NKR STATE BUDGET TAX INCOMES EXCEEDED PLANNED INDICES

‘’The considerable growth of cash receipts to the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic state budget has been mainly provided at the expense of the growth of the tax incomes – Value Added Tax, profit tax, income tax, trade tax, fixed tolls’’, the Head of the State Tax Department under the Nagorno-Karabakh government Hakop Kagramanian stated in an interview with Azat Artsakh newspaper, REGNUM Information Agency reports.
In his words, the fact that the VAT has increased by 85, 1 % as compared with the last year is conditioned by the growth of GDP, tax income, while the growth of the trade tax – by strengthening the control: as a result of the inspections 400 millions additional tax obligations were proposed. In 2006 the state budget’s tax incomes exceeded the planned indices by 783 millions 850 thousand drams.
No drastic changes have been provided in the tax policy current year.

http://www.defacto.am/index.php?OP=71320269

wow what a sensation!

Azerbaijan May Refuse Service of OSCE Minsk Group: Head of Azerbaijani Community of Nagorno-Karabakh
13.12.07 13:47

Azerbaijan, Baku /corr. Trend E.Huseynli / The public-political organizations of Azerbaijan is dissatisfied with the activities of the OSCE Minsk Group involved in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement.
“If from the beginning of next year the Minsk Group does not present proposals on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement in accordance with Azerbaijan’s position and within the international legal standards, Baku may refuse the mediation service of the Minsk Group,” the Head of the Azerbaijani Community of Nagorno-Karabakh, Nizami Bahmanov, reported to Trend on 13 December.
The conflict between the two countries of the South Caucasus began in 1988 due to Armenian territorial claims against Azerbaijan. Since 1992, Armenian Armed Forces have occupied 20% of Azerbaijan including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and its seven surrounding districts. In 1994, Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a ceasefire agreement at which time the active hostilities ended. The Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group ( Russia, France, and the US) are currently holding peaceful negotiations.
Despite this period, the Minsk Group made various proposals, Armenia did not give up its uncooperative position. At the end of November the Minsk Group Co-chairs presented written proposals to the conflicting sides. Currently Azerbaijan and Armenia are considering them.
According to Bahmanov, the recent written proposals reflect only the personal position of the co-chairs. He said that if the co-chairs make proposals not corresponding to Azerbaijan’s official position, the Country will not accept them. Bahmanov considers that the Azerbaijani side will express its opinion towards the proposals of the Minsk Group during their visit to the region scheduled for January.
Azerbaijan’s official position includes regulating the conflict within the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. Firstly the Armenian Armed Forces should be withdrawn from the occupied territories of Azerbaijan, the internally displaced persons should return to their native land and after this the status of Nagorno-Karabakh will be discussed. Bahmanov said that during discussions on the status, the heads of the Azerbaijani and Armenian communities of Nagorno-Karabakh would also join the talks.

Preliminary deal on Nagorno Karabakh can be sealed before Armenian presidential election
13.12.2007 18:50 GMT+04:00 Print version Send to mail In Russian In Armenian
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ A preliminary deal with Azerbaijan over Nagorno Karabakh could be possible before the presidential elections early next year, Armenia's Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan told Reuters in an interview.

"I don't think the presidential election should impact on these negotiations. I am very hopeful, confident even, that we can still reach a conclusion on such a framework before then,"

PM Sargsyan is confirmed his intention to run in next year's elections for the right to replace his ally, outgoing President Robert Kocharian, but said it would not distract from efforts to reach a consensus with Azerbaijan.

"The thing is that I am not a new person in Armenian politics and Armenian government. I was there for long time and I participated in all developments particularly as regards the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict," Sargysan said late on Tuesday on a visit to the European Parliament. "I am well aware of all the details and now when new proposals are coming, there are also coming with my consent. That is why I don't think that the presidential elections can disturb the negotiation process."
http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=24366

thatäs already not funny...

SARKISIAN ‘CONFIDENT’ ABOUT PRE-ELECTION KARABAKH DEAL

By Emil Danielyan

Contradicting a recent statement by President Robert Kocharian, Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian has said that Armenia and Azerbaijan could reach a framework peace agreement on Nagorno-Karabakh before the Armenian presidential election.

"I don't think the presidential election should impact on these negotiations. I am very hopeful, confident even, that we can still reach a conclusion on such a framework before then," he told Reuters news agency in an interview published late Wednesday.

Sarkisian, who is the favorite to win the February 19 vote, argued that he is aware and approves of the existing peace proposals by the OSCE Minsk Group. “I am well aware of all the details and now when new proposals are coming, there are also coming with my consent,” he said. “That is why I don't think that the presidential elections can disturb the negotiation process.”

Kocharian, however, claimed the opposite last October as he commented on similarly upbeat statements made by the Minsk Group’s U.S. co-chair, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza. Kocharian said the conflicting parties are unlikely to agree on the proposed basic principles of a Karabakh settlement before presidential elections due in both Armenia and Azerbaijan in 2008.

The remarks did not stop Bryza and the group’s two other co-chairs from making more trips to Baku and Yerevan. The mediators are due to again visit the conflict zone by mid-January in what appears to be a last-ditch attempt to clinch a pre-election peace deal. They presented the Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign ministers with a slightly modified, final version of their peace proposals at an OSCE ministerial council meeting in Madrid on November 29.

Sources privy to the negotiating process say the parties have essentially accepted the main points of the framework accord and mainly disagree on how those should be phrased.

The document envisages a gradual resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict that would begin with the liberation at least six of the seven Armenian-controlled Azerbaijani districts around Karabakh and culminate in a referendum of self-determination in the disputed region. But it sets no time frames for the holding of the referendum, suggesting that Karabakh’s status, the main bone of contention, would remain unresolved in the foreseeable future.

This makes the Minsk Group plan similar to a solution proposed by the mediators in 1997 and strongly advocated by Armenia’s then President Levon Ter-Petrosian. Ter-Petrosian had to resign after key members of his administration, notably then Prime Minister Kocharian and then Interior Minister Sarkisian, rejected the plan as “defeatist” and demanded a package deal that would solve all issues at once.

The Kocharian administration’s stated readiness to revert to the so-called step-by-step strategy of conflict resolution thus represents a major policy change. Analysts say that by embracing the proposed deal Sarkisian would significantly boost Western support for his bid to succeed Kocharian as Armenia’s president.

The Armenian prime minister was interviewed by Reuters while visiting Brussels for talks with senior European Union and NATO officials. His office said Karabakh was high on the agenda of the talks. Sarkisian was due to proceed to Strasbourg on Wednesday to meet top Council of Europe officials.

Ter-Petrosian and his pro-Western loyalists claim that neither Kocharian or Sarkisian is committed to compromise on Karabakh. Ter-Petrosian has repeatedly said that the two Karabakh-born men, whom he had promoted to high-ranking positions in Yerevan in the 1990s, believe that the best way to ensure continued Armenian control over the territory is to perpetuate the status quo.

In a separate interview that could earn him more points in some Western capitals and Washington in particular, Sarkisian said that Turkey’s accession to the European Union would be “good” for Armenia. “Maybe the problems between us could find a solution within an EU framework,” he told “The Financial Times” newspaper after his talks in Brussels.

Other Armenian leaders, notably Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian, have said that Turkey should not be allowed to join the EU without normalizing relations with Armenia and facing up to the 1915 genocide of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. Sarkisian, by contrast, did not demand any EU preconditions for the Turkish membership. He also said he thinks Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is interested in a rapprochement with Armenia.

“I don’t think it’s correct to say he’s not committed to establishing relations with Armenia,” said Sarkisian. “We’ll see what happens in the future.”

(Photolur photo: Sarkisian awards a soldier during an inspection of the Armenian army's frontline positions.)
http://www.armenialiberty.org/armeniarepor...784CE17671D.ASP

21:44 12/12/2007
KOSOVO: BRILLIANT PRECEDENT FOR KARABAKH
Politician Ervand Bozoyan said that he is sure the independence of Kosovo will be a brilliant precedent for the independence of NKR. “The problems of NKR and Kosovo are on the same surface: the autonomic countries go out from the republics’ borders,” said the politician.
If the international public accepts the independence of Kosovo then they will accept the independence of Karabakh. Bozoyan said “Western forces say that Kosovo should not be a precedent, and they justify it that there is no other choice in Kosovo problem. But if Kosovo fights for its independence then Karabakh and Abkhazia could follow them too.”
“Karabakh and Abkhazia are real republics; just their independence is not yet admitted,” said the politician.
Note that the UN protection counsel session devoted to the broadened discussions of Kosovo situation will take place in December 19.
http://www.panorama.am/en/politics/2007/12/12/kosovo/

Kosovo seen as precedent by four more new countries
TransnistriaAn "independence test" is underway, with diplomats from four new countries closely watching Kosovo for signs of a precedent for these self-declared states to the east. The already de-facto independent countries are Transdniestria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno-Karabakh. Western powers have already ruled out any precedent in the case of Kosovo.
By Aris Ghazinyan, 17/Dec/2007
Street scene from Tiraspol: Transdniestria (Pridnestrovie) is one of the 4 new countries closely watching Kosovo for a precedent
Street scene from Tiraspol: Transdniestria (Pridnestrovie) is one of the 4 new countries closely watching Kosovo for a precedent

STEPANAKERT (Tiraspol Times) - Despite Armenia’s declared position that Kosovo independence will not be used as precedent for Nagorno-Karabakh, political and diplomatic circles in the country are closely watching the developments around the breakaway Serbian province.

Kosovo's authorities plan to declare independence unilaterally, against the will of Serbia. The United States and most of the European Union members have voiced their readiness to recognize Kosovo’s independence despite Serbian objections.

" - We have no intentions to use Kosovo as precedent, as it will contradict our position that all conflicts differ,” Armenia’s Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan declared at the UN General Assembly session in October. But he added that the Armenian side “does not understand and cannot accept the reverse logic that Kosovo was given independence and that another nation cannot obtain self-determination."

Different degrees of freedom?

The foreign minister also stated that there can not be two sets of rules when it comes to unrecognized countries, and that his country will not accept the concept that there can be different degrees of freedom or security depending on each case.

" - Nobody should tell us that there are proportions of freedom or security," Oskanyan said then.

His statement referred to the logic of Kosovo independence becoming a precedent for resolving other conflicts located “east of Kosovo”, mainly the four self-declared republics in the territory of the former USSR – Transdniestria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

Despite the differences existing between the two conflicts, it is patently clear that some aspects of the Kosovo settlement have things in common with these other conflicts, analysts stated. In the case with Kosovo, the international community is in fact offering political independence to an autonomous region despite the objection of the country that officially claims sovereignty over it.

Armenia's Deputy Parliament Speaker Vahan Hovhannisyan said that regardless of the wish of the international negotiators involved in the Kosovo resolution, the ultimate solution in Kosovo would be a factor influencing Nagorno-Karabakh's settlement as well. The same is true for Transdniestria, South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Abkhazia rejects non-objective mediators

The Republic of Abkhazia, next to Georgia, declared through a top diplomat that if Kosovo’s independence is recognized by the international community and the move is not followed by its recognition of Abkhazia’s right to sovereignty, then “the Abkhazian side will reject mediation by countries whose positions are not objective.”

David Gharabekyan, a political analyst from Nagorno-Karabakh, says in this connection that “on Kosovo, the international community is acting as an advocate for self-determination.” But when it comes to settling conflicts on post-Soviet territory, a number of influential states prefer "factual justification of the totalitarian policy in the national issue," in other words clinging to the claims of a so-called territorial integrity which the claimant states have been unable to impose for most of their existence.

On 10 December 1991 Nagorno-Karabakh held a referendum on independence, which took place under unceasing Azerbaijan shelling of the capital Stepanakert. The overwhelming majority of Karabakh voters then expressed their aspiration to build an independent state. Ten of those voters had been killed by the end of the day. (With information from ArmeniaNow)
http://www.tiraspoltimes.com/node/1484

ARMENIA HAS NOT APPROVED MINSK GROUP’S SUGGESTIONS ON KARABAKH

The talks on the November 29-30 meeting of OSCE Foreign Ministers’ summit were a bit harder than last year. Today, on a press conference Foreign Minister of Armenia Vardan Oskanian reminded that this time a civil statement was not adopted either. The participants failed to come to consensus about the improvement of OSCE structure, fight against terrorism, settlement of conflicts and weapon monitoring.

Oskanian emphasized the discussions of the issues of struggle against discrimination and abuse, struggle against trafficking, nature and wildlife protection, as well as the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh.

The Foreign Minister also said that during his December 4-5 visit to Moscow he met with his Russian colleague Sergey Lavrov and discussed the present state and the perspectives of Armenia-Russia relations and a number of regional issues. Karabakh conflict was one of the most important topics of Oskanian-Lavrov conversation.

In Moscow Vardan Oskanian also met with Secretary General of CSTO Nikolay Bordiuzha in order to discuss the bilateral partnership in the frameworks of that organization and the issues connected with Armenia’s chairmanship in CSTO next year.

To foreign diplomatic representatives to Armenia, residing in Moscow, Mr. Oskanian represented the priorities of the foreign policy of the Republic of Armenia and the latest progress of peace process on Karabakh, as well as the social and legislation reforms and the situation on the eve of presidential elections in Armenia.

On December 7, Strasbourg, met with the members of the European Council Foreign Ministers Committee Monitoring Group.

On the meeting with Council of Europe Secretary General Terry Davis the Foreign Minister of Armenia rose the question of sending a monitoring mission to Nakhijevan. He was informed that the monitoring of culture heritage in Nakhijevan shall most probably take place in the first quarter of 2008. Mr. Oskanian stated that Armenia and Nagonro-Karabkah are ready for monitoring on their own territory.

In any case, Vardan Oskanian said he is optimistic about the talks on peace settlement of the Karabakh issue and added that Prime Minister Serge Sarkisian shares his optimism and is well informed about the negotiation process. Nevertheless the Foreign Minister informed that the Armenian Government has not yet approved the OSCE Minsk Group’s suggestions on Karabakh, made during the meeting in Madrid.

By A. Haroutiunian, translated by A.M. http://www.azg.am/?lang=EN&num=2007121907

Oskanian Cools Talk Of Karabakh Breakthrough

By Anna Saghabalian

Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian on Tuesday declined to explicitly endorse Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian’s upbeat statements on prospects for a near-term resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Visiting Brussels last week, Sarkisian reportedly said he is confident that Armenia and Azerbaijan can reach a framework peace accord on Karabakh before the Armenian presidential election scheduled for February 19. “I don't think the presidential election should impact on these negotiations,” he told Reuters.

Commenting on the remarks, Oskanian only implicitly shared Sarkisian’s stated optimism and said he is not aware of all the details of the prime minister’s interview with the Western news agency. He said he has to be always upbeat on peace prospects in his capacity as Armenia’s chief Karabakh negotiator.

“All in all, I too am optimistic about negotiations,” Oskanian told journalists. “It’s good that the prime minister is also an optimist like me.”

Oskanian acknowledged that President Robert Kocharian has a “more cautious” attitude on the possibility of a Karabakh breakthrough. “As they say, a pessimist is an informed optimist,” he joked.

Kocharian stated in October that the conflicting parties are unlikely to agree on the basic principles of a Karabakh settlement, proposed by international mediators, before next year’s presidential elections due in both Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Sarkisian was also quoted by Reuters as implying that the upcoming presidential election will not hinder an Armenian-Azerbaijani peace deal because he expects to win it. He stressed that peace proposals made by the OSCE Minsk Group are “coming with my consent.”

Oskanian, however, questioned the veracity of this remark, suggesting that the Armenian premier only meant to say that he is familiar with those proposals.

The Minsk Group’s U.S., Russian and French co-chairs presented Oskanian and his Azerbaijani counterpart, Elmar Mammadyarov, with the final, modified version of their existing peace plan during an OSCE ministerial council meeting in Madrid on November 29. They are expected to visit Baku and Yerevan next month in an apparent last-ditch attempt to get the two sides to sign up to the proposed settlement before the 2008 elections.

(Photolur photo) http://www.armenialiberty.org/armeniarepor...A781DB5D862.ASP

Karabakh issue bases on right to self-determination
18.12.2007
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Whatever OSCE MG proposals could be, the opinion of Karabakhi people will be taken into account, Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian told a news conference in Yerevan.

“Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan did not say that religious factor lies in the basis of the conflict. His statement was distorted,” he noted. “The issue of Nagorno Karabakh is the issue of right of Karabakhi people to self-determination. If Azerbaijan were a Christian state the problem would remain.”

In an interview with The Los Angeles Times Armenian Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan conceded that the conflict can have a religious motive but it’s not decisive in the opposition.
http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=24406

Artsakh Youth conference

On december 14,15 it was held Artsakh youth forum in the house of culture and youth by participation of the repsentatives of youth structures of the regions . The aim of 2nd forum was the increasing of the political activeness of the youth, the elaboration of joint programs for carrying out effective youth policy and so on.
joint efforts are the pledge for success
Inaugurating the forum the minister of culture newly appointed N.Gasparyan told the youth to undertake the practical steps. The middle age of the employees of several ministries hesitates from 25-35.The minister says the only way for breaking the deadlock, the grouping the power of all youth organisations and strengthening their cooperation with the ministry. He concluded.”I propose the cooperation without complexes and problems”. the youth of the village is as it is After the speeches of the representatives from the regions, the problems of youth were marked distinctively. The same problems are available everywhere: unemployment, the flat problem,the absence of the opportunities for organizing leisure-time.As a result, the youth of the regions leave the villages for better life.Everyone agreed that the problems are much in the regions
one policy must be carried out The problems raised by province youth don’t threat the youth of the town any longer. It’s not secret, that the youth structures have different,often opposite approachings about the youth problems. It’s natural. Nevertheless, there are questions about which the youth structures must have one point of view, among them is Karabakh question.The problem is important and the efforts of youth structures can be significant in the case of representing Karabakh problem on public level.Deputy minister of foreign affairs Atanesyan said that the ministry will help in the question. in conclusion
The youth representatives told about necessity to work jointly.One part of the youth proposed to organize pan Artsakh youth festival, the other part proposed to work out joint vision on Karabakh problem together with the ministry.They decided on the level of working group to discuss it in near future.Deputy minister of Culture G. Grigoryan told that it’s time to do the practical steps and our aim is the centralisation of the power and grouping the youth. She also marked that this meeting helped us to imagine today’s developments and opportunities and to mark the policy, which must be done in future.
http://www.artsakhtert.com/eng/index.php?st=0&id=2430

Karabakh peaceful resolution possible, RA PM says
20.12.2007
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ “The potential of peaceful talks on the Nagorno Karabakh conflict settlement has not been exhausted yet. It’s important for Armenia to recognize the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, which for its part should recognize the right of Karabakhi people to self-determination,” RA Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan said at a meeting with EU Envoy for the South Caucasus Peter Semneby.

“Presidential elections in Azerbaijan and Armenia should not hamper the negotiations. Candidates should not conceal their views from the publics because of the fear to lose supporters. Positions should be voiced precisely,” he said.

“The European Union is interested in maintenance of previous achievements for efficient continuation of talks. I concluded that Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev sees resolution of the conflict after the presidential elections in both states,” Mr Semneby said for his part.
http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=24431

Turkish ambassador to Azerbaijan: You launch war in Nagorno Karabakh, and see how Turkey boils up - PHOTOSESSION
[ 18 Dec 2007 16:14 ]

Huseyn Avni Karslioglu: Azerbaijan is not recognized in Turkey

“My dismissal as ambassador and appointment to another post in Turkey was a surprise for me,” Turkish ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary to Azerbaijan Huseyn Avni Karslioglu said in an interview to APA. The ambassador said when Abdullah Gul was elected president of Turkey media reported that he would work with his old friends and his name was among them.
“But I said that recalling me would not be good. I have just come to Azerbaijan and started some activities here. This is the president’s order. Only 11 months passed. My leaving did not make me fully glad. Of course, my new appointment is also a high post. I will be head of president’s secretariat,” he said.
Huseyn Avni Karslioglu said he could not implement all the projects he planned as an ambassador.
“We wanted Abdullah Gul to pay his first official as a president to Azerbaijan and our wish came true. But not all the projects I planned for improving economic relations have been implemented. Turkey-Azerbaijan relations develop in all spheres, especially in political-economic sphere. Turkey is able to do much for the development of non-oil sector in Azerbaijan. We want Azerbaijan to invest funds in Turkey,” the ambassador said.
The ambassador said that Azerbaijan is loved in Turkey. But Azerbaijan is not recognized in Turkey.
“Year of Azerbaijan has not been held in Turkey up to now. Azerbaijan feels happy for any success of Turkey on the international level and Azerbaijan’s achievement also makes Turkey happy. You launch war in Nagorno Karabakh, and see how Turkey boils up. Turkey will be so happy, if Azerbaijani football clubs Karvan, Turan, Garabagh and Khazar-Lankaran win on the international level,” he said.
Speaking about Turkey’s support to Azerbaijan in the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, the ambassador underlined that his country is not the co-chair of OSCE Minsk Group.
“Neither the co-chairing countries, nor Armenia want this. Our borders with Armenia are closed, and this has a serious influence on Armenians. Turkey undergoes political and economic losses. Turkey is exerted pressure,” he said.
Huseyn Avni Karslioglu said the government devolved Turkish parliament’s authorities in fighting against PKK to the servicemen.
He said that security agencies will take all necessary steps:
“They will either bomb, or carry out operation…”
The ambassador said he will not be able to take his car GAZ 21 he bought in Azerbaijan with him.
“I planned to buy an old yellow bus and motor tricycle. I like to drive them,” he said.
Huseyn Avni Karslioglu also said he does not part with Azerbaijan, and takes Azerbaijan with him. /APA/

Standing subcommittee on frozen conflicts may be formed in PACE
21.12.2007
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The PACE co-rapporteur on Azerbaijan, Andres Herkel stands for formation of a permanent subcommittee on frozen conflicts. “I do support the idea of formation of a permanent subcommittee or organization of public hearings. The issue should certainly be discussed,” Mr Herkel said.

“Resolution of frozen conflicts is a very important issue for the Council of Europe. It refers not only to Azerbaijan but also to Georgia and Moldova. We can’t hope that these conflicts will be resolved tomorrow,” he said. “Public diplomacy is also significant for the purpose. Absence of civil ties will badly prevent development of the process.”

When comparing the Nagorno Karabakh and South Ossetian conflicts, Mr Herkel said the later is remarkable for existence of dialogue and contacts, what allows to speak of prospects, Trend reports.
http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=24442

Kocharian Signs Armenian Defense Doctrine

By Emil Danielyan

President Robert Kocharian signed on Wednesday Armenia’s official military doctrine that describes Azerbaijan’s pledges to win back Nagorno-Karabakh as a key threat to national security and asserts Yerevan’s right to launch pre-emptive military strikes against potential aggressors.

“In the event of an immediate threat of armed aggression, the Republic of Armenia reserves itself the right to take military actions aimed at neutralizing it,” reads the doctrine approved by Kocharian’s National Security Council on Friday.

The 18-page document was drawn up by a special commission of the Armenian Defense Ministry in collaboration with local and foreign experts. Its main points are in tune a separate “national security strategy” that was signed by the president in February.

Both documents were developed as a result of Armenia’s decision three years ago to deepen its defense and security links with NATO and other Western security structures. The Armenian government has since upgraded its participation in NATO’s Partnership for Peace program by negotiating an “individual partnership action plan,” or IPAP, with the U.S.-led alliance.

Accordingly, the military doctrine states that Armenia will increasingly cooperate with the armed forces of NATO member states and the United States in particular in reforming its military and contributing to international security. It specifically commits Yerevan to expanding its involvement in Western-led peace-keeping operations abroad. The Armenian military already has small contingents deployed in Kosovo and Iraq and is considering joining the NATO-led multinational force in Afghanistan.

The doctrine makes it clear at the same that “strategic partnership” with Russia will remain the bedrock of Armenia’s defense policy. It says the two countries will continue to maintain close military ties both on a bilateral basis and within the framework of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization.

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and Azerbaijan’s persistent threats to resolve it by force are high on the list of “external threats” to Armenia’s security contained in the document. “The Republic of Armenia is the guarantor and supporter of the security of the people of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and their chosen path of development,” it says. Among other perceived security threats is Turkey’s “strategic alliance” with Azerbaijan and continuing economic blockade of Armenia.

The doctrine also lists internal security challenges such as attempts to change the country’s “constitutional order,” set up “illegal armed groups” and “discredit” the Armenian Armed Forces. The latter are to play the central role in meeting all these challenges. The government, for its part, undertakes to make the army more combat-ready by supplying it with modern weaponry and boosting the morale of military personnel.

The doctrine reaffirms the government’s commitment to defense reforms that are meant to bring the Armenian military into greater conformity with NATO standards and practices. The government undertook to implement such reforms three years ago and plans to complete them by 2015. If implemented, they will lead to greater civilian control over the military and a so-called “civilianization” of the Armenian Defense Ministry. The ministry’s current organizational structure essentially mirrors that of the formerly Soviet and now Russian armed forces, with army officers holding just about every ministerial position and facing little civilian oversight.

The doctrine further envisages that the proportion of contractual personnel in Armenia’s conscription-based army will grow significantly in the coming years.

(Photolur photo: Kocharian inspects an Armenian army unit.) http://www.armenialiberty.org/armeniarepor...C6665B4419A.ASP

OSCE MG latest package of proposals provides opportunity for Karabakh resolution
26.12.2007
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Some progress was fixed in the Karabakh peaceful process during the recent years, Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian said.

“Armenia’s policy is neither defensive nor aggressive. It’s remarkable that the right of Karabakhi people to self-determination is fixed in the present package of proposals. It’s an item we could only dream about some 10 years ago. The OSCE Minsk Group and other international structures aware of the core of the problem put difference between the Nagorno Karabakh conflict and other conflicts,” the Minister said.

“The document on the table is the result of efforts applied by the sides. There are still uncoordinated issues and that is why the mediators resort to shuttle diplomacy. We have numerously stated that OSCE MG latest package of proposals provides a good opportunity for Karabakh resolution. It contains balanced principles that should be carried to logical completion,” he said.

The Minister noted that the visit of mediators in 2008 will determine the trend of further talks. “In the framework of the negotiations we established normal relations with Azerbaijani FM Elmar Mammadyarov, since normal relations are essential for efficient talks,” Mr Oskanian said in an interview with Shant TV Channel.
http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=24474

Base principles on Karabakh may be ready in January 2008
27.12.2007
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The international mediators can develop a draft on the Nagorno Karabakh peaceful agreement before the presidential elections in Armenia, if both the sides agree upon the basic principles of conflict resolution, OSCE MG Russian Co-chair Yuri Merzlyakov said.

The mediators submitted written proposals to Azerbaijan and Armenia during the meeting in Madrid in the end of November. Due to the confidentiality of the process, no details were announced on the issue.

“The proposals offer nothing new”, said Merzlyakov.

The Russian mediator stated that the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs hope to get reaction of both sides during their visit to the region in the middle of January. “In Madrid, the Azerbaijani and Armenian Foreign Ministers presented their opinions. But the sides are studying the proposals,” Merzlyakov said.

He did not exclude that the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan may meet after the Co-chairs’ visit to the region. The co-chairs are also planning to visit Nagorno Karabakh, Trend reports.
http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=24482

2007 Review: Foreign policy and the pursuit of Nagorno-Karabakh settlement
By Aris Ghazinyan // ArmeniaNow reporter

In the sphere of foreign policy affairs and prospects for the settlement of the Karabakh problem, 2007 was a chronicle of alternating events, some of which had not been forecast at all. In particular, the new year began on January 19 when editor-in-chief of the Istanbul-based Turkish-Armenian-language newspaper “Agos” Hrant Dink was shot dead in the center of Istanbul by a Turkish nationalist. This unforeseen event immediately overshadowed the expected start of the “foreign policy” year, i.e. the winter session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) that had on its agenda Armenia’s fulfillment of its commitments to the Council of Europe.

A corresponding PACE resolution was adopted at the plenary session on January 23. The document stated progress achieved by Armenia in fulfilling its obligations. Armenian Parliament Speaker Tigran Torosyan evaluated that document as an “unprecedented positive resolution ever passed by the PACE on Armenia’s fulfillment of its obligations to the Council of Europe.” Nevertheless, despite even the seriousness of the meeting in Strasbourg, it was Hrant Dink’s murder that marked the start of the year and outlined one of its major characteristics – aggravating tensions in Armenian-Turkish relations.

The start of the year was marked by another surge of optimistic moods among influential Armenian organizations regarding the possible adoption of a resolution on the Armenian genocide by the U.S. Congress. The optimism had first of all been conditioned by the victory of Democrats in the latest congressional elections as well as the statement of the newly elected House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that a draft resolution would be taken to the House floor until April 24, 2007. Resolution 106 was submitted to the House for consideration on January 30. The whole year has been impregnated for Armenians around the world and Armenia’s foreign policy department with expectations for the resolution to be passed.

The foreign policy aspect of 2007 from the very beginning implied two phases of boost, and they were separated from each other by the period of holding parliamentary elections in Armenia. However, the first phase ended earlier than expected in connection with a new unforeseen circumstance – a sudden death of Prime Minister Andranik Margaryan on March 24.

During the first two months of 2007, Armenia’s president met with the heads of Russia and France – two of the three states that co-chair the OSCE Minsk Group on the settlement of the Karabakh problem. Robert Kocharyan met with Vladimir Putin in the Russian resort town of Sochi on January 24, and with outgoing Jacques Chirac in Paris on February 19. It is demonstrative that in-between these two meetings the region of the Karabakh standoff was visited by the OSCE Minsk Group mediators. In particular, on January 27, cochairmen Yuri Merzlyakov (Russia), Mathew Bryza (USA) and Bernard Fassier (France) visited Stepanakert and met with Nagorno-Karabakh Republic President Arkady Ghukasyan. The news was the statement by the Russian diplomat that “there is a common opinion”, but at the same time Merzlyakov refused to reveal details citing confidentiality of the talks.

Not much information was reported about the meeting of the presidents of Russia and Armenia. Apparently, the sides discussed not only the Karabakh problem, but also Russia’s stronger economic presence in Armenia and prospects of forming a vertical geopolitical axis Moscow-Yerevan-Tehran. Remarkably, the supply of Iranian gas to Armenia started on March 19. The ceremony of opening the trans-boundary section of the gas pipeline was attended by the presidents of Armenia and Iran, Robert Kocharyan and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. In order to increase the volumes of import of Iranian gas ArmRosgazprom launched the construction of a 197-kilometer gas pipeline – Kajaran-Ararat.

On the whole, 2007 was marked by the increased Russian capital on the Armenian market. In particular, Russia’s number one wireless operator Mobile TeleSystems (MTS), purchased 80 percent of shares of International Cell Holding which is a 100 percent owner of the K-Telecom (brand name VivaCell) and also signed an option agreement for the purchase of the remaining 20 percent. In the ending year Armenia also made a decision to shut down the Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant whose term of operation ends in 2016 according to technical requirements. But by signing the New European Neighborhood Policy Action Plan, Armenia undertook to close the station within the shortest possible term. Russian Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom) Head, former Prime Minister Sergey Kiriyenko stated his agency’s readiness to render assistance to the Armenian side not only in building a new block, but also in taking a financial part in the project. The strengthening Russian presence in Armenia indeed became one of the characteristics of the ending year.

But the most important foreign policy event of the year for Armenia was the meeting of the OSCE Foreign Ministers’ Council in Madrid, Spain. On November 29, the countries mediating a Karabakh settelement (Russia, the United States, France) gave the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan so-called “fair and balanced basic principles of a peaceful settlement of the conflict”. It is not concretely known what the provisions imply, but the following statement of US Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns in this connection is demonstrative: “Any agreements that will be reached on Kosovo cannot be applied to other conflicts. The situation in Kosovo is specific and I do not think that any parallels can be drawn between the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh and a possible solution in Kosovo.”

It is demonstrative that the parties to the conflict were urged to complete the current stage of negotiations by the approval of the basic principles and immediately pass on to a new phase – development of a draft comprehensive peace treaty. Besides, they were also asked to prepare their populations to peace and stop issuing any statements admitting the option of war as a means of solving the conflict. In this connection, the OSCE Foreign Ministers’ Council issued a statement on Nagorno-Karabakh. “It is with pleasure that we point out that Armenia and Azerbaijan have agreed to continue the current negotiations on the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in the coming electoral year. We demonstrate support for the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs’ effort to forge together with the party basic principles of a peaceful settlement of the conflict. We strongly urge both parties to overcome the last remaining differences that they have thereby approving the general concept of settlement and get down to the development of a comprehensive peace agreement on that basis.”

In this aspect, it should be pointed out that the upcoming year promises not only internal political activity connected with the presidential election slated for February but also foreign policy activity to a much greater extent. As it was unequivocally stated at the meeting of the OSCE Foreign Ministers’ Council, the international diplomatic community intends to solve the Karabakh problem in the visible future.
http://armenianow.com/?action=viewArticle&...69&IID=&lng=eng

Karabakh Armenians Told To Accept Azeri Rule Or Emigrate

By Emil Danielyan

Azerbaijan’s tough-talking President Ilham Aliev has said that Nagorno-Karabakh’s predominantly Armenian population must agree to return under Azerbaijani rule or emigrate from its homeland.

“We will never allow the creation of a second Armenian state on Azerbaijani soil,” Aliev said in his New Year’s address to the nation cited by Azerbaijani media. “If the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh want to self-determine, they should do that within the framework of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity. If they don’t want that, they should leave Nagorno-Karabakh and create their second state elsewhere.”

The remarks came just two weeks before international mediators’ crucial visit to Baku and Yerevan which should finally clarify whether the Karabakh conflict can be resolved before presidential elections due in both Armenia and Azerbaijan in 2008. The French, Russian and U.S. co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group still hope to hammer out a framework peace accord before the Armenian election slated for February 19. Sources close to them say the conflicting parties essentially agree on the main points of the Minsk Group’s current peace plan.

The plan calls for a gradual settlement of the bitter dispute which would start from the liberation of Armenian-occupied lands in Azerbaijan proper and end in a referendum of self-determination in Karabakh. Although it sets no time frame for the holding of such a referendum, the mediators seem to accept the very possibility of eventual international recognition of the disputed territory’s secession from Soviet Azerbaijan.

However, Aliev again insisted that his country will never come to terms with the loss of Karabakh. “Nagorno-Karabakh will never be granted independence,” he said. “The leadership and the people of Azerbaijan will never agree to that.”

Aliev also pledged to carry on with a military build-up which Baku hopes will eventually enable it to win back Karabakh. He said Azerbaijan’s defense spending will rise by at least 20 percent to $1.2 billion this year as a result. “We are reinforcing our army because we must be ready to free our lands of occupiers at any moment and by any means,” he added.

Armenia’s defense budget, although more modest in absolute terms, is likewise set to increase by over 30 percent to $400 million in 2008. In the intensifying arms race with Azerbaijan, Armenia can also capitalize on its close military ties with Russia which allow it to receive Russian weapons at knockdown prices or even free of charge.

In a televised speech on December 31, President Robert Kocharian said his government further boosted the combat-readiness of Armenia’s Armed Forces in the course of 2007. “The strengthening of the army will remain a top priority,” he said.

Kocharian said that Yerevan will also “step up efforts to bolster the Nagorno-Karabakh by helping our brethren to build viable statehood. A statehood which is able to defend itself.”
http://www.armenialiberty.org/armeniarepor...30410065AC6.ASP

Azerbaijan Against The People of Karabakh

Arman Melikyan January 07, 2008

Politico-Legal Consequences of Agression And The Influence of Those Consequences on The Prospects of Regional Security. Arman Melikyan is the editor of this work published in 2006 in Yerevan

As of February 1988, the International Community viewed the Karabakh conflict in the context of Armenian-Azeri relations. The Soviet Union existed at the time when the Karabakh conflict erupted, and the communist authorities of the country tried to portray all the parties involved in this conflict equally accountable.

The late 1980s early 1990s statements of the Kremlin officials about the importance on not having winners or losers in this conflict are strikingly similar to the statements of different international and European officials, who in one way or another deal with the Karabakh conflict. Thus, one should exclude any possibility of just and impartial approach to the process of this conflict resolution. Instead, proposed is the idea of the necessity of unblocking the communication, which ties Azerbaijan, Nagorno Karabakh and Armenia, with further access to Turkey. This kind of approach can be characterized as an option of short-term political solution, which in no way corresponds to a real and long-term peaceful resolution of the existing situation. The immediate hostages of which are two neighbouring nations and three states (Azerbaijan, Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh). The mediators say: let the leaders of the two nations agree on the principles of settling the relations, and the international community will provide all the necessary support on the issues of building peace and eliminating the consequences of war. The mediators also offer conflict settlement models, which in their essence do not have universal legal approaches, which are usually applied to all the parties of the conflict. This, furthermore, deepens the feeling of hopelessness in the prospects of conflict resolution.

The asymmetry, with which the rights of the people and states involved in the conflict are tackled, especially the national discrimination against various categories of people, who had suffered a great extent in the course of the conflict, creates prerequisites for the freezing of the conflict or its resolution solely through forceful means. The situation where ”all the participants are responsible”, does not give any chance of alternative conflict resolution to the parties directly involved in the conflict, since rather influential international players have vested interest in that very kind of assessment of the conflict.

The history of the Karabakh conflict in its existing form can be conditionally divided into two eras. The first era covers the period when the conflict emerged and the subsequent decades of this conflict’s conservation at the time of the Soviet rule. The conflict acquired its contemporary form after, upon mutual agreement between Russia and Kemalist Turkey, the first Armenian Republic (1918-1920) seized its existence, and its substantial part was annexed to Turkey (the region of Kars and Surmali district) and Azerbaijan (Nakhijevan was mandated to Azerbaijan, without any reserved right of giving it to another state). Whilst Karabakh, with an over 95% Armenian population, having at the time internationally recognized status of a disputed territory (which is stipulated in international agreements) was in full given to Azerbaijan, with the condition of creating an Armenian autonomy within. The latter, however, in contradiction to the essential decision, was later on formed only in the Upper (Nagorno) part of the Karabakh region. The agreements on these issues under Moscow’s pressure were finally drawn up in the multilateral Kars Agreement (1921), after which the Karabakh issue and a number of other issues related to the Soviet Armenia ”seized to exist” within the official USSR framework.

The second era began at the time of USSR’s decline, when in 1988 the highest representative body of the Nagorno Karabakh Autonomous Region (NKAR) addressed a petition on transfer of NKAR from Azerbaijani SSR to Armenian SSR, in response to which the Azerbaijani authorities engaged in massive ethnic cleansings and massacres of Armenians, which was followed by a wide raged military activities, involving air force, heavy military equipment and artillery.

It is important to mention here, that in all possible events any intra-state conflict, be it peaceful or military, serves as a proof of incapability of the authorities.

The Karabakh conflict is not an exception. The best scenario, which the Azeri authorities chose to implement, was either expulsion or murder of the Armenian population. With every new attempt to use force on the part of Azerbaijan, not only did the chances of finding a peaceful resolution to the conflict decreased, but also the physical picture of the conflict was inherently changing shape. Almost 500 thousand Armenians were expelled from Azerbaijan, becoming refugees, and approximately the same amount of Azerbaijani people followed suit, acquiring the status of Internationally Displaced Persons (IDPs). Thousands of people from both sides died in the course of military actions, and continue to die even today, despite the ceasefire. In fact, Azerbaijani IDPs were not subject to deportations or ethnic cleansing, they left their homes in the course of military actions, when the Azeri troops were retreating. As a result of military actions, the configuration of the territories controlled by the two sides also changed.

The address of NKAR’s Regional Council on transfer of the region to Armenia was initiated in the result of incessant oppression and discrimination, which was carried out by the Azeri authorities against the Armenian population.

The development of the conflict during the Soviet and Post-Soviet eras can be described in the following phases:
1. 1921-1988: a period, in the course of which repressions and discrimination carried out by the Azeri authorities led to the decision of the NKAR’s Regional Council to transfer the region to Armenia.
2. 1988-1990: the address of the NKAR’s Regional Council, on 20th of April 1988, served as official grounds for the Azeri authorities to carry out massive ethnic cleansings of Armenian population in those regions of Azerbaijan, where they constitute the minority groups, unable to organize any self-defense. These activities of the Azeri government were encouraged by the decision of the Central Committee of the CPSU (Communist Party of the Soviet Union) issued on the 21st of February 1988, assessing that it was extremism demonstrated on the part of Armenian Karabakhis.
3. The first half of 1991: the Azeri authorities began mass deportation of Armenians from densely inhabited areas of Karabakh. The operation on deportation of Armenians was titled ”Kolco” (”The Operation Ring”). The 7th Soviet Army, which was deployed in Azerbaijan, took part in this operation, and despite the resistance of dozens of Armenian villages in the north and south parts of Karabakh the population of these villages was deported.
4. From September 25th, 1991 - Present: the start of bombardments of Nagorno Karabakh Republic’s (NKR) capital and of other areas densely inhabited by Armenians. The first bombardment took place on the 25th of September, 1991. This date can be considered as the beginning of Azerbaijan’s military aggression against the people of NKR.

Every subsequent phase of the conflict’s development further complicated the search for peaceful solution. Thus, if in 1988 the Karabakhi Armenians could consider the possibility of increasing the status of their autonomy to the level of autonomous republic, at the time of signing the ceasefire agreement (1994), no one in Karabakh could even think of any autonomy within Azerbaijan. Moreover, Armenia's exit from the Soviet structures on 21st of September 1991 for the most part predetermined for Karabakh the route of establishing its own sovereign statehood. Every new attempt of the Azeri authorities of solving the conflict through forceful measures raised for the NKR the importance of ensuring the sufficient levels of its people's security and the significance of creating guarantees, which will preserve these levels of security. Moreover, despite the fact that it is allegedly becoming rather difficult today to distinguish who is right and who is wrong in this conflict, it is absolutely obvious, that Karabakh's political requests (which came about as an expected consequence of Azeri discrimination and oppression of the Armenian population) did not convince the Azeri authorities to seek solutions in the diplomatic axis, instead, they attempted to solve the existing situation through force, for which the Azeri government has to take equal accountability and penalty, and recognize its responsibility for the inflicted sufferings, and physical damage inflicted both on the people and the state - the NKR.

The beginning of peaceful process should be marked by Azerbaijan’s recognition of NKR’s sovereignty. Azerbaijan has to clearly state its intent to pay reparations to the Armenian refugees for the inflicted physical and moral damages. Respectively, the government of Azerbaijan must pay reparations to Azeris, who became IDPs as a result of the actions of their government. Today, some territories, controlled by the NKR’s Defence Army, to a great extent serve as buffer zones. However, if in the course of a reasonable timeframe the Azeri side does not commence this process, then the mentioned territories, alongside of being buffer zones can serve as resources for compensating for the material losses of the Armenian refugees and areas of their legitimate re-settlement; considering that as former citizens of Azerbaijan SSR they have the right to settle in those areas of the latter territory, which they prefer and where their security will be guaranteed and the rights protected - most importantly the right for life.

Return to the past is impossible, and this has to be taken into consideration by both sides of the conflict as well as the international mediators. The use of force, as well as the continuing threats of using force, and calls for military solution of the conflict coupled with the Azeri arms race must be condemned and punished, because without the latter the full-fledged development of not only Azerbaijan and Karabakh but also of the region is impossible.
http://www.hetq.am/eng/politics/7437/

Azerbaijan Continues Propaganda War Misleading International Community

It is true that in today's world the strength of arms will not conquer any land or resolve any war. Azerbaijan continues wrongly accusing Armenia and misleading international community on the issue of Nagorno Karabakh conflict.

Khazar Ibragim, the spokesperson of the Foreign Ministry of Azerbaijan, in today's edition of Today.AZ is in offensive mode saying "Armenia not only held ethnic cleansing in Azerbaijan but also continues to occupy Azerbaijani lands."

This is outright lie because it is the mass killings of Armenians in Sumgait in February 1988 and in Baku that escalated the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan prompting people to take arms.

Many educated people know about how people of Azerbaijan massacred ethnic Armenians in the azeri city of Sumgait. U.S. congressman Frank Pallone in 2006 has called for recognition of Sumgait Massacres of ethnic Armenians. "Mr. Speaker, I stand to recognize the massacres in Sumgait, Azerbaijan and the continued Turkish and Azeri aggression against the Armenian people."

Mr. Pallone goes on saying "Mr. Speaker, These crimes were never adequately prosecuted by the government of Azerbaijan, and most of its organizers and executors were set free. Despite the attempt by the government of Azerbaijan to cover up these crimes, enough brave witnesses came forward to give an accurate account of these offenses."

This is what has result in the present negotiation stage to recognize the self-determination rights of the Armenian community of Nagorno Karabakh. If the Kosovo Albanians think that due to the massacres of Serbs it's impossible to live with Serbia and Kosovo should be independent state, the same holds true in case of Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan.

Armenia will mark the 20th anniversary of the Armenian massacres in the Azerbaijani town of Sumgait. Vartan Oskanian, the Foreign Minister of Armenia noted that Sumgait is highly important because it is closely connected with the Karabakh conflict. The military component of the Karabakh conflict settlement originated in Sumgait and if Azerbaijan wants to make peace with Armenia it needs to remember this and condemn any ethnic cleanising. The first attempt of ethnic cleansings took place there, and led the people of Karabakh to the irreversibility of the idea of self-determination and independence of Nagorno Karabakh.
http://www.huliq.com/46837/azerbaijan-cont...ional-community

Arkady Manoucharov died

In connection with the death of Arkady Manoucharov, Bako Sahakian presentes his condolences to the members of his family. It is said:
" Nagorno-Karabakh suffered a great loss. One of the leaders of Artsakh national-liberating movement - Arkady Manoucharov died.
For years Arkady Manoucharov held different responsible and high posts and he had his sensible investment in the work of socio-economical development of Nagorno-Karabakh.
People and authorities of Artsakh estimated highly the contribution of Arkady Manoucharov in the work of Artsakh's state building and rewarded him with "Mesrop Mashtots" medal.
On behalf of the people and authoroties of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic I present my deep condolences to the relatives of Arkady Manoucharov. His memory will be always in our hearts"

Central Administration of Information of the NKR President's Stuff
09-01-2008 http://www.artsakhtert.com/eng/index.php?st=2&id=2470