Month: April 2010

ERDOGAN: "THERE CAN BE NO TALK OF GENOCIDE"

201 0/03/30 | 13:35

world

In a SPIEGEL interview of March 29, Turkish Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan discusses Ankara’s relationship with the European
Union, the debate over genocide against the Armenians and his role
as a mediator in the dispute over Iran’s nuclear policy.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Prime Minister, your country is currently giving a
confusing impression. It is more modern and open than it was before
you came into office, and yet it is also more pious and Islamic. Where
are you taking Turkey: toward the West, toward Europe or toward the
East?Erdogan: Turkey has changed considerably and has been modernized
in the last seven-and-a-half years. Unlike previous governments,
we take the founder of the republic, (Mustafa Kemal) Ataturk, at his
word and are trying to bring the country to the level of contemporary
civilization. In doing so, we look in all directions. We don’t turn
our face from the East when we look to the West. We see this as a
process of normalization.

SPIEGEL: The first thing a visitor sees after passport control at the
airport in Istanbul is an enormous display of the duty free shop’s
alcohol department and a poster advertising an exhibit of the revealing
work of the late Picasso. In the Mediterranean city of Alanya, on the
other hand, there are hotels with separate beaches for men and women,
which would have been unthinkable a few years ago.

Erdogan: What you saw upon arrival at the airport is a nice expression
of freedom. What you say about Alanya is something I hear for the first
time. But even if it’s true, it too is a manifestation of freedom. The
owner of a hotel like that, and his guests, are exercising a right
that we have to respect.

SPIEGEL: This week, you will host German Chancellor Angela Merkel,
who doesn’t want Turkey to join the European Union anytime soon. What
will you say to her?

Erdogan: Turkey submitted its application for associate membership in
the European Economic Community in 1959. That was 51 years ago. No
other country was subjected to such a procedure, and yet we have
remained patient. Nowadays, however, we are no longer a country
that is merely seeking membership in the European Union. Instead,
we are already negotiating for full membership. If proposals are
submitted to us today that diverge from the agreed framework of these
negotiations …

SPIEGEL: You are referring to the "privileged partnership," which
Chancellor Merkel prefers over full membership for Turkey.

Erdogan: … then this is just as strange as someone changing the
penalty rule in the middle of a football match.

SPIEGEL: Your government is trying to shape Turkey into a new regional
power. Why do you need Europe at all anymore?

Erdogan: It isn’t about what we need, but about a mutual need. Turkey
is not a burden for Europe. On the contrary, it takes a burden away
from the EU. Together with Spain, we run the United Nations Alliance
of Civilizations initiative against extremism, which benefits Europe.

We have been a member of the customs union since 1996, and we satisfy
the political criteria established in Copenhagen. In fact, we are
even closer to fulfilling the economic Maastricht criteria than some
EU member states. And then there is the fact that we are a founding
member of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) and have been a member of NATO since 1952. This makes us a
bridge between the West and 1.4 billion Muslims.

SPIEGEL: Turkey has become very self-confident, and you are considered
to be one of the most influential leaders the country has had since
Ataturk. Do you see yourself in the role of a "sultan," as some
supporters, but also critics, describe you?

Erdogan: I am the chairman of a major party that was founded by the
people. Therefore, I would never compare myself with Ataturk, the man
who founded the republic. I have no intention of becoming a padishah,
a sultan. It’s enough for me when people say good things about me.

‘We Will Be Prepared to Accept Our History’

SPIEGEL: Why doesn’t modern Turkey acknowledge the Ottoman Empire’s
genocide against the Armenians? The Foreign Affairs Committee of
the United States House of Representatives has approved an Armenian
Genocide resolution …

Erdogan: When a journalist uses the word genocide, he should take
a careful look at the issue first. There can be no talk of genocide
against the Armenians. Genocide is a legal term. In 2005, I wrote a
letter to then-Armenian President Robert Kocharian, in which I told
him that this is not a matter for politicians like us, but one that
needs to be studied by historians. There are currently millions of
documents on the subject in Turkish archives, of which more than 1
million have been examined since I wrote to Kocharian. If there are
archives in your country, I wrote to him, then make them accessible.

And if historians cannot clarify the subject sufficiently, then
let lawyers, political scientists and archaeologists take part in
the effort.

SPIEGEL: Armenians say that commissions of historians are just the
best way to put off such disputes indefinitely. And we disagree with
the notion that politicians should not talk about genocide. One person
who has used this word is the current American president.

Erdogan: If he used the word, then he did so in error. A word doesn’t
become more correct because a president uses it. And besides, the
United States is not a party to this matter. America, like other
countries, is merely a bystander here. We and the Armenians are the
only participants. This is our history. The Turkish Republic had
not yet been founded in 1915. It was the era of the Ottoman Empire,
which was allied with Germany at the time.

SPIEGEL: Isn’t the republic the legal successor of the Ottoman Empire?

Erdogan: Turkey was undoubtedly founded on what was left of the
Ottoman Empire. No nation can deny its ancestry. Anyone who denies
his ancestry is committing a sin. If something serious comes to light
after the historical examination of the past, we will be prepared to
accept our history. But it’s important that the Armenians are also
willing to accept their history.

SPIEGEL: What history should the Armenians accept in this regard?

Erdogan: This was not a mass murder committed by one side against
the other, but a battle, one that claimed the lives of Turks and
Armenians, who were loyal citizens of the Ottoman Empire. However,
some of them were later controlled by foreign powers and rose up in
an insurrection. This has to be studied very carefully.

SPIEGEL: Why have you further inflamed an already difficult debate
by mentioning the possibility of deporting all of Armenians working
illegally in Turkey?

Erdogan: It saddens me that you see it this way. I talked about what
we could do. For years, we have tolerated Armenians without residence
permits. All I said was that this doesn’t always have to be the case.

The problem of illegal workers is discussed openly all over the
world, but when someone in Turkey makes such a statement, people feel
troubled. Why?

SPIEGEL: Why do you want to punish Armenians in Turkey for genocide
resolutions adopted abroad – like the one in the United States and,
most recently, in Sweden?

Erdogan: Who says that we hold Armenians responsible for this? I
never said that. We began a process of rapprochement between Turkey
and Armenia a year ago. We want to normalize our relations. And then
the Foreign Affairs Committee in the US Congress, at the behest of
the Armenian diaspora, suddenly adopts a resolution that describes
the events of 1915 as genocide. This is not helpful. We turn to the
Armenian diaspora and those countries that support the diaspora:
There are Armenians in Turkey who are Turkish citizens, and there
are those who live in our country illegally. So far, we have not
considered the question of deportation, but if the diaspora continues
to exert pressure, we could imagine ourselves capable of doing that.

SPIEGEL: You refuse to accept the term genocide, and yet you yourself
use it frequently. For example, you accuse Israel of genocide in the
Gaza Strip. On the other hand, you defend Sudanese President Omar
al-Bashir by saying that a Muslim cannot commit genocide. Are Muslims
somehow better people than Jews or Christians?

Erdogan: You take my words completely out of context. I’m not walking
into that trap. I said that, to a certain extent, one could describe
the events in Gaza as genocide: 1,400 people died there, many of them
killed by phosphorus ammunition, more than 5,000 people were wounded
and 5,000 families became homeless.

SPIEGEL: And what about Sudan?

Erdogan: In that case, I was talking about a principle. I am a Muslim.

But I have never compared my religion with other religions. I said that
a Muslim could not commit genocide the way the United Nations defines
it. Islam is a religion of peace. Muslims believe that someone who
kills an innocent person behaves as if he were killing all of humanity.

SPIEGEL: Turkey is currently a non-permanent member of the UN Security
Council. It is also under consideration to be the country through
which an exchange of uranium enriched in Iran could take place. Will
you support sanctions against Tehran? The International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA), has doubts about the peaceful nature of the nuclear
program.

Erdogan: That’s wrong. The IAEA never made that conclusion.

SPIEGEL: In its latest report, it clearly stated that Tehran has not
cooperated sufficiently to rule out non-peaceful use.

Erdogan: I take a different view. Iran offered to transport its
enriched uranium to another country, and the Iranians wanted nuclear
fuel in return. The question, now, is where this exchange is to take
place. Former IAEA Director Mohammed ElBaradei proposed Turkey. The
Americans were opposed to it at first, but then they agreed. Now we
are waiting for an answer from Iran. Iran seemed to be considering
this possibility, but then the connection was cut off.

SPIEGEL: If Iran refuses, will you support sanctions?

Erdogan: First we have to try to find a diplomatic solution for the
problem. Sanctions have been imposed against Iran several times,
but what’s the result? Aren’t any American or German goods reaching
Iran now? They are, indirectly. Of course there is Mercedes in
Iran. And Peugeot, too. I like to speak openly. I hate hiding things
in politics. What we need is diplomacy, diplomacy, diplomacy. Anything
else will do nothing but threaten global peace. And don’t those who
are exerting pressure have nuclear bombs of their own? Turkey isn’t
a nuclear power, but there is one country in this region that does
have nuclear weapons.

SPIEGEL: You mean Israel.

Erdogan: Iran doesn’t have any nuclear weapons now, at any rate. We
say very clearly: We don’t want any nuclear weapons in our region.

SPIEGEL: Have you made this just as clear to Iranian President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

Erdogan: Of course. I speak as openly with him as I do with you. We
don’t want any nuclear weapons in this region.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Prime Minister, thank you for this interview.

Interview conducted by Daniel Steinvorth and Bernhard Zand.

ARMENIAN PM SENT CONDOLENCES TO VLADIMIR PUTIN

Panorama.am
12:01 30/03/2010

Society

Armenian PM Tigran Sargsyan sent a letter of condolence to his
Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin over the terrorist acts committed
in Moscow metro yesterday. According to Government’s press office,
the massage reads:

"Dear Vladimir Vladimiri, Accept, please, my sincere condolences on
the human losses as a result of the terrorist acts committed in the
Moscow subway. Please, convey my condolence to the relatives and
friends of the victims."

OBSERVATIONS ON THE OLD, THE NEW, AND YEREVAN
By Alen Amirkhanian

er-hall/
2010/03/29 | 00:04

Feature Stories culture

In the 1990’s I had the chance to live in Armenia for a few years. It
was my first time in Yerevan. Those were times of hardship and
suffering for Armenians: the Spitak earthquake of 1988, the war over
Nogorno Karabagh with its casualties and economic blockades, and the
country’s newly gained independence that complicated matters further.

But all of this is familiar recent history, fresh memory.

What I would like to share are my observations of Yerevan,
the physical city; the remnants of an ancient city that was
fundamentally reformulated in the 70 years of Soviet reign. Some of
these observations may sound simplistic, some politically incorrect,
and some controversial. But I pray that you read them with kindness
as I have written them with kindness, hoping for a civil and mutually
respectful resolution to a recent civic crisis in the capital-the
plight of Cinema Moscow’s Open-Air Hall.

Observation One: Yerevan Was Loved, and It Was for People and Culture

What I saw was that in the Soviet era great care and love had gone
into molding Yerevan into a city that was for people and culture. The
city wasn’t designed to aggrandize the state. In fact cultural
institutions occupied the dominant points in the city. Even in the
Republic Square, home to the highest governmental offices, the National
Gallery stood taller and more prominent that all. The governmental
buildings seem to stand hand-in-hand guarding the National Gallery,
an institution established to preserve the best in the fine arts this
culture produced. Tamanyan’s suggested Northern Ave., which was not
yet built, was connecting the National Gallery and the Opera, making
them the highest structures in the vicinity.

Yerevan was also not designed to be an industrial city. Industrial
cities leave the distinct impression that people are yet another input
in the production process, like raw materials and fuel. There were no
doubt industrial districts but they were not what the city revolved
around. As importantly, it wasn’t a city designed for automobiles. You
could easily walk everywhere, esp. in the center. And you could take
multiple routes to get to one place. For longer distances, the trams,
the metro, the buses, and the minibuses got you everywhere. There
was an abundance of public space, which people loved to use. These
spaces ranged from wide sidewalks to semi private "hayats" to lush
grand parks.

Monuments to political figures were used sparingly. Stalin’s mega
monument was removed soon after his death and replaced by Mother
Armenia. The most prominent one left was Lenin’s statue in the Republic
Square. But that had already been removed by the time I arrived. The
most prominent urban sites were dedicated to painters, musicians,
and poets. Every step of the way, there was a plaque on a building,
usually carved gorgeously, marking the residence of a scientist,
a painter, a poet. The city was celebrating its achievements in the
sciences and the arts one stone at a time, one statue at a time,
one public square at time.

Observation Two: Valuable History Was Destroyed

I learned that valuable historical structures and neighborhoods
were destroyed to build what I was seeing. And that saddened me. In
my judgment these were grave errors. Gone was the St. Boghos Bedros
Church where Cinema Moscow now stands. Gone was the beautiful Russian
Church where now Shahumian’s monument stands. Gone were the remnants
of the Yerevan fortress, a bitter reminder of this people’s colonial
past. Entry into the fortress was forbidden to the Christians, the
Armenians. It was reserved for the Persian governors, their emissaries
and merchants. And perhaps because of this bitter past we should have
preserved it. We should have preserved it as a reminder of a time
when Armenians lacked freedom of movement within their own lands, a
restriction imposed by a foreign power. Gone also were the bazaar area
adjacent to the fortress with its large square and connecting narrow
and winding streets. But fortunately the Blue-Domed Mosque had survived
though it lacked its former grandeur. It was squeezed in-between new
and insensitive structures, as if accommodated grudgingly.

I thought, surely they could have built the new city without destroying
the old. Maybe there was still hope to preserve the center with Lalayan
Street and its web of narrow roads and magical courtyards that were
still intact in the 1990’s. If not every individual building, maybe the
spirit of that historic center could be saved. The debates over the
plight of that neighborhood were raging in the Soviet times. After
all Tamanyan had planned the Northern Avenue with full intent of
building it. It turns out that the collapse of the Soviet Union
only delayed the demise of that area. When the real-estate boom of
the 2000’s bulldozed in, the destruction of the city’s valuable past
continued. Ostensibly, government officials went through the mechanics
of numbering the stones that were removed from the old buildings, with
the pretense of saving it for reconstitution at a later time. Today
many people wonder where those numbered stones are "preserved."

Observation three: There Were Modern Treasures in Yerevan

I took ample walks in the streets of Yerevan. I was mesmerized by
the Kaskad, I was moved by Tsitsernakaberd, and I was enchanted
by the Komitas Chamber Music Hall-all modern treasures. But one
architectural gem managed to take my breath away, Cinema Moscow’s
Open-Air Hall. It was a structure that conveyed the sense of an
advanced country willing to courageously engage in an aesthetic
dialogue with the world at large.

The Open-Air Hall was built in the 1960’s, rooted in the rich art
movement of Constructivism. Though the movement was abruptly switched
off by Stalin in the early 1930’s, it experienced a restrained
resurgence in the Khrushchev era, in the 1960’s.

onstructivism has fascinated and inspired countless artists and art
institutions in the West. It continues to do so to this day. Super
stars in the today’s world of architecture, Zaha Hadid and Rem
Koolhaas among them, are directly inspired by the work of the
Constructivists. Most major modern art museums in the West include
in their collections paintings, collages, or assemblages from this
movement: MOMA in New York, Tate Modern in London, Hammer in Los
Angeles, and the list goes on. My first exposure to the Constructivists
took place in the 1980s, before the breakup of the Soviet Union,
at the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis. The Walker had organized
a superb exhibition on this movement and the exhibition was to tour
many cities in the U.S.

Built in the 1960’s, during the brief revival of Constructivism,
the Open-Air Hall represented the best and the highest that movement
had to offer. It waved a defiant goodbye to the heavy, formal, and
at times oppressive Stalinist structures. It also decidedly switched
direction from the playful classicism of Tamanyan and his followers.

After the Stalinian horror, it summoned a freedom of spirit-collective
spirit-that strove to heal. It did so with breathtaking simplicity and
elegance. In it’s elegance it was only matched by Tzizernakaberd. It
was an exquisite needlework in the fabric of this formalist,
19th-century-looking city. It was a supreme example of how you
seamlessly co-locate the aesthetics of the old with the aesthetics
of the new, the values of the old with the values of the new.

>>From a compositional point of view the Open-Air Hall achieved
something amazing. Within the same structure it conveyed a sense
of stability and flight-opposites in one. It became an ingenious
antithesis to the Opera complex down the street, striking a perfect
balance. The Open-Air Hall wasn’t grand. It wasn’t symbolic. It wasn’t
historical. It was pure joy-collective joy. And it was designed for
a lowbrow, plebian art: cinema. All the best that the Constructivists
achieved was summarized by this work.

And I was thinking what a gift to future generations. Generation
after generation of Armenian youth will grow up with this structure
in their everyday experience. If only every generation can give to
the future just one gift like this.

I suppose I was too naïve. Even masterpieces like the Open-Air Hall
can be subject to the arbitrary whims of powers that be. On March 4,
2010, through an opaque and questionable process, the Government of
Armenia adopted a decision to remove the Cinema Moscow Open-Air Hall
from the list of cultural-historical structures. Its entry into the
list had ensured its preservation. With this decision, the road was
paved for the destruction of the Open-Air Hall. The current owner
of the space has donated the site to the Armenian Apostolic Church,
which has plans to tear down the Open-Air Hall and "rebuild" the
St. Boghos Bedros Church on that site.

The shock of all of this is hard to put in words. At the mildest the
new plans smacked of barbarism. As the noted architectural historian
Samvel Karapetyan has persuasively argued, from a restoration point of
view it is absurd to think that the St. Boghos-Bedros can be rebuilt.

The location of the church torn down in the 1930s may only partially
overlap with that of the Open-Air Hall, if at all. As far as anyone
knows no building materials have survived from the church edifice. So
what will be built is something entirely new in a location that is
entirely new. So the effort has nothing to do with rebuilding the St.

Boghos-Bedros Church.

Since news of the removal of the Open-Air Hall from the list emerged,
a wildfire of grassroots protest has built up against the demolition of
the Hall. At the time of writing this article 5,000 people had already
joined "SAVE Cinema Moscow’s Open-Air Hall" on Facebook. The numbers
are growing by the hour. The organizers have also started circulating
petitions for signatures. So far they’ve collected 14,000 signatures
against the demolition.

Whether Armenians need more churches or not should remain beyond the
current discussion. That discussion sidetracks us from the core issue
at hand-our obligation to preserving the valuable past. The Open-Air
Hall is a superlative example of the valuable past.

Without a doubt people who want to pray and light candles should
have a place to do so. But to offer them such a place by destroying
cultural gems is something worthy of the Taliban and not the Armenian
Apostolic Church. I pray that the Church will reconsider its decision.

I pray that countless generations will walk by the Open-Air Hall and
be touched by its warm magic and ponder the relationship of the old
and the new, of the past and present, of history and the future.

END

Alen Amirkhanian is an urban planner who lives in the past, present,
but more often in the future

LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL

17340.html
10:58:32 – 30/03/2010

In 2010, 9, 5 percent of growth of world trade is expected. This is the
prediction of the Director-General of the World Trade Organization
Pascal Lami. In 2009, the world trade circulation dropped by 12
percent.

WTO experts predict an 11 percent increase of trade scale in developing
countries, while in developed countries – 7, 5. "This means light
at the end of the tunnel which is good news for the world economy",
said WTO head Pascal Lami.

READERS VOTED FOR THE MOST DISREPUTABLE

0/surveys
08:53 pm | March 30, 2010

Social

Based on a survey by "A1+", 54.3% of people say the judicial branch
of government as the most disreputable in Armenia.

20.4% considered the National Assembly to be the most disreputable,
while 13.2% said the government is the most disreputable.

12.1% qualified mass media outlets-the fourth power-as the most
disreputable. There were a total of 1,384 readers participating in
the survey.

This week we suggest answering the following question: Is it possible
to see change of power in Armenia this year?

Dear readers, if you would like to make comments in addition
to responding to the question, please send your comments to
[email protected].

We look forward to your active participation.

ERDOGAN AND MERKEL TO DISCUSS GENOCIDE ISSUE

Panorama.am
11:43 30/03/2010

Region

Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel, who is paying two-day visit
to Turkey, had a meeting with Turkey’s PM Tayip Erdogan. After the
meeting German Chancellor and Turkish PM conveyed a news conference,
Turkish CNN Turk reported.

To a German reporter’s request whether the issue of Armenian Genocide
was discussed during the meeting, Erdogan nodded "yes". The votings
of Sweden and USA have been thoroughly discussed and concluded that
those resolution obstruct the normalization of Armenian-Turkish ties.

"Let the historians settle that issue, Parliaments aren’t places to
discuss them," Erdogan stated adding that Davutoglu called Clinton
and expressed Ankara’s concerns over it.

Germany’s Merkel underscored: "It’s necessary the ties between Armenia
and Turkey to advance. Hopeful steps are made in this respect."

It’s also notified that Erdogan’s offer to found Turkish schools in
Germany has been differently received this time.

It’s worth reminding that earlier Germany’s Chancellor declared that
Turks living in Germany should attend German schools but yesterday
she stated that the sides have already made agreements. Turkey’s PM
offered changing visa entrance regime, and the Germany’s Chancellor
answered that issue should be thought.

Germany’s Angela Merkel is supposed to meet with Turkey’s Abdullah Gul.

ARMENIA ACCEPTED 2 YEARS AGO

339.html
10:53:20 – 30/03/2010

On March 29, the Armenian Minister of Foreign Affairs Edward
Nalbandyan met with the OSCE Minsk group co-chairs Yuri Merzlyakov,
Bernard Fassier, Robert Bradtke as well as the OSCE Chairman-in-Office
special representative Anjey Kasprchik.

Edward Nalbandyan condoled with the Russian co-chair in relation to
the blasts at Moscow underground.

In the course of the meeting, the latest developments concerning the
Artsakh issue settlement, as well as the possibilities to make the
positions of the parties in connection with the updated principles
of Madrid were discussed.

The co-chairs informed Edward Nalbandyan about their meeting with
the NKR leadership taken place earlier.

The Armenian Foreign Minister said that Armenia accepted the principles
of Madrid as bases of the negotiation two years ago, and still accepts
them so. The MFA press service reports.

ARTSAKH YOUTH GROUPS: PRESIDENT SARGSYAN HAS NO RIGHT TO PROPOSE CONCESSIONS

/
2010/03/29 | 12:56

Nagorno Karabakh politics

At a joint meeting on March 26 in Stepanakert, at the ARF "Nikol
Douman Center", a number of youth groups drafted a letter addressed
to RMK President Bako Sahakyan, criticizing recent comments of
RoA President Sargsyan made in Syria regarding the possibility of
territorial concessions.

The letter congratulated President Sahakyan for enacting steps to
resettle the territories liberated by Armenians during the war and
praised him for stating that these territories were now an integral
part of the RMK and that this point was duly noted in the nation’s
constitution.

Representatives of the various youth groups stated that while the RoA
President could express his personal opinion regarding concessions,
in his official capacity as head of state, he has no right to offer
suggestions regarding the territories of the RMK without the prior
consent of the RMK government and people. The joint letter states
that such remarks by President Sargsyan questions the authority of the
RMK Constitution and the current political line of the RMK government.

The representatives added that the time had come for the signing
of a document between Armenia and Artsakh that would clearly define
the mutual rights and obligations of both states in the process of
garnering international recognition of the RMK
From: Baghdasarian

SAMVEL BABAYAN FEELS DANGER OF WAR

an
08:24 pm | March 30, 2010

Politics

"Yes, we’re on the path to war because Azerbaijan’s obscenity of
getting everything and not giving anything goes to show that it is
leading the conflict to war. Yes, the situation is dangerous and
a war could break out at any moment," said former commander of the
Artsakh Defense Army Samvel Babayan.

However, he did add that this statement doesn’t mean that military
operations will start tomorrow because Azerbaijan is currently not
sure whether it can win.

Babayan doesn’t believe there will be any treaty or document on the
settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict anytime soon.

"As far as I know, Serzh Sargsyan will not make compromises, but I
believe all the statements and opinions expressed by Sargsyan must
be viewed only in the political context. In terms of change of power,
I don’t think the state of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is sharp to
lead to change of power," said Babayan.

As far as Robert Kocharyan’s latest statements are concerned, Babayan
considers them to be a response to Vardan Oskanyan. The Republican
Party of Armenia has criticized the statements by the former RA
Foreign Minister.

"Let’s say t all started with Oskanyan’s statements and Kocharyan
responded to those who had talked about him and accused, let’s say,
the revealed Kocharyan. I am telling you the truth and you can
formulate your thoughts however you wish," said Samvel Babayan.

VARTAN OSKANIAN, INVITE DES DINERS-DEBATS DE NAM
par Ara

armenews
mardi30 mars 2010

NOUVELLES D’ARMENIE MAGAZINE

Vartan Oskanian etait jeudi 25 mars le premier invite du nouveau cycle
des diners-debats de NAM. Lors de cette soiree, qui s’est tenue dans
les salons prives du restaurant Petrossian a Paris, en presence des
representants des principaux courants de la communaute armenienne,
l’ancien ministre des Affaires etrangères s’est a nouveau montre tres
critique envers le regime actuel, mettant en cause sa politique, tant
sur le plan des affaires etrangères que de sa gestion economie. Il a
notamment estime qu’il existait un reel danger de reprise de la guerre
au Karabagh. Selon lui cette eventualite peut etre analysee, entre
autres facteurs, comme une des consequences negatives des protocoles
armeno-turcs qui ont amene l’Armenie a faire des concessions, sans
rien obtenir de tangible en echange.

Preconisant une alternative, il est cependant reste evasif sur les
forces qui pourraient la representer.

Parmi les invites presents, figuraient notamment Hovanes Guevorguian,
representant de la Republique du Haut-Karabagh, Alexis Govciyan
president du CCAF et de l’UGAB Europe, Bedros Terzian, president
du Fonds armenien, Robert Aydabirian president de l’observatoire
armenien, Hratch Varjabedian representant du Bureau Francais de la
Cause armenienne, ainsi que des figures connues du paysage intellectuel
armenien (Rene Dzagoyan, Michel Marian, Gaïdz Minassian) et une partie
de l’equipe redactionnelle de NAM.

Un compte rendu plus detaille de ce debat anime, de haute tenue et
sans langue de bois, sera publie dans le numero de mai de NAM.