Author: Chatinian Lara

MOSCOW PROSECUTOR SUSPEND ARMENIAN STUDENT MURDER PROBE
RIA Novosti, Moscow
22 Aug 06
Moscow, 22 August: The Moscow metro prosecutor has suspended the
investigation into the murder of Armenian student Vagan Abramyants
in the Pushkinskaya underground station, his [family] lawyer Simon
Tsaturyan told RIA Novosti.
“The case has been suspended as it has been impossible to establish
who committed the crime,” Tsaturyan said.
Abramyants was killed on 22 April 2006 by unknown criminals.

Panorama.am
17:36 18/08/06
GOVERNMENT DECREASES RADIATION NORM
The government approved today new norms for population and nuclear
power plant staff reducing it from 0.5 to 0.2 ber (measurement unit
for radiation) for population and from 5 to 2 ber for the staff of the
nuclear power plant. The decision will be effective starting July 1,
next year.
Ashot Martirosyan, nature protection ministry state nuclear supervision
department head, told reporters today that at the moment “the annual
indicator of the radiation for nuclear power plant staff does not
exceed 2 ber”. Martirosyan, however, failed to say what is the level of
public radiation, saying no measurements have been taken. /Panorama.am/

CONFORMATION OF AZERBAIJAN’S ROADS TO INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS REQUIRES $5 BN AND 15 YEARS
Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Aug. 17, 2006
Azerbaijan is behind Armenia of the length of primary roads,
Transportation Ministry Traffic Service Department chief Javid Gurbanov
told a media briefing, APA reports.
Of 18 799-km-long roads, 1% are primary roads, 5% is secondary roads,
29% are third-category and 55% are four-category roads.
“Conformation of Azerbaijan’s roads to international standards requires
at least $5 bn and 15 years”.
Totally, the automobile roads of Azerbaijan is some 30 000 km in
length of which 18 799 km are priority roads.

NEW CHIEF COACH OF ARMENIAN FOOTBALL TEAM GETS ACQUAINTED WITH INFRASTRUCTURES OF ARMENIAN LEADING CLUBS
Armenpress
Aug 17 2006
YEREVAN, AUGUST 17, ARMENPRESS: The newly appointed chief coach of
the Armenian national football team Yan Porterfield got acquainted
today with the infrastructures of the Armenian leading clubs.
He also visited the sport base of “Pyunik”, got acquainted with the
training opportunities of the football players and followed the pace
of the training. Afterwards the new coach discussed with the staff
the issue of the preparedness of the football players.
Armenian Football Federation press service informed Armenpress that Yan
Porterfield also got acquainted with the infrastructures of “Banants”
and “Mika” clubs as well.
The coach underscored the conduction of trainings in different stadiums
and on different grass-covers because it will help the football
players to display their technical abilities in all kinds of stadiums.
Yan Porterfield also visited Vazgen Sargsian stadium and got acquainted
with its infrastructure as well.

MEETING OF UP TO 21-YEAR FOOTBALL PLAYERS’ TEAMS OF BOSNIA AND ARMENIA TO BE HELD ON AUGUST 16
Noyan Tapan
Aug 16 2006
YEREVAN, AUGUST 16, NOYAN TAPAN. Meetings of group tournaments of 2007
football youth championship of Europe are held on August 16. The up
to 21 year players’ team of Armenia will meet in the city of Zenitsa,
Bosnia, with the combined team of that country. 18 football players
left for the place of championship headed by senior trainer Samvel
Petrosian. 11 players play in “Pyunik”, 5 in “Banants” and 2 ones,
Edgar Manucharian and Artashes Baghdasarian, are legionaries. The
meeting will start at 20:00 Yerevan time. The youth team of Armenia

AZERBAIJANI PARLIAMENT MAY DISCUSS SOME OSCE MINSK GROUP PRINCIPLES
Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Aug. 16, 2006
The OSCE Minsk Group’s some principles regarding the Armenia-Azerbaijan
conflict may be discussed in the autumn session of Azerbaijani
parliament, parliament’s first vice-president, head of standing
commission for security and defense affairs Ziyafet Asgarov told
journalists, APA reports.
“The main principle for us is territorial integrity of Azerbaijan.
This principle can be discussed,” Mr. Asgarov said.

WITHIN PROGRAM OF CERTIFICATE FOR BUYING FLATS, 775 MLN DRAMS TO BE ALLOCATED THIS YEAR TO REFUGEE FAMILIES TAKEN SHELTER IN KOTAYK MARZ
Noyan Tapan
Aug 15 2006
YEREVAN, AUGUST 15, NOYAN TAPAN. The sitting of the commission on
providing with flats, in the rural settlements of the marzes of Lori
and Shirak, the families remained without refuge in the consequence of
the 1988 earthquake and the refugee families displaced from Azerbaijan
took place at the RA Government on August 14. Noyan Tapan was informed
about it by the RA Government’s Information and Public Relations
Department. The information presented by the RA Minister of Urban
Development and the corresponding Regional Governors concerning works
on implementation of the program on primary providing with flats of
20 refugee families living in the hostel in the address of Moldovakan
71/1, Yerevan, of families remained without refuge in the consequence
of 1988 earthquake in the city of Gyumri, of people displaced from
Azerbaijan in 1988-1992 in the marz of Kotayk was discussed at the
sitting. The discussed information also related to the process of
construction of unfinished houses of families remained without refuge
in the rural settlements of the marzes of Lori and Shirak. All the
mentioned programs are implemented on the account of the 2006 RA state
budget. It was mentioned that, within the framework of the 2 bln 225
mln drams (about 5.3 mln U.S. dollars) envisaged by the 2006 state
budget, particularly, works of construction of 101 unfinished buildings
are implemented in the marz of Lori, of 34 unfinished buildings are
implemented in the marz of Shirak. From the 875 mln drams allocated
for implementation of the program of giving certificates for buying
flats for refugee families, 775 mln drams were allocated to families
of the marz of Kotayk, and 100 mln to 20 families of the Moldovakan
71/1 building of Yerevan. By the program of giving certificates for
buying flats, 875 mln drams were allocated for providing with flats
families remained without refuge in the consequence of the earthquake
in the city of Gyumri.

TIGRAN TOROSYAN: “BAKU DOES NOT DARE TO RECOGNIZE THE REALITIES”
ArmRadio.am
15.08.2006 10:45
REGNUM: Mr. Torosyan, recently an extraordinary convention of the
Republican Party of Armenia (RPA) took place. What conclusions can
be drawn, what developments are expected, and has the process of
increasing the membership of the RPA already been accomplished?
TOROSYAN: I think during the convention it became clear to everybody
that one should not draw extraordinary conclusions. As for the process
of increasing the membership, I believe, this is a continuous process
for any party. If there are people who wish to be admitted to the
party, naturally the process of replenishment will go on.
REGNUM: According to your forecast how many percent of votes will the
Republican Party collect in the upcoming parliamentary elections of
2007 ?
TOROSYAN: I think it is not worth doing forecasts about the elections
today.
As a matter of fact, I am surprised that some people have already
started to “distribute” parliamentary seats. Our approach is formulated
in an absolutely clear manner. We have repeatedly made it public. In
the course of the elections we will try not only to maintain our
positions, but also to consolidate them as much as possible. One can
notice that the estimates of Serge Sarkisyan (Minister of Defense,
who was recently elected as a member Council of RPA – REGNUM) are
also within the framework of this formula.
REGNUM: However, what will be the distribution of powers in the
new parliament?
TOROSYAN: The most important thing is that the elections meet the
international standards. It is not important who else apart from us
will hold places in the new parliament. We will follow the formula that
I spoke about. The RPA is ready to cooperate with all the political
powers that will enter the parliament after the elections of 2007
both on specific issues that may come up, as well as on broader range
of issues. What the image will be in general — will be determined
by the nation. I will just say that not all experts’ predictions on
Armenia turn into reality. And understandably so, because sometimes
there is significant lack of experience and knowledge for conducting
such studies. As for forecasting by politicians, those are not really
forecasts, but are rather wishful thinking.
REGNUM: Does the Republican Party consider during the forthcoming
elections the possibility of entering any alliance with another
political party? Is such a scenario being discussed?
TOROSYAN: Such an option is not being discussed yet. Each party should
always be ready to campaign on its own. However if the processes
develop in such a scenario, that entering into pre-electoral bloc
with some political power will be convenient, naturally this issue
will be considered. I would like to emphasize once again that this
issue is not on the agenda of the party yet.
REGNUM: If the Republican Party accomplishes all the tasks and
achieves its planned aims, who will be nominated as candidate to the
presidential elections of 2008?
TOROSYAN: I think it will be correct to speak about the presidential
elections after the parliamentary elections.
REGNUM: Many politicians do not exclude the candidacy of the Minister
of Defense Serge Sarkisyan.
TOROSYAN: I know. I am also familiar with his response to that
question.
REGNUM: Do you consider his nomination possible?
TOROSYAN: I am confident that after the parliamentary elections
the Republican Party will certainly discuss this issue and express
its position.
REGNUM: Mr. Torosyan, how efficient do you consider the South Caucasian
Parliamentary Initiative? What can this structure contribute to
Armenia? There is an opinion that such initiatives are doomed to
failure from the very beginning.
TOROSYAN: First of all, we should understand the purpose of the
initiative itself. And the purpose, I believe, is both positive and
important: it is the establishment of contacts between representatives
of parliaments of three South Caucasian countries. This is indeed
very important. In the future such meetings and contacts can “break
the ice” in the relations between these countries. Of course it is
meaningless to anticipate serious results from such meetings at this
point because of one reason: the Azerbaijanis are restrained by the
the official position of Baku, which is the following: relations,
cooperation with Armenia in any area on any issue, including on the
inter-parliamentary level is possible only after settlement of the
Nagorno Karabakh conflict. Our position is absolutely opposite to
this. I believe any reasonable person will prefer Armenia’s position
given its constructive nature.
Alas, this is the reality. Unfortunately, the international community,
which recently has been quite often reflecting on the conflicts
and particularly on the necessity to settle the Karabakh issue as
soon as possible, however, is not willing to see the main problems
that hinder the settlement. And in my opinion the most important
obstacles are the deepening of war propaganda as well as hate speech
in Azerbaijan. Notwithstanding wishes of some people (some consider
2006 to be a window, some — a door, or others consider 2007 and 2008
pre-electoral years) independently from all the above mentioned,
as long as the propaganda in Azerbaijan continues, it impossible
to anticipate any resolution. Today it became obvious that the
settlement of this issue is possible only by applying the principle
of self-determination of peoples. However, I think the President of
Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev is not ready for settlement of the issue
grounding on this principle, although behind closed doors he does
not deny that this very principle seems to him as the only way of
resolution.
Therefore, if the president of Azerbaijan is not ready to settle
the issue on this basis, it means he must prepare his nation not
for the resolution of the conflict, but through lies and vociferous
statements, he prepares them for the illusion that the resolution is
possible only by military means. I must say that the latter option
is also impossible; once everyone was convinced of this, including
Azerbaijanis. I don’t think it will make sense to convince ourselves of
the same once again. However, neither Armenia nor Nagorno Karabakh wish
at all to prove – as to where the ways of confrontation and war lead…
REGNUM: It seems that the negotiations on peaceful settlement of
the Nagorno Karabakh conflict within the framework of the OSCE Minsk
Group have failed.
Do you think it is possible to transfer this issue into another
format, particularly to parliamentary structures, for instance, to the
Parliamentary Assembly of NATO or Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE?
TOROSYAN: It’s absolutely impossible. Especially bearing in mind
the fact that some of those parliamentary institutions have a formal
character, they are not so to say real parliamentary institutions. If
one scrutinizes their regulations, style of work and mechanisms,
one will see that they are not parliamentary institutions. Those are
places where people simply come together, meet, present some reports,
express opinions and that’s it. These meetings do not have any
practical implications. This is on the one hand. On the other hand,
in order to solve such complicated problems, significant experience,
knowledge as well as insight are required. It seems to many persons
that in reality conflicts are very simple and easy to resolve. At
the same time, many of them have an opportunity to grasp that in real
life it is a complicated problem.
I am sure that serious parliamentary institutions won’t have the
temptation to get involved, since they understand that conflict
resolution is a long process in parliamentary institutions, sometimes
it is very difficult to conduct such processes, because, as a rule,
their members change quite often.
As regards the “failure” of Karabakh negotiations within the framework
of the OSCE Minsk Group, frankly speaking, I would not assess the
current situation in such way. The current situation is not different
from, at least last year’s situation. The principles of the resolution
are well known and formulated, including the principle of respecting
the right of self-determination. The only difference in comparison
with the last year is that a year ago no one knew about the gist of
the principles. Today they are known and publicly debated. Before some
principles of negotiations became public, everything was happening
behind closed doors, and neither Ilham Aliyev nor Elmar Mamedyarov
deemed it necessary to deny the fact of their existence. Nevertheless,
today when many people are aware of the principles, they are trying
to reject these principles or some of the principles. Here is the
difference.
Today I am sure as much as I was last year, that when it will be
time to make the principles completely public and formulate the
document, Azerbaijanis will go back on their word. It has happened
repeatedly. The Azerbaijani side has always demonstrated a double-faced
policy. A conduct, which is demonstrated behind closed doors when
no one sees them, especially someone from their own society, and a
conduct outside these rooms and under the sight of others.
These two behaviors essentially differ from each other very often.
REGNUM: Can the principle of returning territories to Azerbaijan,
which are found in the proposals of the co-chairmen and which represent
actually a security belt around Nagorno Karabakh, create a wave of
mass protest in Armenia?
Will it lead to a serious discontent, won’t it?
TOROSYAN: As long as the document does not have a holistic
appearance, naturally there is not a final form and extent of the
compromise. There is no sense to talk about something that doesn’t
have a final form. Theoretically there can be a discontent caused by
the comprehensive resolution of the problem.
Practically, I think no one doubts that in the course of the settlement
of the conflict a compromise has to be reached for sure. What its
content will be, and in what proportions, is a different question. What
is important today is that the right of self-determination of peoples
has been recognized for the first time as a principle of conflict
settlement. This is becoming an irrefutable fact and is enshrined in
several documents. The application of this principle will result in the
recognition of independence of the Republic of Nagorno Karabakh. So the
issue of territories is directly intertwined with this circumstance.
Sometimes, it is articulated that once, Nagorno Karabakh had already
conducted a referendum. But a question is raised – within what
borders? Those who insist that once there has been a referendum, and
in fact been held and no one doubts its lawfulness from political
and legal point of view, have to not forget that if we insist on
that referendum, it means that we insist also on the borders in
which it has been held. Do the people insist on these borders in
the same manner as they insist on the recognition of results of this
referendum? These two factors are interrelated. Why did I bring this
fact as an example? Because there can not be separate questions in
the course of the resolution of the conflict. And it’s impossible to
resolve territorial issues leaving the other issues aside. They are
interlinked with numerous ties directly and indirectly.
REGNUM: So, should a new referendum be held in Nagorno Karabakh?
TOROSYAN: It is the international community that proposes to hold
a referendum. I have no doubts related to how the people of Nagorno
Karabakh will express themselves during another referendum. However,
as I have already noted, there is also another question, i.e. the
borders. And those who insist on the recognition of the previous
referendum have to consider that they suggest relinquishing all the
adjacent areas. The referendum was conducted in the territories of
former autonomous region of Nagorno Karabakh and Shahumyan.
REGNUM: In this case, within what borders does the new referendum
is to be held and does it make sense to hold it, if a timeframe of
10-15 years is being anticipated?
TOROSYAN: Such a term of holding a referendum, in 10-15 years, is not
reflected anywhere. This is another Azerbaijani provocation. There
isn’t such a document that says 10-15 years, and there are no reasons
to speak about such a timeframe. It doesn’t make sense to speak about a
hypothetical timeframe. It has to be linked to certain actions. Apart
from that, the borders within which the referendum will be held have
to be indicated. Furthermore, it should be clearly stipulated, that
independently from the position of Azerbaijan, after the referendum,
the international community must recognize its results. We know from
our experience that Azerbaijan is ready to renounce any agreement,
any commitment or viewpoint at any time. They are even ready to lie
without batting an eye. Therefore, the international community has to
be the guarantor of the recognition of results of the referendum. At
the same time, if 2-3 years are required for holding the referendum,
then it is necessary to define the modalities of the interim status
of Nagorno Karabakh. So there are numerous issues that have to be
necessarily resolved in order to bring the document to its final
shape and prepare it for signing.
I hope that in the meanwhile the Republic of Nagorno Karabakh
also will take part in the negotiations. Furthermore, it is very
important that the document is signed also by the authorities of
Nagorno Karabakh, since they are a fully internationally recognized
party to the conflict.
REGNUM: There is much talk about the possibility of deploying
peacekeeping forces in the area of Karabakh conflict. How effective
will such a decision be and what will it give to the conflicting
parties and to the region as a whole? In fact, it has been ten
years that in the area of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict the regime of
ceasefire is maintained by the efforts of the parties themselves,
not the peacekeepers.
TOROSYAN: I repeat myself, but it is a delusion to separate any issue
from the general context and to begin deliberations around it. Each
sub item is linked with a great number of other sub items. To tell the
truth, there is one core issue of paramount importance — it is the
status of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic. However, all other issues
are connected with each other, and to discuss them separately is,
at least, meaningless waste of time.
REGNUM: Taking into account the forthcoming parliamentary and
presidential elections, do you think that till 2008-09 nothing will
change in the process of conflict settlement and the status quo will
be maintained?
TOROSYAN: Probably, your question is connected with the approach of the
co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group, that settlement of conflicts is
frozen during elections. I think that it to be a wrong approach. Yes,
certainly, this issue has a great political articulation. But what do
the co-chairmen mean? Do they mean that while coming to any decision,
for example, a tide of discontent may arise in Armenia or Nagorno
Karabakh in 2007 or 2008? Discontent may arise at any moment —
in the pre-electoral, electoral, or post electoral period – in case
the decision is unacceptable for the population. And what if it is
acceptable? Either way, the elections are absolutely not important.
Will the Nagorno Karabakh issue remain in the same form till 2009? If
the approaches do not change by that time, of course it will remain
in the same form till 2009. And there are a number of preconditions
in order to change these approaches. Firstly, the international
community that says that the two countries as well as NK should prepare
their respective populations for peaceful resolution must have clear
criterion for the evaluation of the preparatory work. If the countries
move in the opposite direction, the international community should
give its unequivocal evaluation, which will be followed by certain
steps. Only in this case will the Azerbaijani side really understand
that it is required to move in the direction of peace.
There is a good option for resolution which can be helpful also for
Azerbaijan. As I have already said Baku does not have enough courage
to recognize the realties. Moreover, the Azerbaijani side is afraid
that once those realities are confirmed, it will lose the dearest
thing for them, namely petrodollars.
Therefore they need help. The international community can do so. It
can simply recognize the independence of the Nagorno Karabakh
Republic… of course simultaneously presenting certain demands
to Nagorno Karabakh. Azerbaijan will have no choice, apart from
reconciling with it. In such a case the leadership of Azerbaijan will
be relived from the burden making this decisive step themselves. I
believe this is the possibility of the resolution. It would be
advisable for the international community to think about such an
option of resolution. If they truly accept that, in the course of
the resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict the principle of
self-determination must be applied, this can easily be done even
without Azerbaijan. Once it is fixed several times that Azerbaijan is
not ready or resolution of the conflict and is taking steps in the
opposite direction, it will be possible to organize a referendum,
as well as to recognize the Nagorno Karabakh Republic, and to take
all the other subsequent steps. There is nothing impossibe in this.
REGNUM: In this case, why has the international community not yet
recognized the independence of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic?
TOROSYAN: Probably, some time is needed to deeply understanding and
doing that. After all, 17 years have passed if we don’t count the
year 1988, since the international community has admitted that the
principle of the self-determination has to be applied as a basis for
the resolution. If it is necessary for the resolution of the problem,
to wait another 17 years, I think both in Armenia and in Nagorno
Karabakh, people have the necessary patience and will wait for that
day. And, one should not doubt that this day will come.

Armenian National Committee of America
1711 N Street NW
Washington, DC 20036
Tel: (202) 775-1918
Fax: (202) 775-5648
E-mail: [email protected]
Internet:
PRESS RELEASE
August 11, 2006
Contact: Elizabeth S. Chouldjian
Tel: (202) 775-1918
ANCA URGES ADMINISTRATION TO OPPOSE DEPLOYMENT
OF TURKISH FORCES TO LEBANON-ISRAEL BORDER
— Argues that “the presence of Turkish troops would undermine
United States’ interests in a lasting and durable peace”
WASHINGTON, DC – In the interest of preventing further regional
unrest – and mindful of Turkey’s violent legacy in the Middle East
– the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) this week
expressed the Armenian American community’s opposition to the
prospect of Turkish armed forces being deployed between Lebanon and
Israel as part of a future peacekeeping operation.
In an August 9th letter to President George W. Bush, ANCA Chairman
Ken Hachikian called upon the Administration to oppose any proposal
to include Turkish troops in such a deployment, noting that,
“Turkey’s presence on Lebanese soil will only make the current
situation even worse.” He added that, “as Armenian Americans – the
sons and daughters of a people who endured genocide at the hands of
the Ottoman Turkish government – we are especially mindful of
raising the legacy of Turkey’s brutal Ottoman rule over the Middle
East and unnecessarily introducing a nation with history of
destabilizing behavior into an already complex and highly sensitive
region.”
Stressing that, “Turkey’s record of persecution and genocide has
left deep scars in the collective memory of the Lebanese people,”
Hachikian explained that, “it would be immensely insensitive on the
part of the United States to promote Turkish participation in an
international peacekeeping force that will need every ounce of
credibility and goodwill that it can muster in order to succeed in
such a highly delicate and challenging mission.”
The opposition of the Greek American community on this matter was
communicated to the President last week in a letter from the
American Hellenic Institute.
The complete text of the ANCA’s letter to President Bush is
provided below.
#####
August 9, 2006
The Honorable George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
We are writing to share with you the Armenian American community’s
opposition to any deployment by Turkey of its armed forces to serve
as part of peacekeeping force between Lebanon and Israel. We
learned of this possibility from news reports of Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice’s recent discussions in the region.
The presence of Turkish troops would undermine United States’
interests in a lasting and durable peace. As Armenian Americans –
the sons and daughters of a people who endured genocide at the
hands of the Ottoman Turkish government – we are especially mindful
of raising the legacy of Turkey’s brutal Ottoman rule over the
Middle East and unnecessarily introducing a nation with history of
destabilizing behavior into an already complex and highly sensitive
region.
Turkey’s record of persecution and genocide has left deep scars in
the collective memory of the Lebanese people. The famous Martyrs’
Monument in Central Beirut is a vivid reminder of the record of
mass brutality that Turkey has left behind in this tortured land.
It would be immensely insensitive on the part of the United States
to promote Turkish participation in an international peacekeeping
force that will need every ounce of credibility and goodwill that
it can muster in order to succeed in such a highly delicate and
challenging mission. Turkey’s presence on Lebanese soil will only
make the current situation even worse.
As Armenian Americans, we are, as you know, profoundly troubled
that, more than eight decades after the collapse of the Ottoman
Empire, the Republic of Turkey continues to deny this atrocity.
The Turkish government has compounded their ongoing attempts to
escape responsibility for this crime, effectively seeking to
complete the evil campaign launched in 1915, by, even today,
blockading and seeking to isolate Armenia. In addition, Turkey
maintains its military occupation of Cyprus, more than thirty years
after its illegal 1974 invasion. Within its own borders, Turkey is
regularly cited as among the worst abusers of human rights. In
only the past few days, the Turkish military has, against the
advice of U.S. officials, threatened to launch cross border attacks
into Iraq, a move that has the potential of severely destabilizing
U.S.-led coalition efforts to bring peace to this troubled nation.
As you know, Turkey has, in recent years, proven itself an
unreliable U.S. ally on a number of occasions. First and foremost
among these was its refusal, in March of 2003, to allow Coalition
forces to open a northern front in the Iraq War. Secretary of
Defense Donald Rumsfeld has said that the strength of the current
Iraqi insurgency is due, in large part, to Turkey’s rejection of
our request for cooperation in this crucial aspect of the war.
Mr. President, we respectfully call upon you to consider our
reservations, and those already expressed to you by our friends in
the Greek American community, on this matter of profound importance
to our nation’s interests in the Middle East.
Sincerely yours,
[signed]
Kenneth V. Hachikian
Chairman

Le Monde Diplomatique, France
Aug. 11, 2006
Asia’s missing women
Gender discrimination now affects the demographic balance of some
Asian countries, especially China and India, where there are
disproportionate numbers of men to women. In some regions the birth
ratio is already extreme and is likely to worsen.
By Isabelle Attané
When we put the question to an Asian man in his early 30s, he
answered, surprised: `What sort of wife would I like? I don’t care.
It’s so hard to find anyone these days, I just want a wife.’ But in
some Asian countries finding a wife is already far from easy. And
every year after 2010 an estimated million Chinese men will be unable
to marry because there will not be enough eligible women. In some
villages in the northern Indian state of Punjab, men have to travel
to Rajasthan or as far as Orissa to seek wives.
India and China between them represent 37% of the world’s population:
both have a shortage of women. This demographic discrepancy is not
receiving the attention it deserves. Amartya Sen, the Indian
economist and 1998 Nobel prizewinner, first sounded the alarm in 1990
when he wrote `More Than 100 Million Women are Missing’ (1), mainly
about China and India. There has been little response to his warning.
Women usually outnumber men as long as both genders are treated
equally. If Asia complied with this rule and had the standard slight
predominance of females, there would be 90 million more women in the
region.
Thirty years ago China, as the flagship of the communist world, was a
fervent defender of gender equality. Today it leads the world in
demographic discrimination against women, restoring the old
hierarchy; this is the other side of China’s economic and social
liberalisation. India, the other emerging economic giant, now the
world’s seventh industrial nation, also discriminates against women.
China and India, with Pakistan, Bangladesh, Taiwan, South Korea and
Indonesia, account for 3 billion of Earth’s 6.5 billion people. In
these countries, gender-selective abortion, unequal treatment of
children, inferior social status and poor sanitary conditions all
contribute to a high death rate among female children and adults.
A population’s gender structure depends on the ratio at birth and the
death rate for both sexes at each stage of life. When human
intervention does not disrupt the natural balance, slightly more boys
are born, but a slightly higher death rate among males at each stage
of life naturally removes that small surplus. In many Asian
countries, social practice thwarts one or other natural law,
sometimes both, leading to fewer female births and more female
deaths; hence the higher ratio of males. What are the natural rates?
Throughout the world boys outnumber girls at birth by a ratio of 105
to 100. Discrepancies are rare: the lowest ratio is in Rwanda (101:
100) and the highest, outside Asia, in Surinam (108:100).
Shift in nature’s balance
In many Asian countries the rate is unnatural, and the biological,
genetic and environmental factors usually put forward to explain the
discrepancy are insufficient to explain the trend of the past 20-25
years. Until the early 1980s boys and girls were born in normal
proportions in China, India, South Korea and Taiwan. Since then an
overall fall in the birth rate, combined with a traditional
preference for sons, has altered the biological laws.
Technological advances mean that parents can now choose the sex of
their children. A woman can have an ultrasound or amniocentesis in
the first few months of pregnancy. If she learns that she is carrying
a boy she can go home and prepare, but if it is a girl she faces a
dilemma: if she keeps the baby, will she have another opportunity to
conceive a boy? Will the couple be able to face the rising cost of
raising children? Rather than risk failing to produce a son, parents
often decide to abort a girl. Consequently, in China, the birth ratio
of boys to girls is now 12% above normal levels. In India, it is 6%.
In South Korea, after the mid-1990s peak of 115:100, the proportion
improved and dropped to 108:100 in 2004.
The trend has recently spread to other parts of Asia. Half the
provinces of Vietnam have a birth ratio of 110 boys to 100 girls. In
the Caucasus, in Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia, the proportion rose
sharply after the mid-1990s to reach levels comparable with parts of
India and China. But in Russia, Ukraine, Iran and Turkey, the natural
balance remains.
In Indonesia, the ratio of male births to female was still normal in
1990; by 2000 it had reached 106.3:100. This creeping masculinisation
of society is due to the imbalance at birth, compounded by a massive
emigration of women, mostly to Saudi Arabia (2).
Why do men have an advantage over women and why are woman mistreated?
Asian societies affected by the trend all share a strong preference
for sons, a situation exacerbated by the overall fall in the birth
rate. Because of China’s strict birth control policy, the average
number of children per woman has fallen from more than five in the
early 1970s to less than two today. In India, it is less than three,
compared with nearly five 20 years ago. South Korea and Taiwan have
birth rates among the lowest in the world, with an average 1.2
children. Parents desperate for a son will do anything to prevent the
birth of a girl. Should they already have a girl, they will do
anything, including aborting female foetuses, to have a son as well.
The Indian government has promoted small families since the 1960s;
the ideal is to have a boy and a girl. The Chinese saying – you need
`a boy and a girl to complete the pair’ – is gaining acceptance. But
most couples want a boy, possibly several, and only one girl.
In Bangladesh and Pakistan, where women still have many more children
than in China, Taiwan or Korea, the sex of a baby is rarely known
before birth, but discrimination against girls and women is severe.
In these countries, as in India, women’s life expectancy is the same,
if not lower, than that of men, whereas in the rest of the world
women have a natural advantage.
It is common to neglect daughters, and often fatal; sons are well
nurtured, fed first, tended when sick, and vaccinated. This helps
explain the inequality in death rates and particularly infant
mortality. In India, the death rate for infants and children up to
five is 7% higher for girls than for boys. In Pakistan the figure is
5% and in Bangladesh 3%. Interestingly, in Muslim countries such as
Tunisia, Egypt and Mauritania, which have a similar level of
development, the mortality rate for boys under five is a few
percentage points higher than girls, based on the common standard
(3). The discrepancy is greatest in China, where the mortality of
girls is 28% higher than that of boys.
Sex-selective abortions and negligent treatment of girls are the main
reasons that so many women are missing. Other discrimination,
including female infanticide, contributes far less. The practices are
the direct result of women’s inferior social status, attributable to
patriarchal systems, patrilineal families, arranged marriages and a
socialising process that encourages women to be submissive to their
husbands and in-laws. A son is necessary to provide for the family,
perpetuate its name and ensure its social and biological continuity.
`Water your neighbour’s garden’
In China, Taiwan and South Korea, the lack of a male heir means the
extinction of the family lineage and the cult of its ancestors. In
Hinduism, the souls of parents without sons are condemned to eternal
wandering, since the son traditionally carries out the funeral rites
at their deaths. In India, as in China, a daughter merely passes
through her parents’ home; when she marries she devotes herself to
her in-laws and no longer has any obligations to her parents. In the
Chinese countryside, where there are no old age pensions, everyone
knows it is necessary to `raise a son to prepare for old age’.
According to a Chinese saying, to raise a daughter is `to cultivate
another man’s field’; in India, it is `watering a neighbour’s
garden’.
Discrimination has much to do with social, economic and religious
status. In India, the less-educated and poorer segments of society
practice prenatal selection. Women’s autonomy is also a determining
factor: more independent women resort to sex-selective abortion. In
China, younger and better-educated women, especially in cities,
systematically practice prenatal selection.
This does not mean that the rest of the population spares its girls.
Far from it. In China and India, preserving a family’s economic
heritage or means of production, usually land, is crucial to the
decision to have a son. The decollectivisation of agriculture in
China in the 1980s (4), combined with a patrilineal system of
inheritance, made farmers prefer sons. In India, the recent inflation
in dowries is a financial burden on families and a prime reason for
not bearing daughters. Even affluent families regard a daughter as
bad luck: when she marries, part of the family fortune will have to
be handed over to her in-laws as dowry, whereas a son’s marriage
means a cash bonus. `If you have three daughters, you’re ruined; if
you have three sons, you’re saved.’
Religion also influences a couple’s preference for a son and may be a
determining factor in sex-selective abortion. South Korea’s
population is 47% Buddhist, 37% Protestant and 14% Catholic. Buddhism
is more compatible with Confucian values that favour sons, unlike
Catholicism or Protestantism. It is also more tolerant towards
abortion, which may be a factor. Indian Muslims and Christians do not
discriminate much between the sexes and have a normal ratio of male
children; Hindus, Sikhs and Jains are more likely to practice
sex-selective abortion.
The demographic implications of all this are immense because of the
size of populations involved. The first results will be felt around
2015, when huge numbers of men reaching marriageable age will be
unable to find a wife. The imbalance in the Chinese marriage market
will worsen after 2010, and by 2030 there will be a 20% surplus of
men – every year 1.6 million will be unable to find wives. Initially,
the marriage market will regulate itself. Men may first turn to
younger partners and then to women not previously coveted. Widows
will be in demand, which may finally end the taboos against
remarriage, as will divorcees, who are becoming more numerous.
Suitors will have to be patient in their search and will be older at
the age of marriage. In the longer term, men may be forced into
celibacy and have to abandon the idea of an heir, a break with the
tradition of family lineage that provoked selection for sons.
Wife trafficking
To meet the demand for wives, trans-national networks are forming,
especially in China. At the Sino-Vietnamese border there is a boom in
women migrating to China to marry. There are several reasons for
this. There is a particular shortage of women in the southern
provinces of China, and dowry inflation and rising marriage costs
since the economic reforms of the 1980s mean that buying a wife is
now the only way many poor Chinese families can afford to marry off a
son. This in turn fits the economic strategies of poor Vietnamese
women, who hope to improve their lives by marrying a Chinese.
Marriage migration is also increasing in Taiwan, where nearly 8% of
weddings in 2000 were between a Vietnamese woman and a Taiwanese man.
Since the mid-1990s Vietnam has supplied wives to several hundred
thousand Taiwanese men: most sought a stable union with someone who
would respect their traditional values and be less likely than a
Taiwanese woman to demand independence.
Wife trafficking in China is a growth industry. Buyers are usually
poor, uneducated farmers, who find this way easier and cheaper than
going through the normal procedures. The regions where the traffic is
heaviest are lax and corrupt. In some villages marriage registrars
have set up a simplified procedure that enables the buyer to register
his marriage officially, for a price, and to obtain a certificate
stating that he has married the wife he purchased. A young Chinese
woman, found by the police after being kidnapped and sold, demanded
to be returned to her family. But her husband/owner protested that
they were legally married and that he had the licence to prove it:
`So what? I may have bought her, but we are legally man and wife.’
Will the scarcity of women improve their situation? There is no sign
of it. In China and India, women are being merchandised, turned into
consumer goods. Far from increasing their symbolic value, and
therefore the way they are perceived, economic liberalisation and
missing women seem to have exacerbated the situation and made them
chattels. The current economic reforms in China have increased the
market value of women, but the way they are treated has worsened,
especially in the countryside.
Being rare does not mean being more valued. A film, Matrubhoomi: A
Nation Without Women, made in 2005 by Indian director Manish Jha,
illustrates this. It is set in a future rural India where the female
population has been greatly reduced through infanticide. A man,
Ramcharan, wants to marry off his five sons. A poor peasant who lives
nearby is desperate to hold on to his most precious `possession’, his
beautiful 16-year-old daughter, Kalki. Ramcharan finds out about
Kalki through a friend and buys her for gold to give to his eldest
son. Once the wedding is over, she becomes the object of desire for
all the brothers and the father. Later she is chained in the stable
as a sexual slave to the whole village; she becomes pregnant and
gives birth to a girl. The film is more a fantasy than a projection
of reality, but suggests some potential scenarios in a society
deprived of half its population.
Asian governments are aware of the gravity of the situation and have
made political attempts at solutions. In India, the Prenatal
Diagnosis Techniques Act of 1994 makes it illegal to reveal the sex
of an unborn child. Despite the threat of imprisonment and fines, the
law is constantly broken. In China, several laws passed in the 1990s
forbid ill-treatment of and discrimination against girls, as well as
prenatal selection. Because of wide-scale corruption, however,
sex-selective abortion continues. A `care for girls’ campaign
launched in 2001 sought to promote equality of the genders,
particularly in text books, and to improve the living conditions of
daughter-only families. In some regions, couples benefit from special
funds and are exempt from farm taxes and school fees for their
daughters until they reach marriageable age. The government has also
set up a programme aiming to bring the male birth ratio to normal
levels by 2010.
Laws are not enough. Patriarchal values are so deep-rooted that even
though many women realise that girls remain closer to their mothers
than sons and take better care of their parents in old age, they
still prefer sons. It may take several generations, and an
improvement in the status of women, before couples become indifferent
to their children’s gender. There is hope that the laws in place will
succeed in reversing the trend rapidly, as has already happened in
South Korea, where young couples observe patriarchal values less than
before and are less likely to conform to traditional sexist
behaviour.
The story of future generations of women has yet to be written. If
things continue at the present rate, several million women will go
missing every decade and the repercussions will be enormous. Fewer
women means fewer children, and still fewer girls for future
generations. That implies a rapid fall in demographic growth in those
countries that are most heavily populated today.
We are getting closer to fiction as envisaged by Amin Maalouf in his
book The First Century After Beatrice (5), in which he speculates
that if couples were able, by simple means, to chose the sex of their
children, some communities would choose boys only. They would cease
to reproduce and therefore ultimately disappear. Maalouf wrote that
the cult of the male might be a social flaw today `but tomorrow it
would become collective suicide’ and we would witness the
`autogenocide of misogynistic peoples’.