Month: December 2008

TURKISH TZUGTZWANG
Vardan Grigoryan

Hayots Ashkharh Daily
11 Dec 2008
Armenia

Ankara to be unmasked

The Armenian and Turkish intellectuals’ recent statements over
the recognition of the Armenian Genocide bring the official Ankara
face-to-face with serious problems.

The official circles of Turkey seemed to be accustomed to the
situation of constantly opposing the official Yerevan’s appeals
of starting a dialogue and restoring the relationship without
preconditions. And every time, they invented new and new fantastic
preconditions for Armenia. Now, however, neither the Turkish nor the
Armenian intellectuals have advanced any concrete issue of interstate
importance so as to give Ankara the opportunity of "bargaining".

On the contrary, both parties have put the emphasis on the Armenian
Genocide, an irrefutable fact that has separated the two peoples from
each other.

Moreover, the Turkish intellectuals have already recognized the fact;
they have apologized to the Armenians and called on our people to join
them. As to the representatives of the Armenian intelligentsia, they
have addressed their demand to Turkish President Abdullah Gul, one of
the vanguards striving for the normalization of the Armenian-Turkish
relations.

Of course, we may have no hopes and illusions as far as Gul is
concerned, because expressing the official stance of his country
A. Gul will either tr y to act from the vulnerable positions of those
denying the Armenian Genocide or will just have to remain silent. In
both cases, the Turkish leader will be "down in the dumps" because
he is used to adorning himself with the laurels of the champion of
"friendship" and "dialogue".

Moreover, unlike Armenia and the Armenian society which are unanimous
in their assessments of the fact of the Armenian Genocide, the
Turkish society has found itself entangled in internal discontent and
debates. The nationalistic circles condemn the bold step undertaken
by intellectuals like Baksyn Oran, whereas the official Ankara still
remains silent. Because to speak would mean to equalize oneself with
Devlet Bahcheli and the "grey wolves", and to remain silent would
mean to arouse doubts among the latter.

But the time passes and the inauguration of the US President
and the winter session of Congress are drawing near. Naturally,
instead of starting idle talks about the friendly relations between
the Armenians and the Turks, they expect the Turkish President to
undertake concrete steps towards lifting the blockade of Armenia and
establishing diplomatic ties with our country.

Whereas the Armenian side has no reason for making haste, therefore
it isn’t going to agree with the preconditions proposed by Turkey.

Therefore, during his upcoming visit to Israel, Abdullah Gul will
try to receive20the support of the Jewish lobby of the United States
so as to suspend the process of the recognition of the Armenian
Genocide. Calculated to talk President-elect Barrack Obama out of his
intentions, such plans are undoubtedly conditioned by the expectations
from Ram Emmanuel, candidate for the Head of the Presidential staff,
and other figures representing the Jewish lobby.

We believe that an increased number of appeals and declarations
demanding that Turkey recognize the Armenian Genocide may be
strictly important for the present moment. It’s time the Armenian
intellectuals of the Diaspora addressed such Declarations to Turkey and
the pro-Armenian figures of Europe, United States and Russia. During
the upcoming months, it will be necessary to put the Turkish leaders
under a propaganda pressure, so as they will not be able to even
think about applying their primitive propaganda tools against Armenia.

Furthermore, while writing such appeals or declarations, it is
necessary to forget about the opening of the Armenian-Turkish border or
the establishment of diplomatic ties without any preconditions. These
are issues to be tackled only by the diplomats of the given countries,
because whenever being transferred to the political domain, such
issues are obviously speculated by Turkey. It is necessary to hit
the target that can make Turkey vulnerable and force the country to
change its current hostile policy in relation to Armenia.

In the course of the upcoming months, it will be necessary to
raise the issue of the recognition of the Armenian Genocide on
international arenas and in the pages of the press. And after all,
the American President is required to keep the promise he gave the
American-Armenians and start a process of collecting appeals and
declarations and organize rallies and marches.

The Turkish leaders should direct their persistent attempts of
pretending a dialogue against the official Ankara and mount a strong
wave of protest with a demand of recognizing the Armenian Genocide.

DEMOCRACY ON THE LEVEL OF YEREVAN
Lilit Poghosyan

Hayots Ashkharh Daily
11 Dec 2008
Armenia

Paruyr Hayrikyan Proposes

Parliamentary hearings were held in the National Assembly yesterday,
prior to the second reading of the bill on "The Local Self-Governance
and Territorial Administration".

Why should the Major of Yerevan be elected by the internal
representative body, in the person of the council of the aldermen,
and not by the citizens of Yerevan? Why should we pin our hopes upon
indirect elections, if we can do it directly, that is to say by way of
direct elections? Why should they restrict the entry of the political
forces to the parliament?

Is it right to define 100% proportional election system for the
formation of the council of aldermen and to deprive the individual
citizens from nominating their candidacy? Are we not humiliating the
institute of the aldermen by defining that the Major is competent to
dissolve this representative instance, any time?

In response to our questions leader of "National Self-Determination
Union", participant of the inter-party discussions Paruyr Hayrikyan
expresses his viewpoint.

"In general the legislative body, in this case the Parliament of
Yerevan, is established as a representative body, not to be interested
in the contents of law, but to be guided by principles.

It is evident that the main forces involved in th e elaboration
of this bill are interested in this law, that is to say they wrote
the bill for themselves, but it must have been for Yerevan and the
citizens of Yerevan. This is the main issue.

According to the new Constitution Yerevan has become a Community
and we already have a tradition of forming communities, even if
not perfect, still a tradition, according to which the head of the
community is elected by direct elections. Whereas alderman is not a
separate organizational unit.

Its activity is guided by the leaders of the communities. Consequently
that representative body can’t be counterbalance and supervise it. That
is to say the mechanism of the counterbalance doesn’t work perfectly.

Yerevan is becoming a community. And we are annihilating the existing
mechanism of counterbalance instead of making it perfect. The
representative body, the council of the aldermen, elects the
Major. This doesn’t contribute to the development of democracy.

It is quite unacceptable to artificially give 20% more to the electoral
unit. It is also very strange that they create lots of obstacles. If
it is a representative body so why do they create obstacles for them.

For instance 9 parties can obtain 20% votes, but because this is
not enough to overcome the minimum barrier they will not have a
representative in the parliament of Yerevan. And on the contrary,
one party gets 20% and the votes of all the other parties, which
failed will pass to them. This is not a healthy approach."

"What do you propose instead?"

"Our stance is clear. The Major of Yerevan is elected by direct
elections, in parallel with the elections of the council of the
aldermen.

The electoral units must participate in the elections of the aldermen,
which are: the parties, the unions, and the citizens.

Those who got maximum votes gain seats in the parliament and they
elect their Speaker. The latter heads the activity of the aldermen
with his/her staff.

Each member of the parliament votes according to the votes he/she
has obtained. If someone participates in the elections and obtains 40
thousand votes, the other electoral unit – party, obtains 60 thousand
votes and three people gain seats in the parliament, each of them will
have 20 thousand votes. This is what we call ideal democracy. Each
voting turns into a referendum, with the involvement of Yerevan –
and the decisions are made by the ratio of not 33 for, 32 against,
but 400 thousand for, 350 thousand against. Thus the parliament of
Yerevan becomes a perfect representative body."

"Life shows that in countries like ours each election turns into a
trouble for our society. Why should we hold elections every year and
create tension in the political circles?"

"If you subordinate the idea of democracy to your own considerations,20
this means you are not honest. Democracy is an absolute value. And
if you don’t see progress this doesn’t mean that you must give up,
on the contrary you must try more and more.

And if you are elected for 2 years, you feel less tension. And
in case you are not elected you will not protest, you will think,
"Ok I will try next time".

C.S.T.O. TO INCREASE THE ACTIVENESS OF ITS WORK IN ALL DIRECTIONS
Gevorg Haroutyunyan

Hayots Ashkharh Daily
11 Dec 2008
Armenia

The secretaries of the security councils of the member states of the
Collective Security Treaty Organization convened the regular session
of their committee on December 9-10. Yesterday afternoon the whole
staff of the committee had a meeting with the journalists.

The opening speech was made by ARTHUR BAGHDASARYAN, Head of
the Committee of Secretaries. Mr. Baghdasaryan said that the two
working days of the regular session of the committee had been quite
effective. "We made several important decisions. The important thing is
that the CSTO Security Council will work with increased effectiveness
and continue developing its functions.

In particular, during the sessions we were familiarized with CSTO
Secretary General Nikolay Brodyuzha’s report on the activities carried
out over the past year. It is obvous that the Collective Security
Treaty organization is strengthening further and extending the scope
of its activities.

We also discussed the issue of establishing a center directing its
activities towards the elimination of the new challenges and threats
and coordinating the counterbalances. We attached primary importance
to the fight against terrorism and extremism and the counter-balance to
drug trafficking. We also attached importance to the measures ensuring
informational security. We agreed to create collective forces combating
terrorism throughout the region, as well as set up emergency groups."

A. Baghdasaryan also said that by the proposal of Secretary of the
RF Security Council Nikolay Patroushev, the statement of the security
councils of the CSTO member states was discussed and adopted. In this
connection, Mr.

Patroushev reminded that during his visit to France, President of
the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev submitted an initiative on
signing a European Security Treaty.

And with the purpose of fixing the five principles underlined by
the RF President, a relevant statement was adopted on behalf of
the CSTO member states. "Guided by the clauses of the declaration
adopted during the Moscow session of the CSTO Security Council, we
reiterate our support to the initiatives of the Russian Federation for
signing a European Security Treaty as a legally binding document. The
documents will give us the opportunity to create a united and reliable
Euro-Atlantic collective security system.

Underlining the importance of elaborating this document, the CSTO
member states welcome and attach significance to the Russian-French
initiative of convening a pan-European summit with the participation
of the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE),
Commonwealth of Independent State (CIS), Collective Security Treaty
Organization (CSTO) the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) and discussing th e prospects of the architecture
of security.

The CSTO Secretary General underlined that the member states of the
Collective Security Treaty Organization do not pursue any goal for
extending their staff and have not discussed the question on the
membership of new states.

"At the same time, it should be noted that apart from the 7 member
states, there are also 22 countries participating in the CSTO security
programs. Therefore, the CSTO is becoming a nucleus or a specific
kind of centre ensuring security. This factor has become especially
significant after the August developments. Therefore, we will increase
the activeness of our work in all directions."

THEY CALL TO QUIT

Hayots Ashkharh Daily
11 Dec 2008
Armenia

Some organizations in Karabakh appealed to Armenian President Serge
Sargsyan to remove the image of Nagorno Karabakh Autonomous Region,
which doesn’t exist and to replace it by the maps of the Republic
of Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh, in the maps of the meteorological
predictions.

According to the letter, "The presentation of the map of Nagorno
Karabakh Autonomous Region by the Armenian Public TV, after the
declaration of the Republic of Nagorno Karabakh continuously defames
not only the televiewers of Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh but also
the Diaspora."

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

TIGRANAKERT TURNS INTO AN ENCLOSURE

Hayots Ashkharh Daily
11 Dec 2008
Armenia

The town Tigranakert located on the left side of Aghdam-Mardakert
highway got the status of an enclosure.

This decision was made during the discussion of NKR budget. 35 million
drams is envisaged for the continuation of the excavations in this
town by NKR’s budget of 2009.

NKR PRESIDENT ISSUED A CONGRATULATORY…

Azat Artsakh Daily
10 Dec 08
Republic of Nagorno Karabakh [NKR

In connection with the anniversary of the NKR State Independence
Referendum and the Constitution Day NKR President Bako Sahakyan issued
a congratulatory address to the citizens of the republic. The address
reads as follows: "Respected citizens of the Nagorno Karabagh Republic,
Dear compatriots, The tenth of December is one of the most memorable
days for our people. On very day in 1991 our people officially sealed
their will to form free, independent and sovereign state. And it was
not a coincident that 15 years later on this very day of 2006 the
people of Artsakh once again expressed their resoluteness to further
strengthen and develop independent statehood and on a nation-wide
referendum adopted the basic of the country – the NKR Constitution. It
has marked the irreversibility of our state policy to build democratic
country, our commitment to the follow international norms and integrate
with the civilized world. The basic law of the country is among
the attributes of independent statehood. It guarantees rights and
freedoms of people and citizens, regulates internal life of the state
and its relations with the world. It is a specific bridge between the
past, the present and the future of the country and its people. The
Constitution clearly states that independence and secure existence20of
Artsakh have no alternatives. Dear friends, I congratulate all our
people once again on this very important holiday and cordially wish
you peace, good health and happiness. All the best to you."

NKR PRESIDENT RECEIVED ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA

Azat Artsakh Daily
12 Dec 08
Republic of Nagorno Karabakh [NKR

On 9 December NKR President Bako Sahakyan received attorney general
of the Republic of Armenia Aghvan Hovsepyan. A wide range of issue
related to cooperation between the two Armenian states in legal sphere
as well as to the reforms being carried out in the appropriate sphere
of the republic.

The Head of the State considered important signing of a cooperation
agreement between the offices of public prosecutor of the Republic
of Armenia and the Nagorno Karabagh Republic calling it a solid basis
for further development of interrelations between the two structures.
Head of the Office of the NKR President, secretary of the Security
Council Marat Mousayelyan, NKR attorney general Arshavir Gharamyan
and other partook at the meeting.

CSTO CHIEF WARNS OF DETERIORATING SITUATION IN AFGHANISTAN

RIA Novosti
13:54 | 12/ 12/ 2008

MOSCOW, December 12 (RIA Novosti) – The current trend in Afghanistan
is that the situation is deteriorating, the head of the Collective
Security Treaty Organization said on Friday.

"The trend is for deterioration in the situation in Afghanistan,
Taliban militants have almost restored their units and systems of
rule, they control a significant part of the territory and all this
is taking place against the background of an unstable situation in
Pakistan," Nikolai Bordyuzha said.

Southern Afghanistan is the stronghold of the radical Taliban movement
which was ousted by the U.S.-led coalition from government in the
2001 campaign.

The Taliban have intensified attacks on Afghan and foreign troops
this year.

Bordyuzha said that efforts introduced by the antiterrorism coalition
forces in Afghanistan "unfortunately have not yielded the desired
results," adding that the CSTO is ready to continue cooperation with
NATO-led forces in the country.

The CSTO is a security grouping comprising the former Soviet republics
of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Uzbekistan,
and Tajikistan.

NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) has about 53,000
troops in Afghanistan under a UN mandate to help give security support
to the Afghan government and stop the flow of drugs from the country.

Despite the recent deterioration of relations with NATO, Russia
continues to support the military alliance’s operations in Afghanistan,
and has said it shares NATO’s concerns over the worsening security
situation in the country.

WHISPER BLOODY MURDER?
By Paul Sookiasian

Frida y, December 5, 2008

Less than a month ago news started coming across the wires that
surprised many in the Armenian-American community. A CNN press
release said that it would be airing a program by their respected
correspondent Christiane Amanpour, entitled, "Scream Bloody Murder,"
which would deal with the lack of response to genocides of the 20th
century. The release specifically mentioned Armenia as one of the
cases of genocide it would be examining.

This naturally created some excitement that finally a major
news organization would be dedicating a program partly to the so
often overlooked Armenian Genocide of 1915 and inform a nationwide
audience about it. Word was spread by phone and internet with many
Armenian-Americans excited that the mainstream media would finally
take a look at our forgotten genocide.

Personally, I was a little suspicious and the day before the showed
aired I found out through a source that, as I had suspected, the
total time dedicated to the Armenian Genocide in this two hour program
would be 45 seconds. However the many other Armenians who did not know
this went into the show expecting at long last some serious interest
in the plight of their ancestors from one of these many 20th century
genocides. They must have been sorely disappointed. Before the show had
even ended people I know were angrily posting messages20of shock and
disappointment that something billed as a documentary about genocide,
inclusive of the Armenian case, would dedicate large portions of time
to all the other cases but less than a fleeting minute to Armenia.

What’s so interesting is the title of the CNN show to begin with
invokes the imagery of screaming and talked to those who screamed
about genocide, a notion identical to that of Carla Garapedian’s
Armenian Genocide documentary "Screamers". This idea of screaming
about genocide to make it known was originated by Harvard scholar
Dr. Samantha Power in her Pulitzer Prize-winning book "A Problem from
Hell". She was featured in "Screamers" and it is hard to think that
the CNN special was not at least in part inspired by Power’s work
based on this similarity. It bares mentioning that Power dedicated
a chapter of her book on genocide to the Armenian Genocide and so
one can assume that if put in charge of planning "Scream Bloody
Murder" she would have found it worthy of much more screen time
than 45 seconds. This is not to say that CNN should be condemned for
mentioning the Armenian Genocide, but the off-handed manner in which
1915 gets mentioned (despite Armenia having been prominently billed
as one of the documentary’s subjects in the original press release)
when the other examples of genocide each received on average the
space of time through two commercial breaks seems to imply it is a
les ser example or somehow not central to the subject of genocide.

Flying in the face of this conception though is the fact mentioned in
the documentary that 1915 inspired Lemkin to coin the word genocide
and really got him thinking about the crime in the first place. As
one can see in the documentary Screamers or Power’s book, there was
no lack of screaming going on in the Armenian case either. Ambassador
Henry Morgenthau’s story is a now legendary example of someone who
stood up to the very face of genocide and tried to scream about it to
the world. This screaming reached its way to the top, as evidenced by
this article regarding Secretary of State at the time William Jennings
Bryan, but unfortunately it couldn’t be stopped. Other screamers
included Consul Leslie A. Davis who told tales of genocide which
sound frighteningly similar to those which occurred later in Rwanda
and Cambodia as mentioned in "Scream Bloody Murder". Even though the
Armenian Genocide is over its effect and the fact it is unrecognized
by Turkey still resound today in the highest levels of world affairs,
geopolitics, and is quite relevant to our world today even though it
is almost a hundred years in the past. Just a few years ago former US
Ambassador to Armenia John Evans was fired by the State Department for
screaming proper recognition of the genocide. This story compliments
those mentioned by CNN, such as that of Canadian general in Rwanda
Romeo Dallaire, of those who screamed and paid the price (and is
a unique twist in that this scream was so long after the genocide
happened as opposed to while it was going on).

Despite being largely overlooked, the Armenian Genocide was even
referenced in the Genocide Convention covered by Amanpour as having
finally put into law the crime of genocide. While it is too late
now to go back and create a new segment on the Armenian Genocide to
place in the already aired documentary, that does not mean CNN has no
way of rectifying this error. I had been feeling hopeful about the
documentary and might have given it more of a pass on this omission
until I saw this interactive map on the section of Scream Bloody Murder
section of CNN’s website about the world’s killing fields. It appears
that despite the fact when it had first been announced Armenia was
prominently mentioned as one of the examples of genocide that would be
covered, it failed to even be pinpointed on the interactive map as an
example of genocide. This is a very strange thing to ponder since one
would assume if the Armenian Genocide is mentioned in the promotional
material it’d be listed on this interactive map. This seems to compound
the insult of being only mentioned for 45 seconds in the documentary
to being completely forgotten on their world map of genocides and
makes me question what went on behind the sc enes. Perhaps they
found it too provocative to pinpoint a NATO ally such as Turkey and
decided that since marking the Armenian Genocide would mean marking
Turkey it’d be best to just leave Armenia off despite the fact it is
even mentioned in the documentary? Despite the fact it says almost
nothing about the Armenian Genocide, Scream Bloody Murder hasn’t gone
unnoticed in Turkey after all, as this Turkish newspaper article from
Hurriyet yesterday makes clear: "Genocide feature worrisome"

Whatever the case, this oversight is extremely unfortunate and
Armenians and Americans alike should take CNN to task. American
officials were the first to scream out in the 20th century – a proud
fact swept under the rug.

Besides letting CNN know they should have paid more attention to the
original example of 20th century genocide in their documentary, it
can show its good faith immediately by placing the Armenian Genocide
on their website’s interactive map as it deserves. For an otherwise
well-done documentary on the importance of screaming bloody murder
whenever and wherever it happens, this blank spot over Turkey doubles
as a shameful and bloody stain

To write to CNN, or to post your question for Christiane Amanpour,
take action here:

Amanpour Screams ‘Bloody Murder’ But Not about Armenian Genocide

By Ara Khachatourian, Asbarez.com, 4 December 2008

A powerful documentary entitled "Scream Bloody Murder anchored by
Christiane Amanpour premiering on CNN today (9 p.m. ET/PT) offers a
gripping look at Genocide throughout history and those who

witnessed and warned a deaf world about such atrocities, but neglects
to mention the Armenian Genocide as the first such event that prompted
Raphael Lemkin to coin the phrase.

The documentary begins with the roots of the word Genocide and
chronicles the stormy conflicts within Lemkin, who, as Amanpour
puts it, was affected by the slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians by
Ottoman Turks and was prompted to coin the phrase Genocide. In the
almost 90-minute press screener, the Armenian Genocide was mentioned
for about 45 seconds as an anecdotal reference to Lemkin’s struggle
for human justice. Using photographs now familiar to all Armenians
and possibly obtained from Armin T. Wegner Collection, Amanpour
illustrates the horror of the Armenian Genocide but does not delve
into it in as in-depth and compelling manner as she does the other
instances of Genocide.

Throughout the program, Amanpour "reveals stories of those who tried to
stop genocide," as the CNN press information describes it and discusses
the horrific stories of Genocide with "heroes who witnessed evil– and
‘screamed bloody murder’ for the international community to stop it.

Amanpour and CNN should be applauded for the in-depth look at Genocide,
from the Holocaust to the killing fields of Cambodia, to I raq, Rwanda,
Bosnia and now Darfur the horror of it all is told with searing images
and graphic eyewitness accounts.

To bring attention to Genocide, on the eve of the 60th anniversary of
the adoption of UN Convention of Genocide and Human Rights, authored
by Lemkin, is an important accomplishment, one that also asks the
hard question of why the world did (does) not interfere when it has
a moral obligation.

Amanpour adeptly clarifies the political machinations behind the
response–or lack thereof–by the US in all instances featured in the
report and wonders, at the end, whether others who "scream bloody
murder" will be heard. One wonders, however, if Amanpour heard the
screams of Henry Morgenthau, the US Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire
at the time of the Armenian Genocide, who along with Elie Wiesel,
Father Francois Ponchaud, Peter Galbraith, Richard Holbrook, Canadian
General Romeo Dallaire and others who bore witness to such unspeakable
atrocities and whose warnings prompted action but not soon enough to
save millions of lives.

Perhaps, the Armenian community can now prompt CNN, as it did eight
years ago ABC News and its venerable anchor the late Peter Jennings
to take a closer look at the first Genocide of the 20th Century.

Amanpour’s "Scream Bloody Murder" is an important piece of journalism
as it asks the very critical questions that could have prevented so
many acts of Geno cide. In its reporting, Amanpour is also very adept
at pointing to US complicity in all these events, much like Samantha
Power was in her Pulitzer Prize-winning book "A Problem from Hell:
America and the Age of Genocide."

"Scream Bloody Murder" anchored by CNN Chief International
Correspondent Christiane Amanpour airs on CNN Thursday at 9 p.m.

Eastern/Pacific, with an encore at midnight Eastern and Pacific.

1) Post your question on CNN iReport

Ask Christiane Amanpour a question about this serious shortcoming in
her documentary through CNN iReport,

an interactive feature that allows you to post video and text viewable
by the millions of visitors to CNN’s website. Your posting will also
be searchable on Google News.

View an effective CNN iReport

posting commenting on "Scream Bloody Murder".

2) Write directly to CNN’s editors

Send a free ANCA WebFax to CNN’s leadership pointing out this
shortcoming and asking them to address this gap in their reporting
in future coverage of genocide-related issues.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

THE CRITIC IS NOT THE ENEMY
By Avedis Kevorkian

6 December 2008

There are very few people I have ever met who can match the passion
and zeal, and the boundless energy, of Bagrad Nazarian when it comes to
matters-Armenian. To add to these, he has put his money where his mouth
is (to use an apt, but clumsy, cliché) and has invested in Artsakh.

Having worked with him for many years, during my time in London, I can
attest that keeping up with him was a challenge–but one undertaken
with joy.

Thus it is with heavy heart, and no joy, that I respond to his
comments about my recent essay and also, it would appear this
web-site’s policies.

My essay was about corruption in Armenia and I used as the peg on
which to hang the essay the petition on this web-site protesting the
threat to freedom of the press in Armenia and I expressed my view
that it will have no affect on the crooks and thieves and thugs who
are ruining Armenia. (I say, again, however, if there are among you
those who think such petitions will do any good in Yerevan, please
sign and send the petition.)

To those of you who have just joined us, permit me to suggest that
you read both the petition’s text and my comments.

As a journalist, I am aware more than most about the threats to
journalists aro und the world–and, especially, in Turkey. But I
wasn’t commenting about the threats around the world. I am aware,
also, that corruption exists elsewhere, but I wasn’t writing about the
universal corruption (though my essay in July, "The Remittance Curse"
touched on the world-wide corruption and the role the diasporas play
in abetting corruption in "homelands").

For Bagrad to suggest that Armenians in the Diaspora remain silent
about the corruption in Armenia because it exists elsewhere is to
suggest that because starvation exists in Zimbabwe, for instance,
people elsewhere should not eat anything.

Whatever shortcomings may exist in America and its press, rest assured
that investigative journalists in America win Pulitzer Prizes,
and my own organization–the Society of Professional Journalists,
to which I have belonged for more than 60 years–awards prizes for
excellence in investigative journalism and other aspects of journalism,
as do many state-based journalism associations. The only case of a
murdered investigative journalist I can recall was about 40 years
ago, and the reaction was such that journalists from throughout the
country descended on Arizona and continued the investigative work of
the slain journalist and not only helped expose the corruption he was
investigating but also helped find the murderer–who was arrested,
tried, and convicted. Our press may not be perfect, but we don’t beat
journalists as20is done in Armenia.

Neither the petition nor the essay touched on the matter of recognition
of the fact of the Armenian Genocide, so there was no need for this
web-site or me to be criticized.

What I find interesting is that after I wrote about corruption in
Armenia, earlier this year (for which I received nasty comments,
which I chose to ignore), there followed shortly thereafter a damning
report which showed that Armenia had slid down the scale of corrupt
countries. Now, following my essay under challenge, there appears
on this web-site a truly obscene report about the poor housing for
some young people in which corruption has played a hand. Would I be
considered immodest if I were to say quod erat demonstrandum?

While reading that report, I could not help but think about other
reports of the huge, luxurious villas that house the government
officials. The land on which these villas stand were more than likely
stolen from poor Armenians who could not fight back, and the money
to build these villas came from money that was supposed to have been
spent on the poor Armenian people.

Dare I ask, "Where did their money come from?"?

This is not the time or the place for me to relate my sad record
of failure to help Armenia and Artsakh during and following my two
visits to the former. But I will mention that after I narrated to
someone who =0 Aknew how things worked in Yerevan my disappointment
over the failure to get anywhere with any of the projects, I was
asked, "But after you finished your proposals, did you also say,
‘and, of course, we will give you. . .

.’?" I said "No. It was his job." He laughed so hard and so long,
I feared he would die of a heart attack.

In his reaction to my essay, Nazarian also is critical of Bruce
Tasker. I did not recognize the name nor why he should be criticized,
until I noticed his name attached to a recent essay on this web-site. I
had read it, but failed to note the name. Re-reading it, I can
understand why he, too, is on Nazarian’s "nasties" list. Tasker is
critical of things in Yerevan.

Nazarian is not a spokesman for Armenia, and there was no need for
him to be so aroused, but knowing him as I do, I am not surprised;
he will not tolerate any criticism of Armenia. (He should hear and
read my criticism of this country!) However, I would have hoped that
he would have kept his remarks private.

This is not an apology, for I have no reason to apologize, but I must
say that because I criticize the shortcomings in Armenia does not mean
that I am an enemy nor that I am encouraging the enemies of Armenia
(as someone has accused me–in private).

Armenia’s most dangerous enemies are in the Armenian government.

–Boundary_(ID_/RfaGGHK/VZcbm/8T57V4Q )–