Vahram Shahinian Appointed Head Of Special Investigation Service

VAHRAM SHAHINIAN APPOINTED HEAD OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATION SERVICE

Friday,
May 03

According to a decree of Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan, Andranik
Mirzoyan has been relieved of his position as Head of the Special
Investigation Service of Armenia.

The presidential press service reports that A. Mirzoyan was relieved
of his position based on Article 12 part 1 point 2 of the RA Law on
Special Investigation Service.

By another decree of the Armenian president, Vahram Shahinian has been
appointed Head of the Special Investigation Service of Armenia.

TODAY, 20:28

Aysor.am

Government Has A Chance

GOVERNMENT HAS A CHANCE

“What will be after the elections?” the government and the public ask
one another. People in government hope that everything will calm down
after the elections, and it will be possible to finalize efforts for
the next 3-4 years. More optimistic representatives of the society say,
analyzing the situation, that everything will begin after the election.

Armenia has appeared in a situation where one can only dream of a
quiet life in a marsh. Several global processes at once affected
Armenia and they will certainly affect the government. These are the
redistribution of capital, de-offshorization of economy, intensifying
fight in the region for influence and disastrous social polarization
and change of generation.

As a result, over 40% of the population of Armenia said no to the
government, claims to check lawfulness of property of officials are
made, and the government is trying to rid of the criminal burden.

After the election all these processes will intensify. The government
has nothing to fear. It will have several free years to prove its
efficiency, and its main partner could be the civic activists, not
the discredited political parties, including the RPA.

Demonization is as bad as idealization. The society feels how sincere
the intentions of politicians are are to what extent they are in line
with their own interests. Unlike the political parties which are too
stiff regarding political reconciliation, the society is more sensitive
to positive tendencies. However, the society equal refuses imitation.

If it ends up with a reshuffle, the government will not rest over
the next three years but will have to mend holes every week because
public protest will multiply. The society expects a systemic approach.

The economic policy of the government must change. Now the government
supports only three sectors: banks, mines and import. These sectors
flourish while SMEs, local production are suffocated, poverty,
unemployment and emigration grow.

The government will be demonized entirely unless the economic concept
is reviewed and Armenia continues to be a banana republic with a
growing foreign debt. The government has a low rating now and it is
concentrated in some government buildings. The government has not
even dared hold a final rally before the election. The reason might be
the previous rally which ended in the balloon blast injuring hundreds
of people.

However, there is a chance to boost the rating through real steps.

Such steps are welcome by the society. For example, the society has
approved with silence the dismissal of Nersik Nazaryan, but such
steps do not have a clear paradigm.

Naira Hayrumyan 17:59 03/05/2013 Story from Lragir.am News:

http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/29782

War Reporting – A Veteran’s Guide: Shot At, Seized By A Murderous Mo

WAR REPORTING – A VETERAN’S GUIDE: SHOT AT, SEIZED BY A MURDEROUS MOB AND CHASED BY KIDNAPPERS…

As part of our Voices in Danger campaign, Robert Fisk reveals how he
lived to tell the tale – and why the world is becoming a more
dangerous place

ROBERT FISK

Thursday 2 May 2013

This article is part of the series Voices in Danger, which aims to
highlight the plight of journalists working in difficult conditions
around the world.

Years ago, a colleague rang me for advice. She was being sent to
Baghdad in advance of a US threat to attack Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. But
should she go? Were the dangers simply so great that she should not
risk her life? I gave her the only advice I could – the decision was
up to her, but she should remember one thing: she was going to
Baghdad to report, not to die.

That’s what I said to myself last month when I headed back to Syria.

I’m going there to report, not to die. I said this during the Lebanese
civil war, during Israeli invasions, in the Algerian war of the 90s,
in the Iran-Iraq war, in the 1991 liberation of Kuwait, in the 2003 US
invasion of Iraq, in Bosnia and Serbia and in the Armenian-Karabach
war. But is it really that simple?

I used to ponder an interesting equation. If you drive fast when you
are under shellfire, are you safer than if you drive slowly? The
faster you go, the more places you can be hit. The slower, the fewer –
but there’s more time to be hit. Work that out. And here’s another
one: the more wars you cover, the more experienced you are in staying
alive. But of course, the more wars you cover, the greater are the
chances of being killed.

When in 2001 I was beaten by a mob close to the Afghan border – and
they were trying to kill me – I do remember asking myself how long it
would take to die. Then I recalled a friend in civil war Lebanon who
told me that when in trouble, “whatever you do, don’t do nothing.” And
I bashed one of the attackers with my fist. I knocked his tooth out;
the scar is still on the back of my hand. And it allowed enough time
for a Muslim cleric to intervene and save me.

But there are no set rules. Wearing a flak jacket is often good
advice, though I remember a colleague who was killed because he was
wearing one. The bullet penetrated his neck and then became trapped
inside him by the steel jacket, revolving round and round until it had
destroyed his torso. Besides, I don’t like turning up on a street
corner among dozens of unprotected civilians, the flak jacket sending
a vicious message to every man and woman there: this man’s life, this
Westerner’s life is more precious, more valuable than your miserable
lives. So yes, I often prefer to wear my ordinary clothes, no flak
jacket, no helmet, just merge in with the rest. Faster on my feet,
too. Running with a cumbersome jacket on is not easy – though the
foreign editors who insist that you wear it rarely discover this.

But then again, back to the old question. Is it worth it? Every time I
come back from a dangerous assignment, I do get that extraordinary
feeling; that I got my story and came back alive. Churchill captured
it quite well when he said that there was nothing so satisfying as
being shot at without effect.

But. I’ll repeat that. But. But surely none of my colleagues who died
reporting wars ever felt a premonition of their fate – or if they did,
I don’t recall them talking about it. Some, in Lebanon, I knew well.

One was stabbed to death with an ice-pick. Several were killed by
shells. One died in an air crash. Another either died from shrapnel
wounds – or was shot to death as he lay wounded. We never found out.

Another committed suicide after he had left the Middle East. And of
course, their deaths are a warning to us all. Life is not cheap. Death
is.

A lot of journalists were killed at the start of the Bosnian war. Was
this bad luck, the ferocious nature of the Bosnian war or because
there were too many first-time war reporters covering the conflict? I
fear a lot of the younger journalists who die arrive with only one
experience of war: the cinema. And if you believe in movies, well, the
hero usually survives, doesn’t he? War is survivable after all. At the
end, you just go home. Warning: you are not in the movies.

Bouts of “hostile environment” courses might help. I’m not so sure. In
Beirut in the late 1980s, when journalists were being abducted almost
by the week, I adopted the Fisk method of staying free. Drive fast.

And never, ever let them grab you. The one time they tried – a beaten
up old car in Madame Curie Street, guns waved from the window – I was
by immense good fortune recalling an interview I’d conducted that very
morning with a Lebanese man who had been kidnapped. That was the
moment their car tried to drive me off the road. So I pretended to
slow down, then accelerated past them, crashed the front of their car
and sped off through the streets. It took me several minutes before I
realised they didn’t know the area as well as I did. But I was sure I
had been wounded. There was a film of moisture all over me. It was my
own perspiration.

The trouble is that being bombed from the air has always been my
greatest danger in Lebanon – usually by those warriors of the Israeli
air force in their attacks on civilian targets. Unfortunately,
however, the lads and lasses running the ‘hostile environment’ courses
generally don’t tell you what to do in an Israeli air raid. Or, in
Serbia, a NATO air raid. Odd, isn’t it? I suspect that they see the
Israelis and NATO as the ‘good guys’. So they only train you to
confront the horrible, generally Muslim ‘bad guys’ who might want to
spirit you away for a few years – or kill you if their demands are not
met. The Hizballah never touched me in Lebanon – mainly, I suspect,
because I knew many of the kidnap gangs. So those courses – if they
had existed then – wouldn’t have been of much help.

I also fear that we journos make too much of our own suffering. Not
those who die. They are indeed ‘our’ martyrs. They belong to us. They
remind the world that reporters should be honoured for their
sacrifice. But I’ve also met a few who say they suffer from
psychological problems. Quite possibly true. But I have an unhappy
problem with journalists who have to ‘come to terms’ with what they
see, who need ‘closure’ before they ‘move on’. Because if they don’t
like covering wars, they can fly home business class with a glass of
champagne before takeoff. The people who do suffer are the ordinary
people whom we report on. They often have pariah passports, unable to
flee their own land, fearing each day the death of their loved ones
and themselves. No ‘closure’ for them, unless they die.

For reporters – and those that work with them, drivers, fixers,
translators – I fear that wars are becoming more lethal. Bombs are
bigger, more destructive. More bullets fill the air. More and more
precedents – the bombing and shelling of hospitals (Israel in Lebanon,
NATO in Serbia, Syria in Syria), of whole civilian villages, of road
bridges and shops and factories – mean there are fewer and fewer safe
places for us to go. Most armies use civilians as ‘human shields’. Not
just the Hizballah but the Israelis too – why else did they hide their
tanks beside homes in southern Lebanon during their five invasions of
Lebanon? I even recall ringing the Lebanese army in 2006 and pleading
with them to move an armoured vehicle seeking cover beneath a tree
opposite my apartment block. They rightly paid no attention to my
whinging. Soldiers – not civilians or reporters – come first in war.

But yes, there is something we can do to make ourselves safer. Tell
the world, repeatedly, that we are decent people, we journos, that
recording the massacre of the innocent might lessen the chances of the
next massacre, that talking to all sides is not an unworthy cause,
that sometimes being neutral and unbiased on the side of those who
suffer is also a good thing. When I started reporting wars in 1976, we
were not targets. But we have become so. In Lebanon in 1983, a
Palestinian gunman threw my press card onto the road because he no
longer respected journalists. Then reporters became kidnap victims.

Then targets for militia firearms – in Bosnia, especially – until a
dead journo wasn’t so unusual after all. Hardly a war now goes by
without one of us dying. Or two. Or more. Think Iraq. Think Syria.

Yes, I suppose it goes with the job. Reporters were killed in the
Second World War. Richard Dimbleby survived a fire-bomb raid in a
Lancaster over Hamburg but Ernie Pile was killed in the Pacific and an
AP man who dropped behind enemy lines with US commandoes was executed
by a German firing squad. Reporting wars is not romantic. It’s awful.

But at least we are witnesses. At least no-one can say afterwards: we
didn’t know, nobody told us.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/war-reporting–a-veterans-guide-shot-at-seized-by-a-murderous-mob-and-chased-by-kidnappers-8601590.html

Tajik Scholar Shavkat Kasymov: "We Again Must Raise The Issue Of Gui

TAJIK SCHOLAR SHAVKAT KASYMOV: “WE AGAIN MUST RAISE THE ISSUE OF GUILT AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR THER 1915 GENOCIDE”

14:08, May 3, 2013
By Maneh Hakobyan

A much discussed topic of late is the need to place genocide studies
on a firm scientific footing.

Parallels are made with the Jewish holocaust, an event that was
recognized as a genocide soon after WW II. Germany has still not been
able to wrest itself from the moral and material responsibility it
has been forced to assume as a result of the correct policies followed
by the Jewish people.

Concurrently, as we approach the 100th anniversary of the 1915 Armenian
Genocide, we are still attempting to present that event to the world
and convince the international community that it indeed took place,
for the most part without scientific substantiation.

There are hundreds of Holocaust studies centers while we Armenians have
a mere two or three such centers that are indexing and disseminating
three international journals ((Journal of Genocide Research, Holocaust
and Genocide Studies and Genocide Studies and Prevention) Presently,
, there are no academics from Armenia with any published articles in
any of them.

Naturally, we have certain excuses from this lack. The first is that
in 1915 we didn’t possess the science and thus we couldn’t follow
a scientific approach to the issue. Then there was the Soviet state
policy that created obstacles in this field. But what excuses can we
point to during the past twenty years of Armenian independence?

Certain individual benefactors have appeared who are trying to spur
the development of Genocide studies in Armenia.

There are the recent joint efforts of the Tashir Foundatin and the
“We Demand Greter Financing of the Science” Facebook page. They have
organized an awards ceremony to promote the publication of academic
articles by RA and foreign citizens in international journals on the
eve of the 100th anniversary of the 1915 Genocide.

In addition to Vahram Ayvazyan (a 2012 graduate of the university
program of the Zoryan Institute’s Genocide & Human Rights University
Program) and Tigran Sarukhanyan (a senior researcher at the RA Academy
of Sciences Archeology and Ethnography Institute) , another person
who applied to participate in the competition is Shavkat Kasymov from
Kyrgyzstan and now a graduate student at the University of Notre Dame,
Indiana, USA, who submitted the essay, “The example of the Armenian
genocide and the role of the millet system in its execution”.

I recently spoke with Shavkat Kasymov.

The journal Social Identities recently published your essay “The
example of the Armenian genocide and the role of the millet system
in its execution”. Why did you write this article on the Armenian
Genocide?

I wrote it because I felt there was a need to pay respect to the
victims of that unfortunate event, especially given the upcoming 100th
anniversary. The Genocide caused the death of 1.5 million people. I
believe we must again raise the issue of guilt and responsibility
given that on the basis of numerous analyses, including mine, the
Armenian Genocide was the targeted and premeditated work of the Ottoman
Empire. The goal, among others, was to wipe out all Christian peoples,
especially Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians.

Can you briefly explain the main arguments of your essay?

The article discusses the two main theoretical approaches to genocide
and why one supersedes the other, using the example of the Armenian
Genocide.

I wanted to illustrate the validity of the strategic killing
model proposed by Benjamin Valentino, which underscores the
primary significance of elite group interests in the initiation
and implementation of genocidal policies against certain ethnic or
political groups.

I argue that the Armenian genocide was primarily driven by the policies
of the Young Turks’ regime whose main objective was to rid the Ottoman
Empire of the Armenian population and to consolidate a power base. I
substantiate the superiority of the strategic killing model over
the national upheaval thesis brought forward by Barbara Harff in her
study on genocide, and support the main argument that genocide is a
well-organized political strategy of power elites which is aimed at
transforming a society through the deportation or extermination of
a certain ethnic or political group that is seen as a threat to them.

The Young Turk regime regarded the Armenian minority as an obstacle
to its goal of pan-Turkism, which resulted in the creation of modern
Turkey. To substantiate my claims I used empirical facts and secondary
sources and theories.

Are you planning to write more on this topic?

Yes, I would like to write additional articles on te Armenian Genocide,
especially when I locate leading sources and empirical evidence.

I feel that we should not only approach the issue of genocide from
a historical perspective, but rather from a genocide studies point
of view. The long-term objective of this approach must be to craft
and implement such policies that will avert similar brutalities in
the future.

http://hetq.am/eng/interviews/26127/tajik-scholar-shavkat-kasymov-%E2%80%9Cwe-again-must-raise-the-issue-of-guilt-and-responsibility-for-ther-1915-genocide%E2%80%9D.html

Raffi Hovhannisian Meets U.S. Ambassador John Heffern

RAFFI HOVHANNISIAN MEETS U.S. AMBASSADOR JOHN HEFFERN

16:43, 3 May, 2013

YEREVAN, MAY 3, ARMENPRESS. The Head of “Heritage” Party Raffi
Hovhannisian had a meeting with the Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary
Ambassador of the United States of America to the Republic of Armenia
John Heffern. Raffi Hovhannisian’s Headquarters informed “Armenpress”
that at the course of the meeting the interlocutors discussed issues
regarding the internal and foreign policy of Armenia and various issues
of mutual interest as well. The sides paid special attention on the
upcoming Yerevan Council of Aldermen elections, which are scheduled
to be held on May 5. They laid a heavy emphasis on the legitimacy of
the elections and their conformity with the international democratic
standards.

ARF: The RPA Gives Out 20 Thousand Drams and the PAP Gives Out 10

The Armenian Revolutionary Party (ARF) Office: The Republican Party of
Armenia (RPA) Gives Out 20 Thousand Drams and the PAP Gives Out 10
Thousand Drams

May 3 2013

Residents are threatened that unless they vote for the RPA, they will
demand the money given last time; they film everything and see who
votes for whom In buildings at 50, 50/1, 50/2, 52 Arshakunyats Avenue
– in the neighborhood called `Yonjalakh Triangular,’ to be exact –
representatives of the PAP give out 10 thousand drams to the
residents. The residents themselves informed the ARF campaign office
in Shengavit about this. The office informed that Sargis
Kurkchyan, a former head of the public utility, is among those who
give out bribes. The ARF office informed us that the Republicans, in
their turn, gave out 20 thousand drams in Aeratsia, in the RPA office
located near School No. 169. The ARF office was warned about this also
by the residents. Hayrapet Hayrapetyan and one Zhiro who, according to
the residents, is a famous figure in the neighborhood and is the head
of one of the condominiums in the area give out bribes. Besides,
according to the ARF office, Taron Margaryan’s supporters also give
out 10 thousand drams to the residents of Margaryan Side Street 2 in
Ajapnyak. A few residents of 10 Yeghishe Tadevosyan Street told
representatives of the ARF in the ARF office in Shengavit that
Republicans intimidated and threatened residents, `We gave you money
at the last election, and we filmed that you didn’t vote for us. If
you don’t vote for us again, you will have to pay back the money for
this and last time.’ A representative of the ARF office said during a
conversation with that they had explained to the
residents that no one could actually film the moment of voting and
find out whom the citizen had voted for; it was secret. Nelly BABAYAN

Read more at:
© 1998 – 2013 Aravot – News from Armenia

http://en.aravot.am/2013/05/03/154096/
www.aravot.am
www.aravot.am

Conference Commemorating Armenian Genocide Victims Held In Argentina

CONFERENCE COMMEMORATING ARMENIAN GENOCIDE VICTIMS HELD IN ARGENTINA

11:17, 3 May, 2013

YEREVAN, MAY 3, ARMENPRESS: The conference entitled “Against denial,
for the sake of justice and truth”, dedicated to the 98th anniversary
of the Armenian Genocide was organized by the Armenian National
Congress of South America and held at the Buenos Aires Central
College on April 30. As Armenpress was reported by the Department for
Press, Information and Public Relations of the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of the Republic of Armenia, the event was attended by the
Ambassador of the Republic of Armenia to Argentina Vahagn Melikyan,
the representatives of the Argentinean Armenian community, religious
figures and journalists.

The speakers stated that the impunity of the Armenian Genocide gave
birth to other alike terrible tragedies, emphasizing the necessity of
recognition, condemnation and circumstance elimination of such crimes.

It was noted as well that the Turkish government, implemented the
Armenian Genocide, presents the Armenians to the international
community as hostile elements, thus justifying its crime. The
participants of the conference discussed the Argentinean experience
in protection of human rights.

The entire series of the documents, proving the fact of the mass
massacres of the Armenian people in 1915-1923 in the Ottoman Turkey
as a premeditated and thoroughly executed act of genocide, is enormous.

The Armenian Genocide was recognized by different organizations, such
as the European Council, the European Parliament, some commissions
of the UN Organization, the World Church Union, etc.

The Armenian Genocide was recognized by many states. The first
country to officially recognize the Armenian Tragedy was Uruguay in
1965. The massacres of the Armenian people were officially condemned
and recognized as a genocide, in accordance with the international
law, by France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, Switzerland,
Sweden, Russia, Poland, Lithuania, Greece, Slovakia, Cyprus, Lebanon,
Uruguay, Argentina (2 laws and 5 draft bills), Venezuela, Chile,
Canada, Vatican, and Australia.

Concert In St. Petersburg On Aram Khachaturian’s 110th Birth Anniver

CONCERT IN ST. PETERSBURG ON ARAM KHACHATURIAN’S 110TH BIRTH ANNIVERSARY

12:37 03.05.2013

Concert dedicated to the 110th birth anniversary of renowned
Armenian composer Aram Khachaturian was held at the Big Hall of the
Saint Petersburg State Academic Philharmonic Society named after
Shostakovich.

Armenian Consul General Vardan Hakobyan offered opening remarks. The
Academic Symphonic Orchestra of Saint Petersburg played Aram
Khachaturian’s Cello Concerto. Excerpts from “Spartak” and “Gayane”
ballets were also perfumed.

In attendance were Consul Generals and diplomats accredited to Saint
Petersburg.

http://www.armradio.am/en/2013/05/03/concert-in-st-petersburg-on-aram-khachaturians-110th-birth-anniversary/

Margar Yesayan Leaves Turkish Taraf Along With 18 Other Columnists

MARGAR YESAYAN LEAVES TURKISH TARAF ALONG WITH 18 OTHER COLUMNISTS

11:25, 3 May, 2013

YEREVAN, MAY 3, ARMENPRESS. The staff of Turkish Taraf periodical
keeps resigning. After the resignation of the Editor-in-Chief of
the periodical Oral CalıÅ~_lar, it became known that 19 columnist
also decided to leave Taraf and among them is ethnic Armenian Margar
Yesayan. As reports “Armenpress” Turkish Demokrathaber.net stated this.

The columnists issued a statement, which runs as follows: “We, as
intellectual and diligent citizens, find that the problems should be
settled not via weapons, but via politics. Human life is the highest
value. We believe that the road leading to peace will be much shorter
in case of democracy.”

Three other columnist of Taraf also resigned after the resignation
of the journalist and spreading the aforesaid statement. After they
have left the periodical the number of those workers, who followed
their example, reached 23.

http://armenpress.am/eng/news/717511/margar-yesayan-leaves-turkish-taraf-along-with-18-other-columnists.html

Pots-De Vin Distribues Par Le Parti Republicain ?

POTS-DE VIN DISTRIBUES PAR LE PARTI REPUBLICAIN ?

Haykakan Jamanak affirme avoir recu deux jours de suite des temoignages
d’habitants d’Erevan sur des promesses de distribution de pots-de-vin
de la part du parti Republicain a la veille des elections en echange
des donnees de leur passeport. Jamanak dit egalement avoir recu
des appels en ce sens. Armenie prospère aurait egalement fait des
promesses de pots-de-vin. Le ” montant ” propose par les deux partis
serait le meme : 10 euros.

Extrait de la revue de presse de l’Ambassade de France en Armenie en
date du 26 avril 2013

vendredi 3 mai 2013, Stephane ©armenews.com