Month: November 2006

AZERBAIJANI PRESIDENT CAN SAY ANYTHING
Azat Artsakh, Republic of Nagorno Karabakh
Nov 9 2006
The only obstacle in continuing the talks and reaching settlement is
the lack of confidence. Everyone points to this, the EU, the OSCE,
the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs. And there is nothing the world can
do here. The reason is not the reluctance of the Armenian side for
a dialogue, like Azerbaijan is fond of to present, but the idea
of complete isolation of Armenia put forward by Ilham Aliyev. The
Azerbaijani president often appears to have lost the sense of
reality, and he thinks that if Azerbaijan is a medieval feudal state,
others also think like him: destroy Armenia, which dares to disturb
Azerbaijan. And while the Azerbaijani media are delighted to hear
the confessions of their president, the other countries keep silent.
Ostensibly, this silence indicates reluctance to comment on nonsense
rather than agreement. The US co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group
Matthew Bryza gave the best evaluation. He said the Azerbaijani
president may say anything, but they are not going to comment on his
statements. Ilham Aliyev will fail to drag Armenia to a deadlock and
become a “nation’s leader” like his father for several reasons. Most
importantly, he makes statement which would be appropriate for an
ambitious tribal chieftain rather, whereas Heydar Aliyev would never
make such statements. He had a more serious approach to the issues.
He did not simply make allegations but paid the mass media to concoct
pro-Azerbaijani reports. However, soon Moscow and not only Moscow
realized this and started to report the reality. By exaggerating the
influence of the Armenian lobby, Azerbaijan, roughly speaking, doubts
the reason of the entire world. In Baku too they realize that Ilham
Aliyev’s policy on Armenia leads nowhere. They also know that not only
the patience of the Azerbaijani people may start wearing thin, which
does not care, in the long run, but also the international community
may run out of patience. Ilham Aliyevs hopes based on the political
dividends of the oil pipeline cannot become the truncheon to “keep
down” the Armenians of Karabakh. And these dividends are like soap
bubbles, for according to the American expert Richard Kirakosyan,
the value of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan depends on Kazakhstan. In other
words, if the president of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev suddenly
decides that he need not support Azerbaijan, he will turn off the
spigot, and the flow of Aliyev’s oil dollars will stop. And if we
consider the decline of price of oil, Azerbaijan will be having serious
trouble. The Caspian oil is only 3 percent of the world resources,
meanwhile 63 percent is in the Near East. Azerbaijan cannot be taken
seriously by the United States and Europe as a major supplier of
oil. Consequently, the political importance of this country directly
depends on this 3 percent.

REFERENDUM ON DECEMBER 10
Azat Artsakh, Republic of Nagorno Karabakh
Nov 9 2006
On November 3 NKR President Arkady Ghukassian signed the decree
on appointing the day of the referendum on the Constitution of
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. The press secretary of the NKR president
reports that in accordance with the decree the referendum will be
held on December 10, 2006.

MARTIAL LAW ON EVERY OCCASION
Lragir, Armenia
Nov 9 2006
In Armenia, the legislation on martial law was adopted in 1992. The
government of Armenia has worked out a new bill on martial law and
presented to the National Assembly on November 9. When Member of
Parliament Victor Dallakyan saw Arthur Aghabekyan, deputy defense
minister at the hall of the National Assembly before the meeting, he
announced that the bill must be presented by the minister of defense
as the government had notified. In about two hours after starting the
meeting Tigran Torosyan informed that the government had replaced its
representative and the deputy defense minister Arthur Aghabekyan would
present the bill on martial law. Perhaps opening a water pipeline is
more important than this issue, said Victor Dallakyan.
The Republicans, the United Labor Party, the National Solidarity,
the People’s Deputy, Ardarutiun were not present, only 4 or 5 members
of parliament were present: Victor Dallakyan, Arshak Sadoyan, Manuk
Gasparyan, Speaker Tigran Torosyan. Only Victor Dallakyan discussed the
question with the representatives of the government, and stated that
the purpose of the bill is “to declare, impose martial law on various
occasions, not to hold presidential and parliamentary elections,
to restrict the activities of the citizens, political parties and
the media.”
Victor Dallakyan says the provision that martial law can be imposed
when the life and security of the citizens is threatened can be
interpreted arbitrarily. For instance, “talking loudly can be defined
as a threat.” Victor Dallakyan thinks that a number of points of the
bill are unconstitutional and allow for arbitrary interpretations.
The member of parliament thinks it is natural that martial law
is declared if another country shells the territory of Armenia,
but he is against imposing martial law “in case any other weapon is
used. In other words, if our neighbor shoots the gun for several times,
martial law will be imposed.”
Victor Dallakyan says it is unacceptable to impose martial law
in the region of Syunik but restrict the rights of the political
parties, citizens and media all over the county. In particular,
the government proposes a provision, which allows confiscating
recorders and cameras of journalists, hold meetings, marches, search
the apartments of the citizens under martial law. The bill does not
set at least approximate timing of martial law. “In other words,
they can organize a provocation at the border and the president may
remain in office until the year 3001. Or if people in a political
party speak loudly, it may be considered as a different type activity
and the political party may be banished.”
Victor Dallakyan states that the powers of the president under martial
law do not comply with the powers of the president set down in the
Constitution. The bill contains “points reminding the times of Stalin”
and in case it is adopted, “we will appear in the time of Pinechet.”

WHICH ARMENIAN ORGANIZATIONS WILL SUPPORT ARKADY GHUKASYAN?
Lragir, Armenia
Nov 9 2006
NKR President Arkady Ghukasyan is visiting the United States, where
the annual telethon will be held on November 23. The president left
for the United Stated 20 days before the telethon to meet with the
representatives of the Armenian organizations. Because it is not
easy to persuade people to give money. Especially that you have done
this before.
The Armenian community of America is not homogeneous. There are
controversies between organizations and individuals. Often an
organization refuses to take part in an event because another
organization helped to organize it. There are controversies among
the political parties and other organizations. This is the reason why
there is no established all-Armenian organization up today. It is not
clear how complicated the situation has become after the election to
the U.S. Congress.
Will Arkady Ghukasyan be able to come to persuade all these forces?
Who will support the president of Karabakh who has already stated
that he will not run in the election next year.

KARABAKH IS PREPARING FOR REFERENDUM
Lragir, Armenia
Nov 9 2006
Sergey Nasibyan, chair of the NKR Central Electoral Commission said
36 million drams was allocated for holding the referendum. The voters
registers are ready, and the amended draft of the Constitution will
be printed and distributed to the divisional and district commissions.
We have learned that the text of the Constitution is not ready,
whereas the referendum has already been appointed on December 10. The
local experts cannot understand the reason for this hastiness. We have
delayed the adoption of the Constitution for 15 years and suddenly
we decided to adopt it as soon as possible. The problem is that most
people have not read the text and apparently will not manage. Only
a month is left.

GREET YOUR VOTERS AT LEAST
Lragir, Armenia
Nov 9 2006
On November 9 the bill on expropriation, which had been voted down
three times, and returned to the parliament with minor unimportant
changes, got 61 votes and was passed on first reading. 11 members
of parliament abstained. Meanwhile, the parliament can pass a law
if at least 66 members of parliament vote. The opposition did not
vote, and if the ARF Dashnaktsutyun, which abstained, had not voted,
the votes of the Republicans and the United Labor Party would not be
enough to pass the law.
Before the meeting of parliament the victims of expropriation
gathered at the gate of the National Assembly and offered the entering
members of parliament to vote against the bill. Only oppositionist
Vardan Mkrtichyan and Aram G. Sargsyan listened to the call of the
victims. Republican Hamlet Harutiunyan and the others “failed to
notice” the people gathered there. Meanwhile Artak Sargsyan, who had
left his political party for the sake of the seat in the parliament,
flew into a fury when one of the protesters advised him to say hello
to his voters.
Artak Baghdasaryan, chair of Victims of Expropriation for Democracy
NGO said the bill must not be adopted because the government rejected
all the proposals offered after the public hearings. And the members
of parliament did not accept the call of Speaker Tigran Torosyan
to vote each for himself. By the way, voting for someone else is a
violation of the bylaws of the parliament. And while the bill was
adopted in the traditional manner of one voting for three, more
and more protesters gathered outside the parliament. The movement
of Armenian mothers for legality joined them. Susanna Harutiunyan,
a member of the movement said everyone who is dissatisfied with
this government are with them. On the proposal of the government,
the National Assembly will hold the second reading of the Bill on
Expropriation within 24 hours after the first reading.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ARMENIA CAN SUSTAIN ONE SCIENTIFIC SYSTEM
Lragir, Armenia
Nov 9 2006
Armenia has delayed considerably the reform in science, stated the
economist Edward Aghajanov November 9 at the Pastark Club. For the
new policy on the scientific reform, Edward Aghajanov said he is not
acquainted with this policy because he was not invited to cooperate
on working it out. However, the economist thinks that the financial
possibilities of Armenia does not allow having both academic and
university science.
“Armenia is a poor country. I think Armenia needs a system of
scientific education. In order not to demolish the Academy, and not
to destroy and cause a painful transition, I think institutions of
scientific educational should be established, which combine both
science and education,” says the economist.

DONKEY OR ELEPHANT, DIFFERENCE IS NOT BIG
Hakob Badalyan
Lragir, Armenia
Nov 9 2006
The Armenian government is delighted about the defeat of the
Republicans in the election to the U.S. Congress. The pro-Hay Dat
conglomerate of this circle is encouraged by the statistics of the
Hay Dat offices suggesting that there are more pro-Armenians among the
Democrats than the “oil-smelling” Republicans. The Republican layer of
the Armenian government is also in high spirits. It may be thinking
that the American Republicans, depressed by the defeat, will seek
comfort in the idea of the victory of the Republican idea somewhere
else and will use the first opportunity. And the first opportunity
will be the Armenian parliamentary election. These approaches might
be stemming from the tendency to think that the U.S. Congress election
will influence the U.S policy on Armenia.
Therefore, the Armenian government is part by part explaining and
making the victory of the Democrats favorable for it.
However, disappointment is awaiting the Armenian government both in
terms of Hay Dat and the U.S. Policy on Armenia. And U.S. Charge
d’Affaires Anthony Godfrey hinted that the U.S. foreign policy is
the power of the executive, and the executive power has not changed.
Undoubtedly, and the charge d’affaires does not hide that the American
voters, nevertheless, expect a change in the foreign policy.
For us, however, it is important to know what is our role and
importance in the framework of the U.S. policy so that changes in
the foreign policy of this country affect the U.S. – Armenian relation.
Judging by the present U.S. – Armenian relation, Armenia has an
absolutely strategic importance for the United States. The evidence
to this is that in tactical matters the United States often yields
to Russia. The examples are the deals that the Armenian government
signs with Russia giving the country’s important infrastructures and
factories to this country. The reaction of the United States to this
process is highly reserved.
Most people might think that over the past few years the Republicans
have been conducting an obviously pro-Azerbaijani policy both regarding
Karabakh and generally the Caucasus, advising Armenia to learn from
Azerbaijan. They considered that the reason was the oil interest
of most leaders of the Republican administration. It should not be
overlooked, however, that the pro-Azerbaijani stance of the Republican
administration, such as the elimination of Resolution 907 or greater
military assistance to Azerbaijan, was permanently counterbalanced
at the Congress by the Republican majority.
However, besides this, over its rather short but effective history the
U.S. has made it clear for everyone that in terms of geopolitical
strategy it almost never undergoes changes. This country has a
clear-cut strategy, and in different stages of its implementation
the dominance of the Democrats or Republicans becomes necessary, not
more. In other words, figuratively, in the United States the policy
determines the government, not the government decides the policy.
Besides the fact that the U.S. Congress mainly deals with the internal
problems of the country there is another important thing.
The Democrats have always been known for their focus on the internal
problems of the country. In this respect, the Democratic majority will
tackle the internal problems rather to win over the American voters
in 2008. As to foreign policies, despite the obvious dissatisfaction
with the steps that are taken, the Democrats will not try to change the
situation. The Democrats will need the current failure, or in others
words, problems to use against the Republicans in the presidential
election in 2008.
And if the change of the foreign political strategy is almost excluded
because it is not expedient, the U.S. policy on Armenia will not
change and therefore its being favorable or unfavorable depends on
whether Armenia can build an effective political and economic system.

THEY DRANK TO VICTORY IN ADVANCE
James Hakobyan
Lragir, Armenia
Nov 9 2006
Javakheti is a country of lakes. In this territory with a population
of about 70 thousand there are about 20 big and small lakes. The
most famous, the biggest and the “water symbol” of Javakheti is
Lake Parvana. It is difficult to say what the minister of defense
hinted when he invited the foreign minister of Georgia and his
Armenian counterpart to dine at the Parvana Restaurant. Perhaps
he had calculated that even if Bejuashvili were reluctant to speak
about Javakheti, the name of the restaurant would constantly remind
him of it. On the other hand, it is possible that Bejuashvili had
greater interest to speak about Javakheti. And it is possible that
he considered this in choosing the Parvana for dinner. Perhaps it
was a hint that the Armenians are the host in Parvana. However, it is
hardly possible that Georgia does not know this and needs additional
remarks. Otherwise, official Tbilisi would not try its best to replace
the hosting side in Javakheti and would not visit Armenia on the eve
of the local election there. Meanwhile, in this context the relation
with Armenia has a definite purpose. Georgia realizes that at least
in the upcoming few years the demographic pattern in Javakheti will
be in favor of the Armenians. Radical actions are required to change
it quickly. But radical actions would lead to an adequate reaction of
the population and instability. This is not favorable for Georgia at
the moment. Therefore, Tbilisi does not make radical moves in Javakheti
like in the case of the Azerbaijanis of Marneuli. Sahakashvili started
a real chase there and made it clear in this relation that the power
would belong to Tbilisi.
Georgia has chosen a different tactics with regard to the issue of
Javakheti, and thinking and considering that for the time being
they can have little influence on the Armenians of Javakheti,
Tbilisi tries to set up relations with the Javakheti Armenians
via the Armenian government or influential figures of the Armenian
government. In other words, if the Armenians of Javakheti are not
subject to Tbilisi, they must make efforts to make them subject to
Yerevan. And perhaps Bejuashvili was trying to settle this problem by
having a meal in Armenia before the local election. On the other hand,
it is a rather dangerous game for Georgia because if the Armenian
government establishes its influence in Javakheti, it may “take away”
this region from the Georgians. Apparently, however, Tbilisi has
thought about this. Before coming to dinner in Armenia Georgia hinted
at its reluctance to pay for anything and stated that Armenia should
do. It was not accidental that when the Russian-Georgian spy scandal
started, Georgia stated that the actions of the Russian spies were
coordinated from Yerevan. This statement did not appear to have a
continuation but it is notable that Armenia did not react. Official
Yerevan did not try to demand explanations from Tbilisi. The reason
might be that Tbilisi could give an explanation. In that case, it
would be Yerevan’s turn to explain.
Even if there was espionage, and was instigated by the Russians, it
is related to Armenia if it was coordinated from Yerevan. And it is
already an issue of national security when the territory of a country
is turned into headquarters of spies in the region.
Considering this, the seriousness of the accusation from Tbilisi
becomes apparent, and in this context the silence of official Yerevan
kindles doubts that in reality it was considered more expedient to keep
silent about this fact rather than demand explanation. And in politics
everything has its price. Tbilisi agrees to keep silent, and Yerevan
agrees to keep the processes in Javakheti under control. And whatever
they cannot keep under control they keep at the remand prison of the
National Security, like in the case of Vahagn Chakhalyan, who did not
agree to join the national organizations of the Armenians of Javakheti
gathered under the flag of the ruling political party of Georgia, which
got 70 percent of votes in the local election by official statistics.
In fact, it was the victory of official Tbilisi and Yerevan rather
than the Armenians of Javakheti, and the toast to this victory may
have been drunk at the Parvana, in advance. It will become clear
in the course of time what this victory will bring to Javakheti. It
should be noted, however, that Yerevan and Tbilisi have always reached
agreement on Javakheti, and the only problem that has been solved is
enclosing the exiting problems successfully.

U.S. POLICY ON ARMENIA WILL NOT CHANGE
Lragir, Armenia
Nov 9 2006
If the Democrats win the election to the U.S. Congress, the U.S. policy
on Armenia will not change. Although the executive has more powers
concerning the U.S. foreign policy, which has not changed yet,
there have been a number of elections to the Congress over this time,
which, however, did not disrupt the continuity of the U.S. Policy on
Armenia. This opinion was expressed by the U.S. Charge d’Affaires
Anthony Godfrey on November 8 in Armenia, at the moment when the
votes of the Republicans and Democrats were being counted. Anthony
Godfrey stated that the policy on Armenia will not change, and the
United States will continue to assist Armenia in building democracy.
Anthony Godfrey also stated that it is difficult to say what changes
will be made in the foreign policy of the United States generally.
Anthony Godfry says the American policy and particularly the Iraqi
issue is a matter of race, and they have to wait to see what will
happen. He says voters, including him, expect changes.