Author: Jalatian Sonya

RA PRESIDENT RECEIVES OSCE MINSK GROUP CO-CHAIRS AND PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF OSCE CHAIRMAN-IN-OFFICE

Noyan Tapan
Jan 20, 2010

YEREVAN, JANUARY 20, NOYAN TAPAN. On January 20, RA President
Serzh Sargsyan received OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairs Yuri Merzliakov
(RF), Bernard Fassier (France), Robert Bradtke (U.S.), and Personal
Representative of OSCE Chairman-in-Office Andrzej Kasprzyk. RA Foreign
Minister Edward Nalbandian also took part in the meeting.

According to RA President’s Press Office, issues regarding the current
stage of Nagorno Karabakh settlement process and high-level meeting
scheduled for the future were discussed at the meeting.

IS LEMKIN’S LEGACY GOING UNHEEDED?
by Eric Herschthal

The Jewish Week
a17697/Editorial__Opinion/The_Last_Word.html
Jan 19 2010

The Center for Jewish History is currently showing an exhibit
dedicated to the life and work of Raphael Lemkin. If his name isn’t
quite familiar to you, rest assured, you’re not alone. In any event,
you certainly know the one word that’s become synonymous with him:
genocide. In 1943, Lemkin invented the term. And in 1951, he saw to
it that the United Nations make it punishable crime.

The exhibit is a timely one, but you might say it’s timeless too.

There is the matter of Darfur, of course, but perhaps just as tragic
is the ongoing resistance to what is often called "Lemkin’s Law." A
walk through the exhibit’s myriad of letters, legal documents and
grainy recorded speeches gives you a pretty good understanding why.

>From the beginning, Lemkin knew that his task wouldn’t be easy. In
1933, for instance, Lemkin, a young Jewish lawyer born in Poland and
then working for its government, traveled to Madrid for a League of
Nations conference. His mission was straightforward enough: prosecute
the Turkish officials who initiated the Armenian genocide. One million
Armenians had been slaughtered at the outbreak of World War I, and
Lemkin, a fresh-faced 33-year-old, wondered why nothing was being
done. "Why," he asked, "is it a crime for one man to murder another,
but not for a government to kill a million?"

Alas, his timing was off. The year of the Madrid conference, the Nazis
seized power, and under Hitler’s watchful eye the Polish government
pressured Lemkin to resign. Six years later, the Nazi invasion of
Poland forced him to flee, and in 1941 he landed in the United States.

He got prestigious teaching posts at the Duke and University of
Virginia law schools with the help of sympathetic American professors.

But his growing awareness of the Holocaust pulled him out of the ivory
tower. He last heard from his parents just after he fled Poland,
and by the war’s end, he learned that 49 of his closest relatives
had been killed. Years later, he described his march to criminalize
genocide as an "epitaph on his mother’s grave."

What Samantha Power, in her Pulitzer Prize-winning book that also
recaps Lemkin’s career, called "a problem from hell," had for Lemkin
become personal. By 1943, he had already coined the term "genocide"
— from the Greek work genos, for "tribe," and cide, for "kill" —
but the word went into wide circulation only after the publication
of his book "Axis Rule in Occupied Europe," published in 1944. Once
the war had ended and the UN had been created, Lemkin began the next
phase of his career: turning a word into a crime.

It’s at this point that Lemkin’s real tragedy begins. Power’s book does
an especially good job bringing to life the shameful recalcitrance
of even the most civilized governments, particularly America’s,
to endorse the genocide resolution. The main sticking point was
clear: the U.S. did not want to endorse a law that might put their
own government at risk. While respectable institutions like the
American Bar Association made a smart case that the UN law allowed
for too expansive a reading, it was obvious that the real stumbling
block was the U.S. government. Segregation was still allowed in the
South, and the government felt that under related war-crime clauses,
it might be found guilty.

Of course the U.S. was fine leading the charge at the Nuremburg
Trials, which prosecuted Nazis just after the war. But the laws used
to indict the Nazis employed the softer "crimes against humanity"
clause, a holdover from the League of Nations days. That clause
prevented the prosecution of governments for crimes committed within
their own borders. "If the Nazis had exterminated the entire German
Jewish population," Power writes, "but never invaded Poland, they
would not have been liable at Nuremberg." Lemkin’s mission at the UN
was to close that loophole.

He succeeded, but the legacy of criminalized genocide is
disheartening. The UN may have criminalized it in 1951, but the
United States did not sign on until 1987. (Lemkin died in 1959.) More
recently, the International Criminal Court, which in 2002 became
the body responsible for prosecuting genocides, has been severely
handicapped. It has still not been ratified by the U.S., to say nothing
of Israel, Iraq, Yemen, Libya and China, among others. And even then,
it is a court of last resort, summoned only when independent countries
do not try criminals themselves.

To date, eight people have been convicted of genocide in a period
that has seen millions die in its name. Given that record, it’s worth
asking what Lemkin’s Law means if his legacy goes unheeded. He worked
tirelessly in the name of the law, but that was only the handmaiden
of his larger aim. Justice was what mattered, and it is something
that eludes him, and us, still.

Eric Herschthal covers arts and culture for the paper.

ARMENIA-TURKEY: WHO WILL BLINK FIRST?

Spero News
=25768&t=Armenia-Turkey%3A+Who+Will+Blink+Firs t%3F
Jan 18 2010

Over three months have now elapsed since the signing in Geneva on
October 10 of two protocols on establishing and developing "good
neighborly" diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey. But the
prospects that either parliament will ratify those protocols in the
near future remain …

Over three months have now elapsed since the signing in Geneva on
October 10 of two protocols on establishing and developing "good
neighborly" diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey. But the
prospects that either parliament will ratify those protocols in the
near future remain slim.

The major obstacle to ratification is Ankara’s insistence on linking
the normalization of relations with Armenia to concessions by
Yerevan in the Karabakh peace process, specifically, the withdrawal
of Armenian forces from districts of Azerbaijani contiguous to
Nagorno-Karabakh. The text of the two protocols does not, however,
contain any reference either to Nagorno-Karabakh or to Azerbaijan.

Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian, who first argued the case for
establishing relations with Turkey in an editorial published in the
"Washington Post" three years ago, has warned periodically since
October that Armenia may annul the protocols if the Turkish parliament
fails to endorse them within a "reasonable timeframe." Sarkisian did
not, however, set a specific deadline.

In a January 17 interview with RFE/RL’s Armenian Service, Foreign
Minister Eduard Nalbandian too warned that Turkey risks reversing
the progress achieved to date if it continues to peg ratification
to concessions by Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh. He stressed that
neither the Armenian nor the Turkish side set any preconditions when
they embarked in 2008 on the Swiss-mediated talks that resulted in
the formulation of the two protocols. "Had there been preconditions,
we would not have started this process and reached agreements in
the first place," Nalbandian told RFE/RL. "If one of the parties is
creating artificial obstacles, dragging things out, that means it is
assuming responsibility for the failure of this process," he added.

Meeting in Moscow last week with his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said he considers
Turkey’s linkage "in one package" of relations with Armenia and
resolving the Karabakh conflict unrealistic and "not the right
approach." "It is difficult to solve either of these problems
separately in the first place, and if one tries to tackle them
in a single package, then the prospects for resolving them will
automatically become quite remote," Putin reasoned on January 13.

The next year can be ‘historic’ for progress on disarmament –
Secretary-General

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today voiced optimism that 2010 will be
a "historic year" for progress on disarmament and non-proliferation
goals, vowing to press ahead with efforts to rid the world of weapons
of mass destruction.Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov repeated
that argument in Yerevan the following day, telling journalists at a
joint press conference with Nalbandian that "in my view, to try and
artificially link those two issues is not correct."

Erdogan, however, is quoted as having told journalists on his return
flight to Ankara that the "Turkish-Armenian issue will find a solution
only after "the occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh ends." "If Armenia has
good intentions, let it prove them by starting the liberation of the
districts surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh," Erdogan added.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmed Davutoglu by contrast has been less
explicit and less categorical, speaking only of the "need for some
progress in the [Karabakh] peace talks" before the two protocols can
be ratified.

Erdogan’s obduracy raises the question whether Turkey was acting
in good faith when it signed the protocols. Certainly the Turkish
government must have anticipated the outraged accusations from Baku
that it had acted in a way that "directly contravened Azerbaijan’s
national interests and cast a shadow on the fraternal relations
between the two countries."

Yerevan-based analyst Richard Giragosian told the Armenian
daily "Hayots ashkhar" last November that contrary to its
leaders’ statements, Turkey does not expect the signing of an
Armenian-Azerbaijani agreement on Nagorno-Karabakh soon. "Turkey is
not that frank in its demands related to Karabakh…. This is a test
of sorts in which the Turkish side is trying to determine the extent
of Armenia’s readiness to make concessions."

In other words, each side appears to be waiting for the other to
blink first.

Nalbandian on January 17 offered little hope for progress with
regard to a settlement of the Karabakh conflict. He said recent
statements by Azerbaijani leaders, including President Ilham Aliyev’s
renewed implicit threat to restore Baku’s control over the breakaway
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic by force, show that Baku "is not prepared
for mutual concessions in 2010." Parliamentary elections are due in
Azerbaijan in the late fall of this year.

REPRESENTATIVE OF ARMENIA’S COMMISSION: THE MATERIAL PUBLISHED IN AZERBAIJANI MASS MEDIA REGARDING YEGHISHE GEVORKYAN AND HIS FAMILY AMAZES BY THE DEEPEST DEGREE OF STUPID PRIMITIVISM

ArmInfo
2010-01-19 14:55:00

ArmInfo. The material published in Azerbaijani mass media regarding
Yeghishe Gevorkyan and his family is a regular lie and provocation.

This time, this material of the Azerbaijani sources amazes by the
deepest degree of stupid primitivism, Head of the Working Group under
the Commission on Captives, Hostages and Missing Armen Kaprielyan
told ArmInfo when commenting on the information which appeared in a
number of the Azerbaijani electron mass media regarding the citizen
of Armenia Yeghishe Gevorkyan and his family, being currently in the
territory of Azerbaijan.

To recall, Gevorkyan (a recidivist thief, 8- times convicted and
suspected in a murder) transferred to Azerbaijan with his wife and
three minor children on January 10. Azerbaijani Lider TV reported on
January 16 that the Gevorkyan family is living at one of Azerbaijan’s
military units. On January 18, this report was published by the
Azerbaijani agencies.

"The Azerbaijanis arranged a circus show with an Armenian family ‘being
unhappy hitherto but already quite happy’, moreover, the Azerbaijani
propaganda perorates about some ‘Armenian citizens having transferred
to the Azerbaijani side’. If the Azerbaijanis sing "the favorite tune
about the big question" and mean the six Armenian servicemen who fell
prisoners in Azerbaijan during 2009, I officially claim once again
that in each case we deal with non-acquaintance of the servicemen
with the area: the guys just lost their way and turned out to be
in the enemy’s territory by mistake. As for the absurd story about
a joint supper of the Armenians with the Azerbaijani servicemen,
it is nothing else but the next idiot trick of the bone-heads from
the Azerbaijani special services", Kaprilyan emphasized.

To recall, another six Armenian servicemen fell prisoners in
Azerbaijan during 2009. They are: Hrant Markosyan, Rafik Tevosyan,
Vardevan Sargsyan, Ohan Harutyunyan and Gevork Tovmasyan, as well as
Karen Harutyunyan.

UAE STRIVES TO RAISE LEVEL OF RELATIONS WITH ARMENIA

news.am

Jan 19 2010
Armenia

Armenia and the United Arab Emirates should raise the level of
bilateral relations, UAE Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan said at
the meeting with RA Vice-Premier Armen Gevorgyan.

He also underlined importance of cooperation development in atomic
power, mentioning that International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)
might become a good platform for the relations’ establishment.

Armen Gevorgyan highly assessed Armenia-UAE dialogue in various
fields. The officials discussed possibility of economic cooperation
in investments, energy, agriculture, tourism, IT and banking spheres.

They also touched upon activities of interdepartmental commission
recently formed in Armenia. Gevorgyan outlined that early set up of
the commission in UAE will further cooperation efficiency between
the countries.

Armenian delegation comprising RA Energy and Natural Resources Deputy
Minister Areg Galstyan and RA Ambassador to UAE Vahagn Melikyan will
be on a visit to the country till January 11 and participate in the
Third World Future Energy Summit.

ALIYEV: "THE WAY OF SOLUTION TO NAGORNO KARABAKH CONFLICT HAS ALREADY BEEN DETERMINED AND THE PRINCIPLE OF TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY BECOME A PRIORITY IN THE REGULATION PROCESS"

APA
Jan 18 2010
Azerbaijan

Baku – APA. President Ilham Aliyev chaired the meeting of the Cabinet
on the outcomes of socio-economic development of 2009, APA reports.

The head of state said 2009 would remain as the year of financial
crisis in the history.

"Despite this, Azerbaijan as a part of the world economy could get
out of the critical situation with minimal losses," he said.

Ilham Aliyev said the serious social and economic reforms paved the
way for all-round development of Azerbaijan.

"In 2009 our country protected its economic interests, the people’s
social position improved. According to the outcomes of 2009, Azerbaijan
is the country that developed most rapidly in the world.

GDP grew 9.3 percent in Azerbaijan in 2009. This is a historical
achievement. Growth in the industrial production was 8.6 percent,
agriculture 3.5 percent, the inflation rate was 1.5 percent in 2009.

$9.2 billion was invested in Azerbaijan, $7.3 billion of it are
domestic investments," he said.

The head of state said large infrastructural projects were implemented
within a year, 74,000 jobs created, the level of poverty fell by 11
percent, the country’s currency resources made up $20.4 billion.

Moreover, 64 schools, 59 medical establishments were built,
5 olympic-sport complexes were opened, new roads constructed in
Azerbaijan in 2009.

"Important steps were also taken in the foreign policy in 2009. The
number of our friends and strategic partners increase". Touching
upon the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, the president said the way of
solution to the problem had already been determined and the principle
of territorial integrity became a priority in the regulation process.

Minister of Finance Samir Sharifov, Chairman of the Central Bank
Board of Governors Elman Rustamov, Minister of Communication and
Information Technology Ali Abbasov and Chairman of the State Social
Protection Fund Salim Muslumov made reports on socio-economic measures
carried out in the country last year. In his final speech, President
Aliyev noted that Azerbaijan relies on its resources and there is a
strong will to further strengthen the country: "We are proud of these
realities. Azerbaijan does not have an economy of transition period,
today Azerbaijan has liberal and sustainable economy relying on its
resources". The head of state underlined that implementation of social
programs and infrastructure projects would also be continued in 2010.

EDITOR IN-CHIEF OF RUSSIA’S KOSMOPOLIS NEWSPAPER: AZERBAIJAN’S POSITION IS FAR MORE CONSTRUCTIVE AND MATURE

Today
688.html
Jan 18 2010
Azerbaijan

Day.Az interview with editor-in-chief of Russian Kosmopolis newspaper,
political expert Denis Dragunski.

Recently, Turkish PM Erdogan paid an official visit to Moscow. In your
opinion, is it just an official visit scheduled in advance or there are
very important economic negotiations related to gas deal, pipeline,
and geopolitical ones related to resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict behind it?

I think this important and high-level visit focused on both economic
and geopolitical issues. However, I do not expect major breakthroughs
is the Moscow-Ankara, Moscow-Baku and Moscow-Yerevan lines. Erdogan’s
Moscow visit and high-level negotiations were rather traditional
respect for the major nuclear and energy power such as Russia.

Pipeline bypassing Russia will be built, of course. Europe have
already learned lessons from "gas wars" on the Russia-Ukrainian border.

Everything happens at the close patch of southern Europe (Southwest
Asia), next to Russia which insists on a zone of its interests
in the former Soviet Union while peaceful Europe wants it to be
so without a scandal. It wants new relationships along the axis of
Ankara-Baku-Yerevan to be built without a scandal. Russia, of course,
wants to embed itself in this so-called New South Caucasus system.

However, I do not see Russia’s any specific role in this respect. In
the late 1980’s and mid 1990s, the following geopolitical scenario was
considered (as opposed to the famous "Goble Plan"): Russia should take
Armenia under its wing to ensure its survival and prosperity and make
"Russian Israel" in the South Caucasus and Asia.

To put it mildly, this plan was senseless for two reasons. First,
Russia had neither money nor the technical capacity to do so.

Secondly, it is easy to imagine scale of the confrontation with
Azerbaijan and Turkey on this issue. Thank God, this plan has not been
used as the basis of Russia’s policy in the South Caucasus. As far as
I know, today Russia has no concept of its presence (influence, games)
in this region at all. It has no political ideology, no real plans,
strong economic projects, no action, except a very vague statements
about "traditional zone of interests" and establishment of inefficient
structures like CSTO.

The past year has been very active in terms of progress in the Karabakh
conflict with no real steps. This year Baku expects real steps from
Yerevan. In your opinion, what is Russia’s role in Armenia’s possible
withdrawal from the occupied lands? What steps Russia may take towards
its CSTO partner to achieve advances in this regard?

Russia is unlikely to be able or want to influence Armenia in terms of
its withdrawal from Nagorno-Karabakh. This is primarily because the
active pressure on Yerevan would lead to Armenia’s withdrawal from
the CSTO and, consequently, to another fiasco in Russia’s diplomacy.

Another reason for Russia’s caution in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
is quite simple. The fact of long-term and intractable conflict
justifies Russia’s presence in the South Caucasus. "Intermediaries"
and "guarantors" are respected everywhere in the world. All these
meetings and conversations are no more than a diplomatic game.

Moreover, there is reason to believe that Russia, Europe and the
United States have already formed a group of international officials
who have long and reliable "source of income" in such conflicts.

Therefore, the establishment of the New South Caucasus is, first of
all, the affairs of the countries in the region..

Turkey has become more than a serious player in the Caucasus for a
short period of time. However, Ankara did not hide its ambitions to
become a regional leader in the Caucasus. To what degree are Ankara’s
ambitions realistic? What is Moscow’s attitude towards them?

I think Turkey is truly interested in boosting its foothold in
the South Caucasus. This is related to actual failure of Turkey’s
"European project". Despite close and very positive economic and
military-political ties with Europe, Turkey will not be accepted to
the EU in the foreseeable future.

This is the objective course of things. Therefore, quite possibly,
Turkey has decided to launch a major new multi-year regional
project and to become a bridge that will connect the South Caucasus
countries (and, possibly, Transcaspian) with Europe. Of course, some
representatives of Russia’s political class do not like it. Russia
has no real possibilities, but to be honest, there is no reason to
impede it.

Apparently, Turkey has taken up this matter seriously. It was reported
that after Moscow Erdogan will go to Yerevan especially because the
Constitutional Court has confirmed legitimacy of the Armenian-Turkish
protocols.

However, it was stated even at the highest level in Turkey that no real
steps to normalize relations with Armenia will be taken until they see
similar steps in Yerevan in terms of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict …

That’s right, since the Karabakh problem dramatically hinders creation
of the New South Caucasus. Karabakh holds the entire region in a
state of fairly strong, but a dangerous balance of military forces
and political aspirations.

Prior to his visit Erdogan said that he it would be nice to get to
Istanbul by car from Baku, passing through Nagorno-Karabakh, Yerevan
and Ankara without any danger and without any boundaries. Actually,
it is a wise approach. I would call it "The infrastructure on top of
politics. Roads are more important than borders. Economic integration
is more important than sovereignty. "

It would be really great if you built a modern road from Baku, through
the whole of Azerbaijan, including Karabakh, via Armenia and Turkey
onwards to Europe. The Nagorno Karabakh problem will be solved much
easier if significant economic progress is achieved during construction
of new infrastructure and implementation of regional integration,
as well as the rule of law and guarantees to human rights are ensured.

In other words, it will open up new innovative and effective ways to
solve this long and painful problem in an integrated and updated the
South Caucasus in cooperation with Turkey.

Problem of the New South Caucasus is largely a problem of Georgia. New
South Caucasus is difficult to imagine without Georgia, and Georgia –
with no close ties with Azerbaijan and Armenia. If Georgia gets stuck,
politically and psychologically, a desire to return Abkhazia and
South Ossetia, and all its achievements in reforms will be shattered
and it will become a "sick man of the South Caucasus."

In this sense, Azerbaijan’s position seems to me far more constructive
and mature. Not giving up sovereignty over Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan
has a peaceful negotiation policies, patiently developing tools for
a possible solution to the problem through political integration,
economic development and respect for legal principles.

Therefore, relations with Turkey are important for the entire South
Caucasus, and especially for Azerbaijan, which is the most economically
powerful country in the region.

ARMENIA’S LEADING MOBILE OPERATOR VIVACELL-MTS ANNOUNCES THE OUTGOING SMS TRAFFIC AND NUMBER OF OUTGOING CALLS ON ITS NETWORK ON DECEMBER 31, 2009 AND JANUARY 1, 2010

ArmInfo
2010-01-16 10:48:00

ArmInfo. VivaCell-MTS, a subsidiary of Mobile TeleSystems OJSC (NYSE:
MBT) announces that 1,865,976 SMS messages were sent on December 31,
the New Years Eve before midnight by VivaCell-MTS subscribers, with a
further 2,019,725 sent on January 1, 2010. At the same time, 7,657,761
outgoing calls were made by VivaCell-MTS subscribers on December 31,
2009 before midnight, and another 8,535,018 on January 1, 2010.

Armenia’s leading mobile operator VivaCell-MTS announced that in
total its subscribers had sent 3,885,701 short messages and had made
16,192,779 calls in the period from December 31, 2009 to January 2,
2010. Together with guest-roamers, over VivaCell-MTS network 3,900,972
SMS messages and 16,196,539 outgoing calls were made.

Compared to the same period of the previous year, the number of
outgoing calls increased by 19.91% (without guest roamers).

VivaCell-MTS (K-Telecom CJSC) is the leading Armenian mobile operator,
providing a wide range of Voice and Data services. Since its launch
on 1st July 2005, in a short period of time VivaCell-MTS has managed
to build a nationwide network and a considerable customer base.

VivaCell-MTS drives the development and offering of innovative mobile
communications products, services and features in the Armenian mobile
communications market.

Mobile TeleSystems OJSC ("MTS") is the largest mobile phone operator
in Russia and the CIS. Together with its subsidiaries, the Company
services over 97.16 million subscribers. The regions of Russia, as
well as Armenia, Belarus, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, in
which MTS and its associates and subsidiaries are licensed to provide
GSM services, have a total population of more than 230 million. Since
June 2000, MTS’ Level 3 ADRs have been listed on the New York Stock
Exchange (ticker symbol MBT).

Naomi Klein to Deliver Hrant Dink Memorial Lecture at Bogazici University
By Armenian Weekly Staff
January 17, 2010

ISTANBUL, Turkey (A.W.) – Award-winning journalist and author Naomi
Klein will deliver the 2010 Hrant Dink Memorial Lecture on Freedom of
Expression and Human Rights at Bogazici University in Istanbul. She
will deliver the lecture, titled `The Power of Being Consistent:
Insisting on Palestinian Humanity in the Western Media,’ on Jan. 25 at
3 p.m. local time at Albert Long Hall (BTS), South Campus. The talk
will be presented in English and will be translated simultaneously
into Turkish.

The poster announcing Klein’s lecture
The lecture is organized by the departments of History, Sociology,
Political Science and International Relations at Bogazici University.

A press release issued by the organizers presents the following
lecture synopsis:

Recent months have seen a ferocious wave of Israeli attacks targeting
Palestinian activists who have chosen to resist occupation through
principled, non-violent action. Key leaders are being arrested one by
one, particularly those who oppose the construction of the so-called
`security barrier,’ and those who are calling for Israel to face the
kinds of boycotts and sanctions that ultimately ended Apartheid in
South Africa. A central tenet of the international campaign has been
the decision not to advocate a particular political outcome, but
rather to insist that Israel comply with international law. This set
of demands is so threatening to Israel’s expansive colonial policies
that new words like `lawfare’ have recently been invented to slander
it. The lecture will examine this latest stage of the struggle for
Palestinian rights, interrogating what it tells us about the limits of
free expression in the West, as well as the hope it holds to deliver
genuine equality between Jews and Palestinians at last.

Naomi Klein is a Canadian award-winning journalist, political
activist, and author of internationally best-selling non-fiction
books. She writes a regular column for The Nation and The Guardian
that is syndicated internationally by The New York Times Syndicate. In
2004, her reporting from Iraq for Harper’s Magazine won the James
Aranson Award for Social Justice Journalism. Her first book No Logo:
Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies (2000) was an international
bestseller, translated into 28 languages. Her second book, a
collection of her work, Fences and Windows: Dispatches from the Front
Lines of the Globalization Debate was published in 2002. Her third
book, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism (2007) was
also an international bestseller and was translated into 27
languages. A six-minute companion film was created by Alfonso Cuaron
and it was downloaded over a million times. Naomi Klein and her
husband, Avi Lewis, co-produced a feature documentary, `The Take,’
about Argentina’s worker occupied factories in 2004. Klein is a former
Miliband Fellow at the London School of Economics and holds an
honorary Doctor of Civil Law from the University of King’s College,
Nova Scotia, Canada.

ACCORDING TO EDUARD SHARMAZANOV, IT IS TIME FOR TURKEY TO SHOW ITS REAL FACE

Noyan Tapan
Jan 15, 2010

YEREVAN, JANUARY 15, NOYAN TAPAN. RA NA RPA faction Secretary Eduard
Sharmazanov positively estimates RA Constitutional Court’s resolution
on recognizing the commitments stipulated by the Armenian-Turkish
protocols as corresponding to the RA Constitution. As the deputy
mentioned at a meeting held on January 15 at the Hayeli club, with that
resolution CC in the legal respect grounded the political estimations
the RA President had given several months before.

According the speaker, the RA President during his all-Armenian
trip had exactly mentioned that there is no problem of Genocide as
a precondition in the protocols, and the issue of recognition of the
Genocide should remain on RA foreign policy’s agenda.

E. Sharmazanov also said that he attaches much importance to CC’s
resolution in the context of Armenian-Turkish relations and raising
of Armenia’s international authority as "Armenia with this resolution
showed its good will." "Today the ball is already in Turkey’s field
and it is time for Turkey not to speak but to act, it is time for
Turkey to show its real face," he said.

According to the RPA deputy, "protocols having no preconditions
are submitted for ratification today." According to E. Sharmazanov,
it would not be logical if CC made reservations in its resolution on
the bilateral protocols as ARFD asserts it. "We respect all civilized
opposition opinions but do not share them," E. Sharmazanov declared.