Author: Kajoyan Gevork

SACRIFICING GOOD SENSE ON THE ALTAR OF IDENTITY – TURKISH ARMENIANS AT A GLANCE
by Husrev Tabak

Journal of Turkish Weekly
June 19 2012

The tension between Azerbaijan and Armenia rose once again early
this month due to the deadly armed clashes along the border. The
confrontation has intensified and the number of fatalities reached
nine. Consequently, the possibility of further escalation of the
crisis causes anxiety within the international community and among
neighboring countries. However, our attention is confined to the way
the conflict is perceived and reported on by transnational Armenian
diaspora communities aside from the international dimension of the
dispute. We particularly place emphasis on the reflections of conflict
among the Turkish Armenians and in their discourse regarding identity.

Where do the Turkish Armenians locate themselves within the
Armenian-Azerbaijani military dispute? Would it be biased to think
that Turkish Armenians naturally and exogenously align themselves with
Armenia at all costs and in any given circumstances? Diaspora studies
would suggest that their Armenianness may compel or oblige them to
take sides in favor of the political means and ends of the homeland
(referring to Armenia here). This might be true for particularly the
nationalist parties within the broader diasporic community. However,
it is expected that ideology, principles, or simply good sense would
exert influence on the conclusion a member of the diaspora has drawn
on the issues related to the homeland. Nonetheless, our expectation
is not met when we start probing why liberal, socialist, or social
democratic Armenians in Turkey acquire a single-sided and partial
(therefore nationalistic) discourse in the latent Azerbaijan-Armenia
dispute. The recent military clashes between Armenia and Azerbaijan
have presented a question as to the position taken by the Turkish
Armenians (especially of those identified as socialist and democratic).

Among the broader Armenian diaspora, the nationalist or conservative
responses to the incidents put blame on Azerbaijan for committing an
outrageous act through border transgressions and consequently murdering
Armenian soldiers. The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA)
for instance, reports the one incident as Azerbaijani aggression,
an Azerbaijani attack against Armenia, outrage by Azerbaijan’s
military, or a brazen attack (Armenian weekly, June 6, 2012). Their
point of departure is nationalism-driven and consistent in its own
rights. Principally, Agos would embrace a relatively impartial and
unbiased discourse that differs from the ANCA for instance. We will
see below whether it does.

Differing from mainstream media, the Turkish Armenians’ leading weekly
paper Agos comes forth here as an influential social-democratic and
to a certain extent socialist voice of a minority community. Its
standpoint reflects ideological and political consistency most
of the time. Historically, the paper strives to democratically
mobilize Turkish citizens (regardless of their ethnic origin)
to face the historical incidents of 1915. The weekly paper also
favors and promotes an anti-racist, pluralist, multicultural,
and democratic society that would endow the country with societal
accord and tolerance through which peaceful co-existence within the
country would be fulfilled. Such a political leaning indeed clearly
serves to the strengthening of social harmony. Nonetheless, when the
issues come to Armenia and its relations with the neighboring states,
unexpectedly, the paper ends up with the same conclusions as the rest
of the Armenian diaspora over the world. Such a controversy deserves
highlighting and thorough discussion. The recent Azerbaijan-Armenia
armed clashes evidently confirm this attitude of Agos.

Initially, we should note that the Turkish Armenian diaspora,
particularly those who embrace democratic discourse, could pave the
way to Azerbaijan-Armenia and Turkey-Armenia rapprochements. In line
with this, it was expected that the socialist and democratic Armenians
in Turkey would keep their feet on the ground and write impartial news
in order not to let the temporal and fallacious disputes distract from
the peace efforts and possibilities. In contrast to the requirements
of its ideological, political, and social position, Agos releases news
that is discursively backing and legitimizing the Armenian nationalist
claims about the armed conflict while denouncing Azerbaijan. Agos, in
this sense (from its website), published news regarding the dispute
on June 4,5,6, and 8, all of which converges on an argument that
Azerbaijan is the side that started the war and Armenian forces
managed to repulse the attacking side after unfortunately taking
some casualties. The narration and depiction of the incident and the
articulated political language demonstrate that Agos, a prominent
voice of Turkish Armenians, holds an ideological leaning similar
to the world-wide Armenian diaspora on the issues related to the
homeland. This supportive leaning spans from the territorial claims
of Armenia on Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia’s shameful denial of the
Khojali massacre.

Editor-in-chief of Agos after Hrant Dink Rober Koptas’ editorial on
the “Justice for Khojali Meeting” in Istanbul (February 23, 2012)
reflects a similar stance. He poses the question of whether “those who
attended to the meeting today really commemorate the innocent people?

Or do they try to prevent the remembrance of other innocent dead
people?” Simply by reversing his argument we can claim that through
the use of the shameful 1915 incidents, he endeavors to silence the
articulation of Khojali massacre. In fact whichever way we look at
it, there is no room for a democratic or impartial bearing in Agos’s
attitude toward the disputed issues surrounding Armenia, which in
turn prevents Agos from consistently grasping a democratic voice.

Apparently, when Armenia is in question the identity discourse prevails
among others in Agos weekly.

This is what we can call sacrificing good sense on the altar of
identity. Turkish Armenians’ declaration of their ethnic identity as
Armenian in Turkey is yet to be adequate. In order to enhance and
highlight their identity, they feel it necessary to support and be
on the side of Armenia in making “national claims.” Agos does so,
albeit its ideological stance against nationalism and nationalist
discourse in normal occasions.

Theoretically speaking, for Agos the salience of its identity depends
on the performative constitution of its difference (Campbell, 1993:8).

That means Agos, via standing on the side of Armenia, places
emphasis on its difference from Turkey’s national attitudes toward the
Azerbaijan-Armenia dispute. This in fact sharpens the Armenian identity
in Turkey. Additionally, the way Agos draws the boundaries of being an
Armenian (regardless of the ideological difference backing Armenia’s
national claims) presupposes that group membership requires sharing
assumptions regarding Armenia. Finally, since in the course of time
identity becomes a norm that governs the future conduct of relations
(ibid: 10), as long as they do not change the common understanding
of being an Armenian, it would be cogent to predict that Agos will
keep favoring Armenia in the future at all costs.

Consequently, unless Agos gives up favoring Armenian nationalism
vis-a-vis its ideological leaning, the Turkish Armenians will keep
sacrificing good sense on the altar of a vague identity.

Works cited: Campbell, David (1993) Writing Security – United States
Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press.

* Husrev Tabak is a doctoral researcher at the University of Manchester
and the deputy director of CESRAN (Centre for Strategic Research
and Analysis).

The author is indebted to Dr. Ali Balci of Sakarya University for
his encouraging remarks.

NEW ARMENIAN GOVERNMENTAL PROGRAM

Vestnik Kavkaza
june 20, 2012
Russia

A new Armenian governmental program has been presented. Prime Minister
Tigran Sargsyan said that the government will put efforts into opening
new workplaces, improving business climate and strengthening justice.

The society needs full information about high-scaled business, the
PM believes. Audition should be more clear, Armenia Today reports.

Sargsyan said that the GDP grows by 5-7% annually, export growth
exceeds import, minimal wages will double and the birth quotient will
reach 1.8.

The government plans to allow 90% of children aged 5-6 to get
education, increase accumulative pensions to 125-135% of poverty
level, reduce poverty by 8-10%, open over 100,000 new workplaces,
increase the employed population by 30,000-50,000 and increase taxing
efficiency by 0.3-0.4% of the GDP.

12 grades of studies and higher education will be free. Young families
with two children will receive 1 million drams for the third and
fourth child and 1.5 million for the 5th and more children. Families
with children aged 10 will get certificates for free medical care.

Gyumri is planned to become a cultural center, Vanadzor to become an
industrial center, Syunik to become the tourism center. The government
noted 125 communities with clear signs of poverty.

The country will have more intense diversification of construction.

More cheap housing will be built. 4 social houses have been built. The
buildings will have social workers to resolve housing issues.

BAKO SAHAKYAN AWARDED SOLDIER ARAM GYULNAZARYAN POSTHUMOUSLY

On June 20 NKR President Bako Sahakyan signed a decree posthumously
awarding Aram Gyulnazaryan, the machine gunner, private of the
NKR Defense Army with the Medal “For Service in Battle”. Central
Information Department of the Office of the Artsakh Republic President
informs about this.

Aram Gyulnazaryan is awarded for courage shown while defending the
NKR state border.

A. Gyulnazaryan was killed by Azerbaijanis while violated ceasefire
regime on the border.

FRANCE TODAY, ISRAEL TOMORROW?

Hurriyet
June 22 2012
Turkey

It was unusual for the Turkish Foreign Ministry to announce that it
believed Turkish-French relations could improve, following Francois
Hollande’s victory in the first round of the French presidential
elections, after they hit rock bottom under Nicholas Sarkozy.

It could be interpreted as an intervention in another country’s
domestic politics, but it also demonstrated the level of discontent
felt in Erdogan’s Ankara against Sarkozy’s Paris. From his blockage
in the opening of new negotiation chapters between Turkey and the
European Union, to his use of Turkey in domestic politics – especially
regarding the Armenian genocide claims – and doing that for the last
seven years, Sarkozy was obviously not Turkish Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan’s favorite partner in European politics.

After being elected as French President, Hollande’s Socialist Party
won the parliamentary elections too, and that was an obvious relief
for Ankara. Not only because of the clear messages he had given to
Turkey beforehand that he was not going to use the Armenian issue
like his rival Sarkozy did, but also because of his clear messages to
the EU – particularly to German Chancellor Angela Merkel – indicating
that there was a new actor on stage and that the European political
equation had to be renewed.

This has proved right in the EU’s new visa regime, which has been
moderated in parallel with Hollande’s suggestions. At last, Ankara
was hopeful on the outcome of its own visa exemption demands, which
have been in the deep freeze for years.

After a meeting between Erdogan and Hollande in Rio during the
Sustainable Development summit on June 20, Erdogan declared that
there was now a new page in Turkish-French relations. On June 21,
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu announced on TV channel
CNNTurk that Ankara had ended economic measures against France that
were imposed following Sarkozy’s playing with the genocide issue
ahead of the elections. Turkey also welcomes the visa exemption
possibilities brought by the EU Commission, and in return Ankara is
going to sign an agreement on the readmission of illegal refugees,
which the EU has been asking for from Turkey for some time. Welcoming
the EU’s new visa regime, EU Minister Egemen BagıÅ~_ highlighted that
the move was a step closer for integration. It is also important that
Turkey saw this move before start of the six-month term presidency
of the Greek Cypriot government, which Turkey does not recognize.

It would not be too wrong to call the mood in Ankara regarding EU
relations as the “Hollande Spring.”

But this surprise in Turkey’s diplomacy may not be the only one. The
words of Shaul Mofaz, Israel’s Deputy Prime Minister, were carefully
noted down in Ankara, when he said on June 19 that Israel needed to
come to terms with Turkey’s “superpower status in the Middle East”
and mend ties for the good of both countries.

Turkey has already made it clear what is needed to improve relations
with Israel: An apology for the killing of nine of its citizens in
2010, on board the Mavi Marmara ship that tried to break the embargo
on the Palestinians in Gaza. If Mofaz is trying to express a change
in the mood of Israel regarding Turkey under the new government,
and if such a move is to come, then we might witness the opening a
new page in Turkish-Israeli relations too.

ZEAEV KHANIN: “FOR ME, AZERBAIJAN IS ISRAEL…”

Vestnik Kavkaza
June 21 2012
Russia

Petr Lukimson, Israel. Exclusively to VK

A leading scientist of the Israeli Ministry of Integration, Zeaev
Khanin, can be called one of Israel’s chief experts on problems
of people from the USSR-CIS in Israel, he is also one of the most
in-demand political scientists of the country. Khanin is famous for
his ambiguity and paradoxical statements, although they are always
very precise. Ahead of the visit by the Russian President to Israel,
we asked Mr. Khanin to answer our questions on relations between
Israel and Russia and on the problems of the Middle East and the
Caucasus regions.

– Mr. Khanin, we are at the cusp of the visit by Vladimir Putin to
Israel. There are many questions in the complicated relations between
Russia and Israel. For example, the question of Israel’s attitude to
Russia’s support for Bashar Assad. Will this issue be discussed at
the meeting of two leaders and in what perspective?

– It should be understood that Israel is not a side in the Syrian
conflict. Israel still has no position on the problem of exactly
what regime would be the most favorable for Syria. It is difficult to
define what alternative is worse for Israel. What remains of Bashar
Assad’s regime is bad. However, changing the current regime in favor
of radical Islamist-Sunnis is bad too. Dissolution of the country
into Alawi, Kurdish, Arab and other enclaves and the beginning of
a civil war is bad as well, because the waves of this conflict will
reach the Israeli coast. That is why the Russian position, whatever
it is, cannot be a reason for a worsening of Russian-Israeli relations.

The current armament supplies from Russia to Syria probably prevent
the opposition from gaining victory, but do not touch on interests
of the Israeli Defense Army.

On the other hand, as Russia and China state clearly, they won’t
allow intervention in Syria, as there was in Libya, but are ready
to consider some other variants of settlement of the situation in
the country, Israel and Russia gain more and more common points. If
Bashar Assad resigns, but the Ba’ath party and the Alawis remain in
power and new interested forces are allowed to come to power, a new
Syria will appear which will not support the terrorist organization
Hezbollah and stop playing nuclear games for Iran. Will this topic be
discussed during the meeting of Putin and Netanyahu? It will probably
be mentioned, but no more.

– Will topics connected with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and
the Iranian nuclear bomb be discussed?

– It is difficult to call what happens at such meetings
discussions. It is about signing documents, no more. If the leaders of
Israel and Russia have a serious talk, this talk will concern economic
development of bilateral relations. However, they will probably compare
notes on three mentioned problems: the Syrian problem, prospects of
settlement of the Middle East conflict and the attitude to Tehran.

– What will the comparison mean?

– It will show that Russia and Israel don’t agree on Syria.

Probably several possible variants of further development will be
defined, but they will be discussed not by Putin and Netanyahu, but
expert groups of the two countries. As for the Palestinian problem,
it will be confirmed that Russia, just like Israel, is satisfied with
the status quo.

Regarding Iran, there might be some statements and even signing of
some documents. However, we will not learn about it on June 25. I
think we won’t do so even in a year or a decade. The visit is aimed
at discussion of joint Russian-Israeli projects and strategic deals
in the sphere of the military industry and infrastructure.

– Therefore, a stupid question arises – why is a personal visit by
Putin needed for that? These issues could be dealt at a lower level…

– You are right. But Putin is coming to say “thank you” to Israel
and its foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman for its support in the
presidential and parliamentary elections. I’ll remind you that
Lieberman was one of the few international politicians who clearly
stated that the Russian elections were democratic and legitimate,
and Israel accepted Russia’s choice. The Israeli media criticized
Lieberman, but life has shown that he made a thoughtful step.

– It seems to me that the people from Russia living in Israel have
fallen into a kind of euphoria connected with Putin’s visit. How can
this phenomenon be explained – by the fact that the former Russian
citizens still feel a connection with Russia?

– I don’t think so. There are many people in Israel who are concerned
about the so-called “background of the country of origin.”

For former Russian citizens, Putin’s visit is really important as a
symbol. But any poll will tell you that these views do not influence
their strategic symbols. Despite the common opinion, the natives of
the former Soviet Union in Israel are not a pro-Russian lobby.

According to my research, the share of those who think Israel should
redirect its policy toward Russia and become its main strategic
partner in settlement of the Palestinian conflict is 4%.

The euphoria that appeared ahead of Putin’s visit among representatives
of the Russian community is understandable. The same euphoria could
be seen among people of Moroccan origin during the visit to Israel
by the prime minister of this Arab country. Some people were born in
Israel and have never been to Morocco, but they died of happiness.

– How can this phenomenon be explained? Is it some phantom attraction
of the country of origin, where their ancestors had been living
for centuries?

– It is about the well-known sociologic phenomenon: connection
with the country of origin encourages an increase of the status
of the migrants in their own eyes, as well as in the eyes of other
people. This phenomenon is spread among Jewish diasporas in the Western
countries. For example, Canadian Jews feel Israel is very important,
because in Canada a community has a right to existence only if its
representatives clearly know where their historic homeland is.

The Irish have Ireland, the Chinese have China, while the Jews have
Israel. As Russia begins to play an important role in the Middle East,
that promotes the status of the Russian-speaking community in eyes
of the Israeli establishment.

– I cannot help but think of another country that claims to be a
member of the leading players in our region – Turkey. Is there any
chance for normalization of Israel’s relations with this country in
the near future?

– As you well know, all possible words have been uttered by Israel
and all possible proposals have been made. The ball is in the Turkish
side of the court.

– Turkey thinks in a different way. Erdogan stated that he waited for
apologies for the Maramara incident and expected material compensation
from Israel to the families of the lost Turkish citizens …

– The Foreign Ministry’s experts and analytical centers believe
that fulfillment of these requirements won’t lead to normalization of
relations, but will lead to creating new requirements by Turkey. In the
current ruling circles of Turkey there are no serious intentions to
normalize relations with Israel. Fulfillment of Turkish requirements
could only harm Israel’s interests in the long-term. The same
conclusion is made by experts from Brussels and Washington, which
is why Europe and the USA aren’t pushing us to normalize relations
with Turkey. Today only a small group of Israeli businessmen who
have business in Turkey insist on normalization of relations with
this country.

– But what country could be an alternative for Israeli-Turkish
relations? Azerbaijan?

– What do you mean “could be”?! It has already happened.

Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, two Muslim pro-Western states, became a
nice alternative to our relations with Turkey in the Turkic world. And
our parliament will recognize the so-called Armenian massacre of 1915
only after Armeni makes peace with Azerbaijan.

– Is this possible? What do you think?

– I think it is quite possible, if a model of regional development
is created that guarantees the Armenians a speedy growth in living
standards in their country and establishes conditions under which its
partnership with the EU will bring it benefits, while its partnership
with Iran will turn into a failure. However, I don’t think Armenia
and Azerbaijan will make peace in the foreseeable future.

– What position should Israel take on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?

– It is not our sphere, and it doesn’t touch on us. Israel is a
technological, space, and economic, but not geopolitical superpower.

We don’t interfere in a conflict if it doesn’t concern our interests.

– Probably if the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan is
settled, the international community will pressure Israel to settle
the conflict with Palestine according to the same model. What will
this mean for Israel?

– It depends what we are comparing – which side in the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict resembles your Israel and which side –
the Arabs.

– Sorry, but we both are Jews. What do you think?

– I think Israel plays the role of Azerbaijan. It is obvious.

– Why do you think so?

– It is simple. The modern world lives according to the principle
of nations’ right to self-determination within the inviolability of
post-war and colonial boundaries. The state of Israel was established
under this principle. If the principle is violated, all decisions
made by the international community after the Second World War on
establishing of national states should be doubted. The principle is
applied to the boundaries of the former Soviet republics.

That is why an attempt to occupy a part of Azerbaijan’s territory
by Armenia is similar to attempts by the Arab world to legitimise
the state of Palestine, which has never existed. In this situation,
Israel is interested in preservation of the territorial integrity of
Azerbaijan within the boundaries of the Soviet period. Any other result
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict threatens Israel and the whole world.

LET’S MAKE ‘TURKISH’ GEOGRAPHIC, NOT ETHNIC

Al-Monitor

June 21 2012

By:Hadi Uleungin posted on Thursday, Jun 21, 2012

After a long interval, we are again optimistic about the Kurdish
question. The introduction of Kurdish as an elective course into the
educational curriculum is a first step toward solving this issue. This
is a very important accomplishment, especially because for years
Turkey’s official policy was based on a denial of the Kurdish state.

Indeed, this should be considered a major leap forward.

However, this is not enough.

Turkey does not have a Kurdish problem, or an Armenian one. Turkey has
a Turkish problem. The founding fathers of the republic established
Turkey’s identity on a narrow and exclusive ethnic definition. What
I mean by the “Turkish problem” is the imposition of Turkishness on
other ethnic groups and the endeavor to assimilate them. This policy
is epitomized in one of Ataturk’s sayings: “How happy is the one who
says ‘I am a Turk!'”

We should admit that these assimilation policies failed to make
these groups forget or forsake their own identities. If we want to
overcome these issues, we need to redefine the basis of citizenship
in this country.

The French identity is an inclusive one that recognizes the different
ethnicities it encompasses, such as the Franks, Bretons, Occitanians
and the Flemish. The Spanish identity unifies Castilians with the
Catalans, Basques and Galicians. The Italian identity fuses the Latins,
Lombards and Sicilians.

Though there may be some exceptions to this, heterogeneous and
democratic nation-states are based on geographic identities rather
than ethnic ones. To impose the Turkish identity on those who do
not perceive themselves to be part of it is to deny our own cultural
richness. Moreover, this policy has political consequences. This kind
of assimilation-based national understanding generates reactions to
its unjust and oppressive nature. These reactions then become the
catalyst for the disintegration and decay of that same state.

Even if you insist that the term “Turk” describes citizenship rather
than including any ethnic connotation, nobody is convinced by this
explanation.

Therefore, we must go to the root of the problem to solve this “Turkish
issue.” This includes redefining citizenship and finding a new term
for the citizens of Turkey. We need to find a more comprehensive
identity that goes beyond the Turkish one to define the citizens of
the Turkish Republic.

STUDENTS COMPLETING ARMENIAN COURSES REWARDED WITH CERTIFICATES IN TURKEY

news.am
June 21, 2012 | 23:55

SURI. – A Turkish city Suri in Diyarbakır rewarded with certificates
students who completed courses of the Armenian language. Justice and
Development Kurdish party MP, Mayor of Suri, participants and guests
participated in the event, Beyazgazete reports.

The Mayor welcomed all in Armenian, Kurdish and Assyrian languages,
stressing the event is a small step towards returning historical debt
and they were undergone criminal pursues for opening Armenian courses.

As Armenian News-NEWS.am informed earlier, Turkish Suri Mayor opened
course of the Armenian language in March, 2012. He makes efforts that
Turkey developed Kurdish, Armenian and Assyrian languages, as tragic
events had occurred with representatives of those nations. Turkey
should face own history and ask apology from those nations, Suri
Mayor claimed.

ALIYEV ADOPTED A LAW ON HIS LIFETIME IMMUNITY

18:37 . 21/06

Today, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev approved the Law on Former
President of Azerbaijani Republic and His Family Members adopted by
the Azerbaijani Mejlis. Thus, the president and his family members are
granted a number of privileges. Particularly, the former president is
exempt from administrative and criminal liability for any acts while in
office and before that. His wife is also exempt from liability. The
prosecutor general’s consent will be needed to arrest the former
president and his wife or to bring them to account.

According to the new law including two points, the pension of the
former president is equal to 50% of the monthly salary of a person
holding the presidential post and the former president will be entitled
to get that pension till the end of his life. After the death of the
president his wife will get the pension. The law does not apply only
to presidents who have been dismissed from post under Article 107 of
the Constitution.

PSYCHOLOGIST: MIGRATION FROM ARMENIA HAS DEEP PSYCHOLOGICAL REASONS

arminfo
Thursday, June 21, 20:06

Migration from Armenia has deep psychological reasons, which are not
realized by the migrants themselves in most cases, Samvel Khudoyan,
Doctor of Psychological Sciences, said at a press conference in
Yerevan on June 21.

“As early as in the Middle Ages our ancestors resorted to this method.

They were guided by the idea that they could leave the country if it
was bad in it. One can say with confidence that in the neighboring
countries, such as Georgia and Azerbaijan, the situation is not
better, but the number of emigrants is much fewer”, he said. He also
stressed that according to surveys, the children, who were told no
tales about patriotism, have no desire to return to their Motherland,
and the children brought up in the patriotic spirit return to the
Motherland. Khudoyan said that it is psychological reasons that do
not allow the people to find a job in their own country.

“In their own country many people are not ready to do the job of a
swabber or a street-cleaner, as they are shy of their relatives and
friends, but they are ready to do the same job outside their country”,
he said. In this context, the psychologist suggests agitating the
people in Diaspora to return to their Motherland. Moreover, he
stressed that one should encourage development of small and medium
business in the country, which will allow increasing the workplaces,
because the it is the social problems that make the people leave the
country. Khudoyan thinks that emigration endangers national security.

To note, according to the approximate estimations, a total of 69,000
people left Armenia over Jan-May 2012.

ARMENIA’S AMBASSADOR TO FRANCE MET WITH HEADS OF ARMENIAN STRUCTURES

ARMENPRESS
21 June, 2012
YEREVAN

YEREVAN, JUNE 21, ARMENPRESS: Armenia’s Ambassador to France Vigen
Chitechyan visited Rhône-Alpes Region of France June 15-16.

Rhône-Alpes is a region of primary importance for France in the
sense of its economic and political potential. Foreign Affairs
Ministry press service told Armenpress that in the framework of the
visit the ambassador had face-to-face conversations with the head
of the regional council, Lyon deputy mayor, mayors of a number of
French cities, local MPs, as well as with representatives of local
self-governing bodies. The ambassador and the head of the regional
council of Rhône-Alpes discussed the results of the works implemented
in the framework of the cooperation convention signed between the
Communities Association of Armenia and Rhône-Alpes Region. Accompanied
by the heads of community structures and Lyon’s urban authorities,
Vigen Chitechyan also visited a memorial complex commemorating the
victims of the Armenian genocide. On the same day the ambassador
met with heads of local Armenian structures to discuss the programs
they are implementing in collaboration with Armenia. On June 16 the
ambassador attended a reception organized in the grand hall of Lyon
municipality, which was followed by a symposium dedicated to Artsakh.

The symposium was organized within 500th anniversary of the Armenian
first book printing and “Yerevan – World Book Capital 2012” series of
events. A number of historians presented the rich cultural heritage
of Artsakh. Lyon Mayor and Armenia’s Ambassador delivered an opening
speech in front of hundreds of representatives of cultural, public,
community circles and journalists.