Author: Baghdasarian Karlen

TRAP FOR RULING REGIME
Siranuysh Papyan

Story from Lragir.am News:

20:05 15/01/2013

Interview with Manvel Sargsyan, head of ACNIS

Mr. Sargsyan, one of the candidates proposes leaving Serzh Sargsyan
alone in the campaign. His proposal has been declined. Most political
parties boycott the election. Will there be an unprecedented political
situation if they fail to run in the election?

Everyone understands there is nothing new, it is the same irrational
situation. During every election parties use the same algorithm –
if the elections are falsified, our candidate will win so do vote,
protect your votes, and we will win. And after every election they say
the regime again falsified the election. People have got used to this.

This time everything is different. The nominees have launched an
interesting discourse. Some political activists are trying to follow
the tradition and adjust the election to the old algorithm but it will
encounter a different discourse for the first time in Armenia. The
new discourse “allows” Serzh Sargsyan to get his 100% but he will not
digest it. Now a discussion is underway between these two discourses,
and everyone wants to know whether the old tradition will be followed.

As to boycott, everyone interprets it in their way. People accuse
each other that the proposed boycott means staying at home and doing
nothing but some people view boycott as a creative method of changing
the situation. Everyone says the elections in Armenia have become a
ritual and there are no real elections this may become a trap for the
ruling regime because it cannot reject elections – the only mechanism
of their reproduction. In other countries people were able to push the
government into the trap during the elections. A similar thinking may
develop in Armenia, and most people will make sure it is possible to
achieve success in this way. This process leads where the decision of
the society will be made because it is impossible in a small group. In
Armenia an open policy is starting, public opinion may generate
change. If the previous algorithm is unusable, the society must come
up with other proposals which may lead to the change of this regime.

The society must arrive to that on its own – if it rejects the old
algorithm, there will be nothing the old politicians will do, and if
the society does not accept the new proposal, it will have to remain
in the old algorithm. People are not interested in programs, in how
much their salaries will grow because they understand that you will
not be able to do it unless you are able to change the government.

People are interested in political change. The candidates may propose
a new algorithm.

Most candidates follow the old algorithm. Three candidates are
nominated from one election to another.

The algorithm does not depend on age. Most young people of the Armenian
National Congress say since they have not nominated their candidate,
they will go to the voting station, write on the ballot the name of
their candidate and void the ballot. These are elements which form a
new situation. We need to get rid of this bad algorithm. When people
know it is meaningless to run in the election, they do not go.

There is an opinion that people will vote for Serzh Sargsyan because
he appears to them as the safeguard of peaceful life for another
few years.

The segment which says it is unacceptable forms trends. We need to
understand the causes of the current situation – we have passed through
war, hardship, and people think that’s enough. There are also deeper
reasons which date back to the Soviet period when the stereotype was
crystallized that decisions are not made by the society but by the
select ones. Now these images and thinking are reviewed, it is their
crisis. The society has understood the cause of their problems and
proposed something new.

Will the regime remove the source of trouble?

How can the regime remove itself?

Will there be an alternative after this fermentation?

The society will see the alternative. There are ideas, the question
is whether the society accepts them. Politics is a process related
to the society, and as soon as the idea becomes the property of the
society, it becomes an alternative approach to life.

From: Baghdasarian

PRESIDENT OF ARMENIA: ANKARA’S POLICY OF “ZERO PROBLEMS WITH NEIGHBORS” HAVE BROUGHT “ZERO” RESULTS

arminfo
Tuesday, January 15, 18:19

The situation in Turkey is growing tense. The policy of “zero problems
with neighbors” have brought “zero” results, President of Armenia Serzh
Sargsyan said at the enlarged meeting in the Defense Ministry with
participation of the heads of the legislative, executive and judicial
authorities, governors and the leadership of the law-enforcement
agencies, Tuesday.

He said that the Turkish-Azerbaijani tandem under slogan “One Nation –
Two States” has been trying to force Armenia to go on concessions by
means of economic blockade for nearly 20 years.

“They did not succeed in this and will not succeed. As a peaceful,
leading and far-seeing nation we understand the importance of
confidence building in the region for peaceful co-existence with the
neighbors and natural development. Understanding this, we initiated
normalization of relations with Turkey. Everyone knows what happened
to that initiative and how Turkey refused from its commitments
continuing to keep in blockade the only closed border in Europe,”
President Sargsyan said.

He said that Ankara’s policy of “zero problems with neighbors” has
failed because Turkey strives to settle its problems with the neighbors
at the expense of the neighbors. “Today, Turkey is a country that has
achieved a big progress, but it will always be insufficient and will
have a dramatic end unless the Turkish authorities seriously revise
their attitude towards their own state and people. This process is
already endangered because Turkey is repeating the mistakes of its
own history,” the president said.

Sargsyan said that recognition and condemnation of the Armenian
Genocide is Turkey’s duty to the victims of the Genocide, to the
survivors and their successors. However, first of all, it is Turkey’s
duty to its own people. The president drew attention to the fact that
the Turkish people began to cast doubt on the version invited by the
Turkish authorities. The most progressive part of the Turkish public
openly speaks of the Armenian Genocide.

“For Armenia recognition and condemnation of Genocide is not
just a demand of justice or fulfillment of the moral duty to the
predecessors. It is important for our security. I think that without
sincere regret of Turkey and liquidation of consequences of the
Genocide, Armenia’s existence will remain endangered,” Sargsyan said.

From: Baghdasarian

PROSPEROUS ARMENIA CAUSE OF DISAGREEMENTS WITHIN ANC

tert.am
15.01.13

Petros Makeyan, Chairman of the Democratic Homeland party and member
of the opposition bloc Armenian National Congress (ANC), believes
the recent disagreements within the ANC are the result of cooperation
with the Prosperous Armenia Party (PAP).

Disagreements within a political force that once set the agenda and
is now an appendage to the PAP should be expected, he said.

“Last September-October, the ANC began serving the PAP. As a result,
it received the 7% in the parliamentary elections,” Mr Makeyan told
Tert.am.

In response to the report by the Zhoghovurd daily that money is
the real cause of the disagreements, Mr Makeyan said: “During the
parliamentary elections the ANC nominated its candidates in almost all
the constituencies, which means large funds. Most of the ANC candidates
had no personal funds. At that time I asked why they were nominated
in the constituencies if there was lack of funds. That’s all.”

With respect to his allegedly strained relations with ANC Coordinator
Levon Zurabyan, Mr Makeyan said that he has always been on good terms
with Mr Zurabyan. They sometimes have disagreements over work.

From: Baghdasarian

L’ARMENIE : ENTRE LA RUSSIE ET L’UNION EUROPEENNE
Laetitia

armenews.com
mardi 15 janvier 2013

L’Armenie veut a la fois approfondir ses relations avec la Russie et
l’Union europeenne et ne voit aucune contradiction entre ces deux
objectifs de politique internationale, a declare le secretaire du
Conseil de securite du president Serge Sarkissian. ” Il est clair pour
nous tous que l’Armenie et la Russie sont des allies strategiques “,
a declare Artur Baghdassarian lors d’une conference de presse.” La
Russie a toujours ete et demeure notre principal partenaire militaire
et politique et nous devrions approfondir nos relations. Mais il ne
faut pas voir une contradiction entre cela et nos relations avec
l’UE.Nous travaillons très bien avec les deux et nous devrions
poursuivre cette cooperation. ”

Baghdasarian n’a pas precise si Erevan rejoindra l’Union eurasienne
dirigee par la Russie. D’autres dirigeants armeniens ont egalement
ete evasif a ce sujet. Celui-ci concerne l’expansion de l’union
douanière entre la Russie, la Bielorussie et le Kazakhstan. Un haut
responsable de l’UE a declare le mois dernier que l’adhesion de
l’Armeie a l’Union douanière ne serait pas compatible avec un accord
entre l’UE et l’Armenie.

Baghdasarian, (parti Orinats Yerkir), a reaffirme l’interet d’
Erevan de continuer ces negociations d’ici la fin de cette annee :”
En ce qui concerne la signature de l’accord d’association avec l’UE,
nous avons travaille sur une feuille de route avec l’UE qui prevoit
des reformes et d’autres changements dans notre pays “. ” La mise en
~uvre de ces reformes devrait conduire a la signature de l’accord
d’association “, a ajoute Baghdassarian.

mardi 15 janvier 2013, Laetitia ©armenews.com

From: Baghdasarian

MEXICAN COURT REJECTS ALIYEV MONUMENT

The monument of Haydar Aliyev in Mexico City

MEXICO CITY-Mexico’s Federal Administrative Court dismissed a complaint
filed by Azerbaijan’s Embassy to prevent city authorities to dismantle
and remove a statue of Azeri dictator Haydar Aliyev from a park at
the center of the city, reported the Cronica newspaper.

The court’s decision paves the way for the statue’s removal.

The statue was erected over the summer, after the Azeri government
invested a reported $10 million in renovation of the park and the
statue. The giant statue had raised concerns with citizens and
protests from activists who decried the city’s decision to house a
statue of a known dictator along such figures as Abraham Lincoln and
Mahatma Gandhi.

In late November, a three-person panel appointed to investigate the
erection of the statue in the city’s Reforma Boulevard recommended
that the statue be removed, prompting Azerbaijan’s Ambassador to
Mexico Ilgar Mukhtarov to threaten retaliation against the Mexican
government, including the closure of Baku’s representation in Mexico.

The Azerbaijani Embassy appealed the commission decision to the
district court requesting an injunction to stay the decision to remove
the statue.

In November, Muktarov also said Azerbaijan would cancel $4 billion in
investment projects for Mexico, saying if the then Mexico City Mayor
Marcelo Ebrard “decides to remove the monument, we will cancel the
projects, close the embassy, it would hurt the relationship between
the two countries, and it would not be good for his image to be the
person who prevented a $4-billion investment.”

From: Baghdasarian

A CLASH OF CULTURES: RE-IMAGINING THE HYPHENATED ARMENIAN
BY MARIA TITIZIAN

I often wonder if other nations are as hard on themselves as we are.

No doubt our behavior toward one another on a personal, national and
global scale is enough reason to begin a critical discourse on our
self-perceived lack of inspiration. While we all claim to be Armenian
due to genetic material, ethnicity, language, physical characteristics
and a shared history, we are in fact a people whose behavior, world
views and perceptions are in constant conflict. Our personal stories
and experiences in the Diaspora attest to this condition and were
further compounded after Armenia gained independence. We went from
the typical Diaspora hyphenations of Lebanese-, American-, Iranian-,
Syrian-, French-, Argentinean-Armenian to the Hayastantsi-Spyurkahay
shift. We are forever labeling ourselves as Armenians belonging to
a particular place but never a shared space.

We create divisions for the sake of divisions.

My personal revelation of this condition revealed itself to me in 1983
during the first pan-Armenian AYF camp in Greece. Young Armenians
from the Middle East, Europe, South and North America came together
for two weeks of educationals, excursions and activities. I was 17
years old, very young and naïve and my excitement at traveling for
the first time to Europe and getting to meet like-minded compatriots
was beyond measure. The memories and friendships have stayed with me
thirty years on. It was an experience that changed the course of my
life. Although I returned to Canada with a stronger resolve to maintain
my identity as an Armenian, I was also astonished by the serious clash
of culture I had experienced. The Lebanese-Armenians considered us
North American-Armenians not as “Armenian” or patriotic as they were
because we would speak English, the Syrian-Armenians kept mainly to
themselves, especially the girls, none of us Western Armenians could
understand the Iranian-Armenians, to hear the Armenians from Argentina
speak with such a heavy Spanish accent was a little shocking and
the European Armenians were so different that we didn’t interact. We
all considered ourselves to be Armenian but there was a disconnect;
we were in reality so different from one another.

Growing up in Canada, a multicultural society, where ethnic minorities
are encouraged to maintain their identity and culture, living with
a diverse group of different races taught us tolerance and acceptance.

But the labels almost always existed unless you could trace your
Canadian lineage back at least three of four generations. The rest
of us came from somewhere else. We sought out familiarity and made
sure to stick with those who were most like us.

This was true for the Armenian Diaspora. You were a “Lebanonahay” or
“Syriahay” or a “Barsgahay” and you generally kept to your own “kind.”

And the other important division was the “Americahay” versus the
newly arrived hyphenated “other” Armenian, and then the issue became
not only about culture and language but turf.

And then our comfortable hyphenated world shifted as Armenia gained
independence and new labels were quickly assigned – we were the
Spyurkahays and they, the Hayastantsis. But the Hayastantsis also
had their own internal hyphenations based on city or region, and then
there was the Kharabakhtsi, the Javakhtsi, the Bakvetsi, etc. The most
ingrained distinction is reserved for the repatriates from the 1940s
who, 70 years on are still called “aghpars.” We like to distinguish.

And in this strange Armenian configuration of multiple identities,
we moved to Armenia where we came to be known sometimes as “aghpars,”
sometimes the more polite terminology of repatriate, but most times
crazy for leaving behind the comforts of the West. And as a painfully
small trickle of Armenians from different parts of the world come to
live in the homeland, these divisions continue, not as severe as they
were in the Diaspora but they do persist. Some traditions die hard.

The Genocide not only deprived us of our ancestral homeland but it
deprived us of the feeling of belonging to a particular geography,
oneness and unity. Yes, we talk about the power of the Armenian,
our tenacity to survive in the face of adversity, and yes, we still
tend to agree on some things of national importance or significance
but most of the time we like to disagree on many things.

But today, we have ownership, there is geography, recognized borders,
a specific, tangible piece of land, soil, a state that belongs to all
of us, however small or incomplete it may be. And not only one, but
two. Although the Republic of Nagorno Karabakh is not yet recognized,
for all intents and purposes it is de facto a nation state, with its
corresponding institutions and living, breathing people, the second
Armenian state on this planet. And yet the hyphenations continue.

Our diverse narratives, our personal histories and experiences,
the countries and communities where we lived in our formative years,
which have positively impacted our world views and perceptions, are
strengths that we must celebrate and employ to ensure the empowerment
of not only the homeland but the Diaspora. Utilizing the strength of
Armenians right across the globe can be a tool for greatness.

We must re-imagine what it means to be an Armenian in the 21st
century. We are a global nation in a globalized world. The Genocide
viciously cast us out into the world, a dispersion of catastrophic
dimensions for our people. We must flip this tragic narrative on
its head. Without ceasing to struggle for the restoration of our
historic and legal rights, let’s simultaneously use it to empower us
and not weaken us. It forced us to adapt, to become more flexible
and inventive. We had to learn how to live again. Some of us lived
in established democracies, others in authoritarian states; some of
us were caught in wars that had nothing to do with us and survived;
some had the privilege of living in countries where social justice
prevailed and in others where there was corruption, fundamentalism,
lack of freedoms and polarization; we learned tolerance and yet were
targets of intolerance; we learned to be innovative, cunning and how
to survive with nothing and then prosper. We educated ourselves and
our children. Individual Armenians around the world reached dizzying
heights of success because they intrinsically understood and had
felt hatred and deprivation and the only alternative was to succeed
and be better. We have lived in the west and the east, in the north
and south. We have covered the globe and have overcome. This is our
legacy, yet we hyphenate.

I am not a Canadian-Armenian, a Diaspora-Armenian, a repatriate,
or an aghpar, I am Armenian. So are you.

From: Baghdasarian

ICES FORMS OBSERVATION MISSION TO MONITOR PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN ARMENIA

14.01.13

The International expert Center for Electoral Systems (ICES) has
formed a mission to monitor the presidential election in Armenia
scheduled for February 18.

The 35-member mission will be headed by Dr. Alexander Tsinker. The
mission includes international experts from ten EU member-states,
United States and Israel.

The mission includes three groups: the political group (members
of the European Parliament and national parliaments, as well as
political scientists); legal group (lawyers and former diplomats);
and mass media group (political analysis and media representatives).

The eight long-term observers will start working on February 1, 2013.

The group plans meetings with the presidential candidates, head of
the parliamentary groups, members of the Central Electoral Commission
(CEC) and local election commissions, journalists. On February 15,
the ICES mission is to present its second interim report.

The short-term observers are to arrive in Armenia on February 14
to monitor the voting process, vote-counting procedure and summing
up of election returns. On the election day, all the observers will
move to Armenia’s regions to monitor the voting process at as many
polling stations as possible.

The ICES mission has given a generally positive review of the manner,
in which the pre-election process has commenced and is being conducted.

~U The legal foundations of the election process in the Republic
of Armenia basically correspond to the international democratic
regulations. The Electoral Code quite fully describes all the
procedures of the election process. Strictly adhered to, the
Electoral Code may ensure the transparency of the election process
thus expressing the will of the country’s citizens.

~U The Mission appreciates the fact that the current Electoral Code has
had no changes since its adoption in 2011, which gave all participants
of the electoral process sufficient time to plan out their activities.

~U The Central Election Commission of Armenia is conducting its work
professionally and in accordance with all requirements, schedules
and stages of the process as prescribed by the Electoral Code.

~U The Mission urges all candidates and their staffs to carry out
their pre-election activities with much responsibility, to facilitate
in establishment of peaceful and pleasant electoral atmosphere and
to refrain from making premature conclusions regarding the legitimacy
and democracy of the elections.

~U The Mission believes that even at the pre-election stage, all
participants in the electoral process must declare their willingness to
conduct honest and transparent campaign. They must also acknowledge the
legitimacy of the electoral process and its results – whether or not
they will meet their expectations. This is the essence of democracy.

~U The Mission expresses their hope that the pre-election campaign
period, the Elections Day itself and the process of vote counting and
results tabulation will be carried out in Armenia in accordance with
the Electoral legislation, without escalation of the current tensions,
and that these Presidential Elections will meet the international
standards.

~U The mission hopes that the rest of the pre-election period,
the Election Day and the results tabulation will be carried out in
Armenia within the legal framework, without aggravation of the current
political situation, and that the Elections will meet international
standards.

~U The final evaluation and conclusions of the mission on the
democratic nature of the parliamentary elections will be made only
upon completion of the electoral process.

From: Baghdasarian

NATIONAL IDENTITY MUST UNDERLIE ARMENIA’S POLICY TOWARD EU, EURASIAN UNION

17:29 ~U 15.01.13

History shows the Armenian people’s bitter experience in making choice,
says Ruben Safrastyan, Director of the Institute of Oriental Studies,
Armenian National Academy of Sciences (ANAS).

As regards Armenia’s joining the European Union (EU) or the Eurasian
Union, the country should not yield to the “temptation of choosing.”

“We must build up our policy on the basis of our identity. Our identity
is that we are a people of the Middle East and we should not restrict
ourselves to the policy of the South Caucasus,” Mr Safrastyan said.

Armenia should also try to be active in the Near East. “We should be
able to be active because we have the Treaty of Sèvres as a basis. I
am far from the idea that we will be presented with the Armenia of
Woodrow Wilson’s arbitral decision,” Mr Safrastyan said.

If Armenia is able to enhance its international role it will make an
easier choice between the EU and Eurasian Union, and that choice will
meet Armenia’s national interests.

“It is obvious that being Russia’s political and military ally is
in our national interests. In this case alone can our security be
ensured,” Mr Safrastyan said.

From: Baghdasarian

SERZH SARGSYAN LED THE EXPANDING SESSION AT ARMENIAN MINISTRY OF DEFENSE

Armenian President, General Commander Serzh Sargsyan has led the
session of expanded staff of the Armenian authorities at Armenian
Ministry of Defense. Press service of Armenian President informs
about this.

During the session the participants referred to two important
events in defense sphere. One of them was the CSTO military exercises
~SCooperation 2012~T which were held in Armenia. The other one was the
Strategic commanding staff trainings. Head of the Armenian National
Security Service, heads of the Armenian Parliament committees and
fractions, members of the Government, DDM authorities and the high
level servicemen attended the session.

Armenian Minister of Defense Seyran Ohanyan delivered a report and
presented the military-political situation in the region, the current
challenges and the ways to overcome them, spoke about trainings and
their results.

Armenian President also delivered speech during the session.

15.01.13, 16:58

From: Baghdasarian

ARMENIA’S EDUCATION MINISTER FINDS CONTRADICTIONS IN KOCHARYAN’S INTERVIEWS

TERT.AM
15:54 ~U 15.01.13

Deputy leader of Republican party of Armenia, Education and Science
Minister Armen Ashotyan has noticed three contradictions in today’s
and 2011 interviews of Armenia’s second president Robert Kocharyan.

In the earlier interview Kocharyan presented three reasons why he
would run for presidency and in today’s three reasons why he has not.

Ashotyan quoted the earlier interview where Kocharyan said in case
of three factors he would run for presidency. The first one was the
absence of improvement of country’s economic situation and people’s
welfare that result in low moods and increase of emigration. The
second factor was the public’s demand of his return and the third
his own conviction to be able to radically improve the situation.

“It appears that the real causes of unwillingness to run were not
the ones he enumerated today but two years ago,” the minister said.

In his today’s interview Robert Kocharyan singled out three reasons
why he has decided not to run for presidency. First, the fight for
power between two natives of Karabakh, longtime companions, was
unacceptable for him. It would make it difficult for many people to
make a choice and would become a topic for various speculations.

Besides, Robert Kocharyan himself preferred the incumbent President,
Serzh Sargsyan, as his successor, and his desire to run for the second
term is understandable.

Secondly, he wouldn’t like to be involved in creating a format of
“three presidents” fighting for power, which is extremely unpleasant,
and, according to Mr Kocharyan, harmful to the country.

Thirdly, the search for a political compromise in Armenia has turned
into political horse trading. This is not what he would like to spend
his time, knowledge and experience on.

From: Baghdasarian