updated
YEREVAN. The chief U.S. negotiator of the OSCE Minsk Group, Carey Cavanaugh said he believes presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan can find a peace agreement that they would be satisfied with.
As Mediamax reports quoting world news agencies, the American diplomat declared this in New York, at "Armenia Investor 2001" business forum. Carey Cavanaugh said both the presidents are working hard toward the 100 percent, "and they're not there yet, but they're getting closer all the time."
However, Cavanaugh noted that getting the Armenian and Azerbaijani people behind an agreement and selling the tough compromises involved will test their political skills. "People in Armenia and Azerbaijan see the need for peace. But they don't fully see how to do compromise," the American diplomat said.
CIS, May 15, 2001 [ 19:30 ]
Mediamax
RUSSIA READY TO ACT AS GUARANTOR IN THE SETTLEMENT OF KARABAKH CONFLICT
BAKU, May 15, 2001. /RIA Novosti/--Russia is ready to act as a guarantor in the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. However, in the opinion of the Russian side, only the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan must make a final decision. This is what Secretary of the Russian Security Council Vladimir Rushailo said on Tuesday at a meeting with Azeri President Geidar Aliyev.
Rushailo stressed that "no one will be able to feel better than the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan what is acceptable and non-acceptable in this issue." According to the Russian Security Council Secretary, Russia will support the decision that the Presidents of both countries will make.
Rushailo agreed with Aliyev that the normal work of the summit of the Caucasian four states (Russia, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia), the preparation for which was also discussed at today's meeting, is impossible without the settlement of the Karabakh conflict.
In his turn, Aliyev noted that cooperation of the four states implies normal relations in all the spheres, and "this is impossible, if two of the states are in the state of a military conflict."
RIAN.ru
2001-05-15 15:43 * AZERBAIJAN * RUSSIA * RUSHAILO * KARABAKH *
Leaders Need Majority Support in Compromise to Win Favor for Nagorno-Karabakh Peace Settlement Expert
EurasiaNet
Jessica O'Brien: 5/16/01
In an Open Forum at the Open Society Institute on May 11, a month since
OSCE peace talks on Nagorno-Karabakh were held in Key West, U.S. Minsk
Group co-chairman Carey Cavanaugh said "significant, concrete progress was
made in Florida" and the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan felt "closer
to peace than ever before." According to Cavanaugh, the greatest obstacle
to a peaceful settlement is no longer at the negotiating table.
"The people will have to be brought farther along by their leaders to
understand the need for a settlement and to be able to embrace the
settlement that may emerge from the peace process," said Ambassador
Cavanaugh. "I think thats the hardest challenge facing Presidents Aliyev
and Kocharian."
Years of negotiations have worn down the intransigent positions of
Armenian President Robert Kocharian and Azerbaijan President Heidar Aliyev
regarding Karabakh, but the public has been isolated from the evolving
phases of the discussions, negotiations and, now, peace talks between the
presidents. As a result, says Cavanaugh of Aliyev and Kocharian, "I think
that they, themselves, are mentally in a different place than their
populations."
Kocharian and Aliyev have evolved an understanding of the fact that great
compromises are the essential and only means of diffusing a situation
that, status quo, leaves great room for renewed hostility to develop and
is of no benefit to either country. Still, with few people privy to the
negotiations that have been ongoing over this frozen conflict, the
loyalties of the people in Armenia and Azerbaijan are more closely
connected to the unbending terms that sent these nations to war over
Karabakh in the first place.
Cavanaugh asserts that the peoples resistance to compromise is not an
indication that they favor renewed conflict. "You tend to hear, in Armenia
and Azerbaijan, strong support for the idea of peace," he said.
Ambassador Cavanaugh surmises that these unbending attitudes toward
compromise are at least a partial result of the secrecy surrounding the
negotiation process that has kept, and will continue to keep people from
growing used to the exact terms of a settlement as they are
established. Aliyev and Kocharian will only take their peace package to
the people once it is complete. Until then, its precise terms will be
known only to the parties and the mediation teams from the U.S., France
and Russia.
Cavanaugh defended the inevitability of secret peace talks with a nod to
the efforts by Barak and Arafat to offer great compromises in a settlement
that would resolve the longstanding conflict between Israel and
Palestine. "As those elements of a solution for the Middle East became
public they were ripped apart by oppositions who said, you cannot do
thisyou cannot divide Jerusalem, you cannot compromise on the right of
returnyou cannot do this creative solution on the Temple Mount."
The terms of any single facet of compromise might unearth innumerable
religious, cultural and historical debates, and this could hinder progress
toward the ultimate goal of peace, obstructing a big picture
view. Encouraging long-term perspective, Cavanaugh pointed to the
increasing meaninglessness of borders between countries in Europe. "France
and Germany spent two great world wars fighting with one another and now,
if you want to drive from one to the other, you hop in your car and you
go." This would clearly take a very long time to happen in Karabakh, he
said, but it was essential that the Azeri and Armenian people be
encouraged to have a future-forward perspective that is not so bound up on
particular aspects of the settlement.
Still, the secrecy of the process may effect the publics ultimate
acceptance of a peace settlement, and this is the ultimate paradox facing
Aliyev and Kocharian. "[The peace process] requires secrecy but it
complicates the very task I just spoke to before," says Cavanaugh,
indicating the need to gain slow public favor for compromises that as yet
remain unnamed. Aliyev and Kocharian have been countering this problem by
speaking with leading political figures and members of their respective
Parliaments in hopes of spurring an informed public dialogue on the
subject of a peace settlement, and to spread the idea of the need for
compromise. Neither is reported to have firmed up a plan for selling a
settlement built on compromises to their people.
For myriad reasons, it is an opportune time for Aliyev and Kocharian to
introduce a peace settlement. These leaders are the beneficiaries of a
mediation process facilitated by a "seamless cooperation" between the
U.S., Russia and France; they are between election periods; and there is,
in Cavanaughs words, "no competing crisis" on the international scene at
the present time.
Still, Cavanaugh would not set what he called an "artificial deadline" on
the peace process, as a partial peace settlement is in many ways no peace
settlement at all. "The dilemma in working peace settlements is if you
dont have the whole thing, in many ways you dont have anything," he said,
likening the process to the successful construction of a bridge. Even if
you have completed 80 or 90%, you will fall into the water if you try to
drive across it prematurely.
"Kocharian and Aliyev have made significant progress-- but it doesnt mean
theyll succeed," said Cavanaugh. The road ahead remains difficult, but he
is encouraged by their commitment and their preparedness to make serious
compromises to bring a new future to the region and a far better life for
their people.
Posted May 16, 2000 Eurasianet
Azeri paper sceptical about mediators'
new Karabakh proposal
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; May 14, 2001
The Azerbaijani newspaper Zerkalo has said that if the new Minsk Group proposal for resolving the Karabakh conflict turns out to be what was outlined recently by Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan, then there is no way it could be accepted by Azerbaijan. The paper described the proposal as "nonsensical" and a minor reworking of two previous proposals. It said that recent Azerbaijani military exercises demonstrated Baku's readiness to resolve the conflict by force, and alarmed Armenia and Russia. However, the paper said that Russia might not feel inclined to get involved in a renewed Karabakh war on the Armenian side, given that this would bring it into conflict with the USA and could also be a repeat of Russia's military problems in Chechnya. The following is text of E. Abulfatov report by Azerbaijani newspaper Zerkalo on 12 May entitled "Prospects for peace in the Caucasus":
The Minsk Group is probably going to get into a mess again
Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan has again leaked information about the confidential OSCE Minsk Group talks to resolve the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. Oskanyan actually confirmed all the media reports about the content of the new plan to peacefully resolve the conflict which is being prepared by the Minsk Group cochairmen. It emerges from what Oskanyan said that under the new plan, Nagornyy Karabakh remains nominally within Azerbaijan, but has all attributes of statehood. In addition to an anthem, coat of arms and flag, the plan is to preserve all the branches of power in Karabakh, i.e. executive, legislative and judicial. All economic and foreign policy problems are Karabakh's prerogative. Lacin [Lachin], together with a corridor, comes under the control of the Armenians in exchange for a corridor linking Azerbaijan with Naxcivan, and this corridor also remains under Armenia's full control. In addition, security issues also remain under the jurisdiction of Karabakh's power-wielding structures. However, citizens of Karabakh, who are not considered foreigners in Armenia, can participate in parliamentary and presidential elections in Azerbaijan.
Thus, in foisting the Minsk Group's new plan on Azerbaijan, another attempt is being made to plant elements of potential instability any time this becomes advantageous for interested forces.
Apart from other good things, Karabakh would be able to spoil elections both for the legislative and executive authorities in Azerbaijan any time it wished. The absence of any Azerbaijani armed forces in Karabakh would become a serious danger for the Azerbaijanis who return home after a peace agreement is signed. Armenians would be able to commit any massacres they wish under various pretexts and with impunity; and Azerbaijani structures would be able to come to Karabakh only if they gained permission from the separatists to do so. In general, without going into all the points in this clearly nonsensical plan, it is safe to say that if the Minsk Group submits this settlement plan in Geneva, it will confirm once again the meaninglessness of further efforts within this organization. The cochairmen have not gone to any trouble, and have just copied with minor amendments the other two plans to make it look like a stage-by-stage plan.
In general, the Minsk Group's attempt to unite two concepts which cannot be united (Azerbaijan wants territorial integrity while Armenia wants sovereignty for Karabakh) was doomed from the very start because, from the first days when they started working, the cochairmen moved in the wrong direction. If the cochairmen had started their work with a study of the history and objective reasons for the conflict, they could have submitted a detailed report on their research to an extraordinary full conference of the OSCE. Finding out the true cause of the conflict, the cochairmen could have resolved the problem by getting the international community to apply severe pressure to Armenia, possibly sanctions or even an international force to restore the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. However, this was not done and no attempts are being made to redirect the Minsk Group's activity in this way, so we have to rely only on ourselves.
Existence of an alternative
The situation might change in precisely this way. The Azerbaijani leadership has repeatedly declared that they will not sign any documents running counter to national interests. Addressing WWII veterans on 9 May, Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev said that "everybody involved in the occupation of Azerbaijani territories would be punished..." [ellipses as given] He stressed that although the separatists were celebrating the seizure of Susa today, everything would soon change and refugees would return to their homes.
Frankly, we should not have expected anything else. Azerbaijan has to resolve the problem of the invaders in any way it can to avoid this process dragging on for many decades. The prospect of it dragging on is also not acceptable to the Azerbaijani authorities because, in terms of the succession, the new leadership would be doomed to a difficult domestic and foreign policy if it inherited this problem.
Leaving this problem unsettled, or resolving it in a way which runs counter to national interests, could become a factor in the hands of any force interested in creating instability. This, in turn, is fraught with danger both for the authorities and the country as a whole.
Therefore, it can be assumed that if the plan mentioned by Oskanyan is submitted by the Minsk Group in Geneva in June, Baku is unlikely to agree to sign a peace agreement which could wreck the country.
However, it cannot be ruled out that another political game will be played, as was the case with the first two plans from the Minsk Group. In such a case, even if Baku officials approved the plan formally, they could put off signing it until it was submitted for national discussion, knowing that the public would not accept any defeatist peace. Armenia could also show its obstinacy and not accept Karabakh even nominally staying within Azerbaijan. Incidentally, all Armenian politicians are talking about this.
If the Geneva talks are a fiasco, another stage of the settlement will come, i.e. an alternative way of resolving the conflict. This turn of the events can be traced from the beginning of the Key West talks. At precisely that time Azerbaijan started large-scale manoeuvres, the second stage of which continued on 1 May this year. All sorts of troops, including aviation, were involved in the manoeuvres. They could serve as a demonstration of active preparations for a military operation to restore the country's territorial integrity. The previous manoeuvres showed the separatists' impotence as Azerbaijani aircraft flew freely over Karabakh. For this precise reason the Russian and Armenian air defence systems were put on alert in Armenia. Consequently, Yerevan and Moscow are already thinking about the possibility of Azerbaijan carrying out a military operation.
Interests of the leading powers
Therefore, Moscow made it clear that to preserve its influence in the Caucasus it could again be on the Armenian side if hostilities resume. However, this begs the question - Is Moscow ready to get bogged down in Azerbaijan, after two failed campaigns in Chechnya, and to aggravate its already tense relations with Washington. The USA is consistently demonstrating its desire to consolidate its hold on the South Caucasus and restrict as far as possible the scope of the Kremlin. If Azerbaijan manages to enlist the support of the White House, this could serve as a restraining factor on Moscow, which is not ready or able to be in open confrontation with the USA. Therefore, Baku intends to conclude a military union with Ankara to strengthen its pro-western line and create parity in the region. Ankara carries out US policy in the region and its military rapprochement with Baku has most probably been agreed with the White House.
Appreciating in full their responsibility for this current situation, both Moscow and Washington can still exert pressure on Yerevan to prevent hostilities. It should be appreciated that if a military operation is launched, a new conflict could begin in the region and spread very rapidly if the great powers, in their battle for spheres of influence, do not stop using uncivilized methods. In this situation it is very important to define whether the Kremlin will exercise the option which is destined to fail, as one should not forget that the South Caucasus is adjacent to the North Caucasus, which remains Russia's unsettled problem even after two Chechen campaigns.
Source: Zerkalo, Baku, in Russian 12 May 01 pp 3,8
/BBC Monitoring/ � BBC.
Azeri party leader outlines expected peace
agreement on Karabakh
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; May 14, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency MPA
Baku, 12 May: "Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan's statement's [about Karabakh conflict settlement] is nonsense," the head of the Civic Unity Party (CUP), [MP] Iqbal Agazada, has said. He said that an oral agreement was reached at the Key West talks between the Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents. The MP said that "according to this agreement, six Azerbaijani districts, including Susa [Shusha] and five adjacent villages, will be liberated. People from 56 settlements, including Xocali [Khodzhaly], will be settled in Susa and the villages around it. The Molla Nasraddin road, which connects Susa and Fuzuli [Fizuli] District, will be restored and placed under international control. Lacin [Lachin] District will be given the status of a 3-km-wide corridor. International peacekeeping forces will be deployed there. A special road will be built from Lacin to Kalbacar [Kelbadzhar] and Murovdag Region [west of Azerbaijan]. The Azerbaijani side is demanding a corridor similar to the Lacin one. This corridor should cross Armenia's Megri District to unite Azerbaijan with the Naxcivan Autonomous Republic. The details of this corridor have not yet been defined. The Armenians do not want to give the Megri corridor over to international peacekeeping forces, saying that this area is close to Armenia's border with Iran and Turkey."
Agazada said also that "Nagornyy Karabakh, which will remain in Azerbaijan, will be allowed to have a national guard and will become an independent economic zone. Armenians will have Hadrut [Gadrut], Asgaran [Askeran], Xankandi [Stepanakert] and two more districts [presumably Agdara and Xocavand]". This option, Agazada believes, is not ideal for Azerbaijan, but is still totally acceptable. This oral agreement could be put on paper in Geneva if no government changes take place in Armenia. [Armenian President Robert] Kocharyan's opponents could take advantage of this to remove him from his post. The aim of Oskanyan's statements is to shape public opinion, the head of the CUP said. Financial assistance to both countries will be considered if an agreement is signed at the meeting of the "eight" [the forthcoming meeting of G7 and Russia in Italy].
Source: MPA news agency, Baku, in Russian 12 May 01
/BBC Monitoring/ � BBC.
TENSIONS RISE IN BAKU
Observers believe that Heidar Aliev's government is preparing the country
for bad news
By Irada Akhmetova in Baku
Azeri opposition leaders are to stage mass demonstrations in Baku to protest
against government handling of the Nagorny Karabakh peace talks.
With just a month to go before the next round of talks in Geneva, tensions
have been rising across the capital, which has also seen a sharp escalation
in violent crime.
However, local observers claim the strained atmosphere has been deliberately
orchestrated by the authorities in a bid to prepare the population for a
dramatic climb-down over Nagorny Karabakh.
The planned demonstrations are being spearheaded by the Democratic Party of
Azerbaijan (DPA) whose last protest march, on April 21, was forcibly
dispersed by riot police.
But the DPA remains undeterred. Party leader Rasul Guliev, a former
parliamentary speaker, praised the "courage and decisiveness" of the
demonstrators and condemned the government backlash.
"The DPA has no intention of swerving from its course of action," Guliev
told the Eni Musavat newspaper. "We have the strength to continue the
struggle for civil rights and a decent standard of living."
The DPA leader concluded that the party would make no deals with the
authorities and was ready to join forces with other opposition groups.
The next meeting was scheduled to take place on May 12 when the DPA was due
to march with the "classical" wing of the Popular Front of Azerbaijan (PFA)
- a party closely associated with another opposition heavyweight, Musavat.
PFA leader Ali Kerimov said the demonstration had been prompted by news that
the government was ready to sign a capitulatory agreement with Armenia over
the Nagorny Karabakh dispute.
Kerimov went on to say that, after the March peace talks in Florida's Key
West, there was a real possibility of solidarity amongst the opposition
factions.
Musavat leaders are also hinting that they may take part in upcoming
demonstrations. Party secretary Ibragim Ibragimli said, "The resolution of
the Nagorny Karabakh dispute will ultimately be forced upon the Azeri
people."
He explained that recent government propaganda on diplomatic successes
combined with the April 21 crackdown are clear signs that the authorities
are preparing society for compromise.
This argument was reinforced by a May 5 visit to Baku by Carey Cavanaugh,
the American co-chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group which is currently
brokering the peace deal.
Armenian diplomats swiftly claimed that Cavanaugh chose to visit Azerbaijan
-- rather than Armenia or Karabakh - in an attempt to put increased pressure
on President Heidar Aliev.
Ibragimli commented, "Cavanaugh's visit to Baku and his secret talks with
Heidar Aliev indicate that the Azeri authorities are seriously preparing for
D-Day when the results of the peace talks will be made public and the extent
of Azeri concessions will become clear."
Prior to the American diplomat's visit, a new peace formula was allegedly
leaked to the Azeri media which claimed it would form the focus of the June
15 talks in Geneva.
Under this proposal, the Nagorny Karabakh enclave would formally remain part
of Azerbaijan but would enjoy such a large degree of autonomy that it would
to all intents and purposes become an independent state. The question of
complete autonomy has always been rejected by Baku in the past.
In the wake of Cavanaugh's visit, the Turan news agency - traditionally
considered to be the mouthpiece of the opposition - quoted an unnamed
foreign diplomat as saying, "The mediators have come up with a formula that
would be equivalent to cutting off Azerbaijan's hands."
Meanwhile, the authorities are clearly determined to suppress any planned
opposition protests in Baku. However, President Aliev is also aware that
further heavy-handed actions may give his opponents greater leverage in the
upcoming peace talks.
Following the April 21 demonstrations, a US State Department spokesman
commented, "We believe that the Azeri government should respect the right of
its citizens to freely hold public meetings."
He added that an annual report on human rights in Azerbaijan had described
the existing situation as "poor".
At the same time, Council of Europe experts have visited Baku to prepare a
report on human rights abuses and political prisoners in Azerbaijan. They
will present the report to the council on June 30.
Sulhaddin Akper, Musavat party secretary, said the Baku regime was
attempting to plunge the city into "chaos and anxiety" by spreading rumours
and disinformation.
Akper also believes that government agents have sparked off turf wars
between rival crime gangs in a bid to heighten the tensions.
On May 1, two men were shot dead while sitting in their car near Baku's
Fizuli Square. Most observers agree that the killings had all the hallmarks
of a mafia hit.
Isakhan Ashurov, a well-known lawyer and former policeman, described the
incident as an "example of anarchy and lawlessness in the capital."
He also cited another incident on April 28 when three men attacked a car
belonging to the Azeri interior minister, Ramil Usubov.
The assailants - who included Samed Heidarov, a senior counter-intelligence
officer - proceeded to beat up the car driver, Victor Kondaurov, until
police arrived at the scene. The men then produced firearms and Kondaurov
was wounded in the subsequent shooting.
The Bilik Dyunyasy news agency described the incident as "an example of the
clan mentality which dominates the authorities and their complete lack of
control". Ironically, it pointed out, the shooting took place on a street
named in honour of Aziz Aliev, the father-in-law of the current Azeri
president.
Irada Akhmetova is an independent journalist based in Baku
IWPR'S CAUCASUS REPORTING SERVICE, NO. 82, May 16, 2001
Azeris say Armenian diplomacy failed at
Council of Europe meeting
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan
Strasbourg, 14 May: The 108th session of the Council of Europe Committee
of Ministers, which ended last week, was successful for Azerbaijan. This
view was expressed by the ambassador of Azerbaijan's mission at the
Council of Europe, Aqsin Mehdiyev, in an interview with Turan. He recalled
that the ministers adopted a final communique, which confirmed the
territorial integrity of the countries of Europe, including Azerbaijan.
"However, adoption of this document almost fell through because of the
Armenian side. If Armenia had refused to adopt the communique, there would
not have been consensus. Armenia did not dare to act in this way at its
first session following entry into the Council of Europe,"Mehdiyev said.
The issue of respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of
Council of Europe member countries was raised by Azerbaijan and treated
with understanding by all the Council of Europe members, except Armenia.
Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan said that he did not agree with
the text of the document. In his speech at the session, he said: "Armenia
refrains from recognizing the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan until
the Karabakh conflict is resolved."
A statement like this by the Armenian representative inevitably perplexed
those taking part in the session. "Armenia did not show itself in the best
light and was effectively backed into a corner. My theory is that Armenia
found it was not ready for European standards, and it adopted a primitive
position, which can only be described as anachronistic,"Mehdiyev said. The
speech by Vilayat Quliyev, however, was restrained, specific and
persuasive. He did not retaliate with an attack against the Armenian
minister.
Iranian ambassador to Armenia will attend OSCE Summit in Karabakh
Tehran Times (Internet Version-WWW)
in English
15 May 01
>From the "Politics" column by the "Political desk": "Iranian Ambassador
to Armenia to attend first Minsk Summit in Karabakh"
TEHRAN -- Iranian Ambassador to Armenia, Mohammad Farhad- Koleini, was
appointed to represent the country at the first summit conference of the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to be held in
Karabakh.
According to a report of the Press and Information Department of the
Iranian Foreign Ministry, the head of the French group of Minsk extended
the invitation for Iran to take part in the conference called to discuss
ways of settling the Karabakh crisis.
The Foreign Ministry, in a letter to the French Embassy in Tehran,
emphasized the necessity of a peaceful settlement to the crisis and
announced its readiness to helping find a peaceful settlement to the
crisis that would ensure stability, security and permanent development
for the region.
A new round of direct talks between the presidents of Azerbaijan and
Armenia about disputes on Karabakh enclave was held in Keywest, Florida,
April 3-6.
Karabakh disputes between Baku and Yervan, which started in 1988,
came to halt in 1994 after the cease-fire. But the seven years of peace
efforts have been unfruitful.
US, Russia and France jointly act as the head of the Minsk Group
formed by Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)
established in 1992 with participation of 11 countries.
[Description of Source: Tehran Tehran Times (Internet Version-WWW) in
English -- conservative English-language daily published by the Islamic
Guidance and Communications Organization]
COUNCIL OF EUROPE SAYS ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTERS STATEMENT
UNCONSTRUCTIVE: VILAYAT GULIYEV
Source:Turan News Agency
12.05.01--BAKU--Azeri Foreign Minister Vilayat Guliyev has informed
participants in the 108th session of the CE Committee of Ministers about
the process of fulfillment of the commitments undertaken by Azerbaijan to
the CE. Press service of the foreign ministry of Azerbaijan reports that
Guliyev has expressed hope for further strengthening of many-sided
co-operation between Azerbaijan and CE. The minister stressed that peace
negotiations over the Nagorno Karabakh conflict are complicated by
unconstructive position of Armenia, that violated territorial integrity of
Azerbaijan. This negatively affects the process of establishment of peace
and stability in the region. The Turkish delegation made a similar
statement, having called on Armenia to liberate the occupied territories
for soonest establishment of peace and stability in the Caucasus. The
foreign minister of Armenia was the only participant of the session who
expressed his disagreements with item 2 of the final communiqu� on support
and recognition of internationally recognized borders, sovereignty and
territorial integrity of the European countries. He motivated this by
non-recognition of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. Press service
of the Azeri foreign ministry reports that delegations of European
countries have found Armenian foreign minister's statement as negative and
unconstructive.
By Staff Writers
ARMENIAN FOREIGN MINISTER FINALLY
CALLS A SPADE A SPADE
Source:ANS
11.05.01--BAKU--The Foreign Minister of Armenia, Vardan Oskanian made an
unprecedented statement in his interview with Armenias A1+ channel on May
9. The point is that Mr Oskanian called the Azeri lands currently being
under control of Armenias occupant forces +occupied lands- although the
Armenian foreign diplomacy has always referred to them as +liberated
lands.- Ayk Babukhanian, a member of the Armenian Parliament, called the
foreign ministers statement +defeatist.- The MP said Armenia shouldnt
reconcile to a status being less than Karabakhs independence. Mr
Babukhanian noted that Lachin, Kalbajar and other lands being the
guarantee of Armenias and Karabakhs security cant be a subject of
discussions. The Armenian parliamentarian noted that the foreign minister
should revise his last statement in which he came against the common
Parliament thought. +If he doesnt reconsider his stance, we will consider
impossible his further remaining the foreign minister,- said the MP.
Armenias Dashnaksutyun radical party, too, blamed Mr Oskanians statement.
Armen Rustamian, a Dashnaksutyun member, said the parallels being made
between Lachin and Mehri corridors were mistaken and near-sighted.
Articles severely criticizing the Armenian ministers statement were
published in various Armenian mass media outlets on May 11. Yerevan-based
Aravot carried an article named +Oskanian: An Armenian Or Azeri Minister?-
another influential Armenian newspaper Aykakan Zhamanak reckons that Mr
Oskanian only followed the instructions of Armenian President Robert
Kocharian. The newspaper writes that President Kocharian, who is currently
in New York, will decide whether to give an assessment to the foreign
ministers statement or not after learning the reaction of the society and
nations political forces. Another newspaper Iravunk called the Armenian
ministers statement +scandalous- as it was made on May 9, the day the
Azeri town of Shusha was occupied by Armenian forces. According to
Iravunk, it wasnt accidental that the minister used the phrase +occupied
lands- and reckons that Kocharian knew of the statement beforehand.
By Gulgun Gurbanova
[ANS] News Digest, May 12, 2001
Copyright 2001 Azerbaijan News Service
Armenian minister tries to justify statement
on "occupied territories"
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; May 12, 2001
Text of report by Armenian news agency Snark on 12 May
Yerevan, 11 May: Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan has described as
insulting and speculative the comments by a number of political forces on
his recent statement regarding the Karabakh settlement. The latter are
particularly, indignant at Oskanyan's use of the term "occupied territories"
for the districts around Nagornyy Karabakh, which are under the control of
the Karabakh army. Many politicians believe that by using this term,
Oskanyan was, in fact, calling Armenia an aggressor.
"Nobody can teach me lessons about patriotism. I have been at the forefront
of this process for eight years and I have always fought against anything
which the opposite side tried to turn to its advantage," Oskanyan told
Armenian public television by phone from Strasbourg. He said that using the
term "occupied", he meant "territories taken by us".
Oskanyan said that this was not the fist time that he had used this term.
Oskanyan claimed that during the last five or six years, this has been the
key term he has used regarding these territories. In general, Oskanyan said
he used two terms - "seized territories" and "territories under the control
of Armenian forces". Oskanyan noted that he could not afford the luxuries
enjoyed by Armenian MPs, i.e. the latter can mix notions of patriotism and
diplomacy and bravely call these territories liberated.
Besides, Oskanyan said that he took the term "occupied" from the English
language. Oskanyan, who used to be a US citizen, admitted that this language
occupies a key place in his vocabulary.
"I had to use the Armenian equivalent which, however, I could not recall, so
I attempted to give the Armenian equivalent of the English word `occupy'.
Incidentally, dictionaries define this as `take' and that is what I meant.
Nobody should doubt this. If I wanted to say something different, as has bee
n suggested, I would probably use the term `captured territories'. However,
it would not cross my mind for even a moment to use this terminology. That
is why there is no need to speculate on this in vain," Oskanyan said.
Oskanyan promised to explain other aspects of his famous statement on 8 May
on his return to Yerevan.
Today several public and political organizations even demanded Oskanyan's
immediate resignation.
Source: Snark news agency, Yerevan, in Russian 0524 gmt 12 May 01
Azeri ex-aide says Armenian FM's statement on Karabakh "not serious"
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; May 14, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan
Baku, 11 May: Vafa Quluzada, Azerbaijan's former state foreign policy adviser, has described as "not serious" and "unrealistic" the terms of the Karabakh conflict settlement that Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan made public yesterday.
It should be noted that in an interview with the Armenian TV company A1+, Vardan Oskanyan stated that the Armenians could return to Azerbaijan only six of the seven districts surrounding Nagornyy Karabakh (except for Lacin) and this would happen only if Nagornyy Karabakh was offered a kind of status that suits the Armenians. Oskanyan also said that Karabakh could not obey Azerbaijan and that if the Armenian side was offered different conditions, Armenia would be spinning out the negotiations.
Commenting on these statements, Vafa Quluzada said that he knew Oskanyan very well, which is why he is surprised by his "unimportant statements". Most likely, all these statements have a "propagandist" nature and cannot reflect the "real" state of the negotiating process. "Nagornyy Karabakh itself and the territories around it are Azerbaijani lands, about which there can be no haggling. Yes, Armenians do live in Karabakh and we can discuss their conditions there. However, Azerbaijan will never haggle about its land or swap it for peace. Most likely, Oskanyan is trying to put pressure on mediators and gain more favourable conditions for the Armenians on the eve of the Geneva meeting. But I think that Oskanyan's efforts are futile," Quluzada said.
Source: Turan news agency, Baku, in Russian 1135 gmt 11 May 01
/BBC Monitoring/ � BBC.
WASHINGTON SAYS KARABAKH AGREEMENT MUST BECOME PIVOT OF STABILITY AND
SECURITY PACT IN CAUCASUS
Source:Turan News Agency
10.05.01--WASHINGTON, D.C.--The Karabakh peace agreement must become the
pivot of the future stability and security pact in the Caucasus. This was
announced by the representative of the U.S. Department of State who spoke
on condition of anonymity. He noted that the United States is very much
interested in conclusion of the document but added that official
Washington realizes its impossible without establishing peace and
stability in the South Caucasus. Currently, the source continued, its
practically impossible to make Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia come out
from the common stance. Each of these countries ensure their security on
their own way. The source agreed that Iran is playing an important role in
the region. Exactly this is why it was decided during recent Key West
talks between Armenian and Azeri presidents that Tehran would be informed
on the essence of the Karabakh negotiating process. +But no concrete steps
have so far been taken,- the source noted.
By Staff Writers
CONTENTS OF FUTURE AZERBAIJAN-ARMENIA PEACE AGREEMENT STILL UNKNOWN
Source:ANS
09.05.01--BAKU--The co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group held a closed
session in the Austrian capital of Vienna and its improbable that any
information will be released on this account. The session was supposed to
hear the report on the degree of preparedness of the conflicting parties
to sign a peace agreement. Before arriving in Vienna, the U.S. co-chair of
the Minsk Group, Carey Cavanaugh visited Baku, where he held
behind-closed-doors talks with Azeri leadership. The Vienna meeting was
also attended by representatives of Belarus, Turkey, Germany, Italy,
Sweden, Finland and Switzerland. Reuters reports that the agreement
prepared on the Nagorno Karabakh conflict mentions the breakaway region as
nominal part of Azerbaijan, while a high level of independence is granted
to it. The current situation could have been forecast even after the
February 23 debates in the Azeri Parliament. We would remind you that
President Heydar Aliyev said during those debates that the co-chairs
stance was that Karabakh cant be in Azerbaijans subordination any more.
Therefore, one could suppose that Azerbaijans control over Karabakh nears
nil in the peace agreement being prepared by the Minsk Group co-chairs.
For example, Karabakh will have its own Constitution reigning in the area.
According to Armenian laws, the citizens of the self-proclaimed republic
who have the name +Nagorno Karabakh- on their passports wont be considered
as foreigners and will feel free when applying for Armenian citizenship.
Whats interesting is that the co-chairs proposals envision that these
people will also have the right to be elected in the Azeri Parliament and
participate in presidential elections. There is another point - Armenian
will be Karabakhs official language. The separatist region, which is
supposed to have in future its own army, law-enforcement bodies, national
anthem, coat of arms and special currency, will also have the right to
interfere in Azerbaijans foreign policy when issues related to its affairs
will be in question. It should be noted that part of the mentioned clauses
have already been accepted by the Government of Azerbaijan. Most of those
which Azerbaijan still rejects have been included in the peace agreement
to be discussed during Geneva talks between Azeri and Armenian presidents
due to be held on June 15. But on the other hand, Heydar Aliyev is not a
president who makes ungrounded statements: +Know today and tomorrow.
Heydar Aliyev would never accept anything contradicting Azerbaijans
interests.-
By Rustam Abulfatoglu
[ANS] News Digest, May 12, 2001
Copyright 2001 Azerbaijan News Service
Europe calls on Armenia and Azerbaijan to step up efforts to settle Karabakh
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; May 12, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan
Strasbourg, 11 May: The 108th session of the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers, in its final communique adopted today, has called for the intensification of measures to ensure stability and security in the Balkans and the Caucasus. A Turan correspondent from Strasbourg reports that in the third point of the communique, the committee of ministers called on the countries of the Caucasus "to continue and intensify efforts to achieve major cooperation in the region".
The document also says that the committee of ministers welcomes the accession to the Council of Europe of Armenia and Azerbaijan and calls on both countries "to continue" democratic reforms and "meet the obligations undertaken". The countries of the region are also called on to create an atmosphere of "trust" and to develop projects within the framework of the Council of Europe.
The Committee of Ministers also welcomed the initiative of the secretary-general of the Council of Europe to send experts to the region to study the situation with political prisoners.
The communique also says that the Committee of Ministers expects progress from the OSCE Minsk Group on the matter of settling the Karabakh conflict in a way which should respect human rights, stability and supremacy of the law in the Caucasus region.
Today Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh made a statement saying, in particular, that experts from European Union countries support the efforts of the governments of Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan, directed at "speeding up" the meeting of the obligations they undertook on entering the Council of Europe.
Anna Lindh also called on Armenia and Azerbaijan "to intensify" joint efforts to peacefully settle the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict.
"The European Union supports talks between the presidents and welcomes the constructive role of the OSCE Minsk Group," the document said.
Source: Turan news agency, Baku, in Russian 1540 gmt 11 May 01
/BBC Monitoring/ � BBC.
Cavanaugh: Peace Is 'Accelerating'
Saturday, May 12, 2001
By EDITH M. LEDERER
Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK (AP) - The chief U.S. negotiator said he believes the
presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan can settle a 13-year-old
conflict over the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh, one of Europe's
almost forgotten disputes. Armenia's president, however, was more
cautious.
U.S. Ambassador Carey Cavanaugh said Friday that the ``peace
process is accelerating'' after ``dramatic momentum'' during
negotiations between Armenian President Robert Kocharian and
Azerbaijani President Geidar Aliev in Key West, Fla., last month.
``I believe these presidents can find a peace agreement that
they would be satisfied with,'' Cavanaugh told an Armenian
investment forum. ``It has to be 100 percent. They're working hard
toward the 100 percent, and they're not there yet, but they're
getting closer all the time.''
Kocharian, who also attended the forum, was less sanguine in an
interview with The Associated Press, calling himself ``a realist''
and refusing to forecast when an agreement might be reached.
Nagorno-Karabakh is a mountainous territory populated mainly by
ethnic Armenians but nestled inside predominantly Muslim
Azerbaijan. Its declaration of independence in 1988 sparked a
six-year war that killed more than 30,000 people and drove about 1
million, mostly Azerbaijanis, from their homes.
While a 1994 cease-fire has largely held, some 200 people die
every year as a result of the conflict, and the two southern
Caucasus nations have failed to resolve the dispute over
Nagorno-Karabakh's claims to independence.
In the past two years, Kocharian and Aliev have held more than
15 meetings as part of a peace process shepherded by the United
States, Russia, and France. The next round of negotiations is
expected to start in Geneva in June.
Kocharian was meeting representatives from the three co-sponsors
in New York on Saturday to prepare for next months' talks.
Kocharian said the outline of a settlement proposal is clear but
that the details are very important and could take time. If an
agreement is reached, Kocharian said it will take up to a year to
implement - and the Armenian parliament would have to give its
approval.
He insisted that Nagorno-Karabakh, whose population is about
150,000, must take part in discussions on a final settlement - and
that an agreement must take into account that Nagorno-Karabakh has
operated as an independent state since 1988.
``The current situation is irreversible and we cannot ignore
that,'' said Kocharian, who asserted that ``the new generation and
the young people do not perceive Karabakh as a part of Azerbaijan.
Time is doing its business.''
Cavanaugh said Aliev and Kocharian are committed to peace
because they realize it will mean stability, greater investment,
more jobs, and a better life for their peoples.
But he told the AP that getting the Armenian and Azerbaijani
people behind an agreement and selling the tough compromises
involved will test their political skills.
``People in Armenia and Azerbaijan see the need for peace,'' he
said. ``They see there's no jobs in their country for their
children. They see they're stuck in a refugee camp waiting for a
new life, and it depends on peace. But they don't fully see how to
do compromise.''
Copyright 2001 Associated Press.
Azeri journalist slams US cochair's role
in Karabakh settlement
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; May 12, 2001
The Azerbaijani newspaper Yeni Musavat has said that the opposition should demand that the US cochairman of the OSCE Minsk Group for Karabakh, Carey Cavanaugh, be dismissed, as he is urging President Heydar Aliyev to clamp down on those who favour a war to resolve Karabakh. The paper said it was impossible to imprison everyone in Azerbaijan who supports the military option for resolving the conflict as there are just too many of them. The following is excerpt from Rauf Arifoglu report by Azerbaijani newspaper Yeni Musavat on 10 May entitled "Cavanaugh danger":
US diplomat inspires Azerbaijani authorities to repression. This time last year he brought a piece of stone for Heydar Aliyev
A thousand thanks to ours [our officials]. Western diplomats are more ruthless. Facts spoken of by the head of the conflict studies department of the Institute for Peace and Democracy, Arif Yunusov, at his news conference once again showed what dangers Azerbaijani national forces can expect.
The superpowers believe they have got the opportunity, and the worthless authorities required to resolve the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict, and therefore, they are in a hurry, and not just for fear of missing this opportunity. The USA, Russia, France, as well as other interested states, understand that the authorities which will replace Azerbaijan's current authorities when they leave office will not sign any documents which run counter to national interests. Therefore, Carey Cavanaugh, who represents the official US position in the OSCE Minsk Group, is suggesting "isolating the supporters of war". Can you guess what "isolation" means? This means that the West is proposing that the Azerbaijani authorities imprison all patriotic forces. Not only do they want us to yield our lands to the Armenians, but they are also inspiring our authorities to impose total repression against those who are protesting against the loss of our lands. Here they are, our democratic brothers! Here is the real face of a diplomat representing the USA! This man has met Armenian and Azerbaijani officials so many times that he has apparently started to assess events through their eyes.
Here is the same Cavanaugh who this time last year brought a stone from a destroyed mosque in the town of Agdam to mark Heydar Aliyev's birthday. This moved our leader to tears! Do you recall this? Recently he again held a four-hour meeting with Heydar Aliyev. It is said that this time he arrived in Azerbaijan with a new package of proposals on how to resolve the conflict. These are proposals which, in the view of the Russian envoy, [former cochairman of the OSCE Minsk Group, Vladimir] Kazimirov, compelled the Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders to avoid informing their peoples of their contents. And we know that "avoidance" has nothing to do with Kocharyan's recent behaviour.
My opinion is that the opposition should demand the dismissal of Cavanaugh from the settlement process. He is a source of danger to them, There is no guarantee that this antidemocratic diplomat will not affect our president. It emerges that Heydar Aliyev is a greater democrat than Carey Cavanaugh.
Arif Yunusov believes that Cavanaugh put forward another proposal: "The Azerbaijani and Armenian leaders should conduct negotiations with the constructive opposition." Who in Azerbaijan makes up the "constructive opposition" on the Karabakh issue? Who supports conceding Karabakh to the Armenians and not recognizing our nation's right to use force to return to our occupied lands? To be frank, even the ruling party has not totally opposed the war option. The opposition camp expresses absolute solidarity regarding the war option. Everybody recognizes the nation's right to use force. Everybody supports the option of using force and protests against conceding our lands to the Armenians. The situation must be the same in Armenia, since they have gained almost the maximum possible on the Karabakh issue.
[Passage omitted: they are against war now as it promises nothing to them]
The Armenians are even unable to withstand a war waged by Azerbaijan's current worthless authorities. From this point of view, it might seem logical for officials in Armenia to isolate warmongers and brand them destructive elements. However, if Azerbaijani officials want to isolate warmongers, then a number of members of the ruling party, as well as 70-80 per cent of the Azerbaijani people should be put in prison, which is impossible.
Nothing is ruled out. Heydar Aliyev has brought both the West and Russia to this stage and he is under serious external and internal pressures now. Moreover, he has several unresolved problems. As this article coincides with his birthday, we are not going to reveal details. However, I should note that opposition pressure on Heydar Aliyev should not be any less than the foreign pressure he faces.
Heydar Aliyev will very soon face two choices, which means that the problem of taking an important decision will top the agenda. Everything should be done to prevent him taking the decisions desired by the Cavanaughs. The OSCE [Minsk Group] cochairmen, and the world as a whole, should understand that the taking of decisions on the Karabakh issue does not depend exclusively on Aliyev's personality. It should be explained to them that the Azerbaijani people will not agree to any decision running counter to their interests. To send clear signals to them, we should revive public life from the end of May. We shall be very busy this summer.
[Passage omitted: author of this article and active Musavat Party member Rauf Arifoglu dissatisfied with his party over Karabakh issue; he believes the Musavat Party congress, due to take place at the end of May, should take place in the autumn and all efforts should be channelled into the national issue]
Source: Yeni Musavat, Baku in Azeri 10 May 01 p 9
/BBC Monitoring/ � BBC.
Armenia, Azerbaijan face "critical" talks in Geneva: FM
Agence France Presse
May 10, 2001, Thursday 5:10 AM, Eastern Time
DATELINE: YEREVAN, May 10
Armenian President Robert Kocharian faces "critical" talks in Geneva next
month which could produce a draft peace proposal for the 13-year Karabakh
conflict, Armenia's foreign minister said Thursday.
Vardan Oskanian told AFP that expectations were high prior to a summit
with Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev in the Swiss city mid-June and
that the two sides were as close to agreement as they have ever been.
But he also warned that being close did not mean that a peace agreement
was definite. The talks are being conducted under the auspices of the
Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe's (OSCE) "Minsk
Group."
Oskanian said that officials were expecting a draft proposal based on the
two side positions from the co-chairs in Geneva, the first time since late
1998 anything would be put on paper.
"Geneva should be a critical meeting because first we will see if the
co-chairs have produced a document," Oskanian said. "If they have a paper,
that is by itself a major progress and a major success."
Oskanian does not believe that the proposal will be signed in the Swiss
city however. "We are going to bring the document home and put it up for
broader discussion," says Oskanian.
"We've got to open it up to our political parties, to our parliamentarians
and, why not, to the public at large and have a serious discourse on the
issue, because this a broader national issue," he added.
Karabakh is located in Azerbaijan and populated mostly by ethnic
Armenians, but broke away from Baku in the Soviet Union's last years. The
resulting war killed over 30,000 and drove hundreds of thousands from
their homes.
A 1994 ceasefire left Karabakh de facto independent, but unrecognized by
any other government, including Armenia. Karabakh forces also occupied a
large portion of land outside the enclave, creating a refugee crisis in
Azerbaijan.
The latest round of negotiations between the two presidents began two
years ago. Despite 16 meetings, and numerous rumours of an impending deal,
the sides remain locked over the same issue that began it all: Karabakh's
political status.
Yerevan is insisting on recognition of the enclave's independence. Baku
says that it will only grant the territory a high level of autonomy.
Both sides were upbeat after a meeting last month in the southern US town
of Key West, which was overseen by the three Minsk Group co-chairs --
Russia, France and the United States -- and opened by US Secretary of
State Colin Powell.
dls/hb/ccr
Copyright 2001 Agence France Presse
ARMENIAN PARLIAMENT SETS UNFULFILLABLE TERMS TO PEACE SETTLEMENT.
In his current weekly analysis from Yerevan, seasoned local analyst David Petrosian
suggests that a resolution by the Armenian parliament has just doomed in
advance the upcoming round of negotiations to settle the
Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. He also suggests that the parliament's action
may have had President Robert Kocharian's assent.
The negotiating round is scheduled to be held next month in Geneva with the
participation of Kocharian, President Haidar Aliev of Azerbaijan and
representatives of the OSCE mediating group's cochairmen countries--the
United States, Russia and France. The Geneva negotiations represent the
planned follow-up to those recently hosted by the United States in Key West,
the results of which are being kept strictly confidential.
On April 27, the parliament of Armenia unanimously adopted a resolution
inspired by the ultranationalist party Armenian Revolutionary
Federation-Dashnaksutiun, a political ally of Kocharian. The resolution
warns against any "hasty" settlement. Specifically, it stipulates conditions
to any settlement, including two conditions that depart from those that had
formed the basis of discussions until now.
Regarding Karabakh's political status, the Armenian parliament demands
international recognition ("confirmation") of Karabakh's independence or,
alternatively, its unification ("reunification") with Armenia. The
negotiations until now, however, had sought a political status for Karabakh
that could at least pro-forma be reconciled with Azerbaijan's territorial
integrity.
With regard to an overland link between Armenia and Karabakh, the parliament
demands "the necessary length of a common border." The negotiations until
now had envisaged a narrow corridor via Lachin, across Azerbaijani territory
outside Karabakh proper, to link Armenia proper with Karabakh. A corridor
via Lachin was to have been placed under international control, not under
that of Armenia or Karabakh. The Armenian parliament's resolution, however,
implies taking more territory from Azerbaijan, and does not mention
international control.
Concurrently, deputies of Karabakh's legislature adopted a resolution
requiring the retention of some areas in Azerbaijan proper, beyond Karabakh,
which are currently held by Karabakh and Armenian forces. That demand had
been made in Karabakh in the past as well; but it now seems for the first
time to resonate with Yerevan. The Armenian parliament's resolution clearly
ties Kocharian's hands in advance of the Geneva negotiations. The onus will
be on Kocharian--a former president of Karabakh--to demonstrate that he does
not prefer having his leeway restricted in this fashion by his own political
allies (David Petrosian, "Don't Make Things Worse," Noyan-Tapan Weekly
Highlights, no. 117, May 2; Hayots Ashkar, April 27; Snark, May 3; Azg, May
4; see the Monitor, March 7, May 1, 3).
Thursday, 10 May 2001 - Volume VII, Issue 91
MONITOR -- A DAILY BRIEFING ON THE POST-SOVIET STATES
CONCERNS ON KARABAKH PROBLEM AGAIN STRENGTHEN
By Farhad MAMMADOV
Will there be signed a peace agreement in Geneva?
Coming the next stage of talks on the regulation of Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict has strengthened concerns at the Azerbaijani community again. It is notable that the next stage of talks will begin in Geneva on June 15 with the participation of both co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group and experts. It is the continuation of the talks held in Florida State on April 3-7.
And several factors influence on increasing the public concern. First, the Armenian leadership is insistently stating after the Florida talks that they may agree with the settlement of the conflict only within the conditions of full independence of Upper Karabakh. At the same time, the Minsk group's co-chairs and Armenian leadership have, separately, stated that the peace agreement will be gained till the end of the year. Concretely, the Armenian party is strongly sure that there will be concluded a peace agreement at the Geneva talks. In addition, recently a Western diplomat not revealing his/her name has made a statement that can influence on the emotions of the Azerbaijani nation. The diplomat has stated that peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia will be gained as a result of great concessions.
"This concession will be so hard as a man loses his hands. But later the Azerbaijani nation will have to agree with this concession". The prognosis of the anonymous diplomat spread by the agency "Turan" has influenced on the emotions of the Azerbaijani community, as it was expected. The local press has again published articles strongly criticizing Aliev for coming to an agreement with the capitulating peace variant.
The statement of anonymous diplomat occurred simultaneously when Carry Cavanaugh, American co-chair of the OSCE Minsk group, has visited to Baku. Mr. Cavanaugh was in Baku on May 5-6 and met face-to-face with the Azeri president Heidar Aliev. He stated that his visit aimed preparation to the Geneva talks. While he did not talk details about the course of regulation of the conflict in Baku, he has put forward a suggestion that caused concern of the Azerbaijani community at the seminar held on the regulation of Karabakh conflict in Hanover city of Germany before coming to Baku. Mr. Cavanaugh has stated that both parties should isolate those supporting war in order to gain a peace.
Probably, this statement is, in fact, addressed to Heidar Aliev. Because Aliev has not agreed with the concessions being against the national interests of Azerbaijan in the Karabakh problem only because he might face with strong protest of the opposition. It is notable that at some point, Aliev himself has indirectly confirmed this moment. The Azerbaijani opposition considers possible the settlement of the conflict only within the principles of territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country and calls using a military force against the aggressor if it will be impossible.
Such a suggestion of the American diplomat may make Aliev to strengthen pressures on the leading oppositional forces of the country. But it might also be dangerous for the current authorities, because all the oppositional forces demonstrate unity in the Karabakh problem.
The Azerbaijani leadership has reacted to the optimistic statements of the Armenian party and hinting prognosis of moderators. Vilayat Guliev, Azeri foreign minister, and Murtuz Alasgerov, parliament chairman, have stated that there will not be concluded any peace agreement being against the interests of Azerbaijan in Geneva. "The peace will be possible only then, when Armenia backs away from its groundless assertions and demonstrates constructive position", stressed Azeri foreign minister. But Azerbaijan is an authoritarian country and the words of the second or third persons do not solve anything here. This is why, it is doubted what will happen in Geneva and whether the Azeri president will agree with capitulating peace or not.
AZERBAIJAN BULLETIN No:19(273),MAY 10 2001 [ENGLISH]
http://www.andf-az.org/
Speaker: Azerbaijan will not give up Shusha, Lacin
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan
Baku, 8 May: "The Azerbaijani president will not sign a document that
runs counter to the national interests of the Azerbaijani people,"
Speaker of Parliament Murtuz Alasgarov told today's session of the Milli
Maclis. "There will be no concessions on Susa and Lacin," he said,
commenting on statements by a number of deputies and media publications,
according to which the country's authorities are preparing to sign a
disadvantageous peace agreement with Armenia.
Susa, the speaker went on to say, will remain an Azerbaijani town in
Nagornyy Karabakh. Alasgarov also said that the conflict will be resolved
within the framework of Azerbaijan's territorial integrity. He said the
granting to the Armenian side of a corridor between Armenia and Nagornyy
Karabakh could be a compromise.
Turan in Russian
1512 GMT 8 May 01
Azeri leader promises to punish Armenians in Victory Day speech
Text of report by Azerbaijani TV station ANS on 9 May
[Presenter in studio] Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev today visited
the grave of Hero of Soviet Union Azi Aslanov to mark 9 May, Victory Day.
The president laid a wreath on the grave and then delivered a speech
before the assembled war veterans. Heydar Aliyev spoke about the tragic
consequences of the war, which was started by fascist Germany. The
president said that Azerbaijani lands were also under occupation today.
[Heydar Aliyev] The Armenians who invaded Azerbaijan should know that they
will never find justification. Today they are celebrating the occupation
of Susa, but they should not think that this is for ever. No. History,
centuries-old history has already reflected such events in books. All this
is known. An aggressor must always be punished. An aggressor must receive
punishment. Those who killed people brutally, destroyed hospitals and
schools and burnt houses must receive their punishment, and they will
receive it.
Armenians comparable to Hitler's armies: Aliyev
Agence France Presse
May 10, 2001, Thursday 5:10 AM, Eastern Time
BAKU, May 10
Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev compared his country's main rivals
Armenia to fascist forces in a speech marking the anniversary of the
allied victory in Europe, media reported Thursday.
Aliyev compared Armenian forces in the enclave of Nagorno Karabkah to
fascists, saying they would be defeated just as the Soviet Union and its
allies had beaten the axis powers 56 years ago this week.
"The Armenian aggressors do not differ in any way from Hitler's armies,
from German fascism," Aliyev told a crowd at the country's main World War
II monument, as quoted by the official Azertaj news agency.
"Agressors will always be punished," he added. "Those who killed people,
destroyed schools and hospitals, burned people -- they will always receive
their punishment."
Aliyev's comments come as he prepared to meet with his Armenian
counterpart, Robert Kocharian, in Geneva in mid-June, possibly producing a
draft proposal to resolve the 13-year old Karabakh conflict.
Karabakh is located in Azerbaijan and populated mostly by ethnic
Armenians, but it broke away from Baku in the Soviet Union's last
years. The resulting war killed over 30,000 and drove hundreds of
thousands from their homes.
A 1994 ceasefire left Karabakh with de facto independence but it is
unrecognized by any other government, including Armenia.
Karabakh forces also occupied a large portion of land outside the enclave,
creating a refugee crisis in Azerbaijan.
dls/bb/dm
Copyright 2001 Agence France Presse
Solution in Karabakh?
Opinion by Gunduz Aktan
One of the countries that most wants to see a solution the Karabakh issue
is Turkey. Karabakh is the issue that most threatens stability in the
Caucasus. It jeopardizes work on the region's oil fields and the transfer
of this oil to the world markets. It makes Armenia almost as dependent on
Russia today as it was during the Soviet era. It also renders it
impossible for Turkey to establish diplomatic relations with Armenia.
It has been rumored that following long meetings at Key West with the
leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia, the new American administration's
Secretary of State Colin Powell had reached an agreement with both parties
and that the co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group America, Russia and
France have been working on a solution package. It is now being said that
Aliyev and Kocharyan, who have met 17 times to date will sign the package
in Geneva in the middle of June.
The matter was taken up at a meeting held in the German village of Loccum
near Hannover over May 2-4 and that was attended by large numbers of
Azeri, Armenian and European experts. The co-chairmen of the Minsk Group,
American and Russian ambassadors together with the assistant of the French
ambassador also attended the meeting and maintained the need for the
solution. However, they took great pains to avoid touching on the contents
of the solution. They believed that conditions had emerged for a
solution. For one thing, the "displaced persons" had been living for the
past 10 years under unbearable conditions. The Armenians for their part
were rapidly leaving their country. It was impossible to maintain the
status quo.
According to widespread rumor, the solution saw either granting Karabakh
independence or being united with Armenia. In exchange for this, a small
part of Karabakh together with Azeri land that was under occupation with
the exception of the Lachin corridor and its environs would be given back
to Azerbaijan. Armenia for its part would renounce its impossible demands
over Nakhichevan and this region would be joined to Azerbaijan by a
corridor. As the sovereignty over the corridor would remain with Armenia,
the border with Iran would not change.
Almost all the people from both parties that were not members of the
government insisted that even though the solution might be accepted by the
countries' leaders, both peoples would reject it and that neither of the
leaders had either the political might or the democratic legitimacy to
make them accept it. I do not know whether it is possible to say this was
the opinion only of the opposition groups. On the other hand, all the
co-chairmen come from countries with influential Armenian
populations. Turkey, which could safeguard Azerbaijan's interests, is kept
out of the talks. This gives an impression that the solution will be
biased in favour of Armenia. As a result, the Azeris may not see the
package in a positive light.
The co-chairmen also stressed time and time again that the problem is
unique and the solution is equally so. This also created an impression
that the OSCE's founding principles of not using force to change a
country's borders and of protecting a country's territorial integrity
would not be respected this time around, contrary to the situations in
Bosnia, Kosovo and even Cyprus. Of course if the solution is accepted by
both parties, then these principles can be overlooked. But in that case,
on what grounds can we oppose Kosovo, Bosnian-Croats and the Serbs from
becoming independent?
This could require unique solutions should be guaranteed in a unique
way. In other words attempts to reject it in the future will be
resisted. This in turn means the Russian military presence in Armenia
continuing. But who is going to be responsible for the instability and the
strengthening of Islamic fundamentalism in this region, which lies on a
religious faultline, that this solution package will create? How will
America, which now appears to have common interests with Russia in the
matter of keeping the Armenians satisfied, react then?
As those non-Armenians caucasians constantly bemoan, the Russians are not
merely supporting the Armenians over the Karabakh issue, they are also
supporting the Ossetians and the Abkhazians in Georgia. By creating
instability, they are trying to restore their influence over the southern
Caucasus. Can Russia, which does not genuinely accept the independence of
the countries of the region and the resulting economic competition, but
instead is revitalizing it political and military presence in the region,
really accellerate its democratization?
10 May 2001, Copyright Turkish Daily News
Trans-Caspian Project
ARMENIAN-KIRGHIZ ARMS SCANDAL
ONE OF THE MAIN SUBJECTS IN THE FORTHCOMING CIS SUMMIT AGENDA?
The Caucasian problems are to become one of the main orientations of the
forthcoming summit of the CIS leaders in Minsk.
It is in the Belarus capital that the Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders
should conduct major consulting with the Russian president, who, most
likely, will determine the position of official Moscow concerning the
"decisive round" of the negotiations around the Karabakh conflict
appointed in Geneva on June 15. These negotiations, according to official
data, are to be conducted in a "3+2" format (Russia, USA, France +
Armenia, Azerbaijan). However, it is obvious that the major role at the
given stage of the Karabakh peace conversations is played by Washington,
which searches for the most convenient version of cooperation with Moscow
and Paris.
It is also obvious that the question of "Visa relations", a sore point
today between Georgia and Russia, would be discussed during Minsk CIS
summit. The "Georgian card", according to most experts, would be played in
the Minsk summit as the main theme concerning "the benefit of partnership
with Russia", or as the "lack of the CIS format prospects".
There will also be many other surprises in Minsk. Many observers are
almost convinced that Azerbaijan will bring up in the Belarus capital the
question of illegal arms shipments to Armenia. Moreover, it became known
that the object for Baku critics will not be Russia, but as strange as it
may seems, Kirghizia. There have been many reports lately through the
Russian and Azerbaijani Mass Medias about allegedly secret shipments of
Kirghiz ammunitions to Armenia. The Armenian and Kirghiz parties denied at
once those reports. The Armenian embassy in Russia first reacted. Having
pointed out that such reports are a full misinformation, the Armenian
embassy political and information consultant Yuri Chanchuryan refrained
from giving any comments about the "authorship of such speculations". In
the meanwhile, as the Kirghiz diplomatic mission in Moscow informed, the
Kirghiz embassy in the Russian Federation already "started its
investigation concerning the circumstances responsible for the appearance
of such publications".
Those reports appeared first in "Moskovsky Komsomolets" (Moscow's
Komsomol), which asserts that in November-January 2000 the Kirghiz defense
industry enterprise have sold more than three million automatic cartridges
for a total amount of 180 thousand dollars to the Armenian defense
Ministry. The newspaper reports, "The Armenian air force planes
transported the ammunitions, which guaranteed the full safety of this
deal". It is significant that according to "Moscow's Komsomol", Azerbaijan
can bring up the question of the arms deliveries from Kirghizia to Armenia
during the forthcoming Minsk CIS summit in June.
The Armenian Defense Ministry acted with a separate denial. "Moskovsky
Komsomolets" distorted facts about the ammunition acquisition by Armenia
from Kirghizia, is spoken in the Armenian Defense Ministry widespread
report concerning the "MK" "from Bishkek's machine works plant" article.
Being a member of the regular armed forces in Europe Agreement, Armenia
never violated the quotas established by it, is underlined in the
report. As to the information reported by "MK" about the automatic
cartridges, we would like to inform that this category is absolutely not
regulated in any international agreement, the Armenian defense Ministry
marks. Moreover, Armenia, having the conforming production capacities, is
able to produce by itself the required amount of cartridges for its armed
forces, is underlined in the report.
Albert FREEDMAN
10.05.2001
Azeri paper accuses Iran, Arab states of involvement in Karabakh drugs business
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; May 11, 2001
The National Security Ministry does not deny such reports
Following a statement by a high-ranking official of the Azerbaijani National Security Ministry on several Azerbaijani-based religious communities and societies serving foreign interests, the chairman of the Spiritual Board of Muslims of the Caucasus, Seyx ul-Islam Allahsukur Pasazada, has drawn attention to the "dirty trade"
carried out under the guise of religion.
[Passage omitted: Pasazada spoke at a religious conference in Azerbaijan's northern Zaqatala District]
The reality is that religious communities and societies tend to establish ties with groups engaged in the drugs business to implement their own lowly aims. Speaking about the transit of drugs, A. Cabrayilov, the chief of the operational and investigation department of the National Security Ministry's border troops, has said that some humanitarian organizations are playing an important role in the transit of drugs. Although he refused to name them, Cabrayilov confirmed that these substances had been discovered in aid parcels carried across the border. Bearing in mind that the drugs delivered mainly from Arab countries are channelled to European financial magnates by Armenia via the [Azerbaijani] occupied territories, it emerges just how broad the network is. If Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait play key roles in the transit of drugs, it is impossible to turn a blind eye to the involvement of these countries' humanitarian organizations in the process. Iran's role is also unavoidable because the territories which are occupied by Armenia and serve as a transit point, border on Iran. Pasazada's admission openly shows what kind of games the charity societies are involved in.
[Passage omitted: situation is rather dangerous]
Source: Yeni Azarbaycan, Baku, in Azeri 11 May 01 p1,2
/BBC Monitoring/ � BBC.
Armenian embassies abroad said financed by diaspora
Text of report by Armenian news agency Snark
Yerevan, 8 May: Armenia's diplomatic representative offices abroad are
mainly financed by the diaspora. This is an undesirable phenomenon, which
makes them dependent. In future, Armenian diplomatic representative
offices should be financed solely from the budget, Armenian Deputy
Foreign Minister Levon Mkrtchyan said today during parliament hearings of
the bill on Armenia's diplomatic services.
As of today, Armenia has 36 embassies abroad. The buildings of few of
them are the property of Armenia. The 2001 budget envisages 3bn drams
[5.4m dollars] to finance them. This sum is the minimum necessary to
support the country's embassies, consulates and diplomatic representative
offices abroad.
The Armenian Foreign Ministry currently employs 270 diplomats, 130 of
them work abroad and 150 in Armenia. The current staff fully satisfies
the republic in terms of carrying out its foreign policy, Mkrtchyan said.
Snark in Russian
1417 GMT 8 May 01
Armenia publishes propagandist maps
Text of M. Anvaroglu report by Azerbaijani newspaper Ekho on 9 May
entitled "Who has occupied whom?"
The map published in Armenia answers this question unambiguously:
Azerbaijan is part of Nagornyy Karabakh territory
An international seminar was convened in Yerevan on 3-10 February this
year. The seminar was organized by the International Peace Foundation and
was devoted to problems of conflict resolution. There would be no
complaints about this seminar, but for one substantial issue: maps in
English, oddly entitled "the Republic of Armenia and the Nagornyy Karabakh
Republic", were handed out to those taking part in the seminar.
Obviously, this map featured no Azerbaijan covering the territory Baku
believes it to cover, or which is marked in world atlases. However, there
were interesting designations which will probably provoke some response
from inquisitive foreigners. For instance, the territory around Nagornyy
Karabakh, which has been occupied by the Armenian armed forces, was
presented as "a zone liberated by the Nagornyy Karabakh Republic".
There is another very impudent sign in the map: territories occupied by
Azerbaijan. What is referred to here is part of the territory of Shaumyan
[Tartar], Mardakert [Agdara] and Martuni [Xocavand] Districts of the
former NKAO [Nagornyy Karabakh Autonomous Oblast]. It turns out that these
districts are under the hostile boot of the Azerbaijani army.
There is a depiction of the earth in the upper corner of the map, on which
only one spot has been highlighted - the united entity "the Republic of
Armenia, Nagornyy Karabakh and Naxcivan [Azerbaijani exclave]".
The map bears the "Sen Hovhannisyan"trademark. According to the date, the
map was published in 1999. One can imagine how many copies of this
propagandist thing have been distributed over the last few years. Despite
the fact that the frontline is silent, Armenia's propagandist war does not
let up for even a minute.
Turkey's Delegate Writes to UN About Continuing
'Armenian Terrorism' Threat
Anatolia in English
1903 GMT 14 May 01
NEW YORK, May 14 (A.A) - Turkey sent a letter to U.N. General Assembly and
the presidents of the Security Council and noted that the ``Armenian
terrorism`` still continues to constitute a threat.
The letter sent with the signature of Turkey`s Permanent
Representative to the U.N. Umit Pamir, mentioned the danger caused by
the Armenian terrorism, and by Mourad Topalian, the former chairman of
the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) and the decision of
the American courts about Armenian terrorism and Topalian.
Recounting that Armenian terrorists killed 30 Turkish diplomats to
date, Pamir said in the letter that Topalian was involved in the
bombing of Turkish representation in New York in 1980, the bombing at
Los Angeles Orange Country Convention Center, and Turkish Consulate
General in Beverly Hills and he attempted to kill the honorary Turkish
consul general in Philadelphia in 1982.
The letter pointed out that the Justice Commandos of the Armenian
Genocide (JCAG) claimed responsibility for each of the mentioned
terrorist attacks of Topalian. JCAG is the military wing of the
Dashnak Party based in Yerevan, Armenia, the letter said adding that
ANCA is also linked to Dashnak Party.
Pamir also said in the letter that the explosives which Topalian
used in attacks were hidden in a storage unit in Bedford city of Ohio
till they were found in 1996, underlining the fact that this
constituted a serious threat for civil Americans for years.
The letter noted that the Armenian terrorist organizations carried
out 235 terrorist incidents since 1973, adding 70 persons died, 41
persons survived and 524 of them were injured in these attacks.
Pamir said that the Armenian terrorists preferred airports,
shopping centres and crowded places for their attacks.
Pointing to the danger caused by international terrorism, Pamir
said that the Turkish government called all the countries to take
effective measures against terrorists who attack diplomats and
diplomatic representations, to try them or to extradite them to be
tried.
[Description of Source: Ankara Anatolia in English -- Semi-official news
agency; independent in content]
PARLIAMENT PREPARES TO CONDEMN FRANCE: PARLIAMENT TO DEBATE LAW ON INTERNATIONAL CLAIMS
Turkish Daily News
May 10, 2001
The Internal Affairs Commission of Parliament approved the draft law
against international claims, accusations and distortions stipulating the
condemnation of France which issued a law recognizing the so-called
Armenian genocide.
The draft law, which is expected to be debated in the General Assembly
soon, says Turkey refuses the claims of the Armenian genocide which has
been neither determined or accepted by history. It continues to state that
France and other foreign powers provoked the Armenians for their own
purposes during World War I. "We strongly condemn the loss of life and the
support and shelter given to ASALA terror," said the draft.
The draft also underlines France and other European countries' moral
responsibility by falling into silence during the invasion of Azeri land,
forcing the people to migrate, and perpetrating genocide to the people of
Bosnia because of their religion.
Ankara - Turkish Daily News
Copyright 2001 Turkish Daily News
News referred from Habarlar-L