Author: Babajanian Karo

MILLIYET DAILY A LAME DUCK, AS MEDIA CRISIS DEEPENS

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
March 20 2013

by Yavuz Baydar

The crisis that enveloped the Milliyet daily, an old flagship among
the centre newspapers in Turkey, took a very sharp turn on Monday –
an event that implicates even more suffocation of the already badly
constrained media.

It reached its peak as Hasan Cemal (69), a veteran columnist
and internationally renowned media figure – author of several
groundbreaking books on Kurds, Armenians and journalism – resigned in
protest of his column being rejected by the power-fearing proprietor,
Erdogan Demiroren.

Both the censorship and his irrevocable decision to quit have
sent shockwaves not only around the country’s tiny but vocal
liberal-reformist circles but also raised the debate on the state of
journalism to new levels.

As I gloomily predicted in my article titled “Crisis at a newspaper”
(March 12), the chain of events, triggered by a scoop on the minutes
of the meeting between Abdullah Ocalan and three Peace and Democracy
Party (BDP) deputies on Imrali Island, brought to the fore a new,
but a more severe, clash over the freedom to report by the newspaper.

The crisis escalated to great heights when Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan lashed out at the newspaper for publishing the minutes, but
also quoted a line by Cemal’s piece (defending journalism) and added,
“If this is journalism, down with it!”

The chain of events reads like a crystal-clear case study on how
ruthlessly the independence of the media is being strangled by power
politics and the “coalition of the willing” owner groups, who readily
serve their outlets on a platter to the political executive of Turkey.

Let me follow up on what happened, since Cemal was shown – due to
mismanagement of the editor – the “corner of shame” for two weeks by
his column being kept closed, silenced.

Known for his firm stand, integrity and consistency, Cemal (who had
proven his professional resilience during the time of the military
junta during the 1980s as the editor of Cumhuriyet) filed an article
at the end of the “ban.” In it, he continued to defend the role of
journalism and criticized the attitudes of the media proprietors
and government.

Milliyet’s editor, Derya Sazak, primarily responsible for publishing
the scoop, found himself in very rough seas. Knowing that there
already were a couple of telephone conversations between the prime
minister and the proprietor, he tried to negotiate for independence,
but in vain. He even tried to change the content of the column,
which Cemal categorically rejected.

The end result is a veteran colleague silenced and a newspaper that
from now on is a lame duck, with an editorial independence even more
severely damaged, forced to publish news coverage and opinion in an
even narrower scope.

At the time of the writing, Sazak had not handed in his resignation,
and many in the media wonder why he still stays in the post.

Within the media, very few “dared” comment on the case. Milliyet
sufficed with a brief note about the departure, while its columnists
preferred to ignore it. In general, his colleagues look the other
way either because other owners “ordered” them to do so, because they
fear losing their jobs or because they are hostile to Cemal’s liberal
views. The indifference tells even more about the miserable state of
the media.

Responding to Erdogan, Cemal wrote in his censored piece: “I had
underlined a fundamental principle of my profession in those words. I
argued that journalism and ruling a country are separate issues,
and underscored the dividing line that set them apart. This was what
I was saying in a nutshell: In democracies, politicians rule the
country and reporters report!”

He continued: “Relations between the media and the government have
always been problematic in Turkey. Political power groups have always
tried to control the media and the journalists, with the red lines
that they themselves have drawn. They have exerted pressure through
economic, political and legal instruments. This has always been the
case. The economic interests of proprietors have given the political
power groups the upper hand. The owners’ dependence on Ankara for
their economic interests coupled with the second-class judiciary in
Turkey have made it easier for the political power elite to manipulate
the media.”

RUSSIA, ARMENIA, UKRAINE TAKE GOLD AT EUROPEAN WRESTLING CHAMPIONSHIPS

Xinhua General News Service, China
March 19, 2013 Tuesday 1:15 AM EST

Russia, Armenia and Ukraine on Tuesday struck gold on the first day
of the 2013 European Wrestling Championships which drew some 500
wrestlers from across the continent.

Valeriya Chepsarakova won the first gold at stake for Russia at the
six-day championships by defeating Yana Stadnik of Britain in the
women’s 48-kilogram category.

In the ensuing men’s freestyle wrestling, Devid Safaryan of Armenia
beat Yakup Gur of Turkey to win the 66-kilogram category while Pavlo
Oliiniyk of Ukraine defeated Kamil Stanislaw Skaskiewicz of Poland
to win the 96-kilogram category.

In all, 14 gold medals are on offer for men and seven gold medals
are on offer for women competitors.

It was the first time for Georgia to host the European Wrestling
Championships and it was also the biggest ever sporting event held
in the South Caucasus country since its independence.

Georgian Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili is the patron of this
year’s European championships which feature men’s freestyle and
Greco-Roman style and women’s wrestling.

Georgia, a traditional nation of wrestling, collected one gold, three
silver and two bronze medals from last year’s European championships.

Russia finished atop all participating countries at last year’s
championships with five gold, two silver and eight bronze medals,
followed by Ukraine with a medal tally of four gold, as many silver
and three bronze.

Azerbaijan and Armenia, also former Soviet republics, also won gold
medals at the 2012 European championships.

ARMENIA, GREECE, TURKEY UNDER SHELTER

Greek Reporter
March 22 2013

By Margarita Papantoniou

The SHELTER project took place in the Armenian city Tsaghkadzor, from
March 12 to 19. It is about a trilateral youth exchange among Armenia,
Greece and Turkey, with 11 young participants from each country. The
intercultural youth exchange focused on cross-cultural communication
and cultural sharing among the three countries, which are burdened
by a long history of painful disagreements.

It was organized by the Armenian Progressive Youth NGO with financial
support of the Youth in Action Program of the European Union and
co-funding from the Ministry of Sport and Youth Affairs of Armenia.

The 33 participants engaged in a variety of activities, such as
workshops, seminars, artistic activities, training, intercultural
evenings, city games, sightseeing, cultural visits and more. Through
this project they learned to cooperate, share, act and explore together
as one big family, leaving the differences of the past behind.

During the SHELTER project, the theory of intercultural learning
in Europe was presented focusing on culture and learning-different,
but interconnected topics. Different definitions of culture, types
of learning processes, differences among cognitive, emotional and
behavioral learning were presented as well as concepts of formal,
non-formal and informal learning, with emphasis on non-formal learning.

The main objectives of the project were to introduce the concept of
intercultural learning and develop shared understanding, to promote
cultural diversity, to explore the theme of anti-discrimination and
to foster cooperation in the youth field. Through it, young people
from Armenia, Greece and Turkey, managed to break their stereotypes
and prejudices about each other and to find areas of mutual concern,
by working in mixed nationality groups and by exchanging ideas and
experiences. A hope that they will continue to work together in the
future was expressed.

OBAMA MEETS ARMENIAN ARCHBISHOP

Albany Tribune, NY
March 22 2013

U.S. President Barack Obama toured the Church of the Nativity in
Bethlehem with President of the Palestinian National Authority Mahmoud
Abbas, as part of his visit to Israel.

In the church, Obama was greeted by Greek Orthodox Patriarch Theophilos
III, Father Pierbattista Pizzaballa, Franciscan Custodian of the Holy
Land, and Armenian Archbishop Sevan Gharibian.

The president then left on a flight to Amman, Jordan, where he will
have talks and dinner with Jordan’s King Abdullah, NBC news reported.

AZERBAIJAN’S EXAMPLE OF HOW TO BREED SUCCESS

The Washington Times
March 19, 2013 Tuesday

U.S. must signal Russia and Iran to keep hands’ off

By S. Rob Sobhani SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES

As the world focuses on the passing of Hugo Chavez and the impact of
his socialist policies on oil-rich Venezuela, halfway around the globe
a different kind of leader has been quietly transforming his country
into a prosperous and reliable partner of the West. Since assuming the
presidency in 2003, Ilham Aliyev, the 52-year old Azerbaijani head
of state, has used his country’s vast energy resources to make the
transition from a centrally planned economy to a free and prosperous
one. While socialism has ruined Venezuela’s enormous potential, Mr.

Aliyev’s adoption of market capitalism has transformed his country
into the Kuwait of the former Soviet Union with an average annual gross
domestic product growth rate of 24 percent over the past 10 years.

Chavez’s governing style was to put demagoguery before country. In Mr.

Aliyev, Azerbaijanis have a leader who has put his country before
ideology. For example, unlike Chavez, who drove away American energy
companies, Mr. Aliyev has welcomed cooperation with the likes of
Exxon and Chevron. The results are phenomenal: Azerbaijan’s 1 million
barrels per day of oil is exported via pipeline to consumers around
the world without any glitch, and its oil fund now stands at more
than $35 billion. Unlike Chavez, Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Iran’s
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Mr. Aliyev does not use his country’s oil as
a weapon. Instead, he shares Washington’s vision of an uninterrupted
flow of oil and gas from the landlocked Caspian Sea to international
markets.

Unlike Chavez, who spent his time with thugs and anti-Semites such
as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Mr. Aliyev has steered this
Shia Muslim nation of 8 million clear of religious fundamentalism.

When one meets with this forward-looking leader, the first topic of
conversation is the importance of religious tolerance. Mr. Aliyev
and a majority of Azerbaijanis pride themselves on having created a
society whose foundation rests on cultural and religious coexistence.

While operatives of the Iranian regime kill Israeli tourists around
the world, Mr. Aliyev takes pride in inaugurating synagogues and
churches in downtown Baku.

On foreign policy, while Chavez became the ringleader of the
anti-American club, Mr. Aliyev has promoted friendly ties with the
United States. Immediately after the attacks on our country on Sept.

11, 2001, Azerbaijan extended its hand of cooperation in the war
against terrorism. Today, troops from Azerbaijan serve in Afghanistan
carrying out dangerous missions alongside American soldiers. In fact,
according to Sen. John McCain, Azerbaijan’s special forces have
performed critical operations with courage and skill.

Mr. Aliyev also understands that we live in the 21st century and is
investing his country’s wealth in the future. The recent launch of
Azerspace I is a clear example of his forward-thinking approach. The
satellite was manufactured by Virginia-based Orbital Sciences Corp.,
supporting 1,500 American jobs. He understands that growing the
nascent satellite industry will boost his country’s intellectual
capacity and knowledge stream through constant research and education.

It is not surprising that 2013 was declared the year of information and
communications technologies by the president. The launch of Azerspace
marks another milestone in the partnership between Washington and Baku.

Although Azerbaijan is making steady progress in its transition to
a free-market economy and an elevated standard of living for its
citizens, challenges remain. The legacy of human rights violations
and corruption inherited from Soviet times has presented some bumps on
the road to smoother bilateral relations between the United States and
Azerbaijan. Nonetheless, under the leadership of Mr. Aliyev, Azerbaijan
is making the arduous transition to a democracy. Washington must work
with Baku in order to address these issues, but also remember that
America’s transition to a free and fair country took many years.

In recognition of Azerbaijan’s role as a reliable and responsible ally
in the broader Middle East and its strategic location (situated between
a belligerent Russia and theocratic Iran), Washington should take two
immediate steps to further broaden and strengthen this relationship:
First, the United States must make a more robust effort at the
resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Azerbaijan and
Armenia. President Obama’s second term affords no domestic political
land mines. Since the new secretary of state, John F. Kerry, is known
to be a friend of Armenia and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is a good
friend of Azerbaijan, it is in U.S. national security interest to end
this “frozen” conflict. Second, Mr. Obama should invite Mr. Aliyev
to the White House to show America’s appreciation to a friend and
ally. Beyond showing our appreciation, we must send a signal to Moscow
and Tehran that we will not tolerate any adventurism or pushing around
of smaller countries in the region.

As the world contemplates the effects of Chavez’s rule of Venezuela, it
is a useful moment to consider how a very different kind of leadership
in a strategically important, energy-rich country has led not to
confrontation, but to partnership. Azerbaijan still has some work
to do in building its democratic institutions, but in the meantime,
it has been laying the foundations of economic prosperity for its
people. For an example of how Venezuela could have turned out better,
one need only look at Azerbaijan.

S. Rob Sobhani is CEO of Caspian Group Holdings.

SARKISIAN BLAMES THE PEOPLE FOR ARMENIA’S WOES

Friday, March 22nd, 2013

President Serzh Sarkisian meets select members of the broadcast media
during a rare press conference Monday (Official photo)

BY ARA KHACHATOURIAN

Beware citizens of Armenia (and to an extent the Diaspora) you are to
blame for Armenia’s woes-poverty, lack of social justice and rule of
law, emigration, economic monopolies, usurpation of power, the rape of
the environment, election fraud… At least that’s what President Serzh
Sarkisian, who according to his official results, won the election
on February 19, believes and said during a rare press conference on
March 18 with select representatives of the broadcast media.

“The biggest problem of our country is not corrupt officials. The
biggest problem of our country is not criminals. The biggest problem
of country is a cynical atmosphere. That cynical atmosphere must be
eliminated,” said Sarkisian, who also laid the blame on this so-called
atmosphere on certain media outlets. “At least two TV stations and
dozens of print and online media outlets have been talking only about
bad phenomena and only tarnishing everything.”

What Sarkisian is saying is that if the people didn’t believe what
they read or saw on television, they would not be so “cynical.”

Essentially, he is insulting the intelligence of his own citizens
whose daily struggle for survival resonated when they cast their
ballots overwhelmingly for change.

Even if the “official” elections results were not disputed, by
sarcastically brushing aside the ills that have plagued Armenia for
the past 22 years, Sarkisian is ignoring the will of some 40 percent
of the country’s population by claiming that there is a rosier picture
than meets the eye.

Another reality being ignored by Sarkisian is that according to
official results 40 percent of Armenia’s voters elected a Diaspora
Armenian as their leader, thus significantly bridging a massive gap
left open by 70 years of Soviet rule and not closed by the efforts
of Sarkisian’s own Diaspora Minister or Ministry.

Most striking was his effort to belittle the popular movement that
sprung up as a result of flagrant fraud during the elections. The
movement, led by opposition candidate Raffi Hovannisian, has been
continuing for more than a month. Sarkisian’s attempt to downplay
the post-election situation in Armenia is, at best, childish.

“When they say that the people are out in the streets it sounds very
strange to me. On average, only 3,000 people participate in these
rallies taking place in Liberty Square … Even if the opinion of
every person matters to us, 3,000 people account for only 0.1 percent
of our citizens,” said Sarkisian.

I will not go into the he said-he said about his February 21 meeting
with Hovannisian, because his condescending attitude toward the
people’s legitimate expression of mistrust and dissatisfaction far
outweighs the palace intrigue he seeks to paint.

On emigration, Sarkisian said during the press conference, that those
leaving for Russia-in droves-have the same opportunity in Armenia
to establish a viable life for themselves, but leave due to the
“cynical” atmosphere created in Armenia. During one of his campaign
stops, Sarkisian talked about emigration saying that neither he,
nor his government, can hold anyone “prisoner” in Armenia.

He also said there are no oligarchs in parliament, but rather
successful businesspeople who through the toil of their sweat have
achieved success.

At the more than two-hour long press conference, Sarkisian went on to
outline some slight gains in Armenia’s economy, as well as the fact
that presidential election campaign was not marred by mudslinging as
signs of an improving country. He even went as far as to tell Yerkir
Media’s Gegham Manoukian that ten years ago he would not be standing
at the presidential palace asking questions of the president, because
his television station is often critical of the government. So, the
people-and the press-must finally rejoice that the freedoms ingrained
in Armenia’s Constitution are being taken into consideration-however
haphazardly and selectively-20 years later.

This “Rome wasn’t built in one day” analogy, which was also echoed by
Prime Minster Tigran Sargsyan when he met with community leaders in
Los Angeles, is tired and, more importantly dishonest. The people of
Armenia are also tired of the dishonesty of the government and they see
through the corruption that has become institutionalized in Armenia.

By usurping Armenia’s national wealth and distributing it among four
or five people, causing a mass exodus of Armenia’s citizens to the four
corners of world, the country’s president cannot turn around and blame
his own people for the resulting chaos and misery. It is criminal.

Sarkisian’s reckless disregard for and dismissal of the people’s
will is a harbinger of things to come. In the coming five years
and at every turn, the public will have to bear the responsibility
for the government’s misdeeds and impunity. By going on record,
Sarkisian effectively has absolved himself of any responsibility
toward his citizens.

The thousands that have-and will-gather at Liberty Square to express
their discontent deserve better than to be spat upon by the person
who claims is their leader.

ONE SHOULDN’T DISTINGUISH CYPRIOTS AND ARMENIANS AS THE FATE IS SAME. HAGOP KAZANDJIAN

19:31, 22 March, 2013

YEREVAN, MARCH 22, ARMENPRESS: Nowadays issues of Armenians living in
Cyprus don’t differ from the issues of other nations’ inhabitants. One
shouldn’t distinguish Cypriots and Armenians as their fate is the
same. This was noted by Hagop Kazandjian, Chairman of Armenian National
Committee of Cyprus, in the interview with Armenpress when commenting
on current situation in Cyprus.

Number of Armenians living in Cyprus reaches 3500 and almost all of
them has financial issue, with big or small amounts in banks.

In his turn editor of “Gibrahayer” e-magazine Simon Ainejian added
that situation of Armenians didn’t differ from others’ situation,
which changes minute after minute. “We are waiting for new statement
from the president. We have to pass this tough period together with
our compatriots and brothers,” he said.

The Cyprus government was in crisis talks on Wednesday to come up
with a plan to secure an emergency bailout package to shore up its
banks and avert financial meltdown.

On Tuesday night, parliament threw out a controversial plan to skim
[email protected] (£5bn) from savings accounts, in a move that risked plunging
the eurozone into deeper turmoil and heightened expectations that
the cash-strapped country would seek a funding lifeline from Russia.

The newly elected conservative president, Nicos Anastasiades, who said
this week a rejection of the bailout deal would mean “indescribable
misery” for Cyprus, was meeting party leaders to explore a potential
plan B, but few details had emerged, Guardian reported.

He was also due to hold a cabinet meeting and talks with officials
from the EU, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund.

Late on Tuesday night, the eurozone governments said despite the
vote Cyprus would still need to raise a third of the proposed ~@17bn
bailout.

Cyprus has asked Russia for a five-year extension of an existing
loan of [email protected] that matures in 2016, and a reduction in the 4.5%
interest rate. Sarris told reporters in Moscow: “We’re hoping for a
good outcome, but we cannot really predict.”

Anastasiades spoke with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, on
Tuesday night. Moody’s ratings agency estimated Russian banks had
extended up to $40bn in loans to companies in Cyprus.

If Cyprus does not find the money to secure a bailout and satisfy
officials in the eurozone and the IMF, its biggest banks could fail.

Banks remained closed across the island on Wednesday to avert a
potential bank run. They had been scheduled to reopen on Thursday
but they will remain closed for the rest of the week, or until a deal
can be reached.

ICRC: AZERBAIJAN HAS APPEALED TO US TO MEDIATE IN THE TWO ARMENIAN CIVILIANS’ HANDOVER

APA, Azerbaijan
March 19 2013

Baku. Kamala Guliyeva – APA. The State Commission on Prisoners of
War, Hostages and Missing Persons has appealed to the International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) delegation to Azerbaijan to mediate
in the handover of two Armenian civilians, media contact person for
the ICRC Delegation to Azerbaijan Ilaha Huseynova told APA.

ICRC announced its readiness in accordance with its mandate.

Huseynova said that the date of the two Armenian civilians’ handover
depends on the conflicting sides.

The Defense Ministry’s press service told APA that on March 16 at
16:50, resident of Dovekh village of Armenia’s Noyemberyan region
Karyan Durmus and on March 17 at 16:20, resident of Ayqovid village
of Ijevan region Arakelyan Anahid Hamazasovna passed to Azerbaijani
territory on the contact line in Gazakh region and were captured by
our Armed Forces.

The investigation is underway to determine why the captives violated
the line of contact. They were handed over to the State Commission
on Prisoners of War, Hostages and Missing Persons.

Head of the Commission’s working group Firudin Sadigov told APA that
the two elderly Armenian civilians passed to Azerbaijan will be sent
to back.

COURT RULING DASHES HOPES OF ARMENIAN OPPOSITION

Business News Europe
March 19 2013

Clare Nuttall in Astana
March 19, 2013

Armenia’s Constitutional Court on March 14 rejected an appeal by Raffi
Hovhannisyan, the runner-up in the February presidential elections,
effectively bringing to an end opposition efforts to prevent Serzh
Sargsyan’s re-inauguration. Hovhannisyan has declared he will fight
on, but the court’s ruling has ended expectations of mass unrest on
the scale that followed the last presidential election in 2008. As
Armenia waits for Sargsyan to be inaugurated on April 9, the more
lasting impact of the opposition protests may be in creating pressure
for reform during his second term as president.

The court upheld the Sargsyan victory in the first round of voting on
February 18, despite claims from Hovhannisyan, leader of the Heritage
Party and a former finance minister, that the result had been rigged.

The court said that there had been no violations during the election
that could have affected its result.

Hovhannisyan, the runner-up with 36.7% of the vote to Sargsyan’s 58.6%,
claimed that he was the real winner of the election.

Immediately after the election, his supporters said they had observed
violations of the voting process including ballot stuffing and
the removal of stamps from voters’ passports. In the weeks since
the election, Hovhannisyan’s supporters have organised a series of
demonstrations in the capital Yerevan, with the largest attracting up
to 5,000 people. As support for his protests gradually dwindled, on
March 10 Hovhannisyan started a hunger strike and called on Sargsyan
to step down before April 9.

However, the court’s verdict is bolstered by reports from
international election observers that said whatever violations of
the electoral process occurred, they were not sufficient to have
affected the end result of the election. The post-election report
from the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe/Office
for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) observer
mission concluded that the election was “generally well-administered
and was characterized by a respect for fundamental freedoms.” The
February 18 report did note, however, “a lack of impartiality of the
public administration, misuse of administrative resources, and cases
of pressure on voters”, as well as “undue interference”.

Hovhannisyan did take considerably more votes than was predicted. An
opinion poll carried out by Gallup International on February 2-5 put
him in second place with an expected 24% of the vote – well below the
36.7% he received on election day. The decision by fellow opposition
leaders such as former president Levon Ter-Petrossian and Prosperous
Party leader Gagik Tsarukian meant that the anti-Sargsyan vote was
concentrated on Hovhannisyan, with no other candidate taking more
than 3%.

Hovhannisyan’s campaign to have the result overturned also provided a
unifying force for Armenia’s fragmented opposition, with other leaders
including Ter-Petrossian saying they considered the election to have
been rigged.

Following the constitutional court’s ruling, however, the opposition
seems to have run out of steam. “It is clear now that things
are returning to normal,” Richard Giragosian, director of the
Yerevan-based Regional Studies Center, tells bne. “Despite higher
levels of discontent, the opposition reaction is both leaderless
and rudderless. Instead of focusing on the May 2013 municipal
elections, which represents an opportunity to build a power base,
they are resignation of the president which is not only unlikely
but impossible.”

New term

Sargsyan is now preparing for his inauguration on April 9, and is set
to start the new term on a firmer footing than when he first became
president in 2008. None of the opposition protests were as large as
those seen after the February 2008 elections, which were violently
put down by Armenia’s security forces resulting in 10 deaths. These
events seriously tarnished Sargsyan’s legitimacy at the start of his
first term in office.

There are now expectations of greater reform following his
re-election. The economy has performed relatively well in recent years,
rebounding strongly from the depths of the economic crisis in 2009,
with the International Monetary Fund estimating 3.9% GDP growth in
2012. On the political front, Sargsyan has opened a dialogue with
the opposition in an attempt to heal the breach caused by the 2008
elections, and the country has made modest progress in fighting
corruption, rising on Transparency International’s Corruption
Perceptions Index from 120th place in 2009 to 105th in 2012.

Given the unrest after the 2013 elections, Giragosian tells bne that
the government could take the right lesson that it’s very dangerous
for any incumbent government to ignore popular demands for change.

“Counter-intuitively, this may have a positive impact on the government
by accelerating reforms,” he says. Key changes on the cards include
working towards agreeing a free trade area and association agreement
with the EU.

There are also signs that Sargsyan is planning top-level personnel
changes. Under the Armenian constitution, the government has to
resign on inauguration day, which takes place 50 days after the
presidential election. A prime minister has to be appointed within
10 days of inauguration, and a new government no more than 20 days
later. In late February, rumours emerged in the Armenian press that
Sargyan was planning to replace Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan. Former
Yerevan mayor Karen Karapetyan, who is now vice-president of Russia’s
Gazprombank, was reported by Zhoghovurd to have returned from Moscow
to Yerevan for talks with Sargsyan’s Republican Party of Armenia
sparking speculation that he is a possible candidate.

EXPERT: THERE IS NO ANALYTICAL BLOC IN ARMENIA’S MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BECAUSE OF AUTHORITARIANISM

ARMINFO
Wednesday, March 20, 19:18

There is no analytical bloc in Armenia’s management system because
the system was built and has been functioning not according to the
classical requirements but because of authoritarianism, director of
“Sociometer” sociological centre, Aharon Adibekyan, said on 20 March
during presentation of the results of sociological research within
the frames of the programme “Caucasus barometer”.

He said that the government of Armenia signed an agreement with UN
Development Programme, according to which the annual index of human
potential development published by the Programme should be a basis
for the policy of the government, but this agreement is not fulfilled
by the government.

For her part, the acting chief of social management of Armenian
government’s administration, Astghik Mirzakhanyan, said that
unfortunately, executive power bodies take decisions not on the
basis of suggestions of international organizations offered to the
governmental structures on the basis of public opinion polls held in
Armenia. She also added that ministries should use the data of public
opinion polls when drawing out their politics. “However, not local but
foreign structures seem to use the results of sociological research”,
– she said.

For his part, director of “Eurasia” cooperation fund, Gevork
Ter-Gabrielyan, said that there is a big watershed between the
procedure of adopting decisions, the database and the database
production. He thinks that the first reason of such a situation is
a new practice, as during the Soviet times decisions were adopted by
the will of leadership. He presented the data of one of the research
centres, according to which about 25 structures that produce materials
for those which adopt decisions, have been functioning in Armenia,
and half of them are state structures. And only some of them used
funds of international donors so that to create bridges between the
database and adoption of decisions. He thinks that local research
organizations supported by international structures should implement
analytical work for the government. “But the government should want
that”, – he concluded.