Author: Babajanian Karo

LE PARTI TSARUKIAN DEFEND LES MANIFESTATIONS POST-ELECTORALES

Le Parti Armenie prospère (BHK) de Gagik Tsarukian semblait justifier
les manifestations de l’opposition après les elections dans le pays
mettant en garde les autorites contre l’utilisation de la force contre
leurs participants.

Dans sa reaction officielle a la conduite de l’election du 18 fevrier,
le BHK a declare que les manifestations en cours reflètent ” la
mefiance du public ” dans les processus electoraux et le mecontentement
generalise face a ” l’injustice ” et les autres abus du gouvernement.

” Le BHK a ete et sera toujours avec le peuple ” a declare le deuxième
parti au sein du parlement dans un communique. ” Le BHK croit que
c’est le droit absolu de chaque citoyen d’Armenie d’exiger le respect
de ses droits, notamment le droit de vote “.

La declaration a continue en exhortant les autorites a faire preuve
de ” retenue ” pour repondre aux rassemblements organises par
Raffi Hovannisian, le principal candidat de l’opposition. ” Le BHK
previent que tout usage de la force contre des manifestants pacifiques
conduirait a des consequences irreversibles ” a-t-il dit. ” Il appelle
egalement les organisateurs et les participants a des rassemblements
de masse a realiser leurs actions dans le cadre de la loi “.

” Le BHK pense, tout comme le peuple “a declare son porte-parole,
Tigran Urikhanian, au service armenien de RFE / RL (Azatutyun.am)
lorsqu’on lui a demande de preciser sa position sur la conduite
des elections.

” Le peuple s’est leve aujourd’hui en raison de l’impossibilite d’avoir
des conditions de vie elementaires ” a declare Tigran Urikhanian. ”
Le peuple exprime son mecontentement et sa fureur face a la situation
actuelle. C’est ce que le BHK pense “.

Interroge pour savoir si le BHK voit un risque de repression du
gouvernement contre l’opposition menee par Raffi Hovannisian, Tigran
Urikhanian a dit : ” Je veux esperer qu’ils ne feront pas [usage de
la force,], mais le scenario le plus terrible est toujours possible “.

La declaration du BHK a egalement exhorte les principales forces
politiques d’Armenie a travailler ensemble sur une ” feuille de route
” pour la mise en ~uvre de ” reformes democratiques, economiques et
politiques ” qui, selon elle, sont necessaires d’urgence dans le pays.

vendredi 1er mars 2013, Stephane ©armenews.com

HOVANNISIAN TO ADDRESS GLENDALE RALLY FOR ARMENIA

Rally for Armenia

GLENDALE-Opposition leader Raffi Hovannisian will address, via Skype,
participants of Rally for Armenia, which will take place on Sunday,
March 3 at 6 p.m. at St. Mary’s Church in Glendale, announced
organizers.

The rally is organized by the Armenian Revolutionary Federation Western
US Central Committee and the All Armenian Student Association, the
Armenian Bar Association, the ARF Shant Student Association and the
Armenian Youth Federation, and will feature speakers and a performance
by Harut Pamboukjian.

The rally was conceived to show solidarity with the people of Armenia,
who have created a movement since the Feb. 18 presidential elections
to reject election violations and fraud and demand the establishment
of democratic norms and social justice in Armenia.

In joining the movement, the ARF has said that it remains with the
people and will work hard in helping the advance the aspirations of
the Armenian people and restore faith in Armenia.

The public is urged to take part in this important community event
and by joining the rally raise its voice of support for the people
of Armenia.

BRANDY PRODUCTION IN ARMENIA DROPPED 16.2% TO 859,400 LITERS IN JANUARY

YEREVAN, February 28. /ARKA/. Armenia produced 859,400 liters of
brandy in January 2013 which is 16.2% lower from the analogical period
a year earlier, the National Statistical Service said Thursday.

Wine production dropped by 28.9% to 233,100 liters within the reported
period.

Vodka production rose by 62.3% to 547,600 liters in January 2013,
whereas champagne production climbed by 9.4 times to 4,700 liters.

Armenia also produced 432,300 liters of beer (0.9% drop) and 2, 102,100
liters of non-alcohol beverages (36.2% lower from January 2012). -0-

18:21 28.02.2013

INTENSIFICATION OF RUSSIA-TURKEY INDIRECT MILITARY AND POLITICAL CONFRONTATION
Sergei Sargsyan

25.02.2013

Deputy Head of the Center for Political Studies, “Noravank” Foundation,
Senior Expert

The relationship of Russia and Turkey in the periods when they
were in the state of war resemble a game of mult-iboard military
and political chess on the geographically separated boards, and
each game has its logic, its intrigue, its pieces but they all are
interconnected and constitute a part of the same big mosaic. Moreover,
the more independent extra-alliance foreign political activity Ankara
demonstrates the more often and more vividly its policy confronts
the interests of Moscow.

The elements of indirect confrontation can be observed with different
intensity fr om Moldova, Crimea, North and South Caucasus to Ural
and Central Asia. In recent two years Syria has become a new point
of collision of interests.

Russia is very interested first of all in continuing and
intensification of exploitation of their naval base in Tartus and
preserving the Syrian arms and military tenchnics market for the
production of the their military industrial complex.

Turkey’s interests are conditioned by the fact that this country
tends to stir up its foreign policy in all the directions, especially
within the boarders of the former Ottoman Empire. And the goals of
this country in Syria are as follows:

– not to allow using the regions of Syria tensely populated by the
Kurds as rear bases for Kurdish Workers’ Party;

– not to allow the KWP somehow to receive modern arms and ammunition
fr om the Syrian army depots;

– to remove fr om power the Alewi elite of the Syrian Arab Republic;

– to counter Iran thus targeting to become an ultimate leader in the
region, etc.

Their main goal is not to prejudice interests of Russia; simply
objectively and despite the goals of Turkey they do prejudice these
interests.

Turkey’s (as well as Israel’s) logic of action is based on
the conclusion of irreversibility of destabilization of domestic
political situation in Syria, its transition into a state of permanent
instability with a tendency of a critical growth of social-economic
and political problems.

Today the opposition confronting the Bashar Assad’s regime consists of:

– Syrian Free Army,

– Militants of “Muslim Brothers” movement,

– Radicals and jihadists from “Al-Qaida”

– Independently acting small, disjointed groups.

Each of them has the support base of its own as well as established
help channels from abroad. These groups generally and particularly are
ready to form temporary and situational alliances on the assumption
of their tactical interests. They mainly comprise of volunteers and
mercenaries from mostly Sunnite countries.

In such situation without a reliably closed borders, which is almost
unrealizable in case with Syria, it is still possible to reduce the
activity of the radicals but the authorities of Syria can hardly
achieve profound victory over them. They still have enough material,
financial and human resources in order to keep “swinging” the domestic
political situation in the state. Gradual accumulation of the mental
fatigue from long civil war, terrorist activity of different groups
of different ideological orientation, deterioration of social and
economic situation will direct the ways of solution of the crisis in
the way of changing the current leadership.

But even the controlled and abate Islamization of Syria (as they
hope in the West) in the form of anti-Assad democratization of the
country, on the pattern of both Turkey and Egypt, will inevitably
bring to the worsening of the state of Alawis, Christians and Kurds
in Syria. As a result, the Armenian Diaspora in Syria is interested
in stabilization of situation in the country on the assumption of
preserving the current ruling elite (the option Russia insists on).

The naval exercises in the water area of the Mediterranean and Black
Seas, in which 20 ships and 3 submarines, including one nuclear
submarine, of at once three fleets – Black Sea, Baltic Sea and
North Sea (among them major anti-submarine ship of North Sea fleet
“Severomorsk”, major assault landing ships of the Black Sea fleet
“Azov”, “Saratov” and guards guided missile cruiser “Moskva”) –
participated were a manifestation of the support of Damascus and
non-admission of coercive displacement of B. Assad. As the Minister of
Foreign Affairs of Russia Sergei Lavrov said: “We are not interested
in even more destabilization of the Mediterranean region and presence
of our fleet there is an unconditional factor of stabilization of
the situation”1.

And in case of final destabilization and disintegration of the country,
appearance of the Alawi-Christian state on the Mediterranean shore
looks more preferable than final displacement of the Syrian Armenians
from Syria on the model of some other Middle East countries.

Turkey, taking advantage of mortaring of its border areas from the
adjacent Syrian territories, wh ere intensive fights between the
government forces and militants were proceeding, did not restrict
itself to artillery shelling of the positions of the Syrian army
in response, (complicity of the Syrian governmental forcers to
the incidents was not proved) and requested from its NATO partners
assistance and deployment of antiaircraft defense facilities.

According to the official version temporally and exclusively for
covering of the Southern border with Syria, totally 6 “Patriot”
anti-missile defense systems were supplied to Turkey (by two from
the U.S., Germany and the Netherlands), and since the late January
they have come on alert.

The places of their deployment are remarkable – near the cities of
Adana (about 120km from the Syrian border), Kahramanmaras (about 90km)
and Gaziantep (about 45km). Taking into consideration the range of
engagement which does not go beyond 80km, it can be assumed that
the priority mission of “Patriot” anti-missile defense systems will
be rather covering protection of the NATO military objects and in
particular “Incirlik” air base than the near-border population centers
of country.

But the prospects of delivering a massive strike to the territory
of Turkey by Syria, especially under the ongoing domestic political
military conflict, are practically equal to zero and it is nothing but
a suicide for B. Assad. But the attempts by the Syrian militants and
the powers which support them in order to provoke Turkey and NATO into
taking counter measures against the Syrian government forces cannot be
excluded either. This is especially remarkable against the background
of information of a Syrian “Al-Vatan” newspaper about an attempt of a
covert penetration of four Turkish fighter-pilots2 with the assistance
of a group of armed militants to the “Koerc” military airport (Aleppo
province), which was denied by the Turkish General Staff on the same
day3 and as it seems even without checking this information.

Besides Syria, the changing of the place of the second panel session
of the High Level Strategic Partnership Council from Baku to Ghabala
became an unpleasant demarche for Russia on behalf of Turkey and
Azerbaijan. The meeting wh ere the president of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev
and the prime-minister of Turkey Recep Tayiip Erdogan were present
resulted in “singing of seven documents which, by their importance,
did not correspond to the high level of the meeting”4.

Those were documents on metrology, TV companies, cargo transportation,
rescue services and seed industry.

Against the background of setting forth unacceptable for Russia
conditions by Azerbaijan on continuing exploitation of Ghabala
Radar Station and initiation of evacuation of the military staff and
operational personnel and their families, it has become not only a
pinnacle to Moscow but also a vivid manifestation of final shift of
foreign policy priorities by Baku.

One of the sounded reasons of suspending cooperation with Russia
in terms of Ghabala Radar has become the fact that it covers mainly
Muslim and brotherly states to Azerbaijan, including Turkey. Meanwhile
Turkey signed on September 14, 2011 a memorandum with the US on
the deployment of AN/TPY-2 Radar System (old name – FBR-T – Forward
Based Radar -Transportable) intended for detecting ballistic missiles
early in their flight, identifying and tracking them. It is meant
to provide the tracking information to the U.S. Navy ships which
are equipped with missile-defense systems and which will
realize its direct interception. Not long after that the radar was
deployed in the region of Kuluncak of Turkish Malatya province. But
in the opinion of Russian experts one of the main goals of this radar
which can detect and identify objects at the distance of 2000km is the
control of the air space of South Caucasus, part of Central Asia as
well as the Southern part of Russia, thus tracking the experimental
launches of the Russian missiles from the test fields.

One way or another, deployment of the U.S. anti-missile defense radar
and “Patriot” missiles in Turkey will become a handy excuse for Russia
to equip its 102nd military base, deployed on the territory of Armenia,
by the forces and facilities of both electronic and fire suppression
of the anti-aircraft defense and anti-missile defense systems.

During the visit of the Minister of Defense of Russia S. Shoygu in
late January 2013, once again the parties confirmed their aspiration
to strengthen joint security, as well as military-political and
military-technical partnership directed among other aims to not
allowing the military ways of resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict.

The proposal made by the Russian Naval Chief Command on the
strengthening of the 25th separate missile battalion of the 11th
separate coast missile-artillery brigade (Utash population center,
near the city of Anapa, Krasnodar Region, RF) by the forth squadron of
“Bastion” mobile coastal missile systems which will enter service in
2014, fitly works with the asymmetric response of Russia.

The system is capable of hitting naval surface ships and vessels of all
the types and classes, both separate targets and amphibian, carrier and
strike groups under the fire and electronic countermeasures. “Bastion”
is capable of hitting the targets at the distance of 300km5 by “Onix”
anti-ship missiles and to cover from the amphibian operations of the
enemy 600km of coast.

This will adjust the balance of naval forces which was changed not in
Russia’s favour after the division of the Black Sea Fleet and economic
difficulties of the last two decades. Besides the NATO ships which
periodically put in the Black Sea water area (except of coarse the
Navies of Bulgaria and Romania), there are no more potential targets
for “Bastion” than the ships of the Turkish navy.

* * *

At the same time available and deepening indirect discrepancies in
military and political sphere, in due form of Eastern diplomacy,
are accompanied by direct political and diplomatic activity and
development of mutually beneficial economic cooperation. A number of
measures directed to starting construction of the offshore part of
“South Stream” gas pipeline are taken; the negotiations on increasing
natural gas supply to Turkey up to 3 billion m3 are hold; the commodity
turnover is growing (by 11% in 2012, up to $33 billion).

Moreover, invitation to Ankara to join Eurasian integration project
became a new stage in the relations of two countries, though Turkey
has almost no chances to become a full-fledged member of a forming
Eurasian Union due to the same reasons as its entering European Union.

Any other status intends subordinated position of a junior partner
which suits fine to Moscow, Astana and Minsk but not Ankara.

And though in order to create real counterpoise or to balance
virtually the “western” vector of the foreign policy Ankara will tend
to strengthen or at least to imitate strengthening of “eastern” vector,
it will mainly focus on more flexible geopolitical project in which
Russia accumulates more problems and contradictions and wh ere it is
not an ultimate leader, i.e. in Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

1 ea “òÏÓÂÁÌÔ”, 23 ÑÎ×ÁÒÑ 2013C.,

2 ÷ oEÒEE ÁÒÅÓÔÏ×ÁÎÙ ÞÅÔÙÒÅ ÔÕÒÅÃËEÈ ÌÅÔÞEËÁ-EÓÔÒÅÂEÔÅÌÑ,
ea , 31 ÄÅËÁÂÒÑ 2012 CÏÄÁ,

3 ôÕÒÃEÑ ÏÔÒEÃÁÅÔ ÁÒÅÓÔ Ó×ÏEÈ ÌÅÔÞEËÏ× × oEÒEE, ea ,
31 ÄÅËÁÂÒÑ 2012,

4 aÚÅÒÂÁÊÄOÁÎÏ-ÔÕÒÅÃËEÊ ÓÁÍÍEÔ ÐÏÄ ÓÅÎØÀ ÒÏÓÓEÊÓËÏÊ
òìo, aÎÁÌEÔEÞÅÓËÁÑ ÓÌÕOÂÁ ôÕÒÁÎ, 12 ÓÅÎÔÑÂÒÑ 2012C.,

5 By the compound flight line (the extension of the terminal phase)
– 300km; by low-altitude flight line (at a height of 15m) – 120km

“Globus” analytical journal, #2, 2013

Another materials of author GEORGIA: AN ATTEMPT TO MANEUVER IN A NARROW
GAUGE[14.01.2013] SOME ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF MILITARY AND
POLITICAL SITUATION ROUND THE NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT [02.08.2012]
“IT IS NECESSARY TO RAISE ENERGY EFFICIENCY”, – says the deputy
head of the Center for Political Studies of “Noravank” Foundation
Sergei SARGSYAN in his interview to “Golos Armenii”[26.07.2012]
TRANS-CASPIAN GAS PIPELINE: GOALS, PROBLEMS AND RISKS [25.06.2012]
TURKEY IN THE US MISSILE DEFENCE SYSTEM: PRIMARY ASSESSMENT AND
POSSIBLE PROSPECTS[13.10.2011] ARMENIA AT THE INTERSECTION OF
THE INTERESTS OF THE MILITARY AND POLITICAL BLOCKS[05.09.2011]
SHALE GAS GHOST[08.02.2011] GAS FROM IRAQI KURDISTAN FOR NABUCCO:
TURKISH INTEREST [15.12.2010] AZERBAIJAN: SEARCHING NEW FOREIGN POLICY
BALANCE[27.10.2010] TWO ‘STREAMS’ FROM RUSSIA: BREAKING DOWN THE OLD
GEOPOLITICAL STRUCTURES[21.06.2010]

LES MINARETS : UN COMPLOT ARMENIEN ?

Causeur, France
28 fevr 2013

Publie le 28 fevrier 2013
par Daoud Boughezala, redacteur en chef adjoint de Causeur.

Rendons aux Cesars de la diaspora ce qui leur appartient. Nouvelles
d’Armenie Magazine nous apprend ainsi que le plus grand constructeur
de mosquees en Turquie s’appelle… Stepan Aratan. Armenien de son
etat, l’architecte a recu la medaille d’argent de l’association
de protection des monuments de Turquie il y a vingt ans de cela, a
meme revele le journal turc Hurriyet, ensuite repris par des medias
armeniens. Cerise sur le gâteau ottoman, l’ambitieux concepteur a meme
recu un certificat le designant comme le constructeur du plus grand
nombre de bâtiments islamiques dans le pays. Ironie du sort, Aratan
est ne en 1929 a Istanbul, une petite decennie après le genocide
armenien, puis a accompli une carrière de prof de maths au sein du
système scolaire prive armenien en Turquie.

Par un drôle de paradoxe, ce n’est donc pas l’emir du Qatar mais
le rejeton octogenaire du premier peuple a avoir institue une
Eglise chretienne nationale qui s’avère le plus grand contributeur a
l’islamisation de la Turquie, en plein boom depuis plusieurs decennies,
a mesure que la nation d’Ataturk tourne le dos a son modèle laïque
autoritaire. Ce que le journaliste Krikor Amirzayan traduit avec un
melange d’optimisme et d’esprit grincant : ” L’immense apport des
Armeniens a la societe turque dans l’Empire ottoman et a la Turquie
moderne -nee en partie du genocide armenien – se poursuit ! “.

De la a en deduire que la poussee de minarets un peu partout en Europe
est un complot ourdi par le lobby armenien, il y a un pas que certains
conspirationnistes ne seront pas les derniers a franchir…

,21451#

AZERBAIJAN AND THE EU: RECALIBRATING RELATIONS?

AzeriReport
Feb 28 2013

By Eldar Mamedov, Eurasianet.org

BAKU. February 28, 2013: Azerbaijan’s efforts to host the European
Olympic Games and other high-profile international events show that
Azerbaijani leaders yearn to be taken seriously in European Union
capitals. But that doesn’t mean Baku is willing to listen to Brussels.

When the EU foreign policy supremo Catherine Ashton and the enlargement
and neighborhood commissioner Stefan Fule criticized the Azerbaijani
government for the recent arrests of an opposition leader Ilgar
Mammadov and journalist Tofiq Yaqublu, President Ilham Aliyev retorted
that Azerbaijan had no obligations toward organizations of which it
is not a member. EU representatives “had no right to interfere in
Azerbaijan’s internal affairs,” Aliyev stated bluntly.

The signs of a chill in relations were also evident on February 18,
when EU foreign ministers announced that they expected the signature
of the EU association agreements with Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova and
Armenia in time for the Eastern Partnership summit scheduled for the
fall of 2013. On Azerbaijan, they merely “welcomed progress achieved
during the negotiations.” In diplo-speak this meant Azerbaijan is
lagging behind other countries of the Eastern Partnership – a formula
invented by the EU to seek a closer association, in fact a privileged
partnership of sorts with a number of countries lying between the EU
and Russia.

The underlying philosophy of the Eastern Partnership is “more for
more” – more benefits, such as free trade and visa liberalization, in
exchange for more EU-aligned reforms in the partner countries. While
the logic, by and large, works with many formerly Soviet states, it
doesn’t in the case of Azerbaijan. This is so because the Azerbaijani
government feels it does not need “more” from the EU.

In recent years, Baku´s perception of its own importance has grown
vastly. It sees its energy reserves as a potent card that can be played
in its dealings with the EU, which is seeking to diversify its energy
supplies away from Russia. The tendency of Western states to view Baku
as a key partner in addressing regional security issues is another
confidence booster. In addition, steady domestic growth rates, driven
mainly by energy-export revenue, inflate Baku’s sense of its own worth.

Perceptions of its own ascendancy, combined with the sense of that the
EU’s stature is diminished by its own internal fiscal difficulties,
have led Baku to conclude that it has little to gain from closer
alignment with EU norms. Accordingly, Azerbaijan will not be content
with the status of junior partner to the EU. Baku wants a strictly
equal relationship based on shared interests, such as energy supplies
and security cooperation. And even in the case of such a strategic
partnership, Azerbaijani officials would likely be unbending on
two issues where it sees fundamental differences with the EU; the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and human rights and democratization in
Azerbaijan.

On Nagorno-Karabakh, Baku is irritated by what it sees as the
EU failure to acknowledge unambiguously Azerbaijan’s territorial
integrity, i.e. including Nagorno-Karabakh. It is also puzzled by
what it sees as EU reluctance to play a more direct role in conflict
resolution within the Minsk Group framework.

On the democratization question, officials in Baku insist that the
expansion of individual rights can come only after political and
economic conditions in the country are modernized. A preoccupation with
the concept of “modernity” is evident in President Aliyev´s speeches
and visible in Baku´s cutting edge architecture. Democracy is seen as
a messy distraction. This helps explain why Aliyev´s reaction to Ashton
and Fule´s criticism was not an occasional outburst, but an indication
of a fundamental disagreement on democratization and human rights.

So far, Azerbaijani leaders have done whatever they think is necessary
for maintaining the domestic status quo, occasional protests from the
EU notwithstanding. Baku feels it has nothing to fear from the EU,
even if Brussels was to apply the “less for less” principle towards
it, as opposed to the “more for more” approach.

But Baku better be careful not to overplay its hand. If the EU
is interested in diversifying its sources of energy supply, so
is Azerbaijan in diversifying its exports. Despite the questions
surrounding individual government debt and the euro, the EU is a stable
and reliable buyer of Azerbaijani oil, but it has other alternatives.

In terms of regional security, the withdrawal of Western troops from
Afghanistan in 2014 will lessen Western attention given to Azerbaijan
in exchange for over-flight and transit privileges. At the same time,
to prevent the resurgence of the Taliban, the West will have to work
with Russia, Iran and India. If there is a normalization of relations
with Iran – something that is clearly not imminent, but is conceivable
– Azerbaijan´s strategic value for the West could greatly decrease.

And there is an incongruity between Baku´s increasingly vehement
denunciations of the EU and its wish to see the EU more involved
in the solution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict on terms favorable
to Azerbaijan.

If current trends are not reversed, the most likely outcome would be
a recalibration of the EU-Azerbaijan relations: away from a closer
association based on a progressive alignment by Azerbaijan with the EU
norms and values and towards a relationship based purely on selected
shared interests – not unlike those the EU had in the past with the
Mubarak´s Egypt and has currently with Saudi Arabia.

Such a development would be bad news for the democratization process
in Azerbaijan over the near term. But by unnecessarily and imprudently
alienating the EU, the Azerbaijani government could significantly
narrow its room for geo-strategic maneuver, and, in so doing, damaging
its national interests. -0-

* Eldar Mamedov is a political adviser to the Socialists & Democrats
Group in the European Parliament, who writes in his personal capacity.

AZERBAIJANIS WERE BEATEN, TO GIVE TESTIMONIES TODAY

APA, Azerbaijan
Feb 28 2013

Not the police, but French Gendarmerie has been commissioned to carry
out the investigation

Baku. Victoria Dementeva – APA. The French Gendarmerie will investigate
the fact of beating of Chairperson of Paris Azerbaijan House Mirvari
Fataliyeva and Azerbaijani student Vusal Huseynov.

Azerbaijan’s embassy in France told APA that taking into account the
seriousness of the case, not the police, but French Gendarmerie has
been commissioned to carry out the investigation.

The participants of the event, where Mirvari Fataliyeva and Vusal
Huseynov were brutally beaten have been summoned for interrogation.

Armenians, who attended the event, will give testimonies today.

AZERBAIJANIS INJURED IN FIGHT AT FRENCH PARLIAMENT

La Crosse Tribune
Feb 28 2013

French officials on Thursday condemned Armenian and Azerbaijani
activists for clashing with one another in France’s parliament.

Azerbaijan and Armenia have been in conflict since 1988, over the
disputed Caucasus Mountains territory of Nagorno-Karabakh.

The violent outburst occurred Tuesday in the National Assembly in
Paris, during a conference commemorating the anniversary of violence
against Armenians in 1988.

Two Azerbaijanis, a man and a woman, tried to interrupt the conference,
saying they wanted to commemorate the anniversary of a 1992 massacre
of Azerbaijanis. The Azerbaijani Embassy in Paris says the two were
attacked and beaten by some of the pro-Armenia participants.

France’s Foreign Ministry said Thursday it “regrets and condemns”
the acts of violence committed inside the National Assembly.

The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry issued a statement criticizing French
lawmakers for failing to stop the “brutal beating” of Azerbaijani
activists. It blamed “the Armenian lobby and its sponsors” for the
violence and voiced hope that French authorities will punish those
responsible for the beating the woman, a French citizen of Azerbaijani
origin, and an Azerbaijani student.

In Azerbaijan’s capital, Baku, about 100 student activists protested
near the French Embassy, holding placards with slogans such as “Shame
on France!” and “For Justice!”

EVENTS IN MEMORY OF SUMGAIT VICTIMS AND 25TH ANNIVERSARY OF KARABAKH MOVEMENT TAKE PLACE IN PARIS

19:59 28/02/2013 ” POLITICS

Since February 24 events, dedicated to the memory of the victims of
the Armenian massacre in Sumgait and 25th anniversary of Karabakh
movement took place in Paris. According to the information from the
Nagorno Karabakh Republic Permanent Mission to France a memorial
service for the victims of Sumgait massacre was held in St. John the
Baptist Armenian Apostolic Church.

After the event the permanent representative of the NKR to France
Hovhannes Gevorgyan, the Armenian Ambassador to France Vigen Chitechyan
and other officials paid homage to the victims of Sumgait massacre
and laid wreaths at the statue of Komitas near the Garden of Yerevan
in Paris.

On February 25, Hovhannes Gevorgyan was the guest of “Ayb” radio
station on live, where he answered the questions regarding the Sumgait
massacre and events marking the 25 anniversary of the Karabakh movement
and Sumgait massacre, planned to take place in the coming weeks in
different cities of France.

On February 26, the French office of “Hai Dat” organized a conference
titled “25 years after the Sumgait massacre: the current situation
and prospects for the future of the people of Nagorno Karabakh” in
the National Assembly of France. At the beginning of the conference
a documentary prepared by the NKR Permanent Mission about the
massacres in Sumgait was shown. Co-chair of the Coordinating Council
of the Armenian Organizations of France Murad Papazyan, Permanent
Representative of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic to France Hovhannes
Gevorgyan and Chairman of the France-Armenia Friendship Group of the
National Assembly of France Rene Rouqet delivered speeches. The event
was concluded by closing remarks of Vigen Chitechyan, Ambassador of
the Republic of Armenia to France.

Journalists, a great number of deputies, representatives of Armenian
organizations in France were present at the conference. At the end
of the event when the participants were paying silent tribute to the
memory of the victims of the Sumgait massacre two Azeris tried to
make a provocation but were expelled from the hall, NKR MFA press
service reported.

Source: Panorama.am

THE BEST TIME TO SEIZE UNIVERSITIES
Tehmineh Yenokyan

17:44 28/02/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:

Interview with Arpine Galphayan, chairperson of the Institute for
Democracy and Human Rights

Arpine, part of students opposes the system. How would you describe
this step?

The young generation assumes responsibility for the present and future,
becomes aware of the circumstance of being a free citizen and the
role they will have in building a sovereign state. This awareness is
the first step and it is very positive. At the same time, the gaps
are revealed. Students still avoid raising their issues and achieving
their rights. They demand free national elections when the elections to
student boards are as fake, when critical mind and word is limited at
the university. Raising issues that affect them immediately require
more courage, and young people may undergo tougher duress because
they depend on the president of the university more heavily than on
the president of Armenia.

There will be real change when students start liberating themselves,
open up for new and critical thought, come together and self-organize
to draft their own civil agenda, incorporate it in the public and
political agenda, participate in finding solutions. The act of opposing
must transform from dissatisfaction to civic demand. It must penetrate
the university and interweave with other social groups fighting on
the square. Free, conscious, open, equal, positive self-organization
of students is highly important. The process must be based on real
democracy, real freedom, team spirit, mutual respect and creativity.

The doors of universities are locked, students are kept inside,
doors are guarded by student boards. What are their values?

Student boards serve the interests of political parties and have
nothing to do with the needs, aspirations, protection of rights
of students. This is not a secret, isn’t it? There are exceptions
but this is the overall picture. Moreover, standing at the top
of boards of universities are political and party figures. What
does it mean? It means that not progressive and not democratic,
but narrow-minded political forces are doing everything they can
to keep students and young people under control while this is the
class of people who rebel, change what is old, and replace it with
new quality with enthusiasm, crush idols, defy authorities. They
close the doors and don’t let students leave? That’s much better,
it is time to capture the universities, turn the campus to sources
of creative protest, struggle, new politics, and student boards and
different elites will be unable to do anything about it. Doors and
walls cannot stop a free and conscious person. Understanding this, we
will eventually bring about fundamental changes, achieve sovereignty
at the individual and state levels.

What will freedom imprisoned for so long bring about? What does the
global experience say?

I like the words of Desmond Tutu, a famous activist and religious
figure of the fight against apartheid in South Africa when people
decide they want to be free, nothing can stop them. Freedom cannot
be put to prison. Servile and colonized people imprison themselves
voluntarily. And it will be much better if we assume that we are
such in order to be able to change. Young people must desire to rid
of imprisonment, despair, conformism, they must stand and fight for
truth and dignity, achieve and build their freedom.

Police is acting in a tougher style. Does the regime feel danger and
what are those dangerous components?

This is not an issue of a regime. Not only do we need to change a
regime but also the criminal oligarchic system, create a new culture,
work out the models of our independent coexistence. It is not done
once in five years but every day.

The danger of the collapsing system is that the processes may get
out of control and proceed along an unexpected path. They have done
everything they could to keep students, young people, people in
dependence, controllable, they nourished the vices of servility,
obedience, conformism, the culture of violence coming from centuries.

If young people put forth an independent agenda based on freedom and
justice and follow up the issues they bring up, this will be a bugbear
for both the internal and the global systems because they can also
bring up social, cultural and economic problems, put forth claims for
social, cultural, economic independence, the problem of mines, foreign
debt and so on. In today’s political culture no existing and potential
“organization that exercises power” wishes self-determination,
independence of citizens because it will mean regular control, it
will mean that real politics will be built every day on the street,
on the square, everywhere, continuously, not in someone’s office
behind closed doors. Now it is the best time to seize the streets,
squares, universities to create a new quality of political culture.