Author: Andres-Papazian

PRESS RELEASE
RAFFI HOVANNISIAN CAMPAIGN HEADQUARTERS
31 Moscovian Street
Yerevan, Armenia
Tel.: (+374 – 10) 53.69.13
Fax: (+374 – 10) 53.26.97
Email: [email protected]
Website:

16 February 2013

Raffi Hovannisian Meets OSCE, Discusses Election Violations

Yerevan–Raffi K. Hovannisian today met with the official delegation
of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Observation Mission to Armenia,
including Head of Mission Tonino Picula, Assembly President Prof.
Riccardo Migliori and Deputy Secretary General Tina Schøn, and Andreas
Baker, Senior Advisor to the Head of Mission.

Hovannisian discussed all issues related to the process and substance
of the upcoming presidential elections in Armenia, and stressed the
importance of holding free, fair, and legitimate elections on February
18. Raffi Hovannisian also addressed questions from the observers and
presented the numerous Republican Party violations recorded by his
campaign.

Raffi Hovannisian Campaign Headquarters

From: A. Papazian

ARMEE ARMENIENNE
Un nouveau contingent de soldats Arméniens et parti en Afghanistan

Un nouveau contingent de soldats Arméniens des forces de la paix,
après sa formation militaire de près d’un mois en Allemagne, est parti
le 15 février en direction de l’Afghanistan. Le groupe composé de 65
militaires est commandé par le général Arthur Simonian. Il prendra
position sur un aéroport de la région de Kunduz. « Après 10 jours de
transmission les soldats de l’ancien contingent arménien reviendra
d’Afghanistan » a affirmé Arthur Simonian. Les forces arméniennes
d’Afghanistan se trouvent depuis février 2010 sous le commandement de
l’Allemagne.

Krikor Amirzayan

samedi 16 février 2013,
Krikor Amirzayan ©armenews.com

From: A. Papazian

Institute for War and Peace Reporting, UK
IWPR Caucasus Reporting #676
Feb 15 2013

Armenia Gears Up for “Least Interesting” Ballot

President set to sail through, and opposition isn’t even trying.
By Vahe Harutyunyan – Caucasus

Armenians have the day off on January 18 for the country’s
presidential election, but many see little to celebrate in the
inevitable re-election of Serzh Sargsyan.

Of the seven candidates standing for election, Sargsyan has a rating
of 68 per cent, according to the Gallup polling company.

Next comes Raffi Hovhannisyan, a former foreign minister who grew up
in the United States and who has been travelling the country by bus on
an American-style campaign, but is lagging far behind at 24 per cent.

Hovhannisyan’s Heritage party is the smallest faction in parliament.
But it is nevertheless the only opposition party fielding a candidate
for the presidency.

The three main opposition parties have ruled themselves out.

Prosperous Armenia leader Gagik Tsarukyan, seen as a strong
challenger, held a closed-door meeting with President Sargsyan shortly
before an announcement that he would not be running.

Levon Ter-Petrosyan, the country’s first president after it became
independent and now leader of the Armenian National Congress, ANC,
said he felt too old to take part, having turned 68 in January. The
ANC then announced it was boycotting the poll. The third major
opposition force, Dashnaktsutyun said the poll would be rigged and it
would not be taking part.

The Gallup poll does not suggest a strong showing by the remaining
five candidates – former prime minister Hrant Bagratyan; Andrias
Ghukasyan, director of a Yerevan radio station; Paruyr Hayrikyan, a
Soviet-era dissident who now leads the Union for National
Self-Determination; Arman Melikyan, a former foreign minister of
Nagorny Karabakh; and Vardan Sedrakyan, a specialist in epic poetry.

`The current president does have a high rating compared with the other
candidates,’ Armen Badalyan, a political expert from the Centre for
Political Studies, said. `But you have to remember that parties like
the Armenian National Congress, Dashnaktsutyun and Prosperous Armenia
decided not to take part in the election. And you can’t say that the
candidates running against Sargsyan have much political clout.’

Levon Zurabyan, who heads the ANC faction in parliament, predicted
that the turnout in this election would hit at a record low.

`I think everyone realises that the battle between the candidates is
just a formality. Not one of the candidates standing against Sargsyan
is capable of effecting a change of government,’ he told reporters.

Officials dismiss such criticisms and insist this vote will be the
fairest in Armenia’s history.

`These people who say there’s no competition in this election – who
stopped them taking part?’ Sargsyan asked at a meeting with voters in
Yerevan. `If they won’t take part, they must have their own reasons.
And who’s to blame for that – us? Have we blocked their way somehow?
Have we sent them to prison? Are they under house arrest? Have we
intimidated them? Are their candidates scared?’

Much of the recent discussion around the election campaign has focused
on an attack on Paruyr Hayrikyan, who was shot on January 31. He was
operated on and was able to leave hospital after three days.

Hayrikyan, who spent 17 years in Soviet prisons because he campaigned
for an independent Armenia, was quick to blame `Russian imperialist
forces’ for the attack, saying his pro-western views were a threat to
some groups in Moscow. The Armenian authorities have arrested two
suspects in the case.

The attack placed Hayrikyan at the centre of attention for a while,
but does not seem to have improved his chances.

For a while, it seemed that the attack on him might delay the
election. Armenia’s constitution says that if a candidate cannot
campaign for reasons beyond his control, the vote will be deferred for
two weeks. Hayrikyan vacillated over whether to apply for a deferral,
initially saying he would not do so, then changing his mind, and then
changing it back again.

Some candidates have dismissed the election as fraudulent, even though
they are still standing.

`It’s already clear that the election won’t free or fair,’
Hovhannisyan told voters in Echmiadzin. `But this doesn’t mean I am
abandoning the fight.’

Similar views have been expressed by Bagratyan and Melikyan.
Ghukasyan, meanwhile, has been staging a hunger strike for the last
month with the so far unsuccessful aim of `arousing civil
disobedience’.

Armenian businessmen are less than confident that the election will be
followed by action to turn around the country’s depressed economy.

`I can’t say with any certainty that an election like this can resolve
the serious problems facing the state – emigration, corruption and
monopolies,’ Gagik Marakyan, head of the Union of Employers, said. `
We need reforms.’

Official statistics indicate that a third of the population lives in
poverty, while 180,000 people -six per cent of the population – have
emigrated in the last five years. The International Monetary Fund says
that of the three states in the south Caucasus, only Armenia has
failed to climb back to the economic level it was at prior to the 2008
global financial crisis.

On the positive side, Karen Khocharyan, a political analyst and
commentator on the privately owned Armenia television station, sees
some grounds for optimism.

`Democracy isn’t going to emerge in Armenia after this most
uninteresting of elections, but there are some positive signs – that’s
a fact. Look at the media, for example. For the first time, television
channels have become accessible to the opposition.’

Vahe Harutyunyan is a freelance journalist in Armenia.

From: A. Papazian

The Atlantic
Feb 15 2013

>From Russia, Without Love: Is the Former USSR the Least Romantic Place on Earth?

By Matthew O’Brien
Feb 15 2013, 4:46 PM ET Comment

Whether you spent Valentine’s Day curled up with your special someone
or with a book, you can be thankful for one thing: you don’t live in
Armenia. (Sorry, Armenia!).

Matters of the heart typically defy rational explanation, but that
hasn’t stopped economist super-couple Betsey Stevenson and Justin
Wolfers from crunching the numbers on which countries love the most
and the least. It turns out love is a little less mysterious in the
aggregate than in the particular — in other words, you can just ask
lots of people about it. And that’s exactly what Gallup did in 2006
when it asked people from 136 countries whether they had “experienced
love for a lot of the day yesterday”. As you can see in the chart
below from Wolfers, love is a daily phenomenon for most people in most
countries … but aside from that, it’s hard to say much.

As Wolfers points out, there’s a weak, though
statistically-significant, relationship between GDP-per-capita and
love, but it doesn’t explain too much of what’s going on here (though
maybe the answer is the outline looks like a heart?). After all, Japan
reports 50 percent less affection than Rwanda, despite being 25 times
richer.

While there might not be an economic variable tying together loveless
countries, but there is a historical one: they used to be part of the
USSR. Indeed, post-Soviet states make up 14 of the 20 least-loving
countries in the world, with Armenia and its 29.1 percent love rate
setting the standard for unfeeling. (Turkmenistan was the only ex-USSR
country not polled). Something about the experience of Soviet
communism seems to have made these countries less tenderhearted today.
As you can see in the chart below, which compares former Eastern bloc
and Soviet countries, love is something of a scarce commodity in
ex-communist societies, particularly so in the ex-USSR.

The sample size is vanishingly small, but reported love was actually
higher in currently Communist Cuba and Vietnam, at 81.7 and 79.4
percent, respectively. Now, this higher level of affection might just
be about culture, or it might also be about the transition out of
communism. In other words, the kind of “shock therapy” that eastern
Europe tried — quickly privatizing and deregulating their economies
— might be so jarring that it disconnects people from one another.
This is, of course, highly speculative, but what did you expect when
we turned the dismal science on love?

From: A. Papazian

ANCA Calls For Community Meeting With Kerry

Friday, February 15th, 2013 | Posted by Contributor

Secretary of State John Kerry

Requests Pre-April 24th Meeting to Discuss Armenian Genocide, Nagorno
Karabakh, U.S.-Armenia Relations, Syrian Armenians, and other
Community Priorities

WASHINGTON – The Armenian National Committee of America this week called
upon newly confirmed Secretary of State John Kerry to host a meeting
with the broad-based collective leadership of Armenian American
organizations, prior to the annual April 24th commemoration of the
Armenian Genocide.

In a letter, dated February 14th, ANCA Chairman Ken Hachikian
congratulated Secretary Kerry on his new position, noting his decades
of friendship with Armenian Americans from his home state of
Massachusetts. `We are especially pleased that, at this historic
moment in our nation’s foreign relations, our Department of State will
be led by a Secretary with such a distinguished and extensive record,
extending back well over three decades, of expertise and leadership on
the policies, principles, and priorities of special concern to our
community,’ wrote Hachikian.

The letter went on to cite the broad array of Armenian American
foreign policy concerns that the community regularly discusses with
the Department of State, stressing that the ANCA looks forward to
working with Secretary Kerry `on all the issues that [he] so ably
advanced during [his] service in the Senate, among them strengthening
U.S.-Armenia ties, ensuring security for the Republic of Nagorno
Karabakh, protecting Armenians and other Christian populations in
Syria, and, of course, ending Turkey’s gag-rule on American
recognition of the Armenian Genocide.’ Hachikian continued noting,
`In the spirit of open dialogue that has always characterized your
relations with Armenian Americans, in Massachusetts and around the
nation, we respectfully call upon you, prior to this April 24th
commemoration of the Armenian Genocide, to host a meeting with the
broad-based, collective leadership of our community.’

During his confirmation process, then Senator Kerry offered responses
to a series of questions from Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Robert
Menendez (D-NJ) on Armenian American concerns. In his written
responses, he highlighted the growth of relations between Armenia and
the U.S., but, on the subject of the Armenian Genocide, reflected what
ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian described as `President Obama’s
own public retreat, under pressure from Ankara, from his principled
stand in support of a full and forthright American condemnation of
Turkey’s still unpunished crime against all of humanity.’ Secretary
Kerry’s written responses to Senate questions on Armenian American
concerns can be viewed at:

The ANCA recently hosted a roundtable discussion with Justin Friedman,
the State Department’s Director of the Office of Caucasus Affairs and
Regional Conflicts, about strategies to grow the U.S.-Armenia trade
and investment relationship. Video of the roundtable can be viewed in
full at:

The complete text of the ANCA letter to Secretary Kerry is provided below.

Dear Secretary Kerry:

I am writing, on behalf of Americans of Armenian heritage and all of
our nation’s many friends of Armenia, to congratulate you upon your
swearing-in as Secretary of State.

We are especially pleased that, at this historic moment in our
nation’s foreign relations, our Department of State will be led by a
Secretary with such a distinguished and extensive record, extending
back well over three decades, of expertise and leadership on the
policies, principles, and priorities of special concern to our
community. We look forward to working with you, in your new capacity,
on all the issues that you so ably advanced during your service in the
Senate, among them strengthening U.S.-Armenia ties, ensuring security
for the Republic of Nagorno Karabakh, protecting Armenians and other
Christian populations in Syria, and, of course, ending Turkey’s
gag-rule on American recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

In the spirit of open dialogue that has always characterized your
relations with Armenian Americans, in Massachusetts and around the
nation, we respectfully call upon you, prior to this April 24th
commemoration of the Armenian Genocide, to host a meeting with the
broad-based, collective leadership of our community.

Thank you for your consideration of our concerns and attention to our request.

Sincerely,
Kenneth V. Hachikian
Chairman

From: A. Papazian

Unusual Election in Armenia

Igor Muradyan
17:52 15/02/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:

The upcoming presidential election is treated superficially and
banally in Armenia and outside it, describing the current situation as
peaceful backwater. In fact, the ongoing presidential campaign does
not attract attention from outside, there is no storm and is highly
predictable. This may be a more than favorable condition because the
Armenian society has apparently preferred `historical holidays’ and
sees no meaning in dramatizing the moment.

One way or another, the economically active population, first of all
young people who expect changes, still prefer the individual method of
approval rather than a public approach to problem solving. Time will
show whether it is good or bad. Proceeding from current stereotypes,
from the point of view of economy, the individual approach is more
effective, whereas political problems will apparently be solved or not
solved by a small group of people. Most probably, this calm election,
as well as predictable attitude of the international community
(particularly, world centers of generation of political evaluation) is
not only explicable but also fully meets some geopolitical interests.

First of all, it is necessary to understand that for the first time
the presidential election has a geopolitical meaning no matter how
upsetting it will be for politically `shoed’ intellectuals with
different political and ideological views. The Euro-Atlantic community
can be understood because after so many years of doubts and
controversial thoughts Armenia is trying to implement a multi-vector
policy (only), trying to avoid strategic isolation which can be
absolutely possible. Time used to be indulgent but now it is time to
make a decision on what the West is supposed to do about the new
challenges.

Strangely, now the strategy of the West, including the United States,
the EU and NATO are less able to work out new strategies and tactical
approaches than in the 1990s. At that time, the world economy was
developing successfully, the Soviet Communist bloc collapsed, the
regional processes were relatively manageable while the West thought
the time of simple decisions had started. Strategic and conventional
weapons were significantly reduced, it seemed to be time for relative
and absolute reduction of military costs. The world proved more
complicated than 20 years ago, the states had ambitions which were
even more complicated than 20 years ago, the states which acquired not
only new roles not only in the economy but also in defense had
ambitions.

It is not clear what policy will be conducted across the space
stretching from the Mediterranean to China. The Americans and
Europeans continue the games with Turkey which at best will be a
method of avoiding focus of attention. States with ambitions similar
to those of Turkey have emerged in the Near East and Asia. It is not
clear what should be done about such a region as Central Asia but
China remains the most complicated country. In his first speech after
his reelection Barack Obama said the United States will not launch
military actions against terrorism beyond the country.

Hardly anyone figured out what it means, neither did the American
establishment. The Euro-Atlantic community needs partners, a lot of
different partners, and the format of NATO will be reviewed one way or
another. In this regard, despite its global nature, the NATO summit
in Chicago hardly appears as a breakthrough towards forming a global
security system. With the victory of the Republicans in 2000 it became
clear that the time of promotion of democracy in Eurasia has passed,
and the priority is security at all levels.

>From the point of view of economic, social, legal and democratic
development Armenia is not a leader in Eastern Europe and remains a
country of unsolved problems (mildly speaking). At the same time, the
state of security and defense satisfies the Western community and is
the only aspect that interests the West. No doubt the West has a lot
of pretensions to Armenia but Armenia also has a lot of pretensions to
the West. The problem is that neither the political leadership, nor
the political class has put forth these pretensions, which is also in
the interests of the Western community which has understood very well
the real abilities of the opposition, all kinds of opponent groups
which are deemed not only unable but also useless and harmful for the
solution of urgent issues. Even obviously pro-West political groups
are deemed as highly `conventional’ because over a lasting period they
have behaved as consumers of `Western values’ and tangible assets (to
put it more clearly, established total theft and illegality). The
elite fell into oblivion, a new elite must be shaped because time is
not waiting.

Nevertheless, immediately after the presidential election which will
be approved by the West not only pretensions will be put forth but
also a new configuration and approaches will be built in political
decision making in Armenia. In this regard, a human resource purge at
all levels of the authorities must be required. Purge is not a
revolution, it is a counterrevolution, and generally speaking, a purge
is a purge. It will be definitely different for many but there is no
place to go, experiments are not over. The western community needs
legitimate partners, whereas legitimacy on credit is something
vulnerable.

Whatever is now being done in Armenia is done on credit, and a lot of
people may have trouble as soon as the credit is overdue. The role of
the military who are adepts of geopolitical strategies will grow.
However, it cannot happen without involvement of public and
professional groups. It is clear that it would be stupid of
researchers to give Armenia the role of Latin American states. The
model is absolutely different. Moscow has understood this very well,
better than Yerevan. With such expectations the upcoming election in
Armenia appears as banal and of low interest.

Everything could have been different but we did not want to resolve
the problems on our own so we must be happy with others’ projects and
hope that they will be strange to us.

From: A. Papazian

Armenia to benefit from re-operation of Kars-Akhalkalak railway

TERT.AM
19:54 – 15.02.13

Armenia will benefit from the opening of the Kars-Akhalkalaki railway section.

Although Armenia is not involved in the process, Azerbaijan will not
be able to interfere with transportation of Armenian cargoes through
Georgia, which will be of great economic benefit to Armenia, expert of
Georgian studies Jony Melikyan told Tert.am.

`We should also use the Armenian Diaspora’s potential to re-open the
Abkhaz railway section because Armenians live both in Abkhazia and in
Georgia, and the Russian side welcomes the project. A military base in
Armenia without direct communication is a serious difficulty,’ Mr
Melikyan said.

If the railway section is opened, Armenia will become a transit
country for Georgia.

The expert believes that all the sides are interested in the opening
of this railway section. However, a number of regional forces, as well
as ones outside the region, may put obstacles.

`I think Russia will fund the re-opening of the Abkhaz railway section
because a railway section running from Sukhumi was seriously damaged
during the war,’ Mr Melikyan said.

From: A. Papazian

Azerbaijan discusses issue on depriving Armenian classic writer
Shirvanzade of title of National Writer

20:08 15/02/2013 » SOCIETY

After Ekrem Eylisli, the Azerbaijani author of the novel “Stone
Dreams” which is about the massacre of Armenians, was deprived of all
state awards on the agenda was put also the issue of depriving
Armenian classical writer of, Alexander Shirvanzade of the title of
`National Writer of Azerbaijan.’

Website AzNews.az, tried to find out the disposition of the
Azerbaijani intelligentsia on this issue. Thus, the poet Ilyas Tapdig
stated that there is no need to recall the past. `Azerbaijan has
forgotten Alexander Shirvanzade and we should not remember him again.
His work `Namus’ was presented on the Azerbaijani stage for many
years. He lived before us. There is no need to reanimate this topic
now.

Another Azerbaijani poet Musa Yaqub said that at first they should
reason why they deprive of the award the first Azerbaijani national
writer Alexander Shirvanzade. `He is originally Armenian. You need to
reason why and on which basis do you deprive him of the reward.
Grigorian was awarded title of national writer as well. Let’s not poke
into this matter,’ the Azerbaijani poet said.

Ekrem Eylisli is national writer (since 1998) and Honored Artist of
Azerbaijan, holder of the highest order of Azerbaijan `Istiglal’
(2002) and the order of `Shokhrat’ for his outstanding merits in the
literature of Azerbaijan. Recently, on the website of Russian magazine
`Friendship of Nations’ was published his novel titled `Stone Dreams’
in which the author describes the massacres of Armenians in Baku in
1990 and in Nakhichevan in 1919. The author in his novel speaks
positively about the Armenian people and their culture. The novel
`Stone Dreams’ also contains criticism over the former Azerbaijani
President Heydar Aliyev and the tyranny of the system created by him.

After publication of the novel, Eylisli was exposed to severe
pressures in Azerbaijan; the pro-governmental youth held rally in
front of his house, his issue was discussed in the parliament of
Azerbaijan, MPs suggested to burn his books and to deprive him of
citizenship and deport from Azerbaijan. Many people `blamed’ Eylisli
in his Armenian origin, etc. President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev
deprived him of personal pension and the title of National Writer, and
accused him of `purposefully distorting the history of Azerbaijan’ and
`in distorting realities about history of Azerbaijan in an
inappropriate way.’

The leader of the pro-governmental party ‘Modern Musavat’ Hafis
Hajiyev announced that he would pay about 10 Euros to the one who will
cut the ear of the writer. Only after the intervention of the media,
the politician was `warned’ by the Interior Ministry of Azerbaijan
about the illegality of such appeals.

The U.S. Department of State and the OSCE Office in Baku condemned
persecution of Eylisli in Azerbaijan and called on the authorities to
fulfill their obligations.

Source: Panorama.am

From: A. Papazian

Leader of Armenian movement in Georgia arrives in Yerevan

TERT.AM
17:29 – 15.02.13

Vahagn Chakhalyan has come to Yerevan to take part in his
grandfather’s funeral, Chairman of the Shirak compatriotic union,
member of Armenia’s parliament Shirak Torosyan told Tert.am.

`He will give a press conference and answer all the questions,’ Mr
Torosyan said as he answered a question about Mr Chakhalyan’s
participation in the Akhalkalaki protests demanding President Mikheil
Saakashvili’s resignation.

Mr Chakhalyan was recently released by a court verdict.

He had been sentenced to 10-year imprisonment on April 7, 2009.

From: A. Papazian

Erdogan promised Ivanishvili to restore `Georgianized’ Armenian churches

NEWS.AM
February 15, 2013 | 17:56

Georgian Prime Minister Bizdina Ivanishvili received assurances from
his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan that the Georgian
architects can take part in the restoration of Oshkvank monastery and
Ishkhan church located in Turkey’s Erzrum province.

During his visit to Turkey, Ivanishvili discussed restoration of
churches and promised to resolve the issue of building a mosque in
Batumi, Novosti-Gruziya reported.

Georgian PM thanked Erdogan for restoration of the two temples,
promising to take care of the monuments of Turkish origin.

To note, Armenian experts have repeatedly stated that Oshkavank and
Ishkhan are creations of Armenian architects. They bear all the
elements of Armenian architecture, in fact, they have Armenian names.

However, local Georgian authorities are trying to attribute monuments
to the Georgian cultural heritage. Georgians, for their part, always
visit the sites, trying to prove Turks that they are monuments of
Georgian culture

From: A. Papazian