ANDRANIK MARGARYAN TO PAY A WORKING VISIT TO GEORGIA JULY 7
ArmRadio.am
26.06.2006 14:13
July 7 RA Prime Minister Andranik Margaryan will pay a working
visit to Georgia to participate in the recurrent sitting of the
Armenian-Georgian Intergovernmental Cooperation Commission to be
held in Ajaria, Information and Public Relations Department of RA
government informs.
Vladimir Karapetyan: "The main thing for us is to determine Nagorno Karabakh’s status"
Today, Azerbaijan
June 24 2006
24 June 2006 [11:25] – Today.Az
"We have many times stated that the main thing for us is to determine
the status of Nagorno Karabakh," Armenian Foreign Ministry spokesman
Vladimir Karapetyan stated while commenting on the US co-chair of
OSCE Minsk Group Matthew Bryza’s announcing details of the framework
agreement between the parties to the conflict.
Karapetyan said his country supports resolving the problem in package
form.
"The proposals for the resolution of the conflict acquire package
character, they cannot be discussed separately," Karapetyan said.
Matthew Bryza stated that the parties to the Nagorno Karabakh
conflict are negotiating on the items of the framework agreement
regarding Armenian armed forces’ withdrawal from Azerbaijani
territories. The co-chair said the framework agreement will enable to
normalize economic relations between Azerbaijan and Armenia.
He noted this agreement is about deploying peacekeepers in the
conflict zone, international economic support and several other
issues.
"The agreement also envisages holding of a referendum in Nagorno
Karabakh after all these issues are completely solved. I call on the
Azerbaijani and Armenian Presidents to sign the framework treaty on
the settlement of the conflict. There is a need to demonstrate
political will for that," Mr.Bryza said.
URL:
DELEGATION ON KARABAKH ISSUE MAY MAKE A VISIT
Lragir.am
22 June 06
The delegation of the PACE Committee on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue
will probably visit to the region, said Speaker Tigran Torosyan,
the head of the Armenian delegation to the PACE, on June 22. He said
a meeting of the Committee on the Karabakh Issue chaired by Russell
Johnston, may take place during the summer session of the PACE.
Tigran Torosyan found it difficult to specify the issues that the
committee may discuss. According to Tigran Torosyan, however, there is
a question which will be discussed by all means. It is the proposal
of Chair Russell Johnston to second the delegation of the committee
to the region, Armenia, Karabakh and Azerbaijan.
AMBASSADOR TO ITALY MEETS WITH DIPLOMATIC ADVISER OF ITALIAN PM
AzerTag, Azerbaijan
June 20 2006
Ambassador of Azerbaijan to Italy Emil Karimov met in Rome with
Ambassador Stefano Sanino, the Diplomatic Adviser of the Chairman of
the Italian Council of Ministers.
Ambassador Karimov conveyed congratulations and greetings from
President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev to newly elected Prime Minister
of Italy Romano Prodi. He recalled Mr. Prodi’s meeting with national
leader and late President of Azerbaijan Heydar Aliyev in 1997 in Rome
and with incumbent President Ilham Aliyev in 2004 when the Italian
Premier was in Baku as the President of the European Commission.
Speaking of the current state of Azerbaijan-Italy relationship,
Ambassador Karimov noted there were good opportunities for enhancement
of cooperation between the two countries in various areas. He added
that the last year’s official visit to Italy by President Ilham Aliyev
opened a new area in the bilateral relations, and informed Mr. Sanino
on the meetings held and documents signed during the visit, as well
as the positives of the Italy-Azerbaijan business forum.
Mr. Karimov named Italy the Azerbaijan’s largest trade partner
pointing to good opportunities for cooperation and making
investments in the country’s agriculture and chemical, tourism
and light industries. Reminding of the recent commissioning of the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, he let Mr.
Sanino know that a number of Italian companies show great interest
in transportation of gas through Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum pipeline to
start operating soon.
The Azeri Ambassador said the leadership of Azerbaijan intends
to continue cooperation with the new Italian government noting the
importance of organizing high-level reciprocal visits, in particular,
that of Prime Minister Romano Prodi to Azerbaijan.
Ambassador Stefano Sanino expressed satisfaction with the current state
of Azerbaijan-Italy relationship especially noting the cooperation
in energy field. He said his country attaches particular importance
to enhancement of cooperation with Azerbaijan. Mr. Sanino confirmed
that Prime Minister Romano Prodi welcomes Azerbaijan’s European
integration efforts, and supports the region countries’ joining the
New Neighborhood Policy of the European Union.
Ambassador Karimov also spoke of the democratic reforms in Azerbaijan,
the steps taken to ensure economic growth and social improvements
in the country, and touched on the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict
over Nagorno-Karabakh. He described the conflict, which has lead to
occupation of 20% of the Azerbaijani territories and over one million
people’s becoming refugees and internally displaced, as a major threat
to cooperation and security in the region. The diplomat expressed
gratitude to the Italian government for supporting Azerbaijan’s
position in the conflict.
Ambassador Sanino regretted that the conflict has not yet been resolved
and expressed readiness of his country to contribute to its peaceful
resolution.
DUTCH MINISTER ASKS ARMENIA TO GET READY FOR LOW ECONOMIC GROWTH
Trading Markets, CA
June 20 2006
(RTTNews) – Dutch Finance Minister Gerrit Zalm told reporters on
Monday at Yerevan that Armenia must prepare for lower growth rate,
the ARKA news agency said. The minister noted that a growth rate
as high as 40% was a characteristic of countries in the process of
economic rehabilitation.
Meanwhile, the minister was confident that Armenia had the potential
to record high growth rates.
MEETING WITH ENGLISH DIPLOMATS
National Assembly of RA, Armenia
June 20 2006
On June 19 Vahan Hovhannisyan, Vice Speaker of RA National Assembly
and Levon Lazarian, RA Minister of Education and Science met Anthony
John James Cantor, Ambassador of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland and Andrew Page, Deputy Head of Russia, South
Caucasus and Central Asia Directorate of the UK’s FCO.
Upon Mr. Page’s request, Vahan Hovhannisyan, NA Vice Speaker touched
upon the inner developments of the country, the reforms directed to
Euro integration, the political shuffle, the forthcoming 2007 and
2008 parliamentary and presidential elections.
As Mr. Hovhannisyan evaluated, the presidential elections will greatly
depend on the forthcoming parliamentary elections. These elections
will also be a cornerstone of the country’s democratisation. So all
political forces should make all efforts not to violate the law. The
legislative, economic and political reforms implementing in the country
are on the right way, though there are drawbacks in the mechanisms
of their fulfillment. The external factors, in particular Turkey’s
blockade and Azerbaijan’s non-constructive stance connected with the
settlement of Karabakh problem have their negative impact on Armenia’s
development of economy.
In response to Mr. Page’s question, what forecasts are there for the
settlement of the Karabakh problem, Mr. Hovhannisyan informed that
within the framework of the Minsk Group there are 3 recommendations,
which Armenia adopted, and Azerbaijan denied. The latter doesn’t want
to see the key problem, but to eliminate the consequences, which
is not possible without key problem. Vahan Hovhannisyan considered
impermissible the Azeri’s way of thinking in solving the problem by
force later taking into account the oil factor, and not taking strict
steps against that phenomenon by the world public.
Mr. Page noted that some economic circles can connect the Karabakh
problem with the oil factor, but that is not the official stance of
Great Britain, and ensured that his country does everything for finding
mutually beneficial settlement of the Karabakh problem in peaceful way.
THE REPORT ON WARD CHURCHILL
by Tom Mayer
Swans, CA
June 19 2006
[Ed. Professor Mayer of the Univesity of Colorado at Boulder wrote this
text before going on a trip. He sent it "to several local newspapers,
but they all rejected it because it was too long." Our thanks to Louis
Proyect and David Anderson who brought this valuable contribution to
our attention.]
(Swans – June 19, 2006) I have finally finished a careful reading
of the 124 page report about the alleged academic misconduct of
Ward Churchill. Often, but not always, I have been able to compare
the statements in the report with the relevant writings of Professor
Churchill. Although the report by the committee on research misconduct
clearly entailed prodigious labor, it is a flawed document requiring
careful analysis. The central flaw in the report is grotesque
exaggeration about the magnitude and gravity of the improprieties
committed by Ward Churchill. The sanctions recommended by the
investigating committee are entirely out of whack with those imposed
upon such luminaries as Stephen Ambrose, Doris Kearns Goodwin, and
Lawrence Tribe, all of whom committed plagiarisms far more egregious
than anything attributed to Professor Churchill.
The text of the report suggests that the committee’s judgments
about the seriousness of Churchill’s misconduct were contaminated
by political considerations. This becomes evident on page 97 where
the committee acknowledges that "damage done to the reputation
of … the University of Colorado as an academic institution is
a consideration in our assessment of the seriousness of Professor
Churchill’s conduct." Whatever damage the University may have sustained
by employing Ward Churchill derives from his controversial political
statements and certainly not from the obscure footnoting practices
nor disputed authorship issues investigated by the committee. Indeed,
the two plagiarism charges refer to publications that are now fourteen
years old. Although these charges had been made years earlier, they
were not considered worthy of investigation until Ward Churchill
became a political cause celèbre. Using institutional reputation to
measure misconduct severity amounts to importing politics through
the back door.
The report claims that Professor Churchill engaged in fabrication
and falsification. To make these claims it stretches the meaning of
these words almost beyond recognition. Fabrication implies an intent
to deceive. There is not a shred of evidence that the writings of Ward
Churchill contain any assertion that he himself did not believe. The
language used in the report repeatedly drifts in an inflammatory
direction: disagreement becomes misinterpretation, misinterpretation
becomes misrepresentation, misinterpretation becomes falsification.
Ward may be wrong about who was considered an Indian under the General
Allotment Act of 1887 or about the origins of the 1837-1840 smallpox
epidemic among the Indians of the northern plains, but the report
does not establish that only a lunatic or a liar could reach his
conclusions on the basis of available evidence.
The charges of fabrication and falsification all derive from short
fragments within much longer articles. The report devotes 44 pages
to discussing the 1837-1840 smallpox epidemic. One might think that
Ward had written an entire book on this subject. In fact this issue
occupies no more than three paragraphs in any of his writings. In
each of the six essays cited in the report, all reference to this
epidemic could have been dropped without substantially weakening the
argument. To be sure, the account given by Ward is not identical to
that found in any of his sources, but it is a recognizable composite of
information contained within them. The committee peremptorily dismisses
Churchill’s contention that his interpretation of the epidemic was
influenced by the Native American oral tradition. This is treated
as no more than an ex post facto defense against the allegation of
misconduct. The committee also discounts Native American witnesses who
support Churchill’s interpretations as well as his fidelity to oral
accounts. The centrality of the oral tradition is evident in many of
Churchill’s writings. His acknowledgments frequently include elders,
Indian bands, and the American Indian Movement. He often integrates
Native American poetry with his historical analysis. Three of his books
with which I am familiar, Since Predator Came (1995), A Little Matter
of Genocide (1997), and Struggle for the Land (2002) all begin with
poems. As a thirty-year veteran of the intense political struggles
within the American Indian Movement, Ward Churchill could not avoid
a deep familiarity with the oral tradition of Native American history.
By addressing only a tiny fragment of his writings, the report
implies that Ward tries to overawe and hoodwink his readers with
spurious documentation. Anyone who reads an essay like "Nits Make
Lice: The Extermination of North American Indians 1607-1996" with its
612 footnotes will get a very different impression. Churchill, they
will see, goes far beyond most writers of broad historical overviews
in trying to support his claims. He often cites several references
in the same footnote. Ward is deeply engaged with the materials he
references and frequently comments extensively upon them. He typically
mounts a running critique of authors like James Axtell, Steven Katz,
and Deborah Lipstadt. Readers will see that Churchill is familiar with
a formidable variety of materials and can engage in a broad range of
intellectual discourses.
Ward Churchill is not just another writer about the hardships suffered
by American Indians. He offers a very distinctive vision of what David
Stannard calls the "American Holocaust." According to Churchill,
the extermination of Native Americans was neither accidental,
nor inadvertent, nor unwelcome among the invading Europeans. On
the contrary, it was largely deliberate, often planned (sometimes
by the highest political authorities), and frequently applauded
within the mainstream media. "[A] hemispheric population estimated
to have been as great as 125 million was reduced by something over 90
percent….and in an unknown number of instances deliberately infected
with epidemic diseases" (A Little Matter of Genocide, p. 1). Moreover,
Ward maintains that the American Holocaust continues to this day. He
thinks it is fully comparable to, and even more extensive than, the
Nazi genocide of the Jewish people during World War Two. The endemic
chauvinism and Manichaean sensibility this process has induced within
our political culture helps explain Hiroshima, Vietnam, Iraq, and
other American exercises in technological murder.
"If there is one crucial pattern that most affects our assessment,"
writes the committee, "it is a pattern of failure to understand the
difference between scholarship and polemic, or at least of behaving
as though that difference does not matter" (p. 95). Taking away the
negative imputation, I can agree with the latter observation. Ward
believes we are all in a race against time. Thus the main point of
historical scholarship is not to recount the past, but rather to
provide intellectual ammunition for preventing future genocides now
in the making.
Like most scholars, Churchill practices an implicitly Bayesian
(a statistical term) form of analysis. That is, he evaluates the
plausibility of assertions and the credibility of evidence partly on
the basis of his prior beliefs. That government officials connived in
generating the 1837-40 smallpox epidemic seems far more plausible to
Ward than to the investigating committee precisely because he thinks
this is what American governments are inclined to do. He discounts many
of the so-called primary sources cited in the report because their
authors despise Indians or wish to conceal their own culpability in
spreading the epidemic. And contrary to what the report says (p. 96),
many first rate scholars focus on proving their own hypotheses rather
than considering all available evidence even-handedly. Einstein,
for example, spent the last three decades of his life trying to
disprove quantum mechanics while largely disregarding evidence in
its favor. This is not research misconduct.
Virtually all the mass exterminations of recent times have evoked
amazingly divergent historical assessments and numerical estimates.
This is true of the Armenian genocide, Stalin’s collectivization
campaign and purges, the Nazi holocaust, Hiroshima and Nagasaki,
the Great Leap Forward, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Rwanda. In some cases
there is dispute about whether the extermination even happened, and
even when mass killing is acknowledged, numerical estimates sometimes
differ by a factor of ten or even more. These differing interpretations
are almost never politically innocent but, when honestly advanced,
they do not constitute research misconduct.
Neither do Ward Churchill’s assessments of genocidal activities by
John Smith or by the U.S. Army at Fort Clark.
The operational definition of academic misconduct used by the
investigating committee is so broad that virtually anyone who writes
anything might be found guilty. Not footnoting an empirical claim is
misconduct. Citing a book without giving a page number is misconduct.
Referencing a source that only partially supports an assertion is
misconduct. Referencing contradictory sources without detailing their
contradictions is misconduct. Citing a work considered by some to
be unserious or inadequate is misconduct. Footnoting an erroneous
claim without acknowledging the error is misconduct. Interpreting a
text differently than does its author is misconduct. Ghost writing
an article is misconduct. Referencing a paper one has ghost written
without acknowledging authorship is misconduct. No doubt this list
of transgressions could be greatly expanded. I strongly suspect that
many people who vociferously support the report have read neither it
nor any book or essay Ward Churchill has ever written. Perhaps this
should be deemed a form of academic misconduct.
If any of the sanctions recommended by the investigating committee
are put into effect, it will constitute a stunning blow to academic
freedom. Such punishment will show that a prolific, provocative, and
highly influential thinker can be singled out for entirely political
reasons; subjected to an arduous interrogation virtually guaranteed
to find problems; and then severed from academic employment. It
will indicate that public controversy is dangerous and that genuine
intellectual heresy could easily be lethal to an academic career. It
will demonstrate that tenured professors serve at the pleasure of
governors, political columnists, media moguls, and talk show hosts.
Most faculty members never say anything that requires protection. The
true locus of academic freedom has always been defined by the
intellectual outliers. The chilling effect of Ward Churchill’s academic
crucifixion upon the energy and boldness of these freedom-defining
heretics will be immediate and profound.
The authors of the report on Ward Churchill present themselves as
stalwart defenders of academic integrity. I have a quite different
perspective. I see them as collaborators in the erosion of academic
freedom, an erosion all too consonant with the wider assault upon
civil liberties currently underway. The authors of the report claim
to uphold the intellectual credibility of ethnic studies. I wonder
how many ethnic studies scholars will see it that way. I certainly
do not. Notwithstanding their protestations to the contrary, I see
committee members as gendarmes of methodological and interpretive
orthodoxy, quite literally "warding" off a vigorous challenge to
mainstream understandings of American history. Confronted by the
evidence presented in this report, the appropriate response might be
to write a paper critiquing the work of Ward Churchill. Excluding him,
either permanently or temporarily, from the University of Colorado
is singularly inappropriate.
Ward Churchill is one of the most brilliant persons I have encountered
during my 37 years at this university. His brilliance is not
immediately evident due to his combative manner and propensity for
long monologues. Whenever reading one of his essays I feel in the
presence of a powerful though hyperbolic intellect. The permanent
or temporary expulsion of Ward Churchill would be an immense loss
for CU. In one fell swoop we would become a more tepid, more timid,
and more servile institution. His expulsion would deprive students
of contact with a potent challenger of accepted cognitive frameworks.
The social sciences desperately need the kind of challenge presented
by Ward Churchill. His most strident claims may be rather dubious, but
they stimulate our scholarly juices and make us rethink our evidence
and assumptions. One of his main objectives, Ward has often said, is
"to bring consideration of American Indians into the main currents
of global intellectual discourse." In this endeavor he has been a
splendid success.
4.html
–Boundary_(ID_ZlOise/gnoEqdqHUDA6Ieg)–
NATIONAL SECURITY SPIES INSIDE POLITICAL PARTIES
Lragir.am
17 June 06
"Spies" discovered in political parties in Armenia are not separate
cases, stated Vardan Khachatryan, the secretary of the Heritage Party,
on June 17. The political party he represents is the latest victim of
espionage inside political parties. Several weeks ago a member of the
Heritage Party named Edgar Hakobyan was revealed, and Hakobyan was
dismissed. "When espionage inside political parties is concerned,
when especially the interference of national security services
in the activity of political parties is concerned, it makes a sad
impression. Because the country’s security is, as a rule, based on
the activities of these political parties. If they start settling
accounts with the local political parties, employing spies, efforts
to stop some processes by a primitive interference, who is going to
do their job, to support their sphere?" asks Vardan Khachatryan.
June 15, 2006
PRESS RELEASE
Western Prelacy of the Armenian Apostolic Church of America
H.E. Archbishop Moushegh Mardirossian, Prelate
6252 Honolulu Avenue
La Crescenta, CA 91214
Tel: (818) 248-7737
Fax: (818) 248-7745
E-mail: [email protected]
Website:
HOLY MASS, ORDINATION OF ACOLYTES, AND THE GRANTING OF STOLES, ON THE
FIRST ANNIVERSARY OF THE LA CRESCENTA PARISH
SERVE THE ARMENIAN APOSTOLIC CHURCH WITH FAITH, AND BY RECEIVING THE
STOLES REPRESENTING THE YOKE OF JESUS
HUMBLE YOURSELVES IN FRONT OF GOD,
SO THAT HE MAY EXALT YOU
Declared the Prelate
One year ago, with the guidance of His Eminence Archbishop Moushegh
Mardirossian, Prelate, and the support of the Religious and Executive
Councils, the Armenian faithful of the Crescenta Valley made their
dream of having their own parish community a reality.
On the afternoon of Sunday, June 11, 2006, and on the first anniversary
of the establishment of the Crescenta Valley parish, the Prelate
conducted Holy Mass at the parish church, assisted at the altar by
Very Rev. Fr. Barthev Gulumian and Rev. Fr.
Ardag Demirjian. They entered the church in a procession accompanied
by the "Hrashapar" hymn.
During the Mass and prior to the sermon, ordination of acolytes
took place and the granting of stoles to eight candidates who serve
the local parish, and also St. Mary’s Church of Glendale and Holy
Martyrs Church of Encino. Those granted the privilege of wearing
a stole were Dikran Der Sarkissian, Varouj Bedigian, Aram Bekarian,
Harout Odabashian, Setrak Karadolian, Vahe Kassabian, Raffi Demirjian,
and Raffi Garabedian.
The ordination ceremony was conducted in modern Armenian so that
those in attendance would be able to fully comprehend the prayers.
The candidates knelt before the Prelate on the altar and received the
four ranks of acolytes; porter, reader, confessor, and illuminator,
and the privilege of wearing a stole at the conclusion.
In his sermon, the Prelate recognized that although kneeling during
an ordination can be difficult, it is necessary, because he who wants
to serve God must first humble himself to God.
He stressed that it is God’s Grace and Spirit that gives us wisdom
and guides us and it is with the Lord’s guidance that these eight
individuals became worthy of the rank of acolyte. "Study the Lord’s
commandments attentively and apply them to your daily lives. Learn
from God and use what you learn to serve the community. Let God’s
Word radiate from within you and let the Holy Spirit lead you.
Now that you have received the stoles that represent the yoke of
Jesus, humble yourselves in front of God so that He may exalt you.
Serve the Armenian Apostolic Church with love and faith", said the
Prelate, reminding the faithful that it was the first Sunday after
Pentecost and the only one that bears the name of a prophet, the
Prophet Elijah. "Live with faith in the example of Elijah, because
faith transforms and enlightens us. Just as today we conducted the
ordination of acolytes and the granting of stoles, in the future there
will be further ordinations and you will soon have your own church,
which we will anoint with this same faith", said the Prelate thus
concluding his sermon.
Following the sermon, the eight candidates received Holy Communion.
At the conclusion of Holy Mass, the faithful sang "Giligia" and
"Oorakh Ler" along with the Prelate and the procession.
Following church services, the faithful enjoyed a reception organized
by the parish council.
ON MAY 02 MTS MADE A BID FOR ACQUISITION 90% SHARES OF ARMENIA’S OPERATOR ARMENTEL
Agency WPS
TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES MARKET (Russia)
June 15, 2006 Thursday
The deal with the Greek holding company OTE at $350-450 million could
make MTS an Armenia’s key cellular operator and operators of AFK
Systema – the monopolists at Armenia’s market of wire communications
Reference: Valery Kodachigov "Systema is ready to become a monopolist
in Armenia," the Kommersant, June 05, 2006, p. 16; Yulia Belous,
Igor Tsukanov "Systema has changed its mind," the Vedomosti, June 05,
2006, p. B8
"We have actually made a bid for 90% shares of the company, it
corresponds to the strategy of our development," said a spokesman
at Mobilnie Telesystemi Mr. Alyavdin. It is known that the Greek
operator OTE acts as a seller of 90% of Armentel shares. According
to the analysts at Aton, MTS may pay $350-450 million for Armentel.
In the experts’ opinion, buying Armentel MTS will do a profitable
purchase not only for itself but for the operators of fixed
communication which are part of AFK Systema and united in the company
Comstar-Obiedinennie Telesystemi. If the deal is completed, Comstar
will become a monopolist at Armenia’s local market and besides, will
get a solvent base of users of international communications. "The
volume of international traffic to and from Armenia is great. Three
quarters of Armenians live outside Armenia, so demand for services
of international communications is great there," said a partner with
the company ACM-Consulting Mr. Alexeev. As for Armentel cellular
business, MTS is making a profitable acquisition. "Penetration of
cellular business in Armenia is four times lower than in Russia,
so potential of the market is very high," he added.
Despite this fact, other key Russia’s operators are cautious about
Armenia’s telecoms assets. MegaFon announced that the company is
not interested in Armentel, "Purchase of Armentel is not the only
way of entering into Armenia’s market." Altimo holding company
(manages Alfa-Group’s telecoms assets) denied comments on the plans
concerning Armentel. However, in 2005 representatives of Altimo were
negotiating with OTE about Armentel. However, the deal never took
place – according to the sources close to Altimo, the parties did not
agree upon the value of the asset. The experts say that suspicious
attitude to Armentel is explained by the fact that any Russian buyer
will inevitably face with the same problems as OTE faced with.
Armentel’s unstable state at the market is one of the problems. Its
primary shareholder VivaCell (sells services under brand K-Telecom)
appeared at the market in July, 2005 but already serves 350 000
subscribers and, according to Armenia’s experts, will leave Armentel
greatly behind by the end of the current year.
Besides, Armenian market of fixed communication is regulated by the
state strictly. "OTE insisted on increasing tariffs and introduction
of per minute payment. However, the parliament of Armenia does not
want to compromise," said director of the department for corporate
finances at Deutsche UFG Mr. Inshutin. "This was one of the reasons
of friction between OTE and Armenia’s power."
In conclusion, Russian telecoms workers emphasize that Armentel is
de facto deprived of monopoly at a long-distance communications market.
"Experience shows that black market of long-distance and international
communications is flourishing and expanding in Armenia.
We watch that 25-30% of telephone traffic from Armenia is generated
not by Armentel but by unknown IP-operators without licenses and
permission," said senior vice president at Corbina Telecom Mr. Malis.
"This anarchy may reduce Armetel’s investment appeal," he added.