Author: Jirair Kafian

La Croix
29 octobre 2004
Prévenir les génocides. Un crime aggravé au XXe siècle.
Yves Ternon, Maître-assistant école d’architecture Paris-Val-de-Seine
TERNON Yves
Maître-assistant école d’architecture Paris-Val-de-Seine
La convention sur la prévention et la répression du crime de génocide
adoptée par les Nations unies, le 9 décembre 1948, définit cette
infraction par l’article 2 : .. . le génocide s’entend de l’un
quelconque des actes ci-après, commis dans l’intention de détruire,
en tout ou en partie, un groupe national, ethnique, racial ou
religieux, comme tel (suit une liste d’actes permettant une
interprétation très large du concept).
Cette définition, reprise par tous les textes de droit international
– en particulier par le statut de la Cour pénale internationale de
1998 -, sert de fondement à toute accusation et à toute condamnation
pour génocide. Raphaël Lemkin, qui forgea le mot génocide en 1944,
écrivait alors : Si le mot est nouveau, la pratique est ancienne. Il
y eut en effet des génocides dans le passé, mais, au XXe siècle, ce
crime revêt un sens particulier : il est non seulement une forme
aggravée de crime contre l’humanité, mais l’expression suprême de la
criminalité des Etats. C’est dans ce sens que, au-delà du droit, les
spécialistes des sciences humaines le conçoivent.
La qualification de génocide est devenue l’enjeu de controverses
entre des victimes qui la réclament et des coupables qui la récusent.
Historiens et sociologues s’accordent cependant pour exiger que l’on
ne saurait parler de génocide si quatre critères ne sont pas réunis :
la victime est un groupe humain ; les membres de ce groupe sont tués
en raison de leur appartenance au groupe ; la destruction est un
meurtre et porte sur une part substantielle du groupe ; enfin,
l’intention est délibérée, un plan a été concerté. Ces chercheurs
sont unanimes pour reconnaître qu’au XXe siècle, trois meurtres de
masse furent des génocides : le génocide des Arméniens ottomans au
cours de la Première Guerre mondiale ; le génocide des juifs d’Europe
au cours de la Seconde Guerre mondiale ; le génocide des Tutsis au
Rwanda en 1994.
D’autres meurtres collectifs font encore l’objet de débats sur la
qualification du crime : la famine en Ukraine soviétique en 1932-1933
; la mise à mort des Tsiganes d’Europe par les nazis ; les crimes des
Khmers rouges au Cambodge.
Cette conclusion se fonde exclusivement sur l’état des recherches.
Elle ne constitue pas une mise en hiérarchie des malheurs et elle ne
saurait entretenir une concurrence des victimes. Génocide ou autre
crime contre l’humanité, la sentence n’est pas rendue à l’aune de la
souffrance ou de la cruauté. Les travaux sur le crime de génocide
permettent seulement aux chercheurs d’en appréhender la complexité et
d’en percevoir les mécanismes communs. Pour nommer génocide un
événement, il faut être en mesure de douter de l’emploi de ce mot
pour d’autres événements et de pouvoir comparer les circonstances de
perpétration des meurtres de masse.
Peut-on prévenir un génocide ? Le propos paraît contradictoire :
comment prévenir un crime qui n’est qualifiable que lorsqu’il est
perpétré ? Il serait préférable de ne pas avoir à se poser la
question. On le préviendrait en connaissant les nombreuses étapes
parcourues avant même que l’idée ne germe.
Prévenir un génocide, c’est d’abord abaisser le seuil de tolérance
des violations des principes élémentaires du droit naturel, et c’est
toujours avant une guerre ou une révolution que cette prévention a
valeur d’un vaccin. Plus tard, c’est tout au plus un sérum, trop
souvent un traitement palliatif. Quand des massacres ont commencé et
que les nations se demandent s’il s’agit ou non d’un génocide, la
décision d’intervention n’est pas seulement prise pour des motifs
humanitaires, mais aussi en fonction de la puissance de l’Etat
criminel.
L’ONU est intervenue en 1998 au Timor-Oriental et a probablement
prévenu un génocide, en 1999, au Kosovo, où l’on sait maintenant
qu’il n’y avait pas de menace de génocide. Le fera-t-elle au Darfour
? Au rythme où les hommes y meurent quotidiennement, mieux vaudrait
intervenir et constater plus tard qu’il ne s’agissait pas d’un
génocide que tarder à le faire comme ce fut le cas au Rwanda en 1994,
où les Tutsis étaient, et on le savait, victimes d’un génocide.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

NKR FM SAYS BAKU’S MOVE TO DEBATE KARABAKH IN UN NOT GENUINE
Mediamax news agency
2 Nov 04
YEREVAN
The foreign minister of the Nagornyy Karabakh Republic (NKR), Ashot
Gulyan, said in Stepanakert today that Azerbaijan’s initiative to
discuss “The status of occupied territories in Azerbaijan” at the UN
General Assembly “is fully within the Azerbaijani policy which is
aimed at diverting the attention of the international community from
the core of the Karabakh problem by means of propagandistic tricks”.
Ashot Gulyan said that “Azerbaijan knows perfectly well that these
territories are under the control of the Karabakh forces, and Armenia
has nothing to do with them”, Mediamax’s correspondent reports from
Stepanakert.
(Passage omitted: Azerbaijan has brought many accusations against
Karabakh for many years)
The NKR foreign minister confirmed Nagornyy Karabakh’s readiness to
discuss with Azerbaijan any complex issues, including those regarding
the territories.
At the same time, he pointed out that “Baku has always avoided such
discussions and is trying to wrest from the whole package only those
issues which meet its own interests to form an impression that it is
extremely interested in promoting the settlement process”.
Ashot Gulyan stressed that the shortest way to settle the conflict was
the resumption of the negotiating process in the full format with the
participation of Nagornyy Karabakh as a full party to the talks.

The Evening Standard (London)
October 20, 2004
THE DEFINITIVE 100 CLASSICAL CDS
NORMAN LEBRECHT
8 MAGNIFICATHY
CATHY BERBERIAN
The most versatile voice of the 20th century has left scarcely a
recorded trace. Cathy Berberian (1925-83) could sing anything from
Monteverdi to post-modernism. Armenian-American by origin, she was
the means by which her husband, Luciano Berio, found his path as a
composer. She inspired works by Cage, Milhaud, Maderna and
Stravinsky, who composed Elegy for JFK for her to perform. She was
also an inventive composer, the hilarious Stripsody being her
best-known score.
This passionate pathbreaker for performance art hardly ever set foot
in a recording studio. Her fans fall back on rare reissues of radio
broadcasts such as this. Beg, borrow or download this 1970 Milan
recital with Bruno Canino at the piano.
Here Berberian performs, in addition to Stripsody and
straight-recitative Monteverdi, a Gershwin Summertime to outweep
Ella’s and a Surabaya-Jonny that is a woman’s world apart from Lotte
Lenya’s abandoned wimp: Cathy is no victim, but a sexual predator
contemplating vengeance.
The summit of this collection is a baroque setting of Ticket to Ride
which, apart from being funny, recontextualises The Beatles as
post-medieval troubadours, peddling a musical narrative that echoes
down the ages.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

It’s Cold And Boring In Javakhk
Youth Leaves for Russia
Azg/am
12 Oct 04
“There are many young people leaving Javakhk for Russia in search
of jobs and better life now-a-days. They don’t give their way of
“Javakhki” thinking in that country. There are many cases of mixed
marriages with Russians. They often leave their wives and children
here and start a new family abroad. There are villages in Javakhk
with only female population”, Samvel Babayan, priest of Surb Khach
church in Akhalkalak, says.
Vartan Hakobian, 26, has been in Russia for 4 years and now is back
in Akhalkalak (administrative center of Javakhk). “There are less
people able to leave for Russia now because of the visa regime but all
those who managed to cross the border do everything not to return”,
Vartan says.
Georgian “Rose Revolution” didn’t reach Javakhk. Although 98 percent of
Javakhk’s population voted for Saakashvili, they are not satisfied now.
Nothing has changed for good, people say.
Ararat Yesoyan is the head of the Center for Reforms’ Support and
Democratic Development. He points out that the former Georgian leader
Sheverdnadze used to act on the sly and kept everything under wraps
but Saakashvili is different, he is outspoken.
“There has always been discrimination but today it’s more obvious.
Compulsory learning of Georgian, absence of autonomous leadership,
keeping Armenians off ranks, absence of electricity and propped up
emigration are signs of discrimination. All the programs of social
and economic development Tbilisi draws up for Javakhk remain only
on paper. They were written only to throw dust in foreigners’ eyes”,
Yesoyan says.
“It’s not a problem to learn Georgian but if forced, it may cause in
assimilation. There are more than 100 thousand Armenians in Tbilisi
with brilliant knowledge of Georgian. How many of them are better
off? Georgian language is a means of keeping us off the jobs”, he adds.
Davit Rstakian is the co-chairman of Virk party of Javakhk. He says
that situation got even worse with Saakashvili in power. There is
no paved road, no investment, no electricity. “Armenia allocated $2
millions to construct Ashotsk-Ninotsminda medium-voltage line. Why
there is no electricity now?”, Rstakian says.
Artur Yeremian, head of Akhalkalak administration, says that many
things have changed since Saakashvili took the office. “Georgia makes
its first steps as a state. The government had a debt of 22 months’
salary to the budget employees, yet, today all the debts to teachers
are reimbursed. 2.7 kilometers of road have been paved this year. There
is also money allocated to rebuild 9 schools”, Yeremian says.
Javakhk has been Georgia’s most underdeveloped region for
decades. For Akhalkalak’s population, 95 percent of which are
Armenians, agriculture (potato growing) and cattle-breeding are the
main source of survival. Javakhk is Georgia’s Siberia with 7 months
of winter and 5 months of spring.
Levon Levanian is national plenipotentiary representative in the
regions of Akhalkalak and Nonotsminda. He says that there is no
apparent discrimination against Armenians, only some rules are written
without considering minority’s opinion. He reminded the educational
law project according to which all school subjects will be taught in
Georgian but Armenian language and literature. “If the law project
isn’t changed that will mean a discrimination”, Levanian said.
Levanian mentioned rise of the pension and reimbursement of wages
among the reforms. “It’s fine that there is no road police any more
and people are able to transfer their goods freely”, he added.
Head of Javakhk’s A-info news agency Khachatur Stepanian agrees that
most of the news coming from Javakhk is disturbing. “If Armenians
of Javakhk live on the same level as inhabitants of other Georgian
regions that is only due to our diligence”, Stepanian says.
Ararat Yesoyan suggested journalists from Armenia pay more attention
to Javakhk and organize disputes over certain issues. “We want to
know the attitude of the Armenian government and the parliament, what
Armenians think. Officials recall us only when they need us”, he says.
By Tatoul Hakobian from Akhalkalak
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

DESPITE PROTEST OF AZERBAIJAN, ARMENIAN DELEGATION MUST TAKE PART IN
NATO SEMINAR IN BAKU, VAHAN HOVHANNISIAN THINKS
YEREVAN, OCTOBER 6. ARMINFO. Despite the protest of Azerbaijan,
Armenian parliament members must take part in NATO seminar
“Rose-Roth”, which will be held in Baku on Oct 27-29. Vice Speaker of
Armenian parliament, member of the bureau of the party ARF
Dashnaktsutiun Vahan Hovhannisian told ARMINFO.
According to him, not taking part in the Yerevan sitting of the
commission for defence and security of CIS Parliamentary Assembly,
Azerbaijani parliament members gave to understand to the Armenian
colleagues that they shouldn’t arrive in Baku for taking part in the
seminar “Rose-Roth”. But the Armenian delegation must take part in the
seminar, despite the efforts of Azerbaijan to turn their visit into a
political show. “The refusal of Armenian parliament members to leave
for Baku will be misapprehended by NATO and put Azerbaijan and Armenia
in the eyes of the international community on the same scale”, Vahan
Hovhannisian said. According to him, this time NATO will more
thoroughly follow safeguarding of security of the participants of the
seminar, and the authorities of Azerbaijan are themselves interested
in that a hair of the head of the Armenian delegation did not fall
down”.
“So, I think that the Armenian MPs must go Baku and defend the
position of Armenia in this seminar”, the vice speaker said, At the
same time, he did not exclude the possibility that the Armenian
deputies will not be given an entrance visa to Azerbaijan, as it took
place during the NATO exercises “Cooperative Best Effort 2004” in
Baku.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Armenia: Jehovah’s Witnesses apply for alternative military service
Iravunk web site, Yerevan
7 Oct 04
October
The law on alternative service in the Armenian Republic has been
effective since 1 September.
Twenty young men applied to the Armenian Defence Ministry by 1
October, saying they would like to perform alternative service. Most
of them are Jehovah’s Witnesses but there are also those who want to
evade military service for other motives.

Nashua group wants to block sale of St. Francis Xavier
By SCOTT BROOKS, Union Leader Correspondent
The Union Leader
News – September 28, 2004
NASHUA — A Probate Court judge is considering whether to allow a
group of former St. Francis Xavier parishioners to argue against the
Diocese of Manchester’s plans to sell their old church.
Judge Raymond Cloutier said the parties should rekindle their equity
case in Hillsborough County Superior Court while he considers the
parishioners’ right to dispute the sale.
The Diocese closed the parish last year, citing “declining financial
health and waning parishioner attendance.” It now hopes to sell the
building to Hollis real estate developer Vatche Manoukian, who plans
to recast the facility as an Armenian Orthodox church.
The Diocese of Manchester closed St. Francis Xavier Church last
year and now hopes to sell the building. But a coalition of former
parishioners opposes the sale. (SCOTT BROOKS)
The St. Francis Xavier Foundation, a coalition of former parishioners,
opposes the sale, and is trying to block it with a lawsuit in Superior
Court and by intervening in Probate Court.
“The parishioners of St. Francis have a direct interest in what happens
to the property,” said Randy Wilbert, the foundation’s attorney.
Diocesan attorney Ovide Lamontagne, however, said the parishioners
do not have standing before Probate Court, claiming the Attorney
General’s Office can sufficiently represent the public’s interest in
the church’s sale.
“This is not their church,” Lamontagne said. “It is a church and a
property within the Roman Catholic Diocese of Manchester.”
Lamontagne said the parishioners, now members of the nearby
St. Aloysius of Gonzaga parish, would benefit from the church’s sale,
which would reportedly net $1 million for the diocese. The diocese says
it plans to direct all revenue from the church’s sale to St. Aloysius
of Gonzaga.
“The former parishioners are present parishioners; they are
St. Aloysius of Gonzaga parishioners,” Lamontagne said. “They will
benefit by virtue of the bishop’s decision.”
Lamontagne said an Armenian Church representative from Jerusalem
has visited the site and was “very positive” about Manoukian’s
proposal. Armenian Church leaders must agree to accept Manoukian’s
gift for the sale to proceed.
The foundation petitioned the Superior Court in April to force the
diocese to reopen St. Francis Xavier. Judge Bernard Hampsey put the
case on hold in May in anticipation of a Probate Court ruling.
Yesterday, Cloutier said the issue should be handled one case at
a time.
“It makes no sense to have two hearings about the same issue,” he said.
“It’s not going to happen.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Armenia to send its troops to Iraq
by Maria Kozhushko
RusData Dialine – Russian Press Digest
September 8, 2004 Wednesday
SOURCE: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, No 192, p.5
Armenia has become the second, after Ukraine, CIS member country,
which agreed to send its soldiers to Iraq. Armenian servicemen will
join the part of the coalition force under the command of Poland.
The agreement on this was reached during the talks between the
Armenian President Robert Kocharyan and his Polish counterpart
Alexander Kwasniewski, as Kocharyan visited Warsaw on Monday. The
sending of the 30 Armenian troops to Iraq is one of the provisions
of a broad agreement between Armenia and Poland on cooperation in
the fields of defense and security.
In the explanations given to press, the Armenian Defense Minister
Serge Sarkisyan said the decision to send troops was made because
“Armenia feels itself a part of Europe.” Another possible reason is
that Iraq has nearly 25,000-people-strong Armenian community.

Reuters
Sept 6 2004
Open-Agassi sets up Federer showdown at U.S. Open
Mon 6 September, 2004 22:03
NEW YORK, Sept 6 (Reuters) – Sixth seed Andre Agassi set up a
mouthwatering quarter-final showdown with world number one Roger
Federer following a 6-3 6-2 6-2 win over Armenia’s Sargis Sargsian
at the U.S. Open on Monday.
Sargsian survived two five-set battles to reach the fourth round but
Agassi, looking for his ninth grand slam title, was in a different
class as he raced to victory in just 90 minutes.
The 34-year-old American, champion in 1994 and 1999, was in ominous
form as he charged through the match. He won seven consecutive games
to take a 4-0 lead in the decider.
Sargsian, a close friend of Agassi, registered on the scoreboard
in the fifth game but the sixth seed clinched victory with a huge
forehand winner.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Agency WPS
What the Papers Say. Part A (Russia)
August 27, 2004, Friday
BUSH’S TWO-ELEMENT STRATEGY
SOURCE: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, August 26, 2004, p. 5
by Alexei Bogaturov
Four key circumstances define the international environment in which
the United States is planning another round of reforms to the
security structure of the Old World. Firstly, in light of Mideast
events, American politicians have started tacitly acknowledging that
there are some fundamental contradictions between the United States
and the Arab-Muslim world, and they have become afraid of being
dependent on the Arab-Muslim world. Secondly, US economic security
priorities have required a partial shift in energy consumption
towards deliveries from the depths of Eurasia: the Trans-Caspian
region and Russia. Thirdly, Russia’s influence over the global energy
situation has increased; at the same time, Russia has moved to a more
active foreign policy and defense policy. Fourthly, American views of
real threats to US security are decreasing their focus on the
possibility of conflicts in East-Central Europe.
The Americans have realized the inadequacy of the “expanding
democracy” strategy formulated back in 1993. That strategy is based
on “new democracies” arising in place of the erstwhile socialist
bloc: from Hungary and the Czech Republic in the west to Russia and
Kazakhstan in the east. None of these “newly democratic” nations,
save for Belarus, is opposing the West; almost all of them are saying
they want a closer relationship with the West. All the same, the
orientation towards the United States and the European Union is not
absolute for all these countries – only for the Eastern European
countries along the border of the former USSR, and the Baltic states.
Ukraine is acting more cautiously. It periodically declares (as it
recently did) that striving for friendship with the US and the EU is
equally important for Kiev as the wish to cooperate with Russia.
Although such avowals should not be believed without reservation,
it’s still good to see that Ukraine’s leaders have enough common
sense to moderate their pro-Western gestures to a reasonable level,
given the importance of Ukraine’s proximity to Russia and its degree
of economic dependence on Russia. Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan
are maneuvering in a similar way (though not as successfully as
Ukraine). The nations of Central Asia are even more inclined to
emphasize the diversity of their foreign policy orientations; they
say that China is important for them, as well as Russia. Moscow
itself also speaks of a multilateral foreign policy. Although
relations with the US (and the EU) essentially play a determining
role for Russia, there is no reason to underestimate the “China
direction.”
In theory, the countries of Central Asia have always had multilateral
foreign policies. But while Russia was mired in its economic crisis
and shaken by the threat of separatism everywhere (in the Yeltsin
era), no one took the “Russia factor” seriously. Although everyone
expected a “Russian revival,” in principle, no one thought it would
happen soon, nor that it would be due to oil – it’s the oil factor
that enables Russia to act on the advantages of its unique position
as a “nuclear oil state.”
These shifts are taking place at an unfavorable time for the US
administration: the war in Iraq isn’t going well for the Americans,
and in domestic politics the Democrats are trying to paint the Bush
administration’s actions in the murkiest possible tones. It would
seem that this is no time for the American president to ponder global
strategy prospects. That makes it all the more remarkable that he is
thinking about them.
The redeployment of American bases and troops abroad is the second
stage (after the democratization of Eastern Europe, and NATO’s
eastward expansion) of a great reconstruction of the system of
America’s political-strategic presence in Eurasia.
Moreover, an important new element has appeared in America’s
strategy. The strategy is ceasing to be anti-Russian in the
traditional sense; it is losing its overt orientation against Russian
interests. Over the past 15 years – despite all the confrontations,
reciprocal grievances, and irritations – Russia and the United States
have made so much progress towards building the foundations of
partnership that the American elite has started to view relations
with Moscow in in a context that’s not so much about renewed
confrontation as it’s about opportunities for cooperation with Russia
– even if this is on terms primarily favorable for Washington. The
intention of the United States to firmly establish itself along the
Ukraine-Georgia-Uzbekistan-Tajikistan-Kyrgyzstan belt does not seem
like a simple act of squeezing Russia out of its traditional
influence zone, but the first element in a sophisticated two-element
strategy, with the second element being the conflict-free (though not
problem-free) integration of Russia into the developing system of US
interests in this part of the world.
Both major parts of the American elite are inclined to pursue
partnership with Moscow. This attitude is based on the intention to
use the positional and other advantages of Russia to serve American
interests in the region of Central Eurasia – which the United States
has started to view as a key region for itself. Washington’s actions
combine pressure with invitations to cooperate: Anglo-Saxon
“bargaining ethics.” So we need to maintain our composure and be
persistent in this bargaining process. And it seems to me that this
is what Russian diplomats are preparing to do, regardless of who wins
this November’s election in the United States.
Translated by Sergey Kolosov
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress