University of Luxembourg wants to open Armenian TUMO Center for Creative Technologies
09:31, 26 January, 2022
YEREVAN, JANUARY 26, ARMENPRESS. Armenian Minister of Foreign Affairs Ararat Mirzoyan visited the University of Luxembourg within the framework of his official visit to the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a press release.
FM Mirzoyan hailed the University of Luxembourg’s initiative of hosting the Armenian TUMO Center for Creative Technologies and thanked the university for their decisiveness in advancing the project. The Armenian FM said that the opening of the TUMO Center will be a meaningful event on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of establishment of diplomatic relations between Armenia and Luxembourg, which will be marked this year.
Accompanied by Rector Stéphane Pallage, FM Mirzoyan toured the university and got acquainted with the research and education programs. He also held a meeting with the university’s administration and the academic staff.
Speaking about the scientific-educational partnership between the two countries, FM Mirzoyan said that this sector is an important direction of the bilateral agenda and it is inked in the agreement on cooperation in culture, education, youth and science signed between the governments of Armenia and Luxembourg.
“Ever since the university was established, tens of Armenian students received education here at the University of Luxembourg, and the number of Armenian citizens who want to study here is continuously growing. I hope that as a result of the ongoing negotiations between the Yerevan State University and the University of Luxembourg, a document on cooperation will be signed which will ensure the legislative foundation for student exchange and joint research programs,” the Armenian Minister of Foreign Affairs said.
It’s 19:00 in Yerevan, Armenia, and former Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) Captain Viken Djelalian is giving a lecture to members of the Metsn Tigran militia. Barely a year earlier he was still working as a signals officer at Royal Military College St.-Jean in Quebec when war erupted between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh, which is populated by ethnic Armenians. An Armenian-Canadian born and raised in Montreal, Djelalian’s family escaped Turkish persecution during the Armenian genocide of 1915, settling in Syria and then Egypt, and eventually making their way to Canada in the 1960s.
Djelalian joined the CAF in 2013 as a signals officer and worked at various command posts. But by 2020 he was already considering asking for release from the CAF. Despite having an apparently bright future in Canada’s military, he no longer felt he could commit himself to the forces’ mission, given the Canadian government’s posture towards the new war involving his ancestral homeland. Djelalian felt it amounted to tacit support for Azerbaijan and Turkey.
“My way of contributing”: Montreal-raised Viken Djelalian (left) went from a Canadian Armed Forces Captain with a promising career to private citizen offering military instruction to volunteer reserve groups in Armenia following the loss of its 2020 war with Azerbaijan. (Source of photo: Fin DePencier)
Knowing that what he intended to say and do was strictly prohibited to an active CAF member, Djelalian filed his release paperwork in late 2020. “I was restricted to actions approved by the chain of command,” he explains. “Interfering in genocidal acts of Turkey was against Canada’s foreign policy.” On the day his release was approved last April, he took a one-way flight to Armenia, where he’s been living ever since, providing courses to various organizations in Armenia’s decentralized militia network.
Part of tonight’s lesson: commander’s critical information requirements, or CCIR. This concept grapples with when it would be appropriate for troops in lower-level units to involve a senior commander, or even the Prime Minister of Armenia, Nikol Pashinyan, in a wartime decision. The exact answer is classified. But it’s an eternal issue for military organizations. Consider for example that in the leadup to D-Day in 1944, Allied commander General Dwight D. Eisenhower selected Normandy over Calais as the landing site. But “Ike” wasn’t dictating decisions below that, much less micro-managing how the troops would run up the beaches. Djelalian’s point: some decisions can only be authorized at a certain level of command, or by a specific person at that level. The intent of this lesson, he explains, is to “enable streamlined decision-making through clarified delegation of responsibilities.” It’s knowledge Djelalian acquired over his CAF career, which he has molded into a doctrine tailored for the training and organizational realities of the Armenian militias.
Djelalian stresses that he isn’t breaking any Canadian law and everything he teaches is open-source information. “I do not present myself as an active member of CAF,” he points out. “I do not have any knowledge of the regional conflicts that I acquired as a member of CAF. Basically, all my views and opinions have been gathered through my formal education and years of observation. I make sure that all the information I share is readily available online for public use and is issued by official government sources.”
Adelina Vardanian was a medical student at Yerevan State University when war erupted, and she quickly volunteered to work at a battlefield hospital. ‘I joined Metsn Tigran as I strongly believe it’s vital that every single Armenian knows the basics of using a gun and providing first aid,’ she says.
Tweet
He’s primarily focused on the effective deployment of combat first aid, or combat casualty care among fighting units. That is less passive than it sounds. Rather than merely bandaging up the patient, the unit’s first goal must be winning the firefight it’s in, and then planning an evacuation. “For that to work,” Djelalian explains, “You need to understand areas of operations, command relationships of attachments, command post operations, stages of operating capacities, conducting pre-deployment inspections, logistics lines, and enemy electronic warfare capabilities. You must have a certain delegation of responsibility and develop leadership – as opposed to authority – read a map, use a compass, and understand operational requirements in the complex environment of war.” Djelalian believes Armenia would be better able to defend itself were its military to adopt this Western-style combat doctrine.
Some of the organizations he works with are branded as NGOs or volunteer reserve groups. But they all have the same basic purpose, which is to support Armenia’s overstretched and inadequate military with civilian volunteers should total war resume. Recruitment in these organizations has swelled since the 2020 war and an increasing number of women and older citizens are joining their ranks along with military-aged men. Djelalian is among hundreds of diaspora-Armenian military professionals who have repatriated to assist in their training.
To support their country’s military forces, some Armenian women willingly undergo military and combat first-aid training. Among them is Adelina Vardanian (right), a medical student at Yerevan State University. (Source of photos: Fin DePencier)
The militias’ uniforms, equipment and skill-sets all vary wildly. Some are from small community protection units from vulnerable border areas, others prepare Armenian teenage boys for conscription at age 18. The militias are made up mostly of men, with a few women, including Adelina Vardanian. She was a medical student at Yerevan State University when war erupted, and she quickly volunteered to work at a battlefield hospital. “I joined Metsn Tigran as I strongly believe it’s vital that every single Armenian knows the basics of using a gun and providing first aid,” she says. “I saw many deaths that wouldn’t happen if correct first aid was provided. I saw young boys losing arms and legs because of the same reason.”
Another Armenian-Canadian, who wishes to remain anonymous, is wearing the distinctive CAF woodland pattern known as CADPAT, depicted in the accompanying photo. He confirmed that he isn’t nor has ever been a CAF member, but purchased the uniform at a military supply store in Toronto. “I am a citizen of both Armenia and Canada, [but] I have not participated in any actions against Canada or Canadian citizens,” the man vows. “I have duties as a citizen in Armenia as well, born and raised here.”
“The art of staying alive” is both a common Armenian saying and the name of the militia that this Armenian-Canadian dual citizen is instructing. While vowing not to harm Canada’s interests, he believes he must help Armenia. (Source of photos: Fin DePencier)
The man currently works as an instructor for a militia named VoMA, an acronym for the Armenian phrase voghj menalu arvest, meaning “the art of staying alive.” The name captures the psychology of the Armenian nation, a once-impressive empire which, after losing this war and having been whittled to the bone over many centuries, is certainly on the defensive. Armenia’s current population is under 2 million and per capita GDP is barely $5,300.
The 2020 war ended in a humiliating defeat for Armenia. With its troops in Nagorno-Karabakh surrounded and facing slaughter, that November Armenia was forced to sign a deeply unfavourable Russian-mediated ceasefire agreement. The war and its aftermath are described in this C2C article. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1990, conflicts were immediately sparked between many of the newly independent nations over ethnic boundaries, among them Armenia and Azerbaijan. Armenians were able to claim victory in the first Nagorno-Karabakh war in 1994, establishing it and several surrounding provinces of Azerbaijan as the independent republic of Artsakh. But this was not the end of history, and while Armenia became complacent with its winnings, Azerbaijan plotted revenge.
The 2020 Armenia-Azerbaijan war resulted in Armenia losing 75 percent of its territory in and around Nagorno-Karabakh. Despite the presence of Russian peacekeepers, Azerbaijan’s president threatens to march on Yerevan itself. (Map for C2C Journal by Kitty McLeod/Artboard)
Over the next 25 years, Azerbaijan embarked on an extensive military modernization, financed by its significant oil wealth. One of the country’s largest customers, Israel, sold Azerbaijan cutting-edge weapons including Humvee-style armoured vehicles and Kamikaze drones, also known as loitering munitions. But what proved the most decisive acquisition was a fleet of T-2 Bayraktar drones from Turkey, Azerbaijan’s patron-state. Successive Armenian governments, meanwhile, neglected the country’s military. Armenia made the dubious decision to purchase outdated Russian-made fighter jets, then inexplicably failed to equip them with modern munitions, even once the 2020 war started.
‘The primary purpose of NATO is to deter Russian influence,’ Djelalian notes. ‘There is nothing in there about human rights, self-determination of non-NATO sovereign states. The Erdogan and Aliyev regimes [of Turkey and Azerbaijan] have a green light to freely target Kurds, Armenians, Assyrians, Arameans, Yezidis…’
Tweet
The Armenian air force never flew a combat mission during the war, a source of significant internal controversy and suspicion. Armenia also continued using outdated Soviet-era doctrine, but without the support structure from Russia which that doctrine assumed. Azerbaijan not only fielded vastly superior weapons but had tactical and strategic guidance from the modernized Turkish military. Turkish military officers operated Azerbaijan’s newly acquired drones and used them to slice through Armenian defences.
Azerbaijan’s crucial acquisition: Turkey’s Bayraktar T-2, a long-endurance unmanned combat aerial vehicle, here seen armed with guided missiles, gets its targeting precision from Canadian L3Harris WESCAM technology (sensor package visible on belly of aircraft). It proved decisive in Armenia’s defeat.
Unbeknownst to nearly all Canadians, these drone strikes were made possible by Canadian sensor technology. Azerbaijan’s Bayraktar’s were using a thermal imaging system made by L3Harris WESCAM, a Canadian manufacturer of stabilized imaging systems (and a subsidiary of global defence contractor L3Harris Industries, Inc.). The use of this technology in Nagorno-Karabakh was supposedly prohibited under the Canadian export agreement. After a drawn-out “investigation,” Canada cancelled permits for high-tech arms exports to Turkey. But these had already been banned until six months prior to the war, when the Justin Trudeau government mysteriously approved the permits.
As a NATO member, Turkey’s direct involvement in the war put Canada in an awkward position. The Trudeau government had declared its neutrality. But the WESCAM exports suggest otherwise. “When Turkey attacked Armenia, there was no mandate for any NATO country to come to the aid of Armenia,” says Djelalian. “I believe this is what the Kremlin wanted to prove. That is why [Russia] let it happen. NATO lost the moral high ground, and nobody cared.” In effect, Djelalian asserts, Canada was siding with the aggressors.
Valued customer: Total Canadian military exports to Turkey. (Source: “Killer Optics Exports of Wescam Sensors to Turkey – A Litmus Test of Canada’s Compliance with the Arms Trade Treaty”/Ploughshares Special Report)
Serving in the CAF or any other military entails so-called “unlimited liability” – risking one’s life for the mission. Djelalian wasn’t willing to risk his for a CAF mission that, he profoundly believed, was antithetical to Armenia’s survival. “This is not the first time Canada has sided with genocidal regimes, in lieu of democratic free states,” he charges. “When Canada goes overseas, it cooperates with its allies. So, who are Canada’s allies in Asia Minor? Turkey and Azerbaijan.” These countries pose an existential threat to Armenia. While Russia has guaranteed Armenia’s defence on its western border with Turkey, not so regarding Azerbaijan, which has shown an appetite for territorial expansion.
Since the mid-90s Armenia did forge formal ties with NATO, joining several working groups and supplying peacekeepers to NATO’s never-ending stabilization mission in Kosovo. Yet when the chips were down, Armenia received nothing for its efforts. “The primary purpose of NATO is to deter Russian influence. The second purpose is to strengthen military cooperation of its member states,” Djelalian notes. “There is nothing in there about human rights, self-determination of non-NATO sovereign states. The Erdogan and Aliyev regimes [of Turkey and Azerbaijan] have a green light to freely target Kurds, Armenians, Assyrians, Arameans, Yezidis…”
Bitter tears of war: The 2020 conflict delivered death of civilians as well as combatants plus colossal destruction of housing in the regions of Ganja (bottom left) and the Republic of Artsakh (bottom right). (Sources of photos: (top left) Courtesy of Armenian Defense Ministry; (bottom left) Javid Nabizade, licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 International)
Djelalian became convinced he had to do something to aid Armenia. But given Canada’s de facto foreign policy plus the constraints he was under, what could this be? “I believe that someone who releases from the CAF to work for the Red Cross, or the UN is doing nothing more than a career change,” Djelalian asserts. “The career change is sometimes sponsored and facilitated by host organizations.” His dilemma, he explains, is that “In my case, I would have not found a venue of cooperative agreements to transfer from the CAF to work in Armenia.”
So, he felt the honourable as well as legally correct approach was to quit the CAF and go to Armenia as a private citizen. “I can’t comment on what the Armenian military does or adopts,” he says. “Volunteering with NGOs is my way of contributing. Everybody has to do something. Teaching how to use a compass and leading a discussion on comparative doctrine is my way of contributing.” Carefully balancing his involvement in this way, he feels, recognizes his ongoing legal and moral obligations to Canada, the country where he was born and where his family lives in safety, and to his former employer.
Armenia remembers: Pictured, (left) memorial to fallen Metsn Tigran militia members in Yerevan, (right) new burials in Yerablur Military Memorial Cemetery, Yerevan. (Source of photos: Fin DePencier)
On a foggy Sunday somewhere near Armenia’s pleasant and peaceful capital of Yerevan, Djelalian is drilling half his trainees on using a map and compass while the other half are around the corner at the shooting range. He’s teaching them how to generate a range card, which outlines what sectors of fire a soldier is responsible for in a defensive posture. Many of these men fought in the 2020 war and know another could erupt at any moment.
Armenia’s capital of Yerevan, peaceful and safe – for now.
What’s left of Nagorno-Karabakh for Armenia is a small, wedge-shaped exclave centred on the city of Stepanakert and surrounded by the Azerbaijani military. Many suspect Armenia is fated to lose the rest. Despite its Armenian population, most of the world already recognizes it as part of Azerbaijan. The exclave doesn’t even show up on google maps and Azerbaijan has pressured google to remove its Armenian names (this short video shows the shifting boundaries in 2020). Armenia’s meagre and battered forces couldn’t withstand another onslaught. Instead, a Russian peacekeeping presence is the only thing preventing Azerbaijan from capturing the entire territory.
Russia’s peacekeeping mission hasn’t been entirely successful. Skirmishes in the Armenian provinces of Syunik and Gegharkunik are frequent, and last November escalated into a full-scale battle before Russia forced another ceasefire. Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev frequently threatens not only to retake Nagorno-Karabakh but to march his army right into Yerevan. Despite being Armenia’s ostensible ally through the post-Soviet Collective Security Treaty Organization, Russia has declined to provide direct military support for Armenia. With a weak military and no reliable allies, Armenians know they not only need to apply every resource at their disposal – they need all the help they can get, from wherever it might come.
Fin DePencier is a Canadian journalist and photographer who is based in Armenia and covers conflicts around the world.
Source of main image: Shutterstock.
Civil society plays an important role in building a democratic society, and it needs to raise issues related to different spheres and try to get them solved, if, naturally, the authorities have a desire to see the problems solved.
The incumbent authorities in Armenia, particularly Nikol Pashinyan, claim that the government is committed to democratic values and that democracy is not an alien concept to them. However, nowadays civil society is not that active, its voice does not reach the authorities, because, according to the representatives of civil society, the problems and complaints voiced by them do not get any response from the current authorities.
Speaking to Panorama.am, Chairman of the Yerevan Press Club Boris Navasardyan outlined several reasons for the passivity of civil society.
“The first is inertia, which was formed during the revolution and immediately after it. Some representatives of civil society believed that this government already represented the interests of society, so there was no need to further pressure the authorities into making reforms. Since it has lasted for a while, inertia has already been formed,” he said.
At the same time, he noted when they began to notice that the steps taken by the authorities failed to meet their expectations, it was already difficult to “get back into shape” that they had before the revolution.
According to Boris Navasardyan, the second reason is that the political interests of some civil society representatives came to coincide with the political interests of those who were in power structures and the well-known formula GONGO, government-organized non-governmental organizations, emerged.
“We had such organizations before the revolution, but their composition changed after it. That is, the civil society organizations that were not GONGOs before the revolution, in fact, adopted this workstyle after the revolution,” he noted
According to him, the third reason is that, unlike the previous Armenian governments, the new government, strange as it may seem, was not open to a dialogue with civil society and refused to accept its important role,
“It was conditioned not by the fact that the previous authorities respected civil society, but by the fact that a certain dialogue with civil society was a precondition for good relations between the authorities and international organizations. Now, we see that this circumstance is not so important for the government, as they care little about what international structures want to see in Armenia. It may be due to the fact that our authorities exaggerate that there is a perception of Armenia among the international community as a country which has made a big step towards democracy,” Navasardyan explained.
He stressed that this perception is changing for the worse, but the authorities are not yet aware of the importance of what is happening, and therefore they disregard the criticism voiced by NGOs.
“When you face such an attitude, you somehow lose heart and realize that no matter how active you are, there will be no result. Hence, there is certain apathy in the Armenian civil society,” said the Yerevan Press Club head.
In Navasardyan’s words, all these developments, as well as the revolution, Covid-19 and war, resulted in reduced opportunities and willingness of civil society to work and cooperate with each other during this period, while separate organizations or a small group of organizations can hardly solve problems on their own.
He believes consolidation is necessary to increase the activity of civil society. “At least those civil society representatives, who in general think alike, do not necessarily strive for good relations with the authorities and are ready to enter into a conflict if necessary, should be united,” he said. “But such a conflict must also have a reason; it must be understood that by going into conflict, it is possible to have an impact. The authorities must feel that there is a consolidated force on this side, an institution which can influence and restrain public opinion. If it succeeds, the solidarity that existed a few years ago will be restored and, maybe, there will be results, but today Armenia’s civil society is increasingly split.”
Boris Navasardyan also noted that when NGOs working in various spheres of public interest protection have no levers of influence, it naturally affects those spheres. He found it difficult to name a specific area in which reforms and progress have been observed.
President of the Association for Sustainable Human Development Karine Danielyan found it difficult to answer the question of why civil society is passive today. According to her, this issue needs a special study.
“I don’t feel that passivity. Maybe I’m wrong, but it’s generally accepted that there must be a serious phenomenon in society for it to become active and get engaged,” she said, stressing there are problems which require solutions, but there is no such phenomenon which would simultaneously affect many people and pose a threat to their lives.
Danielyan states people are tired of taking to the streets all the time to voice some kind of issues.
She also attributes the decreased activity of civil society to the fact that some of the formerly active members may now hold government posts.
“It has always been the case that when such people come to power, they rule out a wave of protests, but then life dictates its own rules – to swell the ranks with new people and become active,” Danielyan said.
Zhanna Aleksanyan, head of the Journalists for Human Rights NGO, does not share the view that civil society is inactive.
“The work of civil society is more visible now, especially over the past two years. Maybe at the beginning of the revolution I would agree with you; we believed that there would be reforms, the authorities would fulfill their promises, however, we saw that it all did not happen,” she stated.
In Aleksanyan’s words, if there was an opposition that would really raise the issues the society is most concerned about, it could be said that civil society is not that active. It is against this background, she claims, that civil society’s statements and dissenting opinions about various phenomena are more visible.
She found it difficult to say why civil society representatives do not resort to street protest, as they did before.
“Perhaps the reason was the trust in this government. Now the post-war situation may prevent such actions, but I’m sure there will be protests if it continues like this,” Aleksanyan said.
According to her, now it is very difficult to achieve something. Maybe people and civil society trusted the authorities to some extent, but now they see that there is no change in any sphere.
“Nearly two years ago, civil society was pretty lost, and now it’s being overlooked,” she said.
Zhanna Aleksanyan said that only once did Nikol Pashinyan meet with representatives of civil society before the parliamentary elections, adding it was useless. According to her, perhaps it was the authorities who needed such a meeting before the elections.
“This is a disturbing and regrettable situation. After the war, so many families who lost their sons live next to us. Under these conditions, too, one does not feel the role of the state, nor do these families feel it,” Aleksanyan said.
She stressed that she is not at all enthusiastic about the policy of the authorities, their statements, their failure to admit their mistakes and to accept the results of public debates, as well as their inability to draw conclusions. According to the human rights defender, after the war there were spheres where something had to be done, the NGOs themselves expressed readiness to cooperate with the authorities and help, but there was no reaction.
“The part of civil society that is active is having a hard time now, although it makes a small part. There is a certain feeling of powerlessness to change something, as before,” said Aleksanyan.
Human rights activist Avetik Ishkhanyan is surprised by the silence of his former colleagues over various issues, as well as the severance of relationship with him.
“I can make some assumptions. One of them is that, in fact, they were not the bearers of these values, but simply chose a profession, because different areas of civil society – protection of human rights, freedom of speech, ecology – were a mission, not a profession. In my opinion, all of these were not values for them, but a profession. A profession is not a bad thing, but it is only a means of making a living,” he stressed.
According to the human rights activist, not only civil society, but also international organizations remain silent concerning all developments in Armenia. “So the more likely version is that it is politics, they are the carriers of this policy. Part of this policy was also the handover of Artsakh to Azerbaijan,” he said.
Ishkhanyan claims civil society can “activate the order”. “When the very international organizations that have made a name for themselves as democratic start criticizing, they, too, will follow suit,” he noted.
By Orkhan Amashov
Following the four fruitless years of prowling around and travailing in pain as a nominal head of state, Armen Sarkissian eventually decided to quit this top but largely ceremonial post. There is a convincing narrative explaining the reasons for his departure, but the precise circumstances that prompted his resignation and its timing, given the half-confirmed allegations about his dual citizenship, remain shrouded in semi-impenetrable mystery.
One pivotal “but”
There is some truth to the official reasoning that Sarkissian put forward in his resignation statement. As a president, he did not have the necessary powers to influence the fundamental processes related to foreign and domestic policy at a time of national crisis.
This central linchpin of his rationale for quitting seems to be veracious, but to an extent only, as there is one “but” which will continue to haunt Sarkissian for the remainder of his lifetime. When he was offered presidency in 2018, the rules of the game defining the political leadership were already fixed. In many ways, he entered the process as a conformist, who knew exactly what sort of a president he was going to be – a ceremonial figurehead in a parliamentary republic, in which critical powers had been vested in the person of the prime minister.
When Armenia moved from a semi-presidential system to a parliamentary one in 2015, the purpose was to extend war-monger Serzh Sargsyan’s political lifetime and enable him to continue leading the country as a premier. Later, in 2018, when the latter recommended Sarkissian, who was Armenian ambassador to the UK back then, for the post of head of state, the terms of the offer were clear. Armen Sarkissian was never meant to be a strong president with real powers, but a leader in name only, standing by the premier and reinforcing his legitimacy.
It was only after Sargsyan’s resignation and Pashinyan’s ascendance to power that Sarkissian became a vociferous advocate for a political system with a more balanced distribution of constitutional powers. In this vein, his resignation is more indicative of his dissatisfaction with the scope of his resources rather than a defiant attack on the present system of governance.
As a last visible surviving member of the old guard, Sarkissian did not share the outlook of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan as to the future of Armenia. The kerfuffle over a key military appointment was just one of the episodes revealing the lack of harmony at the top. He had no say regarding the ceasefire agreement that the prime minister was forced to sign in November 2020.
The prevailing narrative is that, in view of the Armenian PM’s purported desire to move towards signing a peace agreement with Azerbaijan and normalising relations with Turkey, Sarkissian found it obligatory to disassociate himself from the “inglorious inevitability”.
Grand but impracticable tomorrow
Throughout his tenure, in addition to extensively complaining about his powerlessness, Sarkissian also spoke at inexorable length, without any perceptible sense of immediacy or urgency, about the future in terms of obscure and vague grandiosities.
Being both corpulent and refined, and bearing a striking resemblance to Count Fosco, Wilkie Collins’s literary creation, he had and still has the air of a visibly effete and emollient figure, yet behind the facade of genteel delicacy there is a ruthless character and global operator. If this characterisation is true, there is nothing tangible or consequential on a grand scale that has so far eventuated from this assumed Machiavellian inner persona.
There is a fine and nuanced difference between what is possible and what is not impossible. The latter is what he preferred to pontificate about. He portrayed Yerevan as a future financial centre and bridge between the EU and Eurasia. He enjoyed numerous references to the forum of minds with which he associated great hopes. But when it came to the issues within the rubric of the immediate agenda, he chose to equivocate.
As a spokesperson for a global Armenia, he was self-tasked with the mission to attract investment to the country, using his worldwide connections. Despite the Covid-related restriction, he practiced some globe-trotting in his post, albeit with no easily recognisable benefits for Armenia.
Dual citizenship
There is also a question about dual citizenship rumours swirling around. If to trust the Armenian media platform Hetq, which conducted an investigation together with its international partner, Sarkissian, at the point of assuming his presidential duties, was a citizen of Saint Kitts and Nevis, a Commonwealth nation in the Caribbean, in violation of the Armenian Constitution.
It appears that there was an exchange between Hetq and the presidential office, and the latter did not deny the fact but claimed that the citizenship was acquired by default as a result of his investment, and Sarkissian instructed his lawyers to request the citizenship to be put on hold, which it has now transpired was not duly carried out. The former president denied any connection between this citizenship scandal and the timing of his resignation, but the facts, as they are stated and known, do not favour him.
Future order
It remains somewhat a moot point if Pashinyan prefers to have a president of his own choice and remain an omnipotent premier in a parliamentary republic, or to become a President with enhanced powers, under a new constitution.
What is clear is that Sarkissian’s departure will allow him to put his own man into the office. Now Pashinyan has reached the political equilibrium of the German system in which the time-honoured rule is that “if you can create a President, you can form a government”. Sarkissian was already there when he became a PM. Now the parliament where he has a healthy majority will elect a new figurehead.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan chairs a meeting of National Security Council at the Presidential Complex in Ankara, Turkiye on November 27, 2021. ( Murat Kula – Anadolu Agency )
ANKARA
Turkiye’s National Security Council on Thursday called for de-escalation of tensions between Russia and Ukraine.
The escalation is not in the interest of anyone, the council, chaired by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, said in a statement after meeting at the presidential complex in the capital Ankara.
Russia recently amassed tens of thousands of troops near Ukraine’s eastern border, prompting fears that the Kremlin could be planning another military offensive against its former Soviet neighbor.
Moscow has denied that it is preparing to invade and said its troops are there for exercises.
On Wednesday, Erdogan reiterated that he is ready to host the leaders of Russia and Ukraine to “pave the way for re-establishing peace” as tensions between the two countries show little sign of diminishing.
“Turkiye wants tensions between Russia and Ukraine to be resolved before they turn into a new crisis,” the president said during a televised interview.
Rapprochement process between Turkiye and Armenia
On the recent rapprochement process between Turkiye and Armenia, the National Security Council statement stressed the importance of the improvement of mechanisms and efforts to strengthen peace and stability in the South Caucasus, with the constructive and sincere efforts of the parties, especially Turkiye and Armenia.
Turkiye and Armenia have long been at odds over a myriad of issues, including Armenia’s refusal to recognize their shared border to historical incidents involving the Ottoman Empire’s Armenian population during World War I in 1915.
The first meeting of special representatives from both countries was held on Jan. 14 in Moscow, Russia.
According to a statement by Turkiye’s Foreign Ministry, the parties exchanged preliminary views on the process “in a positive and constructive atmosphere” and “agreed to continue negotiations without preconditions aiming at full normalization.”
A delegation led by EU’s Representative to South Caucasus, Toivo Klaar meets with Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan on Jan. 21
The European Union’s Special Representative to the South Caucasus, Toivo Klaar, who recently visited Yerevan and Baku, summed up the result of his trips, saying that he had substantive conversations with the leaders of the two countries.
Klaar said the meetings provided an opportunity us to follow up on the substantive discussions that Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev had with President Charles Michel in Brussels in December, as well as on their meeting with President Emmanuel Macron following the Eastern Partnership Summit.
Klaar visited both Baku and Yerevan on January 21 and 22, accompanied by Adviser to the French President Isabelle Dumont, as well as Magdalena Grono, Adviser to President of the European Council Charles Michel and Brice Roquefeuil, Ambassador for the Eastern Partnership in the French Foreign Ministry.
Klaar told News.am that the format of this visit was quite unique and allowed for substantive discussions between their delegation, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, among others.
“The aim was to deepen our engagement on a variety of topics and to identify options for further EU engagement with the sides, including on such issues as de-escalation of tensions and ways to avoid further clashes on the ground, border delimitation, addressing humanitarian issues, including the release of detainees, the fate of missing persons and de-mining efforts, and the importance of restoring communications infrastructure between Armenia and Azerbaijan, while fully respecting the sovereignty of all countries,” said Klaar.
On all these issues, President Michel has been closely involved for some time already and several agreements have already been reached, including the established—and well-appreciated—direct communication link between the ministers of defense of both countries and the EU-facilitated handover of 10 Armenian detainees from Baku to Yerevan on December 19, Klaar explained.
“In addition, we continued our discussions with the leaderships about President Michel’s offers for additional support for de-mining efforts, including by providing expert advice, as well as for EU political and practical support to reduce tensions on the border and for delimitation and demarcation discussions. On all these issues, I can say that we have had positive talks in both Baku and Yerevan. We will be continuing our strong engagement with our partners Armenia and Azerbaijan in all these areas,” Klaar added.
Klaar also told News.am that the EU fully supports normalization of relations and opening of communications between Armenia and Turkey as an important objective to ensure lasting peace in the region.
“We also support the upcoming resumption of flights between Yerevan and Istanbul and other high-level contacts between Armenian and Turkish officials, such as the contacts within the so-called ‘3+3’ platform and other possible contacts in the framework of the Antalya Diplomacy Forum,” Klaar stressed.
The EU’s special representative said that while in Yerevan last week, he “had a very interesting exchange of views on these issues” with Ruben Rubinyan, Armenia’s special envoy on normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia.
“It seems to me that his [Rubinyan’s] first meeting with his Turkish counterpart held in Moscow on December 14 was commended by both sides. The EU welcomes this effort and is ready to contribute to any further positive development in this direction, provided the sides show corresponding interest,” said Klaar.
“As stated by several Armenian officials recently, including at the level of Prime Minister Pashinyan, we expect this process to bring stability and prosperity to the peoples in the region and we hope to see additional concrete steps in this direction in the near future. It is my hope that it will result in agreements for the long-awaited establishment of diplomatic relations and opening of the Turkish-Armenian border,” stressed Klaar.
The Turkey-Armenia border
As has become the norm in the context of the newly-started process of normalization of relations between Yerevan and Ankara, Turkey’s Foreign Minister Mevlut Çavuşoğlu made statements regarding the future of the process in an attempt of set the agenda on the talks and, at times, force official Yerevan’s hand to discuss certain issues.
This time, following a meeting for the Central African Republic foreign minister, Çavuşoğlu said the the special envoys, appointed by the leaders of Armenia and Turkey, will discuss further steps, adding that Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is poised to attend a diplomatic summit in Antalyan, Turkey in March.
“The normalization process we started with Armenia and supported by Azerbaijan, continues with confidence-building steps. The tete-a-tete meeting of our special envoys was held in Moscow. They met directly, without any mediator. It is true that the host country, Russia, hosted both of them during the dinner, for which we thank them. After the first familiarization meeting, the special envoys will discuss further steps together,” Çavuşoğlu said, noting that from February, one Turkish and one Armenian airline will start operating Istanbul-Yerevan-Istanbul flights.
He stated that at present 50 countries have confirmed their participation in the Antalya Diplomatic Forum, with 45 of them being represented by their foreign ministers, while another five being represented by deputy foreign ministers. Çavuşoğlu added that representatives of more than 30 international organizations (NATO, EU) will also participate.
“We want to bring diplomacy, dialogue to the forefront, to discuss existing issues, to bring forward visions for the future…,” said Çavuşoğlu.
“We have invited the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia and the Special Representative Ruben Rubinyan. Recently Pashinyan said that they [Armenia] may participate in the forum. We will be happy, because Azerbaijan is also coming. Let Azerbaijan and Armenia present their opinions,” said the Turkish Foreign Minister, who did not rule out that Armenia’s prime minister might visit Antalya.
On Monday, during a virtual press conference, Pashinyan sounded upbeat about Armenia’s attendance of the conference, despite the fact that his foreign ministry had publicly acknowledged the invitation but had said that it was assessing its options.
Eduard Aghajanyan, the chair of the parliament’s foreign affairs committee, said Thursday that a final decision on whether Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan or Rubinyan, the special envoy, will participate in the Antalyan summit.
“As of this moment there is no final decision about the participation,” said Aghajanyan, a member of Pashinyan’s Civil Contract party.
20:16, 26 January, 2022
YEREVAN, 26 JANUARY, ARMENPRESS. On January 26, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia Ararat Mirzoyan, who is in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg on an official visit, met with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Luxembourg Jean Asselborn.
As ARMENPRESS was informed from the press service of the MFA Armenia, the Foreign Ministers of the two countries praised the cooperation in the fields of democracy, rule of law, protection of human rights, as well as the fight against corruption. Ararat Mirzoyan and Jean Asselborn expressed readiness to intensify the political dialogue between the two countries.
It was emphasized that on the eve of the 30th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Armenia and Luxembourg, the first official visit of the Armenian Foreign Minister in the history of bilateral cooperation will serve as a new impetus for the realization of the still untapped potential for cooperation.
The sides exchanged views on deepening the Armenia-EU partnership, emphasizing in this context the effective implementation of the Armenia-EU Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement.
The interlocutors highlighted the cooperation between the parliaments of the two countries, in particular, through the Armenia – Luxembourg friendship groups.
The Ministers noted with satisfaction the experience of effective cooperation within the framework of international organizations, including the Council of Europe, the OSCE, and the United Nations, expressing mutual readiness to make efforts to strengthen close cooperation at the multilateral level.
The Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Luxembourg discussed regional and international security issues. The sides exchanged views on the solution of humanitarian problems created by the aggression unleashed by Azerbaijan against the people of Artsakh. Minister Mirzoyan thanked for Luxembourg’s clear position from the very first days of the 44-day war, including the adoption of the resolution condemning the hostilities unleashed by Azerbaijan against Artsakh by the parliament of Luxembourg. The sides emphasized the need for a comprehensive and lasting settlement of NK conflict under the mandate of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairs’ format.
During the meeting, reference was made to the process of normalization of relations between Armenia and Turkey without preconditions. The importance of establishing cooperation between the countries of the region and creating preconditions for sustainable development was emphasized.
Cristiano Ronaldo (left) wearing an AZAT MARD hoodie during a meeting with VP and Ruler of Dubai Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid and Crown Prince Sheikh Hamdan bin Mohammed
Manchester United forward Cristiano Ronaldo wore a hoodie made by the brand Azat Mard, a name that translates to “Free Man” in Armenian, during the meeting with the Vice President of the United Arab Emirates Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum and the Crown Prince Sheikh Hamdan bin Mohammed.
Ronaldo has been in Dubai for a few days and has been making the most of the warm weather with time spent on the beach and training at the Nad Al Sheba Sports Complex.
Ronaldo in a turquoise Azat Mard hoodie The popular Azat Mard hoodie, as seen on the brand’s website
The Manchester United star was pictured in Sheikh Hamdan’s Instagram stories, along with his son Cristiano Junior.
Azat Mard positions itself as “a contemporary menswear brand specializing in luxury closing and outwear for the fashion-forward, powerful men.”
It was co-founded by Garen Tchobabanian and Neil Malhotra in 2018. Tchobanian previously played for the Armenian National Soccer team.
Ronaldo (second from left) wore the Azat Mard hoodie while attending a meeting in Dubai with his son, Cristiano Junior (far left)
The name, Azat Mard, is from Armenia and translates to “Free Man.”
“Freedom and self-_expression_ are the driving forces behind the ethos of the brand, the Azat Mard man is a leader, he is forward-thinking and not afraid to stand up and stand out,” reads a post on the brand’s website.