by fanning local Ajar and local Armenian opposition to
the central government in Tbilisi.
Second, the ARF's raising of a potential territorial claim on Georgia
coincides with the international campaign to accredit the concept of a
"genocide of Armenians" in the Ottoman Empire and the Caucasus in 1915-23.
The ARF considers that international recognition of that view of history
would pave the way to compensation and territorial claims on modern Turkey.
ARF leader Rustamian (see above), while raising the Javakheti issue, added
in an interview with the Yerevan daily Iravunk: "The first stage is
recognition of the Armenian genocide, and the question of compensation is
directly related to this. Of course the [next] important question is
territorial claims."
Third, attempts to open a "Javakheti issue" would severely hurt Armenia's
own interests by exacerbating her economic isolation. Javakheti and the
rest of Georgia provides one of only two available overland routes--the
other being Iran--between Armenia and the outside world. A sizeable portion
of Armenia's trade moves via Javakheti and the Georgian ports of Poti and
Batumi. Mindful of that situation, Kocharian last year publicly urged
Javakheti's Armenians to support stability in Georgia and to vote for
President Eduard Shevardnadze's reelection. Considering Kocharian's close
relations with the Armenian branch of the ARF, the president should be well
placed to restrain its intrusions into foreign policy making (Noyan-Tapan,
February 5, 8, 10, 16, 19; Asbarez, February 9, 12; Snark, February 9, 17;
Azg, February 10, 17; Iravunk, February 16; Kavkasia-Press, February 17).
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.jamestown.org
Tuesday, 20 February 2001 - Volume VII, Issue 35
Copyright (c) 1983-2001 The Jamestown Foundation