Author: Chalian Meline

A LETTER TO A FRIEND – WHY THE SILENCE AND INACTIVITY?
By Dikran Abrahamian

10 November 2008

>From the moment that the present rulers came to power in Armenia,
there were reservations and critical appraisals. Initially that
involved the fraudulent presidential election, then the brutal way of
silencing the opposition. The most serious matter was yet to come –
a course of diplomacy that is at high gears to implement what some
call a sell out, including but not limited to lethally compromising
decades’ long struggle of the Diaspora for recognition of the Genocide
of the Armenians and the security of Artsakh.

Recently, during a private visit to California, the above topics were
the subject of discussions with many that I met, including editors,
writers, activists, party officials and ordinary folks of various
affiliations and persuasions. Some had praiseworthy remarks about
our community. Indeed a very well respected individual made the
following observation, "we have seen the Canadian Armenian community
being more active in the past couple of years." On the other hand,
I heard some veiled critical remarks too, primarily related to the
apparent silence of the community about the usurped power, ongoing
violations of human and civil rights, the predicament of the political
prisoners, and inactivity of the community regarding recent diplomatic
initiatives of Armenia.

While thanking for the positive remarks, I’ll try to address the issues
of silence and inactivity pointed out by many. To avoid hurting the
sensitivities of people involved in the affairs of our community in
Canada, I’ll describe the situation in as mundane and neutral terms
as possible.

That may not be always possible; for the sake of keeping good
relations, covering realities is not an option – particularly at this
juncture when so much is at stake.

I’ll start with AWA, The Armenian World Alliance in Toronto, comprising
Henchag, Ramgavar and ideologically opinionated but non-party member
individuals. Up to recently ADL, the Armenian Democratic Liberal
Party was a constituent of the formation. It’s no longer the case,
because the ADL leadership in Toronto opted out. Subsequently, to the
chagrin of several sympathizers of AWA, it joined CCA – the Congress
of Armenian Canadians based in Montreal.

CCA, despite being cognizant of the fact that the presidential
election was anything but fair, did not hesitate to congratulate
the new president, and simply made lukewarm remarks about the March
First tragedy. ADL did the same along with AGBU and others, such as
the Armenian Assembly in USA. It’s worth noting that the Armenian
Diocese of Canada is part of CCA, and the Primate ex-officio has
to follow instructions from the Catholicosate in Etchmiadzin. It’s
common knowledge that the Catholicos of All Armenians himself blessed
the new president and urged people to co-operate with the "elected"
authorities.

Of late some members of CCA privately were questioned why the silence
about what has happened and what is evolving. The answers have been
less than satisfactory. It seems that CCA concerns itself only with
matters of the Genocide of the Armenians and recognition of the
Genocide – a very convenient non-answer. Others have just shaken
their heads without providing a straight-forward reply.

With respect to ANCC, the Armenian National Committee of Canada,
to their credit they deplored and condemned the use of Violence
in Tibet. However, it seems that their binoculars were set to see
the higher elevations of the Roof of the World bypassing regions
around Ararat. Flip-flopping between opposition and coalition, the
ARF in Armenia set the tone for the rest of the chapters scattered
all over the world including Canada. Of course, once the agenda of
his Excellency the President of Armenia became more obvious, it felt
uneasy to say the least. How to handle the inconsistencies between
goals that are held dear and reality? There have been news items
circulating in the ARF or affiliated media elsewhere, but nothing
substantial in Canada.

As in other Armenian communities, independent individuals,
intellectuals who for one reason or another have apathy towards
recognized organizations, tried to break the silence. They wrote
open letters, participated in various petitions, initiated public
and on-line discussions, and posted articles in websites. The number
of people involved in such activities is impressive; but due to the
lack of coordination between individuals it did not materialize into
a unified voice asserting itself in Canada, let alone be adequately
heard in the motherland.

Is it time for action? Probably yes; but given the realities that
a primate effectively sets the trend of what’s to be done in one of
the organizations and dichotomy characterizing a coalition partner in
Armenia, it’s hard to expect anything substantive yet. Independents
are silenced, and sometimes – deliberately or inadvertently – their
initiatives are undermined.

Will the Canadian Armenian community be more active and be heard? It’s
argued that such an action is tantamount to interference in the
affairs of Armenia. Nevertheless, equally valid is the argument that
highest officials of Armenia have already hampered the efforts of the
Diaspora. For starters, they have made it all the more difficult to
expand the circle of jurisdictions that have recognized the Genocide –
that horrible traumatic communal experience that kept and keeps the
Diaspora together – a pathological phenomenon, yet very real.

Expecting the organizations to take the lead is to witness more of the
same, for as long as individuals and coalitions in the organizations
are worried about their own interests – personal or otherwise. The
moment that their prerogatives get seriously curtailed they’ll
raise their voice – an event that was observed during the first
administration in Armenia.

Meanwhile it’s up to the people who profess to be independents,
up to the intellectuals and professionals who are concerned about
the hazardous course that Armenia has taken, to coalesce and get the
Canadian Armenian community into the national discourse that began
with a rough ride.

SERBIA WILLING TO IMPROVE ITS RELATIONS WITH TURKEY

Hurriyet
Nov 10 2008
Turkey

ANKARA – Turkey is a very important country in the region and now a
member of the U.N. Security Council. It is very active in all regional
initiatives, we want to have good relations with Turkey. I came to
build our relations in all areas,’ says Ambassador Curgus

The ambassador of Serbia said his return after almost eight months
did not mean his country had withdrawn its objection to Ankara’s
recognition of an independent Kosovo.

Serbia recalled its ambassador to Ankara, Vladimir Curgus, in a show
of protest shortly after Turkey became one of the first countries to
recognize the breakaway region’s independence in February.

"I must say it is an illegal decision by Kosovo to declare
independence. But Turkey is responsible for its own decisions,"
Curgus told the Hurriyet Daily News & Economic Review in his first
interview with the media after returning in late October.

He said he came back, "not because we accept the recognition, but
because Serbia wants to make relations with Ankara better than they
are at the moment."

The ambassador said, "Turkey is a very important country in the region
and a member of the United Nations Security Council. It is very
active in all regional initiatives. We want to have good relations
with Turkey. I came to build our relationship in all areas."

But he said their difference with the Turkish government on the Kosovo
issue remained unresolved.

"No, we have not closed the (Kosovo) file," he said. "We do not agree
that Kosovo is a separate territory from Serbia. Serbia does not accept
the political decision of Turkey (to recognise its independence)."

Turkey multinational country

The process in the run-up to the recognition of Kosovo’s independence
gained momentum early this year with the United States and leading
members of the European Union pledging support. The critical decision
as to recognition sparked fears that Kosovo, populated by 2 million
Albanians, could set a precedent for other states, including Turkey,
who are concerned about separatism.

"Every nationality in every part of the world has its own rights. But
if they all declare independence, every multi-ethnic country including
Turkey would have big problems. Turkey is not a one-nation country,"
said Curgus.

His remarks were in response to questions about Kurdish claims for
broader autonomy inside Turkish territory.

"Did Turkey accept claims for territory? No, and it is right of
Turkey to do so as is the (denial of the independence of Kosovo)
a sovereign right of Serbia," he said.

Kosovo plans to open an embassy in Ankara soon. Diplomatic sources
told the Daily News that suitable sites were being sought.

"They can open whatever they want to open. It is not a question
that I want to comment on. It is a decision of the (Turkish)
government. Tomorrow they must explain their decision to the Tukish
people," said Curgus.

The ambassador said Serbia believed the dispute over Kosovo could be
settled by negotiation.

"The Balkan territory has had a very difficult history, involving many
battles. Because of past experience, we want to solve this (Kosovo)
problem not with guns but with law. We want to believe international
law still exists," noted Curgus.

The president of Serbia, Boris Tadic, asked the U.N. Security Council
to annul the declaration of independence by Kosovo. Belgrade currently
awaits the United Nations decision on Kosovo.

"We strongly believe that the U.N. system cannot approve of this. We
are sure the United Nations will consider the declaration of
independence illegal," said the ambassador.

He also expressed optimism about a real compromise with Albanians
in Kosovo.

"We insist on making a real deal with Albanians. You can never work
when there is a frozen conflict," said Curgus.

He cited another "frozen conflict," Nagorno-Karabakh, between regional
rivals in the Caucasus, Azerbaijan and Armenia. "You see that it is
very important to have a solution concerning Nagorno-Karabakh and
Turkey is involved as frozen conflicts are of no use to neighboring
countries," he said.

AMERIABANK OPENS ITS FIRST BRANCH IN NAGORNO-KARABAKH

ARKA
Nov 10, 2008

STEPANAKERT, November 10. /ARKA/. Ameriabank of Armenia has opened
its first branch on the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Along with traditional banking services, the branch will also be
developing new investment banking services that have not been utilized
in the banking systems of Armenia and Karabakh yet, General Director
of Ameriabank Artak Anesyan said.

Support is to be provided to small, medium and major businesses,
Anesyan said adding that the bank will be extending mortgage and
consumer credits and will be financing leasing and factoring projects.

The Stepanakert branch has about 1,000 clients today and the number of
clients is expected to grow by seven times up to 7,000 in yearly terms.

The banking services, technical equipment and the service level in
the new branch will be in line with highest international standards
and will not yield to the Yerevan Central Office, says the banks’
press release. An online system is to link the Stepanakert Office
with that in Yerevan.

The branch opening ceremony was attended by the Premier of
Nagorno-Karabakh republic (NKR) Ara Hatutiunyan, Chairman of the
Central Bank of Armenia Artur Javadyan and the Head of Artsakh diocese
of Armenian Apostolic Church Parkev Martirosyan.

Ameriabank (formerly Armimpexbank) was established in July 1992 as
the Armenian branch of the USSR Vnesheconombank. On September 8,
1992, the Central Bank of Armenia issued a license to the bank.

TDA Holdings Limited, affiliate of the Russian Troika Dialog Investment
Company, became the bank’s principal shareholder (96.15%). In May
2008 the bank was renamed Ameriabank.

ARMENIA, KYRGYZSTAN INTERESTED IN THE DEEPENING OF ECONOMIC TIES

armradio.am
10.11.2008 18:02

The newly appointed Ambassador of Kyrgyzstan to Armenia Raimkul
Atakurov (seat in Moscow) handed his credentials to President of
Armenia Serzh Sargsyan, President’s Press Office reported.

The President of the republic appreciated the active cooperation
established between the two countries over the past two years.

According to Serzh Sargsyan, when building their relations, Armenia and
Kyrgyzstan take into consideration the fact that the two countries are
parts of the same security system, both are members of the Collective
Security Treaty Organization, which attaches a special importance to
their relations.

The President noted that the activity of the Intergovernmental
Commission is important for the deepening of bilateral economic ties.

Ambassador Atakurov said he would do his utmost to facilitate the
deepening of relations between the two countries.

ARMENIE VISITE DU PRESIDENT SERGE SARKISSIAN A PARIS
par Piotr Smolar

Le Monde
6 novembre 2008 jeudi
France

La diplomatie se remobilise pour eviter une reprise du conflit
armeno-azerbaïdjanais sur la question du Haut-Karabakh

LE HAUT-KARABAKH fait l’objet d’un regain d’activite diplomatique. Il
a ete au coeur de l’entretien, mardi 4 novembre a Paris, entre Nicolas
Sarkozy et le president armenien, Serge Sarkissian. Deux jours plus
tôt, ce dernier a rencontre a Moscou son homologue Ilham Aliev, pour
l’Azerbaïdjan. Les deux dirigeants ont signe une declaration commune
au sujet du Haut-Karabakh, sous la supervision du chef de l’Etat russe,
Dmitri Medvedev.

Ce document ne constitue pas une feuille de route precise pour
un règlement pacifique du conflit qui oppose les deux pays sur ce
territoire, situe en Azerbaïdjan mais peuple d’Armeniens. Toutefois,
il confirme la necessite d’une " solution politique " assortie de "
garanties internationales ", qui devrait etre negociee dans le cadre
du Groupe de Minsk, cree par l’Organisation pour la securite et la
cooperation en Europe (OSCE), copreside par la Russie, les Etats-Unis
et la France.

Lors d’un entretien accorde au Monde, lundi 3 novembre, le president
armenien, Serge Sarkissian, s’est felicite de la signature du document,
" le premier depuis quatorze ans ", date de la fin du conflit arme qui
a dure six ans et fait près de 25 000 morts. " C’est aussi important
car les negociations avaient ralenti. Il n’y avait plus d’avancees
en raison des elections en Armenie et en Azerbaïdjan ", dit-il.

Ancien premier ministre, Serge Sarkissian a ete elu en fevrier. De
son côte, Ilham Aliev a ete reelu president le 15 octobre. En mars,
alors que l’Armenie traversait une grave crise post-electorale, marquee
par la mort de dix personnes et l’instauration de l’etat d’urgence,
le president azeri avait menace de reconquerir " les territoires
occupes " par les armes.

L’Armenie, par la voix de son president, se dit prete aujourd’hui
a avancer sans delai dans les negociations. Mais elle n’est guère
disposee a faire de concessions majeures. " Nous disons depuis
longtemps qu’une solution dans le Haut-Karabakh est possible
si l’Azerbaïdjan reconnaît le droit a l’autodetermination ; s’il
existe un lien terrestre entre l’Armenie et le Haut-Karabakh ; si des
garanties sont assurees pour la securite du Haut-Karabakh ", enumère
Serge Sarkissian. Interroge sur la zone terrestre qui existe de facto
entre l’Armenie et le Haut-Karabakh, le chef de l’Etat armenien a
estime qu’elle devait " avoir le meme statut " que le Haut-Karabakh.

LIENS AVEC LA TURQUIE

La guerre eclair entre la Russie et la Georgie, au mois d’août,
a contribue a accelerer les echanges diplomatiques au sujet de ce
conflit gele. Selon de nombreux observateurs, la Russie s’efforcerait
de reparer son image a l’etranger en apparaissant comme un mediateur de
paix. Elle chercherait aussi a accentuer sa domination politique dans
le Caucase. Selon Serge Sarkissian, le conflit georgien a demontre
qu’" il ne fallait pas ecraser militairement le droit des peuples a
l’autodetermination, sous peine de consequences graves ".

Le president armenien souligne egalement, en reference a la Russie,
que " les positions de tel ou tel pays sur le droit international ne
sont pas eternelles ". Il suffit selon lui de " reculer de quelques
annees et de comparer les declarations de la Russie sur le Kosovo
avec celles qu’elle tient sur l’Ossetie du Sud pour constater de
grandes differences ". Serge Sarkissian refute toute pression accrue
de Moscou sur la politique etrangère de l’Armenie. " Pourquoi les
Russes feraient-ils pression ? En tant que partenaire strategique,
nous assumons nos engagements, dit-il. Et par ailleurs, ils savent
bien que nous ne reconnaîtrons pas l’independance de l’Ossetie du Sud
et de l’Abkhazie, pour la bonne raison qu’on n’a pas reconnu celle
du Haut-Karabakh. "

M. Sarkissian a egalement evoque un autre chantier majeur, la
normalisation des liens avec la Turquie. Les relations diplomatiques
sont inexistantes en raison de la querelle acharnee sur le genocide
armenien, commis pendant la première guerre mondiale.

Debut septembre, le president turc, Abdullah Gul, a effectue une visite
historique a Erevan, a l’occasion d’un match de football opposant les
deux equipes nationales. " Une conversation efficace " est engagee,
dit M. Sarkissian. " Notre approche est la suivante : il faut etablir
des relations diplomatiques, ouvrir les frontières et ensuite seulement
traiter les questions qui nous preoccupent ", souligne-t-il.

–Boundary_(ID_+cD/Yta0PVwcDPS6A1G /dQ)–

TURKEY IN THE SECURITY COUNCIL
Gallia Lindenstrauss

Right Side News
torial/turkey-in-the-security-council.html
Nov 7 2008
GA

Turkey’s election as a non-permanent member of the United Nations
Security Council by a considerable majority (151 out the 192 member
states) reflects Turkey’s importance in the current international
system. Among the members of the European group, Turkey was chosen
alongside Austria after both overtook Iceland. The last time Turkey
was elected to the Security Council was over 40 years ago, and it
appears that the current choice also indicates international support
for some of the diplomatic bridging activity that Turkey has been
involved in recently.

This diplomatic bridging suggests a unique mediating role for
Turkey in conflicts in the three regions it borders: the Middle
East, the Caucasus, and the Balkans. Through this role as mediator,
Turkey attempts to prove that it need not identify with any given
international party and can maintain its good relations with the
West while it increases its involvement in the Middle East and the
Caucasus. Nevertheless, in view of Turkey’s domestic problems and
the instability of certain neighboring countries, some of the issues
that are expected to appear soon on the Security Council’s agenda
are liable to create some tough dilemmas for Turkish decision makers.

Of the diplomatic initiatives recently taken by Turkey, the most
prominent is the "football diplomacy" with Armenia, which peaked with
the first visit ever by a Turkish president to Armenia, to watch the
World Cup qualifying game between Armenia and Turkey. Armenia’s demand
that Turkey recognize the genocide committed against the Armenians
in 1915, and the conflict over the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh, with
Armenia controlling around 15 percent of the territory of Azerbaijan,
Turkey’s ally, have strained relations between them.

Moreover, the absence of diplomatic ties between Turkey and Armenia
and concern over another round of fighting in Nagorno-Karabakh between
Armenia and Azerbaijan impact on the stability of the entire Caucasus
region. For example, Armenia -Russia’s ally – is wary of Turkey and of
Azerbaijan yet the oil pipeline between Azerbaijan and Turkey traverses
Georgia in order to bypass Armenia. Recent developments in Georgia
underscore that players looking to block Russia’s over-dominance in
the Caucasus should also take Armenia into consideration. Thus Turkey
recently launched a plan for advancing cooperation and stability in
the Caucasus region among Russia, Turkey, and the southern Caucasus
states, including Armenia.

Another diplomatic initiative by Turkey, mediation in the Israel-Syria
conflict, is of particular interest since one of the elements in the
strategic partnership between Israel and Turkey that evolved in the
90s was these countries’ confrontation with Syria. Israeli control of
the Golan and the Lebanon question divide Israel and Syria. Between
Turkey and Syria there were a number of disputes based on territory and
conflicts over the division of water resources. Moreover, at the end of
the nineties relations between Turkey and Syria reached a crisis point
following Syria’s patronage of elements from the PKK (the Kurdistan
Workers’ Party) who carried out terror attacks on Turkish soil.

Resolution of the issue of PKK presence in Syria and the events in
Iraq have helped relations between Syria and Turkey thaw in recent
years. Some claim that a new axis is currently evolving between
Turkey, Syria, and Iran based on a shared interest in the future
of Iraq. As part of Turkey’s focus on bridging, it takes pains not
to present these developments as a threat to its good relations with
the United States and Israel, although the question remains as to how
much it will maintain this policy. A related factor is Turkey’s favor
of the Palestinians in its mediating initiatives between Israel and
the Palestinians; this support that has even increased in recent years.

Despite these and other bridging initiatives, Turkey is hard-pressed
to deal with the Kurdish problem on its own territory. Since 2007,
when the Justice and Development party was reelected with a large
majority, reforms towards the Kurds were not extended, reforms that
were spearheaded by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdo?an in his first
term of office as part of Turkey’s efforts to be accepted into the
European Union (EU).

Furthermore, frequent incursions by Turkish forces into Iraq in order
to chase PKK activists taking cover in northern Iraq, and Turkey’s
fierce opposition to the establishment of an independent Kurdish state
damage Turkey’s attempts to present itself as a stabilizing influence
in the international arena. Although it may be assumed that the United
States will labor to prevent Security Council discussion of issues
connected to Iraq, Turkey’s heavy involvement in Iraq will undoubtedly
cause it problems, at least vis-a-vis its dealings with the US in
the Security Council, and will challenge its potential for cooperation.

One of the issues expected to continue on the Security Council’s agenda
is the Iranian nuclear program. Turkey objected to the imposition of
sanctions on Iran and tried to mediate between Iran and the United
States. Iranian cooperation in Turkey’s fight against the PKK and
reciprocal high level visits even suggest a strengthening of ties
between Turkey and Iran. On the other hand, the United States will
look to Turkish cooperation in decisions over international sanctions
on Iran. The United States may link this issue with Turkey’s requests
regarding the Kurdish areas in Iraq, and possibly even subsequent
American non-recognition of the genocide committed against the
Armenian people.

With regard to the Israeli-Arab conflict and the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict, Turkey will almost certainly adopt a position favorable
to the Arab and Palestinian sides in the Security Council. While
relations with Israel are still considered important, partly due the
support of military leaders for these ties, a number of parties will
probably encourage Turkey to adopt positions less comfortable for
Israel. Furthermore, support by the Justice and Development party
for Islamic principles joins Turkey’s traditional pro-Palestinian
stance. In the past, Israel accepted Turkey’s difficulties with
supporting it on issues that contradicted the Palestinian position,
and one may expect Israel to maintain this policy.

While the division into groups in the UN is not based solely on
geography, there were those who pointed out the irony of Turkey being
accepted as a non-permanent member of the Security Council as part of
a European group, even though full membership in the European Union
is not guaranteed. If Turkey manages to fulfill a constructive role
in the Security Council in the next two years this may help to soften
some of the resistance to its acceptance to the EU, for example from
leaders such as French president Nicolas Sarkozy.

It seems that Turkey’s current situation and recent bridging
initiatives may help it to contribute to stability in the regions
around it. Nevertheless, one can imagine scenarios in which Turkey is
faced with considerable dilemmas regarding the way it votes in the
Security Council, principally with regard to its desire to be seen
as part of Europe and the democratic Western world even though it is
an Islamic state with extensive ties to the Islamic world and key
countries such as Iran and Syria. The question is will its conduct
as a non-permanent member of the Security Council be similar to that
of Austria (or Belgium and Italy, which were replaced by Turkey and
Austria) or that of Indonesia. Turkey, however, will likely do its
utmost to mediate and thereby avoid having to take sides.

The Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) is an independent
academic institute that studies key issues relating to Israel’s
national security and Middle East affairs.

DIPLOMATIC ACHIEVEMENTS OF ARMENIA AND NKR HAVE BEEN NEUTRALIZED BY SIGNING OF MOSCOW DECLARATION, POLITECONOMIA NGO STATES

Noyan Tapan

Nov 5, 2008

YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 5, NOYAN TAPAN. Having analysed the Declaration
on settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict which was signed by
the presidents Serzh Sargsyan, Ilham Aliyev and Dmitry Medvedev in
Moscow on November 2, "Politeconomia" Political, Economic and Legal
Research Institute NGO expressed its concern about some wordings of
the declaration.

According to a statement issued by the NGO, the following wordings
of the Declaration cause concern:

1. The first clause of the Declaration, in particular, says that "the
resolution of the conflict will be carried out based on the norms
and principles of international law, and the decisions and documents
passed within this framework".

During the 62nd session of the UN General Assembly on March 14,
2008, decision No 62/243 (The Situation in the Occupied Territories
of Azerbaijan) was adopted, by which, in particular, Azerbaijan’s
territorial integrity within the internationally accepted borders
was recognized, as well as it was demanded that the Armenian forces
should be withdrawn fully, immediately and unconditionally from the
Republic of Azerbaijan. And if, by signing the Moscow Declaration,
Serzh Sargsian agrees to see the political settlement of the Nagorno
Karabakh conflict based on the so far adopted international documents
on the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, it means that Azerbaijan has now
received an opportunity to put the above mentioned decision of the UN
as the basis of the negotiation process. This does not proceed from
the interests of the Republic of Armenia and the Nagorno Karabakh
Republic and may contribute to the use of the principle of territorial
integrity put forward by Azerbaijan.

2. Regardless of what kind of process will start by the signing of
the Moscow Declaration, it is worrying that the Republic of Armenia,
through Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan’s signature, has ratified
a document, in which the presence of Nagorno Karabakh in the form of
a signature of NKR’s official representative is absent.

So far there was no other document on settlement of the conflict
related to the NKR, in which the signature of an official
representative of the NKR was absent. It means that the Armenian
leadership "de jure" accepted the fact of the NKR’s being forced
out of the negotiation process, so the process of involving the NKR
at any negotiation stage will become complicated in the future. It
should also be mentioned that during the terms of presidents Levon
Ter-Petrosian and Robert Kocharian, no document without a signature of
the NKR representative was signed. Both presidents repeatedly stated
that Armenia would not sign an agreement, in which the will of the
NKR’s people is absent.

Both the Bishkek Protocol of May 5, 1994, and the Document on
Ceasefire, which was signed in Baku, Yerevan and in Stepanakert
on May 9, 10 and 11 of 1994, bear the signatures of the official
representatives of the NKR. That is, these documents stipulate the
NKR as a full subject of the conflict. The indicated documents also
bear the signatures of the official representatives of the Azeri
side, that is, Azerbaijan at least "de facto" recognized the NKR as
a subject of intenational law.

Politeconomia NGO believes that after the signing of the Moscow
Declaration, the Azeri side has reached a document that has neutralized
the previous diplomatic achievements of the Republic of Armenia and
the NKR. The NGO calls on all the organizations and persons concened
about the Nagorno Karabakh problem and the whole people to unite their
efforts in order to neutralize the dangers threatening the national
security system.

SERZH SARGSYAN: TODAY ARMENIA IS A DYNAMICALLY DEVELOPING COUNTRY

armradio.am
06.11.2008 16:16

Within the framework of his visit to Brussels, the President of
Armenia Serzh Sargsyan met with representatives of the Belgian
Armenian community.

The President said in his speech that we are entering a new stage
of realization of national objectives, when we face the tasks of
development and rise.

"Today Armenia is a dynamically developing country, which has a stable
financial system and growing economy. The Armenian economy registered a
10.4% growth under the conditions of 4.2% of rise of prices during the
nine months of 2008. We managed to overcome the situations, when the
known events around South Ossetia directly affected our economy. You
know that Armenia realizes over 70% of its commodity turnover through
Georgian territory and you know how the closed roads can affect the
Armenian economy. We avoided the first and most dangerous wave of
the world financial crisis.

It’s hard to find another landlocked country in the world that would
be blockaded by two out of four of its neighbors. In these conditions
we learnt to work and ensure serious economic development. However,
it does not mean that those borders should remain closed forever
or steps should not be taken in the direction of opening those,"
the President said.

"People in this hall are well aware of the importance of international
recognition of the Armenian Genocide. The Diaspora and exactly your
community have an immediate input here. The Resolution of the European
Parliament adapted in Brussels in 1987 became a basis for further
acts symbolizing the restoration of historical justice.

My position is that by realizing the existence of the problem we should
simultaneously move forward along the path of establishing normal
relations with Turkey. Deriving from this circumstance, as President
of the Republic of Armenia I made the first symbolic step in that
direction by inviting Turkish President Abdullah Gul to Armenia. I’m
glad that the Turkish President positively responded to my invitation
and in September of the current year we had an opportunity to initiate
a process, which should result in the establishment of an atmosphere
of trust between the two countries, and this atmosphere of trust can
be created as a result of establishment of diplomatic relations without
any preconditions and diversified cooperation between countries.

In the basis of our relations with Azerbaijan we see the peaceful
resolution of the Karabakh issue based on mutual concessions, which
should guarantee the realization of the right of Karabakhi people to
self-determination. We are ready to develop the negotiation process,
taking as a basis the known principles put into circulation last
year. You probably know that just a few days ago we signed a joint
declaration with the Presidents of Azerbaijan and Russia, which,
I think, marks the start of a new, more active phase of peaceful
settlement of the Karabakh issue," Serzh Sargsyan continued.

"We should leave another Armenia to our generations, a developed,
democratic and peaceful Armenia. Saying "we" I mean the citizens of
the Republic of Armenia and all Armenians, all those who consider
Armenia their Motherland. We should work together to create that
Armenia, because we cannot leave anything more eternal and valuable
to our generations," the President noted.

TRADE GROWS BY 10.1%, SERVICES BY 14.5% IN ARMENIA IN JANUARY-SEPTEMBER 2008 ON SAME MONTHS OF LAST YEAR

Noyan Tapan

Nov 3, 2008

YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 3, NOYAN TAPAN. In January-September 2008, trade
turnover made 1 trillion 127 billion 279.3 million drams (about 3
bln 686.1 mln USD) in current prices in Armenia, growing by 10.1%
in comparable prices on the index of the same period of 2007.

According to the RA National Statistical Service, retail trade turnover
made 690 bln 58.7 mln drams in current prices in January-September
2008, growing by 7.5% in comparable prices on the respective index
of the same months of 2007.

Services made 523 bln 14.8 mln drams in the period under review,
increasing by 14.5% in comparable prices on January-September 2007.

SHIKAHOGH RESERVE SURROUNDED BY MINING SITES

ArmInfo
2008-11-03 17:39:00

ArmInfo. Shikahogh Reserve is surrounded by mining sites. ArmInfo
correspondent was told that to hold geological exploration some company
has taken on lease land plots of four villages of Syunik region –
Tsav, Srashen, Tchakat and Shikahogh. The rent makes up 4 thsd AMD
per hectare. According to preliminary information, over 1700 ha are
leased out for 4 years.

"This company’s representatives haven’t applied to us personally. But
we were instructed by the administration of Syunik region to give our
lands for geological exploration. The relevant agreement was concluded
a week ago", Head of the rural community Shikahogh Gegham Kazaryan
said. According to him, from Shikahogh 2 plots with the total area
of 850 ha have been leased, 509 ha of them are lands of agricultural
designation. The second plot is situated outside the territory of
Shikahog community and neighbors on Shikahogh Reserve. Kazaryan says
that in early XX a group of French miners searched copper here. "I
have heard that there is a uranium deposit near the village of Tsav
but I can’t say if this is true. According to rumors, some people
came here in search of uranium in 2007," says Kazaryan.

Director of Shikahogh Reserve Ruben Lazarian does not think that
prospecting activities pose any threat to the reserve. All the
plots are outside the buffer zone no less than 3 km away from the
reserve. "It is just prospecting and I see no danger in it," says
Lazarian.