Author: Dabaghian Diana

Armenia opposition faction: European structures are engaged in cover-up

Dabaghian Diana
  News.am  
Armenia – Jan 29 2022
18:42, 29.01.2022

The European structures are engaged in covering, said in a statement released by the parliamentary faction of the opposition Armenia bloc.

“During the unleashing of the 44-day war, during the Azerbaijani-Turkish aggression, the use of force, gross violations of international humanitarian principles by Azerbaijan during the war, while there are still Armenian prisoners of war, the ongoing aggression against the territory of the Republic of Armenia after the war, hostile rhetoric, continued use of force and the threat of force, European structures have been busy and engaged in cover-up. And in any reaction to these facts, they are trying to put a sign of “equality” between Armenia and Azerbaijan, which is simply ridiculous. It is noteworthy that with a lesser violation of rights than the illegal detention of prisoners of war, the same body came up with a proposal for specific restrictions (sanctions) against the state, and in this case sends a message to Azerbaijan and Turkey about impunity,” they noted.

“PACE did not react in any way to the use of administrative resources and other violations recorded during the pre-election period and on election day, the illegal arrest of three opposition deputies, the unconstitutional restriction on the movement of opposition deputies, and political persecution.

“PACE actually did not react in any way to the unconstitutional practice of confiscation of the system of electronic sighting of courts, which was carried out by the executive branch about eight months ago, when all cases are now signed by “hand”, or to the facts of ignoring the will of voters in elections to the local self-government bodies and in the post-election period.

“PACE considers the new restrictions on freedom of speech “democratic” and does not even notice cases of violation of the rights of journalists in the National Assembly.

The factual circumstances of all the listed problems were presented to PACE on November 4, 2021, both orally and in writing,” the statement reads.

CivilNet: A recap of Pashinyan’s dubious claims and false statements

Dabaghian Diana
CIVILNET.AM

19 Jan, 2022 05:01

CivilNet has put together Armenia’s Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s dubious claims and false statements over the last year.

1. Price of water

During the parliamentary election campaign of December 2018, Pashinyan announced that the tariff on drinking water would not increase during the next six years. “According to the previously signed agreement, in December, that is now, drinking water should have become more expensive in the whole republic, but we were able to work with Veolia Water, and agreed that there will be no increase in the price of drinking water in Armenia until 2024.”

On November 30, 2021, however, the Public Services Regulatory Commission announced that from January 1, 2022, the tariff on drinking water will increase by 20 drams, from the current 180 to 200 drams.

2. Separation of business and politics

In June 2018, while presenting his government’s program, Pashinyan attached great importance to the separation of politics and business.

“The following conceptual issues […] the practical separation of politics and business are of key importance and will become a landmark for the government’s activities,” Pashinyan said.

Despite that, in the June 20, 2021 parliamentary elections, businessmen Khachatur Sukiasyan and Gurgen Arsenyan appeared on the list of Pashinyan’s Civil Contract party. Both were elected as parliament deputies.

3. Changes in the defense budget

During the June parliamentary election campaign, Pashinyan claimed that the defense budget had grown by almost 50 percent during his tenure.

“We have increased the defense budget by 48% – by 63 billion AMD, during 2018-2020.”

In reality, military spending increased not by 48%, but by 27% in 2020. It increased from 238 to 303 billion AMD.

4. The Shushi Conundrum

One week after the end of the 44-day war, Pashinyan insisted that the war could have been avoided if the seven regions surrounding Karabakh and Shushi were handed over to Azerbaijan.

“Could we have avoided war? Yes, we could have, if we had agreed to hand over seven regions to Azerbaijan, and Shushi,” he said.

Pashinyan’s claim was refuted by then-Foreign Ministry spokesperson Anna Naghdalyan. “At any given stage of the peace process, there was no question about giving up Shushi,” she said.

Pashinyan was also refuted by Russian President Vladimir Putin who said that, “As for the city of Shushi, the issue of its surrender has never been raised […] this issue arose during [the 2020 Karabakh War], this crisis.”

Later, Pashinyan himself admitted that previous peace processes did not mention the handing over of Shushi to Azerbaijan, but they mentioned the return of the Azerbaijanis to the city.

5. Use of the Iskander Missile System

In February 2021, Pashinyan made a scandalous statement about the use of the Iskander missile system during the 44-day war. “Why didn’t the Iskander [missiles] explode, or only exploded at 10% capacity?”

Russia, which sold the Iskander to Armenia, replied to Pashinyan’s claim with the following statement․ “The Russian Federation’s Ministry of Defense got acquainted with the statement of the Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan with bewilderment and surprise that the “Iskander” missiles used by the Armenian armed forces in Nagorno Karabakh did not explode or exploded only by 10%. […] According to our objective and reliable information, […] none of these missile systems were used during the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. ”

After this announcement, Pashinyan took a step back. His spokesperson announced, “As a result of the juxtaposition of the available facts and data, the Prime Minister of Armenia came to the conclusion that he was not properly informed about this situation.”

Later on, local investigators discovered that the Iskander had in fact been used during the 44-day war.

6. Status of Karabakh

In January 2021, Pashinyan published an article claiming that the Russian proposal for a solution to the Karabakh conflict did not mention the question of the region’s status.

“The now well-known Russian proposals, which were conceived in 2013 and finalized in 2015, provided for the return of the seven regions to Azerbaijan…, for the return of refugees, and for the deployment of Russian peacekeepers. The package of proposals has no mention of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh, it bypasses this issue,” Pashinyan wrote.

Former Russian co-chair of the Minsk Group Igor Popov disputed Pashinyan’s claim. “It is not right to claim that Russia has offered to return the seven regions [in exchange] for nothing, or forget about the status,” Popov said.

Armenian Foreign Minister Ara Ayvazyan agreed with Popov. “I definitely agree with Mr. Popov on the fact that the status of Artsakh was the most important principle for the settlement of the conflict.”

7. State borders are not determined by domestic laws

After the war, Pashinyan repeatedly insisted that the 2010 law on “Administrative Territorial Division” defined Armenia’s state border with Azerbaijan.

During his visit to Sisian in December 2020, for example, he stated: “Today’s borders, the description of the administrative borders of our communities were determined by the law on the administrative-territorial division of the Republic of Armenia, that law was adopted in 2010.”

The Law on Administrative Territorial Division is about the internal divisions of the state, it regulates the issue of local self-government bodies, and does not clarify the borders with other countries.

Translated by Zara Poghosyan

Wizz Air Abu Dhabi to start operating flights to Yerevan

Dabaghian Diana

Save

Share

 11:16,

YEREVAN, JANUARY 17, ARMENPRESS. During his working visit in the United Arab Emirates, President of Armenia Armen Sarkissian reached a new agreement with the UAE authorities about the expansion of cooperation between the two countries in the field of air communication, the Presidential Office said.

According to the agreement, Wizz Air Abu Dhabi will soon start operating flights to Yerevan.

President Sarkissian said that the new air bridge between the two countries is another important step for strengthening the trade-economic and business ties between Armenia and the United Arab Emirates, adding that this will also greatly boost tourism.

Central Bank of Armenia Prices of Precious Metals and Exchange Rates 17-01-2

Dabaghian Diana

CENTRAL BANK OF ARMENIA PRICES OF PRECIOUS METALS AND EXCHANGE RATES 17-01-2

Save

Share

 18:00,

YEREVAN, JANUARY 17, ARMENPRESS. The Central Bank of Armenia informs Armenpress that on January 17, the following exchange rates were set by the bank.

The exchange rate of the US dollar increased by 0.61 drams, making 481.49 drams. The exchange rate of Euro decreased by 0.93 Drams, making 550.01 Drams. The exchange rate of Russian ruble decreased by 0.02 drams and made 6.30 drams. The exchange rate of British pound decreased by 1.67 drams, making 658.63 drams.

As for precious metals, the price of gold increased by 75.95 drams, making 28219.74 drams. The price of silver decreased by 1.79 drams, making 357.59 drams. The price of platinum increased by 65.59 drams, making 15155.18 drams.




Ombudsman: Azerbaijan is launching provocations in Armenia territories where it earlier invaded

Dabaghian Diana
  NEWS.am  
Armenia – Jan 12 2022
15:34, 12.01.2022

YEREVAN. – The Office of the Human Rights Defender (Ombudsman) of Armenia has received calls from the residents of Kut, Norabak, Verin and Nerkin Shorzha villages of Gegharkunik Province, in connection with Azerbaijan’s provocation yesterday on the border with Armenia, ombudsman Arman Tatoyan told a press conference Wednesday.

“We are in touch with everyone. Residents heard the sound of artillery,” the ombudsman added.

Tatoyan stressed that Azerbaijan is launching aggressive actions in the Armenian territories which it invaded in May last year.

But the same time, the ombudsman noted that this invasion had taken place earlier, in October 2020, during the Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) war, in the direction of Tsav village near Kapan city  of Syunik Province.

“Therefore, we need to talk about the Azerbaijanis’ invading the sovereign territory of Armenia, and globally, the need for the withdrawal of Azerbaijani forces, and not only about the ‘May invasion,'” Tatoyan said.

The ombudsman reiterated that the presence of Azerbaijani military near Armenian villages has no legal basis, especially since they appeared there under the threat of a new war. He added that when the ombudsman speaks about this, the respective statements should not be distorted.

“Yesterday’s actions are proof of that. They [i.e., the Azerbaijani military] are so close that the [Armenian] civilian population hears the sound of artillery. There is no time. Events are developing rapidly. The longer we delay, the more the rights of the [Armenian] residents will be violated,” Arman Tatoyan concluded.

Kazakhstan crisis challenges Turkey’s leadership of Turkic union

Dabaghian Diana 
AL-Monitor
By Cengiz Candar
Jan. 12, 2022
[The unrest rattling Kazakhstan has reflected the irrelevance of
Turkey and the Organization of Turkic States chaired by President
Recep Tayyip Erdogan.]
Turkey has faced a stark beginning to 2022. Its foreign policy, which
appeared to be triumphant and very effective in 2021, is suffering a
rough start to the new year amid a currency meltdown and skyrocketing
inflation at home.
The unprecedented and violent protests that erupted in Kazakhstan on
Jan. 2 betrayed Turkey’s assertive foreign policy flaws perhaps more
vividly than any other incident over the past three years. Oddly, the
protests have hardly received the attention it deserves in Turkey
because of the country’s highly consuming domestic political and
financial situation.
In 2020, Turkey’s military and political role in Libya changed the
course of the war in favor of the Tripoli-based forces in the
country’s civil war. Turkey challenged France, Greece and the European
Union during a standoff over conflicting territorial claims in the
Eastern Mediterranean. In the fall of 2020, Turkey’s military,
political and diplomatic support for Azerbaijan in the
Nagorno-Karabakh war changed the balance of power dramatically in
favor of Baku. Thus, with boosted Trans-Caspian ambitions extending to
Turkic Central Asia via Azerbaijan, Turkey entered 2021 as a new
revisionist power, albeit not on the same par with Russia and China.
Turkey has aimed to utilize the Cooperation Council of Turkic-speaking
states to realize its ambitions in Central Asia. The brainchild of
Kazakhstan’s former leader, Nursultan Nazarbayev, the council was
planned in 2006 and launched in 2009. In accordance with its new
political grandstanding, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan became
the new chairman of the body in 2021 during a summit held in Istanbul
on Nov. 12.
Erdogan’s staunch ally, the leader of Turkey’s arch-nationalist party,
Devlet Bahceli, presented him a giant map of the Turkic world as a
gift, encompassing big chunks of the Russian Federation, raising
eyebrows in Moscow and irritating neighboring Beijing, which is busy
with suppressing its Turkic minority, the Uyghurs.
Nevertheless, it took only two months for the Organization of Turkic
States (OTS) to prove its impotence, manifesting Turkey’s irrelevance.
On Jan. 2, Kazakhstan imploded. And Kazakhstan's security
establishment hasn’t knocked on the doors of the Turkic Council but
instead on the doors of the Collective Security Treaty Organization
(CSTO) to maintain its survival in the face of the rattling violence
in its commercial capital, Almaty. The CSTO, which was founded in 1992
and is led by Russia, includes Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan,
Belarus and Armenia.
In a nutshell, the Kazakh leadership — at a time of urgent security
needs — preferred Russia over Turkey and Vladimir Putin over Erdogan.
Kazakhstan has special bonds with Turkey. The two countries as well as
Azerbaijan have been the main pillars of the OTS. Kazakhstan had
entered into a military cooperation agreement with Turkey that
encompasses cooperation in several fields including the defense
industry, intelligence-sharing, joint military exercises, information
systems and cyber defense. The growing military ties between Turkey
and Kazakhstan as well as Uzbekistan had given rise to a fanciful idea
in October 2020 to establish a Turkic NATO.
Against such a backdrop, Kazakhstan’s choice to invite the CSTO
instead of the OTS has a highly symbolic significance. The choice has
also indicated that — unlike Azerbaijan's Ilham Aliyev who did just
the opposite almost a year ago during the war with Armenia over
Nagorno-Karabakh — the Kazakh regime has been favoring Russia over
Turkey at the expense of any prestige the OTS may have.
More striking than anything else and perhaps adding further insult to
injury to Turkish nationalists was the deployment of Armenian soldiers
and Russian special forces units to Kazakhstan upon the request of the
Kazakh president. The announcement of the deployment came from
Armenian President Nikol Pashinyan — a striking irony displaying the
degradation of Turkey's foreign policy.
What’s more intriguing is the anti-US and anti-Western obsession of
certain secularist-nationalists and leftists in Turkey. For example,
reacting to the unfolding developments in Kazakhstan, prominent
retired Turkish Adm. Cem Gurdeniz blamed the unrest on “an imperialist
plot.” Gurdeniz, who is also an ideologue of the controversial Blue
Homeland doctrine that advocates more aggressive policy in the
Mediterranean, claimed that the unrest stemmed from a “Soros-type
provocation” that aimed to harbor “turmoil in Eurasia” and was
organized by “imperialists very irritated from the foundation of the
Organization of Turkic States.”
In social media, many Turkish leftists viewed similar opinions.
Pro-Erdogan circles, in turn, citing a former Russian parliamentarian,
claimed that followers of Fethullah Gulen, a US-based cleric who is
accused by Turkey of staging a coup attempt in 2016, might be those
fomenting trouble in Kazakhstan.
Erdogan was quick to support his Kazakh counterpart, Kassym Jomart
Tokayev — the hand-picked successor of Nazarbayev. He rapidly
expressed his support for Tokayev. However, Erdogan’s support of
Tokayev was noticeably low-key. He did not pick up the issue much.
Perhaps he was embarrassed by Tokayev’s choice of inviting CSTO
troops, thereby undermining his prestige. Erdogan’s low-key support
might be also linked to the uncertainty around Nazarbayev.
In an opinion piece in the Financial Times, Gideon Rachman wrote,
“Kazakhstan is a country in which the average income is around $570 a
month, but where the family of Nursultan Nazarbayev, who ruled the
country from 1991 until 2019, has acquired foreign properties worth at
least $785 million. The turmoil in Kazakhstan may be linked to
infighting within ruling circles. But these kinds of problems are
inherent to corrupt autocracies. If wealth is divided up as part of a
spoils system, any hint of a change in leadership creates
instability.”
On Jan. 5, Tokayev sacked and arrested long-time Nazarbayev loyalist
Karim Massimov, head of Kazakhstan's intelligence. He also dismissed
Nazarbayev from his position as head of the National Security Council
and appointed himself as the new head.
Turkey seems to have lost track of the developments in Kazakhstan.
Almost two weeks after the unrest, Turkey's Foreign Minister Mevlut
Cavusoglu gathered a conference of the foreign ministers of the OTS.
In a speech on Jan. 11, he expressed satisfaction that the situation
in Kazakhstan was brought under control, without mentioning that the
shaky control was maintained by a Russian-led military intervention.
"Kazakhstan has a state tradition, experience and ability to overcome
the current crisis," Cavusoglu said.
Putin, for his part, was opaque in praising the role the military
troops played in suppressing anti-government protests in Kazakhstan.
"We won't let anyone destabilize the situation in our home," the
Russian president said. His remarks were a reflection of the
irrelevance of Turkey and the OTS led by Erdogan at a critical
juncture of the Turkic world.
It also is a stark indicator of the changed fortunes of Turkey in its
assertive foreign policy. The Kazakhstan crisis represents a defeat of
Turkish nationalism on foreign policy.

Armenian PM Pashinyan discusses Kazakhstan situation with Putin

Dabaghian Diana
Jan 7 2022

ANI
7th January 2022, 22:37 GMT+11

Yerevan [Armenia], January 7 (ANI): Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the phone and discussed the situation in Kazakhstan.

“Pashinyan and Putin discussed the situation in Kazakhstan, as well as the progress in implementing joint steps within the CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization],” Sputnik quoted, according to the Armenian Cabinet of Minister’s statement on Friday.

Pashinyan, as the current rotating chair of the CSTO, officially gave the order to begin the peacekeeping mission in protest-hit Kazakhstan. In the same light, Armenia’s permanent representative to the United Nations informed the organization of the CSTO mission in the Central Asian country.

Hundreds of citizens and military personnel were injured and killed in Kazakh city of Almaty during the recent riots, Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev said on Friday expressing his condolences to the families of those killed during the protests, Sputnik reported.

Kazakhstan is witnessing a massive protest over soaring fuel prices across the country.

The protest took place in the western town of Zhanaozen against the doubling of the price of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), which most Kazakhs use as car fuel, Al Jazeera reported.

Amid nationwide agitation in Kazakhstan, protesters earlier pulled down the statue of the country’s first President Nursultan Nazarbayev. A state of emergency has been declared in the country in the light of the eruption of this violent protest. (ANI)

Armenpress: NATO concerned over situation in Kazakhstan

Dabaghian Diana

NATO concerned over situation in Kazakhstan

Save

Share

 21:13, 7 January, 2022

YEREVAN, JANUARY 7, ARMENPRESS. The NATO is concerned over the developments in Kazakhstan and calls on the parties to exercise restraint and protect human rights, ARMENPRESS reports, citing “RIA Novosti”, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said.

“We are closely following the situation in Kazakhstan, we are concerned about what has happened. Restraint, end to violence, protection of human rights are a necessity,” he said.

Nagorno-Karabakh authorities slam Pashinyan for ‘dangerous’ statements

Dabaghian Diana
Dec 28 2021
 28 December 2021

ByAni Avetisyan
Stepanakert. Photo: Ani Avetisyan/OC Media.

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s statements about a future, conflict-free Nagorno-Karabakh shared by Armenians and Azerbaijanis left a bad taste in the mouths of Armenian opposition figures and Nagorno-Karabakh officials.

Armenian opposition figures and Nagorno-Karabakh officials criticised Pashinyan for statements he made regarding the status of Nagorno-Karabakh in a 24 December press conference.

Pashinyan dedicated a good portion of his two-hour online conference to discuss the conflict surrounding the disputed region. He claimed that after coming to power, he was given a ‘heritage of negotiations’ that made it impossible to solve the conflict and have Nagorno-Karabakh remain under Armenian control. 

Pashinyan also spoke about the former Azerbaijani population of Nagorno-Karabakh, saying the issue of the rights of the Azerbaijanis living in the region ‘has never been disputed by any government or negotiator’.

He recalled that Armenia’s third president, Serzh Sargsyan, would say ‘Artsakh [Nagorno-Karabakh] will never be a part of Azerbaijan’, but he did not say that  ‘his negotiations were about the fact that Artsakh needs to remain Armenian’ — implying that the end of the conflict meant Armenians and Azerbaijanis would live in the territories of the former Soviet Oblast together. 

‘I will go on and say that I don’t agree with that either because Artsakh couldn’t have been a completely Armenian land’, Pashinyan said. 

The Prime Minister posited that legislation and referendums in Nagorno-Karabakh would take into account quotas representing Armenians and Azerbaijanis.

‘In that context, could the Azerbaijanis of Nagorno-Karabakh, in turn, increase their right to self-determination? And in this case, what kind of relations could have arisen?’ Pashinyan asked.

According to Pashinyan, dramatic changes in the negotiation process occurred in 2016 — before and after the April Four Day War. He said that the final resolution suggested at the time was the transfer of the conflict’s file from the OSCE Minsk Group — Russia, France, and the United States — into the hands of the United Nations Security Council, which recognised Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan in its 1993 resolutions.

The PMs statements came in stark contrast to his actions before the 2020 war. In a 2019 visit to Nagorno-Karabakh, the Armenian Prime Minister stated that ‘Artsakh is Armenia, and that’s it’ — and yet, Pashinyan did not pay any visit to the region since the end of the Second War in late 2020.

Waves of criticism and accusations from prominent Armenian and Nagorno-Karabakh political figures followed his latest statements.

‘Only the authorities of Artsakh are allowed to speak on behalf of the population of Artsakh’, Nagorno-Karabakh President Arayik Harutyunyan wrote in a Facebook post the same day.

Harutyunyan said the ‘full recognition of the right of the Armenians of Artsakh to self-determination’ was Nagorno-Karabakh’s main ‘benchmark’ and ‘is not subject to reservation and concession’.

‘If any Armenian wants to support Artsakh, they must take into account the will and goals of the Artsakh Armenians. Otherwise, they should just not hinder.’

On 27 December, the Nagorno-Karabakh Parliament held a special session in which they described Pashinyan’s statements as ‘worrying and dangerous’ and dismissive of  the ‘Armenian origin of Artsakh’.

‘The fate of Artsakh has never been, and will never be, the monopoly of any political force’, parliament said.

The parliament called back to the 1992 decision by the Supreme Council of Armenia, which defines Armenia’s attitude towards Nagorno-Karabakh, and stresses Armenia’s duty to ‘support’ and ‘protect’ the Nagorno-Karabakh, and to ‘consider any international or domestic document, where the Nagorno Karabakh Republic is mentioned as part of Azerbaijan to be unacceptable’.

 For ease of reading, we choose not to use qualifiers such as ‘de facto’, ‘unrecognised’, or ‘partially recognised’ when discussing institutions or political positions within Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh, and South Ossetia. This does not imply a position on their status.

https://oc-media.org/nagorno-karabakh-authorities-slam-pashinyan-for-dangerous-statements/