National, International, Armenia, and Community News and Opinion

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Armenian Reporter | November 8, 2008NationalWashington briefingby Emil SanamyanRegional leaders offercourtesies to PresidentelectObamaFollowing the election of BarackObama as president on November4, foreign leaders communicatedtheir desire to strengthen their respectivecountries’ relations withthe United States.In congratulatory messages,President of Armenia Serge Sargsianand President of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic Bako Sahakianspoke of a “new quality” inrelations and “epochal changes” inworld politics that they expect theObama presidency to bring about.In his message, Mr. Sargsian underscoredthe importance of theArmenian-American community,which “repeatedly conveyed” toArmenia’s president “their enthusiasmfor the changes” Mr. Obamahas promised the American people.n Continued from page But the very fact of the declarationis likely to renew expectationsfor a peaceful settlement and providefor an important milestone inthe peace process. Not since May1992 have the presidents of Armeniaand Azerbaijan signed a declarationof this kind.Russian mediation, coming soonafter the war in Georgia and Russianrecognition of South Ossetiaand Abkhazia, is meant to reaffirmRussia’s leadership role in theSouth Caucasus.No commitment to thenonuse of forceThe tortured language of the declarationis almost as important inwhat it painstakingly avoids to saythrough omission or deliberatevagueness as in what it says.The first point commits the partiesto a “political settlement ofthe Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.”Importantly, it does not commitparties to maintain the cease-fire inplace or the nonuse of force.A political settlement, the declarationsays, would be on “the basisof principles and norms of internationallaw and solutions and documentsadopted in their frames.” Itdoes not mention territorial integrityor self-determination or anyspecific solution or document.The second point refers to developing“basic principles of a politicalsettlement” in the future. Importantly,it refers to the “meeting” betweenthe mediators, Armenia, andBoth Armenian presidentsstressed the role the United Statesis playing as a supporter of Armeniaand a mediator in the Karabakhpeace process.Also noting the mediating role ofthe United States was Azerbaijan’sPresident Ilham Aliyev, who inhis message appeared to hold outhope that the United States wouldhelp Azerbaijan to “put an end toArmenia’s aggression and liberateour occupied territories.” Mr. Aliyevalso underscored a “strategicpartnership” between two countriesbased on Azerbaijan’s oil salesto the United States.Both Azerbaijani and Turkishcommentators expressed concernsabout Mr. Obama’s pledge toproperly recognize the ArmenianGenocide. Speaking in reference tothe issue, Prime Minister RecebTayyip Erdogan expressed “hopethat some theses raised during theelection campaign will stay there,”in the past, as campaign issues; healso noted the “strategic nature”of bilateral ties, Turkish media reported.From Georgia, one of the fewcountries in the world where thepublic was more sympathetic to Sen.John McCain’s foreign policy approach,leader Mikheil Saakashvilialso highlighted positive expectationsfrom President-elect Obama.In televised remarks reported bywww.Civil.ge, Mr. Saakashvili citedMr. Obama’s supportive commentsand the role played by Vice President–electJoe Biden in securingthe pledge of $1 billion in U.S. assistanceto Georgia following theAugust war with Russia.A congratulatory telegram fromRussia’s President Dmitry Medvedevhad perhaps the most reservedtone. In a message posted to www.Kremlin.ru, Mr. Medvedev said he“counts on a constructive dialogue[with President Obama] based onAzerbaijan during the OSCE Ministerialin Madrid in November 2007,rather than the principles offered bythe mediators at that meeting. Ineffect the declaration leaves roomfor a substantial deviation from theso-called Madrid principles.The third point stresses the needfor “legally binding internationalguarantees of all . . . aspects andstages” of a peaceful settlement.The purpose of this point is not immediatelyclear. But it does mention“peaceful settlement” and “internationalguarantees” favored byArmenia, and “stages” favored byAzerbaijan.The fourth point reiterates thepresidents’ commitment to continuewith the settlement formatin place since 1999 – bilateral meetingsof the foreign ministers of Armeniaand Azerbaijan along withthe three co-chairs, with occasionalmeetings of the two presidents.The fifth point refers to the needfor “confidence-building measures.”Such measures have long been advocatedby Armenia and the mediators;but far from committing Azerbaijanto dropping its hate rhetoricand implementing such measures,the declaration only stresses theimportance of “promoting the creationof conditions” for the implementationof such measures.The absence of any possibly controversialpassage from the declarationconfirms the impression thatthe Russian mediators wanted verymuch to have the Armenian andAzerbaijani presidents sign a jointdeclaration at the end of the summitinitiated by Russia.Vahan Hovhannesian. Photo: Photolure.trust and consideration of eachother’s interests” in order to promotebilateral cooperation “for thecause of international peace andsecurity.”U.S. diplomats,Armeniancommentators disagreeon trends in U.S.Caucasus policyAlthough Barack Obama ran withthe slogan “The change we need,”American diplomats posted in theCaucasus say they do not expectU.S.’ regional priorities to change.The Democratic candidate renewedhis pledge on the ArmenianGenocide and stronger relationswith Armenia in a statement releasedon the eve of the election.Nevertheless, the Regnum newsagency cited a spokesperson for theU.S. Embassy in Azerbaijan, TerryDavidson, telling Azerbaijanis“not to fear” Mr. Obama’s pledgesto speak clearly on the ArmenianGenocide, and promising continuityin U.S. regional policy.An importantmilestoneAlthough largely devoid of meaningfulcommitment to a peacefulsettlement, the declaration is neverthelesshistorically important,since only twice before have leadersof Armenia and Azerbaijan signeddeclarations committing themselvesto finding a settlement ofthe Karabakh conflict.The first was a joint communiqué(declaration) signed on September23, 1991, in Zhelznovodsk,Russia, by Presidents Levon Ter-Petrossian and Ayaz Mutalibov,with President Boris Yeltsin ofRussia and President NursultanNazarbayev of Kazakhstan. Thatdeclaration pledged a cease-fireand the annulment of both Armenia’sdecision to reunify with Karabakhand of Azerbaijan’s decisionto abolish Karabakh’s autonomy;the declaration was followed by intensificationin violence and a fullscalewar in Karabakh.The last time Armenian and Azerbaijaniheads of state signed a jointdeclaration was in Tehran on May7, 1992. That declaration was signedby President Ter-Petrossian, Azerbaijan’sacting president YaqubMamedov, and Iran’s PresidentAli Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani.The declaration was followed by thefirst major Armenian military successin Karabakh – the liberation ofShushi – and the subsequent overthrowof Mr. Mamedov.President Ter-Petrossian andPresident Heydar Aliyev later accededto declarations by the headsBut Ruben Safrastian, a Yerevan-basedTurkey expert, cautionedagainst expectations that the UnitedStates could influence Armenian-Turkish relations. He said, “Turkey’sapproach toward Armenia can onlychange through a fundamental reassessmentof the priorities of theTurkish elite, which needs considerabletime to play out.”At the same time, Mr. Safrastianremained hopeful that changes inU.S. policy under the new presidentwould occur. In particular, U.S. affirmationof the Armenian Genocidewill now be “more realistic” andwould contribute to strengtheningof U.S.-Armenia relations, he said.Vahan Hovhannesian, a NationalAssembly member from theARF, similarly suggested that theelection result provides Armenian-American organizations with “newserious opportunities for promotingArmenian interests.”of state of the Commonwealth ofIndependent States (CIS) in Moscowin April 1994 and the Conferencefor Security and Cooperationin Europe (CSCE) in Budapest inDecember 1994 that called for effortsto achieve a peaceful settlementof the Karabakh conflict,which continue to this day.The May 1994 cease-fire agreement,mediated by Russia, wassigned by the speakers of parliamentof Armenia, Azerbaijan, and the Nagorno-KarabakhRepublic, and subsequentlyendorsed by the defenseministers of the three republics.Russian leadershipMore than anything, the MeiendorfCastle declaration of November 2sought to underscore the leadershiprole played by Russia in theSouth Caucasus.Early international mediation effortsin the Karabakh conflict weremarked by competition betweenRussia and the West over who wasbest suited to help reach an agreementand, by extension, lead apeacekeeping mission in Karabakh.By 1994 a compromise solution wasfound, where Russia would co-chairthe CSCE (later OSCE) Minsk Group,with European countries rotating asthe other co-chair every year.In early 1997, Russia agreed to afurther compromise, establishing apermanent troika of France, Russia,and the United States. A June23, 1997, declaration by PresidentsJacques Chirac, Boris Yeltsin,and Bill Clinton in Denver (duringa G8 Economic Summit) gavehigh-level political support to theMoscow declaration onKarabakh welcomed,analyzed in the WestAlthough France and the UnitedStates were not involved in draftingof the Moscow declaration on thesettlement of the Karabakh conflict,the document is nevertheless“totally supported” by the UnitedStates, Deputy Assistant Secretaryof State and envoy to the Karabakhtalks Matt Bryza told Azerbaijanimedia on November 2 and 3.Mr. Bryza and his French colleaguewere invited to the summitbetween the Russian, Armenian,and Azerbaijan presidents, but apparentlywere kept out of the trilateraltalks held near Moscow on November2, Mr. Bryza told the TrendNews Agency.While hosting Azerbaijan’s PresidentIlham Aliyev in Ankara onNovember 5, his Turkish counterpartAbdullah Gül similarly expressedsupport for the declaration.A statement by the Turkish ForeignMinistry carried by news agencieson November 6 similarly expressedAnkara’s desire to “contribute” tothe conflict’s settlement via mediationby France, Russia, and theUnited States.While most Western commentatorssought to downplay thedeclaration’s importance, RadioFree Europe/Radio Liberty’s leadingCaucasus expert Liz Fuller describedit as a “victory for Armenia.”In a November 3 analysis, she particularlynoted that while PresidentAliyev previously threatened waragainst Armenia, has now pledgeda political solution to the issue.Writing for Eurasianet.org onNovember 4, the Russia-skepticStephen Blank noted that while“Moscow’s opposition to the use offorce can be justified for many reasons,but it also is probably the onlyway Baku could ever stand a realisticchance of recovering its lost lands.All of this means that Russia has imposedlimits on Azerbaijan’s negotiatingposition, leaving Baku in an extremelydisadvantageous position.”Azerbaijan ceased issuing publicthreats of going to war after the Georgianattack on South Ossetia resultedin a massive response by Russia.A report by the InternationalCrisis Group (ICG) on October 29suggested that even though Azerbaijanhad spent some $4.5 billionon its armed forces in recent years,“for now at least, the delicate militarybalance with Armenia probablystill holds.”The ICG report also complainedabout the lack of even basic publicoversight over Azerbaijani governmentspending, but noted that “amodern and efficient army, even ifsubject to democratic, civilian control,is not unproblematic while theloss of Nagorno-Karabakh remainsdeeply resented.”fRussia brokers Armenia-Azerbaijan declaration on Karabakhformat that continues to this day.After the failure of the three troikaproposals in 1997–98 to achievea breakthrough, the United Statestook the initiative in the mediationprocess, brokering a direct meetingbetween Presidents Heydar Aliyevand Robert Kocharian in April1999 during the NATO Summit inWashington. That effort culminatedin the near-agreement at KeyWest, Florida, in April 2001.Following the U.S. attempts, itwas Mr. Chirac’s turn to hold Armenia-Azerbaijansummits. But ahigh-level meeting between PresidentsKocharian and Ilham Aliyevat Rambouillet in February 2006and other France-led efforts alsofailed to produce a breakthrough.Significantly, neither U.S. norFrench efforts produced any jointdeclarations, even of the watereddownkind made at the Russianpresident’s Meiendorf castle.Likely impactAt this time, the Karabakh standoffoffers no attractive solutionsto either Armenia or Azerbaijan.The most recent effort by Russia isunlikely to contribute to an actualsettlement, since such settlementpresents both the sides and mediatorswith more problems than thecurrent status quo.The peace process serves as akind of a pressure release valve inthe uneasy and dangerous standoffover Karabakh. The Moscowdeclaration can provide this processwith a fresh lease on life, makingthe existing relative peace just alittle more durable.f
The Armenian Reporter | November 8, 2008InternationalThe Maiendorf Declaration: reactions fromArmenia, Nagorno-Karabakh, and Azerbaijanby Tatul HakobyanYEREVAN – The three co-chairs ofthe OSCE Minsk Group on November6 met in Vienna to discuss Russia’smediation effort in the Karabakhpeace process and the resultsof the meeting of the presidents ofArmenia, Azerbaijan, and Russiain Moscow. Matthew Bryza, theAmerican co-chair, announced thatthe Moscow Declaration made itclear that henceforth negotiationswill continue based on the MadridPrinciples. “The issue of whetherthe Madrid Principles was on theagenda or not has been resolvedwith this declaration. All the effortsgeared toward resolving thisconflict from now on will be basedupon the those founding principles,”Mr. Bryza said.Yuri Merzlyakov of the RussianFederation, Bernard Fassierof France, Deputy Assistant Secretaryof State Bryza, and AndrzejKasprzyk, the Personal Representativeof the OSCE Chairman-in-Office on the Nagorno-Karabakhconflict, talked to journalists aftertheir address to the OSCE PermanentCouncil. “There are personalfactors and objective factors in theregion that give us co-chairs a reasonfor some cautious optimism orrealistic optimism,” said Mr. Bryza.“Among the personal factors,the November 2 Moscow meetingconfirmed the constructivespirit of their first St Petersburgmeeting last June. This constructivespirit allowed them to signthe first-ever declaration on theNagorno-Karabakh peace process,”Mr. Fassier said. He cited discussionsbetween Ankara and Yerevanamong the positive factors.Among the “objective factors,”was the crisis in Georgia. The cochairssaid that Armenia felt thefragile character of their lines ofcommunication for imports and exportsthrough Georgia. Azerbaijanfelt deeply the vulnerability of theso-called energy corridor throughGeorgia.“The Moscow meeting, thoughprepared long in advance in a bilateralway, Russia-Armenia, Russia-Azerbaijan,nevertheless is inthe framework in the Minsk Groupco-chair countries’ efforts of mediation,”said Mr. Merzlyakov.Mr. Kasprzyk noted that an estimated25 people died this yearon the front lines of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and highlightedthat such incidents were detrimentalto the peace process.The Minsk Group co-chairs planto visit the region in the weeks priorto the OSCE Ministerial Council,scheduled in Helsinki on December4–5, to work with the partiesto build on the recently establishedmomentum and to try to find amutually acceptable solution to thelast remaining differences betweenthem.Does Karabakh get asay in its fate?The tripartite declaration, signedby the presidents of Armenia andAzerbaijan on November 2 at MeiendorfCastle near Moscow, mediatedby the president of Russia, isthe first document following the1994 ceasefire agreement to bearthe signatures of the presidents ofthe two countries involved in theKarabakh conflict.But the document is also the firstsince 1994 that does not bear thesignature of the main party to theconflict – Nagorno-Karabakh. InFrom left, Presidents Aliyev, Medvedev, and Sargsian on Nov. 2. Photo: Photolure.1994, Vladimir Kazimirov, whowas the Russian mediator and themain proponent of stopping thebloodshed in Karabakh, at thattime attached great importance toStepanakert’s involvement and signatureon all documents. The Bishkekprotocol and Moscow’s agreementthat were signed that year hadthe signatures of Karen Baburyan,the speaker of Nagorno-Karabakh’sparliament and Samvel Babayan,the minister of defense.The reactions to the Meiendorfdeclaration are different in Yerevan,Stepanakert, and Baku. ForeignMinister Edward Nalbandianassesses the Dmitri Medvedev- Serge Sargsian - Ilham Aliyevmeeting as successful and productive,since “the signing of the declarationwill assist the future processof the negotiations and the politicalresolution of the Karabakh conflict,within the framework of the MinskGroup and the Madrid principals.”The opposition is worried. In aninterview with A1+, Levon Ter-Petrossian, the first president ofArmenia, said, “That document issimply the tip of the iceberg. Other,more detailed documents lie beneathit.” Mr. Ter-Petrossian is concernedbecause the Madrid proposalstipulates that the harmonizationof the two principles of territorialintegrity and the self-determinationof nations will be the basis forthe Karabakh settlement. Duringhis last public appearance at a politicalrally, Mr. Ter-Petrossian saidthat according to the Madrid principles,“Armenia would be forced toreturn most of the liberated territoriesoutside of Nagorno-Karabakh,except for the Lachin corridor, toAzerbaijan.”The Moscow Declaration “speaksof the necessity of resolving theKarabakh issue through the directdialogue underway between Azerbaijanand Armenia. De facto, anew formula is being set for theconflicting sides. This declarationburies the decision adopted atthe OSCE 1994 Budapest summit,where NKR was recognized as thethird legitimate side in the conflict.This means that NKR will not havea role in the negotiation processesthat will determine its fate,” saidMr. Ter-Petrossian.The first president underscoredthat with Mr. Sargsian’s and Mr.Aliyev’s signatures under the Meiendorfdeclaration, “the final stageof the settlement of the Karabakhconflict has been announced.”On October 25, in an interviewwith Armenia’s Public TV, Mr. Sargsianconfirmed that the resolutionof the Karabakh conflict hasentered a new active stage. “Thesettlement of the Karabakh issueis possible if Azerbaijan recognizesthe right for self-determinationof the people of NKR; if NKR has aland border with Armenia, and internationalorganizations and leadingcountries guarantee the safetyof the people of Karabakh,” saidMr. Sargsian.Stepanakert is notsatisfiedGeorgi Petrossian, the foreignminister of Nagorno-Karabakh,said that the meeting at Meiendorfwas an attempt to clarify therespective positions of Armeniaand Azerbaijan through politicalmeans, taking into considerationthe changes in the region after theevents of August.Mr. Petrossian believes that inorder for the resolution process tomove forward, NKR, which has fulfilledall international obligations,must be a full partner in the negotiations.“If Azerbaijan was trulyinterested in the resolution of theconflict, then they would have satdown at the negotiating table withNKR a long time ago, instead of applyingto different internationalbodies to apply pressure on NKRand to cloud international publicopinion,” Mr. Petrossian said.Political analyst Davit Babayan,head of the information office ofthe president of Nagorno-Karabakhsaid during an interview withthe Armenian Reporter that in thedeclaration, “there is no mention ofNagorno-Karabakh nor the Karabakhside.“Isn’t that an attempt to shift theKarabakh conflict to the level of aterritorial argument between Armeniaand Azerbaijan? Such an inclinationis present, but, nevertheless,not decisive. First of all ‘Armenian-Azerbaijaniconflict’ or ‘Conflicton Nagorno-Karabakh’ is notmentioned in any of the points inthe declaration, which not only defacto, but also from the legal aspectwould mean a territorial dispute.Secondly, from the declaration’stext it is evident that Stepanakert’sparticipation is expected,” said Mr.Babayan.Gegham Baghdasarian, an independentmember of the Nagorno-Karabakh parliament, thinks thatthe true evaluation of the documentwill be the steps taken arisingfrom it.“In order to give a complete evaluationof the document, it is necessaryto be aware of all the information.In other words, apart from beingaware of the text, one must alsobe aware of the behind-the-doordiscussions in Moscow and the oralagreements. Since we do not possessthe relevant information, thenour analyses and evaluations aregoing to concern the visible part ofthe iceberg: the text of the declaration.As far as the main wordingis concerned, then it is not verycertain what the president had inmind when agreeing that peace settlementshould be accompanied bylegally binding guarantees for everyaspect and stage of the settlementprocess,” Mr. Baghdasariantold the Armenia Reporter.Vahram Atanesian, chair ofthe Permanent Committee on ForeignAffairs of the parliament ofNagorno-Karabakh noted that allsuch documents can be interpretedin many ways and the Moscow declarationwill not be an exception.“A new name, Moscow Declaration,is being put into circulation.The difference is that in the pastwe were talking about verbal agreements,but today we are dealingwith a signed document. As I see it,Nagorno-Karabakh’s willingness tojoin in or not in the declaration andto take on the responsibility or notis going to be fundamental. It seemsthat in the near future the mediatorsare going to concentrate theirefforts to carry out so called ‘explanatorywork’ in Nagorno-Karabakh.They can outline at least some factorsafter those contacts, but meanwhilethe mediators should not overestimate Armenia’s influence onNKR,” said Atanesian.Armen Sarkissian, the only ARFmember of Nagorno-Karabakh’sparliament, characterized negotiationswithout Karabakh’s participationas “absurd.”“The Madrid Principles are unacceptablefor Nagorno-Karabakh,as Nagorno-Karabakh’s self-determinationis brought under question.De facto, an attempt is beingmade to accept the principles andforce them on Karabakh. Withoutthe participation of Karabakh, thenegotiations are condemned tofailure,” Mr. Sarkissian said to theArmenian Reporter.Full text of the declarationThe declaration, adopted by thepresidents of Azerbaijan, Armenia,and Russia at Meiendorf castle nearMoscow on November 2, was publiclyread out by Russia’s PresidentDmitry Medvedev. This ArmenianReporter translation is based on thetranscript circulated by the Regnumnews agency.The presidents of the AzerbaijaniRepublic, the Republic of Armenia,and the Russian Federation, havingmet in Moscow on November2, 2008, on the invitation of thepresident of the Russian Federation,and having discussed in aconstructive atmosphere directlyand in detail the status and prospectsof the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakhconflict by politicalmeans, through direct dialoguebetween Azerbaijan and Armeniawith mediation by Russia, theUnited States, and France as cochairsof the OSCE Minsk Group,1. Declare that they shall contributeto the establishment of ahealthier situation in the SouthCaucasus and securing regionalstability and security througha political settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakhconflict on thebasis of principles and norms ofinternational law and solutionsThe oppositionin Azerbaijan isdissatisfiedChief of the international relationsdepartment of the Azerbaijan’spresident’s office Novruz Mammadovdescribed the Moscow Declarationas “very important” and“the beginning of a new phase in the14-year-long, complicated and difficultprocess of negotiations. I thinkthe process should be accelerated becauseof Russia’s active involvementin the process and the documentsigned directly by the presidents,”he told APA Azeri news agency.Member of the Political Councilof the ruling New Azerbaijan PartyAydin Mirzazade stated that theactivation of Russia in the settlementof the Nagorno-Karabakhconflict will accelerate its solution.“Signing of declaration means acceptanceof juridical obligations, whichis a positive milestone,” he said.The opposition in Azerbaijan, is,however, first of all dissatisfied andconcerned that the declaration hasbeen signed at Russia’s initiative.Independent political scientistVafa Guluzade (advisor to previouspresidents Mutalibov, Elchibey,and Aliyev Senior; he conductedthe Karabakh negotiations in the90s) said “the document is profitableonly for Armenia and Russia. Ifpreviously Armenia suspected thatAzerbaijan could attack, now theyhave the document and can sleepquietly.”The Musavat Party (the party’sleader Isa Gambar was the actingpresident of Azerbaijan for ashort period of time in 1992) issueda statement which said thatthe joint declaration and its pointsabout the Madrid proposals placeAzerbaijan in an unacceptable positionabout the future status ofNagorno-Karabakh. “Solving theNagorno-Karabakh problem on thebasis of the Madrid proposals putthe issues of Azerbaijan’s territorialintegrity and sovereignty underserious question.”The Azerbaijan Democratic Partyvalued the Moscow talks andRussia’s attempt to take the initiativeunilaterally as revenge for theMinsk Group members’ intentionsto dismiss Moscow for its actionsagainst Georgia. The party arguedthat the 2007 Madrid principles arecontrary to international law andsolution of the problem on the basisof these principles has no prospectsand doesn’t guarantee longtermpeace in the region. fand documents adopted in theirframes, that would create favorableconditions for economic developmentand all-encompassingcooperation in the region;2. Confirm the importance ofcontinued efforts by the OSCEMinsk Group co-chairs, with considerationof their meeting withthe sides in Madrid on November29, 2007, and subsequent discussionsaiming at the developmentof basic principles of a politicalsettlement in the future;3. Agree that the achievementof a peaceful settlement must beaccompanied by legally bindinginternational guarantees of all ofits aspects and stages.4. Note that the presidents ofAzerbaijan and Armenia agreedto continue to work on the developmentof a political settlementof the Nagorno-Karabakhconflict, including through futurehigh-level contacts, and instructtheir foreign ministers to activatefurther steps in the negotiationsprocess, including in cooperationwith the OSCE Minsk Group;5. Consider important promotingthe creation of conditionsfor implementation of confidencebuildingmeasures in the contextof efforts toward settlement. f
Page 1 and 2: ProfessorYeritsyan’simmeasurablew
Page 3: Number 87November 8, 2008the armeni
Page 7 and 8: The Armenian Reporter | November 8,

National, International, Armenia, and Community News and Opinion

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?