Author: Kajoyan Gevork

HERITAGE PARTY REMINDS AND CAUTIONS SERZH SARGSYAN HEADING FOR KAZAN

hetq
16:13, June 23, 2011

Heritage Party’s Statement on the Trilateral Meeting in Kazan

In connection with the Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents’ meeting
to be held in Kazan, Russia, on 24 June 2011 upon the initiative of
the president of the Russian Federation, the Heritage Party hereby
concludes:

1. We reject the efforts to present as negotiations the
Armenia-Azerbaijan format of meetings, which are held in the absence
of the legitimate authorities of the Mountainous Karabagh Republic
(MKR), or Artsakh, as well as the attempts to impose solutions as
their result. In addition, and while highly evaluating the mediators’
efforts, we consider the adopted path to be not solely at an impasse,
but also a process which poses new perils and leads to destabilization.

2. We assess the distortion of the format of negotiations, as a
product of Azerbaijani pressure, to be a policy of altering the
essence, history, and prospect for a just resolution of the Karabagh
conflict, as a result of which: a) contrary to irrefutable facts,
efforts are made in order to portray the aggressor Azerbaijan as
a victim, to compel respect for Soviet Azerbaijan’s territorial
integrity-which no longer exists-and to recognize as “occupant” the
Armenian side which has defended itself against genocidal massacres,
a unilaterally unleashed and failed war of aggression, and continued
sabotage; b) by imposing unilateral concessions upon MKR, an attempt
is made toward violating its sovereignty and territorial integrity;
and c) by method of deeming MKR’s establishment unlawful, an objective
is pursued toward carrying out what can never be achieved: MKR’s
forcible annexation to Azerbaijan.

3. We regard the prospect of Armenia’s endorsement of a document
which is designed under force or duress by Azerbaijan, and in MKR’s
absence, as a criminal plot that is condemned to fail against MKR,
which has lawfully self-determined, decolonized, and established
itself and thus is worthy of international recognition.

4. We remind and caution the Armenian president who heads for Kazan
that:

– any meeting held without the presence of the legitimate
representatives of MKR, or any document which is born from such a
meeting, is legally null and void;

– his commitment under oath is not to foreign leaders, as the Deauville
Statement implies, but rather before the entire Armenian nation;

– the respect and recognition of Artsakh’s fundamental sovereignty
and territorial integrity is the constitutional duty of the Armenian
president, this truth cannot be a bargaining chip, and therefore MKR’s
right to hold direct peace talks and to be recognized must be restored;

– the maintenance of the current format of the talks, or its toleration
hereafter, will mean a readiness not to recognize MKR’s sovereignty
and integrity, de jure and de facto alike; and

– formal participation in this conspiracy will entail his effective
self-resignation from the homeland and his official duty and, in
the event of such unacceptable developments, he must be prepared to
legalize such resignation through the conduct of pre-term presidential
elections.

ILLEGAL BLOCKADE OF ARMENIA SHOULD BE STOPPED

yerkir.am
22.06.2011

The collapse of the Berlin Wall heralded the elimination of dividing
lines in Europe. Unfortunately, twenty years later, our region is
still waiting for its dividing lines to be eliminated. Said president
of Armenia Serzj Sargsyan on his speech at PACE.

Two years ago, we initiated a process of normalization between Armenia
and Turkey, which would have allowed, through the establishment of
diplomatic relations and opening of the border, to gradually overcome
the divide that had existed for almost a century. I would like to note
that, throughout the process, we greatly appreciated the inspiration
and permanent support of not only the mediator states, but also
the international community more broadly, including various senior
officials of the Council of Europe. Unfortunately, in spite of this
support, Armenia-Turkey normalization process ended up in a deadlock.

The sole reason was that Turkey reverted to its practice of setting
preconditions, and failing to honor its commitments, which rendered
the ratification of the signed protocols impossible. Having faced the
wall of disappointment and mistrust, I cannot predict when the window
of opportunity will reopen. I regret to say so, but it is the reality.

It is important to emphasize that Armenia initiated the process
with good intentions, true to the 21st-century imperative of peaceful
coexistence of nations and peoples, all on the backdrop of Turkey still
not only failing to recognize, but also engaging in a policy of blunt
denial of the Genocide of Armenians committed in the Ottoman Empire
in 1915. Meanwhile, Armenians worldwide are expecting an adequate
response. Our tireless efforts, and hopefully also the efforts of
those concerned about crimes against humanity, will henceforth remain
focused on the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

However, we are determined not to leave this problem unsolved for
generations to come. The normalization of relations between Armenia
and Turkey is important not only for Armenians and Turks, but also
for the whole region, I believe even for the whole of Europe in terms
of creating an atmosphere of peace, stability, and cooperation. The
unlawful blockade of Armenia must come to an end.

TURKISH OPPOSITION LEADER READY TO NEGOTIATE WITH ARMENIANS WITHOUT PRECONDITIONS

news.am
June 22 2011
Armenia

Leader of Turkish opposition party said they are ready to negotiate
with Armenians without preconditions.

Head of the Republican People’s Party (CHP) Kemal Kilicdaroglu
commented on a remark of U.S. journalist who said the CHP’s policy
regarding ties with Armenia was not different from that of the ruling
Justice and Development Party. The journalist stressed that both
parties were putting Armenia’s withdrawal from Nagorno-Karabakh as
a precondition, reports Hurriyet Daily News newspaper.

“The difference between us and the AKP is that we see a possible
withdrawal as a gesture, not a condition,” said party’s deputy chairman
Osman Koruturk.

At the meeting with Armenian, Turkish and U.S. journalists,
Kilicdaroglu also noted that he does not agree with Turkish Premier
Recep Tayyip Erdogan on this issue.

It is noteworthy that two political forces – Republican People’s Party
and Nationalist Movement Party opposed signing of the Armenian-Turkish
protocols.

Certain changes occurred after Kilicdaroglu replaced party’s former
leader Deniz Baykal who resigned after being involved in a sex scandal.

Kemal Kilicdaroglu dismissed from the party’s board and candidate
lists a number of nationalists, including Onur Oymen and Canan Aritman
known for their anti-Armenian stance.

Rumors have it that Kilicdaroglu’s mother had Armenian roots, this
is used by the ruling party to tarnish his image.

ARMENIAN PRESIDENT HAD A MEETING WITH COE SECRETARY GENERAL

Panorama
June 22 2011
Armenia

Yerevan is determined to implement issues included in Council of
Europe-Armenia agenda, President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan stated
today in a briefing after a meeting with CoE Secretary General
Thorbjorn Jagland.

“Panorama” reporter tells from Strasbourg President Sargsyan thanked
for the reception, referred to the meetings he has had, the issues
he has discussed and ensured that EU basic principles are key issues
for Armenia and that Armenia is determined to reinforce and develop
them including democracy, human rights and other issues.

CoE Secretary General greeted Armenian President and congratulated for
the effective steps being carried out in Armenia, having particularly
underlining amnesty statement.

ARMENIA-KARABAKH DIFFERENCES ‘NOT JUST A GAME’

news.az
June 22 2011
Azerbaijan

News.Az interviews Prof. Gerard Libaridian, director of the Armenian
Studies Program at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

How can you explain the special attention towards the Karabakh conflict
shown by the major powers, including the Minsk Group co-chairs (the
US, Russia and France), at the recent G8 summit?

One can find many reasons. First, the Minsk Group co-chairs have
been openly criticized recently by a number of observers for their
unproductive mediation efforts and weak position. I, for one, did
so in April at a conference in the CSIS [Center for Strategic and
International Studies] in Washington DC; I asked a simple question:
What would have been different in the outcome of mediation if,
instead of Russia, the US and France we had Nigeria, the Ivory Coast
and Liberia mediating the Karabakh conflict, or if instead of these
three major powers we had two NGOs mediating? In fact, we may have
had better results. I know others have criticized the co-chairs. It
is possible that such widespread criticism has inspired the co-chairs
to show more concern.

It is also very possible that they are genuinely concerned at the
possibility of a resumption of military hostilities. We know there
are too many militarized conflicts in the world for the major powers
to deal with; they don’t need another one.

Another possibility is that the US and France are concerned that
Russia may be developing a hegemonic policy in the South Caucasus
and would like to see some progress while they still have something
to say about the region.

Finally, the major powers may feel that Presidents Aliyev and Sargsyan
are vulnerable politically and could have use for international
support and legitimation which they would get if they agreed to
endorse a document that consolidates regional stability.

The Minsk Group co-chairing countries expect progress at the upcoming
summit on Karabakh in Kazan. Do you share their optimism? If not,
why not?

It is possible that they have reasons to be optimistic of which I am
not aware; after all, what I know is what you guys write and they say.

Nonetheless, I see no reason to believe that there will be a major
breakthrough in Kazan. This is not the first time such optimism
has pervaded the atmosphere before summit meetings. I hear the
[Azerbaijani] deputy minister of foreign affairs, Araz Azimov, express
pessimism; I hear the spokesman of the Karabakh president indicate
serious differences with the position of Armenia, assuming Armenia is
ready to go along with a deal, and clearly state that Karabakh is not
bound by any document Armenia signs. I know that many in Azerbaijan
think that the Armenia/Nagorno-Karabakh differences are just a game,
and they are wrong.

I do not see the leaders of the three political units involved in
the conflict preparing their peoples for an imminent breakthrough.

President Aliyev has made a couple of tentative statements, just as
Foreign Minister Mammadyarov has done. It is possible they too are
hopeful. We shall see.

In conclusion, I hope I am wrong; I hope sincerely that progress will
be made.

What do you think of Russia’s current work as a mediator? Could this
be more successful than the combined work of the three co-chairing
countries?

In general, yes. I have stated before that the tendency now is for
Russia to dictate the terms of an agreement. Which side gets what in
that deal is a very different issue. But as I indicated above, the
West has less and less to say about what happens in the region. Russia
needs stability in the region more than any other country, except
that stability has to be secured on its own terms.

Azerbaijan’s spiritual leader, Sheikh Allashukur Pashazade, has
received an invitation to visit Armenia in November to attend a CIS
Inter-Religious Council meeting. Armenian spiritual leader Garegin
II visited Baku last year. What kind of role may such visits and
contacts play in the Karabakh settlement?

These are welcome gestures; they have symbolic value and they help slow
down the dehumanization process that is taking place on each side with
regard to the other. But I am not sure these two religious figures
have enough moral authority and political capital to reverse the sad
process of mutual dehumanization. They certainly are not in positions
to impact the policies of their governments on the Karabakh issue.

>From 1991 to 1997, Gerard Libaridian was adviser to the then president
of Armenia, Levon Ter-Petrosian, and from 1993 to 1994 was Armenia’s
first deputy minister of foreign affairs.

RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC CRISIS IN SOUTH CAUCASUS COUNTRIES

The Messenger Staff
June 22, 2011
Georgia

The Armenian organization Caucasus Institute printed an analytical
report where it assessed the situation in the South Caucasus during
and after the global economic crisis.

According to the report, Armenia faced a big setback during the crisis
as the major branch of its current economy construction business
failed. Before the crisis 27% of the country’s economy was based on
the construction business but during the crisis real estate property
in Armenia was sold quickly and cheaply. This created an outflow of
foreign currency from the country, the local currency rate fell and
this influenced the country’s economy very negatively. In addition
to this there was a decrease in exports from the country as well.

Georgia managed to come out of the crisis in much better condition.

This was mainly because of the result of the huge economic assistance
Georgia received after the Russian invasion of 2008. The country
received almost USD 5 bln including 1 bln as a grant. This money
protected the country from collapse.

Azerbaijan also did not suffer much from the crisis, even though the
oil prices went down as the country had enough reserves to maintain
its economy and as soon as oil price went up, Azerbaijan retained
its position.

NKR DEFENSE ARMY: KARABAKH FIRES TO DETAIN LAWLESS ACTIONS BY AZERBAIJAN

Panorama
June 22, 2011
Armenia

“NKR Defense Army military units keep the ceasefire regime along the
line of contact. The information released by Azerbaijan’s Ministry of
Defense isn’t true,” NKR DA spokesman Senor Hasratyan told Panorama.am
making his remarks on a statement released by the Azerbaijani side
that a soldier was murdered by firing from Armenian side.

S. Hasratyan noted, unlike the Azerbaijani side, Karabakhi side
launches fire to detain lawless actions by them.

“I’d like to mention once more that the information released by
Azerbaijan isn’t true,” S. Hasratyan said.

NALBANDIAN ACCUSES CAVUSOGLU OF DISTORTING REALITY

PanARMENIAN.Net
June 22, 2011 – 19:19 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – The process of normalization of Armenian-Turkish
relations was launched with understanding that it should go on without
preconditions, Armenia’s top diplomat said.

Slamming the statement by PACE President Mevlut Cavusoglu, who linked
the Nagorno Karabakh conflict settlement with the Armenian-Turkish
reconciliation, Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian said, “All those
present at the ceremony of signing of the protocols have numerously
called for their ratification without preconditions.”

In 2009, Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Turkey, Edward Nalbandian and
Ahmet Davutoglu, signed the protocols on establishment of diplomatic
relations and opening of the common border, however no real steps
followed to implement the protocols due to Turkey’s attempts to
bring forth Nagorno Karabakh conflict settlement as a precondition
for normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations.

RI GOV. SIGNS GENOCIDE EDUCATION BILL

Stamford Advocate

June 22 2011

PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) – Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee (CHAY’-fee)
has signed a new law that aims to help educators teach students
about genocide.

The legislation, signed into law Wednesday by Chafee, directs state
education officials to create online curricular materials dealing
with past genocides.

The material will be designed to help local middle and high schools
create lesson plans on the Holocaust and genocides in Armenia,
Cambodia, Iraq, Rwanda and Darfur.

The bill was sponsored by state Rep. Anastasia Williams, a Providence
Democrat, and state Sen. Joshua Miller, a Cranston Democrat.

Williams and Miller say students need to learn about the dark chapters
of human history to become thoughtful and informed citizens.

DEAL ON DISPUTED TERRITORY POSSIBLE, ARMENIA PRESIDENT SAYS

Radio Netherland

June 22 2011

Published on 22 June 2011 – 5:01pm More about:
ArmeniaAzerbaijanconflictKarabakh

Armenia’s president said Wednesday that his country’s long-running
territorial dispute with Azerbaijan may be resolved at an upcoming
summit, but “Armenia-phobia” could derail the talks.

President Serzh Sarkisian is set to meet his Azerbaijani counterpart
Ilham Aliyev and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in Kazan, Russia,
starting Friday, to discuss Nagorny Karabakh, a territory Azerbaijan
has demanded back since losing it in a 1990s conflict. The Kremlin
had earlier announced the summit would start on Saturday.

Speaking at the Council of Europe on Wednesday, Sarkisian said he was
“full of optimism and strongly hoped it will be possible to find a
common denominator,” at the upcoming meet.

Some 30,000 people died in the conflict when Karabakh was seized
from Azerbaijan. The territory is still controlled by ethnic Armenian
forces, 17 years after a ceasefire.

Azerbaijan insists that Karabakh must remain part of its sovereign
territory, albeit with widespread autonomy, while Armenia says it
must never return to Baku’s control.

Sarkisian told the European assembly that he is willing to make
concessions to reach an agreement.

“If we go in with a constructive spirit and Azerbaijan does not come
with new demands, we could see a positive result,” he explain.

But, he added, “it is difficult to say that we will have a positive
result,” because there exists in Azerbaijan an “Armenia-phobia”
that has consistently undermined attempts to resolve the dispute.

France, the United States and Russia issued a statement last month’s
G8 summit that labelled the status quo in Karabakh “unacceptable” and
urged the disputing factions to make preparations for “peace, not war.”

Energy-rich Azerbaijan, flush with oil and gas money, has massively
increased military spending, and the International Crisis Group think
tank earlier this year warned that an arms build-up and clashes on
the front line could lead to renewed fighting.

Analysts warn that a return to conflict could threaten important
pipelines which pass close to Karabakh, taking Caspian Sea oil and
gas from Azerbaijan to Europe.

Turkey, which supports Baku over Karabakh, and Russia, which has troops
stationed in Armenia, could also be drawn in, some analysts argue.

Regular firefights continue along the Karabakh front line and
Azerbaijan has threatened to seize the region back by force if
talks fail.

Azerbaijan has said it is absolutely unthinkable for Karabakh to be
allowed to secede.