updated
BAKU, Mar 3, 2001 -- (Agence France Presse) Azerbaijan's President Heydar
Aliyev left Baku Saturday for Paris where he and his Armenian counterpart
Robert Kocharian are due Sunday to discuss the future of Nagorno Karabakh
at talks mediated by French President Jacques Chirac.
The two former Soviet republics fought a three-year war over the Armenian
enclave, which proclaimed its independence from Azerbaijan in 1991 with
Yerevan's backing, and a final settlement has proved elusive.
"We are going to talk to Kocharian about how to reach a firm agreement for
resolving the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh in a peaceful way," Aliyev said
just before he flew out of Baku airport.
"But when we will achieve the breakthrough, I cannot say," he added.
France, along with Russia and the United States, is a co-sponsor of the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe's Minsk group, which
is attempting to broker a lasting solution in the region.
(c) 2001 Agence France Presse)
Armenia, Azerbaijan presidents due in Paris
to discuss Nagorno Karabakh
PARIS, March 3
Armenian President Robert Kocharian and his Azerbaijan counterpart Heydar
Aliev were due in Paris Monday to discuss the future of the disputed
enclave of Nagorno Karabakh, in talks brokered by French President Jacques
Chirac.
The two heads of state met in the French capital on January 26, and
promised to continue negotiating to find an acceptable solution to end the
lonstanding conflict.
The two former Soviet republics fought a three-year war over the Armenian
enclave, which proclaimed its independence from Azerbaijan in 1991 with
Yerevan's backing, and a final settlement has proved elusive.
Aliyev, who left Baku for Paris on Saturday, said talks would focus on
reaching a firm agreement.
"We are going to talk to Kocharian about how to reach a firm agreement for
resolving the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh in a peaceful way," Aliyev said
just before he flew out of Baku airport.
"But when we will achieve the breakthrough, I cannot say," he added.
On Thursday, however, Aliyev called on Armenia to adopt a "more
constructive position" in negotiations on the enclave's status.
France, along with Russia and the United States, is a co-sponsor of the
Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe's Minsk group, which
is attempting to broker a solution.
More than 30,OOO people died and nearly a million were displaced after the
ethnic Armenian majority in Nagorno-Karabakh launched a rebellion in 1988
in a bid to become part of Armenia.
A ceasefire was signed in 1994 after Karabakh Armenians overran the region
and a large block of Azerbaijani territory outside it.
Agence France Presse
March 3, 2001, Saturday 3:03 AM, Eastern Time
[RFE/RL] Armenia/Azerbaijan: Presidents' Paris Talks May Signal New Progress
By Jean-Christophe Peuch
Armenian President Robert Kocharian and Azerbaijani President Heidar Aliev
will meet in Paris over the weekend to discuss the two countries' dispute
over the Nagorno-Karabakh enclave. Analysts from both countries believe
that this new round of talks -- the 15th between the two presidents since
1998 -- will not end with a major breakthrough. But they say the meeting
may signal a new phase in the negotiation process. RFE/RL correspondent
Jean-Christophe reports:
Prague, 2 March 2001 (RFE/RL) -- The heads of state of Armenia and
Azerbaijan will begin a scheduled two days of talks in Paris Sunday (4
March) in a new attempt to hammer out a peaceful solution to the
13-year-old territorial dispute over the Nagorno-Karabakh enclave.
Robert Kocharian of Armenia and Heidar Aliev of Azerbaijan will meet under
the aegis of French President Jacques Chirac. France co-chairs with Russia
and the United States the so-called "Minsk Group," which has been tasked
by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, or OSCE, to
monitor the peace process.
This new round of talks -- the second in less than two months -- may be an
indication the two countries are getting closer to a peaceful settlement
of the bloody conflict that has claimed the lives of tens of thousands and
turned about 800,000 Azerbaijanis into refugees. The conflict began in
1988, when the mainly ethnic Armenian enclave seceded from Azerbaijan.
Speaking yesterday (1 March) in the Ukrainian capital Kyiv, where he was
on an official visit, Kocharian said he believed the meeting in Paris with
Aliev would move the parties closer to an accord.
"We will probably have two meetings [in Paris], and there is a great hope
that we shall register some progress. The prospect of a settlement is
realistic."
But analysts from both countries say that no final agreement will be
reached in Paris. But they agree the meeting is still significant.
Hmayak Hovanisian is a member of Armenia's Unity parliamentary group, and
also chairs the country's Association of Political Scientists. In an
interview with RFE/RL, Hovanisian said both presidents are likely to
discuss a general framework that would provide a basis for further
negotiations.
"What I'm talking about is the Paris meeting which should, first and
foremost, allow the two presidents to lay down those principles that would
provide the basis for a renewal of the negotiation process sponsored by
the Minsk Group."
Hasan Guliyev is a journalist for Azerbaijan's state-run Turan news
agency. A former aide to Abulfaz Elchibey, Aliev's predecessor as
president, Guliyev also thinks the Paris meeting may open what he calls a
"new phase" in the peace process.
"One can expect that, as the peace negotiations continue, new ideas based
on a new approach will come out."
On Tuesday (27 February), Kocharian held talks in the Armenian capital
Yerevan with Romanian Foreign Minister Mircea Geoana, whose country chairs
the rotating annual presidency of the OSCE. The same day, Kocharian's
office said in a statement that the peace process has entered a "quite
responsible period."
Kocharian was also quoted by his press service as saying that he hopes
Yerevan and Baku will be able to settle the Karabakh issue during
Romania's presidency -- that is, by the end of this year.
On 1 March, the Romanian envoy held talks with Aliev. Speaking to
reporters in Baku, Geoana called upon both countries to display "political
courage and determination" in settling their dispute.
Since 1997, the OSCE Minsk Group has drafted three peace proposals that
have failed to obtain the consent of both negotiating parties.
The most recent of these proposals, which provides for the creation of a
so-called "common state" between Azerbaijan and Karabakh, was rejected by
Azerbaijan as unacceptable. The other two -- known as the "package plan"
and the "step-by-step plan" -- were turned down by Armenia.
Last week, Aliev ordered that the three drafts be published in the
Azerbaijani press and initiated a parliamentary debate on the Karabakh
issue.
Speaking before the Azerbaijan's National Assembly (Milli Meclis), Aliev
strongly criticized the Minsk Group, calling all of its three drafts
unsatisfactory. He described the common state plan as a "provocation"
against Azerbaijan.
Last month, diplomatic sources close to the talks told RFE/RL that the
Minsk Group did not expect the two presidents to agree on any of the three
drafts. More likely, they said, Aliev and Kocharian would agree on a new
document that would include elements of the existing proposals and
unspecified new provisions.
Last week, Aliev's former diplomatic adviser, Vafa Guluzade, told the
Turan news agency that a fourth draft -- details of which are still
unknown -- might appear in the near future.
Guliyev thinks that the failure of the three previous drafts will help
move both sides toward a compromise.
"Obviously, after these unsuccessful experiments, both sides have come to
the conclusion that they need to adopt a new approach. They understand
that, let's say, a fourth draft is necessary. And I think that ways of
formulating the general principles of a fourth draft will perhaps be
examined in Paris. When one speaks of a fourth draft, one really means a
synthesis of all positive elements in the three previous drafts."
Guliyev thinks that one of the subjects to be discussed in Paris could be
the direct inclusion of the Karabakh leadership in the peace process, a
possibility that Azerbaijan has always rejected.
While in Yerevan last Tuesday (27 February), Romania's Geoana met with
Arkady Gukasian, the president of the self-proclaimed Nagorno-Karabakh
Republic. After the talks, Gukasyan told Armenian television that no peace
deal could be reached without the enclave's participation.
Addressing the Azerbaijani parliament last week, Aliev raised the prospect
of a resumption of fighting. But he warned that such an development would
be fraught with consequences for his country.
Some opposition parties have openly called for a renewal of military
operations to recapture the territories occupied by Armenian troops since
1993. Earlier this week, Azerbaijani refugees and war veterans called for
the return of territories under Armenian occupation through military
means.
Still, few in Azerbaijan and in Armenia believe that a resumption of
military operations is likely to occur.
Analysts note that, in his address to the parliament last week, Aliev
warned his opponents that in the event of hostilities resuming, he would
declare a state of emergency and ban all opposition parties and media.
Armenian deputy Hovanisian says Aliev, who signed a cease-fire with
Armenia in 1994, believes he is the only politician in Azerbaijan capable
of reaching a peace agreement with Yerevan.
"As the architect of the cease-fire, Aliev also wants to be the architect
of a long-lasting peace. He believes he is strong enough to achieve that."
Both Hovanisian and Guliyev say that, despite difficulties, the peace
process is "irreversible."
Copyright 2001 RFE/RL
OSCE fails to reconcile Armenia and Azerbaijan
over Karabakh
Mihaela Rodina
BAKU, March 2
OSCE chief Mircea Geoana wound up a four-day tour of the south Caucasus
Friday with little to show for his efforts to break the stalemate between
Armenia and Azerbaijan over the troubled enclave of Nagorno Karabakh.
But Romanian Foreign Minister Geoana, who is also the current president of
the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, said he was
"cautiously optimistic" about the outcome of a key meeting in Paris on
Sunday.
Azerbaijan's President Heydar Aliyev and his Armenian counterpart Robert
Kocharian are set to discuss the unresolved status of the Armenian enclave
of Nagorno Karabakh at talks mediated by French President Jacques Chirac.
The two former Soviet republics fought a three-year war over the enclave,
which proclaimed its independence with Yerevan's backing in 1991.
Around 30,000 people died before a ceasefire took hold and a final
settlement has proved elusive.
"As long as the dialogue between Armenia and Azerbaijan is continuing, we
have hopes of a settlement to the conflict," Geoana said.
Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian also voiced hopes that "the
proposals recently outlined by President Chirac for a negotiated
settlement of the crisis will win the backing of the two presidents."
However, Aliyev has repeatedly criticised the OSCE for its role in
mediating the Karabakh dispute and denounced a controversial 1998 proposal
by the OSCE's so-called Minsk group to give the enclave autonomy within
Azerbaijan.
Aliyev blamed the Yerevan government and the OSCE for "the failure of the
negotiations" until now and used Geoana's visit to threaten once again a
"military solution," favoured by more and more Azeris, he claimed.
"As head of state, I never cease to believe that a settlement is
possible. But this settlement is in the hands of the OSCE and the
presidents of the two countries," he added.
The Azeri leader invited Armenia to adopt a "more constructive
position" at the Paris summit.
Faced with Baku's intransigence, the OSCE has been forced to proceed in
peace talks on the basis of the 1998 Minsk proposal, which is likely to
loom large at Sunday's talks in Paris.
France, along with Russia and the United States, is a co-sponsor of the
Minsk group, which is attempting to broker a lasting solution in the
region.
The Minsk proposal foresees a greater autonomy for Karabakh giving it the
status of "a state within Azerbaijan," but the authorities in Baku have
refused to even contemplate such a turn of phrase.
"It would be impossible to do a greater injustice to Azerbaijan than to
come up with such a proposal," Aliyev said.
"We have rejected this plan, while the Armenians have accepted it, because
it completely serves their own interests," he added.
However, amid the lack of progress over Nagorno Karabakh, there was a
glimmer of hope that Geoana's visit had achieved a breakthrough elsewhere
in the Caucasus by kickstarting talks between Georgia and its separatist
province of South Ossetia.
"Bucharest has offered to host negotiations between Georgia and South
Ossetia, and Tbilisi has accepted," Geoana said after talks with his
Georgian counterpart Irakli Menagarishvili on Wednesday.
No response from the Ossetian side was immediately available.
The two sides to the conflict, which erupted in 1990, are discussing a
16-point draft agreement but have been at odds for the past two years over
a definition of the region's status, Irakli Machavariani, co-president of
a joint commission on the conflict, told AFP.
Talks broke off in July 1999 after the two sides reached a partial
agreement that could serve as a basis for future negotiations.
The Ossetians are demanding independence to which Tbilisi -- which has had
no control over the region since 1991 -- is opposed.
mr/hb/ml
March 2, 2001, Friday
Agence France Presse
MP says Azerbaijan should be ready for war,
use information war
Source: Xalq Qazeti, Baku, in Azeri 27 Feb 01 p5
MP Anar Mammadxanov's speech
Excerpt from report by Azerbaijani newspaper Xalq Qazeti entitled "Meeting
of Milli Maclis devoted to discussions of Armenian-Azeri conflict over
Karabakh and peaceful settlement of the problem"
Dear president, speaker, deputies and guests. Our president usually does
not repeat what he says, but yesterday he repeated a sentence three times
which was: please, give us your proposals. Unfortunately, we have not had
any proposal yet. I would like those who are going to talk after me to
give their proposals...
I totally agree with Mr Heydar Aliyev about the issue of diaspora. It is
not possible in the USA or France, but it is possible in Russia. Many
Azerbaijanis, who are originally from our country, live in Russia. Mr
President, let me say that many of them are not organized. They have not
done anything since you last met them. It appears that no meeting ever
took place.
Azerbaijanis who live in Russia can be a very influential group in that
country, because many of them are very rich. However, as far as I know,
they are not in touch with each other. Current Russian officials are
pragmatists. In order to gain votes, they conduct their policies in line
with the advice of spin doctors or political publicists. It is for this
reason that Azerbaijanis can become a very influential group in Russia.
We all know that Armenia's foreign policy is based on professional
insolence and on blackmailing of Azerbaijanis and Turks. Turks are our
brothers and I believe that they are quite aware of this policy. Why did
they not take any action when Armenian genocide issue was being discussed
over the last two years? Their parliamentary traditions are better than
ours. Let us work with them. Nothing should prevent us from cooperating
with them...
We were in a better position after our president's meeting with [Russian
President Vladimir] Putin. In spite of this, we did not gain anything.
I believe that there is no alternative to peace. However, we should not
laugh at those people who want war, because it is an alternative. Do you
want Armenian newspapers to write: "Those who want war are being heckled
or laughing at."? It is not acceptable . We should be ready for war,
because the enemy is very aggressive...
If you recall, two years ago I told all the newspapers, which are now
writing about patriotism, to write daily on their third page: "Do not
forget Karabakh." Then I was criticized and it was said that someone was
instructing me. Nobody was instructing me. The newspapers did not pay any
attention to my suggestion. Later, I told the papers that they should not
write Nagornyy Karabakh Republic even when they are quoting someone. I
asked them to write "separatist regime" or "occupying regime", but they
refused.
I promised to create a web site in the Internet and kept my promise. This
web site has been available for the last two or three weeks. It provides
information in English, French, Russian and Azerbaijani. As an
Azerbaijani, I want to say that we should be active. Unfortunately, I am
not a military specialist and therefore cannot say much about military
matters. But, I would like to say that we can achieve a lot from the
information "war".
March 01, 2001, Thursday
BBC Summary of World Broadcasts
WHAT OPTIONS REMAIN FOR RESOLVING THE KARABAKH CONFLICT?
[RFE/RL] Caucasus Report, 2 March 2001, Volume 4, Number 9
The publication last week of the three most recent OSCE Minsk Group draft
proposals for resolving the Karabakh conflict (see "RFE/RL Caucasus Report,"
Vol. 4, No. 7/8) has prompted senior officials in both Armenia and Azerbaijan to
distance themselves from all three drafts. As for Arkadii Ghukasian,
president of the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, he told OSCE
Chairman-in-Office Mircea Dan Geoana in Yerevan on 27 February that any
attempt to resolve the Karabakh conflict should proceed from "current
realities" rather than "far-fetched models."
Armenian President Robert Kocharian told journalists on 22 February that
none of the three OSCE draft proposals drafts has been discussed during
his one-on-one meetings with his Azerbaijani counterpart Heidar Aliev over
the past 18 months. (That statement does not necessarily conflict with
Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian's statement last summer that the
final peace plan may be a composite comprising elements of two or more of
those proposals -- see "RFE/RL Caucasus Report," Vol. 3, No. 28, 14 July
2000.)
In Azerbaijan, President Aliev told a two-day parliament session on 23-24
February that all three drafts are "unacceptable" to Azerbaijan. At the
same time, he defended his own efforts to reach a settlement, noting that
he has met a total of 98 times with the Minsk Group co-chairs, and
discussed the Karabakh conflict 18 times with the U.S. president or
secretary of state, 16 times with the French president, 28 times with the
Russian president and 78 times with various Turkish leaders.
Referring to the groundswell of support in Azerbaijan for a military
campaign to bring Nagorno-Karabakh under Baku's control, Aliev said that
Azerbaijan's armed forces are strong enough to do so. But he pointed out
that starting a new war would incur condemnation from the international
community and serve to corroborate the perception in the West that
"Azerbaijanis again want to slaughter Armenians as they did in the past."
As for the option of "freezing" the status quo until Armenia's economy
collapses and its leadership agrees to concessions, Aliev said that doing
so would be unfair on the hundreds of thousands of displaced persons who
have been living in tent camps since 1992-1993, and who want desperately
to return to their homes.
Another approach raised and then rejected at the parliament session was
that of an exchange of territories whereby Armenia would receive Karabakh
in return for ceding its southern Meghri region. Aliev told deputies on 23
February that the Armenian leadership had rejected that proposal last year
(see "RFE/RL Caucasus Report," Vol. 3, No. 23, 8 June 2000).
On the issue of Karabakh's future status, Armenia and Azerbaijan appear
still to be as far apart as ever. Armenia rejects any "vertical"
subordination of Karabakh to Baku, whereas Azerbaijan has hitherto
insisted that its territorial integrity must be preserved and Karabakh
should remain an autonomous formation within Azerbaijan. But whereas
Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Vilayat Quliev had said late last year that
Baku is prepared to offer Karabakh "a high degree of autonomy," Aliev told
parliament deputies on 24 February that he no longer considers it possible
to revert to the "regional autonomy" which Nagorno-Karabakh had prior to
1988, and that "cultural autonomy" is all that Baku could offer. "Let us
think reasonably," Aliev said. "They [i.e. the Karabakh Armenians] did not
tolerate this regional autonomy created in1923 and started war and
aggression in 1988, so much blood was shed, they occupied our lands. Can
we now return to them that regional autonomy? This is not possible."
Two possible approaches may, however, offer a chance for progress, if not
a fully-fledged peace agreement. The first of those, which has the
advantage of obviating the "status" issue, is Armenian Foreign Minister
Vartan Oskanian's so-called "Don't ask -- don't tell" approach. As
explained to RFE/RL's Yerevan bureau last September by then Armenian
Foreign Ministry spokesman Ara Papyan, it would entail Armenia and
Azerbaijan reaching agreement on all points of a settlement, including the
future status of Karabakh. But that status would deliberately be couched
in terms vague enough to allow the two presidents to present it to public
opinion in a way that would not leave them vulnerable to accusations of
"selling out." That approach would entail covering all aspects of the
settlement in one peace agreement.
The second approach was advocated last year by former Azerbaijani
presidential advisor Eldar Namazov, and is comparable to the 1996
"Khasavyurt" accord that was intended to pave the way for a peaceful
political settlement of the Chechen conflict. Under that accord, Moscow
and Grozny were to reach agreement on other issues, such as the withdrawal
of Russian troops from Chechnya and reconstruction of the republic's
shattered infrastructure, while agreeing to postpone for a maximum of five
years a formal agreement of Chechnya's status vis-a-vis the Russian
Federation.
Namazov was quoted in "Zaman" on 30 January as suggesting that "we can put
off the granting of status to Nagorno-Karabakh for 10-15 years. During
this period, we can solve other problems (return the refugees to districts
around Karabakh and open communications with Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia)
and achieve mutual trust with the Armenian separatists," by which he
presumably meant the leadership in Stepanakert. But Namazov added that "we
should notify the Armenians right at the start as to what would be the
highest degree of self-government we would give them within Azerbaijan in
10 or 15 years. At present, [Karabakh] Armenians are not willing to accept
this status, but they will agree to it 10 or 15 years down the line, after
obtaining rich social protection within Azerbaijan and not within
Armenia."
"Zaman" further quoted presidential administration official Novruz
Mammadov as saying that Namazov's ideas have figured "in the general
context of the settlement process." It is not clear whether they have been
discussed by Aliev and Kocharian. (Liz Fuller)
Copyright RFE/RL
Retired colonel says Karabakh war to be fought
"sooner or later"
Source: ANS TV, Baku, in Azeri 1730 gmt 26 Feb 01
Excerpt from report by Azerbaijani TV station ANS on 26 February
[Presenter] Good evening. You are watching Point of View programme. Nine
years have passed since the Xocali tragedy [of 26 February 1992]. God save
us. But may God not give us patience. The ninth anniversary of the tragedy
coincided with the debate in the Milli Maclis [Azerbaijani parliament] on
the proposals by the OSCE Minsk Group for the settlement of the Karabakh
conflict... The guest in our studio is Col Fatulla Huseynov, who believes
that war, not peace, is the honourable way to liberate our lands. In other
words, he is the "black colonel".
Fatulla muallim [form of address], welcome.
[Fatulla Huseynov] Thank you...
[Presenter] If you participated in the debates or were an MP, would you
have backed the war option and Azerbaijan's victory in it?
[Fatulla Huseynov] Of course, I would. We did this in the Union of Retired
Officers, we carried out calculations, both the Organization for
Liberation of Karabakh and the National Resistance Movement did
this. Everything has been calculated up to every battalion and the forces
we need. There is nothing special about this. There is a military
doctrine, military regulations and instructions. All the figures are
there. We know our territory well, we know the contact line with the
enemy, we know our strength. This is not something difficult. They should
not make a big problem out of this.
[Presenter] Can Fatulla Huseynov assume the responsibility for starting a
war and winning it? This is a very serious responsibility.
[Huseynov] I said on many occasions, I am saying this now and will say
this in future - there is only one way to solve the Karabakh problem. War,
war and war. I will say nothing else. There is a saying - you can chase
pigs out of a millet field only with sticks. What kind of peace are you
talking about? What kind of peace can we discuss with the Armenians? That
is it. They could have done this over the past eight years while they were
talking about peace.
[Presenter] Do you think the Azerbaijani army is capable of winning a war
today?
[Fatulla Huseynov] Yes, I believe that the Azerbaijani army is now capable
of starting a war and winning it. But the army needs some attention. The
army cannot be led in this way and treated like this...
[Presenter] Fatulla muallim, so even if Azerbaijan is not going to start
this war tomorrow, it should at least demonstrate its readiness to regain
its territories by war. It should make it clear that it can fight a war if
its lands are not liberated. So we must prepare for this.
[Huseynov] Definitely. We must get ready. We will fight this war sooner or
later...
March 01, 2001, Thursday
BBC Summary of World Broadcasts
Milli Mejlis made a decision on the Armenian-Azerbaijani Upper Karabakh conflict settlement
Baku 02.26.01. /AzadInform/. At the 23-24 February sitting the national
parliament Milli Mejlis made the 6-point resolution regarding the peaceful
settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict on Upper Karabakh. The
resolution falls into is following points:
� a.. approve provisions of the Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev's
speech;
� b.. recommend to the Azeri President Heydar Aliyev to continue
face-to-face meetings with the Armenian President in order to reach the
peaceful settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Upper Karabakh conflict;
to make use of all methods to strengthen the OSCE Minsk Group's activity;
� c.. consider necessary and recommend continuation of negotiations
between the Azerbaijani and Armenian Presidents to achieve peaceful
settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Upper Karabakh conflict;
� d.. taking into account existence of more than one million refugees and
IDPs living in tent-camps under unbearable conditions since for a long
time and considering the Upper Karabakh conflict the real jeopardy to the
independent statehood to recommend to the Azeri President Heydar Aliyev to
apply all efforts to let down the conflict for the shortest time making
mutual compromises;
� e.. appeal to deputies non-effort an opportunity to address the MM
sitting, as well as political parties, public organizations and community
to present to the MM office proposals on resolution of the conflict and
establishment of peace in the region talking into consideration proposals
started during the MM sitting regard to the Armenia-Azerbaijani Upper
Karabakh conflict;
� f.. commission the MM office to prepare and submit to the President of
the republic all proposals received.
Due to the resolution adopted, the UN and OSCE chairmen, heads of states
of the OSCE Minsk Group members were decided to be appealed on the
Armenian-Azerbaijani Upper Karabakh conflict.
Refugees and IDPs are spent 1 trillion manat per a year
Baku 02.26.01. /AzadInform/. Refugees and IDPs are being spent 1 trillion
manat per a year, deputy prime minister, chairman of the State Refugee
Committee Ali Hasanov imparted. Of this total 190 bn manat is foreseen to
be allocated form the state budget only. The rest part cant' be loaned
from the state budget in view of the economic difficulties the republic is
experiencing at present, he said. Beside this, all benefits refugees and
IDPs are enjoying (medicare, free education, free gas, water and energy
supply, immunity from taxation) came to 537 bn manat to the state budget
annual.
According to the deputy premier, all humanitarian aid and services
rendered to refugees and IDPs totaled 270 bn manat.
It should be noted today above 700 thousand refugees and IDPs army was
temporarily settled in different regions of the republic. Of this total 50
thousand refugees and IDPs are living in tent-camps, 12 thousands - in
freight cars, 18 thousands - in underground shacks, in the streets, about
100 thousands - in quonset huts and the rest - in non-completed buildings.
AzadInform #31 (631) 02/26/01
OSCE Supports Resumption of Armenian-Azeri Dialogue
(Bucharest) Ziua (Internet Version-WWW)
in Romanian
28 Feb 01
Report by "D.E."
An official Romanian delegation headed by Foreign Minister Mircea Geoana,
who is also acting chairman of the OSCE, at 1000 (Bucharest time) [0800
GMT] yesterday arrived in the Armenian capital Yerevan, Radio Romania
Actualitati reports.� Geoana, who is accompanied by representatives of the
OSCE troika and secretariat, is on a tour of the south Caucasian region,
which includes Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan.� In a statement to the
media, the Romanian Foreign Minister said that during his talks with the
Armenian authorities he would be briefing them on the talks held in
Bucharest by the ambassadors of the countries acting as chair of the Minsk
Committee on the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.� These
countries are France, the Russian Federation, and the United States.� The
group held a meeting last week, at which its members assessed the
situation and examined the positions taken by Baku and Yerevan on how a
dialogue could be resumed between the two parties.� Geoana welcomed the
decision by Armenian President Robert Kocharian and Azerbaijan's President
Heydar Aliyev to meet in Paris sometime in March, assisted by President
Jacques Chirac, in an attempt to find a compromise that works and can be
accepted by both parties to settle the Nagorno-Karabakh problem.� Geoana
wants to convey the OSCE's and other international organizations'
readiness to support the resumption of the Armenian-Azeri dialogue.
Following his talks with the head of Romania's diplomacy, Arman
Hachatryan, speaker of the Armenian National Assembly, stated that his
country was ready to meet all the conditions set by the Council of Europe,
Rompres reports.� The need to settle the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis
peacefully, via diplomatic channels, was also raised during the Romanian
Foreign Minister's talks with his Armenian counterpart, Vartan Oskanyan.
This was discussed also during the news conference that followed.
Yesterday's agenda also included a visit to the OSCE mission headquarters
in Yerevan.� Last night acting OSCE Chairman Geoana was scheduled to be
received by Armenian President Robert Kocharian.
[Description of Source: Bucharest Ziua (Internet Version-WWW) in Romanian
-- popular, privately owned daily; generally critical of the political
establishment across the board]
Azeri president addresses parliament on Karabakh
23 February � full version
WE COULD WAGE WAR BUT IT MUST BE SUBSTANTIATED, SAYS PRESIDENT ALIYEV
The Parliament of Azerbaijan is currently discussing the package of
proposals made by the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs. The discussions are
participated in by President Heydar Aliyev, Cabinet of Ministers and
Presidential Administration officials, heads of force structure, members
of a number of political parties, as well as heads of foreign embassy and
NGOs. Speaker Murtuz Alasgarov revealed the list of opposition parties
which ignore the process of discussions. The issue was put on vote and MPs
expressed for discussion of the three OSCE proposals. Foreign Minister
Vilayat Guliyev spoke of the works done for peaceful adjustment of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. According to him, the proposals of the Minsk
Group co-chairs have been returned for revision for a number of times
before because they didnt meet the interests of both Azerbaijan and
Armenia. Mr Guliyev said one of those proposals, namely the common state
principle, was rejected by Azerbaijan as not meeting its interests.
President Aliyev stressed in his speech that close participation of the
whole Azeri society in peaceful resolution of the long-running conflict
was necessary. According to the nations top diplomat, solution of the
problem means return of hundreds of thousand of refugees to their
homelands and development of Azerbaijan. We would remind you that the
Minsk Group has made three proposals for peaceful resolution of the
Nagorno Karabakh conflict. President Aliyev also said the proposals were
submitted to consideration of Parliament on his personal initiative. Mr
Aliyev said Azeris weak point, unlike Armenians, was their inability to
put aside all internal contradictions. The president said addressing the
opposition that he couldnt receive any proposal which would contradict
Azerbaijans national interests. Said Azeri president: Youve been saying
over the past 7 years that Im the culprit as I cant do anything to help
solution of the Karabakh conflict. Then please give your concepts of
adjustment of the conflict. But you dont. Give them to the OSCE and UN. I
address those parties which hold a hostile position toward me: if you dont
like me, dont, but give me your concepts. The OSCE Minsk Group doesnt give
any other proposals, while the bilateral talks are very hard to continue.
Can you imagine how hard are the talks conducted by a president of the
country which underwent aggression with the one heading the aggressor
country? As for the military way of resolution of the conflict, President
Aliyev said the following: Azerbaijan has a strong army. We could wage a
war. Tell me those who support the military way, do you see the
consequences of a probable war? Will the Azeri public accept the second
war? Im not running away from the war. If the public accepts this idea,
then it should be substantiated. President Aliyev also said it made no
sense to wait for Armenias and breakaway regions economic collapse. One
needs to liberate the occupied Azeri lands, at least those lying around
the region, President Aliyev said. He also added that his meeting with
Armenian President Robert Kocharian was planned to be held in Paris on
March 5. Tripartite meeting, including Frances Jacques Chirac, is planned
on the same day.
By Ganira Pashayeva
[ANS] News, February 28, 2001
Azeri opposition party congress sets out conditions
for Karabakh peace
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Feb 26, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan
Baku, 26 February: The main directions in which the Party for National
Independence of Azerbaijan (PNIA) will work were discussed at this
opposition party's 7th (extraordinary congress) on 25 February. The party's
press service reports that PNIA leader Etibar Mammadov delivered a political
report at the forum.
The congress adopted a resolution on the principles for eliminating the
Armenian aggression against Azerbaijan and the country's socio-economic
crisis, and also a statement about the parliamentary elections which took
place on 5 November last year.
The first document stresses that the PNIA believes that mutually beneficial
cooperation in the political and economic spheres is possible between
Armenia and Azerbaijan once a just peace is achieved.
The PNIA believes that a peace treaty could be signed on the following
conditions:
- the unconditional liberation of the occupied territories and the
subsequent return there of the Azerbaijani population in line with the
resolutions of the UN Security Council and the Council of Europe;
- in the event of Armenia not recognizing Azerbaijan's territorial
integrity, Baku should refuse to hold talks with Yerevan;
- given the presence of an influential Armenian lobby among the countries
cochairing the OSCE Minsk Group, Turkey should be included among the
cochairmen;
- Only after recognition of Azerbaijan's territorial integrity and the
return home of refugees should talks be held on the status of Nagornyy
Karabakh and the delimitation of powers.
The second document points out the government's inability to resolve the
country's socio-economic problems. "Only a change of power could become the
basis for creating a competent government," the document says.
As for the statement about the 5 November parliamentary elections, the PNIA
does not recognize their results in the light of their total falsification.
Source: Turan news agency, Baku, in Russian 1603 gmt 26 Feb 01
Azeri refugees say won't forgive authorities if sign defeatist peace accord
Turan in Russian 1603 GMT 26 Feb 01
�� Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan
�� Baku, 26 February: The Lacin [Lachin] public association, which unites
residents of this occupied district of Azerbaijan, has adopted a
statement at its meeting condemning the OSCE Minsk Group proposals to
settle the Karabakh conflict. The statement calls on the Azerbaijani
authorities not to permit the signing of a defeatist accord, which would
be viewed as an anti-constitutional step and treachery.
�� A similar meeting was held by former inhabitants of the town of Susa
[Shusha]. A statement was adopted at the end of this meeting, which says
that former inhabitants of Susa will not forgive the signing of a
defeatist peace accord. Moreover, the statement notes that the people of
Susa will not agree to any legitimization of an Armenian presence in
Susa.
�� The signing of a defeatist peace "is an even greater tragedy" than the
occupation of the territory itself. Acknowledgement of the occupation and
the conferring of any status on Nagornyy Karabakh would forever deprive
refugees of any hope of the occupied territories being liberated, the
statement says.
YOUTH READY TO FIGHT FOR GARABAGH
Azeri youngsters will never put up with the defeatist peace and is ready
to fight for Garabagh and liberation of the occupied lands if necessary.
This was the bottom-line of the round-table at the "Ideal" press-club
Monday, held on the initiative of the Youth Union for liberation of
Garabagh and attended by leaders and members of youth branches of the
organization, Musavat, ADP, PFPA, the Union for Integral Azerbaijan, the
Azerbaijan Democratic Union, the Movement of youth intellectuals, and the
National Union against Armenian aggression.
Speakers touched upon the documents discussion in the Milli Mejlis
February 23-24 and ways of solution to the Garabagh conflict.
One participant said this was the time to launch pubic protest actions in
order to make it clear to some western super-powers that Azerbaijan is not
a calm and non-belligerent nation it is thought to be.
On February 28, representatives of youth organizations will convene again
to agree on the time and venue of a protest action.
[AssA-Irada] News Digest, February 23-26, 2001
ZERKALO: The unmasking of the OSCE Minsk Group
Azeri paper says OSCE Minsk Group wants to destabilize Azerbaijan
�� Text of report by Azerbaijani newspaper Zerkalo on 24 February
entitled "The unmasking of the OSCE Minsk Group" by political scientist
E. Abulfatov
�� [Subhead] Now every citizen of Azerbaijan knows the details of the
cochairs' "amateur performance"
�� The publication of the three options for "settling the armed conflict
in Nagornyy Karabakh offered at various times by the OSCE Minsk Group"
has shown how dangerous the uncertainty in which the Azerbaijani public
has been over the last years is. Looking only at a small part of the
political games behind the scenes, it becomes clear how shaky and
dangerous the situation is into which they are trying to drag Azerbaijan.
�� The analysis of all three options offered by the Minsk Group has shown
clearly that they are absolutely unacceptable. However, the Azerbaijani
side has previously repeatedly announced the possible acceptance of the
second option, which is why there is an objective need for a detailed
analysis of this plan.
�� This option has obvious advantages over the first and second [as
published], however it seems at first sight.
�� Despite beautiful phrases about the norms and principles of
international law, which the preamble contains, the blurred formulations
are especially designed so as to obscure one's mind, or to be more
precise, drawing a veil over true intentions.
�� The second point, the part on the withdrawal of Armenian armed
formations, indicates that "all the armed units of Armenia, if they are
beyond the borders of the country, return to within the borders of their
country". Of course, it is not pointed out anywhere that they are on
occupied Azerbaijani territory.
�� Then the point on the withdrawal of Azerbaijani troops "beyond the
indicated borders" points out particularly their withdrawal from "some
territories" of Armenia.
�� The formulation, which seems ridiculous at first sight, has deep
roots. By signing such a document, Azerbaijan de jure admits the seizure
of some Armenian territories (which is, of course, absurd) and de facto
confirms that there has been no aggression by Armenia.
�� Then there is a point which speaks about ensuring the security of the
people in Nagornyy Karabakh by the military and security structures of
Nagornyy Karabakh itself. Therefore, the process of Azerbaijani refugees'
return to their permanent homes is in jeopardy. Unarmed Azerbaijani
civilians are left face-to-face with Nagornyy Karabakh's armed
structures.
�� Also, an OSCE peacekeeping contingent is engaged in ensuring security
on the Armenian-Azerbaijani state border, although Azerbaijan has
repeatedly said it was inadmissible for a third party to protect its
borders since this might become a direct threat to its national security.
�� Then it is planned to restrict the armed forces of the parties in line
with the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty. Another question arises -
if Nagornyy Karabakh preserves its armed forces (probably heavy weapons
as well, since the draft document does not clearly specify their
withdrawal from Karabakh), then, of course, all armed forces on
Azerbaijani territory are de jure included in its quote since this is
Azerbaijani territory. Although Azerbaijan has to trim down its armed
forces, which will undoubtedly break the balance of power both between
Armenia and Azerbaijan and between the Karabakh regime and Azerbaijan.
�� Then the point on signing a trilateral agreement "On the status of
Karabakh", as well as Lacin [Lachin], Susa [Shushi] and Goranboy District
[Shaumyan] (the fate of which remains unclear because the formulations
are vague), envisages its confirmation and recognition at the OSCE's
Minsk conference. The recognition of three sides to the conflict and the
granting of international status might automatically turn Nagornyy
Karabakh into a subject of international law, i.e. its sovereignty will
be recognized.
�� [Subhead] What is the Minsk Group striving for
�� If its every proposal might lead to Nagornyy Karabakh's sovereignty in
this or that form? There are several theories.
�� The first theory. The cochairs' "amateur performance" is due to the
Minsk Group's lack of knowledge or qualifications (None of the proposals
by the cochairs corresponds to the norms and principles of international
law).
�� The second theory. The Minsk Group is deliberately taking a biased
position and doing everything possible to act in Armenia's interests and
its occupation regime on the seized territories (There is not even a
minimum pretext to say that the cochairs are not biased).
�� The third theory. The purpose of the Minsk Group is the possible
destabilization of the situation in Azerbaijan (this cannot be ruled out
either, taking account of the interests of many states in the region).
Perhaps the last theory does not seem so fantastic. Modelling the
situation that might come about in Azerbaijan after the signing of any
document related to the Minsk Group proposals, we can analyse the
possible development of events.
�� After giving legal force to the possible signing and automatic
(subsequent) recognition of Karabakh's independence (which would become
clear only after the signing), it would be just impossible to change
something. Any attempt to restore Azerbaijan's territorial integrity in a
diplomatic or military way will be seen by the world community as
territorial claims by one state against the other.
�� It cannot be ruled out that sanctions against the country might follow
(in this case, international organizations might demonstrate special
zeal), which may lead to the aggravation of the internal political
situation (for example, in Armenia the administration's desire to sign
the agreement led to the fact that mass dissatisfaction caused Levon
Ter-Petrosyan's resignation). There might immediately appear a third
force in the person of puppet representatives of other countries'
interests. Incidentally, Russia has many candidates for this role.
�� Taking into account the interests of many states in Azerbaijan, an
attempt to divide spheres of influence is possible, which will naturally
influence the balance of power in the region.
�� History has seen a sufficient number of cases when options, which led
to a protracted civil war, numerous human casualties and economic
collapse, were played on the territory of a sovereign country in the
interests of leading states. This subsequently enabled countries
interested in the region to acquire free access to the resources of that
country.
�� As we can see, the "activities" of the Minsk Group might cost
Azerbaijan dearly, and it is probably time to announce their failure
openly.
�� It is expedient to immediately create a national programme for the
objective recognition of the problem in the world and unconditional end
to Armenian aggression against Azerbaijan, which has lasted for many
years. With this, at least four resolutions of the UN Security Council
and decisions of the Lisbon summit should be taken as a basis. It is
necessary to point out that only after the withdrawal of the Armenian
armed forces from all the occupied territories and full disarmament of
the illegal military units of the Karabakh regime, will negotiations with
Armenia be possible.
�� The fate of Nagornyy Karabakh should accordingly be solved within the
framework of the Azerbaijani constitution and laws as an administrative
unit with a high degree of self-government (although self-government
cannot be high or low). The status of the Naxcivan Autonomous Republic
can be applied as a precedent.
�� Then taking into account the return of Azerbaijani refugees to their
homes, we should start creating self-government bodies, police and other
forces from Azerbaijani citizens regardless of their nationality. This
would make it possible to speak to a full extent about the restoration of
territorial integrity within our own borders and about their
inviolability in line with the generally-recognized norms of
international law.
�� It is clear that the implementation of these ideas is, to put it
mildly, difficult, taking into account the results of the military
campaign, as well as the frequently dual pro-Armenian policy of the
leading powers of the world. Azerbaijan's main argument can be a position
that relies on the possibility, if necessary, of resuming hostilities up
to the full restoration of territorial integrity. This is the right of a
sovereign state and no-one can has deny it to us.
�� The most important thing is that all political forces finally stop (at
least temporarily) their hostility and solve the fate of the people
together without turning the negotiating process into the main tool and
argument in their struggle for power.
(Baku) Zerkalo
in Russian
24 Feb 01
Azeri daily rejects Minsk Group proposals,
calls for an Azeri plan
�� Excerpt from E. Abulfatov, E. Mahmudov report by Azerbaijani newspaper
Zerkalo entitled " Capitulatory options proposed to Azerbaijan"
�� [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.
(Baku) Zerkalo
in Russian
23 Feb 01
53 % OF RESIDENTS OF NAGORNO KARABAKH SUPPORT APPLICATION OF ARMENIAN CONSTITUTION ON BREAKAWAY REGIONS TERRITORY
Aparaj, one of most influential newspapers of Azerbaijans breakaway
Nagorno-Karabakh region, conducted a public opinion poll among all strata
of society of the separatist region. Most of respondents criticized the
current regime. The goal of the poll was to determine the degree of
confidence in the policy being pursued by higher circles of
Nagorno-Karabakh. 1.5 % of Nagorno Karabakhs population, i.e. 1,268,
participated in the poll. 52 % of respondents, who answered a total of 13
questions, reckon that the so-called government of the breakaway region
doesnt do its best to improve peoples condition. According to 46 % of
respondents, local officials put their personal interests above
everything. 70 % of respondents say the law-enforcement bodies dont defend
their rights. 81 % pointed out the necessity of staff changes in the local
government. 38 % of respondents hold the opinion that the strained
relations between local leader Arkady Gukasian and former defense minister
Samvel Babayan had personal roots. 22 % of them rated it as a fight for
control of the economic sector. 53 % reckon that its necessary to apply
the Constitution of Armenia on the territory of Nagorno Karabakh. Although
41 % of respondents believe that a new social force will head the region,
but they dont believe this will happen soon.
By Staff Writers
[ANS] News, February 28, 2001
Why publish the OSCE texts?
All segments of Azerbaijani society swiftly condemned three OSCE
proposals dating from 1997 and 1998 once the texts were "leaked" by the
Azerbaijani foreign ministry to the official newspaper, Azerbaycan, which
published them on 21 February.
The July 1997 proposal represents the so-called "package approach" which
attempts to resolve all the outstanding issues in one document.� In the
phraseology of that draft, "Nagorno-Karabakh is a state and territorial
formation within the confines (v sostave) of Azerbaijan."� OSCE
peacekeepers would be introduced to facilitate the return of refugees and
to police the Lachin corridor which connects Armenia and
Nagorno-Karabakh.� The second proposal, from December 1997, the so-called
"phased approach," would provide security guarantees to Nagorno-Karabakh
and return some Armenian-occupied districts (east of Nagorno-Karabakh) to
Azerbaijan and then begin talks on the status question.� [For in-depth
analysis, see Gerard Libaridian, THE CHALLENGE OF STATEHOOD: ARMENIAN
POLITICAL THINKING SINCE INDEPENDENCE� (Crane Books: 1999).� For a brief
summary of the texts published last week, see RFE/RL CAUCASUS REPORT, 23
Feb 01.] The third proposal, the "common state" put forth in November
1998, would grant Nagorno-Karabakh virtually all the attributes of an
independent state and anchor it in a loose confederation with Azerbaijan.
(BAKINSKI RABOCHI, 21 February 01; BBC Monitoring, via
[email protected])
The immediate effect of the publication has been to consolidate
Azerbaijani public opinion in opposition to accepting the terms proposed
in the three documents.� "The authorities have finally come to appreciate
the need for gaining or even leaning on public support," commented
Azarbaycan on 21 February. (BBC Monitoring, via lexis-nexis)� Statements
from refugee groups, parliamentary and non-parliamentary opposition, and
Azerbaijani experts all leave no doubt that the bilateral talks to be
held in Paris on 4 March hold out no promise of success.
The more than 40 political parties condemned the proposals, which also
came under scrutiny in parliament on 23 February. (RFE/RL AZERBAIJAN
SERVICE, 23 Feb 01)� One after another, the representatives of the
democratic opposition stood up in parliament and called for a military
solution.� (ANS, 1700 GMT, 24 Feb 01; BBC Summary of World Broadcasts,
via lexis-nexis) As compared with them, President Heydar Aliev looked
like a dovish senior statesman as he announced through his former adviser
and Azerbaijan's most highly regarded foreign policy expert, Vafa
Guluzade, merely that no peace agreement would be signed in Paris.
(TURAN, 1400 GMT, 24 Feb 01; via lexis-nexis)� All of this posturing and
maneuvering is cast� against the background of hunger-striking invalid
veterans being forcibly removed from the protest, arrested and denounced.
Responding to Aliev's invitation for political parties to submit their
own proposals, Etibar Mammadov, the leader of the opposition, Party for
National Independence of Azerbaijan (PNIA), set out the party program for
regulating the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. (TURAN, 1603 GMT, 26 Feb 01;
FBIS-SOV-2001-0226, via World News Connection)� The demands of the
opposition are much tougher than those pursued by the present government.
They are:
--Unconditional liberation of the occupied territories and the return of
the Azerbaijani population;
--If Armenia refuses to recognize Azerbaijan's territorial integrity,
then talks with Armenia should cease;
--Turkey should be made a Minsk group co-chair to balance those co-chairs
with influential Armenian lobby groups.� (This refers to the recent
recognition of the Armenian genocide by the French parliament);
--Talks on Nagorno-Karabakh's status can begin only after refugees return
to their homes.
According to an Armenian paper (ARAVOT, 21 Feb 01; BBC Monitoring, via
[email protected]) the third proposal, the so-called "common state"
formula, has not been altered since 1998.� That plan is the brainchild of
Yevgeni Primakov, former Russian spy-master and prime minister,
remembered in Baku chiefly for his leading role in the massacre of
Azerbaijani civilians by Soviet military and special forces on 20 January
1990.� This� proposal begins with the following principle:
"Nagorny-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."� (BAKINSKI RABOCHI, 21 Feb 01; BBC
Monitoring, via [email protected])� Under this formulation, therefore,
Nagorno-Karabakh is a state but Azerbaijan is not!�� That the "common
state" idea has not been modified since November 1998 may mean only that
it hasn't been discussed since then.
While they certainly expose the pro-Armenian slant of the OSCE approach,
the 1997 and 1998 texts are not clearly relevant for the present
negotiations.� In theory, all three proposals remain on the table, if the
sides wish to discuss them. That does not mean that any of the drafts
provide the basis for the bilateral talks, at present mediated by
France's President Jacques Chirac.� Moreover, the text that seemed to
have the greatest potential for success remains secret.� Progress on the
framework agreement developed by Presidents Heyder Aliev and Robert
Kocharian in 1999 with US mediation was derailed by the assassinations in
the Armenian parliament in October 1999.� The publication of that text
and subsequent modifications would give observers an opportunity to
compare proposals� and provide a more accurate picture of the range of
available possibilities.
Another immediate (and perhaps not so coincidental) development is the
postponement of the summit of Caspian states, at Iran's request, which
had been scheduled for next week.� That meeting, a follow-up to the
Putin-Aliev summit which was held in January 2001, was expected to
approve a legal regime for the Caspian Sea that would facilitate progress
towards the construction of the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline.
The NIS Observed: An Analytical Review
Volume VI, Number 4 (28 February 2001)
Azerbaijan marks anniversary of Khodzhaly
massacre before talks
Baku/Moscow
As officials in Baku and Yerevan prepared for upcoming talks in Paris to
settle the conflict over the Caucasus enclave of Nagorny-Karabakh,
President Heidar Aliyev of Azerbaijan on Monday led a ceremony to mark the
slaughter in 1992 of hundreds of ethnic Azeris by Armenians in the village
of Khodzhaly.
Aliyev criticised the former leadership of Azerbaijan for preventing what
Baku says was a massacre of 613 people during the storming of the village
on February 26, 1992. Another 1275 people were taken prisoner.
Despite a ceasefire in Nagorny-Karabakh since 1994, Azerbaijan and Armenia
have not been able to reach a final agreement on the status of the 4,400
kilometre-square region.
Aliyev will meet with Armenian President Robert Kocharyan in Paris this
weekend in a fresh attempt to resolve the issue.
Both governments have recently rejected peace proposals put forward by the
Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
The Nagorny-Karabakh enclave was set up under the Soviet government in
1923 and is mainly populated by ethnic Armenians. dpa fk na eg
Copyright 2001 Deutsche Presse-Agentur
Azeri foreign ministry says Armenians
to answer for 1992 Xocali massacre
�� Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan
�� Baku, 27 February: "The policy of groundless territorial claims and
ethnic cleansing against Azerbaijan that Armenia launched in 1988 led to
a genocide of Azerbaijanis by Armenian occupiers in the town of Xocali on
the night between 25 and 26 February 1992. This crime became one of the
most monstrous crimes against humanity of the 20th Century," the
Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry press service said in a statement today.
�� The document says that the Armenian occupation regime in Nagornyy
Karabakh and its puppet "government", on the eve of the anniversary of
the Xocali tragedy once again tried to conceal the scale of this bloody
crime, falsify it and brush aside the hatred and anger of the Azerbaijani
people over the murder of more than 600 innocent people - women, the
elderly and children.
�� The Armenian occupiers will sooner or later answer for this terrible
crime and get the punishment they deserve, the statement said.
Turan in Russian 1630 GMT 27 Feb 01
Azeri paper claims Armenia was behind
1988 clashes in Sumqayit
Source: Xalq Qazeti, Baku, in Azeri 28 Feb 01 pp 1,2
Excerpt from article in Azerbaijani newspaper Xalq Qazet on 28 Februaryi
Thirteen years have elapsed since the Sumqayit events. There are many
reports and books about the reasons behind the events. Nevertheless,
certain aspects of the events, including its organizers and the way that
Armenia has exploited them have not been studied yet...
Conditions for the clashes in Sumqayit were prepared beforehand. As a
result of an investigation carried out, we know that a number of ethnic
Armenians, several months prior to the clashes in Sumqayit, withdrew their
deposits from banks. In general, three months before the events, 1,206
Armenians withdrew 1,220,000 roubles. Ethnic Armenians who spoke fluent
Azeri were sent to Sumqayit for carrying out acts of sabotage. They were
given the addresses of those Armenians who refused to become members of
the Krunk [Crane] organization. This organization operated in Sumqayit
covertly and intended to encourage the crowd to start an unrest in the
town. The provocateurs shouted with megaphones that Azeris were being
murdered in Stepanakert [Xankandi] and Azeri women were being raped
there. It was even said during the unrest that a carriage full of Azeris
corpses had been brought to Bilacari [settlement of Baku]. Members of the
secret Armenian organization were told they should seek the release of
their relatives from local hospitals and move them to other areas.
Before the clashes, video cameras were secretly installed on the roofs of
houses in specific areas where clashes were expected to be more
intensive. The films taken there coupled with additional reports of the
Armenians were immediately shown on foreign TV channels... An Armenian in
the film said that people of Sumqayit cut off his wife's head and after
that 30 Azeris attacked his young girl, raped her one after another, cut
her hear into pieces, made kebab out of her and ate her...
Six people out of the 26 Armenians killed in Sumqayit were killed by an
ethnic Armenian, Eduard Grigoryan. Grigoryan was convicted in Azerbaijan
and sentenced to 12 years imprisonment. The Armenian lobby had Grigoryan
taken out the Azerbaijan prison and sent him to Budennovsk in Stavropol
territory... Later, the investigation showed that during the unrest, along
with the Azeris who fell for Armenians' provocations and took part in the
clashes, there were representatives of other ethnic groups...
There is no USSR now, but instead there are countries which protect
Armenia and support it. The Armenians fabricate lies and present them as
"facts" about events in Sumqayit, Baku and Ganca. Armenians even go
further. They aggrandize the so-called facts and then describe them as
"genocide" and the countries which try to exert pressure on Azerbaijan
give a green light to the falsified "Armenian genocide"...
BBC Summary of World Broadcasts
March 03, 2001, Saturday
Armenian official denies presidents discussed Karabakh� self-government
(Yerevan) Snark in Russian 0705 GMT 24 Feb 01
�� Text of report by Armenian news agency Snark on 24 February
�� Yerevan, 23 February: Armenia appreciates the fact that the
international community realizes that the conflicting sides need to be
given the opportunity to find a solution to the Nagornyy Karabakh problem
themselves, the Armenian presidential press secretary, Vage Gabriyelyan,
has told a Snark correspondent.
�� "Repeated statements by the countries cochairing the OSCE Minsk Group
about their readiness to accept any solution to the Nagornyy Karabakh
conflict acceptable to the sides is in itself a positive fact," the press
secretary noted.
�� Commenting on the statement by Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev on
Baku's readiness to grant Nagornyy Karabakh the highest form of
self-government within Azerbaijan, Vage Gabriyelyan said that Armenian
President Robert Kocharyan and the Azerbaijani president had never
discussed self-government for Nagornyy Karabakh.
#########################################################################
HL NOTE: The following Armenian news article deliberately ignores such
basic facts that:
1) Karabakh region of Azerbaijan was, is, and will remain to be a
�� legitimate part of the Azerbaijan Republic;
2) Karabakh, and seven other regions are illegally occupied by
�� the Republic of Armenia, the aggressor;
3) That the puppet leaders and regime(s) of some self-proclaimed "NKR"
�� entity are recognized by no state and lack any legitimacy whatsoever.
Further, the Stalin imposed name of Stepanakert in 1923, is invalid and
the historic name of the city, Khankandi, has been restored since
Azerbaijan's re-establishment of independence.
* All names in parenthesis are original and as received from FBIS.
#########################################################################
Armenian defense minister, Karabakh president discuss
military situation
(Yerevan) Snark in Russian 1620 GMT 21 Feb 01
[FBIS Translated Text]��� Armenian defense minister, Karabakh president
discuss military situation
�� Text of report by Armenian news agency Snark
�� Yerevan, 21 February: The defense minister and secretary of the
National Security Council under the Armenian president, Serzh Sarkisyan,
today met the president of the Nagornyy Karabakh Republic [NKR], Arkadiy
Gukasyan, in Stepanakert [Xankadi]. The NKR presidential press service
has told Snark that the Armenian minister is paying a short working visit
to Stepanakert.
�� The meeting discussed the situation along the front line between
Armenia and Azerbaijan and between the NKR and Azerbaijan, cooperation
between military departments of Armenia and the NKR and development of
the army. They stressed the importance of steps to strengthen the
cease-fire regime with the Azerbaijani side and establish trust between
the conflicting sides.
�� The meeting was also attended by NKR Defence Minister Seyran Oganyan.
US envoy� welcomes Ankara's initiative on settlement of Karabakh problem
(Yerevan) Snark in Russian 0550 GMT 19 Feb 01
�� Text of report by Armenian news agency Snark
�� Yerevan, 19 February: The US cochairman of the OSCE Minsk Group, Carey
Cavanaugh, welcomed the initiative of the Turkish foreign ministry on
holding the next round of talks between Yerevan and Baku about the
settlement of the Karabakh problem under the aegis of Ankara. The above
was reported by the Armenian National TV today without reference to any
source.
�� The American diplomat added that the lack of diplomatic relations
between Armenia and Turkey is unnatural. Cavanaugh said that after the
latest meeting between the Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents in Paris
on the initiative of the French President Jacques Chirac, the activities
for the settlement of the Nagornyy Karabakh problem have gained momentum.
Russian minister urges political settlement of Nagornyy Karabakh dispute
Moscow ITAR-TASS in English 1556 GMT 22 Feb 01
�� Text of report in English by Russian news agency ITAR-TASS
�� Moscow, 22 February: Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov told a press
conference on Thursday [22 February] that political agreements aiming at
Karabakh settlement would be to the advantage of all the sides concerned,
and Russia above all.
�� "Russia has been always interested in a political settlement of the
problem," Ivanov emphasized. "We have never shirked the problem, and will
never do so in the future", he added. The head of the Russian diplomacy
stated that Moscow was seeking the conflict settlement more than any
other side.
�� Ivanov reminded that it was Russia that spared no effort to support a
direct dialogue between the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan. According
to the minister, it was the only way to reach peace in the region. Ivanov
pointed out the important role Russia, the European Union and the USA
were playing in the conflict settlement in the region.
[Description of Source: Moscow ITAR-TASS -- main government information
agency]
Armenian head refuses to comment on OSCE proposals printed in Azeri press
(Yerevan) Snark in Russian 1525 GMT 22 Feb 01
�� Text of report by Armenian news agency Snark
�� Yerevan, 22 February: Armenian President Robert Kocharyan preferred to
abstain from commenting on the publication by the Azerbaijani official
press on 21 February of the contents of the OSCE Minsk Group proposals
about Nagornyy Karabakh.
�� Asked by journalists whether this was not aimed at destabilizing the
situation, Kocharyan noted that he did not want to comment on this issue
due to the possibility of clashes between different approaches and
conclusions.
Georgia reluctant to grant autonomy to Armenian-populated region - agency
�� Excerpt from report by Armenian news agency Noyan Tapan
�� Yerevan, 21 February: Out of four countries which have borders with
Armenia, only two have diplomatic relations with Armenia. Compared with
Iran, with which the process of rapprochement is developing in quite a
predictable way, there are some hidden obstacles in the development of
friendly relations with Georgia. A visit to Armenia by Georgian Minister
of State Gia Arsenishvili underlines the fact that the accumulated
problems need to be urgently resolved.
�� [Passage omitted: about documents signed during the visit]
�� Another problem is the transfer of the Russian gas to Armenia through
Georgian territory. In fact, the problem is not about the transfer of
gas, but about the periodical stealing of the gas by Georgia (the
Georgian mass media admitted this). This began at the beginning of 1990s
and has continued up to now. The latest case was in February 2001 and
this time Armenia reacted and reduced the electricity supply to Georgia.
�� [Passage omitted: a Georgian official will visit Armenia]
�� However, problems between the two countries are not confined to
economic issues alone. Amongst the officials accompanying the minister of
state during the visit, were: the governor of the Samtskhe-Javakheti
province, Gigla Baramidze; representatives of Georgia's ethic Armenian
population; an MP of the Georgian parliament; Van Bayburtyan, the head of
the self-governed Ninotsminda and Akhalkalaki Districts, Artush
Ambartsumyan; and Rafik Arzumanyan. Both Ninotsminda and Akhalkalaki are
the districts which largely populated by the ethnic Armenians and in fact
both indirectly bordering Armenia. Javakhk is the what the Armenians call
these places.
�� The Javakhk population, who are going through difficult times (like
the entire Georgia), have more than once raised the issue of autonomy
within the territory of Georgia. This is the main political demand by the
Virk opposition party [of Georgia], which has not been officially
registered.
�� The position of the Tbilisi government is that the current Georgian
constitution does not envisage administrative division of the republic,
but this issue will be definitely debated after the restoration of the
country's territorial integrity - that is to say, the restoration of the
control by Tbilisi over the rebelleous territory of Abkhazia and South
Ossetia.
�� We are aware that it is a vague promise. To recap, Georgia is willing
to grant Abkhazia a status whereby it remains part of the Georgian
federation. No matter whether Abkhazia will agree to this option or not,
one should note that the Georgian side has not taken any firm steps
towards Javakhk.
�� The difficult economic situation of Javakhk might deteriorate after
the closure of the Russian military base in Akhalkalaki following the
agreements signed in 1999 between Russia and Georgia. Today about the
quarter of the servicemen of the military base are local ethnic
Armenians.
�� The position of the Armenian government concerning Javakhk was
declared by Armenian President Robert Kocharyan during his visit to
Georgia in October 1999. Kocharyan said: "there are no political problems
in Javakhetia".
�� However not all Armenian political parties agree with the president.
At the ceremony marking the 110th anniversary of the influential Armenian
Revolutionary Federation Dashnaktsutyun [ARFD], a representative of the
party bureau (supreme body of the party), Grant Markayan, said: "despite
the fact that it is very important for us to have good relations with
Georgia, the Armenian Javakhk, where human, national and cultural values
are violated, cannot become a victim of this friendship".
�� The statement by the ARFD caused an ambivalent response. The former
ruling party, the Armenian Pan-National Movement (APNM), condemned the
ARFD's statement and decsribed it as "an inflamatory statement".
�� However, Georgia ought to be aware that the problem of Javakhk is very
serious.
�� [Passage omitted: about problems concerning development of relations
between Georgia and Turkey].
(Yerevan) Noyan Tapan
in Russian
1435 GMT 21 Feb 01
HL Funny Headlines:
Armenia to ask France to recognize "fish genocide" in Lake Sevan -lawman
�� Text of report by Armenian news agency Snark on 24 February
�� Yerevan, 23 February: If Armenia's law-enforcement agencies do not
take effective measures to stop illegal fishing in Lake Sevan, which has
reached catastrophic proportions, the republic's Justice Council will ask
their French colleagues to recognize the "fish genocide" in the country,
(?Robert Avakyan), member of Armenia's Justice Council, told journalists
today at a meeting organized by the anti-corruption public organization
(?Akastver).
�� According to Avakyan, an accusatory statement against the deputy of
the Armenian National Assembly nicknamed Lobi because of the illegal
fishing of rare species of fish, had been received by the prosecutor's
office of Gegarkunik Region. Avakyan preferred not to disclose the name
and the surname of this deputy. On 17 December 1998 Lobi illegally caught
100 tonnes of fish and inflicted damage on the state estimated at 20bn
drams [36m dollars].
�� The member of the Justice Council accused the prosecutor of Gegarkunik
Region, (?Suren Parsamyan), of passivity, as the case was not set into
motion. He noted that last September the Justice Council charged Armenian
Prosecutor-General Boris Nazaryan with getting acquainted with this
criminal case and delivering a public report which, incidentally, has
actually not been read out yet. As a new prosecutor-general has recently
been appointed in Armenia, Avakyan expressed the hope that the case
against the deputy will move from its deadlock.
(Yerevan) Snark
in Russian
0705 GMT 24 Feb 01
-----------------------------------------------------------------
News referred from Habarlar-L