Author: Emil Lazarian

“I should like to see any power of the world destroy this race, this small tribe of unimportant people, whose wars have all been fought and lost, whose structures have crumbled, literature is unread, music is unheard, and prayers are no more answered. Go ahead, destroy Armenia . See if you can do it. Send them into the desert without bread or water. Burn their homes and churches. Then see if they will not laugh, sing and pray again. For when two of them meet anywhere in the world, see if they will not create a New Armenia.” - WS

Asbarez: The Armenian Saga Continues in Brazil

Emil Lazarian
by Catherine Yesayan

 

 October 20, 2021

 

in Columns, Community Links, Latest, Top Stories

The Vardan Travel tour group at the Dourian Armenian school

BY CATHERINE YESAYAN

The idea of traveling to Brazil came to me during my trip to Armenia, where I learned that Vardan Travel was taking a group to Brazil. After several years of visiting different countries and writing about their respective Armenian communities, it was time for me to explore Brazil.

I signed up for the excursion during my visit to Armenia, then returned home to the United States. A month later, I headed to Brazil to join the group in São Paulo, the country’s most populous city.

Before I continue to tell you about the Armenians of Brazil, I will provide a brief history of the country.

Brazil is the “longest” and fifth largest country in the world. The land now known as Brazil was inhabited by several tribal groups before the arrival of a Portuguese explorer named Pedro Alvares who, in 1500, claimed the area for the Portuguese Empire.

Brazil remained a colony of Portugal until 1815, at which time the colony was elevated to the rank of kingdom under a constitutional monarchy. Brazil’s current constitution was framed in 1988, and it is now defined as a Democratic Federal Republic.

  • The tour group was welcomed in Rio de Janeiro with a Samba dance
  • The double decker bus the tour group traveled in
  • The author, Catherine Yesayan, at São Paulo’s Armenian Genocide monument

The Armenian community of Brazil, after Argentina, is the second largest in Latin America. It is estimated that there are between 50 to 70,000 Armenians living in Brazil. They have maintained a strong presence in the city of São Paulo, as is evidenced by the two churches—a Catholic and an Apostolic one, a few Armenian community centers, and a radio station. There is also a metro station named “Armenia.”

Members of the Brazilian Armenian community have been involved in the country’s political realm, and there are even a few well-known artists and actors who represent Armenia’s ethnic contribution to Brazil’s cultural landscape.

The three most recognizable Armenians from Brazil include: actress Aracy Balabanian, actor Stepan Nercessian, and University of São Paulo President Vahan Agopyan.                

One of the earliest Armenian immigrants to Brazil was Rizkallah Jorge Tahan (1868 to 1949) who arrived to Brazil in 1895. He was fleeing the massacres of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. Back home, Rizkallah had learned the trade of copper smelting, a skill which he brought to this new country.

The story goes that Rizkallah made a fortune through melting copper. His success lies in the fact that he discovered a market niche that was untapped in Brazil. He would melt copper and manufacture items.

  • St. George Armenia Apostolic Church’s stained glass windows
  • The interior of St. George Armenian Apostolic Church
  • São Paulo’s Paulista Street on a Sunday

Riskallah’s business evolved into manufacturing of bathroom items, such as siphons, pipes, valves for water tanks, etc. Three years after his arrival, at the age of 20, Rizkallah opened “Casa da Boia,” a hardware store in downtown São Paulo, for building materials. The building still exists and is considered a historical landmark. In 2018, the store celebrated its 120th anniversary. The Casa da Boia is still a family business—now run by Mário Rizkallah, his grandson. 

Rizkallah later became an accomplished builder. He made his mark by erecting at least six architecturally significant buildings in the center of São Paulo. Riskallah supported the Armenian community in many ways, such as providing aid for new immigrants.

When I research about potential Armenian communities to visit, I try to find members of that locality to meet and learn about the challenges, opportunities, history, and culture unique to that area. Prior to landing in Brazil, I connected with Sarkis Karamekian on Facebook, and he arranged for someone to pick me up from the airport.  

I arrived in São Paulo, at five in the morning. After being picked up by the ride Sarkis had arranged, I was at the hotel around 6:30 a.m., where I had asked for an early check-in. I had enough time to have breakfast and sleep to regain my energy. Having started my trip a day before at 10:30 a.m. (L.A. time), I was quite exhausted. I had first flown from LAX to Miami, and later taken a red eye from Miami to São Paulo. Altogether, I had been on the road for 16 hours with no chance to sleep.

Casa De Boia — the hardware store built by Rizkallah Jorge Tahan in 1989

Later in the afternoon, Sarkis met me at the hotel where we had the opportunity to sit down and chat. Sarkis was born in São Paulo to Armenian parents. His father was an immigrant from Syria, but his mother was born in Brazil. Since he was a young boy, he had patriotic sentiments toward Armenia.

 “At the age of 20, I wanted to fight for Armenia in the first war of Armenia and Artsakh,” said Sarkis. Today, he is actively involved in several Armenian causes. In 2006, he started an Armenian radio station. He has also created a foundation to support Syrian Armenian children who have recently arrived in São Paulo — about 300 kids. His heart is so close to the issues that affect the Armenian community both in the Middle East and in South America. To list all his good deeds, I would need to write a separate column exclusively about his work.

Our group of 80 people from Yerevan arrived at the hotel around 7 p.m., with two buses—a double decker and a regular one. The following day was a Sunday. Our itinerary started with a visit to Paulista Avenue, which is the financial and cultural heart of São Paulo. The headquarters of several financial and cultural institutions are located on this fabled street. Paulista Avenue is also known to be the first paved street in São Paulo, having been paved in 1909. 

On Sundays, Paulista Avenue is closed to traffic and people can walk its 1.5-mile length. There are towering buildings displaying stunning and unique architecturally designed buildings on both sides of the street. It was a true pleasure to have the opportunity to walk that street.

Later, we visited two more sites, and then the tour continued to the Armenian Apostolic Church of St. George in São Paulo. The church was built by Rizkallah in 1948. It was one of the most ornate Armenian churches I’ve visited in the Diaspora.

The spacious interior of the church was decorated with exquisite wall paintings and stained-glass windows. The Diocese welcomed us with a special liturgy, followed by a dinner. We visited the Armenian Genocide memorial, which was right across from the church. 

Adjacent to the church was the Armenian National Dourian school, which was founded 94 years ago. Today the school has 120 students from kindergarten to 12th grade. We visited some of the classrooms, which were truly impressive.

After our visit to the church, we boarded our buses and went to the Armenian Club to have dinner. The Armenian Club is equipped with tennis courts and a swimming pool and accommodates other sports, as well. The club has about 200 members.

The following day – on Monday morning – we boarded our buses to depart for the spectacular Rio De Janeiro. Perhaps the most breathtaking city in the whole world, where urban planning blends with the splendid views of the hills emerging from the ocean and the beaches. 

In Rio De Janeiro there were no Armenian traces to follow. However, we experienced the many attractions and sightseeing options available there. The tour had also organized a few excursions to areas outside of the city, such as a coffee plantation, swimming with fish and a trip to the historic city of Petropolis. 

I must add that our stay at the Sheraton Hotel of Rio De Janeiro was a true delight. It happened that our hotel was the only hotel in Rio that is right next to the beach. It was very convenient. We took the elevators down and the beach and the swimming pools were right there. In all other hotels of Rio, you must cross a street to get to the beach.

This was indeed a wonderful trip.

Asbarez: Senate Committee Calls for Continued U.S. Aid for Artsakh De-Mining

Emil Lazarian
by Contributor

 

 

 

in Armenia, Artsakh, Latest, News, Top Stories

Senate urged to earmark $2 million for Artsakh de-mining

Proposed FY 2022 Foreign Aid Bill Would Continue to Block Arms Sales to Erdogan’s Bodyguards Following 2017 Attack on Washington DC Protesters

WASHINGTON—The Senate Appropriations Committee called for ongoing U.S. aid for Artsakh de-mining and expressed concern about unrest in the Caucasus, in its version the Fiscal Year 2022 foreign aid bill presented Monday, reported the Armenian National Committee of America.

“The Committee recommends up to $2,000,000 for humanitarian de-mining and UXO clearance activities in areas affected by the 2020 fighting in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, subject to prior consultation with the Committees on Appropriations,” stated the report accompanying the Senate FY2022 foreign aid measure.  It went on to note that “the Committee remains concerned with the protracted conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and requests the Secretary of State to consult with the Committees on Appropriations prior to obligating assistance made available under title IV of the act for Armenia and Azerbaijan.”

“We are deeply troubled that to date USAID has provided only $2.5 million in new aid to meet the needs of the 100,000 Armenians displaced from their indigenous Artsakh homeland by an Azerbaijani army which has received over $120 million in U.S. military assistance,” said ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian. “Armenian American will continues to work with Appropriations Committee members to expand life-saving U.S. assistance to Artsakh while demanding the enforcement of Section 907 restrictions to end U.S. support for Azerbaijani aggression.”

Pro-Armenia and Artsakh advocates can urge their U.S. Senators and Representative to zero out military aid to Azerbaijan by visiting 

The Senate’s proposed FY2022 foreign aid measure, for the fifth consecutive year, blocked any U.S. arms to President Erdogan’s elite bodyguard unit, which, under Erdogan’s orders, brutally beat peaceful U.S. protesters in Washington, DC on 2017.  Senators also called on the “Government of Turkey to immediately release the remaining locally employed U.S. Embassy employee, and to dismiss the false charges against him and two other locally employed staff whose cases are on appeal.”  The Committee went on express its concern about “widespread arbitrary detention and abuse of the judicial process in Turkey, as well as reports of torture and other mistreatment of detainees.”

The U.S. House version of the FY2022 foreign aid bill, adopted on July 28th, calls for not less than $50 million in U.S. assistance to Armenia, “for economic development, private sector productivity, energy independence, democracy and the rule of law, and other purposes.”  It urges not less than $2 million for de-mining activities in Artsakh.  The recommendation for U.S. assistance to Armenia is over twice that requested by President Biden in his FY2022 proposed budget, which remains silent on U.S. assistance to Artsakh.  It also includes an ANCA-backed amendment, led by Congressional Armenian Caucus Co-Chair Frank Pallone (D-NJ), which restricts U.S. foreign military financing and training assistance to Azerbaijan.

The ANCA shared its FY2022 Armenia and Artsakh assistance priorities with Senate and House Appropriations Committees earlier this year.

Azerbaijan’s Aliyev is a Strategic Liability, Not an Asset

Emil Lazarian
The National Interest
Oct 22 2021

Aliyev may be a dictator, but Western denial of Azerbaijan’s new reality and neglect of his increasing belligerence promise a far bloodier future for justice and democracy in the region than he does.

by Michael Rubin

lham Aliyev, President of Azerbaijan for nearly eighteen years, sits atop a mirage. Azerbaijan’s capital Baku exudes wealth. Luxury boutiques like Bulgari, Christian Dior, Gucci, and Trussardi line Neftchiler Avenue across Primorsky Park from the Bay of Baku. Luxury hotels like the Four Seasons, Marriott Absheron, and the Hilton Baku overlook the cornice. Car dealerships showcase the latest Rolls Royces, Lamborghinis, and Ferraris. Azerbaijan is hardly the only country to sport such an ostentatious display—Persian Gulf emirates do as well—but the wealth extremes among Azeri citizens are greater, as anyone who has bypassed the official tours to see the mudbrick houses and shantytowns outside the capital can attest. While those associated with the Aliyev family and his inner circle might afford Baku’s luxury goods, most city residents, including the educated and professional class, barely scrape by. Travel an hour or two outside the capital, and the situation is even worse.  

Azerbaijan is among the world’s most corrupt countries; Transparency International ranks Azerbaijan with Russia, Mali, and Malawi. In contrast, neighboring Armenia sits alongside Greece and Slovakia in the rankings, while Georgia scores even better. The recent Pandora Papers exposé showed that family members of senior Azeri officials had bought or sold tens of millions of dollars of luxury real estate.

Politically, Azerbaijan remains an authoritarian dictatorship. Freedom House assesses that Azeris living under Aliyev’s dictatorship enjoy less freedom than Palestinians struggling under Hamas rule in the Gaza Strip and Houthi repression in Yemen; Azeris enjoy fewer civil liberties than the Chinese under President Xi Jinping’s repressive rule.

Why the West Ignores Azerbaijan’s Reality

Western states have ignored Aliyev’s corruption and repression for a variety of reasons:  

The United Kingdom shields Azerbaijan at international forums because of British Petroleum’s interest in the country’s energy market. While China’s trade with Azerbaijan has historically been only a fraction of Great Britain’s, Beijing’s ambitions in Azerbaijan are quickly growing, which ironically makes China and the United Kingdom allies in the United Nations Security Council offering blind support to Azerbaijan, when the United Nations considers issues involving the South Caucasus.

Israel, meanwhile, has long-standing ties with Azerbaijan that are rooted in the arms-for-energy trade. During last year’s Nagorno-Karabakh war, Azerbaijan used Israeli drones against both civilian and military targets to turn the tide of the war after ethnic Armenian forces in Nagorno-Karabakh rebuffed the initial Azerbaijani invasion.  

Traditionally, both Israel and the United States also value Azerbaijan for its strategic location and willingness to allow espionage, if not full-fledged operations, against the Islamic Republic of Iran. While the mostly Shi’ite Azerbaijan once sought to distinguish itself from theocratic Iran to its south, in recent years, Aliyev has played the issue both ways: coasting on Azerbaijan’s past reputation while increasing his ties with Iran (and Russia), recent disputes with Tehran notwithstanding.

Azerbaijan’s reputation for religious tolerance and secularism also attracts many Western supporters. Certainly, Azerbaijan deserves praise in this regard, though the myth does not live up to reality. While Azerbaijan has generally protected its Jewish community, Aliyev’s government has long targeted Azerbaijan’s Christians, in some cases by erasing centuries-old cultural property like the graveyard in Julfa that Azerbaijani troops systematically destroyed. More recently, Aliyev’s cooperation with and tolerance for Syrian jihadi mercenaries, whom he used in his fight against Nagorno-Karabakh’s Armenians, raise questions about his outlook. In many ways, Aliyev appears to be taking a page from Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s playbook: Distract the West with paeans to the secular past while quietly co-opting, if not promoting, religious extremists to act as policy proxies. When countries have embraced such tactics, the result has been blowback that harmed the standing of religious minorities. Azerbaijan’s subordination of its foreign policy to Erdoğan’s—even allowing Turkish diplomats veto power over Azerbaijani engagements—should raise questions about Baku’s tolerance and the ability of Israel and the United States to leverage Azerbaijani territory for other strategic pursuits in the near future.

Beyond the strategic reasons for ignoring Azerbaijan’s reality, there is also the reality of caviar diplomacy and golden parachutes. Azerbaijan pays well. The regime spends lavishly on gifts, luxury hotel suites, and dinners and provides access to those who parrot official positions and, more importantly, refuse to research or consider counterarguments. Some Israeli officials openly talk about how they hope to enter the Azerbaijani business scene after retirement. Former American officials might be more discreet in what they say, but their actions do not substantively differ.  

Aliyev’s orientation should raise questions for any honest analyst, but, what really makes Azerbaijan a strategic liability, is Aliyev’s increasing unwillingness to live within Azerbaijan’s borders. This problem goes beyond disputes with Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh, the contested territory recognized by most countries as Azerbaijani territory, and extends to Aliyev’s territorial claims over Armenia proper, which the Azerbaijani dictator has increasingly voiced over the past decade.

For example, on November 20, 2012, Aliyev said, “Armenia as a country is of no value. It is actually a colony, an outpost run from abroad, a territory artificially created on ancient Azerbaijani lands.” The following year, Aliyev gave a speech in which he promised not only to retake Nagorno-Karabakh but also all of Armenia. “Azerbaijanis will live on their historical lands in the future. Our historical lands are Irevan [Yerevan] and Zangezur regions,” he said. He returned to this theme on January 22, 2014, during a visit to Ganja, Azerbaijan’s second-largest city, when he described Armenia as “historical Azerbaijani lands” that his countrymen will eventually regain. While Minsk Group diplomats pushed a land-for-peace and security deal, Aliyev promised Azeris that an Armenian withdrawal from Nagorno-Karabakh and the adjacent districts would only be the first phase of a final solution.   

At Nowruz celebrations the following year, Aliyev tripled down on the theme. “The Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict must be settled only within the framework of Azerbaijan’s internationally recognized territorial integrity,” he said, then added, “after that, we will return to our ancient lands—to Yerevan, Geicha, and Zangezur.”

While successive secretaries of state took Aliyev at his word when he promised to settle his disputes with Armenia diplomatically, Aliyev did not try to deceive his home audience. Speaking in the central Azerbaijani district of Terter in December 2016, he explained, “Today, we are not claiming any in the modern Republic of Armenia. We do not intend to reclaim Yerevan, Meghri, Goris through military force but I’m sure that time will come, and we, Azerbaijanis, will return to all our historic lands,” He then promised, “The main factor [for success] is strength. This is true. We live in the real world. So we have to become even stronger, to create a more powerful army.”

In recent years, especially as his economy has stagnated or declined against the backdrop of falling oil prices, Aliyev has increasingly turned toward revanchist claims to distract the public from his own mismanagement. During a speech to his New Azerbaijan Party, for example, Aliyev claimed that Yerevan, the territories of Lake Sevan, and the province of Syunik, also known as Zangezur, are historical Azerbaijani lands and that their return was a “strategic and political goal.” During a Baku military parade after the Azeri victory in the most recent Nagorno-Karabakh war, Aliyev called Yerevan, the capital of Armenia, as well as Armenia’s Syunik and Sevan regions “historical lands” of Azerbaijan. Such rhetoric dashes hopes for peace. Just last month, Aliyev threw cold water on Armenia’s request for talks about the status of Nagorno-Karabakh, warning Armenians that they should refrain from raising the subject since Azerbaijan has more historical grounds for claiming parts of Armenia like Zangezur and Lake Geicha.

It is one thing for Azerbaijan not to have diplomatic relations with Armenia—that can be rectified—but it is quite another to reject Armenia’s right to exist.

A Perfect Storm

Family fiefdoms seldom succeed in countries without formal, institutionalized monarchies. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak fell when he tried to promote his son to power. Likewise, Muammar Gaddafi fell as he tried to have his son Saif succeed him. Hafez al-Assad’s son Bashar did come into power, but Syria ultimately paid a far higher price as it descended into civil war.

For dictators, the problem with multi-decade rule is that political scapegoats are in short supply. For example, Erdoğan cannot blame his predecessors for the corruption and economic mismanagement that drained Turkey’s foreign reserves and crashed its currency. For all of Azerbaijan’s hydrocarbon wealth, the per capita income of Azerbaijanis is actually less than that of Georgians and Armenians, the latter of whom subsist under a Turkish-Azerbaijani economic blockade. While the citizens of Gulf emirates arguably accept a contract in which they sacrifice freedoms for wealth, the comparison between the Gulf states and Azerbaijan falters because ordinary Azeris receive little in exchange for political pliancy.

Azerbaijan now faces a perfect storm. As Aliyev seeks to promote his wife and son to succeed him, ordinary Azerbaijanis grow increasingly frustrated with their plight. They also see the cost of Aliyev’s Nagorno-Karabakh victory: infringement on Azerbaijani sovereignty by Russian and Turkish troops. Aliyev sponsors trips for foreign officials and some Azeris to recaptured areas of Nagorno-Karabakh, but few Azeris who originate from the territory are prepared to return permanently, given the region’s lack of jobs and their new roots in and around Baku. In effect, Aliyev wants to spend billions of dollars on infrastructure and Potemkin ghost towns that few Azeris want to reside in permanently during a shaky time for  Azerbaijan’s economy, the rise in oil prices notwithstanding.

In this situation, Aliyev’s only recourse will be like that of Iraqi president Saddam Hussein’s in 1990—to distract and play the nationalist card. Aliyev may believe Armenia is weak, but no invasion of Armenia proper will be limited to the two states. Any attack on Armenia proper will draw Turkey, Russia, and perhaps even Iran into the fight, creating an immediate crisis for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Even if aggression brings no outside intervention, an Azerbaijani conquest of Armenian territory will not solve but rather delay the solving of Azerbaijan’s internal problems, weaken its economy, and set the cycle on repeat.   

On the other hand, if Azerbaijani pressure forces Armenia to sacrifice some sovereignty for security and enter a broader security alliance with Russia, the United States and NATO would soon face ramifications elsewhere. Russia would use Armenia as an example to push other former Soviet states—not only in the Caucasus and Central Asia but also in the Baltics—into a new Russia-dominated union.

Aliyev may be a dictator, but Western denial of Azerbaijan’s new reality and neglect of his increasing belligerence promise a far bloodier future for justice and democracy in the region than he does. At issue is not simply some theoretical dispute between two small states but the West’s strategic position against retrograde forces like Russia, Iran, and jihadism that want to reimagine the post-World War II liberal order.

Michael Rubin is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

Armenian authorities dissatisfied with Ombudsman’s activity, official says

Emil Lazarian
PanArmenian, Armenia
Oct 22 2021
– 14:28 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – Authorities in Armenia are dissatisfied with the activity of Human Rights Defender Arman Tatoyan, Security Council Secretary Armen Grigoryan said Thursday, October 21, according to Rusarminfo.

Grigoryan weighed in on the Ombudsman’s political position, maintaining that Tatoyan “distorts the reality” and “behaves like an oppositionist”.

“He has several months left before he can engage in more obvious political activity. His term expires, and I am sure that the ruling [Civil Contract] party will propose a new candidate for the post of Ombudsman of the country,” Grigoryan added.

Tatoyan on Thursday published evidence of the Azerbaijani military’s reinforcement on Armenia’s territory, following a statement from the Defense Ministry denying Tatoyan’s earlier claims. The Ombudsman said authorities have embarked on a campaign to discredit his activity, and that the Secretary of the National Security Council has now joined it.

Azerbaijan conceals actual number of captured Armenians and places of their detention, FM says

Emil Lazarian
Panorama, Armenia
Oct 22 2021

Armenian FM Ararat Mirzoyan stated on Friday that the immediate repatriation of Armenian prisoners of war and captured civilians held in Azerbaijan remains a priority. In the words of Mirzoyan, Azerbaijan continues violating the provisions of the Geneva Conventions and the trilateral statement from November 9, 2020, creating artificial barriers for returning the captives. As the press department at the foreign ministry reported, Mirzoyan’s remarks came at a meeting on Friday with Gilles Carbonnier, the Vice President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). 

Mirzoyan attached importance to the ICRC mission in Artsakh as the only international organisation at present operating in the region and providing assistance to the population suffered as a result of the Azerbaijani aggression. According to the minister, despite proofs presented by the Armenian side, Azerbaijan still conceals the actual number of captured Armenians and places of their detention which is an indication of cases of forced disappearances. 

During the meeting, the ICRC delegation expressed readiness to continue their support to the RA authorities in overcoming the post-war humanitarian issues. 

Restrictions against journalists are regressive and concerning – Ashot Melikyan

Emil Lazarian
Panorama, Armenia
Oct 22 2021

“The third quarter of 2021 brought serious challenges for the media which had to operate in extremely difficult conditions, especially due to number of restrictions adopted by the legislative body,” Ashot Melikyan, the Chairman of the Committee to Protect Freedom of _expression_ (CPFE), told at a press conference, presenting the findings of the Quarterly report of CPFE on “Situation with Freedom of _expression_ and Violations of Rights of Journalists and Media in Armenia.”  

In Melikyan’s words, most of the restrictions were adopted through legislative initiatives and adoption of various normative acts which obstructed the free operation of the media. 

“We consider those restrictions and legislative initiatives regressive and concerning, which further worsen the situations,” stressed Melikyan. The CPFE Chairman specifically referred to the decision of the National Assembly leadership on the freedom of movement of accredited journalists inside the parliament building. 

“That was an unprecedented decision in the history of that representative body. We record that the decision significantly limits the opportunity of reporters to take interviews and comments from NA deputies and cover the work of the NA Standing Committees. Another concerning issue was the reporters and cameramen accredited to the pArliament were not notified about expected changes and they were informed about it on the same they when the decision was published,” said Melikyan. 

Another notorious incident, per Melikyan, was the arbitrary decision of the Speaker of the Parliament to cease the live broadcast of the parliament session when a brawl started among lawmakers during the  sitting in August. Following the Speaker’s instruction to stop the broadcast, the security officers ordered reporters to leave their designated area, obstructing their activity. 

Melikyan also condemned the physical violence and other pressures against reporters by security officers during the incident. 

Melikyan commented on the legislative changes tripling the maximum penalties for online insult and defamation to 3 and 6 million Armenian drams (approximately $5,700 and $11,400), respectively. In his words, the bill was adopted without taking into account the views the civil society and media organizations that expressed serious concerns about it. 

“In the past 9 months, 13 cases of physical violence against reporters, 83 cases of various pressures against media outlets or individual reporters and 67 violations of the right to receive and disseminate information have been recorded in Armenia. Meanwhile, 48 lawsuits have been filed against media outlets and reporters since the beginning of year most of which submitted former and acting officials which is a high and concerning figure,” Melikyan summed up. 

Ombudsman releases evidence of Azerbaijani military’s reinforcement in Armenia in response to Defense Ministry’s denial

Emil Lazarian
Panorama, Armenia
Oct 22 2021

Armenia’s Human Rights Defender (Ombudsman) Arman Tatoyan has released evidence of increased Azerbaijani activity in Gegharkunik Province in response to the denial of the Defense Ministry.

In a statement on Monday, the ombudsman stated the Azerbaijani troops, that have invaded Gegharkunik, are actively strengthening their positions, conducting other engineering works. Tatoyan stated that they have built large shelters, stocked up on firewood and concreted the roads leading to their positions. In addition, they continue to build new roads, and the number of troops and weapons at their positions has increased, he said.

In response, the Defense Ministry said there were a number of inaccuracies in the statement of the human rights defender, as well as allegations that did not correspond to reality. In particular, it called the claims about the construction of shelters, firewood stockpiles and new roads “clearly exaggerated”.

In a statement late on Thursday, Tatoyan said that after his public post a campaign to discredit the human rights defender launched, adding the secretary of the Security Council also joined it.

He explained that the reason for the ombudsman’s October 18 statement was that the actions of Azerbaijani forces grossly violate the rights of Armenian civilians. The ombudsman’s office continues to receive complaints from border residents. Moreover, he stated, such violations are usually followed by criminal actions of the Azerbaijani servicemen, including those of a terrorist nature, which target civilians and the Armenian military.

“Both this and any other statement of the ombudsman are based on reliable data collected during fact-finding activities,” Tatoyan said, adding the mentioned statement is based on the facts that the ombudsman’s office has consistently collected as a result of the daily monitoring and report studies of recent months.

He stressed that if the ombudsman makes a public statement, he has enough evidence and reliable sources, and not just one, but several.

“We urge the officials of the ministry not to make such ill-advised formulations i when responding to the statements of the human rights defender,” Tatoyan wrote.

He underlined that by denying his statements, the Ministry Defense officials are generating an international Azerbaijani campaign questioning the credibility of the work carried out by the ombudsman.

Tatoyan stated that various Azerbaijani sources have already taken the statement of the Armenian Defense Ministry as a basis and applied to various instances, questioning the reports and statements of the human rights defender.

“Therefore, it should be borne in mind that the ombudsman submits reports and makes statements, even if they may cause political discontent, but at the same time they become a valuable source in protecting the rights of Armenian citizens, which is used in international instances, such as the UN International Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights,” Tatoyan noted.

He stressed that throughout the post-war period, the Defense Ministry could somehow support the ombudsman’s call to create a demilitarized zone around Armenia’s borders. He noted that this was dictated by the need to protect the lives of civilians and Armenian soldiers from the criminal actions of Azerbaijan.

“The human rights defender has always supported the Armenian armed forces through his public and non-public activities and will continue to act on this principle in the future,” Tatoyan said.

He also urged the newly appointed Gegharkunik governor to carefully study the principles of the ombudsman’s activities, the results of his work and the situation on the ground not to question the accuracy of the defender’s statements or reports in the future.

Opposition MP: Ombudsman’s statements are in Armenia’s interest, but they might not be pleasant for authorities

Emil Lazarian
News.am, Armenia
Oct 22 2021
Opposition MP: Ombudsman’s statements are in Armenia’s interest, but they might not be pleasant for authorities
23:46, 22.10.2021

Every faction of the National Assembly of Armenia can nominate its candidate for the position of Human Rights Defender. This is what deputy of the opposition “Armenia” faction of the National Assembly Aram Vardevanyan said during a conversation with Armenian News-NEWS.am today.

Yesterday Secretary of the Security Council of Armenia Armen Grigoryan declared that Tatoyan [Human Rights Defender of Armenia] acted as a counterrevolutionary and that there are only a few months left until the end of his term of office.

According to Vardevanyan, state officials started putting this into circulation when Tatoyan was talking about the fact that the Azerbaijani Armed Forces are committing a crime by being located on the borders of Armenia.

“Instead of supporting the Human Rights Defender and reaffirming his positions, the government officials started criticizing him and even questioned the reliability. This is embarrassing. This again shows that the statements of the incumbent authorities and the statements of Azerbaijan and Turkey are very interestingly combined. Since last night, Azerbaijani presses have been stating that the Human Rights Defender should be criticized and make references to Armenia’s government officials for substantiating the criticism,” he said.

 Vardevanyan noted that Tatoyan is carrying out a fact-finding mission, and the facts are used as arguments on different international platforms.

“The facts are exclusively in the interests of Armenia. A fact that is in the interests of Armenia might not be pleasant for the incumbent authorities, but that’s a different story,” he added.

Biden encircling while engaging Putin

Emil Lazarian 
Asia Times
By MK Bhadrakumar 
[US suggests new expanded arc of containment against Russian
'aggression' amid hints of another Biden-Putin meeting before year
end]
Moscow butted the grand old trans-Atlantic alliance in the chest on
Monday with the Foreign Ministry announcing that it will suspend the
NATO military liaison mission with effect from November 1 and recall
the accreditation of its staff in response to the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization’s decision to withdraw the accreditation of eight
Russian diplomats.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov curtly added, “If NATO has some urgent
matters, it may contact our ambassador in Belgium.” Sparring has begun
for the next NATO summit in Madrid on June 29-30, 2022.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said during a recent visit to
Madrid that the summit will adopt NATO’s next strategic concept,
“which will reflect the new security environment” and the
trans-Atlantic alliance’s 2030 agenda that aims to deal with a “more
unpredictable and dangerous world” of “increasingly aggressive”
Russian behavior, China “flexing its economic might to intimidate
others,” and instability in the Middle East, North Africa, and the
Sahel.
NATO plans to shake off the gloom over the defeat in Afghanistan by
marching on. NATO-Russia conversations had dried up already much
before that sobering moment. The 1977 NATO-Russia Founding Act has
been moribund since 2014, when relations between Moscow and the West
landed in a deep freeze.
But in such situations, there is always a tipping point. Most
certainly, the regional tour by US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin to
Georgia, Ukraine and Romania en route to the NATO ministerial meeting
in Brussels (October 21-22) came to be that.
Austin’s remarks suggested that an encirclement of Russia in a new arc
that includes Transcaucasia is in the cards. “Russian aggression” was
his constant refrain.
On the last leg of his tour in Romania, Austin claimed, “The security
and stability of the Black Sea are in the US’s national interest and
critical for the security of NATO’s eastern flank.”
The Pentagon said Austin’s tour is a way to “reassure allies and
partners of America’s commitment to their sovereignty in the face of
Russian aggression.”
The power dynamic is shifting.
On Wednesday, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu alleged that the
US military “has stepped up work with the full support of its NATO
allies to modernize tactical nuclear weapons and their storage sites
in Europe.”
He noted that “a cause for special concern is the engagement of pilots
from the bloc’s non-nuclear member states in the drills to practice
employing tactical nuclear weapons. We regard this as a direct
violation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.”
To be sure, Russia will make countermoves. Shoigu made the above
remarks while the chief of the General Staff of the Iranian Armed
Forces, General Mohammad Hossein Bagheri, was on a high-profile
four-day visit to Russia.
Shoigu told Bagheri that Russia is ready to maintain “dynamic and
versatile” military cooperation with Iran, and proposed Syria-style
cooperation in Afghanistan and “on the territory of neighboring
states.”
After a tour of the Russian Navy’s headquarters in St Petersburg and
military facilities in Kronshtadt after talks with Shoigu and with the
chief of the Russian General Staff, Valery Gerasimov, Bagheri voiced
satisfaction that “the conclusion of arms agreements and their
implementation in the near future will considerably deepen our
relationships.”
The US strategy of encircling Russia has been very consistent since
the Bill Clinton presidency when NATO expansion began. Recently
declassified Western archival materials confirm Moscow’s claim that
then-US secretary of state James Baker and German chancellor Helmut
Kohl had assured Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev verbally that NATO
would not expand “one inch” to the east in a post-Cold War setting.
By 2003, president George W Bush unilaterally withdrew the US from the
ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) Treaty, which was a cornerstone of global
security, anchored on the complex security matrix of gaining strategic
advantage by de-energizing the nuclear potential of a probable
opponent.
President Barack Obama followed up with planning missile-shield
deployments in Romania and Poland, just outside Russia’s Western
Military District. Obama resigned from his promise in 2012 to
then-Russian president Dmitry Medvedev that after winning a second
term, he would reach a consensus with Moscow on missile defense
deployment.
Obama’s successor Donald Trump thereafter withdrew the US from the
Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty banning
intermediate-range missiles.
Surveying this debris of broken promises, the paradox of the US-Russia
relationship is that while President Joe Biden is content with
selective engagement of Russia and is in search of “predictability,”
President Vladimir Putin regards the US policy as highly predictable
in its potential toxicity but is pleased nonetheless that the
engagement is constructive enough.
Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping are probably on the same page
here. Interestingly, Putin spoke at some length recently on China. At
the Russian Energy Week International Forum last week, Putin said, “As
far as I understand the Chinese philosophy, including state-building
and governance, it does not include the use of force.
“I believe China does not need to use force. China is an enormous and
powerful economy. It has become the world’s No 1 economy in terms of
purchasing power parity, leaving the United States behind. China is
capable of achieving its national goals by building up this capacity,
and I see no threats here.” Putin was referring to Taiwan.
As for South China Sea, Putin said wherever “mixed interests are at
play … every country in that region should be given a chance to
resolve all arising controversial issues without the intervention of
non-regional powers in a calm manner relying on the fundamental norms
of international law and by way of negotiations. I believe the
potential is there, and it is far from being fully tapped.”
There are similarities in the Russian and Chinese strategies – and,
possibly, coordination too. Thus the new mantra in the White House is
“responsible competition.” Biden needs to focus on his domestic
agenda, which is decisive in clinching a second term for his
presidency in 2024.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov disclosed on Wednesday that US Under
Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland, who visited
Moscow recently, discussed “various options and certain understandings
were reached” on another Putin-Biden meeting.
Asked whether another Putin-Biden meeting was possible this year,
Peskov noted that “it is realistic in one format or another,” and
added that Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov and Nuland reached some
understanding “in terms of the prospects for further dialogue at the
highest level in the near future.”
*
M K Bhadrakumar is a former Indian diplomat.

Ambassador presents Armenian POW issue to UK MPs

Emil Lazarian

Save

Share

 10:33,

YEREVAN, OCTOBER 21, ARMENPRESS. Armenia’s Ambassador to the United Kingdom Varuzhan Nersesyan met with Catherine West and James Murray, members of the Labor Party of the House of Commons and the UK-Armenia All-party parliamentary group, the Embassy of Armenia in the UK said in a statement on social media.

During the meeting, the Ambassador first thanked the MPs for their constant support to Armenia and Artsakh, especially during the 2020 war, and for voicing and supporting Armenia’s approaches in the UK Parliament. The Ambassador presented in detail the latest regional developments, Azerbaijan’s ongoing aggressive actions against Armenia, and the possibilities of resuming the negotiation process.

Varuzhan Nersesyan attached special importance to the issue of repatriation of POWs, who are kept in Azerbaijani prisons contrary to all international humanitarian norms. The Ambassador also presented the need to preserve the Armenian historical and cultural heritage of Artsakh, emphasizing the importance of expressing a clear position of international partners in this issue.

The parties also discussed the Turkish factor and the negative regional impact, which was vividly reflected in Turkey’s direct involvement in last year’s war in Artsakh.

The Ambassador and the members of the UK House of Commons highlighted the development of the Armenian-British relations, emphasizing the role of parliamentary diplomacy in that process and the activation of ties between the parliaments of the two countries, the organization of mutual visits and cooperation on various issues.