Author: Ekmekjian Janet

Agence France Presse
27 mai 2005 vendredi 3:32 PM GMT
Arménie: le projet de Constitution doit être modifié (Conseil Europe)
STRASBOURG (Conseil Europe)
Le projet de Constitution, adopté en première lecture par l’Assemblée
nationale arménienne le 11 mai dernier, “nécessite des modifications
substantielles” pour atteindre les critères européens, a estimé
vendredi une commission du Conseil de l’Europe.
La commission de Venise, l’organe consultatif de l’organisation
paneuropéenne sur les questions constitutionnelles, a souligné dans
un communiqué que le texte adopté ne tenait que “très partiellement
compte des commentaires” des experts européens.
“Si le texte ne reflète pas entièrement les avis de la commission de
Venise, le processus de réforme constitutionnelle, dans son ensemble,
ne permettrait pas de rapprocher l’Arménie des valeurs européennes et
d’atteindre l’objectif d’une intégration européenne plus avancée”,
poursuit la commission.
La commission pointe notamment “la nécessité d’équilibrer les
pouvoirs entre le président et le Parlement – ce qui implique un rôle
plus fort de l’Assemblée nationale -, de garantir l’indépendance du
pouvoir judiciaire et d’assurer que le maire d’Erevan soit élu, au
lieu d’être nommé par le président”.
Des représentants de cette commission se rendront en Arménie le 2
juin afin de discuter de ces questions avec les autorités
arméniennes.

The Gazette (Montreal)
May 27, 2005 Friday
Final Edition
Judge scorches CIBC branch manager: Denounces failure to contact
fraud victims. Trial for Montreal couple who unknowingly guaranteed
losses of strangers nears verdict
PAUL DELEAN, The Gazette
The lawyer defending CIBC Wood Gundy’s seizure of $1.4 million from a
retired Montreal couple who unknowingly guaranteed the trading losses
of complete strangers got a thorough grilling yesterday from Superior
Court Judge Jean-Pierre Senecal.
As CIBC lawyer Bernard Amyot presented closing arguments in the
five-month-old trial, Senecal intervened for clarification on several
key points.
He drew attention to the failure of CIBC branch manager Tom Noonan to
actually phone or meet with retirees Haroutioun and Alice Markarian
in the years before the brokerage took their money using guarantees
obtained by former broker Harry Migirdic, an admitted fraudster. (The
Markarians are suing the CIBC for the return of the $1.4 million,
plus $10 million in punitive damages).
“Why didn’t he (Noonan) make a call?,” the judge asked.
Amyot said he sent letters instead.
“Is there any better way to facilitate fraud than do everything on
paper?” Judge Senecal commented, later adding “if it had only
Noonans, CIBC would be bankrupt.”
He also wondered why CIBC had never contacted Sebuh Gazarosyan, whose
account (guaranteed by the Markarians) was $1 million in the hole.
Gazarosyan was Migirdic’s uncle in Turkey and only a figurehead.
“If I’m a branch manager, and a client I don’t know owes $1 million,
I think I’d be interested in meeting him,” Senecal observed. “He owes
$1 million to CIBC, but the branch manager never meets him. How is
that possible?”
Amyot agreed that if calls had been made, the fraud would have been
detected sooner, but maintained the Markarians had deactivated CIBC’s
internal checks and balances by signing guarantee confirmations year
after year.
Senecal also zeroed in on wording in the CIBC defence mentioning that
Migirdic and Markarian both were members of Montreal’s tight-knit
Armenian community and giving the impression they were somehow
complicit.
“Why this reference to them being in the same community? Why insist
on that?” the judge asked.
Amyot said CIBC never alleged there was an Armenian plot, but there
could have been. “Was it a possibility? Yes. There’s nothing racist
in saying that.”
The trial is expected to conclude today.

Press Release – International Monetary Fund
May 26 2005
US$34.2 Million Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility Arrangement for the
Republic of Armenia.
The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) today approved
a three year, SDR 23 million (about US$34.2 million) arrangement under the
Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) for the Republic of Armenia to
support the government’s economic program through 2008. The decision will
enable the Republic of Armenia to draw an amount equivalent to SDR 3.28
million (about US$4.9 million) from the IMF immediately.
Following the Executive Board’s discussion, Mr. Agustín Carstens, Deputy
Managing Director and Acting Chair, said:
“Armenia’s economic performance continued to be strong in 2004 and early
2005. Real GDP grew strongly, mainly driven by a boom in agriculture and
construction, while inflation fell, aided by an appropriately tight monetary
policy and the continued appreciation of the dram. Encouragingly, poverty
and inequality indicators have improved notably in recent years, owing
mainly to higher salaries, private transfers from abroad, and state social
assistance.
“The authorities’ new three-year PRGF-supported program aims at
consolidating macroeconomic stability, generating additional domestic
resources to finance poverty-reducing and growth-enhancing expenditures, and
boosting private sector activities. Tax and customs administration reforms,
the heart of the program, will focus on raising domestic resources in a
transparent and nondiscretionary manner, thereby helping to create a
business climate conducive to economic activity and strengthening the tax
base, which will be needed as external aid flows diminish over the medium
term.
“The Central Bank of Armenia (CBA) will continue to focus on maintaining
price stability, amid strong capital and remittance inflows. The CBA will
maintain the flexible exchange rate regime, while enhancing the instruments
for sterilizing capital inflows. Fiscal consolidation over the medium term
will facilitate containing the monetary effect of capital inflows.
“The program envisages financial sector reforms. The authorities will
strengthen banking supervision and improve corporate governance,
particularly of banks, to expand financial intermediation. They will step up
the pace of reforms in the nonbank financial sector, including by
implementing an appropriate supervisory and regulatory framework in the
insurance sector. The authorities are determined to address remaining
problems in the energy and water sectors, with the support of the World
Bank,” Mr. Carstens stated.

RIA Novosti, Russia
May 26 2005
RUSSIA NEEDS A STABLE CAUCASUS
16:08
MOSCOW (Sergei Markedonov for RIA Novosti) – The Russian military
presence in Georgia has become the key issue of the Caucasian Big
Game in the last few months.
Discussions of the timeframe and speed of their withdrawal from
Georgia overshadowed the problems of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
But the Russian presence (including military) in the South Caucasus
is not an element of its “imperial resurgence.” Ensuring stability in
the former Soviet republics of the Transcaucasus is a fundamental
condition of Russia’s peaceful domestic development and the
preservation of its integrity.
Russia is a Caucasian state because ten of its Federation members are
located in the North Caucasus. Another three (Volgograd and Astrakhan
regions and the Republic of Kalmykia) are part of its South Federal
District and have become involved in the Caucasian socio-economic,
political and cultural projects in the last decade. The territory of
Russia’s North Caucasus is bigger than the independent states of the
South Caucasus.
Nearly all ethnic-political conflicts in South Russia are closely
connected with conflicts in the former Soviet republics of the
Transcaucasus and vice versa (the Georgia-Ossetia and the
Ossetia-Ingush conflicts, the Georgia-Abkhazia confrontation, the
Chechen problem, the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict and the difficult
relations between the “indigenous” population of the Kuban and
Stavropol territories and migrant Armenians).
Besides, the Russian North Caucasus and the states of the South
Caucasus have a common problem of “divided nations” (Lezghinians,
Ossetians and Avars) and persecuted nations (Meskhetian Turks).
Hence, security in the Russian Caucasus cannot be ensured without
restoring stability in the neighboring Georgia, Armenia and
Azerbaijan. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Russia took
over the burden of geopolitical leadership in the former Soviet area.
The Collective Security Treaty of May 15, 1992, signed by the
Caucasian powers Russia and Armenia (Azerbaijan and Georgia acceded
to it later) became an attempt to develop an integration strategy in
the sphere of security.
But the treaty failed to become an effective instrument of the
Caucasian geopolitics. The leaders of Georgia more than once spoke of
its declarative nature. Azerbaijan believes that the problem of
Nagorny Karabakh was provoked by the Armenian aggression and hence
views the CST as ineffective for ensuring its territorial integrity
and security.
Peacekeeping operations, which Russia undertook in the 1990s, became
more effective instruments of the Russian influence in the South
Caucasus. Russian peacekeepers have been maintaining peace in the
zone of the Georgia-Ossetia conflict since July 1992 and in the zone
of the Georgia-Abkhazia conflict, since July 1994. In autumn 1993,
the units of the Group of Russian Forces in the Transcaucasus helped
stop the civil war in Georgia between the supporters of Eduard
Shevardnadze and the deposed president Zviad Gamsakhurdia.
The Russian peacekeeping operations in the region proved to be much
more effective than comparable actions of the U.S. and its allies in
Somalia, Rwanda and Kosovo.
The Russian military facilities in Georgia were mostly located in
problem regions, which complicated, to a degree, Russia-Georgian
relations. The bases were deployed in Batumi (Adzharia), Akhalkalaki
(Dzhavakheti), Vaziani and Gudauta (Abkhazia; the provisional capital
of the self-proclaimed republic in 1992-1993).
Georgia viewed the Russian military presence as the bridgehead for
the Kremlin’s neo-imperial policy. In 1997, Georgia adopted the law
on the protection of the border, under which Russian border guards
were obliged to hand over their functions to their Georgian
colleagues. The Russian “border” presence in Georgia was discontinued
in 1999.
At the Istanbul summit of the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (November 1999), Russia and Georgia agreed on
the withdrawal of Russian bases. These Istanbul agreements were
formalized as the official supplement to the Treaty on the
Conventional Forces in Europe.
The current aggravation of Russia-Georgia relations is connected with
the bases in Batumi and Akhalkalaki. The importance of the Batumi
base for Russia’s policy is close to zero, but an accelerated
withdrawal of the Akhalkalaki base will create quite a few problems.
The base is located in the Samtskhe-Dzhavakheti region populated by
Armenians, who view the Russian presence as a guarantee of personal
and ethnic security.
The Russian diplomatic inaction with regard to the Akhalkalaki base
is shocking. The Russian presence there is not a military but a
political question. If we leave Akhalkalaki, we will lose the trust
of the Armenian population of the Transcaucasus.
This issue can and should be presented not as a Russia-Georgia
conflict but as a problem of Georgia-Armenia relations. We could
apply the methods of Mikhail Saakashvili and elevate the problem to
the international level, involving influential Armenian lobbyists in
Europe and the U.S. and the Yerevan authorities. Regrettably, the
same policy was pursued with regard to the two bases and so
withdrawal from Akhalkalaki is inevitable.
But the issue of Russian military bases has one more crucial aspect.
The withdrawal of Russian troops from the South Caucasus would not
encourage an intensive post-conflict settlement in the zones of
ethnic conflicts there. The Georgia-Abkhazia, Georgia-Ossetia and
Armenia-Azerbaijan conflicts can be mothballed but will not be
settled until the leaders of the independent Caucasian states offer
their people a new political agenda and new forms and methods of
national development.
Worse still, withdrawal from Akhalkalaki is fraught with
Georgia-Armenia contradictions. The potential refusal to send Russian
peacekeepers to the zones of Georgia’s conflicts with Abkhazia and
Ossetia can provoke a new round of ethnic tensions. In a word,
demanding a speedy liquidation of the Russian military presence
without filling the gap with a substantiated security policy does not
promise a tranquil future to the Greater Caucasus.
Sergei Markedonov, candidate of history, is head of the department of
ethnic relations at the Institute of Political and Military Analysis
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and
may not necessarily represent the opinions of the editorial board.

The New Anatolian, Turkey
May 26 2005
Chirac Appeases Armenians on Turkish EU Bid
Sunday’s referendum in France, which will decide that country’s
position on the EU Constitution, has forced French politicians to use
every tool at their disposal to get the Yes vote from the people.
French President Jacques Chirac yesterday used the word “genocide”
for the first time when characterizing deportations of Armenians in
the early 1900s to appease the powerful Armenian lobby in France, and
coax their support for the EU Constitution in Sunday’s referendum.
Chirac sent a letter to the Coordination Committee of the Armenian
Organizations of France (CCAF), claiming that the new European
Constitution “would further delay” Turkey’s EU full membership.
Noting the French Parliament’s recent decision recognizing the
genocide, Chirac said: “France recognizes the genocide.” Despite the
Parliament’s decision, the president has not used the word publicly,
choosing instead to describe the controversial events of early 1900s
as “tragic.”
“The EU Constitution will promote tolerance, justice and respect for
minorities,” Chirac wrote in his letter. “For the first time in our
history, fundamental human rights and freedom will be recognized in
the EU Constitution, and will be guaranteed for all of EU citizens.
Pluralism, opposition to discrimination, justice, solidarity,
gender-based equality and minority rights will become mandatory for
all member states.”
Chirac also expressed his belief that Turkey will “refresh its
memory” on the issue.

Eurasia Daily Monitor, DC
The Jamestown Foundation
May 26 2005
AMENDMENTS TO KEY LAWS UNLIKELY TO FOSTER ARMENIA’S DEMOCRATIZATION
By Emil Danielyan
Thursday, May 26, 2005
The Armenian authorities claim to have taken a further step toward
meeting their membership commitments to the Council of Europe with
the May 20 passage of amendments to the country’s controversial laws
on elections and rallies. President Robert Kocharian’s leading
political allies say the move will guarantee freedom of assembly and
seriously complicate chronic electoral fraud, the principal source of
political tension in Armenia.
However, their political opponents and leading civic groups have
dismissed the amendments as insignificant and misleading. Indeed,
they allow the ruling regime, which has failed to hold a single free
and fair election, to continue to exercise full control over all
electoral processes and to restrict anti-government demonstrations.
Besides, the regime has never quite complied with the existing laws
that declare vote rigging to be a serious crime and that guarantee
Armenians’ basic human and civil rights. This appears to be the
reason why the Council of Europe’s and other pan-European structures’
emphasis on legislative reform in Armenia has yielded few tangible
results in terms of the democratization of its deeply flawed
political system.
On paper, the amended law on public gatherings makes it somewhat
easier for opposition groups to stage demonstrations. The authorities
can now stop or disperse such protests only if they result in
“violations of the law” and feature calls for a “violent overthrow”
of the government. The legislation does not specify what those
violations could be. It also retained a highly controversial clause
whereby no rallies can be held within a 150-meter radius of the
presidential palace in Yerevan and other “strategic” facilities such
as the nuclear power plant at Metsamor.
The law in question was enacted in May 2004 at the height of an
opposition campaign of anti-Kocharian demonstrations. Legal experts
from the Council of Europe and the OSCE concluded afterward that it
does not meet European standards for freedom of assembly. They also
criticized Armenia’s Electoral Code for not envisaging sufficient
safeguards against vote irregularities.
The amendments to the code give more rights to proxies of election
candidates on polling days and should enable the police to sort out
Armenia’s notoriously inaccurate vote registers. More importantly, it
allows Kocharian to appoint only one member of each electoral
commission.
Kocharian until now named three of the nine members of the country’s
Central Election Commission and its territorial divisions. The other
commission seats are controlled by the six parties and blocs
represented in parliament. Only two of them are in opposition to
Kocharian.
The two vacant commission seats will now be given to another
pro-presidential parliamentary faction and Armenia’s Court of
Appeals, all of whose members were appointed by Kocharian. The
Armenian leader and his allies will thus retain their overwhelming
control of the bodies handling elections at various levels.
Not surprisingly, the opposition is not happy with the legislative
changes. They were also criticized on May 24 by the Partnership for
Open Society, a coalition of more than three dozen local
non-governmental organizations advocating political reform. Its
leaders claimed that some of the amendments would even facilitate
fraud. One of amendments stipulates that ballot papers no longer have
to be signed by at least three members of a precinct commission in
order to be considered valid.
The NGOs also slammed Council of Europe experts for reportedly
praising the amendments. They had already denounced the pan-European
organization’s Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) for its October 2004
resolution that made a largely positive assessment of Yerevan’s human
rights record just months after an unprecedented crackdown on the
Armenian opposition.
The 46-nation assembly noted its “excellent cooperation” with the
Armenian authorities, echoing statements by officials from the
Council of Europe’s top governing body, the Committee of Ministers.
One of them, Pietro Ago, declared during a February 2004 visit to
Yerevan that the authorities “should be congratulated for their good
actions” relating to political reform. The Italian diplomat pointed
to the abolition of the death penalty in Armenia and to the passage
of new laws on mass media, the human rights ombudsman, and
alternative service.
The enactment of those laws was among the key conditions for
Armenia’s accession to the Council of Europe in January 2001.
However, the country has hardly become more democratic since then; it
has even regressed in some areas. The Council of Europe membership
did not prevent the authorities from scandalously closing A1+, the
sole Armenian television channel not controlled by Kocharian, in
April 2002. Ironically, they used one of the laws cited by Ago to
pull the plug on the popular channel.
Furthermore, the Armenian presidential and parliamentary elections
held in 2003 were again judged undemocratic by Western observers, and
the U.S. State Department continues to describe the Kocharian
administration’s human rights record as “poor.”
The Armenian authorities have repeatedly demonstrated that they can
easily trample a law or constitutional clause if it threatens their
grip on power. They have rejected the few Council of Europe
recommendations that pose such a threat. The authorities, for
example, have stubbornly resisted demands to scrap the Soviet-era
practice of “administrative arrests,” which they have used to
imprison hundreds of opposition activists and supporters. Nor have
they agreed to significantly curb Kocharian’s sweeping powers as part
of a planned reform of the Armenian constitution.
(RFE/RL Armenia Report, May 19, 24; February 6, 2004)

European Report
May 25, 2005
CONCERNS EXPRESSED ABOUT AZERBAIJAN ARRESTS.
A recent “series of arrests” by the authorities in Azerbaijan led
Dutch Socialist MEP Jan Wiersma to express concerns on May 20. “These
arrests could be confirmation of a pattern of intimidation of the
opposition in the run-up to parliamentary elections in November”, he
said. The MEP added that, “in the light of recent statements by the
Azerbaijan government, outlining their intention to create closer
relations with the EU, the authorities in Baku should be aware that
arresting opposition members is contrary to the basic values of the
EU”. Just days ahead of a planned May 25 ceremony marking the opening
of the $4 billion Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, Azerbaijan police
prevented an unauthorised opposition rally from taking place,
reportedly leading to the arrest of 45 protestors. In April, EU
Foreign Ministers invited the European Commission to start joint
discussions to prepare ‘neighbourhood policy’ action plans that would
aim for closer ties – linked to reforms and ‘common values’ – between
the EU and each of the three South Caucasus countries – Armenia,
Azerbaijan and Georgia.

An-Nahar, Lebanon
May 25 2005
Translated from Arabic exclusively for Armenian News Network by Katia
M. Peltekian
A Tashnak Delegation visits Solange Jumeyel
Mrs. Solange Basheer Jumeyel met with a Tashnak delegation headed by
Hagop Pakradouni, vice-president of the Party and a candidate for a
parliamentary seat in Al-Metn, Mardig Boghossian, member of the
Central Committee of the Party, and Baruyr Arsen, director of the
Party’s parliamentary office.
Pakradouni congratulated Mrs. Jumeyel for winning the Maronite seat
in Ashrafieh uncontested and then informed her of the Party’s
decision to nominate him for the Armenian Apostolic seat in the
Al-Metn district to replace Sebouh Hovnanian.
Mrs. Jumeyel confirmed that the election law of 2000 was drawn
according to the conditions at the time that imposed on Lebanon
certain electoral combinations. She also stated that the current
electoral law will be amended as soon as the elections are over…

Pan Armenian News
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF GENOCIDE POSSIBLE ONLY HAVING REALIZED ITS CAUSES
24.05.2005 06:14
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Unless the Turkish society realizes and gets to know the
causes and consequences of the events of 1915, it will not be able to
acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. Stated Editor-in-Chief of Agos Turkish
journal Hrant Dink, when commenting on the holding of Ottoman Armenians in
Period of Collapse of the Empire: questions of scientific policy and
democracy conference in Istanbul, reported the Yerkir newspaper. In his
words, before the 20-es of the past century there was no taboo in Turkey on
the discussion of the Armenian issue, moreover, monuments to Genocide
victims were erected. However, since 1923, when people, who had committed
the Armenian Genocide, started `penetrating’ into the ruling elite of
Turkey, the discussion of the issues of the Armenian Genocide was banned.
Moreover, pensions were assigned to those charged for committing the
Armenian Genocide and the Turks killed. As noted by Dink, the Turkish people
thought for a rather long period of time that the Armenian issue is long ago
solved by the Treaty of Lausanne. The journal editor noted that the fact
that only 50-60 thousand Armenians live in Turkey today is an outcome of
Turkey’s brutal policy regarding national minorities. Answering the question
why Turks decided to exterminate the Armenian population he said that the
world wanted to return the indigene Armenians to the territories inhabited
by them, but the Young Turks decided to massacre Armenians to avoid it and
to leave the issue out of the agenda. As of the statements made in Turkey
that Armenians exterminated Turks, these are consequences of the wide-scale
genocide. Such actions were committed by revenge groups of Armenian, who had
lost their relatives.

PRESS RELEASE
Mijnaberd
Cultural Public Organisation (NGO),
38 Briusov street, apt. 6, Yerevan, Armenia, 375023
Tel: +374-9-43-81-96
E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]
Contact person: Nouneh Dilanyan, Vice-Chair
Mijnaberd and Caucasus NGO Forum are organizing a Creative Game
‘Strategic development of Armenia and Armenian civil society’. This is a
5-day long strategic seminar run with a special methodology in
Tsakhkadzor. It starts on May 27th and ends on June 1 (departure day).
Participants start moving at 8.30 on May 27 from next to Tamanyan
Monument in Yerevan.
Creative Game is a non-stop brainstorm using special methodology and
language (drawings, charts) for 30-120 people who work in groups all day
long and report back to the plenary in late evenings. It has an
agenda–topics of days–and names of groups. Its result is opening up
the minds and creative capacities of participants, building joint and
consensual philosophical visions, strategies and conceptual language,
and coming up with concrete ideas and tools for follow up. It is
facilitated by Game-Methodologists–specialist experts in
‘de-object-ising’ people’s minds and creative capacities and in
observing and registering the ways of thinking.
The Armenian Committee of Game-Methodologists was created in 1989. In
2003, a Caucasus Game-Methodologists Committee (CMC) was created, and
the group run several strategic Creative Games–all-Caucasian, as well
as in Georgia, Abkhazia and South Russia, sponsored by EU, UN etc.
This Creative Game is organised by Mijnaberd, an Armenian NGO, and
Caucasus NGO Forum–a network of NGOs from all over the Caucasus whose
office is currently in Yerevan.
The Game will be discussing many strategic issues pertinent to today’s
Armenia and Armenians-Armenia after the collapse of the USSR, Armenia
and Artsakh, Armenia in the world, global issues, Armenia and Armenians,
Armenia in the region, issues with Turkey and Azerbaijan, civil society,
development, etc.
The Game is sponsored by private individuals and Open Society Institute
Armenia.
The results of the game will be summarised within a month and widely
distributed, and will become available on-line.
If you wish to participate at your own expense, please let know Nune
Dlianyan, Vice-Chair of Mijnaberd and Game-Methodologist, at
[email protected]. You will have to arrive to Tsakhkadzor in time and be
obliged to take part in the entire duration of the Game. The language
is Armenian. You will have to pay your fees for travel, accommodation
and subsistence. You may have to accommodate yourself in a nearby
hotel rather than the one where the Game takes place (The University
Hotel). Participation is free.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress