Author: Jagharian Tania

New York Times, NY
June 22 2005
Verse Film Pits Love Against the Clash of Cultures
By ANNETTE GRANT
Published: June 22, 2005
Sally Potter – a dancer, choreographer, actress, singer, composer,
writer, poet and filmmaker – has a new movie, “Yes,” opening on
Friday. It follows “Orlando” (1993), “The Tango Lesson” (1997) and
“The Man Who Cried” (2000) and several short films and documentaries.
“Yes,” stars Joan Allen, Simon Abkarian and Sam Neill. It is written
in verse (iambic pentameter), one of the few films to use an unusual
form of dialogue. (Two others are “Force of Evil,” 1948, in blank
verse, and “The Umbrellas of Cherbourg,” 1964, which is sung
through.) “Yes” has two main characters, She (Ms. Allen), an
Irish-American, and He (Mr. Abkarian), an Arab from Beirut, who begin
an affair in London and end it in Havana. Mr. Neill plays She’s
husband. On a recent visit to New York, Ms. Potter talked to Annette
Grant about making “Yes.”
Skip to next paragraph

Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times
The writer and director Sally Potter.
Movie Details: ‘Yes’ | Trailer

Forum: Hollywood and Movie News

Nicola Dove/Sony Pictures Classics
Simon Abkarian and Joan Allen, who play the main characters in “Yes,”
a new film by Sally Potter. Written in verse, the film concerns an
affair between an Irish-American, called Her, and an Arab, called
Him.
Annette Grant “Yes” was your response as an artist to 9/11?
Sally Potter It was a visceral necessity, the very next day. I wanted
to contribute something affirmative in the face of such disruption,
when it seemed that the seeds of greater destruction had been
planted. The answer I found is “Yes,” a tender, erotic love story
played out against a backdrop of the clash of fundamentalisms, East
and West.
Q How did you decide to write it in verse?
A In my 20’s I was an improvising singer and I wrote many, many
songs. And at various stages, every screenplay I’ve written has been
in verse. But they’ve all been locked away in a drawer. Somehow it
seemed like the moment had finally come to let that idea play itself
out. I wanted this film to be like a river of voice. “Yes” just came
out that way, like a long poem or song.
Q So there was no opportunity for improvisation?
A No, it had to be the words as written exactly. Of course there were
many rewrites if something wasn’t working in rehearsal. The writing
and the directing of this film were so intertwined they became
inseparable. But the mode of delivery within the structure of what
was written was very free, so the actors never felt trapped in it.
They were word perfect. It was very easy for them to memorize,
because of the rhyme.
Q What was the first part you wrote?
A The car park scene in which He breaks up with She. I made it into a
five-minute film. Rewrote it, rewrote it, rewrote it, rewrote it,
again and again – partly because the world situation kept changing.
When we went into rehearsals the United States and England had just
gone into Iraq. So the script felt extremely prophetic, or pertinent
anyway.
Q Was this a hard film to raise money for?
A Really hard because it was perceived as very, very risky. People
found it difficult to believe that it would work.
Q Did you do a lot of research?
A I went to Beirut with Simon Abkarian, who is Armenian from there.
He was involved for about a year. I talked with him a lot, listened
to him a lot, about his life growing up there and his friends. I
often find that I need to write something first and then research it
afterwards because it’s as if the research has already been done
somewhere in my imagination, based on accumulated knowledge and
experience over the years. But then I fact check everything in
whatever way is relevant for fiction. I mean, you can’t – it’s not
“fact” by definition, but to make sure that the voice is authentic.
We were going to shoot in Beirut, but when the war broke out, the
insurers would not let us go. So we decided to shoot Beirut in
Havana, while we were there shooting the Havana scenes. We had to
shoot Havana in the Dominican Republic, because as an American, Joan
Allen couldn’t travel to Cuba.
But we obviously couldn’t take all the extras into Cuba, so we went
to the Arab Union in Havana, and I think the entire Arab population
of Cuba was in one scene. But I had Simon and the two friends come to
a meeting with all the extras and tell me is this a believable face
for this situation.
Q You cast yourself in “The Tango Lesson.” Were you ever tempted to
play She, the Joan Allen role, yourself in “Yes”?
A It crossed my mind and, of course, in the early days when I was
writing it I was reading it aloud to find out how it felt in the
mouth. But I think the experience of “The Tango Lesson,” taught me
that being in a film that you also direct can kind of hijack it away
from its intention to some degree.
Q If “Yes” is poetry, the real language of that film was dance.
A But also the language of whose eyes are looking – so it’s about
filmmaking. Every filmmaker makes a film at some point about the
process of filmmaking.
Q Joan Allen describes “Yes” as an extremely emotional adventure for
her. She has talked about rehearsals at which everyone was crying.
What were these emotions arising from?
A A combination of things. The script gave permission to feel,
through the vehicle of the story, the horrors of the global
situation. In rehearsal you need to arrive at the most profound level
of emotional contact with the material, partly in order to discharge
some of it to achieve the necessary transparency to play it. So that
the viewer doesn’t see a kind of therapeutic process going on on the
screen, but sees something many, many stages beyond that. But you
have to have gone through that first.
It wasn’t just the actors who would cry in rehearsal, but I would
turn around and the crew was also crying during the shooting. And now
audiences are crying at screenings. So some nerve is getting, I
think, usefully pushed. People are being allowed to feel; feel what’s
hard to feel or is amorphous and unfocused or it’s too threatening to
feel. And precisely because the film ultimately is affirmative, and
is joyful and is a celebration of love.
Q Isn’t this what art means to do, to make people feel through it?
A Yes. And to feel therefore themselves in it. I think that’s the
key.

Agency WPS
What the Papers Say. Part B (Russia)
June 21, 2005, Tuesday
TANKS WILL GO TO ABKHAZIA
SOURCE: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, June 21, 2005, p. 5
by Yuri Simonjan
Lieutenant-General Valery Yevnevich, Ground Forces Second-in-Command
in charge of peacekeeping operations, currently on a visit to
Georgia, has announced a new route for the withdrawal of Russian
military bases from Georgia. This concerns Abkhazia, a region no one
regarded as the potential route until now. The Defense Ministry
initially intended to withdraw the troops and military hardware to
Armenia and – via the Batumi port – to Russia. Yevnevich said,
however, that Russia would make use of Abkhazian roads because the
Military Georgian Highway was too complicated a route.
Yevnevich’s statement became public knowledge due to Kakhi Ardia,
Presidential Envoy in Samegrelo-Zemo Svanetia. “General Yevnevich
assured me that not a single armored vehicle would remain in
Abkhazia,” Ardia said. “He said that withdrawing military hardware
via the Military Georgian Highway is practically impossible.”
Georgy Volsky, Deputy State Minister for Conflict Resolution, calls
Yevnevich’s statement irrational and politically short-sighted. “The
Russian Defense Ministry may make this decision, but it will only
generated additional tension in our relations,” Volsky said. “I was
present at the talks in Moscow, and the Abkhazian route was not even
mentioned then. Only the transfer of some military hardware to the
Russian base in Gyumri, Armenia, was mentioned. All the rest was
supposed to be pulled out to Russia via Batumi.”
Yevnevich visited South Ossetia before going to Tbilisi. The
situation there noticeably deteriorated last week. Georgia and South
Ossetia blame each other for the escalation of tension, and the head
of North Ossetia Teimuraz Mamsurov even proposed a reunification of
the Ossetian people. Volsky described his statement as an attempt to
incite unrest.
Official Tskhinvali was annoyed by an interview with Vaja
Khachapuridze, South Ossetian Presidential Envoy, with Imkedi (a
Georgian TV channel) where he did not rule out the possibility of the
return of the restive republic to Georgian jurisdiction. South
Ossetian authorities immediately denounced the statement and
emphasized that “membership of South Ossetia in Georgia, with
whatever status, is not even considered.”
Translated by A. Ignatkin
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

The US war with Iran has already begun
(MT Edit — “The road to Tehran leads through Baku”)
Aljazeera.net
Sunday 19 June 2005
By Scott Ritter
Americans, along with the rest of the world, are starting to wake up to
the uncomfortable fact that President George Bush not only lied to them
about the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (the ostensible excuse for
the March 2003 invasion and occupation of that country by US forces),
but also about the very process that led to war.
On 16 October 2002, President Bush told the American people that “I have
not ordered the use of force. I hope that the use of force will not
become necessary.”
We know now that this statement was itself a lie, that the president, by
late August 2002, had, in fact, signed off on the ‘execute’ orders
authorising the US military to begin active military operations inside
Iraq, and that these orders were being implemented as early as September
2002, when the US Air Force, assisted by the British Royal Air Force,
began expanding its bombardment of targets inside and outside the
so-called no-fly zone in Iraq.
These operations were designed to degrade Iraqi air defence and command
and control capabilities. They also paved the way for the insertion of
US Special Operations units, who were conducting strategic
reconnaissance, and later direct action, operations against specific
targets inside Iraq, prior to the 19 March 2003 commencement of hostilities.
President Bush had signed a covert finding in late spring 2002, which
authorised the CIA and US Special Operations forces to dispatch
clandestine units into Iraq for the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein
from power.
The fact is that the Iraq war had begun by the beginning of summer 2002,
if not earlier.
This timeline of events has ramifications that go beyond historical
trivia or political investigation into the events of the past.
It represents a record of precedent on the part of the Bush
administration which must be acknowledged when considering the ongoing
events regarding US-Iran relations. As was the case with Iraq pre-March
2003, the Bush administration today speaks of “diplomacy” and a desire
for a “peaceful” resolution to the Iranian question.
But the facts speak of another agenda, that of war and the forceful
removal of the theocratic regime, currently wielding the reigns of power
in Tehran.
As with Iraq, the president has paved the way for the conditioning of
the American public and an all-too-compliant media to accept at face
value the merits of a regime change policy regarding Iran, linking the
regime of the Mullah’s to an “axis of evil” (together with the newly
“liberated” Iraq and North Korea), and speaking of the absolute
requirement for the spread of “democracy” to the Iranian people.
“Liberation” and the spread of “democracy” have become none-too-subtle
code words within the neo-conservative cabal that formulates and
executes American foreign policy today for militarism and war.
By the intensity of the “liberation/democracy” rhetoric alone, Americans
should be put on notice that Iran is well-fixed in the cross-hairs as
the next target for the illegal policy of regime change being
implemented by the Bush administration.
But Americans, and indeed much of the rest of the world, continue to be
lulled into a false sense of complacency by the fact that overt
conventional military operations have not yet commenced between the
United States and Iran.
As such, many hold out the false hope that an extension of the current
insanity in Iraq can be postponed or prevented in the case of Iran. But
this is a fool’s dream.
The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak,
American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless
drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities.
The violation of a sovereign nation’s airspace is an act of war in and
of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the
intelligence-gathering phase.
President Bush has taken advantage of the sweeping powers granted to him
in the aftermath of 11 September 2001, to wage a global war against
terror and to initiate several covert offensive operations inside Iran.
The most visible of these is the CIA-backed actions recently undertaken
by the Mujahadeen el-Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group, once
run by Saddam Hussein’s dreaded intelligence services, but now working
exclusively for the CIA’s Directorate of Operations.
It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labelled as a
terrorist organisation, a group trained in the art of explosive
assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of
Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to
carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush
administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq.
Perhaps the adage of “one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s
terrorist” has finally been embraced by the White House, exposing as
utter hypocrisy the entire underlying notions governing the ongoing
global war on terror.
But the CIA-backed campaign of MEK terror bombings in Iran are not the
only action ongoing against Iran.
To the north, in neighbouring Azerbaijan, the US military is preparing a
base of operations for a massive military presence that will foretell a
major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran.
Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld’s interest in Azerbaijan may have
escaped the blinkered Western media, but Russia and the Caucasus nations
understand only too well that the die has been cast regarding
Azerbaijan’s role in the upcoming war with Iran.
The ethnic links between the Azeri of northern Iran and Azerbaijan were
long exploited by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and this vehicle
for internal manipulation has been seized upon by CIA paramilitary
operatives and US Special Operations units who are training with
Azerbaijan forces to form special units capable of operating inside Iran
for the purpose of intelligence gathering, direct action, and mobilising
indigenous opposition to the Mullahs in Tehran.
But this is only one use the US has planned for Azerbaijan. American
military aircraft, operating from forward bases in Azerbaijan, will have
a much shorter distance to fly when striking targets in and around Tehran.
In fact, US air power should be able to maintain a nearly 24-hour a day
presence over Tehran airspace once military hostilities commence.
No longer will the United States need to consider employment of Cold
War-dated plans which called for moving on Tehran from the Arab Gulf
cities of Chah Bahar and Bandar Abbas. US Marine Corps units will be
able to secure these towns in order to protect the vital Straits of
Hormuz, but the need to advance inland has been eliminated.
A much shorter route to Tehran now exists – the coastal highway running
along the Caspian Sea from Azerbaijan to Tehran.
US military planners have already begun war games calling for the
deployment of multi-divisional forces into Azerbaijan.
Logistical planning is well advanced concerning the basing of US air and
ground power in Azerbaijan.
Given the fact that the bulk of the logistical support and command and
control capability required to wage a war with Iran is already forward
deployed in the region thanks to the massive US presence in Iraq, the
build-up time for a war with Iran will be significantly reduced compared
to even the accelerated time tables witnessed with Iraq in 2002-2003.
America and the Western nations continue to be fixated on the ongoing
tragedy and debacle that is Iraq. Much needed debate on the reasoning
behind the war with Iraq and the failed post-war occupation of Iraq is
finally starting to spring up in the United States and elsewhere.
Normally, this would represent a good turn of events. But with
everyone’s heads rooted in the events of the past, many are missing out
on the crime that is about to be repeated by the Bush administration in
Iran – an illegal war of aggression, based on false premise, carried out
with little regard to either the people of Iran or the United States.
Most Americans, together with the mainstream American media, are blind
to the tell-tale signs of war, waiting, instead, for some formal
declaration of hostility, a made-for-TV moment such as was witnessed on
19 March 2003.
We now know that the war had started much earlier. Likewise, history
will show that the US-led war with Iran will not have begun once a
similar formal statement is offered by the Bush administration, but,
rather, had already been under way since June 2005, when the CIA began
its programme of MEK-executed terror bombings in Iran.
Scott Ritter is a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, 1991-1998, and
author of Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America’s Intelligence
Conspiracy, to be published by I B Tauris in October 2005.
The opinions expressed here are the author’s and do not necessarily
reflect the editorial position or have the endorsement of Aljazeera.
You can find this article at:

Karabakh polls ‘more democratic” than Armenia’s – opposition leader
Noyan Tapan news agency
21 Jun 05
YEREVAN
The [parliamentary] elections held in Karabakh were more democratic
than those in Armenia, Viktor Dallakyan, secretary of the Armenian
parliament’s Justice faction, has said.
“The first impression is that the elections were normal as a whole,”
Dallakyan said, quoting reports by international monitors. If the
elections qualified as being in keeping with the democratic
principles, this will be of great importance to Karabakh in terms of
its international recognition and reputation. Otherwise, this may
have negative ramifications for Karabakh he said.
[Passage omitted: minor details]

Yerevan Press Club of Armenia presents `MediaDialogue” Web Site as a
Regional Information Hub project.
As a part of the project web site is maintained,
featuring the most interesting publications from the press of Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey on issues of mutual concern. The latest
updates on the site are weekly delivered to the subscribers.
***************************************************************************
===========================================================================
CONFLICTS
==========================================================================
NEGOTIATIONS PROMISE RAPPROCHEMENT
———————————— —————————————-
Source: “Echo” newspaper (Azerbaijan) [June 21, 2005]
Author: R. Orujev
Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov Informed the Media
At the negotiations on the settlement of Mountainous Karabagh
conflict yesterday, special representative of Azerbaijani President,
Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov held a press conference on the
results of recent negotiations in Paris on June 17. He stated that
the negotiations had two formats – general, with the participation of
OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairmen, and the one between the Foreign
Ministers of the two countries, Elmar Mamediarov and Vartan Oskanian.
Azimov stated that the negotiations may be viewed essential in
content. `Various elements of peaceful settlement of the conflict
were discussed. Thus, the main issue raised was setting up a normal
situation on the occupied territories of Azerbaijan after their
liberation and return of the displaced persons to their
homes. However, this problem raises many other issues to be
resolved. Liberation of the territories is the most principle point
in Azerbaijani stance. Most concerns are raised by working out of
mechanisms for the coexistence of Azerbaijani and Armenian
communities of Mountainous Karabagh and their joint control over the
territory. Peaceful cooperation should be established between the
sides’.
As an instrument for reaching this result, the Paris negotiations
discussed the issue of restoring transport communication between
Azerbaijan and Armenia, according to the Deputy Minister. `It is a
common fact that Armenia has long supported it. Our position is that
in exchange for opening communications, Armenia should reject any
territorial claims to Azerbaijan. The functioning highway via Lachin,
linking Armenia to Mountainous Karabagh, should be under Azerbaijani
control. Another car route Agdam-Shusha-Khankendi-Lachin-Goris(Armenia)
-Sisian(Armenia)-Shahbuz(Nakhichevan autonomy) should be restored and
used by both sides. This highway leads further to Turkey. In my
opinion, recovery of this route may have a positive impact on setting
trust measures between Azerbaijanis and Karabagh Armenians. It is of
benefit to both peoples’.
Azimov noted that he does not intend to appear a great optimist since
all the points of negotiations mentioned are now on discussion.
Speaking about the `parliamentary elections’ in Mountainous Karabagh,
Azimov emphasized that in contrast to previous statements of this
country’s MFA, the recent one states that this event impedes joint
cooperation of the Azerbaijani and Armenian communities of Karabagh
in setting up legitimate power bodies. `I will note that Minsk Group
Co-chairmen of Russia, France and USA stated in Paris that they do
not view the current authorities in Mountainous Karabagh as
independent and legitimate, nor do they recognize any events
organized by such authorities’.
Azimov states that Agdam-Armenia-Nakhchevan car route will not be
very costly. `It certainly needs reconstruction in separate sections
but it is not a very complex project. The sooner the route is ready
for exploitation, the better conditions for cooperation between the
communities. To restore the route, there is an idea for holding a
conference of international donor organizations. Their assistance will
be necessary for restring all the infrastructure on the occupied
territories as well. It is expected that the aid will be provided by
UN, European Union and others. As for the security problems at initial
stage, it should be ensured on liberated territories by international
armed forces. Besides, control observation groups will be set by
Azerbaijan and Armenia. The route from Agdam to Shahbuz will be put to
operation only after withdrawal of Armenian forces from the occupied
territories. Its security will be ensured by the representatives of
international forces. Future sta! tus of MK will be discussed within
the framework of peaceful negotiation process’.
According to Azimov, the issue of subordination of Karabagh new
authorities to official Baku has not been considered yet. `However,
it may soon be discussed. In any case, the new authorities should
represent the interests of the population in total, including the
Azerbaijanis that returned`.
The Deputy Minister noted that in early July, Co-chairmen will visit
the region and may introduce new proposals to the sides. `Azerbaijan
insists on intensification of the negotiation process. We suggest
organizing several meetings between Foreign Ministers prior to the
coming negotiations between Presidents I. Aliev and R. Kocharian to
be held in Kazan in August while celebrating the city’s
anniversary. The Ministers should submit a number of agreements for
Presidents’ approval’. At the same time, A. Azimov stated that it is
still too early to speak about any principal agreement of the sides
even on one of the currently discussed points.
One of the most interesting issues of the conference was the
possibility of breaking the negotiation process in Prague, as it
often was the case provoked by various international forces. `I would
not state there is no such risk in place’, Azimov declared. `On the
contrary, the situation is quite complex and more problems are still
ahead. Each side should do its utmost for withstanding this
danger. In any case, Azerbaijan has not a single force opposing
peaceful settlement of the conflict. Therefore, I do not think that
our opposition forces, ready for parliamentary elections, may be used
for disrupting negotiation process”.
As reported by `Mediamax’, Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian
gives a positive assessment of the negotiation results by his
Azerbaijani colleague Elmar Mamediarov. Oskanian stated yesterday at
the briefing in Yerevan that the negotiations were `of constructive
nature and passed in quite friendly atmosphere’. Alongside this, the
Minister noted `we did not reach agreement on one of the important
issues delegated to us by the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan
after the Warsaw meeting’. Despite this, Oskanian stated, `if each of
the sides makes a small compromise, there is a large chance for
agreement’.
===========================================================================
REGION
==========================================================================
IN THE BACKYARD OF BIG POLITICS
—————————————– ———————————–
Source: “Novoye Vremya” newspaper (Armenia ) [June 21, 2005]
Author: Tamara Hovnatanian
Since May, the dislocation of the Russian bases from Georgian
territory and opening of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline have become
most urgent issues on regional agenda. Moreover, they are related to
the factors likely to disrupt the geopolitical status quo in the
region. Therefore, these issues now get most comments by the
politicians and analysts, military men and economists.
Dislocation of the Bases Turned Into `Perfect Psychosis’ The epic
about dislocation of Russian military bases from Georgian territory,
particularly Batumi and Akhalkalaki, got prospects for fast
resolution through the mutual statement made on May 30 by the Foreign
Ministers of Russia and Georgia – Sergey Lavrov and Salome
Zurabishvili. Based on the agreement reached, the process of Russian
base dislocation is to be over in 2008.
Further information on the transfer of a part of Russian munitions
from Georgia to Armenia, to 102 Gyumri Base of Russian Armed Forces,
provoked a storm of indignation in Baku.
`We demand that the Russian military bases be not stationed in
Armenia’, Azerbaijan issued a `note of protest’. `The region needs
demilitarization, therefore we raise the issue of no necessity for
dislocating the troops here’, AR Foreign Minister, Elmar Mamediarov
stated.
`This step will not serve the interests of peace and security in the
region and will aggravate the situation still more in the complex
process of settling the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan,
which has shown faint hope for reaching peace in
negotiations. Moreover, this may impact Russian-Azerbaijani
relations’, Azerbaijani MFA states in its note.
Commenting on the official response of Russian MFA, Russian Charge
d’Affaires in Azerbaijan, Peter Burdykin stated, `This dislocation is
not directed against any of the third countries, it will in no way
impact Mountainous Karabagh settlement and does not contradict
international agreements. Therefore, I think there is no reason for
serious concerns and exaggeration’…
`The concerns over alleged transfer of Russian bases from Georgia to
Armenia, thus strengthening the military potential of Yerevan and
putting a menace to the process of Karabagh settlement, are
groundless. Any such statements, to put it mildly, do not sustain
criticism and reveal ignorance of the commenter at best and the
deliberate misinformation of the public for anti-Russian attitude at
the worst’, Foreign Policy Advisor of the Russian Embassy in
Azerbaijan, Achahmat Chekunov repeats, qualifying the reaction of the
Azerbaijani press to this question as `perfect psychosis’. The
psychosis by the way took the form of quite concrete threats to
Russia.
`Constructivism’ in Azerbaijani Style
Prime Minister and Head of Azerbaijani MFA both implied the `steps’
that might be taken by Baku in response. The `counter measures’ are
denunciation of the agreement on the tenancy of the Gabalin radar
station and access for American military bases to Azerbaijani
territory. At the same time, Baku threatens to have a wholesale
instead of retail in their case. `There is no point about giving
munitions to Armenia, it is just a dislocation to another Russian
base. This will be Russian property simply at another Russian base,
that’s all’, Russian Defense Minister Sergey Ivanov explained. He
emphasized that Russia will transfer only a part of the munitions to
Gyumri since it `respects and complies with the zone limitations of
the adapted Treaty on Reduction of Armed Forces in Europe’.
The fact that the dislocation of the munitions is carried out within
the framework of the Treaty and by Georgian quota is recognized even
in Baku. `Formally, Russia will have no changes, which is also true
for Azerbaijan’, Baku political scientist Rasim Musabekov comments on
the situation. `Aren’t the majority of the servicemen at the Russian
base in Akhalkalaki Armenians by nationality? We have another point
here. Previously, Armenia was rendered support in less obvious form,
now it is quite open. By its large military presence in Armenia,
Russia seems to be sheltering it from Turkey and stimulates its
unconstructive role in the region’.
It may be assumed the threats for `American landing troops’ are made
in Baku exclusively out of the bent for constructivism. The spirit of
constructivism also nourishes the Turkish aid to the reforms of
Azerbaijani armed forces. Thus in the time to come, the Nakhichevan
corps will get assistance of up to 3 million US dollars, besides a new
agreement with Turkey is to be signed. Based on the agreement, the
arsenal of Azerbaijani air defense forces will be renewed, a new
military aerodrome will be built in Nakhichevan and joint maneuvers on
guarding Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline are planned. Moreover, the
Azerbaijani sources state that the summer meeting of the Defense
Ministers of Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey will discuss the issue of
setting up Turkish-Azerbaijani-Georgian military bloc. It is assumed
that the idea of creating this bloc may become a reality after the
operation of Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline. This context should also
embrace the Georgian-Turkish plans on the const! ruction of
Kars-Akhalkalaki railway network and the predictions of many analysts
speaking of the presence of Turkish military in Samtskhe-Javakheti
instead of Russian bases, even despite the promise of the Georgian
leadership for avoiding it.
`Russian Base is an Element of Security’
Meanwhile, the news agencies report that a railway echelon – 15 cars
with equipment and munitions, is already transported to Armenia from
Batumi. Two more echelons are taken to Russia.
The recent comment on this issue is made by the head of the General
Headquarters of Armenian Armed Forces, Michael Harutiunian, stating
yesterday `the planned dislocation of a part of the Russian munitions
from Georgia to Armenia will not disrupt the balance of forces in the
region’. `The Russian base in Gyumri is set for ensuring security not
in the East but the West. If we compare the balance of forces in the
West, it is essential to consider the half million Turkish Army,
dozens of thousands of Turkish tanks, hundreds of military aircraft’,
colonel-general stated, advising Azerbaijan to calculate its
equipment and munitions. `I would like to officially state that
Azerbaijan deceitfully holds more equipment and munitions than
allowed by the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces’.
The views of Armenian politicians and experts on dislocation of the
Russian munitions are diverse.
`Armenia and Russia comply with the bilateral Agreement on Military
Cooperation and Dislocation of the Russian military bases in Armenia,
also the quota obligations under the Treaty on Conventional Armed
Forces in Europe. If our decisions fall in the frames of these two
documents, no one is eligible to interfere in the affairs of Armenia
and Russia’, RA Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian commented on the
situation.
`The Russian base in Armenia is an element of security’, head of the
Standing Committee on Defense, National Security and Internal Affairs
of the National Assembly, Mher Shahgeldian stated, emphasizing that
there is no new agreement on enlarging and strengthening the
base. The dislocation is carried out within the strict limits of the
current agreement’.
`We have a neighbor having executed Armenian Genocide on state level,
and the presence of the Russian military base meets our interests’,
is the opinion of the head of Republican Party of Armenia, Galust
Sahakian, noting that the stir around the dislocation is the result
of insinuations by the Azerbaijani side.
Among alternative views, the right forces took quite a negative
stance. According to the Chairman of Liberal Progressive Party of
Armenia, Hovhannes Hovhannisian, the Armenian authorities are making
`another unreasonable and dangerous step’. `They are trying to
withstand the disrupted political and economic balance in the country
by a military disbalance in the South Caucasus, by transferring the
Russian military equipment from Georgia to Armenia’, Hovhannisian
holds. At the same time, he does not suggest alternative ways for
restoring the disrupted balance.
`Armenia is No Dump’… Ex-Speaker of the National Assembly Babken
Ararktsian is still more categorical. `Armenia is no dump. Let
Russia take its garbage back. These munitions are over 40 years old,
and they are useless’, Ararktsian states, urging not to be anxious
over Azerbaijan’s statement that the transfer of the Russian
equipment to Armenia will radically impact the military potential of
the Armenian army. `Dislocation of the military bases to Armenia has
the aim of deteriorating Armenian -Georgian relations’, Ararktsian
thinks.
By the way, Russian military journalist Victor Baranets also
expressed a similar view. `I think this old rusty junk, more
resembling scrap metal, should not have been dragged to Armenia, it
is objective. However, it is a comfortable position for someone
sitting at a warm Moscow office. There is one serious objective
reason. If we go home by tanks and fighting machines from Georgia,
there are 18 bridges on the way, and nothing but the name might
remain from them’, the journalist holds, supporting the view that the
equipment was not transported by cargo aircraft and the trawls to
aggravate Georgia.
`The Russian bases is more a political than military factor’, Leader
of Popular Democratic Union, Vazgen Manukian states. `I don’t think
we should currently discuss if their military potential in case of
abstract military operations. I think Azerbaijan also understands
that these military bases will never be used in military
operations’. Leader of National Democratic Union also thinks the very
sense of the presence of military bases in Armenia will gradually be
reduced to zero point both for Russia and Armenia.
`I do not know how long this period will last till the economic,
political and geopolitical issues of the region are solved. There is
great uncertainty, however it is quite clear that this uncertainty
will not be settled through military means’, Manukian states.
`The bases in Georgia should have been dislocated a while ago’, the
political scientist, Director of Caucasus Media Institute, Alexander
Iskandarian thinks. In military sense, they lost their significance,
whereas in the political sense the presence of these bases works for
Georgia and not Russia, since Georgia is using this factor as an
instrument for pressure, and by the way in a very qualified way’.
According to the political scientist, Armenian-Georgian relations
were never very warm and good. `Alertness’ – by this term he defines
the relations between Georgia and Armenia, emphasizing that this
alertness, conditioned by objective reasons, will last for quite long,
not growing into confrontation that cannot be afforded by either
Armenia or Georgia. `The bases in Batumi and Akhalkalaki are not only
Georgian-Russian problem. It is the problem of Georgia, Russia and
Armenia’, political scientist Andranik Migranian holds. He thinks that
Armenia should be involved in Russian-Georgian negotiations on the
bases.
`The Richer Our Neighbors, the Better For Us’
It is only for a while that dislocation of the Russian equipment from
Georgia to Armenia distracted the politicians and experts from much
more obvious infringing on regional balance than the Russian bases.
`The exploitation of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline disrupts the
economic balance of forces in South Caucasus region, and Armenia is
trying to find alternative ways for its restoration’, RA Prime
Minister Andranik Margarian thinks.
`I don’t think Armenia’s interests are affected since the richer our
neighbors are the better for us’, former RA Prime Minister Hrant
Bagratian states as an argument. `Sooner or later such projects,
including the hopefully successful Baku-Ceyhan project, will have a
positive impact on Armenian economy as well’.
Not entering the disputes on economic efficiency of Baku-Ceyhan
pipeline, we will just note that Bagratian is not the only one
doubting the efficiency of BTC and its impact on Armenia.
`The presence of Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline feeds the prospects of
Karabagh issue settlement and excludes the possibility for restarting
military operations’, Vartan Oskanian thinks, emphasizing that
Azerbaijan in this sense faces serious limitations. `Those
considering Armenia’s marginalization from the project as a defeat of
Armenian diplomacy, get the following response from Armenian Foreign
Minister, `It is obvious that only through rejection of Karabagh we
might have the oil pipeline pass via our territory…’
In other words Armenia, being forced to choose, kept to
Karabagh. This choice fits in the formula, `Oil to Azerbaijan,
independence to Karabagh’. As a result, we have a quite peaceful
response to the oil pipeline by political parties of Armenia.
`Armenia has numerous factors for resistance, and it is not hopeless
or condemned’, head of `Dashnaktsutiun’ Armenian Revolutionary
Federation, Levon Mkrtchian states. `As for Armenian neighbors and
architects of regional politics, they should understand that
political science does not allow for the notion of `black holes’. So
if they try to keep Armenia in communication blockade, circumvent it
through all possible ways, they should keep in mind that in this case
stability and security are impossible in the region’.
Representative of `Ardarutiun’ opposition party Victor Dalakian
suggests as a counteraction development of democracy in the
country. As an illustration, he provides a full assessment of the
incomes in Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey for the next year and a
long term forecast up to 2030. He does not calculate democracy in
barrels, assuring that it will bring more dividends than oil dollars.
Becoming A Regional Player?
The greatest optimism is expressed by economic experts. Thus, the
Director of `ArmRosgasprom’ company Karen Karapetian holds that
Armenia has a chance to use Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline and
Baku-Tbilisi-Erzrum to meet its national interests.
`Certainly it would be more desirable if these pipelines passed via
Armenian territory, still it is already positive that they are
constructed even circumventing the Republic’, Karen Karapetian
states. He sees new possibilities for Armenia in these projects as
regards production of electrical energy. In his opinion, Georgia may
supply to Armenia a part of its gas from the quota for the transit of
the `blue fuel’.
`Having abundance of electrical energy and finishing the construction
of Iran-Armenia gas pipeline, as well as reconstruction of Abovian
subterranean gas depositary, Armenia may become a serious player in
the region’, the Director is confident. He suggests transforming `the
negative geopolitical situation for Armenia into an advantage’. The
forecasts show that Armenia’s neighbors will soon face deficit of
electrical energy they would have to compensate. It is not by
accident that Georgia has already started negotiations on the
construction of a new `Armenia-Georgia’ power transmission line’,
Karapetian states.
Meanwhile, regional processes keep developing in unexpected
directions for Armenia. As Iran IRNA agency reports with reference to
Baku sources, till the end of 2005, an agreement will be signed on
the supply of natural gas from Iran to Georgia via Azerbaijani
territory. Karadag-Tbilisi pipeline will be used for deliveries. The
Azerbaijani section of the pipeline was restored in 2004, whereas the
Iranian side allotted 2.5 million dollars without compensation for
repairing the Georgian section. Iranian gas will become for Georgia
an alternative to Russian supplies in case of their suspension. It is
interesting what advantages for Armenia will be envisioned by
Armenian political scientists and experts in this project?
SOUTH CAUCASUS PARLIAMENTARIANS REACHING AGREEMENT
9—————————————————————————-
Source: `24 Saati’ newspaper (Georgia) [June 17, 2005]
Author:
Last week, Tbilisi witnessed a notable event likely to have a large
impact on the social political life of South Caucasus in
general. Parliamentary Assembly of South Caucasus countries was set
up at Georgian Parliament.
The negotiations on this issue started quite a while ago. The authors
of the idea stated that despite the contradictions in place, the
point is about the unsettled relations between Azerbaijan and
Armenia. The South Caucasus states have a lot of similar problems or
tasks which may be resolved through mutual effort, particularly when
it refers to international arena where Georgia, Armenia and
Azerbaijan may have a unified front for achieving their goals and
forgetting the current internal problems for a while. However, a
resolute step in this direction was made only recently, though the
bilateral negotiations (Georgia-Azerbaijan, Georgia-Armenia) at
parliamentary level regularly voiced the willingness for certain
activity in setting up the Parliamentary Assembly. Both the Armenian
and Azerbaijani sides, each on its behalf, thought it essential to
emphasize that the activity of the organization can hardly be
efficient as a result of problematic Armenian-Azerbaijani relations.!
Naturally, Baku put the blame on Yerevan, whereas Yerevan conditioned
the possible problems for the functioning of the Assembly by Baku.
Anyway, heads of the parliamentary delegations of the three South
Caucasus countries still signed the Memorandum on setting up the
Parliamentary Assembly of South Caucasus Countries (PASC) on June
16. It was signed yesterday at Georgian parliament. The signatories
to the Memorandum were Chairman of Georgian Parliament Nino
Burjanadze, Vice-speaker of Armenian Parliament Tigran Torosian and
member of `Yeni Azerbaijan’ government party, deputy of Milli Mejlis
(Parliament) of Azerbaijan, Syavush Novruzov.
Nino Burjanadze qualified the event as `unique’. `I think PASC has
the potential for becoming a serious and stable guarantee of
stability in the region. Setting up this union will undoubtedly
promote active dialogue between the three countries of the region’,
she stated to media representatives. According to Nino Burjanadze,
signing of the Memorandum became possible due to the study of the
experience of the Inter-parliamentary Assembly of Baltic countries.
However, the `unique event’ again revealed the deep contradictions
among the participants and raised certain doubts of its
sustainability. Thus, the head of the Armenian delegation, Tigran
Torosian expressed hope that the Assembly may be launched already in
2007. `I see no serious reasons that might stand in the way’, he
stated. However, the Azerbaijani delegation had its vision of the
situation. Representative of Azerbaijan, Syavush Navruzov stated in
his turn that setting up of the Assembly may become possible after
resolution of Mountainous Karabagh problem. `The territorial problems
unresolved, the Assembly’s activity may be considerably impeded’, he
stated.
Nevertheless at a special briefing, the sides showed willingness for
compromise and avoided discussion of the problems. After signing the
document, the sides unanimously declared that the mutual efforts of
the South Caucasus states may promote more efficient implementation
of the activities, aimed at the development of their countries and
the region as a whole.
===========================================================================
NEIGHBOURS
==========================================================================
GENOCIDE ALLEGATIONS MOVING AT US IN AVALANCHE
—————————————- ————————————
Source: “Milliyet” newspaper (Turkey) [June 18, 2005]
Author: Semih Idiz
Erdogan’s position, shortly qualified as `Our archives are open. Let
all the sides involved open their documents to do away with empty
talk,’ was again voiced in Beirut the day before. It stirred into
action International Union of Genocide Researchers, which sent its
address to Erdogan on June 13, 2005.
The Union, involving many famous scientists from various countries,
Turkey included, resolutely parries the arguments by Erdogan (`the
events of 1915 should be studied by historians to reveal the
truth’). The letter states that Erdogan is not aware of hundreds of
pieces of research on Armenian Genocide, conducted by the scientists
from various countries and nationalities for decades.
Conference in Every Two Years
The letter states in particular that the events of 1915 are qualified
by most scientists as Genocide, in compliance with the Genocide
Convention of 1948. The text of the letter was adopted unanimously at
the conference of the Union, held every two years. This year it took
place on June 4-7 in the city of Boca Raton (USA, Florida). The
address also states, `We admit that there are diverse opinions as to
how and why the Armenian Genocide occurred. However, rejection of
Genocide is not academic but propaganda behavior, an attempt to
justify the perpetrators, put the blame on the victims and to
obliterate the significance of this event from history pages’.
The Conference in Bogazici is Also Mentioned
The statement also points to the Turkish scientists, accused of
dependence on the government and the state in the attempts to hide
the truth and `provoke ethnic turmoil’. It also mentions the
conference on the Armenian issue, planned at Bogazici University and
postponed because of the reaction of Justice Minister Cemil
Cicek. `Thus your government proved its intolerance to academic and
intellectual freedom – the most important condition for democratic
society’.
Interesting Coincidence
The letter ends up, `To occupy a decent and equal place in
international democratic society, the Turkish society needs to bear
responsibility for Armenian genocide similarly to the German people
towards the Jews’. It is notable that the date of the address
coincided with the hearings on Armenian Genocide in German
Parliament. The historians should get together and study the issue
thoroughly in order to withstand similar statements to be gradually
increasing.
External Problem
The situation is getting clear each day. Both in the West and East,
Turkey stands alone in its position on Armenian Genocide. It is still
not clear what is the way out. Foreign Minister Abdullah Gull notes
that this issue is a priority for the government, not mentioning
however a concrete action plan. The government statements on this
issue seem to be largely focused on internal audience. Meanwhile, the
source of the problem is not inside the country, the greatest part of
the population refuting Genocide allegations. The problem is outside
Turkey’s borders, where these allegations are growing as a snowball
and moving at us in avalanche.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

AMIC’s Newsletter, Montreal, Canada
AMIC’s Info-Flash
2340 Chemin Lucerne, # 30
Ville Mont-Royal, Quebec, Canada
H3R 2J8
Tel : (514) 739 8950
Fax : (514) 738 2622
Web:
Email: [email protected]
June, 2005
1. Article 1: ” 9th AMIC World Medical Congress”
2. Article 2: “AMIC General Meeting”
3. Article 3: “AMIC-AUA database”
4. Article 4 : « What is AMIC?”
***************************************
Article 1: 9th AMIC WORLD MEDICAL CONGRESS
At the end of this month, the Congress starts with a cocktail party on
Wednesday, June 29. From June 30 to July 3, a very interesting scientific
program has been prepared for you, as well as social events for accompanying
persons.
If you have not yet registered, you still have the time. You can either go
to the Congress website (mentioned above), or call the president of the
organizing committee: Dr. Jerry Manoukian (650) 940 1006, or e-mail him at:
[email protected]
For any question/information concerning the Scientific Program, please call
Dr. Krikor Soghikian, chairman of the Scientific Program: (510) 339 6002 or
e-mail him at: [email protected]
“Info” herein provides the Congress program in two parts: the plenary
sessions and the concurrent breakout sessions.
PLENARY SESSIONS:
Plenary Session 1
Thursday June 30:
9:15 to 10:00 a.m. KEYNOTE ADDRESS:
” Hypertension: A Worldwide Epidemic
Aram V. Chobanian, MD
President, Boston University
Former Dean, Boston University School of Medicine
10:15 to 11:00 a.m. OSTEOPOROSIS:
” Osteoporosis, 2005: Diagnosis and Therapy”
John Bilezikian, MD
Professor of Medicine and Pharmacology
Chief, Division of Endocrinology
Director, Metabolic Disease Program
College of Physicians and Surgeons
Columbia University, New York
11:00 to 11: 45 a.m. ALZHEIMER’S DISEASE:
“An Overview of Alzheimer’s Research:
Prospects for Preventing Dementia”
Zaven S. Khachaturian, Ph.D.
Consultant, lecturer and author on Alzheimer’s
disease, neurodegenerative disorders, aging.
Editor in chief, “Alzheimer’s and Dementia:
Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association”. Formerly
Director, Office of Alzheimer’s Disease Research,
National Institute of Aging, National Institute of
Health.
Plenary Session 2
1:30 to 2:15 p.m. MENTAL HEALTH 1
“Generational Impact of War and Genocide:
Psychological Trauma Transmitted Generationally”
Anie Kalayjian, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Psychology
Fordham University, New York
President, Armenian American Society for Studies
On Stress and Genocide
2:15 to 3:00 p.m. “Drugs, Diet, Herbs: Interactions in the Management
of Depression”
Talia Puzantian Atkinson, PharmD, BCPP
Associate Clinical Professor
School of Pharmacy
University of California, San Francisco
Plenary Session 3
3:15 to 4:00 p.m. DIABETES
“Pharmaceutical Advances in Insulin Therapy”
Arshag Mooradian, MD
Professor of Medicine
Director of Endocrinology, Diabetes and
Metabolism,
Saint Louis University
4:15 to 4: 45 p.m. SURGERY AND ORTHOPEDICS
“The Armenian nose”
Arnold Tchakerian, MD
“Prostatic Cancer treatment on community level”
Hagop Dikranian, MD
“Eastern Armenian DASH Questionnaire for Outcome
Mesurement in Hand Surgery”
Abrahamyan , MD et al.
« Express-Splinting Essential Part of Upper Extremity
Rehabilitation »
GV Yaghjyan, MD et al.
« Vertebroplasty »
Lazik Der Sarkissian, MD
” BAFA’s Support in the Development of Orthopedics
in Armenia in the Last 15 Years”
Hayk Avagyan, MD
Friday July 1
Plenary Session 4
8: 30 to 9:15 a.m. TRANSPLANTATION
“Transplantation- An overview”
April Zarifian, ANP, DNSc
Nurse Practitioner
Tulane University
9:15 to 10: 00 a.m. CHILDHOOD OBESITY
“Obesity and Comorbitidies in Youth: The Ticking
Bomb of the Millenium”
Silva A. Arslanian, MD
Professor of Pediatric Endocrinology, Metabolism
and Diabetes Mellitus
Children’s Hopital of Pittsburgh
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
10:15 to 11: 00 a.m. PLASTIC SURGERY
“My Most Unhappy Patients and What they
Taught Me”
Mark B. Constantian, MD
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Nashua, New Hampshire
11: 00 to 11: 45 a.m. RADIOLOGY
“New Imaging Technologies”
Ara Kassarjian, MD
Assistant Professor of Radiology
Harvard Medical School, Boston
Plenary Session 5
1: 30 to 2:15 p.m. MENTAL HEALTH 2
“New Understanding of Depression: Biologic and
Public Health Aspects for the Medical Practitioner”
Hagop Akiskal, MD
Professor of Psychiatry
Director, International Mood Center
University of California, San Diego
2:15 to 3: 00 p.m. “Depression in childhood and adolescence, diagnosis
and treatment: the SSRI saga”
Elizabeth Boghossian Weller, MD
Professor of Psychiatry and Pediatrics
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
Plenary Session 6
3: 15 to 4: 00 p.m. CARDIOLOGY
“Current and Future Trends in Interventional
Cardiology-Balloons, Stents, Devices, and Beyond”
Vicken Aharonian, MD
Director, Regional Catheterization Laboratory
Southern California Permanente Medical Group
Los Angeles
4: 00 to 4: 45 p.m. “The Role of Stem Cell Therapy in Cardiac Disease-
Present and Future”
Yerem Yeghiazarian, MD
Assistant Professor of Medicine
Interventional Cardiology
Director, Cardiac Translational Stem Cell Program
University of California, San Francisco
Saturday July 2
Plenary Session 7
8: 30 to 10: 00 a.m. HEALTH AND MEDICINE IN ARMENIA
TODAY
Norayr Davidian, MD., Minister of Health of
Armenia
Zoya Lazarian, MD., Minister of Health of Artsakh
10: 30 to 12: 00 STRATEGIC PLANNING:
Zareh Ouzounian, DDS
12: 00 to 12: 30 p.m. CONCLUDING REMARKS
Jerry Manoukian, MD
Chairperson of the Congress Organizing
Committee
CONCURRENT BREAKOUT SESSIONS
Concurrent breakout session 1
Thursday June 30
1: 30 to 3: 00 p.m. DENTAL PROGRAM 1
“Dental Implants”
Edmond Bedrossian, DDS
“Dental Emergencies”
Raffi Margosian, DDS
1: 30 to 3: 00 p.m. PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
“Weight Loss and Healthy Living”
Arpi A Simonian, MS, ScM
“Impact of Diabetes Education Classes on
Control of Hemoglobin a 1 c”
Zarmine Naccashian RN, MN
“Folate Supplementation Lowers
Homocysteine Levels in Young Men with
Stroke”
Sarkis Nazarian, MD
“Repatriation, Repopulation, Socioeconomic
Betterment, and Stabilization of Border
Regions of the Republic of Armenia and
Karabagh”
Vicken Arabian
“The Diabetic Foot”
Hermoz Ayvazian, DPM
1: 30 to 3: 00 p.m. GENETICS AND MOLECULAR MEDICINE
“Decidual Endothelial Cell Interactions with
Peripheral Blood Monocytes in Normal and
Type 1 Diabetic Human Pregnancy”
Karime Bidal, MD
“Histamine and Histamine Receptors in Human Tumors”
G. Badalienvery, MD et al.
“Successful Treatment of Acute Leukemia Patients by
Bone Marrow and Peripheral Stem Cell Transplantation
Mihran Nazaretyan, MD et al.
« Upregulated MMP-2 and MMP-3 in Melanoma Cell
Lines with Different Invasiveness by Interaction with
Soluble Elastin Peptides »
Pocza et al.
« Molecular Analysis of Iranian Families with Sickle Cell
Disease »
M. Ayatollahi, MD
” A Previously Unidentified MECP2 Open Reading Frame Defines A New Protein
Isoform Relevant to Rett Syndrome”
GN Mnatzakanian, MD
Concurrent Breakout Session 2
3: 15 to 4: 45 p.m. NURSING AND ALLIED HEALTH 1
“Emotional Intelligence”
Mary Konyalian, RN, PhD
Ruzanna Ohanjanian, PhD
3: 15 to 4: 45 p.m. DIASPORAN ARMENIA PROJECTS 1
“AMIC Database”
Zareh Ouzounian, DDS
“Women’s Health Clinic in Stepanakert, Karabagh”
Avedis Bogosyan, MD
“From Nowhere to Everywhere-Bone Marrow Donor
Registry- A Window of Opportunity for Global
Integration”
Sevak Avagyan, MD
“Armenian American Medical Society of California-20 Years of Service”
Armen Cherik, MD, MBA
“An Arrhythmology and Electrophysiology Center in Armenia”
Smbat Jamalyan, MD
3: 15 to 4: 45 p.m. PUBLIC HEALTH IN ARMENIA
“Perspectives for Development of Children’s
Epileptology in Armenia”
Nune Aghababian, MD et al.
« Morbidity of Acute Leucosis in the Capital of Armenia, Yerevan. The Role
of Air-Polluting Substances”
Yelizaveta Amirkhanyan
“A Stress Center in Armenia – a History and a Future”
Adel Tadevosyan, PhD
“The Situation of Reproductive Health in Armenia and the Main Strategies”
Razmik Abrahamyan, MD
“ISTC: Achievements and Advantages for Armenian Public Health”
H. Navasardyan
“Breast Reconstruction-Current State in Armenia”
Artavazd Sahakyan, MD
Friday July 1:
Concurrent Breakout Session 3
1: 30 to 3: 00 p.m. DENTAL PROGRAM 2
“Advanced Bone Graft for Maxillofacial Defect”
Martin Chin, DDS
“Achieving Optimum Esthetic and Functional Results Using Gingival Colored
Ceramic”
Jack Koumjian, DDS, MSD
1: 30 to 3: 00 p.m. DIASPORAN ARMENIA PROJECTS 2
“Armenia Eye Project”
Roger Ohanesian, MD
“AECP Support in Creation of Cornea and Uveitis
Department in Armenia”
Anna Hovakimyan, MD
“Cochlear Implant: Armenia Regional Center”
Salpy Akaragian, RN, MN
“Armenian Dental Society of California Projects in
Armenia and Karabagh”
Nishan Odabashian, DMD, MS
“Fighting Infectious Diseases in Armenia-Our
Experience”
Daniel Stamboulian, MD
“The Shengavit Medical Center – Fruition of Labor of
Love and Cooperation”
Bedros Kojian, MD
1: 30 to 3: 00 p.m. PEDIATRICS
“Pediatric Urolithiasis in Armenia : Etiology in 312
Patients Observed 1991-2004”
Ara Babloyan, MD et al.
« Frontiers of Palliative Care »
John Saroyan
“Regional Peculiarities of Bronchial Asthma (BA) Morbidity Among the
Children of the Armenian Population”
Vardan Akunts
“HPA-1a Induced Neonatal Thrombocytopenia”
H. Bessos, PhD
“PTSD Symptoms, Depression, and Separation Anxiety Disorder Among Bereaved
Adolescents and controls”
Haig Goenjian, BA, Ida Karayan PhD
“Strategies in Child and Adolescent Health in Armenia”
Karine Sirabekian, MD et al.
Concurrent Breakout Session 4
3: 15 to 4:15 p.m. COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
“Noraluys-Homeopathy Project in Armenia”
Haritoun Kurtcuogly, MS
“Armenian Foods, Beverages, and Recipes in the 15th
Century Recorded by Amirdovlat Amasiatsi”
John Gueriguian
“Narek as a Means of Bibliotherapy”
Armen Nerisisan, MD et al.
“Intestinal Microflora, Probiotics, and Human Health”
Harout Bronozian
4:15 to 4: 45 p.m. FAMILIAL MEDITERRANEAN FEVER
“Process of Biosynthesis and Cleavage of
Phosphatdylcholines in FMF in Children During Pre-
and Post-Application of Colchicine Comnbine with Hypothalamic Polypeptide
PRP”
Petros Ghazarian, MD et al.
« The role of Somatoform Disorders in Case Aseptic Inflammations Observed
During the FMF »
Armen Nersisian, MD et al.
3:15 to 4: 45 p.m. NURSING AND ALLIED HEALTH 2
“Evidence Based Practice”
Lucine Daderian Huckabay, RN, PhD
Salpy Akaragian, RN, MN
3:15 to 4: 45 p.m. SURGERY
“Reconstructive Mammoplasty with Autologous
Tissues”
AB Sahakyan, MD et al
« Hand Port-Assisted Laparoscopic Aortic Surgery »
Garo Yerevanian, MD
“The Role of Palmaris Muscle Tendon in Mitral Valve Annulus Reconstruction:
A Novel Technique for Mitral Valve Repair”
JH Shuhaiber, MD et al.
« Snoring Surgery in 2005 »
Walker Regina P, MD
“Sounding Like a Good Idea: The Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Diagnosis and
Management of Malignancies”
Eric Esrailian, MD
“The Neurosurgical Service in Armenia”
Arshak Zohrabyan, MD
3:15 to 4: 45 p.m. PHYSICIAN EDUCATION
“The Basics in Outcomes Research Process Development”
Chris Arslanian, PhD
“Hypothyroidism and the Internet”
Edward Paloyan, MD
“Armenian Medical Society and Foundation for
Education and Research-a New Perspective for Old
Friendships”
M. Zeveyan, MD et al.
« Evaluation of AAMSHA’s Mentorship Program »
Raffi Tashdjian, MD
“Actuality of Preparation of Nurses with Bachelor Degree in Republic of
Armenia”
Alina Koushkyan, MD
“Medical Equipment and Supplies for hospitals in Armenia and Karabagh”
Berge Minassian, MD
We encourage all our readers who have not registered yet, to do so quickly.
Don’t miss such an outstanding scientific program!!
***************************
Article 2: AMIC General Meeting
AMIC General Meeting will take place on Saturday July 2 from 2 to 5.00 p.m.
**************************
Article 3: AMIC-AUA database
The AMIC-AUA database lists health related projects undertaken by the
Diaspora in Armenia since the earthquake of 1988. It is posted on AMIC’s
website (). After a period of interruption, we inform our readers
that it is now functioning.
**********************
Article 4: What is AMIC?
The Armenian Medical International Committee was created fifteen years ago.
It is an umbrella organization that unites Armenian medical associations
throughout the Diaspora, creating thus a large network through which
information and data are exchanged.
AMIC organizes Armenian Medical World Congresses. So far eight have been
held in different cities of the Diaspora. In 2003, “The First International
Medical Congress of Armenia” organized by Armenia, was held in Yerevan from
July 1 to July 3. The 9th AMIC Congress will be held in 2005 (from June to
July 3) in San Francisco (USA). We gave in this issue of the Info-Flash the
scientific program of this coming Congress (Website: )
AMIC publishes since 1998 an online newsletter and sends it freely to all
Armenian Health Care professionals. If you are a health care professional
and are interested in receiving Info-Flash, please send us your e-mail
address ([email protected]). To all those who already receive the Info, please do
not forget to send us your new e-mail address when you change it. For
further information, visit our website:
A useful information to remember: you can send freely from wherever you are
located, medical equipment/medicine through the services of the United
Armenian Fund; President Mr. Harout Sassounian ([email protected])

STATE DUMA DEPUTY GIVE HIGH ASSESSMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS IN NKR
STEPANAKERT, JUNE 20. ARMINFO. Deputy of Russian Sate Duma, Director
of CIS Institute Konstantine Zatoulin, who observed the parliamentary
elections in NKR, gives a high assessment to them.
According to ARMINFO’s special correspondent to Stepanakert, at a
press conference K.Zatoulin says that yesterday the people voted for
various political forces, hereby solving their tasks and the issues
connected with state development, which is of great importance. He
says there are states in the world which are called unrecognized, and
the recognized states feel a temptation to not only deprive them of
statehood, but also to refuse their rights to self- determination. In
the current situation, when Nagoprny Karabakh is an unrecognized
state, it could easily slip to authoritarianism arising doubts of the
international community in the Karabakh people’s right to vote. The
elections held on June 19 showed that the standards they were
organized on were higher than in the neighboring state which does not
recognize it “in spite of all my respect for the Aliyevs Senior and
Junior,” Zatoulin says. In this connection he asked: “How one can make
the people of Nagorny Karabakh to enter into or withdraw from anything
in such situation?”
The Russian MP thinks the elections not only a way to solution of
NKR’s problems, but also confirmation of the country’s adherence to
democracy and right to independence to the world. He emphasized the
high activity of voters and calmness of the elections. Zatoulin
personally visited 6 electoral districts and observed no violations.
He emphasized the electoral registers on the walls of polling
stations, which is not done even in Russia. He called this elections a
step forward as compared to the previous ones. Zatoulin announced his
intention to raise the issue of revision of the funds “for support of
democracy outside Russia” at the State Duma, hereby NKR can take
advantage of it. As regards the influence of the elections on the
process and final result on the settlement of Karabakh conflict,
Zatoulin answered positively. He says he sees no possibility of
participation of the Azerbaijani community in the parliamentary
elections in NKR. Having lost the war, the Azerbaijani authorities
continue it in a virtual regime, Zatoulin says.

Pro-government party in Karabakh urges unity
At Artsakh, Stepanakert
14 Jun 05
One of the leaders of a pro-government party has called for unity
as Karabakh begun voting in parliamentary elections. In an interview
with a Karabakh newspaper, Ashot Gulyan said: “As we are at war with
Azerbaijan, we have no alternative but be together and fight together
both in happiness and sadness. Any other way would be destructive.”
He said that after the 19 of June elections Karabakh will “move
up in terms of politics… because of the fact that democracy has
taken solid roots here”. The following is an excerpt from Svetlana
Khachatryan report by Nagornyy Karabakh newspaper Azat Artsakh on 14
June headlined “We will win, because the bases of democracy are solid”
Interview with the co-chair of the Democratic Party of Artsakh
[Nagornyy Karabakh], Ashot Gulyan.
[Correspondent] Mr Gulyan, the election campaign is nearing its end,
what do you think of the current stage of the campaign?
[Gulyan] I think, people will give their comprehensive assessment on
the day of the elections: 19 June.
As to my attitude to the current stage of the election campaign in
terms of both the logic of law and the due conduct of the campaign,
it is positive. Equal conditions have been created for all the blocs
fighting for parliamentary seats and the principles of democracy
were widely applied. I think it is very important to ensure that our
elections are free, fair and transparent.
[Passage omitted: on the election campaign and calls for responsibility
in the formation a new parliament]
Party history
The NKR authorities and the Democratic Party Artsakh (DPA) have
concrete programs in all the spheres. The predecessor of the DPA,
the Democratic Union of Artsakh [DUA], became a parliamentary
fraction in 2000. It drafted the programmes which are now being
implemented. Our economic and political programmes look to the future
and ensure solutions. Unfortunately, we have not received alternative
programmes from any of the other parties. At the same time, we are
far from saying that the DPA had made no mistakes during its five
years of work. We might have made some mistakes, but we are working
on eliminating them gradually as envisaged in our programmes. We
would have preferred for the criticism to be more targeted and factual.
[Correspondent] In the criticism voiced, we often hear the opinion
that the former DUA, which was founded by the authorities and renamed
the DPA, has not changed. Do you agree with this view?
[Gulyan] I am sure that people have not forgotten the situation of
1999, when the state was under threat of division into two poles,
the ramifications of which could have been damaging for the NKR.
Also the military dictatorship that rose at the time should not be
forgotten. The direct result of it was the assassination attempt
on 22 March 2000. There was a need for a force that could take
the responsibility for the state into its hands. [Passage omitted:
recaps history]
A revolutionary movement is one thing and quite another is to take
responsibility for the fate of people. It is in that situation
that the Democratic Union of Artsakh was founded. We did not call
ourselves a party, we stayed away from populist actions and empty
promises. We became partisans of a public movement. If we are to
look at the successes of the DUA , it is first of all the freeing
the people’s minds form fear. It is thanks to its role that we have
democracy today. From 2000 onwards all the elections in the NKR were
qualitatively better than the previous ones. I don’t think all that
has been forgotten. Why don’t we compare the level of social welfare
of the people with the one we had five years ago?
Why was the DUA renamed. That is another issue which some used
for manipulation. It was as a result of our parliamentary activity
that the law on parties was adopted. The renaming of the DUA became
imperative. Even the name is very much in place here.
[Passage omitted: reiterates the point]
Plea for “common” language
The DPA was not formed by the authorities. It is not fair to describe
as pro-government a party that was formed at such a difficult time
and that managed to take the state out of the crisis. The authorities
could not find a way out of that alone. And since all other political
parties did not back the government, the DUA supported it. It is a
positive example of mutual cooperation and trust between the government
and a serious socio-political organization.
[Passage omitted: more of the same]
Independent of the results of the elections we will continue to work
in the same fashion and try and find a common language with all the
political forces. That is a new imperative. As we are at war with
Azerbaijan, we have no alternative but be together and fight together
both in happiness and sadness. Any other way would be destructive.
Democracy in Karabakh has “solid” roots
[Correspondent] The 2005 election differs in terms of a comparatively
large number of candidates. Do you think this is normal?
[Gulyan] Certainly, the fact that not only political parties, but also
a great number of individuals expressed interest in becoming a member
of the legislative branch of power proves the presence of democracy
in its broadest form. [Passage omitted: talks about observers]
We have to show to the world that we are a state which observes
the internationally-recognized democratic principles. I believe,
that after the 19 June elections, Karabakh will move up in terms of
politics. And not because of the saviours of the country from the
opposition, but because of the fact that democracy has taken solid
roots here. And this will be our common victory.

Al-Jazeera, Qatar
June 19 2005
Turkey apprehensive over EU crises
Turkey is uneasy over EU failures to ratify a constitution
As the European Union becomes embroiled in one integration crisis
after another, prospective member Turkey’s EU accession path is
looking more troubled than ever.
The latest blow to European unity – the failure to agree on a 2006-2013
budget – came quick on the heels of founding members France and
Holland’s rejection of the EU constitution.
The failure to agree on the constitution revealed deep anxieties in
both countries over future Turkish membership.
The constitution’s author, former president of France Valery Giscard
d’Estang, went so far as to blame the Turkish membership issue for
the double rejection of the constitution.
At the same time, the German opposition Christian Democrat Union
(CDU) – who are on course to win September’s early elections – have
said they are opposed to Turkey’s membership.
Recent debate on enlargement has also caused anxiety in other
prospective EU member countries Romania and Bulgaria -which are set
to join in 2007 – and in Croatia.
A Christian club?
However, “Turkish membership has always been different from the other
candidates,” Sedat Laciner, director of the Ankara-based think-tank,
the International Strategic Research Organisation, told Aljazeera.net.
“This is because the other European countries don’t really consider
Turkey a European country, as Turkey is the only Muslim candidate.”
Such a view has often led in the past to allegations from Ankara that
the EU is a Christian club. Now, some argue, Europe’s basic prejudices
are coming out as the union faces a crisis.
But this is a view denied by European leaders, who decided last
December to give Turkey a 3 October 2005 date to begin accession
talks – more than 40 years after Turkey first applied to join.
“The EU has to stick to its existing commitments,” European Commission
spokesperson Krisztina Nagy told Aljazeera.net on Friday.
“The talks will begin on October 3 provided Turkey fulfils the
necessary conditions.”
Difficult conditions
However, these conditions are already proving difficult for Ankara
to meet.
Turkey undertook last December to extend the Ankara Agreement –
a deal between the country and the EU over customs and trade –
to include all the EU’s latest members. Since May 2004, the new EU
countries have included the Republic of Cyprus, which Turkey does
not recognise and with which it has long had hostile relations.
Turkey has recognised Cyprus as part of a customs agreement
Many Turks resent the idea of having to include the Greek
Cypriot-dominated Republic in any official relationship -preferring
instead to champion the cause of the internationally unrecognised
Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, the isolated breakaway state in
the north of the island.
“The EU has to take some steps on Cyprus too,” says Zeynep Ersahin,
research fellow at the Bosphorus University-TUSIAD Foreign Policy
Forum.
She points to the fact that Brussels promised to assist the Turkish
Cypriots, who voted last year in favour of the last United Nations
plan to reunify the island, while the Greek Cypriots voted against it.
“After the referendum, however, the EU did not take any action,” she
says.
Revamped penal code
At the same time, Turkey also agreed as a precondition for accession
talks that it would enforce six pieces of legislation that would bring
the country more in line with EU norms. These included a revamped
penal code, which went through parliament in Ankara on 1 June.
“The EU is always emphasising that legislation adopted has to be
implemented,” says Nagy. This, too, is a major sticking point, as it
requires potentially open-ended-on-the-ground evaluation.
Recent violence in southeast Turkey worries the EU
Recent heightened violence in Turkey’s southeast between the army and
Kurdish separatists has also called this implementation into question.
Dutch ambassador to Ankara Sjoerd Gosses said earlier this week
that the EU stood for “the integration, not … disintegration” of
its future members, backing calls from the European Commission for
Turkey to find a civil alternative to its military campaign against
the separatists.
The EU argues that the southeast is effectively run by the Turkish
military, rather than civilian authorities.
Armenian haunting
Then there is the long-running Armenian question. On 16 June, the
German parliament passed a resolution acknowledging the massacres
of Armenian citizens of the Ottoman Empire back in 1915 by Ottoman
troops and irregulars.
Stopping short of labelling these events ‘genocide’, the Germans called
on Turkey to acknowledge the massacres -something it has always been
wary of doing.
While the EU itself has made no such demand on Turkey, it has called
for a normalisation of Turkey’s relations with neighbouring Armenia,
a process which inevitably involves the events of 1915.
Relations with Armenia have been a thorny issue for Turkey
“This was almost 100 years ago,” says Laciner. “And the EU makes no
mention of the current Armenian occupation of Azeri territory.”
In the conflict over the enclave of Nagorno Karabakh in the early
1990s, Armenian forces took a swathe of land from Turkish ally
Azerbaijan, linking the enclave to their border.
“People in Turkey see this as an example of Christian solidarity.
Just focusing on the events of 100 years ago shows the EU is not
sincere,” Laciner told Aljazeera.net.
Cautious optimism
However, despite this range of disputes, some Turks remain optimistic
about their EU chances.
“I don’t think Turkey’s EU membership can be looked at from the
perspective of the recent referendums on the EU constitution,” says
Ersahin, pointing to the recent Eurobarometre poll which found that
only 6% of French respondents voted against the constitution because
of Turkey.
In Holland, the figure was even lower, at only 3%. Most voted ‘no’
because of concerns over unemployment and the local economy.
“The EU has to deal with its own economic and social problems first
and Turkey later,” Ersahin says. “Accession is a process, which can
go up or down.
“Turkey has made great strides on many issues, and while there will
be many discussions on the shape of the EU in the future, the EU is
the most successful integration process of the century. It may take
10 to 15 years, but Turkey will become an EU member.”
“Yes, there are many problems here in Turkey,” acknowledges Laciner.
“But the EU has already said Turkey is a candidate and that these
problems can be solved. Up to now, Turkey has done what the EU wanted
in terms of reforms and the Europeans have acknowledged this.”
The pressure, however, is likely to be growing not just on Turkey
to fulfil its commitments, but on the EU to carry through with its
obligations.
“The EU is a community of commitments,” says Nagy, “and those that
have been taken have to be met.”

Zaman, Turkey
June 19 2005
‘Ankara Should Show US It is not Alone’
By Suleyman Kurt
Published: Sunday 19, 2005
zaman.com
Professor Georgi Derlugiani, of Armenian-origin, of the Northwestern
University, US, claimed that US need for Turkey in possible operations
against Iran and Syria in addition to pressure policies it implements
on them after Iraq is “very clear”. Derlugiani said if Ankara wants
to resist against this, it should show it is not alone.
Attending the Istanbul Conference on Democracy and Security last week,
Professor Derlugiani answered Zaman’s questions. He described rejection
of the March 1 deployment motion, which aimed to permit US troops pass
to Iraq, as a “brave and brilliant decision that showed Turkey was an
independent country even in the most difficult situation”. The Armenian
academic suggested to Turkey that it belonged to Europe and should
form more close relations with countries such as Russia, Eurasian
countries, Armenia, China, even Brazil, Mexico, and South African
countries through a “strong balance policy”. He said this would show
that Turkey is not alone when a super power applies pressures on it.
Expressing his approach to the Armenian issue, Derlugiani drew to
the attention to difficulty of a solution. Stressing that academic
discussions should be continued, Derlugiani urged forming of close
connections between the two peoples as well.