Prosecutor Gen. – Hetq Articles About Museum Thefts to be Processed

RA Prosecutor General – Hetq Articles About Museum Thefts to be Processed

hetq
18:45, June 15, 2012

Yesterday, Hetq published an article penned by Chief Editor Edik
Baghdasaryan raising the alarm about works of art `vanishing’ from
Armenia’s museums and the apparent inaction of Armenian law
enforcement regarding the theft of state property.

In response, the Prosecutor General’s Press Secretarym Sona Trouzyan,
left a comment that: `This is to inform you that the RA Prosecutor
General has forwarded the Hetq articles in question for legal
processing.’

Upsurge in Tensions as Clinton Visits Yerevan, Baku

Institute for War and Peace Reporting IWPR, UK
CAUCASUS REPORTING SERVICE, No. 645
June 13, 2012

Upsurge in Tensions as Clinton Visits Yerevan, Baku

Each side blames the other for spate of cross-border shooting incidents.
By Jasur Sumerinli, Naira Melkumyan – Caucasus

Clashes along the front lines separating Armenian and Azerbaijani
forces last week resulted in deaths on both sides, but that does not
mean the Nagorny Karabakh conflict is in danger of reigniting after a
two-decade-long truce, experts say.

As is often the case, accounts of the shootings from June 4 to 7 – and
of who was to blame – differed sharply on both sides. The Armenians
said the Azerbaijani military suffered 25 dead and killed four of
their soldiers. Azerbaijan said Armenian troops killed five of its men
at a cost of 40 of theirs.

The end of full-scale hostilities in 1994 left an Armenian
administration in control of Nagorny Karabakh and adjoining regions,
but without international recognition. The ceasefire agreement has
held over the years, despite sporadic gunfire both across the `line of
control’ that rings Karabakh, and along the border between Armenia and
Azerbaijan. Years of negotiations have not produced a formal peace
agreement.

Officials in Yerevan said the violence started on June 4 with an
Azerbaijani incursion into Armenia’s Tavush region, which left three
Armenian soldiers dead. A fourth was killed overnight on June 5-6 on
the front line around Karabakh.

Azerbaijan’s defence ministry described one clash on June 5 as an
Armenian attack on its forces’ positions in the Qazakh region, which
was repulsed. Apparently referring to the same incident, Armenian
sources said Azerbaijani troops made an incursion into Tavush region –
which borders on Qazakh – and lost five men in the process without
causing any fatalities.

The one point on which Armenian and Azerbaijani commentators agree is
that this spate of skirmishes was connected with a visit to the region
by United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that took place at
the same time – June 4-7. Each side accused the other of deliberately
provoking an outbreak of violence timed to coincide with the Secretary
of State’s arrival.

`I think it’s no coincidence that these aggressive actions occurred
during Hillary Clinton’s visit,’ David Jamalyan, a defence expert in
Armenia, said. `Azerbaijan wanted to check to see what the reaction
from the United States and other world powers would be.’

At a joint news conference with Clinton, Armenian foreign minister
Eduard Nalbandyan pressed home his government’s position.

`Not satisfied with violating the ceasefire regime in the Nagorny
Karabakh conflict zone on a daily basis, Baku is trying to raise
tensions on the border with Armenia,’ he said.

In Azerbaijan, reserve lieutenant-colonel Oqtay Kerimov said it was
Armenia that was responsible, and suggested that it was planned long
in advance as a tactic for focusing US attention on Karabakh.

At the same time, Kerimov blamed the general recurrence of ceasefire
violations on an Armenian policy of bolstering military positions, for
example by gaining control of hilltop vantage points and buildings
near the conflict lines.

Sergei Minasyan, head of political studies at the Caucasus Institute
in Yerevan, said tensions – caused by Azerbaijan – had reached
unprecedented levels, and it was not clear which way things were
heading.

`Azerbaijan has not been so active on the border for a long time,’ he said.

In Yerevan, Clinton stressed that the Karabakh conflict must be
resolved via the ongoing peace process.

`I am very concerned by these incidents and have called on all
parties, all actors, to refrain from the use or threat of force,
because there is no military solution to this conflict,’ she said. `It
can only be resolved at the negotiating table. And of course there is
a danger that it could escalate into a much broader conflict that
would be very tragic for everyone concerned.’

Clinton took precisely the same message to Baku, where she met
Azerbaijani foreign minister Elmar Mammadyarov on June 6.

`I am deeply concerned about the danger of escalating tension, which
could have unpredictable and disastrous consequences. This cycle of
violence and retaliation must end, and everyone should work to keep
the peace and comply with the obligations under the 1994 ceasefire
agreement,’ she said. `I have asked the president, as I have asked the
president of Armenia, to work together to exercise restraint and to
take the steps necessary for peace, not conflict.’

Elnur Aslanov, a spokesman for Azerbaijan president Ilham Aliyev, said
Armenia was attempting to undermine the talks.

`This most recent act of sabotage by Armenia is an example of the
unconstructive position which that country has taken for a number of
years,’ he said. `Armenia is trying to maintain the status quo.
Instead of taking steps towards peace, stability and security, it is
increasing militaristic rhetoric, instability and provocations. That
shows Armenia is not interested in achieving peace.’

Ilgar Mammadov, chairman of the Republican Alternative Movement,
argued that Clinton’s comments supported the Azerbaijani position – if
peaceful negotiation was the only route for resolving the Karabakh,
Armenian control of Karabakh could not be legitimate.

`Clinton’s remarks don’t mean that at one point, there was a military
solution to the conflict, and that Armenia achieved it. If there is no
military solution, that means there never was and never will be one,’
he said, noting that this logic meant that `Armenia must withdraw its
armed forces from the occupied territories.’

Despite the violence on the ground and the political recriminations,
analysts in Yerevan are not predicting that things will really get out
of hand.

`This sabotage [of the ceasefire] is more or less constant,’ Artsrun
Hovhannisyan of Armenia’s Institute for Political Studies said. `It
isn’t worth deliberating whether such incidents genuinely make it more
or less likely that the ceasefire will break down.’

Jasur Sumerinli is editor-in-chief of the MilAz defence news agency in
Azerbaijan. Naira Melkumyan is a freelance journalist in Armenia.

http://iwpr.net/report-news/upsurge-tensions-clinton-visits-yerevan-baku

Chess: Kazan GP R06: four decisive games, Danielian leads

Chessbase News, Germany
June 17 2012

Kazan GP R06: four decisive games, Danielian leads

16.06.2012 – Today Armenian GM Elina Danielian defeated the second
Kosintseva sister, Nadezhda, while her closest rival Anna Muzychuk
drew her game against Alexandra Kosteniuk. Ukrainian GM Kateryna Lahno
defeated former women’s world champion Antoaneta Stefanova, and now
Lahno and Muzychuk are in 2-3 position, half a point behind the
leader. Report after round six.

>From June 9 to 23, 2012 Kazan, the capital of the Republic of
Tatarstan, will play host to the FIDE Women’s Grand Prix, part of a
series of elite events organised by FIDE and Global Chess. There will
be six tournaments over two years in various countries around the
world. The winner of each tournament takes home 6,500 Euros, the total
prize fund is 40,000 Euros. The overall winner will get a further
15,000 Euros at the end of the series. Starting time of the games is
15:00h (check your local time here).

For results, tables, etc. go to

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8255

Azerbaijani, Armenian FMs discuss Karabakh conflict in Paris after c

AP Planner
June 15, 2012 Friday

Azerbaijani and Armenian ministers discuss Karabakh conflict in Paris
after clashes

France: Foreign ministers from Azerbaijan and Armenia discuss their
conflict over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region following recent
border fighting which reportedly claimed ten lives. Military
skirmishes have continued between the two states since a ceasefire was
signed in 1994 to end a six-year war over the predominantly ethnic
Armenian region which voted to break away from Azerbaijan in 1988. The
war is estimated to have left more than 30,000 people dead on both
sides

Frenzy and Solidarity

Novaya Gazeta, Russia
June 13 2012

Frenzy and Solidarity

by Dmitriy Oreshkin
[translated from Russian]

Diagnosis

Putin has driven himself into a corner. His social support is
shrinking away like the magic wild ass’ skin in Balzac’s Peau de
Chagrin; the economy is creaking, the vertical hierarchy has given up
drawing pictures of a bright future and is occupied exclusively with
self-defence. All very predictable.

It could not have been otherwise. At the basis of Putin’s strategy
lies the bogus thesis of the “great and mighty USSR,” which in fact
was a propaganda bubble for the “broad popular masses” that was doomed
to burst sooner or later. And burst it did – spraying and wounding
millions of people accustomed to living in the crooked Soviet world
and to achieving any success in life within a spurious system of
coordinates.

The system collapsed, but how are they to blame?

Apart from anything else, its falsity was underlined by the rapid
retardation of advanced territories that had been joined by force to
the “great and mighty” [Soviet Union]. Bourgeois Austria always felt
better than socialist Czechoslovakia and Hungary; the pieces of the
Karelian isthmus severed from Finland [absorbed into the USSR after
1944] slid into profound stagnation in contrast to the pieces that
remained beyond the border; East Germany fell catastrophically behind
West Germany. To such an extent that they had to hastily build the
Berlin Wall when the number of refugees from the socialist paradise
began to approach 1 million.
Some people actually liked this very much – for example, the guys from
the Stasi. They received new stars, status, influence, and coupons for
special services. But the territory as a whole – no, it did not like
it. It choked and fell behind to the thunder of triumphant propaganda.
Of course, the propagandists were still pleased. The fighters on the
ideological front!

Such is the dreary practical reality. But what is reality before the
might of Her Majesty, propaganda? Her Majesty explained that the wall
was protecting us from the fascist Bundeswehr. Many believed. As they
believe now – about rising from our knees, about the State Department,
and about the fifth column. The difficulty is that, to preserve one’s
faith, it is necessary to screw up one’s eyes ever more tightly. Until
you get a pain in the back of your head. Those who do not want to
screw up their eyes, the authorities are ready to treat with
truncheons. They are simply doomed to this. Otherwise the legitimate
question arises: And why, in point of fact, do we need these chiefs
(for example, from the Stasi), who keep the tasty roots for themselves
and invite us to enjoy cheap propaganda vegetable-tops?

Putin’s propaganda has managed to present the natural successes of the
market economy connected with the appearance of private property, a
normal rouble, the reorientation of production towards the solvent
demand of the population, and free trade – as the meritorious
achievement of the “vertical hierarchy.” Even though, in practice, it
is entirely the other way around: It is not the vertical hierarchy
that created an efficient economy, but the efficient economy that
created the resource prerequisites for the appearance of the vertical
hierarchy. The end of the NEP [New Economic Policy – limited
introduction of capitalism in the 1920s after the Civil War] era comes
to mind. In an impoverished country tangible assets suddenly appear
from somewhere or other (produced by the private entrepreneur) within
a few years. Which tangible assets it is a sin for statesmen not to
take away – to the din of talk about strengthening the state and
establishing order and justice.

A Soviet restoration after an anti-Soviet revolution is a logical,
and, most likely, inevitable affair. With predictable, but delayed
consequences: A renewed Chekist and party nomenklatura, expertly
exploiting the energy of the post-revolutionary disenchantment, moved
onto the counteroffensive, clambered onto the neck of the growing
economy, and set about telling those fairy stories so familiar to the
Soviet ear. Meanwhile neatly squeezing competition, reinforcing its
monopoly in the most profitable (naturally, the raw material) sectors,
elevating the siloviki to the top of the pile, killing off independent
private initiative, and, little by little, driving the country
backward – into the channel of what economists call procyclical policy
and political scientists call authoritarianism.

Time has passed. The gap between propaganda and practice, between the
official values and real nomenklatura interests, has once again
reached critical level. As it did on the eve of the USSR’s collapse.
Of course, once again it was the most advanced and best informed
social groups and territories that realized this first. In our case –
Moscow, St Petersburg, and Kaliningrad Oblast. This was shown in the
presidential elections – despite the thick, thick layer of falsifying
chocolate.

The minimum results (according to the official figures) recorded in
Moscow were 47 per cent and in Kaliningrad Oblast – 52.6 per cent.
Next, according to honesty, should come St Petersburg. But there,
thanks to padding, they managed to stretch 8-10 extra percentage
points and feign 58.8 per cent. In point of fact, they did the same in
Kaliningrad Oblast too: A good one-fourth of voters there are military
persons, with compulsory turn-out, and just as compulsory a result. In
districts where civilian monitors managed to monitor the counting of
votes, the average result was around 42 per cent. Which, it must be
admitted, is quite a lot. But all the same, not 50 per cent.

But the maximum results, as it is not hard to guess, came from
Chechnya (99.8 per cent), Dagestan, Ingushetia,
Karachayevo-Cherkessia, and Tyva. Everywhere 90 per cent and above.
Well, who would have doubted it! The real question: Of WHAT is V.V.
Putin, whose victory was ensured by [Central Electoral Commission
Chairman] V.Ye. Churov in the first round, now the president? Of the
North Caucasus, where the electorate, controlled by the local elites,
is prepared to give their favourite leader “even 120 per cent” – as
Dukuvakha Abdurakhmanov, speaker of the Chechen parliament, aptly put
it? Or is he president of the more urbanized, modern, and therefore
critically minded central territories?

The picture is unpleasantly reminiscent of the referendum on keeping
the Union in 1991. Which, of course, was also not a model from the
point of view of counting. But that is not the point; rather, it is
the asymmetry! Expressing themselves clearly “against” at that time
were the Europe-oriented republics of the Baltic, and also Armenia,
Georgia, and Moldova. They basically ignored the ballot. On the other
hand, the most votes “for” were cast by Abkhazia – 99.06 per cent,
Turkmenistan – 97.9 per cent, Karakalpakia [autonomous republic within
Uzbekistan] – 97.6 per cent, Kyrgyzstan – 96.4 per cent, and
Tajikistan – 96.2 per cent.
Let whoever wishes to do so work out how the triumphant result in the
Turkmenistan of that time differs from the even more triumphant result
in today’s Chechnya. It is more important that not even the Putinian
propagandist who has gone crazy from state-mandated rapture would risk
describing either Turkmenistan or Chechnya as “an innovative cluster.”
But a buttress of the feudal-sultanic regime – why not.

The Forecast

The trajectory is obvious. The Soviet bosses, having squandered, for
the sake of their own ambitions, Russia’s economic, demographic, and
sociocultural resources under the cover of a campaign for World
Justice, slid towards catastrophe over a period of several decades.
Without ceasing for a second to drum the population’s ears full of
bullshit about the planned economy, the nationwide character of the
state, scientific and technical progress, and the higher productivity
of socialist labour. And again, many believed it. Well, of course,
nationwide! Surely the dynasty of the Kims or, say, [Turkmenistani
President] Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow would not tell their subjects to
whom power really belongs and in whose interests it functions?

The question is the readiness of the population (and the elites!!!) to
put up with these fairy tales indefinitely. That is to say, to screw
up their eyes until they feel a pain in the back of their heads. The
Russian Federation, unlike the USSR, is informationally transparent.
The Internet, radio, foreign travel, the ability of people apart from
the nomenklatura monopoly to earn a living… This is why we will not
be able to sink so deeply or so hopelessly as the DPRK, Cuba, or
Turkmenistan – for all the desire of the Collective Putin to introduce
a constitutional order in Russia along the lines of the Chechen model.
On the contrary! The realization of the vertical impasse, which in the
USSR took three generations to arrive at, for us fitted comfortably
into 12 years. Well, maybe another year or two, while it creeps all
the way to the Urals Wagon Plant [symbol of Putin’s ultra-conservative
industrial support base]. Some people earlier, here and there later.
But the process has begun again. And this is associated with the
series of threats that developed Putinism has placed before Russia. In
exactly the same way as developed Brezhnevism did.
The first threat, which selfishly liberal Moscow cannot see, or does
not want to see – is the latest cycle of the territorial squeeze. We
turn away somewhat too easily from the difficult question of how
“freedom” has turned out for smart citizens (not only Russians) in
sovereign Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and so forth.

But this is only half the trouble. How will the same Kadyrov behave if
Putin’s departure becomes a reality? He has two options. Either final
sovereignty, the consolidation of sultan-like powers, and
“nationalization” (in reality, this means privatization in the
interests of the sultan) of the local oil fields. With a sharp tilt in
the direction of sharia as the ideological basis of stability. Or,
according to the logic of feudal loyalty – sending members of his
personal retinue (= “peasants” from the Ural Wagon Plant [here
obviously figuratively; “manual labourers, loyal to the regime”]) to
impose order.

This would no doubt be more colourful than the sapper spades in
Tbilisi or tanks in Vilnius. In these conditions, the frenzy of
citizens against “their own” siloviki no longer seems like the most
constructive position. Though it is understandable in human terms. Who
is without sin?

The second threat stems from the Kremlin per se, which in its
mentality is sliding ever closer towards Groznyy. In a similar
situation, Gorbachev, first, did not have the resources to feed the
siloviki and to send them against the people; and, second, on the
other hand he had a clear understanding of the pointlessness of
actions of this kind. For the sake of what – preserving a dead-end
economic model capable only of reproducing stagnation? He, at least,
being perfectly familiar with the structure of the Soviet
collective-farm order, was not deluded on this score.

For the Collective Putin, there are none of these restrictions. There
is plenty of money, the siloviki are willing, and the decade-long
habit of addiction to oil creates the illusion that there is something
to feed oneself with and something to fight for. Against this
background, the desire to trample the herd of hamsters who have become
too bold into the sidewalk could easily gain the upper hand. So
Putin’s guys will not go away simply and quickly. Do not flatter
yourselves.

The danger is not so much of physical violence, as that AFTERWARD some
clever people will once again wring their hands: As if to say, “they
took aim at Communism, but they hit Russia!” Tell me how the one is to
be separated from the other, seeing that the regime is totalitarian,
that no alternatives are even near, and that there no legal procedures
for the public handover of powers. Even now, the architectonics of the
regime are such that the entire vertical hierarchy is more likely to
collapse than attempts to sever the national leader [Putin] from it
are likely to succeed. If it is not possible to replace the chief via
legal elections, sooner or later he will be replaced together with the
system that he built in his image. But apart from the “vertical” –
once again because of its essential monopolist nature – , we have no
alternative mechanisms for maintaining the integrity of the state.
Within the 12 years of Putin’s rule a structure has been built that
combines a state with a specific set of individuals to the degree of
total amalgamation. Hence the entirely understandable results: They
took aim at a time-encrusted monarchy, and hit Russia… They took aim
at Communism – and once again they hit poor old Russia… And now
authoritarianism is in their sights, but it will be Russia (sooner or
later) that cops it again. This is bad.

Maybe it is not the riflemen who are to blame, but those who so
whimsically position the target in front of a historical process? As
in a gangster movie – as soon as something happens, the gangster uses
a hostage as cover…

The third threat lies in the ardour of the street opposition itself.
They are young and hot-headed. Someone has told them (or did they
think of it themselves?!) that on the cusp of the nineties it was the
masses who decided the outcome of the affair. It would appear that
this is the logic of the Soviet textbook that put into the heads of
children the false thesis of the “popular revolution,” only turned
inside out. In fact, in Moscow in the nineties, in Kiev in 2004, and
indeed, in Petrograd in 1917, the first and main condition for changes
was the preceding schism of the elites.

A vertical hierarchy is stable precisely because (according to the
Soviet ideal) it is always ready to purge itself of schismatics. Only
not under Putin. With him, loyalty has been defined not by the threat
of being purged, but, on the contrary, by the sweetness of corrupt
income. Attempts to follow in the footsteps of Stalin and remove
someone from the feeding trough and send him into disgrace (but at the
same time, not to destroy him!) only exacerbate matters. Something
that in the Double Dutch of political science is called “a
counter-elite” is rapidly forming and consolidating itself.

The problem, strictly speaking, has no solution. If you really do
attempt to recreate the Soviet model of totalitarian management, you
cannot avoid terror at the top and at the bottom, machine-guns on the
street, censorship, “the philosophers’ steamboat” [nickname for the
ship on which dissident members of the intelligentsia were deported
from Russia after the Civil War, and also, by extension, for the
further expulsion of intellectuals that followed], and “the iron
curtain.” For the simple reason that a false system of values and
mendacious propaganda are doomed to defeat in an encounter with the
facts and with qualified experts. And you – if you are honest – are
perfectly aware of this. Otherwise why scour competent opponents from
elections and falsify the results of even this malformed race to boot?

However, no one wants terror. They want to do it cleanly. So that it
should be like under Stalin, but without firing squads. Now, if they
were to start it first, and we were only forced to respond… Well,
for the sake of maintaining law and order…Have you understood me,
colleagues? Or else the number of oppositions has multiplied a bit too
much.

Losers clinging onto power have no other recourse than to set various
social groups at loggerheads. And then to play the role of the
exclusive conciliatory, mobilizing, and pacifying force. “You see…
We did warn you!” Music by Aleksandrov [composer of the Soviet/Russian
national anthem], words by Pushkin: “The government is the only
European in Russia.” Once again, straight from the Soviet
spin-doctoring roots: Endless purging of external and internal
enemies. Until all that is left of a rich, diverse, and contradictory
people is the single, sterilely clean skeleton of a new historical
community of individuals … Well, and an irreproachably pure and
magnificent ruling regime above it. Only with its hands and boots
somewhat caked in blood.
No, this will not fly either.

Pace Pushkin, the current “Collective Putin,” the heir of Stalin and
the Lubyanka, is actually the main Asiatic (the main sultan) in a
rapidly Europeanizing Central Russia. Churov’s elections are an
accidental proof of that.

They would like to set people at loggerheads – but this is possible
only in a primitive sociocultural milieu that is accustomed to
thinking in categories of “us” and “them.” In Chechnya, let us
suppose. But not in Moscow. Its cosmopolitan milieu is too variegated.
Even in the Urals Wagon Plant, it is not particularly likely. Unless,
of course, the instigators of the protests help from below…

The temptation to help from below is great. The more rigid and more
haughty the regime – the more radical the street protest movement. As
long as there exists a clear asymmetry of resources (including
propaganda resources), you will grasp to whose advantage the growing
frenzy largely is. In December-March rallies were held without a hitch
– but in May, things reached the point of a violent brawls. It is
obvious that this was organized by the authorities – but the
interpretation machine is so far still in their hands – so here is
your explanation: The protest movement is dying, its leaders need
radicalization… Lies, of course. But some people will believe it.
And some people are taking fright and will no longer go to rallies.
And for some people it is indeed unpleasant to be the ball in someone
else’s game. Mission accomplished…

In fact, the protest movement is not dying, but growing wider and
deeper. It attracts various people and various methods. Among other
things, it forces the elite groups to adapt. Albeit more slowly than
the impatient [opposition] fighters would like. And it is precisely
here that there may be a chance of escaping the unintelligent frenzy
and the Soviet logic of “who is not for us is against us.”

Why is [rock group leader and sometime oppositionist] Yu. Shevchuk
playing the guitar, and not getting his brains bashed out on the
sidewalk, like a decent person should? Well, because for Shevchuk,
playing the guitar is more effective than for his gallant critic.

Why do the Gudkovs, father and son, sit in an illegitimate Duma, not
laying down their mandates, rather than getting their brains bashed
out by hurling themselves at the OMON [Special-Purpose Police
Detachment]?! Because the Gudkovs with their mandates can do a little
bit more (and do it a little bit differently) than daring street
toughs.

Why do Kudrin, Prokhorov, and Chubays scheme and while away their time
in high offices instead of repenting and getting their brains bashed
out alongside the people?! Because they have interests that are a
little (or not so little) different, and different ways of influencing
the situation. They very much have something to lose apart from their
chains – and it is precisely in this that they are useful. Any general
would drop everything and pay attention to Kudrin, let us say. And any
businessman, even more so. But to you and me getting our brains bashed
out – oh, hardly. It is a somewhat different sphere of competence.

There is nothing easier than demonstrating intransigence. For which, a
separate thank-you to the fighters of the nomenklatura front, who
resolutely defend their vertical feeding-trough from the irresponsible
population.

But a bourgeois (in the pure sense of the word, URBAN) revolution is
made precisely by people who have something to lose. City folk.
Burghers. Or, in Soviet terms, the bourgeoisie. Not by Prometheuses
with hypertrophied livers, not by stormy petrels, who in profile look
more like geese fattened for foie gras, but by normal citizens with a
sober understanding of their bourgeois interest, who demand, not an
abstract bright future, but the specific observation of today’s laws
and rights.

The game is simple: The authorities, who have no intention whatever of
sharing their monopolistic rights, are trying to shove pro test out of
the legitimate sphere so as then to strangle the protestants [as
published] one by one. To reduce matters to the familiar level of
ours-and-theirs and to the brawl that is logical in such a situation.
The Russian is a Caucasian. The over-fussy Muscovite is a hungry
resident of Chelyabinsk. The bright Orthodox believer is a nasty
atheist. The office hamster is the labouring proletariat. The Central
Army Sports Club is Spartak [soccer team]…

The protestants, sensing the trick with their city instinct, are
endeavouring not to succumb to the provocations. They understand what
is happening is the multiplication and addition of various forms of
LAWFUL opposition. “Solidarity” – that is the key word here. Once
again, not in the Soviet sense of unity with one’s own people, but on
the contrary – in the anti-Soviet sense. Solidarity with strangers,
with other, unfamiliar people – this is more difficult, and less
familiar.

Everyone needs freedom – apart from the privileged denizens of the
vertical hierarchy. But they need it in different ways. It is never
otherwise in a big city. It is otherwise only in a barracks, a prison,
or a cemetery: ideal social milieus for a vertical hierarchy.

Armenian subsidiary of Russia’s Inter RAO prepared to invest $240 ml

Interfax, Russia
June 15 2012

Armenian subsidiary of Russia’s Inter RAO prepared to invest $240 mln by 2018

YEREVAN. June 15

Power Grids of Armenia (PGA), a subsidiary of Russia’s OJSC Inter RAO
UES (RTS: IRAO), has begun working on a new investment program for
2013-2017, the company’s chief executive, Yevgeny Bibin told Interfax.

He said the program would amount to “no less than the company has
already invested in the whole period of its operations, or about
AMD100 billion (about $240 million).”

“This program will focus on providing quality and reliable electricity
supplies. While before the investment program was aimed at overhauling
and building main substations, now it will be primarily aimed at the
so-called last mile to the consumer,” Bibin said.
He said at least 55% of investment will go towards upgrading 0.4-10kV
grids. The distribution grid is “currently the most worn out and
vulnerable in terms of ensuring the reliability and quality of
supply,” Bibin said.

The program will also provide for such important projects as the
completion of updates to distribution and transformer substations in
Yerevan, improvements to the metering system, and updating the fleet
of specialized equipment, Bibin said.

Armenia’s Commission for Regulation of Public Services on June 13
approved PGA’s AMD8.2 billion ($20 million) investment program for
2012.

PGA, which has an exclusive license to transmit and distribute
electricity in Armenia, serves about 950,000 customers.
The official exchange rate for June 14 was AMD415.12/$1.

Armenian Delegation will Visit Kansas National Guard in Topeka and S

Targeted News Service
June 15, 2012 Friday 7:50 AM EST

Armenian Delegation will Visit Kansas National Guard in Topeka and Salina

TOPEKA, Kan.

The Kansas Adjutant General issued the following news release:

Two representatives from the Republic of Armenia will visit Kansas
June 18-21 as part of the State Partnership Program.
On Monday and Tuesday, Maj. Gen. Ishkhan Matevosyan, head of Combat
Readiness Department, and Col. Gevorg Hakobyan, chief of
Noncommissioned Officer Development Branch, Combat Readiness
Department, will meet with senior leaders of the Kansas National Guard
in Topeka to learn about the force structure of the Kansas National
Guard and some of its programs.
“Armenia is in the process of transitioning from a conscripted
military force to one that has a professional noncommissioned officer
corps,” explained Lt. Col. Brent Salmans, director, Kansas National
Guard State Partnership Program. “The Kansas National Guard is part of
a consortium with the U.S. Marine Corps, the United Kingdom’s Royal
Marines and the RAND Corporation to assist the Armenian Ministry of
Defense with this major transition to its force.”

Salmans said the Armenian delegation will receive briefings and
discuss the roles and responsibilities of staff noncommissioned
officers. Specific emphasis will be on personnel management and
operations and training, along with enlisted promotions, selections
and assignment processes and the noncommissioned officer education
system.

On Wednesday and Thursday, Matevosyan and Hakobyan will travel to
Salina to observe training at the Great Plains Joint Training Center.
The Armenians will also be given a tour of the facility and later will
visit the Officer Candidate School at the 235th Training Regiment to
learn about the roles of officers and noncommissioned officers in the
tactical environment. They will participate in a roundtable discussion
on the command team concept, which highlights the commander and senior
noncommissioned officer relationship.

Kansas has been partnered with Armenia under the program since 2003.

“We’ve had many productive exchanges with our Armenian friends over
the years,” said Maj. Gen. (KS) Lee Tafanelli, the adjutant general.
“We’ve learned a lot from each other and built many good relationships
in both the military and civilian sectors. I’m sure we’ll continue to
build more in the years to come.”

The National Guard Bureau’s State Partnership Program links the
National Guard of participating states with developing nations to
foster mutually beneficial military-to-military, military-to-civilian,
and civilian-to-civilian relationships. Kansas and Armenia conduct 15
to 20 engagements a year focusing on a variety of professional fields
such as emergency response, law enforcement, medical training, and
military operations.

Contact: Sharon Watson, Director, Public Affairs, 785/274-1192,
785/806-4063,

http://www.kansastag.gov

DM: Armenia has always been active in initiatives to help families o

Defense Minister: Republic of Armenia has always been active in
initiatives to help families of the missing

15:55 16/06/2012 » Politics

Armenian Defense Ministry hosted a meeting of the Commission on
Prisoners of War, Hostages and Missing People, chaired by Defense
Minister Seyran Ohanyan.

The meeting discussed the work done over the past six months and
outlined future work plans. It was reported that the Republic of
Armenia has always been active in initiatives to help families of the
missing.

Upon completion of the meeting, Seyran Ohanyan gave members of the
commission an assignment to carry out their future activities
properly, Defense Ministry press service reported.

Source: Panorama.am

New Baku scheme to allow liberation of Armenian territories occupied

New scheme of Baku to allow liberation of Armenian territories
occupied by Azerbaijan – expert

news.am
June 16, 2012 | 16:16

YEREVAN. – If Baku unleashes new war, it will grant the Armenian side
an opportunity to liberate other occupied territories by Azerbaijan,
expert Edgar Hovhannisyan said at a press conference on Saturday.

According to him, the Armenian side should include official
Stepanakert into direct negotiation talks. At the same time,
Nagorno-Karabakh does participate in the talks to some extent, which
is testified by the visits of the Co-Chairs in Karabakh and meetings
of high ranking foreign officials with the Karabakh administration. As
a matter of fact, the international agencies realize that the Karabakh
conflict settlement is impossible without the Karabakh agreement.

As for the upcoming meeting between the Armenian FM Edward Nalbandian
and Azerbaijani FM Elmar Mammadyarov in Paris on June 18, Hovhannisyan
said that it is likely to precede a high level meeting. In general,
the expert noted increase of interest by the West towards the conflict
settlement.

Serzh Sargsyan nominated members of Armenian Government

Serzh Sargsyan nominated members of Armenian Government

Today Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan nominated the members of
Armenian Government based on the 4th point of 55th article of Armenian
Constitution.

So, here is the new staff of the Armenian Government:

Sergo Karapetyan-Minister of Agriculture

Tigran Davtyan- Minister of Economics

Vache Gabrielyan- Minister of Finance

Gagik Beglaryan- Minister of Transport and Communication

Artem Asatryan- Minister of Labor and Social Affairs

Derenik Dumanyan- Minister of Helathcare

Hrayr Tovmasyan- Minister of Justice

Aram Harutyunyan- Minister of Nature Protection

Armen Movsisyan- Minister of Energy and Natural Resources

Armen Ashotyan- Minister of Education and Science

Hasmik Poghosyan- Minister of Culture

Hrachya Rostomyan- Minister of Sport and Youth Affairs

Hranush Hakobyan- Minister of Diaspora

Samvel Tadevosyan- Minister of Urban Development

Armen Gevorgyan- Minister of Territorial Administration

According to another degree Armen Gevorgyan is nominated as Armenian
Deputy Prime Minister.

The new Governmental staff was discussed yesterday in the evening
during the RPA session.

16.06.12, 15:45

http://times.am/?l=en&p=8592