Author: Badalian Vardan

Global Insight
June 23, 2011

Azerbaijan’s “Armenophobia” May Thwart Peace Agreement, Armenian
President Warns EU

by Lilit Gevorgyan

Yesterday (22 June), Armenian president Serge Sargsyan in his speech
to the Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe (PACE) warned that
continued intolerance and “Armenophobia” in Azerbaijan may derail the
current peace process between the two neighbours. Sargsyan highlighted
the conclusion of a recent report on Azerbaijan by the European
Commission against Racism and Intolerance, which criticised the
extreme level of racism against Armenians currently practiced in
Azerbaijan. The report, published in May, urged Baku to take measures
to curb those social attitudes. The Armenian president said that his
country is willing to seek peaceful settlement to the conflict over
the final status of the Armenian-populated, self-declared
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR), which broke away from Azerbaijan in
1988. Sargsyan had earlier stated to Armenian media that the upcoming
meeting with his Azerbaijani counterpart Ilham Aliyev in Russia on 24
June may bring a breakthrough in long-running peace talks, as the
parties could agree to a framework agreement. In his speech at PACE,
Sargsyan said that “an agreement can be finalised and effectively
implemented only when the patterns of Armenophobia and racism are
eliminated in Azerbaijan and an atmosphere of trust is formed”.

Significance:The Armenian president’s warning is reflective of a
strong sentiment, particularly among the NKR Armenians, who fear that
in case they are forced under Azerbaijani rule, their physical
security will be highly compromised. Since the 1988-94
Armenian-Azerbaijani war, which claimed 30,000 lives on both sides,
there are practically no Armenians or Azerbaijanis left in either
country. Although the hostile sentiments in Azerbaijan towards
Armenians are understandable, in recent years the government has also
promoted the cultural intolerance of and outright hunt for Armenians.
Perhaps this trend was best expressed in 2005 when the government
ordered the Azeri army units stationed in its Nakhichevan
region–currently part of Azerbaijan but part of historic Armenia–to
bulldoze a unique site of dozens of medieval Armenian Christian
cross-stones protected by UNESCO as a world historic heritage site.
The video of the destruction was shown on Azerbaijani state television
as an act of revenge. This symbolic act reaffirmed the NKR Armenians’
fear that they too face physical destruction should Azerbaijan gain
the upper hand in terms of military capabilities over the coming
years. Aliyev himself decided in 2006 to award the “Man of the Year”
honours to infamous Azeri army officer Ramil Safarov. This was after
Safarov was convicted in Hungary for beheading his fellow Armenian
colleague with an axe in 2004 while the latter was asleep. Both were
army officers attending a NATO-sponsored language course in Hungary.
Aliyev’s drive to drum up nationalistic rhetoric domestically can win
him support. However, this leaves almost no scope for integrating the
NKR into Azerbaijan. The NKR Armenians say they have every reason to
believe that without proper security mechanisms in place, a repeat of
the ethnic cleansing of Armenians is unavoidable, as Azerbaijan is
openly preparing for war. Against this background, it is hard to see
how the negotiating parties can reach any meaningful settlement of the
conflict during the upcoming talks in Russia.

Washington Post
June 24 2011

Armenia, Azerbaijan fail to reach agreement on disputed region

By Will Englund, Friday, June 24, 4:50 PM

MOSCOW – The presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan met Friday in the
Russian city of Kazan to see whether they could finally agree to begin
peace talks over a region that has been disputed since the two
countries fought a war nearly 20 years ago. They couldn’t.

At issue was Nagorno Karabakh, an unrecognized enclave within
Azerbaijan run by ethnic Armenians. Russia, the United States and
France have been pushing the two sides to negotiate for years, even as
they continue to trade shots over the border. Friday’s meeting was
sponsored by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, and President Obama
called the two leaders Thursday urging them to reach an agreement on
the conduct of further talks. But after more than three hours they
broke up without a resolution.

Lower-level talks were continuing Friday night.

`The two sides are simply too far apart, but the meeting is a helpful
strengthening of diplomacy over war,’ said Richard Giragosian,
director of the Regional Studies Center in Yerevan, Armenia.

Each side has been stepping up its threats toward the other recently,
to the alarm of Russian, American and European officials who have no
desire to see an escalation of the fighting in a region close to
Georgia, Iran and the Caspian oil fields.

`War by miscalculation’ is the biggest danger, Thomas de Waal of the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace said Friday night.
`Obviously, time is beginning to run out on Medvedev’s initiative. It
doesn’t look good.’

FAIRYTALE OR SERIOUS MESSAGE?: ARMENIAN POLITICAL CIRCLES ASSESS PRESIDENT SARGSYAN’S PACE SPEECH
Gayane Abrahamyan

ArmeniaNow
23.06.11

Some opposition political circles in Armenia describe President Serzh
Sargsyan’s Wednesday speech at the Council of Europe Parliamentary
Assembly (PACE) as a “beautiful fairy-tale that has little to do with
the country’s reality.” But the main opposition alliance has been in
no rush to provide its assessment.

Representatives of the ruling coalition parties have welcomed
Sargsyan’s speech, in which the president addressed Armenia’s
democratic processes and the country’s stance on foreign affairs.

(Read the president’s full speech here:
).

They stress that it constituted a serious message to the international
community that Armenia is a state “moving along the path of democracy,
trying to overcome its internal difficulties and showing a constructive
approach in solving major external problems.”

Meanwhile, for some parts and separate figures on the opposition
side of the political fence the speech seemed to be “about nothing,
unconvincing and of a declarative nature.”

“A speech that seems smart, but says nothing and solves nothing,”
commented ex-prime minister Hrant Bagratyan, who currently is a key
member of the opposition Armenian National Congress (ANC).

“On the other hand, such a speech became possible due to the ANC,
which, meeting the government half-way, so to say extending it a loan
at the expense of its own rating, is still awaiting a proper answer,”
the oppositionist told ArmeniaNow.

The ANC as a whole, however, still keeps silent and avoids any
assessments of Sargsyan’s speech.

“We still do not want to say anything, nor do I want to explain the
reasons for refusing to comment,” ANC coordinator Levon Zurabyan
told ArmeniaNow.

Meanwhile, Giro Manoyan, Director of the International Secretariat
of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation Bureau in Yerevan, thinks
that the main emphases of the president’s speech in Strasbourg were
adequate to the particular audience.

“The president’s explanations regarding the Armenia-Turkey negotiations
were appropriate, but still it would have been more correct if the
president had taken advantage of the opportunity and stated that
in response to Turkey’s improper attitude the Republic of Armenia
recalls its signature from the Armenia-Turkey protocols,” Manoyan
told ArmeniaNow.

However, President Sargsyan’s speech has angered some of the parents
of those who were killed in the 2008 post-election clashes.

In response to a question from the Strasbourg body’s member as to
why three and a half years after the events, the investigation into
those deaths has not been finished yet, Sargsyan, in particular, said:
“The investigation has not been finished for the simple reason that
not all of those responsible have been found.”

Sargis Kloyan, the father of 29-year-old Gor Kloyan who was killed
on March 1, 2008, told ArmeniaNow that the president’s answer was an
“outrageous lie”.

“Why did he go to the PACE and was making false statements from the
tribune there? If he doesn’t know who is responsible, let him invite
me to his residence and I will name all – both those who killed and
those who ordered the killings. They know very well who the murderers
are,” claimed Kloyan.

Investigators conducting the probe, meanwhile, have repeatedly
suggested that for the time being they lack clear evidence that would
lead to the identification of those responsible for the killings or
prove there had been clear orders to shoot.

NAGORNO-KARABAKH’S FUTURE: SOME PROGRESS IS BEING MADE, BUT MANY OBSTACLES TO PEACE REMAIN

Jun 23rd 2011 | from the print edition

THE Soviet Union had three years left when rumbles hinting at its
imminent collapse began to reverberate in the Caucasus. In 1988
leaders of Nagorno-Karabakh, a territory populated mainly by ethnic
Armenians, demanded a transfer from Soviet Azerbaijan to Soviet
Armenia. The Kremlin refused and a nasty war between Azeris and
Armenians followed. As Thomas de Waal, an author on the Caucasus,
writes, “it was the first stone in an avalanche that swept away the
entire multinational construction of the Soviet Union.” Some 20,000
people died in the war and over a million became refugees. Armenia won,
gaining control over seven Azerbaijani regions next to Karabakh.

A ceasefire came in 1994. Pipelines sprang up to ship oil and gas
from Azerbaijan. Karabakh has gained some features of a state, but
is the most combustive spot in the region.

Worryingly, Azerbaijan has poured energy revenues into its army-it
spends $3 billion a year (5% of GDP). It makes menacing noises
about reconquest. A new war would risk Azerbaijan’s petro-wealth,
but irrational behaviour is all too common in the Caucasus. A renewed
conflict in a region that includes Turkey, Iran, Russia and Georgia
is the stuff of nightmares.

Russia’s president, Dmitry Medvedev, is the latest mediator. This
weekend he will sit with his counterparts, Azerbaijan’s Ilham Aliev and
Armenia’s Serzh Sargsyan, in the Russian city of Kazan to cajole them
into accepting some basic principles first drafted in 2007. The idea is
that Armenia should withdraw from Azerbaijani regions outside Karabakh
and that the disputed territory should win “interim status”, giving it
some international legitimacy but falling short of full independence.

Mr Medvedev has invested time and effort in what will be his fifth
trilateral meeting. Yet many experts who have watched these peace talks
fail repeatedly remain sceptical. The two countries’ semi-authoritarian
leaders seem to prefer process to results and have done nothing to
prepare people for peace. They may negotiate compromises in private,
but they make fiery “no surrender” speeches in public.

There are doubts over Russia’s motives. A benevolent explanation
is that it has leverage over its ally, Armenia. Helping to resolve
a complex conflict would win Mr Medvedev kudos. Grigory Shvedov,
editor of Caucasian Knot, an online news agency, argues that Russia’s
strategic goal is to increase its political and economic influence in
the Caucasus. Dominating negotiations, he says, may be more important
than a solution that increases Turkey’s influence.

Turkey would indeed benefit from a peace deal, but its sway over
Azerbaijan is limited despite its big Azeri population. In a typical
case of tail wagging dog, says Mr de Waal, Azerbaijan sabotaged moves
to reopen the border between Turkey and Armenia in 2009. Yet he sees
Mr Medvedev’s initiative as the best chance for peace. The Armenians
are signalling that they accept the draft. Azerbaijan has not rejected
it but has not hinted at its agreement either.

The Americans and French, the other two mediating powers with Russia,
are increasing the pressure. At the recent G8 summit in France,
all three presidents stated that “further delay would only call into
question the commitment of the sides to reach an agreement.” If the
two leaders agree in Kazan, it will be a big step, even if it leaves
room for new disputes. Were Armenia to withdraw from its “security
zone”, the question arises of who would replace it. Russia may hope
its role would give it an edge for providing peacekeepers, but that
may not appeal after the August 2008 war in Georgia. Any notion of
involving NATO troops would be fiercely resisted by Russia and Iran.

One thing is certain: making peace in Nagorno-Karabakh requires the
skill of walking over a minefield.

COOPERATION IS EXPECTED WITH SKILLFUL LAND USERS

NKR Government Information and
Public Relations Department
21.06.2011

Today a conference took place with the heads of the regional
administrations headed by the Prime Minister Ara Haroutyunyan. During
the conference were discussed issues concerning the barley harvest.

Minister of Agriculture A.Tsatryan and executive director of ~SVillage
and Agriculture Assisting Fund~T V.Baghdasaryan took part in the
conference. First the Prime Minister inquired about yesterday~Rs
rainfall in the regions Martouni and Askeran. He assigned a task to
the Minister of Agriculture to form a commission for making research.

On the base of the research results will be taken measures to assist
those land owners who suffered from rainfall and other natural
disasters.

Heads of the regional administrations reported on the anti-fire
measures, harvest and current issues. Ploughing works go on normally,
average yield is higher than 20 centner from 1 hectare.

Taking into account unpredictable weather conditions Prime Minister
exhorted to organize works as fast as possible. ~SIt is necessary to
finish the harvest during three days~T, instructed A.Haroutyunyan. He
advised the heads of regional administrations to present the list of
those land users who will function according to the demands of land
cultivation. Henceforth the Government is intended to cooperate only
with them.

RUSSIAN INVESTMENTS TO ARMENIA IN JANUARY-MARCH 2011 SLASH BY 55.7%

/ ARKA /
June 23
YEREVAN

Russian investments to Armenia in January-March 2011 slashed by 55.7%
year-on-year to $23 million. Of that amount $14 million were direct
investments which contracted by 67%, according to the numbers released
today by the National Statistic Service.

According to the data, Russia accounted for 17.6% of total foreign
investment in Armenian real sector and for 14.9% of direct investment.

In terms of total investments, as well as in terms of largest direct
investments Russia ranked second after France, which invested $37.7
million in the reporting period of time.

Some 34.9% of Russian investments ($8.046 million) were channeled
into the production and distribution of electricity, gas, hot water
and steam, 24.8% into production of basic metals, ($5.721 million).

Russian investments went also to telecommunications -18.9%- ($4.356
million) and construction -3.7%- ($853,000) The total volume of
foreign investments in Armenia in January-March 2011 amounted to
approximately $130.6 million, of which $93.7 million were direct
investments in real sector.

ARMENIA, AZERBAIJAN PERCEIVE MADRID PRINCIPLES DIFFERENTLY – PRESIDENT

news.am
June 22 2011
Armenia

Back in 2007 Armenia stated the principles underlying the Madrid
proposals provide an opportunity to reach fair solution to the
Karabakh conflict. They are non-use of force or threat of force,
territorial integrity, the right of nations to self-determination,
Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan said on Wednesday answering questions
of the PACE delegates in Strasbourg.

He stressed the problem is Armenia and Azerbaijan perceive the
principles differently.

President Sargsyan said Azerbaijanis have recently claimed they are
willing to reach settlement by military means. It is violation of
the first principle, he added.

“As regards the second principle, we have no problem. The Armenian
government has never represented the territorial claims not only to
Azerbaijan, but another states as well. For this reason, Armenia has
not recognized Nagorno-Karabakh’s independence.

The right of nations to self-determination is also acceptable. Over
the recent years it gave an opportunity to create dozens of states.

Azerbaijanis think otherwise. Azerbaijanis say they recognize, but in
this case, within the borders of their state. We say it is a truncated
self-determination. Self-determination must be such as to give an
opportunity to decide their fate. The essence of the Madrid principles
is that they can not be accepted. We do not have any reservations,”
he said.

PRESIDENT OF ARMENIA: KARABAKH HAS BEEN, IS, AND WILL REMAIN A PART OF EUROPE

Panorama
June 22 2011
Armenia

“Naturally, no one may question the inherent right of the people of
Karabakh to live freely and safely on their land and to be the masters
of their destiny. Thus, what can be expected of the Council of Europe?

First of all, not to harm the process. The short-term impact of
uninformed debates allows the parties to avoid lasting solutions that
could otherwise emerge in the peace talks in the frameworks of the OSCE
Minsk Group,” President Serzh Sargsyan said in his address to PACE.

“I am confident that the overwhelming majority of our colleagues at
the PACE, who have expressed or will express a desire to discuss any
issue related to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, have done or will
do so out of good will. However, some can still act on the basis of
inadequate information, which can indeed undermine the process.

Therefore, I urge all of you to exercise some restraint. The main
guidance should be the principle of causing no harm.

Regardless of different visions for the final resolution of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, one thing is certain. Karabakh has been,
is, and will remain a part of Europe, albeit unrecognized. Do we
realize that society in Karabakh today is a part of European society,
a part of the European family regardless of the de-jure status of
Karabakh? Has the time not come for the Council of Europe to engage
directly with Karabakh in terms of its primary functions of protection
and promotion of human rights, formation of civil society, democracy,
tolerance, and the like? Would it not be much more logical if the
Council of Europe first engaged with Karabakh before expressing a
desire to discuss matters related to Karabakh, with the participation
of the people of Karabakh in such discussions?”

RUSSIA EXTENDS TREATY ON MILITARY BASE IN ARMENIA

CRIENGLISH
June 22, 2011
China

Guo The Russian Federation Council, the upper house of parliament,
ratified a protocol Wednesday extending the presence of a Russian
military base in Armenia.

The two countries signed amendments in 2010 to a 1995 bilateral treaty,
extending Russia’s use of its military base in Gyumri near Armenia’s
border with Turkey until 2044.

According to the newly ratified protocol, the term of the treaty will
be automatically extended every five years unless either side gives
six months notice it wants to end the arrangement.

The base, which is under the command of Russia’s North Caucasus
Military District and part of the Commonwealth of Independent States
integrated air defense system, is also responsible for maintaining
Armenia’s security together with the Armenian armed forces, Russian
media reported.

RIA Novosti news agency said the base had about 5,000 personnel,
as well as S-300 surface-to-air missile systems and MIG-29 fighters.

MOURADIAN TO DISCUSS TURKEY’S CONFISCATION OF CHRISTIAN CHURCHES AT ARMENIAN CAUSE 2.0

Armenian Weekly
Tue, Jun 21, 2011

Timely Presentation will Address Key Points Raised by Introduction
of H.Res.306

WASHINGTON–Khatchig Mouradian, the editor of the Armenian Weekly
and one of the diaspora’s leading public intellectuals, will speak
at the Armenian National Committee of America’s (ANCA) “Armenian
Cause 2.0â~@³ conference about the confiscation of Christian church
properties by the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Turkey.

Armenian Weekly editor Khatchig Mouradian Mouradian’s timely
presentation will take place in wake of the recent introduction of
a resolution, H.Res.306, in the U.S. House calling upon Turkey to
return Christian religious properties to the Armenians, Greeks,
Assyrians, and the other nations that have lived on the lands of
present-day Turkey for thousands of years. This religious freedom
measure, which has already come under attack from Ankara’s surrogates
in Washington, D.C., has drawn broad bipartisan support, including
from both Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Ranking Democrat Howard
Berman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the influential panel
to which this legislation has been referred.

Mouradian’s presentation, the first ever about H.Res.306 at a civic or
community gathering, will cover the Ottoman era of Sultan Abdulhamid
and the Young Turks through to the present-day Republic of Turkey.

Drawing from a wealth of primary and secondary sources, including
recently published scholarly works, Mouradian will present an overview
of the process through which Armenian property, including church
property, was confiscated from Armenians and transferred to the Ottoman
and later Turkish state, and how the economic wealth stolen from the
Armenians contributed to the creation of the Turkish national economy.

He will share a broad overview of the destruction, desecration, and
disregard of Armenian and other Christian church properties, and a
detailed inventory of pre- and post-genocide religious properties.

Mouradian will then discuss the Turkish state’s current policy
towards Armenians and Armenian cultural and religious heritage in
Turkey. He will also explore, with all in attendance, the moral and
material remedies available to begin addressing the damages inflicted
upon the Armenian and other victims of Ottoman and later Republican
Turkey’s genocidal campaign to eliminate the Christian populations
within its borders.

In addition to serving as editor of the Armenian Weekly, Mouradian
is a Ph.D. student in Holocaust and genocide studies at Clark
University in Worcester, Mass., where he is writing his dissertation
on the destruction of the Armenians in the Syrian desert during
the Armenian Genocide. Mouradian has lectured extensively and
participated in conferences in Armenia, Austria, Cyprus, Lebanon,
Norway, Syria, Switzerland, Turkey, and across the United States. He
has presented papers on media, human rights, and the Armenian Genocide
at several academic conferences, including the 5th and 6th Workshops on
Armenian-Turkish Scholarship, held at NYU in 2006 and at the Graduate
Institute in Geneva in 2008; the International Conference on Genocide
and International Law at Haigazian University in Beirut in 2009; the
Middle Eastern Studies Association (MESA) conference in Boston in 2009;
the Armenian Genocide Research Conference at Clark University in 2010;
and the Armenian Genocide Reparations Conference in Ankara, Turkey,
in 2010. Mouradian writes for a number of national and international
publications.

Armenian Cause 2.0’s full schedule of educational workshops and
interactive presentations, including speakers such as former U.S.
Ambassador to Armenia John Evans, POLITICO National Politics Editor
Charles Mahtesian, and angel investor and blogger Haig Kayserian will
be complemented by social and networking opportunities, including a
dinner reception at the Armenian Embassy hosted by Ambassador Tatoul
Markarian. Break-out sessions will include workshops on advocacy,
social media, and elections.

Due to high demand, Armenian Cause 2.0 has sold-out. No more
registrations are being accepted.