Author: Badalian Vardan

HOLLYWOOD STARS NATALIE PORTMAN AND ARMAND ASSANTE TO BE INVOLVED IN MOVIE TELLING ABOUT GENOCIDE OF ARMENIANS
by Ashot Safaryan

Friday, September 6, 13:11

Hollywood stars Natalie Portman and Armand Assante will be involved
in a new movie called ‘The Genex’ that tells about the Genocide
of Armenians. Armenian director Artak Sevada reportedly plans the
screening of the movie on April 24, 2015 when Armenians around the
world will be marking the 100th anniversary of the start of the
Ottoman Empire’s genocidal policy during World War I that resulted
in the killings and deportations of some 1.5 million Armenians.

According to the synopsis of the movie published on its official
website, it tells about a “beautiful 25-year- old woman”, Sally
Solomon, who “has spent years running from her family (and her own
ethnic) history.” “But, when Sally’s father is murdered, she finds
herself thrust into the middle of a vast conspiracy that puts her
and the young lawyer trying to defend her against a large, powerful
corporation hell bent on keeping secret its own dark involvement in
the Armenian Genocide.

As Sally will learn – history is a contact sport – and no one can
hide from it.”

Two Hollywood stars – Natalie Portman and Armand Assante – have already
reportedly signed papers to be involved in the movie to be produced by
EdgeArt Entertainment and Sevada Productions, with an expected budget
of $30 million. Several other Hollywood actors, including megastars Al
Pacino and Leonardo DiCaprio, are featured in the conceptual trailer
currently published on the official movie website:

IF THEY WASH AWAY THEIR HANDS

Europe’s reaction to Serzh Sargsyan’s statement on joining the Customs
Union indicates that Brussels is uncertain and is trying to orient.

First, several diplomats announced that Armenia has actually blocked
the perspective of the association process. Then the European
Commission stated that the Association Agreement and DCFTA are
compatible with integration with the CIS and Europe is awaiting
explanations from Armenia. In other words, a window is left open
for Yerevan.

Of course, it will be strange that Europe does not know what to
do. It is even hard to believe it. Was the Brussels so ingenuous to
cooperate with Serzh Sargsyan without keeping in mind the possibility
of a U-turn and accordingly a scenario of further actions? Didn’t it
occur to them that Serzh Sargsyan may deceive or let them down?

Although, they would hardly have thought about it. Withholding
significant funding and postponing the donor conference is evidence
to lack of confidence.

So why doesn’t Europe speak clearly? What explanations does it await
from Armenia? The impression is that Europe wants to forgive Armenia
and is therefore demanding explanation. Like a teacher who wants
to give a satisfactory mark to a student but asks him to utter at
least something.

As of now, it is hard to imagine what Armenia is going to explain.

Another question is which part of this explanation is going to be
public. It is noticed, however, that Europe needs to evaluate the
situation for itself, either it puts up with Armenia’s capitulation
or continues to work towards liberating Armenia from Russian dominate.

A more global and important issue has come up beyond more petty
relations with the Armenian government – the issue of methodology and
tools of working with Armenia. Inefficiency of the former ones has
come out or they have been exhausted, and Europe needs new approaches
and partners.

>From this point of view, it is equal with Russia. In other words,
the Russian methodology and toolkit in dealing with Armenia, Russia’s
partners are not any more effective and successful. Moreover, Europe,
the West, has an advantage.

The problem is that Moscow’s huge starting advantage play down the
West’s technological advantages. Russia defeated the West in Armenia
not due to technology used presently but starting advantages.

This is the key problem for Europe. In Armenia Europe or the West
was let down not only by the government or opposition individuals
on who they bet. As a partner, most public groups failed because
the produced public effect of efforts for a wider awareness of the
Euro-Atlantic values in Armenia was weak vis-a-vis the used resources.

In this regard, the clarification of the Armenian government is a
secondary issue for Europe or it is not the most important one. The
West may need it for tactical issues but the West needs its own
clarifications from the point of view of strategy.

Why is it so important for Armenia?

If the West gives up the race for Armenia, it will further aggravate
the consequences of September 3. In this case, Russia will achieve
dominance and may allow annual or quarterly change of government
in Armenia just for fun but will never allow a change of system and
thinking. It will be helped by about two dozens of forces who will
be ready to stand in line in the Kremlin corridors for hours for the
sake of help.

In case the West continues the race, notwithstanding September 3, be it
in economy, sports or politics, it may ensure positive developments. At
the same time, competition implies challenge, risk and danger. However,
the lack of competition does not imply risk but lack of options.

Hakob Badalyan 14:17 06/09/2013 Story from Lragir.am News:

REVUE DE PRESSE N1 – 06/09/13 – COLLECTIF VAN

Publié le : 06-09-2013

Info Collectif VAN – – Le Collectif VAN [Vigilance
Arménienne contre le Négationnisme] vous propose une revue de presse
des informations parues dans la presse francophone, sur les thèmes
concernant la Turquie, le génocide arménien, la Shoah, le génocide
des Tutsi, le Darfour, le négationnisme, l’Union européenne, Chypre,
etc… Nous vous suggérons également de prendre le temps de lire ou
de relire les informations et traductions mises en ligne dans notre
rubrique Par
ailleurs, certains articles en anglais, allemand, turc, etc, ne
sont disponibles que dans la newsletter Word que nous générons
chaque jour.

Pour la recevoir, abonnez-vous a la Veille-Média : c’est gratuit !

Vous recevrez le document du lundi au vendredi dans votre boîte email.

Bonne lecture.

Turquie : 1er baptême a l’église d’Aghtamar depuis 1915 Info
Collectif VAN – – Turquie : L’église arménienne
Sainte-Croix d’Akhtamar (Lac de Van) accueillera sa première
cérémonie de baptême depuis le génocide de 1915, durant la messe
du dimanche 8 septembre 2013 a 11h. ” Nous attendons une augmentation
énorme du nombre de personnes qui viendront a la messe ” a déclaré
Muzaffer Aktug, directeur du tourisme et de la culture de la ville de
Van, qui a mis l’accent sur les retombées positives du tourisme dans
le processus de paix. Effectivement, le ” tourisme génocidaire ”
prend chaque année de plus en plus d’ampleur en Turquie, des milliers
d’Arméniens de la diaspora faisant le pèlerinage sur les terres de
leurs grands-parents ou arrière-grands-parents, a la recherche de ”
la vie d’avant le génocide ”. Souhaitons que ces rencontres ne soient
pas seulement l’occasion, pour la partie turque et kurde, d’engranger
des bénéfices et qu’elles débouchent sur un véritable travail
de mémoire. Ce n’est pas gagné si l’on en juge les déclarations
de l’association négationniste ASIMDER, qui compte être présente
le 8 septembre a Aghtamar pour faire valoir sa vision mensongère
de l’histoire… Le Collectif VAN vous invite a lire la traduction
d’un article publié par le journal arménien de Turquie, AGOS,
le 26 aoÔt 2013.

Presse arménienne : Revue du 5 septembre 2013 Info Collectif VAN –
– “” La décision de l’Arménie de se joindre
a l’Union douanière ne signifie point la fin ou la suspension de
notre dialogue politique avec l’UE ”. V.

Sarkissian a réitéré les assurances données par le Président
arménien : Erevan reste déterminé a mener les réformes convenues
avec l’UE. ” Nous sommes conscients que l’adhésion a l’Union
douanière pourrait contrevenir certaines dispositions de l’accord
sur la zone approfondie de libre-échange avec l’UE.” Le Collectif VAN
vous présente cette Revue de Presse parue sur le site de l’Ambassade
de France en Arménie le 5 septembre 2013.

Erevan n’exclut pas une association avec l’UE L’administration du
président Serge Sarkissian a déclaré aujourd’hui que l’Arménie
espère encore finaliser un accord d’association avec l’Union
Européenne cet automne, malgré l’annonce inattendue du président
de rejoindre le bloc dirigé par la Russie.

Syrie : Francois Hollande lâché par l’Europe au G20 ”Nous
comptons sur le soutien des Européens et des pays arabes”,
assurait l’entourage du chef de l’Ã~Itat. Peine perdue. Francois
Hollande avait a peine posé le pied sur le tarmac de l’aéroport de
Saint-Pétersbourg qu’il était déja lâché par ses plus proches
alliés, les Européens.

Les Arméniens de Boston soulèvent 1,3 million de dollars pour
que les Arméniens de Syrie s’installent au Karabagh La communauté
arménienne de Boston a soulevé 1,3 million de dollars pour que les
Arméniens de Syrie puissent commencer une nouvelle vie au Karabagh.

Syrie : pourquoi la plupart des pays émergents sont contre une
intervention La crise syrienne n’est pas officiellement a l’ordre du
jour de la réunion du G20 qui doit se dérouler, jeudi 5 et vendredi
6 septembre, a Saint-Pétersbourg, en Russie. Mais l’éventualité
d’une intervention militaire contre le régime de Damas risque fort
de bouleverser l’agenda, et révéler une nouvelle fois le fossé
béant entre la Russie, pays hôte et soutien indéfectible a Bachar
Al-Assad, et les Etats-Unis et leurs alliés, qui entendent “punir”
Damas pour l’attaque chimique du 21 aoÔt perpétrée dans la banlieue
de la capitale syrienne.

Réactions des Européens au retournement arménien Selon l’actuel
président de l’UE, le lituanien Linas Linkevicius, l’engagement
surprise de l’Arménie dans l’Union Douanière dirigée par la Russie
serait incompatible avec l’élément clé de son accord possible
avec l’UE, a savoir la création d’une ” zone de libre-échange
approfondi et complet ”. Linkevicius a ajouté ” respecter le choix
du pays, mais il est impossible pour l’Arménie d’adhérer aux deux
associations ”.

DARFOUR : LE CORPS D’UN CASQUE BLEU DISPARU A Ã~ITÃ~I RETROUVÃ~I
Le porte-parole du Secrétaire général de l’ONU, Martin Nesirky,
annonce aujourd’hui que le corps d’un Casque bleu a été retrouvé
au Darfour, une dizaine de jours après avoir été emporté par des
inondations. ” La MINUAD a indiqué que l’une de ses patrouilles
avait retrouvé le corps d’un de ses quatre soldats portés disparus
au cours de ces inondations ”, annonce-t-il.

En Turquie, le pot de peinture comme arme de protestation massive
Depuis la fin du mois d’aoÔt, Istanbul et quelques dizaines d’autres
villes turques se couvrent d’arcs-en-ciel. La nuit, munis de pots
de peinture de toutes les couleurs, des Stambouliotes peignent des
escaliers et certains passages. Un mouvement artistique qui tend a
se transformer en mouvement politique : la poursuite, plus calme,
des protestations de la place Taksim, réprimées en juin.

Les Arméniens de Syrie préoccupés par l’effet négatif de possibles
frappes aériennes américaines La situation autour de la Syrie,
où les forces de l’opposition se livrent a des combats armés
contre les forces gouvernementales fidèles au président Bachar
al-Assad, s’est aggravée a la suite de l’utilisation présumée
d’armes chimiques le 21 aoÔt. Les Ã~Itats-Unis affirment posséder
des preuves concluantes que le régime d’Assad a utilisé du gaz sarin
près de Damas ce jour tuant 1429 civils, dont 426 enfants. Pendant
ce temps, les deux factions belligérantes en Syrie ont accusé leur
adversaire de l’horrible attentat.

Retour a la rubrique

IRAVUNK: NEW SECT IN ARMENIA ADVOCATES INCEST AND PEDOPHILIA

10:43 06/09/2013 ” DAILY PRESS

A new sect has penetrated into Armenia from Ukraine advocating incest
and pedophilia, Iravunk daily says.

This sect is very dangerous because its members not only advocate
perversion but also incite people to suicide, the paper adds.

Source: Panorama.am

Trend, Azerbaijan
Sept 5 2013

ARMENIA, RUSSIA DISCUSS MILITARY-TECHNICAL COOPERATION

The First Deputy Minister of Defense of Armenia Davit Tonoyan discussed
the Russian-Armenian military and military-technical cooperation with
the Deputy Minister of Defense of Russia Anatoly Antonov in Moscow
on Thursday, Russian Defence Ministry Press Service and Information
Directorate said, Novosti-Armenia reported.

“The sides also exchanged their views on implementation of the existing
agreements in the field of conventional arms control in Europe,”
the statement said.

ARMENIA HAS THROWN PUTIN AS NAUGHTY DOG, RETURNING TO SIGNING OF AN ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT WITH EU

Azerbaijan Business Center
Sept 5 2013

Baku , Fineko/abc.az. No sooner had President Serzh Sargsyan to return
from Moscow to Yerevan, as his administration announced: despite the
promises made to Russian leader Vladimir Putin, Armenia is going to
initial an Association Agreement with the EU in Vilnius this November.

Of course, as a naughty dog, Armenia accompanied this statement with
tons of verbal garbage and conditions that no one will implement
knowingly.

“The initialing of the Association Agreement with the EU within the
framework of Vilnius summit “Eastern Partnership” still remains
in our political agenda,” stated yesterday Armenian Presidential
Administration’s head Vigen Sarkisyan.

He does not see contradictions between the plans to sign the agreement
and to join the Customs Union of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia.

“Of course, we know the view and approach that membership in the
Customs Union can be an obstacle to agreement on the formation of a
free and comprehensive free trade area with the EU. Armenia’s position
is well known: we’ve always believed that one should try to reconcile
these positions. In case it is impossible, we’ll take out of this
agreement the most important thing that was in the European direction,”
Sarkisyan said, by referring to the main thing the reforms aimed at
the social, political modernization and strengthening of the system
of government.

Immediately after the declaration of plans on joining the Customs Union
by Yerevan Foreign Affairs Minister of Lithuania Linas Linkyavichus
said that this makes it impossible the free trade between the EU and
Armenia. Now we need to wait for Lithuania’s statement as the summit
host party whether it is possible to sign an association agreement
“by half”.

Armenia’s projected appeals to Azerbaijan’s experience (such borrowings
are traditional for the Armenian mentality), which brought the issue
of free trade beyond the frames of negotiations on an association
agreement with the EU, will not work. Azerbaijan, not being a member
of the World Trade Organization, simply does not have legal basis
for negotiations about free trade with the EU.

Whatever it was the Armenia’s statements made for a couple of days show
everybody from Lisbon to Vladivostok, why the Armenian-Azerbaijani
Nagorno Karabakh conflict is not resolved by negotiations, which
are conducted with the support of international mediators. Only
inconsistent and “naughty” position of Armenia’s should be blamed
for that.

OPPOSITION PROTESTS ARMENIA’S TURN TOWARDS CUSTOMS UNION

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Sept 5 2013

5 September 2013 – 1:33pm

Armenian opposition rallied protests at the President’s Residence
in Yerevan, provoked by President Serzh Sargsyan’s plan to join the
Customs Union, as he stated in Moscow yesterday, Panarmenian.net
reports.

David Sanasaryan of the Heritage Party noted that it was not a mass
demonstration organized beforehand. People came to warn that they
were against the initiative.

The police detained Vilen Gabriyelyan, Alen Manukyan, David Sanasaryan,
Karen Arutyunyan, Suren Saakyan. A total of 9 protesters were detained
and taken to the Arabkir Police Station.

The protests were highlighted by Levon Bargesyan, head of the
Asparez Club, Paruyr Ayrikyan, head of the Union for National
Self-Determination. The latter pointed out that the decision to
join the Customs Union had been made by President Sargsyan, not by
the population.

The demonstration was organized with the help of Facebook. About 100
people took part in the protests.

RUSSIA PILES PRESSURE ON FORMER SOVIET SATELLITES TO DROP EU ASPIRATIONS

The Sofia Globe, Bulgaria
Sept 5 2013

Written by Alex Bivol

As the Vilnius summit of EU’s Eastern Partnership draws nearer, at
which several former Soviet states are expected to sign association
agreements with the EU, Russia appears to have stepped up efforts to
pull those same former Soviet states closer and into its own Customs
Union, with mixed results.

On the surface, it appears to be a simple choice between which free
trade agreement would offer those countries a better economic incentive
– but where the EU can wield the carrot of foreign aid, Russia leans
on the stick of threatening to withhold energy resources (and, unlike
the EU, could not care less about asking for lasting reforms).

In the long run, Russian president Vladimir Putin sees the Customs
Union as the building block of the Eurasian Economic Union – outlining
its key institutions in an article he penned for Russia’s newspaper
of record, Izvestia, in October 2011.

Despite pointing out in that piece that that the new entity was not
meant to hijack the EU aspirations of former Soviet republics, it has
become clear that at the very least the Eurasian Union is meant as
a counterweight to the EU, but also a way to bring the former Soviet
states closer into Russia’s orbit in a way that the Commonwealth of
Independent States (which former out of the ashes of the Soviet Union
in December 1991) never quite managed.

One of the four countries expected to initial an association and
free trade agreement with the EU at the Eastern Partnership summit
in Vilnius in November, Armenia, has now given in to Russian wooing,
announcing that it would join the Moscow-led Customs Union.

Given the government change in Georgia, which has lead to the thawing
of relations with Russia, Tbilisi could be expected to follow suit.

Indeed, pro-Russian prime minister Bidzina Ivanishvili said on
September 4 that his government was “studying” the customs union issue,
although that statement was later clarified to mean that membership
was not an option, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reported.

But in Moldova, Russia’s efforts have been unsuccessful so far,
prompting a deputy Russian prime minister to make not-so-subtle threats
that the country could find itself freezing come winter. And the big
prize, Ukraine, appears also out of the Kremlin’s grasp.

Abrupt announcement

Armenian president Serzh Sargsyan’s announcement on September 3,
following talks with Putin in Moscow, appeared to take the EU by
surprise.

“We look forward to understanding better from Armenia what their
intentions are and how they wish to ensure compatibility between these
and the commitments undertaken through the Association Agreement and
the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area,” the European Commission
said in a statement. “Once this consultation has been completed,
we will draw our conclusions on the way forward.”

The bafflement was best summed up by Swedish foreign minister Carl
Bildt, a frequent visitor to Eastern Partnership countries in recent
years, who tweeted: “Armenia negotiated 4 years to get Association
Agreement with EU. Now President prefers Kremlin to Brussels.”

It appears security concerns – Armenia still has an unsolved dispute
over Nagorno-Karabakh with Azerbaijan – might have played the decisive
role in Sargsyan’s decision, according interpretations by some EU
politicians, like British MEP Charles Tannock, who told the BBC
on September 5 that concern about Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan
appeared to have influenced Sargsyan more than any other issue.

Sargsyan’s own statement at the joint news conference with Putin could
certainly be interpreted to lend credence to such claims. “Twenty
years ago, Armenia in cooperation with Russia and other CIS countries
established its military security structure in the format of the
Collective Security Treaty Organization. Through these decades,
the structure proved its viability and efficiency,” he said.

“Currently, our CSTO partners are forming a new platform for economic
cooperation. I have said on many occasions that participating in one
military security structure makes it unfeasible and inefficient to
stay away from the relevant geo-economic area.”

Under pressure

Moldova is home to the other major “frozen conflict” dating back
to the immediate aftermath of the Soviet Union’s dissolution, with
the de-facto independent (albeit unrecognised by the international
community) breakaway region of Transnistria, or Pridnestrovie, as
its Moscow-backed government calls it.

Over the past two decades, Moscow has opposed any efforts to remove
its troops in the region and replace them with international
peacekeepers. Russia has also rebuffed any plans to settle the
conflict, other than its own plan to form a federation, on equal
footing, between Moldova and Transnistria.

Moscow has also given the breakaway region hundreds of millions of
roubles in financial aid, but, curiously, insists that the bill for
all the gas shipped to Transnistria – where consumption outweighs
that in the rest of Moldova – be footed by authorities in Chisinau.

Moldova is entirely dependent on Russian gas supply. On September 3,
Russian deputy prime minister Dmitry Rogozin, who is also the Russian
envoy to the region, said during a visit to Chisinau that “energy
is important, especially to stop the cold; I hope you won’t freeze
in winter.”

At the same time, a senior official at Russia’s consumer watchdog
Rospotrebnadzor, Kremlin’s weapon of choice in blocking foreign
imports (such as Moldovan wine in 2006, or anything from Georgia until
recenty), raised the prospect of a new ban on Moldovan products –
prompting Bildt to tweet “Threatening a small nation to cut off gas
and to block exports – is this Europe 2013?”

Trade war

Most recently, Rospotrebnadzor banned, in August, all confectionery
made by Ukrainian firm Roshen, claiming it contained carcinogens.

Similar checks carried out in several other countries reportedly
found no problems.

Chocolate is not the only Ukrainian products not welcome on the
Russian market – Russia recently scrapped the quota for Ukrainian
steel pipes. Furthermore, some Ukrainian companies have complained
in recent weeks about harassment by Russian customs officials.

Most recently, Russian authorities plan to bill Ukraine for all the
taxes Ukraine has collected from goods delivered to Russia’s Black
Sea fleet, stationed under a long-term lease on Ukrainian territory,
Russian daily Nezavisimaya Gazeta reported on September 4. Russia
estimates the figure at an annual $10 million to $15 million.

(A dispute there could end costing Russia more than Ukraine, since
Moscow pays only $98 million a year to lease the fleet’s base, built
during the Soviet times – Ukrainian opposition parties have long
been demanding a review of the leasing agreement, which currently
runs until 2042.)

Separately, Moscow is demanding $7 billion from Ukraine under the
terms of the long-term gas contract Kyiv has with Gazprom, claiming
that Ukraine has failed to buy the amounts stipulated under the
“take-or-pay” clause of the contract – as part of its efforts to
convince Ukraine to turn over its gas grid to Gazprom.

Negotiations with Russia on a “bilateral consortium” to manage the gas
grid – relinquishing control to Gazprom in all but name – reportedly
came close to being finalised earlier this year, but the legislative
amendments that would have allowed the privatisation to go ahead were
never tabled. Since then, Moscow has stepped up its rhetoric against
Kyiv, hinting at a possible repeat of gas disruptions like the ones
in 2006 and 2009.

Ukraine is one of the two largest former Soviet republics – Kazakhstan
has long been on board with Moscow’s initiatives and is a founding
member of the Customs Union – and would represent a coup for the
Kremlin both politically and economically, especially given that
Ukraine trades as much with the EU as it does with Russia.

Ironically, the presidency of Viktor Yanukovich, elected on the ticket
of the pro-Russian Party of Regions, has not brought quite the results
that Moscow expected when he took office in 2010.

AGAINST ALL ODDS, FEMALE REPORTERS LEAD IN SYRIA

The News Today (Bangladesh.)
September 4, 2013 Wednesday

Women both domestic and foreign are bringing to light the untold
stories of Syria’s brutal civil war. Still audible through the
increasingly sectarian cacophony of Syria’s ongoing civil war, a
small but influential group of Syrian and foreign women are telling
the stories of the country’s destruction in unique and meaningful ways.

Present in all aspects of the conflict, women are penning the history
of Syria.

>From the very beginnings of the initial and peaceful opposition to
Bashar al-Assad’s Baathist regime, Syrian women have played a powerful
role. Samar Yazbek, a female Syrian writer and journalist-herself an
Alawite, a member of a religious group traditionally associated with
the regime-was among the women who initiated oppositional activism.

Women, she says, were among the first who went out and protested:
“They organized these protests, formed coordinations and organizational
bodies.”

According to Yazbek, as the peaceful protests turned to armed
resistance and then into civil war, the role of women in the conflict
changed. “Syrian women didn’t pick up arms, but kept helping the
revolution by documenting violations, organizing, writing and in
the media.”

Nour Kelze, a young photographer from Aleppo, is one of these women.

An English teacher before the revolution, she began documenting
the revolution with her cellphone before being given a camera by a
professional photographer. She now spends her days on the front lines
as photo stringer for Reuters.

The visible role of women in the early stages of the uprising is what
drew American reporter Anna Day to the conflict, which she has been
covering for two years. She says her involvement was mobilized by
her original connections with women in the resistance via social media.

“It was exciting, and as a young woman myself, I was incredibly
inspired and felt privileged to tell the story of my peers in Syria
fighting for their rights.”

Historically, Syria has a reputation for being a more equal society
for women than other Arabic-speaking countries. This attitude, combined
with the absence of sexual violence like that faced by female reporters
covering Egypt and of the inherently male-dominated and militarily
embedded reporting of the Afghan and Iraqi wars, means the Syrian
conflict has drawn an unprecedented number of female foreign reporters.

For some, like journalist Jenan Moussa, based in Dubai, United
Arab Emirates, or American reporter Clarissa Ward, the conflict has
brought them wide acclaim. Others haven’t been so fortunate. Sunday
Times journalist Marie Colvin was killed by shelling in Homs during
the early days of the war, and just over a year later, Yara Abbas,
a prominent female war reporter for Syrian state-owned Al-Ikhbariyah
TV, was murdered by sniper fire in the same province.

Armenian-American journalist Lara Setrakian, founder of the digital
media project Syria Deeply, says gender is not a disadvantage in
reporting in the dangerous and unforgiving environment. “I think
at this point it is a fallacy to assume that women cannot approach
rebels or even rebel commanders in the field. I don’t think there is
any gender barrier to accessing people involved in this conflict.”

In fact, Setrakian says, women bring a unique approach to the story.

She cites female reporters’ unwavering dedication to the ongoing
conflict and says those she works with are “extremely patient and
diligent.” Comparing the Syrian conflict to a patient to a chronic
illness, she says this approach is essential. “You don’t just leave the
patient while it’s breathing. You pay attention. The women journalists
I’ve seen working in Syria have that kind of consistency and ethic.”

In conflict, women often bear the brunt of tremendous amounts of
suffering while attempting to maintain family life-and Syria is no
exception. For Yazbek, the most tragic stories are those of women
who struggle to preserve a normal home existence despite the violence.

“Most important are the women who still live out a normal life
under the shelling,” she says. Women reporters are usually those who
represent female civilians’ stories. Yazbek and Day try to give these
women a voice in their reporting.

The conflict has also brought suffering to the Syrian journalists
and activists covering it. Last month Human Rights Watch released a
report detailing the torture suffered by 10 female activists in Syria.

Accordingly, for Yazbek, Syria is no longer her physical home-she has
been living in exile in Paris since 2011. “I don’t live in a place
now, I live in the idea of a country and a revolution. My home is
my own head, filled with blood, the cries of children, and with the
sound of airplane bombs.”

For Kelze, the price of war was physical. In February she was hit by
shelling and broke her leg. “The shell hit the wall that I was using
as a shelter to cover myself. There was half of a second when I felt
like all I could see was black.” She said about the incident: “I tried
to stand up when I realized that there was a problem with my leg.”

Even in the immediate aftermath of her injury, Kelze’s first instinct
was to tell the story: “I kept shouting, ‘Where is my camera?'”

For Western journalists, the impact of covering the conflict has
been a desire to find creative ways to tell the story. Frustrated by
lack of coverage and the limits of mainstream news, Setrakian left
a successful reporting job to start Syria Deeply. The online project
compiles news, interviews, social media, and background information
to provide a detailed picture of the conflict.

“I could see that this was a chronic story. It’s hard to follow,
and it’s a very complex crisis. I was reporting to television, radio,
and Web, and I could see that across those platforms we still weren’t
really capturing the essence of what was happening.” She continues
to develop the Syria Deeply platform and hopes to expand it to other
news subjects in the future.

Day, shocked by apathy from both news outlets and audiences, has
used social media to change the way she tells stories. “I did one
experiment where I shared Instagram photos that showed snippets of
some of the most haunting stories I covered over the course of an
assignment.” Her project created a cohesive narrative arc focused
on the civilian catastrophe, she says: “I found this brief but
personalized way of telling the story to be effective in piquing the
interest of people in my networks that may not follow world politics.”

As the conflict drags well into its third year with little sign of
resolution, these dedicated women from varied backgrounds and nations
all want to keep working to find new ways to get people to listen.

Each has a different hope for Syria and for herself. Yazbek laments
the rise in sectarianism, which she blames on regime strategy. She
insists she will return to Syria and be involved in the reconstruction
of the country she has sacrificed so much for. Of herself, she says:
“I have only one dream: the fall of Bashar.”

WHY ARMENIA SHOULD HAVE CHOSEN THE PATH TO EU

Thursday, September 5th, 2013

The EU says its association agreement is not compatible with Russia’s
customs union

BY ANNETTE MOSKOFIAN

LONDON-Armenia has faced many challenges since its independence
and being a landlocked country surrounded by hostile neighbors
with few natural resources has tried to survive. Survival has been
the aim of this tiny fragile state and pursuit of its security has
been a priority. It has survived economically through international
aids, through investments made by Armenians living in Diaspora and
through marginal foreign investment. Through privatization of its
state owned industries most of its assets were either sold or given
away to Russian owned companies in return for much needed gas and
fuel. “These concessions have in part resulted in Russian dominance
in the economic sector, overdependence on Russia for Armenia’s energy
needs, and the perpetuation of Armenian submissiveness to Russian
interest”(McGinnity 2010).

To protect its borders from Turkey and Azerbaijan and concerned for
Nagorno Karabakh’s security, Russia has been a valuable ally. Armenia
has relied on Russian military assistance and allowed the placement of
a Russian base in Gyumri. The most notable bilateral defense agreement
between Russia and Armenia is the membership of the Collective Security
Treaty Organization (CSTO) by which Moscow committed to the defense
of Armenia in case of an attack. Armenia regards these measures as
key elements of its national security.

Russia has provided this assistance because Armenia is geopolitically
important. Armenia is its only ally in the region, as Georgia and
Azerbaijan are looking more to the West. It is also strategically
important for Russia to have a presence and dominance in an area rich
in oil and gas, traditionally part of its imperial control. Russia
also wants to contain its old adversary Turkey from becoming a regional
power and control expansion of US influence in the region.

Loss of Armenia as an ally would lead to Russia’s loss of influence
in the region. Armenia plays a significant role in achieving these
objectives as it is the only country in the region that has strong
ties with Russia.

There is mutual interest for both Armenia and Russia to have
a strategic alliance but Armenia is the weaker partner in this
mutually beneficial partnership. There is a dichotomy on views
about this alliance. Some believe that Armenia has no choice in the
matter, insisting that it’s the only way to guarantee its security,
while the opposing view believes it threatens the sovereignty of
the country. To counter balance this unhealthy dependence Armenia
adopted “complimentary” or “multivector” foreign policy, to create
more alliances and multilateral cooperation with Iran, EU, US and
even NATO, important for enhancing its security and survival.

Since the end of the 90’s Armenia has pursued the possibility to join
the EU. Through the EU-Armenia Partnership and Cooperation Agreement
(1999) and in negotiations on free trade agreements with several
Eastern Partnership (EaP), European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) and Deep
and Comprehensive Free Trade Area Agreements (DCFTA) it has secured
funding from the EU (around 157 million euros from 2011-2013). The EU
has become Armenia’s largest trading partner accounting for around 30%
of its total trade. Its relations with the EU would have promoted
Armenia’s transition to a full-fledged democracy, aiding economic
growth, poverty reduction, strengthening democratic structures, and
good governance. In a poll carried out in 2005, 72% of the population
showed a desire to join the EU, hoping that this might give them
an opportunity for improving their standard of living. Armenia’s
chosen path was a logical move which was part of the trend of other
Eastern European countries, giving it a chance to break away from the
post-Soviet empire. This was not necessarily contradictory with the
strong military ties with Russia. However, Russia has tried to bully
Armenia in joining the Eurasian Economic Community, a brainchild of
Putin to raise its prestige in the world and reassert its influence
and sustain a leading role in post-soviet countries. Armenia chose
to have an observer status instead without wanting to offend Russia
and had shown a preference to join EU. The EU had made it clear that
membership in the Eurasian Customs Union was incompatible with the
DCFTA and the EU Association Agreement. Armenia’s efforts to join the
EU were not well received by the Kremlin as it started blackmailing
Armenia and used tactics such as an increase in gas prices by 18%.

What went on behind closed doors when President Sarkisian and Putin
met at the beginning of this week is not clear. However the dramatic
announcement that shortly followed this meeting made it clear that
Armenia had decided to join the Eurasian Union: a union still with
few members and no substantial activity as opposed to the EU with
its long history.

It would have been to Armenia’s benefit if it had kept its security
alliance with Russia and had developed its economy by joining the EU.

The EU would have also aided the democratization process of the
country. But instead without any public referendum or a discussion
in the National Assembly, Sarkisian made a political u-turn and made
a very important decision that will have long term consequences.

There is a tendency for Armenian government to consistently make
concessions to Russia. Armenia could have leveraged its strategic
importance to gain a stronger and more independent stance. However,
the interests of the pro-Russian elite do not allow the country
to see true independence and implement policies that will serve the
interest of the nation on the long run. Instead it has become a colony
of Russia under its hegemonic domination. Carrying forward a more
balanced multilateral foreign policy would have been advantageous
for Armenia but this decision has shattered any hope of that.