Month: September 2013

GOVERNMENT TO SUPPORT COMMITTEE ON ARMENIAN GENOCIDE 100TH ANNIVERSARY EVENTS

14:30, 10 September, 2013

YEREVAN, SEPTEMBER 10, ARMENPRESS. The Government of the Republic
of Armenia will allocate AMD 24 million 578 thousand to the State
Science Commission of the Ministry of Education and Sciences of the
Republic of Armenia for the activity of the Committee coordinating
the events advancing the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide.

As reports “Armenpress” this issue has been included in the agenda of
the September 13 session of the Government of the Republic of Armenia.

The State Science Commission of the Ministry of Education and Sciences
of the Republic of Armenia will grant the aforesaid amount of money
to the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute. Also, the Government of
the Republic of Armenia will allocate money for the creation of the
official website of the State Committee.

COPYRIGHT ENFORCEMENT: NEW LAW WOULD MAKE PLAGIARISM A MISDEMEANOR

Society | 10.09.13 | 16:05

By Siranuysh Gevorgyan
ArmeniaNow reporter

Through legislative changes law-makers and media experts in Armenia
hope to restrain unscrupulous reporters and media representatives
who often resort to plagiarism or make improper use of the content
produced by other news outlets without posting the reference to either
the author or the news outlet.

Enlarge Photo Ashot Melikyan

On Monday the parliament discussed and Tuesday unanimously passed
by first hearing the bill on amendments to the law on “Copyright
and Related Rights” submitted by Republican faction MP Arpine
Hovhannisyan. The law is co-authored by eight MPs from four factions
of the National Assembly.

The authors say the bill aims at defining in detail the order of
using articles (fully or partly) published by newspapers, magazines,
periodicals and internet news websites.

Article 22 of the law puts restrictions on usage of another’s work,
including properly identifying the source of the original content.

Violators would face a fine of up to about $480.

Prior to the drafting of this law a number of media turned to
self-regulatory measures by setting terms of cooperation trying this
way to fight widespread abuse of copyright. And although editors have
set terms of using one another’s production, reporters of Facebook
group “For Conscientious Reporting” come across articles in other
news outlets, where the fruit of their thought and efforts is stolen
or copy-pasted without proper reference to the author or the website.

Head of the Freedom of Speech Protection Committee Ashot Melikyan
told ArmeniaNow that the law is doubtlesssly going to need amendments.

“Nobody can claim for hundred percent that the law would act at
its fullest capacity, but the fact that the reporter community was
interested and initiated this process is a step aimed at making the
field healthier. It is very important for those breaking copyright
in their daily activities to straighten up and understand that it
is forbidden by the law. It is important that precedents happen when
breach of that law is punished, meaning if someone has violated the
copyright of the given media reporter, s/he should sue the wrongdoer,”
says Melikyan, stressing at the same time that he has noticed little
positive change in the field after the editors’ statement.

MANAGING DIRECTOR TOM GARABEDIAN CONTINUES ATP’S MISSION

ARMENIA, COMMUNITY | SEPTEMBER 10, 2013 4:25 PM

By Gabriella Gage

Mirror-Spectator Staff

WATERTOWN – In early 2012, Tom Garabedian was named the new managing
director of the Armenian Tree Project (ATP), a non-profit organization
founded to promote Armenia’s reforestation and subsequent socioeconomic
developments.

For Garabedian, a former actuary consultant, the decision to get
involved was an easy one. “There is no question that more emphasis
needs to be focused on Armenia’s environment. The Tree Project is one
of the key organizations whose sole focus is on Armenia’s environment,
and that is personally motivating,” he said.

Prior to joining the ATP team, Garabedian had worked for Aon Hewitt,
retiring in early 2011. He first joined ATP as a management consultant
for its Executive Committee. “I had an opportunity to interview
management and staff both in Watertown and Yerevan and was able to
develop a sense of ATP’s strengths and to identify areas needing
improvement,” said Garabedian. From there, Garabedian took his skills
managing both people and projects and his newly acquired intimate
knowledge of the organization into his new role as managing director
of ATP in early 2012, taking over for Jeff Masarjian.

Garabedian is responsible for all of the operations of ATP both
here and in Armenia. He oversees the finances of the organization
including fundraising and expense perspectives, the programs
underway in Armenia and staff assessment and development. While he
has far-reaching responsibilities, Garabedian is quick to credit his
fellow ATP staffers with aiding him in these endeavors. “We have very
competent managers both in Watertown and in Armenia, so that relieves
some of the pressure on the Managing Director,” said Garabedian.

While he does help to oversee operations in Armenia, his managerial
focus is in the US and Director of ATP Armenia Operations Areg
Maghakian has day-to-day control of activities there. “I usually plan
three trips to Armenia each year to meet with our managers, review our
projects both in the office and out in the field, discuss strategy
and manager development and handle any people issues that arise,”
Garabedian said.

A knack for producing results and a passion for ATP’s cause made the
position an ideal one for Garabedian.”My involvement stemmed from
a desire to be engaged in a pursuit that was both challenging and
interesting mentally and that was producing meaningful results in
Armenia, he said.

ATP was founded by Carolyn Mugar in 1994, and its primary mission
at the outset was to plant trees in urban and rural sites as a
way of overcoming the tree cutting that had occurred during the
energy blockade that Armenia experienced. According to Garabedian,
that mission led to the development of two nurseries within a short
distance of Yerevan and employment of a full-time staff in Armenia of
nearly 40 people. Since its founding, ATP has broadened its mission
to include environmental education which it accomplished by developing
a curriculum which is now in use throughout Armenia’s public schools.

New developments are always on the horizon for the organization, which
continues to evolve. Garabedian noted, “Within the past 10 years,
we established the Mirak Family Reforestation Nursery in Margahovit
to develop seedlings for large scale reforestation efforts and two
Environmental Education Centers sponsored by Michael and Virginia
Ohanian.”

There are now 60 full-time staffers in Armenia and hundreds of
seasonal and part-time workers engaged in forestry work. “As far as
new projects, we are evaluating the need for a fourth nursery in the
southern part of the country and considering ways that tree planting
could become an integral part of an expanded environmental curriculum
in every public school,” said Garabedian.

The actual planning and continued upkeep of trees after planting are
both essential to the process. One of the primary responsibilities
of planting managers is site selection. According to Garabedian,
planting managers “review potential planting sites to ensure that
there is proper soil and water and that the community is committed
to maintain trees once they’ve been planted.” He added, “We need
to ensure that our sites are protected from livestock who view our
seedlings as a tasty addition to their diets, and that often means that
we need to fence areas that are planted. Generally, we will return
to communities for a three-year period following planting to ensure
that maintenance is being handled properly.” As far as large-scale
reforestation efforts, ATP hires seasonal workers for a similar period
to cut grass around the planting sites to improve the likelihood that
seedlings will survive. “In community planting, we expect a three-year
survival rate of 85 percent or better; in forestry, the threshold is
somewhat lower because we’re at the mercy of the weather to produce
an adequate amount of water. These are expensive commitments but you
must undertake the maintenance. Otherwise you’re just wasting your
nursery stock,” he explained.

In addition to proper planning and maintenance, there are many
challenges that ATP faces in its pursuit of reforestation. Garabedian
explained, “The first challenge is recognition by the Armenian
government that deforestation and illegal logging will threaten the
country’s long-term survival. Trees deliver an abundance of benefits to
a country; they serve as a food supply, they protect against erosion,
they clean the air and protect the water supply. They are a renewable
resource and should be used, but only in a sustainable way.

He added, “We would like the government to devote more resources
to restore Armenia’s historic forest cover and to enforce existing
laws against illegal logging.” Another daunting challenge that ATP
faces is that it is one the few organizations undertaking large
scale reforestation in Armenia. “We constantly need money in order
to support our reforestation activities,” explained Garabedian.

Their education efforts are primarily directed to children through the
environment al curriculum that we’ve prepared for Armenia’s public
schools and through classes taught at the Ohanian Environmental
Education Centers. “We have conducted a few agricultural classes at
our new Ohanian Center in Margahovit specifically for the region’s
farmers. These classes are extended without cost to the participants,”
he noted.

With Garabedian at the helm, ATP is currently in the midst of
a sustainable forest management project in Margahovit. “Working
with Hayantar, the Armenian forestry agency and the village, we are
developing a pilot plan to manage a 200 hectare forest in a sustainable
way,” he said, adding, ” If the pilot is successful, we hope that
the model can be spread to other communities throughout Armenia.”

ATP has worked with several other organizations, most recently
partnering with the Norwegian government which provided a four-year,
$1.2 million grant to support reforestation activities and with the
Acopian Center for the Environment at the American University of
Armenia on “Regardening of Eden” activities in Margahovit.

For more information on ATP, to donate or to get involved, visit

– See more at:

ARMENIA’S U-TURN – FOR BETTER OR WORSE

EDITORIAL | SEPTEMBER 10, 2013 4:02 PM
________________________________

By Edmond Y. Azadian

For the last three and a half years, Armenia had been negotiating
with the European Union (EU) to sign the Association Agreement, yet on
September 3, at the conclusion of the meeting between Presidents Serge
Sargisian and Vladimir Putin in Moscow, Armenia’s president announced
that his country had decided to join the Customs Union with Russia.

Polls in Armenia were indicating that 72 percent of the population
preferred joining the EU, in anticipation of internal reforms bringing
the country up to European norms, in terms of economic development,
democratic processes and rule of law. But the president’s announcement
caught everyone by surprise, since there had been no debate in
parliament, nor was a public referendum held.

The negotiations of the EU Association Agreement (including a deep
and comprehensive free-trade area) with Armenia were finalized in July.

Upon learning about Armenia’s U-turn, the European Commission issued
a memo, stating, “This agreement would allow Armenia EU support, to
drive forward a program of comprehensive modernization and reform based
upon shared values, political association and economic integration.”

Although the European Union has not expressed forcefully its
disappointment with Yerevan’s decision, Western media has. The Wall
Street Journal normally does not dwell much on what goes on in Armenia,
but it published an article in its September 5 issue with the following
headline: “Armenia Jilts Europe, Ties Trade Knot with Moscow.”

Commenting further, the Journal writes, “European diplomats were
stunned this week by word that Armenia, which had been heading toward
strengthening ties with the European Union, will instead join a
Customs Union led by Russia – handing the Kremlin a victory in its
tug of war with Brussels for influence in the region.”

The EU commission had limited its remarks to a wait-and-see position,
announcing that it will wait for clarifications from Yerevan. One thing
was clear – the two sides’ agreements were mutually exclusive. A few
apologists with the current administration had announced that Armenia’s
shift towards Russia would not take place at the expense of severing
its ties with the EU. But the latter does not see the situation that
way. European officials say that countries in the Moscow-led Customs
Union cannot be integrated into the EU because they have effectively
ceded their sovereignty over trade issues to Russia.

In terms of its economic clout, Armenia does not weigh significantly on
either side of the fence given the size of its gross domestic product
– $10 billion. The issue hinges more on politics – the West has been
trying to increase its influence in the region by luring Azerbaijan
and Georgia, while Russia has been trying to develop a counter-weight
through its economic associations, Therefore, Armenia’s shift is
symbolized as a political victory in this tug of war.

Thus far, only Belarus and Kazakhstan have joined Russia’s Customs
Union because Belarus economically depends on Russia. As for
Kazakhstan, its demographic balance tilts it towards Russia since the
country’s population is composed of 63 percent Kazakhs and 24 percent
Russians. Moscow can easily manipulate that population to influence
the country’s orientation.

Ukraine has joined the Customs Union as an observer member, after
President Putin closed Russia’s borders for a while against the
Ukrainian imports.

Georgia is sending mixed signs, after Moscow began importing Georgian
wines and holding the carrot for more economic benefits. Prime
Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili announced that Georgia will study the
terms of the agreement and may join the Customs Union if it finds the
terms beneficial. That remark was rebuked publicly by the lame-duck
President Mikheil Saakashvili.

Thus Armenia is firmly in Moscow’s quarter because the EU officials
believe Russia has exerted irresistible pressure on President
Sargisian.

It was very apparent at the outset, when President Putin visited Baku
and Russia’s $4-billion arms shipment to Azerbaijan coincided with
that trip.

Friendship with powerful countries does not yield much benefits,
but absence of that friendship may cost them dearly.

It is believed that Putin may have used two pressure points against
Armenia: the Karabagh issue and the delivery of energy. No one
believes that Russia will side with Armenia in resolving the Karabagh
problem. But it can use it as leverage to extract concessions, like
in the case of the Customs Union.

No one knows yet what is in that agreement, except its political
implications. One analyst has used the metaphor of a man stepping
out of a window into the fog.

The current administration and its supporters have been defending
the president’s decision, while others criticize it harshly. When
Russia itself is in dire need of economic reform, how will that impact
its partners?

Former President Levon Ter-Petrosian, who refrains from making public
commentaries since the last presidential election, has lambasted
President Sargisian’s handling of the issue, always mindful that
Armenia should never antagonize Russia.

Former Prime Minister Hrant Bagratian has called for a referendum
on the agreement. The ARF has issue an unusually-mild statement,
saying that the initiative was not wrong but was not handled properly.

There is lively public debate in Armenia. One burning question is:
How does Armenia join the Customs Union, with or without Karabagh? The
answer to that question makes a whole world of difference. In the case
of military treaty it has not been properly defined whether Russia will
defend Armenia if attacked. But does the defense also cover Karabagh?

There are many unanswered questions regarding Armenia’s adherence to
the Customs Union and Armenian-Russian relations in general.

When the dust settles, people in Armenia will find out if the U-turn
was for better or worse.

– See more at:

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

NO INTEGRATION PROCESS MUST ABSOLVE US OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR OUR COUNTRY’S FUTURE – SAMVEL FARMANYAN

21:27 10.09.13

Samvel Farmanyan, a Republican Party of Armenia (RPA) parliamentary
group member, made a statement in Parliament on Tuesday. The statement
deals with Armenia’s accession to the Customs Union and reads in
particular:

“Following lengthy discussions, Armenia’s decision to join the
Customs Union was announced. Despite the fact that Armenia’s public
and political forces do not yet have the full idea of all the arguments
and our country’s expectations underlying the decision, as well as the
truth that, whatever we may say now, it is only further developments,
in a broad historical context, that can reveal such crucial decisions
being wrong or right, a number of reasons for the decision can be
presented now.

1. Our society is indifferent to long-term development prospects
in the country, which arouses concern. The positions of political
figures, forces and public circles, which have so far been stated –
even in the case of such a momentous issue – are pursuing the political
interests of the moment and are not anchored to sincere ideas of the
country’s long-term development and, in some cases, are derivatives
of Armenia’s external commitments, which arouses concern as well.

2. The discussions of the issue once more revealed our centuries-old
fixation that Armenia’s existence depends on being the auspices of
a great power, “either… or” logic and inevitability of a historic
decision. I wonder how many times history has to punish us for us to
come to realize that being the center of a conflict and of geopolitical
interests will never lead to the country’s progress.

3. If greater concern is the fact that this decision is viewed in the
context of alternatives – peace or war – which is, first of all, far
from the reality. Secondly, it diverts the public from a particular
problem. Integration into any structures will not resolve the problems
facing our country nor will it settle the issue of national security.

Solutions to such problems are only in our hands and no integration
process is supposed to absolve us of the responsibility for our
country’s future.

4. And finally, whatever future we choose, it must be our own choice
in our interests.

Armenian News – Tert.am

From: Baghdasarian

A ROAD TO PERDITION FOR ARAB CHRISTIANS

The Daily Star (Lebanon)
September 10, 2013 Tuesday

by Basem Shabb

Recent events in Syria have seriously jeopardized the future of
Eastern Christian communities in the Levant. But not as much as
the ill-conceived outbursts of the clergy in support of the brutal
regime of President Bashar Assad and silence in the face of flagrant
atrocities. The prophet Isaiah prophesied the destruction of Damascus –
“Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous
heap” – and the patriarchs and bishops seem eager to expedite the
process. Blinded by the fear of Sunni extremists, Christian communities
in Syria have adopted seriously flawed policies and attitudes. Wishful
thinking and poor judgment have somehow aligned Eastern Christianity
with a cruel regime and an anti-Western alliance headed by Iran.

As the Syrian uprising gained momentum, a majority of the Christian
communities grew both critical and skeptical of the Arab Spring. The
Greek Catholic patriarch, Gregory III Lahham, has repeatedly voiced
support for Assad on religious occasions, totally oblivious to the
fact that a majority of Catholics are in Aleppo, where there have
been major advances by rebels, many of whom are Sunni radicals.

In Lebanon, too, churches have made questionable choices. Maronite
Patriarch Beshara Rai has both publicly and privately expressed his
fear that radical Sunni jihadists may gain in Syria and regularly
receives the Syrian ambassador to Lebanon.

The Armenian political and clerical leadership in Lebanon and Syria
has turned a blind eye to Hezbollah’s involvement in the Syrian
conflict. An evangelical pastor in Aleppo who staunchly defends the
Syrian regime accused the opposition of using chemical weapons.

Widespread human right abuses have been met with deafening silence
by representatives of almost all the Christian denominations, with
no hint of empathy for the displaced and the incarcerated.

Many pro-Syrian Christian groups in Lebanon such as Michel Aoun’s Free
Patriotic Movement and Suleiman Franjieh’s Marada Movement regularly
call for the closure of the Lebanese-Syrian border in the face of
Syrian refugees and for expulsion of the displaced in Lebanon. Syrian
refugees are regarded not as victims but as jihadist sympathizers.

This sentiment against the opposition was reinforced by jihadist
terrorist actions against the Syrian Christian population and
institutions as well as the absence of genuine condemnation by the
more moderate Sunni majority.

The Syrian regime and Iranian and Hezbollah propaganda have convinced
large swathes of the Christian community in Syria and Lebanon that
their fate is organically tied to survival of the Assad regime.

The Christian narrative of victimization and persecution is often laced
with anti-Sunni sentiment, without any meaningful consideration that
the Sunni community in Syria has suffered infinitely more than the
Christian community. True, churches have been targeted and destroyed,
but many more mosques have been targeted and destroyed.

True, tens of thousands of Christians have been displaced, but millions
of innocent Sunnis have been made refugees in and outside Syria.

Moral apathy reached its nadir with the gruesome chemical attack in the
Ghouta area of Damascus recently. Instead of horror and condemnation,
conspiracy theories were invoked to exonerate the perpetrators.

The Armenian churches, themselves the victims of genocide, remain
unapologetic about the excesses of the Syrian regime. The Greek
Orthodox church echoes Russia’s position of supporting the regime in
the face of the so-called “takfiris,” with an added anti-Western and
often anti-Semitic twist. Little attention is paid to the fact that
Russia’s ruthless support of a despicable and barbarous regime is the
cause and not the consequence of rising Sunni radicalism. Russia’s
self-serving interest in Syria’s Christians has produced a false
sense of security.

Western countries assisting Syrian Christian refugees are appalled
by the prevalent pro-regime and anti-Western sentiment of Christians,
often directed against those same countries trying to host them. This
week, for instance, Rai attributed the current crisis to a “foreign
agenda” designed to serve Israel’s interests. He also called on Arabs
“to resolve their confessional disputes that were created by the West
and Israel.”

Conspiracy theories and anti-Western rhetoric may appeal to popular
sentiment but are hardly fitting for a cardinal in the Vatican
and perhaps the leading cleric in Eastern Christianity. Eastern
Christianity cannot antagonize the West yet call for its help in
times of despair. The duplicity of siding with Russia and Iran,
yet seeking refuge in France, Germany and Sweden has not been lost
on the West, which has reacted by being slow in granting emigration
visas to Syria’s Christians.

The Greek Orthodox church in Syria survived centuries of turbulence
because of it’s symbiotic relationship with Sunni Islam. Should this
relationship sour as it has, neither Russia nor Iran can save Syria’s
Christians. Christians have not learned the lesson of Iraq. The
fate of Christian communities cannot be tied to a decaying order,
let alone to a brutal dictator who is likely to be overthrown.

The road to perdition has been paved with moral ambivalence, overt
anti-Sunni sentiment and cultural detachment from the West. This
course must be reversed before the coming onslaught against the regime,
which may hasten its downfall, even if such a reversal is unlikely.

God forbid that after the dust settles in Syria, Eastern Christians
will echo a haunting refrain from Psalm 22: “My God, my God, why hast
thou forsaken me.”

Basem Shabb is the Protestant representative from Beirut in the
Lebanese Parliament. He wrote this commentary for THE DAILY STAR.

COMMUNITY MEMBERS GATHER FOR PEACE IN SYRIA

Tuesday, September 10th, 2013

Community members gather to oppose Syria attacks

GLENDALE-On September 9, more than 200 community members gathered
at the Glendale Youth Center to join the Armenian National Committee
of America, Glendale chapter, MoveOn.org Civic Action, CREDO Action,
Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), The Martin Luther King
Coalition of Greater Los Angeles and Win Without War, in order to
voice their opposition to U.S. military strikes against Syria.

Thousands of people throughout the nation were hosting such vigils.

After a short welcome by ANCA Glendale’s Executive Director, Talar
Malakian, and a prayer, Seto Boyadjian, the Chairman of the ANCA
National Board, Caro Avanessian, the Chairman of the California
Armenian American Democrats, and Glendale Unified School District
President Nayiri Nahabedian spoke out against military intervention in
Syria by the United States. They stressed the importance of finding
diplomatic solutions while also sending more humanitarian aid to
suffering communities in need, including over 100,000 Syrians of
Armenian descent living in Syria.

Berdj Karapetyan, Chairman of the ANCA Glendale Board concluded with
final remarks and asked community members to gather around a board
filled with pictures from the Syrian crisis, in the back of the room.

After a moment of silence for the lives lost, the lit candles were
circulated and everyone was ushered out of the hall and to St. Mary’s
Apostolic Church. Many returned to write messages for peace that were
pinned to the board. Many also sent emails to their representatives
on iPads provided by ANCA Glendale.

“We are gathered to commemorate the lives lost but to also show that
we are opposed to more violence. The only way to achieve peace is
through diplomacy,” said ANCA Glendale Executive Director, Talar
Malakian. “We need to urge our representatives to remember that.”

Local affiliates of CBS, NBC, and ABC covered the event on evening
news. KNX Radio, and KPPC Radio aired reports earlier in the day.

Community members will be joining a delegation to Congressman Adam
Schiff’s Hollywood office from 3 to 5 p.m. Tuesday, to urge him to
vote against the authorization to strike.

ANCA action alerts to representatives can still be sent online
through the National Armenian National Committee of America website:

The ANCA-Glendale advocates for the social, economic, cultural,
and political rights of the city’s Armenian American community and
promotes increased civic participation at the grassroots and public
policy levels.

AUTHORITIES IN IRAQ’S KURDISTAN REGION INTERROGATES PREACHERS

Al-Mada, Iraq
Sept 8 2013

Ministry of Endowment Interrogates Preachers Who Promoted Particular
Political Sides and Bans Live Coverage of Friday Sermons Without
Permission

by Umar Mahmud Abdallah

The Ministry of Endowment and Religious Affairs in the Kurdistan
Region Government started on Wednesday 4 September 2013 to interrogate
a number of mosque imams and preachers for indirectly promoting
particular political sides. The ministry also banned live coverage
of Friday prayers without official permission. Meanwhile, a number
of civil organizations announced the formation of a joint alliance to
monitor the parliamentary elections that will be held in the Kurdistan
Region on 21 September 2013.

Mariwan al-Naqshabandi, director of the Media Office in the Ministry of
Endowment and Religious Affairs, said that the ministry has previously
issued strict instructions to the preachers, clerics, and political
entities to refrain from using mosques or religious platforms for
election propaganda. He also noted that the ministry warned that
it would take legal and administrative measures against any of the
ministry’s personnel, including imams and preachers, if they do not
abide by those instructions during the election period.

Al-Naqshabandi added that a number of Friday preachers violated the
instructions; therefore, the ministry is currently interrogating
the violators.

He noted that five Friday preachers violated the ministry’s
instructions and indirectly promoted a particular political side.

Al-Naqshabandi said that the sermons are documented on videotape and
the Endowment Directorate in the Arbil Governorate will interrogate
the preachers and will submit a report to the minister of endowment,
who will decide on the punishment that the violators should get before
Friday 13 September 2013.

With regard to carrying live coverage of Friday prayers, the director
of the media office said that the ministry issued strict instructions
to the local television and satellite channels to refrain from covering
the Friday prayers without obtaining permission from the ministry. He
also warned that the ministry will bring to account all those who do
not abide by these instructions.

On a related development in the elections, a grouping made up of 56
non-governmental civil organizations announced the formation of an
alliance that aims to monitor the next parliamentary elections. This
came after a meeting held by these organizations upon a request from
the civil developments organizations, Spart for Media Development
[as received], and the Ahfad al-Salam [Grandsons of Peace] Network.

The supervisors of the alliance said that 500 observers have been
appointed so far and they will be distributed across the election
centres to monitor the parliamentary elections. The supervisors added
that roaming groups will also be sent to the election centres across
Kurdistan, noting that the alliance works on a voluntary basis and
aims to maintain honest and transparent elections. They noted that
they will provide media reports on the election day.

Thirty-one political entities are running for the Kurdistan
parliamentary elections slated to be held on 21 September, competing
for 111 seats. Nineteen entities will compete to win the general seats,
which consist of 100 seats, while five entities representing the
Turkoman component will compete for a five-seat quota. In addition,
a five-seat quota is allocated to the Christian component and one
seat to the Armenian component, which has four candidates.

[Translated from Arabic]

OBAMA CALLS FOR DIRECT AZERBAIJAN-ARMENIA DIALOGUE ON N KARABAKH

ITAR-TASS, Russia
September 9, 2013 Monday 11:05 PM GMT+4

BAKU September 9

– U.S. President Barack Obama said it was the time for new efforts
to restore peace in the area of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict on the
basis of the compromise reached during the talks.

In his message to Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev delivered by
James Warlick, the new U.S. Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, who
is in Baku on an exploratory trip, Obama had offered full support
to Warlick in his mission and said his appointment to this post a
month ago was a strong sign of the U.S. commitment to act towards a
peaceful settlement in Nagorno-Karabakh.

The U.S. president supported Aliyev’s intention to use direct
dialogue with Armenia in the coming months, with the assistance of
the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, to break the stalemate in the
Nagorno-Karabakh talks.

Aliyev said earlier that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict could be
resolved only if the territorial integrity of his country was ensured.

“The conflict can be resolved only within the framework of the
territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. There is no other solution,
and I have no doubts that Azerbaijan will restore its territorial
integrity,” the head of state said.

He stressed that Azerbaijan was seeking to solve the issue
“peacefully.”

“We hope for a peaceful resolution yet. To this end, the Armenian side
should unconditionally comply with the resolutions of international
organisations, including the U.N. Security Council, free the occupied
territories, and Azerbaijani citizens should return to their homes.

After that peace and stability will come to the region,” Aliyev said.

He said the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was the “biggest source of
threat” in the region.

Azerbaijan and its people “will never allow a second Armenian state
to be created on their historical land,” he said.

“Nagorno-Karabakh will never get independence. The people who live
in Nagorno-Karabakh now, and the Azeris will certainly return there
should live in autonomy. This is a well known international approach,”
the president said.

He made it clear that Azerbaijan would “never step aside from its
position of principle.”

The head of state called for a speedy and fair settlement in Karabakh
on the basis of international law.

Speaking of the final status of Nagorno-Karabakh, he said it was
“a matter of the future.”

“We have said many times that we will never agree to any status for
Nagorno-Karabakh outside Azerbaijan, and international law supports
our positions,” the president said.

Aliyev urged Armenia to continue peace talks on Nagorno-Karabakh.

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict began on February 22, 1988. On November
29, 1989 direct rule in Nagorno-Karabakh was ended and Azerbaijan
regained control of the region. However later a joint session of the
Armenian parliament and the top legislative body of Nagorno-Karabakh
proclaimed the unification of Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenia.

On December 10, 1991, Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh held a referendum,
boycotted by local Azeris, that approved the creation of an independent
state.

The struggle over Nagorno-Karabakh escalated after both Armenia and
Azerbaijan obtained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. By
the end of 1993, the conflict had caused thousands of casualties and
created hundreds of thousands of refugees on both sides. An unofficial
ceasefire was reached on May 12, 1994.

As of August, 2008, the co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group were
attempting to negotiate a full settlement of the conflict. On August 2,
2008, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian President Serzh
Sargsyan travelled to Moscow for talks with Dmitry Medvedev, who was
Russian president at that time. As a result, the three presidents
signed an agreement that calls for talks on a political settlement
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

HOW IMPERIAL AMBITIONS STIRRED A POT THAT’S NOW BOILING OVER

The New York Times
September 9, 2013 Monday

By JANET MASLIN

LAWRENCE IN ARABIA War, Deceit, Imperial Folly and the Making
of the Modern Middle East By Scott Anderson Illustrated. 577
pages. Doubleday. $28.95.

Scott Anderson’s fine, sophisticated, richly detailed “Lawrence in
Arabia” is filled with invaluably complex and fine-tuned information.

This demanding but eminently readable account of the Middle East during
World War I is certainly no hagiographic T. E. Lawrence biography,
as the tiny nuance (“in,” not “of”) coloring its title makes clear.

Mr. Anderson does not filter the tricky history of a crucially
important era through any individual’s perspective. Nor does he see
Lawrence as the only schemer trying to manipulate Arab destiny; this
book has an assortment of principal players, only one of whom managed
to become so famous. As to why such acclaim elevated one renegade
Briton and his feat of creating a guerrilla Bedouin army, Mr. Anderson
writes that the short answer may seem anticlimactic. His reason: This
was a time when the seed was planted for the Arab world “to define
itself less by what it aspires to become than what it is opposed to:
colonialism, Zionism, Western imperialism in its many forms.”

Clarity was hard to find, and so, after such wanton loss of life, were
victors. But heroes were needed, and here was a shoo-in. According to
the book, “Lawrence was able to become ‘Lawrence of Arabia’ because
no one was paying much attention.”

That does not make Mr. Anderson’s account a debunking. For those
already fascinated by Lawrence’s exploits and familiar with his
written accounts of them, Mr. Anderson’s thoughtful, big-picture
version only enriches the story it tells. “Lawrence in Arabia”
emphasizes the Gordian difficulties facing any strategist from any
of the numerous contingents involved either in fighting for Arab
freedom from the Ottoman Empire or looking to carve up Arab land once
the fighting was over. He illustrates how difficult it was to have
any foresight at all, let along to see clearly, and he reserves his
greatest interest for players whose imaginations were most fertile.

Lawrence was the best and most eloquent of these manipulators, but
he was by no means alone.

The book is careful to acknowledge aspects of Lawrence’s skill that
are not always done justice. Mr. Anderson is especially illuminating
about Lawrence’s purely political gifts: his way of anticipating the
fallout from strategic or military maneuvers, his “peculiar skill at
polite belligerence,” his no-nonsense powers of description.

Drawing from the vast body of Lawrence’s writing, Mr. Anderson finds
this bit of irreverence: “Jerusalem is a dirty town which all Semitic
religions have made holy. … In it the united forces of the past
are so strong that the city fails to have a present; its people,
with the rarest exceptions, are characterless as hotel servants,
living on the crowd of visitors passing through.”

Beyond having a keen ear for memorable wording, Mr. Anderson has
a gift for piecing together the conflicting interests of warring
parties. His account of the grisly British debacle at Gallipoli and
the bad decisions leading up to it display this book’s analytic powers
at their best. He explains why Alexandretta, now called of Iskenderun,
on the Mediterranean near the Turkish-Syrian border, looked to Lawrence
and others like the Ottoman Empire’s most vulnerable point.

It describes the 1914 incident in which a British warship, the Doris,
managed almost accidentally to expose how weakly defended the area was.

But “throughout history,” he adds, “there have been occasions when
a vastly superior military force has managed, against all odds, to
snatch defeat from all but certain victory.” Though Lawrence imagined
the Syrian and Armenian uprisings that might further undermine Ottoman
control of the Alexandretta region, the British looked eastward,
designating the Dardanelles as the place to send wave after wave of
troops. Fully exposed to the enemy as they made their naval landing,
they were massacred to no strategic effect at all. Lawrence believed
that Britain’s decision had been influenced by the desire of its ally
France to keep Syria stable — and lay claim to it after the war.

As “Lawrence in Arabia” lays out Lawrence’s career, and his delicate
negotiations to unite the sons of King Hussein to create an Arab
revolt against the Turks, it also follows other diplomatic efforts.

One of the book’s startling revelations about Curt Prufer, a German
diplomat in Cairo with espionage connections, is that he deployed
Minna Weizmann — a seldom-mentioned sister of Chaim Weizmann,
Israel’s first president — as a pro-German spy. Also involved in
espionage was Aaron Aaronsohn, a Zionist and agronomist, who worked
his way into the good graces of the Ottoman regime.

The book also follows the track of the American William Yale, roaming
the region to do the bidding of Standard Oil of New York, known as
Socony. He was instrumental in helping the company lay claims in
Palestine, “except there was a key detail in all this that Socony saw
no reason to trouble the Turks with,” Mr. Anderson writes. Drilling
for oil could have helped the Turkish war effort, but Yale’s employers
had no intention of doing so until the war was over.

“Lawrence in Arabia” is a fascinating book, the best work of military
history in recent memory and an illuminating analysis of issues that
still loom large today. It’s a big book in every sense, with a huge
amount of terrain to cover. So it is perhaps understandable that
Mr. Anderson makes only passing and none too flattering reference to
David Lean’s magnificent film about Lawrence.

But readers who know the movie are apt to summon it more than he does.

Yes, it was history a la Hollywood, with moments of clear
exaggeration. But its effort to depict Lawrence, his military raids,
the tribal leaders with whom he dealt, the inept British military
effort and the sly French diplomatic one are all shown by this book
to be unusually faithful to the facts. It’s high praise for both the
visually grand film and this grandly ambitious book to say that they
do have a lot in common.

URL: