Priest brawl in Bethlehem – Historical symbol

The Meadville Tribune , PA
Jan 4 2012

Priest brawl in Bethlehem – Historical symbol
By James Drane
Meadville Tribune The Meadville Tribune Wed Jan 04, 2012, 08:37 PM EST

MEADVILLE – Priests in a public brawl inside the Church of the
Nativity in Bethlehem captured broad public attention around
Christmastime. Photos of priests, dressed in cassocks, hitting one
another with sticks and brooms, and throwing stones at one another,
have appeared in newspapers around the world.

This image of priests fighting inside a church is a symbol, a picture
that captures centuries of religious misunderstanding and scandalous
ways of handling religious differences. Religious differences continue
to fuel similar hostilities throughout the world. In the face of this
scandalous reality, decent religious persons have to pause and ask:
Are there not better ways of relating to one another and handling
religious differences?

Christianity, over the centuries, has split into thousands of
different denominations and communities. The fighting priests were
from two Eastern Orthodox communities: Greek Orthodox and Armenian
Orthodox. Together with Roman Catholic priests, they administer the
Church of the Nativity which was built over a grotto where Jesus is
believed to have been born. Each religious group claims control over a
certain section of the shrine, separated one from another by lines
drawn on the floor of the church.

Priests fighting inside a church creates a powerful portrait of the
whole Christian world. Thousands of different churches are separated
one from another by lines drawn not on a floor but on a text, or on a
theological conviction, or on a geographical territory. The
differences are between Western and Eastern Christianity, Roman and
Orthodox Catholics, Anglican and Continental Protestants, etc., etc.
The fighting priests symbolize the world-wide fragmentation of
Christianity and the scandalously hostile way different groups relate
to one another.

The Church divisions and associated hostilities have taken place over
the long history of Christianity. The earliest divisions took place
between the first followers of Jesus and groups of gnostics. The
Eastern-Western split began with Constantine in the early 4th century.
The Eastern churches were never centralized the way they were in the
West. Instead of a Roman pontiff who ruled over communities in many
different geographic areas, Eastern Orthodox bishops of a capital city
ruled over other bishops and the church in an ethnic area (Armenia,
Serbia, Russia, Greece, Ukrainia, etc.).

Some Eastern churches are united with Rome but most are not. The Greek
Orthodox and Armenian priests who were engaged in the public fight
were not responsible to any single church authority. The fighting that
took place in Bethlehem symbolizes the long historical fragmentation
of Eastern Christianity and the split between Eastern and Roman
Catholics.

For Christians in the West, fragmentation of the church began during
the Renaissance because of corruption within the papal system of
government. Certain reformers decided to break away from Rome rather
than carry out reform within the whole Western Church. One break-away
reform took place on the British Isles and was closely bound up with
the British monarchy beginning with Henry VIII (Anglican Reformation).
A different reform movement took place at different locations on the
European continent. Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and others were the major
reformers and their churches were united with rulers in different
geographic areas.

In every case there were lines drawn, followed by extensive fighting
and killing. The Reformation Movement which began in the early 16th
century, over the years split into thousands of different churches.
The priests fighting inside the church in Bethlehem create a shocking
image from which all Christians can learn something important. What
the priests were doing is what Catholics and Protestants have been
doing for centuries. It’s time to recognize this shocking reality and
to do something about it.

Who will speak for the millions of innocent men, women and children
who have been victims of this violence over the long history of
Christianity? When will some courageous members of the different
Christian communities stand up and announce: `Enough is enough. We
have had enough fighting, killing, criticizing, proving who is right
and drawing of lines. The priests fighting with one another is a
scandal and so are the on-going religious battles, competitions,
criticisms, prejudices. All this is scandalous because the moral core
of Christianity is: Love God and love your neighbor as yourself.’

After so much fighting, where are the peace builders? Where are the
new images and the non-violent symbols of Christianity? Some peace
builders are out there. They need ordinary people from all the
different congregations in order to fill their ranks and expand an
ecumenical interdenominational campaign for peace and reconciliation.
Enough is enough. Love is what counts.

Drane is Russell B. Roth Professor of Bioethics at Edinboro University
of Pennsylvania.

http://meadvilletribune.com/opinion/x1666060857/Priest-brawl-in-Bethlehem-Historical-symbol

Beirut: Armenian-language reporting gains steam

The Daily Star, Lebanon
Jan 5 2012

Armenian-language reporting gains steam

January 05, 2012 02:52 AM
By Van Meguerditchian, The Daily Star

BEIRUT: At 4:30 p.m. each day, many Lebanese Armenians switch their
televisions to FutureNews or OTV to watch coverage of local, regional
and international news in Armenian.

While community members can choose from among dozens of
Arabic-language television stations, many viewres told The Daily Star
that they miss having a television channel dedicated to broadcasting
Armenian-language programs.

Paradise station, a local radio station that was based in Burj
Hammoud, established the Armenian Television Network during the Civil
War, but the station stopped broadcasting after its administration
failed to obtain a proper license in the mid-1990s.

While it’s not a substitute, the nearly half-hour daily newscasts
every afternoon provide viewers the opportunity to hear all the news,
including local Lebanese affairs, in Armenian.

Lorig Saboundjian, a reporter and anchor at OTV, told The Daily Star
that the daily newscasts signalled that local media outlets were
beginning to realizr the value and market for broadcasting news in
Armenian.

`After years of being off television screens … people started to
realize that, just like Arabic, Armenian is also an important language
that needs to be used on TV,’ Saboundjian said.

According to Saboundjian, the Armenian news team at OTV needs to bring
on more Armenian-language reporters because there are more events to
be covered every day.

`Not only should the team become bigger, I believe the daily 20-minute
broadcast is regularly failing to cover all important issues,’ she
said, lamenting a lack of opportunities to study journalism in
Armenian.

Saboundjian said that she would have studied journalism in Armenian if
it had been available at the university she attended.

`Although I wanted to study Armenian journalism, the major wasn’t
available anywhere in Lebanon,’ said Saboundjian, who studied Social
Work at Haigazian University instead.

`This is the main reason why there is a shortage in Armenian
[-language] media personnel today and most probably this is one of the
obstacles to lauching an Armenian [-language] TV channel,’ Saboundjian
added.

`Whoever studies journalism in English, Arabic or French … they will
probably prefer to work in English, Arabic or a French media outlet.’

Saboundjian, 35, first started her career in journalism as a part-time
presenter for Beirut-based Radio Van.

`All I did back then was simply present news after it was prepared by
the editor,’ she said.

Before joining OTV in 2009, Saboundjian held a number of different positions.

`In 2004, I was offered a job by an Armenia-based TV station that
wanted to open an office in Beirut,’ she said. `As a correspondent for
the YergirMedia, I prepared all Lebanon-related documentaries and news
broadcasts and sent them to Armenia.’

A rash of security incidents in Lebanon after 2004 helped Saboundjian
further establish herself in the profession. `I was the first
journalist to send video coverage of [former Prime Minister Rafik]
Hariri’s assassination in 2005 to the Armenian capital of Yerevan,’
Saboundjian said.

`My work at YergirMedia was a great experience because sending
political news from Lebanon to Armenia required a great deal of work
and extra effort,’ she said, noting how she needed to explain to
Armenian viewers in Armenia the sometimes-convoluted background of
Lebanese politics.

It works the other way as well.

`Although we have a team of Armenian journalists at OTV … we
constantly need to explain to non-Armenians at the studio about
specific news and its importance during a certain news broadcast,’ she
said.

`While thousands of Lebanese Armenians held a demonstration in
Beirut’s Martyrs Square against Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan’s visit, Prime Minister Saad Hariri was giving a speech in
Tripoli,’ said Saboundjian, providing one example.

`The decision about which event to broadcast was influenced by the
Armenian desk, which explained to the administration the importance of
the demonstration,’ she added.

Saboundjian’s colleague at Future News, Shiraz Djeredjian, said an
interest in politics led him to journalism.

A graduate of Biology from the American University of Beirut,
Djeredjian, 25, said that his ability to speak Armenian helped launch
his career.

`I was offered a reporter’s job at Future News four years ago … and
I had to go through a four-month journalism training led by a group of
journalists at the studio,’ said Djeredjian.

While Saboundjian cited a lack of academic opportunities, Djeredjian
said that another burden hindering the expansion of Armenian-language
journalism is the political divide among Lebanese Armenians.

`Although Future News and OTV are the only channels that currently
have daily Armenian news broadcasts, Lebanese Armenians prefer one of
them over the other based on their political affiliations,’ said
Djeredjian.

Future News is affiliated with the Future Movement while OTV is
connected to Michel Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement.

`The political rivalry between the two TV channels is negative … it
has led most Armenian politicians and figures to boycott one of the
two stations, refusing to go on Future News or OTV,’ he said.

Shiraz, who presents the daily Armenian broadcast on Future News said
that he and four other reporters staff the Armenian desk, producing
local Lebanese news, Armenian news and international news.

When asked what it takes to be a competent journalist in the Armenian
language, Djeredjian said that both strong journalism skills and a
sound knowledge of Armenian are equally important. `It’s not enough to
be a good journalist … one needs to have an advanced knowledge of
Armenian as well.’

Djeredjian said he was hopeful that Armenian-language journalism in
Lebanon would move forward and expand because of the experience many
Armenian-language journalists have gained in newspapers and other
media outlets.

Besides being a full-time reporter at Future News, Djeredjian presents
morning news on the Armenian Radio Sevan station.

Djeredjian also appears live on two Armenian talk shows on the
Yerevan-based ShantTV that connect Beirut via satellite broadcast with
studios in Yerevan, Moscow and Los Angeles.

While politics may influence which newscast viewers watch, many in the
Lebanese Armenian community emphasize the importance of broadcasting
in Armenian.

`I don’t mind which channel I’m watching … watching news in Armenian
even once a day is a great thing,’ Nareg Hejinian told The Daily Star.

Hejinian expressed dismay at not having a separate Lebanese Armenian
television channel that broadcasts in Armenian. `We should have had it
by now … not having it is a big mistake,’ said Hejinian.

Another viewer agreed, saying that the news broadcasts that are
currently offered are too brief.

`Of course it is important to watch Armenian news and watch it every
day … but it needs to be longer and provide more details,’ commented
Armen Seferian, as he waited for the broadcast to begin.

A version of this article appeared in the print edition of The Daily
Star on January 05, 2012, on page 3.

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Local-News/2012/Jan-05/158895-armenian-language-reporting-gains-steam.ashx#axzz1iZ9fhvYb

ISTANBUL: Analyzing France’s Armenian bill

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Jan 4 2012

Analyzing France’s Armenian bill

by Ramazan Gözen*
4 January 2012 / ,

The French National Assembly approved a bill to punish those who deny
Armenian allegations about the 1915 incidents with a prison term of
one year and a fine of 45,000 euros.
Although not as yet signed into law, this initiative as such is
against the objective norms of law, logic and reason. It is known that
the bill was passed not with the purpose of protecting rights or the
law but out of concerns for French domestic politics.

It is nothing other than a distressful period in history being
exploited for political ploys. That the bill was passed by only 10
percent of the members who make up the French parliament was in itself
odd. That may be in line with French law, but it is openly in
contravention of the understanding of universal law. This bill, which
is likely to deeply impact France’s domestic and foreign policy,
having been accepted by such a small group, is a strange development
even for French democracy. Why this maneuver, employed by vote-hungry
President Nicolas Sarkozy, who aspires to entice more people to his
side and his party, is going to be binding on the French people is
also difficult to comprehend. Whether or not it is going to be a law
aside, even the making of such a decision has already inflicted damage
on relations.

The second dimension of the damage concerns Turkish-French relations.
Turkey, which has strongly reacted to the bill, has taken an
anti-France stance. The government has decided to take measures
against France, and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÄ?an has
unveiled an eight-measure package to this end. These measures, unless
developments in the opposite direction take place on the French side,
are bound to damage the interests of the two countries. We believe
that the bigger of the damages will be to the centuries old system of
Western institutions and values of which Turkey also wants to be a
part.

The most damaging of all is the violation of freedom of thought and
expression, which is the most vital dimension of the human rights and
freedoms the Western system is built on. While there is permission for
coming up with the allegations of a so-called genocide, denying those
the freedom to say just the opposite of that is clearly a legal
inequality. Everyone should be expected to have the right to think and
express even the most radical and misbegotten idea. Even the person
who rejects a universally acknowledged piece of information, such as
the world is round, should have the freedom to express it no matter
what his justification may be. Having freedom of expression does not
mean that he is to be taken into consideration.

Bulding a wall before the freedom of thought

No thought or view should be limited, inhibited and sealed within
barriers unless it is a slur against the personality and identity of
others or usurps their rights. Building a wall before the freedom of
thought and expression is simply undemocratic and a violation of law.
The decision made by the French National Assembly flatly conflicts
with fundamental laws and ethical norms. Everyone should have the
right to express whatever they think of the 1915 incidents. The bill
is also against the policies and values championed by the EU, which is
pungently critical of the democracy and human rights issues in non-EU
countries. That the EU has always criticized Turkey on the grounds of
freedom of thought and expression violations and that the European
Court of Human Rights has fined Turkey millions of euros using the
same arguments is very well known. The decision made by France in just
the opposite direction, when there are many decisions against Turkey
and a lot of other countries, is simply an affront to the EU. France
has cornered not only itself but also the EU by behaving the way it
has. If the EU cannot stop that, its status, already tarnished
economically and financially, will also be called into question in
terms of law and politics.

Erosion of the legal and freedom values of the EU besides its economic
and financial malaise will have an unfavorable impact on the
peripheral regions of Europe in political, social, cultural and even
security affairs. More importantly, the whole of Turkey, including its
citizens and administrators, will get more anti-France and anti-EU,
the signs of which can already be discerned. The reactions by Turkey
to France have increased considerably in the past week. Not only will
these reactions deal a blow to Turkish-French relations, they will
also have an undesirable reflection on France in Turkey and Turkey in
France. It is obvious this deterioration in bilateral ties is in the
interests of neither Turkey nor France.

The so-called Armenian genocide problems cannot be resolved in this
way but activate the potential to worsen them to the extent they can
become insoluble. It may mutually spawn ultranationalist and radical
tendencies and movements. If the aim of the French National Assembly
is to politically isolate Turkey, tear it away from the EU and put
pressure on its foreign policy — if there is such a deep scheme
behind all that maneuvering — the country to be harmed the most is
firstly France. The signals of that have already been seen in the
international media. The world media have come up with views that
France’s move will draw reactions from almost all countries, Turkey in
particular. Finally, the French National Assembly’s decision may have
pleased the Armenian diaspora, but it has certainly made for unease
among Turkish citizens of Armenian origin.

*Dr. Ramazan Gözen is an instructor at Abant İzzet Baysal University.

French Senate to vote on Genocide bill this month

PanArmenian, Armenia
Jan 4 2012

French Senate to vote on Genocide bill this month

January 4, 2012 – 18:49 AMT
PanARMENIAN.Net – France’s upper house of parliament, the Senate, will
vote this month on a bill to outlaw denial of the Armenian Genocide
despite a furious diplomatic spat with Turkey, a government official
told AFP.

On December 22, 2011, French National Assembly passed a bill
criminalizing public denial of the Armenian Genocide. If passed and
signed into law by the Senate, the bill would impose a 45,000 euro
fine and a year in prison for anyone in France who denies this crime
against humanity committed by the Ottoman Empire.

Turkey has withdrawn its ambassador to Paris, but officials say he may
return shortly in order to lobby against the bill and has threatened
sanctions.

Iranian vocalist, Armenian Philharmonic Orchestra to perform in Tehr

PanArmenian, Armenia
Jan 4 2012

Iranian vocalist, Armenian Philharmonic Orchestra to perform in Tehran

January 4, 2012 – 12:40 AMT
PanARMENIAN.Net – Iranian vocalist Nazeri will perform a concert in
Tehran in collaboration with the Armenian Philharmonic Orchestra in
spring, Tehran Times reported.

Iranian composer Peyman Soltani will also be cooperating to stage the
concert entitled `Melal’, director of Qoqnus Music Institute,
Mohammad-Hossein Tutunchian told the Persian service of ISNA on
Tuesday, Jan 3.

Tutunchian also said that Nazeri might be repeating his collaboration
with the Dusti Ensemble in the coming months. The group, including tar
virtuoso Hossein Alizadeh, kamancheh virtuoso Ardeshir Kamkar, and
percussionist Pejman Haddadi as well as Nazeri, gave a performance
several months ago in Tehran after a 23-year hiatus.

Nazeri is a holder Chevalier de la Légion d’honneur medal presented to
him by the French government in 2008.

Presidents of Armenia and Artsakh visited Martouni region together

news.am, Armenia
Jan 4 2012

Presidents of Armenia and Artsakh visited Martouni region together

January 04, 2012 | 01:15

STEPANAKERT. – President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan and President of
the Artsakh Republic Bako Sahakyan visited the Nagorno-Karabakh
Martouni region, press service of Artsakh President informs Armenian
News-NEWS.am.

The Presidents were in a number of military units and got acquainted
with life of the servicemen.

On the same day Bako Sahakyan and Serzh Sargsyan partook at a solemn
ceremony of opening a new `Sayat-Nova’ sports complex in the regional
center of Martouni.

Afterwards the Presidents of the two Armenian states arrived in the
Askeran region. In the village of Avetaranots they inspected the
activities of briquettes production as well as the production site of
solid fuel boilers located on the Shoushi-Karmir Shouka crossroads.

Premier Ara Haroutyunyan and other Karabakh officials accompanied the
Presidents.

ISTANBUL: But …

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Jan 1 2012

But¦

MARKAR ESAYAN

I just want to ask this. Let us try to answer this question by
stripping away all contexts.

What would be the reaction of Turkey had the massacre in Uludere taken
place in western Turkey and had 35 people died due to an accident or a
terrorist attack? In terms of politics, media and society, what would
we feel and what reactions would we have?

They would not be like the reaction we had to this massacre in
Uludere. I just know this. And it bothers me, as a human being and as
a citizen of Turkey. It bothers me so much that it makes me angry.

Whether the attack was an accident or a deliberate act, whether the
error involved provocation, who provided the intelligence and who gave
the order for the attack based solely on the intelligence they had
received are all of secondary importance to me.

I feel this way because it is possible to find answers to these
questions and to prosecute those responsible. And I hope this will be
done. But I believe that our ethics, which generate problems, are
problematic. Who turned the country into this? Who is responsible for
the huge difference between the standard of living in Uludere and
Etiler? Is it the fault of past elites alone?

Just like the locusts flooded Egypt in line with Moses’ prophecy, it
seems that the actual source of the problem is the flow of `buts’ in
my homeland when the dead are Kurds.

`But they were smugglers.’ `But what they were doing over there?’ `But
PKK [Kurdistan Workers’ Party] militants could have been there.’ `But
such accidents can happen while combating terrorism.’

What kind of double standard is this? What kind of humanity is this?
What kind of conscience is this?

How have we become like this?

I was notified of the massacre by Twitter early that morning. By noon,
the TV stations had not aired a single report on the incident. Then,
they broadcast it in their news tickers only. Most of them referred to
the massacre in these headlines as `Incident at the border.’ On
Saturday, the Uludere district governor, who paid a visit to the
families of the victims, was attacked. The same TV stations were swift
to report this. Those who used to speak out in similar cases of human
rights abuses and suspicious deaths by the military adopted a fairly
opposite position this time, feeling that the government and the
National Intelligence Organization (MİT) might be hurt. What is the
duty of an intellectual, taking a suitable position or telling the
truth?

Why should we expect maturity from political actors before we get rid
of this inhumane double standard? Politics is a mirror of the
community. And society is even more progressive than the clumsy state
in its desire for change. But I see a state of double standards in
Turkey. Positions are not principled or ethical; they are conjectural
and partial. We cannot go on like this.

If we turn our backs on the 1915 deportations — where hundreds of
thousands of Armenians were murdered — while calling Dersim a
massacre, and refer to the 1915 incidents with a `but,’ our humanity,
faith and ethics become trapped within that `but.’ We cannot go
anywhere with this mentality. The contradiction would steer us towards
that which is evil.

It is an inherent motive for a man to support others who are similar
to him, but this implies deliberate ethics. Our humanity is
complemented by our ability to make room for differences and
diversity. Peace and justice are achieved only when we believe others
actually deserve them.

This was articulated so perfectly in the columns by A. Turan Alkan and
Nedim Hazar published Saturday that I thought while reading those
columns we could be hopeful for the future of this country.

I felt the same way when I heard the following remarks that Bülent
Arınç made in Parliament. `The presence of the Kurds has been a
reality for more than 1,000 years. You cannot deny this. If you do,
you would be going back to 1980. You have to recognize the Kurds and
their rights. We will recognize their constitutional rights; we will
respect their language. We will not think of this as a concession or
submission to terrorism. We denounce racism. We will recognize the
right of a person who calls himself a Kurd to education, culture and
language. This is not a reward; this is their right.’

Yes, the constructive approach was expounded in these remarks.
Resolution of the Kurdish issue is possible if this approach permeates
politics and society. And true, this refers to a Turkey that is
completely different from the one of the past.

We are acting slowly; we do not swiftly turn our backs on the `buts.’
The fact that massacres like the one in Uludere take place is because
of this slowness.

I offer my condolences to our nation. Uludere is the joint loss and
pain of us all.

http://www.todayszaman.com/columnistDetail_getNewsById.action?newsId=267309

ISTANBUL: Turkish envoy to return to Paris to block Senate approval

Today’s Zaman , Turkey
Jan 3 2012

Turkish envoy to return to Paris to block Senate approval of genocide bill

January 2012 / TODAYSZAMAN.COM,

Turkey plans to send its ambassador to France, who was recalled to
Ankara for consultations in the wake of French Parliament’s approval
of a bill seeking to penalize denial of the alleged Armenian genocide,
back to Paris to step up efforts to prevent the approval of the bill
by the senate, the Turkish media reported on Tuesday.
Reports citing Turkish diplomatic sources say Turkey’s move to recall
its ambassador, Tahsin BurcuoÄ?lu, does not mean it is downgrading
diplomatic ties with Paris as he was recalled simply for consultation.
Since the bill has not yet been enacted, Turkey will make the utmost
effort to prevent the law from becoming law, the same sources said.

The lower house of French Parliament voted last month in favor of a
controversial bill penalizing those who deny that the 1915 killing of
Armenians by Ottoman Turks was genocide, ignoring massive Turkish
protests against the measure. The bill sets a punishment of up to a
year in prison and a fine of 45,000 euros ($59,000) for those who deny
or `outrageously minimize’ the alleged genocide of Armenians in
eastern Anatolia during the final years of the Ottoman Empire, putting
such an action on par with denial of the Holocaust.

The measure now needs to be passed in the Senate, the upper house of
French Parliament, before it will come into effect. It is up to the
French government to either put the bill on the Senate’s agenda or
not. If the Senate, which will take a recess on Feb. 22 for April’s
presidential elections, does not discuss the bill until Feb. 22, the
fate of the bill will be dependent of the new government to be formed
after June’s legislative elections.

The disputed genocide of 1915 has been a matter of a fuming discussion
between Turks and Armenians, as Armenians claim that Ottoman Turks
carried out a systematic mass murder of Armenians with the aim of
eradicating them in the country. Turks say Armenians were deported
when they took up arms against the state at a time of chaos as the
Ottoman Empire crumbled and modern-day Turkey’s founders fought a
political and armed war against foreign forces trying to take over the
country. Turkey’s asserts that most of the casualties occurred as
deported Armenians were en route to various destinations due to the
extreme circumstances, but Armenians allege that the deaths were
intentional.

http://www.todayszaman.com/news-267464-turkish-envoy-to-return-to-paris-to-block-senate-approval-of-genocide-bill.html

BAKU: Georgia: Azerbaijan is an ally, and Armenia is a partner

MilAz.info, Azerbaijan
Jan 3 2012

Georgia: Azerbaijan is an ally, and Armenia is a partner

16:37 03-01-2012
On December 23, 2011 the parliament of Georgia adopted a new national
security concept to replace a similar conception, approved in 2005.
The main reason for the change of the doctrine was the
Russian-Georgian war in 2008.

Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, addressing on July 28, 2010 in
the Ministry of National Defense, said that under the increasing
danger it became necessary to develop a new security concept. “If the
enemy again attacks us, then every inch of land under their feet
should burn,” said Saakashvili, stressing that the Georgian army must
be ready not only to carry out its peacekeeping mission, but also to
military defensive actions.

In the concept of 2005 among main threats to Georgia were called the
violation of its territorial integrity, destabilizing conflicts
between neighboring countries, military intervention and international
terrorism. In the document “Foreign Policy Priorities” Georgia ranged
its strategic partners in such order: USA, Ukraine, Turkey and
Azerbaijan. In the Armenia was called a regular partner. In other
words, the document adopted in 2005 stressed that the importance of
Azerbaijan to Georgia is one step higher than Armenia’s significance.
That document stated: “A joint energy projects with Azerbaijan,
transport and communication projects raises this country to the level
of strategic partner of Georgia. And Armenia and Georgia are tied by
bonds of pragmatic cooperation in all areas.” In the concept of 2005
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was considered as a major threat to
regional stability.

Such assessment of Azerbaijan and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in
Georgia’s National Security Concept was founded. Thank to energy
projects and pipelines in Azerbaijan, Georgia’s financial resources
and geopolitical weight have increased; even for the construction of
the Baku-Tbilisi-Cars railway, Azerbaijan considered it necessary to
allocate for Georgia $200 million loan with low interest rates. But
cooperation with Armenia brings nor political, nor economic dividends
to Georgia. On the contrary, Tbilisi has to constantly think about the
neutralization of the separatist claims of the Armenians living in
Georgia; nationalist circles in Armenia continue to provide full
support to this separatism. There are not such problems with
Azerbaijanis living in Georgia. As for the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict,
as the main threat to regional stability, in case of a resumption of
the war one of the victims of Armenia can become Georgia: the
construction of pipelines through its territory can create problems
for the security of this part of Georgia. Moreover, the war between
Azerbaijan and Armenia will aggravate the relations between the
Azeri’s and Armenians densely living in Georgia.

The new concept of Georgia’s national security has been changed
dramatically only in respect of relations with Russia. The document
stresses that after the seizure of Abkhazia and South Sestina by
Russia, it is considered the main enemy of Georgia, and the main
threat to the country is connected with Moscow”s policy. The previous
concept did not have appointed on the possibility of Russian attacks
on Georgian territory, but such appoint was included into the new one:
it reads clearly that the Kremlin is interested in weakening and
disintegration of the state of Georgia.

A serious supplement was made in connection with the Karabakh
conflict, `the consequences of the war will be difficult for each of
the three South Caucasus countries, and Russia will increase its
influence in the region.” That is, the war will create conditions for
Russia to launch a mechanism of weakening of Azerbaijan.

The question about the role of Armenia in the new concept was
discussed for a long time in the upper echelons of Georgia, but the
approach remains the same: a country which is a military strategic
ally of Russia, can not be a strategic ally , or strategic partner of
Georgia.

As a result, in a new concept Azerbaijan, as before, is called a
strategic ally, Armenia is just a partner, and the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict is the most dangerous problem in the region.

Source: Turan Analytical Service

S. Sargsyan and B. Sahakyan visited servicemen in Martouni region

Times.am, Armenia
Jan 3 2012

S. Sargsyan and B. Sahakyan visited servicemen in Martouni region

On 3 December President of the Artsakh Republic Bako Sahakyan together
with President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan visited the NKR’s Martouni
region.

The Presidents were in a number of military units and got acquainted
with life of the servicemen, Central Information Department of the
Office of the Artsakh Republic President informs.

On the same day Bako Sahakyan and Serzh Sargsyan partook at a solemn
ceremony of opening a new `Sayat-Nova’ sports complex in the regional
center of Martouni.

Afterwards the Presidents of the two Armenian states arrived in the
Askeran region. In the village of Avetaranots they inspected the
activities of briquettes production as well as the production site of
solid fuel boilers located on the Shoushi-Karmir Shouka crossroads.

Premier Ara Haroutyunyan and other officials accompanied the Presidents.