Author: Kajoyan Gevork

RA DIASPORA MINISTER RECEIVES REPRESENTATIVES OF ARMENIAN COMMUNITY TO KEMEREVO

ARMENPRESS
June 23, 2011
YEREVAN

RA Diaspora Minister Hranush Hakobyan received today Aram Khachatryan,
chair of the regional office of Kemerovo Oblast of the Union of
Armenians of Russia, and Argishti Simonyan, chair of the “Urartu”
Armenian benevolent organization of the oblast of Kemerovo.

An official from the press and PR department of the RA Diaspora
Ministry told Armenpress that the issues of the Armenian community of
Kemerovo were discussed at the meeting. In particular, the educational
and cultural programs of the community were touched upon. Minister
Hranush Hakobyan emphasized the events and programs in the community
and said those aimed at the promotion of the Armenian language in
the community are urgent.

Aram Khachatryan said after RA Diaspora Minister Hranush Hakobyan’s
visit of October 1-3, 2011 the contact between the Armenian community
of Kemerovo Oblast and the homeland became more dynamical.

SPEECH, PRESS FREEDOMS IN ARMENIA NEED PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION

June 23, 2011

Following is a conversation regarding the state of the media and
related legal issues in Armenia. We talk with Artur Papyan (a blogger
and reporter with Radio Liberty) and Ashot Melikyan (President of
the Committee to Defend the Right to Speech).

To what extent are the legal guarantees to free speech and the media
defended in Armenia?

Ashot Melikyan – In terms of legislation, there are pretty good
safeguards for free speech and the press. We just have to hope that
one day the reality on the ground corresponds to the laws on the books.

But I must point out that the old and new versions of the RA “Law
on TV and Radio” hinder liberalization of the sector. That was the
exact law used to close down the A1+ TV station back in 2002.

Everyone is aware that this move was a political one and that loopholes
in the law were taken advantage of to achieve the silencing of the
station.

The law has many modifications but they are of a cosmetic nature. The
suggestions and observations of journalists and international
organizations have been repeatedly overlooked.

Thus, major problems like the independence of the State Committee of
TV and Radio have yet to be tackled in a serious manner.

At first, Committee members were simply appointed by the president.

Supporters said there was no alternative process. Later, appointments
were made on a competitive basis, but this too is just a formality,
for it is the president who drafts the rules and conditions involved.

After reforms to the constitution, the president has the right to
appoint 50% of the Committee and the parliament appoints the rest.

Some though that this formula would allow for dissenting voices in the
Committee but since the parliament is controlled by the president’s
party this remains an illusion.

Thus, Public TV in Armenia is “public” in name only.

What are the problems regarding the putting the laws defending a free
press into practice?

Ashot Melikyan – Some might not agree with me, but I believe if there
is the political will even the existing “Law Regarding TV and Radio”
can ensure free and fair competitive tenders in the sector. But the
government doesn’t want to cede its near total control of broadcasters.

Most programs are simply vehicles to praise the government and little
airtime is given to opposing views.

The print media in Armenia is split into several political and economic
camps. But only a few really try to promote their product.

The same division exists in the electronic media. In this environment,
journalistic activity becomes political activity and the publications
of media outlets are used as tools to settle political scores.

What problems do citizens and reporters face in the realm of freedom
of speech and the media? What role can international organizations
play in Armenia to defend these rights?

Artur Papyan – A major problem is the lack of faith in the judicial
system.

Thus if a reporter writes his or her viewpoints and observations,
there is no guarantee that they won’t be dragged before the courts and
“punished” for their actions or fined enormous amounts in compensation.

The second problem is one of self-censorship. There is no outright
censorship but sometimes reporters are apt to “rein in” what they
write out of fear of possible repercussions.

Then too, citizens face problems of putting their right of freedom
of speech into practice from a technical standpoint. Some take their
issues to the press and others seek expression in various social
networks.

Bloggers also have a role to play here. I have my own blog. If
traditional reporters are vulnerable to self-censorship than bloggers
should be free of such psychological restrictions.

Here, I’m merely talking about putting this freedom into practice
and not the extent of its effectiveness. In terms of the internet,
this possibility exists. But there are skills involved to getting
ones message across in an effective manner.

As a blogger and reporter, I do not see the positions taken by
international organizations as being of a principled nature. One day
they say one thing and the next, something different.

How is citizen journalism (blogs, social networks) developing in
Armenia? To what extent do average citizens trust the traditional
media outlets?

Artur Papyan – In the last year or two, a number of civil initiatives
were organized via Facebook. Today, activists working through the
internet have been successful to a degree when it comes to realizing
legal reforms and court decisions.

Some of these grassroots movements include “We are the owners of this
city” and “We are against foreign language schools”.

One month ago, Facebook had 140,000 users in Armenia. Today, this
number has hit 170,000 and it’s still growing.

People exchange information and debate the issues.

It is interesting that those who created this network didn’t set out
to spur the activism of civil society. Their aim was to create an
environment conducive for contact and to generate revenues through
advertising.

But there was an evident need in Armenia for self-expression and
people quickly began to register.

People are buying the latest telephones and plugging into the
internet. They are taking photos of events and developments and
transferring the news to others.

ARMENIAN WAR INDUSTRY COMPLEX DEVELOPING DYNAMICALLY

ARMENPRESS
June 23, 2011
YEREVAN

The process of development of the Armenian war industry complex has
been dynamical recently, according to Hrayr Karapetyan, chairman of
the NA Standing Committee on Defense, National Security and Internal
Affairs.

He said today in an interview with Armenpress that the scientific
force has a great potential for the development of the sphere.

“Azerbaijan buys ammunition with its oil dollars and we do it without
spending money – using our scientific potential,” Hrayr Karapetyan
said.

ARMENIAN PARLIAMENT EXEMPTS IMPORTED AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY AND FERTILIZERS FROM VAT

/ARKA/
June 23
YEREVAN

Armenian National Assembly amended the laws on value added tax and
on the list of imports exempted from customs charges, excise tax and
VAT at the second, final reading.

The amendments imply exemption of imported agricultural machinery,
fertilizers and seeds from VAT.

Agriculture Minister Sergo Karapetyan said the amendments would make
agricultural imports more available and the agriculture industry more
effective.

A MOMENT FOR PEACE IN THE SOUTH CAUCASUS
SABINE FREIZER

June 23, 2011

The United States, the European Union and Russia don’t seem to agree
on much these days. But in the volatile South Caucasus, they concur
that Armenia and Azerbaijan need to sign an agreement on Friday if
they are serious about finding a peaceful solution to the decades-old
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

President Dmitri Medvedev of Russia has invited the Armenian and
Azerbaijani leaders to the city of Kazan on Friday and expects they
will finally put their signatures on a “basic principles” text they
have been wrangling over since 2007. This will be the ninth meeting
that Medvedev hosts with his Caucasian counterparts.

To some, the deal on the table may not seem like much. After all, it
would still only mark the start of a process, not its conclusion. But
if Medvedev can get them to put ink to paper, it will be a rare and
significant step forward in this confrontation and a validation of
the Russian leader’s persistence.

The signs seem promising. In a strongly worded statement issued at
the May G-8 summit meeting in Deauville, France, Presidents Obama,
Medvedev and Nicolas Sarkozy of France, representing the mediators
of the “Minsk Group” charged with settling the dispute, highlighted
the Kazan meeting and demanded no further delay. Indeed, time is
running out because this autumn campaigning will begin in the region
and in the Minsk Group countries for 2012 and 2013 elections, thus
complicating matters for some and driving the issue lower on the
priority list for others.

Nagorno-Karabakh has been pushed down the ladder for too long. It has
often been described as a “frozen conflict” ever since a cease-fire
deal was signed 16 years ago leaving Armenian forces in control of
the mountainous territory and surrounding areas, at least 13 percent
of Azerbaijan’s territory. However, shooting across the line has been
killing dozens of people every year. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan have
been trying to outdo each other buying sophisticated weapons – with
Azerbaijan spending as much on arms as Armenia’s total state budget –
in expectation of a major war. Pressure to reverse the status quo by
force is especially increasing in Baku, Azerbaijan’s capital.

A final settlement would allow some 600,000 internally displaced
people to return to their homes and offer a sense of security for the
approximately 150,000 people currently living in Nagorno-Karabakh. It
would put an end to fears of a regional war, in which, because of
existing security accords, Russia could step in on Armenia’s side
and Turkey on Azerbaijan’s, and Iran would be unlikely to stay on
the sidelines. .

It is now up to President Serzh Sargsyan of Armenia and Ilham Aliyev
of Azerbaijan to decide if war or peace is more threatening. They
have done very little to prepare their people for peace and a lot to
prepare them for war. But they could still convince their citizenry
of the advantages of compromise. If a deal is forthcoming in Kazan,
they will need to do a lot to prevent spoilers from surfacing.

The deal on the table includes withdrawal by Armenian forces of most
of the Azerbaijani territory they occupy around Nagorno-Karabakh,
the deployment of international peacekeepers, the establishment of
an Armenian security corridor, return of displaced persons, interim
status for Nagorno-Karabakh, and the promise of a “legally-binding
expression of will” to determine the future status of the territory
at the end of the process.

This is very balanced. But it will take 10 years or more to implement.

Armenians and Azerbaijanis have spent the past two decades building
up reservoirs of hate and don’t trust each other to respect their
commitments. The Armenians want quick implementation to ensure that
Nagorno-Karabakh gets independence, Azerbaijanis are in no rush to
let go of a territory that Aliyev says will remain part of his country
as long as he is president. Even with a deal, the United States, the
European Union and Russia will have much to do after the ink is dry.

They may have to begin the painstaking work of drafting a comprehensive
peace agreement and start physical planning for implementation. The
occupied territories have been destroyed, massive reconstruction will
be needed, as will international peacekeepers. The E.U. especially will
need to quickly provide civilian, military and economic assistance. If
there is no speedy follow up to an agreement in Kazan, and firm
international commitment to support it, the deal risks unraveling.

Or, if the presidents don’t sign, the international actors will have
to start preparing for a renewal of fighting that would be drawn out.

With so much violence already happening in the broader region, this
is not an eventuality that the United States, the E.U. and Russia
can afford.

Sabine Freizer is Europe program director of the International
Crisis Group.

AZERBAIJAN WILL NOT RESORT TO ADVENTURISM, MILITARY PSYCHOLOGIST SAYS
Anna Nazaryan

“Radiolur”
23.06.2011

No military actions will not start after tomorrow’s trilateral
meeting between the Presidents of Armenia, Russia and Azerbaijan,
irrespective of the outcome of the negotiations, military psychologist
David Jamalyan told a press conference today.

“Azerbaijan will not resort to adventurism, although every time
Azerbaijan links the results of the talks to war,” Jamalyan stated.

“There have been no changes of the military potential of that country
over the past month or two, therefore Azerbaijan will not unleash war,”
the psychologist said.

“Of course, the potential threat of war is always there, but it’s not
connected with the meeting in Kazan,” he said, adding that tension
may rise at the line of contact.

According to Jamalyan, Azerbaijan is spreading wrong propaganda,
hatred will not bring to victory. “The events in Sumgaitt were a
demonstration of hatred, but they did not bring victory.”

MOSKOVSIYE NOVOSTI: ARMENIA’S EX-PRESIDENT SEES CHANCE FOR RUSSIA TO SETTLE KARABAKH CONFLICT

23.06.11 | 11:14

Armenia’s ex-president and current opposition leader Levon
Ter-Petrosyan believes there is a chance Russia will be able to
broker a solution to the longstanding Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict
over Nagorno-Karabakh.

In a recent interview with the Russian Moskovskie Novosti newspaper
presented in full today Ter-Petrosyan, in particular, said: “I have a
feeling that the West is not making sufficient efforts to address this
problem, as it is not a priority for it… On the one hand, it puts
off the solution, but on the other hand, it creates an opportunity
for Russia to be more active in this issue.”

“Initiative in solving the Karabakh problem is passing over to Russia,
which has a chance [to succeed in settling the conflict]. I’m sure
that the West will not be against the issue being solved the way
that the parties to the conflict agree on… But if this process does
not bring about a quick success, then a war is possible. Azerbaijan
will simply run out of patience. Armenia will never initiate the war
whoever its president is. If a war breaks out, it will be solely on
Azerbaijan’s initiative. And the most dangerous thing is that no one
can check Azerbaijan,” said Ter-Petrosyan.

The presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan will hold another round of
talks hosted by their Russian counterpart in Kazan on June 24.

International mediators as well as both negotiating parties themselves
have been cautiously optimistic about the possibility of achieving
a breakthrough in the protracted talks regarding the future of
Nagorno-Karabakh.

(The full interview in Russian is available here:
)

SERGE SARKISSIAN SE MONTRE PRUDENT SUR L’ISSUE DU SOMMET DE KAZAN
armenews.com

Marion
jeudi 23 juin 2011

Le president Serge Sarkissian, mercredi 22 juin, s’est montre prudent
quant au prochain sommet armeno-azerbaïdjanais en Russie qui pourrait
deboucher sur un accord-cadre sur le conflit du Haut-Karabagh.

S’exprimant a l’Assemblee parlementaire du Conseil de l’Europe (APCE),
S. Sarkissian a declare qu’il incombe a son homologue azerbaïdjanais
Ilham Aliev de faire le premier pas lors de leur rencontre a Kazan,
ce vendredi.

” Je pars a Kazan optimiste et nous voulons vraiment trouver un
terrain d’entente commun, car l’Armenie et le Haut-Karabagh veulent
profondement trouver une solution rapide a ce problème. Nous avons
besoin d’une solution qui etablira une paix juste et durable. ”

” Donc, si nous rencontrons une approche constructive, si la partie
azerbaïdjanaise ne vient pas avec de nouvelles propositions, alors
je pense que nous serons en mesure d’atteindre des resultats positifs
“, a-t-il ajoute lors d’une seance de questions-reponses suivie d’un
discours de 30 minutes.

S. Sarkissian et I. Aliev doivent discuter a Kazan des principes
fondamentaux de la resolution du conflit elabore par les Etats-Unis,
la Russie et la France. Le mois dernier, les co-presidents du groupe
de Minsk les ont exhorte a se mettre d’accord sur le règlement propose
sans ” delai “.

Les ministres armenien et azerbaïdjanais des Affaires etrangères ont
fait etat de progrès significatifs vers ce règlement après la tenue
de pourparlers a Moscou au debut du mois.

” Bien sûr, ce n’est pas le document que la partie armenienne a reve “,
a note S. Sarkissian. ” Erevan n’a pas de reserves quant au règlement
du conflit selon ces principes. ”

Interroge sur les derniers obstacles a la signature d’un accord, S.

Sarkisian a fait valoir les interpretations divergentes sur certains
des principes de base, notamment sur l’autodetermination. Il a souligne
les declarations repetees des dirigeants azerbaïdjanais disant que
la population majoritairement armenienne du Karabagh ne peut pas
determiner l’etendue de son autonomie au sein de l’Azerbaïdjan.

L’accord-cadre de paix propose par les mediateurs prevoit que le
statut final du Karabagh soit determine lors d’un referendum qui
aura lieu dans le territoire conteste après le retrait armenien des
districts azerbaïdjanais alentours.

S. Sarkissian a souligne que les Armeniens du Karabagh doivent pouvoir
etre capable ” de decider de manière independante de leur sort dans
leur propre pays “. Il s’est egalement plaint de ce qu’il decrit
comme le ” racisme anti-armenien regnant en Azerbaïdjan ” et des
menaces regulières de Bakou de recourir a la force pour recuperer
le territoire.

” Dans notre cas, cela signifie que nous allons faire des concessions
a quelqu’un qui est a l’affût pour nous tirer dessus “, a declare
le leader armenien. ” Dans cette situation, il sera très difficile
de convaincre l’opinion publique en Armenie et au Karabagh … qu’il
est necessaire de faire quelques concessions a un pays où il y a tant
d’intolerance et de racisme envers les Armeniens. ”

CHURCH DISPUTE AND CONTOURS OF THE CAUCASIAN CONFEDERATION
By Zaza Jgharkava

23.06.2011

After the meeting of the presidents, Armenia and Georgia tried to
resolve the church confrontation at the level of high-ranking church
authorities. The meeting of the highest-ranking ecclesiastic figures
planned for October last year finally took place – Armenian Catholicos
Garegin II met with the Patriarch of Georgia Ilia II. There were
expectations that the visit of Armenia’s spiritual leader would put
a certain stop to the property dispute, which has gone beyond the
sphere of the church and acquired a geopolitical meaning.

The visit by Armenia’s Patriarch had been planned for three years.

However, due to the existing political situation and the health
conditions of the Georgian Patriarch, Garegin II had not been able
to visit Tbilisi until now.

The visit took place ten days ago. However, instead of addressing the
existing issues and questions, the meeting raised even more questions.

The advice of the Georgian Patriarch speaks to this fact when he
stated that, “Garegin II is a young person and needs more experience.

He is a wise man but wants to do everything quickly, which is not
always possible. I told him that I was very experienced, this is why
making no haste was the most important,” Ilia II pointed out at the
Sunday service.

The Armenian Catholicos visited Tbilisi to resolve the issues of the
status of the Armenian Church and six churches in Georgia. The Holy
Echmiadzin considers these to be Armenian and demands that they be
transferred under his jurisdiction. Officials in Yerevan were raising
the issue in high-level meetings, but after Armenian politicians were
forwarded to the Patriarch’s Office, the Armenian Catholicos became
involved in the matter.

These were the issues that the two Patriarchs discussed during their
face-to-face meeting. However, it seems that even the involvement
of Garegin II could not resolve the issue. “If Armenian churches are
opened in Georgia, Georgian churches should open in Armenia as well,”
this was Ilia II’s answer.

The Armenian media evaluated the visit of Garegin II as unsuccessful.

The news portal “Zhamanak” writes that the visit was not beneficial
for the Armenian side. “Garegin II failed on the negotiations between
the Armenian and Georgian churches. While speaking about the issues
of Armenian churches in Georgia, Patriarch Ilia II gave an unexpected
answer to the Catholicos.”

The answer proved truly unexpected. According to the Georgian
Patriarch, while speaking about the churches, we should not forget
that both sides have demands and related facts and documents proving
that there are Georgian churches in Armenia and Armenian churches
in Georgia.”

The article on the “Zhamanak” news portal points out that this was
not a sensational reaction from the Georgian side when it raised the
issue of churches in Northern Armenia. However, the most interesting
aspect is that the Armenian side agreed to the establishment of a
commission comprised of historians.”

The author of the article thinks that the Armenian side should not
have agreed to the establishment of the commission, as it automatically
raised the issue of Georgian churches in Armenia.

On June 11, the spiritual leaders of Georgia and Armenia adopted a
joint communiquй. “This visit showed that relations between us are
developing and are being upgraded to a new level, which considers
defining the equal legal status of the Armenian Apostolic Church
in Georgia and the Georgian Apostolic Autonomous Orthodox Church in
Armenia; as well as supporting the opening of Armenian (Gregorian)
Churches in Georgia and Georgian (Diophysite) Churches in Armenia on
the parity basis,” the statement released by the Georgian Patriarch’s
Office reads. “In order to solve the above-mentioned we found it
necessary to create the bilateral inter-church commission and we
request that the governments of Georgia and Armenia support timely
implementation of the communiquй.”

The question arises: how many Georgian churches are there in Armenia
and how many Georgians live there? According to precise information,
500 Georgians live in Armenia today, whereas in Georgia there are 450,
000 Armenians. The Armenian experts have in mind this disproportion
when criticizing Garegin II for the joint communiquй.

The fact that the Armenian Patriarch Garegin II requested the
meeting with the Georgian Patriarch for three years but received no
confirmation by Ilia II adds to it. Meanwhile, the Georgian Patriarch
met with the spiritual leader of the Turks, which created a big stir
in Yerevan.

Professor at Sokhumi University, Guram Murghuli, thinks that the
visit of Garegin II was not determined by the church issues only;
this is why the visit was postponed. According to the scientist,
the visit of the Armenian Catholicos served the goal of strengthening
the role of Armenia in the Caucasus Confederation.

“Establishing the South Caucasus Confederation is an American project,
which envisages tearing Armenia from Russia’s orbit,” Murghuli says.

“Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia, Nagorno Karabakh, Abkhazia, Tskhinvali
should all join the Confederation and Tbilisi should be declared a
free city. This is why Armenians are trying to gain ownership on as
much property as possible before the big redistribution.”

Taking into consideration the fact that Russia manages all the
Caucasian conflicts, the establishment of a possible Confederation
in the Caucasus can truly be a way out of the deadlock.

Nevertheless, how much the visit by the Armenian Catholicos has to do
with this project is hard to say. The fact is that Garegin II returned
to Yerevan with empty hands and while away, only asked for looking
after the disputed churches, “I hope before the final resolution of
the problem, there will be a considerate approach and the Armenian
spiritual and cultural heritage will be treated with care.”

TBILISI, AKHALKALAKI AND AKHALTSIKHE ARMENIAN SCHOOL TEACHERS TRAIN IN KUTAISI

epress.am
06.23.2011

Within the frames of the agreements between RA Minister of Education
and Science Armen Ashotyan and Georgia’s Minister of Education
and Science Dimitri Shashkini, training classes for teachers at
Armenian schools in Georgia kicked off at the Z. Zhvania School of
Public Administration in the Georgian city of Kutaisi, according to
a statement on the official website of Armenia’s education ministry.

The 32-hour training course, carried out by the RA Ministry of
Education and Science National Inspectorate of Education working
group, is intended for elementary school teachers of Armenian history,
language, and literature.

Ninety-two teachers from Armenian schools in Tbilisi, Akhalkalaki and
Akhaltsikhe are participating in the course. Training classes were
held for the first time in 2010, in which participated 100 teachers
from Akhalkalaki, Ninotsminda, Aspindza, Borjomi, Marneuli, Tbilisi
and Akhaltsikhe.

The training classes are implemented with funding from both Armenia
and Georgia.