Author: Babajanian Karo

ARMENIAN LEADERS RETICENT ON UKRAINE CRISIS

Institute for War and Peace Reporting, UK
IWPR Caucasus Reporting #726
March 7 2014

Government too closely tied to Moscow to say anything controversial,
although it plans to work with new Kiev leaders.

By Vahe Harutyunyan – Caucasus

Armenian officials are treading a careful line over the Ukraine crisis,
keen to avoid angering their allies in the Kremlin but also anxious
to avoid supporting an intervention in a sovereign state.

Just before Russian troops fanned out across Crimea, Armenian deputy
foreign minister Shavarsh Kocharyan pledged to maintain ties with
the new Ukrainian administration set up after President Viktor
Yanukovich fled.

“This is our position – to continue cooperating with Ukraine, and to
always act in line with Armenia’s interests,” Kocharyan told reporters.

While this position is out of step with Russian policy, which refuses
to recognise the removal of Yanukovich, Armenian officials refused
to join the Ukrainians in condemning what the Kiev leadership says
is an invasion of Crimea.

“Our ambassador is in Kiev and is carefully following the course of
events,” said foreign ministry spokesman Tigran Balayan.

Analysts in Armenia say the government is in a tricky position. Russia
is Armenia’s chief trading partner, a strategic military ally and home
to the largest Armenian diaspora. Ukraine, meanwhile, is Armenia’s
fourth largest trading partner, and home to a 100,000-strong Armenian
community.

Officials in Yerevan are therefore trying not to antagonise either
side.

“The situation is, shall we say, delicate. The government in Armenia
is trying to keep quiet until the outcome of the Ukrainian crisis
becomes clear,” Sergei Minasyan, deputy director of the Caucasus
Institute in Yerevan, told IWPR.

Ruben Mehrabyan, of the Centre for Political and International Studies,
added that “even if the Armenian government recognises the dangers
posed by Russia, they still can’t criticise the Kremlin since they
are under its control,”

Armenia has faced dilemmas about foreign policy direction similar to
those that form the backdrop to Ukraine’s current crisis. In early
September, President Serzh Sargsyan announced that Armenia was to
join the Russia-Kazakstan-Belarus Customs Union, ditching plans to
sign an Association Agreement with the European Union.

Armenia is already part of the Moscow-led Collective Security Treaty
Organisation, hosts a large Russian military presence, does a quarter
of its foreign trade with that country.

Although ties have always been close, many Armenians still suspect
that President Sargsyan was pushed into applying for Customs Union
membership – and that the same pressure is making other leading
figures stay silent on Crimea.

Hovhannes Sahakyan, secretary of the ruling Republican Party’s
parliamentary group, reflected this caution in studiously guarded
remarks.

“It is important to us for the crisis in Ukraine to be resolved
peacefully. At the same time, however, it is no less important that
a solution is reached in line with the norms of international law,”
he said.

Most opposition parties have taken a similarly cautious line, the
only exception being the Heritage party, which strongly condemned
Moscow’s actions.

“Russian actions in Crimea and in other parts of Ukraine constitute
aggression and a gross violation of international law. Their aim
is to force Kiev into Moscow’s orbit,” Styopa Safaryan, the party’s
general secretary, told IWPR.

Many Armenians share this view.

Daniel Ionisyan, 27, who spent several hours behind bars last year
after protesting against a visit to Yerevan by President Vladimir
Putin, said the outcome of the Ukraine crisis would seal the fate of
Armenians, too.

A Committee for Solidarity With the Maidan – the Kiev square where
protesters massed to oppose Yanukovich – has been set up in Yerevan.

It too damned Putin’s government as the aggressor, and likened the
official silence in Armenia to appeasement.

“These actions resemble those shameful episodes in European history
– the German Anschluss of Austria in 1938, and the annexation of
Czechoslovakia by Adolf Hitler,” a statement from the committee said.

The Maidan solidarity committee includes prominent rights activists
like Artur Sakunts, head of the Vanadzor office of the Helsinki
Civilian Assembly, Boris Navasardyan, head of the Yerevan Press Club,
and Davit Shahnazaryan, former director of the National Security
Service, as well as many ordinary people.

The Armenian business sector has been as reluctant as the politicians
to express forthright opinions on events in Ukraine.

Gagik Makaryan, head of the Republican Union of Employers, said
he was concerned about the potential impact of the crisis on the
Russian economy, which is already weakening despite consistently high
oil prices.

“The possibility that the international community will impose sanctions
against Russia is also a matter of concern to us. Such a course of
events would strike a blow against Armenian businessmen,” Makaryan
told IWPR. “The instability of the Ukrainian economy is also having
a negative impact on us.”

Vahe Harutiunyan is a freelance journalist in Armenia.

OPINION: IGNORE WESTERN HYPOCRISY, PUTIN WILL DO WHAT HE WANTS

CNN
March 7 2014

By Simon Tisdall, Special to CNN

Editor’s note: Simon Tisdall is assistant editor and foreign affairs
columnist of the Guardian. He was previously foreign editor of the
Guardian and the Observer and served as White House corespondent
and U.S. editor in Washington D.C. The opinions expressed in this
commentary are solely his.

(CNN) — All the self-righteous huffing and puffing in Washington over
Ukraine jars on European and especially Russian ears after the multiple
U.S.-led invasions and interventions in other people’s countries
of recent years. It’s difficult to say what is more astonishing:
the double standards exhibited by the White House, or the apparent
total lack of self-awareness of U.S. officials.

Secretary of State John Kerry risked utter ridicule when he declared
it unacceptable to invade another country on a “completely trumped-up
pretext,” or just because you don’t like its current leadership. Iraq
in 2003 springs instantly to mind. This is exactly what George W. Bush
and Tony Blair did when they “trumped up” the supposed threat posed
by the hated Saddam Hussein’s fabled weapons of mass destruction.

Like Saddam, the Taliban leadership in place in Afghanistan in 2001
was deeply objectionable. But instead of just going after Osama bin
Laden and his al Qaeda training camps after the 9/11 attacks, Bush
(again abetted by Blair) opted for full-scale regime change. The
lamentable consequences of that decision are still being felt 13
years later, not least by Afghan civilians who have been dying in
ever greater numbers as the final Nato withdrawal approaches.

U.S. President Barack Obama, a former law professor who should know
better, has charged Vladimir Putin, his Russian counterpart, with
violating Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, in breach
of international law.

But it is Obama, following in Bush’s footsteps, who has repeatedly
and cynically flouted international law by launching or backing myriad
armed attacks on foreign soil, in Libya, Somalia, Yemen and Pakistan
to name a few, without U.N. security council authorization. It is
Obama’s administration which continues to undermine international law
by refusing to join or recognize the International Criminal Court,
the most important instrument of international justice to have been
developed since 1945.

And it is Obama’s State Department, principally in the person of
Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, that fatally overplayed
its hand in the run-up to last month’s second Ukraine revolution.

Nuland’s infamous “f**k the EU” comment revealed the extent to which
Washington was recklessly maneuvering to undermine Ukraine’s elected
pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych, by backing the Kiev street
protesters’ demands.

The EU had wanted to take things more gradually, for fear of provoking
the very Russian reaction to which the U.S. now so strongly objects.

When the foreign ministers of Germany, France and Poland, acting
for the EU, negotiated a compromise agreement on February 22 that
envisaged early elections, the crisis appeared to have been defused.

Russia did not like the deal, but seemed ready to go along.

But within 24 hours, the opposition had torn up the agreement. It
forced Yanukovych from power and sacked the government. To alarm in
Moscow, where nightmarish World War II memories linger, Ukrainian
neo-fascists were among those who seized control. They are now part
of the new government in Kiev.

The U.S. almost immediately gave its blessing to what the Kremlin
later described as a “coup d’etat” while the EU, knowing this was
what Washington wanted, just looked on. Little wonder the Russians
were furious at what they saw as a western double cross.

Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, reflected these worries
when he voiced “most serious concern” over Ukraine in phone calls
to the French, German and Polish foreign ministers. “The opposition
not only has failed to fulfil a single one of its obligations but is
already presenting new demands all the time, following the lead of
armed extremists and pogromists whose actions pose a direct threat
to Ukraine’s sovereignty and constitutional order,” Lavrov said. But
it was already too late.

Obama and Kerry seem to have calmed down a little since the crisis
first broke. The self-righteous hyperbole about international rights
is less evident, though it has not disappeared entirely. Obama has
heard the many voices in the U.S. and beyond terming this the worst
east-west crisis since the end of the Cold War — and as the biggest
foreign test of his presidency.

So now he’s doing what he does best: talking. In his latest phone
call to Putin, on Thursday this week, Obama put forward a plan
to resolve the stand-off diplomatically. It includes direct talks
between Moscow and Kiev, the return of Russian troops to their bases,
and the deployment of international observers to ensure the rights
of all ethnic groups, including Crimean Russians, are respected.

But don’t hold your breath. Putin is in no hurry to back off or
back down.

He has his tail up after a fortnight in which he exposed the hypocrisy
and hollowness of much of western policy and politicians. His
behavior, especially in Crimea, has been dangerous, wrong-headed and
irresponsible in the extreme. In many ways, Putin is an unredeemed
Cold War throwback. He is definitely not the sort of chap one would
invite round for dinner, as a former British diplomat commented. The
crisis could still explode in his and everyone else’s face. But it
was not unprovoked.

And the Russian leader has an eye for precedent. Similar battles over
so-called “frozen conflicts” and the rights of isolated ethnic groups
loom elsewhere on Russia’s periphery, in Georgia, Moldova, Armenia,
Nagorno-Karabakh, and maybe Belarus and the Baltic states too. Putin
is putting down a marker, even as he plays Obama and Kerry for fools.

Whatever they think in Washington, and whatever the financial markets
say, it’s working for him personally. Latest opinion polls in Russia
show Putin’s popularity soaring. One of these days western leaders
will drop the pious cant, learn to stop under-estimating him, and
recognize Russia’s leader-for-life as the canny, very dangerous,
utterly unscrupulous opponent he is.

ARMENIA: ACTIVISTS PUSH FOR DOMESTIC-VIOLENCE LAW AMID OFFICIAL INDIFFERENCE

EurasiaNet.org
March 7 2014

March 7, 2014 – 1:52pm, by Gayane Abrahamyan

As elsewhere in the South Caucasus, Armenian women can expect to
receive an array of toasts, flowers and little gifts on March 8,
International Women’s Day. But there is one thing Armenian women
won’t enjoy, or get anytime soon – a law covering domestic violence.

Citing alleged shortcomings in its provisions, the Armenian government
in January rejected a proposed bill on domestic violence, legislation
that non-governmental organizations, international experts and
government members had worked to get adopted for seven years.

The Coalition to Stop Violence against Women, which unites seven
non-governmental organizations (NGOs), has now re-drafted the bill, but
hopes for passage are lower today than a few months ago. “If before,
Social Welfare Ministry workers cooperated with us and believed the
law would be passed, now we do not have even that assistance,” said
Women’s Support Center spokesperson Perchuhi Kazhoian. “They do not
say they disapprove, but their messages make it clear there is no
political will for it.”

Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian, who used to frequently raise the
issue, has fallen silent. Work with the United Nations Population Fund
ended after 2011 with the conclusion of a project against gender-based
violence. Lobbying efforts from local NGOs go nowhere.

The need for such legislation, however, has not vanished, women’s
rights activists say, pointing out that during the first two months of
2014 five Armenian women between the ages of 28 and 38 were murdered
by their husbands. While advocates believe that Armenia’s long-time
tradition of keeping silent about domestic violence has been overcome,
women still usually refrain from going to the police about abuse. A
domestic-violence law would make it easier for victims to file
complaints and gain protection, advocates say.

“Where should they turn if there isn’t a designated department
[for domestic violence], trained police officers, when there isn’t a
law regulating their issues?” asked Women’s Support Center Director
Maro Matosian. “In many cases, they turn to the police then retract
their complaint because the officer tells the woman she has to pay
an administrative fine, [or] shames her for complaining about her
husband.”

Colonel Nelly Durian, a senior official for police investigations,
concedes that many regional police departments lack professionally
trained officers to handle domestic violence cases, but stressed that
progress on addressing domestic violence has been made. The number of
complaints from alleged domestic-violence victims has increased by
“about 20 percent” since 2009 “due to [police stations’] increased
reliability,” she said.

Official police statistics show lower incidences of domestic
violence in 2013 (“around 500”), than in 2012 (760 cases). Rights
activists believe only extreme cases of abuse are registered with
law-enforcement. Even then, an appropriate police response may not
follow, said Lida Minasian, a project manager for A Society without
Violence, a women’s rights non-governmental organization.

The parents of one 30-year-old Yerevan resident, Tatevik Nikoghosian,
went to the police last summer after her husband allegedly stabbed
their daughter 25 times, damaging her heart, lungs and liver. He
currently is in jail, awaiting trial. Previous attempts by the parents
to involve the police after reportedly vicious beatings had failed.

Minasian and other women’s rights activists underline that the
attack could have been prevented if a law existed that provided for
training for police officers and social workers, restraining orders
on abusive husbands, and shelters for abused women. Only one shelter
for abused women, operated by the Women’s Support Center in Yerevan
exists in Armenia.

The Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare is now drafting a
social-assistance bill, which includes several provisions on domestic
violence, but does not provide for police training, or measures
designed to prevent abuse. Deputy Labor and Social Welfare Minister
Filaret Berikian told EurasiaNet.org that the ministry does not
oppose a law on domestic violence. The new bill, Berikian continued,
“certainly does not replace the one on domestic violence, but some
of its provisions would at least allow assistance to abused women.”

Kazhoian, though, scoffed that the bill “is like saying ‘Go get abused,
then we will help you.'” The Coalition to Stop Violence Against Women
intends to show its reworked version of the domestic-violence bill
to the labor and justice ministries this spring before resubmitting
it to parliament.

“When a law is passed, it sends a message that the state cannot
tolerate” a given crime, said Matosian. “It is also a message to
courts that are reluctant to handle such cases.”

Editor’s note: Gayane Abrahamyan is a freelance reporter and editor
in Yerevan.

March 7, 2014
Western Prelacy of the Armenian Apostolic Church of America
H.E. Archbishop Moushegh Mardirossian, Prelate
6252 Honolulu Avenue
La Crescenta, CA 91214
Tel: (818) 248-7737
Fax: (818) 248-7745
E-mail: [email protected]
Website:

PRELATE TO VISIT ST. GREGORY CHURCH COMMUNITY
IN SAN FRANCISCO

This weekend, H.E. Archbishop Moushegh Mardirossian, Prelate, will
visit the parish community of St. Gregory Church of San Francisco.
On Sunday, March 9, 2014, the Prelate will preside over Divine
Liturgy at St. Gregory Church.
Rev. Fr. Boghos Tinkjian will celebrate Divine Liturgy and deliver
the sermon. Deacons Khatchig Shannakian and Avo Markarian will assist at
the altar.
Following the service, the Prelate will meet with the Parish pastor,
Board of Trustees, and Delegates.
In the afternoon, the Prelate will preside over the ARS Oakland
“Erepouni” Chapter’s 80th anniversary celebration and convey his message and
blessings.

***

PRELACY LADIES AUXILIARY
ANNUAL GREAT LENT LUNCHEON

Each year at the start of the Lent, the Prelacy Ladies Auxiliary
hosts a traditional Lent luncheon, which this year will be held on
Wednesday, March 12, under the auspices of the Prelate.
The day will begin at 10:00 a.m. with Sunrise Service presided over
by the Prelate at St. Mary’s Church in Glendale.
The luncheon will begin at 11:30 a.m. at Carousel Restaurant in
Glendale. A traditional Lenten feast will be offered. The event also
features a cultural program.
Rev. Fr. Boghos Tinkjian will speak on Great Lent.

***

PRELATE PRESIDES OVER FIRST SUNRISE SERVICE OF LENT
AT HOLY MARTYRS CHURCH

On Wednesday, March 5, 2014, the first Sunrise Service of the Lent
season was held in Prelacy Churches.
In keeping with tradition, H.E. Archbishop Moushegh Mardirossian,
Prelate, presided over the first Sunrise service at Holy Martyrs Church in
Encino. Rev. Fr. Boghos Tinkjian and Rev. Fr. Razmig Khatchadourian
participated in the service. Among the faithful were Ferrahian School 9th,
10th, and 11th grade students.
His Eminence conveyed inspiring and encouraging words to the
faithful and students to motivate them in their Lenten journey, which he
wished will be a time for spiritual renewal and enrichment for all.
In his sermon, Rev. Fr. Boghos Tinkjian spoke of the importance and
purpose of fasting, stating that through physical abstinence, our spirits
are nourished and strengthened. He concluded by wishing a spiritually
fulfilling fast and strengthened willpower to overcome temptation during
Great Lent.
Following the service, the traditional annual Lent luncheon hosted
by the ARS “Anahid” Chapter was held at “Dickranian” Hall. Chapter
Chairlady Mrs. Silva Poladian welcomed the Prelate, clergy, and guests.
Ferrahian students presented a cultural program of poetry and songs.
The Prelate first commended the ARS members for their dedicated
service, and then conveyed his wishes for the Great Lent season, for all to
collectively combat against evil forces with the Cross, overcome darkness
with light, and triumph over evil with goodness.

***

HOLY CROSS CATHEDRAL HOSTS
WOMEN’S WORLD DAY OF PRAYER

Each year on the first Friday of March, women around the world
observe a common day of prayer, known as the World Day of Prayer. Prelacy
faithful also share in this annual event, which this year was held at Holy
Cross Cathedral in Montebello with the participation of clergy from the
Armenian Apostolic, Catholic, and Evangelical Churches. The theme of the
44th annual World Day of Prayer was “Streams in the Desert”. Holy Cross
Cathedral Ladies Aid hosted the gathering.
H.E. Moushegh Mardirossian, Prelate, participated in the service and
delivered his message to the faithful. His Eminence was accompanied by Very
Rev. Fr. Muron Aznikian, Archpriest Fr. Nareg Pehlivanian, and Rev. Fr.
Ashod Kambourian.
Very Rev. Fr. Muron Aznikian delivered the invocation. A program of
prayers, hymns, Scripture readings, spiritual reflections, and messages in
Armenian and English followed. The program concluded with the Prelate’s
message.
His Eminence first expressed thanks to God for the gathering of
prayer, worship, and fellowship. Reflecting on the day’s theme of Jesus
Christ as the “Living Water”, the Prelate stated that just as water is
essential for our bodies, the living water our Savior offers is essential
for our spirits, thus, “let us open our hearts to Him and allow the living
water to flow within us and quench our spiritual thirst”. Furthermore, the
Prelate called on the faithful to share the good news of God’s promise of
salvation and eternal life by letting the rivers of living water flow from
within them unto others, inspiring and drawing others to Christ, and
especially our younger generations. The service came to a close with the
benediction.
A reception followed at “Bagramian” Hall.

***

GLENDALE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESIDENT
JACK IVIE VISITS THE PRELACY

On Wednesday, March 5, 2014, H.E. Archbishop Moushegh Mardirossian,
Prelate, welcomed the visit of Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center
President Mr. Jack Ivie, who was accompanied by Ms. Marie Filipian,
Community Relations and Business Development Manager, and Rev. Cassie
McCarty, Director of Mission Integration and Spiritual Care Services.
Rev. Fr. Vazken Atmajian joined in the meeting.
After greeting the guests, upon their request the Prelate presented
an overview of our church history and on the effect of the Armenian Genocide
on the Armenian Church, and specifically on the Holy See of Cilicia which
itself was a victim of the Genocide. The Prelate also spoke of the
struggles of the Syrian-Armenian community and answered questions regarding
the endeavors of the Prelacy.
Mr. Ivie thanked the Prelate for his warm welcome and for the
information he imparted. Mr. Ivie expressed appreciation especially for the
Prelacy’s close collaboration and the Prelate’s support of Glendale Memorial
Hospital.
At the conclusion of the visit the Prelate presented the guests with
mementos.

MIKHAIL MAMIASHVILI: WRESTLING UNITES THE CAUCASUS

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
March 6 2014

6 March 2014 – 8:53pm

On February 23 FILA elected as its vice-president Mikhail Mamiashvili,
president of the Russian Wrestling Federation. Today he talked to VK
about this election and about the development of wrestling in Russia
and in the Caucasus in particular.

“It is not my personal achievement, it is an achievement of all our
wrestling public. The contribution that Russia made to the task of
promoting wrestling and keeping it in the Olympic program, to develop
this sport is a work by many lovers of wrestling and professionals
who work in the structure of wrestling”, said Mamiashvili, commenting
on his election as a vice-president of FILA.

Speaking about the development of wrestling in Russia, he said that
“the Caucasus has always been famous for its outstanding wrestlers,
coaches and schools”. He expressed hope that the Caucasus will continue
“the great traditions of Ali Aliyev, Degi Bageyev, Soslan Andiyev,
Murat Kardanov and many other champions”.

According to Mamiashvili, wrestling unites the Caucasus. “For instance,
the founder of the wrestling traditions in Azerbaijan was an Armenian,
Kasparov, who brought up a line of outstanding wrestlers.

Ossetians helped Georgians and Georgians helped Ossetians, great
champions, great coaches. So our history is so entangled. We are
different in character and mentality, but once we are united by one
goal, we are invincible”, he said.

VENEZUELA IS NOT UKRAINE

Published on Tuesday, March 4, 2014 by The Guardian

Venezuela’s struggle is widely misrepresented in western media. This
is a classic conflict between right and left, rich and poor

by Mark Weisbrot

(Photo: Chris Arsenault/ @AJEChris/ Twitter)The current protests in
Venezuela are reminiscent of another historical moment when street
protests were used by right-wing politicians as part of an attempt
to overthrow the elected government. From December of 2002 through
February 2003, there was strike of mostly white-collar workers at
the national oil industry, along with some business owners. The US
media made it look like most of the country was on strike against
the government, when, in fact, it was less than one percent of the
labor force.

The spread of cell phone videos and social media in the past decade
has made it more difficult to misrepresent things that can be easily
captured on camera. But Venezuela is still grossly distorted in the
major media. The New York Times had to run a correction last weekfor
an article that began with a statement about “The only television
station that regularly broadcast voices critical of the government …”

As it turns out, all of the private TV stations”regularly broadcast
voices critical of the government”. And private media has more than
90%of the TV-viewing audience in Venezuela. A study by the Carter
Center of the presidential election campaign period last April showed a
57 to 34% advantage in TV coverage for President Maduro over challenger
Henrique Capriles in the April election, but that advantage is greatly
reduced or eliminated when audience shares are taken into account.

Although there are abuses of power and problems with the rule of law
in Venezuela – as there are throughout the hemisphere – it is far
from the authoritarian state that most consumers of western media
are led to believe. Opposition leaders currently aim to topple the
democratically elected government – their stated goal – by portraying
it as a repressive dictatorship that is cracking down on peaceful
protest. This is a standard “regime change” strategy, which often
includes violent demonstrations in order to provoke state violence.

The latest official numbers have eight confirmed deaths of opposition
protesters, but no evidence that these were a result of efforts by
the government to crush dissent. At least two pro-government people
have also been killed, and two people on motorcycles were killed
(one beheaded) by wires allegedly set up by protesters. Eleven of
the 55 people currently detained for alleged crimes during protests
are security officers.

Of course violence from either side is deplorable, and detained
protesters – including their leader, Leopoldo Lopez – should be
released on bail unless there is legal and justifiable cause for
pre-trial detention. But it is difficult to argue from the evidence
that the government is trying to suppress peaceful protest.

>From 1999-2003, the Venezuelan opposition had a strategy of “military
takeover”, according to Teodoro Petkoff (pdf), a leading opposition
journalist who edits the daily Tal Cual. This included the military
coup of April 2002 and the oil and business owners strike from
December 2002 – February 2003, which crippled the economy. Although
the opposition eventually opted for an electoral route to power, it
was not the kind of process that one sees in most democracies, where
opposition parties accept the legitimacy of the elected government
and seek to co-operate on at least some common goals.

One of the most important forces that has encouraged this extreme
polarization has been the US government. It is true that other left
governments that have implemented progressive economic changes have
also been politically polarized: Bolivia, Ecuador, and Argentina
for example. And there have been violent right-wing destabilization
efforts in Bolivia and Ecuador. But Washington has been more committed
to “regime change” in Venezuela than anywhere else in South America –
not surprisingly, given that it is sitting on the largest oil reserves
in the world. And that has always given opposition politicians a
strong incentive to not work within the democratic system.

Venezuela is not Ukraine, where opposition leaders could be seen
publicly collaborating with US officials in their efforts to topple
the government, and pay no obvious price for it. Of course, US support
has helped Venezuela’s opposition with funding: one can find about
$90m in US funding to Venezuela since 2000, just looking through US
government documentsavailable on the web, including $5m in the current
federal budget (pdf). Pressure for opposition unity and tactical and
strategic advice also helps: Washington has decades of experience
overthrowing governments, and this is a specialized knowledge that you
can’t learn in graduate school. Even more important is its enormous
influence on international media and therefore public opinion.

When John Kerry reversed his position in April and recognized the
Venezuelan election results, that spelled the end of the opposition’s
campaign for non-recognition. But the opposition leadership’s closeness
to the US government is also a liability in a country that was the
first to lead South America’s “second independence” that began with the
election of Hugo Chavez in 1998. In a country like Ukraine, political
leaders could always point to Russia (and more so now) as a threat to
national independence; attempts by Venezuelan opposition leaders to
portray Cuba as a threat to Venezuelan sovereignty are laughable. It
is only theUnited States that threatens Venezuela’s independence,
as Washington fights to regain control over a region that it has lost.

Eleven years since the oil strike, the dividing lines in 2002 have
not changed all that much. There is the obvious class divide, and
there is still noticeable difference in skin color between opposition
(whiter) and pro-government crowds – not surprising in a country and
region where income and race are often highly correlated.

In the leadership, one side is part of a regional anti-imperialist
alliance; the other has Washington as an ally. And yes, there is a big
difference between the two leaderships in their respect for hard-won
electoral democracy, as the current struggle illustrates. For Latin
America, it is a classic divide between left and right.

Opposition leader Henrique Capriles tried to bridge this divide with
a makeover, morphing from his prior right-wing incarnation into
Venezuela’s Lula in his presidential campaigns, praising Chavez’s
social programs and promising to expand them. But he has gone back
and forth on respect for elections and democracy, and – outflanked
by the extreme right (Leopoldo Lopez and María Corina Machado),
last week refused offers of dialogue by the president. At the end of
the day, they are all far too rich, elitist, and right wing (think
of Mitt Romney and his contempt for the 47%) for a country that has
repeatedly voted for candidates running on a platform of socialism.

Back in 2003, because it did not control the oil industry, the
government had not yet delivered much on its promises. A decade later,
poverty and unemployment have been reduced by more than half, extreme
poverty by more than 70%, and millions have pensions that they did
not have before. Most Venezuelans are not about to throw all this
away because they have had a year and a half of high inflation and
increasing shortages. In 2012, according to the World Bank, poverty
fell by 20% – the largest decline in the Americas. The recent problems
have not gone on long enough for most people to give up on a government
that has raised their living standards more than any other government
in decades.

(c) 2014 The Guardian

Mark Weisbrot is Co-Director of the Center for Economic and Policy
Research (CEPR), in Washington, DC. He is also president of Just
Foreign Policy. He is co-author, with Dean Baker, of Social Security:
The Phony Crisis. E-mail Mark: [email protected]

EREVAN CRITIQUEE POUR SON MANQUE DE REACTION A L’INTERVENTION RUSSE

Crise ukrainienne

Un groupe de militants civiques pro-occidentaux et d’autres notables
armeniens ont vivement critique hier le gouvernement armenien car il
n’a pas condamne l’intervention militaire russe en Ukraine.

Ils ont compare l’occupation russe de la Crimee a l’annexion des
pays voisins de l’Allemagne nazie et ont appele a des sanctions
internationales contre Moscou.

” Nous condamnons le silence indigne des autorites de l’Armenie dans
le cadre de l’agression de la Russie contre l’Ukraine “, peut-on
lire dans un communique publie par 12 membres du Comite armenien de
solidarite avec Maïdan, qui a ete forme le mois dernier pour soutenir
la revolte anti-gouvernementale en Ukraine.

L’un des signataires, l’artiste Boris Yeghiazarian, est un
ressortissant ukrainien qui a participe activement aux manifestations
anti-gouvernementales en place de l’Independance a Kiev, egalement
connu sous le Maïdan. Quatre autres signataires vivent aux Etats-Unis
et en Europe .

Erevan a ostensiblement refuse de reagir a la chute du president
pro-russe Viktor Ianoukovitch en Ukraine et a l’operation militaire
russe en Crimee qui a suivi. Les principaux groupes politiques
de l’Armenie ont egalement evite toute critique officielle de
l’intervention de Moscou, pourtant fermement condamnee par l’Occident.

Leur silence reflète la forte dependance militaire et economique de
l’Armenie a la Russie.

” Dans cette situation, il serait bon que l’Armenie ait une position
claire. Elle ne peut avoir en permanence une position ambiguë et
incertaine “, a declare Boris Navasardian, membre du Comite armenien
de solidarite avec Maïdan et president du Yerevan Press Club.

Navasardian a reconnu que la critique ouverte des actions russes en
Ukraine entraînerait la colère de Moscou. ” Mais garder le silence
est aussi dangereux. Car si les evenements se deroulent d’une manière
qui se traduira par des sanctions contre la Russie, l’Armenie va se
trouver dans une situation très desesperee “, a t-il dit.

” En theorie , la Russie pourrait forcer l’Armenie a faire des
declarations et meme plus, mais je pense que ce serait provoquer
des ressentiments très grave en Armenie “, a declare Shahnazarian,
veteran politique egalement affilie a la commission. ” Esperons que
les autorites armeniennes seront assez prudentes pour ne pas se plier
a une telle pression. ”

mercredi 5 mars 2014, Claire (c)armenews.com

ARMENIAN HONEY IMPORT SLASHES LAST YEAR BY 85 PERCENT

YEREVAN, March 5. / ARKA /. Honey import to Armenia last year slashed
by 85 % to 2.5 tons, down from 16.8 tons in 2012, according to the
State Revenue Committee. The cost of imported honey last year was
$25,600 versus 63,300 in 2012.

The largest batch of honey last year came to Armenia from Belarus
(695 kg ) , followed by Russia (630 kg) , Austria (478.3 kg) and Italy
(467.7 kg).

At the same time, Armenia exported last year 6.7 tons of honey worth
a total of $98,400 versus 4.3 tons in 2012 worth $32,200. Armenia
sold 3 tons in China, 2 tons in USA and 1.7 tons in Russia. -0-

– See more at:

AFTER RETURNING FROM THE AZERBAIJANI CAPTIVITY MAMIKON KHOJOYAN CANNOT MOVE INDEPENDENTLY

ARMINFO
Wednesday, March 5, 16:53

After returning from the Azerbaijani captivity Mamikon Khojoyan
cannot move independently, a physician of the Ijevan Medical Centre,
Emil Brutyan, told Arminfo correspondent.

To recall, a 77 year old Armenian shepherd lost his way and was taken
captive on 28 January and was taken back to his native land under
the auspices of the ICRC on 4 March.

Brutyan also added that Mamikon Khojoyan has bodily traces of
violence. It is not ruled out that he is under an influence of a
strong stress as he does not recognize his relatives and is awkward
in his speech, he added and did not rule out that the former captive
was injected psychotropic medications. After the examination multiple
bruises, fractures and injuries were found on his body.

Brutyan thinks that Khojoyan should stay in the hospital at least
for a week.

EXPERT: TURKEY TO ACT IN US INTERESTS ON CRIMEA ISSUE

March 05, 2014 | 14:57

YEREVAN. – Turkey’s reaction to Crimea events is logical, expert in
Turkic studies Mushegh Khudaverdyan told reporters.

He recalled that Turkey is an ally of the United States and is trying
to have relations with Crimean Tatars. Khudaverdyan is confident that
Turkey, as an ally of Washington, will serve their interests rather
than holding independent policy.

A prat of Crimean Tatar oppose the idea of extending rights of the
Autonomous Republic of Crimea, unlike the major part of the population.

News from Armenia – NEWS.am