Author: Hovhannisian John

Armenpress
ARMENIAN FM RECEIVES STATE SECRETARY OF SWEDISH PM’S STAFF
YEREVAN, AUGUST 12, ARMENPRESS: Armenian Foreign Affairs Minister Vartan
Oskanian received today delegation headed by the state Secretary of Swedish
prime minister’s staff Lars Danielsson Gunnar who is in Armenia within the
frameworks of regional visit.
Armenian Foreign Affairs Ministry press service said during the meeting
the sides underscored the necessity of development of bilateral relations
and organization of mutual visits in this respect. Armenian foreign affairs
minister pointed out the support of the Swedish side in promoting the
involvement of Armenia in the EU New Neighborhood policy. The sides also
underscored the successful pace of implementation of technical programs
which have launched in Armenia since 1995 funded by Swedish International
Development Agency.(SIDA).
Speaking about the peaceful regulation of the Karabagh conflict, Gunnar
noted that his country is interested in regulation of all the conflicts in
the region as soon as possible. He also pointed out that Sweden is ready to
support the sides both politically and economically for reaching agreement
on the conflict regulation. With the request of the guest, Oskanian
presented the current cooperation programs implemented with EU and NATO, as
well as issues on the Armenian-Turkish relations.

HANDS ARE NOT FOR BEATING
By Onnik Krikorian /UNICEF Armenia
YEREVAN, Armenia – Mane Tonoyan might seem a little too young to concern
herself with the problem of violence against children in Armenia but
this 16-year old is somehow “different.” A member of the Manana
Youth-Cultural non-governmental organization, she has already made a
one-minute-film on the subject and at the beginning of July, was one of
25 child participants at the regional consultation for the UN Study on
Violence Against Children in Europe and Central Asia.
The consultation held from 5-7 July 2005 was hosted in Ljubljana, the
Slovenian capital, and organized by UNICEF as well as other UN agencies.
It was one of nine such consultations that will eventually contribute to
a major study of the problem by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan next
year. Accompanying Mane was Naira Avetisyan, UNICEF’s Child Protection
Officer in Armenia, and three representatives of various government
agencies.
“We were asked to find someone familiar with child rights and
experienced with making films and writing articles,” says Avetisyan.
“That is why we chose Mane. Taking into account that Manana is
experienced in producing materials to distribute among peers we thought
it best to select a child from this organization. We will also be
holding a round table in Armenia at the end of July.”
Certainly, Mane seems to have benefited greatly from the consultation.
“Before going to Ljubljana, I was concerned about violence against
children although I wasn’t as well informed as I am now,” she says. “In
particular, I learned more about the consequences that violence can have
on children. For example, even a slap on the face can emotionally damage
a child. Before the consultation, I don’t think that I would have ever
considered it as violence.”
According to Mane, almost all children in Armenia are subjected to
violence in some shape or form. In particular, she says, it is
particular evident in schools and institutions – something that others
attending the consultation also concluded. Unfortunately, she says, when
violence becomes “acceptable” in the classroom it can then also manifest
itself in the form of bullying.
“In Armenia, there is very little awareness of this problem,” explains
Mane. `But violence exists – in the family, in schools and particularly
in institutions. Beating is considered an acceptable way of disciplining
children. However, it’s terrible if a teacher hits a child in front of
others. It’s humiliating and can have a serious impact on their self-esteem.
I want to raise awareness of this problem among other children but also
parents and teachers. First of all, however, it is necessary to raise
awareness among the public at large.”
“Of course,” concludes Mane, “parents have the right to discipline their
children when it is necessary and it is important that nobody attempts
to challenge their authority. However, I would like to remind parents
that they were children once and their actions now might have an impact
on how future generations are also raised. Violence is not the way to
bring up children.”
For more information:
Emil Sahakyan, Communication Officer, Armenia
Tel: (374 10) 523-546, 566-497
E-Mail: [email protected]
—

PRESS RELEASE
The National Citizens’ Initiative
75 Yerznkian Street
Yerevan 375033, Armenia
Tel.: (+374 – 10) 27.16.00, 27.00.03
Fax: (+374 – 10) 52.48.46
E-mail: [email protected]
Website:
August 10, 2005
National Citizens’ Initiative Examines Likelihood of Revolution in Armenia
Yerevan–The National Citizens’ Initiative (NCI) today convened a roundtable
on “The Probability of Revolution in Armenia: Preconditions and
Consequences.” The meeting brought together public figures, policy makers,
media representatives, analysts and experts.
NCI coordinator Hovsep Khurshudian welcomed the audience with opening
remarks and wished the participants fruitful work. “The final hopes that
Armenia’s rulers would find strength and decency in themselves to change the
destructive course which is taking the country toward the Middle Ages, and
that they would initiate the first steps to the public demand for
fundamental transformation seem to be thwarted. Consequently, headed by the
progressive political powers, the society itself must engage in fundamental
value metamorphosis, and in the outcome, Armenia would find its rightful
place in the family of free, dignified and prosperous societies,”
Khurshudian said.
During her policy intervention, National Press Club chairperson Narine
Mkrtchian put an emphasis on the implementation of socio-political changes,
and the historical necessity for the establishment of a new political
system. She talked in detail about the existing preconditions in the
country, which, in her view, would cause a revolution. And these are: the
absence of authoritative legitimacy; the political elite’s ineptitude to
form a progressive social order; corruption; clan-based rule; dilapidation
of ethics at all levels; and other abuses upon which economic,
intra-governmental and parliamentary crises have also accumulated; resulting
in one general systemic emergency. “In countries like Armenia, the resolving
of systemic crises is possible only by means of revolution,” Mkrtchian
mentioned.
ACNIS analyst Hovhannes Vardanian made a breakdown of the domestic and
external preconditions for a rebellion. According to his observations, the
revolts that have taken place in the post-Soviet region are primarily a
consequence of the public’s extreme social polarization, poverty, widespread
corruption, an atmosphere of arbitrariness and rights for the privileged,
and other adverse phenomena. In the words of Vardanian, revolutionary
developments in Armenia are being nourished by the factor that the incumbent
administration is not capable, in any way, of carrying out true systemic
reforms. “The current situation, which can be characterized by the
inactiveness and ineffectiveness of state authorities, unbridled
arbitrariness by high-level bureaucracy, advanced level of bribery and
corruption, and the explicit violation of law and order, is leading the
country toward anarchy and chaos, and the rule of the jungle, when the big
and strong eats up the small and weak, and this makes the chance of a
revolution in Armenia simply inevitable,” Vardanian said. Among external
stimuli, he set forth the “snowball effect.” In his opinion, from this
vantage point, the parliamentary elections to be held in Azerbaijan this
fall might turn into a serious test for Armenia.
Susanna Barseghian, another ACNIS analyst, deemed the printed media’s role
important in the formation of public opinion, and by means of a
content-analysis made a distinction among the ideas the media could form
when portraying the likelihood or unlikelihood of a revolution in Armenia.
“When reflecting on the probability of a revolt in Armenia, on the one hand,
the oppositional and pro-governmental press keeps talking about choosing the
‘right time’ for a democratic revolution, and on the other hand, it
refreshed the topic of inevitability of a ‘state coup,'” Barseghian
maintained, pointing out the important findings of her analysis. According
to it, in May alone, 13 Armenian periodicals have printed 153 articles, or
one report per one and a half issue, on the likelihood of a revolution, and
that constitutes 2.8% of total publication space printed in the researched
newspapers.
The remainder of the session was devoted to exchanges of views and policy
recommendations among the public figures and policy specialists in
attendance. Noteworthy were interventions by former minister of state and
board member of the Heritage Party Hrach Hakobian; Edward Antinian of the
Liberal Progressive Party; Noyan Tapan news agency political analyst Davit
Petrosian; Moushegh Lalayan of the Republican Party; ACNIS analyst Alvard
Barkhudarian; Artak Zeinalian of the Republic Party, Ruzan Khachatrian of
the People’s Party; “Areg” Youth Association chairman Gerasim Barseghian;
Alexander Butaev of the National Democratic Union; and many others.
The National Citizens’ Initiative is a public non-profit association founded
in December 2001 by Raffi K. Hovannisian, his colleagues, and fellow
citizens with the purpose of realizing the rule of law and overall
improvements in the state of the state, society, and public institutions.
The National Citizens’ Initiative is guided by a Coordinating Council, which
includes individual citizens and representatives of various public,
scientific, and educational establishments. Five commissions on Law and
State Administration, Socioeconomic Issues, Foreign Policy, Spiritual and
Cultural Challenges, and the Youth constitute the vehicles for the
Initiative’s work and outreach.
For further information, please call (37410) 27-16-00 or 27-00-03; fax
(37410) 52-48-46; e-mail [email protected]; or visit

Alienation of the Islamic Diaspora in Europe
By Fawaz Turki
Arab News, 8/10/05
The Daily Telegraph of London, a respected conservative paper,
published a survey on July 23 of British Muslim opinion and found that
though the vast majority of the respondents condemned the bombings in
the capital, a substantial minority are so alienated from their
objective world that they are prepared to justify terrorist acts.
According to the poll, 88 percent of Muslims, evidently moderate,
law-abiding citizens or residents of the United Kingdom, abhorred the
attacks and evinced no support for the perpetrators. However, 6
percent claimed that the bombings were justified. That’s clearly 6
percent too many, representing roughly 100,000 people who mean their
native or adopted country harm, individuals who, though not prepared
to carry out terrorist acts themselves, are ready to support those who
do.
The survey revealed other figures that are both reassuring and
disturbing. Before we consider what all this says about the Muslim
community in Britain, and perhaps by extension in the rest of Europe,
let’s step back a little and take stock.
Public pollsters, like statisticians, can be manipulative with their
figures. In other words, before we trust the results of a survey such
as this, where 526 Muslim adults across Britain were interviewed
online July 15 and again on July 22, we have to ask some relevant
questions here. Who conducted the poll? Who should have been
interviewed but was not? What was the sampling error for the results?
Did the pollsters avoid the pitfall of wording questions in such a way
as to suggest an answer by the respondents? Was a cross-section of the
entire community interviewed (randomly rather than selectively)? Were
other polls done on the subject, and if so, were the figures
different? And if they were different, then why?
All we get from the Telegraph is that its survey was conducted by a
group called YouGov. We have to accept the findings on faith, though
few of the direct questions or respondents’ answers were in quotes,
which is obviously troubling.
Yet, since we refuse to believe that a highly respected publication
would cook the books, because it has an ideological ax to grind or
deliberately promote a skewed view of the Muslim community, then we’ll
let its findings stand as credible ones indeed.
According to these findings, a large majority of Muslims believe that
the time has come when they must shoulder their share of the
responsibility for preventing and punishing those who commit terrorist
acts such as those in London, and as many as 70 percent said they took
it as their duty to go to the police if they saw something in the
community that made them feel suspicious.
A majority, 60 percent, believed that Western society may not be
perfect but Muslims should live with it and not seek to harm
it. Nevertheless, a third of British Muslims, 32 percent, are
dismissive, claiming that `Western society is decadent and immoral and
that Muslims should seek to bring it to an end,’ one of the few
answers in the survey, incidentally, presented in quotes.
Among those who hold this view, almost all go on to say that Muslims
should only seek to bring about social change by non-violent means,
but one percent, about 16,000 individuals, declared themselves ready,
willing and able, even eager, to embrace violence.
So does that mean that the Muslim Diaspora in Britain, and along with
it the rest of Europe, have a problem with integration?
Clearly, this Diaspora, numbering roughly 20 million, has effected a
demographic shift on the Continent, altering its social landscape. All
of which is not surprising.
Cultural flow and population transfers have always been an integral
part of human history, and copious research has been done, by
historians, sociologists and anthropologists, of diasporic societies,
of forced or voluntary migration of Greeks, Armenians, Africans,
Palestinians and Puerto Ricans.
We also read of the Chinese Diaspora (60 million in Southeast Asian
countries), the French Diaspora in Canada, and the Irish Diaspora in
the US, Australia and the UK. And most recently the Muslim Diaspora in
Europe, whose members hail from Pakistan, India, Bangladesh,
Indonesia, Somalia and a wide range of other Asian, North African and
Middle Eastern countries.
For Muslims in Europe, if we can generalize about them, it has been a
constant battle with alienation ‘ how to see the world around you in
terms that redefine your relationship with the Other, how to live in
and be not just from but of those societies that continue to refuse to
accept you, that thrust upon you a range of hybrid images.
The young in particular are socialized from an early age on the need
to deal with integration conflict and racist bias ‘ a heavy lot of
cargo for a youngster to have to carry on his back growing up.
You don’t have to have written a dissertation on the psychology of
alienation to discern these youngsters’ human response: If you’re a
young Turk, Pakistani, Yemeni or any other kind of Muslim born in a
European country that thrusts a sense of otherness on you, your
identification with Islam, as a pan-ethnic identity, becomes more
strongly felt than with your ancestral national heritage.
Then the defense mechanisms kick in. You feel pride in this otherness
than had been thrust upon you by the Other, and turn upside down those
racist labels, that define you, into labels of pride.
Consider how in Germany, the term `barbaren,’ used by some (note, I
say some) Germans to dismiss foreigners, is co-opted and embraced by
ethnic Turkish gangs to describe themselves, where the term here
connotes power, inclusiveness and acceptance. To call yourself
`barbaren’ is a means to challenge a culture that rejects you, denying
you its solidarity and connection to a reference group.
Diaspora, a word from classical Greek that means a `scattering or
sowing of seeds,’ is a sad term ‘ sad because it implies an uprooting
of a community, a struggle by its members to reassemble their inward
preoccupations in order to fit in their new locale.
The Muslim Diaspora in Europe, representing 56 nationalities speaking
over 100 languages, feels, it has to be admitted, an emotional
distance from the societies they inhabit, loss of a robust sense of
identity, and a crippling numbness at their core.
So the answer to the question, whether the Muslim Diaspora in Britain,
and along with it the rest of Europe, have a problem with integration,
is yes, it does. It definitely does.
But that is a problem for Britain and the rest of Western Europe to
deal with, not Islam.
The integration of millions of well-adjusted Muslims in places like
the US, Canada and Australia, countries with a tradition of welcoming
and assimilating immigrants, must surely tell you something here. In
America, we don’t use terms like barbaren, wog, bicot or the N-word ‘
not unless we want to go to jail.
An opinion poll, such as that in the Daily Telegraph two weeks ago,
may reveal the sentiments, `disturbing’ and `alarming,’ as the paper
called them, that a segment of the community harbors. What triggered
them in the first place is the real revelation.
[email protected]

Eurasianet Organization
August 8, 2005
RUSSIA AND TURKEY FORGE NEW TIES ON SECURITY, TRADE
by Igor Torbakov
Turkish Prime-Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s recent talks with
Russian President Vladimir Putin suggest that the two Eurasian
countries have found common ground on a number of key regional
security issues.
`It’s our fourth meeting during the last seven months, and I guess,
all of you understand what it means,’ Erdogan said at a news
conference following the July 17-18 negotiations at Putin’s posh
summer residence in the Russian Black Sea resort town of Sochi. `Our
views totally coincide with regard to the situation in the region as
well as to the issues concerning the preservation of stability in the
world,’ Interfax news agency quoted Erdogan as saying.
The current Russian-Turkish encounter came after the Kremlin leader’s
official visit to Ankara in December 2004 and Erdogan’s trip to
Moscow in January 2005. Last May the Turkish prime minister also
attended festivities in the Russian capital commemorating the 60th
anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany in World War II.
Such a sharp increase in top-level contacts appears to be the result
of both countries’ wariness toward political turbulence in their
overlapping `near abroads’ – specifically, in the South Caucasus and
Central Asia, the regional analysts say.
Both Moscow and Ankara are closely following the geopolitical changes
that are taking place in post-Soviet Eurasia – in particular, those
brought about by the so called `color revolutions.’ In the South
Caucasus, the `frozen conflicts’ between Tbilisi and the breakaway
territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and the stalemate between
Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh drive these mutual
concerns.
In public, both Russian and Turkish leaders have stressed their
commitment to the peaceful settlement of the inter-ethnic conflicts
in the Caucasus. However, a number of Turkish and Russian experts
argue that Ankara and Moscow seem reluctant to embrace political
changes in the Commonwealth of Independent States’ southern tier and
would rather support the preservation of the status quo.
Even before the Putin-Erdogan meeting in Sochi, some regional
analysts suggested there might be joint Russian-Turkish attempts to
solve the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. As Armenia’s main
geopolitical ally, Russia can be expected to mediate between Turkey
and Armenia on a number of issues, they say.
Russian media reports confirmed that the Nagorno-Karabakh issue was
discussed during the Russian-Turkish talks. The Russian government
newspaper Rossiiskaya Gazeta reported on July 19 that Moscow had
expressed its readiness to pursue the settlement in Nagorno-Karabakh
`more actively,’ and that Ankara had agreed to cooperate on this
issue. Furthermore, according to some Russian and Azerbaijani
sources, Turkish Defense Minister Vecdi Gonul, who made an official
visit to Baku on July 18-21, hinted that Ankara is interested in
normalization of relations with Yerevan and discussed with
Azerbaijani leadership the prospects of Turkey’s participation in the
Nagorno-Karabakh settlement.
At the same time, Turkey appears keen to act as a mediator in the
Georgian-Abkhazian conflict. Turkey is home to a sizeable Abkhazian
community, and Ankara has established friendly ties both with Moscow
and Tbilisi, some Turkish commentators note.
`We don’t want to live in a world where enmity dominates; we need a
world where friendship reigns supreme,’ Erdogan said in Sochi,
referring to the urgent need to settle the South Caucasus’s
conflicts.
Both leaders, however, appear to share a strong apprehension
regarding potential political upheavals on post-Soviet territory.
While both Moscow and Ankara understand fully that a huge potential
exists for political change in the Caucasus and Central Asia, the
Putin administration and Erdogan government are unlikely to welcome
the revolutionary transformation of the authoritarian regimes in the
region, some Turkish analysts contend.
Azerbaijan’s November 2005 parliamentary elections are a case in
point, noted Suat Kiniklioglu, head of the Turkish office of the
German Marshall Fund of the United States. For Russia, securing
stability in this energy-rich Caspian state is important within the
framework of the Kremlin’s strategy of preserving its influence in
the Caucasus, Kiniklioglu said. But Turkey, too, wants to see
Azerbaijan stable, and keep secure the delivery of crude oil via the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan export pipeline, he said in an interview with the
Russian Nezavisimaya Gazeta newspaper.
Similarly, in Central Asia, Turkey and Russia seek to maintain the
geopolitical status quo. According to Kiniklioglu, both the Turks and
the Russians would prefer to deal with the likes of Uzbek President
Islam Karimov and other autocratic regional leaders than face the
uncertainty of revolutionary turmoil. A number of Turkish foreign
policy experts suggest that Ankara’s strategic perspective on Central
Asia is much closer to the Russian position than to that of the
United States. `Neither Moscow nor Ankara is happy to see US forces
in the region,’ wrote analyst Semih Idiz in the mass circulation
Milliyet daily.
The talk of shared security interests extends to economic issues,
too. Bilateral trade and energy issues figured prominently during the
Sochi meeting. The two leaders said they aim to raise the trade
volume between the two countries to $25 billion from the current $11
billion.
The Russian president signaled that Russia would like to increase
energy exports to Turkey. Putin set out plans for new gas pipelines
through Turkey to supply southern European markets and also raised
the possibility of electric power exports to Turkey and Iraq. Erdogan
appeared to welcome Moscow’s intention to boost gas supplies to
Turkey. `There is serious potential for increasing supplies through
the Blue Stream pipeline,’ the Turkish prime minister said. According
to Erdogan, the pipeline has a capacity of 16 billion cubic meters
per year, but current supplies amount to only 4.7 billion cubic
meters. The 1, 213-kilometer Blue Stream gas pipeline under the Black
Sea was completed in 2002, but has since been a source of dispute
between Russia and Turkey over gas prices.
Most Russian and Turkish commentators give a very positive overall
assessment of the Putin-Erdogan meeting’s outcome. The rapid
rapprochement between the two Eurasian powers could serve as useful
leverage for boosting each country’s geopolitical stature, they
argue.
The strengthening of cooperation between Russia and Turkey `adds
significantly to our country’s international prestige,’ noted one
Russian commentary posted on the Politcom.ru website. Many Turkish
experts seem to agree. Argued Milliyet foreign policy columnist Idiz:
`It may be an exaggeration to call our bilateral relations `strategic
partnership,’ but Turkish-Russian relations have already grown in
importance to the extent that they affect the entire region.’
NOTES: Igor Torbakov is a freelance journalist and researcher who
specializes in CIS political affairs. He holds an MA in History from
Moscow State University and a PhD from the Ukrainian Academy of
Sciences. He was Research Scholar at the Institute of Russian
History, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow; a Visiting Scholar at
the Kennan Institute, Woodrow Wilson International Center for
Scholars, Washington DC; a Fulbright Scholar at Columbia University,
New York; and a Visiting Fellow at Harvard University. He is now
based in Istanbul, Turkey.

PanArmenian News Network
Aug 8 2005
KLO THREATENS RUSSIA WITH SEVERING RELATIONS
08.08.2005 04:08
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ `The start of the transportation of the Russian
military equipment from Georgia to Armenia can cause serious problems
for Azerbaijan. The story of the unfinished Karabakh war proves that
Armenia always used Russian military bases for its aggressive
purposes’, the statement spread by the Karabakh Liberation
Organization yesterday says. The authors of the statement say that by
sending its armament to Armenia `Russia creates conditions for
Armenia’s continuing aggression and that this step conflicts with the
activities of Russia as the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair.’ `The KLO
considers that Russia should immediately stop the militarization of
Armenia or quit activities in the OSCE MG. International
organizations like the UN should take preventive measures against
Russia while the Azerbaijani authorities should re-consider relations
with this country. Otherwise we will take over the initiative and
press for Russia’s removal from the post of Co-Chair’, the statement
says. A source in the Azerbaijani Defense Ministry reported that
presently, the 112-nd military base in Gyumri is not capable of
receiving the military equipment withdrawn from Georgia. `The issue
was also discussed at the meeting of Azeri FM Elmar Mammadyarov and
head of the Chief of Russia’s Armed Forces General Staff Yyuri
Baluevsky’, Azeri 525-th newspaper reports

JUDICIAL REFORM IN NKR
Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
01 Aug 05
The peculiarity of the post-communist countries is the weakness of
their judicial powers, intended to defend human dignity although human
rights and freedoms are set in pride of place in the constitutions of
these countries. In this respect our republic is not an exception;
it does not have a constitution, instead it has constitutional
law. Why? Do we have a law which, if put in effect precisely
and completely, would improve the state of things? Yes, in our
republic we have these laws and on the whole they correspond to the
international standards. What is the problem then? We will try to
answer these questions. The basis of action of the judicial power is
its independence. The principles of independence of the judicial power
were maintained by the 7th Congress of the UN in 1985. These are the
independence of judicial bodies, freedom of speech and assemblies,
naming and qualification of specialists, conditions of service and
powers, professional secrets and immunity, punishment, removal and
dismissal. The independence of the judicial bodies is guaranteed
by the state and set down in the Constitution. The governmental
bodies and other institutions must respect their independence. The
judicial bodies deal with the cases impartially, relying on the facts,
in accordance with the law, without any restriction, pressure or
intervention (either direct or indirect). And are these principles
respected in our country? No, they are not. The examples are many,
and those who have somehow come in touch with this system will confirm
this. Judicial bodies were granted the right to settle all kinds of
disputes. Every citizen has the right to go to court. Now let us see
the situation in our country and begin with who the judges are. In
my opinion, the order of appointing judges cannot guarantee their
independence. By international rules a judge should be elected. He
or she must possess high morality and abilities. And the law should
provide for his or her independence, security, conditions of service,
age of retirement, etc. What about our judges? A small survey showed
that none of the courts works in the conditions provided for by the
law. The court houses inherited from the former Nagorno Karabakh
Autonomous Region are in a lamentable state. Absence of convenient
court rooms, special rooms for verdicts and decisions, transport and
modern equipment – this is the reality. One of the functions of the
court of law is the educational function, whereas nothing of the kind
may be concerned since the court sits in a small room which can hardly
admit a few people, where there is hardly any room for the flag and
emblems of the state and the judicial power, and finally there are
no special clothes for the judge in order for them to differ from
the other participants of the process. Immense means are required
to improve the situation, which are difficult to raise. Whereas one
of the branches of power is concerned; not only the establishment of
democracy in our country but also the prosperity of all the members
of the society depends on its action. By the international standards
three judges must preside over the case to ensure the independence and
objectivity of the court. In our country this is not the case. This
refers to the Court of Cassation as well but the crime code and the
civil code require three judges in only the Court of Appeal. This
may be the reason why the first instance decisions are changed at
the Court of Appeal when one judge sits in both courts who may be
mistaken or even dependent. The worst thing about this is that in
many cases there is intervention into the work of the court from the
outside. What about the law defending the judges? The law, in fact,
contains provisions defending the judges. The question is whether
these are effective or not. Another sensitive issue is whether the
litigants, the council for prosecution and the council for defence
are in equal conditions, and the interests of any of these are not
harmed. Our citizens are not aware of their rights and duties, which
results in a feeling of insecurity. Therefore the citizens resort to
condemnable means (bribery, protection, etc.). However, we believe
that this serious problem can be solved. Our society, though feebly
but walks towards a democratic society and it is the judges who must
become its moving force; the independence of the courts depends on
them. We think that it is the public prosecutor’s office that must
support the judicial power in this matter. The lawyers should not have
a formal participation in trials but seek to achieve equal conditions
for the litigants. Another serious problem is the barristers acting as
intermediaries. The mass media should focus on this urgent matter. It
is not a secret that the mass media in our republic hardly ever cover
trials and instead the society feeds on rumours. In the meantime these
problems need coverage which is the job of the mass media. And do the
judges seek for independence? Many will immediately give a negative
answer. What is the problem then? Maybe the concern is that the judge
may make an independent decision, and if it is altered, he or she may
have problems. Whereas according to article 31 of the law on the status
of judges, the fact of altering the verdict or the decree of the court
does not suppose any responsibility except the cases when the court
intentionally violates the law or acts unconscientiously. Thus, there
is only one answer to the question whether the judicial reform was
successful in NKR and the answer is negative. What are we to do then?
Is there a way out? Of course, there is. Most judges in our country
are experienced, respectable persons, and each of them would like
the judicial reform to be successful and the judicial power to find
its place. We understand that for an unrecognized country it is not
easy to solve the problem which requires immense financial means. But
it is not a secret either that we are a law-abiding people, and as
corrupted as Armenia or Azerbaijan. Therefore it is easier to carry
out a judicial reform in our country; we believe in this.
G. SAFARIAN.
01-08-2005

TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION NOT REHABILITATION CENTER BUT DESTRUCTIVE SECT: EXPERT THINKS
YEREVAN, AUGUST 1. ARMINFO. Transcendental medication advertised in
Mass Media as a rehabilitation center is a destructive totalitarian
sect in reality, Head of the Center for Rehabilitation of Victims of
the Destructive Cult Alexander Amaryan tells ARMINFO’s correspondent.
He says the Center of Transcendental Meditation (TM) Maharishi
occurred in Armenia in 1989. After the earthquake in Armenia, Mikhail
Gorbachev allowed TM teachers to entry the USSR for post-traumatic
rehabilitation. In 1990, a decision was made by the Ministry of public
Health on education of TM for struggle against alcoholism. In 1990,
followers of TM in Armenia number 12 people, in 2005, they number
40,000 , head of the TM center (professor of Yerevan State University).
Amaryan says the leadership of the sect uses elements to infusion and
deception to control over the consciousness of the followers. Thus,
in the constant reference to the positive responses of scientists to
the TM do not mention hat the authors of these researches were members
of the organization of TM or received orders by the TM. Maharishi
Mahesh Yogi is the founder of the Transcendental Meditation or TM
Movement. In 1957 he founded The Spiritual Regeneration Movement, the
first of several organizations collectively known as the TM Movement,
and began the first of many tours to teach the Transcendental
Meditation technique around the world. The Beatles were among
his students. After some allegations of sexual abuse against the
Maharishi, the Beatles left him, voicing their disappointment in some
songs (“Sexy Sadie”). These allegations turned out to be unfounded,
and single Beatle members, like George and Paul (Larry King Show)
have shown support to Maharishi in later years. The Maharishi’s
Transcendental Meditation has been taught worldwide to over 5 million
people. Over 600 research studies have been made at universities
in over 30 countries. In 90s Maharishi Mahesh Yogi had $4 bln, due
to a number of commercial projects (in total 57 registered trade
marks). Long before Gorbachev’s decision to open a way of TM to
the USSR, in 1997 the Federal Court of the New Jersey State banned
extension of the TM at schools. TM was classified as a destructive
pseudo-religious sect (cult) in the decision of the above court, as
well as in the resolutions of the jury of the Federal Court of Appeal
of Philadelphia (USA), in the determination of the Archierey House of
the Russian Orthodox Church, in the verbal note of the FRG Embassy,
in decision of the Committee for Ethics of Dutch Medical Society,
by the Ministry of Health and Medical industry of RF, and by the
experts of the National Assembly of France.

RIA Novosti, Russia
July 29 2005
Armenia plans to build new nuclear power units

YEREVAN, July 29 (RIA Novosti, Gamlet Matevosyan) – The government of
Armenia believes the construction of new nuclear power units is a
strategic goal to maintain and enhance the republic’s energy security
and independence, Armenian Prime Minister Andranik Markaryan said
Friday.
Markaryan held a meeting with chief of the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) Muhammad El-Baradei who is currently visiting
Yerevan.
El-Baradei said the IAEA could assist Armenia in conducting
feasibility studies for the construction of a new nuclear power
station.
The IAEA chief said that Armenia had made significant progress in
enhancing the safety of the country’s nuclear power station but much
had yet to be done. He suggested the drafting of a systematized plan
with an outline of the project’s timeframe and financial breakdown to
simplify creditors’ efforts.
Markaryan said Armenia was committed to using nuclear energy for
peaceful purposes only and pursuing a nuclear non-proliferation
policy.
The Armenian nuclear power station was launched in 1980, but its
operations were suspended in March 1989 for political reasons. It
restarted operations in November 1995 due to a severe energy crisis
in the republic.
The station’s second unit is equipped with Russia’s first-generation
VVER-440 reactor and generates an average of 30-40% of all electric
power in the republic. Experts say the nuclear power station can
operate until 2016.
In September 2003, the nuclear power station was transferred to a
subsidiary of Russia’s electricity monopoly RAO UES and Rosenergoatom
Corporation for five years of trust management.
The European Union insists that Armenia’s nuclear power station be
deactivated and is ready to allocate 100 million euros for this
purpose. However, Armenian experts say the creation of alternative
energy capacities in the mountainous republic will require almost 1
billion euros.

ArmenPress
July 28 2005
ARMENIAN GENOCIDE ISSUE RAISED AGAIN BY URUGUAY PARLIAMENT
MONTEVIDEO, JULY 28, ARMENPRESS: Turkish ambassador to Uruguay
asked for a behind the door meeting with members of an Uruguayan
parliamentary commission on foreign relations but refused to talk to
journalists afterwards. Uruguay was the first nation to officially
recognize the 1915 Armenian genocide back in 1960-s.
According to RFE/RL, members of the commission, spoke to
reporters, describing the meeting as ‘very useful,” and even
‘historic.” A member of the National Party was quoted as saying that
it was the first time when a Turkish ambassador came to parliament to
talk about the Armenian genocide. He said the meeting was focused on
a well-known letter of Turkish prime minister Recep Erdogan to his
Armenian counterpart Robert Kocharian suggesting that an
international commission of historians be established to examine the
mass slaughter of Armenians in the last years of the Ottoman Empire.
He said the Turkish ambassador asked Uruguay to support the idea,
saying also his government was ready to accept the guilt if the
commission found it proven.
An Armenian member of the parliament, Lilian Kechijian, was
quoted as saying that she could support or participate in the
would-be commission’s work, but as an Armenian she could not question
the fact of the genocide. She said the parliament of Uruguay is
likely to make a statement addressed to Turkish and Armenian
parliaments.
Armenian ambassador to Uruguay Ara Aivazian, who learned about
the meeting from a local Radio Armenia expressed his concerns and
asked for a similar meeting with the commission. He also asked that
Uruguay parliament to listen to the Armenian viewpoint before coming
out with a statement. The commission was said to accept his proposal.