Jump to content

Нахиджеван: азербайджанцы продолжают разрушение


Recommended Posts

I'm afraid that even if he confirm the facts ov vandalizm, it will hardly have any consequences for Azerbaijan, and certainly, destroyed monuments couldn't be restored.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 168
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Что слышно про акцию Дашнакцутюн, говорят по всему миру перед посольтвами азеристана будут пикеты протесты 28 Февраля.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

12:14:57, 07 февраля 2006 года. Элладская церковь протестует против разрушения армянских памятников в Нахичевани

Religio.Ru

Архиепископ Афинский и всей Эллады Христодул и Священный Синод Элладской православной церкви выступили с протестом против разрушения армянских памятников в Нахичеванской провинции, с 1921 года входящей в границы Азербайджана.

"Разрушение священных мест и памятников составляет одну из самых черных страниц человеческой истории", - говорится в распространенном заявлении главы Элладской церкви.

Подобные действия "нарушают основные принципы толерантности и мирного сосуществования народов", поэтому Элладская церковь обратилась в ряд международных организаций с призывом "предпринять все усилия для того, чтобы армянские религиозные и исторические памятники в Цуфле были сохранены, восстановлены и пользовались уважением".

В официальном сообщении афинского Синода со ссылкой на базирующийся в греческой столице Национальный совет армян и архиепископа Хорена Тограматзяна, религиозного лидера армянского меньшинства в Греции, сообщается, что недавно группа из двухсот азербайджанских солдат "разрушила с особенной жестокостью археологические сокровища, расположенные на армянском кладбище в Цуфле, провинция Нахичевань". История кладбища насчитывает уже пятнадцать столетий, говорится в сообщении, сообщает "Интерфакс-Религия".

Лидеры греческих армян утверждают, что разрушение этих монументов продолжается уже несколько десятилетий и направлено на "уничтожение всех свидетельств армянского присутствия в этой области". В последнее время азербайджанскими властями предпринимаются усилия, чтобы окончательно завершить эту работу; при этом они пользуются "полным отсутствием армян в данном регионе" после армянско-азербайджанского конфликта вокруг Нагорного Карабаха.

Священный Синод также обвиняет "мировые сверхдержавы и международные организации" в "вялости и неэффективности" при отстаивании человеческих прав "беззащитных народов".

Link to post
Share on other sites

БЮРО АРФД ВЫСТУПИЛО С ЗАЯВЛЕНИЕМ О ПРЕСТУПНОЙ ПОЛИТИКЕ АЗЕРБАЙДЖАНА

Бюро Армянской Революционной Федерации Дашнакцутюн выступило с заявлением, в котором говорится: "В декабре 2005 года перед безразличным взором всего мира Азербайджан вновь показал свой истинный облик и свое отношение ко всему армянскому. Азербайджан нагло пошел на этот шаг, игнорируя и отрицая все факты.

С целью выражения протеста против преступной политики Азербайджана и обращения к мировому сообществу с требованием проявить соответствующее отношение Бюро Армянской Революционной Федерации Дашнакцутюн решило провозгласить 28 февраля 2006 года - очередную годовщину армянских погромов в Сумгаите - Днем протеста против преступной политики Азербайджана. В этот день у зданий азербайджанских дипломатических представительств и соответствующих международных организаций в разных городах мира должны состояться митинги протеста и другие акции.

Бюро АРФД обращается ко всему армянскому народу, армянским политическим и общественным организациям, национальным и общинным структурам, а также к неармянским правозащитным организациям с призывом 28 февраля 2006 года принять участие в акциях протеста и совместными усилиями показать миру, что Азербайджан со дня своего основания добивался исхода армян из Арцаха, Нахиджевана и Гандзака, истребления армянского населения Баку и других районов Азербайджана, уничтожения армянских памятников, свидетельствующих о принадлежности этих земель армянскому народу, сеял ненависть ко всему, что имеет армянское происхождение.

Азербайджан не пощадил и другие национальные меньшинства, проживающие в пределах его границ. Более того, в настоящее время Азербайджан предпринимает попытки вновь поработить и подчинить себе Арцах.

Пришло время еще раз показать Азербайджану и всему миру, что в вопросе сохранения единства Арцаха и Армении армянский народ проявляет единство воли и решимость.

28 февраля 2006 года все вместе против преступной политики Азербайджана.

Бюро АРФД

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nakhchivan August 2005

http://www.hra.am/eng/?page=issue&id=15680

Steven Sim

The following is an account of my visit to the region of Nakhchivan, in Azerbaijan, during August 2005. My primary purpose in visiting Nakhchivan was to try to discover what the condition of that region’s numerous Armenian monuments was. This was in the light of the widely reported damage inflicted on the medieval Armenian cemetery at Jugha, west of modern Julfa, in 1998 and 2002.

My criteria in drawing up a list of sites to be visited was to chose those monuments that were architecturally the most visually interesting, whose locations I could place on a map, and which did not lie too close to the Armenian border. For this I was guided by the photographs and information contained in Armen Aivazian’s 1990 publication "Nakhchivan Book of Monuments". The photographs in this book were taken between 1965 and 1987.

I entered Nakhchivan by land, by way of Turkey, and travelled first to Nakhchivan city. The following day I hired a car and driver. My destination was the Yernjak valley, about 25km east of Nakhchivan city. Towering over this valley is Yilanlidag (Snake Mountain), also known as Odzasar. This is an impressive-looking conical hill, tall enough to be visible from most parts of Nakhchivan. In order to have a safe reason for travelling through the various villages that had Armenian churches in them, I told the driver that I wanted to have a closer look at the mountain and the nearby peak of Alinca (also known as Yernjak).

The first settlement in the Yernjak valley is the village of Abrakunis (also spelt Abragunis and Abrakonts). I had explained to my driver on the way that I had heard there was an old church in Abrakunis and that I wanted to see it. At the entrance to the village he asked a passer-by, a boy of about 12, where the church was. The boy pointed towards some empty ground just to the right of the main road, up a lane, and almost opposite the spot where we had stopped.

I got out of the car and walked up the lane to look around. I found an empty site, whose earth was heavily disturbed and completely bare of vegetation. Sticking out of the loose soil were many fragments of old bricks. A comparison between my photographs of this site and photographs of the church in Aivazian’s book removes any doubt that this was the former location of the Armenian church in Abrakunis. Because of the total lack of surface vegetation it seems unlikely that the destruction of the church took place earlier than 2004.

Known as Surb Karapet, and originally part of a monastery, the Abrakunis church was built in the year 1381 over the ruins of an older church. Internally, it was a domed basilica with four piers. The lower parts of the church were built of cut stone, but the dome and its tall drum were from a later repair and were built of brick. The interior had some Persian-style frescoes from the 1740s. On the exterior walls were various relief carvings – crosses, eagles, etc. Built against the western end of the south wall was a second church – a small chapel dedicated to St. Stephanos. In 1705 a bell tower had been added to the roof of this chapel. The photographs in Aivazian’s books reveal that by the 1980s the church, chapel, and bell tower lay derelict and unused, but were still substantially intact.

Beyond Abrakounis the next settlement was Bananiyar. Known to Armenians as Aparank, it was an important Armenian settlement during the late-medieval period. At least until the 1970s there were some ruins of a large medieval church located on high ground in the middle of the village. We asked if there was a church in the village, but were told no. On high ground at the eastern end of the village there was a newly built mosque – a grand structure built of brick and with twin domes. The next village, which lay a short distance off the main road, was Saltagh, also spelt Salitagh. It once had an Armenian church from the 19th century, but the village was too far away from the main road for me to see anything.

We then drove through Norashen. A ruined 12th century church, known as Surb Hovhannes, existed at the north-western edge of this village at least until the 1960s. Aivazian’s book illustrates an Armenian church called Surb Astvatsatsin that was located inside the village, beside the main road. It was a large, stone-built, domeless basilica dating probably from the 17th century. Aivazian’s book also has photographs of an extensive medieval Armenian graveyard containing ram-shaped and coffer-shaped gravestones. I found no trace of either churches, or the graveyard.

After Norashen the road divided at the base of a large rocky crag formerly called Yernjak and now called Alinja. On it are the ruins of a castle. The road to the left continued northward. The road to the right led down into the village of Hanagha. Halfway up a hillside overlooking Hanagha I noticed a domed structure and I decided to visit it. On getting closer, it turned out to be an old Muslim shrine comprising a kumbet-type tomb and a prayer hall. The structure was undergoing the final stage of a restoration that seems to have amounted to a complete rebuilding - there was scarcely a single original brick or stone left in the monument. From its elevated location I had the opportunity to get a good view of Hanagha and the adjoining village - I do not know if there had been churches in these villages, but I saw no trace of any now.

On my third day in Nakhchivan I took the Nakhchivan to Julfa train, departing at 10:30 prompt. While still in the station a policeman got onto the train and asked to see my passport. Almost as soon as the train had left the station two railway employees asked me if I would like to go to the dining car and drink tea with them. I received the impression that this was more than just an invitation - probably they had been asked by the policeman to keep an eye on me. In the dining car I asked them if I could take photographs of the Aras (Arax) gorge but they said it was forbidden, regardless of whether the camera was pointing towards Iran or to Azerbaijan.

After about 70 minutes I noticed a large building on the Iranian side – it was rectangular, had a mud-red dome with a semicircular roof, and was surrounded by the ruins of a village. Its East-West orientation indicated that it was probably a church.

Shortly afterwards, and from the opposite side of the train, the remains of the Jugha graveyard made a sudden appearance. I saw a hillside covered by stone slabs, spread out over three ridges. All of the gravestones had been toppled, without any exceptions. There were many gravestones lying so close to the railway that I could make out the details of their designs. On the easternmost ridge were large bare patches of disturbed ground amongst the gravestones and about 1/3rd of the stones appeared to have been removed. On most of the middle ridge and on the entire westernmost ridge the gravestones all appeared to be still there - but were lying toppled.

The graveyard lies outside the security fence that protects the border zone. However, an army post at the entrance to the gorge bars the only approach road to the site. It would be impossible to enter the gorge without being noticed by the soldiers. For this reason I decided not to attempt a visit to the graveyard. Just after this army post the train slowed down in order to stop at a village. Just before this village I observed a small graveyard that still had some khatchkar gravestones standing upright. It lay just north of the railway and below the remains of the medieval town wall of Jugha. Just after leaving the village the Gulustan or Vardut turbe was visible, lying inside the security fence zone. The train reached Julfa town at 12.00 noon.

From Julfa I then took a taxi to the town of Ordubad. From Ordubad I had hoped to reach Agulis (a small town in an adjoining valley which contained numerous churches at least until the 1980s). Unfortunately, the restaurant in Ordubad in which I had decided to have lunch lay next to the town’s police station and contained numerous policemen also having their lunch. On exiting the restaurant, I was met by a security official and then taken to the police station where my bag was searched and I was asked about my purpose in visiting Ordubad. After this I was taken on a tour around the older parts of Ordubad, accompanied by a security official and an English-speaking inhabitant. Then I had to wait with them in the town’s tea-garden for an hour until they were able to put me on the next bus back to Nakhchivan city.

After what I had seen in the Yernjak valley, I wanted to know if the destruction of Armenian monuments in Nakhchivan had been limited to sites that were easily accessible and close to Nakhchivan city. For this reason I decided to visit the village of Shurut which lay in a remote location on the north-eastern side of Yilanlidag.

Shurut, also spelt Shorot, was a small Armenian town during the late medieval period, with churches, schools, monasteries, scriptoria and several tens of thousands of inhabitants. In the 1980s there were four churches still standing in Shurut: the Surb Stephanos and Surb Grigor Lusavorich churches, an isolated church known as Kusanants or St. Astvatsatsin, and the village’s main church, Surb Hakob-Hayrapet.

The Surb Stephanos church was located about 3km south of the village. It was a small, single-nave structure, crudely built of rubble masonry, and located on the edge of a cliff overlooking the village. Inside this church there was a khatchkar monument with an inscription in Armenian giving the names of nine9 donors and the date 926.

The Surb Grigor Lusavorich church was located about 1km to the northeast of the village and was from the medieval period but with repairs from the 18th century. It was built of cut stone, had a portico also of stone, and had a lantern belfry on its roof. The settlement of Shurut had once extended all the way to this church, and ruins of houses were still visible in surrounding fields.

The St. Astvatsatsin church, also known as Kusanants, was built in 1631 on the site of an older church. It was built of rubble masonry and its interior had figurative frescoes from the 17th century. North of this church was a khatchkar gravestone dated 924.

The St. Hakob-Hayrapet church was located in the middle of the village. It was from the 12th century, but rebuilt in the middle of the 17th century. It was one of the most impressive churches in Nakhchivan: a massive structure, with a basilica plan rather like the Abrakounis church. It had a tall dome with a polygonal drum that was built of brick and dated from 1706. The church’s west entrance was set within an ornate frame of muqarnas mouldings and rope-work interlaces and had a monolithic stone lintel.

To reach Shurut I travelled by taxi back to the Yernjak valley. We asked for directions in Abrakunis and then turned to the right, into a village whose current name I do not know, but which was known as Krna by Armenians. Aivazian’s "Monuments" book has photographs of a ruined church from the 19th century that stood on a hillside overlooking Krna. It was a cavernous, mosque-like structure that would be difficult to miss. However, I saw no traces of this church as we drove around the edge of the village and then took an extremely rough road that led past the southern side of Yilanlidag.

About half-an-hour after Krna we reached a narrow earthen road that took us northward. After about fifteen more minutes of driving we passed through a small hamlet consisting of a few scattered houses. This was the village of Gah which had a large Armenian church built in the 19th century. Photographs of this church are in Aivazian’s book. Nothing of it now survives.

Shortly after Gah we passed a man walking along the road. The driver asked him about the church in Shurut – we were told that it had been destroyed.

We continued onward, reaching Shurut after about a further fifteen minutes. At the entrance to the village I notice a large millstone lying at the base of a slope. We drove up the last few metres of road and stopped in the middle of a large open area at the southern end of the village. A half-dozen or so houses lay scattered around the edge of this open area. I got out of the taxi to have a look around. On the ground were the same telltale signs I had seen at Abrakunis: hundreds of small pieces of broken bricks. In a recently built wall outside one of the houses overlooking the open area were a number of cut stone blocks. At the edge of the open area was a large slab of stone. On its face-down side I could see traces of a cut surface: maybe it had been the lintel of the church’s entrance. The open area appears to be the former site of Shurut’s Surb Hakob-Hayrapet church. I walked further into the village, but it was clear that there was nothing to see - Shurut was now a tiny, miserable place; its few houses, none of which seemed particularly old, were little more than stone shacks and many were boarded up. I scanned the surrounding hills for any traces of the other churches that were once here, or for the village’s Armenian graveyard, but I could see nothing.

Returning to the taxi I found that a crowd of villagers were waiting there. One man had his daughter aged about twelve with him. Her name was Niko, and she could speak some English. Through her, her father asked why I was visiting Shurut.

When I told him that I had come to see the old church in Shurut, he replied "Who told you there was a church here?"

"A book did" I responded.

"What book? Do you have it with you?" he then asked.

I did not.

"There was never a church here", said the man, his daughter translating. "I grew up here and there was no church here even then, there never were any Armenians living in Shurut".

At this point an old man with a mouth full of ugly gold teeth barged forward and aggressively barked a few unintelligible sentences at me. At first I took them to be an attempt at German.

"He is speaking Armenian", the girl then told me. (I presume this was a test to see if I was actually Armenian). To explain why an Armenian speaker was in a village that never had any Armenians she quickly added "he came to Shurut from Armenia".

I wanting to stop their questions and give them a polite way out, so I asked them "maybe there is another Shurut and it is the one that has the church in it?" But they did not take the hint – "no, there is only one Shurut".

Things continued awkwardly for a while longer, but eventually we got back into the taxi and the man gave us a parting gift of a packet of bread, meat, and cheese. As we left Shurut the driver then told me that the villagers had phoned the police in Julfa and that a car would probably be waiting for us somewhere along the road.

A car was indeed waiting for us, shortly after the hamlet of Gah. In it were a policeman and someone in civilian clothing. The policeman got out and got into the back of my taxi. He could speak rough English and said that he was actually traffic police.

"Do you have topographic map, ethnographic book?" he asked.

I replied in the negative – but he made a cursory search of my bag anyway.

We continued along the earthen road and on reaching the tarmac road we turned to the left, towards the town of Julfa. In Julfa we stopped at the police headquarters, where I was first taken to see the head of the traffic police, then to the deputy-head of the regular police (where my bag was again searched). After waiting in a corridor for a while, I was escorted outside and into a car that took me to the town’s Araz Hotel, the taxi driver following behind in his car. I was escorted into a garden at the back of the hotel. Waiting at a table was a man in his 50ies, and a younger man in his 20ies. My escort also sat down at the table, and gestured to me to take the remaining chair. The taxi driver was given a seat a few metres away. The time was now about 5.30pm, and it was not until 8pm that I was finally allowed to leave. I will not bore you with details of all the questions that followed – however I will mention those that seem to throw some light onto the attitudes that Azerbaijan holds about Armenians and anything Armenian.

Everything in my bag was taken out and carefully looked at, and the bag itself was examined for any secret compartments. This lasted for about 15 minutes, without a word being spoken. Then the younger man spoke to me in English, mostly translating questions given by the older man (whom I took to be some sort of security chief – he never gave me his name or position).

To start with I was asked "What was my job, how much did I earn, who paid me to come to Nakhchivan, why would I use my own money to come here?"

He examined carefully a notebook I had with me. One of the things that I had written in it was the title of a book about Ottoman Armenians I had seen in a bookshop in Turkey. Seeing the word "Ermeni" in the title he asked me about it. When I told him what it was, there was incredulity in his voice – he was clearly astonished that a book about Armenians, written by a Turkish Armenian, could be published in Turkey, in Turkish, and that Turks would wish to buy it!

They checked through all the photographs stored in my digital camera. Fortunately I had left those of the Yernjak valley in my hotel room. They showed most interest in a photograph I had taken in Nakhchivan city. It was of a stone slab that I had seen in the gardens opposite the Momina Hatun mausoleum, surrounded by a large collection of ram-shaped gravestones. On this stone was carved a cross rising from a rectangular base. The arms of this cross ended in a two-pronged fork, and the head ended in a semicircle. When I had seen it I thought that it resembled a very simplified khatchkar. "What do you think this is", he asked.

"It looks like a cross", I replied.

"No it isn’t. It cannot be. Only Muslims have ever lived in Nakhchivan!" he replied.

"Well, what do you think it is?" I asked him.

They had a discussion amongst themselves for a while, before pronouncing that "the curved top is a crescent moon – that is a Muslim symbol, so it is really an Islamic carving".

They seemed pleased with themselves for concocting this explanation – so I was surprised to discover, when checking over my pictures later, that they had deleted the two photographs that showed this stone.

They asked me why I thought that there was a church in Shorut.

"Because a book had told me", I said.

"It is wrong, it is lying to you. It is an Armenian book, yes?"

"Yes" I replied.

"You see, Armenians are always lying – they are lying to everyone".

I couldn’t resist pointing out to them that there were photographs of the Shurut church in the book. To this they responded by saying "Armenians, they came here and took photographs of Shurut village and then they went back to Armenia and put into them photographs of a church in Armenia."

"It is all just Armenian lies. They are lying to you! There never were any Armenian churches anywhere in Nakhchivan. There were no Armenians ever living here - so how could there have been churches here? There never was a church in Abrakunis, there never was a church in Shurut, there never was a church in Julfa!"

My interview culminated with them having a discussion amongst themselves, at the end of which they said, "we think that you are not here with good intentions towards the Azerbaijan republic". I was told that I had to be out of Nakhchivan by midnight. It was agreed that for an additional 50 dollars on top of the agreed fare to Shurut, my taxi driver would take me back to Nakhchivan city and then on to the Turkish border. I crossed the border with about 45 minutes to spare.

© Steven Sim, January 2006

Link to post
Share on other sites

There will probably be a motion condemming the destruction that will be presented to the European Parliament next week.

Didn't they already do that on January 19th or was that not a condemnation but just a warning?

They need to send someone there for an inspection.

Btw in the above HRA Armenia link they transliterated your name as Stefan instead of Stepan.

Link to post
Share on other sites

European Parliament Strongly Condemns Azerbaijan's Destruction of the Djulfa Armenian Cemetery

BRUSSELS, BELGIUM - The European Parliament today overwhelmingly adopted a resolution condemning the Azerbaijani government's destruction of the Armenian cemetery in Djulfa, a unique archaeological treasure located in the Nakhichevan autonomous republic administered by Azerbaijan.

The resolution, which was approved by a vote of 85 to 5, noted that, "serious allegations have been raised about the involvement of the Azerbaijani authorities in the destruction of these monuments" and stressed that " Azerbaijan has not provided answers [on this matter to] the former special rapporteur of the United Nations." Based on these and other findings, the European Parliament "strongly condemns the destruction of the Djulfa cemetery [.]" and "demands that Azerbaijan allow missions dedicated to surveying and protecting the archaeological heritage on its territory, especially Armenian heritage [.]." The measure also asks Azerbaijan to "allow a European Parliament delegation to visit the archaeological site at Djulfa."

http://www.anca.org/press_releases/press_r...es.php?prid=900

Link to post
Share on other sites

European Parliament resolution on Azerbaijan

The European Parliament,

– having regard to its resolutions of 9 June 2005 and 27 October 2005 on Azerbaijan,

– having regard to its resolution of 19 January 2006 on the European Neighbourhood Policy,

– having regard to its previous resolutions on the South Caucasus and especially its resolution

adopted on 11 March 1999 and its recommendation adopted on 26 February 2004,

– having regard to its previous resolutions on the South Caucasus and especially its resolution

adopted on 11 March 1999 and its recommendation adopted on 26 February 2004,

– having regard to the decision taken by the Council on the 14 June 2004 to include both

Armenia and Azerbaijan in the European Neighbourhood Policy, in particular for the purpose

of fostering goodneighbourly relations, especially through respect for minorities,

– having regard to the obligations of Azerbaijan and Armenia towards the Council of Europe,

especially through the European Cultural Convention, the revised European Convention for

the Protection of Archaeological Heritage, and the Framework Convention for the Protection

of National Minorities, that they have ratified and undertaken to respect,

– having regard to the UNESCO 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural

Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and its 1954 Protocol, to which both Armenia and

Azerbaijan are party, as applicable to occupied territories,

– having regard to the 2003 UNESCO Declaration concerning the Intentional Destruction of

Cultural Heritage whereby the international community recognises the importance of the

protection of cultural heritage and reaffirms its commitment to combat its intentional

destruction in any form so that such cultural heritage may be transmitted to the succeeding

generations,

– having regard to the report of ICOMOS and the intermediary report on freedom of worship

and religion made by the UN Committee for Human Rights,

– having regard to Rule 115(5) of its Rules of Procedure,

A. whereas allegations have been made by Armenia that campaigns to destroy the Armenian

cemetery at Djulfa in the region of Nakhichevan were carried out by Azerbaijani forces in

November 1998 and December 2002; whereas the most recent destruction took place in

December 2005, as evidenced by the recent video footage from the Armenian authorities,

B. whereas there were numerous reactions to these actions from the international community;

whereas Azerbaijan has not provided answers to inquiries from Mr Abdelfattah Amor, the

former special rapporteur of the United Nations, concerning the events in November 1998

and December 2002,

C. whereas serious allegations have been raised about the involvement of the Azerbaijani

authorities in the destruction of these monuments,

D. underlining the exceptional nature of this archaeological site, which still had 6000

'khatchkars' remaining – crosses carved in stone typical of Armenian religious art – and

which testifies to the ethnic and cultural diversity of the region,

E. whereas the destruction or desecration of any monuments or objects of cultural, religious or national heritage infringes the principles of the European Union,

F. whereas that destruction is taking place in the context of the suspended conflict between

Armenia and Azerbaijan on the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh,

G. whereas there might soon be a favourable outcome to the negotiations on Nagorno-Karabakh and agreement might be reached on the principles for settling the conflict in spite of the unproductive meeting in Rambouillet between the presidents of Armenia and of Azerbaijan on 10 and 11 February 2006,

H. recalling that the European Neighbourhood Policy aims to establish a privileged partnership with Azerbaijan and Armenia on the basis of common values, including respect for minorities and their cultural heritage,

1. Condemns strongly the destruction of the Djulfa cemetery as well as the destruction of all

sites of historical importance that has taken place on Armenian or Azerbaijani territory, and

condemns any such action that seeks to destroy the cultural heritage of a people;

2. Calls on the Council and the Commission to make clear to Armenia and Azerbaijan that all

efforts must be made to stop the practice of ethnic cleansing which has led to such actions,

and to find ways to facilitate the gradual return of refugees and displaced people;

3. Demands that Azerbaijan and Armenia respect their international commitments - notably in the cultural realm - and especially those deriving from their accession to the Council of

Europe and incorporation into the European Neighbourhood Policy;

4. Stresses that respect for minority rights including historical, religious and cultural heritage is conditional on the genuine and effective development of the European Neighbourhood Policy, which must also lead to the establishment of goodneighbourly relations between all

the countries concerned;

5. Demands that Azerbaijan allow missions dedicated to surveying and protecting the

archaeological heritage on its territory, especially Armenian heritage, such as experts

working with ICOMOS, and also allow a European Parliament delegation to visit the

archaeological site at Djulfa;

6. Calls on Armenia and Azerbaijan to abide by their international commitments, in particular

in the area of culture and of safeguarding cultural heritage, entered into within international

bodies such as UNESCO and the Council of Europe, and calls on them to do their utmost to

protect archaeological, historical and cultural heritage on their territories in order to prevent

the destruction of other endangered sites;

7. Invites the Commission and the Council to incorporate a clause on protecting those

territories’ invaluable archaeological or historical sites into the action plans currently being

discussed in a European Neighbourhood Policy context;

8. Invites the Commission and the Council to make the implementation of the European

Neighbourhood Policy action plans conditional on respect by Azerbaijan's and Armenia's for

universally accepted principles, in particular their obligations as members of the Council of

Europe, regarding human and minority rights, and calls on the Commission and the Council

to incorporate into these action plans specific provisions for the protection of the cultural

heritage of minorities;

9. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the national parliaments and governments of the Member States, the Government and the President of Armenia, the Government and the President of Azerbaijan, as well as the OSCE

Parliamentary Assembly, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the

Director-General of UNESCO, and the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NB: the above text came from a pdf file.

And the removed section. The Greens, who were against the resolution because some of their numbers included ethnic Turks, tried to have the following text inserted, between sections F and G. They did not succeed, since they could offer no evidence that such destruction had taken place.

"whereas the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has already led directly or indirectly to the

destruction by Armenian forces of many invaluable objects of Azerbaijani cultural, religious

and historical heritage in the occupied territories, in Nagorno-Karabakh and on Armenian

territory,"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Эту резолюцию конечно следует считать победой. Но увы, как заметил Армен Айвазян, пользы от неё никакой. Хакчкары уничтожены, и сейчас уже не о чём говорить. И эти хачкары - лишь маленький эпизод в процессе уничтожения армянского культурного наследия на территории Азербайджана, происходящего сегодня.

Кстати, Баку опять завонял по этому поводу. Посмотрите что пишут эти уроды!

Последние новости по теме вандализма в Джуге можно посмотреть здесь:

Հայերեն

English

русский

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Очень интересная статья Мурада Асратяна про хачкары Джуги на французском (.pdf) из журнала "Environmental Design: Journal of the Islamic Environmental Design Research Centre". Увы, я французский не понимаю :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Вот и всё, покричали, побили себя в грудь, Запад осудил, а они все равно сравняли с землей. Из этого вывод плевать на Запад, плевать на Америку на их гарантии чего либо, плевать на обещания помощи от РФ(наш "главный" "союзник" РФ по вопросу разрушения хачкаров вообще сделал вид что ничего не происходит). Наши гарантии это наши войска и наши интересы, больше гарантий нет. Никаких уступок в переговорах с туркоазерами, хватит раздавать наши земли, пора их забирать обратно.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Министр культуры Азербайджана: на заявление Пиотровского повлияло его родство с армянами

Мнение директора Государственного Эрмитажа России Михаила Пиотровского, заявившего во время своего визита в Армению, что, "имевшее место разрушение надгробных памятников в Джульфинском районе Нахичевана, надо расценивать как уничтожение исторических и культурных памятников", не может отражать позиции серьезных российских ученых. Об этом заявил журналистам министр культуры и туризма Азербайджана Абульфас Гараев. По его словам, это заявление надо рассматривать "как проявление родственной близости Пиотровского с армянами". "Мы рекомендуем руководству Эрмитажа занять в этих вопросах более справедливую и принципиальную позицию", - заявил азербайджанский министр.

Напомним, что визит Михаила Пиотровского осуществлялся в рамках одной из программ Фонда развития "Кавказский институт демократии", направленной на укрепление традиционных армяно-российских связей в культурной, научной и гуманитарной сферах.

Постоянный адрес новости: www.regnum.ru/news/612496.html

=============================

Если во главе Министерства "культур-мультур" стоит вот такои вот подонок,то чего ожидать от его паствы?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

The important phrase in the following is "Prior to travelling to Djulfa, they

will need to get the necessary authorisations from the Azerbaijani

authorities." Of course, no such authorisation will ever be given by

Azerbaycan, and no investigation team will ever be sent to examine Julfa.

The European Parliament (also of course) know this - which is why it is an empty

gesture. But it will silence critics for long enough until the whole issue can be

safely forgotten. Am I too cynical?

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT SET TO SEND INVESTIGATION TEAM

TO EXAMINE AZERBAIJAN'S DESECRATION OF DJULFA CEMETERY

-- South Caucasus Delegation Set to Travel to Region at the End of April

STRASBURG (FRANCE) - Speaking at an official conference on Thursday, April

6th, the President of the European Parliament was joined by the leaders of

its political parties in strongly approving the body's decision to send a

delegation in Djulfa, in the Nakhichevan region of Azerbaijan.

The aim of the mission is to investigate the destruction by Azerbaijan of

the Armenian cemetery in Djulfa, a treasure of world architectural heritage

that was effectively destroyed and replaced by an Azerbaijani military

facility.

The EP leaders unanimously decided to entrust this mission to the

Commission on EU-Armenia parliamentary cooperation rather than to an ad-hoc

delegation, as it had initially been planned.

The mission is being sent in accordance with the Parliament's resolution

"on cultural heritage in Azerbaijan," which was adopted in February of 2006

(P6_TA(2006)0069). This measure "demands that Azerbaijan allow missions,

including experts working with ICOMOS, who are dedicated to surveying and

protecting archaeological heritage, in particular Armenian heritage, onto

its territory, and that it also allow a European Parliament delegation to

visit the archaeological site at Djulfa."

The delegation will be composed of ten Members of the European Parliament

(MEP) who are members of the Commission of EU-Armenia parliamentary

cooperation group. They are set to travel to Djulfa as part of their trip

to Armenia from April 17th to 21st. Prior to travelling to Djulfa, they

will need to get the necessary authorisations from the Azerbaijani

authorities.

The delegation will include the following MEPs:

Mme Marie-Anne Isler-Béguin, présidente (Verts, France)

M. Arpad Duka-Zolyomi, vice-président (PPE, Slovaquie)

M. Alessandro Battilocchio (NI, Italie)

M. Johannes Blokand (IND/DEM, Pays-Bas)

Mme Frederika Brepoels (PPE, Belgique)

M. Robert Evans (PSE, R.-U.)

Mme Siiri Oviir (ALDE, Estonie)

Mme Gabriele Stauer (PPE, Allemagne)

M. Hannes Swoboda (PSE, Autriche)

M. Tadeusz Zwiefka (PPE, Pologne)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The important phrase in the following is "Prior to travelling to Djulfa, they

will need to get the necessary authorisations from the Azerbaijani

authorities." Of course, no such authorisation will ever be given by

Azerbaycan, and no investigation team will ever be sent to examine Julfa.

The European Parliament (also of course) know this - which is why it is an empty

gesture. But it will silence critics for long enough until the whole issue can be

safely forgotten. Am I too cynical?

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT SET TO SEND INVESTIGATION TEAM

TO EXAMINE AZERBAIJAN'S DESECRATION OF DJULFA CEMETERY

-- South Caucasus Delegation Set to Travel to Region at the End of April

STRASBURG (FRANCE) - Speaking at an official conference on Thursday, April

6th, the President of the European Parliament was joined by the leaders of

its political parties in strongly approving the body's decision to send a

delegation in Djulfa, in the Nakhichevan region of Azerbaijan.

The aim of the mission is to investigate the destruction by Azerbaijan of

the Armenian cemetery in Djulfa, a treasure of world architectural heritage

that was effectively destroyed and replaced by an Azerbaijani military

facility.

The EP leaders unanimously decided to entrust this mission to the

Commission on EU-Armenia parliamentary cooperation rather than to an ad-hoc

delegation, as it had initially been planned.

The mission is being sent in accordance with the Parliament's resolution

"on cultural heritage in Azerbaijan," which was adopted in February of 2006

(P6_TA(2006)0069). This measure "demands that Azerbaijan allow missions,

including experts working with ICOMOS, who are dedicated to surveying and

protecting archaeological heritage, in particular Armenian heritage, onto

its territory, and that it also allow a European Parliament delegation to

visit the archaeological site at Djulfa."

The delegation will be composed of ten Members of the European Parliament

(MEP) who are members of the Commission of EU-Armenia parliamentary

cooperation group. They are set to travel to Djulfa as part of their trip

to Armenia from April 17th to 21st. Prior to travelling to Djulfa, they

will need to get the necessary authorisations from the Azerbaijani

authorities.

The delegation will include the following MEPs:

Mme Marie-Anne Isler-Béguin, présidente (Verts, France)

M. Arpad Duka-Zolyomi, vice-président (PPE, Slovaquie)

M. Alessandro Battilocchio (NI, Italie)

M. Johannes Blokand (IND/DEM, Pays-Bas)

Mme Frederika Brepoels (PPE, Belgique)

M. Robert Evans (PSE, R.-U.)

Mme Siiri Oviir (ALDE, Estonie)

Mme Gabriele Stauer (PPE, Allemagne)

M. Hannes Swoboda (PSE, Autriche)

M. Tadeusz Zwiefka (PPE, Pologne)

You are right, but at least the MEPs will get really pissed off. Even if they visited Djulfa, what would change?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Вот и всё, покричали, побили себя в грудь, Запад осудил, а они все равно сравняли с землей. Из этого вывод плевать на Запад, плевать на Америку на их гарантии чего либо, плевать на обещания помощи от РФ(наш "главный" "союзник" РФ по вопросу разрушения хачкаров вообще сделал вид что ничего не происходит). Наши гарантии это наши войска и наши интересы, больше гарантий нет. Никаких уступок в переговорах с туркоазерами, хватит раздавать наши земли, пора их забирать обратно.

Это точно!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Baku Objects to Europarliament Survey in Nakhichevan

Баку против намерения Европарламента провести расследование в Нахичеване

11.04.2006 23:28 GMT+04:00

http://www.panarmenian.net/news/rus/?nid=17349

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Согласие официального Баку для начала работы направленной в Армению миссии Европейского парламента в составе 10 человек по расследованию имевшего место разрушения армянского кладбища в Нахичеване может быть дано «только с условием проведения двустороннего расследования», сообщает АПА.

Напомним, что Европарламента принял решение о направлении делегации организации в Старую Джульфу в Нахичеване. Целью миссии является расследование факта уничтожения азербайджанской стороной армянского кладбища в Старой Джульфе – мирового архитектурного наследия. Руководство Европарламента приняло решение доверить эту миссию Комиссии по межпарламентского сотрудничества ЕС-Армения, вместо того, чтобы формировать специальную комиссию, как это планировалось ранее. Миссия будет направлена в Нахичеван в соответствии с Резолюцией о “культурном наследии Азербайджана”, принятой в феврале 2006 года и призывающей Азербайджан разрешить миссиям, занимающимся исследованием и защитой археологического наследия, в частности, армянского, доступ к археологическим памятникам на своей территории. В состав делегации войдут 10 парламентариев, которые также являются членами Комиссии по межпарламентскому сотрудничеству ЕС-Армения. Они намерены посетить Старую Джульфу в рамках визита в Армению 17-21 апреля.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...