Defenselink.mil
March 31 2004
Change Only Constant in European Command, General Says
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, March 30, 2004 – Change is the only constant in U.S.
European Command — that’s the not-so-subtle message of the
organization’s commander in prepared testimony for the House Armed
Services Committee March 24.
Marine Gen. James L. Jones said that the command has been involved in
the overall war on terrorism. It also is positioning itself to
provide support in the future and help allies counter the growing
terror threat.
“EUCOM’s greatest contribution to security and stability lies as much
in preventing conflict as it does in prevailing on the battlefield,”
Jones said in written testimony. “This is accomplished through
influence and engaged leadership, and is sustained only through our
enduring and visible presence and commitment.”
Change is the constant. The general said many of the issues that now
drive events in the region were impossible to predict. “Expanding
theater security- cooperation requirements, an expanding NATO,
instability in Africa and Eastern Europe and the global war on
terrorism largely define ongoing changes and require a comprehensive
review of EUCOM’s theater strategy,” he said. “Today’s security
environment has been fundamentally changed by enemies without
territory, without borders and without fixed bases.”
At the same time, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is changing
also. Not only is the alliance expanding, but it is also seeking new
capabilities – many tied to U.S. capabilities. “A transformed NATO,
with greater agility, capability, and a new vision for engagement
outside its traditional area, will be an essential and more capable
partner for the United States,” he said. “We should welcome and fully
support this historic change in the alliance.”
Jones said the command must become more agile, lethal and responsive
to face the threats of the 21st century. “(European Command) is
ideally positioned to engage, disrupt, dismantle and prevent
terrorists from using their lines of communication and methods of
resourcing which are critical to their ability to both operate and
sustain themselves,” he said.
European Command’s Strategic Theater Transformation Plan – part of
DoD’s Global Posture Review – will permit the command “to transform
itself in such a way as to be better able to meet the diverse
challenges of this new century,” Jones said.
At its base, the plan calls for a fundamental realignment of basing
concepts, access and force capabilities. The changes in both NATO and
the command are needed and are mutually supporting, Jones said. “By
its leadership and example, (European Command) supports both the
alliance in its transformation as well as NATO member nations
undergoing their own internal transformation.”
In his testimony, Jones said the command will continue studies to
reduce and realign “legacy” infrastructure in Europe. Many bases are
leftovers of the Cold War, well suited for defending Western Europe,
but for little else. Jones said the command also reassessed “the
manner in which our forces are deployed and assigned to this theater
from the United States.”
This last included reorienting U.S. forces toward the southeast and
south to more suitably reflect the command’s expanding strategic
responsibilities. “In addition to being joint, agile, sustainable and
highly mobile, future forces operating in our region will be a
combination of both permanently based and rotational units,” he said.
The command is also looking at concepts that capitalize on innovation
to maintain old capabilities and create new ones. “Simply put, the
traditional military principle of ‘mass’ no longer equates to
commitment or capability,” the general said. “We will continue to
re-tailor our forces based on an expeditionary model much better
suited to meet the demands of the 21st century.”
An expeditionary approach means new manning models. At its heart, the
general foresees a series of smaller forward operating bases and
forward operating locations strategically located throughout the
region. “Such bases will be anchored to several existing joint main
operating bases, which are of enduring strategic value and remain
essential to theater force projection, throughput and sustainment,”
he said.
Prepositioning equipment and supplies will be a part of this effort.
“This will augment this basing plan by allowing units to ‘fall in’ on
essential equipment that will capitalize on the strategic advantage
of being an ‘ocean closer’ to engagement, influence and conflict,” he
said. “This new basing plan … will help effectively posture our
forces, in order to counter current and future threats.”
Of concern to the command are not only ongoing operations in Iraq,
but the so- called “arc of instability” in its area of operations.
Efforts may prevent terrorists from using the nations of that area as
a safe haven. These include the Caucasus states, such as Azerbaijan,
Georgia and Armenia. Another such area is the Levant region: Cyprus,
Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestinian territories and Syria. The third
is “ungoverned” regions of North and West Africa. –
Jones said due to successful operations in Afghanistan and Iraq,
terrorists “are moving into regions where nations already struggle
with explosive population growth, resource scarcity, weak national
institutions and ineffective militaries.”

New York Times
March 31 2004
Starved for Safety
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
DRÉ, Chad – So why is Africa such a mess?
To answer that question, let me tell you about a 34-year-old man who
limped over to me at this oasis in eastern Chad. “My name is Moussa
Tamadji Yodi,” he said in elegant French, “and I’m a teacher. . . . I
just crossed the border yesterday from Sudan. I was beaten up and
lost everything.”
Mr. Yodi, a college graduate, speaks French, Arabic, English and two
African languages. During the decades of Chad’s civil war, he fled
across the border into the Darfur region of Sudan to seek refuge.
Now Darfur has erupted into its own civil war and genocide. Mr. Yodi
told how a government-backed Arab militia had stopped his truck – the
equivalent of a public bus – and forced everyone off. The troops let
some people go, robbed and beat others, and shot one young man in the
head, probably because he was from the Zaghawa tribe, which the Arab
militias are trying to wipe out.
“Nobody reacted,” Mr. Yodi said. “We were all afraid.”
So now Mr. Yodi is a refugee for a second time, fleeing another civil
war. And that is a window into Africa’s central problem: insecurity.
There is no formula for economic development. But three factors seem
crucial: security, market-oriented policies and good governance.
Botswana is the only African country that has enjoyed all three in
the last 40 years, and it has been one of the fastest-growing
economies in the world. And when these conditions applied, Uganda,
Ghana, Mozambique and Rwanda boomed.
But the African leaders who cared the most about their people, like
Julius Nyerere of Tanzania or Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, tended to adopt
quasi-socialist policies that hurt their people. In recent decades,
Africans did much better ruled with capitalism than with compassion.
These days, African economic policies are more market-oriented, and
governance is improving. The big civil wars are winding down. All
this leaves me guardedly optimistic.
Yet Africa’s biggest problem is still security. The end of the cold
war has seen a surge in civil conflict, partly because great powers
no longer stabilize client states. One-fifth of Africans live in
nations shaken by recent wars. My Times colleague Howard French
forcefully scolds the West in his new book, “A Continent for the
Taking,” for deliberately looking away from eruptions of unspeakable
violence.
One lesson of the last dozen years is that instead of being purely
reactive, helpfully bulldozing mass graves after massacres, African
and Western leaders should try much harder to stop civil wars as they
start. The world is now facing a critical test of that principle in
the Darfur region of Sudan, where Arab militias are killing and
driving out darker-skinned African tribespeople. While the world now
marks the 10th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide and solemnly
asserts that this must never happen again, it is.
Some 1,000 people are dying each week in Sudan, and 110,000 refugees,
like Mr. Yodi, have poured into Chad. Worse off are the 600,000
refugees within Sudan, who face hunger and disease after being driven
away from their villages by the Arab militias.
“They come with camels, with guns, and they ask for the men,” Mr.
Yodi said. “Then they kill the men and rape the women and steal
everything.” One of their objectives, he added, “is to wipe out
blacks.”
This is not a case when we can claim, as the world did after the
Armenian, Jewish and Cambodian genocides, that we didn’t know how bad
it was. Sudan’s refugees tell of mass killings and rapes, of women
branded, of children killed, of villages burned – yet Sudan’s
government just stiffed new peace talks that began last night in
Chad.
So far the U.N. Security Council hasn’t even gotten around to
discussing the genocide. And while President Bush, to his credit,
raised the issue privately in a telephone conversation last week with
the president of Sudan, he has not said a peep about it publicly.
It’s time for Mr. Bush to speak out forcefully against the slaughter.
This is not just a moral test of whether the world will tolerate
another genocide. It’s also a practical test of the ability of
African and Western governments alike to respond to incipient civil
wars while they can still be suppressed. Africa’s future depends on
the outcome, and for now it’s a test we’re all failing.

Pasadena Star-News, CA
March 31 2004
Community reaches out to Marshall
Students urged to work toward ending racial violence
By Gretchen Hoffman , Staff Writer
PASADENA — Community members urged students to open their minds to
diversity and take control of their school at cultural awareness
assemblies held Tuesday in response to fights earlier this month at
Marshall Fundamental High School.
A dozen students were suspended then transferred out of Marshall
after fights broke out March 5 and three students were injured . Nine
of the students were also cited by Pasadena Unified School District
police, and the school was locked down for hours.
The altercations started with a fight between two students, an
Armenian American and an African American who had been suspended
earlier in the week for fighting, and expanded to include others.
Students, parents and school officials have repeatedly stressed that
it was a fight between individuals rather than a racial issue, but
community meetings since then have stressed the need for better
interracial relations at the school and in the community at large.
“We’re very concerned when you draw lines and say, ‘ I’m on this
side, you’re on that side,’ ‘ PUSD Assistant Superintendent George
McKenna said at the assembly.
“If two people fight and 10 people watch, 12 people are guilty,’
McKenna said. “They’re participating and permitting the existence of
violence.’
McKenna said community leaders have been meeting and will form a
coalition to focus on events at the school. Leaders will return to
the school in two weeks after spring break to solicit input from
students, he said.
Krikor Satamian, chairman of the Pasadena Armenian Police Advisory
Council, told students to embrace the diversity found at Marshall.
“This is the time for you to learn about other people,’ Satamian
said. “Get along with people that’s your advantage here and that’s
what will help you when you leave here.’
Local real estate broker Aaron Abdus Shakoor told students to
remember that, despite racial or ethnic differences, everyone comes
from “one family.’
“When you’re talking and the conflict arises, try to sit down,’ Abdus
Shakoor said. “It’s very difficult to fight when you’re sitting
down.’
The school is continuing its conflict- resolution programs, which
were in place before the recent fights, and officials urged students
to take responsibility for keeping the peace at Marshall.
“I think there are too many young people going to jail and I want it
to stop,’ PUSD Police Chief Mike Trevis said. “You’ve got the power
to make it stop. You see people dogging each other, say ‘Hey, stop it
now.’ ‘
Suzanne Berberian, a community liaison specialist with the PUSD, said
bridges have been built between various segments of the community
over the past few weeks.
“I see a bright future because I see us as a school community coming
together,’ Berberian said. “It brought us together and made all of us
pay attention to each other.’

Interfax
March 31 2004
Deno invests $3 mln in Armenian mine
Yerevan. (Interfax) – Deno of Switzerland invested $3 million in the
first stage of an investment program for the Kapan Ore- Dressing
Plant or GOK in Armenia.
The money was spent on acquiring materials and on repairs, the
plantTs general director, Martun Akopyan, told Interfax.
The second stage of the program will need about $7.5 million and is
to take two years, during which a processing factory will be built.
After privatization, Kapan GOK tripled ore production and processing
to 30,000 tonnes a month.
Kapan GOK produced 300,000 tonnes of ore in 2003, and plans to
produce 450,000 tonnes in 2004. It exports concentrates to processing
companies in China and Belgium. Output totaled $4.5 million in 2003
and is planned at $12 million in 2004.

Transitions Online, Week in Review
23 – 29 March 2004
ARMENIA: A GATHERING STORM?
As the opposition prepares to challenge the president, Kocharian and his
government play the good cop/bad cop routine.
YEREVAN, Armenia–An increasingly defiant, more unified opposition, a
government out on the road meeting the people, and a president changing
senior figures in law-enforcement agencies: these three recent developments
are being taken as signs that, a year after deeply flawed presidential
elections, Armenia may be on the cusp of a fresh, large-scale political
battle.
The battle will become a little clearer on 31 March, when the opposition is
expected to announce that it will hold a rally in mid-April with the aim of
forcing President Robert Kocharian to step down.
This will be days after a demonstration on 2 April to mark the second
anniversary of Armenia’s leading independent TV channel A1 Plus. Despite its
popularity and international calls for greater media plurality, A1 Plus has
repeatedly been refused a TV license, with the government-appointed
commission usually opting to give licenses instead to new or inexperienced
producers. A1 Plus has said it may hold rolling demonstrations unless the
government meets its demands for the license tenders to be re-opened, with
civil-society members on the selection commission.
The demonstrations represent a gamble by the opposition. It has a record of
disunity and question marks hang over the size of the crowds that it will
draw. While the A1 Plus issue has angered many and while the station was
very popular, demonstrations two years ago garnered between 5,000 and
10,000. Crowds of up to 40,000 protesters gathered after the presidential
elections in 2003.
The opposition, however, is showing more unity than in the past. The joint
organizers of the mid-April demonstration, Artarutyun and National Unity,
have in the past accused each other of working with the government and were
widely seen as rivals. Both parties are big players on the political scene:
the rally will bring together the supporters of the man who came second in
the presidential elections, Artarutyun’s Stepan Demirchian, and the man who
came third, National Unity’s Artashes Geghamian.
Moreover, since the presidential elections in 2003, there has been a potent
demonstration of street power in Georgia in the form of the “rose
revolution,” which toppled the country’s long-time president, Eduard
Shevardnadze. In the immediate aftermath of Georgia’s revolution, there was
speculation about whether Armenia might follow Georgia’s lead, but there
were no major demonstrations. That may largely have been due to the wintry
weather, which is a factor in the timing of the new wave of protests.
National Unity had initially been thinking of holding off on demonstrations
until the arrival of warm weather in May.
A FRIENDLIER FACE, BUT A STRONGER HAND
The opposition also are taking hope from the actions of the government and
the president.
In recent weeks, senior ministers have been going out into the provinces and
countryside in a move interpreted as a bid to bolster public support for the
government. It also may be a direct response to ongoing nationwide tours by
members of the opposition.
There also has been some signs of a slightly milder tone by some members of
the governing coalition. In a joint statement on 26 March, representatives
of the three coalition parties–the Republican Party of Armenia, Orinats
Erkir (Country of Law), and the Armenian Revolutionary Federation
(Dashnaktsutyun)–poured some ash on their heads by acknowledging the
existence of many problems (though mainly social) and indicated that 2004
would be a crucial year for the government to deliver on its promises.
The appointment to senior posts of relatives of members of the coalition
might also suggest a rebalancing of power within the coalition.
However, Kocharian himself has struck a harsher tone, attacking the
opposition for having “a tramp’s mentality.” He also has showed a strong
hand. In a move that seems designed to show the opposition that he is firmly
in command of the security services, he fired four district prosecutors on
22 March. The clear-out affected seven of Yerevan’s 11 districts.
On 17 March, he had dismissed Armenia’s prosecutor-general, and sacked or
moved over a dozen senior police officials.
The country’s new prosecutor-general, Aghvan Hovsepian, is a Kocharian
loyalist.
Moreover, the government is not relenting to criticism about its policies
toward the opposition. During the week, the government also presented a
revised draft law to parliament that would in some instances enable the
police to arrest the organizers of mass rallies and would limit the right to
hold demonstrations. The government says the bill matches Council of Europe
standards. However, according to a 26 March report in the opposition daily,
an Armenian delegate to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
(PACE), which Armenia joined in 2001, says that the bill falls short of
European standards.
Armenia has a poor record on political tolerance. After unsanctioned
opposition demonstrations over alleged electoral fraud in 2003, according to
RFE figures, police rounded about 400 supporters of the Artarutyun leader,
Stepan Demirchian. Many were sentenced to 15 days in prison, and reports
suggest that many were denied access to lawyers and their trials were held
behind closed doors.
Armenia’s current criminal code allows the security forces to jail people
briefly without a particular reason.
Fears that similar measures could be taken after the A1 Plus and opposition
demonstrations were heightened on 25 March when a leading member of the
opposition, Victor Dallakian, claimed to have been attacked on 23 March by
three men.
The police have already called the planned 2 April rally illegal.
THE UNDERCURRENT OF VIOLENCE
Kocharian also has demonstrated that he is unconcerned about allegations
regarding the violent nature of some of his appointees, choosing as governor
of the southern Syunik region a man who is accused of being the head of a
criminal gang.
Two nephews of Surik Khachatrian, a leading veteran of the war in
Nagorno-Karabakh, are currently being investigated for murder. RFE reported
that Khachatrian denied any role in the killing, though he did not deny the
guilt of his nephews.
Khachatrian’s appointment is just one of several recent examples of a
violent undercurrent in Armenian politics and among its political elite.
That was shown most explosively on 12 March. Kocharian and his Georgian
counterpart, Mikheil Saakashvili, were having dinner together when a
gunfight erupted in the next-door café. Five men were taken to the hospital.
Among them was the son of the minister for urban development, Ara Aramian.
The minister confirmed that his son had been involved.
Unconfirmed reports suggest that the son of the minister for local
government, Hovik Abrahamian, also was involved.
–by Anna Hakobyan
From: Baghdasarian

[30-03-2004 ‘Region’]
————————————————- ———————
WE WERE RIGHT ON CYPRUS. WHY DID WE END UP HERE?
Source : `Turkish Daily News’ newspaper (Turkey)
Author: Mehmet Ali Birand
BUERGENSTOCK
Seeing all the negotiations being carried out here, international
games being played, all the pressures being exerted; reading the Annan
plan and listening to statements being made, I can’t help asking
myself the same question:
“We were always right on the Cyprus issue. We carried out the 1974
intervention to defend our rights. Then what happened? What happened
that we ended up being the wrong party in the eyes of the
international community? We cannot simply tie this to Greek
propaganda. There must be other reasons as well.”
Am I not right?
Cyprus was our just cause.
We won the support of the international community as well.
Remember the developments until 1974.
We did not forget what certain Greek Cypriot and Greek circles did
after the London and Zurich agreements to destroy the Turkish
community on the island in order to achieve the goal of unification
with Greece. Raids onto Turkish villages by Grivas and his team, their
massacre attempts, their retreat in the face of threats from Turkey
and coming back as soon as things cool down, we all remember these
very well. The last drop to pour the water out of glass came with a
coup carried out by a Greek junta toppling Greek Cypriot leader
Makarios to achieve Enosis.
Turkey had no option but military intervention after this. It was the
Greek junta and their extension in Cyprus that forced Ankara to take
this option. Since the international community was aware of this,
nobody opposed Turkey’s intervention at that time.
Turkey was right.
Then how did it happen that we ended up the unjust party?
Is the whole world setting up a plot against us? Is there a game
being played out in Cyprus to punish us? Did we make a mistake? If we
did make a mistake, where was it?
Looking back, we see a few major mistakes having been made by the
Turkish side.
First mistake: Intervention was two-staged
Turkey’s first big mistake was that it completed the military
intervention in two stages. The first operation was met with
understanding in the international community. But the lack of
sufficient preparation on the part of the Turkish Armed Forces and the
failure to send the needed back-up in time led to a failure to achieve
the military goals in the first stage of the operation.
Then a 4-5 week interval followed. In the meantime, a peace conference
was held in Geneva. There was a proposal to divide the island and
even to create five different cantons. The military operation resumed
when the desired outcome could not be obtained.
But this time the whole world rose up. Turkey, which had received
applause before, became an occupier dividing a poor and defenseless
country. The embargo imposed by the U.S. Congress, reaction from
world parliaments, resolutions passed in these parliaments condemning
Turkey and accusations from the United Nations, all came at that
stage.
The “liberating” Turkey came to be known as the “occupier.”
Second mistake: Not signing the peace deal
You will lose what you won in a military operation if you do not make
peace afterwards. The success will disappear.
We were a most typical example of this.
We kept settling on the island. And while doing it, we sent all the
diseases in Turkey to the island. Instead of creating a model that
would suit the needs of Cypriots, we attempted to create a second
Turkish Republic together with its military and bureaucracy in
Cyprus. We turned a blind eye to international realities. We wasted
the chance to make peace that was offered to us several times.
We kept changing policies.
We first said we intervened in order to restore the order as created
under the 1960 agreements. Then we came up with the thesis of
federation. Then we presented the proposals of confederation and
independence. We failed to win recognition from a single country for
the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC).
We were left alone.
Throughout all these years, Greek Cypriots took clever steps because
they saw better than us the course that the developments had
taken. They turned the last corner by applying to the EU for
membership. The train was missed as Turkey failed to prevent the
membership attempts of Cyprus.
Let’s do better calculations for the future
Now, the last stage is due to be played until May 1.
If Greek Cypriots can reach the date May 2 without becoming the side
who spoils the agreement, they will get what they want. What will
corner them will be incorporation of the Annan plan into Cyprus’
accession treaty. And this may be achieved by May 1. After May 1, they
can easily block the Annan plan because they will have veto right
after that time.
After May 1, the Turkish side may find itself in a position which is
far worse than the Annan plan.
This is the real danger.
Let’s leave conspiracy theories aside and see, perhaps for the first
time, the truths clearly. Let’s derive lessons from past
mistakes. Instead of putting the blame on others, let’s understand our
own realities.
[25-03-2004 ‘Armenia-Azerbaijan’]
———————————————————————-
CLASHES BETWEEN THE MILITARY OF AZERBAIJAN AND ARMENIA IN KOSOVO?
Source : `Echo’ newspaper (Azerbaijan)
Author: H. Aliev, E. Alekperov
Bulgarian news agency reports about the conflict. The Defense
Ministry of the Country Does Not Confirm this Statement
Clashes occurred between the military forces of Azerbaijan and Armenia
stationed in Kosovo. This information was provided by Bulgarian
`Novinar’ news agency. This fact is brought forward by the agency as
one of the proofs of the failure of KFOR peacekeeping forces in
Kosovo. “KFOR-units are able to keep two communities (Serbian and
Albanian – Ed.) apart for a certain period of time, but it cannot last
forever. Moreover, when the contingents of such countries as
Azerbaijan and Armenia serve together in the international coalition”.
According to the reports by `Novinar’, the first clashes took place
already during the transportation of the servicemen via Budapest. The
agency also notes that there is a report of one `person killed’,
however it is not specified who he was – Azerbaijani or Armenian
military man.
In its turn, the Defense Ministry of Azerbaijan refutes the report of
the Bulgarian news agency. The Defense Ministry press-service
reported to `Echo’, that there are no Armenian servicemen in Kosovo
altogether. The press service keeps stating that official Yerevan
planned transportation of the peace contingent within the Greek
battalion. However, as this office reports, the plans of the Armenian
side fell flat. Besides, the press service also emphasized the fact
that Azerbaijani military men are transported to Kosovo via Turkey and
not via Hungarian capital. “Therefore, the reports of the Bulgarian
press do not correspond to reality”.
Commenting on the aggravation of the situation in Kosovo, the press
service noted that `fortunately, our servicemen did not participate in
military conflict”. The press service reported that 32 Azerbaijani
military men are in Gradush village near the city of Grizren.
Meanwhile, despite the statements of the Defense Ministry of the
country, Armenian media officially reported that on February 12 a
platoon of RA armed forces left for Kosovo. “Within the Greek
battalion, the Armenian platoon will participate in peacekeeping
mission in the Balkans”.
It is to be mentioned that the information source within the Defense
Ministry of the country also doubts whether `Novinar’ reports are
true. In its view, the Bulgarian press might confuse details related
to the murder of Armenian serviceman by the Azerbaijani officer Ramil
Safarov. The incident, as it is common knowledge, occurred in
Budapest. At the same time, the source confirmed the reports of the
Bulgarian news agency on the Armenian peacekeeping contingent in
Kosovo. However, according to the source, Armenian military men serve
at quite a distance from Azerbaijani peacekeeping units.
Besides, he noted that Azerbaijani peacekeepers are transported to
Kosovo via Turkey. The expert excludes the possibility of the clash
between the peacekeeping forces of Azerbaijan and Armenia also for the
reason that this information did not leak anywhere. “In case this
happened, international community would be informed”, the source
concluded.
It was also noted that the recent events in Kosovo kept the
Azerbaijani peacekeeping in full fighting capacity.
[23-03-2004 ‘Region’]
———————————————————————-
ANY INITIATIVE ON RECONSIDERATION OF KARS TREATY SHOULD BE SUBSTANTIATED
Source : `Azg’ newspaper (Armenia)
Author: Hakob Chakrian
On March 16, upon the initiative of Writers’ Union of Armenia a forum
of intellectuals was organized. It was devoted to Russian-Turkish
(March 16, 1921) and Kars (October 13, 1921) treaties. The forum
called on RA National Assembly to denounce the Kars Treaty and to
apply to State Duma of the Russian Federation with a claim to annul
the articles of Russian-Turkish treaty concerning Armenia.
What is this initiative conditioned by? The appeal to the National
Assembly on addressing State Duma is still more incomprehensible in
the sense that Kars Treaty is not simply a duplicate of
Russian-Turkish treaty. Russia also has its signature under it
similarly to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey.
In other words, even if State Duma annuls the points of
Russian-Turkish treaty, pertaining to Armenia, still the fact that
Russia signed the Kars Treaty, will not allow RA National Assembly to
abrogate the treaty unilaterally without Russia’s
agreement. Apparently, the initiators of the forum missed this
circumstance, which raises doubts concerning the validity of the
initiative.
Ajarian crisis demonstrated that in the case of Kars Treaty, the
problem lay not only in the validity of reconsideration process but
also in controversial approaches and speculation with these issues on
international level.
Speaking about speculations, I mean Turkey. Its interests clashed with
Georgian and Russian resistance. That is, the problem of Kars Treaty
appeared on the agenda not only in Turkey but also in Georgia and
Russia. With the only difference that if in Armenia it was due to the
initiative of the Writers’ Union, in the countries mentioned it was
the result of the peculiar reaction of the Turkish Ambassador to
Azerbaijan, Unal Chevikoz.
On March 17 in Baku, Chevikoz declared to the journalists that Turkish
authorities, in accordance to Kars Treaty of 1921, are entitled to
deploy troops in Ajaria. Further, he added, `I think no explanations
are required in this aspect. The treaty will remain in force, and it
is already sufficient’. Georgian ambassador to Moscow, Constantine
Kemularia objected to it. He noted that in compliance with the Kars
Treaty, Ajaria cannot hope for the assistance of Turkey. He also
emphasized, `Any comments on the treaty are senseless. It is already
invalid. At present, international relations are built on the
realities of XXI century. Totally different relations appeared to form
between Russia and Turkey, Georgia and Turkey, Georgia and Russia”.
In its turn, Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs presented its
objection to Georgian Ambassador in Russia, declaring that Kars
Treaty, signed in 1921 among Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey,
lost its validity. At the same time, the statement of MFA of Russian
Federation reminds about Turkey’s agreement to cede Ajaria to Georgia
under the condition that Ajaria be provided with the highest autonomy
status. In this period, Russian national newspapers started to
actively criticize Chevikoz, viewing his declaration about deployment
of troops in Ajaria as a challenge.
The approaches of the countries in question towards the Kars Treaty
are conditioned by the interests they have in Ajaria. By the
willingness to station troops in Ajaria, Turkey recognizes the
validity of the Kars Treaty. Georgia considers it `to be invalid’ in
order to exclude any interference (Turkey included) in ensuring
territorial integrity of the country. As for Russia, despite its
opposition to Turkish interference, by preservation of the status quo
in Ajaria, it plans to influence Georgia and insists, in an attempt to
account for its actions, on the validity of the Kars Treaty.
In other words, Georgia has polar views with Turkey and Russia on the
issue of the validity of the treaty, whereas Russia and Turkey are in
agreement. As regards the initiative of the Writers’ Union of Armenia
on reconsideration of the treaty, though Georgia involuntarily
supports the Armenian stand, viewing this issue as anachronism, still
it should be kept in mind that it is Russia that is the strategic
partner of Armenia.
Moreover, if RA National Assembly resolves to meet the appeal of the
forum, it will have to apply with the claim `to recognize the points
on Armenia of the Russian-Turkish treaty (16 March, 1921) invalid’ not
to Georgian parliament but Russian State Duma. Since State Duma will
not be able to ignore this position held by MFA of Russian Federation
on the treaty affecting the national interests of Russia, the claim
will probably be rejected. And it means reconsideration of the Kars
Treaty is not feasible.
—
Yerevan Press Club of Armenia, ‘Yeni Nesil’ Journalists’ Union of
Azerbaijan and Association of Diplomacy Correspondents of Turkey
present ‘Armenia-Azerbaijan-Turkey: Journalist Initiative-2002’
Project. As a part of the project web site has
been designed, featuring the most interesting publications from the
press of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey on issues of mutual
concern. The latest updates on the site are weekly delivered to the
subscribers.

A1 Plus | 18:00:04 | 30-03-2004 | Politics |
AUTHORITIES RESORTED TO PROVOCATIONS
Justice opposition bloc representatives Albert Bazeyan, Victor Dallakyan and
Grigor Harutyunyan spoke mainly about Sunday’s incident in Gyumri.
The politicians are sure that the incident occurred at a rally held Sunday
in Armenian town of Gyumri is nothing more than provocation orchestrated by
the republic’s authorities. The police appeared as a conflicting side
instead of fulfilling their direct duty of keeping order, they said.
The opposition activist said no investigation has been launched into the
police conduct so far but a series of raids on some Gyumri residents’
houses. Nine people are already arrested in the raids. It is not ruled out
the police to charge them.
Bazeyan said there are video record of the incident and witnesses testifying
that eggs and explosives were given by policemen and municipality officials.
Justice bloc members say the city bosses staged fake funeral in an apparent
attempt to bar them from conducting their meeting with their constituents.
Cortege and all funeral attributes but the dead were used.
—

New Model Armenia
Geographical
March 2004
Vol. 76, Issue 3, p24
Text and photography by Nick Smith
With a history of persecution, natural disasters and political
upheaval, Armenia has lurched from one crisis to another. But now it’s
poised to recover and, with the aid of a population in diaspora, is
starting to reinvent itself as a heritage tourist destination.
Not many people visit Armenia. In fact, as many people go to Lord’s on
the first day of a test match as go to Armenia in a year. Most of the
30,000 visitors are ‘heritage tourists’, which is to say that they are
part of the estimated four million-strong globally distributed network
of the Armenian diaspora, descendants of refugee Turkish Armenians who
fled this part of Central Asia during the Ottoman persecution of
1915. Most come to rediscover their homeland, track down long-lost
distant relatives and to commemorate their ancestors. They are a
much-needed source of income for the two million or so Armenians who
live in Armenia today.
Once a far-reaching territory ranging from the Black to the Caspian
sea, Armenia is now landlocked in the Southern Caucasus, covering an
area little more than the size of Belgium. It is the smallest of the
former Soviet states and was the most reluctant to become independent
when the USSR collapsed in 1991. Armenia benefited from a longstanding
and strong political alliance, relying heavily on the machinery of the
Soviet economy. Now, with little of its own heavy industry or
electronic engineering to support it, Armenia’s youth has emigrated
westward in search of jobs and tertiary education, while the elderly
and unemployed have returned to the land to scratch out a living as
subsistence farmers. War in the 1990s with neighbouring Azerbaijan
drained the economy further, while migration in same period reduced
Armenia’s population by a quarter.
It’s a hard life, not helped by the fact that Armenia has a
surprisingly dry climate that gives rise to vast areas of
semidesert. More than 80 per cent of its arable farmland needs to be
irrigated. Some relief from the unremitting hardship comes in the form
of tourism: Armenia has an incomparable wealth of medieval (and
earlier) religious architecture, to which members of the diaspora make
pilgrimage. At the same time, Armenia has the most beautiful landscape
imaginable — the majestic scenery that the country’s great composer
Aram Ilich Khachaturian describes in his sublime 20th-century
orchestral works.
Khachaturian is buried under a slab of grey-black granite in the
Pantheon of Heroes in Armenia’s capital, Yerevan. You can see much of
the city from his resting place: its drab centre fades into an even
more drab urban sprawl, designed by Soviet architects with an eye more
on utility than aesthetics. But there are redeeming features: apart
from the recently refurbished Republic Square (formerly Lenin Square),
there’s an impressive, if defunct, Ferris wheel on the skyline, as
well as the imperious Ararat brandy factory perched on a plateau high
above Victory bridge.
Armenians are proud of their brandy. And so they should be: its deep
amber colour and smoky simplicity make the ten-year-old a fine match
for any cognac. Boris Yeltzin likes it so much that he has his own
barrels in the factory’s cellars, as does singer, songwriter, actor
and local hero Charles Aznovour. Recently, the brandy has been getting
better and better. But it may be the only thing: for Armenians, life
under the hammer and sickle was comparatively rosy. But since the
disintegration of the Soviet Union, the country has become one of the
poorest in the developed world, with an average annual inflation rate
of 172 per cent. It has also ceded control of its energy utilities to
Russia in lieu of debts.
Not far from Khachaturian’s grave is a bronze statue of Komitas, a
composer whom Armenians hold in even higher regard than Khachaturian,
if that is possible. As an ethnomusicologist, Komitas travelled the
length and breadth of Armenia collecting its traditional folk songs,
which he then wove into the fabric of his own music, music that
defines Armenia as much as its red, blue and gold flag. As my guide,
Nina Dadayan, put it, “He writes in the colours of the countryside,
the gold and the green of the hillsides.”
During the First World War, Komitas saw firsthand the slaughter of
those whose culture he had done so much to save. He survived the
genocide, but having witnessed the rape and murder of his people, he
was plagued by mental illness for the rest of his life. He was unable
to complete his ongoing choral work, Divine Liturgy, which became the
last music he ever wrote, and died in Paris in 1935 a broken and
beaten man. If you look carefully at his statue in the Pantheon you’ll
see it is tarnished and covered with grime, apart from the right index
finger, which shines like gold. This has been kept clean by the stream
of Armenians who visit the cemetery to pay their respects by touching
his hand.
The genocide is an incredibly emotive subject. The Armenian section of
the Financial Times World Desk Reference 2004 sums it up, somewhat
dispassionately, as follows: “1915: Ottomans exile 1.75 million
Turkish Armenians; most die.” And while the book is very careful not
to use the word ‘genocide’, the Armenians aren’t so
lily-livered. According to the Armenian National Institute (ANI) in
Washington, there are 28 official genocide memorials in the
country. The main one is at Tsitsernakaberd (‘Swallow Castle’) and is
a 44-metre stele that symbolises the survival and rebirth of the
Armenian people. Next to the stele is a ring of 12 huge basalt slabs
— closely resembling traditional khachkars, or engraved memorials —
which encircle and lean towards an eternal flame. The steps down to
the flame are extremely steep, and you have to look at your feet to
avoid stumbling. This has the effect of making visitors appear to be
in mourning. Why there is a need to create this illusion defeats me:
most people I saw there were weeping.
The current British government does not recognise the 1915 genocide.
Fact. On the Holocaust Memorial Day in 2001, the UK, along with many
other nations (including the USA), honoured the victims of genocide in
the 20th century, including the Jews killed during the Second Word War
and the Tutsis murdered in Rwanda in 1994. But there was no mention of
Armenia. Nicholas Holding, an expert on the former Soviet Union and
author of the new Bradt Travel Guide to Armenia, says, “So far as the
1915 genocide is concerned, every Turkish government since has denied
that it even happened, as have certain US academics. The evidence to
the contrary seems overwhelming. I imagine that Tony Blair’s
reluctance to acknowledge it stems from his unwillingness for obvious
reasons to upset Turkey, as well as his own ignorance.”
One “obvious reason” is that Blair and George W Bush need Turkish
goodwill to secure permission for the use of Incirlik airbase, from
where they launch air raids on Iraq. Critics of the British-US
alliance see this denial as shameful — as shameful as denying, say,
Auschwitz to spare Gerhard Schroeder’s feelings. Writing in the New
York Press on the 2001 Holocaust Memorial Day, journalist Charles
Glass said: “Alas poor Tony. Upon whose lack of integrity will he
model his own when Bill [Clinton] departs? I suppose Al Gore or George
W Bush is up to the job.” Bush appears to have fulfilled Glass’s
expectations.
The UK’s current position is completely at odds with its historical
record. The first official report on the atrocities against Armenians
in 1915 was prepared for the British government by Viscount Bryce, who
submitted his findings to parliament, which published them in an
official document in 1916. Wartime prime minister David Lloyd George
said that Ottoman policies regarding its Armenian subjects resulted in
“exterminating and deporting the whole race”. The foreign secretary
James Balfour described the massacres as “calculated atrocities”,
while Winston Churchill, writing in 1929, ten years before the
beginning of the Second World War, referred to the massacres as an
“administrative holocaust”.
The facts and the record haven’t changed. What has changed, says Dr
Rouben Adalian, director of the ANI, is the willingness of the British
government to concede to the Turkish government’s insistence on
denying the Armenian genocide. “The reluctance to affirm the
historical record in the face of official denial implies participation
in that denial,” he says. “That is the major departure from the
original position of the British government back in 1915.”
In December 2003, the Swiss lower house of parliament voted to label
the killings by Ottoman Empire forces as ‘genocide’ — a move welcomed
by the Armenian ambassador to Switzerland, Zograb Mnatsakanyan, who
said on Armenian television, “The Swiss parliament has again confirmed
its adherence to human values and justice.”
With the addition of Switzerland, the list of countries that recognise
the genocide now has 15 signatories. This includes France, Argentina
and Russia, but no UK or USA.
John Hovagimian bounds up the perilously steep and narrow stone
staircase up to the entrance of the Sourp Astrastatsatjin (‘Holy
Theotokos’) of the Noarovank monastery. With his designer travel gear
and chunky SLR slung around his neck, he looks prosperous and
confident. To Hovagimian, his tour of Armenia’s heritage with his
newfound Russian and Georgian friends is a big party. And why
shouldn’t it be? He’s glad to be home. “Come on down,” he shouts,
before quietly correcting himself, “er, up, I mean”. Talking with him,
it emerges that his exuberance is mostly superficial. “It’s nice to
know we have a history. It’s a feeling of grandeur. Every Armenian
feels this way, and we cry inside for the tragedy. But now you see our
architecture restored, where once there were no roads.”
Most visitors are, like Hovagimian, members of the Armenian diaspora,
usually from Canada, France or the USA. And most are fabulously
wealthy by the standards of native Armenians. One Armenian
philanthropist, who paid for so much of the restoration work and the
reappointing of Republic Square in Yerevan, is billionaire Kirk
Kerkorian, a man who made his money in Las Vegas hotels and Hollywood
movies.
And there is some serious urban development in Yerevan. Although
estimates vary considerably, there seems to be a consensus on
Kerkorian contributing somewhere in the region of $130 million (USD)
for a major facelift of the civic centre of the country’s capital. So
you will see plenty of new pavements and resurfaced roads. In fact,
there are 20 kilometres of new streets in Yerevan, there are five-star
Western-style hotels and there are Gucci and Armani.
Travelling around Armenia it’s easy to see what donations by members
of the diaspora are doing for the country, but not so easy to see what
they mean for the people. Whenever there is a celebration, there is
always money. (For example, when Armenia’s war-damaged tourism
industry decided to give itself a much-needed boost in 2001 by touting
the year as the 1,700th anniversary of Armenian Christianity.) And yet
only one in 1,000 Armenians owns a car and only 14 per cent of the
population is connected to a telephone.
Critics of the influx of funds from abroad say that there is no other
rational conclusion than this: the money may well be restoring civic
and devotional heritage architecture, but it’s also turning Armenia
into a rich man’s playground and transforming Yerevan into a ghastly
imitation of any Western European city you care to mention. Why
rebuild quite so many churches, they ask, when Armenia has so many
rare metals and semi-precious minerals lying underground waiting to be
exploited? The aid money should be spent releasing the natural wealth
of the country and helping the indigenous people on a day-to-day
basis. The reply from the diaspora is that the development is
creating employment and wealth in a country staggering under the
burden of its own poverty as a result of the post-Soviet transition.
But it isn’t necessarily that simple. “Even a quick survey of the
contributions of overseas Armenian organisations would show that
members of the diaspora remain very concerned about the well-being of
the population in Armenia,” says Adalian. He offers the example of the
largest of the philanthropic groups, the Armenian General Benevolent
Union, which supports a range of services from soup kitchens to
institutions of higher education such as the American University of
Armenia which, Adalian says, is “preparing new generations of leaders
and managers”.
However well planned, the spending of money from the diaspora is
dictated by external events. “There was no choice but to seek to
rehouse the 500,000 made homeless by the 1988 earthquake,” says
Holding. Also, the closure of several borders meant that road and rail
routes to Iran in the south that passed through the Azeri exclave of
Nakhichevan were now literally off limits. This meant that less-used
routes — such as that which connects Armenia with Iran via the Selim
Pass — which had suffered terribly from soil erosion and
underinvestment, had to be rebuilt virtually from scratch.
Conservationists have objected to the reconstruction of the Selim Pass
road because it travels within a few metres of an ancient Silk Road
caravanserai. Increased tourism, they say, will ruin the magic of the
place. They also claim, with more justification, that vibrations from
the huge freight lorries that are forecast to travel regularly over
the pass will damage the fabric of this ancient building.
However, this is the only route into the Yerevan district of Armenia
from the south. As such, it’s an umbilical cord to Iran and, by
extension, the outside world. Currently, the Turkish border is closed,
as are the two Azerbaijan borders, and there’s little sign of any
immediate resolution. To the north, the relationship with Georgia is
unstable, although improvements in the political and economic
conditions there can only contribute to “reducing ethnic tensions and
security concerns across the entire Caucasus region”, says Adalian.
PHOTO CAPTION Clockwise from right: the fourth-century monastery of
Geghard (‘spear’) was built into the side of a mountain and later
surrounded by walls. On the UNESCO World Heritage list since 2000, it
is named after the spear that pierced Christ’s side at Calvary;
‘temporary housing in Vayots Dzor is now well into its second decade;
the Temple of Garni, which was built in the first century AD,
subsequently destroyed by earthquake and renovated several times
While it is tempting to think that the collapse of the Soviet Union
could only have been a good thing, many Armenians would argue with
this. Under the Soviet regime, people may have lived like “machines”,
says my guide, but at least it was all planned out for them. “There
was no need to think for tomorrow,” she says. There were holidays and
pensions, and there was electricity and public transport. Now, one of
the few trains that runs through Armenia takes six hours to complete
its 70-kilometre journey (that’s slower than a London bus on Oxford
Street). “The problem is,” says Nina, offering a somewhat unnecessary
explanation, “there are too many stops and the train doesn’t go fast
enough.”
It’s not just the trains that have fallen into disrepair. As you drive
around Lake Sevan there is mile after mile of abandoned heavy
machinery, now broken and idle. They stand by countless unfinished
construction projects that became derelict before they were ever
used. There are blocks of concrete crumbling to nothing, their metal
reinforcements rusting away. There are sections of oil pipeline lying
unconnected on scrubland by the side of the road.
Most of the land around Lake Sevan is reclaimed. During the 1950s,
Soviet hydro-electric power engineers decided to lower the level of
the lake by 19 metres. As with so many Soviet schemes, the engineers
were betrayed by their idealism and instead of benefit-ting from
unlimited free power, new land for arable farming and livestock
grazing, they got a wasteland. Most of the fish in the lake died and
the land proved to be useless for cultivation. Only a gorse-like scrub
plant now grows there in any abundance, while peasants working above
the old shoreline dig up potatoes, for which they will receive
100drams (7p) per sack, with their bare hands. In the background, a
monastery stands on a headland — once an island — jutting out into
the lake.
Further along the shoreline there is the faded optimism of the 1960s
Soviet residential areas of Sevan, with its close-packed blocks of
apartments in estates with names like ‘Gagarin’, and the obligatory
Ferris wheel in the luna park, the likes of which you can see in
Zanzibar, Mozambique, and the former East Germany. It’s what my guide
calls, without a trace of irony, “good old Soviet architecture”. It’s
hard to see what the nostalgia is all about — they’re every bit as
horrible as some of London or Manchester’s worst blocks of flats or
Glasgow’s tenements. It’s a far cry from the splendor of Armenia’s
churches.
In the shadow of Mount Ararat there is a monastery called Khor Virap,
where Gregory the Illuminator was imprisoned in the third century
AD. Despite his title, he wasn’t a manuscript illuminator
(illustrator). He got his name, and was subsequently imprisoned, for
casting the light of Christianity into the dark comers of Armenia. For
a small fee, you can release doves from this monastery, in the same
way as Noah did as the flood subsided and his ark came to rest on
Mount Ararat. In this case, however, the doves fly back to their cages
and their owners ‘sell’ them again to the next unsuspecting diaspora
tourist.
It’s a place of mixed feelings. In the local orphanage, children are
encouraged to draw pictures of Ararat and Noah’s ark. These crayon
drawings are stuck on the wall next to US flags. One class has
obviously been taught to write, “We love George Bush.”
I wonder if the children who made these drawings have been taught that
Ararat, the national symbol of Armenia, is in Turkey and that they
will never get the chance to climb it.
Visiting Armenia
Nick Smith travelled to Armenia with British Mediterranean Airways (0845
772 2277;).
Regent Holidays can organise trips to Armenia (0117 921 1711;
).
Armenia with Nagorno Karabagh by Nicholas Holding is the first
English-language guide to Armenia. It is published by Bradt.
PHOTO CAPTION Clockwise from top left: men in Vayots Dzor trade smoked
fish from Lake Sevan; old women meet in the ‘Field of Khatchkars’, whose
900-or-so engraved stone memorials are a national treasure.
PHOTO CAPTION Noaravank monastery, built in the 13th and 14th centuries
and renovated in 1998 with money from the diaspora.
PHOTO CAPTION Clockwise from right: high above the Yeghegis valley is
the fifth-century fortress of Smbataberd, guarded on three sides by
steep cliffs.
Local legend has it that it fell to the Seljuk Turks in the 11th century
when they used a thirsty horse to sniff out its water supply; the
eternal flame at the genocide memorial at Tsitsernakaberd in Yerevan;
the memorial’s 44-metre stele.
PHOTO CAPTION Top: standing just below the top of the Selim Pass
(2,410metres), the caravanserai at Selim, one of the best-preserved in
the world, used to be an important resthouse for traders following the
Silk Road; Above: subsistence farmers scratch out a living growing
potatoes at the Selim Pass.
PHOTO CAPTION Clockwise from top left: Gregory the Illuminator kneels
before King Trdat in a 17th-century Turkish manuscript; Mount Ararat and
the monastery of Khor Virap (deep dungeon), where Gregory was imprisoned
by King Trdat in the late third century; a child’s drawing of Noah’s ark
on Mount Ararat.
*************************************
Earthquakes in the Caucasus: a shaky history
As the recent earthquake in southern Iran tragically showed, the
collision of the Eurasian and Arabian tectonic plates has turned this
part of Central Asia into an earthquake danger zone. Although it lies
to the north of Iran, Armenia sits on the same boundary and is subject
to the same catastrophic geophysical forces.
As tectonic plates move, they often grind against each other, slowly
building up stress until one of them moves suddenly. When this
happens, the result is an earthquake, a natural phenomenon with which
Armenia is all too familiar. Historical accounts describe how
earthquakes claimed thousands of lives, destroyed the ancient cities
of Erznka, Erzroom, Basen and Dvin and ruined the temples of Garni
(below left) and Zvartnots.
On 7 December 1988, northwestern Armenia was struck by a quake
measuring 6.9 on the Richter scale. It devastated the cities of
Giumri, Vanadzor and Spitak. Countless houses were obliterated,
leaving more than half a million people homeless. Manufacturing, as
well as cultural, scientific and educational institutions, were
destroyed. According to the UN Development Programme, more than 45,000
people were pulled from the rubble, 25,000 of whom were dead. In 2000,
the UNDP estimated that 20,000 people were still displaced and living
in temporary housing (left).
Geographical is the property of Campion Interactive Publishing

Armenia’s Software Advantage
McKinsey Quarterly
2004 Issue 1
p12, 3p
By Andre Andonian, Avetik Chalabyan and Pierre Gurdjian
Geopolitical problems and macroeconomic reforms are currently
preoccupying Armenia, but to achieve long-term growth and lift itself
out of poverty the former Soviet republic must also grapple with
microeconomic policy. Armenia should focus on developing the industry
sectors that have the best chance of competing globally and on
eliminating any barriers to productivity within them. Our study of this
landlocked economy in the Caucasus (Exhibit 1) suggests that software
and IT services are among its most promising sectors.
With annual growth of more than 20 percent since 1999, software and IT
companies now account for 2 percent of Armenia’s GDP — a proportion
comparable to that of India, the world’s leading offshore IT
destination. Businesses in this sector achieve much higher productivity
than the average for Armenia’s economy as a whole (11.5 percent of the
US level). Why the relatively strong performance? The software and IT
services sector is especially suited to exploit Armenia’s three
competitive advantages. First, it has a well-educated workforce with an
emphasis on science, a result of the country’s heritage as the Soviet
Union’s high-tech center. The second advantage is low wages: a software
and IT services specialist earns $2,400 to $6,000 a year, a quarter of
the average salary such a worker receives in India. The third is a five
million-strong diaspora across Europe and North America. Many of these
overseas Armenians are successful businesspeople and professionals in
the IT and software field and provide access to international business
networks as well as funding for Armenia’s development.
Foreign-owned and domestic companies in Armenia’s software and IT sector
have different average levels of productivity and somewhat different
barriers to
raising it. Some 25 foreign software companies, owned mostly by
businesspeople of Armenian descent, have set up offshore subsidiaries in
the country to develop
customized applications for their corporate parents. To attract the best
programmers and thus achieve the best labor productivity, these foreign
units offer salaries twice as high as domestic IT firms do. But labor
productivity is still only half of the US level, partly as a result of
the shortcomings of Armenia’s higher-education system, which produces
excellent programmers but not enough skilled project managers. For the
85 or so domestic companies that develop, program, market, and sell
packaged software at home and abroad, improving total productivity —
which currently stands at 25 percent of the US level — is even more
crucial. Among the managerial shortcomings these companies face is a
lack of market knowledge and business know-how. Furthermore, they don’t
always know what higher-value-added products to make for international
markets, and they sometimes don’t possess the business skills needed to
market and sell sophisticated products abroad (Exhibit 2, on the
previous page).
We recommend a series of steps in two areas to remove productivity
barriers and stimulate the growth of Armenia’s software and IT sector.
First, increasing the capacity and quality of the educational system is
critical for delivering the highly qualified graduates needed to improve
the sector’s programming and management skills. To this end, the
government should try to attract and retain teachers, professors, and
researchers by raising their salaries, which a: $100 to $200 a month are
low even by domestic standards. Partnerships between companies and
universities can also help. A large foreign-owned software company, for
example, currently supports a multidisciplinary university course that
combines semiconductor design and IT programming — important for the
development of higher value added products. One university cooperates
closely with IT start-ups by providing them with work space on its
premises. Computer science curricula should be modernized so that
technical courses are enriched by business know-how, such as project
management and business-case writing. Second, the government and the
domestic financial and high-tech sectors should team up to establish a
major investment fund and a promotional agency to channel private equity
money from the diaspora and other foreign sources into the software and
IT sector and thereby stimulate its growth.
Increasing the productivity of software and IT services alone won’t
carry Armenia’s economy to the next level, however. A handful of other
sectors — diamonds and jewelry, tourism, and health care — should also
be development priorities. Successful initiatives in the four sectors
could double their productivity, generate double-digit increases in
revenues annually through 2010, and raise their aggregate employment to
102,000, from 71,000. By first focusing on these potentially high-growth
sectors, Armenia could increase its foreign earnings and use the influx
of cash to raise domestic demand and boost other parts of the economy.
Armenia must still resolve its conflict with neighboring Azerbaijan over
the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region and carry out macroeconomic reforms
to complete the transition to a market economy. But concentrating on
specific sectors such as software and IT services should allow Armenia
to move beyond basic stabilization and take the next steps on the road
to prosperity.
DIAGRAM: EXHIBIT 2: Armenia’s productivity gap: Estimated labor
productivity, index: total productivity for software/IT sector in United
States = 100
MAP: EXHIBIT I: Armenia in context: Major economic indicators, 2002

Classical Score: In Armenia, Discovering The Past And The Present
Billboard
3/27/2004
By Anastasia Tsioulcas
Armenian composer Tigran Mansurian is a man of passion and intensity.
Whether discussing his friendship with Dmitri Shostakovich, describing
his childhood in Beirut, Lebanon, or recounting the influence of William
Faulkner’s writings on his work, Mansurian punctuates his reflections
with sweeping hand motions and piercing glances.
Yet the 65-year-old’s own music exemplifies the power and pungency of
the small and subtle gesture. Renowned violist Kim Kashkashian — herself
Armenian-American — explains the appeal of Mansurian’s music this way:
“His writing is very distilled, very concentrated. The intensity is
extreme.”
Mansurian says his music is steeped not just in Armenian music and
history but is also influenced by a Japanese artist he observed some 30
years ago.
“I saw an ikebana artist creating a composition from flowers,” he says,
“and the theory behind this art is to reveal beauty through simplicity.
When they cut off
leaves, you can see the childhood of the plant. From that emptiness, you
imagine and create life yourself.”
Despite his renown at home and his friendships with such colleagues as
Arvo Part, Alfred Schnittke, Sofia Gubaidulina, Valentin Silvestrov and
others, Mansurian
is not well-known internationally. However, that is rapidly changing.
Since their first meeting several years ago, Kashkashian has become a
champion of Mansurian’s work, and the composer has written several works
for her.
Kashkashian’s advocacy has blossomed into a long-term commitment to
Mansurian from producer/ECM label head Manfred Eicher.
The first fruit of that relationship arrived last July, when the
Munich-based ECM released “Hayren,” a disc that included Mansurian’s
piece “Havik” as well
as songs by the revered Armenian composer/ethnomusicologist Komitas
(1869-1935), arranged by Mansurian.
On March 30, ECM continues to explore Mansurian’s exceptional work with
a two-CD set titled “Monodia.” Two compositions on the new disc were written
expressly for Kashkashian: the 1995 viola concerto “And Then I Was in
Time Again . . .” and “Confessing With Faith” for viola and voices (in
which Kashkashian is joined by the Hilliard Ensemble).
“Lachrymae,” a piece for viola and saxophone, is played here by its
dedicatees, Kashkashian and Jan Garbarek (who makes his instrument sound
remarkably
like the traditional Armenian duduk). Rounding out the collection is
1981’s Violin Concerto, played by Leonidas Kavakos.
PHOTO (COLOR): MANSURIAN: WRITES MUSIC WITH ‘EXTREME’ INTENSITY