Month: August 2008

ARMENIAN REVOLUTIONARY FEDERATION-DASHNAKTSUTYUN BUREAU

Mher Lazarian 12/1, Yerevan, Armenia
Mailing Address: P.O.Box 123 – Yerevan, Armenia 0010
Tel.: (37410) 52-18-90, 52-19-66 – Fax: (37410) 52-14-53
E-mail: [email protected] Website:

DECLARATION

The events of the past week in the South Caucasus – the de facto state
of war that has come into being with all its tragic consequences, the
international tension these developments have fostered, and the
implications of these events for the future – reflect new realities in
our region that are of direct concern to Armenia and for all
Armenians.

The events in our immediate neighborhood have created new political
and economic challenges. Our first reaction, of course, is that of
sympathy for the thousands of human lives lost and harmed and damaged
destinies on all sides of this conflict.

The most pressing issue today is preventing similar situations from
developing in the future. The era of resolving inter-ethnic issues
through the use of force, as seen in the 1990’s, has passed, and the
recent events have once again proven, unnecessarily, that such conduct
has no prospect and is cause for tragedy.

On the one hand, it should be acknowledged that Georgia is our
immediate neighbor whose stability and development is of the utmost
importance to us, while Russia is our strategic partner and has a role
in the Caucasus. On the other hand, clearly, escalation of EU-RF-USA
relations to a confrontational level can not be beneficial for the
region.

In spite of assurances by Armenian officials that there are no
problems with the transport of goods to Armenia, we remain concerned
regarding this matter and expect that during this difficult situation,
a friendly Georgia will not take any steps to hinder such transport.

For the ARF-Dashnaktsutyun, this situation is extremely important in
three regards. First is the issue of reinforcing the right of the
people of Artsakh (Mountainous Karabakh) to determine their own
destiny through their expression of their right to self-determination.
Recent events have clearly demonstrated, that Azerbaijan’s
saber-rattling – that it wants to resolve the issue through the use of
force – not only has no prospect, but also that such threats will only
lead the region into destructive and ultimately unforeseeable
troubles. Artsakh cannot be part of Azerbaijan. During the
negotiation process, we are compelled to defend our national interests
with greater clarity and in an even more comprehensive manner by
demanding that all parties first of all sign a legally binding
document undertaking that they will not use force as a means of
settling the conflict.

Second, regarding the Georgian-Armenians and specifically the
Armenian-populated Javakhk (Samtskhe-Javakheti) region, are the
issues of defending their security and rights as a national minority,
and of its autonomy. In this case we can not be indifferent and
express our hope and expectation that Georgia will act with utmost
responsibility and in accordance with the overriding principles of
international law.

The final issue is being fully aware of the necessity for national
unity regarding Armenia’s stability and the fundamental intra-state
and intra-national matters. This represents an issue of
responsibility for all Armenians in front of our people and our
history.

We hope that following the impetuous reactions, both the conflicting
parties and the international community will find ways to bring peace
to the region and resolve all outstanding problems in a civilized
manner. Armenia can and should contribute to these efforts.

The ARF-Dashnaktsutyun is confident and ready to do its part, so that
the foundations are laid for full cooperation and development in the
South Caucasus, so that all the peoples of this region will have the
opportunity to live in harmony.

A.R.F.-Dashnaktusyun Bureau
Yerevan, 15 August 2008

South Ossetia and the Remaking of the Post-Soviet World
An interview with Ronald Suny

ZNET

August, 16 2008

By Khatchig Mouradian
and Ronald Suny

Ronald Grigor Suny is professor of social and political history at the
University of Michigan and professor emeritus of political science and
history at the University of Chicago. He is the author of The Baku
Commune, 1917-1918: Class and Nationality in the Russian Revolution
(Princeton University Press, 1972); Armenia in the Twentieth Century
(Scholars Press, 1983); The Making of the Georgian Nation (Indiana
University Press, 1988, 1994); Looking Toward Ararat: Armenia in
Modern History (Indiana University Press, 1993); The Revenge of the
Past: Nationalism, Revolution, and the Collapse of the Soviet Union
(Stanford University Press, 1993); and The Soviet Experiment: Russia,
the USSR, and the Successor States (Oxford University Press, 1998).

Suny is currently working on a two-volume biography of Stalin for
Oxford University Press, a co-edited volume on the Armenian Genocide,
a series of essays on empire and nations, and studies of emotions and
ethnic politics. He has appeared numerous times on the McNeil-Lehrer
News Hour, CBS Evening News, CNN, and National Public Radio, and has
written for the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles
Times, the Nation, New Left Review, Dissent, and other newspapers and
journals.

In this interview, conducted by phone on Aug. 12, we talk about the
situation in the Caucasus after Georgia’s attack on South Ossetia and
Russia’s heavy-handed retaliation in August 2008.

***

Khatchig Mouradian – Talk about how the mainstream media in the
U.S. is covering the conflict between Russia and Georgia.

Ronald Suny – The mainstream media is completely off the wall. It’s
echoing the line of the president, the government, and the
presidential candidates. Also, in trying to make sense of the
conflict, the mainstream media is using frames like "Russian
imperialism" and "Russian aggression." These are old, cold-war era
frames that they are reproducing and the result is a complete
misreading of the situation.

After various developments in early 1990’s and by international
agreement, Russia took up the role of peacekeeper, separating the
Georgians from the Abkhaz and the Ossetians. It has kept its role
relatively responsibly and maintained peace in the area. Of course, it
is correct to say in some abstract way that Russia is not observing
the territorial integrity of Georgia or that Russia is attacking a
sovereign democratic country, but all this misses the whole point that
Russia has been involved in peacekeeping in those areas for years.

This particular crisis began with [Georgian president Mikhail]
Saakashvilli. He launched a rocket attack against Tskhinvali, the
capital of South Ossetia. The attack came at a very strategic point,
when Bush and Putin were in Beijing and [Russian president Dmitry]
Medvedev was on a cruise on the Volga. Important details such as these
are left out of many reports.

The mainstream media is talking about empire and imperialism. But what
Russia is practicing is, in fact, hegemony. It wants to dominate its
near abroad, just like the U.S. wants to dominate Latin America –
although the Americans also seek global hegemony.

The Russians want to preserve the status quo. They want to keep
Abkhazia and South Ossetia in a kind of frozen conflict
situation. That works for them. They can irritate Tbilisi, keep
Georgia from integrating fully with the West, and try to prevent it
from entering NATO. For the Russians, Georgia’s membership to the
military alliance spells disaster. Baltic countries, many Eastern
European countries, and Turkey are in NATO. If you add Georgia, the
entire western and southern borders Russia would be with NATO member
countries. This is unacceptable for a great power like Russia.

K.M. – How do you explain Russia’s response to Georgia’s attack on
South Ossetia?

R.S. – In the last 15 years, Russia has suffered humiliation after
humiliation. The breakup of the Soviet Union was not popular in
Russia, except among some liberals – and liberal in Russia means
right-winger, traitor. The U.S. had promised not to expand NATO to
Eastern Europe but has done it. In turn, the so-called "colored
revolutions" in Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan frightened the
Russians. They read these revolutions as Western interference,
artificial events conjured up by the West to push forward anti-Russian
elements like Saakashvili and [Ukranian president Victor]
Yushchenko. Then Kosovo gained independence despite Moscow’s
objections. After this colossal sense of humiliation, of a loss of
power, [former Russian president and current Prime Minister] Vladimir
Putin comes along, oil prices shoot up, and the Russians are making
money, the country is growing, and they begin to flex their muscles
again. If you listen to the Russian rhetoric now, it is about how
after years of humiliation, they are back and they are no longer going
to be pushed around.

K.M. – How far do you think Putin will go after this show of force?

R.S. – I think the Russians made their point. Confrontation is not
their first choice. They have too much going with the international
community to want to go back behind some kind of Iron Curtain. They
don’t want to be isolated.

K.M. – What do you think about the West’s response?

R.S. – I don’t think it’s an accident that [French president Nicolas]
Sarkozy, [German Chancellor Angela] Merkel, and other European leaders
and diplomats are flocking to Moscow and trying to resolve this
issue. The Europeans see Russia as a part of Europe. And they are not
taking as hard a line as the Bush Administration.

I have to note that the Bush Administration was very influenced by
[vice president Dick] Cheney. The first statement that President Bush
made was not particularly strong, but later, he and the government
adopted the Cheney line.

But the U.S. and NATO are powerless in this situation. They’re
obviously not going to go to war over South Ossetia. They don’t have
much maneuverability. Saakashvili started this, but it’s the Russians
that took it up and have improved their position.

The only thing that Saakashvili and the West can try to do now is
discredit Russia. They’re going to play that card, of course. They’re
going to make Russia look like the aggressor. And, of course, the
Russians play into this image. They brutalize. Why did they bomb the
Georgian city of Gori? They wanted to punish the Georgians. They
wanted to teach them a lesson. And I think they have. I predict that
Saakashvili’s days in power are numbered. What was he thinking? He’s a
very impetuous leader. People in Georgia are afraid of him because
they never know what to expect. He gambled and he lost this
gamble. When you don’t win a war that you initiate – as the Israeli
leaders have learned in Lebanon, and the U.S has learned in Iraq –
then you pay for it.

K.M. – What has changed in the equation after the war between Georgia
and Russia?

R.S. – Small as it seems to be, the tiny little place that few have
ever heard of – South Ossetia – in fact has changed the nature of the
post-Soviet world. Now countries have learned not to muck around with
the Russians. They have always been a hard country to bargain
with. Now they’re saying: if you push us hard enough, we’ll also use
military power. That’s a new dimension.

K.M. – Talk about the situation in South Ossetia and Abkhazia before
and after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

R.S. – In Soviet times, South Ossetia was an autonomous district and
Abkhazia was an autonomous Soviet republic. They had this official
autonomy, but in fact they were dominated completely by Georgia,
particularly during the Stalin period, when [Stalin’s secret police
boss Lavrenty] Beria was close to Stalin. Much resentment
developed. There was a kind of Georgianization that took place in
those regions.

When the Soviet Union began to disintegrate, a very radical
nationalist, Zviad Gamsakhurdia, was elected president in Georgia. He
declared "Georgia for the Georgians." They were going to have an
ethno-national republic, and the other peoples, who were 30 percent of
the population (hundreds of thousands of Armenians, Azerbaijanis,
Muslim Georgians, and, of course, Abkhazians and Ossetians), did not
figure in their vision. The Abkhazians and Ossetians rebelled and,
with Russian help, declared their autonomy and drove the Georgians
out. There are hundreds of thousands of Georgian refugees from those
areas now in Georgia. Roughly around 1993-94, around the time the
Russians were negotiating the armistice in Nagorno-Karabagh between
Armenia and Azerbaijan, they also negotiated a similar armistice in
Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

The Ossetians and Abkhazians want to be in Russia or
independent. Russia never wanted to annex them and bring them fully to
Russia because of the international law of territorial
integrity. Russia’s position is that you can’t alter borders without
mutual agreement. (In other words, they are against the independence
of Kosovo for good reason, because that would then justify Chechnya’s
revolt). The Russians have held that principle, but when the
U.S. backed Kosovo’s independence, Putin remarked that if Kosovo can
do it, why not Abkhazia and South Ossetia as well?

Unlike Karabagh, where Armenians were an overwhelming majority – they
were about 76 percent in 1989 when the conflict broke – in Abkhazia,
the Abkhaz were only 17 percent of the population and Georgians were
something like 43 percent. (By the way, according to most accounts,
the Armenians may be the largest ethnic group in Abkhazia today).

K.M. – In your book The Making of the Georgian Nation, you say, "If
there is any conclusion to be derived from such a study of the longue
duree of a small nation, it might be that a nation is never fully
`made.’ It is always in the process of being made." How do you think
the current conflict will affect the making of the Georgian nation?

R.S. – In their own discourse, the Georgians blame everything on
foreigners, the Russians, or minorities. They don’t recognize their
own responsibility for their own fate. Basically, in some ways, the
Georgian state committed suicide by this fierce policy both towards
Russia and its own minorities. The Georgians had to make a choice: do
they try to regain and solidify, consolidate Georgian national
territory with a hard militaristic confrontational policy that is
essentially anti-Russian, pro-West? Or do they try to negotiate, grant
concessions, offer high degrees of autonomy to Abkhazia and South
Ossetia, and also try a more cooperative approach towards Russia?
Georgia has alternated between these choices. The problem is, they
don’t get much from the cooperative approach and they get frustrated
with that.

Saakashvili has taken a harder line. He’s figuring, "I can put Russia
in a very difficult position. I can use the West and maybe that kind
of pressure will both force Russia to come to some kind of agreement
with me and also help me get into NATO." That was his gamble.

K.M. – Georgia’s neighbor, Azerbaijan, welcomed Tbilisi’s move to
regain control of South Ossetia and signaled the possibility of a
similar action against its own breakaway republic of
Nagorno-Karabagh. Do you think Azerbaijani officials will act on their
war talk?

R.S. – Russia’s actions are changing things. Had Saakashvili
succeeded, then Azerbaijan would have been more encouraged to try to
do something in Karabakh on its own. If I were Azerbaijan, I’d be very
wary. The events in Georgia have shaken things up. Russia is once
again the major player in the South Caucasus, and it considers Armenia
to be its closest ally in the region.

Khatchig Mouradian is a journalist, writer and translator, currently
based in Boston. He is the editor of the Armenian Weekly. He can be
contacted at: [email protected].

PRESS OFFICE
Diocese of the Armenian Church of Canada
Contact: Dn. Hagop Arslanian, Assistant to the Primate
Tel; 514-276-9479 (ext. 3)
Fax; 514-276-9960
Email; [email protected]
Website;
615 Stuart Avenue, Outremont-Montreal
Quebec-CANADA H2V 3H2

* * *

Armenian President and Canadian Prime Minister Exchange Messages

The Right Honorable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, sent a
message to H.E. Mr. Serzh Sargsyan, congratulating him on his
inauguration as President of the Republic of Armenia. In his letter
the Prime Minister particularly stresses that `Canada has long
supported democratic development as one of its international
priorities. We were pleased to note that Armenia’s presidential
election showed further progress towards internationally accepted
electoral standards’. Mr. Harper further notes that `Canada has been
enriched by the presence of a large community of Armenian heritage,
who I know will also be heartened by Armenia’s democratic progress,
both in the parliamentary elections of last May and in the recently
concludedpresidential election.’

In his reply message the President of Armenia thanked the Prime
Minister ofCanada for his congratulations, stressing that `our mutual
commitment to universal human values and Canada’s active and efficient
involvement in the resolution of the most urgent global issues provide
a solid basis for productive bilateral and multilateral cooperation’.

The two leaders also exchange m essages on the forthcoming 12th
Conference of Heads of State and Government of Countries Using French
as a Common Language in Quebec (Sommet de laFrancophonie). Responding
to the Canadian Prime Minister’s invitation to participate in the
Francophonie Summit, the President of Armenia wrotethat `l’Arménie
accorde une grande importance à l’Organisation Internationale de la
Francophonie l’adhésion à laquelleen tant qu’observateur a donné un
nouvel élan aux riches traditions de la francophonie dans notre
pays. Désireux d’amplifier la dimension francophone de l’Arménie qui
partage profondément l’ensemble desvaleurs et principes fondateurs
formulés dans la Charte de la Francophonie, la République Arménie a
présenté la demande officielle de devenir membre associé de
l’Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie, et cette demande va
être examiné au Sommet du Québec’. President Sargsyan expressed
hope that Canada would support Armenia’s desire to become associated
member in the International Organization of Francophonie.

The forthcoming Francophonie Summit was also the subject of messages
exchanged between President of Armenia, Mr. Serzh Sargsyan, and Prime
Minister of Quebec, Mr. Jean Charest.

Augu st 14, 2008
Master Plan or Screw Up?
Georgia and U.S. Strategy

By MIKE WHITNEY

The American-armed and trained Georgian army swarmed into South
Ossetia last Thursday, killing an estimated 2,000 civilians, sending
40,000 South Ossetians fleeing over the Russian border, and destroying
much of the capital, Tskhinvali. The attack was unprovoked and took
place a full 24 hours before even ONE Russian soldier set foot in
South Ossetia. Nevertheless, the vast majority of Americans still
believe that the Russian army invaded Georgian territory first. The
BBC, AP, NPR, the New York Times and the rest of the establishment
media have consistently and deliberately misled their readers into
believing that the violence in South Ossetia was initiated by the
Kremlin. Let’s be clear, it wasn’t. In truth, there is NO dispute
about the facts except among the people who rely the western press for
their information. Despite its steady loss of credibility, the
corporate media continues to operate as the propaganda-arm of the
Pentagon.

Former Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev gave a good summary of
events in an op-ed in Monday’s Washington Post:

For some time, relative calm was maintained in South Ossetia. The
peacekeeping force composed of Russians, Georgians and Ossetians
fulfilled its mission, and ordinary Ossetians and Georgians, who live
close to each other, found at least some common ground….What
happened on the night of Aug. 7 is beyond comprehension. The Georgian
military attacked the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali with
multiple rocket launchers designed to devastate large areas…
Mounting a military assault against innocents was a reckless decision
whose tragic consequences, for thousands of people of different
nationalities, are now clear. The Georgian leadership could do this
only with the perceived support and encouragement of a much more
powerful force. Georgian armed forces were trained by hundreds of
U.S. instructors, and its sophisticated military equipment was bought
in a number of countries. This, coupled with the promise of NATO
membership, emboldened Georgian leaders into thinking that they could
get away with a "blitzkrieg" in South Ossetia…Russia had to respond.
To accuse it of aggression against "small, defenseless Georgia" is not
just hypocritical but shows a lack of humanity."

Russia deployed its tanks and troops to South Ossetia to save the
lives of civilians and to reestablish the peace. Period. It has no
interest in annexing the former-Soviet country or in expanding its
present borders. Now that the Georgian army has been routed, Russian
president Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin have expressed a
willingness to settle the dispute through normal diplomatic channels
at the United Nations. Neither leader is under any illusions about
Washington’s involvement in the hostilities. They know that Georgian
President Mikail Saakashvili is an American stooge who came to power
in a CIA-backed coup, the so-called "Rose Revolution", and would
never order a major military operation without explicit instructions
from his White House puppetmasters.

The Georgian army had no chance of winning a war with Russia or any
intention of occupying the territory they captured. The real aim was
to lure the Russian army into a trap. US planners hope to do what they
did so skillfully in Afghanistan; lure their Russian prey into a long
and bloody Chechnya-type fiasco that will pit their Russia troops
against guerrilla forces armed and trained by US military and
intelligence agencies. The war will be waged in the name of liberating
Georgia from Russian imperialism and stopping Putin from achieving his
alleged ambition to control critical western-owned pipelines around
the Caspian Basin.

In June, former foreign policy adviser to President Jimmy Carter,
Zbigniew Brzezinski, presented the basic storyline that would be used
against Russia two full months before the Georgian invasion of South
Ossetia. The article appeared on the Kavkazcenter web site. Brzezinski
said the United States witnessed "cases of possible threats by Russia,
directed at Georgia with the intention of taking control over the
Baku-Ceyhan pipeline".

Brzezinski: "Russia actively tends to isolate the Central Asian region
from direct access to world economy, especially to energy supplies..If
Georgia government is destabilized, western access to Baku, Caspian
Sea and further will be limited".

Brzezinski’s speculation is part of a broader scenario that’s been
crafted for the western media to provide a rationale for upcoming
aggression against Russia. Brzezinski is not only the architect of the
mujahadin-led campaign against Russia in Afghanistan in the 1980s, but
also, the author of "The Grand Chessboard–American Primacy and its
Geostrategic Imperatives", the operating theory behind "the war on
terror" which involves massive US intervention in Central Asia to
control vital resources, fragment Russia, and surround manufacturing
giant, China.

"The Grand Chessboard" is the 21st century’s version of the Great
Game. The book begins with this revealing statement:

"Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some
five hundred years ago, Eurasia has been the center of world
power…..The key to controlling Eurasia is controlling the Central
Asian Republics."

This is the heart-and-soul of the war on terror. The real braintrust
behind "never-ending conflict" was actually focussed on Central Asia.
It was the pro-Israeli crowd in the Republican Party that pulled the
old switcheroo and refocussed on the Middle East rather than Eurasia.
Now, powerful members of the US foreign policy establishment
(Brzezinski, Albright, Holbrooke) have regrouped behind the populist
"cardboard" presidential candidate Barack Obama and are preparing to
redirect America’s war efforts to the Asian theater. Obama offers
voters a choice of wars not a choice against war.

On Sunday, Brzezinski accused Russia of imperial ambitions comparing
Putin to "Stalin and Hitler" in an interview with Nathan Gardels.

Gardels: What is the world to make of Russia’s invasion of Georgia?

Zbigniew Brzezinski: Fundamentally at stake is what kind of role
Russia will play in the new international system.(aka: New World
Order) Unfortunately, Putin is putting Russia on a course that is
ominously similar to Stalin’s and Hitler’s in the late 1930s. Swedish
foreign minister Carl Bildt has correctly drawn an analogy between
Putin’s "justification" for dismembering Georgia — because of the
Russians in South Ossetia — to Hitler’s tactics vis a vis
Czechoslovakia to "free" the Sudeten Deutsch. Even more ominous is the
analogy of what Putin is doing vis-a-vis Georgia to what Stalin did
vis-a-vis Finland: subverting by use of force the sovereignty of a
small democratic neighbor. In effect, morally and strategically,
Georgia is the Finland of our day.

The question the international community now confronts is how to
respond to a Russia that engages in the blatant use of force with
larger imperial designs in mind: to reintegrate the former Soviet
space under the Kremlin’s control and to cut Western access to the
Caspian Sea and Central Asia by gaining control over the Baku/Ceyhan
pipeline that runs through Georgia.

In brief, the stakes are very significant. At stake is access to
oil as that resource grows ever more scarce and expensive and how a
major power conducts itself in our newly interdependent world, conduct
that should be based on accommodation and consensus, not on brute
force.

If Georgia is subverted, not only will the West be cut off from
the Caspian Sea and Central Asia. We can logically anticipate that
Putin, if not resisted, will use the same tactics toward the Ukraine.
Putin has already made public threats against Ukraine."

Brzezinski, Holbrooke and Albright form the "Imperialist A-Team";
these are not the bungling "Keystone Cops" neocons like Feith and
Rumsfeld who trip over themselves getting out of bed in the morning.
They know what they are doing and they are good at it. They’re not
fools. They have aligned themselves with the Obama camp and are
preparing for the next big outbreak of global trouble-making. This
should serve as a sobering wake-up call for voters who still think
Obama represents "Change We Can Believe In".

Richard Holbrooke appeared on Tuesday’s Jim Lerher News Hour with
resident neocon Margaret Warner. Typical of Warner’s "even-handed"
approach, both of the interviewees were ultra-conservatives from
right-wing think tanks: Richard Holbrooke, from the Council on Foreign
Relations and Dmiti Simes from the Nixon Center.

According to Holbrooke, "The Russians deliberately provoked (the
fighting in South Ossetia) and timed it for the Olympics. This is a
long-standing Russian effort to get rid of President Saakashvili."

Right. Is that why Putin was so shocked when he heard the news (while
he was in Beijing) that he quickly boarded a plane and headed for
Moscow? (after shaking his finger angrily at Bush!)

Holbrooke: "And I want to stress, I’m not a warmonger, and I don’t
want a new Cold War any more than Dimitri does….The Russians wish to
re-establish a historic area of hegemony that includes Ukraine. And it
is no accident that the other former Soviet republics are watching
this and extraordinarily upset, as Putin progresses with an attempt to
re-create a kind of a hegemonic space."

It is impossible to go over all of Holbrooke’s distortions,
half-truths and lies but, what is important is to recognize that a
story is being constructed to demonize Putin and to justify future
hostilities against Russia. Holbrooke’s bogus assertions are identical
to Brzezinski’s, and yet, these same lies are already appearing in the
mainstream media. The propaganda "bullet points" have already been
determined; "Putin is a menace","Putin wants to rebuild the Soviet
empire", "Putin is an autocrat". (Unlike our "freedom loving" allies
in Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt!?!) In truth, Putin is simply
enjoying Russia’s newly acquired energy-wealth and would like to be
left alone.

So why are Brzezinski and his backers in the foreign policy
establishment demonizing Putin and threatening Russia with "ostracism,
isolation and economic penalties?" What is Putin’s crime?

Putin’s problems can be traced back to a speech he made in Munich
nearly two years ago when he declared unequivocally that he rejected
the basic tenets of the Bush Doctrine and US global hegemony. His
speech amounted to a Russian Declaration of Independence. That’s when
western elites, particularly at the Council on Foreign Relations and
the American Enterprise Institute put Putin on their "enemies list"
along with Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Castro, Morales, Mugabe and anyone
else who refuses to take orders from the Washington Mafia.

Here’s what Putin said in Munich:

The unipolar world refers to a world in which there is one master,
one sovereign—- one center of authority, one center of force, one
center of decision-making. At the end of the day this is pernicious
not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign
itself because it destroys itself from within…. What is even more
important is that the model itself is flawed because at its basis
there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilization.

Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved
any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and
created new centers of tension. Judge for yourselves—wars as well as
local and regional conflicts have not diminished. More are dying than
before. Significantly more, significantly more!

Today we are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper-use of force –
military force – in international relations, force that is plunging
the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts.

We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic
principles of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a
matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to one state’s legal
system. One state and, of course, first and foremost the United
States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is
visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies
it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about
this?

In international relations we increasingly see the desire to
resolve a given question according to so-called issues of political
expediency, based on the current political climate. And of course this
is extremely dangerous. It results in the fact that no one feels safe.
I want to emphasize this – no one feels safe! Because no one can feel
that international law is like a stone wall that will protect them. Of
course such a policy stimulates an arms race.

I am convinced that we have reached that decisive moment when we
must seriously think about the architecture of global security.

Every word Putin spoke was true which is why it was not reprinted in
the western media.

"Unilateral and illegitimate military actions", the "uncontained
hyper-use of force", the "disdain for the basic principles of
international law", and most importantly; "No one feels safe!"

Putin’s claims are all indisputable, that is why he has entered the
neocons crosshairs. He poses a direct challenge to what Brzezinski
calls the "international system", which is shorthand for the
corporate/banking cartel that is controlled by the western oligarchy
of racketeers.

Was the Goergian attack last Thursday a set-up, organized in
Washington? Unfortunately for Bush, the wily Russian prime minister is
considerably brighter than anyone in the current administration.
Bush’s plan will undoubtedly backfire and disrupt the geopolitical
balance of power. The world might get that breather from the US after
all.

Mike Whitney can be reached at [email protected]

IMEX INVITES CONFERENCE AND CONVENTION CENTRES TO "GO WILD"

eTravelBlackboard MICE News
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Australia

New convention and conference centres in emerging destinations are
being invited to apply for the 2009 IMEX Wild Card Programme for the
first time.

The amendment to Wild Card rules has been motivated by findings from
the IMEX Politicians’ Forum which suggest that newly built convention
or conference centres in fledgling destinations often suffer from
lack of local political support and understanding. By opening the
scheme to include new venues (up to three years old) as well as the
destinations in their own right, IMEX hopes to give Wild Card winners a
valuable global endorsement which can be used to reinforce prominence,
funding and goodwill locally.

The IMEX Wild Card Programme offers a high profile opportunity for
emerging destinations and new convention centres in such destinations
to learn about the global meetings market and to hone their offering
and market positioning in front of a relevant and active worldwide
audience of buyers. It also provides a forum for winners to build
important contacts and potential partnerships for the future.

IMEX will be offering four free Wild Card places at its 2009 trade
show which takes place from May 26th – 28th in Messe Frankfurt. Each
winner will receive a place in the Wild Card "Look to the Future"
Pavilion in addition to a valuable support package that includes
year-round marketing and sales advice plus subsidised air travel
and accommodation.

Says Dale Hudson, IMEX Projects Manager, "This year IMEX welcomed
over 3500 exhibiting companies from 150 countries plus 3,600 hosted
buyers from 58 world markets, amongst a total of 8,700 visitors. For
Wild Card Winners this translates into an exceptional opportunity to
meet interested buyers, gain feedback and learn from and share ideas
with established exhibitors. The Wild Card Programme is genuinely
unique in the industry and reflects our ongoing pledge to support
meetings industry growth, diversity and innovation."

Application forms to win a Wild Card place can be found
online. Applicants are not permitted to have exhibited at a major
meetings or incentive travel trade fair before. They also have to
demonstrate that they have the commitment and capacity to handle new
business and that their destination has the infrastructure to support
the demands of the meetings and incentive travel market.

Recent winners of IMEX Wild Card places have included Armenia, Addis
Ababa, City of Praia in the Cape Verde Islands and Transylvania.

Speaking about the benefits of becoming a Wild Card winner, Tigran
Ghahramanyan, President of Armenian Event, says, "As a new company in
the meetings market we were able to represent our destination to the
world market at IMEX. Thanks to Wild Card we made very useful contacts
that gave us the chance to develop Armenia as a new destination. We
believe Wild Card is a great idea and have advertised our win widely
to all our partners."

The closing deadline for Wild Card 2009 entries is 14th November 2008.

ANC URGES ARMENIAN AUTHORITIES TO TAKE ACTIVE POSITION ON SITUATION IN GEORGIA

Noyan Tapan

Au g 14, 2008

YEREVAN, AUGUST 14, NOYAN TAPAN. The Armenian National Congress
(ANC) is concerned about the situation in neighboring Georgia and the
possible undesirable political, social and humanitarian consequences
(for Armenia) of the current developments in the region, coordinator of
the ANC Center Levon Zurabian stated at the August 14 press conference.

During the press conference, a statement of ANC was read, in which the
Congress expresses its perplexity at the passive position of Armenian
authorities on the issue of the strained situation in Georgia. The
statement contains a call for the de facto Armenian authorities to
take a number of active steps, in particular, to express officially
condolence to all the conflict sides on their casualties, announce
a willingness to provide humanitarian aid to those who suffered as a
result of military operations, to organize visits of representatives
of the respective Armenian departments to Moscow and Tbilisi with
the aim of ensuring regular supply of Armenia, etc.

As for the statement of deputy chairman of the ruling Republican Party
of Armenia (RPA) Galust Sahakian that in case of an attack on Armenia,
Serzh Sargsyan would have interrupted his vacation in Olympic Beijing,
L. Zurabian said: "I am glad that at least in case of an attack on
Armenia, Serzh Sargsyan would return to the country".

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ANC DEVELOPS MODEL OF "SHADOW GOVERNMENT"

Noyan Tapan

Au g 14, 2008

YEREVAN, AUGUST 14, NOYAN TAPAN. The Armenian National Congress (ANC),
whose short-term goal is resignation of president Serzh Sargsyan,
also has a long-term goal: to create a union that will undertake the
function of governance in the country. ANC today is already developing
a model of "shadow government", coordinator of the ANC Center Levon
Zurabian stated at the August 14 press conference.

He appealed to Armenian citizens to join ANC and announced that
individual admission of citizens to ANC starts on August 18. As
regards political forces, L. Zurabian said that the ANC consisting
of 16 parties is open to other parties for joining it.

Speaking about the next steps of the opposition, L. Zurabian said that
in the future too ANC will exercise its constitutional right to apply
to the mayor’s office for notification about holding a meeting. In
his words, ANC is more interested in holding sanctioned meetings that
"pass in a less strained atmosphere".

According to L. Zurabian, ANC tries to prove to PACE and other
international organizations that the amendments made in the law on
meetings are in essence false and the authorities continue to prevent
the opposition from holding its meetings.

As for the position of outside forces on the internal political
situation in Armenia, the ANC Center coordinator said that the visits
of ANC representatives to various countries and the response of the
press of these countries bear evidence of the fact that the opposition
movement in Armenia has received international recognition.

GRISHA VIRABIAN GIVES UP STRUGGLE FOR VACANT MANDATE OF NATIONAL ASSEMBLY DEPUTY

Noyan Tapan

Au g 14, 2008

YEREVAN, AUGUST 14, NOYAN TAPAN. Non-party man, unemployed Grisha
Virabian – one of the two candidates to run in a by-election of a
National Assembly deputy by the majoritarian electoral system at
electoral district No 17 in Ararat marz on August 24, announced his
decision to withdraw his candidacy in by the envisaged deadline, NT
correspondent was informed by the chairman of the district electoral
commission Armen Margarian. Thus, the only remaining candidate who
will run for the vacant mandate of NA deputy is the chief of the
RA presidential staff, member of the board of the Republican Party
of Armenia (RPA) Hovik Abrahamian. He was nominated by a decision
of the RPA board. The four parties forming the coalition: RPA, ARF,
"Orinats Yerkir" and "Prosperous Armenia" on August 1 issued a joint
statement about their endorsing H. Abrahamian’s candidacy.

Electoral district No 17 includes the city of Artashat and 24 adjacent
rural settlements of Ararat marz.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

DIOCESE OF ARMENIAN CHURCH OF AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND CELEBRATE 40th ANNIVERSARY OF FORMATION

Noyan Tapan

Au g 14, 2008

SYDNEY, AUGUST 14, ARMENIANS TODAY – NOYAN TAPAN. On August 2 in Sydney
"1968: A Year of Significance" celebration was held devoted to the
40th anniversary of the formation of the Diocese of the Armenian Church
of Australia and New Zealand and the ordaining of the future Primate.

After the formation of the Diocese of the Armenian Church of Australia
and New Zealand on January 15, 1968, the future Primate of the
Diocese was ordained a celibate priest in Jerusalem on 28 July of
the same year.

Among the list of distinguished guests were clergy, local government
and community representatives. The occasion also welcomed guests from
the Armenian Church of Kolkata, India, Father Oshagan Gulgulian and
Wardens Mrs Susan Reuben and Mrs Sunil Sobti with their spouses.

ARMENIAN SPORTSMEN WIN 3rd MEDAL AT BEIJING 2008 GAMES

Noyan Tapan

Au g 14, 2008

BEIJING, AUGUST 14, NOYAN TAPAN. Armenia has won its third bronze
medal at the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games. Weightlifter Gevorg Davtian
took third place in 77 kg category.

According to Radio Liberty, Sa Jae-hyouk of South Korea became champion
in this weight category, while Li Hongli of China won the silver medal.

Greco-Roman wrestler Yuri Patrikeyev (Armenia) was beaten by Mijain
Lopez of Cuba (0-5) in a 120 kg quater-final match.