text:
Eleven frustrations (both minor and perhaps not-so):*
1. People who do ten miles an hour below the speed limit in broad daylight in dry conditions. Add to these the people who don't know how to use signals (either they're always on or they're never on); people who drive with one foot on the brake at all times; people who slow down for green lights; and people who can't read signs and, as a consequence, realize they have to make a right-hand exit from the left-hand lane.
2. Students who complain TO MY FACE that they can't do their homework because they a) want to go to the dance or b) are missing their favorite t.v. show. Seriously?!
3. The parents who allow their slacking kids to go to dances and to watch t.v. when those children have outstanding work due to their teachers.
4. Pledge week (which is really "pledge ten days") on Public Radio.
5. Children who will walk OVER folded laundry in the family room for a whole week, then complain that they have no clean clothes in their room.
6. Waking up at 3:40 in the morning for no good reason, and not being able to get back to sleep.
7. People who don't honor promises or commitments.
8. People who say they're finished with something, but can't resist coming back to re-do just one more thing. If you're done, you're done; move the fuck on.
9. Bringing the wrong connector for my computer to work and not being able to show the movie I intended in class. Ugh.
10. Expecting something helpful in a workshop, and getting a whole afternoon's worth of nuthin' (though, I suppose, this is another way of expressing #7; the workshop didn't deliver what it promised).
11. Computers (or cars, or any such something) that act up on me, but that work just fine in the presence of others (especially the others I depend upon to fix such things when they break). Twice I've brought a computer to one of my colleagues (who is good at making them do his bidding), complaining that it wasn't working and twice has that colleague handed the thing back to me, claiming that he couldn't reproduce my problem. He returns to me a computer buzzing with happy compliance and function. GRRRRR!
*Chili's note; I'm not in a mood, though this might lead you to believe I am. It's just that this was the quickest list I could come up with today…


text: On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 06:29:21PM +0100, Jaap Dijkshoorn alleged: > Hello, > > We are runnig torque 2.4.11 and i noticed that if you have a directory > with spaces in it and you submit your jobscript from it, it won't > generated the .o and .e files in your homedir/<subdir with spaces/. > pbs_mom is unable to copy back the files and put them in undelivered. > > Is this known behavior? It looks like a buf to me. Since there are a few layers of subshells, it is next to impossible to get this right. scp uses a shell on the remote end, but cp doesn't. Argh! Avoid metacharacters in filepaths in Unix. -- Garrick Staples, GNU/Linux HPCC SysAdmin University of Southern California Life is Good! -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.supercluster.org/pipermail/torqueusers/attachments/20101215/ce7dc722/attachment.bin

subset: commoncrawl


text:
CNN's Ferré advances claim that Obama is "joining Bolivia, Venezuela, and Nicaragua" on Honduras
CNN's Ines Ferré advanced the conservative claim that President Obama is siding with Latin American leaders in opposing Manuel Zelaya's ouster in Honduras, without noting that the European Union and the UN secretary-general have also condemned the ouster.
On the July 6 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, correspondent Ines Ferré advanced the conservative claim [1] that President Obama is siding with Latin American leaders in opposing the June 28 ousting [2] of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya. Ferré uncritically reported that Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) "says [3] that in joining Bolivia, Venezuela, and Nicaragua, the U.S. is quote 'serving as an echo chamber ... not helpful to our political, economic, or security interests in the region.' " Earlier in her report, Ferré stated that "one of Zelaya's biggest supporters is Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez." But at no point did she point out that the European Union and United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon have also [1] condemned [4] the ouster.
As Media Matters for America has documented [1], several media conservatives, including Fox News contributors Charles Krauthammer and Bill Kristol, Wall Street Journal editorial board member Mary Anastasia O'Grady, and Internet gossip Matt Drudge, have advanced the claim that Obama is siding with Chavez and the leadership of Cuba without noting that the European Union has also condemned Zelaya's ouster. The Hill similarly advanced [4] former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's (R-GA) claim that "the obama administration has joined castro and chavez" in opposing Zelaya's removal from office.
On June 28, Obama released [5] the following statement on the situation in Honduras:
I am deeply concerned by reports coming out of Honduras regarding the detention and expulsion of President Mel Zelaya. As the Organization of American States [OAS] did on Friday, I call on all political and social actors in Honduras to respect democratic norms, the rule of law and the tenets of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. Any existing tensions and disputes must be resolved peacefully through dialogue free from any outside interference.
At a June 29 joint press availability with Colombian President Álvaro Uribe, Obama stated [6]: "All of us have great concerns about what's taken place there. President Zelaya was democratically elected. He had not yet completed his term. We believe that the coup was not legal and that President Zelaya remains the President of Honduras, the democratically elected President there. In that we have joined all the countries in the region, including Colombia and the Organization of American States." He later stated: "So we are very clear about the fact that President Zelaya is the democratically elected President, and we will work with the regional organizations like OAS and with other international institutions to see if we can resolve this in a peaceful way."
On June 29, the European Union posted on its website a "Declaration by the Presidency, on behalf of the European Union, on Honduras," which states [7]:
On 28 June Foreign Ministers of the European Union strongly condemned the military actions which were directed against democratically elected President Zelaya and part of his cabinet and have violated the constitutional order of Honduras. The EU urges the immediate release of all detained governmental representatives and calls on all relevant parties and institutions to refrain from violence and to strive to find a swift and peaceful solution to the current situation. This should be in accordance with the existing constitutional order of Honduras, the principles of rule of law and democracy.
And on June 28, the office of the spokesperson for the UN secretary-general issued a release stating [8] that Ban "condemns the arrest today of the constitutional President of the Republic. He urges the reinstatement of the democratically elected representatives of the country." From the statement:
The Secretary-General is deeply concerned about the latest developments in Honduras. He expresses his strong support for the country's democratic institutions and condemns the arrest today of the constitutional President of the Republic. He urges the reinstatement of the democratically elected representatives of the country and full respect for human rights, including safeguards for the security of President Zelaya, members of his family and his government. He calls on all Hondurans to engage peacefully and in the spirit of reconciliation to resolve their differences.
The Secretary-General welcomes the prompt diplomatic efforts of the Organization of American States, whose Permanent Council is holding a special meeting this morning. He trusts that international and domestic efforts will succeed in the promotion of a peaceful solution to the crisis through democratic means.
From the July 6 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight:
[begin video clip]
FERRÉ: More clashes in Honduras' capital over the military ousting of leftist President Manuel Zelaya. At least one person died and two were injured Sunday when pro-Zelaya protesters called for his return, a demand Washington supports.
IAN KELLY (State Department spokesman): We're very focused on our common goal, which is a restoration of a democratic order.
FERRÉ: Yet one of Zelaya's biggest supporters is Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez; their relationship has focused mainly on cheap oil for Honduras. It was Chavez who provided the plane that tried to take Zelaya home on Sunday. The military blocked the landing. Zelaya says it's not just about him returning to power.
ZELAYA (through a translator): It is the people who choose and not the military, nor the elites, nor the politicians, but the people who choose whomever they want to govern them.
FERRÉ: Zelaya was ousted by the military eight days ago after pressing ahead with a plan to hold a referendum on allowing him to run for a second term, something the country's Supreme Court deemed unconstitutional. This professor of Latin American studies says Zelaya was testing the limits of democracy.
PATRICIO NAVIA (New York University professor): He was elected democratically, but he was not governing democratically. In fact, he was doing a number of things that undermine democratic institutions. But after he was pushed aside by the military on Sunday morning, he all of a sudden became a victim and a champion of democracy.
FERRÉ: The ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee says that in joining Bolivia, Venezuela, and Nicaragua, the U.S. is quote "serving as an echo chamber ... not helpful to our political, economic, or security interests in the region." Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will meet Zelaya tomorrow, the most senior U.S. official to do so since his ouster.
[end video clip]
FERRÉ: And Chavez has asked President Obama to clarify his stance on the coup, even though the president has already condemned it. At the same time, Chavez says the Honduran army's intervention is supported by, quote, "the Yankee empire."
LOU DOBBS (host): And the Chavez strategy in Central and South America proceeds?
FERRÉ: Well, their strategy is to gain -- I mean, to keep Honduras as their ally. I mean, that's what they want. And also, one of the experts I was talking to is saying that he wants to test to see how far the OAS can actually go. What can they do? Because if they don't do anything, then that means that, in other occasions, other leaders could do other things then. There'll be no --
DOBBS: And there's no history of the OAS having done anything, is there?
FERRÉ: Well, the OAS has actually just -- they have suspended --
DOBBS: I mean in concrete action?
FERRÉ: Right. Exactly.
DOBBS: All right. Thank you very much, Ines Ferré. Thank you.
- Posted In
- National Security & Foreign Policy [9], International Conflicts [10]
- Network/Outlet
- Person
- Ines Ferre [12]
- Show/Publication
- Lou Dobbs Tonight [13]


text:
best viewed in
1024 x 768
01/01/10 : Chhandayan is proud
to announce that we will soon be launching a new website. Please have a
sneak peek at the beta version, and be sure to leave your comments and
suggestions which will be invaluable in creating this new user-oriented
Chhandayan ~ A true experience of Indian music ~
Chhandayan is sincerely dedicated to serve all aspects of Indian music in
every possible way. With its primary mission to propagate learning,
understanding and appreciation of Indian music (mainly north Indian
classical), Chhandayan's activities cover almost all of the areas essential
to such pursuit.
It was born in 1984 in Calcutta, India. In 1998 it got re-established in the
United States of America as a not-for-profit organization. First it started
its operation in the state of New York, and within a short span of time
spread its wings out to New Jersey, Maryland, Florida and Pennsylvania.
Today it has grown to be the most significant organization of Indian music
in North America.
Chhandayan offers classes of Indian music (vocal and instrumental)
supplemented by periodic workshops, seminars and lecture- demonstrations
throughout the year in Manhattan and Jackson Heights (Queens) in New York,
Nutley, Edison and Kendall Park in New Jersey, Potomac in Maryland, Ashburn
in Northern Virginia and Cheswick (in Pittsburgh area) in Pennsylvania.
Chhandayan's series of concerts are some of the most popular and exciting
events to the local community where it serves. The highlight of these series
is the annual all-night concert held in New York city on the second Saturday
of May, every year.
To facilitate learning Chhandayan has also developed a store with the supply
of good quality instruments available online and in location (New Jersey).
The store also carries selected supply of books and recorded music.
Chhandayan publications are designed to enrich the music world with new
works of music and writings. As in every other aspect, quality of content
and presentation is always prioritized.
Chhandayan is constantly in the creative process of developing new and
unique productions offering invaluable insight into the scopes and
possibilities of Indian music and its relationship with other musical and
cultural traditions. One such production is Chhand-Anand, the Bliss of
Rhythm, which is an emblem of different percussion instruments from Africa,
Arab, Europe, North America, South America and Asia. Similarly, Indo-Flame
is a beautiful blend of Indian and Flamenco dance and music. Dawn to Dusk
and Beyond depicts the correspondence and influence of music on physiology
and environment.
To enhance the ambiance of Indian music Chhandayan regularly sends out
musicians for different occasions. This serves the community in two ways -
the attendees get a live experience and young aspirants get encouragement to
be in music.
Chhandayan strongly believes in the power of music, particularly that of
Indian music, which has helped human civilization to sustain over the past
five thousand years. It is perhaps the most ancient tradition that is still
alive and vibrant. Chhandayan is committed to create awareness as to the
potency of this art-form and thereby help humanity across geographical,
racial, cultural and religious barriers. Such a treasure is not to be
ignored and lost, but to be preserved and promoted all across the globe and
in that mission Chhandayan seeks your involvement and support.
Classes & Workshops
Upcoming Events
Donation & Grants
Affiliated Musicians
Latest News
Discussion Forum
All Night Concert NYC
Guest Book


text:
Background paper on the Nagorno-Karabak conflict
(Moderator: Mr David Stern)
NOTE: This background paper is prepared by the Directorate General of Political Affairs for the seminar "Youth and conflict resolution", where participants with personal conflict experience are expected to discuss other conflicts, lesser known to them. To serve its purpose, the paper seeks to present fairly the official positions, but also the historic and psychological burdens, the fears and aspirations of the sides in the conflict. In describing the position of one side, the paper contains textual and graphic information, which is not necessarily acceptable and may be offending to the other side. Views are clearly attributed throughout the text. Presenting them does not imply endorsement by the Council of Europe Secretariat. Where Secretariat views are given, they are clearly marked as "Comment".
Basic facts
"International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
The name Nagorno-Karabakh is a relatively recent combination of the Russian word Nagorno, meaning mountainous, and the Turkic-Persian word Karabakh, meaning black garden. The de-facto authorities of Nagorno Karabakh (hereinafter: N-K) as well as most Armenian sources use the historical name of the region: Artsakh, meaning strong forest. The origin of both names seems to be linked to geographical features: elevation, cooler climate and, in ancient times, forests rich in game and fruit.
Armenian historiographers indicate that present-day N-K comprises one-third of the historic Artsakh territory, just as present-day Armenia covers about one-tenth of traditionally Armenian lands.
For this paper and for conflict-resolution purposes N-K means the territory of the former
N-K has an area of 4.400 square kilometres - for comparison, about twice the size of Luxembourg or half that of Cyprus. There are lowlands, hills and peaks as high as 3724 m. Vineyards, orchards, silkworm and grains are the major agricultural activities. According to the 1989 USSR census, N-K had 186.100 inhabitants of whom 138.600 (73.5%) were Armenians and 47.500 (25.3%) Azerbaijanis. Estimates about today's population vary from less than 100.000 to 130.000. There are no Azerbaijanis left in N-K.
The N-K conflict left estimated 30.000 dead and twice as many wounded combatants and civilians. Over one million people, some 800.000 from them Azerbaijanis, have fled their homes to live refugee lives in tents, railway carriages and mud brick homes.
The "line of contact" between the ethnic Armenian and Azerbaijani forces is heavily mined; much of the infrastructure is destroyed or dismantled. Nine years after the 1994 cease-fire, the yearly death toll along the line of contact has diminished, but young persons continue to die in mine blasts or occasional skirmishes.
Because of the conflict, Armenia has no diplomatic relations with two out of its four neighbours, Azerbaijan and Turkey. Prospects for regional co-operation are bleak.
The N-K conflict is the longest-running one in the former Soviet Union. It is a strong barrier to economic development and democratic reform in the whole region.
Two largely opposite versions of history shape present-day Armenian and Azerbaijani perceptions as regards the N-K conflict.
The Armenian view is that Artsakh is the cradle of Armenian identity. Back in the 5th century, the first Armenian school was open at the Amaras Church in present-day Martuni District of N-K. Earlier, in 301 Armenia had adopted Christianity and in 405 scholar, preacher and military leader Mesrop Mashtots had created – or according to other sources, revived the forgotten Armenian alphabet.
The Azerbaijani view is that from 4th century B.C. to 8th century A.D. present-day N-K belonged to Caucasian Albania, the most ancient state of Northern Azerbaijan, which adopted Christianity in 313 and had its unique alphabet composed of 52 letters.
In the centuries that followed, the region was subject to influence and conquest by Persians, Arabs, Mongols, Turks and Russians. Armenian historiographers consider this long period essentially as Christian or Armenian resistance against foreign, largely Muslim domination. The Azerbaijani view is fundamentally different: the region was populated by Caucasian Albanian and Turkic tribes ruled by Albanian Mikhranid princes and later by descendants of Hassan-Jalal - Jalalids. In the 15th century, after they lost political and secular power, the Jalalids became spiritual leaders – Patriarch-Catolicos of the Albanian autonomous Church. Under this interpretation, the Albanian Autocephalous Church was subordinated to the Armenian Church only in 1836, resulting in the Grigoriniasation (Armenisation) of the Albanian population.
For their part, Azerbaijani historiographers trace the beginning of Islamisation back to 705 when Arabic tribes conquered Albania lowlands. According to Azerbaijani sources, the Meliks were descendants of the clan of Jalalids, granted the title of Melik by the Jahanshah of Persia in the 15th century; none of them were of Armenian descent. The Albanian title of "Melik" differs from Armenian titles "Ishkhan", "Tar" etc. In their letters to the Russian czar, Karabakh Meliks call themselves "descendants of the Albanian Arshakids".
In the early 1800s, in the wake of Russian-Persian and Russian-Turkish wars, the Karabakh khanate and much of the South Caucasus were transferred to Russia. Azerbaijani historiography considers that migration of Armenians to the South Caucasus began after the Turkmanchay Treaty between Russia and Iran (1828) and Adrianopol treaty between Russia and Turkey (1829), both of which included special clauses allowing for migration of Armenians into the Caucasus. This is when first compact Armenian settlements appeared in Karabakh and Zangezur (the present-day area between Azerbaijan proper and Nakhichevan). Further to the Turkmanchay treaty, Russia created, for the first time in history, an Armenian Oblast (district). It comprised Erivan, Nakhichevan and Ordubad areas.
Comment: Depending on the viewpoint taken on ancient history, N-K can probably be seen as traditionally either Armenian of Azerbaijani land – or both.
Comment: the recent history of the South Caucasus is replete with tragic events, which have become powerful myths dominating popular mindsets and political decisions. In this context, the term "myth" does not imply that historic events are questioned - it is used to identify the extent of the influence of these events on current thinking as well as the need to address related perceptions in the conflict resolution process.
For centuries, the Ottoman Empire ruled over numerous Christian minorities, which lived as second-class subjects ("infidels"), a mixed existence of conformism and resistance. In the 19th Century, Christians asserted their identity and struggled for independence - against severe punishment inflicted by the decaying Ottoman power and against the political turbulence resulting from the dispute amongst European Powers over how to divide the Empire.
Unlike other Christian Minorities, who lived mostly on the outskirts of the Empire, there were large groups of Armenians in the big cities of Turkey as well as a sizeable compact population in Asia Minor. Altogether, at the beginning of the 20th century there were some 2.5 million Armenians in Turkey. In the late 19th century, Armenian political movements emerged to claim reform and autonomy: the oldest Ramkavar (1885), the socialist-oriented "Hnchak" (1887) and the biggest party, the only one surviving to this day, "Dashnaksutyun" (1890), also known as the Armenian Revolutionary Federation.
Armenian historiographers indicate that in the 1890's, Sultan Abdul Hamid II (1876-1909) encouraged the first massive anti-Armenian pogroms. The Armenian community welcomed the "Young Turks revolution", which introduced Constitutional rule in 1909. As the Young Turks saw their pro-liberal reforms stall, they turned to pan-Turkic nationalist ideas. Towards 1915, the Young Turk "Committee for Union and Progress", dominated by Mehmed Talat Pasha, Ismail Enver Pasha and Ahmed Djemal Pasha masterminded a plan to take advantage of the First World War events to deport the Armenian population from Asia Minor with a view to "consolidate" Turkey.
The Armenian view is that, in effect, the "relocation" turned out to be an unpitying death march towards the Mesopotamian deserts amidst murder, rape and starvation. Under the scorching sun, deportees died by the thousands of dehydration and disease. Armenian sources put the death toll at 1.5 million. This tragedy remains burnt forever in the collective Armenian memory. The Armenians refer to it as The Genocide.
The Turkish view is that there was no Genocide. What happened was a bitter civil war started by Armenian nationalists, in which both Armenians and Muslims died. The figure of 1.5 million Armenian victims is exaggerated; the number of Muslims who died in the same period is close to 3 million.
Source: www.cilicia.com
The post-war Turkish government held criminal trials and found the Young Turk triumvirate guilty in abstentia. Turkey agreed to let US President Wilson draw the border with the newly born Republic of Armenia. The US-proposed solution, known as "Wilsonian Armenia" was to include most of the six western Ottoman provinces as well as a large coastline on the Black Sea. Cilicia, or "Little Armenia", a separate region on the Mediterranean (North of Cyprus) was to be a French mandate.
This was not acceptable to Turkey. During the brief Turkish-Armenian War of 1920, the army of Mustafa Kemal-Attaturk drove the returning Armenians out of Wilsonian Armenia and imposed the re-writing of the treaty. In agreement with Soviet Russia, the Kars and Ardahan provinces of Armenia went to Turkey. Thus the present-day borders of Armenia were drawn.
Comment: the Armenian perception about the Genocide and the lost Wilsonian dream combined to produce a powerful myth of injustice done to the Armenian people. The "restoration of historic justice" is enshrined in the acting Constitution of Armenia.
The Armenian Revolutionary Federation turned radical. In 1919, its 9th World Congress in Yerevan adopted a sweeping platform, which has remained essentially unchanged - "integral Armenia repopulated by Armenians". The Dashnaks focused on pressuring Turkey into admitting and apologizing for crimes of the past. In this context, a radical's view, will make little or no distinction between "Turkey" and "the Turks" – including the Azerbaijanis.
In this broad context, Azerbaijani sources trace the first Dashnak anti-Azeri pogroms back to 1905 – when nine Azeri villages in the Echmiadzin region, as well as the villages of Khalaj, Saldashy, Injevan and Gatar were pillaged and burnt. Azerbaijani and Turkish sources maintain that the Dashnaks are responsible for terrorist attacks against Turkish interests, all over Europe throughout the 20th century.
In October 1917, the Bolshevik Revolution ended the involvement of Russia in the First World War and Russia withdrew its troops from the South Caucasus. In May 1918, after a brief spell in the short-lived Transcaucasian Federation, Azerbaijan and Armenia declared independence. Several chaotic and violent years followed, with episodes of the Russian civil war, the Turkish-British military enmity for control of the region and ethnic strife where Armenia and Azerbaijan sought, unsuccessfully, to control N-K. This is also the time when ethnic pogroms, on both sides, took place.
From May 1918 to April 1920, the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic (ADR) existed. Azerbaijani historiographers are proud of this 23-month period. They underline that ADR was the first secular state in the Orient, with the first European-like Parliament, Cabinet of Ministers and other democratic institutions. The ADR was represented at the Paris Peace Conference and at the League of Nations.
The ADR delegation in Versailles, 1919
Azerbaijani sources attach great importance to the short-lived Batum Treaty of 4 June 1918 between the Ottoman Empire and Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. The treaty accorded to Armenia only the Erivan and Echmiadzin districts, some 10 000 sq. km.
From July to September 1918, ethnic conflict raged in Nakhichevan, Karabakh and Zangezur. Azerbaijanis fled the area of Zangezur (according to Azerbaijani sources, their number was 50 000). Subsequently the ADR fought the Soviet Commissars for control of Baku. The takeover of Baku was followed by anti-Armenian pogroms in what some Azerbaijanis viewed as retaliation for earlier anti-Azeri violence.
In 1920, the Bolsheviks took over the South Caucasus or, as seen from Moscow, the Transcaucasus. In November 1920, the Azerbaijan Revolutionary Committee recognized the disputed regions of Zangezur and Nakhichevan as integral parts of Soviet Armenia and granted N-K the right to self-determination. The resolution, which some historians ascribe to a wish to help the Armenian Bolsheviks to take power, was never put into practice. However, N-K Armenians will often quote this episode, as they believe it gives historic legitimacy to their claim to unity with Armenia or sovereignty.
In July 1921, the Bolshevik Party Caucasus Bureau reversed the above decision. N-K was granted a broad autonomy within the newly created Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic. In 1923, the N-K Autonomous Oblast (NKAO) was established. Russian analysts believe that the final decision was made to appease the Muslim population of the region: in the Bolshevik mindset Azerbaijan, with its larger population and oil resources was assigned the role of a beacon of the revolution in the East and was therefore more important than Armenia.
Armenian historiographers generalize the Soviet period as the time of determined policy of the Azerbaijan SSR to under-fund N-K and prevent the growth of the Armenian population in the region. They point out that, if in 1921 Armenians were 96% of the N-K population, in 1979 the percentage dropped to 75%.
Late in the Soviet epoch, in the winter of 1987-1988, Yerevan re-launched the move for ethnic homogeneity of the Armenian SSR by driving 165 000 Azerbaijanis out of Armenia.
The demise of the USSR and the slide into war
Comment: the early stages of the N-K conflict developed against a complex and rapid political changes in the USSR, but also in Soviet Azerbaijan and Armenia. Without a deep knowledge of the epoch, many of the positions taken by key decision-makers of the time may seem unconvincing or irresponsible. The perception problem should be kept in mind, as this paper can only give the briefest of sketches about this period.
During Gorbachev's "glasnost" times, N-K renewed its drive for a change of status. On the basis of a popular petition1 , in February 1988, the N-K Supreme Soviet appealed to the Supreme Soviets of Armenia, Azerbaijan and the USSR to allow NKAO to join the Armenian SSR. In June1988, the Armenian lawmakers approved the request; two days later their Azerbaijani counterparts rejected it. Such a clash between Union Republics was without precedent in the USSR. In July 1988, Moscow decided to maintain the disputed region within Azerbaijan, but adopted "special measures for the accelerated development of NKAO". As the situation seemed to get worse, in January 1989, Moscow established direct governance over N-K.
On 24 February 1988, a direct confrontation between Azerbaijanis and Armenians near Askeran (in N-K, on the road Stepanakert-Agdam 2) degenerated into a skirmish. During the clashes, which left about 50 Armenians wounded, a local policeman, reportedly an Armenian, shot dead two Azerbaijanis - Bakhtiyar Uliyev, 16 and Ali Hajiyev, 23.
On 27 February 1988, while speaking on Central TV, the USSR Deputy Prosecutor General mentioned the nationality of those killed. Within hours, a pogrom against Armenian residents began in the city of Sumgait, 25 km North of Baku, where many Azerbaijani refugees resided. The pogrom lasted for three days. According to reports, phone calls for help to the local police and ambulance services went unanswered. Later, Moscow covered up the Sumgait affair as "hooliganism".
The Armenian view is that the Sumgait pogroms were prepared months in advance and implemented with the tacit approval, if not covert assistance, by the authorities. The Sumgait events conjured up ever-present memories of "Turks killing Armenians". In Yerevan, the "Karabakh Committee" was formed, soon to be headed by future President Levon Ter-Petrosian. In N-K, its counterpart was the "Krunk Committee" - from the Armenian word for crane, a symbol of longing for the homeland.
The Azerbaijani view is that, against the background of the expulsion of thousands of Azerbaijanis from the Meghri and Kafan districts of Armenia, the killing of the two young men triggered the outburst of violence in Sumgait. The violence was two-way: the official investigation reported 32 deaths - 6 Azerbaijanis and 26 Armenians.
In 1988-1989, the Azerbaijani Popular Front (APF) emerged as an alternative to the Communist Party. The Azerbaijani Communist Party, increasingly unable to govern, allowed APF to stage giant meetings in Baku in the summer of 1989 – also as a means to impress on Moscow the need to bring back N-K under Azerbaijani control. The APF used nationalism and the N-K issue to stir up popular support.
By end-1989, the N-K crisis, the Azerbaijani refugee problems and an assortment of local grievances had brought the situation in Baku close to explosion. When the Armenian and N-K legislatures adopted the joint resolution "On the reunification of N-K with Armenia" (1 December 1989), many in Azerbaijan thought that was the last straw.
In January 1990, the sporadic pogroms in Baku took on an organized character. Azerbaijani sources point out that the local militia was disarmed on orders from Moscow, thus preventing it from keeping law and order. The Armenian view is that the city was being cleared of Armenians house by house. The number of fatalities is not known. The Soviet Army Baku garrison, under Moscow commandment, stayed in the barracks.
On 15 January 1990, Moscow lawmakers imposed a state of emergency in N-K. Their Baku counterparts did not give approval, as required by the procedure. A week later Soviet tanks rolled out in Baku. The Soviet Army reportedly used armour and random fire to remove barricades, killing over 130 mostly very young civilians and wounding many times more. In Azerbaijan, this tragedy is known as the "Black January".
By the autumn of 1990, elections had taken place in all three South Caucasian Soviet Socialist Republics, The communists retained power only in Azerbaijan. Russian analysts note that support for Azerbaijan was acquiring added significance for the Kremlin, which aimed at safeguarding the Soviet Union. Indeed in March 1991, Azerbaijan voted "in favour" of the preservation of the USSR.
Starting in April 1991, Soviet forces and Azerbaijani militia stepped up the pressure on ethnic Armenian paramilitaries operating in N-K. Russia had already deployed troops to Yerevan, too. The Armenian side holds Moscow responsible for conducting deportations of Armenians of northern N-K in the spring of 1991. Twenty-six N-K villages were reportedly surrounded and ethnically cleansed by USSR and Azerbaijani forces in operations known as "Kaltso" (Ring), resulting in the killing of more than 150 civilians and the deportation of some 10.000 ethnic Armenians.
For their part, the Azerbaijani side holds Russia responsible for the decisive military assistance to Armenia as well as for episodes of anti-Azeri ethnic cleansing (notably, the role of the Russian 366th motorized regiment in the Khojali massacre.
After the August 1991 putsch failed, in September Moscow ordered the Soviet Army units to cease military actions and return to their barracks. On 2 September 1991, the "Nagorno-Karabakh Republic" was declared. The newly emerged entity had its own "self-defense forces", which quickly swelled to some 15 000. Violence in N-K increased dramatically. In November 1991, Azerbaijan adopted a law "On Abolishing NKAO". In 1992, the N-K conflict escalated into a full-scale war, which saw episodes of aerial bombardments of Stepanakert, tank battles in the north and trench war along the Iranian border.
In February 1992, almost day-to-day four years after the Sumgait events, the ethnic Armenian forces attacked the only airport in N-K, in Khojali, to the North of the local capital. At the time, the population of Khojali was 7000. The Azerbaijani view is that the taking of Khojali, which left some 150 defenders of the airport dead, was followed by unprecedented brutalities against the civilian population. In one day, reportedly 613 unarmed people were massacred and close to 1300 were captured – many of them while trying to flee through an alleged humanitarian corridor. The Armenian side contests this view and the number of casualties.
The Khojali massacre sparked an exodus of Azerbaijanis and precipitated a political crisis in Baku. Five years later, in 1997, President Aliyev issued a Decree referring to the tragedy as the "Khojali genocide".
In May 1992, Armenian forces overtook Shusha (or Shushi, in Armenian) and the Lachin district of Azerbaijan, establishing a link between N-K and Armenia proper – the so-called "Lachin corridor". The fall of traditionally Azerbaijani Shusha, a fortress reputed for its strong defences, is one of the most controversial events in the war. Azerbaijani political forces and individuals have been accused by their opponents but also by regional actors (Iran) of willingly surrendering Shusha for political reasons of the moment.
In June 1992, the Azerbaijani Popular Front Chairman Ebulfez Elcibey won the presidential election. Born in N-K, a former dissident having spent time in Soviet prisons, Mr Elcibey became a prominent nationalist. Under his presidency, Azerbaijan launched a fresh military offensive, which eventually turned unsuccessful. In June 1993, the APF was ousted from power by the forces of rebel army colonel Suret Gusseinov. Mr Geidar Aliyev replaced Elcibey.
By October 1993, ethnic Armenian forces succeeded in occupying almost all of N-K, as well as large areas in south-western Azerbaijan. Hundreds of thousands of refugees fled to other parts of Azerbaijan. The map on the next page represents the official position of Azerbaijan as regards occupied territories and refugees.
In May 1994 Azerbaijan, N-K and Armenia, with the mediation of Russia, Kyrgyzstan and the CIS Inter-Parliamentary Assembly signed the Bishkek Protocol and a few days later, the 1994 Moscow cease-fire, which holds to this day.
The result of Armenian aggression
Click on the photo to see a larger version
Figures about refugees and internally displaced persons are disputed on both sides. Therefore the numbers given below are of indicative value. The total number of Armenians who left their homes in Azerbaijan is estimated at 300.000. Around 30.000 of them were resettled in N-K and the Lachin district. The total number of exiled Azerbaijanis is estimated at 800 000, including some 200.000 refugees from Armenia and around 600.000 internally displaced persons from the zone of conflict. The latter figure counts practically all 50.000 Azerbaijanis from N-K.
Perceptions of the military conflict
The official line of Armenia and the N-K de facto authorities is that Azerbaijan had the stronger army, formed on the basis of the military equipment of the 4th Soviet Army stationed in the Azerbaijani SSR3 . Nevertheless, N-K forces won the victory because their soldiers were fighting for their homes. The Armenian logic is: we won the war because our cause is just.
Until recently, the notion that "Azerbaijan lost the war and must come to terms with this reality" was part of the official position of Yerevan.
The Azerbaijani view is that, with the combined populations of Armenia and N-K less than half of the Azerbaijani population, ethnic Armenian victories were made possible by huge arms shipments from Russia often in violation of the Treaty of Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE). Azerbaijani sources quote a 1997 report on illegal deliveries of Russian arms to Armenia by Mr Lev Rohlin, then Chair of the Duma Defense Committee.
In addition, while there are Russian military bases in Armenia and Russian troops guard its borders with Turkey and Iran, Azerbaijan was unfairly placed in 1992 under a "US embargo" under Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act - because of Armenian lobbying 4 . The continuing Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani land creates a strong perception of injustice done to Azerbaijan, further aggravated by the feeling that the international community tolerates the status quo.
The Azerbaijani logic is reversely identical to the Armenian one: our cause is just therefore we will prevail.
National aspirations. On 1 December 1989, the Supreme Soviet of the Armenian SSR and the N-K legislature adopted a joint resolution "On the reunification of N-K with Armenia" The resolution has not been withdrawn or otherwise invalidated.
On 23 August 1990, the Supreme Soviet of the Armenian SSR referred to the above document in the "Declaration of Independence of Armenia". Two out of its six preambular paragraphs read as follows:
"Aware of its historic responsibility for the destiny of the Armenian people engaged in the realization of the aspirations of all Armenians and the restoration of historical justice";
"Based on the December 1, 1989, joint decision of the Armenian SSR Supreme Council and the Artsakh National Council on the "Reunification of the Armenian SSR and the Mountainous Region of Karabakh."
For the Armenian founding fathers, independence of Armenia is inseparable from the powerful myths of restoration of historic justice and unification of N-K with Armenia. The acting Constitution of Armenia, adopted on 5 July 1995, elevates these to the rank of national aspirations, in the following preambular text:
"Recognizing as a basis the fundamental principles of Armenian statehood and the national aspirations engraved in the Declaration of Independence of Armenia…"
The Azerbaijani side in the conflict points a finger to the Constitution of Armenia to prove that "Greater Armenia" aspirations are at the at the core of the Armenian domestic and foreign policy and that Yerevan has never renounced the territorial claims to its neighbours.
Legal history. On 30 August 1991, the Supreme Council of the Azerbaijani SSR declared "the restoration of the state independence of the Republic of Azerbaijan in 1918-1920". According to Armenian lawyers, this act legally nullifies the USSR set-up. Moreover, N-K was not internationally recognized as part of the Azerbaijani Democratic Republic of 1918-1920. Therefore, Azerbaijan has no legal claim over N-K.
Validity of referendum. On 2 September 1991 the Regional Councils of NKAO and of the Shahumian district (on the Northern tip of N-K) proclaimed a new state - the N-K Republic. On 10 December 1991, a "referendum" on independence took place.
The Armenian side maintains that the N-K independence referendum was conducted in accordance with the USSR law on the "Procedure for Solving Issues of Secession of a Soviet Republic from the USSR" of 3 April 1990. Article 3 of this law provided autonomous regions within the Soviet republics with the right to determine independently, by referendum, whether they wished to remain within the USSR or join the republic seceding from the USSR 5 . It would however seem that according to this law N-K would have the choice of two options – to remain within the USSR or to join independent Azerbaijan; N-K independence does not seem possible.
The Azerbaijani side points to the USSR Constitution of 1977, namely Article 78 stipulating: «The territory of Union Republics may be altered by mutual agreement of the Republics concerned, subject to ratification by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics».
International law. In their legal disputes, both sides often refer to recognized principles of International Law, such as the right to self-determination and the respect for territorial integrity. Council of Europe experts, in providing legal assistance in a different conflict have examined arguments based on the Soviet legal doctrine, which traditionally treated self-determination outside of its legal context, in effect - much as a political concept. For information, Appendix I contains the relevant excerpts of Document CM/Inf (94) 27 of 2 September 1994 "Expertise on a Special Legal Status for the Gagauzes in Moldova".
The broader geopolitical context
The Caspian basin, very rich in oil and extremely rich in natural gas, has traditional problems in bringing the energy to the consumer markets. The shortest and cheapest route is to the South through Iran. This route (both existing pipelines and projects) is opposed, mainly by the US, on political and strategic grounds. Idem for the (more recent) Eastern route through Afghanistan. All Westward pipelines bring the oil and gas to Black Sea terminals, notably Novorossiysk. Novorossiysk also serves the bigger part of the oil coming from Northern Russian energy fields. The figure on the next page gives the main pipelines and their capacity in thousands of barrels per day.
Analysts agree that Russia has both an economic and a strategic interest to keep control over the Westward flow of Caspian energy. A project named Blue Stream is underway to lay a 24-inch gas pipeline on the bottom of the Black Sea to link Novorossiysk with the Turkish coast in order to avoid the Bosphorus.
The pipeline project, which has given rise to most controversy during its 10 years of gestation, is the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan project (BTC). Construction is now scheduled to begin in March 2003 and the first oil is to flow in 2005. BTC consists of a 1777 km-long, 42 inch-oil pipeline and a 700 km-long gas pipeline, also known as the South Caucasus Gas Pipeline. The gas will run parallel to the oil, but the pipeline is shorter as it will link to the existing Turkish gas distribution system.
The main problem of the BTC project is instability in the region. The energy route will pass some 60 km from Chechnya and 10-15 km from Armenia and N-K. The pipeline was also seen as too long and costly, but that was largely offset with the confirmation of the commercial viability of the huge Shah Deniz gas site (400 billion m3,100 km South of Baku).
The BTC carrying capacity will be one million barrels per day. That is double the size of any of the existing pipelines. The gas pipeline will carry 7 bn m3 per year by 2006 and later – double that volume. To give an idea of the scale of what is at stake: the projected oil demand of OECD countries (minus Mexico) by 2020 is close to 50 million barrels per day, with the countries in question producing themselves around 20 million barrels per day. In other words, BTC capacity will be equal to 1/30 of the oil needs of the industrialized world.
Georgia supports the BTC, from which it stands to gain yearly some 70 million usd. in transit fees. As long as the present stalemate in relations of Armenia with Azerbaijan and Turkey continues, the BTC stands to isolate further Armenia.
Because of the N-K conflict, the BTC will bypass Armenia
Turkey and Azerbaijan obviously favour the project. However, the BTC will bypass two regional powers with compelling interest in oil and gas – Russia and Iran. Many analysts have indicated that the latter have a rational interest to delay the BTC project.
Whereas Iran has direct access to Asian oil markets, whose forecast growth exceeds tenfold the projected oil demand increase in Europe and the US, Russia will be particularly affected. Most of its energy exports come to Novorossiysk from oil fields in Northern Russia, increasingly expensive to exploit, the aging pipelines are smaller in debit. Experts predict that several years after BTC becomes operational, market forces will squeeze smaller the Russian share of the energy trade, itself a major income source for the budget of Russia.
Pundits recall that back in 1993, Russia supported Mr Aliyev against Mr Elcibey, who was seen as much more anti-Russian. In June 1993, the month Mr Aliyev came to power, he suspended a deal with a Western consortium (BP, Amoco, Pennzoil and others) to develop three Azerbaijani oil deposits. This agreement was crucial for the Baku-Ceyhan project. Fifteen months later, on 20 September 1994, when President Aliyev had consolidated his power, he signed "the deal of the century", prompting a failed coup d'etat attempt in Baku and Ganja (where supporters of the ousted 1e Minister Suret Gusseinov took part). Russia opposed the deal, quoting the unresolved delimitation of the Caspian Sea bed.
According to US analysts, after September 2001, Moscow realised Russia cannot rely only on close relations with Armenia to guarantee its regional interests against growing US presence. Five days after the Baku-Ceyhan launching ceremony, Presidents Putin and Aliyev signed a treaty on the division of the Caspian Sea bed. Russian companies are considering participation in the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan project. In January 2002, Baku rented to Russia the Gabala radiolocation station (RLS), close to the city of Mingacevir in central Azerbaijan. The Gabala RLS was the last but one of nine facilities the Soviet Union built to ensure its early warning capability. Put in operation in 1988, the up to 350 MW station is capable of monitoring the Persian Gulf, much of Africa and can "see" as far as Australia.
The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan project
Mediation efforts in the N-K conflict
Iranian mediation. Iran made a short-lived effort in March - May 1992, when two meetings took place in Tehran, the second one on presidential level. In March, the first ever cease-fire between the belligerents was achieved, but it only lasted days.
According to Iranian analysts, the effort failed for a number of reasons, one of them being that Tehran was not perceived as impartial. Iran, a traditional rival of Russia and Turkey in the region, was thought to have an interest that the newly emerging Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia survive as independent "buffer states" between itself and Russia, while keeping them in balance by pressuring the stronger side. In the N-K conflict, this would imply constraining Armenian military advances.
Iran shares the same religion with all neighbouring countries except Armenia, but has the greatest affinity with the Azerbaijanis who, like the vast majority of Iranians, are Shiite Muslims (until Azerbaijani independence, Iran was the only State representing Shiite Muslims). On the other hand, Armenians are traditionally hostile to Iran's rival Turkey, while Iran and Armenia have not had problems in recent history.
Iran has a sizeable Azerbaijani minority – the second largest in the country. The Azerbaijani Popular Front had a pro-Turkish orientation. At one point the APF openly appealed to Iranian Azerbaijanis to secede and join Azerbaijan. While accusations that Iran provided arms to Armenia cannot be proven, it is certain that Yerevan today enjoys very good relations with the Iranian neighbour.
In a little known episode, in September 1993, when Armenians launched an attack on Nakhichevan, Iranian troops crossed the border, with the official purpose to guarantee the security of the jointly managed dams on the Araz river and to establish camps for Azerbaijani refugees (Iran says it hosts over 4 million refugees from Azerbaijan and Iraq). Russia and Turkey bristled, but Armenia agreed there would be no more military action in Nakhichevan.
Russian mediation. In October 1993, President Yeltsin of Russia proposed to his counterparts from the three South Caucasian states a joint declaration calling for setting up of Russian military bases and joint protection of the borders of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan with Turkey and Iran. The draft also called for the unblocking of lines of communication. Presidents Ter-Petrosian and Shevardnadze agreed, but President Aliyev maintained that a declaration of this type could not be adopted until the Armenian forces had withdrawn from the occupied Azeri territories.
Earlier, in September 1991, President Yeltsin and President Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan visited Baku, Stepanakert and Yerevan. Following the visit, the first direct negotiations took place in Zheleznovodsk, Russia, with the participation of the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan as well as the N-K leadership.
The problem of Moscow as mediator is that, like Tehran, it has its own vital interests in the region. In particular, Russian energy-related interests are of strategic dimensions.
The UN Security Council adopted, in 1993, four resolutions on the N-K conflict 6 . They called for cessation of military activities and hostile acts, withdrawal of forces and resumption of negotiations, condemned the violation of the then established cease-fire and the excessive use of force in response thereto. The UN Security Council also referred to the forces that overtook the Kelbajar district of Azerbaijan as "local Armenian forces" and urged the Armenian government "to exert its influence" on the Armenians of N-K.
The Minsk process goes back to March 1992, when the CSCE Helsinki Meeting requested the Chairman-in-Office to convene a conference in Minsk on N-K peaceful settlement. The meeting named eleven States to participate in the conference. The conference never took place, but the name of the Belarusian capital remained attached to the process and the would-be participants became known as the Minsk Group. N-K was to be invited to the conference as an interested party. The formula "elected and other representatives of N-K" refers to the de facto authorities and the Azerbaijani refugees.
In 1994, the OSCE Budapest Summit "strongly endorsed the mediation efforts of the CSCE Minsk Group and expressed appreciation for the crucial contribution of the Russian Federation and the efforts by other individual members of the Minsk Group". In order to harmonize these into a single co-ordinated effort, a Co-Chairmanship for the process was established – Russia and Finland. In 1997, the Co-Chairmanship was revised to its current composition: the United States, Russian Federation and France.
The Minsk Group receives assistance from the Personal Representative of the Chairman-in-Office, who resides in the region and a High-Level Planning Group made up of military experts seconded by OSCE participating States. The latter is a dormant body, which would come into action if and when the multinational OSCE peacekeeping force recommended by the Budapest Summit is established.
The Minsk Group has put forward several peace plans, which have been rejected as they were not seen to deal acceptably with major concerns of one or another party to the conflict,
Direct negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan at the highest level go back to the Zheleznovodsk meeting mentioned above. President Aliyev and Kocharyan have met nearly 20 times, with no breakthrough or decisive step forward in sight.
In December 2002, the OSCE Porto Ministerial meeting "welcomed the continuing meetings of the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan and of their Special Representatives" and "encouraged the parties to continue their efforts, with the active support of the Co-Chairmen, aimed at reaching a just and enduring settlement".
Comment: the viewpoints of the parties to the conflict are opposed as to the causes of the conflict, the way in which it should be resolved and which problems should be addressed first.
- Armenia is the aggressor;
- the international community/participants in the negotiations must give an appropriate political evaluation of the conflict;
- occupied territories must be liberated as a precondition for serious negotiations;
- Azerbaijan must come to terms with reality - Baku lost the war, Azerbaijani legal claim on N-K is not valid;
- N-K has never been/will never be part of independent Azerbaijan;
- the blockade of Armenia by Azerbaijan and Turkey is illegal and must be lifted;
- the position of the N-K de facto authorities is largely identical with that of Armenia, as aptly symbolized by the flag
- an arrow yearning to merge with the Motherland, also hinting of traditional N-K carpets
- N-K has already covered its part of the road to compromise by renouncing the claim to
The content of the proposals for settlement officially remains a secret. Nevertheless it is not difficult to see that any solution is to be one of or a mix of elements from the following main options:
(1) restitution of the status quo ante;
In 1996, the OSCE Lisbon summit elaborated three principles for settling the N-K conflict:
The above principles could not be adopted by consensus due to Armenian disagreement.
According to Azerbaijani sources, in 1997, on the margins of the Second Council of Europe Summit, Presidents Aliyev and Kocharyan reached an understanding based on a swap of territories. Subsequently Armenia allegedly rejected the arrangement, which had also become known as the Sadarak agreement. The Armenian view is that a swap of territories is not possible as it would cut Armenia off its border with Iran.
In April 2001, further to their travel to Strasbourg on the occasion of the joint accession of Armenia and Azerbaijan to the Council of Europe, the two presidents met in Paris upon the invitation of President Chirac of France. Reportedly, an agreement was reached, referred to as the Paris principles. Subsequently, in a weeklong negotiation in a proximity format7 in Key West, US, the Paris agreement was put on paper. The bargaining seems to be about exchange of corridors, the Lachin corridor linking Armenia with N-K and the Meghri corridor linking Azerbaijan with Nakhichevan.
In October 2002, there were vague press reports about new Azerbaijani proposals – notably, to divide contested lands with international mediation, with some localities choosing by referendum whether they belong to Armenia or to Azerbaijan. The same reports indicated that Baku had reiterated it would never accept that N-K become a new sovereign state.
Problems of Conflict Settlement
Comment: the following summary is based on writings by experts in conflict-prevention and negotiation.
The extent of historical mistrust between Azerbaijanis and Armenians is difficult to evaluate. Whereas both sides may be exaggerating at present, serious violent episodes date back at least to the end of the 19th century. At the same time, as recently as 1990, far more Armenians lived in Baku than in N-K. During the N-K war, Armenians maintained life-saving relations with Iranian Azerbaijanis.
It is noteworthy that, some experts argue that, generally speaking, in the South Caucasus the definition of ethnicity as well as the link between ethnicity and territory may be not so strong as in other regions where nation-building took place earlier and in different circumstances.
Armenians are mistrustful of all Turkic-speaking Muslims, whom they tend to view as a single people ("Turks"). Most Azerbaijanis and Armenians seem to believe that the N-K conflict is not simply between Governments or the military, but between their two peoples.
The internally displaced persons, in particular in Azerbaijan and especially those from N-K are known to be a bitter and intensely radicalised force, and have been responsible for attacks on Armenians in Baku. Here again, the problem may be exaggerated. Many observers note that Baku seems unwilling to help refugees integrate – as this would mean accepting the Armenian war gains. Such a position is likely to change as progress is made towards settlement.
Security problems. Azerbaijan cannot feel secure while Armenians occupy seven of its provinces. However, if Baku forces were to re-establish control of Azerbaijani territories, the Armenian perception about the south-eastern part of their country would be one of vulnerability. In addition, Yerevan has particular worries about its long border with Turkey. Last October, Armenian Defence Minister Sarkisian told the press that the newly created joint Russian- Armenian military unit is to serve, inter alia as a deterrent against a possible Turkish incursion. Generally, security perceptions are a particular concern for Armenia and represent one of the main stumbling blocks in the attempts to find a settlement.
The state of democratic reform. Ethnic Armenians find it difficult to trust a government in Baku that they may perceive as authoritarian, corrupt, and intolerant of minorities; Azerbaijanis, for their part, cannot bring themselves to trust the government of a state they believe is constructed on a strictly ethnic basis - a state that acts as if it believes Armenia is for ethnic Armenians alone.
More broadly, many analysts believe that a solution to the N-K conflict would have to pass through more democratic reform, i.e., better alignment of the interests of those mostly affected by the conflict and those in power.
Domestic politics. The way the N-K conflict has interlocked various players in internal political life is the single biggest obstacle to solution. President Kocharyan, himself native of N-K, came to power after his predecessor Ter-Petrosian was forced to resign by N-K hardliners opposing his moves towards settlement. Against the background of economic difficulties, Yerevan has little to deliver for the time being, except a war that was won and a national dream. In Azerbaijan, the predecessors of President Aliyev are seen to have lost the war. Partly for this reason, the present-day political opposition often takes a hard line view on the conflict. President Aliyev, a native of the Azerbaijani exclave of Nakhichevan, can hardly afford to be seen to give in to Yerevan.
Once, a high-ranking official from the region put the political problem in a nutshell: both in Armenia and Azerbaijan, N-K is both a source of power and a threat to power.
Guarantees. N-K is very sensitive to the question of guarantees. N-K recalls the British guarantees of 1918-1920, which did not prevent the application of force by the first Azerbaijani Republic, and the "guarantees" of the Soviet Union, which permitted what Stepanakert sees as the de-Armenianization of Nakhichevan.
Regional issues. Several analysts indicate that the conflict is unlikely to find a lasting settlement before regional powers – Russia, Turkey and Iran – adapt to geo-political changes. These refer mainly to a considerable shrinking of the formerly absolute Soviet/Russian influence over the South Caucasus and the newly assertive US presence. In the post - 11 September world, these geo-political shifts are not necessarily a zero sum game where gain by one side is another side's loss.
Common interest in settlement. From 1988 to 1994, the GDP of Azerbaijan fell 73%. Azerbaijan needs to have the N-K conflict solved to gain stability for development based on oil wealth. According to experts, Azerbaijan has enough energy deposits to finance two generations of economic growth. There would be the immediate economic gain of a large segment of the population – the refugees and IDPs – returning to regular economic activity. Experts also caution that oil-based development is only guaranteed in a country with stable democratic institutions ("will Azerbaijan develop like Norway or like Nigeria").
From 1988 to 1994 Armenia saw its GDP fall by 60%. Particularly in Armenia, the economic situation was further aggravated by the 1999 Russian financial system crisis. For Armenia, not having diplomatic relations with two out of four neighbours is clearly an abnormal situation. Restoring regular relations with the outside world would not only bring transport costs back to normal but would also enable Armenia's longer-term comparative advantages – the Diaspora support with its networking, lobbying power and capability to raise investment. There are expert calculations suggesting that Armenia could experience a short term increase of up to 40% of GDP. Some analysts broadly compare the Armenian "Diaspora factor" to the Azerbaijani "oil factor". In this context, the "Norway vs. Nigeria dilemma" is also valid for Yerevan.
The Council of Europe position
Armenia and Azerbaijan joined the Council of Europe simultaneously on 25 January 2001. For the first time in its history, the Organisation invited two new members with a bitter unresolved conflict between them. This was made possible by the prevailing understanding, both in the Parliamentary Assembly and in member States' Governments that the accession of Azerbaijan and Armenia could help to establish the climate of trust needed for a solution to the N-K conflict.
The Political Affairs Committee held hearings on the N-K in 1998 and 1999. While voting positively on their accession demands, the Parliamentary Assembly asked Armenia and Azerbaijan to commit themselves, with regard to the N-K conflict:
- to continue efforts to settle the conflict by peaceful means only;
The Presidents, Speakers of parliaments, Prime Ministers and the chairmen of the political parties represented in Parliaments of Armenia and Azerbaijan confirmed these commitments in writing.
The Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan wrote separately to reiterate their countries' commitment to a peaceful negotiated settlement of the N-K on the basis of a compromise acceptable to all concerned. President Aliyev stressed that Azerbaijan's accession to the Council of Europe would be a major contribution to the negotiations process and stability in the region.
In September 2002, the Parliamentary Assembly adopted Resolutions 1304 and 1305(2002) on the honouring of obligations by Armenia and Azerbaijan, where it:
The Parliamentary Assembly has appointed Mr Terry Davis (UK, Soc) Rapporteur on N-K.
The Committee of Ministers monitoring Group, also known as "GT-Suivi Ago" follows regularly N-K conflict settlement efforts. It asks questions in writing, urges Yerevan and Baku to build confidence and, generally, impresses on the two countries the position of the member States' Governments.
In April 2002, the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers, further to a visit to the South Caucasus region, reported, "the most difficult challenge the member States face are their unresolved conflicts. Indeed, the conflicts of Nagorno-Karabakh and Abkhazia undermine the European efforts to assist Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia and threaten to effectively put limits on the process of democratisation".
In January 2003, the Enlarged Bureau of the Committee of Ministers' Deputies held an exchange of views with the Co-Chairmen of the Minsk Group and the Special Representatives of the two Presidents.
Within the framework of its assistance activities, the Council of Europe can bring to the sides in the conflict the European experience of post-conflict reconciliation and "work on the past". It can also promote regional co-operation as one of the means of post-conflict rehabilitation, and it can apply the Organisation know-how in working with the civil society for awareness raising and confidence-building. If a solution requires legal expertise, the Council of Europe, through the Venice Commission, remains prepared to help the Minsk Group work out the legal aspects of N-K status and protection of minorities.
Comment: In the end, Nagorno-Karabakh is part of the shared history and common suffering of the Armenian and Azerbaijani people. A common solution must be found for a better future.
Excerpts from Document CM/Inf (94) 27 of 2 September 1994 "Expertise on a Special Legal Status for the Gagauzes in Moldova".
"International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
It must be noted that the ICCPR makes no attempt to define who are a "people". The term "people" is often used with different meanings. Sometimes it is used to mean all the citizens, regardless of their ethnic origin, of a particular State. For example, somebody might refer to "the people of France" or "the people of Germany". On other occasions it is used for the purpose of designating a particular ethnic group and without any intention to indicate any legal status. For example, a person might refer to "the Welsh people" or "the Scottish people".
Such references are sometimes made by persons in the United Kingdom who would be quick to contradict any suggestion that they were implying that the Welsh or the Scottish people have any right to an independent State or that Article 1 of the ICCPR confers any such right on Wales or Scotland. Government Ministers in the United Kingdom who are committed to the continued existence of the United Kingdom have sometimes referred to "the Welsh nation" or "the Scottish nation".
It must also be noted that the Charter of the United Nations does not provide any definition of the term "people". The charter begins with a statement by "the peoples of the United Nations" in which it is stated that "our respective Governments" (i.e. the Governments of those peoples) have agreed to the Charter and thereby establish an international organisation to be known as the United Nations.
Article 1(2) of the Charter provides that one of the purposes of the UN is "to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace".
Because of the tendency in many parts of the Charter to equate "nation" with "State" this does not appear to be a reference to any entitlement to have the borders of a State changed except, possibly, in the case of colonial territories of the colonial powers. In the "Charter of the United Nations; Commentary and Documents" by Goodrich, Hambro and Simons, it is stated that questions regarding the difference, if any, between the terms "nations", "peoples" and "states" were left unresolved at the San Francisco Conference of 1945 at which the Charter was signed, see page 30 of the 3rd edition. Two of the authors attended that Conference.
It must be noted that the ICCPR does not contain any provisions, which set out the type of measures to be taken by a State Party under Article 1. There is no provision that statehood must be granted to all the peoples within its territory by a State Party. This omission would appear to be deliberate.
Lack of any definition of a "people" and the omission to state how States Parties are to implement Article 1 have the consequence that Article 1 cannot be regarded as having any clear legal consequences, except in the case of the people of a State.
The preamble to the Covenant contains a number of paragraphs, which clearly relate to the rights of individuals but it does not contain any clear statement about the self-determination of peoples. The reference in the first paragraph of the preamble to "the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family" appears to be ambiguous insofar as the question of whether a reference is being made to all peoples as members of the human family is concerned.
The Human Rights Committee has considered Article 1 of the ICCPR but in a General Comment on this Article it avoided giving any opinion on whether the right to self-determination applied to any people in a sovereign State. Some individual members of the Committee appear to have suggested that it is so applicable but those individual views do not seem to represent any generally accepted view.
The fact that the protocol gives no right of petition to peoples and that Article 7 only preserves the right of petition of colonial peoples suggests that Article 1 of the ICCPR was not intended to give any right of self-determination to other peoples. It would seem that the only clear conclusions are that Article 1 of the ICCPR is intended to oblige States Parties to it to promote the realisation of the right of self-determination of the people of each State, i.e. of all the inhabitants of each State, and, probably, to colonial peoples. The cases of the dissolution of the USSR and Yugoslavia do not seem to give any useful guidance on the interpretation of Article 1 of the ICCPR.
If Article 1 of the ICCPR had been considered to confer on all groups with a separate ethnic identity forming the majority in a particular area a right to independence then it seems most unlikely that a number of the Parties, such as Spain, France and the United Kingdom, would have become parties to a convention which could have led to the break-up of their States".
"Article 27 of the ICCPR protects the rights of persons belonging to ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities. The term "minority" should not be regarded as having any derogatory implications. It merely refers to certain numerical and ethnic realities. The Gagauz clearly have an ethnic identity and the term "ethnic" is used with reference to the Gagauz identity in a number of places in the document attached to the letter from Mr S. Topal.
Article 27 provides that in those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion, or to use their own language. The word "culture" in Article 27 was interpreted by the Human Rights Committee established by Part IV of the ICCPR in the case of Ominayak and the Lubicon Lake Band (i.e. Tribe) –v- Canada, see the Annual Report of the Human Rights Committee 1990, UN Document A/45/40, Volume 2, Appendix A (1990).
In that case the Human Rights Committee said that the rights protected by Article 27 "include the rights of persons, in community with others, to engage in economic and social activities which are part of the culture of the community to which they belong". This is clearly a wide interpretation of the word "culture". Presumably such economic and social activity must be necessary for the preservation of the ethnic minority in question.
The Committee did not deal with the question of what would happen if such activities conflicted with the general social and economic policies of the State in question. However, it would seem likely that the mere fact that such activities by a minority in some way contradicted general economic policy of the State in question would not be held to justify interference by the State. There would seem to be good ground for thinking that a State could only interfere with such activities in order to prevent serious consequences of an economic nature. Definite opinions cannot be expressed on this point because the views of the Committee in the Lubicon Lake Band Case will require further development in other cases. Reference is made to an Article in the International Comparative and Law Quarterly, 1991, page 658, by Dominic McGoldrick".
Note Note
Note Note
Note Note
Note Note
Note Note
Note Note
Note Note


text:
Church holds Native American Day
The congregants at Walhalla's St. Luke United Methodist Church heard a message of "Making the Invisible, Visible" as delivered yesterday by Tracy Pender, chair for Native American Ministries. Those who heard Pender's message included several visitors, such as Nancy Basket, Lori and John Hall of Pickens, and various members of the Cherokee Bear Clan. After lunch, Luther and Marcia Lyle took the Penders to see the "Spirit of Oconee" and the work-in-progress Museum of the Cherokee, the only Native American museum in the state. St. Luke United yesterday celebrated the first year of its food pantry. Pastor Richard Reams honored volunteers. Just last Wednesday, more than 140 families were served.


text:
A sportswriter rethinks his position on Brett Favre
It was just about one year ago that I wrote a few words that I thought were dripping with wisdom and insight:
"I think it's time they (the Green Bay Packers) find out if Aaron Rogers can play quarterback in the NFL," I wrote. "If he can't, they better find one who can, either in the draft or through a trade. But the important thing is to get an answer to that question.
"What that means is, of course, is that Brett Favre should stop being the starting quarterback for the Packers. (I never thought those words would pass my lips.)
"The question is how do you make that happen?
"Favre isn't going to volunteer. That's so far out of character that we better realize this leopard isn't changing his spots. So that means Ted Thompson and (Mike) McCarthy have to do this. Sure, it's a tough decision, but they get paid to make tough decisions.
"The best choice is to do this with Favre's cooperation and understanding. Find a way to do it how he'd like it done. Either let him retire to the bench, to Mississippi or trade him to a team that thinks it's a great quarterback away from the Super Bowl."
Honest to God. I actually wrote those words and OnMilwaukee.com, published them under an agreement we have that says they'll publish whatever rantings I have without editing for content.
Now close your eyes and see if you can envision me slapping my forehead with great force and muttering to myself, "I can't believe how amazingly stupid I can be sometimes."
Right now, the Packers have one of the top three quarterbacks in the league and maybe one of the top two. And I wanted the Packers to force him out of the lineup last year so some untested kid from Cal could begin his career. I mean: the old quarterback is having a season that may well bring him yet another MVP award. He's put a team of kids on his shoulders and said, Follow me boys." I actually said that a quarterback who may well lead his babies to the Super Bowl ought to be on the bench. Ow.
Now, what I wrote a year ago points up several things. Chief among them, of course, is how certain I sounded when I wrote that and how wrong I could be. Some people say there are no degrees of wrong. When you are wrong, you are wrong. Well, I certainly disproved that. I was both wrong and stupid, although I'm not sure which came first.
But, the other thing this helps to prove is just how uncertain the world of sports really is. And not just for the fans.
Think, for a moment. Sam Bowie was drafted before Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley and John Stockton. Tony Mandarich was drafted ahead of Barry Sanders, Derrick Thomas and Deion Sanders. The Bucks got Tractor Traylor and not Dirk Nowitzki. Not one of the general managers who drafted those guys thought a mistake was being made. They were certain they had made the right decision.
And those general managers are experts. They know more about basketball, baseball and football than you and me and 10 of our friends combined.
Then, listen to the sports radio talk shows or read the newspaper columnists, especially in Milwaukee. Everybody knows everything.
Can you believe that call that Yost made? I can't believe Thompson drafted that guy. How the hell could Kohl offer that kind of contract to that bum?
We know the truth. We all know the truth.
But, the most wonderful thing about all of sports is that we really don't know the truth. At least in some cases we don't know until the game has been played. And in other cases, we may never know the truth, because we don't know all the facts.
Who thought the Jets would beat the Colts, or who thought Rulon Gardner would beat Alexander Karelin in the Olympics? Appalachian State over Michigan? No bleeping way. And the Washington Generals have beaten the Harlem Globetrotters.
The point, of course, is that you never know for sure. We shout. We bang the table. We punch the keyboard of our laptop with confidence and bombast. But, we just don't know.
Will that change us? Absolutely not. Which just goes to show how dumb we all really are.
In the face of incontrovertible evidence, we all will pretend that we have the corner on the secrets. We know what other people should be doing. If they would only listen to us they would score more, run faster, play smarter and win much more.
Yeah, right.
Myke | Nov. 14, 2007 at 3:11 p.m. (report)
Sandstorm I can't even spell my own name how can you expect me to spell Farve or rather Favre!
|Rate this:
sugarcreekboy | Nov. 13, 2007 at 10:01 p.m. (report)
Pick an opinion and stick with it. This is from your July article ripping a fellow columnist: "And, perhaps the most important point of all is this: Brett Favre is the best quarterback the Green Bay Packers have. The best. And whoever is second is not even close. "So, if you want to win next year, the quarterback who gives you the best chance to do that is (DRUMROLL, PLEASE) Brett Favre.." That's less than a year ago, pal. And, by the way, calling out a co-worker is a good way to look like a World Class Jerk. Imagine how you'd be treated if you did that to a buddy of yours. you'd be pounded on. I still can't believe you had the gall to try to punk a fellow columnist like that, but I digress. In a month, if Brett Favre is struggling, will you again be calling for Rodgers? It seems that way, because you can't even keep track of your own writings.
|Rate this:
stevedempsey4 | Nov. 13, 2007 at 4:38 p.m. (report)
It would be interesting to hear what people would be saying today if he had continued to decline and was sitting with a 3-5 team instead. Dave's article could have been an "I told you so!" Wouldn't you agree that most would claim they thought he should have retired 2 years ago, whether they did or not? Glad we will never have to find out! Hindsight is 20/20... mine was 20/200, which is legally blind. BTW - Thanks to whoever gave me one star for my first comment. I should have just said, " I love Brett Favre!!!!" Now, that is the stuff five star comments are made of.
|Rate this:
sandstorm | Nov. 13, 2007 at 4:16 p.m. (report)
steve, you are not the bad guy. my point is now that Favre (note the spelling Myke) is performing well again a lot of people seem to be pointing to the "fact" that "everybody" wanted Favre to retire or at least to ride the bench in favor of Rodgers when that was simply not the case. granted, we most likely with different crowds steve, but i honestly don't know many people at all who didn't want Favre to not only stick around, but to stick around and start.
|Rate this:
stevedempsey4 | Nov. 13, 2007 at 3:58 p.m. (report)
First off, after rereading my comment I knew that I would catch flak for using the word "delusional" without the key words "I presumed to be" in front of it. I also must have misread Dave's sentiment because I never thought he should be benched. As long as he was/is on the team he should be in the game. What I was speaking of was after the 2005 and 2006 seasons. When there was speculation he was going to retire, I wanted him to and (as it is obvious to see this season) was wrong. I did not think he had it in him to be a top notch quarterback in the NFL. It pained me to see him struggle and I would have rather had him retire than go through the pain and ridicule he was going through. I did not want him to hold on for too long as it appeared he was doing. He is too good for that. I am not going to look for trackbacks that echo that sentiment because I know what I felt, what friends around around me felt, and what the sports talk radio waves were saying out of Green Bay. I felt as though everyone wanted him to hang'em up. The only people I personally knew that wanted him to play were fans that I labeled as "delusional" because they were not seeing that the team would be better off as it built towards a future without him at quarterback. It is obvious that I and all others that thought like I did, both locally and nationally, were the delusional ones. Sandstorm - "odd how history shifts for some people needing to make a specific point". How do you know what I experienced? History has not "shifted" for me. My history included exactly what I said in this and my last comment and has not changed one bit. I admit when I am wrong. I was wrong, and am happy I was because this has been one of the most exciting seasons I have experienced as a Packers fan. Myke - I am really enjoying Favre and am disappointed my future kids will not get to see him play. We do not know what Rodgers will be like and may not find out for awhile the way Brett is playing and I do not mind that. I also thought Ted Thompson had a terrible offseason by not making any major moves... but, again, I was wrong. It's not worth going back and forth because I think we all agree we are better off with number 4 than without.... besides I hate being the bad guy and it feels as though you guys think I am.
|Rate this:
Show me the other 10 Talkbacks
15 comments about this article.
Post a comment / write a review.
Facebook Comments
Disclaimer: Please note that Facebook comments are posted through Facebook and cannot be approved, edited or declined by OnMilwaukee.com. The opinions expressed in Facebook comments do not necessarily reflect those of OnMilwaukee.com or its staff.


text:
We're sorry, this listing is off the market. Try these listings instead:
West Metro Florist & Garden Center. Nearly $200k #467988 posted May 9, 2017
- Saint Paul, Minnesota, United States
- $595,000
This well established Florist & Garden Center is easily visible on a highly trafficked thoroughfare in an affluent part of the Twin Cities. It has a wonderful reputation for providing a superior level of customer service, the freshest flowers and plants, and a wide assortment of unique and carefully...
Well-Known Floral and Gift Shop -Motivated Seller #384887 posted Jul 3, 2015
- Des Moines, Iowa, United States
- $110,000
This is a fun business for a creative person, don't miss this opportunity to be your own boss and be creative as you like. This business is a 50 year old busy floral shop with a reputation for offering only the finest arrangements and gifts, backed by superior customer service. The seller will provide...
Highly Profitable Home Decor, Floral & Gift #366054 posted Sep 27, 2014
- Des Moines, Iowa, United States
- $264,000
This high end gift and home decor retail business for sale is a progressive and trendy business in a thriving, affluent neighborhood. This prosperous business has the best of both worlds a custom, state of the art facility with top notch equipment but is a brand that has stood the test of time since...
Did you know that social networking is a great way to buy a business? Sign up now and we'll show you how.
Disclaimer: DealStream has not independently verified any of the information in this listing and makes no warranty as to its accuracy or completeness.


text:
Dec 2, 2012 - StaffMiriam Pittman of Dubois died Tuesday, Nov. 20, 2012, at Riverton Memorial Hospital.
She was 80 years old.
Cremation has taken place, and there will be a memorial service sometime in the spring of 2013.
Miriam Joy Waughman was born Jan. 15, 1932, in Snoqualmie, Wash., the daughter of Frank and Lane D. (Endicott) Waughman.
She grew up on the West Coast in Oregon, California and Washington.
She graduated from Officers Training School on July 24, 1951, at Fort Lee Virginia and served in the Army (WAC) as a First Lieutenant during the Korean War.
She continued to serve until Aug. 2, 1953, when she was honorably discharged.
She met her husband, Jerold Franklin Pittman, while both were on "R&R" leave. They married March 28, 1952, in Petersburg, Va.
After leaving the Army, she and her husband made their home in Clemson, S.C., where her husband was a professor at Clemson University and a general in the U.S. Army Reserves.
Mrs. Pittman was a homemaker and raised their two sons.
The family took vacations to the Cross-Mill Iron Ranch in the Dubois area on a regular basis. Thirty-one years ago she decided to move to Dubois.
She worked for the Cross-Mill Iron Ranch as a cook for pack trips and then worked as a cook at Red Rocks, Ziggys and The Cowboy. She was a member of Mensa.
She is survived by her sons, Jeffrey Pittman and wife Kelly of Rancho Santa Margarita, Calif., and Brian Pittman and wife Keri of Tensleep; grandchildren Brittany Pittman, Brandon Pittman, Brock Pittman, Jessi Crain and husband Cody, Timothy Pittman, Aaron Pittman and Adriel Pittman; and one great-grandchild, Addy Crain.
She was preceded in death by her parents, her husband, and a sister, Marybeth Morse.
Memorials may be made to Dubois Assisted Living Project through Davis Funeral Home (www.thedavisfuneralhome.com).
Get your copy of The Ranger online, every day! If you are a current print subscriber and want to also access dailyranger.com online (there is nothing more to purchase) including being able to download The Mining and Energy Edition, click here. Looking to start a new online subscription to dailyranger.com (even if it is for just one day)? Access our secure SSL encrypted server and start your subscription now by clicking here.


text:
Met Office experts say the trend could be linked to long-term changes in air pressure, caused by greenhouse gases.
The findings have been revealed at a United Nations Climate Change Convention meeting in Milan.
They come as the future of the Kyoto agreement on cutting greenhouse gases is in doubt, with Russia indicating it may refuse to ratify the protocol.
Climate experts believe the same factors responsible for global warming also lead to more extreme weather.
Analysis of figures from weather stations across the UK showed the number of sharp drops in pressure that lead to severe winter storms has doubled since 1950.
Geoff Jenkins, of the Met Office's Hadley Centre, says this could be linked to separate findings showing air pressure is rising in the Atlantic around the Azores and getting lower in the Arctic - with Britain caught in the middle.
He told BBC News: "South of the UK we've had the build up of pressure. North of the UK we've had a reduction in pressure. We tend to be on the receiving end because changes in pressure mean greater winds."
The report made to the UN suggests even drastic action now would make little difference to climate change for at least 40 years.


text:
Video: Building a Smarter Strategy Through Social Listening
Photo of the author, Alicia Johnston by Alicia Johnston on March 25, 2016
As the term social media listening grows in popularity, it can be hard to break free from the buzzword to really understand how it can benefit your business. At our most recent Sprout Social Hour, we invited social media experts Elly Deutch (Social Engagement Campaign & Advocacy Manager at McDonald's), Caleb Gardner (Digital Director at Organizing for Action) and Katie Gear (E-Comm Marketing Manager at Hyatt) to discuss how they use social listening to inform social strategy.
Since the Sprout community spans the globe, we recorded the event in order to share the panel no matter what city you call home. Watch the video to learn more about social listening, including:
- How social listening differs from social monitoring
- Top insights your brand can derive from social listening
- Examples of how listening can build better content and customer relationships
- Best practices for implementing social listening as part of your social strategy
The panelists went beyond social listening to discuss how they determine which trends to pursue, how small businesses can use social to get competitive insights and set goals, and how to educate your organization about the value of social and secure internal buy-in.
We host Sprout Social Hours throughout the US and in London, and we participate in events around the world. To see where we're headed next, check out the events page and come see us at an event soon.
Alicia Johnston: Alicia Johnston is a Brand Marketing Specialist at Sprout Social. When she isn't writing about social media strategy, she loves to cook, hike and explore Chicago's street festivals.


text:
The collaboration is expected to be featured in Breezy's new album, 'X', which was delayed due to his recent incarceration.
Chris Brown took to Instagram on Thursday, June 26 to share a snippet of his new track called "New Flame". According to what looks like the cover art, the song will feature guest vocals from R&B star Usher and rapper Rick Ross.
In the short preview, Breezy can be heard singing, "You gon' be my baby, love me, love you crazy/ Tell me if you with it, baby come and get it/ Try a new thing, and let's spark a new flame." Fans who want to listen to Usher and Rozay's part will likely have to wait until the full version comes.
"New Flame" is expected to be featured in Brown's oft-delayed new album, "X". Originally slated to be released earlier this year, the LP was pushed back indefinitely due to the singer's recent incarceration.
Following his release from jail earlier this month, Brown has been working hard on his music. He's recently spotted hitting the studio with a number of musicians, including Tyga, Lil Boosie, RoccStar and Prince Royce.
The "Loyal" hitmaker will also make a guest appearance in Usher's upcoming album. In an interview on Revolt Live last month, Usher said, "The song that we did together, I think it answers a lot of questions." The 35-year-old star's untitled studio effort is scheduled to come out this fall.


text:
I WAS disappointed to see John Glen use his View from the Commons (Journal, February 27), to respond to the chorus of criticism from church leaders about government welfare reform without actually addressing any of the issues raised.
No one objects to welfare reform or the principle of universal credit.
No one disagrees that an effective tax rate of 84 per cent for hardworking, low wage earners is criminal, and although much of the justification for the benefits cap is based on misinformation, no one disagrees that the underlying issue - channelling tax payers' money to landlords charging unaffordable rents because of a catastrophic lack of affordable housing - is anything but unfair to ordinary people.
But Mr Glen needs to address the actual criticisms; that the implementation of benefits reform has not just involved bureaucratic failures but has included indiscriminate cuts and punitive sanctions, which along with all the other cuts to local authority spending are causing real hardship to ordinary people who have done all the right things but find themselves at a time of rising living costs and decreasing income unable to make ends meet.
He also needs to answer the grave concerns about government misuse, misrepresentation and manipulation of evidence and statistics to create untruths that stigmatise people on low incomes as well as genuine welfare recipients.
No one expected welfare reform to be easy, and we all want to ensure that abuse of the system is kept to an absolute minimum.
But if it is to be genuine reform rather than part of an ideological agenda it needs to be based on facts, evidence, reasoned judgement, and a public debate that avoids the temptation to smear and scapegoat one section of the community as "feckless scroungers".
Benefit dependency is a serious issue which dates back to the de-industrialisation and high unemployment of the Thatcher years.
It will only be solved by those with the humility to realise that we all share responsibility for the resulting damaged communities and that punitive, vindictive and degrading treatment alone is not going to be the solution.
It is good that Mr Glen is on the cross-party group on hunger and food poverty and I hope the group is able to report back promptly and objectively.
However, it would also be useful if Mr Glen did what MPs are supposed to do and held the Government to account for the consequences of its policies as well as its use of deliberately misleading and inflammatory rhetoric.
Colin Lawson, Salisbury


text:
Learn and Speak Italian makes learning to speak Italian easier for an English-speaking person. We show you the meaning of individual words, phrases and sentences. This helps you understand how the language is formed and makes it easy to form your own sentences with the words learned.
Most other courses will tell you that "Non Parlo Italiano" means "I don't speak Italian". Literally translated it doesn't !
The Italians do not normally use the word don't, it actually means
"Not I speak Italian", because that's how the Italians say it. So if you're looking for the word don't in the sentence, you won't find it.
Non parlo Italiano
Not I speak Italian
Most courses will tell you that "Quando parte il treno?" means
"When does the train depart?"
It does not !
There is no such word as "does" in Italian, it means "When departs the train?" because that's what the Italians say. So if you're looking for the word "does" in the sentence, you won't find it.
Quando parte il treno
When departs the train
Learn and Speak Italian shows how sentences are formed and exactly what each translated word means so you can use that word again to make up different sentences of your own.
"Only by knowing the meaning of individual words is a sentence, will you be able to re-use those words to construct your own phrases or sentences".
Learn and Speak Italian shows you how to do this, whereas some other courses do not.
Learn speak Italian with ease and convenience
with learnandspeakitalian.com
Designed to be useful right away, whether you are on a trip to Italy or simply want to show off!!


text:
In Defense of Broadcasting – My Career is Again Ranked As One of the Worst in America
The annual list of best and worst jobs is out. Mathematician leads the list. At the bottom of the list is the life-and-limb-losing prone career of lumberjack. But just a scant 4 spots from the bottom of the list is my chosen career, broadcaster.
They say our jobs are high stress. Nah. It's really not. We're paid to talk on the radio and dream up things to talk to you about. That's cake.
They say my job is at risk. Well, I have to give the listmakers that, this is a notoriously fickle occupation.
But does broadcaster truly belong at the bottom of the list of worst jobs? Here's my take, In Defense of Broadcasting.
Subscribe to Lite 98.7 on


text:
So Nemo hit and did not disappoint. The Prospect Park snow day was a hit; did you get to enjoy it? Make any snowmen?
Make sure to keep up with Park Slope news all week by signing up for our daily newsletter, following us on Twitter and Facebook, and emailing us with questions, news tips, ideas, or anything at email@example.com.
Here's what you may have missed this week:
• Beyoncé is coming to Barclays! Beyoncé is coming to Barclays!
• Music Together of Park Slope is running a video contest for 50% off spring tuition.
• We scoped out the local Pilates gyms and studios.
• City Stomp Live released a lineup of shows at Dizzy's on Fifth.
• We're all going to pitch in and buy Brooklyn Lyceum when it goes up for auction. (Right?)
• We found the best in local Valentine's Day gifts (hint: it requires a tape deck).
• The NYPD Stop-and-Frisk report revealed disproportionate incidents involving minorities.
• We love Culture for many reasons, but especially for the toppings on the top and bottom.
• There's still time to make some Valentine's dinner reservations.
• Pork Slope is up for Time Out NY's Best New Neighborhood Spot. Vote!
• Some elementary schools are still hosting open houses before the March 1 kindergarten application deadline…
…and our new elementary school will be named after Maurice Sendak.
• Puppetworks is struggling through the school bus strike. Check out one of their public shows!
• We prepared for Nemo. (And then we played in it!)
• The V-Spot owner Alex Carabano competed on the premiere of CBS's "The Job."
• Die Koelner Bierhalle is in the middle of its weeklong Koln Karneval festival.
• Community Board 6 is looking to honor youth who have made positive contributions to the community.
• And finally, BAM and the Brooklyn Public Library have ongoing film screenings in honor of Black History Month that are well worth checking out.
Photo via Don Doherty