updated
Throughout the 20th century Azerbaijanis have repeatedly been subject to
extermination and persecution on part of Armenians. Facts of eradication
of Azerbaijanis and joining of Azeri lands to Armenia were concealed for
years, while those who exposed them were labeled as nationalist bigots and
severely punished by the law-enforcement.
On March 26, 1998, President Aliyev issued an edict On genocide of
Azerbaijanis, the first document to give political and legal assessment to
the atrocities perpetrated by Armenians in the name of their great Armenia
obsession.
At the dawn of the 20th century, in 1905-1907, Armenians unleashed
genocide first in Baku and then in other regions of Azerbaijan and the
Caucasus. Renowned Azeri writers M. S. Ordubadi and M. M. Navvab, in their
books Bloody years and Armenian-Muslim war of 1905-1906, gave a detailed
account of the genocide of Azerbaijanis in those years. Even more
appalling were the developments of 1918, as Armenians brutally slaughtered
Azeris in Baku, Guba, Shamakhi, Ganja, Nakhchivan, Garabagh, Zangazur,
Iravan, etc. According to some data, several hundreds of people were
killed and hundreds of villages looted and destroyed.
In late March-early April 1918, as a result of an unprecedented massacre
spearheaded by Armenian Bolsheviks, more than 15,000 innocent people were
gunned down in Baku and adjacent villages. In 1919-1920, March 31 was
marked by the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic as the Day of Prayer.
In July 1918, after the take-over of the territory of Nakhchivan, Dashnak
Andranik started impoverishing and looting Azeri-populated villages in
Goycha and Zangazur and slaying peaceful population. The barbaric actions
were led by the Bolshevik Dashnak Stepan Shaumian.
In the Soviet times, Armenians pushed ahead with their anti-Azerbaijan
policy. In 1920-1930s, as well as in post-war years, Armenians contributed
to the arrest and exile of Azeris to Siberia, their being executed as
traitors of the nation, extermination of religious figures and renowned
intellectuals, and repression of other innocent people.
During the developments of 1988, after the issue of joining Upper Garabagh
to Armenia emerged, several hundred thousands were ousted from Azeri lands
and more than 400 brutally slain. As a result of the occupation of 20% of
Azerbaijans land, the number of refugees from Armenia, a country with not
a single Azerbaijani remaining, and from Upper and Lower Garabagh,
exceeded 1 million.
In 1992, Armenian thugs committed an unprecedented Khojali genocide, as
hundreds of innocent people were savagely murdered, women, children and
old people taken hostage.
On the eve of the Day of Genocide of Azerbaijanis, President Aliyev said
in a nationwide address, The genocide has inflicted a serious political,
economic and moral blow upon Azerbaijan. In general, the consequences of
the policy of deportation and genocide have affected around 2 million
Azerbaijanis.
On Friday, the Milli Mejlis adopted an address to international
organizations and governments of the world, saying that in March 1918
Armenians unleashed hideous genocide to tens of thousands of Azerbaijan,
which, however, has failed to attract the attention of the world
community.*
Copyright 2001 AssA-Irada
Azerbaijani Genocide commemoration -- 31 March
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HL NOTE: To read the Decree of the President of Azerbaijan on the genocide
of the Azerbaijanis, issued on 26 March 1998, visit
http://scf.usc.edu/~baguirov/azeri/genocide.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 31 is Azerbaijanian Genocide Day. Massacries realized by Armenians
in Baku, rudely murdering of ten thousands of Azerbaijanians, destruction
of art monuments in bloody March days of 1918 ended with intrigue and
enmity between two neighbor nations of Caucases. It is already a century
that our people faces with the deception of neighbor country Armenia.
Bloody conglicts started in 1988 and realized by Armenian separatists in
order to divide unseparable part Nagorniy Garabagh from our motherland
Azerbaijan ended up with occupation of 1/5 part of Azerbaijan territories,
displacing 1 million Azerbaijanians, killing over 20 thousand civil
Azerbaijan citizens and the most horrified tragedy of the century -
Khodgali genocide. Even after declaration of seatfire, Armenian terrorism
continued its bloody operations in Baku and other parts of Azerbaijan
<<< more on www.azerigenocide.net>>>
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
BBC Summary of World Broadcasts
March 30, 2001, Friday
President Aliyev addresses nation over "genocide" of 1918
Source: MPA news agency, Baku, in Russian 0930 gmt 28 Mar 01
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency MPA
Baku, 28 March: Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev has addressed the
Azerbaijani people on the anniversary of the Azeri genocide by the
Armenians on 31 March 1918. The president said that about two million
Azeris were deported and suffered from this genocide in the last
century. This genocide inflicted great political, material and moral
damage on the Azerbaijani people at the beginning of the 20th Century,
Aliyev noted. The Armenian nationalists have been waging a persistent
information and propaganda war to establish a Greater Armenia. The grave
crimes [committed in this genocide] should not be forgotten, Aliyev added.
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\
AZERBAIJAN COMMEMORATES GENOCIDE
VICTIMS ON MARCH 31
Source:Turan News Agency
31.03.01--BAKU--March 31 is the national mourning day in Azerbaijan - the
Genocide Day. All national flags were lowered all over the country on this
day. The President of Azerbaijan, Heydar Aliyev, members of Government,
Parliament, as well as representatives of the diplomatic corps and
international organizations visited Bakus hilltop Shahidlar Khiyabani
(Alley of Martyrs) to pay homage to the memory of Azeris killed during
numerous genocide campaign launched by Armenians. Ambassadors of foreign
states presented their condolences to President Aliyev. Scores of ordinary
Azeris, too, visited the site sacred for the whole nation. 83 years ago,
armed detachments of Armenias nationalist Dashnak Party backed by the
Armenian-dominated Baku Communes Bolshevik leadership inflicted reprisals
upon Azeri civilians. Under the pretence of combating counterrevolution,
the purposeful ethnic cleansing and Armenization plan was being realized
in the Baku Province. Some 50,000 Azeris were killed in Baku and suburbs
within a few days, while hundreds of mosques, schools and architectural
monuments were razed to the ground. The peace and stability were restored
on the Azeri land only after arrival of the Turkish Army and the transfer
of the Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan from Baku to Ganja on May 28,
1918. Unfortunately, the March-April 1918 events were only a leaf in the
whole tragic history of this nation. Some 2 million Azeris were subjected
to genocide and deportation along the whole XX century. The process of
ousting Azeris from their historic lands began as long ago as in XIX
century, after Azerbaijan was colonized by czarist Russia. Armenians were
being used by the Russian Empire as its social basis in the region. Mass
slaughters of Azeri civilians were committed by Armenian nationalists in
1905-07. Hundreds of settlements were destroyed, thousands of Azeris
killed. The genocide and deportation policy continued in the Soviet period
as well. Thus, mass deportation of Azeris from the territory of Armenia
was committed in 1948-53 in accordance with the resolution of the former
Soviet leadership. Another wave of anti-Azeri sentiments fell upon late
1980s. New Armenian aggression left thousands dead and injured.
By Staff Writers
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\
AZERIS SHOULDNT FORGET ARMENIAN
ATROCITIES, SAYS STATE ADVISOR
Source:ANS
29.03.01--BAKU--Some one million Azeris have been killed over the past 200
years, while up to 2,000 settlements have been destroyed. There isnt any
single Azeris on the territory of Armenia which is the result of the
policy of deportations conducted over the past centuries. This was
announced by Azerbaijans State Advisor on National Issues, Hidayet Orujov
in a news conference held in Baku. According to Mr Orujov, Azeris shouldnt
talk of the atrocities committed by Armenians only on memorable dates such
as March 31 and February 26. Asked what measures were taken with the
purpose of recognition of the Khojali tragedy by the world community, the
state advisor noted that creation of a special center was needed for
that. Mr Orujov also touched upon the friendly relations between Armenia
and Iran. According to him, Iran renders Armenia large assistance, while
there is a bridge connecting Armenias Mehri region with Iran. The Azeri
state is using all opportunities for convincing Iran not to support
Armenian occupants, the state official underlined saying that Russia
openly realizes military cooperation with Armenia. According to Mr Orujov,
Azeris of the whole world should create their organizations to deal with
informing the world community on the Armenian atrocities.
By Lala Gafarli
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\
Interfax News Agency
March 30, 2001, Friday
Azerbaijan accuses Armenians of anti-Azeri genocide
BAKU. March 30 (Interfax) Azerbaijan's parliament has demanded that
international bodies recognize that the Armenians committed genocide
against the Azeris in the 19th and 20th centuries.
In an appeal to the United Nations, the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe, the Commonwealth of Independent States and other
international organizations, the legislature said the Armenians deported 2
million and killed 1.5 million Azeris in the two centuries.
The Azerbaijani parliament urged the international community to use all
its resources to avert anti-Azeri genocide and asked for help in
liberating "Azerbaijani lands occupied by Armenia" and in putting into
practice a proposed security and cooperation pact for the South Caucasus.
The legislature accused some of the European parliaments of holding a
pro-Armenian position by recognizing "the invented anti- Armenian genocide
of 1915" by the Ottoman empire.
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\
Azeri government to turn to International
Court over 1992 Xocali massacre
Azerbaijani news agency Sarq
29 March 2001
Sarq correspondent F. Huseynzada: "The genocide of the Azerbaijani people
began in the first half of the 19th Century, when Russia gave a part of
Azerbaijani lands, including the Erivan [Yerevan] Khanate, to Armenia in
1828," Hidayat Orucov, state advisor for national policy of the
[Azerbaijani] Presidential Executive Staff, told today's press conference.
He said that as a result of Russia's migration policy, over 100,000
Armenians from Iran and Turkey had been resettled in historical Azeri
areas. These Armenians settled in these new lands and began to drive away
the local population - Azeris - using various methods, including mass
killings. As a result, over two million Azeris fell victim to Armenian
butchers during the 19th-20th Centuries. Orucov quoted data provided by
Armenian historian Lalayan, according to which in 1918 alone, nearly 60
per cent of the Azerbaijani population were eliminated on the territory of
contemporary Armenia.
Orucov noted that since 1998, 31 March had been marked as the day of
genocide of the Azerbaijani people. The state is carrying out tremendous
work in this connection. "But not only the state should deal with this
issue. The public should join in," the state advisor said. In this
connection, Orucov stressed the role of Azeris living outside their
motherland, as well as non-government organizations. Orucov said that this
work should be done all year round and not only on 31 March.
Touching upon the Xocali [Khodjaly] tragedy of 26 February 1992, when
Armenian soldiers killed almost all the residents of the village with the
help of the 366th regiment of the Soviet Army, Orucov said that he was
confident that the perpetrators would be punished soon. He said that the
Azerbaijani government was conducting work to submit materials on this
tragedy to the International Court.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Powell to Show Mediating Skill on Nagorno-Karabakh
WASHINGTON, Apr 2, 2001 -- (Reuters) Exploiting what one U.S. official
called a rare window of opportunity, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell
has turned to a remote mountain conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan to
show off his mediating skills.
Facing accusations of a new American isolationism, Powell hopes to show
the United States at work with Russia and France as co-chair of talks when
he flies into Florida Tuesday to launch a fresh bid for a peace deal over
disputed Nagorno-Karabakh.
The United States sees grounds for optimism that it can bring an end to
the first major ethnic dispute to erupt in the waning days of the Soviet
Union, bringing stability to a region where Russia, Turkey and Iran also
have interests. It is also a region from which Washington would like to
export Azeri oil.
"It is not a region that anyone would welcome renewed fighting in," one
senior State Department official said on condition of anonymity, of a
territory recognized as part of Azerbaijan but partly occupied by Armenian
forces.
If Armenian President Robert Kocharyan and Azeri President Haydar Aliyev
make progress at the talks, which are expected to run up to six days, it
would be a feather in Powell's cap.
"The United States recognizes how rare sometimes these windows of
opportunity can be," the official said.
He said Bush had already discussed the issue with French President Jacques
Chirac, who mediated two meetings between Kocharyan and Aliyev this year
which failed to end the 13-year conflict that killed 35,000 people before
a 1994 cease-fire.
Azerbaijan wants Nagorno-Karabakh back in its control, though it is
offering the mainly ethnic Armenian region broad autonomy. Armenia wants
independence for the region.
"With this format that is taking place in Key West, we are highlighting
both the intent to advance a resolution of this problem and the
cooperation toward that end by the United States, Russia and France
together," the official said.
This could help the U.S. image as Europe slams Bush for withdrawing
support for a 1997 treaty on global warming.
Russia has close ties with Armenia and has been accused by Azerbaijan of
giving military aid to its rival. Iran would prefer not to see a
U.S. foothold established in the region, where about 200 people are killed
each year despite the truce, mainly due to snipers and land mines, the
official said.
Russian, U.S. and French diplomats will participate in the talks whose
first day Powell will attend and which for the first time will bring the
two sides together for intense talks over several days with mediation of
the three co-chairs.
Some experts fear tensions in U.S.-Russian relations may complicate the
talks, with Washington and Moscow ordering reciprocal expulsions of 50
diplomats accused of spying.
LOW-LYING FRUIT?
Diplomats and experts do not expect a deal to be signed at Key West, the
southernmost island of the Florida Keys whose most famous resident was
writer Ernest Hemingway.
But some see the talks as ripe for progress, making them attractive to the
U.S. administration in its early weeks.
Ambassador Carey Cavanaugh, who has also led U.S. efforts to resolve
conflicts in Georgia and Moldova, will lead the talks for the United
States once Powell leaves. He also led the effort on Nagorno-Karabakh for
the Clinton administration.
"It's low-lying fruit," said Fiona Hill of the Brookings Institution who
compared Nagorno-Karabakh to the West Bank.
But she warned against excessive optimism, recalling former Deputy
Secretary of State Strobe Talbott had only just left Armenia when gunmen
wrecked peace hopes in 1999 by shooting dead the prime minister and seven
other people.
No new proposals are on the table but one could come out of the talks,
brought about by contacts through the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) of which the three co-chairs are members, the
U.S. official said.
Azerbaijan has rejected three OSCE proposals and demanded new
ones. Aliyev's impatience has been reflected in a number of bellicose
statements in which he threatened to use military means to restore Baku's
control of the territory.
(C)2001 Copyright Reuters Limited.
Florida Summit Holds out Hope for Karabakh Peace
BAKU, Apr 1, 2001 -- (Agence France Presse) Azerbaijan and Armenia may
enjoy the best prospects of resolving their bloody 13-year dispute over
Nagorny Karabakh when the two foes' leaders meet in sunny Florida this
week, experts say.
Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev and his Armenian counterpart, Robert
Kocharian, will meet Tuesday for a four to six-day Key West summit aimed
at ending the former Soviet Union's longest unresolved ethnic conflict.
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell will open the talks, which will be
attended by U.S., Russian and French representatives -- three co-chairs of
the OSCE's Minsk Group, which is charged with finding a solution to the
conflict.
Expectations in the two Caucasus capitals in recent weeks have swung from
hopes for a peace settlement to fears over the resumption of
hostilities. Officials close to the talks however say a deal could be in
the making.
"The sense is that the prospects now for peace are the best ever," said
one Western diplomat.
Yet major issues divide the two sides. "There still may not be peace --
there are still questions that are very difficult. But at least they are
talking about it," said the official.
"It's a meeting by meeting situation," the official added.
The latest speculation that the two Caucasus leaders were reaching
agreement was set off by President Aliyev calling a special session of
parliament in February to discuss previous peace proposals.
It was the first time the peace negotiations were debated in
public. Opposition leaders immediately accused the government of plans to
sell out.
The two presidents have met more than a dozen time in the last two years.
In late 1999, they were likewise rumored to be close to a deal, but the
assassination of Armenia's prime minister in parliament ended those talks.
Both Aliyev and Kocharian are playing down the chances for a resolution in
Florida. Aliyev called the previous meeting in Paris fruitless. Kocharian
said the talks were deadlocked.
Indeed some observers see the recent flurry of activity mostly as an
indication that the three Minsk Group co-chairs are increasing the
pressure on the two sides.
Karabakh is a tiny strip mountainous land in southwestern Azerbaijan. In
Soviet times it possessed an 80 percent Armenian majority. In 1988, it
local assembly voted to be administered by Yerevan and not Baku.
Fighting broke out among villagers, which turned into full-scale war with
the breakup of the Soviet Union. The Karabakh Armenians, with support from
Yerevan, drove the Azeris from the territory and occupied patch of land
linking it to Yerevan.
A cease fire was signed in 1994 but peace talks have dragged on ever
since. More than 30,000 were killed from both sides and some one million
driven from their homes during the course of the dispute.
At the heart of the deadlock remains the status of Karabakh. Baku is
offering "the highest level of autonomy," which might mean de facto
independence for the territory, but without its own army or foreign
policy.
The Armenians are holding out for recognition of their Nagorno Karabakh
republic, saying that they did not win the war just to go back to being
dominated again by Baku.
Other issues include the future Susha, one of Azerbaijan's most important
historical and cultural centers, now a ghost town. It is located in the
heart of Karabakh, overlooking the Armenian-dominated capital of
Stepanakert.
A final solution could involve a land swap of sorts, allowing Karabakh to
keep the land bridge to Armenia it conquered, while giving the Azeris
access to Susha or else its exclave of Nakhichevan, located on the other
side of Armenia.
The unresolved dispute has stifled economic development in the region and
frightened away potential investors, fearful that hostilities could break
out at any moment.
It has also complicated hopes to develop an east-west goods and
communication corridor in the region. Extra kilometers were added to a
project for major oil pipeline from the Caspian to the Turkish
Mediterranean, so as to avoid Armenia.
(c) 2001 Agence France Presse)
Optimism for Nagorno-Karabakh peace conference
by Dave McIntyre, dpa
Washington
The presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan will meet Tuesday in the bucolic
sunshine of the Florida Keys, far from the snowy, disputed mountains of
Nagorno-Karabakh.
Participants hope the peace talks will bring increased stability to the
Caucasus region and perhaps end one of the most bitter conflicts of the
post-Cold War era.
The four-day conference, which could by extended to six days if progress
is made, will be the most extensive session for the two leaders since they
began their periodic negotiations two years ago.
Presidents Heidar Aliyev of Azerbaijan and Robert Kocharian of Armenia
have met 16 times during that period, most recently in March in Paris,
with the help of French President Jacques Chirac.
Those meetings created enough optimism for U.S. Secretary of State Colin
Powell to invite the two presidents to Key West, at the southern tip of
Florida, for an extended session with mediating teams from the United
States, France and Russia.
Underlying the optimism, however, is concern that the bloody conflict that
claimed 35,000 lives from 1988 to 1994 could erupt anew in an oil-rich
region strategically bordering Russia, Turkey and Iran.
More than 1 million people have been displaced from their homes, with many
of them living in train cars or makeshift dwellings. Significant portions
of Azerbaijani territory are occupied by Armenia, and a tense cease-fire
arrangement periodically threatens to unravel.
"There's not a lot of confidence that this situation will remain
frozen," said a senior U.S. official involved in the mediation
effort. "Over time, there has not developed a stable situation on the
ground in either Armenia or Azerbaijan that would make countries in the
region confident that conflict won't again break out sometime in the
future."
However, the official said that the recent Aliyev-Kocharian talks, along
with Russian President Vladimir Putin's state visit to Baku, have helped
to open "a unique window of opportunity" to create progress toward a
resolution.
In addition, the two countries have recently strengthened their cease fire
arrangements, established a hotline connection between Baku and Yerevan,
and agreed to release prisoners of war.
"The United States recognizes how rare these windows of opportunity can
be," the official said.
That helps explain the personal involvement of Powell, as he delves into
his first intensive peace effort.
To be sure, Powell will open the conference on Tuesday and then leave
negotiations to the professionals. But U.S. officials say he could return
to Key West if his presence would be helpful.
While U.S. mediators hope to make progress to help refugees from
Nagorno-Karabakh and open the region to economic development, they are not
expecting a final resolution to come out of the Key West talks.
The three mediating countries do not plan to present a peace proposal on
Tuesday. "But there might be one forthcoming as a result of what happens
in Key West," the U.S. official said.
And Washington knows all too well from last year's Camp David summit with
Israel and the Palestinians that sequestering leaders for an extended
period does not guarantee success.
"Finding peace is always an extremely difficult endeavour," the
U.S. official said.
The talks are officially sponsored by the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). The United States, France and Russia act as
mediators, or co-chairs of the "Minsk Group", a gathering of 13 countries
established in 1992 as part of an effort to end the conflict in
Nagorno-Karabakh. dpa dm ff
Deutsche Presse-Agentur
March 31, 2001, Sunday, BC Cycle
03:19 Central European Time
Azeri paper says successful Key West talks in Bush administration's interest
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Mar 28, 2001
[Subhead] The outcome of the [Azerbaijani President Heydar] Aliyev-[Armenian
President Robert] Kocharyan meeting might be an important turn in the White
House's struggle against Russia and France
A regular meeting between the Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents on the
settlement of the conflict between the two countries will be held on 3 April
on the island of Key West (state of Florida). The new US secretary of state,
all three cochairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group and hundreds of diplomats and
journalists will attend the meeting. The forthcoming peace conference is
quite different from others for a number of reasons, and promises to be a
historic event in a certain way. This forecast is confirmed by a number of
objective reasons.
First, the peace-keeping mission was never presented on such a broad and
high level during the eight-year activity of the OSCE Minsk Group and the
four years of cochairmanship of the USA, Russia and France. But formal
matters are not the main point. All this is primarily about the current
geopolitical situation in the South Caucasus region. This situation has been
created as a result of a number of new tendencies. Processes which seemingly
had no links with each other took place over the last two months.
However, these processes had an impact on the establishment of the
geopolitical climate surrounding the Key West talks:
1. As the majority of politicians expected, an activation of the Bush
administration's "tough" foreign policy;
2. The gradual transformation of US-Russian relations into a new "cold war";
3. The failure of a French peace initiative, a deterioration in
Turkish-French relations;
4. A war hysteria in Azerbaijan as a result of the inactivity of the OSCE
Minsk Group and its cochairing countries;
5. Russia's demonstrative gesture against the West (the USA) (the results of
the Russian-Iranian talks, etc.)
6. The resumption of the Balkan crisis (Macedonian events);
7. The strengthening of Turkey's interest in the Karabakh problem and the
possibility of the signing of a strategic military and political agreement
between Turkey and Azerbaijan etc.
[Passage omitted: there might be a new turn in the settlement process]
The world community is attentively observing the foreign policy activities
of the Bush team. Everybody expects and predicts tough and systematic steps
by the new administration. The Key West meeting will be the first serious
activity or even the first geopolitical exam for the new team (an important
peacemaking mission as opposed to Clinton's failure in the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict).
It is clear that Azerbaijan and Armenia are pinning hopes on this
conference. However, this conference is more important to the Bush team. The
success of future steps will mainly depend on a pragmatic achievement in Key
West.
A certain positive outcome is necessary for Bush himself. He could confirm
his position as superpower leader and project himself as the consistent
protector of US interests in the world, including the Caucasus.
The participation of the other cochairmen (Russia and France) in this
meeting is interesting from this point of view. Russia's tactical behaviour
is of special importance in the context of prospects for the settlement of
the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. Many people are now asking the following
question: to what extent are the peacemaking (geopolitical) intentions and
moves of the USA and Russia agreed?
Two options are possible, in theory: Russia either completely pursues its
own interests on this issue and does not take US recommendations and wishes
into account, or US and Russian peace-keeping (geopolitical) intentions have
been agreed beforehand during secret meetings.
[Passage omitted: Bush will do his best to achieve some kind of result]
It is quite possible that the expected success of the Bush team will somehow
be in Azerbaijan's interest as well.
Source: Yeni Azarbaycan, Baku, in Azeri 28 Mar 01 pp1,3
Azerbaijan, Eyeing Armenia, Wants NATO on Its Soil
BAKU, Mar 27, 2001 -- (Reuters) Oil-rich Azerbaijan wants NATO to
establish military bases on its territory to counterbalance a Russian
military presence in neighboring Armenia, Azeri Foreign Minister Vilayat
Guliyev said on Monday.
Azerbaijan accuses Moscow of arming its arch-foe Armenia, with which it is
locked in a grinding dispute over the region of Nagorno-Karabakh. The
area, administratively part of Azerbaijan, is populated by ethnic
Armenians who defy Baku's rule.
It also accuses Armenia of lending the territory military and political
support and nurturing closer economic ties.
"If the state, which has occupied Azerbaijan's lands, has military bases
of another state on its territory, Azerbaijan has to take the same
measures to create a balance," Guliyev told journalists.
Azeri and Armenian leaders are due to join U.S. Secretary of State Colin
Powell in Florida next month to try and find a final settlement to the
conflict which killed 35,000 people between 1988 and a ceasefire in 1994.
Azerbaijan, seeking stronger ties with NATO, has sent signals that Baku
would welcome a more powerful alliance role in the Caucasus region and
first stated its desire to host NATO bases in 1999.
Russia, which shares a land border with the former Soviet republic that
has a population of 7.5 million, has stated concerns over those
statements. Iran, another neighbor, had also expressed dismay.
Safar Abiyev, Azeri Defense Minister, said on Sunday NATO should consider
establishing bases in South Caucasus.
"NATO bases in the South Caucasus could become one of the main factors of
stability in the region and could sober up countries which tried to
violate this stability," Abiyev said at a meeting with U.S. military
officials.
Armenian President Robert Kocharyan has said that Armenia opposes a role
for NATO in the Karabakh dispute.
ARMENIA WILL HAVE TO REVISE ITS STANCE,
SAYS AZERI FOREIGN MINISTER
31.03.01--BAKU--Foreign Minister Vilayat Guliyev says its unknown yet what
proposals will be made by the U.S. and other co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk
Group concerning the ways of resolution of the Karabakh conflict during
the Key West talks. According to Mr Guliyev, the Azeri delegation is
leaving for the talks with strongly set principles which will determine
Azerbaijans stance at the talks. Russian mass media say its not excluded
the U.S. will suggest the Conch Republic variant at the talks as a method
for resolution of the conflict. It should be noted that the Conch Republic
was declared on the Key islands in 1982 announcing its independence. The
Conch Republic citizens have been considering themselves citizens of both
the Conch Republic and the United States. According to Russias
considerations, the Conch Anthology is understood to be the most ideal
variant for resolution of the long-running conflict. But Azerbaijans
foreign minister thinks otherwise: I personally dont take all this
seriously. We cant deceive ourselves by finding symbolic ways of
adjustment. This problem should be solved fundamentally. The Azeri side
isnt going to make any suggestions at the talks. Now its Armenias turn to
give suggestions, Mr Guliyev said. According to the chief of Azerbaijans
foreign diplomacy, Armenias serious revision of its stance could give
impetus to the talks. But all these are forecasts. The foreign minister
also said its hard to say whether any documents will be signed in Key
West. Its too early to talk about any agreement or rapprochement of
stances between the two presidents, Azerbaijans Foreign Minister
concluded.
By Gulshan Aliyeva
Copyright ANS
Azeri foreign minister doubts Karabakh accord
to be reached in Key West
Turan in Russian 1330 GMT 24 Mar 01
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan
Baku, 24 March: Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Vilayat Quliyev has
described the initiative to deploy Turkish and NATO bases on Azerbaijan's
territory as "constructive". "If the state which is occupying
Azerbaijan's lands has military bases of another state on its territory,
then Azerbaijan must take similar measures to establish a balance,"
Quliyev told journalists. He said that Baku must "make more active
efforts in this direction".
Commenting on the forthcoming meeting in Florida between the Armenian
and Azerbaijani presidents, Quliyev ruled out the possibility of any
agreement on the settlement of the Karabakh conflict. He believes that an
exchange of views on general principles will be held in Key West. Quliyev
even ruled out the possibility of a declaration being signed.
Foreign minister disagrees with Armenians that talks at an end
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Trend
Baku, 26 March, Trend correspondent E. Huseynov: The negotiations to
settle the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict have not been exhausted yet since
the subject remains eternal and unchangeable, Azerbaijani Foreign Minister
Vilayat Quliyev told Trend news agency, commenting on statements made by
Armenian politicians that the negotiation process has come to an end and
new proposals by the OSCE Minsk Group are necessary.
The minister stressed that the negotiation process will come to an end
when a resolution can be found. "Simply that the presidents have run out
of views and ideas about this subject is what Kocharyan said. It is
natural that we have been taking the position that along with the direct
dialogue between the presidents, the activities of the OSCE Minsk Group
should also continue. For this reason, there is nothing unnatural in the
[Armenian President] Robert Kocharyan statement," Quliyev said.
Expressing his views about the statement made by Ashot Manucharyan, a
representative of the Union of Socialist Armenia, that pressure will be
exerted on Armenia at the US meeting, Quliyev pointed out: "First,
exerting pressure on Armenia should have taken place a long time
ago. Armenia is the aggressor which has occupied quite a large part of
Azerbaijani territory for more than eight years. Should the world
community realize this reality and put pressure on Armenia during the Key
West negotiations, then a right step will be taken towards the restoration
of justice. The statements by Manucharyan prove, once again, that the
demands of the Armenian side are unfair, this injustice will finally
receive its true evaluation and the occupying country will be shown its
own real place."
Source: Trend news agency, Baku, in Russian 1040 gmt 26 Mar 01
Opposition wants issue returned to UN
Excerpt of report by Azerbaijani TV station ANS on 26 March
[Presenter] The OSCE's failure to solve the Karabakh conflict has made the
Azerbaijani opposition come out with new proposals. The opposition is
talking about the importance of returning the Karabakh problem to the UN,
which demands the unconditional withdrawal of Armenians from the occupied
lands.
[Correspondent] The Karabakh conflict should be returned to the
UN. Representatives of a number of opposition parties have come out with
this demand. They believe that by returning the problem to the UN, it will
be possible to ensure the fulfilment of UN resolutions and provisions in
the UN regulations. We should note that according to Article 7 Section 41
of the UN regulations, force can be used to implement resolutions adopted
by the Security Council...
Asked about how the UN would react if Azerbaijan decided to liberate its
lands in a military way, Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov said that
under Article 51, every state has the right to protect itself
collectively.
Source: ANS TV, Baku, in Azeri 1600 gmt 26 Mar 01
Armenia violating cease-fire to discourage
Azeris from war - agency
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Bilik Dunyasi
Baku, 27 March: Cases of cease-fire violations on the contact line between
the Armenian and Azerbaijani armed forces have become frequent
recently. Probably, the opposite side is trying to test the combat
readiness of Azerbaijani soldiers.
Discussions in the Milli Maclis [Azerbaijani parliament] of ways to solve
the Karabakh conflict, the signing of a military cooperation accord with
Turkey, and against this background, the upsurge in the public's military
patriotic mood cannot fail to have caught the attention of
Armenia. Armenia is openly demonstrating its anxiety and using propaganda
and acts of provocation on the contact line. People there understand
perfectly well that if Azerbaijan under the leadership of
Commander-in-Chief Heydar Aliyev decides to liberate the occupied lands in
a military way, then there will be no repeat of the years of 1988-93.
It is known that Armenian youths have no desire to die for the Dashnak
idea of "A Greater Armenia from [Black] sea to [Caspian] sea". Men of
call-up age are using various means to evade military service and are
leaving the country. Armenia's population, which was never very big, has
reduced in size and amounts to 1.5m people. This can be observed even on
the streets of Yerevan. You can see big crowds only in two places: near
the US and French embassies. These are "tourists" queuing for visas for
tours, from which they will never return. Even those who fought for the
"liberation" of Karabakh, understand that the occupation of Azerbaijani
lands does not hold the promise of anything good for them, especially as
the country's economy is growing worse every day.
With the aim of suppressing the growing morale and combat spirit of the
Azeris, the Armenian propaganda machine is again provoking
anti-Azerbaijani hysteria, making new territorial claims against
Azerbaijan, Turkey and Iran. They have no scruples about the methods they
employ, even going so far as provocations on the contact line.
Source: Bilik Dunyasi, Baku, in Russian 0808 gmt 27 Mar 01
BBC Summary of World Broadcasts
March 29, 2001, Thursday
Number of Armenian military deaths in frontline
halves in 2000, defence boss
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Mar 26, 2001
Text of report by Armenian news agency Snark
Yerevan, 26 March: The number of Armenian servicemen killed by shots fired
by the Azerbaijani side has halved over the last two years. In 2000, eight
cases were registered, compared with 14 in 1999, and 33 in 1998, Armenian
Defence Minister Serzh Sarkisyan said in the "Orakarg" ("Point of View", 25
March 2000) programme on Armenian Public TV. According to him, this is a
result of contacts between the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan, as well
as between the defence and foreign ministers of the two states. "We have not
made friends with Azerbaijanis, however, these contacts change the
atmosphere significantly," the minister said.
Source: Snark news agency, Yerevan, in Russian 0910 gmt 26 Mar 01
Azeri TV says systematic cease-fire violations
could lead to war
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Mar 23, 2001
[Presenter] The fact that [Azerbaijani] President [Heydar] Aliyev has put on
the agenda proposals by the OSCE Minsk Group on the settlement of the
Nagornyy Karabakh conflict has given rise to a militaristic mood among a
certain part of society.
[passage omitted: Paris meeting between Azerbaijani, Armenian presidents
yielded no results] Everyone says that when the war starts, everyone and
their sons will go to war. But one thing is not clear: who will start the
war and how?
[Correspondent over video of military operations, archive footage of Heydar
Aliyev] As a rule, wars start in the following way: a country's
commander-in-chief declares the beginning of hostilities and orders his army
to attack. This could hardly be the case in the current situation. The
statement by Heydar Aliyev that those who back war in Azerbaijan are the
people who fought and lost this war can be interpreted as his determination
not to issue orders for an attack.
There is also another way to resume hostilities. Some units of our armed
forces deployed in districts bordering on Armenia violate the cease-fire
regime and try to enter Karabakh. This would happen if the president spoke
about his unwillingness to start a war only declaratively but, in fact, gave
the go-ahead to Azerbaijani soldiers. The third theory differs from the
previous ones. Not individual military units, but refugees from the occupied
districts start the fighting. Crowds of people try to cross the border at
any cost from a favourable position. This becomes a pretext to start the
war.
Finally, the fourth theory - the cease-fire regime is violated by both sides
systematically. The sides incur losses, and unleashing a fresh war becomes
inevitable in the view of fresh victims. This theory is the most realistic
one. The firing on villages in Agdam a few days ago and then in Naxcivan,
which resulted in fresh losses, proves that cease-fire violations have
become systematic.
[passage omitted: Azeri MPs express their position on resumption of
hostilities in Karabakh]
Source: ANS TV, Baku, in Russian 1600 gmt 23 Mar 01
Armenian ex-security chief says Russia to back
Azerbaijan over Karabakh
Excerpt from report by Armenian news agency Noyan Tapan
Yerevan, 28 March: At his 27 March press conference the leader of the
21st Century National Democratic Party, David Shakhnazaryan, said that
the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict did not exist today as a problem of
self-determination but as a territorial dispute between Armenia and
Azerbaijan. [Passage omitted: Armenia's foreign policy is in a deadlock]
Shakhnazaryan said in connection with the situation in the region that
unlike the 1990s, Armenia has no allies today and judging from the recent
developments in Russian-Azerbaijani relations, the conclusion can be
reached that Russia will be inclined to help Azerbaijan. He said that due
to its foreign policy Armenia has found itself in the middle of clashing
geopolitical interests. Key West might become Camp David and this is very
dangerous, Shakhnazaryan said.
[Passage omitted: President Kocharyan must resign]
Source: Yerevan Noyan Tapan in Russian 0430 GMT 28 Mar 01
"IF THE WAR BEGINS AGAIN,
ARMENIA WILL LOSE IT"
Says Armenian former minister of National Security D.Shahnazaryan.
"The United States that organizes the meeting of the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia in Florida takes great responsibility. If the military operations begin again, this responsibility will lie on Washington", told to journalists David Shahnazaryan, former Armenian minister of national security, in Yerevan.
In his opinion (Agency "Turan"), any result of military operations will not in favor of the Armenian side. Armenia has gained everything that was possible to achieve by military operations. Even restoring the war by the Azerbaijani side will become Armenia to an aggressor and Azerbaijan to a state holding war for freedom.
Shahnazaryan has called non-serious the opinions of several political figures that the Armenian army will complete the new war in Baku. He stated that all the wars since 1945 up today have been finished with peace but not with capitulation. As to the Karabakh conflict, Shahnazaryan thinks that such an agreement will not in favor of Armenia.
There is a need to reliable allies besides army for holding a war. Shahnazaryan thinks that either Russia, Iran or the U.S. is not such an ally. In his opinion, if the war begins, this time, like in the previous war, Armenia will fight, but not Nagorno Karabakh. As to the Nagorno Karabakh problem itself, after 15 meetings of Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents, Baku has not changed its position, but Yerevan had to change it several times. He considered also non-serious the statements as if the meeting resources of both presidents have exhausted. "Robert Kocharian "counted" on the health of Azeri president in these meetings and is doing it now, too. Even the efforts of freezing the situation will, of course, cause beginning of military operations", stressed Shahnazaryan.
The former minister has called the wish of Armenia of not accepting Ankara as negotiating party besides Baku as a rough political mistake: "Today Armenia is putting forward its groundless claims without consideration. Nevertheless, Turkey has strong influence on Azerbaijan, has its regional interests and this is why, must take part in the talks". In his opinion, if Armenia does not do it, there will be raised question on the impeachment of the Armenian president. "A country should be governed by a president elected by the nation, but not by a person gaining the power forcefully and being a toy in the hands of other powers", stressed Shahnazaryan.
THE UNO SECURITY COUNCIL TO DISCUSS
AZERBAIJANI-ARMENIAN CONFLICT
The Azerbaijani government has requested Ukraine that temporarily chairs the UN Security Council to put on discussion the question related with the execution of 4 resolutions of the UNO, which were adopted in 1993 on the regulation of Upper Karabakh conflict, in one of the sessions of the Council that will be held in recent days. Vilayat Guliyev, Azeri foreign minister, gave information about it to journalists. In his words, Ukraine has already stated that it approaches positive to the request. "Ukraine has principally agreed with it and recently the question will be discussed at the UN Security Council", stressed Mr.Guliyev.
It is notable that in the resolutions of the UN on the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict has been stressed immediately liberating the occupied Azeri territories by the unified military forces.
AZERBAIJAN BULLETIN No:13(267), MARCH 29 2001[ENGLISH]
http://www.andf-az.org/
Armenian national interests will be protected in upcoming Key West meeting -paper
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Mar 26, 2001
Text of Suren Vaganyan report by Armenian newspaper Yerkir entitled:
"Political unity is real"
For the sake of our statehood, the liberation of Artsakh [Karabakh] is
exceptionally important form historical and political viewpoints. Therefore,
issues relating to its existence and safety deserve full attention by
political forces and the Armenian community, taking into account that from
time to time the interested super powers try to act as international
mediators [for the resolution of the Karabakh problem].
We are now facing a crucial time when 16th Kocharyan-Aliyev meeting is going
to take place in the USA. Considering the importance of the issue, the
Armenian president made a speech before the students on 21 March about the
forthcoming talks and Armenia-Azerbaijan relations. Kocharyan said that the
meetings were necessary. However, he added they have already exhausted all
the likely options. In other words, both presidents have discussed all the
possible options and they can not agree on any of them. Having suffered a
defeat during the war, Azerbaijan wants to see Artsakh as part of its
territory again, to give it [Karabakh] a convoluted "high level
self-government", to return the so called refugees.
Armenia has another demands: the sides to the conflict being equal legal
subjects; geographical link of [Karabakh] with Armenia and its existence as
an enclave being ruled out; and international guarantees for the security of
Karabakh. Kocharyan said that the international mediators must be aware
that, prior to the meeting in the Key West, the two president reached the
final line without finding a solution to the problem. This means that the
cochairs of the OSCE Minsk Group must come up with a new proposal. It should
be noted that none of the last 15 meetings, including the forthcoming one,
have been held in free conditions without political pressure.
However, we have to say that since 1999, President Robert Kocharyan has not
shown an enthusiasm for negotiations. Today, Azerbaijan has raised hysteria
before the meeting and in doing so is trying to exert pressure on the
mediators and Armenia. Azerbaijan is saying that something should be done so
that Kocharyan comes to an agreement, otherwise there will be a war. The
Armenian president, who participated in the war, stresses three points which
would be detrimental to Azerbaijan should it start a war. The first one is
the defence line along the border, which after the 1994 cease fire has been
continually strengthened. The second point is that the political and world
community do not approve of a renewed war and they will condemn it. The
third point is the public opinion in Azerbaijan. As for Armenia, it does not
need a war. However, should Baku start a war, our country is ready to give a
counter blow.
Returning to the upcoming meeting in Key West, I would like to say that we
need at least three things. First, a state functionary or a politician with
a strong enthusiasm and good at the art of negotiation. The stable position
of President Robert Kocharyan indicates that Armenia and Artsakh can
perfectly defend their interests.
The second essential factor is the current international situation. It goes
without saying that Russia is not interested in the USA leading the
settlement of conflicts in the South Caucasus. The American initiative for
the settlement of Karabakh problem is opening the door not only for
Washington but also for Ankara. This means that to sideline Russia and to
turn Armenia into the appendage of Turkey. It is surprising that the new US
administration wants to maintain a diplomatic link with Chechnya and does
not recognize independence of the Karabakh Republic.
Finally, the domestic political factor, the link with all strata of society
and political forces. It is noteworthy to mention that our progressive
political forces inside the parliament and outside, up to now, have neither
agreed with the handing over of Artsakh not the start of another war. It
means that we can (and should) have different political views, but when it
comes to national and vital issues we can unite. In this connection, the
president held meetings with the political forces of the country, including
the Unity bloc. It is not odd to see all political forces expressing their
views in support of Atrsakh as it has already been done by the ARFD board.
The Armenian Pan-National Movement is notable for supporting Karabakh's
interests.
Before Kocharyan's speech and his views about the Key West meeting, the
propaganda machine of the Armenian Pan-National Movement was talking about
the threat to the national interest emanating from the agreement that might
be signed by Kocharyan. Didn't they think that a political crisis might
surface in Armenia? Today, as it has become apparent that an agreement will
not be signed, the same propaganda machine is trying to reduce the
significance of the upcoming meeting. Our experience in negotiations and
national will, our potential and unity of political forces can give us hope
that during the Key West meeting our national interests will be protected.
Source: Yerkir, Yerevan, in Armenian 24 Mar 01 p1
WAR-MONGERS BLIGHT PEACE TALKS
Opposition leaders in Baku believe that Azerbaijan's lost territories can
only be recovered by force
By Mark Grigorian in Yerevan and Shahin Rzaev in Baku
While the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan prepare for another round of
Nagorny Karabakh peace talks, a new mood of pessimism is creeping over the
South Caucasus.
President Robert Kocharian and his Azeri counterpart, Heidar Aliev, are to
meet in Florida's Key West this week to discuss a lasting solution to the
conflict.
In the West, observers are hoping for the long awaited breakthrough but, in
Armenia and Azerbaijan, there is gloomy talk of another war.
The April 3 summit will mark the 16th meeting between Kocharian and Aliev in
the seven years since a ceasefire was called in Nagorny Karabakh, suspending
the armed conflict which claimed an estimated 30,000 lives.
America, Russia and France - all co-chairs of the OSCE's Minsk Group -- have
taken an active role in brokering a peace deal but, despite their efforts, a
signed agreement has remained elusive.
Armenian analyst Gagik Avakian commented, "The two presidents met in Paris
and now they are to meet in the USA. All the political indicators point
towards a third meeting in Moscow where we can expect some serious results,
under the aegis of Vladimir Putin."
However, the past two months have seen significant developments. On the eve
of the Paris meeting on February 21, several state newspapers in Azerbaijan
published details of the three peace proposals currently being discussed by
the Minsk Group.
Despite claims by Armenian foreign minister Vardan Oskanian that these
proposals had already been abandoned, they became the subject of fierce
debate in the Azeri parliament. In fact, during one speech, President Aliev
called on all political parties and social organisations to present their
proposals for a peace settlement in Nagorny Karabakh.
It was the first time in eight years that Aliev had sought a second opinion,
prompting speculation that he was attempting to share responsibility for a
potentially unpopular decision.
But the proposals flooded in, most notably a radical peace plan devised by
two well-known political figures -- Tofik Zulfugarov, the ex-foreign
minister, and Eldar Namazov, formerly head of the president's secretariat.
They argued that the conflict could not be resolved by negotiations alone.
It was essential, they said, that the peace process went hand in hand with
an anti-corruption campaign, economic reforms and increased defence
spending.
The plan also called for a "humanitarian initiative" to return Azeri
refugees to the occupied territories. This operation, said the authors,
should be conducted by the police and military "outside the administrative
borders of Nagorny Karabakh".
The Zulfugarov-Namazov plan enjoyed widespread support amongst the
opposition parties as well as some pro-government factions and newspapers.
The most active champions of a military solution are Araz Alizade,
co-chairman of the Social Democratic Party, and Lala Shovkat Gadzhieva,
chairman of the Liberal Party. Back in 1994, it was Alizade who urged Aliev
to declare a "Patriotic War", imposing martial law on the former Soviet
republic and uniting the people in an all-out drive for victory.
And Etibar Mamedov, chairman of the National Independence Party, has called
on the Azeri leader to follow the example of former Armenian president Levon
Ter-Petrosian who resigned over his failure to solve the Nagorny Karabakh
problem.
Mamedov has proposed an "anti-terrorist operation" in the breakaway Armenian
enclave. "This is our internal affair," he said. "There is no need to even
have it discussed by parliament."
Most opposition politicians consider that any negotiations with Armenia
should be "frozen" until Azerbaijan is in a stronger bargaining position.
Popular Front chairman Ali Kerimov said, "A fair peace is only possible if
Azerbaijan is much stronger than it is today."
Surveys of the Azeri population show that most people still believe the
Nagorny Karabakh conflict can only be solved by military action.
An old man selling sunflower seeds in Baku's central market said, "My son
was killed. Now at least I hear people saying that we should go and win back
the lands we lost. Before that there were only empty calls for peace."
But others fear the authorities could use a war as an excuse for repression.
A girl on Baku's Fountain Square said, "I don't want there to be a war
whatever happens. I can't believe that people are calling for war, saying
this is the only way to get our lands back. Where were they during the last
war? What stopped them from fighting for their country back then?"
She added, "I'm certain that these same people will never go and fight
themselves. Neither will their children."
Meanwhile, in Armenia, the Zulfugarov-Namazov plan has been interpreted as a
call to arms. Defence minister Serzh Sarkisian told the Golos Armenii
newspaper that the Armenian armed forces were well prepared for a renewal of
hostilities, adding that the Azeri war-mongers were not members of the
ruling party.
"It's easy for them," commented Sarkisian. "They won't have to take
responsibility for a war. And fresh fighting could mean victories for
Azerbaijan as well as defeat."
President Kocharian's reaction was unequivocal. He said Armenia had no
intention of throwing down the gauntlet, adding, "Whoever starts a war will
lose."
And David Shakhnazarian, leader of the 21st Century opposition party, warned
that the Key West meeting could become a Camp David for the South Caucasus.
When the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations in Camp David collapsed, he said,
there was a sharp escalation of tension in the near East.
Certainly, there is little sign of sabre-rattling amongst the Armenian
population at large.
Aram, 30, a resident of Yerevan, said, "I don't want war. I hope they sign a
peace agreement as soon as possible so that we can freely mix with the
Azeris once again. Then the roads will open up and life will get better."
But Aram added that if Armenia were under threat, then he would not hesitate
to defend his homeland.
Anait, a waitress in a Yerevan cafe, commented, "I hope there won't be a
war. We've already lived through one and it was terrible. I don't know if
this is right from the political point of view but I want Kocharian to do
everything he can to ensure there won't be another conflict."
There can be little doubt that the peace-makers are faced with a monumental
task - and one that is well illustrated by two recent comments from the
Armenian and Azeri camps.
In Baku, the president's son, Ilkham Aliev, commented, "Heider Aliev will
never sign a peace treaty that is not in the interests of Azerbaijan because
such a peace will destabilise the country and it will be the regime first
and foremost which suffers the consequences. We should all prepare ourselves
for war."
And, in Yerevan, President Kocharian said, "Since 1987, the Karabakh
conflict has become the most important issue in my life. It has never given
me a moment's peace. I have lived with one idea, one dream - to do all I can
to secure independence for Nagorny Karabakh. I have no intention of
rejecting everything that has been gained by the blood of our people."
Mark Grigorian and Shahin Rzaev are regular IWPR contributors
IWPR'S CAUCASUS REPORTING SERVICE, NO. 76
Azeri military accord with Turkey makes
fighting Karabakh war possible
(Baku) Zerkalo
in Russian
24 Mar 01
Excerpt from J. Nasibov report by Azerbaijani newspaper Zerkalo
entitled "Military cooperation between Azerbaijan and Turkey"
[Subhead] Preparation for the use of force, diplomatic pressure, or
both?
Contacts between representatives of Azerbaijani and Turkish military
circles are intensifying. A number of highly-placed people from the
fraternal country's military department have been in Baku over the last
10 days. [Passage omitted: list of names of visiting officials]
Finally, just recently, the head of the operational department of the
Turkish General Staff, Lt-Gen Ethem Erdagin, held talks with his
Azerbaijani colleagues. A protocol on developing military cooperation
between the Azerbaijani Ministry of Defence and the Turkish General Staff
was the result of these talks.
To be honest, it is hard to recall another occasion since Azerbaijan
gained independence when such an (official) stream of Turkish generals
came to Baku over such a short period of time. Incidentally, these visits
occurred at a time when discussion by the Azerbaijani public of ways to
resolve the Karabakh problem started to reach its culminating point. On
the other hand, at practically the same time the Azerbaijani president
was holding talks with Robert Kocharyan in Paris and preparing to
continue them in Florida.
It is clear that such a coincidence did not come about by chance.
Azerbaijan is today going through the most difficult diplomatic days in
its recent history. How we ended up in this Karabakh deadlock is a
separate topic altogether. But now we have to get out of it. Moreover, we
have to do this ourselves.
From this point of view, the visits by Turkish generals could bear
some relation to preparations for certain events to get out of the
Karabakh deadlock. Moreover, statements made both by Turkish and
Azerbaijani representatives after the visit could be seen as signalling
the start of real preparations for the use of force.
The Turkish generals, as though they had agreed amongst themselves,
with one voice announced that Turkish-Azerbaijani relations in the
military sphere will develop both within the framework of NATO's
Partnership for Peace, and also bilaterally. But no less interesting are
the statements by our minister, Safar Abiyev, about all the agreements
needed for cooperation with Turkey in the military sphere having been
already signed. When asked whether there is any need to conclude a new
agreement, Abiyev replied that there is, and one will be signed. As for
military aid being supplied to Azerbaijan should the war resume, Abiyev
said that time would tell.
And so, observers put forward the theory that Azerbaijani-Turkish
military cooperation could enter a new phase. It could culminate in the
renewal of the bilateral agreement on military cooperation signed in
1996. Now the signing of a broader military treaty between Azerbaijan and
Turkey can be expected. It is possible to predict that it will, to a
large extent, depend on the results of the Florida talks between the
presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia.
On the other hand, Azerbaijan could use the visits to Baku by Turkish
generals to exert diplomatic pressure on the enemy and the mediators. By
not shrouding in secrecy the visits by the Turkish military, but rather
giving them wide coverage, Azerbaijan can demonstrate to those taking
part in the Key West meeting their plan to use force should no progress
suiting official Baku be made in Florida.
Incidentally, from this point of view it is worth drawing attention to
a statement made by President Heydar Aliyev: "The Azerbaijani leadership
is very determined to secure liberation of the territories occupied by
the enemy. If our lands are not liberated peacefully, then we shall
demonstrate the people's will, show our force, and use our army to
liberate all occupied territories." But all the enemy's demands show that
any peace in the current situation will not be to Azerbaijan's benefit.
This means there will have to be a demonstration of force.
In this case, it will be necessary to rely on Turkey. Naturally, the
Turkish army won't fight in Karabakh. However, with Turkey's support,
Azerbaijan's military industry is capable of providing for our army's
needs. Our specialists are in no doubt about this. As for Turkish
military bases being deployed in Azerbaijan, which has been discussed
over the last few days in our media, this cannot happen in the next few
years. And this for reasons depending not just on us.
RFE/RL
IS KEY WEST A PRELUDE TO PEACE
OR TO NEW FIGHTING...
Since the OSCE Minsk Group's draft Karabakh peace proposals were
leaked to the press a monthago, predictions about the upcoming summit in
Key West have ranged from discussions about the possibility of war to
predictions of a new step toward peace. In recent weeks, some senior officials in
Azerbaijan have noted that Baku has the right to use force if all attempts to
resolve the conflict peacefully fail and that the Azerbaijani armed forces are now
strong enough to liberate the raions currently occupied by Armenian
forces. Officials in Yerevan have responded by reaffirming their
commitment to try to resolve the conflict peacefully. But both Defense
Minister Serzh Sarkisian and President Robert Kocharian have warned that
any Azerbaijani aggression is likely to lead to a further defeat.
Noyan Tapan's veteran commentator David Petrosian said in a recent weekly
analysis that he considers a war unlikely not least because neither side
is strong enough to win a clear-cut military victory. He predicts that any
fighting would grind to a halt after six-eight weeks because neither side
has the resources to fight a protracted campaign. Moreover, during those
six to eight weeks, he suggests, each side would incur losses of between
2,000-5,000 men and up to 35 percent of its armor, while depleting
ammunition reserves by 50-70 percent. Such an inconclusive war makes a
resumption of negotiations difficult if not impossible in the short term
-- a development which, he notes, would be to the advantage of both Moscow
and Tehran.
Moscow's "Nezavisimaya gazeta" on 17 March offers an alternative scenario,
one which, however, it labels unlikely. The paper suggests that the
international community may have a vested interest in a resumption of
hostilities that would break the insistence of the unrecognized
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic that it not be subordinated to the central
Azerbaijani government under the terms of an eventual peace agreement. It
postulates an attack by Baku on the forces of the Karabakh Self-Defense
Army and a "mini-war," the outcome of which -- the Karabakh leadership's
capitulation -- would have to be agreed in advance between Baku, Yerevan,
and the international community. (Liz Fuller)
...OR WILL IT LEAD TO A RAPPROCHEMENT
BETWEEN ARMENIA AND TURKEY?
Commenting on the U.S.'s recent offer to host talks between Armenian
President Robert Kocharian and his Azerbaijani counterpart Heidar Aliev in
Key West early next month, the pro-Kocharian daily "Azg" suggested that
Washington is hoping to arrange a meeting between the foreign ministers of
Armenia and Turkey, RFE/RL's Yerevan bureau reported. Such a meeting
"promises to mark an interesting moment in Turkish-Armenian relations and
regional affairs," the paper concluded. (Liz Fuller)
[RFE/RL] Caucasus Report, March 23, 2001, Vol 4, No 12
Karabakh leader sees future as part of
"single Armenian state"
Snark in Russian 0900 GMT 22 Mar 01
Text of report by Armenian news agency Snark
Yerevan, 22 March: Discussion of the question of Armenia joining the
Russia-Belarus union would only have some meaning for the Nagornyy
Karabakh Republic [NKR] if what was being discussed was not only Armenia,
but NKR as well joining the Russia-Belarus union. In this context
guarantees for the non-renewal of military actions could also be studied,
Nagornyy Karabakh Republic President Arkadiy Gukasyan said in response to
questions from readers of the Yerevan newspaper Golos Armenii (22 March
2001).
Gukasyan said that this issue was, generally speaking, a separate
topic in itself. In all cases, the futures of Armenia and Nagornyy
Karabakh cannot be examined in isolation. "NKR's future is as part of a
single Armenian state," Arkadiy Gukasyan stressed.
Karabakh parliament brings tax laws into line with Armenian legislation
Excerpt from report by Armenian news agency Snark on 26 March
Stepanakert [Xankandi], 24 March: A number of Nagornyy Karabakh
Republic [NKR] laws have recently been revised because of the need to
bring NKR tax legislation into line with that of Armenia, and given that
they are operating in a single economic space. A recent session of the
NKR parliament introduced changes into the laws on income tax, profit
tax, VAT and fixed taxes.
[Passage omitted: more details of debates in parliament]
Snark in Russian 0426 GMT 26 Mar 01
Copyright Snark
War's phantom survivors
Azerbaijan: After the fighting stopped between this newly independent state
and its neighbor, countless refugees melted into a scattered life abroad.
By Kathy Lally, Sun Foreign Staff
The Baltimore Sun
Originally published April 1, 2001
SAATLI, Azerbaijan - They are ghostly figures, long forgotten by the world,
more than 570,000 refugees living in railroad boxcars, snake-infested holes
in the ground, mud huts and abandoned buildings.
Once, the world cared deeply for them. That was nearly 10 years ago when the
Soviet Union was freshly dissolved and embers from a war between the newly
independent states of Azerbaijan and Armenia threatened to raise
uncontrollable flames from the ashes of the Cold War.
But the fight for a mountainous sliver of land called Nagorno-Karabakh ended
with an Armenian victory and a cease-fire in 1994. Armenia took
Nagorno-Karabakh and occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan's territory,
preventing the displaced from returning home. Once the guns had stopped
firing, the wounded, homeless people were quickly forgotten.
Mekhradj Veysalov, a middle-aged father, has become part of the phantom
legion that war left behind. Here in rural Azerbaijan, he walks listlessly
along the railroad tracks and boxcars that shelter him, a spectral presence,
hoping the world will see him and remember.
"The only real help we can get from America," he says, "is an effort to try
and solve the problem of Karabakh. How can you let a blameless people
suffer? It can't be accepted anywhere."
The presidents of the two countries met for the first time in 1999, and the
United States, Russia and France have been overseeing subsequent
negotiations, without success. Now, in one of his first attempts to
influence the course of world events as U.S. secretary of state, Colin L.
Powell has invited the two presidents to meet in the United States on
Tuesday.
"When you're dealing with peace talks, it's always difficult to predict
possible success," said Carey Cavanaugh, the U.S. special negotiator for
Nagorno-Karabakh. "We've seen how hard it is in the Mideast and Northern
Ireland and Cyprus. What we hope to do here is give it its best chance for
success."
Progress in the talks might very well give Mekhradj Veysalov and his
countrymen hope of returning to their homes.
"I can remember the day very well," Veysalov says, describing the moment
life as he knew it ended. "It was Oct. 23, 1993. The weather was very cold.
I had to swim in the water with my mother."
Fleeing in panic
Veysalov, his wife, mother and six children were fleeing their home in the
terror and panic of an Armenian advance on the Jabrail region, wedged
between Nagorno-Karabakh and the Arax River on the border with Iran. Many
drowned in the crossing. Ever since, the Veysalov family has lived in a
hulking railroad boxcar. In winter, the metal car is like a drafty
refrigerator. In summer, it is like an oven, and the families sleep on the
tracks, underneath the car.
"They came to the train station here, saw the boxcars and went inside," says
Israil Iskenderov, director of UMID, a fledgling Azerbaijani
non-governmental aid agency. "They heard the Armenians were coming. The
alarm went out, and they ran. They left without clothes, without animals."
Now they are part of a settlement of nearly 500 people who have lived in
these boxcars for more than seven years. About 80 cars are lined up in two
long rows on tracks that run past the Saatli train station. Passenger trains
speed by at 1:30 in the morning and 6:30 in the evening.
Veysalov's kitchen looks medieval. His 16-year-old daughter, Basti, crouches
over a pail of gray water, washing the lunch dishes. A hen is tied by one
leg to the leg of a table. Nine chicks hop and cheep in merry disorder.
Behind a partition, the family has fashioned a living room with empty but
colorful candy boxes decorating the walls like priceless paintings.
Lives are measured out in small humiliations. The men sit, chafing at their
lack of work, playing dominoes. The women haul water from a half-inch pipe
that flows for two or three hours every other day. Nearly 500 people rely on
a dozen outhouses.
Idled women perch on the tracks, as if on a front porch, and talk of their
lost homes. The children play around them in the gravel roadbed. Laundry
waves from the sides of the boxcars. Turkeys strut about, their gobble
stern, their feathers magnificent. A rooster crows.
These people have settled into a mood of weary acceptance, modulated neither
by great joy nor deep sadness. "Usually it depends on the water supply,"
Veysalov says, "or whether we have electricity."
A warring past
The people of the Caucasus - Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Georgians, Chechens
and others - were born into a land of legendary significance, where East
meets West. Empires rose and clashed here like tectonic plates. Alexander
the Great, Tamerlane, Genghis Khan, czars and shahs, all fought for these
mountains and plains.
The Christian Armenians and Muslim Azerbaijanis, absorbed into the Russian
Empire, never liked each other, but the Soviets gave them something to fight
over - Nagorno-Karabakh. In the early 1920s, as the Soviet Union created new
states within its empire, it made Nagorno-Karabakh a part of Azerbaijan,
though the region was nearly 80 percent Armenian.
The dominant political and emotional factors here are ethnic more than
religious. The Armenians accuse Turkey of genocide against them in 1915, and
so they loathe the Turkic Azerbaijanis. Shiite Iran supports Armenia, at the
expense of Shiite Azerbaijan, because it dislikes Turkey and its NATO
allies. More ethnic Azerbaijanis live in Iran than in Azerbaijan, making
Iran uneasy about a stable neighbor with nationalistic ambitions.
America has interests here, too, in the vast Azerbaijani oil fields and in
promoting stable, Western-oriented democracies on Russia's border.
Armenia claims an ancient, mystical attachment to Nagorno-Karabakh.
"Historically," says Yuri Chanchurian, political counselor of the Armenian
Embassy in Moscow, "this territory has always belonged to Armenia, 100 years
ago, 200 years ago and 1,000 years ago."
Azerbaijan considers it an inviolable part of its territory. "The Armenians
will have you think Armenia stretched from the Black Sea to the Caspian, and
that there were never Muslims here at all," says Iskenderov. "It's not
true."
As always, people like Mekhradj Veysalov pay the price for their rulers'
ambitions, living out their lives haunted by the old dreams and enmities.
"Those who are suffering are ordinary, plain people," Veysalov says. "What
can the point of that be?"
Veysalov fled from the village of Boyuk Marjanli, where he coached soccer,
volleyball and basketball for the community sports committee. His mother,
Chichek, now 85, worked on the collective farm for 30 years, growing grapes.
Every family kept animals and grew fruits and vegetables.
"We had trees," Veysalov says, "nuts, apricots, cherries, pears, peaches,
figs and grapes. We had different kinds of chickens."
Like their neighbors, they had a small but comfortable stone house gleaming
with stucco. Their land was rich with cucumbers and tomatoes, sheep, cows
and fresh milk.
"We can't say, sitting here, that we lived in a house of marble," Veysalov
says, "but conditions were pretty good."
Outside, six women and four children are sitting on the rails. They're
talking of home. One 80-year-old woman sits cross-legged on a wooden tie.
"Our only need," says Sumaya Shamiyeva, a 40-year-old mother of five, "is to
go back to our homeland."
Women come and go, talking lately of Jacques Chirac. The French president
moderated a meeting between Armenian President Robert Kocharian and
Azerbaijani President Heidar Aliyev in Paris on March 4 and 5, which did not
result in any public change in their positions.
The children listen curiously to the adults. Even the smallest ones know the
exact day their families fled, though they were too young to remember
anything of it. These boxcars abandoned on a dusty plain are the only homes
they know.
"Our houses are so hot in the summer," says Shalala Valiyeva, a 9-year-old
girl who has big brown eyes and the badly decaying teeth that mark most of
the children, "and so cold in the winter."
A boy, a few years older, rebukes her. "It's not a house," he says
scornfully. "It's a wagon."
About half of the displaced people live in miserable public buildings -
abandoned schools, hospitals and sanatoriums. Another 100,000 live in camps
of mud huts and a few prefabricated shelters. About 50,000 live in boxcars,
and more are scattered among dugouts and other makeshift homes.
In Agdzhabedi, 60 miles to the west of Saatli, 400 refugees live in a
five-story hostel once used for students from a technical institute.
Electricity is sporadic, and the hallways are long and very dark. Children
emerge from apartments like rabbits bounding out of a cramped hutch, shadowy
figures racing for freedom through a tunnel closing around them.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees helps, trying to create
work and distributing clothes, quilts and school supplies from organizations
such as Lutheran World Relief, based in Baltimore. Azerbaijan allots each
person about $5 a month. The people call it bread money.
"They get kerosene about four times during the winter," Iskenderov says.
"It's about 25 percent of what they need - if they get it at all; sometimes
it doesn't all get from the city to the settlement."
The United Nations arrived in December 1992 and by 1993 was helping to
organize camps. At the time, the rest of the world listened to the pleas for
help, expecting a simple and fast resolution.
"It seemed it would not be difficult to organize the return of the displaced
to their homeland," says Didier Laye, the representative to Azerbaijan of
the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. "It turned out to be more
complicated."
He imagines that little is left of their homes by now. Occupiers have
reportedly stripped the region, ripping off roofs and digging up pipes in
the ground.
The war has left Azerbaijan, a country of 8 million people, poor and
unemployed, despite future prospects for oil wealth. Armenia, once a country
of 3.7 million, has been impoverished, too. Its people have endured terrible
suffering, going without heat and light in winter, nearly surrounded by
hostile neighbors, the economy suffocating. The population has reportedly
dropped to fewer than 2.5 million.
"There's misery on both sides," Laye says. "Neither side has won anything -
even though they each think the other side has."
The road out of Agdzhabedi leads to a vast expanse of dry, cracked, brown
earth in a place called Vagazin. Here and there, mounds of dirt rise up,
like enormous groundhog warrens. Halig Dunyamaliyev, a tall, handsome
blue-jean-wearing 18-year-old, stands in front of what looks like a small
shed.
He opens the door, motioning toward what turns out to be rough steps leading
downward into the earth. "Please come into my house," he says.
Several hundred refugees from the Lachin region have been living in dugouts
like this since 1992. In summer the dugouts turn into earthen furnaces, hot
as hellfire. Snakes and lizards crawl inside. There are no trees to offer a
little shade. Here, one child out of four dies before age 5, says Laye.
Visible toll
"The weaker are disappearing quickly," he says. "Someone who would live
until 70 dies at 60."
The cemetery, they say, is growing rapidly.
In Sumgait, 25 miles from the capital of Baku, refugee families are crowded
into the single rooms of an old sanatorium.
On a rise above the Caspian Sea, only a short walk from the beach, Afarim
Abdullayeva looks out her window as if considering a nasty joke. She has a
rich man's ocean view, and fancy houses are rising nearby.
Like her neighbors, she fled Lachin in 1992, when Armenians captured the
Azerbaijani city to open a corridor to Nagorno-Karabakh. She is 70,
surrounded by poverty and distress. Water is available three hours a day,
and she walks down two flights of stairs and outside to haul it.
The sewage system has long since failed, and the two toilets on every floor
empty into the basement. The residents live on top of a huge cesspool.
From her window in Sumgait, Abdullayeva can look out on a courtyard. She can
see an old and very decrepit orange bus out there, up on blocks, rusting
into nothingness. The bus was commandeered from its regular route in 1992 to
rescue refugees.
A sign with its old, well-traveled destination remains propped up in the
window.
Lachin, it says.
Perhaps now, so many years after the bus faltered to a stop, someone will
remember it is here, waiting.
"We still live on hope," Abdullayeva says. "Our hope helps us to survive."
News referred from Habarlar-L