Author: Baghdasarian Karlen

AZERBAIJAN PROFILE

BBC
20 March 2012

Oil-rich Azerbaijan gained independence from the Soviet Union in
1991 amid political turmoil and against a backdrop of violence in
Nagorno-Karabakh.

It has been famed for its oil springs and natural gas sources since
ancient times, when Zoroastrians, for whom fire is an important symbol,
erected temples around burning gas vents in the ground.

In the 19th century this part of the Russian empire experienced an
unprecedented oil boom which attracted international investment. By
the beginning of the 20th century Azerbaijan was supplying almost
half of the world’s oil.

In 1994 Azerbaijan signed an oil contract worth $7.4bn with a Western
consortium. Since then Western companies have invested millions
in the development of the country’s oil and gas reserves. However,
the economy as a whole has not benefited as much as it might have done.

Caspian oil is now flowing through a pipeline running from Baku
through Georgia to the Turkish port of Ceyhan, providing western
countries with ready access to a vast new source of supply.

Environmental groups have protested that the cost of this benefit
is unacceptable.

Azerbaijan has large gas reserves too.

Baku’s seafront: Oil exports fuelled a construction boom Azerbaijan
became a member of the Council of Europe in 2001. Often accused
of rampant corruption and election-rigging, ruling circles walk a
tightrope between Russian and Western regional geo-strategic interests.

As the Soviet Union collapsed, the predominantly Armenian population
of the Nagorno-Karabakh region stated their intention to secede
from Azerbaijan. War broke out. Backed by troops and resources from
Armenia proper, the Armenians of Karabakh took control of the region
and surrounding territory.

In 1994 a ceasefire was signed. About one-seventh of Azerbaijan’s
territory remains occupied, while 800,000 refugees and internally
displaced persons are scattered around the country.

Azerbaijan was in the media spotlight in June 2007 when Russian
President Vladimir Putin offered the US the use of the Gabala radar
station for missile defence as an alternative to using bases in Poland
and the Czech Republic.

From: Baghdasarian

POLICEMAN POSING IN PHOTO WITH DINK KILLER GETS PROMOTION

PanARMENIAN.Net
March 19, 2012 – 16:20 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – A police officer who appeared in a highly
controversial a photograph with the killer of Armenian-Turkish
journalist Hrant Dink has been promoted, Today’s Zaman reported.

The photograph, released to the media shortly after the murder showed
Ogun Samast – the shooter – standing next to then-Samsun Police
Department’s Public Security Unit head Yakup Kurtaran and a soldier
with a Turkish flag in the background. The image was allegedly taken
at the Samsun Police Department where Samast was captured before
being brought to Istanbul. While many were expecting the office to
face charges or disciplinary action for the controversial photograph,
Kurtaran reportedly has advanced in his career since then.

According to the Radikal daily, after the photograph surfaced,
Kurtaran and a group of police officers were suspended from duty
on Feb 5, 2007. Although police inspectors proposed a punishment
of suspending severance pay for Kurtaran for 16 months, the officer
simply received a forfeiture of pay for one day. However, this was
later cancelled after Kurtaran appealed the punishment at the Samsun
1st Administrative Court.

Kurtaran was reassigned to Amasya and then to Malatya Police
Department’s Traffic Services Unit. After he worked for a while
in the traffic services department, Kurtaran was appointed fourth
degree superintendent, then second degree superintendent. He was most
recently promoted to the office of deputy chief of the Malatya Police
Department in 2012.

While security officials who posed for the photos with the Samast faced
no charges or disciplinary action, those who leaked the photograph to
the Turkish media reportedly face an official investigation on charges
of leaking secret documents to the public. A recent report prepared
by the State Audit Institution (DDK) regarding the Dink murder also
mentioned the controversial photograph. The report termed the incident
a product of “marginal insights.”

The late editor-in-chief of the Turkish-Armenian weekly Agos,
Dink was shot dead on Jan 19, 2007 by Samast outside the offices of
his newspaper in Istanbul in broad daylight. In July of last year,
his killer was sentenced to nearly 23 years in jail. Samast, tried
in juvenile court because he was a minor at the time of the crime,
was sentenced by the court to 21 years, six months for “premeditated
murder” and one year, four months for carrying an unlicensed gun.

From: Baghdasarian

RUSSIA HAS ‘STRONGER’ EFFECT ON KARABAKH CONFLICT THAN OTHERS
Laurence Broers

News.Az
Mon 19 March 2012

News.Az interviews Laurence Broers, Caucasus Programme Projects
Manager, Conciliation Resources.

What do you expect from Putin’s policy towards Georgia, do you expect
any improvements in the Russia-Georgian relations?

Russian-Georgian relations will probably develop along lines shaped
more by internal developments – President Putin’s return to centre
stage, seemingly weaker than before, and Saakashvili’s handling of
political renewal, which seems unlikely to leave him stronger than
before. So there may be less space and confidence with which to
continue the current Russian-Georgian feud, in which all sides lose.

How may Putin’s victory in the Presidential elections reflect on the
Karabakh settlement?

Dmitriy Medvedev staked a lot of personal prestige and effort on NK,
and it seems that some kind of window has closed, although what kind
of window it really was we don’t know. With Vladimir Putin back in the
Russian presidency we can expect less of this personal commitment,
and more reliance perhaps on raw power politics. Putin’s return in
a sense emphasizes the geopolitics, and geopoliticization, of the
Karabakh conflict.

This can have its positive outlook in terms of applying pressure on
Armenia and Azerbaijan to desist from war and move in the direction
of settlement. Overall, though, geopoliticization is dangerous as it
creates ambiguities over local and outside agendas. Developments in
Russia or in any of the other Minsk Group countries are less important
in the long term than developments at home.

Chairman of the socio-political department of the Azerbaijani
Presidential Administration Ali Hasanov said that the only power
that could bring a progress in the Karabakh conflict is Russia due
to its influence capacities on Armenia. How would you comment on that
opinion of the Azeri official?

It is undoubtedly true that Russia has more ‘hard’ influence over the
overall situation in the Karabakh conflict than any other external
power. And it is also true that outside coordination and pressure are
critical in attempts to move the process forward. Yet over the years
we have seen that even coordinated external action and more unilateral
attempts by Russia have not succeeded in securing fundamental change.

The only real powers that can genuinely influence this process
are Armenians and Azeris, both elites and societies. It is at these
levels and in these relationships that we should be working to achieve
progress in the settlement in the conflict, supported and encouraged
by outside actors.

There are many rumors about soon air strikes on Iran. How may this
scenario reflect on the South Caucasus? And may it cause new wars in
Georgia or Azerbaijan, as some experts predict?

It all depends on the scale of any conflict that might transpire. At
the very least, it would accentuate and strain the current
configurations of relationships and preferences with key actors –
Iran, Israel, the United States. Especially with regard to Iran’s
roles and influence, Armenia and Azerbaijan have had quite different
perspectives in recent years. However, in the event of a more drawn
out, open-ended conflict in Iran, it will surely be in both Armenian
and Azerbaijani interests to minimize its impact. The existence of
protracted conflict and generalized insecurity in the North Caucasus
has had only a negative effect on the South Caucasus; conflict and
insecurity to the south of the region would create only another barrier
to the region’s long-term prosperity, stability and integration.

From: Baghdasarian

DO NOT PROVIDE ARMENIAN JUDGES WITH US ENTRY VISA, SAYS HUMAN RIGHTS GROUP

epress.am
03.20.2012

The Yerevan-based Helsinki Association for Human Rights has appealed
to US Ambassador to Armenia John Heffern in writing, requesting
that several Armenian judges not be granted entry visas to the
United States. Helsinki Association president Mikael Danielyan and
attorney Gayane Khachatryan informed Epress.am that these judges and
prosecutors have permitted numerous gross procedural violations in
several criminal cases in recent years, the victims of which to whom
the Association was providing legal assistance.

In the letter to Ambassador Heffern, the Helsinki Association notes
that the courts and state prosecutors are not objective and through
their indifference and inaction, ignore the many complaints of clearly
trumped-up charges that allow for longer prison sentences.

“This proves that reform of Armenia’s judicial system is [merely]
a formality. Republic of Armenia judges, though from time to time
undergo training in such juridical countries as the United States,
continue to fulfill the orders of the prosecution and operate according
to the unwritten rule ‘the prosecution always knows best’ and are
not guided by the principles of the RA Constitution, criminal law and
procedure,” said Khachatryan, presenting an extract from the letter,
copies of which were sent to RA Prosecutor General Aghvan Hovsepyan
and the RA Council of Justice.

According to Danielyan, considering the fact that the US government
has large investments in the reforms carried out in Armenia’s judicial
system, a question arises: Do these funds serve their purpose?

“The Helsinki Association has repeatedly raised the need for
various sanctions against the Armenian authorities. That is why, as
a precautionary measure, we are suggesting that the following judges
be refused an entry visa to the US, who directly through their actions
damage and hinder the implementation of democratic reforms in Armenia,”
reads the letter, which lists the names of the following judges:

Mesrop Makyan, Court of General Jurisdiction of Kotayk Region; Suren
Kostanyan, Court of General Jurisdiction of Shengavit Administrative
District of Yerevan; Artur Lazarian, Court of General Jurisdiction
of Arabkir and Kanaker-Zeytun Administrative Districts of Yerevan;
and Criminal Court of Appeal judges Grisha Melik-Sargsyan, Henrik
Adamyan, Gagik Avetisyan, Eva Darbinyan and Sergei Chichoyan.

From: Baghdasarian

ZAKARIA: THE GEOPOLITICS OF THE EUROVISION SONG CONTEST
By Fareed Zakaria

CNN

March 19 2012

What caught my eye this week was a dispute between two members of a
grand old European alliance. The alliance isn’t NATO; it’s not the

Arctic Council nor the Euro Zone, nor the EU. I’m talking about the
annual Eurovision Song Contest.

It’s camp; it’s cheesy; but it’s a huge hit across the pond. Every
year, dozens of countries send their top performers to an American
Idol-style music competition. More than a 100 million viewers tune
in to vote for their favorites. The one rule: you can’t vote for your
own country.

And so the tradition has continued since the 1950s.

Abba won for “Waterloo” in 1974. Celine Dion made a splash in 1988
representing Switzerland. But somewhere along the way the contest
became known less for big names, and more for kitsch: Sequined
costumes, outlandish productions, the works.

Now, despite its name, Eurovision is not just a European competition.

Algeria participates and so does Israel. This year’s host is
Azerbaijan. And that’s why Eurovision is in the news this week.

First some background: Azerbaijan has long clashed with Armenia. In
1994, the two countries ended a years-long war over the separatist
region of Nagorno-Karabakh. But tensions flared up again recently
when an Armenian soldier was shot to death at the border.

So with Azerbaijan as the host, Armenia is pulling out of the
Eurovision party. The intrusion of politics into these kinds of
events is not new. Music competitions, like big sporting events,
are often proxies for larger disputes or trends. When Moscow hosted
Eurovision in 2009, Georgia was reluctant to take part because it
had just fought a war with Russia.

But music can unify, too. That same year, Israel’s entry featured a
duet with an Arab and Israeli Jew.

For me, the fascinating thing about Eurovision is not the performances
or the music. It’s the politics and public psychology. Here at GPS,
we plotted the capital cities of the winning countries from the past
two decades on a longitudinal graph – yeah, that’s the kind of thing we
do in our spare time. We found that in the 1990s, the winners tended
to be from Western Europe – Dublin or London. But by the late 2000s,
the winners mostly came from the East – Moscow and Kiev. Europe’s
center of gravity is clearly moving East.

And these voters have interesting tendencies. In 2003, Britain got
exactly zero votes – that was the year the Blair government supported
the war in Iraq. Votes aren’t always conscious political choices. But
we saw trends. Greeks always vote for Cypriots. The Cypriots return
the favor. Viewers from former Warsaw-Pact countries often vote as
a bloc. So do members of the former Yugoslavia. In 2007, Serbia won
after picking up maximum points from Bosnia-Herzigovina, Croatia,
Macedona, Montenegro, and Slovenia. All in all, this is an interesting
window into Europe.

So it got me thinking. We have American Idol here in the U.S.,
and we have “The Voice”. But perhaps what we really need is our own
Eurovision – an “Americavision”.

Will people from red states strategically vote for each other? Will
the two coasts create an alliance? Will there be a North-South divide?

I hope a TV executive somewhere is watching. Remember to credit us
with the idea – and maybe send a few royalties our way.

From: Baghdasarian

SENATORS MENENDEZ AND KIRK INTRODUCE SENATE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE RESOLUTION

armradio.am
20.03.2012 18:18

Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Mark Kirk (R-IL) introduced
legislation, S.Res.399, today calling upon the U.S. government to
properly recognize the Armenian Genocide and to use the lessons of
this atrocity to prevent future crimes against humanity, reported
the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA).

“It is time for the United States to join the nineteen nations
including Belgium, Canada, France, Italy and the European Union
that have formally recognized the actions carried out by the Ottoman
Empire from 1915 to 1923 as genocide,” Senator Menendez said. “The
Armenian Genocide is a historical fact and was one of the incidents
upon which the Genocide Convention was predicated. Only by accurately
acknowledging the crimes of the past can we ever hope to move forward
in a legitimate manner and prevent such human rights crimes from
happening in the future.”

“The Armenian Genocide is well-documented and formally recognized by
11 NATO allies and the European Union. This resolution accurately
characterizes the events of 1915-1923 as a genocide, honors the
memory of the victims, and strengthens America’s moral leadership on
human rights and the prevention of mass atrocities around the world,”
said a spokesman for Senator Kirk.

Joining Senators Menendez and Kirk as original cosponsors of the
bipartisan measure were Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chairman of the Senate
Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Human Rights and Chairman of the
Senate Environment Committee and Public Works Committee, Michael
Bennet (D-CO), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Chairman of the Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence, Carl Levin (D-MI), Chairman of
the Senate Armed Services Committee, Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Chairman
of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee,
Jack Reed (D-RI), Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee
on Seapower, and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Chairman of the Senate
Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism. Senator Chuck Schumer
(D-NY), the Vice-Chairman of the Democratic Conference, has also
joined S.Res.399 as a cosponsor.

“We join with Armenians from New Jersey, Illinois, and around the
country in thanking Senators Menendez and Kirk for their many years
of leadership in pressing for an end to Turkey’s gag-rule on American
condemnation and commemoration of the Armenian Genocide,” said Aram
Hamparian, Executive Director of the ANCA. “Turkey has no right to hold
America hostage to its willful refusal as a state to accept a truthful,
just, and comprehensive resolution of this crime against all humanity.”

Parallel to this effort, Reps. Robert Dold (R-IL) and Adam Schiff
(D-CA) have offered a nearly identical measure, H.Res.304, in the U.S.

House. Senators Scott Brown (R-MA), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and Mark
Kirk have introduced S.Res.392, the Senate version of a religious
freedom measure that was adopted last December, in the U.S. House
calling upon Turkey to return stolen Christian church properties to
their rightful owners.

From: Baghdasarian

SEYRAN OHANYAN’S AMERICAN CHANCE
HAKOB BADALYAN

Story from Lragir.am News:

Published: 12:58:47 – 20/03/2012

Minister of defense Seyran Ohanyan left for the United States on March
19 where he will meet with the leaders of security agencies of this
country, in particular, defense minister Leon Panetta and CIA head
David Petraeus. Other high-ranking meetings are scheduled.

The American visit of the Armenian defense minister is interesting in
terms of chronology for it has been long since the Armenian defense
minister has not been on such a presentable visit to the United
States. In general, the Armenian and American military contacts have
been usually limited to the low-ranking command meetings, while the
upcoming meeting of the defense ministers is unprecedented.

It is noteworthy that the U.S. Defense Minister visited Armenia and
Azerbaijan back in 2001 spending in Yerevan a few hours.

In this sense, after such a long pause, essential growth in the
contacts of the Armenian and American cooperation can be noticed. This
is not a surprise considering the U.S. statements that the
Armenian-American relations are now at the highest ever level.

It would hardly be logical if the relations with the first power in
the world were at the highest level and it did not impact military
cooperation.

Here, not only the status aspect but also its chronological expression
is essential. The point is that it is a difficult period for the
Armenian armed forces. The demands of the information century require
disclosure of the army to the society, on the other hand, forcing
faster modernization of the army and effective management since with
the open flow of information the society will have access to it to
control the situation and consequently the shortcomings and vices
become more evident.

Though the Armenian defense ministry answers public inquiries keeping
loyal to the best traditions of Soviet Russian propaganda,
nevertheless, the top leadership of the army and the defense minister
extremely need to overcome this situation and improve management to
handle the plight and stop being the target of public discussions. In
the end, Seyran Ohanyan understands that it is impossible to keep
defending oneself with the help of the Russian propaganda technologies
which only deepens the issues and brings the collapse closer rather
than resolves the issues.

For the solution of the issues, the leadership of the Armenian army
needs to introduce the Western practice since it is the system which
has achieved most success in the management of the armed forces in
terms of the security of soldiers.

The Armenian military leadership needs to understand that issues can
be solved only through study and application of the Western experience
in Armenia.

In this sense, contacts with the American military leadership as an
absolute leader in effectiveness, development and combat readiness in
the world armed forces have a vital importance for Armenia if there is
enough will to translate these contacts into practical policy.

However, the Armenian defense minister will certainly commit the
biggest mistake if he uses the American contacts for the Armenian
government and to diversify the protection of his ministerial
positions in this context instead of using them for the modernization
of the management of armed forces. In this case, Seyran Ohanyan will
not only endanger his own and the government’s position, causing the
chain of army tragedies to continue, but he will also torpedo the
military-political mission of Armenia in the South Caucasus now when
Armenia has a good chance to restore the loss of potential for the
fulfillment of this mission.

In this sense, Seyran Ohanyan has a historic chance to regain this
chance through the contacts with the U.S. military leadership.

It would be naïve to think that the minister who has meetings with the
U.S. military leadership will ignore his own office and worries,
promoting first of all the issues of Armenia’s armed forces. For
Ohanyan, perhaps the most important thing will be his personal
position in the government, and official Yerevan has perhaps
calculated Ohanyan’s preference to this issue by how his visit will
promote protection of the general position of the Armenian government.

But, both for Ohanyan and the government, it will be more effective to
understand that it is time to use the effective military contacts,
confrontation of interests and change the methodology of keeping
governmental position and build the government not on the general
commandership but on the military staff and immunity of health.

From: Baghdasarian

ISTANBUL PATRIARCHATE SUES FOR RETURN OF PROPERTY

asbarez
Monday, March 19th, 2012

The Sanasaryan School in Erzerum

ISTANBUL (Hurriyet Daily News)-The Armenian Patriarchate of Istanbul
filed a landmark suit in Ankara for the return of the historical
Sansaryan School in the eastern province of Erzerum that was the
site of the 1919 Erzurum Congress, an assembly headed by Mustafa
Kemal Ataturk.

“Some other foundations belong to [minority] communities, but the
Sansaryan Foundation was granted to the patriarchate by philanthropist
Meguerdich Sansaryan in the 1800s. The administration and management
of the Sansaryan Foundation legally belongs to the patriarchate,”
lawyer Ali Elbeyoglu, who represents the Armenian Patriarchate in
court, told the Hurriyet Daily News Sunday.

The patriarchate also demanded the return of other properties in
Sivas formerly owned by the Sansaryan Foundation in the lawsuit it
filed on March 14.

“We are not going to content ourselves with the mere return of
historical buildings. We are also going to demand compensation from
the Foundations General Directorate for all material losses incurred
by the patriarchate since 1936,” Elbeyoglu said.

Upon the government’s request, Turkey’s minority groups in 1936 gave
the government declarations detailing their real property. Over the
years, however, many of these properties did not remain registered
under the minority foundations’ names, and some were even sold to
third parties.

Turkey’s Foundations General Directorate expropriated the Sansaryan
Foundation citing the 1936 Declaration, according to Elbeyoglu.

The Istanbul Armenian Patriarchate also filed another suit against
the Foundations Directorate General in recent months demanding
that the Sansaryan Shopping Center in Istanbul’s Eminonu district be
returned to the Patriarchate. However, the head of Turkey’s Foundations
Directorate General has said it will not be returned despite a ruling
by an Istanbul court to impose an interim injunction over the building.

“This runs counter to all international legal [norms] as well as the
Treaty of Lausanne. The Patriarchate is still in possession of the
title deed,” Elbeyoglu said.

The Armenian community currently owns three small foundations across
the whole of Anatolia. If the patriarchate wins its lawsuit, it will
mark the first time that Turkey’s Armenian community has regained
control of a foundation in Anatolia.

“If the Armenian community had not hesitated for various reasons, they
could have filed this suit in 1936, as they are legally in the right.

There is a case dated to 1936, and its files indicate that the
patriarchate officially owns Sansaryan. Our research shows that the
best-preserved archival documents are located at the Land Registry
Cadastre,” Elbeyoglu said.

Elbeyoglu also dismissed suggestions indicating a link between the
lawsuit and the Foundations Law that recently came into effect. The
Turkish government enacted a measure that went into effect on Aug. 27,
2011, to return properties seized from minority foundations through
the 1936 Declaration.

The Foundations Directorate General still classifies Sansaryan as a
property left without a manager and whose ownership consequently passed
onto the Foundation Directorate General, but for that definition to
hold up in court, it would require there to be no citizens of Armenian
descent in Turkey, according to Elbeyoglu.

The Sansaryan Foundation was established by Meguerdich Sansaryan,
a Russian-Armenian philanthropist. The police used the Sansaryan
Shopping Center in Istanbul for a long period during which torture
was widespread.

From: Baghdasarian

Artsakh President signs series of laws

15:39 17/03/2012 » Law

Artsakh President Bako Sahakyan signed laws on making amendments and
addenda to the NKR laws `Regulations of the National Assembly,’ “On
Legal Acts,” on making an amendment to the law `On State Non-Profit
Organizations,’ on making amendments to the law `On Liability for
Violations in Urban Development,’ on making amendments and addenda to
the laws `On Joint-Stock Companies,’ `On NKR Rescue Service,’ and `On
General Education,’ presidential press office reported.

Source: Panorama.am

From: Baghdasarian

Armenian, French film centers sign convention

news.am
March 17, 2012 | 19:06

Armenia’s Ambassador to France, Vigen Chitechyan, and Deputy Culture
Minister Arev Samuelyan on Friday met with Eric Garandeau, President
of the National Film and Moving Image Center of France.

The interlocutors underlined the need to deepen cooperation in
screening Armenian and French films in international festivals.

Armenia’s Deputy Culture Minister invited Eric Garandeau to Armenia
along the lines of the Golden Apricot International Film Festival.

Ambassador Chitechyan underscored the necessity to present
Armenian-French cinematography to the francophone world, too.

Eric Garandeau stressed that joint film production enables an extra
opportunity to circulate the cinematography products between the two
countries, and, in this connection, he expressed a readiness to deepen
the practical bilateral contacts.

As a result of the meeting, the National Film Center of Armenia and
National Film and Moving Image Center of France signed a convention on
cooperation in cinematography.

From: Baghdasarian