Author: Baghdasarian Karlen

ANALYSIS: DO GENOCIDE DENIAL LAWS DENY HUMAN RIGHTS?
by Alex Pearlman

Global Post

April 25 2012

The anniversary of the 1915 Armenian genocide has people on both
sides of the Atlantic all riled up. Are laws criminalizing genocide
denial a threat to free speech if the genocide in question is still
up for debate?

Since the mid-1980s, legislation criminalizing the denial of the
Holocaust has become the norm. There are 17 countries with Holocaust
denial laws, mostly in Europe. In general no one complains about
these laws, and there have been prosecutions in England, Austria,
Germany and France.

Yesterday, on the eve of the anniversary of the 1915 Armenian genocide,
French President Sarkozy announced he would try again for a law to
criminalize denial of that genocide, too. (France has had a Holocaust
denial law since 1990.) But the backlash from Turkey and people
of Turkish origin has been severe, many claiming these laws are an
insult to history and their country. The first law against Armenian
genocide denial was overturned last February, which Turkey called a
“positive” move. The Turkish government, then and now, has accused
Sarkozy of politicizing what they deem a historical, war-time action,
ahead of upcoming elections.

According to Al Jazeera, the International Association of Genocide
Scholars has recognized the Armenian genocide since 1997, despite
Turkey’s fierce denials.

“There is no powerful state which does not reflect on its own history.

A powerful state’s first sign is the evaluation by its residents. This
is the perception that it can prove the impartiality of its own
history. France demands from Turkey to review its own history. This
is not a sign of weakness,” Sarkozy said in a speech yesterday.

Meanwhile, across the pond, Armenian-Americans face a different problem
with their executive. That is, President Obama did not mention the word
“genocide” Monday when he announced a new Atrocities Prevention Board
while he toured the Holocaust museum, nor did he mention it yesterday
when he commemorated the Armenian anniversay.

On the campaign trail and in the Senate, then-candidate Obama was
both a signatory on a bill to recognize the massacre of 1.5 million
Armenians as genocide and also promised in a strongly-worded 2008
statement that when elected he would, “recognize the Armenian
Genocide.”

More from GlobalPost: Armenian genocide anniversary marked with
remembrance, protests (PHOTOS)

Instead, Obama said yesterday, “We honor the memory of the 1.5 million
Armenians who were brutally massacred or marched to their deaths in
the waning days of the Ottoman Empire.”

The president’s statements have infuriated the Armenian-American
community, which has issued calls for Obama to both acknowledge that
the mass killings were genocide, and to pressure Turkey to do the
same and investigate its history, accusing him of playing politics
to make nice with Turkey.

“Turkey, an emerging leader in the Muslim world, needs to face up to
the horrors that were unleashed a century ago and offer apologies,”
wrote Nina Shea today, a former commissioner on the U.S. Commission
on International Religious Freedom. “President Obama should take
the lead in encouraging Ankara to cooperate in an open, impartial
investigation into what exactly occurred during this period.”

The Obama administration’s reputation on the matter wasn’t helped by
Secretary of State Clinton saying in January that the original French
law actually did infringe on free speech because the matter is still
up for debate by historians – it’s not clear to anyone whether the
Armenian genocide is actually a genocide.

Bernard Lewis of Princeton University is one of the world’s foremost
scholars on the Middle East and has said that there is no proof of a
conspiratorial effort on behalf of the Ottomans to target Armenians
specifically for massacre during World War One, the way there is
proof of this in other instances of genocide.

More from GlobalPost: Armenian couple name their baby Sarkozy

“This is a question of definition and nowadays the word ‘genocide’
is used very loosely even in cases where no bloodshed is involved at
all and I can understand the annoyance of those who feel refused,”
said Professor Lewis in a 2002 interview with C-SPAN [PDF]. “In this
particular case, the point that was being made was that the massacre
of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire was the same as what happened
to Jews in Nazi Germany and that is a downright falsehood.”

He continues, after clarifying facts that armed Armenian rebels had
joined with Russia to invade, “to make this, a parallel with the
holocaust in Germany, you would have to assume the Jews of Germany
had been engaged in an armed rebellion against the German state,
collaborating with the allies against Germany. That in the deportation
order the cities of Hamburg and Berlin were exempted, persons in the
employment of state were exempted, and the deportation only applied
to the Jews of Germany proper, so that when they got to Poland they
were welcomed and sheltered by the Polish Jews. This seems to me a
rather absurd parallel.”

Of course, there is the more mainstream argument that opinions like
those of Professor Lewis and the Turkish government are denialist
and generally wrong. However, because these opinions are not held
by a fringe minority (in fact, the Armenian genocide truly is hotly
debated in academia), unlike the deniers of other historical genocides
that are more recent like the Holocaust, Sudan, and Rwanda, Secretary
Clinton wasn’t wrong.

The question remains: how can something like a questionable historical
fact be criminalized, if that fact isn’t defined or accepted by a
wide majority? Under anti-speech laws, it would become criminal to
debate the issue, ask questions, or dig deeper for the truth.

From: Baghdasarian

EXPERT WARNS OF THREAT OF NEW ARMENIAN MASSACRE

tert.am
26.04.12

Azerbaijan’s aggressive policy is actually a threat of a new Armenian
massacre, the military expert David Jamalyan told journalists on
Thursday.

In contrast to 1915, however, Armenia has an efficient army. The May
9 military parade in Nagorno-Karabakh will show the army’s efficiency.

“This is an aggression against Armenia. The Armenian army is only
retaliating now. But if the things go on like this, we have all
the reasons to neutralize the fire,” Jamalyan said. The reason for
Azerbaijan’s behavior is that its authorities are seeking tension
on the frontline rather than large-scale hostilities. The Armenian
side’s retaliation is normal. “We cannot turn a blind eye to what is
going on,” the expert said.

From: Baghdasarian

ARMENIAN COMMUNITY ON SAAKASHVILI TO CONSIDER GEORGIAN MP’S ANTI-ARMENIAN STATEMENTS

news.am
April 26, 2012 | 16:27

TBILISI. – Armenian community in Georgia along with 35 organizations
turned to the Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili regarding
anti-Armenian statements of MP from the United National Movement
party Azer Suleymanov.

Armenians claim the President as the head of the ruling party should
ponder on MP’s further membership in the party, Armenian cultural
center Hayartun informs Armenian News-NEWS.am.

Besides, Armenians in Georgia have turned to the Speaker David
Bakradze and the Chief Prosecutor of Georgia Murtaz Zodelava to
instigate proceedings against Suleymanov.

Earlier on Tuesday on the occasion of the 97th anniversary of the
Armenian Genocide, Georgian MP Jondi Bagaturia delivered a speech on
the Armenian issue.

In response, another MP Suleymanov made racist statements towards
the Armenians. Hence, the Armenian community demands to consider the
MP’s statements according to the Georgian Criminal Code. Georgia’s
Ombudsman also released a statement on this occasion.

From: Baghdasarian

AGREEMENT ON TECHNICAL COOPERATION SIGNED BETWEEN STATE REVENUE AGENCIES OF ARMENIA AND LATVIA
Liana Yeghiazaryan

“Radiolur”
26.04.2012 16:32

An agreement on technical cooperation was signed today between the
State Revenue Committee of Armenia and the State Revenue Service
of Latvia.

The delegation headed by Chief of Latvia’s State Revenue Service Nelija
Jezdakova is visiting Armenia April 24 to 27. The visit is aimed at
discussing the cooperation and exchange of experience between the
two agencies in the tax and customs spheres.

A number of issues of mutual interest have been discussed with Latvian
counterparts. Armenia anticipates exchange of experience with the
Latvian side towards settlement of concrete issues.

The parties stated that there are a number of similarities between
the state revenue agencies of the two countries. The two fulfill the
same functions and have similar views on the further development of
the system.

Latvia is a full member of a number of European structures, and under
the agreement signed today it will provide information to Armenia on
countries, which our country does not have close relations with.

From: Baghdasarian

ARMENIAN GENOCIDE COMMEMORATED IN THE NETHERLANDS

Panorama.am
26/04/2012

The Netherlands based “Karot” Armenian non-governmental organization
joint with local Armenian organizations held a rally near the
Parliament building of the Kingdom of Netherlands and procession to
Embassy of Turkey to commemorate the victims of Armenian Genocide.

It’s reported that more than 150 people attended the rally.

The head of “Karot” Varuzh Vardanyan said he is determined to collect
organizations from Armenia and Diaspora to develop a cooperation
project targeting 100th anniversary of Armenian Genocide.

From: Baghdasarian

TURKEY WILL NEVER JOIN EU

PanARMENIAN.Net
April 26, 2012

PanARMENIAN.Net – Turkey’s entry into EU would further increase the
danger of islamization of Europe, Johann Ewald Stadler said. Ahead
of the parliamentary elections in Armenia, PanARMENIAN.Net had an
interview with Johann Ewald Stadler, Austrian representative in the
European Parliament. Stadler will visit Armenia as member of the
observing mission of the International Center of Election Systems
(ICES). Speaking in Austria’s parliament on April 24, Stadler called
on Turkey to recognize the Armenian Genocide. In 2011, Austrian MP
demanded that Turkish ambassador in Vienna be banished.

Do you think Turkey’s accession to EU is something possible in the
coming future?

No, for two reasons. First because those countries that seem to
favour it are bluffing, especially Britain, just for their interests;
but they know it is unrealistic. Secondly, because opinion polls in
countries with large population, especially Poland and Austria show
that 75-80% of respondents oppose Turkey’s accession to EU. Finally,
there would have to be a referendum which Turkey would never pass.

How do you estimate the danger of islamization of Europe as a whole?

The danger is huge, as the birth rate of Muslims is far beyond those
of Christians, plus there is ongoing Muslim immigration. Turkey’s
entry into EU would worsen that even more.

Do you think there are any prospects for Armenian Genocide recognition
by Turkey?

Turkey will have to recognize the Genocide against Armenia because the
debate on genocides does always include historical genocides; Turkey
will have to admit its historical fault and crimes against Armenians.

Any other comments on Armenian-Austrian relations…?

We have close ties lying on the basis of common Christian identity
and solidarity; besides, there is also a strong moral basis because
the good Austrians like Franz Werfel make much effort to enforce the
rights and justice to Armenia.

Strong symbols are the Mkhitharists and the Werfel monument in Vienna.

From: Baghdasarian

TURKEY SETS UP “BOUTIQUES” IN ANI

news.am
April 26, 2012 | 14:46

Efforts are continuing in Turkey toward receiving sources of income
from the ruins of ancient Armenia’s historical capital Ani, which is
located in modern-day Turkey’s Kars Province.

Official opening of the trade booths nearby Ani was held, and the
locals will sell souvenirs at these booths, Zaman daily of Turkey
informs.

Kars Governor Ahmet Kara, who was on hand at the official opening
of these booths, noted that the latter will help the residents of
the Ocakli village-which is situated in the vicinity of Ani-receive
additional income by selling souvenirs.

From: Baghdasarian

AZERIS FIRE BULLETS AT ARMENIAN AMBULANCE CAR

tert.am
26.04.12

The Azerbaijani armed forces opened fire on an Armenian ambulance car
on Tuesday, injuring two servicemen, Andranik G. Madoyan and Ernest
M. Sargsyan.

According to a statement by the Nagorno-Karabakh Defense Army, the
Azeris have been recently violating the ceasefire across the Line of
Contact in a more intensive manner, releasing 2,000 gunshots.

“The fact confirms yet another time that the enemy keeps destabilizing
the strategy on the Line of Contact between the conflicting forces,
and, cynically violating the humanitarian provisions enshrined by
the Geneva Convention, opens fire on an ambulance vehicle bearing
the Red Cross emblem,” reads the statement.

From: Baghdasarian

GYUMRI TECHNOPARK BUILDING TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN 1.5 YEARS

news.am
April 26, 2012 | 13:13

YEREVAN. – The building, which will be constructed in Gyumri city’s
technological zone, will have an area of 6,500 m2, whose 5,300 m2
will be used for technological purposes, Armenian Economy Minister’s
advisor Vahe Danielyan told news reporters on Thursday.

A total of AMD 1.67 billion (approx. US$ 4,266,840) will be allocated
for the construction which, as per Danielyan, will finish in eighteen
months.

The technopark will function with the incubation principle, as close
to twenty companies will operate in the new technological center. The
latter will have laboratories, an educational center, and business
infrastructures.

From: Baghdasarian

RUSSIA’S DEFENSE POLICY
Igor Muradyan

Story from Lragir.am News:

Published: 11:50:17 – 26/04/2012

The current situation in Russia is a paradox because though the
defense and security system and foreign policy were under Putin’s
control, they still expected a final political definition, which has
eventually been provided. In Russia, nothing could be more fatal and
non-productive than a pending status but now a race of proposals and
initiatives has started where all services and structures, overtaking
each other, are trying to strengthen their foothold in politics and
the Russian administration.

For fifteen years the political class of Russia has undergone
meticulous filtration and may think that at last the moment has come
when the main groups of the Russian elite have matured enough to
fulfill most strategic goals relating to the new phase of Putin’s
the political activity.

It cannot be denied that interesting, creative groups of professionals
have appeared in Russia who are ready to set to the solution of tough
tasks in science, technology, politics and security. The Russian
elite are inspired by the fact that the Russian political life and
the oligarchic bourgeoisie are interacting in harmony.

Why is this circumstance considered a sign of maturity of the modern
Russian elite while the concept of maturity is composed of a number
of components including ideological and spiritual ones? Nevertheless,
the responsible structures in Russia have started working out a number
of principled directions of the national policy which involve the
regional policy which became an important direction, since Russia,
having lost the status of a world power, is trying to regain its
influence on the region.

Russia’s regional policy has such components as modernization of army
and navy, geo-economics, especially energy, development of Northern
and Siberian areas, demographic challenges in the Arctic and Pacific,
Central Asia, Black Sea and Caucasian regions.

The Black Sea-Caucasus region is the most problematic aspect
of Russia’s regional politics, and still there is no hope for
fundamental change of the situation, the improvement of Russia’s
situation. Russia was even unable to resolve the core conflict issues
in its relationships not only with the world but also with regional
centers of power.

In the past period, Russia failed to agree with the Western and Asian
powers on the problems in this region. It is crisp and clear that the
economic and military-political resources are limited and there is
no hope that Russia will be able to overcome the threats and risks
which occurred in the neighboring regions associated with high risk
of regional war.

Now Russia is trying to demonstrate the persistence of its intentions
but how long and how consistently will this policy be conducted? In
this regard, a situation may occur when the Russian elite prefer
playing different foreign political games, making various tricks,
testing the foreign ambience, entering some political bargaining with
the U.S. and NATO, European Union, China, Turkey, Iran and maybe also
with leading Arab countries.

As of now, Russia is trying to define and confirm its positions on the
known geopolitical limits and border which suppose the implementation
of the security and defense policy, at least in the former Soviet
Union. It will lead to very complicated prospects for the Black and
Caucasian states and Central Asian regions.

Currently, Russia has enough serious agreements with a number of
states in Eurasia and it is trying to demonstrate the feasibility
of its commitments, but having such agreements Russia is ready to
manipulate relations with its closest partners and allies.

We can presume the problem is that Russia is not satisfied with the
formats of the CSTO and Eurasian economic union and it can sacrifice
the relations with other states for the sake of fulfillment of its
obligations within CSTO. That is, the existing military and economic
organizations do not represent a value for Russia.

There is no need to invent some complicated hypothetical situations
in order to understand the conditions under which Russia is ready to
sacrifice the interests of its partners and allies. It should also be
understood that Russia’s allies themselves are not very “devoted” to
Russia, including Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Armenia. Russian
politicians openly suggest that the relationship with the so-called
allies is not so valuable and highly questionable, and Russia “has
the right” to develop relations with other states and partners that
may enter into conflict with the interests of the current allies.

Moreover, this opinion belongs to both the policy of “patriotic”
and Atlantic orientation.

From: Baghdasarian